HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009 06-23Meridian City Council Meeting June 23, 2009
A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m., Tuesday, June
23, 2009, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd.
Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Charlie Rountree, Keith Bird, Brad
Hoaglun, and David Zaremba.
Others Present: Bill Nary, Jaycee Holman, Pete Friedman, Kyle Radek, Bill Parson,
Mark Neimeyer, Scott Colaianni, Matt Ellsworth, John Overton, Steve Siddoway, and
Dean Willis.
Item 1: Roll-call Attendance:
Roll call.
X David Zaremba
X Charlie Rountree
X Brad Hoaglun
X Keith Bird
X Mayor Tammy de Weerd
De Weerd: I will go ahead and start tonight's meeting and -- by welcoming you and
thanking you for being here with us this evening. For the public record it is Tuesday,
June 23rd. It's 7:00 p.m. We will start tonight's meeting with roll call attendance.
Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance:
De Weerd: Item No. 2 is our Pledge of Allegiance. If you will all rise and join us in the
pledge.
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.)
Item 3: Community Invocation by Darrell Taylor with Ten Mile Christian
Church:
De Weerd: Item No. 3 is our community invocation. Tonight we will be led by Darrell
Taylor, he's with the Ten Mile Christian Church. If you will all join us in the community
invocation or take this as an opportunity for a moment of reflection. Thank you for
joining us.
Taylor: Thank you for having me. Heavenly Father, we are just truly thankful for this
day and, Father, we are just truly thankful, Lord, for the many blessings you have given
us as a community and individuals. Father, we just praise your name that we are able
to live in a country that's free where we can be free to -- to pray when we want and to
talk about you and just to live for you, Lord, and, Father, we ask now that you will be
with those in the armed forces that are keeping this country free and, Father, for the
leadership on a national and state level, we just ask, Lord, for your watch care over
them and, Father, too, for Meridian and for the City Council, Lord, we just ask for your
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 2 of 57
guidance and wisdom, Father, we just thank you for a community that cares about --
about families and we just ask now, Lord, that this meeting will be a benefit for the
community and we just pray this in Jesus' name, amen.
Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda:
De Weerd: Thank you. It's my honor to mention what happened earlier today. We had
the ground breaking ceremonies for Ten Mile interchange. So, it's -- it's historic. So, I
had to mention it. And if you didn't notice, on your way in we have a farmers market
going on outside where I got my dinner and just a block down Main Street we have live
music going on, so when you're done with your business here you can stay downtown
and enjoy the rest of your evening. So, with that said I will ask Council -- Item No. 4 is
adoption of the agenda.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: As there appear to be comments added in, I will add one as well. Last
Saturday night was the first of the Concerts on Broadway series. Councilman Bird and I
both attended, sitting out in the plaza, the amphitheater out here. It was very well
attended and very well received and I found myself sitting there thinking this place really
works. The plaza was very good and it was a good event and there will be another one
about a month from now and one a month after that. So, I hope everybody gets a
chance to go.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Zaremba: And with that on the agenda for tonight we've had a request from the legal
department to add an Item G and an H and an I to the Consent Agenda and I would add
that it's important to do this tonight, because this is our last meeting before July 4th and
all of these apply to July 4th. Item G would be a professional services agreement with
musical talent for the Independent's Day celebration in Storey Park. This agreement is
with Lindy Waugh, W-a-u-g-h, for no monetary cost to the city. Item H is a professional
services agreement for musical talent for the Independence Day celebration in Storey
Park. This one is with Eric Hansen, H-a-n-s-e-n, again, for no monetary cost. Item I
would be professional services agreement for musical talent for the Independence Day
celebration in Storey Park for Bill Roulo, R-o-u-I-o, and that one is in the amount of
1,200 dollars. So, we would like to add those three items to the Consent Agenda. Let
me back up a minute. The previously last item on the Consent Agenda, Item F, the
resolution number for that is 09-673. Now, under Department Reports, under 6-A, Legal
Department would also like to add a third report, which would be a discussion on
security card readers. Moving onto the regular agenda, Item 14, the ordinance number
is 09-1420. And with those amendments I move we adopt the agenda.
Hoaglun: Second.
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 3 of 57
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. Council, as of July 1st you will not see late
additions anymore. Kind of a heads up to our departments. No more late additions.
And if Council -- if you're not comfortable, we can put this on the public notice for your
consideration before the budget hearing for parks. I think that that could be a posting
you put on there. Again, I will reiterate, fortunately, we had a state code change and so
we will not see late additions on our agenda. I know our next meeting our city clerk will
give -- oh, are you doing this this evening?
Holman: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: An update on that tonight.
Holman: Madam Mayor, that is this evening and I'm actually going to let our city
attorney Bill Nary do it. He actually took an extended -- one of the courses at AIC really
just went over all of this specifically. He's got a little bit more information on the
particulars of how we do late items --
De Weerd: Okay.
Holman: -- on agendas and what changed July 1st.
De Weerd: I think it would just be safe to say we will not do them. Then, we don't have
to guess what's right and what isn't. But we will get an update from Mr. Nary, since he
has added everything to our agenda tonight. Council, we are voting on this motion.
Okay. All those in favor say aye. Opposed nay? All ayes. Motion carves.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 5: Consent Agenda:
A. Approve Minutes of June 9, 2009 City Council Special Meeting:
B. Approve Minutes of June 9, 2009 City Council Regular Meeting:
C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 09-
001 Request for Rezone of 7.65 acres consisting of 25 single-family
residential lots and 2 common lots (Lots 1 and 2 and a portion of
Lot 3, Block 2; portions of Lots 1 & 10 and Lots 2-9, Block 1, Dove
Meadows Subdivision No. 1; portions of Lots 11 & 12 and Lots 13-
24, Block 1, Dove Meadows Subdivision No. 2) from L-O to R-8 for
Dove Meadows by City of Meridian Planning Department -various
properties in Dove Meadows Subdivision Nos. 1 and 2 zoned L-O:
D. First Addendum to Development Agreement: MDA 09-002
Request to modify the Development Agreement for Woodbridge
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 4 of 57
(Instrument #100006602) by T.T.S. Developments, LLC - 385
South Locust Grove Road:
E. Approve Beer, Wine, LIQUOr License for Shoot The Moon III,
LLC dba On The Border Restaurant located at 3004 North
Eagle Road:
F. Resolution No. Amended 2009 Waiver
of Impact Fees Resolution:
De Weerd: Okay. Item No. 5 is our Consent Agenda.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: If I understood the vote we just took, we have added the three items to the
Consent Agenda.
De Weerd: We have.
Zaremba: And also identified the resolution number. With that I move that we adopt the
Consent Agenda and for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest.
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: We have a motion and a second to adopt the Consent Agenda as
amended. If there is no discussion, Madam Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 6: Department Reports:
A. Legal Department:
1. Discussion on Requiring Alcohol Training for Servers:
De Weerd: Item No. 6 under our Department Reports, we will start tonight's Department
Reports with our city attorney.
Nary: Thank you, Madam Mayor. I'll move up here. Madam Mayor, Members of the
Council, a couple of different items here, so -- the first one I'd like to hand out is a
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 5 of 57
proposed amendment to our ordinance and both of these are two different versions of
server training ordinance --one's an ordinance and one was a state code provision.
De Weerd: While he's passing that out, I know that the efforts of Mr. Nary were greatly
appreciated by the Association of Idaho Cities. We are trying to make this a state law to
have the serving training a requirement. So, we will try it again next year, but this way
the city can adopt what we would like to see happen ourselves.
Nary: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the one
that's in front of you is the Boise City code, which was the model we used for the state
code provision that you also have in front of you for server training. Basically, the
difference -- most significant difference, really, is in the state code and what was
possibly may be short sighted, but the state code requires for restaurant facilities, they
had mandatory server training and there are existing services out there in the
marketplace for people to do that. They are online, they are fairly inexpensive, run
between 35 and 60 dollars for training. The requirement was all on the train -- the
server, as well as the restaurant to maintain their certification, maintain their records for
-- that the requirement was not mandatory for the packaged deal, for the Albertson's
and the convenience stores and Walmarts and those types of things. And part of the
reason was is that currently the marketplace the training is different. So, there isn't
quite the same level of training and comfort that the state police had to require
mandatory training. Many of the ones in this area -- and they really felt it more in the
state in the more rural areas of the state. There wasn't online things. Many of the areas
in this area, Albertson's, Walmart, Fred Meyer, Jacksons, all run their own internal
training and from what I have been told -- what we have been told as part of this group I
was with, they have actually been very effective. The state police is very comfortable as
how those are being handled, yet not every single cigarette shop and such that sell
alcohol gets the same level of training. But it wasn't as available. So, that's one issue
you're free to consider, if you're going to require training, whether you want to make it
mandatory for both the retail dealers, as well as the restaurant. Obviously, alcohol is
alcohol, but one of the reasons the concern from the state committee that we were a
part of was the service of alcohol in restaurants and in liquor establishments can be
more significant, because people are sitting there drinking versus at a grocery store
where they're taking it home or they are taking it elsewhere. Again, I -- we are not trying
to downplay the risk that certainly drinking and driving can be, but the realization that
how that's being consumed and how that ends up back on the roadway is a little
different from a grocery store versus a restaurant or a bar. So, in the state version that
you have it was mandatory to have it done, they have to maintain it, they have to do it
within a certain period of time. Once that was done they had to -- basically, everyone
that attends these courses gets a certification, a license, for lack of a better word. So,
proof that they have attended this and the requirement is that they -- they needed to
carry it, so the police officers could request it if they enter the bar, that they had proof
and, again, all of them -- and, then, the establishment also had to have similar proof,
especially because there is a lag time, 30 to 60 days is what we have seen. So,
obviously, you have somebody that starts, they haven't taken the course yet, so, then,
you're going to have to have proof when did they start, so they know they fall within the
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 6 of 57
exception. That was the state version. The Boise City version, which, again, was the
model we used, doesn't deal with stores at all, doesn't deal with the retail outlets at all.
It only deals with the restaurants and bars and those types of licensees. And, again, it's
the same thing, it's all based -- it's all on the individual, their cost, or the cost to many of
the restaurants in this area -- in this Boise and Meridian area provide it themselves,
because they -- they pay for it, because it's easier and faster to make sure it's done,
because if they don't, then, if their server gets caught and the server hasn't got it done,
then, they are on the hook and responsible for it. The other issue on the state -- when
the state was discussing it was allowing some -- I guess for lack of a better word, a
break to the license holders, that if they had aperson -- if they trained them and they
still violated the law, if the licensee had done the training, then, the server was
responsible first two times they had served outside of that training and licensee was not
responsible to -- or couldn't be at risk of losing their license. Again, that was fairly
controversial to folks. Under the Boise City one they are all just going to be subject to it
if -- regardless of whether or not they -- the first time or whether their training was done,
it's still going to be subject to this potential fine. This doesn't -- the Boise City one does
not deal with their license being revoked. The state one was trying to deal with their
license being revoked. I do believe it is time. I think it's a good idea to lead the way.
The city of Boise has theirs in place, they have had it in place for awhile, they have
been using it more as an educational tool since they implemented it last year. I think
you're looking -- and I did get a -- did get an a-mail from their city attorney staff, I think
they are looking at their enforcement now. I think at the end of this summer they, then,
start enforcing all of these requirements. They've tried to educate since last year.
Questions? Direction? Time to think about it? You don't have to make a decision
tonight.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Question for Mr. Nary. Bill, under the state proposed law, just reading where
if the mandatory training on premise sales and voluntary training off premise retailer, the
off premise retailer is like an Albertson's or a convenience store, anything like that.
Nary: Right. The premise is talking about where they can be consumed.
Hoaglun: And that would be voluntary.
Nary: Yes.
Hoaglun: What you're proposing like the state law, but on premise where it's consumed
on site, that would be mandatory training.
Nary: Yes.
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 7 of 57
Hoaglun: And it looks like that the national -- the National Restaurant Association has
programs, Safe Serve Alcohol and some things that they offer for their member
restaurants; is that correct?
Nary: There is three -- Boise City also lists them, Serve Safe, TIP, and Leam to Serve,
are all online courses that can be done. Again, they are all fairly inexpensive. Again,
the burden is on the individual or the restaurant to pay for that. The city or the state
won't be paying for any of that.
Hoaglun: And just to follow up, Madam Mayor. Is the off-premise retail, is that more
just to do the identification, making sure there is not underage purchases being made?
Is that primarily that focus of that program or do you know what the difference between
the two --
Nary: That's my understanding, Council Member Hoaglun. It is to deal with the license
issue, the identification. I mean, obviously, there is some concern, too, that there is
potential of serving people who are intoxicated or selling to people that are intoxicated,
so there is some necessity to have some framing to understand that. But it is
predominately focused on the identification.
Hoaglun: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: It appears from the language, Bill, that the police chief, in effect, certifies the
trainer by approving the trainer.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Rountree, yeah, what
they -- what they did in the state level -- or in the city level at Boise was to use,
essentially, a similar way that the state does it, because there at the state level it's the
director if ISP and the city level it's the police chief and what they are saying is we have
identified these three programs. If there is another program, then, you're going to have
to have the police chief approve it. That's certainly one logical way to do it. It doesn't
have to be the only way. We could certainly do it differently if you wanted to.
Rountree: Does that in some way increase the city's liability in case of a situation where
you have someone who consumes too much and creates an issue? Does it cascade
back to the city?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Rountree, you know, I
-- I have a hard time seeing that connection to be made and certainly people can think if
we approve the program, they follow the program, they end up serving somebody who
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 8 of 57
is intoxicated, I wouldn't see our police chiefs approving a program that's outside of one
of these types of programs that hasn't been vetted for a number of citizens before we do
that. So, I'm not too concerned that even identifying these in our ordinance would
cause us to have liabilities, again, by following this program and if people -- because
they are still required to follow the law regardless. I think with most of the ones that are
-- when they are dealing with service in a restaurant or bar setting, besides the
identification issue again, what they are really trying to help people understand is how
alcohol works, because it is also a crime in the state to serve people who are already
intoxicated and there has been some give and take in the courts as to how that's to be
interpreted, but that's what -- from what I understand the training focuses on is trying to
understand the physiological effects of alcohol. While you might go up the first time you
end up talking to this person to serve them they seem perfectly fine, you come back 20
minutes later and they are not so fine anymore, what does that mean, why is that
happening, you know, how to deal with that in a large setting. Also, how to deal with the
fact you know this person, you might know this person and feel you're intimidated or you
feel some kinship with them or some relationship, how to deal with those kind of things.
