►
From YouTube: Boise City Council - Work Session
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
C
Matt
america,
council
members
good
afternoon,
mike
schrack
for
travis
black.
Here
we
have
just
one
interim
budget
change.
We
are
seeking
approval
on
today
and
that
deals
with
a
capital
project
at
cottonwood
park.
The
project
is
in
process
and
we've
just
run
into
some
additional
costs
due
to
getting
the
new
restroom
hooked
up
to
the
sewer
main
and
putting
in
some
increased
electrical
infrastructure.
C
D
F
A
A
G
A
G
G
G
It
was
much
more
a
dip
dipping
our
toes
in
the
pool
to
see
what
the
community
knows
about
civilian
police
oversight,
how
the
community
feels
about
civilian
police
oversight,
whether
or
not
folks
have
had
an
opportunity
to
interact
with
the
current
model,
the
current
office
and
what
the
community
would
be
looking
for.
Moving
forward
in
a
model
of
civilian
police
oversight,
so
we
had
828
responses.
G
G
We
have
really
fantastic
translators
that
we'd
use
that
do
a
really
great
job
of
that,
and
we
advertised
it
through
various
channels.
You
all
did
a
great
job
on
your
social
media
channels
and
accounts.
We
did
that
multiple
times
and
through
several
of
our
different
accounts,
our
internal
and
external
newsletters.
We
worked
closely
with
relationship
managers
throughout
the
city
to
share
it
with
community
partners
to
get
it
as
deep
into
the
community
as
possible
and
through
at
least
one
press
release.
G
We
did
try
to
push
it
out
a
few
different
times
to
get
as
many
responses
as
possible.
What
we
weren't
able
to
do,
and
what
we're
waiting
in
to
do
until
the
new
model
is
affirmed
by
the
council
and
we
have
a
director
on
board-
is
to
go
deeper
into
that
community
engagement
to
get
even
more
feedback,
particularly
from
communities
that
may
or
may
not
have
as
easy
access
to
digital
ways
of
interacting
with
us.
G
So
once
a
new
director
is
on
board,
I
mean
you'll,
see
at
the
end
of
the
presentation,
we'll
work
with
that
person
to
really
build
out
community
meetings
listening
sessions,
particularly
with
those
communities
that
may
have
less
comfortable
relationships
with
with
police
officers
than
other
communities
that
we
typically
see
participate
in
surveys,
some
quick
demographics.
Just
so
that
you
can
see.
I
think,
the
last
time
I
was
before
you,
we
were
doing
survey
results
on
our
bpd
survey.
We
did
have
about
100
more
respondents
to
this
survey
than
we
did.
G
G
G
So
the
first
question
we
asked
just
to
get
a
very
baseline
take
on
what
the
community
feeling
is.
How
important
do
you
think?
Civilian
police
oversight
is
to
our
community
so
really
telling
here?
If,
if
you
add
extremely
important
and
very
important
about
63
percent
of
the
community,
is
saying
that
this
is
a
valuable
program
to
have
available
within
our
community.
I
mean
22
percentage,
23
percentage,
not
so
important
or
not
at
all
important,
but
I
think
we
can
see
a
very
a
very
clear
view
from
the
community
that
they
see.
G
This
is
a
valuable
thing
to
add
to
our
community
the
themes,
of
course-
and
it
was
really
interesting
to
read
through
the
comments
just
like
last
time.
I've
got
pages
and
pages
and
pages
of
comments,
I'm
happy
to
send
them
to
you
and
for
you
to
read
through
they're,
really
interesting,
and
they
really
are
at
the
heart
of
what
our
community
members
are
feeling.
G
But,
for
example,
one
resident
said
you
know:
I've
lived
in
in
boise
for
20
years
and
I've
never
had
to
access
police
oversight,
but
I
would
want
to
know
that
it
was
there
and
if
somebody
needed
it,
we
need
to
make
sure
that
we
have
it
in
place,
and
that
was
a
really
common
theme,
so
even
folks
who
didn't
know
or
think
that
they
would
ever
need
to
access
civilian
police
oversight
felt
like
it
was
an
important
role
in
a
democratic
society
that
transparency,
accountability,
making
sure
that
there
was
a
way
to
logical
plate.
G
G
We
thought
it
was
also
important
to
ask
how
familiar
our
community
is
with
the
current
model,
the
office
of
police
oversight
in
part,
because
we
really
want
to
make
sure
we
have
a
good
baseline
as
we
move
forward
and
work
with
the
community
on
more
awareness
about
how
to
access
civilian
police
oversight
so
that
we
know
what
we're
shooting
for.
And
if
you
think
about
this,
how
familiar
are
you
from
extremely
familiar
those
that
have
had
interactions
with
the
current
office
of
police
oversight
to
not
at
all
familiar
being
people
who
didn't
even
know?
G
We
had
it
at
all?
I
think
we
would
want
this
to
look
more
like
a
bell
curve
right.
We
would
want
extremely
familiar
and
not
at
all,
familiar
to
be
pretty
similar
and
and
then
have
the
high
point
in
the
middle,
so
extremely
familiar
familiar
meant
that
you
had
had
some
sort
of
interaction
with
or
you
had
a
strong
knowledge
of
the
current
model.
The
office
of
police
oversight,
very
familiar
meant
that
you
had
heard
of
it,
knew
its
function,
knew
what
it
did
somewhat
familiar
was
like.
G
I
think
I've
heard
of
it
and
not
at
all
familiar
was
like.
I
had
no
idea,
we
even
had
an
office
of
police
oversight,
so
we're
feeling
like
this
gives
us
a
very
good
baseline
so
that,
as
we
continue
to
work
with
the
community
on
education
on
awareness
as
a
new
model
takes
shape.
This
can
be
a
question
we
can
ask
again
and
hopefully
we'll
be
able
to
see
that
more
in
that
in
that
bell
curve,
so
that
the
community
really
knows
that
it
exists
how
to
access
it
if
they
need
it.
G
We
also
asked:
where
are
you
most
likely
to
go
for
information
to
access
police
oversight?
If
you
need
it,
and
I
truncated
these
questions
just
a
little
bit,
we
have.
Obviously
I
can
send
you
the
raw
results
and
you
can
have
the
full
questions.
The
caveat
to
this
is
remember
that
we
distributed
the
survey
digitally
so
you're,
going
to
see
folks
that
are
most
comfortable
with
accessing
information
online.
G
So
far
and
away
people
rely
a
lot
on
the
city
of
boise
website
and
on
internet
searches
to
get
information,
especially
those
who
engage
with
the
city
through
our
digital
channels,
and
we
saw
that
come
out
really
clearly
in
these
survey
results.
We
also,
though,
asked
if
they
would
ask
trusted
friends
or
colleagues
elected
officials,
non-profit
organizations
and
as
part
of
our
outreach
effort
once
the
once
the
office
is
established.
G
We
also
then
asked
where
they
thought,
where
the
community
thought
we
should
be
advertising.
They
were
allowed
to
choose
as
many
answers
as
made
sense
to
them.
So
you
can
see
across
the
board-
and
we
know
this
about
about
human
beings.
In
today's
day
and
age,
people
like
to
get
information
from
lots
of
different
places,
and
so
it's
incumbent
upon
us
to
present
information
in
lots
of
different
places.
So
these
these
are
scored
and
ranked
according
to
like
how
they
related
to
each
other
social
media
coming
in
really
strong.
G
But
also,
if
you
look
here
when
when
we
ask
the
question
about,
where
do
you
think
we
should
advertise
the
new
office
of
police
accountability?
Community
groups
rose
really
high
to
the
top.
So
that's
an
incredible
opportunity
for
a
new
director
and
new
staff
to
partner
with
our
office
of
community
engagement,
to
really
build
relationships
and
work
with
community
organizations
to
get
the
information
about
the
office
out.
G
We
asked
about
what
kind
of
form
of
contact
would
be
most
comfortable.
We
know
that
those
who
need
to
access
civilian
police
oversight
are
typically
in
a
it's.
Not
it's.
It's
not
always
comfortable
right.
So
we
want
to
make
sure
that
what
whatever
we're
doing
for
folks
who
need
to
access
these
services
we're
providing
the
most
comfortable
easiest
points
of
entry.
Email
came
up
number
one
telephoning
phoning.
G
The
director
high
on
the
list,
a
web
form
high
on
the
list
and
then
also
in
person,
so
we'll
make
sure
that
as
that's
building
out
and
as
a
new
director
is
working
through
policies
and
regulations
that
we're
presenting
the
information
and
saying
hey,
look
like.
Let's
have
multiple
entry
points,
each
as
easy
and
comfortable
as
any
other
entry
point,
because
the
the
whole
point
of
it
is
for
folks
to
be
able
to
access
the
service.
G
G
One
thing
to
note
here
is
in
the
comments
we
did
see
a
request
for
anonymity,
not
only
for
people
making
complaints,
but
there
was
a
a
desire
within
some
of
the
comments
to
make
sure
that
we
were
also
providing
protection
for
police
officers
who
are
having
complaints
lodged
against
them
so
like
an
equal
kind
of
a
balance,
definitely
more
towards
the
side
of
making
sure
that
there
was
anonymity
for
folks
who
might
have
a
complaint
but
making
sure
that
we
also
had
some
protection
for
police
officers
in
that
process.
G
If
you
or
someone
you
cared
about
needed
to
file
a
complaint,
would
you
feel
comfortable?
61.6
percent
of
folks
said?
Yes,
so
that's
a
great
place
to
start,
but
we
really
should
focus
in
on
the
people
who
said
no
or
not
sure
and
think
about
the
the
complaints
or
the
the
concerns
that
they
may
be
having,
and
they
were
loud
and
clear
and
pretty
consistent.
So
when
we
asked
people,
if
you
said
no
or
unsure
to
being
comfortable
about
a
complaint,
what
would
they
need
to
feel
comfortable?
And
we
heard
a
lot
of
what?
G
Probably
we
all
feel
in
our
guts,
the
ability
to
to
be
anonymous
to
make
sure
that
there
would
be
no
retaliation
or
no
repercussions,
no
retribution?
We
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
not
like
starting
to
be
pulled
over.
We
want
to
make
sure
that
there
would
actually
be
a
process
in
place.
Transparency
about
what
that
process
would
look
like
and
transparency
about
how
the
information
would
be
used
when
we
would
be
getting
information
back
and
the
community
really
said
loud
and
clear.
G
If
I
make
a
complaint,
I
want
to
know
what
happens
to
it.
What
is
the
process?
Where
does
it
go?
Am
I
going
to
be
told
when
there's
a
resolution
or
what
that
resolution
looks
like
and
a
big
call
to
make
sure
that
the
complaint
was
taken
seriously,
that
they
would
hear
back
from
the
office
to
say
we
got
your
complaint,
we're
working
through
it?
Here's
where
it
is
in
the
process
and
regular
communication
back
and
then
what
the
resolution
of
that
was.
G
We
asked
too
knowing
that
we,
in
terms
of
the
community's
awareness
of
the
office,
that
we
need
to
do
a
better
job
about
that.
We
asked
about
what
kind
of
information
would
give
the
community
confidence
that
our
model
of
police
oversight
is
working
well
and
again,
there
was
a
real
real
consistency
in
the
themes
that
we
saw
here,
and
it
was
to
be
as
public
and
transparent
about
the
information
as
possible.
G
So
you
know
categories
of
complaints,
the
process
for
the
investigations
where
things
are
in
the
investigation
and
then
actions
taken
there
was
like
the
comments
are
really
all
over
the
board,
and
I
would
encoura
encourage
you
to
read
them
because
some
folks
said
it's
not
that
I
necessarily
want
people
to
be
punished.
G
G
Some
of
the
the
statistics
that
go
along
with
that
are
all
of
the
complaints
being
dismissed
are
all
of
the
complaints
being
coming
to
some
sort
of
an
action
being
taken
like
what
does
that
actually
look
like,
so
that
the
community
can
gauge
and
judge
for
themselves
to
make
sure
that
that's
working
right?
We
they.
There
were
several
several
comments
asking
for
disaggregated
data.
G
I
think
the
major
theme
here
is
the
community
wants
us
to
trust
them,
to
see
data
and
and
draw
their
own
conclusions,
in
addition
to
the
conclusions
that
that
we
draw
from
the
data
that
we
look
at
and
then
any
trends
that
the
data
is
showing
the
community
just
wants
a
real,
clear
conversation
about
that
and
then
to
know
what
the
city
is
doing
in
response
to
those
trends.
So
if
we're
seeing
something
happen
over
and
over
and
over
again,
a
particular
kind
of
complaint,
maybe
a
particular
individual.
That's
getting
a
lot
of
complaints.
G
G
So
our
next
steps
through
the
office
of
community
engagement,
I
think
when
we,
when
you
saw
on
the
first
and
the
second
reading,
we're
going
to
be
partnering
really
closely
with
opa
and
the
new
director,
and
we
will
provide
that
person
as
soon
as
they
are
selected
and
seated
with
these
survey
results,
and
you
know
a
deeper
dive
if
they
wish
and
assume
that
they
will
want
to
read
all
the
comments
as
we
have
and
then
really
working
with
them
to
develop
an
outreach
plan
to
key
community
members
to
learn
more,
to
have
conversations
with
folks
who
didn't
participate
in
the
survey.
H
Questions.
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
maria.
So
a
couple
of
things,
the
the
part
where
you
talked
about
going
deeper
at
some
point.
H
I
strongly
encourage
us
to
look
into
spanish
language,
radio,
that's
a
a
major
resource,
even
though
the
rest
of
the
world
may
have
moved
on
to
podcasts
and
that
sort
of
thing,
spanish
language,
radio,
is
still
a
very
good
place
to
disseminate
important
information,
and
a
lot
of
those
djs
are
they're
they're,
informal
leaders
in
our
community
and
people,
trust
them
with
information,
so
that
would
be
a
good
place.
H
The
other
thing
the
question
about
what
were-
and
I
can't
remember
quite
how
it
went
something
about
people
had
not
really
strong
feelings,
either
way
about
there
being
an
office
of
police
oversight
or
accountability.
H
G
Yeah,
let
me
look
at
that
and
see
I
mean
we
I
you
know,
as
you
would
imagine,
we
have
a
broad
range
of
folks
in
our
community,
so
I
there
there
were
definitely
survey.
Respondents
who
said
this
is
not
a
good
use
of
taxpayer
money.
We
don't
understand
why
we
need
this.
We
haven't
heard
complaints,
so
why
would
we
need
this?
There
I
mean
there.
I
want
to
be
transparent
about
the
fact
that
there
was
that
theme
there.
G
Let
me
see
if
we
can
tease
that
out
and
thank
you,
council
pro
tem
sanchez
about
the
spanish
language,
radio,
it's
a
really
valuable
asset.
Thank.
E
You
thanks
maria.
I
really
appreciate
this
information.
As
you
know,
we've
got
the
ordinance
on
our
agenda
tonight.
It's
typical
with
ordinances
like
these,
especially
ones
that
have
changed
significantly,
that
we'll
ask
for
a
review
of
the
ordinance,
and
it
sounds
like
with
these
next
steps
that
you're
identifying
here
that
it
would
be,
I
think,
reasonable,
to
ask
for
that
review
to
also
come
back
with
some
of
this
information.
A
I
By
the
mayor,
just
to
kind
of
tag
on
that,
thank
you,
maria
and
now
I'm
curious.
I
J
Madame,
thank
you
maria.
Thank
you
for
all
that
information.
It
was
great.
I
really
appreciated
the
statistics
that
63
percent
of
the
community
believe
that
the
opa
is
extremely
important
are
very
important
and
how
that
contrasts
with
the
68
of
folks
who
are
not
familiar,
or
only
somewhat
familiar
with
the
current
position,
and
then
there's
like
a
lot
of
opportunity
right
to
do
some
great
community
outreach
and
to
grow
my
question,
and
maybe
it
was
on
the
previous
survey.
J
But
I
was
wondering
if
there
was
a
question
on
this
current
survey
that
asked
people
where
they
would
want
to
access
it
from
a
from
a
physical
standpoint.
I
thought
there
was
a
question
that
asked
like
where
it
should
be
located
to
be
most
convenient
for
people,
whether
was
it
like
city
hall,
west,
in
its
own
location
or
city
hall.
Am
I
misremembering
that
I
thought
there
was
a
geographical
location
question
on
the
survey.
G
I
think
we
had
we
had
considered
asking
not
geographical
location,
but
the
importance
of
being
able
to
access
it
from
a
door
that
was
not
in
a
government
building
which.
I
G
Which
is
where
the
current
office
is
located.
We
didn't
ask
that
question
I
could.
I
could
make
a
guess.
That's
not
specific
to
that
question
there.
You
know
there
was
a
strong
theme
throughout
it
of
believing
that
civilian
oversight
is
important
because
it
needs
separation
from
the
actual
police
department
itself.
So
I'm
guessing
if
we
gave
people
the
option
of
like.
Would
you
like
it
at
city
hall
west?
That's
probably
not
good.
G
That
probably
would
not
have
been
the
choice,
but
that's
something
that
I
think
we
can
work
into
a
further
deeper
dive,
particularly
with
folks
that,
where
it
might
be
more
might
be
more
difficult.
J
B
J
J
One
of
the
the
answers
on
the
survey
was
that
people
really
wanted
to
be
able
to
access
it
from
the
web,
so
that
kind
of
talks
to
it
a
little
bit
is
that
they
don't
necessarily
want
to
have
to
go
into
a
place
where
they
feel
unsafe,
which
is
great
because
that
can
be
created
and
then
the
challenge
really
is
when
we
have
so
much
stuff
on
our
city
of
boise
website
to
make
sure
it's
super
super
accessible
for
for
folks,
and
so
just
recognizing
that
that
may
be
a
challenge
and
that
there's
68
percent
of
folks
who
are
somewhat
or
very
unfamiliar
with
what
currently
exists.
F
J
Make
sure
that
people
know
where
to
find
that
exact
information,
because
even
the
search
or
wherever
it
may
be,
may
be
tough
to
find.
So,
thanks
again
for
all
the
information
and-
and
I
look
forward
for
what's
next.
G
Thank
you,
councilmember
and
I
to
be
we'll
build.
We
will
build
out
a
pretty
significant
educational
campaign
that
will
likely
include
all
kinds
of
ways
to
get
people
to
drive
them
directly
to
where
that
is,
and
to
provide
community
leaders.
Frankly
with
the
information
so
that,
if
somebody
comes
to
them,
they
can
say.
Oh
look,
you
just
go
right.
F
This
is
just
kind
of
a
note
for
the
for
us
up
here
when
I
look
at
this
and
the
weight
of
the
words,
if
I
understand
it
correctly.
At
least
this
survey
group
was
more
concerned
about
the
opa
process,
hurting
them
than
it
was
with
the
effectiveness
or
the
seriousness
of
the
process.
F
Administratively,
in
other
words,
complaint
taken
seriously
heard
public
concerns,
protection,
confidential
investigation
all
are
weighted
smaller
than
anonymous
trust,
retribution,
retaliation,
etc,
and
so
that's
something
that
we
all
need
to
be
mindful
of,
as
we
help
the
public
learn
about
the
the
office
that
we're
creating
and
also
interact
with.
It
looks
from
this
slide.
F
If
I
understand
it
correctly,
like
there's
real
concern,
not
necessarily
with
the
outcome
of
police
conduct,
investigations
on
the
police,
but
the
outcome
of
police
conduct
investigations
on
the
complainant,
and
that's
just
something
that
we
should
all
be
very
sensitive
to
and
pay
attention
to,
at
least
based
on
the
survey
group
and
this
slide.
If
I'm
reading
it
right.
G
Yes,
council,
member,
that's
exactly
correct
and
what
was
so
interesting
throughout
the
survey
results
were
folks.
That
said,
even
even
if
I
never
have
to
access
this,
if
I
did
here's
what
I
would
want
to
make
sure
of
which
was
a
really
compassionate
way
to
answer-
and
I
think
really
indicative
of
the
compassion
of
our
community,
but
it
came
through
loud
and
clear.
People
want
to
make
sure
that
the
complaint
would
be
taken
seriously
and
that
they
wouldn't
suffer
any
retribution
from
making
the
complaint.
Madam
mayor.
H
B
H
A
All
right:
well,
thanks
for
the
presentation.
This
was
super.
Informative,
really
appreciate
people
taking
the
time
to
fill
out
the
survey
and
but
then
your
review
of
it
to
make
it
more
accessible
and
understandable
for
all
of
us
and
look
forward
to
the
next
conversation
that
we
have
and
once
we
have
the
office
confirmed
by
the
council
and
the
work
being
done
to
develop
the
processes
to
kind
of
respond
to
this,
but
then
collect
more
information.
A
A
All
right,
next
up,
jennifer,
are
you
presenting
great
okay.
We've
got
jennifer
today
to
talk
about
to
give
us
an
overview
really
of
the
southwest
boise
area
of
impact
and
annexation,
and
you
know
I
want
to
welcome
everybody.
That's
here,
of
course,
welcome.
A
We
owe
it
to
the
residents
of
boise
to
look
at
this
fully
and
to
do
our
due
diligence
on
a
potential
trade,
the
use
of
land
to
meet
the
needs
of
residents
in
boise-
and
this
is
the
beginning
of
that.
We'll
talk
about
the
history
of
the
area.
Tonight
and
we
will
have
we'll
get
feedback
and
then
have
a
discussion
as
a
council
and
from
the
public
when
annexation
is
scheduled
and
appreciate
the
conversations
we've
had
so
far.
A
I
know
the
council
president
has
met
with
you,
I'm
sorry
we
haven't
yet
we've
got
something
scheduled.
I've
met
with
the
president
of
southwest
ada
county
associate
swatka,
I'm
just
going
to
call
it
swaka
and
we've
heard
from
a
lot
of
residents
of
the
county
and
residents
close
to
the
area,
and
we
appreciate
that
we're
taking
all
that
into
account
and-
and
I
also
want
to
be
clear-
that
we're
still
waiting
for
an
appraisal,
so
there's
so
much.
I
A
K
A
little
break
it
did
it's
like
wow
you're,
going
to
use
me
for
an
hour.
Thank
you,
madam
mayor
appreciate
the
comments
jennifer
tomlinson
park,
superintendent
and
just
as
a
little
bit
of
background.
The
reason
why
I'm
presenting
this
is
actually
because
I
was
in
the
comprehensive
planning
division
of
the
city
for
quite
a
number
of
years,
so
I
transitioned
over
into
the
parks
department,
but
as
a
long-range
planner
for
pds.
K
I
have
a
lot
of,
I
guess,
background
information
on
kind
of
where
we've
been
and
where
we
are
right
now,
so
I'm
just
going
to
run
through
a
few
slides,
I'm
going
to
go
over
kind
of
the
history
of
annexation,
the
status
of
the
southwest,
what
we
look
at
as
a
city
when
we
are
look
at
when
we're
looking
at
modeling
annexation
and
we're
looking
at
our
assumptions
and
what
goes
into
that
model,
and
I
also
asked
mike
schreck
from
the
from
dfa
to
be
here-
he's
really
the
numbers
guy
on
this
thing.
K
So
he's
the
the
model
guru
an
overview
of
impact
fees
and
then
some
of
the
next
steps
that
we're
going
to
be
going
through
potentially
on
the
mcgardio
parcel.
K
So
just
as
a
little
bit
of
background,
idaho
state
code
defines
what
an
area
of
city
impact
is.
It
also
defines
factors
that
we
need
to
consider
when
we're
looking
at
that
those
include
the
trade
area,
geographic
factors
and
areas
that
can
be
reasonably
expected
to
annex
into
the
city
in
the
future.
K
So
just
some
quick
facts
about
this
area.
We
have
about
34
000
people
who
live
down
there.
Our
average
household
size
is
about
2.87,
which
is
a
little
bit
bigger
than
our
city-wide
average
and
then
just
some
other
quick
facts
about
some
of
the
demographic
information
and
some
of
the
household
income
per
capita
income
and
education.
E
At
the
history,
sir,
sorry,
if
you
could
go
back
one
question
on
the
business
activity,
if
I'm
not
mistaken,
that's
a
little
bit
low
for
that
many
residents
is
that
is
that
true.
K
K
So,
going
back
to
the
70s,
there
was
a
lot
of
development
that
happened
in
the
southwest
in
this
part
of
town,
and
this
has
always
been
under
the
county's
jurisdiction.
So
a
lot
of
development
was
happening
on
lots
that
were
smaller
than
today.
We
would
ever
allow
septic
tanks
to
be
installed
on
so
we
had.
There
were
septic
tanks
on
parcels
down
to
like
a
third
or
a
quarter
of
an
acre.
We
don't
allow
that
in
current
development
patterns.
Now
central
district
health
regulates
that
aspect
of
development.
K
The
county
issued
a
moratorium
on
new
development,
as
there
was
some
groundwater
contamination
as
a
result
of
the
quantity
of
septic
tanks
down
there,
and
they
were
really
concerned
about
the
lack
of
urban
services
and
infrastructure
down
there.
So
in
1978
the
southwest
was
included
in
the
area
of
city
impact.
So
that's
an
area
as
like
on
the
first
slide.
That
is,
you
know,
meets
the
criteria
of
the
area
of
impact,
but
it
was
not
included
in
the
urban
services
planning
area.
K
So
there
was
no
studies
done
on
providing
an
urban
level
of
service
in
the
area
in
the
80s.
This
the
county
actually
asked
the
city
to
step
in
and
start
extending
sewer
to
the
area,
so
the
city
agreed
and
we
started
develop
or
we
started
allowing
folks
to
connect
to
sewer
down
there.
We
don't
currently,
as
practice,
allow
properties
to
connect
to
sewer
outside
of
the
city
limits
unless
they
meet
two
criteria,
one
that
their
septic
systems
are
failing
or
that
they
have
agreed
to
consent
to
annexation.
K
So
we
have
like
three
big
issues:
one
sewer,
two
annexation
consent
and
then
three
just
the
level
of
urban
services
that
we
have
in
the
area.
So,
as
a
result
of
that,
we
prepared
a
master
plan
for
existing
and
new
development
that
went
hand
in
hand
with
the
southwest
planning
area
policies
that
were
also
developed
in
the
90s.
K
We
completed
a
sewer
master
plan
for
the
area
and
we
had
two
large
areas
that
had
widespread
septic
failure,
so
those
were
countrymen,
estates
and
then
sherman
oaks.
Sherman
oaks
is
just
south
of
molinar
park
and
it's
really
hard
to
see
where
countrymen
estates
is
it's
it's
south
of
overland
and
at
the
time
it
was
asked
of
southwest
residents
if
they
would
be
interested
in
forming
a
separate
sewer
district
whereby
they
would
manage
the
sewer
assets
out
in
the
area
and
they
overwhelmingly
said
no.
K
So
the
city's
invested
a
good
bit
of
funding
in
the
area
from
the
70s
into
the
90s
and
then
in
the
late
90s.
We
completed
a
number
of
sewer
extensions
into
the
area
and
those
have
all
been
approved
by
the
county.
So
by
the
90s
early
2000s,
we
were
up
to
about
15
to
20
000
people
who
are
being
served
by
city
sewer
and
the
city
has
invested
over
10
million
dollars
in
the
area.
So
the
map
on
the
screen
is
the
the
area
in
red.
K
K
Right
around
2000
parcels
that
we
brought
in,
and
that
was
in
2004
that
triggered
a
number
of
lawsuits
against
the
city
for
various
reasons,
but
kind
of
as
a
result
of
that
the
legislature
did
look
at
our
annexation,
enabling
legislation
and
did
change
it
at
that
time.
So
at
this,
at
this
time,
consent
was
considered
implied
if
somebody
has
hooked
up
to
sewer.
K
So
the
act
of
hooking
up
to
sewer
was
considered
consent
to
annex
into
the
city
limits
once
that,
once
this
annexation
went
forward
and
in
2000
the
2008
legislative
session,
the
legislature
put
in
a
new
clause
that
said
that
consent
has
to
be
written
for
all
annexation
consent
after
2008..
K
So
if
a
property
has
connected
to
sewer
prior
to
2008,
then
we
can.
We
are
allowed
to
consider
that
implied
consent.
If
it's
after
2008,
we
have
to
have
written
consent
and
the
way
that
we
achieve
that
is
either
through
on
a
subdivision
plot.
We'll
have
a
note
on
it
that
says
this:
by
subdividing
this
property,
the
city
or
the
you
know,
whoever's
subdividing.
It
does
agree
to
annexation
into
the
city
limits
of
boise
at
any
time
that
the
city
limits,
or
at
any
time
the
city
chooses
to
annex
in
this
area.
A
So
I
have
a
question
actually
jennifer.
Sorry,
because
that
previously.
B
A
K
It
spanned
council
president
clegg,
it
spanned
a
couple
of
years.
It
took
that
long
to
get
through
the
process
and
then
to
get
through
the
the
litigation
process.
I
believe
it
took
a
good
bit
of
time
and.
K
B
K
A
E
E
K
In
madam
mayor
council
president,
we
did
consider
that
consent
at
the
time,
so
it
that
would
have
been
a
blanket
consent
for
all
of
the
homes
that
are
hooked
up
to
stewart
at
the
point
of
when
the
property
was
subdivided.
Okay,.
K
So
as
we
move
on
throughout
our
history
of
the
southwest
in
2005
until
about
currently
the
way
that
development
happened
in
the
southwest
was
through
what
we
called
a
county
referral
process,
so
ada
county
has
adopted
blueprint
boise
and
the
previous
comprehensive
plan
for
lands
in
the
area
of
impact.
Ada
county
retains
the.
K
I
guess
the
right
to
dictate
development
in
those
areas,
so
they
zone
it.
They
do
conditional
use
permits.
They
do
all
of
the
entitlement
work
in
the
county
that
is
outside
of
the
city
limits.
The
overarching
goals
that
they
are
kind
of
implementing
are
the
city
comp
plan
vision,
so
we
would
get
we
would
get
referrals
from
ada
county,
so
we
could
say.
Charter
point,
for
example,
is
a
really
good
example.
K
It's
a
really
large
development
that
went
in
kind
of
around
this
time
and
the
way
that
the
city
got
involved
in
it
is
we
had
it
laid
out
as
a
certain
designation
on
our
land
use
map
and
the
applicant
would
have
kind
of
worked
with
us
just
to
talk
about
the
vision
and
what
we
had.
You
know
anticipated
for
the
area,
densities,
housing
type,
any
kind
of
amenities
out
there,
and
then
they
would
submit
their
application
to
ada
county
once
they
submit
their
application
to
ada
county.
K
It
would
come
to
us
through
a
county
referral
process.
Pds
staff
would
review
that
for
consistency.
Only
with
a
comprehensive
plan.
Zoning
ordinance
does
not
apply
city,
zoning
ordinance
doesn't
apply
and
it
would
not
go
through
the
planning
and
zoning
commission.
Those
referrals
came
directly
to
city
council
and
generally
they
would
have
a
series
of
conditions
of
approval
on
them.
That
would
outline
things
that
the
city
would
like
to
see
a
lot
of
times.
K
It
was
things
like
not
having
garage
dominated
homes
on
the
property,
so
moving
setbacks
for
garages
pathway
connections,
alley
loaded
product.
It
was
really
a.
It
was
a
way
for
us
to
provide
a
recommendation
on
a
building
form
that
you
know.
We
really
wanted
to
see
in
the
area
that
we
thought
would
be
beneficial
to
the
community.
K
So
those
would
then
those
will
go
before
city
council.
We
would
send
the
recommendation
back
to
ada
county
and
they
would
either
adopt
or
not
adopt
our
conditions
of
approval.
K
There
wasn't
a
follow-up
process
to
ensure
that
they
did
adopt
those
conditions
of
approval.
We
just
assumed
that
they
did,
because,
generally
those
conditions
of
approval
related
to
us
extending
sewer
are
at
the
time
our
our
policy
was.
You
will
follow
our
recommended
conditions
of
approval
and
you
will
get
sewer,
and
that
was
that
was
basically
it.
So
we
were
getting
an
awful
lot
of
development
between
about
2005
and
2012
in
the
southwest,
and
a
lot
of
preliminary
plots
were
going
out
there.
K
It
was
almost
entirely
residential
single-family
homes
is
mostly
what
we
were
seeing
out
there.
We
have
a
couple
like
I
said,
there's
a
couple
of
commercial
areas
out
there,
but
it
was
largely
single-family,
residential
and
in
about
in
2013.
We
started
to
have
some
issues
with
our
this
kind
of
relationship
that
we
had.
So
the
council
directed
public
works
to
look
at
our
sewer
extension
policy,
and
at
that
point,
that's
when
we
we
basically
said
we're
not
going
to
be
doing
this
county
referral
process
anymore.
K
K
Only
then
will
we
look
at
reviewing
your
application
and
allowing
the
entitlements
to
go
on
the
property,
so
that's
kind
of
a
very
short,
quick
overview
of
the
history,
I'll
pause
here
for
any
questions,
if
you
guys
have
any
more.
I
B
I
Thank
you
so
much
jennifer
for
that.
Since
council
hit
that
pause,
I
can't
think
of
very
many
properties
that
have
come
across
our
desk
for
annexation.
Do
you
have
any
kind
of
general
idea
of
how
many
have.
K
Madame
may
or
council
member
woodings
it
all
but
stopped
entitlements
in
the
southwest.
So
we
do
have
a
lot
of
subdivisions
and
preliminary
plots
that
were
in
the
pipeline
that
were
running
through
and
that
hadn't
final,
those
finaled
out
and
but
since
that
time
we
really
haven't
had
almost
any
that
I
know
of.
But
again
I
haven't
been
in
pds
for
a
little
bit.
K
So
I
think
it's
been
a
fairly
low
volume
of
things
that
have
come
in
and
it's
really
kind
of
forced
developers
in
the
area
to
figure
out
a
way
to
get
annexed
into
the
city,
which
is
why
you're
starting
to
see
like
the
muriel
farms
come
in.
You
know
and
some
of
those
other
pieces
that
we
have.
D
K
Madam
mayor
councilmember
thompson,
I
wouldn't
say
tons
so
if
you
consider
muriel
farms
and
then
like
where
serena
valley
is
those
are
in
the
city
limits.
So
if
we
take
those
out
we're
really
looking
at
some
infill
parcels
that
are
within
the
southwest,
some
of
the
density
in
the
southwest
is
very
low.
So
there
you
know
there
are
still
parcels
on
two
five
10
acre
lots
out
here
or
homes
that
are
on
those
lots.
K
So
in
theory
you
could
redevelop
a
10
acre
parcel
and
you
could
get
some
good
density
on
it,
but
it's
all
contingent
upon
the
sewer
service
being
available,
but
the
last
time
I
ran
just
some
pretty
general
calculations.
Again
it
was
a.
It
was
a
good.
It
was
a
while
ago.
It
was
probably
like
maybe
2
000
units
that
we
could.
You
know,
go
into
the
nooks
and
crannies
out.
K
There
so
that
brings
us
to
today
in
our
current
analysis
of
southwest
annexation,
so
and
mike
your
slides
next.
So
when
we
look
at
annexation
of
an
area,
the
first
question
we
have
to
answer
is
whether
or
not
we
have
the
consent
to
be
able
to
do
it.
So,
as
I
mentioned,
consent
is
defined
as
50
plus
one.
K
K
So
all
of
those
numbers,
that's
how
we
define
consent
when
we
run
through
this
calculation.
What
we
do
is
we
take
the
whole
land
area.
We
pull
out
all
public
parcels
because
those
aren't
considered
in
the
in
the
actual
calculation,
and
then
we
count
the
acreage
of
consent
that
we
have.
It
is
not
based
on
parcels.
It
is
based
on
acreage
and
all
of
that
criteria
and
that
process
that
we
go
through
is
outlined
in
state
code.
So
some
of
the.
K
E
Madame
error
so
jennifer
in
this.
As
I
look
at
this
map,
I
just
want
to
make
sure
I'm
reading
it
right.
The
the
areas
in
green
do
have
consent.
The
areas
in
white
do
not.
E
And
so
the
areas
in
white,
especially
to
the
kind
of
in
the
middle
on
the
eastern
portion
and
then
the
bottom
on
the
the
south
western
portion,
those
two
big,
no,
the
ones
that
are
developed
but
in
white
yeah.
That
one
and
then
south
west.
A
E
Saying
that
in
the
time
between
2008
and
2014,
when
we
made
the
assumption
that
the
county
was
following
through
and
getting
the
consent
written
that
these
did
not
because
those
were
developed
very
clearly
on
sewer
with
an
intent
to
get
consent
right
because
they
wouldn't
be
be
developed
at
those
densities.
Otherwise,.
K
Madam
mayor
council
president,
this
area
here
these
are
all
half-acre
lots
and
I
believe
a
lot
of
these
were
actually
developed
prior
to
kind
of
our
2000's
relationship
with
the
county.
This
area
is
largely
all
on
septic.
Also,
oh.
B
K
K
One
other
point
just
to
note
is
that
as
part
of
our
enabling
legislation,
parcels
that
are
over
five
acres
are
not
considered
to
have
consented.
So
all
parcels
that
are
over
five
acres
are
removed
from
this
calculation
unless
we
have
written
or
some
agreement
to
annexation
for
the
parcels.
So
public
works
updates
that
fairly
frequently
on
where
we
have
written
and
then
our
implied
consent.
That's
been
kept
up
to
date
for
years.
K
So
just
a
couple
of
considerations
in
our
current
analysis
of
the
southwest
you
know,
hospital
389
has
reduced
our
property
tax.
New
construction
annexation
value
to
90,
so
reducing
the
value
by
10
does
impact
the
calculation
a
good
bit,
and
then
mike
can
probably
speak
to
this
a
little
bit
better
than
I
can
we'll
exceed
the
eight
percent
property
property
cap.
If
we
do
this
all
in
one
year,
so
if
we
it
would
have
to
be
split
into
multiple
years
in
order
to
meet
our
requirement
to
stay
under
that
eight
percent
property
cap.
K
K
So,
but
we
have
to
provide
services
basically,
the
next
day,
so
we
have
to
say
like
put
the
services
on
a
credit
card
for
a
year,
but
it's
kind
of
something
similar
to
that
in
that
we
have
to
front
the
money
in
order
to
be
able
to
get
the
services
out
there.
So
with
that
I'll
turn
it
over
to
mike
and
he's
going
to
just
go
over
some
of
our
inputs
that
we
put
into
the
model.
Oh
wait!
Oh
sorry,
just
one
other
one!
K
I
just
wanted
to
give
some
scale
of
comparison
when
we
talk
about
property
taxes,
and
we
do
talk
about
the
impact
to
property
owners,
we're
generally
looking
at
about
a
30
35
impact
on
our
property
owners
in
in
the
property
taxes
that
they
pay
once
they
are
in
the
city
limits.
C
Metameric,
council
members,
as
we
look
at
this
type
of
analysis
as
jennifer
just
talked
to
a
bit,
we
look
at
the
mainly
the
property
tax
and
as
well
as
other
revenue
sources,
and
then
we
look
at
what
costs
of
service
would
need
to
go
in
and
see
if,
if
the
revenues
can
cover
those
services
and
their
costs-
and
we
have
done
some
preliminary
analysis
still
still
early,
we
need
to
do
some
refinement
look
at
things,
but
when
we
really
take
a
look
at
that
size
of
a
parcel
and
that
many
people
it
does
involve
quite
a
bit
of
service
additions
in
discussions
with
with
police.
C
Historically,
I
think
we've
gotten
by
with
a
lower
number
of
police
per
thousand.
We
start
looking
at
what
they
really
maybe
should
get
to.
As
we
become
a
larger
city,
you
can
see
that
is
perhaps
60
to
70
police
staff,
including
officers,
support
staff
and
supervisors
plus
vehicles
for
every
true
patrol
officers.
You
had
or
officers
you
had
you
had
a
vehicle
and
then
there's
also
certain
startup
costs
and
other
things
with
with
that
many
employees,
particularly
police
officers,
and
then
that
many
police
officers
added
may
cause
us
to
need
more
building
space.
C
Perhaps
somewhere
down
the
southwest
given
city
hall
west
is
already
getting
close
to
capacity,
if
not
at
capacity.
So
there
is
some
assumptions
to
work
with,
as
we
look
at
cost
to
add
for
fire,
there
will
be
a
need
for
a
new
fire
station
down
in
that
area
and
as
the
slides
get
to
here,
perhaps
more
than
that.
C
But
when
you
add
a
fire
station,
we
also
have
an
engine
and
then
we
have
staffing
and
we
have
a
fire
academy
to
to
get
the
new
staff
to
to
run
the
the
station
and
the
other
thing
with
fire
stations
and
police
buildings
is
as
you're
aware,
we've
had
significant
increases
in
costs
in
recent
years.
For
anything
we
build
like
that
in
in
looking
at
what
fire
would
do
there
again.
This
is
preliminary.
C
Then
looking
at
parks,
there
are
two
park
sites
down
there,
the
pearl
jensen
and
the
wrigley
parks
and
the
cost
we
would
look
at.
There
is
greening
up
both
parks,
adding
amenities
and
then
maintaining
those
parks,
in
particular,
pearl
jensen,
is
a
sizable
park,
then
also
another
amenity.
That
parks
would
look
to
add
is
some
canal
connectivity,
pathways
and
trails
in
that
area.
That's
that's
an
important
part
of
being
able
to
get
get
around
get
to
parks.
C
You
know
pedestrian
bikes,
things
like
that,
then
moving
on
to
library,
I
believe
there
are
two
ada
county,
ada
county,
small
branches
down
there.
C
What
we
might
do
is
look
at
putting
in
a
branch
library,
a
neighborhood
library
down
there,
potentially
a
bigger
facility
along
the
lines
of
what
we
do
in
the
city.
If
it
is
city.
What
is
our
level
of
service
so
there's
another
facility
which
we
may
build
or
lease
then
have
operating
costs.
We
would
save
some
money
on
the
ada
county
contract
that
we
pay,
because
right
now,
some
of
our
citizens
use
those
ada
county
library
branches
down.
C
There
then
also
just
general
staff,
as
we
look
more
and
more
at
when
we
add,
say
police
officers.
You
know
that
puts
more
demands
on
I.t
and
finance
and
and
public
safety,
and
just
we
also
see
that
there
would
be
quite
a
few
number,
maybe
20,
25
employees.
We
would
add
in
support
departments
just
to
accommodate
the
operations
and
and
that
many
more
people
in
the
city,
and
then
there
could
be
a
couple
vehicles
there
as
well
and
then
also
just
a
couple
of
things
to
mention.
C
If
vrt
funding
is
five
percent
of
property
tax.
Well,
we've
got
a
a
good
chunk
more
a
city.
There
would
be
more
property
tax
if
we
set
aside
five
percent
of
that
for
vrt
there's
some
more
cost
and
then
animal
services
contract.
C
We
currently
pay
that,
based
on
some
kind
of
a
population
and
some
of
the
the
county's
costs,
there
would
probably
come
to
the
city
if
that
still
holds
as
far
as
that
contract
with
idaho,
humane
society
and
then
last
and
another
thing
that
would
likely
come
up
is
just
street
light
additions.
I
understand
talking
public
works
that
there
aren't
a
lot
of
street
lights
out
there.
C
There
would
be
a
need
to
put
in
perhaps
many
many
street
lights
where
those
are
desired,
or
you
know
that's
the
city
service
level
and
once
you
have
to
put
them
in
a
retrofit
you're
cutting
asphalt,
you're
having
to
get
things
under
the
street.
It's
it's.
It's
takes
time
and
it's
a
fair
amount
of
cost.
So
those
are
some
of
the
early
assumptions
we
would
have.
E
Madame
thanks,
you
know,
idaho,
state
law
is
really
not
set
up
to
annex
already
developed
areas.
It's
set
up
to
annex
undeveloped,
land
and
over
time
build
up
the
both
the
ability
to
provide
services
and
the
tax
revenue
collected
to
support
those
in
an
already
annexed
area.
E
If
I'm
not
mistaken
from
what
I
understand,
probably
the
biggest
costs
to
catch
up
with,
on
the
immediate
basis,
are
public
safety
and
both
police
and
fire
in
this
case,
isn't
it
true
that,
without
extra
cost
to
the
residents
of
this
area,
they
receive
urban
levels
of
policing
from
the
sheriff's
department
that
everywhere
else,
the
sheriff's
department
provides
urban
levels
of
policing?
They
have
a
contract
with
typically
with
a
city,
for
instance,
as
they
do
with
city
of
eagle
to
provide
those
services.
E
E
E
C
Madam
mayor
council
member,
I
have
not
heard
of
anything
like
that.
I
don't
know.
C
Councilmember
good
good
question
in
the
early
discussions
with
fire
that
has
come
up
that
if
you're
looking
at
service
level
for
city,
it
would
be
a
truck,
and
I
think,
looking
at
the
other
way
is,
as
you
stated
it's
residential.
So
do
you
have
the
same
need
for
that
there,
where
that
could
be
on
the
the
east
side,
yeah.
C
Potentially,
that's
where
you
have
more
need
at
some
point
and
we
are
going
to
see
development
there
with
syringa
is
being
constructed
now,
and
so
yes,
that
could
be
the
way
that
come
comes
out
with
a
fire
station
down
there
eventually
or
going
to
the
east.
You
know
at
some
point
you
get
another
fire
station,
but
I
think
that
is
to
be
determined
and
that's
one
reason
we
don't
have
a
fire
truck
down
there.
C
Yet
is
it's
county
and
there
just
hasn't
been
that
that
need,
but
fire
would
like
to
have
that
as
as
a
tool
to
provide
service
down
there.
E
And
then,
finally,
if
I
might
had
a
mayor,
I
was
one
of
the
people
who
worked
really
hard
to
do
the
last
annexation
down
here.
E
E
I
just
I
I
I
got
to
a
point
where
it
seemed
impossible
to
to
make
work,
and
so
having
said
that,
we're
at
a
point
now,
where
I
think
it's
worthy
of
having
a
transparent
discussion
with
the
community
about
where
we
are
and
what's
possible-
and
I
appreciate
you
know
this
as
a
starting
point
and
I'm
guessing
that
some
of
us
will
probably
be
pushing
a
little
bit
to
get
a
little
deeper
on
some
of
this
as
we
go
forward.
C
E
A
I've
got
a
question
just
to
follow
up
on
that
kind
of
on
this
theme
of
the
state
hasn't
set
up
the
laws
in
such
a
way
that
work
for
cities
to
annex
already
built
areas.
Can
you
talk
and-
and
there
might
be
slides
about
the
financial
impact
of
this
to
the
city?
If
that's
next,
that's
great,
but
I'm
wondering
if
you
can
talk
also
about
the
differences
in
impact
fees
of
one.
A
What
can
be
what
impact
fees
could
be
used
for,
given
that
this
is
already
built
two
if
they
paid
anything
as
impact
fees
and
what
that
was
compared
to
if
some
of
these
areas
had
been
built
as
and
willingly
annex,
at
the
same
time,
what
they
would
have
paid
for
the
services
that
some
of
these
are,
some
of
which
are
impactfully
eligible.
K
Madam
mayor,
I
have
a
series
of
slides
on
that
particular
time.
K
But
just
one
other
point:
real,
quick
to
council
president
clegg's
discussion.
We
have
over
the
years
looked
at
this
in
so
many
different
ways.
We've
looked
at
chunking
it
up
into
you,
know
four
sections
chunking
it
up
into
ten
there's
just
it's
never
penciled
from
the
city's
perspective,
but
we
have
gone
through
a
fairly
intense
and
robust
process
internally
to
try
to
figure
out
a
way
if
there
is
a
path
forward,
largely
because
up
until
the
2014
or
I
think
it
was
the
2014
annexation
of
the
northwest.
K
We
had
been
on
a
cadence
of
annexing
about
every
five
years,
so
we
had
99
was
a
big
one
2004,
and
at
that
time
we
were
really
looking
at
filling
in
the
city
limits
on
the
north
side
of
the
freeway.
So
we
were,
you
know
getting
all
the
way
over
to
our
impact
area
over
there,
so
that
was
the
cadence
that
we
were
on
and
then
we
just
sort
of
stopped
and
that
was
kind
of
after
2004
and
then
when
the
northwest
annexation
went
through,
that
one
was
highly
contentious
as
well.
K
We
did
in
the
meantime
we
did
a
series
of
99
parcel
annexations,
so
we
can
just
do
99
parcels
if
they
are
surrounded
by
city
limits,
so
we're
picking
up
some.
You
know
kind
of
bits
and
pieces
around
the
city
just
to
fill
in
a
lot
of
those
holes,
but
really
the
intent
of
this
is
to
be
able
to
provide
uniform
coverage
and
service
within
our
city
limits.
K
It's
very
difficult
for
police
to
you
know,
service,
something
where
they're
trying
to
figure
out
on
a
map
if
they
are
in
the
city
or
they
are
outside
of
it.
A
good
example
of
that
is
like
sim
plot
sports
complex
up
until
we
annexed
that
a
couple
of
years
ago,
ada
county
was
responding
to
that
until
we
annexed
it
and
now
bpd
has
been
responding
to
that.
K
So,
just
to
have
a
quick
overview
discussion
of
park
impact
fees,
and
this
is
specific
to
parks.
You
know,
as
the
city
within
the
city
limits
we
collect,
parks,
police
and
fire
impact
fees.
We
started
collecting
park
impact
fees
in
the
90s
and
we
started
collecting
police
and
fire
impact
fees
in
2008
in
2008.
When
we
started
collecting
those
impact
fees,
we
did
go
to
ada
county
and
ask
them
to
collect
them
on
our
behalf
and
we
were
denied
that
request.
K
So
impact
fees
are
just
a
one-time
charge
that
the
city
you
know
uses
in
order
to
start
to
build
out
our
level
of
service
in
area
it
is
collected
when
a
builder
applies
for
a
building
permit,
so
our
relationship
with
ada
county.
Now,
if
there
is
a
building
permit
that
is
being
pulled
in
our
impact
area,
they
will
send
the
person
pulling
the
permit
to
the
city.
K
They
will
pay
us
an
impact
fee
and
that's
different
than
what
a
city
resident
will
fee
will
pay
and
I'll
get
into
that
in
just
a
moment
and
then
we'll
verify
it
back
with
ada
county
and
then
they'll
move
forward
with
the
building
permit
in
the
county.
So
since
1997
we
have
collected
local
park
impact
fees
of
4.3
million
dollars
in
this
area
and
those
have
gone
to
peppermint
and
molinar
parks.
We
are
right
now
under
construction
at
molinar
with
amenities.
So
that's
one
of
the
later
projects,
that's
getting
done.
K
Peppermint
was
done
after
the
2004
annexation,
so
that
was
one
of
the
commitments
we
made
to
the
community
at
the
time
was
once
we
annex
you,
we
will
build
this
park
which
we
did
complete
and
then
we
have
6.2
million
dollars
in
regional
park.
Impact
visa
have
been
collected
in
this
area
and
that's
since
1997.,
so
it's
gone
up
and
down
kind
of
over
the
years
as
we've
had
peaks
and
valleys
in
the
growth
pattern.
K
You
know:
we've
collected
like
three
hundred
thousand
dollars
a
year
in
some
years
and
in
some
really
light
years,
we've
collected
sixty
thousand
dollars.
So
it's
really
kind
of
all
over
the
board
as
far
as
the
consistency
associated
with
it,
but,
as
I
mentioned,
they
have
not,
in
addition
to
not
adopting
our
police
and
fire
impact
fees,
they
have
not
updated
our
park
impact
fees
since
2006.,
when
we
adopted
our
2006
impact
fees,
we
set
that
collection
rate
at
50
of
the
cost
of
our
capital
improvement
plan.
K
So
you
can
see
where
we're
having
a
compounding
impact
of
all
of
these,
like,
I
don't
want
to
say
decisions,
but
these
deficiencies
right
so
we're
trying
to
it's
almost
like
at
this
point
we're
trying
to
catch
up.
So
the
thought
I
think
the
thought
process
at
the
time
was
we
don't
want
to
discourage
development
with
kind
of
punitive
fees
and
that
the
city
would
kind
of
make
up
the
difference
as
far
as
our
capital
improvement
plan
at
the
time.
K
One
important
point
to
note
is
that,
in
order
for
a
project
to
be
funded
through
impact
fees,
it
must
be
called
out
in
our
capital
improvement
plan,
so,
like
mcgradio
part's,
never
been
in
a
capital
improvement
plan.
Pearl
jensen
never
been
in
a
capital
improvement
plan.
So
that's
where
we
get
to
this
kind
of
perplexing
issue
of
annexing
already
built
areas,
because
we're
not
going
to
be
collecting
impact
fees
for
them,
but
in
the
event
that
we
do
annex
them,
we
will
need
to
be
investing
in
capital
infrastructure
out
there.
K
So
this
is
a
chart
of
what
our
current
impact
fees
are
for
residents
within
the
city
limits
in
the
southwest
planning
area.
So
that's
everything
north
of
victory,
road
and
then
everything
south
of
victory
road.
So
again,
this
is
when
a
building
permit
is
pulled
and
this
the
upper
chart
is
based
on
our
most
recent
impact
fee
plan
and
our
capital
improvement
plan,
and
then
the
lower
one
is
based
on
our
2006
impact
fee
calculations.
K
So
you
can
see
where
again
this
compounding
impact
of
like
not
getting
those
impact
fees
updated,
is
starting
to
impact
actually
our
revenue.
We
are
currently
going
through
an
update
to
our
capital
improvement
plan.
We
are
required
under
idaho
state
code
to
update
that
every
five
years,
so
we
are
in
that
cycle
right
now,
where
we
are
looking
at
all
of
our
different
park
facilities,
our
service
levels,
the
cost
for
park,
improvements
and
police
and
fire
are
going
through
the
same
exercise.
A
Can
I
can,
I
ask
a
question
sure
about
this,
so
you
have
here
the
difference
in
impact
fees
based
on
the
decisions
made
at
various
points
in
time,
and
so
there's
a
big
difference
between
those
that
live
in
the
city
and
those
that
don't
right.
Now.
However,
didn't
you
also
say
that,
in
order
for
a
park
to
have
been
planned
and
to
be
eligible
for
these
fees,
it
would
have
had
been
placed
in
the
capital
improvement
plan
back
in
97
2000
whenever,
as
this
discussion
was
being
had.
K
Madam
mayor,
that's
correct:
it
would
have
been
in
the
2006
update
to
our
capital
improvement
plan
because
that's
the
last
time
that
ada
county
has
updated
those
impact
fees.
So
it's
those
projects
that
would
have
been
eligible
for
that
funding
at
the
time
that
they
updated
the
fees,
correct,
okay
and
just
to
speak
to
the
timing,
a
little
bit
molinar
has
been
called
out
in,
I
don't
know,
I
think
at
least
the
last
three
capital
plans,
so
it's
always
been
intended
to
be
developed
on
some
schedule.
K
E
Peppermint
yeah
thanks
jennifer.
Isn't
it
also
true
that
when
the
boise
city
of
boise
updated
our
impact
fees
for
parks,
we
are,
I
think,
maybe,
if
not
the
only
one
in
the
state.
Certainly
the
only
city
in
the
valley
that
has
districts
where
impact
fees
collected
at
least
those
identified
for
local
or
or
community
facilities
are
spent
within
that
district,
and
only
a
portion
of
the
impact
fees
are
spent.
City-Wide
on
regional
facilities
is
that.
K
True,
adam
mayor
council
president,
that
is
correct,
so
we
have
five
local
park
planning
areas
and
the
the
intention
of
the
park
planning
area
is
that-
and
this
is
specifically
true
for
kind
of
our
historical
methodology
of
how
we
serve
residents
through
parks
is
that
residents
are
served
by
a
hierarchy
of
parks,
so
neighborhood
parks
are
intended
to
serve
residents
within
half
a
mile.
K
Community
parks
are
intended
to
serve
residents
within
a
mile,
and
regional
parks
serve
residents
within
the
entire
city,
so
the
local
impact
fee,
specifically
the
southwest
local
impact
fee,
is
intended
to
cover
the
cost
of
local
and
community
parks.
Now
community,
like
a
local
park,
is
considered
7
to
10
acres,
a
community
park
is
20
acres
and
then
regional
facilities
kind
of
go
up
from
there,
so,
like
pearl
jensen,
would
be
considered
a
regional
facility.
If
anything
ever
happened
with
that
magurdio
regional
facility.
E
Okay,
so
as
an
example,
if
we
had
an
impact
fee
schedule
and
ordinance
like
the
80
county
highway
district,
we
would
collect
the
same
impact
fees
all
over
the
city
and
we
could
spend
them
wherever
we
wanted.
There
wouldn't
be
identified
that
they'd
need
to
be
spent
in
district,
but
in
our
case
we've
identified
that
we
need
to
do
that
and
that's
an
important
factor.
Madam
mayor
council,.
K
Good
said
segway
so,
as
I
mentioned,
regional
parks,
which
is
what
the
magurdio
parcel
is
classified
as
just
just
kind
of
some
background
on
them.
K
These
are
our
large
ribbon
of
jewels
parks
that
are
generally
located
along
the
river,
and
then
we
have
our
sports
complexes
too,
and
magurdia
was
considered,
was
envisioned
to
be
one
of
these
sports
complexes,
but
one
of
the
probably
the
more
important
aspects
of
our
regional
parks
is
that
we
develop
them
through
a
series
of
partnerships,
and
I
don't
think
we
have
a
single
one
of
them
in
this
in
the
system
where
we
haven't
had
some
sort
of
partnership
to
develop
that
park.
So
marion
williams
is
a
good
example.
K
We
got
the
land
donated
for
that,
and
then
we
also
had
funding
dedicated
to
that
through
the
development
of
through,
like
the
brighton
group
out
there,
anne
morrison,
that
was
built
almost
entirely
by
donations.
Estherson
plot
was
built
like
a
good
bit
by
donations.
We
had
a
small
impact
fee
role
in
that
park
in
developing
it,
but
impact
fees
are
generally
a
smaller
funding
source
than
what
we
end
up.
What
we're
able
to
partner
with
our
community
partners
on
in
developing
these
parks?
K
The
cost
of
these
is
high.
I
mean
there's
just
no
way
around
it.
These
are
large
facilities,
they're
intended
to
serve
240
000
residents
of
the
city.
So
they
have.
You
know
lots
of
parking
lots
of
amenities,
sometimes
lots
of
water,
that
we
have
a
really
hard
time
keeping
clean.
You
know
they
just
they
have
lots
of
stuff
in
there
for
residents
to
use
and
we
love
it
when
people
use
them-
and
you
know
we
want
people
to
use
them
to
death.
K
That's
how
we,
you
know,
that's
what
we're
really
good
at
maintaining,
usually
except
for
water
in
some
instances,
but
you
know
we
really
do
intend
on
the
whole
community
to
be
able
to
access
them
and
to
be
able
to
use
them.
They
often
come
with
a
downside,
though.
Residents
in
columbia,
village
aren't
super
huge
fans
of
sim
plot
sports
complex
on
a
saturday.
K
You
know
they
get,
I
don't
know,
probably
4
000
cars
parked
on
their
streets
and
they
do
everything
in
their
power
to
try
to
get
out
of
their
driveways,
but
sometimes
parents
just
are
like
want
to
be
right
next
to
the
field,
and
so
it's
not
they're.
Not
this.
You
know
kind
of
they
just
do
have
some
drawbacks
that
a
lot
of
our
residents
start
to
experience.
K
You
know
esther
simplot's,
a
great
example
that
park
is
under
parked,
like
you,
cannot
get
a
parking
spot
in
there
after
11
o'clock
any
day
of
the
week,
and
it's
because
people
want
to
drive
up
and
get
right
into
whatever
it
is
that
they're
doing
and
it's
hard
to
lift
a
kayak.
I
mean
things
like
that,
but
you
know
they.
They
really
do
impact
the
neighbors
around
them.
The
30th
street
neighborhood
experienced
a
lot
of
impacts
when
we
built
this
facility,
a
lot
of
things
that
they
weren't
used
to.
K
So
we
really
did
have
to
go
through
an
effort
to
work
with
the
neighbors
and
try
to
figure
out
a
way
way
to
make
it
you
know,
so
it
didn't
have
a
negative
impact
on
them,
but
these
facilities
are
intended
to
bring
lots
of
people
to
them
and
that
you
know
sometimes
there
are
just
some
downsides
to
that.
K
So
the
mcgardio
parcel
was
master
planned
in
like
1997
as
a
regional
sports
complex.
K
So
this
is
an
awful
lot
of
field
space,
and
this
is
what's
been
called
for
for
the
last
24
years
and
at
the
time
when
you
know
we
went
through
this
process,
there
was
the
assumption
that
we
would
need
all
this
field
space
and
that
we
would
continue
to
grow
and
but
also
that
we
would
be
annexing
on
that
cadence
so
that
we
would
start
be
able
to
collect
impact
these
and
we
would
start
being
able
to
pay
for
it.
K
But
you
know
that
didn't
happen
so,
like
I
said
this
is
a
really
large
facility.
This
is
where
we're
our
cost,
estimating
like
right
now,
is
between
30
and
35
million,
just
to
green
it
up.
This
is
expensive,
there's
no
there's
no
way
around
it.
There's
no
way
to
you
know
just
develop
a
portion
of
it
or
only
develop
a
portion.
K
K
K
That
is
without
a
doubt,
you
guys
have
seen
it
I'm
before
you
all
the
time
asking
for
more
money,
but
you
know
even
kind
of
at
the
lowest
point
in
our
economy,
and
you
know
like
the
2008
times.
I
still
think
the
cost
estimate
for
this
for
green
up
was
like
15
to
18
million.
So
we're
not
you
know,
which
is
in
line
with
what
our
cost
estimating
has
looked
like
for
pretty
much
all
of
our
other
projects.
K
K
Madam
mayor,
that's
like
the
33
million
question.
I
I
don't
know
I've
gone
back
through
the
records.
I've
looked.
I've
tried
to
find
anything,
but
I
think
absent
annexation.
We
have.
We
have
not
developed
parks
outside
of
city
limits.
We
just
we
don't.
It
has
been
the
city's
policy
for
the
last
20
something
years,
and
so
I
think
if
we
were
looking
at
you
know
if
there
had
been
a
you
know,
kind
of
keeping
on
that
five-year
cadence
of
of
annexing.
K
You
know
the
story
might
be
different,
but
we
it's
almost
like
we
got
so
far
behind.
We
were
never
ever
able
to
catch
up.
Again.
I
guess
is
what
I
would
say,
but
I
I'm
really
not
sure
why
it
wasn't.
K
Included
so.
J
Excuse
me
so
real,
quick,
I'm
trying
to
kind
of
sort.
K
Madam
mayor
council,
member
hallie
burton
it's
a
lot
of
times
it's
a
combination
of
both,
especially
for
the
larger
ones.
There
have
been
some
where
I
think
on
esther
sim
plot
they
donated
almost
all
of
the
cost
of
construction.
K
For
it
we
had
some
remediation
issues
that
had
to
be
taken
care
of
that
the
city
picked
up
the
tab
on,
but
it's
largely
when
we're
going
out
to
develop
a
new
site,
which
we
don't
actually
do
that
frequently
like
marianne
williams
and
esther
simplato,
the
two
most
recent
that
we've
done
and
there
were
significant
contributions
from
the
families.
J
And
that
mayor
is
just
the
follow
up
with
that,
so
with
this
particular
one
with
margaritio
park,
what
we
might,
if
we
were
comparing
it
to
other
ones,
we
might
see
both
the
property
get
donated,
as
well
as
a
partner,
come
on
board
to
help
fund
a
lot
of
the
creation
of
the
park
and
because
that
property
was
donated,
but
there
wasn't
necessarily
that
additional
partner
to
help
pay
for
a
lot
of
those
funds.
That
could
possibly
be
one
of
the
reasons
it
hasn't
been
pushed
forward
or
developed
as
well.
A
E
J
Yeah,
I
guess
through
that
just
one
more
question
as
well,
so
when
we
look
at
our
one
of
our
other
more
recent
regional
parks,
I'm
thinking
of
the
one
in
in
northwest
boise
the
optimus
field,
that
would
have
been
another
one
where,
where
we
had
a
private
partner,
the
optimist
who
helped
fund
a
lot
of
that
project.
K
All
right
go
ahead,
so,
as
I
mentioned,
just
a
a
few
key
points
to
consider
with
this
whole
project
is
that
the
first
and
foremost,
this
parcel
is
not
located
within
the
city
limits,
so
the
applications
have
been
submitted
to
pds
to
get
it
annexed
into
the
city
limits,
and
that's
where
we'll
be
before
the
planning
and
zoning
commission
on
august
9th
to
extend
the
city
limits,
and
then
you
know
that
no
funding
had
ever
been
identified
or
that
the
property
was
never
included
in
any
capital
improvement
plan.
K
I
think
that's
really
kind
of
the
crux
of
why
we're
at
where
we're
at
today,
but
once
the
annexation
goes
through
the
planning
and
zoning
commission,
it
will
be
before
you
guys,
probably
in
september,
I'm
thinking
for
the
public
hearing
for
the
final
decision
on
that
piece
of
it.
K
In
order
to
move
the
any
discussions
of
the
land
swap
forward,
we
will
need
to
remove
the
restrictive
covenants
that
are
on
the
parcel,
so
those
covenants
are
they're,
basically
deflating
the
value
of
the
parcel,
because
you
can't
do
anything
with
it
other
than
build
a
park
right.
So,
while
we're
behind
the
scenes
working
on
recalculating
the
value
of
the
property
based
on
some
of
our
external
factors,
you
know
like
what
land
is
going
for
in
the
area.
K
Right
now,
there
have
been
a
couple
of
recent
sales
that
are
going
to
impact
the
value
of
this
property.
We
can't
have
any
real
discussion
with
those
covenants
on
that
property.
K
Great
and
then
on
the
20th
at
this
point
we're
we're
looking
at
having
the
surplus
resolution
on
the
agenda
also
at
the
same
time,
to
set
the
surplus
hearing
with
the
kind
of
steps
that
we're
taking
in
the
background
on
the
on
the
appraisal
and
trying
to
get
through
through
some
of
those
that
that
date
may
may
need
to
move
and
then
yeah
so
august
for
planning
and
zoning
and
then
september,
for
you
guys
on
the
manner
of
the
annexation
map
amendment.
K
Once
we
get
kind
of
the
background
due
diligence
that
we're
working
on
right
now,
I'll
have
some
more
clarification
on
when
we're
looking
at
the
public
hearing
for
the
surplus
piece
of
it.
D
Madame
yeah
go
ahead,
thank
you
jennifer.
I
believe
you
mentioned
that
some
years
back
it
you
looked
at
the
the
cost
of
building
that
park
out
and
it
was
something
like
17
million.
But
if
you
said
that
I
think
that
that
number,
but
in
today's
dollars
it
would
be
substantially
more.
As
I
understand
it,
perhaps
double
that.
K
Madam
mayor
council
member
thompson,
our
preliminary
cost
estimate
for
was
around
33
million
33.
in
its
depicted
state
on
the
master
plan.
So
whether
or
not
that's
what
we
would
actually
build,
we
actually
have
an
internal
process
where,
if
we
have
a
master
plan,
that's
older
than
five
years
we'll
go
out
to
the
public
and
update
it.
So
we'll
go
through
that
process
with
neighbors
to
figure
out
if
it's
still
what
people
are
looking
for
and
what
they
are
interested
in.
Seeing
we
do
that
when
we
do
have
capital
dollars
in
the
near
future,.
F
K
E
So
jennifer,
I
think
the
whole
discussion
for
me
brings
up
some
really
interesting
questions
right
now.
We
don't
have
any
regional
parks
outside
of
the
center
core
of
the
city.
That
aren't
sports
parks.
Is
that
right?
I
guess
marianne
williams
marion.
K
E
Others
are
pretty
close
to
the
core,
except
for
the
regional
parks
that
are
sports
parks,
that's
chuck,
mcdevitt
optimist
and
simpler,
okay.
So
second
question,
then,
as
you've
gone
through
this
process,
I've
begun
thinking
about.
What's
the
need
for
those
kinds
of
non-sports
park,
larger
park
facilities,
and
is
that
another
question
that
we
need
to
start
asking
ourselves.
K
Madam
mayor
council,
president
clegg,
I
mean
it
is
probably
a
question
that
we
need
to
look
at.
Our
regional
parks
generally
have
a
like
a
almost
like
a
preservation
component
to
them.
So
like
marion
williams,
esterson
plot,
they
all
have
like
river
corridor.
You
know,
like
riparian
habitat
things
like
that,
that
we
really
do
look
at
they're,
more
natural.
A
lot
of
them
are
more
natural
areas
instead
of
just
manicured
grass
and
as
we
are
going
through
kind
of
our
capital
planning
and
what
we
have
on
the
horizon,
we
really
are
looking
at.
K
You
know
whether
just
a
turf
and
parking
lots
is
the
way
to
go
as
far
as
like
what
people,
what
they
really
need
and
are
we
able
to
stack
benefits
of
you,
know
looking
at
habitat
preservation
and
preserving
open
spaces
in
different
forms,
so
like
hyatt,
hidden
lakes
is
a
really
good
example.
I
mean
that
was
a
formal,
gravel
pit
that
we
were
able
to
end
up
turning
into
a
pretty
lovely
facility
that
people
are
generally
pretty
happy
with.
K
So
you
know
we're
just
we're
kind
of
looking
at
as
as
a
as
a
city
or
our
needs
changing.
When
we
look
at
what
kinds
of
parks
we're
developing,
we
just
cut
the
ribbon
on
bowler,
where
we
did
have
20
acres.
We
only
developed
six
acres
of
it.
We
were
able
to
preserve
some
pretty
outstanding
sage
stands
that
are
probably
a
couple
hundred
years
old
that
was
really
exciting
for
us
and,
and
you
know,
we
were
able
to
be
pretty
compact
about
what
we
put
in
there
and
preserve
what's
around
it.
E
E
E
This
conversation
is
the
the
future
of
that
area,
and
that
would
include
housing,
at
least
in
my
mind,
at
this
point,
certainly
as
a
highest
and
best
need
for
a
lot
of
pieces
of
land
in
this
valley
at
this
moment,
but
it
also
includes
recognizing
the
community
values
out
there
and
and
wondering
what
it
is
that
we
should
ensure
gets
preserved
if
you
will
so.
E
The
question
is
this:
if
we
chose
not
to
act
on
the
covenants
next
week,
what
what
could
be
a
process
to
determine
how
how
to
move
that
forward,
not
suggesting
that
we
stop,
but
but
maybe
a
little
more
process
around
that
I
I
know,
I'm
catching
you
off
guard
with
this
and
and
if
you
don't
have
an
answer
just
say
so,
that's
great.
I
I'm
just
kind
of
thinking
out
loud
as.
B
H
H
I
think
I
understand
why
people
are
upset,
so
I
think,
prior
to
seeing
that
when
I
kept
hearing
we
were
promised
we
were
promised
but
to
actually
have
pen
to
paper
and
actually
have
that
visualization
starting
to
understand
a
little
bit.
Is
that
unusual
for
something
to
get
that
far
into
the?
K
Madam
mayor
council,
pro
tem
sanchez,
we
have
a
plan
very
similar
for
pearl
jensen,
so
I
would
say
it
was
fairly
standard
for
the
time
that
they
went
through
this
process
and
you
know
looking
at
the
existing
conditions
and
what
was
being
called
for
in
the
area.
So
it's
it's
almost
it's
kind
of
specific
to
the
southwest
that
we
actually
do
have
this
so.
K
Madam
mayor
councilmember
sanchez,
the
fact
that
it's
gone
on
this
long
and
it
hasn't
been
revisited
is
also
very
unusual
because,
as
I
mentioned,
when
you
know,
we
try
to
look
at
stuff
every
five
years
to
see
if
it's
still
current
and
it's
still
relevant,
so
that
hasn't
happened
so
as
they
both
be.
Actually,
let's
just
say,
the
whole
thing
is
highly
unusual.