Treasure Valley Partnership

Meeting Minutes

January 22, 2007

	Attendees Matt Beebe Dave Bieter Tom Dale Tammy de Weerd John Evans	Frank McKeever Nancy Merrill Nate Mitchell Margie Watson Paul Woods Rick Yzaguirre
	Absent Garret Nancolas Dean Obray	Guests/Staff Brian Ballard – Holly-Troxell Bill Larsen - Staff Mike Martin – Suncor Bob Taunton – Suncor Numerous Fire Marshall’s from the Treasure Valley.

Nate Mitchell opened the meeting and welcomed everyone to Star.

Nancy Merrill moved and Tammy de Weerd seconded the approval of the previous meeting’s minutes and the finance/budget report.

Nancy Merrill introduced the final floodplain enhancement proposals that have been developed through cooperation with each jurisdiction’s floodplain management officials and representatives of the Idaho Water Resources and others. She indicated that each of the five bulleted items represent minimum standards that should help cities/counties minimize damage like what occurred during last year’s relatively minor flood event. She stated that three of the items are physical standards and two of the items are more philosophical or administrative in nature.

She stated that to institute the three physical standards some jurisdictions might have to create an overlay district for exceptions on areas where residential construction has already occurred along waterways. Nancy mentioned that the “no adverse impact” portion of the floodplain enhancements represents one of the most important philosophies of floodplain management that will help mitigate future damage due to flood events.

Nancy Merrill requested that each jurisdiction work these floodplain enhancements through their ordinance processes, and be prepared to come to the February meeting of the Treasure Valley Partnership to report on where each jurisdiction is in the process of enacting these enhancements. She indicated she would like to be able to identify a time to hold a press conference on flood mitigation management at the February meeting. Frank McKeever asked if there was a timeline on enacting these ordinance enhancements. Nancy stated that she felt we should try to have these enhancements in place by spring. Nancy also stated that she is working with several legislatures to work on this issue at the State level. There is a law that is being drafted to provide some guidance on floodplain issues at the State level.

Margie Watson commended Nancy for spearheading this effort.

Nate Mitchell introduced Bob Taunton, President of Suncor Idaho, to deliver a presentation on financing public infrastructure.

Bob stated that all jurisdictions are struggling to finance public infrastructure and there isn’t any new money available. He introduced Mike Martin to deliver the power point presentation.

Mike Martin indicated that they have done assessment bonds, general obligation bonds and revenue bonds to finance public infrastructure. They have worked with local jurisdictions to help coordinate the development of these finance tools.

Community Infrastructure Districts are separate political subdivisions or districts within a City that has the power to finance public infrastructure using tax exempt financing. The district has the ability to acquire and maintain public infrastructure. The project has to be a public project and within the boundaries of the impact area of a city or areas that are contiguous to the City. The district is governed by the City Council or County Commission.

Rick Yzaguirre asked if the CID is what is being proposed to the Idaho Legislature. The answer is yes. Matt Beebe asked why we are excluding the unincorporated areas of counties that are rapidly growing? Mike indicated that due to the political experience of last year it was felt the unincorporated part of past proposals would not progress very well with the legislature this year.

A CID is not mandatory. It is just a financing tool that Cities can use to finance public infrastructure. After a CID is formed, it is fully disclosed to potential homeowners of the district. The publicly financed debt of the district is guaranteed by the district and is not an obligation of City/County taxpayers. This type of financing tool for public infrastructure and is good for master plan developments. Additionally, this year’s proposal will include schools.

Benefits of the CID are that it is a tool that developers and Cities use for areas in the district and not all of the jurisdictions citizens are obligated to the tax. Paul Woods asked, if a CID were inside an area of impact, why would those citizens want to be annexed? Mike Martin stated, up front the City would be knowledgeable of CID areas and the plans for annexation of the development. Then when it goes to vote, everyone is knowledgeable of the process.

Tammy de Weerd asked if the CID would lower the price of homes in the district. Mike Martin stated that it will help lower the cost of homes in the district, but it would be impossible to prove. At the district development stage, all improvements are negotiated at the consent stage it places the burden on the jurisdiction up front as to what infrastructure improvements are involved.

The steps in the process: 1) Petition, 2) Form a board, 3) Developer constructs infrastructure, 4) Authorize bonds (these can be general obligation, special assessment, and revenue bonds), 5) District issues bonds, 6) District pays the debt service.

Nate Mitchell introduced Fire Marshall Joe Silva from Meridian to discuss the Fireworks Ordinances that have been developed. The major components of the ordinances include; 1) minimum ages of purchase, 2) maximum sizes of tents, 3) permanent structures for wholesale operations.

They asked for clarification on direction they would take with regards to this issue. Specifically would the Partnership want them to include language at the county level on banning dangerous or illegal fireworks?

Tammy de Weerd indicated that some of the problems we are having are the differences between city and county laws. Joe indicated that they are trying to address the issues at the supply side of fireworks. Tom Dale stated that closing the loophole of banning the sale of illegal fireworks in the county or at the State level is desirable.

The loophole in the State law has to do with inter-state commerce for legitimate wholesalers who are merchandising illegal fireworks for sale outside of the State. Rick Yzaguirre indicated that they would have their legal department to address this issue and hopefully have something for the next meeting. Matt Beebe asked what the reluctance is of the legislators for closing the State loophole. Joe indicated that legislators do not see the aerial fireworks as a problem as it seems as though everyone is purchasing and utilizing illegal fireworks and a belief that people will purchase and use them regardless if they were available in the State. Specifically, they could be purchased on Indian reservations. Additionally, there are no real statistics statewide on the property damage or injury/death due to illegal fireworks.

Nancy Merrill made a motion to support the ordinances as presented to the Partnership. Tammy de Weerd stated that we have to have the Counties on board with these ordinance proposals. She asked them to have their legal departments address this issue and come back to the Partnership with their recommendations. Matt Beebe indicated that when the State closes the loophole with respect to illegal fireworks, then Canyon County would follow suit. Motion carried.

Rick Yzaguirre indicated that Paul Woods would be the liaison from Ada County.

Tammy de Weerd asked each of the members to report back to the February meeting as to what each jurisdiction is doing for the March Against Meth activities. They would like to hand out a listing of what each jurisdiction is doing to battle substance abuse on March 21st.

Meeting adjourned.

Treasure Valley Partnership

Meeting Minutes

February 28, 2007

 

Attendees: Tom Dale Tammy de Weerd John Evans Frank McKeever Nancy Merrill Margie Watson Paul Woods Rick Yzaguirre

Absent: Matt Beebe Dave Bieter Nate Mitchell Garret Nancolas Dean Obray Guest/Staff Lori Fisher - Albertson's Foundation Mike Reynoldson - Micron Bill Larsen - Staff

 

Tammy de Weerd opened the meeting and welcomed everyone to Meridian.  She described the Meadowlake Village development and indicated that the Grand Lodge and other buildings in the center of the development were designed as an independent living/assistant care center for the elderly.  In addition, the homes being built in the development serve as a retirement/independent living location for the residents.

Tammy discussed the March against Meth activities that were scheduled for the 21^st of March.  She mentioned that several different school districts, chambers of commerce and other organizations were participating in the activity.  She mentioned that the youth councils of Nampa, Eagle, Caldwell, Meridian, Parma, and Wilder are offering a rally and march, starting at BSU.  They also have a poster contest for the March Against Meth activity.

Tom Dale mentioned that Mercy Hospital is hosting a community sale that raises funds for youth activities throughout the valley.

Tammy welcomed Hal Tolmie from Owyhee County who was attending as they are intending on joining the Partnership.

Tammy introduced Lori Fisher from the Albertson’s Foundation and Mike Reynoldson from Micron who were there to discuss the petition drive to establish a Community College district in the Treasure Valley.  Lori gave a brief history of the Community College Yes campaign and the Albertson’s foundation involvement on this issue over the past two years.  Last year they began talking with the Treasure Valley Community College from Ontario.  She indicated that they were pretty limited in what they could do in Idaho and couldn’t do the professional/technical and workforce development component because of the expense and long-term sustainability of these components.  She indicated that Mayor Nancolas and TVCC have been working on this.

