***Monday, April 4, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., Commissioners met in regular session with Commissioner Wally Cossairt, Commissioner Tim Bertling, Clerk Glenda Poston, and Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser. Chairman Dan Dinning was out of the office tending to other matters.

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

Commissioner Bertling moved to appoint Commissioner Cossairt acting chairman in the absence of Chairman Dinning. Commissioner Cossairt second. Motion passed unanimously.

8:58 a.m., John and Patty Solt joined the meeting.

9:00 a.m., Road and Bridge Department Co-Superintendents Renee Nelson and Randy Morris joined the meeting to give the department report. A written report was provided.

Ms. Nelson said the Solts are requesting an extension for their approach variance to Road Standards Ordinance 2020-2. Ms. Nelson commented that the reason for an extension is that the process was pending approval and the record of survey needed to be updated, but there have been a few processes to go through and now the Solts need to apply for short plat subdivision. Information needs to show that Commissioners granted a variance for an approach. There is a one-year time frame for variances and an extension is needed. Nothing has changed as far as the location of the approach, according to Ms. Nelson. Commissioner Bertling said it’s just a formality, really. Ms. Nelson is hoping Commissioners can extend the variance for more than another month. Commissioner Bertling suggested a one-year extension.

Commissioner Bertling moved to approve a one-year extension for Variance 4-2021 to Road Standards Ordinance 2020-2 for John and Patty Solt. Acting Chairman Cossairt yielded the chair to second. Motion passed unanimously.

Mr. and Ms. Solt left the meeting at 9:07 a.m.

Ms. Nelson discussed the offer for Durapatch oil for year 2022 and she said due to the price it is more of a quote as compared to the formal bid process. This year’s price is $723.38 per ton and for the last three years the cost had been $415.00 per ton. Road and Bridge has budgeted $10,000.00 for Durapatch oil. The offer is for 20 tons as a bench mark so if Road and Bridge didn’t use all of that tonnage, the price would not change. Road and Bridge used 18.5 tons last year and based on the new price, Road and Bridge can get approximately 13.5 tons. Ms. Nelson said she may have to add dollars later on or not expend funds in other areas as Durapatching needs to be done so it may take away from chip sealing. Ms. Nelson and Mr. Morris discussed verifying that Idaho Asphalt is the only supplier in the area that provides Durapatch oil, but they would not provide for a piggyback offer. Commissioner Bertling questioned applying a heavier chip seal.

Commissioner Bertling moved to accept the offer of up to 20 tons of CRS-2/Durapatch oil from Idaho Asphalt at a cost of $723.38 per ton for year 2022. Acting Chairman Cossairt yielded the chair to second. Motion passed unanimously.

Ms. Nelson informed Commissioners that Attorney Hull is still working on the trailer lease and the Union Pacific Railroad guardrail project agreement.

9:28 a.m., Marty Martinez and Gregory Lamberty joined the meeting.

9:30 a.m., County Civil Attorney Tevis Hull contacted Commissioners via telephone to update them on various matters he is working on.

9:32 a.m., Bonners Ferry Herald Reporter Emily Bonsant joined the meeting.

Chairman Dinning joined the meeting via conference call at 9:33 a.m.

Commissioners and Attorney Hull discussed establishing storage fees when vehicles have been impounded and are being stored on county property. It was said there are impounded vehicles that have been stored at Road and Bridge and Attorney Hull asked Ms. Nelson to find out more information as to why and how those vehicles came to be stored there. Ms. Nelson will look into that and get information back to the Prosecutor’s Office.

Ms. Nelson said she forwarded the proposed amended Union Pacific Railroad lease agreement for the guardrail project to Attorney Hull, but she hasn’t heard back yet. Attorney Hull said he will review that lease.

Attorney Hull is working on Tim Tucker’s request for abandonment. As far as the matter pertaining to Labrosse Hill, Ms. Nelson said she needs exact wording pertaining to footage and prescriptive use, deeded easement to the county, etc., but she needs a full understanding. Attorney Hull said it’s better to have a written easement and the dimensions for the truck turnout the county has been using. If we don’t have all of the landowners on board with signing an easement, then the county would have to claim a prescriptive easement. The county will need to do that or get a court order. It depends on the landowners, according to Attorney Hull. Attorney Hull provided an update on the Riverside Road Improvement project and the city’s involvement, Western Federal Lands, etc.

The meeting with Ms. Nelson and Mr. Morris ended at 9:44 a.m.

