House Local Government Committee Minutes

 

2004 Minutes

 

January 22, 2004

February 4, 2004
February 10, 2004
February 12, 2004
February 18, 2004
February 20, 2004
February 24, 2004

March 8, 2004

DATE: January 22, 2004
TIME: 1:30 pm
PLACE: Room 408
MEMBERS: Chairman Barrett, Vice Chairman Collins, Representatives Eskridge, Clark, Smylie, Bradford, Miller, Ringo, Pasley-Stuart
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

GUESTS: Jerry Anderson, Department of Health & Welfare; Ken Harward, Executive Director, Association of Idaho Cities; Steve Allison, State Controller's Office; Dan Chadwick, Executive Director, Idaho Association of Counties; Mindy Hobson, Leon Duce, and Justin Ruen, AIC; and Jolynn Frank, Meridian High School, interning with AIC
Chairman Barrett called the meeting to order at 1:35 pm.
MINUTES There were no minutes to approve.
MOTION:
Chairman Barrett welcomed the members to the 2004 Session and introduced Anne Pasley-Stuart as a new member on the committee.
Ken Harward, Executive Director of Idaho Cities, made a brief statement in regards to the AIC relationship with cities. They provide a full gamut of education and training for city officials. He pointed out that during the interim an accounting manual was completed and is now available for city use.

He presented a list of the Association of Idaho Cities 2004 Legislative Priorities, which is attached to these minutes as Attachment "A". Not all of these items will be presented in 2004 as legislation.

1. Modernize the public works bidding requirements. This see that bids are awarded, not merely to the lowest bidder, but to the lowest bidder who does the best work. They have been working with the contractors on this legislation. Would like to see competitive bidding statutes for local entities co-located in the Idaho Code. This legislation will not be ready until the 2005 Legislature.

2. Electrical generating facilities will likely be presented through the Revenue and Taxation Committee.

3. A performance contracting law was passed two years ago involving state buildings. This legislation will allow the same law to apply to other public entities.

4. Adoption of the 2003 versions of the International Building Codes will be introduced in the Business Committee legislation.

5. Statutory provisions for filling vacancies are troublesome and inconsistent. This legislation is intended to clarify and would be introduced in the Local Government Committee.

6. A task force has been formed of all appropriate entities to update the subdivision and platting statute.

Dan Chadwick, Executive Director of the Idaho Association of Counties, appeared before the committee to present a list of the Priority Legislation for Idaho's Counties, which is attached to these minutes as Attachment "B".

Mr Chadwick advised he still has the same staff, Tony Poinelli as Deputy Director, IAC; Maggie Mahoney and Kerry Ellen Elliot, Policy Analysts for the IAC, but they were attending other meetings. The Idaho Association of Counties works with and provides education and training to all elected county officials.

The legislation concerning Ambulance District Funding, Enhanced Revenue for Alcohol Related Indigent Claims, and Deferred Tax on Forest Land, will all be introduced in the Revenue and Taxation Committee.

Mail Ballot Precincts legislation will be introduced in the State Affairs Committee.

The legislation the Local Government Committee will look at involves "Full Disclosure" or legislation that will bring uniformity to the assessment process by requiring that the actual sales price be disclosed. This would be used as one of the many tools in the assessment process and would require strict confidentiality on the part of the county.

ADJOURN: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 2:25 pm.




DATE: February 4, 2004
TIME: 1:30 pm
PLACE: Room 408
MEMBERS: Chairman Barrett, Vice Chairman Collins, Representatives Eskridge, Clark, (Jorgenson), Smylie, Bradford, Miller, Ringo, Pasley-Stuart
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:



Representative Clark
GUESTS: Walter Steed, Consultant; Don Munkers, CEO, Idaho Rural Water Association; Teresa Baker, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney; and Paul Kimmell, Latah County Commissioner
Chairman Barrett called the meeting to order at 1:35 pm. She introduced Michael Jorgenson, who will be serving as a Representative from District 3, until Representative Clark returns.
MINUTES It was moved by Rep Pasley-Stuart that the minutes of January 22, 2004, be approved as written.
VOTE ON A VOICE VOTE THE MOTION CARRIED.
RS 13779 Rep Ringo presented this proposed legislation which would increase the notice time which must be given before termination of a tenancy of a tenant. Current legislation states the landlord will give the tenant not less than one hundred twenty days' notice in writing prior to the date designated in the notice of termination. This legislation proposes to increase that 120 day notice to three hundred (300) days.

Rep Ringo stated that in many mobile home parks that are being closed, the mobile units are older and the tenants have a limited number of choices. They must bring the unit up to code prior to moving, which is very costly; they can move them; or they can sell the unit to the landlord. Whichever one of these choices is elected, it is very difficult to accomplish in 120 days. She did check into a few other states to see how their code read and did state that Washington allows one year.

