COMMISSIONERS MINUTES                                        OCTOBER 31, 2005

 

The Elmore County Commissioners met in regular session on the above date in the basement of the Courthouse, 150 South 4^th East Street, Mountain Home, Idaho.

 

Present at the meeting were Chairman Larry Rose and Commissioners Connie Cruser and Mary Egusquiza.   Also present at the meeting was Clerk Gail Best.

 

Motion by Rose, second by Cruser, to go into Executive Session pursuant to I.C. 67-2345(b).

ROSE - AYE

EGUSQUIZA - AYE

CRUSER        - AYE     Motion carried and so ordered.

 

There was no action taken as result of the Executive Session.

 

Reyes Lopez, of Rolling Stone, Inc., and Bonnie Sharp appeared before the Board to discuss two separate Letters of Information (LOI’s) for Mr. Lopez.  Mr. Lopez stated that he is willing to follow any regulations that are in place for him to be able to complete his project.  The Mountain Home Rural Fire District does not currently have a list of what they want, and the Fire District also stated that they believe Mr. Lopez is developing a subdivision of five lots or more.  Mr. Lopez stated he did tell them he has applied for two separate four lot splits not a subdivision Mr. Lopez stated he will be doing the two four lot splits at the same time, but the Fire District still feels it is a subdivision.  There was general discussion on the issue.  Motion by Rose, second by Cruser to approve the Tax 21 LOI and Tax 22 LOI for Rolling Stone, Inc. with the stipulation that current regulations of the Mountain Home Rural Fire District are followed.

ROSE - AYE

EGUSQUIZA - AYE

CRUSER        - AYE     Motion carried and so ordered.

 

Motion by Egusquiza, second by Cruser, to approve the Eisenman LOI also known as Michael Eisenman and Juniper Farms with the following conditions: that the property is located within four miles of the Orchard Training Range and so the CC&R’s include a statement regarding all hazards associated with being close to the range property, such as dust, flares, and both daytime and nighttime firing.

ROSE - AYE

EGUSQUIZA - AYE

CRUSER        - AYE     Motion carried and so ordered.

 

Motion by Egusquiza, second by Rose, to approve the minutes of October 11, 13, and 17^th, 2005.  There was discussion and the minutes were approved with three minor changes.

ROSE - AYE

EGUSQUIZA - AYE

CRUSER        - AYE     Motion carried and so ordered.

 

Motion by Rose, second by Egusquiza, to recess for lunch.

ROSE - AYE

EGUSQUIZA - AYE

CRUSER        - AYE     Motion carried and so ordered.

 

The Board reconvened after lunch with all three Commissioners, the Clerk and Prosecutor Schindele present.

 

A public hearing was called to order at the hour of 1:30 p.m.  The purpose of the public hearing was to hear testimony on an appeal of an application from Rick Taylor for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for an auto/repair/restoration shop, sales and storage classified under the Junkyard/Wrecking Yard Ordinance in an Agricultural A Zone.  The site is located in the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 30, Township 1 South, Range 5 East, B.M.  A more common means of locating this site is from Simco Road and Desert Wind Road (Old Highway 30), proceed south on Desert Wind Road approximately 3 miles, property located on the west side.

 

Chairman Rose explained the rules, including the order and time limit for citizens wishing to give testimony.  The appeal to the CUP is being brought by Soles Rest Creek Homeowner’s Association.  Chairman Rose asked if the group had a spokesperson, and was told that Cathy Reichert was the spokesperson for the group.  Chairman Rose stated that she would be allocated additional time if she was speaking for the group in general.

 

Bob Ruth turned in a packet from the Sole’s Rest Homeowner’s Association to be considered by the Board.