She indicated that BSU has been charged with the development of a Community College in the valley, but it really is up to the voters to create a district.  BSU wants to transition the Selland College off of their campus in downtown Boise to the BSU West campus.  In addition, she indicated that BSU is willing to step in to get it started and would pull back in two to three years as the college got up an running and accredited as a new college.  The BSU business plan proposal called for 2,500 students in the first year with up to 6,000 students in year three.

Lori mentioned that in August, Micron had conducted a survey, which revealed that 71% of those surveyed, support the need for a community college and 61% of those surveyed would support a tax for establishing a community college.

Tom Dale asked if the TVCC model has been adequately studied to bring student populations up to the scale of need just mentioned.  Lori Fisher indicated that it has been thoroughly studied and that because they are an Oregon College operating in Idaho, the long-range sustainability of the TVCC model comes into question because of the continued funding required to raise the student levels as they are projected.

Mike Reynoldson stated that one of the benefits of setting up a community college district is there would be a locally elected board that would be in control.  That board could then work with TVCC to avoid duplication of services and to partner on new programs.  He indicated that BSU has about 5500 students being educated in their Canyon County facilities.  These are community college type courses, but the students get the privilege of paying full university tuition for this service that is double what they would pay for community college tuition.

Tom Dale asked if the May election is rock solid?  Is their enough time to get the education generated to get this vote passed?  Mike indicated that he felt May is the right day to hold an election.  He stated that the community college issue was raised in the campaign for governor as well as numerous candidates for State legislative offices.  He indicated that there appears to be all kinds of momentum on this issue.  In addition, in the State of the State address there was a pledge for $5,000,000 for creation of a community college.

Mike stated that when it comes to credibility on this issue, elected officials were not seen as credible on the issue of community colleges.  He also indicated that they are attempting to raise about $1,000,000 for the educational campaign on this issue.

Mike mentioned that they are projecting a need for $4,000,000 per year funding for a community college.  This equates to a property tax of $17.42 per year on the average priced home in Ada and Canyon County.

Tammy de Weerd introduced the topic of Floodplain Ordinance enhancements and mentioned that Nancy Merrill was not there to lead the discussion.  She mentioned briefly that the City of Meridian had their first public hearing on the proposed fireworks ordinance.  A discussion ensued about the need for a common fireworks ordinance in the cities and counties to restrict the sale and use of the illegal fireworks.

Margie asked how the other municipalities were doing with regard to passing the floodplain ordinance components the TVP had agreed on.  Tom Dale stated that the City of Nampa faces different issues than those municipalities that are on the Boise and Stake River systems.  Nampa doesn’t have a major waterway in the City.

John Evans stated that the philosophy of having consistent floodplain ordinances that have an impact on development is a good one.  However, in Garden City, the latest floodplain maps show that there are significant properties that are due for redevelopment that are now encumbered by being in the floodplain.  They are faced with the problem of dealing with definitions and how those effect development.  The biggest thing they are dealing with is how to treat existing developed areas in the redevelopment side of things.  He feels there needs to be exemptions tailoring analysis that restricts redevelopment issues that are specifically crucial in Garden City.

He feels that in this issue, one shoe does not fit all jurisdictions.  And these enhancements have a major impact in Garden City.  He showed a map that indicated the areas of Garden City that are in the 100-year floodplain.  John indicated the he is more interested in channel preservation than any other issue.

Paul Woods stated that from the County perspective they directed their staff to make these ordinance enhancements happen.  They support the concept, but need to address some of the details prior to instituting any changes.  They don’t think that providing 100-foot access all along the river makes any sense.  Also, point number five of the enhancements puts a lot of liability on the permitting jurisdiction.

Margie indicated that Parma has a huge floodplain because of the confluence of the Boise and Stake rivers.  She wants to address this issue at the next meeting.

Bill stated that Christian Nafzger had been employed for approximately two weeks.  At this point he has two indictments and eight cases in the works with one arrest.

A motion was made by Margie Watson and seconded by John Evans to approve the minutes and financial reports.  Motion carried.

Meeting adjourned.

 

 

Treasure Valley Partnership
Meeting Minutes
March 26, 2007

Attendees Matt Beebe Dave Bieter Tom Dale Tammy de Weerd John Evans Frank McKeever Guests/Staff: Brad Holton John Bechtel Christian Nafzger Carrie Blankenship Bill Larsen - Staff

Nancy Merrill Nate Mitchell Margie Watson Paul Woods Rick Yzaguirre Absent: Garret Nancolas Dean Obray

Matt Beebe opened the meeting and introduced Carrie Blankenship from Canyon County Development Services. She is the individual in Canyon County that coordinates flood plain services.

Brad Holton and John Bechtel representing Greenleaf and Wilder were in attendance as they are anticipating joining the Partnership.

Christian Nafzger was introduced as the employee on the SAUSA Project. He indicated that he had five indictments thus far and 15 individual cases in the works. These are all local gang members with firearm offenses. He mentioned that there is a new State gang act and there are penalties for knowingly selling a firearm to known gang members.

Tom Dale stated that he was please that Christian is up and running right now as there was anticipation of a lag time between his hire and actually prosecuting cases. Dave Bieter asked what kinds of cases he is working on. Christian indicated that they are all firearms offenses related to gang activities. He stated that if any of the Treasure Valley Partnership members had any questions for him, to be sure to contact him at 334–9408.

Tom Dale stated that the Community College petition is in front of the State board of Education on this day. He reminded the members that as they talk to individuals that we need corporate support for the election public campaign. Dave Bieter mentioned that he feels there is a moving target on some of the issues associated with this campaign. Nancy Merrill reiterated a need to have answers to some of the specific questions.

Tom indicated that as far as BSU’s involvement, there have been some changes in the interpretation of their commitment. He suggested that Bill get a meeting with some of the Community College Yes members and gather the latest facts on the issues and distribute it to the members.

Nancy Merrill began discussing the floodplain ordinance enhancements. She mentioned that early on after the flooding last year, a taskforce was put together to create ordinances that would create some continuity up and down the Boise River. The members of the taskforce included representatives from Idaho Water Resources, Corps of Engineers, Flood District 10 and others.

She mentioned the 5-floodplain ordinance enhancements that have been developed as best practices. These are; 100’ setback, Flood mitigation plan, Base flood elevations for residential structures, no adverse impact and a 50’ setback for emergency equipment. She indicated that the City of Eagle is ready to move forward with these ordinance enhancements.

She indicated that in areas that are already developed or in areas that there is not room for the minimum setbacks, the jurisdictions should put in place an overlay district, which would exclude these areas.

John Evans mentioned that the problem they have been having is the definition of the finished floor.

Nancy asked that seeing as we are struggling with the differences of these ordinances among our jurisdictions, we should then see if we can set up resolutions. Dave Bieter indicated he felt that the resolution idea is a good one that each jurisdiction can then see how these enhancements can be instituted.

Nancy moved that we put together a draft resolution and bring it to the next meeting. Seconded by John Evans, motion carried.

Rick Yzaguirre suggested that we draft a letter to the State Land Board supporting the minimum of 25’ easement. Seconded by Tammy de Weerd. Motion carried.

Matt Beebe indicated that a new mosquito abatement law had been passed and was on the Governor’s desk.

Nate Mitchell moved to approve the minutes and the budget. Seconded by Frank McKeever.
Motion approved.

April Meeting Minutes not available at this time...

Treasure Valley Partnership
Meeting Minutes
May 30, 2007

Bill Larsen opened the meeting and explained that our host Nancy Merrill had gotten called away on an emergency.

Bill asked all of the members that were ready to sign the Resolution on Floodplain Management practices, to gather to sign the resolution and get a picture taken for a press release to the local media. Those that signed the resolution included: Dave Bieter, Tammy de Weerd, Brad Holton, Margie Watson, John Evans, Nate Mitchell and Paul Woods.

Bill introduced Lisa Stark from the Bureau of Reclamation, Snake River area office. Their office addresses issues in the Snake River watershed from Jackson to the confluence in Lewiston. She manages issues associated with water resource planning for the watershed. There are two ways in water resource management issues are looked at. They include the supply side and the demand side. The supply management issues include finding new supplies. The demand management issues include the implementation of policies, looking at economic, conservation, training, and marketing issues.

From a planning perspective, the Bureau looks at supply, demand and conservation. They also look at both national and local interests associated with planning for and managing the core elements of supply, demand and conservation.

