OPENING Mayor Hellar called the regular meeting of the city council to order at 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday, August 19, 2009 in the council chambers at City Hall, 1123 Lake.
ROLL CALL Council members Boge, Newton, Snedden, Logan, Reuter and O’Hara were present.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Hellar led the council and the public in the pledge of allegiance to the flag.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Councilwoman Logan noted that at the August 11, 2009 budget public hearing, she voted for a motion that shut down all debate and called for a vote on the budget. She stated although expeditious, the vote was rude and disrespectful to Councilwoman Newton and apologized to her for her action. She also apologized to the citizens of Sandpoint. She said although Councilwoman Newton’s input would not have changed the vote on the budget, everyone lost the value of her input which is always thoughtful and well reasoned.
She pointed out that a motorist towing a boat was stopped on Interstate Highway 90 that was treated for mussels by Washington State personnel with a destination to Priest Lake. She said last week, the same boat was on route to Priest Lake and was stopped in Priest River at the inspection station. She said personnel at the Priest River inspection station found that the boat did not have a thorough inspection in Washington State as it was contaminated by mussels and was taken to the cleaning station at city beach where it was finally cleaned properly.
Councilman Boge suggested that the city clerk underline those items that are re-amended on agendas.
Councilwoman Newton announced that former Police Chief Bill Kice who served the city from 1982 to 2000 recently passed away. She commented that he served the city well.
PUBLIC FORUM
Tim Blankenship, 1824 Main, stated that he’s employed with Sewell Engineering and was representing the Litehouse project regarding Item I on the agenda. He requested a variance from Section 8 of the streetscape ordinance requiring installation of curb, gutter, and sidewalk during paving of their parking lot. He distributed a plan of the Litehouse parking lot to city council. He noted that the current parking lot has gravel with difficulties of ice buildup during the winter months and the runoff from the parking lot has poor quality due to the current material surface. He said Litehouse is proposing to pave the parking lot and bring the storm water management system up to city standards. He said he reviewed the plan with the city’s arborist with approval of the plan for trees and shrubs as demonstrated on the plan that will include bicycle parking in the lot. He explained the reason Litehouse didn’t want to install curbs, gutters and sidewalks is for easy maintenance so that they can store snow from the parking lot on the east side. He said the proposed layout would also increase safety for pedestrians during icy conditions. He requested a variance from installing curb, gutter and sidewalks.
Fred Darnell, 608 Lakeview, said there simply should have been a vote of “no” long ago on the ordinance and to move onto to something that would have more value for taxpayers. He felt this issue has been a colossal waste of time and money and the proposed change only touches part of the problem. He raised concern about the enforcement of the ordinance as it will be a judgment call of a city employee and asked why the issue can’t address certain items. He stated that many citizens have been financially impacted and stressed by judgment calls by city employees regarding sidewalks. He said every faucet in every house could become a selective judgment on whether there would be a possibility or not a backflow could occur. He urged the city to keep the requirement for non-residential applications only and residences that have separate pressurized irrigation systems in order to cover the concern of Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). He stressed that local common sense should prevail and citizens’ rights should be acknowledged.
Steve Tanner, 2110 Ironwood Parkway, Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, stated he was a representative from the DEQ and was available for any questions regarding the rules and regulations of backflow. He explained to Councilwoman Logan that a double check value at the property line shouldn’t be used if the premise is required to have a backflow prevention assembly as it doesn’t substitute for a hazard situation. He said other instances where backflow prevention system is used is for boilers and solar hot water systems. He responded to Councilman Reuter that the current ordinance does not meet DEQ standards. He said if city council adopted the proposed ordinance this evening, the City of Sandpoint would be in compliance. He stressed that single family residences can have hazards with concerns that a dual check valve at the meter is not testable. He said when a backflow occurs when check valves are used, it could fail. He said that Coeur d’Alene, Post Falls and the Greens Ferry Water District have adopted backflow prevention ordinances and are testing single family residences. He noted that the City of Coeur d’Alene recently hired a second cross connection coordinator. He said he works for the North Idaho area and wasn’t aware of other cities that may have adopted a similar ordinance outside the North Idaho area. He stated the City of Sandpoint was obligated to comply with the Idaho Public Drinking Water Rules and that his department works with communities to make sure they meet all standards. He said the city’s certification could be disapproved by DEQ and that an approved drinking water system is considered for business or home financing. He noted the city could have potential liability if the water supply is not protected. Councilwoman Newton asked if every city in the district was in compliance. Mr. Tanner said he has worked with the Cities of Coeur d’Alene and Post Falls who are actively participating in backflow compliance. He said DEQ has not disapproved Bonners Ferry who is actively implementing a cross control program. He said as far as he was aware of the Cities of Hope, East Hope, Priest River, and Clark Fork had ordinances in place that meet DEQ requirements. He said DEQ conducts a survey of water systems every five years with entities to make sure a cross connection ordinance has been adopted. He explained the process takes a long time.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilman Reuter moved to remove Item C-2, Economic Development Corporation of Sandpoint – appointment of Karl Dye and that discussion follow the Consent Calendar. Councilwoman Logan seconded the motion. Councilman Reuter stated he had a few comments to make about this matter. He withdrew his motion and Councilwoman Logan withdrew her second. Councilman Reuter referred to Mr. Dye’s letter of interest with reference of the goals of the Bonner County Economic Development Corporation (BCEDC). He said he intended to approve Mr. Dye’s appointment to the Economic Development Corporation (EDCS) of Sandpoint Board position and not the BCEDC Board for the position. He felt Mr. Dye was immensely qualified to serve on the EDCS Board individually.
