***Monday, January 27, 2014, Commissioners met in regular session with Chairman Dan Dinning, Commissioner LeAlan Pinkerton, Commissioner Walt Kirby, Clerk Glenda Poston, and Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser.

 

Commissioners gave the opening invocation and said the Pledge of Allegiance.

 

9:00 a.m., Road and Bridge Superintendent Jeff Gutshall joined the meeting to give his departmental report.Mr. Gutshall provided a written report. Mr. Gutshall said Road and Bridge has been clearing brush in the right-of-way on Eileen Road. Mr. Gutshall discussed the program that involves pulling stumps and tree brush in county rights-of-way that are to be used in the River Restoration Project. Work will be done on the Behrman and Manley properties, according to Mr. Gutshall. Dunning Road and Winesap Road have had brush cleared as well. Guardrails along the Myrtle Creek Bridge have been repaired. Loaders have been serviced and Road and Bridge crew are working on putting a sandbox on the Durapatcher as a conveyor to speed up the process by eliminating the dump feed. Mr. Gutshall spoke of installing two to three more culverts on Eileen Road

 

Mr. Gutshall said the Local Highway Safety Improvement Program has a few hundred thousand dollars available for District I and only a couple project applications have been submitted. Mr. Gutshall said he would like to submit an application to install a guardrail along Cow Creek Road and Crossport Road. For this application there has to have been an injury or fatality in the area proposed and there is a good argument for guardrails along Cow Creek and other places, according to Mr. Gutshall. The request is just under $100,000, but if there is trouble getting the money spent on projects and there are only small projects, the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) might fund this project instead of returning the money. ITD just wants the Local Public Agencyís Certificate of Completion of Right-of-Way Activities document signed in advance. The match is approximately $7,000 to $8,000, a 7.34% match.

 

Commissioner Kirby moved to put the matter of the Local Highway Safety Improvement Project Application on the morningís agenda as it is time sensitive. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

 

Those present discussed engineering costs.

 

Commissioner Kirby moved to authorize the Chairman to sign the Idaho Transportation Department, Local Public Agencyís Certificate of Completion of Right-of-Way Activities document for the Cow Creek Guardrail Project, STC 5810. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

 

Those present discussed a proposed four wheeler poker run event through Forest Service property. The Forest Service is requiring a one million dollar liability insurance policy and the county should as well. Mr. Gutshall asked what is required for four wheelers to use county roads. Commissioners asked Mr. Gutshall to have any related documents reviewed by Attorney Hull. The county roads used would be Snow Creek Road to Myrtle Creek Road, but Lions Den Road would be used to travel between Snow Creek Road and Myrtle Creek Road. Sheriff Sprungl stopped by and suggested a location to start from. Commissioners suggested not requiring mechanical turn signals on the four wheelers, but that they should be licensed. Mr. Gutshall said the poker run would be a summer event. Sheriff Sprungl said it would be nice to know how many participants to expect. ††

 

Mr. Gutshall and Commissioners discussed looking at the value of all the trees in the countyís rights-of-way and giving the matter some thought.

 

Mr. Gutshall left the meeting at 9:30 a.m.

 

9:30 a.m., Commissioner Pinkerton moved to go into executive session under Idaho Code 67-2345(1)b, to consider the evaluation, dismissal or disciplining of, or to hear complaints or charges brought against, a public officer, employee, staff member or individual agent, or public school student. Commissioner Kirby second. Commissioners voted as follows: Chairman Dinning ďayeĒ, Commissioner Pinkerton ďayeĒ and Commissioner Kirby ďayeĒ. Motion passed unanimously. 9:40 a.m., Commissioner Kirby moved to go out of executive session. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously. No action was taken.††

 

Sheriff Sprungl left the meeting.

 

9:40 a.m., Courthouse Maintenance Jerry Kothe joined the meeting to give his departmental report. Mr. Kothe said he has been moving some items around in the basement and working on getting the surplus equipment ready for public auction. Mr. Kothe said the sink in the janitorís room has been unplugged.

 

Chief Deputy Sheriff Rich Stephens joined the meeting at 9:44 a.m.

 

Mr. Kothe said it would be good to hold the public auction anywhere from February 17th through the 21st as he is totally out of room for storage. Mr. Kothe said he will ask to move the ambulance for the auction.

 

Mr. Kothe discussed his unused vacation hours with Commissioners as he will be retiring soon.

 

Mr. Kothe left the meeting at 9:49 a.m.

 

Chief Deputy Sheriff Stephens presented Commissioners with Operation Stonegarden Grant Quarterly Report for signature. Chief Deputy Sheriff Stephens said this grant provides reimbursement for time and fuel spent on border specific patrols so what is being presented is a quarterly financial report for overtime, fuel spent and documents for equipment purchased that were awarded through the grant process.

 

Commissioner Pinkerton moved to authorize the Chairman to sign the 2012 Operation Stonegarden Grant (OPSG), Grant #EMW-2012-SS-00136 Quarterly Report for the reporting period of December 31, 2013. Commissioner Kirby second. Motion passed unanimously.

 

Chief Deputy Sheriff Stephens left the meeting at 9:55 a.m.

 

Commissioner Pinkerton moved to reappoint Steve Shelman and Caleb Davis to the Planning and Zoning Commission with terms to expire January 2018. Commissioner Kirby second. Motion passed unanimously.

 

Commissioner Pinkerton moved to reappoint Karen Pedey and Larry Dirks to the Community Guardianship Board with terms to expire January 2018. Commissioner Kirby second. Motion passed unanimously.††

 

Commissioner Kirby moved to approve the minutes of January 13 & 14, 2014. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

 

10:00 a.m., John Kettle, Board Chairman and Larry Binks, Director of Area C, of the Regional District of Central Kootenay, British Columbia joined the meeting for introductions and to update Commissioners on Crestonís new recreational facility that is now open and to discuss some commonalities both communities share.

 

Mr. Kettle informed Commissioners that he represents an area from Creston past the Yahk, having both border crossings and a joint fire department with Hall Mountain Fire Department in his area. Mr. Kettle said he chairs the Board of Directors throughout the whole region. Mr. Kettle said he is originally from Texas and is a two tour Vietnam veteran. Mr. Kettle spoke of the newly built $20,000,000 Creston & District Community Complex that offers swimming, ice skating, and other activities. Mr. Kettle said it is the best thing for his valley.

 

Mr. Kettle said in addition, Creston has waste management and that is something that has never been discussed with Boundary County, and he mentioned a big effort in Washington State to contract with the Okanogan for waste. Mr. Kettle said there are a lot of things the Directors of Central Kootenay and Commissioners couldíve been talking about and he apologized for not thinking about that, as an American. Creston and Boundary County share joint services, which is the border and Mr. Kettle said he is familiar with the county commissioner process. The Central Kootenay Board of Directors would also be described as county commissioners and they are also weighted by votes based on population. There is a fairly distinguishable vote when it comes to financials, but generally the same rules are followed. The same public processes are followed and there is the same strictness on advertising for meetings. Mr. Kettle said he would like to tell Commissioners how his board operates as a government model.

 

The fire protection service in the Regional District of Central Kootenay is the only the second approved fire protection across the board ever signed by Canadaís Prime Minister cross border. Mr. Kettle said when he originally came to Canada there was an actual Hall Mountain Fire Department with American plates, subscriptions, etc. When the fire protection service went to petition and referendum it passed by 92% and now another fire protection area has been added to his district. Mr. Kettle said this meeting is just to get to know Boundary Countyís Commissioners, find commonalities and to discuss ways to make it better for both communities.

