HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996 05-29 SpecialMeridian City Council Special Workshop May 29, 1996
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
MAY 29, 1996
The special workshop of the Meridian City Council was called to order
by Mayor Robert D. Corrie at 6:30 P.M.:
MEMBERS PRESENT: Walt Morrow, Glenn Bentley, Charlie
Rountree, Ron Tolsma: OTHERS PRESENT: Wayne Crookston,
Will Berg, Gary Smith, Bob Hailey, Kathy Shiflet, Bob McQuade, Pam
Babbitt,
HAILEY: (Inaudible) and we hope to open and additional 3 of them
by June 20 (inaudible).
(Discussion Inaudible)
HAILEY: The one at Fuller Park, Edgeview and Hobble Creek. And
one that (inaudible) and because we added that a little later than the
others. (Inaudible) Just a quick report for you, we have now closed
on the Voigt property and so we own that. You should have the deed
for four acres (inaudible). We also closed on the (inaudible)
easements worked out and (inaudible). Again on the high school site
we will need to work together on (inaudible). And of course for us
am sure we are secure (inaudible). The Barnes' property I would
estimate that 3 to 4 years we would be putting an elementary school
on there. I would suspect the next bond that (inaudible) that very
likely could be. Although the other one that I am sure will be pressing
(inaudible) and he wants to (inaudible) so we have made an offer and
he is going back to his partners (inaudible).
BENTLEY: What school are you going to put there? Hailey: It
would be an elementary (inaudible). The middle school site is the
one that I am most concerned about and it is still not going anywhere.
Mr. Van Auker reports that he hasn't been able to (inaudible) because
there are two guys over there that just won't give him easements. He
can't do anything until (inaudible). In the meantime we are still
working with Dennis Baker on his piece (inaudible). Some of our
concerns are the cost to tile those two ditches, drains, creeks
whatever they are across there. He is working with us right to
(inaudible) updated figures and costs. If that turns out to be
(inaudible). At the moment I guess those are the sites that we are
working on. Some time within the next month we will begin to look for
a five acre site for a middle school alternative program. The
legislature this year passed the legislation that allows us to
(inaudible) alternative programs down to (inaudible). There, it is not a
good idea to try and mix them (inaudible) so we will look at a five acre
site that will (inaudible) Fall of 1997 or Fall of 1998. That will be a
program that will be started much like Meridian Academy (inaudible)
with your help and cooperation. If any of you run across five acres
coming in this little (inaudible) primarily but not exclusively but
primarily Meridian Middle School and Lake Hazel Middle School.
They are the ones that have the highest population (inaudible) that
would be the next project that I see. I think that pretty well brings you
up to date where we are. Are there any questions?
CROOKSTON: I just have one, do you know if Mr. Voigt executed
the deed for you?
HAI LEY: I don't know that he has. He was to do so and I haven't
seen (Inaudible). Our instruction at the closing was that was to be
(inaudible).
CORRIE: Any other questions of Bob? Thank you, we will see you
later. Kathy, since you are here why don't we move you up to the slot
now rather than hold you up very late tonight. Would you like to
come up here. (Discussion Inaudible)
SHIFLETT: Gary thank you for inviting me, I certainly do appreciate
that. I love to talk about conservation, that seems to be a real good
topic that we have an opportunity to talk about several times.
brought some packets (inaudible) would like to each have a packet. If
you would each like to have (inaudible) In your packet I provided you
with just this little short article, it just is a real good (inaudible) and it
talks about conservation measures and conservation incentives.
think it is very important that we talk about each one of (inaudible)
conservation program and talk about conservation incentives. On the
left side of your (inaudible) all of these are, you can (inaudible)
provide these to the public, but they are only incentives to help the
public to develop a conservation ethic and try to talk again to do
some kind of conservation and the other conservation tactic it to
(inaudible) and that is where you actually make some changes that
actually conserve water. We started with the (inaudible) where we
just did school programs, public information and it was, we were
spending a lot of time (inaudible) but we didn't see a lot of things
happening. So that is when we decided to go to conservation
measures and that is when we started this program. We started with
water audit; our reason for conservation was to cut our peak demand
in the Summer time. That was our whole objective in having a
conservation program because as you know with irrigation (inaudible)
our summer peak would be 3 to 4 times more than our winter average
would be. However, when the (inaudible) was to have to cut the
amount of water that went into their wastewater plant. I had to
(inaudible) so they did not include the water audit program in their
conservation approach at all. They only talked about the kits and this
is the same kit that we use for our water audit program. The first year
that we did the program we actually had 4 part time water auditors
that worked during the Summer time and we actually went into the
homes and installed them in the homes. And that was really
(inaudible) we were very fortunate we didn't have too many problems.
We ran into some situations where there was (inaudible) could have
been a disaster if we weren't very careful. We did have to have a
plumber, we had a plumber on staff but he went in to out of 500
homes that we did the first year he probably went into 5 homes and
helped them correct some problems. So we thought that we were
very fortunate but we found that it was very labor intensive. We were
having our auditors actually going to homes that couldn't always
guarantee exactly what the situation would be there. So we learned
from our first go around and now we just deliver these kits to the
homes and there is an instruction sheet (Inaudible) personalize by
putting your name on the information right here. And then on the
other side there are some instructions (inaudible) elements. Inside
the kit there are 2 low flow showerheads and (inaudible) and there
are two (inaudible) two toilet tank dams (inaudible). We found that
when (inaudible) so we went with these kinds of dams, they are very
flexible you just fold them and put them against the side of the tank
and it is (inaudible) so it is still (inaudible) that depends on the water
pressure and (inaudible) and I agree with you that sometimes they
have to be flushed a couple of times but over all they do (inaudible)
these just block out enough that it does still provide for (inaudible).
like the way that these work better than my low flow toilets. There are
dye tablets and tell people how to check for a leak (inaudible) find out
how much water is actually being lost and (inaudible) a diverter and
there is a gadget in there (inaudible). We have negotiated with
Niagara, when we first started doing this program we were paying
$10 and something per kit and we negotiated with them this year and
that with our program and Eagle's program and we negotiated for an
extra 1000 kits so we have it down that this kit only costs us $7.06
which we felt was very reasonable and we would be very happy to
partner with you (inaudible). Eagle took 500 and I don't know what
their current request (inaudible). We feel that if you have a lot better
response if you put a little extra effort (inaudible) so you will notice in
your packet (inaudible) this is what we send out to (inaudible)
complementary service to our customers. And we offer them an
outdoor water audit as well as indoor. They send this and then we
actually have two part time students and we found that students work
pretty well. We tried to target college students, not high school
students because they are our representatives out in the community
and that works pretty well. When we had (inaudible) an adult and a
student kind of partner not going together but at least going together.
When we had just (inaudible) and we did provide (inaudible) their
insurance on their vehicle and (inaudible). The first time they took the
company vehicle and came back with about 100 miles on it the first
day we knew we had to be very specific as to where they would drive
the vehicle. We also have had (inaudible) wear and don't wear
(inaudible). We have an evaluation, I didn't give each of you one but
did give Gary the forms that we actually use on our outdoor water and
(inaudible) gave Gary some extra information on where to order some
of the items that (inaudible). But Niagara is the best resource we
have found (inaudible). I did (inaudible) when they go to the door and
(inaudible) it is a long device that looks like a meter stick with
(inaudible) takes a sample of the soil so they can see how deep the
root dense is. How deep the water is in the soil. We have the actual
precipitation (inaudible) and they are placed in each sprinkler
(inaudible) water is turned on for five minutes, we test the amount of
water and then that way we can tell how efficient the sprinkling
system is and how much water is actually (inaudible). There is some
extra information (inaudible) and we have (inaudible). We actually
went to the irrigation association has audit classes and Mary and
both completed those audit classes so we can (inaudible). They are
more for commercial (inaudible) and not residential but we have to let
the homeowners know how efficiently they are watering. Let them
know how much water they are putting on their lawn and if they have
(inaudible). We have received more positive comments on our water
audit program (inaudible) and I think it is because (inaudible) and we
do provide for (inaudible) who is really hesitant and doesn't really
know how to go about we actually go out and install theirs (inaudible).
TOLSMA: When you pass these kits out how many of them do you
feel is actually installed or do you have somebody check to see if they
were actually installed?
SHIFLETT: We do, we always call back. We wait to the end of the
summer and then we call back every person that we left a kit with just
to follow up and ask them how they like it, if there is anything they
would change if they had to start this program all over again. Just
ask enough questions so that we know that they are actually
installed. If, and there is a questionnaire that we ask them how many
bathrooms in the home, if they have a washer and dryer in the home
if they have a dishwasher and how many children in the home. One
thing that our (Inaudible) run a history of (inaudible) for our customers
and we take that with them so they can see what their consumption
has been every billing period for the previous four years. When we
check to see, you will notice that the first thing we do is show them
how to check this to see if they have a leak. We ask them then to
track their consumption for the next year. And so we ask them
questions like how do your children like the low flow shower, how
long did it take them to get used to the change in pressure. Did they
notice a change in pressure, those types of questions? People are
pretty forthright. Some of them say we installed it but we didn't like it
so we took it out. When we installed it ourselves we picked up the
old shower to make sure that they stayed there. Then they had no
option but to buy themselves a new one if they didn't (inaudible).
think we had better retention then we have since then. But we feel
like, I can't give you an exact percent but at 75% of the people we
feel very sure are continuing to use them. We go back then and
monitor after a year and this is the third year we are doing this
program. So we can go back and check winter consumption
(inaudible) over the years to see if it has made a difference.
(Inaudible) Mostly what it does is start them thinking about
conservation and we find that they start taking about part of their
yards, doing different things that are permanent. We talk about
making permanent changes so that you don't have to think about
conservation, I wouldn't do conservation if I thought it was (inaudible)
and when I showered and (inaudible) that to me isn't worth it five
dollars of water over a month (inaudible) so we talk about making
permanent changes. That is why I think this program does help. That
is when Eagle Sewer District contacted me we talked a lot about this
so that they could potentially have a (inaudible) voluntary or at what
point do you require that they do something. Of course (inaudible)
should be getting new fixtures so we target, we only do 500 a year
because they are time intensive and they are (inaudible) pick the
highest water use meter book that we have of the homes (inaudible).
ROUNTREE: Do you have any (inaudible)
SHIFLETT: No, and that is very difficult, we think the families are
using about 20% less but when we are just doing 500 out of 55,000 it
is very hard to document savings and if it is really making a difference
because we have to make sure (inaudible) low flow we have no way
of checking them out (inaudible) so we haven't tried to track their
usage. (Inaudible) probably heard that when we go (inaudible) P & Z
if we can (inaudible) will they allow us to earn on that. They have
consistently twice now told us they will not let us earn on water
savings but they will let us pass on the cost of devices to (inaudible)
(Inaudible)
SHIFLETT: I think conservation is something that everybody has to
kind of buy into (inaudible).
TOLSMA: I noticed something when I was back east this time that a
lot of the airports, a lot of massive restrooms like in convention
centers and stuff have went to sensor type washing systems in the
sinks that the water didn't come on until you put your hand under it
and as soon as you take your hand it shuts off. I could see where
they would save a bunch of money because I have noticed a lot of
places where they turn the water on and let it run. These things here
couldn't figure out how it was I (inaudible)
SHIFLETT: I think that with commercial, large apartment complexes
those types of things I think it would be a very good targeted area,
any type of commercial. We have not, our conservation program only
deals with residential at this time we haven't gotten into the
commercial at all. We have to be real honest, our main reason isn't
indoor conservation it is outdoor conservation. Then I have to tell you
that every time we talk about conservation (inaudible) because it is
mandate to the public utilities commission. We were on the
Governor's task force for conservation under Governor Andrus and
he had a conservation task for irrigation and other uses of water and
domestic. It is pretty discouraging when you know that 70% of the
water that is used in the State of Idaho is ground water and of that
1 % of that is domestic use. So, conservation is very important to us to
think about (inaudible). That is why I think it makes good sense for a
waste water system to do some type of a conservation effort in
conjunction with water because (inaudible) as well as making a
difference (inaudible). We do in our capital budget we do a five year
strategic plan and we feel like over a period of 5 years we defer at
least a million dollars in capital expenses if in fact (inaudible). We are
saying that (inaudible) and we think that we can back that up.
(Inaudible) It is really hard to get the overall impact of conservation.
CORRIE: Does anybody have any questions for Kathy?
BENTLEY: I have a couple, I will plead ignorant, the answers are
probably in here. What is the standard flow on shower heads?
SHIFLETT: I have to admit Mary Cahoon is the one that has done
conservation for two years and what is it 1.8 (inaudible).
BENTLEY: Well these heads are 2.5, but I mean on the standard
heads?
SHIFLETT: Oh, the old ones, about 8 or 9. (Inaudible) What makes
the biggest difference is if we can take this program to the high
school and talk to the high school kids. If you can just get them to put
the stopper in when they take a shower and when the tub is full that is
it.
TOLSMA: My daughter, I just turned off the hot water at the water
tank and it didn't take her long to get out.
