OPENING Mayor Hellar called the regular meeting of the city council to order at 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday, September 16, 2009 in the council chambers at City Hall, 1123 Lake.
ROLL CALL Council members Boge, Newton, Snedden, Logan, Reuter and O’Hara were present.
INVOCATION Ken Lawrence, River of Life Church, gave the invocation.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Hellar led the council and the public in the pledge of allegiance to the flag.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Mayor Hellar announced that if the meeting was still in session at 11:00 p.m. this evening, that she would entertain a motion to continue the meeting to next Wednesday night.
Councilwoman Logan moved that Item S, Stewardship of Lakeview Cemetery, be removed from the agenda and asked for a consensus of council to provide direction to the Finance and Parks and Recreation Departments to prepare a cost analysis based on maintaining the cemetery at the current level of service and one day per week of administrative services and bring this information back to the Administrative Committee. Councilman Reuter seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by council.
Councilwoman Logan reported that the train depot meeting with Amtrak and the Idaho Transportation Department that was held today at 1:00 p.m. this afternoon demonstrated a willingness on the part of Amtrak to keep the depot in Sandpoint and to work for a solution on the deteriorating status of the building itself. She said there were details to work out but was very optimistic. She thanked all the members of the Historic Preservation Commission for their hard work. She noted that the Chair of the Commission, Aric Spence, spent countless hours in collecting information in facilitating an assessment of needed repairs and associated costs by local engineer Carlos Swarez and architect Tim Boden. She commended these gentlemen for their donated time and expertise to this effort. She commended the Historic Preservation Commission and all volunteers who serve on all city committees and agencies whose involvement is invaluable to the city and the community.
City Clerk Maree Peck announced that the polls for the November 3, 2009 city general and special election will be at the Sandpoint City Hall council chambers and the polls will be open from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.
PUBLIC FORUM
Stacy Jenkins, 517 South First Ave., opposed fluoridation of the water on the grounds that it is a right to freedom of choice as to whether a person chose to consume fluoride.
Tammy Powell, 171 Vedelwood Drive, also owns property on Jenny Lane, opposed fluoride in the water. She raised concern that fluoride is the only chemical added to drinking water for the purpose of medication to prevent tooth decay. She said all other treatment chemicals are added to treat the water to improve the water’s quality which fluoride does not do. She noted that Europe has banned fluoridation as they feel this is a matter that should be left up to health professionals, not water districts. She asked why the City of Sandpoint would want to burden itself with the task of delivering medicine through its public water.
Jill White owns property at 805 Main Street, noted fluoridation of municipal water has occurred since the 1940s. She said the public has been told that fluoride is good for them and dentists have been taught that fluoride is a benefit. She pointed out the vast majority are unaware that much of the fluoride added to drinking water is actually an industrial waste product. She felt fluoride information was similar to the fables regarding lead, tobacco and asbestos in which medical accomplices helped industry to hide the truth about these substances for generations. She said endless studies, that assured workers that their factories and mines were safe, concealed the truth that thousands of people were being poisoned and dying painful early deaths from these chemicals. She noted that the same professionals and institutions who told the public that fluoride was safe provided the same regarding lead, asbestos and DDT or persuaded the public to smoke more tobacco. She begged the council to take fluoride out of Sandpoint’s water.
Richard Neuder, D.D.S., 1109 Birch St., stated when he started his dental practice 45 years ago, he witnessed in young adults and older patients extensive tooth decay, repair and partial or full replacements. He said when he retired three years ago, he noticed in high school students, there was minimal decay with no necessity of tooth repair. He was convinced that fluoride was a contributor to this and is safe in the city’s water.
Jennifer Ekstrom announced she was representing the organization, Lake Pend Oreille Water Keeper. She noted that the type of fluoride in the city’s water system is not a pharmaceutical grade but a toxic waste product from the phosphorate fertilizer industry and is a widely known contaminant such as lead, arsenic, mercury and other heavy metals that have toxic effects on human bodies. She noted that based on new compelling scientific evidence, the National Academy of Sciences is calling for additional studies about the effects of fluoride that can be connected to ailments such as Alzheimer’s, cancers, diabetes and other ailments. She stated according to the American Dental Association and the Center of Disease Control report, fluoride is most effective if it’s applied topically. She noted pharmaceutical grade fluoride recommended for tooth decay prevention is available at no charge for all children 12 years old and younger through a community health program. She said there’s no reason to spend taxpayer’s money on an unnecessary and questionable additive to the city’s water supply. She urged council to err on the side of caution and stop the use of fluoride.
Laura Bry, 313 Pine St., stated she was the Chairman of the Bonner County Democrats and the President of the Human Rights Task Force but spoke as an individual. She said in 1992 she joined her fellow citizens in opposing fluoride in the City of Bellingham, Washington. When she moved to Sandpoint in 1998, she was surprised that the city had fluoride in its water and took steps to not drink Sandpoint water. She urged council to stop fluoridation in the city’s water system immediately. She also respectfully requested that city council apply the precautionary principle. She said if council had doubt, to leave fluoride out. She stressed that most European countries have done this already.
Heather Lewis Sebring, 605 S. Olive Ave., announced that she represented the Sandpoint Mothers for Safe Water which consists of 350 concerned parents. She stated there was clear overwhelming evidence that fluoride can be effective but research showed that there were dangers when taken as a drink. She said the American Dental Association has warned that it’s dangerous for infants to drink fluoride in their formula. She felt there was no reason to drink fluoride and had concerns that families were medicated against their will. She asked for the right to choose and that parents should decide how to take care of their children. She urged city council to vote to discontinue fluoridation in the city’s water.
John Ukich, D.D.S., 1310 Ponderosa Drive, reported that the American Dental Association declared fluoridation of community water supply as the single most effective public health measure to prevent tooth decay and since its introduction of fluoride over 60 years ago, it has dramatically improved dental health in millions of Americans. The Center of Disease Control and Prevention proclaims community water fluoridation as one of the ten great public health achievements of the 20th Century. He said fluoride is nature’s cavity fighter with small amounts already present in all water sources. He noted that the addition of fluoride is like adding vitamins to milk and cereals. He said currently approximately 70% of United States residents consume fluoride through community water systems. He said in the past 8 years, more than 302 communities in 41 states have adopted fluoridation. He noted that studies have confirmed that water fluoridation reduced the amount of cavities in the young by 60%. He said there has been more than 60 years of scientific research with evidence that fluoride is safe.
According to the National Cancer Institute, fluoride in drinking water does not impose cancer risk to humans. He reported that every dollar invested in community water
fluoridation, results in $38.00 saved in dental treatment costs. He said the American Dental Association, United States Public Health Service, American Medical Association and the World Health Organization support fluoridation of water communities. He said he has been a practicing dentist for over 31 years with overwhelming evidence that it benefits children’s teeth. He pointed out that dentists would profit more if fluoride was removed from the water.
Brad Webb, 1120 Superior, Apt B, noted that in 1992, the New Jersey Department of Health Studies demonstrated that osteosarcoma rates are higher among males in fluoridated regions and bone defects were detected in fluoridated water in Newborough, New York with Newborough being the home of the first human health fluoridation experiment conducted in 1945. Over 7,000 environmental and public health professionals called for a moratorium on fluoridation programs across the country and asked that EPA recognize that fluoride imposes a serious risk of cancer in humans.
Jay Mock, 248 Flume Creek, Sandpoint, questioned whether science was ever settled. He commented that Socrates was not a wise man because of what he knew but what he didn’t know. He stated if the city council of Sandpoint would allow the citizens to chose for themselves how much fluoride they receive, they would be wise.
Art Webb, 1804 W. Poplar, stated he has been on the city’s water system for 40 years and encouraged council to do research on the internet which demonstrates overwhelming evidence that the city should not use fluoride at all. He said there has been negative input with little research on the benefits. He urged council to weigh in on both sides with the need to do more research before a decision was made.
Bryce Powell stated that he conducted research with very little evidence that fluoride taken through water is beneficial and there was considerable knowledge that the consumption of fluoride in water is harmful. He said there is evidence that fluoride in water doesn’t decrease tooth decay. He noted the vast majority of Western Europe has rejected water fluoridation and tooth decay rates are just as low as or lower than those rates in the United States. He raised concern that his young son has a white chalk film on his teeth and has been advised that it’s flourocis which is a sign of toxic exposure to fluoride where he obtained this through the city’s water system. He stated evidence does not support the continued fluoridation within the city.
Tom Dillin, 311 St. Clair Ave., opposed fluoride in the city’s water. His main concern was the mass medication of the entire population was a bad idea. He urged council to respect individual freedom, freedom of choice, and urged council to vote to eliminate fluoride from the city’s water. He said if the vote fails, council should send this matter out for public vote.
Mary Baenen stated that she presented a petition with over 1000 signatures to the Public Works Committee and noted that some of the people signed the petition twice but that it demonstrated there were a significant amount of people who want pure safe drinking water without fluoride. She said she was a representative of North Idaho Citizens for Safe Drinking Water which is affiliated with the National Citizens for Safe Drinking Water. She noted that when crops are watered with fluoridated water, it boosts fluoride in food even higher. She said the nature of fluoride is different from chlorine as fluoride does not dissipate when water is boiled. She said since people are consuming too much fluoride by too many sources, fluoridation is not required by law, and was not voted by the people, the North Idaho Citizens for Safe Drinking Water asks city council to stop adding fluoride to the city’s water system.
Harold Hilton, 300 McGhee Rd., Sandpoint, stressed that fluoride (sodium fluorosilicate) had been added to the city’s water without the approval of the citizenry. He said since city council has been informed at previous meetings of the potential dangers of mass fluoridation of the population through city water treatment, each city council member is risking personal liability for any harm that came to any citizen as a result of drinking fluoride in the city’s water. He noted the warning on toothpaste reads “Warning: Keep out of the reach of children under 6 years of age. If you accidentally swallow more than used for brushing, seek professional help or call a poison control center immediately.” He said the same warning does not exist on unfluoridated toothpaste. He referred to Councilwoman Logan’s comment that scientific evidence and information provided by citizens at the last council meeting was antidotal. He said many left the meeting with the impression that several of the council members were non-responsive to the citizen’s plea for safe drinking water. He demanded that city council allow the health professionals to provide the fluoride and urged the city to eliminate fluoride from the city’s water system.
Rob Harrison, D.D.S., 530 S. Florence, stated he is a dentist and supports fluoride in the water. He said in Europe they use a different method of providing fluoride. He reported fluoride is most efficient and is a safe way to provide to those who don’t get regular dental care. He noted there is a natural amount of fluoride in the water and asked whether those who oppose want to filter all the fluoride out or to leave the fluoride at the level in its natural state. He maintained fluoridation in the municipal water system is a benefit to the community and supported it wholeheartedly.
Rick Ballard, D.D.S., 501 Creekside Lane, noted the American Dental Association represents 155,500 dentists who support fluoridation with their expertise behind the research. He said the American Dental Association is not in the business to harm people. He urged council to look at the literature that’s available.
Brigitte Gerlach, 311 St. Clair Ave, felt fluoride was an industrial toxic waste. She said if she wanted fluoride, she can obtain it from her dentist or from the use of
toothpaste. She liked the freedom to choose what she wanted to drink.
Rose Chaney announced that she has lived in Sandpoint for 50 years. She said she has been involved in the dental profession and has witnessed the tremendous improvement for dental health in the children in Sandpoint after fluoridation was added to the city’s water. She noted there are 50% of the children in Sandpoint who never see a dentist and felt it was important that the city continue using this public health measure in the city’s water supply.
Toby McNeal stated there was reputable information on both sides of the issue. He said there are clear indications that there are adverse health effects of fluoride in the water. He suspected when fluoride was started, there were no other valid options to provide fluoride treatment but that dental hygiene has changed with many other resources to obtain fluoride. He stated that removing fluoride from water is extremely difficult and is costly to remove. He felt council would be setting a precedent and urged them to give people the choice of safe clean water.
Allen Banks stated he has a PhD in chemistry and has had 40 years experience in biological and chemical research with emphasis on pharmaceutical development and cancer treatment. He reported through his studies of water fluoridation, that fluoride added to water is harmful for most people and is classified as a pharmaceutical. He referred to testimony from the dentists this evening, that there is a benefit in small children but that small children are not the only people who drink the water. He stated pharmaceuticals should be used for individual treatment only, not for mass treatment. He pointed out there were over 70 scientific articles that demonstrate the harmful effects of fluoride in drinking water. He stated there was a statement from a Nobel Prize winner in medicine, opposition to fluoride by 1500 scientists of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, and a scientific survey he conducted himself. He distributed this documentation which was provided to the city clerk for the record. He noted those who live in Bonner County are also impacted by fluoride in the city’s water. He stressed that children should not be medicated without parental consent.