Lisa then began a summary of the Boise/Payette Water Storage assessment study completed by the Bureau. She mentioned that there are three levels of study, begging with the assessment, which can lead to an appraisal or a feasibility study which are much more intensive studies.
Lisa then provided a summary of a recently completed Water Storage Assessment Study. This Water Storage Assessment Study focused on water storage opportunities that exist in the Treasure Valley. The Study was managed by Ch2M Hill included large stakeholder involvement with the development of the study. They looked at water rights, flows and a variety of studies on the river systems to develop this assessment study.

The differences in the Boise and Payette river basins can be summarized as follows.

1. The Payette River Basin is about 25% larger than the Boise basin.
2. The Boise River Basin is more developed than the Payette basin with a little more than one million acre/feet captured storage water compared to only 815,000 storage water capacity.
3. The Boise River Basin receives less hydrology (snow pack).

Projected water demand (20 – 50 yrs.) appeared to be one area of information that was lacking adequate consensus and consistent documentation. For example, the projected future demand ranged from 50,000 acre/feet to 300,000 acre/feet.

In the assessment report, they identified several physical locations to develop storage capacity. There are 8 areas of opportunity for water storage. They include three storage opportunities in the Boise Basin including; raising lucky peak, Arrowrock or Anderson Dam and water storage opportunities on the lower south and the north forks of the Boise River. In addition, there were five storage opportunities in the Payette Basin.

John Evans asked if the study recognized the urbanization of the valley. Lisa indicated that the trend growth figures that did not take into account increasing population growth trends since 2003.

Tammy de Weerd asked if there are models that Lisa would recommend using? Lisa indicated there are lots of good models and that they had just completed a water budget in the Boise area. This indicates what they are delivering and quantified by type of use. They also have a groundwater use model that has been recently developed.

Update: Lisa mentioned that they are processing the LIDR data and it should be available soon.

Nate Mitchell asked, what is the reality of having new storage facilities built? She indicated it is a political process on the federal level. However there are processes in place that are advancing feasibility studies to progress toward generating new storage facilities. It could take from conception to completion 15 years to complete the approval process.

Paul Woods asked if the Treasure Valley Partnership could request a feasibility study for raising lucky peak for increased storage. She indicated that is an option and the Bureau would welcome local input in pushing the process forward.

Election of Officers. The current officers are; Nancy Merrill – President, Tom Dale – Vice President, and Tammy de Weerd as Secretary/Treasurer.

Nate Mitchell asked if there were normally a progression through the offices. Bill indicated that the historical expert, Elizabeth Conner, former TVP Director should be able to shed light on the process. Elizabeth stated that normally there was a progression through the offices in the past. Additionally, in the past, officers were selected by rotating representatives from Ada and Canyon Counties each year.

Nate moved that we elect Tom Dale as President, Tammy de Weerd as Vice President and Margie Watson as Secretary/Treasurer. John Evans seconded. Motion carried unanimously.

Bill handed out a spreadsheet on current dues associated with membership in the Partnership. He stated that there would be lots of room under the current budget to carry forth with our financial obligations for the 2007-2008 fiscal year. Tammy de Weerd moved to keep the membership dues at the existing level. Margie Watson seconded. Motion carried unanimously.

Tammy de Weerd requested that obligations regarding the SAUSA Project be included in the monthly profit/loss statements. Margie Watson moved and Tammy de Weerd seconded to approve the minutes and budget. Motion carried.

Paul Woods indicated that Ada County has been asked to look into a covered vehicle/tarp ordinance. There was a lot of discussion on this and it was decided that Bill would look into this issue and report back to the Partnership.

Nate Mitchell moved to adjourn the meeting. Margie Watson seconded. Motion carried.

June Meeting Minutes not available at this time...

Treasure Valley Partnership
Meeting Minutes
July 25, 2007

Garret Nancolas opened the meeting by welcoming everyone to the City of Caldwell. He indicated that they are proud of the renovation activity in downtown Caldwell. In the past, the City of Caldwell was extremely vibrant, however, the downtown core of Caldwell lost a good deal of its retail presence at the time of the development of the Karcher Mall. In addition, the city decided to cover up Indian Creek that runs through the downtown core.

Recently a group of downtown Caldwell business folks and a host of community and state leaders joined to reinvent the downtown. They got a grant from the DEA for a study that showed that revitalization would be possible. Garret indicated that they have learned there are a multitude of regulations once you start dealing with water issues such as the renovation they have undertaken on Indian Creek. They have worked with the Army Corps. Of Engineers and have gotten approved, the first urban stream restoration project in the history of the Army Corps.

Garret introduced Jennifer Heidt with the Idaho Lieutenant Governor’s Office who was at the meeting to speak about server training. She mentioned that Idaho is the only state in the area without some form of responsible alcohol server training. Responsible alcohol server training helps servers identify factors associated with when customers have had too much to drink or are going to be disruptive.

In her study she found that distributors, restaurants and bars are surprisingly passionate about the need for server training. From a business standpoint server training helps with some of the liability costs associated with serving alcohol.

Through the use of a small grant, they were able to gain cooperation and institute server training in downtown Boise establishments. The results showed that the incidents of minors in establishments, fights and the presence of disruptive behaviors went down dramatically after instituting server training.

Jennifer mentioned that Mayor Bieter asked her to present this information to the Partnership. It has been found in the surrounding states that when there is regional consistency and participation in the development of this training, server training works well. There is a movement to address alcohol server training in the State. But Jennifer did not know how far along they are in the process.

She felt that the best way to develop support for server training is at the community level. Local alcohol serving establishments know best how server training will impact their businesses. In other states, alcohol server training implementation has been a top down approach. Jennifer indicated that we have the opportunity to include businesses in this process. With this approach, ordinances that make sense for businesses and that are effective will be supported in the ordinance development process.

There are problems associated with server training that needs to be addressed. One is the transient nature of the workforce. Most establishments are not willing to reimburse employees for the cost of getting the training. However this problem can be solved with internal business policies. As an example, some businesses have policies that reimburse employees for the training costs based on their employment tenure. Other problems associated with server training are; phase in time for instituting the requirement for training, requirements for servers to have this training prior to hire and a tracking mechanism for identifying those that have had the training.

Jennifer introduced a draft alcohol server-training ordinance that has been developed by the City of Boise. She indicated that this was just a draft and that if the Partnership decided to take this project on, it would serve as a good base for developing the region-wide ordinance.

Jennifer explained that there are a couple different of alcohol server training programs that are available. She introduced Susan Sterts whom is an alcohol server trainer in the treasure valley and uses a program called TIPS. She described the TIPS training program and indicated that they have trained up to 800 people in the State with the TIPS program in recent years. Susie started providing TIPS training as a result of a lawsuit that happened in her business several years ago. She talked about nuances associated with the training and the resulting costs of liability that may or may not result.

Margie asked if the infrastructure is available to institute an ordinance. Jennifer Heidt indicated that there are a lot of trainers in the valley and there are several server-training programs. Jennifer also indicated that there is a national organization where trainers can get their certifications.

Tom Dale moved and Margie Watson seconded to pursue having the Partnership work together to institute a common alcohol server-training ordinance. Motion carried.

Tammy de Weerd suggested that each of the Partnership members identify two or three individuals in the server industry in our communities to assist with championing this topic when we go to public comment on any proposed ordinance.

Susie Sterts indicated she would get a list of names to the Partnership members of local alcohol establishments that could serve as champions. She stated she would get the list to Bill who would distribute them to the members.

Bill presented information on the Covered Load issue to the Partnership members as a result of a request at a previous meeting. After much discussion it was decided to table this issue at this point in time.

Frank McKeever moved to approve the minutes and budget report. Tammy de Weerd seconded. Motion carried.

Meeting Adjourned.

Treasure Valley Partnership
Meeting Minutes
August 27, 2007

Mayor Margie Watson opened the meeting and welcomed everyone to Parma, Idaho. She stated that the City of Parma is drastically changing as a result of growth. Margie mentioned they are doing four blocks of downtown revitalization and have obtained a couple of grants to help with the work. In addition, they are also working on a grant to improve the airport infrastructure.

Bill introduced Leonard Herr with the Idaho Dept. of Environmental Quality. Leonard started by saying that the fires with large air quality impacts are up near McCall and east and were not heavily impacting the Treasure Valley. He did say that there were numerous air quality alerts due to smoke but that the impact of the fires this summer have not been as hard on the Treasure Valley air quality as the previous summer.

We have had a lot of smoke in the valley, but it has mostly been elevated. So we have not been getting some high numbers due to the smoke. With that said, he indicated the public perception is that this year is substantially worse than in the past. He did indicate they have issued more air quality alerts this year. And there are a couple of reasons for that. Reason # 1 is that the Fed’s lowered the standards for this year. Therefore, the air quality hasn’t been worse, just the standard by which it is measured has.

Reason #2 – They started measuring Ozone back in 2000. With influences on air quality, ozone is the one that is tied specifically to population. As the population as grown, the ozone measurements have gone up.

He started a discussion around how close is the treasure valley getting for non-attainment for air quality? Leonard mentioned that there are several things to look at. One is Particulate and the other is Ozone. Particulate worries tend to be in the winter and Ozone worries tend to be in the summer. Ozone and Particulate attainment measurements are based on three year running averages.

If we looked at the years 04, 05 and 06 the valley was real close to non-attainment for particulate. In 2004, we had a real bad year for air quality. Because of the way the rolling average works, we now have some breathing room because the numbers in 2004 skewed our three-year measurement because it was so much higher than we have seen lately.

For Ozone, the numbers have been getting worse. And if we can avoid a bad year we should be ok under the attainment number of 80. The Treasure Valley is measuring at a 77 currently. However, it is contemplated that the Feds are in the process of lowering the attainment number and this could cause us some problems. In addition, a couple of bad weather years would also throw some complications to meeting attainment.

The things we can do now include; control measures and early action compacts. The work that has been done with the Treasure Valley Air Quality Coalition would help our cause if we reach non-attainment.

Nate Mitchell asked what non-attainment would do to title 5 permit holders? Leonard indicated it would make it more difficult to get new title 5 permits and to modify existing permits.

Matt Beebe asked what we should be looking at as far as the recommendations of the Air Quality Council. Leonard indicated that instituting recommendations would be slow, but we would probably start with controls of volatile organic compounds (vapors). Controlling fumes from underground storage tanks, and emissions testing controls for the transportation industry would be some of the first control measures.

John Evans asked how big an issue the Canyon County Emissions Testing is? Leonard indicated, as far as control measures go, this has a big impact.

Margie Watson asked about Covered Loads. Leonard stated that the Air Quality Council has been talking about this issue. One of their recommendations is, uniform dust control ordinances. The State has a dust control law, but there is no enforcement. Leonard indicated they are real interested in seeing uniform Covered Load ordinances in the Treasure Valley. He stated that Covered Load issues are the number one complaint regarding air quality.

Ed Burnett started his discussion on Mosquito abatement by passing out some up-to-date statistics put out by the Department of Health & Welfare on the West Nile Virus. The reports showed five human cases in Ada County and seven in Canyon County. Compared to last year at this time, we are significantly lower in the cases of West Nile Virus. He indicated that in Canyon County they have two surveillance teams that set out mosquito traps and monitors them. Once the traps are retrieved, they have had the ability to test the results of trapping for West Nile. Ed stated that this has helped tremendously because they have a faster turnaround to finding a positive test and responding with spraying if necessary, all because they are doing their own testing.

Ed indicated that one of the big problems last years was that the Canyon County Mosquito Abatement District was not county wide. They were able to work with the Canyon County Commission to create an interim district that helped them get broader coverage and better response to the problem.

Christian Nafzger provided a report on the progress of the SAUSA Project. He showed a chart indicating the number of gun related crimes. He showed that there were 24 indicted defendants and seven convicted/sentenced defendants. These defendants are serving sentences from seven to 48 months in Federal Prison.

He mentioned they would be holding press conference on September 4th. He laid out an anticipated agenda for the press conference and stated it will be concentrating on the SAUSA Project as well as the Treasure Valley Task Force.

Margie Watson asked if we could see some information on where these offenders were from. That way we could use the information for member jurisdictions in future conversations on the SAUSA Project. Mark indicated they would try to add this information to future reports.

Mark Haws asked if the SAUSA Project is having an impact in the community. Tom Dale indicated that his sense was that the project was having an impact and the word is out. He further stated is that we had a long term vision included lobbying the Idaho Legislature at the end of the project to get them to step up to the plate and fund this activity on a permanent basis.

Tom asked if there were any local legislators that we could approach to getting the State to pick up the SAUSA Project. John Evans suggested that we bring this issue up at the retreat and discuss some strategy around the SAUSA Project.

Bill opened the floor to get input on the Retreat and future partnership meetings. Frank McKeever suggested that we are having real problems with irrigation districts and maybe it should be a topic for future discussion. John Evans mentioned that we should have time set aside at the retreat to discuss future partnership topics.

Margie Watson moved to approve the minutes and financial report. Nate Mitchell seconded.

Meeting adjorned.

Treasure Valley Partnership

2007 Retreat Minutes

Owyhee Plaza
September 27 & 28, 2007

Attendees:
Matt Beebe
Tome Dale
Tammy de Weerd
John Evans
Margie Watson
Paul Woods

Guests:
Dan Chadwick
Ken Harward
David Hensley

September 27, 2007

Tom Dale opened the meeting mentioning we would enter into a discussion about issues centering on upcoming urban renewal district legislation. He introduced Ken Harward with the Idaho Association of Cities. Ken stated that during the last Idaho Legislative session there were several bills that were introduced to reform urban renewal law.

Legislation was proposed that instead of having a board appointed by Counties and Cities, that urban renewal district board positions would be elected positions. That bill did not get out of committee.

Chapter 20 is the classic urban renewal section that has been on the books since the 60’s. It did not permit any propterty tax. Then Chapter 29 called the Local Economic Development Act was passed in 1987. It allows the creation of a revenue allocation area. This creates the property tax component. The emphasis is “local economic development”. The district that you created could not account for more that 10% of the total taxable value of the City. Then the overlapping tax rates of the various jurisdictions would be added up and that rate would be applied to the taxable market value of new development. This is called the increment.

Now the overlapping taxing entities will forego revenue during the life of the urban renewal plan. Then at close out, taxable market value will be reported in the new construction role. Therefore there is a real incentive to close out urban renewal district projects as soon as possible.

Paul Woods asked, the year that it sunsets, cities and counties are providing services, then all of a sudden, you can run your budget up to this level because you can on the new construction, if it is under the 3 percent. Ken indicated you can grow your budget by three percent over the levy of the previous year, and you can apply last years tax rate to a new construction role plus any foregone. The effect is that Bodo in essence raises taxes in Star.

Tom asked if it is causing Stars taxes to raise, or inhibit them from going down. Ken stated that the tax effect was there.

Ken indicated that there have been a bunch of people have prepared some legislation that would; 1) a bill that would no longer allow, in this overlapping tax rate that is applied to the increment, to include any voter approved bonds, i.e. School district or city bond levies.

Tom Dale stated that we need to be cognizant as to what is going on with this legislation and continue to be diligent by keeping involved with efforts of IAC and AIC in monitoring and shaping the discussion. Tammy agreed that this is something we need to watch.

Ken indicated that there is a legislative task force that has as its charge, to review and analyze land use policy; area of impact, annexation and urban renewal. It is co-chaired by Sen. Fulcher and Rep. Bayer. Their personal concerns center around the SW Boise Annexation. There have been 3 meetings thus far. He feels however, there probably wont be any legislation introduced from this committee this year.

Paul asked about personal property tax. Ken indicated that their concern is just not loosing revenue. There is a legislative committee looking at exemptions.

Ken said he was at a meeting on transportation funding. The ITD board had voted on requesting 130 million on Garvee. The sentiment however is that why should the State approve these funds when it is the Treasure Valley that is getting all the money. We saw this sentiment play out last year in JFAC. This also has an effect when trying to find traditional money for transportation. The Governor appears not to be supporting a gas tax. Matt suggested that we have the legislature stay in hotels/motels in Caldwell and experience the traffic problems by being forced to drive in it during the session.

Tom introduced Leonard Herr with the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality. Leonard mentioned that this might be a short presentation. He had just a few items to share with the Partnership. Leonard would like the Partnership to look at and pass new ordinances. Specifically, fugitive dust controls.

