HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001 09-11Meridian City Council Workshop September 11, 2001
The regularly scheduled workshop of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:37 P.M. on Tuesday September 11, 2001 by President Keith Bird.
Members Present: Keith Bird, Tammy de Weerd, and Cherie McCandless.
Members Absent: Mayor Robert Corrie and Ron Anderson.
Others Present: Bill Nichols, Gary Smith, Bill Musser, Brad Watson, David McKinnon, and Will Berg.
Roll Call: ___X___ Tammy de Weerd ___X___ Cherie McCandless
___O___ Ron Anderson ___X___ Keith Bird
__O____ Mayor Robert Corrie
Bird: Okay, I’ll call the planning session workshop meeting to order on Tuesday September 11, 2001 at 6:37 P.M. Let it be shown that Councilwoman de Weerd, Councilwoman McCandless, and
Councilman Keith Bird are present. Councilman Anderson and Mayor Corrie are on nice vacations.
Issue #1 Discussion with the Meridian School District Representatives – update on staff meeting and easement rejection
Bird: With that, we’ll start with the Meridian School District. Christine and Wendell if you want to come up here. We’ve got to have you talk up here. Will wouldn’t set up our fancy
thing this time.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
De Weerd: We won’t bite.
Bird: We don’t bite.
De Weerd: Not tonight.
Donnell: Mr. President.
Bird: yes.
Donnell: Councilwoman, I guess. Thank you for having us on your agenda again. We’ll plan to be here each time.
Bird: Thank you.
Donnell: It may not be (inaudible) but one or the other of us or someone will be here. In light of what has happened today, it’s a sad day in our country. We’re not going to take very
much time at all. In fact I think we took most of your time last time that we met with you. So, we just wanted to tell you that the staffs are still arranging a time to meet.
Bird: Okay.
Donnell: --on one issue that we’ve discussed and that we just want to continue to keep you informed of what we’re doing and hope that we can continue to be cooperative in all that we’re
doing. With that –
Bird: We’re agreeable to that.
Donnell: I know you are. I don’t think (inaudible)
Bird: Wendell, do you have anything?
Bingham: No, other than last time again we took the lion’s share of the time. If you guys have some concerns or inquiries that you would (inaudible).
Bird: Does anybody, any other department heads have anything pertaining to the school district?
Smith: I called and talked to Wendell yesterday. I had received a message that Wendell had called Shari and left a message on her voice mail. Shari had forwarded it on to me. In the
forwarding process, we didn’t get back and get a meeting set up with staff. So, we will get that done before we have another meeting. I’ll get together with Shari as soon as she gets
back from her illness and get something scheduled.
Bird: Thank you guys.
De Weerd: Mr. President.
Bird: Yes.
De Weerd: I imagine in the staff meeting you’ll also cover the easement issues. I know that Gary had gotten a packet and saw your recommendation, Wendell and it just led to more confusion.
We look forward to getting that information back. We see this as a very valuable partnership between the schools and the city. So, we’re anxious to start working together.
Donnell: We agree and with that, we go home to dinner.
Bird: Okay, we appreciate that. We’re not going to be here that much long.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Bird: We’re going to go fast.
Donnell: Thank you very much.
Bird: Thank you. I will, also Christine, we met yesterday morning at Idaho Power, ACHD had done regarding the power lines out at Overland Road. Idaho Power is very willing to work with
us, our time schedule. It’s to the benefit of everybody. I came out of there very encouraged that there was no problem at all. The power will come in with the road.
De Weerd: (inaudible) comp plan meeting set. Idaho Power had indicated that that would be their desire to work with the roads.
Bird: They’re going to – everything possible we’ve done and they didn’t say anything to put a crook in it.
De Weerd: I think there will probably still be a tight schedule but it will be nice to see it happen.
Donnell: We’ll make it and if it’s not quite all finished by the time (inaudible)
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Donnell: Thank you again.
Bird: Thank you. Thank you Wendell.
Issue #2 Discussion of flood plain ordinance – Shari Stiles and Dave McKinnon
Bird: Okay, item No. 2 is the flood plain ordinance. I think Dave’s here to discuss that. Council, you got any questions on it? I don’t. I mean it’s just something that we’ve got to
look at. There’s got to be some clarification which has to be done through --. I don’t know who we’re going to get it from Bill.
De Weerd: Well, David did have a meeting and he’ll update us to that meeting.
McKinnon: Mr. President and Council. We did meet this last week. Members in attendance were Bill Nichols, Dominique (inaudible), Gary Smith, myself, Brad Watson and (inaudible). We all
met with Scott. He has replaced at the department of water resources as the new Idaho State coordinator for the flood plain. We did meet with him. Clarification was received concerning
what’s crawl space, what’s a basement. Crawl spaces are considered basements as long as all 4 sides are underneath the grade and enclosed on all 4 sides, straightforward in that we’ve
already adopted an ordinance, as we discussed in the past. We have 2 ordinances. Bill and I have talked about this a little bit more, highlighted what we’ve already got adopted as the
lowest floor. That’s all the areas, the lowest floor is the lowest enclosed area including basements. That’s the lowest floor. FEMA has been very explicit in the conversations I’ve had
with FEMA, in
Garden City and here. Since I’ve been here I talked with Carl Cook who is the region 10 director. I talked with (inaudible) who is the engineer for FEMA for region 10. They both say
that anything that’s enclosed on all 4 sides is considered a basement even if it is just a crawl space that’s non-habitable. In talking with Scott, I requested a letter from Scott, from
FEMA that says exactly that. While I was sitting waiting I just remembered that the actual elevation certificate that everyone has to fill out actually does define that and gives a diagram
explicitly diagramming that a crawl space is a basement and considered lowest floor. So, it is the lowest floor. There is some good news though. The ordinance that we’re trying to get
rid that we’ve currently got adopted, if we get rid of this --. I’ll read this to you. This is in one of our other ordinances. It says that no basement floor shall be below this one
foot safety margin. We’re talking about that being one foot above the base flood elevation. So, the way our ordinance currently reads is that the lowest floor including the crawl space
has to be one foot above.
Bird: I was going to say (inaudible).
McKinnon: By getting rid of this we eliminate that one foot requirement. This ordinance that we’ve got adopted, its in the building department states it can be at or above which is FEMA’s
guidelines. It doesn’t have to be above. It can be at. The reason why that’s important is because the lowest floor crawl space can be at the base flood elevation but as long as the finished
floor is one foot above base flood elevation, they will get a discount in their flood insurance rates. Flood insurance premiums are generated by the lowest, no the lowest floor elevation
but the lowest finished floor elevation. So, we eliminate one foot requirement by getting rid of the existing chapter 11, title 11 –
Bird: I believe most foundations, David, if I’m not wrong, they’re at 18. Most of them are 24 inches.
McKinnon: Yes, absolutely.
Bird: (inaudible)
McKinnon: Cross line is 24 inches.
Bird: So, you’re basically, your finished floor line that way basically way above (inaudible)
McKinnon: It’s going to be way above that one foot.
Bird: Unless their elevation starts –
McKinnon: -- base their premiums on. A couple other things that I just have – that I saw here that might be a good reason that we’d want to get rid of the existing title 11, chapter
11is that you guys know that we have a great deal of development applications that are coming in. This would eliminate anything that’s in the flood coming before you if it’s a permitted
use. The way this currently sits, all permitted uses –
De Weerd: Yes (inaudible)
McKinnon: We’re getting rid of a layer of bureaucracy. That should make people happy.
Bird: Yes.
McKinnon: And in addition to that, the existing ordinance that we’ve got in chapter – title 10 chapter 6 states they do have to get a development permit already. That’s the development
permit that’s issued by the building department (inaudible). The safe guards that we have in here are located in this other ordinance. By getting rid of this one, we’d be getting rid
of the one foot safety margin for basements, allow them to go to one foot at or above. We’ll be getting rid of a number of applications that are coming before you. They would be handled
in a more streamline basis since those permitted uses would be allowed to be permitted uses rather than conditional uses.
De Weerd: Now, with the lowest floor there’s an issue, now that everyone understands the definition. Does that change anything for existing homes?
McKinnon: That’s a good question. Existing homes that have had elevation certificates issued for them, those elevation certificates are still valid. So, if somebody comes in and says
–
Bird: (inaudible)
McKinnon: So, if someone comes in and says I’m refinancing my home, they go to a flood determination company and the flood determination company says yes, you’re in the flood plains.
They call the city. The city is depository for those elevation certificates. Cheryl keeps those. She should be able to look it up and say yes, you have an elevation certificate, here’s
a copy of it. Send it to them. They send it to their mortgage insurance lending company, whomever is requesting it. They can say here’s the lowest floor, here’s the finished floor elevation
of this home. That hasn’t changed. There will be a time that it will change sometime in the future. Any time they change the flood maps under a new study, they would be required to have
new elevation certificates issued for them at that time.
Bird: Then, do they (inaudible)
McKinnon: (inaudible) Everybody comes up to the code.
Bird: So, the existing homes then is going to have – if they don’t meet that one foot above –
McKinnon: If they don’t meet the finished floor being one foot above –
Bird: One foot above the –
McKinnon: They would pay higher insurance premiums.
Bird: They would pay higher?
McKinnon: But, there’s no way around that.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
McKinnon: By ordinance we can’t keep FEMA from doing that.
Nichols: If I could interject.
Bird: Yes, Bill.
Nichols: The problem that we’re experiencing isn’t really nothing that we (inaudible) proposed ordinance. It has to do with FEMA’s interpretation of that lowest floor definition.
Bird: Yes.
Nichols: so, I don’t see any impediment to adopting this proposal because it doesn’t really change any of the rules from what they are now as far as the city goes. Its just FEMA is taking
a more severe interpretation of that definition. These new flood elevation certificates do have a space in it for, as David mentioned, a crawl space or a basement (inaudible). That’s
why you might have 2 houses, one was old, one built right next to it in the same fashion. One pays a higher premium (inaudible). It has nothing to do with the proposed ordinance.
Bird: this ordinance, Council, shall we bring it forward and get it on the agenda?
De Weerd: Yes.
McCandless: I have a question.
Bird: Will you take a – ? Go ahead Cherie.
McCandless: I’ve got a question. If, what did you call that? An elevation – are contractors required to have that?
McKinnon: Yes they are. Any home that’s built, any structure that’s built in the hundred-year flood plain.
McCandless: Because I’ve never heard of it.
McKinnon: Yes, they are required to do that prior to occupancy.
McCandless: Thanks.
Bird: Shall we bring it forward?
McCandless: As far as I’m concerned yes.
Bird: Will you see that it gets on the –
McCandless: put it to bed.
Bird: Was this the proper --?
Nichols: Will already has it I think.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Bird: Thank you very much Dave.
McKinnon: Thank you.
Bird: I appreciate the work.
De Weerd: Yes, thank you Dave.
Issue #3 Discussion of business licensing – Gary Smith
Bird: Okay, businesses licensing, Mr. Smith.
Smith: Thank you Mr. President. Celeste from the wastewater treatment plant submitted a memo to Mayor and Council on August 17th concerning business licensing. We’ve talked about business
licensing for some time. I think it’s important that we have some record of what businesses are operating in the City of Meridian for several different reasons. One of course is the
wastewater plant, what they may be putting down the sewer and our MPDS permit. The other of course is fire, police, and our planning and zoning department (inaudible) what’s going on.
Celeste attached a sample license from Boise City. A license application and also an application from Kuna I believe. I guess it would be our request, the public works department’s request
that this business license be placed before City Council for some action. I don’t know what it takes, whether it takes -- . Does it take an ordinance, Bill, to establish that license?
Nichols: They could ordinance it. You could also have a set of regulatory (inaudible). There are a couple of things that I wanted to talk to you about though in terms of looking at what
Celeste provided. If you look, the City of Boise does not license everything.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Nichols: The only license a few things whereas Kuna, it may be in their ordinance, but at least their license application would essentially cover everything. What type of business in
Boise City (inaudible) police issues or fire issues. Not necessarily what may be --. Nothing would really go toward any of the pre-treatment issues.
Berg: these look pretty much like your non-located businesses, or very minor located businesses.
Nichols: I didn’t see any sewer pre-treatment issues in any of these other than maybe drinking establishments, wash a lot of glasses. (inaudible) I guess I would recommend we look for
some others unless you want to have something where every business is (inaudible). What’s the reason for having the license? You need to have a clear idea. If it’s just to get at these
pre-treatment issues then we narrow it down to that. If it, you know on a broader range, like some of these things that are covered in Boise City. You want to know where the massage
parlors are. (inaudible) ahead of time. That’s a different zoning issues. Somebody has to come in and apply for a license before they set up shop in their own house.
Smith: I think we’re looking for all businesses, aren’t we?
Bird: And I –
Smith: From wastewater and planning and zoning and fire and police. (inaudible) spectrum of businesses.
Bird: But, I also, my personal opinion is there’s some businesses that if you do have a license you have a small one because there’s some service shops and stuff like that. There’s only
one or two employees. They’re not going to load the --. They’re just normal wastewater treatment. They’re not going to effect the police any harder. They’re not going to be storing chemicals
or anything like that where the fire would be. I thought the licensing was basically for the police, fire and wastewater, where businesses that would have --. Well, massage parlors for
one thing for the police. Chemicals or stuff like that for both the fire and the wastewater treatment. See what’s going down the deal. I think we need a business license of some sort
but I think we need a good one. One that we’re not going to be having for 6 months and say, oh that’s a bad one. I think we need to delve into it a little more. I don’t know what you
guys think about that, . And look at how successful these other business license are being in the city. I don’t think you’ll have any problems with the business people. But I think we
need to make sure that we’re covering the right, all the right businesses that we need to be covering. Some of the businesses we probably don’t need to worry about getting a license
from.
Smith: I think that, Mr. President, that the zoning issue that Shari brings up all the time with businesses moving into certain areas and setting up shop and not being allowed in that
area because of the zone classification.
McCandless: You mean, like using old houses? Former residents.
Bird: Just switching from --. Say you ran a regular, you ran a sewing and you can move into an office that don’t cover that type of business in that zone. We don’t know it because we
don’t have enough --. See they don’t have to come in and get a permit or anything. They just move into the deal and the only way you find out if they’re going in is if they have to have
a TI. They have to get a permit for tenant improvement. If they don’t have to have a tenant improvement, they just move in. So, we don’t know what’s there. It could be in accordance
with the zoning but it also could not be. I’m sure there’s a lot of it. Shari’s got a very good point about that. Maybe that’s the one reason you need to license every business. But
I think for wastewater, fire and police that we need to have some sort of business on it. So they have an idea what’s there, what’s in the building, what its like and everything else.
What kind of business it’s suppose to be coming out of there. Mr. Berg.
Berg: Mr. President and Council. This subject has been brought up, I think ever since I started here. The previous fire marshal thought we should have some kind of a registration for
businesses so they knew what kind of a business was going in there and what --. His concern was chemicals, explosives, or whatever it may be. I think now that it’s coming into what goes
down the drain and we had a few issues that we didn’t know what some of these businesses were doing. I’ve seen it start out as just a business registration to a license now that we can
maybe kind of regulate other impacts that business with the city. Some may not, if you keep a registration or business very small in fee but then have some kind of ordinance that tails
on to that. If this business is this type then it may need to have some other inspections (inaudible).
Smith: You can have a fee structure that’s based on type of business as long as you can tie in (inaudible).
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Nichols: (inaudible) a lawn mower shop it still may need additional stuff because they’re going to need solvents and –
Bird: That’s right.
Nichols: Whereas a bookkeeper, tax preparer doesn’t. You know, you’re inevitably going to have some things fall through the cracks. You’re protecting your wastewater system and those
public safety issues. On the other hand I guess I should have talked to Gary. This doesn’t really get us (inaudible). It may get us there on some issues but not (inaudible).
Berg: I think there’s another (inaudible) that the other cities have that I think we’ve looked at in the past that may do a better job of getting to where we need to be. The other concern
I have is the requirement for all businesses. You’re going to find more businesses operating out of a home without an accessory use permit that may need to be required. So, I’m just
kind of throwing that out. The home business that you don’t
even know exists, pretty soon may need to have a requirement to (inaudible) a license. Then they may have to go through the accessory use because (inaudible).
Bird: Most of your covenants will tell you that you’re not suppose to be running a business out of your house anyway. Even in my old subdivision it says that.
Berg: In today’s age you can have a computer running business out of your home and not –
Bird: I realize that.
De Weerd: You know, I’m not one that likes to regulate everything to death –
Bird: I don’t either.