SHIFLETT: I think that a high school program to target the amount
of water that is used and to (inaudible). We really do grade schools
thinking as they grow up they have a conservation ethic that
(inaudible). We do third grade and sixth grade and I think that
(inaudible) most of the schools in Meridian participate in the water
awareness week program and that is a very good program for sixth
graders where about 25 sponsors provide curriculum to every sixth
grade class and that is going almost statewide now.
CORRIE: You get the young people involved and (inaudible).
SHIFLETT: That is right.
CORRIE: Anyone else?
MORROW: I guess my only question would be is (inaudible) saves
and works, the question in our community would be what you are
telling me is it is very difficult to project accurate numbers other than
the fact that kind of take my word for it I know what works. Is that
really what it boils down to?
SHIFLETT: At this point that is the best we can do. Our experts, we
have worked with and expert that has written several, he is out of
California and he is the one that developed our plan for us. He told us
on a short term basis it is very difficult to quantify until we have had
our program five years and then into ten years you can really go back
and measure because (inaudible). It has to make sense (inaudible)
an 8 the only thing is you don't know how much longer they let it run
because it has lower flow.
MORROW: Let me ask you this, I know a lot of the reason for your
program is exterior water use where we are using substantial
pressurized irrigations I think our and most of our City is reasonably
new. I think our goal would be to both lower domestic consumption
but also input into the sewer plant and continue to follow the
pressurized program and other things part of which is directed, we do
have a ground water problem as you well know also. So would you
think that in our community homes built prior to 1991, 1 am sorry 1992
is 500 might be a bit aggressive for us. If we are seeing the water
savings because of the act in 1992 and the vast majority of our
expansion has been since really 1990. Is it conceivable that this
program wouldn't need to be a real aggressive program for us?
SHIFLETT: I think the more aggressive it is the more they will buy
into it. (Inaudible) that there is a program going on (inaudible)
MORROW: Let me rephrase that, the homes built since 1992 which
constitute the bulk of the homes that we have in our community these
types of things aren't going to do a lot in terms of those homes. So,
our focus would need to be on the homes built prior to that. Which
constitute very soon a minority of the homes and so once we have
serviced those homes for the most part then the program for us is
kind of over.
SHIFLETT: That is right, (inaudible) I don't know, we struggled with
this with Eagle. How do you motivate them to do this and I know that
in California where they felt like that they had (inaudible) and they
really felt like they had to have some very aggressive programs. They
give people incentives on the bill for installing them and keeping them
installed. I know that worked quite effectively (inaudible). It is hard to
know what happens (inaudible).
CORRIE: I was curious did you get a lot of feed back on people that
when you gave them these and (inaudible) did they have a problem
with that (inaudible).
SHIFLETT: We didn't have too much of a problem and I think the
reason why those we (inaudible) probably 2000 out to different
people and it is only the people that returned them back to us that we
(inaudible) so they have some incentive (inaudible) versus those
people that are never going to care. And so I think for that reason
they would really buy into it and we did take it so that their old
showerheads could be recycled as part of the program (inaudible).
MORROW: So actually you are kind of doing a presale with it.
SHIFLETT: I think that is really important (inaudible) part of our
success is when we (inaudible) and they talk to their neighbors. The
second year we had people calling us and saying (inaudible) and we
always buy about 500 extra and (inaudible) Meridian people, Eagle
people (inaudible) We haven't done it but we talked about going to
the school and sending something home with the student and actually
doing a program on conservation and sending something home with
the student saying I learned about conservation today in school and if
you will go by the water department you are entitled to get a kit and
think that is a good way to (inaudible).
MORROW: When you do something like that would you qualify by
saying if your home was built after 1992 or 1991 so that you are not
(inaudible) where they are virtually doing no good.
SHIFLETT: We haven't done that but I think people pretty well know
(inaudible) as a builder do you think they do?
MORROW: I have never been asked the question by a perspective
buyer, it is a lot like the heat stuff. They really don't care. It is not a
sales tool anymore that the buyer will come and ask what is the R
factor in the ceiling. And you say that ceiling has R38 and this one
over here has such and such and that is the end of it and they are off
to something else. It is a lot like the gas thing where now we are
back to bigger cars and faster cars and so on and so forth and
(inaudible) it seems to have gone away as a sales tool or item of
great interest. We seem to be having now experiencing more
complaints because of condensation build up and that type of thing
within the homes. Particularly homes where there are not children
because they are built too tight and insulated too much. We have
gone way over board as an industry because of these governmental
acts that we are trying to satisfy. Now we are starting to see
complaints from two people or single person households because the
house simple can't breath. (Inaudible)
MORROW: That is the issue that we deal with in terms of the buyer
concerns. I have to tell you I have never been asked the question if
the fixtures were water saving fixtures. I have been asked that
commercially on commercial jobs (inaudible).
SHIFLETT: And there is no regulation on commercial now so you
can buy either the low flush or the (inaudible).
MORROW: Well unfortunately what is happening commercially is
that the high volume toilets now are no longer going to be produced
after 1996. So you are seeing a lot commercial folks do (inaudible)
to replace old toilets so they can still get the good ones. And so it is
kind of the opposite.
SHIFLETT: In fact we found that (inaudible) stating that the industry
does have to install low flow, high flow is still manufactured
(inaudible) and they are available. Some of the manufacturers still
have them in stock ship them to Idaho so you will have some homes
that were built after that time (inaudible) the builder got a really good
deal on the high flow that the manufacturer needed to get rid of. So
1992 isn't a magic date and 1996 won't be a magic date commercially
either. But at least it is some (inaudible). We wished we had all the
answers but we have been doing this for starting education for about
10 years and doing the radio and tv commercials, spots in the paper
and we are still not sure. (Inaudible)
SHIFLETT: We do find out that, customers who come in from other
states who have aggressive conservation programs (inaudible).
SMITH: We are one of the highest per capita water using states in
the nation.
SHIFLETT: One of the top two but it has a lotto do with our
irrigation. I think that 20 years ago (inaudible)
SMITH: Bob, I would like to thank Kathy for coming tonight
personally and also for all of the help that United Water gives to me
as the City Engineer in Meridian whether I am talking to Dan Brown
or Ed Squires or herself anybody that I have dealt with at United
Water has been very cordial and very helpful. I really appreciate it
(inaudible).
CORRIE: Kathy it was a nice presentation (inaudible)
SHIFLETT: Thank you
CORRIE: (Inaudible) will probably be in June, probably 25th. Bob
McQuade, are they going to be able to make it? (Inaudible)
CORRIE: We have sewer and water fees.
SMITH: We still got, we have all of the information that I have as far
as our facilities are concerned over to the consultant and he is
processing that. But he needs information for our billing department
for different classes of water users to establish some basis for the
rate. Leslie is still working on that. I checked with Brad today and
Leslie wasn't here so I don't know exactly where she is. But that is
the last piece of information to go to the consultant. So I don't have
anything back for you tonight. We have sent over everything that we
have on (inaudible) since 1985 1 think.
CORRIE: Any questions? (inaudible)
MORROW: So then what we will have probably at our 28th meeting
SMITH: We should have it by then Walt, there shouldn't be any
reason that we don't have it by then.
MORROW: Will we have an opportunity to read that study before
our meeting?
SMITH: I will get it to you just as quick as I can. As soon as
(inaudible) I will get it distributed.
CORRIE: They are going to have the level pay?
SMITH: I have asked the consultant to look into that and see how
that would be or see how it could be structured.
CORRIE: TCI will be here about 8:00 and, job descriptions. We
have most of those, just got the license department. What are we
lacking here (Inaudible)
CROOKSTON: Mine
CORRIE: (Inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible)
CORRIE: Let's back off on this one for just a second. Patty why
don't you introduce your people.
WOLFKIEL: This gentleman right here is your Ada County
Assessor Bob McQuade, this is his Chief Deputy Wayne. This young
lady is Pam Babbit, she is Commander Pam Babbitt with the Ada
County Sheriff's office. This gentleman is Captain Wright with the Ada
County sheriff's office. So these are all my bosses along with all of
you.
CORRIE: I am Bob Corrie, (inaudible) this is Glenn Bentley, Charlie
Rountree, Councilman, Councilman Ron Tolsma, City Attorney
Wayne Crookston, and City Councilman Walt Morrow. We kind of
voted for you to come tonight to kind of discuss some of the plans for
the future and Bob we talked about that (inaudible) about the space.
We are running out of space and you were thinking about what are
you going to do as far as that is concerned. I guess I might open up
here first from the Council if the Council has any particular questions
that they would like to ask Bob or Pam or Patty or anybody here. So
we will open it up (inaudible) does anybody here want to say
anything?
MORROW: I guess my comments would be I don't particularly have
any questions so much as comments and perceptions of problems
that we as a City are dealing with as you can see this is it for space.
We are not 22,000 folk plus when this arrangement started out we
were 8,000 to 9,000 people. It looks like we will be again at 1000
homes which will make a population increase for calendar year of
1996 of about another 3,000 people. Those numbers seem to be
holding up fairly strongly. Last year was our weakest year in the last
five years and we were like 860 homes that we built. We are going to
see a lot of commercial activity, which we have been very aggressive
in terms of trying to get for property tax purposes and also to try and
make ourselves a whole community where we live work and play
here. Having the facility in terms of the (inaudible) has been a great
thing for our citizens and we think that ought to continue. Having said
that now we are to the dilemma where we are desperately short of
staff people, I will make no bones about it we have (inaudible) pretty
hard for the last couple of years and we desperately need to give
them some help. I think that would be our number one priority for this
budget year is to get those folks some help so that they can get back
to having somewhat normal lives and family lives and so on and so
forth. Our major problem is space. How do we solve the space
problem a lot of questions will come up from the Council in terms of
new buildings, new facilities, add on to this facility, how many people
is it going to take to service a city of 50,000. Very candidly what these
strategic planning sessions are for on our part we started 2 years ago
with the one proposition that we were going to be a town of 50,000 by
the year 2000. So these sessions are designed for us to be able to
plan to meet the infrastructure needs for those 50,000 people. It does
appear that population projection given building permits is fairly
accurate, so I guess where we are at as a Council is that we need
some help from you guys on how we solve the dilemma in terms of
space, how we solve it in terms of manpower from your standpoint,
does it make sense for the license bureau to be your employees and
not our employees so that their wage rates are commensurate with
the other parts of or the counterparts in other parts of the County.
And how we go about addressing those types of issues, we need to
have you guys tell us what directions you may think that your
departments want to go, I know from the standpoint of the City and
the size that we are going to be it makes a certain amount of sense to
have some more of the County functions based within this area to
serve our citizens to keep them out of downtown Boise in Bob's case
and in Pam's and Bill's case keep them out of Barrister because
those facilities aren't capable of supporting any more people being
there based on my observation. I guess from my standpoint the
value of this session this evening is to begin talking about how we
start solving those problems for us, for you and for the taxpayer and
how quickly we can do it. And we as a City need to decide how to go
about getting the space and where we put personnel.
CORRIE: In our meetings we were talking about we might be able to
get the library over here (inaudible) Have you had any further
thoughts on those possibilities.
MCQUADE: (Inaudible) first of all (inaudible) the people who
elected you into office also elected me into office. So I think if we
cooperate together (inaudible) with that in mind I would like to see
some type of a partnership with the City and County would cooperate
(inaudible) right now it is limited to the (Inaudible) expanded further
where the citizens in your community would be able to pay their child
support payments, they would be able to pay their property taxes
over here, file homeowners exemptions. I think that the public would
benefit (inaudible) I do understand and realize you have a problem
with space. Where we would go I don't know, just somewhere
(inaudible) several weeks ago it just donned on me that the Sheriff
has just as much at stake as I do but those are my feelings, I would
like to see some type of cooperative effort between the City and the
County and providing some of these (inaudible)
WRIGHT: Sheriff Kileen is very much interested in retaining what we
have termed satellite office (inaudible) as distinguished from the main
office where we issue drivers licenses. As you may or may not be
aware we have already expanded some our drivers license
capabilities to down town Boise. We have met with the County
Treasurer's office, Barbara Bauer now in the Ada County
Administration building is currently issuing drivers licenses and
renewals. She doesn't get into any of the (inaudible) if you have a
simple renewal you can go into the Ada County Treasurer's office.
And the same benefit is afforded the citizen, the taxpayer in that
respect and he doesn't have to again drive out to Barrister where you
have sometimes a wait in line and some other difficulties out here.
Sheriff Kileen has given Pam and I both direction to work with Mayor
and Council members and Bob (inaudible) satisfactory resolution of
the problem. I think he expects from Pam and I tonight to bring back if
you will your druthers. The sheriff is very flexible in the approach and
think he would like to know, obviously this has been on (inaudible) in
your previous discussions do you have like a preference. You
identified for the City a direction that you would prefer to go in instead
of, so we don't spin our wheels and waste a lot of time and energy in
developing a solution that you would should I say grudgingly accept.
In other words we want it to be a satisfactory workable solution and
the best of all possible worlds for all of us and absolutely involving
(inaudible). So I guess with those preliminary comments I would just
ask for Mayor and Council's recommendation or suggestions if you
have them. Bob and Sheriff have already met a time or two to talk
about this very issue. Really our disadvantage is not knowing what
your preference is if you have a preference.
