Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001 11-07Meridian City Council Meeting November 7, 2001 The regularly scheduled meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:30 P.M. on Wednesday November 7, 2001 by Mayor Robert Corrie. Members Present: Robert Corrie, Cherie McCandless, Ron Anderson, and Keith Bird. Members Absent: Tammy de Weerd Others Present: Bill Nichols and Will Berg. Item 1. Roll-call Attendance: O Tammy de Weerd X Ron Anderson X Cherie McCandless X Keith Bird X Mayor Robert Corrie Corrie: -- City Council meeting for November 7, 2001 at 6:30 P.M. Roll call attendance Mr. Clerk. Item 2. Adoption of the Agenda: Corrie: The second item is the adoption of the agenda. Council, we have a request by the, on item C by Mr. Morrow to, if we would table his order granting appeal to 12-4-01. Then we’ve also, the Podiatry Building, the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law, the request was made by Podiatry to table that until the next meeting on the 11-20-01. Then item No. 13, which was discussion of Cherry Lane No. 7 is not on the agenda. That was there by mistake. Well, it's 12 but there’s 2 nines in there. Anderson: Oh, okay. Corrie: So, we made it 13. Anderson: There is no Cherry Lane? Corrie: There is no Cherry Lane, the Lakes at Cherry Lane No.7, scratch that one. (inaudible discussion amongst Council) Corrie: On Staten Park, on item No. 9, that has been requested to table until December 4th as well. That will be tabled when that comes up for No. 9 on the hearing. There was one other request by Dakota Company that they would request that this item be pulled from the November 7th agenda and move it to the following Council meeting in order that it can be heard by the entire City Council. All these would take a motion to do so. So, I guess before we can get the consent agenda we need to – Bird: Approve the adoption. Corrie: Approve the adoption. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would move that we adopt the agenda as stated. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion been made and second to adopt the agenda as stated. Any further discussions? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Item 3. Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of October 9, 2001 City Council Workshop: B. Approve Minutes of October 16, 2001 City Council Regular Meeting: C. Tabled from October 2, 2001: Order Granting Appeal: AP 01-00 Stop Work Order at 2340 West Franklin Road by Walt Morrow: D. Tabled from October 16, 2001: Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 01-024 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a storage unit on 9.79 acres with one office/commercial pad for Franklin Mini Storage by Ron Osborne – 1975 East Franklin Road: E. Tabled from October 16, 2001: Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 01-010 Request for annexation and zoning from R1 to C-G zones for Podiatry Building by Smith Brighton, LLC – 1065 East Fairview Avenue: F. Attorney to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial: CUP 01-026 Request for Conditional Use Permit for the addition of a Drive-up window and Drive-Thru lane in a C-G zone for Moxie Java by Avest Limited Partnership c/o Dakota Company – North Locust Grove Road and East Loop Lane: G. Meridian School Resource Officer Agreement between Joint School District No. 2 and City of Meridian: H. Mutual Aid Agreement between US Bureau of Land Management, USDA Forest Service-Boise National Forest, Idaho Department of Lands, Ada County Emergency Medical Services, Boise Fire Department, Caldwell Fire Department, Eagle Fire District, Kuna Fire District, Middleton Fire District, North Ada County Fire and Rescue District, Star Fire District, Whitney Fire District and Meridian City Fire/Rural District: I. Addendum to Development Agreement for Bear Creek: J. Street Light Agreement with Bear Creek, LLC for Bear Creek Subdivision: K. Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement Agreement with St. Luke’s Regional Medical Center, LTD for Touchmark Living Center Project: L. Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement Agreement with Touchmark of Treasure Valley, LLC for Touchmark Living Center Project: M. Beer License location transfer for The Cigarette Store: N. Development Agreement: AZ 01-003 Request for annexation and zoning of 371.42 acres from RUT to R-4 and C-G zones for a planned development consisting of residential, office and commercial uses for proposed Bridgetower Crossing Subdivision by Primeland Development Company – 2420 Ustick Road: O. Approve Bills: Corrie: Okay. On the consent agenda, you have --. Okay, Mr. Bird. Bird: Mr. Mayor. I would move on the consent agenda that we pull item C, the appeal by Walt Morrow to December 4, 2001 and that we pull the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for approval for Smith Brighton to November 20, 2001. I would move that we table item F, the Moxie Java by Dakota Company to 11-20-01. With that I would make a motion we accept the consent agenda. Corrie: Okay, is there a second to that? Okay, hearing no second, motion dies. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I would make a motion then to approve the consent agenda with the exception of item C, being tabled to 12-4, item E being tabled to 11-20, and the rest of the consent agenda to stay as written. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion been made and second to approve the consent agenda removing item C until 12-4-01 and item E to be tabled until 11-20-01 and the consent agenda approved as corrected. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion --. No. Lets have a roll call vote. Roll-Call: Bird, naye; De Weerd, absent; McCandless, aye; Anderson, aye. MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYE, ONE NAYE, ONE ABSENT Item 4. Department Reports: A. Public Work’s Department – Gary Smith: 1. City of Meridian Transportation Task Force Committee: Corrie: department reports, Gary. Smith: Thank you Mr. Mayor, Council Members. The first item on the agenda is our Transportation Task Force Committee report. I submitted to you a copy of the committee’s report along with a copy of response from the highway district on the various questions that the committee had during the time that the committee did meet to discuss our transportation projects. One of the things that the highway district submitted to us was a summary of the impact fees that were collected along with the expenditures where the fees have been used. I don’t know if this was sufficient information. I know Councilman Bird raised the question several times about getting a complete report on this fund and the monies that have been collected and spent. The main impact this evening, or the main request this evening would be for you to act on the priority listing that the Transportation Task Force committee prepared. COMPASS is in need of a decision by Council on this priority list so that they can in turn present that to ITD and ACHD for their work programs. They need to have that information no later than November 15th. The signalization project which we have shown as priority No. 1, the last time I talked to the highway department district, the coordinator down there for the project told me that it should be out of their plan, specification and estimate section by January 1st, there about. That means that it would be going to bid for construction at that time. So, we probably wont see any construction actually being taking place until the first part of February would be my guess at the earliest. The project includes not only the signal at the eastbound off ramp at Kuna Meridian Road but it also includes pavement replacement from Overland Road north to the off ramp, the westbound off ramp and through that intersection for that signal. So, it's a roadway improvement project as well as a signalization. Corrie: Gary, not to interrupt you, I guess I am. Smith: That’s fine. Corrie: Is the one, the priority list that we’re doing now, that you gave us on --? Smith: That tabular listing Mayor was a listing of the projects that we have had that we have presented to COMPASS and APA before COMPASS over the last, I think 6 or 7 years. It was just a tabulation to show you what projects have been on the priority list and how they have been prioritized. To give you some idea of how it's moved up and down. I did not compare the dates that the highway district had established for the projects so that you could see how those have moved, but they have. Over the years, they’ve slipped generally back and not ahead. Corrie: So, this 2001 column, is this what it is now? Smith: Yes, that’s the recommendation from the committee for this year. Yes sir. Corrie: I’m sorry to interrupt you. Smith: That’s fine. I appreciate the question. The other thing that I wanted to talk you about tonight is the enhancement program. That is item No. 16 on the list, the interchange beautification. Brad Hawkins-Clark from Planning and Zoning department has had some conversations with the City of Caldwell concerning an application that they had submitted and for which they were ultimately funded for some beautification work on, I think it's called Centennial Boulevard, I believe that comes off the interstates. It's the northerly most interchange at Caldwell. It comes back into town. They had a $516,000 project that was funded through this program. It's not a grant. I think it's about 80-20. 80 percent federal state funds and 20 percent local match. It does require the City to front the cost for the project and then they are reimbursed on those percentages. It's not something that we need to act on, or that I need your action on tonight but it. It's a program that takes several years to develop. I believe Brad said that the earliest that the project would be under construction if the application was approved would be 2005. So, it takes 4 years for it to develop. Part of the application process is to present a plan, a concept plan bid of what we want to do. Brad has talked to Tom Kuntz in the parks department, obviously that's a key person that needs to be involved in this because they do require an agreement that the City would be responsible for maintenance of the project of whatever is installed there for beautification. So, we’ve got some on-going expense that would have to be committed to by the City as well as the initial construction expense. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: On the maintenance of that, how many acres is there? Smith: I don’t know. I’m not sure. Bird: Gary, and on the maintenance of it then is the enterprise fund going to pay for it? Smith: Not the enterprise fund, no sir. It would be a parks general fund project. In effect it's a parks project. It would be similar to our entrance on East First by the speedway for example. I mean, that’s all taken care of by the parks department. It's an entrance beautification project is what it is. Like I say, it's nothing that has to be decided tonight but it has been on the prioritized list by the committee for a number of years. It's a pretty competitive program according to Brad because he sits on the selection committee. I think he said there were only 3 projects selected each year. Generally, they have 10 to 12 to 15 projects that are submitted for consideration. As usual on federal projects there will be a lot of hoops to jump through. A lot of things that need to be done that will incur expense that will be costly. That’s just part of dealing with the federal aide projects. Corrie: Does this include the Eagle interchange? Smith: Well, it would include whatever the City would want it to include. Yes, sir. You might want to pick one or the other. It probably wouldn’t serve us well by going in with both of them on one application. It would just be too big of a project. You’d really have to just deal with perhaps a landscape architect. Tom may even have some knowledge as far as cost, what things cost as to what we could do for a certain number of dollars. Again, it's 20 percent of it would end up being City cost plus the maintenance. Brad Hawkins-Clark is going to talk to Gordon Law, who is the city engineer in Caldwell and get a little more detail as to how things went on it. I know we’ve had some real concern about another pathway project using the CMAQ funds. I don’t think that we would do it. Corrie: Probably not. Smith: I know Tom wouldn’t. I know the City of Kuna is not going to and I believe Garden City is of the same attitude. There’s just so much peripheral work that has to be done that really doesn’t benefit the project from the federal requirements. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Isn’t item No. 8 the Franklin fire station, this is probably for Chief Bowers, that looks like they’re putting in the permanent. That isn’t going to be temporary. That looks like it's the permanent setup. Those lights that are going in out there. They’re putting them in every place where Terri told us was going to be permanent and it looks like a permanent setup to me. Bowers: Mayor Corrie, City Council Members, Councilman Bird. What they told me was that they would come in and tear those out when they got ready to do the widening of the road. They will put up permanent lights at that time. Bird: Those are temporaries? Bowers: What they keep saying is they’re going to have to come farther into our property to the north, take a little bit of our north. They’re moving the road over to the north I guess, farther. That’s what they’ve told me is they are just temporary. Bird: Holy Toledo. (inaudible discussion amongst Council) Corrie: Are we paying for those temporary ones? Bird: No. We’re not paying for them. Bowers: I don’t think so. Bird: Go ahead. Bowers: It says in here 35,000. Anderson: It says in here 35,000 but I thought they agreed to waive that. Bird: We’re not paying anything. Corrie: They did. I remember that. Bird: But, you’ve got to be kidding me. They went to a lot of work for just temporary. The layout looked just exactly what Terry showed us the permanent ones were going to be. (inaudible discussion amongst Council) Bowers: Mayor Corrie and Keith Bird. Bird: Yes. Bowers: Councilman, the one probably possibly on the south side might be in the right positions. Then still, they’ve got to come through that sidewalk. They’ve got to put all that sidewalk through there. So, I don’t know. It looks like to me they’re going to have to take it all out. Bird: That looks like a lot of wasted expense when you know where you’ve got to be. The one at R-Tech --. The one they’ve got next to R-Tech looks like that shows where they were going to put that one. Kenny you might be right but boy, that looks like a lot of wasted money. Bowers: If they have to bring the road to the north, then they would have to be pulled out. Thank you for keeping on them Keith Bird. I appreciate that. You did a good job for us on those lights. Thank you. Bird: I think it was all of us. Corrie: Any other comments, Gary? Smith: No sir, I don’t have any. Corrie: Council, any questions? Bird: We have to approve this, Mayor to go to COMPASS? Corrie: Yes. That’s their request to go to COMPASS by November. (inaudible discussion amongst Council) Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: If there's no more discussion, I would move that we approve the priority rating by the committee dated 10-23-2001, the top 16 items. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Motion been made and second to move to give the COMPASS board the Meridian Transportation Task Force Committee’s recommendation of items 1 through 16 on the sheet dated 10-23-2001. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT 2. Grit Basin, UV Disinfection and Effluent Disposal Project – Addendum No. 1 to Agreement for Professional Services: Smith: Thank you Mayor. Thank you Council. I’ll have Brad Watson give you the run down on this next one, please. Corrie: Okay. Watson: Thank you Mayor and Council. Item 2 under department reports for Public Works is just a professional services addendum to the original agreement for the Grit Basin, UV Disinfection and Affluent Disposal Project at the Wastewater Plant. Some time ago, you approved a contract with Carrillo Engineers to do a study on the non-potable water system at the plant. That’s been finalized and approved by John Shawcroft and myself. We’re going to implement the recommendations in that study into this next project that Keller Associates is actually designing. We would request that --. This is kind of a long request, I guess. You can read it for yourself. If there's any questions I’d be happy to answer those. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Brad this should take care of the complete contract then at that time? Do you foresee any other addendums coming up that’s going to require additions to the contract? Watson: Mayor, Council Members, Councilman Bird. We thought that this was, we would actually save money rather than having Carrillo go through the process of developing their own specifications and drawings that we would just wrap those recommendations into Keller’s project that they’re already working on. This is the only thing that we have in the works in the immediate future as far as construction at the wastewater plant. The total design addition fee --. The total addition to the design fee would be $9,000 lump sum. Then 3600 for construction administration and some other additional services on a not to exceed time and material basis. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I’d make a motion then that we accept addendum No. 1 to the agreement for the wastewater treatment plant Grit Basin for UV and affluent Disposal project to include non-potable water system improvements to Keller and Associates in the added lump sum amount of 9,000 for design and an added time and material basis not to exceed $3600 for an additional services listed and described in the agreement addendum No. 1 and authorize the Mayor to sign and Clerk to attest. Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion been made and seconded to the agreement on amendment No. 1. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Corrie: I’m going to stop here if I might and offer a couple of congratulations on the elections last night. Our own Keith Bird was re-elected for another 4 years on City Council. My congratulations to you Keith. Bird: Thank you Mayor. Corrie: Does the Council have anything they would like to say? Or just dittos? McCandless: Yes, ditto. Anderson: Congratulations. It wasn’t even a close race. I think that reflects well of your leadership role as the Council President. I wish you luck in the next 4 years. Bird: Thank you Ron. I appreciate it. Mr. Mayor, could I --. Corrie: No, you go right ahead. Bird: I appreciate it and I want to thank everybody that helped and all the support I had. I’ve enjoyed the 4 years that we’ve had here. I’m going to miss one guy that decided not to re-run. We’ll get him back after he retires from Fire Chief. We’ll get him back up here. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. One other announcement, I want to say, congratulations to Frank Thomason for getting the Man of the Year award at the Chamber dinner last Saturday. Congratulations, Frank. Item 6. Resolution No. : Representatives and Alternates for the City of Meridian on the Regional Public Transportation Authority (VIATRAN): Corrie: Okay. Item No. 6 is a Resolution No. 01-371. this is a representatives alternatives for the City of Meridian on the Regional Public Transportation Authority VIATRAN. Mr. Clerk, if you read that resolution by title at this time. Berg: Thank you Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. Resolution No. 01-371. a resolution of the City of Meridian Idaho authorizing the Mayor to represent the City of Meridian on the Regional Public Transportation Authority VITRAN and authorizing the Public Works Director Gary Smith to be an ex-officio member and Brad Hawkins-Clark and David Zaremba shall be appointed as alternates of that authority on behalf of the City of Meridian. Corrie: Okay. Nichols: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Point of privilege, we made a mistake in the title. Mr. Smith would be a regular member rather than an ex-officio member. I will prepare a revised title page for that resolution. The body of the resolution does correctly reflect his status. Corrie: Okay. Bird: He would just be a member wouldn’t he? A regular member like you would be Mayor? Corrie: Yes. Bird: That’s what I understood. Corrie: We have 2 seats now. Bird: Yes. The other 2 would be the alternates when one of you can’t make it? Corrie: Right. Bird: Okay. Corrie: Okay, I’ll entertain a motion on Resolution 01-371. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I would make a motion to approve Resolution No 01-371 appointing representatives and alternates for the City of Meridian to the Regional Public Transportation Authority, VIATRAN. Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion been made and second. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Item 7. Ordinance No. : AZ 01-003 Request for annexation and zoning of 371.42 acres from RUT to R-4 and C-G zones for a planned development consisting of residential, office and commercial uses for proposed Bridgetower Crossing Subdivision by Primeland Development Company – 2420 Ustick Road: Corrie: Okay. Item No. 7 is Ordinance No. 01-930, a request for annexation and zoning of Bridgetower Crossing Subdivision by Primeland Development Company. So, if the Clerk would read Ordinance No. 01-930 by title only please. Berg: Thank you Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. Ordinance No. 01-930. an ordinance finding that certain land to be known as Bridgetower Crossing Subdivision, the location of which lies contiguous or adjacent to the city limits of the City of Meridian, County of Ada, State of Idaho and finding that the owner has made a request for annexation in writing to the Council and that said land be annexed to the City of Meridian and zoning designated low density residential district, R-4, and general retail and service commercial district, C-G, and declaring that said land by proper legal description as described below be a part of the City of Meridian, County of Ada, State of Idaho, repealing all ordinances, resolutions, orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith and directing the City Engineer to add said property to the official maps of the City of Meridian, Idaho and directing the Clerk of the City of Meridian to file a certified copy of the ordinance and map of the areas to be annexed with the Ada County Recorder, Auditor, Treasurer, and Assessor and the State Tax Commission of the State of Idaho pursuant to Idaho code section 50-223 and section 63-2215. Corrie: Okay. You’ve heard the reading of Ordinance No. 01-930. Is there anyone from the audience that would like to have the ordinance read in its entirety? Okay, I will entertain a motion on Ordinance No. 01-930. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would move that we approve Ordinance 01-930 and for the attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Motion been made and second to approve Ordinance No. 01-930. Bird: No, we don’t say second. We don’t need that. Corrie: I was just going to say the suspension of the rules – Bird: With the suspension of rules. No Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law. Corrie: What I was hearing and what I was going to say would be – Bird: Good, you say it right. Corrie: We’ve got to correct you. I can’t make the motion. Okay. Motion been made and seconded to approve Ordinance No. 01-930 with the suspension of rules. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll call vote Mr. Clerk. Roll-Call: Bird, aye; De Weerd, absent; McCandless, aye; Anderson, aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Item 8. Continued Public Hearing from October 16, 2001: CUP 01-021 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a dual restaurant with drive-thru in a C-G zone for Kentucky Fried Chicken/A&W by G & H Enterprises II – 677 East First Street: Corrie: Item No. 8 is a continued public hearing from August 16th on CUP No. 01-021, this is a request for a conditional use permit for a dual restaurant and drive through in a C-G zone for Kentucky Fried Chicken and A&W by G&H Enterprises II, 677 East First Street. I will continue the public hearing and have staff comments at this time. Good-bye Becky. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council. We have received a revised plan on the Kentucky Fried Chicken A&W. it does show, --. It's a little hard to see on this. But it does show there was an error apparently on the last drawing that did not change the plan. They had the right of way, the centerline of Meridian Road in the wrong place. So, they do have 40 feet there. I did talk to Mr. Gibb yesterday. I expressed a little concern about the landscaping down here because of the fact that traffic will be going this way and also the lights will be shining into people’s eyes this way. He has agreed to work with us and make sure that’s not going to cause a problem here. If he needs to put up additional landscaping, he will. We would recommend approval with all staff and agency conditions. Corrie: This is a continued public hearing. Is there any other testimony at this time? Okay. Council, questions? Bird: Does the owner have any problems with it? Corrie: The owner, do you have any --? Bird: The new date on the site is 10-29-01, or 10-28-01? Is that the right one? Stiles: Yes. Corrie: That’s the one (inaudible). Bird: That’s the one we’re basing it off from right? Stiles: Yes. Bird: Okay. No more questions, Mr. Mayor? I would move we close the public hearing. Corrie: Okay. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made and second to close the public hearing on CUP 021. any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Corrie: Any further discussion from Council? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Hearing none, I’ll entertain a motion on the request for a CUP. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I would make a motion that we have the City Attorney draw up the appropriate Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law approving a CUP No. 01-021, request for a Conditional Use Permit for a dual restaurant with a drive-thru in a C-G zone for Kentucky Fried Chicken and A&W by G&H Enterprises II at 677 East First Street. Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion is made an seconded to approve the CUP 021 and to direct the attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law with approval. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll call vote Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: Bird, aye; De Weerd, absent; McCandless, aye; Anderson, aye. Item 9. Tabled from October 2, 2001: FP 01-015 Request for Final Plat approval of 23 building lots and 5 other lots on 8.15 acres in an R-4 zone for Staten Park Subdivision by D’Alessio Building Development – south of West Ustick Road and North Black Cat Road: Corrie: Item No. 9 is a tabled item from October 2nd for a final plat 01-015. There's been a request to table this request by the developer until December 4, 2001. So, if we have any other approvals of the Council, I’ll entertain a motion to that affect. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we table item FP 01-015 the request for Final Plat of 23 building lots and 5 other lots on 8.15 acres in an R-4 zone by Staten Park Subdivision until December 4, 2001. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion been made and second to request item No. 9 the Final Plat 01-015 be tabled until December 4, 2001. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Item 10. FP 01-018 Request for Final Plat approval of 57 building lots and 3 other lots on 17.66 acres in an R-4 zone for Turtle Creek Subdivision No. 3 by Turtle Creek, LLC – east of Linder Road and south of Ustick Road: Corrie: Item No. 10 is a request for Final Plat approval of 57 building lots and 3 other lots on 17.66 acres in an R-4 zone for Turtle Creek Subdivision 3 by Turtle Creek LLC, east of Linder Road and south of Ustick Road. Staff, comments? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council. This Final Plat is, or the Preliminary Plat is no null and void. The time has expired for them to submit the Final Plat. So, they have submitted a variance for exceeding the time requirements. This is the area out off Linder Road. As you remember, the big communications tower exists in this area here. They’re platting all around it. I would ask that you would continue the, or table this until December 4, 2001. Corrie: Any comments form Council? Bird: I have none. Corrie: I’ll entertain a motion on the request by the Planning and Zoning Director to table. Bird: MR. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would move that we table FP 01-018, the request for a Final Plat approval of 57 building lots and 3 other lots on 17.66 acres in an R-4 for Turtle Creek Subdivision No. 3 by Turtle Creek LLC, east of Linder Road and south of Ustick Road until December 4, 2001. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made and second to table the Final Plat 01-018 until 12-4-01. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Item 11. Canvassing the votes for the General and Special City Elections on November 6, 2001: Corrie: Do you want to hear No. 11 canvas the votes and then we can quite? Bird: I would appreciate that myself. Item 12. Discussion of Pathway in The Lakes at Cherry Lane No. 9: Corrie: Okay. Lets discuss the pathway at the Lakes of Cherry Lane No. 9. I believe the attorney has some questions on that. That was requested by – Nichols: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Yes? Nichols: Mr. Bradbury’s out in the foyer. We can go get him. Or you could take up No. 11. Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. Just to let you know what the --. I think you have Mr. Bradbury’s letter dated October 29,2001 regarding the pathway in The Lakes at Cherry Lane No. 9. it was a condition of approval for that subdivision that a pathway be constructed along the Eight Mile Lateral. The applicant, developer has furnished a letter of credit, which either was about to expire or did expire. Then they furnished another one to guarantee the construction costs of the pathway. But, as you might expect, Nampa Meridian is not too thrilled about any kind of pathway along a lateral. The applicant is asking for some relief. He can tell you what that relief that they seek and we have some possible alternatives before we get to that point, I think. Mr. Bradbury is prepared to address the Council. Bradbury: Thank you Mr. Mayor and Members of the Council. I appreciate your taking the time to hear us on this issue. I apologize, I was out and you guys got through your business a lot faster than I thought you would. Good job. As Mr. Nichols has indicated, Steiner Development has ran into a little bit of a snag, which was not an unpredictable or unpredicted snag in getting a pathway constructed in the Lakes at Cherry Lane No. 9 Subdivision. Unfortunately all of the contacts that have been made by Steiner’s representatives at Briggs Engineering have been rebuffed by the irrigation district with essentially the comment that a pathway is unacceptable. There's been little, if --. Well, I guess I’d have to say there's been no indication that the irrigation district would consider anything else. It's essentially been, you know the answer is no and what part of no don’t you guys understand? Steiner’s kind of caught in kind of a tough spot. Some of the options that are perhaps available to Steiner are to build the pathway anyway and see what the irrigation district does about it. In other words, invite them to sue, which of course is not a very attractive alternative. Another alternative is to sue the irrigation district and try to get a court to grant some sort of relief or some sort of judgment on behalf of Steiner saying yes, Steiner Development can construct that pathway. But, again, that’s another lawsuit. Of course, Steiner Development is in the business of developing subdivisions not in the business of engaging in litigation. I’m just not sure that the City --. I don’t think the City necessarily wants to send Steiner Development off to battle a lawsuit. Steiner Development is not opposed to building the pathway. I’ve been authorized to tell you folks that Steiner Development will deliver a check made payable to the City this week in the amount of the construction costs for that pathway and let the City build it, if the City really wants to do that thing. They’re not trying to avoid building the pathway. They’re trying to avoid getting into a lawsuit. I guess the crux of it all is then that we need some guidance from you. Steiner Development needs some guidance from you as to what you would like to see Steiner Development do. Whether or not you would be interested in or are inclined to participate with Steiner Development in working with the irrigation district to try to resolve this thing or just what you all would like to try to do. One of the things that has transpired over the course of the last couple of months while we’ve been talking about this is that the irrigation district has apparently directed a letter to the City indicating that it believes, the irrigation district believes that the master pathway agreement the City entered into about a year ago applies to this thing, to this proposed pathway and as a result, the irrigation district concludes that the City should be involved in this process and should be attempting to obtain the approval from the irrigation district, which is fine. I don’t know what you all think about it. I’ve had some conversations with Mr. Nichols about it. That, of course suggests that maybe the City needs to be involved. I don’t know. Another question that comes up, and it kind of tags onto this issue of whether it's, whether this pathway falls under the master pathway agreement is whether this pathway is suppose to be a public pathway or a private pathway. It's a good question because I don’t know. I read the condition of approval and it doesn’t say. I think Steiner Development understood that this was going to be on private property, you know a common lot owned by the homeowner’s association and constructed with private funds. But, I don’t know that Steiner Development understood and they’ve said to me, I’m not sure what the City’s expectations were with respect to whether that was going to be a pathway open to the public or a pathway that would be a private pathway to be used only by the homeowners in the subdivision. We don’t know. We’re perhaps looking for some guidance from you in that respect. If it was intended to be open to the public, that might suggest that this master pathway agreement does have something, does apply to this thing. If it was intended to be private, well, then maybe not. If it was intended to be a private pathway, we’re kind of questioning the utility of this thing. It's about 1,000 feet long that goes essentially from a roadway and dead-ends at the end of Steiner Development’s property. Then we begin to wonder what really utility there is for this pathway. That’s really kind of what we’re after. We’re hoping to get some guidance from you guys. Get the benefit of your thoughts. Let us know how you would like for us to proceed. In the mean time, of course Steiner Development would like to be able to continue to sell lots and have those people who buy those lots pull building permits. When they complete the construction of their homes, get certificates of occupancy from them. Steiner has recently posted a new letter of credit in the amount of $19,000 in order to secure its financial obligation. Steiner is certainly hopeful that having done that, the City will permit building permits and certificates of occupancy to be issued. With that, I would be pleased to respond to any questions you may have, or however you want to proceed. We’re somewhere at your mercy here I think. Corrie: Go ahead, Bill. You may answer my question by your comment. Nichols: Thank you Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. Mr. Bradbury, a couple of things that historically you need to know that have happened since this project was initially approved. First of all, the City does have a master pathway agreement, which has been entered into with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District, which has --. It's quite detailed. The other thing that you need to know is about a month and a half after this February 1st letter that the irrigation district sent to Briggs Engineering that’s referenced in your packet, the Idaho Supreme Court decided a case against Nampa Meridian Irrigation District on the issue of some landscaping improvements and I think it was a sidewalk along the Finch Lateral off Fairview Avenue. A bank, I believe it was Washington --. It was either Washington Federal or Washington Mutual. I can’t remember which one. Washington Bank essentially wanted to put the stuff in and they did. The irrigation district took them to court and lost. One of the arguments that the irrigation raised at both the district court level and in the Supreme Court level was whether the district could use safety as a reason to deny the owner of the property the ability to put in a pathway or another improvement along the lateral. The court found that since there was nothing in the easement that the irrigation district had for the lateral, nothing in that easement that referenced safety, that safety was not an issue to be considered. They didn’t really go into whether it's safe to have a pathway along a lateral or any of those issues. They basically said it wasn’t in your agreement, therefore it's not an issue and we’re not going to consider it. The improvements that the bank put in were allowed to stay in. there were also other issues that were raised with regard to maintenance of the lateral and how they were to maintain it and so forth. The evidence in the case was that once every so many years, they ran a pickup along side and burned weeds, I think was about what they did with that. You have a case that stands for the proposition that safety is not an issue. The agreement – *** End of Side One *** Nichols: -- do with the irrigation district says that it will apply to public pathways, or pathways available for public use. It also has some things in it such as we give the irrigation district plans, advance notice of it, opportunity to comment on the plans, and they have the ability to object if the pathway creates an unreasonable risk of harm. That’s not defined. Unreasonable risk of harm is not defined. What we’re looking at --. I guess what I’m coming down to is we have not required Steiner to this point, to address Nampa Meridian in light of this lawsuit that they lost. We have not required them to approach Nampa Meridian with the idea that perhaps the master pathway agreement does apply and therefore all the hoops that are in there have to be jumped through. My recommendation to the Council is that it's a bit premature to completely remove the pathway from the project. Instead, the City and the developer can go to Nampa Meridian to see, I guess to push back if you will. The knee-jerk letter that came back that said this is a violation to the master pathway agreement end of story. Well the master pathway agreement doesn’t give them veto authority over the pathway. It does require us to cooperate with them with regard to the installation of pathways. I think if you --. If the pathway was intended to be something that could be used by the public, then the pathway agreement would apply. There are certain steps that have to be gone through to get to that point. Now, if Nampa Meridian says thank you very much, your pathway is fine, except we don’t want any pathway by a live lateral, for all I know the answer is that the pathway is only open to the public when there's no water in the ditch. In some of those different issues --. I think we need to take a run at this thing in light of the fact that frankly they got spanked on that case. All of this time, they’ve been raising the safety issue and raising the safety issue and it had never been decided by a higher court. But, for that master pathway agreement, safety would not be an issue period because of that case. It's something to be considered. I don’t want to make light of the fact that you’ve got to be careful around live water. From a legal standpoint, absent the master pathway agreement, safety would really not be an issue other than they throw their weight around and try to intimidate developers and municipalities and others into not doing these things. Corrie: I don’t see how they can do anything else but say safety if there's water in it. If there's not water in it --. I’m no attorney. Okay. Any discussion from the Council? Bird: Mr. Mayor Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I think we need to determine something. I agree wholeheartedly with Bill that, lets make a run for it. I’d just as soon that Steiner made the run for it. Is that what you --? With our cooperation, or our backing and stuff. But, let them be the leaders and go out and make the run for it. See how it hangs with the district. Hopefully it will fly right through. I want to keep the pathway but I also want to be able make sure that Steiner can keep selling lots and getting occupancies too. So, I think this is something we need to get progressing right on. I am quite disturbed by this letter that says, after receiving no response from the City after several inquiries. I don’t recall getting any inquiries. I’m a little disturbed at that. The delay that’s been taking care of. It would be my feeling that, to let as Mr. Nichols said lets make a run at it. With the Nampa Irrigation District and I’d like to see Steiner be the lead forward and the City can be backing. McCandless: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Yes Mrs. McCandless? McCandless: I would like to ask Bill a question. Is this a public or private? Bird: It's public. Nichols: Councilwoman McCandless, Mayor, Members of Council. My understanding is it's on private property but I think it was an amenity that most likely would be available to the public. It would be like in the subdivision that I live in, in Nampa, has a pathway that goes along the Wilson drain. There are people that walk that that don’t live in that subdivision but our homeowner’s association maintains the landscaping along that including the asphalt path. There's no ticket taker out there to find out who’s, you know who lives there and who doesn’t. it's open to the public, but it’s essentially a private pathway. I don’t believe the City helped, the City had something to do with help getting it put in place but I don’t believe they do any maintenance on it. McCandless: So, in this case it's not going to be spelled out? Nichols: Well, it's not the City’s pathway, the same