[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6612341,"mediaKeyId","2891690-a559fed1311b631e4fe28cf413b71e3c","parentId",2891690,"title","Marine deputies report: new engine purchase, boat-ramp fees and quagga mussel monitoring","audioSeconds",269,"startMs",2663480,"endMs",2932695,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2891690-a559fed1311b631e4fe28cf413b71e3c&start=2663&end=2932","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2891690-a559fed1311b631e4fe28cf413b71e3c/thumbnail_2663480.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6612341/Valley-County/Idaho/Marine-deputies-report-new-engine-purchase-boat-ramp-fees-and-quagga-mussel-monitoring","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6612341-28b7b4709c3a3755fd2299b311e9f5bd/orig.mp4?Expires=1771168520&Signature=UjFQbPBk~KYGvqa5J~Q6~wVKBlyCdg9FtEk0bc3gjMZ0usQ-ZErcrHgMVjf9UfNcnFKDOYa31NO4Dsu-zCvtFPlkvJnSj9fMhJhdEc~8cuG3u0u9Wop7UNjiT7q1DIfdcu~ctZr18duBvv--xwKOacJ0dngsO7S8xPR2i7NpbFSoClR7mr4rA~frbZHLzKdIzknaSypf6Neil22ZpSKOm9ZM~2P7lBEBdoLyFXr0JWXV8fmbjOxml9kMKUQjI~x~1cx2rLNYsZatnk~OiK6ED7thRayr00~jLZfBiBNttBZgdGTuwlqBrhMpOc1FK-BWbTLPraOiaO3GdKvQGOXjBg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Valley County","date","2025-04-07T20:19:26.297Z","article","A county waterways update to the Valley County Board of Commissioners on April 7 covered new equipment purchases, boat-ramp fees, invasive-species monitoring and aquatic-weed control discussions.

Charlie (marine committee representative) reported that a new engine purchase for an older boat is underway and that the engine cost is about $42,000. The board was told the county has roughly four active boats in rotation; older boats are typically auctioned or cycled out. Deputies and staff discussed advantages and disadvantages of jet boats versus prop-driven boats for safety and shallow-water work.

The county's boat-ramp fee program was described as returning revenue that is required to be spent on ramp maintenance; staff said the ramp program generated about $15,000 last year and that state grant and IDPR rules constrain how fee revenue may be used. Commissioners and staff discussed possible in-state and out-of-state fee differentials, parking and traffic congestion at busy ramps, and longer-term planning with Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation (IDPR) and city partners to expand parking or ramps where feasible.

On invasive species, staff reported that current tests show no quagga mussel detections in Valley County lakes but that testing will continue two to three times per year. Commissioners were told county water quality appears to be unfavorable for quagga establishment but that boat-cleaning and inspection remain important because mussels can arrive on equipment from other areas. The board also heard that discussions are underway about milfoil (aquatic-weed) treatment in lakes where drinking water is affected; one city (McCall) is considering whether chemical treatment is appropriate and will present to its city council.

Other items: staff supported a McCall-led project to add a Dinard Bridge access ramp for kayaks and paddleboards and discussed grant and lands-exchange possibilities for future ramp expansion. The marine representative said the county is tracking grants and working with partners but is not proceeding with any unilateral improvements without further details.

