Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-07-20city council minutesBook 39 Page 160 REGULAR MEETING JULY 20, 1998 7:00 P.M. The Meeting was called to order by Mayor Nancolas. The Invocation was offered by Charles Wigdon, Associate Minister from the first Christian Church after which the Mayor requested that everyone remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. A member of Scout Troop No. 276 lead the Pledge. The Roll of the City Council was called with the following members present: Earl, Ozuna, Langan, Wells, and Evans. Absent: none. ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA The Mayor asked if there were any additions or deletions to the prepared Agenda. It was MOVED by Earl, SECONDED by Ozuna that Item No. 5 under New Business be deleted which was a request for an Executive Session that was no longer necessary. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Earl, Ozuna, Langan, Wells, and Evans. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: none. MOTION CARRIED MOVED by Earl, SECONDED by Evans to accept the Agenda as amended. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Earl, Ozuna, Langan, Wells, and Evans. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: none. MOTION CARRIED SPECIAL PRESENTATION Mayor Nancolas recognized Boy Scouts from Troop No. 276 and Troop No. 269 who were present in conjunction with their Citizen in the Community Merit Badge and Communications Merit Badge. He welcomed them to the Council Meeting and encouraged them to ask questions at any time. The Mayor noted that there was a large assembly of senior citizens at the meeting tonight for the special presentation to Dot Blessing, who has been the Director of the Senior Center for many years. She recently announced that she was going to retire and spend more time with her husband. Mayor Nancolas further stated that he wanted to express his personal gratitude for all she has done and for her friendship. Many people's lives have been changed by her smile, her words of support and she will be greatly missed. He believed it would be very difficult to replace Dot. The Mayor then read a Proclamation declaring July 20, 1998, as Dot Blessing Day and ask the citizens of Caldwell to join with him in wishing her well for all the service she has contributed to the cori�ununity. In addition, a plaque was presented to her stating, "To Dot Blessing in Appreciation For Your Love, Compassion, and Your Dedicated Service to the Seniors of This Community, presented on this 20 " day of July, 1998, by the Mayor and City C:olnvil of the City of Caldwell." AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION The Mayor asked if there was anyone in the audience who cared to address the City Council on any item that was not on the prepared Agenda. Book 39 Page 161 Leo Holmes was recognized by the Mayor and commented on Pioneer Plaza and how beautiful it was. (CONSENT CALENDAR) Mayor Nancolas presented the following items on the Consent Calendar for consideration by the City Council: I . Dispense with the reading of the minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of July 6, 1998, and approve as written; 2. Accept the minutes of the Caldwell Golf Board Meeting of June 30, 1998; the Caldwell Industrial Airport Meeting of July 2, 1998, the Caldwell Traffic Commission Meeting of July 10, 1998; and the Caldwell Public Library Board Meeting of June 4, 1998; 3. Approve a Resolution authorizing the execution of a cancellation of an Airport Tenant Agreement with Max Barker; 4. Approve a Resolution authorizing the execution of a new Airport Tenant Agreement with John and/or Lyn Siebold; 5. Approve the appointment of Janie Archuleta to the Planning and Zoning Commission. 6_ Approve awarding the bid for asphalt paving under L.T.D. 98 -3 and L.I.D. 97- 5 to Nampa Paving and Asphalt, the qualified and low bidder for this project. MOVED by Earl, SECONDED by Evans to approve the Consent Calendar as presented by the Mayor. Councilwoman Earl noted that it was nice to see the Caldwell Traffic Commission Meeting minutes in their packets. It was very informative. Mrs. Earl also commented on the appointment of Janie Archuleta to the Planning and Zoning Commission. They have needed another member for some time and she felt that this appointment was excellent as she was a hard worker and would be an asset to the Commission. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Earl, Ozuna, Langan, Wells, and Evans. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: none. MOTION CARRIED OLD BUSINESS (SECOND READING OF BILL NO. 20 TO AMEND THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, CASE NO. OA-16-98) Mayor Nancolas announced that this was the time set for the second reading of Bill No. 20. This Bill was read for the first time during the Regular City Council Meeting of July 6, 1998. The Bill was read by title only as follows: AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 11, OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF CALDWELL, COUNTY OF CANYON, STATE OF IDAHO, REGARDING CHANGING THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FROM A DECISION- MAKING BODY REGARDING PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL TO A RECOMMENDING BODY: ARTICLE 2, SECTION II- 02-04 STAGE 2 PRELIMINARY PLAT, SUBSECTION 5A AND 5B BY ADDING AND DELETING CERTAIN LANGUAGE; AND, SECTION 11 -02- 04, SUBSECTION 6C AND 61) BY ADDING AND DELETING CERTAIN LANGUAGE: REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT HEREWITH. Book 39 Page 162 MOVED by Evans, SECONDED by Ozuna that this stand as the second reading of Bill No. 20. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Evans, Earl, Ozuna, Langan, and Wells. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: none. MOTION CARRIED The Mayor stated that the next reading would be at the Regular City Council Meeting on August 3, 1998. (FIRST READING OF BILL NO. 19 TO AMEND THE CODE REGARDING DWELLING UNITS, NON - CONFORMING USES, AND THE LA SID USE SCHEDULE) Mayor Nancolas announced that this was the time set for the first reading of Bill No. 19 which was to amend the Code pertaining to dwelling units, non- conforming uses, and the land use schedule. The Order of Decision was rendered at the last public hearing. AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 10, OF TIIE MUNICIPAL CODE OF TIIE CITY OF CALDWELL, COUNTY OF CANYON, STATE OF IDAHO, REGARDING: ARTICLE 3, SECTION 10- 03 -11, DEFINITIONS BY REDEFINING "DWELLING UNIT" AND AMENDING SECTION 10- 02 -08, SUBSECTION 12, NONCONFORMING USES, BY ADDING AND DELETING CERTAIN LANGUAGE IN ORDER TO RE- CLARIFY THIS SUBSECTION AND AMENDING SECTION 10- 02 -02, TABLE 1, LAND USE SCHEDULE BY ADDING CHILD CARE CENTER AS A SPECIAL USE TO R1 AND R2 ZONES, AND BY ADDING GROUP DAY CARE FACILITIES AS A SPECIAL USE TO RI ZONES: REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS, ORDERS, AND PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT HEREWITH. MOVED by Earl, SECONDED by Langan that this stand as the first reading of Bill No. 19. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Earl, Ozuna, Langan, Wells, and Evans. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: none. MOTION CARRIED The second reading of this Bill will be held on August 3, 1998, which was the first Regular City Council Meeting in August. NEW BUSINESS (RECOMMENDATION FROM THE MAYOR REGARDING THE APPOINTMENT OF A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER) Mayor Nancolas announced that this was the time to bring to the City Council a name for appointment to the position of City Councilperson to fill the vacant seat by the untimely passing of Councilman Chuck Houchins. The Mayor stated that he would like to comment a moment about the process and how pleased he was with the way it has gone. It has been a sincere desire to establish the team work philosophy between the Mayor, Council, Administration, and citizen's groups and it was working nicely. We felt sincerely that this person needed to work with the Council as well as with the Mayor. We also felt that Council should be included in this very important process. Through articles in the newspaper, we informed the public that the seat would be filled by application. Book 39 Page 163 Eight applications were received out of which one withdrew and one was not qualified. The City Council interviewed six candidates and from those six, two were forwarded to the Mayor with the recommendation that either would be acceptable to the Council. The Mayor stated that he met with them both and had a good interview and conversation with both very qualified candidates. it was a very difficult decision as they were both very qualified, conscientious, and community minded and had many good aspects. He felt that with Mike Gable, who has the same philosophy of teamwork, understands the importance of vision in moving the community forward, was very outspoken, has the ability to investigate any question in depth to decipher the information and make a rational decision, was the person for the appointment. In working with him on the Traffic Commission, he was always there and dependable and informed about those items to be discussed. Mr. Gable has proven his dedication to the community. The Mayor then stated that he would present the recommendation to the City Council that Mike Gable be appointed to fill the remainder of Councilman Houchins's tenure as a member of the Caldwell City Council. MOVED by Earl, SECONDED by Evans that the City Council accept the Mayor's recommendation to appoint Mike Gable to replace Councilman Houchins until the duration of the term in January 2000. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Earl, Ozuna, Langan Wells, and Evans. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: none. MOTION CARRIED Mayor Nancolas presented the Oath of Office to Mike Gable as Councilperson for the City of Caldwell. (ADOPT THE TENTATIVE BUDGET FOR 1998 -99 AND SET THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR AUGUST 17, 1998, DURING THE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING) The Mayor asked that the Finance Director, EIJay Waite, present the background information on the Tentative Budget for 1998 -99. Mr. Waite reviewed the budget for the City Council stating that the Budget represents the combined budgets of the Department Heads. The recommendations from the City Council were still in the budget and will be negotiated and reviewed over the next few weeks as we take comments from the public. There were no reductions to the original budgets from the Department Heads and Council Members will receive copies of all that has been discussed during the hearings as to reductions. At this time, the Department Heads were reviewing the budget and were considering Council requests. There was a brief discussion about the proposed budget with Council presenting questions to the Finance Director. It was also noted that information and copies of the Tentative Budget were available at City Hall in the Mayor's Office. Council commented that the proposed budget was very easy to read and they did appreciate the work and time that Mr. Waite has spent on this budget. Councilman Evans further stated that for the record, he wanted people to know of the expertise that Mr. Waite has brought to the position he was hired for and the excellent work he has provided. The Council was very pleased and thanked him for that work. During the course of the conversation, the City Council also decided that they would hold a workshop on August 14, 1998, at 6:00 p.m. in City Hall. Book 39 Page 164 The Tentative Budget presented to the Members of the City Council was as follows: General Fund Caldwell Events Ctr Fund General Fund Override Library Fund Street Fund Airport Fund Recreation Fund Liability Ins Fund Cemetery Fund Cemetery Capital Imp Fund Cemetery Perp Care Fund Community Development H.U.D. Fund (Remaining) Debt Service Fund Capital Imp Fund Golf Fund Water Fund Sewer Fund Sanitation Fund Street Lighting Fund Employee Health Ins Fund Employee Dental Ins Fund FY 97 FY 98 FY 99 Actual Budgeted Proposed Expenditures Expenditures Expenditures 5,308,475 6,455,508 7,239,654 246,292 290,816 251,777 0 0 0 667,666 708,433 738,758 1,375,737 3,285,692 3,215,512 331,877 447,352 1,746,519 265,370 282,206 285,900 109,145 498,598 251,513 149,888 192,834 196,883 57 50 32,050 30,465 26,300 30,300 98,644 346,000 250,000 33,019 161,828 171,931 385,438 546,569 644,510 254,761 500,046 387,788 644,389 821,426 916,713 1,234,335 2,557,807 2,350,651 1,460,127 8,258,397 12,767,971 1,501,219 1,470,685 1,556,581 128,380 152,924 216,309 513,841 673,632 635,896 _ 76,841 _ 93,000 85,000 TOTAL Expenditures 14,815,966 27,770,103 33,972,21 FY 97 FY 98 FY 99 Actual Non- Actual Non- Proposed -non Property Tax Property Tax Property Tax FUND Revenue Revenue Revenue General Fund 3,090,620 3,257,977 3,748,588 Caldwell Events Ctr Fund 200,289 204,600 251,600 General Fund Override 0 0 0 Library Fund 365,370 391,579 397,384 Street Fund 1,653,812 2,027,151 1,758,528 Airport Fund 412,149 315,220 1,540,377 Recreation Fund 148,943 139,579 155,206 Liability Ins Fund 27,820 20,000 25,000 Cemetery Fund 132,129 120,349 135,639 Cemetery Capital Imp Fund 11,193 9,000 10,100 Cemetery Perp Care Fund 46,220 44,000 48,000 Community Development 97,282 346,000 250,000 H.U.D. Fund (Remaining) 20,077 9,000 11,500 Debt Service Fund 553,492 543,525 688,626 Capital Imp Fund 63,654 302,680 218,878 Golf Fund 668,100 673,500 745,320 Water Fund 1,488,787 1,373,300 1,474,216 Sewer Fund 2,469,210 8,031,941 9,523,000 Sanitation Fund 1,567,953 1,520,800 1,613,035 Street Lighting Fund 169,294 164,527 174,888 Employee Health Ins Fund 408,523 670,632 632,000 Book 39 Employee Dental Ins Fund 78,594 109,540 100 TOTAL Other Revenue 13,673,511 20,274,900 23,502,38 I1181►1�] General Fund General Fund Override Library Fund Street Fund Airport Fund Recreation Fund Liability Ins Fund Cemetery Fund Capital Imp Fund TOTAL Property Tax Revenue SUBTOTAL All Revenue Use of Fund Balance or Retained Earnings TOTAL All Revenue FY 97 FY 98 FY 99 Actual Budgeted Proposed Property Tax Property Tax Property Tax Revenue Revenue Revenue 2,863,552 3,033,009 3,280,745 0 0 0 304,945 316,193 341,222 492,627 511,709 553,505 44,927 46,213 49,988 122,807 112,724 121,931 3,186 0 0 47,379 48,719 52,698 172,614 143,598 155,327 4, 052,037 4,212,165 4,555,416 17,725,548 24,487,065 28,057,801 0 3 5,914,415 17,725,548 27,770,103 33,972,216 MOVED by Langan, SECONDED by Evans to adopt the Tentative Budget for 1998 -99 as presented and that a Public Hearing on the budget be held during the Regular City Council Meeting on August 17, 1998, at 7:00 p.m. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Langan, Wells, Gable, Evans, Earl, and Ozuna. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: none. MOTION CARRIED (PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED STORMWATER POLICY ORDINANCE — OA- 17 -98) Mayor Nancolas stated that the next item under New Business was a Public Hearing on the proposed Stormwater Policy Ordinance — OA- 17 -98. The Mayor informed the City Attorney, Mr. Hamilton, that he believed the City Council had questions with regard to whether to proceed with the Hearing this evening. Mr. Hamilton, the City Attorney, stated that the best policy since the Public Hearing was noticed would be to proceed with the Public Hearing at this time. At the conclusion of the testimony taken tonight, Council could either continue the Hearing or send the proposal back to Planning and Zoning for reconsideration. At that time, it would be more appropriate to schedule a workshop and review the proposal before it was reconsidered by Planning and Zoning. He did believe the best procedure would be to continue with the Public Hearing and then make a decision to either send back to the Commission, approve it, or disapprove. Councilwoman Earl stated that she wanted to clarify their options: We can proceed with the Public Hearing and either adopt it as recommended or could make changes at this time. We can deny it and remand back to Planning and Zoning with the understanding that there will be a joint workshop between Planning and Zoning, the City Council, and the Staff. Page 165 Mr. Hamilton agreed with the options as stated by Councilwoman Earl. Book 39 Page 1.66 Councilman Wells commented that he would like to hear testimony and make the decision after that. He firrnly felt that there were some issues that Council needs to discuss. There were some fundamental issues of the policy that they need to go through and he believed it would be better in a workshop. They needed to understand the policy that they were being asked to consider adopting. Mayor Nancolas noted that there was only one person signed to testify and he was signed to speak in favor of the policy, Mr. Lull Gilbert. No one signed to speak in opposition. After this comment, the Mayor reviewed the procedure for the Public Hearing and opened the Public Hearing. The Community Development Director, Mrs. James, informed Council that she wanted to present the recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission which was included in their packet. On June 25, 1998, the Planning and Zoning Commission Members did hear the proposed Ordinance. At that time, they voted to recommend to the Mayor and the City Council that the Storrnwater Policy be approved. Under Section 2.3 , Background Information, Council will note that the Policy was sent to a long list of agencies and I would like to state for the record that 33 agencies, businesses and political subdivisions were notified of the draft. In fact, they were sent a copy. Of those agencies, three responded in writing. Those included Pioneer Irrigation District, Bureau of Reclamation, and Earl and Associates. Mr. Law did take those comments into consideration and they were incorporated into the draft before the City Council. Councilwoman Earl stated that she spoke earlier that day with Mrs. James and with the City Attorney, Mr. Hamilton. IIer question goes back to the Idaho Regulatory Takings Guidelines. This was a booklet that all Council should have received from the Attorney General's Office. It states that there were guidelines and six questions that have to be asked by Staff as to whether or not taking issues could possibly come tip. Also states that it was mandatory and it should take place prior to this going out to agencies and groups. Her question to Mrs. James was whether this has taken place. Has the Staff done the review on these taking issues, had the Attorney reviewed it for those issues. Mrs. James answered that she did not personally review it as to takings. The copy was sent to our legal cou isel and whether or not they reviewed it as to taking, she would need to ask theirs. Mr. Hamilton stated that they did not review this with regard to takings. When it was received, I talked with Mark Hilly briefly. He had looked at the proposal, but he did not consider that issue. Mr. Hamilton further said that he, did look at the Regulatory Taking Statute after he talked with Mrs. Earl. It was his opinion that this was not a taking as legally defined. It appeared to him that if this low was to be applied prospectively instead of retroactively, that it would not be a taking because it was not an involuntary taking of someone's property as widening a road would be. As reviewing these questions that the Attorney General proposed, it does appear in several that the answer could be yes and the takings would have to be considered. He thought there was an economic gain when. someone proposes a subdivision and they have a choice in that they can accept this regulation as part of their choice to subdivide or they can choose not to subdivide. They were not forced to do that. If the City comes along and widens the road, you have no choice mud would be entitled to compensation. Councilwoman Earl stated that she believed they were talking about more than just subdivisions. Specifically, she was going back to where it states that State Agencies and Local Govermnents were required to use this procedure to evaluate the impact of proposed administrative or regulatory actions on private property. IIer question originally was and still stands was whether the City followed the guidelines of the Attorney General in evaluating this prior to bringing it to Public Hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission. Book 39 Mr. Hamilton stated that his office did not render an opinion as to those questions. The City Engineer stated that this question just read was not addressed by Staff. Gordon Law, the City Engineer, was recognized and informed Council that this business to do with the Storm Drainage Policy has been in the works for quite some time. In fact, back in January a workshop was held on this matter which was preliminary to the work of preparing the Storm Drainage Policy. In total, we probably had about seven months involved in writing the Policy and considerable amount of time in comment. If I understand the discussion earlier this evening, it appears that Council wishes to have a more detailed explanation under a workshop format which was an action I assume will take place later. Mr. Law continued stating that in light of that, he would keep his comments brief on the Policy outlining it's basic format. There were three principle items as the present regulatory climate suggests that need to be considered. (1) What size of storm does the City wish to have to be the criteria under which they were going to operate their Storm Water Policy; (2) How much water was going to be allowed off site from a development. Usually, that was a matter of rate, but it could also include a matter of quantity. In this particular Policy, it only addresses rate; (3) It has to do with the quality of the water which was discharged off site; what constituents was it allowed to have or what level of cleanliness was it allowed to have before discharged off site. What environmental factors enter into the quality of water which was discharged off site. The three items were the size of the storm, the rate of water which was allowed to be discharged off site, and the quality of which that water must exist when it was discharged off site. Page 167 The City Engineer further stated that this Policy, after review and consideration from a number of inputs, proposed that the basic storm size was twenty -five year, twenty -four hour duration with exception of one particular type of storm water facility which has no off site discharge. The basic design philosophy was twenty - five year•, twenty -four hour and the only exception being for the facility that does not have an off site discharge, but purposes to retain everything on site. The second item was the rate which water was discharged off site. It was proposed to be identical to the delivery rate for irrigation water in this Valley which was one miners inch to the acre. The reason for that being that most of the drain ditches on which we depend to convey this water have all been sized, built, constructed, maintained, operated over the years at a rate to take of return water which was being delivered at the rate of one miners inch to the acre. With regard to the third item which was those structures or best management practices which were included in this Policy for the controlling of pollutants being transported off site in the storm water, there were only two contemplated in this particular Policy. One was the construction or installation or use of sand and grease traps for the separation of floatables and sinkables before the water was discharged. The second management practice which was included in this Policy was the retaining of a portion of the stormwater so it does not discharge off site while the remainder could discharge off site. Those were the only two management practices included in the Policy. There were a number of other issues. Some could be considered minor and some could be considered major that were addressed by this Policy. Mr. Law briefly presented a few of them. One was that this Policy requires that a developer consider existing up stream drainage rights and down stream irrigation rights that have historically taken place across their property and that those things need to be preserved. Another was that all existing systems in place as the date of adoption of this Policy were grandfathered in which was an usual and typical clause to be included in policies. There was a so called engineer's rule which indicates that for small developments that an engineer and his stamp were not required for the design of the system, but for larger developments, the engineer's stamp and his assistance were required. Since he was not privy over the last couple of weeks to the questions that Council may have, he would like to conclude his remarks on the policy and open it for questions so he could address Book 39 Page 168 specific concerns. The Mayor stated that the City needs to create a document that will accommodate for possible future needs and regulations placed on us by regulatory commissions that we were all familiar with. The concern was that as more and more ground was covered up by concrete, pavement, and buildings, the issue would become more important. We have to take into consider what our needs were, but also the needs above us and below us in the water system. This document needs to take all of those items into account and try to plan for the future. The Mayor and Council discussed the document at some length including the changes in the near future such as the water duality; the State was working on the Total Maximum Daily Load Document and stormwater was one of the components that was included in that Document; changing of the hydrologic pattern of runoff and the attempt to try to restore the original pattern; characteristics of the City's runoff was changing; the Engineer's primary issues which were health, safety and welfare of those he was responsible for; the fact that you cannot sign out all risk. Councilwoman Earl specifically asked questions with regard to Legislative Authority in the Impact Area; Jurisdiction and Ownership and the fact that the City was designated as the operating entity for public right of way within Corporate City Limits; the Grandfather Clause; Engineer's Rule; location of storage facilities; Homeowner's Associations and having future discussion with regard to the Associations; storm drainage from offsite and whether multi lot development could accept water which the City Engineer felt should be discussed further, operational responsibility and what responsibility the City has; erosion and sediment control and Pollution Prevention Plan for developments for five acres or larger in size. Councilman Wells also referred to the Engineer's Rule and when an Engineer's certification. stamp was necessary. There was also some discussion pertaining to whether the City has any legal right to prevent a development from discharging into one of the City's drains. The tape of this meeting will be held in the Office of the City Clerk and available to anyone caring to review it. The City Engineer, Mr. Law, pointed out that there was an Ordinance with this Storm Policy. The intent of the Ordinance was to remove from the City Engineer the sole responsibility for setting storm drainage policy. When the Policy was adopted, that becomes the Policy for the City. Another item included in that Ordinance was that it sets up an appeal process if someone was aggrieved by this Policy particularly in the Engineer's interpretation or implementation of it. There was also a Resolution adopting the Policy and it was his opinion that the Ordinance would need to be considered first. After a short recess, the Mayor recognized Bill Gilbert, who was signed to testify regarding this issue. Mr. Gilbert, 21476 East Linden, was the only person signed to testify_ Mr_ Gilbert stated that the sign up sheets were ambiguous. He was in favor of the Policy, but also had some concerns. His suggestion was that a third sheet be provided for those who simply wanted to ask questions or comment. Mr. Gilbert informed the Mayor and Council that he was basically in favor of a Storm Water Policy. He would support the Policy if it was not excessive. Several questions were presented to the City Engineer by Mr. Gilbert. Mayor Nancolas asked that a motion be presented closing the testimony portion of the Public Hearing. MOVED by Evans, SECONDED by Wells that the testimony portion of the Public Hearing be closed. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Evans, Earl, Ozuna, Langan, Wells, and Gable. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: none. Book 39 Page 169 MOTION CARRIED The Mayor noted that the evidence exhibits included the Staff Report, the draft summary of the Stormwater Management Policy, and the sign up sheets. MOVED by Earl, SECONDED by Evans to accept the evidence as noted by the Mayor. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Earl, Ozuna, Langan, Wells, Gable, and Evans. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: none. MOTION CARRIED Mayor Nancolas informed Council that it would be appropriate at this time to present the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. Councilwoman Earl presented the following Facts: • The general facts that were presented to us and the comments made indicate that there was need for further discussion and study between the Council, Staff, and Planning and Zoning Commission before this Policy was adopted. Mayor Nancolas commented that the Conclusion could also be substantiated based upon this Fact. If the decision of the Council was to decline this particular document this evening and feels that a Workshop was appropriate, the only Finding of Fact that was necessary was that there were considerable questions and concerns raised by the Council that would constitute and necessitate need for further discussion through a Workshop format. Because of that issue, Council would have the right to decline approval this evening and your decision of order would be to decline and recommend setting a Workshop. • Councilman Wells suggested another Fact stating that the City does need a Stormwater Policy, was something the City needs, it was something they needed to fully understand and there were remaining questions in the process of understanding that were not answered at this Public Hearing and could be better answered at a later time. Councilman Langan asked for some clarification as to the meaning of fully understand. Councilman Wells stated that Mr. Law presented three areas of the Policy: Amount, rate, and quality. It was a matter of the liability of what the City was willing to accept. If we look at the Policy, it does not state exactly what those liabilities were and how it will effect it. Therefore, to fully understand the document, we have to understand the ramifications or what it means from the liability point of view, safety, and economic development to the City. Councilwoman Earl commented that they have talked about the City's role and the developer's role. She believed that they have to keep in mind that they were here to look after the general populace of the community and to make sure that whatever was adopted was going to serve them. There was some areas the Council really needed to go back and discuss so that when it was finished, they could say that they have done all they could to make sure that the public was protected. Councilman Langan stated that he has been on the Council for over four years and his experience has been that the current City Engineer's has been here since he has and he respects his judgment. He intended to ask Mr. Law some questions during the workshop and the final hearing regarding this, but he had to trust that what he says was going to be for the betterment of the City of Caldwell. Book 39 MOVED by Earl, SECONDED by Ozuna to accept the Findings of Fact as presented. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Earl, Ozuna, Langan, Wells, Gable, and Evans. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: none. MOTION CARRIED The Mayor stated that the Conclusions of Law would simply be that based upon the Findings of Fact, the City Council has the right to deny this Stormwater Policy in its present form based upon need for further information. The City Attorney suggested that they add that public notice requirements were met and that the hearing was conducted within the guidelines of the Idaho Code and City Ordinances. Councilman Langan further stated that he would like to designate a workshop for further study. The Conclusions of Law were as follows: • Based upon the Findings of Fact, the City Council has the right to deny this Stormwater Policy in its present form based upon need for further information. • The public notice requirements were met and the hearing was conducted within the guidelines of the Idaho Code and City Ordinances. • The Council felt there was a need for further study. MOVED by Earl, SECONDED by Langan that the Conclusions of Law as presented be accepted. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Earl, Ozuna, Langan, Wells, Gable, and Evans. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: none. T d=21 Mayor Nancolas then instructed Council that they would need to present an Order of Decision at this time. MOVED by Earl, SECONDED by Evans that based upon the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law adopted by the City Council, that the Council deny the proposed Stormwater Policy and that it be remanded back to the Planning and Zoning Commission and a joint workshop be scheduled between Planning and Zoning Commission, the City Council, and the City Staff which the public would be invited to attend. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Earl, Ozuna, Langan, Wells, Gable, and Evans. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting! none. MOTION CARRIED MOVED by Langan, SECONDED by Ozuna to close the Public Hearing. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Langan, Wells, Gable, Evans, Earl, and Ozuna. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: none. MOTION CARRIED The Public Hearing was closed by Mayor Nancolas. Page 170 (BILL NO. 21 REGARDING THE STORMWATER POLICY) Book 39 The Mayor noted that based on the Order of Decision approved by the Council and upon the recommendation of Staff, it would not be appropriate to consider Bill No. 21 at this time. Mr. Law, the City Engineer, stated that there were significant issues that he would like for the Council to take their time in studying and to have recommendations, ideas, and suggestions in mind before walking into a meeting. His recommendation was to wait three or four months so this could be done in detail. Mr. Law further informed Council that he was dealing with several other issues at this time and felt it was not practical to hurry on the Policy. After a short discussion, it was agreed that the Mayor would work with Staff to determine when would be a good time for a workshop. Mr. Law also noted that some of this Policy was second nature to him, but not necessarily second nature to everyone else. There were certain aspects of the Policy that the Council would not be interested in and were implementation type of issues. For his benefit, the Council needs to understand the nature of their questions so he could understand and deal with it and put it down verbally. By the same token, he felt his duty was to try to point out anything that might be inconsistent with other parts of the Policy or might have financial impact or will effect our ability to operate and maintain the system or the cost. It would be helpful if everyone was well prepared for the workshop. The Mayor also stated that he would be happy to take the time to sit down with Mr. Law and Mrs. James and try to project an appropriate time frame. As Mr. Law pointed out, he was dealing with the NPDES permit response to E.P.A. and that response time was much shorter than anticipated and also the stormwater treatment construction process has begun as well as several other construction projects. (FINANCIAL REPORT) Councilman Langan reported that the Finance Committee has reviewed current accounts payable in the amount of $472,118.81 for the period ended July 15, 1998, and a net payroll of $137,239.64 for the pay period ended July 4, 1998. MOVED by Langan, SECONDED by Evans that accounts payable in the amount of $472,118.81 represented by check numbers 58702 through 58925 and payroll for the amount of $137,239.64 represented by check numbers 62212 through 62353 and direct deposit stub numbers 8438 through 8536 be accepted, payment approved, and vouchers filed in the Office of the City Clerk. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Langan, Wells, Gable, Evans, Earl, and Ozuna. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: none. MOTION CARRIED (CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS) Councilman Gable thanked the Mayor and Council for the nice words and reception. He looked forward to being on the City Council. Councilman Evans remarked about how nice the mural on the back of the band shell looked He hoped that it would remain unmolested. Page 171 Councilwoman Earl stated that she would agree with Mr. Gilbert regarding the sign up sheets. She believed there should be a sheet for those who simply cared to comment or ask questions. It was agreed that there would be a third sheet. Book 39 Page 172 Councilwoman Ozuna welcomed Councilman Gable and thanked the Finance Director for coming to the Golf Board Meeting. Councilman Langan also welcomed Councilman Gable to the Council and would be happy to assist him if he had any questions. Iie also expressed that he was pleased with the appointment of Janie Archuleta to the Planning and Zoning Commission. (MAYOR'S COMMENTS) Mayor Nancolas thanked the Council Members for their participation in the selection process for the new City Councilperson. He believed the process was very good. The Mayor also noted his appreciation to the Finance Director for his work on the budget. It was a good budget which took a lot of time. Councilman Evans commented that he has been on the Council for two and a hall' years and this was the easiest budget to read. He also expressed his appreciation for the Finance Director, Mr. Waite, and in addition, thanked the Mayor for his input and interest in compiling the budget. He also reminded the Council of the budget workshop scheduled for August 14, 1998. (ADJOURNMENT) MOVED by Langan, SECONDED by Evans that since there was no further business, the Meeting be adjourned at 9:45 p.m. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Langan, Wells, Gable, Evans, Earl, and Ozuna. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: none. MOTION CARRIED APPROVED AS written THIS 3rd DAY OF August , 1998. Mayor Councilperson Councilperson C G/� �'k %'�� Councilperson City Cleric AT'T'EST: