C.L. "Butch"
Otter
Governor
Lawerence
Denney
Secretary of
State
Lawrence
Wasden
Attorney
General
Brandon D
D Woolf
State
Controller,
Secretary
SCO > Board of Examiners > Subcommittee Minutes
STATE BOARD OF EXAMINERS
MINUTES – SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING
700 W. State Street, Boise, Idaho
5th Floor, Conference Room A
November 9, 2006


The regular meeting of the Subcommittee to the State Board of Examiners was called to
order at 700 West State Street, Boise, Idaho, at 9:07 a.m. pursuant to Idaho Code §67-2002
and by order of the chair.

The following members were present: Brad Foltman, Governor’s Office; Chuck Goodenough,
Office of the Secretary of State; David High, Office of the Attorney General; and Patrick Hodges,
Office of the State Controller, as assisting secretary to the subcommittee.

Also present by invitation were: Lorrie Pond, Bureau of Hazardous Materials; Jeanne Jackson-Heim,
State of Idaho Real Estate Commission; David Tolman, Idaho Transportation Department;
Michelle Kelly, Idaho Department of Correction; Kathee Weyerts, Idaho Department of Correction;
Ron Mesler, Department of Correction; Audrey Musgrave, Office of the State Controller; and
Deborah Finkbeiner, Office of the State Controller.

CONSENT AGENDA

1. Minutes
Approval of official minutes for the meeting of the Subcommittee to the Board of
Examiners on October 5, 2006.

Resolution: Mr. Foltman moved to approve item 1. Mr. Goodenough seconded the
motion. The motion carried on a unanimous voice vote.


REGULAR AGENDA

2. Idaho Transportation Department
Request approval to reimburse real estate expenses for a new director for up to
$45,000. This amount is the maximum allowed in the Board of Examiners Real
Estate Relocation Policy option 3 ($300,000 home value x 15%).

Discussion: Mr. Foltman inquired of the Transportation Department’s
status in its recruiting process.

Mr. Tolman answered that the department put out a nationwide search and was able
to narrow the list down to five candidates for director. They will be interviewed next
week. The Transportation Department would like to have this relocation reimbursement
as one of the options available in case someone needs to move to Idaho. They would
like to have pre-approval so the department can make an offer to the candidate they
choose. The department would like the maximum amount allowed, based on whether
or not they will need to move the new hire. If the new hire is already from Idaho, then
they will not need the full amount of money reimbursement.

Mr. Goodenough said the policy is already in place. After the employee is hired, Mr.
Tolman can come back and ask for the money. Mr. Goodenough did not think the
maximum rate should be the negotiating point between the transportation board and
whomever the new hire is.

Mr. Tolman said previously they have come to the Board of Examiners to get
approval in advance.

Mr. High asked if this has been done for a new employee before.

Mr. Tolman said it was done for Dave Eckerman a little over three years ago.

Mr. Goodenough advised Mr. Tolman to come before the Board of Examiners after
the fact with a hard amount and the board can approve it then.

Mr. Tolman said the amount the department paid for Dave Eckerman when he moved
here was a little over $8,800 for his real estate reimbursements.

Mr. Foltman asked if that was done on a pre-approved basis.

Mr. Tolman said no, the money actually came after the effect.

Resolution: Mr. Goodenough moved to defer item 2 until the Idaho Transportation
Department hires a new director, and at that time will bring their request back to the
Board of Examiners so the board can give the request another positive look. It will
be subject to approval at a later date.

Mr. Foltman seconded the motion. The motion carried on a unanimous voice vote.
The Board of Examiners Real Estate Relocation Policy is used for existing employees,
not for new hires.


3. Idaho Department of Correction
Request approval to establish a rotary account to be used for grant funds, including
a recent Federal Grant for $4,500.00 intended for fugitive recovery. In the interest of
that goal, funds will be used to pay confidential informants a small “fee” for information.
The system to keep the informant identity confidential would be similar to the one used
by Idaho State Police.

Discussion: Mr. Foltman said he would like a little more information on how this process
would work.

Mr. Mesler answered he has been working in fugitive operations for the Department
of Correction for six years. At any given time the IDOC usually has 100 parole fugitives,
600-800 probation fugitives, and six escapees at large. The escapees are not typically in
a walled facility, but rather from a work center. 80-85% of them have substance abuse issues. They do not usually leave a trail through society, such as credit reports, etc. The IDOC uses other means to find them. It is often information obtained from other people who may have mixed motives for coming forward. The person might be a good citizen who just wants to help, but often they are people who have more of a flirtation with the dark side of the criminal justice system. Paying the informants money for information is quite a common practice. This system is to buy information to locate a particula person. People may call on a tip line, but the information they have is usually quite vague. However, people within the ring of the criminal group will see the criminal again and again, and will be able to describe the car make and model, the time of day he comes and goes, or their address, etc. For one instance, last year the IDOC had a very high profile case of a sex offender that fled and went to Belize. The Department had someone who was in contact with the criminal’s wife by e-mail, and who was feeding the Department information as to the criminal’s location. The informant was a person of limited means, and was about to have her phone shut off. Mr. Mesler said they went to the ISP and asked for $50 to pay the woman’s phone bill so she could use her Internet and continue to e-mail the criminal’s wife.

Mr. Foltman asked if there would be a possibility of snitches inside the prisons that would
provide leads and might want money for the use of their information.

Mr. Mesler said it is certainly not inconceivable that an inmate might help out, but their
sort of information is usually vague. The Department is looking for more concrete
information. Mr. Mesler said their focus is looking more at people in the community to provide tips.

Mr. Foltman asked how long the $4,500 would last.

Mr. Mesler answered that it depends. A small amount of money will have a very high value
to an incarcerated person, whereas someone on the street will want more money for their
information. Mr. Mesler said the focus is on high profile criminals in society.
This money is a renewable fund through the Rocky Mountain Information Network.

Mr. High asked how the IDOC handles confidentiality and making sure the informant money
is going where it needs to go.

Mr. Mesler answered that in most of the cases he handles, confidentiality is not a huge
possibility. The informant that is paid the money will probably not even need an alias.
There is a recordkeeping system on the Rocky Mountain Information Network where the
Department would have to document someone if they were going to be a confidential informant,
and they would have to maintain paperwork which would document the informant’s identity as
something different. That sort of situation would be a rare occurrence.

Mr. Goodenough said he is concerned about accountability and who would be approving the expenditure of the funds. He asked at what level is the money approval done.

Ms. Weyerts said that Ron leads the investigations for the Department, but he has to get
approval from his supervisor when there is a need for investigative funds to be utilized. A form is filled out and brought down for approval to the fiscal department. A check is cut and made out payable to the informant, and then the informant has to file a receipt per Rocky Mountain Information Network. They have to fill out forms with the description and amount included. There has to be multiple signatures on the forms, and it has to be witnessed. Rocky Mountain Information Network receives the forms that are reconciled and makes sure that the Department is spending the money appropriately.

Mr. High said it sounds like the department has good control.

Mr. Goodenough commented that there was no address or phone number on the letterhead.
Mr. Goodenough might have given someone a call to ask these questions to, had there been
contact information included with the request.

Resolution: Mr. Goodenough moved to place item 3 on the consent agenda for approval.
Mr. High seconded the motion. The motion carried on a unanimous voice vote.



4. State of Idaho Real Estate Commission
Request approval for reimbursement of expenses for Executive Director Jeanne
Jackson-Heim's airfare to the ARELLO conference in San Antonio from September
24-27, 2006. The total amount of her airfare was $377.65.

Discussion: Mr. Goodenough asked what the ARELLO conference was.

Ms. Jackson-Heim answered it was the Association of Real Estate License Law
Officials. She was hired over the telephone near the end of August, and a few days
later when she was speaking with her new employers, the Real Estate Commissioners,
she was informed she was expected to attend this conference which was set up
for September 24th. The previous Executive Director Donna Jones would have attended,
but she was resigning effective September 30th. In the meantime, Ms. Jackson-Heim
was expected to go to another convention a week before that for her new job, which by
coincidence, was a convention she was already planning on attending for her previous job.
But she was not able to leave from Boise because she had not moved to Boise yet, and
she was not able to get a good price on a plane ticket like the other people going. It was
short notice for Ms. Jackson-Heim, and the others had gotten their tickets at a good price
in July. The Real Estate Commission called Patrick Hodges and asked about travel
reimbursements. Patrick told her the policy reflected that Ms. Jackson-Heim would get
reimbursed as much as the Boise commissioner. Ms. Jackson-Heim bought the cheapest
ticket she could get, which was about $80 more than what the Boise commissioner’s ticket
cost when he bought it in July. She would like to be reimbursed for the full amount of her
airline ticket, rather than the reduced amount, because she did the best she could in the
time given her. Ms. Jackson-Heim feels that this is an extenuating circumstance that would
not normally occur and she would not normally make this request. She also included some
other information that she did travel back and forth a couple of times to accommodate her
new employers, paid with her own money, and is not asking for reimbursement for that.
She takes this very seriouslyas an obligation she had to fulfill. However,
the plane ticket was something she could not do much about. She also believes the
commissioners did not realize ahead of time that this was going to come up because they
also did not understand all of the policies. The commissioners did mention there would be a few
things she would be reimbursed for, but they did not realize this was not in the habit of the policy.

Mr. Foltman asked when the commission offered the job, did they say what the starting
date was going to be?

Ms. Jackson-Heim said that yes, they asked her to be on the payroll by September 11 for
the meeting in Jackson, Wyoming. Then they said they needed her to attend a meeting
in San Antonio the following week. The commission had also told her they needed her on
the payroll as of this particular date, but they understood that she was not going to be in Boise
yet. Ms. Jackson-Heim had to give notice at her job, help train the new person taking her old
position, and had the task of moving her belongings to Boise.

Mr. Foltman asked if they did not inform her that when she started her employment on
September 11th and in addition, wanted her to attend these two functions, that because she
was not located in Boise there may be some difference in terms of how that may be handled?

Ms. Jackson-Heim said no, they did not tell her. Ms. Jackson-Heim honestly does not believe
the commission knew. She is not critical of them because they are business people,
and if this were a private sector situation, it would not be of concern. She believes sometimes
they do not quite catch on to the nuances of the commission being a state agency. She
understands why the policies are in place, etc., but for her to be out of pocket these particular
expenses, has been a challenge. Ms. Jackson-Heim said she expected she would have
to pay for some moving expenses, but she did not think she would have to pay for a trip her
employers asked her to take.

Mr. Foltman said to clarify, is the $377.65 the total cost of the airfare, or is that the difference
between what the Boise person paid and your airfare?

Ms. Jackson-Heim said it was the total cost of the airfare.

Mr. Goodenough asked if it was known how much the Boise airfare cost.

Ms. Jackson-Heim she has no way to compare, except for the Internet special airfare
ticket which was purchased in July. It was a different airline and priced at $295.

Mr. High noted she would get at least $295.

Mr. Goodenough asked what the Real Estate Commission’s view was. Typically the
board gets a request from an agency or a commission for reimbursement, not from an individual.

Ms. Jackson-Heim said they are aware that she made this request and she brought it up at
their last meeting in October and asked them if it would be alright if she made this request.
The board said it was alright and encouraged her to go forward with the request.

Mr. High told Ms. Jackson-Heim that she has been very honorable in how she has been
dealing with the state, but it is rather odd.

Mr. Foltman said there was one thing for further comment for the Controller’s Office, that
it mentioned in the request the commissioners could choose to make up the shortfalls
retention bonus at the end of the year. Mr. Foltman said he is a little reluctant to see that.
When we have these differences in how to apply the policies, Mr. Foltman thinks the board
should communicate with the Real Estate Commission that a retention bonus would not be a
normal way to address these variances that come before the Board of Examiners, or just the
normal accounting transactions. Retention bonuses are issues of recruiting and retention that
are specific to how we compare to the market. It is not a way to get money to an employee.
The board has had all kinds of special circumstances. It is a new thing for the state as well,
because the legislation this last session changed some of those policies, and we have not
clarified it on the state side. Mr. Foltman believes it would be helpful to have communication
not only to the Real Estate Commission but through all of the agencies to make it clear.

Mr. High said that he agrees on retention bonuses, that they should be used for a different
purpose. It seems the Controllers office interpreted the policy correctly by rejecting this;
however, it does seem like Ms. Jackson-Heim was doing this on behalf of her employer and
the State. Mr. High believes the request does justify as an exception, but not the rule.

Resolution: Mr. High moved to place item 4 on the consent agenda for approval. Mr.
Goodenough seconded the motion. The motion carried on a unanimous voice vote.

Mr. Foltman commented that Ms. Jackson-Heim is the new employee, making the
case before the board by herself, when the Real Estate Board should have been present
to hear about the policies and see how this was handled.

Ms. Jackson-Heim said with all due respect, the Real Estate Board needs some education
on the policies and procedures. She said she would communicate this to her agency.


5. Military Division, State of Idaho
a. Request fo approval pursuant to Idaho Code §72-928 of payment of worker's
compensation claims for members of the Idaho National Guard, resulting while
the soldier was on duty, int he amount of $5,523.90.
b. Ratification of military contracts.

Discussion: Mr. High stated when we buck slip contracts, they should be ratified at
our regular meeting.

Mr. Hodges said we see the contracts in bursts.

Resolution: Mr. Goodenough moved to place item 5 on the consent agenda for approval.
Mr. Foltman seconded the motion. the motion carried on a unanimous voice vote.


    6. Internal Revenue Service— Change to Federal Mileage Rate
    Request to amend the state travel policy to reflect the change to the federal
    mileage rates beginning January 1, 2007. The new rates are 48.5 cents per
    mile driven for business purposes, 20 cents per mile driven for medical or
    moving purposes, and 14 cents per mile driven in service to a charitable organization.

    Discussion: Mr. High asked if this request typically ends up on the consent agenda.

    Mr. Hodges said that last time it was not on the consent agenda because the rate
    was such a large change.

    Mr. Foltman said he was uncertain whether there was an advantage to decide on a
    different rate than what the IRS will be using. Agencies will need to look at the costs
    and reduce their trips, etc. Most employees would be confused if the mileage was
    different than the IRS' standard rate.

    Resolution: Mr. Foltman moved to place item 6 on the consent agenda for approval.
    Mr, Goodenough seconded the motion. The motion carried on a unanimous voice vote.



    7. Bureau of Homeland Security, Division of Military, Executive Office of Governor
    ID #
    Description
    Amount
    Comments
    Date to Board
      2006-00097
    HazMat
    $150.00
    Incident involving a semi truck rollover on Highway 95 near New Meadows, resulting in a diesel spill.
    10/23/06
      2006-00122
    HazMat
    $4,192.43
    A structure fire incident involving various agricultural chemicals such as herbicides and pesticides. Incident location was 138 SW Blvd in New Plymouth.
    10/23/06
      2006-00165
    HazMat
    $7,204.37
    Incident involving a fuel tanker rollover at 3900 N. 3400 E. in Twin Falls, resulting in a diesel spill.
    10/23/06
      2006-00171
    HazMat
    $5,042.80
    Incident involving a commercial vehicle crash at U.S. Hwy 12 at milepost 151.5 in Idaho County, resulting in a fuel and oil spill.
    10/23/06
      2006-00174
    Drug Lab
    $2,799.08
    Incident at 150 8th Avenue North in Payette, involving a suspected drug lab.
    10/23/06
      2006-00176
    HazMat
    $270.20
    Incident involving a semi truck accident on Fairview and Five Mile in Boise, resulting in a diesel spill.
    10/23/06
      2006-00180
    HazMat
    $114.34
    Incident involving the Boise Tour Train with a ruptured fuel tank at 5th and Jefferson in Boise.
    10/23/06
      2006-00187
    HazMat
    $1,043.02
    Incident at 600 E. 116 S. in Burley, where 6-8 sticks of 20 year old dynamite was found next to a residence. Unknown responsible party.
    10/23/06
      2006-00191
    Drug Lab
    $2,283.05
    Incident at 905 E 4th Street in Emmett, involving a suspected drug lab.
    10/23/06
      2006-00193
    BioHazard
    $17,779.45
    Incident at the Sun Valley Inn-Resort where an unknown white powdery substance was discovered on the air handler intake duct. Unknown responsible party.
    10/23/06
      2006-00194
    HazMat
    $174.50
    Incident at 4792 W. Overland Road in Boise, where someone left a 55 gallon drum of propane in a parking lot. Unknown responsible party.
    10/23/06
    TOTALS
    $41,053.24

    Discussion: Ms. Pond informed the group that two items (items 2006-00171 and 2006-00180)
    have already been paid.

    Mr. Foltman said the lists keep getting longer.

    Rsolution: Mr. Foltman moved to place item 7 less the amounts already paid on the consent
    agenda. Mr. Goodenough seconded the motion. The motion carried on a unanimous voice vote.



    INFORMATIONAL AGENDA

    8. Attorney General

    a. Notification that Lawrence E. Kirkendall, Attorney at Law, has been appointed pursuant to
    Idaho Code §67-1409 as a Special Deputy Attorney General for the purpose of representing
    the State of Idaho in the case of Corson v. Indust.

    b. Notification that Lawrence E. Kirkendall, Attorney at Law, has been appointed pursuant to
    Idaho Code §67-1409 as a Special Deputy Attorney General for the purpose of representing
    the State of Idaho in the case of Gage v. Indust.

    c. Notification that Lawrence E. Kirkendall, Attorney at Law, has been appointed pursuant to
    Idaho Code §67-1409 as a Special Deputy Attorney General for the purpose of representing
    the State of Idaho in the case of Darrah v. Indust.

    d. Notification that Lawrence E. Kirkendall, Attorney at Law, has been appointed pursuant to
    Idaho Code §67-1409 as a Special Deputy Attorney General for the purpose of representing
    the State of Idaho in the case of Azevedo v. Indust.

    e. Notification that Lawrence E. Kirkendall, Attorney at Law, has been appointed pursuant to
    Idaho Code §67-1409 as a Special Deputy Attorney General for the purpose of representing
    the State of Idaho in the case of Seng v. Indust.

    f. Notification that Donald J. Farley of the firm of Hall, Farley, Oberrecht & Blanton, PA, has
    been appointed pursuant to Idaho Code §67-1409 as a special Deputy Attorney General
    for the purpose of representing the State of Idaho in the case of Lazy Y Ranch v. Wiggins, et al.

    g. Notification that Lawrence E. Kirkendall, Attorney at Law, has been appointed pursuant to
    Idaho Code §67-1409 as a Special Deputy Attorney General for the purpose of representing
    the State of Idaho in the case of Romey v. Indust.

    h. Notification that Richard A. Hearn of the firm of Racine, Olson, Nye, Budge & Bailey, Chtd.,
    has been appointed pursuant to Idaho Code §67-1409 as a Special Deputy Attorney General
    for the purpose of representing the State of Idaho, Department of Administration, Office of
    Insurance Management—Risk Management in the case of McKeiver v. State of Idaho, et al.

    i. Notification that Philip H. Robinson, Prosecuting Attorney with the Bonner County Prosecutor’s
    Office, has been appointed pursuant to Idaho Code §67-1409 as a Special Deputy Attorney
    General for the purpose of representing the State of Idaho in the case of Richard R. Stafford
    and Lori L. Irelan Real Property Forfeiture.

    j. Notification that J. Evan Robertson of the firm of Robertson & Slette, PLLC, has been
    appointed pursuant to Idaho Code §67-1409 as a Special Deputy Attorney General for the
    purpose of advising the Idaho Water Resource Board in its acquisition of a fish hatchery and
    interests in spring water rights and addressing the surface ground water conflict in the Eastern
    Snake Plain Aquifer.

    k. Notification that David Zaslowsky of the firm of Baker & McKenzie, LLP, in New York, New York,
    has been appointed pursuant to Idaho Code §67-1409 as a Special Deputy Attorney General
    for the purpose of representing the State of Idaho in the case of M & M Packaging, Inc. v.
    Kole, et al.



    9. State Insurance Fund

      a. Estimate of the State Insurance Fund expenses to be paid by sight drafts for the month of July, 2006.
          Estimated expenditure for workers compensation claim costs, dividends and premium refunds
      $25,000,000.00
        Funds Expended in August, 2006
        Workers Compensation Claim Costs
      11,962,540.78
        Dividend
      00
        Commissions
      3,383,563.06
        Policy Refunds
      465,775.34
        Total
      15,811,879.18
      b. Estimate of the Petroleum Clean Water Trust Fund expenses to be paid by sight draft for the month of July, 2006.
          Estimated expenditure for Petroleum Clean Water Trust Fund
      $750,000.00
        Funds Expended in August, 2006:
        Payroll
      66,567.82
        Operations
      9,225.97
        Claim Costs
      104,283.83
        Total
      180,077.62

    Mr. Foltman asked that the record reflect that this is the impending retirement of Mr. High.
    Today is the last subcommittee meeting for him being present. Mr. High has given tremendous
    support and assistance to the Subcommittee and the Board of Examiners over the years,
    and has been very much appreciated.

    Mr. High said it has been an extremely interesting and wonderful career.

    The Subcommittee agreed in unanimous support in recognizing Mr. High’s retirement and
    his many years of service to the State.




        A meeting agenda will be available at the Idaho State Controller’s Office, 700 West State Street, Boise, Idaho, two (2) working days before the meeting.

        If you have questions or would like to arrange auxiliary aides or services for persons with disabilities, please contact the Idaho State Controller’s Office at (208) 334-3100. Accommodations for auxiliary aides or services must be made no less than five (5) working days in advance of the meeting.

        The CONSENT AGENDA addresses routine items the board may approve without discussion.

        The REGULAR AGENDA addresses policy and program items the board may wish to discuss prior to making a decision.

        The INFORMATION AGENDA provides information only.

        The agendas are subject to change and the Board may move an item from one agenda to another.


    Page last updated on 12/20/2006 10:58:14 AM