De Weerd: The reason this was brought up initially was for emergency service type of issues, police, fire, and what’s going into our sewer system. You know, I kind of -- . Those are
the greater need businesses and certainly the ones that need to be identified. I don’t know if we necessarily need to mandate it for everything. The advantages I see is some things that
we’re starting to see in old town crop up. You know, someone’s trying to sell their home or their business for that same use and its been rezoned in the mean time. They are very confused
with why they can’t sell it for its current use. That would be more the time that this would be beneficial. Those are being caught by the banks or the financer anyway. I just don’t want
us to start regulating things to death and there is a definite reason to have business licensing because of a lot of issues that have been raised. But for everyone, I’m –
McCandless: Well, you can’t cover all what if’s either.
Bird: That’s right. Now I know Boise, (inaudible)
McCandless: You can’t cover all that.
Bird: In our business, neither our retail outlet or our commercial outlet. I think we just need to look at more and more. I will tell you after meeting last Wednesday with DEQ, Mayor
and I sat in here with DEQ. Wastewater, and Brad probably knows this real well, it’s the wastewater. They’re going to get a lot stricter on wastewater coming out. It’s just starting.
So, the businesses that have a chance at discharging chemicals or something into –
McCandless: Or grease.
Bird: --into our deal and just like storm drains. It should not be discharged, the drains off of parking lots and stuff. They were telling us and then with chemicals and stuff I think
our fire and police both need to know. I think businesses like that need to be licensed. The other business, I’m like Tammy. I have no problem with a person working out of
their house with a little business as long as they’re not bringing 50 or 60 cars a day in front of a house.
De Weerd: that’s what my neighbors bring in.
Bird; Yes.
De Weerd: Maybe if police, fire and public works could get together and identify those specific businesses that they would like to fall on their back. That would be the best place to
start and maybe get copies of the actual ordinance that other cities are doing and how they’re working.
Bird: Yes, Captain Musser.
Musser: We do at this time, have a number of license ordinances in (inaudible).
Bird: Yes.
Musser: We’ve had (inaudible). (inaudible) of chemicals via storm drains. (inaudible) dry cleaning outfits. (inaudible)
Nichols: A couple of points. I think Celeste, well she’s kind of done that. If she could get a hold of the Association of Idaho Cities and see if they have any sample of business license
and ordinances. I’m not sure that she would have (inaudible). One of the things that (inaudible) is when an existing commercial building vacates and the tenant leaves. The building department
puts a green sticker on the door which warns any potential purchaser or tenant in order to occupy this space they have to have a certificate of occupancy. You have to contact them (inaudible).
Anytime they saw a space that was up for sale, had a for lease sign, they put a sticker on the door. That’s for the occupancy. (inaudible) Fred or Joe had some of these stickers and
I don’t know about on the new buildings that are up and don’t have any tenant improvements in them yet, maybe not. But it certainly would warn (inaudible) set up shop (inaudible).
Bird: Okay. We’ll take a look at it Gary and work on that and see if we cant get something going between you and Captain Musser and Chief Bowers and of course the (inaudible). Okay.
Any more discussion on the licensing?
Issue #4 Discussion of transportation priorities (with process and procedures)
Bird: Okay, discussion of transportation priorities with process and procedures.
De Weerd: Shall we put it on next month’s agenda?
Bird: Yes, we’ll put this on next month’s, the business licensing. Discussion of transportation, Ladies, did you need to speak to us?
(inaudible discussion from audience)
Bird: Okay, thank you. Thank you for being interested.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Bird: I’m learning from Tammy. Discussion of transportation priorities. Really I think after meeting with ACHD, our transportation priorities got lined out for us which I thought was
absolutely great. As we reported earlier, Idaho Power is very willing to work with Overland and Franklin Road with us on the time schedule. I just wish there was a way, some way that
the time schedule for that Locust Grove overpass could get moved up but it isn’t going to because of the federal dollars. But, Tammy, did you have any other things that you wanted to
discuss on the transportation priorities?
De Weerd: I just thought it would be important if we had any expectations for the list or information that we thought would be helpful when we meet with ACHD. I think that the city needs
to better communicate our need. Its kind of a process we’re going through with our budget. It should be the process that we follow too in justifying our own requests. I sent both Gary
and Shari as our liaison kind of suggestions on what could be on the list such as, --. Many of these items on the transportation list have been on there for years. Some of them have
also been scheduled and re-scheduled and all of a sudden they’re not even on the 5 year plan. Those are key items that I think should be noted under each item. One other thing that I
remember ACHD bringing up is you know what happened with the one way street things? Well, when that transportation task force came in and made the recommendation to do the loop and that
kind of put that on the sideline and made higher priorities for those loop improvements but they never understood that. It was never explained through the process and as you get new
Commissioners coming on, they don’t see that rationale or that history either. I think Susan Eastlake and Sherrie Hooper are the only ones that really have a good deal of history and
they have short term memories, especially when they tell us that’s the first time they’ve seen Locust Grove on our list. I just thought it was very important this year, all of our members
on that transportation task force have been on there a long time. They’re a walking history book as far as our road improvements and our road requests. They know what’s been scheduled
and dropped and scheduled and dropped and those kind of things that I think would be very helpful, not only for ACHD but for new Council members stepping on as well. I just thought if
there was anything that the Council could think of that might help improve our justification and our need and make it a stronger list in getting out to ACHD or to COMPASS. The more we
can inform the better off we will continue to be. Its been a very good thing having COMPASS move to Meridian because they are seeing how desperately in need we are of some attention
over here.
Berg: Its good to have meetings here.
Bird: We finally got one of the priorities off that’s been on for 10 years. North Locust Grove, Fairview to Ustick is being done.
De Weerd: It’s not done.
Bird: Well, it’s being worked on at least.
McCandless: We still need an interchange that gets moved all over the place.
De Weerd: Well, and also, maybe on other thing Gary, and I don’t think I put that in my email to you is I notice in the COMPASS outline they put the responsible parties. Like last year,
they said well, why do you have number one as the light? You know, that’s not our responsibility. That’s ITD but our transportation list is broader – it has a broader brush than just
ACHD. Maybe we should also have that column assigning responsible parties so that --. And to clarify, developer paid projects you know so ACHD’s not using that. Well, see you got a project
this year. Well, yes, the developer paid for it. those kind of things might be worth noting as well.
Bird: Anything else on transportation?
Smith: That meeting, --. Mr. President (inaudible) that task force committee meeting is tomorrow night at 6:30.
Bird: Here?
McCandless: No.
Smith: At the public works conference room.
De Weerd: Did you get, Gary, that list of improvements that , or that was voted on at the COMPASS meeting? That some were taken off like the light improvements, the landscaping which
saved $11 million. They also broke it into what the Meridian projects were within the next 5 years. I thought I had that with me.
Smith: Was that a letter that COMPASS sent to us? Or was it from a meeting that COMPASS had?
De Weerd: It was from a meeting that COMPASS had. Mayor said he would get it to you and Shari but I didn’t know if he did or not.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
De Weerd: I thought I might have stuck it in here.
Bird: Tammy, why don’t you get it down here to Will so he can get it to him before tomorrow night before they have a meeting. None of the rest of us got one. You’re by yourself.
De Weerd: I didn’t get one either. I got one from one of the Commissioners who said, did you see this?
Bird: Okay, you will take care of that.
De Weerd: I’ll see if I can.
Issue #5 Discussion of status/update of fee study for possible increases for P & Z, Public Works, Parks (impact fees) and Public Safety impact fees
Bird: Okay, discussion of status update on fee study for possible increases for P&Z, public works, parks impact fees and public safety impact fees. Brad, do you want to start? Before
you start, let me, Shari Stiles is working with Stacy on hers seriously.
De Weerd: I’ll give you an update on that.
Bird: Okay.
De Weerd: With Shari’s she has met with Stacy and even though she kept a log for 2 months, not everything she has a fee for had occurred during those 2 months. So, she’s going to have
to work some hours for each of those services and kind of put it together. Stacy also is going to use that and use her actual cost to come up with the standard cost for each employee
plus an overhead cost. She’s also trying to figure in the attorney’s fees and –
Bird: That’s overhead costs.
De Weerd: Yes, a good way. But that’s been her biggest --. She does need to have this done by the end of the week. She’s going to get it to David Turnbull who is going to bring it to
the developer’s Council next week so that they have a chance to discuss it. she will ask him, because I said when is he going to get feedback to you. I’ve gone to BCA for feedback and
they show up at the public hearings. We’re hoping that they actually give us a time frame and we can inform Council to what that feedback is.
