Click for the latest Bonners Ferry weather forecast.
Print Version

Home   News   Sports   Social   Obituaries   Events   Letters
Looking Back     Health Jewels    Stitch in Time

County commission minutes, January 28-29
March 2, 2013
***Monday, January 28, 2013, Commissioners met in regular session with Chairman Dan R. Dinning, Commissioner LeAlan L. Pinkerton, Commissioner Walt Kirby, and Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser.

Terry Capurso and Blue Sky Broadcasting Reporter Mike Brown joined the meeting.

9:00 a.m., Road and Bridge Superintendent Jeff Gutshall joined the meeting to give his departmental report. Mr. Gutshall presented a written report. Solid Waste Superintendent Claine Skeen and Clerk Glenda Poston also joined the meeting.

Mr. Gutshall briefly discussed the 2013 Idaho Federal Lands Access Program documents for Meadow Creek Road and Westside Road. Mr. Gutshall said he had hoped the documents would be ready for Commissioners to sign, but he is still waiting on the process. Chairman Dinning said Commissioners would be able to sign these documents since a motion has already been made.

Mr. Gutshall provided Commissioners with two original copies of the State/Local Agreement (Project Development) Project No. A013(419) for Westside Road; Trout Creek Bridges, Key No. 13419. Mr. Gutshall said he has applied for this program and it has recently been awarded. A deposit of $10,000 has to be submitted for administrative expenses incurred by the Idaho Transportation Department. As soon as these documents are signed the consultant selection process can begin. The Local Highway Technical Assistance Council (LHTAC) will ask for engineering firms likely to be considered and will go through the request for proposals (RFP) process. Mr. Gutshall explained this project is for the southern most Trout Creek Bridge, which is the main channel. Chairman Dinning mentioned the square concrete culvert on the north bridge. Mr. Gutshall said he will try to explore three alternatives in the concept, which is standard.

The total project is $ 979,000, which includes $260,000 for project development, $94,000 for construction engineering, and $625,000 for construction itself. Chairman Dinning said he felt this cost was high and Mr. Gutshall added that this is a small bridge. Mr. Gutshall said he would like to put a project together that widens the road between the bridges and addresses the channel. Mr. Gutshall said the county needs to be aware of the new policy that the State will not actively look for additional funds if the project costs run over. Mr. Gutshall explained this project is on Westside Road and it’s the bridge over Trout Creek. Mr. Gutshall spoke of having to do repairs on these types of bridges and the earth is creating rot to the wood structures. Mr. Gutshall said the abutments on the old Forest Service bridges are very shallow and there has been nothing but problems. Farm equipment has had problems crossing these bridges. Mr. Gutshall said the county’s total match for this project is $71,859. This match is paid up front during project development, but the county can then apply for reimbursement.

Those present questioned costs again. Mr. Gutshall said this is currently a single lane bridge proposed to be a double lane bridge. It’s a 42 foot long bridge that will become a 60 to 65 foot bridge. Mr. Gutshall said that same length for the Deep Creek Bridge cost approximately $380,000 to $390,000 so the dollars have inflated.
It was decided to postpone signing the State/Local Agreement until tomorrow morning allowing Commissioners a chance to review.

Mr. Gutshall mentioned how involved Title VI requirements are in his projects. The Title VI requirements need to be in place and to have a Title VI coordinator otherwise ranking for projects decreases.

The Trout Creek Bridge project had been applied for some time ago, according to Mr. Gutshall. Chairman Dinning asked about the ability to reroute traffic during the construction phase in a way that will not disturb the farmers as much as possible.

Mr. Gutshall said his department had to switch to narrow band radios. Boundary County Emergency Services Director Bob Graham was able to get $3,600 in Bureau of Homeland Security grant funds to use for new radios. Mr. Gutshall said he took care of licensing changes a while ago. Mr. Gutshall explained how he had heard Latah County law enforcement talking on their frequency, but Scott Grimmett with Industrial Communications fixed the problem.

Mr. Gutshall talked about providing sand to private contractors. Mr. Gutshall said private contractors such as Frederickson’s Bonners Ferry Garbage and KG & T come to the landfill to pick up sand. Road and Bridge bought a used sand screen deck a few years ago and it’s been working well, but he doesn’t feel comfortable loading the sand for private contractors for various reasons. Mr. Gutshall explained the cost involved with running the screen. Mr. Skeen said since this was brought to his attention he no longer loads this screened sand for these contractors.

It was said the county is not charging for this sand. Mr. Skeen said he uses that screened sand, but the landfill also has a regular sand pile for the public to load. Chairman Dinning asked if there is a private sand company. Commissioner Pinkerton spoke of hauling sand for a commercial enterprise and the matter of reimbursement. Commissioner Pinkerton questioned who would be to blame if the county had an emergency and needed sand, but the sand had been used for someone else to make money off of? Mr. Gutshall questioned if the county could legally sell sand because the county doesn’t sell gravel, etc. Commissioner Pinkerton said the county doesn’t sell fuel either, but is giving it away as they’re loading the sand. Commissioner Kirby questioned if we have a mechanism in order to. Chairman Dinning said when he was growing up, the county was selling culverts, but that doesn’t happen anymore. If the county is supplying materials to someone in trouble, that is good, but to supply someone for free so they can run their business is not good for the county, according to Commissioner Pinkerton. Chairman Dinning said the contractor is most likely charging the school district for the materials.

Clerk Poston asked if BF Redi-Mix sells sand. Mr. Gutshall said sand is sold locally. Clerk Poston asked if the Idaho Transportation Department sells their sand, and Mr. Gutshall said no.

Chairman Dinning said at some point in the future the landfill site will have to be capped and will need the sand. Commissioner Pinkerton said that is getting back to his point. Commissioner Dinning said selling sand would be competing with private industry and he would rather stay out of that arena. Commissioner Pinkerton said it’s supplying material to a personal enterprise. This could undercut BF Redi-Mix for that cost because the private contractor is getting the material for free. Mr. Gutshall said from his standpoint, he is also concerned about loading it. Mr. Gutshall said what if the person gets out of his vehicle and walks behind the truck and gets hurt. Commissioner Pinkerton said the county shouldn’t be doing that and it’s a liability. Chairman Dinning asked about providing notice to these contractors that the county will no longer able to provide sand and materials.

Mr. Gutshall briefly updated Commissioners about providing fill at the turn-bay on Division Street.

The meeting with Mr. Gutshall ended at 9:30 a.m.

Courthouse Maintenance Jerry Kothe joined the meeting to give his departmental report. Mr. Kothe presented a written report. Mr. Kothe said last week was a short week for him. The air conditioner mount for the Clerk’s Office has been installed. Mr. Kothe said he had spent most of the day plowing snow last Thursday at Memorial Hall and the Exhibit Hall.

Chairman Dinning questioned if there is a way to provide better lighting at the fair ground parking lot in the area along the east side of the fair grounds. Mr. Kothe said he has water standing down at the fair grounds and the city is probably chomping at the bit to get the pump working again.

Clerk Poston said Fair Board Secretary Sandy Schnepf is going to take a look at the copy machine that the Extension Office needs to surplus.

Mr. Kothe said he is going to install the water heater tomorrow.

The meeting with Mr. Kothe ended at 9:40 a.m.

9:40 a.m., Commissioner Kirby moved to go into executive session under Idaho Code #67-2345(1) to consider the evaluation, dismissal or disciplining of, or to hear complaints or charges brought against, a public officer, employee, staff member or individual agent, or public school student. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Commissioners voted as follows: Chairman Dinning “aye”, Commissioner Pinkerton “aye”, and Commissioner Kirby “aye”. Motion passed unanimously. 9:45 a.m., Commissioner Kirby moved to go out of executive session. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

Clerk Poston reported that the total Secure Rural Schools (SRS) payments should come in this week.

Clerk Poston and Commissioners discussed available Idaho Association of Counties webinars.

Boundary Volunteer Ambulance Association President Ken Baker joined the meeting at 9:50 a.m.

Commissioners tended to administrative duties.

10:00 a.m., Commissioner Kirby moved to recess as the Board of Boundary County Commissioners and convene as the Governing Board of the Boundary County Ambulance Service District. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

10:20 a.m., Commissioner Kirby moved to adjourn as the Governing Board of the Boundary County Ambulance Service District and reconvene as the Board of County Commissioners. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

Mr. Baker left the meeting at 10:21 a.m.

Deputy Clerk Nancy Ryals joined the meeting at 10:21 a.m.

Mr. Capurso and Mr. Brown left at 10:25 a.m.

10:25 a.m., Commissioner Kirby moved to go into closed session under Idaho Code #31-874. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously. 10:55 a.m., Commissioner Kirby moved to go out of closed session. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

Commissioner Kirby moved to set the monthly reimbursement on indigent accounts 2011-30, 2011-49 and 2012-17 combined at a minimum of $100 per month beginning in February 2013. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

Commissioner Kirby moved to moved to deny indigent cases 2013-5, 2013-6 and 2013-8 and to put indigent case 2013-4 in suspension pending another resource per the Clerk’s recommendation. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

Deputy Clerk Nancy Ryals left the meeting at 11:00 a.m.

Blue Sky Broadcasting Reporter Mike Brown returned to the meeting.

Commissioner Pinkerton moved to deny the request for a Memorandum of Understanding from the Idaho Transportation Department as advised by the County Assessor. Commissioner Kirby second. Motion passed unanimously.

11:02 a.m., Treasurer Jenny Fessler joined the meeting.

Those present discussed the matter of issuing refunds to the property owners whose properties had been annexed by the City of Bonners Ferry in error. Treasurer Fessler said she’s going to make sure her account information balances because originally it didn’t balance. Chairman Dinning said for clarification that not having been able to balance was not due to any error, but due to the computer programming at the State level. Treasurer Fessler said that was correct. Treasurer Fessler said there is just a small amount of funding that hadn’t been turned over for January and she wants to make sure that when the information is sent to the Clerk’s Office the information will be the same.

Treasurer Fessler left the meeting at 11:04 a.m.

Those present updated Mr. Brown on the status of annexation.

11:18 a.m. Commissioners spoke to Lincoln County, Montana, Commissioner Ron Downing via telephone to inquire about information on the Forest Service’s Buckhorn Project and to see if Lincoln County Commissioners support this project. Commissioner Downing said he has not seen the information on this project yet. Commissioner Pinkerton said most of the project is to take place in Lincoln County, Montana so since a majority of this project is in Commissioner Downing’s area, Boundary County Commissioners wondered what Montana’s standing was prior to providing comment of their own. The Buckhorn Project consists of a number of things and is 56,000 acres in total. Commissioner Pinkerton reviewed goals of the project to include regeneration harvest, prescribed burns, and road stabilization.

Commissioner Downing said this project doesn’t sound like something he and the other Lincoln County Commissioners would be against if it creates jobs, etc. Commissioner Downing said he doesn’t know about other two commissioners, but he hasn’t seen the proposal himself.

Chairman Dinning asked Commissioner Downing to write a list of comments for Boundary County. Commissioner Pinkerton reiterated the project is not just a timber sale as it also consists of inventory roadless areas, a burn area, timber areas, wetlands, and wildland urban interface.

The call to Lincoln County, Montana Commissioner Downing ended at 11:20 a.m.

11:24 a.m. There being no further business for the morning session, Commissioners recessed for lunch.

1:30 p.m., Commissioners reconvened for the afternoon session with Chairman Dinning, Commissioner Pinkerton, Commissioner Kirby, and Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser.

1:30 p.m., Commissioners attended a presentation at the County’s Extension Office for the purpose of showcasing the various programs offered by the Extension Office and University of Idaho. The presentation ended at 2:40 p.m.

Commissioners tended to administrative duties.

3:00 p.m., Commissioners held a meeting to continue the discussion on future requirements for the bailiff’s position. Present were: Clerk Glenda Poston, Sheriff Greg Sprungl, Judge Justin Julian, Chief Deputy Clerk Tracie Isaac, and Chief Deputy Sheriff Rich Stephens. Judge John Mitchell participated via telephone.

Judge Mitchell said that Judge Haynes and Trial Court Administrator Karlene Behringer were also notified of this meeting. Ms. Behringer may participate, but she isn’t available as of yet.

Chairman Dinning mentioned that Judge Mitchell should have received Commissioners’ minutes of the prior week’s meeting on this matter. Judge Mitchell said he received Sheriff Sprungl’s letter dated January 17, 2013, Commissioners’ meeting minutes from January 22, 2013, and another document dated January 28, 2013. Judge Mitchell said he had read the Notification of Position Vacancy and the job description for the bailiff’s position. The job description contains an error as there isn’t any post certification for a bailiff and we can’t try to look for someone who has similar credentials or someone who is willing to get that training, according to Judge Mitchell. Judge Mitchell said his bailiffs all go to Peace Officers Standards and Training (POST) certified classes. Judge Mitchell said there are lots of things to do to get an employee not “certified”, but trained in good order.

Ms. Behringer joined the meeting via telephone at 3:05 p.m.

Chairman Dinning said this position has gone to Boundary County’s Personnel Classification Committee and the Committee felt the position’s grade should increase from a grade 12 to grade 13 if basing it off the new job description. Chairman Dinning said the county needs to get going down this road and he doesn’t want to end up not being proactive. There are questions about such things as POST certifications and carrying a gun as this position is also courthouse security. Chairman Dinning said he had talked to Sheriff Sprungl about this, but hadn’t had the opportunity to speak with Judge Julian.

It was asked if the Sheriff could provide staff to fill in as bailiff and have the Clerk’s Office staff work on the jury related work if a job description is not put together by the time the current bailiff retires. Judge Mitchell agreed it’s possible to postpone hiring and to have the Sheriff provide a bailiff and have the Clerk’s Office provide the jury aspect, but he’s not sure if that needs to happen. Chairman Dinning said that was a thought if there wasn’t an agreement on the job description within the timeline available. Other than the reference to POST certification, everything else seems to still be accurate. Judge Mitchell said he’s happy to talk now about any further changes or how to advertise it.

It was said that currently the bailiff, Ron Sukenik by default handles matters involving people on community service and the question is if that should be a function of this position or shift it to somewhere else. Judge Mitchell said he would want to talk to Judge Julian about that, but there isn’t a reason for the next successor to do that.

Judge Julian said on a broader scale, he thinks it would be a tremendous mistake and a huge loss to not have Mr. Sukenik train a replacement with his experience and willingness to train. That training would be invaluable. Judge Julian said maybe Mr. Sukenik could be contracted to provide training if need be, but to have someone new come in and pick it up and go, throws a monkey wrench into the court system. Judge Julian said he’s hesitant to lose that training opportunity.

Ms. Behringer said it’s unclear why it’s necessary to have POST certified listed in the description or is it a request by the Sheriff’s Office. Chairman Dinning said that condition had been in the original description. If the bailiff is an individual in courthouse who carries a fire arm, they need to have some kind of training that will bring them to a level of acceptance in court that proves they can handle it. Commissioners were presented with information on training courses equivalent to POST that Kootenai County has used. Ms. Behringer said there is a course in Montana and Kootenai County really likes this training.

Commissioner Pinkerton said of the concerns that come to mind, as prior law enforcement, he would have concern for a set standard such as use of force and alternative weapons. That’s putting the county, who’s paying this employee, in compromise if there is an adverse situation in the courthouse and this employee is not trained. Commissioner Pinkerton said this issue came up his first morning and these are just things that have come to mind in visiting this issue. Judge Mitchell said those are good questions to raise. It was said whoever is hired unless they are former law enforcement, they aren’t going to be POST certified. If this person is former law enforcement, they probably still need to go to bailiff training. Judge Mitchell said his gut is to continue with the job vacancy notice and the county may end up with someone who has training, but if the county falls short due to not having enough candidates, etc., then patch something together for a limited amount of time such as if Mr. Sukenik is on vacation. No matter who is hired they will need some background training.

Judge Mitchell said he thinks Kootenai County and their bailiff’s office along with Bonner County could help by sharing their information with Boundary County to see what their policies are with use of force, tasers, and weapons, etc., and then Boundary County can draft its own policy.

Sheriff Sprungl said the problem with having just one person is that he and Commissioners won’t write the policies for someone they don’t supervise. This position is a good portion of the Sheriff’s Office and the Sheriff’s staff fills in. Sheriff Sprungl said as an elected sheriff he’s working for the bailiff here.

Ms. Behringer questioned if it would be appropriate if Kootenai County had their bailiff and senior or retired bailiff help when this person was on vacation and she added that something is done similar to this in Bonner County. This would help take stress off the Sheriff’s Office. Sheriff Sprungl said he doesn’t have enough Sheriff’s Office employees as it is. The Sheriff’s Office has been audited as to how many detention deputies are on at one time and that is why the jail doesn’t comply and the county has to look at a higher cost insurance rate. Judge Mitchell said that raises another issue. This job description includes notifications for vacation, etc., and the Sheriff’s Office should be included in that notice in addition to the Clerks’ Office. Judge Julian said a process for requesting vacation time has been developed and they’ve tried to accommodate that, but there could be a better system. Sheriff Sprungl said his office may know that Mr. Sukenik is going on vacation, but it’s not coordinated with him and he may be out of town or there are things going on in the Sheriff’s Office. It was clarified that the Sheriff’s Office has been made aware, but it still may not be a time that works for the Sheriff’s Office.

Chairman Dinning said you can write all kinds of rules and regulations, but it ultimately comes down to the individual and if they comply with communication. In this process of going forward is there the ability to have input from the courts if there is a problem with that employee because they become court employees. The direct oversight is with courts and the county really has no input of day to day with that individual. How can Commissioners structure something to allow open honest communication regarding an individual? What if the person who fills this position doesn’t get along with the Sheriff who is turning inmates over to them? Chairman Dinning asked how that can be foreseen going forward. Judge Mitchell said that should be a part of the job description so that person knows what they’re getting into. The shared employee concept is difficult, but can work very well. Judge Mitchell said Commissioners always have that input as they can let him know directly or inform Judge Julian. Judge Mitchell said the same holds true for Sheriff Sprungl or Clerk Poston. The elected clerk of court is a county employee, but supervised by the district judge. The bailiff is a county employee and is supervised by the administrative judge and just as betrothed to the Justice Supreme Court as the Clerk. Judge Mitchell said if there are problems, Clerk Poston can call Ms. Behringer or him about issues or can also contact Judge Julian to pass along concerns. Judge Mitchell said he wants Judge Julian, Sr. Judge Verby, Judge Buchanan, Judge Heise, Sheriff Sprungl, Commissioners and Clerk Poston to be involved in selection process. Judge Mitchell said Commissioners should never feel there isn’t a mechanism to get concerns to him.

Chairman Dinning said the other question in conversations is that Commissioners have no requirements in place as to background. Ms. Behringer said Kootenai County does background checks through the National Crime Information Center (NCIC), but they don’t administer lie detector tests. Sheriff Sprungl said the bailiff in this county gets the in-custody and walks them to the courthouse and out of his custody. When the bailiff’s job started it was a shared employee and he was deputized, but as time has gone on all sheriffs agreed this position should not be deputized. If this position is turning in-custodies over, he is not adequately trained. The hiring process should be at least equal to the Sheriff’s Office hiring process. Judge Julian voiced the long concern of turning over inmates to the bailiff. That is somewhat unique and no other court security that he knows of leaves the building to get these inmates. The way it usually works is that the Sheriff’s own deputy brings the in-custody to the courtroom and the bailiff supervises from within the courtroom. Judge Julian said maybe that part of the job should be turned over to the Sheriff’s Office as normally the bailiffs supervise within the courtroom only. Ms. Behringer agreed. Judge Julian said he doesn’t know if that is a huge issue with Mr. Sukenik’s job or if the Sheriff wants to do that and it becomes a workforce issue. The courthouse needs that security position eight hours per day, according to Judge Julian.

Sheriff Sprungl said if he’s walking inmates over for court and the walk can take longer than the actual hearing and that has been a concern of his, but that had been fixed by deputizing the bailiff, which is no longer done these days. Judge Mitchell said he doesn’t know if being sworn in is a big issue one way or another. Whether it’s Mr. Sukeniks’ replacement to bring inmates over and back or whether there’s an agreement for the Sheriff’s Office to bring the inmate to the courthouse for a handoff that would be fine by him. Judge Mitchell said what he likes about having a bailiff control the inmate in the courthouse is that it does ratchet down the tension within the inmate as well as ratchets down the tension and anxiety in jurors. Judge Mitchell said the handoff should occur at the jail or in the courthouse. Maybe liability would be less if the handoff occurred somewhere in the courthouse just shy of the courtroom.

Chairman Dinning said at this point of moving forward in the hiring process or interview process, did Judge Mitchell indicate the Clerk, Sheriff, Judge Julian, and a Commissioner would be involved in that process? Judge Mitchell said he would like input from as many people as possible and the same group of people should sit in on all interviews. Judge Mitchell said he would like to have Judge Julian available if his schedule allows and no matter who is on the interview team, he would like it to be consistent. Judge Mitchell said he would like to have the Clerk’s, Sheriff’s and Commissioners’ input as well as someone from the judiciary standpoint. This person could be the deputy on the team, but he still also wants to hear from the deputy’s supervisor as to who they think would be the best candidate.

Sheriff Sprungl spoke of partaking in these interviews and said when hiring someone he usually offers a condition of employment such as the academy, a polygraph test, and background checks and he wondered how extensive of a background check would be done. Ms. Behringer asked what type of background check is given to probation officers and both Clerk Poston and Chief Deputy Clerk Isaac said no background checks are given. The county, through the Idaho Association of Counties (IAC), conducts a civil, identity, criminal background and drug check as well as fingerprinting. Chairman Dinning said the county’s probation officers don’t carry weapons. Sheriff Sprungl asked about polygraphs being given and Mr. Mitchell said he’s not uncomfortable or opposed to that although doesn’t know if it’s necessary. Chief Deputy Rich Stephens said he usually administers the hands-on background testing. Chief Deputy Stephens said sometimes a polygraph doesn’t always make it or break it and it’s not something that has to be done, but it’s one more tool to use. Sheriff Sprungl said he’s not sure if he can legally issue this test to a bailiff. Judge Julian said it’s legal if the employee consents to it as a condition of employment.

Commissioner Pinkerton said this individual would have to go to a training course and Sheriff Sprungl said the Commissioners would have to also set the policy. A problem with this one man operation is to hire someone to write the policy. Ms. Behringer said as a condition to employment, besides the polygraph and other testing, the applicant has to pass at the shooting range and that’s the only thing she knows that’s being done. Chief Deputy Sheriff Stephens asked who administers the shooting range training and the reply was the range master in Kootenai County administers the training and the actual shooting takes place in Post Falls. Chief Deputy Sheriff Stephens said Boundary County’s complication is that there is no one available for that and it should possibly be the Sheriff’s Office to administer that type of training. Sheriff Sprungl said he doesn’t want to buy too far into someone he doesn’t supervise.

It was asked if Boundary County’s new bailiff could accompany Bonner County bailiffs in their training and to qualify with other court security employees. Sheriff Sprungl said someone has to develop policies as this person will have to work by themselves. Chief Deputy Sheriff Stephens said if Judge Mitchell wants to review the Use of Force Policy and if Judge Julian could adopt that, there would at least be continuity. Judge Julian suggested finding out if Bonner County has a written Use of Force Policy or law. Judge Mitchell said he’d fax what Kootenai County has with their bailiff. It was said that Boundary County is just in this position because they’ve had a really good employee for about three decades.

Those present discussed issues in the scenario that the bailiff had to shoot someone and the policy wherein a person involved in a shooting is interviewed a while after an incident.

Chairman Dinning said there have been a couple things identified that need to be tweaked. One thing is that POST needs to establish some type of acceptable course for bailiffs to attend as there is not POST certification. This person should be trained in the use of fire arms and tasers and know when to use these weapons.

Those present questioned community service as the scheduling had been done by Mr. Sukenik. Sheriff Sprungl said Ron Pell most likely works with the adults, but he would find out. Sheriff Sprungl spoke of working out the matter of ballistic vests, etc., in a policy.

Chairman Dinning said the mention of communications officer is in the job description because of Mr. Sukeniks’ unique talents and that needs to be reworked. Also listed is a mention of the county’s DSL and technical equipment.

Chairman Dinning said the certifications that are required can be done within the first year of employment. Judge Mitchell mentioned having a high school diploma, but then have POST, something equivalent or be willing to obtain that training. Judge Julian suggested removing the term POST from the job description and that there should be a requirement to complete required training, but to take POST out of the requirements. Those present reviewed items to be included in the requirements as follows: a portion of the hiring process may require a polygraph once the person is offered the job, the employee is to complete the necessary training as agreed within one year, individuals will be interviewed by the same individuals such as Judges, Sheriff, Clerk and Commissioners, the county will review policies of other counties and the availability of shared training for the bailiff position. Once those decisions are made the Commissioners are good to advertise, according to Judge Mitchell.

Chairman Dinning questioned the need to let the employee know of the process for background checks and if that should that be a part of the information that goes out when posting the job. Judge Mitchell said that information should be mentioned, but he didn’t see that it was listed on this job description. Chief Deputy Clerk Isaac said on the county’s application forms permission is requested for background testing, etc.

Commissioners said they would amend the job description and get it down to Judge Mitchell for review.

Ms. Behringer said she thinks Kootenai County recertifies in tasers every year along with the other certifications so maybe that could be utilized as well. Sheriff Sprungl said that would be helpful.

The call to Ms. Behringer and Judge Mitchell ended.

Judge Julian left the meeting at 4:13 p.m.

Those present discussed the bailiff’s new job description. Commissioner Pinkerton suggested removing POST and inserting certification of an annual job specific education and/or training. Clerk Poston said the bottom line is that the job description doesn’t need to go to the Personnel Classification Committee and those present agreed.

4:20 p.m., Courthouse Security/Bailiff Ron Sukenik joined the meeting.

Commissioners asked Mr. Sukenik about his roll as Community Service Coordinator. Mr. Sukenik said that is for district court. Mr. Sukenik said the biggest thing is to protect the county and he explained issues that had been experienced with probationers, liability and insurance coverage provided by the county. Mr. Sukenik the probation service is a county service and he monitors only felons.

Commissioner Pinkerton said the other question is in regards to communications. Mr. Sukenik said the communications work has been a job of evolution and the amount of time spent on that pulsates depending on phone equipment problems. Mr. Sukenik said he can work on the phone issues with the exception of the Sheriff’s Office. Mr. Sukenik said he has files and contact numbers on the courthouse communication system in a file. Mr. Sukenik and Commissioners felt it would be appropriate to leave communications in the new job description.

Mr. Sukenik left the meeting at 4:25 p.m.

Those present briefly discussed inserting random drug testing.
Clerk Poston left and the meeting ended at 4:35 p.m.

Commissioner Kirby moved to authorize the Chairman to sign the Idaho Transportation Department EEO Office Notice of Requirements for Local Public Agencies. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

Commissioner Kirby moved to authorize Commissioners to sign the State/Local Agreement (Project Development) Project No. A013(419) for Westside Road; Trout Creek Bridges, Key No. 13419. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

There being no further business, the meeting recessed until tomorrow at 9:00 a.m.

***Tuesday, January 29, 2013, Commissioners met in regular session with Chairman Dan Dinning, Commissioner LeAlan Pinkerton, Commissioner Walt Kirby and Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser.

9:00 a.m., County Outside Auditor Leonard Schulte met with Commissioners to present and review the county audit. Also present was Clerk Glenda Poston.

Mr. Schulte said this is the audit report for year ending September 30, 2012. The presentation is to review key parts and every part of the report has a purpose and requirement to be there, according to Mr. Schulte. Mr. Schulte reviewed information to include his written opinion, the scope of the audit to include business and governmental activities and the standards under which the audit is performed. Mr. Schulte said the county’s financial statements present fairly and his opinion is a clean opinion.

Mr. Schulte explained that Boundary Community Hospital’s financials are not reflected in the county’s audit. The Hospital has a different audit year. Mr. Schulte reviewed details to include government-wide statement of net assets such as governmental or business activities, capital assets, buildings and improvements, equipment, current liabilities, and all tangible items. Mr. Schulte explained other assets such as funds held for landfill closure.

Mr. Schulte explained the methods of accounting as the modified accrual method to consist of a balance sheet, which included total revenues, taxes, fees, grants, and other revenues. Also total expenditures for capital outlay, general government, public safety, etc.

Those present discussed landfill closure costs. Mr. Schulte said several years ago any government entity that operated a landfill didn’t have to account for it, but that has now evolved and agencies now begin to recognize this potential liability. Factors in determining closure costs include projected future cost, how much capacity the landfill has and how much of that capacity is used up. Mr. Schulte said this formula translates into the county’s landfill. The actual costs associated with closing the landfill may actually be more due to inflation and the study done on this is now older. Every year Solid Waste Superintendent Claine Skeen sends monthly usage information to Mr. Schulte to try to determine how fast the landfill is filling up.

Mr. Schulte referred to his separate letter referencing other facts that have come up in the course of performing the audit. One issue is a repeat issue discussed each year and that is the accounts receivable at the Restorium. Mr. Schulte said for years said record keeping procedures and records were inadequate and the accounts at the Restorium can’t be verified and audited. The staff tracks the residents and who is being charged, and when the funds are collected they bring them to the Clerk’s Office. The Clerk reviews receipts and that’s the point at which good accountability started, according to Mr. Schulte. There is not a good record of who is being charged, what is being charged and how much each individual should be charged. There is a manual ledger that has been used for a long time, according to Mr. Schulte. Mr. Schulte said there are no control totals in their bookkeeping and he explained errors made. Mr. Schulte said he had suggested getting the Quickbooks Program and he had offered to help set up the program. Mr. Schulte said this issue has been pointed out as an error and enough so that this error would create a true audit finding in that management is disregarding the suggestion. Mr. Schulte said this is rising to a point that something drastically needs to be done. This year there was some improvement and Mr. Schulte said he did want to give credit for that. The ledger now has dates and charges were separate from payments, etc. This will show that the appropriate actions are still being disregarded and will show up as a finding. This raises risk that something may happen with the funds as they may not make it to Clerk’s Office. Something inappropriate could happen and not be detected in regular duties.

Mr. Schulte said the other area is at the landfill having to do with recycling revenue. In 2011 the year end recycling revenue totaled $140,000, but revenue in year end 2012 was only $40,000. Mr. Schulte said he expected that amount to be higher so he looked into it. The good explanation was to time the sale of metal to when the price is right and it just happens there was only one sale. Mr. Schulte said that raises a question of how does anyone know that revenue the county is entitled to receive will be received. Mr. Schulte said his suggestion is developing some type of record to determine some kind of history of how much metal is built up. Something to show a historical trail to identify, in this case, how many tons were not sold, etc. Commissioner Kirby suggested having a record of what metal prices are every so often. Even having pictures of the metal pile would be helpful, according to Mr. Schulte. Clerk Poston said Mr. Skeen was going to start a file of documentation, which will reduce the risk, but not eliminate it. Chairman Dinning said Mr. Skeen had indicated revenue to recycling is even. Chairman Dinning said if the revenue has not increased or there is even a loss the landfill hole is not filling up.

Clerk Poston asked if the Boundary County Ambulance Service District is audited under the county or separate. Mr. Schulte said the Ambulance Service District will probably be a component of the county’s audit such as adding another column to the multi column approach. Mr. Schulte said he has an issue with that debt for the Ambulance Service District as money was borrowed in anticipation of taxes, but he isn’t sure money can be borrowed on taxes that have not yet been levied. Chairman Dinning said a lot of counties have done this.
The meeting with Mr. Schulte ended at 9:45 a.m.

9:50 a.m., Planning and Zoning Administrator Dan Studer, and Planning and Zoning Commission Chairman Matt Cossalman and Vice Chairman John Cranor joined the meeting.

Introductions were made to Commissioner Pinkerton. Mr. Cossalman said he’ll be reinstated to the board for the next four years and that will be his last term. Bruce Behrman has also expressed interest in reappointment, but he may not have provided a letter yet. Mr. Studer said Mr. Behrman has been on the Planning and Zoning Commission since year 2006 and became a member due to the resignation of a prior member. Mr. Behrman had completed the three years of that individual’s term then was reappointed to his own term.

Mr. Cossalman said in the past there hasn’t been much contact between Commissioners and the Planning and Zoning Commission and that is something he would like to start. Chairman Dinning said Commissioners can’t discuss specific things due to protocol. Mr. Cossalman said Commissioners could discuss legislation matters.

Mr. Cossalman said in the process of developing the new Zoning Ordinance in year 2011, there were several things that should’ve been changed looking back on the Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan) as they were obsolete and superfluous. Mr. Cossalman said he wanted to talk with Commissioners about amending the Comprehensive Plan in order to address those deficiencies and there has been informal interest on the Planning and Zoning Board that this should be done. This Planning and Zoning Board is uniquely fit to do this and there needs to be a philosophy that matches the vision statement.

Mr. Cossalman said in terms of obsolete, this Comprehensive Plan was supposed to describe characteristics, but not specifics, and in the Comp Plan some specifics were discussed. When the 2011 Zoning Ordinance was put together no specifics were mentioned because they were supposed to have been eliminated. Mr. Cranor said there is also terminology that is not wanted and the Comprehensive Plan often strays from the mission statement.

In the section on wildlife, the Comprehensive Plan makes recommendations about wildlife suggesting that we make our land use decisions based on state and federal wildlife provisions. The Comp Plan was supposed to refer to critical area maps, but instead the map was just based on historical sightings, not the census of the animals. Some of this language is still in the Comp Plan so this should be cleaned and lined up. Commissioner Kirby said it is just housekeeping.

Mr. Studer said in support of the present Planning and Zoning Commission he echoes Mr. Cossalman’s comments. The Planning and Zoning Commission is a very able, capable and a good working group so Commissioners are encouraged to take advantage of that. It was said that prior Chairman Smith had been approached about this at one point, but the request was stopped. Mr. Studer said he would like to say his opinion is this is a good working group to have engaged in this and his experience in working with volunteer organizations is that you want to keep them busy. Mr. Studer said this is a board that wishes to engage.

Mr. Cossalman said he would like to see a process where County Commissioners could see some change and direct the Planning and Zoning Commission on it and when it gets to the point the changes are proposed to be adopted that Commissioners want to adopt those changes as well. Chairman Dinning said he would like to have this accomplished in less than one and a half years. Chairman Dinning said there are definite things to be fixed and addressed as he knew it didn’t mesh. Mr. Cossalman said he recalled Chairman Dinning requesting to delay the adoption of the Comp Plan in order to see how it fit with the Ordinance. The Ordinance was rewritten and it addressed the Supreme Court issue specifically.

Mr. Cossalman presented Commissioners with his idea for going forward. All Commissioners agreed to amend the Comprehensive Plan. Chairman Dinning said he would like to have the Planning and Zoning Commission come up with all changes they can foresee then legally meet in a workshop setting before holding a public hearing.

Mr. Studer said Mr. Cossalman is interested in Section 13 and 14, Land Use Implementation. Mr. Studer asked if this is a Comp Plan review process where the Planning and Zoning Commission would initiate action and County Commissioners would adopt by resolution. Chairman Dinning said this matter needs to be covered by the best legal opinion Commissioners can get. Chairman Dinning said to go ahead and identify areas that need to be changed for discussion in a workshop. Mr. Cranor said he’s looking at two public meetings.

The meeting with Mr. Cossalman and Mr. Cranor ended.

10:15 a.m., County Chief Deputy Prosecutor Tevis Hull joined the meeting.

It was said the purpose of this meeting is to review the Commissioners’ public hearing process. In an upcoming appeal hearing either Commissioner Kirby or Commissioner Pinkerton will take the lead. This upcoming hearing is just a review of a Planning and Zoning decision so it’s like an appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court. Chief Deputy Prosecutor Hull said he wanted to talk in general about procedures and things that might be helpful for any meeting as he is not sure of the procedures this Board uses or how the public knows the procedures for providing input.

Commissioner Kirby mentioned the upcoming hearing and Chief Deputy Prosecutor Hull said this hearing is about a decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission and Commissioners stand in the appellant capacity. Chief Deputy Prosecutor Hull said he can just talk about his general thoughts about common sense matters and then decide if Commissioners need to go into executive session.

Chief Deputy Prosecutor Hull said one issue is the preparation from Commissioners’ standpoint when someone is going to present information. A lot of time there will be written documents submitted.

Planning and Zoning Administrator Dan Studer joined the meeting at 10:20 a.m.

Chief Deputy Prosecutor Hull said it’s helpful to know what Commissioners are being asked to do in the hearing and to know their role for that meeting. There is a need to remember to continue to be respectful and to check emotions at the door. If Commissioners are in a meeting that requires a decision, every objection that is brought up doesn’t have to be answered. Commissioners don’t have to argue or debate with someone about that specific objection as it may have no relevance to the purpose of the meeting. Some decisions made may require specific findings according to statute. Chief Deputy Prosecutor Hull said Commissioners need to be prepared through their counsel to know what the statute requires and when making a case that the correct language is included. That is where Commissioners will see people appeal a decision so they need to make sure all things are included. Chairman Dinning said in almost every decision made on Planning and Zoning issues, Commissioners need to have a Findings of Fact and Conclusion to cover that the application meets the Comprehensive Plan. Chairman Dinning asked if Commissioners have to address that at the hearing or could action be made to approve the Findings at a later date. Chief Deputy Prosecutor Hull said those Findings do need to be verbalized at the hearing.

Mr. Studer explained that considerations of the Planning and Zoning Commission are provided to the Chairman at that meeting. Chief Deputy Prosecutor Hull said it’s important to individually review each finding. If Commissioners are reviewing the Planning and Zoning Commission findings and the factors are the same that will be adopted, they have to be read aloud individually as it keeps the record clear.

Commissioner Kirby said there will be a lot of questions for Chief Deputy Prosecutor Hull. Mr. Studer said he provides the public hearing script to the Chairman at the public hearing along with a staff report that includes various parts of Comp Plan. Chief Deputy Prosecutor Hull said it may be helpful to also have Mr. Studer provide the hearing or meeting agenda handout to the public.

10:40 a.m., Chairman Dinning left the following executive session due to a conflict of interest.

10:40 a.m., Commissioner Kirby moved to go into Executive Session under Idaho Code #67-2345(1)f. To communicate with legal counsel for the public agency to discuss the legal ramifications of and legal options for pending litigation, or controversies not yet being litigated but imminently likely to be litigated. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Commissioners voted as follows: Commissioner Kirby “aye” and Commissioner Pinkerton “aye”. Motion passed unanimously. 11:05 a.m., Commissioner Kirby moved to go out of executive session. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.
Chief Deputy Prosecutor Hull left the meeting.

Chairman Dinning returned to the meeting.

Treasurer Jenny Fessler and County resident David Stockwell joined the meeting at 11:02 a.m.

Commissioner Kirby moved to grant an extension of time to pay year 2009 taxes for parcel #RP60N01E067230A until April 15, 2013. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

Commissioner Kirby moved to cancel year 2009 taxes totaling $190.08, costs totaling $50 and late charges totaling $23.42 and to return $981.28 to Cabinet Mountains Water District for collection for parcel #RP61N01E124700A. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Motion passed unanimously.

Treasurer Fessler left the meeting.

Commissioner Pinkerton moved to approve the minutes of January 14 & 15, 2013. Commissioner Kirby second. Motion passed unanimously.

Mr. Stockwell said he’s is trying to find how to get access to Herman Lake as he is aware that there is undisputed county property at the lake. Mr. Stockwell said someone has placed no trespassing signs. Chairman Dinning said what he’s trying to convey may or may not be accurate, but there had been a lawsuit involving the state and all property owners surrounding the lake. Chairman Dinning said the Idaho Department of Lands owns land underneath the water and he recalls that out of the clear blue Boundary County received a quit claim to something in relation to the lake. Chairman Dinning said he doesn’t know what that means other than it’s due to the level of the lake. There is an area in there that is no mans land. Chairman Dinning said he would need to pull that document to see what’s involved. Even though the county has this quit claim deed there is no way to legally get to it, and it can be legally posted. Chairman Dinning said he needs to see where the historic high water mark is. Commissioner Kirby said this matter came up years ago and it seems there was something like a driveway to the north side of the lake. Mr. Stockwell said there is a boat launch.

The meeting with Mr. Stockwell ended at 11:15 a.m.

Chief Deputy Clerk Tracie Isaac and Clerk Glenda Poston joined the meeting at 11:18 a.m.

Those present reviewed the proposed job description for the bailiff’s position.

11:25 a.m., Community Guardianship Board member Richard Hollenbeck and Chairperson Gini Woodward joined the meeting.

Chief Deputy Clerk Isaac and Clerk Poston left the meeting at 11:30 a.m.

Ms. Woodward wanted to inform Commissioners of their most recent experience with a guardian and their family.

11:35 a.m., Clerk Glenda Poston returned to the meeting.

Ms. Woodward explained that the current guardianship matter is working itself out as a temporary guardianship is in place and the process of looking into permanent guardianship has started. Ms. Woodward said before she got involved, there hadn’t been many cases at all. There have been approximately two actives cases and it isn’t often that there is a case, but when there is one it’s very challenging. The Guardianship Board tries not to get involved when there is family as it clouds the situation and if the Board is involved, the family gives up their rights. Ms. Woodward informed Commissioners the Guardianship Board has gone through state training and is able to become a guardian if necessary.

Ms. Woodward said Tamina Boonisar, who is a local representative with the Area Agency on Aging is retiring and she has expressed interest in becoming a Community Guardianship Board member. Ms. Woodward said one concern the Board has is that they feel it’s important for them to be anonymous as certain negative situations could arise. Chairman Dinning said this information is public. Those present discussed listing Commissioners as the one to contact when in need of information on the Board of Guardians. Commissioner Pinkerton said there is a degree of insulation from subjecting the Board of Guardians to negative family and safety situations.

Clerk Poston left the meeting at 11:45 a.m.

The meeting with Ms. Woodward and Mr. Hollenbeck ended at 11:45 a.m.

Commissioners tended to administrative duties.

Commissioners recessed for lunch at noon.

1:30 p.m., Commissioners reconvened for the afternoon session with Chairman Dinning, Commissioner Pinkerton, Commissioner Kirby and Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser.

1:30 pm., Boundary County Little League President Jeff Bennett and Player Agent Renae Bennett joined the meeting to discuss field availability with Commissioners.

The Bennett’s said every year Boundary County Little League uses the Parks and Recreation fields. Approximately the first of January Boundary County Little League receives a field schedule, but one has not yet been received for this year. A Parks and Recreation Board member does attend the Little League meetings and it was mentioned that a field schedule should be ready soon. The Parks and Recreation Board had stated that Mr. Bennett is not allowed to speak at the Parks and Recreation Board meetings so he can only go through the county to inquire about field availability. It was said that Boundary County Little League reserves fields on Monday, Wednesdays and Fridays for practices and games.

Boundary County Little League is hosting a tournament in April and wishes to get on the calendar so they are going about it this way. Chairman Dinning mentioned a Parks and Recreation Board member attending the Little League meetings and the Bennett’s said that is Rob Tompkins, but Lisa Carle has also attended at times. Chairman Dinning said Boundary County Little League is welcome to attend the Parks and Recreation Board meetings, but the Parks and Recreation Board had just requested that a Boundary County Little League Board member other than Mr. Bennett speak at their meetings. Chairman Dinning asked if that is what the Bennett’s also recalled.

Chairman Dinning said he has spoken to Mr. Tompkins and a letter should go out this week. Chairman Dinning said no one has gotten the letter yet so no one is being singled out. Mr. Bennett questioned if he has to go through the County Commissioners for this type of information and Chairman Dinning said no. Chairman Smith referred to the issue about bleachers that he wasn’t involved in. Chairman Dinning said there is miscommunication on both sides and he hopes both groups have the kids at the heart of this as it can be that the adults seem to mess it up.

Ms. Bennett said she started to send a letter to put the issues aside and to open communication, but she didn’t hear anything back and now her term is up. Mr. Bennett said he is the President of Boundary County Little League and he wants the Parks and Recreation Board to work with him. Boundary County Little League has reached out to the Parks and Recreation Board and they’re not having it.

Commissioner Pinkerton said a solution to this issue needs to be found by the two groups and they need to be involved. Chairman Dinning said attempts to fix this issue need to be made. Mr. Bennett said this issue is not about the bleachers; it’s a personal issue between Parks and Recreation and a coach from last year.

Chairman Dinning said the letter from the Parks and Recreation Board should be sent out by mid February. Ms. Bennett said that won’t give enough time and Little League may have to reserve Valley View. Commissioner Pinkerton suggested the Bennett’s or Boundary County Little League send an email or correspondence to the Parks and Recreation Board respectfully referencing the schedule needed for Little League and explain the need to have this information set for the National Little League District.

Clerk Glenda Poston joined the meeting.

Mr. Bennett said it’s not just about volunteers. Boundary County Little League wants to run the league as best as they can. Chairman Dinning said that is how the Parks and Recreation Board feels as well. Ms. Bennett asked how to best contact the Parks and Recreation Board and Commissioners mentioned contacting Parks and Recreation Board Chair Pam Copeland or possibly the county’s interoffice mailbox for the Parks and Recreation Board/Department.

The meeting with Mr. Bennett and Ms. Bennett ended at 1:50 p.m.

Clerk Poston left the meeting.

Chief Deputy Clerk Tracie Isaac joined the meeting at 2:00 p.m.

Commissioner Kirby moved to go into executive session under Idaho Code #67-2345(1)b, to consider the evaluation, dismissal or disciplining of, or to hear complaints or charges brought against, a public officer, employee, staff member or individual agent, or public school student. Commissioner Pinkerton second. Commissioners voted as follows: Chairman Dinning “aye”, Commissioner Pinkerton “aye” and Commissioner Kirby “aye”. Motion passed unanimously. 2:40 p.m., Commissioner Pinkerton moved to go out of executive session. Commissioner Kirby second. Motion passed unanimously.

2:50 p.m., Boundary County Library Director Sandy Ashworth joined the meeting.

Ms. Ashworth met with Commissioners to discuss the talking points for the Library Expansion Project. Ms. Ashworth said the idea is starting a community conversation and she’s working to gather information from people as to how they would like the project to function. Ms. Ashworth said as things happen there have been other possibilities and a goal is to do the least amount of harm to anyone as far as the building where North Idaho College’s (NIC) Bonners Ferry satellite office is now. It was said Panhandle Area Council (PAC) has the building loan that is being paid by North Idaho College’s lease agreement and at the end of that period, the property belongs to the county. Ms. Ashworth wanted to know if Commissioners think it’s best to keep this building for the county in the long run. Ms. Ashworth spoke of starting a business incubator in that building and she mentioned other examples of business incubators.

Bonners Ferry Herald Reporter Laura Roady joined the meeting at 2:54 p.m.

Ms. Ashworth said Frontier Communications can bring high speed internet so it would be nice to have an incubator at a site other than the library as the library cannot act as a business incubator. Chairman Dinning asked if NIC would move into the library’s new addition and Ms. Ashworth said yes. Ms. Ashworth said she is anticipating needing more space where the students can work together. The idea is to build another floor at the library as the current space has been maxed out. Ms. Ashworth said the library bought the next door property.

Ms. Ashworth informed Commissioners the library receives 79,000 visitors per year and about 300 per day so the preference is to keep the library downtown. Ms. Ashworth said the library has been working with different groups to see how the library could add value in economic development and educational services. Instead of just a large library, the building could also have a learning commons and all that is needed is a larger empty space to have room for an academic presence such as NIC and possibly the University of Idaho and Lewis and Clark College. A business development center and technology lab could be built to house a variety of equipment people can use. Ms. Ashworth referred to Robotics Instructor Ed Katz and said students could learn techniques for inventions. Ms. Ashworth said the group would like to stay in the same place, but have a larger building. Boundary Economic Development Specialist David Sims’ office could also be housed in this space. If NIC were to move into the same building as the library, it would be nice to use the old NIC building as a business incubator.

Ms. Ashworth said in her conversation with Extension Office Educator Carol Hampton, she learned the Extension Office would like to move into the library building. Chairman Dinning said maybe the worst case would be to look at selling what would be the old NIC building and then PAC is no longer involved and NIC can pay the lease here. Chairman Dinning said that makes a clean easy break for another building to be considered for a business incubator.

Clerk Glenda Poston joined the meeting at 3:00 p.m.

The library would be a better learning atmosphere for NIC to use than their current location. Ms. Ashworth said by expanding the library it would also provide a meeting space and video conferencing could be done on site rather than traveling for conferences. Ms. Ashworth said the Extension Office is crowded and getting nervous that the University of Idaho will reduce their services if they can’t show that the University of Idaho Extension services are used to the maximum.

The current library building really needs an elevator because of the way it’s built, but the proposal is to build up. Ms. Ashworth said Ms. Hampton indicated it would be Commissioners to talk to about moving the Extension Office. Chairman Dinning asked about costs. Ms. Ashworth said she didn’t know as they don’t yet know the size to build. Ms. Ashworth said they’re scheduled for fall semester to be taken on as a service learning project by the University of Idaho’s interior design program and College of Architecture. Ms. Ashworth said she just wants a bigger building; not a large monument and it needs to be practical.

Ms. Ashworth said some people wonder if it would be more expensive to build a bridge over the existing parking lot to the proposed building site. Ms. Ashworth asked Commissioners if they would be comfortable with the University of Idaho Extension Program moving its location. Ms. Ashworth said the process is to talk to many groups to see what they would like before students show up.

The meeting with Ms. Ashworth ended.

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 3:30 p.m.

***Friday, February 08, 2013, 1:00 p.m., Commissioners met in special session with Commissioner LeAlan L. Pinkerton, Commissioner Walt Kirby and Deputy Clerk Michelle Rohrwasser.

Commissioners met in special session in Commissioners’ Chambers at 1:00 p.m., for the purpose of going into executive session under Idaho Code #67-2345(1)F. Also present were: Planning and Zoning Administrator Dan Studer and Chief Deputy Prosecutor Tevis Hull.

Commissioner Kirby stated for the record that Chairman Dan Dinning was not present as he had abstained from participating in the executive session.

Commissioner Pinkerton moved to go into executive session under Idaho Code #67-2345(1)f, to communicate with legal counsel for the public agency to discuss the legal ramifications of and legal options for pending litigation, or controversies not yet being litigated but imminently likely to be litigated. Commissioner Kirby second. Commissioners voted as follows: Commissioner Pinkerton “aye” and Commissioner Kirby “aye”. Motion passed unanimously. 2:00 p.m., Commissioner Pinkerton moved to go out of executive session. Commissioner Kirby second. Motion passed unanimously.

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 2:00 p.m.

/s/
DAN R. DINNING, Chairman

ATTEST:

/s/
GLENDA POSTON, Clerk
By: Michelle Rohrwasser, Deputy Clerk
Questions or comments about this letter? Click here to e-mail!