City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening, everyone. Thank you for coming tonight. A lot of great faces out in the crowd. Thank you for being here. We appreciate attendance. All right, I'm going to call the meeting tonight to order. It's just after 6 p.m. on July 20th, 2026. Once again, welcome those who are joining us. First on the agenda is the invocation, which tonight will be offered by Russell Snow of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. So please stand for that invocation, and then we'll go right into the Pledge of Allegiance after that. Jim, would you mind volunteering, please? Thank you.

I would not mind volunteering. Father God, we thank you for this day. Thank you for another beautiful, outstanding, wonderful day in the city of Caldwell. Thank you that you made it possible for this to become our hometown. We love this place. We want it to do good and we want it to do better. Father, we pray that you would give these men and women extraordinary wisdom, make them good at their jobs, because that's for the benefit of all of us. Father, watch over our proceedings tonight. May it honor you. We pray this in Jesus' name. Amen. Amen. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you for filling in. We appreciate you, as always, and of course your service to the city has gone on for many, many years, you and your wife, thank you. All right, Madam Clerk, can you call the roll?

Tillmont? Here. Stoddick?

Here.

Register? Here. Williams? Here. All good? Here. Denver? Here.

All right, everyone is present. Next on the agenda is the conflict of interest declaration. Are there any members who have a conflict of interest to declare relating to any item on tonight's agenda? Seeing none. right next on the agenda is going to be special presentations and we're going to go ahead and move on down to a special presentation by the local highway technical assistance council known as ltac of caldwell road scholars so we want to go ahead and come forward and present mr wood thank you thank you uh thank you uh council for allowing ltac to come present these awards to your staff for their outstanding achievements uh one of ltec's missions

is to advocate, support, and train all local highway jurisdictions, including the city of Caldwell. The LTAC T2 Center is part of a national program known as the Local Technical Assistance Program, and we provide training and technical assistance to meet the needs of highway jurisdictions in Idaho. The technical assistance portion of the T2 Center comes anytime any staff picks up a phone and calls us. We do our best to answer the questions and to find the right resources to help local highway jurisdictions out with their needs. As part of the T2 Center, there is a training portion that is offered in the form of classes held throughout the state, generally in the spring and fall. These classes, we offer a wide variety of topics, including safety professional development, and the largest portion being construction and maintenance techniques. Most of these courses have an exam with them that requires an 80% to pass. We want to make sure when your staff are in class, they are getting educated and bringing their knowledge back to be served. The first awards are going to go to your staff that attained the Rhodes Scholar. The Rhodes Scholar program takes about 80 hours of instructions, seven core classes, including classes such as roadway materials, pavement maintenance and preservation, flagger certification, math, effective communications, and they have an option of four electives. Each student has four years to complete this level. Rhodes Scholars are presented with a certificate, a hat, and an engraved Leatherman tool. It's my pleasure to announce that you have three Rhodes Scholars presented with awards tonight. We have certificates for them. Somebody can hand those out. As I call their name, if you could come up and receive your certificate. Jonathan Kershaw, Joe Elsner, and Daniel Snodgrass. The next level is the Roadmaster, which builds upon some of the same materials taught through the Road Scholar program. This level includes 80 additional hours instructions, four core classes, including classes such as roadway drainage, environmental best management practices, traffic control supervisor, traffic control technician, and five student-selected electives. Each student has four years to complete this. In addition to a certificate, the Roadmasters are presented with a very nice Carhartt jacket with the LTAC T2 Center logo on it. I'm going to call those names out. This year you have two that have reached Roadmasters. Don Gowans. Gage Calloway. The next level is the Leadership Development Program. It includes classes such as Transition to Leadership, Mastering Management, Leadership communications, organizations of a local highway organization, leading across generations, and team building. Leadership recipients are presented with their certificate and a Stanley Cup. You had one participant this year that went through the classes, and that was Kevin Northrup. Interesting enough, he's only our third person to go through this program. Congratulations and good job on your hard work.

Congratulations, gentlemen. I appreciate all your hard work. Once again, the mayor and council are thankful for all the hard work done by our street department staff, especially this time of the year when it's very hot outside. With that, we're going to go ahead and move back to the special presentation by our callable deputy public works director of streets, Mr. Bruce Mills on the quiet zone update.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor and council. And first, let me just say how proud I am of, not just those guys, but the whole street department, amazing group of individuals along with our electrical department. I've had the privilege of, of, uh, being part of their organizations for the last couple of two and a half years and just top notch, top notch, quiet zone. You've seen the construction going on the last few weeks. Uh, it is now, I would say 99% complete. The only thing left is putting delineators, up on top of the medians on 21st Avenue, and then all the construction will be complete. They had to backorder them, apparently. Who would have thought? Anyway, so all the medians are in. You've probably seen those. They're in. They're striped, painted. The barriers are in. All the access control point changes have been completed. The project came in under budget, so... The contract we had with Nelson Corporation was for $163,000. It came in at $146,000. And the additional $75,000 I had estimated for all the other costs, like the railroad flaggers and permitting and the barriers we had to purchase, I thought it was going to be about $75,000. That came in at $39,000. So all the construction costs total, estimated at $185,000. Then we had to pay for Union Pacific for their review time, for their permitting fees, all that. And we had an agreement we've entered into a couple of years ago on that for an estimated $60,000. And they recently told me that it's going to be more like $75,000 with all the reviews when they're complete. So if you add that 75 to the 185 for construction, The total project cost with design, permits, construction, everything is about $260,000. I have been asked about what are the ongoing costs for a quiet zone. There are no annual fees for a quiet zone for the city, so we're not paying Union Pacific anything. I've seen posts that say that we are. We're not. Maintenance. really is going to be keeping up the striping, the signage, and the barricades, keeping them a good repair. And that'll all be done by our street department. So the cost will be minimal for that as well. So as soon as those delineators are installed, and hopefully that's this week, we'll send FRA a notice of establishment letter. That gives the FRA and Union Pacific 21 days to come out and to assure themselves that we've built everything according to the plans that they approved we have and then after that 21 days is up we will install no train horn signs along the road and the sidewalks and Union Pacific will then cease to blow their horns at the crossings with the caveat that if they see any obstructions like people and vehicles on the on the tracks they will blow their horns the gates Flashing lights the warning bells will all continue at each crossing So with that I will be Sending that notice out again this week and I anticipate the horns to stop about in mid-august Stand for questions, I guess Thank You Thank You, I appreciate that update

Um, I'm not sure if my questions should go to you or go to Haley. Do you have a preference?

Okay.

Okay. Um, I appreciate the update very much. Um, so when we talked about the quiet zone originally, there was some concern about 21st Avenue and the 18 foot medium. Um, the only report we have is the one from Horrocks engineers that said, that the recommended median length is 100 feet there. And if we couldn't do that, we should not do the quiet zone in that area. So when we talked about that as well, and after I talked to the FRA, they had mentioned that the 21st Avenue crossing got a low score, but it was pulled through because the other scores on the corridor basically pulled it through. So the FRA has, like standalone by itself on 21st got a low score but was pulled through by the higher scores. So the concern is that if a car is stopped to turn left onto Stock Trail, that it could have the potential to back cars up onto the railroad track. That's not something I came up with. That's what the engineer said in the report. So when we talk about 21st specifically, The only way to really make it safe, according to the engineering report, is to either not do it or you make stock trail a right in, right out, and you extend the median. So this, I think, is where we had discussed that this would come up in budget, and it didn't, so this is why I was asking for an update. In order to make stock trail a right in, right out with the extension of that median, the estimated cost is over a million dollars. Is that, I just wanted to be correct that it's... Yeah, I'm not aware of the estimated cost.

That's probably one for you. Let me point out one thing before she does though. So by putting in all these mitigative measures, we're reducing the overall risk in the corridor by 37%. However, even on 21st Avenue, By having that median in there, even the short median in the south, we're reducing the risk by 14.5% over just having a horn there. So actually it improves 21st as well, just not as much.

The score on 21st was like 48 or something like that, I believe. 4.8. 4.8?

I have the FRA calculations here, but anyway.

What was it again?

Yeah. So, pardon?

The score on 21st?

The 21st Avenue? Yeah. It goes from 79, 371 down to 67, 830. It's about 14% reduction. It's not as much as the other ones where we have the full length of the curb medians. I think I have some notes. But we have a full length on the north side. We just have a shorter length on the south side.

Right. So all I'm pointing out is that the engineers in the Horrocks report said that it is not, if you can't extend the median, you should not put a quiet zone there because the risk of cars backing up on the,

And tracks is there I'm just telling you what sure no no that's so that's fine what they and they're entitled to their opinion you know I mean the traffic would back up with or without the quiet zone there because of that median and because trying to turn left so without so why are we not extending the median then it's up to the council they wish to extend the median and Spend the funds for that But we didn't need to do it for the quiet zones, is what I'm saying.

Okay. So if we extend the median, then it's a million-dollar project, right? So, Haley, the thing I just want to make sure that we all understand is that if we want to extend the median and make a right in, right out, if we decide to do that at some point, that it's over a million dollars to do that project, and while they are separate projects, It sounded to me, and you can correct this, that the only way to extend the median is if we do that other project.

