Commissioners' Meeting Minutes - Week of August 16, 2021

***Monday, August 16, 2021, at 9:00 a.m., Commissioners met in regular session with Chairman Dan Dinning, Commissioner Wally Cossairt, Commissioner Tim Bertling, Clerk Glenda Poston, and Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser.

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

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

Dick Staples with JRS Surveying and property owner Dayton Skrivseth joined the meeting in order to discuss Mr. Skrivseth’s property with Commissioners and Road and Bridge.

County resident Gregory Lamberty joined the meeting to listen to Commissioners’ meetings.

It was said there is a final plat to sign for Mr. Skrivseth and Ms. Nelson reviewed the conditions of approval. Mr. Staples would like to show the approach to Roosevelt Road was granted by a variance and the instrument number will be shown on the plat. That condition takes care of item B of the Conditions of Approval. Item H of the Conditions states that access to lot 1 is to go through lot 2 through Holly Place, and a comment was made regarding an easement for utilities. Ms. Nelson said access to Lot 1 is now shown as going through lot 3 instead of lot 2 so she contacted County Civil Tevis Hull about her ability to sign the plat as it’s different from the Conditions of Approval. Ms. Nelson said Attorney Hull recommended putting this discussion on Commissioners’ schedule as an action item. Ms. Nelson commented that she felt she couldn’t sign the plat as the conditions that were set had not been met. Ms. Nelson added that she couldn’t sign the plat without discussing it with Commissioners.

Mr. Dayton said the utilities off of Roosevelt Road are still valid and he mentioned that he never said he didn’t want that. Ms. Nelson said the utilities were also not listed on the final plat that she was supposed to sign. Mr. Dayton commented that the utility information has since been added and the utilities are on the plat now, but what has changed is the access to lot 1. Mr. Staples said it was agreed access to lot 1 would go through lot 2, but they just moved that access to the other side of the line. Chairman Dinning questioned if the access moved 30 feet and Mr. Staples said yes. Ms. Nelson said at the hearing, it was stated that access to lot 1 would go through lot 2. Mr. Staples commented that the variance pertained to the county road only, so this is more of a condition of the plat as opposed to the variance. Ms. Nelson said according to Planning and Zoning Administrator Clare Marley, Ms. Marley also had concerns. Ms. Marley had mentioned that Road and Bridge has to state that if someone is dividing a parcel, the approach they’re looking at has to guarantee access to all parcels. Ms. Nelson said Ms. Marley sent her the Findings and Decision from the subdivision hearing and had reviewed the access on the final plat. Any access and easements shall be shown on the final plat. Comments were made about moving access from lot 2 to lot 3. Chairman Dinning said this road, in his mind, gives access to lot 2 through the subdivision process. Ms. Nelson said she has no problem with that, but that differed from Commissioners’ conditions of approval so Attorney Hull suggested that she not sign the plat based on what was presented. Commissioner Cossairt said it’s fine.

Mr. Staples said the other concern early on was how do we have a recorded document stating that access is through Lot 2 so he included a second signature line for Commissioners stating everything has been satisfied as far as access to lot 1 going through lot 3 instead of lot 2.

Commissioner Cossairt moved that the conditions, as represented regarding access to lot 1 meets conditions of the Planning and Zoning hearing and that the road originally was to go through lot 2 and that will not occur. This will be on the record and then approve the final plat. This will address Road and Bridge’s concerns. Commissioner Bertling second. Motion passed unanimously.

Mr. Staples and Mr. Skrivseth left the meeting at 9:15 a.m.

Mr. Lamberty remained in the meeting.

Ms. Nelson questioned which budget the invoices from Innovate are to come out of and it was stated that it was Commissioners’ professional services line item.

Ms. Nelson and Mr. Morris discussed a belly dump that is for sale in Kalispell for approximately $22,000.00. If the truck that is also available could be purchased, it could pull the belly dump and then Road and Bridge would have two trucks that could pull a low boy and haul gravel. Clerk Poston questioned the affects to cash carry forward. Ms. Nelson said when she estimated cash carry forward for Road and Bridge, it was based on funding as of June 30th, but more funding came in than expected. Ms. Nelson explained that some of the projects are not getting invoiced, such as the School House Road project won’t be invoiced prior to the end of this budget year. Those present discussed two vacant positions that Road and Bridge is looking to fill.