No formal board action was recorded; staff asked commissioners to consider documentation and interagency coordination for long-term ramp management and fee use.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Valley County Board of County Commissioner Meeting April 7, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","At the April 7 meeting Valley County marine deputies and committee members updated the board on boat purchases and maintenance, a ramp-fee program that generated about $15,000 last season, quagga-mussel testing (no detections), and local work on aquatic-weed issues.","taxTitle","Valley County, Idaho","taxId",51032,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6612346,"Commissioners discuss RFP, site concept and community survey for Cascade property near pickleball courts",800,274995,1075890,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2891690-a559fed1311b631e4fe28cf413b71e3c&start=274&end=1075","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2891690-a559fed1311b631e4fe28cf413b71e3c/thumbnail_274995.jpg","/articles/6612346/Valley-County/Idaho/Commissioners-discuss-RFP-site-concept-and-community-survey-for-Cascade-property-near-pickleball-courts","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6612346-d40ff7b6773983322fcbf1d99f2dc419/orig.mp4?Expires=1771168521&Signature=QcpAf566QVNxtZAzjP0LAkvm5pjzgUaGzrIj5rPUBrtKoZC-jZAIRldt4HwmM0jggNWu8SxUZG40lkdz4sd8fK6eYgUY43Wal0gmi7N9Z78Xegpk0~S9JaaY0ZD7~26DRBkf3LbQS1jPx5h3ZetX1UNNEqZOhj~dH-1TwBZIioSQKhMcDxXczRabXCiEhBJCtdzrYmUrMAA5fFHEcz-io9tZYz2F7f9wvTTb00o2zXs3Nd3LlLp-mggJf-wR4XJJZMMJ-uik93oE8esHw0hK7bcY7ng4~Wkm6EBnECs7j2HQGd72T3IsBeq1S~e6lx-KT5k7pEd6W4HmlrXIwMhdsw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","County commissioners spent a substantial portion of their April 7 meeting on planning options for county property near the pickleball courts and the adjacent 80-acre parcel. The discussion covered possible uses including an event center, recreation features, and whether a charter school might occupy part of the site.

Commissioners agreed to gather more information before issuing a formal request for proposals (RFP) for a conceptual plan. Directions recorded on the audio transcript: staff member Mackenzie will run a public survey on the county Facebook page to solicit community input; commissioners will consult the road department to confirm gravel resources and facility needs; the Recreation Advisory Committee will be asked to develop a recommendation and bring a conceptual vision to a future workshop. Commissioners said the board may issue an RFP for a conceptual plan after those steps.

Speakers raised technical and site constraints. Commissioners and staff noted the current road department location and recycling operations occupy roughly 5 acres, the road department yard extends back about 55 acres, and there is an additional 80-acre parcel immediately adjacent. Participants said the 80-acre parcel includes an existing gravel-extraction lease (Granite) and a gravel pit easement; staff advised verifying whether commercially valuable gravel remains before converting that parcel for other uses. One attendee urged the board to confirm how many years of extraction remain before any land-use change.

Other planning points included: the potential need for a conditional use permit for certain sites or uses; parking demands for an elementary or high school site (board members suggested a typical elementary school might need about 20 acres and a high school about 40 acres); and that recreation proposals alone may not address county needs such as the road department and recycling functions. Commissioners discussed holding a workshop after the road department and recreation advisory input are received.

Outcome and next steps: commissioners directed staff to (1) consult the road department on gravel resources and facility needs, (2) ask the Recreation Advisory Committee to develop a draft vision, (3) run a community survey (Mackenzie to lead), and (4) schedule a workshop to review concept proposals prior to issuing any RFP for professional services. No final RFP was issued at the meeting; the board discussed timeline constraints for a construction-services RFP and adjusted proposal deadlines in conversation with staff and the clerk.

","Valley County commissioners discussed a conceptual plan for county-owned land near the pickleball courts, possible use by a charter school, and timing for an RFP to produce concept plans. Commissioners directed staff to consult the road department, the recreation advisory committee and conduct a community survey before issuing an RFP.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6612351,"Board approves CP 24-24 Gold Fork River Ranch facts and conclusions",123,1688985,1812000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2891690-a559fed1311b631e4fe28cf413b71e3c&start=1688&end=1812","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2891690-a559fed1311b631e4fe28cf413b71e3c/thumbnail_1688985.jpg","/articles/6612351/Valley-County/Idaho/Board-approves-CP-24-24-Gold-Fork-River-Ranch-facts-and-conclusions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6612351-ac0849467aa9c3d15149f1d51e62d9ae/orig.mp4?Expires=1771168521&Signature=OtqT2Ru0Z3HGetqbvWCHTdMOHDoBBroddoyJ~pmXX7SlVMvvJBC8qh6y~WSDtLZuNxT~hA-KJ5u-dkVvPgChtbXOP08qDE20n8MAdkK~q8LlSrfFsTXmFWd-2VO1F9xU3pFnFSIYVol-nMMhWy7eEr~iGnvc3KUSOjAGvFTcdbN7jpLatqwBFLmo4XnnMIH-pYuDxazz~~4riYKn7KojRQcyTbphBw0LkakPzHDTXhglSj6osuqS3gZaWnXk-QNt0BogEfXEEKo5q5VqyBam29mMdjW18B8p1zGm4Szhv-qcFgopNyhjF5bh-fM9CKOq3vJcHo8~LHUAb6nhe1r5yw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Valley County commissioners unanimously approved the planning staff’s facts and conclusions for CP 24-24, Gold Fork River Ranch, during their April 7 meeting.

A planning staff member told the board the document was circulated in advance and, in staff view, accurately records the conditions of approval the board asked for. Commissioner (unnamed) moved to approve CP 24-24 as presented; another commissioner seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote.

Commissioners commended staff for thorough preparation. During discussion, a commissioner noted the amount of staff work required to prepare similar documents and tied that workload to a planned proposal to increase fees for appeals and motions for reconsideration, citing related Supreme Court decisions. After the vote, staff arranged steps to record and sign the document for filing.

Outcome and next steps: the board approved CP 24-24 facts and conclusions; staff will arrange to record the document and have commissioners sign it so it can be entered in the record.

","Valley County commissioners unanimously approved the planning department’s facts and conclusions document for CP 24-24 (Gold Fork River Ranch) and discussed related fee and appeals workload.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6612356,"Valley County commissioners name new building 'Cascade Annex'",113,12540,126155,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2891690-a559fed1311b631e4fe28cf413b71e3c&start=12&end=126","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2891690-a559fed1311b631e4fe28cf413b71e3c/thumbnail_12540.jpg","/articles/6612356/Valley-County/Idaho/Valley-County-commissioners-name-new-building-Cascade-Annex","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6612356-eac8708b74dee729d5f3829854a07d95/orig.mp4?Expires=1771168521&Signature=NvJnEq4Z2d7MopvyQCwaSnPo-~O15OzXmQWGWMLajHKDgMppvno~8KJmizDJUb9wpExrxouMAHNSKksSywHGVe6gH4OgU8BrGNZTROxX~ERRnzaXT2dMn7IvVDiikMoJVUptUvDJuPl3tUBhhzk18BaObokzC9gk8st1Zm6xSO-ldItgxVxIbdKe15Hpw3x9ryp6D8yFI7SM33YF6js6m6jHI7HbnWgQKOmU5WcIwsJ3aGqoUDGoElb~iPYPwO5aYPyybHuI1THRMY0g3o~tuz1LHpMTjP5ErVRcDuKDCCDqWg7U3gYCNrz0XKq7ht-lW1d4DPd1P8j7k-KKDrhxYw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Valley County commissioners voted April 7 to name the county’s new facility the Cascade Annex and directed staff to begin arranging signage.

The board approved the name by voice vote after brief discussion about alternatives and sign design. Commissioner (unnamed) moved to name the building the Cascade Annex; a second commissioner (unnamed) seconded the motion. The motion passed with unanimous “aye” votes recorded on the audio transcript.

Commissioners said they want the sign to read “Valley County” above “Cascade Annex,” keep the design simple and follow Valley County public-relations guidelines. The chair said she will contact Scott and will work with staff member Mackenzie to confirm sign specifications and keep the cost within county PR standards. Commissioners also discussed a backlit sign option and noted the physical sign panel at the building is roughly 4 feet by 2 feet.

Board members also raised related site-identity items: whether to include labels such as “Fairgrounds” or an event-space name later, and whether to remove outdated signage that referenced the road department. One commissioner suggested running an employee naming contest for inclusiveness; the chair and others said they preferred the straightforward “Cascade Annex” name for the courthouse property.

Outcome and next steps: the name was adopted by motion and majority voice vote. The chair will contact Scott and Mackenzie to begin sign procurement; the board discussed keeping sign copy basic and verifying budget constraints before final ordering.

","On April 7 the Valley County Board of Commissioners voted to name the new county facility the Cascade Annex and directed staff to arrange signage in keeping with county PR guidelines.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Marine deputies report: new engine purchase, boat-ramp fees and quagga mussel monitoring

Commissioners discuss RFP, site concept and community survey for Cascade property near pickleball courts

Board approves CP 24-24 Gold Fork River Ranch facts and conclusions

Valley County commissioners name new building 'Cascade Annex'