Loading...
09/20/10 WS City Council/Impact Fee Committee Minutes from Karlene KhorCITY COUNCIL MEETIM 9/20/2010 Time in V+dee 8:30 to 13:00 minutes AubiL: Hi. My name is Karlene Khor, a resident of Kalispell. I serve on the Impact Fee Committee which met last Thursday to elect new officers. I am the new chairman. Chad Graham is our Vice Chairman and Sharon DeMeester is our secretary. In August we had a joint meeting with the City Council. It was kind of a get together, get to know each other meeting and you made two demands of us. One was to keep in touch and the second was that on written request you would ask us as a committee to assess policy. We agreed to both of those demands, although the latter some of us agreed to reluctantly. So, how did this committee meet those two demands. Well, I am here tonight to tell you that Sharon DeMeester will meet with you twice a year at this venue to report on what we are doing. She will also make sure that the minutes of our meetings are placed in your council packets and she will look to see how we can get our minutes put on the City of Kalispell internet site. Also, at our last Thursday meeting, some developers attended. It was a very interesting dialog with them because they did not know that we are not the policy makers. The Impact Fee Committee members have a consultant, we review his methodology and what we are very good at is assessing methodologies, formulas, programs and assessing impact fees. But we do not make policy and that the City Council is, of course, the policy makers on impact fees. So, I would like to invite more members of the public, not just developers, to come to our meetings, which are the third Thursday of each month at 7 o'clock in these chambers. We always, traditionally have public comment at the beginning of our meetings but I am inclined to also include public comment at the end of our meetings too, if time allows. And, one interesting thing that did happen Thursday at the close of our meeting, our consultant, Tom Gould, was walking Sharon DeMeester and I to our cars and he mentioned that he has, of course he is a consultant for many cities and has a vast experience, that he has had a lot of experience with various impact fee payment schemes. And I thought that was very interesting. And because I was not aware of other cities with impact fee payment schemes but he is very knowledgeable on that and said that there are many cities that he worked with and had knowledge of, that did have various impact fee schemes. I would like to offer, in order to meet that second demand of yours of this committee, that I would be more than willing to fast track on our committee with our consultant to get more information on impact fee payment schemes that he would have and we could put together, research and assess for your information because it never hurts to have a lot of information and to know what other cities have done with impact fees and how they have assessed them and what kind of various schemes they have put together with regards to payment options. I guess that what I am saying is, write me. I just thought that was interesting that he had such vast experience in that. And I think that where our experience is as a committee is that we are very, very good at digesting materials, research, assessing it and making recommendations based on assessment of materials. So, I would like to make that offer to you, that that is something that we could fast track and we could do it as fast as putting it on the agenda at our meeting this third Thursday in October. Thank you very much. CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 20, 2010 Duane Larson: A little bit later. The Mayor is unable to be here tonight so I'm going to be running the meeting and I think though, first of all I'll ask if there is anyone in the audience who would like to... The only thing on our agenda tonight is a mutual meeting with the Impact Fee Advisory Committee, and so if there is anyone in the audience would like to speak on any other subject, why, we will give them an opportunity right now. We won't make them wait until the end of the meeting, which could be hours and hours from now. (Laughter) Jim Atkinson: If I call you Judy, don't be... Jane Howington: Don't worry about it. Duane Larson: They're saying no one called this meeting to order. It is a regular workshop at the Kalispell City Council and meeting in conjunction with the Impact Fee Advisory Committee... Jane Howington: (Unintelligible) Jim Atkinson: (Unintelligible) Duane Larson: and first of all, I think we will introduce ourselves. I do not know if all of us know all of the committee members, but I'm Duane Larson, President of the Council; and Wayne? Wayne Saverud: Wayne Saverud, member of the Council. Jim Atkinson: Did you want... Jane Howington: No, go ahead. Jim Atkinson: Okay: I am Jim Atkinson, Ward 3, for what it's worth, huh? Jane Howington: Hey, I'm in your ward. Jim Atkinson: Oh, alright. Jane Howington: (Laughter) Bob Hafferman: Bob Hafferman, Ward 1. Duane Larson: Okay, I'm from Ward 4, by the way. Jane. Jane Howington: If I could, just as a matter of order. If, as people talk along here, it's important that we use the microphones and you need to press that little white button to turn it on to light it up to red. That way you'll be recorded. So, I know some of you haven't been in the council chambers that often so, just when you introduce yourself make sure your button in red, and make sure, and make sure to turn your button off if you have any under the breath comments. (Laughter) Female: Plus any comments we make. (Laughter) Duane Larson: Jane, you wanna go ahead and... Jane Howington: I'm Jane Howington. I'm City Manager here. Sharon DeMuster: I'm Sharon DeMuster, member of the Impact Fee Committee Karlene Khor: I'm Karlene Khor, member of the Impact Fee Committee. Myrna Terry: I'm Myrna Terry, member of the Impact Fee Committee Chad Graham: Chad Graham, member of the Impact Fee Committee. Rick Wills: Rick Wills, member of the Impact Fee Committee Duane Larson: Thank you all. First of all, I'm just gonna read very briefly from the States Statues the role of Impact Fee Advisory Committee. In 2009, as you well know, the legislature passed... enacted the Impact Fee Bill which was Senate Bill 185, and that allowed the cities to recoupe some of the expenses they have for establishing, not establishing, but for annexing and for newly impact on the community in the form of infrastructure roads, police, fire, and parks, water and sewer. And so, as a member... as a part of the Senate Bill 185 the City of Kalispell decided that in order to establish what we thought were fair fees and fees that were justifiable, we hired a consulting firm at that point in time. And they took a period of, I think, probable a year or a year and a half to come up with a report for sort of... a report the Council thought was fair and accurate, and so we accepted the report and began establishing our impact fees. As part of the law also is that we did have to have an Impact Fee Advisory Committee, and basically, what happened is the State governs the size of the Impact Fee Committee, while it does limit the size, but we decided that we must conclude that at least seven members who are either property owners, residents, or actively engaged in business for employment was in the Kalispell City limits. They're appointed three-year terms, staggered terms, and part of the makeup of the committee, and I am not sure about this exactly so I am going to ask Jane, in a minute. We do have to have a CPA on the committee and Rick is... Wills is acting as our CPA. He is an employee of the city and we are actively looking, not because we don't like Rick, but because we feel it would be more fair to have someone from the community on the committee rather than a 2 city employee, so, as of this time I don't think we've got any volunteers to come forward to serve in that capacity, so... The impact fee is... the task assigned to the Impact Fee Committee is to review and monitor the process of calculating, assessing, and spending impact fees. In this capacity, the Impact Fee Advisory Committee acts in an advisory capacity to the governing body of the governmental entity. I am going to turn this over to Jane at this point to just give us a brief synopsis of other members that are required on the committee. I do not know if an attorney is required or not. Jane, if you'd... Jane has had some contact with the Mayor today. The Mayor wasn't able to be here, so if Jane would explain that then we'll move on with the meeting. Jane Howington: Well, first let me offer apologies on behalf of several members of Council. Randy Kenyon was called out of town on business as he often is on the... toward the end of the month for his job and Tammy, who was particularly interested and excited to have this meeting with the Impact Fee Committee had three trials that kind of erupted in chaos today, and so even this afternoon she was still hoping to be able to be here, but late in the afternoon she knew she wasn't going to be able to, so she does send her apologies. Both Tim and Carrie have... on Tim's part, his mother-in-law over in Japan had a medical emergency and so he had to send his wife back to Japan and he is caring for his kids, so he offers condolences to you that he can't be here; and Carrie has had to go back to South Carolina to be with her mother; so, we have had a lot of mishaps tonight, but we think we'll still be able to have a good conversation and Tammy asked me if I could kind of relay a few of her concerns in hopes that we can have conversations about tonight. While I'm not part of the elected body, I hope I can do her justice in talking about it. One, she has been concerned with the lack of ability on the Council's part and herself included to be able to actively recruit people for the Impact Fee Committee. In particular, a CPA, and she really hasn't quite been sure why it is so hard. It's hard to recruit anybody to any voluntary capacity right now, so... but she felt like perhaps a clarification and understanding of what the Impact Fee Committee's been doing, what their frustrations are, and what their goals are as well as those of Council, and then working those together might help to clarify a strategic plan for forward movement and recruitment of Impact Fee Committee members; so, that is one part of what she was hoping to have the discussion about tonight. As much as we love to have Rick on the committee, I think that to have an impartial committee, Tammy feels strongly that we'd like to get a community member as a CPA so that there isn't going to be any kind of struggle with: well I'm staff, now I'm policy maker, now I'm staff, now I'm policy maker and so on. So, that's certainly one of the things that she's really hoping that we can accomplish by clarifying the strategic plan and actions that... and priorities that Council and the Impact Fee Committee are looking at that that will help to have the Council and the Impact Fee Committee be able to go out and recruit people that would want to help with this. There have been a lot of things... I am channeling Tammy now, so... There have been as lot of things through the election process, a lot of comments made over impact fees and what we do and how we calculate them and so on. And when Tammy first took office, she talked to both Charlie and myself about whether or not there was a need for a new committee to be made to evaluate the policies assuming that the current Impact Fee Committee is really a committee that just reviews the current fee structure; and so, in our discussions with Tammy and going back as the chair has mentioned the review.. to review and monitor the process of calculating, assessing, and spending impact fees, that can be interpreted very broadly or very narrowly, and I think that that is where she thought, well, before we do anything we need to have a joint session together to talk about what we are trying to accomplish here to see if this committee... if the task of also looking at 3 more of the policy, broad -based approaches to working with impact fees puts too much on this committee, you know, in addition to what you are doing or not... you know, or if that's in line. So, that's really where she was hoping to have the conversation tonight. Karlene Khor: Jane. There's just several things that kind of struck me. I really don't think that there is a problem in attracting members, people from -to... I don't think there is a problem attracting people to this committee. You already have three names right now that have been sitting for almost three months waiting to be, to fill... We have two seats possibly open. We have one that's been vacated because Mr. Cossitt's term ran out. Then we have this new issue of the... we would prefer to have a CPA that is not staff, but as far as this first issue goes, you have had three names for three months and you haven't filled it, so that's what's perplexing and frustrating to me as an Impact Fee member. You've had three names. You've had it for three months. Why didn't you pick one of them? Why are you waiting to find a CPA when we've got a CPA. Okay, if you want a CPA that you feel could in no way be considered bias, then you need to do the same thing that attracted those three people which is, you need to put something in the paper that says we really just need a CPA now. I really don't think that this is such an issue. I mean, you've already got three names, pick one. And as far as the CPA goes, put out something in the paper saying we need a CPA and tell what you need; and what you need is just as Duane read. These are the things that we all have to fit into. We either have to have a business or we live here, and there you are. I think we're kinda making a mountain out of a mole hill here on that issue. As for the interpretation of the code, you're absolutely right. When I look at that I see that as very narrow. I think for us to do a good job we can't be your policy maker. The only policy maker in the City of Kalispell is you gentlemen and the women that are not here, who when they are here are definitely policy makers. (Laugh) You know, but I ... I don't think the committee's role is to do policy. That is your role. Our role is exactly what it says, to review and monitor. The only thing that does concern me is that, I think, as far as the Impact Fee Committee goes, it would be nice and I have, you know, spoken publically and I've also called as many of you as I could to say, you know, we're kinda lopsided. You know, we are either in the commercial real estate business or we're builders, and the ordinary Joe whose paying his sewage and water and whatever bill isn't represented in this committee and probably needs to be, and... and that was the one thing that I would like to see is an ordinary Joe and there, you know, of the three that you currently have to fill that one position, a couple of them must be ordinary Joes, and as far as looking for a CPA, I think you need to advertise. So, I guess, I... I don't understand. To me, this seems to be very small and I think it's something we can easily accomplish. Sharon DeMeester: When I... When the issue came up, that Greg brought it up and he mentioned the word "policy", and that I think was in the e-mails, I went through the documents from the City Council and from the State Resolution and I read all of that documentation and nowhere is the word "policy" related to the Impact Fee Committee stated. So, I am assuming that we are here to review and make recommendations to the City Council, and that was my understanding of our job, because I can see nowhere policy was ever stated in any directive anywhere. Duane Larson: Anyone else have any doubts on the Impact Fee Advisory Committee? Chad? M Chad Graham: I guess I would just like to see if Ms. Howington was finished with what she was saying. Jim Atkinson: No. She's got about 14 pages there. (Laughter) Karlene Khor: Are you still channelling is the question. (Laughter) Jane Howington: Well, I think... I'm not going to channel anymore. I'm going to try and interpret. Since I've been here, I've been here now just a year and in my time being here I've seen that there are not only within the Impact Fee Committee some differences of opinion, but there's also some differences of opinion on the Council as to what the role should be and what you'd like it to be. Maybe to move forward, it would be helpful to hear from Council what they see as the role of the Impact Fee Committee, because one of the most frustrating things for volunteers to spend their time working in a committee and coming forward with recommendations and someone that are not following the guidelines of what the Council is interpreting your role is, and I don't want that to happen because volunteers are hard to come from... hard to come by and they're very valuable. So, before we get too far down the road one way I want to make sure that we're both ... we're on the same page, and again, if we're on the same page that this Impact Fee Committee is to do exactly as you two have both expressed, to review our current rates and so on and make recommendations on the rates, then we need to go back to what Tammy had said earlier to see if we should be developing a separate committee to look at other financing mechanisms for the growth pays for growth concept. Duane Larson: Any thoughts on the Council. Robert Hafferman: Well, I'd like to ask the members of the committee that when you first took your seat and so forth, were you given any documents or anything else to kind of... or some sort of orientation as to whether just to assume the seat and start talking. Karlene Khor: No, Mr. Hafferman. I... I ... I would have to say that I was fortunate. I had a 101 class and that it was given by the consultant and staff was there and other new members like myself were also at the 101 class, and it was very instructive because, you know, this impact fees aren't something that you, you know, aren't really a life skill that you pick up. (Laughter) Karlene Khor: You really have to get a course, and ... and we were... I ... I went through this course and then, I... I must admit, I... this material that I have I've never worked so hard for no money in my life. I really had to study. So, yes, I was given a course which was helpful. Staff and the consultant are always available by e-mail or picking up the phone, or they physically come to the meetings to answer questions; and when we go through these documents, we all have questions. We... many times we have similar points of view, you know, of a document we 5 passed today was brought before us over a seven -month period. Seven meetings. All kinds of questions. All kinds of answers. So, yes, the answer is yes. We weren't just set off on our own. We were given an education, but you... also if you want to do a good job, I think you still have to try to educate yourself, too; but you couldn't do it without that 101 class. I thought that was the most valuable thing. Duane Larson: Did all of the committee members have the same orientation. Sharon DeMuster: I did. Robert Hafferman: Okay. Sharon DeMuster: I did. Myrna Terry: My orientation, of course, was a little bit different, I think, because I attended the... I was one of the members of the original Impact Fee Committee and when we began we were... we really, I think, were kind of confused about what our role was going to be. At that point, we were told that the Council had determined that they wanted to charge impact fees and that they were... a consultant had been hired and that was the consultant we were going to use and our job at that point in time was to review the recommendations from the consultant and to review the formulas from the consultant. Since then, when we came to like transportation impact fees, I think that got a little fuzzy again. We, as a committee, tried to stay with just doing review of what the consultant was giving us and let the Council make the other decisions, the political decisions rather than anything that had to do with the formula and the number of recommendations; but we also... at one point, I think the Council has occasionally asked us for information for other items that we... such as looking at reviewing long-term pay rather than paying at the specific time of picking up the building permit, and we... I think we've been... I've been confused as to whether we are supposed to do those types of things or not, so I am personally wanting to take whatever direction the Council wants to give us. I am happy to do either looking specifically just at these reports and making recommendations on the numbers or looking at more broad cases, whatever you... whatever direction you want to give us. Darlene Khor: And I have a concern about you giving us direction because when I read that... We live in such a litigious society and my concern is that if we stray from what that code is really saying this committee is supposed to do, it just makes me worry about the litigious nature of the citizens, so that's why I really think that what we have been doing, reviewing and monitoring and staying within the guidelines of that annotated code is a wise thing to follow. So, I am resistant in a way to that unless I can be assured that, you know, if your... if we're suddenly going to go into a policy situation which is kind of a legislative process that that... that would be a little stressful, I think. Duane Larson: Chad, did you have a comment or as question? Chad Graham: Yeah, I do. In the section here of the Montana Code annotated, I'm hearing on the committee here that it doesn't say anything about policy, and I have met with resistance on the committee when trying to talk about issues of policy, not trying to set the policy but just even rel talk about it. I read on here from what you ... we had read. If you take these subnote 2 and 3 under, you know, the Impact Fee Advisory Committee; if you take those two to mean the same thing they're redundant, and so, basically the two of them would be saying the same thing. Well, the first one talks about reviewing the reports, which is the role of the committee. The second one says that the Impact Fee Advisory Committee shall serve in an advisory capacity to the governing body. I don't know how the Council reads that, but I read that as all we do is we may have a piece of advice or as the committee as a whole we advise the committee on what our opinion is. I mean the Council. The Council makes... you guys make your own decision. I'm also on the Planning Board and it's the same thing. As a Planning Board we issue recommendations. You can take this word "advisory" and switch it out for recommendation if you want. We offer up recommendations to the City Council and they choose whether to reject them or accept them, and that's why I got on this committee, `cause I thought that that would be something that we would be looking at when I saw that; even in the title of it Impact Fee Advisory Committee. That's why I got on this board. I was offered the... Well, at first I had gotten all of the impact fee reports and stuff from Terri and I talked to her and had that starting process and then a couple of...I think it was the first meeting, we were offered by this... the consultant to have the one-on-one. I can't remember what reason it was, but I wasn't able to do it, so I never had that; but I've really... am looking for direction from the City Council based on both... the advisory component of this committee. I think, as you can see here, there is two different ways of looking at it and when I look at this, like I said, the two of them are redundant if they mean the same thing. (Coughing) Chad Graham: So, ultimately they can't mean the same thing. They would have written it in just one. So. Duane Larson: Bob, go ahead. Robert Hafferman: Well, you know, as far as the two most committees or boards that have the most effect on not only the citizens of Kalispell but our neighbors are the Planning Board and the Impact Fee Committee, and both of them are —deal a lot with what comes before the Council. There is, as far as setting policy, I don't really have any policy as such. I don't know as that's the correct word, but there are certain documents that, it seems to me, is essential that you have a working knowledge of and most of them are very brief and gives a general statement. As an example, we have had for years a document called Extension of Services Plan. Now, that is one thing that a member of the Impact Fee Committee should have knowledge of, and there is really only a very little bit of, I think it's a 26-page document or 30 page, or something, that there's only about ... I counted them this morning or today. There's only one and a half pages of how infrastructure is extended and there's three and a half pages on the financing portion, so there is very little of that that ... that is really ... you gotta know that as far as I can see, because that's an integral part of what their doing ... what their doing, and then of course, now that we have impact fees we should have a copy of what was enacted. Let's call it a master copy for terms of semantics here. As I see it, as far as the Council, I think there's several, about three real problems. One of them was... at the last Council meeting we were to vote on the increase or adjustment of the fees for police and fire. What we got in the packet was a great big bunch of 7 paper. Most of it was stuff that had already been enacted and there wasn't ... you had to try to wade through this stuff to compare it with what was enacted from what has been changed, and a very useful master copy, let's say it's 80 pages as an example, to be useful for the Council and the committee you need a... an executive summary which is maybe three to six pages long that gives the gist of what this document you are being presented with to make a decision on has within it, and of course, it has in the executive summary it references places within the text portion of where this... all this comes from, but the way it's presented is I... and it's important that we do have the text because it's not just the Council and the committee that it's important to. It is important to the public and particularly the users of the document, but none of us are supposed to be particularly knowledgeable about all of the ramification of how this thing is done. All the adding and subtracting and... and what so forth you review it, but you know what you are looking at with the executive summary. By not having that, it can be a very laborious job to know where you're heading. Then, on this particular one with the water ... the police and fire, again, we had all this repetitious paperwork about that thick, and really, all that was needed in that document was what had changed from the master copy. In other words, maybe three -page report out of a eight -page document going through just the changes. We don't need the whole report of the master copy again. That's just paperwork and it confuses the whole issues. Then, so, having all this paperwork it's very frustrating to try to separate the wheat from the shaft and that's why I think we have to do something different. Okay. The second thing is... problem as I saw it... and this just come up during the transportation impact fee or when it got to the Council. I begin to wonder does the Impact Fee Committee understand the Extension of Services Plan, do they have a copy of it.? It's no on the Internet, by the way, and I don't know why it's not on the Internet, but that's an important document, and there's only a few pages of it that really get to the meat, but it's good to know the whole document and it certainly ... it isn't that big of a document that a committee such as this wouldn't have consume a lot of time studying it. Because, as I looked at the transportation impact fee, there are a lot... was a lot of things occurring in there that just seemed to be piling on. As an example, the total cost of a road through Wolford's place, as an example, was listed. He puts in the roads, not the city. Also, when a development goes in there has to be a certain amount for safety and usability that the contractor or the developer has to install right now when he puts that equipment... that in and he don't want to do it in advance because it may never happen; so, the developer has to put that in. Then, of course, there's other methods of funding, and again, this is an Extension of Services Plan, such things as an SID. Some places are jointly... the road is jointly owned by the County. Some places get State and Federal funding. There's grants and so forth. So these are all things that add together that the total cost of this road isn't... shouldn't be completely charged to impact fees. In my analysis of it, I figured it was about a third of what the impact fees should be. The Council adopted something similar to that amount. That was the...the purpose because we already have to do some of that stuff when a developer comes in, and you can't do it in advance because they fade away just as quickly as they come in sometimes and then you're left holding the bag. As I recall on that particular thing, the Council sent it back to the Impact Fee Committee two or three times. I don't remember what, but I wondered why ... what are we going to tell the Impact Fee Committee to do. What was it that they were supposed to do? In other words, if we're going to send it back we should certainly tell them what to do. Now we have ... the third one I have is I don't remember seeing a letter from the Impact Fee Advisory Committee on their recommendations, yet the state law says that the committee is to determine the... and monitor the impact fees and the spending of the impact fees. I have asked to see a written recommendation Ri from the committee during the various budget sessions that we've had since the committee was formed and I've yet to see a written recommendation from the committee for the expenditure of funds, which is part of the state law, so my, quite frankly, I think that I've got some recommendations: One is new members of the Impact Fee Advisory Committee should be given a copy of the Extension of Services Plan and also this should go on the web site that we have, because it's an important document for developers as well. Now, maybe it's on there. I couldn't find it, but it certainly should be. And when we get future updates, lets only look at the changes to the master copy. Let's not go back and look at the whole master copy again. Let's find the changes, because the master copy is always available, but... and that's what was enacted, so if...we want to know what was changed. And I think as far as consultants, we should insist that they have an executive summary on all reports. This is a common thing in the engineering business anyway ... is if you want to sell something, you tell them what the meat is so that then they can go ahead and look at the meat, and if they have other questions, look further and then perhaps ask questions at the meeting. Again, another thing that I think we oughta... I certainly want to see it is have a written comments from the advisory committee on all expenditures that are going to the budget and what does the Impact Fee Committee think. See, in your vote packet it lists the things that they derived the impact fee from. Those are all listed. Does this particular item fit in that ... is it in there? If it isn't, it shouldn't be recommended. Now, maybe the impact fee should be revised and it is periodically. We don't have to wait two years. If there's a situation comes up that has to be changed or it is an urgency, then let's bring it forward and see about it, but let's not just say, well it kind of agrees that this is needed. Well, if it's not in the impact fee calculations, it ain't supposed to be. Male: (Unintelligible) Robert Hafferman: And again, if the Council, again like the transportation one, if go back and say for the Impact Fee Committee to look at this again, tell them what you want `em to look at. So, they should expect a letter from the Council that tells them what the Council wants them to look at. Those are recommendations I have. Duane Larson: Thank you, Bob. I'm gonna let the Impact Fee Committee comment on those and then let's get some other input from the Council because it seems like Bob had some rather good ideas, I think, so.... Jim. Jim Atkinson: Thank you. I think one of the questions that the Council's... that the committee had was that are we supposed to be just looking at the cost and reviewing the cost and I believe reviewing the projects and ... and how that relates back to the cost of the impact fee or they're ... I perceive what you're saying the political part of it is. What should the Impact Fee make recommendations as to maybe changing the formula or something like that. Is that what you're talking about relative to politics? Chad. Chad Graham: Or the collection of impact fee. Jim Atkinson: How it's collected or wha... how much:? Chad Graham: How it's collected. Whether it all be 100% up front... 0 Jim Atkinson: Oh yeah, up front or spread out. Chad Graham: Yeah. Jim Atkinson: Yeah, and a Chad Graham: Something like that. Jim Atkinson: And you consider that a political decision Chad Graham: I would con ... I would say that it's probably considered a policy issue that, personally, I would like to, on the committee, talk about and flush out and see where it goes on the committee as a whole and the debate comes down, that's policy, that's what you guys are supposed to debate, and I look at that as that, well, as a committee we can debate that as a committee for you guys and just put a recommendation out there, and if you don't like the recommendation, then, you know, you guys don't do anything with it. Jim Atkinson: Okay. As far as the liability of a advisory committee, I think Charlie would agree with me that there is no liability. You make the recommendations. The policy makers would ... would take that in and make their own decisions and then the emphasis is on the policy makes. So, I don't see that as a problem there if you want to expand your views and make some recommendations to us. A part ... part of the frustration that I think you're having is the ... the Council is sending things back to you the Council isn't in agreement with. We don't know what to do with the darn things so why don't we send it to the impact fee committee, and I'm sure that that's a frustration that you are ... that you feel, and it is certainly something I feel from here. As far as recommendations are concerned, I think I understood the directives, and I could be wrong, but I understood the directives of the Impact Fee Committee to be you'll look at the costs and re ... or look at update the projects that need to be done, come up with those costs, and then assess whether the fees need to go up or down, and that would be your directive. I don't have a problem with you folks discussing some basic ways to go about collecting and... and things like that, and making some side recommendations. I don't have a problem with that. So. Chad, do you.... Chad Graham: So, if I could give you an example of where that kinda happened and my past experience of being on the Planning Board. We had the Trumble Creek subdivision down Evergreen, and as a planning board we weren't really quite sure as to what our role was on recommending or advising Council, so we just put in that recommendation, you might want to look at annexation policy. Jim Atkinson: Right Chad Graham: The Council came back to us and said, well, how come you're not doing it.? And, so now we're looking at annexation policy and we've just turned it in to you guys, and now we're going to be getting it back and the whole ball is rolling, so unless the discussion's happening, one body doesn't know what the other body is really lookin' for from each other. 10 And, when that happened, it really —it really allowed a lot more discussion to happen on the board. Jim Atkinson: I see an advisory board being an extension of the Council, being a community arm, and I agree with Karlene especially that Joe Schmo ought to be on there, too, you know? And that the community gets better represented when you've got arms like you folks to make these recommendations, so, I don't have a problem with making recommendations back to the Council and then, of course, the Council will have to fight it out there, too. But, I would definitely feel that you'd need to meet, but in ... maybe the Council can correct me if I'm wrong, but what I see the main egg is, and that's to look at the projects, relook at the project saying does this project fall out, does this project coming on, whatever, calculating how much it's gong to cost and then setting those fees based upon the fee structure or the approach that the consultant set forward for us and that the Council agreed upon. Karlene Khor: I think that when that ... when we're looking at the consultant's work, we're looking at the consultant's work. In a way, Chad is suggesting something that is outside of the consultant's work and that's why we had a very strong discussion about that's a policy. Two, for the Impact Fee Committee to make a recommendation outside of the work of the consultancy is something that I'm personally, as a member of this committee, feel is inappropriate. I don't think it's our role to say that a developer should be given five payment plans to pay their impact fees, and the consultant isn't putting that in the document; so for us to take something extraneous outside, which is really something, again, that's legislative, that's where we get into these arguments within the committee and we'll say to Chad, "Chad, I think that's policy. It's not, the consultant isn't putting that in the document"; and ... and that's where these ... where that issue arises out of it is that some of us feel we have to look at the document at hand. We have to look at that and see if it's, if it's, if the formula is right, if the process is right. Bob Hafferman's suggestion of an executive summary, that is something that should be suggested to the consultant just for expediency in terms of what all the things that you all have to read as Council members; so, I mean, again, it's the ... the consultant produces the document and then we have to review, monitor, and say did he scientifically do this right. Is that process right? Is that formula right? That's ... so, if you have this document we don't really want to move outside that document `cause there is so much work in working on that document; so, that's where that came out of. Just to provide some more... Jim Atkinson: There lies of controversy. Karlene Khor: Yeah, Yeah, Yeah. Jim Atkinson: You guys sound like the City Council. (Laughter) Jim Atkinson: Myrna, you haven't spoken how ... how you feel about this internal controversy. 11 Myrna Terry: You know, part of the difficulty for me is that I thought that at one of the meetings with Council we were directed to look at pay ... looking at options for paying impact fees over time. So I thought that was one of the things we needed to be doing. Jim Atkinson: I can't comment on that. I don't know a record of it, but... Myrna Terry: Okay. Jim Atkinson: I... Myrna Terry: Yeah, and I think we did... Jim Atkinson: I do recall it being discussed. Myrna Terry: Okay. Jim Atkinson: I don't know if you had the directive or not. And once again, I, I think within the ... I think that could be within the parameters. I appreciate the fact that Karlene is saying, let's just say that these are parameters and let's work within rather than making more work for ourselves. Appreciate that, also appreciate Chad's view of these are some other ways that we might be able to link this whole thing better. It's gonna make more longer evenings for us, but I understand it. Duane Larson: Wayne. Wayne Saverud: Thank you. We all realize that the Council gets a lot of advice, some solicited and some offered,... (Laughter) Wayne Saverud: and some free, and some expensive, but I think this whole issue of impact fees is obviously still relatively new within the city, within permissible features of state law, and I would hate to tie your hands. I think it ... the Council needs the benefit of your struggle. The Council needs the benefit of the time and energy that you're putting into the thing as opposed to just monitoring it. There's probably a fine line with what's advice and what's policy setting, but I think ... I think we have to work through that on a case -by -case basis and not draw hard perimeters around the issues; so, I would encourage you to continue to struggle with it and —and following some of the advise that Bob gave, I think the executive summary format and that type of thing makes excellent sense. And if...if you as a group think you're straying into something that looks a little more like a policy rather than advice, label it as such and say for Council consideration, but don't be afraid to address it or don't be afraid to bring it ... bring it to us because I think we can handle it. Duane Larson: And I'll just add that I ... I'm hearing that, and I think it's pretty well been said by most of the Council members and some of the advisory fee committee members, but I don't think...I think there's a communication problem between the Council and the committee, and I 12 think a lot of it is probably our fault. The ... it appears like there's a ... you guys are looking for a direction tonight, and I'm not sure that you're getting a lot of it; but as a good example, last meeting we ... we had a issue before us on whether to readjust the fire and police impact fees between residential and commercial. I don't know if you guys were ever consulted about that, which I think you should have been. Myrna Terry: We did last December. We voted on it last December but it didn't get to you. Sharon DeMuster: I wasn't...I wasn't on the committee. Karlene Khor: And I wasn't not Duane Larson: Okay. Karlene Khor: on the committee either. Duane Larson: Alright... Karlene Khor: And Chad wasn't either. Duane Larson: I guess maybe Jane has claimed that to us, but I haven't see any, and I think Bob is right, it would be nice if the Council, and I'm not blaming the committee at all, if the Council had a written recommendation, you know, to go by, because sometimes we don't, and as well, like Jim says, and I think Wayne and several ... Bob probably, too, a lot of times we don't know what to do with something so we send it back to you. Well, if we don't know what to do with it, how can we expect you guys to, you know. And several issues have been sent back to you two or three times at least and with no guidance from us on what we want you to do; so, I just look at it as ... as part of the problem as an overall communication problem and probably more so on our part than yours. And I ... I just think that our ways we've improved. Bob mentioned several of `em, and I think they were great ideas. We maybe need to expand the thinking on the state statutes and to include recommendations. I think Wayne had a good suggestion for the Council. If you'd address your recommendations as far as policy is concerned. I think there's a very fine line between policy and advice, but you can certainly cross that line by making a recommendation. You're not doing anything wrong by recommending something. The women always listen anyway; so, we do try to listen and I know that people here week after week say, you never listen to us. Well, we listen. We don't happen to agree with them a lot of times, and... but I think we do listen and I think that you guys ... you folks could come up with some good ideas and... and concern policy, but I, for one, am a real stickler on policy. As far as the committees we interchange with and the staff, I don't do any policy making except make the policy. I don't try to enforce it. I don't try to change it unless I go to the Council and make sure that it's a legitimate request from the Council's format. Duane Larson; I don't know if you got ... if you've gotten any guidance, so I would like to hear from you folks if you have specific questions about what the Council is talking about and... Sharon. 13 Sharon DeMuster: Yeah. Duane, it would be very, very helpful if it ... if whatever your concerns were re ... put in writing and sent back to us. Duane Larson: Uh huh. Sharon DeMuster: Because we who are new on committee were given a stack, and if I were able to read them in previous meetings or previous committees did, then I would understand what would be required of it. As there is, there is no ...written document. Myrna has been here the longest and she says, "Well, I remember that discussion", but that doesn't help me. Duane Larson: Uh huh. Sharon DeMuster: So, if you want us to do something or if you have any concerns, you need to put that in writing to us so that becomes part of the document... Jim Atkinson: That's fair. That's fair. (whispering) Sharon DeMuster: that we can refer back to. Jim Atkinson: That's fair. Karlene Khor: And I guess I would still be careful about muddying this committee with policy, and I really caution that I think that this committee's... is to monitor and review this document that a consultant comes up with and there's a lot of wrestling within the committee with that document. And then, to throw policy also into this committee, I'm not certain that that really does this committee a service or our citizens who need the service. One of the nice things about this committee is supposed to be an impartiality in terms of that we're just looking at a document that a consultant produces and in our looking at that, we have a lot of questions and a lot going back and forth as members, but if you also throw policy in there, then I'm not too certain that this committee then can....I'm not sure that this committee can do both roles that well; so, I just want to caution that that you really might want to revisit within yourselves if that's really what you want us to do. And as for the ... I love the executive summary. (Laugh) I can't go back on that enough. He's absolutely right. It really, really, really makes sense. Duane Larson: You know, I've been on several committees and still am. That's the first thing I always read whenever a report is the executive summary, and if I don't understand parts of the report I go back to that part, but it's necessary in reading it. Any other committee members? Myrna. Myrna Terry: I have a few comments. Can you guys hear me alright here? Duane Larson: Yeah. Myrna Terry: And I...I, also I think that the executive summary is a great idea and we can ask our consultant to do that. 14 Duane Larson: Uh huh. Myrna Terry: and it makes perfect sense. I just had a few comments that I jotted down throughout the discussion. One is the Extension of Services Plan. I would really like a copy of that myself, and I think we should also make sure that our consultant has a copy of that, and I don't believe he does; so, I think that's important. Jim Atkinson: Can I step in there. Can you explain to me why you think an Extension of Services Plan is important for an impact fee? Myrna Terry: The only reason... Jim Atkinson: Discussion Myrna Terry: There's two reasons. One is that Representative Hafferman is ... or Council member Hafferman is telling... is telling us that that's important for us to read, but also because if impact fees are looking at really payment for extension of services, I assume that we should read what's already in place. Jim Atkinson: I guess I don't see where impact fees were ever designed for payment of the extension of services. Myrna Terry: Okay. Jim Atkinson: Um. Myrna Terry: Extending infrastructure, then, which is services; so, that was how I assumed that they're similar. Jim Atkinson: Yeah. Myrna Terry: They may not be. Jim Atkinson: I guess I don't see the connection. Impact fees, these are paid for by the end user. The Extension Services Program is ... was ... well, I guess I can see that they ... whoever extended those services was gonna want to get paid for them, and that doesn't. and the the impact fees do muddy up the water on that. Myrna Terry: And see, I guess I don't know enough about what the Extension of Services Plan is to know whether it's... Unidentified Male: Relevant or not. Myrna Terry: relevant or not. Jim Atkinson: Uh huh. 15 Myrna Terry: I'm assuming that if it's somethin' related to it, I should at least know what it is to know whether its relevant... Jim Atkinson: I'm wondering if Charlie could enlighten us relative to ... to that. Charlie: We're required by law to have an Extension of Services Plan and that includes the information in there as how we go about paying for the extension of our services out there. The impact fees are a piece of that, certainly. And it is something, in fact, that the consultant does take into account as they are developing this plan. The consultant has taken that into account. He does have it available to him, and that is a part of the formula. Now, there may be some disagreement about how that fits in the formula that Council and Impact Fee Committee discuss, and those could be issues that we discuss with the consultant, but the Extension Services Plan has been taken into account by him. Jim Atkinson: Thank you, I appreciate that and I saw their report, I guess I would back up a little bit and say, you know, that even though it's been taken into account, if you're interested in wanting to know more about it, then I think it kind of muddies the water, I think, but I ... I can see why you may want to look at that. Thank you for letting me interrupt. Myrna Terry: No problem. No problem. The other questions I had is I heard Councilman Hafferman talk about a letter from the Impact Fee Committee on our recommendations of expenditure of funds, and I wasn't sure what that meant exactly, and is that something that the Council wants us to do. If that's what I'm hearing from the directive here? So that's one question I had, and I think that had to do with the point in time when you guys are doing your budgets, as I'm assuming that's when you were looking for that; and so, I just wanted to know if that's something you guys want us to do and if so what that would look like. Then the other question I had, I heard you guys talk about one of our jobs was to look at what roads or pipes, what in the CIP should be included for impact fees; and I guess I need to apologize. As a committee, I think we've ... I have spent, over the last five years or how many years I have been doing this, looking more at the methodology than at actually what specific projects are included in that. Mostly because at one point in time, I was told we were not allowed to look at what is included, and that was when there was a previous ... two ... two city managers ago. I was not told I was allowed to look at what the money was being spent on because that was what the Council voted on; so, I have tried to stay away from that. I'm wondering if I was ... if that information was maybe incorrect or is ... is not what we're supposed to be (laughing). So, I guess I need some direction on that. Are we supposed to look at which roads, which pipes, which things are specifically to be included and make recommendations? DuaneLarson: Okay. Duane Larson: Just a second, Bob, and I'll turn it over to you. I wondered the same thing, Myrna. I ... my own thoughts are, and we'll ask somebody that knows, but the ... the im...the Capital Improvement Plan which the impact fees are partially calculated on, you know, I don't think that's a function of the Impact Fee Evaluating Committee. I really don't. Maybe I'm wrong. And ... Jim Atkinson: Could we ask maybe Jim ... Jim Hans? Duane Larson: Yeah, I was gonna ask Jim and I think if they have any comments on anything. Jim Atkinson: At least Jim, you could tell us how those roads got on the list. Jim Hans: Well, the Capital Improvement Plan that is used as the basis for the impact fees is derived from the overall facility planning that is done by the city; whether its for water or sewer systems or transportation. There is then from that study of what those needs are a listing of projects that are needed to meet those needs. Then there is a discussion with the Council with respect to when you gonna put these things together into an impact fee world. Do you want all of these projects on that list or do you want just a part of the projects on that list? Once you've established that you've got a Capital Improvement Plan based upon what you feel the needs are, and then you can actually create a duplicate of it that becomes then the Capital Improvement Plan that you base your impact fees on, why you can take a piece of it and just say, now we're going to focus impact fees on only doing these things. But once you've done that, whether it's that mirror image or that adjusted image, and then you come to the basis of your impact fees. You can't freelance. Jim Atkinson: Okay, so what your saying is that Myrna's right. We're not supposed to be... the committee's not supposed to be talking to that. Wha.. . Jim Hans: Yeah, because you guys are the ones who establish what the, you know, Capital Improvement Plan is. You may be calling it a transporta ... then agonizing ordeal for transportation. There was this fairly big list of projects that were related to transportation needs, and as a result, there was a really big fee; and there was a big desire on the Council's part to try to pare that fee down to a more manageable level. And the most reasonable way of doing that was to adjust the plan so that you took projects off, so that you then dealt with instead of two dozen projects, maybe a half a dozen projects. The result of doing that reduces your fee. Once you got this capital plan for impact fees, you live with it. Jim Atkinson: Thank you. Jim Hans: And that, I think, is the rationale behind this committee's obligation to review the way in which the funds are spent. Hey, if there's a plan ad you're spending money on this instead of the things that are on that plan, that's what they're supposed to tell you. Jim Atkinson: Okay. Jim Hans: You spend it the wrong way, you shouldn't have spent it on this thing, you should have, you actually collected it to spend it on these things. Jim Atkinson: Ah, okay. Is that ... it provides some clarification for me. Myrna Terry: That helps. That helps. 17 Jim Atkinson: Does it provide clarification for the committee? Thank you. Duane Larson: Thank you, Jim. Bob, did you have comment on Myrna's... Robert Hafferman: Yeah. The things that I was concerned about is about a couple of budget sessions ago as an example. The police and fire wanted to spend money for radios, justifying on the fact that with annex of all of these islands and so forth. Well, it wasn't part of how the impact fees were... for police and fire were initiated. That wasn't part of the whole situation. Then going back to the recent change, the police changed the distribution on how it was charged between commercial and residential. That's a recommendation that I think the Impact Fee Committee should wrestle with and tell us their opinion, because it's not a scientific thing. It was a presentation that had changed the methodology on the whole thing. Those are the type of things, as far as the Capital Improvement Plan, that eventually has to ... there has to be some sort of plan to what you reasonably think that we have in over a period of time. The Impact Fee Committee then would agree or disagree or what what's gonna happen over a period of time, but as far as generally of Capital Improvement Plan, that's more of a vegetting type of thing as far as I'm concerned. That doesn't necessarily mean a recommendation, but something is ... comes up that changes the methodology, and as an example on the fire, I don't know what they changed. There was so much hidden in there that reading that big, thick document, I ... I finally said no, there's no way I'm gonna read all of this stuff and try to compare what the master copy is from what the changes were gonna be. Actually, Dan Beals one -page letter told me more than that whole batch of papers that we got, and that's the kind of thing that —that I'm ... so, if there's a change in methodology, I certainly think the Impact Fee Committee should agree or make recommendations as to that change whether it's good or bad in their opinion. Duane Larson: Bob, do you consider it like the radios as a change in methodology or just the Robert Hafferman: Change of expenditure of money. Duane Larson: Okay. Robert Hafferman: It was not... Duane Larson: Eligi ... eligibility. Robert Hafferman: It was not part of the figuring of the impact fee. Duane Larson: Uh huh. Robert Hafferman: They did take 'ern off. Duane Larson: Yeah. Robert Hafferman: And ... but it shouldn't have appeared on there at all is. ..is my point, and without a recommendation from the Impact Fee Committee that something was ... they agreed IN that this is part of it or don't disagree that it is part of the ... In other words, their riding herd over what they had recommended to start with. Duane Larson: So. Then did you, like the radios for example, did you even have any knowledge of that? Sharon DeMusrer: We weren't on the committee. Karlene Khor: We weren't on ... I was.. Myrna Terry: I was on the committee at that time. I don't remember a discussion of the radios. I do remember we talked about just the cost of the buildings and we had some discussion about whether certain types of trucks could be part of the impact fee or not, but I don't remember a discussion of the radio, but that is a good question because there are times when we've gone through a list and we discussed are snowplows part of the transportation.. Duane Larson: Impact Myrna Terry: plan. Can they be paid for with impact fees or not? Are they part of what can be paid for or not? Those are the types of things that even though that's part of the CIP, it ... I'm wondering if those are the types of things we need to look at and say is this impact fee eligible or not. Duane Larson: Does ... do those kind of items generally come to you do you think or... Myrna Terry: We get a list of...I mean it has skid steers. It has backhoes. It has, I mean, all sorts of things on them, and ever pipe that was put in for the last a 100 years, and how big it is, and how much it cost when it was put in, and how much it ... its ... what its charge for impact fees after so many years. Karlene Khor: How much capacity is left. Myrna Terry: Uh huh. Duane Larson: Well, do you ... do you feel you got any, on this question that was answered, as far as do you think that you should make/refer recommendations on eligibility items, whether or not they are eligible for impact fees? Myrna Terry: Well, now I confused about it. Duane Larson: Yeah, that's Myrna Terry: `Cause I thought we agreed we weren't supposed to, but now I'm kinda thinking maybe these items we should, because if their not legally supposed to be paid for maintenance operations. 19 Duane Lawson: Jane? Jane Howington: In a perfect world it would be really clear and it's probably not in reality, but the capital planning process is part of the budgeting process. Duane Larson: Yes. Jane Howington: The budget is your annual plan. Your capital plan is your five sometimes ten-year plan that works toward your comprehensive plan, your growth management strategy, all the various long-range plans, and so on. We haven't had a capital plan for awhile as a collective. I think each department has had kind of their own planning process, but that capital plan and that comprehensive evaluation has not taken place that I'm aware of in the past number of years; and if you recall in our budget sessions, we try to start that again this year. We had a work session on it and we've given you, I wouldn't say it's a CI... a full CIP, but it's working toward that. In theory, the city staff would be putting together their proposal for their capital planning needs. Those would be going to the Council through the work sessions and the budgeting process and once Council has approved those things, that becomes the capital plan that then feeds into what the Impact Fee Committee looks at when they review the fees and ... and what the consultant's done with evaluating the capital plan and the fee structure and so on. Now, that doesn't mean that they shouldn't be questioning because there's a lot of infrastructure inside, for instance, water and sewer, that isn't ever gonna be in the capital plan because the capital plan has thresholds of your life expectancy of equipment or your capital outlay that a lot of things will fall below that. So, for instance, when they talk about the whole list that they have of...of...of pipes and some equipment, some of that stuff is never gonna be in the capital plan because it's less expensive, or it has to be replaced more often, or it's part of the infrastructure rather than part of the capital, and so those things get melded into your impact fee considerations that they're looking at. That's different than the capital plan, so some of those things... So that's why it's ... it's not as easily to say it's either a capital item or it's not. You all have kind of purview of setting the capital plan for your large expenditures in your capital plan, which is your five-year replacement plan, but there are a lot of other pieces of equipment that get into the impact fee consideration that they have to look at for recommendation. I don't know if that helps or not, but... Myrna Terry: My understanding from that is that ... that it ... those types of items are the things that we as a committee should look at to determine, is this impact fee eligible or not. Jane Howington: And those are not necessarily part of your capital plan. Jim Atkinson: Right. Jane Howington. Those are in addition to. Yes. Myrna Terry: Like the sludge trucks and sludge injectors. I'm just looking on this list... Jane Howington: Right. MEN Myrna Terry: that's in front of me, that we determined were part of impact fee even though... Jane Howington: Eligible. Myrna Terry: we determined at other times... Jane Howington: Right. Myrna Terry: snow plows weren't. Jane Howinton: And so, in their capital plan and some of...like a sludge truck, for instance. That would be something that would go in the capital plan, but you would need to ... to look at that and evaluate that whether that has ... is it impact fee eligible or a portion is; because if you look at our capital plan, there is a column that indicates what the funding source is. And so some of it will say impact fee. Some of it will say general fund. Some of it will say enterprise account, grants, and so on. That determination is also partly established by whether you feel that that is a piece of equipment that qualifies for an impact fee funding or portions thereof. So, in some cases, you'll get that list that we're looking for clarification on what the funding source is, then once you determine that is or isn't impact fee eligible, that'll then get presented to Council in the proposed capital plan as how ... as the funding source. Myrna Terry: There's a little question on how that works here. The way it has come to us is we don't get the list of which funding sources they are, but we have ... the consultant and the city staff have done that for us and made their recommendations, and then we just look at those. Jane Howington: Right, right. That's correct. Duane Larson: Jim. Jim Atkinson: Impact fee eligible. That sounds like a firm thing that you can hold onto and say, (Laughter) Jim Atkinson: yes, and it isn't evidently. Okay, can you explain impact fee eligible? How ... how does it say, or are you the ones who determine whether it is eligible? Myrna Terry: It's in the law what's eligible. Jim Atkinson: Okay. Myrna Terry: Um, it has to be, and it's different from your fringe types of uses, for police and fire; basically the things that are eligible is their space, their square footage space, and fire, the trucks and such are. They have to have a 15-year useful life, I think. Is that right? Jane Howington: 10 21 Myrna Terry: So then... Jim Atkinson: And that's why police cars wouldn't. Jane Howington: Right. Myrna Terry: Police cars were not eligible. Jim Atkinson: Okay. Myrna Terry: Maintenance and operations are not eligible. Jim Atkinson: Okay. Myrna Terry: So that sometimes that's tough to figure out, which is actually part of the actual facility... Jim Atkinson: Right. Myrna Terry : when your. ..when we're talking about roads, it's really tough, and which is maintenance and operations. So, those are tricky things to figure out. Jim Atkinson: It's been very enlightening. Thank you. I wish it were more black and white, but that's job security, I suspect. (Laughter) Duane Larson: Any other comment on Jane with... Jane Howington: Can I try and just ... so I can beat a dead horse; can I try and clarify the issue of...of the ... what came before you with the police and fire recommendations a couple weeks ago? Those recommendations were approved by the Impact Fee Committee a year ago, but they were also part of, you know, when I first came here in August, they were just landing on my desk as far as moving them through to Council. And at the time, we had quite a long backlog of work session items, and so as staff, we kind of prioritized the things that were coming to you in work session items so that we could get ... start getting some of this stuff off of our plate, and the things that we were trying to bring forward were the time ... were things that had time deadlines or anything. Since the fire and police impart fee report were not time sensitive at that point because the budget had already been approved and so on, we had a number of months to bring those forward to you, and the only reason we brought `em forward to you in June was because we had to pass the budget as well and for any capital expenditures that used impact fee dollars we needed to have those approved. So, the recommendation you had had been approved by the Impact Fee Committee. Duane Larson: The same. —the same amounts, Jane? 22 Jane Howington: Yes. Yes Duane Larson: Got this the other day. Jane Howington: Now, what was not apparent, obviously, in that ... in the recommendations and what brought for...was brought forward to you was the Impact Fee Committee making that recommendation. Jane Howington: And so, we'll try and be.. (Coughs) Jane Howington: more clear about that in the future, but that was not something that staff just brought forward and bypassed the Impact Fee Committee. Duane Larson: As I say, you may have made that comment the other night. I just didn't remember that. Jim Atkinson: We never listen to you anyway. Jane Howington: I can't believe you don't hang on... (Laugh) Jane Howington: It shows that I've been here too long. (Laughter) Jane Howington: You don't even listen. You're like my husbands. (Laughter) Duane Larson: Okay. KarIene Khor: We all must be married to the same guy. (Laughter) Duane Larson: Does the staff have anything or comments to make about this? Full discussion? (Whispering -Loud laughter) Jim Haas: I think just one point that, you know, Bob's comment about the radios, I think perfectly illustrates the point we made earlier in response to the question about capital plans. The ... in every organization and every day of life you come up to some new thing you're gonna need. Okay? And with our police folks it happened to be radios, and it was included in the way 23 in which they formed up their budget with the intent that they wanted to see if it would be funded via impact fees. Part of what we do at staff level is to try be the gatekeepers and figure out... do some of these fit or do they not fit. We looked at it and it was apparent that this was not something that was on that impact fee list; and funding it with impact fees would have been inappropriate, a new item for the budget. That was the reason for that dialogue and for, well, where does the Impact Fee Committee recommendation on it. They hadn't seen it. It wasn't part of it. Those kind of new things, it's important that when those new items get identified, whether it's now or six months from now, whether it's a different kind of fire truck or an additional fire truck, or maybe it's radios, that it gets brought to the Impact Fee Committee so that there can be that dialogue to determine the eligibility of that and the appropriateness of funding it through impact fees. If it then... everyone agrees, you know what, this is actually a good idea and a good thing, then you got to figure out the appropriate way of doing it. Do you have to amend the fees to add it to it so that you can boost the fees up and then it becomes part of that plan? Could you take something off the list? And that's the kind of recommendation then would come back to you is that, you know what? All those other things that were on the list are still good. You gotta add this to it and that means you need to change your impact fee. Once you guys have done all of that, then you can put it in the budget, but it's premature to make those impact fee thing decisions on something that's needed. (Sneezing) Jim Haas: If when this group has had an opportunity to review it and give you the feedback that you need to know, how it is your paying for it. It's kind of a long-winded way of saying, you know that when new things happen this committee's role is properly to engage those new things, figure out how they should be funded, and whether it's appropriate, so that you then get that feedback. The budget process is something separate. The impact fees process is something separate. They come together at a certain point in order to get these things paid for. Jim Atkinson: Thank you. One of the thing I see as a disconnect and our policy setting and stuff is we all agree that X, Y, and Z should be funded through impact fees, and X, Y, and Z will be funded through impact fees and here's the recommendation of the fee. Well, that looks too expensive, so we cut the fee down and we don't go back and say, okay, and what's not going to be paid for. That's the disconnect. The cost of it and what will we really get done, and I'm not sure we have ever addressed that to any degree. I don't know if we send it back to the Impact Fee Committee... (Laughter) Jim Atkinson: and make up their minds as to what we want to do. Male: Probably. Jim Atkinson: Yeah, probably. But I...when...I just wanted to state that so we keep that in our heads. When we reduce costs or reduce the fee we reduce our ability to fund the projects. `Nuff said. 24 Duane Larson: However, at the time that we reduced the impact fees last February, I think it was, we saw ... the Council saw some of those projects as there's no time limit. We felt it never ... there's no need for them to be on the list at that point in time, because there was something that weren't gonna happen in the near future, even in the foreseeable future. So, that's... that's another consideration, you know, that we made at that time, I think. Jane. Jane Howington: I just want to try and...and try and clarify maybe or catch me if I'm wrong with this. It sounds like the flavor of Council is that the role of the Impact Fee Committee is as stated here to review the reports of the consultant, make sure the methodology is appropriate, look at the funding mechanisms, and make recommendations to Council. As fax as some policy advice or advice to look into new and different ways of maybe doing collections or whatever, you're open to the committee just saying, hey, heads up, this is something that some other communities practice and we thing you might want to look into it or whatever as opposed to really delving into it and making a final recommendation. Now, you may end up taking that and turning it back to them and saying, hey, that's a great idea. Will you look into this for us? But it would be at your direction that they would look into those policy initiatives or some other organization, some other group, and so on. If staff is looking at some alternate methods of revenue generation that may have, that may supplant or augment impact fees, would you be asking us to do a similar thing or ... where staff would be bringing that kind of concept to Council and you would determine if you wanted a ... and ADHOC Committee or a task force developed for it depending on the magnitude or if it was something you would then send to the ... potentially send to the Impact Fee Committee and see if they would look at it. Is that... Robert Hafferman: Sure. Jim Atkinson: Yeah. Robert Hafferman: Absolutely. Jane Howington: That's pretty... Okay. Does that sound like what everybody else is hearing? Duane Larson: Does that sound okay to you Karlene, viewing how you feel about the mingling of policy and... Karlene Khor: I still think it's wrong to mingle policy with this committee, and I think you have to be very, very careful what you send to us that has anything to do with policy. I think if you do, it needs to be in writing. The guidelines have to be really definitive. Jim Atkinson: That's fair. Karlene Khor: I really, really do. Duane Larson: Okay. Karlene Khor: I don't think we're your policy people. 25 Duane Larson: Do you feel that... I don't want to put words in your mouth or... Do you feel that making recommendations to the Council for the Council to review or consider is wrong? Or is that getting into an area that you feel is bad, too. Karlene Khor: I still think that's policy. What we're looking at is a document, and we're really assessing that document, and we're assessing all the things that go into that document. And that's a lot different than taking an exponent out here that may, in some way, be related to that document but not really. And provide you our recommendation as a committee is really about the consultant and his work and our reviewing his work. So, yes, I, again, would say what I've said throughout this whole thing. I would be very, very careful. Duane Larson: I guess knowing that the Council is open to recommendations, they're not going to solci...myself, I wouldn't solicit recommendations from you, but I'd be pleased to look at `em; however, that's ... I ... I guess that would be up to the ... your committee to determine whether or not you wanna even get into that minor area of... My own interpretation of policy is setting policy and that's different than considering policy. So. Sharon DeMeester: Well, well, I think the issue that's the most current is the one of a developer paying payment over time, and we've had discussions on, and I'm not really sure if that's our position that we should be telling you. You should be discussing that amongst yourself, `cause that's gonna be a policy issue when you settle it. Duane Larson: And I think that your right. Sharon DeMeester: And you know, maybe in our summary, because you get the minutes from our meeting, if that were brought up and discussed at the meeting, you would have the minutes to read and say they at least discussed this. Myrna Terry: Do you guys get minutes? I don't know that we get good minutes. Duane Larson: I've, I've never seen any of those. Sharon DeMeester: Well, we started ... we've started it. Karlene Khor: While you were away, we started... Sharon DeMeester: We started doing minutes. Robert Hafferman: I haven't seen any minutes. Myrna Terry: We had a big discussion... Sharon DeMeester: We've just started, Bob, because that was brought up two meetings ago. Duane Larson: I think it's a good idea, yeah. W Jane owington: That's one of the things that staff is trying to work with all of your advisory boards and commissions now is to get minutes from all of your boards and commissions, just a summary of the actions and the discussions, not all the details. It's not verbatim; so that you have some way of keeping up with what all of your boards and commissions do. So, we're in kind of...the summer is a little bit of a flux because not all of the boards meet during the summer months, but that's one of the things that you'll be seeing as the fall comes and people come back to their regular meetings. Robert Hafferman: I thought that was good. It was published once on the ... and I thought it was a good idea. Sharon DeMeester: Yeah. Duane Larson: Okay. Myrna. Myrna Terry: I just wanted ... and I don't want ... I just wanted to bring in a different level of discussion into this also, and I ... and it's not that I'm in any way suggesting this happened, but I think another important thing for us to be aware of is that the law doesn't require that we have a consultant, and it doesn't require that we have a specific consultant. And I just think it's important for us to be aware of that. That, I think there are communities where they are working without a consultant. I don't want to do that... (Laugh) Myrna Terry: because I understand it's a really difficult process, but I think when we're looking at what the Council ... what the committee's role is, we can ... if we didn't have a consultant our role would be very different. Duane Larson: Oh. And I ... I kinda mentioned at the beginning that I think the Council felt by having a consultant, this is probably a poor choice of words, but we could justify the fees we decided on because of the study that the consultant did originally, and I think Bob is right. The last report we got from him was just a repeat of the first one basically. So. But, the fact that that the statute doesn't require a consultant and doesn't require any specific one, that gives us a little leeway. Maybe if in the future we wanna look into changing consultants we might consider that, too. You know, but that's a good point. Myrna Terry: I'm assuming that would be a Council... Duane Larson: Uh huh. Yeah. But I ... I ... I'm like you, and I'm glad that we did have a consultant because I wouldn't have known where to start, you know. Sharon DeMeester: Yeah. Jim Atkinson: Given the newness of this law... Duane Larson: Yeah. 27 Jim Atkinson: if we didn't have a consultant we'd need an attorney. Duane Larson: Yeah. (Uninteligible) Sharon DeMester: Well, in order to understand, I mean, the whole complexity of this. It's absolutely imperative that you have someone to interpret that for you. Duane Larson: That's right. Jim Atkinson: Right. Duane Larson: Yeah. We could probably need three attorneys... Jim Atkinson: Yeah, right. Duane Larson: just to defend. (Laughter) Duane Larson: the decisions we made if we hadn't hired in consultants. Jim Atkinson: Yeah. Duane Larson: Any other comments or questions, or did the ... did you get some insight into direction or ... Sharon DeMuster: Well, I think that it's imperative that if you want us to do a particular thing that we get a written document from the Council... Duane Larson: Okay. Sharon DeMuster: to us... Robert Hafferman: And I made a note... Sharon DeMuster: so we know what it is. Robert Hafferman: of this, too, Sharon, because I think you're right. It's... Karlene Khor: And, and of course, we've all loved the executive summary. Duane Larson: Yeah. Darlene or: We will certainly impart that to. Myrna Berry: Is there any particular thing that you guys want us to look at? Darlene Dhor: Put it in writing. (Laughter) Duane Larson: I think that if, as Jane said in the beginning, I think if we ... I think we probably as Tammi requested, that maybe we determine whether or not we wanted to interpret that state statute more broadly or pretty much the way we understand it. Isn't that basically what ... and I gathered from our conversation that it's the way we're doing it now and the way the Impact Fee Committee is doing it now is broad enough. We don't need to add to it. I don't think so. Or add our interpretation to it ... make it more broad. So. I guess if there aren't any other questions or... Is there any questions from the audience here? Okay. If not, then I think we're ... unless somebody would have some other comments, why I think we'll adjourn. Jane Howington: I... Duane Larson: Thank you for coming. Jane Howington: Thank you. Jane Howington: This is not a meeting comment other than to ask... You were all given a copy of those question answers for the noise ordinance. I think that in your packet last week, and we just wanted to check. A couple of weeks ago when we had... You don't recall it? Duane Larson: I don't ... Jane Howington: Okay. We'll send it out again because we wanna make sure that you have a chance to look at those and if it hasn't ... if you have any other questions or comments to let me know, because I don ... we're gonna finalize what we're bringing to you, but we thought we wanted to see if there were any other issues that came up. So, we'll send it out to you again. 29