COMMISSIONERS MINUTES                                    AUGUST 15, 2006

The Commissioners met in special session on the above date in the Commissioner’s Room, basement of the Elmore County Courthouse, 150 South 4^th East, Mountain Home, Idaho.

The purpose of this special session was to meet with the Atlanta, Mountain Home, and Glenns Ferry Highway Districts. 

Present at the meeting was Chairperson Mary Egusquiza, Commissioners Larry Rose and Connie Cruser.  Also present was Prosecutor Tina Schindele and Deputy Clerk Barbara Steele.

The meeting was called to discuss Ordinance No. 2006-1, which is an Ordinance of Elmore County, Idaho, a Political Subdivision of the State of Idaho, requiring all subdivision developers to plan and construct public roadways in accordance with certain defined standards; requiring all subdivision developers to plan and construct private gravel roadways in accordance with certain defined standards; establishing minimum standards for public roadways; and providing an effective date.

Linda Jensen introduced Dave Wynkoop, Attorney, Boise Idaho, and asked if he could speak as a representative of the three above mentioned highway districts. 

Mr. Wynkoop gave an overview of himself and wanted to thank the Commissioners for Ordinance No. 2006-1 as it addresses private road issues and believes it is a positive step.

Prosecutor Schindele asked if anyone had filed a request for amendment to the Ordinance.  No one had.  Mr. Wynkoop stated he just wanted to talk about it.  Prosecutor Schindele asked where was the public comment when the Board held their public hearing?  Mr. Wynkoop stated he didn’t have an answer, but that the Highway Districts thought it was a draft and was caught by surprise when the Ordinance went into effect.

Mr. Wynkoop spoke regarding the Highway Districts Statutes in Idaho Code that address powers of Highway Districts.  He then reviewed the powers of the Commissioners over highways and   compared the statutes.  He informed the County Commissioners that the Highway Districts overrule the County Commissioners.  He then gave an example from the Idaho Supreme Court on decisions, that reflect Highway Districts have the final say over roads.

Mr. Wynkoop then wanted to know if the Commissioners would entertain suggestions from the Highway Districts to change our Ordinance.

Chairperson Egusquiza asked if the Highway Districts would like to come forward to speak for themselves, Russ Beavers came forward from the Atlanta Highway District and stated it would be a hardship for a developer in Atlanta to meet the standards set forth in the Ordinance because of their location.  Chairperson Egusquiza stated a variance process was available to the developer.  The Highway Districts can make their own decisions on the roads in their areas.

Commissioner Rose asked Mr. Wynkoop if all these codes he referred to applied to private property. 

Mr. Wynkoop stated that Commissioner Rose had an excellent point.  The Counties have a lead role in the planning process itself but with respect to the actual construction standards of the streets that will be dedicated to the public the ultimate authority on the road construction itself clearly belongs to the highway districts.  The Commissioners stated that nobody is questioning that.  Commissioner Rose replied he did not understand what the problem was.  The road is not a public road until a Highway District accepts the road, until then it is a private road and is the Commissioner’s responsibility.  Mr. Wynkoop agreed that up until the point the road is accepted by a Highway District it is private property and a private road.  Commissioner Rose stated that having private roads brought up to Highway District standards was a safety issue.  

Harold Tews from the Glenns Ferry Highway District stated he was upset because their district was not included in the process of adopting the Ordinance.  The Commissioners repeated there was a variance process and that the Highway Districts have control over their own roads.   The Commissioners also stated the notification process was followed.  The variance process was discussed.

Prosecutor Schindele stated the variance process is in the Planning and Zoning Ordinance, and that the intent of this Ordinance was to protect the citizens, roads that are private and have not yet been dedicated for public use will fall under the Ordinance the County adopted.  She also stated no Highway Districts showed up for the public hearing and gave no comment. 

Mr. Wyncoop stated he would like to have the three highway districts come up with suggested amendments to the Ordinance, possibly the variance process. 

Commissioner Rose explained that the County’s requirements were the same as the Highway District’s.  Sooner or later the developer or land owner will want the Highway District to accept the road and the Commissioners are making sure the road will be acceptable. 

Jay Friedley, Attorney for the Mountain Home Highway District, stated they supported the Ordinance.  Wayne Tindall, Mountain Home Highway District, also spoke and questioned the variance procedure.  He also stated that the Highway District has a variance process also.

Prosecutor Schindele stated they would still have to go through the County to get the variance.   Discussion followed about the possibility of adding a variance procedure to the Ordinance  

Mr. Wyncoop spoke and stated that the developer would have to go to the Highway District for a variance and then go to County for a variance.  Why not have one variance process and he suggested some amendments.

Prosecutor Schindele stated they have not seen any written amendments, but would like the Highway District’s to submit them.

Commissioner Rose stated he wanted it said one more time, “The Commissioners don’t have any control over any thing that the Highway District Boards want to do, the Commissioners do not have control over their roads.”

Chairperson Egusquiza stated the reason this Ordinance was adopted was to protect the citizens of Elmore County.  Planning and Zoning struggles continuously with trying to protect the public, along with the fire districts. There were no standards and the Commissioners wanted to have standards to protect everyone. 

Jerry Gorrell appeared before the Board to apologize if everyone thought he was the instigator of all this.  He was in the process of developing a parcel.  He stated they submitted their application for a subdivision four days after the Ordinance was passed.  Three days after our Ordinance was passed the Glenns Ferry Highway District signed off on the plat regarding the roads.  Six weeks after that, a public hearing was held and he stated they were not informed of the Ordinance until then.  He stated a lot of money was spent on engineering fees and it was a hardship for them.  He explained that with these conditions on roads, the density would increase on the subdivisions and if they had to be paved roads it would increase the cost of the lots.  Chairperson Egusquiza asked Bonnie Sharp, Growth and Development Director, how much the variance application cost and she replied $200.00.  Chairperson Egusquiza asked Mr. Gorrell if he didn’t want to pay for the variance.  Mr. Gorrell said he stated he would pay for the variance on the project.  Mr. Gorrell stated that on a Letter of Information the requesting party has to have approval from the Highway Districts.  Mr. Gorrell stated his problem is what constitutes a private road.  Commissioner Rose stated that Mr. Gorrell was the only developer that has come forward and had a problem with this Ordinance.

Bonnie Sharp stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission did apologize to Mr. Gorrell for not informing him about the Ordinance.  At that time, before the Planning and Zoning Commission approved his preliminary plat, they did offer him the option of tabling the matter.   Mr. Gorrell stated he requested that his preliminary plat be approved. 

Chris Alzola, Mountain Home Rural Fire, thinks it is a great ordinance and not having to go through two variance processes would be helpful.

Carl Phares, Mountain Home Highway District, stated that yes it is expensive for the contractors to bring the roads up to Highway District standards, but in ten years the highway districts cannot afford to pave those roads if the developer doesn’t do it in the developing stage.  Taxpayers should not have to pay for what the contractors don’t do.

Mark Noble, 2156 Sailor Creek Road, Glenns Ferry Highway District, stated that in principle they were in favor of the Ordinance.  The circumstances of how it all happened is the problem.  The Glenns Ferry Highway District would have been here had they known about the public hearings.  The reason why this happened was because the communication lines weren’t open.  No variance process was mentioned when Commissioners Rose and Cruser met with the Glenns Ferry Highway District.  They weren’t aware there was a variance process.

Geri Perkins, Atlanta Highway District, didn’t understand the ordinance and apologized for the miscommunication. 

Chairperson Egusquiza thanked the highway districts for coming.  She stated she wasn’t aware that they did not know there was a variance process and that possibly rectifying our Ordinance to reflect a one variance process would be helpful.

Motion by Egusquiza, second by Cruser, to adjourn.

EGUSQUIZA................................................ - AYE

ROSE............................................................ - AYE

CRUSER....................................................... - AYE     Motion carried and so ordered.

/S/ MARY EGUSQUIZA, Chairperson

ATTEST: /S/ MERRILEE HILER, Clerk