HomeMy WebLinkAbout02 20 2019 CMCITY OF CHUBBUCK
COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
FEBRUARY 20, 2019 — 6:00PM
LOCATED AT
CHUBBUCK CITY HALL
5160 YELLOWSTONE AVE.
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor England.
PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG: Councilmember Hernandez.
INVOCATION: Reverend Jenny Peek from the Pocatello Unitarian Universalist Fellowship.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
AMEND COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 6, 2019 (Action Item).
GENERAL BUSINESS:
1. Recognition of PW Employees Ryan Sullivan & Terry Udy.
2. Approval of Chubbuck-Pocatello Intergovernmental Agreement. (Action Item)
(Council will discuss IGA related to Pocatello/PDA creation of Northgate URA).
3. Adoption of Ordinance XXX Transfer of Powers. (Action Item)
(Council will discuss adoption of ordinance to transfer power for creation or URA to Pocatello/PDA).
4. Adoption of Ordinance XXX Capital Plans and Impact Fees. (Action Item).
(Council will discuss changes to 17.16 and adding 17.24 to City code).
(Or the Council will discuss adding 17. 28 to City code).
5. Approval of Intergovernmental Transfer of Personal Property. (Action Item)
(Council will discuss the transfer of property from the CPD to the Bannock County Sherriff Office).
6. Adoption of Resolution XXX Reimbursement of Costs. (Action Item).
(Council will discuss reimbursement of certain reimbursable expenditures with the New City Hall).
7. Approval to Appoint Ernie Moser to the Chubbuck Development Authority. (Action
Item). (The council will discuss an appointment to the Chubbuck Development Authority Board).
8. Adoption of Ordinance XXX Elected Officials Salaries. (Action Item).
(Council will discuss the appropriate salary for elected officials).
CLAIMS:
1. City of Chubbuck claims for February 20, 2019 as presented to Mayor England and
Council. (Action Item).
GENERAL ANNOUNCEMENTS:
ADJOURN:
City Hall and the City Council Chambers are accessible for persons with disabilities. Any person needing special accommodations to participate
in the meeting should contact City Clerk, Rich Morgan at 208.237.2400 at least 24 hours prior to the meeting.
CITY OF CHUBBUCK
COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MINUTES
FEBRUARY 6, 2019 — 4:OOPM
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor England
COUNCIL PRESENT: Ryan Lewis, Melanie Evans, Roger Hernandez, and Annette Baumeister.
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Kevin England, City Attorney Tom Holmes, Public Works
Director Rodney Burch, Human Resource Director Scott Gummersall, Police Chief Bill
Guiberson, Fire Chief Merlin Miller, Streets & Sanitation Supervisor Paul Hathaway, City Clerk
Rich Morgan, and Deputy Clerk Joey Bowers.
GENERAL BUSINESS:
1- Update from the Regional Economic Development for Eastern Idaho (REDI).
Dana Kirkham, CEO, Regional Economic Development for Eastern Idaho (REDI)
gave an update on what REDI is working on, and what they have to offer the City of
Chubbuck in conjunction with Bannock Development. REDI is working on a survey to
define Eastern Idaho, so REDI knows what Eastern Idaho has to offer to attract
businesses, maintain workforce, and identify the regions five key industries.
2- Discussion with the Pocatello Development Authority (PDA).
Meghan Conrad from Elam & Burke represented the Pocatello Development
Authority (PDA). The PDA had completed an urban renewal eligibility study at the same
time the City of Chubbuck annexed some of the land that was involved in that study. The
PDA would like to work with the City of Chubbuck and the Chubbuck Development
Authority (CDA) to do a transfer of powers on the roadway and interchange only; so that
the PDA can use its urban renewal district to reimburse the PDA for funds invested in the
interchange as originally planned.
3- Update from the Streets & Sanitation Departments.
Streets & Sanitation Supervisor Paul Hathaway gave an update on services provided,
his vision for these departments in the future, and his plan to bring the City's sidewalks
and streets into ADA compliance.
4- Update on the SAUSA and HIDTA programs.
Mayor England gave an update on the successes of the Special Assistant United States
Attorney (SAUSA) and the High Intensity Drug Traffic Area (HIDTA) programs. Mayor
England stated that these programs are some of the most successful programs the City of
Chubbuck has ever participated in.
ADJOURN: Mayor Kevin England adjourned at 5:40.
CITY OF CHUBBUCK
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
FEBRUARY 6, 2019 — 6:00PM
LOCATED AT
CHUBBUCK CITY HALL
5160 YELLOWSTONE AVE.
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor England.
PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG: Scouts BSA Troop 384
INVOCATION: Tony Seikel from the Portneuf Sangha
COUNCIL PRESENT: Ryan Lewis, Melanie Evans, Roger Hernandez, and Annette Baumeister.
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Kevin England, City Attorney Tom Holmes, Public Works
Director Rodney Burch, Human Resource Director Scott Gummersall, Police Chief Bill
Guiberson, Fire Chief Merlin Miller, Planning and Development Director Devin Hillam,
City Clerk Rich Morgan, and Deputy Clerk Joey Bowers.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: January 16, 2019.
Councilmember Baumeister motioned for approval of the Council Meeting minutes.
Councilmember Evans seconded motion for approval of minutes.
Roll Call: Hernandez -yes, Evans -yes, Baumeister -yes, Lewis -yes, motion passed.
PUBLIC HEARING:
1. An application for a Preliminary Planned United Development (PUD) called Sunset Townhomes
which includes the re -designation of approximately 9.4 acres of land for 88 residential units.
Location is 4933 Whitaker Road, Chubbuck, ID 83202, within SE % of Section 3, Township 6 South,
Range 34, of the Boise Meridian, Bannock County. Current zoning designation is Limited
Residential (R-2) and Industrial (1). Proposal will be evaluated against criteria established in
municipal code 18.20.110 and Idaho Code 67-6511. The Land Use and Development Commission
reviewed the application and recommended denial.
Councilmember Baumeister recused herself from General Business Items 1 & 2.
Blake Jolley from Connect Engineering represented the applicant. Mr. Jolley presented an 88
unit single story one car garage residential townhomes PUD (4-plexes and 6-plexes), and stated
this development would remain under one ownership. The Developer had a neighborhood
meeting and made some changes to the application after that meeting. Some of the changes
included a 6ft privacy fence, and an access onto Chubbuck Rd.
BJ Driscoll legal counsel for the developer. Mr. Driscoll felt like the message from Idaho State
code on planned unit developments (PUD) is "flexibility". In Channel Northcrest Columbus
Action Committee vs. The City of Boise; the Idaho Supreme Court's 2002 opinion was that the
purpose of a PUD is to allow for flexibility in planning, which should be prohibited if the
developer doesn't meet the requirements set forth in the ordinance. Mr. Driscoll presented City
of Chubbuck code 18.08.01 OJ land use chapter which defines a PUD as its own zoning district.
In the City's PUD Ordinance it states a maximum choice of living environments, a variety of
housing types, permitting an increase density, more useful patterns of open space and
recreational areas, preserving the natural features, and a more efficient use. Mr. Driscoll stated
this development meets the requirements set forth in Idaho code for flexibility; and the City of
Chubbuck's ordinance, comprehensive plan, and historical perspective/precedence.
Councilmember Lewis thinks every application is factually different and the decisions made
by a quasi-judicial body is if an application had met its burden of proof. Precedence is helpful
but what is important is the proof provided to that body.
Planning and Development Director Devin Hillam went over City Code, and stated that this
application meets the historical interpretations of City Code and recommended approval.
Councilmember Hernandez wanted to know how exactly the Land Use and Development
Commission determined that this application did not met City Codes. Mr. Hillam stated that
contentions were made that this application did not met the definitions of a PUD under Idaho
code. Mr. Hillam believed Idaho code granted the authority to define a PUD over to
municipalities, and that the City of Chubbuck defines a PUD under City Code 18.06.180, and
18.20.10.
City Attorney Tom Holmes asked Mr. Hillam if city staff meet with the applicant after the
Land Use Meeting, and if city staff made any suggestions to the applicant on how to move
forward. Mr. Hillam stated that city staff recommended the applicant look at moving forward
with an R-2 (single family/duplex) development. The applicant choose to proceed with its
original plan.
Councilmember Evans asked City Attorney Tom Holmes if the Council was bound by
previous PUD decisions on future applications. Mr. Holmes stated that in his opinion the Council
was not bound by previous application decisions, each application stands on its own burden of
proof.
Mayor England presented prior communication letters from residents Jill Turner, and Paul
Jensen. The Council wanted it known that they did receive a letter from Wayne and Alane Hale
after the published deadline, and will not consider that information.
Mayor England declared the public hearing open for public comment.
Craig Parrish at 689 E. Chubbuck Rd. was legal counsel representing the Hillmans, who were
opposed. Mr. Parrish stated that as long as the Council had a rational basis for a decision they
had the authority to approve or deny an application, even if it meets code or historical
interpretations. Mr. Parrish was concerned about the density of this development and land
locking the land to the north of this development. Mr. Parrish also sited Idaho code 22-4501
about the right to farm.
Councilmember Lewis stated that the Council needed to take into consideration the
importance of private property rights, and is held to the standards of the City Ordinances.
Mr. Holmes asked if this development was developed under the R-2 standard and density if
the residents would be more open to this application. Mr. Parrish stated they would probably
have concerns but would be more receptive with an R-2 development.
TJ Budge with Racine Olson was legal counsel representing Terry Briscoe, Vern Briscoe,
Michael & Rebecca Crockett, Verlyn & Jodi DaBell, Jim & Katie Forsythe, Boyd & Kim Hardy,
Rick and Linda Hillman, Dana Hillman Stone, Dee & Janae Greene, Wayne & Elaine Hale, Mike
& Claudette Jones, Brandon & LuJean Holst, Arley Lish, Kimberly Watt, Fred & Kathleen
Wooden, and Verle & Patricia Yensen, who were opposed. These land owners are not opposed
to a development that meets the R-2 requirements. Mr. Budge presented why this development
does not met City Code; apartments are not permitted in the current zone, single parcel of land
with one land use, does not qualify as a planned unit development (PUD), does not comply with
the comprehensive plan, and this development would be detrimental to the present surrounding
uses.
Councilmember Lewis asked Mr. Budge about his interpretation of City Code 18.20.040. Mr.
Budge stated those land uses that are allowed in an R-2 zone would be allowed in an R-2 PUD.
Jodi DaBell at 4895 Whitaker Rd, was opposed. Ms. DaBell wants development in Chubbuck,
but wanted development where people come and stay for the long term. She thinks that would
be in single family homes and not in apartments or townhomes. Ms. DaBell was also concerned
about the traffic on Whitaker and Chubbuck Roads.
Arley Lish at 4913 Whitaker Rd. was opposed. Mr. Lish was concerned about traffic, and felt
like it didn't meet city code. Mr. Lish also said this development didn't fit their neighborhood.
Dee Greene at 410 E. Chubbuck Rd. was opposed. Mr. Greene was concerned about traffic
and presented traffic numbers from the Idaho Transportation Department. Mr. Greene was also
concerned about the irrigation/water rights, and how those would be maintained.
Verle Yensen at 4940 Whitaker Rd. was opposed. Mr. Yensen was concerned about the
increase of traffic, and stated that this development was not consistent with the surrounding areas
and would have a negative impact on the neighborhood.
Jim Forsythe at 4839 Whitaker Rd. was opposed. Mr. Forsythe stated that this area was not
all zoned R-2, and thought that all uses could be permitted in a PUD but it had to have multiple
uses to qualify, and this application only had one.
Vern Briscoe at 5112 Whitaker Rd. was opposed. Mr. Briscoe was concerned about irrigation
rights, and water runoff.
Patricia Yensen at 4940 Whitaker Rd. was opposed. Ms. Yensen was concerned about traffic
head lights, and did not think this development was consistent with the surrounding areas and
will have a negative impact on the neighborhood.
Brandon Holst at 4941 Whitaker Rd, was opposed. Mr. Holst stated that it should remain an
R-2 zone and be developed as an R-2 development.
LuJean Holst at 4941 Whitaker Rd, was opposed. Ms. Holst was concerned about the affect
it would have on their property and their landscape investment.
Kimberly Watt at 4924 Whitaker Rd. was opposed. Ms. Watt was concerned about the
increased traffic using the LDS Church parking lot to get onto Hiline Rd. from Whitaker Rd.
Niki Taysom at the Super 8, was opposed. Ms. Taysom was opposed because of the density
of the development and increased traffic.
Dana Hillman at 4967 Whitaker Rd. was opposed. Ms. Hillman was concerned about the
affect this would have on their current cattle operations, facilities, and irrigation rights. Ms.
Hillam was also concerned about the density and increase of traffic.
Kim Hardy at 426 E. Chubbuck Rd. was opposed. Ms. Hardy was concerned about traffic,
and irrigation. Ms. Hardy stated that there was already too much high density development along
this main corridor in Chubbuck.
Mike Crockett at 5111 Whitaker Rd. was opposed. Mr. Crockett agreed with everything that
had already been said. Mr. Crockett stated that it should remain an R-2 zone and be developed
as an R-2 development.
Arley Lish at 4913 Whitaker Rd. was opposed. Mr. Lish stated that the developer could build
16 half acre lots in a cul-de-sac in this area.
Paul Jensen at 125 N. Garfield was in favor. Mr. Jensen believed this development would
maintain the property, like the existing surrounding residents.
Niki Taysom at the Super 8, was opposed. Ms. Taysom stated that this development was too
close to the train tracks to keep children safe.
Due to no more comment Mayor England closed the public hearing.
BJ Driscoll stated that if there hadn't been a change in the law, than the Council doesn't have
a rational basis and should follow historical precedence. Mr. Driscoll also stated that this
application is not building under an R-2 zone, but requesting for a PUD rezone, which allows
apartments to be built. Mr. Driscoll stated that City Code 18.08.010 lists all the different uses
which includes a PUD as a variety of uses. Also chapter 10 in the comprehensive plan under
medium density allows 8-12 units per acre, and this development would qualify at 9 units per
acre. Mr. Driscoll stated that this was a great buffer development between the train tracks and
the single family units that already exist.
Blake Jolley stated that not everyone can afford to be a homeowner and this development
would allow for people to have options. Mr. Jolley stated that this development meets the same
density requirements as a duplex, and that this development has over 4 acres of landscape. Mr.
Jolley also stated that they are required by Idaho law to maintain water/irrigation rights to all
property owners, and the 6ft privacy fence would be placed one foot onto their property for
maintenance. Mr. Jolley stated that these types of developments are designed to be off a main
artillery.
Councilmember Lewis was concerned about land locking the land to the north. Public Works
Director Rodney Burch stated that the Chubbuck Rd. access is not a public street but an access
to this development.
Councilmember Evans wanted it known that people that live in apartments are great family
oriented people. Councilmember Evans was not convinced this development was the right fit for
this area, and asked City Attorney Tom Holmes about the legal ramifications if approved.
Mr. Holmes stated that there is a possibility the neighbors could bring this to court, because
of the inconsistences in the City's Ordinances that need to be corrected. That's why Mr. Holmes
asked city staff if they made any suggestions to the developer after the Land Use Meeting on
how to move forward.
Councilmember Lewis stated that there is personal property rights on both sides, and if you
want to control development you need to own it. Councilmember Lewis wanted it known that
the increase of property taxes is never a factor in his decision making. Councilmember Lewis
felt like any type of development would increase traffic. Councilmember Lewis also stated that
as a quasi-judicial body decision the Council is bound to hold the burden of proof on the
applicant. Councilmember Lewis felt like the applicant had not met the burden of proof In City
Codes 18.20.040, 18.20.040A, 18.20.040D, 18.28.040C #3, 4, and 7, 18.20.110, and 18.20.110G
#3, and 6.
GENERAL BUSINESS:
1. Approval of Sunset Townhomes Planned Unit Development (PUD).
(Council will discuss the application and if it meets City code).
Councilmember Evans motioned to deny the Sunset Townhomes planned unit development.
Councilmember Hernandez seconded motion for denial.
Roll Call: Evans -yes, Lewis -yes, Hernandez -yes, Baumeister -recused, motion passed.
2. Approval of Sunset Townhomes Preliminary Plat.
(Council will discuss the application and if it meets City code).
Councilmember Evans motioned to deny the Sunset Townhomes preliminary plat.
Councilmember Hernandez seconded motion for denial.
Roll Call: Lewis -yes, Hernandez -yes, Evans -yes, Baumeister -recused, motion passed.
3. Adoption of Ordinance XXX Police and Emergency Services Capital Plans and Impact
Fees. (Council will discuss adopting chapter 17.28 to City code).
Mayor England presented a separate Ordinance to approve the Police and Emergency
Services capital plans and impact fees, as the Council works on the parks capital plan and
impact fee.
Councilmember Baumeister is in support of these fees but, doesn't want to separate
these from the parks impact fee; and wanted to table this decision until the Council could
have a special study session to discuss this more. Councilmember Lewis felt like there
was still more discussion needed before proceeding.
Councilmember Evans supported these fees and wanted the Council to approve these
fees. Councilmember Hernandez didn't have any issues with these fees and wanted to
proceed with approval.
Councilmember Baumeister motioned to table adoption and hold a special study session on
February 20, 2019 for further discussion.
Councilmember Lewis seconded motion.
Roll Call: Baumeister -yes, Evans -yes, Lewis -yes, Hernandez -no, motion passed.
4. Approval of Elected Officials Salaries.
(Council will discuss the appropriate salary for elected officials).
Councilmember Baumeister believed that with the increase of responsibilities and to
attract qualified candidates in the future there needed to be an increase of salaries.
Councilmember Hernandez felt like it was the Councils responsibility to think of the
future and the proper pay associated.
Councilmember Evans stated that the current pay and benefits were sufficient for the
responsibilities associated with the position and should remain the same.
Councilmember Baumeister motioned to raise the Mayor's salary to $60,846 and the Council
salary to $7,961 starting in January 2020.
Councilmember Hernandez seconded motion for approval.
Roll Call: Evans -no, Lewis -yes, Hernandez -yes, Baumeister -yes, motion passed.
CLAIMS:
1. City of Chubbuck claims for February 6, 2019 as presented to Mayor England and
Council.
Councilmember Evans motioned to approve the City of Chubbuck Claims.
Councilmember Baumeister seconded motion for approval.
Roll Call: Hernandez -yes, Baumeister -yes, Lewis -yes, Evans -yes, motion passed.
ADJOURN: Mayor Kevin England adjourned at 10:00.
f.
Certificate of Special Recognition
Awarded to:
Terry Ud v
IN HONOR OF YOUR ACTION TAKEN ON JANUARY 18TH, 2019, TO IDENTIFY AN IMMEDIATE NEED, TAKE
SWIFT ACTION AND PROVIDE CRITICAL COMFORT AND CARE TO A MEMBER OF OUR COMMUNITY THAT
CONTRIBUTED TO SAVING THE LIFE OF A THAT INDIVIDUAL.
WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE ABOVE AND BEYOND YOUR ASSIGNED DUTIES AND ACKNOWLEDGE
YOUR EFFORTS AS A TRUE REPRESENTATION OF YOUR PERSONAL CHARACTER IN CARING FOR OTHERS
IN NEED.
Awar end this 20th Dayfebr ry, 019
�.�..-=
Ch of Merlin Miller, Chubbuck Mayor Kevin B. land Chief Bill Guiberson, Chubbuck
Fire Department Police Department
X04 F D �
CHUBBUCK
x � �
. i
Certificate of Special Recognition
Awarded to:
Rvan D, Sullivan
IN HONOR OF YOUR ACTION TAKEN ON JANUARY 18TH, 2019, TO IDENTIFY AN IMMEDIATE NEED, TAKE
SWIFT ACTION AND PROVIDE CRITICAL COMFORT AND CARE TO A MEMBER OF OUR COMMUNITY THAT
CONTRIBUTED TO SAVING THE LIFE OF A THAT INDIVIDUAL.
WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE ABOVE AND BEYOND YOUR ASSIGNED DUTIES AND ACKNOWLEDGE
YOUR EFFORTS AS A TRUE REPRESENTATION OF YOUR PERSONAL CHARACTER IN CARING FOR OTHERS
IN NEED.
Chi6f Merlin Miller, Chubbuck
Fire Department
Awarded this 201h Day of wary, 2019
Mayor Kevin B. Is d
CHUBBUCK
--L --Ai-
Chief Bill Guiberson, Chubbuck
Police Department
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR ROLES AND
RESPONSIBILITIES UNDER IDAHO CODE SECTION 50-2906(3)(b)
This Intergovernmental Agreement is entered into this day of , 2019,
by and between the City of Chubbuck, Idaho ("Chubbuck") and the City of Pocatello, Idaho
("Pocatello"), and is made for the purpose of complying with Idaho Code § 50-2906(3)(b).
RECITALS
WHEREAS, Chubbuck is a duly organized existing municipality under the laws and the
Constitution of the State of Idaho;
WHEREAS, Pocatello is a duly organized existing municipality under the laws and the
Constitution of the state of Idaho;
WHEREAS, the Pocatello City Council and Mayor of Pocatello respectively on or about
July 14, 1988, adopted and approved a resolution creating the Urban Renewal Agency of
Pocatello, Idaho, also known as the Pocatello Development Authority (the "Agency"),
authorizing it to transact business and exercise the powers granted by the Idaho Urban Renewal
Law of 1965, Chapter 20, Title 50, Idaho Code, as amended (hereinafter the "Law"), and the
Local Economic Development Act, Chapter 29, Title 50, Idaho Code, as amended (hereinafter
the "Act") upon making the findings of necessity required for creating said Agency;
WHEREAS, there are currently four existing urban renewal project areas in Pocatello;
WHEREAS, based on inquiries from property owners and information presented, it
became apparent that additional real property within Pocatello and Pocatello's area of operation,
as defined in Idaho Code § 50-2018(18), may be deteriorating or deteriorated and should be
examined as to whether the area is eligible for urban renewal planning purposes;
WHEREAS, the Agency commenced certain discussions concerning examination of the
new area as appropriate for an urban renewal project;
WHEREAS, during 2017, the Agency authorized Kushlan Associates to commence an
eligibility study and preparation of an eligibility report of an area located east of Interstate 15 and
north of Chubbuck Road, and the surrounding properties;
WHEREAS, the Agency obtained an eligibility report, dated January 2018 (the
"Report"), which examined an area of operation of Pocatello, in an area known as the Northgate
Area, which area also included real property located within unincorporated Bannock County, for
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
UNDER IDAHO CODE SECTION 50-2906(3)(b)- 1
the purpose of determining whether such area was a deteriorating area or a deteriorated area as
defined by Idaho Code Sections 50-2018(9) and 50-2903(8);
WHEREAS, the Agency, on January 17, 2018, adopted Resolution No. 2018-1 accepting
the Report and authorizing the Chairman of the Agency to transmit the Report to the Pocatello
City Council requesting its consideration for designation of an urban renewal area and requesting
the Pocatello City Council to direct the Agency to prepare an urban renewal plan for the
Northgate Area, which plan may include a revenue allocation provision as allowed by law;
WHEREAS, Idaho Code Section 50-2018(18) states that an urban renewal agency cannot
exercise jurisdiction over any area outside the city limits without the approval of the other city or
county declaring the need for an urban renewal plan for the proposed area;
WHEREAS, the Agency also authorized the transmittal of the Report to the Bannock
County Board of County Commissioners for purposes of obtaining a resolution accepting the
Report and determining such area outside the boundaries of Pocatello to be a deteriorated area
and/or a deteriorating area and appropriate for an urban renewal project;
WHEREAS, the Report was submitted to the Bannock County Board of County
Commissioners, and the Bannock County Board of County Commissioners were asked to adopt a
resolution finding the need for an urban renewal project for the proposed Northgate Area;
WHEREAS, the Bannock County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Agency's
findings concerning the proposed Northgate Area by adopting Resolution No. 2018-23 on
February 13, 2018;
WHEREAS, the Pocatello City Council, by Resolution No. 2018-03, dated February 15,
2018, declared the Northgate Area described in the Report to be a deteriorated area and/or a
deteriorating area as defined by Chapters 20 and 29, Title 50, Idaho Code, as amended, that such
area is appropriate for an urban renewal project, that the Bannock County Board of County
Commissioners adopted the necessary resolutions and directed the Agency to commence
preparation of an urban renewal plan;
WHEREAS, the required property owner consents for any parcels deemed to be an
agricultural operation included within the Northgate Area were obtained by the developers;
WHEREAS, the Agency and its consultants have undertaken the planning process during
2018;
WHEREAS, the Agency retained the Leland Consulting Group to perform a market
analysis for the purpose of aiding in the determination of the economic feasibility of the
proposed project;
WHEREAS, the Agency prepared the Urban Renewal Plan for the Northgate Urban
Renewal Project (the "Northgate Plan") and the urban renewal area referred to as the Northgate
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
UNDER IDAHO CODE SECTION 50-2906(3)(b)- 2
Project Area ("Project Area" or "Revenue Allocation Area") for the area designated as eligible
for urban renewal planning;
WHEREAS, the Northgate Plan also contains the provisions of revenue allocation
financing as allowed by the Act;
WHEREAS, the Agency Board on December 19, 2018, adopted Resolution No. 2018-03
proposing and recommending the Northgate Plan;
WHEREAS, Chubbuck annexed into its corporate limits a section of the Project Area,
which annexation was final after December 19, 2018, but on or before December 31, 2018 (the
"Chubbuck Annexation");
WHEREAS, the Agency, by letter of transmittal dated January 9, 2019, submitted the
Northgate Plan to the Mayor of Pocatello and the Pocatello City Council;
WHEREAS, the Mayor of Pocatello and the Pocatello City Council are taking the
necessary action to process the Northgate Plan consistent with the requirements set forth in Idaho
Code Section 50-2906 and Idaho Code Section 50-2008;
WHEREAS, as a result of the Chubbuck Annexation, Idaho Code Section 50-2906(3)(b)
and Idaho Code Section 50-2018(18) contemplate an agreement between the Pocatello City
Council and the Chubbuck City Council, governing administration of a revenue allocation
financing provision for any area extending beyond Pocatello's municipal boundary but within the
city limits of Chubbuck, and such agreement must be formalized by a transfer of powers
ordinance adopted by the Chubbuck City Council;
WHEREAS, as a result of the Chubbuck Annexation, there are certain properties within
the Northgate Plan and Project Area which extend beyond Pocatello's municipal boundaries and
into Chubbuck's municipal boundaries, which properties are more particularly described and
depicted on Exhibit 1 attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference;
WHEREAS, the Pocatello City Council and the Chubbuck City Council desire to enter
into this Agreement to avoid any uncertainty regarding the Pocatello City Council's jurisdiction
and authority to establish the Project Area and the Agency's authority to implement the
Northgate Plan concerning those properties which are outside Pocatello's municipal limits and
within the city limits of Chubbuck;
WHEREAS, the Pocatello City Council and Chubbuck City Council deem it in their
collective best interests to enter into this Agreement covering said properties and assuring
compliance with the Act and Law, Idaho Code Sections 50-2906(3)(b) and 50-2018(18)
respectively;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed as follows:
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
UNDER IDAHO CODE SECTION 50-2906(3)(b)- 3
AGREEMENT
1. PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT
The purpose of this Agreement is to detail the duties, roles, and responsibilities to be
provided by the parties with respect to compliance with the Act and Law, Idaho Code Sections
50-2906(3)(b) and 50-2018(18) respectively.
2. GENERAL PROVISIONS
The Chubbuck City Council does hereby agree that the Pocatello City Council shall have
the right, power, authority, and obligation to administer the Law, Act and particularly the
revenue allocation financing provisions of the Northgate Plan for that certain property which is
contained within the boundaries of the revenue allocation area (as defined in the Act and the
Northgate Plan) as a result of the Chubbuck Annexation, which property now extends beyond
Pocatello's municipal boundary and into the city limits of Chubbuck. The property governed by
this Agreement is described, defined, and depicted on Exhibit 1 of this Agreement. The
Chubbuck City Council further specifically acknowledges and declares the need for urban
renewal activity in the area which extends beyond Pocatello's municipal boundaries and into the
city limits of Chubbuck.
By agreeing to the administration of this property by the Pocatello City Council for the
limited purpose of implementing the Northgate Plan, the Chubbuck City Council agrees all
revenue allocation proceeds generated from such property shall be available to the Agency for all
purposes authorized under the Act and the Northgate Plan. Following the establishment of the
Project Area, the Agency shall administer the revenue allocation provision affecting this property
as allowed under the Act and the Northgate Plan. Additionally, the Chubbuck City Council
acknowledges the Northgate Plan will be reviewed by the Pocatello Planning & Zoning
Commission for the Northgate Plan's conformity with the general plan for the development of
Pocatello as a whole consistent with and limited to the requirements of Idaho Code § 50-2008(b).
The Chubbuck City Council defers to the Pocatello Planning & Zoning Commission's review
and recommendations as required by Idaho Code § 50-2008(b) solely with regard to adopting the
Northgate Plan. The Pocatello City Council expressly acknowledges the parcels located within
the city limits of Chubbuck are subject to and shall be developed in conformity with the
Chubbuck Comprehensive Plan, Zoning and Development Codes as well as the Northgate Plan.
The Chubbuck City Council defers to the Agency to implement and carry out the Northgate Plan.
The Chubbuck City Council shall approve this Agreement by the adoption of a transfer of
powers ordinance and the Pocatello City Council shall approve this Agreement by the adoption
of a duly authorized resolution.
Upon approval and adoption of the resolution referenced above, the Pocatello City
Council shall take the necessary steps through the Pocatello City Clerk to transmit a copy of the
Chubbuck City Council Resolution to the County Auditor, County Assessor, the County
Recorder, the other taxing districts of the revenue allocation area, and the Idaho State Tax
Commission.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
UNDER IDAHO CODE SECTION 50-2906(3)(b)- 4
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
Public Improvements. In consideration of this Agreement, the Chubbuck City Council
hereby consents to those certain public improvements identified in the Northgate Plan which
may be acquired, constructed or installed on certain rights-of-way not within the Pocatello limits
but on the rights-of-way owned in trust by Chubbuck.
4. EFFECTIVE TERM
This Agreement shall be deemed effective upon the execution of this Agreement by both
the Chubbuck City Council and the Pocatello City Council and shall remain in effect for the
duration of the Northgate Plan.
5. MODIFICATION
This Agreement may be modified or amended in writing if executed by both the
Chubbuck City Council and the Pocatello City Council.
6. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
Except as provided otherwise herein, this Agreement and any attachments hereto
constitute the entire Agreement between the parties concerning the subject matter hereto.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City Council of the City of Chubbuck, Idahoand the City
Council of the City of Pocatello, Idaho, have executed this Agreement by proper persons
thereunto duly authorized as of the date first hereinabove written.
CITY:
ATTEST:
Rich Morgan, Chubbuck City Clerk
CITY OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO, a municipal corporation
of Idaho
go
Kevin England, Mayor
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
UNDER IDAHO CODE SECTION 50-2906(3)(b)- 5
CITY: CITY OF POCATELLO, IDAHO, a municipal corporation
of Idaho
By
Brian C. Blad, Mayor
ATTEST:
Ruth E. Whitworth, City Clerk
ACKNOWLEDGED BY:
BANNOCK COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Steve Brown, Chairman
Terrel N. Tovey, Member
Ernie Moser, Member
ATTEST:
Jason Dixon, Bannock County Clerk
4824-0345-4853, v. 4
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
UNDER IDAHO CODE SECTION 50-2906(3)(b)- 6
CITY OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO
ORDINANCE NO.
TRANSFER OF POWERS ORDINANCE:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO, ADOPTING FINDINGS ON
THE NECESSITY OF THE URBAN RENEWAL PLAN; PROVIDING THE CITY OF
POCATELLO WITH THE RIGHT, POWER, AUTHORITY, AND OBLIGATION TO
ADMINISTER THE URBAN RENEWAL AREA PURSUANT TO CHAPTERS 20 AND 29,
TITLE 50, IDAHO CODE, AS AMENDED; GRANTING THE REVENUE ALLOCATION
PROCEEDS DERIVED FROM THE POCATELLO REVENUE ALLOCATION AREA
LYING WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF CHUBBUCK TO THE POCATELLO
URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY ALSO KNOWN AS THE POCATELLO DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY; ADOPTING THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
IMPLEMENTING THIS ORDINANCE; AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE
AGREEMENT AND SUCH OTHER AND FURTHER DOCUMENTS AS MAY BE
NECESSARY TO CARRY OUT THE INTENT OF THIS ORDINANCE.
WHEREAS, that this Ordinance is adopted to approve and confirm the duties, roles, and
responsibilities of the City of Pocatello, Idaho, the Pocatello Urban Renewal Agency also known
as the Pocatello Development Authority (the "Agency"), and the City of Chubbuck, Idaho (the
"City") for that portion of the revenue allocation area, as defined and described in the proposed
Urban Renewal Plan for the Northgate Urban Renewal Project, lying outside the corporate
boundaries of the City of Pocatello as illustrated in Exhibit 1 and to transfer power as provided in
Idaho Code Section 50-2906(3)(b) and the necessary declaration set forth in Idaho Code Section
50-2018(18);
WHEREAS, the Agency obtained an eligibility report, dated January 2018 (the
"Report"), which examined an area of operation of the City of Pocatello, in an area known as the
Northgate Area, which area also included real property located within unincorporated Bannock
County, for the purpose of determining whether such area was a deteriorating area or a
deteriorated area as defined by Idaho Code Sections 50-2018(9) and 50-2903(8);
WHEREAS, the Agency, on January 17, 2018, adopted Resolution No. 2018-1 accepting
the Report and authorizing the Chairman of the Agency to transmit the Report to the Pocatello
City Council requesting its consideration for designation of an urban renewal area and requesting
the Pocatello City Council to direct the Agency to prepare an urban renewal plan for the
Northgate Area, which plan may include a revenue allocation provision as allowed by law;
WHEREAS, Idaho Code Section 50-2018(18) states that an urban renewal agency cannot
exercise jurisdiction over any area outside the city limits without the approval of the other city or
county declaring the need for an urban renewal plan for the proposed area;
WHEREAS, the Agency also authorized the transmittal of the Report to the Bannock
County Board of County Commissioners for purposes of obtaining a resolution accepting the
Report and determining such area outside the boundaries of the City of Pocatello to be a
deteriorated area and/or a deteriorating area and appropriate for an urban renewal project;
ORDINANCE NO. - I
WHEREAS, the Report was submitted to the Bannock County Board of County
Commissioners, and the Bannock County Board of County Commissioners were asked to adopt a
resolution finding the need for an urban renewal project for the proposed Northgate Area;
WHEREAS, the Bannock County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Agency's
findings concerning the proposed Northgate Area by adopting Resolution No. 2018-23 on
February 13, 2018;
WHEREAS, the Pocatello City Council, by Resolution No. 2018-03, dated February 15,
2018, declared the Northgate Area described in the Report to be a deteriorated area and/or a
deteriorating area as defined by Chapters 20 and 29, Title 50, Idaho Code, as amended, that such
area is appropriate for an urban renewal project, that the Bannock County Board of County
Commissioners adopted the necessary resolutions and directed the Agency to commence
preparation of an urban renewal plan;
WHEREAS, the Agency prepared the Urban Renewal Plan for the Northgate Urban
Renewal Project (the "Northgate Plan") and the urban renewal area referred to as the Northgate
Project Area ("Project Area" or "Revenue Allocation Area") for the area designated as eligible
for urban renewal planning;
WHEREAS, the Northgate Plan also contains the provisions of revenue allocation
financing as allowed by the Act;
WHEREAS, the Agency Board on December 19, 2018, adopted Resolution No. 2018-03
proposing and recommending the Northgate Plan;
WHEREAS, the City annexed into its corporate limits a section of the Project Area,
which annexation was final after December 19, 2018, but on or before December 31, 2018 (the
"Chubbuck Annexation");
WHEREAS, the Agency, by letter of transmittal dated January 9, 2019, submitted the
Northgate Plan to the Mayor of the City of Pocatello and the Pocatello City Council;
WHEREAS, the Mayor of the City of Pocatello and the Pocatello City Council are taking
the necessary action to process the Northgate Plan consistent with the requirements set forth in
Idaho Code Section 50-2906 and Idaho Code Section 50-2008;
WHEREAS, as a result of the Chubbuck Annexation, Idaho Code Section 50-2906(3)(b)
and Idaho Code Section 50-2018(18) contemplate an agreement between the City and the City of
Pocatello, governing administration of a revenue allocation financing provision for any area
extending beyond the City of Pocatello's municipal boundary but within the city limits of the
City, and such agreement must be formalized by a transfer of powers ordinance adopted by the
City Council;
WHEREAS, as a result of the Chubbuck Annexation, there are certain properties within
the Northgate Plan and Project Area which extend beyond the City of Pocatello's municipal
boundaries and into the City's municipal boundaries;
ORDINANCE NO. -2
WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Council deem it expedient and in the best interests of
the City of Chubbuck to establish and enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement for Roles and
Responsibilities under Idaho Code Section 50-2906(3)(b) between the City of Chubbuck and the
City of Pocatello, to confirm the consent of the City of Chubbuck, under Idaho Code Section 50-
2018(18), and to assure compliance with the Act and Law.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHUBBUCK, IDAHO:
Section 1: That the above statements are true and correct.
