HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001 04-10Meridian City Council Workshop April 10, 2001
The City of Meridian City Council Workshop was called to order at 6:30 p.m. Tuesday, April 10, 2001 by Keith Bird.
Members Present: Mayor Robert Corrie, Tammy de Weerd, Cherie McCandless, Ron Anderson, Keith Bird.
Others Present: Bill Nichols, Gary Smith, Brad W., Bill G., Shari Stiles, Ken Bowers, Tom Kuntz.
Bird: Mr. Mayor and City Council, we’ll call our Planning Session Workshop to order at 6:32. Roll Call, Mr. Clerk. Thank you.
Issue #1 Discussion of National Night Out by Linda deHaro
Bird: All right, Item No. 1, I think Linda is here. Linda DeHaro is going to discuss the National Night Out.
DeHaro: Mayor Corrie, Council Members, I promise to keep it to my three minutes. I’m basically here to let you know that we are underway in planning the National Night Out this year.
Quickly to let you know, we bagged the parade, from last year, it didn’t go over very well. We are going to have the pre-celebration on August 4th, a Saturday, from 10:00 to 3:00.
However, National Association of TownWatch plans – they are the National Organization that plans the actual Night Out. It is the first Tuesday of every August. I am not able to do
anything about that – I can’t change that date and the time is from 7:00 to 10:00. It is basically, everybody – last year the 17th annual, they had 32.5 million people cross the country
and military bases around the world participate. The whole idea of this is to do it all at the same time. One big party in the whole country, celebrating National Night Out. I understand
that the Council has their hearings the first Tuesday of every month, is that right? For public hearings? And I am here to beg and plead with you to possibly get that, just that one
Tuesday in August of every year, free for my National – for this National Night Out for the City because I think that it is really important for you all, as City Council members to participate
as well. This year, we would like to see, not only Mayor Corrie and the Chief, Chief Gordon, participating, but we would like to see you, as members as City Council, go from neighborhood
to neighborhood and visit with the people and get out there and introduce yourselves. I think it is really good for the City to know who you are. Last year, to give you an idea on
how big this was. We had nine different communities in the City of Meridian alone that participated alone. I had 40 to 50 people at my barbecue, Meridian Greens had over 400 people
in their subdivision alone at their barbecue. We had Astrojumps, we had – just – it was just a really good time. We had people dress up as clowns and it was all to celebrate this National
Night Out program. All – in total we had over 800 – let’s
say approximately 800 people in the city celebrating that night. I would like to see you all participate in that as well. It being only one Tuesday out of the year.
Bird: It’s the 7th this year.
DeHaro: Yes it is. It is on August 7th from 7:00 to 10:00.
Bird: With the Mayor’s permission we could change the Council Meeting to the 8th, Wednesday. We’ve done that before.
DeHaro: Now, is this going to be a snag I am going to run into every year. I don’t want to – I am trying to see if – it is always going to fall on the first Tuesday of August. It
is never going to change. It’s been that way – this is the 19th annual, and it has never changed.
Corrie: Well, the problem is, the Council can’t commit the next Council to doing the same thing.
DeHaro: Right, I understand.
Corrie: I mean the Mayor can ask the Council if they would do that, but to say that we are going to – the first Tuesday in August, change it to a Wednesday, it may change when the next
Council gets together.
DeHaro: and I’ll be right back. I’ll come back as it changes.
Corrie: I think you will probably be successful, but I think it would have to stay on a time to time basis and let us – let the Council look at that. I don’t think you will have a
lot of problems, so, far I don’t think you have with this Council, but you never know about different ones that come down or another Mayor. But, I don’t see any problem with that.
It is something that the City of Meridian has taken hold of and run with it. I enjoyed meeting all those people. Last year it was a lot of – a lot of neighborhoods got together, people
came out, eat a lot of hamburgers and hotdogs.
DeHaro: Yes, don’t eat dinner then.
Bird: Okay, any questions for Linda.
De Weerd: Mr. President, Linda, at those night outs, those are sponsored by the individual neighborhood associations?
DeHaro: Yes they are. The neighborhood associations either donates money or the people in that subdivision or neighborhood get together and do potluck. We’ve had ice cream socials
in their clubhouses – some of them have clubhouses. We had a swimming party last year and barbecue. But, mostly it is
just everybody getting together, potluck style, barbecues and wanting to get out there and meet their neighbors and get to know each other. The – I had some requests last year for Council
Members. You know, there are some people out there who don’t even know who you guys are. If you get out – it is great PR for you guys to get out there and really hear first hand what
some of the issues are out there.
De Weerd: And your weekend event, is that on the 4th.
DeHaro: It is on the 4th. We are trying to do that on the Saturday prior to the first Tuesday in August every year.
Bird: It’s at the Storey again, Linda, up at Story Park.
DeHaro: It’s at Storey Park, yes it is.
De Weerd: I’d be happy to help.
DeHaro: Thank you because it is just me again.
De Weerd: I know how that goes.
Bird: Any other questions for Linda? If not, thank you Linda. And by the way, for the people who didn’t know, she won a national award for her Night Out, National Night Out. So,
we are very proud of her. Thank you Linda.
DeHaro: Thank you.
Corrie: It’s a lot of work, you did a good job.
Issue #2 Discussion of Storm Water Regulations by Joan Meitl
Bird: Mr. Watson, I believe you want to do the introduction on Item No. 2, The Storm Water Regulations.
Watson: Thank you President Bird, Mayor, and Council. As you may have heard, Storm Water Regulations are coming down the road and they are going to affect us, especially in light of
our latest population count. So, Public Works has invited an expert in the field, Joan Meitl, to come in and give a brief presentation on what this means to us. She was recently employed
for five years with Boise City, oversaw their storm water departments, before that I think it was U.S. Fish and Wildlife, and before that the Department of Environmental Quality. So,
she has a lot of experience in this. She is going to spend 15 to 20 minutes talking about regulations, how they affect us, and where we go from here. Then she will allow some time
for the questions, that I’m sure that you will have. So, with that, I leave you Miss Joan Meitl.
Bird: Thank you.
Meitl: I have a handout coming around that is an exact duplication of the overheads I am going to show you tonight. So, if we have to go through some of those fairly quickly, at least
you will have the information. I’m audio- visually impaired. Well, as Brad said, I spent the last five years helping Boise City develop their storm water program. The Clean Water
Act requires that storm water runoff from your municipalities now be regulated and they do that through a permit process. I’m going to use some acronyms tonight; I’ll try and explain
what they all mean. This one you may have heard of, it is the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, NPDES. Wastewater treatment plants have NPDES permits. They are now
permitting storm water discharges. The program was developed in two phases. Phase 1 affected larger communities and Idaho Boise City was the only community that was affected in the
first go round. Phase 2 affects smaller communities, including the City of Meridian. Boise City applied for and received a permit with ACHD, Boise State University, The Idaho Transportation
Department and Drainage District 3. Garden City later joined in that permit because they realized they were going to be a part of Phase 2 permitting. Basically, they had to prepare
a very specific permit application, submit it to EPA and received an individual permit. Phase 1 also addresses storm water discharges from industrial facilities and construction sites
greater than five-acres. Keep that construction site element in mind, we’ll talk about it just a little bit more later. The Phase 2 regulations were finalized in December of 1999.
They address discharges from smaller communities. If a community is part of an urbanized area, as defined by the U.S. Census, they are automatically designated. Meridian is designated
because it is part of the urbanized area that includes Boise City. Donut holes – something – someone like Garden City, would be considered a donut hole or part of an urbanized area
as well. it also folded in some additional construction site activities and industrial activities under the regulations. I should point out that EPA can also designate communities,
even smaller than 50,000, to be regulated under this program. But, they have not yet done that in this region, so, as the count currently stands, there are about a dozen communities
in Idaho that are going to have to deal with Phase 2 storm water regulations. The Phase 2 requirements require communities to reduce pollutants to the maximum extent practicable. There
are really two standards that communities have to meet this maximum extent practicable and the standard of eliminating non-stormwater discharges to your stormwater system. Other NPDES
permits, like the permit that your wastewater treatment plant has, has a specific numeric affluent limit that they must meet. Stormwater permits don’t have a number that they have to
meet. Rather, they rely on best management practices, which are a variety of activities, regulations, education activities that reduce the amount of pollutants that would ultimately
end in your system. The assumption is made that if you implement, sufficiently a number of best management practices, you meet the standard of maximum extent practicable. One advantage
of this is that this program does not require the water quality monitoring that your wastewater treatment plant is required to do over Phase 1
communities are required to do. As I said, communities, like Meridian, were automatically designated in the final rule as being subject to this regulation. Other communities can be
designated by EPA or the State, if they are contributing to pollutants. There is also an acronym called a TMDL, I’m sure you have heard of that. It stands for Total Maximum Daily Load.
Where streams and lakes are not meeting water quality standards a water quality improvement plan is developed, a TMDL, and that requires a variety of activities to reduce the discharge
of pollutants. The same things that Meridian will have to do to meet the Federal Storm Water Regulations, will also be appropriately to address the requirements of the TMDL. So, in
effect, you can kill two birds with one stone by addressing these two sets of regulations simultaneously. You have a variety of options as to how to approach this regulatory requirement.
One is, you could join in with an existing Phase 1 community and do a joint-program. In this case, Boise City is the only Phase 1 community in the City of Idaho – or in the State of
Idaho, excuse me. Another approach is to partner with other entities that are affected by these regulations. A good example, in your case, would be the Ada County Highway District.
As I understand it, they have the responsibility for much of the public infrastructure that exists within this community. And even larger regional approaches are also appropriate.
In fact, EPA encourages more of a watershed-based approach, but they don’t require it. You have the option of applying for a general permit, an individual permit – like the Phase 1
communities applied for – or as I said, a co-application with the Phase 1 permit. A general permit is a set of requirements and performance standards that EPA writes and conceivably,
every community in Idaho could receive that same permit. Rather than having to create a very substantially, costly, time consuming application you would simply submit a notice of intent
with a certain amount of minimum information and then you would be covered by this general permit. That is what EPA is encouraging Phase 2 communities to do because it is less time
consuming and costly than applying for an individual permit. If you applied for an individual permit, there would be other requirements associated with it that aren’t part of the general
permits. The general permit includes the notice of intent, it includes a discussion of how you will address the six minimum measures which I will talk about in a minute. You have to
identify measurable goals for each one of those six minimum measures. You also have to include a time frame for when you will begin and end each one of those activities. I should point
out that the permit is for a five-year period. So your time period would have to include that five-year time period and then you would have to identify a responsible entity who will
implement each of those activities identified in this application. I wanted to say just a little bit more about regional cooperation. As I pointed out earlier, although it’s not required
by EPA, it’s strongly encouraged. You can coordinate with other local government programs or even private programs if there are private entities within your community who are engaging
in some of the activities that are required by the regulations. You can do all or part of your program as a regional or coordinated activity. Here are some instances where you might
want to work with others on a regional basis; joint funding for capital facilities, sharing resources such as GIS for mapping your system or any other program elements
such as public education that may make more sense on a regional basis or developing regionally consistent design standards. I know Boise City spent two and a half years developing their
design standards for new development. One of them – concerns we heard from our advisory group which consisted of many engineers who worked throughout the valley, is they never are –
well the standards are different from community to county to other communities and it’s very confusing to them and the developers they work for and having a different set of rules depending
on where they’re operating. Now I’d like to discuss the six minimum control measures. I should point out that the permit application that the Phase One community and co-applicants prepared
had thirty-three elements. It’s been narrowed down significantly in Phase Two with six minimum measures. The first is a public education and out-reach program. It’s something that you
must implement – and I guess I should also point out that throughout the discussion of these measures, I’ll lead off with those activities that you must do, that you’re required by federal
regulations to do. Then I’ll also discuss some measures that you should do and should is from EPA’s perspective. They strongly encourage you to do these other things, but if you don’t
do them you won’t be penalized for not doing them. You must implement a public education program to let members of your community know about storm-water run-off and the pollutants that
can contaminate it and how it effects the receiving waters. You should provide them with information about how they can modify their own behaviors to limit the discharge of pollutants
into storm water. Ways that they can do that for instance is proper application of lawn and garden chemicals so it doesn’t end up on the sidewalks or streets and in the storm drain system
when it rains. You also should direct information to other targeted groups. They’re generally types of businesses or activities that tend to be higher contributors to storm water run-off.