So, I mean I think there is a lot more to it, but I wouldn't see the city having a liability by
even selecting these national programs as ones that we find acceptable.
Rountree: If we went this direction and an enforcement component, has Boise identified
what their cost is going to be and have we considered that with the police chief at this
point?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Rountree, no, we have
not discussed with the police chief. Boise, because they have -- they have taken a pro-
active in education tact with this to this point, I don't believe have additional costs, but --
and Idon't know if Lieutenant Colaianni or Lieutenant Overton have any opinion, but we
wouldn't probably do this outside what our normal bar check would be, but we would
probably -- as our officers enter -- enter these drinking establishments and are looking
for intoxicated persons or minors, it's afairly -- should be a fairly simple process to say I
need to see the identification cards of all of the servers that are here right now and I
need to make sure that this one on here is that person right there. So, there are easy
ways that we can make this enforceable without it being problematic for our officers.
De Weerd: Lieutenant Overton or Lieutenant Colaianni, any comments?
Colaianni: Yeah. Madam Mayor, Council Members, our understanding is the way Mr.
Nary's laying it out is that this would go in conjunction with what we are already currently
doing in checking IDs and going through the bars and doing those types of things. It's
not something that would be separate, we would do it all together.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Hoaglun: One last question for Mr. Nary.
De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun.
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 9 of 57
Hoaglun: The -- once they receive -- once the server receives that certification and
goes through that course, there is no continuing education requirement or anything like
that, it's -- once he's been certified or -- do you need a refresher course say once every
five years or once you're done you're done?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Hoaglun, you know, I --
it's not in the ordinance, but my recollection was there is an expiration date, but I don't
recall if it's three years or five years. I don't believe it's annual, I believe it's longer than
that, but I'm not certain, so I don't know.
Hoaglun: Okay.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Would we assume that if somebody, at the time they went through the
training and got a certificate was working in Boise or Miami, Florida, and, then, went to
work for somebody in Meridian, is that certificate still good?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Council Member Zaremba, if it's like in the Boise ordinance, for
example, if they went through one of those courses it is a national online course. So,
yes, if they went through Serve Safe in Florida and, then, moved to Boise, they are still
certified, it would still be valid.
Zaremba: Thank you.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, Bill asked for some comments. At first glance, I would
recommend not including those points of training, whether it be Serve Safe, TIPS, or
Leam, and have a statement that national recognized or state recognized services,
either online or through appropriate training facility as approved by the police chief.
That way when they change names, get bought by somebody or vanish, we don't have
to amend the ordinance, assuming we get there.
De Weerd: Any other comments? You know, I do know this came up in the drug task
force meeting that an example of some of the environmental changes we can make to --
as acommunity change behaviors and certainly the education and prevention part of
this is -- is very needed. I know it has strong support from our police department and I
think it is the right thing to do. It was also discussed as something that would help with
the education pieces to it with the underage drinking aspect and better training our
servers to know certain things about the environment that they work in. So, Council,
would like to know -- would you like to see this on a --
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 10 of 57
Colaianni: Madam Mayor, there is somebody here from Serve Safe, if you have
questions for him directly, he may be able to clarify some things before you make a
decision.
De Weerd: Would love to. Yes. Yes, please. If you will, please, state your name and
address for the record.
Dixon: Bob Dixon. 2048 North Whittier Place, Meridian.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Dixon: I've certified in Serve Safe training and it is a national training through the
National Restaurant Association. We teach criminal, civil liability, how to recognize
intoxication. How to go through and properly check identification and how to handle
difficult situations in your establishment. It's a three year certification. And I do it on
premises for 30 dollars per person, which is the same as online, and I have talked to
several places and said, you know, this way you know your people are being trained
immediately and they are not going home and telling you, yeah, we are doing it online
and they are not getting it done. So, if there is any other questions that I could answer
for you I would be happy to.
De Weerd: Well, I appreciate your comments and I do know when the Treasure Valley
Partnership was talking to various trainers, the dialogue that you have with the onsite --
because different people bring up different scenarios, you can learn from one another.
So, certainly, that would be the preferred route, but the convenience of the online, when
we discussed it -- discussed it -- not disgusted -- was -- was very -- was a good option
to also provide.
Dixon: For the people to go that can't get up at 8:00 o'clock in the morning and show up
and take the class.
De Weerd: Yes. So, any questions from Council?
Rountree: I have none.
Zaremba: Thank you.
Hoaglun: Just one quick question. How long does a course take?
Dixon: It took me about ten hours to become certified. Fifteen hours. It's about three to
four hours for a server, bartender. That includes taking the test.
Hoaglun: And is the test -- Madam Mayor. Is that administered right after the course --
Dixon: It's administered after the course and if it's with Serve Safe -- and I don't know
about TIPS or the other program, but with Serve Safe the instructor does not grade the
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 11 of 57
test, I have to ship them to Chicago. They are graded in Chicago and, then, I'm sent
back the results and their certification.
Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Well, thank you for being here tonight for this discussion. Council,
any further questions or comments for Mr. Nary? Would you like to see this on a future
agenda? What is your pleasure?
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, I think if we get some of these details hammered out, I think
it's worth having further discussions about and bringing it forward to discuss, in my
opinion.
Nary: We'll start crafting a draft and, then, maybe try to meet with some of the local
license holders to see if there is issues that they would have that we would be unaware
of. We -- probably what I would recommend is once we get to an actual ordinance form
that you're all comfortable with, then, we give -- either sometime before the enactment
of it, so there is one opportunity for the servers to get trained, as well as, again, an
opportunity to educate.
De Weerd: Well -- and, Council, I know when -- we have talked about it, the chief and
Mr. Nary and I, I think the police department would feel comfortable with kind of that
grace period, similar to what Boise has done, is to put it out there, not make it
mandatory for the first year, work with the restaurants and establishments to educate
and, then, the following year make it the mandatory. So, that way we have an
opportunity to work with our businesses and get everyone on board. But it's a good
start and we appreciate starting the dialogue and this -- you got the green light it looks
like, Mr. Nary.
Nary: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you.
2. Recommendation from the Mayor and Council
Compensation Review Committee:
Nary: Next item, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, is sometimes a double edge
sword. It is our report from our Mayor and City Council Compensation Committee. As
required by our city ordinance we have a -- every election -- every city election cycle we
have a committee made up of community leaders, community participants, former
Council members, commissioners, and what they do is evaluate the current pay of both
the Mayor and the Council and make a recommendation to you. So, tonight I'm here to
report that recommendation to you. The committee is made up of myself, there was
Christine Donnell, former Council member. Joe Marshall, a current Planning and
Zoning Commissioner. Dr. Tom Hammond, a current historic preservation commission
member. Tracy Vance, the current Chamber of Commerce board president. Chris
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 12 of 57
Kline, a local businessman with Edward Jones Investments. And Mark Gilbreath with
Vengaworks Venture Center in Meridian. The committee met on three different
occasions to discuss. The committee asked for lots of different kinds of information and
some of that's in that little packet I have just provided you. There was some a-mails
from other cities as to what the mayors in various cities around the state make and the
council members. Of course, every city is a little different. There aren't a tremendous
amount of comparables in our state or even in our valley. There are not a lot of full-time
mayors in the state of Idaho. Some cities are run by city managers, so there is city
managers -- make significantly more than what the mayor makes, but the mayor doesn't
have the same daily responsibilities that the mayor of our city has or the mayor of any
other full-time mayor position in the city. So, the committee also did wrestle with -- and I
have in that statement in front of you --the committee also did wrestle with the concems
about the economic times and there is a recognition, obviously, by all of those
community people that these are difficult times, that you as the Council face in working
with budgets and working with salaries and working with that for all the employees, not
just -- not just the Mayor and the Council, but all the employees in the city in the various
roles that they have. But they also recognize that the state code provision I provided
you requires or only allows -- I guess that's a better way to say it -- only allows us to
revisit the compensation for elected officials every election cycle. So, there isn't an
opportunity to grade an elected official and make a decision on what their value is. The
state code requires -- you can create a formula and do that every two years, but you
can't -- you can't after the fact decide whether or not the person should get paid a
certain amount or not based on their performance. There isn't any way to do it. In fact
one of the concems I would have in that. is there is supposed to be a separation of
powers between executive and legislative branches and so there is not a -- there is not
an intent in the state code for the Mayor to grade the Council or the Council to grade the
Mayor in relation to pay. So, as I put here in this statement from the group -- and this
was a statement I prepared based on the minutes of the meeting and, then, had all of
them review it and this is their unanimous approval of this statement to you was that
they wanted to evaluate -- and I'll just read it out loud for the members of the public.
The committee recognizes that any increase in the current times may be controversial
or concerning, but the committee's responsibility is to evaluate all the above criteria and
make a recommendation that is reasonable in light of all the factors. The City Council
has the ultimate discretion to accept -- accept, reject, or modify the recommendations,
but the committee's responsibility is to not look at the current time only, but also the long
term needs of the positions and the city. Because the city has been prudent and fiscally
responsible to the taxpayers of Meridian, the committee felt that the recommended
increase would be affordable and appropriate. And one of the things I guess to be a
little clearer on what their intent was, one of the things we as Meridian have been is we
have not had afull-time Mayor for very long. For a number of years our Mayor was a
part-time position and there was a decision made in the early part of this decade that
the Mayor position no longer could be part time and be effective. And with that there
was some intent to move the pay to be commensurate with afull-time position. But also
because it's an elected position, there is some discomfort at times to try to move it
where it maybe should be or could be depending on what criteria you would like to use
to evaluate it. The committee felt that their responsibility as citizens as part of this
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 13 of 57
group was to make that hard decision, to say this is where we think it should be, but we
want to recognize that there is some financial factors that go into that, but we want to
recognize what we believe as -- as citizens in our community what the Mayor's pay
should be in relation to what the responsibilities and expectations that the Mayor's job is
and not wanting to consider the individuals or Madam Mayor here or any of the Council
members, but what these positions are worth to us as members of this community. And
the same relation to the Council members, what we think the time and effort that it takes
to pertorm the job effectively and responsibly what it's worth and what it should get paid
in relation to that. So, they looked at all of these factors that are bulleted on your -- on
this statement, the length of time the Mayor's position has been full time, the salary
increases that have been done since it was made full time, because we slowly gradually
moved it up, but not in very large increments. The increased number of employees of
the city since the Mayor's position was made full time to the present, it's almost double
of what it had been when the Mayor's position was made full time. Actually, it's more
than double. The growth of the city in the same time period and the complexity and
expectations of the position. The Mayor's position, I believe, was made full time in
2001. Our population was approximately 40,000 people. Now, it's almost 75,000
people or hovering around that number. The increased number of direct reports to the
Mayor. When we looked at the early part of this decade, the Mayor had Ibelieve -- and
I don't have that number in front of me, I'm sorry. Ibelieve the Mayor had about seven
direct reports and now the Mayor has -- besides all the directors, which there is seven,
the Mayor also has the city clerk and her staff -- or some of her staff report directly to
her. So, the Mayor has more than ten direct reports today. The comparable salaries of
mayors and council members in the valley and around the state. Again, they recognize
it is kind of an apples and oranges to some degree, but they also still felt there was
some relationship to what the mayor of Kuna or the mayor of Eagle, the mayor of
Nampa, the mayor of Boise makes in relation to our city that even though it's not
completely comparable, because there is -- some cities are smaller, some are larger, at
least it has some relevancy to them. The current city personnel budgets and how much
we budget for increases. That was a number the past few years and how we have
budgeted for the different departments personnel needs. A target objective was
considered, but also the realization that an increase would still need to be incremental.
The committee talked a long time about we think the Mayor should be X. We think
Council members should make Y. But we recognize to get there it's probably too
drastic for many people to do in one budget and it might take more than -- more than
even two years to get there. So, they did wrestle with that in trying to figure out how to
make that make sense when we have to fix the budget -- or have to fix this amount for
these positions for the next two years today, without knowing the people that will be
serving in those positions, without knowing anything else about what the position would
be, what's the position's value and what should be done, what the pay should be.
Current expectations and performance of the elected officials -- again, the law doesn't
give us that much flexibility for that. It's not really intended to be flexibility for that, it's
not supposed to be a grading system. The grading system for elected officials is the
ballot box, not -- not your compensation. But, again, the committee recognized there is
some value with citizens as to what the expectations they have for that and what -- what
you expect people to do and the commitment that you expect them to make is relative to
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 14 of 57
the pay that they get. There is some relationship there, even if it may not always sound
very pleasant to folks, there is a relationship to what you're going to pay somebody to
what you're going to expect them to do. A strategic evaluation to move salaries to an
appropriate level over amulti-year period, again, that was some idea of the committee
that we needed to look beyond even the two years and say where do we think these
positions will be two, four, six, eight years out. Obviously, they don't necessarily control
that, but-they want us to see, one, to at least plant that seed that here's the progress we
are trying to get to, here is the direction we think we'd like to go. Okay. Equity in light
of the trajectory and growth of the city. That was very significant to the group, because,
again, they see our city as a growing city. I mean we may be fairly -- fairly slow at the
moment, but they didn't see that -- none of these folks -- and I'm sure all of you on the
dais know all of these people in some capacity or another, they don't see Meridian as a
city that's getting smaller, getting less complex, getting less involved over the next two,
four, six, eight years. They anticipate the city growing larger, both population based, as
well as employee based and that the positions that all of you hold are going to become
more time consuming, more -- hopefully interesting, but also more involved than you are
today. And they recognize that being a part of it, compensation has a relationship to
that. Again, your current economic condition of the city and the community. Again,
that's that balancing act as we recognize these are difficult times and increases and
recommending increases for anyone in any position is very concerning, but yet, in
reality, the city has the funds and the capability to do it, because we have been frugal
and because we have been good as a city in watching our dollars and being able to do,
the committee felt comfortable in at least making that recommendation. Partly as an
aside, they also recognize it's not their ultimate decision. I mean they recognize it is
yours and it has to be done by ordinance, so the Council it does fall on you. So, they
recognize that they are making a recommendation that they don't have the ability to
carry out and it does put the burden on you folks, but, yet, they did feel that they wanted
to make that recommendation. So, the committee's recommendations to the Mayor -- or
to the Council is that the Mayor's salary be increased on January 2010 to 76,350 dollars
and, then, on January 1st, 2011, 82,500 dollars. The Mayor currently makes 70,200.