 

Cathy Reichert, 15279 Soles Rest Creek Road, was the first to speak on behalf of the Homeowner’s Association.   Ms. Reichert read her statement from prepared text:

 

Mr. Chairman and members of the commission:

 

My name is Cathy Reichert, I live at 15279 Soles Rest Creek Road, Oasis that is in the Soles Rest Creek Development.  I was asked by our homeowners association to speak today on the appeal of the Conditional Use Permit, Exhibit 7, granted to Rick Taylor.  Our recently developed Soles Rest Creek community, consisting of approximately 35 home sites, and the Red Baron Estates Air Park, consisting of approximately 37 home sites with air strip and hanger access are directly adjoining this proposed junk yard and will be greatly affected by its construction.

 

There is growing concern of ours that a business such as this will be an eye-sore in our community and will not only negatively impact the future growth of new homes in our neighborhood but also the value of our existing homes.

 

We have submitted the 2004 Comprehensive Growth and Development Plan, Draft #5 as Exhibit 3.  The county has spent a great deal of time and money developing this plan and allowing construction of a junkyard near a residential area runs counter to its theme.  We would like to site some specific language from the plan.

 

1.                  Chap 1 Private Property Rights, Objective 7 - “Property owners shall not use their property in a manner that negatively impacts upon the surrounding neighbors or neighborhoods. 

2.                  Chap 1 Private Property Rights, Objective 10 - “Property owners acknowledge and expect that Elmore County will preserve private property rights and values by enforcing regulations that will ensure against incompatible and detrimental neighboring land uses.”

3.                  Chap 5 Land Use, Light Industrial/Manufacturing, Land use Objective 15 - “Evaluate all development proposals in terms of land use and environmental compatibility.  Discourage development proposals, which negatively impact land use patterns and negatively impact the human and natural environment.”

 

According to Mr. Taylor’s application for his Conditional Use Permit we understand that he views this area as just an obscure piece of desert on the outlying edge of the county.  However, its location and accessibility to I-84 have made it a huge draw to Boise residents, which will provide Elmore County the opportunity to generate thousands of tax dollars through positive growth and development.

 

Allowing this junkyard into our community raises many concerns for our neighborhood.  These concerns include the potential increase in fire danger, additional traffic and noise, loss of property values and the hazardous waste that must be monitored and contained.  While we realize that the conditions attached to the granting of this use permit address some of these concerns, practical history shows that county enforcement is weak at best and we question whether adequate resources are available to monitor these conditions.

 

Then, of course, is the aesthetic aspect of the junkyard.  Mr. Taylor is proposing as many as 125 broken down vehicles to be contained within his wrecking yard with a 10-foot metal fence surrounding the compound.  There will also be storage of tires, fuels, batteries and other hazardous materials associated with wrecking yards.  While the conditions of the use permit do address containment for large spills with a dike or berm, there is no provision for the smaller spills and leaks that occur on a day-to-day basis, which may allow contamination of the soil and potentially the ground water.

 

Mr. Taylor’s application and his previous statements all indicate that he is away from subdivisions and has no close neighbors, which is misleading.  According to the audio record of the meeting he also stated that his closest neighbors were file miles toward Boise and eight miles toward Tipanuk.  We would like to show you the layout of the land and properties surrounding Rick Taylor’s proposed junkyard.  In reality, this property is located less than one mile from our homes.

 

The map, Exhibit 5, shows the proposed junkyard’s location in relation to Soles Rest Creek and the Red Baron Estates Air Park, both of which Mr. Taylor omitted in his diagram attached to his request for the Conditional Use Permit.  We in Soles Rest Creek take pride in our properties by maintaining them in such a way to add to the beauty and value of the surroundings.  Exhibit 6 shows photographs of some of the homes in Soles Rest Creek, one of them being my own.  I want to be able to bring family and friends in from the airport with pride, not only in my new home but pride in its surroundings.  I don’t want to take an alternative route in order to avoid a bad first impression because of a junkyard so close to the entrance to the development in which I live.