Two examples that are given here are restaurants and auto maintenance facilities. You also should address the viewpoints and concerns of all sub-communities and there are a number listed
here. The way we did that at Boise City was through the use of public advisory groups when we were developing a new program, a new policy or a new ordinance we invited the stake-holders,
the effected parties to participate in that process. The second minimum control measure is public involvement and participation. You must comply with all state or local public notice
requirements but EPA also encourages you to involve the public when implementing and reviewing your storm water management program. There are some suggestions here for how you could
do that. The next minimum measure is probably the one that involves the most substantial effort and it’s the component of the program that involves detecting illicit discharges and elicit
connections to your system. It requires that you develop storm water system maps, show major pipeline out falls and topography. In this case it would primarily be the Highway District
who would be involved in this particular element. That points out the advantage of coordinating with them at least on certain elements of your program. It would save a lot of headache
and demonstrate to EPA that all the regulations are being met in a comprehensive fashion. You’re also required to show areas of concentrated activities that are likely to be significant
contributors of pollutants to the system. You must prohibit
illicit discharges through ordinance orders or other enforcement mechanisms and you must implement enforcement procedures. Boise City did this through a storm water discharge management
ordinance. You must also implement a plan to detect illicit discharges and illegal dumping. You must inform the public of hazards associated with those illegal activities and it’s encouraged
that you coordinate this with your public education measure as well. Measure Four deals with construction sites. This is something that Boise City is struggling with right now. They
took their ordinance to their City Council about a month and a half-ago and received quite a bit of public comment. They’re in the process of working with the trade associations to make
some changes and I expect it’ll go back to Council in May. This program is designed to control construction sites and the reason I mentioned the federal regulations associated with construction
sites earlier in my presentation is because there is some redundancy and it was intentional. Right now any construction site greater than five acres and soon to be greater than one acre
has to file a notice of intent with the federal government, develop a storm water pollution prevention plan, have it on site and implemented. In effect, you’ll be setting up programs
that will require much the same thing and for whatever reason EPA intended that redundancy exist. Just because there’s a federal program doesn’t mean that the local municipality doesn’t
also have to take an active role in implementing controls to deal with construction sites. The program has to include a requirement to implement best management practices. Some examples
would be stabilization measures, silt fences, controlling your construction site entrance so that trucks are not tracking dirt and mud into the street. Those are examples of construction
site BMPs. You must have pre-construction approval of site plans. You must have procedures to review and consider public in-put, regular inspections and enforcement activities to make
sure that your requirements are being met. Minimum control measure number five addresses post-development discharges. From what I understand of both the Highway District regulations
and the regulations you currently have in place for commercial businesses here in Meridian, you have an on-site detention program. For the most part that will address many of the requirements
under this particular regulatory element because the water is stating on-site. It’s not being discharged into the waters of the US. Basically what’s required is structural and non-structural
BMPs that limit the discharge of pollutants and some assurance that there’s going to be long-term maintenance of these control measures and that they’re effective at minimizing water
quality impact. Finally, control measure number six has to do with good housekeeping practices for municipal operations so that would be your parks, your airport, any fleet maintenance
activities that you’re engaged in, any kind of activities that you have responsibility for that do have the potential to generate pollutants that could get into the storm drain system.
This also requires that you provide employee training so that they know what activities are proper for reducing pollutants. The third rain drop here shows a variety of activities that
EPA recommends that you include in your program, maintenance activities schedules and inspections, controls for reducing pollutants from streets, parking lots, solid waste operations,
proper disposal of waste, assessing water quality impacts associated with new flood control
operations. Again these are things you are encouraged to do and these are not things that are part of the minimum requirements. I briefly wanted to mention the program administration.
In addition to the application requirements, the filing of the notice of intent, during the life of the permit, you’ll be required to evaluate the effectiveness of your program. There
are certain record keeping requirements and there’ll be a requirement for an annual report to EPA so they can assess compliance with the regulations. As part of your administrative process,
you’ll have to identify someone who’ll be responsible for implementing the program. You’ll have to establish measurable goals, an implementation schedule, a way to evaluate your program,
keep those records and report as required. The question that’s come up in other presentations I’ve done is what is this going to cost us. I’m borrowing some of EPAs numbers tonight.
There’s a real range. This over-head breaks out by each minimum measure a range of costs from the low end to the high end, per capita, per year. You can see there’s a great deal of variability
in what it could cost depending on what your program ultimately looked like. I haven’t taken the time to figure out what this would be for your population. I think the new census counts
are out. What is your population at this point?
Bird: Thirty-five thousand.
Meitl: So if you were to say about a buck thirty per person per year for thirty-five thousand people, that would give you a sense of what this program is going to cost you on the low
end. Again, if you partner with other entities, or in the case of your situation where in fact the Highway District will be responsible for some of the elements of the program, then
in fact your cost may be lowered. This gives some sense of what EPA is projecting nationwide for these regulations to cost. This schematic basically addresses setting up your program
and how you go about doing it. It’s a good opportunity to also address any local needs related to drainage, flooding and storm water control that may have been identified by your public
works staff. At the same time that you’re looking at existing needs, you can also address he regulations and develop a program that comprehensively addresses all of those requirements.
For instance, if you have local needs related to flooding problems, storm systems that back-up, regulating new development to pay it’s own way, those things can be addressed as local
needs through the development of your program to address the federal requirements that are shown in this box here. Depending on what your local needs are and how you choose to address
these federal requirements, your new program may have some or all of the components that are shown in this box. It may require new regulations, capital projects, inspection and enforcement,
design review and permitting, you know, a variety of new activities. In many cases though, you may be able to just build upon existing programs, add a few elements rather than develop
a whole new approach. My last over-head basically is a list of the deadlines. Your notice of intent or your application for a general permit will be due to EPA by March first of 2003,
a little less than two years from now. EPA will issue that general permit hopefully, later this year. That will give smaller communities to review that permit in advance and make comments,
kind of a reality check for EPA as to whether
what they’re proposing you all comply with in fact makes sense or not. Then, full implementation of the program will occur five years from when you receive your permit. It doesn’t end
there, though. There’ll be a second five-year permitting process. The Phase II communities may get a reprieve though. Congress said in passing the final – in direction to EPA in passing
the final rule that at the end of the second permit period the regulations that apply to the Phase II communities would be re-evaluated. You don’t automatically go into a third permitting
cycle like the Phase I communities do. That’s a very quick over-view, a lot of information and I’d be willing to take questions now and give you a little more detail.
Corrie: Mr. President, I’m sure, Joan that you’ve had this question asked many times since this is a mandate from the EPA and the government, is there any money available from the
government or any grants that can be used by the City for this or is it – we’re on our own?
Meitl: There are. Some aren’t exclusively earmarked for storm water activity. Some are competitive grant programs like the non point source grant program administered by the Department
of Environmental Quality. The State Revolving Fund which has been traditionally used to finance wastewater treatment plants and associated improvements is now -- the funds available
under that are now available for storm water related activities as well. Those are primarily available as loans although they do make limited grants under the Revolving Fund as well.
There are several additional grant programs that come directly out of EPA region ten that could conceivably be used for elements of the program. In terms of on-going implementation and
– you know the city will have to bear much of that cost. In terms of development and specific activities under that program I think that there are ways to get funding from other sources.
Corrie: So, it would behoove us to partnership with ACHD as much as possible -
Meitl: Or other entities.
Corrie: -- Or these other entities, right? Okay.
Meitl: If you have other drainage districts within your city limits or Irrigation Districts that may potentially have to comply with these regulations, the county, the Idaho Transportation
Department if they have facilities within your city limits, they all could potentially be partners.
De Weerd: I think Compass is already starting to look at some of those and I know ACHD has been in conversations with Nampa Meridian irrigation districts. So, I imagine a lot of
this is already under way in particular for those agencies who have higher responsibilities for these areas. Are there any standard or generic guidelines out there that can be adopted
by communities? Guidelines as far as educational programs and those kind of things?
Meitl: There’s a great deal of information that’s been developed both by EPA and by the larger communities that had to deal with the Phase I requirements. For instance, public education
materials, there are so many wonderful examples around the country that it really doesn’t make sense to start from scratch. In terms of construction site or erosion and sediment control
programs, there are many model ordinances and programs that have been developed around the country in addition to what Boise City has done themselves. EPA was also going to develop a
catalog of BMPs that – just the kind of information that you’ve described that would essentially give small communities much of what they’d need to comply with the requirements you would
just need to tailor it for your particular situation.
De Weerd: Great .
Bird: Any other questions?
Corrie: I had one. You indicated that you could get new growth or construction to kind of pay it’s way as far as the construction management part of it and controlling the run-off
from them. What are some of the ways you do that? Is that through permits or fees that are charged to the developers when they come in?
Meitl: The most common method that I’m familiar with is a plan review and program implementation fee. When you apply for your building permit, you pay an additional fee that covers
the cost of plan review and the inspection and enforcement activities that go with the program. There are other mechanisms as well. I’m not as familiar with them but I could provide
that information to you if you’d like more information.
Anderson: Is the inspection and enforcement is that typically done by your other in-field inspectors that are there inspecting the different phases of the construction. For example,
your concrete, or your framing or something like that or is this a whole set of other inspectors that would be required to be out there inspecting this type of stuff?
Meitl: You know, how you choose to address this is entirely up to the city. If the way that makes the most sense to Meridian is to train and use existing inspectors to do multiple tasks
then that’s certainly an acceptable approach. If you decide that you want a single inspector devoted exclusively to both construction sites and the variety of activities that have an
enforcement component, then that’s an acceptable approach as well. EPA doesn’t really dictate the specifics of these best management practices. As long as you meet the goal, as long
as you address the minimum measures, how you do it is entirely left up to you.
Anderson: What did Boise do? Did they have to do that in their Phase I stuff?
Meitl: They hired an individual to set up the program, develop the ordinance. He will also review plans and continue his inspection activities once the ordinance is passed. To a great
extent, he relies on other inspectors to tell him where there are problems so he can focus his field activities on the real problem areas. Instead of methodically inspecting every single
site he really targets the areas there are problems and he does that through citizen complaints and inspector reports, you know, l inspector notification.
