Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Surety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bonner County delays $2.39 million surety release after engineers report limited inspection
Summary
Commissioners voted to delay releasing $2,388,636.04 in developer surety for project S0001-23 after county engineering said a full on-site inspection could not be completed because of winter conditions; the board asked planning to return with legal, risk and engineering verification.
Bonner County commissioners voted on March 17 to delay a developer surety release of $2,388,636.04 for project S0001-23, citing incomplete on-site verification reported by county engineering.
Assistant Planning Director Alex Fan presented the request to release the remaining half of a letter of credit after the applicant said warranty and utility work were finished. The county engineer reported a site visit on Jan. 14, 2026, but noted that a "full site inspection could not be fully verified" because snow and site conditions obscured some stormwater and underground utility elements. Engineering flagged reliance on a third-party "engineer of record" for compaction and underground utility verification.
A commissioner who led the motion (Committee member) said the county must do its due diligence before releasing a bond intended to protect the public: "I personally don't like that, and I think that requires a legal review," the commissioner said, urging legal and risk review plus a full engineering reinspection before any release.
Lance Badger of Schweitzer Mountain Properties, the developer on the project, told the board the work had been accepted as complete a year earlier and that engineers had provided stamped as-built records and completion documentation. He urged the county not to hold the funds longer than the warranty period. County engineering and planning staff explained some inspection elements (particularly underground utilities and asphalt compaction testing) required records that were not fully verifiable during the winter site visit.
After debate about the missing field checks and an apparent discrepancy in numbers staff reported on the record, the board approved a motion to defer the release and direct planning to return with legal and risk review and a confirmed, complete engineering inspection.
The commission instructed planning and engineering staff to expedite the follow-up so the matter could return to the board quickly with clarified documentation and a recommended dollar amount, if appropriate.