 

The residents of the community of Soles Rest Creek over the last 3 years have strived to develop our area into an attractive country setting providing a quality lifestyle in a pleasant environment and to discourage any negative growth.  This commitment was demonstrated by the overwhelming turnout at last year’s Planning and Zoning meeting concerning the realignment of the county zoning.  We feel that allowing this business in this location would undo all that we as a community have strived to accomplish and lead to deterioration in the area.

 

A junkyard will not only degrade the scenery in Oasis, it will lower or property values.  This is a big concern for my neighbors and myself as seen in the petition, Exhibit 2, which represents the overwhelming majority of the land and homeowners in Soles Rest Creek.  Per the 2004 Elmore County Comprehensive Plan, Elmore County will “discourage development proposals which negatively impact the human and natural environment”.  The plan also stated that Oasis is designed for a “small community/family atmosphere”.  I am a mother, but I think a lawyer may define a junkyard as an “attractive nuisance”, a hazardous area that inherently attracts children.  I do not want to raise my children near a junkyard and it definitely does not represent a small/family community atmosphere.  I have lived from Florida to Alaska, my husband and I have chosen to retire from the military here in Oasis, Idaho.  We like having the open spaces of sagebrush and grassland but still having neighbors close enough to get to know well.  As a representative of a Homeowners Association, a property owner and more importantly a mother I ask you not to allow a junkyard in our community.

 

R. Monte MacConnell, Robert Ruth, Rick Sebring, Ken Casper, Bud Prmbroke, and Dean Reichert all chose not to testify since Cathy Reichert had spoken for them.

 

Spike Ericson, 15000 Soles Rest Creek Road stated he is on the Homeowner’s Association Board and also has several properties in that particular area, one of which he resides on and some he is holding for investment purposes.  Mr. Ericson stated he is really concerned about a junkyard negatively influencing property values and their investments.  Mr. Ericson added that he wanted to say that all these people are friends and there is nothing personal in this appeal process.  Mr. Ericson added that the members of the Homeowner’s Association would welcome Mr. Taylor as a neighbor living there, but not as a junkyard.

 

Judy O’Dell, 910 W. Orchard, Nampa, Idaho 83651 stated she is the wife of Mr. Taylor and a property owner and was the first to speak in favor of his application.  Ms. O’Dell read her statement into the record:

 

The Soles Rest Creek Homeowners Association appealed the Conditional Use Permit issued to Rick Taylor.  I would like to address the issues brought up in that appeal.

 

Issue #1: “A junk yard is not compatible with our rural residential neighborhood.”

·                    It is my understanding that Soles Rest subdivision is not zoned residential, but Ag  A, which allows a subdivision to exist with a CUP.

·                    Mr. Taylor did not purchase land within the subdivision to move his business.

·                    The area that Elmore Planning and Zoning was required to notify was 1/4 mile.  Soles Rest Creek subdivision’s closest boundary to the Taylor property is 1 mile.  I fail to see how Mr. Taylor’s property is part of their neighborhood.

·                    The property under appeal is located between US Highway 30 and Interstate 84.  Property in such a location is commonly more business property than residential property.

·                    Mr. Taylor’s property is also zoned Ag A, and in accordance with Elmore County Zoning and Development Ordinance, a business such as Mr. Taylor’s can exist there, with a CUP.

(Source: Zoning and Development Ordinance Article IV-1 Establishment and Purpose of Districts)

 

Issue #2: “This junk yard will present a scenic degradation, a fire hazard, and will incur loss of property value for the residents of Oasis.”        

·                    At the planning and zoning meetings to obtain the CUP in question, these issues were addressed.  Although Soles Rest is outside of the required notification area, residents of that subdivision were in attendance and were granted the right to address the Planning and Zoning Board.  The members of the P & Z committee specifically asked those that attended the meetings what Mr. Taylor could do to compromise.

·                    Mr. Taylor volunteered to put up a 10 foot fence around his storage yard, thereby eliminating a ‘scenic degradation’.

·                    Mr. Taylor has agreed to establish and maintain a fire barrier according to current BLM standards.

·                    Mr. Taylor also agreed to allow Elmore County Growth & Development Dept. to inspect his property semi-annually to verify that all DEQ standards are being met and that he will remain in compliance at all times.

·                    Mr. Taylor’s current business location is in a zoned residential neighborhood and his neighbors have not been able to enjoy any loss of property taxes, because it’s based on property value.

 

Issue #3: “Per the 2004 Elmore County Comp Plan, Oasis is designated for a ‘small community/family atmosphere’.”

·                    Don’t small communities have businesses?

                        ·          Mr. Taylor’s shop is a one man operation; doesn’t that fit into the small community category?

 

Issue #4: “The plan directs that ‘light industrial...must be planned so it will not degrade the present quality of life’ and that Elmore County will ‘discourage development proposals which negatively impact land use patterns and negatively impact the human and natural environment.’”

·                    The Soles Rest Creek Homeowners want to keep their planned community a “rural residential neighborhood”, and I believe in their right to so choose.  Since Mr. Taylor’s business in this small community would be located one mile from their RURAL RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD,    Elmore County Planning and Zoning did NOT make a mistake by granting his CUP.  According to the Findings of Fact, Mr. Taylor and his business met all the required criteria and was granted the CUP under the Elmore County Zoning and Development Ordinance Chapter 1, Article XIV, Section C. 14-1 and Idaho Code 67-6512.

 

Mr. Taylor’s Conditional Use Permit was effective September 6, 2005.  I believe this process has dragged on long enough.  In closing, I would like to point out that there has been no violation of any laws or ordinances by Planning and Zoning or Mr. Taylor, and I ask that his CUP be upheld and Mr. Taylor be allowed to get on with his plans.

 

Judy O’Dell, wife of Mr. Taylor & Property owner.

 

Barbara Jameson, 1500 N. Bluff Street, Boise, Idaho, 83706, stated her property is closer to Mr. Taylor’s property than the Soles Rest Creek Subdivision.  Ms. Jameson stated her land is between Highway 30 and the Interstate.  Ms. Jameson stated she has no objection to Mr. Taylor having an auto repair in that area, it will be open during daytime hours so it should not disturb anyone.  The contents on the shop will be metal, much less likely to burn in a fire situation.  Ms. Jameson stated an auto body shop is fine with her, there is a lot worse businesses that could go in like a porn shop, smoke shop, or a house of ill repute.

 

Rick Taylor, 910 W. Orchard, Nampa, Idaho 83651, stated that the property is between Highway 30 and the Interstate and he sees the property as multi-use, a good location for retirement purposes to run a new business and reside there.  Mr. Taylor stated there are no close neighbors except a few across the street and he had spoken to those people and they had no objection.  Mr. Taylor stated he had submitted everything that he was asked to provide by the Growth and Development Department.  Mr. Taylor stated that he is requesting that his business plan and home be approved with conditions.

 

Barbara Hennis, 1615 W. Blaine, Nampa, Idaho, 83651, stated that she had a brother who had a wrecking yard in Oregon, and her husband had a wrecking yard located at their home and that neither had any conflict with neighbors at all during any of the time they conducted those businesses.  Mrs. Hennis stated she had no objection at all and she does have property in the area in question.

 

Frank Hennis, 1615 W. Blaine, Nampa, Idaho, 83651, stated that he had been a government worker for many years and feels this proposed business would be a great benefit to the area.  Mr. Hennis added that having a place to get rid of unwanted items would be a good thing for the area.  Mr. Hennis said he would like to have Mr. Taylor out there, and he is right across the street.

 

Dan Hennis, 1811 Merv Landing Drive, Oasis, Idaho, 83647, stated he understood the proposed business was an auto body shop and not a junkyard.  Mr. Hennis said he had no problem with Mr. Taylor locating there.

 

Mary Kay Jenks, 20806 Ditto Creek Road, Oasis, Idaho, 83647, stated she was in favor of commercial development in the area and she was excited to have Mr. Taylor out there as a business owner.  Ms. Jenks stated she drives past the property daily and has no objections.  Mr. Jenks also stated that currently the residents have a twenty minute drive to receive health care, and that she would eventually like to put in a health care facility out there.  Ms. Jenks stated that Mrs. Grimmett who had to leave before she could testify stated that she, her husband, and her Mother-in-law all were in favor of Mr. Taylor receiving his conditional use for the business on his property.  Ms. Jenks added that she thought business should be encouraged out in that area.

 

Cathy Reichert was asked if she had any rebuttal to the testimony in favor of Mr. Taylor’s CUP?  Ms. Reichert stated that they respect Rick Taylor’s rights, the Association does not oppose Mr. Taylor’s auto shop but they do oppose the wrecking/junkyard, even with a ten foot fence around it.  Ms. Reichert stated she is not opposed to commercial ventures in the area, a convenience store would be really nice or a small diner.

 

Rick Taylor stated he doesn’t necessarily like the idea of a ten foot fence either, but he was willing to install it if it helped the neighbors feel better.  Commissioner Cruser asked what kind of fence he was going to put up?  Mr. Taylor stated it would be chain link with roofing material around it to obstruct the view of the contents inside the fence.

 

Bonnie Sharp of Growth and Development stated that Mr. Taylor’s application indicated that there would be 125 vehicles in inventory.  Mr. Taylor replied that he has mostly Volkswagens to repair.  Mr. Taylor stated he has never had a citation issued against him and that he has more than 110% contained in his present operation in Nampa.

 

Rick Sebring, 19834 N. Cairns Place, Oasis, Idaho, 83647, stated that while the Association appreciate Mr. Taylor’s efforts to do all these things to cooperate with the feelings of the neighbors they still do not feel that they want a junkyard/wrecking yard on his property.

 

Robert Ruth, 19550 Del Norte Place, Oasis, Idaho, 83647, stated that Idaho Waste Systems was mentioned and that is a very controlled area as far as seepage, and has specialty equipment, but a smaller operation does not have these controls.  Mr. Ruth stated it has been stated that the CUP will be reviewed annually but he is wondering who on the local level will enforce those conditions?  Mr. Ruth asked if the State checks on businesses on a regular basis?

 

Written testimony for the hearing was submitted by Bruce & Regina Ewell, Reta Brown, Florencio and Cally Velasquez, Daniel and Tamara Hennis, Chairman Rose stated the Board would hold the hearing open for written testimony in response to the written testimony received but not read aloud at the hearing only until 5:00 p.m. on November 14, 2005.  The public hearing was closed.

 

During the public portion of the meeting a group of citizens appeared to discuss the proposed Pine/Featherville Fire District.  The Prosecutor explained to the group that the Board followed Idaho statute by duly accepting the petition that was presented to them, holding a public hearing, and based their decision upon that public hearing, to order an election for citizens to vote on the proposed district in an election to be held on November 8, 2005.  Prosecutor Schindele also explained to the group assembled that it was too late for the Board to overturn the Order for the election.

 

Della Harris, 1331 Pine Creek Road stated she believed the Board was planning that a fire district would be formed even prior to a petition being submitted to them.  Ms. Harris stated as early as July there is a record in the minutes about the City offering a fire truck for the new district and so she believes the Board pushed for the proposed district all along.  Ms. Harris stated that Commissioner Cruser had asked her what she thought about forming a fire district long before the petition was submitted.  Ms. Harris asked how anyone could be expected to even know about the hearing?  Prosecutor Schindele stated the statute requires publication in the official newspaper of the County, which is the Mountain Home News, and that publication of Notice of Hearing was done.  Ms. Harris stated “what about those of us that don’t take the Mountain Home News.?  Clerk Best asked what else Ms. Harris thought the Board should do?  Ms. Harris stated that more notice should be given and that people don’t take the paper because they do not receive mail daily there, and the news is old before they receive the paper.  Ms. Harris also stated that the Board should have held several hearings not just one.  Ms. Harris added that she did attend the hearing but felt the Board discouraged testimony unless people had made up their mind to approve it or oppose the district and people thought they would have another opportunity to voice their opinion, not have the election rushed through.  Ms. Harris ended her comment by saying that the Board had not given any consideration to the big problems of water availability and snow conditions.