Bird: Okay, now Bradley.
Watson: Mr. President, Council. I’ve got a couple things here. These are pretty rough. The first one is public works the review and inspection. It sounds like I’ve done sort of what
Shari is trying to do. We had our tax log time earlier in the year. I just kind of went back through those, just interviewed each of them on some of these things. I actually had another
one that I printed out a little after 5 tonight that showed some comparisons with Boise City and Nampa. But that’s not on this one. I’ve got another one that I need to talk about. I’m
just trying to give this to you so you have something to look at and see if that’s something that you have in mind. Over on the front page on the right, I took 4 subdivisions just to
see how these fees would accumulate with those as examples. I got a value out of wack on that last one Bridgetower No. 1 (inaudible). For example Bear
Creek (inaudible) 20 lot subdivision the total fees on that being around 5200. Bear Creek No. 1 which had a lot of off site water and sewer, 2 miles of each. Well, another 2 miles of
water. The total fees for all of this review and inspection 6,000.
De Weerd: Wow.
Watson: But, when I look back and think of all the time that we spent on that subdivision, I don’t feel like that’s (inaudible). That consumed a lot of time in the last 2 years. Autumn
Faire No. 1, a very ordinary subdivision, (inaudible) 14,000 (inaudible). I tried to kind of equate those 2. Some of them are pretty high. The inspection fees (inaudible). There’s only,
Boise has --. Everyone calculates these differently and I don’t have their calculations.
Bird: I think we just need to worry about what we need to get to make it, you know to break-even or something. (inaudible) paper itself and a little overhead coverage too. I think that’s
what you’ve done here. You went back and looked at --.
De Weerd: How does it compare?
Watson: Some are higher. Some are lower with those 2 cities. I wish I would have (inaudible)
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
De Weerd: I know. I think we all kind of got a little bit off track.
Watson: I’m going to give you these other 2. These are updates for water and sewer rates. These are also draft. I don’t know that Gary has even them yet. All I told him is they’re high
and I keep trying to get them lower.
De Weerd: Gary, what are you adding on there? Is hunting season coming up or something?
Bird: He’s trying to tell he needs a pay raise so he can buy razors.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Smith: We’ll have to wait to see what it looks like. It may come off a lot faster than it went on. I’ll keep it trimmed as long as I have it, as long as Janice will let me have it.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
De Weerd: I know. You’re looking awfully (inaudible). Yes, you are.
Watson: I don’t really need to get into this too deeply. The second page, I think it’s the third page on the sewer, on the water because I got things out of order. It shows a table showing
what –
McCandless: Sewer or water?
Watson: Both.
Bird: Yes.
Watson: Third page on the water, second page on the sewer stuff. It looks like this. Its just a --. It shows the monthly bills for all the various usage levels. A normal 7,000 8,000
a month bill of water would be an increase of 16 percent. Sewer is about 15 percent. That’s pretty high. What I did, is we haven’t raised these 96, so I equated that to an increase over
the last couple of years. It’s right around 3 percent. (inaudible)
Bird: Our cost has went up 3 percent and stuff, so we can justify it even though it is a big one.
Watson: that’s the part –
Bird: That’s our problem. That’s the problem that I’ve been saying the last 3 years I’ve gone Council. We need to update these, whether we need to increase them or we don’t every year
so we don’t have these all of a sudden big jumps. Now, we’ve got to have a public hearing. It’s going to be hard to explain to people but Brad can justify every bit of that. He has,
you know, but people aren’t going --. They’re not going to look at that 3 percent. They’re going to look at the 15 22 percent or something like that you know that it actually shows up.
Once we get the system like Stacy is working with Shari on. Once we get the system it will be really easy to upgrade our fees and see whether we need to raise at a yearly basis. It’s
the same thing we do in our business is with our labor, you know you give them a pay raise every year. Then you have to calculate the cost at what the labor’s costing you at that point.
But if you waited 5 years to bring that up, you would have one big jump in labor. Of course you would have lost your butt the 4 years before. This is why we need to get these drafted
up this year so that every year we can look at it. Whether they need to be increased or not, at least look at it and make sure we are getting out costs and stuff out of it because if
you wait this long --. I think Gary, you know he warned us of this. You know if we don’t do it. Shari’s going to find out the same thing. We’re going to have to bite the bullet and go
after it and get our fees up to where they should be.
Watson: Two things. The last page on the sewer, the minimum charge for Meridian is very, very wrong so you might want to scratch that out. That formula, it should be 14.32 as a manhole
charge.
McCandless: I was going to say --. I don’t think I would pay one that large.
Watson: Well, I got to pasting back and forth. 1432 on a minimum charge.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Watson: Then the 5303 should actually be 1986. those are higher.
Bird: Our sewer rate might be all right then, is what you’re telling me?
Watson: It’s higher than anyone else’s. I’m going about this another alternative way that may have some hope.
Bird: Yes.
Watson: I’ve done and income analysis too to see if it matches up to what we’re going to be charging based on last year’s billings. I’m coming out with 100 to $200,000 surpluses so,
something can be (inaudible)
Bird: Okay.
Watson: The only other thing that I was going to mention, well I wasn’t going to mention until you mentioned the meeting with DEQ. I just got this email today talking about –
***End of Side One***
Watson: -- strategy for that. It looks like the wastewater plants up on the Boise River. It would service the Boise River directly and indirectly. I’ll probably be required to do a biological
(inaudible) removal fairly quickly. That’s a cost that is not just spread to you. That will be spread out over these rates. Its another (inaudible) about 1.8 million.
Bird: Is that what it is Bradley?
Watson: (inaudible) I can’t understand this. If its 18 months to develop their (inaudible) or --. It can’t be 18 months to build it. (inaudible)
Bird: They warned us Brad that they’re going to start coming down hard and heavy and its being derived from EPA more than DEQ. But DEQ being the state agency is going to have to do it.
I never knew what this meeting was or I would certainly have invited you guys to it. it was really a (inaudible)
Watson: Was it (inaudible)?
Bird: Do you know who the guy? No, it wasn’t him, the head of the DEQ.
Watson: Steve Lester? The regional or --?
McCandless: He’s –
Watson: Allred?
Bird: Yes, Allred. He lives in Meridian. He said he was very --. It makes you think, I’ll tell you that. You’re not going to be dumping, unless its drinkable water almost into any river.
Watson: Well, we did expect it. There’s as footprint for the facility and there’s a (inaudible). It’s just a matter of (inaudible)
Bird: I don’t know about the other Council People but I would like to see a draft. Now that we can digest these, go back through and at next month’s workshop, come up and before the
first of the year lets get this implemented so we can get it passed the public hearing and get it taken care. What do you think? Do you think that’s doable?
Watson: Yes, one of the things that (inaudible) is if you would want to consider phasing this –
Bird: Yes.
Watson: -- because it is such a big –
McCandless: Oh, yes.
Bird: I think you would have to. That’s what we expect you to tell us Brad, is you know, the first six months, this. The second six months this. Yes, you can’t pay for no 15 to 20 percent
jump at one time.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Bird: In Meridian there’s a lot of people on fixed incomes. There’s a lot of young families that they got hit this hard, you know, they only get a 3 percent increase and we’re – in their
wages most of the time, or whatever the cost of living is. Then we stick a 20 percent increase on their water and sewer or something like that. It’s hard. Then we’re going to be --.
The trash is going to need an increase.
McCandless: I was just going to say they’re paying around 35 now.
Bird: So, you know its something that we need to phase in. we can’t just take one big jump. If you could work out a scale on that for us and bring it back and show us how you propose
to do it Gary.
Smith: I would also mention for your --. I’m sure you’re aware of it, but conservation of anything is directly proportionate to the cost. I think in our area, in this part of the United
States, the per capita consumption of drinking water is very, very high because water is very, very cheap. If you think in terms of, a gallon of gas. I know a lot more goes into a
gallon of gas than a gallon of water but you’re talking about a $1.33 for a thousand gallons of water. My brother in law lived in Reno for 30 years and he said down there, of course
there’s a high desert area and they are water conscious there. They actually have water cops that are out and around. If you’ve got water running off your lawn into your gutter, you
get a ticket. Around here you see it all the time. Water running, just running.
De Weerd: Well, soil too, is so bad you get run off the minute you turn your water on.