Tammy asked if we don’t already have some common ordinances. Leonard indicated that the common burn ordinances that were instituted were very successful. With the burn ordinances issue, all jurisdictions had some variation in place and all we had to do was change each ordinance to a common standard and protocol. For the most part, these fugitive dust regulations do not exist.

The only place fugitive dust regulations exist is under State Law. These are very general in nature and talk about reasonable controls, like fugitive dust should be not be allowed “unreasonably”. And there are real minimal controls on covered loads, trackout, etc.

Tom asked what is the State law on covered loads? State law states, “loads should be covered reasonably”. Tom indicated that this term “reasonably”, opens up a wide interpretation.

Leonard passed out a model ordinance on fugitive dust, which included covered loads. He pointed out some of the specifics of this ordinance that gives stricter interpretation compared to the Idaho state law.

Tom provided an example he had witnessed just this week. Where there was a big truck on the freeway that was just billowing sand and gravel from the rear. He asked, “could the State ticket this person”? Leonard said, that under his reg., this person could not be ticketed.

Margie asked where Ag concerns fit under the model ordinance? He indicated that Ag. is exempted on most fugitive dust regulations. Margie asked if it was true that gravel pits are exempted because of mining regulations? Leonard said no, while in the pit, yes, but once it gets on public highway it is a different ballgame.

John felt that the piecemeal approach to this fugitive dust area would probably be the best. He said, he was pretty sure that for example, his council would have little problem instituting a covered load ordinance because we have all seen that truck on the highway. But the other portions of the model ordinance he distributed, are doable, but will take different and more concentrated efforts. Maybe we should bite off small parts of this issue at a time.

Leonard stated, one thing that would be a priority in the development of a covered load ordinance would be insuring the ordinance reads same in each jurisdiction.

John Evans stated that it might be real important if Ada and Canyon County adopted this above all others, because most of these gravel pit type loads originate in the county. His concern was that if we take some common language and then each jurisdiction does their own tweaks to the ordinance we would defeat the standardization concerns. He felt that if the two counties settled on some common language then the cities could easily piggy back off of that and there would be less variation among the ordinances.

Tom felt to be effective on this endeavor; each jurisdiction’s ordinance needs to happen at the same time. Tammy concurred. Paul volunteered to work with Bill and put together draft language for a covered load ordinance. Leonard stated that he would ask his staff to gather some example language and forward it over to Bill.

During the discussion of the model ordinance, the track out issue was brought up. Several jurisdictions have track out ordinance language. Tammy asked that Bill do some research among the Partnership jurisdictions to identify the track out language that exists. Bill indicated he would develop this and bring to the October meeting.

Leonard indicated that the number one air quality complaint is dust from construction. So if we take these measures step by step, we can go along ways to mitigating our fugitive dust issues. Additionally, the track out issue can be handled in a different manner. Track out primarily occurs around construction sites and they are not permanent problems. And you can mitigate this in your permitting process.

Paul stated that the covered load ordinance is a good idea for public safety and air quality combined. But on a larger scale, it is also a nuisance issue.

Paul asked, “When we have orange and red quality days, would it make sense to outlaw certain activities like paving?” Leonard stated that this would help out on poor quality days. But there is no authority for this type of action. Under State law, there are stages. Each stage allows the State to take more action. Leonard felt that paving and chip sealing are possibly big contributors to our ozone problems. They just conducted an air quality study where there was some paving occurring around the test site and they are waiting to see how that affected the monitoring.

Tom opened the discussion on meeting dates for the Partnership. Margie would like to change the date as Monday seems to conflict with a lot of our regular meetings. After the discussion the 1st and 4th Wednesday of each month would work out as a regular meeting dates. Tom asked that Bill put out a notice out to members to find out their preferences.

Margie asked to move on to the budget. Bill indicated that over last years budget he would like to add more to the phone expense amount. He requested that the partnership reimburse him $35.00 to pay for half of his regular monthly charges on his cell phone. The TVP phone number is Bill’s cell number.

He indicated that he also had reduced budget items for expenses such as; the retreat regional meetings and also added money to the computer repair line item. Bill stated that this was the only real change in the budget. Tom mentioned that Bill is having some trouble with his computer. Paul mentioned that he would talk to his IT staff to see if there were some assistance that could be provided.

Tom mentioned that he would like to mount an effort to introduce legislation to have the State fund the SAUSA project. He wanted to approach Patti Lodge and other legislators to see if we can push this forward this year. Margie agreed.

John moved to accept the FY 2008 TVP Budget. Margie seconded. Motion carried.

Bill showed the MOU with TVP and Owyhee County that had been updated for the next year of the project. Margie moved to approve the MOU and Tammy seconded. Motion carried.

Bill stated that he has been getting the sense that our regular monthly meeting agenda’s are too full and he felt we needed to provide more open discussion times. Tom stated that this was one of the priorities of the TVP. Tammy said she really enjoyed the round table discussions on a monthly basis. Paul mentioned that already have forums for transportation and planning and the TVP could be a forum for discussion of other issues.

Tom liked the idea of having a free form discussion at the beginning and end of monthly agenda. It was generally agreed that we would try to shake this up and try to limit real structured time to one hour per meeting.

Tammy wanted to talk about their Youth Fest. Drug Free Idaho has an event at Boondocks and last year they had 1,200 Kids. This year there were sponsors with booths and the kids had to gather information from the booths in order to get free admission. This year they had 2,700 kids attend that had earned their wristbands. She mentioned that these are the types of issues we like to hear about. Anytime we can talk about successes is important to the TVP forums.

Tammy moved to accept the August minutes and adjourn. Margie seconded. Motion carried.

Mayor Dale introduced Dan Chadwick with the Idaho Association of Counties and David Hensley with the Idaho Governor’s Office.

David started out by relaying the message that the Governor is impressed with the effectiveness of the TVP in the recent past and is looking forward to working with its members to positively effect Idaho.

David indicated the governor is looking into efficiencies to of the highway funding formula so that more funds can go to roads. As an example, Parks and Rec. comes off the top and in that highway fund, ISP gets 3% and with that goes to ITD, 14% goes to overhead and 4% goes to roads. So, they are looking into the funding formula, identifying inefficiencies and working to identify better ways to fund transportation needs.

Tom asked if we were to have some enhancements on transportation funding?

David indicated this legislative session is going to present unique challenges. The construction on the Statehouse will be one of them. It will be hard to access people as the legislature is in session.

David stated that the Governor is interested in the issues the Cities and Counties are facing. Tammy said she would like to see Cities, Counties and the Governor’s Office work together to tell the story to rural legislators, the key role that urban counties/cities have in the economic health of the State. This impacts transportation/roads. We have to convince them that we need to fix the congestion problems in urban Idaho and how this impacts our State as a whole. Paul added that he felt that ITD does not have the tools in its toolbox to deal with an urbanizing environment.

John added that you run into problems on state highways with access management types of issues, for example. One of the challenges you get into is who makes the decision when it comes to these types of issues. He stated there are a lot of layers beyond the District 3 representative. The challenge is there is not an urban philosophy in the ITD toolbox.

Tom stated if we could partner with the Governor on specific related issues, we could be a powerful force. We should pick a few issues and partner together to see if we can get fixes to the system. Paul stated he felt it was a revenue enhancement issue to get transportation in the urbanized areas of the State improved.

Tammy said that if we look at highway 20/26, access management issues pit developers against cities, counties and ITD. The problem occurs when the developer walks into ITD’s door and gets looser constraints on access management concerns. This makes the city/county vulnerable.

David stated that this access management issue might be handled outside of the legislature. He indicated that this discussion has brought up a need to have a discussion to see if we can solve it. He feels that the three entities, ITD, the TVP and the Governors office needs have a discussion and he will look into getting this discussion started.

Dan stated that there are other transportation corridors around the State that are having the exact same access management issues that the TVP members do. They will probably be allies in this discussion.

Tammy indicated that tools like Sales Tax Alternative Revenue Source give us an alternative when we talk with developers. In rural Idaho, public transportation seems to be easier to do than in urban Idaho. We need funding tools, local options, impact fees etc. We are going to be severely hampered in the valley if we do not have more tools.

David stated that this discussion is good. Part of the need is helping the Governor’s office understand problems. Paul felt, we need to be active in identifying solutions and need to begin thinking in the solutions area as we work together.

Tom mentioned the SAUSA Project. He mentioned that we can prove the project is saving the State money. We would like to push through and request the State pick up the full cost of the SAUSA program this year. We would like to have help from the Governor’s office to begin the process.

David said he would more than happy to talk to the Governor about this. One of the issues that will come up, is where do we put the money. The AG’s office has been trying. Dan suggested the Criminal Justice Commission as a place to house this program. David asked if the bottom line on the project is $100,000.00 plus. Tom said that there might be some ancillary costs for processing of checks and benefits. All the other overhead costs, such as office space, secretarial assistance, etc. is all being provided by the U.S. Prosecutor’s Office.

Paul wanted to update folks with the community Detox Center that would serve as a crisis center. They are trying to focus on the ongoing operation and try to accommodate substance abuse and mental health components. Ada County has said that they would step in the lead role for operations of the Center. Their frustrations come from decisions by H&W to not fund Franklin House. We would like to work with the Governor’s Office and Legislature to earmark funding for the Detox Center and not have funding be at the discretion of the Regional office of the Department of Health & Welfare.

Paul said that they see this Detox facility as saving taxpayers dollars. They have substantial agreement, they think on the funding and structure. David suggested that Paul meet with Debbie Field as they are working on this project.

Dan added, that H&W’s decision to not fund Franklin House also hurt local law enforcement. The Franklin House gave the option to get people stabilized on their meds for example without funding a Hospital Emergency Room visit.

Dan stated that there is an interim committee on how to effect property/sales tax exemptions. This will have a great impact on Ada/Canyon Counties. There are two things, the source and the growth as it affects personal property tax. As a company rotates manufacturing equipment, will you be able to capture funds on the increase in the equipment. He indicated that they do not know where this committee’s work will end up.

John said that before David Hensley leaves he wants to be sure the Governor keeps his eye on urban renewal legislation. If we can assist the governor by providing information on the success of the urban renewal tools, we are more than ready to participate and volunteer to help in gathering information.

David said that the Real Estate Commission asked if they could have statutory permission to buy and own their own property. They current lease property for their administrative purposes, but the Fish and Game was allowed to make a payment in leau of taxes for the property they own. So, the Governor’s office is looking at saying if you are a state agency like any number of self regulating agencies, then maybe you should be paying property taxes.

As he was leaving, David felt that the Partnership needed to focus on bringing forward issues that need attention either through legislation or administrative analysis. Good timing on this information exchange would be in the next couple of months.

A discussion ensued about member attendance at the meetings. Tom stated that in the last 3-4 years, through the TVP we have done some good things. Examples include SAUSA and pseudoephedrine control. As a body, we are affecting some good changes even though all members are not taking part. John asked how we get more of the members engaged? Tammy stated that the power of this group has everything to do with the health of our valley. If all the members are not serious and present at the table, it diminishes the effectiveness of the Treasure Valley Partnership. Tammy felt that we all have a responsibility to contact our TVP members that are not showing up and encourage participation.

Dan Chadwick stated that the TVP members that are attending regularly, need to work with the members that are not attending meetings and encourage being active. He agreed with Tammy that the health of the Valley is affected by the participation of all cities and counties working together to affect positive change. He indicated that the Association of Idaho Counties has also encountered the problem and their solution was to have all members be responsible for encouraging all members participate. And, you as individuals need to be mindful and active in this pursuit.

Margie asked if meeting once a month was too frequent for the Partnership. John mentioned that one of the principle objectives of the partnership was relationship building. Paul mentioned that all the members have competing interests for our time. What would make it so that members would not want to miss a TVP meeting? The Partnership has proven its value over time. And we need to reinforce that. He thinks that the value of the Partnership is that when we are facing issues we have compare and contrast ability across jurisdictions.

Tom stated that he likes meeting frequently and feels it is necessary to build and develop relationships. Paul even said that as a candidate he would be advertising the fact he has been an active member of the Partnership.

Bill mentioned that as new elected officials come into office after elections, he would like to see a “welcoming team” go and visit the newly elected officials. This was agreed as a good idea and we would tackle that as it was happening.

In addition, Bill mentioned that he was also thinking about attempting some team building exercise with the TVP members. Dan suggested we bring Keith Allread in and work with the TVP on leadership. He is however expensive. Or the TVP could bring in Jim Weatherby to conduct a leadership program with the members.

Tammy asked where we were with regard to instituting fireworks ordinances and the alcohol server-training project. She stated that we attempted to recruit champions to a alcohol server meeting earlier in September. Bill indicated that the City of Boise is charging ahead with their ordinance. Bill said he was planning a meeting for October and would be attempting to recruit champions from each jurisdiction as well as other folks from the insurance industry, Liquor Licensing bureau, ISP and others to discuss this server-training issue and would be ready to move forward with the ordinance process.

Dan mentioned the Governor’s task force on alcohol and beverage control was meeting. More information would be following as this group meets. One issue is the administration of the licensing. The other is the quota system and whether this system would be eliminated. The big battle is the value of the licenses.

Meeting adjourned

Treasure Valley Partnership
Meeting Minutes
October 22, 2007

Attendees:
John Bechtel
Dave Bieter
Tammy de Weerd
John Evans
Brad Holton (Lee Belt - City Clerk)
Margie Watson
Paul Woods

Absent:
Matt Beebe
Tom Dale
Scot Dowdy
Richard Freund
Frank McKeever
Nancy Merrill
Nate Mitchell
Garret Nancolas

Commissioner Paul Woods opened the meeting at the new FACES facility in Boise. The facility was created about a year and a half ago. It serves victims of domestic violence, child abuse and sexual assault and is a partnership between law enforcement, the prosecutor’s office, local hospitals (St. Luke’s and St. Alphonsus), the Woman and Children’s Alliance and the Family Advocacy program.

Paul mentioned that the TVP held its annual meeting in August and he felt it was productive. John Evans added that he felt the conversation with the Governor’s representative (David Hensley) and Ken Harward of AIC on upcoming legislative issues was extremely helpful.

Paul introduced Dr. Hirschfeld who expressed his gratitude for the opportunity to speak to the Partnership. He stated that they deal with domestic violence, child physical/sexual abuse and neglect as well as adult sexual assault. These issues have always received compassion but very fragmented care. We have seen an evolution to pursue not re-victimizing the victim. Traditionally, victims have had to go from place to place and retell their story to numerous agencies. With the FACES facility, victims have to relive this experience a lot less.

This facility is a massive public and private partnership and the victim’s receive comfort, relief and security to solving the problem. The issue is personal and social and does impact society.

About 90% of the folks in correctional facilities will speak of abuse as a child. It is intergenerational and a learned behavior. If your parents dealt with you in these manners, there is a likelihood that you will also deal with your children in the same manner. They do a lot of secondary prevention (rescue and recovery) but primary prevention as well. Primary prevention includes education and outreach by reaching out and educating people, for example, on how to deal with a crying baby so a shaken baby can be prevented.

The importance of this justice center provides justice to all and is a very nurturing and caring place. The CARES Unit volume has went up 8% since the facility has been built. It has been taken out of the St. Luke’s environment and at this facility the victim can meet with law enforcement, Child Protective Services and prosecutors right here on site.

This project was put together in the past three-five years by combining grants and donations from throughout the community. The hospitals contribute on a yearly basis. The CARES facility serves a 10 county area. He asked if there is some way this program can be sustained through some sort of budgetary process so; when the grants run out, and the contributions to this charity are pushed aside for a newer compelling charity, we are able to continue to provide this service.

He introduced Kevin McTeague. Kevin indicated they are trying to create a place where all the service agencies are on-site to provide services in a multi-disciplinary approach. Criminal Justice, health care and social service agencies are housed together and work together to solve problems for victims.

In 2005, the St. Luke’s CARES facility served 966 children. Through this facility, the number of people served has increased dramatically. For example, the Ada County Prosecutor’s office filed 386 felony domestic violence charges. Tammy stated that she felt the numbers are symptoms to a deeper problem.

Kevin indicated that they are in the process of developing a domestic violence forensic nursing program. They would have nurses trained to do collection of forensic evidence within the nursing arena. Lastly, they are looking at expanding into elder abuse services but will not begin this till they get their forensic nursing program established.

Some of their business partners include; St. Alphonsus and St. Luke’s hospitals, Integrated Security Systems, Ashley Furniture. Government sponsors include; the Ada County Board of Commissioners, the U.S. Dept. of Justice, and the U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development. There was approximately $700,000 of grant money from HUD. They have also had lots of local sponsors and donors that have assisted with the development of FACES.

Tammy de Weerd asked what kind of cooperation the facility had with the faith community? Dr. Hirschfeld stated that cooperation falls within the jurisdiction of CPS services on how those families are supported. There is an intense focus on keeping families whole. Every opportunity is given to the family to be successful. This is a multi-faceted issue and the facility is keeping all options open to provide support to the family and children involved in child protection issues.

Greg Bower indicated that in the last quarter century, the CARES Unit has prevented literally thousands of people from being unjustly accused. We have prevented suicides and homicides in this area.

Paul Woods introduced Mark Dunham who is on the Board of Directors for the new College of Western Idaho. Mark indicated that the Community College would be inviting all of the Partnership members to a meeting of the Board on or about November 21st.

Last year the Legislature set aside $5,000,000 to aid in the creation of a community college in Idaho. In May of 2007 the voters approved the creation of a community college district in Ada and Canyon County. In July of 2007 five individuals were installed as trustees for the community college. Right now they are working on a transition plan with Boise State University. It is anticipated that the Larry Selland College of Technology, in one form or another, will be transferred to the College of Western Idaho.

It is anticipated that non-credit certificate classes will be opened in the spring of 08. In order for the College of Western Idaho to be successful, they must obtain accreditation. Accreditation is a national network of academics that insure courses meet certain criteria. If they tried to do it themselves, it could take 7-10 years. Accreditation is very important because credits need to be transferable to a four-year school. They have a road map that includes the need for a “host institution” that would carry the accreditation for several years as the College is being established. The plan is to have an agreement with Boise State to fulfill this role.

They are going to establish and Advisory Council of 15 members. They want the 15 members to be as representative of the two counties as possible. When it comes to the Treasure Valley Partnership, it is desired that they have a representative of local government on the Advisory Council that could represent both Cities and Counties. He asked that a member of the Partnership be a part of the Advisory Council.

Dave Bieter congratulated the trustees on their hard work thus far. He felt it was a great idea for the Treasure Valley Partnership to send a representative to the Advisory Council. He asked if there is any sense of the enrollment as the College starts up. Mark replied that they anticipate 2,500 students at start-up.

Mark indicated that they are developing relationships with school districts. It is anticipated that classes will be offered utilizing local school properties throughout the valley instead of at the campus in Canyon County.

Paul Woods asked if there is interest in building additional storage capacity in the Boise River. John Evans asked on how far down the road we will be looking at. Tammy asked what kind of investment we would be talking about. Paul indicated he would bring more information on this to the next meeting.

Margie Watson moved, John Evans seconded the approval of the minutes and financial report.

Meeting Adjourned

Treasure Valley Partnership
Meeting Minutes
November 28, 2007

Attendees

John Evans opened the meeting and welcomed everyone to Garden City. He said it was a pleasure to showcase the Garden City Hall/Library facility. He turned over the floor to Tom Dale for a presentation. Tom presented Eagle Mayor Nancy Merrill, with a Certificate of Appreciation from the Treasure Valley Partnership for her many years of service to the organization including the past three years as President.

John Evans introduced Tammy de Weerd to begin the discussion on the upcoming Local Option Tax District Legislation. Tammy asked if any Partnership member had major issues with regard to the legislation, and are we comfortable moving forward at this time? Tom indicated he had talked with the Mayor of Payette and she had a concern that adding more sales tax would hurt the border communities. Tom felt that this concern highlighted concerns that the tax would be levied outside of the Regional Public Transit Authorities boundaries (Ada & Canyon Counties).

Ken Burgess, the lobbyist for COMPASS stated that there is concern around the State that this is an ADA County bill. Ada County Highway District has expressed concern over the voting structure of the District. He stated that they are changing the name, nature and co-chairs of the “Coalition to reflect the State-wide nature of the group. He felt that this would help alleviate some concerns that it is not just transit legislation related to ADA County, but transportation legislation that will have impacts Statewide. Ken felt that if there is not broad unanimity coming from the Treasure Valley, we might have a hard time moving the legislation forward.

John and Margie asked what were the primary concerns coming out of the Ada County Highway District? Tom mentioned that part of the Bill includes the consolidation of COMPASS and VRT. Right now, the way COMPASS voting is structured; ACHD has a greater power than any community. With the proposed Bill, jurisdictions would be more equalized. Matt Stoll added that ACHD prefers to have the money directly allocated to them, instead of having money coming from the Regional Transportation Authority. In addition, they also have concerns regarding the mix between transit and roadways.

Tammy de Weerd felt that the bottom line question is that, if a potential COMPASS partner is in opposition to the legislation, do we feel comfortable moving forward. Nancy Merrill asked if there was opposition from the Canyon County Highway Districts. Tom Dale indicated that he has heard nothing but support coming from these Districts.

Dave Bieter stated that we need to be unanimous in our support and if there is opposition from a Partnership member, we need to hear that now. Nancy Merrill indicated that she is running a pole, in the first part of December for our legislative districts, of which, this transit legislation will be part of the pole. Margie Watson added that people from Gem County, Weiser, Payette, Fruitland and other communities on the Oregon border consider themselves part of the Treasure Valley. We need to make sure that it is clearly communicated that this will only have an effect in ADA and Canyon Counties.

Tom Dale believed if there is a fundamental objection to the idea, the opposition would work around the issue and find miniscule sections of the legislation to oppose. With regard to ACHD, the fundamental disagreement is the equalization of the power of the voting arrangement in the RTA.

John Evans asked if there is any reservation to adding transit to this local option? Nate Mitchell indicated that today, there is no opposition to the transit piece of the legislation. He added, in his district, legislators are going to beat on the City Council hard. Tammy de Weerd mentioned that she has a split City Council; they don’t oppose it and believe the citizens should have the opportunity to vote. She added that Legislative Districts 14, 20 & 21 will be difficult districts.

Tom Dale moved that the Partnership put together a statement of support for the Local Option Legislation. Margie Watson seconded the motion.

Discussion:
Matt Stoll pointed out that there is one inherent piece of the legislation that everyone needs to be comfortable with. That is the merger of Valley Regional Transit and COMPASS. Nancy Merrill stated that she had a discussion with Senator Bastion. He is under the assumption that COMPASS is going away and that Valley Regional Transit is going to be the lead. The concern is, what happens to the MPO? Matt Stoll added that the two organizations have the same elected officials so there will be some time efficiencies with the merger. The MPO will still exist, just under a different banner.

Dave Bieter’s concern is whether it hurts the chances to pass the legislation. He indicated that the City’s of Pocatello and Idaho Falls had concern about that piece of the legislation. Kelli Fairless added that the voting structure is an issue with ACHD as well as throughout the State. It is going to create an opportunity for Regional Transportation Authorities to figure out a voting structure.

Dave Bieter asked if this “voting structure” issue complicates this too much. Kelli Fairless stated that she has heard from both Governor Otter and Congress Simpson, that if they are going to support putting more money in the coffers of transportation, they want to know that it is not going to bureaucracy. One of the strongest statements we can make in this legislation is that we are consolidating two organizations into one, we are going to maximize staff resources, we are going to create efficiencies for board members to meet and work on these issues. This is a large selling point.

John Evans called for the question. The motion is; does the Treasure Valley Partnership support the concept of a local option sales tax for transportation. Motion carried unanimously.

John Evans moved ahead on the agenda and that we needed to appoint a member to the Advisory Council for College of Western Idaho. Nancy Merrill moved and Nate Mitchell seconded to appoint Tom Dale as our representative to the Advisory Council of the College of Western Idaho. Motion carried unanimously.

Paul Woods highlighted the “draft” Covered Load Ordinance he had developed with his legal staff. He mentioned that the Covered Load draft Ordinance is modeled after the State of Washington’s covered load law. He requested that each Partnership member take the Ordinance and run it by each jurisdiction’s legal staff and the Council’s/Commissions. Tom Dale mentioned that the target goal of this ordinance is not agricultural trucks; it is the construction trucks running down the road with a load of sand/gravel dumping down on the roadway. Also, this becomes an air quality issue when this sand/gravel gets ground up on the highway and becomes PM 2.5 type air pollution. Tom indicated that we do not want to take on the agricultural issue at this time.

