***Monday, June 22, 2020, at 9:00 a.m., Commissioners met in regular session with Chairman Dan Dinning, Commissioner Wally Cossairt, Commissioner Walt Kirby, Clerk Glenda Poston, and Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser.

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

9:00 a.m., Road and Bridge Department Co-Superintendents Renee Nelson and Randy Morris joined the meet to give the department report. A written report was presented. Ms. Nelson said they visited about Mountain View Heights 3rd Addition regarding road names of Nuthatch and Muley Drive and she asked if Commissioners had looked into it. Chairman Dinning said the surveyor mentioned that road names do change all of the time, but that Commissioners will talk to Attorney Hull about it.

Ms. Nelson asked the status of the Tamarack Lane matter. Ms. Nelson informed Commissioners of a matter regarding the Moyie River Road south of Cobles Bridge. There is a resident in this area who has always parked further south to fish and now there are no trespassing signs in that area. This resident is wondering about the right-of-way. Mr. Morris said it looks to be 25 feet and Ms. Nelson added that it’s prescriptive. It was said it’s 20 feet from the center.

Ms. Nelson sent Commissioners a sample letter for the acceptance for Queen View Road for Union Pacific Railroad. It was noticed that Union Pacific Railroad representatives had not yet signed their portion of the documents for the siding project.

Commissioner Kirby moved to sign a letter of acceptance regarding Union Pacific Railroad and Queen View Road upon receipt of the signed documents from Union Pacific Railroad. Commissioner Cossairt second. Motion passed unanimously.

Ms. Nelson discussed the need to fill the secretary position for the Boundary Area Transportation Team (BATT). In the past Ms. Nelson had been the secretary before the position was held by Susan Kiebert who is no longer available. Ms. Nelson asked about prerequisites for this position and she commented the person in this position contacts the Local Highway Technical Assistance Council and the Idaho Transportation for updates and takes meeting minutes. There are five members and not a lot of help out there and other counties have consulting firms who fill the BATT Secretary position. Ms. Nelson said they would be willing to have the Road and Bridge secretary fill that position after Commissioners’ approval and the BATT Board’s approval. Commissioners said they had no issues with Ms. Nelson’s proposal.

Lower Camp Nine Road is to have calcium put on it so Road and Bridge may want to coordinate that, according to Chairman Dinning.

Commissioner Kirby 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. Commissioner Cossairt second. Commissioners voted as follows: Chairman Dinning “aye”, Commissioner Cossairt “aye” and Commissioner Kirby “aye”. Motion passed unanimously. The executive session ended at 9:25 a.m. No action was taken.

Ms. Nelson and Mr. Morris left the meeting at 9:25 a.m.

9:29 a.m., County Civil Attorney Tevis Hull joined the meeting.
Attorney Hull said he would send another letter to Garvin William’s attorney.

Chairman Dinning informed Attorney Hull that the survey gave him 30 examples of road names within subdivisions that have change. Attorney Hull asked if there had been any mention of a public notice given as we could do an affidavit to attach for recording purposes referring to that instrument number. Commissioners can make a motion to do that through the road naming process.

Attorney Hull left the meeting at 9:33 a.m.

Commissioner Cossairt moved to sign a Certificate of Residency for Sheniece Whitecrow. Commissioner Kirby second. Motion passed unanimously.

Commissioners discussed a possible alternate location to hold meetings in order to accommodate more members of the public.

Commissioner Kirby moved that beginning Monday, June 29, 2020, Commissioners will do away with the conference call line and if they get a large number of people wanting to attend a Commissioner meeting, Commissioners will make alternate meeting location plans. Commissioner Cossairt second. Motion passed unanimously.

9:37 a.m., Commissioners considered an application filed by New World Trade LLC. doing business as Old West Texas BBQ at The Hemlocks RV & Lodging, located at 73400 Highway 2, Moyie Springs, Idaho, to sell bottled, canned and draft beer on premises and wine by the drink. Present were: Chairman Dan Dinning, Commissioner Wally Cossairt, Commissioner Walt Kirby, Clerk Glenda Poston, and Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser. The proceedings were recorded.

The county application has been completed and returned along with the applicable fee. Yet to be received is a copy of the 2020 State of Idaho Retail Alcoholic Beverage License and a copy of the 2020 Panhandle Health District Permit.

Commissioner Cossairt moved to approve the 2020 County Alcoholic Beverage License for New World Trade LLC doing business as Old West Texas BBQ at The Hemlocks RV & Lodging to sell bottled, canned and draft beer on premises and wine by the drink pending receipt of the 2020 State of Idaho Retail Alcoholic Beverage License and the 2020 Panhandle Health District Permit. Commissioner Kirby second. Motion passed unanimously.

9:38 a.m., the proceedings to consider the beverage license ended.