 

Mr. Binks provided Commissioners with information to provide a picture of the area he represents. His district butts up against the end of Reclamation Road, and he explained how many head of milking cattle, beef, and acreage of land under different types of hay, wheat, canola, and wetland are in his district. Mr. Binks said his district also goes to the top of the Salmo Creston Pass and over the other side, which is the largest vehicle passage in North America. Mr. Binks chairs the Creston Valley Services Committee to include a library, recreation center, museum, etc., and his real goal is to see if he can start a relationship between the recreation centerís staff and the Boundary County School District. Mr. Binks said he would like to have Boundary County School Districtís Board and Commissioners tour the new center, which includes a fitness center, curling rink, ice arena, Olympic size swimming pool, and physio works operation to help people. Mr. Binks said he would like to give Boundary Countyís kids a chance to see what the center is like and to get them in the pool and on the ice, etc. It would be beneficial and there are all kinds of things that can be done between the communities.

 

Mr. Kettle said he would like to form a working group in regards to waste management. Creston has just now solidified a close on their Class A landfill. Chairman Dinning explained that Boundary County has a small community exemption for its landfill, which is rainfall specific and it exempts the county from a lot of requirements. One requirement is that Boundary County has to keep the landfillís contents below 20 tons daily and due to recycling tonnage is down to approximately 12 tons. There are approximately 23 years left of the landfill at 12 tons per day, according to Chairman Dinning. Mr. Kettle spoke of his areaís limitations, but mentioned the area involved is large. There are 26 different stations and theyíve reduced in there as well. Mr. Kettle said his areaís legislative mandate is to go to zero waste in a specific number of years, but they are close to looking at biologics. Mr. Kettle said the Regional District of Central Kootenay is looking at a composting facility and that could be something to talk about between his district and Boundary County. Central Kootenayís district is geared to expand the life of its landfill by another 30 to 40 years. Mr. Kettle said his board is looking for viable solutions and with the programs he has, itís working quite well as compared to before. The landfill is chaired by a different committee, according to Mr. Kettle. The cross border ability for families to recreate is the big thing, though.

 

Mr. Kettle and Mr. Binks spoke of how they recycle glass and reuse it on service roads and working out any border issues.

 

Chairman Dinning said our school district is a separate taxing district and Boundary County has nothing to do with their finances other than to collect taxes. Those present reviewed and area map of the Regional District of Central Kootenay. Mr. Kettle said their area has a golf course, airport that can accept jets, and saw mills.

 

Terry Capurso joined the meeting at 10:25 a.m.

 

Chairman Dinning spoke of Boundary County being between federal and state ownership and how that has a huge impact as a county. Those present discussed matters involving grizzly bear and the caribou recovery zone as both are located in Canada and the United States. Chairman Dinning said this has a huge affect. Mr. Kettle said for these issues, the two programs are identically mirrored and Canada has adopted a lot of American rules such as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards so he would think that the U.S. does the same thing, but the titles are different. Chairman Dinning said he brings it up because there is someone who will test the whole grizzly bear recovery area and test DNA samples to help determine the grizzly population, but that also needs to be done on the Canadian side, but itís not known how to do that across border. Mr. Kettle said heís thankful for Bonners Ferry because if the US Army Corps of Engineers didnít have to protect Bonners Ferry, his area would have sustained millions of dollars in damage due to high water levels during flood season. Mr. Kettle spoke of the Columbia River Treaty coming up and how his area now has the ability to handle a 100 year event. Chairman Dinning said Boundary Countyís issue is seepage. There are 96 kilometers of levees along the Kootenay River, according to Mr. Binks. Unlike Bonners Ferry, Canada cannot haul in riprap when itís needed. Chairman Dinning explained having to get the Army Corpsí approval for work to levees and the imminent danger status.

 

Mr. Binks said he has a large area farm in his district with hundreds of acres of corn, which draws grizzly down through the corridor, but instead the bears branch off to a particular farmerís property where the feed is plentiful. This farmer has had to build a large concrete container with gates so the grizzlies cannot get in there. Mr. Binks said caribou are different as they are endangered and protected, but they are killed more so by trucks. The area of this district used to be called Dark Woods, but is now called Nature Conservancy. Those present said Boundary County and the Regional District of Central Kootenay share the same needs and wants, worries about jobs, and the need for high speed internet. Much like the U.S., Canada is a confederation.

 

Chairman Dinning said the countyís demographics are about half the population is over 50 years of age. Mr. Kettle said his area has about the same demographics and they cannot get the younger families to move to his area. Those present discussed the health care program issues. Mr. Kettle said government cannot put the load on the backs of the people with property as far as medical insurance costs. Mr. Kettle said this is all just general discussion.

 

Mr. Kettle said the reason for Mr. Binks and his visit is to do business with each other. Chairman Dinning mentioned that Creston Mayor Ron Toyota had tried to meet with him a while back, but it didnít work out due to timing. Commissioner Pinkerton said both groups need to have this meeting in order to get to know both sides of the border, to learn what each side thinks, to build a relationship, and understand the common ground. Mr. Kettle said they could share studies that they have conducted. Mr. Kettle spoke of establishing a quarterly meeting with an open agenda and that Commissioners could pick a date to come up and tour the new recreational facility.

 

For clarity Mr. Kettle said he chairs his entire board of directors and Mr. Binks chairs the services in the Creston Valley. Mr. Kettle said the proposed meeting would be with the entire board of directors. Chairman Dinning explained how he had not much contact with Lincoln County, Montana for some time, but he did the same thing and started interacting with Lincoln County Commissioners.

 

Mr. Kettle said his District is working on repopulating sturgeon, but those new populations donít count toward the original enlisted number. Chairman Dinning said sturgeon in Boundary County have a problem with reproducing naturally in that they hatch, but not many survive that first year. Chairman Dinning said Boundary County works with the Kootenai Tribe and Director Binks said his region also has a good relationship with their tribe.

 

The meeting with Mr. Kettle and Mr. Binks ended at 11:05 a.m.

 

Commissioners tended to administrative duties.

 

11:30 a.m., Mountain West Bank Lender Merle Ansley joined the meeting. Chief Deputy Clerk Tracie Isaac also joined the meeting.

 

Mr. Ansley asked Commissioners about the possibility of county employeesí interest in attending a class on credit scores and reports and any related issues to help them understand how banks look at credit. People usually have credit issues and this informational class could help instruct how to take care of these issues, according to Mr. Ansley. The best thing is to learn how to manage credit yourself. The course is essentially a class on credit and those in attendance will receive a booklet on all of the points that really matter. Chairman Dinning said Commissioners have received requests to meet with employees for various topics over the years and the countyís policy is that the course just couldnít be done or attended by an employee on county time. If the Extension Office was available and the meeting was at 5:00 p.m., that would work. Chairman Dinning said information or a flyer could be sent to employees to notify them of this meeting. Clerk Poston said a lunch hour would also be a possibility as far as holding a class. Mr. Ansley said the course would only last about 15 to 20 minutes. Chief Deputy Clerk Isaac suggested a couple classes in which one class could be held during a specific lunch hour and then schedule another class one hour later for the following lunch hour. Chief Deputy Clerk Isaac said she could send notice of meeting times with employee paychecks. Commissioner Pinkerton said as long as the county is not promoting one thing or another, he is fine with it. Clerk Poston asked if Mr. Ansley has ever talked to Ms. Hampton at the Extension Office as they have the Clover Talk Program. Mr. Ansley said itís a very good class and he has seen bad credit situations that can be fixed easily.

 

The meeting with Mr. Ansley and Chief Deputy Clerk Isaac ended at 11:32 a.m.

