Commissioners’ – Week of August 24, 2026

Meeting Date: August 24, 2026 9:00 am

Meeting Minutes

***Monday, August 24, 2026 at 9:00 a.m., Commissioners met in regular session with Chairman Ben Robertson, Commissioner Tim Bertling, Commissioner Lester Pinkerton, Clerk Glenda Poston, and Deputy Clerk Stephanie Sims.

Commissioners said the Pledge of Allegiance.

Maintenance Supervisor Squire Fields entered at 8:59 a.m. and updated Commissioners on some projects. He said the City of Bonners Ferry will be digging in front of the courthouse today in preparation of the replacement of the main water line that will happen tomorrow morning. The Yukon has had all four tire sensors replaced; there was a stem leak in one tire and a small hole in another. The windshield was scheduled to be replaced soon. He will also have it cleaned as well as the Assessor’s vehicles.

He put a dehumidifier in the basement at Veterans Memorial and cleaned and adjusted the pump system so it was coming on sooner. He felt that was where a lot of the smell was coming from. The humidity has dropped to 55%. In order to vent it like it was previously, they would have to cut through the new siding.

Tomorrow they will be cutting through the floor of the women’s restroom to replace the line that has been leaking. He believes the repair should be easy. He will update Commissioners on any other damage when he knows more.

The meeting with Mr. Fields ended at 9:10 a.m. and he left the meeting.

Civil Attorney Bill Wilson entered the meeting at 9:33 a.m.

Mr. Wilson reviewed Commissioners earlier question about boundaries for North Bench’s petition for a taxing district. He said that by Statute their boundaries need to be contiguous in their application and that was a requirement of the Tax Commission. However, an individual can go through a process for consideration to de-annex their property afterwards and the boundaries may no longer be contiguous at that time. For the hearing, Commissioners have the ability to deny, approve, or the law also states you can amend the boundaries presented. There weren’t any expressed criteria for you to follow and Commissioners can use their discretion. He suggested that they include justification for their decision.

Chairman Robertson stated that the levy rate keeps coming up and confirmed that was not part of the question at this time. Mr. Wilson replied that was correct, that decision would be something that came at a later stage. Chairman Robertson also confirmed that we would be basing this on a map because that was all we have in front of us at this time. Mr. Wilson replied that you can call on your Assessor to comment on that. The Tax Commission also would have been willing to review, but he did not believe the applicant did that and it wouldn’t be appropriate for the County to do it for the applicant. The county was not guaranteeing that what they have presented was accurate, that was entirely on the applicant.

Commissioner Bertling asked who could we call upon to answer questions about their budget. Mr. Wilson replied any board member, their attorney, or whomever they designate to represent them. The heart of the matter was — will creating a taxing district resolve the issues they currently have. You can ask intelligent thoughtful questions to help you answer that question.

Chairman Robertson asked if we were to change the mapping, who writes that legal description. Mr. Wilson replied that you have the right to change it and he believed that would fall back to the applicant to write it. Ms. Poston added that we have discussed the date for ballot language and so far, have not received anything from them. She expressed concern that there wasn’t enough time to amend the map/legal description. Mr. Wilson felt that might push it to the next election cycle then and if so, that would also fall to the applicant to pay those costs.

Mr. Wilson then updated Commissioners on the airport and said they should have information to move forward soon.

The meeting with Mr. Wilson ended at 9:55 a.m. and he and Ms. Poston left the meeting.

Commissioner Bertling moved to sign Certificates of Residency for Tatiana Dewberry and Hanna Franck. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

Commissioner Pinkerton moved to sign Commissioner meeting minutes from the week of August 17^th. Commissioner Bertling second. Motion passed unanimously.

Commissioner Bertling moved to approve New Private Road Name Request for Bobby Lane as recommended by the naming committee. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

Commissioner Bertling moved to sign two-year Juvenile Detention Agreement with Bonner County. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

Commissioner Pinkerton moved to sign Utilities Form to retire electric service to Hangar I. Commissioner Bertling second. Motion passed unanimously.

Commissioner Bertling moved to sign Utilities Form for trunk line extension to feed new hangar sites. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

Commissioner Pinkerton moved to sign CASA Contract for Services for FY26-27. Commissioner Bertling second. Motion passed unanimously.

Commissioner Bertling moved to sign Passthrough Funds Recipient Agreement with Idaho Dept of Juvenile Corrections. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

Commissioner Bertling moved to sign Resolution 2026-38 for Destruction of Records from Sheriff’s Office. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-38

COUNTY ASSISTANCE

APPROVAL OF THE DESTRUCTION OF BOUNDARY COUNTY SHERIFF RECORDS

WHEREAS, Boundary County Sheriff records requests with supporting responses prior to and including 2008 have been reviewed and found to be “temporary” which need to be retained not less than “2 years” and;

WHEREAS, the Boundary County Sheriff Records Custodian is the custodian of these records and has been consulted and does give approval for the destruction of those inactive records older than “2 years” and;

WHEREAS, the Boundary County Prosecuting attorney pursuant to Idaho Code 31-871(2)(g) has reviewed the request and has no objection thereto, and;

WHEREAS, Idaho code 31-871 does authorize the destruction of the above-named records, a detailed list of which is attached to and incorporated herein.

NOW, THERFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Boundary County, Idaho, that the above-named documents, identified in detail in the attached list, may be destroyed, and the same is hereby approved and adopted as a resolution of the Boundary County Commissioners.

Dated this 24^th day of August, 2026

BOUNDARY COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

s/_________________________________

Ben Robertson, Chairman

s/_________________________________ By: s/_____________________________

Lester Pinkerton, Commissioner Deputy Clerk

s/_________________________________ Dated: 8/24/2026

Tim Bertling, Commissioner

Recorded Instrument #304072

Note: Detailed list can be viewed in the Clerk’s Office

Commissioner Bertling moved to sign Resolution 2026-39 for Destruction of Records from Sheriff’s Office. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-39

COUNTY ASSISTANCE

APPROVAL OF THE DESTRUCTION OF BOUNDARY COUNTY SHERIFF RECORDS

WHEREAS, Boundary County Sheriff records requests with supporting responses prior to and including 2010 have been reviewed and found to be “temporary” which need to be retained not less than “2 years” and;

WHEREAS, the Boundary County Prosecuting attorney pursuant to Idaho Code 31-871(2)(g) has reviewed the request and has no objection thereto, and;

WHEREAS, Idaho code 31-871 does authorize the destruction of the above-named records, a detailed list of which is attached to and incorporated herein.

Dated this 24^th day of August, 2026

BOUNDARY COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

s/_________________________________

Ben Robertson, Chairman

s/_________________________________ By: s/_____________________________

Lester Pinkerton, Commissioner Deputy Clerk

s/_________________________________ Dated: 8/24/26

Tim Bertling, Commissioner

Recorded Instrument #304073

Note: Detailed list can be viewed in the Clerk’s Office

Commissioner Bertling moved to sign Resolution 2026-40 for Destruction of Records from Sheriff’s Office. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-40

COUNTY ASSISTANCE

APPROVAL OF THE DESTRUCTION OF BOUNDARY COUNTY SHERIFF RECORDS

WHEREAS, Boundary County Sheriff records requests with supporting responses prior to and including 2015 have been reviewed and found to be “temporary” which need to be retained not less than “2 years” and;

WHEREAS, the Boundary County Prosecuting attorney pursuant to Idaho Code 31-871(2)(g) has reviewed the request and has no objection thereto, and;

WHEREAS, Idaho code 31-871 does authorize the destruction of the above-named records, a detailed list of which is attached to and incorporated herein.

Dated this 24^th day of August, 2026

BOUNDARY COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

s/_________________________________

Ben Robertson, Chairman

s/_________________________________ By: s/_____________________________

Lester Pinkerton, Commissioner Deputy Clerk

s/_________________________________ Dated: 8/24/2026

Tim Bertling, Commissioner

Recorded Instrument #304074

Note: Detailed list can be viewed in the Clerk’s Office

Commissioner Bertling moved to sign Resolution 2026-41 for Destruction of Records from Sheriff’s Office. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-41

COUNTY ASSISTANCE

APPROVAL OF THE DESTRUCTION OF BOUNDARY COUNTY SHERIFF RECORDS

WHEREAS, Boundary County Sheriff records requests with supporting responses prior to and including 2016 have been reviewed and found to be “temporary” which need to be retained not less than “2 years” and;

WHEREAS, the Boundary County Prosecuting attorney pursuant to Idaho Code 31-871(2)(g) has reviewed the request and has no objection thereto, and;

WHEREAS, Idaho code 31-871 does authorize the destruction of the above-named records, a detailed list of which is attached to and incorporated herein.

Dated this 24^th day of August, 2026

BOUNDARY COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

s/_________________________________

Ben Robertson, Chairman

s/_________________________________ By: s/_____________________________

Lester Pinkerton, Commissioner Deputy Clerk

s/_________________________________ Dated: 8/24/2026

Tim Bertling, Commissioner

Recorded Instrument #304075

Note: Detailed list can be viewed in the Clerk’s Office

Commissioner Bertling moved to sign Resolution 2026-42 for Destruction of Records from Sheriff’s Office. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-42

COUNTY ASSISTANCE

APPROVAL OF THE DESTRUCTION OF BOUNDARY COUNTY SHERIFF RECORDS

WHEREAS, Boundary County Sheriff records requests with supporting responses prior to and including 2018 have been reviewed and found to be “temporary” which need to be retained not less than “2 years” and;

WHEREAS, the Boundary County Prosecuting attorney pursuant to Idaho Code 31-871(2)(g) has reviewed the request and has no objection thereto, and;

WHEREAS, Idaho code 31-871 does authorize the destruction of the above-named records, a detailed list of which is attached to and incorporated herein.