Section 2: That the City Council of the City of Chubbuck, after reviewing the
Northgate Plan delivered to the City on January 23, 2019, finds: (a) the Northgate Plan and
Project Area is eligible under the statutory criteria and is appropriate for an urban renewal
project; and (b) the City of Pocatello has the authority to proceed with the creation of the
Northgate Plan and Project Area after the adoption of this Ordinance by the City Council of the
City of Chubbuck.
Section 3: That the City Council of the City of Chubbuck, after reviewing the
Northgate Plan delivered to the City on January 23, 2019, supports the findings in the Northgate
Plan that: (a) the adjusted base assessed values of all existing revenue allocation areas within the
City of Pocatello do not exceed ten percent of the current assessed taxable value of the City of
Pocatello; (b) the proposed Northgate Plan and Project Area is financially feasible given the
assumptions used in the Northgate Plan; and (c) the required consents from the owners of
agricultural operation lands within the Project Area have been given.
Section 4: The revenue allocation proceeds from areas lying within the boundaries of
the Northgate Plan and Project Area shall be devoted to the statutory purposes as described in the
Northgate Plan and as authorized by the Urban Renewal Law of 1965, Chapter 20, Title 50,
Idaho Code, as amended, and the Local Economic Development Act, Chapter 29, Title 50, Idaho
Code.
Section 5: That the Intergovernmental Agreement for Roles and Responsibilities
Under Idaho Code §50-2906(3)(b) (the "Agreement") attached hereto as Exhibit A, is
incorporated herein and made a part hereof by reference and is hereby approved and accepted.
Section 6: That the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign and enter into the Agreement,
and to execute any further documents necessary to carry out the intent of the City Council as
expressed in this Ordinance and in the Agreement. A copy of this Ordinance and the attached
Agreement shall be held on file in the office of the City Clerk.
Section 7: Repeal of Conflicting Ordinances. The provisions of any Ordinance of the
City and any provision of the Municipal Code which are in conflict with the provisions of this
Ordinance are repealed to the extent of such conflict.
Section 8: Severability. The sections of this Ordinance are severable. The invalidity
of a section shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections.
ORDINANCE NO. -3
Section 9: Effective Date. The rule requiring an Ordinance to be read on three
separate days, one of which shall be a reading in full, is dispensed with, and this Ordinance shall
become effective upon its passage, approval and publication.
PASSED BY THE COUNCIL AND APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF
CHUBBUCK, IDAHO, this day of 12019.
Kevin B. England, Mayor
ATTEST:
Richard Morgan, City Clerk
4812-6345-6645, v. 3
ORDINANCE NO. -4
CITY OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO, REPEALING SECTIONS
17.16.110, 17.16.130 THROUGH 17.16.240, AMENDING 17.16. 100 OF THE
CHUBBUCK MUNICIPAL CODE EFFECTIVE MARCH 26,2019; ADOPTING
CHAPTER 17.24 "IMPACT FEE" TO PROVIDE AN IMPACT FEE UPON NEW
DEVELOPMENT EFFECTIVE MARCH 26, 2019 PROVIDING NEW
DEVELOPMENT SHALL PAY IMPACT FEES TO BE APPLIED TOWARDS PARKS,
EMERGENCY SERVICES, AND POLICE, PROVIDING FOR THE
ADMINISTRATION OF SAID IMPACT FEES AND PERIODIC ADJUSTMENT
THEREOF; ADOPTING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLANS DATED
SEPTEMBER 1, 2018 FOR THE POLICE, EMERGENCY SERVICES AND PARKS
AND RECREATION DEPARTMENTS; REPEALING PRIOR CONFLICTING
ORDINANCES; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PROVISIONS OF
THIS ORDINANCE; AND PROVIDING WHEN THIS ORDINANCE IS EFFECTIVE.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHUBBUCK, IDAHO:
Section 1. Repeal of Certain Sections of Chapter 17.16. Effective March 26, 2019,
Section 17.16.110 and 17.16.130 through 17.16.240 shall be repealed; provided however any
existing development implementing a park under this Chapter shall, at the discretion of the city,
complete the development of the park in accordance with the plans previously approved under
this Chapter.
Section 2. Amended Section 17.16.100. Effective March 26, 2019, Section 17.16. 100 is
amended to read as follows:
17.16.100 REQUIRED: Asa condition of approval of any development required to be
platted under the provisions of this title, which includes residential structures, each developer
will be required to dedicate land for park and recreational purposes to serve the immediate and
future needs of the residents of the development, or pay an Impact Fee for Parks as provided for
in Chapter 17.24 inake a contribution in fictrof actnal land dedication, or a combination of both,
at the option of the cit , in accordance vrith the criteria and foinittla set XfO -1 "11 . in section
17.16.110 thiough 17.16-.220 of this . Tire
shall include the land, ctub, gutter and sidewalk along any stree�-fiontage, turf-, andergron
department. 6enetally, chain and post will be requited along the stieet frontage.
ORDINANCE - Page 1.
chubbuck 021119 imp fee ord (1).wpd
Section 3. Adoption of Title 17, Chapter 24, "Impact Fee". The following is adopted
effective March 26, 2019:
17.24. 100 LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS:
The city council of the city of Chubbuck, Idaho, finds that:
(A) Based on the city of Chubbuck Comprehensive Plan adopted by the City pursuant to
Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, including, but not limited to, the capital improvements element
of the comprehensive plan, and the general governmental goal of protecting the health, safety,
and general welfare of the citizens of the city, and its Area of City Impact, it is necessary for: 1)
police public facilities; and 2) emergency services public facilities; and 3) parks and recreation
public facilities to accommodate new development within the city, and its area of city impact.
(B) New residential and nonresidential growth and development imposes and will impose
increasing and excessive demands upon the public facilities.
(C) The revenues generated from new residential and nonresidential growth and
development often does not generate sufficient funds to provide the necessary levels of service
provided by these public facilities to accommodate new development.
(D) New development is expected to continue, and will place ever increasing demands on
the city to provide and expand the public facilities to serve new development.
(E) The city has planned for the improvement of the public facilities in the capital
improvements element of the city of Chubbuck Comprehensive Plan and in the impact fee
analysis and the capital improvement plan reviewed and adopted therewith.
(F) The creation of an equitable impact fee system in accordance with Title 67, Chapter
82, Idaho Code would enable the city to impose a proportionate share of the costs of needed
improvements to the public facilities to accommodate new development, and would assist the
city in implementing the capital improvements element of the comprehensive plan.
(G) In order to implement an equitable impact fee system for the public facilities, the city
retained Zions Public Finance, Inc. ("Zions") to prepare an impact fee studies for these types of
facilities. The resulting documents are titled:
Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis,
Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis, and
Parks and Recreation Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis
all dated September, 2018 (the "Impact Fee Study"), and recommended for approval by the
Impact Fee Advisory Committee. The studies are on file in the office of the city clerk of the city
ORDINANCE - Page 2.
chubbuck 021119 imp fee ord (1).wpd
of Chubbuck. Any reference herein to the Impact Fee Study shall be to the respective study for
that service.
(H) The Impact Fee Study is consistent with the capital improvements element of the city
of Chubbuck Comprehensive Plan, and uses the levels of service set forth in the Comprehensive
Plan for these public facilities.
1. Police level of service from page 2 of the Police Impact Fee Study is .4599 calls per capita
for 2016 with an estimated number of calls per capita at build out to be .4574.
2. Emergency Services level of service from page 3 of the Emergency Services Impact Fee
Study is .0762 calls per capita for 2016 with an estimate number of calls per capita at build
out to be .0647.
3. Parks and recreation level of service from page 7 of the Park Impact Fee Study is 5.22
acres per thousand population.
(1) The Impact Fee Study sets forth reasonable methodologies and analyses for
determining the impacts of various types of new development on the public facilities, and
determines the cost of acquiring or constructing the improvements necessary to meet the
demands for such public facilities created by new development.
(J) The Impact Fee Study uses a calculation methodology in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles. This chapter shall not be deemed invalid because payment of an
impact fee may result in an incidental benefit to others within the service area other than the fee
payer.
(K) The impact fees described in this chapter are based on the Impact Fee Study, and do
not exceed the costs of system improvements for the public facilities to serve new development
that will pay the impact fees.
(L) The police, emergency services and parks and recreation services included in the
calculation of impact fees in the Impact Fee Study will benefit all new development throughout
the city, and it is therefore appropriate to treat all areas of the city and the area of city impact as a
single service area for purposes of calculating, collecting and spending the impact fees collected.
(M) There is both a rational nexus and a rough proportionality between the development
impacts created by each type of development covered by this chapter and the impact fees that
such development will be required to pay.
(N) This chapter creates a system by which impact fees paid by new development will be
used to finance, defray or to provide capital improvements for the public facilities in ways that
ORDINANCE - Page 3.
chubbuck 021119 imp fee ord (1).wpd
benefit the development for which impact fees were paid.
(0) This chapter creates a system under which impact fees shall not be used to correct
existing deficiencies in public facilities, or to replace or rehabilitate existing public facilities, or
to pay for routine operation or maintenance of those public facilities.
(P) This chapter creates a system under which there shall be no double payment of impact
fees, in accordance with Idaho Code § 67-8204(19).
(Q) This chapter is consistent with all applicable provisions of title 67, chapter 82, Idaho
Code, concerning impact fee ordinances.
17.24.200: AUTHORITY, APPLICABILITY, AND EFFECTIVE DATE:
(A) This chapter is enacted pursuant to the city's general police powers pursuant to the
authority granted to the city by title 50, Idaho Code, and pursuant to the authority granted to the
city by § 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code.
(B) The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all of the territory within the limits of the
city and to any unincorporated areas of the city within the city's area of city impact where the city
has executed an intergovernmental agreement with Bannock County for purposes of collection or
expenditure of impact fees pursuant to § 67-8204A, Idaho Code, and other applicable laws of the
state of Idaho.
(C) This chapter is effective March 26, 2019 ("Effective Date"), which effective date is
more than thirty (30) days subsequent to the passage, approval and publication, according to law,
of the ordinance codified herein, which adopted the provisions hereof.
(D) Applications for building permits received by the city prior to the effective date
hereof, or amendments hereto, adopting impact fees or amending or adopting any methodology
by which impact fees are calculated, will be exempt from that portion of this chapter, or
amendment enacted after such building permit application, if a valid building permit has been
issued or construction has commenced prior to the effective date hereof, or amendment. For
building permits that expire or are revoked after the effective date hereof, the fee payer shall be
entitled to a refund of previously paid fees as provided herein, provided that in the case of
reapplication for building permit, the impact fee in effect at that time shall be paid.
(E) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, development requirements for system
improvements shall be imposed by the city only by way of impact fees imposed pursuant to and
in accordance with § 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code, and this chapter.
ORDINANCE - Page 4.
chubbuck 021119 imp fee ord (1).wpd
17.24.300: INTENT:
(A) The intent of this chapter is to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the
residents of the city and its area of city impact.
(B) The intent of this chapter is to be consistent with those principles for allocating a fair
share of the cost of capital improvements to public facilities to serve new development in
compliance with the provisions set forth in § 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code. The provisions of this
chapter shall be interpreted, construed and enforced in accordance with the provisions set forth in
§ 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code.
(C) The intent of this chapter is that impact fees should be charged, collected, and
expended for police, emergency services, parks and recreation, and street capital improvements
to increase the service capacity of such categories of public facilities, which capital
improvements are included in approved capital improvements plans that list the capital
improvements that may be funded with impact fees.
(D) The intent of this chapter is to ensure that:
1. public facilities are available to serve new development;
2. new development bears a proportionate share of the cost of police, emergency
services, and parks and recreation capital improvements to such public facilities;
3. such proportionate share does not exceed the cost of the capital improvements to
such public facilities required to serve new development; and
4. the funds collected from new development are used for capital improvements for
public facilities that benefit new development.
(E) It is not the intent of this chapter to collect any monies from new development in
excess of the actual amount necessary to offset new demands for capital improvements to public
facilities created by such new development.
(F) It is not the intent of this chapter that the impact fees be used to remedy any
deficiency in police, emergency services, and parks and recreation capital improvements existing
on the effective date hereof, or ever be used to replace, rehabilitate, maintain and/or operate any
public facilities.
(G) It is not the intent of this chapter that any monies collected from an impact fee
deposited in an impact fee fund ever be commingled with monies from a different fund, or ever
be used for capital improvements that are different from those for which the impact fee was paid.
(H) It is not the intent of this chapter that impact fees be used for:
Construction, acquisition or expansion of public facilities other than capital
ORDINANCE - Page 5.
chubbuck 021119 imp fee ord (1).wpd
improvements identified in the capital improvements plan.
2. Repair, operation or maintenance of existing or new capital improvements.
3. Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to
serve existing development in order to meet stricter safety, efficiency,
environmental or regulatory standards.
4. Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to
serve existing development to provide better service to existing development.
Administrative and operating costs of the city unless such costs are
attributable to development of the capital improvements plan used to
determine impact fees by a surcharge imposed by ordinance on the collection
of an impact fee, which surcharge shall not exceed a development's
proportionate share of the cost of preparing the capital improvements plan.
6. Principal payments and interest or other finance charges on bonds or other
indebtedness except financial obligations issued by or on behalf of the city to
finance capital improvements identified in the capital improvements plan.
17.24.400: DEFINITIONS:
401. APPROPRIATE: To legally obligate by contract or otherwise commit to use by
appropriation or other official act of a governmental entity.
402. BUILDING PERMIT: An official document or certificate by that name issued by
the city authorizing the construction or siting of any building.
403. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS: Improvements with a useful life of ten (10) years or
more, by new construction or other action, which increase the service capacity of a public
facility.
404. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT: A component of a comprehensive plan
adopted pursuant to chapter 65, title 67, Idaho Code, which component meets the requirements of
a capital improvements plan pursuant to this chapter.
405. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN: A plan adopted pursuant to this chapter that
identifies capital improvements for which impact fees may be used as a funding source.
406. CITY: The city of Chubbuck, Idaho.
407. CITY COUNCIL: The legislative body of the city of Chubbuck, Idaho.
ORDINANCE - Page 6.
chubbuck 021119 imp fee ord (1).wpd
408. DEVELOPER: Any person or legal entity undertaking development, including a
party that undertakes the subdivision of property pursuant to §s 50-1301 through 50-1334, Idaho
Code and this title.
409. DEVELOPMENT: Any construction or installation of a building or structure, or
any change in use of a building or structure, or any change in the use, character or appearance of
land, which creates additional demand and need for public facilities or the subdivision of
property that would permit any change in the use, character or appearance of land. As used in this
chapter, "development" shall not include activities that would otherwise be subject to payment of
the development impact fee if such activities are undertaken by a taxing district, as defined in §
63-201, Idaho Code, in the course of carrying out the taxing district's public responsibilities,
unless the adopted impact fee ordinance expressly includes taxing districts as being subject to
development impact fees.
410. DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL: Any written authorization from a governmental
entity which authorizes the commencement of a development.
411. DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE: See definition of Impact Fee.
412. DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENT: A requirement attached to a development
approval or other governmental action approving or authorizing a particular development
including, without limitation, a rezoning, which development requirement compels the payment,
dedication or contribution of goods, services, land and/or money as a condition of approval.
413. DWELLING UNIT: A building or portion of a building designed for or whose
primary purpose is for residential occupancy, and which consists of one or more rooms which are
arranged, designed or used as living and/or sleeping quarters for one or more persons. Dwelling
unit includes a multi -family building, a mobile home, a manufactured home, a modular building
and/or a motel/hotel/rooming house.
414. EXTRAORDINARY COSTS: Those costs incurred as a result of extraordinary
impact.
415. EXTRAORDINARY IMPACT: An impact which is reasonably determined by the
city to: result in the need for system improvements, the cost of which will significantly exceed
the sum of the impact fees to be generated from the project; or the sum agreed to be paid
pursuant to a development agreement as allowed by § 67-8214(2), Idaho Code, or result in the
need for system improvements that are not identified in the capital improvements plan.
416. FEE ADMINISTRATOR: The Public Works Director or the Director's desgnee.
417. FEE PAYER: A person who pays or is required to pay an impact fee or the fee
payer's successor in interest.
ORDINANCE - Page 7.
chubbuck 021119 imp fee ord (1).wpd
418. GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY: Any unit of local government that is empowered by
§ 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code, to adopt an impact fee ordinance.
419. IMPACT FEE: A payment of money imposed as a condition of development
approval to pay for a proportionate share of the cost of system improvements needed to serve
development. The term does not include a charge or fee to pay the administrative, plan review or
inspection costs associated with permits required for development; connection or hookup
charges; availability charges for drainage, sewer, water, or transportation charges for services
provided directly to the development; or amounts collected from a developer in a transaction in
which the city has incurred expenses in constructing capital improvements for the development if
the owner or developer has agreed to be financially responsible for the construction or
installation of the capital improvements, unless a written agreement is made pursuant to §
67-8209(3), Idaho Code, for credit or reimbursement.
420. IMPACT FEE STUDY: The documents entitled:
Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis,
Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis, and
Parks and Recreation Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis
dated September, 2018, prepared by Zions Public Finance for the city.
421. LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS: A description of the service area and projections of
land uses, densities, intensities, and population in the service area over at least a twenty (20) year
period.
422. LEVEL OF SERVICE: A measure of the relationship between service capacity and
service demand for public facilities.
423. MANUFACTURED HOME: A structure, constructed according to HUD/FHA
mobile home construction and safety standards, transportable in one or more sections, which, in
the traveling mode, is eight feet (8') or more in width or is forty (40) body feet or more in length,
or when erected on site, is three hundred twenty (320) or more square feet, and which is built on
a permanent chassis and designed to be used as a dwelling with or without a permanent
foundation when connected to the required utilities, and includes the plumbing, heating, air
conditioning, and electrical systems contained therein, except that such term shall include any
structure which meets all the requirements of this definition except the size requirements and
with respect to which the manufacturer voluntarily files a certification required by the secretary
of housing and urban development and complies with the standards established under 42 USC
5401 et seq. The definition in this chapter of a Manufactured Home shall have no application to
the definition of a Production Building in Title 18.
423. MODULAR BUILDING: Is defined in § 39-4301, Idaho Code, and means any
ORDINANCE - Page 8.
chubbuck 021119 imp fee ord (1).wpd
building or building component, other than a manufactured or mobile home, which is of closed
construction and is either entirely or substantially prefabricated or assembled at a place other than
the building site. § 67-8203(19), Idaho Code.
424. MULTI -FAMILY: A building or portion thereof, containing two (2) or more
dwelling units, excluding attached single-family townhouse units located on individual lots.
425. OWNER: The person holding legal title to real property, including the local, state
or federal government or any subdivision thereof.
426. PERSON: An individual, corporation, governmental agency, business trust, estate,
partnership, association, two (2) or more persons having a joint or common interest, or any other
entity.
427. PRESENT VALUE: The total current monetary value of past, present or future
payments, contributions or dedications of goods, services, materials, construction or money.
428. PROJECT: A particular development on an identified parcel of land.
429. PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS: Site improvements and facilities that are planned
and designed to provide service for a project and that are necessary for the use and convenience
of the occupants or users of the project.
430. PROPORTIONATE SHARE: That portion of the cost of system improvements
determined pursuant to § 67-8207, Idaho Code, and this title, which reasonably relates to the
service demands and needs for public facilities of a project.
431. PUBLIC FACILITY:
(A) Water supply production, treatment, storage and distribution facilities;
(B) Wastewater collection, treatment and disposal facilities;
(C) Roads, streets and bridges, including rights of way, traffic signals, landscaping
and any local components of state or federal highways;
(D) Stormwater collection, retention, detention, treatment and disposal facilities,
flood control facilities, and bank and shore protection and enhancement improvements;
(E) Parks, open space and recreation areas, and related capital improvements; and
(F) Public safety facilities, including law enforcement, emergency services,
emergency medical and rescue and street lighting facilities.
ORDINANCE - Page 9.
chubbuck 021119 imp fee ord (1).wpd
432. RECREATIONAL VEHICLE: A vehicular type unit primarily designed as
temporary quarters for recreational, camping, or travel use, which either has its own motive
power or is mounted on or drawn by another vehicle.
433. SERVICE AREA: Any defined geographic area identified by a governmental entity
or by intergovernmental agreement in which specific public facilities provide service to
development within the area defined, on the basis of sound planning or engineering principles or
both.
434. SERVICE UNIT: A standardized measure of consumption, use, generation or
discharge attributable to an individual unit of development calculated in accordance with
generally accepted engineering or planning standards for a particular category of capital
improvements.
435. SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST: A person who gains legal title in real property for
which an impact fee is paid or a credit is approved pursuant to the terms of this chapter.
436. SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT COSTS: Costs incurred for construction or
reconstruction of system improvements, including design, acquisition, engineering and other
costs attributable thereto, and also including, without limitation, the type of costs described in §
50-1702(h), Idaho Code, to provide additional public facilities needed to serve new development.
For clarification, system improvement costs do not include:
(A) Construction, acquisition or expansion of public facilities other than capital
improvements identified in the capital improvements plan;
(B) Repair, operation or maintenance of existing or new capital improvements;
(C) Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to
serve existing developments in order to meet stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or
regulatory standards;
(D) Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to
provide better service to existing development;
(E) Administrative and operating costs of the governmental entity unless such costs
are attributable to development of the capital improvements plan, as provided in § 67-8208,
Idaho Code; or
(F) Principal payments and interest or other finance charges on bonds or other
indebtedness except financial obligations issued by or on behalf of the governmental entity to
finance capital improvements identified in the capital improvements plan.
ORDINANCE - Page 10.
chubbuck 021119 imp fee ord (1).wpd
437. SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS: In contrast to project improvements, means
capital improvements to public facilities that are designed to provide service to a service area
including, without limitation, the type of improvements the city has the authority to make as
described in § 50-1703, Idaho Code
17.24.500: IMPOSITION AND COMPUTATION OF IMPACT FEES:
(A) Any application for a building permit enabling the construction, and in the case of
construction that does not require a building permit, any building that takes place on or after the
effective date hereof shall be subject to the imposition of impact fees in the manner and amount
set forth in this chapter. The methodology adopted for the purpose of determining police,
emergency services, and parks and recreation impact fees shall be based upon the assumptions
set forth in the Impact Fee Study for that respective service.
(B) Impact fees shall be required as a condition of approval of all residential and
nonresidential development in the service area for which a building permit is required and shall
be payable prior to the issuance of any building permit (or installation permit in the case of a
manufactured home) for a dwelling unit or a nonresidential building. Except as otherwise
provided herein, after the effective date hereof, no building permit shall be issued until the
impact fees described in this chapter have been paid, unless the development for which the
permit is sought is exempted by § 17.24.800 of this chapter or approved credits are used to cover
the impact fee, as set forth in § 17.24.900 of this chapter. The fee administrator shall have the
authority to withhold a building permit, stop construction, withhold utility services or impose
liens as the case may be, until the appropriate impact fee has been collected.
(C) After payment of the development impact fees or execution of an agreement for
payment of development impact fees, additional development impact fees or increases in fees
may not be assessed unless the number of service units increases or the scope or schedule of the
development changes. In the event of an increase in the number of service units or schedule of
the development changes, the additional development impact fees to be imposed are limited to
the amount attributable to the additional service units or change in scope of the development.
(D) A fee payer required by this chapter to pay an impact fee may choose to have the
amount of such impact fee determined pursuant to either the fee schedule (whereupon such
payment shall be recognized as full and complete payment of the development's proportionate
share of system improvement costs, except as provided in Idaho Code § 67-8214(3)) or
subsections (E) through (G) of this section. If the fee payer chooses to have the amount of such
impact fee determined pursuant to subsections (E) through (G) of this section, such impact fee
shall be subject to the adjustment described in section 17.24.900 of this chapter, if applicable. If
the project is a mix of those uses listed on the fee schedule, then the impact fees shall be
determined by adding up the impact fees that would be payable for each use as if it were a
freestanding use pursuant to the fee schedule.
ORDINANCE - Page 11.
chubbuck 021119 imp fee ord (1).wpd
(E) Individual assessment of impact fees is permitted in situations where the fee payer can
demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that the established impact fee is inappropriate for
the project. Written application for individual assessment shall be made to the fee administrator
at any time prior to receiving building permit(s). Late applications for individual assessment of
impact fees may be considered for a period of sixty (60) days after the receipt of a building
permit only if the fee payer makes a showing that the facts supporting such application were not
known or discoverable prior to receipt of a building permit and that undue hardship would result
if said application is not considered. Such independent impact fee calculation study for the fee
payer's development shall be prepared at the fee payer's cost by a qualified professional and
contain studies, data and other relevant information and be submitted to the fee administrator for
review. Any such study shall be based on the same methodology and the same level of service
standards, improvements and costs used in the Impact Fee Study, and must document the
methodologies and assumptions used. The city may hire a professional consultant to review any
independent impact fee calculation study on behalf of the city, and may charge the reasonable
costs of such review to the fee payer.
(F) Any independent impact fee calculation study submitted by a fee payer may be
accepted, rejected or accepted with modifications by the city as the basis for calculating impact
fees. The city shall not be required to accept any study or documentation the city reasonably
deems to be inaccurate or unreliable, and shall have the authority to request that the fee payer
submit additional or different documentation for consideration in connection with review of any
independent impact fee calculation. If such additional or different documentation is accepted or
accepted with modifications as a more accurate measure of the impact fees due in connection
with fee payer's proposed development than the applicable impact fees set forth in the fee
schedule, then the impact fee due under this chapter shall be calculated according to such
documentation.
(G) The fee administrator shall render a written decision establishing the impact fees in
connection with the individual assessment within thirty (30) days of the date a complete
application is submitted. The decision shall include an explanation of the calculation of the
impact fees, shall specify the system improvement(s) for which the impact fees are intended to be
used, and shall include an explanation of the following factors considered:
1. Any appropriate credit, offset or contribution of money, dedication of land, or
construction of system improvements;
2. Payments reasonably anticipated to be made by or as a result of a new development in
the form of user fees and debt service payments;
That portion of general tax and other revenues allocated by the jurisdiction to system
improvements;
4. All other available sources of funding such system improvements;
ORDINANCE - Page 12.
chubbuck 021119 imp fee ord (1).wpd
5. The cost of existing system improvements within the service area;
6. The means by which existing system improvements have been financed;
7. The extent to which the new development will contribute to the cost of system
improvements through taxation, assessment, or developer or landowner contributions,
or has previously contributed to the cost of system improvements through developer
or landowner contributions;
8. The extent to which the new development is required to contribute to the cost of
existing system improvements in the future;
9. The extent to which the new development should be credited for providing system
improvements, without charge to other properties within the service area;
10. Extraordinary costs, if any, incurred in serving the new development;
11. The time and price differential inherent in a fair comparison of impact fees paid at
different times; and
12. The availability of other sources of funding system improvements including, but not
limited to, user charges, general tax levies, intergovernmental transfers, and special
taxation. The city shall develop a plan for alternative sources of revenue.
(H) Certification of the impact fee for a project maybe applied for in the following
manner:
1. Written application may be made to the fee administrator not later than sixty (60) days
after development approval by the city council. Late applications for certification of
the impact fee will not be considered unless the fee payer makes a showing that the
facts supporting such application were not known or discoverable until after the time
had run and that undue hardship would result if said application is not considered.
2. The fee administrator shall provide the fee payer with a written impact fee
certification for the project within thirty (30) days of the date a complete application
is submitted. The certification provided by the fee administrator shall establish the
impact fee for the project in question so long as there is no material change to the
project as identified in the certification application or the impact fee schedule. The
certification shall include an explanation of the calculation of the impact fees, shall
specify the system improvement(s) for which the impact fees are intended to be used,
and shall include an explanation of the factors considered, which factors are identified
in subsection (G) of this section.
ORDINANCE - Page 13.
chubbuck 021119 imp fee ord (1).wpd
(I) Appeals of the fee administrator's determination of an individual assessment or
certification shall be made to the city as provided further in this chapter.
(J) The city recognizes that there may be circumstances where the anticipated fiscal
impacts of a proposed development are of such magnitude that the city may be unable to
accommodate the development without excessive or unscheduled public expenditures that
exceed the amount of the anticipated impact fees from such development. If the city determines
that a proposed development would create such an extraordinary impact on the city's police,
emergency services, and parks and recreation, the city may refuse to approve the proposed
development. In the alternative, the city may calculate a pro rata share per dwelling unit, or
square feet of nonresidential buildings, of the extraordinary impact and charge a reasonable
extraordinary impact fee that is greater than would ordinarily be charged.
(K) If the city discovers an error in its impact fee formula that results in assessment or
payment of more than a proportionate share, the city shall, at the time of assessment on a case by
case basis, adjust the impact fee to collect no more than a proportionate share or discontinue the
collection of any impact fees until the error is corrected by ordinance.
17.24.600: PAYMENT OF IMPACT FEES:
(A) After the effective date hereof all fee payers shall pay the impact fees as provided by
this chapter to the fee administrator following application for a building permit and prior to the
issuance of any building permit for a dwelling unit, or nonresidential building.
(B) All impact fees paid by a fee payer pursuant to this chapter shall be promptly
deposited in the impact fee fund described in section 17.24.700 of this chapter.
(C) If a fee payer fails to pay the impact fee when required and due, the city may
(1) Charge interest on the amount of the fee from the due date until the date paid
at the rate provided in Idaho Code § 28-22-104;
(2) Withhold of the building permit or other governmental approval until the
development impact fee is paid;
(3) Withhold the providing of utility services until the development impact fee is
paid; and/or
(4) Impose and file a lien against the property subject to the impact fee following
procedures contained in chapter 5, title 45, Idaho Code.
ORDINANCE - Page 14.
chubbuck 021119 imp fee ord (1).wpd
17.24.700: IMPACT FEE FUNDS; REFUNDS OF IMPACT FEES PAID:
(A) There is hereby established a police impact fee fund into which shall be deposited all
police impact fees for the purpose of ensuring police impact fees collected pursuant hereto are
designated for the accommodation of police capital improvements reasonably necessary to serve
new development that paid the impact fee.
(B) There is hereby established a emergency services impact fee fund into which shall be
deposited all emergency services impact fees for the purpose of ensuring emergency services
impact fees collected pursuant hereto are designated for the accommodation of emergency
services capital improvements reasonably necessary to serve new development that paid the
impact fee.
(C) There is hereby established a parks and recreation impact fee fund into which shall be
deposited all parks and recreation impact fees for the purpose of ensuring parks and recreation
impact fees collected pursuant hereto are designated for the accommodation of parks and
recreation capital improvements reasonably necessary to serve new development that paid the
impact fee.
(D) Each fund shall be an interest bearing account which shall be accounted for separately
from other impact fee funds and from other city funds. Any interest or other income earned on
monies deposited in a fund shall be credited to such fund. Expenditures of impact fees shall be
made only for the category of system improvements for which the impact fees were collected and
as identified in the capital improvements plan.
(E) Except as otherwise provided herein, monies from each fund, including any accrued
interest, shall be limited to the financing of acquisition, expansion, and/or improvement of
capital improvements, or for principal and interest payments on bonds or other borrowed
revenues used to acquire, expand or improve such capital improvements, necessary to serve new
development. Impact fees in each fund shall be spent within eight (8) years from the date such
impact fees were collected on a first in/first out (FIFO) basis. The city may hold the impact fees
longer than the prescribed time period if the city identifies, in writing: 1) a reasonable cause why
the impact fees should be held longer; and 2) an anticipated date by which the impact fees will be
expended but in no event longer than eleven (11) years from the date the impact fees were
collected.
(F) The fee administrator shall prepare annual reports to be provided to the advisory
committee and the city council, which reports shall: 1) describe the amount of all impact fees
collected, appropriated or spent for system improvements during the preceding year, as
applicable, by category of public facility and service area; and 2) describe the percentage of tax
and revenues other than impact fees collected, appropriated or spent for system improvements
during the preceding year, as applicable, by category of public facility and service area.
ORDINANCE - Page 15.
chubbuck 021119 imp fee ord (1).w -pd
(G) Funds shall be deemed expended when payment of such funds has been approved by
the city. The fee payer or successor in interest shall be entitled to a refund of the impact fee if: 1)
service is available but never provided; 2) a building permit or permit for installation of a
manufactured home is revoked or abandoned; 3) the city, after collecting the impact fee when
service is not available, has failed to appropriate and expend the collected impact fees; or 4) the
fee payer pays an impact fee under protest and a subsequent review of the impact fee paid or the
completion of an individual assessment determines that the impact fee paid exceeded the
proportionate share to which the city was entitled to receive.
(H) When the right to a refund exists, within ninety (90) days after the city determines
that a refund is due, the city shall provide written notice of entitlement to a refund, to the owner
of record and the fee payer who paid the impact fees at the address shown on the application for
development approval, or to a successor in interest who has notified the city of a transfer of the
right or entitlement to a refund and who has provided to the city a mailing address. When the
right to a refund exists, the city shall also publish the notice of entitlement to a refund within
thirty (30) days after the expiration of the eight (8) year period after the date that the impact fees
were collected. Such published notice shall contain the heading "Notice of Entitlement to Impact
Fee Refund".
(I) A refund shall include interest at one-half (%2) the legal rate provided for in
§ 28-22-104, Idaho Code, from the date on which the impact fee was originally paid.
(J) In order to be eligible for a refund, a fee payer, successor in interest or owner of record
shall file a written application for a refund with the fee administrator within six (6) months of the
time such refund becomes payable under this Chapter, or within six (6) months of publication of
the notice of entitlement to a refund, whichever is later. If a successor in interest claims a refund
of impact fees, the fee administrator may require written documentation that such rights have
been transferred to the claimant prior to issuing the requested refund. Refunds shall be paid
within sixty (60) days after the date on which the fee administrator determines that a sufficient
proof of claim for a refund has been made.
(K) Any person entitled to a refund shall have standing to sue for a refund under the
provisions of this chapter if there has not been a timely payment of a refund as provided herein.
17.24.800: EXEMPTIONS FROM IMPACT FEES:
(A) The following types of land development shall be exempted from payment of the
impact fees imposed by this chapter:
Rebuilding the same amount of square feet of a dwelling unit or nonresidential
structure that was destroyed by fire or other catastrophe, provided that the structure is
rebuilt and ready for occupancy within two (2) years of its destruction.
ORDINANCE - Page 16.
chubbuck 021119 imp fee ord (1).wpd
2. Construction of an unoccupied, detached accessory structure, or addition of uses
related to a dwelling unit unless it can be clearly demonstrated that the use creates a
significant impact on the capacity of system improvements.
3. Remodeling or repairing a dwelling unit or a nonresidential structure in a manner that
does not increase the number of service units.
4. Replacing a dwelling unit with another dwelling unit on the same lot, provided that
the number of service units does not increase.
Placing a temporary construction trailer or office on a lot.
6. Constructing an addition on a residential structure which does not increase the
number of service units.
7. Adding uses that are typically accessory to residential uses, such as tennis courts or
clubhouse, unless it can be clearly demonstrated that the use creates a significant
impact on the capacity of system improvements.
(B) An impact fee will be assessed for installation of a modular building, manufactured
home or recreational vehicle unless the fee payer can demonstrate by documentation such as
utility bills and tax records, either: 1) that a modular building, manufactured home or recreational
vehicle was legally in place on the lot or space prior to the effective date hereof, or 2) that an
impact fee has been paid previously for the installation of a modular building, manufactured
home or recreational vehicle on that same lot or space. Lawful storage of a recreational vehicle
shall not be deemed installation for purposes of this chapter.
17.24.900: CREDITS; REIMBURSEMENTS:
(A) No fee payer shall be required to construct, fund or contribute any capital
improvement to meet the same need for police, emergency services, and parks and recreation
improvements for which an impact fee is imposed. All system improvements constructed, funded
or contributed over and above the proportionate share of system improvement costs, including
such system improvements paid for pursuant to a local improvement district, shall result in either
a credit on future impact fees or reimbursement (at the fee payer's option) for such excess
construction, funding or contribution to be paid from impact fees paid by future development that
benefits from such system improvements constructed, funded or contributed by the fee payer.
However, no credit or reimbursement shall be provided for: 1) project improvements; 2) any
construction, funding or contribution not agreed to in writing by the city prior to commencement
of such construction, funding or contribution; and 3) any construction, funding or contribution of
a type of capital improvements not included in the calculation of the applicable impact fee.
ORDINANCE - Page 17.
chubbuck 021119 imp fee ord (1).wpd
(B) In the calculation of impact fees for a project pursuant to subsections 17.24.500 (E)
through (G) of this chapter, credit shall be given for the present value of all tax and user fee
revenue generated by the fee payer within the service area and used by the city for system
improvements of the category for which the impact fee is being collected. If the amount of such
credit exceeds the impact fee for a project, the fee payer shall receive a credit on future impact
fees. The credit may be applied by the fee payer as an offset against future impact fees only in the
service area where the credit was generated.
(C) In the calculation of impact fees for a project, credit or reimbursement (at the fee
payer's option) shall be given for the present value of any construction of system improvements
or contribution of land or money required by the city from the developer for system
improvements of the category for which the impact fee is being collected, including system
improvements paid for through local improvement district assessments.
(D) If credit or reimbursement is due to the fee payer, the city and fee payer shall enter
into a written agreement, negotiated in good faith, prior to the construction, funding or
contribution. The written agreement shall include, without limitation: a description of the
construction, funding or contribution of system improvements including, in the case of real
property, a legal description of the real property, description as to how the system improvements
are to be valued; the amount of the credit or the amount, time and form of reimbursement;
instructions as to how the capital improvements should be provided to the city to ensure full
transfer of ownership; and the circumstances under which the credit or reimbursement is deemed
effective. To assist in such reimbursement, the city shall continue to collect impact fees from
other developers whose proposed developments will benefit from such construction, funding or
contribution, and will promptly transfer such funds to the fee payer. If a successor in interest
claims a reimbursement or credit, the fee administrator may require written documentation that
such rights have been conveyed to the claimant prior to issuing the requested reimbursement or
credit.
(E) Approved credits may be used to reduce the amount of impact fees of the category for
which the impact fee is being collected in connection with any new development until the
amount of the credit is exhausted. Each time a request to use approved credits is presented to the
city, the city shall reduce the amount of the applicable impact fee otherwise due from the fee
payer and shall note in the city records the amount of credit remaining, if any. Upon request of
the fee payer, the city shall issue a letter stating the amount of credit available. If the credit has
not been exhausted within eight (8) years of the date of issuance of the first building permit for
which an impact fee was due and payable, or within such other time period as may be designated
in writing by the city, such credit shall lapse, unless a refund of the remaining credit is applied
for as set forth in subsection 17.24.700 (J) of this chapter.
(F) Approved credits or reimbursement shall only be used to reduce the amount of the
impact fee of the category for which the impact fee is otherwise due, and shall not be paid to the
fee payer in cash or in credits against any other monies due from the fee payer to the city.
ORDINANCE - Page 18.
chubbuck 021119 imp fee ord (1).wpd
(G) Credit for land dedications shall, at the fee payer's option, be valued at: 1) one
hundred percent (100%) of the most recent assessed value for such land as shown in the records
of the Bannock County assessor; or 2) fair market value established by a private appraiser
reasonably acceptable to the city in an appraisal paid for by the fee payer. Credit for contribution
or construction of system improvements shall be valued by the city based on complete
engineering drawings, specifications, and construction cost estimates submitted by the fee payer
to the city, which estimates shall be revised as actual costs become available. The city shall
determine the amount of credit due based on the information submitted, or, if the city determines
that such information is inaccurate or unreliable, then on alternative engineering or construction
costs reasonably acceptable to the city as a more accurate measure of the value of the offered
system improvements to the city.
(H) Approved credits for land dedications shall become effective when the land has been
conveyed to the city in a form reasonably acceptable to the city at no cost to the city, and has
been accepted by the city. Approved credits for contribution or construction of system
improvements shall generally become effective when: 1) all required construction has been
completed and has been accepted by the city; and 2) all design, construction, inspection, testing,
bonding, and acceptance procedures have been completed in compliance with all applicable
requirements of the city. Approved credits for the construction of system improvements may
become effective at an earlier date if the fee payer posts security in the form of a performance
bond, irrevocable letter of credit or escrow agreement in the amount and under terms reasonably
acceptable to the city.
(1) Credit may only be transferred by a fee payer that has received credit to such fee
payer's successor in interest. The credit may be used only to offset impact fees for the same
category for which the credit was issued. Credits shall be transferred by any written instrument
clearly identifying which credits are being transferred, the dollar amount of the credit being
transferred, and the system improvements for which the credit was issued. The instrument of
transfer shall be signed by both the transferor and transferee, and a copy of the document shall be
delivered to the fee administrator for documentation of the transfer before the transfer shall be
deemed effective.
17.24.1000: APPEALS:
The decisions of the fee administrator may be appealed as provided below:
(A) Any fee payer who is or may be obligated to pay an impact fee, may appeal a decision
made by the fee administrator in applying this chapter to the city council. Such decisions that
may be appealed include:
1. The applicability of an impact fee to the development.
ORDINANCE - Page 19.
chubbuck 021119 imp fee ord (1).wpd
2. The amount of an impact fee to be paid for the development.
3. The availability, amount or application of any credit.
4. The amount of any refund, reimbursement or credit.
5. Any discretionary action or inaction by or on behalf of the city.
A fee payer may pay an impact fee under protest in order to obtain a development approval or
building permit(s) and, by paying such impact fee, shall not be estopped from exercising the right
of appeal provided herein, nor shall the fee payer be estopped from receiving a refund of any
amount deemed to have been illegally collected. Upon final disposition of an appeal, the impact
fee shall be adjusted in accordance with the decision rendered and, if necessary, a refund paid.
(B) In order to pursue an appeal, the fee payer shall file a written notice of appeal with the
city clerk with a copy to the fee administrator within fifteen (15) days after the date of the
decision being appealed, or the date on which the fee payer submitted a payment of impact fees
under protest, whichever is later. Such written application shall include a statement describing
why the appellant believes that the decision was in error, together with copies of any documents
that the appellant believes supports the claim.
(C) The city clerk shall notify the fee payer of the hearing date on the appeal, which
notice shall be given no less than fifteen (15) days prior to the date of the hearing, and shall hear
the appeal within thirty (30) days after receipt of a written notice of appeal. The appellant shall
have a right to be present and to present evidence in support of the appeal. The fee administrator
shall likewise have the right to be present and to present evidence in support of the decision. The
burden of proof in any such hearing shall be on the fee payer to demonstrate that the amount of
the impact fee, credit, reimbursement or refund was not properly calculated by the city.
(D) The criteria to be used by the city council in evaluating the appeal shall be whether:
1) the decision or interpretation made by the fee administrator; or
2) the alternative decision or interpretation offered by the appellant, more accurately
reflects the intent of this chapter that new development in the city pay its
proportionate share of the costs of system improvements for public facilities
necessary to serve new development.
The city council may affirm, reject or revise the decision of the fee administrator, providing
written findings of fact and conclusions, within fifteen (15) days after hearing the appeal. The
city council shall modify the amount of the impact fee, credit, refund or reimbursement only if
there is substantial evidence in the record that the fee administrator erred, based upon the
methodologies contained in the Impact Fee Study, this chapter and/or the capital improvements
plan. The decision of the city council shall be final.
ORDINANCE - Page 20.
chubbuck 021119 imp fee ord (1).wpd
(E) Upon voluntary agreement by the fee payer and the city, the fee payer and the city
may enter into mediation with a qualified independent party to address a disagreement related to
the impact fee for proposed development. Costs for the independent mediation service shall be
shared equally by the fee payer and the city. Mediation may take place at any time during an
appeals process and participation in mediation does not preclude the fee payer from pursuing
other remedies.
17.24.1100: MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS:
(A) As used in this chapter, masculine, feminine or neuter gender and the singular or
plural number shall each be deemed to include the others wherever and whenever the context so
dictates; the word shall, will or must is always mandatory; the word may is permissive; and the
word should indicates that which is recommended, but not required.
(B) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to create any additional right to develop
real property or diminish the power of the city in regulating the orderly development of real
property.
(C) Nothing in this chapter shall limit or modify the rights of any person to complete any
development for which a lawful building permit was issued prior to the effective date hereof.
(D) Nothing in this chapter shall prevent the city from requiring a developer to construct
reasonable project improvements in conjunction with a project.
(E) Nothing in this chapter shall limit the ability of the city to enter into inter-
governmental agreements as provided in § 67-8204A, Idaho Code.
(F) Nothing in this chapter shall obligate the city to approve any development request that
may reasonably be expected to reduce levels of service below minimum acceptable levels
established in the development Impact Fee Study.
(G) Nothing in this chapter shall obligate the city to approve development which results
in extraordinary impact.
(H) Notwithstanding any agreement by the fee payer to pay the proportionate share of
system improvement costs documented by the supplemental study, nothing in this chapter shall
obligate the city to approve development that results in an extraordinary impact.
(1) Nothing in this chapter shall work to limit the use by the city of the power of eminent
domain or supersede or conflict with requirements or procedures authorized in the Idaho Code
for local improvement districts or general obligation bond issues.
ORDINANCE - Page 21.
chubbuck 021119 imp fee ord (1).wpd
(J) A development impact fee shall not exceed a proportionate share of the cost of system
improvements determined in accordance with § 67-8207, Idaho Code. Development impact fees
shall be based on actual system improvement costs or reasonable estimates of such costs.
(K) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prevent or prohibit private agreements
between developers, the city, the Idaho transportation department, and/or other governmental
entities in regard to the construction or installation of system improvements or providing for
credits or reimbursements for system improvement costs incurred by a developer or fee payer,
including interproject transfers of credits, or providing for reimbursement for project
improvements that are used or shared by more than one development project. If it can be shown
that a proposed development has a direct impact on a public facility under the jurisdiction of the
Idaho transportation department, then the agreement shall include a provision for the allocation
of development impact fees collected from the developer or fee payer for the improvement of the
public facility by the Idaho transportation department.
(L) Nothing in this chapter shall restrict or diminish the power of the city: 1) to impose
reasonable conditions on the annexation of any property to the city in accordance with Idaho
Code, including conditions for recovery of project or system improvement costs required as a
result of such voluntary annexation, or 2) to negotiate and execute development agreements that
may impose additional conditions on development, including the recovery of project or system
improvement costs, either in connection with a proposed annexation or in connection with any
other development within the city.
(M) The impact fees described in this chapter, and the administrative procedures of this
chapter shall be reviewed at least once every five (5) years to ensure that:
1) the demand and cost assumptions and other assumptions underlying such impact
fees are still valid;
2) the resulting impact fees do not exceed the actual costs of providing police,
emergency services, and/or parks and recreation system improvements required to
serve new development;
3) the monies collected in any impact fee fund have been and are expected to be
spent for system improvements of the type for which such impact fees were paid;
and
4) such system improvements will benefit those developments for which the impact
fees were paid.
(l) Violation of this chapter shall be subject to those remedies provided in this code.
Knowingly furnishing false information to any official of the city charged with the administration
of this chapter on any matter relating to the administration of this chapter including, without
ORDINANCE - Page 22.
chubbuck 021119 imp fee ord (1).wpd
limitation, the furnishing of false information regarding the expected size or use of a proposed
development, shall be a violation of this chapter.
(0) The captions used in this chapter are for convenience only and shall not affect the
interpretation of any portion of the text of this chapter.
(P) The respective capital improvement plans for Police, Emergency Services and Parks
and Recreation as set forth in the respective:
Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis,
Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis, and
Parks and Recreation Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis
all dated September, 2018 are hereby adopted and accepted as the capital improvement plan for
the respective department set forth in the Plan for that department.
17.24.1200: FEE SCHEDULE:
This fee schedule shall be in effect March 26, 2019. Except for such impact fee as may be
calculated, paid and accepted pursuant to an independent impact fee calculation study, the
amount of each impact fee shall be as follows:
Police impact fee schedule per unit:
Residential:
Single Family Residential $ 231.56
Multi Family Residential 154.86
Non -Residential
General Commercial per 1,000 sq. ft. $ 371.61
Office per 1,000 sq. ft. 47.72
Institutional per 1,000 sq. ft. 67.92
Emergency Services Impact Fee per unit:
Residential:
Single Family Residential $ 274.01
Multi Family Residential 243.45
Non -Residential
General Commercial per 1,000 sq. ft. $ 308.13
Office per 1,000 sq. ft. 145.41
ORDINANCE - Page 23.
chubbuck 021119 imp fee ord (1).wpd
Institutional per 1,000 sq. ft. 43.73
Parks and Recreation Impact Fee per Household:
Single Family Residential $ 2,355
Multi Family Residential 2195
On January 1, 2020, and on January 1 of each year thereafter in which an impact fee is in
effect, the amount of the impact fee shall be automatically adjusted to account for inflation
increases in the cost of providing police, emergency services, and parks and recreation facilities
to serve new development utilizing the municipal cost index as published by "American Cities
And County Magazine". Nothing herein shall prevent the city from electing to maintain a then
existing police, emergency services, and parks and recreation impact fee or from electing to
waive the inflation adjustment for any given fiscal year, or years. Any such action to determine
an inflation factor shall be by city council resolution.
ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 1. Repeal of Conflicting Ordinances. The provisions of any Ordinance of the
City and any provision of the Municipal Code which are in conflict with the provisions of this
Ordinance are repealed to the extent of such conflict.
Section 2. Severability. The sections of this ordinance are severable. The invalidity of
a section shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections.
Section 3. Effective Date. The rule requiring an ordinance to be read on three separate
days, one of which shall be a reading in full, is dispensed with, and this Ordinance shall
become effective upon its passage, approval and publication.
PASSED BY THE COUNCIL AND APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY
OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO, this day of 12019.
Kevin B. England, MAYOR
ORDINANCE - Page 24.
chubbuck 021119 imp fee ord (1).wpd
ATTEST:
Richard Morgan, CITY CLERK
ORDINANCE - Page 25.
chubbuck 021119 imp fee ord (1).wpd
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO.
An ordinance of the City of Chubbuck, Idaho, repealing sections 17.16.110, 17.16.130
through 17.16.240, amending 17.16. 100 of the Chubbuck Municipal Code effective March 26,
2019; adopting chapter 17.24 "Impact Fee" to provide an impact fee upon new development
effective March 26, 2019 providing new development shall pay impact fees to be applied
towards parks, emergency services, and police, providing for the administration of said impact
fees and periodic adjustment thereof, adopting the Capital Improvements Plans dated September
1, 2018 for the Police, Emergency Services and Parks and Recreation Departments; repealing
prior conflicting ordinances; providing for the severability of the provisions of this ordinance;
and providing when this ordinance is effective
The full text of this ordinance is available at the City Clerk's Office, Chubbuck City
Offices, 5160 Yellowstone, Chubbuck, ID 83202.
I have reviewed the foregoing summary and believe it provides a true and correct
summary of Ordinance No. and that the summary provides adequate notice to the
public of the contents of this ordinance.
DATED this day of
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE - Page 1.
chubbuck 021119 sum impact fee ord.wpd
2019.
Thomas J. Holmes, City Attorney
CITY OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO, ADOPTING CHAPTER
17.28 "POLICE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES IMPACT FEE" TO PROVIDE AN
IMPACT FEE UPON NEW DEVELOPMENT EFFECTIVE MARCH 26, 2019
PROVIDING NEW DEVELOPMENT SHALL PAY IMPACT FEES TO BE APPLIED
TOWARDS POLICE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES; PROVIDING FOR THE
ADMINISTRATION OF SAID IMPACT FEES AND PERIODIC ADJUSTMENT
THEREOF; ADOPTING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLANS DATED
SEPTEMBER 1, 2018 FOR THE POLICE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES
DEPARTMENTS; REPEALING PRIOR CONFLICTING ORDINANCES; PROVIDING
FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ORDINANCE; AND
PROVIDING WHEN THIS ORDINANCE IS EFFECTIVE.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHUBBUCK, IDAHO:
Section 1. Adoption of Title 17, Chapter 24, "Police and Emergency Services Impact
Fee". The following is adopted effective March 26, 2019:
17.24. 100 LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS:
The city council of the city of Chubbuck, Idaho, finds that:
(A) Based on the city of Chubbuck Comprehensive Plan adopted by the City pursuant to
Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, including, but not limited to, the capital improvements element
of the comprehensive plan, and the general governmental goal of protecting the health, safety, and
general welfare of the citizens of the city, and its Area of City Impact, it is necessary for: 1) police
public facilities; and 2) emergency services public facilities to accommodate new development
within the city, and its area of city impact.
(B) New residential and nonresidential growth and development imposes and will impose
increasing and excessive demands upon the public facilities.
(C) The revenues generated from new residential and nonresidential growth and
development often does not generate sufficient funds to provide the necessary levels of service
provided by these public facilities to accommodate new development.
(D) New development is expected to continue, and will place ever increasing demands on
the city to provide and expand the public facilities to serve new development.
ORDINANCE - Page 1.
chubbuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd
(E) The city has planned for the improvement of the public facilities in the capital
improvements element of the city of Chubbuck Comprehensive Plan and in the impact fee
analysis and the capital improvement plan reviewed and adopted therewith.
(F) The creation of an equitable impact fee system in accordance with Title 67, Chapter
82, Idaho Code would enable the city to impose a proportionate share of the costs of needed
improvements to the public facilities to accommodate new development, and would assist the city
in implementing the capital improvements element of the comprehensive plan.
(G) In order to implement an equitable impact fee system for the public facilities, the city
retained Zions Public Finance, Inc. ("Zion") to prepare an impact fee studies for these types of
facilities. The resulting documents are titled:
Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis, and
Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis, and
all dated September, 2018 (the "Impact Fee Study"), and recommended for approval by the Impact
Fee Advisory Committee. The studies are on file in the office of the city clerk of the city of
Chubbuck. Any reference herein to the Impact Fee Study shall be to the respective study for that
service.
(H) The Impact Fee Study is consistent with the capital improvements element of the city
of Chubbuck Comprehensive Plan, and uses the levels of service set forth in the Comprehensive
Plan for these public facilities.
1. Police level of service from page 2 of the Police Impact Fee Study is .4599 calls per capita
for 2016 with an estimated number of calls per capita at build out to be .4574.
2. Emergency Services level of service from page 3 of the Emergency Services Impact Fee
Study is .0762 calls per capita for 2016 with an estimate number of calls per capita at build out
to be .0647.
(I) The Impact Fee Study sets forth reasonable methodologies and analyses for determining
the impacts of various types of new development on the public facilities, and determines the cost
of acquiring or constructing the improvements necessary to meet the demands for such public
facilities created by new development.
(J) The Impact Fee Study uses a calculation methodology in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles. This chapter shall not be deemed invalid because payment of an
impact fee may result in an incidental benefit to others within the service area other than the fee
payer.
ORDINANCE - Page 2.
chubbuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd
(K) The impact fees described in this chapter are based on the Impact Fee Study, and do
not exceed the costs of system improvements for the public facilities to serve new development
that will pay the impact fees.
(L) The police and emergency services included in the calculation of impact fees in the
Impact Fee Study will benefit all new development throughout the city, and it is therefore
appropriate to treat all areas of the city and the area of city impact as a single service area for
purposes of calculating, collecting and spending the impact fees collected.
(M) There is both a rational nexus and a rough proportionality between the development
impacts created by each type of development covered by this chapter and the impact fees that such
development will be required to pay.
(N) This chapter creates a system by which impact fees paid by new development will be
used to finance, defray or to provide capital improvements for the public facilities in ways that
benefit the development for which impact fees were paid.
(0) This chapter creates a system under which impact fees shall not be used to correct
existing deficiencies in public facilities, or to replace or rehabilitate existing public facilities, or to
pay for routine operation or maintenance of those public facilities.
(P) This chapter creates a system under which there shall be no double payment of impact
fees, in accordance with Idaho Code § 67-8204(19).
(Q) This chapter is consistent with all applicable provisions of title 67, chapter 82, Idaho
Code, concerning impact fee ordinances.
17.24.200: AUTHORITY, APPLICABILITY, AND EFFECTIVE DATE:
(A) This chapter is enacted pursuant to the city's general police powers pursuant to the
authority granted to the city by title 50, Idaho Code, and pursuant to the authority granted to the
city by § 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code.
(B) The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all of the territory within the limits of the
city and to any unincorporated areas of the city within the city's area of city impact where the city
has executed an intergovernmental agreement with Bannock County for purposes of collection or
expenditure of impact fees pursuant to § 67-8204A, Idaho Code, and other applicable laws of the
state of Idaho.
(C) This chapter is effective March 26, 2019 ("Effective Date"), which effective date is
more than thirty (30) days subsequent to the passage, approval and publication, according to law,
of the ordinance codified herein, which adopted the provisions hereof.
ORDINANCE - Page 3.
chubbuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd
(D) Applications for building permits received by the city prior to the effective date
hereof, or amendments hereto, adopting impact fees or amending or adopting any methodology by
which impact fees are calculated, will be exempt from that portion of this chapter, or amendment
enacted after such building permit application, if a valid building permit has been issued or
construction has commenced prior to the effective date hereof, or amendment. For building
permits that expire or are revoked after the effective date hereof, the fee payer shall be entitled to
a refund of previously paid fees as provided herein, provided that in the case of reapplication for
building permit, the impact fee in effect at that time shall be paid.
(E) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, development requirements for system
improvements shall be imposed by the city only by way of impact fees imposed pursuant to and in
accordance with § 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code, and this chapter.
17.24.300: INTENT:
(A) The intent of this chapter is to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the
residents of the city and its area of city impact.
(B) The intent of this chapter is to be consistent with those principles for allocating a fair
share of the cost of capital improvements to public facilities to serve new development in
compliance with the provisions set forth in § 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code. The provisions of this
chapter shall be interpreted, construed and enforced in accordance with the provisions set forth in
§ 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code.
(C) The intent of this chapter is that impact fees should be charged, collected, and
expended for police and emergency services capital improvements to increase the service
capacity of such categories of public facilities, which capital improvements are included in
approved capital improvements plans that list the capital improvements that may be funded with
impact fees.
(D) The intent of this chapter is to ensure that:
1. public facilities are available to serve new development;
2. new development bears a proportionate share of the cost of police and emergency
services capital improvements to such public facilities;
3. such proportionate share does not exceed the cost of the capital improvements to
such public facilities required to serve new development; and
4. the funds collected from new development are used for capital improvements for
public facilities that benefit new development.
(E) It is not the intent of this chapter to collect any monies from new development in
excess of the actual amount necessary to offset new demands for capital improvements to public
ORDINANCE - Page 4.
chubbuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd
facilities created by such new development.
(F) It is not the intent of this chapter that the impact fees be used to remedy any deficiency
in police and emergency services capital improvements existing on the effective date hereof, or
ever be used to replace, rehabilitate, maintain and/or operate any public facilities.
(G) It is not the intent of this chapter that any monies collected from an impact fee
deposited in an impact fee fund ever be commingled with monies from a different fund, or ever be
used for capital improvements that are different from those for which the impact fee was paid.
(H) It is not the intent of this chapter that impact fees be used for:
1. Construction, acquisition or expansion of public facilities other than capital
improvements identified in the capital improvements plan.
2. Repair, operation or maintenance of existing or new capital improvements.
3. Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to
serve existing development in order to meet stricter safety, efficiency,
environmental or regulatory standards.
4. Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to
serve existing development to provide better service to existing development.
5. Administrative and operating costs of the city unless such costs are attributable
to development of the capital improvements plan used to determine impact fees
by a surcharge imposed by ordinance on the collection of an impact fee, which
surcharge shall not exceed a development's proportionate share of the cost of
preparing the capital improvements plan.
6. Principal payments and interest or other finance charges on bonds or other
indebtedness except financial obligations issued by or on behalf of the city to
finance capital improvements identified in the capital improvements plan.
17.24.400: DEFINITIONS:
401. APPROPRIATE: To legally obligate by contract or otherwise commit to use by
appropriation or other official act of a governmental entity.
402. BUILDING PERMIT: An official document or certificate by that name issued by the
city authorizing the construction or siting of any building.
403. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS: Improvements with a useful life of ten (10) years or
ORDINANCE - Page 5.
chubbuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd
more, by new construction or other action, which increase the service capacity of a public facility.
404. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT: A component of a comprehensive plan
adopted pursuant to chapter 65, title 67, Idaho Code, which component meets the requirements of
a capital improvements plan pursuant to this chapter.
405. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN: A plan adopted pursuant to this chapter that
identifies capital improvements for which impact fees may be used as a funding source.
406. CITY: The city of Chubbuck, Idaho.
407. CITY COUNCIL: The legislative body of the city of Chubbuck, Idaho.
408. DEVELOPER: Any person or legal entity undertaking development, including a
party that undertakes the subdivision of property pursuant to §s 50-1301 through 50-1334, Idaho
Code and this title.
409. DEVELOPMENT: Any construction or installation of a building or structure, or any
change in use of a building or structure, or any change in the use, character or appearance of land,
which creates additional demand and need for public facilities or the subdivision of property that
would permit any change in the use, character or appearance of land. As used in this chapter,
"development" shall not include activities that would otherwise be subject to payment of the
development impact fee if such activities are undertaken by a taxing district, as defined in §
63-201, Idaho Code, in the course of carrying out the taxing district's public responsibilities,
unless the adopted impact fee ordinance expressly includes taxing districts as being subject to
development impact fees.
410. DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL: Any written authorization from a governmental
entity which authorizes the commencement of a development.
411. DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE: See definition of Impact Fee.
412. DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENT: A requirement attached to a development
approval or other governmental action approving or authorizing a particular development
including, without limitation, a rezoning, which development requirement compels the payment,
dedication or contribution of goods, services, land and/or money as a condition of approval.
413. DWELLING UNIT: A building or portion of a building designed for or whose
primary purpose is for residential occupancy, and which consists of one or more rooms which are
arranged, designed or used as living and/or sleeping quarters for one or more persons. Dwelling
unit includes a multi -family building, a mobile home, a manufactured home, a modular building
and/or a motel/hotel/rooming house.
ORDINANCE - Page 6.
chubbuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd
414. EXTRAORDINARY COSTS: Those costs incurred as a result of extraordinary
impact.
415. EXTRAORDINARY IMPACT: An impact which is reasonably determined by the
city to: result in the need for system improvements, the cost of which will significantly exceed the
sum of the impact fees to be generated from the project; or the sum agreed to be paid pursuant to a
development agreement as allowed by § 67-8214(2), Idaho Code, or result in the need for system
improvements that are not identified in the capital improvements plan.
416. FEE ADMINISTRATOR: The Public Works Director or the Director's designee.
417. FEE PAYER: A person who pays or is required to pay an impact fee or the fee
payer's successor in interest.
418. GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY: Any unit of local government that is empowered by
§ 67-8201 et seq., Idaho Code, to adopt an impact fee ordinance.
419. IMPACT FEE: A payment of money imposed as a condition of development
approval to pay for a proportionate share of the cost of system improvements needed to serve
development. The term does not include a charge or fee to pay the administrative, plan review or
inspection costs associated with permits required for development; connection or hookup charges;
availability charges for drainage, sewer, water, or transportation charges for services provided
directly to the development; or amounts collected from a developer in a transaction in which the
city has incurred expenses in constructing capital improvements for the development if the owner
or developer has agreed to be financially responsible for the construction or installation of the
capital improvements, unless a written agreement is made pursuant to § 67-8209(3), Idaho Code,
for credit or reimbursement.
420. IMPACT FEE STUDY: The documents entitled:
Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis, and
Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis
dated September, 2018, prepared by Zions Public Finance for the city.
421. LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS: A description of the service area and projections of
land uses, densities, intensities, and population in the service area over at least a twenty (20) year
period.
422. LEVEL OF SERVICE: A measure of the relationship between service capacity and
service demand for public facilities.
423. MANUFACTURED HOME: A structure, constructed according to HUD/FHA
ORDINANCE - Page 7.
chubbuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd
mobile home construction and safety standards, transportable in one or more sections, which, in
the traveling mode, is eight feet (8') or more in width or is forty (40) body feet or more in length,
or when erected on site, is three hundred twenty (320) or more square feet, and which is built on a
permanent chassis and designed to be used as a dwelling with or without a permanent foundation
when connected to the required utilities, and includes the plumbing, heating, air conditioning, and
electrical systems contained therein, except that such term shall include any structure which meets
all the requirements of this definition except the size requirements and with respect to which the
manufacturer voluntarily files a certification required by the secretary of housing and urban
development and complies with the standards established under 42 USC 5401 et seq. The
definition in this chapter of a Manufactured Home shall have no application to the definition of a
Production Building in Title 18.
423. MODULAR BUILDING: Is defined in § 39-4301, Idaho Code, and means any
building or building component, other than a manufactured or mobile home, which is of closed
construction and is either entirely or substantially prefabricated or assembled at a place other than
the building site. § 67-8203(19), Idaho Code.
424. MULTI -FAMILY: A building or portion thereof, containing two (2) or more
dwelling units, excluding attached single-family townhouse units located on individual lots.
425. OWNER: The person holding legal title to real property, including the local, state or
federal government or any subdivision thereof.
426. PERSON: An individual, corporation, governmental agency, business trust, estate,
partnership, association, two (2) or more persons having a joint or common interest, or any other
entity.
427. PRESENT VALUE: The total current monetary value of past, present or future
payments, contributions or dedications of goods, services, materials, construction or money.
428. PROJECT: A particular development on an identified parcel of land.
429. PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS: Site improvements and facilities that are planned
and designed to provide service for a project and that are necessary for the use and convenience of
the occupants or users of the project.
430. PROPORTIONATE SHARE: That portion of the cost of system improvements
determined pursuant to § 67-8207, Idaho Code, and this title, which reasonably relates to the
service demands and needs for public facilities of a project.
431. PUBLIC FACILITY:
(A) Water supply production, treatment, storage and distribution facilities;
ORDINANCE - Page 8.
chubbuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd
(B) Wastewater collection, treatment and disposal facilities;
(C) Roads, streets and bridges, including rights of way, traffic signals, landscaping and
any local components of state or federal highways;
(D) Stormwater collection, retention, detention, treatment and disposal facilities, flood
control facilities, and bank and shore protection and enhancement improvements; and
(E) Public safety facilities, including law enforcement, emergency services, emergency
medical and rescue and street lighting facilities.
432. RECREATIONAL VEHICLE: A vehicular type unit primarily designed as
temporary quarters for recreational, camping, or travel use, which either has its own motive power
or is mounted on or drawn by another vehicle.
433. SERVICE AREA: Any defined geographic area identified by a governmental entity
or by intergovernmental agreement in which specific public facilities provide service to
development within the area defined, on the basis of sound planning or engineering principles or
both.
434. SERVICE UNIT: A standardized measure of consumption, use, generation or
discharge attributable to an individual unit of development calculated in accordance with
generally accepted engineering or planning standards for a particular category of capital
improvements.
435. SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST: A person who gains legal title in real property for
which an impact fee is paid or a credit is approved pursuant to the terms of this chapter.
436. SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT COSTS: Costs incurred for construction or
reconstruction of system improvements, including design, acquisition, engineering and other costs
attributable thereto, and also including, without limitation, the type of costs described in §
50-1702(h), Idaho Code, to provide additional public facilities needed to serve new development.
For clarification, system improvement costs do not include:
(A) Construction, acquisition or expansion of public facilities other than capital
improvements identified in the capital improvements plan;
(B) Repair, operation or maintenance of existing or new capital improvements;
(C) Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to
serve existing developments in order to meet stricter safety, efficiency, environmental or
regulatory standards;
ORDINANCE - Page 9.
chubbuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd
(D) Upgrading, updating, expanding or replacing existing capital improvements to
provide better service to existing development;
(E) Administrative and operating costs of the governmental entity unless such costs are
attributable to development of the capital improvements plan, as provided in § 67-8208, Idaho
Code; or
(F) Principal payments and interest or other finance charges on bonds or other
indebtedness except financial obligations issued by or on behalf of the governmental entity to
finance capital improvements identified in the capital improvements plan.
437. SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS: In contrast to project improvements, means
capital improvements to public facilities that are designed to provide service to a service area
including, without limitation, the type of improvements the city has the authority to make as
described in § 50-1703, Idaho Code
17.24.500: IMPOSITION AND COMPUTATION OF IMPACT FEES:
(A) Any application for a building permit enabling the construction, and in the case of
construction that does not require a building permit, any building that takes place on or after the
effective date hereof shall be subject to the imposition of impact fees in the manner and amount
set forth in this chapter. The methodology adopted for the purpose of determining police,
emergency services, and parks and recreation impact fees shall be based upon the assumptions set
forth in the Impact Fee Study for that respective service.
(B) Impact fees shall be required as a condition of approval of all residential and
nonresidential development in the service area for which a building permit is required and shall be
payable prior to the issuance of any building permit (or installation permit in the case of a
manufactured home) for a dwelling unit or a nonresidential building. Except as otherwise
provided herein, after the effective date hereof, no building permit shall be issued until the impact
fees described in this chapter have been paid, unless the development for which the permit is
sought is exempted by § 17.24.800 of this chapter or approved credits are used to cover the impact
fee, as set forth in § 17.24.900 of this chapter. The fee administrator shall have the authority to
withhold a building permit, stop construction, withhold utility services or impose liens as the case
may be, until the appropriate impact fee has been collected.
(C) After payment of the development impact fees or execution of an agreement for
payment of development impact fees, additional development impact fees or increases in fees may
not be assessed unless the number of service units increases or the scope or schedule of the
development changes. In the event of an increase in the number of service units or schedule of the
development changes, the additional development impact fees to be imposed are limited to the
amount attributable to the additional service units or change in scope of the development.
ORDINANCE - Page 10.
chubbuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd
(D) A fee payer required by this chapter to pay an impact fee may choose to have the
amount of such impact fee determined pursuant to either the fee schedule (whereupon such
payment shall be recognized as full and complete payment of the development's proportionate
share of system improvement costs, except as provided in Idaho Code § 67-8214(3)) or
subsections (E) through (G) of this section. If the fee payer chooses to have the amount of such
impact fee determined pursuant to subsections (E) through (G) of this section, such impact fee
shall be subject to the adjustment described in section 17.24.900 of this chapter, if applicable. If
the project is a mix of those uses listed on the fee schedule, then the impact fees shall be
determined by adding up the impact fees that would be payable for each use as if it were a
freestanding use pursuant to the fee schedule.
(E) Individual assessment of impact fees is permitted in situations where the fee payer can
demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that the established impact fee is inappropriate for
the project. Written application for individual assessment shall be made to the fee administrator at
any time prior to receiving building permit(s). Late applications for individual assessment of
impact fees may be considered for a period of sixty (60) days after the receipt of a building permit
only if the fee payer makes a showing that the facts supporting such application were not known
or discoverable prior to receipt of a building permit and that undue hardship would result if said
application is not considered. Such independent impact fee calculation study for the fee payer's
development shall be prepared at the fee payer's cost by a qualified professional and contain
studies, data and other relevant information and be submitted to the fee administrator for review.
Any such study shall be based on the same methodology and the same level of service standards,
improvements and costs used in the Impact Fee Study, and must document the methodologies and
assumptions used. The city may hire a professional consultant to review any independent impact
fee calculation study on behalf of the city, and may charge the reasonable costs of such review to
the fee payer.
(F) Any independent impact fee calculation study submitted by a fee payer may be
accepted, rejected or accepted with modifications by the city as the basis for calculating impact
fees. The city shall not be required to accept any study or documentation the city reasonably
deems to be inaccurate or unreliable, and shall have the authority to request that the fee payer
submit additional or different documentation for consideration in connection with review of any
independent impact fee calculation. If such additional or different documentation is accepted or
accepted with modifications as a more accurate measure of the impact fees due in connection with
fee payer's proposed development than the applicable impact fees set forth in the fee schedule,
then the impact fee due under this chapter shall be calculated according to such documentation.
(G) The fee administrator shall render a written decision establishing the impact fees in
connection with the individual assessment within thirty (30) days of the date a complete
application is submitted. The decision shall include an explanation of the calculation of the impact
fees, shall specify the system improvement(s) for which the impact fees are intended to be used,
and shall include an explanation of the following factors considered:
ORDINANCE - Page 11.
chubbuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd
Any appropriate credit, offset or contribution of money, dedication of land, or
construction of system improvements;
2. Payments reasonably anticipated to be made by or as a result of a new development in
the form of user fees and debt service payments;
3. That portion of general tax and other revenues allocated by the jurisdiction to system
improvements;
4. All other available sources of funding such system improvements;
5. The cost of existing system improvements within the service area;
6. The means by which existing system improvements have been financed;
7. The extent to which the new development will contribute to the cost of system
improvements through taxation, assessment, or developer or landowner contributions,
or has previously contributed to the cost of system improvements through developer or
landowner contributions;
The extent to which the new development is required to contribute to the cost of
existing system improvements in the future;
9. The extent to which the new development should be credited for providing system
improvements, without charge to other properties within the service area;
10. Extraordinary costs, if any, incurred in serving the new development;
11. The time and price differential inherent in a fair comparison of impact fees paid at
different times; and
12. The availability of other sources of funding system improvements including, but not
limited to, user charges, general tax levies, intergovernmental transfers, and special
taxation. The city shall develop a plan for alternative sources of revenue.
(H) Certification of the impact fee for a project maybe applied for in the following
manner:
1. Written application may be made to the fee administrator not later than sixty (60) days
after development approval by the city council. Late applications for certification of
the impact fee will not be considered unless the fee payer makes a showing that the
facts supporting such application were not known or discoverable until after the time
had run and that undue hardship would result if said application is not considered.
ORDINANCE - Page 12.
chubbuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd
2. The fee administrator shall provide the fee payer with a written impact fee certification
for the project within thirty (30) days of the date a complete application is submitted.
The certification provided by the fee administrator shall establish the impact fee for the
project in question so long as there is no material change to the project as identified in
the certification application or the impact fee schedule. The certification shall include
an explanation of the calculation of the impact fees, shall specify the system
improvement(s) for which the impact fees are intended to be used, and shall include an
explanation of the factors considered, which factors are identified in subsection (G) of
this section.
(1) Appeals of the fee administrator's determination of an individual assessment or
certification shall be made to the city as provided further in this chapter.
(J) The city recognizes that there may be circumstances where the anticipated fiscal
impacts of a proposed development are of such magnitude that the city may be unable to
accommodate the development without excessive or unscheduled public expenditures that exceed
the amount of the anticipated impact fees from such development. If the city determines that a
proposed development would create such an extraordinary impact on the city's police and
emergency services, the city may refuse to approve the proposed development. In the alternative,
the city may calculate a pro rata share per dwelling unit, or square feet of nonresidential buildings,
of the extraordinary impact and charge a reasonable extraordinary impact fee that is greater than
would ordinarily be charged.
(K) If the city discovers an error in its impact fee formula that results in assessment or
payment of more than a proportionate share, the city shall, at the time of assessment on a case by
case basis, adjust the impact fee to collect no more than a proportionate share or discontinue the
collection of any impact fees until the error is corrected by ordinance.
17.24.600: PAYMENT OF IMPACT FEES:
(A) After the effective date hereof all fee payers shall pay the impact fees as provided by
this chapter to the fee administrator following application for a building permit and prior to the
issuance of any building permit for a dwelling unit, or nonresidential building.
(B) All impact fees paid by a fee payer pursuant to this chapter shall be promptly deposited
in the impact fee fund described in section 17.24.700 of this chapter.
(C) If a fee payer fails to pay the impact fee when required and due, the city may
(1) Charge interest on the amount of the fee from the due date until the date paid at
the rate provided in Idaho Code § 28-22-104;
ORDINANCE - Page 13.
chubbuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd
(2) Withhold of the building permit or other governmental approval until the
development impact fee is paid;
(3) Withhold the providing of utility services until the development impact fee is
paid; and/or
(4) Impose and file a lien against the property subject to the impact fee following
procedures contained in chapter 5, title 45, Idaho Code.
17.24.700: IMPACT FEE FUNDS; REFUNDS OF IMPACT FEES PAID:
(A) There is hereby established a police impact fee fund into which shall be deposited all
police impact fees for the purpose of ensuring police impact fees collected pursuant hereto are
designated for the accommodation of police capital improvements reasonably necessary to serve
new development that paid the impact fee.
(B) There is hereby established a emergency services impact fee fund into which shall be
deposited all emergency services impact fees for the purpose of ensuring emergency services
impact fees collected pursuant hereto are designated for the accommodation of emergency
services capital improvements reasonably necessary to serve new development that paid the
impact fee.
(C) Each fund shall be an interest bearing account which shall be accounted for separately
from other impact fee funds and from other city funds. Any interest or other income earned on
monies deposited in a fund shall be credited to such fund. Expenditures of impact fees shall be
made only for the category of system improvements for which the impact fees were collected and
as identified in the capital improvements plan.
(D) Except as otherwise provided herein, monies from each fund, including any accrued
interest, shall be limited to the financing of acquisition, expansion, and/or improvement of capital
improvements, or for principal and interest payments on bonds or other borrowed revenues used
to acquire, expand or improve such capital improvements, necessary to serve new development.
Impact fees in each fund shall be spent within eight (8) years from the date such impact fees were
collected on a first in/first out (FIFO) basis. The city may hold the impact fees longer than the
prescribed time period if the city identifies, in writing: 1) a reasonable cause why the impact fees
should be held longer; and 2) an anticipated date by which the impact fees will be expended but in
no event longer than eleven (11) years from the date the impact fees were collected.
(E) The fee administrator shall prepare annual reports to be provided to the advisory
committee and the city council, which reports shall: 1) describe the amount of all impact fees
collected, appropriated or spent for system improvements during the preceding year, as applicable,
by category of public facility and service area; and 2) describe the percentage of tax and revenues
ORDINANCE - Page 14.
chubbuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd
other than impact fees collected, appropriated or spent for system improvements during the
preceding year, as applicable, by category of public facility and service area.
(F) Funds shall be deemed expended when payment of such funds has been approved by
the city. The fee payer or successor in interest shall be entitled to a refund of the impact fee if. 1)
service is available but never provided; 2) a building permit or permit for installation of a
manufactured home is revoked or abandoned; 3) the city, after collecting the impact fee when
service is not available, has failed to appropriate and expend the collected impact fees; or 4) the
fee payer pays an impact fee under protest and a subsequent review of the impact fee paid or the
completion of an individual assessment determines that the impact fee paid exceeded the
proportionate share to which the city was entitled to receive.
(G) When the right to a refund exists, within ninety (90) days after the city determines that
a refund is due, the city shall provide written notice of entitlement to a refund, to the owner of
record and the fee payer who paid the impact fees at the address shown on the application for
development approval, or to a successor in interest who has notified the city of a transfer of the
right or entitlement to a refund and who has provided to the city a mailing address. When the right
to a refund exists, the city shall also publish the notice of entitlement to a refund within thirty (30)
days after the expiration of the eight (8) year period after the date that the impact fees were
collected. Such published notice shall contain the heading "Notice of Entitlement to Impact Fee
Refund".
(H) A refund shall include interest at one-half (%2) the legal rate provided for in
§ 28-22-104, Idaho Code, from the date on which the impact fee was originally paid.
(I) In order to be eligible for a refund, a fee payer, successor in interest or owner of record
shall file a written application for a refund with the fee administrator within six (6) months of the
time such refund becomes payable under this Chapter, or within six (6) months of publication of
the notice of entitlement to a refund, whichever is later. If a successor in interest claims a refund
of impact fees, the fee administrator may require written documentation that such rights have been
transferred to the claimant prior to issuing the requested refund. Refunds shall be paid within sixty
(60) days after the date on which the fee administrator determines that a sufficient proof of claim
for a refund has been made.
(K) Any person entitled to a refund shall have standing to sue for a refund under the
provisions of this chapter if there has not been a timely payment of a refund as provided herein.
17.24.800: EXEMPTIONS FROM IMPACT FEES:
(A) The following types of land development shall be exempted from payment of the
impact fees imposed by this chapter:
ORDINANCE - Page 15.
chubbuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd
1. Rebuilding the same amount of square feet of a dwelling unit or nonresidential
structure that was destroyed by fire or other catastrophe, provided that the structure is
rebuilt and ready for occupancy within two (2) years of its destruction.
2. Construction of an unoccupied, detached accessory structure, or addition of uses
related to a dwelling unit unless it can be clearly demonstrated that the use creates a
significant impact on the capacity of system improvements.
Remodeling or repairing a dwelling unit or a nonresidential structure in a manner that
does not increase the number of service units.
4. Replacing a dwelling unit with another dwelling unit on the same lot, provided that the
number of service units does not increase.
5. Placing a temporary construction trailer or office on a lot.
6. Constructing an addition on a residential structure which does not increase the number
of service units.
7. Adding uses that are typically accessory to residential uses, such as tennis courts or
clubhouse, unless it can be clearly demonstrated that the use creates a significant
impact on the capacity of system improvements.
(B) An impact fee will be assessed for installation of a modular building, manufactured
home or recreational vehicle unless the fee payer can demonstrate by documentation such as
utility bills and tax records, either: 1) that a modular building, manufactured home or recreational
vehicle was legally in place on the lot or space prior to the effective date hereof, or 2) that an
impact fee has been paid previously for the installation of a modular building, manufactured home
or recreational vehicle on that same lot or space. Lawful storage of a recreational vehicle shall not
be deemed installation for purposes of this chapter.
17.24.900: CREDITS; REIMBURSEMENTS:
(A) No fee payer shall be required to construct, fund or contribute any capital
improvement to meet the same need for police and emergency services improvements for which
an impact fee is imposed. All system improvements constructed, funded or contributed over and
above the proportionate share of system improvement costs, including such system improvements
paid for pursuant to a local improvement district, shall result in either a credit on future impact
fees or reimbursement (at the fee payer's option) for such excess construction, funding or
contribution to be paid from impact fees paid by future development that benefits from such
system improvements constructed, funded or contributed by the fee payer. However, no credit or
reimbursement shall be provided for: 1) project improvements; 2) any construction, funding or
ORDINANCE - Page 16.
chubbuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd
contribution not agreed to in writing by the city prior to commencement of such construction,
funding or contribution; and 3) any construction, funding or contribution of a type of capital
improvements not included in the calculation of the applicable impact fee.
(B) In the calculation of impact fees for a project pursuant to subsections 17.24.500 (E)
through (G) of this chapter, credit shall be given for the present value of all tax and user fee
revenue generated by the fee payer within the service area and used by the city for system
improvements of the category for which the impact fee is being collected. If the amount of such
credit exceeds the impact fee for a project, the fee payer shall receive a credit on future impact
fees. The credit may be applied by the fee payer as an offset against future impact fees only in the
service area where the credit was generated.
(C) In the calculation of impact fees for a project, credit or reimbursement (at the fee
payer's option) shall be given for the present value of any construction of system improvements or
contribution of land or money required by the city from the developer for system improvements of
the category for which the impact fee is being collected, including system improvements paid for
through local improvement district assessments.
(D) If credit or reimbursement is due to the fee payer, the city and fee payer shall enter into
a written agreement, negotiated in good faith, prior to the construction, funding or contribution.
The written agreement shall include, without limitation: a description of the construction, funding
or contribution of system improvements including, in the case of real property, a legal description
of the real property, description as to how the system improvements are to be valued; the amount
of the credit or the amount, time and form of reimbursement; instructions as to how the capital
improvements should be provided to the city to ensure full transfer of ownership; and the
circumstances under which the credit or reimbursement is deemed effective. To assist in such
reimbursement, the city shall continue to collect impact fees from other developers whose
proposed developments will benefit from such construction, funding or contribution, and will
promptly transfer such funds to the fee payer. If a successor in interest claims a reimbursement or
credit, the fee administrator may require written documentation that such rights have been
conveyed to the claimant prior to issuing the requested reimbursement or credit.
(E) Approved credits may be used to reduce the amount of impact fees of the category for
which the impact fee is being collected in connection with any new development until the amount
of the credit is exhausted. Each time a request to use approved credits is presented to the city, the
city shall reduce the amount of the applicable impact fee otherwise due from the fee payer and
shall note in the city records the amount of credit remaining, if any. Upon request of the fee payer,
the city shall issue a letter stating the amount of credit available. If the credit has not been
exhausted within eight (8) years of the date of issuance of the first building permit for which an
impact fee was due and payable, or within such other time period as may be designated in writing
by the city, such credit shall lapse, unless a refund of the remaining credit is applied for as set
forth in subsection 17.24.700 (J) of this chapter.
ORDINANCE - Page 17.
chubbuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd
(F) Approved credits or reimbursement shall only be used to reduce the amount of the
impact fee of the category for which the impact fee is otherwise due, and shall not be paid to the
fee payer in cash or in credits against any other monies due from the fee payer to the city.
(G) Credit for land dedications shall, at the fee payer's option, be valued at: 1) one hundred
percent (100%) of the most recent assessed value for such land as shown in the records of the
Bannock County assessor; or 2) fair market value established by a private appraiser reasonably
acceptable to the city in an appraisal paid for by the fee payer. Credit for contribution or
construction of system improvements shall be valued by the city based on complete engineering
drawings, specifications, and construction cost estimates submitted by the fee payer to the city,
which estimates shall be revised as actual costs become available. The city shall determine the
amount of credit due based on the information submitted, or, if the city determines that such
information is inaccurate or unreliable, then on alternative engineering or construction costs
reasonably acceptable to the city as a more accurate measure of the value of the offered system
improvements to the city.
(H) Approved credits for land dedications shall become effective when the land has been
conveyed to the city in a form reasonably acceptable to the city at no cost to the city, and has been
accepted by the city. Approved credits for contribution or construction of system improvements
shall generally become effective when: 1) all required construction has been completed and has
been accepted by the city; and 2) all design, construction, inspection, testing, bonding, and
acceptance procedures have been completed in compliance with all applicable requirements of the
city. Approved credits for the construction of system improvements may become effective at an
earlier date if the fee payer posts security in the form of a performance bond, irrevocable letter of
credit or escrow agreement in the amount and under terms reasonably acceptable to the city.
(I) Credit may only be transferred by a fee payer that has received credit to such fee payer's
successor in interest. The credit may be used only to offset impact fees for the same category for
which the credit was issued. Credits shall be transferred by any written instrument clearly
identifying which credits are being transferred, the dollar amount of the credit being transferred,
and the system improvements for which the credit was issued. The instrument of transfer shall be
signed by both the transferor and transferee, and a copy of the document shall be delivered to the
fee administrator for documentation of the transfer before the transfer shall be deemed effective.
17.24.1000: APPEALS:
The decisions of the fee administrator may be appealed as provided below:
(A) Any fee payer who is or may be obligated to pay an impact fee, may appeal a decision
made by the fee administrator in applying this chapter to the city council. Such decisions that may
be appealed include:
ORDINANCE - Page 18.
chubbuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd
1. The applicability of an impact fee to the development.
2. The amount of an impact fee to be paid for the development.
3. The availability, amount or application of any credit.
4. The amount of any refund, reimbursement or credit.
5. Any discretionary action or inaction by or on behalf of the city.
A fee payer may pay an impact fee under protest in order to obtain a development approval or
building permit(s) and, by paying such impact fee, shall not be estopped from exercising the right
of appeal provided herein, nor shall the fee payer be estopped from receiving a refund of any
amount deemed to have been illegally collected. Upon final disposition of an appeal, the impact
fee shall be adjusted in accordance with the decision rendered and, if necessary, a refund paid.
(B) In order to pursue an appeal, the fee payer shall file a written notice of appeal with the
city clerk with a copy to the fee administrator within fifteen (15) days after the date of the decision
being appealed, or the date on which the fee payer submitted a payment of impact fees under
protest, whichever is later. Such written application shall include a statement describing why the
appellant believes that the decision was in error, together with copies of any documents that the
appellant believes supports the claim.
(C) The city clerk shall notify the fee payer of the hearing date on the appeal, which notice
shall be given no less than fifteen (15) days prior to the date of the hearing, and shall hear the
appeal within thirty (30) days after receipt of a written notice of appeal. The appellant shall have a
right to be present and to present evidence in support of the appeal. The fee administrator shall
likewise have the right to be present and to present evidence in support of the decision. The
burden of proof in any such hearing shall be on the fee payer to demonstrate that the amount of
the impact fee, credit, reimbursement or refund was not properly calculated by the city.
(D) The criteria to be used by the city council in evaluating the appeal shall be whether:
1) the decision or interpretation made by the fee administrator; or
2) the alternative decision or interpretation offered by the appellant, more accurately
reflects the intent of this chapter that new development in the city pay its
proportionate share of the costs of system improvements for public facilities
necessary to serve new development.
The city council may affirm, reject or revise the decision of the fee administrator, providing
written findings of fact and conclusions, within fifteen (15) days after hearing the appeal. The city
council shall modify the amount of the impact fee, credit, refund or reimbursement only if there is
ORDINANCE - Page 19.
chubbuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd
substantial evidence in the record that the fee administrator erred, based upon the methodologies
contained in the Impact Fee Study, this chapter and/or the capital improvements plan. The
decision of the city council shall be final.
(E) Upon voluntary agreement by the fee payer and the city, the fee payer and the city may
enter into mediation with a qualified independent party to address a disagreement related to the
impact fee for proposed development. Costs for the independent mediation service shall be shared
equally by the fee payer and the city. Mediation may take place at any time during an appeals
process and participation in mediation does not preclude the fee payer from pursuing other
remedies.
17.24.1100: MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS:
(A) As used in this chapter, masculine, feminine or neuter gender and the singular or
plural number shall each be deemed to include the others wherever and whenever the context so
dictates; the word shall, will or must is always mandatory; the word may is permissive; and the
word should indicates that which is recommended, but not required.
(B) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to create any additional right to develop real
property or diminish the power of the city in regulating the orderly development of real property.
(C) Nothing in this chapter shall limit or modify the rights of any person to complete any
development for which a lawful building permit was issued prior to the effective date hereof.
(D) Nothing in this chapter shall prevent the city from requiring a developer to construct
reasonable project improvements in conjunction with a project.
(E) Nothing in this chapter shall limit the ability of the city to enter into inter-
governmental agreements as provided in § 67-8204A, Idaho Code.
(F) Nothing in this chapter shall obligate the city to approve any development request that
may reasonably be expected to reduce levels of service below minimum acceptable levels
established in the development Impact Fee Study.
(G) Nothing in this chapter shall obligate the city to approve development which results in
extraordinary impact.
(H) Notwithstanding any agreement by the fee payer to pay the proportionate share of
system improvement costs documented by the supplemental study, nothing in this chapter shall
obligate the city to approve development that results in an extraordinary impact.
(1) Nothing in this chapter shall work to limit the use by the city of the power of eminent
ORDINANCE - Page 20.
chubbuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd
domain or supersede or conflict with requirements or procedures authorized in the Idaho Code for
local improvement districts or general obligation bond issues.
(J) A development impact fee shall not exceed a proportionate share of the cost of system
improvements determined in accordance with § 67-8207, Idaho Code. Development impact fees
shall be based on actual system improvement costs or reasonable estimates of such costs.
(K) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prevent or prohibit private agreements
between developers, the city, the Idaho transportation department, and/or other governmental
entities in regard to the construction or installation of system improvements or providing for
credits or reimbursements for system improvement costs incurred by a developer or fee payer,
including interproject transfers of credits, or providing for reimbursement for project
improvements that are used or shared by more than one development project. If it can be shown
that a proposed development has a direct impact on a public facility under the jurisdiction of the
Idaho transportation department, then the agreement shall include a provision for the allocation of
development impact fees collected from the developer or fee payer for the improvement of the
public facility by the Idaho transportation department.
(L) Nothing in this chapter shall restrict or diminish the power of the city: 1) to impose
reasonable conditions on the annexation of any property to the city in accordance with Idaho
Code, including conditions for recovery of project or system improvement costs required as a
result of such voluntary annexation, or 2) to negotiate and execute development agreements that
may impose additional conditions on development, including the recovery of project or system
improvement costs, either in connection with a proposed annexation or in connection with any
other development within the city.
(M) The impact fees described in this chapter, and the administrative procedures of this
chapter shall be reviewed at least once every five (5) years to ensure that:
I) the demand and cost assumptions and other assumptions underlying such impact
fees are still valid;
2) the resulting impact fees do not exceed the actual costs of providing police and/or
emergency services system improvements required to serve new development;
3) the monies collected in any impact fee fund have been and are expected to be spent
for system improvements of the type for which such impact fees were paid; and
4) such system improvements will benefit those developments for which the impact
fees were paid.
(N) Violation of this chapter shall be subject to those remedies provided in this code.
Knowingly furnishing false information to any official of the city charged with the administration
ORDINANCE - Page 21.
chubbuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd
of this chapter on any matter relating to the administration of this chapter including, without
limitation, the furnishing of false information regarding the expected size or use of a proposed
development, shall be a violation of this chapter.
(0) The captions used in this chapter are for convenience only and shall not affect the
interpretation of any portion of the text of this chapter.
(P) The respective capital improvement plans for Police, Emergency Services and Parks
and Recreation as set forth in the respective:
Police Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis, and
Emergency Services Capital Improvement Plan and Impact Fee Analysis
both dated September, 2018 are hereby adopted and accepted as the capital improvement plan for
the respective department set forth in the Plan for that department.
17.24.1200: FEE SCHEDULE:
This fee schedule shall be in effect March 26, 2019. Except for such impact fee as maybe
calculated, paid and accepted pursuant to an independent impact fee calculation study, the amount
of each impact fee shall be as follows:
Police impact fee schedule per unit:
Residential:
Single Family Residential $ 231.56
Multi Family Residential 154.86
Non -Residential
General Commercial per 1,000 sq. ft. $ 371.61
Office per 1,000 sq. ft. 47.72
Institutional per 1,000 sq. ft. 67.92
Emergency Services Impact Fee per unit:
Residential:
Single Family Residential $ 274.01
Multi Family Residential 243.45
Non -Residential
General Commercial per 1,000 sq. ft. $ 308.13
Office per 1,000 sq. ft. 145.41
ORDINANCE - Page 22.
chubbuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd
Institutional per 1,000 sq. ft. 43.73
On January 1, 2020, and on January 1 of each year thereafter in which an impact fee is in
effect, the amount of the impact fee shall be automatically adjusted to account for inflation
increases in the cost of providing police, emergency services, and parks and recreation facilities to
serve new development utilizing the municipal cost index as published by "American Cities And
County Magazine". Nothing herein shall prevent the city from electing to maintain a then existing
police, emergency services, and parks and recreation impact fee or from electing to waive the
inflation adjustment for any given fiscal year, or years. Any such action to determine an inflation
factor shall be by city council resolution.
ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 1. Repeal of Conflicting Ordinances. The provisions of any Ordinance of the
City and any provision of the Municipal Code which are in conflict with the provisions of this
Ordinance are repealed to the extent of such conflict.
Section 2. Severability. The sections of this ordinance are severable. The invalidity of
a section shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections.
Section 3. Effective Date. The rule requiring an ordinance to be read on three separate
days, one of which shall be a reading in full, is dispensed with, and this Ordinance shall
become effective upon its passage, approval and publication.
PASSED BY THE COUNCIL AND APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY
OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO, this day of , 2019.
Kevin B. England, MAYOR
ATTEST:
Richard Morgan, CITY CLERK
ORDINANCE - Page 23.
chubbuck 021119 polic & emergency sry imp fee ord.wpd
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO.
An ordinance of the City of Chubbuck, a municipal corporation of the state of Idaho,
Adopting Chapter 17.28 "Police and Emergency Services Impact Fee" to Provide an Impact Fee
upon New Development Effective March 26, 2019; Providing New Development Shall Pay
Impact Fees to Be Applied Towards Police and Emergency Services; Providing a Schedule for
said Impact Fees; Providing for the Administration of Said Impact Fees and Periodic
Adjustment Thereof, Adopting the Capital Improvements Plans Dated September 1, 2018 for the
Police and Emergency Services Departments; providing for the repeal of conflicting ordinances;
providing for the severability of the provisions of this ordinance; providing when this ordinance
shall be in effect.
The full text of this ordinance is available at the City Clerk's Office, Chubbuck City
Offices, 5160 Yellowstone, Chubbuck, ID 83202.
I have reviewed the foregoing summary and believe it provides a true and correct
summary of Ordinance No. and that the summary provides adequate notice to the
public of the contents of this ordinance.
DATED this day of , 2019.
Thomas J. Holmes, City Attorney
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE - Page 1.
chubbuck 021119 sum pol & em sry ord.wpd
Joey Bowers
From: Thomas Holmes <tholmesid@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2019 12:27 PM
To: Bill Guiberson
Cc: Joey Bowers; Richard Morgan; Kevin England
Subject: Light Bars
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Bill
For the light bar transfer, where they have nominal value, let's put it on the council agenda for a direct transfer
to he Bannock County Sheriff so they can approve. Where is for and of no value, we don't need to do the notice
and hearing, etc. that we normally do on a sale of property to another governmental entity.
Thomas J. Holmes
Attorney -at -Law
Beard St. Clair Gaffney
Jones Robison Holmes
203 S. Garfield
P.O. Box 967
Pocatello, Idaho 83204
(208) 232-5911, ext. 12
Fax: (208) 232-5962
CITY OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO
RESOLUTION NO. 2019 -
RESOLUTION RE: REIMBURSEMENT OF COSTS
[Official Intent pursuant to Section 1.150-2, Code of Federal Regulations]
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO DECLARING ITS
OFFICIAL INTENT TO REIMBURSE CERTAIN REIMBURSABLE
EXPENDITURES RELATING TO CERTAIN PROJECTS FROM TAX
EXEMPT OBLIGATIONS AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Chubbuck, Idaho (the "City"), is a municipal corporation
operating and existing under and pursuant to the provisions of the Constitution and laws of the
State of Idaho;
WHEREAS, the City intends to finance the costs of (1) acquisition of certain land and
construction of a new City Hall on the same, (2) renovation and conversion of the City's existing
City Hall to police facilities, and (3) construction a new animal shelter on property currently
owned by the City (collectively, the "Project");
WHEREAS, to finance the Project, the City intends to either (i) issue a tax-exempt
obligation in the form of a lease agreement, subject to annual appropriation, or similar
obligation, including issuance and sale of certificates of participation (the "COP Structure"), or
(ii) request assistance from the Chubbuck Development Authority, an urban renewal agency of
the City of Chubbuck, Idaho (the "Agency"), pursuant to which the Agency would issue one or
more tax-exempt obligations in the form of Bonds, utilize the proceeds of the Bonds to acquire
and construct the Project, and lease the Project to the City subject to annual appropriation (the
"Conduit Structure") (the COP Structure and the Conduit Structure are interchangeably referred
to herein as the "Proposed Obligation");
WHEREAS, the City has incurred expenditures and expects to incur further expenditures
related to the Project prior to entering into the Proposed Obligation and the City reasonably
intends to reimburse itself or be reimbursed for such prior expenditures on the Project (the
"Reimbursable Expenditures") with the proceeds of the Proposed Obligation; and
WHEREAS, the City expects such reimbursement to occur not later than 18 months after
the later of the (i) the date of the Reimbursable Expenditures, or (ii) the date the Project is placed
in service, but no later than three years after the date of the Reimbursable Expenditures.
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED by the Mayor and City Council of the City as
follows:
Section 1. The purpose of this Resolution is to permit the City to reimburse itself or
be reimbursed for the Reimbursable Expenditures relating to the Project from the proceeds of the
Proposed Obligation.
RESOLUTION NO. 2019- — Page 1 of 3
56125.0001.11626981.1
Section 2. The City intends to incur and pay for Reimbursable Expenditures with its
available funds, and hereby declares its intent and reasonably expects to reimburse itself or be
reimbursed for those Reimbursable Expenditures from the proceeds of the issuance of the
Proposed Obligation not later than 18 months after the later of (i) the date of the expenditure, or
(ii) the date the Project is placed in service, but no later than three years after the date of the
expenditure.
Section 3. This declaration of official intention is made pursuant to Section 1.150-2,
Code of Federal Regulations.
Section 4. The maximum principal amount of the Proposed Obligation expected to be
issued to finance the Project is $15,000,000, plus costs.
Section 5. The officials of the City are hereby authorized and directed, for and in the
name and on behalf of the City, to take any and all actions and execute, acknowledge and deliver
any and all agreements, instruments or other documents and revisions or corrections thereof and
amendments thereto, as may in their discretion be deemed necessary or desirable to carry out the
terms, provisions and intent of this Resolution.
Section 6. This Resolution shall take effect and be in full force from and after its
passage.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHUBBUCK, IDAHO, THIS day of , 2019.
CITY OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO
an
ATTEST:
Richard Morgan, CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO.2019- — Page 2 of 3
Kevin B. England, MAYOR
56125.0001.11626981.1
I, the undersigned, City Clerk of the City of Chubbuck, Idaho, hereby certify that the
foregoing Resolution is a full, true, and correct copy of a Resolution duly adopted at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Chubbuck (the "City Council"); the meeting was duly
and regularly held at the regular meeting place of the City Council on , 2019;
all members of the City Council had due notice thereof; and a majority of the members were
present.
The following is the vote upon the Resolution:
Councilmembers voting Yes:
Councilmembers voting No:
Councilmembers abstaining:
Councilmembers absent:
I further certify that the Resolution has not been amended, modified, or rescinded since
the date of its adoption, and is now in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City on
2019.
CITY OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO
LIM
Richard Morgan, City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. 2019- — Page 3 of 3
56125.0001.11626981.1
1 1
1 1
EVEIOPMENT AUTNDRIT
CERTIFICATE OF APPOINTMENT
Chubbuck Development Authority
Board of Commissioners
This document hereby certifies that on the 20th day of February, 2019, in compliance to IC 50-
2006, Ernie Moser was duly appointed by Mayor England and approved by City Council to
replace Steve Brown on the Chubbuck Development Board of Commissioners. Ernie Moser will
complete Steve Brown's term that will end October 31, 2022.
Date
Mayor Kevin B. England
Rich Morgan
Clerk
1:\Administration\Chubbuck Development Authority\Board of Commissioners\Certificate of Appointment\2019\2019 Moser.docx
CITY OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHUBBUCK, IDAHO, AMENDING
CHUBBUCK MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 2.04.010 TO SET THE MAYOR'S
SALARY AT $60,846 PER YEAR AND THE SALARY OF A MEMBER OF THE
CITY COUNCIL AT $7,961 PER YEAR, EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2020;
PROVIDING PERIODIC ADJUSTMENTS IN THE SALARIES IS DISCRETIONARY
AND MAY REFLECT CHANGES IN NOT ONLY THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX
BUT OTHER BENCH MARKS OR AVAILABLE DATA; REPEALING PRIOR
CONFLICTING ORDINANCES; PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY OF THE
PROVISIONS OF THIS ORDINANCE; PROVIDING THAT ALL OTHER SECTIONS
AND PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 2.04 NOT HEREIN AMENDED SHALL REMAIN
IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT; AND PROVIDING WHEN THIS ORDINANCE
SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHUBBUCK, IDAHO:
Section 1. Section 2.04.010 is amended as follows:
2.04.010 Mayor and Council Salaries:
Commencing January 1, 201$ 2020, the salaries of the mayor and of the members
of the Chubbuck city council shall be as follows:
A. The mayor of the city of Chubbuck shall receive an annual salary in the sum of
fifty-five thousand sever. hanched twenty doltars 0-55,720) sixty thousand eight
hundred forty-six dollars ($60,846).
B. Each member of the council shall receive an annual salary in the sum of six
thottsmid three ifirta-m-'red doll= ($6,300.00) seven thousand nine hundred sixty-
one dollars ($7,961) per year.
C. At the second council meeting in January of each year in which there shall be a
general election to elect city officials, the mayor and council shall review salaries and
whether or not changes in the mayor and council salaries should be made on January 1
following the next general election. Notwithstanding any other adjustments adopted by
the mayor and council, salary adjustments for such elective officers may be made at this
review in accordance and in proportion with changes in the Consumer Price Index for all
U.S. urban consumers as published by the United States Department of Labor and any
other bench marks or available data since the last such salary adjustments were made by
the Council. Such accordance with Idaho lawents must eand specifically Idaho ted Code § 50-ordinance203 prior to the
assed and
published m
effective date of such adjustments.
ordinance - Page 1
chubbuck 021119 salary Ord.wPd
ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 1. Repeal of Conflicting Ordinances. The provisions of any Ordinance of the
City and any provision of the Municipal Code which are in conflict with the provisions of this
Ordinance are repealed to the extent of such conflict. All other sections of Chapter 2.04 not
herein amended shall remain in effect.
Section 2. Severability. The sections of this ordinance are severable. The invalidity of a
section shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections.
Section 3. Effective Date. The rule requiring an ordinance to be read on three separate
days, one of which shall be a reading in full, is dispensed with, and this Ordinance shall become
effective upon its passage, approval and publication.
PASSED BY THE COUNCIL AND APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF
CHUBBUCK, IDAHO, this day of February, 2019.
Kevin B. England, MAYOR
ATTEST:
Richard Morgan, CITY CLERK
Ordinance - Page 2
chubbuck 021119 salary ord.wpd
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO.
An ordinance of the City of Chubbuck, a municipal corporation of the state of Idaho,
amending Chubbuck Municipal Code section 2.04.010 to set the Mayor's salary at $60,846 and
the salary for a member of the City Council at $7,961per year, effective January 1, 2020;
providing for the repeal of conflicting ordinances; providing that all other provisions of Chapter
2.04 not amended shall remain in effect; providing for the severability of the provisions of this
ordinance; providing when this ordinance shall be in effect.
The full text of this ordinance is available at the City Clerk's Office, Chubbuck City
Offices, 5160 Yellowstone, Chubbuck, ID 83202.
I have reviewed the foregoing summary and believe it provides a true and correct
summary of Ordinance No. and that the summary provides adequate notice to the public
of the contents of this ordinance.
DATED this day of , 2019.
Thomas J. Holmes, City Attorney
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE - Page 1
chubbuck 021119 ord sum sal.wpd