way that the Five Mile is. McCandless: Okay. I agree with Councilman Bird. I think we should go ahead with it, cooperate with – Bradbury: I guess I’d like maybe a little more help. I’m convinced that Steiner will pursue, will further pursue approval from Nampa Meridian, if that’s what you ask them to do. The question, I guess it comes back to is this going to be open for public use? In which case the master pathway agreement applies, or not in which it doesn’t apply. I think I’m hearing you say you think that this is intended to be open for public use in which case the master pathway agreement does apply. In which case it suggests that the City has a significant role in pursuing the approval from the irrigation district. Steiner can get the paperwork together, do the designs, and help with the submittals but I think we’ve got to have City involvement in actually making the requests and in helping to negotiate with the irrigation district. In other words, Steiner can be in the game, but I’m not sure that Steiner can be in it alone. It probably needs to be about a --. It's needs to be a cooperative effort between the 2 to pursue the thing. Bird: Steven, I think that is --. That was my feeling is yes, we will be cooperative but you bring up the plans and you get all the stuff together and then we cooperate and go in with you. You bet. As I recall, and Shari might can clear this up, but when that was passed and everything there was never anything said about that being a private pathway. I always assumed that it was going to be open for the public if they wanted to walk in there and walk. Stiles: As far as it being owned by the City, that was never the case. Bird: No. Stiles: Just by virtue of it being there, anybody is going to be walking on it. Bird: We took it as being public. It wasn’t just going to be big gated off and you had to come through a special, you had to be a member and had a key there – Bradbury: I think that’s what Steiner thought too. Bird: I had always thought that it was. That’s the way I took it even though we weren’t going to own it. It was going to be open for the public. I thought that’s the way it was passed. McCandless: Yes, I did too. Corrie: Well, as long as Steiner – Bradbury: I think it was. I think that – Bird: I think that was a condition that --. I think everybody was in agreement with that. Bradbury: I don’t think, the difficulty that that presented now is that since that condition was approved, you all have entered into an agreement with the irrigation district that suggests that now it's the City’s responsibility to pursue those approvals. You read the agreement and it says, City is to do this and City is to do that and City is to do --, to the extent that you want Steiner to be involved and to prepare the documentation and to do that. That’s fine but I think we need to have more than just instructions to Steiner to go on out there and get it done. I think the City has to take – Bird: I would be willing to participate but I don’t think the City should have to draw up the site and put in all that kind of stuff. Steiner should get that all ready. Then, yes, we’ll go to the district with you. Bradbury: Okay. Bird: That’s my thinking. Bradbury: All right. I think we can do that. Nichols: I don’t want to cut you off. Bradbury: No. I was going to move on to the okay, then part. So, if you have something more on that --. Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. I think we can also take the position that if it's not public pathway, then Steiner can jolly well put it in. which then says --. But rather than get into that kind of a fight with you why don’t we work on doing it under the master pathway agreement which gives you a chance to comment, look at your maintenance and so forth. Rather than the Council declare it open to public use, I think I’d ask you to reserve that judgment so that we can make the colorable argument that if it's not one it's the other. If it's the other, the unreasonable risk of safety issue is not even an issue. Bradbury: I hope you understand, and please don’t take this as threat but just as an open – going in with eyes wide open. Is that if Steiner Development is taken court as a result of the condition imposed by the City, I suspect the City is going to be there with us. I don’t know how else to do it. I don’t know how else to be in a position where City says you shall build a path and either Steiner does or doesn’t because the irrigation district says you can’t. then Steiner makes a decision either builds it and sees if it gets sued or doesn’t build it and sues the irrigation district in order to get the approval. I can’t see how we can have that litigation without the City being in it. That’s, again, I’m not suggesting it. I’m doing everything in the world I can to stay out of that battle. That’s why we’re here, to stay away from that battle. I fear that that’s where we go. We’re all going to be in that bucket together I’m afraid. That’s kind of what I --. I just want to make sure everybody’s understanding that the just go build it is probably not the best solution. Let me try it this way. Think about how you all would feel if you said to Steiner Development we don’t want you to do X, whatever it is. Steiner Development says to heck with it, I’m going to go do it. I suspect it would be very irritating to you. She’s remembering something and she’s never forgotten when Steiner Development’s representative Mr. Campbell did exactly that. Shari’s been mad about that, how many years now? For as long as it's been. That’s what I’m trying to avoid. I’m trying to not get into that situation. That’s not the way Steiner Development wants to do business. We don’t want to do it that way. Even though, from time to time in the past, Steiner Development has done things that it probably should not have done. Corrie: I have a question. If we do all this, we go to the Nampa Meridian Irrigation and they say okay you can build a pathway, who builds it? Do you build it? Bradbury: Right. Corrie: Okay. Bradbury: Yes. If Nampa Meridian will approve it, Steiner will build it. There's no question. Corrie: That’s what I thought I was hearing but I – Bradbury: There's never been a question about that. Steiner doesn’t have any problem with building it if it can get approved. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Also, Steiner would still own it. Bradbury: Yes. Actually the homeowner’s association will own it. Bird: The homeowner’s association? Bradbury: That’s right. I wanted to move on to my okay, then that being the case, can we have some assurance from the Council that building permits can be issued while we’re working on this thing and certificates of occupancy can be issued? If the letter of credit expires, in the interim, we’ll give you a new one if you need it. I expect you would want it. But, we sure would like to have assurance that under the circumstances we could continue to pull building permits. Actually, you know Steiner doesn’t build houses. Steiner sells lots. Bird: Yes. Bradbury: Somebody else pulls the building permits. Then once, they build that house, some other person is being, you know an ultimate consumer is the one who’s effected by the certificate of occupancy being held up. That just doesn’t seem right. That seems like very harsh punishment. Bird: (inaudible). As long as you’ve got your letter of credit on, I have no problem with it. I don’t know about the other Council People. Anderson: I’m fine with the issuance with building permits. I guess, what I’m hearing Bill say is that he just doesn’t think the Council ought to take any action tonight specifically and give you some assurances that we will allow the building permits. But then to ask you to partner with the City, or the City partner with you, and try to broach this subject with the irrigation district and try to resolve it satisfactorily. I think is what I was kind of hearing. Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of Council. My opinion is that building permits ought to be issued as long as Steiner is making good faith effort to fulfill the condition of approval. The only condition of approval that hasn’t been met at this point is the installation of the pathway. So, if they’re working with the City, the City with them to try to get Nampa Meridian to approve the pathway, it's not just sat on anybody’s back burner. But, we’re working toward getting it done, they’ve posted the letter of credit, which is the financial surety. They ought to get their building permits and they ought to get their CO’s as long as we’re working toward it. I have every expectation that --. That doesn’t mean, necessarily that we’re saying to Steiner you have to take them to court and all the way to the supreme court in order to be pursuing it with due diligence. You’ve got to make a good faith effort given the circumstances here to continue working toward getting that done. Bird: And within a timely manner. Nichols: Yes, diligently. Like I say, it's not on a back burner. I have every expectation that that’s what will happen. Bird: Do you agree with it? Corrie: I get a little nervous when I have 2 attorneys making agreements that way. I think I can live with that. Bird: I’m glad you said that. I didn’t have to. Bradbury: Why would you feel that way, Mayor? Corrie: I was a little bit confused earlier when you said the attorneys don’t like lawsuits. Bradbury: I should actually say that the best thing that ever happened to me would be if we had a gigantic lawsuit. That’s just me. Corrie: Now (inaudible). Bird: Now we know that you’re telling the truth. Corrie: Yes, we’re comfortable now. I see nothing wrong with that either. I would agree to that. (inaudible discussion amongst Council) Corrie: I think the Council – Anderson: There's no action – Corrie: No action is being taken – Bird: No action but everybody is in agreement. Corrie: -- everybody is in agreement with that. Let the record show that. Bradbury: I appreciate again, you taking the time to address the issue. Corrie: Thank you. Bradbury: We’ll get to work on this thing. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Bird: Thank you Bill. Corrie: Here's an armful of goodies. Bradbury: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Yes? Bradbury: Mr. Arnold from Briggs Engineering. Apparently I had an issue you wanted to raise with you. Arnold: Mayor Corrie, Members of the Council. Steve Arnold, Briggs Engineering. Just one thing to address. I was 2 days away from having this pathway paved. Then it was kind of at the advice of Mr. Bradbury is you’ve done it once. You didn’t get sued. This time you might want to be a little bit smarter about what you’re doing and hold off on it. We can have the pathway, as soon as we get this issue resolved. I’ve got a guy that’s waiting that can go out there and put it in within 2 days. The problem that we’re going to be facing here within the next few weeks is batch plants are going to close. As they were speaking about due diligence going through and getting the issue resolved, there may be a lull that’s 3 or 4 months before we can get in there and actually do the work once we get approval. I’m hoping that the letter of credit will suffice and that we can follow up on it. The other thought that I would like --. I’ve talked with Bill Henson directly and he’s the one that’s telling me, not just no but heck no. I’ve had verbal conversations with him. We’ve not sent a plan in --. I’ve got a plan set that shows where the pathway is to be built and how it is to be built. It's a matter --. I can get that into him tomorrow, but I think because I’ve been told so many times by the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District, no before I send something else to them I think I’d like something from the City, at least a letter of comment facilitating our efforts. Maybe, (inaudible) what happened at our meeting tonight discussing that you’ve directed us directly after hearing this to go work with Nampa Meridian. otherwise, they’ll think not that I’m just an idiot, but I’m stupid too. Corrie: Bill, can you draft me a draft and put it on my email tomorrow? I’ll write the letter and sign it? Nichols: Mr. Mayor and Members of the Council. I would be pleased to ghost write a letter for you. I don’t think I’ll be able to have it done tomorrow. But what we could do is prepare a letter that’s rather carefully worded that, --. I want to preserve Steiner’s argument, that the same facts apply here as applied in that Finch Lateral case. I think what we can do is we can come up with some language for a letter from the Mayor that says, the City has directed Steiner to do X. without foreclosing the argument that was raised in that Washington Bank case. It will take some wordsmithing and not just, we told them to go ahead. So, I would like some time to work on the language for that letter. Corrie: Okay. Arnold: That’s great (inaudible) what I need. Corrie: Ron suggested maybe we ought to have a meeting before we send them a letter. But, we could set it either way you want to do it. As long as I have the verbiage. If I have to go to a meeting with you, at least I’ll know what to say. Anderson: That’s what I meant. It seems to me like other than sending them a letter that may just further agitate the situation is maybe contact them and say, hey the City of Meridian and Steiner’s representatives would like to set up a meeting with you to discuss this issue. Then go talk with them. The letter to me, seems like you’re just going to make the situation worse before you ever get in there. Corrie: We could do it either way. Bird: Either way. Corrie: If you want to do it that way and take Bill. Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. What I had contemplated in mind was Steiner has already gotten 2 letters that said no. The irrigation district, I mean this pathway is on their radar screen. They know that it's there. They know that it's a condition of approval for this subdivision. Who knows what else they know about that part of it. What I had in mind was, the letter would essentially summarize some of the issues and indicate why Steiner is coming back with this or why Steiner is submitting the design for review. We can do that in terms of kind of going down through the language and saying we’d like to set up a meeting. I still think because they’ve already said no twice, there has to be something other than just lets arrange a meeting. It needs to be some kind of frame work. At least in my mind that’s something that we could set up so that they understand that we’re not just coming to the table begging but, that we’ve been doing some homework. Anderson: I would leave it in you guys’ hands because you’re the ones that are going to have to go to the meetings or whatever you think would start the process off on the best foot. I’ll leave that to your judgment. Corrie: We’ve got both shots in there. Bradbury: If you’ll allow, Bill and I ought to be able to work together because I have the same concerns he does. I want to make sure that we’ve postured this thing right so that we don’t foreclose other options too. If we work together we ought to b e able to figure out some way to get the right kind of message across. I think you’re right, Councilman that we probably need to try to get a face to face with those guys. Otherwise it's just paper flying back and forth. It's really easy just to say no. Anderson: At this point, after 2 letters it's like well what part of no didn’t you understand? Bradbury: Exactly. Where we already feel like we are. (inaudible discussion amongst Council) Bird: I think Mayor and the attorneys can work it out. Corrie: Okay, Bill. Item 11. Canvassing the votes for the General and Special City Elections on November 6, 2001: Corrie: Item No. 10. we’re going to canvassing the votes of the general and the special City election on November 6, 2001. Mr. Bird, if you’ve got all the boxes and that. Berg: Sure. Thank you Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. You should have in your packet, the unofficial results. Bird: Yes. Berg: If you don’t have those, we can make you a copy. Corrie: It's on my desk. Berg: Do you have one Bill? Bird: I think I have 2 here. Do you have one Mayor? Berg: Did you not look in your mailbox? Corrie: I have one in my desk. Bird: I think I might have 2 here. Berg: I can present to you the tally books and the poll books from the 4 precincts. I’ll pull those out now and pass them down and you can examine them. Corrie: Which one do you want Keith, this one? Bird: I don’t care. Corrie: Okay. Anderson: I just want to know why you’re the slowest guy to report? (inaudible discussion amongst Council) berg: Just kind of a little bit of information. We had 3,011 ballots cast which I think is the most in any City election so far. It's extremely low compared to the number of registered voters that we have. Bird: What is our registered voter count, Will? Berg: As of October 12, when they closed registration, we had 16,024 registered voters. Bird: We got 2900 to vote? Berg: Well, we had – Bird: 2982? Berg: We had 3,011 ballots cast. Now, what you’re looking at is how many yes and no actual – Bird: Oh, okay. Berg: -- votes which means there were some ballots that were turned in with nothing