Can you hold on just a second? For the crowd, can we just try and remember to silence our cell phones just so we can hear? Sometimes it reverberates, so thank you.

Councilwoman Register, Councilmembers, Mayor. So the issue on 21st and Stock Trail, as Bruce indicated, there's been an issue there pre-existing quiet zone studies. I want to reiterate that That left turn movement already does back people up onto the railroad.

So I want to say one thing before I forget, though, that the issue in the report was that it, what did they say? They said that without the early warning that they felt like that was going to create a bigger problem. So just to sort of keep that in mind with this. Sure.

Yes, yes, absolutely. But I just wanted to make sure that that was pointed out, that that issue already exists today. In order to mitigate that issue, we could put those delineators up today and it would be relatively inexpensive to turn Stock Trail into a right in, right out. My recommendation to council is before we do that, look at the area a little bit more holistically. The reason I say that is because Arthur, just to the south, does not currently have that left turn lane. So if we close the left turn lane at Stock Trail we would then be creating an unsafe left turn movement at the next street south. In order to widen the road to put that left turn lane in we would need to move a house. We have enough right of way. However this home at the corner of 21st and Arthur is partially within that right of way. So in order to do our improvements We would either need to relocate a house which does have a basement so that can be expensive. It's not just a slap on grade or we would need to fully demo and pay that property owner for the value of his home. So there would be two options in order to widen that road. Again looking at the area holistically I requested in this current fiscal year and our operations and maintenance through our professional services the ability to analyze this area. because I want to see if a traffic study is deemed necessary. And that's because again if we're changing the movement and the flow of the event center groups like the rodeo the fair they have those big trailers that are going to be turning left there. I want to see if it warrants putting a signal at that at that location. So between a potential signal to make it safe a safe left turn movement potentially moving a house with a basement it could be a large fund it could be a large project to add shift the left turn movement from Stock Trail to Arthur. We threw out an estimate of 100 or of a million excuse me I almost said 100 million don't want to scare anyone. We threw out an estimate of a million dollars just because until we actually get in there and see what that house looks like work with that property owner see how they want to move forward. It's it's a it's a sliding scale so I don't know exactly I can't give it a hard number to counsel today. of how much it would cost to make Arthur a safe left and restrict Stock Trail to a right in right out. But our estimate is a million in order to make close one and make the other safe.

So right now we're just leaving the 18 foot median at 21st and that's that.

That is correct. I would like to take this upcoming fiscal year to work with our partners at the event center to determine what the best traffic movement would be both for the city of Caldwell the residences of Caldwell, again, all of our partners out there, and then all of the residences who use that area. So I just want to take a step back for a minute and just make sure that that is the best decision for all parties who would be involved.

And then do you have any update on Linden? Some of the concerns were that when the median went in, it decreased the lane size and pushes the pedestrians out into the street.

So we're actively working on a project at Linden. You would have seen it in budget as approved for the design of the intersection improvements at Linden and Cleveland. Those intersection improvements are greater than just that intersection. They extend all the way beyond the railroad. So you will see, so that is currently in design, excuse me, to widen Linden across the railroad, and we would be completing pedestrian improvements as part of that project. Okay, thank you.

Real quick. When we get to that project, right, and that construction occurs at the railroad tracks, will that affect the quiet zone temporarily? Or will they maintain the same?

We will have to do an amendment to the crossing agreement that we have because any time you do any changes within that crossing footprint, you have to update your crossing agreement. So we'll do that. The median that we have there now is 18 inches wide. We're going to put a three-lane road all the way across Linden, when we do that, the median itself will be the full width of the center lane like it is on Ustick and 21st. So yeah, there will be some changes that will occur. It won't change the fact that it won't stop the quiet zone. It will just, yeah.

Just like a temporary, will the construction, does that affect it or do we know that yet?

During construct, that's a good question. I don't know the answer to that, whether they would suspend during the construction or not.

That's a good question. So just in case the train horns come back, that could be a thing. Additionally, if we widen 21st from the tracks to Arthur, do we have to then do 21st from Arthur to Blaine and then Blaine to Cleveland with that realignment?

If we widen 21st to add that left turn lane, I don't think that we would need to add it the full width all the way down to Cleveland just based on the way that the other streets operate. You know how Just because with Cleveland and Blaine both being one ways.

Yeah, I didn't mean the left turn.

I just meant the roads the alignment I've seen the map so my question was just are we gonna have to realign those other two there might be some realignment right at the intersection of Arthur and Excuse me Arthur and 21st But that realignment would just be to make sure that the lanes align and so it wouldn't travel further south from the intersection Okay, thank you any other

Councilor Williams.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mills, I just want to say thank you very much. I know you're probably in the process of cleaning out your desk, but I really do appreciate everything you've done for this city, not just the quiet zone. And you deserve to be awarded and the accolades are not enough, but thank you for everything.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Williams. Expanding on that, quite a few years ago, we started on a grid. project to improve the walkability and safe routes to school. Um, it felt like one of those fill in the blank checkerboards and you have done a great job, uh, making our city a much safer place. Um, if you could actually see the scale and the scope, and I believe we had it in a recent meeting where you had that up, but if you actually got around the city and see how widespread that was, um, Bruce did a phenomenal job leaving Caldwell a safer place and we appreciate it truly. Um, know all the hard work you've done of course your team helped out but you were the lead on that so thank you very much and we're gonna miss you and i appreciate the support we've had with the mayor and council as well because you know we have to have money to do those things so thank you yes and the school districts thank you too so appreciate that all right next is audience participation Section of the agenda is reserved for citizens wishing to address council on city related issues that are not on the agenda Speakers will have three minutes comments related to public pending hearings including decisions Maybe appeal to the City Council are out of order Should be held for the public hearing it doesn't look like any tonight or for that With that if you have any issues with staff, please address that with me later or we can schedule a meeting and And we'll go ahead and move forward with Ms. Jean Kreidbring. Three minutes, and your clock will be right up here.

Good evening. For the record, Jean Kreidbring, a Boring County resident enjoying my boring life, as noted by a sitting counselor. Also for the record, I do pay city taxes. Anyhow, that is not my reason for being here. I'm here concerning citizen welfare due to excessive speeders. I read a letter from Robin Della Maggiore previously concerning the speeding situation on Larch. She has thousands of hours of video footage proving the issue. This morning, an officer visited with Robin and explained that there are only three traffic officers for 90,000 people. So since there isn't enough traffic patrol, why wouldn't the city install speed mitigation bumps? And please don't tell me it's because of emergency vehicles or snowplows. There are countless severe dips in roads downtown that would cause slowing for the emergency vehicles and snowplows. Those dips haven't been filled in to accommodate emergency or plowing traffic. Gosh, there's even a pronounced dip on the west end of Larch closer to Montana. You need speed mitigation closer to the east end of Larch near Michigan Avenue. The city has a love affair with roundabouts for traffic calming. Perhaps it's time to embrace other means of mitigation like speed bumps, especially with only three traffic officers. Driving fast can kill people, including the driver. Two stats. Traffic is the biggest single killer of 12 to 16 year olds. Let that sink in since the high school is at Indiana and Larch. The biggest single killer of 12 to 16 year olds is traffic. Surprisingly, at 35 miles per hour, you are twice as likely to kill someone you hit as at 30 miles per hour. I have a lot of research from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration that I brought to share with you. It deals with speed. That's the issue on Larch. You need to do something. Larch feeds directly into the high school on Indiana and Larch. Think of how many teenagers walk, ride bikes, drive cars in that area. I want you to pay attention to the image at the end of my research. The average risk of death for a pedestrian at impact rises as speed increases. At 23 miles per hour, there's a 10% risk of death. At 42 miles per hour, there is a 50% risk of death. At 58 miles per hour, there is a 90% risk of death for a pedestrian. Are you willing to continue to ignore the excessive speed on L'Arche, knowing that a pedestrian, citizen, child, or bicyclist could be killed? Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Any questions from council? All right, next, Mr. Brandon Weist from Team Rubicon.

For the record, Brandon Weist. Good evening, Mayor, council members, legislators, senators, county commissioners, elected sheriffs, and fellow members of the community. My name is Brandon Wiest. I'm speaking today not just as a resident of Caldwell, but as a Team Rubicon volunteer and geographic area leader. Over the last week plus, Team Rubicon volunteers came to Caldwell from across the country to help our community recover from the storm that caused flooding on June 26th. These are military veterans, first responders, and civilians who took time away from their families, jobs, many using their own vacation, and paying their own travel expenses to serve the people they had never met here in Caldwell. They didn't come here for recognition. They came here to work and serve a community in need, and work they did. They helped homeowners, county public spaces, Grace Lutheran Church, and Cannon County Courthouse, cleared debris, supported recovery efforts, and demonstrated what selfless service truly looks like. They represented the very best of what volunteerism can be. What I find deeply disappointing is that, despite all of that, Not one elected official from the city or county or state of Idaho took the time to come out and personally thank these volunteers or even see the work being accomplished. I'm not talking about hours, I'm talking about 20 minutes. 20 minutes to shake a hand, 20 minutes to say thank you for serving our community, 20 minutes to recognize people who traveled from all over the United States to help the citizens of Caldwell. That didn't happen, whether it was because of busy schedules, a lack of awareness, or simply a missed opportunity, the result is the same. An incredible group of volunteers gave everything they had to this community and our local leadership was absent. At the same time, I want to recognize the people and organizations that did show up. Our partners and sponsors helped make this operation possible. Their generosity, support, and willingness to invest in our mission directly impacted the families we were able to serve. Disaster response is never accomplished by one organization alone. and we are incredibly grateful for everyone who stood beside Team Rubicon throughout this deployment. Those businesses and organizations are as follows. The Idaho VOAD, which stands for Volunteer Organization Active in Disaster, Canyon County Emergency Manager Christine Wendelsdorf, Idaho Power, Albertsons, Chick-fil-A, Norco, and Molina Healthcare. We owe a huge thank you. But most importantly, I want to give a huge shout out to Caldwell Christian Church. They took a leap of faith by opening their doors to us. They treated every volunteer with first-class hospitality. They didn't just provide us with a place to operate. They made us feel welcome, valued, and supported from the moment we arrived. The kindness and generosity, servant-hearted attitude exemplified what this community can be. And every Team Rubicon volunteer noticed it. On behalf of all of us, thank you. You set the standard for what hospitality looks like. Leadership isn't just about attending meetings or making policy decisions. Leadership is about being present when people step up to serve your community. It's about recognizing sacrifice, showing appreciation for those who ask for nothing in return. This wasn't about politics or assigning blame. It's about expectations. I expected our leaders to recognize service when they see it. I expect them to welcome organizations that invest our time, energy, and resources to making Caldwell stronger. And I believe the people of this community should expect the same. My hope is that next time Team Rubicon or any volunteer organization comes to Caldwell to help our residents, someone from the city or county will make time to show up. Not because volunteers need applause, but because gratitude is part of leadership. To every Team Rubicon volunteer who stood here, thank you. You represented integrity, compassion, and service above self. You made a lasting difference in this community. Regardless of who's there to witness it, I hope you all do better next time in closing. I invite anyone to watch a 13-episode docuseries on Team Rubicon and the work we do found at Roku Apple TV produced by this old house. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Register.

Yeah, question. So I appreciate everything that Team Rubicon did. I think it's fantastic that these organizations can come together. But quick question. you were very critical of the council not showing up to these. And I feel like this would have been much. I feel like you had an opportunity to really think the group to go going out there to do stuff. But instead, like all this was directed at the council. And my question to you is, Did anybody send us a calendar or a list? Because I don't recall ever hearing before where you were, what you guys were doing, who was there. There wasn't an opportunity or an invitation to council or I don't know about the mayor, but to come there. Although I did see a lot of posts afterwards, which I thought was fantastic, but you can't come down on a council for not coming if we didn't even know where you were, what you were doing. So the suggestion would be, Next time, like hopefully there's not a next time, but if there ever is that maybe you have a point person that reaches out to council and lets us know where you're going to be. And then I'm sure many of us would be there. Thank you.

Thank you. Counselor register. Counselor Tillman.

And just as a statement, I agree with counselor register a little bit odd coming at us considering I am a member of Caldwell Christian church. We purposely gave up our church to help Team Rubicon. I'd actually like to thank them. They left our church in a better position than it was when our men's group has been there. I didn't put myself out in front of it because they did have a mission to do and it wasn't about me. It was about the church and what they did and how they helped the church and how the church was helping them. I didn't believe it was my place to put myself in front of it. So I do take offense to what was said because I was there and I did thank him, but I didn't thank him as a member of this council.

Thank you. Counselor Tillman. Counselor didn't bear.

Thank you. I, in addition to what a counselor register said and counselor tell him, and I also take offense to it because when the floods happened, I was not looking for team Rubicon. I was out cleaning the street gutters so other houses in my neighborhood didn't flood. I was also activating the resources I had to pump the basement out of two houses. I wasn't looking for Team Rubicon. I was working my ass off. So I take great offense to what you're saying, and you should get the hell out of here.

I think that last part was unnecessary. I don't think you need to. I don't think that's the answer. What I would like to encourage you to do is to foster the communication so that if something like that were to happen again, that we could all support you, support the churches, that kind of thing. I know the mayor and I were out the next day trying to assess damage, but there's a lot of stuff that goes on and a lot of people doing a lot of organization. Christine Wendeldorf, who's the director of emergency management for the county, is fantastic with her communication. So it would be something that maybe you could go through her and she could let us know and then we could show up where needed if it's to help or to thank or whatever. And I apologize for that comment.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments tonight. And we'll have additional conversations on that. I do also want to thank Not only Christine who spent hours and hours our first responders our finance I mean there was a lot of effort put into all this also want to thank our event center who organized We had a request for dumpsters to bring all that material that they brought out of those houses. So the city graciously Utilized our 21st Avenue parking lot to bring several Republic services large dumpsters. I know that was coordinated We did attend the vo ad that was at the Salvation Army. So that's where there was a lot of volunteer stuff going on. So we did attend several things. But with that, we will make sure this is a learning experience for a lot of us with such an event. We'll work together and we do thank Team Rubicon for their services to the city and we'll continue working together to refine that process. Anything additional from council? All right. Seeing none, Sven Olsen. Sorry for getting your name wrong last time, but I could read it.

Don't worry about it at all. It's no big deal. I appreciate it. Good evening. My name is Sven Olson. I wanted to thank you again for this opportunity to address the council. I very much appreciate you guys and all that you do. I've come back tonight to speak to you again about the LPR cameras. I want to start by saying that I appreciate the thought and care that some of you have shown to this issue. It means a lot to me and other community members, and we hope that you will continue to look into this problem. The main problem, the main point I'd like to make tonight is to go a little further into detail about the security exploits used to get into flocks networks. I have some documents here that will go into greater detail about some of the exploits and how people are using them. This is a published white paper about several of the exploits, although nowhere near the extent of them. I'll try my best not to get too technical, as I understand that we also don't want to inspire people to commit any crimes. but I think it's important to give you an idea of how easy it is to get access to all or some of the data these cameras collect. First, one of the easiest ways to access the data is via a leaked API. APIs function as a password between computers, essentially giving the cameras permission to speak to the servers and vice versa. API keys were leaked by Flock themselves, easily found in the HTML script of a demo site that they published. Once people had the API keys, they were able to remotely access the servers and information, make inquiries to the algorithm, and view, edit, or delete surveillance video recorded by the cameras. This data leak also powered Have I Been Flocked, a website that tells people during a certain time period that that data was available if they had been searched on the database. It also showed a bunch of different police officers misusing the data, granted not in Canyon County, I want to clarify, across the nation. Another method is a deauth bug. This is a small handheld and affordable device that people are able to use to convince computers that their Wi-Fi has been dropped. Once this computer sees that, it will automatically try to rejoin the Wi-Fi signal, but this time it will join the router that the adversary has provided. Once they do that, the attacker can send a bug message to the receiving computer asking for credentials from the operator, and then the attacker has full access. Flock does not require two-factor authentication from all agencies, meaning that the data is only as secure as the weakest link. The same technology that keeps your email safe is not required to keep our data safe. Every week, more and more security exploits are found and published. Flock won't take the necessary action to remedy all of them because, frankly, the data is too valuable for adversaries to give them up. A whole country's worth of tracking data and all they have to do is buy a $40 device and park near a police station for an hour or sometimes not even that. Thank you again for listening to me tonight and I'm happy to answer any questions I can. I'd like to give this to the clerk if that's okay.

Thank you, Sven. Anything from the council? Thank you once again for the audience participation tonight. I know we had a little bit of outbursts and we'll follow up with that later. With that, thank you, council, for the things you've allowed us to do, especially when it comes to utilizing the city property. So for all the events that have happened and the funding and such and the emergency action order. With that, we're going to go next on the agenda is approving the consent calendar. These are routine items that are grouped together to be approved in one motion unless the councilor moves for one or more items to be removed from the consent calendar. And consider separately, are there any motions to amend the current calendar? All right, seeing none, can we get a motion to approve the consent calendar as presented? So moved. Do we have a second? Second. Motion to second. Council, can you please vote electronically? All right, thank you the consent calendar motion passes the next item on the agenda discussion Authorizing the cobalt fire department to seek out and hire consultants for the review and analysis of establishing a fire district in an amount not to exceed $80,000 chief Daniels I And thank you for all your work. It's been hours and hours and hours, you and your staff, um, amongst other people involved. So thank you.