Commissioners continued their updates with Attorney Hull.

Chairman Dinning said the signatory person for Mountain Springs Church has changed so he will find out more information on who the signers should be for the parking lot agreement and get that information to Attorney Hull.

Attorney Hull briefly mentioned the matter of members of the public wanting to cancel their voter registration. Attorney Hull said a person has to be a registered voter to vote and they can show up at the polls to vote, but if they’re not registered, they will have to register.

The call with Attorney Hull and Chairman Dinning ended at 9:54 a.m.

Commissioner Bertling moved to sign Certificates of Residency for Martie Peterson, Stephanie Chase and Eika Willis. Acting Chairman Cossairt yielded the chair to second. Motion passed unanimously.

Commissioner Bertling moved to approve Commissioners’ meeting minutes from the weeks of March 21, 2022 and March 28, 2022. Acting Chairman Cossairt yielded the chair to second. Motion passed unanimously.
Commissioner Bertling moved to sign the Idaho State Department of Agriculture CWMA Acknowledgement of Project to be Bid document for the County Noxious Weed Department. Acting Chairman Cossairt yielded the chair to second. Motion passed unanimously.

10:00 a.m., Solid Waste Department Superintendent Claine Skeen joined the meeting to give the department report.

Discussion took place on obtaining quotes to bale the metal pile at the landfill. Mr. Skeen will reach out to companies to get quotes.

Mr. Skeen said he did pay a claim to North Bench Fire Association for fire protection. Acting Chairman Cossairt said the county has not been paying those invoices as the county allows North Bench Fire Association’s station to sit on county property.

Mr. Skeen discussed with Commissioners air curtain burners for wood waste as well as a concrete grinder. Mr. Skeen said if he could get a used grinder, it might be at a reduced price. There is probably approximately 80 feet of concrete. Commissioners and Mr. Skeen discussed verbiage for establishing an ordinance on accepting railroad ties brought into the landfill.

The meeting with Mr. Skeen ended at 10:14 a.m.

Commissioners tended to administrative duties.

10:30 a.m., Chief Probation Officer Stacy Brown joined the meeting to give a department report.

Ms. Brown said her department has 20 juvenile cases with eight cases pending. There are 27 people on adult misdemeanor probation, and 151 people on unsupervised probation. Ms. Brown said currently there are no diversion cases. There are three drug court participants.

Ms. Brown informed Commissioners that Boundary County Probation Department had its peer review done by the Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections on March 29th and they seemed to be pleased. A follow up report to that review will be coming soon. Ms. Brown said she was part of the peer review of Shoshone County and Bonner County and she said Shoshone County, Bonner County and Boundary County all have close to the same number of people on supervised probation. The cases are low, but they’re complex. One case can take a juvenile probation officer one entire day, even an entire week, to get various entities together, etc. Ms. Brown said her office is staying busy.

Ms. Brown mentioned Absolute Drug Testing to Commissioners. The county does its own drug testing for probation as there is no other company locally that does that, according to Ms. Brown. Clerk Poston said this company, Absolute Drug Testing, wanted exclusive use of the restrooms at the Annex to conduct testing and that is not going to work as other offices in that building also need use of those rooms. Ms. Brown said this company was talking about needing an entire day for testing.

The meeting with Ms. Brown ended at 10:35 a.m.

11:00 a.m., Courthouse Maintenance John Buckley joined the meeting to give a department report.

Mr. Buckley spoke of the roof of the Sheriff’s Office and improvements to the sidewalks. When Commissioners approved sidewalk improvements last year, it was understood Alex Wedel would need to bid the project again since he couldn’t fit the work in last year. The project would be rebid in case prices had increased. Concrete has increased and those prices have remained higher, according to Mr. Buckley. Those present discussed the price of the bid. The bid stated that the county’s maintenance person will insert the tubes for glycol heating, but that is not listed in Mr. Buckley’s scope of work. The time to make these improvements is in August and Mr. Wedel would like to do the project in two phases, according to Mr. Buckley.

Mr. Buckley said it’s the same thing with roof improvements at the Sheriff’s Office in that if the county is moving forward with that, the work needs to be done in August as it’s a dry month. Mr. Buckley spoke of having contacted multiple companies to do the job and only Tim Fulton is interested in submitting a bid. Commissioners said we need to move forward with this. Mr. Buckley will contact Mr. Fulton.