Bird: Any more?
Anderson: On the discharge detection and that, they set up monitors in streams or they just do periodic sampling in various locations around town or is this sophisticated equipment
that gets set on certain rivers and streams and drainages?
Meitl: That’s one way to do it, but that’s generally not what I would recommend. There are other ways to detect illicit discharges besides a comprehensive water quality-monitoring program.
You’re not required to do comprehensive water quality monitoring by EPA in the Phase II requirements. You can just inspect dry weather discharges simply by noting changes in color or
any abnormal characteristics of the water you can begin to identify whether there might be an elicit discharge and you can work your way up in the system to determine where that’s coming
from. There are also very simple field kits called Hot Kits that allow you to do very simple tests in the field that are not necessarily very quantitative but they are very qualitative.
So you could determine whether or not there was a pollutant present and then work your way upstream or up slope in your system to determine where that might be coming from. Another
really effective way to determine whether you have illegal dumping or elicit discharges is to just have a number where citizens can phone in complaints so if they see a problem occurring,
they can notify you and you can address it in that way. No comprehensive monitoring is not a requirement.
Anderson: Okay. Thank you.
Corrie: Any other questions?
Bird: Joan, On the record keeping and stuff in Boise, do they have a department head, or who takes care of the record keeping? That sounds like it would be quite complicated and you’d
have to say practically a full time job.
Meitl: There is a program coordinator, but each department and each program within the department that is involved with some element of the storm water requirements does their own record
keeping. The coordinator sees that they are keeping track of the appropriate things. Then at the end of the reporting year they provide that information to the coordinator. It gets even
more complicated then that though, in that all six entities who are in this permit together submit one
report. Then all that information goes to the Highway District who puts together all of that information for the six different entities and then that goes to the EPA. Fortunately, there
are only six requirements to keep track of here and for the most part the information you will be submitting to the EPA is summary information. You know, it’s probably the kind of thing
that you would want to know as a decision making body in terms of the level of activities and the kinds of activities that are going on in your program and what you’re paying for. For
instance, number of plans reviewed in your construction site program or number of new developments that have established on site detention requirements. Those are the kinds of summary
statistics you’ll provide to EPA. The number of complaints you’ve responded to, things like that.
Bird: Going back to follow up on Councilman Anderson’s question on construction. On subdivisions and stuff, now when they do the plan review, I realize there’s a site but they don’t
have the site set up as to where they’re going to have trailers or where they’re going to have concrete washes or anything like that. Who comes out and inspects that after that is set
up by the general contractor?
Meitl: That’s one thing that you as a group will have to decide how you want t o address. You may hire an inspector who will do that exclusively –
Bird: You’d almost have to.
Meitl: Or you may want to use existing inspection staff. The other thing that I neglected to point out is Boise City coordinates a great deal with The Ada County Highway District on
this particular program element. Their zone inspectors are out in the field a lot and if they see something that’s occurring on private construction site they’ll notify the city and
vise versa. They’ll step in for each other so that there’s a very coordinated effort and the manpower goes a lot farther.
Bird: That’s great.
Meitl: You know I’ve heard even in other parts of the country that there are private firms that are beginning to provide these kinds of services –
Bird: I can believe that.
Meitl: -- where they can do plan review and site inspection for you, I mean that’s another option. I’m not aware of anyone in this area that provides those kinds of services.
Bird: I don’t know why they don’t. They’ve taken the safety inspection and stuff to the private sector within construction and stuff. It would be – if you could joint venture with other
entities it would be very nice because – I do know Boise in the
last few years has been much more difficult, you know, getting mud out on the road and stuff, we’re warned constantly on that, so, it’s working. I just was wondering how the inspection
was going down because I’ve never seen one out on the construction site.
Meitl: Well, since their ordinance has not yet enacted, their erosion control person primarily responds to complaints, to reports from other inspectors, from the Highway District or
from the public. Once construction sites undergo plan review and there are required inspections, then it’ll be a more methodical process.
De Weerd: Mr. President
Bird: Mrs. De Weerd:
De Weerd: I think a lot of the questions apply to our staff and I know they were anticipating a lot of this coming up and I think some planning has been made to start implementing
certain measures and that sort of thing and probably could give us a better idea of the separation between what our city is looking at as well as ACHD. I think I got that lesson not
too long ago when there was some backing up in a new subdivision and that is ACHDs. You know there are some things that definitely need to be coordinated with other agencies.
Bird: Staff, have you got any questions for Joan? Or comments?
Watson: I don’t think we have any questions at this point, President Bird, but we haven’t made a lot of progress in this. There’s a long ways we have to go. As our first step we wanted
to bring Joan here and kind of educate you guys on what we’re going to be doing. Just so you don’t get blind-sided with a brand new ordinance or a new mud cop as they call them in some
circles. This is the first step.
Bird: We need to stay on top of it. Brad’s very familiar with what we have to go through out at the wastewater plant for DEQ and EPA and all that. We need to stay on top of it especially
as fast as we are growing and stuff.
De Weerd: Mr. President
Bird: Yes, Mrs. De Weerd
De Weerd: I do appreciate what you had to say about bringing different agencies in and different interest groups into the fold and maybe you could help identify some of those that can
come in and help us in our development of a ordinance or even as we start looking at setting certain policies. That we can bring those voices to the tables with us and do it. Again like
I said, Brad I do know that Compass has a framing group on water quality and this is one component of it. I
haven’t read the document yet, but it will be covered next Monday and I think the Mayor or myself or Councilman Anderson, we all have some information on that framing document you might
be able to gain some information out of that as well that might be applicable to what we’re trying to do.
Bird: Any other questions? If not, thanks very much for your time –
Meitl: Thank you.
Bird: -- Nice presentation. We appreciate you coming.
Meitl: If I can be of further assistance, I’m working with Phase II communities on these regulations.
Bird: We’ll certainly do that. Thank you very much. Before we go further, I’d like to welcome the Meridian Varsity Scout Troop from First Ward LDS Church. This is not a regular Council
Meeting. This is a workshop. We’re glad you boys have come here and hope you can learn something.
Corrie: Mr. President, if I may, I invite you back to a regular Council meeting where there’s public input. You’ll get a little bit more about what Council does and how we run the
City as best we can so, you’re invited back any time. Thank you.
Bird: Thank you, Mayor
Issue #3 Discussion of Water and Sewer Fees
Bird: Okay. Item No. 3 is discussion on water and sewer fees. Mr. Watson.
Watson: Thank you President Bird. Mayor and Council, what I hope got into your packets –
Bird: They did.
Watson – I see they did, is a draft of some stuff we’ve been working on as far as updating our assessment fees. You will also note in that draft sheet, it’s labeled appendix one at the
top, a new component to the fees. It’s called a system development fee in this draft. There’s three different columns of fees here. First column outlines the existing fees and how those
were calculated. Those were last updated in the fall of 1996. The second column is an update to those fees using the same calculation methodology that was used in 1996. The third column
is a new calculation methodology with the addition of the system development fees. The next seven or eight pages that you have was intended to be a note to myself to explain all of this
to myself and it was suppose to be a one page summary. This has ended up being pretty lengthy. I had a brief discussion with
Bill Nichols last week regarding this. Feel free to step in, Bill, any time I’m not correct here. There’s a lot of legal questions that I started having after I jumped in to try to calculate
this system development fee. I’ll back up a little bit. The assessment fees that we’ve been charging to all new connections to the water and sewer system are intended to recover a proportionate
share of the cost of the facilities that a new customer owes. Those facilities are already in the ground. They were built with a certain capacity. They are being guaranteed service by
paying that fee. Another way of looking at it, This is what I was told many years ago, that fee is replacing the capacity they are using. The system development fee is a whole different
creature. They way I’ve calculated it in both the water and the waste water sections is to take the cost projections for the new trunks to build out the waste water plant to our ultimate
population and distribute water lines throughout the city as well as wells. We take those projected costs and divide it by the future number of connections to the system to get some
rather large numbers under the system development fee. The seven page, so called, summary, is an attempt by me to figure out if we can implement these system development fees simply
by ordinance or if we need to conform to some statutory requirements. I think the conclusion that I came to anyway, and Bill hasn’t read this, I’ve only had a brief discussion with him,
is that there are quite a few statutory requirements that we would need to go through to implement this system development fee. The waste water treatment and the water system development
fee, even though we have to go through all those steps, I don’t have too much heartburn in being able to justify those and to meet the statutory requirements. The collection system
is where I get into a bit of a catch twenty-two. The statute, and please Bill jump in when I’m misspeaking, seems to me to say that fees have to be collected or calculated on a benefit
area basis. The way that the collection system is set up there are very specific, definite trunk areas, trunk service areas. I think where we’re trying, or where I think you guys have
been directing us to go is to be able to implement a fee that could be used for extension of some of these trunk lines. The way the statute reads to me is that you can only collect fees
from a specific benefit area and that money can only be spent in that benefit area. The problem is that you can’t collect fees in an undeveloped, un-sewered benefit area because development
can’t occur because there is no sewer there. I’m going around in circles with this problem. There’s a couple of different options that I’ve proposed in that paper. One is to some how
borrow money from one benefit area to build something in another benefit area. You would borrow the money you are collecting from a benefit area that does have sewer and spend it in
another that doesn’t have sewer. I think Bill would have something to say about that.
Nichols: That’s shaky enough.
Watson: The second option is that the city some how funds these extensions and collects these fees as people connect to them through the building permit process, which kind of defeats
the whole purpose of the system development fee because at that point it becomes an assessment fee. It’s already in the ground
and we’re just charging people their proportionate share of the cost of building those trunks. There’s a lot of stuff in this summary again. I outlined some of the steps we would have
to go through to be able to charge this so called assessment fee, at least to my view. We are proceeding with some of those steps, whether we go this route or not. The water master plan
has begun and that will be done by the end of the year. We plan to at least update our wastewater treatment and collection system facility plan next budget year. The statutes require
a very specific capital improvement plan, which we have in both of those documents. We are going down the road. The last page in that paper has a public works recommendation of at least
the four initial steps we can take. The first one is to complete the comprehensive plan, which I think is on schedule, or back on schedule. One of the main things in the statutes that
would interest you is to go through this process there has to be formed a development impact fee advisory committee. I don’t call it an impact fee, the statute does. We’re calling it
a system development fee. You’ll note that I didn’t finish the sentence in that bullet point in that paper too. This is a little rough around the edges. The tasks of that committee are
spelled out. There’s a lot of tasks that they have to do, just some of them are outlined earlier in that paper. The third and fourth bullet points of tasks to do, like I said, we’re
already initiating those. Number four, the benefit zone analysis and projected cost, we already have those, they would simply have to be updated. I guess the long and short of this is
we’re proceeding down that road with our preliminary information but at some point this year, we have to make a decision. I need some help from the attorney’s office on this collection
fee. I don’t have a problem with the wastewater plant because a fee for the build out of that plant benefits anyone that connects to this system. Bill may have a different view on that
but it’s just that the sewer trunks are very specific service areas. I don’t have any other comments. If you have any questions or if Gary has any more comments.
Bird: Any questions for Brad?
Anderson: I don’t know if I have a question. I guess it’s kind of I appreciate you know Brad’s point here. Sounds like there’s confusion over your interpretation of the law and how
we could use impact fees to do this. I guess I’ve always just worked on the assumption that the sewer system is that, a system just like the park system is a park system. We charge a
park impact fee for residential lots and so what we’re trying to build is a system and when you pay a park impact fee, that doesn’t necessarily mean there’s going to be a park in your
back yard. You’re paying into the system that will be eventually built out. That’s where, in my mind, I don’t have any problem collecting the impact fee but again, maybe Bill can shed
a little more light on that for us as far as how he interprets that statute.
Nichols: Councilman Anderson, Mayor, President Bird, Members of the Council, The distinction with the park impact fee is I can go use the park, I can take my kids to the park and swing
them on the swings and I’m not paying a fee for using the park. Whatever city I live in, I’m paying for those parks out of my general fund
dollars. With the sewer and water systems, the city is allowed to charge fees under the Idaho local revenue bond act, which Brad has cited the loomis versus city of Hailey case in that
the holding in that case is that you can only charge the minimum amount necessary to run and operate the system. You can factor some things into it. You can factor in depreciation and
some other things like that which help you replace things that are already there. The impact fee thing is designed to go towards something new coming in that impacts, as you say, the
whole system. Where most of this new growth is the developers are installing the water and sewer lines, we’d have to figure out whether there’s the impact fee with regard to the plant,
sewer plant is one issue. Like Brad says, that’s a connection fee issue. You’re now using up this much capacity; therefor you’re paying this fee versus the sewer line trunk fee, which
we’ve been talking about for quite a while. There was even a provision in the Bear Creek Development agreement for payment of the sewer trunk line impact fee. There’s a little distinction
there with Bear Creek. In Bear Creek the sewer trunk line that would gravity flow for Bear Creek is not built yet and so they’re pumping over into Ten-Mile. Where you have a development
that’s out of it’s drainage, that would be a pretty clear cut case of, here’s the impact fee you have to pay because you’re going to eventually, and that’s where you’re going to collect
it on this one, and you’re going to eventually use it to help build that Black Cat trunk which is going to serve that development. How you assess the fee for something that’s in it’s
correct drainage and the developer’s putting in the lines, that’s where we get hung up. I don’t have a quick answer for that one.
Anderson: I guess, that’s kind of what I was seeing as what we wanted to get away from is the developer actually putting in the trunk line. Right now, we’re at the mercy of the developer.
Our communities are going to grow wherever the developer wants it to grow because he’s the one that’s funding that. I guess what my line of thinking was, is that we wanted to have the
capital so we could put the sewer lines where we wanted the city to grow. Then make it grow in an organized fashion.
Nichols: Councilman Anderson, Members of the Council, Mr. Mayor, there is a way to do that. There is no prohibition against using general fund dollars for an enterprise fund and then
having an impact fee that would reimburse that general fund dollars. For example, if the Council decided to build, well, the white trunk is the one that’s the hot one right now. If we
were going to use – Let’s just pick one that we don’t have yet. Let’s pick the north slough since that seems to be everybody’s favorite topic. The city takes from the general fund and
builds the north slough, or builds the first leg of it. Then has an impact fee, so many dollars per equivalent residential unit for the sewer trunk. Then, as a development comes in that’s
going to utilize that north slough, it’s a 310 unit single family residential subdivision. That’s 310 times whatever the ERU impact fee is and that’s what the developer would have to
pay in order to make the connection. It’s not really an impact fee as such, it’s a connection fee at that point because it’s directly. -- You see, that’s one way that the Council could
get ahead of it.
Anderson: It’s almost like a late comers for the developers. For us it’s a connection fee. You said it had to come from general funds. Why can’t that come from enterprise? Why can’t
you loan yourself money from the enterprise from one item to the next –
Nichols: That may be a possibility to loan the funds but we’d have to check into that. I’m not – It would still be used within that fund, it would just simply be used and then paid
back in with regard to the operations.
Bird: That’s basically the way the fifty-six acres was bought, or was suppose to be bought, was a loan from enterprise to -- and then paid back with fees. I agree with Ron, if we start
taking out of the general fund like that then we effect the other budgets big time. I’m not for that and if we can do it. My question on this is how has Boise, Nampa, and all these other
cities got away with it? I know they have not been challenged, Maybe if they were challenged then it would be a different deal. They are getting – I mean if you’re building in southeast
Boise, your fee is going into – doesn’t necessarily go to the southeast Boise trunk line. It might be going out here to the Hewlett Packard trunk line being used. I have some reservations.
I want to see everything done legally and can stand up to challenges and I agree with Brad on everything but this trunk thing is real touchy. I think there’s got to be a way we can be,
on every building permit getting fees for future trunk lines. Other cities are doing it.
Corrie: Mr. President, yeah, I understand what you’re saying but you better be ready to go to court if you have to.
Bird: Yeah, Mayor, and I understand that. That’s just what I said, I don’t want something like that. Evidently it’s being done and hasn’t been challenged. Also on our fee system, we
haven’t checked it. This is the thing I believe is a Council, Mayor and Council, we need to on all our fees, regardless of whether it’s public works, zoning, parks, has to be looked
at on a yearly basis. I realize our cost of living index hasn’t been very high since 96. It can be and we’re entitled to raise those fees as our costs go up. Our costs to maintain that
treatment plant in wages alone has went up, let alone material that we have to use and all this stuff. I think this is something that we need to really look at on a yearly basis is all
our fees and keep them up to date.
Corrie: Mr. President. Oh, go ahead.
Anderson: Brad, did you look into how Boise was doing theirs and is there something different that they’re using then what we’re talking about?
Watson: Councilman Anderson, over the years, I’ve met with public works staff, Gary and I both have, and I’ve corresponded with him, with their assistant city engineer, who basically
over-sees the sewer system. I’ve been provided documents and I can’t get to the root of their calculations.
Smith: I can’t either.
Watson: I guess that’s all I can say.
Bird: I agree with you, Brad, I can’t either but they sure get it in there somewhere.
Watson: By no means am I trying to open a can of worms, I just don’t understand totally how theirs works or how it was arrived at.
Corrie: Mr. President.
Bird: Yes, Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: I would suggest that we really have the attorney look into this general fund receiving loans from the enterprise fund and see if we can’t do it. I know that we have to pay
it back with the interest –
Bird: Wait a minute Mayor, if the attorney’s sitting here telling me that we can borrow from general fund for enterprise fund, you know how mad I am? I just wanted to use the interest
off of one of the funds and I was told I couldn’t do it.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor and Members of Council President Bird. That’s not what I said. What I talked about was using general fund balance and then repaying it from impact fees. That was my
statement –
Anderson: It wasn’t from the enterprise fund to the general fund.
Nichols: -- The question that the Council wants researched is how does Nampa and how does Boise, since those are two communities that are close to us, how do they fund their sewer trunk
fees? How do they build them, what’re they doing? We can check that out. Brad’s dilemma I think is, it sounded like a duck, but what he was looking at didn’t look like a duck, or they
weren’t calling it a duck in Boise City. They were doing something completely different from what the impact fee – impact fees are only allowed when there’s a specific state statute
that says you can have them. Impact fees are allowed for certain capital improvements, parks is one, I think there’s a lot, public safety impact fee. Public safety impact fee is one
that you may need to look at. There are certain things that allowed under statute that as I understand in my conversation with Brad, he was asking questions. You know, do you have this,
do you have this, how did you do this? The answers he was coming back didn’t match what the impact fee statute requires must be in place before you can assess them. That’s where his
quandary comes from.
Corrie: I guess I would have two requests then. Find out if they’re not calling them impact fees, what they’re calling them or how they’re doing it. Then the
other question is, just like we talked about. If a case where we could loan ourselves money from the enterprise fund to go ahead and do trunk line expansion and then repay it with a
connection fee, I’m happy with doing that. It does the exact same thing that we want to do and is not really going to hurt us. Either of those I wouldn’t mind doing.
Bird: Don’t tell me you’re going to borrow from the general fund for the enterprise fund.
McCandless: We don’t have the money.
De Weerd: Mr. President
Bird: Mrs. D Weerd
De Weerd: Brad, could their engineer not explain how their impact – I don’t understand. I know there’s very strict requirements on impact fees and they have to be justified. Can he
not explain how they came up with the formula?
Watson: Councilwoman De Weerd, there was originally a formula and I understand it and it can be explained. There’s since been several adjustments to that trunk fee, trunk connection
fee as I think they call it. That I cannot explain how those happened.
De Weerd: They can’t either?
Nichols: It can be explained but it doesn’t match anything having anything to do with the impact –
Bird: That’s right.
Nichols: -- fee statute. I guess any further explanation would have to come from them as to their reasoning. I hate to conjecture on their part.
Bird: You can’t tell when you look at their fee structure when you get a permit and stuff. It’s there but how it gets there and how they derive the formula I’ve never figured out. I’ve
had builders get me two or three of it and I’m like you Bradley –
De Weerd: How can they justify it?
Bird: They’re doing it someway. It is not an impact fee. Basically it is Kent. It is, but they don’t call it that.
Brown: What part goes to the treatment plant –
Bird: Come on up here on the deal. We’ll invite Kent Brown, an ex- Boise engineer.
Brown: Part of it goes for the treatment plant, and then part of it goes back to repay trunk lines that get installed. You made a comment about southeast Boise. In Boise’s comprehensive
plan, it was very easy for Boise to grow west as you guys have experienced. What they did in their comprehensive plan is they did LIDs, where they went out and installed sewers the way
Ron ‘s talking about, Councilman Anderson, in the southeast. Thereby making it easier for development because they didn’t have to go out and build those lines. That’s how they encouraged
growth in the part of town that they wanted to. You know when we grew up there wasn’t anything around Triangle Dairy and that’s how they forced that that way. They’ve had the similar
impact. They get the capacity way in advance, that’s why they’re able to spend I think over the last three years, ten million dollars or twenty million dollars –
Bird: Twenty-two million, isn’t it?
Brown: -- for treatment plant up grades. They’ve been getting this money; it’s all set aside, and the capacity for the treatment. Supposedly as everybody connects, it’s not impacting
the existing people. They took that same formula and also used it to take United Water court with the Public Utilities Commission to justify that the over-all rate payers weren’t paying
for new development that was taking place. So that they would make sure that new development was paying it’s way where United Water was saying; well we’ve got depreciations that we need
to fix. They were going, are they depreciations or are those up sizing trunk lines that feed certain areas? At least that’s the way I’ve always understood it.
Bird: They don’t call it –
Brown: It’s not considered an impact fee.
Bird: Even if you had a lot in old Boise and the sewer’s already there and stuff. You put a new house up there; you still pay that fee plus the hook up fee. Am I not right?
Brown: That’s correct.
Bird: That’s why it’s a fee and not an impact. I think we are entitled to that, a fee, not an impact.
Brown: In the nine years that I worked for the city of Boise, seven of them were with the Public Works Department. Every single year that fee went up. It increased, except for the last
two years I worked there. They would increase that capacity fee because they viewed the additions, you know, we got to fight more environmental DEQ requirements, we have. So that was
a large part of how they
calculated those fees had to do with what the collection system itself needed to keep up graded with what was going on. It wasn’t the installation of the sewer lines that were necessarily
going up but it was the collection facility.