CORRIE: Two of the things (inaudible) one is space, we are running
out of space in the building in the City. The second is whether we
want the City to handle all of the bookkeeping, the personnel rather
than put it on the County (inaudible) because we are running into
some problems, as Bob knows with wage scales with what is down
Barrister and what is here. So, I guess the Council, do you have any
preference on where we are going to want to go with this.
ROUNTREE: (Inaudible)
TOLSMA: (Inaudible)
ROUNTREE: (Inaudible) but it seems to be the bulk of licensing
(inaudible) it just seems logical that is where personnel ought to be
(inaudible). The issues have to be resolved (inaudible) the Mayor
might (inaudible). That would be my preference I don't know what the
rest of the City Council thinks.
BENTLEY: I would have to agree because we have the salary as
Charlie said we have the salary disparity. (Inaudible) I think if you are
going to be doing the same thing and then say regulations and laws
they need to be governed and under the same.
CORRIE: It is very difficult for us hereto have the secretarial on one
side making one amount and then the other side saying we want the
parity with downtown Boise which is considerably higher and as
(inaudible) you are making more than I am. So I think since we are
here tonight we would like for you to (inaudible) and the County then
would be County employees rather than City employees.
MORROW: I think I would like to look at it from a slightly different
perspective, I do think that, I think the job description solved the
dilemma of the secretarial thing as opposed to across the hall and so
forth. And the attitudes as one of management is simply say that if
you wan to earn that much more money then you school yourself or
apply for that job opening. That is always going to be a problem
within management or within this building and any building. So it is up
to us as a management team to determine that is the philosophy that
we are going to have and that is what the employees are going to
have to adjust themselves too. But I think the other thing and
support what the other three councilmen and Mayor talked about with
respect to them being your employees from a managerial standpoint
in that we are not very good supervisors or bosses because their job
description is clear the heck outside of our area of expertise and our
area of responsibility and should be. I don't see whether they are
housed in this building or some bigger building that we may opt to
build in the future or some lease building that we may (inaudible).
don't see any benefit from that standpoint alone for them to remain
employees of the City. I think that it adds to confusion it certainly
adds to our makes our problem more difficult in terms of the salary
issues and those things that Bob has to address on a day-to-day
standpoint and we as Councilmen hear about at budgeting time. So
think that I would like to see as soon as possible and I recognize that
we are into the budget process now and that it may be too late this
year for them to become your employees in fact as opposed to they
are our employees by now yet you really supervise them and we
don't do a very good job of that nor can we because we are not
familiar with that function. That would be my thought on the employee
issue.
CORRIE: One of the other things too that we discussed was
whether it would be a lease, an out and out lease space because we
are running into a situation here where they are using City's
equipment back and forth, of course they don't do the banking now,
guess Wells Fargo has taken over that now. Some of the copying
and (inaudible) so we need to think about if we are going to do it in
the building or where we are on strictly a lease space basis and so it
is so much per square foot and you have to buy your own desk or all
the equipment on that. So that is another thing you have to think
about is using City space as well on a lease program. (Inaudible) I do
know that it could be considerable amount of outlay (inaudible)
MCQUADE: I believe one of the things that is overriding in our mind
was mentioned here a minute ago is the budget process. We
mentioned time lines as you are probably aware State codes requires
the County to submit its budget by the third Monday in May which has
past. We have budgeted based on prior years and current operation
should say. I probably should be perfectly candid and just ask you
whatever changes we make if it involves significant expenditure will it
wait until the beginning of the next, not this coming fiscal year but the
following in view of the fact that we have already budgeted and
submitted to the commissioners our budget for FY 96/97.
MORROW: I think from my perspective the answer to that is yes, the
purpose of us having this meeting is so that nobody is blind sided.
would like to have all of us have a years chance to adapt to this
because we are talking a significant change. In our case we have to
be looking for people right away for places for that and where to put
them. So we have the immediate problem but I think what we are
talking about here if I have understood the Council correctly is that a
longer term solution and we are saying okay we have a problem here
is a year's advance boarding and let's work towards a solution. So
that this time next year we have a definite goal or path that we are
going to follow amongst all of us.
BENTLEY: I have a question too in regards to what you are saying;
you are talking about finding a place and putting these people. Well
wouldn't it be a good option to just take the people with it since they
are already trained?
MORROW: (Inaudible) we may have to move a department head
out of here but that is a decision that the five us need to make over
the next month or so. But that won't impact this folks.
BENTLEY: I misunderstood what you were saying I thought you
were saying we would take the people that are currently working over
there since they are our employees and bring them over here.
MORROW: No
CORRIE: I would not see a problem over long term (inaudible) 97/98
program. There are just some things what you are talking we need to
get a handle on it because we are running out of space and I think
you are too over here from what Patty is telling me. We can probably
(inaudible) with the budget that we sent over to you where we go with
it I am not too sure. At least we have it in the budget to take care of
it. (Inaudible) I do agree that we need to work with you and vice versa
on this next six to 8 months pretty heavily.
WRIGHT: (Inaudible) we increased our budgets again from last
year and we felt that we were not (inaudible)
ROUNTREE: As far as the timing of that goes (inaudible) transition
time (inaudible) come to agreement as to how the transition
(inaudible)
MCQUADE: I think anything that involves this much complexity and
joint operation and cooperation is best addressed with some sufficient
amount of lead time and we certainly have got ourselves in trouble by
trying to implement something too complex too soon. That was, we
were just a little concerned about that. If we can say that the
milestone that we are all reaching for is the beginning of, well just say
October 1, 1997 then that automatically then sets goals for us. We
need to them back up to the May when we have to submit our budget
and that automatically dictates that we have all of our planning done
in advance by January. So now we have already pooled so far as
agreements and planning is concerned we have already pulled about
10 months of that deadline. So it is not really as far out as we think it
is. It gives everybody I think a chance to come up with the best plan
and that really is what we are after.
BABBITT: The proposed purchase for renovation of the old library
building, does the City of Meridian have plans to fill that space or
would there be space available in that building?
CORRIE: Quite honestly Pam I don't know, I have not heard a word
from them on the letter that I sent over to them about the possibility.
have heard that we have the first right of refusal to buy it. There is
quite a bit of space over there, just how much would be used by our
department or yours or whatever the case may be, I don't know.
guess I have not heard a word from the board. Hopefully I can make
some inquiries this week or next week and ask them where they are
on that.
BABBITT: (Inaudible)
CORRIE: (Inaudible) I was told if they do need to go to the other
library which they will then the City has the first right of refusal to take
and buy that building and that was given by (inaudible) and I have not
seen any of the leases or anything that they have had with them. If
they have to do that or they don't (inaudible) but there is quite a bit of
space over there and whether we would use that to lease or whatever
the case may be we can talk about that. If (inaudible)
MORROW: I think from our standpoint the answer to the question
really is that we are going to look at our options, it may even be that
one of our options is to abandon this facility and go to a much larger
facility that, because we have to project I guess would be somewhere
in the near term, 15 to 20 more employees over the next 3 to 4 years
and of course wanting parking space. So that maybe what we end up
seeing is a joint facility that is very similar where Bob's office is
(inaudible) City County site here and with the appropriate parking.
Obviously one of the problems with the library thing across the street
is that it doesn't solve any of her parking needs, there is no parking, it
is on street that is it.
BABBITT: That doesn't serve itself well for licensing.
MORROW: And then some of our constraints with this site is that
although we utilize it to their (inaudible) Farmers and Merchants owns
most of the parking that you see behind this facility. So there is that
natural (inaudible) in Patty's shop over here there is not enough
seating space in terms of square footage for her folk, there is spill
over into the aisles an then of course now we begin and with Farmers
and Merchants, if our relationship with them should get upside down
then all of the sudden we lose the parking space for not only the City
Hall folks that have been coming in and out (inaudible) so on and so
forth. As a Council we have to determine what it is we are going to do
(inaudible) would be a very very poor investment for us. It may not
solve any problems, it may in fact create some. Those are all issues
that we in fact have to deal with in the next few weeks, the next
couple of months. I think part of that answer may very well come from
your two departments that say well we prefer to do it this way or that
way and you can could give us immediate feedback as to what your
thoughts might be so that we have a direction (inaudible).
WRIGHT: (Inaudible) we better get our own facility somewhere.
think the feeling that I get around this table (inaudible).
MORROW: Well our philosophy as a Council when these planning
sessions started two years ago with the last administration and now
with this one is we want to see for our citizens a one stop shop.
Whether they are coming to pick up a building permit and need
Gary's expertise in the public works and whatever we want the
taxpayer to be able to come in the front door and have all his or her
needs serviced and go back out with a smile on their face. That is
what we are after. So I think you will find us very cooperative in
pursuing that goal so that we can work with you and Bob's idea about
adding these other services, great idea.
TOLSMA: How many more people do you plan on (inaudible)
WRIGHT: Right now without having done any kind of (inaudible)
think one more person could do the other functions.
TOLSMA: Like Walt was saying, there are days that they are lined
up clear out in the hallway over to (inaudible) sitting on benches and
chairs.
WRIGHT: (Inaudible) be out of synch (inaudible)
BENTLEY: I think the sooner we find out what your requirements
are going to be space wide and staff wide and get that to us. Like
Walt was saying, we have to start looking and looking soon at what
our plans are going to be to expand (inaudible). I mean take a look, if
we know what space requirements you are going to have for any
extra departments you want to add then we can sort of jointly plan on
(inaudible) everything in one building or whether we are going to have
satellites (inaudible).
WOLFKIEL: Pam, is the Sheriff going to go along with this as far as
upgrading this facility and making it quite larger when his facility now
is, I can't understand the Sheriff wanting to do this when his own
facility is half again as small as what I have.
BABBITT: It is and we processes 3 times as many transactions.
WRIGHT: It is an awful problem, we are running over 300 a day,
very fair honest question and maybe that is why I lead off with my
question so we will know what to plan. (Inaudible) funding for that
purpose although I don't think it is going to be quite sufficient. But
unfortunately in the overall approach that we are taking here there
are some (inaudible) County Clerk (inaudible) so we need his
endorsement of County Treasurer (inaudible) Bob and the Sheriff and
the county entities need to get together and see if we are able to
expand based on the position taken by other elected officials that are
not presently involved. To see if we are going to expand this drivers
license and vehicle registration service. So that is kind of an unknown
right now, we talked about that and we think it is extremely desirable
and I would suspect that Barbara Bauer the County Treasurer would
also agree with me, she is very public service oriented and she has
worked very close with us as I said earlier in setting up a second
satellite office downtown at the County building for drivers license.
So I don't expect any problem there but it is difficult for Bob and the
Sheriff to sit here tonight and give you some direct responses to that
and we just see that as a desirable step to back to the one stop shop
kind of thing where you can go and accomplish all of those things that
you normally drive down town for or normally go out to Barrister.
Somewhere we have to draw the line and there are some services
just by their nature we can't bring out with us from the County
Administration Office. Back to your question, the Sheriff does have a
very legitimate concern with the problem that we are experiencing at
Barrister and the overcrowding there because especially during the
student driver training program we have folks lined out the lobby and
down the steps and out to the parking lot. It is a horrible situation and
thank goodness that doesn't happen all of the time. But it does often
enough that we need to do something about that. So we have some
plans for that and that is why the Sheriff wanted to see primarily
tonight he made some assumptions about personnel that we would
naturally. I think in the big picture what we have done is we have just
outgrown our sewer service, I started with the County in 1968 and
just completing 28 years now I have seen a lot of changes and what
we have seen here is the natural evolution of the service that we
have started out with. When we first began licensing in Meridian we
had a combination of a clerk performing county tasks and Meridian
City government tasks and that was good and it was to everybody's
benefit because when that individual was not involved in the licensing
function she was able to perform functions for the City of Meridian.
And now we have evolved to the point where that is not really
practical it is not possible anymore simply because of the work
demands and the workload placed on those people. So now we need
to put this demarcation down here and say this is the County function,
this is the City function and just all of us acknowledge to each other
that needs to exist and it needs to come about now or within the next
year. So there is that issue and I know that the Sheriff supports that
proposal that several Council members made about taking over the
complete personnel responsibilities, salaries and benefits and all of
that. But that does leave the issue of facilities. That really is more of
a problem for us logistically than personnel, personnel is really quite
easy for us to take over (inaudible). But the facility, we are back to
hate to keep saying one stop shop, if you have one facility that is
going to offer all of those services then that says that we need to plan
in the direction of a common roof that houses these functions.
guess I can't answer it anymore than that. The Sheriff recognizes that
there is a facility problem here, he very definitely has a facility
problem in Boise that we are going to try to address over the next
several months. But I think that the Sheriff is going to be taking a real
close look at investing a significant amount of funding in the facility.
That is not to say that they won't or can't or wouldn't be willing to do
that. But as I mentioned earlier we are not budgeted for it. We have
submitted our FY 96/97 budget. We don't have penny one in there for
facilities. We just submitted the budget and you all gave us and it
doesn't really address facilities. To go back now at this late date to
the Board of County Commissioners with a significant and that is
maybe the key word significant expenditure (inaudible) we need to
look at some alternatives and although a one stop shop is desirable it
is probably something that would fit into that milestone that we are
shooting for come the first of that 97 fiscal year and that is what we
need.