Atlas Boiler will be at the Courthouse on May 7th to install valves and dial them in with the actuators and sync them to the programmable thermostats. The boiler is approximately 18 years old and their life span is 20 years old, according to Mr. Buckley.

Mr. Buckley informed Commissioners that the gutters have been installed along the back of the Annex building, but heat tape needs to be added.

Mr. Buckley mentioned that the Courthouse, former North Idaho College Building and Extension Office roofs need to be recoated this year. Mr. Buckley said approximately $20,000.00 will cover the cost of having all three roofs resealed. The parking lot might need to be restriped and new seal coat should be applied this summer.

The meeting with Mr. Buckley ended at 11:27 a.m.

Planning and Zoning Administrator Clare Marley, Planning Assistant Tessa Vogel and County Civil Attorney Tevis Hull joined the meeting via telephone at 11:27 a.m. to participate in the meeting with Trevor Schneider.

11:30 a.m., Trevor Schneider and Darlene Schneider joined the meeting to discuss a Planning and Zoning matter regarding simple and primitive subdivisions. Attorney Hull said he reviewed emails on this matter that had been sent to Planning and Zoning and the issues are fairly well framed out. Attorney Hull explained that Commissioners have an ordinance that states there is an exemption to split parcels as long as each parcel created is 20-acres. It was said that there is no form for that type of split. A person needs to create the deeds, which was done. The issue is that after breaking up parcels into 20-acre lots, Mr. Schneider now wants to further split those parcels and an application for a short plat needs to be filed with Planning and Zoning to do that. Attorney Hull said if Mr. Schneider feels the Planning and Zoning Department is misinterpreting that section and has denied Mr. Schneider’s ability to develop the land, then he needs to file an appeal to that decision and that is what goes before Commissioners for a hearing. Mr. Schneider said he did not do the 20-acre split as it had been done by the prior owner and there was no tracking to let people know that 20-acre split was done. Mr. Schneider said his meeting is to go over the intention and he added that it’s not an exemption if it prevents someone from doing further things. Attorney Hull said Mr. Schneider is exempt from filing something with the county. Attorney Hull added that there may be a misunderstanding on how the exemption is used. If you break parcels more than the 20 acres, depending on what is being done, then different rules apply. Anyone who has large acres of land they want to split, as long as no piece is under 20 acres, they can do that, but if they want to split the parcel smaller, they need to file an application for a short plat. Mr. Schneider said only if the 20-acre exemption was done, otherwise it’s a simple subdivision. If someone was using the 20-acre exemption at one point, they’re no longer able to use the primitive division. You would not be able to tell if you could split the property as it doesn’t come up in the title search or deed that the 20-acre exemption was used to split the property and it’s preventing someone from using the primitive or simple division process. Attorney Hull said everyone is talking about hypotheticals. If someone says they need to make application to Planning and Zoning Department, that department works with people on want they want to do and they work within the ordinance to see how to do that. If a person is aggrieved by the decision of Planning and Zoning, they have the ability to appeal that decision to County Commissioners for them to take a look at the matter. Commissioners can’t make a decision based on hypotheticals and Attorney Hull said he can’t give an opinion on hypotheticals. Mr. Schneider said he would say most properties were split by the 20-acre exemption, but there is no tracking system to verify that. Attorney Hull said he thinks that is when you go to the Planning and Zoning Department. If a title company wants to make that part of the package, they can do that, but he can’t see a title company saying that can be done based on Planning and Zoning. The market is moving too fast to wait for Planning and Zoning to make a determination before the property is sold. Maybe that is something that needs to be done in the deeds or the county needs a better tracking system, according to Mr. Schneider. Something like that is basically unknown. The split might need to go through the whole short plat process, which takes longer than the primitive or simple process.

Attorney Hull said Mr. Schneider is coming from the perspective of his buyers as he is a realtor, but if he wants a tracking system, the Commissioners will have to take that up if they want any type of amendment to the Land Use Ordinance. Attorney Hull added that Ms. Marley, in doing work for the county, has noticed things that need to be addressed by Commissioners in relation to a form of an amendment, so Mr. Schneider could make that suggestion to be included in an amendment. Attorney Hull said there may be no mechanism for the public to know that and it would be up to the seller and buyer of the property to do their due diligence in that aspect; more so on the buyer’s part if they want to do something. Mr. Schneider reviewed Ordinance Section 20.4.2. If application is made by the same owner of the parcel, then platting will be done. Mr. Schneider said to him it’s saying the same owner cannot do further splits and that makes sense, but it doesn’t make sense if it’s a different owner. Attorney Hull said Mr. Schneider doesn’t think the ordinance is clear and if he has input to clarify language and a possible ordinance amendment, that is what he should state, but Commissioners can’t be in the position of interpreting the ordinance as there is nothing in front of them to interpret. The county has an ordinance, so if a person is aggrieved by the ordinance, then they can appeal to Commissioners and flush out how the parcel was created, who the owners were and determine how that fits in the ordinance. At this point, Commissioners would be asked to do something based on no factual information; just do you see this the way that someone else does and they don’t actually have anything in front of them other than two people who don’t feel the ordinance is written clearly. This matter needs to go through the Planning and Zoning Department and if the application is denied and the applicant is aggrieved, they can appeal the decision to Commissioners, but currently there is nothing in front of Commissioners. Mr. Schneider asked for the appeal process. Attorney Hull said other than sending emails, has an application been made? Mr. Schneider said yes and the application was within the last month or so and it was denied.

Ms. Marley said March 17th is when the application was received and Planning and Zoning has not recommended denial, but there is a valid application that is under review and processing. Mr. Schneider said that is in process now, but he wanted to see if he could get his first three splits done. Attorney Hull said he is sure Ms. Marley and Planning Assistant Tessa Vogel are working on that application as quickly as they can. Ms. Marley said she did receive an application for a short plat and on the same day she advised JRS Surveying of things that were needed and the matter still needs to go before Commissioners. Mr. Schneider said he doesn’t know the timeline of the short plat process.

Ms. Vogel said she’s waiting for corrections on the preliminary plat so it hasn’t been rerouted. The sooner those corrections are made the better before the application can go before Commissioners. Ms. Vogel explained that rerouting is when the application goes to various agencies for review. The application also needs to meet publication and public notice requirements and it’s a 15-day notice so there is approximately one month ahead for publication dates.

Attorney Hull said the county may have archaic ordinances, but Commissioners don’t want to piecemeal amendments. Mr. Schneider said if he has the short plat in process, the issue is more of a timeline issue, mostly. Ms. Marley listed the process of turnaround time. Mr. Schneider said he’s not trying to get away with anything and he wants to follow the rules and laws, but it was not clear and he briefly commented on a different interpretation by a county employee.

The meeting with Mr. Schneider and Ms. Schneider ended at 11:55 a.m.

Commissioners recessed for lunch at 12:04 p.m.

1:00 p.m., Acting Chairman Cossairt and Commissioner Bertling participated in the Community Wildfire Protection Plan meeting at the County Annex for the All Hazard Mitigation Plan update. The meeting ended at approximately 2:30 p.m.

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

***Tuesday, April 5, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., Commissioners met in regular session with Commissioner Wally Cossairt, Commissioner Tim Bertling, Clerk Glenda Poston, and Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser. Chairman Dan Dinning was out of the office tending to other matters.

9:00 a.m., Commissioners held a hearing to consider Variance Application #2-2022 filed by Carol and Dennis Gruber Jr. This is a request for a variance to Road Standards Ordinance 2020-2 as it pertains to an approach. Present were: Acting Chairman Wally Cossairt, Commissioner Tim Bertling, Clerk Glenda Poston, Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser, and Road and Bridge Department Co-Superintendents Renee Nelson and Randy Morris. Applicants Carol and Dennis Gruber Jr. participated via conference call. The hearing was recorded.

Acting Chairman Cossairt read aloud the hearing procedures. There were no questions of the procedures. No members cited a conflict of interest.

Ms. Nelson provided a staff report. This is an application for a variance for an approach as it does not meet Boundary County Road Standards Ordinance 2020-2. Ms. Nelson referred to ordinance sections 3.3.B. and 3.3.F. as the sections applicable to the variance being sought and they pertain to new approaches, the distance to another existing approach and a minimum sight distance for the new approach entering local access roads.

This proposed approach provides access to a parcel at the location of a deeded easement. Exhibit 6 shows the new physical address request form for an approach and it’s requested to access bare land and is for utilities only. The footage distance of the approach from Amber Lane is the reason for cause of the variance request. Road and Bridge has verified the related safety aspects, according to Ms. Nelson. Ms. Nelson listed the topography for this section of Moyie River Road. As it relates to public comment, nothing had been received. Planning and Zoning did provide comment, which is attached and they stated any development of a dwelling or structure would require a permit. There are riverine wetlands present on the property, but they’re nowhere near where this access is located. The county mapper had no comments.