Bird: Thank you, Kent, very much.
McCandless: Mr. President
Bird: Mrs. McCandless
McCandless: If you used LIDS, you couldn’t use it on undeveloped land, could you? Wouldn’t have to be developed before you put in a LID?
Anderson: I don’t know who you’d collect the money from on a LID if it wasn’t developed yet.
Nichols: First the property would have to be in the city limits. That’s the first thing. Since most of the land that you’re talking about that would be developable is greater in size
than five acres, you couldn’t even force annex it if it’s next to your city limits.
Corrie: It goes back to the old boys saying, we’re going to have pockets everywhere.
Bird: We’re in the middle of old town. Any other statements or questions here? This is a very good subject. Thank you Brad very very much for coming forward with this.
Watson: Thank you.
Bird: Council, I take it that we would like Brad and Gary and Bill to continue on with this and see if they can come up with a solution for us?
Anderson: Definitely.
De Weerd: Mr. President
Bird: Mrs. De Weerd
De Weerd: In addition to coming back on that, you know when we last talked about fees. We have our planning and zoning fee schedule that Shari’s put together. I would like to know the
process of implementing those fees. I know we have to go through public hearing but instead of having those continue to just sit on Shari’s desk, I think we need to start the process
of getting these updated and implemented.
Bird: What’s the process we need to do, Clerk, or Mr. Nichols?
Berg: Mr. Mayor, Mr. President, Members of Council, The fee, I believe, increased more then five percent so they require the public hearing –
Bird: Who notices until we get started?
Berg: -- We would have to look and see if any of them were in the ordinance itself. There might be a couple fees. I’ll have to check because if it’s in the zoning and development portion
of the ordinance then it will have to go before Planning and Zoning as well as the City Council because you’re changing and modifying that section. We’ll check that out but it’s going
to require a public hearing at least before the City Council because they are increasing more then five percent.
De Weerd: Mr. President
Bird: Yes, Mrs. De Weerd
De Weerd: I guess then if those specific points could be looked into and we can discuss at our next workshop so we can set kind of a timeline on how we want to go about implementation.
I think we just need to get on this. I do believe, haven’t you given these fees to the BCA for their comment? I thought that at one time Richard McCaughy got a copy of them. I don’t
think we’ve ever gotten any response back.
Stiles: I think he was not there not long after he got those so I don’t if they would have been given to the members yet.
De Weerd: Maybe, Kent, can you follow up on that, I know you’re involved in that. If Shari can get Kent a copy and you can get it to the appropriate people. Two copies, oh peace.
Anderson: I would just make a recommendation that maybe we have a workshop on it because there would be more people then the development Council and instead of going to your public
hearing, like some of the things, ordinance changes and so forth, if we could hammer it out in a workshop. We can agree to disagree about certain things but if we can kind of at least
understand it doesn’t take the rest of the publics time that come for the knock down drag out that we normally go through.
De Weerd: I would agree with that –
Bird: That’s a very good idea.
De Weerd: Maybe when we put this on our next workshop to address the finer details of this, as far as procedure wise, we can incorporate that component in there as well.
Bird: You bet. That sounds great to me. Okay. While we’re on fees. We’ve discussed an impact area park fee. We talked about it, I believe, last March or last February. How’s that coming,
Tom?
Kuntz: Mr. President, Mayor and Council, To date, the only thing we’ve done it as far as staff is got background information from Boise City. Talked about it briefly with Bill Nichols.
I guess I could use some direction as far as, did the Council talk to the County Commissioners about how to proceed with that or was that going to be an issue coming up this Thursday
at the meeting?
De Weerd: Mr. President. I think those are two separate things. Our up date of impact fee is certainly our business with the county and all has just been asking them to collect any fees
within our area of impact. At our last meeting with County Commissioners, they said all they needed was a letter from the city. Like I told Tom the other day I thought the city had gotten
that to them but apparently not.
Bird: That’s the way I understood it last time. Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: We haven’t had the committee meeting yet I understand because you don’t have the park master plan together yet, is that correct?
Kuntz: Mayor, President and Council. I guess I’m a little confused –
Corrie: Okay
Kuntz: -- Is it necessary for the impact fee – Re-establishing the impact fee committee was going to be done to address the need to increase our impact fees.
Corrie: That’s correct.
Kuntz: Which doesn’t sound like it has a direct relation to asking the county commissioners to collect impact fees for us.
Corrie: It doesn’t. I guess my question to you again is: when are we going to have that committee put together? You were going to get me the names and get it together and I haven’t
had it yet.
Kuntz: Well, the impact fee committee, the names, the committee has been re-established and we have the names.
Corrie: Okay
Kuntz: We are not going to meet with them until the parks comprehensive plan is complete.—
Bird: I understand that.
Kuntz: -- My question though is, it sounds like we can move ahead with addressing the impact fees with the county commissioners in our area of impact with just a memo. Is that correct,
or not correct?
Bird: That’s what I understood when we had that meeting. Maybe the Mayor remembers the same thing. I’m like Tammy, I understood that all we have to do is send them a formal letter from
the city requesting that they collect some impact fees for parks within our impact area. Then we need to, I guess, set the fees. Isn’t that the way Boise does it? Boise gets park impact
fees throughout their impact area. These people within our impact area I hope are going to use our parks.
Corrie: I imagine they would.
Bird: Yes so I –
Corrie: We can put a letter up to them and have it by the end of the week.
Bird: We need to set a fee though, don’t we, Mayor?
Corrie: Yeah, but that’s what I’m saying.
De Weerd: The fee’s been set.
Corrie: We’ve got the old fee.
Bird: I’m sure Shari’s got something here. Shari
Stiles: Mr. President, Mayor and Council. That might be something that we could talk to them about, however I think the staff is probably going to be a lot more critical then actually
the commissioners would be because they’re going to be looking at our ordinance and make sure that it, at least they believe it, to meet the state requirements. They’re also going to
be looking for a capital improvement plan for the parks. I don’t know, I guess we can address the commissioners and ask them what they perceive the process to be. I know in talking to
the staff, that’s what they’re looking for is to make sure that our ordinance meets state code requirements and also that that capital improvement plan is in place.
Corrie: The county commissioners going to look to their planning and staff for the answer to the question that we’re going to give them.
Kuntz: Mayor and President and Council. We have a capital improvement plan, or will have a capital improvement plan as part of our action plan when it’s adopted.
Nichols: Mr. President
Bird: Mr. Nichols:
Nichols: Just a few comments. First of all, I believe the city does have a capital improvement plan, it just needs updated for the parks. I mean otherwise we couldn’t be charging the
park impact fee that we’re charging now. That’s one thing. Secondly, we can see from the values of the land the developers are having to pay the farmers for in order to have that land,
that the cost of acquiring an acre of land for park space, the cost of developing that acre of land for park space is dramatically greater then what it was at the time the park impact
fee was determined. The other thing is, I believe that in order to collect the impact fee for parks inside the area of impact requires an amendment of the area of impact agreement with
the county. I think that’s Boise’s area of impact agreement with the county allows Boise to collect those fees. I may be mistaken on that. It’s been a while since I looked at it but
I believe that’s the case. There may be other items that you want identified that you’d like to amend the area of impact agreement with the county besides just the imposition of park
impact fees. You may ask that the city’s subdivision and development ordinances apply inside the area of impact so that those building standards inside the area of impact would be the
same building standards that are in place inside the city. You may want to ask that your Landscape Ordinance, which that’s already part of your building and development ordinance, or
that title in the code, that that apply. May be you want the sign ordinance to apply inside the area of impact. –
De Weerd: Oh, yes.
Nichols: So, there may be several things that need to be identified that you ask the county to allow those city standards to be applied inside the area of impact, not just the park
impact fee.
Bird: Mr. Nichols, if we re-negotiate that, does that extend our time? If we open that agreement up to get these added, could we go back and lose area? Could they --
Nichols: Mr. President, I don’t know the answer to that. There’s two issues. One is the content of the area of impact agreement. Second is the identification of the boundaries of the
area of impact. I would say that they should be treated separately. One is, the areas already been defined and that should be left alone.
We’re just talking about what happens with regard to some of the development standards inside. I mean, that’s the way I would approach it.
Bird: What if we want to open up for that part, we’re opening up the agreement. What if the commissioners say well, let’s look at the impact area, you know? Boise wants and can service
another half mile or another mile in your place right now and we’ve been getting a lot of pressure from developers to get that taken care of. If you want to open up for this, may be
we want to open up for the impact area.
Nichols: That may well be a risk. I would say this, if you can’t agree on the amendments, I don’t think it goes to the committee of nine with regard to these other issues. I think
that’s only with regard to the designation of the area.
Anderson: Can we get a copy of Boise’s agreement?
Nichols: That’s real easy. It’s an ordinance; we just pull it off the web.
Bird: See what they’ve got and what we’ve got.
De Weerd: It seems to me that Roger Simmons seemed to think that all we needed to do is write a letter and request that they collect our park impact fees and that would be sufficient
to have them do it. Again, that’s just my recollection. He didn’t seem to think that it required amending anything that currently existed.
Bird: It would have to amend somebody’s ordinance.
De Weerd: We can bring a memo and ask them if that’s good enough when we meet with them.
Corrie: I can do that but you’re sitting there with two other commissioners that don’t think the ways that Roger Simmons does.
De Weerd: Well, they did. I know that one of them is changed. At the time, they all were nodding. I took that as a yes, do it and get on.
Corrie: One way to find out is, we can do it and see what they say.
De Weerd: That’s worth a try.
Bird: That’s good. Somebody’s got to change somebody’s ordinance to change the wording, I would think. Either the county or the city, somebody. It’s got to change somebody’s ordinance.
Kuntz: Mr. President –
Bird: That and add an impact fee.
Kuntz: Council –
Bird: Mr. Kuntz:
Kuntz: What I would suggest is let me meet with Mr. Nichols and pursue this. If it could be brought up at the meeting on Thursday that would be fantastic, to give us some direction
from them. Then put this on as a discussion item for your next workshop and we’ll have something to report back. Not only on the area of impact, but also on where we are with increasing
our impact fees.
Corrie: Okay.
Bird: Is that fair, Council?
De Weerd: No. We’ve waited this long.
Corrie: Well, yeah, you’re not going to get it done overnight anyway. I still think that their planning people are going to have something to say about this.
Bird: Okay. No more discussion on fees and stuff.
De Weerd: Sure. You know we have mentioned a public safety impact fee and the attorney brought it up again tonight. Have we started anything along those lines? Has a committee been formed?
Corrie: Are we talking about the mill levy?
De Weerd: No, Public safety impact fee.
Corrie: Oh, no.
Bird: Mr. Nichols
Nichols: Mr. President, I don’t believe that there’s anybody working on that, although the Fire Department is working on a facilities plan as part of their, aren’t they. Isn’t there
some sort of capital improvement plan?
Corrie: Yeah, there’s a capital improvement plan being worked on as part of the strategic plan.
Nichols: That would be a critical element that would have to go into that.
De Weerd: As well as for the Police.
Bird: That’s right.
Nichols: As I understand, the capital improvement plan for the Fire Department came after the assessment was completed and it was part of that assessment evaluation recommendation
was to have one. That was the next stage. The Police Department evaluation and the draft is done or will be done.
Corrie: Hopefully, we’ll have it by May the tenth.
Nichols: It’s getting close to being finished on that and then the next part of that can be the capital improvement plan for the Police Department.
Bird: Then we can start the impact fees.
Corrie: But you have to have those --
Bird: Do you have to have those in place?
Corrie: -- before we can get, yeah.
Bird: Okay, anything else before we move on? Okay
Issue #4 Discussion of Mill Levy Election
Bird: Item No. 4. Discussion of Mill Levy Election. I don’t know who wants to handle this. Do you want to Mayor, take the ball and start dribbling it?
Corrie: Go ahead. I haven’t been able to get back to Ken Harwood yet, of what program he was going to put together for us. I hope to have it by Friday. Then, Tammy brought up the citizen’s
committee or citizen’s group to work with us. We need to get that done. I guess, I was kind of hoping to have that by tonight from Ken Harwood so we could go with this program. He hasn’t
done it yet.
Where do you want to go on a committee? You don’t have a lot of time here.
Bird: Council?
Anderson: Mr. President
Bird: Mr. Anderson
Anderson: I guess I was thinking that maybe we could have a meeting that that would be the sole and only discussion item and that we could devote three or four hours to it and develop
a specific strategy with assignment as far putting together citizen groups or make assignments as far as who was going to hit what community groups, putting together fact sheets as far
as why it was needed,
what the money was going to be used for. That’s going to take more, you know, I appreciate Ken coming the other night and the insight he gave, but really that was just kind of the tip
of the iceberg to me. We need to spend at least another full night working on what our game plan is going to be. We’ve got to get moving on it because that election is getting closer
and closer every day. I’d be willing to set another meeting if we could to get –
Bird: I’m like the Mayor, I left with the impression that Ken was going to get us all this material that we could do a workshop with and get people and know what we were going to go
out and present to the public. I’m like the Mayor. I was waiting for some stuff of his.
Corrie: He had two cities that had done this before. He was going to get the information to us. I think if we can set a meeting up –
Bird: I have no problem with it.
Corrie: -- That will probably push him a little harder.
Bird: When are you going to set it?
Corrie: We have to have a deadline. You’ve got, well, Thursdays are probably out. The sevetenth’s out, you have the eighteenth.
Bird: How about the eighteenth?
Corrie: It’s a Wednesday. I don’t think there’s anybody in here that can’t do it, right?
Bird: You won’t be here.
Corrie: How’s the eighteenth look?
Bird: Looks good.
Corrie: We’ve got three that can be at the eighteenth, Keith.
Bird: I have no problem with it. Start it at 6:30 and go. That’s the only thing on the item.
Corrie: I would think that we need to really hit it hard.
Bird: Okay
Anderson: I think one of the biggest things is we’re going to have to actually put some hard numbers to what are we going to use the money for. That’s one of the
big things we’re lacking and that’s not something that Ken can put together for us. We’re waiting on some information from him on what other cities did, but we’re going to have to do
this other part of it.
Corrie: Part of his presentation to us is what they did as well so we can get some ideas. You are absolutely right, we’re going to have to do it ourselves but it’ll give us some good
points.
Bird: Mayor, you and Ron kind of, when we started this, said you guys would head it up so get your presentations and be ready to go for a workshop on the eighteenth at 6:30.
De Weerd: You guys will organize the workshop and that sort of thing.
Bird: Yeah, and be ready to go.
Anderson: Sure.
Corrie: As much experience as we’ve had working together, we’ll get it done.
Anderson: We’re in trouble already.
Bird: Mr. Mayor
Corrie: Yes.
Bird: One thing that -- I don’t want to tell you and Ron what we probably should have at the workshop, but we need to get with the department heads and have them bring some plans; the
Fire, the parks and the police, of what the needs are. We know what the needs are but to have them present the needs and stuff so that we can have something to go forward with.
Anderson: I think we need to get with those department heads and get figures. What I don’t want to get into is just like we got into at budget time, a war between departments that
we need it worse then the other department. I want to avoid that at all cost. That’s not going to do anything but hurt our cause. What we need to have is basic numbers. What does it
cost to put an acre of park ground into usable ground? --
Bird: What does a fireman cost? What does a police officer cost?
Anderson: -- What does a police officer cost?
Bird: What does a police car cost and stuff like that.—
Anderson: Those are the basic things that we need.
Bird: That’s all we were asking. We don’t want to, you know, we’re not going to say the police department gets one dollar and the fire department gets fifty cents and the parks department
gets a dollar and a half. Let’s get some costs that you can show the people of each department.
Anderson: Right.
De Weerd: That’s what we agreed on last week.
Corrie: They already have those.
De Weerd: Those three things.
Corrie: We’re getting those from them.
Bird: Ok, then we’ll go –
Corrie: Your basic numbers are going to come out from them too as well.
Bird: four eighteen at 6:30.
Nichols: Mr. President
Bird: Yes, Mr. Nichols
Nichols: Mr. President, Mayor, members of Council. I may not be able to be here that evening. I’ve got a trial starting on Tuesday next week. I’ve got Dave Swartley lined up to cover
council meeting if I can’t do that on the seventeenth. Do you want somebody from our office here on the eighteenth for this one?
Bird: I think we’ll be all right. We’ll tape it and you can listen to it when you get time.
Corrie: I don’t think there’ll be real heavy legal that you can’t handle over the tape.
Bird: Over the tape, and then you can tell us where we screwed up.
Nichols: Ok. I just want you to be aware of that.
De Weerd: Mr. President
Bird: Mrs. De Weerd
De Weerd: Would that be an appropriate time if there had been citizens who are interested in helping, ask them to be there as well?
Bird: What do you say? What do you say, Mayor and Mr. Anderson?
Anderson: I think at that point, if you involve the citizens, you’re going to get into just like we’re talking about the departments. The citizens that’ll be there will have a cause
that they’re there for, whether it’s parks, police or whatever. Then we’re going to get into the exact same thing that we’re trying to avoid with the department heads. Let’s figure out
the game plan first. Then we’ll get the volunteers to do the stuff.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: Okay. That’s enough said on the Mill Levy.
Issue #5 Discussion of Ada County Commissioners Meeting
Bird: Item No. 5 is discussion of Ada County Commissioner Meeting which is at 2:30 Thursday. Mayor, what have you got planned for that?
Corrie: Well, I think we should hear from the police, the fire and I’d better ask the rural to be here. What we’re going to tell the county commissioners, the fact that what will be
the cost to the city in those public services to let them put those subdivisions out there. I know it’s going to have an effect on the fire department. Police department may not have
an effect, but because they won’t be in the city limits but our fire department is going to have to be running out there. They’re going to have costs. I just feel that we should make
sure that we’ve got all of our rocks in a row as has been said when we make our presentation to the county commissioners. That we don’t want to see this thing happen, we need their help.
As we went to that last meeting, you realize there were three different opinions about that in the county. Sharon Aulman is they own it, they ought to be able to do what they want to
with it. Roger Simmons I don’t think is for that but then Of course Grant Kakes has said that if you can get the developer to build you a sewer, why not? Then we came with the department,
Brad was with us, about if they put their sewer system in will we be able to even have the elevations that can work with our sewer systems going out there. That’s why I ask the fire
department to kind of give us some ideas of their cost and what would be run if they did that type of thing and get some input from the rural as well tonight. I even ask them to come
to that meeting.
Bird: Yeah, but the only thing is the rural is getting a very good Mill Levy out of these houses that are being done out there. I think that you know, we said the police weren’t involved.
I agree, right now their probably not involved but some of the subdivisions I’ve seen come in with the roads and stuff, if and when they are
ever annexed into the city, then our police are involved. I tell you some of those things look like a maze out there that it would be hard to patrol and be horrible for fire departments
to get in and out, let alone the police officer. I think that our public safety period is involved.
Corrie: That’s why I asked that they be at that meeting. There are going to be some questions asked by the county.
Bird: Yes.
Corrie: My reason for this is, what is their plan of attack? We go in there just sit in the seat of our pants and let them ask questions, we’re going to lose.
Anderson: Mr. President
Bird: Mr. Anderson
Anderson: We had a discussion at the rural fire district meeting. Was that this month or last month, Mike? I guess it was last month, about this issue though. The fire department, I
think can put together a very good case and it does include the rural district quite heavily because that development is occurring in their area right now. Because of the partnership
– The big thing with the fire department 9is response times – even though those areas are rural right now, they may only account for a handful of runs but if the county allow those to
develop at an urban density several miles from our existing city limits and our existing fire stations, then that run volume goes up considerably. I think Joe, from the fire department,
had put together some numbers on what type of run volume that these developments would cause to increase for the fire department. That’s pretty staggering when you start looking at those
numbers and what that will do. Really what they’re doing when they’re approving those is they’re giving those people that buy those subdivision lots, they’re giving them a false impression
that they’re going to have the same level of service as what you’re getting when you live closer in to the city. They’re going to be far from it. They’re going to have seven and eight
minute response times. In the case of a fire o medical call, that’s going to be a lot of times, way too late, or after the fact, if it’s a case of a fire or somebody not breathing. I
think Mike, from the rural district, can pout together a pretty good case that he can argue why the rural fire district doesn’t want the commissioners to allow those types of development.
I think Kenny, with the help of some of Joe’s numbers that he’s put together, can put together case for the fire department. I can jump in there and help them out a little bit with what
those time responses would mean for them.
Bird: I agree. Mayor, I think you need to make sure we get everything put together so we can present it orderly and we’re not all running off the gun.
Corrie: The county commission’s going to ask some questions. You can expect Sharon will give you a lot of them. She has her opinion of what should be done in the county. Just want
everybody to be prepared for their questions and plus the fact, police and fire is going to be a big factor here. Now Chief, how about as far as the police are concerned. Keith did raise
some issues about roads and that. Do you have anything that you want to bring up with them at this point?
Gordon: Same as the fire. When you bring that many people close in, we respond to a lot of the surrounding subdivisions right now. Whenever we do that, we take a car and an officer,
or two officers, out of service. The more that they have in this general vicinity, the more we’re going to be losing officers. That dispatch center sends our cars just as easily as they
send county cars. During the week from about midnight until six in the morning, the only thing on the west end of the county is Meridian cars. We keep track of how many times we go out.
That’ll increase proportionately depending on populations.
Bird: That’s true.
De Weerd: Mr. President
Bird: Mrs. De Weerd
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor, would it be possible that you meet with our different department heads Thursday morning and pull kind of an outline of how we’re going to present these different
issues to the commission, kind of get all the ducks in a row so each department head also has an idea of what the other will cover. They can either expand on that or just continue the
story.
Corrie: Yeah, we can do that. One of the things I was going to mention, --
Bird: I was just going to say.
Corrie: -- keep an eye –
Bird: That scares me more then anything.
Corrie: -- Gary had a talk with United Water. They are poised to do more then just put water, believe me and Keith understands what I’m saying here. They’re there with water right now.
They are able to do some sewer systems with United Water. That’s going to be probably one of our major talks here, is where United Water is in this type of thing. We can run water lines
out and take care of that but their water is there now. They’re there for the money. –
Bird: They’re there for the duration too.
Corrie: -- and they’re in for the duration too. That’s right. Like Keith has said to them, I think that they’re well within their powers to put sewer systems in too.
Bird: They are very much so.
Corrie: They didn’t deny that.
Bird: No, they scare me.
Corrie: Are those package systems?
Bird: Some of their biggest business is running municipalities sewer systems and owning sewer systems. Most of them they run. Let me tell you something. Ron, you sat on the council,
when we allowed the water to come across for the church, was that not made a statement that once our water was out there, they went away?
Anderson: Yeah.
Bird: They don’t go away. It wasn’t their representative that said it.
Anderson: I think it was condition that we put, or they agreed to. –
Bird: I said we’d have to dig up the development agreement. They’ve been approached and I’d felt this, I’d heard the rumor after we had the meeting. They have been approached by developers
to put in a sewer system. If they put it there, they will go from Locust Grove to Star and they don’t have to stop at county lines. They’ll take that whole – They’ve got their water
all the way to Spur Wing right now on the north side.
Anderson: They’re already developing smaller spurs out in Canyon County. We have two or three of their systems.
Bird: That’s what we’re told. We know that. They’re not afraid. I think this is something. We don’t want a bunch of sewer districts. It doesn’t benefit anybody.
Corrie: That’s what we’ve got to convince the county commissioners.
Bird: That’s what we’ve got to talk the commissioner – The public safety, yeah, I worry about that. I don’t think we’re going to have to worry about public safety if this other stuff
goes through.
Anderson: I think our two strongest arguments are the sewer and the public safety.
Bird: I agree they’re the strongest. That sewer and water really scares me.
Corrie: Out of the sewer and water, our strongest argument is going to be the sewer because that’s the one that we’ve spent years planning for the ultimate build out of the waste treatment
plant –
Bird: That’s right.
Corrie: -- have all the master plans done for the trunk line systems. If somebody’s allowed to come in and start breaking that area up now that we’ve done all that planning for, it
just throws the whole rest of our plan into shambles.
Bird: I will also state that if I were in United Water’s boots, I’d do the same thing. They’re here, they’re a private industry and to grow is part of their deal and make a profit. Developers
come to them, I can understand it but that’s the thing that scares me. I just hope the commissioners won’t let – we don’t need anymore Kentucky Ridge sewer systems in our impact area.
McCandless: I don’t think Central Health is too excited about it either.
Bird: Yeah, but – Tammy they didn’t deny, when asked them, putting in a full blown sewer thing if they go far enough. They don’t have to worry about county lines or impact areas.
Corrie: One of the things we’re going to really talk to the county commissioners about is that they gave us that ten year window –
Bird: That’s right, Mayor.
Anderson: That’s right. Corrie: -- to do these things. Hopefully, they will honor that. Roger remembers it. Fred does too. --
Bird: He was on the other side when that went through.
Corrie: -- I think that we can emphasize that and talk to them on that one. Will you be able to meet Thursday morning? All right. I’ll give you a call, Mike, tomorrow morning and tell
you the time we can get together. I think we meet at 2:00 or 2:30, 2:30 Thursday afternoon at the county commissioner’s office. Thursday morning I’ll get with Kenny and you and Chief
and Gary. We’ll make out the plan to run, can you make it, do you think? I know you’re going to be part of this. We know we can get you the information to you before you can get there.
De Weerd: And Shari?
Corrie: Yeah, she’ll be there too.
Gordon: I’m training those policemen on how to be diverse in the work place over from ten to noon over in Nampa. If they’d learn to behave, I wouldn’t have to do that.
Bird: Gary, did you have something to say?
Smith: Mr. President, Mayor and Council. I was just going to say what Mayor Corrie already did say. That I hope that Ada County Commissioners will recognize the agreement that we have
and the amount of work that we put into planning for development in this impact area.
Bird: So do I.
Smith: That’s the hope, I guess, of all of us.
Anderson: What also might be helpful, Gary, is like some of the dollar figures of what we’ve spent on all that planning and infra-structure out there so far.
Bird: Okay, any other items, Mayor, on the commissioner deal?
Corrie: I just want us to be aware of what we’re doing.
Bird: You bet.
Nichols: Mr. President, Mayor, members of the council, I have a court appearance in Canyon County at 2:30 that afternoon. Just to let you know, if you want me to try to find somebody
to be at the meeting, I’ll do that. I had a court hearing moved. It was suppose to have been last week and got moved to this coming Thursday.
Corrie: I don’t recall that you would need to be there, Bill, or have somebody there. There’s not going to be any legal questions.
Nichols: Okay.
Bird: The only familiar with our problems is you and you’d have to brief somebody. I wouldn’t feel comfortable.
Nichols: Okay.
Bird: Okay, going on –
De Weerd: Mr. President. Gary, in addition, I really feel strongly and I know I mentioned this at a workshop but, we need to have, even if it’s a sketchy timeline of how we are going
to develop different drainage, you know, what would also help as well. I know that’s kind of what the development community was looking
for. Well, if you won’t let us develop now, when is that going to be out there. At least have some idea because it might be a question that the commission asks. Yeah, we have seven years,
but what is the plan.
Corrie: You mean sewer and not drainage?
De Weerd: Yeah.
Bird: Yeah.
Bird: We kind of had a timetable.
Corrie: We‘ve got the time schedule already pretty well set up.
Bird: We had it pretty well set up didn’t we?
Corrie: Don’t you, Gary, have that pretty much on line time schedule? I mean we’re doing the white trunk now, getting it done.
Smith: Right. I don’t know that we’ve got a schedule set up exactly as to when that other trunkline would be constructed. We’ve got a developer that wants to build that trunkline right
now.
Corrie: Council, want to let him do it? That’s going to be a question the county commission’s going to ask.
Bird: Right.
Anderson: Do we have the easements?
Bird: D.K. He owns all the ground. He can get the easements.
De Weerd: We don’t have the design or, do we have the capacity?
Anderson: There’s a little issue of annexation route. They’re saying they’ve got the annexation route. I don’t know. We haven’t seen it.
Corrie: There’s a lot of good that they put all that in there and we don’t have it annexed.
Anderson: Right.
Corrie: We’re kind of shooting in the dark.
De Weerd: And then again, like Councilman Anderson has been saying, there’s more to it than just water and sewer.
Corrie: It’s political too, very much so.
Bird: Ok, any more on this item? If not, I think we pretty well, on our future topics, anybody got any ideas right now? Tammy did you have a couple items you wanted to talk about before
we get into future.
De Weerd: Yeah. I had asked Keith, at our last meeting if I could get just an item that I would like to discuss at some point. I don’t know if it would be really an ordinance amendment.
I think that Will had mentioned that it didn’t need to get anything changed. What number one would be, property posting, right now what is being posted on some of these properties that
are up for public hearing. The postings are very small, they’re not noticed by the neighbors and I would like to see standard set as far as what size of posting that should be placed
on properties. Secondly, we have the ability to set sunset clauses on CUPs. I would like to see us maybe put a set time frame on those clauses for CUPs so that something that was approved
twenty-five years ago can’t come back and say, ok, we’re ready to build. We’re all going what, what are you going to build? It’s just something that we do with our plats. I think it’s
a good idea the surrounding cities do that. It might be something we want to look at. An additional item would be pre-application neighborhood meetings. Having also sat on Planning &
Zoning, it’s sometimes shocking getting a huge application coming in and the developer hasn’t met with the neighbors. You know, if we’re looking at expediting some of our processes,
this alone would help that process tremendously. I think we sat that with the St. Al’s application. The neighborhood people that they worked with certainly didn’t show up. And apparently
that’s a good sign that they felt comfortable with what was being proposed. I think it saves time for our staff, as well as the developer and maybe even the developer’s representative
by having some of that done prior to. I know our city doesn’t have neighborhood associations so it’s not as heavily emphasized as it is over in Boise but I think there’s some definite
benefits to asking. Then you’d have to define how big and what kind of project you would ask those kind of pre-requisites to. In addition –
Anderson: I just had a question on those neighborhood meeting. At point in the process do those occur? Prior to submitting to P&Z, or after?
De Weerd: Prior to application.
Anderson: So, the neighborhood might be behind it, then they get to P&Z and find out that there are some hurdles there that they couldn’t get through?
Bird: Mr. Nichols
Nichols: Councilman Anderson, Shari can correct me on this, but typically, a developer comes in and has their pre-application meeting with staff and talks about what they’re going
to do. Staff can say, I’ve been in at least one, that
involves an apartment issue. They basically said well, we’re going to have meetings with the neighbors and so they had a pre-application meeting with staff to kind of go over what they
want to do. Staff can say, make sure you do this, make sure you look at the new landscape ordinance, make sure you look at these requirements. What are you going to do about lighting?
They ask some of these sorts of questions that you would expect. Then the developer goes out and meets with folks in the neighborhood with the sort of concept plan that they have before
they actually make the application so that if there are some modifications that need to be made in the application because of something they didn’t think about or the neighbors want
some particular issue. They’ve already had sort of the read from P&Z staff before they actually go out and meet with those people. It’s not like they just go out and meet with them on
their own and then come in with the deal. They’ve had some contact with the staff.
Anderson: My other question was, I mean not really a question I guess, a comment. You’d have to be pretty specific about what that process would be for that neighborhood meeting. I
mean in the other apartment complex project that we looked at not too long ago, that was one of the complaints we kept hearing was, well, the developers were saying we were having the
neighborhood meetings. The neighborhood was saying we weren’t having the meetings. You’d have to define how far you’re going to go into the neighborhood, who’s got to be noticed, what’s
the proper posting of those meetings, everything else.
Nichols: I think, Councilman Anderson, if I may. From what I’ve seen, those that know what they’re doing get the coverage, get the people and they don’t have that issue. I mean, we
could set some minimum standards perhaps for those things but I think in that particular one, the Valerie Heights, they just didn’t know how to get out there and figure out what the
issues were. Plus they kept changing the project.
Corrie: It was doomed from the start.
Nichols: They kept switching on it. They’d have a meeting and then they’d change something and not have another meeting. They really complicated things. Maybe Shari’s got some comments
on that as far as requiring those neighborhood meetings.
Stiles: We do encourage to meet with the neighbors, especially if it’s some kind of controversial project. I guess there are pros and cons to having neighborhood meetings because a lot
of people who aren’t really familiar with the process think that the neighborhood meeting, and if a developer tells them they’re going to do something at the meeting, they think that’s
it. Even if they have those meetings, we have to tell the surrounding people, you better come and get it on the record because nothing they say, they can’t be held to anything they’re
going to say. Then there are other developers that will go out and they don’t want to compromise, in Boise, I know. They did the required neighborhood meeting, but
they just went out and said this is what we’re doing and if you don’t like it, tough. I don’t know. I think it’s right that the people that know what they’re doing are going to go out
and have those meetings. The people that don’t are just taking their chances. If we don’t regulate the content of the meeting, if we’re not attending those meeting, we don’t know what’s
said or what agreements have been made. I don’t know. I guess I have one way or the other, it doesn’t really matter to me as long as the people know that it’s just an informational meeting
and the city isn’t responsible for the content of the meeting and that any agreements that are made had better be in writing and presented at any public hearing there is.
Corrie: Correct me if I’m wrong counselor, but none of us can be at those meetings.