10:00 a.m., Solid Waste Department Superintendent Claine Skeen joined the meeting. Chairman Dinning asked about the monitored sites and what the proposed schedule is for them. These sites are currently open three days per week from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Chairman Dinning said if we open up the sites another day, what will that entail for employees. Mr. Skeen said right now there is a position open at the Paradise Valley site and Chairman Dinning said we can use an employee from the landfill to fill in there. Chairman Dinning questioned leaving the current schedule as it is and Mr. Skeen said he would be covered as far as employees. Chairman Dinning said if we increase hours or days at the monitored sites, we’re looking at needing more employees. Mr. Skeen commented that if we go back to the prior normal schedule, the county will need to hire for another position there. Commissioners informed Mr. Skeen that they are not going to fill the now vacant foreman position at the landfill for a while. Mr. Skeen said nothing will change at the landfill without that position. Chairman Dinning asked which monitored site sees the most use and Mr. Skeen said the Naples site followed by Paradise Valley. Chairman Dinning informed Mr. Skeen that the entire county budget is uncertain. It was asked if the monitored sites were to open six days per week, is there an employee to cover that shift. Clerk Poston said she does not have budget for an assistant landfill foreman and she did not change any rural site hours. Commissioner Cossairt said someone from the Mt. Hall area told him that he would like to see if the Mt. Hall junction site could be open on Sundays and this person would also like to see a bin for metal there. Mr. Skeen voiced wanting to keep the current bin system for the safety of the employees. Chairman Dinning questioned if there is any way to use other bins in order to get a metal bin at the Mt. Hall junction.

Mr. Skeen said the 10 yard bin has been moved back to the fairgrounds, Boundary Community Hospital and the Restorium both have 10 yard bins and the Courthouse has a five yard bin.

Mr. Skeen discussed a wood study and the cost of metal. Mr. Skeen said metal is currently at $50.00 per ton. Those present discussed revenue, fees, etc.

The meeting with Mr. Skeen ended at 10:16 a.m.

Chief Deputy Clerk Nancy Ryals joined the meeting.

10:30 a.m., Commissioner Kirby moved to go into closed pursuant to Idaho Code 31-874. Commissioner Cossairt second. Motion passed unanimously. 10:45 a.m., Commissioner Kirby moved to go out of closed session. Commissioner Cossairt second. Motion passed unanimously. No action was taken.

The indigent appeal hearing for indigent case #2020-4 ended at 10:45 a.m.

10:45 a.m., Commissioner Cossairt moved to go into closed session pursuant to Idaho Code 31-874. Commissioner Kirby second. Motion passed unanimously. 10:47 a.m., Commissioner Cossairt moved to go out of closed session. Commissioner Kirby second. Motion passed unanimously.

Commissioner Cossairt moved to deny indigent case 2020-4 on appeal as there is no verification of the spouse’s income. Commissioner Kirby second. Motion passed unanimously.

Commissioner Kirby moved to authorize the Chairman to sign the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES) Act Request for Reimbursement for the airport upon verification of the figures. Commissioner Cossairt second. Motion passed unanimously.

Chief Deputy Clerk Ryals left the meeting at 10:50 a.m.

11:00 a.m., There being no further business, the meeting recessed until tomorrow at 9:00 a.m.

***Tuesday, June 23, 2020, at 9:00 a.m., Commissioners met in regular session with Chairman Dan Dinning, Commissioner Wally Cossairt, Commissioner Walt Kirby, Clerk Glenda Poston, and Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser.

9:00 a.m., Road and Bridge Department Co-Superintendents Renee Nelson and Randy Morris joined the meeting and those present reviewed Road and Bridge projects and budget. The meeting ended at 10:06 a.m.
Commissioners tended to administrative duties.

10:30 a.m., Commissioner Cossairt moved to recess as the Board of Boundary County Commissioners and to convene as the Board of Equalization. Commissioner Kirby second. Motion passed unanimously.

Commissioners held a Board of Equalization appeal hearing for parcel #RP61N01E218540A owned by Michael and Donna Bejzak. Present were: Chairman Dan Dinning, Commissioner Wally Cossairt, Commissioner Walt Kirby, Clerk Glenda Poston, Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser, Assessor Dave Ryals, Deputy Appraiser Tracy Golder, residential appraisers Melissa Kramer and Monica Tompke. The appellants were not present and they did not call in to participate via conference call. The hearing was recorded. The Assessor presented one exhibited Marked “County Exhibit Assessor Exhibit #1” (consisting of 5 pages, copied both sides)

Chairman Dinning reviewed the hearing procedures and administered the oath to those giving testimony. The appellant’s appeal form included information on five surrounding properties. The appellants state on their appeal form that there are appraisal inequities of the five surrounding properties. Most of these surrounding properties have additional outbuildings with more than one septic system, plus the values of the surrounding properties are of greater value. Chairman Dinning listed the addresses for the comparable properties as reference.

Commissioners asked for the Assessor’s Office statement. Deputy Assessor Golder read his statement, from his exhibit in its entirety, into the record.

Chairman Dinning stated that the appellants were not present to give a rebuttal. Assessor Ryals had no questions. Chairman Dinning said it appears the homesite (Category 10) is assessed at $52,060.00 and is the same for the other properties the appellant submitted with his initial appeal form. Excluding new construction, it’s the same for the other parcels. Chairman Dinning asked about square footages in the assessments and Deputy Assessor Golder said yes, there are some differences. Deputy Assessor Golder said Mr. Bejzak’s complaint is that compared to his property, the rest of the properties were undervalued. Deputy Assessor Golder said he could provide Commissioners an overview about that. Chairman Dinning said with square footages and improvements and listed improvements, it appears the appellant has an assessment of $319,000.00 on improved value, so there is a probable difference with that.

Commissioner Cossairt said the only thing is that two of these lots are valued less. There are home sites on smaller lots. The appellant has 10 acres. Deputy Assessor Golder said Mr. Bejzak has a 1,100 square foot unfinished basement and two other comparables don’t so that is a difference in square foot. The comparable at the Brown Creek address has a larger lot.

Commissioners closed the hearing to further public comment and explained that the last day for decisions to be made by the Board of Equalization is July 13, 2020. The Board of Equalization’s decision will be mailed to the appellant and they have right to appeal that decision with the Board of Tax Appeals or to district court.

Commissioner Kirby moved to sustain the Assessor’s valuation of parcel RP61N01E218540A owned by Michael and Donna Bejzak. Commissioner Cossairt second. Motion passed unanimously.

The Board of Equalization appeal hearing for parcel #RP61N01E218540A ended at 10:48 a.m.

11:10 a.m., Commissioners held a Board of Equalization appeal hearing for parcel #RP01000001005AA owned by Thomas and Lisa Davies. Present were: Chairman Dan Dinning, Commissioner Wally Cossairt, Commissioner Walt Kirby, Clerk Glenda Poston, Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser, Assessor Dave Ryals, Deputy Assessor Tracy Golder, and Appellants Thomas and Lisa Davies. The hearing was recorded. The Assessor presented one exhibit marked “County Exhibit Assessor #1” (consisting of four pages, copied front and back). The appellants did not present any exhibits.

Chairman Dinning reviewed the procedures followed for the hearing and administered the oath to those giving testimony. Mr. Davies asked for a moment to review the Assessor’s exhibit. Mr. Davies gave an opening statement and stated that he had searched for comparable sales with Moyie River frontage and only found one property that had sold in the last 12 months. This particular property would be adjusted downward for features it has that his property does not. This other property is also on 4.09 acres versus the 2.9 acres the Davies have, the home is approximately 700 square feet larger, it has a 768 square foot additional dwelling unit, a 50 foot by 36 foot, three bay shop, and a sleeping quarters above the garage and these are all things the Davie’s property doesn’t have. Ms. Davies commented that as comparables you could only use sold properties. Mr. Davies said the Assessor’s comments as to why that’s not a valid comparable doesn’t hold water. If an appraiser is appraising their property, they will look at that sold price for $385,000.00 and not worry whether or not it’s a distressed sale. In year 2008 and 2009 when there where hundreds of thousands of foreclosures or properties that were bank loan sold, those were comparable sales that were taken into account by appraisers. The generalizations they’re making about market insanity are just subjective comments without any hard data.

Ms. Davies said the Assessor’s Office also asked her husband about a masonry fireplace and she found that disturbing, and she wondered if the Assessor’s Office is looking in her windows as she finds that a little awkward and weird. They have a no trespassing sign clearly marked and video surveillance cameras, but that concerns her that people are looking in her windows and she doesn’t think they should be so she is upset about that. Mr. Davies said there are other pending sales across the river from them at Copper Falls, but it’s still pending so they don’t know what it will sell for, but that property is significantly lower than theirs. There are some differences, but its value is a lot less than this value. Ms. Davies said she and her husband love Idaho because it’s a non-disclosure state and the beauty of living here is that you don’t just look at Zillow for prices and talk about wanting to raise taxes as that is not how it should be done so that’s why she and her husband are here today to present hard data as to why their property assessment shouldn’t be raised. Mr. Davies said he is 90% certain a buyer would need a loan for their house and the appraiser would look at the sold price.

Chairman Dinning asked if there are any questions from the Assessor or Commissioners. Mr. Golder said in his conversation with Mr. Davies they were only going over the one comparable and he had indicated that one sale doesn’t make a market; it doesn’t mean it’s not a usable sale. Chairman Dinning said he would like the fireplace and security issues addressed. Mr. Golder said he never looked in the windows and just used the information from whomever drew up that property and he doesn’t know if that predates the Davies owning it. Mr. Golder explained the reason he asked about the fireplace specifically is because he was trying to go over the Davies’s specific appraisal and that information had already been inserted into the Assessor’s Office system so he was just confirming whether or not the Davies had a masonry fireplace; not saying he’s seen it. Mr. Davies questioned how this information got into the system. Chairman Dinning replied that he thinks Mr. Golder was saying that this information came from a prior owner, before the Davies, who may have indicated that.

Chairman Dinning asked for a statement from the Assessor’s Office. Mr. Golder read page 3 of his exhibit into the record as follows: parcel RP01000001005AA is an improved property on 2.9 acres with approximately 260’ of Moyie River frontage located at 518 Timberlane Road. There were no changes made by this appraiser to the appellants’ property assessment for 2020. The appellants provided one closed sale comparable as support to their value complaint. It is established in the real estate profession that one closed sale does not make a market. The State requires a minimum of five closed sales to establish a taxable market value and lenders require a minimum of 3-4 closed sales and possibly two additional current listings. If there aren’t enough comparable sales found within a 12-month search it is then compulsory to expand that search for similar properties further away (riverfront in this case) or further back in time, possibly requiring adjustments for the expanded parameters. This expanded search practice is common and typical in Boundary County with so many unique properties. The appellant is a real estate broker with access to the MLS and was reminded verbally of the need for additional comparables in the phone conversation before the appeal was filed. Specific reasons the sole closed sale provided was not enough support is explained on Line 2. 1. The current assessed value for the Davies property is as follows: $84,460 Land & Amenities + $369,540 Improvements = $454,000 Total Market Value. 2. The closed sale provided was not considered a valid sale for the County due in part to private information shared in confidence by the seller who was motivated to accept a cash deal that was $204,000 less than the original listing price. The assessment for the sale for 2020 is $471,680 Total Market Value. The new owners of this property did not inquire about a reduction of their assessment value, possibly due to getting what appears to be a very good deal. In closing: The appellants assessment value has not been adequately refuted with only one sale and since the value increase was entirely due to the market driven county-wide adjustments for 2020, it is at this time we would ask the Board of Equalization to sustain the Assessor’s Office values.

Chairman Dinning asked if the appellants had any questions of the Assessor. Mr. Davies said if the 2020 assessed value for the subject property he provided is $471,680.00, if you make adjustments for more square footage, more acreage, a shop, and an additional dwelling unit, and in comparing to their property, there is only a $15,000.00 or $16,680.00 value or something. The value of the land, the shop and additional dwelling unit is significantly more than $16,000.00. So when applying the current assessed value and making deductions for comparables the Davies’s property doesn’t have, would result in a market value far less than $454,000.00. Chairman Dinning said if he’s understanding, the assessed value of the subject property, in comparison to the assessed value of the comparable sale at the current time, once you deduct out the differences, is what the Davies are suggesting. Mr. Davies said yes, if the county has the assessed value for the subject property, let’s accept that, then go down from there and compare the items that his property does not have. Commissioners had no questions.

Chairman Dinning said at this point the appellants can issue a rebuttal or closing statement and then more questions may be asked. Ms. Davies said she believes in fair due process. If you take the two assessed values and take a reduction for more acreage, more square footage, and accessory dwelling unit, that’s fair and they’re all about being fair and reasonable and paying their taxes, so they’re not trying to be unfair, but they are trying to be reasonable.

Mr. Golder said one thing he pointed out is that it’s not that this wouldn’t be a sale that would be adjusted. He is sure an appraiser would do that and make adjustments, but the issue is that this is the only comparable and in an appraisal that’s why there is more than one comparable, because somewhere between all adjustments is the true value. It’s not just one sale. That’s why there’s a requirement for more than one to weed out what may be weak or may have differences. Those adjustments would be made to that and he can’t say it would come in above or below, and it might’ve come in below that one particular comparable, but you might have two others where it doesn’t and it adjusts up so you would have a final adjustment with a higher market value than just this sale. Mr. Golder asked if in year 2015, the Davies purchase the property for $475,000.00. Ms. Davies asked how that falls into this conversation. Mr. Golder said he’s just asking. Mr. Davies said they don’t have to answer that. Mr. Golder said that was a turned in sale verification so he just wanted to put it in the record.

Chairman Dinning asked about adjustments for an older sale and what figure Mr. Golder would have looked at. Chairman Dinning clarified that he is asking about the comparable. Mr. Golder said with making adjustments like this, that’s why it’s done in a format where it’s a grid. You take each item and adjust either up or down versus, in this case the Davies’s property, and if the comparable property is superior, then you subtract, but if not, you add and every line has its own plus or minus adjustment and at the end you have a tally. There are usually more comparables to offset somewhere within those three or more comparables, especially with unique properties it’s usually more than three. That is how it’s derived usually in an appraisal and he didn’t do an appraisal as there was only one comparable to make the adjustments to. Mr. Golder said there is information on the Davies’s property, due to due diligence of research. Mr. Golder explained to the Davies that there was a listing at one time of their house and it showed pictures of the house, interior or exterior, and he didn’t do the Davies’s appraisal using that information, but that information is on the internet. The Davies asked what that date was and Mr. Golder said it was May 2015. Ms. Davies asked if that was when they bought the property. Mr. Golder said he was just asking if they purchased the property for $475,000.00. Mr. Golder said that is the information he found in the Assessor’s Office system. Ms. Davies said that system is incorrect in that 500 Timberlane Road and 518 Timberlane Road are two different parcels and were combined for $475,000.00 and they purchased their property for $375,000.00 and the parcel with a cabin on it for $100,000. There are two separate parcels and they were combined for $475,000.00, according to Ms. Davies. 518 Timberlane Road was not sold for $475,000.00 so it’s both 518 Timberlane Road and 500 Timberland Road that make up the amount of $475,000.00, for clarification. Mr. Davies said it was mentioned there is a grid with features of the property and additions and subtractions to the subject property based upon features. Mr. Davies said they listed the shop, the additional dwelling unit, more square footage, and more river front and he asked Mr. Golder to provide an example of one item that his house would have that is superior to the comparable. Mr. Golder said he just wanted to make it clear that it’s not just about one comparable. Ms. Davies said that’s all there is. Mr. Golder informed those present that he is also a licensed fee appraiser in this state and it’s never acceptable from a lender to say they cannot find a comparable as you are to expand your search and you will have to make adjustments if it’s warranted. If you had to go back further in time, you make time adjustments. Mr. Golder said there are comparables, but it just appears there was only one comparable the Davies were comfortable with and that is what was used. Mr. Golder added that all he is saying is more comparables would’ve made it easier to say the Davies were right or that the Assessor’s values were right. One comparable doesn’t change the Assessor’s Office value. Mr. Davies said Mr. Golder cannot have his cake and eat it too. Mr. Davies said he had asked Mr. Golder if he could identify one characteristic of their property that would be an increase in value compared to the subject property and he could not. Mr. Davies said if he’s accepting the Assessor’s Office’s numbers of $471,600.00 and we’re only doing subtractions, it would be far less than $454,000.00.

Chairman Dinning closed the hearing to further testimony and public comment. Commissioners said they would try to reach a decision before this hearing is concluded, but that the deadline for a decision is July 13, 2020. Chairman Dinning read aloud the appeal instructions the appellants can take. Commissioner Cossairt said this one is tough. Chairman Dinning said Commissioners should take this matter under advisement then issue a conclusion.

Commissioner Cossairt moved to take the decision for parcel RP01000001005AA under advisement with a decision to be made at a later time. Commissioner Kirby second. Motion passed unanimously.

The hearing to consider parcel RP01000001005AA ended at 11:40 a.m.

Commissioners recessed for lunch at 11:40 a.m.

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

1:30 p.m., Commissioners held a Board of Equalization appeal hearing for parcel #RPB0160002012CA owned by Philip McGuire. Present were: Chairman Dan Dinning, Commissioner Wally Cossairt, Commissioner Walt Kirby, Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser, Assessor Dave Ryals, Appraiser Melissa Kramer and Appellant Philip McGuire. The hearing was recorded. The Assessor presented one exhibit marked “County Exhibit Assessor #1” (consisting of 5 pages, copied front and back). The appellant presented four exhibits marked as “Appellant Exhibit #1 (consisting of 8 pages), “Appellant Exhibit #2 (consisting of 7 pages), Appellant Exhibit #3 (consisting of 3 pages), and Appellant Exhibit #4 (consisting of 1 page). Chairman Dinning reviewed the hearing procedures and administered the oath to Assessor Ryals, Ms. Kramer and Mr. McGuire.

Chairman Dinning asked the appellant for an opening statement. Mr. McGuire said he had spoken to his realtor who informed him he wouldn’t be able to list his house for the assessed value and he added that he had provided comparables (comps) (see Exhibit #1). Mr. McGuire commented that when he purchased the property he didn’t make any updates. This house was built in 1954 and according to online information, it was renovated in 1991. The swimming pool in the back yard has been dismantled so it’s not operational. The windows are about as old as the renovation and the roof is at least 15 years old or older. McGuire said the deck behind the house is flaking and blistering and some of the wood is rotting. The value of $2,000.00 or so for the deck is not worth it as it’s very old. The landscaping doesn’t look like the pictures online as the prior owner paid a landscaper and he now maintains the landscaping himself. Assessor Ryals and Ms. Kramer had no questions. Mr. McGuire said he purchased the house in year 2016. The pool was operational when he bought the home. Chairman Dinning asked about the comps and Mr. McGuire said they’re all sold comps. Chairman Dinning asked about square footage and Mr. McGuire listed the square footages of the comps as 2,899, 2,600 and 3,000. Chairman Dinning said one comp shows as sold in 2016 or is that Mr. McGuire’s property. Commissioner Cossairt said it’s hard to tell without having dates as it’s been a very volatile year.

Chairman Dinning asked for the Assessor’s Office testimony. Ms. Kramer read her written testimony into the record in its entirety. Ms. Kramer added that an invitation was extended to Mr. McGuire to bring in comparables to establish market value and to further discuss his appraisal, but she didn’t hear back from him after that.

Mr. McGuire said he did get the opportunity to bring in comparables, but he had run out of time by the time he did get them. Ms. Kramer said this home was one of the older ones that lost all of its depreciation. Ms. Kramer added that she did do a mock up to see what she could come up with and there was a grade change made from the previous sale. If the value was reduced, the amount of $268,160.00 is what she could’ve reduced the value to. Assessor Ryals asked if all of that reduction was on the improvements and Ms. Kramer said yes.
Chairman Dinning offered Mr. McGuire the chance to make a rebuttal. Chairman Dinning said he heard Ms. Kramer say that she could reduce value to $268,160.00 using appropriate reductions. Assessor Ryals and Ms. Kramer made no rebuttal.

Commissioners closed the hearing to public comment to hold discussion amongst themselves. Commissioner Cossairt said he approves of reducing the value to $268,160.00 if the Assessor is in agreement.

Commissioner Kirby moved to reduce the Assessor’s value of parcel #RPB0160002012CA to $268,160.00. Commissioner Cossairt second. Motion passed unanimously.

Chairman Dinning explained that Mr. McGuire has the ability to appeal the Board of Equalization decision to the State Board of Tax Appeals or district court if he chooses.

The Board of Equalization appeal hearing for parcel #RPB0160002012CA ended 1:47 p.m.

2:00 p.m., Boundary Economic Development Director Dennis Weed joined the meeting to discuss the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act broadband grant. Kevin Lederhos with EL Internet participated in the meeting via telephone. Mr. Weed said people can request the county to be the grant recipient for this grant through the Department of Commerce and the process will go through the Department of Commerce portal, such as the GEM grant and other programs have. Commissioners would entertain requests for that grant and decide who proceeds. The county would submit the selected vendor for this grant, which would then be submitted to the State of Idaho and if that particular company meets the requirements, the county receives the funds and administers the grant. Chairman Dinning said it was indicated there were two other firms interested in working within the county. Mr. Weed said yes. Chairman Dinning said Commissioners are to take a look at the proposals from all three vendors to see what will best fit the county. Mr. Weed said Commissioners can review the proposals from the vendors prior to submitting them to the state. If the state says they have a worthy proposal, they would issue the grant to that company through the county. The county has the final say as a Board of Boundary County Commissioners about who and what they want to support. Mr. Weed discussed proposals needing to be in by July 8th. Mr. Weed said Commissioners need to look at all proposals. Mr. Weed added that the only action today is for Commissioners to be open to receiving proposals from contractors and either he or Panhandle Area Council will do a lot of grant administration work.

Mr. Lederhos ended his conference call 2:10 p.m.

Mr. Weed left the meeting at 2:13 p.m.

Commissioner Cossairt moved to sign the Idaho Office of Emergency Management (IEOM) 2017 Operation StoneGarden Grant for the performance period of September 1, 2017 through May 31, 2021 for $35,000.00. Commissioner Kirby second. Motion passed unanimously.

Commissioners tended to administrative duties.

2:52 p.m., Commissioners resumed the Board of Equalization appeal hearing for parcel #RP01000001005AA owned by Thomas and Lisa Davies in order to deliberate the Davies’s property valuation appeal. Present were: Chairman Dan Dinning, Commissioner Wally Cossairt, Commissioner Walt Kirby, Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser, Assessor Dave Ryals, Deputy Assessor Tracy Golder and Appellants Thomas and Lisa Davies. The proceedings were recorded.

Chairman Dinning said Commissioners are at the point of discussing this matter amongst themselves. Commissioner Cossairt mentioned there being a lack of comparables and with this year being a volatile year anything that’s a couple months old is outdated.

Chairman Dinning stated that one thing Commissioners have to consider, specifically in state rules or code, is that the Assessor’s valuation is presumed correct unless there is something that shows that it’s not. Mr. & Ms. Davies presented a comparable and that the property comparable sale had 4 acres of riverfront as compared to the Davies’ 2.9 acres. The comparable house is 3,600 square feet and the Davies’s home is 3,000 square feet. The comparable home has a 768 square foot additional dwelling unit and a 50 by 36 square foot shop with sleeping quarters above it. That sale had been indicated as a distressed sale from the prior owner. Commissioner Kirby said he doesn’t like using the fire sale, the get out of town sale, it’s not a worthwhile comp and Commissioners shouldn’t consider it. Commissioner Kirby said he thinks the Assessor has hit it very close with today’s market value, in his opinion.

Commissioner Cossairt said he just doesn’t see enough information to work with. Chairman Dinning said the only thing he would look at is the Assessor’s original letter that was read into the record in that the assessment for the comparable sale was $471,680.00 this year, which is $17,000.00 or $18,000.00 more in assessed value than the subject property as it has a large shop, with an additional dwelling unit, and a bit more square footage. Chairman Dinning said he’s trying to, in his mind, look at a bit of equity and quality regarding assessed values and what is there. A shop and additional dwelling unit is going to be more than $17,000 or $18,000. Chairman Dinning asked if what he’s saying makes sense and Commissioner Cossairt said yes. Commissioner Cossairt asked if there was a breakdown of the other comparable property. Chairman Dinning said no. Commissioner Cossairt said without seeing the shop, etc., he could see a $30,000.00 reduction in value. Chairman Dinning said if we’re giving credence to the other sales comparable, it would put it at $47,000.00 in assessed value below that other one and we don’t know the condition of it or anything. Commissioner Cossairt said he is going to stick with his estimated reduction of $30,000.00.

Commissioner Cossairt moved to reduce the improved valuation assessment for parcel #RP01000001005AA owned by Thomas and Lisa Davies by $30,000.00. Commissioner Kirby second. Motion passed unanimously.

Chairman Dinning reviewed the instructions and options for appealing the Board of Equalization decision before the State Board of Tax Appeals or district court.

The Board of Equalization appeal hearing for parcel #RP01000001005AA owned by Thomas and Lisa Davies ended at 3:15 p.m.

Commissioner Kirby left the meeting at 3:24 p.m.

3:30 p.m. Commissioner Cossairt moved to recess as the Board of Equalization and to reconvene as the Boundary County Board of Commissioners. Chairman Dinning yielded the chair to second. Motion passed unanimously.

There being no further business, the meeting recessed until tomorrow at 10:00 a.m.
***Wednesday, June 24, 2020, at 10:00 a.m., Commissioners met in special session with Chairman Dan Dinning, Commissioner Wally Cossairt, Commissioner Walt Kirby, Clerk Glenda Poston, and Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser. The purpose of the meeting is to participate in a conference call with representatives of North Idaho College (NIC) to discuss the Bonners Ferry satellite campus. Participating via conference call was NIC President Rick MacLennan, Boundary County School District teachers Paul Bonnell and Sharlene Anderson; NIC Vice President of Finance Chris Martin, and NIC Chief Academic Officer Dr. Lita Burns.

Chairman Dinning said this call is for information as to what is going on with the NIC campus in Bonners Ferry. Dr. MacLennan said this is not the best of times for communication and following process for making decisions with impacts and this affects Bonners Ferry. Dr. MacLennan said NIC has been discussing sustainability of all outreach centers for the last three or four years as to whether or not NIC was able to go ahead and carry the effort that was happening, especially in Silver Valley and Bonners Ferry. As NIC began the budget process last fall, the college had been experiencing enrollment decline over the last several years. NIC received a 2% budget reduction from the State and with COVID-19, NIC received an early indication of an additional 5% reduction from the state, which equates to nearly one million dollars of support. That shortfall looks to be something of a permanent feature, according to Dr. MacLennan. With other COVID-19 variables, NIC made a decision to close the physical structure in Bonners Ferry. The article in the local newspaper did not express fully NIC’s intention. NIC representatives had met as a group with the Economic Development Council Director and Boundary County School District Superintendent approximately one week ago to discuss this issue. NIC had to quickly move to an online environment and was in a good spot relative to other institutions with funding distance learning support and information technology. It wasn’t easy, but NIC was quickly able to migrate to a virtual environment. There is a lot of entry engagement to get students on board with NIC and NIC learned they can do that more broadly in a virtual environment than to require students to go to a campus to schedule services. Dr. MacLennan said they started talking about the Bonner Ferry center, some lessons learned will come into play as to how to serve Bonners Ferry as we go into the future. That does not mean NIC only intends to be virtual presence as they have adult programs and general education degree (GED) programs so NIC will have a physical presence in Bonners Ferry. NIC is extending its operation in Bonners Ferry through the fall semester to have an opportunity to do what needs to be done face to face and to also look at other ways to increase and in ways enhance a virtual format. Dr. MacLennan said the commitment is genuine. They recognize the loss of the center and what that means. For NIC’s outreach, it will require them to do things differently than they had done in the past. Dr. MacLennan discussed staffing for Sandpoint and Bonners Ferry.

Chairman Dinning asked if this is a financial decision based upon declining enrollment at the Coeur d’ Alene facility or a look at everything overall? Dr. MacLennan said the enrollment concern is districtwide. The total student population has been declining. After the 2008 recession, in years 2011 and 2012, enrollment was at all time highes before gradually returning to pre-recession levels. NIC has also dipped below those levels. Enrollment is districtwide. Mr. Martin informed those on the call that $140,000.00 is spent on Bonners Ferry each year and tuition to that outreach center is less than $20,000.00 per year. Dr. MacLennan said that only covers direct costs; not indirect costs.

Chairman Dinning said just to be clear, Boundary County, Bonners Ferry and the Kootenai Tribe purchased the Bonners Ferry facility for $90,000.00 so we could put in place something with NIC. We’ve gone out and reached to provide that for our community. Chairman Dinning asked about the local staff and what will happen to their positions. Dr. Burns said the NIC Coordinator Christine Callison is over both the Sandpoint and Bonners Ferry centers and she will continue in that role and capacity. There is also an advisor and credit coordinator and they will also maintain that fulltime with a home base at the Sandpoint center. Alissa Pinkerton spends a majority of her time in high schools and other outreach centers and she will continue to have an in-person presence at those locations. There hasn’t been discussion about the part time employees, but NIC would lose them at the Bonners Ferry Center. Chairman Dinning asked if NIC would consider coming back in a physical presence if enrollment turns around. Dr. MacLennan said he doesn’t want to say never, but there is a physical deficit. This issue has been a long term challenge for NIC and they would really need to see some strong reasons or indicators and enrollment projections that would have them consider coming back in a physical presence. Dr. MacLennan said he doesn’t want to oversell, but NIC is truly and sincerely looking at how to provide services for providing access to higher education and he added that we’re talking about out of the box thinking for instructions.

Dr. Burns said NIC provides enrollment information to NIC’s Board of Trustees and for a number of years they have changed how to report on outreach centers and if they only went by courses offered, it would look like there is no reason to be there. NIC believes it’s important to have outreach as it’s more than students sitting in a classroom. They’re trying to provide a really good transition for community members to have access to education for skills to get a good job or receive higher education. Access is really important and NIC is working to put together a transition team and Dr. Burns listed Gary Aitken Jr., Paul Bonnell, Summer MacDonald, Dennis Weed, Jan Bayer, Christine Callison, members of Student Services, and herself as members of that team. This team will look into transitioning into virtual environment, but they also do want to have some sort of physical presence in Bonners Ferry somehow to be able to meet face to face with students. It may be that students have to travel to Sandpoint for GED testing. Another thing that is really important is access to dual credit courses and NIC wants the course schedule to continue without interruption. NIC realizes students need a face to face contact so they will look into the ability to use the local school facility for that. NIC will plan to best meet all needs without having the Bonners Ferry Center open. Chairman Dinning said all of that sounds good probably from the perspective in the community. Our populous will not drive to do what is offered at the Sandpoint campus. Our technology in this area won’t handle the need so there needs to be some presence for local students to use those remote services. Dr. Burns said they’re aware of that challenge and understand the center in Bonners Ferry is very widely used by students due to the interest in services. It was asked if NIC partners with the library or school district to make sure students receive internet abilities. Dr. Burns commented that Bonners Ferry is a bit ahead of Kellogg as it concerns internet. Dr. Burns said she doesn’t have all of the answers today, but she does have ideas and they will problem solve on how to address issues.

Chairman Dinning said if NIC is looking at $140,000.00 plus other areas of savings, what cuts are being made at the college to make up that difference. Dr. MacLennan said he mentioned in early fall budget planning taking place and the connection of enrollment and staffing. NIC has looked at the three year future and saw they would clearly have issues with staffing. NIC has an early retirement program so they’re looking at the next three years to not refill positions that open up. Dr. MacLennan said the budget that is before NIC’s Board now, includes a $4,000.000.00 problem of which a little over $2,000,000.00 has been accommodated by reductions in staff, etc. Another $1,400,000.00 and $2,000,000.00 will be made up with college’s reserves. NIC will look at between $200,000.00 and $300,000.00 of recapturing. Chairman Dinning said the general services for Coeur d’ Alene students will still be in place even with reduced staff. Dr. MacLennan said he would go back to structural realignment, and based on enrollment decline it was clear NIC needed to reduce its workforce to balance that out and have a way to reduce the impact to students as much as possible. Those positions are in direct relation to enrollment decline. Mr. Martin said there are no two ways about it, there has been a reduction in enrollment. The services the students are used to having at the main campus will continue. Chairman Dinning said we, as a community, at least Commissioners, were totally unaware this was being considered and we would’ve appreciated a heads up prior to this so that we could have provided input to help facilitate something. Commissioners would sure appreciate some form of an update as NIC goes along as to how they’re looking to resolve concerns for Bonners Ferry. Commissioners are disappointed as we made efforts to get NIC to Bonners Ferry and Commissioners would appreciate being included in a little better fashion. Dr. MacLennan said he appreciates the gentle admonishment. Throughout the budget development process pre-COVID-19, the outreach centers were included in the budget. COVID-19 and the second reduction in the budget is when this discussion started. NIC has no other intent than to be transparent. At the time NIC was able to be transparent, which was with the additional 5% reduction from the state and that was about the time Commissioners and Mr. Martin began talking. NIC does have commitment for open communication going forward. Dr. Burns commented that she had not invited Commissioners to be a part of the transition team, but she feels it would be very appropriate to extend the invitation to them. Chairman Dinning said he appreciates that.

Commissioners asked if NIC will be staying in the local facility through the fall semester and Dr. MacLennan said that was correct. Mr. Martin said he would modify the lease beyond December so he thinks during the first quarter of year 2021 NIC would vacate the facility.

The call to discuss the local NIC campus ended at 10:40 a.m.

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 10:40 p.m.

____________________________________
DAN R. DINNING, Chairman

ATTEST:

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