Chairman Dinning said we still need to look into purchasing a truck prior to looking into the belly dumps. The truck cost is approximately $25,000.00. Mr. Morris said the company that has the truck was going to reduce the price by $1,000.00 as the air conditioner was not working. This truck is a Peterbilt and you can still get parts for it. Commissioners said they had no problem with Road and Bridge checking to see if the truck and trailer are still available. It was said the truck would help haul the low boy trailer without being overweight. Clerk Poston said it’s possible Road and Bridge will be receiving additional funds, but the amount is not yet certain.

Chairman Dinning commented that if the House signs the bill, Secure Rural Schools funding was reauthorized for three years, but he doesn’t know what the level of funding would be.

9:30 a.m., Commissioners received a telephone call from Planning and Zoning Administrator Clare Marley and they gave her an update on what the results were of the discussion with Dayton Skrivseth and Mr. Staples regarding the plat.

Ms. Marley’s call ended at 9:34 a.m.

Ms. Nelson said Road and Bridge is making progress with Innovate pertaining to addressing. Innovate is beginning to understand the process, the program Road and Bridge uses and where the hang-ups are occurring.

Those present reviewed all of the work that is in progress as listed in the Road and Bridge Department report.

Commissioners gave Mr. Morris permission to purchase the truck and trailer if they’re available.

9:42 a.m., Commissioners contacted Attorney Tevis Hull and Planning and Zoning Administrator Clare Marley via telephone.

Commissioners raised questions about Dayton Skrivseth’s application at Roosevelt Place. Mr. Skrivseth and Mr. Staples had wanted Road and Bridge to sign the plat and the variance was approved, but there was some confusion within the variance process and access to lot 1 was discussed. It was said that in Commissioners’ public hearing for the Planning and Zoning application, it was said there would be access to lot 1. Attorney Hull commented that Ms. Nelson said the specific condition was that access was to go through lot 2 and what was written on the plat map was showing access going through lot 3. Chairman Dinning said that was through the variance process; not the Planning and Zoning process and Commissioners determined the variance only dealt with where access came off of the county road, and in the Planning and Zoning process, access to the lots was very generalized. Ms. Nelson was given permission to sign the plat. Attorney Hull said whenever a specific condition is given by Commissioners and it’s written, if something different is put on the plat as opposed to the conditions that were approved, the question is always going to be from Ms. Nelson or Ms. Marley whether or not the conditions are met and according to the findings, they’re not. It’s dictated by Commissioners based on the language in the conditions so Commissioners needed an action item on the schedule saying this is what is approved and this is what they actually did so that is why this was noticed before Commissioners. Ms. Marley said her situation was a bit different due to North Bench Fire Association’s comments on fire hydrants and turnarounds. Chairman Dinning said North Bench Fire Department is an association as they’ve not gone through a formal process to be a taxing district, but they’re using the title of “district” now. A district has some standing, but an association does not. Attorney Hull said that was correct. Commissioner Bertling mentioned the comment about a fire truck not being able to turn around. Chairman Dinning said the concern is that yes, Commissioners can consider suggestions, but North Bench Fire Association has no standing to demand anything. Chairman Dinning questioned if Commissioners specified a type of hydrant and it was mentioned that the information just says “fire hydrant.” Attorney Hull said what Ms. Marley is saying is that the representative from North Bench Fire Association went to the site and took a look at the road and on the drawing, it may be big enough, but if it’s roughed in, it might not look big enough so when Chief Jackson went to the site, maybe the roughed in road wasn’t the actual size of the cul-du-sac. Someone should actually see the footprint on the ground. Commissioners will think about this a bit longer.

The call to Ms. Marley ended at 9:58 a.m.

10:00 a.m., Boundary Ambulance Service Chairperson Nancy Russell and Chief Jeff Lindsey joined the meeting.

Commissioners discussed the reason for the delay in addressing the LMJPNP, LLC public hearing.

Commissioners and Attorney Hull discussed matters of business that are in progress. Attorney Hull spoke of issues with Riverside Road that he’s trying to work out with the city. The City of Bonners Ferry will ask for approval to pay the county’s match if the Federal Highways Division makes the payment with regard to moving power lines from where they’re currently at. Those present discussed hoping to reach a conclusion soon.

Attorney Hull said when he originally tried to use the county’s email, it just didn’t work for him and he explained issues he experienced, such as reversing the order of emails received and after getting so many emails, it would say his email is almost full, so he just reverted to using his own email. Prosecutor Pluid is also now getting notices that her email storage is almost full, as well as both of the Prosecutor’s Office staff members, according to Attorney Hull. Clerk Poston clarified that the issue is not the county, but the email service provider. People just need to sign in and delete emails. Ipower is the server for the email domain and that is where this issue originates.

The call to Attorney Hull ended at 10:12 a.m.

Commissioner Cossairt moved to recess as the Boundary County Board of Commissioners and to convene as the Boundary County Ambulance Service District Governing Board. Commissioner Bertling second. Motion passed unanimously.

Chief Lindsey said he has nothing new to discuss since last week’s meeting. Chairman Dinning spoke of needing to find out how Boundary Ambulance Service or someone else can educate the public on the proposed override levy. It was asked if a sunshine report needs to be completed if over $500.00 is spent on advertising. Boundary Ambulance Service had a booth at the fair and that went well, according to Ms. Russell.

Commissioner Cossairt moved to approve the minutes of the Boundary County Ambulance Service District for July 19, 2021. Commissioner Bertling second. Motion passed unanimously.

10:17 a.m., Commissioner Cossairt moved to adjourn as the Boundary County Ambulance Service District Governing Board and to reconvene as the Board of Boundary County Commissioners. Commissioner Bertling second. Motion passed unanimously.

Commissioner Cossairt moved to sign the Certificates of Residency for Emma Lucas, Riley Petesch, Kirsten Steinhart, and Rebecca Sandaker. Commissioner Bertling second. Motion passed unanimously.

Commissioners took a short recess before their meeting at 10:30 a.m.

10:33 a.m., Bonners Ferry District Forest Ranger Kevin Knauth joined the meeting via telephone to provide an update on various Forest Service projects. Mr. Knauth briefly discussed the Jay Peak fire. The Forest Service has the Blue Joe fire that was discovered yesterday and it’s probably a holdover from last week’s lightning storm. This fire is approximately 25 acres and it is one-half mile from the Canadian border. Forest Service Road 1011 is right up there and it’s on the east and west flanks of this fire and another part of the road is on the north system, and the fire is somewhat boxed in by that road so the Forest Service will try to hold the fire at that road system. The feasibility of cutting a fire line doesn’t really stop the fire from spreading due to conditions and it’s a bit more fire than personnel are really able to handle. Helicopters are available as a resource. Canadians also have aviation resources if need be. Last Friday retardant and buckets were utilized, but it didn’t hold for very long. Mr. Knauth said property owner Mike Ripatti has cows at Grant Creek and he thinks he’s okay as far as the fire, but Mr. Knauth said he will reach out to Mr. Ripatti Mr. Knauth and Commissioners briefly commented on working with Canada on fires.

Mr. Knauth said the other matter is weather as we will have some wind today, but tomorrow the wind will push harder as colder temperatures come in. Winds will be out of north and northeast at 20 to 25 miles per hour.

Mr. Knauth said the Westside Restoration project has moved into the objection resolution period. The Alliance for the Wild Rockies (AWR) has filed an objection so now the Forest Service will take the main issues to the regional office for review and determine what the true issues are that can be interpreted out of the 300 pages submitted. Mr. Knauth said there weren’t many of them. The Forest Service has put together a panel in order to address these issues appropriately as a team. Chairman Dinning said if the Forest Service goes forward with a resolution meeting, it would be good for others to at least be able to view the meeting. The deciding official, Forest Supervisor Carl Petrick, has the deciding authority for additional viewing, according to Mr. Knauth. Chairman Dinning said he’s expressing interest as a County Commissioner and Mr. Knauth mentioned he would inform Mr. Petrick of that and then follow up with Commissioners. Mr. Knauth said he would update Kootenai Tribe of Idaho Administrative Director Rhonda Vogl on behalf of the Kootenai Tribe. Mr. Knauth commented that the goal was to have a decision in September and so far, that schedule is on track.

Commissioners discussed receiving a complaint about the condition of the lower portion of Snow Creek Road. Mr. Knauth spoke of work that will be done to this road and he added that he will pass that information along.

The call to Mr. Knauth ended at 10:57 a.m.

Boundary Economic Development Council Director Dennis Weed joined the meeting at 10:58 a.m.

Mr. Weed said water service is still an issue and he added that he thinks the City of Moyie Springs will provide water to residents outside of city limits. Mr. Weed commented that people are moving that direction because of issues with other water districts. Clerk Poston questioned if these parcels will be annexed into the City of Moyie Springs and Mr. Weed said he didn’t think so.

Mr. Weed said the City of Moyie Springs did receive additional funds for the regional sewer feasibility study. It was said the county will wait for a check. Mr. Weed said the City of Moyie Springs is at 100 hookups and they’re going for more. Mr. Weed added that he has a meeting coming up with the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and his question is, do we want to expand sewer in the city? If so, it would have to be paid for by DEQ. Mr. Weed said he wants to find out if there is any way to expand sewer into Westwood. Chairman Dinning said depending on being able to use American Recovery Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA) funds, we will have a significant amount of funding that is only good for sewer and water. If we cannot use these funds for the county, can we use it to help our partners? Mr. Weed said he will look into it. If DEQ has a desire to expand the service, he will present it to the City Council. Chairman Dinning said it’s not a rush as far as a timeline in which to have these funds spent. It was said the cost to replace a leach field is approximately $25,000.00 to $30,0000.00, but he would have to check with KG&T Septic Service to see if that still holds true.

Mr. Weed said employment is still an issue in the county. Mr. Weed informed Commissioners he still has not received any applications to fill his position as EDC Director when he retires. Those present contemplated what they could change about the position in order to attract applicants. Mr. Weed spoke of being awarded the funds for the EDC Director position so we’re on track for funding.

Those present estimated what they thought the county’s population was to be.

The meeting with Mr. Weed ended at 11:22 a.m.

11:31 a.m., Ben Wolfinger with Performance Leadership Institute joined the meeting to interview Commissioners about their thoughts on needed jail improvements, to include matters pertaining to the facility itself, meeting certain inmate needs, safety, overcrowding, what should and should not be provided.

The meeting with Mr. Wolfinger ended at 12:28 p.m.

Commissioners recessed for lunch at 12:28 p.m.

1:30 p.m., Commissioners reconvened for the afternoon session with Chairman Dan Dinning, Commissioner Wally Cossairt, Commissioner Tim Bertling, and Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser.

1:30 p.m., Commissioners met in the County Annex conference room with Road and Bridge Department Co-Superintendents Renee Nelson and Randy Morris, County Civil Attorney Tevis Hull, and Innovate Technician Debra Dreger for the purpose of holding a workshop focused on addressing and approaches.

Topics discussed and reviewed included Section 3 of the Boundary County Road Standards Ordinance 2020-2, definitions and a definition lacking for change of use, alterations, etc. Alterations could include a residential approach changing to a commercial approach, or a driveway approach compared to a road. Ms. Nelson referenced farming approaches that are only used a few times per year turning into approaches for a residence or multiple parcels. Attorney Hull commented that anything created up to January 24, 2007 is grandfathered. Commissioner Bertling commented that improvements would need to be done to an approach if it’s going from an alfalfa field to a residential approach. Those present discussed and questioned when to improve an approach.

Chairman Dinning questioned what can be done to where it doesn’t matter how many houses or parcels there are as it would be treated the same. Commissioner Bertling suggested one uniform approach, culvert, etc. Those present agreed that it would make it simple to have a uniform 28-foot approach with a 40-foot culvert.

Those present discussed leaving Section 3F of the Road Standards Ordinance as is and using discretion, and suggestions were made to remove Section 3D and leave 3A. It was also suggested to delete the term “use” because all approaches will be 28 feet. Attorney Hull mentioned discretionary and Ms. Nelson commented that she will have to document why an approach deviated from the Ordinance so it’s not arbitrary. It was said notes will need to be kept. It was said private roads were documented when the county started the E911 process, but there are no requirements to bring these up to standards.

Chairman Dinning discussed and questioned being able to amend the Road Standards Manual by resolution, but Attorney Hull advised that Commissioners should hold a public hearing for amendments. Commissioners discussed having another workshop with Road and Bridge, Planning and Zoning and the Addressing Coordinator.

The workshop ended at 3:17 p.m.

3:17 p.m., Commissioner Cossairt 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 complaint or charges brought against, a public officer, employee, staff member or individual agent, or public-school student. Commissioner Bertling second. Commissioners voted as follows: Chairman Dinning “aye”, Commissioner Cossairt “aye” and Commissioner Bertling “aye”. Motion passed unanimously. The executive session ended at 3:23 p.m. No action was taken.

There being no further business, the meeting recessed until tomorrow at 1:30 p.m.

***Tuesday, August 17, 2021, at 1:30 p.m., Commissioners met in regular session with Chairman Dan Dinning, Commissioner Wally Cossairt, Clerk Glenda Poston, and Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser. Commissioner Tim Bertling was out of the office tending to other matters.

Commissioner Cossairt moved to adopt Resolution 2021-26. A resolution transferring sales tax-revenue sharing cash from the current expense revenue account to the Restorium revenue account due to loss of revenue as a result of COVID-19. Chairman Dinning yielded the hair to second. Motion passed unanimously. Resolution 2021-26 reads as follows:

RESOLUTION 2021-26

TRANSFER SALES TAX-REVENUE SHARING CASH FROM THE CURRENT
EXPENSE REVENUE ACCOUNT TO THE RESTORIUM REVENUE ACCOUNT
DUE TO LOSS OF REVENUE AS A RESULT OF COVID-19

WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners, County of Boundary, State of Idaho, did establish operating budgets for the fiscal year 2020-2021 for Boundary County, and

WHEREAS, the Boundary County Restorium has needed to increase staff and has not received the anticipated revenue for room and board due to COVID-19, and

WHEREAS, Boundary County has received more Sales Tax-Revenue Sharing funds than anticipated and Sales Tax-Revenue Sharing Funds can be used where needed in the County budget, and

WHEREAS, the Boundary County Commissioners deem it in the best interest of the general public of Boundary County to transfer Sales Tax-Revenue Sharing cash in the amount of $130,000.00 from the Current Expense Revenue account number 01-00-0324-0002 to the Boundary County Restorium Revenue Account number 36-00-0324-0002, and
WHEREAS, the addition of this revenue does not affect the tax levy for Boundary County, and
NOW THEREFORE, upon motion duly made, seconded and unanimously carried,

IT IS RESOLVED that the transfer of Sales Tax-Revenue Sharing cash in the amount of $130,000.00 from the Current Expense Revenue account number 01-00-0324-0002 to the Boundary County Restorium Revenue Account number 36-00-0324-0002 is hereby authorized and ordered, and

IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the Clerk is instructed to deliver certified copies of this resolution to the Boundary County Treasurer and the Boundary County Auditor.

DATED this 16th day of August 2021.
COUNTY OF BOUNDARY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
s/_________________________________ Dan R. Dinning, Chairman
s/_________________________________
Wally Cossairt, Commissioner
s/_________________________________
Tim Bertling, Commissioner
ATTEST:
s/________________________________________________
Glenda Poston, Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners
Recorded as instrument #288125

Clerk Poston mentioned that Leonard Schulte advised putting the funds into current expense, then transfer to the Restorium from there.

Commissioner Cossairt moved to sign Certificates of Residency for Kieley Little, Katelyn Bennett, Ella Huggins, and Gabriella Barajas. Chairman Dinning yielded the chair to second. Motion passed unanimously.

1:30 p.m., Commissioners held a public hearing to consider Planning and Zoning Application #21-056, for a Comprehensive Plan map and zoning map amendment requested by Applicant Daniel DeHart. Present were: Chairman Dan Dinning, Commissioner Wally Cossairt, Clerk Glenda Poston, Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser, Planning and Zoning Administrator Clare Marley, Applicants Dan and Linda DeHart, and the Applicants representative Attorney Eric Anderson.

Chairman Dinning reviewed the hearing procedures. No member cited a conflict of interest. Commissioners opened the hearing and asked for an opening statement.