Paul Woods asked that we come back in February for approval. John Evans requested that each of our Staff’s look this ordinance over and rout your suggestions to Bill for distribution out to each of the members.

Paul Woods mentioned that during our meeting in Eagle this past spring that the woman from the Bureau of Reclamation talked about a study that then Congressmen Otter commissioned looked at additional storage to the Boise and Payette water sheds. Since then, during the Snake River Basin Adjudication, the Meridian/Nampa Irrigation District challenged the Bureau of Reclamation’s in-stream flow right within Lucky Peak. The issue is, if the Irrigators get that right, we the citizens of the Treasure Valley will have to pay for in-stream flow. If the issue is the delivery of water to farmers, we will never want to see that cut off. The question is, do we want to have a discussion with the Bureau of Reclamation on potentially providing additional storage at Lucky Peak. The consensus was that the Partnership wants to continue with dialogue on this issue and Paul Woods would represent the Partnership in continuing this dialogue.

Dave Bieter stated that he had a meeting with Senator Crapo with regards to the Fair Housing Act and what we are allowed to do under the Act with regard to “Group Homes”. He indicated that we could require notice as to where these Group Homes are to be located. This could then drive a meeting with the neighbors for communication purposes. Tom Dale stated that this is a real big issue in Nampa. After looking at it, there are a couple things we can do. Group Homes are still subject to International Building Codes. Once Group Homes house more than five people; the fire code could require sprinklers, handicapped access and other requirements. Additionally, we might be able to provide more regulation in the area of parking.

Dave Bieter stated that they have had some heated meetings with neighbors. Their primary objection was no notice was given with regard to opening a Group Home and there was no opportunity to voice an opinion. He felt the issue is not going to go away. The biggest objection was the neighbors wanted to know ahead of time. Dave Bieter requested that; each Partnership member get the opinion of their legal departments and come prepared at a future meeting to discuss what our options might be. Then we can take a united approach to this issue.

John Evans asked if we have any further information on fully funding the SAUSA Project through the Governor’s Office. Bill indicated that he, Mark Haws and David Hensley have been talking and preparing information for the Governor to make a decision on this issue. The report presented to the Partnership, completed by Christian Nafzger, highlighted a needs assessment on how the rest of the state was viewing their need to have federal prosecution of gang crimes.

John Evans mentioned that Garden City has just revised their towing ordinance. When the City requests a tow, they have had to regulate against abuse around charging gate fees.

Nate Mitchell moved, Nancy Merrill seconded to approve the previous meetings minutes and financial report for the month. Motion carried unanimously.

Meeting Adjourned

Treasure Valley Partnership
Meeting Minutes
December 17, 2007

Attendees:

Tom Dale introduced Phil Bandy and Vicki Thurber the newly elected Mayors of Eagle and Middleton respectively. He welcomed the incoming Mayors and described the purpose of Treasure Valley Partnership. The Partnership was started in an effort to create relationships between the Mayors and County Commissioners. Started by former Mayor Brent Coles, the Partnership works together to develop projects and ordinances throughout the valley and provides and avenue for communication among the members. Tammy de Weerd added that the Partnership has served as a vehicle for collaboration to aid each others jurisdictions. Tom mentioned that fundamentally, the partnership is not project oriented but projects grow out of the discussions that ensue.

Tom Dale presented a Certificate of Appreciation to the outgoing Mayor of Middleton, Frank McKeever for his dedicated service to the City of Middleton as well as the Treasure Valley Partnership. Frank thanked the Partnership members for the great relationships, collaborations and camaraderie that have occurred over the past eight years. Frank mentioned that as a Mayor in a small community he appreciated the aid and support Middleton has received through involvement with this and other organizations.

Covered Loads
Paul Woods opened up the discussion on the proposed Covered Load Ordinance. Paul stated that both Ada and Canyon Counties have a covered load provision on covering the transport of trash to the landfill. He stated that the main target of this ordinance is the transport of sand, gravel, chips, etc. but would apply to all loads. The issue is not an air quality issue but a public safety issue.

Paul presented an ordinance he and his staff had prepared. He reiterated that we needed to attempt, a much as possible, to have the provisions of the ordinance be consistent in through all jurisdictions in the valley.

He suggested that we bring in, in March, representatives from building contractors, road construction contractors, Association of general contractors, etc. and hold a discussion on the ordinance and flesh it out for possible implementation in May or June.

Paul asked for feedback from the members. Tammy stated that she had shared this with the Meridian City Council and they were supportive. Additionally, her City Attorney suggested we hold a meeting with our jurisdiction’s legal staff to take a look at the language and make any changes necessary. John Bechtel added that we need to be careful that it not turn into a 35 page document. John said his attorney could pare it to one paragraph.

Brad Holton provided that it is important that we have our legal staff’s look at this ordinance language and make sure that all of the provisions mesh with State Code requirements. If we do not have our ducks in a row, we could really get bashed by those we invite in to provide a public hearing process with the industries that will be affected.

Paul indicated he and Bill would put together a meeting for us to invite legal staff’s to attend prior to the next partnership meeting. His thought was that we would utilize January and February to hammer out all the minor details of the Ordinance and then in March, hold a public hearing so to speak with representatives from industries/organizations that would be most affected.

Vicki Thurber stated that she was concerned a little with the timing aspect. Build and growth are tapering off and a lot of these gravel companies and construction contractors are laying-off personnel. Therefore, these industries are in a little bit of trouble financially and we would be proposing added expenses. Brad Holton added that he was familiar with the financial aspects of these industries, but felt it was a health and safety issue, and if these industry sectors were “good neighbors”, they would already be covering their loads.

Tom asked if this ordinance would apply to State Highways. Paul mentioned he would follow up with ISP to clarify if this ordinance would be enforced on State highways. Frank McKeever mentioned that in his travels, he has noticed that Idaho has the dirtiest highways in the west. This ordinance needs to include items that blow out of pickups and not just concentrate on haulers of construction materials.

Garret Nancolas opened the discussion about the Local Option Tax. The current legislation is a combination of two years of research. This years attempt includes bundling of public transportation as well as funds for roads. Dave Bieter mentioned that he had spoke with Representative Moyle. Rep. Moyle felt that a constitutional amendment was one route they may take. Garret indicated that part of the problem is that the State Legislature does not want local jurisdictions to have the authority over these type of taxes. Garret indicated he would follow up and see if he can acquire the constitutional amendment language.

Paul stated that the real problem is that the State ITD clearly does little or no planning and they are non responsive on land use applications. This is their problem to fix and we need to continue to shine a light on this. Tom mentioned that Governor has mentioned that they may take away the highway distribution funds and then allow the passage of the local option to make up the difference.

Tom pointed to the letter of support that was drafted for the local option tax issue. He asked for a motion to approve the letter and to pass the language on. Dave Bieter moved and seconded by John Evans. Motion passed unanimously.

Tom asked if there was an update on the SAUSA Project. Bill mentioned that the Governor’s office has decided not to support fully funding this project this year, but has again committed the $25,000 match funds. The only difference is these funds would be placed under the budget of ISP. Tom stated that he has been thinking about this and if the State funds this SAUSA project, the focus may be moved statewide. If we stop paying for this, would we loose the ability to control the focus of the SAUSA to the Treasure Valley?

2008 Meeting Dates.
Bill pointed out the meeting calendar and mentioned that several communities have not hosted a meeting for awhile. He asked for some jurisdictions to pass this year to give some of the other communities an opportunity to host a meeting. Tammy de Weerd indicated she would be happy to give up the City of Meridian’s February slot to Kuna. Paul Woods indicated he would be happy to relinquish the October date. Both Mayor’s Brad Holton and John Bechtel stated that Greenleaf and Wilder would co-host the meeting in October.

John Evans moved to approve the minutes and financial report, Paul Woods seconded. Motion carried.

Paul Woods mentioned that the City of Boise and Ada County have been working on an issue of in stream flow. The group indicated they wanted to hear the particulars. Paul indicated he would bring information to the January meeting.

Meeting adjourned.