 

Gary Earle stated he has a place at 348 Pine Meadows Circle and he resides in Twin Falls.  Mr. Earle stated he has been a fire fighter for many years and he knows that there is no such thing as a fire truck that can put out a fire, people put out fires.  Mr. Earle stated this whole process has been rushed through.  Mr.  Earle stated that none of the questions have been answered that people have asked and that a feasibility study should have been done prior to this whole issue of a fire district got started.  Mr. Earle expressed his anger that all the people who own property in the area can not vote in the election, only the voters of the precinct.  Mr. Earle accused the Board of not doing any research prior to ordering the election because they did not look into water availability, where the truck would be parked, the costs to the taxpayer, who would be on the Board and many other issues.  Prosecutor Schindele stated that it is not up to the Board to research this material, but to follow the statute set out in Idaho Code.  Clerk Best added that it is up to voters to express what they want by voting for or against the District.  Mr. Earle again expressed his discontent that he could not vote and urged the Board to halt the election.  Mr. Earle ended by saying the Board’s job is to see where the taxpayer’s money is used.

 

Vicky Hasselbring, 454 Pine Meadows Circle, stated that she felt it was not right for twenty-five people to turn in a petition for this district when it effected so many taxpayers.

 

Ken Black, 1021 Old Stage Drive, stated he felt that more hearings should have been held.  Mr. Black stated that the people wanting the district formed could not answer any of the questions he asked, they just keep saying the district needed to be formed.

 

Ramona Yrazabal, 1685 East 6^th South, Mountain Home, asked if people could petition to have their property exempted out from the district?  Prosecutor Schindele stated they could, once the district was formed, and that she would research the procedure.  Ms. Yrazabal stated she does get the paper, but somehow missed the notice of hearing about this district.

 

Jetta Graybeal, 4206 North Jetta Drive stated that Larry Barrett is going around telling residents that a fire district will mean that the Mountain Home Highway District will plow out the roads during the winter and she fears people will believe that and vote the district in.  She said “that really isn’t true is it?”  Ms. Graybeal stated she is a mile from the blacktop and she has always had to take care of the plowing of her place on her own - in fact she did it herself for many years.  Ms. Graybeal also stated that many of the residents will be moving out and then the ones left will be left to pay the bills.  Mr. Graybeal stated that people did not even know what they were signing when they signed the petition and in fact, now some of them have even changed their minds and are no longer in favor of the fire district.  Ms. Graybeal stated that another thing wrong is that some people should not even be voting in this election, like Preston Lord who she saw on the list because he doesn’t live in that strip between Pine and Featherville.

 

Marlene McCoy, 4498 N. Nita Drive stated that there needed to be more notification of hearings.  Ms. McCoy stated that she heard there was a notice posted at the Senior Center, but that there are residents who won’t go to the center.  Ms. McCoy asked why there weren’t other notices posted?  Clerk Best asked if there were any business people here who would be willing to post meeting notices if they were sent?  Jetta Graybeal stated she would be willing to take them to the businesses if the Clerk sent them to her.  Clerk Best stated that had crossed her mind, but she had gone with what was required in the statute instead.  Clerk Best indicated she would be willing to do so in the future.  Ms. McCoy stated if some of the people that signed the Petition have changed their minds, why can’t we stop the election for that reason now?  Prosecutor Schindele stated the election could not be stopped at this point.  Ms. McCoy stated she was at the hearing that was held but did not speak because they were told that to speak the had to sign up yes or no and she was just there to listen, which was also why she did not ask questions.  Ms. McCoy stated she could tell by his questions that Ken Black was not for the district, didn’t the Board notice that?  Ms. McCoy stated that the Board thought the residents were for the district but she could tell that at least three people were not.  Ms. McCoy stated it would have helped if they could have asked questions afterward.  Clerk Best stated that at the end Chairman Rose asked if anyone had any questions or anything further to say.  Commissioner Egusquiza confirmed he did.  Ms. McCoy stated she didn’t hear that.