Mr. Anderson said the proposal is a property within the airport overlay zone located at the south end. This property is currently zoned commercial/light industrial presumably due to noise concerns. The proposed amendment to rural residential makes the most sense for safety as with rural residential there would only be one home and in the commercial zone, there is no limit to the density. Rural residential would create uniformity as it matches zones contiguous to the site; and as for administrative expedience, this would pretty much end the airport’s problems moving forward, especially at the south end. The subject property is 10 acres and the DeHarts want to make this property their home. Leaving this parcel in a commercial zone leaves it open to multiple applications and lack of limitations. Mr. Anderson said the Airport Board was consulted and they provided recommendations, basically that the two five-acre parcels be combined. The airport regulations would be followed, the appropriate forms would be submitted to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and granting an avigation easement would be requested for one corner of the airport protection zone. Before Planning and Zoning, there was a recommendation to move forward with the removal of conditions A and C. If the two parcels are combined, by right, at the end of the development agreement the applicants could split the property again and the ordinance says you don’t have to do that. The suggested requirement to locate the placement of a home as far east as possible seems arbitrary. It was said that would be something Ms. Marley will look at when it comes to the Residential Placement permit. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval without conditions A and C. Given the Planning and Zoning’s recommendation, the State of Idaho Aviation Division has moved off their prior position once they understood what is going to occur on the ground, according to Mr. Anderson.

Chairman Dinning mentioned the fair disclosure statement and if that had been agreed to. Mr. Anderson said yes. Chairman Dinning questioned the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation that the two parcels don’t have to be combined and also, that as far as the location of a dwelling, it can be anywhere? Mr. Anderson said essentially, but that would be checked. Chairman Dinning questioned if this allows for an additional dwelling on the second parcel. Mr. Anderson said he believes it would, but there should be no conflict. Chairman Dinning said if something is allowed; than it should be allowed. Commissioner Cossairt had nothing to add.

Ms. Marley provided a staff report and explained that this is called a conditional zone where you place conditions on a zone change and she listed three points of a conditional zoning authority. Idaho Code and the land use code allows this and the terms of the development agreement are contained in the draft conditions of approval. Those present reviewed the map of the two parcels. These properties are south of the runway and are not within the city area of impact, but they are in the airport overlay. Ms. Marley presented a slide showing an air traffic pattern image and reviewed uses of the surrounding area, and showed the Comprehensive Plan map and zoning map showing the rural residential areas nearby.

Ms. Marley reviewed the proposed development agreement conditions, which included combining the parcels, placing a two-year deadline for the placement permit, placing the dwelling to the far east, following the airport overlay regulations, submitting the FAA Form 7460-1, and having an avigation easement requested for .01 of an acre. Ms. Marley mentioned the State Division of Aeronautics submitted a strongly worded advisory that any such accidents would not be the responsibility of the state and the state is not in favor of change, but after more communication the state changed its position and decided to leave the decision up to Commissioners’ determination. The state asked for certain conditions.

Chairman Dinning asked the reason for the two-year timeline for the placement permit and it was said this came out of the original requirements in the code section. Chairman Dinning said if we do away with combining the parcels so there are two parcels, is this saying that if a placement permit is not submitted for the parcel that doesn’t contain a structure, the property owner cannot build on that parcel? Ms. Marley said there might be some conflict with that.

Mr. Anderson said his understanding of the ordinance is the minimum time set is five years for a development agreement and at the expiration of five years, it would revert to no development conditions. Chairman Dinning said we are not entering into a development agreement, but conditional zoning. Ms. Marley mentioned that this will have a development condition with it. The Board of Commissioners shall set the duration of agreement; to be not less than five years. Those present read Section 18.4.4.1 into the record. It was said that Idaho Code’s section on this matter has changed and you can no longer take away zoning until after four years. Chairman Dinning said as it sits today, Commissioners can’t even impose the two-year limit. Chairman Dinning questioned if the development permit should say four years instead of two. Ms. Marley said the permit could list what state code is. Chairman Dinning said we have two parcels that currently have the ability to have a structure on each one without a deadline today, so in doing what we’re considering, should any deadline be listed other than we’re changing the zone? Ms. Marley said this question may need some help from County Civil Attorney Tevis Hull as she doesn’t know how to write the agreement and not address the state.

Commissioners asked Mr. DeHart about his proposed timeline for building. Mr. DeHart said he has been considering the time frame of the local builders and he’s hearing that it takes two years just to get started. Mr. DeHart added that he planned on working with an engineer on placement. Mr. Anderson and Mr. DeHart said probably in about two to three years. Chairman Dinning said his concern is adopting something today as written and then it becomes more of a hinderance due to conditions. Ms. Marley suggested that Condition B be written somewhat lighter so it provides room to give a solid reason that doesn’t violate state code. Ms. Marley gave an example and said it can say that the property has to be developed in accordance with this section so it will allow work within that. Mr. Anderson said he thinks there is still a five-year minimum for the development agreement. Ms. Marley said Condition B can be stricken and she can work with issues of conflict of code and state code. Those present discussed striking Conditions A, B and C.