 

Commissioners recessed for lunch at 11:45 a.m.

 

1:30 pm., Commissioners reconvened for the afternoon session with Chairman Dinning, Commissioner LeAlan Pinkerton, Commissioner Walt Kirby, Clerk Glenda Poston, and Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser.

 

1:30 p.m., Commissioners continued the public hearing to consider amendments to the County Subdivision Ordinance. Present were: Chairman Dan Dinning, Commissioner LeAlan Pinkerton, Commissioner Walt Kirby, Planning and Zoning Administrator Dan Studer, Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser, Terry Capurso, and Bonners Ferry Herald Reporter Laura Roady. County Attorney Tevis Hull participated via telephone. The public hearing was recorded.

 

Commissioners resumed the public hearing and clarified that Mr. Studer had reviewed his questions with County Attorney Tevis Hull. Mr. Studer said there were three principal questions. One being the concern over Chapter 11.9.5., and of the exclusions for corporations so it is a decision to drop that entire clause from the proposed amendment. Section 11.12.3., refers to false representation and after consulting with Attorney Hull, that clause has been rewritten. The portion of concern was stricken and the entire clause was rewritten to state the owner or real estate agent of the owner, who offers property for sale and is represented as being in a subdivision without a final plat, is a misdemeanor. So the section on offers to sell has been stricken entirely. Chairman Dinning questioned if that eliminates a matter pertaining to a purchase and sale. Mr. Studer said the new verbiage is just a rewrite of the old version that is in the current Subdivision Ordinance. The provision does not allow an agent or owner to falsely represent a property as being a lot in a subdivision. That lot and subdivision have to be recorded in a plat, and that plat has to be accepted prior to anyone advertising a lot within that subdivision. Attorney Hull said if someone publishes that they have lots for sale and an offering, this is designed to prohibit people from offering. Chairman Dinning said the side affect is if someone is doing a preliminary plat and are going though the process of a final plat, until the plat is final, that person would be breaking the law if they advertise the lot for sale. Attorney Hull said yes, the way it is written. Chairman Dinning said this provision is limiting then as sometimes a pre-sold lot is required for the transaction to go through. Attorney Hull said he understands what Chairman Dinning is saying as itís helpful for a seller to get costs up front. The only way to get around that is redrafting that section of the ordinance. Chairman Dinning said he thinks by saying ďno sale can be completed until a final plat is recorded,Ē that would then allow the opportunity to offer for sale. Attorney Hull mentioned having the proper language that one condition of sale is the final plat be recorded. Chairman Dinning said in this case, if a sale were to close prior to final plat, everyone is on the hook, both the seller and representative. Attorney Hull said correct. Chairman Dinning asked if that still addresses what the Planning and Zoning Commission was thinking. Mr. Studer said the Planning and Zoning Commission didnít have a comment to that. Mr. Studer said the current Subdivision Ordinance provision for false representation includes the language that he read. Chairman Dinning said we may have made an error and not caught it and suggested a change to ďsale cannot be completedĒ. Attorney Hull spoke of the need to define ďcomplete.Ē, and Chairman Dinning said recorded. No transfer of property without recording of the final plat.

 

Fees listed in the Appendix were mentioned and Mr. Studer said he was going to consult with Attorney Hull on the fee of $90 for an appeal hearing and of Commissionersí ability to update fees. Attorney Hull said Commissioners would need to adopt a resolution for fees. Mr. Studer discussed fees in relation to receiving a request for an appeal that would not require a public hearing or if there is going to be an appeal that would require sending out notices, etc., and in that case there would be a $90 fee. Attorney Hull said it had been his impression that the county hadnít had an appeal hearing for some time, but there have been at least two hearings recently. Attorney Hull said right now the statute is written that Mr. Studer would contact the appellant who would be issued a fee to go forward with the appeal, but there is nothing in a resolution as to what that fee comprises. Mr. Studer said in Attorney Hullís argument any time there is an appeal, even if court ordered, there are certain administrative functions that have to happen that cost the county money, and the court charges for certain types of filing as well, which may not cover the costs so that is how the fee of $90 was arrived at.

 

Chairman Dinning asked about record of survey requirements, and when requiring all instruments on a record of survey, is that county responsibility or the title companyís responsibility to disclose that to an individual buyer. Chapter 11.10., refers to final record of survey requirements. Chairman Dinning said instrument numbers must be shown on a record of survey. Mr. Studer said the Planning and Zoning Commission added this provision for a record trail that would be picked up by a title company in their search. The Planning and Zoning Commission wanted this just to insure the purchaser of a parcel was aware there was a record of survey recorded and to have instrument numbers available. Chairman Dinning asked if the title companies were contacted about this. Mr. Studer said no and that this provision was added to the ďfinal record of survey requirementsĒ.

 

Section 11.10.1, states that surveys and descriptions are in the provisions of Idaho Code. A list of all instruments that encumber a parcel will be listed on the record of survey. Chairman Dinning said to him that becomes cumbersome. Attorney Hull questioned what if the ordinance changes as you canít guarantee what ordinances will look like after this Board of Commissioners changes. Chairman Dinning said Section 11.10.5, says there should be a place for the Clerk of Court to certify a record of survey, but the Clerk already does that so is that needed. Attorney Hull said no. It was said Section 11.10.6, is far more restrictive than what is required in a warranty deed for a legal description. Who ever buys the land does so with all encumbrances on it and that is the purpose of the title companies.

 

Lisa Holmes with Community Title, Rick Dinning with Tungsten Holdings and Donna Capurso with Selkirk Mountain Real Estate joined the meeting.

 

Chairman Dinning said Section 11.3.9, speaks to primitive parcel division and in this it says at minimum needing a defined access and easement. What if there is a Forest Service road without a defined easement and it accesses property, there would be no way to necessarily define an easement on federal property so will that be limiting factor. Attorney Hull said the version that he has rewritten for Mr. Studer probably isnít the version Chairman Dinning is looking at. Chairman Dinning said his thinking is that a level of service or lack there of must be accurately disclosed on the survey and does that include access. Attorney Hull said thatís an interesting question since he is going through this right now. A parcel was made somehow and it didnít list what the access to that property was, which made it confusing for a future buyer and that is where the issue is made. Certainly there should be something for access and it doesnít have to have an easement listed, but a defined access. Any future purchaser will want to make sure a piece of property has access and the title company looks up the record of survey to see how that access was granted. Chairman Dinning asked if the title company will provide that information with or without the survey. Attorney Hull said title reports are difficult and itís easier to see with the picture. We would want a picture of it, according to Attorney Hull. If you have a picture and the title company refers to an easement across a certain property or properties to get to the subject property and the picture looks different, then something is incorrect. Chairman Dinning questioned if it would be a requirement to have a survey of another access if one exists through another property. Attorney Hull said he doesnít want to get into a situation where the county is guaranteeing access. Chairman Dinning spoke of primitive subdivisions and trying to put the burden on the applicant to say this is what we understand as the legal access to their property and this isnít the county validating that, but have the property owner make that a part of their application. Chairman Dinning said his concern is someone could say there is access over an existing road. Could someone hold up something by saying the road has changed four times and this isnít right so youíre going to have it surveyed. Attorney Hull said the property owner could just be required to get some type of policy that says this is the access to the property. Chairman Dinning said his thinking is if this statement is what the county wants. Attorney Hull said he and Mr. Studer could see if there is rewriting that is more direct at this point.

 

Chairman Dinning said todayís hearing was a continuation and there are members of the public in attendance so do Commissioners invite testimony or wait. Attorney Hull recommended waiting until receiving the final language. There will probably be good insight, but Commissioners will know that language is going to change.

 

Commissioners said to recap Mr. Studer and Attorney Hull will discuss verbiage on primitive parcel subdivisions and the proposal to take out corporation limits on limited parcel subdivisions. Chairman Dinning said heís thinking about Section 3, 11.1.0., in regards to final records of survey requirements, and Section 11.10.2, talking about centerlines existing on roads and alleys. Commissioners asked Attorney Hull and Mr. Studer to review Sections 11.10.2., and Section 11.10.3, which talks about instrument numbers on records of survey. Section 11.10.4., speaks to the certification for something the clerk signs, but the clerk signs anyway when records of surveys are recorded and the instrument number for a warranty deed is shown. Chairman Dinning suggested talking about Section 11.10.3 through Section 11.10.6, after Attorney Hull has reviewed them. It was mentioned there being changes on fixing the verbiage for false representation. Commissioners discussed continuing the public hearing until February 18, 2014. Attorney Hull said if substantial changes are made, the language should be narrowed down and taken back to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Chairman Dinning asked if Commissioners could look at the information one more time before sending the changes back to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Attorney Hull said he would look into whether the application is to be denied by Commissioners and sent back to the Planning and Zoning Commission.

 

Commissioner Pinkerton moved to continue the public hearing on proposed subdivision amendments to Tuesday, February 18, 2014 at 1:30 p.m. Commissioner Kirby second. Motion passed unanimously.

 

The public hearing ended at 2:15 p.m.

 

Rick Dinning said the State of Idaho does not require someone to hire a title company to do title searches so if all this regulation goes into effect, itís a new law. Mr. Dinning said title searches are not required so this would force him to buy title insurance when he is not required to. Mr. Capurso said this process is driving a gap and putting Commissioners on the hook for real property land transfers. Mr. Capurso said he understands the need for Planning an Zoning regulations to be in place, but the further we step down this road all itís doing is putting the county on the hook for guaranteeing that property is transferred correctly.

 

Mr. Dinning, Ms. Holmes, Mr. Capurso and Ms. Capurso left the meeting at 2:35 p.m.

 

Clerk Glenda Poston joined the meeting at 2:40 p.m.

 

Commissioners tended to administrative duties.

 

3:00 p.m., Kurt Pavlat with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) joined the meeting to provide Commissioners with an update on BLM matters.

 

Mr. Pavlat said there is not a lot going on for the BLM and that if Commissioners have any questions, to never hesitate to call him or have him come up. The BLM owns approximately 4,400 acres of public lands in Boundary County and they donít expect to have any land tenure changes, or changes in ownership. There will not be any exchanges or land sales in the works. Mr. Pavlat said the BLM has nothing in the works for vegetation management projects. After the Two Tail Project, the BLM did salvage logging after the Myrtle Creek fire. The BLM also looked at the Kootenai Bench, but it didnít pencil out as there is not enough acreage, etc. There are BLM areas to look at such as Two Tail, Myrtle Creek, etc., to see what has been going on and they look to see how vegetation was doing after the burn. Trees have been planted, but they didnít have good survival on the south facing slope. A fair amount of money had been spent on those trees that didnít survive so the BLM is going to just let nature take its course.

 

Mr. Pavlat spoke of Hideaway Island in relation to weed issues so the BLM will have weed personnel work on eradication. When the river level is up, the BLM will put a boat in and take a look at those two islands. Mr. Pavlat said there are no active mines on BLM public lands. There is a parcel near the Canadian border that used to have mining activity, but that operation had been shut down since after the second World War. There is no active mining at this point. Mr. Pavlat asked Commissioners to let him know of any reports of open shafts as they are a safety hazard.

 

BLM staff is dwindling and there are now 13 full time employees, according to Mr. Pavlat. BLM does hire five seasonal employees for the recreation crew and weeds personnel. Mr. Pavlat thanked Chairman Dinning for having a place on the Resource Advisory Board. Chairman Dinning said it helps keep Commissioners informed. Mr. Pavlat said the Grazing Advisory Board is still in place and they make determination on grazing funds. Mr. Pavlat further discussed staffing such as having an acting district manager, a fisheries biologist and a natural resource coordinator. Mr. Pavlat and his counterpart in Cottonwood, Idaho will remain in place. Come October 1st, there have been rumblings the Coeur díAlene District will be absorbed by the Spokane District, but until things are sorted out at the top, Mr. Pavlat said he is not sure what will happen with his district. Commissioners said they appreciated the update. Mr. Pavlat asked if he needs to come up more often. Chairman Dinning said this schedule is fine unless some projects come up otherwise he would see Mr. Pavlat at the Kootenai Valley Resource Initiative (KVRI) meetings. Mr. Pavlat spoke briefly of a couple timber sales in the Silver Valley. One being in Mullen and the other in Murray and that most saw logs will go to Chilco.

 

Chairman Dinning informed Mr. Pavlat that payment in lieu of taxes (PILT) had not been funded. Commissioner Pinkerton said they realized that was a mistake so theyíre trying to attach it to the farm bill.

 

The meeting with Mr. Pavlat ended at 3:10 p.m.

 

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned until tomorrow at 9:00 a.m.

 

***Tuesday, January 28, 2014, Commissioners met in regular session with Chairman Dan Dinning, Commissioner Lealan Pinkerton, Commissioner Walt Kirby, Clerk Glenda Poston, and Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser.

 

9:00 a.m., Commissioners held a public hearing to consider the zone map amendment requested by Dennis Shelton. Present were: Chairman Dan Dinning, Commissioner LeAlan Pinkerton, Commissioner Walt Kirby, Clerk Glenda Poston, Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser, Planning and Zoning Administrator Dan Studer, Applicant Dennis Shelton, Josh Shelton, and Paula Clark. The hearing was recorded. No member had a conflict of interest.

The request of Mr. Shelton is to change the zone for his property to rural/community commercial zone from light industrial. The subject property is located off of Sunrise Road and consists of 13.89 acres.

Commissioners asked the applicant to making an opening statement. Mr. Shelton asked that his son, Josh, speak on his behalf. Mr. Shelton said the zone was changed from rural/community commercial to light industrial back in year 2011. The property is not completely in the zone that was redone for the airport, only part of it is and his father would like the area rezoned to the original zone designation. The designation of light industrial messes up the plan for the land and Mr. Shelton feels it was unfair to be taken out of the original zone without given prior notice. Mr. Shelton said he doesnít recall the term for the original zone designation, but his fatherís subdivision had already been approved by the county back around August 2011.