 

Ray Brun, 739 Lester Creek in Pine, thanked the Commissioners, Gail Best, and the Prosecutor for listening to them today.  Mr. Brun stated that he had just voted today and he had to vote yes or no with his hands tied behind his back because he was uninformed, with unanswered questions.  Mr. Brun asked if it was fair to ask people to vote when they do not have any information on the issue they are being asked to vote on.  Mr. Brun stated that we teach our young people to be informed voters, but he is getting to be an old man and had to vote with little information on the issue.  Mr. Brun asked if there was any way to nullify the vote?  The Board said there was not.  Mr. Brun asked if there was a record of this hearing.  Chairman Rose stated it was not a hearing, but a taped record was being kept of the proceedings.  Mr. Brun stated to make a public appeal to Mr. Larry Barrett to call off the election.  Mr. Brun stated he also thought that some people were planning to make a profit from this fire district, and he thought the petition should be withdrawn.  Prosecutor Schindele stated there was no provision in the law to withdraw a petition once it is accepted and the election is ordered.

 

Clerk Best stated that sometimes elections are ordered when not many citizens are for the issue.  She asked if they remembered an elections some years back when they had a cemetery election and only one person voted yes?  Jetta Graybeal stated that the workers put in a twelve hour day for one yes vote.  Clerk Best stated that obviously they didn’t get a cemetery district - and the same thing could happen with this - maybe not so close.

 

Jackie Ellsworth, 470 N. Pine Meadows Circle asked if the district need 2/3 or ½ to be formed?  Prosecutor Schidele stated that a simple majority of 51% was needed to form the district.  Ms. Ellsworth asked why school bonds, which would increase their taxes, needed a 2/3 vote?  Prosecutor Schindele stated that is the way the statute reads and only the State Legislature can change that.

 

Frank Black, 1040 Old Stage Road, stated that he had been on the original committee to form a fire district and the entire thing got started over a myth that some people could not get insurance on their property.  Mr. Black stated that turned out not to be true, it was a myth.  Mr. Black continued to state that the first meeting was held in June and Phil Gridley did a great job laying out the process of forming a fire district for them.  There was one thing that bothered Mr. Black, a State Fire Marshall told them to think big - to go ahead and spend the money to build it large enough to get all they could, like a building large enough to have meetings.  Mr. Black stated he did not like that initial attitude.  Mr. Black stated the committee had lots of questions but they were always told to get the petition done and get the issue on the November ballot and the questions were always put on the back burner.  Mr. Black stated he got disillusioned by the whole thing and quit the committee and that later, Steve Hall quit too.  Mr. Black stated there were not enough young people up there to fight fires and he did not think the issue would go so fast that it would be on a November ballot.  Mr. Black stated he and his wife signed the Petition, but he has changed his mind so they could take their names off now.  Chairman Rose stated he has always had the greatest respect for Mr. Black and when he saw who had signed the Petition he felt they should be allowed to decide for themselves if they wanted to tax themselves for a fire district.  Prosecutor Schindele stated that names could not be removed from the Petition at this point in time.  Mr. Black asked why Preston Lord could vote?  Clerk Best stated he could not, but there are a few areas in Precinct 7 that are included in the boundaries of the proposed district.  This happened because the legal description did not follow the Pine precinct lines but section lines instead so part of Precinct 7 could vote if any qualified voters are in that area.  Jetta will ask people to check the map to see if voters are in the boundaries prior to them voting.  Mr. Black stated that is has been said that the election could not be stopped but he is wondering if at least it could be slowed down?  The Prosecutor stated that even Clerk Best would have preferred February but at this point there is no recourse but to hold the election in November as ordered.

 

Mr. Black asked who drew up the ballot.  Clerk Best stated in the end her office did because Mr. Barrett did not get the ballot language into them on a timely basis - however Mr. Barrett approved the language prior to the ballots going for printing.  Mr. Black asked if the Prosecutor had approved the ballot?  Clerk Best stated that the Prosecutor does not approve ballots.  Mr. Black asked if the election could be called off because Mr. Barrett did not get it in on time?  Clerk Best and the Prosecutor agreed that the election could not be called off for that reason.

 

The Prosecutor again stated that the Board made their decision, on the record, with the testimony given at the public hearing - the only information they had.  Commissioner Cruser added that there were people, like the Kennedy’s, that got up to testify and they had not signed the Petition.  Commissioner Cruser stated the Board thought that the people wanted the district to be voted on, even though a few questions were asked and unanswered.  More general discussion followed.

 

Mr. Earle of Twin Falls stated that when Twin Falls formed a district the levy was set low at first.  Mr. Earle asked who decides the levy amount?  Prosecutor Schindele stated that the Fire District Board will do that.  Mr. Earle stated “you can’t tell me that this Board will have no say - I am sure the Twin Falls Commissioners did”.  Clerk Best stated that would happen only if they were over the maximum levy amount or over budget.  Mr. Earle replied “they don’t even have a budget”.  Clerk Best stated “Of course not, they aren’t even a district yet”.  Mr. Earle replied “So this board has no say?  How the hell can you do something with no budget?”

 

Prosecutor Schindele stated that this session was not getting anywhere - it is too late to do what the group would like and call off the election.  The Prosecutor again stated that the Board had acted in good faith with the information they had from the public hearing and made their decision accordingly, on the record and now it was up to the voters.  Mr. Earle stated his statements were for the next time a proposed district came up.  Mr. Earle told the Board that he wanted them to know what they were doing and said “you guys need to be sure it’s cost effective, that is your job”.  Mr. Earle added that he still did not know how they were supposed to know about hearings.  Prosecutor Schindele stated that if you own land you better find a way to find out about issues that affect it.  She suggested he may have to get the paper.

 

Chairman Rose suggested they could form a phone tree to notify each other.  Clerk Best stated that the public needs to take some responsibility for finding out what is going on.  Mr. Earle stated they were absolutely correct and ended saying “you guys still have the responsibility to see it’s cost effective.”

 

Ken Black asked if the district does go through can the residents present a petition to the Board of Commissioners to disband the district?  Prosecutor Schindele stated there’s a provision in the code for that, you will have to look it up.  Mr. Black asked who could vote on it?   Prosecutor Schindele stated she was not going to give him a complete legal analysis - he would need to look it up.  Prosecutor Schindele stated she could not give him legal advice - she could only advise the Board, but if asked, she could give him copies of the statute.

 

There was more general discussion.  Commissioner Cruser asked if they felt the issue would pass?  Jetta Graybeal said some have done a survey and they think so.  An unidentified person from the audience stated that some are after personal gain to make money from the fire district.  The question was asked if renters could vote but the owners of the property in some cases could not.  The Clerk stated if renters were qualified electors they could vote, but the property owners could always raise the rent if their taxes increased.

 

Chairman Rose asked if anyone else had comment or questions?  Hearing none, Chairman Rose asked if there were any members of the public that were there to talk to the Board about any issue other than the fire district?

 

The Board had general discussion regarding applicants for the opening in the extension office.