Matt D. Hathaway stressed that the people should have the right to make their own decisions on how they medically treat themselves. He said he contacted the District Attorney’s office but had not received a response to find out what class the “drug” falls under and whether the State provides the right for the city to mass drug the entire population. He stated he recently received a prescription from his dentist for his daughter with a warning that if she consumed a specific amount of fluoride, she would become ill.
Phil Gervais, D.D.S stated he has been a dentist for 29 years in Sandpoint and supported fluoridation of the city water. He said his father was a dentist in a small town in Minnesota which did not have fluoride but added fluoride later with his father witnessing the evidence that fluoride improved dental care in his young patients. He noted that dentists appear to be the only ones who support fluoride this evening but that there was a lot of research, studies and journals over the last 29 years supporting the safety of fluoride. He appreciated the concern of those who opposed fluoride but was in favor of retaining fluoride in the city’s water.
Nikki Salfeld opposed fluoride and didn’t trust all scientific information as its constantly changing. She didn’t think fluoride should be in the water system. She stressed that parents should take the responsibility for their children and that different drugs have a different effect on different people.
Pierre Bordenave, 813 McGhee Rd., stated that he owned an environmental service business in Sandpoint for 26 years. He asked why the city did not make an effort to remove the chemical complex Di Hydrogen Monoxide or DHMO from its water. He noted that drinking large quantities of DHMO can cause serious sometimes fatal electrolyte imbalance and can be fatal if inhaled. In solid form, it can cause tissue damage in a half hour of exposure and is the primary constituent of acid rain. Researchers found nearly 90% of people were willing to sign a petition to ban this universal solvent in the United States. He stressed that DHMO will never be removed from our water supply because it is our water supply. The other chemical name for Di Hydrogen Monoxide is H2O. He stressed to council that it was their responsibility to make decisions and not shirk that responsibility by saying the council was not intelligent or informed enough so you should leave it up to “the people to decide.” He said the people did decide by voting for them and that for the past 55 years, 99% of Sandpoint has not taken issue with this matter. He asked how the AMA, ADA, CDC, EPA, FDA, and the American Academy of Sciences are all in a huge conspiracy to poison the water when not a single legitimate scientific analysis comes to that conclusion. He said the FDA does not define nor regulate fluoride as a drug because it’s not a drug or medication. He reported you would need 800% more fluoride to exceed the EPA limits and even that would not be defined as toxic. He stressed if a person drank 800% more distilled water than recommended in a day, it would be fatal. The real conspiracy would be if dentists said not to use fluoride because it would increase their business. He urged council to table this issue and leave it tabled for another 55 years or until there was some reason for not reducing cavities and dental disease in our children. He said let’s not create a future where we subject ourselves to the joke of saying the best way to compliment a young child in Sandpoint was by saying “nice tooth.”
Clay Russell, 602 S. Third Ave, requested a deferral on the requirement to install a sidewalk at his home. He noted South Third Avenue is five blocks long where only a block and a half has a sidewalk and it is unusable. He said a 50 foot long sidewalk in front of his home would be a sidewalk to nowhere ending at his neighbor’s driveway. He felt it would be more dangerous for children to walk on the 50 feet of sidewalk rather than darting back into the street to the public beach. He pointed out there have been children traveling in the street for years with never an incident. He said it would make no common sense to spend $6,000 to install the sidewalk to nowhere. He pointed out that city council granted Litehouse a deferral even though the ordinance doesn’t allow deferrals for commercial property. He requested a deferral to build his sidewalk until the property owners on Third Ave and Pacific Street are required to install their sidewalk. He agreed to participate in a LID when and if it occurred.
Jim Parsons, Jr. 301 Iberian Way, #229, opposed the city taking over the Lakeview Cemetery. He urged city council to take more time to review what it would cost the city.
Duane Kock, 719 N. Division, requested city council to remove the parking restrictions on the west side of Division. He didn’t understand why the city would eliminate 150 spaces to accommodate those few who ride bicycles. He pointed out he received notice in the mail the day the city painted the bicycle lane.
Steve Navarre spoke regarding the Safe Routes to School Project on Michigan Street. He noted that the street along his business is very narrow and would be a dangerous place to install a sidewalk on his side of Michigan Street due to traffic congestion. He did not oppose providing the means for the children to travel to school safely but that he would have limited parking and snow storage at his business in the winter months. He noted he has been plowing the snow for this whole section in the street for the last 20 years because he didn’t want the city to move the snow onto his property where it would be difficult to have access to his business. He asked council to take this under consideration when this item was discussed later this evening.
Mayor Hellar read comments from Kathy Leone, Eveline Leucht, and Elissa Wadds who opposed fluoride and a comment from Janis McClelland who approved fluoride.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Hellar requested confirmation of the reappointment of Karen Bowers to the Arts Commission, reappointment of Dave Reseska to the Bicycle Advisory Committee, and reappointment of Bruce Vogelsinger to the Historic Preservation Commission. She also requested confirmation of the appointment of Kathleen Hyde, Molly McCahon, and Aaron Qualls to the Planning and Zoning Commission. She stated that items removed from the consent calendar would be heard after Item U on this evening’s agenda. She said that any committee appointments removed from the consent calendar would be discussed before Old Business.
Councilwoman Newton requested to remove Item A-2, Planning Commission minutes held August 4, 2009. Councilman Reuter requested to remove Item C-1, Planning and Zoning Commission Appointments for Kathleen Hyde, Molly McCahon and Aaron Qualls.
Councilman Snedden moved that items A-1, A-3 through B, and Items C-2 through F-4 be approved. Councilman O’Hara seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by a roll call vote of council.
A. MINUTES
A-1 City Council regular minutes of August 19, 2009 and special and workshop minutes of August 27, 2009;
A-2 Planning Commission minutes of August 4, 2009 – removed from consent
A-3 Historic Preservation Commission minutes of August 18, 2009;
A-4 Pedestrian Advisory Committee minutes of July 21, 2009;
A-5 Urban Renewal Board minutes of August 11, 2009 and August 19, 2009
B Bills for the month of August 2009 in the amount of $1,092,835.69, $648,157.97 which is for accounts payable and $444,677.72 for payroll and benefits
C-1 Planning and Zoning Commission – Kathleen Hyde to a three-year term expiring January 1, 2012; Molly McCahon to a three-year term expiring January 1, 2012 and Aaron Qualls to complete a three-year term expiring January 1, 2010 – removed from consent
C-2 Arts Commission – Karen Bowers to a three-year term expiring March 31, 2012.
C-3 Bicycle Advisory Committee – Dave Reseska to a three-year term expiring February 28, 2012.
C-4 Historic Preservation Commission – Bruce Vogelsinger to a three-year term expiring May 31, 2012.
D PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE SEPTEMBER 2, 2009
D-1 Residential Carpentry Fee Deferral for 1213 Honeysuckle – deferral of building permit fee, plan check fee, water NUFFs, sewer NUFFs, water hookup deposit and impact fees until the house sells and closes
D-2 Sandpoint West Athletic Club Sewer Credit – grant sewer credit two years and utilities department track for three months
E ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE SEPTEMBER 9, 2009 MINUTES
E-1 Insurance Coverage for Terrorism Acts – decline offer of additional terrorism coverage
F RESOLUTIONS
F-1 Resolution No. 09-54 Agreement for the Disposal of Wastewater Sludge
F-2 Resolution No. 09-55 Bald Mountain Sonneland Transmitter Site Lease Renewal
F-3 Resolution No. 09-56 Bald Mountain Avista Transmitter Site Lease Renewal
F-4 Resolution No. 09-57 Community Hall Users Policy Revision
C-1 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS
Kathleen Hyde was asked why she was willing to serve on the Planning and Zoning Commission. She responded that she had attended council meetings with support of city council decisions. She said she had experience working downtown and represented businesses downtown which was an added benefit for the commission. She noted that she resided in Sandpoint for 26 years, her grandfather homesteaded in Sandpoint and she had a passion for Sandpoint. She felt that by being on the commission would be a responsibility where she could become more involved in the community. Councilwoman Newton noted that she is fully supportive of Ms. Hyde’s appointment but suggested that the mayor had made an unintended exaggeration in her memo recommending Ms. Hyde when she said that Ms. Hyde “has probably attended more city meetings than any of us.” Councilwoman Newton noted that in 3 years and 8 months on the council she has personally attended 202 regular or special council meetings, council workshops and council committee meetings and that Ms. Hyde had attended only a few of these.
Councilwoman Logan moved that city council approve the appointment of Kathleen Hyde to a three-year term expiring January 1, 2012. Councilman Reuter seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by council.
Molly McCahon stated that she was raised in Sandpoint, wanted to raise her children in Sandpoint and wanted to be involved in future Sandpoint decisions. She noted that she graduated as a landscape architect and wanted to provide her expertise to the commission. She confirmed that she has read the current comprehensive plan but acknowledged that she needed to update her knowledge with city codes. She said she would represent the area of city of impact on the Planning and Zoning Commission. She said she appreciates the rural quality of life and believes in not expanding the current infrastructure and wants to preserve open space.
Councilwoman Logan moved that city council approve the appointment of Molly McCahon to a three-year term expiring January 1, 2012. Councilman Snedden seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by council.
Aaron Qualls said he would like to serve on the Planning and Zoning Commission as he shares concerns with those who have lived here their entire life as well as those who are new in town. He said he would like to see Sandpoint grow intelligentally and to meet the goals and objectives of the plan. He felt he could bring a lot to the commission. He confirmed that he read the comprehensive plan but is still reviewing city code pertaining to planning and zoning issues.
Councilwoman Logan moved that city council approve the appointment of Aaron Qualls complete a three-year term expiring January 1, 2012. Councilman O’Hara seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by council.
Councilwoman Logan suggested that based on the beginning of code development from the comprehensive plan, it would be a benefit to schedule a joint workshop between the Planning and Zoning Commission and city council to review the intent and the creation of the comprehensive plan. Councilman Snedden suggested that the Planning Director provide notice to the city council so they could attend the training that would be provided to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Councilman Reuter felt there should be training on the comprehensive plan so city council can share their insight on the document.
OLD BUSINESS
G GILLET PROPERTY ACQUISITION
This item was removed from the agenda as the agreement was consistent with what was already approved by council. City Attorney Will Herrington confirmed there were no changes to city council’s prior approval of this property acquisition.
NEW BUSINESS
H. PROPOSED FEE SCHEDULE – PUBLIC HEARING
Mayor Hellar announced that the purpose of this public hearing was to hear public testimony regarding establishing new fees or proposed fees increases more than 5%. The revised fees are for Community Hall Rental, new fees for park events, and new and revised fees for false alarms for both police and fire departments. In accordance with Idaho Code, notice of this public hearing has been published in the Bonner County Daily Bee on September 2 and 9, 2009.
The mayor advised that the hearing would be conducted in compliance with the
following rules of procedure: Before persons testify at public hearings, they are to fill
out the signup sheet available at the front of council chambers and hand deliver to staff. If you desire, you may note your objection or approval on the form provided; if you wish
to comment during the public hearing, please come to the microphone and state your name and residence address for the record; if you do not wish to comment but have written comment that reflects your opposition or support, please provide to the city clerk and she can read your letter into the record; please limit your comments to no more than three minutes; testimony shall directly address the subject at hand and shall not be personally derogatory nor shall it be personally directed at any individual, organization or business; members of the council may ask questions of persons who testify. If they do so, it will be only for the purpose of clarifying information; once the public hearing portion of this meeting is closed, there will be no further opportunity for public input on the proposal; the council will then discuss among themselves the testimony they have heard and what, if anything, they may propose as a result of this hearing; those testifying should clearly indicate their name and address for the clerk.
The mayor opened the public hearing to accept testimony. No one testified.
Mayor Hellar closed the public hearing.
Councilwoman Newton clarified that the third false alarms and those beyond three the proposed charges are for each in order to encourage people to fix their alarm systems.
Councilwoman Logan moved to accept the proposed fee schedule. Councilman Snedden seconded the motion.
Councilman Reuter moved to amend the fee for Community Hall Rental for non-profit (with proof of 501 C-3 free, open to the public) back to its current fee of $10.00 per hour. Councilwoman Logan seconded the motion. Councilman O’Hara didn’t feel this was an onerous amount of money to use the facility. He said it made sense to react to the current economic times and if the city will hold back fees for non-profit organizations, they are not the only ones who are hurting during the economy. He felt if this was the case, that the city should not allow any of the fees to increase. Councilwoman Newton concurred. The motion passed by a majority of council with Council members Newton and O’Hara dissenting.
Councilman Reuter moved to set all the fees under Public Safety to what they were last year with the exception of false alarms for first and second responses. He said if there was no fee, then it would be eliminated. No one seconded the motion. Motion failed.
The motion to accept the proposed fee schedule passed by a majority of council with Councilman Reuter dissenting.
H-2. RESOLUTION NO. 09-58 ADOPTION OF REVISED FEES FOR COMMUNITY HALL RENTAL, REVISED FEES FOR MOORAGE SLIPS, REVISED AND NEW FEES FOR PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES
Councilwoman Logan moved that the proposed resolution, “Adoption of Revised Fees for Community Hall Rental, Revised and New Fees for Public Safety Services” be approved. Councilman Boge seconded the motion.
Councilman Reuter moved that all moorage slips be set at last year’s rates. No one seconded the motion. Motion failed.
Councilwoman Newton suggested separating the fees because the city attorney advised at a prior meeting that those council members who had a moorage slip should not vote on moorage slip fees. City Attorney Will Herrington concurred.
The motion passed by a majority roll call vote of council with Council member Reuter dissenting.
Councilman Reuter moved to amend to reduce Laser Deck fee to the previous year’s price. Councilwoman Logan seconded the motion. Councilman Reuter pointed out it would be difficult to increase the fee where the city can’t rent at its current price. Councilwoman Newton noted that for a five month season, there would only be an increase of $1.00 per month for the slips. Councilwoman Logan commented that for non-city residents there would be an increase of $6.00. The motion passed by a majority of council with Councilwoman Newton dissenting and Council members Boge, Snedden, and O’Hara abstaining.
Councilwoman Logan moved to approve the remainder of the revised moorage fees. Councilwoman Newton seconded the motion. The motion passed by a majority of council with Councilman Reuter dissenting and Council members Boge, Snedden and O’Hara abstaining.
I. FLUORIDE IN DRINKING WATER
Councilman Reuter noted that the Public Works Committee recommended that full council discuss three options: whether to make a decision not to add fluoride, make a decision to have an advisory vote, or table discussion and make no changes. He said his preference was to send this matter to an advisory vote. Mayor Hellar stated the citizens have the right to conduct an initiative process outlined in Idaho and City Codes.
Councilwoman Newton referred to comments during earlier testimony that there were 1,000 signatures supporting the removal of fluoride. She said she received a photocopy of the 20 page document provided to the city clerk which had approximately 538 signatures on the 20 pages, not 1,000. She noted only 145 of the signatures are of persons who reside within the city. She referred to Title I, Chapter 8 of city code which provides the creation of the right of people to enact ordinances through initiative and the right to repeal an ordinance through a referendum process. She said to repeal by referendum, there must be a petition submitted to the city clerk with the signatures of legal voters of the city, equal to at least 20% of the total number of electors who cast votes in the last general election in the city. She said there were 1,550 voters which would require 310 signatures but according to code the referendum needs to be filed with the city clerk not less than 60 days following the final adoption of the ordinance. She noted the ordinance introducing fluoride in the city’s water was adopted in 1951 with the 60 day deadline passed and was amended in 1991 to reduce fluoride where the 60 day deadline has also passed. She read from an e-mail she received from Rose Chaney stating that over 50 years ago, her first husband, Dr. Snedden introduced the benefits of adding fluoride to the city water supply and the city did consider the matter on March 5, 1951. The city council and public works department announced the date fluoridation of the city’s water supply would begin. On that date several protesters became extremely ill—vomiting, nausea, rashes, headaches, loss of consortium, etc. There was a delay in the installation of the equipment and no fluoride had been added to the water. By the time equipment was installed and fluoride was added to the water, the agitators of that day had lost their credibility.
Councilwoman Newton said she has received several phone calls, visits, and e-mails on this issue. She received a plea from Jack Parker that the city keep fluoride in the water as he witnessed a difference in the benefit of having fluoride in the water for his family. She said the time has passed that this ordinance can be repealed by a public process and that legally advisory vote carries no weight as a basis for a city council decision. She pointed out that the most recent advisory votes have been taken for the bypass and building heights. Many years ago the council placed about 20 items on an advisory ballot concerning how the city should spend their money. The vote of the citizens had little impact on the city council’s decision when adopting the city’s budget. She felt council had enough information to form an opinion and should make a decision. She believed there was a personal choice not to drink, cook, or bathe in the water as there were numerable other water resources. She said the ultimate choice would be not to live in an area where they fluoridate water. She said her choice is to put weight on scientists, particularly local health professionals. She believed that no motion on this matter was necessary if council wishes to continue to fluoridate the water.
Councilman Reuter was bothered by the suggestions that it was problematic sending a decision to the people as a vote. He said a majority of the citizens want to fluoridate the water but if there was an advisory vote, he would follow the vote of the people.
Councilman O’Hara said he would weigh the concerns of people having the ability to not have fluoride in their water and deferred to the referendum and initiative process in city code. He appreciated comments from dentists, background and medical research but questioned whether it was the right thing to do or if the city council are the right people to put fluoride in the water system.
Councilwoman Logan believed the information available was supportive of fluoridation of the water supply and was supportive of not taking action so that the city can continue fluoridating the water.
Councilman Snedden felt research was broad and the experts’ opinions differed. He said prior testimony didn’t settle the issue and erred on the side of caution. He noted that both his father and grandfather were dentists and appreciated his grandfather’s effort to bring fluoride into the water in Sandpoint but supported removing fluoride this evening. He said he would like to see an advisory vote with more dialogue.
Councilman Boge praised Sandpoint’s good water and agreed with the dentists’ testimony this evening. He referred to Ms. Ekstrom’s earlier testimony that fluoride was free but that a prescription was needed from a dentist. He stated that over time things do change as there were other options in obtaining fluoride. He referred to Ms. Salfeld’s earlier testimony that it should be parental responsibility but that city council needed to decide on this issue tonight. He felt the city should remove the fluoride so that parents can take the responsibility for their children.
Councilman Reuter moved that city council hold an advisory vote regarding the continuation of fluoride in Sandpoint’s water and language for the ballot to be drafted by city staff. Councilman Snedden seconded the motion. Councilman Boge pointed out that city council didn’t follow the vote of the people based on the results of the water bond election last spring. Councilman O’Hara concurred. The motion failed by roll call vote with Council members Boge, Logan, O’Hara and Newton dissenting.
Councilman O’Hara moved to remove fluoride from the city’s water. Councilman Boge seconded the motion. Councilman Boge suggested if the motion passed, that the dental professionals be proactive in making sure those children that don’t get dental care are provided fluoride. Council members Boge, Snedden and O’Hara voted yes. Council members Logan, Reuter and Newton voted no. Mayor Hellar voted not to remove fluoride. Motion failed. She suggested those who wanted to remove fluoride should follow the referendum process to put the matter to a vote of the people.