marked on them. Anderson: I’ve got a question on that. If that’s turned in with nothing marked, then you count that as a no vote on the mill levy? Does it cancel itself out? Berg: It is not counted at all. Bird: Yes but it's counted as a vote. Berg: No, it's not counted at all because --. I clarified this with Ben Usersa, today even. It's an intent to vote. A blank ballot is no intent to vote. So it's not counted as – Anderson: Either way? Berg: -- either a total or a no. it's not counted. That’s why when Councilman Bird mentioned the 2992 as a total yes and no votes. That’s where your percentage came off the yes. Actually it's more of a plus side on the yes votes. Bird: So, we probably had another 25 or 30 that picked up ballots but didn’t vote? Berg: Correct. Bird: Stuck it in their pocket or something? Berg: Yes. They did not vote. They turned in a blank ballot that wasn’t counted a yes or a no. it was counted as a ballot cast but no as a vote. Anderson: It was on 2 separate forms. They weren’t on the same form. They were on separate pieces of paper. Berg: 2 ballots. Anderson: So. Those people just never turned back in their paper? Or did they turn it in -- Berg: Or they turned it in with a blank ballot. They didn’t put an X on either spot. So, it was counted as a returned ballot but it wasn’t counted as a vote. Thus it wasn’t counted against the percentage that we needed. I don’t want to say it was kind of a wasted ballot, but that’s kind of what it was. Anderson: Can’t you shoot them if they don’t give you a ballot when they leave? Berg: We could probably get the trend of the old west and have some armed deputies at the entrance and exit and make sure they the right X in the right box. Corrie: This doesn’t show how they voted. Anderson: What's wrong with this book? Corrie: Yes, what's wrong with this book, I don’t know how they voted. Berg: Just another couple bits of information, -- Bird: This is sick. Berg: In April 27th when we had our other mill levy election we had 13,907 registered voters. So, over those 6 months we had another 2,000, little over 2,000 that registered. Same day registration we registered 369, yesterday. In other words they came in. they weren’t in the poll book. They registered to vote. It's really hard to try to figure out how many people are out there that could have voted but are not registered to get a percentage of what the feeling of the people is. It's probably not a real strong turn out. Never the less, it's not the worst turn out either. Bird; But, it's sickening when you open this page up and there's 26 names and 4 and 5 and even 1 voted off that whole page. (inaudible discussion amongst Council) Berg: There's another scenario too. Some of those people may have moved too and you don’t know it until they re-register. Berg: Yes, but you can’t tell me that 19 or 20 out of 26 people have moved. Berg: I’m not telling you that. I’m just saying that there's a possibility. Some could have deceased too. Bird: Yes. Berg: That’s why they’re trying to keep up current as far as if you don’t vote for a couple of years, you may be taken off the poll book. 802 was the library. You’re in – (inaudible discussion amongst Council) Bird: I have 800. I’m checking to see if you voted. (inaudible discussion amongst Council) Anderson: We were suppose to vote yesterday? Bird: You sound like some of the people (inaudible). What are you talking about? Berg: The other thing, we didn’t have any declared write in candidates but we did get a few names written down. We didn’t count them. Corrie: Does that spoil the whole ballot? Berg: No, you just don’t count that portion of it. They could have voted for a candidate in one portion but the other one they wrote somebody’s name. They just didn’t get counted in that. (inaudible discussion amongst Council) Anderson: If they wrote in a name, that person had to file a write in candidacy, then that – Berg: Correct. The idea behind that law change was to not count all the write in names. It was set up to the you need to declare to be a write in candidate so many days prior to the election. Then you would count those names. Bird: 803 is everything south of the freeway isn’t it? Corrie: Yes. Berg: To be honest with you, they probably had a better percentage turn out than the precinct 801, which was here at City Hall, north and east of Meridian Road. (inaudible discussion amongst Council) berg: As far as just the type of people that voted, we did have a variety. There wasn’t one stream of elderly or a stream of young. We had a very well mixed representation. McCandless: On these ballots, (inaudible). Berg: There's a theory of --. You order a percentage of registered voters, those ballots. Yes you throw them away in 2 years. Yes, you don’t get the response and it's terrible. But, you don’t want to run out of a ballot. You’re hoping for a miracle. Anderson: What does an election like this cost to put on, with paying the polling people and the advertising? Berg: I can get those figures for you probably in about a week, after we pay the people. We budget about 4,000 but its kind of split between 2 budget years because I order supplies and things in September. Then I actually pay of the expenses in the (inaudible). (inaudible discussion amongst Council) Berg: But, for us it's about 4,000 or 4500. Anderson: (inaudible) total cost, advertising, printing and paying people? Berg: Yes. AIC did some surveys too, to determine that. McCandless: Here you are. Corrie: Is mine down there? McCandless: Yes. Bird: Did he vote? McCandless: He voted. Berg: We can get that. A city like Twin Falls has – (inaudible discussion amongst Council) Bird: Good. I’m glad to hear that. Berg: It's very expensive. Corrie: No, I put 2 X’s in there (inaudible). (inaudible discussion amongst Council) Berg: The reason the precincts are designed kind of geographically with ours, we also have to incorporate and not split up any county precincts. (inaudible discussion amongst Council) Bird: Well, when I called Will the first time, Ron Anderson, I think was there with the smart one, I can’t remember. Charlie Rountree, one of the ex-Councilmen were there, wanted me to make sure he was getting the CHADS okay. Was that you Ron? Anderson: No that wasn’t me. McCandless: Yes, I heard that. Bird: Which one was that, Grant or somebody? McCandless: I can’t remember though. Bird: Make sure to tell Will he’s getting the CHADs counted right. McCandless: Then I got home last night it was about 11:00, Tammy called me from Florida. Then she wanted your cell phone number. I says I don’t have it. Bird: She got a hold of me. McCandless: Yes, I gave her the – Bird: 1:00 I was talking to her. Anderson: She’s down there in Florida, the election specialty state. (inaudible discussion amongst Council) Anderson: Trying to count our ballots from down there. Corrie: Do we have any special forum that we need to say? Bird: Vote on or anything? Corrie: How do we do that? That the canvassing was done and the – Berg: I have the unofficial results. I guess you could approve that as the official. Corrie: As these right here? (inaudible discussion amongst Council) Bird: The last time we had to list the votes for each candidate, didn’t we? Berg: When Gigray was here, we had some document that he created that we approved. Bird: Yes, Bill, -- Berg: That was the first time that we’d ever done that. I looked back in the records and we usually just approved the tally sheet that we printed up. Corrie: He’s adding a lot of things and he’s taking a lot of things off. So, I don’t know where we are for sure. As far as this, we just need to approve the results of the City of Meridian general election on November 6, 2001 as stated in the unofficial list and hereby make it official? (inaudible discussion amongst Council) Corrie: Okay. Berg: The last yes and no one that we did it on. Bird: So moved to that motion. Corrie: Okay. Do I hear a second? Anderson: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion made and seconded to officially approve the results of City of Meridian general election on November 6, 2001 as stated. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Corrie: Mr. Clerk, you now have the official – (inaudible discussion amongst Council) Corrie: With that, I will entertain a motion to close at 8:00. McCandless: So moved. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made and second to close the meeting at 8:00. all those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:00 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: / / ROBERT D. CORRIE, MAYOR DATE APPROVED ATTESTED: WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK