City Council

CITY OF POCATELLO, IDAHO CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MARCH 12, 2015 AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Mayor Brian Blad called the City Council Study Session to order ROLL CALL at 9:03 a.m. Council members present were Steve Brown, Craig Cooper, Jim Johnston, Gary Moore, Eva Johnson Nye and Michael L. Orr. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Kari Giesbrecht, Chair Person, and Judy Boren, Idaho Stars CHILD CARE ADVISORY Consultant, representing the Child Care Committee; and Jene’ COMMITTEE UPDATE Cardenas, Licensing Enforcement Officer and Staff Liaison; were present to discuss the Committee’s goals and projects, as well as Council’s policies and expectations. Ms. Cardenas reviewed the number of child care inspections completed (160 total) and noted there are 47 active day cares and 11 pre-schools currently licensed in Pocatello. Ms. Boren gave a report on the Idaho Stars programs that provide trainings for child care providers. She shared there are multiple individuals and providers that participate in their program. Ms. Boren noted 299 scholarships were approved for Pocatello Child Care Providers to attend their trainings. In all, there were 301 trainings offered with 1342 participants attending training in Pocatello during the last fiscal year. Ms. Giesbrecht outlined who the members of the Child Care Advisory Committee are. She noted the Mission of the Committee is to protect the welfare of children in the community. Ms. Giesbrecht explained staff has been working on changing the Day Care Code so it works specifically for the care of children in Pocatello. She noted Kim Stouse, previous Child Care Enforcement Officer, provided suggested updates for the code to Council in April 2013. The Advisory Committee has submitted several suggestions to Legal Department staff for the final Child Care Code revision. In response to a question from Mr. Moore, Ms. Boren feels the attendance numbers for trainings are great and the quality of Pocatello’s providers has improved as a result of the training. She mentioned some cities only require 4 hours of training per year and she has noticed the difference in the level of care based upon training hours. Discussion followed regarding inspections of day care facilities and individuals caring for children in a home setting. The City can regulate safety standards in a home once they are made aware children are being cared for in the home. It was clarified that individuals charging a fee to care for children in the home on a regular basis are required to be licensed. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Stephanie Heaton, Chair Person, Brenda Pollard and Dorcey CDBG ADVISORY Hill, Committee members, representing the Community COMMITTEE UPDATE Development Block Grant (CDBG) Committee; and Cass Fonnesbeck, Staff Liaison, were present to discuss the Committee’s goals and projects, as well as Council’s policies and expectations. Ms. Heaton gave an overview of the Committee’s accomplishments in CDBG Program Year 2014. It was noted that nine (with one new application pending) rehabs for owner-occupied housing were completed. These projects included roofs, water and sewer lines; and lead-based paint stabilization. Ms. Heaton mentioned two individual sidewalk projects have been completed. The Committee will oversee Program Year 2014 projects for the following organizations: Aid For Friends, Family CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION 2 MARCH 12, 2015 Services Alliance and a sidewalk replacement project in the College Neighborhood. Ms. Heaton thanked staff for assisting the Committee with processing complex applications and understanding funding guidelines. In response to questions from Council, Ms. Pollard, explained Habitat For Humanity is working with Pocatello Neighborhood Works, along with many other organizations to improve Pocatello’s neighborhoods. Ms. Hill feels the CDBG program has had amazing results. Idaho State University students and other individuals seeking housing in Pocatello are treated well. She mentioned staff is very knowledgeable of HUD and Fair Housing rules. Ms. Fonnesbeck noted staff continues to provide education materials for landlords regarding Fair Housing. She explained staff will remain proactive concerning Fair Housing issues. AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Shelley Stayner, representative from Mercer; and Kim Smith, MERCER MARKETPLACE Human Resource Director, and Nicole Harms, Human Resource –INSURANCE BENEFITS Consultant; were present to discuss Mercer Market Place, a PRESENTATION private exchange, as an alternative way to provide insurance benefits to the City. This presentation will focus on long-term and short-term benefits for City employees. Staff is seeking Council’s direction to research the proposed benefits. A future presentation will be prepared to provide an update of their findings. Mrs. Smith stated the City has worked with Mercer for 13 years to achieve affordable employee benefits. The Marketplace Private Exchange is another option for Council to consider when considering medical needs for employees. Mrs. Smith feels the Exchange gives employees more choices to personalize their health benefits. She noted that the technology platforms are cost effective because they remove a lot of the administration work load. Ms. Stayner explained Mercer is a global company and reviewed how their medical programs have changed based upon healthcare reform. It was noted overall medical expenses are increasing. Mercer representatives went to the regional health insurance carriers and gave the perimeters that Mercer desired. As a result, the MarketPlace was developed by those who responded. Instead of one benefit program, employees will now have a choice. Employees will be able to make choices to personalize their benefit plan. Council discussion followed regarding location of the call center employees will use for the plan, eligibility determination, and long-term care benefits not being offered. In response to questions from Council, Ms. Stayner explained Mercer partners with many healthcare providers and are pushing for more transparency from these medical providers. Efforts are being made to get providers on board to disclose more of their costs so individuals know what type of healthcare plan they need. The network of providers is very broad and will be based upon the City’s decision to move forward. Ms. Stayner noted if there is a 10% to 15% reduction in employees utilizing the program, Mercer would need to re-write the plan. Ms. Smith explained Human Resource staff recommends moving forward with the proposed program. She feels it will keep employee costs down and also save the City money. If Council would like to move forward with the plan, the suggested start date would be October 1, 2015. CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION 3 MARCH 12, 2015 Discussion followed regarding the need to research various healthcare plans that will be available for employees. Cost estimates will be based upon the amount of employee contributions and percentage of what the City pays. Ms. Stayner announced Mercer will need a letter of intent so insurance carriers know the City is serious about considering them as a benefit provider. She added that the carriers have agreed to cover the cost of implementation for the City. Mrs. Nye noted the City will be starting the budget process shortly and would like to have the cost to implement the proposed health programs in order to consider the costs during the budget meetings. In response to questions from Council, Ms. Stayner explained the employee’s choices will be narrowed down to 3 carriers with benefit plans. That is the sample breakdown of benefits that will be made available. More discussion followed regarding requirements related to signing a letter of intent. Council did not feel comfortable signing a letter of intent without additional information. It was the consensus of the Council to review the wording of the letter of intent before making a decision of how to move forward with the program. Kirk Bybee, City Civil Attorney/Risk Manager, clarified the City has an existing agreement with Mercer regarding health insurance benefits. The current agreement allows Mercer to act as the City’s agent to explore these issues. In closing, Ms. Stayner stated the Market Place program is set up with a commission built into all of the insurance rates. The commission earned by Market Place covers the cost to implement the program. As a result, the current agreement would be replaced with the Market Place agreement if Council chooses to move forward with the plan. Mayor Blad called a recess at 10:29 a.m. Mayor Blad reconvened the meeting at 11:04 a.m. AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Mike Jaglowski, Public Works Director, and Deirdre Castillo, ALAMEDA ROAD City Engineer, were present to summarize the written and verbal /JEFFERSON AVENUE public comments regarding the Redesign Concepts of the INTERSECTION UPDATE Alameda/Jefferson Intersection. Comments have been collected from three separate public outreach meetings hosted by the City and Idaho Transportation Department. The meetings were held on Saturday, November 28, 2014; Saturday, December 6, 2014; and Tuesday December 9, 2014. An informational presentation will be provided to Council for the consideration by staff. Mr. Jaglowski gave an overview of the following: 1) public meeting questionnaire analysis; 2) summary of comments for each of the proposed alternatives; and 3) City funding and project budget for the project. Mr. Jaglowski reported approximately 191 public contacts and 87 comment forms were received regarding the project. The following is a small sample of the questionnaire answers as a result of the public meetings. 1) Have you experienced excessive delay or had safety concerns while traveling through the CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION 4 MARCH 12, 2015 intersection? 59 respondents answered yes. 24 answered no. 2) How often do you travel through the intersection in an average week? 66 stated they travel 10 times or more and 13 stated they travel 5 to 10 times; 3) Please rank the three evaluation criteria that you think are most important. Ranking from attendees: No. 1 safety; No. 2 traffic operations; and No. 3 access locations. 4) Which alterative do you prefer and why? 26 chose no-build; 31 alternative 12A; 13 Alternative 14A; and 17 did not choose an alternative. Mr. Jaglowski felt the public meetings were well attended and all comments received have been taken into account. He was told that the public appreciated the City’s efforts to keep them informed and receive their input regarding the intersection. Mr. Jaglowski listed the following outcomes from the meetings: a) Public comments represented mixed emotions to alternatives and solutions; b) City received more public participation and comments than expected; c) there was not an overwhelming support for one alternative; and d) major businesses and property owners have made extra efforts to understand the project. Staff is still receiving calls asking if comments may be submitted. Mr. Jaglowski noted representatives from Foothill Plaza businesses and Maverick Country Store have recently provided comments. In response to questions from Council, Mr. Jaglowski shared his professional experience with similar projects. He noted that typically you will have one alternative that is very evident. Mr. Jaglowski reviewed the final comments. They revealed that 75% of respondents indicated a change should be made to the intersection; 66% of the respondents feel safety is the highest concern at the intersection; and 62% of the respondents indicated that a better solution could be found or they provided another alternative to correct the issue. Discussion followed outlining funding options for the construction project and estimated costs. It was noted the existing budget for the project is $4.3 million for right-of-way acquisition and construction; Alternative 12A would be $5.8 million to $7.0 million; and Alternative 14A would be $7.2 to $8.8 million to complete. Council discussion continued in order to give direction to City staff on which alternative to pursue. It was determined that no clear solution to the issue can be identified at this time. It was the consensus of the Council to have staff complete an environmental document for the site and then decide how to proceed. In response to questions from Council, Ms. Castillo clarified there is a 10-year time limit to use the funds received to complete the intersection project. The funds were acquired and a portion was spent in 2009 to start the alternative concept design. As a result, the City has until 2019 to complete the project or jeopardize losing the funds. AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Mike Jaglowski, Public Works Director; Hannah Sanger, Science PORTNEUF VALLEY and Environment Division Manager; and Merril Quayle, STORMWATER DESIGN Development Engineer; were present to give a brief overview MANUAL UPDATE regarding updates to the City’s stormwater design criteria, including the Portneuf Valley Stormwater Design manual and enacting the code. Mrs. Sanger identified the partners that helped put the stormwater manual together. She mentioned the draft manual was distributed to other engineers to obtain their feedback and place their suggestions into the manual. Mrs. Sanger noted the next step would be adoption of the proposed stormwater manual. CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION 5 MARCH 12, 2015 Discussion followed regarding the flooding that took place when heavy rains hit Pocatello in the summer of 2014. It was noted that the 12 inch water pipes in place were not able to handle the large amounts of water resulting from the storm. Since the City is not able to upgrade the pipes, staff is looking at other ways to control stormwater. It was mentioned the Portneuf River does not run clear so staff must be more aware of what is distributed into the river. In response to questions from Council, Mrs. Sanger reviewed proposed changes in the 2015 Manual. The changes include: 1) Clear and consistent information regarding submittal requirements and the enforcement process; 2) requirements for treatment of stormwater are site specific soil properties at the site; 3) requirements for detention and retention of stormwater are similar to the previous requirements, but allow use of standard hydrologic analysis methods. Requirement are more stringent in areas with flooding concerns; 4) requirements for source control are based on existing code, including the Illicit Discharge Ordinance (8.48); 5) requirements for erosion and sediment control are based on existing code, including the Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance (8.44); and 6) requirements for Operations and Maintenance are similar to the 2010 manual, but now apply to all stormwater facilities. It was noted that it has rained less in Pocatello than predicted 50 years ago. However, The City still has flooding problems and needs to update the Pocatello Stormwater Masterplan based upon new data. It was announced a new federal stormwater permit is anticipated in 2015 or 2016. The new permit requirements will drive additional changes to the City’s Stormwater Design Manual and may impact Capital Improvement Project rankings. AGENDA ITEM NO. 7: Mike Jaglowski, Public Works Director; Hannah Sanger, Science LEVEE ACCREDITATION and Environment Division Manager, Tom Kirkman Street UPDATE Superintendent; and Deirdre Castillo, City Engineer; were present to give a brief update on levee accreditation by FEMA and resulting floodplain mapping. City staff seeks Council guidance on funding a certification study of the downstream portion of Reach 2 levees (Sand Trap to Centennial Park on the east side of the Portneuf River) in order to limit the number of homes FEMA maps into the floodplain when FEMA redraws Pocatello’s floodplain maps in the next few years. Mr. Jaglowski explained the current levee is designed to carry an existing river. The amount of rainfall we currently receive has changed and the river carries less precipitation than it has in the past. In order to have FEMA accredit a section of the levee, a levee certification study will be required for the downstream section of Reach 2. Mr. Jaglowski mentioned FEMA began creating new floodplain insurance maps for Pocatello in 2014. He reviewed anticipated floodplain mapping results. Reach 2 and 3 will not have homes mapped into the floodplain due to the analysis of flooding from the Portneuf River. However, an estimated 16 homes and one school will be mapped into the floodplain of Reach 2 (downstream) due to FEMA’s analysis of flooding from the Portneuf River. Council discussion began regarding the following options: No 1. Certification study - City pays for a certification study for Reach 2 (downstream) anticipated results: FEMA accepts the certification study accredits the levee and no homes within Reach 2 are placed into the flood plain; probable costs: City $45,000.00 (estimated) affected property owners will be ZERO; No. 2 No action - Anticipated results: in 3 years 16 homes and 1 school would be mapped into the floodplain; Probable costs City ZERO. Affected property owners would be $1,000.00 per year flood insurance without a basement, $1,700.00 for flood insurance with a basement, upwards of $5,000.00 per year for the school; No. 3 complete Portneuf River masterplan (in progress) - Anticipated results : defers CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION 6 MARCH 12, 2015 decision for 18 months. Will provide guidance on community vision related to the river for the area. Probable costs – same as Option No. 2. Mr. Jaglowski reviewed the current Portneuf River levee situation. He noted annual levee maintenance costs could be less. However, it would depend on input by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. It was the consensus of the Council for staff to take steps toward the certification study for Reach 2 (downstream) and then determine the next step. AGENDA ITEM NO. 8: At 12:52 p.m. Mayor Blad and Council members Brown, WORKING LUNCH Cooper, Johnston, Moore, Nye and Orr left the Council Chambers and participated in a working lunch in the Paradice Conference Room. Discussion centered on insurance options, economic development and general City topics. No formal action was taken. Mayor Blad adjourned the meeting at 2:10 p.m. APPROVED: BRIAN C. BLAD, MAYOR ATTEST: RUTH E. WHITWORTH, CMC, CITY CLERK