J. CLAYTON RUSSELL 602 SOUTH THIRD SIDEWALK DEFERRAL
Councilman Reuter noted that a majority of the Public Works Committee recommended granting a sidewalk deferral until adjacent properties were required to installed sidewalks with him dissenting. He explained city code allows the Public Works Director to grant a deferral for one year. Right of Way Inspector Bruce Robertson stated there have been two previous occasions when this request was brought forward to city council. He said the first instance was where the property owner was required to install the sidewalk and the second time the decision was deferred until the streetscape was rewritten. He noted city staff enforced the ordinance after it was adopted. Councilman Boge pointed out the Russell’s were here this evening to request a deferral and agreed that they would participate in a LID when it occurs as the requirement currently puts them in financial constraints.
Councilman Reuter moved to grant a deferral of one year allowed under city code at the discretion of the Public Works Director. Councilman Snedden seconded the motion. Mayor Hellar commented that it was the city attorney’s and her view that if city council granted the deferral, council will be violating city code and that she has concerns. She pointed out the deferral for Litehouse was because they were remodeling but that the Russell’s situation was new construction. She urged city council to take this under consideration.
Councilwoman Newton pointed out the proposed Sidewalk Agreement asked for an indefinite deferral but that the motion would change the agreement. She referred to Item P on this evening’s agenda where there was a comment that in order for the city to come under budget to improve Pine Street, the city was deleting the requirement to install a sidewalk on the south side of Pine in front of Alpine retirement home and in front of the school’s baseball field at a cost of approximately $34,000. She stressed this would result in a sidewalk not being placed in front of a public sports facility and on a route to the most utilized park in the city. She pointed out the city didn’t install a sidewalk along the route to the Washington Elementary School when they resurfaced the street. Mr. Herrington noted that the city is not required to install sidewalks at their cost where sidewalks do not exist. He said traditionally sidewalks have been the responsibility of adjacent property owners in Sandpoint. He explained when sidewalks are constructed at the public expense, they usually are supported by grant money. Councilwoman Newton asked why the city didn’t require the property owner to install the sidewalk. She felt this was duplicitous. Public Works Director Kody Van Dyk explained to Councilman O’Hara the scope of work on Erie Street along Washington Elementary was for a sewer replacement project and the scope of work didn’t include the requirement to install sidewalks on both sides but that the school installed a sidewalk for one-half block. He explained a sidewalk at the Russell’s would be required to be installed after the one year deferral. If the property owner didn’t install the sidewalk, the city would install and would bill the property owner but that the owner would not be fined.
Councilman Boge moved to amend that the deferral be for three years. No one seconded the motion. Motion failed.
The motion to grant a deferral of one year at the direction of the Public Works Director failed by roll call vote with Council members Boge, Logan, O’Hara and Newton dissenting.
Councilwoman Newton moved that city council approve the proposed Sidewalk Agreement with deferral of the sidewalk requirement until at such time adjacent property owners are required to install sidewalks. Councilwoman Logan seconded the motion. Councilman O’Hara raised concern that this will force children and those who use a wheelchair into the street. He felt city council should amend the ordinance to allow no sidewalks. He said if there was going to be an effort to provide safe non-motorized transportation corridor, it should require something outside curb to curb. He believed it was in the city’s interest in terms of providing safe transportation to any citizen in the city to have sidewalks and the requirement if it exists in city code, shouldn’t be deferred. He stressed that he would expect himself and any other city citizen to bear the burden for safer streetscape. Councilman Snedden commented Litehouse submitted their request prior to the adoption of the ordinance. He pointed out the city council granted a deferral for the Russell’s until the new streetscape ordinance was adopted. He said based on consistency, the Russell’s should be required to install their sidewalks. He felt sidewalks to nowhere are somewhat beneficial.
Councilman Boge felt there should be consistency but felt it was difficult due to obstructions in the right of way. He raised concern that the city would force its residents to install sidewalks but that the city doesn’t install sidewalks. He said the city needed to find ways to fund sidewalks if sidewalks were a priority. He felt it beneficial to hold a workshop for council to list their priorities. He commented there was unwillingness for staff to work with city residents which brought on the problem. Mayor Hellar pointed out that city employees were simply enforcing the ordinance.
Council members Boge, Newton and Logan voted yes. Council members Snedden, Reuter and O’Hara voted no. Mayor Hellar voted no. Motion failed.
K. STEVE NAVARRE 1111 MICHIGAN SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL DISCUSSION
Councilman Reuter moved that Item K, Steve Navarre 1111 Michigan Safe Routes to School Discussion and Item L, Michigan Safe Routes to School Bids and Contract Award be considered together as it was the intent of the Public Works Committee. Councilman O’Hara seconded the motion for point of discussion. Councilwoman
Newton disagreed and felt they were two separate items. Councilman Boge asked that the council follow the agenda. The motion failed with Council members Boge, Snedden, Logan, O’Hara and Newton dissenting.
Councilwoman Newton moved to follow the recommendation of the Public Works Committee to exclude the sidewalk on the south side of Michigan Street between South Ella Street and Olive Avenue in the Safe Routes to School project. Councilwoman Logan seconded the motion. Councilman Boge stated the business owner has requested that he be allowed to install the sidewalk immediately next to the curb. He urged city staff to work with property owners and businesses. Public Works Director Kody Van Dyk explained the original plans sent out for bid showed a sidewalk along south side of Michigan but that the sidewalks would be installed against the curb on the side where vehicles are parked but not adjacent to the auto repair business.
The motion failed with Council members Boge, Snedden, Logan, O’Hara and Reuter dissenting.
Councilman Boge moved that the sidewalk on the south side of Michigan Street be included in the Safe Routes to School project but that the sidewalk is installed the full length of the property owner’s property against the curb. Councilman O’Hara seconded the motion. Right of Way Inspector Bruce Robertson explained that the sidewalk would be moved out to the curb to provide parking for the business owner and to make a safer sidewalk particularly on the two eastern bays extended to the property line. He said having the sidewalk along those two doors was not prudent. Councilwoman Newton raised concern that to the west, a healthy tree was removed and that the sidewalk jogged around the stump. Mr. Van Dyk explained the reason the tree was removed was to accommodate the installation of a power pole and street light to make crossing the intersection of US Highway 2 safer. There was a roll call vote with Council members Boge, Newton and Logan voting yes. Council members Snedden, Reuter and O’Hara voting no. Mayor Hellar voted yes. Motion passed.