McCandless: (inaudible)
Smith: Yes, and I agree Tammy. It is. There are things that can be done but --. Its one of those things. Any time you get in a group of people talking about water and water conservation,
the cost of that always comes up. I agree with you that it needs to be staged, it needs to be phased. We can’t just hit all at once like that but people have got to come to the realization
that this water is a valuable asset.
De Weerd: You know, I really like my bill. We’ll get into billing now. I like my bills with intermountain and the power because they not only tell us our usage of the month before compared
to the year before. We really have been trying to conserving and conscientious about what we do. You know, it really brings it to your attention, you know what your use is this year
and what it was last year. I read in a magazine, and we’re doing it this year. Our water use is down on how we irrigate our yard. We do it in 15 minute through one cycle. Then we run
another cycle again 15 minutes. So, we have very low run off anymore. In our front yard we still have a little bit but we just can’t change the head of our sprinkler to not hit our pavement.
Smith: You’ve got a lot of slope on your front yard too.
Bird: Yes, you do.
De Weerd: But, you know it’s made a big difference. If I hadn’t read it in that magazine, I never would have thought of it. so, you know even to put in a conservation --. I know you
have done a little bit of that, but even different irrigating techniques or practices that would help conserve and bringing the awareness. You know, this year you’re up 20 percent in
your use. Do you wonder why your bill is higher? You know and it just –it makes you stop and think. Maybe not everyone but certainly some people they’re really trying because they are
trying to save that extra dollar or whatever.
Bird: I think that Gary hit it on the head. If you stop and think if you don’t have water. Our aquifer, our ground level in this area has went way down from what it use to be. I think
Gary can tell you, we’re drilling deeper for wells now. Am I not right?
Smith: We are. We’re trying to get into a better quality.
Bird: That’s just exactly what you’re having to do. It use to be, you didn’t have to drill that far to get into plenty of quality water. This is the reason we need to know where these
chemicals and stuff, because they are getting into the aquifer too. This is what DEQ was --. Like storm drains off parking lots and stuff, that oil and stuff. You can filter out a lot
of it going through the grass and all this kind of stuff but its still going to be some they’re discharged into your plant. Anyway, we need to work on that.
De Weerd: Now, last month you talked about 4 different areas of your fee. The planning and review, the monthly user rates, the assessment fees, and the trunk fees. So we have the monthly
user rates draft, planning and review is dealt with in here and I think –
Watson: There’s no assessment (inaudible)
De Weerd: -- trunk fee.
Watson: Those are the hard ones.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: Those are the hard ones to figure out.
De Weerd: So, these are the first things we’ll tackle.
Watson: Right. I plan to do those later next month, or have the draft of those next month.
De Weerd: Okay. So, maybe we can schedule those for November?
Bird: Yes. We can bring them on afterwards.
De Weerd: So, will you note that (inaudible) on our workshop. We need to keep better track too, of when we schedule these.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Bird: we also need to put on the fees for next month.
De Weerd: Then these will (inaudible) in October?
Bird: Yes. Okay.
Berg: Another thing you might look at is rewarding those people who are conservative. I know, this is one of my pet peeves is we have a winter average that you assess sewer but yet,
if people use less water (inaudible) you still charge them whatever they use on an average during the winter. You know, we’re saying everything costs, well they can start thinking differently
if they’re rewarded if they go below that.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Berg: Its always nicer to (inaudible). It’s also nice that our trash is looking at recycling and other things (inaudible).
Bird: Okay. Anything else for these gentlemen?
De Weerd: Not for these. Did the mayor give you any kind of update on what he’s doing with the public safety impact fees?
Bird: I don’t believe that --. He did not give me any. How about the park’s impact fees? We have lost I don’t know how many hundred dollars for our parks by not having that same thing
that Eagle and Boise has got in where they’re getting within their impact area and we’re not. Has the liaison, have you heard anything on it? Because I sure haven’t.
De Weerd: Well, we were suppose to meet on that weren’t we? That meeting was canceled.
Bird: Because he was sick. He could make the 10:30 but he couldn’t make the 9:00.
De Weerd: So, it needs to be rescheduled.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Bird: The mayor is out of town.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Bird: it’s the one that goes in --. They’ve allowed it to go into the impact area, Gary. It’s an impact fee. Boise has, their impact area gets a park impact fee. So, we should be getting
it in our area. There are subdivisions going out there. The (inaudible) and everything. We’re not getting a single penny off of them for a park impact fee.
De Weerd: Keith, I think that Tom is under the impression, and I don’t know if its because he has talked to a county commissioner or not, that he has to have the action plan approved
and capitol improvement plan approved and the parks master plan and all of that. I don’t know if he’s ever called them to verify if he needs all of that for the request or he can tell
them that right now that substantiated our current fees if when we go to increasing those impact fees if he can just substantiate it at that time. I don’t think that the County Commissioners
would be opposed to that. I have suggested that to both the Mayor and Tom but I think that Just –
Bird: I’ll call Tom and I’ll call him tomorrow with your permission.
De Weerd: Yes, they’re just really stuck on that.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
De Weerd: But, you know I do want to see, and maybe Cherie you can push for this is that the committee gets formed on this public safety --.
Bird: I think Mr. Nichols can inform us on the public safety. He is –
De Weerd: Well, you have to have a committee. You have to.
Bird: Yes, and it shouldn’t be ---. The thing you’ll find out, if its not elected officials, it’ll go through a lot faster., our park impact fee went through with no problem. We didn’t
have a single (inaudible)
De Weerd: The developers did it.
Bird: That’s right.
Nichols: President Bird, Members of the Council. I did have a discussion, a short discussion with the Mayor about the public safety impact fee. My recollection was (inaudible) necessary
to establish those things. One of the (inaudible). Back to the issue on the parks, one of the pre-requisites of having the impact fee in the state code is a capitol facilities plan for
those permitted areas, whether it be parks, public safety, those things. So, there is a state statute where you should have that capitol facilities (inaudible). I think Tom was considering
with (inaudible) and some of the stuff that he had done in terms of what it costs to acquire and develop park land/ plus some of the experiences that we’ve had in terms of Bear Creek
and the 58 acre park and all of those things provide very good data with regard to what it costs to acquire and what it costs to develop a park site. In the area of impact agreement,
provision for collecting impact fees could probably be done sooner rather than later but I think Tom was considering that when we’re going to set new fees, to do that in conjunction
with (inaudible).
De Weerd: No, I think you’re right but I’ve been hearing this for the last year and a half or 2 years, or 3 years. Why don’t we just do it. Even if it’s in 2 month, we increase it, we
have the justification and everything all in place to do that.
Bird: Mr. Nichols.
Nichols: Just to finish up on the public safety impact fee, I (inaudible). What I would also like to do in connection with that. I would like to see if that could also help --. Of course
the Council (inaudible). It may be possible that those could possibly pay (inaudible) the expansion of that facility would (inaudible). Do that plus, fire department would acquire another
parcel of land.
Bird: And build another station.
Nichols: Those things could be --. I think that’s a wonderful way of getting development at least to play a part of this significant impact. (inaudible)
Bird: I agree Bill and I think the biggest thing to look at on public safety impact fees is the fact that they can help with the facilities, build the facilities, that’s going to give
us money to not only furnish them. We’ve got a real problem right now, basically we’ve stayed up pretty good in the police department except in one area. We’ve got a hunk of junk of
cars down there that we’ve got to replace. We’ve got to get them in a plan and we just haven’t had the money to lay it out where they’re buying them. You know, we’ve got a lot of cars
we need to replace down there. I believe I’m not speaking out of place. Its true. We have these assessment teams come in and give us a plan like they did the fire and they’re doing the
police. We’ve got to make sure that we’ve got the money that we can stay with that plan. By having these impact fees to pay for our capitol, that frees us more money to buy the facilities
that we need to fill those capitol improvements.
De Weerd: Well, you’re preaching to the choir.
Bird: I know that but --.
De Weerd: We just need to get it going.
Bird: Okay.
Musser: Council President, Members of the Council. In a past meeting here just recently with Councilwoman McCandless, Chief –
McCandless: Mike Worley.
Musser: -- Worley. One of the things that the Chief doesn’t even mention deals with some of the expansion stuff and some other items (inaudible). There are some potential things that
California cities have done that he’s familiar with through some of his experience. He’s going to look at some of those models to be able to make some presentations on some of those
public safety impact fees that might be workable for us. One of them in particular was a model based on what Burbank has done for their redevelopment, not so much development as redevelopment.
The emphasis that they had down there where developers were coming they would have to pay some front load some of the public services needs with expansion (inaudible) and that type of
stuff. (inaudible). He is planning on trying to help that out (inaudible).
De Weerd: Then there’s also, well not at this meeting, but its also been raised in the past that businesses are also having to go to giving compensation back for the time there, their
staff spends on shoplifters. They’re now making shoplifters compensate for their staff time. It might be something, I don’t know if cities can be compensated for their officers time
by that, the one who’s committing the offense, but –
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
De Weerd: You don’t get it.
Musser: That’s the problem is most of the time it’s the parents who are paying the juvenile’s (inaudible). (inaudible) not able to pay for what would amount to an officer’s over time
in a lot of instances. That’s what the courts have allowed us to submit restitution for the over time associated as far as the wage (inaudible).
Bird: So, we’ll press on with the public safety. I think that’s very important. Okay, put these fees on again for next month.
De Weerd: You’re following (inaudible)
Bird: With Grant on the impact fees? I’ll call him and ask him but I’ll call Tom also.
Issue #6 Discussion of mill levy increase election – review of strategic plan
Bird: Okay, discussion of mill levy increase election. Review of strategic plan. I think we all got these, they’re PowerPoint. I haven’t had the chance to look at them.
De Weerd: The reason this article is on there is an FYI in case you didn’t read the whole thing. The Meridian school district –
Bird: Are you the one that handed these out?
De Weerd: No. The Meridian school district plans to authorize a 3 and a half million dollar emergency levy to help with their 25,000 students. Just kind of a heads up. I don’t know if
they have to go through the voters for that.
Nichols: They do not. President, Members of the Council. There’s a special provision in state law that if the student population exceeds a certain percentage, then they’re allowed to
go emergency level basis. Nampa has done the same thing. Caldwell is doing the same thing. Valley View is doing the same thing. But, they don’t have to go to voters for approval. It’s
a provision that is in the law for growth. There’s no corresponding provision for cities that –
De Weerd: Oh, I was just going to ask that.
Nichols: .004 .
De Weerd: Okay, well, you know it might be something that sticks in people’s minds. Like I said, if they read that far.
Bird: The problem is in the Meridian school district and the thing we need to consider, is only probably 20 percent of the Meridian students are taxpayers in the Meridian district live
in the City of Meridian.
De Weerd: That’s true.
Bird: There’s more of them that live in the City of Boise (inaudible). Something like this shouldn’t, and it should be noted that you know there’s a small percentage. We’re not the majority
of this Meridian school district by a long shot.
De Weerd: I know but taxes are taxes.
Bird: Yes, they’re taxes and that. See, now you’re the co-chair, do you want to go through this with us?
De Weerd: Well, I’m not a co-chair. I said I would help.
McCandless: She’s going to give this to the chamber, I believe, one of the chamber (inaudible).
Bird: Who is?
McCandless: Stacy.
Bird: I understood that –
McCandless: Not you.
Bird: I understood the Mayor was getting a committee of business people and was going to have them take this out and do it.
De Weerd: Then he was going to get funding for, to fund the flyers and whatever –
Bird: He did not –
De Weerd: That’s why we put on there, you know review strategic plan so we can know what our roles will be and how we can help and that sort of thing. Because we are a month and a half
our here and –
Bird: I personally feel that the best chance of passing is to get the citizens involved and leave the elected officials –
De Weerd: And have them do the presentations.
Bird: Let the elected officials keep their --. Every taxpayer thinks we’re trying to, if we’re asking for an increase, we’re trying to line our pockets. So, if you can get the business
community out and get them behind it, let them do the selling of it it’ll pass.
De Weerd: And –
Bird: Not that we cant either approve or disapprove, don’t get me wrong.
McCandless: That’s why we need Stacy to give this presentation. It was really a good one.
Bird: I have no problem with Stacy doing it Cherie. I have absolutely --. Bob was going to leave me a deal but he evidently didn’t, in my box. This is something that we can discuss this
in a department next week and get started on it. like Tammy said, we need to get started.
De Weerd: I almost think its worth a special workshop that we can invite --. You know I had a (inaudible).
Bird: Let him and you invite some people here that you want to get on that committee but you don’t need to have a special full-blown Council meeting to do something like that.
De Weerd: You don’t want to see (inaudible)?
Bird: The strategic plan is basically the same thing. All I know, I just want to see the truth and that’s all. That’s all I ask.
De Weerd: I think that’s important that if a citizen group does take this on Keith, that we agree on what they’re putting out. And that it’s factual.
Bird: Its factual. All I want to know is its factual.
De Weerd: (inaudible) this has to come through the community voice and we know it’s out there but they need to –
Bird: Bob has to talk to some of the people.
De Weerd: (inaudible)
Bird: He did go on vacation and he’s certainly entitled to go on vacation right at this time but I think that he has got some plans set up to get it out.
McCandless: Well, we’ll just have to make sure that –
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
De Weerd: But, with 2 department representatives here, has –
Bird: We’ve got 3.
De Weerd: Oh, 3, I’m sorry. Okay, shoot me now. I’m sorry Will. No, I was really leaving out Will.
McCandless: He’s use to it.
De Weerd: What do you think the role of the departments are in getting the need explained to the employees and kind of getting them starting to talk about it within their circles of
influence and that sort of thing? Last election, did you get the presentation of what the need is and were you well equipped to share that with your employees?
McCandless: The biggest problem there is that not an awful lot of their employees live in Meridian.
De Weerd: But they have circles of influence in Meridian, most definitely.
Bird: Less than 50 percent of them live in Meridian.
De Weerd: Do either of you want to respond?
Musser: President, Members of the Council. As far as the police department in response to where we’re at, because of some other past issues that came to light concerning officer activities
off duty, we pretty much have hammered no political involvement what so ever associated with them on duty. Each of the member can fully understand how much the levy means you know to
having additional officers come on and helping to continue to fund the department and help out the city. But, they’re strictly prohibited from talking about the (inaudible) while they
are working which is where major source of their zone of influence comes from is when they’re out there working. However, they have been talking amongst themselves and the association
as a member (inaudible) call themselves. They have also been talking about supporting it and trying to get the word out to the residents here in town so that we can go that route. Then
they are going to do it in their subdivision talking about it as well including myself. (inaudible) we do walk a bit of a fine line when we are on duty. That’s one of the things that
we (inaudible). They are free to talk to their neighbors and they are free to talk to their friends that live here in town and I (inaudible) almost all of them that I’m aware of are
fully in support of it.
De Weerd: Well, Bill and I appreciate that. I would not want any employee talking about it on city time. It’s just that do they know enough about it to be able to talk about it or answer
questions if a friend were to ask them and that sort of thing? Would it be advantageous for us to do an informational night for our own city employees, if they want to come in. I guess
the real compelling thing came when we had that public
information meeting, we had 2 employees there. One of them said when I came here I wasn’t supporting this. From the presentation they got that night, the information was pretty compelling
and you know it just says if we cant justify it to our own employees, how on earth are we going to justify it to the community? That’s more, I want to make sure that people understand
the need and conversations in their social world and that sort of thing. If they have the opportunity to answer questions, that we should make sure that they have that information.
Musser: From my perspective, (inaudible) I think they do have an understanding. I know when I was requested to provide information for the first go around on it that information was
posted for them. We discussed it with supervisors. We discussed it with the officers that had an understanding where we were coming from and just how much money this would mean for the
city and for the department in particular. They were aware of the positions, the capitol it would provide, in association with those positions (inaudible). so, I think that they of have
a full understanding of what it means to them. Beyond that though as to whether or not they can articulate it out, I cant give you an answer on that.
De Weerd: Right.
Musser: I know that they know the bottom line is. Its four officers, two cars and potential supervisors and a whole bunch of other things. I know they can type that on (inaudible).
De Weerd: Will or Gary? Do you have any comment?
Smith: I guess just the information sheet that was prepared last time that showed the effects –
De Weerd: Not really, just the letter, actually. I didn’t think it was strong enough on what the need was and what would happen if we didn’t pass it. was the information sheet helpful?
Smith: Yes. I don’t know – I didn’t really get a feel (inaudible). I encouraged everyone to (inaudible).
De Weerd: That’s what we need to do.
Bird: Okay, you got any other discussion Will?
Berg: I was going to say I talked to more other people than employees about it as far as (inaudible) what they were actually doing (inaudible). I think the probably the key to employees
to get out the information and if they have questions to ask them. Not be (inaudible) .
