Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-03-06city council minutesBook 41 REGULAR MEETING MARCH 6, 2000 7:00 P.M. The Meeting was called to order by Mayor Nancolas. The Invocation was offered by Pastor Dick Shaw from the First Baptist Church after which the Mayor requested that everyone remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. The Roll of the City Council was called with the following members present: Gable, Callsen, Earl, Ozuna, Langan, and Wells. Absent: none. aC� IJ I1 IT�Z17►�Y1JZll�f�l1��]�I.���I L�l�L'��`►i:�7! The Mayor asked if there were any additions or deletions to the Agenda. It was MOVED by Gable, SECONDED by Langan to delete the present Item No. 10 on the Consent Calendar which was a Resolution approving a new farm tenant agreement and add a new Item No. 10 which was to consider acceptance of a quitclaim deed from Ralph Smeed for a parcel of land on Airpark Avenue and also under New Business to add an Item 3A to request an Executive Session for the purpose of discussing property acquisition. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Gable, Callsen, Earl, Ozuna, Langan, and Wells. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: none. MOTION CARRIED MOVED by Gable, SECONDED by Ozuna to accept the Agenda as amended. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Gable, Callsen, Earl, Ozuna, Lanl -an, and Wells. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: none. 1 u [t r] I I � I4 ] ► [ � t7 I � I L ` T I p� The Mayor recognized the Government Class from the High School acid asked that each one stand and introduce themselves. He also noted the presence of the former City Attorney, Richard Harris. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION Mayor Nancolas asked if there was anyone from the audience who cared to address the City Council at this time on any item that was not on the prepared Agenda. As there was no one, the Mayor declared that the meeting would continue as outlined. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Dispense with the reading of the minutes of the February 22, 2000 Regular City Council Meeting and approve as written; 2. Approve acceptance of the minutes from the Senior Citizen's Board Meeting of January 17, 2000; 3. Approve Resolution authorizing the execution 'of an Agreement between the City and the Idaho Transportation Department and Wal -Mart Real Estate Business Trust regarding traffic signal for Wal -Mart Development; 4. Approve acceptance of a right of way deed from Jack and Dorothy Blessing for Iand transfer to the City; 5. Approve acceptance of an easement from Jack and Dorothy Blessing for relocation of a gravity irrigation line along Beech Street; 6. Approve recommendation from Forestry, Elroy Huff, to go to bid for the weed control for the City in the year 2000; Page 47 Book 41 Page 48 7. Approve Resolution to cancel a farm tenant agreement between the City and Byron Sheets; 8. Approve Resolution for a new farm tenant agreement between the City and Sid Freeman; 9. Approve Resolution to cancel a farm tenant agreement between the City and Matsumoto Brothers, Inc.; 10. Approve acceptance of quitclaim deed from Ralph Smeed for a parcel of land on Airpark Avenue. MOVED by Earl, SECONDED by Gable to approve the Consent Calendar as amended. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Earl, Ozuna, Langan, Wells, Gable, and Callsen. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: none. MOTION CARRIED OLD BUSINESS (RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF A JOINT USE, OWNERSHIP AND OPERATION AGREEMENT FOR FIRE PROTECTION BETWEEN THE CITY OF CALDWELL AND THE CALDWELL RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT) The Mayor stated that the only item under Old Business was to consider an agreement for fire protection between the City and the Caldwell Rural Fire Protection District This was a Resolution that was brought forward at the last Council Meeting. A workshop was held to discuss some issues that the Council had questions on and has now been brought back with corrections suggested by the Council. He read the Resolution as follows: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE A JOINT OWNERSHIP AND OPERATION AGREEMENT FOR FIRE PROTECTION. BE IT RESOLVED That the Mayor and the City Clerk of the City of Caldwell be, and the same hereby are, authorized to execute a Joint Ownership and Operation Agreement for Fire Protection as attached hereto and made a part hereof as if set forth in full by and between the City of Caldwell and the Caldwell Rural Fire Protection District for the purpose of providing the use, operation, and ownership of all fire protection assets and property (real and person) of both entities and to continue to provide fire protection, rescue and related services for all residents within the City of Caldwell and within the boundaries of the Caldwell Rural Fire Protection District. MOVED by Callsen, SECONDED by Gable to pass the Resolution authorizing the execution of the Agreement for fire protection between the City of Caldwell and the Caldwell Rural Fire Protection District. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Callsen, Earl, Ozuna, Langan, Wells, and Gable. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: none. ►UNIKI7IES 9117 NEW BUSINESS (PUBLIC HEARING IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF JAMES McCOY TO AMEND THE FACE OF THE PLAT OF GLENN MEADOW ESTATES AND REQUEST FOR APPROVAL TO CONNECT EACH LOT TO Book 41 Page 49 TIIE CITY'S DOMESTIC WATER SYSTEM FOR THE PURPOSE OF IRRIGATION) The Mayor stated that this item was a Public Hearing in the matter of an application submitted by Mr. McCoy to amend the face of the plat of Glenn Meadow Estates and a request to approve comlection of each lot to the City's domestic water system, Case No. SUB- 04(A)97. The process for public hearings was reviewed by the Mayor including the fact that the hearing was properly noticed and that each person must be sworn in before testifying. Sign up sheets were available at the Staff table for those asking to testify. The Public Hearing was then opened by the Mayor and the Conununity Development Director was asked to present the Staff Report. Linda James, Community Development Director, 621 Cleveland, was sworn in and presented the report stating that the notice of public hearing for this matter was duly noticed and posted as required by law. Under Background Information, Council will note that Glenn Meadow Estates Subdivision, a Planned unit Development, was preliminarily approved by Planning and Zoning Commission members on December 14, 1995. It was presented to the Commission by Mr. McCoy to be a senior commimity and such received approval for narrower right of way widths, minimum lot sizes of 3272 square feet, a cotmnLmity center and an RV parking area. The final plat for the PUD was approved by City Council on June 26, 1997 and the Order of Decision was signed on July 7, 1997 and irrigation was discussed under Sections 2.10.6 and 2.10.7 of the Order of Decision which was included in Council's packet. Also, Glenn Meadow's CC &Rs, Section II(Q) include the following: "GRAVITY PLOW IRRIGATION: As required by Pioneer Irrigation District, irrigation shall be provided to each homeowner by the Developer. Irrigation shall be available approximately May through September or October. Each lot will be finished and graded so that the water being used to irrigate will remain on each individual lot. It will be the homeowners responsibility to take care of the water being used so that water does not flow outside the perimeter of the individual lot. The CC &Rs were recorded as Instrument No. 9719339 on June 17, 1997. Mrs. James further commented that she indicated in the Staff Report that the face of the plat included requirements for gravity flow irrigation. She also pointed out that as a part of Council's decision, they did follow Subdivision Ordinance 1758 which reads that irrigation system must be approved by the appropriate district and must be installed in accordance with the standards of that district. Also noted was 2.3.1 in the Staff Report which indicates that in late November, 1999, a lot owner in Glenn Meadow came into her office questioning why he had to pay Pioneer Irrigation for irrigation water since he was using City water for irrigation. This inquiry certainly caught their attention as the plat was approved for gravity irrigation only. They did do a review and research of all of the permits for Glenn Meadows Subdivision. This included sixteen permits for homes for development which were included under 2.3.3 of the Staff Report and included as a part of the record indicating that three permits were issued. No permits were issued for the remaining thirteen. The Director continued under 2.5.2 regarding a memo from the City Engineer noting that 1) The City was not attempting to provide sufficient water supply to provide irrigation water for the City. The City has also been advised by their consultant that underground reserves of pristine waters suitable for drinking were limited and ought to be used judiciously; 2) The City Engineering Department has recommended that all subdivisions, approved in the last 6 plus years contain the requirement that irrigation water be supplied from available surface sources and there was no justification to allow an exception to this case; 3) Mr. McCoy has comlected several lawn sprinkling systems to the City water system without permit, without paying fees, without coordinating with the water department so that the water delivery system was not contaminated, and after direct instructions from the City Engineer that irrigation water was to be provided by surface waters and not the City potable water. Book 41 Page 50 Under 2.5.3, Mrs. James noted the receipt of a letter from Pioneer Irrigation District which was included in the Council's packet as PA -3. He advised the City as follows: 1) The District has correspondence on file dating back to 1995 regarding Glenn Meadow's irrigation system; 2) Pioneer at the time of reviewing the initial preliminary plat requested a pressurized irrigation system be installed in order to make use of the water rights for irrigation water from the District rather than using domestic water from the City and this request was reiterated by letter five other times; 3) Mr. McCoy stated in a letter dated May 6, 1997 that his proposed system "would provide water to each lot and the homeowners will be able to flood irrigate when and if they want." The District then agreed to the gravity flow irrigation system based on a plan submitted by Mr. McCoy and approved by the District; 4) The District was in strong opposition of any plan of Mr. McCoy's that would provide water for irrigation purposes using water other than that warranted to the property owners through their water rights under Pioneer; 5) The District was requesting that Mr. McCoy be required to honor the water rights to each parcel of land within the subdivision by making use of the water available from the District. Includedd in the Council's packet were copies of all of the correspondence with regard to this matter. Mrs. James stated that she would also like to enter for the record that she did speak to Lonnie Freeman of Pioneer Irrigation District on February 29, 2000 and he indicated that the gravity system was never inspected by Pioneer and that he did drive through the subdivision after he received a request from Mr. McCoy for hooking into the City's water system. He indicated that there were risers in some of the yards. In addition, Gary Shoemaker from the City Water Department in a memo received on February 18, 2000 affirmed that all of the developed lots (16) in Glenn Meadow were connected to City water for the purpose of sprinkling. Mrs. James entered into the record PR -1 which was a letter received in her department on February 29, 2000 and was signed by the homeowners in Glenn Meadow Estates expressing their concern over the situation. The letter was included as a part of the record. At the completion of the review of the background information presented by Mrs. James, the Council Members asked a number of questions with regard to this matter. During that time, they discussed the fact that three of the homes were allowed to connect to the City water due to the fact that the building services were not physically combined with Planning and Zoning so no questions were asked; the development was still within the Pioneer Irrigation District; Fair Oaks was connected to City water, but in the last six years no subdivisions have been hooked to domestic water; Crystal Springs came before Council last year as a P.U.D. and they were asked to adhere to Pioneer Irrigation District's requirements for pressurized irrigation and the City did not approve hooking onto the City's domestic water system; City was not aware of the problem at Glenn Meadow Estates until the gentleman came forward and brought it to their attention; anytime there was a permit for any kind of plumbing, a copy of the permit was given to the Water Department so they do become aware at that time of someone requesting a hookup to domestic water; the reason for the requirement to have the lines inspected when connecting to City water was due to a backflow device which means that anything that was connected to the City's water system has to be done in such a manner that it will not contaminate the City's potable water system. In conclusion, Mrs. James stated that it was very rare for her to make a recommendation to the City Council. In this instance, she stated that she would like to say that she believed very much in the public hearing process, believed in the decisions made by the Council and that they do not enter into them lightly. There was a part in her role as Community Development Director to certainly ensure that any decision you make was adhered to. She did support the recommendation of the City Engineer and Pioneer Irrigation District that Council not allow the subdivision to be hooked up to the City's potable water system. She believed it would set a precedence which was something they do not want to happen. Her recommendation was that Council not approve Mr. McCoy's request to hook up to the City's domestic water system. Book 41 Page 51 The following individuals were sworn in by the City Clerk and testified in favor of the application of Mr. McCoy to amend the face of the plat of Glenn Meadow Estates and request for approval to connect each lot to City's domestic water system for the purpose of irrigation: Thomas Prall, 2113 Glemi Way, who reviewed the letter that was entered into the record as PR -1; Jim McCoy, 2210 %2 Ray Avenue, who handed out documents labeled as PR -2 which included letters from Pioneer Irrigation District and a letter from Gary Shoemaker of the Caldwell Water Department. Mr. McCoy stated that he understood that the final plat approval was that gravity flow irrigation would be provided to each lot and it was provided for each lot and could be used or not used at the homeowner's discretion. He pointed out that the letter from Pioneer says that the homeowners will be able to flood irrigate when and if they want. In regard to the inspection of the gravity flow irrigation system, Pioneer was called and Lonnie Freeman informed him that he drove through the subdivision. There were no stickers put on anything. As far as inspections for the individual lots, there were three he personally got permits for and he called for inspection and in each case, a green tag was put on the backflow device. With regard to the other thirteen lots, he hired a subcontractor to install the systems and he assumed that he did get the inspections. He further stated that he personally obtained permits to install the sprinkling system in the three lots. In his comments, he also stated that at the time they requested final plat approval a gravity flow system was already in place. Mr. McCoy continued with his presentation to the Mayor and Council and discussed this matter with them at some length. The tapes were available in the Office of the City Clerk for anyone caring to review them. After Mr. McCoy completed his comments, Gilbert Hafcn, 1807 Emerald, stated that the Seniors involved in this matter were distressed and his plea in favor of this matter was on behalf of those Seniors. Richard Harris, Attorney at Law, 1023 Arthur Street, discussed several points pertaining to the matter including the fact that when this subdivision and the final plat was presented to Council, there was a misunderstanding as to how irrigation water was to be provided to each of these lots. His client's understanding was that the final plat approval required Pioneer Irrigation notification to the Council that water was available and that water was available. However, the lots were designed specifically for the use of pressurized irrigation. The lots were small and the usage of water was very low. He discussed the procedure for amending plats at some length and stated that this amendment requested does not set a precedent which would be binding on this body in any further or future action that would come before Council. Other comments involved the inspections and the dates that they occurred. In reviewing City Ordinances, he did not find anything that prohibits the use of City water for irrigation purposes. At the conclusion of the testimony, there was considerable discussion among the Council and questions presented to those who testified. The Mayor asked Mr. Prall if there were standards in each lot available for flood irrigation. Mr. Prall explained that when they bought into the subdivision, there were pipes above ground on the south side of the lots to be developed. At the time they were negotiating, Mr. McCoy told him that the purpose of those pipes was for the gravity flow, but that they were on the City water. Therefore, those pipes were useless to them and could be cut off and capped. Mayor Nancolas asked Mr. McCoy several `questions which he answered as follows: He had been in the development business for about thirty years; had been involved in five subdivisions and final plats during those years; he was familiar with final plats and requirements, restrictions on how to read them. There was considerable discussion with regard to whether setting a precedent was an issue. Mrs. James noted that in the last six years, the City has not approved any subdivision that has irrigation water hooked to the City's domestic water system. It was a burden for the developer to hook to Pioneer Irrigation for pressurized irrigation, but this was a requirement. During the ensuing discussion, Book 41 Page 52 the Council and City Attorney made several comments with regard to the letter addressed to Mrs. James from Pioneer Irrigation District and when Mr. McCoy made the change from one system to the other. Council discussed at some length as to whether the developed lots should have to convert to gravity flow along with those lots not yet developed. The City Attorney noted that all Council can do at this time was approve or deny the amendment request. The Mayor stated that he would like to call Council's attention to some factors testified this evening. The City has had for many years a policy that surface water and surface water only was to be used for irrigation. That policy was very clear and has been consistently and fairly administered to every request in the last six plus years as was testified. The reason was because things do change. Pristine water was not available as it once was. This was due to development patterns, our aquifers were not refilling at the same rate. There has been several studies done telling this Valley that they need to be very careful about the use of pristine water sources. That moved the Council to make that policy decision to not allow pristine water except in very unusual and unique circumstances. We just went through several situations where there has been requests made to not use surface water. In every situation, this Council has held firm that they would not allow that to happen even to the point of not allowing phases of development to be moved forward until surface water systems were accomplished and dealt with. His concern was to be fair and equable to everyone. These people were told something that they had no control over. It was entered into the record that they were told that they did not have to worry about gravity irrigation system because there was a pressurized system on the City system. How that came about, I don't know. These people were the innocent bystanders here. I am not saying that there was anything intentionally being done, but to me there was a disregard for the requirements that were given on the plat which brings us to this situation now. We now have the question as to whether we maintain consistency and fairness with our policy pertaining to surface water because of the true reason that it was in limited supply and must be used judiciously and if you make an exception for this, where do we go with other special condition that comes along. There may not legally be a precedent here, but I think morally and ethically, there would be a precedent set that would be hard to justify to other developers. He further stated that he was not accusing anyone of doing anything on purpose. He was simply talking consistency and fairness throughout the entire program so he would ask Council to consider all of the things when making a decision. Again, he would remind them that the decision was whether to make an amendment to the original plat or not. It was very clear and there were plenty of facts that flood irrigation was to be used. Councilwoman Earl asked the City Attorney what would happen if Council dad not approve amending the plat. Mr. Hilty answered that under Article IV, it indicates that the unpermitted use of City water was a misdemeanor crime and can be prosecuted as a misdemeanor. He talked with Tim Fleming, the City Prosecutor, and he believed what was appropriate even within the context of criminal prosecution would be a simple compromise. Within the context of a civil compromise, the City may have some latitude in terms with dealing with these individuals. Article IV indicates that water cannot be used in violation of the water permit when the actual permit itself was issued, it has a series of potential uses. He couldn't remember all of them, but included household plumbing, showers, heat pumps and things that were domestic related — swimming pools and hot tubs were included. The last one was irrigation. The permit was valid for those boxes that were checked. Where the permit violation occurs was where you have somebody that has a permit that provides for use of the water for domestic purposes and they are spraying on the lawn for irrigation. This would be permit violation. The other violation occurs where you have no permit for use of City water at all. Regarding the use of the water, the penalty provided in City Code was a criminal prosecution. There was also a series set out where you provide notice to the individuals regarding the unpermitted use. We have notified Mr. McCoy and Mr. Hafen, but have not provided notice to all of the individual homeowners. There was a sixty day period where you try to work it out and you Book 41 Page 53 allow for them to be disconnected. The scheme of the Ordinance was that it was a misdemeanor crime to use the water in an unpermitted fashion and it needs to be discontinued. Councilwoman Earl further questioned that if the decision of Council was to not amend the plat, want the remaining ten lots to conform to the requirements, but do not want to penalize the property owners that were there, how would we deal with that. Mr. Hilty stated that this raises a procedural question as to whether you could do that tonight based upon the application that has been made which was an amendment to the plat generally. Council has not been asked nor has this been noticed as a request to amend a portion of the plat. I can't put my finger on any legal authority that allows you to do that based upon the general grants of authority regarding prerogatives of the City Council. IIe would think that there would be something there that would allow for that. He thought the appropriate thing to do legally would be to deny the amendment request and invite another one that deals with a distinction between the developed lots and the undeveloped lots and simply asks for City Council to approve an amendment that will allow the use of City water for irrigation purposes on the developed lots, but maintain those requirements for the undeveloped lots. Then, you could rule on that when it comes. He thought the homeowners have the right to seek a plat amendment. After more discussion, it was MOVED by Gable, SECONDED by Callsen to close the public testimony of the Public Hearing. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Gable, Callsen, Earl, Ozuna, Langan, and Wells. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: none. MOTION CARRIED The following bindings of fact were presented: • The plat that was recorded and signed by the developer indicated that there would be gravity irrigation supplied to each lot; • That the CC &Rs was recorded as Instrument No. 9719339 on .Tune 17, 1997 and indicates that each lot will be finished and graded so water can be provided by growid irrigation; • We have had testimony stating that the lots were small within the development; • We have had testimony that approximately half of the lots have been developed with homes and approximately ten have not been developed up to this point; • We have had testimony from the people who live within the development that a number of them have removed their irrigation standard for gravity irrigation and some placed under patios and were no longer available to even have access to; • Other facts presented and written during testimony this evening by the Staff Report as well as the City Engineer's letters; • Homes that exist there were in fact hooked up to City domestic water system; • Three have been permitted and thirteen have not. MOVED by Earl, SECONDED by Gable to accept the Findings of Fact as presented. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Earl, Ozuna, Langan, Wells, Gable, and Callsen. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: none. MOTION CARRIED Mayor Nancolas presented the Evidence List for acceptance by the Council Members as follows: • Staff Report. Book 41 Page 54 • Sign up sheets. • PR -1 which was a letter from the residents • PR -2 which was a letter from Pioneer Irrigation that was presented as testimony from Mr. McCoy. MOVED by Ozuna, SECONDED by Langan to accept the evidence list as presented. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Ozuna, Langan, Wells, Gable, Callsen, and Earl. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: none. MOTION CARRIED Conclusions of Law: Councilwoman Earl presented the following Conclusions of Law: • The City Council has the authority to either approve or deny this application; • The application has been properly noticed by State Law and by the City's Subdivision Ordinance; The Hearing was conducted consistent with City Ordinance and Idaho Code. MOVED by Gable, SECONDED by Earl to accept the Conclusions of Law as presented. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Gable, Callsen, Earl, Ozuna, Langan, and Wells. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: none. MOTON CARRIED Councilwoman Earl commented that she felt the plat should not be amended; that it continue the way it was. However, she would like to see consideration being given to the homeowners of the existing homes that were there. She was not sure how they could do this. She did not want to see the City pursuing any legal action against them. They couldn't tell people that they have to bring forward another application, but we need something from them allowing them to do that. Mr. Hilty, the City Attorney, stated that this was sufficient direction to him and they may have to get a little creative. As a Staff, they could work on this. Mayor Nancolas suggested that the motion needs to clearly either approve or deny the amendment as requested. After the motion was approved or denied, Council could direct staff to be of assistance in whatever manner Council felt or deemed appropriate and necessary to assist in some sort of remedy to this decision. Council needs to keep the Order of Decision very clear and precise. MOVED by Langan, SECONDED by Gable to deny the application of .lames McCoy to amend the face of the plat of Glenn Meadow Estates, Case No. SUB -04 (A) 97. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Langan, Wells, Gable, Callsen, Earl, and Ozuna. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: none. MOTION CARRIED MOVED by Earl, SECONDED by Ozuna to close the Public Hearing. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Earl, Ozuna, Langan, Wells, Gable, and Callsen. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: none. MOTION CARRIED Book 41 Page 55 Councilwoman Earl stated that she would propose that Staff be directed to work on this issue just discussed with the current property owners within the development. What Council wanted was for Mr. Hilty, Mrs. James and perhaps Mr. Law to work with the homeowners to come up with a solution so that they were not impacted by this decision and were not under a cloud of having; the City brining criminal charges against them. Council wanted to make sure that they were not penalized and can continue using their irrigation system as they have. Councilman Gable asked that the City Attorney craft this in a way that would not bind any further Council to undo that decision and also some wording that would give background that we don't want to set a precedent in this matter. The Mayor called for a short recess and the Meeting was reconvened at 9:15 p.m. (CONSIDERATION OF BILL NO. 6 TO AMEND THE CITY CODE PERTAINING TO ANIMAL CONTROL WITH THE REQUEST TO WAIVE THE RULES AND PASS ON THE FIRST READING) Mayor Nancolas noted that the next item on the Agenda was to consider a Bill to amend the City Code pertaining to Animal Control. The Mayor read Bill No. 6 by title only as follows: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF CALDWELL, STATE OF IDAHO, REGARDING ANIMAL CONTROL REGULATIONS BY DELETING AND ADDING CERTAIN LANGUAGE IN CHAPTER 8, ARTICLE 3, SECTION 17 PERTAINING TO RUNNING AT LARGE PROHIBITED: (1) CANINES: AND CHAPTER 8, ARTICLE 3, SECTION 29 PERTAINING TO UNIFORM SUMMONS; PROSECUTIONS; FINE SCHEDULE; (1) VIOLATIONS; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS, ORDERS OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT HEREWITH. MOVED by Earl, SECONDED by Gable to waive the rules requiring that a bill be read at three separate times and read in full for one reading. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Earl, Ozuna, Langan, Gable, and Callsen. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: Wells. MOTION CARRIED MOVED by Earl, SECONDED by Gable that Bill No. 6 be passed and entitled Ordinance No. 2320 after the one reading by title only. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Earl, Ozuna, Langan, Gable, and Callsen. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: Wells. MOTION CARRIED (CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE SUMMARY OF BILL NO. 6) The City Attorney noted that he did give his approval for the Summary of Bill No. 6. MOVED by Ozuna, SECONDED by Earl to approve the Summary of Bill No. 6 for publication. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Ozuna, Langan, Gable, Callsen, and Earl. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: Wells. MOTION CARRIED (REQUEST FOR AN EXECUTIVE SESSION) Book 41 Page 56 Pursuant to Idaho State Code 67 -2345, Mayor Nancolas stated that he would request an Executive Session for the purpose of discussing land acquisition to convene at this time. MOVED by Gable, SECONDED by Callsen that the City Council convene into an Executive Session pursuant to Idaho State Code 67 -2345 for the purpose of discussing land acquisition at 9:20 p.m. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Gable, Callsen, Earl, Ozuna, and Langan. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: Wells. Pursuant to Idaho State Code 67 -2345, the City Council convened into an Executive Session for the purpose of discussing land acquisition. The Council reconvened at 9:50 p.m. (FINANCIAL REPORT) Councilwoman Earl reported that the Finance Committee has reviewed current accounts payable in the amount of $386,990.25 for the period ended February 29, 2000 and a net payroll of $126,458.83 for the pay period ended January 26, 2000. MOVED by Earl, SECONDED by Ozuna that accounts payable in the amount of $386,990.25 represented by check numbers 67799 through 67991 and payrolls for the amount of $126,458.83 represented by check numbers 67400 through 67506 and direct deposit stub numbers 12979 through 13085 be accepted, payment approved, and vouchers filed in the Office of the City Clerk. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Earl, Ozuna, Langan, Gable, and Callsen. Those voting no: None. Absent and not voting: Wells. MOTION CARRIED (CITY COUNCIL REPOR'T'S) Councilman Langan reported that the State Democratic Convention was going to be held in Caldwell at Albertson College. The Catholic Church was also having a convention. The Mayor explained that the Catholic Convention was to be held on March 17 and involved about 2,000 high school students. The opening ceremonies would be held at the Caldwell High School at 7:30 p.m. and would last for three days. Councilwoman Ozuna informed Council that last week was full of meeting. They started planning for the youth games and Cinco de'Mayo was coming along well. Councilman Callsen stated that he attended the Library Board on the 2 " An appointment recommendation for the Board will be coming from the Board. Councilman Gable reported that applications were being received for the Airport Manager's job. (MAYOR'S COMMENTS) The Mayor stated that he has been at the Statehouse testifying on HB -538 and would suggest that Council write to their State Legislatures in opposition to this Bill. Another Bill that they were successful in changing was Senate Bill 1505 which was the Senate's version of an urban renewal bill that changes the structure of the bill. He also reminded the Council of the basketball game to be held next Saturday between the Mayor's team and the High School team. Book 41 Page 57 (ADJOURN) Since there was no further business, it was MOVED by Gable, SECONDED by Langan that since there was no further business, the meeting be adjourned at 10 :10 P.M. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Gable, Callsen, Earl, Ozuna, and Langan. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: Wells. MOTION CARRIED APPROVED AS written THIS 20th DAY OF March , 2000. Mayor ATTEST: �� City Cleric