L. MICHIGAN SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL BIDS AND CONTRACT AWARD
Councilman Reuter moved to approve the acceptance of the base bid in the amount of $130,375.00 from Earthworks to build the Michigan Street project with the exception of the amended sidewalk to be moved to the curb at 1111 Michigan Street. Councilwoman Logan seconded the motion for discussion. City Treasurer Shannon Syth clarified the $20,000 was the city’s match and the grant was in the amount of $100,000. Right of Way Inspector Bruce Robertson explained the scope of work was from Division to US Highway 2, south side of Michigan Street and from US Highway 2 to Boyer Avenue on both sides of Michigan Street in order to have an accessible route. He explained the re-bid would have a cost savings of $10,000 only if the scope of work was reduced. City Treasurer Shannon Syth explained the Pine Street re-build was still budgeted for next year and that the city would need to come up with another $10,000 next year. The motion passed by a majority of city council with Councilwoman Newton dissenting.
M. NON-MOTORIZED MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORTATION IN THE DOWNTOWN CORE
Councilman Reuter explained that multi-modal transportation includes skateboards, unicycles and tricycles used by the disabled. He stressed that this still would not allow multi-modal transportation on the sidewalks with the exception of pedestrians.
Councilman Reuter moved that an amended ordinance be drafted to allow all non-motorized multi-modal transportation to travel on the streets within the downtown core. Councilman Boge seconded the motion.
Police Chief Mark Lockwood referred to Idaho State Code 49-714 which provides that every person operating a vehicle propelled by human power or riding a bicycle shall have all of the rights and all of the duties applicable to the driver of any other vehicle under the provisions of chapters 6 and 8 and that every operator or rider of a bicycle or human-powered vehicle shall exercise due care. He raised concern with issues of enforcement that these types of transportation can be complicated. He stressed that bicycles and all other human-powered vehicles must travel with the flow of traffic and that signals and rules of the road must apply according to Idaho Code. He suggested the Pedestrian Advisory Committee and Bicycle Advisory Committee be involved and questioned what input the downtown merchants would have on this issue. He wasn’t aware of any other cities that allow non-motorized multi-modal transportation. Councilman Reuter pointed out it’s difficult for human-powered vehicles to have access to City Beach legally, for example.
Councilwoman Newton referred to the ordinance that was adopted May 1988 when city council could see traffic was increasing and wanted to make the streets safer. She felt it would be problematic to allow skateboards among the congested traffic within the downtown.
Councilman Reuter recognized the current traffic situation in town but that it was not consistent with the comprehensive plan. He said it wasn’t acceptable that bicycles were the only human powered means of transportation to travel on the streets and raised concern that skateboards were only attached to young people. Councilman Boge said this would be an issue to set people up for failure as it wouldn’t be clear as to the boundaries of downtown. He said it also came down to parental responsibility and the key was the specific time of day when non-motorized transportation would be used. He said the city should be willing to give this a try as it was mentioned in the comprehensive plan to allow multi-modal transportation. He supported the police chief enforcing the ordinance because people need to follow the law. Councilman O’Hara said he enjoyed the ability to have other means of transportation downtown but that people needed to be educated properly. He felt the bigger issue was having prohibition of bicycles and other modes of transportation on the sidewalks within the downtown core for children. Chief Lockwood said he has received complaints this summer from merchants regarding near incidents with skateboards on the sidewalks. Councilman Boge hoped if this proposal would pass, that there would be education so that people would have respect for others. Councilwoman Logan commented that downtown is a “wild west” and has witnessed near accidents between vehicles, skateboards and bicycles this summer. She was uncomfortable with the proposal but felt an educational component should be required. The motion passed by a majority of council with Council members Newton and Logan dissenting.
N. RESOLUTION NO. 09-59 DOCK STREET IMPROVEMENTS
Public Works Director Kody Van Dyk said the maximum amount for the project is $32,631.50. He said if there was a change in the scope of services, the price would come back to city council.
Councilwoman Newton moved to amend to add to the WHEREAS “for a fee not to exceed $32,631.50” and that the proposed resolution, “Dock Street Improvements” be approved as amended. Councilman Snedden seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by a roll call vote of council.
O. ORDINANCE NO. 1220 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE
The city clerk read the proposed ordinance by title only. Councilman Boge moved that the proposed ordinance titled “An ordinance of the City of Sandpoint, a municipal corporation of the State of Idaho, providing amendments to the City of Sandpoint’s adopted version of the 2006 version of the International Building Code; providing that security may be required before a temporary certificate of occupancy is issued; providing for severability; repealing conflicting ordinances and providing an effective date” pass its first reading and, if applicable, the summary be approved. Councilwoman Logan seconded the motion. Planning Director Jeremy Grimm said this ordinance would provide the tools to ensure compliance with future commercial development. City Attorney Will Herrington explained city staff would require this at the time a temporary occupancy permit was awarded.
A roll call vote of the council resulted as follows:
Councilman Boge Yes
Councilman Snedden Yes
Councilwoman Logan Yes
Councilman O’Hara Yes
Councilman Reuter Yes
Councilwoman Newton Yes
The motion passed by a unanimous vote of the council and the proposed ordinance passed its first reading by title only and, if applicable, summary was approved.
Councilman Snedden 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. Councilwoman Logan seconded the motion. A roll call vote of the council resulted as follows:
Councilwoman Newton Yes
Councilman Snedden Yes
Councilwoman Logan Yes
Councilman Reuter Yes
Councilman Boge Yes
Councilman O’Hara Yes
The motion passed by a unanimous 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 1220.
P. PINE STREET PROJECT CONTRACT AWARD
Councilman Snedden moved that the bids be rejected and that the project be re-bid. Councilman Boge seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by council.
Q. 726 NORTH BOYER AVENUE – LARCH STREET HOUSE REMOVAL
Councilman Snedden moved that city council approve to advertise for removal of the house on the property recently purchased by the city at 726 N. Boyer where a roundabout will be installed. Councilwoman Logan seconded the motion. Councilwoman Newton suggested offering the home to Habitat for Humanity. Councilwoman Logan stated this was also her intent but that the city attorney felt in order to facilitate the process, the property first had to be advertized for sale for removal with the city having the option of accepting or rejecting the bid. City Attorney Will Herrington advised that the home needs to be declared surplus and advertised for sale to be moved. He felt if no bids were received, this matter could be brought back to city council next month with other options that would allow Habitat of Humanity to
salvage what they needed. The motion passed unanimously by council.
R. STREETSCAPE ORDINANCE 1159 DEFERRAL FEE
Councilman Reuter moved to set a deferral fee at a maximum fee of $100 for public hearing to be scheduled at next month’s regular city council meeting. Councilwoman Logan seconded the motion. Councilwoman Newton suggested setting all fees for public hearing as a group instead. Councilman Reuter felt it made sense to have this particular fee adopted sooner. City Attorney Will Herrington stated that it would be a one-time fee.
Councilwoman Newton moved to amend to set the fee as a one-time deferral fee in the amount of $100. Councilman O’Hara seconded the motion. The motion passed by a majority of council with Council members Snedden and Reuter dissenting.
The main motion to set the deferral fee at a maximum fee of $100 passed unanimously by council.
S. STEWARDSHIP OF LAKEVIEW CEMETERY
This matter was removed from the agenda.
T. ORDINANCE AND SUMMARY NO. 1221 – FLOOD PLAIN ORDINANCE REVISION
Councilwoman Newton pointed out that Building Official Don Carter had been corresponding with the State of Idaho regarding the new flood plain ordinance which the state requires be adopted by November 16, 2009. It was explained that the revisions provided in the ordinance were the recommendations from Barbara McEvoy of the Idaho Department of Water Resources following the Inkom, Idaho ordinance which is the only one adopted thus far in the state.
The city clerk read the proposed ordinance by title only. Councilman Snedden moved that the proposed ordinance titled “An ordinance of the City of Sandpoint, Bonner County, Idaho, establishing a flood damage prevention ordinance and findings of fact to establish purposes and objectives and methods of reducing flood losses; providing penalties, providing that a violation of this ordinance shall be a misdemeanor punishable by thirty days in jail, a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000.00), or both such fine and jail time, providing that these provisions shall be deemed severable; providing for publication and an effective date” pass its first reading as amended by the Idaho Department of Water Resources and, if applicable, the summary be approved.
Councilman O’Hara seconded the motion.
Planning Director Jeremy Grimm explained to Councilwoman Logan that this ordinance relates to the people’s ability to insure their property from the threat against catastrophic flood and will be implemented toward any new construction. Councilwoman Newton commented that Mr. Carter has used the flood plain ordinance three times in 30 years.
A roll call vote of the council resulted as follows:
Councilman Boge Yes
Councilman O’Hara Yes
Councilwoman Logan Yes
Councilman Reuter Yes
Councilwoman Newton Yes
Councilman Snedden Yes
The motion passed unanimously by council and the proposed ordinance passed its first reading by title only and, if applicable, summary was approved.
Councilman Snedden 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 Yes
Councilman Boge Yes
The motion passed unanimously by 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 1221.
U. FIRE DEPARTMENT PROPOSED USER FEES
Councilwoman Newton pointed out the proposed fees were discussed at length during the Administrative Committee meeting regarding what the city should or should not bill for. She said the only items the Administrative Committee proposed for discussion by city council are structure fires outside the city limits when requested through mutual aid agreements, all responses for hazardous material, hazardous conditions, pipeline break and air craft and marine response. Councilman Snedden noted that he dissented on the proposal. Councilman Boge asked if there was consideration of medical responses outside the city limits. Councilman Snedden explained he had concern with adopting the proposed fees as it would be based on who can afford it and disagreed with the philosophy. He raised concern that there should be general consistency and that the city wouldn’t be considering medical responses. Councilman Reuter’s greatest concern was creating a revenue source.
Fire Chief Robert Tyler said the revenue would be utilized for capital expenditures because his department has a lack of revenue. He said his department needs a sustainable funding source for responses. Councilwoman Logan’s concern was that future city councils may allow the funds to be used for other basic operating expenses. She suggested that it should be structured so that it was always dedicated for capital improvement purposes. Councilman Snedden appreciated the chief’s effort to find funding for capital improvements. City Attorney Will Herrington advised that the proposed fees be set for a public hearing first, then staff would provide a proposed ordinance if the fees were adopted.
Councilwoman Newton moved that the proposed fees as provided with the three conditions for billing be set for public hearing at next month’s regular city council meeting. Councilwoman Logan seconded the motion. She said the city should consider medical calls outside the city. Chief Tyler said those type of responses occur very rarely. Councilman Boge pointed out this would open up the “barn door”. Council members Newton, Logan and O’Hara voted yes. Council members Boge, Snedden and Reuter voted no. Mayor Hellar voted yes. Motion passed.
A-2 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 4, 2009
Councilwoman Newton said she fully realizes that council only acknowledges the Planning Commission minutes but was concerned about the process followed by the Planning Commission for the planned unit development for Cedars at Sand Creek as reflected in the minutes of their August 4, 2009 meeting. She felt there were substantial changes brought to the Planning Commission based on the city council’s review of the planning unit development on May 16, 2007, September 5, 2007, and January 16, 2008. She stated she reviewed this matter recently with the Planning Director and he agreed that if this needs to be amended, council should review. Councilwoman Logan expressed her dissatisfaction on how the process was utilized.
Councilman Reuter asked for unanimous consent from council to suspend the rules to allow discussion of the issue brought forward. Councilman Boge seconded the motion.
Mayor Hellar left the meeting at 9:27 p.m.
Planning Director Jeremy Grimm explained that city council approved both a subdivision and the planned unit development on June 2006. He said the planned unit development was essentially the right of the applicant to develop as multi-family lots.
Mayor Hellar returned to the meeting at 9:29 p.m.
Mr. Grimm continued that subsequently the developer requested before the Planning Commission that the planned unit development be allowed to be considered as ten unit cottage condominiums. He said city staff and the Planning Commission utilized the provisions of Title 10, Chapter 3, Section 10-10-3-M that provides that the Planning and Zoning Commission have the authority to determine the modification of a final development plan and revisions can be considered if not in conflict of the public interest. He noted the planned unit development approved by city council was revised twice. He said the applicant moved forward with Planning and Zoning recommendations. He replied to Councilwoman Newton that Mr. Gillham modified the plans and expressed surprise that his modifications were not accepted by staff but was forwarded to the Planning Commission which they felt was in the public’s interest and wasn’t significant enough to call for a public hearing.
Councilwoman Newton moved that city council acknowledge the Planning and Zoning Commission minutes of August 4, 2009. Councilwoman Logan seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by council.
V. EXECUTIVE SESSION IDAHO CODE 67-2345(1)(c) – TO ACQUIRE AN INTEREST IN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS NOT OWNED BY A PUBLIC AGENCY
This matter placed on the agenda by Councilwoman Logan was withdrawn from the agenda by her.
ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:35 p.m.
Gretchen A. Hellar, Mayor
ATTEST: Maree Peck, City Clerk