The committee also recommended that the .Council salary be increased to 10,500 in
2010 and 12,000 dollars in 2011. Currently the Council's salaries are 9,000 dollars a
year. Do you have any questions? What I need from you is direction of -- it is required
by state code that we pass an ordinance -- if we are going to change it we'd have to
pass the ordinance by -- I looked it up today, Jaycee. I don't know if -- I think it's August
20th. It's 75 days before the election you have to approve it. So, I think it's August 20th
was the date and that's what sticks in my mind from the AIC. So, we'd have to pass it
by then if you choose to make a change.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I appreciate all the work that the committee has put into it. Certainly a bunch
of knowledgeable people there. I would say right off the bat that the recommendation
for the Mayor's salary is an excellent one. Although it's only officially been designated a
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 15 of 57
full-time job for a short while, it was afull-time job in actuality before that and has now
gotten to be a full and a half time job. The demands that are placed on the Mayor and --
ourcurrent Mayor has stepped up to them excellently and I think works 24 hours a day.
But the demands that are placed on the Mayor I think easily justify the recommended
increases. If anybody wanted to discuss making it even higher I would go for that. So,
I'm very supportive of the recommendation on the Mayor's one. I would say on the City
Council one, as we know, nobody does this job for the pay, there is some time involved
and some compensation I think is fair. I have been satisfied with what we are making
now. The only thing that I would say about the increase is that I also know that there
are some very qualified people that would be good City Councilmen that don't run for
the office, because they don't feel they can put quite as much time in as we do for as
little as we make and whether or not they'd ever be adequately compensated I don't
know. So, I -- if I may state, I am all in favor of the Mayor's salary increases and I could
go either way on the City Council increases.
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Zaremba. Any other comments, Council?
Rountree: Question for Bill. If we take action and set a number, can the pay be based
on an amount not to exceed that number at final budget time? It's tough to stump the
lawyer.
Nary: I'm just waiting until you're done.
Rountree: No, I'm done.
Nary: I was just making sure you were done. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council,
no, you can't do that.
Rountree: So, It's --
Nary: You must set the salary by ordinance and, like I said, my concern would be a
challenge of the separation of powers that if the Council made the decision later to not
fund the position or to do that, based on what their perceived performance would be, I
think you would be challenged by that.
Rountree: Next question, Madam Mayor. The recommendation of the committee is for
a transition to 2011. Can we actually craft an ordinance that does that or can we -- do
we have to wait until the next election cycle to make a change? Can we make a double
change with one ordinance?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Member of the Council, Council Member Rountree, are you
saying to set it beyond 2011?
Rountree: To set it beyond 2010.
Nary: Well, this sets 2010 and 2011.
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 16 of 57
Rountree: My question is can we do that?
Nary: Yes.
Rountree: Two years.
Nary: Yes. You can set it for two years. You can't -- you can set it for ten years, but
you can only revisit it every two. You can set it for -- you can set it -- you don't have to
set it for any amount, you could -- for example, if you wanted to make it 82,500 on
January 1 of 2010, you could make it 82,500 and not do anything for the next two years
and you could not do anything until the next Council two years from now would make a
decision do we want to change it.
Rountree: And that change could go either way.
Nary: Yes. The change could go up or down.
Rountree: Okay.
Holman: And, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, August 20th is the deadline for
publishing the ordinance.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, my comment is that I think that the full-timeness of the
Mayor's position certainly is most evident. I don't disagree with the recommendation to
increase the rate of pay. I'm not convinced that the -- the steps that have been
recommended are the right ones, but I would like some time to think about that and I
have the same opinion as Mr. Zaremba about City Council not here because of the pay.
The compensation received at this point for this councilman is more than sufficient and
I'm not either way. I would recommend that it stay the same for budget purposes.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I agree that I'd like to think about it more. Plus, we have also got our budgets
coming -- the city wide budgets coming the 30th and the 2nd. So, while I, too, am one
that the Council pay is sufficient forme and in these times it's hard to justify an increase,
but I could certainly look at the Mayor's increase, but I want to look at the overall city
budget before I say yea or nay.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun.
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 17 of 57
Hoaglun: I, too, agree that the position of the Mayor is one that has increased in
responsibility and is something that we need to keep up for the demands of the position.
We are the third largest city in the state. The Mayor is the CEO of the city, its day-to-
day management, hands-on management, and it's something that we do need to -- to
have a salary that is in step with qualified people currently in ofFce or in the future. We
want good solid managers in that position and you have to have that salary to do that.
In relation to the Council's salary, you know, I think all of us have been in positions and
organizations where we served and you go to meetings and you work and I have to tell
you I'm still surprised when our paycheck shows up for me. It's kind of like, oh, they pay
me for this job. It's one of the few that you do that you do get a paycheck and it's -- and,
again, as Councilman Zaremba said, you don't do it for the money and -- and there are
a lot of hours and it can be demanding at times, but it is something that I think in light of
the economic situation, you know, we should probably hold off for two years and see
what happens. But, you know, that's something we can talk about and discuss and
think about. I mean this is the first time I have read this document, so appreciate the
committee doing that work, Bill, and they did a good job and that helps us, because it
does impact us and at the same time if I don't come back after the November elections,
whatever the salary we decide on, is whoever follows, that's going to be the salary. So,
that does have ramifications down the road for future members of this body.
Nary: Madam Mayor, if I could just say one more thing. The committee -- the
committee's intent was -- their preference was the final numbers, the ones -- the second
year number. But they recognize an incremental was probably more comfortable and
palatable for folks. But their preference was the 82,500 and the 12,000. That was what
they thought was most appropriate. But, again, they felt -- trying to balance all those
things, that's why they slipped that into two -- two increases, rather than one.
De Weerd: Council, I don't think there was any action for today. I think you do need to
look at it as part of the budget and this was for your information, reporting back from the
committee with their final meeting. Okay.
3. Discussion on Security Card Readers:
Nary: Thank you. Madam Mayor, did you folks add the security doors or did you want
that on the Monday meeting with --
De Weerd: It was part of the motion.
Nary: For tonight. Okay. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, you had asked us
awhile ago -- we had looked at some security doors in the building that have -- do not
have card readers on them. You asked us to prioritize them and to identify those and,
then, bring back a number to you to consider. We did -- we narrowed it down to -- I
thought I had the number. I'm song. We eliminated a bunch of them. We ended up
with an amount that ends up being 38,163 dollars. That's to add reader doors on the
women's locker room in the basement, the exercise room in the basement, the clerk's
file room. The receiving interior door. That's the door off the loading dock here. Right
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 18 of 57
now it only has a key entry and the only key right now for that door is the master key, so
no one else has access through that door. Also the mail room. The access into the
mail room is also a key lock only. This chambers -- the two sets of doors in this
chamber. In the MUBs area, if you noticed, in the cash -- or the area where the public
comes in to pay, there is a door there, it only has a key lock on it. They are concerned
from the security standpoint of ,having to leave that door open or having to have
somebody stand up all day to answer the door. There is an east corridor -- or there is a
doorway on the second floor, the only door in the fire department that is a rear entry
door, has a key and only the chief has the key to that and no other department has that.
The attorneys -- our attorneys office waiting area, the Mayor's office waiting area, there
are no locks at all in those areas and that was it. We took out about seven other doors,
so we took out about 20,000 dollars worth of ones that we thought were not priorities.
These were the ones that were still left and so we like your direction on whether we
should proceed.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Bill, you said 38,000 and you took 20 out or is that 38 after you took 20 out?
Nary: Thirty-eight after we took 20 out.
De Weerd: Questions?
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay.
Rountree: If you're looking for a recommendation, I'd say move forward, get them done.
De Weerd: Do you need a motion, Bill?
Nary: Probably. I'd say Stacy would probably want a motion to that effect.
Rountree: I move that we authorize the priority list for security door -- security card
readers. Those doors stated by Mr. Nary in the amount of 38,000 dollars.
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Madam Clerk, will you call
roll, please.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carries.
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 19 of 57
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Nary: Madam Mayor, do you want a break from me or do you want me to do changes
to the open meeting law before you go to --
De Weerd: That was brave that you asked me that.
Rountree: Before we -- I just -- back to the last item -- or prior to the last item. Take a
message to the compensation committee that we thank them very much for the time
they spent and appreciate the effort and I don't know that we have ever necessarily
agreed with them in total on these compensation committees that I can ever remember,
but we always take their information and use it in some fashion and without it we
wouldn't know where to go. Appreciate the time and effort.
Nary: I appreciate that. I will certainly pass that along.
De Weerd: Thank you.
C. Clerks office:
1. Update on Changes to Open Meeting Laws effective July
1, 2009:
Nary: Do you want me to talk about open meetings?
De Weerd: He just know how wordy you can sometimes get and --
Nary: I have no idea what you're talking about.
De Weerd: I could leave after mine or --
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the open meeting law has been
amended effective July 1st, but I think you probably may have had bad information as to
what the intent of the amendment for -- and how it affects us. The intent of the
amendments were to take the practice that exists both here and in other cities and
make sure in the code it's supported. Many of the things that we do and other cities do
don't really have any support in the code, but everybody does it that way. And so what
they tried to do was to make sure the code matched up with that and also to the credit
of the folks that helped write this, on both the Attorney General's Office, as well as some
folks with AIC and others, is they wanted to make sure that there is a means to cure
violations. You know, most of the things that -- there is four things they did. Three of
them relate to executive session and -- it's predominately executive session and one
relates to the agenda. So, let me tell you real quickly -- as quickly as I can -- on the
amendment agenda -- or agendas and the amendments to the agenda. All agendas for
regular meetings have to be posted prior -- no later than 48 hours prior to the meeting.
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 20 of 57
That's the same law that exists today. Everyone amends their agenda. I know it drives
you crazy and I know sometimes you guys find it irritating -- everyone does that. This
doesn't change it. If you amend the agenda before -- before the 48 hour window, that's
your agenda. Okay? So, what they are saying is I guess other people maybe post their
agendas 60 hours or 72 hours before the agenda -- what the law says now -- the one
that's -- the one that's posted 48 hours before the meeting starts, that's your agenda.
Everything after that, between that 48 hours window and the moment you start your
meeting, are proposed changes, which is what you do now. So, everything like tonight's
agenda and any other meeting you have had -- other things people want to bring for
whatever reason, you can add them to your agenda and what the recommendation from
the Attorneys General's Office is is what you should say -- instead of saying amended
agenda, it should say proposed agenda, because once you start the meeting you're
going to decide what you want to hear and what you're not going to want to hear. You
can add stuff, you can delete stuff, you can not hear stuff, you can do it anyway you
want to do it. So, people can bring it to you at the last minute while you're running in
here, they can run up here and say I've got this contract, we got to have it on tonight.
You can put it on your agenda and you're done. It's fine. It's no violation. The intent
was to, again, give you the flexibility to set the agendas the way you want them to be
and that it wouldn't be a violation to the public if you brought something at the last
minute, because until you have set the agenda and approve it at the beginning of the
meeting, all that's proposed is what's proposed. So, you can do it any way you want.
And if you don't want additions to the agenda, you don't have to allow them, but there is
nothing in the law that prohibits them. The only thing about the provision that I think
some of you heard is the good faith reason -- what the law says was you have to do all
of this in good faith. Well, hopefully, we always do. What it says is once you start the
meeting you have set your agenda and somebody says I forgot we have this
agreement, we have to have this tonight, because it's tomorrow. Now they have to --
now you have to state it on the record what's the good faith reason that you have to do it
now. You don't have to say why we could have done it sooner, just why do I have to do
it right now, because once the meeting starts, the intent is the public's going to know if I
show up at 7:00 o'clock and you set the agenda, that's what you're going to hear. If
something else creeps in but after 7:00 o'clock, then, they are going to have to know
why was that. But up until that meeting starts you can -- everything after that is
proposed. Now, again, how you have informally done it over the years where you get
authorization or approval to add these items to the agenda, that doesn't change, you
can still do that. It doesn't .make any difference. It's just the law hasn't made it harder,
it's trying to make it easier for you. Executive session. This is one -- you probably all
were aware, because I know you have all been to these trainings, is they want to -- they
want to make sure it's clear -- when they used to say in executive session that the law
says you have to convey the general subject matter of the discussion, that doesn't mean
anything to people. They don't know what they are talking about. So, now it says
identify the purpose and topic. So, you have to specifically do what we already do, we
already identify on the agenda what we are talking about. So, if they weren't doing that
before, that's what they have to do. There is exceptions now or they are more specific
on the exceptions, for example, when you are considering hiring people, you have to
actually be considering hiring somebody. What people, I guess, have done and we
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 21 of 57
haven't, but other people have done is they were talking about general openings and
whether we had the budget money to go forward with that and they evolve their
executive session from are we going to hire John Doe to why are we hiring anybody and
why are we doing this and how much money do we have and it evolves itself into stuff
that's not executive session, so what the law says now you have to be -- you have to be
able to show you're actually hiring somebody for a specific job, not just a general
discussion on finances. When you're talking about imminently likely for a lawsuit in
executive session, there is a provision in that that says you have to, again, be -- you
have to be able to identify what's imminent and they tried to narrow that down and
ratchet that down, so that imminent isn't just somebody might sue us, but, actually,
somebody's going to sue us. I mean there is a letter, there is a lawsuit, there is
something more concrete. So, again, that hasn't always being done. The penalty's
different. The penalty used to be up to 150 -- no, excuse me, it was 150 dollars for a
violation. Now it says if it's a knowing violation it's 50 dollars. If it's known -- if you
knowingly violate -- and it's liability. So, if you knowingly violate something it's 50
dollars. But -- and, again, this is I guess what the anticipation of the city attorneys
would be -- is that you shouldn't have it, because they created a cure. If you did it
wrong -- oh, let me back up one more thing. In executive session what happens
occasionally is somebody will -- a group will enter executive session on one premise
that's legitimate, hiring a public officer for example or disciplining someone and, then, it
evolves itself into something else -that still would be an executive session item,
purchasing property or we are talking about hiring and now we are talking about firing.