There were landowners previous to the Grubers who had proposed an approach location that did not meet standards and they had been informed of the variance process. The Grubers purchased this property understanding they had a legal easement, which they do, however, they did not understand that there was no approved approach for that location. The Grubers were offered the ability to have a hearing for a variance in order to correct the approach so it would be approved in the future. Ms. Nelson said Road and Bridge wanted verification for the location that there is a survey corner marker and the easement says it is 50 feet along that south line and there should be a map for that. Ms. Nelson said in talking to County Civil Attorney Tevis Hull, we need to make sure that the approach center is within that easement so no driving happens outside of that easement. The previous owner had filled in the ditch with rock so it’s not in the property location. The centerline of the easement will need to move 25 feet to ensure the approach is within the deeded easement. The property owner will also need a culvert of the proper size and a proper permit.

The applicants were asked to make an opening statement.

Ms. Gruber said they currently reside in Arizona and Ms. Nelson stated everything she knew when they purchased the property. Ms. Gruber said she thought she was being diligent in making sure this property was good to go. The fact that the access is in the wrong location was news to her, but they are planning to have a survey done on their property and of the easement as well. Ms. Nelson explained that the center of the approach is 25 feet too far to the north and the Grubers have a 12-inch by 30-foot culvert so they need a 10-foot extension to make the culvert 40-feet.

Commissioners closed the hearing to public testimony and stated that no members of the public were present. Commissioners did not have any discussion amongst themselves.

Commissioner Bertling moved to approve the variance request of Carol and Dennis Gruber Jr., Parcel Number RP65N02E348700A, for a road approach that does not meet Boundary County Road Standards Ordinance 2020-2, Section 3.3.B., with the following conditions: A, upon approval of this variance, applicant/landowner shall use as reference property corner survey marker and measure from that point 25 feet north to mark the centerline line new approach ensuring the approach is within the deeded easement described in Instrument #278502. B, Applicant/landowner shall obtain a Road and Bridge approach permit, and per Ordinance 2020-2, Section 3.3.A., approach shall conform to Figure 3.3. with a 28-foot minimum width and a minimum 40-foot length culvert and shall construct approach. C, upon approval of variance, variance granted approach location shall be recorded with the Findings and Decision Letter and a copy of Recorded Instrument Number shall be provided to applicant. D, the variance shall run with the land unless as described in paragraph E. E, should approach permit and approach construction not be completed within one (1) year from the date of this document, variance shall be terminated and shall not run with the land, except for extensions granted by the Board of County Commissioners. F, this approval does not in any way change, alter, or amend any requirements from other government agencies including but not limited to Boundary County Planning and Zoning. Staff is directed to prepare written findings, a decision and terms and conditions of approval of Variance Application 2-2022. Acting Chairman Cossairt yielded the chair to second. Motion passed unanimously.

The hearing to consider Variance Application #2-2022 ended at 9:15 a.m.

9:30 a.m., Commissioners held a public hearing to consider Variance #3-2022 filed by Robert and Marsha Herb. This is a request for a variance to Road Standards Ordinance 2020-2 as it pertains to an approach. Present were: Acting Chairman Wally Cossairt, Commissioner Tim Bertling, Clerk Glenda Poston, Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser, Road and Bridge Department Co-Superintendents Renee Nelson and Randy Morris, Adam Herb, and Karen Parroff. Applicant Robert Herb participated via conference call. The hearing was recorded.

Acting Chairman Cossairt read aloud the hearing procedures. There were no questions of the procedures. No members cited a conflict of interest.

Commissioners opened the hearing and asked Road and Bridge for a staff report. Ms. Nelson provided a staff report and said this is an application for a variance for a proposed approach as it does not meet Boundary County Road Standards Ordinance 2020-2, Section 3.3.B. Brown Creek Road is a minor collector so the 330 feet requirement in Section 3.3.B. applies. Section 3.3.F., sets the sight distance for a new approach at a minimum of 300-feet and a minimum sight triangle of 40 feet so this location requires verification, according to Ms. Nelson.

Ms. Nelson the Herbs submitted a new physical address form and the approach would access bare land at this time. Ms. Nelson reviewed ordinance Section 3.3.B., and said that Road and Bridge had verified the related safety aspects and these can be met, however there are questions the Planning and Zoning Department has regarding wetlands. The topography is somewhat hilly with long slight curves. Ms. Nelson referenced the comments received from various agencies and she mentioned that the comments that Road and Bridge answered only pertained to Road and Bridge.