 

Mr. Studer provided a staff report. Mr. Studer informed Commissioners that maps and drawings had been included in Mr. Sheltonís application. The application involves 14 parcels ranging in size of 1.81 to 6.41 acres. The current zone is the commercial/light industrial zone, and the application is for rural/community commercial. Commercial light industrial does not allow for residential other than a caretakerís house or commercial facility, according to Mr. Studer. The rural/community commercial zone does allow residential and more commercial uses such as Moose Valley Farms, etc. Mr. Studer said he provided an outline of the Comprehensive Plan for descriptions of rural/community commercial. Mr. Studer asked if Commissioners had any questions about the drawings. To the south of the Shelton property is a residential zone, to the east is the rural residential zone and to the north is near the airport and that zone is commercial/light industrial. There is also a map showing airport influence in the file, according to Mr. Shelton. The Shelton property is largely to the east and the lines depicted on the map of the airport shows a seven to one ratio. Mr. Studer said just a small portion of the Shelton property is included in that area, and this is not a concern to the Airport Board or Airport Manager Dave Parker according to Mr. Parkerís letter. The concern is simply noise should that be an issue in the purchase of those lots. The zone prior to year 2011 was rural/community commercial. Commissioner Kirby said that was a change and before the zone was ag/forestry. Mr. Studer provided the history of zone changes for this area to reflect the zone changed from ag/forestry to rural community/commercial and in year 2011 to light industrial. Chairman Dinning said for clarity that Mr. Shelton would like the zone changed back to rural/community commercial. Commissioners asked if communication had been received from Mr. Shelton during that period in year 2011. Mr. Studer said no. Chairman Dinning said the Airport Board had recommended any purchasers of these parcels be advised of airport noise that exceeds the 55 decibel limit and in addition any outdoor lighting should be shielded to prevent shining upward as that is per the Airport Overlay. Chairman Dinning said the rural/community commercial zone allows for as little as one-quarter acres with water and sewer utilizes. Chairman Dinning said the parcels around that area to the west are generally smaller in size. Mr. Studer said the parcels were divided a long time ago. Chairman Dinning said Commissioners received a copy of the recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, which denied the application and suggested the zone be changed to rural residential, which has a minimum lot size requirement of five acres. Commissioner Pinkerton asked if Mr. Sheltonís subdivision had already been recorded. Mr. Studer said yes and he added that any further division of property could not result in any of those parcels becoming smaller, only larger and it would be against provisions to increase non-conformity.

Commissioner Kirby reviewed the lot sizes proposed and Mr. Studer said that has already been done. It was said a parcel line adjustment could be done. Chairman Dinning said if the subdivision was completed prior to the current ordinance and met the prior ordinance requirements, it allowed for the rural/community commercial use. Mr. Studer said he would guess at that time, the idea of having some high quality rim properties was the plan for the original 14 parcel subdivision. Chairman Dinning asked if Commissioners could put this on a temporary pause to allow Mr. Studer to look for the original subdivision map.

 

Applicant Dennis Shelton said rural/community commercial was to allow for one-quarter acre lots, but that is not what he wanted to do anyhow. Commissioner Kirby said he remembers extensively negotiations back and forth about this property and it seems like it was the previous owner. Mr. Shelton said it was with Sandy DeHart. Commissioner Kirby said for this zoning the ultimate result was to allow light industrial in order to prevent the encroachment of residential. At that point in time it was a whole different ball game and it was due to the airport and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in relation to the runway. Commissioner Kirby said it comes back to him that the zone change applied to this property and he mentioned the want to keep any residential development on the property. Over time it appears that, by reading airport documents, it seems it doesnít really matter anymore, except the Airport Board says potential buyers should be warned about noise, according to Commissioner Kirby. Commissioner Kirby said the applicant doesnít want to put in one-quarter acres, but something bigger to make a nice neighborhood. Commissioner Kirby said his thoughts are that the county did something at one time to protect the airport from that piece of property, but that is no longer an issue.

 

Commissioner Pinkerton moved to pause the public hearing to allow for Mr. Studer to provide prior ordinance information for Commissionersí review. Commissioner Kirby second. Motion passed unanimously. ††††††††

 

The hearing resumed at 9:30 a.m. The zoning had been rural/community commercial and this allowed for a single family home or a duplex on a lot not less than one-quarter acre in size. Chairman Dinning said prior to the change in year 2011 there was no residential.

 

Commissioner Pinkerton said the property had already been subdivided and the subdivision had already been approved. Currently residential dwellings are not allowed other than a caretaker home. Commissioner Pinkerton said with what Mr. Shelton is requesting, a rural/community commercial zone, could a simple home for residential use be built. Mr. Studer said yes. Commissioner Pinkerton said but he canít increase the non-conformity as it was prior. Mr. Studer said if Three Mile Water and Northern Lights Inc., utilities could be made available in the rural/community commercial zone, Mr. Shelton could subdivide to a one quarter acre lot. Mr. Studer said that allows for a single dwelling or duplex. Mr. Studer said the Planning and Zoning Commission felt any commercial designation or light industrial was inappropriate.

 

The condition of the road was briefly mentioned and the Planning and Zoning Commission felt retail businesses would bring larger commercial vehicles and more traffic trips and their decision was that if someone was going to purchase a piece of property as a residential lot, it would be their choice if they want to drive that road or not. Commissioner Kirby said rural residential seems to be a more obvious choice for that property. Mr. Studer said that was the Planning and Zoning Commissionís opinion. Mr. Studer said the road has an effect on the subdivision of parcels. Chairman Dinning said if the zone went to rural residential, the lots would be non-conforming lots that have been approved, but the lots could not be further reduced to one-quarter acres in size. Rural residential has a five acre minimum, per Mr. Studer.

 

Commissioners opened the hearing to public testimony. Chairman Dinning stated for the record that written testimony had been received. Mr. Studer said Don Jordan had expressed concern primarily over growth. Mr. Jordan is on the Airport Board, but the opinion was Mr. Jordanís personal opinion. Lewis and Paula Clark also provided a letter as did Dave Parker, who is the Airport Manager.

 

Commissioners asked for public comment from those in favor of the application. Paula Clark said she is a neighbor of Mr. Shelton. Ms. Clark said she felt putting this parcel in a residential zone would be much better than light industrial, especially with the road condition not being good. Ms. Clark said she supports Mr. Shelton.

 

No one from the public spoke uncommitted or opposed. Commissioners asked the applicant to make a closing statement.

Josh Shelton said the lots are beautiful view lots and the land doesnít lend well to further subdivide. These are rim lots with uneven ground in between and they are great view lots for homes. As far as industrial use these lots are not good for that purpose and it is not a good spot for large buildings/manufacturing structures.

 

Chairman Dinning said if the zoning changed back to rural residential, it would allow plans for non-conforming lots of record as they are below five acres, and he asked Mr. Shelton if that fits into his plans. Mr. Shelton said yes.

 

Commissioner Pinkerton asked Mr. Shelton if he is the one who divided the property. Mr. Shelton said he has purchased the property from Stan and Georgia DeHart in year 2000. Mr. Shelton said he is the person who subdivided the property and he had it subdivided to what he perceived at the time of purchase for the future.

 

Commissioners closed the hearing to further public testimony and called for discussion amongst themselves. Commissioner Kirby said if the zoning changed to rural residential as discussed with staff, it would take care of the airportís problems as well as taking care of the property owner.

 

Commissioner Kirby moved to amend the zone designation for Mr. Sheltonís parcel to rural community/commercial providing the conditions for notifying potential buyers of the lots of the potential for airport noise and that lighting restrictions are followed, which is to shield any lighting from shining upward. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

 

Chairman Dinning mentioned that he wanted to talk about some points. The condition of the Airport Boardís approval is the condition for lighting and when a lot is sold, the new owners will be notified about the airport overlay and noise if exceeding 55 decibels. Commissioner Kirby said that addresses the Airport Boardís concerns. Chairman Dinning said the letter from Don Jordan mentioned improving the road, but Commissioners cannot do that. Commissioner Pinkerton said in the rural residential zone, it is protecting the area from further expansion in which the road would be further impacted. The zone change is perfectly suited for this piece of property, according to Commissioner Pinkerton. Commissioner Kirby said with the discussion on the road by Mr. Jordan, that road would probably become a mute point as future development happens around the airport properties. Itís just an unfortunate situation that currently exists, but at some future date, Commissioner Kirby said he feels that road will get taken care of. Chairman Dinning said the quality of a place to build a home takes into account the condition of the road. Itís market driven. Chairman Dinning said for clarification that the application goes along the lines of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Mr. Studer said precisely. Commissioners asked if theyíve failed to address any other conditions. Mr. Studer said no.

 

The public hearing for the Shelton zone map amendment ended at 9:45 a.m.

 

Mr. Studer spoke of work load in rewriting the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Studer said his plan is to have the subdivision portion done now or at least very shortly. Mr. Studer informed Commissioners that he wants to withdraw his application for the subdivision amendment, but instead bring the subject up again this next fiscal year. Mr. Studer said 41% of his budget has been spent in advertising and he will end up going way over budget so that is a big reason for putting the amendment off. Mr. Studer spoke of his schedule coming up to include Comprehensive Plan work, and he said his schedule is full and the budget for advertising has been hit.

 

Deputy Clerk Nancy Ryals joined the meeting at 10:00 a.m.

 

Mr. Studer left the meeting at 10:01 a.m.

 

Commissioner Kirby moved to go into closed session under Idaho Code 31-874. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously. 10:07 a.m., Commissioner Kirby moved to go out of closed session. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

 

Commissioner Pinkerton moved to set monthly reimbursement for indigent account 2011-41 at $25 per month beginning March 2014. Commissioner Kirby second. Motion passed unanimously.

Commissioner Pinkerton moved to deny indigent application 2014-12. Commissioner Kirby second. Motion passed unanimously.

 

Commissioner Pinkerton moved to approve indigent applications 2014-13 and 2014-16. Commissioner Kirby second. Motion passed unanimously.

 

Deputy Clerk Ryals left the meeting at 10:05 a.m.

 

10:10 a.m., Property owner Joseph Duginske joined the meeting to discuss his delinquent taxes.

 

Mr. Duginske informed Commissioners that he is still in pursuit of his delinquent taxes, but is making progress. Mr. Duginske offered to pay $300 towards his taxes today, and added that he is now receiving social security benefits and is enrolled in a vocational rehabilitation program. Mr. Duginske also added that he has until the end of December for his agriculture deduction for the timber exemption and he has done that. Mr. Duginske said he has taken an assessment and he relayed his limitations to Commissioners. Mr. Duginske said heís in the rehabilitation program to learn clerical skills for computers, and he said he could project making payments on his taxes totaling $400.

 

Treasurer Jenny Fessler joined the meeting at 10:17 a.m.

 

Treasurer Fessler said Mr. Duginske owes $2,964.83 for tax year 2010, $1,269.20 for year 2011, $1,491.78 for year 2012 and $550.96 for the first half of year 2013. Total amount owing is $6,276.76. Treasurer Fessler said tax deed would take place on March 18th of this year. Chairman Dinning said Mr. Duginske has received tax cancellations five years in a row. Mr. Duginske said he has been making payments. Treasurer Fessler informed Mr. Duginske that he has made only two payments of $200 for the month of October and November, but there has been no payment made in December. Commissioners said once the property has been tax deeded the property owner has one year to redeem their property. Mr. Duginske said he could project paying over $4,000 by that time. Treasurer Fessler said she would need to collect over $6,000 to cover the amount due. Chairman Dinning said it is not fair to the citizens in the county to cover the cost. Chairman Dinning asked Mr. Duginske if he could get financial assistance from his grown children. Mr. Duginske said no.

 

Commissioners said this is where they are at in this situation. Chairman Dinning said the county could tax deed the property and Mr. Duginske would have one year to redeem it. Mr. Duginske said he is hardly in the position to show much optimism, but he is doing better. Chairman Dinning said Mr. Duginske should honestly consider selling his property in order to put cash in his pocket, pay the taxes and not worry about this as he could then look further down the road. Mr. Duginske said the issue is that he would probably not be in the position of owning property again. Mr. Duginske said he has a homeownerís exemption on his home. There is a home there, but it is not finished. If someone were to come to the house, it really isnít presentable, but selling is an option, according to Mr. Duginske. Mr. Duginske proposed making a payment of $300 today followed by $400 the next month. Mr. Duginske said he knows he does not have much credibility, but heís in a better position and is employable for the first time in five years. Commissioner Kirby said that remains to be seen.

 

Commissioner Pinkerton said Mr. Duginske is up against the wall and really doesnít have a choice at this point. Commissioner Pinkerton suggested Mr. Duginske try to pay as much as he could, that the property would go up for tax deeding in March, and then Mr. Duginske would need to find another funding source to redeem his property. Treasurer Fessler said all taxes are due in order to redeem the property. Mr. Duginske said the issue just snowballs and compounds. Commissioner Kirby said after the tax deed Mr. Duginske has one year. Treasurer Fessler said Mr. Duginske would have to pay all taxes owing including year 2014, which hasnít been added yet. Commissioner Pinkerton said the goal is to pay what is possible and to pay extra at every opportunity. Treasurer Fessler mentioned selling the home. Commissioner Pinkerton said if Mr. Duginske could sell his property, he could purchase a small home in town. Mr. Duginske mentioned that his employment and church services are in the Sandpoint area.

 

Chairman Dinning said Commissioners will continue to follow their process and he suggested that Mr. Duginske not wait until the last minute if he wants to put the property on the market. Mr. Duginske mentioned the issue with Cabinet Mountain Water Districtís charges and the fact that he is not using their service. Commissioners said the county cannot do anything about that.

 

The meeting with Mr. Duginske and Treasurer Fessler ended at 10:25 a.m.

 

Commissioners tended to administrative duties.

 

Commissioner Pinkerton moved to adopt Resolution 2014-12. A resolution declaring surplus county property and authorizing the sale of surplus county property at public auction. Commissioner Kirby second. Motion passed unanimously. Resolution 2014-12 reads as follows:

RESOLUTION NO. 2014-12

 

A Resolution Authorizing the Sale of Surplus County Property at Public Auction

††††††††††††††† WHEREAS, Boundary County owns surplus personal property, which is not being used by the County and for which the various department heads and the Board of Boundary County Commissioners have determined is not necessary for the Countyís use; and

 

††††††††††††††† WHEREAS, the Board of Boundary County Commissioners are authorized under Idaho Code Section 31-808 to sell or offer for sale at public auction, after not less than ten daysí previous notice given by publication in a newspaper of the county, any property, real or personal, belonging to the County but not necessary for its use; and

 

††††††††††††††† WHEREAS, the Board of Boundary County Commissioners believes it is in the best interest of the County that the surplus property described as in ďAttachment AĒ be sold and therefore desire to sell the property so described at public auction as provided in Idaho Code Section 31-808.

 

††††††††††††††† NOW, THEREFORE, upon motion duly made, seconded and unanimously carried, it is

 

RESOLVED that, after publication of notice in the Bonners Ferry Herald in the manner and for the time required by Idaho Code, the personal property of Boundary County described as in ďAttachment AĒ be offered for sale at public auction at a date, time and location determined by Boundary County Commissioners.

 

††††††††††††††† DATED this 28th day of January, 2014.

††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† ††††††† ††††††† COUNTY OF BOUNDARY

††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† s/_____________________________†††††††††††††††††††††††††††††

††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† ††††††††††† ††† Dan R. Dinning, Chairman

††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† s/______________________________††††††

††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† ††††††††††† ††† LeAlan L. Pinkerton, Commissioner

††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† s/______________________________†††††††††

††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† Walt Kirby, Commissioner

ATTEST:

Glenda Poston

Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners

Bys/________________________________

Recorded as instrument #259897

 

ďATTACHMENT AĒ

 

COUNTY SURPUS ITEMS

 

 

Wooden playground structure with slide and metal jungle gym as follows:

 

Playground climber, conical, small Class #923

Playground structure, WD, MDLR small child, big toy

Playground unit, slide, waved, medium

 

Clerk Poston returned to the meeting.

 

Commissioner Pinkerton moved to grant an extension of time to pay the second half of year 2013 taxes for parcel #MH62N02E14734AA until the end of February, February 28, 2014. Commissioner Kirby second. Motion passed unanimously.

 

Commissioners tended to administrative duties.

 

11:00 a.m., Restorium Administrator Karlene Magee and Restorium Assistant Pam Barton joined the meeting to review Restorium billing reports to include Medicaid.

 

Commissioner Kirby moved to write off the following accounts: $1,355.91 for resident #201104-15, $1,618.76 for resident #201101-30 and $894.12 for #201105-33. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

 

Ms. Magee and Ms. Barton left the meeting at 11:40 a.m.

 

11:40 a.m., Boundary County Airport Manager Dave Parker and J-U-B Engineer Brad Niemeyer joined the meeting. Mike Brown with Blue Sky Broadcasting was also present.

 

Mr. Parker said the reason for this meeting is to talk about the next airport improvement grant. Mention was made of a letter from Gary Gates of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as to the status of the $64,000. Mr. Parker said his thinking is the county should go forward with a grant for next year if it can be afforded. Those present discussed the costs involved with the Merrifield transaction and said $64,000 was for replacement housing and the waiver is just the amount of $17,000. Mr. Niemeyer said his general feeling is the FAA didnít address what the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) used for justification of the waiver so he would like to have another conversation with the FAA as to why they should want to approve the waiver.

 

Mr. Parker said by the end of this week the State of Idaho and the FAA will want to know if the county wants to enter into a grant agreement for additional properties. It was said the environmental study done had included just a portion of the Howard property. The Helena FAA Office questioned why only 10.3 acres of the Howard property was reviewed in the study as it should have been the entire property due to the easement. This property has been an issue and the FAA sees this as an opportunity to deal with the approach departure trees and to get rid of the easement. It was said this property will also create a problem in the future due to height limitations. Mr. Parker said Mr. Gates would like to have a meeting in order to get a plan. The State of Idaho is willing to give $150,000 of airport improvement funds and would also provide another $150,000 in state apportionment. This is funding that may go away for smaller airports, according to Mr. Parker. The county could get $450,000 from the FAA with the FAA paying 90% and the remaining 10% would come from the state and county. The initial $150,000 can be for pavement maintenance as well as the second allocation of $150,000, according to Mr. Parker. The Airport Boardís position is to continue with the land purchase as itís seen as an opportunity. Mr. Parker mentioned a third payment of $150,000 and with some discussion with the State of Idaho, if the county wanted to use a portion of those funds to buy land and a portion for maintenance on pavement, it was indicated that would be workable. If those funds do not get used, they would go back into the pot to be used next year. Mr. Parker said Commissioners need to decide if they want to continue with the land purchase and he would meet with Mr. Gates to see if the federal government is good with the plan. Chairman Dinning asked what the Airport Boardís attitude is on that. The Howards would like to sell the whole property as there arenít any family members living in Bonners Ferry, according to Mr. Parker. Mr. Parker said Mr. Gates sounds positive as he encouraged purchasing all of the Howard property as opposed to just a portion. Chairman Dinning said going forward can Boundary County or a representative of Boundary County handle the negotiations with the land owners as opposed to having a contractor. Mr. Parker said that would be talked about in the pre-design meeting. In order to use funds for year 2014, Mr. Gates said the matter should be squared away by May. Mr. Parker said itís wise to tie up federal funding and if the plan isnít completed by this year, those funds would roll over into a pot. Once the federal government has spent money on the environmental study and due process to get to an end, they donít like to waste it. Commissioner Pinkerton said that money means absolutely nothing to the federal government. The federal government will spend a large amount of money on a project and if it doesnít work out, they will walk away. Commissioner Pinkerton said a statement was made about ďif the county can afford itĒ, and that is the question. If itís costing the county, what good is it? Commissioner Pinkerton said now weíre looking at the Howard property and if the county did nothing, would that property stop the airportís operation as it currently exists. If the county doesnít do something with the Wheatley property, would the operation cease? Mr. Parker said yes. Commissioner Pinkerton said we need to prioritize the project and he questioned why there is worry about the Howard property and is it just because money became available. Mr. Parker said if the Howards sell the property and someone creates a subdivision, currently there is no access from the existing road. Mr. Howard has legal access through airport property and if that access is used, the county would lose $150,000 that is currently received every year to maintain the airport. It would be bad for Mr. Howard to construct buildings in the object free area and it would put the airport out of compliance. Commissioner Pinkerton said the county is in a bad way right now with this airport project.

 

Now there is the issue of the $17,000 waiver as it pertains to the Merrifield purchase. Can the county recover from this and how long will it take? The county is standing knee deep in the mud right now and how long will it be to fill the hole. Commissioner Pinkerton said when it comes to the FAAís money that is already spent, they will still walk away and he has been there to experience that. Commissioner Pinkerton said we need to look at what is most important. Commissioner Kirby said weíve got to get rid of the trees and a house and it costs a bunch of money that the county had to pony up front. We got burned on this, according to Commissioner Kirby. Commissioner Kirby said we talk about proceeding with the Howard and Wheatley properties so letís put numbers on it so we know, such as what is our match and when do we have to have it? We talk about Howard and Wheatley and $450,000. Commissioner Kirby said he really wants to do this and go forward, but he doesnít want to put his county in jeopardy. There has been the political heat and ethical heat that Commissioners got into to maintain the airportís position. That is something we need to think about. Commissioner Pinkerton said he thinks Mr. Parker is a good manager and he trusts his judgment. Commissioner Pinkerton asked Mr. Parker to put together what the priorities are and he added that this is a lot of money on a knee jerk reaction, and he has seen the federal government walk away before. Commissioners need to look at what is best and what is best for where we are at.

 

Commissioner Kirby said when he first became Commissioner the issue was the Howard property. Commissioner Kirby said he doesnít want to quit this process, but he also doesnít want to get in over his head again. Mr. Parker said this isnít a knee jerk situation as these parcels are a priority for the FAA and have been decided five years ago. Commissioner Pinkerton said he apologizes as he hasnít been a Commissioner for long, but just for the time he has been here, it has gone from moving parts, etc.

 

Chairman Dinning said if there is an opportunity through the grant, is there a grant match of the first $150,000 and he asked about the second and third payment of $150,000. Where in this does any of that money reduce the countyís match on the purchases or how does it tie into land purchases. Chairman Dinning asked where the advantage is for the $150,000 for land. Mr. Parker said the airport should also receive treatment to the pavement as it is due and that would cost approximately $150,000. So $150,000 of the total $450,000 would go towards pavement maintenance. Mr. Parker said if it were up to him, he would put off pavement maintenance for one year and deal with the land.