Thank you, mayor council, uh, as containing your packet is a brief memo that, uh, explained how we got to this point so far, just so for the sake of the public, um, two weeks ago, last Thursday, we held a public workshop where we asked, or we collaborated with some new information. on what it would take for the rural district to annex the city fire department and assume control over the city fire department. Last Tuesday, the culpable rural fire district informed me that they are not interested in pursuing annexation of the city fire department based on a number of reasons as their fire chief. And and the other the other Board of Commissioners that I do report to I ask that you respect that decision I do and It just is what it is Which leaves us with two viable options we have discussed I believe at great length the first option being a public safety levy the second being creating being being to create a entirely new entity or a new fire district within city limits and I am leaning towards and I suggest that we look at forming our own independent fire district. And this is predicated on the fact that House Bill 959 which allows growth to pay for growth would allow a new fire district to capture revenue beyond the 8 percent cap to offset some of those costs and capture some of the funds that we are that we are looking to capture with that. I'm requesting to hire a consultant to build us a roadmap on how to do that and what that looks like for the city to possibly place on the ballot an initiative for next May for the city of Caldwell to form an independent fire district. As well, I'd like to hire a marketing consultant or a public outreach coordinator to help us message and deliver that information to our public specifically so they know what's happening. in an amount not to exceed $80,000. I have received a quote or a scope of work, which I indicated I included in the packet. However, I found some errors in there, so I removed that from Tischler Beiss, their first of one consultant to work with us. They drafted our CIP, and they've helped us with other capital projects. They are also the consultant that Nampa and CUNA have used, and they're going through consolidation right now. Um, so they're kind of the experts in the, in the region. Um, their initial quote was $43,000, which would leave us, um, the remainder to hire an outreach coordinator with that. I'll stand for any questions.

Thank you. Chief Daniels, council, councilor register.

Thank you. Um, I'm sorry. It didn't work out, um, with the rural district, at least not right now. It sounds like they had some good reasoning for it. Um, I think, like, I believe that the best way to do this is to have somebody helping that can draw out a roadmap and the best thing to do. Obviously, it's a money thing. So my question for Rochelle, I guess.

As far as paying for the services to have the study done, there has been some cost savings internally within the fire department, so there is sufficient funding in the current operating budget to be able to start those. I don't think or foresee that all of that will hit in the current fiscal year. So there might be a little bit going into the future year for that, which is allocated appropriately.

So is that? Yes, perfect. That's all I needed to know. I think it's a great idea to have a guide if we can afford it, which it sounds like we do.

Thank you, Councilor Register.

Councilor Stoddart. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Napa has gone through this already. Is that correct or not?

the fire district mayor They're they're pursuing a consolidation effort between the Nampa Fire District and the cuneifier district I don't know what their time frame is for that to go into effect, but they are currently working towards that goal Okay, just to clarify you're asking has the Nampa City gone through this process when before they went to the district correct from city to district Yes, to answer your question, Mayor and Councillor Stoddart, yes, Nampa did do exactly what I'm proposing that we pursue.

Would any of that information reduce the $80,000 cost that we're looking at right now for us?

Councillor Stoddart, I did ask that question. A lot's changed, including legislation over the past four years, so I believe having the most current information would probably be the best investment.

Okay, thank you. Just to clarify one additional thing, I know you had discussed before that they had to leave the admin building, the city building, and get their own. In this instance, you would have your own already. We wouldn't have to move you out, correct? That's correct. So that could be a cost savings. Councillor Dentonburg.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Chief, I've had the opportunity over the last several months to work with you in the fire negotiations, and you did a remarkable job there. Both your command staff and the fire union are to be applauded with the civility by which they came to an agreement that I think will come before this council soon. I also want to applaud you for your efforts in getting that remarkable group of people together to help us understand what the current situation is with our current fire department being connected to the city and at Separation whenever that happens, but with regards to this $80,000 for the consultant What exactly will that provide will that provide us with a list of administrative tasks that need to be undertaken? Well that just provide us with a yes or no you should do it or you should not do it Can you just kind of run down what we anticipate getting for the $80,000?

Absolutely. Mr. Mayor and Council of Denver I anticipate roughly sixty percent of that eighty thousand dollars going towards a consultant who will give us a roadmap of financial analysis carried over legal liabilities financial liabilities how we go in in order to transfer fire engines and buildings to the new district and Really, it's not a consultant on if you should or shouldn't do it. It's if you decide to do this. This is the road now and I believe at this point in time, we know we need to capture additional funding. The mechanism in House Bill 959 allows us to capture that. I think it's the direction we need to go. And I believe that a consultant can draw that out for us, the administrative structure and the timelines, the deadlines, everything with putting it on the ballot. And so we can all make informed decisions and really understand the process.

So if I understand the correction, if it was going to be on the ballot for November, we have like an August deadline. So there's basically a two and a half month time period by which it needs to be approved by the council. So having this on a May ballot initiative would have somewhere around a mid-February deadline for being presented back to council. Do we anticipate this being a six month project, a four month project? How long do will the consultant need

Anywhere from 60 to 90 days to wrap up that project If we choose to pursue forming a new fire district There is a number of administrative steps that we need to go through So November is not an option for us to put this on about it The soonest we could do this is May or the following November in 2027 If that answers your question.

That answers my question. I was just interested in the dates and the timelines in order to have something like this completed in the forest.

I understand. And I'm not aware of what the submission deadline is for 2027 for February. Sorry, for May of 27.

Thank you.

Chief, can you expand that even if council approves to move forward, there's an additional step with another governing body that we're going to have to go through? And I believe we forward this to council, just FYI.

Absolutely, Mayor. For advisement, the The procedure to form a new fire district does require county commissioner approval. And they would need to see what our service area would consist of, which would basically be the city's service area right now. They would need to hold public workshops and a hearing to approve to put this forward on a ballot.

Thank you. And this is just for council's information. This is why the November ballot time frame would be very tight. With that, Councilor Tillman. And then I'll go to you, Councilor Sonning.

Just for clarification to Rochelle, back to Councilor Register's question, do we have enough to cover the consultant in this year's and then we would be covering outreach in next year's budget? Or is even the consultant going to be split over two years?

We currently have about 100,000 of cost saving in personnel. Movement, I guess you could say and so there's enough to fool it fun late fun fully funded in this current fiscal year I just don't foresee it at all Actually coming to fruition by the end of September when we close our fiscal year so I am allocating to prepare to have a little bit go into and flow into next year, but if it all did Happen and the cost did come in by the end of September We would still have enough funding to to do that and then we had just have cost savings next year

Perfect. Thank you Counselors daughter Thank You mr. Mayor Chief would this be just within the city limits and this new fire district or would you look to? Expanding that in the future.

Mr. Mayor councillor static. This would just be for the current city's fire service area Okay, and it create a new fire district identical to the city's This the service area that we already provide service to

Do all the outline smaller towns do they all have their own fire? Departments that are that are paid by the taxpayers or there's some voluntary firemen on these like the Parma's or the Wilder's or you know Yes, mr. Mayor councillor static.

I believe Parma and Wilder are the only departments that currently host volunteers Okay, thank you Thank You councillor static councillor all good

real quick chief just so the public's aware I just want to make sure just because we're not joining with the rural district we're going to continue to provide those services and honor the contract we have with them is that correct that's that's correct mr. mayor and a counselor we are we are partners with the rural districts if we were tomorrow to flip the switch and become the Caldwell fire district we would still be partners with the Caldwell rural district we have a

long-term relationship with them where we provide their staffing and we are their fire department we are the fire department for the cities of notice and Greenleaf and unincorporated areas that they serve and that relationship would need to continue in order to continue providing those twelve to fourteen hundred calls for service per year and those in those spaces so we are absolutely committed to continuing that service and and they are they are still receptive and interested in us providing those services to them

Thank you, Councilor. All good. Councilor Williams.

Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve the request to authorize the consultant for the review of this not to exceed $80,000. Second. Second.

Motion to second. Any discussion on that motion? Madam Clerk? All right, that motion carries. Thank you, Chief, for all your hard work, and we look forward to the future as this moves forward. The next item on the agenda is a discussion of a possible Canyon County ballot measure to establish a local option vehicle registration fee. This will be presented by Director Haley Hart from Public Works.