Commissioners opened the hearing to public testimony and asked for comment. No one spoke in favor, uncommitted or opposed to the application. The hearing was closed to additional testimony. Commissioner Cossairt had no comments or questions.

Commissioner Cossairt moved to approve Planning and Zoning Application #21-056 to amend the Comprehensive Plan map and zoning map as requested by Applicant Daniel DeHart, and keeping Conditions D, E, F, and G. Chairman Dinning yielded the chair to second. Motion passed unanimously.

The hearing to consider Planning and Zoning Application #21-056 ended at 2:05 p.m.

Commissioners recessed until their next meeting.

2:34 p.m., Commissioners held a public hearing to consider Variance Application #8-2021 to Boundary County Road Standards Ordinance 2020-2. Present were: Chairman Dan Dinning, Commissioner Wally Cossairt, Clerk Glenda Poston, and Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser. The hearing was recorded.

Chairman Dinning said documentation for this hearing is not yet in order and a continuance was requested.

Commissioner Cossairt moved to continue the hearing for Variance Application #8-2021 to Boundary County Road Standards Ordinance 2020-2 to Monday, September 20, 2021, at 11:00 a.m., to be held in Commissioners’ Office. Chairman Dinning yielded the chair to second. Motion passed unanimously.

The hearing ended at 2:35 p.m.

Commissioners returned to their office at the Courthouse for the next meeting.

3:20 p.m., Restorium Administrator Karlene Magee joined the meeting.

Commissioner Cossairt 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. Chairman Dinning yielded the chair to second. Commissioners voted as follows: Chairman Dinning “aye” and Commissioner Cossairt “aye”. Motion passed unanimously.

Ms. Magee left the meeting.

The executive session ended at 4:19 p.m. No action was taken.

Boundary County Emergency Manager Andrew O’Neel joined the meeting at 4:19 p.m.

Mr. O’Neel informed Commissioners that all five northern counties are teaming up with Welch Enterprises to run the planning and execution of the Cascadia Rising 2022 exercise. The cost share agreement is to pay the county’s portion and is dependent on State Homeland Security Performance Grant (SHSP) funds so it’s a reimbursable program. The cost to Boundary County is $1,560.23.

Commissioner Cossairt moved to sign the Professional Services Agreement, Office of Emergency Management, Cascadia Rising 2022 Exercise in the amount of $1,560.23. Chairman Dinning yielded the chair to second. Motion passed unanimously.

Mr. O’Neel explained that a brochure on evacuations has been created and he listed what information the brochure provides.

The meeting with Mr. O’Neel ended at 4:50 p.m.

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 4:50 p.m.

***Wednesday, August 18, 2021, at 12:08 p.m., Commissioners met in emergency session for the purpose of holding an executive session. An issue was discovered on August 17, 2021 after 5:00 p.m. and per the advice of Boundary County Civil Attorney Tevis Hull, this emergency executive session is being held. An emergency is a situation which involves injury or damage to persons or property, or immediate financial loss, or the likelihood of such injury, damage or loss. Present were Chairman Dan Dinning, Commissioner Wally Cossairt, Commissioner Tim Bertling via telephone, Clerk Glenda Poston, and County Civil Attorney Tevis Hull.

Commissioner Cossairt moved to go into executive session pursuant to Idaho Code 74-206(1)(a) to consider hiring a public officer, employee, staff member or individual agent, wherein the respective qualities of individuals are to be evaluated in order to fill a particular vacancy or need; and 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; and Idaho Code 74-206(1)(f) to communicate with legal counsel for the public agency to discuss the legal ramifications of and legal options for pending litigation, or controversies not yet being litigated but imminently likely to be litigated. Commissioner Bertling second. Commissioners voted as follows: Chairman Dinning “aye”, Commissioner Cossairt “aye” and Commissioner Bertling “aye”. Motion passed unanimously. The executive session ended at 12:35 p.m. No action was taken.

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 12:35 p.m.

_______________________________________
DAN R. DINNING, Chairman

ATTEST:

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

Date: 
Thursday, September 9, 2021 - 09:15
Back to Top