Councilman Snedden requested to remove Item B, Bills for the month of July 2009 as he had a question on a bill in the amount of $857.00. Councilwoman Logan requested to remove Items E-1 DSBA 2009-2010 Budget, E-2 ARRA ACT Grant Funding for Energy Generation Facility at the Airport Industrial Park and Item F-4 Proposed Resolution DSBA Contract to Manage BID. Councilman Boge requested to remove Item F-2 Proposed Resolution Pall Corporation Contract for Membrane Supply.
Councilman Boge requested more information on the mayor’s appointment of Bradley Steele Granfield to the Historic Preservation Commission. Mayor Hellar responded that Mr. Granfield was committed to preserving historical buildings and will look at the economic aspect of preserving buildings.
Councilman Boge noted that he recently received phone calls from citizens as to how they can get deferrals and that city council needs to be aware of this issue.
Councilwoman Logan moved that items A-1 through A-8, C through E, F-1, F-3 and F-5 from the consent calendar be approved. Councilman Snedden seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by a roll call vote of council.
A. MINUTES
A-1 City Council regular minutes of July 15, 2009, special minutes of June 24, 2009, August 5, 2009 and August 11, 2009 and workshop minutes of June 25, 2009, June 26, 2009, July 2, 2009 and July 9, 2009;
A-2 Planning Commission minutes of July 7, 2009 and July 21, 2009;
A-3 Arts Commission minutes of June 9, 2009;
A-4 Economic Development Corporation of Sandpoint July 8, 2009;
A-5 Historic Preservation Commission minutes of June 16, 2009 and June 30, 2009;
A-6 Parks and Recreation Commission minutes of April 27, 2009;
A-7 Pedestrian Advisory Committee minutes of June 16, 2009;
A-8 Urban Renewal Board minutes of July 7, 2009
B Bills for the month of July 2009 in the amount of $1,750,322.49, $1,314,324.62
which is for accounts payable and $435,997.49 for payroll and benefits – removed from consent
C-1 Historic Preservation Commission – Bradley Steele Granfield to a three-year term expiring May 31, 2012.
C-2 Economic Development Corporation of Sandpoint – Karl Dye to a three-year term expiring December 31, 2012.
D PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE AUGUST 5, 2009
D-1 Habitat home request deferral of water new user facility fee – deferral of $3,795 for Water New User Facility Fee at Lot 9 Schissler Meadows Phase II
E ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE AUGUST 12, 2009 MINUTES
E-1 DSBA 2009-2010 Budget – removed from consent
E-2 ARRA ACT Grant Funding for Energy Generation Facility at the Airport Industrial Park – development and submission of $500,000 grant to the Idaho Office of Energy Resources to construct a combined heat and power generation facility on city owned land – removed from consent
F RESOLUTIONS
F-1 Resolution No. 09-47 Rules and Regulations – Utility Account Deposits for Commercial and Industrial
F-2 Proposed Resolution Pall Corporation Contract for Membrane Supply – removed from consent
F-3 Resolution No. 09-48 Pend d’Oreille Bay Trail Memorandum of Understanding
F-4 Proposed Resolution DSBA Contract to Manage BID – removed from consent
F-5 Resolution No. 09-49 Bald Mountain Transmitter Lease with Gary Garrett DBA North Idaho Connection
OLD BUSINESS
G ORDINANCE AND SUMMARY NO. 1218 – BACKFLOW ORDINANCE
AMENDMENTS
The city clerk read the proposed ordinance by title only. Councilwoman Logan moved that the proposed ordinance titled “An ordinance of the City of Sandpoint, Bonner County, Idaho providing for amendment of Section 4, Title 7, Chapter 8 (Backflow and Cross-Connection Control) of the municipal code of the City of Sandpoint, Bonner County, Idaho; providing that all backflow assemblies be subject to inspection annually by a licensed inspector and providing for publication and an effective date” pass its first reading and, if applicable, the summary be approved. Councilman O’Hara seconded the motion.
Councilman Reuter referred to Mr. Tanner’s statement earlier this evening that the city is required to make the changes and stressed the city needs to follow state regulations.
A roll call vote of the council resulted as follows:
Councilman Boge No
Councilman O’Hara Yes
Councilwoman Logan Yes
Councilman Reuter Yes
Councilwoman Newton No
Councilman Snedden Yes
The motion passed by a majority vote of the council and the proposed ordinance passed its first reading by title and, if applicable, summary was approved.
Councilwoman Logan moved that the rules requiring three separate readings, once in the ordinance’s entirety be suspended and that the ordinance pass its second and third reading under the suspension of the rules. Councilman Snedden seconded the motion. A roll call vote of the council resulted as follows:
Councilwoman Newton No
Councilman O’Hara Yes
Councilman Snedden Yes
Councilwoman Logan Yes
Councilman Reuter Yes
Councilman Boge No
The motion passed by a majority vote of the council and the rules requiring three separate readings, once in the ordinances’ entirety be suspended and the proposed ordinance passed its second and third reading under suspension of the rules. The ordinance was considered read, passed and adopted and the summary was approved. The ordinance is Number 1218.
NEW BUSINESS
H. ORDINANCE AND SUMMARY NO. 1219 – BOND ELECTION
Mayor Hellar announced that city council unanimously approved at the June 17, 2009 city council meeting to place the water treatment bond on the November 3, 2009 city election ballot. She said a majority of city council approved to not proceed with the award of the membrane supplier contract and not to continue with the project design with Councilwoman Logan dissenting.
The city clerk read the proposed ordinance by title only. Councilwoman Logan moved that the proposed ordinance titled “An ordinance of the City of Sandpoint, Bonner County, Idaho, calling a special election to be held on November 3, 2009; and providing for the submission to the qualified electors of the city a proposition authorizing the issuance of water revenue bonds in the aggregate principal amount not to exceed $17,000,000 for the purpose of construction and improvements to the water system and facilities of the city at an estimated cost of $17,000,000; providing for public notice of said election; providing for the appointment of the City Clerk to conduct the election; providing for the effective date of this ordinance; and providing for other matters properly relating thereto” pass its first reading and, if applicable, the summary be approved. Councilman Reuter seconded the motion.
Councilman Boge stressed that he could not vote in favor of the proposed ordinance because the public spoke when voting for this matter in May. He referred to the proposed contract for membrane supply that was on this evening’s agenda and raised concern that there was no regard to the public based on the outcome of the May election. Councilwoman Newton felt that the proposed ordinance and the proposed contract for membrane supply were bound together with a majority of council voting to not move forward with the membrane supply issue at a prior meeting. She also was concerned as the public already voted on this issue. Councilman Reuter sympathized with the concerns but believed it would be less expensive for the citizens if the bond passed by having the membrane contract in place now. He stated he didn’t want to be lectured about listening to the public’s will from a council member who had previously proposed to take this matter before a judge. He commented if this issue was put on a ballot, it would fail on November 3rd but stressed it was necessary to make sure the will of the people was followed. He pointed out that he originally requested to put this matter on the November ballot and not to have it on the May ballot. Councilman Boge noted that the election was held in May in order to get grant opportunities and that he never agreed that this matter be put in front of a judge. He felt the solution was conservation and better management of the water for future years.
Councilwoman Newton asked why the membrane contract had no dollar figure. Public Works Director Kody Van Dyk explained that if the bond election passed and the contract is entered with Pall Corporation, it will cost $3 million per ten million gallons a day. He said the cost savings could be estimated at $25,000 to go through the proposal process which amounts to the cost savings. He said the cost included the cost to analyze different proposals. Councilwoman Logan asked why there couldn’t be a delay on adopting the resolution until after the election was completed. Mr. Van Dyk explained the bids can only be held for 120 days and if it goes beyond the 120 days, the price could increase and the city would be forced to go out to bid again because legal requirements would not be followed. Councilman O’Hara asked if conservation measures would only impact new user hook ups and whether there would be enough water supply through the end of the year. Kody Van Dyk stated there was a question as to how long the water supply would last and didn’t feel conservation could make up for the shortfall.
A roll call vote of the council resulted as follows:
Councilman Boge No
Councilman O’Hara Yes
Councilwoman Logan Yes
Councilman Reuter Yes
Councilwoman Newton No
Councilman Snedden Yes
The motion passed by a majority vote of the council and the proposed ordinance passed its first reading by title only and, if applicable, summary was approved.
Councilwoman Logan moved that the rules requiring three separate readings, once in the ordinances entirety be suspended and that the ordinance pass its second and third reading under the suspension of the rules. Councilman O’Hara seconded the motion. A roll call vote of the council resulted as follows:
Councilman Snedden Yes
Councilwoman Logan Yes
Councilman O’Hara Yes
Councilman Reuter Yes
Councilwoman Newton No
Councilman Boge No
The motion passed by a majority vote of the council and the rules requiring three separate readings, once in the ordinances’ entirety be suspended and the proposed ordinance passed its second and third reading under suspension of the rules. The ordinance was considered read, passed and adopted and the summary was approved. The ordinance is Number 1219.
I. LITEHOUSE STREETSCAPE DEFERMENT FOR 1109 N. ELLA
Councilman Reuter stated that the Public Works Committee did not have a recommendation on this matter as the vote was split. City Attorney Will Herrington stated there was no ability to grant a deferral for a commercial use under the recently adopted ordinance. Councilwoman Logan pointed out that the streetscape ordinance doesn’t allow deferment for commercial properties and opposed granting the deferral.
Councilwoman Newton pointed out to Councilman Reuter’s comment in the Public Works Committee minutes that the city has just recently passed one of the most aggressive sidewalk ordinances in the State. Councilman Reuter stated that it was important to consider this particular request as city council has allowed encroachments and granted deferrals in a number of other cases to assist businesses that were considerably smaller than Litehouse. He felt it necessary to allow reasonable leniency and that this matter could be revisited. Councilman Boge noted Litehouse is an incredible employer and was committed to staying in Sandpoint. He felt deferrals should be made on a case by case judgment.
Councilman Reuter moved to approve the sidewalk agreement as written. Councilman Boge seconded the motion. Will Herrington noted that the deferral request was received prior to the adoption of the streetscape ordinance which is one of the reasons city council could consider the deferral. He said city council had allowed deferments before the ordinance was adopted.
Councilman Snedden moved to amend to strike “with an automatic renewal” from Section 2 of the proposed Sidewalk Agreement. Councilman Reuter seconded the motion for purposes of discussion. Councilman Snedden raised concern with allowing an automatic renewal and stated he would approve the agreement if this language was stricken. Council members Boge, Snedden, and Reuter voted yes. Council members Newton, Logan, and O’Hara voted no. Mayor Hellar voted yes. Motion passed.
The motion to approve the proposed Sidewalk Agreement as amended passed with Council members Boge, Snedden, and Reuter voting yes. Council members Newton, Logan and O’Hara voted no. Mayor Hellar voted yes.
J. ADA COMPLIANCE PLAN
City Attorney Will Herrington promoted the concept that city staff work with the Idaho Attorney General’s Office in order to reach an agreement with American Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance that would be on the September Public Works Committee agenda, and then forward to city council at their regular meeting in September. He said if city council requested modifications to the agreement, then it may be necessary to meet before October 10, 2009 which would be the 90 day deadline to guarantee the city’s compliance. He explained a portion of the compliance will require a committee to update or renew a transition plan which would be a significant element to satisfy the complaint. He said he would work with Tim Thomas of the Idaho Attorney General’s office to identify the six projects that are unsatisfactory and to identify curbs to be installed. He said a determination would also be made on how much time is needed to completely satisfy the requirement for curb ramps. He said the deadlines would depend on the work involved to satisfy the findings of incompatibility. He stated that he mailed a letter to the State and just received a response that cited the policies the city was in violation of.
Mayor Hellar noted the city couldn’t have an adequate transition plan by October 10th but that an agreement needed to be reached as to what would be covered in the transition plan in order to meet the State’s concerns. Will Herrington said definitive information needed to be included in the agreement so compliance and deadlines were precise. He pointed out there were some elements such as required curb ramp installation that could be specific. He stated two elements will be left with some vagueness that were unavoidable with the goal of having more specificity once the plan is completed.
Councilman Reuter noted that city council has been trying hard to create multi-modal access and have been addressing ADA issues throughout the city such as emphasizing those elements in the comprehensive plan and implementing a sidewalk ordinance. He felt it was unfortunate that the results of the complaint distracted from what the city council has been trying to do. He hoped the city could move forward in spending their money effectively particularly for those who are disabled and are in need of transportation. Mayor Hellar announced that letters have been sent to property owners regarding the most recently adopted streetscape ordinance with requirements to install sidewalks but are receiving complaints and requests for deferrals. She hoped city council would support the ordinance and that city staff would enforce the ordinance. Councilwoman Newton pointed out the mayor had just minutes earlier approved Litehouse’s request for deferment earlier this evening. Mayor Hellar felt there was an overriding community interest of wanting to preserve jobs in that instance. Councilwoman Newton raised concern and hoped that the people in the community would see the difference in treatment regarding this issue.
K. FIRE RECOVERY USA
Councilman Snedden stated he was Acting Chair at the Administrative Committee during Councilwoman Newton’s absence and noted that the committee considered implementation of user fees for fire responses and false alarm fees but did not consider the contract with Fire Recovery USA. Fire Chief Robert Tyler requested support of the user fee schedule as provided. He proposed false alarms fees within a twelve month period that the first two alarms are free, the third alarm at $150, the fourth through sixth alarm at $300, and a maximum of $500 per calendar year. City Treasurer Shannon Syth pointed out fees would need to be reviewed before they were added to the proposed fee schedule. Councilman Snedden confirmed that the Administrative Committee did not consider the false alarm ordinance.
Councilman Reuter moved that city council reject the proposed fire department user fees and false alarm fees. No one seconded the motion.
City Attorney Will Herrington preferred to include false alarms that would apply not only to fire department false alarms but also security system alarms. He said the primary reason to have a fee schedule for false alarms provides incentives for people to correct
the deficiencies in their alarm systems in order to reduce the number of false alarms.
Councilwoman Newton moved to approve fees for false alarms applying to both the police and fire department to be instituted as follows: No charge for the first or second false alarm, $150 for the third false alarm, $300 each for the fourth through sixth false alarm, $500 each for the seventh through ninth false alarm, and $1,000 each for the tenth and all additional false alarms. Councilwoman Logan seconded the motion for discussion.
Police Chief Mark Lockwood stated after review of many false alarm ordinances, that after a certain amount of false alarms, public safety does not respond until the fee is paid and that in service training is provided in order to correct the issue. He said there are more than fees structures to address. Councilman Boge raised concern that this may open the city to liability. Chief Lockwood explained that financial institutions have protocol to follow. He stated dispatch currently does not monitor any alarm systems but those are done with private monitoring services. He said false alarms are often due to employee error and lack of training but sometimes can be a mechanical aspect. Chief Tyler stated he has received up to seven alarms from one institution in one day. Councilman O’Hara commented the purpose of the false alarm fees was not for another revenue source for the city but to assist public safety to reorient manpower where it’s needed and not allow someone to abuse the system. He agreed with Councilwoman Newton’s proposal to increase Chief Tyler’s proposed fee schedule.
Councilman Reuter noted that it was conceivable particularly for those who were safety conscience that may accidentally set off their new alarms with concern that they would be charged with a significant fee. Mayor Hellar pointed out at times emergency responders lives are in jeopardy when responding to alarms. Councilman Reuter disagreed but felt that their lives are put into danger after they arrive to the scene. Will Herrington advised that the effective action would be to add the proposed fees to the list of fees to be held for public hearing in September and that city council could take action on the proposed fees at the September council meeting. Fire Chief Robert Tyler pointed out that nationally more emergency responders die annually responding to and returning from incidents because of the failure of persons within the traffic circulation pattern to stop or notice the public safety vehicles.
Councilman Boge moved to amend to add “within a 24 hour period.” Chief Tyler noted that any new alarm system would have a grace period. He stated that smoke alarms and sprinkler systems need to be inspected annually and when they’re not, that’s when there are problems. Councilwoman Newton suggested to leave the motion as is but could reduce the fees at the public hearing. Councilman Boge concurred.
The motion to approve the proposed false alarm fees passed by a majority of council with Councilman Reuter dissenting.
Councilwoman Logan supported the concept of the proposed user fees but referred to the letter from Mike Mahoney, the local agent representing ICRMP which insures the city of Sandpoint, in which he states that there are instances where an insurance company wouldn’t pay. She requested more information on that aspect prior to making a decision.
Councilwoman Logan moved to table this matter until the next city council meeting. She wanted reassurance that if a homeowner is billed for a service that their homeowner’s insurance would cover it. City Treasurer Shannon Syth stated that another public hearing could be scheduled to review fire department user fees but tried to implement all new fees and those increased by 5% at the same time. Councilwoman Newton seconded the motion. The motion failed with Council members Boge, Snedden, Reuter and O’Hara dissenting.
Councilwoman Newton pointed out that Mr. Mahoney stated in his letter that many policies have language which state that this fee is not covered if the property is located within the limits of the municipality or district, that it may increase premiums and may impact a person’s credit rating. Councilman Reuter raised concern on how this would impact those who didn’t have homeowner’s insurance. Councilman O’Hara stated that someone will be impacted and will absorb the financial impact. He said a decision needed to be made as to what user fees are and if the city doesn’t allow user fees for these types of services, then discussion was needed on maintaining a level of service. He said if the level of service is deemed too high and if the level of services is maintained, someone needed to pay for it. Councilman Snedden concurred and raised concern that this wasn’t the only aspect of what the fire department responds to. He didn’t support this type of piecemeal implementation of the plan. Councilman Reuter hoped the city would reject the user fees and didn’t feel it was the appropriate way to fund revenue. He appreciated Chief Tyler trying to find revenue but felt it was up to city council to find the revenue.
Councilman Reuter moved to reject the proposed user fees for the fire department. Councilman Snedden seconded the motion. Councilman Boge referred to Mr. Mahoney’s letter that stated that coverage is intended to assist homeowners to pay for charges when the property is not located within a fire district. He suggested considering mutual aid calls. Chief Tyler stated there are only three ways in which his department can recover the fees from a structure fire: put an ordinance in place for cost recovery for structure fires regardless of what the individual policy requires, bill for those areas outside the fire jurisdiction for a structure fire, and that an insurance policy covers fees or charges regardless. He said the city needed to construct something for revenue for services and noted there are instances where the city can’t be paid. He noted that every year he looks for ways to fund capital expenditures during the budget process for apparatus and major equipment replacement. He stressed his fleet is aging and grant funding has decreased. He pointed out that Mr. Mahoney confirmed in his letter that it’s legal to recover costs through insurance companies but that each contract on a homeowner insurance policy is different. He said he pushed this matter forward in order to meet the public hearing schedule for the other proposed fees. Councilwoman Newton couldn’t support rejecting the proposed fees because of instances of environmental cleanup, hazardous materials, and marine vessel situations that needed to be addressed. She opposed applying the fees to structure fires within the city limits because citizens are paying taxes to support these services. Councilman Reuter felt there were other mechanisms to gather revenues from visitors such as the resort city tax. The motion failed with Council members Snedden, Logan, O’Hara and Newton dissenting.
Councilwoman Newton moved to refer the proposed fire department user fees to the September 9th Administrative Committee meeting so that Chief Tyler could bring a schedule proposal for the city council to consider at a future date. Councilwoman Logan seconded the motion. Councilman O’Hara suggested the Administrative Committee could review the fee structure which would allow discussion of the ordinance and contract later. The motion passed by a majority of council with Council members Boge and Reuter dissenting.
L. PROPOSED FEE SCHEDULE
Councilman Snedden stated that the Administrative Committee recommended review and discussion with full city council and to set a public hearing on September 16th for all new fees and those with 5% increase. Councilwoman Newton suggested that the water and sewer rates and new user facility fees be scheduled at a public hearing in October.
Councilwoman Newton moved that all new fees as presented on the proposed fee schedule and those proposed with a 5% increase be heard at a public hearing at the September 16th regular council meeting. Councilman Snedden seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by council.
M. RESOLUTION NO. 09-50 2009 AUDIT ENGAGEMENT LETTER
City Treasurer Shannon Syth stated the proposed audit engagement letter was basically the same as it has been in the few past years with governmentally recommended changes which entails what both the auditor’s and city’s responsibilities are. She noted there was a slight increase in the fee this year reflecting a 2.4% increase. She discussed DSBA’s concerns with the auditor regarding the $3,000 budgeted for the audit component unit. She said the auditor stated they would try to conduct the DSBA’s audit for a fee of $1,500 but that the DSBA needed to be prepared for a higher fee. She said Magnuson, McHugh and Company would charge DSBA an additional fee if their services would go beyond $1,500.
Councilman Boge moved to put the 2009 audit engagement letter out for bid with other companies. Shannon Syth noted there was no time to put this matter out for bid as the audit needed to start in September. She pointed out there was a new deadline because of the sewer bond. Councilman Boge commended Magnuson and McHugh for their work but raised concern that they raised their fee because of the economic situation. He commented there was always an excuse and that the proposed letter should have been submitted sooner. Councilwoman Logan seconded the motion. Councilwoman Newton concurred with Ms. Syth and noted there was no time to put this out for bid as there are deadlines imposed by governmental entities. She respectively suggested changing the motion to provide that the audit services go out to bid next year. Shannon Syth said this could be done in March 2010. Councilman Boge commented that if city council opposed the proposed audit engagement letter, Magnuson and McHugh will come up with a solution so that they can move forward with the audit. The motion failed with Council members Snedden, Logan, O’Hara, Reuter and Newton dissenting.
Councilwoman Newton moved that next year’s audit be put out for bid after the first of the calendar year. Councilman O’Hara seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by council.
Councilman Reuter moved that the proposed resolution, “2009 Audit Engagement Letter” be approved. Councilman O’Hara seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote of council.
B. BILLS FOR THE MONTH OF JULY 2009
City Treasurer Shannon Syth stated the bill in the amount of $857.00, that Councilman Snedden had questioned, was for the cost of hotel accommodations for the police officer and dog for canine certification. She noted the city was reimbursed for those funds from the Bonner County Prosecutor’s Office.
Councilman Reuter moved to approve the bills for the month of July 2009. Councilman Snedden seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by council.
E-1. DSBA 2009-2010 BUDGET
Councilwoman Logan supported the Downtown Sandpoint Business Association (DSBA) but wanted to see more emphasis on the DSBA soliciting more new businesses in town. She referred to the DSBA’s goals, objectives and strategies reflecting their goal in working with vacancies in the downtown. She questioned why the DSBA budgeted $500 again for this year for economic development and stressed that this was a miniscule amount for the effort to solicit businesses. Kathleen Hyde, DSBA Office Manager, stated the Economic Development Committee only utilized $50 last year with the Board deciding to keep the $500 for promotions and to cover their objectives for the fiscal year. She said additional monies would be available within their budget to promote economic development. Mayor Hellar stated that Karl Dye, Executive Director of Bonner County Economic Development Corporation (BCEDC) will be working on business retention and recruitment, the Economic Development of Sandpoint (EDCS) provides start up assistance and the DSBA is working on marketing. She stated the importance of having Karl Dye serving on the EDCS Board was to have emphasis on downtown and hoped to have a system that was mutually supportive. Councilman Reuter noted the budget increase to compensate Ms. Hyde’s position was important as she has had involvement with business recruitment with greater responsibilities. He echoed Councilwoman Logan’s encouragement to make it a higher emphasis to the DSBA board that economic development was a city council priority. He noted funds for this emphasis could be utilized from the $50,000 paid from Panhandle State Bank that was paid to stimulate technological development downtown. Councilman Boge commented that the DSBA should market Sandpoint to retain businesses downtown which would require more marketing and special events.
Councilwoman Logan moved to approve the DSBA 2009-2010 budget. Councilman Snedden seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by council.
F-4. RESOLUTION NO. 09-51 DSBA CONTRACT TO MANAGE BID
Councilwoman Logan moved that the proposed resolution, “DSBA Contract to Manage BID” be approved. Councilman Snedden seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote of council.
Kathleen Hyde thanked city staff and city council for their support.
E-2. ARRA ACT GRANT FUNDING FOR ENERGY FACILITY AT THE AIRPORT INDUSTRIAL PARK
Councilwoman Logan asked why the City of Sandpoint was involved in the grant application. Planning Director Jeremy Grimm explained that the Idaho Office of Energy Resources received money through stimulus funds and that he was trying to target the available funds. He said if the grant was successful, it would put the city’s property on the tax rolls, would completely develop the property, add $5 million in valuation of the new structures, add jobs, complete the build out of the airport industrial park, and would utilize a waste product that would be put to use for energy.
Councilwoman Logan pointed out that when the Panhandle Area Council (PAC) was involved with the airport study, it was revealed that it wasn’t necessary for the city to be involved at the rate they were involved. Jeremy Grimm explained this project involved a number of facets. He said the EDCS can issue industrial revenue bonds with the facility costing $3 million to construct. He said someone needs to lead the charge and that no one else was approaching with this idea. He said the city could identify any buildings that would be consuming the power for the project but that Avista would have to raise their cap of wattage in order to take advantage of the power. He said the steam could be piped to the Bonner Business Center, Lead Lok and other new businesses located in the industrial park. He said a Laundromat is interested in utilizing steam to power the facility in order to save the costs of delivering laundry to Spokane. He stated the location for the energy facility is where the city currently stores snow. He noted that Matt Janssen, CEO of Vapor Locomotive Company, serves on several national boards and is a renowned boiler engineer. He said Mr. Janssen is working on this project at his own cost and expense for revenue projections for sale of thermal energy steam and electricity based on existing rates and replacement of steam from natural gas. He said the unit would serve the Bonner Business Center and adjacent buildings to use thermal energy. He said if this pilot facility demonstrates efficiency and is cost effective, a larger system could be built on the Renova site that could provide the power and all steam for all users on the property.