Mayor, council members, thank you for your time tonight. Were you able to get that PowerPoint that was sent in? Oh, I thought it was sent over to you. Did you? I can get started while that pulls up. So we I came forward a couple council meetings ago with a special presentation or a workshop I can't remember which of the two but I came forward a little bit ago and talked about this project before. So this is a project that has been ongoing since about 2019. Tom points the public works director of Nampa is here tonight and he was a lead figure in getting that started. So if you have any question regarding history process please let me know and he'd be more than happy to come up and speak. So tonight the request is, thank you very much, sorry about that confusion. Tonight your request is the local option registration fee for Canyon County residences. So as you know, agencies in Canyon County have a shortfall in the amount of transportation funding that we're expecting to receive through 2050 of about $49 million. Caldwell specifically, this upcoming fiscal year, and Rochelle can correct me if I'm wrong, when I worked with Ray Lynn, this year we're losing about 1.1 million of expected revenue from the state for our transportation and our streets departments. So there's insufficient funding to continue to address safety, congestion, deteriorating roadways, not just in Caldwell, but in Canyon County and statewide. So there's a few ways that this can be addressed. Sales tax, nobody wants more sales tax, nobody wants more property taxes. We do have development impact fees. So we have traffic impact fees that were adopted a couple of years ago. Those help with projects that are specifically on our capital improvement plan, but those impact fees can only be used on that capital improvement plan. So they can assist with ongoing maintenance And they can assist with some of the smaller projects that our streets department works on on a daily basis so the county highway districts and cities came together and decided that a Vehicle registration fee was the best route to move forward It's directly tied to our transportation use so those who are using the roads are the ones that are paying for the improvement as having a vehicle registration fee and And it helps generate local funding. And having this as a ballot measure puts this at the hands of the residences. So it's the voters who get to decide whether this moves forward or not. So again, this has been an ongoing process for quite some time. I said it started, I think, back in 2019. But this current proposal that's in front of you was met, the group met several times in 2024 to discuss. They shared pros, cons, ideas, concerns, and they've developed what's before you tonight. Sorry. So a lot of the discussion that was had during that 2024, those 2024 meetings were concern over tax increase in levy rates. I know nobody wants, added registration fees. Nobody wants increased tax. So that was something that was discussed at that time. But this would be an alternative to property tax increase. Again it would be putting the burden on the people who are using the infrastructure. So keys to success include focus on safety pavement condition condition and congestion present a clear unified message with specific recognizable projects. So adding a registration fee to Canyon County residences at $20 per vehicle per year would generate estimated revenue of about $4.4 million. For Caldwell, that would be about $640,000 estimated. That $4.4 million is proposed to be split 50-50 between cities and local highway districts. Local highway districts will then spread that amount out based on road miles, whereas the city will distribute the remaining 50%, so about 2.2 million, based on the proportion of vehicle registration within that jurisdiction, with a $60,000 minimum distribution to some of our smaller cities here. So of these cities and highway districts that are on this list before you, Nampa Highway District, Highway District 4, Star, Middleton and Nampa have voted in favor of adding a ballot measure to potentially put a $20 vehicle registration fee Melba notice as well as ourselves We are all voting on this tonight. So Melba notice are also hearing about this proposal this evening In order to get a ballot to the voters there's a few ways that you can move forward. One initiated by voters another initiated by all agencies. It was the direction to proceed that we wanted to initiate this by the board of county commissioners. So your vote tonight would be a recommendation to the board of county commissioners who would then vote to put this measure on the ballot in November. So again, just to summarize, the request before you is to add a ballot measure proposal, or I should say request, to the Board of County Commissioners for them to then vote to place the ballot measure on the November 3rd ballot to add a $20 vehicle registration fee, $19 for motorcycles. That did get modified recently. And then that revenue would be distributed per the formula that I discussed a couple slides ago so that there's a minimum of sixty thousand per year per city and other cities and highway districts would be allocated based on their size. This would be decided by the voter. So you would not be deciding if this registration fee is going to be added tonight. the voters will still get the opportunity, would still have the final say in November with a 50% plus one requirement on whether to add a $20 vehicle registration fee. So I've kind of already gone through this, so I won't repeat myself too much. But it must be before, the Canyon County Commissioners must act before August 28th. So this is why it's an action item for you tonight so that we would have time whether to add it to the commissioner's agenda or not. If it was then placed on the ballot based on the county commissioner's vote, there would be public education, but there would be no advocacy from any public agencies. Any advocacy would have to happen from a third party, not by council members. So with that I will stand for any questions again Tom points He has started this from day one. So if you have further questions, he would be a great resource I'd be happy to pull up for you and I'll hand it back to you.

Thank you director our counselor didn't Mary Thank You Haley if you'd go back a couple slides to the list of different jurisdictions that need to that one there so if I understand correctly the path forward to getting this to the voters would be that the majority of these cities are and I'm not sure if there's a percentage breakdown or a number breakdown, that have to vote to take it to the county commissioners. Is that correct?

That is correct. I believe it is just a simple majority.

And then the follow-up question to that, while you're trying to get the answer to that, is even if we have the simple majority of the cities asking for the county commissioners to put this on a vote on the ballot, are they obligated to or can they say we know You got the number of votes, but we're still not putting it on the ballot?

Yeah, the county commissioners could still vote against this if they so chose. And you can correct me on the process.

Mayor, council, yeah. So we were planning on if we had 50% of us 13 agencies on board that we would ask the county commissioners to put it on. And she's right. They could still say no. But again, I appreciate the discussion. This is up to the people. We're just trying to get... We hear a lot about transportation needs, and this is an option that's available, but we're following exactly what Idaho code allows us to do.

Thank you, Councillor Denton. Councillor Stoddart.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm just curious on the fees that you're going to propose. It's obvious that these big... heavy equipment trucks that move around, you know, probably do most of the damage. Is that a fair statement?

Mayor, council. So, um, we wanted to start this out and be keeping it very simple with a $20 flat fee, no matter what vehicle you are, except for the motorcycle, which Idaho code, there's a, uh, a provision in that didn't allow us to go to the 20. Um, The trucking industry, we haven't done a lot of outreach to them. We know that that's a big lift. I can tell you that they pay a lot more money to the state registration fee, which comes back to us to the vehicle registration and gas tax fee. So we feel like they are covered. And so we didn't want to go there with that. So also, we're trying to not get too far out from others in the state that are doing this, which is Ada County Highway District. They do not charge. Additional fee for for trucking they actually have double the fee that we're proposing and I said $40 for vehicles and it goes down to about 25 based on the age of the vehicle, but they don't have anything for trucking I feel like if we were gonna do a truck fee we would need to Unify with a CHD and propose something different Yeah, I was just thinking that you know, they do most of the damage to these streets at least in Caldwell And I just wonder was there any consideration for that?

I

So mayor and council we actually I can provide to public works director. We did a study on garbage truck fees and what the actual damages on easels between trucks and and and Vehicles and the the truck damage was actually less than I thought it would be around the 20% versus 80% on Vehicles just because there's so many more vehicles.

I see. Thank you.

Yeah, all right

Thank you, Councillor Stoddart. Any additional questions? Councillor Tillman.

Mr. Mayor, not really a question, but I'm always for putting things in front of the voters instead of making the decision myself. So I will move to approve the initial support for a registration fee ballot measure in coordination with surrounding municipalities.

Second.

Mr. Mayor.

Councillor Denver. Just in the interest of absolute clarity, I was handed a piece of paper with the real motion that needs to be on it. So, Mr. Tillmont, do you mind if I amend the motion to request the Board of County Commissioners to place the local option registration fee on the November 3rd, 2026 ballot?

Motion and a second.

Second.

All right.

Sorry, Councilman Tillmont, that was my fault for getting the wording over to the clerk too slow.

Just to further clarify, do we need to withdraw his motion, even though we started to?

Councilor Tillmont, are you okay with that amendment?

Yes, I am okay with that.

Fair enough. Thank you, Councilor Ditmer and Madam Clerk.

Thank you for throwing us under the bus.

Absolutely.

All right, we have a motion and a second, and Madam Clerk, motion passes. With that, once again, just to clarify, we didn't vote just to increase your fees. That was a motion and a vote to join with a coalition of other cities and highway districts to put that before the county county commissioners for potential votes. So we'll see what the future holds on that. With that, we'll take a quick 10 minute break. Are we good? All right. We're back from the break. All council and the mayor present, including staff. The next item on the agenda tonight is under new business, which is an action item in public hearing for case number SPP25-00009 and ZON25-00005. The applicant, ALC Architecture, on behalf of Bennett Forest Industries, Inc., is Requesting a rezone of a portion of two parcels From c2 to r2 to include a development agreement as well as approval of a preliminary plat for ambrosia subdivision a mixed-use subdivision with eight point four two acres of commercial fronting on you stick Road And South 10 the subdivision will include five point three acres of single-family residential which includes 47 single-family detached lots with the density of five point three two acres of correction 5.32 units per acre we will move on to the applicant but first we're going to hear from our city attorney before we move on to the applicant the applicant just so everyone's aware we'll have 10 minutes to speak after our city attorney's finished thank you mr mayor council i just briefly want to address the council to kind of give a backdrop of the procedural history on this application this is not the first time this application has been before the council

It was in front of the council for the first time. This is actually the third time it's been in front of the council. The first time it ended in a three three tie with the mayor absent. And so without being able to have an affirmative vote either to deny or to grant it was continued to a different hearing and that second hearing it was denied for three and their concerns for traffic although the traffic impact study had just been submitted during the hearing and didn't have time for review from staff. After the second hearing, the city reached out to the applicant, uh, regarding a meet a possible mediation under Lupa, uh, which is an Idaho code 67, 65, 10, the applicant agreed, but wanted to, uh, have neighborhood representatives present at the mediation, which, uh, which was granted and a mediation held place with, with the applicant, the neighborhood representatives and staff representing their, uh, per Idaho law. What went on and was discussed at the mediation does not become part of the official record. However I just want you to have that background and I would report to you that I think overall at least from staff's point of view the mediation was productive. Part of that mediation process under the law requires that there be a new public hearing after if if the mediation takes place after a final decision. And so with that we have decided to have another public hearing with the applicant that will look just like all the other hearings that we have typically in front of the council. So I just wanted to be able to give the council a brief backdrop on that before the applicant gets up. If there aren't any questions, I'll gladly stand up. Thank you.

Councillor Denver.

Nice try. So, Oscar, you talked about a mediation that took place, and this is done and at some point the mediation concluded and so you feel comfortable bringing it to us, when does the conclusions or the outcome of the mediation, when is that presented to us? Do you present that or will the petitioner present that to us? How will the outcome be presented to us?

Mr. Mayor, Councillor Dittenberg, so the approach we took in this one was as an informal mediation. In fact, we didn't, because of the way the parties were able to cooperate, there wasn't a need for a formal mediator. And since this can't be in the official record, there won't be a report to you about what came out of the mediation, since you're the finders of fact here and trying the case, only that it did go to mediation is the information that I want to give you on that. It may come up as part, some of it may come up as part of the presentation, but we'll let the parties be able to do that if they so choose.

Thank you, Councillor Dittenberg, and thank you to our wonderful city attorney. All right. Next, we're going to hear from the applicant. Keep in mind, this is a public hearing. The applicant or the representative will have 10 minutes to speak, and our clock will be right here. And go ahead. Thank you for being here tonight.

Thank you so much, Mayor Phillips and members of the council. My name is Deborah Nelson. My address for the record is 601 West Bannock Street in Boise. I'm a land use attorney with the law firm of Givens Pursley, and I'm really pleased to be here tonight on behalf of the applicant team. travis stroud the owner and developer is here and so are other members of our applicant team in case you have any questions everybody is available to answer them for you as you know from from prior discussions this is a mixed use development at the corner of 10th and ustic and as you just heard from the city attorney you have previously considered this since that time in addition to the mediation that the applicant team has also met with neighbors and so wanted to let you know that in addition to the mediation with neighborhood representatives, also held a neighborhood meeting to meet again with neighbors to talk about their concerns. This site is located, again, at the southwest corner of 10th and Ustick. It was just a little bit of history to remind us all. It was annexed in Zone C2 in 2001. So over the last 25 years, at the time it was annexed, it included that Walgreens corner. So in 25 years, that's the only portion of the site that's been able to develop. So the C2 has not been successful there. And there's a few reasons for that. At 16 and a half acres, it's just too small to support a major anchor. And without that major anchor, you really can't support that second tier commercial that's a little deeper away from the street frontages. There's other conditions that impact that inability to support a major anchor here. The zoning only allows buildings up to 80,000 square feet, so you can't go to the super stores. The area rooftops and the traffic along Eustick and 10th, the numbers don't support it. That's what these commercial businesses are looking at when they're making those siting decisions. And the existing Walmart that you can see across 10th, which is a neighborhood market, not their super store for similar reasons, they've kind of eaten up the grocery market. So that's impacting this site as well. You know, the time has, has tested all those, those, um, theories and proven out that it's just not working with, with this depth. And that's why the applicant came in and sought to rezone the center of the site away from those street frontages, leaving the C2 commercial and more viable sizes, but also pulling 8.8 acres into, um, residential in the R2 zone. This is the updated site plan. It includes those seven commercial lots that are more right sized for those neighborhoods serving commercial uses that are viable on these streets. There's now only 47 residential lots down from the original application that had 63. The site also includes over two acres of landscaped open space with over an acre that will be required in the commercial area and over an acre in the residential. There's been a lot of discussion between the applicants and neighbors to try to address their concerns. Those are our neighbors to the south and the Cumberland development. Now all of the residential lots are 50 feet wide. The homes along the southern border are limited to single story. And if that single story does include a bonus room then the height is capped at 22 feet and the windows cannot face south towards the Cumberland homes to give them more privacy. Um, the open space area and that Southwest corner of the development will only be a passive amenity to try to limit noise, um, impacts on our neighbors, um, but still give them that visual, uh, view scape. And then the North South 20 foot wide open space area that runs through the center of our residential development will not extend all the way through our Southern row of homes, um, in front their neighborhood. And that was per their request. We appreciate all their input and continued engagement. We know we can't satisfy everybody, but we really do believe that the site plan is improved with everyone's input. The development agreement will likewise reflect the site plan that is the new site plan and be limited to these 47 lots, and it includes those site-specific conditions as well. There will be extensive landscaping with more trees that are required by city code, so this will be a very attractive site. Here are a few excerpts from the landscape plan that was included in your materials showing improvements along the frontages at Kimball and Ustick and 10th Avenue, plus the 20-foot open space area along with the larger southwest corner. And consistent with the development agreement, the commercial frontage landscaping. So all the street landscaping around the site will have to be developed with the first phase, regardless of what moves forward first. Utilities will be extended to and through the site as required. Um, but in addition to what's necessary to serve this development, there will also be additional work that the applicant is doing at the request of the city engineer to extend water and sewer along you stick. And so they have access at 10th Avenue. but to help the city with its use to improvement plans and to serve other development in the future, including commercial that's in the future across the street when that area comes into the city at such time as you decide to. But consistent with your plan, you're calling for a commercial corridor there. So that will help that future development when you're ready for it. And that's just additional expense to this project for doing that. The council at the last hearing had questions, concerns about traffic generation and whether the commercial zoning that was there before, the C2 zoning on the entire site versus the mixed development that's being proposed now with a mix of R2 and C2, what the impacts of that reduction are on traffic generation. And so we did have our traffic engineer analyze exactly that issue. There is a July 14th report. that's included in your materials, and this slide really summarizes what that looks like. So the top table has the proposed development that has that mix of zoning with C2 and R2. You can see the daily chip generation with that mix is under 7,000 trips per day. If you compare that to the existing C2 with a comparable mix of the type of commercial that we expect to be viable, just more of it because there's more space, 13,000 trips per day over 13,000 similar changes between the AM and the PM peak hour trips as well. And so overall the, the mixed use development definitely generates less traffic, um, than the entirely commercial. The site is designated community center in your comp plan. Um, both the C2 and the R2 zoning districts are designated as compatible zones in that designation. The comprehensive plan actually calls for a more intensive use here than what we're bringing forward with two to five story buildings and higher density residential with minimum of eight units per acre up to 15. And it really talks about in the text about the residential serving as a transition between commercial and existing single family detached residential that can be in the area. Our site plan has a lower, intensity and that's in part because of the accommodations and changes that have been made to address concerns from the neighbors. And so that lower density development has been one of the requests and is one of the outcomes of having the larger lots the 50 foot wide lots and staff report goes through this and talks about how the project as presented does meet all of your city code criteria for the applications before you and is consistent with your comprehensive plan. even with that lower density because of the important transition to neighbors. And that can be approved through the development agreement. Just want to show you a couple of quick elevations here. This is an example commercial elevation showing that kind of neighborhood serving scale of development. And an example residential elevation with quality design and materials that are anticipated here. And with that, I'll just look to Travis to see if he has anything he wants to add.

For the record, Travis Stroud, 1980 South Meridian Road, Meridian, Idaho. I just wanted to take a moment to thank staff. Hands down, in 20 years of developing, Caldwell staff has been amazing to work with. Also want to thank the Cumberland Estates neighbors. for the willingness to collaborate with us. And honestly, their feedback was invaluable. Wish I would have got it sooner. Maybe we wouldn't be here for the third time, but they were great to work with. That's really it.

Thank you. Anything else from the applicant? You have 33 seconds.

We'll just stand for any questions you may have.

All right. Counsel, counselor, register.

Thank you. I appreciate it. Thank you for speaking also. Thank you. appreciate you working with staff and the residents have heard a lot of good feedback about some of the meetings that you've had so question one thing about the retail in this place is that I believe the south side of Caldwell starting at about you stick all the way down needs better commercial I have a problem with taking commercial away I feel like if This has been very thoughtful. But one of the and I look forward to hearing from the neighbors and the public hearing in general. But one question that I do have while we're listening to that is the applicant willing to I don't know exactly how to word this. So planning and zoning might have to help me restrict your commercial to like your office space to a certain percentage I guess is if that's the correct way to say it and have another percentage be retail gathering spaces a restaurant something along those lines so that we're not just going to have doctors offices along you stick there.

ELLIE WILSON- Mayor Phillips council member register. I'll let Travis respond to this very specific question about whether any restriction could make sense and still bring a viable commercial development. If I could just address your other comments that led up to that, just with some additional points. You were talking about you really want to make sure you've got commercial here. And I just wanted to say that we do fully agree with that, that we want viable commercial here too. And that's when the applicant came into this site. They actually intended to develop all commercial. And that's why we spent some time kind of going through those points about how, you know, why isn't it working here? Um, and it's those points that it, it, if you can't support that major anchor, it's hard to have that second tier. Um, and the types of uses you have around here are detracting. It's not just that, um, the Walmart neighborhood store there, but you've also got, you know, just about three miles away. You've got the major, um, the, the major anchors that are pulling those grocery uses with your, your Fred Meyer, et cetera, on Florida. And so that's where people are going to go. Neighborhood serving commercial still plays an important role though. And so we think if this is right-sized, you will actually get the commercial that you're looking for, whereas now you just have vacant land. So I just wanted to respond that we agree that it'd be great to bring forward commercial, and we're trying to find that way that actually does produce it for you.

Well, and I agree with you, and I believe that the applicant has worked hard to come to what I'm hoping what we hear is that there's a resolution with the neighbors and that they've decided whatever it is that's going to work for everybody. But what I don't want to see is doctor's offices and dentist's offices all lined up on Ustick and then we miss an opportunity to start developing that area with, like I said, like a restaurant or some sort of gathering space. Not to say that there can't be some office space, but just to say we can't have the whole thing doing that and whatever is viable because I'm going to guess that you've probably done some research into that. And then I haven't, I'm going to have a question for our city attorney where we had already told the neighbor, the people that own the neighboring lot, that we would not reduce their commercials. So if we do that here, are we opening ourselves up to a problem there?

Is that a pending question or were you, you said you were going to ask?

Well, I mean, it's just going to be a question. So, okay. Oh,

I don't know if you want me to answer it or if you want, I'm still, is that going to be a question or is that, that is the question? It is a question. I don't think that the basis for a land decision on one application binds you on a different application. There's different facts and different things going. So I don't think that that's, that prohibits you a decision on a, on a different application. Okay.

Thank you.

Uh, Mr. Mayor, council president register. Um, that's a really fair question. Um, Probably help to give you some background on us. We are primarily for the last 20 years have been commercial retail developers. We've built probably 200 plus commercial retail buildings. So we're not office developers. We anticipate all of this being retail uses similar to what you're describing. At one point in time in the beginning of this, we did have almost all these pads committed to, but time kind of kills all deals. I still feel confident we will get them all committed to, but the uses we're talking are very neighborhood-oriented, multi-tenant buildings that would bring those small restaurants with patios. The only office I anticipate is similar to what you said. If we have a multi-tenant building and a dental user wants to be a part of it or chiropractor, something like that, I could anticipate seeing those. But for the most part, it's been coffee Auto parts a bank. We still have the bank very interested Should this get approved?

I think the bank will still move forward But That's what we do is retail and we anticipate most of it being retail so would you be willing in the design agreement to say that a certain percentage would Be dedicated to something other than just office space I

Yeah, I mean, I would be open to that discussion because I just, I do feel that the only office that we really would see would be maybe doctor, dentist, stuff like that. Edward Jones, maybe. The stuff that you would see.

Well, maybe you could do, like, no more than 40% office space and have the other 60% be retail and gathering spaces. Something along those lines.

I'm open to those, yeah. Just because I felt confident that it's gonna primarily be retail.

Yeah Thank you.

Yeah Thank You councillor register councillor static Thank You mr. Mayor What you want to go back to the slide where your property borders the Cumberland? Excuse me That's fine One of the major issues that we've heard over the last several meetings on this is that the lot sizes that border on your South property don't match the lot sizes of on their property, and that still isn't remedied yet, so. That's a major problem I have with it yet.

Mayor, Council Member Stoddick, if I could address that. Yes, we definitely are providing more of a transition residential here, and so you're right, it's not one for one on the lot size. But it has gone up significantly from 40 feet wide to 50 feet. And as you know, If you, if you took every single lot across the city and every new development that came in, you would only have one type of housing. And so what your comprehensive plan calls for here with the community center designation is to have that a little more diversity of housing. Now we're not bringing in, you know, the, the attached housing or other diversity in that way, but you are getting a little bit more, um, of diversity just in lot size. And that gives you that transition that was anticipated. If you have residential in that community center area between the commercial and existing single family. So it's not perfect, but it, it compared to their, their lots, but it is, um, what allows this site to be developed economically and to provide that nice transition and diversity of housing.

So, but you know what we always try and do would be good neighbors too. And we trying to match, you know, new housing with what's there already. And that still doesn't, It still doesn't meet the specs.

So and you're right. And it is important to us to be good neighbors, especially after meeting them. Like they're great people. There's a lot of pride in that in that neighborhood. But it's important. And we also own a home building company, which I don't know how to our houses are a step up from what you're going to see from the national home builder. I mean, there's a need for that, but we're a step above that. Um, but we want it to be obtainable. Um, we want it to be obtainable housing. Most people couldn't afford those homes in Cumberland that are just starting out. Um, we think we can build in that price range where young families, this is a, this is a good starting point or for the people that are getting ready to retire and don't want that big of a house. Don't want that, um, big yard. I do think there's a market for that as well. And right now, our intention is to build these homes, and we would love to build every one of them. We may bring in another home builder or two to build them with us, but we do very much plan on being one of the builders in there.

Thank you.

Also, to add to that, we plan on retaining ownership, if we can, of most all the commercials. So we'll remain vested in this project.

Thank you, Councillor Stoddard. Councillor Allgood.

Thank you. Can I ask you to go the other way again to your elevation of the business? You had a business elevation there. So if I'm understanding this right, that is inward facing to the project?

This would be facing the street frontage.

That would be facing the street frontage. Okay, that's. And that was my question is as you're driving down, you stick or 10th, what are you seeing? And so this is what you would see from the roadway and that that's, I wanted to make sure the, the site, the side that the public was seeing driving by on the roads, wasn't a blank wall kind of thing.

That would be our preference unless you guys wanted something different.

No, no. I liked, I just didn't want, if they were going to be in facing, I didn't want the back of the building just to be blank. So people just seeing a wall of, I wanted architecturally nice to look at as you're driving by.

Yeah. Mr. Mayor council member, I'll get that. Our intention is always to have the front and the parking lot facing the street. The only time we do it different is if the city requires us to push the building all the way up to the street. Um, retailers actually prefer what you're requesting. Um, So it's a benefit to us to have it that way, but we would do it the other way if that's what the city wanted. Um, and the architecture is going to be very sick. This is a building we're currently building in one of our projects and star. So, um, we do plan on building basically this exact building here.

Okay. Yeah. And that, no, I'm not asking for any change. I just want to make sure that again, people driving by the roadway, we're looking at a nice building.

Honestly, that's music to my ears. That's how we would prefer to do it.

Okay. Thank you so much.

Mayor. Sorry.

Go ahead.

I did just want to jump in. Councilor Allgood, this is along the key corridors, so it does have to meet our design guidelines, which does outline that parking must be concealed behind the buildings. So that is a condition. We would obviously want the facade facing the street to to match this facade as well. Okay, I just wanted to clarify.

Okay, and so that changes what we're talking about here.

I knew she was gonna kill her dreams on this one.

And so I would just emphasize that the street side needs to look nice.

Yes, and we deal with this all the time too because more and more people are wanting the street presence of the building up against the street. So this building is going in star. And what we've done, I now wish I would have had a slide with the rear elevation. We make the rear elevation look very similar to this with windows. And so it doesn't just look like a monotonous blank wall. The rear elevation almost matches the front. We've put windows on the rear. We've put still those same elements. So it looks the same almost from the rear.

just minus it doesn't have big storefront but we put decorative windows and some awnings too as well yeah that's what I'm after I'm sorry Haley blew up our dreams yeah okay I'm sorry mayor could I have just a quick follow-up on that in light of Katie's correction to our assumption there we do still have to go through design review does that could the Can the council direct which way, which preference you have on this? Because as Travis said, we could do either.

Staff.

Mayor, if the council wanted to condition something that be reviewed at design review, when they have to submit, that would be something we'd be able to add in as a condition.

So that could be your decision about orientation?

Well, Katie, with your permission, I would ask for this. So would I.

right thank you council register well i still want to see how the public hearing goes but i was thinking this is how walgreens is set up so it would actually probably match better with walgreens because it has the parking lot in the front but i really like this design too what i was curious about was how does the so you said the back it kind of mirrors the front so your homes how far back are they like how does it stack out so you have parking lot Your commercial and then another parking lot and then do you have a landscaping buffer and then your homes?

Can we go back?

So there is a rear landscape there is a Mr. Mayor comes president register. There is a rear landscape buffer And our intention is if you got on our website and looked at Fall Creek homes. They're a very farmhouse style And so the design of these buildings is intentional to match the character of our homes as well So yes, it will be very appealing both front and back with those same architectural elements and the landscape buffer and the trees and then you'll have the street until you get to the houses Thank you.