CORRIE: Has Vaughn given you any indication as to what he wants
to do out here? As far as facility wise is concerned?
WRIGHT: He has told, given Pam and I both direction that he would
like to do whatever is necessary to provide the best service to the
Citizen in retaining whatever relationship you would like to continue to
exercise over the next (inaudible).
ROUNTREE: (Inaudible)
WRIGHT: There again it comes down to the missing players. The
Sheriff can submit whatever budget that he wants to to the Ada
County Commissioners what comes back to him in the form of
approved funding is an entirely different matter.
(Inaudible)
WRIGHT: That is why I mention those because if we involve the
County Clerk and Auditor, County Recorder, County Sheriff and the
County Assessor then the Commissioners would be extremely likely
to look favorably on whatever it would take to bring that level of
service to the residents of the City of Meridian and the County
residents. And I think if we can reach out and pull in those other
County services to make it more attractive to the citizen and therefore
to the Commissioners that they would be more inclined to look with
some favor on funding that. There is as I mentioned a big difference
between submitting a budget request and having that approved. So
we need to work with the Commissioners and I found that the biggest
objection they have to our funding request is being out of the loop or
not in the planning phase. So we need some time for lack of a better
term to lobby them to make sure they are in on the planning that the
Commissioners feel like they have had a hand in the design and
rightly so they should have. They are responsible for all county funds
and so we need to involve the Commissioners in the plans that we
put together. But preparatory to that we need to make sure that
Mayor and Council and Sheriff and other county elected officials are
together.
BABBITT: Is the City of Meridian looking at voting a bond if you build
or are you looking at other forms of funding for that?
MORROW: I think the reality is from our standpoint is the Council
that we try to do everything by way of savings account. Recognizing
that as difficult as it is to pass a bond issue for schools that the
taxpayer in Western Ada County is not likely to look favorably on any
kind of bond issue. We have adopted the kind of savings account
philosophy for parts and pieces of things that we need to do. So
guess that is probably the direction we will look first. (Inaudible)
BABBITT: And when you look at (inaudible) parts of the county that
are taxed so heavily for the school districts there are a lot of
(inaudible) another bond issue.
CORRIE: There are a lot of factors that we just don't know yet
(inaudible)
WRIGHT: Failing any real desirable solution to the problem like the
passage of a bond issue we may be forced into continuing operation
for another fiscal year in somewhat the same undesirable conditions
that we have now. Obviously there are things that we can do to
mitigate that as we go along. I know that you are already looking at
that. I guess what I am saying is for a major change in the solution
that everybody is after I think we need to look with some reality at that
and say we need it now or we would like to have it now, we are going
to have to admit that really is (inaudible)
BENTLEY: I don't think anybody disagrees since your budget is in
we are going to have to do some planning ahead. But I think as I said
before what we need to know what you are going to commit to what
extra services you are going to put on, what extra people is going to
be put on and what you are going to need footage wise to meet this
need. And sooner we can get that information gathered and back
and possibly this positive input this is what we are going to back then
we can sort of put the plans together whether we look for a joint
building or look just for space outside of us. Sooner we get some
information on that is the sooner we can start putting the plans
together here.
MCQUADE: When do you need something from us so that you can
proceed with your planning?
MORROW: I think it would be nice to have it within the next couple
of months at least a general outline of the goals to go for because we
need to start our (End of Tape)
MCQUADE: I would need to get the participation of the Sheriff
(inaudible) the Sheriff and I could get together (inaudible) next week
(inaudible).
CORRIE: I would be happy to sit down with you and Vaughn and
Barbara and see what we can come up with.
ROUNTREE: I would suggest that you put it together in terms of this
(inaudible) phased into get (inaudible)
WRIGHT: I think maybe, you have already said what I needed to
hear and that is if you do have a bond issue and you provide for
whatever funds are necessary to build a new building do you want the
County service in that building? As a philosophical issue, do you
want those services in that building or again from a City government
approach would you just assume have City government services in
the City building and the county government services in a County
building. I need to again be perfectly candid and upfront with you
need to ask you that. Would you, if Vaughn and I and Bob and get
together next week and say we found a building over here and the
County (inaudible) provide our services and hang the big county seal
above the door.
MORROW: From this standpoint I think the direction that we are
moving as a Council is we recognize that there is one taxpayer out
there. The day of each governmental entity having its own taxpayer to
support his function is over with. We are doing such things as and
talking about such things now as putting together assets that are
within the community that are owned by several entities to the goal of
being used by the taxpayer in general and trying to coordinate how
those things happen. I would think that conceptually one stop shop
means that we would like to see our citizens serviced in the front door
for any governmental needs that they might have being able to be
handled in one building. Now then maybe the step to get to that
ultimately is that we have 2 or 3 different sites that we have to
struggle through in the interim but long term we get to the one stop
shop that we are after. As a City we are looking at schools and other
things to try and bring together other assets for other purposes. So
think our philosophy long term would be one building.
ROUNTREE: There may be (inaudible)
TOLSMA: Across the street (inaudible) if we all have to go different
directions for a short period of time then finally congregate all back
together again that is what the ultimate goal is.
WRIGHT: And that is just an objective route to the goal and we can
certainly do that. I guess Bob and I just needed to leave here with
the understanding that we don't have an absolute emergency here
where the County has to be out of this building in two months or
whatever. That is what I am understanding, right?
CORRIE: (Inaudible) where you put the City/County building or
such is going to be as big of a factor as when (inaudible).
ROUNTREE: Speaking of that though (inaudible) that would be my
preference (inaudible)
WAYNE: I am sure you are aware having just voted on the County
court house and county administration building now what that means
obviously the voters have approved that is Boise City government
services is going to be down stairs next to the Egyptian theater,
County government services is going to be way down the road and
around the corner on Broadway. So, there is a split and
BABBITT: (Inaudible) in that our magistrate court, our traffic court is
going to move out of that City building that is next door to us so it will
give us room for expansion (inaudible) and a lot of that is going to
address is the answer to your question about is the Sheriff going to
support that. Now, I don't want to (inaudible) because they haven't
but both the City and the County know that City administration is
going to take over the county portion of the facility at 650 main and
150 S. Capital Boulevard and that will all be city offices. (Inaudible)
BABBITT: Now how that will affect Boise PD in the 7200 Barrister
area is kind of a question mark, there will probably be some kind of
administrative offices in the City building down town but the bulk of
City's PD operations will remain at Barrister but will have that traffic
court area to expand for City PD which is growing by leaps and
bounds. In addition to the sheriff staff. So we are experiencing all of
the same things but we have some hope in sight because of all of
those changes.
WOLFKIEL: I do have one question, I don't know if you can answer
it this evening or not in regards to the discussion we have had this
evening I put together some figures and I gave the Mayor and all
Council members a copy and I just gave Bob and Pam one, what you
see in front of you is what I am asking for wage wise for my
department. With all of this in mind in the budget that we have
submitted to you folks is anything going to happen salary wise for my
employees this year. Are they going to be able to be moved up in the
budget that we asked for, is it going to be okayed by both ends. The
main concern and the main issue is the salary increases.
WRIGHT: I don't know that, I won't pretend to speak for Bob, but
from the Sheriff's perspective I don't know that we can answer that
tonight. We have submitted our preliminary budget to the
Commissioners the third Monday in May a couple of weeks ago.
Babbit: For clarification, the budgeted dollar amount that you
submitted that you provided to Bob and I to split 70/30 did that
include the salary increase in it?
WOLFKIEL: I believe it included a 9.5% or 10% increase.
CORRIE: 9.5% if it is approved by Council. There again they are
under the City's employ and that is again back to the same problem.
We can make the change that is the Council's decision where they
want to put the salaries.
BABBITT: Patty did you calculate the percentage of increase for
your employees on an average percentage. I know that you have
calculated them individually but do you know what that comes out for
an overall salary increase for your employees, is it more than 9%?
WOLFKIEL: I don't remember if I did or not.
WRIGHT: The reason that we are asking there is there is an Ada
County Code that the Commissioners are pretty tight to that if we
exceed a 10% over it is a really battle.
WOLFKIEL: I don't know if I did, (inaudible)
MORROW: I guess the question is of these six people is the
percentage increase greater than 9%, 1 am sure it is over all. I am
sure it is because you are 9.97, 14.4. 9.44
WOLFKIEL: And that is why I mentioned to Bob is what I was asking
for is out of line if we can go a 9.5 straight across the board for all the
girls. That is not listed in what you have but Bob and I did discuss
that. (Inaudible)
WOLFKIEL: What is in the dollar figure that we submitted is that that
you are looking at, that total.
MCQUADE: That also includes the breakdown Patty that you gave
Patty on the B budget issues (inaudible)
CORRIE: (Inaudible) which one did you give me, this isn't that one.
WOLFKIEL: That is the one that I gave you is the same thing that
you and I have right here when I wrote them to the side. Some of
them, like for instance myself mine is a 9.3 there was a 9.7, there was
a 14 and a 9.9 and that is when you had mentioned that those were
pretty scary percentage wise if you looked at it that way. That is when
mentioned if we could just go a 9.5 straight across for everybody
that would be acceptable as well. But what was submitted to you was
the higher dollar amount.
BABBITT: So the amount that Bob and I have divided includes the
higher amount.
WOLFKIEL: Yes
CORRIE: (Inaudible)
WOLFKIEL: (Inaudible) that Will had salaries are $103,886, last
year they were 94,442. This is what you and I have (Inaudible) okay
you have the lower not the higher then, that was my mistake I will
make sure and make note of that.
WAYNE: I think that is something that we will have to meet again
and discuss further because there is a great many similar inequities
in the Sheriff staff that he has asked for corrections and we need to
and we don't have answers on those yet either. So there are a lot of
things in the budget process that have yet, have we got Bob do you
know from Dave Navarro the percentage increase. Have the
Commissioners, have they said that 4% is it?
MCQUADE: Yes
WAYNE: Okay merit is 4 and then we have that County code
requirement that you can't exceed 10% on a per person basis that we
need to look at. So there are just some variables that I can't really
give you an answer as to whether (inaudible).
WOLFKIEL: The reason I ask is because I am sure that I am going
to have several interested bodies tomorrow so that is why I asked.
WAYNE: Well tell, we certainly, identify to those people that we
have a real concern with salary and have done what we can to
budget to correct that and address those problems. But
unfortunately we don't know until we get into budget negotiations with
the board (Inaudible).
BABBITT: I have a question for you Patty, talking about a one stop
shop for County services to be with an additional employee added to
your supervisory responsibility and broadening fairly well your
required level of understanding across County government to be able
to provide those services to the residents. How do you feel about
taking on that additional responsibility?
WOLFKIEL: I don't have a problem with it, I can't think of any
reason why I wouldn't be able to learn the possibility of court clerk,
different things like that, collecting the money. There has been,
have worked in each of the departments inside City Hall as far as
dealing with the building permits and then the water and sewer bills.
don't see that it would be a problem for me to supervise an additional
person and learn the 4 or 5 new skills that I might have to lean to
supervise that person. I don't foresee
BABBITT: Are your employees currently and completely cross
trained in DMV so the citizen who stands in front of them if it is a
motor vehicle registration and the next one is driver's license.
WOLFKIEL: Yes (Inaudible)
CORRIE: I guess if anybody has any questions? (Inaudible)
ROUNTREE: (Inaudible) get together with the other service
providers and (inaudible)
MCQUADE: (Inaudible) and perhaps we could (Inaudible) and
telling him what we thought or tell him when we thought we could
complete it. I would think, do you think maybe the end of June is that
going to be pushing it.
MORROW: Our next meeting for this purpose is the 25th of June
and that would be an ideal time to discuss it. WRIGHT: I think Bob
if we could shoot for around the first part of June for a meeting with
Vaughn and yourself and maybe the 3 or 4 or five of us. (Inaudible)
WRIGHT: Just ask Betty to calendar a date that would work for the
both of you.
CORRIE: Perhaps we could be involved (inaudible)
WRIGHT: We may be able to provide you with written
correspondence that you could be considering prior to the meeting.
So when we get together we don't just start off cold we will know what
is kind of in each other's minds. (Discussion Inaudible)
MCQUADE: I would like to make one comment, I really appreciate
(inaudible) City of Meridian being so kind and giving us a year
(inaudible) three weeks to figure something else out. Thank you
WRIGHT: I second that 100%, we appreciate the opportunity to be
here and we more than appreciate your asking for our input. We will
do what we can to get everything you need so we can (inaudible)
CORRIE: We will meet back here on the 25th and see what kind of
progress we have made. (Discussion Inaudible)
CORRIE: This is Dan Clark the General Manager in the middle here
of TCI and Steve Proper, we asked them to come here today and
kind of give us an idea on this new ordinance. If you have any
questions on it the attorney has been over it a few times with them.
So do you guys want to start with any questions. PROPER: Just for
an introduction I handle franchising for TCI for the states of Utah and
Idaho. A little over a year ago (inaudible) Dan as a local General
Manager for TCI for a number of years (inaudible). The Mayor
indicated to Dan (inaudible) and we have been working I guess since
came on board and Dan came on board last year with Will and the
Mayor and recently Wayne to try and come to terms with regards to a
renewal of franchise here in the City of Meridian. While it is not due to
expire for I think it is 1998 is it not. There are over 3 pieces of
legislation that (inaudible) framework. We (inaudible) municipality in
terms of how these renewals occur. It is (inaudible) expire in three
years that we enter into those negotiations. There is a whole formal
process that we have been successful in achieving renewals through
an informal process which really allows just this type of opportunity to
talk back and forth rather than the municipality dictating an issue and
us responding to it and (inaudible).
PROPER: In our last meeting with the exception of a couple issues
and I don't mean to speak for the City but with the exception of a
couple issues (inaudible) we have here I should say an ordinance
renewing our franchise addressing a number of issues. I can go
through it and highlight a few of those issues if you would like or
everybody has had an opportunity to at least see it. Would that be
best (inaudible) open it up to any questions.
BERG: (Inaudible)
PROPER: The marked up one because we made a few changes
since our last (inaudible) the one I sent to you, May 7 it was dated.
That is the most current one that reflected the changes (inaudible)
Again I will just go through and highlight the (inaudible) the definitions
are just that, definitions. (Discussion Inaudible)
CLARK: First off I am Dan Clark, I am the local manager in the
Treasure Valley, fairly new I have been here about a year by way of
Seattle. Some good news, on June 1st we are launching a bunch of
new services primarily in the Meridian market, country music
television, the history channel, ESPN 2, introduction television which
is basically a sampling service of a lot of services that we offer. A
bunch of pay per view opportunities are coming to this market. Action
pay per view, request 2, request 4, all the movies that you could
possibly want. This is where we started our rebuild of our facility to
compete in the future. We feel we need to rebuild our infrastructure.
In the Treasure Valley we started in Meridian. So this is phase 1 of
our rebuild. So you guys are going to have a lot of the services that
others will want and that all happens on June 1st. So we are pretty
excited about that. One other thing that is note worthy is we are not
going to have any more part time services that caused some
customer frustration in the past. Everything that was part time will go
to full time that includes the learning channel, something that our
customers will enjoy, wonderful educational programming. In addition
to the programming itself, quality and reliability will be improved
dramatically through the use of fiber optics and basically a total
rebuild of the system in Meridian. So stay tuned so to speak until
Saturday.
PROPER: It might also be worth mentioning the (inaudible)
CLARK: That is right, TCI has received a lot of media this year
because they are building what is called a customer satisfaction
center on Cloverdale near Hewlett Packard. You may have seen that,
it will be operational on December 1st. We are going to build 8 of
those throughout the United States and change our corporate
structure for the most part. Boise is extremely fortunate to be selected
for one of the 8; we figure the annual impact on the economy will be
about $30 million. We estimate between 600 and 800 jobs will be
provided through that service and will handle about 2 million
customers, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. (Inaudible)
CLARK: You know I didn't make that decision, if it were up to me
would have built it in Meridian, (inaudible).
PROPER: I think you recognize the windfall (inaudible) pretty
substantial hiring of folks and we can (inaudible). Now that
everybody has their copies again definitions are just that (inaudible)
many of these definitions many of these provisions in this agreement
are reflective of various cable acts that occurred since 1984 and 1992
most recently in 1996 although that didn't have a whole lot to do with
franchising issues. Much of that framework is represented in here.
draw your attention to section 3, non„exclusive grant. This ordinance
is just that, it is a non„exclusive license if you will for us to continue to
operate our cable facility here in Meridian. The old, I should say the
current agreement allowed that as well. That is one of the issues that
is dictated by federal law. You cannot, cable operator cannot have
an exclusive agreement to provide services. There always has and
there always will be opportunities for anybody else to come in as long
as they (inaudible) to be able to operate a cable system as well.
Section 5, provide some standard of service and meeting federal
FCC federal communications commission requirements and those
range anywhere from customer service standards that we have and
many of those are just the minimums we go far and beyond that
(inaudible) phone operations. Even prior to this center coming up of
any cable customer in Meridian to pick up a telephone 24 hours a day
365 days of the year and speak to a live TCI person. I think you
would be hard pressed to find many companies in this community or
any community where that can occur and have whatever issues that
customer might have be (inaudible) Obviously there city rights in the
franchise in terms of use of our system by the City in the case of and
list the various issues there in terms of emergency maybe you want
to string street lights on poles that we might own (Inaudible). Section
7, 1 will draw your attention to number 2 there, restoration that is often
times an issue with in terms of communities in terms of us repairing
(inaudible) to is reasonable (inaudible). There are tree trimming
provisions in there. (Inaudible) Section 8, federal law allows up to 5%
of a cable operators gross revenues derived from operation of the
system to be assessed in the way of franchise fees by the local
municipality. Currently that has been at 3% and the old ordinance had
a schedule much like you see here and it also allowed for a review of
that percentage every 5 years if the City so chose to increase that.
Much again as it says here and this is really reflective of the old
agreement I think that (inaudible) that (inaudible) again the federally
allowed maximum amount is 5%, currently we are at 3%. So that
would be about a 66% increase and that is additional revenues to the
City if you will. But that is also passed through if a law were to pass
that through to customers as well. We have a concern in that even
though we are allowed to pass it through we are no longer (inaudible)
consumers (inaudible) might be itemized, they are going to look to the
bottom line in terms of their comparison. And there goes Dan's
mention of trying to stay competitive and rebuilding the system so
that (inaudible) we can put on there that would be desirable so they
don't (inaudible). So franchise fee percentages is a concern of ours,
mention that just so you understand that but it is wholly within your
discretion and you are allowed by law to ask for that amount up to the
5%. Rates and fees of subscribers basically would be the 1992 set a
number of rates, the old ordinance had a whole list of rate schedules
in it. That is no longer applicable under law. This ordinance does not
allow nor does it disallow you to pass the requisite ordinances to
regulate rates if you are so interested. Then there are some of the
reporting requirements on our part, a couple of liability and
indemnification in terms of the amounts of insurance that we carry.
Service the public buildings, section 15, we provide and have for
some time a product that we are pretty proud of here (inaudible)
cable to classrooms. We have as a matter of fact a national teacher
training facility (inaudible) to attend but hopefully in the future we can
get (inaudible) the old one was 20 years as well. I think that was one
of the other issues that we talked about. I have just FYI a list of all of
the renewals that we have done back to 1992 of the various
communities in Idaho and in Utah in the length of those agreements
and certainly see that 20 years is not an unusual amount. As well as
(inaudible) we can certainly those are really the highlights of
(inaudible) as well. But I wanted to point those out as the starting
point (inaudible)
CORRIE: Questions Council?
MORROW: I guess my question would be is what rate in terms of
percent are the immediate surrounding communities doing, Boise?
PROPER: I have a schedule of that (inaudible)
MORROW: And Nampa is? CLARK: Nampa I am not sure
(inaudible). I can give you that specifically by area if you like, I can
get that to you tomorrow. (Discussion Inaudible)
PROPER: (Inaudible) Garden City 5%, Boise 5%, Canyon County
5%, Caldwell 3%, Nampa 5%, Eagle 5%, (inaudible).
MORROW: Let me ask you a follow up question then, the rates that
you charge the folks in those cities reflect the 3 to 5%, in other words
is the rate in Kuna and Ada County 2% less than it is in the City of
Boise.
PROPER: Not necessarily I would have to look at little further over.
Some of the older agreements didn't necessarily assess that
percentage on a gross revenue basis. It might have just (inaudible)
again what federal law allows is 5% of the total gross revenues
(inaudible) when you look at 3% you have to know it is 3% of what. It
is whatever that agreement was negotiated. I can tell you that at a
point the threshold that is now 5% used to be 3% so that is why
(inaudible). I don't know if I answered your question.
MORROW: Well my question was in those communities where it is
3% is the service less expensive
PROPER: The actual monthly subscription, Dan will talk a little bit
about the service rates but basically since 1992 many of our service
rates have been regulated and there is a fairly complicated process
that goes into that based on number of subscribers, number of
channels we have to offer and etc. But you know the rate issues
Dan.
CLARK: Right, the basic and expanded basic rate would be the
same for example Eagle and Meridian. The difference is again in the
franchise fee, as Steve pointed out it depends on what it is assessed.
In Meridian it might be for basic and expanded basic whereas in
Eagle it might be for basic service, expanded basic service and
installation revenue. All of that is passed onto the customer. So it is
not simply looking at the 5% versus the 3% it is looking at what that
percentage effects. I think the answer you are looking for is simply
this though. If it is 3% most probably that customers bill would be
less.
PROPER: I think your question though too was putting the franchise
fee aside is the rate to be charged for basic cable franchise fee aside
the same in Meridian as say it is in Caldwell? MORROW: No my
question was if we set the franchise fee at 3% does the monthly rate
that our tax payer pay less than Boise's monthly rate which is set at
5%.
PROPER: I see, and all things being equal the answer would be
yes.
BENTLEY: I have a question for you, with your agreement with
Nampa you have got, you agreed to 2% donation of their rec center,
is that included in the percentage, or is that above?
PROPER: I am not all that familiar with Nampa, now, is it, I don't
know is the answer. But I am going to speculate that 2%, once we
provide the City with the franchise fee payments the City can really
do with that what they want. Is it your understanding that
arrangement is with TCI and the (inaudible) is that what that
community is doing with those funds that TCI (inaudible) and I am
guessing that is probably the scenario but I am not sure. I am not
aware of any franchises that we have that deviate what we are
looking at here and (inaudible). Maybe,
BERG: I don't think there is any agreement, what they have is set up
that percentage goes to a different fund (inaudible). When I started
working with TCI with Grant (inaudible) his indication was he could
persuade or have a basis that the taxpayers are the users are paying
2% and it is going to a specific use which may be better than just
(inaudible) I think that is what Nampa sold its citizens on.
PROPER: And if in fact it does go up as you determine it should go
up we will have to work with you on language that you feel
comfortable with (inaudible) but we will be happy to work with you
with any language. The standard language in this sort of scenario is
that well it might be increasing it is going to support the City
(inaudible). But we are happy to work with you in terms of notification
language.
ROUNTREE: I don't find it in here (inaudible) a lot of our, (inaudible)
restoration of landscaping, fences and those kinds of things. I think
that is something (inaudible) could get real ugly.
PROPER: Are you talking about private easements outside of the
city?
ROUNTREE: Well I am talking about where a lot of your lines are,
like our neighborhood they are all in the back yards. We also have a
(inaudible) It is along the easement with the telephone lines.
PROPER: Just so I have it clear is it or is it not (inaudible)
ROUNTREE: Well they are in easements but the easements are not
restricted for gardening, landscaping and fences and all of that sort of
thing.
PROPER: And under restoration the language that is in there
(inaudible)
ROUNTREE: All that speaks to me about is restoration of pavement
surface.
PROPER: Or surface of any public way disrupted (inaudible). And
that is why I was trying to get (inaudible) that is certainly our intent,
that is not clear.
MORROW: I guess my question would be is the same as Charlie's
public way means to me it could be road or back of curb or sidewalk it
doesn't necessarily mean easements that you share in common with
PROPER: If you look at the definition (inaudible)
ROUNTREE: (Inaudible) should be restored.
PROPER: And again what we would try to do, the City's authority is
obviously the public ways.
ROUNTREE: The public way, I have a public way in my backyard
and right now it has 6 to 8 feet of landscaping.
PROPER: Again understand our intent here is just as you want as
well but I thought we were pretty well covered there. Again if you look
at the definition of public way (inaudible) alley, court, boulevard,
sidewalk, parkway, lay, public drive, circle.
ROUNTREE: I understand that (inaudible) but restoration (inaudible)
not covered by other surface,
PROPER: It says other surface of any public way which goes back
to the definition. (Inaudible) and again our intent here is the same so
TOLSMA: Do you know who the contractor was that put the fiber
optics underground here in Meridian.
CLARK: DEA
TOLSMA: They went through my backyard, the neighbors back yard
and all the neighbors back yards, and two days after they were there
you couldn't tell he was there.
CLARK: I was going to say we try to do that at all times, we go
above and beyond, we will buy sod and seed and put in a fence
(inaudible).
PROPER: And your concern is legitimate and that is why I pointed
out it out as a highlight because I know it is a concern.
ROUNTREE: (Inaudible)
PROPER: By virtue of the fact that we have already done it here
would hope that is testimony to our concern about it.
TOLSMA: I was amazed, I went back and looked at what they are
digging up back there (inaudible) (End of Tape)
ROUNTREE: (Inaudible)
CROOKSTON: I would have to look into it further Charlie,
(inaudible)
PROPER: Again our intent there is to do just as you say (inaudible)
entertain some additional language.
ROUNTREE: The other thing I have in here (inaudible) I know you
have a desire for some new equipment (inaudible) that may not lie in
what is yards at this point in time. I don't know what the issue
(inaudible) they bought a lot specifically because it didn't have a
(inaudible) 2 by 3 box in the corner of their yard (inaudible).
PROPER: And remember too that in all likelihood at least we hope
so that, that person is also a customer of ours and there are other
issues. (Inaudible)
PROPER: And again so everyone has a clear picture based on what
has been achieved here in terms of the rebuild we have basically for
a number of years done unless there is an emergency (inaudible) we
have basically rebuilt this system and already addressed those
issues. Most of our construction now as you described going into new
developments is coordinated in advance. But again point well taken
and again I will reiterate I would hope that person is going to be a
customer so if we don't treat them right in that respect we probably
won't get them as a customer either.
CORRIE: I had a couple of them call me and call Dan and they were
making changes that day, they were quite surprised that they got it
done so quickly. He did a good job on the that called me.
ROUNTREE: My last copy (inaudible) is there significant difference
between the two or are these highlighted changes the differences on
this copy that I have (inaudible).
CROOKSTON: Bob and I and these two gentlemen discussed it
approximately a month ago. There are changes from the ordinance
that we did have but they are not significant. The question that I had
was whether or not the Council wanted to go with the 20 years.
think I had some other questions but I don't have that file that I had in
this hand with me tonight (inaudible) proposed ordinance.
PROPER: Just as an illustration (inaudible) had a rate schedule
(inaudible) again that has been superseded by the (inaudible) so that
sort of stuff was cleaned out (inaudible).
CROOKSTON: What changes you show here are changes
(inaudible) not changes from (inaudible).
PROPER: Correct the changes you are looking at are only changes
from our meeting of a month ago. But there were changes
(inaudible).
BENTLEY: How many people do you have on line in Nampa and
how many people here?
PROPER: I can give you some ball park figures off the top of my
head.
MORROW: (Inaudible) what do you think about 15 years
(inaudible).
CLARK: Nampa, is 6200 compared to Meridian we are about 4200.
PROPER: Any other questions for either Dan or myself?
MORROW: What is the basic cable rate per month?
CLARK: We have essentially three different rates right now
depending on where you live. In the City of Meridian basic and
expanded basic which is what 95% of our customers purchase wil
be approximately $26 a month.
TOLSMA: (Inaudible)
CLARK: 95% of our customers take expanded basic which is
essentially our cable services like CNN, ESPN those types of
services are expanded basic. In Meridian that includes the history
channel, science fiction channel is coming to Meridian, a lot of
customers demand for that service.
TOLSMA: (Inaudible)
CLARK: That is optional and additional correct. (Inaudible)
PROPER: And again, let me just add again our rates since 1992
whether a community chose to regulate us or not which they have the
option to do and I can tell you (inaudible) we made a commitment and
plan on continuing to tell those communities even though you chose
not to regulate your rates will be based on those same calculations
that same guidelines that (inaudible) handed down by the FCC and
that is how our rates have been determined since 1992.
CLARK: There is a lot of good news, so far knock on wood we
haven't received a lot of negative customer feedback especially from
Meridian because while we are initiating an increase we have a good
story to tell. We are adding three basic services and four expanded
basic services. Customers have asked for those services and we are
providing them now and are willing to pay a little extra. It is a little
more difficult in other areas where you have a rate increase and you
are not launching new programming services.
PROPER: Probably sci„fi and history there are probably count on
one hand the TCI systems in the country probably that carry those
services which Meridian will soon be one. So that is a real perceived
as a real feather in our cap (inaudible).
MORROW: Let me ask this question, if the going rate for example
is $25 or thereabouts that means that a 5% rate you have $1.25 in
terms of the franchise fee does that go on top of the $25 or is it in
included in the $25?
CLARK: Yes, that would be based on gross revenues. I can run
some real quick averages here for you if you want just to give you
some perspective. On and average, customers in the way of
franchise fees at 3% right now are paying $.90 a month. That would
go up to $1.50, so $.60 if you maxed it up to the full 5%. Now there is
nothing that says you have to do that this agreement, there is wording
in there, if you don't like this wording there is other wording available.
Again this is wholly your prerogative to say that if you wanted to keep
it at something the same or a little bit more but you wanted to have
the option which this agreement does allow you the option to increase
it to the federally allowed amount, maximum amount. Sometime
during the rest of the franchise, the life of the franchise, so there are a
number of options here. Frankly I can tell you up until late last
summer whenever we were renewing an agreement and it was
something less than 5% it was an automatic the communities would
take it up to that and then as I said late last summer I saw them
without any prompting on our part say we are going to keep it where it
is at or just increase it a little bit but have the option to take it up to
the full 5% as we described earlier. I said (inaudible) but the good
news is and we are happy about it, since that time I have seen
communities continue to do that. It obviously depends upon tax
bases, available to the City, the make up Council's in terms of
positions they have taken. While some might call this a user tax only
those folks that are using it are being assessed. Other Councils and
philosophical by principle don't like any taxes so they want to
(inaudible). That is the long and short of it in terms of how this is
being dealt with. We of course couldn't, don't expect to make that
decision for you but if there is any questions that we can address
(inaudible). Of course proportionally as we add services as well
those franchise fee payments increase to the cities as well. The
services that Dan just mentioned by virtue of the fact that it was
assumed that he left it at the 3% gross we are adding new services
and the people are (inaudible) and that in itself should generate what
would you guess another 5%. Assuming everything stayed as it was
you were probably looking at a minimum of 5% increase of franchise
fee payments anyway by virtue of us growing the business and
(inaudible). 5% over the previous year.
CORRIE: What advantage Steve, why would we go 20 and not 15?
PROPER: Again 20, 1 certainly approach this the same way you
approach it. You are not looking for anything less than what you had
before in the way of an agreement and I understand that and I guess
by the same token we are (inaudible). Certainly in other communities
where we have a longer term that you see on that list that I think
everybody has there that longer term has been negotiated as a result
of our commitment to rebuild the system that is a non issue here
having rebuilt it. As was pointed out by a couple council members
certainly competition is going to dictate much of where we go from
here. Not to minimize our franchise obligations but all things said and
done it is the consumer that is going to drive this business. Twenty
year deal certainly from an administrative point of view cuts off what
we are doing right now and minimizes that. I touched upon that
attached little list. A few of our concerns or principle interests with
regard to the franchise terms is our ability to continue (inaudible).
We certainly as I noted those communities on that list that have
(inaudible) I guess as a final comment I would only hope that our last
20 years have been an indication (inaudible) partnering with the City
and providing the type of service that (inaudible). Again I can't
minimize enough the fact that this has been rebuilt, that is not
happening just every place. I can assure you as Dan mentioned that
including Boise metro it has not happened but it did happen here in
Meridian. This was chosen to happen first in terms of this (inaudible)
and still are to continue to rebuild into the other communities as well.
But we have really hit a stone wall in terms of a lot of our lending
institutions and our ability to borrow capital to rebuild these systems.
(Inaudible) rebuilding out of this facility. So, luck of the draw or what
have you Meridian is said and done and it is state of the art
(inaudible) fire optics and the potential that is available there.
CORRIE: Charlie do you want Wayne to look into that one wording?
ROUNTREE: Yes (inaudible).
PROPER: I can look at some of the other agreements that, that is
pretty close (inaudible) and again your concern is our concern we
have no problem committing to that. That is certainly not an obstacle
that (inaudible) above and below of any (inaudible). Again if you are
not comfortable with that we are willing to (inaudible).
CORRIE: Okay, any other comments?
PROPER: Again we just appreciate the opportunity that (inaudible)
addressing this issue and (inaudible) come to some mutual
conclusion and (inaudible) sounds like there is still maybe a franchise
fee issue that needs to be resolved. Where should we go from here
in terms of the rights of way thing I think I can address that over a
phone call. (Inaudible)
CROOKSTON: In regard to the franchise fee (inaudible) but this
calls for (inaudible)
MORROW: I think where we really want to be (Discussion
Inaudible)
PROPER: That is language that hasn't been changed since we
received the initial proposal, well I can't say that for sure because Will
and I sort of pulled the pieces together here not remembering who
said the last proposal. In the recent year anyway that language has
not changed. I don't know if the City very originally proposed that or
that has been modified or not. But I think you clearly understand that
we can go whatever (inaudible)
CORRIE: As the gross revenues increase you want to (inaudible)
PROPER: As I mentioned even if it stayed at the current percentage
level we anticipate (inaudible) by the way we are growing. So that
might be something that you can weigh into it.
MORROW: I think a lot depends from my perspective what
obviously we will do is a public hearing but if there is any input from
the, I think in the very minimum (Inaudible) in terms of those rates
and I think from our perspective that we ought to do that as a Council
and do that in the public hearing forum or format so that we have
some input from the citizens because that is really who we are taxing
here. And that is what we are talking about is the tax.
PROPER: And I can tell you again having got into this negotiation a
little bit late that every five year language that was in the old
(inaudible) in recent agreements when (Inaudible) that says anytime
during the remainder of the franchise that the city desires to change
that simply upon notification to us so that we can notify the
customers. That is very common language that (inaudible) all those
that I mentioned earlier.
MORROW: But the thing of it is Charlie that from my perspective
would like to see something with some consistency (inaudible) on our
part as the governmental entity they have some right to consistency
or stability or cost and I don't think I want to see an agreement, the
agreement ought to bind them or ought to bind us between each
other but it also ought to bind the two entities to the taxpayer from the
standpoint that they have some continuity there also. We have been
doing, the trash thing we have done in terms of five year increments
ultimately we will get to a five year option at the Council's discretion.
Which seems to be the industry standard. I think we need to be
sensitive to these types of things. I think I liked to see us commit
ourselves to (inaudible)
ROUNTREE: (Inaudible)
MORROW: No the rate is stable and what we say is that we are
going to start out for example at 5% and we will review that in five
years and we may go down but it won't go up. So
ROUNTREE: That is a better place to start in my opinion?
(Inaudible)
BENTLEY: When does the current one expire?
CROOKSTON: I think it is 1998. The other concern that I had on the
renewal idea was to set (inaudible) then you have to give 90 days
notice before the expiration (inaudible). The question is will the City
remember that (inaudible) of it it wasn't done in five years can it then
be done in the next year or any time.
PROPER: And that is why I suggested the other option that we have
come to terms with other communities and (inaudible) and that says
that any time you want to change it as long at it is federally allowed.
CROOKSTON: I totally agree with the notice.
PROPER: And we are obligated by law, and 90 days is only
reasonable because of the billing services we use. By law we have to
give them 30 days notice so depending upon our billing systems
(inaudible) so all we are saying there is (inaudible) time frame it takes
us to facilitate that. So all you need to do is and there is no tickler file
here if you will but if in fact you (inaudible) probably do it be resolution
or something anyway right and we would receive a copy of that and
(inaudible).
ROUNTREE: I had one other little thing (inaudible) in case of any
disturbance (inaudible) in the manner provided by the City, what does
that mean? Is that a quality provision, the City is going to provide
(inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible)
PROPER: This language is verbatim to what the original (inaudible).
For instance if it was a street and (inaudible)
MORROW: Oh I think we put it on the agenda for a public hearing
and be on with the process.
CORRIE: That would be the 18th of June. (Inaudible)
PROPER: Well we will certainly make it a point to be there.
(Inaudible)
CORRIE: Okay, job descriptions. (Inaudible) water department,
sewer department.
MORROW: We have fire, police, sewer and water, license.
(Discussion Inaudible)
MORROW: Is Janice's stuff done, what about the front, the building
department, the girls?
BERG: (Inaudible)
MORROW: You don't have police, we had it last year would it not be
the same?
BERG: (Inaudible)
CORRIE: (Inaudible) any further comments on that one?
ROUNTREE: (Inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible)
CORRIE: Okay, resolution of findings of fact and conclusions of law.
MORROW: Wayne was going to give us a read out on that
CROOKSTON: You are talking about the Eagle versus Boise and
Ada County. I don't find that there is anything that says specifically
much of anything.
MORROW: That is kind of what I read but the thing I was
concerned about is that obviously it was a bad reporting in the
newspaper that indicated that some of those things had been dealt
with because I couldn't find anything that was dealt with in terms of
notification and public's right to know.
CROOKSTON: (Inaudible) the judge mentions just like on page 9, at
the bottom of the first full paragraph it says (inaudible) the subdivision
was pretty well (inaudible) On page 13, in the middle paragraph, it
says it appears the City Council has furnished, was furnished with
this information both in support and in opposition to the requested
zoning classification. Boise City's finding that the requested zoning
classifications weren't compatible with existing uses appears to be
supported by substantial evidence it will not be upset by this court in
review. It doesn't say what the substantial evidence was. It talks
about (inaudible) is governed by Idaho Code 50„1301, plats and
vacations rather than the local land use planning act as (inaudible)
not required to provide findings of fact for the subdivision approval.
totally agree with that, it doesn't state much (inaudible) I don't think it
says specifically that we are doing things right or we are doing things
wrong. It is my understanding that Eagle has appealed this I haven't
checked into it. They have 42 days to file that appeal it was decided
on April 22nd so they have time to file the appeal. (Inaudible) I don't
think it says anything. It certainly doesn't talk about release of
findings at all.
ROUNTREE: I think the question though based on (inaudible)
CROOKSTON: It doesn't say (inaudible)
MORROW: The implication in the newspaper wasn't (inaudible) in
terms of 300 feet and so on and so forth. Very candidly I didn't see
any of that being addressed when I read through that document
unless I didn't understand what I was reading that is a good
possibility too.
BENTLEY: I had the same feeling; I didn't see where the two stories
aligned themselves.
ROUNTREE: Well I guess getting back to the subject at hand my
question is that are we doing something wrong or do we just need
something (inaudible)
MORROW: I don't think from my perspective that we are specifically
doing anything wrong, I don't think that, part of the issue here and the
real valid issue that I see is that is most of, couple points. Most of the
work that we do we simply adopt findings of fact and conclusions that
have already been prepared. There is discussion about the adoption
of those either we do or don't or modify or whatever. I think the critical
thing here in my mind is that we have got to get some method for
reconsideration on the table right away. The real problem is that if we
have and let's use the Smith's thing as an example because that is
the best example and the most complex one that we dealt with in the
last couple of years very candidly that I can recall. and if in that
document there were some technical conditions that weren't doable
and we adopted the findings of fact such as Ashford Greens and now
they have to come back to the hearing process for modification of
those because we can't reconsider or we can't do something about it.
That doesn't make any sense in my mind at all. In that scenario, what
needs to happen is that we need to have some procedure to
reconsider or have those technical aspects there in front. Because
the way that we do business now is that those people aren't allowed
to talk to us between the release of the draft and the adoption of the
findings anyway.
ROUNTREE: (Inaudible)
MORROW: Well the seminar that Glenn and I went to there is a
legitimate thought by the guys in Northern Idaho that says if Ashford
Greens calls you up and says that you are too restrictive in terms of
your side yard setbacks that constitutes taking public testimony and
we have to give the neighbor who might object to that and want it to
stay 10 feet the same opportunity again to be heard. And their advice
was that if Ashford Greens calls and says the 10 feet is wrong we
have to say you can't talk to us about this. You have to do that in the
public forum because the opposite side has to have the same
opportunity to say they want it at 10 feet. So that is where some of
the real dilemma in my mind in this issue comes in. Is that we are
getting mixed signals all over the board as to what it is we ought and
ought not to be doing. And your point about reconsideration I think is
the most valid way of getting ourselves out of that dilemma.
ROUNTREE: (Inaudible) without receipt of testimony.
CROOKSTON: That is another concern, we have nothing in our
zoning or subdivision and development ordinance that addresses
reconsideration. Whether or not there should be public testimony, we
just don't have a procedure.
ROUNTREE: (Inaudible)
BENTLEY: So we get all of these letters requesting us to revisit
closed issues and (inaudible) so they are wasting our time under our
current ordinance and system.
CROOKSTON: The only thing that we have right now is if someone
doesn't like the decision they can appeal it to the court.
MORROW: (Inaudible) (End of Tape) and in reality although Mr.
Wardle's point is well taken the Statesman has somewhat missed the
point of the whole issue is that he was asking to see that the
conditions meaning the line item conditions to make sure that all of
those line items conditions were right but the real point is here that if
they were wrong and they were released in draft form then he
couldn't have any testimony to us if they were wrong anyway, nor any
other member of the public. Unless the hearing had been opened
and continued through the entire process and then we say okay Mr.
and Mrs. public the applicant has the opportunity to address the
conditions now you all have the opportunity to address whatever he
says he doesn't agree with. So in some respects that hearing process
could go on almost indefinitely.
BENTLEY: But if you did allow that would you have to or would you
want to, I think you would, would you want to stipulate the only thing
they can speak on would be the conditions and not offer new
testimony.
TOLSMA: (Inaudible)
BENTLEY: But just the conditions not to bring in something else that
was brought up. Like if we release the findings of fact and
conclusions in draft form and somebody wanted to comment on them
that is the only thing they could speak on, they could not add new
material in, new evidence in. $
TOLSMA: (Inaudible) disagreeing with what the man says that is
new testimony. (Inaudible)
BENTLEY: You have to draw the line somewhere we will be here
until 3:00 for each issue.
(Discussion Inaudible)
CORRIE: Draw the line at what we have and say if you don't like
that then you go to court.
MORROW: Explain that Bob?
CORRIE: You could draw your line like we have anyway, (Inaudible)
because then I don't like anything you see, and think they have
(inaudible) challenge anything that you do. So why not just leave it
the way you have done it with the public testimony that you make the
public testimony that you make the decision and stand by it. Unless
the Council itself says maybe we did make a mistake here. But
don't think that is the case.
CROOKSTON: I think that you could have a motion and of course
passage to where the Council reconsiders it without any statements,
no evidence, no statements from the applicant. If you think it was
done wrong you have a motion to reconsider it and you accept no
further testimony. All you are doing is re„evaluating it under the
testimony that was previously given.
BENTLEY: Okay, we are speaking of Smith's how did Boise do
theirs, they had the same piece over there. They were asked to
reconsider on Smith's but how did they do it, they turned around and
took their vote and said no they weren't reconsidering and that was it
and Smith's is taking them to court.
MORROW: They have a method (inaudible) they have it in their
ordinance (inaudible).
ROUNTREE: They renoticed it as a public hearing.
CORRIE: That is my whole point we have to (inaudible) or leave it
alone.
ROUNTREE: We won't know (inaudible) with the two or maybe
three subdivisions (inaudible) technical real specific items in the
findings that cause the applicant to agree and were not necessarily in
their opinion (inaudible) having had a public hearing on those issues
and actually nobody really speaking to side setbacks and those sorts
of things it would seem to me that we need to (inaudible) some of
those real technical items if there is no testimony brought forth during
the testimony period that took issue with the setbacks.
TOLSMA: If you do that, the only way you have got that you want to
reconsider that because somebody has raised the question which is
public testimony. So then you have to have the public hearing again.
ROUNTREE: I don't know if, (inaudible) applicant came in and said
no findings do not reflect in my opinion what I presented I don't think
that is public testimony.
MORROW: I think the other thing there Charlie,
ROUNTREE: It is a point of clarification from the applicant's
perspective
BENTLEY: Testimony that was given
CROOKSTON: We have to have a procedure to where the applicant
or an opponent can bring the question to the Council.
BENTLEY: You have to do both sides.
MORROW: But see the other part of this, where this really enters in
with the Ashford Green issue is that the findings incorporated staff
stuff and clearly staff didn't understand what the heck they were
doing with respect to a planned unit development. They didn't think
through from A to D recognizing that it rendered the whole application
moot because if you followed through the sideyard setbacks and
some other things that is in there that is technical information it gets
virtually impossible to do what is applied for.
ROUNTREE: If that is a rough then staff could go back (inaudible)
say they re„evaluated their comments and their comments have
changed to reflect this. All the findings say is that it incorporates staff
comments, staff wants to re„draft their comments or clarify their
comments the findings (inaudible) they are correct if the staff
comments have changed to really reflect what is going on and needs
to be done.
MORROW: Maybe another avenue is that you don't put that kind of
technical kind of stuff in findings and you do it with some other
document.
ROUNTREE: We kind of want to get away from the development
agreements (inaudible)
CROOKSTON: This doesn't really pertain to what we are talking
about but I think much of the problem with Ashford Greens was
presentation didn't set forth what they were doing and how they were
going to do it. We talk about the setbacks, well you look at what they
submitted, I don't even know (inaudible) a building site, it shows the
lot and then it shows the building site. There is no zero lot lines in any
of that. So you almost get to the position well if you are not going to
present it to us right why should we change it. That is not what we
are talking about.
BERG: Well they have to have the responsibility to present it
(inaudible)
MORROW: Will the deal is there that I knew what those sideyard
setbacks were I knew what it was that they were trying to get to and
how to get to there and the zero lot line and all of that stuff. Very
candidly the minute they raised the red flag about what was in the
body of that portion of the findings it was clear in my mind it didn't
represent what I was voting for at all. I was voting for a planned unit
development that incorporated several things that I know by virtue of
having building in those things what it takes to make the thing work.
When you cross read the requirements in there their point was
absolutely correct. It has been rendered useless by those specs that
were within those findings of fact and conclusions. And so basically
they had approval of a project that wasn't doable in terms of a
planned unit development. So as it gets back to the releasing of the
findings of facts how do you, it seems to me that we are back to the
same point, we need a simple method to deal with that kind of a
problem because the release of the draft form if we are going to
follow the advice of those at the seminar that says we can talk to
nobody about anything simply means that we release it so what. At
the point at the following meeting if we haven't got the hearing under
a continuance of some sort we vote on the findings and make the
necessary changes or whatever without the benefit of the public
having the ability to say anything about the findings at all.
BERG: That is the idea behind the findings, you gather all of the
information and you are supposed to put it in written form.
MORROW: I understand that my point here is that if you are going
to release stuff in draft form and you have got mistakes in there darn
it there ought to be some sort of vehicle by which you can correct
those mistakes at the next meeting to get it resolved. That is where it
solves a legitimate purpose for the public whether you are pro or con
without having to go through an appeal process. Somebody
renoticing and posting monies and so on and so forth. That is in my
mind that is the benefit of release of draft.
ROUNTREE: And if you can't do that there is no point in releasing
the draft. The only other purpose the draft would serve is at least if it
was voted on by Council as draft to approval those folks would
(inaudible) whereas now they don't know whether their testimony has
been incorporated in the decision, whether an issue they had at the
public hearing has been taken care of by (inaudible). I guess my
analysis of what is going on I think that is probably the real issue.
The folks leave here and don't know what happened. The suggestion
would have there is to maybe have a synopsis of the findings read
as an introduction as an action on the findings. Maybe a small
paragraph saying these are the general, like Smith's (inaudible)
buffers will be placed etc. and then go ahead and then the general
audience has an idea of the kinds of things that are considered and
included so when we take an action they don't go (inaudible) and say
did they do this or that or what did they do to us. And they won't have
Mike Wardle back there to cheer them on to say I don't know what
the did either. They did it behind (inaudible)
MORROW: That is simply not true
ROUNTREE: But that is the perception that came out of (inaudible)
MORROW: Well the travesty of the deal is that they don't have any
input at that point either way.
ROUNTREE: I understand but at least they would know what the
decisions the City was making. The bottom line Walt is that I agree
with you if they want to know what it is all they have to do is call the
City the next morning and they can find out. They can't appeal it that
night anyway if they are going to appeal it. They have to wait until the
findings are approved and then go through the appellate process.
However they decide to do it.
MORROW: Philosophically I don't have a problem with releasing
draft form findings, I think the caveat there is that it is just like the one
that we did at the last meeting, we ended up changing everything
about those findings. And there would be those that have read the
draft form and said okay fine my desire is all covered I am out of
here, I am not coming.
ROUNTREE: So they don't come and we change it and then they
read it about it in the newspaper and it is 180 degrees of what they
understood and then they come back and say well (inaudible).
MORROW: Either way it is a no win deal.
CROOKSTON: I don't see all along that the release of findings of
fact that there has never been a decision by the Council as to how
the findings would be released if they were going to be released is
basically been my treatment of the findings as if it were a decision by
the judge. Which people don't have the right to go look at it before the
judge adopts them. That under the circumstances may be completely
wrong and I am totally willing to recognize that may not have been
the correct thing to do. I don't think it was incorrect totally but I well
understand why they are complaining. I don't see any problem with
releasing the findings as a draft which may be changed by the
Council or the Planning and Zoning Commission after I deliver to
them to the City whether that be the Council or the Commission I see
no problem with that. As I said before the only problem I see with it is
that when those people have access to it they are going to read it and
they are going to say that is baloney then they are going to call you,
you, you and you and they you are going to take the heat and then
you have to tell them just like Walt said I am sorry I can't talk to you
about this because we can still change those. You can't take outside
statements from anyone about an application.
MORROW: Nor can you give them.
CROOKSTON: That is right.
MORROW: Well the other thing there is maybe the phrase, maybe if
we are going to do that maybe we stamp on them draft and
underneath subject to change.
CROOKSTON: I have done that on some of them. That would be
very (inaudible)
MORROW: Maybe that is a standard way of doing it.
ROUNTREE: I think you could put a boilerplate cover letter on the
findings saying these findings and stamp them too these findings are
daft form for consideration by the Council at the next meeting. The
hearing is closed the Council will not accept further testimony or
discussion on these items.
CROOKSTON: That is true before I even deliver findings. You don't
hear from anybody whether the hearing is closed or not.
CORRIE: That is correct.
ROUNTREE: And we cannot discuss it with the public and cannot
and will not discuss it further with the public but it will be subject to
Council discussion on the next scheduled meeting date at which time
they will either modify, rewrite, or adopt and then explain to them their
course of action if they agree then they ought to be at the meeting
just in case something there is changed by Council. If they disagree
indicate that if the Council approved something that they disagree
with (inaudible). That could just be a standard two -paragraph staple
on when you hand it out. The same thing for P & Z (inaudible) same
kind of guidance as far as discussion (Inaudible)
MORROW: The thing that is interesting about this is I am thinking
back to (inaudible) in the City of Boise and really the only thing as an
applicant that you are issued is the staff findings which is prior to the
public hearing and then what happens is you go through the public
hearing process, you don't see the findings of fact they come to a
decision. Everything has an automatic appeal period of I believe it is
15 days and nothing becomes like on a rezone it doesn't become
final until that appeal period has passed. Then it becomes final and
you proceed with your project.