What the law says now, you have to come back out, amend your agenda, and the new
item, which you can add, because it's an executive session, you can state your good
faith reason why -- we just teamed of this issue, we weren't aware of it previous to this,
add it to the agenda, go back in executive session. What they don't want is they evolve
into things that the public never knew you even talked about. So, that's another change
to executive session. But, again, there is a cure. And so the city -- now the city
attorney -- if you do this right -- when you do it wrong you can fix it. If you fix it, there is
no penalty. And what you're fixing it is do you realize you did it wrong or if somebody
else says you did it wrong, you need to do it over. So, if you didn't notice it up properly
you got to rehear it. If you didn't add it to the agenda properly, add it to next week's
agenda and you can fix it. You can fix it and if you fix it there is no penalty. So, it was
trying to make it easier for elected bodies to be able to do their business the way they
have been doing their business and to make sure that they don't get hung up and that's
what I think a lot of other agencies have gotten hung up on occasion is we did it wrong,
now what do we do. And we can't do anything to fix it. We do, then, we are going to be
in trouble and, then, we will get a 150 dollar civil penalty and that's not going to be a
good thing. You can go on the record, you can admit we made an error, we didn't add
this properly, we didn't add this on at the right time, or whatever the violation is, we are
going to do it over. So, once you do it over it's done. There is no penalty for that. So,
there are some changes, it's probably not as significant as some people may have led
you to believe, because I know that was some of the discussion prior to the AIC
meeting. I reread the code tonight just to be sure I wasn't mishearing it and it's pretty
clear to me, it's not meant to make it harder, it really is meant to make it easier. It's
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 22 of 57
really meant to make it run the way you do it anyway, so -- do you have any other
questions?
De Weerd: No. It is kind of disappointing about the agenda. I do put you all on notice.
No late -- unless they are an emergency addition.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: I know this Council is getting tired of it and I say that because I am. Mr.
Zaremba.
Zaremba: Just curious whether or not, even though we would be allowed to add
agenda items, could we make a policy of our own that anybody that adds anything after
48 hours gets the very last item on the agenda?
De Weerd: Now, that would be effective.
Nary: The only thing I would recommend you not to do -- at our city attorneys meeting,
the city of St. Manes has an ordinance that prohibits adding agenda items and it,
obviously, must be very important to them. The problem is is it's not a lot of logic to
creating an ordinance that only applies to you and it doesn't apply to anyone else. If
you don't like it, you're just going to repeal it. You can set policy or standard any way
you want, you can set guidelines, that's perfectly within your realm of doing that, but I
wouldn't recommend you set an ordinance that the only person to be penalized is the
Council themselves and that doesn't make much sense. Reasonably short.
De Weerd: That's a great idea.
Nary: Thank you.
B. Planning Department:
1. Discussion on CZC Fee Clarification and Additions:
De Weerd: Okay. Pete.
Friedman: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. What we have before
you tonight is a proposal from the planning department to reorganize and restructure
our certificate of zoning compliance fee schedule to really accurately depict more the
amount of time we are spending on certain planning approvals and decrease the
amount of duplicate paperwork that we are going to be -- that we currently require for
some of our tenants. Essentially we want to reduce the fees and the paperwork for
tenants that are requesting a change of use if the building is currently in compliance
with the city code. Right now there are two types of CZC's, or certificates of zoning
compliance. One with the full-blown application and which is establishing a new use,
we are looking at the building, and the site for code compliance and that costs 453
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 23 of 57
dollars. The second one is referred to as the certificate of zoning compliance with prior
approval and which applies in the case where the buildings are there, they have gone
through a CZC process or a CUP process and they are simply modifying the original
site plans or are having a change of use within the building. So, what we are asking
you to do is add another category for CZC's called the CZC verification, which would
only cost 53 dollars. This allows a tenant to change the use of the building, with no
exterior alterations, without supplying all the paperwork, site plans, and so forth that we
typically require for a CZC. It would only be allowed if the building has an existing
certificate of zoning compliance on file and if there is no -- the change does not trigger
any other code requirements or physical site modifications. In addition, we are also
requesting that we drop the CZC, the prior approval fee, down to 173 dollars to match
the design review fee, thereby eliminating some confusion. We think it's an equitable
change. It's just something that we have been looking at and trying to figure out how to
formalize. We gave you about a three or four page memo on this, complete with a very
detailed flow chart, but what I'd like to do is we have prepared an interactive change of
use handout that we can use both for our staff and for our applicants to reflect what we
were talking about tonight. So, if you will indulge me just for a moment, I'm going to use
the Joe's building, which is now sitting vacant, and show you -- try to illustrate how this
would apply. So, the first question we would ask is is it a legal use. Well, obviously, it
is. So, is the applicant making interior changes only and, again, the answer is yes.
Well, is the intended use the same as previously existed and if somebody is coming for
a retail use in that space and the answer is yes, go straight to building to services for
you tenant improvement, your change of occupancy, no CZC modification, no CZC
verification, anything like that. We are hoping this tool assists our clients and our staff in
wading through the determinations on this. So, going back to the same building, back
to Joe's. Is it an existing legal use? The answer is yes. Are they making improvements
only to the interior and the answer is yes, but is it a different use than previously
existed? If for some reason they are taking that space, which was once retail and now
turning it into something different, like office suits or something like that, so it is no
longer -- it is no longer the same use, so is there a certificate of zoning compliance
currently existing for the building, the answer is yes. And are there any site
modifications that are required? Well, in the case of Joe's the answer would be no,
because the parking and the landscaping is there and so forth, there is no need to go
through design review. So, all they would need would be this new CZC verification
letter, which would cost 53 dollars and wouldn't require the amount of paperwork that
we usually require. Right now, again, that would be a CZC modification for 187 dollars.
That in a nutshell is what we are proposing. So, we are trying to cut down the amount
of paperwork and some of the costs, if we are merely converting existing spaces for
new uses and developing this slick little tool to help us all wade through the process.
De Weerd: Where is the I don't know button?
Friedman: That is the reset button right there and, really, the I don't know button is the
use legal and the answer is no, then, you're back to square one and bringing everything
to code.
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 24 of 57
De Weerd: Council, any questions?
Bird: It's a good program to me, Mayor.
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree?
Rountree: I have no questions, I just wanted to thank Pete and Will for putting that
together. I know he just sits in the comer there and comes up with these neat little
process charts and materials. So, good job. It will certainly help.
Friedman: Thank you. I'll pass that on to him. I think he's working on a couple more of
those, so I think we will be seeing more of them in the future.
De Weerd: Thank you, Pete. Any others? No. Thank you.
Friedman: Thank you.
D. Police Department:
1. Weed abatements:
a. Blaser properties Cherry / Linder $1,650.00 -
b. 331 S. Malachite - $300.00 -parcel -
c. 1513 Tourmaline $275.00 -parcel -
d. 2305 Beatrice $250.00 -parcel -
Total approval for abatements: $ 2,475.00
De Weerd: Okay. The next item is under police department about weed abatement.
Overton: Good evening, Mayor and Council. Just a precursor to this about weed
abatement, you will not see this in the form of a report or coming before you as a
general rule. We thought this first one to kind of talk about the perfect storm that we are
seeing this year, might be good to do it in person and explain where we are at. In
further meetings and further abatements, you will see that we will submit the paperwork
through the city. attorney's office. Emily has the legal documentation and will actually
come through on the Consent Agenda for all further abatements. So, do not feel that
what I talk about tonight is how the process will be every week. We worked it out last
year. The reason we are here tonight is talk to the chief and talked to legal about really
kind of laying out where we are at, because we are seeing the perfect storm of weeds
this year. Due to that tremendous growth we have seen we have a lot of ground, we
are seeing a lot of not just people losing jobs, but losing houses and foreclosure, but we
are losing builders and now we are losing developers and because we are seeing that
we are seeing way more properties than we have ever had to deal with. Coupled with
that a beautiful June has given us at least three times the normal rainfall, so our eight
inches of weeds are running four to five feet tall and it's causing a tremendous amount
of concern for us. We are running -- instead of dealing a hundred weed complaints, we
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 25 of 57
are dealing with 500 to 1,000 and in one subdivision alone right now we are dealing with
130 lots and a developer who is in bankruptcy proceedings. It's made us challenging.
We want to make sure that you know that we have got -- in fact, that is what we do. I
think weed abatement is the code enforcement right now, because that's literally 98
percent of our job. We have got these four tonight and I say it's a very fluid -- we
passed onto the Mayor how our process works, how we go through identifying any and
all possible owner of the property, the letters that we file to the property owners notifying
them of the process and how soon and what we will do and what actions will be taken.
What we didn't put really is kind of a syndrome that we call shaking the tree, because
when we have trouble locating people, we call everybody and we just shake that tree
and see what falls out and one of the attributes of that is it becomes very fluid on what
happens. For example, tonight originally on Friday I had these four properties listed that
we needed to have .abated. As of today two of them have been abated. Now, we don't
know who did it, because nobody answered our letters, no one answered our phone
calls, but there is a mysterious person out there that's sneaking around abating some of
these properties and we appreciate that. I wish we could direct them where to go next.
So, tonight what I really stand in front of you to do is to notify you that we have got some
big abatement issues coming up, we will come in front of you on those. I mean if you
have to do a development of 130 properties, you can imagine what the cost would be.
We are working -- we have a representative from legal and from code enforcement
going to their homeowners meeting, trying to work out a solution that does not involve
us abating those properties. The homeowners association has the ability to abate and
file liens, they are just worried their legal people are telling them if they do that right now
and it changes hands, their liens are no good. So, they are in a little bit of a position as
well. So, tonight I'm asking for permission, if you will grant us the ability to abate --
unfortunately still the most expensive one on the list, which is A, the Blaser property,
which is three parcels at Cheny Lane and Linder, which is very obvious to certain
people sitting on the Council as they drive home every day. And C, 1513 Tourmaline,
we have a situation there where the residence -- the resident is going to be occupied in
a structure to the south of town for a little while longer and they can't take care of their
weeds. So, we need to take care of that one as well. So, the total tonight corrected as
of this aftemoon is 1,925 dollars. So, with that I stand to answer any questions. I also
have a note just to head off a question I was warned about this aftemoon. I will be
getting in touch with someone about some weeds backing up to property and we will do
that tomorrow and make sure that's already on our radar. With that I'll ask if there is any
questions we can answer.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: How long does it take when weeds are reported to get some action, lieutenant?
Overton: Well, if --
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 26 of 57
Bird: Do we have to go through a -- writing a letter to the owner and, then, waiting, so --
giving them so many days or something?
Overton: Because we are compliance based we don't pull enforcement out as our first
tool. We seek to get communication with the landowners or the lenders or the owners,
landlords, whoever, and see if we can get that repertoire going to get that handled.
Many of these will strike up a conversation with somebody and have promises made. I
bet I have 20 properties right now that they are working on where we have been
promised and promised for over a month I'm going to get that done next week and we
have to say, you know, we can't play anymore, then, we go through with the letter that
we had designed by legal and file letter to them, which really only gives them -- I believe
it's another five days after that and, then, we can bring it through you. After the five day
letter is expired we, then, get our bids on abatement and can bring them forward and
part of what we have been going through and part of the reason I'm here is we have had
a very very good success rate up until now. I mean all the properties we abated last
year we -- we even got the state of Idaho to abate one of them, because they know they
are going to own it and we thought it might be in their best interest and they bought it.
Fantastic. They did it. Department of Health and Welfare abated a property. It will
never happen again. But the fact that they did it was great. So, everything we did last
year we managed to get abated this year without having to come in front of you. The
problem we are running into now is what we have left is probably going to be a high
percentage of abatements, not getting them done.
Bird: We got a real problem out at -- on the sidewalk out by Heritage Middle School.
There is a sidewalk there, but you can't tell it. And kids this spring -- and I should have
paid attention sooner -- had to walk in the road, because they didn't want to walk
through a weed patch to get --
Overton: Yeah. We can add about 20 to 30 more sidewalks just like that around town.
We have got parts of pathway we are dealing with in Southern Springs right now where
we have had to go back and get agreements with planning to determine who is
responsible fora 14 inch swath of weeds next to our beautiful pathway.
Bird: Can I ask another question, Mayor?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Bird: And Bill might have to answer this, but if you do it and file a lien, he said
something about the lien don't go if it changes ownership? I thought the lien went with
the property and before you could change ownership it had to be cleared.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the lien would run, but what I think
John's talking about is -- it's not as fast or easy a process. I mean it's still a lawsuit to
file a lien on someone's property, because we are the government and that's why we
encourage the HOA's to do it, because through their CC&Rs they can do that, they can
assess special assessments, they can file liens as part of their homeowners
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 27 of 57
association, whereas we have to file a lawsuit, get a judgment, then, file the lien for that.
So -- and, again, you got an absent owner who is already broke, who -- even, then, is
still --Imean it doesn't cost us a great deal of money and time, but it does -- it just adds
more money and time on the time that they have already spent on the enforcement
piece. So, it's not something we can't do, it's something that -- it's not as seamless as --
or as easy as we would like it to be.
Bird: And I agree that the homeowners association would be the best to do that, don't
get me wrong, but I probably misunderstood him, I thought he said that it don't go --
even the homeowners association attorneys were not wanting to do it, because it didn't
transfer with the property, but having been in the business that had to file liens once in
awhile, I can assure you it goes -- sometimes you don't get your money.
Nary: Well -- and, Mr. Bird, I think part of what you're talking, though, too, is
materialman's liens are different than judgment liens and that's -- and that's the
difference. A materialman's lien like what you've experienced in your line of work,
because, essentially, the product is attached to the ground, is the reason why it runs
with the land. These others will run with the individual, because that's who the
judgments against, if you can get a judge to agree to attach it as a lien on the property,
then, that -- and that's what I think they are talking about is that -- it's a different type of
lien, so -- and because with the government we have to go through all of those steps to
do it, so that's again -- it's a little more problematic. The most difficult one, which I think
people have this misunderstanding, is that we can get a tax lien and get the assessor to
collect it. We can't get them to collect for this. We can get them to collect for taxes.
De Weerd: I guess, lieutenant, my concern is traditionally this was taken care of
through homeowners associations. I don't want to be the homeowners association and
I don't think the taxpayers should, you know, put that risk out there. Now, for the larger
ones or the vacant owners, I -- you know, I don't know how best to even say there
should be a priority order to some of these. We just need to be cautious that it doesn't
become the city is now one big giant homeowners association. So, that would be my
concern.
Overton: Yeah. We don't want to do that either. Our budget is -- as you know, 2,000
dollars and I'm asking for 1,925 and telling you this is just the tip of the iceberg. We
don't want to go there. We are going to try to limit this as much as we can.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Imean -- and we have said the same
thing, too, from the legal department. Imean that's not the message we think is
appropriate for the taxpayer. If the city was just in the business of cutting weeds,
everybody would let us cut their weeds. That's not the -- that's not what we do and
that's why we really do try to work hard with code enforcement and we do get a
significant amount of voluntary compliance, it's just that there is a point in time where we
can't continue to rely on that and we have to get to this step, so --
De Weerd: Well, I know I'm the first one to call, so -- any other comments?
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 28 of 57
Rountree: Madam Mayor, just a question for the lieutenant. You want an action from
us this evening or just a nod of the head to go ahead and do what you're doing?
Overton: What action I need is whatever will make the attorney happy. If that's a nod of
the head, then, we will get -- we can go forward with it. I just need approval on A and C.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, John had asked this question earlier
today. Our ordinance is written in way it requires you to authorize this specifically, that's
why it's in front of you. So, you do need to make a motion.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we authorize the expenditure for weed abatement for the Blaser
property at Cherry and Linder and 1513 Tourmaline in the amount of 1,925 dollars.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. If there is no discussion, Madam Clerk,
please call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Overton: Thank you.
Item 7: Items Moved from Consent Agenda:
De Weerd: Thank you. Item 7, there were no items moved from the Consent Agenda.
Item 8: SSC Update and Final Public Comment:
De Weerd: We will move to Item 8, which is SSC update and final public comment. Mr.
Sedlacek.
Sedlacek: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. We were last here on
May 19th and we, I believe, began a public hearing on converting the city to an
automated collection system for recycling and solid waste. At that meeting you
requested that we develop some sort of a rate structure based on a number of
assumptions that we don't know if it will occur or not, but just to put our arms around
what this might look like in 2010 as far as the rate structure goes. I presented you guys
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 29 of 57
with a memo with that information. I can go through it tonight if you'd like. I don't know
-- I have got just a summary of it up on the overhead if you'd like to talk through that or
we can just open this up for open public comment or you can ask me questions,
whatever your pleasure might be.
De Weerd: Steve, if you want to give a summary of comments to date and where you're
at and, then, the public will have more to comment on perhaps.
Sedlacek: Okay. Well, where we are at is -- we are prepared to -- basically the
schedule that we discussed is that we convert the recycling to a commingled recycling
system this fall. It's looking like we can do that in October. I have ordered a number of
trucks, so I hope this goes through, and -- we can cancel the order if we have to, but --
we would, then, convert the solid waste collection next spring to automated collection
and this would allow homeowners to try the recycling system, understand how
automated collection works, and get a handle on how much waste is left over in their --
in their personal residences after they recycle. So, kind of a teaming tool. The
recycling piece would not cause any rate change. The landfill fees will be going up this
fall and discussions with Ada County, I asked them for a range of possible numbers and
they said from zero to 40 percent. So, it's probably closer to 40 than zero, but I don't
know the number and I'm sure I won't know if for awhile. I did do a look at the
consumer price index, which is what our costs are pegged to, and found out that the
consumer price index is going down. Deflation is occurring. So, what that means to me
is my portion of the structure will go down in October, assuming that the trend I see in
May continues in June, which -- now, it hasn't changed that fast, so probably going to be
a bad thing for me and a good thing for the customers. That's what was discussed in
the rate memo. Can we technically see it real quickly or not?
Rountree: Well, probably ought to. I have gone through it, so --
Sedlacek: Okay. Basically, the current rate structure is 13.45, if you have your own
cans. Unlimited collection. Weekly collection. That includes recycling. And this is -- I
break this out just as I do every year for you in the memo and I gave you in August for
the October rate change, some of it goes to the city for franchise fees, some the county,
and some to Sanitary Service, which is both recycling and solid waste collection. And --
how do Imake this thing go forward?
Friedman: I can do it for you.
Sedlacek: Okay.
Friedman: Maybe.
Sedlacek: October 1st -- or we can just slide the bar down it.
Friedman: Now you're getting ahead of me. Okay.
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 30 of 57
Sedlacek: There we go. If you would -- what I have done in the summary is I have just
said let's look at the 40 percent rate increase. In your memos you have got a zero
percent rate increase and a 40 percent rate increase and pretty soon we are talking
about too many things and it's too confusing, so let's just talk about the 40 percent one
to the landfill. What you will see is the $13.45 becomes 14.71, it's about a buck and a
quarter rate increase. And, then, the 2.88 cart renter becomes 2.88, because we had to
decrease that cost by probably about one percent. So, the rate that was 16.33 is now
17.56. So, basically, everybody's rate in October is probably to go up about a buck and
a quarter. Okay? Nothing we can do about it. Of course, we will modify this memo and
get it to you in August when we know -- I suppose -- I hope we will know the county's
landfill numbers. So, let's talk about -- so, let's assume it's next spring and we want to
convert to automated. How do we do that? Well, we take the landfill fee, which is 4.47
per house per month and we put it right in the center of this matrix and say that, you
know, that's what -- that's purchased for the average homeowner two garbage cans a
week, 64 gallons of waste. We, then -- well, of course, we add our cost, 9.35, that's the
same. It cost me $9.35 to get to your house twice a week, basically, and pick up
recycling and garbage. We had the disposal -- now, we have a cart number in there for
a dollar, basically, Sanitary Services receives money now for carts and we will need to
cover that cost in the future. We will have two carts at every house. If you assume that
the carts cost about 50 dollars each, they will last about a hundred months, 50 cents a
month for a cart. Now, that's just the principal. If I have to get a loan that doesn't
include any interest charges. So, it's a little bit of a low number forme. But it's from my
capital. Okay? And, then, your six percent franchise fees varies, because the total
varies. And so the rate that was -- you know. So, the rate that was 14.71 up to 17.56,
now ranges from 13.39 to 18.15, approximately -- the range has gotten wider. We are
charging more for people that throw away more, less for people that throw away less.
Will people's rates go up and down? The answer is, yes, they will do both. Some
people's rates will go from 14.71 up to 18 dollars, so you will have to get a 95 gallon
cart, because they don't want to recycle or they have a big family or they like to mow
their grass and throw their grass away. I don't know. Some people will find that -- a
majority of the people, actually, in the city will rent a cart and they pay 17.56. Well, they
are going to be able to rent a smaller cart for 15.77 and save two dollars -- about a buck
eighty a month. That's a great deal. So, I don't -- everyone will have a different story
about whether this is good or bad. You will either love it or hate it, that's for sure. I
don't mean to be flip about the cost, you know, it just sort of is what it is. This is how we
would divide up the landfill fees to be a volume -- to be a base volume based billing
system. Okay? Just sort of mathematically. So, in our public presentations we talked
about a range of about 18 dollars fora 96 gallon cart, it came out to be 18.15. The 64
gallon I thought would be about 14 dollars, it's 15.77ish. Of course, these numbers are
subject to change based on what happens. So, I was close. I wasn't quite pertectly
accurate, but I thought I did a pretty good job, though. One thing to remember is we are
not going to advertise the 32 gallon can size. We are going to advertise the 64's and
96's. We can't have too many people picking the small can and, then, not liking it and
sending it back. The cart purchases alone will cost us over two million dollars. So, I
can't have too many of those retumed to me. The 96 gallon ones that they get retumed
to me, I can reuse those as recycling carts as the city grows or we can change the lid
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 31 of 57
color to be -- move it from a garbage can to a recycling can. We are going to have them
interchangeable with different -- with just buying different lids. Right now we are going
to have green garbage cans with green lids for garbage and green garbage cans with
red lids for recycling. Red recycling, green garbage. That's my theory. So, that's
where we are at and do you have any questions?
De Weerd: Council, any questions?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Steve, the recycling can will be a 64 gallon?
Sedlacek: It will be. There are some people who may not be able to get by two weeks
with a 64 gallon can. Now, we would be happy to give them a 96.
Rountree: And that comes with no fee?
Sedlacek: That's correct.
Rountree: Okay.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor? Yeah. If I can follow up on that. Recycling will be once
every two weeks and garbage is still on once a week, but recycling once every two
weeks will be picked up; correct?
Sedlacek: Yes, that's correct. We will be switching to bi-weekly -- it's -- we have to do
that, because if we drive by 1,000 homes and pick up half full cans it's really inefficient.
We'd rather drive by 500 homes and pick up full cans and that's -- that's really it for us.
We -- to make this work financially that's -- we have to do that.
Hoaglun: And, Madam Mayor, I wanted to ask about the bag tags. That seems to be --
of all the comments I hear, what do I do with my grass clippings, et cetera, et cetera. In
your memo I didn't see anything about in the past you talk about, you know, if you get a
96 gallon, whatever you can put in that thing you can -- and close the lid, it was in. With
the bag or -- bag tags or whatever you want to call it, what's the process for that? Do
they have to be in the -- they will have to be outside the container, but are there any
other stipulations or how will that work?
Sedlacek: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, and Councilman Hoaglun, we have
a rate proposed on the bottom, last paragraph of the memo, 75 cents a tag. I have
gotten that by taking the 32 gallon can rate, dividing it by four, you know, it's about -- it's
about 60 cents a week fora 32 gallon can for disposal and, then, I'm going to have
some idle time -- I got to get out of the truck and throw it into the cart. So, it's about 75
cents my cost. So, what -- to do that what we will have to have is some procedure to
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 32 of 57
come and purchase the tag. I assume that we will purchase them at City Hall and since
the city has always been the handler of the money, you send out the bills and handle all
the money, that you would continue to do that. You may choose to have some sort of a
system where you could buy them at D&B Supply or Sanitary Service or some other
place. How we control those tags and missing tags and, you know, that kind of thing, is
something we would have to work through. I'm hoping also that people could call into
the city, if they don't -- can't make it down here, call in and identify themselves and have
it put on their bill, their utility bill, and sent to that address and charge it on a Visa card
maybe. No?
De Weerd: I can hear it already. You haven't talked with finance about the tag system?
Okay.
Hoaglun: But Madam Mayor --
Sedlacek: We would be happy to sell the tags -- just if I could interrupt just for a minute.
I'm sorry. We would be happy to sell the tags, we can take Visa cards over the phone,
and send them where ever they want. You would have to trust us that we will are
reporting to you how much revenue we receive, so that we did the franchise fee
properly. We can do -- the tags will be serial numbered, so we will know, you know, if
there is missing ones or if there fake ones out there that people are trying to gin up on
their color copiers and that kind of thing.
De Weerd: Problem solved. You got it.
Sedlacek: Okay.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: The bag tag would be tagged on a specified size and kind of bag or size and
type of can?
Sedlacek: What I have proposed in the last paragraph is that it be in a bag or a can.
Rountree: Weight restricted?
Sedlacek: Well, they are all weight restricted now. A bag is 35 pounds and a can is 65.
So, actually, you know, if you're a homeowner it's better to put it on a can. There is --
mean Ithink Boise is going to be charging a dollar for their tags, but they are going to
be giving away five free to every homeowner. At least in the beginning to get people
used to it. I'm not sure I want to give out a lot of free tags, but it seems like a 75 cent
per tag rate is pretty reasonable. You would also have the option to -- as a homeowner
if you were -- had a steady flow of extra weight, you can rent a second 65 gallon -- or 64
gallon can or 96 gallon can and keep it for a number of months through the summer if
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 33 of 57
you want to do that, that would be easier. I'm hoping that people will mulch their grass,
rather than just continue to throw it away. And grass is the biggest problem. I mean
that is the problem.
Hoaglun: I think, Madam Mayor, the solution about it, if they realize that mulching
blades do work and they don't have to be collecting that up, but -- and, then, that's a
question I know in the fall, Steve, they were, there was some discussion about some
homeowners about their leaves and so they could rent another container and have that
picked up once a week. They may not get rid of them atone time, or they could rent or
buy the tags -- is that kind of how you envision that to work in the fall?
Sedlacek: Councilman Hoaglun, in fall leaf collection we are going to be providing a
free leaf collection for two weeks, as we do now. Actually, it's a one week collection
now, we are going to extend it to two, and we will also have free leaf drop off at the
transfer station for the month of November. So, if you can get the stuff in a paper bag to
us, you can get it to us for free if you bring it to us, or for the two week period we will
pick it up on the curb for free. The issue with renting carts, we are going to have to be
careful about. I don't want someone renting a cart because they are having a party and,
then, I have got to deliver it and, then, pick it up in the next week and, then, redeliver it
-- you know, that -- unless we have delivery and redelivery charges, that would be okay.