Commissioners asked applicant Robert Herb for an opening statement. Mr. Herb thanked Ms. Nelson for her efforts working on his application and for keeping him informed of information needed. Mr. Herb commented that he had submitted some sketches, markups and photographs with his application and he explained the sketches of the proposed new approach for the new driveway. The proposed approach is 170 feet from an existing driveway and Mr. Herb said you can see that there is not enough property to meet the 300 feet requirement. Mr. Herb said his understanding is when trying to figure out an address, Planning and Zoning states you can’t have three or more residences on a driveway without it becoming a private road. The neighbors have two addresses and his application would make a third. Mr. Herb informed Commissioners that he would more than likely have a mother-in-law dwelling, which might require another address. Mr. Herb added that he would like his own approach to Brown Creek Road and not have to deal with private road issues.

Commissioners opened the hearing to public testimony and asked for comments in favor of the application. Karen Parroff, 2537 Brown Creek Road, said she and her husband appreciate the Herb’s wanting their own driveway and they would be very supportive of Commissioners granting this variance. Ms. Parroff said she appreciates all of the interaction they’ve had with Mr. Herb to make this happen.

There were no public comments made uncommitted or opposed to the application.

Ms. Nelson reviewed comments received from other county departments and she mentioned that as it pertains to comments from the Planning and Zoning Department, that is something Planning and Zoning can help the Herbs with when they start construction. Mr. Herb has definitely been diligent in trying to follow all county ordinances, according to Ms. Nelson.

Commissioner Bertling asked about wetlands being channeled and he commented that it appears the wetlands are located across the way in the creek.

Mr. Herb thanked everyone for their time.

Chairman Cossairt said he’s reluctant to add a driveway, but the proposed approach comes at a 90-degree angle, which is safer.

Commissioner Bertling moved to approve the variance request of Robert and Marsha Herb, Parcel Number RP61N01E217212A, for a road approach that does not meet Boundary County Road Standards Ordinance 2020-2, Section 3.3.B., with conditions A through E as follows: A, upon approval of variance, the variance granted approach location shall be recorded with the Findings and Decision letter and a copy of recorded instrument number shall be provided to the applicant. B, Applicant/landowner shall obtain a Road and Bridge approach permit, and per Ordinance 2020-2, Section 3.3.A., approach shall conform to figure 3.3. with a 28-foot minimum width and a minimum 40-foot length culvert and shall construct approach. C, the variance shall run with the land unless as described in paragraph d. D, should approach permit and approach construction not be completed within one (1) year from the date of this document, variance shall be terminated and shall not run with the land, except for extensions granted by the Board of County Commissioners. E, this approval does not in any way change, alter, or amend any requirements from other government agencies, including but not limited to Boundary County Planning and Zoning and the United State Army Corps of Engineers. Staff is directed to prepare written findings, a decision and terms and conditions of approval of Variance Application #3-2022. Acting Chairman Cossairt yielded the chair to second. Motion passed unanimously.

The hearing to consider Variance Application #3-2022 ended at 9:50 a.m.

Commissioners tended to administrative duties until their next meeting at 10:30 a.m.

County Civil Attorney Tevis Hull joined the meeting at 10:29 a.m.

10:30 a.m., Commissioner Bertling moved to go into executive session pursuant to Idaho Code 74-206(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. Acting Chairman Cossairt yielded the chair to second. Commissioners voted as follows: Acting Chairman Cossairt “aye” and Commissioner Bertling “aye”. Motion passed unanimously. The executive session ended at 11:36 a.m. No action was taken.

Attorney Hull left the meeting.

Commissioners recessed for lunch at 11:50 a.m.
1:30 p.m., Commissioners reconvened for the afternoon session with Acting Chairman Wally Cossairt, Commissioner Tim Bertling, Clerk Glenda Poston, and Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser.

1:30 p.m., Restorium Administrator Karlene Magee joined the meeting to give the department report.

Ms. Magee informed Commissioners that she has a couple more assessments to do for potential residents and one resident is returning. The Restorium currently has 25 residents and it may soon have three more.

The meeting with Ms. Magee ended at 1:40 p.m.

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 1:40 p.m.

______________________________________
DAN R. DINNING, Chairman

ATTEST:

_____________________________________
GLENDA POSTON, Clerk
By: Michelle Rohrwasser, Deputy Clerk