Agenda - 09-05-2013 - 5a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

24 1 Chair Jacobs said this issue comes up periodically to the Board of County 2 Commissioners. He said that while he personally feels a law may be unjust, he cannot ignore 3 legal counsel. He asked if every tax bill could include a juxtaposition of words that would qualify 4 under one of the three criteria to allow for refunds in the event of a legitimate error. 5 John Roberts said if this kind of intentional action were taken, then the personal liability 6 could still come into play. 7 Frank Clifton said that if a tax payer has an error it is corrected going forward; however, 8 there are no retroactive refunds. 9 Commissioner porosin said he does think that the law is what a judge says it is, though 10 there can be disagreements about what it stands for. He does not think the Board is as strictly 11 bound as has been stated and he feels he could defend this. 12 Commissioner porosin made a motion to offer refunds as requested by taxpayers, as 13 listed and refund the $20,056.54. 14 There was no second. 15 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to 16 deny requests for refunds. 17 18 VOTE: 5-1 (Commissioner porosin) Commissioner Rich recused. 19 20 e. Contract Award for Professional Desiqn Services for the Northern Human 21 Services Center Community Center Proiect 22 Jeff Thompson said this is an item that was deferred from June 4th and is coming back 23 with more background information, as well as a charge for the work group. 24 He said that the primary background information is contained in attachment 2, and a 25 charge has been drafted for the informal resident design advisory group, regarding space 26 programming and design activities. This includes information from the 2012 public input 27 process regarding features within the 10,000 square foot space. 28 He reviewed the background section of the abstract and noted several key points: 29 1. In November 2012 the Board of County Commissioners authorized moving forward 30 with a 10,000 square foot adaptive re-use community center with a deconstructed 31 classroom wing set, that honors the cultural and historical significance of the property. 32 2. In a board work session held on April 16, 2013, the Board requested the designer 33 provide a conceptual feasibility analysis for the classroom wings not being de- 34 constructed. This is outlined in attachment 6. 35 3. Any approval of an alternate agreement for services may establish an expectation for 36 the facility that could result in additional cost for the facility that would need to be 37 appropriated outside of the current capital investment plan. 38 4. The current septic system can sustain 2,400 gallons per day which will accommodate 39 a community center size of 10,000 square feet. 40 5. The proposed informal advisory group has achieved a reasonable consensus on 41 community center programming and construction methods. 42 43 He reminded the Board of the dates of the two community input meetings and 44 referenced pages 3 and 4 of the packet, which outline the public input from the March 1 gtn 45 session. He noted the consensus on the uses of the facility in a 10,000 square foot footprint. 46 He said there were mixed feelings regarding re-use versus "memorialization". 47 He referred Commissioners to the list on page 4 regarding the areas of strong opinion 48 and the consensus items regarding use.