Typically you don't do that, you would tell someone if you want to rent a second cart you
have to keep it for, you know, four months or something like that. Some period of time
to avoid a delivery charge. So, we are getting into a more complicated system where
we have to keep track of toter carts and what people are doing and what carts are
where. So, we are automating our system, but more difficult to track.
Hoaglun: And just to follow up on that, Steven -- and I think that would work, where
you're offering -- extending it two weeks, although the one homeowner -- I was at a
meeting and, you know, Sycamore -- he's explaining Sycamore trees fall later in, you
know, November, et cetera, et cetera. What is the process, then, for getting the word
out to people about this. I assume the city's going to be involved in that, you will be
involved in that. Do we have a marketing plan, if you will, to make citizens understand
what the changes are?
Sedlacek: We have put together a public out reach plan and that is the key to success.
It is the central issue, really. Particularly with regard to recycling being every other
week, you know, people are going to wake up on their trash day and not -- are they on
week A or week B and which week is it and that kind of thing. Did I put it out last week?
I can't remember. They will have to call their neighbors. Or go on the website. It's got
to be a multi-media issue where we have intemet -- we have to have some sort of
intemet map so you can look up your -- where you are in the house and check a
calendar and see if it's week A or week B this week. That's easy enough to do. We
need to send out fliers to people, we have to do it through the -- through the
newsletters. When we hand out the carts we are going to have to have all that literature
with the cart, hooked onto the handle somehow. And the companies that produce and
manufacture these cart have all that information, we can get that from them. I don't
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 34 of 57
know if we want to go to the point of, you know, TV spots and
go that distance. It is somewhat frustrating to figure out
environment we are in who -- how do you get information tc
frustrating.
Hoaglun: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything else from Council at this point?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
radio ads and -- we can
in this fractured media
the public. It could be
Zaremba: A question on the can tag -- actually, about the cans. I understood your
explanation earlier about the bags, because the way they would be done is that the
homeowners regular can would be dumped and, then, when it came back down the
operator would have to get out of the truck and put the bag into that can, which would,
then, be dumping it. How do you do that with a can?
Sedlacek: You just take the can you dump it.
Zaremba: Empty it into --
Sedlacek: Empty it into the larger 96 gallon can. Yeah.
Zaremba: Okay. So, your people are going to have to lift some nonstandard cans
and --
Sedlacek: In the very first -- in the very first public meeting that we had at Sanitary
Service, I was proposing that we not do tags and just say it's got to be in the can,
because I don't want to have -- one of the issues with this conversion is we don't want to
have injuries, which if we get out of the cab and start lifting something, we are going to
have. But there is so much comment about what do we do with all this extra stuff that
we have to have some mechanism to do it, it's -- it's an imperfect solution to this issue.
So, this is sort of where we are landing if you want to move this way. Now, one thing
about the can that we need to be very clear about is you can't have your lid open on
your can. What you're paying for is that can with the lid shut and that's what you get.
And if you have extra you need to smash it down more in your can, I guess, or buy a tag
and put a bag out or tag your own -- personally owned can, your 32 gallon can. So, we
are going to have to be somewhat mean, difFcult with some customers who just throw
stuff in there and the lid's half open or all the way open and we are going to have to
figure out some mechanism, either we are not going to dump the cans, which is going to
cause a problem, or we are going to have to -- I don't know, in some cities they charge
you a dollar or something. I don't know. Well, then, how do we prove the can was
open. Well, then, we have to take a digital photo of that house. Well, then, the
homeowner says, well, that's not my stuff in there, my neighbor put that in there. There
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 35 of 57
is going to be issues. You're going to get phone calls about this. It's not as clean as
unlimited collection, but it's going to take some time to get everyone understanding the
system. We are moving from an imperfect system to another imperfect system.
Zaremba: All right. Thank you. Just a comment on what -- the charge for the tags. I
would suggest charge a dollar each, but six for five dollars, something like that.
Sedlacek: Bulk discount. Okay. I like that.
Hoaglun: Council President?
Rountree: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Just a follow up on -- I did have one other question on the tags. If someone
wants to come in they are going to be coded, they are colored, or different things like
that, if they know they are going to be cleaning and they are going to have a lot of stuff,
but it's going to be multiple weeks and they want to come in and buy them in bulk, can
they do that -- I mean will that work with the system that you're looking at for -- they put
some out one week and, then, they have got some they want to put out the next week,
that would be okay?
Sedlacek: Absolutely. Councilman Hoaglun, the tags are good forever.
Hoaglun: Okay.
Sedlacek: So, they are not time stamped or good for 30 days or anything like that. I
assume what we will do is we won't sell them anything less than five dollars increments,
would be my guess. I doubt someone's going to come in and buy one tag for a dollar or
whatever. And, then, if your neighbor needs one, you can give it to your neighbor or
use it one a month for six months.
Hoaglun: I think you just helped me out on my Christmas list.
Rountree: Further questions? Thank you, Steve. We are taking public comment this
evening and I have signed up Edward Dunns. Denis? There is no indication how to
pronounce it, so come on up and and give us your name and address, please.
Denis: My name is Edward Denis at 2887 North Fieldstone Way here in Meridian.
83646. First I have never been here to one of your Council meetings, so I'm not sure
exactly how this works, but -- can you folks hear what these guys are saying? It's your
volume or something, because you guys mumble. I can't hear what the hell you're
saying. That's just an aside. But maybe I'm here on a mute point, because I'm here
because of the trash guys. I'm not convinced Meridian city is serious about recycling
Maybe now with these bins or something, maybe there is going to be a change. But
where I have a real problem -- I'm one of these guys with a Sycamore tree and those
leaves don't come down until November and December and January, and these two
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 36 of 57
weeks of free leaf pick up don't help me at all. I had 25 bags of leaves accumulated that
I took to the landfill, because I want to do my part in recycling, I could have thrown them
in the bin. Drove to the landfill up there at Ada County. But I'm trying to do my part.
They got 26 bags of leaves, I used my time, my truck, wear and tear on my truck, my
gas, and they have the audacity to charge me 13 dollars to go in there and dump it. I
ripped out part of a fence this past spring, 150 feet of new fence, took all the old
stripped cedar boards, I could have cut them up, put them in the bin, but, no, I put them
in my truck, hauled them to the transfer station there to recycle them. They got gins out
there to put this stuff into -- 15 dollars I had to -- why should I have to pay for something
-- I'm trying to help out here. That should be a free service. I'm taking trash -- yes.
There should not be a charge on that. And even with these new bins, if I get a lot of
stuff, I don't want them sitting around my house for two or three weeks, I want to get it
out of there. My house is neat. I want to keep it that way. I'll haul it, but there should
not be a fee like they are charging. How you -- how you can agree to that I don't know.
I mean I understand these fees are going up and I hope you will do a better job of
notifying the homeowners about their fee increase requests, as opposed to how you did
on the sewer increase and the water increases, that was a shame. We were blindsided
by that. But I just wanted to make my feelings known that I should not have to be
paying -- I'm paying their monthly fees as it is and I'm trying to do my part to help
recycling. That's the big thing right now is recycling. Joe Green. Don't charge me twice
for when I'm trying to help out. Okay?
Rountree: Thank you.
Denis: Thank you for your time.
Rountree: Anybody else wish to provide comments this evening? Please. Your name
and address.
Green: My name is Diana Green. I live at 1520 West 1st and I would just to like say
that for being in California in over six years ago, we lived in a community where the city
was -- had pressure put upon them to start recycling, because they are running out of
places to throw garbage and so, of course, they passed that onto us and they said, you
know, we could not have an extended -- you know, all the cans we wanted and it was
amazing how motivated we all got, you know, from whining and complaining, we got
very motivated, so it's the point after awhile you start being a real recycled Nazi, you
walk around the neighborhood and you go, uh, look what they are throwing away, you
know. And so you get really really motivated. I think it's a good thing. I can't wait to
have the commingled recycling -- I mean, you know, I guess my life's not exciting, but it
really is turning out to be. So, we do have neighbors that have -- I want to say a bajillion
-- but six or seven cans, things hanging all over them, and if they had to pay more for
their garbage I think that they would get motivated, too, to start thinking about what
goes where. And it's just a responsible thing to do to recycle. And I know we have to
pay for recycling here and there is things to whine about, but it was just -- I think it's a
good thing to do.
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 37 of 57
Rountree: Thank you. Anyone else want to make a comment? Madam Mayor, you can
take it back.
De Weerd: Okay. You were doing such a good job. If there is no further public
comment -- Mr. Sedlacek, do you have any final wrap-up remarks? Okay. Council, any
questions for staff or SSC?
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, just a comment to address one issue raised. I know -- and
this is kind of for Public Works and staff, Iknow -- I think we are still working on plans,
looking at down the road of doing some leaf recycling, some sort of program, we have
got to find a space, we got to go through that process, but that is something that we are
working on; is that correct?
Radek: Madam Mayor, Mr. President, Council Member Hoaglun, I am not prepared to
speak to that. I think Mr. Sedlacek might have a little more knowledge, because I know
he and Mr. Bany had been talking about trying to get some composting going and they
have been working out some numbers, but I'm not sure how far they have gotten.
De Weerd: I think it's just still on the talk stage. Very early. So, it is in discussion and
we do hope to move in that direction.
Hoaglun: Great. Thank you.
De Weerd: There is obstacles, though.
Hoaglun: Of course.
De Weerd: Council, any other questions?
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Well, we did hold this public comment period open until tonight. Mr.
Nary, procedurally what -- what are the next steps?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I think what we had talked about initially
is some vote of this Council to move forward -- if the desire is to move forward with
automated collection, I think what's proposed in the memo from SSC again is to begin
the -- the recycling portion in October, to, then, begin the automated trash collection in
the spring. If that's your direction, because of the commitment that's necessary as to
the capital to be able to fulfill that, the desire was to have a vote of this Council, if that's
the direction you want to go, so they have assurance that when they are ordering all
these trucks and investing this additional capital, that they have some assurance that
that's the desire of the city in moving forward. So, some direction from this Council, a
motion and a vote I think would be appropriate to go forward.
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 38 of 57
De Weerd: Thank you. I guess, Mr. Nary, or Ms. Clerk, do we have an open public
hearing or this was a public comment period?
Nary: This was just a public comment period.
De Weerd: Okay. Well, Council, I will look for your direction.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we authorize SSC to
program starting in October and phase in the
date, possibly in the spring, but as the system
by the end of the summer next year.
move forward with the recycled pick up
automated collection system falling thal
and the bugs are worked out, hopefully,
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Madam Clerk, will you call
roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: I guess I would ask Mr. Nary and Mr. Sedlacek if we can work on drafting a
letter to the county regarding the landfill rates and I do know in talking to Commissioner
Tilman, who is the chair of the commission, that they don't anticipate a 40 percent
increase, they have asked their landfill director Mr. Neal to go back to the drawing board
and bring back different numbers. And so we hope to see that remain as flat as we can
until these new programs and those that use less pay less and to reward those that
recycle and those that dispose of more will cover more of the cost. So, I would, though,
like that probably from the Mayor and City Council, but since you have the details and
some of the background information, let's -- let's get together and write a letter to the
commission to support their -- their interest in -- in zero or lower impact.
Bird,: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Steve, also -- and you've done a great great job -- do a little better job than we did
with the rate increase in our sewer and water. Please get this out ahead of time
explaining it for us not clear citizens, so that we all get clear on it, if you would. I'd
certainly appreciate that.
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 39 of 57
Item 9: Continued Public Hearing from June 9, 2009: AZ 08-015 Request for
Annexation and Zoning consisting of 15.05 acres from Ada County RUT to
C-G (General Retail and Service Commercial) and I-L (Light Industrial)
zones for Fignut by Ronald Van Auker -west side of South Locust Grove,
north of East Overland Road and south of I-84:
Item 10: Continued Public Hearing from June 9, 2009: RZ 08-009 Request for
Rezone of 1.69 acres from C-G (General Retail and Service Commercial)
to I-L (Light Industrial) zone for Fignut by Ronald Van Auker -west side
of South Locust Grove, north of East Overland Road and south of I-84:
Item 11: Continued Public Hearing from June 9, 2009: PP 08-012 Request for
Preliminary Plat approval consisting of 6non-residential building lots and 1
other lot in a proposed C-G and I-L zoning districts for Fianut by Ronald
Van Auker -west side of South Locust Grove, north of East Overland
Road and south of I-84:
De Weerd: Okay. If there is nothing further on this item, we will move to Items 9, 10
and 11, continued public hearing on AZ 08-015, 08-009 and -- RZ 08-009 and PP 08-
012. I will open these public hearings, though continued, but we haven't received any
presentation or public comment on them, with staff comments.
Friedman: Right. Thank you, Madam Mayor, Council Members. We are actually now
going forward with the hearing tonight after numerous continuances and Bill will be
giving the staff presentation on this.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Parsons: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. As Pete said and as you
stated so eloquently, this is an annexation and preliminary plat and rezone for the
Fignut project, located on the west side of Locust Grove, north of Overland Road, and to
the north is bordered by Interstate I-84. Surrounding the property to the east is I-L
zoning and C-G zoned property currently vacant. Also the northwest pipeline station
there where my arrow is, we annexed and zoned that into the city in 2006. To the south
of them is the Maverick gas station and Sportsman Subdivision, zoned R-4, and to the
east we have a child care center and a Pack Ahead Subdivision, which is also vacant
commercial land, and as I stated before, we have the interstate to the north and Jabil
Subdivision zoned C-G. This is an aerial of the site. Currently it is vacant land. There
is an existing home on there, which the applicant uses to generate income as a rental
property and that condition has been changed since the Planning and Zoning
Commission and I will brief you on that later in this presentation. Here currently is the
annexation boundary. It is currently approximately 15.08 acres and, then, of course, the
southeast comer here we have some -- preliminary plat boundary, which is 16.78 acres.