Rep Eskridge did not feel this time frame was out of line. In his area, if notice is given in late fall, due to the weather, it would be spring or early summer before all the requirements could be met to make a move to private property.

Rep Barrett expressed some concern about the change in language under 55-2010, TERMINATIONS (1), which currently reads "Tenancy during the term of a rental agreement may be terminated by the landlord only".... The new language reads "A landlord shall not terminate or fail to renew a tenancy of a tenant of whatever duration except".... She stated property owners do have some rights. She wanted to be assured this legislation did not impact the rights of the property owner.

Rep Miller supported the legislation, but questioned whether the time frame might be excessive. She did state, however, that a mobile home park in her district faced this issue and it took longer than a year to relocate.

MOTION: Rep Eskridge moved that RS 13779 be introduced for print.
VOTE ON A VOICE VOTE, THE MOTION CARRIED. Rep Clark (Jorgenson) is recorded as voting no.
RS 13779 Rep Meyer, sponsor of this legislation stated there were flaws in this legislation and asked that it be returned to the sponsor. RS returned.
RS 13831 Rep Eberle, sponsor of this legislation was not at the meeting. No action taken.
H 554 Rep Trail presented this legislation which related to notice inviting bids for counties. It will revise publication requirements before the date for opening bids by a county, changing the notice from thirty (30) days to at least two (2) weeks before the date for opening bids. It further changes the publication requirement from at least twice, not less than three (3) weeks apart, to read at least twice, not less than one (1) week apart.

Walter Steed, Consultant, supports this legislation. This proposed change would make county bid notice requirements the same as existing requirements for Idaho cities. He stated the proposed wording only sets a minimum time frame and counties can still advertise for thirty (30) days or longer if they need or desire. In fact, he stated, two weeks was a very short time frame and, in many cases, a longer time frame would be required.

By law, cities and counties are required to accept the lowest bid. However they do want the best possible low bid and do not feel this legislation would negatively impact their clients. With a construction season impacted by Idaho weather, every day counts in getting projects bid and under construction so as to not have projects held over until the next spring or summer.

A shorter bid period can have a positive financial impact by not having to include more expensive cold weather construction techniques or a winter shutdown.

Rep Barrett noted that by shortening the minimum time frame for inviting bids, any extension in time frame is left to discretion of the individual county or city, as it is not included in the statute language.

MOTION Rep Smylie moved that H 554 be sent to the floor with a DO PASS recommendation.
VOTE ON A VOICE VOTE THE MOTION CARRIED. Rep Trail will sponsor this legislation. Rep Naccarato will be a co-sponsor.
ADJOURN: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 2:10 pm




DATE: February 10, 2004
TIME: 1:30 pm
PLACE: Room 408
MEMBERS: Chairman Barrett, Vice Chairman Collins, Representatives Eskridge, Clark, Smylie, Bradford, Miller, Ringo, Pasley-Stuart
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

GUESTS: Kerry Ellen Elliott, IAC; Ken Baker, Consultant, AIC; David Naccarato, Account Executive, Siemens; Rep Sali
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Barrett at 2:33 pm.
MINUTES It was moved by Representative Pasley-Stuart that the minutes of February 4, 2004, be approved as written.
VOTE ON A VOICE VOTE THE MOTION CARRIED.
RS 13807 Chairman Barrett pointed out the sponsor found some problems with this legislation and asked that it be removed from the agenda.
MOTION Representative Collins made a motion to hold RS 13807 in committee for time certain until Thursday, February 12, 2004.
VOTE ON A VOICE VOTE THE MOTION CARRIED.
RS 13942C1 Representative Sali presented this legislation which will afford a presumption of historic significance and value to statues and monuments that have been on public property for 25 years. It will further provide procedures for removal and provide for representation by the attorney general, if requested by a political subdivision of the State of Idaho.

Representative Sali stated that removing a monument or statue of long standing is, in his opinion, akin to book burning. He feels it has attained a certain historical value over the period of time it has been in place. Any statue or monument deemed to have historical significance and value would need approval of the Idaho State Historical Society prior to removal.

MOTION: Representative Clark made a motion that RS 13942C1 be introduced for print.
SUBSTITUTE

MOTION

Representative Ringo made a substitute motion that RS 13942C1 be returned to sponsor.





Representative Eskridge spoke in favor of the original motion. He feels this legislation presents a side he has not thought of before. He feels it has merit in an area not previously.

Representative Pasley-Stuart spoke in favor of the substitute motion. She is concerned that the state is getting involved in matters under local control. She further expressed concern that the fiscal statement was incorrect, that assistance from the Attorney General would have a fiscal impact.

Representative Sali responded that the Attorney General would only be involved if his assistance was requested by a political subdivision of the state. He could not think of an instance where the Attorney General had been involved, so he felt the fiscal statement was accurate. It is difficult to anticipate when a lawsuit might be filed and when the Attorney General would be called on to assist.

VOTE

SUBSTITUTE MOTION

ON A ROLL CALL VOTE, THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO RETURN RS 13942C1 TO SPONSOR FAILED 2 - 7.

2 AYE - Representatives Ringo and Pasley-Stuart

7 NAY - Representatives Collins, Eskridge, Clark

Miller, Bradford, Smylie, and Barrett

VOTE ON A VOICE VOTE THE MOTION TO INTRODUCE RS 13942C1 TO PRINT PASSED.
S 1222 Representative Eskridge presented this legislation would allow Idaho public entities to participate in the bidding process entitled "Energy Saving Performance Contracting". This process specifies a way to finance and implement capital energy improvements and services offered by a qualified energy service company.

An example of this might be a boiler. New boilers are very expensive, but much more efficient, and would result in significant energy savings.

This legislation corrects an oversight in the legislation passed a few years ago. It was assumed cities, counties and schools had the same rights as state agencies, but the uncertainty has led to unnecessary costs and project delays while the matter has been researched.

MOTION Representative Smylie moved that S 1222 be sent to the floor with a DO PASS recommendation.
VOTE ON A VOICE VOTE THE MOTION CARRIED. Representative Eskridge will sponsor this legislation.
S 1223 Kerry Ellen Elliott, Idaho Association of Counties, presented this legislation which would repeal the requirement for the Idaho Association of Counties to present an annual report to the legislature regarding the use and growth of transferable development rights systems in the state.

This requirement is not in the Statute, but in Session Law. Since 1999, when the legislation passed on transferable development rights, the IAC has made an annual report to the legislator. During that time there has been no significant change or activity.

In the future, should this committee require or want an update or report, the information would be made available by the IAC.

MOTION Representative Collins moved that RS 1223 be sent to the floor with a DO PASS recommendation.
VOTE ON A VOICE VOTE THE MOTION CARRIED. Representative Collins will sponsor this legislation.
ADJOURN: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 3:57 pm.




DATE: February 12, 2004
TIME: 1:30 pm
PLACE: Room 408
MEMBERS: Chairman Barrett, Vice Chairman Collins, Representatives Eskridge, Clark, Smylie, Bradford, Miller, Ringo, Pasley-Stuart
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

GUESTS: Jim Kalousek; Wendell Bartlow; Robert Kunesh; Ed Pinson; Mark Larson, State Fire Marshall; Jim Jones, Attorney; David Kerrick, Lobbyist; Richard Stovel, Attorney; and Leon Duce, Fiscal Officer, AIC
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Barrett at 1:39 pm.
MINUTES It was moved by Rep Pasley-Stuart that the minutes of February 10, 2004, be approved as written.
VOTE ON A VOICE VOTE THE MOTION CARRIED.
RS 14036 Rep Sali presented this legislation which would repeal current Idaho Code 50-222 and replace it with language that had been previously enacted with some changes. A new section 50-221A is added, to provide that, except when the consent is obtained from those to be annexed, a city will give notice of intent to annex, hold a public hearing and hold an election in the affected area under certain conditions. Further, that a city must comply with this section before it can annex adjacent territory.
MOTION Rep Clark moved that RS 14036 be introduced for print with the correction made that on page 2, line 16, that twenty-five (25%) be changed to twenty per cent (20%). This refers to oral or written protests received by the council from the registered voters who reside in the area proposed to be annexed.
VOTE ON A VOICE VOTE THE MOTION CARRIED.
RS 13872C1 Rep Shepherd presented this legislation which would increase the penalty for owners or occupants failing to comply with orders for remedy or removal. It would further designate the entities to which penalties shall be payable and provide that penalties may be recovered in certain civil enforcement actions under the direction of attorneys for fire districts.

Penalties for noncompliance would be based on an increasing scale for each day's neglect beginning with $10.00 on the first through seventh day; $50.00 per day on the eighth through thirtieth day; and $100.00 per day on the thirty-first day and each day thereafter until compliance is met.

MOTION Rep Miller moved that RS 13872C1 be introduced for print.
VOTE ON A VOICE VOTE THE MOTION CARRIED.
H 612 This legislation, which refers to closure of a mobile home park, was heard in this committee and introduced for print. Rep Ringo, the sponsor, felt there were serious flaws in the legislation and had it rewritten. She is now asking that this bill be HELD in committee.
MOTION Rep Clark moved that H 612 be HELD in committee.
VOTE ON A VOICE VOTE THE MOTION CARRIED.
RS 14017 Rep Ringo presented this legislation, which is a re-write of H 612. Closure of a mobile home park presents tenants in need of low cost housing with a number of complex issues. Many mobile homes must be renovated prior to being moved, the move itself can be costly and complicated by weather conditions, and a new location must be found. Current law does not allow sufficient time to deal with these issues. This legislation would increase the length of time provided by the landlord from 120 days to 300 days.

Rep Clark missed the hearing on H 612 when it was presented and questioned how 300 days was arrived at. Rep Ringo responded it was a result of research of other states and working with the people in her area who are involved in this situation.

MOTION Rep Eskridge moved that RS 14017 be introduced for print.

Rep Miller and Rep Clark both expressed concern that 300 days was too long a period of time. Rep Miller stated she would not support the bill.

Rep Eskridge supported the length of time due to the fact these people were being asked to move their homes and weather conditions, at least in his part of the state could require a lengthy period before a move could be completed.

VOTE ON A VOICE VOTE THE MOTION CARRIED.
RS 13831 Rep Eberle presented this legislation which would clarify the establishment and disestablishment of a Local Business Improvement District. It provides for one man, one vote, instead of according to the dollar amount of property owned. The legislation further requires a majority of two-thirds (2/3) of the property owners to change the rate of taxation
MOTION: Rep Clark moved that RS 13831 be introduced for print.

Rep Smylie asked Rep Eberle if he had discussed this legislation with the cities and counties. Rep Eberle responded he had not.

VOTE ON A VOICE VOTE THE MOTION CARRIED.
RS 13964 David Kerrick, Attorney, presented this legislation which would prohibit the use of auditorium district funds to advertise or promote ballot measures of the district. A "ballot measure" would include proposals to create or dissolve an auditorium district, as well as proposals to incur bonded indebtedness.
MOTION Rep Collins moved that RS 13964 be introduced for print.
VOTE ON A VOICE VOTE THE MOTION CARRIED.
RS 13970 David Kerrick, Attorney, presented this legislation which would establish a graduated maximum tax rate for auditorium districts that are financed through the hotel/motel room sales tax. The current maximum tax rate is 5%, which applies to all hotels/motels located within the geographic boundaries of the auditorium district, regardless of how close the hotel/motel is to the facility being financed. Those hotels/motels located nearest the facility receive a greater benefit than those located the furthest away.

The graduated rate would be a maximum 5% tax payable for hotels/motels located within a one-half mile radius; maximum 4% rate would apply within a one and one-half mile radius; maximum 3% rate would apply within a three mile radius; and a maximum rate of 2% would apply to hotels/motels located beyond a three mile radius.

Rep Smylie felt the radius was too tight and questioned where the measurements would be calculated, from the center of the facility, from the edge of the property or just where.

VOTE ON A VOICE VOTE THE MOTION CARRIED. Representatives Miller, Smylie and Pasley-Stuart are recorded as voting no.
ADJOURN: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 2:20 pm.




DATE: February 18, 2004
TIME: 1:30 pm
PLACE: Room 408
MEMBERS: Chairman Barrett, Vice Chairman Collins, Representatives Eskridge, Clark, Smylie, Bradford, Miller, Ringo, Pasley-Stuart
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

Rep Eldridge and Rep Ringo
GUESTS: David Kerrick, Attorney
Chairman Barrett called the meeting to order at 12:30 pm
MINUTES It was moved by Rep Smylie that the minutes of February 12, 2004 be approved as written.
VOTE ON A VOICE VOTE THE MOTION CARRIED.
H 689 This legislation would prohibit the use of Auditorium District funds to advertise or promote a measure including ballot measures. This issue more properly belongs in the House Revenue and Taxation Committee.
H 690 This legislation would provide for a graduated tax based on the proximity of the taxpayer hotel or motel to the facility being financed. This issue more properly belongs in the House Revenue and Taxation Committee.
MOTION Rep Collins moved that H 689 and H 690 be referred to the House Revenue and Taxation Committee.
VOTE ON A VOICE VOTE THE MOTION CARRIED. Rep Smylie is recorded as voting no.
ADJOURN: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 12:35 pm.




DATE: February 20, 2004
TIME: 1:30 pm
PLACE: Room 408
MEMBERS: Chairman Barrett, Vice Chairman Collins, Representatives Eskridge, Clark, Smylie, Bradford, Miller, Ringo, Pasley-Stuart
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

Rep Eskridge
GUESTS: R Stover, Boise City Attorney; Nyle Fullmer, Rexburg City Council; Ben Reminger; Marlena Belnap; Stanley B Davis, Mayor of Salmon; Ray Bixler; Tim Kalouskek; Jerry Spengler; Anna Spengler Leon Duce, AIC; Robert Kunesh, SW Neighborhood Assn; Lee Welsh; Cliff Diffendaffer; Wendell Bartlow; Randall LC Miller; Chuck Thomas; Mike and Sally Sturman; John Eaton, Boise Contractors Assoc; Ray Stark, Boise C of C; Lloyd Maxwell; Robert and Carol Johnson; Gerald and Jonna Praegitzer; Wayne Gibbs, Planning Director; Joe Tawney; Louise and Stan Sever; Terry Hoover; Cindy Ries; Ed Pinson; Vern Alleman; Bill Nichols, Attorney; Wendell and Aaron Klein; Mark Butler, Land Planner; Mary Ann Williams; Alex LaBeau, Idaho Assoc of Realtors; Malcolm and Erma Counsil; Don Harness; Pat and Joyce Lewellyn; Nancy Merrill, Mayor of Eagle; Tom Dale, Mayor of Nampa; Garret Nancolas, Mayor of Caldwell; Dee Bailey; Mitch Whited; Roland Fain; Jeff Ramage; Robert Finley; Shirley McKague, Legislator; Pam and Kim Beam; Don Countryman; Steve Ahrens, IACI.
The meeting was moved to the Gold Room to accommodate the crowd. Chairman Barrett called the meeting to order at 1:40 pm.
MINUTES Rep Pasley-Stuart moved that the minutes of February 18, 2004, be approved as written.
VOTE ON A VOICE VOTE THE MOTION CARRIED.
H 685 Rep Sali presented this legislation which he stated was different from the legislation presented in 2003. He also presented proposed amendments to the legislation. The amendments would change the following: Page 2 of the printed bill, line 25, delete "two-thirds (2/3)"; line 28, delete "two-thirds"; and line 29, delete "(2/3)". Further amendments would include Page 1, line 31, delete "for at least", line 32 delete "fourteen (14) days" and insert "on three (3) separate days over 2 weeks in the city's official newspaper as defined in Section 50-213, Idaho Code, with the last publication being made at least seven (7) days prior to the hearing"; Page 1, line 40 delete "In addition to the", delete lines 41 and 42 and on line 43 delete "Code, for seven (7) days prior to the hearing". On Page 4, line 8 delete "Any annexation pending a legal decision by a court cur-", and delete lines 9 and 10.

The intent is to require three publications within a two week period. On page 2, line 16, the twenty-five percent (25%) requirement of registered voters did not get changed to twenty (20%) as requested in a motion made on sending RS 14036 to be introduced to print at the meeting held February 12, 2004. However, Rep Sali stated he would have recommended it stay at twenty-five (25%).

Rep Clark stated he would prefer seeing all of the proposed amendments in proper legislative form.

Rep Bayer, a co-sponsor of this legislation stated he felt this legislation would reach a balance of city needs, growth and private property rights. Many entities will admit there have been some wrongful moves in annexation made over the past. He stated the tax difference in some areas might be five (5%), but probably less in most areas. He feels we need some common sense representation and this legislation will accomplish that.

Garret Nancolas, Mayor of Caldwell, spoke against this legislation on behalf of the Association of Idaho Cities. He respects a due process in annexation, however he felt the fiscal impact statement was incorrect in that this legislation would require additional publications, which are costly, and would require an election, which also is costly. He stated most areas do not use a forced annexation process, but many times are annexed at the request of the residents of an area. In Caldwell, they were able to help a subdivision through annexation who had their wells contaminated by nitrate from their own septic tanks.

There is value in cities being able to plan. The legislation passed two years ago allows for planning and is good legislation. Part of the need to annex arises from the fact that it is very costly to run infrastructure around subdivisions that do not want to be part of the city.

Marlena Belnap of Rexburg, testified in favor of this legislation. She stated 70 families were force-annexed by a City Council and Mayor that didn't represent them as county citizens. Her testimony is attached to these minutes at "Attachment A". This group has become part of a lawsuit filed against the State of Idaho on the annexation law.

Nyle Fulmer, City Councilman, Rexburg, spoke in opposition to this legislation. He stated that in response to the testimony of Marlena Belnap, the City Council met with individuals and held public meetings. None of the property owners were required to connect to city services, but they were given significantly discounted connection fees and an 18-month window of opportunity. His testimony is attached to these minutes as Attachment "B".

Robert Kunesh, SW Ada Neighborhood Association, is in favor of this legislation. He feels there is a need to be given the right to vote. This is likened to taxation without representation. If other states have a voting process, why not Idaho. This process violates the one man, one vote right of all citizens.

Ray Stark, Boise Metro Chamber of Commerce, is opposed to this legislation. Under the opportunity for economic development, annexation is a good tool. They want to know why the Senate bill passed two years ago is not working. He is not aware of too many examples.

Joe Tawney, spoke in favor of this legislation. He feels it is best for the citizens, even though cities do not think the citizens know what is best for themselves. He sees developers as being part of the problem.

Cindy Ries, spoke in favor of this legislation. She listed several locations where annexation were put in place since 2000, all forced annexations. On March 22, there will be hearing on the lawsuit that has been filed against the State of Idaho Annexation law. She states it is the job of the legislature to pass laws, not the courts. She stated voluntary annexation happens about 90% of the time and this legislation only affects the other 10%.

Vern Alleman, spoke in favor of this legislation. He wanted to thank Rep Sali and Rep Bayer for sponsoring it. He feels ordinary citizens are no match for those paid to represent large groups. H 685 addresses the problem of no vote for annexation.

Bill Nichols, Attorney for City of Meridian, spoke against this legislation. He stated his comments were prepared before he heard the proposed amendments. He further stated Idaho is not the only state that implements annexation without a vote. His testimony is attached to these minutes at Attachment "C".

Wendell Bartlow, spoke in favor of this legislation. He feels it is reprehensible we are fighting a war in Iraq to give them the vote and withhold it here in America. His testimony is attached to these minutes as Attachment "D".

Mark Butler, Planner, spoke against this legislation. He thinks the key for annexation is concentration. If this bill passes it makes it difficult to annex and there would be a need accompanying legislation. Cities need to be able to plan and comprehensive plans are essential in that process.

Alex LaBeau, Idaho Association of Realtors, spoke against this legislation. Every community may not have an open, willing-to-listen Mayor such as Mayor Nancolas in Caldwell, but ultimately these public servants are accountable for their actions. He feels the law in place should be allowed an opportunity to work.

Nancy Merrill, Mayor of Eagle and Legislative Chair of the AIC, spoke against this legislation. She feels they worked hard on S1391aa and listened to the people. Feels there are many other things that can be done in lieu of voting on everything. Her testimony is attached to these minutes as Attachment "E".

Tom Dale, Mayor of Nampa, spoke against this legislation. He stated there is great ability in Idaho to plan and prevent unplanned development. He sees enclaves as the problem. He believes the effects of growth is what drives annexation of enclave subdivisions. One of the questions he is having a hard time trying to answer is what are these enclaves gaining from annexation.

Rep Collins questioned Mayor Dale about the arrogant attitude and rudeness the Council had in regards to the residents of a subdivision to be annexed. The Mayor responded he was unaware of this, however, Rep Collins pointed out a newspaper article he had in his possession that supported his comments.

Rep Clark stated Rep Collins might have a conflict of interest in this issue.

Rep Collins asked that he be recused from the committee because he has a personal interest in this legislation which provides a conflict of interest.

Mitch Whited, spoke for this legislation. He does not feel the city has a right to enforce annexation without any right to vote. He does not like the way the city and developers work together.

Stan Davis, Mayor of Salmon, asked the committee to hold H 685 in committee and allow the existing annexation process time to see how it works. Cities work very well with counties on many issues but there are times tools are needed. Comprehensive planning is required of cities as it is a state mandate.

Steve Ahrens, IACI, spoke against this legislation. He states the law on the books now made several improvements on notification and input. Economic development is necessary in his business and orderly planning is required for orderly development.

John Eaton, Building Contractors Association, spoke against this legislation. He stated they worked hard on the legislation that is now on the books. His organization supports the Land Use Planning Act.

Ron Bean, spoke in favor of this legislation. He does not see H 685 being any kind of impediment to cities.

Rep Sali, winding up debate on the bill stated forced annexation is painful. Most states allow a vote, not all. Forced annexations happen rarely so this bill would not effect too many people. He thinks the fiscal statement is correct. Advertising and elections are expensive, but would happen rarely. The lawsuit that has been filed is dealing with several constitutional issues. If the lawsuit is successful, there will be no annexation law on the books. He feels passing this legislation, allowing citizens to vote on annexation, provides the ability to eliminate arrogance in government.

Rep Bayer, feels that the incivility that occurs during the process may still occur, but it would be less. He states there is not a direct correlation between the services and utilities cities and counties provide. He would like to see this legislation pass.

Rep Clark questioned Rep Sali as to what would constitute an oral protest. The response would be voicing a protest at the public hearing.

Rep Collins pointed out that under Rule 38 he could possibly have a financial interest in this issue that might provide a conflict of interest. He is involved in the enclave area in Nampa that is going through a forced annexation, however, he feels he can vote objectively on this issue.

MOTION: Rep Miller moved that H 685 be HELD in committee. She feels S 1391aa, which passed two years ago needs more time to see how it works. She stated she is aware of the concerns of the people that were annexed in Boise since her district is border to this area.

Rep Pasley-Stuart supports the motion to hold H 685. She agrees that we need time to see how the current law works.

SUBSTITUTE

MOTION

Rep Collins made a substitute motion that H 685 be Reported Back with Amendments Attached to be Placed on General Orders for Consideration.
VOTE ON SUBSTITUTE MOTION ON A ROLL CALL VOTE THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILED ON A TIE VOTE

4 AYE - Representatives Barrett, Collins, Smylie, and Bradford 4 NAY - Representatives Clark, Miller, Ringo, and Pasley-Stuart

VOTE ON MAIN MOTION ON A VOICE VOTE THE MOTION TO HOLD H 685 IN COMMITTEE FAILED ON A TIE VOTE

Representatives Barrett, Collins, Bradford and Smylie are recorded as voting no.

ADJOURN: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:15 pm.




DATE: February 24, 2004
TIME: 1:30 pm
PLACE: Room 408
MEMBERS: Chairman Barrett, Vice Chairman Collins, Representatives Eskridge, Clark, Smylie, Bradford, Miller, Ringo, Pasley-Stuart
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

GUESTS: Cornel Rasor, Bill Denman, Ken Harward, AIC, Bruce Allcott, Fire Chief, Ben Estes, and Mike Naccarato
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Barrett at 2:57 pm
MINUTES It was moved by Representative Bradford that the minutes of February 20, 2004 be approved as written.
VOTE ON A VOICE VOTE THE MOTION CARRIED.
H 688 Rep Eberle presented this legislation which would clarify the establishment and disestablishment of a Local Business Improvement District. It provides for one man, one vote rather than according to dollar amount of property owned. It requires a majority of two thirds (66 2/3) to change the rate of taxation. This is about power, who has it and who uses it. It covers two issues, the way a petition can be brought forward and changing the vote to one man, one vote, rather than by value of property.

Rep Smylie questioned where one man, one vote was covered in the legislation. Rep Eberle felt this question would be answered after listening to the testimony of Mr Denman and Mr Rasor.

Bill Denman stated this legislation is trying to promote property rights overall. He quoted from the constitution as well as a quote from former English Jurist William Blackstone in regards to property rights. People who ultimately pay for this are the consumers.

Pro active government makes laws to protect rights of property owners. Reactive government waits until something happens and then writes laws to correct.

Mr Denman's comments in regards to this legislation are attached to these minutes as Attachment "A".

Rep Clark questioned how Mr Denman had become involved in this legislation. He responded it was because of a problem that had arisen in Sandpoint, even though he was not personally involved in that problem.

Rep Smylie wanted to know how widespread this problem was, or was it only in one locality.

Ken Harward, Executive Director, Association of Idaho Cities, stated that the way the legislation is written, it deals with two different sections of the law. It covers Local Improvement Districts and Business Improvement Districts, but they are two different things, even though a BID works like an LID. He does not know the number of BID's in the State of Idaho, but he does know that in Nampa alone, there could be 20 to 25 operating at one time.

BID's are formed, for the most part, for promoting businesses in a specific geographic location in a city. The ones he is familiar with, Twin Falls, Coeur d'Alene, Nampa, the city contracts back with the BID to manage.

Rep Eskridge does not think we should be treating an LID and a BID the same.

Cornel Rasor business owner in Sandpoint, desires to make the BID process less subject to abuse. BIDs are divisive in nature. Mr Rasor's testimony is attached to these minutes at Attachment "B". He feels the treatment he received was rude and abusive and no one was willing to listen to his concerns or to help him. His business is not adjacent to the BID he is talking about, but is on the edge. However, he is included in the assessments. He feels he should be capable of making his own business decisions and not subject to the decisions of a group of business owners.

He does not see a BID creating any long lasting economic effect. In the cities he has looked at, after an initial burst of activity things returned to the status they were before. He feels any lasting business increase is due to hard work, innovation and entrepreneurial spirit of the property and business owner.

Rep Clark questioned whether this legislation should be considered, in that it appeared to cover two different subjects. The rule is that legislation cannot cover two subjects.

Rep Barrett asked Rep Eberle if there was any dialogue about this when he took it to Legislative Services. Rep Eberle said Legislative Services made the appropriate changes in the legislation.

Mr Rasor feels LIDs and BIDs are so closely related, the issues are often the same. He stated this issue has become very frustrating and abusive to him. He has discovered that even though there are procedures in the law for BIDs, they are basically ignored.

Rep Collins asked Mr Harward to tell the committee how a BID is formed and dissolved. He replied that business owners, representing a majority of the assessments, bring forth a petition to form a BID in the proposed geographic area. A majority of those who formed the BID can dissolve the BID.

Rep Eberle said assessment is based on the assessed value of the property, not one person, one vote.

Mr Denman said Section 17 of this legislation does cover a Business Improvement District, it is just called Local Improvement District.

MOTION: Rep Collins moved to HOLD H 688 in committee. He has a great deal of sympathy to the things that have been said. He thinks this issue needs some study as he does not feel this legislation will accomplish what they want.

Rep Eskridge supports the motion. He states there is a problem in Sandpoint, but he does not feel this legislation will solve the problem.

Rep Collins asked that Rep Eskridge and Rep Eberle work with these people and put together two different pieces of legislation to deal with these issues. Rep Ringo agreed with Rep Collins and Rep Eskridge. Rep Smylie also agreed and did not feel this legislation addresses the issue.

VOTE ON A VOICE VOTE THE MOTION TO HOLD H 688 IN COMMITTEE PASSED.
H 686 Rep Shepherd presented this legislation which will increase the penalty for owners or occupants failing to comply with orders from the state fire marshal for remedy or removal and to designate the entities to which penalties shall be payable. It provides for penalties on an incremental increased rate basis, and provides that penalties may be recovered in certain civil enforcement actions under the direction of attorneys for fire districts. It further provides for the award and payment of reasonable attorney's fees.

Rep Clark asked how the costs for enforcement were arrived at.

Bruce Alcott, Fire Chief, stated that the purpose of the penalty is to encourage compliance. Since every situation is different, there is no way to determine a specific flat rate for a violation. He stated Fire Chiefs do not want to heavy hand this, so they felt a staggered schedule and including court costs, if it should go to court, would be an additional incentive for complying with the violation order.

Rep Eskridge asked what types of things were being talked about. The response was it could be a damaged mobile home, tall weeds located next to a building, or other kinds of safety hazards.

Mr Alcott stated that if an individual was making an honest effort to correct the problem, proceeding to court action would be very unlikely.

Rep Clark did not like the wording on line 33, where it states costs "shall" be awarded. He felt it should read "may" be awarded.

Mr Alcott stated this legislation was merely to determine where monies were to go if court action was promulgated. Rep Barrett wanted to know when attorneys would come into the picture. Mr Alcott responded it would be difficult for him to pin that down, since he was not an attorney. He did say that proceeding to court was not the driver if this legislation, but increasing the penalty to encourage compliance was.



MOTION Rep Eskridge moved that H 686 be sent to the floor with a DO PASS recommendation.

Rep Clark voiced his opposition to the motion. He thinks the additional amount of the penalty is pretty pricey.

Rep Ringo supports the original motion.

Rep Clark still thinks the legislation should read "may" rather than "shall".

It was pointed out this merely designated who would receive the money.

VOTE ON A VOICE VOTE THE MOTION CARRIED. Representatives Barrett and Clark are recorded as voting no. Representative Shepherd will sponsor this legislation.

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:50 pm.

ADJOURN:




DATE: March 8, 2004
TIME: 1:30pm
PLACE: Room 408
MEMBERS: Chairman Barrett, Vice Chairman Collins, Representatives Eskridge, Clark, Smylie, Bradford, Miller, Ringo, Pasley-Stuart
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

Jerry Mason, Attorney; Roger Seiber; Waste Management; Steve Sedlacek, Idaho Sanitation Services Assn; Tim Gordon, J & M Sanitation; Shawn Perkins, Voorhees Sanitation; Steve Purvis, City of Boise; and Molly Steckel, BFI
GUESTS: The meeting was called to order by Chairman Barrett at 2:40 pm
MINUTES Rep Ringo moved that the minutes of February 24, 2004 be approved as written.
VOTE ON A VOICE VOTE THE MOTION CARRIED.
H 765 Rep Miller asked that H 765 be HELD IN COMMITTEE. The Association of Idaho Cities and the Idaho State Historical Society have been working together to solve the problem of storage of records and that alleviates the need for this legislation. The Historical Society is ready to store and archive records for the cities. The city is now paying $5.00 per box for storage and they have approximately 1000 boxes, so this agreement will help them financially.
S 1298 Jerry Mason, Attorney and counsel for the Association of Idaho Cities, presented this legislation which will clarify legislative intent to continue to allow counties and cities to maintain and operate solid waste systems by exclusive or non-exclusive means. This will confirm and reaffirm what most have always thought was the law. It is the law for counties and the reason this legislation is presented is to try and eliminate the language in the statute that gives something to argue about.
Waste disposal can be provided several ways, through contract or franchise, by themselves or by contract with another unit of government. When asked about competitive bidding, Mr Mason said since 1985 competitive bidding has survived very well without mandating. He thinks it takes care of itself. Communities have the ability to look at other communities and if there is a great variance in fees, city officials soon hear about it.
MOTION Rep Clark moved that S 1298 be sent to the floor with a DO PASS recommendation.
VOTE ON A VOICE VOTE THE MOTION CARRIED. Rep Bradford will sponsor this legislation.
ADJOURN: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 3:04 pm.