De Weerd: Learn from (inaudible). Everyone gets information in different ways whether its verbal or written that we should be providing them both methods so that --. Would you think
it would be helpful to have an informational opportunity for city staff?
McCandless: I don’t think it’s as important for the city staff as it for business people and the general public out there. I think the city staff pretty much knows what we’re doing.
De Weerd: That would be in addition to what we would have to do as far as community education.
Smith: I think if there was an information sheet prepared that had an adequate amount of information on it, I don’t know whether that would be, I think just the plusses and the minuses
of the increase. What this increase will provide and if its not approved, (inaudible) here’s where we’re going, here’s where we would like to go.
McCandless: Didn’t we do that? Did we include those in the water bills?
Bird: Yes we did.
Berg: The letter and voter information were very restrictive of what we could put in the water bill.
McCandless: We might consider doing that again because everybody gets one of those.
Berg: Yes, we need to. I usually do when it comes to general election to get some information out to people so they know where to vote.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Musser: If I can make a suggestion on getting the information out. One thing I noticed, and Stacy did do was write a graph and demonstrates. It shows where (inaudible). Put the letter
in for the things we would use it for. Then show what we had approved for the budget and show where that short fall is because there was a number of items that we weren’t able to budget.
It just came down to simply numbers. Maybe if they can see what the apples and oranges really consist of, maybe they can make a better and more informed decision. It might be a little
bit more of a pamphlet. We might need two sides to fold up and put in. I think combining it, this is what we budgeted for, this is what we have. These are some of our needs. This is
expressed to us when we had the first levy and its still here. You know, here’s the comparison.
McCandless: That’s why I would like to see Stacy give this presentation she gave to say, the chamber and to any business like (inaudible) or something like that that would use her on
their program because I think it was an excellent one. She really showed it well.
Berg: I don’t know if it’s going to be too late for the chamber since their already booked up several things. One is the candidates’ forum that they have every year. But I think there’s
other avenues meaning business or clubs and organizations that meet on a weekly basis that (inaudible).
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
McCandless: That would be okay too.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Bird: The biggest thing I think we forgot to get out on passing everything was to tell the people it isn’t going to stay at 40 but one year as long as the growth stays, its going to
keep coming –
McCandless: Back down.
Bird: If the growth shuts down, sure we’re going to be there but that’s still not a bad tax. If the growth keeps coming like it has in the last 4 or 5 years, we’re not going to drop
like we did in 94, 95, 96, (inaudible). It’ll, you know before long it’ll be back down to 34 if the growth keeps. I think that’s the big --. They look at the 40 and they paid the 31.
it looks like a pretty hefty increase and everything. They’ve got to realize the reason we have to ask for this is that 3 percent cap. That 3 percent cap is also going to be taking their
mill levy increase down.
De Weerd: I like your comments. I think more people are visual or they want bullets and they’re not going to read a long letter.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Bird: With what?
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Musser: But, I’m sure we can probably muster some volunteers up to be able to hand these things out. You know the library would let us do it for people to come and talk to them down
there. Functions, get together with different clubs, that kind of stuff, just somebody can be there to pass out the information and answer questions, or at least (inaudible).
De Weerd: Would you like to serve on our committee?
Bird: Well, that’s something that –
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
De Weerd: You’re good.
Bird: You and the Mayor can get together on that Tammy and report back to us –
McCandless: Yes, but if we use bullets, what you just said is something that ought to be on the bullet too. That it’s not going to stay.
Bird: That’s the thing I think that we fell on our faces last time.
McCandless: Yes.
Bird: When we didn’t explain to the people that --. We didn’t really do a good job explaining but there were a lot of things we didn’t want --. That’s why I say, the truth, all the facts
have to come out. Period. Whether they’re an asset to us or a liability. There is some liabilities to us.
McCandless: The biggest one is nobody wants their taxes to be raised.
Bird: No, I’m talking about some facts and figures that we need to get out to the public. I felt that that was the one asset that we didn’t do. We didn’t explain to them, with the growth
continuing that just going to keep coming down. Anyway, we’ve wasted enough time on this.
McCandless: I agree.
Issue #7 Discussion of North Corridor Planning (vision and goals)
Bird: No. 7, discussion north corridor planning. I don’t know what we’re going to discuss on that. I mean, we’ve had meetings and –
De Weerd: If you looked at your packet, --
Bird: I looked at my packet.
De Weerd: Okay, you saw a little graph or a table right?
Bird: Yes.
De Weerd: A time schedule.
Bird: Yes.
De Weerd: It says here, that we need to agree on the vision and goals. Well, if we never discuss it, how are we going to agree on it? So, the deadline for that was at out next meeting.
So, we need to get any comments that we have on the vision and goals and I do have a suggestion. You know, he had a dot, dot, dot after that. North Meridian will
develop with all the diverse elements of community dot, dot, dot. Well, I didn’t think that was good enough. So, I added in an orderly and serviceable manner in accordance with approved
community plan. I thought it was pretty powerful myself.
Bird: I don’t. I think that --. I was under the impression that we were going to discuss this at one of the Council meetings not at a workshop. This is something we have to make a decision
on, we have to.
De Weerd: Well, we can do it on a non-land use. Can we do it on our non-land use?
Nichols: I think we only said no land use applications.
Bird: That’s right.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Bird: Because, you know, invite some of the public out here.
De Weerd: We need to make sure that we agree with these visions and goals because if we don’t and everyone starts moving forward and we’re not even on line with the visions and goals,
then everyone is spinning their wheels.
Bird: That’s very true.
Berg: So, do you want that on the agenda then?
De Weerd: Yes, the fourth Tuesday.
Bird: Okay, we’re going to move that to the fourth.
De Weerd: The 25th.
Berg: Then we’ll just reproduce that.
Bird: Yes.
De Weerd: Do you want my suggested verbiage?
Bird: No, keep it and bring it out on the 25th.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: I’ve got a different one.
Issue #8 Discussion of status of E. 1st name change to Main Street
Bird: Item –
De Weerd: then we’ll get the analytical –
Bird: -- 8 is the first --. That has been passed Bill. We passed that a long time ago to change that name. I don’t know what we have to do. The Mayor was going to take care of it. I
don’t know.
Nichols: Well, here’s what we know --. Let me back up.
Bird: Okay.
Nichols: President Bird. (inaudible) this is what Marilyn found and probably in conjunction with Will. I didn’t have a chance to talk to her about it. on June 1, 1999, it looks like
there had been some approvals through the name change committee, the Ada County (inaudible) committee. So, its been signed off on by the Ada County Engineering and County Planning associate
of the City of Meridian and the fire district to change the name from Southeast First Street to proposed South Main Street. So, that’s –
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Nichols: That’s what it says. So, this is all we could find. Now, we – there is a provision in the city code and ordinance for name changes. It appears to only require a resolution rather
than an ordinance. So, we will – I’ve got a draft I’ve got to review. (inaudible) a resolution.
Bird: That is to Overland Road?
McCandless: From Fairview to Overland Road.
Bird: Fairview to Overland Road.
McCandless: Yes.
Bird: I thought we had passed on it.
De Weerd: Why Overland?
Bird: That’s where we decided to go.
De Weerd: Why not Franklin?
Bird: Meridian Street don’t take off of Corporate.
Nichols: Here’s what this memo was signed off says. The committee does suggest the change of name begin at the intersection of East Central Drive and Southeast First Street and Meridian
Roads. Do, essentially form that light now because its Meridian Road, at least as I understand it called Kuna-Meridian Road –
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Nichols: -- south. So, that’s what we have.
De Weerd: Okay, sounds good.
Bird: Will you draw the resolution up then?
Nichols: I’ve got a draft of it.
De Weerd: Then the next step after the resolution is the letter that goes out to the property owners?
Nichols: You can indicate in your –
De Weerd: A letter?
Nichols: In the code it says you should give the people appropriate amount of time to get, you know (inaudible).
De Weerd: (inaudible) come to a point, right?
Nichols: That depends on, if you want it to be effective a certain date, you’ll need to tell us to put it in the resolution.
Berg: What code is that? What title?
Nichols: 8-2.
Berg: Is there a procedure that we have to follow? Do we have to have any hearings or anything like that? We just had a presentation (inaudible).
Nichols: There is a reference in here to Commission –
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Nichols: Planning and Zoning Commission.
Berg: Through the Planning and Zoning Commission?
Nichols: Commission it is. Planning and Zoning Commission. It says where necessary or desirable applications may be made to the Commission to change a street name.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Nichols: Commission may hold public hearings on such changes. Avoiding these, all changes shall be made in such a manner so as to create the least possible inconvenience to residents
and property owners in the area. No change shall become effective for at least 30 days after initial action by the Commission. In this case, (inaudible).
Berg: I don’t recollect any public hearing for P&Z. I know there was just a discussion (inaudible)
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Bird: They would be the one changing it.
De Weerd: Now, so we could give –
***End of Side Two***
De Weerd: -- we could have it double signed for a year. The post office would deliver it for a year.
Nichols: But, you see the post office will deliver your mail at the same address for a year, I think anymore (inaudible). As far as ACHD and double signing, I don’t know.
Bird: That’s what I thought but Glenn says no, so I didn’t realize that. I thought you just took the East First down and put up the Main Street and that was it, the post office would
still deliver it.
De Weerd: The confusing thing and the reason why ACHD was asking if it could be double posted, is in the phone book, you have East First. We already have a West First. You don’t double
sign it, the people will be driving to West First looking for that business and it will get real messy. It was more of a convenience thing.
Bird: How much more was it going to cost us to double sign it?
De Weerd: Well, they have to go and put them up anyway.
Bird: Because you are paying for the new signs.
De Weerd: (inaudible) $4,000. I think its all included in that price. But I think the Mayor, was going to confirm that. I don’t know if he heard that or not.
Bird: Lets proceed ahead Bill with the resolution. See what we have to do. If it has to go through the Planning and Zoning we’ll have to get on board there and get it through there.
Nichols: I’ll do that.
Smith: Mr. President.
Bird: Yes.
Smith: For some reason or other I kept a file on this subject and I’ve got some May 18, 1999 minutes from the Council that established the boundaries of this change for the approval
by the Council on that date, to instruct ACHD to change Meridian’s new Main Street from Cherry Lane to South of Overland.
Bird: I remember that Charlie Roundtree’s the one that wanted to go to Overland.
Smith: Charlie Roundtree (inaudible) approved by the Council.
Bird: That’s why I said it goes to Overland.
De Weerd: Well, we can change it at the (inaudible).
Nichols: President and Members of the Council. This document which is from the street name committee did request or suggest that it only be from Central Drive to Meridian.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Bird: Okay, any more Gary?
Smith: No sir.
Issue #9 Discussion of city logo – Tammy de Weerd
Bird: The city logo.
De Weerd: Frank is still here, at least we can get it in the Valley Times.
Bird: Frank are you still here?
De Weerd: Lets get it in the Valley Times.
Bird: You were suppose to have done that a month ago.
De Weerd: No. we were having problems opening up a zip mac file. So, we decided we weren’t going to do it. Now, you need all 3 of those Frank.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
De Weerd: It’s the same as when we talked about it before. Giving until the end of the month for public comment. We’ll have these also on hand at the City Clerk’s office. Hopefully,
Darcy can run off some nice clean color copies for Will to have in his office. We’ll just ask for comments back and we’re going to talk about it at the next workshop. I’ll give you a
summary of whatever comments we get.
Bird: Okay.
Smith: Are we looking for size or style? The 2 choices, or the size, or --.
De Weerd: No. there's not choices. You’re seeing 2 different ones. The more detailed one will be the one on the letterheads, business cards and any paper.
Smith: Okay.
De Weerd: The simple line art one are for shirts, pens and what else did I put in there Frank? Shirts, pens, and mugs or whatever you know that you would want --. Okay, not mugs, cups.
Bird: Then one for the vehicles?
De Weerd: And also can be used on the vehicles or you get the real simple one which is the third one that just maintains the oval shape for cars if you didn’t want the graphic on there.
Those were the 3 that I got to Frank and with descriptions of each of them. They’re self-explanatory.
Bird: Any other questions?
De Weerd: I think you need to give that back to Frank, Gary.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Nichols: He’s going to put it in a file. Years now he can say I don’t know why I kept a file on that.
De Weerd: So, you have all 3 of them?
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
De Weerd: Yes, that’s the detail of the line art and if they didn’t want to do vehicles with the graphic that one. Yes.
Issue #10 Discussion of proposal of services from Blakeslee & Associates
Bird: Thank you Tammy. Okay, now on item No. 10 is the discussion with proposal of services for Dawneen Blakeslee and Associates for the Planning and Zoning and public works building
department. I got you a copy of the letter that the Mayor and myself received from Dawneen. Tammy and I had met with her, a month and a half , in June, had dinner with her and asked
her to give us a proposal on taking our public works and building and Planning and Zoning through the same scenario that she had done at Boise so that we could establish a system that
was efficient and effective for our builders and developers. Because Boise, talking to developers and contractors, went from the worst to the best in the valley in getting their plans
and their developments and stuff through. Dawneen, she has done this in Twin Falls. She’s done it in Lewiston and been very successful. We thought this would be a help to our employees
because she’d get a pattern, a system that could be run and would be consistent. Where now, we have some antiquated ordinances and stuff that they have to live by. Then the Council changes
about every other Council meeting with variances and stuff. So, anyway this was it. the Mayor is very much in agreement with it. if you want to --. I would like to push it on the agenda
for next week. The Mayor is very acceptable to it. Ron is the only one that I haven’t gotten feedback from. He should have a copy of it I believe. Maybe (inaudible). I’d like to see
it brought forward and on board. We’ve got Gary here. We’ve got Brad if you would like their input. I would be willing to listen to it and hear what they have to say about it. Did you
not get a copy, Cherie?
McCandless: (inaudible)
Bird: There was one in your box. Will?
McCandless: When was it put in there?
De Weerd: It didn’t come with –
Bird: September 5th.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Bird: September 5th is when we received it and it should have been in your box because I personally took it in there –
McCandless: It might have been. I probably haven’t gone through it yet.
Bird: Gary, do you got anything you’d like to say? Brad? lets put it his way. I’m speaking for myself and I’m sure I’m speaking for (inaudible). There’s no headhunting out here about
it. We’ve just got to get a system in. If you don’t know --. You two of all people know that we’ve got some problems getting our building, development services through. A lot of it is
antiquated stuff. This is the thing she can help. She took Boise from the world’s worst to right now, considered by most contractor, developers I know as the best. Not that they don’t
have their glitches, don’t get me wrong. But we have ours too.
De Weerd: Keith.
Bird: Yes.
De Weerd: I talked to both Gary and Shari about this earlier in the spring and it was a lot in conjunction with our update of our comprehensive plan and a lot of the changes that are
going to be needed in that. Also as an extension of the process improvement group and some of the strives forward that public works has made in response to that. There’s always two sides
to the story. The one thing we found through the pig is that one thing that staff was getting blamed for was not necessarily our staff. It was more the engineers or the planners or their
architects or something like that. So, this dialogue will be really healthy and I really think that before we get hit with all the changes that we’re going to need with the comprehensive
plan that we really need to have our systems in line and that sort of thing to so, we’re not dealing with everything all at the same time. I’ve been hearing about this issue at that
time. It seemed, at least (inaudible).
Bird: Okay.
McCandless: Where’s the money coming from?
Bird: We’ve got (inaudible).
McCandless: Okay.
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
Bird: It seems like we --. So, if (inaudible).
Issue #11 Discussion of Future Topics
Issue #12 Executive Session according to Idaho Statute 67-2345 b
Bird: Before we go to future -- . I would entertain a motion to go into executive session by statute 67-2345 (b).
De Weerd: So moved.
Bird: Do I hear a second?
McCandless: Second.
Bird: All in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT
Go into executive session at 8:48 P.M.
Re-adjourned at 8:48 P.M.
Bird: Okay, Council I’ll entertain a motion to come out of executive session.
De Weerd: So moved.
McCandless: Second.
Bird: Do I hear a second?
McCandless: Yes, second.
Bird: All in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT
Bird: Now, I’ll entertain a motion to adjourn at 8:50.
De Weerd: Just one thing for next month is that we would like to get the park action plan and the park master plan on the agenda.
Bird: Good. You got that Will?
(inaudible discussion amongst Council)
De Weerd: Mr. President, I move we adjourn.
Bird: Got a second?
McCandless: Second.
Bird: All in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT
ADJOURNED AT 8:50 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVED:
/ /
ROBERT D. CORRIE, MAYOR DATE APPROVED
ATTESTED:
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK