Loading...
12. Ordinance 1268 - Meridian Road - 1st ReadingAgenda -October 6, 1997 AGENDA ITEM 12 - ORDINANCE 1268-MERIDIAN ROAD -ONE WAY EAST BETWEEN HIGHWAY 93 AND WINDWARD WAY -1ST READING BACKGROUND/CONSIDERATION: Discussion of this change in the traffic flow for Meridian Road has been ongoing since 1995. As a condition for the approval of the improvements to the Meridian intersection for the Buffalo Commons development, MDOT required a traffic flow change to one-way Eastbound. The approach access permit for Northridge Drive/Buffalo Commons has the change included as item 16 I. The City's representatives all acknowledged this requirement. The improvements to the road and to the intersection are now being completed. We need to proceed with the changes in striping and signing as soon as possible. RECOMMENDATION: To fulfill previous commitments and to follow through with the conditions this Council approved at the July 21, 1997 meeting, I highly recommend approval of this change in traffic direction. ACTION REQUIRED: APPROVAL of Ordinance 1268 will complete the change legally. The staff will work with the contractors to complete the change -over in concert with the intersection improvements. ORDINANCE NO. 1268 AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH ONE-WAY ONLY VEHICLE TRAFFIC ON MERIDIAN ROAD EAST BETWEEN US HIGHWAY 93 NORTH AND WINDWARD WAY AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. All vehicular traffic on Meridian Road East between US Highway 93 North and Windward Way shall be from West to East only. SECTION II. Vehicle traffic in a manner and direction other than as provided herein is prohibited, and a willful, purposeful or negligent violation hereof shall be punished as provided by section 1-9 of the Kalispell City Code. SECTION ITT. This Resolution shall become effective 30 days following its passage by the City Council and approval by the Mayor. - PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL, THIS 6'H DAY OF OCTOBER, 1997. Douglas D. Rauthe, Mayor ATTEST: Debbie Gifford, CMC Clerk of Council lonrana Jaoartmant t•.-inscortation P.O. Box 7039 Missoula Montana 59807 December 12, 1995 Robert Babb Director of Public Works City of Kalispell P.O. Box 1997 Kalispell, Montana 59903 Subject: Public Approach Intersection of Kalispell Access Request US-93 and Meridian Road This is to document our position on your subject request for access as a result of the meeting held in the Kalispell Division office on October 25, 1995. I feel we -all profited from the extensive and enlightened discussion. We now believe that permission can be granted to allow an approach connection to US-93 across from Meridian Road if very specific operational characteristics are provided. i think we all came to a common agreement that the goal of this new approach is to provide effective, safe and efficient access into the developments (both existing and proposed) located east of this point on US-93. As a result of that extensive discussion we feel the group identified an alternative that would provide efficient high -volume access into the development area without compromising the integrity of either US-93 or Meridian Road. We feel very comfortable with the concept of providing one- way eastbound access into the development at this point with the reciprocal westbound movement back to US-93 along a roadway to be identified by the developers and the City located to the north of this intersection. if designed and coordinated properly with the r ion of Meridian Road, low delay and high volume access can be provided into the developing area east of US-93 with very little if any negative influence on existing and future flow of traffic on US-93 and on Meridian Road. Using an alternate roadway or roadways to provide the recipr t flow toII8 g n `' a ar 2e - v A low conflict signalized intersection/s, will facilitate effective high volume westward traffic flow from the development. If done properly it will once again have little or no affect on existing and future expected flow potential on US-93. At the same time it would provide high volume westward traffic flow that access at Meridian is not capable of providing. We all have a very large stake in the ability to both effectively move the high demand for both north/south and east/west traffic flow and be able to absorb the rapid increases that demand is experiencinq. As a result of our analysis and the very enlightening discussion we had with you we feel that this attack is the only way to provide for the desired access using the Meridian Road intersection. From our discussion we understand your concern for timing. As mentioned at the meeting we would be willing to consider a tg=2rary two-way connection across from Meridian Road. That temporary connection would be intended to allow time to develop potential reciprocal routes. However, the term of that temporary two-way connection would have to be very short in length, only two to three years. There is a very efficient way to affect that conversion. That would be to tie it to the reconstruction schedule planned for Meridian Road. If the conversion could be completed before that time we would all benefit from the reduced delays and higher capacity. Regardless, the geometric design of the Meridian Road /US-93 intersection on the reconstruction project would only provide one-way eastbound access into the street system east of US-93. In closing, if we can come to a firm agreement on these points and schedules we can proceed with finalizing the approach permit. Please be assured that our goals are the same as yours. We want to promote the safest and the most effective flow of traffic in both the north/south and east/west directions that we can provide. We certainly know the demand is there and is growing. Working together we can accomplish this to where the widest public interest is served. 7'OAw-o-\ 4LA"-T Weaver, P.B. District Administrator JTW/dpd;access cc: C. S. Pail S. L. Rerzocl D. P. Dusek �Pr KA M 4onrara Oaaarrmpr . ' r: �AyDURa:JCR P.O. BOX 7039 MISSOULA, MT 59807 406-523-5800 January 16, 1996 Mr. Bob Babb Director of Public Works City of Kalispell PO Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903 Subject: North Meridian Extension Dear Bob, This is to confirm our general agreement on the extension of Meridian Road easterly from US-93. ;le are in agreement that the initial roadway, intersection, and signal.will be designed for full access and all movements. We still need to review the detailed geometrics and signal plans. These should be submitted through Steve Herzog. The above approval will be conditioned on the agreement that once either the Meridian Road project south of US-93 or the Northridge Drive connection east of the US-93 is constructed that the east leg of Meridian Road will be reconfigured to prohibit left turns and through movements into the intersection. It is agreed we will allow right turns northbound onto US-93, but only with the understanding that we will not allow this movement to "demand" time from the signal or to diminish the overall capacity of the intersection or US-93. I hope this is a satisfactory solution to all parties, including the developers. We firmly believe this will go a long way towards enhancing traffic flow on US-93. I certainly appreciate your help and assistance in reaching this compromise. sincerely, J es T. Weaver, P.E. District Engineer -Missoula JTW:kld:21 cc: District File Steve Herzog Don Dusek t�= N ' fSo Incorporated 11192 Telephone (406) 758.7700 FAX (406) 758-7758 Post Office Box 1997 Kalispell, Montana Zip 59903-1997 January 24, 1996 Mr. Jim Weaver, P.E. District Engineer Montana Department of Transportation P. 0. Box 7039 Missoula, MT 59807 Dear Jim: I discussed your letter of January 16, 1996 concerning the extension of North Meridian Road with the Kalispell City Council. It is their consensus that the compromise outlined in your letter is an acceptable alternative for the functioning of the new segment of North Meridian Road. I was asked by the City Council to clarify MDOT's position - concerning the traffic movements at the intersection of Northridge Drive and Highway 93. As you will recall, we discussed this issue at our last meeting. It is my recollection that we -decided and agreed that when Northridge Drive is extended east into the Buffalo Commons PUD, that the new street will be signaled and will allow left and right turns onto Highway 93. With this clarification, we will proceed with design and construction of North Meridian. I appreciate the cooperative spirit and approach that you have taken to resolve our differences with this project. Let me know as soon as possible your position concerning Northridge Drive. Again, thanks for your assistance. Sincerely, Bruce Williams City Manager BW/ksk p . c .:. Bob Babb Glen Neier l+ fyl Evt,,.- Douglas Rauthe Mayor Bruce Williams City Manager City Council Members: Cary W. Nystul Ward I Cliff Collins Ward I Norbert F. Donahue Ward It Dale Haarr Ward If Jim Atkinson Ward III Lauren Cranmo Ward III Pamela B. Kennedy Ward IV M. Duane. Larson Ward IV Montana Departnk Of Transportation P.O. BOX 7039 MISSOULA, MT 59807 406-523-5800 January 26, 1996 Mr. Bruce Williams, city Manager The City of Kalispell P.O. Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903-1997 Dear Bruce, Wax Racrcat. Governor This is to confirm our agreement on the Northridge Drive - US 93 intersection. We did agree it would be signalized and that it would be a full access intersection. Again, thanks for your help on this matter. Sincerely, LIS J T. WEAVER, P.E. DISTRICT ENGINEER-MISSOULA JTW:ale:39 cc: Steve Herzog Don Dusek District File 3 Akh -W Montana Department of Transportation G L Helena, Montana 59620 Memorandum To: Cart S. P 0, P.E. i �' � Preco ction Engineer !' C JUN 17 1997 From: Donald P. Dusek, P.E. v -- Traffic Engineer of rRUSPORUDON C-- a, Date: May 29, 1997 > o Subject: Traffic Signal Warrant Review Buffalo Commons - Development Intersection of - US 93 & Northridge Dr. Kaliispel We have reviewed the above subject site and work done by the Buffalo Commons consultant relative to traffic signalization here. We feel signilization should be added by the developer this summer as part of their construction of the development's internal roadway infrastructure. The consultant's report stated that warrant 2,9,10 and 11 were rnet with their projected volumes based on comple ion of all phases of the devekpTient and the internal roadways. Without waiting,' g, until that event occurs, we used work as a foundation to come up with our own report. As part of this subject report ifm also anticipated new site parameters at the conclusion to the mentioned summer construction. These parameters are actually keyed to several issues not fully purstied by the consultant. The foremost issue is that fair considerat«on must be given to applying the system warrant (#7) here. We found that all criteria for warrant 7 were rnet when the following items are in place. t ' Y tr r • t • - !+ i • ter! it 1:4-)A-A!AI • ! - i _ i _.. tea,: ! -,!: -i �/a _ � .. • • � ! � ,I � `Cf .. aE • ._ i i � • 9 !:' -. G ♦.�... Will, •,r...-�: • i_.. -• •✓ i •' ! i;: !. f -• �. `� Ys�. (: -:L fir_ :: • i Y 9 _ i � :fit .- • � �l-- ! .. �� �• ��� Carl S. Peil, P.E. Page -2- May 29, 1997 infrastructure placement as discussed above) on Northridge's new east leg would be close to, if not more than 100 egressing units per hour. With any added building at all in this immediate area we do or will almost assuredly exceed the minimum requirement of warrant 11 (peak hour). As mentioned in earlier correspondence from our office to the Missoula District we concur that warrant 11 is met as called out above by the consultant while also in the same vein we have no reason to doubt warrants 2 & 9 will also be met. Taken all together we therefore have one warrant "7" met and a real good chance several others will be such that signalizaiion can be added to the summer's construction work. Finally since a warrant is met, we examined the intersection's operation. This is done by using the HCM's model and engineering judgement of expected traffic conditions. We updated the consultant's projections on all movements to more closely reflect current conditions (ie. at the end of this summer). For the new east leg's egress into the intersection, in the unsignalized mode of operation, we had LOS "F' operation. This was true even when we used only 10% of potential traffic from the facilities (presently in existence), mentioned previously, north of Meridian Rd. This is an indication that extreme congestion will be felt by westbound traffic movements using the intersection. No accident history is available for this site with its' new geometdcs. It is our opinion that with the growth rate in this area, speeds around 45 mph and high conflict egress the intersection writ operate safest under a active traffic control device; in this case a traffic signal. In conclusion, we recommend signalizabon of this site under the above editions. The plans for this work have been drawn up by the developer's consultant and are near completion with expected release to bid before June 1997. Let us know if we can assist any further in this matter. I concur &X •- Ed Date - J /-997 Carl S. Pell, P.E D. P. ;A v v W G 3fi Approach Permit Northridge Buffalo Commons Additional Conditions #cont. 16 d. 1.) The plans and special provisions (set # 8) received by MDT on May 13, 1997 along with the addendum number 1., plan sheets C2-3 &A 1-7 received on May 27, 1997, prepared by Robert Peccia & Associated shall serve as the basis for the approval for MDT. 2.) The final comments from Donald Dusek dated June 13, 1997 shall be included as a part of the final plans and the changes shall be included during construction. 16 e. There shall be a signal technician inspector on -site to inspect and monitor all electrical, cable, hardware and conduit work associated with the signal installation. This inspector shall be approved by MDT prior to the initiation of any signal or associated work within MDT right of way. The purpose of this inspector is to represent MDT on site and ensure compliance with permit and plan requirements. The inspector is responsible to report to the Kalispell Field Maintenance Chief, for MDT. 16 f. The timing of the signal will be established by MITT. The signal testing and turn -on shall be witnessed and accomplished by a representative of the signal controller company and a traffic signal technician from MDT. The permittee shall notify MDT 48 hours in advance of the activation of the signal. 16 g. Three sets of as-builts for the signal and highway shall be submitted to MDT upon completion and final acceptance by MDT. Once accepted MDT shall become the owner of the Traffic signal, the controller and all associated hardware, heads, poles and associated futures. MITT shall be responsible for the maintenance and repair of this signal upon acceptance unless otherwise covered by manufactures' warranties. 16 h. A traffic control plan shall be submitted and approved by NOT prior to any work occurring on MIT right of way. 161. Mer&an East shall become a iwe one-way roadway east upon the activation of the signal at Northridge Drive. The City of Kalispell and MIST shall work jointly to reconfigure the Meridian / US 93 intersection. A left turn bay shall be added to flee southbound lanes of US 93 to accomodate Ihe one way leg at East Meridian. The odsting access at Heritage Way shall remain intact and functional going east from US 93. 0 k MTCE 112-A 11-26-91 --To be filled In by Department of Transportation Personnel-- F.A. Route No. p-5 (US 93) - Approach Station(s) 82+00 District 'Missoula No County Flathead US 93 (P-5) Milepost 114.4 Project DP 2 7 9 (13 ) Drainage As Determined By Dept. Of Transportation: Type As shown on plans Approach Recommended by District Traffic Engineer or Traffic Unit size Length Applicant (Property Owner) Stock No. 3255-1193 Date Approach Application Date Approved by District Engineer Name: City of Kalispell Phone: 758--7700 Address: 312 1st Avenue East, Kalispell, MT 59901 herein termed the applicant, requests permission to construct approach(es) described and shown on attached plot plan or plan and profile and hereby made a part of this application. Please indicate if permits or approaches are required from units of government other than the Department of Transportation. Write the number of permits required in the box: ❑ Federal Government ❑ State O County - O City . ❑ N/A Private: Use of Property or Facility: Public: x Northridge Drive Access to US 93 (Residence, Trailer Court, Gas. Station, Field Access, Type of Business, etc.) Location: City or Town: Kalispell (if rural - direction & apprdx. distance from nearest city or town) Street Name, if any: Northridge Drive Roadway Or Highway: Sight Distance:Left 1000+/- Right 1000+/- Surfacing: Asphalt Width: 80 reet Approach: upgrade existing westside approach Estimated number of trips per day: See July 10, 1996 Peccia Analysis (cony attached) Width- Per plan Flare: per p14a sheet Side of Roadwa : E Sheet A1-7 dated 4197 Um'ld 46b ;4' Ar 9 Y ��..- f�. Drainage: See above as determined by Department of Transportation. -- Instruction Concerning Use1•.Of .This Form' • . . .,, _ ,, •-t1ta+�5� tti� runs' - Applicant will complete and deliver this form in duplicate to the District Engineer serving the area in which the Approach Permit is requested -- - The District Engineer, in conjunction with the District Traffic Engineer, is delegated authority to approve curb cuts, public and private approaches servin# businesses, residence and agricultural uses in rural or urban areas without further consultation if the traffic conditions are not con- gested. In congested arras, usually urban situations, the District Engineer and.-Dipi(j, Trii i►e rz Engineer can request the Manager, Traffic Unit in Helena for additional technical assistance. tf this is necessary, the approach should be scaled onto existing plan and profile sheets showing the highway right-of-way and sent to Helena. MTCE 1 1 2-A Swck No. 11.26-91 3255.1195 —Approach Permit -- Subject to the following terms and conditions, the permit applied for upon the reverse side hereof. Is hereby granted: 1) Tenn. This permit shall be In full force and effect from the date hereof until revoked as herein provided. 2) Rental. Rental shalt bed 3) Revocation. This permit may be revoked by State upon giving thirty (30) days notice to Permittee by ordinary mad. directed to the address shown in the application hereto attached, but the State reserves the right to revoke this permit without giving said notice In the event Permittee breaks any of the conditions or terms set forth herein. 4) Commencement of Work. No work shall be commenced until Permittee notifies the District Engineer, shown in application, when he proposes to commence work. 5) Changes in Highway. If the State changes the highway or there are other changes to adjoining streets, alleys, etc. which necessitate alterations in structures or installations installed under this permit. Permittee shall make the necessary alterations at Permittee's sole expense or in accordance with a separate agreement. 6) State Saved Harmless From Claims. in accepting this permit the Permittee, its/Ns successors or assigns, agree to protect the State and save it harmless from all claims, actions or damage of every kind and description which may accrue to, or be suffered by, any person or persons, corporations or property by reason of the performance of any such work, character of materials used, or manner of installations, maintenance and operation, or by the improper occupancy of said highway right of way, and in case any suit or action is brought against the State and arising out of, or by reason of, any of the above causes, the Permittee. Its/his successors or assigns, will upon notice to it/him of the commencement of such action, defend the same at its/his sole cost and expense and" satisfy any judgment which may be rendered against the State in any such suit or action. 7) Protection Of Traffic. insofar as the interests of the State and the travelling public are concerned, all work performed under this permit shall be done under the supervision of the District Engineer of the Department of Transportation and his authorized representatives, and he/they shall indicate barriers to be erected, the lighting thereof at night, placing of flagmen and watchmen, manner In which traffic is to be handled, and shall specify to Permittee how road surface is to be replaced if it is disturbed during operations, but said supervision shalt in no ay operate to relieve or discharge Permittee from any of the obligations assumed by acceptance of this permit. and especially those set forth under Section 6 thereof. 8) Highway Drainage. If the work done under this permit interferes in any way with the drainage of the State Highway effected, Permittee shall, at its/his own expense, make such provisions as the State may direct to take care of said drainage. 9) Rubbish And Debris. Upon completion of work contemplated under this permit, an rubbish and debris shalt be immediately removed and the roadway and the roadside left In a neat and presentable condition satisfactory to the State. 10) Work To Be Supervised By State. All work contemplated under this permit shall be done under the supervision of and to the satisfaction of the authorized representative of the State, and the State hereby reserves the right to order the change of location or removal of any structure or installation authorized by this permit at anytime, said. changes or removal to be made at the sole expense of the permittee. 11) State's Right Not To Be interfered With. All such changes, reconstructing or relocation shall be done by Pennit. tee, in such a manner as win cause the least Interference with any of the State's work, and the State shall in no wise be liable for any damage to the Permittee by reason of any such work by the State, its agents, contractors or representatives, or by the exercise of any rights by the State upon the highways by the Installations or structures placed under this permit. 12) Removal Of installations Or Structures. Unless waived by the State. upon termination of this permit. the Permit - tee shall remove`the installations or structures contemplated by this permit and restore the premises to the condition existing at the time of entering upon the same under this permit. reasonable and ordinary wear and tear and damage by the elements, or by circumstances over which the Permittee has no control, excepted. 13) Maintenance At Expense Of Permittee. Permittee shall maintain, at its/his sole expense the installations and structures for which this permit is granted, In a condition satisfactory to the State. 14) State Not Uabie For Damage To installations. to accepting this permit the Permittee agrees that any damage or injury done to said Installations or structures by a contractor working for the State. or by any State employee engaged in construction, alteration, repair. maintenance or Improvement of the State Highway, than be at the sole expense of the Permittee. 15) State To Be Reimbursed For Repairing Roadway. Upon being billed therefore Permittee agrees to pmmpti)r reimburse State for any. expense Incurred in repairing surface or roadway due to settlement at installation. or for any other damage to roadway as a result of the work performed under this permit. 16) Other Conditilans And/Or Remarks a. At approach side slope$ win be constructed on not less than 6 to 1 slope. unless otherwise appoved. lb. No private signs or devices etc. will be constructed or Installed within the Highway Right of Way limits. N. This permit Is valid only K approach construction Is completed within 6 nonths fion date of issue. d. Attachments. Dated at Kalispell Montana. this day of June 19 9 7 The undersigned, the `Permittee' mentioned In the foregoing Department Of Transporation tnstnrment, hereby accepts this permit. together with an of the terms and conditions set forth thereln. By District Engineer Completed.approach inspected b)r. Permittee . x -.One copy of permit to'bishici ET&tr foc titTkIt-' -04e copy of pemit to ' )�-: :C::4:1 : E'l X7 LEAGUE OF CITIES F01 September 17, IM To; Mies and Towns wrath Extended Building Code Jurisdiction i "IM Alec Hansen RepridIng.- Intapretation of Howe Bill 388 1 _ ., 'e . •.. U1U f . • f tilflq .. - 1 •► tr,1 ', 1! II I., 7 .ff ♦ f f' . i :.: 4 tt iil if 11' ♦ 7 1: 7 1 r . f - ), ! ,iU • 1�_ -+ �-.. f ♦ ) . !. '�. !x : '. 7 1t :^.:. t ... f i.. • s- L.: • t i :. _t. - ' xi a •.': • •. f{I -� ! -� • i1 l It;." 1t♦ . ♦ t . ! k� a ) 1 ,♦411 '. ♦ !. -. 1 _ ♦ � Gl:• S t ! ! "� f f �1 fH 't t • 1 { .ali • :/i{fil if,! •'.t /. },1 ='IA "�f f i 1 frl ♦f i ! �7/ ' iI "i • +•Mf. r Y.: t/ //.. { 1 1s 1 i 1 ♦ ,/ tlt t ;t :• i 11T. FOT i • 1 , It -. i t f '.r ♦ t ,,• f 1 _ f • : 1 f... .{.1 f1 .1♦. t ! •!• 1 { / f",. {. Ii1 .:III 1 1 / li t:..l !.: - ♦ 1 1. �• .• 4 Itl �: i ► r.. • At 1tI 1{ • .• l ' !J •� f 7 It u .. .{tt'-.• , fl.M .1 t: �:1 fiff i'"> lftf it ,l :f 1 4.♦ ,•i :._..f .._ai..f =•: of the Leape,1nd theCity of Wings .11..• 1 sponsor of theHEI-389 agreed that there was no USislative intent or statutory basis to anow counties to revoke extended Jurisdiction withoutcause,proposed 11 anotbler .. V.,t: •. 1 of the * +• ;l lltm • pl . trule. M • • ,1 tfr 41 t*. { Y tIf 11 -�'t [1 M,I ', 1 f w� ► } wf.�'-Pvje l,r: l • •A • ,1ti .^ ♦ .ili it! f :*!;•' f 1 '..{I ! !'f it/ 1 '.i. /, .� lfl. :.- t :ti �. -: 1 f f .1.•ilt f..! - • ,rl 1 ..tl .-t •� 1 't '. t, PO*1r Fax MW MI E FLATHEAD CITY/COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH MINUTES OF AUGUST MEETING AUGUST 21, 1997 2:00 - 4:00 P.M. CONFERENCE ROOM 1 / COURTHOUSE EAST MEMBERS PRESENT Al Benavides Glinda Fagan Duane Larson Connie Stein Bob Watne Val Yaholkovsky, MD KALISPELL, MONTANA MEMBERS ABSENT Vicky Smith OTHERS Lynda Blake Ron Blake Casey Blumenthal Lee Griswold Dennis Klukan Ben Long Pat McConnell Joe Russell Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Val Yaholkovsky, MD at 2:00 p.m. Attendance Approval of Agenda The agenda was approved as mailed. Approval of Minutes of June 19, 1997 MOTION Duane Larson to approve the minutes of June 19, 1997 as mailed. SECOND Al Benavides MOTION CARRIED Citizen Comments There were no citizen comments. Variance Request Hurley - Joe Russell briefly reviewed the variance request to Section 9.2 and C.8 (2) of the FCRSTS for an elevated sand mound drain field. He explained that this would replace a failing system. There were questions from the Board. Benavides asked if the system could be monitored. Russell said that it could be added as a condition if the variance was granted. MOTION Benavides to grant the variance to Section 9.2 and C.8 (2) of the FCRSTS with the condition of monitoring periodically. SECOND Larson MOTION CARRIED Blake - Russell reviewed the variance request to Section C.8 (2)(d) and C.8 (4)0) and C.8 (4) of the FCRSTS. He stated that the property is on McGregor Lake and explained the site proposal for a retaining wall. Benavides asked if there were other systems like this around. Russell said there are a few on Foys Lake. Klukan thought they were replacements for failing systems. There was concern from the Board in regards to setting a precedent. Russell said that this is a unique situation. He drew the system on the board. Benavides had concern regarding monitoring the system. Klukan asked the Blakes if they realize that if the system fails the property would have to be abandoned. Glinda Fagan stated that there is such a thing as a non -buildable lot. There was some discussion. MOTION Benavides to grant the variance to Section C.8 (2)(d) and C.8 (4)6) and C.8 (4)(k) of the FCRSTS with the condition of monitoring periodically and that an affidavit must be signed by the property owner that if the system fails it will have to be abandoned. SECOND Bob Watne For: Larson, Benavides, Watne Against: Stein, Fagan MOTION CARRIED Departmental Reports Yaholkovsky stated that he would like comments on the Environmental Health Report for scores 70 - 75. Russell stated that these are not bad scores and explained the advantages and disadvantages to the scoring system. He suggested rotating the sanitarian to different restaurants. Benavides stated that he would like to notify the public on the scores by newspaper. There was discussion regarding the State's scoring system. MOTION Benavides that the Board of Health print restaurant inspection scores in the news- paper. SECOND Fagan Connie Stein suggested publishing the critical violations instead of the score. Russell stated that he could use the comment section of his Environmental Health monthly report for critical violations. There was some discussion. Benavides stated that the Board owes it to the public for their safety. Larson said that the issue should be studied further. For: Fagan, Benavides Against: Larson, Watne, Stein MOTION NOT CARRIED MOTION Watne that the Board review Environmental Health Reports by critical violations and frequency there of. SECOND Larson MOTION CARRIED Watne suggested that this issue should be run by the County Attorney's Office. Klukan stated that Flathead County has had several E Coli cases since the last meeting. He explained that one family was sent to Washington for medical care and that none of the cases are connected to restaurants. Klukan said that Flathead County has been fortunate in that no restaurant has had cases of E Coli. Klukan stated that Joe Russell was appointed Deputy Health Officer effective August 1, 1997. The Board congratulated Russell. Klukan reviewed the letter from Stan Strom praising the work of Dick Quist. The Board congratulated Quist. Klukan reviewed the letter from the National Association of City/County Health Officials regarding the Turning Point Grant. He said that they will be visiting us on September 18 regarding our Cornerstone Project application. Klukan reviewed the letter from Dr. Michael Spence, the new State Medical Officer, regarding the breakdown of primary cancer sites and the potential spread from nuclear testing. There was some discussion. Casey Blumenthal stated that four people's terms have expired on the Home Health Advisory Board. She said that Patti Reed, Dorothea Darwall, Christopher Gill, MD, and Sue Pratt would like to be reappointed to the Board. Yaholkovsky signed their reappointment letters. Pat McConnell stated that visits were down to 1400 last month. McConnell stated that the federal government is looking at the number of visits for expenditures for Medicare and that the Home Health staff if very diligent -in that respect. There was some discussion. Yaholkovsky asked when the move was going to take place. Blumenthal stated that it still looks like October 1. Klukan reviewed the letter that the County Commissioners sent to him on June 24, 1997 regarding an increase in rental rates from $75 to $100 per room per month and stated that Yaholkovsky responded to their letter by stating that the next regular Board meeting is in August and it would be discussed then. Yaholkovsky stated that the rental rate is a 33% increase from last year. Benavides asked if there was a committee regarding this issue. Klukan stated that a committee was formed when the Commissioners first started charging rent. MOTION Fagan to pay the $100 per room on a monthly basis. Yaholkovsky stated that he did not want the rent paid for the full year, he just wanted it paid monthly. Benavides said that he wanted a committee to look at alternatives. Klukan explained that last year the rent was paid up front for the full year. MOTION Benavides to pay $75 per room for rent for the months of July, August and September. SECOND Stein Larson asked what the rate was last year. Klukan stated $75 per room. Klukan explained that it was the same increase for other non county offices. For: Benavides, Fagan, Larson, Stein Against: Watne MOTION CARRIED Benavides, Larson, and Stein were appointed to the building committee. Klukan reviewed the series of letters from the Commissioners office regarding alteration of the budget for FY 98. Yaholkovsky stated that the Budget for the Health Department was reviewed and approved by the budget committee and then by the Board of Health and then sent to the County Commissioners in mid April. There was a public hearing and the budget was approved by the Commissioners on August 6, 1997. Yaholkovsky went on to explain that, without being on the agenda, the Commissioners met regarding the Health Department budget and sent the letter dated August 7 to the Board of Health. He said that on August 12 the Commissioners sent a letter rescinding the letter dated August 7. Watne stated that what brought this on was the amount of cash reserves, and by separating these two programs the percentage of cash reserves would be changed and there would be quite a savings. Yaholkovsky said that the objective of the individuals pursuing this is to privatize Home Health, which may lower our budget figures, but will cost the patients more money. He went on to say that historically we have been charging 10% less than Kalispell Regional Hospital for services. Yaholkovsky pointed out that Home Health does not cost the taxpayers anything because costs are covered by Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurance. Yaholkovsky expressed his concern regarding the Commissioners wanting to get rid of Home Health, and then perhaps, Family Planning and various other Health Department programs. He said that the Commissioners rescinded their letter dated August 7 because they knew they had held a meeting without it being on the agenda. Watne explained that it was reversed because they could not decipher the assets and liabilities. Klukan stated that those are funds held by the County Treasurer and that this would not be an audit of the Health Department. Fagan said it was her understanding that when Home Health/Health Department was audited in 1994 it was over on the allowable for cash reserves and we were told then that something had to be done with the cash reserves. Klukan reviewed the history of Home Health and their budget. He made it clear that in the contract it's guaranteed that the only payments made to North Valley Hospital is from Medicare, Medicaid, and third party providers and that there are no county dollars going to North Valley Hospital. Klukan stated that the word `audit' in the letter dated August 12 and the letter from Nordwick, Denning and Downey is misused. He said that an audit is a review of fiscal statements based on certain principles of accounting and that has been completed every year. He explained that what is actually wanted is the determination of the amount of cash in accounts receivables and accounts payables through June 30, 1997, which is essentially a balance sheet. Klukan said that he has a copy of the final sheet from the last Medicare audit, as well as the review of the last process audit, that is a licensure audit of the Home Health Agency. Benavides asked Watne what the motive is of the Commissioners. Watne explained that they could not decide what was Health Department money and what was Home Health and that is why they asked for the audit or balance sheet, so that it could be separated next fiscal year. Watne reminded the Board that the reason this all started was because of the amount of cash reserves and stated that by separating the two there would be a reduction of 1.766 mils. Klukan stated that any business man would tell you keeping the maximum of cash reserves is a good idea. Watne stated that with it not being broken out, the cash reserves are still over the allowable amount. Klukan explained the effect this would have on the carry over and mils. Klukan figured it would be no more than an accounting trick to reduce the millage of the Board of Health. Benavides stated that it is basically monkeying with the budget. Yaholkovsky also made clear that this budget cannot be adjusted just by the County Commissioners, that this is a city/county department and it was already approved by the City Council and they were not consulted in any way about the Commissioners decisions. Watne stated that the Commissioners are not adjusting the budget, they are breaking out a section. Yaholkovsky stated that it still affects the whole picture that was presented at the budget hearings at both the City Council and the Commissioners. Fagan asked if the Board was denying Nordwick, Denning and Downey the audit or balance sheet. There was some discussion. Klukan stated that he would be glad to give the auditors any information they need, but all the information they need is at the County Treasurer Office. McConnell gave an explanation for the difference on the liabilities and assets. Benavides stated Watne was on the finance committee and approved the budget and wanted to know where Watne was when this happened at the Commissioners office. Watne explained that it was a last minute deal and it did not come from him. Benavides stated that Watne signed it. Watne stated that all three Commissioners signed the letter. Yaholkovsky clarified that two Commissioners signed the first letter and all three Commissioners signed the rescinded letter. Watne stated that one commissioner questioned the Health Department budget and that it persuaded the Commissioners Office to look further into this because there could be a substantial savings. Benavides asked if the Commissioners looked at the impact this could have on the community. There was some discussion regarding a reduction in the budget and taxes. Watne suggested that the Board have a committee to look over this and make an appointment with the Conunissioners to discuss the issue. Fagan asked why would separating the two budgets automatically mean that the Commissioners want to get rid of Home Health. Klukan stated that the Home Health license is held by the Board of Health and it is something that should be discussed between the two Boards. Watne stated that getting rid of Home Health may be the opinion of one commissioner, but there is not enough support from the rest of commissioners. Yaholkovsky stated that the Commissioners letter dated August 7 is a step in that direction. Larson asked if Watne would publicly state that he does not support getting rid of the Home Health Agency. Watne stated that he does not support this and he thinks we should watch Lake County for awhile and see how they turn out. Klukan explained that the Lake County Commissioners owned the Home Health Agency license and they decided to put it out to bid and the agency was bought by a local hospital and has no involvement with government. There was some discussion. Yaholkovsky said there is some pressure from the federal level to have regional health departments instead of city/county health departments that are not controlled by government but by independent operators. Klukan stated that he brought this information to the Board and they can make what decisions they would like. Benavides stated that it needs to be reviewed and he sees no actions being taken now. Watne asked if the Board would like to be put on the Commissioners agenda. Yaholkovsky stated that he did not feel that was necessary yet and that both sides have stated their positions and the Board will wait until the auditors are finished with their part. There was some discussion regarding Home Health's cost report and budget. Klukan stated that this partnership with a privatetpublic organizations is the most effective he has ever seen. McConnell stated that it is North Valley Hospitals mission to treat all patients regardless of their ability to pay and that is why he feels comfortable with the relationship. Meeting adjourned at 4:15 p.m. rn "dc&q Tonya M. asswater, Secretary