The reason for the discrepancy is that you can see along the north boundary and a
portion of the east boundary some of that has been zoned already into the city. So,
that's why the plat acreage is larger than the annexation acreage. So, here is what the
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 40 of 57
applicant is proposing. Again, this is annexation and a preliminary. This has changed a
little bit from the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing. When staff presented this
to the Commission at that time the applicant was proposing seven lots and the plat
before you tonight is proposing eight lots, seven being nonresidential lots, four of them
being zoned C-G and three of them being zoned I-L. The dividing line is pretty much
east there, by the way, which is the east -- west and east local commercial street that
the applicant is proposing to construct and the C-G zone also on the side of South
Fignut Way, which is the north-south local commercial street that they are proposing to
construct with the plat. The reason for the change, at least from what happened at
Commission, and what's before you tonight, is primarily -- if you follow my arrow here,
Lots 2 and 3 were originally zoned -- proposing to zone I-L and because of the provision
in our UDC, it required where you have industrial zoned property adjacent to
nonindustrial uses, the UDC requires a 25 foot land use buffer and after talking with the
applicant and meeting with them, they had some reservations about that and they
thought that was a large landscape buffer for what they were proposing for the property
and they weren't sure what would happen on the C-G zoned lots, which is Lot 1 and Lot
4, the lot along Locust Grove and the lot proposed along Overland Road. And so staff
had recommended at the meeting after the Planning and Zoning Commission met, they
just go ahead and split those lots and just zone it C-G to kind of get away from that
requirement and move forward, because the northwest pipeline is zoned C-G, but it has
more of an industrial use on it -- occurring on the property. The applicant wouldn't be
required to put in a 25 foot landscape buffer. So, they were in agreement with that.
However, with Lot 2, with my arrow here, it's C-G zoned property, which is vacant at this
time. Also, with the application the applicant is proposing altemative compliance,
because of an easement that encumbers a good portion of the plat and along the west
side of Fignut Way the applicant had to go through the altemative compliance process,
because they aren't allowed to plant the required trees within those areas, because of
irrigation -- the Nine Mile Creek running through that area of the property and the
irrigation district will not allow trees within the easement. So, the applicant has
proposed something different. So, moving forward to the landscape plan, that was the
other hold up for all the continuations, the applicant was trying to get a letter from the
irrigation district stating that there was insufFcient irrigation water in the area. That did
not happen, so the applicant will be required to build a pump station and provide
irrigation water to the subdivision. Basically, the primary change from this landscaping
plan to the one presented at Planning and Zoning is rather than having lawn along the
50 foot landscape buffer along the interstate and lawn within the area of belonging --
encumbered easement areas, the applicant is proposing to use native grasses, some
drought tolerant plants, rather than your typical green lawn. The interior landscape
buffer along East Bird Dog Drive on both sides and the east side of South Fignut Way,
will be lawn and trees as required by code or proposed by the applicant in compliance
with the code. I did provide some examples for you as far as what these native grasses
would look like, so this is some of what the applicant is proposing to go along, again, I-
84 and, of course, that common lot along South Fignut Way and, then, along Lot 2,
Block 1. So, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval at their
March 5th hearing. Speaking in favor at that hearing was Ron Van Auker, Junior. No
one spoke in opposition. No other person commented. No other written testimony has
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 41 of 57
been provided staff since the Planning and Zoning Commission. Key issues of
discussion with that hearing -- one was cross-access between the Maverick C-C zoned
lot and, then, Lot 1 -- proposed Lot 1, Block 2, and, of course, the required 25 foot
landscape buffer where the I-L lots were adjacent to C-G zoned property. Key changes
proposed by the Planing and Zoning Commission -- one is they modified DA provision
number eight. At that time they added a provision that said we had -- we had the DA
provision, staff recommended a DA provision that would require the 25 foot landscape
buffer. Planning and Zoning added some verbiage that said unless approved through
altemative compliance process. Later on in my presentation I will be asking you to
amend that recommendation to something else. The plat has changed since that
hearing. The other change Planning and Zoning Commission made was one --
because there is an existing home, as I mentioned to you earlier, typically that needs to
be removed prior to the city engineer's signature. The applicant doesn't really have a
time frame when someone will come in and possibly final plat that property, so they ask
that that home be allowed to remain until they actually get an end user there and so we
modified -- or Planning and Zoning Commission modified condition of approval 2.6 to
say prior to the issuance of a CZC for the development. So, prior to, basically, issuance
of a building permit that house would have to be removed. So, really, there is only two
outstanding issues for you tonight and one as I mentioned is to modify DA provision
number eight, which, basically, staff is recommending that it -- a future development of
Lot 2, Block 1, the applicant shall construct a 25 foot landscape buffer adjacent to the
southern boundary approved by altemative compliance 08-028. One other thing I'd
point out to Commission -- or, excuse me, to Council is the fact that somehow in our
database the altemative compliance file number were duplicated, since 08-027 had
already had action on it through letters provided by staff, this is our opportunity at this
hearing process to change that file number, so I added that as a DA provision that we
do change that file number, instead of right now as the staff report reads, altemative
compliance number AZ -- ALT 08-027 and so when my findings come before you within
two weeks it would be changed from 027 to 028, so I wanted to make that clear on
public record tonight. And, then, also prior to us coming to hearing staff was notified by
the flood plain administrator that there is a possible further water act violation in the
property. Back in 2003 the applicant went through their approval process with Nampa-
Meridian Imgation District to the the Nine Mile Creek. They receive approval, got their
construction drawings approved, and proceeded to the the creek. Like I said, it's come
to our attention that there may be possible violation. We have not received any written
verification from the Army Corps of Engineers or Department of Water Resources of any
violation, but we thought we might bring to your attention tonight, since we are acting on
the application. So, what staff has done working with Public Works is we have drafted --
we'd like to add a DA provision number ten on the project to include that the applicant
should -- prior to final plat approval that the applicant provide staff with that
documentation that they have received approval from the Army Corps of Engineers and
Idaho Department of Water Resources. Staff has not received any comments from the
applicant and I stand for any question the Mayor or Council may have of me.
De Weerd: Council, any questions?
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 42 of 57
Bird: Not at this time.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Question for staff. On the recommendation you made with respect to the
Corps of Engineers and the Department of Water Resources, so what if they aren't in
compliance, what do we do? I don't think we want to get into that.
Parsons: Madam Mayor, Councilman Rountree, I'll defer that to Kyle Radek, he's been
in touch with the Army Corps of Engineers.
Friedman: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Kyle has just deferred the question
to me. So, what -- as Bill has suggested, we realize that we at the city are not
responsible for the enforcement of either the Clean Water Act or the Idaho Water
Resources regulations. And in proposing the development agreement conditions
stating that prior to final plat approval, which can be two years, could be, actually, three
and a half years with time extensions, that they provide the city with either clearance
from either one of those agencies or take corrective actions as may be required by
them, just provide evidence of that to us. As I said, we do not enforce those
regulations, but -- and I will bounce this back to Kyle, through the tiling of that creek it
may have the consequence of raising the actual flood levels within that area and that
hasn't been examined yet. So, they have to work with Kyle and those other agencies.
Again, this happened six years ago and so there is not a lot of history here, other than
what we were able to obtain from the applicant in terms of the license agreement they
received from the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District. So, we were just recommending
that condition that one way or the other, either corrective actions are taken or letters of
clearance are provided. To the city prior to final plat approval. I don't know if that
answers your question, Council Member.
Rountree: I guess our action is where we approve the final plat or not, based on the
outcome. And a question for Kyle. Are we in a flood plain, flood way zone?
Radek: Mr. President --
Rountree: That's the real issue?
Radek: Pardon me?
Rountree: And that's the real issue?
Radek: That's what brought up the issue, Councilman Rountree, and, then, secondary
to that was, you know, they should -- if they would have had the -- this properly
permitted they would have had a flood plain development permit from Ada County at the
time and Ada County would have checked to see if they had IDWR permitting and
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 43 of 57
Corps of Engineers permitting and none of those permits were applied for, so we have
three regulatory issues, one being IDWR, one being the Corps of Engineers and one
being a flood plain administration, so there is really three agencies that have kind of a
shot at what's the -- what's the fix for what's been done. We won't know if it's a problem
for us flood plain wise until we require a hydraulics analysis by the application in our
land development review. And if it pleases the Council, we do have some background -
- some photos of the -- of the property and the piping, just for background information, if
you'd like to see it. I have about ten slides. I'm a lot faster at slides than my boss. It
shouldn't be too painful if you're interested.
Rountree: My question, really, is if we have the Corps and we have Water Resources
on our list, why don't we have FEMA?
Radek: That's one of the three, sir. The flood plain administration would be -- you
know, FEMA is administered through us, so --
Rountree: Okay. That answers it.
De Weerd: Okay. Any -- Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I think it's been awhile since we have had a property that
fronts the interstate, but my recollection from several years ago is that ITD always
requests that we have some kind of an agreement -that the property only -- or the
property owner is responsible for any sound abatement -- I'm not able to access the
development agreement or perhaps it's not on here, but do we have a provision in the
development agreement that makes it clear that neither the city, nor ITD are responsible
for sound abatement on any buildings built along --
Parsons: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I believe that abatement -- that noise
abatement requirement is for residential property and the applicant is proposing I-L
zoned property. And also our code requires a 50 foot land use buffer adjacent to the
interstate, which the applicant is in compliance with. So, they will have that -- that
landscape buffer as well that they have to maintain. Which is fairly easy, because it is
industrial property there is also a DA provision in there that vehicle display areas --
heavy equipment display areas will not be allowed within that 50 foot buffer, everything
has to be without -- outside of that buffer in compliance with UDC.
Zaremba: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. If there is not anything further at this point, I would ask the applicant
if they should like to make comments. If you will, please, state your name and address
for the record.
Van Auker: Good evening, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. My name is Ron
Van Auker, Junior, 3084 East Lanark in Meridian. 83642.
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 44 of 57
De Weerd: Thank you.
Van Auker: First issue, the irrigation issue that was brought up by the flood plain
administrator. At the time we tiled the ditch in 2003, there was no requirement. The
only person we were -- we needed to deal with was Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District.
We got all the necessary approvals that were required at the time to the that ditch, we
submitted plans and a license agreement to the city and I would stand here to say that
we have done everything necessary in compliance with what was the law at the time.
So, I can assure you that we have based our reputation on it, that we didn't -- we don't
have a violation of the Clean Water Act out there. And, you know, if we need to be
investigated on that, we will work with the Army Corps of Engineers and if we need to
get -- if they determine that we need to get a 404 permit, because we have dealt with
the guy in charge of the Army Corps of Engineers, we will work with them and get it put
to rest and I don't think it will be an issue, so -- and, then, the other issue I wanted to
bring up was on page two of the staff report, letter I -- or letter D -- the cross-access
between the Maverick store and Lot 1, Block 2, that being -- is this a pointer?
Friedman: Yeah, you can write on that.
Holman: If you want to write on it, sir, hit the red button on the top of that display board
and anything you write will be -- will be read.
Van Auker: This block right there. And the Maverick store sits like right here
somewhere. Not really the shape of the building, but -- the staff has requested -- or
recommended that we provide cross-access through that lot. There is a completely
separate ownership on the parcel on the comer there where Maverick sits and the -- this
subdivision before you tonight we feel that we really can't provide cross-access there
without compensation from the owner of the property to the south and would ask that
we -- that you strike that recommendation to have us provide cross-access to the
Maverick. So, that's the only other comment I would have and would stand for any
questions.
De Weerd: Thank you, Ron. Any questions from Council?
Rountree: I have none. Thank you.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: On the cross-access agreement -- and this is, again, foggy recollection -- the
Maverick would have come through while I was still on the Planning and Zoning
Commission, but since I believe it was the intent -- the driveway kind of splits the
property line and I assume there was going to be a shared use of that driveway. The
Maverick may have already provided their cross-access to -- at the time nobody knew
who, but it shouldn't be that difficult for you to do your part of it and that would complete
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 45 of 57
the cross-access process. I'm pretty sure that that shared driveway caused that to
happen.
Van Auker: That's aright-in, right-out there; correct?
De Weerd: It is right-in, right-out. Bill, do you have comment on that? Is there
something on the Maverick site that was raised by them?
Parsons: Madam Mayor, I don't have that information for that driveway. I did speak
with ACHD for that requirement. I know that they did -- there always was a sign in there
for right-in, right-out, you are correct on that information, and now there is curbing out
there to restrict the left-in. And to give you some history, the reason why we were
requiring cross-access is because that Maverick site only has right-in, right-out access
to, so in order for somebody to get to their development, they are going to have to either
go out on Overland Road and, then, tum back up to Fignut Way to -- to get into some of
those parcels. Now, if that person was leaving Maverick going north, they have to cut
through his parcel and, then, take the left onto Locust Grove. So, there is really no way
that Maverick can really get to Locust Grove without going back through that
commercial street. So, we thought we wouldn't require cross-access for all the
commercially zoned own property, but it made sense to have cross-access there based
on the fact that they did have shared access on the property boundary. It's split
between the two parcel boundaries and we anticipated that would be cross-access. But
I don't know if that -- I could check on that for you, but I don't know if that's one hundred
percent an answer for you on that. But I can certainly research that for the applicant
and provide that information to him.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Zaremba: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further questions from Council?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, on that point, I would have a question for Mr. Nary. It seems
to me that if there isn't a provision in the develop agreement for the approval
documentation for the Maverick to provide cross-access, it almost seems like that's an
off-site improvement that we can't enforce.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, yeah, I would agree. I mean if that's -- I
think we probably do need to research that to make sure what exists from the
development agreement.
Rountree: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 46 of 57
Van Auker: Sony about the name, too. I didn't come up with that one. You can
probably imagine who did.
De Weerd: At least it's better than Porky Park or whatever the last one was. I do have
a public hearing sheet that's -- we have a sign up. Mike Ball of Sportsman Point HOA.
If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Ball: Good evening, Madam Mayor and Council. My name is Mike Ball. 1629 South
Labrador Place, Meridian. 83642.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Ball: I do have a couple of questions real quick first. The general retail -- or the -- which
lots -- I know they were talking Lot 1, but is any along Overland to the west of Maverick
going to be general retail. I guess that's what I'm trying to figure out what that --
Parsons: Yes, sir. That sounds correct.
Ball: And, then, that general retail, what is going to be put there? I mean what kind of
lighting systems and stuff like that, because right now the Maverick store lights my
backyard up like a Christmas tree. So, that's -- that's my biggest concem about this
whole -- I'm always lit up more if you continue to add more general retail there, I -- my
backyard is completely lit up, as I do Overland -- back up to Overland. And there are
several of the neighbors that are, again, in that predicament, because all follow along
the Overland Road all the way to Retrieve and Sportsmans and on down. So, that
would be our biggest concem. It was a concem when Maverick went in and those lights
do point straight into our property, so --
Parsons: Mr. Ball, the only thing that -- we do have provisions in the code by which we
restrict lighting from -- escaping from the property boundary. So, they -- with their
submission -- with their CZC or CUP application, they will have to provide staff with a
photometric plan showing how their lighting will impact the property and adjacent
properties.
Ball: And I agree with that and understanding that, but the Maverick light does expose
out beyond their property, from their building out. So, what prevents them from doing
that same plan?
Parsons: Where our code really -- it talks about down spotting of the lighting. So, it's
just challenged so it doesn't -- that doesn't create that, but we can certain look into that
and look at that file while I'm researching that cross-access to see if we can get that
photometric plan with that --
Ball: I'd really appreciate it. And I am -- this is this person's homeowners association
president, too. So, I have been getting concerns from other ones talking about that
same issue and the lighting in the backyard, so -- that's all I have to say.
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 47 of 57
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Is there any further testimony on this application? Any
final wrap-up remarks by the applicant? Okay. Seeing none, Council, any questions for
staff or the applicant?
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, a quick question for staff. Want to be sure -- if we can go
back to the -- not the aerial, the other one you had that showed right here, the C-G
where the pipeline operation is, that's -- I want to under -- oh, you had it. Back -- there
we go. Along Locust Grove and the freeway, that's C-G where the pipeline -- I always
thought that was industrial, but that is C-G, apparently. Are they going to have to -- you
had commented about that. I want to make sure I understood what the landscaping
requirement was to be right there. Is that going to be a 25 foot or is there -- there
enough property there already -- what's -- what's that situation again?
Parsons: Madam Mayor, Councilman Hoaglun, basically, because that is a non -- it's an
industrial use as you stated, it wouldn't require that 25 foot land use buffer adjacent to
that property boundary. Our code meets -- where you have I-L property adjacent to
non-industrial uses, you will provide a 25 foot land use buffer and so when we have sat
down with the applicant and talked about that, we -- staff determined that probably is
more of an industrial use and probably wouldn't be looking fora 25 -- wouldn't require
the 25 foot land use buffer for that portion of the property along that western boundary.
Hoaglun: Okay. So -- Madam Mayor, then, that will not be required for that particular
stretch of property because of the use that's there right now?
Parsons: That is correct.
Hoaglun: Okay. I just want to be sure that -- that was my understanding, but I want to
be sure. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further from Council? If not, I would entertain a motion to
close the public hearing on these three items.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Since we do have some things that we continue to question, would we
continue this hearing, as opposed to closing it?
Friedman: Madam Mayor, Council Members, I'd defer to the city attorney. I think we
had the one outstanding issue, really, which is the cross-access agreement and if we
could research that and have an answer for you and Bill maybe can help me out,
depending on what Council's pleasure is on disposing of this application, if it turns out
that we have a problem in terms of requiring that cross-access agreement, we could
bring the development agreement back without that condition.
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 48 of 57
Nary: Yeah, we could do that. If that's the direction of the Council -- Madam Mayor,
Members of the Council, if that's your direction, yeah, we can do that and we can work
that out with the applicant, rather than setting this over, but if you'd prefer that we get
that information first, that's perfectly fine.
Friedman: Absolutely.
De Weerd: Does that work for the applicant? I just assume that that was a nod. Yeah.
Okay. Council, what is your direction?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I would move that we close the public hearings for Item 9, 10
and 11 and deal with the issue in the motion of approval --
Zaremba: Second.
Rountree: -- or denial.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the public hearings on Item 9,
10 and 11. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carves.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Okay. We will first consider Item 9, which is AZ 08-015.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, a question for Pete or Bill. DA's in the annexation or the
rezone?
Nary: In the annexation.
Rountree: Okay. Madam Mayor, I move that we approve Item No. 9, AZ 08-015 with
staff comments and the comments of the applicant. Upon further investigation if the
staff finds that there is a no cross-access agreement or condition with the Maverick
store, that that provision of the DA be removed.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second.
Bird: Discussion.
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: Did you also in this --did you want to change the --
De Weerd: Can you speak up, Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 49 of 57
Bird: Oh, I'm sorry. In the DA did he want to change the 1.2 -- 1.1, bullet three?
Rountree: Those were in the staff comments I referred to in my motion.
Bird: Okay. That's what I thought. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other discussion? Madam Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Item 10 is RZ 08-009.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve Item No. 10, RZ 08-009.
Bird: Second.
Rountree: And direct staff to further investigate the lighting that currently exists at the
Maverick store to see if it's compliant with our ordinance.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 10. I think the research into
the Maverick is a separate issue, but we definitely will look into that and research that
cross-access; is that correct? Okay. Any discussion? Madam Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carved.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Item 11 is on PP 08-012.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I move that we approve Item 11, PP 08-012 with the
landscape plan and lot configuration a provided to Council this evening.
Bird: Second.
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 50 of 57
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 11 with comment. If
there is nothing further, Madam Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carved.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 12: Public Hearing: PY2009 CDBG Action Plan:
De Weerd: Thank you. Item 12 is a public hearing on PY -- Y? What is PY?
Nary: Plan year.
De Weerd: Plan year. PY-2009 of CDBG action plan. Sony, that kind of threw me
there, Matt. Didn't know what a PY was.
Ellsworth: And I apologize, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we will be a little
more specific on those in the future. That is program year 2009 and there is the off-set
between program years and calendar years and all that good stuff. But in any event, for
the last several years the City of Meridian has been a direct recipient of federal funding
through the CDBG program as an entitlement community and one of the requirements
that comes along with receiving those funds is that each year the city adopt an annual
action plan that will dictate the use of those funds over the course of that program year.
The program year in this case will run from October 1st, 2009, through September 31st,
2010. So, in addition to conforming to applicable federal regulations and so forth, that
plan also must -- must conform to the direction established by the city's 2007 thorough
2011 consolidated plan. And it's, basically, the relation between those two plans is
similar to the Comprehensive Plan future land use map, as opposed to the zoning map.
One sets the direction, the other one moved in that direction. The document before you
this evening will begin moving in that direction. So, on screen there in front of you is a
brief breakdown of the proposed expenditures per via the draft 2009 action plan. The
bold face type in column number one, with the exception of administration, relates back
to priorities that are established in the city's consolidated plan. You can see the
percentage breakdown on screen there as well. So, to up some specifics behind those
expenditures, under the umbrella of community improvements, what is proposed is
55,000 dollars towards Centennial Park improvements. Second project is completing
the environmental and beginning the construction of Five Mile Creek pathway section H-
1,which we have discussed previously. Fifteen percent of the city's annual allocation is
allowed to go to public service projects. Based on Council's direction last week staff
proposes the use of the full 15 percent, so that's to the tune of 37,490 dollars. Priority
number two is economic development, which translates into a continuation of MDC
facade improvements program that would receive 40,000 dollars. And priority number
three is affordable housing, which is proposed to receive 20,000 dollars toward home
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 51 of 57
ownership assistance that is filtered through Boise City -Ada County Housing Authority
and that goes toward downpayment and closing cost assistance for eligible home
buyers identified through BC-ACHA's Section 8 voucher program. The requested action
that's in front of you this evening is a public hearing and opening of the comment period
that's required within our citizen action plan -- our citizen involvement plan, excuse me,
and also with federal standards for consideration of these plans. That's how the
comment period is mandated to remain open for a minimum of 30 days, so outside of
that 30 day window the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting comes on July
28th of this year. That would allow an additional week if there are comment that change
some of the details within the draft plan. It would allow staff enough time to go back,
make whatever changes are necessary, and come back on August 4th with a final draft
plan for Council's consideration, still allowing the city enough time to forward and adopt
the document onto HUD within the required time line, so --
De Weerd: Just a comment, Matt, is we probably won't have a Council meeting on
August 4th, which is National Night Out. So, we can -- we can do it if it's absolutely
necessary, but direction to the clerk's office has been don't schedule anything that day.
Ellsworth: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, thank you for the heads up on that.
On the one hand in the past public comment has been relatively minimal on a lot of
these proposed activities, so if past experience is any indication of what's to come on --
as far as comments on this year's plan, there may not be any major shake-ups that
would come before you on July 28th. If that's not the case, we can either add an
additional meeting to consider public comments that may be able to handle the bulk of
them and, then, consider anything additional that comes in between that interim public
meeting and the 30 day comment period, or if there is an additional week built into this
scheduled here, HUD will need the adopted plan forwarded no later than August 15th.
Staff will be out of town at that hearing date, but there are plenty of bodies in the
planning department if we need to relay information that way, then, we can certainly do
so.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Ellsworth: With that I would stand for any questions.
De Weerd: Council, any questions?
Rountree: I have none at this time.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, just a comment. I was not at the last meeting last week when
you discussed this, but I have read the minutes and I am in agreement with what
Council had directed in terms of the priorities and the projects. We have discussed
those before and I think it's a good list and I hope that we can get the funding and that
moves forward.
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 52 of 57
De Weerd: Okay. Any further comment? Okay. Well, I imagine this is -- this is kept
open for written public comment until July 28th; correct?
Ellsworth: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, that's the way that these have been
processed in the past. It starts with opening the public hearing, the full draft plan will be
available at Meridian City Hall, at the Meridian Senior Center, at the Meridian Public
Library, and also on the city's website as of tomorrow, they will allow an opportunity for
-- for the public to soak it in, contact staff with any questions, submit any comments over
the course of the 30 day public comment period and, again, based on the timeline right
now, we are set to reconvene on July 28th to consider the plan in light of any comments
received during the comment period.
De Weerd: Okay. Very good. Thank you very much, Matt.
Ellsworth: Thank you.
Item 13: Public Hearing: Status of Funded Activities for Meridian Senior
Center with Idaho Community Development Block Grant (ICDBG):
De Weerd: Okay. Item 13 is a pubic hearing on the status of funded activities for the
Meridian Senior Center with their Idaho Community Development Block Grant, and,
Delta, we appreciate you waiting until the end of our agenda with us.
James: That's quite all right, Madam Mayor. Madam Mayor, Member of the Council,
my name is Delta James, I'm a planning specialist with Sage Community Resources
and I have been the grant administrator for Idaho Community Community Development
Block Grant that was received in 2006. The City of Meridian received it in 2006 to
provide upgrades to the Meridian Senior Center and so this is part of the close out --
required close out procedure is to hold a status of funds hearing towards the end of the
project and so here we are and if it's okay with you, I'd like to just read into the record
some brief statistics about that project. The City of Meridian applied for and received an
Idaho Community Development Block Grant in the amount of 52,900 dollars. It was in
2006, and the funds were being used to help fund improvements to the Meridian Senior
Center. Of the 52,900 dollars -- 52,413 dollars have been spent to date. The remaining
funds or 487 dollars, of that 460 are remaining for grant administrative compensation
and, then, there are 27 remaining unutilized construction funds, which will go back to
the Department of Commerce. The activities that were completed to date include
installation of a front entrance ramp to the facility, a cover and awning structure to that
ramp and the front door rehab'd to allow better access and ADA compliance. Also, the
facility's windows were replaced with energy efficient and building code approved
windows. The dining room sound boards were replaced with sound boards that have a
higher fire safety rating and better acoustical qualities in the dinning room. Also an air
conditioner was installed in the kitchen and the parking lot was paved and restriped with
handicapped parkage signage -- signage installed and, then, finally, the kitchen with
serving area counter tops were replaced with those funds. There is some final close out
procedures that are still remaining, so we anticipate to complete those by the end of
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 53 of 57
August 2009. We are in the home stretch. Originally the grant application did request
funds to widen some of the doorways on the interior of the building. That project was
modified after it was investigated by a construction company and determined to be far
too costly at the time, so the board of the Meridian Senior Center chose to reallocate
those funds to pave the parking lot and do those improvements instead and that request
-- project amendment request was approved by the Department of Commerce and so
it's all good. That's basically it. I would stand for any questions that you might have.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Thank you for your administration of this. We know these grants can be
very cumbersome and appreciate your handling of that.
James: We are pleased to provide assistance to the City of Meridian. So, thank you,
Madam Mayor, Council Members.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Bird: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. I guess, Delta, do we need to keep this open until things are closed
or you just -- this is just a formality?
James: Madam Mayor, this is an opportunity for the public to provide any comments
they might have about the project to date and the construction that has occurred. It is
only required to be open this one time this evening, so --
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Bird: Madam Mayor, do we need to close the --
De Weerd: Yes. Thank you. I would ask Ralph if he has any comments and seeing
that he doesn't, Council, any further comments or questions?
Rountree: None.
De Weerd: I would entertain a motion to close --
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Bird: I move we close the public hearing on the Idaho Community Development Block
Grant for the Meridian Senior Center.
Meridian City Council
June 23, 2009
Page 57 of 57
De Weerd: All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Thank you.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:46P.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
~~ ~~~
MAYO A MY de WEERD
ATTEST:
JAYCE
i D~ MEJ4in_
7~ ~~ST 1S'~ ,,
:,~q~ 1
'/~~1~~~~~lrevry ~~fl~~~
DATE APPROVED .,