Microsoft word - 2005-01-18.doc
Latah County Planning Commission
Planning Commission [PC] Members: John Hunt [JDH], Suvia Judd [SJ], Kathleen Warnick
[KW], James Smith [JS], Janet Hohle [JH], Louise Barber [LB].
: JDH, SJ, KW, JH, JS, LB present. Staff: MF. Public present.
: Agenda; minutes from 12/21/04; 1/12/05 draft of ordinances
: Exhibit #1: letter from Sarah Skaar, Pres. of Latah County Cattleman s Assn.
Minutes of 12/21/04 approved. JDH introduced the members of the PC and Michelle
and staff and presented an overview and plan of attack for the evening s discussion. Public
testimony was then invited.
(short-term county resident, lawyer with Westberg, Landeck, Judge
and Graham): Since no longer a strictly ag county, work on Comp. Plan and ordinances
at the same time; thinks building restrictions in A/F zone need more looking into, as well
as temp. dwelling for dependent persons, and wanted to know if the county has issued
approvals that defied 8.01.01. Murray Stanton
(Deary lawyer/owns or uses horses), presented exhibit #2: believes
there is a bias against ag in this ordinance; using a CUP for so many activities is against
ag/animal husbandry; the ordinance is vague, overly broad, unenforceable, and if that is
the case, then it is not an effective tool. Larry Lacey
(Potlatch?): thinks the name of the game is freedom; Latah is an ag county
and needs less regulation since there are already on the books state and federal
regulations. Sarah Skaar
(Kendrick; see exhibit 1, above): affected persons should not be different
for livestock/animal owners (i.e., why separated out?); livestock = domestic animals, so
why removed from animal husbandry? Make AU equivalency available so it is clear;
why parttime sales for gardeners, but not for livestock owners? Three-year term for a CU
too short, much longer time needed for investment; clearer definition for enjoyment ;
non-conforming uses need clarification; document needs clarification; decisions need to
be based on sound science. Eileen Macoll
(Whitman county; horse owner/dressage trainer; presented exhibit 3):
With King County experience, believes ordinance singles out horse owners; most practice
best management techniques; feels ordinances solution to problems is lessened activities,
whereas there is a need for increased activities. Is there evidence for abuses of horse
activities? Needs some justification for exclusions.Deb Pearson (Deary):
Definitions re. numbers of animals need improvement ( 3.01.02
or year-round confined animals); how do 1 animal/acre and 250 maximum balance? Is
it our desire to regulate to this level? Planning generally tries to help things keep
growing. We do not want to destroy our land. Can we really not sell our products?
[MF responded that the number of animals (density) had been removed from the draft and SJ indicated that our intent was to prevent feedlot/dairies.]
asked if the county would have another shot at this, to which JDH
responded yes and asked him to submit written testimony ? Skaar
(Kendrick, horse owner): doesn t want a CUP for a rodeo; liability already an
problem for us; tourist draw dimished if further limited. M. Wilkinson
(Potlatch): 35 feet from a stream for those of us with open pasture?
Who s paying for the fence? Will we pay taxes on unused land? This is another user fee.
When culverts are built with Corps of Engineers for cattle to cross streams, they at least
help pay for fencing and off-site watering.
JDH: the ordinance is not meant to fence grazing animals, but for confined animals and new
operations; PC needs to redefine confinement. Barry and Karen Chestnut
(Troy, realtor): language tweaking necessary; ambiguous;
everything depends on the weather year (regarding streams); property rights affected.
Delford Cohen? (Princeton?)
: Comp Plan is flawed on division of property; the plan is
based on the 1981 USDA Soils Survey which states that it is not to be used for land-use
planning ; clusters were intended, but we ended up with a house on every hilltop; CUPs:
why should one expire if not in violation? What are the violations? Since a CUP goes
with the property or business, it would kill sales. Ron Crumbley
(Potlatch): repeated the 35 criticism; number of animals doesn t make
any sense if rotating pastures.
(Deary/Helmer?): Pony club (on 107 acres) has been used continuously
for horse-related activities for years, contributes to county economy, and county should
stay out of regulation! Jim Kuska
(Randal Flat Road): He uses his property for 4-H, trail riding, etc.; is a CUP
needed every time? Guy wires illegal on electric poles? 35 business the USGS maps
are imprecise at best and should not be used as a basis for a legal definition (has 35 years
of professional experience in this area). Harold Kremlin
(Princeton): repeat argument about fencing streams; pollution already
exists due to game, etc. Fencing streams would deny land use.
MF: we do not have a definition of confinement. Draft might be ambiguous.
(Potlatch): No proper notification of this meeting; promote business,
don t drive it out. CUP is political; all this supersedes state laws. Doug Kinzer
(Deary/Park Ranch): weeds would be worse if streams were fenced. Brant Glover
(Viola/Wildlife Rescue operator): Would he need a CUP to have the UI
and WSU vet students come to his place to volunteer and learn how to rescue animals?
Grazing now takes care of the weeds that grow along streams; unattended would create
major hassles down the road. Susan Ziener
(Moscow/Palouse Dressage and Eventing, with 50 members): Why have
horses been singled out; we do all we need to do to keep things safe.
(Potlatch/Robin Heart Ranch, which produces horse shows): Business
expansion seems to be targeted; encouraging horse activities adds to the culture of a
community; badly written document; is the county operating inconsistently? Are the
ordinances subjectly interpreted? Why have the number of rooms for rent changed? Dan Griffen
(Latah all his life): Ag is being drained from the county. Dennis Roberto
(Deary/married to a veterinarian): my wife s practice would be
restricted; all these regulations would put them out of business. Doug Fouty
? (owns cattle, border collies/horses): One brood of pups = a CUP?
(Ridge Road/dairy background in southern Idaho): regulations exist;
but one-size fits all regulations don t work; clarify, but build in leeway. Kathryn Aleve
? (Harvard/business owner): how do we grow businesses and sustain
local businesses in the process? Loren White
(Potlatch): we d like to work together on this participatory process. Are
we being heard? Betty Jo Smith
(near Park Ranch): How many children would stick around w/o animals;
how about a dry year and lightning if streams are fenced and weeds not grazed? Jeff Harkins
(county resident/UI professor): not enough time for public to digest this
draft; process for public disclosure needs vast improvement; 2 windmills on 600 acres? Gary Hess
(Boulder Creed Road): Frightened by this draft; my property won t conform
to putting in a windmill the way it s written; these regulations will increase the cost
considerably; Can I not put together a dogsled team? Trapper Stewart
: clarify the split of land by a highway; review basis of land uses. Lois Grafmusson
?: Is a home office not permitted at/as? location for business?
Camping: no more than six tents? The CUP is just another tax. Murray Stanton
: the CUP is an infringement; activities fall under the scrutiny of others;
what happens if someone is sick and can t continue to finish something within a year; any
provision for that (in CUP)? Draft is out of touch with the reality of the county. Dale Rhodes
: more public testimony needed in formulating this draft. Sarah Skaar
: affected persons should be defined as property owners in Latah
(Harvard/sheep rancher): flexibility and agility is being removed by
these ordinances, and therefore, business will be affected.
JDH asked that written testimony be delivered by February 1, our next meeting.
: 1 February 2005 at 5:30pm in the Latah County Courthouse, Room 2B.
Submitted by Louise D. Barber, 25 January 2004
Mina Amezcua 3726 Las Vegas Blvd, Suite 309w, Las Vegas, NV, 89158562-842-5024 firstname.lastname@example.org EDUCATION 2009-Current University of Nevada School of Medicine, Las Vegas, NV OB/GYN Residency Albany Medical College, Albany, NY , M.D. University of California – Los Angeles , C.A. B.S., Psychology-Biology CERTIFICATE/LICENSURE 2011 RESEARCH EXPERIENCE 2011-
Rabattverträge der DAK-Gesundheit Hinweis: Die DAK fusionierte zum 01.01.2012 mit der BKK Gesundheit zur DAK-Gesundheit. Folgende Verträge gelten ausschließlich für die Versicherten der ehemaligen DAK:alle Verträge mit Endedatum 30.09.2013 und 31.12.2013die offenen Verträge zu den Wirkstoffen Levofloxacin, Naproxen und Pramipexol. Heumann Pharma GmbH & Co. Generica KGSTADApharm G