Tracking code caldwell guardian

Wednesday, February 28, 2018

EPA and IDEQ Mandates

I received the following letter from Nampa resident Hubert Osborne regarding $165 MM bond election to upgrade Nampa wastewater:



Just as Congress is facing trillion $$$ deficits for the foreseeable future we find that the city of Nampa, Idaho is facing the same problem with a $165 million bond issue plus interest which is estimated at over $94 million for a total debt increase of nearly $270 million. unprecedented for a city of our size.

The reason is none other than strict interpretation of the clean water act and aggressive action by the EPA and IDEQ to enforce Phosphorous standards.

In a document entitled Lower Boise River Total Maximum Daily Load: 2015 Total Phosphorous Addendum (IDEQ, August 2015) it concludes water quality goals cannot be met without significant reductions from non-point sources. In addition IDEQ concludes that municipal sources who contribute minimal degradation in water quality thru discharges from effluent into, in Nampa's case Indian Creek which is a tributary of the Boise River, even if they fully are able to comply with the mandates it will make little difference. It is documented in the study non-point sources provide over 80% of the constituent load.

Because of the mandates as interpreted in the Clean Water Act, IDEQ has decided to put enforcement and the resulting huge cost burden  on municipalities while depending on voluntary compliance from non-point sources.

Preliminary estimates put the monthly increase to the average resident of as much as $111 per month. Clearly this is a huge burden on a community where the poverty rate exceeds 22 percent.

Proposals have been made to recycle the water onto farmland which in this area needs more phosphorous for crop production but permission to even do this has not been granted.

The City of Nampa has already spent $38 million which has achieved a 90% reduction in Phosphorous.

We implore you for regulatory relief.

Respectfully requested,
Canyon County Concerned Citizens (26 names on file)
by Hubert Osborne

Thursday, February 8, 2018

Sheriff and Jail Capt. Refuse to Give Citizen a Jail Tour

Despite the fact there is an open invitation for anyone interested in getting a tour of our jail we now find the open invite does not apply to everyone.  Below is the response given to a member of Concerned Citizens of Canyon County and a former Nampa Police Officer as well as a sitting Nampa City Councilor.

Concerned Citizens of Canyon County want to share this with you:



New Badge Logo
Captain Daren Ward
Security Services
From: VICTOR RODRIGUEZ [mailto:VICTORERODRIGUEZ
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2018 10:06 AM
To: Office of the Canyon County Sheriff
Subject: Touring the Jail

Hello Sheriff Donahue, several of Nampa’s Citizens would like to tour the current jail. Please advise if you will allow us to.

Thanks Kieran

Victor Rodriguez


From: Daren Ward
Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2018 3:40 PM
To: 'VICTOR RODRIGUEZ'
Cc: Kieran DonahueDaren Ward
Subject: RE: Touring the jail

Victor, when I first read your email and responded I thought you were inquiring on behalf of the Citizens Academy with whom we have always had a positive and collaborative relationship with. I realize now that I misread what your email was requesting and what or whom your email was representing. 

The simple answer is no, we have no intention of allowing you and your group to tour the jail facility as it is our belief your intentions for doing so are suspect at best. 

Canyon County has been dealing with a jail crisis for well over a decade and yet only now do people like your group and their alleged expertise want to tour the jail and give their “expert” evaluations and opinions. Canyon County has gone through intensive and detailed lawful steps to hire real experts in these matters and the Sheriff’s Office stands behind the legitimacy of this professional, expert and scientific methodology that was provided whether people who have never been involved in addressing this crisis agree with it or not. 

Further, it is distasteful and less than professional for members of your group to continue to go around the Sheriff’s Office to other elected officials in an attempt to garner an invitation to tour the jail after they have been told no by the Sheriff or his designee.

Captain Daren Ward

New Badge Logo
Captain Daren Ward
Security Services

From: ron harriman
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2018 1:05 PM
To: 'VICTOR RODRIGUEZ' ; 'Daren Ward' <DWard@canyonco.org>
Cc:
Subject: RE: Touring the jail

Daren;
RE: your communication with Victor Rodriguez concerning the jail walk through is now public.

First Daren, I would remind you that you are a public servant and are subject to perform in a manner befitting a public servant and not an antagonist to those who provide your livelihood. From your response it is obvious you don’t understand we are actually trying to resolve the jail problem in a way that will be affordable for the citizens of Canyon County.  This committee would not have become involved if the BOCC and Sheriff had come to logical and affordable solution to the jail problem.   
The Sheriff on the other hand is an elected official and subject to stand for election every 4 years which is a little over 2 years at this point.  Your repugnant response belies your position and is not one befitting a public employee.However, we do understand the difficulty and frustration of your present position in trying to perform your public assignment with inadequate facilities.  We have come forward to assist in resolving this issue and we will guide the public opinion in that solution.  When you question our expertise in a degrading manner you should realize that this committee is composed of attorney’s, businessmen, city councilpersons and experts on construction.  I myself have extensive experience in construction and am not only a professional construction estimator, but also a structural expert in buildings.  The reason I wanted to visit the jail is that I am concerned that the “Old” jail is nonfunctional and remodeling due to the described Flat Plate concrete design more costly than demolition. 
I personally will not tolerate the employment of a public official with the attitude you appear to have. As such I would suggest that you consider serving the public you are supposed to serve or begin looking for another job.

Ronald M. Harriman



Saturday, February 3, 2018

Jail Letter Sent to BOCC




COUNTY COMMITTEE of CONCERNED CITIZENS
BOARD OF DIRECTORS

DIRECTORS
2018
Darl Bruner
Chuck Stadick
Ronald Harriman
Hubert Osborne
Dale Pearce
Larry Olmsted
Ed Parnell
CHAIRPERSONS
Paul Alldredge
Kathy Alder




2/1/2018
To: THE CANYON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

As concerned citizen taxpayers and voters in Canyon County we are reaching out to you, our elected County Commissioners, as the issue of a County Jail project looms in our future. This ad-hoc Committee was formed to provide grass roots input for your consideration and review during this process.
After due diligence concerning the inadequacy and need of expansion of the County Jail Facilities the Board of Directors of this committee recommend the actions listed below. After our fact-based research it is our opinion these recommendations will provide the best solution, with the least increased tax burden on Canyon County Citizens.

Our first recommendation:
The location of any new jail, holding, or correctional facility required, should be adjacent to or within a distance not to exceed one quarter mile from the existing Canyon County Court Building.  We recommend the vacated and available Vanburen School property, two blocks North of the Canyon County Court Campus, as the most probable and affordable site.   With this recommendation we also recommend the Notus site be sold, and the funds be applied to the cost of the future jail expansion. The cost of infrastructure at the Notus site and the transportation of prisoners to the Canyon County Courts would add unnecessary and continuing expense, which would be borne by the citizens of Canyon County.

Our second recommendation:
In the interest of the County of Canyon tax payers and the State of Idaho’s economic welfare we recommend the selection of an Idaho development firm partnered with an Idaho Architectural firm to build the new facility.  In our investigation, consisting of interviews with jail constructors and architectural firms, we have determined the cost to build in Idaho (as of the date of the publication of the DLR Group’s proposal) to be only 45% of the cost the DLR Group indicated.  We have also found a jail currently under
construction in Kootenai County is being constructed for $67,000.00 per bed; and within the past 20 months a facility was completed in Jerome County at $84,000.00 per bed.  In comparison, the DLR Group’s proposal was $189,655.00 per bed.  Like Canyon County, Kootenai County has failed on three bond issues. They also had a failed effort in securing a Judicial Confirmation. Finally, they decided to use available and excess county funds to incrementally construct their needed incarceration facilities.  

Our third recommendation:
Question - Is a jail expansion to the capacity of 663 combined cells and dormitory beds needed? A review of the U.S. Census for Canyon County identifies a 2% population increase per annum from 2010, indicating the 2018 population with the same growth pattern will be 220,250 and the 2028 population 263,220. When compared with Ada County’s functional facility at 2.25 beds per 1,000 of population; an average bed usage of 1,000 per day; and a population of 444,028 in 2016; Canyon County’s proposed facility in fulfilling the ten-year (10) need would require 592 beds. However, based on a statistical average from the National Institute of Corrections at 2.52 and Utah at 2.54 beds per 1,000 population, a ten (10) year staged development of the jail consisting of 663 existing and new beds is appropriate; with planned expansion after 2028 in 10-year increments.  By utilizing the existing 477 beds this would require a new addition of 186 beds at a cost of $15,624,000.00 based on present construction costs within Idaho. 

Our fourth recommendation:
Utilize excess funds from the County Budget, and the sale of excess property now owned by the county such as the aforementioned Notus site. 

Yours,

Board of Directors; Concerned Citizens of Canyon County