ROUNTREE: (Inaudible)
MORROW: You know Charlie I don't know that it would need to be,
obviously in their case it is burdensome because of the huge staff
that they have and all of the staff conditions. But it is a fairly simple
process really. Everybody has the right of appeal in the 15 day
period, the applicant, anybody that
ROUNTREE: It would take care of our reconsideration problem.
MORROW: They also have the reconsideration capabilities of any
decision that they make.
BENTLEY: Are we going to get into a situation where every project
has got one guy a little P.O.ed so he is going to appeal it and we just.
MORROW: (Inaudible) it comes out of your pocket book (inaudible)
BERG: I will find out if that is what it is (inaudible) those notices
aren't cheap anymore.
MORROW: Mind you it has been a couple of years since I have had
a project before the City of Boise and that was the procedure then.
ROUNTREE: Well I guess on an interim basis (inaudible) and
release them and take care of the issue (inaudible) expanding our
thoughts (inaudible) and the audience knows what is going on and go
on with the action of the findings.
MORROW: Let me ask you this Charlie do you need to do a
synopsis, if you are going to release them in draft form they got 3 or 4
days, we don't have an obligation to do a synopsis of what they say in
draft form. They can even have as much as 2 weeks. (Inaudible)
BENTLEY: I don't think we are going to run into this that often. Like
Walt said, we haven't seen an issue like this for quite some time and
of course we are going to be, we will (inaudible) don't along with
those roads, those people will be calling us up.
MORROW: Well the real deal here is that this is a contrived issue on
the part of the Statesman and the reality is that we have done nothing
wrong as a City, we have had no intent to do anything wrong. The
point is that it comes from Mr. Wardle's objection to the fact that he
didn't have access to the findings of fact and conclusions at that
particular meeting and so therefore the discussion took place and
there was a capitalization on the part of a reporter to make an issue
of what was really a non -issue.
BENTLEY: Well that wasn't the whole crux of what happened, he
got tattooed in the hallway by some of the (inaudible) snowed off of
that.
MORROW: But it was prompted by his thoughts. So the issue is do
we release them in draft form with the cover letter and call it good.
don't see any reason to be doing synopsis at our meeting and son on
and so forth.
BENTLEY: I don't think we need (inaudible)
MORROW: I think a cover letter and you just stamp them (inaudible)
(Discussion Inaudible)
CROOKSTON: That is not a problem at all, the other thing I think we
need to discuss about with the findings, because they are raising the
concern that we have meetings, the Council has meetings with the
attorney. The Council does not have meetings with the attorney or the
Mayor, the attorney has a phone discussion with the councilman and
the Mayor so I think we need to address are we going to have after
the hearing or decide right then (inaudible) right after the hearing. If
you don't want to do it then you have it at the next Council meeting
where you say what your individual decisions are and then I draw up
the findings and at the second meeting after the hearing is over you
have findings of fact and conclusions of law to adopt. Some you will
be able to do right at the meeting some you won't.
MORROW: It it is a real simple issue it gets taken care of that night,
the point is between that night and the next meeting if I have question
in my mind I want to talk to you about it I am going to talk to you
about it. If I want to change my mind between those two points I am
going to change it. In the longer ones, the ones that are more
complex sure you take all of the testimony, you think about if for two
weeks and you have the discussion at the end of the two weeks. And
it may very well be in the interim of those two weeks I or anybody
else may want to know about legal issues. The reason that we have a
city attorney is so that we can talk about the legal issues and I will
continue to do that.
CORRIE: And you have the legal right to do that.
(Inaudible)
MORROW: He can call us if he has a question about what was said.
CORRIE: If it is about what was said that is right he can call you.
MORROW: Or if he has a legal point.
CORRIE: But again whatever your decisions are going to have to
be pretty well discussed on the record.
BENTLEY: So in essence in some cases we are going to be
delaying findings of fact for another two weeks.
CORRIE: Could be 30 days.
ROUNTREE: The reality is that the decision could be made fairly
readily and maybe the conditions you want to place on that decision
could take some time. So a lot of this stuff you have a tentative
feeling (inaudible) the direction of the decision (inaudible) something
that we do want to sit down (inaudible) just to discuss the legal
ramifications (inaudible) and if the conditions turn out to be something
that is really not doable then you are leaning (inaudible).
BENTLEY: As soon as we make a statement that the hearing
closure (inaudible) I am leaning sort of against this or whatever then
they are going to call you and you are going to tell them I am sorry
can't talk to you the hearing is over.
MORROW: The long and the short of this issue is we are in a no win
situation. No matter what we do we are wrong. I would suggest that
you that probably some point in the future we catch the same amount
of guff from the same reporters, same newspaper for refusing to take
any type of testimony from the public that is not a popular decision. A
decision that may be based in law but it is highly unpopular. But that
goes with the job. (inaudible)
CROOKSTON: They can call you, the hard part is for any of you to
say I am sorry I can't talk to you about this and you are going to have
to do that. (Inaudible)
CORRIE: Anything further on the resolution? I have one other thing
ROUNTREE: I have one other thing; I would like to see Wayne
maybe pull together some thoughts (inaudible) just a general policy
(inaudible) that is something that Jim specifically (inaudible)
BERG: They try to be as informative to the public about the process
of what; this is only the first step.
ROUNTREE: And their cover letter on their draft findings (inaudible)
BENTLEY: I thinking part of the biggest trouble and I have said this
before is I don't think the public thoroughly understands the whole
procedure anyway that P & Z does their thing and and (inaudible)
because I have had so many people tell me that they passed it at P &
Z it is a done deal. Well it is not a done deal, because it has to go
through our hands too. We have to pass it and a lot of times they
give testimony at one they don't bother coming into the other and
Smith's was a prime example. They had them lined up out the door to
hoot at P & Z and we didn't have that many.
MORROW: But in fairness to them they have done an admirable job
in resolving the (inaudible)
BENTLEY: They did but the people that I got thumped on was
people out at Glenfield and I said where were you at the hearing. Well
we are at the other one well you weren't at ours. You need to be at
them both; if you have concerns you need to keep voicing them.
BERG: I do want to say that Jim makes it very clear that this is one
public hearing and you get a chance for a second. This is a
recommendation to the Council this isn't the final decision. It is pretty
clear about trying to tell them the process they just don't like the
decision or just don't want to listen. But I guess we have to
overemphasize to them what the process is and their rights.
CORRIE: So you are going to at least (inaudible) One other thing on
this City seal, what do you want to do on that? This kid is bugging
me.
MORROW: What do you guys think about the City seal?
ROUNTREE: I give him the gold star for trying but I don't want to
adopt it. If we are going to have a City seal (inaudible) 100% effort
but he is not a graphic artist and he doesn't, to me it doesn't have any
aesthetic appeal. I want to see Meridian (inaudible)
CORRIE: This goes back 2 years, he was doing this for his scout
project and so they brought it to us and we had stuck on the fire
department.
BENTLEY: Can we give him (inaudible) for all of his efforts that he
has put forth? Politely tell him
ROUNTREE: Well the just of the last meeting was that he wants the
City to adopt it.
CORRIE: Well his mom does, she is the one that is pushing it.
BERG: Some of the other cities have gotten with colleges or
surrounding institutions that are some kind of graphic artists or
whatever and had contests and actually had people come up and
explain why they put whatever in the seal. They had to do a lot of
research and there was prize money of course but it was a lot less
than having a professional graphic artist do it. But the idea was to
research it out and have reasons behind why they put things in it.
MORROW: Let me ask you this, I guess Bob and Ron because the
three of us were there when this went on, but I was under the
impression that when we did this before and it was a scout project
that the project was completed with the painting on the hose stack
and required no further action from us as a Council. We participated
in his scout project to the extent of approving his design allowing him
to put it up there and I thought the issue was done. Now how did we
get to where we are at today, he is requesting now that we make this
the formal seal for the City.
CORRIE: That is the just that I am getting, I don't know what Grant
told him, I know that when he came in and (inaudible) the water tower
in place of the star in the state, we were getting pretty specific about
something. And to me, I was out here doing that they are wanting to
do it (inaudible) well what were we getting specific about just to say
okay this is what we would like to see he put that up there and then
you made the decision we want to see a water tower in place of a
star.
MORROW: Didn't he give us four or five schematics with different
stuff and then we ended up with a composite of that. I thought that is
what he put up on the smoke tower or the hose tower over here.
What was the extent of our commitment, what do you guys remember
us being committed to?
TOLSMA: Well he was supposed to come up with some kind of
drawing that showed what the concept was is what I understood. But
we was going to come up with a concept and probably somebody
was going to utilize the concept to make a drawing out of what he has
drawn doesn't have any emotion to it.
ROUNTREE: Maybe that is what we do is we write him a letter and
say
CORRIE: No need to write him a letter he is coming to my office
tomorrow.
ROUNTREE: Well tell him (inaudible) that City Council has adopted
this as a concept for the City to pursue professional artwork to create
the City seal.
CORRIE: Something else that bothers me too is that if we accept
that then we have to get legal opinions about he has got, if we use it
as the seal does he get money and all of (inaudible) that is really
bothering me.
MORROW: Copyrights you mean?
CORRIE: Copyrights and everything else and this was a scout
project, we got a little more specific with him about what we wanted to
see in there and then he did his Eagle scout and was done and then
all of the sudden we are coming back with here is the seal and we
want to make some changes on it. I said well okay make whatever
changes you want and he made a couple others and that was
(inaudible) so I will be more than happy to do that tomorrow.
MORROW: I guess I am confused as to where we are headed with
this deal and I don't know why we are there. I thought we were
completed when the scout project was completed and we signed off
on it as he completed his deal he did his deal on the hose tower and
it was a done deal. Now all of a sudden it has come back and
(inaudible) and I don't know why we are there to be candid.
TOLSMA: (Inaudible)
CORRIE: I will take care of that tomorrow (inaudible)
BERG: You might want to call and see what Nampa did with theirs;
they had a contest (inaudible) copyright.
CORRIE: (Inaudible) and then this came along and (inaudible) but
will talk to the mother tomorrow and take care of that.
CROOKSTON: Real quickly, are we going to do anything on the
County Commissions comprehensive plan, there is a hearing on it on
June 3. 1 haven't looked it, it was in my box so I thought I would bring
it up.
TOLSMA: (Inaudible) and then they changed their mind again and
took some more of it.
MORROW: That is the area of impact based on their comprehensive
plan?
CORRIE: On the Ada County comprehensive plan.
BERG: (Inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) ROUNTREE: I guess
restate what our position is whether they accept it (inaudible)
BERG: I don't know if Shari has a copy or not, she should.
(Discussion Inaudible)
CROOKSTON: The last question is the license agreement on
Fothergill.
TOLSMA: License agreement for what?
CROOKSTON: (Inaudible) we own the property and they say they
are not going to enter into any kind of deal on the pathway plan along
Five Mile Creek until Fothergill is done. The question is there are
some things in here that there have always been. They said they
would not do it, they prepared an agreement just like Nampa has and
they said they weren't going to do it, I drafted very similar almost
exactly the same as Nampa's and given it back to them and it still has
the City of Meridian based on all damages.
MORROW: This is Nampa Meridian Irrigation, that is what we are
back to.
CORRIE: (Inaudible) all damages no matter what happens.
MORROW: That is not acceptable to me.
CORRIE: (Inaudible)
CROOKSTON: I took it out in my initial drafts and put it back in and
they said that they were not going to do anything unless it was like
that. So I changed it and it is back (Inaudible)
CROOKSTON: That I don't know
ROUNTREE: (Inaudible)
MORROW: I think it is a legal issue in terms of a license agreement,
what ought to be happening is Wayne ought to appear before the
board and say this is not accept able with the City Councilmen.
ROUNTREE: We want to work it out but we want to be reasonable.
MORROW: I don't mind paying for something that we screw up but
am not paying for something that somebody else screws up.
CORRIE: Okay, ACHD meeting with us again, we never set a date
we need to do that and I need to get back with them.
(Inaudible)
ROUNTREE: June 17th?
CORRIE: That is a Monday, you have them on Friday's
MORROW: (Inaudible) AIC week here you are gone and Glenn is
gone. It needs to be the 14th if it is going to be on a Friday.
BENTLEY: I think that is what we were talking
CORRIE: (Inaudible)
MORROW: Where we left of was the decision with APA and APA`s
role for expanding what appears to be expanding role within the
Highway District.
(Inaudible)
MORROW: Those were the two issues that needed to be resolved
and were the most outstanding, the most dominant issues.
CORRIE: (Inaudible) because Larry Sale
BERG: I talked to Mike Brokaw and I am working on some figures
because the figures that he has researched back are (Inaudible)
there are some discrepancies and I think it depends on what fiscal
year they are putting it (inaudible) even though it is received after
October 1, it still might be part of September, you understand what
am saying. He is saying our figures are a lot closer to what he has
got and just could be that variation of those two months. So I am
looking some of that up. He also wanted a little bit of history when we
started this. (Inaudible)
CORRIE: We will get a letter out and I will talk to Jerry tomorrow.
All those in favor of adjournment? Opposed? MEETING
ADJOURNED AT 10:43 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE
PROCEEDINGS)