Councilwoman Logan raised concern if there was no guarantee that the fuel source was available, it would be difficult to pay the bond. Mr. Grimm noted that the Federal government won’t enter into a 20 to 30 year harvesting commitment for wood bi-products from the forest but will open up to five year contracts. He said the forests won’t disappear and that McFarland Pole Company could be a great feed source but if that was disrupted, there would be a need to find an alternative feed stock. He said the city would have no liability but would need the political support for the grant and until the grant was received, he would put a maximum of 30 hours of staff time into the project. He said if the grant was received, there would be discussion of EDCS issuing industrial revenue bonds and working with PAC to leverage their small business program. He noted that $4.2 million is available with stimulus funds and that EDCS would focus on industrial revenue bonds for the energy production facility. He said he would try to lock into a 20 to 30 year contract with McFarland Pole Company or other producers of waste product. He said he would review the historical trend of what fuels cost and any estimates of maintenance and operation of operating the facility. He said depending on net metering with Avista in which power is generated to put into the system, and allows the increase in the cap, there could be identification to include other city facilities. Councilman Boge suggested including low income housing. Jeremy Grimm said Mr. Janssen explained that you feed the power based on the demand and if the power was running at full speed, it could create the demand to equal production. He said the steam could be used for cooling as well. Councilman Boge pointed out the City of Spokane, Washington has had problems with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) because of the steam from their garbage plant impacting the air near the airport. Jeremy stated he could discuss the project with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).
Mr. Grimm said one part-time city employee could cover the operation of the facility depending on the level of automation. He said based on Mr. Janssen’s estimations after deducting the costs, the facility could produce $150,000 revenue per year and the first 20 to 30 years the revenue would pay back the industrial revenue bonds which thereafter, it could be a city owned utility that would sell electricity for profit. He said there could be carbon credits and other Federal legislation that could provide additional benefits for the facility. He said the property consisting of 2.9 acres on the east half of the property could be sold to house three new businesses but the portion of the city property where the energy facility was located would be the city utility. He said Vapor Locomotive Company is located in Sandpoint. He said the grant funds in the amount of $500,000 would be used for the portion of the cost to build the facility.
Councilman Snedden moved to authorize the development and submission of the ARRA ACT $500,000 grant to the Idaho Office of Energy Resources to construct a combined heat and power generation facility on city owned land. Councilman O’Hara seconded the motion.
Councilman Boge moved to amend that the heat and power generation facility be used for low income housing. No seconded the motion.
Councilman Boge moved to amend to enter into a 20 year contract with McFarland Pole Company. Councilwoman Newton seconded the motion for purposes of understanding the motion. Councilman Boge stressed that it was necessary to enter into a contract to guarantee wood waste products to fuel the facility. Jeremy Grimm suggested applying for the grant first, then to discuss industrial revenue bonds with the EDCS, and to get a firm commitment for the feed stock. He said these concepts could be discussed after the grant was obtained. Councilman Boge withdrew his motion.
Councilwoman Newton asked whether air quality from the proposed energy facility would be negatively affected. Jeremy Grimm stated he would get the details of the emissions. The motion passed unanimously by council.
F-2. RESOLUTION NO. 09-52 PALL CORPORATION CONTRACT FOR MEMBRANE SUPPLY
Councilman Snedden moved that the proposed resolution, “Pall Corporation Contract for Membrane Supply” be approved. Councilwoman Logan seconded the motion. Councilman Reuter commented that if the bond election passes, it could cost the taxpayers $25,000 less. The motion passed by a majority roll call vote of council with Council members Boge and Newton dissenting.
N. EXECUTIVE SESSION IDAHO CODE 67-2345(1)(c) – TO ACQUIRE AN INTEREST IN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS NOT OWNED BY A PUBLIC AGENCY
Councilman Snedden moved to convene in an executive session pursuant to Idaho Code 67-2345(1)(c) to acquire an interest in real property which is not owned by a public agency. Councilman O’Hara seconded the motion. A roll call vote resulted as follows:
Councilman Boge Yes
Councilman Snedden Yes
Councilwoman Logan Yes
Councilman O’Hara Yes
Councilman Reuter Yes
Councilwoman Newton Yes
By a unanimous vote, the council convened in an executive session at 8:00 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT The council did not reconvene as there was no action to be taken and the meeting adjourned at 8:12 p.m.
Grchen A. Hellar, Mayor
ATTEST:
Maree Peck, City Clerk