Dated this 24^th day of August, 2026

BOUNDARY COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

s/_________________________________

Ben Robertson, Chairman

s/_________________________________ By: s/_____________________________

Lester Pinkerton, Commissioner Deputy Clerk

s/_________________________________ Dated: 8/24/2026

Tim Bertling, Commissioner

Recorded Instrument #304076

Note: Detailed list can be viewed in the Clerk’s Office

Commissioner Bertling moved to sign Resolution 2026-43 for Destruction of Records from Sheriff’s Office. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-43

COUNTY ASSISTANCE

APPROVAL OF THE DESTRUCTION OF BOUNDARY COUNTY SHERIFF RECORDS

WHEREAS, Boundary County Sheriff records requests with supporting responses prior to and including 2019 have been reviewed and found to be “temporary” which need to be retained not less than “2 years” and;

WHEREAS, the Boundary County Prosecuting attorney pursuant to Idaho Code 31-871(2)(g) has reviewed the request and has no objection thereto, and;

WHEREAS, Idaho code 31-871 does authorize the destruction of the above-named records, a detailed list of which is attached to and incorporated herein.

Dated this 24^th day of August, 2026

BOUNDARY COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

s/_________________________________

Ben Robertson, Chairman

s/_________________________________ By: s/_____________________________

Lester Pinkerton, Commissioner Deputy Clerk

s/_________________________________ Dated: 8/24/2026

Tim Bertling, Commissioner

Recorded Instrument #304077

Note: Detailed list can be viewed in the Clerk’s Office

Commissioner Bertling moved to sign Resolution 2026-44 for Destruction of Records from Sheriff’s Office. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-44

COUNTY ASSISTANCE

APPROVAL OF THE DESTRUCTION OF BOUNDARY COUNTY SHERIFF RECORDS

WHEREAS, Boundary County Sheriff records requests with supporting responses prior to and including 2020 have been reviewed and found to be “temporary” which need to be retained not less than “2 years” and;

WHEREAS, the Boundary County Prosecuting attorney pursuant to Idaho Code 31-871(2)(g) has reviewed the request and has no objection thereto, and;

WHEREAS, Idaho code 31-871 does authorize the destruction of the above-named records, a detailed list of which is attached to and incorporated herein.

Dated this 24^th day of August, 2026

BOUNDARY COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

s/_________________________________

Ben Robertson, Chairman

s/_________________________________ By: s/_____________________________

Lester Pinkerton, Commissioner Deputy Clerk

s/_________________________________ Dated: 8/24/2026

Tim Bertling, Commissioner

Recorded Instrument #304078

Note: Detailed list can be viewed in the Clerk’s Office

Commissioner Bertling moved to sign Resolution 2026-45 for Destruction of Records from Sheriff’s Office. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-45

COUNTY ASSISTANCE

APPROVAL OF THE DESTRUCTION OF BOUNDARY COUNTY SHERIFF RECORDS

WHEREAS, Boundary County Sheriff records requests with supporting responses prior to and including 2021 have been reviewed and found to be “temporary” which need to be retained not less than “2 years” and;

WHEREAS, the Boundary County Prosecuting attorney pursuant to Idaho Code 31-871(2)(g) has reviewed the request and has no objection thereto, and;

WHEREAS, Idaho code 31-871 does authorize the destruction of the above-named records, a detailed list of which is attached to and incorporated herein.

Dated this 24^th day of August, 2026

BOUNDARY COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

s/_________________________________

Ben Robertson, Chairman

s/_________________________________ By: s/_____________________________

Lester Pinkerton, Commissioner Deputy Clerk

s/_________________________________ Dated: 8/24/2026

Tim Bertling, Commissioner

Recorded Instrument #304079

Note: Detailed list can be viewed in the Clerk’s Office

Commissioner Bertling moved to sign Resolution 2026-46 for Destruction of Records from Sheriff’s Office. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-46

COUNTY ASSISTANCE

APPROVAL OF THE DESTRUCTION OF BOUNDARY COUNTY SHERIFF RECORDS

WHEREAS, Boundary County Sheriff records requests with supporting responses prior to and including 2022 have been reviewed and found to be “temporary” which need to be retained not less than “2 years” and;

WHEREAS, the Boundary County Prosecuting attorney pursuant to Idaho Code 31-871(2)(g) has reviewed the request and has no objection thereto, and;

WHEREAS, Idaho code 31-871 does authorize the destruction of the above-named records, a detailed list of which is attached to and incorporated herein.

Dated this 24^th day of August, 2026

BOUNDARY COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

s/_________________________________

Ben Robertson, Chairman

s/_________________________________ By: s/_____________________________

Lester Pinkerton, Commissioner Deputy Clerk

s/_________________________________ Dated: 8/24/2026

Tim Bertling, Commissioner

Recorded Instrument #304080

Note: Detailed list can be viewed in the Clerk’s Office

Commissioner Bertling moved to sign Resolution 2026-47 for Destruction of Records from Sheriff’s Office. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-47

COUNTY ASSISTANCE

APPROVAL OF THE DESTRUCTION OF BOUNDARY COUNTY SHERIFF RECORDS

WHEREAS, Boundary County Sheriff records requests with supporting responses prior to and including 2023 have been reviewed and found to be “temporary” which need to be retained not less than “2 years” and;

WHEREAS, the Boundary County Prosecuting attorney pursuant to Idaho Code 31-871(2)(g) has reviewed the request and has no objection thereto, and;

WHEREAS, Idaho code 31-871 does authorize the destruction of the above-named records, a detailed list of which is attached to and incorporated herein.

Dated this 24^th day of August, 2026

BOUNDARY COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

s/_________________________________

Ben Robertson, Chairman

s/_________________________________ By: s._____________________________

Lester Pinkerton, Commissioner Deputy Clerk

s/_________________________________ Dated: 8/24/2026

Tim Bertling, Commissioner

Recorded Instrument #304081

Note: Detailed list can be viewed in the Clerk’s Office

The contract for the airport runway project was not ready, so no action was taken.

The meeting recessed at 10:43 a.m.

Commissioners reconvened for the afternoon session at 1:30 p.m. with Chairman Robertson, Commissioner Bertling, Commissioner Pinkerton, Clerk Glenda Poston, and Deputy Clerk Stephanie Sims.

Road and Bridge/Landfill Superintendent Brad Barton and Assistant Superintendent Adam Ryals entered the meeting at 1:27 p.m.

Chairman Robertson stated that he has had another request for a 4-way stop at Kootenai Trail and Paradise Valley. Mr. Barton replied that they have considered adding a blinking light to the sign. He then suggested adding traffic counters to get information on the number of cars and speed statistics so they can evaluate.

Mr. Barton said that they have been doing sign work on Westside, Cemetery/Love, Kootenai Trail and Moon Shadow. They graded the washboard areas and added dust abatement to Blume Hill. They finish up chipseal on Moyie River Rd and have moved to Porthill where they have pulled ditches and continued with chipseal. If all goes well, they should be headed south to Twenty Mile this week.

Chairman Robertson asked about their wish list in the future to convert gravel roads to chipseal. Mr. Barton said they should be caught up in about two years with the list of roads that are in really poor condition and can then focus on that. He hopes to dedicate time entering data this fall to assist them on what roads should be considered.

Mr. Ryals provided Commissioners with proposed changes to the frost law. Commissioners will review and discuss at a future meeting.

Mr. Barton said the landfill was doing well and they have a meeting regarding cardboard tomorrow. The metal baling was nearing completion. He then asked about air quality testing for the ACI. Commissioners asked him to get numbers on the cost and gather more information for them to evaluate.

The meeting with Mr. Barton and Mr. Ryals ended at 1:53 p.m. and they left the meeting.

Personnel Director Pam Barton entered at 2:21 p.m.

Commissioner Bertling moved to go into executive session 74-206(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 Pinkerton second. Commissioners voted as follows: Chairman Robertson “aye”, Commissioner Bertling “aye”, Commissioner Pinkerton “aye”. The executive session ended at 2:41 p.m. No action was taken.

Ms. Barton asked about the position for grant administration and personnel and if Commissioners were ready to proceed. Commissioners agreed to move forward. Ms. Poston reminded Commissioners that all grant records needed to remain with the Clerk’s office.

The meeting with Ms. Barton ended at 2:46 p.m. and she left the meeting.

Ms. Poston left the meeting at 2:49 p.m.

There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 3:25 p.m.

Tuesday, August 25, 2026 at 9:00 a.m., Commissioners met in regular session with Chairman Ben Robertson, Commissioner Tim Bertling, Commissioner Lester Pinkerton, and Deputy Clerk Stephanie Sims.

At 2:00 p.m. Commissioners held a public hearing for FILE #26-0133, RURAL SUBDIVISION VIA SHORT PLAT, THE BILLIE & PATRICIA I. POULTON FAMILY TRUST. Those in attendance were: Chairman Robertson, Commissioner Bertling, Commissioner Pinkerton, Deputy Clerk Stephanie Sims, P&Z Staff Tess Vogel, P&Z Staff Clare Marley, P&Z Tech Jenn Maynard, Carrie Figgins, Cathi Winkelseth, Karen Pedey, Coral Koberstein with JRS Surveying, and Shelly Yount. The hearing was recorded.

Chairman Robertson opened the hearing stating the applicant was requesting preliminary plat approval for the replat of Lot 19 of Poulton Pines Subdivision, a rural subdivision via short plat, to divide a 15.72-acre lot into two lots of 7.79 acres and 7.93 acres in the Residential zone. The Residential zone district has varying lot size minimum densities based on community water and sewer services – ¼-acre where both community water and sewer services are available; 1-acre where either community water or sewer service was available; 2½ acres where neither community water nor sewer services was available. The lot was located off Chokecherry Drive and was identified as Assessor’s Parcel RP008450000190A in Section 21, Township 62 North, Range 1 East.

Chairman Robertson called for disclosures and conflicts. Chairman Robertson and Commissioner Bertling replied that they had none. Commissioner Pinkerton recused himself because he felt he was too close to the family.

Ms. Vogel explained the hearing process and proposed project stating that this may look familiar because it was part of an earlier project. This one however was across the road from the previous one and they are splitting one lot into two. The plat name currently says amended, but will be updated to show replat. Each of the lots are approximately 8 acres so there are no concerns about minimum density. The file was routed to various agencies for comment with Addressing having no concerns and DEQ stating there was no impact at this stage. PHD provided information on land development. No written comments were received from the public.

Ms. Marley added that since the codification has not yet been implemented, they will also include the current numbers for reference.

Chairman Robertson then asked the applicant to present. Ms. Koberstein had no additional comments. He then opened the hearing to public comment in favor of, neutral, and opposed. No one spoke. Chairman Robertson then asked if there were any comments from the applicant for a rebuttal and Ms. Koberstein had none. Commissioners also had no clarifying questions.

Chairman Robertson then called for deliberation. Commissioner Bertling stated that he saw no problems with the project moving forward. Chairman Robertson stated it meets the minimum standards required. Ms. Vogel then read through the reason statement and Commissioners responded to each.

Chairman Robertson called for a motion.

Commissioner Bertling moved to approve the preliminary plat for the Replat of Lot 19 of Poulton Pines Subdivision, a proposed rural subdivision, File #26-0133, and direct staff to prepare written findings, a reasoned decision, and terms and conditions of approval, finding that the preliminary plat is in accord with the applicable zoning and subdivision standards of the Boundary County Land Use Ordinance, based upon the findings and conditions as written and based upon the reason statements as read into the record during deliberation. This action does not result in a taking of private property. Chairman Robertson stepped down as chair to second. Chairman Robertson and Commissioner Bertling voted in favor. Commissioner Pinkerton recused himself.

The hearing ended at 2:15 p.m.

Ms. Vogel stated that they have not received any new files, so they may not have anything until later in the year. They have received 154 applications to date. They are also continuing to review the ordinances for updates to the codification.

At 2:30 p.m. Commissioners held a public hearing for text amendments for the Planning & Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance 2019-1. Those in attendance were: Chairman Robertson, Commissioner Bertling, Commissioner Pinkerton, Deputy Clerk Stephanie Sims, P&Z Staff Tess Vogel, P&Z Staff Clare Marley, P&Z Tech Jenn Maynard, and Gerald Higgs. The hearing was recorded.

Ms. Marley explained the legislative hearing procedures and stated that FILE#26-0121, LAND USE TEXT AMENDMENT, BOUNDARY COUNTY for Ordinance 2019-1 to update Planning and Zoning Commission duties and organization; allow residential placement permits to be transferable to subsequent owners; establish expiration dates for residential placement permits to match the 2-year expiration date of commercial and industrial permits with permits remaining valid as long as work continues on the permitted structure; remove regulation that invalidates an issued commercial/industrial permit if the building’s use was discontinued; add extension allowances for placement permits and conditional use permits; remove a requirement that all special purpose districts sign final plats; correct typographical and grammatical errors; correct and update references to rights of appeal, record maintenance, and legal noticing; and remove references to the now-defunct Area of City Impact. She then reviewed each of the changes providing a summary and the reasoning for the changes.

Ms. Marley stated that the changes were routed to agencies for comment with Cabinet Mountain Water asking for assurances that they will still be included for comments. She informed them that they would still be included in the routing. The City of Moyie also requested information on the impact and signatures for plats. A comment was also received by Grant Dorman about placement permits and the practice of collecting information on the specific features of proposed structures.

The attorney reviewed the changes at both the P&Z Commission and BOCC levels and his recommendations have been implemented. Ms. Marley also referenced the Planning & Zoning Commission findings and stated that they recommended approval. Lastly, she reviewed the Reasoned Statement.

Commissioners had no questions.

Chairman Robertson opened the hearing up for public comments. Mr. Higgs had a comment but it was for the previous hearing. He did not have a comment on the current hearing.

Chairman Robertson closed the hearing to public comment and called for deliberations. He stated that we have been talking about these small changes for 2 years and saw nothing wrong and no controversy. Commissioner Pinkerton stated it reads much better and was easier to use. Commissioner Bertling agreed.

Commissioner Pinkerton moved to approve File #26-0121, an amendment to update standards and procedures of the Boundary County Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance 2019-2, also known as 9B18LOV2, finding that the proposal is in accord with the comprehensive plan and the criteria of Section 18 of the Boundary County Land Use Ordinance based upon the findings and reasoned statement as recommended by the Boundary County Planning and Zoning Commission. I further move to approve a summary of the ordinance for publication in the newspaper in accord with Idaho Code 31-715A, as written and as approved by the county clerk and county civil counsel. Commissioner Bertling second. A roll call vote was called and Commissioners voted as follows: Chairman Robertson “aye”, Commissioner Bertling “aye”, Commissioner Pinkerton “aye”.

BOUNDARY COUNTY, IDAHO ORDINANCE NO. 2026- 2

BOUNDARY COUNTY PLANNING & ZONING FILE #2026-0121

standards & procedures

AN ORDINANCE OF BOUNDARY COUNTY, IDAHO, AMENDING THE BOUNDARY COUNTY ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE 2019-1 (ALSO KNOWN AS 9B18LOV2 AND CODIFIED AT CHAPTERS 153 AND 154 OF BOUNDARY COUNTY CODE OF ORDINANCES) TO: SPECIFY THAT REFERENCES TO IDAHO CODE INCLUDE FUTURE AMENDMENTS AND RENUMBERING; UPDATE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DUTIES AND ORGANIZATION; UPDATE PLACEMENT PERMIT PROCEDURES; ALLOW RESIDENTIAL PLACEMENT PERMITS TO BE TRANSFERABLE TO SUBSEQUENT OWNERS; ESTABLISH EXPIRATION DATES FOR RESIDENTIAL PLACEMENT PERMITS TO MATCH THE 2-YEAR EXPIRATION DATE OF COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL PERMITS WITH PERMITS REMAINING VALID AS LONG AS WORK CONTINUES ON THE PERMITTED STRUCTURE; REMOVE A REGULATION THAT INVALIDATES AN ISSUED COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL PERMIT IF THE BUILDING’S USE IS DISCONTINUED; ADD EXTENSION ALLOWANCES FOR PLACEMENT PERMITS AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS; REMOVE A REQUIREMENT THAT ALL SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICTS SIGN FINAL PLATS; CORRECT TYPOGRAPHICAL AND GRAMMATICAL ERRORS; CORRECT AND UPDATE REFERENCES TO RIGHTS OF APPEAL, VARIOUS OUTDATED IDAHO CODE SECTIONS, RECORD MAINTENANCE, CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, AND LEGAL NOTICING; AND REMOVE REFERENCES TO THE FORMER AREA OF CITY IMPACT; AND PROVIDING SEVERABILITY AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

WHEREAS, the Constitution of the State of Idaho, Article XII, Section 2, and Title 31, Chapter 7 provides authority for the Boundary County Board of Commissioners to adopt ordinances necessary to provide for the safety, health, and prosperity of its inhabitants, and for the protection of property; and

WHEREAS, the Idaho Local Land Use Planning Act, Title 67, Chapter 65, sets forth the procedures for the adoption and amendment of land use codes; and

WHEREAS, the Local Land Use Planning Act sets forth Planning and Zoning Commission duties, membership and organization, application procedures, rights of appeal, and decision-making requirements and the County desires to have regulations be in accord with adopted Commission bylaws and state law; and

WHEREAS, Idaho Code §67-6511 and Boundary County land use codes provide the procedures and authority for the county to amend its land use regulations; and

WHEREAS, Boundary County desires to update its zoning and subdivision regulations to reflect current state standards for land use matters, to amend conflicting sections of code, remove repetitious sections, and to adjust the terms of permits; and

WHEREAS, the Boundary County Planning and Zoning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on July 23, 2026, in accord with the notice and hearing procedures of Idaho Code §67-6509, and recommended to the Board of Commissioners approval of the proposed amendment with revisions; and

WHEREAS, the Boundary County Board of Commissioners held a duly noticed public hearing in accord with the notice and hearing procedures of Idaho Code §67-6509 on August 25, 2026, at which time interested persons had the right to be heard regarding the proposed ordinance; and

WHEREAS, the Boundary County Board of Commissioners has analyzed the proposed changes to zoning ordinances and has found them to not be in conflict with the policies of the adopted comprehensive plan.

NOW THEREFORE, Be it ordained by the Board of County Commissioners of Boundary County, Idaho that the following is hereby adopted:

Section 1: Adoption of Ordinance: The sections of the Boundary County Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance No. 2019-1 (also known as 9B18LOV2 and codified at Chapters 153 and 154 Of Boundary County Code Of Ordinances) are hereby amended as follows:

(Text to be added is shown with underline. Text to be removed is shown with strikeout. Codified Code shown in (parenthesis.))

PART A: Section 1.8, “Affect on Other Laws,” (codified at §154.004) is hereby amended to read as follows:

Effect on other laws. No portion of this chapter will be construed to usurp requirements or regulations of any other county departments nor any state or federal land use regulation or requirement. Any reference to a provision of Idaho Code shall be construed to reference that provision as it currently exists or as it may be amended, re-codified, or re-numbered in the future unless otherwise stated.

PART B: Section 3.6, Planning and Zoning Commission (§154.024), subsections 3.6.3 (§154.024 C) to 3.6.8 (§154.024 H) and subsection 3.7.3 (§154.025 C), and subsection 3.8.1 (§154.026 A), Powers and Duties of the Board of County Commissioners, are hereby amended to read as follows:

3.6. Planning and Zoning Commission

3.6.3. Appointment/Term of Office/Qualification of Members: Members of the planning and zoning commission will shall be appointed by resolution of the board of county commissioners and will shall meet the residency requirements established at IC-67-6504. County commissioners may, at their discretion, also include area of residence within the county as an additional criterion so as to assure balanced representation. The appointing resolution will specify the effective date of appointment as well as the expiration of the term of appointment.

3.6.3.1. Terms will be staggered so that no more than five terms expire within any two-year period. The term of office for members of the planning and zoning commission will be four years.

3.6.3.2. Where a new member is appointed to fill a vacancy created by an expiring term, that member will be appointed to a full term. Where a new member is appointed to fill a vacancy created by resignation, that member will be appointed to complete the remainder of the term vacated.

3.6.3.3. If a member wishes to be reappointed, the member shall submit a letter of intent to serve a subsequent, consecutive term to the Administrator or Chairman prior to the expiration of the member’s term.

3.6.3.3. Prior to the completion of the fourth year of a member’s term (in October of that year) a letter of intent to serve a subsequent (consecutive) term will be submitted to the Administrator and/or Chairman.

3.6.3.4. Appointments to serve more than two (2) consecutive terms shall be in accord with the requirements of Idaho Code §67-6504. No member shall serve more than two (2) consecutive terms without specific Concurrence by a simple majority of the Planning and Zoning Commission adopted by motion and added to the minutes.

3.6.3.5: Upon review and presentation by interviewed applicants, the Planning and Zoning Commission may either direct Staff to seek additional letters of interest and table the review or forward to County Commissioners a recommendation as to who should fill any vacancy, made by motion and majority vote (see 3.6.3.4. above). The Administrator will forward the recommendation, along with all letters of interest submitted, to County Commissioners and set a date on the County Commissioners agenda for initial review. County Commissioners may:

make final decision based on the merits of the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation and the content of the letter of interest, or
table a decision to allow for interviews with prospective members, or
direct the Administrator to seek additional letters of interest for consideration by the Planning Planning and Zoning Commission.

3.6.4. Filling Vacancies: In the event of a vacancy, either by completion of term or by resignation, the administrator will shall publish notice of vacancy in available media so as to soliciting letters of interest from those qualified county residents who and wishing to serve., and The administrator will shall schedule review of those letters and schedule applicants interviews on the next available planning and zoning commission agenda. Upon review and presentation by interviewed applicants, Following applicant interviews, the planning and zoning commission may either direct staff to seek additional letters of interest and table the review or forward to county commissioners a recommendation as to who should fill the vacancy, made by motion and majority vote. The administrator will shall forward the recommendation, along with all and letters of interest submitted, to county commissioners and set a date on the agenda for initial review. The appointments shall be in accord with the requirements of Idaho Code §67-6504. County commissioners may make final decision based on the merits of the planning and zoning commission recommendation and the content of the letter of interest, table a decision to allow for interviews with prospective members, or direct the administrator to seek additional letters of interest for consideration by the planning and zoning commission.

3.6.5. Meetings: The planning and zoning commission will shall hold regular meetings once per month except when no agenda items are scheduled, and will hold special meetings or workshops as needed to conduct the business of the planning and zoning commission, as approved by the chair.as set forth in its adopted bylaws. Pursuant to IC 67-6504, at least one (1) regular meeting shall be held each month for not less than nine (9) months in a year. at least nine regular meetings will be held each calendar year. The regular meeting date, time and location shall be set in accord with the planning and zoning commission adopted bylaws. will be set by motion and majority vote of the planning and zoning commission at the first regular meeting of the calendar year.

3.6.6. Open Meetings, will be Open/Quorum, /Voting by Proxy: All planning and zoning commission meetings will shall be conducted to conform to the requirements of the Idaho Open Meetings Law. In order to conduct business or make motions, a quorum of half the assigned membership, not considering fractions, plus one member, is required. Vote by proxy is prohibited. Vote by proxy of a member anticipating absence at a meeting is prohibited, though the absent member may submit written comment for consideration on any application or item on the agenda.

3.6.7. Election of Officers: At the first meeting of each calendar year, or at the next scheduled meeting following vacancy of an office, the planning and zoning commission will elect, by nomination and majority vote, a chair, who will preside over and conduct meetings, having the vote solely to break a tie, and a co-chair, who will preside over and conduct meetings in the absence of the chair. In the event both the chair and the co-chair are absent at a meeting and a quorum of members is present, a special election will be held prior to the conduct of business to appoint an acting chair for that meeting Election of officers, duties, and voting rights shall be in accord with the adopted planning and zoning commission bylaws.

3.6.8. Removal of Members: A member may be removed from the planning and zoning commission for cause by a majority vote of the governing board, pursuant to Idaho Code §67-6504 and in accord with the membership standards provided in the adopted planning and zoning commission bylaws. following three unannounced absences from regular meetings in any consecutive twelve-month period or by willful failure to reasonably apply the provisions established by this ordinance. The planning and zoning commission may recommend the removal of a member on the above grounds by motion and majority vote. The board of county commissioners can remove a member based on the recommendation of the planning and zoning commission or by direct action.

3.7. Powers and Duties of the Planning and Zoning Commission:

3.7.3. Recommendation Authority Granted: The planning and zoning commission will shall interpret the provisions of this ordinance specific to individual applications so as to render written findings supporting a recommendation to the board of county commissioners on applications for temporary use, development agreements, long-plat subdivision and non-administrative zone map amendment, and will shall likewise forward findings and recommendation to county commissioners on applications to amend the Boundary County Comprehensive Plan, administrative zone map amendments, proposed city area of impact agreements and proposed amendments to this ordinance. At the discretion of the planning and zoning commission, final action on a recommendation to county commissioners may be tabled until the next regular meeting to allow review and adoption of the written findings and recommendation. When deemed necessary by the planning and zoning commission, it may, by motion and majority vote, initiate applications for legislative actions, including administrative zone map amendments and amendments to the comprehensive plan, the comprehensive plan map, or the zoning ordinance.

3.8.1. Final Local Authority: The board of county commissioners is the final local authority and arbiter for the interpretation and application of all provisions established herein, and will decide all appeals to final decisions of the administrator and the planning and zoning commission. Final decisions of the board of county commissioners may only be contested through action in a court of competent jurisdiction. An applicant denied an application or aggrieved by a final decision may seek judicial review or seek reconsideration under the procedures provided by the Idaho Local Land Use Planning Act, chapter 65, title 67, Idaho Code.

PART C: Section 6, Administrative Development Permits (§154.083), subsections 6.4.2, 6.4.2.1, 6.4.2.2, 6.4.2.3 (§154.083 B 1-3), 6.4.3 (§154.083 C), 6.5.2, 6.5.2.1, 6.5.2.2, 6.5.2.3 (§154.083 B 1-3), and 6.5.3 (§154.083 C) are hereby amended to read as follows:

Administrative Development Permits

6.4.2. Decision: Not later than ten (10) business days following receipt of a complete application, the administrator may shall:

6.4.2.1. Approve: Approve the application and issue a residential placement permit, providing the applicant contact information for other state or federal permits that may be required. and forwarding a copy to the GIS mapping department for assignment of a physical address. OR

6.4.2.2. Table: Place in Pending: Table Place issuance of the permit in pending status awaiting pending proof of compliance with requirements of other county departments and applicable agencies. OR

6.4.2.3. Deny: Deny the application for cause, advising the applicant in writing of the reasons for denial and steps that may be available to gain approval, including the right to appeal.

6.4.3. Duration of Permit: Following issuance, a residential placement permit shall run with the land. The permit may be administratively transferred by the county, without further permit application, to subsequent owners of the subject land upon sale of the property, provided the new owners request the transfer in writing and confirm the proposed construction is consistent with the approved permit. Any proposed changes to the permitted structures involving placement, setbacks, number of units, size, or other such changes, shall require county approval for modifications. The permit shall expire two (2) years after issuance if the work authorized by the permit has not commenced. The permit shall remain valid for as long as work continues on the permitted structure. The administrator may grant in writing one extension not to exceed two (2) years, if the owner requests an extension prior to the expiration date and the administrator finds there is cause for the extension, such as weather delays, personal or financial hardships, or other unanticipated permitting delays. belong to the applicant and will only be transferable to the extent that development as depicted on the application has been completed on the date of sale or transfer of the parcel or lot.

6.5.2. Decision: Not later than ten (10) business days following receipt of a complete application, the administrator may shall:

6.5.2.1. Approve: Approve the application and issue a commercial/industrial placement permit, providing the applicant contact information for other state or federal permits that may be required. and forwarding a copy to the GIS mapping department for assignment of a physical address. OR

6.5.2.2. Table: Place in Pending: Table Place issuance of the permit in pending status awaiting pending proof of compliance with requirements of other county departments and applicable agencies. OR

6.5.2.3. Deny: Deny the application for cause, advising the applicant in writing of the reasons for denial and steps that may be available to gain approval, including the right to appeal.

6.5.3. Duration of Permit: Following issuance, a commercial/industrial placement permit will go run with the land and remain valid for the life of the use and be transferable on sale of property, to the limits established in the approved application. Expansion beyond the limits established in the approved application will shall require the issuance of a modified or new commercial/industrial placement permit or conditional use permit, as applicable. When a use for which a commercial/industrial placement permit was issued is discontinued for a period of two years, the permit will be considered lapsed.

PART D: Section 7, Conditional Use Permits, subsections 7.4 (§154.098) and 7.9.4 (§154.102 D) are hereby amended to read as follows:

Conditional Use Permits

7.4. Terminating a Conditional Use Permit: An approved conditional use permit will be deemed to lapse if work to establish the use has not begun within two (2) years of the date of approval, or when a use established by a conditional use permit is discontinued for a period of two (2) consecutive years, as established by Idaho Code §67-6538, “Use for Designed Purpose Protected.” The landowner may request in writing an extension of the permit from the Boundary County Planning and Zoning Commission. The Commission may grant an extension not to exceed two (2) years upon a finding that there is good cause or hardship warranting the extension. The owner of property subject to a conditional use permit may request termination of a conditional use permit at any time by notifying the administrator in writing.

7.9.4. Defer Decision Authority: The planning and zoning commission my may defer decision authority, forwarding to county commissioners a written recommendation or synopsis of issues when:

7.9.4.1. It is decided by the planning and zoning commission that a guarantee of installation agreement pursuant to Section 5 (§154.060-§154.066) is necessary as a condition of approval; or

7.9.4.2. When the planning and zoning commission has cause to question whether or not an application meets criteria for consideration within a zone district, or

7.9.4.3. When the scope of the application or controversy generated is such that members of the planning and zoning commission are unable to reach consensus sufficient to render a motion or when it is determined by the planning and zoning commission that decision authority should rest with the board of county commissioners.

7.9.4.4. When decision authority is deferred to the board of county commissioners, the administrator will shall schedule an additional public hearing before that body pursuant to Section 19.

PART E: Section 11, Subdivisions, subsection 11.7.8 (§153.39 H) is hereby deleted and replaced with the word (Reserved) to read as follows:

Final Plat Requirements:

11.7.8. (Reserved) If the plat is located within any special purpose district, the plat shall contain a certificate bearing the signature of the appropriate official of such district signifying the plat’s compliance with the regulations of the district and/or the relevant provisions of Idaho Code.

PART F: Section 13, Mediation and Appeals, subsections 13.2.2, 13.2.3, 13.2.4.4, 13.2.5 and 13.2.7 (§154.196 B1, C, D4, E and G) are hereby amended to read as follows:

13.2.2. Establishment of Authority: The board of county commissioners is the first body of authority in considering and deciding an appeal of the provisions established herein, and all methods of relief established by this chapter and Idaho Code shall will be exhausted prior to seeking redress in a court of law.

13.2.3. Notice of Appeal to be Filed: Any affected person aggrieved by a final decision rendered by the administrator or planning and zoning commission pursuant to this ordinance will, may file an appeal with the board of county commissioners. The notice of appeal shall be filed with the board of commissioners within seven (7) working days of the final written decision being rendered. , file notice of appeal with the board of county commissioners. This written notice shall will be in the form of a letter and contain, at minimum, the following:

13.2.3.1. The appellant’s name, address and telephone number

13.2.3.2. The specifics of the decision in dispute, including the file number and date decision was rendered.

13.2.3.3. A summary of the reasons that the decision may be flawed or that procedural errors have been committed.

13.2.3.4. The action expected of the county to resolve the appeal or satisfy a grievance.

13.2.4.4. The appellant and those affected may request from the administrator, at their own expense, copies or transcripts of the audio record of any public hearing pertinent to the decision rendered, submitting such request in writing, within five working days from the date notice of hearing was mailed. in accord with Idaho’s Public Records Act. Cost of audio record and transcription will be as established by the Boundary County Clerk of Court.

13.2.5. Appeal Hearing: Appeal hearings will be conducted in accordance with the procedures for quasi-judicial public hearings established at Section 19, of this ordinance, with the appellant filling the role of applicant. Following an appeal hearing, the commissioners may, at its their discretion, direct the affected parties to enter into mediation pursuant to Section 13 of this ordinance and Idaho’s Local Land Use Planning Act and table proceedings on the appeal until such mitigation mediation is concluded.

13.2.7. Judicial Relief: Any person aggrieved by a final decision rendered by the board of county commissioners as a result of an appeal hearing as a result of a land use appeal consideration may seek reconsideration or judicial review under the procedures provided by the Idaho Local Land Use Planning Act, chapter 65, title 67, Idaho Code. judicial review pursuant to Rule 84, Idaho Court Rules, or other relief as established by the court.

PART G: Section 19, Public Hearings and Notification, subsections 19.2.1, 19.2.3 (§154.286 A and C), 19.3.2, 19.3.3 and 19.3.4 (§154.287 B, C and D), are hereby amended to read as follows:

19.2.1. Legal Publication: Upon receipt of an development permit application for a land use request requiring a public hearing, the administrator will shall establish the date, time and location of the meeting during which the application will be considered, and cause to be published in the official newspaper of record a legal notice not less than fifteen (15) calendar days prior to the date the hearing is scheduled. Legal notice will contain, at minimum:

19.2.1.1. The name of the applicant.

19.2.1.2. The type use being proposed and a brief description of that use.

19.2.1.3. The parcel number upon which the use is proposed and a general description of the location.

19.2.1.4. The date, time and location of the public hearing.

19.2.1.5. The address to which written comment should be submitted and the deadline for receipt of written comment.

19.2.1.6. A telephone number for those seeking additional information.

19.2.1.7. The location where the full record may be reviewed.

19.2.3. Mailed Notification: Pursuant to Idaho Code, the administrator will shall draft provide a “Notice of Public Hearing” containing at minimum the information contained in the legal notice, to be mailed by first-class post mail not less than fifteen (15) calendar days prior to the hearing date prior to publication of the legal notice to:

19.2.3.1. The applicant and any agent(s) engaged by the applicant as indicated in the application. In addition to notice, the applicant or designated agent will also be sent an invoice of mailing listing names and addresses of all entities and persons to whom notice was mailed, as well as the overall cost of mailing. No final permit will be issued until the mailing invoice is paid. It will be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the mailing list is complete and to notify the administrator immediately of any additional agencies or individuals who should receive notice.

19.2.3.2. All affected governmental and quasi-governmental agencies.

19.2.3.3. All property owners or purchasers of record within three hundred (300) feet of the lot or parcel upon which the use is proposed that is the subject of the application. Where the applicant owns additional properties adjoining the property that on which the use is proposed, the applicant’s entire holding will be considered a single parcel for the purpose of mailing.

19.2.3.4. Any additional noticing as re quired by Idaho’s Local Land Use Planning Act.

19.3.2. Record to be Maintained: All public hearings will shall be recorded to provide a transcribable audio record. , and Such recordings will shall be maintained by the zoning administrator in accord with the requirements of Idaho Code. for a period of not less than six months from the date of the public hearing. Written minutes shall be maintained of all public meetings, to include public hearings, and maintained as a permanent record. for a period of not less than twenty-five years. If the minutes are subsequently typed, the original notes from which the minutes were typed will be maintained as part of the hearing record.

19.3.3. Ex Parte Contact/Conflict of Interest: Public hearings will shall be conducted pursuant to the Idaho’s Local Land Use Planning Act §67-6506 and Title 74, Transparent and Ethical Government or subsequent amendments thereto. Open Meetings Law, and No member will shall seek or accept comment, testimony or information outside the established public hearing process; or sit preside on the panel when conflict of interest exists during any quasi-judicial public hearing. Should a member have concern regarding potential ex parte contact or conflict of interest, that member shall will disclose these concerns to the sitting chair prior to the hearing being opened to public testimony, and the chair will shall render a decision as to whether such concern constitutes ex parte contact or conflict of interest. When ex parte contact or conflict of interest is declared, the member may elect to absent themselves from the room during that hearing. or sit in the gallery as a member of the public. A member so removed may give testimony as a member of the public, but cannot participate in the decision making process. Ex parte contact and conflict of interest do not apply in a legislative public hearing. A member so removed may give testimony as a member of the public, but cannot participate in the decision making process. No member of a governing board or a planning and zoning commission with a conflict of interest shall participate in any aspect of the decision-making process concerning a matter involving the conflict of interest. For purposes of this section the term “participation” means engaging in activities that constitute deliberations pursuant to the Open Meetings Law. Ex parte contact and conflict of interest do not apply in a legislative public hearing.

19.3.4. Lack of quorum or absence of staff: In the event of a lack of quorum or absence of staff, scheduled public hearings will be opened and tabled to a set date and time, with no additional public notice required. The Chair shall declare the hearing canceled if a quorum is not present at a scheduled hearing. No decisions shall be made nor votes cast in the absence of a quorum.

Section 2: Severability

If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this title is held to be invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this title and they shall remain in full force and effect.

Section 3: Effective Date

This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon the passage and publication of the ordinance or ordinance summary in one (1) issue of the official newspaper for Boundary County, in accordance with the Idaho State Code.

This ordinance duly enacted as an ordinance of Boundary County, Idaho on this 25^th day of August, 2026, upon the following roll call vote:

ROLL CALL:

Commission Chair Robertson “Aye” _____s/____________________________

Commissioner Bertling “Aye” _____s/____________________________

Commissioner Pinkerton “Aye” _____s/____________________________

APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE SUMMARY

Publication of the ordinance by summary in the official newspaper is hereby approved by the Boundary County Commissioners on this 25^th day of August, 2026, upon the following roll call vote:

ROLL CALL:

Commission Chair Robertson “Aye” _____s/____________________________

Commissioner Bertling “Aye” _____s/____________________________

Commissioner Pinkerton “Aye” _____s/____________________________

ATTEST:

s/________________________ ____8/25/2026____________

Glenda Poston Date

Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners

Recorded Instrument #304174

The hearing ended at 2:52 p.m. and the meeting recessed.

At 5:33 p.m. Commissioners held a public hearing for North Bench Volunteer Fire District’s petition to become a taxing district. Those in attendance were: Chairman Robertson, Commissioner Bertling, Commissioner Pinkerton, Clerk Glenda Poston, Assessor Olivia Drake, Sheriff Travis Stolley, Civil Attorney Bill Wilson, Deputy Clerk Stephanie Sims, Haley Wenk, Judy Weible, Melissa Weible, Jim Byler, Barb Awbrey, Murray Hackett, Leonor Saldana, David & Carol Pack, Donna Capruso, Rick Montez, David Sims, John Souza, Carol Souza, Steve Stewart, Kathy Stewart, Lorna McNearing, Judy Dooling, Victoria Rogers, Mike Kupper, Jim Dorhofer, Brion Poston, Richard McKusker, Janet Wenhold, Kenneth Wenhold, Alice Wood, Rick Wood, Blaine & Debbie Sells, Beate Clark, Margaret Wachsman, LeAlan Pinkerton, Nadine Sulier, Pam Barton, Teresa Harvey, Lucy Newton, John Reynolds, Lawrence Drake, Ken Wooten, Charles Smith, Pat Yaeger, Mark Weber, Julie Messina, Nat Wachsman, Ross Hayden, Mike Krejci, Rick Braun, Linda Fontanes, Elaine Gaztambide, Gary Gaztambide, Edna Runyan, Charles Guthrie, Jenny Economu, Mary Bristol, Karen Pease, Linda Wolfe, Lon Postulka, Doug Higgins, Terry Captruso, Earl Irving, Chuck Newhouse, A.L. Livingston, Tawyna S., Lou Aceto, Jim & Lin Hill, Bill & Ronnie Bustillos, Donna Wooten, Helen Nystrom, Fred Nystrom, Gerald Higgs, Jon-Paul Mickle, Rick & Teresa Dodd, Rosalinda Henry, Sandi & Jeff Willard, Ken Baker, George & Marcheta Trowbridge, Terry & Jeanine Betsher, Spencer Newton, Thomas Griffin, Chris Sabin, Jennifer Wright, Sam Wolfe, Sandy Garner, Conrad Garner, Tom Oxford, Dan Teller, Kelly Lambirth, Jeff Silbaugh, Greg Mead, Bud & Cathy Litterell, Fay Almond, Paul & Charlie Wells, Linda Manley, Owen Baisden, Mike Williams, Shelly Kramer, Bryon & Judith Regehr, Terry Howe, Ron MacDonald, John Lazier, Kathy Wenzel, Sandy Steinhagen, Ann Lewis, Lynda Fioravanti, Steve Fioravanti, Karen Pinkerton, Tammy Schneider, Mike Schneider, Karen Pedey, and Hank Solt. The hearing was recorded.

Introductions were made of those on stage and Chairman Robertson explained the process for the evening. He said we will start with North Bench presenting their proposal and the BOCC can then ask questions. The hearing will then be opened to public comment in favor of, neutral/uncommitted and then opposed. North Bench can then provide a closing statement or rebuttal.

Civil Attorney Bill Wilson explained that they would be following the same process as land use hearings. He asked those giving testimony, keep their comments to 2 minutes or less, so that the board could hear from as many people as possible. The decision before the board was whether to approve their application or not and submit it to voters. There were no set criteria by statute for the process of the hearing, that was at the board’s discretion. The board will hear your testimony and then they will decide if this moves forward or not.

Chairman Robertson said that what most people do not understand was that this meeting does not establish a levy rate or budget for a new district. What we are deciding was if this idea of a taxing district should be on the November ballot or not. If it gets to the ballot, your choice was to decide if you want to establish a new district without knowing a budget or levy rate. Any discussions on how much this would be was a moot point at this time.

Chairman Robertson then called for North Bench to present their proposal.

Jim Hill, Boad President of North Bench Volunteer Fire District said the fire department was chronically underfunded since its inception. Looking at our apparatus and equipment, most recently we had to have an engine towed out of the Turner Hill fire. We will also have to vacate Station 1 at the airport because of the FAA. We have property, but there are no funds to build a station. Station 2 has serious issues with the heating system, which was necessary to keep everything from freezing.

Their current budget was $225,000/yr which was funded almost exclusively from membership dues. He thanked members who were faithful supporters of the district. They believe that approximately half of the members in the district actually pay their dues. They also receive a small amount of grants and a small amount of donations as additional income. A small amount of additional revenue also comes from providing tenders to IDL and other entities. Everyone benefits from their service protecting homes from fire and assisting with traffic accidents but only about half of the members pay.

Mr. Hill stated that they believe they can properly operate the district with about double their current budget at $440,000/year. They have significant vehicle expenses, expenses with maintaining structures, one full-time paid employee and other employees are paid a small stipend on a per call basis. They felt a taxing district would be the fairest because everyone would pay their share.

He said they were advised that there was approximately $710 million in assessed value in their area with $62 per $100,000 after the HO exemption. He stated that it would essentially be a wash at $300,000 valuation compared to their membership structure. There have been some claims that property taxes would go up significantly but that didn’t happen in other areas and the rate would be set by the new fire commission so it was out of their hands. The current North Bench board felt that they could operate efficiently on $440,000/per year. We recognize that some are opposed to tax, but they felt it was a necessary service.

Chairman Robertson asked if North Bench has any debt currently. Mr. Hill replied yes, there are two aspects to that. One of which was the property on Hwy 95 which has about $200,000 in debt currently. It was recently refinanced to get the lowest rate possible. The second was that they purchased two used tenders to replace older ones. The current debt on that was about $80,000. Total debt of the district was approximately $280,000.

Chairman Robertson stated that a taxing district cannot assume the debt of a private organization. He then asked how did they plan to rectify that. Mr. Hill replied that one way would be to create a taxing district and then have the district hire the current fire department on a contract basis.

Chairman Robertson said in his opinion he doesn’t believe that system works. The reason for that, was that there was no accountability of tax payer dollars. The Commissioners that are elected for the fire district have to have full control over the district for anything going forward.

Mr. Hill stated that another option would be to sell the property on Hwy 95 and use the proceeds to payoff the tenders and possibly keep some portion of the property for a future station. Chairman Robertson then replied that the problem was that the decision they have to make tonight would be based on an idea of what could happen. There was nothing holding North Bench to proceed with that plan to sell property to pay off debt so they can then relinquish all property to the taxing district. We have to make a decision today, and as it currently sits North Bench, has debt and I am not in favor of contracting for control of taxpayer dollars.

Commissioner Pinkerton asked how many residential fires (excluding Turner) has the district responded to in the last year. Mr. Hill stated he would have to defer to Chief Baker. Chief Baker then came to the podium and replied in the last year there were 3 structure fires. If you count other structures, it might be 6-10.

Commissioner Pinkerton then asked how many accidents have you responded to in support of the Sheriff’s office. Chief Baker replied 5-6 in the last month. Commissioner Pinkerton asked how many in the last year. Chief Baker replied he would have to look at his paperwork for that information and then described a number of ways they assist with fire support, extrication, EMS, hazard assessment, and cleanup to get the road open.

Commissioner Pinkerton asked Chief Baker to define the mission and service level you want to establish with a potential taxing district. Chief Baker replied that would be all hazards. Commissioner Pinkerton asked him to explain what that meant. Chief Baker replied that could be fire and anything law enforcement needs assistance with such as natural gas, propane, electrical, smoke smells, down powerlines, EMS, Sheriff’s office. We would support all emergency agencies.

Commissioner Pinkerton asked Chief Baker to explain what he means by wildland fire suppression. Chief Baker replied that we help everyone in the community with mutual aid. The service is generally provided for our members, however NBVFD also assists others when needed.

Commissioner Pinkerton stated that most of us pay for wildland fire suppression to the State of Idaho through our property taxes. He then asked how the district would avoid unnecessary duplication of existing state response. Chief Baker replied that they generally are the first one on scene and prepare the fire for the state because they come in behind us. When they arrive, we step back and let them take over.

Commissioner Pinkerton asked if they saw themselves expanding their wildland services. Chief Baker replied that they have for the last two years. Commissioner Pinkerton asked if they see more expanse as they move forward. Chief Baker replied no, the tenders are set up so they can protect and explained the various sprayers on the tenders. We built them for what we need.

Commissioner Pinkerton stated he was also very concerned about the statutory authority of a volunteer organization that has debt and the potential of the fire district having to assume that as we move forward.

Chairman Robertson opened the hearing for public comment and asked for anyone who would like to testify in favor of the application.

Rick Montez stated that he was a member of the district and volunteers 3 days per week for the last year. He felt he was in a pretty good position to know the state of the organization. It needs help. The funding was unpredictable so you don’t know what you can spend. If we have to build a new fire station, that will be very expensive and there was no money to do that. Everyone in the district needs to participate and he recommended approval so that it could be voted on.

Spencer Newton moved here several years ago. He spent the last 31 years running a fire district and ambulance service in Bonner County. He was not for taxes over all, with the exception of local entities. The reason we are here was the board wanted to determine if there was a need. NBVFD has been there for 49 years, so he felt there was an obvious need. He stated that they were not perfect, but no public entity was. He liked that they were always accessible. Unfortunately, there will be people at the end that will be opposed and provide misconceptions. He hoped that those would be called out. Lastly, he stated that South Boundary and Paradise Valley were both associations that became taxing entities.

Teresa Dodd wanted to speak from personal experience and about the water tenders. She described a house fire as one of her earliest memories. They now have property on Fawn Lane and were trying to get equipment and vehicles out during the Turner Hill fire. She was extremely grateful that they had the ability to do that. The water tenders that were purchased belonged to her and her husband. The tanks were built in 2018 with firm specifications and it also has spray bars all around. They could have sold the tenders for more money, but they wanted them to stay local and be used here. They also included radios, pants, shirts, and fire shelters in the sale. She said they made sure that the department received a good deal.

Rick Bates said that if you listen to the scanner, IDL will respond in 20-30 minutes, they are not quick. If grandma falls down, they don’t show up. North Bench fills a gap that was necessary and needed by the population. Costs have gone up significantly. The clothing alone was over $10,000 per firefighter. He also stated that the stats will show the majority of their response will be for medical aid. Fire will be the least. However, they need to be statutorily trained and rated. The training costs time and money. If everyone paid, they would have a budget. He felt a taxing district made the most sense because it would require everyone to pay. He didn’t feel it was right for everyone to get the benefit whether they paid or not.

Leonor Saldana was a retired San Francisco firefighter that moved to the area 14 years ago. She recently joined North Bench as a volunteer and spends three days a week helping. She said she sees first hand what they have to deal with, the PPE was below par. She was appalled at the PPE and apparatus and the danger they have to put themselves into. She was buying her own gear so she can feel safe. She invited people to come by so she could show them.

Chuck Newhouse said that we have heard a description of our last resort fire protection program, that half the people don’t pay their dues, and that they have debt. He found it hard to believe that this was the system that they have. Instead of having a meeting on why we should move on to something different, we should be thinking of ideas to make it better so it can work. He felt people would encourage others to vote no because of poor management, but it needs to be a vote about a taxing district so that there can be funding to make it work. They will also say that the taxes will never go down, he said the membership dues won’t either. They will also say there was no local control. The Commissioners will appoint a board so there was. This will help us have a good reliable fire system.

Karen Pedey said she has been a resident of Boundary County for 81 years. She then referred to several points in a letter to the editor stating a fire district does not replace volunteers it strengthens them. It would have an audited budget, long-term stability, and local leadership that was elected. It was not more government it was local control.

No one else wished to speak in favor of the application. Chairman Robertson then called for anyone who wished to speak as neutral or uncommitted.

LeAlan Pinkerton said he was inclined to be in favor of putting it on the ballot and letting people make the decision. He had questions however about what they get now and what it will change to in the future. He was also curious about how many parcels are they counting and more detail on that aspect. He shamed anyone in the room that was not paying their dues. If it became a taxing district, he wanted to know what the target was, how many locations do they own verses what they want. They state they have a 15-minute response, but didn’t believe that counted the westside – how long was the response there. He would also like to see the books and a budget. The department would need to make that information public so that people could make an informed decision.

Jeff Silva stated that he recently moved to the area and used to be a volunteer fireman. He has concerns because there was no accountability. Where he came from all departments were run by the county and all of them were audited. He has concerns because it does not appear to be done that way here. He felt that before we raise taxes, the county should do an audit to see how to distribute the money.

No one else wanted to speak as neutral. Chairman Robertson then called for those who wish to speak in opposition.

Steve Fioravanti extended his gratitude to the volunteer firefighters and supported their dedication and service. He opposes becoming a taxing district because he attended three town hall meetings where he felt the chair and vice chair were disingenuous and deceptive. His wife served on the board for ten years and the statement that it had been mismanaged for decades was false. During that time the department met their budget while facing the same issues. He felt the reason for their success was because they operated within their means. He felt the current board does not have a revenue issue; it was a leadership issue.

Chairman Robertson asked the public to refrain from clapping between statements.

Linda Fioravanti said she was on the board for 10 years and served as president and vice president during that time. When she began on the board, they were in the red. She took over the invoicing and if you had multiple parcels, you were provided one bill if the parcels were contiguous. At that time 87% of people paid their dues. The current board provides an invoice for each parcel number which has significantly increased the dues for members. She felt that explained why the board was saying only 50% pay their dues. She felt the numbers were skewed. She also referred to documents provided stating that they were operating in the black and have more money than was needed.

She had great concerns about the volunteer firefighters not going to trainings. Previously they budgeted to replace turnouts every single year and has concerns that has not been continued. Their current proposed budget has $93,000 in savings and asked the Commissioners to vote no.

Chairman Robertson stated that they will disregard the documents they were handed, because he was not sure of their accuracy at this time.

Sandy Steinhagen said she lives on Westside Road and currently does not get any benefit from the department because she lives too far away. She said that was their choice when they bought the property, so they are not upset by that. However, they also felt they should not be forced to pay tax dollars for something they will get no benefit from. She also said they had a fire near their home recently and because of road construction it took IDL 45 minutes to arrive and North Bench arrived at the 1-hour mark with only a pickup. She asked what would change for them if they were in a taxing district. She would be paying more to get the same zero benefit.

She also used to work for the ambulance district and said that it was nice to have North Bench arrive to assist to help lift and carry, but she said it was not necessary. They were able to handle their job without their assistance.

As she understands it, 60% of the district was outside of the magic circle to get any kind of break on fire insurance. She was also aware that their volunteers are not wearing the proper PPE. If we don’t have the money to protect the most valuable asset, why are we spending money on tenders.

Bryon Regehr said he didn’t believe a taxing district would improve anything. His home was located inside the magic circle, but they can’t get there any faster than they do now. He commended the volunteers, but you can’t save a wood house with wood siding that is doused in oil. He might feel differently if the service were to improve, but the area they cover was spread out too far.

Mike Kupper had issues with the statement that they had three years left on their lease. When he pressed further about that, they admitted that they didn’t have any contact information and nothing from the FAA that said their lease would end. They are in debt and we need to find ways to help them get out of that, but didn’t feel taxing was the answer. No structures were lost in the Turner Hill fire and they did a great job. If they can handle that and do a great job, we need to help them get out of the hole and avoid a taxing district.

Chairman Robertson stated that they will address the lease for Fire Station 1 after the public comment portion of the hearing.

John-Paul Mickle said that everyone here supports the fire department and wants to continue the legacy. He has reviewed the petition and supporting documents submitted and noted that the county had identified concerns that they may not meet the statutory requirements concerning the boundaries that effect voter eligibility and levy authority. He said that the county cannot advance a petition that does not meet the statutory requirements.

The petitioners have also not provided a levy rate or a reasonable budget or a sustainable financial plan. Without a clear plan he felt the county should not put this measure on a ballot.

A taxing district was a public agency that was subject to open meeting laws, record requirements and administrative standards. The petitioner does not currently comply with these standards and noted significant gaps in records. He has concerns about the North Bench administration’s ability to administer a taxing district.

He also felt the county needed to take into consideration many other issues within NBVFD that the creation of a taxing district would not resolve. He felt the district would need to be operational and ready and he did not feel they currently met those standards. He also noted that Fire Station 1 was not in danger of loosing their lease.

Marcheta Trowbridge has lived here for over 4 years. She stated that opposing a taxing district does not mean that she does not support the fire department and everything that they do. She has many concerns currently and feels they have not been creative to overcome their funding gap. They have website issues where a quote has been provided that was very expensive. To her knowledge nothing has been pursued. She has concerns about fiscal responsibility. Buying property without a plan of what to do doesn’t make a great deal of sense.

Lou Aceto said he moved here because of high government over-reach and high taxes. He said that he didn’t believe they were bad guys, just bad decisions. They don’t ask for input until after the decisions are made and then they ignore the input. He also has concerns that the 501(c)3 that their lawyer requested was denied and they paid the lawyer anyway. He would like to see the tax proposal stopped at this point and let the membership fund the proposed budget. He suggested fee waivers, partial payments and ask others to pay more if they can.

Judy Weible has lived here since 1964 and was totally against a taxing district. She feels that the board and Chief need to be replaced with individuals who know how to budget. She won’t vote for them again because she feels like they are not listening.

Ken Wooten said he wanted to respond to the amount provided by the president and board that the fee increase would only equate to $1.83 per $100,000. A $500,000 home would amount to $310 the first year. A 3% increase on top of that multiplies like compound interest. In 10-years that would be $416.26, 20 years it would total $559.45 and $751.83 in 30 years. Those amounts would be in addition to your regular county taxes. He felt their figures were erroneous.

He also said that his understanding was that 1,700 of the parcels have homes and the rest are vacant land. If 1,100 of them paid their membership dues last year, that leaves 600 that did not. That number was far better than the 50% average stated. He proposed that they have a fee cap. Those homes within a 5-mile radius would pay one fee and those outside of that radius would pay a lessor amount.

Earle Irving said that they were told 4 years ago that the property that was purchased would be subdivided and they would sell four parcels and keep two to develop. When he inquired about the status of that, he was told there were too many issues to move forward. He had concerns that in four-years they have done nothing and have no ideas.

He also added that he has experience with zero based budgets and has offered his time and expertise to help. There has been no response from anyone. He had concerns that they currently lack the leadership needed to move forward and would like the Commissioners to take that into consideration. If they can’t come up with an idea in four years, there are drastic problems.

John Lazier stated that he has attended three town hall meetings and the results of each of those was negative toward a taxing district. In his opinion we shouldn’t be here, but that didn’t sink in with the board. He said he has been a paying member for 39 years. He felt the board should have brought this to the members before bringing this to the Commissioners. He has concerns about the money that was paid for the petition and wants to know what safety measures have been placed on the back burner as a result. It should not have come to this and he urged them to stop it now.

No other members of the public wished to speak so the public comment was closed at 6:42 p.m.

Chairman Robertson then asked North Bench to respond to some of the statements made. President Jim Hill approached the podium.

Mr. Hill said the longest serving board member’s tenure was 3 years. The land was purchased by a previous board, so we do not have any information on that.

There were concerns from the previous board that the FAA was going to expand the hangars at the airport and take over the Station 1 location. There was only 3-years left on the current lease. If we are able to stay at that location, the rate could go to a commercial rate if renewed. The FAA has control over that.

As for training personnel, we do the best that we can with a limited budget. The Chief does an excellent job and we are very appreciative of that. However trained personnel can leave and go to other districts where they get paid more, so we have to retrain over and over.

As for the comment on the Westside, we have a small station on the Kootenai Tribe’s reservation. Even though we have “district” in our name, we are not recognized as one and our budget was open to all. We have nothing to hide. However, it doesn’t matter what the budget says, if a truck breaks down, you fix it. Last year they were over budget by $27,000 and that money came from their savings. He was unsure how other boards were able to save money in the past. The $440,000 proposed budget includes some reserves or savings which would be used for a new fire station and apparatus replacement.

Most of the district has no water supply and they have to provide it so that was why they spent money on tenders. Mr. Hill expressed frustration at the request for multi-year budgets and finances. They don’t control the levy rate and can’t predict the amount they would receive. The $440,000 budget would provide reserves, safety, and training.

He admitted there have been gaps in posting meetings. They have a volunteer board and are thankful for their efforts. Someone did provide a proposal for a website that was outrageous and they did not proceed.

They have one of the fastest growing areas in the community and believe their existing service to be inadequate. Most of the new comers assume the department was already supported by a taxing district. Only half of their members pay their dues, but we also don’t get really good data on who to mail the invoices to. We also don’t know if the parcel was residential, commercial or vacant. There wasn’t anything to tell us that.

NBVFD was a 501(c)4 and we engaged with an attorney to get us a 501(c)3 which was denied by the IRS. The attorney refunded the money that was paid to him. If they were a governmental agency or taxing district, they would qualify for more grants. They would gladly accept additional money from the membership.

The comment regarding the number of homes at 1,700 was probably accurate. He asked people to think about the number of businesses and noted the significant hazmat that comes with commercial property. He again said that only 50% of the properties pay. He commended the volunteers of present and past board members.

Chairman Robertson expressed his gratitude to all of the volunteers that serve the community. He then asked Mr. Hill if he has had any resolution about the debt the volunteer department currently has. He again stated that was a sticking point for him. Mr. Hill replied that he understood the issue with private contracting. The best option he could come up with was to sell the property and get enough money to pay off the debt.

Chairman Robertson said the problem that we have today was that there are no assurances. NBVFD was carrying debt and if this went to the ballot and was approved the only option for the newly appointed Commissioners would be to contract with NBVFD. Chairman Robertson said that was the wrong way to handle public dollars. Those Commissioners then have no authority over the day-to-day operations of the tax dollars. Until that problem was resolved, I believe you know where I stand.

Commissioner Pinkerton stated that should the property be sold, there would be some revenue to pay off the debt, but it also might generate some income to help fund the district. He had concerns as to why they were holding on to property and also asking the public for additional money. He felt that needed to be finalized before he would consider it.

Chairman Robertson said he would not tell them how to spend their money, but he would speak about the debt because that was his concern. Mr. Hill said he understood the concern with the debt and he said the only thing that came to mind to raise money was to sell a portion of the property and sell older vehicles. The property has two different zonings so they would also have to work though a resolution for that. He also added that if we have to move out of Station 1, we do own Camp 9, but there are many areas around 3-Mile that would then be outside of the 5-mile radius.

Chairman Robertson said the agreement with the airport property was with the Boundary County Board of Commissioners and as long as I am in this position, I will continue to contract with NBVFD. Other Commissioners in the future might want to change that, but this BOCC wants to continue. Commissioners Bertling and Pinkerton agreed.

Commissioner Bertling asked if anyone has spoken to the previous board that purchased the property and what their vision was. You should get their insight. Mr. Hill replied that the previous board was very contentious and he believes their intentions were to sell part of it to pay off the debt. We have not had a whole lot to do with the property other than mow it.

Commissioner Bertling said that as far as the current location of Station 1, we have no problem continuing the contract for another 5 years. We will continue pushing on the FAA that it was a great location for the fire district. Mr. Hill replied that another 5 years would help, but noted that there are no plans to build a station now or in the future. Commissioner Pinkerton added that the rate increase at the end of the lease would be minimal.

Commissioner Pinkerton stated that he had some questions for Chief Baker. He asked what options have been explored to combine districts. Chief Baker replied that everything south of us was already a taxing district. There are two municipalities and anything north isn’t interested in combining so we are stuck in the middle. The hardest part of the job was finding a volunteer base that was young enough to do the job.

Commissioners had no further questions and Chairman Robertson called for deliberation.

Chairman Robertson said that he was not opposed to putting this on the ballot, it was the functionality and how it was set up going forward. He didn’t care about past mistakes; his focus was on making the future right and if we don’t set this up right in the beginning it will haunt us down the road. Unfortunately, they have debt and there was no way for them to turn everything over to a taxing district if this was to pass.

Commissioner Pinkerton replied that was also a hang up for him. We have the statutory authority that we have to follow. It was clear that the new taxing district cannot assume debt. He also commented that there was value to the property and if they explored that, we might not even be having this discussion.

Commissioner Pinkerton then asked about the map and if all of those issues were resolved. Assessor Olivia Drake replied that the latest map submitted by the surveyor appears to be sufficient.

Commissioner Bertling stated that we need to enter into this cleanly. It feels forced and there needs to be more outreach with the membership at this point in time. Commissioner Pinkerton added that the mission needs to be clearly defined. He had an issue with the wildland fire services and there was a considerable amount of expense that goes with that. He wondered if the membership was in agreement with that. He also added that the books need to be published with salaries and have it available to everyone.

Commissioner Robertson said he felt it was fine to prevent wildfires. He said they are often times the first one to arrive and that was worth a lot. He didn’t want to take away anything that they do, it was a hard job and he didn’t want too dimmish that. He then added that if this passed today and if it passed at the ballot, everything would start over with new Commissioners. Chairman Robertson said this has structural issues because of their debt, so there was only one conclusion. A taxing district was the wrong way to proceed at this time.

Commissioner Bertling moved to deny the petition from proceeding to the ballot based on the facts presented. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Chairman Robertson called for a roll call vote: Commissioner Pinkerton “aye”, Chairman Robertson “aye”, Commissioner Bertling “aye”.

The hearing ended at 7:10 p.m.

s/________________________________

BEN ROBERTSON, Chairman

ATTEST:

s/_______________________________

GLENDA POSTON, Clerk

By: Stephanie Sims, Deputy Clerk

All times are tentative unless identified as a specific appointment or public hearing & the Board will address items on the agenda as they are completed, which may either shorten or lengthen the times for which items are addressed on the agenda. Claims Review & Approval, Indigent Matters and Junior College Tuition Forms will be discussed & approved and Resolutions will be adopted as time allows. Commissioners’ meetings are held in their chambers, Room 28, in the Boundary County Courthouse, unless otherwise stated. For Commissioners’ meetings that are held at the County Annex Conference Room, that address is 6566 Main Street, Bonners Ferry, Idaho.

Monday, August 24, 2026

9:00 a.m.: Squire Fields – update on maintenance projects.

9:30 a.m. – 10:00 a.m.: County Civil Attorney Bill Wilson – Update on various matters. Motion to sign Certificates of Residency for Tatiana Dewberry and Hanna Franck. Motion to sign Commissioner meeting minutes from week of August 17^th. Cancel/extend various taxes. Motion to sign New Private Road Name Request Form for Bonnie Lane. Motion to sign Juvenile Detention Agreement with Bonner County. Motion to sign Utilities Form to retire electric service to Hangar I. Motion to sign Utilities Form for trunk line extension to feed new hangar sites. Motion to sign CASA Contract for Services for FY26-27. Motion to sign Passthrough Funds Recipient Agreement with Idaho Dept of Juvenile Corrections. Motion to sign Resolutions for Destruction of Records from Sheriff’s Office. Motion to sign/approve the contract with Wink Inc., for the Boundary County Airport Runway 2/20 Rehabilitation and Extension project. ACTION ITEMS.

1:30 p.m.: Road and Bridge Department report. Solid Waste Department Report. Discussion on frost laws.

2:15 p.m.: Human Resources Report. Executive Session 74-206(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. This paragraph does not apply to filling a vacancy in an elective office or deliberations about staffing needs in general. Executive Session 74-206(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. ACTION ITEM.

Tuesday, August 25, 2026 (afternoon meetings located at County Annex)

2:00 p.m.: FILE #26-0133, RURAL SUBDIVISION VIA SHORT PLAT, THE BILLIE & PATRICIA I. POULTON FAMILY TRUST is requesting preliminary plat approval for the replat of Lot 19 of Poulton Pines Subdivision, a rural subdivision via short plat, to divide a 15.72-acre lot into two lots of 7.79 acres and 7.93 acres in the Residential zone. The Residential zone district has varying lot size minimum densities based on community water and sewer services – ¼-acre where both community water and sewer services are available; 1-acre where either community water or sewer service is available; 2½ acres where neither community water nor sewer services is available. The lot is located off Chokecherry Drive and is identified as Assessor’s Parcel RP008450000190A in Section 21, Township 62 North, Range 1 East, B.M. ACTION ITEM.

2:30 p.m.: FILE#26-0121, LAND USE TEXT AMENDMENT, BOUNDARY COUNTY has initiated an amendment to the Boundary County Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance 2019-1 to: update Planning and Zoning Commission duties and organization; allow residential placement permits to be transferable to subsequent owners; establish expiration dates for residential placement permits to match the 2-year expiration date of commercial and industrial permits with permits remaining valid as long as work continues on the permitted structure; remove regulation that invalidates an issued commercial/industrial permit if the building’s use is discontinued; add extension allowances for placement permits and conditional use permits; remove a requirement that all special purpose districts sign final plats; correct typographical and grammatical errors; correct and update references to rights of appeal, record maintenance, and legal noticing; and remove references to the now-defunct Area of City Impact. The Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously voted to recommend approval to the Board of County Commissioners at their July 23, 2026, public meeting. ACTION ITEM.

(Evening meeting located at the Bonners Ferry High School Auditorium)

5:30 p.m.: Public Hearing regarding North Bench Volunteer Fire District’s petition to become a taxing district. ACTION ITEM.

DISCUSSION MAY INCLUDE ANY OTHER TOPICS THAT HAVE BEEN COVERED IN THE PAST. Anyone requiring special accommodation due to disability should contact Boundary County Commissioners’ office at (208) 267-7723 at least two working days prior to the meetings.

Commissioners’ – Week of August 24, 2026

Meeting Date: August 24, 2026 9:00 am

Meeting Minutes

Site Map

Contact Information

Address

Mailing Address

Office Hours

Commissioners’ – Week of August 24, 2026

Meeting Date: August 24, 2026 9:00 am

Meeting Minutes

Meeting Agenda

Site Map

Contact Information

Address

Mailing Address

Office Hours