Bird: No.
De Weerd: Right.
Nichols: That’s correct Mr. Mayor.
De Weerd: Two more, three more things.
Bird: You said you were going to add two and now it’s five now it’s six.
De Weerd: I already ask you on these other ones. I know I brought these up too. Are we going to go through goal setting this year? Are we asking for annual reports from our departments?
I know we’ve received it from police and wastewater and I’ve read them. I appreciate those departments giving them to us. If we do goal setting this year, I would hope that we set city
goals and then the departments fit their goals within the city goals. I am a firm believer in goal setting. Enough said on that.
Corrie: Mr. President, let me kind of jump in here. John, Lucy and I had a discussion yesterday morning. We had talked about having him do this goal setting and some of the things
with the departments heads and the city. Of course, he’s been working with this framing team and it’s about done. He’s going to be getting in touch with us and when we can start that
program. It’s not a loss in the shuffle, it’s just a matter of he’s trying to get things put together as fast as we are.
Bird: Great.
De Weerd: We wanted the finance director on board before we did that.
Corrie: You’re right.
De Weerd: My second to the last issue is, I talked with Steve Hassen, who has been working the last two years on a collector’s study with ACHD. They’re wrapping that collector’s study
up and he is available to come and present that to City Council and to staff if there is an interest. It’s very timely in light of our comprehensive plan update. Our comprehensive plan
steering committee has kind of been looking at a collector’s system partial or, we’re not sure at this point. Would that be something of interest to the Council and the Mayor?
Corrie: How much time is that going to take?
De Weerd: Fifteen, twenty minutes.
Anderson: Can we at the next workshop or something?
Bird: We can do it at the next workshop. You’ve only got six items for the next workshop, one more isn’t going to hurt.
Bird: Mr. Berg
Berg: Mr. President, Mr. Mayor members of council. Is that something that the Planning and Zoning Commission would also be interested in?
De Weerd: Yeah, we may want to do it on that May –
Corrie: In May is that fifth workshop.
Anderson: May the 29th.
Corrie: I was going to say, we’re meeting the twenty-ninth with P&Z, that might be a good time to have that.
De Weerd: Ok, that’s excellent. Thank you, Wil. Last but not least, I’ve noticed some of the applications coming in. I won’t talk about any specific ones but it looks like there’s some
activity going on around the area. If I’m out of line Mr. Attorney, just cut me off whenever. There are some applications coming up over by the Locust Grove area that I don’t know if
they’re being talked to about the plans with the Locust Grove over-pass. If they are considering donations versus dedication of right-of-way and if so, who’s talking to them?
Bird: I’m not.
Anderson: ACHD has the right-of-way program. I don’t know whether they want to talk to them or not or if they are willing to do that. I would assume they are. I think we had that last
meeting with O’Neil, they’re not going to be very favorable to giving their land away.
De Weerd: He did bring up at the time, you know if he wasn’t required to do something he would consider it. Knowing that he’ll end up doing it eventually when he comes in with the CEP
on the other piece of property, I think that sounds like a great exchange, personally. I thought last year when we talked about dedicating money to this overpass, that the city was going
to be very active in approaching these land owners and strongly encouraging participation and donating right-of-way. That’s why I supported this whole thing. I know that Locust Grove
is very needed, but I also know that with restrictions we have in our budget. I saw this a way to meet some of those, that 1.8 million dollar commitment to right-of-way is it was going
to be through some donations. They’re not going to donate it without anyone asking them to do it. If we need to be asking them, we should be asking them and who is the appropriate person
to do that?
Corrie: We got Jabil. I talked to Jabil and they politely told me they’ve already done it. We checked back and they had already done it. They gave a hundred and some thousand dollars
worth of right-of-way to the ACHD. Again, you heard that O’Neil will trade which is possible. The council would have to make that decision whether they want to trade this for that. As
far as contacting the other people, I mean, I guess, I think Keith and I can look at that again and see where we are. We’ve talked about it a couple of times and, if I’m not mistaken,
we need to just maybe approach those people. Keith and I have talked about that. You’re probably no going to get a lot, but you’re going to get a better. ACHD and the city said ok, we’ll
try to do what we can for each other. The right-of-way, if we can’t get it donated to us, then it will have to be through ACHD and their workings with the people there. I guess we can
increase our program with Keith and I, I guess.
Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Maybe I’m not wise to how that works. It would seem to me like if the P&Z staff because it sounds to me like they’re kind of the first person that the developer
meets with on a project. If they knew where we wanted future fire stations or where we were trying to get right-of-way for a road or where we might need some land for a park or where
we need land for well sites, if that was all part of the plan and they knew that. Then when developers came in with a project in a particular area, they could say, by the way the city
needs park space in this area or we’re looking for right-of-way along this road, that could be the lead in and could be the first contact. It would get the developers thinking along
the lines that maybe if I donated this right-of-way along here that might help my cause a little bit, or if I donated some park space or something like that. I would think that maybe
P&Z would be the first stop. Not to exclude you, I mean you could be involved in that process if you wanted. I would think that they would be the one to plant the seed with the developers
as far as when we might want something like that.
Corrie: Mr. President, I agree with him one hundred percent.
Bird: I do too.
Corrie: I think that we were discussing mainly that those private owners –
Bird: The private owners
Corrie: -- and if we could do that. You’re absolutely right. The Planning and Zoning is where it belongs.
Bird: That’s right.
Corrie: At the front, we can’t tell a developer you have to do this but you’re right we can kind of work out a plan. I was under the impression –
Bird: We were talking about the private ones along there.
Anderson: I was just thinking of the ones that were coming in.
De Weerd: I did ask commissioner Bivens about Jabil and he said that they do have the right of way from Jabil but they paid for it. ACHD, they off-set it in impact fees, I think was
what was said. That’s not donating, --
Bird: Well, it is too.
Corrie: There was a hundred and fifty seven thousand that they paid in there and we had, Dave went back to ACHD. It was part of their program and they did donate some of that. I asked
Dave to really check it out good because we got in there, he really raked us over the coals really quick. Of course that was the time they were getting ready to do all this other.
De Weerd: And their stock plunged.
Corrie: I can check it again.
Bird: Mr. Anderson, do you have anything?
Anderson: No.
Bird: Mr. McCandless, Mr. Mayor
Corrie: No.
Bird: Mr. Kuntz
Kuntz: Mr. President, thank you –
Bird: How many items?
Kuntz: Two plus just a couple of brief announcements. I’ll start with the announcements.
Bird: You sure learned from your liaison.
Kuntz: Yes sir, she trained me well. First off, the opening for Generations Plaza is tentatively scheduled for June 1 which is a Friday night at approximately 6:30.
Bird: Are we still having a band or a deal?
Kuntz: Yes –
Bird: Is the one Steve Siddoway’s putting on?
Kuntz: No. We’re not going to have a street dance because Dairy Days, two weeks later, is having a street dance.
Bird: Is that one Steve’s putting on?
Kuntz: No, they’re not going to do that one. Yeah, because it’s so close to Dairy Days. Two is just to let you know the downtown merchants are putting together a program called Terrific
Tuesday once a month. The first one will be June fifth. We are discussing how the alcohol’s going to be handled as far as permitting, that type of thing. We need to meet with our city
attorney on that. I informally asked commissioners about meeting on the twenty-third of this month on a workshop with the comprehensive plan. We are not going to meet on the twenty-third.
The parks commission’s going to have a workshop on the twenty-sixth to pull that together. The last two items I have, one is on the meeting Thursday with the county commissioners. I
didn’t hear any discussion or consideration as far as open space, park space. We are park deficient right now. These developments that want to come into our impact area, where are those
people going to go? The county is not in the parks business, as my understanding. I just raise those as questions. I don’t know if they have any validity or not. The last item I have
is, there is a public hearing coming up on the seventeenth of this month and I know that Council member De Weerd will not be at that meeting. Staff feels like it is important that she
be there. I don’t know if there’s anything that can be done to postpone that specific hearing or not.
Corrie: Which one is that?
Kuntz: On Cedar Springs. Thank you.
Bird: Okay, Mr. Smith, do you have anything?
Smith: No, I don’t Mr. President.
Bird: How about Mr. Watson? You don’t have anything? Shari, Chief, Chief Bowers. You learned from Ron
Bowers: President Bird, Mayor Corrie and City Council members. I have the study back from Emergency Service Consulting Group, Joe Perritt. Also, we’ve got the information back from our
Idaho survey and a rating from Doug Young. I know we don’t have a lot of nights. Possibly, I would think it would maybe take a couple of hours possibly to do that. I don’t know if we
could do that on a rural commissioner’s meeting night or if you’d rather have it here at City Hall. I just put that out –
Anderson: When are they meeting on it?
Bowers: -- They will meet next month, the second Wednesday of the month.
Bird: Yeah, won’t that get us both together.
Bowers: Ninth or tenth, I’m not sure.
Corrie: Do you have it down at the fire station?
Bowers: Yes.
De Weerd: The second Wednesday is the ninth.
Bird: Yeah.
Anderson: They’re having one on May sixteenth, it’s their next one.
Bowers: May sixteenth.
Bird: Why couldn’t we do that then?
Anderson: and April –
Bowers: Thursday night, I think, Ron.
Anderson: April what?
Bird: Twelfth.
Anderson: Oh, there it is. It’s the twelfth. So it’s this Thursday.
Bowers: It would have to be next month if we decide to do it.
Bird: I would just as soon, when you guys meet, just come down and listen too.
Corrie: You going to do it on the sixteenth, are you?
Bowman: I couldn’t get that consultant in here by the twelfth.
Bird: Oh, no, no. The sixteenth you can?
Bowman: Yeah.
Corrie: We can all go down there –
Bowers: Ok. I will mention it to President Mike Ingraham and see if we can put it on the agenda for that night and get back with you guys. I’ll find out for sure what night it is because
it has been changed a few nights.
Bowman: That was the latest one they gave us.
Bowers: Ok good.
Bowman: it was on the ninth and now it’s on the sixteenth.
Bowers: Okay. Thank you very much. I appreciate it.
Bird: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Berg, do you have anything?
Berg: Yes, Mr. President, Mayor and Council. Just a couple of follow-ups. The ACHD meeting is the thirtieth, we need to get some items for the agenda. If you can get that to me. Hopefully
in your boxes, you found several things that came out of the AIC Spring workshop yesterday. Planning and Zoning Budget manual, legislative updates, and also there is this presentation
growth management that was put on by Jerry Mason that was very good. I’d maybe just encourage you look through that before the Ada County Commissioner’s meeting Thursday. It points out
and emphasizes what good planning really is. Maybe we can stress that that’s what the cities are here to do. That’s it, thanks.
Bird: Mr. Nichols
Nichols: Nothing
Bird: Can you believe that from an attorney? Would anybody have anything? I’d entertain a motion to adjourn.
De Weerd: So moved.
Bird: We get a second?
McCandless: Second.
Bird: Any discussion?
Corrie: I’ve a little discussion.
Bird: Okay.
Corrie: Am I allowed to make a motion whenever I’m not running the meeting?
Bird: Sure you are.
Corrie: Never mind we’ll take it up later.
Bird: All in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:59 PM
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVED:
ROBERT D. CORRIE, MAYOR
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK