HomeMy Public PortalAboutMinutes_CCSpecialMeeting_08262014CITY OF IONA
AMENDED PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City Council for the City of Iona will conduct a
public hearing on August 26, 2014, at 7:15 pm at the Iona Community Center, which is located
at 3548 North Main Street, Iona, Idaho. The purpose of the hearing is to consider the annexation
and initial zoning of the Nu'R Subdivision, a Bonneville County Subdivision located on 45th East
(Crowley Road) between East Lincoln Road and East Iona Road. If such annexation is granted,
the proposed zoning of the property will be R-1 and the Comprehensive Plan will be amended
with the designation of such area as Residential, as provided in such Plan.
The Nu'R Subdivision is more particularly described, as follows:
Beginning at the Northwest Corner of Section 12 T2N R38 E.B.M. and running
thence N 89'39'35" E along the Section line 421.00 feet; thence S 0'05'05" W
277.44 feet; thence N 88'21'35" E 35.44 feet; thence S 0'05'05" W 1000 feet;
thence N 88'21'35" E 187.40 feet; thence S 0'05'05" W 860.00 feet; thence S
88'21'35" W 644.00 feet to a point on the West line of said Section 12, said point
being N 0'05'05" E 475.00 feet from the West Quarter Corner of said Section 12;
thence N 0'05'05" E along the Section line 2147.00 feet to the point of beginning,
containing 25.914 Acres.
NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that on the 9th day of July, 2014, the Iona Planning and
Zoning Commission unanimously recommended that the Nu'R Subdivision be annexed into the
City of Iona and that the said property be zoned as R-A (Residential Agricultural).
The public is invited to attend and public comment is encouraged. Written comments
will be accepted and considered, provided they are delivered no later than three full business
days prior to the hearing. Such comments must be physically delivered to the Office of the City
Clerk at 3548 North Main Street, Iona, Idaho. Comments may also be emailed to the following
email address: iona@cityofiona.org. A copy of the Annexation Plan for the proposed
annexation may also be obtained from the City Clerk's office.
Any person needing special accommodations to participate in such meetings should
contact the City Clerk's Office no later than the day prior to the meeting. The City Clerk's
telephone number is 523-5600.
DATED this 23`1 day July, 2014.
Julie - ammond
Cit Clerk
Mailed: July 25, 2014 & August 8, 2014
Posted: July 25, 2014 & August 15, 2014
Published: July 27, 2014 & August 10, 2014
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
NU'R SUBDIVISION ANNEXATION PUBLIC HEARING
AUGUST 26, 2014 — 7:00 P.M.
IONA COMMUNITY CENTER
PRESENT: Mayor Brad Andersen, Council President Robyn Walker, Council Member Rob Geray,
Council Member Dan Gubler, Council Member Kathy McNamara, Public Works Director Zech
Prouse, Police Chief Shannon Basaraba, City Clerk Julie Hammond, and City Attorney Dale W.
Storer.
ABSENT: Building Inspector Allen Eldridge, and Treasurer Amy Sullivan.
VISITORS: Angie Huntsman, Roger Gundert, Lawrence Burke, Vicki Burnham, Dillon Young,
Dixie Young, Roby Hansen, Krista Stafford, Nate Rowley, Joyce Scott, Larry Scott, Rob Hawkins,
Shellie Edwards, Jack Edwards, Rod Moore, Teresa Moore, Nicole Seda, James Boone, Ina
Nordstrom, Jeny Nordstrom, Jim Baster, Dana Andersen, Beau Bunnell, Bonnie Bunnell, Brad
Nielsen, Jim Brook, Ian Archibald, Anya Wilson, Cody Nealis, J.W., Debbie Cramer, M.T.
McNamara, David M. Taylor, Sherri Gardner, Sandy Geray, Austin Geray, Shad Dunthorn, Sunnie
Dunthorn, Sally Price, Jack Depperschmidt, Ryan Walker, Dean Stevens, Deanne Stevens, Clay
Kappas, Aubrey Wieber, Vicki Killian, Marilyn Sargent, David Huntsman, Stuart Rubio, Jinger
Coombs, Christy Abbott, Mike Coombs, B.J. Driscoll, Craig Hansen, Michael Waters, Jeromy
Stafford, Sharla Mann, Alma Stumpp, Trina Stumpp, Doug Tolbert, Greg Hansen, Rodney Bell,
Steven Stewart, Traci Mockli, Glen Clark, Dale Nealis, RosAnn Nealis, Jay Johnson, Tom Lugo,
Karen Lugo, Wade Gardner, J.D. Byerly, Kami Byerly, Carolyn Depperschmidt, Roger B. Killian, Lori
Davies, Jolyn Louk, Troy Cook, K. Baldwin, and Mandie Davies.
Mayor Andersen welcomed everyone and Council Member McNamara led with the Pledge of
Allegiance.
Mayor Andersen called the Special City Council Meeting to order and took a roll call vote:
Council President Walker — Yes Council Member Geray — Yes
Council Member Gubler — Yes Council Member McNamara — Yes
Mayor Andersen expressed his appreciation for citizen interest and information provided during the
Planning & Zoning Public Hearing regarding the Nu'r Subdivision Annexation. He stated it is truly
democracy in action. Mayor Andersen's written remarks were marked as "Exhibit AM" and admitted
into the record.
Mayor Andersen further stated that he recognizes that a majority of the Nu'r Subdivision Residents
strongly object to the proposed annexation. He had informally visited with each Council Member and
he felt there was a general sentiment among the Council Members to deny the Nu'r Subdivision
Annexation. For that reason, it was his intent to entertain a motion from Council to that effect, but he
would first like to explain some considerations and hear Council's comments that brought us to this
point.
Mayor Andersen explained urban growth and its effect on cities. He referenced the Idaho Local Land
Use Planning Act (Idaho Code § 67-6502(f)) and explained that the public policy therein encouraging
urban development within incorporated cities was in -part what drove the Council to consider the
1
rs
annexation. He had hoped that the Nu'r Residents would see the benefits that could come from the
annexation, but unfortunately that was not the case. Until the Idaho Legislature creates equal taxes for
cities and counties, we will continue to have this problem.
Mayor Andersen then asked for Council comment.
Council President Keyes echoed Mayor Andersen's comments and supported his sentiments.
Council Member McNamara wished things had happened differently and expressed her difficulty in
making decisions with her head or her heart.
Council Member Gubler explained his perception that the matter involved a determination of what was
in the best interest of the City versus what was in the best interest of the individual residents. He
explained that at the inception of the Nu'r Subdivision, it was platted with the intent to be a part of
Iona.
Council Member Geray stated he had received a notice on his door indicating it was Iona's objective to
continue growth to the North Yellowstone Highway. He wanted to make clear that this was
misinformation and that Iona only intended to expand its impact area in an attempt to regulate urban
growth within the unincorporated areas of Bonneville County immediately surrounding the City.
Council Member Geray read a prepared statement which was marked as "Exhibit AN". He explained
that at his workplace they go by Principles of the Program and one of the principles was to "Face Facts
Brutally" which he went on to explain to the Nu'r Residents.
Bonneville County Zoning RA-1 has similar large animal limitations comparable to the City of Iona's
Zoning.
Law enforcement; crime currently drops off sharply at 45th East. County law enforcement attributes
this to two things; Iona's local law enforcement and the 'A mile width of land between residential
developments west of 45th and 45th itself The Green Valley Subdivision will bridge this land which
could potentially increase crime within the unincorporated area.
The Bonneville County Comprehensive Plan categorizes the Nu'r Subdivision and Green Valley as
"Urban Residential" as opposed to the rural lifestyle Nu'r Residents prefer.
Nu'r Residents' biggest concern was the rising property taxes that would come from the annexation.
Council Member Geray then offered an analogy explaining how taxpayers pay for the use of
governmental services.
Mayor Andersen entertained a motion. Council Member Gubler moved to deny the Nu'r Subdivision
Annexation without further consideration or public testimony. Council President Walker seconded the
motion. The Nu'r Subdivision Category B Annexation was denied by roll call vote as follows:
Council President Walker — Yes
Council Member Gubler — Yes
Upon motion being made, seconded, and
Council Member Geray — Yes
Council Member McNamara - Yes
approved, the me
ng wa
?G�
djourned at 7:37 p.m.
2
MAYOR'S OPENING COMMENTS
Nu'R Subdivision Annexation
August 26, 2014
I. Introduction
A. Express appreciation for citizen interest and attendance at public hearing
B. Express appreciation for information provided at the P&Z hearing, as well as
written comments provided in advance of tonight's hearing.
C. The annexation procedure in which we are currently engaged is truly an
example of democracy in action. The annexation statute provides for a public
hearing whereby citizens are afforded a venue to voice their concerns and
provide information to their elected representatives on the matter. The statute
also requires the City to provide certain information regarding the Annexation
to the residents affected by the annexation in order to allow them to make an
informed decision as to what is in their best interest.
D. We have followed such process. Tonight's hearing is the culmination of that
process. The process contemplated by the annexation statute is very similar
to a courtroom trial. The statute provides for an orderly process for submitting
testimony and evidence to the Council and the Council, acting as a whole,
functions very much like a trial judge who weighs the testimony and evidence
and then makes a decision based upon the record and upon their belief as to
what lies in the best interest of the City, as well as the residents affected by the
proposed annexation. The statute also provides a means for judicial review the
Council's decision if any resident is dissatisfied with such decision.
E. The Council respects that process and has made every effort to comply with
the statute and to provide the citizens with the information upon which they
might be able to determine their position on the matter.
II. Summary of Mayor's Assessment of Current Council Sentiment
A. Many of you may believe the Council has already made up its mind to annex
the Nu'R Subdivision and that the hearing process is an exercise in futility. I
assure you that is not the case.
B. The Council has spent a great amount of time in examining this issue and in
weighing the recommendations received from the Planning and Zoning
Commission, considering the citizen comments made at the P&Z hearing and
in reviewing the written comments received in advance of this hearing. Nearly
Exhibit "AM"
f
all of you have expressed strong objections to the proposed annexation and I
believe the Council would be remiss in summarily dismissing those objections.
The Council has the difficult task of determining what is in the best interest of
the City while at the same time weighing and giving proper consideration to
the strong objections voiced by the residents of the Nu'R Subdivision. This
has not been an easy task nor one that the City Council takes lightly.
C. I have informally visited with all members of the City Council and based upon
these discussions I believe there is a general sentiment at this point to deny the
annexation of the Nu'R Subdivision and it is my intent to call for a motion to
that effect, rather than proceeding with the hearing. If that motion passes,
there will be no further need for the hearing or need to further consider the
matte
A.
'R-Stubd ision-
Before making such motion, I would like to explain some of the considerations
that brought us to this point.` /? h�L�
10
l . Urban growth is an inevitable and inescapable fact. Some would take
the position that growth is not desirable, and that a "no growth" policy
will preserve our way of life. In my judgment, such "no growth"
policies are naive and ultimately redound to the detriment of
communities who adopt them. Growth does and will inevitably occur
— it is only a matter of whether or not the growth occurs inside the City
or within the County. If you do not believe that phenomena, all you
have to do is take a drive around Bonneville County and see how many
County subdivisions have been developed within this County in the past
ten years. One can quickly see that if the status quo continues, cities in
Bonneville County will soon be surrounded by rural subdivisions over
which they have no control and little input into the manner in which
such subdivisions are developed. Such type of urban growth, while
regulated by rural development standards, can and does impact cities.
It affects city roads, city parks and the delivery of fire and emergency
services. Conversely, if growth occurs inside city boundaries, it
enables cities to provide urban services on a more economical basis,
due to the economies of scale that can be realized when urban services
serve compact, more densely populated areas. Simply stated, "no
growth" policies ultimately cause interior urban decay and diminish
property values as time goes by and cities become less and less able to
serve the core urban areas.
-2-
2. The Idaho Local Land Use Planning Act specifically recognizes that
reality. Specifically, the Land Use Planning Act states that one of its
purposes is to "encourage urban and urban -type development within
incorporated cities." (See Idaho Code § 67-6502(f))
3. I believe these considerations are what drove the City Council in this
case to propose the annexation of the Nu'R Subdivision. Quite clearly,
without such annexation, Iona's ability to grow and expand to the west
will grind to screeching halt. Urban growth west of Crowley Road will
undoubtedly continue, but it will be regulated and controlled entirely by
the County. Iona will have little say in the way in which such growth
is managed and developed other than a very limited amount of control
under its Area of Impact Agreement.
4. These important public policy considerations are what drove the City
Council in this case to put the matter before the public for consideration
and solicitation of public input.
5. I believe the City Council sincerely hoped the Nu'R Subdivision
residents would see the benefits that could come from annexation and
wold thus support the annexation. These benefits would include (i) a
well -established water system and elimination of future repair and
maintenance expenses, (ii) access to City parks and recreation programs
at reduced rates, (iii) being part of a community which supports many
youth programs, social events and cultural events.
IV. Deference to Nu'R Subdivision Residents' Wishes
A. That being said, the Nu'R Subdivision residents have spoken loudly and
clearly and have emphatically stated their desire not to be annexed. Although
the City Council takes issue with many of the malicious characterizations of
their motives for annexation, the City Council does respect the democratic
process and does not wish to impose its will upon County residents who wish
to have no part of the community. The City Council respects and understands
the subdivision residents' sentiments and recognizes the large amount of ill -
will that would be created should they go forward with this annexation — at
least such is my assessment of the Council's perspective at the present time.
B. At this point, I would inquire of the Council member if they wish to add to my
comments.
-3-
\A
P/1" 465
1
%(✓
Cyt
°A;Of‘n5 1"‘
In v
C. Based upon the foregoing, I would entertain a motion that the annexation be
denied at this time, without moving forward with further testimony or
evidence. (Assuming such motion is made and seconded, request the City
Clerk to take a roll call vote).
GAWPDATAIDW8\2708 City of Iota\ANNEX\2014\Nu'r Addition Annezatimatayors Comments.wpd3m
-4-
Nu'R Annexation Statement (Council Member Geray)
Throughout this process, I have learned some interesting things about human behavior. One of
these things is how people, who have friends or neighbors they've known and trusted for years,
can suddenly believe that friend or neighbor is out to get them and destroy their way of life.
They resort to name calling and equating their friends to Hitler or placing this annexation in the
same context as the 1838 Missouri executive order to exterminate or drive out Mormons.
I understand the lack of trust people have in government right now. I sometimes have trouble
trusting the federal government myself. But we're talking about locally elected officials, who
are your friends and neighbors, not some bureaucrat who's isolated in Washington, DC.
I work with the Navy's Nuclear Propulsion Program out at the site. Some of my co-workers are
part of the Nu'R subdivision. In the program, we have some guiding principles we call the
Principles of the Program. One of these principles is to "Face Facts Brutally." My co-workers
will be familiar with this phrase. "Face Facts Brutally" means we don't candy coat the issues or
pretend the issue is something other than what it really is. I would like to take this opportunity to
face some facts brutally.
1. Based on letters received, one of the issues Nu'R residents have with annexation is that you
won't be able to do anything you want with your land anymore. FACT: you already can't do
anything you want with your land. Per Bonneville County's zoning map, the Nu'R subdivision
is zoned as an RA-1 zone. Believe it or not, the county also has ordinances that limit the use of
your land. (Read excerpt from Bonneville County ordinance.) Since most lots in the Nu'R
subdivision are about 42,000 square feet or less, the most large animals, such as horses or cows,
you would be allowed to have is two. Anyone having more than two is violating the current
county ordinance. You may have an exception for a non -conforming use, but that would be the
same allowance you would have being annexed into the city.
2. Based on letters received, Nu'R residents don't need any additional law enforcement...the
county provides you with everything you need. FACT: crime currently drops off sharply at 45th
East. We can only speculate why this is the case, but reports from county law enforcement
officials attribute it to two things: our local law enforcement and the '/2 mile or so wide strip of
land between existing residential developments west of 45t" and 45t" itself. With the ongoing
development of that same strip of land, now the Green Valley subdivision, a bridge will be
created that has the potential to result in an increase in crime east of 45t". I hope the county can
maintain the same level of law enforcement service that the Nu'R residents are reportedly
accustomed to.
3. Based on letters received, the Nu'R residents prefer the rural lifestyle associated with not
being in the city. FACT: the area of land which includes Green Valley and the corresponding
land north of Iona Road is currently zoned by the county as R-1.5 which allows lots as small as
6,000 square feet for a single family residence. That's 0.14 acres. The only thing preventing the
lots from actually being that small is the City of Iona Impact Agreement with the county.
Whether we like it or not, the area is growing. The county recognizes this because another fact is
that the Bonneville County Comprehensive Plan map categorizes the areas of Nu'R and Green
Valley as "Urban Residential."
Exhibit "AN"
Nu'R Annexation Statement (Council Member Gerav)
4. Based on letters received, it appears that the Nu'R residents' number one concern about being
annexed is the rise in property taxes and nothing to show for it. I'll concede that, largely because
of the almost purely residential nature of Iona, we don't have a lot of sales and other tax base to
provide a lot of other services beyond those already presented, primarily water, law enforcement,
animal control, parks, and the library. To comment on that concern, let me close with an
analogy.
There was once a community of residents who decided to get together and have their own water
system. The community got along great together and felt that it could work out well so they
didn't have to rely on anyone else for their water. Another neighbor adjacent to the community
thought it would be okay to tap into the community's water system, figuring they wouldn't really
notice or have a problem with it since they weren't paying by the gallon anyway. Time went by
and eventually the community did find out about the neighbor using their water system, but they
didn't think too much about it. One day the community's water pump broke and it was going to
cost about $20,000 to replace it. So the community went to the adjacent neighbor to ask for his
share. At this point the adjacent neighbor said, "Why should I help pay to replace the pump, it's
not my water system." The community residents were understandably aggravated by this
response, but simply stated, "Because you use the water."
The Nu'R residents say that many of the Iona City residents are no more in favor of the
annexation than the Nu'R residents. To that I say, "They haven't had to foot the bill yet." As
the surrounding area continues to grow and some Nu'R and other non -Iona residents invariably
end up using at least some of Iona's infrastructure, who's going to pay the bill for the wear and
tear? The citizens of Iona, your friends and neighbors? How fair is that?