 

Mr. Niemeyer said there is no land acquisition or a project without the $150,000. Chairman Dinning asked where the $150,000 or the other dollars get applied to in this process. Mr. Niemeyer said Mr. Parker is saying there is option to get $450,000 from the federal government and that has a match of $45,000 between locals or $20,000. That money combined would go to all the land purchases and some to maintenance, if there is enough to go after it all, or a reduced portion. Chairman Dinning said his understanding of what has occurred is that itís the purchase price plus all allowables and that was reimbursed at a certain amount. Where in there does that $150,000 apply to any of that? Mr. Niemeyer said this is a completely different grant. Chairman Dinning said weíre talking about the Wheatley and Howard properties. If the county has $450,000, what does that get spent on? Mr. Niemeyer said what the county has been basically spending it on, though this process was coordinated with the FAA was for six original parcels. For year 2013 it covered the Merrifield, Dinning and Byler properties. The remaining parcels, which are Speed, Howard and Wheatley, do not have any federal funds allocated yet. The $450,000 would be used to purchase those properties in the same fashion. Commissioner Pinkerton said the plan has not changed, but has expanded. Mr. Parker agreed and said this is just continuing what was started. Chairman Dinning said the $450,000 can go to the environmental assessments, the appraisals, and what else? Mr. Parker said to buy land, etc. That $450,000 will not cover the purchase price of the Howard property. How does the county get into the grant cycle for values that are higher? Mr. Parker said that is when you apply for a supplement. Chairman Dinning said the county probably wouldnít have enough to buy either property so what if it costs more. Chairman Dinning said he thought the county was originally approved for $1,200,000, and that the county has only used $600,000. That grant cycle has not expired and additional funds are not available through that old grant. Mr. Niemeyer said the grant moved to the Helena FAA Office so the county has to get something planned through that office so they can put that money aside. Mr. Gates would like to know the countyís intentions and how much money is needed. The FAA will not do anything without a purchase and sale agreement and the county would have to make a commitment to go forward and have an appraisal done. Mr. Niemeyer said that is the same path as Merrifields. Chairman Dinning said that wasnít a good experience and Commissioners are trying to avoid that. Mr. Parker said it would be good to get an appraisal first, but if the county decides not to go forward, it will have to eat those costs. Chairman Dinning asked when the FAA would tell the county they will fund what the appraisal is without significant risk. It was said the situation is a catch 22 to get the money, get an appraisal and then the FAA says they wonít fund until they get a purchase and sale agreement, and then have the costs turn out to be more and then the FAA says they will not fund. Commissioners said they would not do that again. Mr. Niemeyer said these are questions that will be answered at the meeting with the FAA, but Mr. Parker has to have an idea of how to even start that discussion.

 

Mr. Niemeyer said the FAA needs planning money up front from the counties and then they sit down with the budget for the year and will notify the county how much it can spend. The Helena Office has a lot of money tied up that they need to spend so if there is a deficiency, there are possible discretionary funds to make up that deficiency. Commissioner Kirby said there is no reason not to continue to talk with the FAA about this. Mr. Parker said the FAA wonít pay for the appraisal if the county isnít going to purchase the property. Commissioner Pinkerton asked what the design plan is that Mr. Gates is looking for. Commissioner Pinkerton said before Mr. Gates can bring the funds to his area he has to know what the plans are for his district. Mr. Niemeyer said this is his understanding of what the FAA does in this process. The FAA will ask the county what they intend to do as a project and they will take that information with the dollars and see what is available. There will be a bit of back and forth during this process. This gives the county a chance to sit down with the FAA to define tasks to get from the start to the finish. The FAA wonít issue a grant until the purchase and sales agreements are done and that is why there was up front work. The work is done up front and then the FAA will issue the grant. Chairman Dinning asked if any money spent until the purchase and sale agreement will cost the county 10%. Mr. Niemeyer said any money spent up until the purchase and sale agreement is done so at county risk. Commissioners asked if reimbursement is done at $450,000 and Mr. Niemeyer said yes. Mr. Parker said he has budgeted $40,000 for this. Chairman Dinning said to deduct $17,000 from that. Mr. Parker said if everything goes well he will end up with $30,000 plus $40,000. Mr. Parker spoke of lost funding for the Speed property as Ms. Speed withdrew from the offer of sale. Chairman Dinning mentioned infrastructure such as the funding from the state for pavement. Mr. Parker said the Airport Board feels this land purchase is more important than the asphalt in that these have been key pieces of property since the 1970ís. In year 2015 the county will get another $150,000 as that figure will continue to come, but the state apportionment money that is beyond the $150,000 may go away, according to Mr. Parker. Mr. Niemeyer said there appears to be a lot of grant money out there as carry over from the FAA and the State. The rumor mill is the FAA is sitting on a lot of money to spend on projects this year. Land is a big ticket project and the FAA can come to the table with a lot of money, although they will want the county to cover the match. Commissioner Pinkerton said he worries about not finishing the projects by the deadline and then being left without the funding. Mr. Niemeyer said historically the FAA has not taken back funding issued via the grant so that is why Mr. Gates wants a meeting in May so he can tie down grant monies. Commissioner Pinkerton said the federal money can easily go away and he mentioned he is worried about having to have a meeting by the end of this week as the funds will go away if there is no plan. Commissioner Pinkerton mentioned having to borrow funds for the Merrifield property purchase and what would happen if the funding had gone away. That transaction was supposed to be done by a certain date, but it wasnít completed so if that happens with this new purchase and the county has to borrow money up front, the obligation to the bank does not go away for the county. Commissioner Pinkerton said that is his concern, not whether to buy 10 acres or 40 acres. Itís getting a loan from the bank and getting reimbursement as $450,000 is a big price tag for the county and it makes him nervous.

 

The question is when to walk away and cut losses. Chairman Dinning said no lender will waste their time if there is no purchase and sale agreement. Chairman Dinning spoke of getting a signed release and taking the purchase and sale agreement to the lender and that the transaction doesnít close unless the release is in hand. The title company will contact the lender and they will handle all of that. Chairman Dinning mentioned when Epic Land Solutions Relocation Specialist Roxanne Grimm had someone sign a warranty deed when she knew the legal description was wrong. Having a purchase and sale agreement with the condition the lender will release, for a certain number of dollars, but let the title company do it as that is their job and they can do it, according to Chairman Dinning.

 

Chairman Dinning asked what the status is for the $67,000 as it pertains to the Merrifields. Mr. Niemeyer spoke of putting in a request. The replacement housing payment and increased mortgage interest payment of $19,000 are still being reviewed by the FAA. It was said the property hasnít yet been vacated. A request for reimbursement can be done for $44,000 plus miscellaneous closing costs. Mr. Niemeyer said Mr. Gates feels certain entitlement to that money. That difference lends itself to that more interest will be paid for the life of the loan for that property. Mr. Niemeyer said information sent to Mr. Gates has to get approved at the FAA headquarters. Commissioner Kirby said we can leave Mr. Wheatleyís property out of this as that will go to court. Commissioner Pinkerton said he feels that will work itself out. Chairman Dinning said if in fact Mr. Wheatley comes to an agreement of what the county is going to do and he wants to be paid right away, and if the FAA has not committed this money, where is the county at? Mr. Parker said if the county is going to complete the Wheatley purchase, we donít want to turn this money away. Commissioner Pinkerton said that is the priority he wanted to hear. Commissioners agreed to move forward and to prioritize the Wheatley property purchase and to give a figure to Mr. Gates. Chairman Dinning said the Commissioners need to be prepared to buy both parcels this year and to have enough funds so the county is not committing and then telling Mr. Wheatley Commissioners donít have enough.

 

Commissioner Kirby left the meeting at 12:50 p.m.

 

Chairman Dinning said he hears Mr. Parker anticipates buying the Howard property. Mr. Parker said he didnít think the Wheatley property would be resolved this year. †††

 

The meeting with Mr. Parker and Mr. Niemeyer ended at 12:50 p.m.

 

Commissioners tended to administrative duties.

 

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 1:50 p.m.

 

 

††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† _____________________________________

††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† DAN R. DINNING, Chairman

 

ATTEST:

 

 

_______________________________

GLENDA POSTON, Clerk

By: Michelle Rohrwasser, Deputy Clerk †††††††††††††††††††††††††