[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-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],{"_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",6549897,"mediaKeyId","5419838-f31d3328667700365a3b653f39a00083","parentId",5419838,"title","Valley County budget workshop: assessor, parks, wildfire, sheriff and dispatch staffing requests","audioSeconds",963,"startMs",3902820,"endMs",4866345,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5419838-f31d3328667700365a3b653f39a00083&start=3902&end=4866","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5419838-f31d3328667700365a3b653f39a00083/thumbnail_3902820.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6549897/Valley-County/Idaho/Valley-County-budget-workshop-assessor-parks-wildfire-sheriff-and-dispatch-staffing-requests","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6549897-a9ad622278854fee023aac6e1a5023ba/orig.mp4?Expires=1773592812&Signature=oe8tWxjzi6pLCrBxtwL2kUGx3McBJK9eDLIRTdP~jW2K5wk1AdiSZ7Il6VJyJA2fq3yWOfr5VXNLcsLdPn27KqfBmefH4eQ2sT5vyakkKkXYqkOuwX5GB49s2HbSOOchfmqToZZJb0~0VLBN3O-oms8yBrBZ79mgW29JyAr7FVV5DFuebQpyjddlJDYHxMHsKmlzxHqwcQ6GmzA~-tYXspxbISooIc1KhuPbspIn5xSawgKJAU~RNHZ1V9fUVrImYx3NySIBr1U5fvJvSZl1dYDGi~1ymGwZLUhihu9sskCkVqMr36WZkET4v54UWqebWfC5ooDu3uqX0FB9r89QZw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Valley County","date","2025-07-17T08:30:40.147Z","article","Valley County commissioners continued budget-workshop discussions July 16, receiving multiple staffing requests from county departments and external partners and discussing timing, funding sources and pilot approaches.

Assessor request: additional appraiser
Assessor Sue told commissioners rising parcel counts and commercial growth have stretched the assessor\u001as office. Citing new parcels recorded and the office\u001as five-year reappraisal plan, she said the office is short of the recommended staff level. \"Because we have added that many parcels on, I I truly need another person,\" Sue said, describing a current appraiser cross-training to cover data-processing continuity and asking the commission to consider adding a position to meet projected reappraisal workload.

Parks and recreation: campground operator
Director Binghamen asked for a part-time seasonal campground operator for the Horse Thief and Wellington campgrounds to handle daily maintenance, light repairs and on-site oversight during the busy season. Binghamen said projected campground receipts would cover roughly seven months of the position in year one and that full funding from campsite receipts might be possible within a few years. He described duties including trash/portable sanitation servicing, light repairs and morning parking-lot presence.

Wildfire mitigation: staff expansion and funding options
Director Mara (wildfire mitigation) said current work is heavily grant funded and that program staff capacity has dropped since a recent departure. Mara described thousands of parcels that need risk assessments and a backlog of public requests. Mara said additional local funding or modified grant agreements could cover part of a new implementation-focused position, and urged the commission to make the position permanent rather than dependent on uncertain grant cycles. One commissioner said, \"If I were making it today, I would tell Mara that you will always be a part of Valley County.\" No final hiring decision was made; commissioners asked staff to pursue adjustments to grant agreements and to return with options.

Sheriff and communications staffing
The sheriff presented a multi-year staffing roadmap that emphasized supervision, detention safety and communications capacity. The sheriff said the department needs additional communications (dispatch) deputies and shift supervisors, a detention corporal and additional patrol deputies as call volumes and serious incidents have increased. The sheriff described recent in-custody violence and said his \"priority is a communications deputy.\" Commissioners discussed regional-cost sharing with fire districts, EMS and neighboring jurisdictions for dispatch services; the sheriff said he had asked his chief deputy to convene a roundtable this winter to discuss contributions.

Extension: 4-H assistant to coordinator regrade
Extension Director Hamilton proposed reclassifying an existing 4-H assistant position to a 4-H coordinator (pay-grade B to C) to sustain community afterschool programming and volunteer leadership. The director said the change is a regrade, not a headcount increase, and emphasized workforce-development programming and partnerships with local afterschool providers.

Budget timing and next steps
Commissioners scheduled continued deliberations in upcoming budget workshops and asked department heads to provide final cost estimates, funding sources and any offsetting revenue (for instance, campground receipts or grant matches). Several commissioners suggested trial periods or phasing for positions funded by new receipts or pilot grants. No pay-rate adjustments or hires were approved at the July 16 session; staff were asked to prepare spreadsheets and timelines for final budget decisions and to present staffing-cost impacts at the next workshop on July 23 and an additional budget workshop slot the following week.

Ending: The workshop mapped requests, possible funding sources and next steps; commissioners requested additional data, implementation plans and draft job descriptions ahead of formal budget decisions.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Valley County Board of County Commissioner Meeting July 16, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Valley County commissioners continued budget-workshop deliberations July 16, hearing staffing requests from the assessor, parks and recreation, wildfire prevention, the sheriff\u001as office and extension and discussing funding, timing and pilot options.","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},6549907,"Valley County commissioners begin preliminary review of proposed shore setbacks, stormwater rules",1779,14035,1793975,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5419838-f31d3328667700365a3b653f39a00083&start=14&end=1793","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5419838-f31d3328667700365a3b653f39a00083/thumbnail_14035.jpg","/articles/6549907/Valley-County/Idaho/Valley-County-commissioners-begin-preliminary-review-of-proposed-shore-setbacks-stormwater-rules","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6549907-27ac0fa150ab537c333801056d8b797d/orig.mp4?Expires=1773592812&Signature=cgJsfpiOOES3Q5Mjp4IhOkbiuOYFlv8aVE2~rL9L8Mh~RlLraPB73sYK-BAMfptphgt0NqpZmVMTAGkogmV1qXn3S9wUIGsX3ycO1B8146gZL9IflMELL6OtbhbcDcC2Z3eS7DAVqiPosw4Iks2dy-Ic~TxMn9lsf-4fu7lR64jxpWnmlrfi6IoFSEC2CNWQyA2qHpwUzJdF7Wz6IdUjhgf2sxLvY1P~BwXBaAFBeiJ6AR3pnbG6X31g~LrLrTLOU7finKwvkxguUPqSyJDWJdbdOwFeMUurk7ZC-juoSq0IL1aM~RO8HYsmcmkODbl41W0RCW3WvBAfac4yy6iR7w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Valley County commissioners held a preliminary discussion July 16 about possible amendments to the county\u001as water-quality and shoreline rules, focused on setbacks from water bodies, required vegetation, stormwater controls and how to handle wetlands determinations.

Director Herrick opened the session by framing the topic as a staff direction question: \"So this is just a preliminary discussion about what you're going to want to see for water quality improvements in our ordinance amendments, and in the implementation by whatever department. Because before we actually write it, I'm gonna need to know what you want me to write it to.\" Herrick specifically tied the work to recent changes in local impact areas and to concerns around Piat Lake and Cascade Lake.

The nut graf: Commissioners discussed raising the standard setback from the current 30 feet to 50 feet for many water bodies, how to treat smaller lake lots and streams, whether variances/waivers should be available, what shore-zone vegetation should be required or prohibited, and whether the county should adopt any wetland delineation requirements now handled by state or federal agencies. The conversation remained at a policy-option level; no ordinance language was adopted and no votes were taken.

