Wednesday, March 22, 2006

Bellevue candidates debate annexations

Incumbent Wilkes bows out of city council race


By JASON KAUFFMAN
Express Staff Writer

Bellevue City Council candidates Beth Callister and Steve Fairbrother participate Monday evening in a Pizza and Politics forum sponsored by the Idaho Mountain Express. Vivian Ivie also is a candidate for the three council seats up for election on Monday, April 3. Vivian Ivie Photo by David N. Seelig

What Bellevue looks like many years into the future has a lot to do with the decisions that are made today on three pending annexation applications, the city's municipal budget woes and much-needed upgrades to its aging water and sewer system.

This was the general consensus of the three candidates for Bellevue City Council who participated Monday, March 20 in a Pizza and Politics forum sponsored by the Idaho Mountain Express. Express publisher Pam Morris moderated the session that drew at least 30 Bellevue residents.

There are three seats on the Bellevue City Council up for election on Monday, April 3.

Candidates Beth Callister, Steve Fairbrother and Vivian Ivie fielded numerous questions from the media, city residents and each other during the approximately 90-minute session at Bellevue City Hall.

Incumbent City Council candidate Jon Wilkes didn't show up for the debate, but did drop off a written statement announcing his withdrawal from the race. Wilkes' withdrawal means the three remaining candidates are essentially assured of winning a seat on the council.

The three candidates all took relatively tough stances on the issue of the pending annexation applications, saying the applicants will not only have to prove their projects will be a benefit to Bellevue, but won't be a liability either.

The annexations under consideration include one approximately 100-acre property at Slaughterhouse Canyon and two others south of the city that together comprise approximately 560 acres.

"I'm not a real advocate for annexations," said Ivie, an incumbent. Most importantly, the applicants will have to, among other things, provide affordable employee housing and land for future city building projects, such as a new city hall, Ivie said.

Fairbrother, also an incumbent, said his primary concern is making sure Bellevue receives proper monetary compensation from the annexations.

He said the annexations' potential impacts on traffic in Bellevue are a grave concern for him. "It can't make Bellevue's traffic get worse."

Callister, currently a member of the city Planning and Zoning Commission, said voting to approve the annexations has less to do with what benefits she's looking for and more to do with the potential costs to the city. Callister said if the costs of the annexations outweigh the benefits, the City Council should reject the proposals.

"We really have to be careful," she said. "If Bellevue doesn't come out on top, then it doesn't make any sense."

The topic of affordable housing was also the subject of comments by the candidates. Each candidate highlighted differing views on how to address the need for affordable housing in Bellevue.

Fairbrother said Bellevue needs to consider adding more trailer parks for manufactured homes in addition to considering affordable deed-restricted housing.

Callister said embracing the dreaded D-word—density—would go a long way toward creating more affordable housing. The simple act of reducing the minimum lot size in Bellevue from 12,000 square feet would make homes more affordable, she said.

"Density is a way that we can get at affordable housing," Callister said.

While saying she supports the idea of affordable housing in Bellevue, Ivie said she isn't an advocate of building apartments in the city. "This is a single-family-dwelling community," she said.

Picabo resident Nick Purdy, reminding everyone that full build-out on the proposed annexations would likely take between 30 and 40 years, asked the candidates whether the city can properly manage the funds it will receive as part of the annexations.

"Yes, absolutely," Callister said. She said Bellevue's staff and elected officials are talented and are dedicated to the city's future. "I think everyone's on the same page," she said.

Fairbrother said growth in or near Bellevue is going to happen one way or the other. "If we can't (properly manage the growth) then leave it for the county," he said.

Ivie suggested the city should set aside separate line-item appropriations for future budgetary needs.

Like Fairbrother, Ivie said Bellevue will see impacts related to growth regardless of whether they approve the annexations. The only difference is Bellevue won't be compensated in any way if they reject the annexations, she said.

"We may have to come down to choosing the lesser of two evils," Callister said in regards to the annexation question. The city needs to look at both scenarios "and then figure out the best thing to do," she said.

All three candidates said the proposed annexations could solve a number of Bellevue's budget-related woes. They cited the estimated $9.5 million price tag for repairing and updating Bellevue's aging water system as a prime example.

"Our biggest problem is (a lack of) cash," Fairbrother said. "We won't be able to fund water and sewer projects without money."




 Local Weather 
Search archives:


Copyright © 2024 Express Publishing Inc.   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy
All Rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission of Express Publishing Inc. is prohibited. 

The Idaho Mountain Express is distributed free to residents and guests throughout the Sun Valley, Idaho resort area community. Subscribers to the Idaho Mountain Express will read these stories and others in this week's issue.