Treasure Valley Partnership

Meeting Schedule 2008

Meetings are normally scheduled for the fourth (or last)
Wednesday of the month, 11:00 A.M. to 1:00 P.M. unless otherwise notified.

Treasure Valley Partnership

Meeting Minutes

January 23, 2008

Nate Mitchell welcomed everyone to Star and their new City Hall. He indicated they are working with Ada County to hopefully add some county related services in the building.

Paul Woods opened the discussion on Covered Loads. On the 22nd of December, he hosted a meeting of individual representatives of the legal departments of the TVP members. Also in attendance was ACHD.
The discussion centered around a draft ordinance on Covered Loads. There were two options to the draft. One was that you physically had to cover the load and the second included some freeboard language.

Paul indicated that they ran into a snag. In Ada County, there is a County-wide Highway District (ACHD) that has ordinance authority and there is some question whether the TVP members in Ada County would have jurisdiction. Paul indicated that ACHD has been looking at the Covered Load issue as well.

Carol McKee indicated that for the last couple of years, they have been working with Representative Phylis King and Senator David Langhorst to present State legislation on Covered Loads. They are trying the legislation this year. The bill is the same bill as last year. They would love to get a legislative task force together after they see what happens to the bill this year.

Tom Dale asked what the objections to the bill were last year. Carol indicated there several trucking companies that were opposed to the Bill. She added that all of the States around Idaho were enacting covered load type legislation.

John Evans asked, that if we get another delay in this year’s legislature, is the highway district amenable to passing a covered load ordinance locally. Carol indicated that we needed to get the AGC (Association of General Contractors) on board with us. Right now, there are about 50 percent of the members in agreement. The smaller contractors are concerned about costs.

Paul indicated that the good thing about the TVP is the leadership of the members to tackle issues that the legislature has failed at. The interesting thing is the Idaho Legislature then takes on the issue and passes it. He pointed to the Pseudoephedrine issue the TVP tackled a couple of years ago.

Steve Price indicated that the Covered Load issue is dear to him as he had a friend that was killed as a result of debris falling out of a truck. In 2002, they (ACHD) started an effort with the Association of Highway Districts. They continue to run up against opposition from the AGC. The smaller contractors see this as a heavy burden with costs. ACHD is supportive of the issue because of; air quality issues, storm water quality, and public safety issues. They have several claims a year because of rocks hitting windshields. They take the approach of paying the claims because, if they don’t, it leaves the taxpayer with a sense of helplessness. They also have started including a covered load provision in the contracts they release for road construction.

The AGC has successfully kept the Covered Load legislation from passing in the past. He felt that it would be a good time to sit down with the AGC. We need to relay to them that the jurisdictions of the TVP are looking at making a local ordinance happening. John Evans stated that many of the TVP members are ready to pull the trigger on a Covered Load Ordinance.

Tom Dale indicated we need to invite representatives from the AGC to a Partnership meeting and have a discussion on this issue. Tammy de Weerd indicated that the Partnership member Councils are supportive of putting in place an ordinance on Covered Loads. She also indicated that we cannot sit by and wait for the State Legislature to do their thing.

Brad Holton mentioned that he had done some research and found that 2/3’s of the aggregate and ready mix companies within Ada County are owned by Old Castle out of the United Kingdom. They have deep pockets.

Steve Price stated that to create a united front, legally, ACHD has jurisdiction over the roads and they have ordinance authority where as no other highway district in the State does. The problem with their ordinance authority is they have no enforcement powers. In the City of Boise, they have a joint powers agreement over storm water where they have the ordinance and the City of Boise does the enforcement. This joint powers agreement is pretty strong and can withstand most legal challenges.

Paul Woods asked, “what if Ada County passes an ordinance on Covered Loads on the roads”? Would this be thrown out? Steve Price indicated that if we had a joint powers agreement with the local jurisdictions, it would be pretty strong. Tom Dale asked, “cannot the city of Boise or Meridian vote to change a speed limit without ACHD’s permission”? Tammy de Weerd, said no, but we can enforce it. Her attorney gave her a summary; we can pass an ordinance and enforce it within our own jurisdiction. If Ada County, ACHD and each of the local municipalities pass the same ordinance it would be much stronger.

Steve Price indicated that if the City’s pass an ordinance based on public safety and they and ACHD passed an ordinance and did the joint powers agreement on enforcement, it would be a real tight package. Tom asked about jurisdictional authority over the Interstate. John Evans said that we can write a traffic ticket on the State highway over a local ordinance.

Dave Bieter indicated that we need to know if ACHD is going to go into this with us. We need to move forward. Tom Dale stated that if it would help Carol McKee and their statewide effort, he makes a motion to have the TVP support a statewide effort to institute legislation on Covered Loads. The motion was seconded by John Bechtel.

Paul Woods added that it was always the Partnership’s intent to get our draft together and then approach the AGC. Dave Bieter added that we don’t want to engage the ACHD in a jurisdictional battle. We can settle this among us, so the public will see this as a unified effort. Steve Price agreed.

Motion carried, unanimously.

Paul Woods began a discussion on in stream flow in the Boise River. He stated that this involved Anderson Ranch, Arrowrock and Lucky Peak. As the Snake River Adjudication has moved forward, the Bureau of Rec. has had a water right for many years. This is an incredibly complex issue.

The Water Resource Development Act passed. In this was an earmark of $175,000 for the Corps of Engineers to study flood control on the Boise River. Part of that can be additional storage. What seems to be opportunity for us is, in high water years we could take advantage of additional storage, for example, an aquifer recharge. This might be an opportunity for us to look at a water supply for us as we move forward. Tammy de Weerd indicated they have an application into DEQ for reuse. They are looking at delivering that water into a park and a golf course.

Phil Bandy indicated the irrigators are not willing to divert surface water into potable water uses. They are aggregating these water rights anticipating that someday they will be selling them off. Paul Woods mentioned, on the Boise River, there is excess water that could be gained through storage (aquifer recharge).

Tammy de Weerd wanted to know who we could bring to the next meeting so that our staff’s gain the knowledge that they need.

Brad mentioned that who owns the water in the Boise is convoluted and complicated. There is documented usage that as we go from agriculture to residential is creating a lot more demand. In the State of Idaho, irrigation systems are scared of use of canal systems for anything other than irrigation. The reason is they get into an EPA issue.

Paul Woods suggested that with this flood control grant, it is an opportunity for us to sit at the table and have some impact on what the study issues are. Dave Bieter indicated that collectively we need to get a place at the table.

Tom Dale spoke on the SAUSA Project. He stated a concern that if the State funded this project 100%, the project would be split up state-wide and we would loose our control. He pointed to the statistics on the number of indictments. Dave Bieter mentioned that this is a great project but had a concern about the Partnerships ability to maintain paying the percentage of the project costs it has in the past. He felt that we should stay at the table and see if the State could pick up a bigger chunk of the costs. He would like to have Christian Nafzger come to each jurisdiction’s Counsel Meetings and give a presentation on the SAUSA Project. Bill mentioned he would talk to Christian and have him contact each of the Partnership members to schedule a time to make a presentation.

Bill presented a request to have the SAUSA Project pick up Christian’s health insurance costs through Owyhee County. In the past year, Christian’s families’ health insurance was picked up by his wife’s employer. They have had a change in their family and his wife is no longer working. The proposal is to increase the reimbursement to pick up their health insurance costs. Tom Dale moved and John Evans seconded to approve the proposed increase in the reimbursement for the SAUSA Project to cover the increase in health insurance costs. Motion passed unanimously.

Tammy de Weerd mentioned that she had requested a report on the Server Training initiative. She passed out a report that Bill had completed. Dave Bieter indicated that there is an initiative underway in the legislature. He will obtain information on how this is doing and have information at the next TVP meeting.

Dave stated that they had passed a public intoxication ordinance. The server training initiative is working, this year they had ½ the DUI’s than they did last year.

Tiffany Floyd, Assistant Regional Administrator for DEQ was in attendance. They now manage five environmental programs; air quality, water quality, engineering and waste and remediation sections. They see their role as a technical resource. Tom Dale mentioned that the EPA is pushing 70 parts per million phosphorous. If we go to the 70, it will cost just the City of Nampa, $100 million for plant improvements. He was unsure if there was any benefit to go to this level. Tiffany indicated that the EPA has set some interesting but unrealistic standards. For example, water systems are struggling with the arsenic standards 10 parts per million. They are struggling to understand where the EPA is coming from and how they enforce these standards.

Tammy de Weerd mentioned as the cities struggle with unfunded mandates, where do we get the funding to meet compliance issues. Tiffany indicated there are some funds out there, for example the State Revolving Fund program. But there isn’t money added to it each year. There is also Rural Development funds. But there is not enough money to go around. The result is there are a lot of people out of compliance because of the lack of funds to meet ever increasing mandates.

Paul Woods asked Tiffany to write the Partnership a letter regarding how NPDS permit holders are going to comply when there is little water in the Boise River. Tiffany indicated she would.

There was a discussion about legislative issues concerning air quality and other items. Dave Bieter moved that we try to bump up the February Partnership meeting a week, in an attempt to get ahead of the curve on legislative issues. Tammy de Weerd seconded, motion carried.

Tammy de Weerd asked to hold the December meeting of the Partnership on the 8th. The group agreed to add this meeting in addition to the regular holiday lunch.

Tammy de Weerd moved to approve the minutes and financial report, John Evans seconded, motion approved.

Bill mentioned that David Ferdinand is now the Canyon County representative to the Treasure Valley Partnership.

Meeting adjourned.

Treasure Valley Partnership

Meeting Minutes

February 27, 2008

Mayor Scott Dowdy welcomed the members to Kuna. He indicated that their Sewer LID issue is a hot topic as the Legislature is messing with the LID process and it is making the City of Kuna nervous. He stated the city is growing quite a bit. In 2005, the City of Kuna consisted of about 3,000 acres of space. In 2006, they annexed about 3,200 acres and currently they have about 3,400 acres that is up for annexation. Even though the housing market is slowing down, the developers have not slowed down in the city of Kuna.

Mayor Dowdy mentioned that he really appreciates the camaraderie that has developed from membership in the Partnership and feels that there are real benefits of the members meeting on a regular basis.

He turned the meeting over to Paul Woods to go through the covered loads issue. Paul indicated that this issue in Ada County is encumbered due to ACHD having ordinance authority. He felt that we need to push this issue forward. We need ACHD to use their authority and the municipalities in Ada County to utilize their police powers to implement this ordinance.

Paul indicated that he has talked to Mayor De Weerd and she is ready to pull the string on the ordinance. In the latest draft, Agriculture is exempted. Phil Bandy wanted to clarify the intent. He had understood there were two intentions surrounding the ordinance, one, air quality and two, public safety. Paul indicated that the air quality issue comes from dirt leaking out of trucks and getting ground up which leads to increased particulate matter. However, the real issue is public safety.

Scott Dowdy asked about the two drafts that were in front of the group. Bill indicated that one was the draft put together by the work group and the other was the draft as proposed by the City of Meridian. A discussion ensued about the penalty portion of the drafts. The discussion settled that the penalty should be a misdemeanor.

John Evans asked why we have to wait on the ACHD. Paul indicated that the AGC has influence over the ACHD. John wanted the partnership to move forward on instituting a Covered Load ordinance. Tom mentioned that the only issue they had was enforcement. He wanted to make it an infraction just like a speeding ticket. Tom felt that the simplest we make this to enforce the better off we will be.

Scott Dowdy added that most trucking related infractions are misdemeanors. He felt that if we moved the violation provision from the Meridian draft and substitute this language into the draft developed by the work group, we would have a workable ordinance.

Paul stated that he will take this back and bring forth a final draft. He will route it around and look forward to completing this process at the March meeting. We will invite the AGC to the March meeting, get their feedback and finalize this ordinance at that time.

Scott introduced Tony Poinelli from the Idaho Association of Counties who was invited to lead a discussion around current legislative issues.

A discussion ensued around the State trying to take control of emission testing in the Treasure Valley. Tom Dale mentioned that time and time again, local leaders in Canyon County have asked for the science that indicates emission testing is making a difference. There has been no forthcoming information. With the upcoming proposed drop in the ozone requirements, he felt that local leaders will increasingly lose their voice in this matter.

Paul Woods stated that he has to agree with Tom on this emission testing issue. We need to work this out among ourselves and going to the State for assistance is a bad idea. John Bechtel indicated that emission’s testing is leaving out a large percentage of the vehicles that need to be included. Brad Holton agreed that if you look at fuel usage, we are not even looking at trucks and other vehicles that are not as efficient as passenger vehicles. Scott Dowdy added that emission testing doesn’t do much to fix the problem. He added that approximately 85% of the vehicles pass and that it seems unrealistic that the 15% that do not pass are causing the problem.

Scott indicated that the money being raised by emission testing is not being used to help mitigate the problem. The money is being used to pay for the bureaucracy of the Air Quality Board. Testing is not addressing the problem. Phil Bandy stated that we still are not addressing the source of the problem. Paul mentioned that he agrees with Tom on that we need to be committed to the idea of local control.

Brad stated that the scope of the problem goes far beyond Ada and Canyon County. This does not address the contributing factors. He felt that we need to be proactive and work together to identify a solution. Additionally, there is a lot of fuel that is being burned that is outside the scope of current testing.

Paul mentioned there is a large disconnect between budget and assessed value. We need to get some sort of information campaign to educate people that it should not matter what happens with your assessment. You cannot have more than a 3% increase in your budget.

There is a push to consolidate elections. Tony indicated that this 105 page document has not been shared with local leadership. There would be a maximum of four elections per year. This will cause some hardships for local municipalities.

A discussion ensued around the proposed vehicle registration fees. It was felt that this issue would be revamped numerous times before it settles on a number.

Tony stated that there will probably be another study on property tax. They have never really focused on what property taxes should be used to pay for. The concurrent resolution ACR 45, the overall intent seems to focus on law enforcement and corrections. We will have to see how this goes.

There is a bill from ACHD regarding eminent domain. John Evans stated that lets assume we have a piece of property on an intersection that ACHD has to come and take part of it to improve the intersection. The property then becomes nonconforming to City specs. The property owner then states that you have rendered my property useless and the resulting lawsuit settles on the original value of the property. The Bill basically says that the property owner cannot settle on the original value. But the property has to be treated as it is conforming for the rest of time. This bill is all about reducing the acquisition costs to the highway district.

The focus of the meeting switched to the next agenda item, water storage. Paul Woods mentioned that there is current legislation at the state level to study water storage. He indicated that the Bureau of Reclamation and ID Water Resources is happy to partner with us to look at this issue. He would like to invite these folks to the next meeting. He mentioned that he would like for us to invite some of our staff to the next meeting and look at the feasibility of this. Do we want to look at a regional water storage project that would also help with flood control problems?

John Evans moved and John Bechtel seconded to approve the minutes and financial report. Motion passed.

Meeting adjourned.

Treasure Valley Partnership

Meeting Minutes

March 26, 2008

Commissioner David Ferdinand opened the meeting. He indicated that they are working hard on commercial developments. Canyon County was part of Ada County till 1887. Canyon County encompasses 604 square miles with 9,895 acres of residential property.

David presented a map of the valley and indicated that several people have been working on trying to reserve the property for a Freeway bypass rout. He mentioned three dates for a possible workshop on this issue; April 1, April 23 and May 14. He asked the group if there were any problems with either of these dates. He was planning on trying to hold these workshops in the evening. Phil Bandy indicated that the COMPASS board meeting is on the 21st and this might be a good time to begin this discussion.

Covered Loads Ordinance

David asked Paul Woods to begin the discussion on the Covered Loads ordinance. Paul introduced Mark Dunham with the Association of General Contractors and thanked him for coming to the meeting. Paul indicated that the Partnership has been discussing the possibility of a Covered Load Ordinance since November. Paul then pointed to the latest draft of the ordinance that the working committee has put together. The ordinance has been scaled down considerably from its inception. The goal is to make it short and simple and avoid a big long document.

Paul mentioned that the plan was to have a draft that everyone could buy in on, and then bring the Association of General Contractors in to get their opinion. The Partnership’s intent with this ordinance was to focus on public safety and some of the other issues we deal with as municipal governments, such as cleaning up roads as a result of this activity. However, public safety has been the driving force behind developing this Covered Loads ordinance.

We are intending to make this ordinance uniformly applied throughout the Partnership jurisdictions. Tammy added that the intent was to do this as a region and not to have difference ordinances across the valley. Paul asked for Mark Dunham’s input.

Mark thanked the partnership for his opportunity to comment on this issue. The AGC really understands there is an issue with covered loads. They are supportive to the need and do want the ordinance to be consistent across the valley. He would like to take the ordinance to their Highway Committee. He has talked to the Chair of that committee and they would like to have a chance to look at the ordinance and provide feedback. He also talked to Senator Langhorst who had State legislation on covered loads, during the last legislative session.

Mark indicated that there could be some questions, for example, one of the members of the AGC had a question on what was deemed a term public roadway. The AGC as a whole wanted to have the opportunity review the ordinance and to ask questions like this.

Mark offered to inform the partnership on latest developments at the State Legislature. He indicated that GARVEE had passed. The House Ways and Means Committee was supposed to meet on a transportation infrastructure bill. It would be a package that would increase the fuel tax by 3% and registration fees by 60%. That is projected to raise 45-70 million per year. This is an update as of that instant in time. It could change by this afternoon.

Paul Woods asked for the AGC’s feedback prior to the next TVP meeting and asked the members if they are willing to make a formal commitment to adopting a covered load ordinance in our jurisdictions during May of this year. Those in attendance agreed.

Water Storage Studies

Paul Woods introduced Helen Harrington and Debbie Willis. He mentioned that the Corps of Engineers has been given about $170,000 to look at flood protection and water supply issues. He felt that this would be an ideal time for the Partnership members to partner with other agencies to look at water supply issues. This is a unique opportunity for us to be involved in this study.

Helen Harrington mentioned that in 1986 there were significant changes in how the Corps does business. Basically, it mandated that all future studies had to be cost shared 50-50. The nonfederal share can be totally in-kind match. In 1996 and 1999 they had opportunities to do some studies but were not able to put together a local coalition to further studies. In 1999, the State had been working on their comprehensive plan on the lower Boise. However, there was no local cost-share.

One of the things other communities have done is identify and get credit for, in-kind work that could be used prior to a feasibility cost sharing agreement being entered into. ID Dept. of Water Resources decided that they could get some previous in-kind credit. About three years ago they started working on some language to present to congress to get about $500,000 credit for work they had done, towards a feasibility study on the lower Boise.

That gave impetus to a study. In January, the Corps got an appropriation for funding for the study. She indicated we have a unique opportunity to do a comprehensive plan that includes a multipurpose project focus. Phil Bandy agreed with the opportunity we have before us. He mentioned that this idea of a multi-purpose comprehensive Lower Boise River study has been discussed for several years. We have now have the opportunity to utilize work done by all jurisdictions and have that count as in-kind match. And as a result, we will be able to take a look at all of these issues such as water storage, flood management, etc., as an entire lower Boise Watershed.

Helen stated that the result could include individual needs of each jurisdiction; including sewage needs for example. In addition, this represents a good opportunity to do a programmatic environmental impact statement, so when jurisdictions want to undertake activities along and involving the Boise River, then it is easier because we have already addressed environmental consequences of programmed needs.

She stated that in this fiscal year, they received $172,000 and projects the study could cost upwards to $2,000,000.00. As we get started in the public input process, we are going to find out additional needs that will be added to the study.

From an in-kind service standpoint, the jurisdictions need to look at all the work that has been done in the following areas. A more complete list will be provided to Bill to distribute to the Partnership members.
GIS Database work
Assessed properties in the 100 & 500 yr. Flood plain
Utilities
Include work that includes tributaries of the Lower Boise

Phil Bandy asked if we are looking at multiple use and supply, then ground water should be a significant component. Helen agreed, we are looking at water supply and demand and that includes both surface and ground water. Phil asked, if conjunctive management is going to be a part of the continuum of water resources? The Department of Water resources has asked to do a ground water study in the Boise foothills, could this potentially be used as in-kind match. Helen stated actually associated with this study is a ten year aquifer basin planning project. These include both the Rathdrum and Treasure Valley areas.

She reiterated that, the State alone could not come up with the local community match. They are actively seeking local communities to help provide the in-kind match for the plan. Debbie stated that the Bureau of Reclamation is also very much involved.

Paul stated that he got interested as a result of a presentation to the Partnership last summer. He has been intrigued by the opportunity to take what we have already done and leverage it. For the Partnership, new development is not just about infrastructure, it is about where the water is going to come from. We need to start addressing how we “regionally” can create a source of water we can control. He stated that we all have fun dealing with the irrigation districts. This is an opportunity for us to look at creating a storage facility for us. His priority is in knowing how we participate and have a voice.

Dave Ferdinand added that maybe look at more than one area for water storage. Could this be part of the study? Debbie Willis stated, it could be, but they do not know the answers right now. They are in the beginning phase of developing this study effort. She indicated that they will be in touch with the Partnership members to work to generate the in-kind match documentation that will go toward the study. She plans on having the initial stages complete to begin the public input process by June.

Margie Watson welcomed the opportunity for the Partnership entities as a whole to have a voice and be able to provide past work to be used as in-kind match. Debbie indicated that they will be developing a list of potential city/county planning activities that could be used.

Brad Holton asked about how water quality issues might be included in this study? Debbie was unsure how water quality aspects might fit in. She indicated that when you are looking at surface and ground water from a conjunctive management aspect and you are dealing with declining ground water, you that is when you can look at a comprehensive study of water supply. Then you can ask the question if surface water can be used in place of the ground water. All of this is part of the big picture and a comprehensive study allows you to take into consideration of all aspects of water supply and usage.

Dave Ferdinand asked if, through this comprehensive study, we could gain some ground on NEPA studies associated with infrastructure development along river channels. Helen stated that this may in fact help shave some years off the process.

Other News

Paul Woods mentioned that they were successful in securing $900,000 funds for the Community Crisis Center. It will be located near St. Alphonsus Hospital.

Project Manager’s Report

Bill mentioned that there were no out of the ordinary expenses and our monthly financial report includes the quarterly SAUSA Project payment. Margie Watson moved and John Evans seconded to approve the financial report and the minutes from the previous meeting. Motion passed unanimously.

Bill shared the latest quarterly SAUSA Project report. He also indicated that Matthew Faulks, Owyhee County Prosecutor is not running for reelection this year. He stated that the Partnership as a whole may want to look at the hosting of the SAUSA Project. Margie Watson felt that the three counties should look at taking turns at hosting the project. Dave Bieter mentioned that the project speaks for itself and encouraged the members to speak to their respective county prosecutors in case we need to switch hosting entities. Hal Tolmie requested that the Partnership hold off and he will do some more investigating and would have some input on this issue at a meeting in the near future.

Bill indicated that he has been diligent in attempting to update the Partnership website. It seemed like updates would show up and then go away. After a couple of months struggling with this issue, Bill terminated business with the website host and hired a different hosting organization for the same money.

Bill wanted the organization to again take a look at meeting dates/times for the Partnership. Even though we have had much improved attendance since shifting to the 4th Wednesday, this day does not work with Garret’s schedule. Dave Bieter mentioned that we should go through this exercise again and attempt to find a time that is conducive to everyone’s schedule. John Evans added that we should stay away from COMPASS meeting dates. Bill stated he would send out a schedule and have an analysis of potential meeting dates/times at the next meeting.

Meeting Adjourned.

Treasure Valley Partnership

Meeting Minutes

April 23, 2008

Vicki Thurber opened the meeting and welcomed the Partnership to Middleton. Middleton was established in about 1883 and was originally along the river. Because of regular flooding, from 1876 and 1881 Middleton was moved to its present location.

Covered Loads

Paul Woods introduced Mark Dunham the Executive Director of the Association of General Contractors. He thanked the Partnership for including the AGC in this effort and asked: What originally prompted the Covered Load Ordinance effort? What is the need given federal inter-state guidelines on covered loads? And they had some comments on the wording of the ordinance.

Paul responded that most everyone around the table has had some personal experiences in this regard and he indicated that fellow Ada County Commissioner Fred Tilman had some experience with this issue when he was in the Idaho Legislature. Tom Dale added that he was very happy when the partnership started talking about this issue. His personal experience has stemmed from driving down the freeway and seeing sand and gravel flying out of trucks. This is not only a safety issue for travelers, but it puts dirt on the highway that gets ground up and turns into PM 2.5. John Evans added that he was hit by a rock that was picked up by a car in front of him. Tom asked, how do those rocks get on the highway? It is from material escaping from trucks that are traveling the roads.

Mark indicated that these are the reasons his board suspected. For their members they are required by Federal law to cover their loads. Paul wanted Gene Petty to respond to this. Gene said that the Federal law talks about enforcement being from the State Police from a compliance review and inspection. Brad Holton added that they had a flagrant violator on Hwy. 19. He had his officer call and was told there are only two units available in the State to go out and stop that truck for that violation. A regular patrol officer can make a stop if he sees it.

Mark Dunham asked about the need to cover if the truck is working in a subdivision and not operating on an open public roadway. Gene Petty indicated that this scenario has been accounted for in the latest draft of the ordinance.

Mark indicated that there was a concern with the language that was divergent from Federal Law, specifically, that law mentions the term secured and had suggested changing the title of the ordinance from uncovered to unsecured. Paul stated he is not necessarily opposed to that, but he had a concern that this clouds the meaning on what this ordinance is about. The whole focus is to try to insure that stuff doesn’t come flying out of trucks. Tom added that if we changed the language to secured, we would have to add a definition of what secured would mean.

John added that the word secured has a different meaning to the construction industry. He felt that the goal of this ordinance was directed toward those who are hauling aggregate and other construction materials. We may need to narrow this. Ada and Canyon Counties already have an ordinance directed at folks that are heading with a load to the land fill. If we are primarily targeting aggregate haulers, we may need to fine tune the language to fit that language. Margie Watson mentioned that she fine is with the aggregate idea; however there are other items that are causing hazards.

Mark indicated that they will do some investigating around the covered vs. secured language and get with Paul with any suggested changes. Paul moved that upon hearing from Mark and their suggested changes, they will take this ordinance back and look into the word-smithing around “covered load vs. secured” and bring this back to the May meeting to move forward to formal adoption by the Partnership. Tom Dale seconded. Motion carried.

Emission Control and Ozone Standards

Vicki introduced Leonard Herr who was there to talk about emission control and ozone standards. Leonard pointed to the handout in the information packet. He stated there are a couple of issues that are before us that will have an effect on the entire valley. (1) The Feds lowered the Ozone compliance standards. (2) The State Legislature enacted state-wide emissions testing requirements.

The EPA, in their periodic review of nationwide Ozone standards, decided to lower the standard from .08 parts per million to .075. This will have the potential to have an effect on the Treasure Valley, because our last three years of testing has been above the requirement. He expected the valley to achieve non-attainment this summer.

If the valley goes into non-attainment, one of the things we will be required to do is develop a STIP, State Implementation Plan. In this plan we will be required to tell the EPA what we are going to do to bring the area back into attainment. One of the components of this is the type of control measures we are going to institute to bring the valley into compliance with these ozone standards. These include:

1. Enhanced vehicle inspection and maintenance program (for entire valley)
2. Emissions offsets for major source (1.5)
3. Expanded operating permit program and controls for minor sources of VOC
4. Regulation of vehicle fueling (stage 1)
5. Implementation of transportation control measures
6. Installation of Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACT) for major sources
7. Enhanced emission inventory and air monitoring requirements
8. New transportation conformity requirements

There is a big consideration to the timing of this ozone requirement and potential non-attainment status. If we go into non-attainment this summer, we will have till 2010 before the EPA officially designates the non-attainment. This effectively gives the valley 2 years of summer testing. If we can achieve testing values in the low seventies, then this would drop our 3-year moving average to a point where we could be in compliance. The big reason is because the valley had a very high summer of 2006 with our testing nearing .082.

If we get the letter from the EPA on non-attainment of Ozone standards, the State will have three years to develop the STIP. Then from that time, we will have three years to implement our control measures to lower our tested levels.

Leonard Herr also mentioned Idaho House Bill 586, passed year. This Bill states that if an air shed exceeds 85% of ambient air quality standards, then that area has to institute vehicle emissions testing or something similar. This has an effect on us as well as the Coeur d’Alene area. This does allow for alternative vehicle emissions control strategies.

As this Bill goes into effect July 1, Leonard indicated they will be in contact with the Partnership members in the near future to begin the process of looking at the requirements under the Bill.

David Ferdinand stated that in current vehicle emissions testing; only 8% of the vehicles are found to be in noncompliance with emissions control standards. He asked Leonard about the smoking car program. Leonard indicated there is a couple of ways to do this without bringing everyone into a testing station. (1) Remote sensing testing technology can be set up along highways etc. that can remote sense the traffic and find the polluters. (2) There is also a kind of a kiosk being tested in Oregon where the car would drive by the equipment and it would test the vehicle emissions. The person would then not even have to stop if there is not an emissions problem.

However, there is some privacy issues with these technologies.

Vicki asked how much wildfire’s contribute to our air shed problems? Leonard stated that they do contribute primarily to particulate pollution and to a lesser extent the ozone problem. If there is a testing that occurs during a natural event like this, they can ask to have the testing excused only if we exceed the standards. If it just elevates our levels we cannot ask for this relief.

Tom asked if Cities particularly could require in an ordinance Stage 1 type vapor recovery type measures? Leonard indicated that yes, Cities could undertake this action. Tom mentioned he heard that these Stage 1 vapor recovery measures could have up to a 5% reduction in VOC’s. He felt that maybe we should look at this as a possible way to head off vehicle emissions testing.

Leonard stated that DEQ has potentially found some funds to ask for a voluntary compliance with Stage 1 vapor recovery this year. One of the contingencies of these funds is, they cannot be used to fund the law. So, if we could put out a campaign to utilize the grant funds to get businesses to voluntarily undertake the steps for Stage 1 Vapor Recovery. Then next year, pass state DEQ requirements on having Stage 1 vapor recover equipment in Ozone non-attainment areas. So, if Cities/Counties passed an ordinance to require Stage 1 vapor recovery equipment and put implementation a year a way, this would give impetus to get folks to come into compliance.

David Ferdinand mentioned that there are some dos and don’ts that affect the VOC levels. Examples are; don’t fuel up in the afternoon, fuel up in the morning; don’t mow your lawn in the afternoon, do it in the morning. Does the public know these kinds of common sense approaches to limiting the components in the creation of ozone?

Leonard mentioned they are going to undertake some public information campaigns on these common sense approaches to ozone control this summer.

Leonard indicated that there are two different ways to control vapors, Stage 1 and Stage 2.

Stage 1 vapor recovery is recovering the vapors from the underground storage tanks that occur when they are filling the storage tank up. When they fill the tank up, they displace the vapors in the tank with gasoline. Stage 1 is then capturing these vapors that are displaced as a result of refueling, and pumping these vapors back into the truck. The cost of instituting these vapor recovery efforts is not that expensive.

Stage 2 is where you have a bellows over the gasoline nozzle that captures the displaced vapors as you are filling your gas tank and these are then pumped back into the storage tank. To put these in vapor recovery systems is rather expensive. Additionally, modern cars have an onboard vapor recovery system. However these are not super efficient.

David Ferdinand asked if the new service station being constructed down the street from him will put any of these vapor recovery systems. Leonard stated that they are not required to put any vapor recovery systems while they are building. He also indicated that it is hard to buy storage tank that is not compatible with stage 1 vapor recovery. There are only 6 states in the country that are not requiring stage 1 recovery systems.

Margie asked if the grant money is available right now for retrofitting for stage 1 vapor recovery. Leonard indicated that these funds have not been released by the ITD Board yet.

Tom asked if we can go to the ITD Board and get some sort of clarification or decision out of them to get that money released for vapor recovery efforts. Leonard indicated he is not sure how aware their board is of this possibility. He indicated he would talk to Pam Lowe to find out if there is an awareness of the ability to release these vapor recovery funds.

Paul Woods asked why we could not have a differential pricing structure. 20% of the vehicles are 80% of the problem. Testing would be part of the vehicle registration and those who fail the test would pay a higher vehicle registration. Could we do these sorts of things? Leonard indicated that you can do pretty much what you want to as far as that goes. The reason that is not done is, the people that drive the cars that are not passing vehicle emissions are those with little income.

Hal Tolmie added that we are rather inefficient when it comes to building roads and these things. It costs almost as much studying for a road than you do for actually building it. Leonard agreed and added if we go into non-attainment, those planning costs will go up.

Margie asked, what are the competing needs for the funds, that are available, to aid with vapor recovery efforts. Leonard indicated that currently about ½ of this 10-12 million dollars goes to ITD general fund activities, the other half is distributed around the state for projects that reduce air pollution. Examples are sweeper trucks, spray trucks, and other projects.

Tom asked if Leonard could investigate the chip sealing practices and get back to us on some of the answers surrounding this contributor to the ozone problem. Leonard mentioned ACHD is looking at putting together a meeting on this. He will certainly make sure everyone is aware of the meeting.

Paul wood asked about pavement hot mix plants. Leonard said that these plants are currently controlled.

Server Training

Bill pointed to the handout packet which included the draft server training ordinance and a document that summarizes the results of the industry participation meetings on the server training issue. In addition, there was included an ordinance that prohibits the “all you can drink” special events. Bill mentioned that in August and October of 2007, we held some public participation meetings in Meridian and Nampa. There was an effort to invite bar and restaurant owners and managers, distributors, training agencies and representatives from law enforcement to these meetings. They were pretty sparkly attended.

We did not run across much opposition to the idea of a valley-wide server training ordinance. Corporate establishments already have components of server training requirements in their employee training programs. Independent establishments were primarily concerned with the costs of paying for a server training for an employee to given the transitory nature of the workforce. Some of the requests for adjusting the draft ordinance included.

• A request to have a central authority approve training programs. A representative from the ISP indicated during the meetings that this would be doable and they did not foresee the need to approve very many training programs.
• A 3-6 month period for phase in of the ordinance from passing to implementation. This would give the industry time to react and the servers time to obtain training.
• There was a request to add language in the ordinance that clearly identified that this is the servers responsibility, not the establishments.

Tom Dale moved and Margie Watson seconded to move forward with creating a final draft of the server training ordinance and get set to have the Partnership members institute this in their jurisdictions. Motion carried. Bill stated he would get with Alison Tate to coordinate a meeting and send an email out to Partner members to invite staff to participate in a discussion on the ordinance.

Project Managers Report

Margie Watson moved that the minutes from the March meeting and the financial report. John Evans seconded, motion carried.

Bill pointed to a hand-out of an analysis of possible meeting times for the Partnership. There were three weeks and dates that were listed. This analysis of possible meeting times has been done in an attempt to get all members to the meetings. The meeting date and time were changed back in September in an attempt to increase participation in the Partnership meetings. The meetings have been well attended with the exception of Caldwell since that time.

The three dates listed were, the 2nd and third Wednesday of the month and the 2nd Monday of the month, with meeting times from 11-1 pm. Bill indicated that Monday’s were problematic as Owyhee County holds their Commission meetings on Monday mornings. It wad decided that Bill continue to work on this and have something ready for the next meeting.

Website

Bill mentioned that he has been involved with updating the TVP website. He will be adding a “community forum” section to enable people make comments on current issues.

Old Business

Hal Tolmie asked if any of the members had talked to their County Prosecutor to identify if there was another county looking at picking up the SAUSA Project. A discussion ensued and it was decided to table this discussion for the next meeting.

Meeting adjorned.

Treasure Valley Partnership

Meeting Minutes

May 28, 2008

Phil Bandy opened the meeting and welcomed the Partnership to Eagle. He passed out a magazine that tells about the history of Eagle. Established in 1971, Eagle continues to grow. However, residential building permits have subsided a little this spring but commercial permits are still pretty steady. The only issue they have right now is the private water system that serves this area.

In the last five years they have had a growth rate of about 12 percent. In the 1970 census, Eagle had about 250 people. Now the population is near 23,000.

Covered Loads

Paul Woods began the discussion on the Covered Loads issue. He indicated that during the April meeting they had left the ball in the hands of the AGC to come back to the Partnership with suggested changes to the Covered Loads Ordinance. There has not been any contact about changes since that time. Tammy indicated that they had sent out some ideas to the area attorney’s and had heard back from Boise but had not heard from any others. She stated that here council is ready to pass the ordinance but wanted to pass the same language as everyone else.

Tammy also indicated that they have been working with Leonard Herr to move forward with the Stage 1 vapor recovery draft. At the earliest they will have it in July 09.

Paul asked if we would like hold a public hearing on the Covered Loads issue. Tom indicated that in the past after we had had each of our councils/commissions discuss the issue, we then issue a press release that indicates each of the cities/counties are discussing the ordinance and agree collectively to pursue an ordinance in each of the jurisdictions. Then subsequent to the cities/counties passing the ordinance, we hold a ceremonial signing. Paul asked Bill to work with each of the jurisdictions and coordinate a press conference once each of the cities/counties councils/commissions have agreed to pursue the Covered Loads ordinance.

Paul’s suggestion was to look at a press conference after the week of June 23rd to give each of the jurisdictions an opportunity to look at and discuss the ordinance. A discussion ensued that Bill would coordinate with the Partnership members and schedule a press conference.

John asked what the group thought about an effective date for the Covered Load Ordinance. Brad mentioned that there would have to be enough lead time to give the industry time to react, maybe 60-90 days. Tammy suggested October 1st. There was consensus that this would be the effective date for the ordinance.

Phil wondered what kinds of questions the AGC might throw at us in our individual public hearings. Paul felt that they are split on the issue. There are some members who are for and some against. Tammy added that from the conversation with Mark Dunham, they are anticipating that it will happen sooner or later.

Brad asked which version of this ordinance we should pursue. Bill indicated that the version before us was the same he had emailed to the members within the last two days. It was the latest version out of the group effort.

Paul also indicated that this was the version we shared with Mark Dunham’s at the last TVP meeting. Mark’s only change was to substitute “secured” for “covered” in the language of the ordinance. Brad reiterated that the two words mean different things to different people and, the more consistent language in-line with our intent is “covered”.

Paul felt that we have taken the comments of the AGC and we should move forward.

Brad offered a suggestion that may deflect all of the concerns. Their council had discussed the possibility of changing the title of the ordinance itself to include all the dropping, sifting, leaking….etc. language of the ordinance. Tammy indicated she would have no problem with changing the title. There was a consensus to have Bill make this change and send to the Partnership.

Scott mentioned that our jurisdictions don’t necessarily have to have a public hearing on the subject. He believed they would put it on the City Council agenda and may just adopt it then. Tom added that they will probably have public hearings on the ordinance. Tammy stated their public hearing would be on June 17th. Tom said he wanted to do his earlier as he is going to be out of town. Paul indicated theirs would be June 14th.

TVP Meeting Dates

Bill explained the analysis of regular meetings. Based on the data Bill suggested that we hold a rotating schedule of meetings. For example on odd months we hold our meeting on the 4th Monday and on even months we hold our meeting on the 4th Wednesday. Otherwise we will be consistently missing certain members because of conflicts with regular meeting schedules.

It was pointed out that there was an AIC meeting during the regularly scheduled meeting in June. Margie moved that maybe we cancel the meeting in June because of the conflict. Tom seconded. Motion Carried.

Tammy suggested that we go with the fourth Monday and the fourth Wednesday. We could also coordinate with Compass to be sure that those Monday meetings will not conflict with the few Compass meetings that are held on Monday’s. A discussion ensued. Bill indicated he would get with Mayor Bieter on the July meeting dates and then adjust the schedule for the ensuing months.

Goal Setting Discussion

Tom understood that one of the purposes of the Partnership was to bring Commissioners and Mayors together to discuss issues that concerned both Cities and Counties. It was not, in the inception, meant to be an organization that focused on projects only. As we discuss issues that are common to each jurisdiction, we will run across activities that are natural for us to pursue. One of the good values to the organization is the opportunity to work on creating relationships with one another.

Phil was hoping that we continue to have speakers come in and speak to all of us instead of individually. Paul indicated one of the things he likes about the Partnership is the ability to bring issues to the table. We have forums for transportation, infrastructure, etc. One of the issues on the forefront that is important is the issue of group homes. Another is mobile home parks.

Margie asked what the other jurisdictions are doing with the Idaho Meth Project. Tammy indicated that there was a bunch of information being given at the AIC Conference. Margie indicated she was interested in the Montana Meth project and was interested in the Mural activities and was trying to pursue having this kind of activity in Parma.

Paul mentioned that one of the issues they are facing in Ada County is the drug courts require offenders to pay for their urinalysis. Well the kids cannot afford to pay; therefore the County has to foot the bill for keeping them in this drug court program.

Retreat

Tammy suggested some of the topics for the retreat could be; transitional homes, substance abuse and transportation. Phil added a topic could be affordable housing. Tom felt that local option tax issues related to the Frazier decision could be a good topic. Additionally he mentioned Local Improvement Districts as a topic for future discussion.

SAUSA Project

Tom mentioned that he had talked with Marc Haws and they are opening up a new position at the U.S. Attorney’s office and that Christian might be the candidate for this new position. Additionally, the SAUSA Project had originally been a two year commitment from the partnership then the Cities of Boise, Nampa, Caldwell would look at taking over the reigns. But there is the option of the State picking up the project. In the conversation with Marc Haws, Mark felt that the Treasure Valley would not really loose much coverage if the State picked this project up.

Paul asked if there was an opportunity for us to reach out to the other Cities and Counties that have been effected by the project to see if there may be an opportunity to get some reimbursement back from the SAUSA prosecutions in these other jurisdictions.

Tom mentioned that he had had some conversations with local legislators about sponsoring legislation around the SAUSA Project. He asked for some guidance from the group if he should continue to pursue that with these legislators. Margie indicated she would like him to pursue talks with legislators. She indicated she would talk with Brad Little and others as she feels strongly that we need to make this a permanent position for the employee.

Margie moved and Tom seconded to approve the minutes and financial report.

Meeting adjourned.

Treasure Valley Partnership

Meeting Minutes

June 2008

The June 2008 Meeting Minutes are not available at this time. Please check back soon!

Treasure Valley Partnership

Meeting Minutes

July 23, 2008

Dave Bieter opened the meeting and welcomed everyone to Boise.

He introduced Allison Tate from the Boise City Attorney’s Office who was in attendance to talk about the Server Training Ordinance. She introduced the server training ordinance and an ordinance prohibiting “all you can drink specials”. These ordinances were the results of over a years worth of discussion. These ordinances were modeled after similar ordinances in California. She indicated that there are lots of server training ordinances throughout the United States.

Allison stated that they have tried to make the language of these ordinances as simple as possible. Basically it states that “if you are a server of alcohol or an individual that manages waiters, waitresses, and bartenders then you are required to receive training. And there are three different types of training and that are considered applicable. They are:

• “ServSafe Alcohol”- programs of the National Restaurant Association Educational.
• “TIPS” - training for Intervention Procedures programs of Health Communications, Inc.
• “Learn2Serve” - training for on premise servers and sellers of alcohol.

Tammy asked if TIPS was the only training that bar owners could use? Allison stated that bar owners should be able to access all of the above training programs.

John asked how there is verification of training? Allison stated that these training programs have a testing component and will print out at certificate of completion for the training. Tammy added that training recipients will receive a card indicating they have completed the training. Tom followed by asking how is the issuance of the card monitored?

Dave mentioned that there are ways to circumvent almost any license. Dave indicated that he had started recognizing that there was becoming an alcohol related problem in downtown Boise. After a process of involving bar owners, police and others, it came out that these two things could have an impact on curbing the burgeoning problem. He indicated that they also passed a public intoxication ordinance and recommends this to all of the partnership members.

Allison stated that the number of alcohol related incidents in downtown Boise have been drastically reduced. Dave indicated that the server-training ordinance has a broad range of support from both the police as well as the server industry.

Tom stated that these ordinances are a good idea. He also feels that there is a consideration that the members of the Partnership need to realize, and that is the City of Boise has been working on this for a couple of years. Building relationships with Owners, Distributors, the Police and other entities involved in the serving of alcohol in establishments. We as individual jurisdictions need to undertake a similar type of effort to encourage cooperation to combat alcohol related incidents.

Tammy indicated that she has talked to her chief and they are looking at encouraging a voluntary compliance with such an ordinance. She asked, what kinds of liability insurance breaks entities get access to as a result of the Server Training. Allison indicated that all the bar owners are showing some sort of break on their rates.

Allison mentioned that there was a State effort to pass language almost exactly as this ordinance reads that was shut down. She indicated there was concern that State Code language could subject serving establishments to State administrative review processes that are harsher than would be the case associated with city or county code violations.

John indicated that caring business owner should recognize the liabilities associated with over serving of alcohol. He indicated that they would be looking at jumping on board with this right away, because they have to have pretty aggressive policies with regards to alcohol related problems.

Dave stated that there is safety in numbers and obviously the more of the members decide to do this, the better off we will all be.

Scott indicated that there were a few problem areas in Kuna and that these ordinances could help curb alcohol related incidents. John said that in Garden City they fixed their one big problem, they raided the bar. Tammy mentioned that her and her Chief attended the underage drinking conference in Boise the previous week. Server training and other processes were discussed that can reduce alcohol related incidents.

Dave mentioned that it would help their cause if he knew if the Ada County mayors were considering such an ordinance. Phil stated that Kuna, Star and Eagle are all contracted with the Ada County Sheriff’s office. He indicated that he has written a note to himself to coordinate with their Police Chief and the Ada County Sheriff’s Office to open discussions on this discussion.

Dave indicated he has what he needs to move forward with server training and all you can drink special ordinances. He felt that this was one of the least restrictive, forward thinking things they could do to combat alcohol incidents and he encouraged the rest of the members to look into it.

Tom asked what the server-training requirement would entail as far as compliance. Allison stated that upon employment, the establishment has to maintain a copy of the employee’s server-training certificate. Individual servers can access the training for about $25.00 on the Internet. Dave added that they would most likely sponsor “live” training periodically for free.

Tom asked what the guidelines for compliance with the new ordinance? Allison stated that they have in their ordinance that there would be a 60-day grace period.

Smoke Free Boise Program

Dave introduced Kristin Mathews who was there to speak about the Smoke Free Boise program. Kristin introduced Adrian Casper, American Heart Association and Tom Lloyd, with the Boise Young Professionals organization.

Adrian said they have come to the Partnership as part of a Coalition for a Healthy Idaho. At its core, it is a movement or an answer to a call from the community. A summary of results of a poll in the Treasure Valley was presented. And they have collected over 5,000 signatures of individuals who are supportive of smoke free environments.

This is not just a patron issue. It is a worker issue. Servers and individuals that work in establishments that allow smoking are at risk from the effects associated with second hand smoke. Kristin mentioned that the poll showed there was overwhelming support for the creation of a law prohibiting smoking in indoor public places, with 73% of the treasure valley in favor. The poll also showed that 68% of those polled would frequent places more often if smoking were banned. Research across the country shows that there are few adverse effects on businesses as a result of smoke free laws.

Kristen mentioned that they are involved with this movement primarily because of the workers who are subjected to second hand smoke.

Dave mentioned that when they first approached him, he just did not want another fight. However, some establishment owners have approached him about creating an ordinance banning public smoking. He is warming to the idea and thinks that the State won’t act and maybe it is an issue whose time has come.

Phil indicated he felt it was a good idea. But his experience has been that you end up going through a cloud of smoke to go into a nonsmoking establishment. Was there a way we could restrict smoking near entrances and exits or have a distance from the building requirement associated with the smoke-free zone. Adrian stated that 20’ was about the standard around the country.

Tammy mentioned that as they open their new City Hall it would be a smoke-free building and campus.

David Ferdinand added that he would like to see some prohibition against parents smoking in an enclosed car with children in the vehicle.

Tom stated that he disagreed to a point in that creating another ordinance to take the responsibility off of the consumer to stay away from smoke filled establishments.

Idaho Nonprofit Center

Dave introduced Lynn Hoffman and Rich Toney from the Idaho Nonprofit Center

Lynn stated that the Idaho Nonprofit Center is an organization of nonprofits that has been in existence for about five years. There are 1,600 501 (c)(3)’s in Idaho. If you counted all of the soccer groups, home-owner associations, etc., there is about 8,000 nonprofits in Idaho. Nonprofits spend $1.5 billion in the Treasure Valley every year. If nonprofits did not exist, there would be a lot of services to members of the community that would fall back to State and Local governments.

The funding for nonprofits in 2008 is pretty grim. As a result of economic pressures, nonprofits are finding funding sources diminishing.

Dave said that they have dealt with several instances where nonprofits failed and the City had to basically pick up the tab. He was not aware of the resources available to help insure the success of nonprofits. The nonprofit center works with nonprofits to improve on organizational aspects of these organizations.

The week of November 10th is being declared nonprofit week. Mayor Bieter has indicated they will probably participate by with a proclamation. Lynn Hoffman indicated they would be in contact with each of the members to have an individual conversation on how they can assist each jurisdiction with supporting the nonprofit sector in each community.

Covered Loads Update

Dave stated that the City of Boise is a little behind on the Covered Loads issue. He reiterated that they do not have philosophical differences and they are moving forward. Margie asked where Canyon County was with the issue. David indicated that Canyon County would be having their hearing on the second week of August. John indicated that Wilder would be bringing the ordinance up in an upcoming council meeting but felt they would probably end up waiting to see what Canyon County does with the ordinance. Phil stated that several Eagle Counsel members are not convinced to the need for the ordinance.

John Bechtel moved and Margie Watson seconded to accept the minutes and financial report. Motion carried.

Meeting adjourned.

Treasure Valley Partnership

Meeting Minutes

August 25, 2008

Garret Nancolas opened the meeting and welcomed everyone to Caldwell. He asked everyone to join him in a short walk along Indian Creek at the end of the meeting.

Bill asked to add a discussion on the retreat to the beginning of the meeting. He indicated that there had been a request by Mayor Bieter to adjust the schedule of the retreat to enable him to participate on Friday. Bill stated that there was an ability to move the open forum session and the discussion on ozone control measures to Friday.

Tammy de Weerd indicated that she had already made plans for Friday afternoon that she cannot get out of. Margie Watson and Tom Dale stated that they also had commitments on Friday afternoon. Several other members indicated that this would conflict with their schedules as well. Paul suggested that maybe we could move the Thursday morning agenda to Thursday evening.

Mayor Watson made a motion to move the Thursday morning session to Thursday evening. Brad Holton seconded. Motion carried.

Garret introduced Rafael Gonzales and Christian Nafzger to talk about the SAUSA Project. Christian pointed out the final section of his report, which showed the individuals set for sentencing. He indicated that several of the people awaiting sentencing are expected to receive 10-20 years of prison. They were bigger targets and the leaders of particular gangs. The level of cases are trending upward and are bigger players in the local gangs.

Christian indicated they have added a new FBI agent in the Metro Task Force and this individual is making inroads into generating larger cases.

Phil asked about the 91% conviction rate and how it relates to similar positions around the country. Christian indicated that in Federal court he has a bigger hammer and people are more willing to roll over with their testimony.

Rafael mentioned that Christian’s conviction rate is quite a bit higher than similar positions around the country. He stated that the TVP’s involvement is unique around the country. He added that our SAUSA program for gang and gun crimes has been by and large the most successful program in the country. Christian has been taking some cases that are weaker than would normally be prosecuted and has been successful.

Paul asked where we were with regard to moving the SAUSA Program from Owyhee County to another County. Christian stated that Matthew Faulks is not running for reelection in Owyhee County and added that the individual running for Prosecutor for Canyon County has stated publicly that he wanted to move the SAUSA position to Canyon County.

Tom stated the time-line dictates what we do. He felt that Owyhee County has committed to hold on to the SAUSA Project till January when the new Canyon County Prosecutor is in office. It would seem impossible to do anything until that time.

Tammy noticed that there might be a trend of arrests in some of the smaller towns in the valley and asked what Christian has noticed in this regard. Christian mentioned that these people are arrested where they are operating out of and this may not be where they live. Margie pointed out arrests in Payette County. Christian indicated that there have been arrests in smaller communities but the individuals live in the bigger communities. He added that the smaller communities and communities outside of the Treasure Valley are aware of Christian’s activities and are cooperating in targeting the individuals that are operating in their communities.

Garret pointed to the projected savings to the State as a result of the program and said it would make for a real great article. Tom volunteered that he would put together a press release on the program. Christian cautioned that the statistics that Bill puts together are not the complete story as there are State costs associated with the Federal Prosecution of these gang criminals such as housing while the individual awaits trial. Additionally, these individuals often time do receive credit for time served while awaiting trial.

Brad added that because this is such a positive, we should be having an article in the local papers as often as possible. Christian pointed out that he has been sending out press releases on some of the high-profile cases and that he has noticed a drop off in the coverage by the press.

Garret stated that a couple of years ago, a photograph surfaced that included 12 individuals in the South-side gang. His police officers have been putting x’s through those that have been prosecuted and now about eight of the twelve included in the photograph have been prosecuted and shipped out of State.

Rafael asked if there was any movement with the State to moving this program to the State. Tom stated there have been some conversations with regard to lobbying the State to get them to pick up the program. There was a concern that if we did this we would run the risk of loosing the Treasure Valley focus of the program. Rafael mentioned that the U.S. Attorney’s office has Prosecutors operating in the Northern Office and the Eastern Office. True, if the State funded it, the person would be assigned to the Southern Office and there would be a little more focus on the Twin Falls area than there is now. But the person would still be working from Twin Falls to New Plymouth. He added that the targets of these prosecutions do not have boundaries and their operations do span the southwestern part of the state.

Christian felt that focus would always be on the urbanized Treasure Valley area because this is where these individuals are. He said that there would be a small amount of focus shift from the Treasure Valley to include the Twin Falls area. But he added that there would much of a significant shift due to the population center would insure that 90% plus of the cases would still focus on the Treasure Valley.

Tom said, with this in mind, maybe it is time we start talking to the legislature to craft a bill to get the State to step up to the plate and wholly fund the position. Margie, felt we needed to jump on this and get the State to fund this program. Garret mentioned he would start talking to local legislators to include Sen. John McGee. It was agreed that each member would start talking to local legislators to generate a bill to have the State sponsor this program. John cautioned about the Northern and Eastern Idaho legislators being concerned that the focus of the program being the Treasure Valley. Brad added that maybe we could push the State to fund three SAUSA’s.

Rafael stated that they have three prosecutors in Northern Idaho and three in Eastern Idaho and that you could not really make the case there is a need, from the perspective of the U.S. Attorney’s office, that there is a need in the other regions of the State. Also, the magnitude of gang activity in the other regions of the State is not as large as the Treasure Valley. However, there would be no bar from Christian taking on cases in other parts of the State. However, because of the distances involved, it would not make sense for the U.S. Attorney’s office to have Christian (operating out of the SW Region) prosecute a case in Idaho Falls or Coeurd’ Alene and they would have someone from these regional offices pick up the case.

Garret mentioned that Canyon County Mayors and Commissioners will be receiving a letter from him regarding air quality and basically asked the questions, what are we going to do to get this ozone problem under control? We want to make sure that folks in Canyon County get involved so we can develop some solutions that work. The consequences of non-attainment are bad.

Project Managers Report

Bill pointed to a hand out which details the member activities on the Covered Load Ordinance. He mentioned that Wilder and Parma have met and are awaiting a decision from Canyon County before they act on the Ordinance. Garret mentioned that the City of Caldwell had passed the Ordinance the previous week.

David stated that Canyon County has been looking at the Ordinance. They met with all of the highway districts in Canyon County and feels that their questions were answered. He added that with loads having an adequate amount of freeboard, there would not necessarily be a need to cover the load. David said they were thinking of renaming the ordinance to “Contained Load” ordinance. This has helped alleviate their concerns. They had a lot of comments from businesses revolving around the costs of covering the vehicles.

Paul stated that ACHD just passed this ordinance. Additionally, prior to this ordinance, law enforcement had to refer to an obscure State Statute. The report’s he has received from local law enforcement is that this ordinance more clearly defines the ability to cite someone for having material escape from the vehicle.

Margie mentioned that they had employee that was killed the previous week due to an unsecured load. A person was hauling a load of wood and several logs rolled off and a person was killed. David, mentioned that he had a law enforcement officer involved with his meeting with the highway district and they felt that the language of the ordinance would cover such an incidence.

Tom moved to approve the minutes and financial report. Margie seconded. Motion approved. Tammy asked if Bill could prepare the financial report ahead of time to ensure the members had adequate time to review the expenditures for the month. Bill said he would attempt to get this out earlier.

Paul stated that Idaho Power is looking to meet its capacity needs by running transmission lines in from Portland and Wyoming. They have been having some meetings on how they are going to go about permitting these new transmission lines. Some counties are doing a conditional use permit; others have no ordinance at all. As they went to permit one section in Eastern Oregon, there were a lot of mistakes.

By statute, we can form planning and zoning commissions across county lines. And they are looking at doing this just for this process. He just wanted point out this is a key issue, as members would be confronting this as these transmission lines come through the valley.

Paul brought up a huge issue for the members. The irrigators have filed in the Snake River Adjudication regarding restricting the discharge of wastewater into the Boise River. He encourages everyone that discharges in to the Boise River to keep up on the case and be aware that this is happening. The Corps has that $175,000 that provides a better opportunity to have a look better flood control and study storage opportunities. Brad added that he felt the Ag community does not have a clue with respect to what is going on with this issue.

Tammy asked that Paul send out a summary with regard to this issue so the members could alert their staff to this issue. She would like to bring up one additional issue to be a future agenda item regarding drilling practices for water quality. Ed Squires could come in and give a presentation on what this would mean to municipal water supplies.

Garret mentioned that the consequences of the Phosphorous ruling have the potential to cost this valley a great deal of money. The main source of phosphorous is non-point sources. But the point sources are whom they can regulate. Tom felt that we should go together to talk to our congressional delegation and get our voices heard with regard to the costs associated with this ruling.

Meeting adjourned.

Treasure Valley Partnership
Meeting Minutes
September 24, 2008

Attendees:

Phil Bandy
John Bechtel
Dave Bieter
Tom Dale
John Evans
David Ferdinand
Brad Holton
Paul Woods


Absent:

Tammy de Weerd
Scott Dowdy
Nate Mitchell
Garret Nancolas
Margie Watson
Vicki Thurber
Hal Tolmie



Guests/Staff

Lee Belt
Tom Berry
Ed Squires
Bill Larsen - Staff

Brad Holton welcomed everyone to Greenleaf for the Partnership meeting.  He mentioned that the cities of Wilder and Greenleaf did a lot of things together including holding joint council meetings.  In addition, the cities jointly fund a city police force that says Greenleaf and Wilder Police on the side.  

John reiterated that they do welcome the Partnership and the special guests to Greenleaf.  He said they had Salmon flown in for the meeting and that there was an alternate meal consisting of MRE’s for the choosing.  

Brad indicated that in Greenleaf they have the city divided up into “Care Hoods”.  It is kind of like Community Watch but goes much deeper.  We know the resources in each of the areas of the City.  For example, if people are sick, who to contact, and if there is a disaster, who is stuck in their house and cannot get out.  They have 100% participation across the City in Care Hoods.

Another thing that came out of that, they have developed their own emergency contact list that they pass out to residents.  

Brad stated, during the last meeting, that we would invite someone who has knowledge of water rights and well drilling practices come to this meeting.  The person he knows is Ed Sprague and introduced him as the water guru of the Treasure Valley.

Paul mentioned he wanted to update everyone on the ruling from the Snake River Basin Adjudication case in respect to Lucky Peak.  We prevailed in keeping the water right for recreational and winter flow purposes.  Brad mentioned that this is a very interesting judgment just before the Water Summit.

Ed said he would build on what Paul said.  The recent decisions coming out of the Dept. of Water Resources and Director David Tuthill have been astoundingly good decisions for cities.  He thinks that the Director needs a lot of support in this.  The Director is beset upon by irrigation entities, and he does not get a lot of support.  Things like the City of Eagle case and A&B Irrigation case, the decisions are complete turnarounds that are going to save Cities enormous efforts and money.   

They are taking away decades old statutes that are no good for cities and that hold them hostage.  In 1964 there was an act called the Ground Water Act.  Before this act there was a protection, there were cases that said that you could not interfere with Artesian pressure.  When you get many wells in an area, you gradually lower the water level for each one them.  So this decree made the rule you could not lower someone’s water level without compensation.

So these new cases are diminishing these archaic rules.  One of the recent cases indicates that water levels are not protected.  There is a “reasonable” level in which water levels can be lowered by other well activity.  Many wells are drilled into the top of the aquifer that can be as much as 300 feet thick.  Under preexisting rules, you would not have to deepen your well as a result of additional wells being added and the water level gets lowered.  

The irrigation entities are opposed to these regulations as this idea of reasonableness might come to play in the surface water world.  There would not be this monopoly of surface water if you are not using it and there would be some reasonable distribution of the waters.  This is something he believes the cities should be very active in.  

Phil mentioned that in Eagle there are a number of free flowing artesian wells.  By doing something, you might impact the water level and they have been going round and round in these water cases for numerous years.  

The point is that you should not be able to hold the whole aquifer hostage because you only drilled in to the very first few feet of the aquifer.  You ought to be required to deepen your wells.  And this is one of the things the Department is saying that we need to look at.  He thinks this is positive.

In the A&B case there is some new rulings on well construction.  How well construction can have an effect on water rights and artesian heads.  This is a case worth reading.

Ed stated that he wanted to talk about well construction.  Not because the cities have a problem with well construction.  There are regulations out of DEQ that require municipal wells to be drilled and constructed in a certain way.  Unfortunately the number of wells drilled by cities are a drop in the bucket of the total number of wells that are being drilled.  For example there might be 12 municipal wells drilled in the treasure valley in a year and there might be 1000 domestic wells in a year.

Domestic wells are not subject to the same criteria and are not drilled to the same standards as municipal wells.  These domestic wells by and large are going to be the cause if the aquifer gets contaminated.  Various directors have tried to change the drilling rules for many years.  He has been a part of many of these initiatives.  The drilling community has prevented these rules from being improved over the years.  

Ed stated that this is a very complicated subject and he was going to keep his presentation about the rudiments and the basics of well construction.  

David indicated that they have been dealing with contamination of the aquifer.  They have a huge problem out by purple sage with a high nitrate priority area.  The neighbor hood has spent $200,000 to fix their well and someone 100 yards away has been given a water permit for a domestic well by IDWR.  This is the agency that has to stop this process.

Ed indicated that they are trying, but in many cases they are not even knowledgeable about a new well.  The drillers have a program called the Start Card Program.  They can drop a card in the mail on a Friday afternoon and the well can be drilled to 1,000 feet by Monday before the department receives the Start Card.  These wells are not required to be built to the standards of municipal wells.  

Ed stated that he has a pet peeve with regard to setback requirements.  Because the reason for the setbacks is that deep down there is knowledge that these wells are not sealed.  He was going to show during the meeting about how unsealed these wells are.   This silent danger is the single biggest threat to the aquifer.  There are 1,000 wells a year that poke through all the protective layers and are blowing the aquifer formations apart.  Outside these well casing there are huge voids.  The proof is there.  But it is a livelihood with a whole profession that is built on drilling these cheap wells.  But the biggest concern of the drillers is that if you make wells the proper way, no one would be able to afford them.  

They do not want to handle a bigger casing and do not want to get a mud pump if they don’t have to.  The real money is in drilling the holes.

There are about seven different drilling methods and most of these domestic wells are utilizing the following technique.  Ed then demonstrated on the chalkboard by drawing hole that is drilled.  In the case he demonstrated the casing is larger than the hole and the casing is literally being beaten into the ground.  If you have a large enough hole and centralizers on the casing, this leaves room around the casing for well seal to go around the casing without there being gaps.  This sealing of the casing helps prevent degradation of the aquifer zones.  

In the Treasure Valley we have an alternating geologic section of sands and gravels.  If you drill through these aquifer layers and do not put protective seals between the zones then the natural protective layering of the aquifer is compromised.  The danger in these wells is that you don’t reestablish the seals you disrupt the natural protective layer that protects our aquifer.  

When they develop test wells, they are finding that it is not just the anthropogenic contaminants (gas, nitrates, etc) we are finding that there are natural constituents that are problematic such as arsenic and uranium.  The way we are currently building wells, we are allowing those contaminants to mix and move through the aquifer layers.  

If we are going to get a handle on this contamination, he believes it is easy to keep these layers separated with good sound drilling practices.

He then drew a domestic well where there are a lot of openings between the casing and the surrounding sedimentary layers.  The reason this looks like this is the wells are drilled with air. And they are done with a drill and drive method where the casing is just beat into the ground.  When this is done, the air rushes up the space bringing the cuttings with it and mining the area in front of the casing.  This causes the sands and sediments to be carried into the well.  

The reason you do this, is you have to make a hole big enough to get the casing into the ground.  What these wells do is they commingle the water between the levels of the aquifer that they go through.  All these levels of the aquifer have different chemistries.  This leads to the contamination of the aquifer as the water is transported between zones.

Phil mentioned that Director Tuthill indicated in a recent meeting that there is enough water in the valley to support a 6 million population.  However the reason for this is the supply of surface water.  Ed stated that the NY Canal is 2000 CFS, where a large production well is 2 CFS.  If we do not start making inroads in the rights for surface water, we will lose the possibility.

Downstream on the Columbia, a city needed some water because the Snake is restrictive on the Oregon and Washington sides.  The city could not get a water right, so they went to the Boise Valley and purchased a water right in perpetuity so they could take it out down on the Columbia.  The SRBA is the coup-de-grass.  Once this is finalized and those decrees are out there, we will know what is available and so do the people downstream.  These are clear threats to Idaho’s water.  If we don’t make inroads to keeping the water back and using it beneficially, then there will become downstream water rights that are dependent on it and they will call for it and they will get administered and we will not have it.  

There is a 1996 statute called the Municipal Water Rights Act that only cities can take advantage of.  To date, there is not one city that has taken advantage of it.  Only M3 and Tamarack Resort have filed on it.

You can put in a planning horizon called a future needs application.  For example, United Water filed a municipal needs application asking for a planning horizon of 50 years.  Gordon Law advocates for a CMAP where all municipalities in the valley go together and file a future needs application package.  Ed suggested that the cities and counties need to do this and take advantage of that special protection.  

There are also other special protections in the act.  It allows all your wells to be mutual points of diversion for all your other water rights associated with the other wells.  So when a well goes down and does not produce any more, you do not loose that water right, it just automatically moves to the other well locations.

Ed then showed some video clips of well holes.  It showed the shape of the borehole outside of the casing wall and that there were voids and it was not sealed.  He also showed a well where there was a hole in the casing. It clearly showed the water entering and exiting the well along with contaminants that were moving freely between aquifer zones.

Phil asked what causes the holes in the casing?  Ed indicated that there are several factors including corrosion, the steel being used is not as good as it used to, etc.  Ed indicated that the future of wells is PVC.  It is just a better material and not susceptible to corrosion.

Dave mentioned that there is a lot more storage of water underground.  He asked of Ed sees this as a future storage option for Cities.  Ed indicated that ASR (Aquifer Storage and Recovery) is complicated because of a number of factors.  Whenever you try to pump something in, you plug things.  But in Boise, there is one of the most applicable areas for ASR in the valley.  Out by Micron, there is 500 feet of real course sediment that is a vessel that is waiting to be filled.  The rest of the valley has high artesian pressures that do not lend itself easily to ASR.

In closing, Ed indicated that below the level of members of the group of the TVP, none of the reforms are going to happen.  Tom asked if he had an opportunity to give this presentation to legislators.  Ed indicated that he has only give a few presentations.  

John moved to accept the minutes and financial report.  Motion seconded and approved.

Meeting adjourned.

Attendees:

Phil Bandy
Dave Bieter
Tom Dale
Tammy de Weerd
John Evans
David Ferdinand
Brad Holton
Vicki Thurber
Hal Tolmie
Margie Watson
Paul Woods

Absent:

John Bechtel
Scott Dowdy
Nate Mitchell
Garret Nancolas

Guests/Staff

State Representative Carlos Bilbao
State Representative Darrell Bolz
Nicci Cleveland – Special Olympics
State Representative Gary Collins
Rafael Gonzalez – U.S. Attorney’s Office
Mark Haws – U.S. Attorney’s Office
David Hensley – Idaho Governor’s Office
State Senator John McGee
Christian Nafzger – SAUSA Project
Bill Larsen - Staff


Tom Dale opened the meeting and welcomed the State Legislative contingent, the Governor’s Office and the representatives from the U.S. Attorney’s Office.  He indicated that he looks forward to the discussion on the SAUSA Project. 

Tom mentioned the growing jobless rate and referred to the news that the State of Idaho has been hit pretty hard by layoffs.  He has had talks with the Dept. of Labor, there have been about 2,500 jobs lost in the last few weeks.  As Cities/Counties, now is a good time to be looking at infrastructure building.  He indicated that they had awarded a few bids in the last couple of weeks and those costs are about ½ of what they were a year ago.  There have been 31 recessions since the turn of the century.  With each one there was a recovery.

He introduced Nicci Cleveland with Special Olympics.  She wanted to talk to the partnership about the Host Town program.  Dave Bieter reiterated that what she has to say is very important.  What we are about to take on with the Special Olympics is very important for the valley.  This piece refers to the three days before the opening ceremonies.  This program will enable us to get the athletes into town a little early.  In addition, this will help the community to embrace the games. 

Nicci referred to a handout on the 2009 Special Olympics Winter Games.  The Host Town program is a very vital part of the Games.  It gives the athletes and their families an opportunity to be paired with folks from the community. 

Host Towns provide transportation for the athletes and staff from the airport either to the host family or the lodging where they will be put up.  During their stay, they will need transportation to training facilities, and any activities the host town sets up for them.  Host towns also provide lodging in homes or traditional lodging centers, as well as meals and access to community or cultural activities. 

The benefits to becoming a Host Town is that delegations get a chance to meet the people and experience their hospitality and it gives them an opportunity to rest and adjust to Idaho prior to the games.  In addition it provides a cultural exchange that enriches the lives of everyone involved.

The greatest need for the 2009 games from Host Towns is donated traditional lodging such as hotels and motels.  There is a need to provide traditional lodging to 41 delegations for an average of three nights.  This equates to 575 double occupancy rooms for three nights.  Nicci indicated they are looking for the Cities/Counties to appoint someone to serve on a committee to find the donated lodging.  This volunteer would also coordinate the Host Town efforts for the delegates. 

David asked if they are requesting donations of hotel/motel rooms and/or money to be used for the rooms.  Nicci stated that the best scenario would be to have the rooms donated and that cash would be a possibility.  David asked then if they would like the different jurisdictions to provide someone to work on the committee, then they would figure out the details. 

David asked if there was a 501 c designation in place for the organization setting this up?  Nicci indicated she would double check and make sure she gets back him. 

Tammy asked for Nicci to describe the requirements of the homes in order for homes to donate space?  Nicci indicated they do have almost as many homes donated as they need and this will not be a problem.  However, because of cultural differences, there are many athletes/families that cannot stay in a home. 

Dave indicated he was pleased to see the list of countries and numbers being represented.  Many of the delegations are small enough that a civic organization such as the Rotary could pick a country and provide aid to the whole delegation.  This develops camaraderie among the athletes, their families and the organization. 

Tom asked to clarify if they already had rooms for the games and this was just for the three or four days prior to the game.  Nicci indicated that this is true.  Do these people need transportation as well?  Nicci indicated that all of the delegations are going to need transportation services.  Tom added that a Civic organization could also plan to provide aid in transportation and in essence spend the full day with the delegations. 

Phil asked if the Home Town program is a traditional part of the games.  Nicci indicated the home stay is traditional and there was no way to gauge how many separate rooms would be required because of the differing make-up of the cultures from game to game. 

Nicci thanked the partnership for the opportunity to come meet with them.  She encouraged the Partnership to get in touch with her if there were any questions.

SAUSA Project
Tom welcomed Senator John McGee, Representative Carlos Bilbao, Representative Darrell Bolz, and Representative Darrell Collins to the October Treasure Valley Partnership Meeting. 

Tom pointed to the reports that have been coming out on the SAUSA Project and that from the very beginning; the Project was piling up numbers greater than was anticipated.  As we look back on all of the Partnership efforts, this is one Project that has made a great difference.  We are here today to talk about the future of the program.  The best scenario would be to move toward this position as an established position and one that is not funded from year-to-year.  We have a commitment from members of the Partnership to continue the project.  Ultimately however, the best scenario would be that some State Program takes over the Project. 

Tom introduced Mark Haws, Christian Nafzger and Rafael Gonzales from the U.S. Attorney’s Office as well as David Hensley from the Governor’s Office. 

Christian gave an update on the Project.  He talked about the latest updated report on the SAUSA Project.  Roughly the total prison time sentenced under the Project is up to 65 years. 

Christian indicated he has taken a position as an Assistant U.S. Attorney to begin in the first part of December.  However, he will continue to work on the SAUSA cases for the short term.  He mentioned that the FBI has gotten more involved and there is some exciting stuff this entity is doing in this regard. 

Representative Bolz pointed out there have been a couple of people that received a very short sentence and asked Christian to talk about these.  Christian indicated there are a few individuals that cooperated in an investigation and there are a couple that are on supervised release for three years.  These individuals are not violating probation. 

David Bieter mentioned that his Police Department was very complimentary of both Christian and the SAUSA Program.  One of the advantages of the program is that the king-pens have become known and Police then target these people and the members tend to disperse. 

John asked Christian to run through the logistics of his employment with the SAUSA Program and then the AUSA position.  Mark stated that Christian may begin as an AUSA around December 8.  He indicated that it will take about 3-4 weeks to advertise and then 3-4 weeks to select the individual and then about 6 weeks for the federal background check to be completed.  They figure that around the first of February we would be able to have a new SAUSA position on board.

Mark added that the switch from Owyhee County to potentially Canyon County would have an effect.  A MOU has to be in place and that it appears this transition will take place when John Lujac comes on board with Canyon County Prosecutors.  A new MOU has to be developed and signed by all parties by the time of the new start date. 

Mark indicated that John Lujak and Tim Flemming are not in a position to participate on the hiring process.  However, they are comfortable with the hiring process continuing with the U.S. Attorney’s Office and the Partnership conducting the interviews and making the selection.  Mark mentioned that he would be in contact with Bill and Margie and make sure all goes well when it comes to making a selection of candidates.

Margie asked if maybe we could invite the Ada County Prosecutor to participate in the selection committee, as we had a county representative involved in the last hiring.  Mark indicated he would be fine with the Ada County Prosecutor participating.  Paul Woods added that he has had discussions with Greg Bower about this and he would follow up with him. 

Mark added that Tim Flemming who is the elected Gem County Prosecutor is going to the Chief Deputy in Canyon County, so he would not be averse to sitting in as a defacto representative from this group, the Treasure Valley Partnership. 

Paul asked if the model of local entities funding a U.S. Prosecutor is the model we want to go forward with.  Mark stated that the U.S. Attorney’s office has a tremendous number of priorities.  Therefore, the U.S. Attorney’s Office is spread pretty thin and this model adds to the manpower of the U.S. Attorney’s Office to prosecute gang cases.  The SAUSA Program adds capacity for prosecuting gang cases that they would not have otherwise. 

He added that Christian has had some big cases that will go to sentencing in the next six to eight weeks.  Right now he is sitting on approximately 65 years of sentenced time.  This could well be over 100 years of sentenced time in the next few weeks thus greatly increasing the savings to the State. 

Tom asked, where we go from here in with regard to funding.  Currently the project is funded at $100,000 and the State is participating with $25,000 coming in from ISP.  There is a tremendous savings being realized through the State penal system.  He feels that saving $3-4 million with just a $100,000 expenditure is a pretty good return on investment. 

Mark Haws injected that if the SAUSA program were to go completely to the State, the entity would have to be the State’s Attorney General’s office because of prosecutorial authority needs.

Senator McGee clarified that the goal was to continue the SAUSA Program as it has been with just the State picking up the tab.  He asked if this project was in the Governor’s budget.  David Hensley indicated that they are currently in the process of preparing the Governor’s budget.  ISP’s budget was coming up in the next week or so and he had to make sure that Colonel Russell, the Director at ISP is comfortable with the SAUSA Project being under his program. 

Senator McGee indicated that it is very important that this program be in the budget coming down from the Governor’s Office.  He added as we all know these are trying economic times and there will be resistance to any new programs being added.  Representative Bolz agreed with Senator McGee.  When you take a look a typical budget for this next year, if any program is not recognized in the Governor’s budget it will have a difficult time making it into the States budget for the year. 

Representative Bolz wondered if there could be a cost sharing of entities being affected in this project.  Paul answered that basically as it sits now, there is a cost share, as 75% of the projects costs are being carried by the Partnership.  At a minimum, he felt that there should be an at least 50-50 split on these costs.  Recognizing in a lean budget year, it will be difficult to completely shift the funding of this program to the State, maybe we should look for the State to at least match dollar for dollar the contribution of the Partnership. 

Tammy indicated that there is no doubt that the Cities and Counties feel that this is a top priority.  Because of the ramifications this has to our law enforcement, we made a commitment to be a partner.  We must look also at the savings this project has, not just financial impacts of corrections budgets, but the quality of life impacts to local communities are huge.  She felt frustration with when the legislature is in session; everyone points fingers at property taxes and how irresponsible local governments are with budgets.  It seems like more and more of the enforcement burden comes to local entities.  We cannot continue to take on the burdens that the State is not willing to participate in. 

David mentioned that this project is not in the current ISP budget.  This was presented as a one-time expenditure last year.  And one-time items were not carried forward this year because of the 1% hold back.  He thinks it is important to let this process move forward and this partnership has been of value to the State as well as the individuals in this room.

Senator McGee indicated he carried this legislation originally to JFAC.  It is not that they do not know this project is important, they are just in the process of logistically figuring how to deal with this, this year. 

Tammy asked if there was a way we could help our legislators get behind this program.  Representative Bolz indicated, a need to push this as not a treasure valley issue.  There are a couple of people that we need to get some legitimization of this project.  They are Representative Jim Clark and Senator Denton Darrington.  They are the Chairmen of the Jud and Rules Committee’s for the House and Senate.  Also the co-chairs of the Appropriations Committee would be important people to have on board with this project. 

Senator McGee stated that the thing that helped the most during the first go round with this project was a letter signed by the members of the Treasure Valley Partnership in support of the legislation for State match. 

Dave indicated that we should just ask for ½ of the project cost and stay there.  This program is a large part of the Partnership budget.  What we should do is continue to make it a partnership between the State and members and commit a regular part of our annual budget to continued funding of the SAUSA Project.  So the Partnership needs to come to grips with how we are going to continue with this program.

Representative Bilbao mentioned, the Partnership members need to be active in convincing legislators from districts representative of the Partnership membership to support this project.  There are certainly more legislators from the valley than the four here from Canyon County.

Margie asked how we get the Governor on board?    David Hensley indicated that right now it is not just the merits of the program.  They just need to go through the internal budgeting process. 

Margie moved to ask for $50,000 from the Governor’s Office this year.  Motion seconded by John.  Motion carried. 

Tammy reiterated that this SAUSA Program has been a great example of a partnership between State, County and local jurisdictions. 

Margie asked for a round of applause for Christian and his fine work.

Paul mentioned that while we have the State legislators in the room, he wanted to bring up the Covered Load Ordinance.  There has been some division with various legal opinions from different entities on whether the Treasure Valley Partnership has the legal jurisdiction to institute such an ordinance.  We have been trying to work with the AGC and their thought is this State is the only one with the authority to do this.  There are only two State troopers that have jurisdiction over the State’s Covered load law.

He was hoping that the State Legislature could take a look at this issue.  Tom added that there is a State Statue on covered loads but there are only two troopers that are enabled to enforce this.  What we are after is for our local police to have the authority to enforce this requirement. 

Tom mentioned that there was a Water Summit meeting and that Paul Woods represented our interests very well.  Margie concurred.  Paul added that they put on the table to meet regularly with water users and irrigation districts.  The format of the Water Summit was not conducive to productive conversations. 

Bill indicated that Margie and him had finished up the proposed budget for this fiscal year and it was included in the packet. 

Margie moved to approve the minutes and financial report.  John seconded.  Motion carried. 


Meeting adjourned.

Treasure Valley Partnership

Attendees:

Phil Bandy
John Bechtel
Dave Bieter
Tom Dale
Tammy de Weerd
Scott Dowdy
John Evans
David Ferdinand
Brad Holton
Vicki Thurber
Garret Nancolas
Margie Watson
Rick Yzaguirre



Absent:

Nate Mitchell
Hal Tolmie

Guests/Staff

John Caywood
Lori Church
Bonnie Ford-LeCompte
Nancy Merrill
Bill Larsen - Staff

Margie welcomed everyone to Parma and appreciated everyone braving the fog to get to the meeting.  As the members drove in to Parma this morning, you saw the beginnings of redevelopment in Parma.  Curbs, gutters and sidewalks are not something this town had all the way through.  They started with five blocks and as the economic downturn occurred, they ended up with a lot of money left over from the redevelopment.  They plan on putting in street lights and other things with the funds that were left over. 

Tammy added that the City of Meridian did not get sidewalks and lights on their Main Street till the 90’s. 

Margie introduced Nancy Merrill and John Caywood that were here to discuss a Boise River Master Water Plan.  Nancy indicated that it was a real pleasure to see everyone again.  She mentioned that she is now working for Parametrics, which is involved with transportation related activities.  They work in five different States and do a lot of community building work.  She will be involved with governmental relations and community building and gets to work on parks, recreation, pathways, trails, etc. 

Nancy indicated she is working on opportunities that are abounding on the Boise River Corridor.  She has been gathering studies that have been done on the Boise River.  There are so many coalitions on various issues that it is astounding.  She passed out a listing of documents/plans that have been conducted on the Boise River dealing with a variety of issues.  She indicated that there is an opportunity to gather all these documents together into a large master plan that would encompass everything that has been done to date.  And then we could move forward with various issues.  Her dream is to put together a living document that could be used by each jurisdiction that would impart all of the information that has been generated to assist with each jurisdictions plans and activities along the river. 

Nancy stated that the biggest things that happen as a result of putting together a master plan is not grants or money, it is the coalitions of groups that make things happen.  Her purpose was to get discussion going on creating a master plan for the river corridor.  We have an opportunity through knowing what has happened in the past and move it forward into the future. 

She introduced John Caywood that would inform the Partnership of the activities that are happening along the river in just the recreation area.  John indicated that they are working on a cross county, multi-jurisdictional effort to plan a trail system down the Boise River.  This is an example of regional planning in just one aspect that can be accomplished on the river. 

John indicated that all the cities and counties along the river have been meeting to plan a trail system up and down the river.  They are working toward a vision of connected pathways near the river from Lucky Peak down to the confluence with the Snake River.  Their vision is to connect the recreational, educational and economic opportunities of the river communities.  An example of the economic opportunities is represented by Barber Park in Boise.  It grossed over $300,000 in a few weeks from floating revenue this past summer.  This business model could be applied to other places in the valley. 

John indicated that there is a real opportunity to create between twelve and fifteen miles of new trails in the next couple of years.  Tom asked if these trails were to incorporate bicycle traffic.  John indicated they have been working with the biking community to provide bike access along the trail system.

Tammy asked how police handle large pathways with lots of undergrowth.  Dave mentioned that there are a lot of volunteers that patrol the greenbelt in Boise.  They patrol using bikes, golf carts and by walking.  Both Tom and Garret indicated that they also have a large contingent of volunteers patrolling pathways. 

John stated that there are several floats on the lower sections of the Boise River that are real good.  He mentioned going from Star to Lansing lane and it was about a three-mile float.  David indicated he had been on that float as well.  It is serene with lots of undergrowth along the banks and you really cannot see many houses from the river on that stretch.  David also stated that we should look at some more access points along this stretch.  He would like to get the Partnership to float that stretch sometime this next year.  Brad said we could go right now with our shotguns. 

Nancy indicated that her goal was to have all the local officials informed as plans change and that the trail ways plan is just one piece of the whole pie.  She stated that she had been working with FEMA and the response was encouraging for local entities to get together on planning.  She looks forward to garnering support for coalitions as they look at putting together a master plan for the river. 

Phil stated that the Corps of Engineers have tried for years to get this kind of activity moving forward.  What they have lacked was a sponsor.  This would be great if we can get our coalitions together and identify a sponsor, we could tap into some of the planning money that the Corps has as well as other organizations.  Nancy stated that they are trying to tap into that $500,000 Corps money for this purpose. 

Margie wished we could get some pressure on Fish and Game to get involved with planning a pathway down at the confluence.  One of the problems is nesting issues involved in the area around the confluence.  Therefore, they do not want walkers/bikers moving around and disturbing the wildlife.  She feels that it is going to take a larger coalition than her and John Caywood to get some movement from Fish and Game. 

Nancy mentioned that they had problems with Fish and Game while trying to put trails on the river near Eagle Island State Park.  At first they were real resistant, but their resistance cooled over time.  You just have to be persistent with them. 

SAUSA Project
Margie asked Bill to give the partnership an update on the SAUSA Project.  Bill pointed to the meeting packet that contained a fiscal analysis, a spreadsheet on sentences and a draft letter to legislators.  Bill mentioned that the Fiscal Year spreadsheet analysis identifies the savings per State fiscal year projected into the future. 

Bill mentioned that we needed a decision point on funding into the next year.  The Partnership originally voted to fund the project for two years.  And by the time we get Christian’s replacement we will be beginning our third year for the project.  He also indicated that there has not been an update from the Governor’s Office on our $50,000 request.  John asked if there was some trouble with this request.  David mentioned that they were just hesitant to commit to a number given the fiscal concerns the State is having this year. 

Garret stated that Dave, Tom and him had committed to fund the SAUSA Project into the future.  He still feels this commitment is there.  He has had discussion with his City Council and they have discussed the need to make sure the SAUSA Project is funded and that the Treasure Valley Partnership should be the vehicle to do this. 

Dave mentioned that you know you are on to something good when 6 elected officials took credit for the project prior to it even starting.  He said this project has proven itself more dramatically than they had anticipated.  We are taking out the kingpins of these gangs and gangs are thus disbanding. 

Garret mentioned that when the SAUSA Project first started, there was a photo of the East Side Lobos.  There are now X’s through seven of the members.  His numbers show that this is the seventh year in a row where gang related numbers have decreased.  There are a lot of initiatives working to make the numbers go down, but the SAUSA Project is right in the middle of it. 

In Nampa they have seen the violence in gang activities go way down. 

Margie asked where we should go from here.  Dave moved to send the draft letter that Bill prepared to garner legislative support.  Garret seconded.  Vote passed unanimously.  Tom mentioned that he appreciated all the work Bill had done in putting together this information. 

Dave was concerned that this SAUSA Project is the farm system for the U.S. Attorney’s office.  He asked Bill to research wages and benefits of the U.S. Attorney’s office so we could make an appropriate decision on pay. 

Margie mentioned she is on the interview committee and wanted to know what to say to potential candidates.  Garret suggested that we have a motion to continue the project and if we do not get the State commitment, we will figure out how to structure the funding from the Partnership.  Tom said we need to say we have a long-term commitment.  Garret moved that we move the SAUSA Project to a long-term commitment regardless the annual participation by the State.  As we identify the State commitment, we then address the cost make-up between the Partnership, and the Cities of Boise, Nampa and Caldwell.  Tom seconded.  Motion carried unanimously. 

Rick mentioned in the beginning, Ada County was the only dissenting vote on the SAUSA Project.  Their position at the time was the use of Partnership dues.  Tom mentioned that maybe we can switch this line item from a dues basis to a city/county budget basis. 

Tammy felt it was important that the Treasure Valley Partnership, as an organization, continue to fund a portion of the SAUSA Project.  When we went into this Project, all of us wanted to do this and we all want to share in the costs of the project. 

Covered Load Ordinance
David mentioned that they are having a hearing on December 10th and this will be called a Contained Load Ordinance.  They are repealing their covered garbage ordinance and rolling it into this ordinance.  He will send everyone out a copy of the Canyon County Ordinance.  Dave stated they are still in the process of putting their covered load ordinance on the books in Boise.  He anticipates the beginning of the year as a rollout date. 

Transportation Access Plan
Garret mentioned he had just met with Pam Lowe, Monty Mclure and Dave Jones.  What they are really trying to do is add some consistency on highway access along State corridors.  What they have found, they have been working for two years on an access plan and on Hwy. 20/26, and in the middle of all this, ITD gave deeded access points.  They signed off on those deeds less than a year ago. 

Phil stated he had a meeting with the same individuals from ITD.  One of the concerns is that the Governor’s Office has put a red light on this.  One of the major concerns is that through this TAP process, ITD may be able to transfer some of their legal accountability to Cities/Counties. 

John said he attached his support from a couple different perspectives.  One is the TAP process is completely voluntary.  It does not commit your jurisdiction to enter into agreements with ITD.  The second aspect is the customization and flexibility of TAPS from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.  One shoe will not fit all.  Additionally, you can take the attitude that this can further protect personal property rights.  And you can further marry this agreement to your Comp. Plan.

Tammy indicated that you get a higher and better use when you put it into your Comp. Plan.  Ordinances are parallel to the Comp. Plan. 

Brad stated that he has been watching the horror stories of the past experience in the valley and feels that maybe the Partnership should support this legislation as a group. 

Garret volunteered to work with Bill to draw-up a broad support letter.  Tom moved to have Garret and Bill draft a support letter from the Partnership.  Rick seconded.  Motion carried unanimously. 

David moved to approve the minutes and financial report.  John seconded.  Motion carried unanimously. 




Meeting adjourned.

Treasure Valley Partnership

Attendees:

Phil Bandy
John Bechtel
Tom Dale
Tammy de Weerd
John Evans
David Ferdinand
Brad Holton
Vicki Thurber
Margie Watson
Paul Woods



Absent:

Dave Bieter
Scott Dowdy
John Evans
Nate Mitchell
Garret Nancolas
Hal Tolmie

Guests/Staff

Keith Allred
Joe Borton
Jeff Lavey
Pete O’neal
Bill Larsen - Staff


Tammy de Weerd opened the meeting and welcomed everyone to the new Meridian City Hall.  She introduced Joe Borton who is the Chair of Big Brothers/Big Sisters.  He mentioned that January is National Mentoring Month for the organization.  They are trying to spearhead a proclamation for each city to have a Big Brothers/Big Sisters week in January.  They will be talking to each member individually to encourage members to participate in the event.

Margie mentioned that Parma does not have a Big Brothers/Big Sisters organization but does have a mentoring program.  She asked if this proclamation was to recognize the organization or mentoring that communities have.  Her mentoring program is run through the school district.  Joe mentioned the idea was to recognize mentoring activities and does not necessarily have to just recognize the organization. 

Phil felt there was another way to get the message out and that was by approaching our local legislators and see if we can get a joint resolution at the State level. 

Tammy mentioned that a Christmas tradition in her family was to give an ornament.  At this time she gave out Christmas ornaments to those in attendance. 

SAUSA Report
Margie indicated that they had their conference call on the applicants for the SAUSA Project.  There were 32 really good applicants.  The group has reviewed the candidates and interestingly enough, each member came up with the same top five applicants to interview.  The will be interviewing candidates on December 22nd.  She felt real good about the type of person we are going to get from this applicant pool.  The interview team was happy that the governor had put in the $25,000 for this next years funding.

One thing Tom Moss did say is that as he talks to candidates he wanted to be able to reiterate the longevity of the SAUSA Project.  Margie reiterated with Tom the Partnership’s commitment to maintaining the project. 

David asked about the timing of this SAUSA Project hire.  Bill mentioned that it takes about 6 weeks for the Feds to do their full criminal background check on the candidate. 

Tammie asked if we had heard back from the Governor’s office on the funding.  Bill mentioned that the $25,000 is in the Governor’s proposed budget.  Bill pointed to two handouts for the SAUSA Project.  The SAUSA Project income/expense report indicates that at Christian’s last day the remainder in the project will be approx. $6,600.  He pointed out that the 2nd year’s 4th qtr payment has not been made to the project yet.  So theoretically, there is an added $25,000 going to be in the project at start.

One of the questions from last months meeting was the pay scale for AUSA’s.  Bill provided the pay scale for the federal employees.  He mentioned that people located in Boise get a bump in their wages.  Therefore, the scale for an AUSA in Boise is anywhere from $56,000 - $73,000, with 0-3 years experience.  We were paying Christian $68,000.  Bill asked for a decision on pay or guidance to give the interview committee. 

Paul mentioned that we could experience a lot of turnover for the 68,000.  David said that they are paying some of their PA’s in Canyon County, somewhere around $80,000.  Bill stated that the crux of his analysis, at five years of experience, for example, what we were paying Christian was on the low end of the pay scale. 

Margie mentioned that all the candidates with less than three years of experience were not invited for interviews.  Tom added that we do not have to be the top pay but we should be competitive with the range. 

Paul asked why we were liability insurance.  Bill indicated that early on in the process ICRIMP had a problem putting this project under liability coverage and the liability insurance we did receive covers Owyhee County.  David mentioned he would check and see what kinds of liability insurance Canyon County has and if they would be able to put the SAUSA employee under this insurance. 

TAP Legislation Support Letter
Tammy asked if everyone had a chance to see the letter that Garret and Bill had put together on the TAP legislation.  She did mention that she did see the addition they requested on economic certainty.  Margie moved and Tom seconded to approve the TAP Legislation Support letter.  Motion carried. 

Firearms Training Facilities
Tammy introduced Jeff Lavey, Meridian Chief of Police who was there to talk about firearms training facilities.   For several years the Meridian police have looked at the opportunity to build their own training facility.  The idea was to build an indoor facility.  His question was what were other jurisdictions doing with regard to training facilities.  There have been a lot of articles in the paper about the lack of facilities. 

As he slowly sees the space in the valley begin to fill up, there becomes a need to secure a facility for firearms training.  His question was more future oriented and geared to a 20-year long-range plan.  He felt that his peers in the Treasure Valley were all concerned with finding a way to fill current needs, and maybe we could look at a cooperative venture to build a facility that could fulfill all the valley’s needs. 

Tammy mentioned that as they were looking at the price tag for fulfilling their own departments training needs, they quickly realized the possibility of fulfilling a need regionally.  The City of Meridian would like to have a state-of-the-art facility.  We want to plan at accommodating future needs.  We know we cannot do this alone and we know that any one of our individual jurisdictions can not do it alone. 

Her proposal is to get the TVP members and our Chiefs together and start this dialogue.  She indicated it is important for Partnership members to be in the room to listen to their dialogue.  The City of Meridian is willing to pay for someone to pull all of this together.  It will help us with recruitment of talented law enforcement officers.  This will also benefit our current law enforcement officers to get them maximally prepared to do their jobs. 

Tammy mentioned that this is one of those issues that it makes sense to have a regional solution.  We would love to work the Cities and Counties to insure that we have a predictable place to do our training in. 

Jeff felt that we shouldn’t do this alone.  We should build something once and get together and share it together. 

Tom felt that his understanding was that there was not a training concern for the Nampa Police Dept.  He added that he believes in a more dispersed idea was more efficient.  There was a lot of inefficiencies in coming from all over to a central facility.  He felt there was not a lot of interest given the economy and other priorities right now. 

Tammy felt that discussing a facility like this worth the dialogue.  She encouraged the group to discuss this issue.  If Canyon County feels that their needs are being met.  Then maybe it is just a need being experienced by Ada county jurisdictions. 

Discussion on Air Quality
Tammy asked if everyone saw the article where Director Toni Hardesty was talking to the City Club.  In the article she said, “maybe we are in non-attainment, maybe we are not?  As a member of the Treasure Valley Air Quality Council, this announcement was a shock.  They have not met to discuss this revelation.  She did want to get the discussion going to see if we could be leaders in the discussion around air quality. 

Keith indicated that the state of Air Quality today is kind of confusing.  Really what this is all about, is we have an air-shed in the valley that has physical constraints and is well defined by DEQ.  A major portion of this air-shed is made up of Canyon and Ada County.  The Air Quality Council made four recommendations.  Two of them had to do with governmental action.  Stage one vapor recovery is one.  Hopefully through the first half of 09, most of these vapors will be captured as a result of grants that are being let to tank owners.  The other is this idea of emission testing and maintenance of convoluted legislation that went through this past year.  This process is being strung out and what ever we come up with probably won’t have an impact on the testing during the summer of 09. 

The other two recommendations is that we need to change our behavior and drive less.  Automobiles combine to produce a little over 50% of the VOC’s in the air-shed.  Those things combined with the heat and sunshine create the ozone.   In the long run, cars are getting cleaner.  The fact  is there are a lot more vehicles in the valley.  If we marry the ideas of land-use planning with transportation planning, we won’t have to drive as much.  This is a long-term solution. 

The reason the EPA set air quality standards in the first place.  Last summer it was announced that because of lowering the standard for ozone standards we had reached non-attainment for ozone.  In 08, we had a cool summer and didn’t get those long sections of hot temperatures and the high prices of gasoline did in fact get people to change their behavior and they drove less.  Putting these two things together, our measurement was below the 75.  Depending on how you rounded the numbers, we may reach attainment. 

The State DEQ has until June 09 to submit the data to EPA that substantiates whether we do or do not have a problem. We ought to make a blitz effort to make sure we do not exceed the standard in the summer of 09.  At that point in time, we will be able to say we had a problem last year, but we have done all these smart things and have improved on our ozone problem. 

The challenge in the short run is getting the word out so that people will change their behavior.  What some of the members of the council would like to do would be to get the Boise Valley Economic partnership engaged in raising money for an awareness campaign.  He felt it was important that we do not have the Treasure Valley get labeled with bad air quality. 

Margie mentioned that two small gas station owners in her area did not know anything about the vapor recovery grant.  Tom mentioned that this activity will remove a tremendous amount of the VOC’s.  Tammy mentioned the Treasure Valley Air Quality Council will be looking at their reporting and working with the Boise Valley Economic partnership because the leader in this effort need to be the business community.  We can be leaders by providing the information but we need to create the groundswell and information on all the little things that can be done.  And if we can get people to take on little pieces of the overall problem, we will have a large effect on the outcome. 

Phil was concerned that if we are not proactive, we are going to be forced into doing mitigation.  All of the mitigation efforts are unfounded.  Smaller investments now will save us on this big investment. 

Tammy provided an example of a small paint shop that made some small capital improvements to do their part of cutting back on VOC emissions.  This business is recouping these costs.  Phil mentioned he supervised the pollution prevention program at DEQ for awhile.  The economic impacts and making people aware of that, were the best way to go.  If you explained that people could make small changes they could get below the regulatory threshold, and they don’t have the regulations apply to them.  In the long run, it was much more efficient to make the small changes to avoid regulatory requirements. 

Brad mentioned he recently flew his plane to Bakersfield and when they flew back, there was a frightening amount of similarities.  In Wilder in Canyon County, a vehicle emissions testing program is a bittersweet pill to swallow.  For the bang on the buck it sucks.  To him it is easier to pass a valley-wide ordinance on that if your car smokes any patrolman can pull you over and you have to get certified that your vehicle passed or you fix the problem.  Instead of having all the people test, we could test only the problem vehicles

Is this not a Treasure Valley Partnership issue that needs to be pulled up on our priority of issues.  He can think of several industries that are pumping out VOC like mad.  Let’s go after the long hanging fruit that is really easy to grab and create the lists and communications to businesses and industries about VOC emissions.  As a leader he feels like he has no traction.  He is frustrated that we do not have a game plan.

Tammy said that we have to get beyond the data and make it a healthy air issue and an economic attraction issue.  She has passed out what they are doing as ideas.  She would like to collect from the members what they are doing.  If the members have stories of what the business community is doing in this regard, please share this.  We have got to highlight the good stuff and we have to highlight what people are doing that is different.  The idea generators have a cumulative effect that is positive.

Steve mentioned he has been trying to put a working group together to solve the problem.  Tom indicated Canyon County is getting together tomorrow and are coming back together in the near future on this issue.

Beer/Wine Taxes
Steve mentioned that the Id Dept of Correction projects there is going to be $1 billion in new prison costs coming down the road.  There lots of policy options where you can spend less and get more out of it.

Most of these options cost a lot of money.  One however is appropriate and that is to raise the beer and wine tax and have the funds be dedicated for State substance abuse efforts.  85% of the offenders in our prisons have substance abuse problems.  The State has done a great deal to increase effectiveness and oversight in the substance abuse system.  Nationally, for every dollar you give into substance abuse treatment you get back 9 dollars in taxpayer savings and 8 dollars in savings for victims of crime.

This year, the office of drug policy has come forward with a 19 million request for the legislature this year.  There has been a roller coaster in funding in this state and providers do not want to open.  We think it is important to telegraph out into the future a stable funding for substance abuse treatment. 

The beer/wine taxes have not been raised in over 20 years.  The notion behind these taxes are, they are there to offset some of the cost that alcohol abuse imposes on communities.  The idea is to raise the beer/wine tax to a level that would offset the substance abuse treatment needs…..the 19 million. 

Tom moved that we approve the letter of support that was provided and send it to the State legislature.  David seconded, motion carried.

Paul Woods thanked the partnership and said his time with the Partnership was very rewarding. 

John moved and Tom seconded to approve the financial statement and minutes from the previous meeting.  Motion Carried.  



Meeting adjourned.