Most important facts
- Current county lot setback: 30 feet from water bodies (lakes, creeks, irrigation ditches). Commissioners discussed writing a 50-foot setback standard for lakes and other significant water bodies but using a waiver/variance process for constrained lots such as many around Lake Cascade. Chair Malef asked whether a waiver process should apply; Herrick and others agreed variances would be part of the package.
- Vegetation and fertilizer controls: Commissioners discussed requiring natural shore vegetation or limiting certain plantings and fertilizer use within the setback to reduce nutrient runoff. Participants noted enforcement challenges and suggested a mix of code provisions, public education and targeted enforcement.
- Construction controls: Staff proposed requiring stormwater plans for sites within a defined distance of water bodies (discussion ranged between 100 and 150 feet) and discussed making engineering review and inspections part of the permitting process. Herrick asked whether a stormwater-management plan should be required for sites within 100\u0015150 feet of water bodies; several commissioners said yes for higher-sensitivity areas.
- Wetlands: Commissioners debated whether to require site-level wetland delineations. Commissioners and staff warned that requiring delineations on every building permit would raise costs and timelines (consultant travel and fees), and that some wetlands are already overseen by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and by Central District Health for septic/sewer setbacks. No change was decided; staff were asked to research practical options and agency roles.
- Buffer-width debate: Valley Soil & Water recommendations were discussed in summary (participants noted a prior county 300-foot floodplain threshold and that 300 feet feels excessive for shore zones; some suggested 150 feet as more reasonable in local topography).

Supporting details and context
Director Herrick said the county currently does not require floodplain building elevation standards in unincorporated areas, and commissioners contrasted city standards (which may require two feet above base flood elevation) with county practice of avoiding building in floodplains. Herrick and others repeatedly emphasized balancing water-quality protections with buildability on small lots, enforcement capacity and cost impacts to property owners.

Commissioners and staff discussed making the proposed 50-foot setback conditional in older subdivisions platted before adoption (i.e., allow 30-foot or require a variance), and tying stormwater-control requirements during construction to the county engineer's sign-off and permit fees to offset review time. Director Herrick recommended consulting a landscape architect about appropriate shore vegetative treatments and noted McCall's existing 50-foot setback and maintenance-during-construction requirements as a model to review.

Wetland delineation was highlighted as a potential cost driver: staff estimated private delineations could cost \"a couple thousand\" per site, and commissioners emphasized that many local wetlands are not year-round open water and may not be waters of the U.S. Central District Health's septic setbacks for year-round water sources were flagged as already constraining house and drain-field siting.

Next steps and administration
Staff will research: (a) McCall and other jurisdictions' shore-zone standards and maintenance-during-construction lists; (b) practical buffer widths (50 vs. 150 vs. 300 feet) tailored to Valley County topography; (c) whether Central District Health, IDWR or the Corps of Engineers should remain the primary delineation authority or whether the county could require delineations only in higher-sensitivity areas that drain directly to lakes or rivers. Herrick said staff will prepare draft ordinance language and a flowchart addressing preexisting subdivisions and variance paths; the commission scheduled follow-up workshop time.

Ending: The session was exploratory and informational; commissioners directed staff to gather model language, implementation options and cost estimates and to return with draft language and enforcement/cost scenarios for further deliberation.","Valley County commissioners held a preliminary discussion July 16 about possible amendments to the county\u001as water-quality and shoreline rules, focused on setbacks from water bodies, required vegetation, stormwater controls and how to handle wetlands determinations.",{"_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},6549902,"Valley County weighs contracting indigent services, seeks audit and reporting safeguards",1612,2108810,3720974,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5419838-f31d3328667700365a3b653f39a00083&start=2108&end=3720","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5419838-f31d3328667700365a3b653f39a00083/thumbnail_2108810.jpg","/articles/6549902/Valley-County/Idaho/Valley-County-weighs-contracting-indigent-services-seeks-audit-and-reporting-safeguards","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6549902-9b6009c1f38e86ab9fd9f0a07fc525c1/orig.mp4?Expires=1773592812&Signature=o99-72unBQWbtdzYz2P93G6i3vMmFCIG5tyxQL8gTnolgt80v1I0hQOCM~TjCrC90eGJ98CT0fy~EBlNi0rX3N0Ii3PMG7Wr5ctvotBJ6P90aWCPFHBfSHcoJihVMT-KbvhSFUA7nnGr~tRF7mxsAsopmCh~vuGYXU9ggu~zAJsBqogY5mYjN4UxJXzPkBGBlx1QbA7aN2aa7mWO6J4h9o5~PJStRjRpLxZkNwYOz4IGfr7YX3Kxo4jIX6S4mHgbmLqtp6ThrPDPaeyiSp8xLwxXiHZhqguKlQfa8usjVO-SZEC9Ia~LiYJ~9MapeNcQYdeKxCFBsMlM0xt-B~I1~A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Valley County commissioners on July 16 held a workshop on whether the county should contract out indigent-services delivery to a nonprofit and, if so, under what terms. The clerk\u001as office, county legal counsel and potential provider representatives participated.

Deputy Clerk Candice Limbaugh summarized current practice and the county\u001as constraints: \"Valley County currently no longer has the ability to levy property tax dollars for indigent services. However, we do have a balance, of approximately $231,000 that the county can provide to individuals requesting services.\" Limbaugh described the current process: applications are processed through the clerk's office, reviewed by the commissioners (often in executive session) and the county generally records a lien and requires repayment when appropriate.

Why it matters: Commissioners have asked whether contracting services to a nonprofit (Ignite Idaho was discussed) would preserve fiscal controls and allow faster delivery of assistance while avoiding duplication among churches and local providers. The discussion focused on auditability, public-records obligations, repayment enforcement, and how to structure funds and reporting to protect taxpayer dollars.

Details of the discussion
- Contracting and oversight: Staff said legal counsel has been asked whether the county may contract indigent-services delivery to a nonprofit and whether the county must retain audit and lien authority. Commissioners emphasized that any contractor would need to provide documentation suitable for audit and for public-records requests; redaction rules would protect personal data while leaving an auditable trail.
- Reporting frequency and records: Limbaugh and others proposed quarterly reporting and coordination between the contractor and the county so the county can respond to public-records requests with appropriately redacted records. Limbaugh said the county currently retains full documentation and would need a contractual right to receive records.
- Repayment and liens: The county currently records liens and receives modest repayments (Limbaugh said the county receives between $15 and $5,000 per year in repayments from medical-indigent cases). Commissioners asked whether a nonprofit contractor would (a) be willing or able to record liens and collect repayments and (b) require the county to reserve a portion of funds for unavoidable county obligations such as cremations.
- Program models: Ignite Idaho provided a business plan to county staff; participants suggested a trial or pilot with an initial block of funds (one commissioner suggested starting with $10,000) to test processes, reporting and repayment before committing larger sums. Commissioners discussed whether county staff should continue an application role (a \"one-stop\" model) or whether the contractor would be a direct point of entry for clients.
- Confidentiality and use of county application: Staff suggested using the county application and release-of-information language so the county retains necessary permissions for audits and reporting while allowing the contractor to perform case management and client support.

Budget and administration questions
Commissioners asked about contractor fees and the cost to operate a case-management function. Potential contractor representatives described a likely staffing profile (a case manager position) and discussed options for part-time or pilot arrangements. Commissioners said any agreement should specify reporting cadence, audit access, record-keeping responsibilities and whether liens/recoupment measures would be maintained.

Next steps
Legal counsel is drafting opinions on whether a contracted nonprofit can record liens and whether the county\u001as repayment and lien practice can be preserved under a contract. Staff asked that potential contractors propose a detailed scope of work, price and reporting plan; commissioners suggested starting a pilot trial and asked staff to assess audit/reporting language and public-records handling before approving a larger contract.

Ending: No formal decision was taken. Commissioners said they were open to a pilot arrangement but required clear contractual audit, reporting and repayment terms before committing funds or delegating the county\u001as responsibilities.","County staff and commissioners discussed whether Valley County should contract delivery of indigent services to a nonprofit (Ignite Idaho was discussed), what auditing and repayment requirements would be needed, and whether the county can preserve liens and reporting to ensure fiscal accountability for roughly $231,000 in available funds","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Valley County budget workshop: assessor, parks, wildfire, sheriff and dispatch staffing requests

Valley County commissioners begin preliminary review of proposed shore setbacks, stormwater rules

Valley County weighs contracting indigent services, seeks audit and reporting safeguards