Yep All right, thank you next we'll hear from staff

Thank you, Mayor and Council. Katie Wright, Senior Planner, 205 South 6th Avenue. ALC Architecture, on behalf of Bennett Forest Industries Inc., is requesting a rezone of a portion of parcels R32582 and R32581 from C2 to R2, as well as approval of a preliminary plot for Ambrosia subdivision, a mixed-use subdivision with 47 single-family homes and 6.21 acres of commercial. The project property is 16.57 acres located at the southwest corner of 10th Avenue and Eustick Road. The subject parcel is currently being utilized as farmland. The property is surrounded by residential to the south, commercial to the east and west, and Eustick Road to the north on the north side of Eustick. There are larger residential lots. In 2001, parcel R32582 was part of an application to annex 76.5 acres ANN5001. The subject parcel was annexed with the initial zone C2 along with the parcel where Walgreens is currently located. The rest of ANN5001 is not part of this application. Also in 2001, parcel R32581 was annexed into the city with the initial zone of C2 ANN5601. the time this parcel had a single family home that has since been demolished the parcels are currently located within the city with c2 community commercial zone the applicants requested a rezone of the southern 8.84 acres from c2 to r2 and will keep 7.73 acres zoned c2 the site is 16 and a half acres and is located in a largely developed area The applicant's proposing a mixture of single-family residential detached homes and commercial development along the arterial street frontage, which conforms with the purpose statement as specified within the Caldwell City Code for R2 and C2 zones. The proposed density of 5.3 dwelling units per acre is less than what's required by code, which requires density of 8 to 15 dwelling units per acre, but may be approved through the development agreement. The parcel is located along the key corridor overlay. The purpose of this overlay is to connect people and help them move through the city, but also serve as a distinct place that is high profile. They utilize streetscape elements with distinct landscaping, signage, or similar place-making elements to create a sense of place as one moves along the corridor. As part of the project, the applicant is required to submit design review for commercial buildings fronting Eustick Road and 10th Avenue that include buildings fronting the streets with parking in the rear, specific street landscaping, and elevations that are compatible with the surrounding area. The subject site is located in the community center place type within the comprehensive plan. The community center is primarily low intensity commercial place type. However, it allows for higher density residential uses that can transition the commercial uses to surrounding residential. The requested R2 zone is a compatible zoning district within the community center place type. The comp plan also calls out this area as an area hub, which encourages Increased intensity and density of the development. This should be focused around a large gathering space park or a similar major public amenity area hubs and community centers should be three to five stories in scale at their core and then transition and intensity and scale from surrounding uses of less intensity. The large scale building is not codified so this is not required by code but the building scale will be reviewed at time of building permit to be compatible with the surrounding area. Staff has recommended a condition for the applicant to depict a public plaza or gathering space at time of design review. The preliminary plat request is for 47 single-family detached lots. The project is also proposing 6.21 acres of commercial. The applicant originally submitted the plat with 63 single-family lots with lot widths ranging from 20 feet wide to 40 feet wide. After recommendation from the hearing examiner to enlarge southern lots, And after the applicant spoke with the neighbors several times they decided to enlarge all the lots to 50 feet wide reducing the overall number of single family lots to 47. The applicant also is requesting that conditions be included that state the buildable lots along the southern boundary shall be limited to single story or a single story with a bonus room on the second floor limited to 22 feet in height with second story windows only facing the north and a condition that common lot 17 block 9 will have passive amenities only. 11% open space is being provided at 0.98 acres, where 10% is required. The development will have write-in, write-out access off of Ustick to the commercial portion and write-in, write-out access off of 10th Avenue. There will also be access from Kimball Avenue along the west boundary of this site, which will be full access. Due to the site and scope of the development, a traffic impact study has been provided and approved by the engineering department. The applicant is requesting the proposed reduced density of 5.3 dwelling units per acre be allowed through the development agreement because the proposed project has enlarged the residential lots at the request of the neighbors. To fit open space in the commercial uses on this site, it'd be hard to meet the density without going below the allowed lot size for R2. Otherwise this project does meet all applicable codes. All utilities are available or will be made available to serve the proposed mixed use development. Political subdivisions, including school districts, were notified and provided opportunity to comment. No agencies commented with concerns. Public notices were sent to all property owners within 500 foot radius of the property. Five public comments were submitted in opposition due to concerns with multi-story residential development, replacing the commercial and traffic concerns. There were two letters in favor. David Kroll submitted in favor with some suggestions to single story along the southern boundary and second story residents be limited to north face windows. And there was a late exhibit provided to you tonight from Laura Shannon in support of the project due to the changes the applicant has made with the conditions within the development agreement and how well they worked with the neighbors. The application was heard by the hearing examiner on February 24th and recommended denial due to the lack of transition in lot size from the residential to the south to the commercial along the frontage. As mentioned, the applicant has made changes to their site plan since that hearing in an attempt to address those concerns from the hearing examiner and the adjacent neighbors. Staff's initial review found the proposed project is in conformance with all applicable city codes, approval criteria per city code and Idaho code, the adopted comp plan and future land use map, and all other adopted master plans and city policies. The city council has the authority to approve or deny applications based on the approval criteria within Caldwell City Code once they've reviewed the record and evidence and heard all public testimony. Thank you, and I stand for questions.

Thank you for that. We always appreciate our staff and all the work that they put into it. Councilor Register.

Just real quick, you mentioned the hearing examiner denied this project and originally you kind of went over it a little fast for me. So can you remind us why it was denied again originally and have they rectified that?

Mayor, councilor, register. Originally, the hearing examiner did recommend denial. The lots to the south were originally, I believe, 40 feet wide, and she wanted to see those to be enlarged. And so that's why they enlarged those originally to 50. And then they just decided to do all of the residential lots 50 foot wide.

Did she say how large she wanted them to be enlarged?

I do not believe that she did say specifically how large. The applicant may have that record with them. But I cannot say that for sure. OK. Thank you.

Do you want them to come up? Okay. Any other questions from council? Going once, going twice. All right. Thank you for your report.

Thank you.

All right. Now we're going to open up the public hearing. If anyone's signed up to testify, now will be the opportunity to speak. Three minutes. The clock will be up here. I'll remind everyone this is a respectful public forum. We understand sometimes there's applause. Try and keep it to a minimum or not at all, preferably. Please no booing. cheering and Please start off by giving us your name for the record. I'm just gonna start off with you in favors There's a combination of no comment and then people that want to speak and we do have that late exhibit by the way But we're gonna start with Sue Smallwood Good evening and please just come forward right here and there's your clock right right up here

I'm against any new development in housing. We do not have the infrastructure we need in this city to accommodate new people and new housing. And if they need a sewer, the sewer line that they have going down in Main Street has been way too long, and we've had to contact you several times about problems with them.

I just don't think it's feasible for this city at this at this point in time with the infrastructure We have to do any new developments Thank you just for councils information there was two signups, so I believe that would have been opposed Yes, thank you for your comment tonight We're gonna move on to Jeff Allen was a no. Laura Shannon was a yes to speak tonight, and this is in favor.

My name is Laura Shannon. I live at 4707 Middlesboro Way. Good evening, mayor and city council members. I support this updated version of the Ambrosia subdivision. Since the last hearing, Travis Stroud held a neighborhood meeting with roughly 25 Cumberland residents. He made us feel heard and respected in the process and even invited a couple of us to join him at the mediation meeting with the city. And although many in the neighborhood hate to lose the commercial land in this area, Travis helped some of us understand how the current proposal could be beneficial to both neighbor and developer. And almost half the property is slated for commercial purposes. And I appreciate that it includes nearly an acre of open space. Additionally, Travis lives in the Valley and pointed out that his commercial properties will be serving Cumberland and the greater Caldwell community, thereby motivating him to be a good neighbor. Uh, I wanted to thank the council for requiring that transitional buffer when Ambrosia was heard previously. And since then, the developer has made concessions, including height and window limitations, as well as, um, larger lots. that will make Ambrosia more compatible with the existing neighborhood. And I was at the meeting with the hearing examiner, and she wanted a transition. And I think she just wanted more of a transition. And I think the width, in addition to the height limitation, for me, a big one was the height limitation that I felt I didn't get until recently. But anyway, Travis pointed us towards quality homes that he's built, and I hope he follows through in building similarly beautiful houses in Ambrosia. But with council support, the associated DA will run with the land if the residential portion is ever sold. And if for any reason the DA were terminated, I understand the land will revert back to its commercial status.

and subject to a binding da with the conditions that travis has committed to i'm in support of the approving the proposed ambrosia subdivision thank you for your time and consideration thank you any questions from council as always thank you thanks all right next up will be david kroll just confirm looks like you signed up twice but clearly marked out as your opposition so you'll be in support all right thank you go ahead and come up

Good evening. Good evening Mayor Phillips and Councilmember David Kroll 4521 Pine Mountain Avenue in Caldwell. I live approximately a thousand feet southerly of the Ambrose development. I'm here to speak in favor and support of the subject rezone the development agreement and the preliminary plat for the development. The developer has agreed to restrictions included in the development agreement that restricts the housing to be constructed adjacent to the Cumberland and the open space spot in the southwest corner. The housing along the southerly boundary is restricted to single family, detached single family and single story or along with the provision for a bonus room and if that bonus room is constructed any windows on that room would be facing north. This protects the privacy of the existing residents in the Cumberland development and The developers also agreed to a height restriction to match Cumberland and a restriction on the open space to keep it a quiet area with passive activities. The rezone will provide a needed transitional buffer between the existing C2 zone and the current R1 zoning that is what is Cumberland Estates. Currently, C2 properly zoned immediately adjacent to existing residential the existing single-family residential. Some of the C2 uses allowed could result in 24-hour operations immediately adjacent to existing residential developments. I've seen that happen elsewhere and the results in the adjoining residences experiencing continual noise from the commercial operations. This is noise which my house could also experience if the zoning remains as is. That's why I recommend approval of this because of the transition area that's provided the transitional buffer. Travis has been great to work with. You've heard additional testimony about wider lots. He's agreed to the restrictions on housing, on the housing development, how the houses are developed, and the restriction on the open space area. So this concludes my comments. Thank you.

Thank you anything from the council and just to clarify additionally which thank you by the way there's a Jeff Allen and a sherry Marcicola Did you Jeff did you want to speak Mayor council my name is Jeff Allen four six one four gap Creek Avenue Caldwell

I'm in the Cumberland Estates subdivision, and I was previously recorded as opposed. I just want to set the record straight that that has changed. I'm now in favor of this development proposal tonight before you, as it has been amended. And again, I would restate that Travis has been great to work with. He's included input and addressed our concerns. And I appreciate you giving me a chance to correct my position on this. Thank you.

Thank you anything from council we appreciate your comment. All right we're going to move on to neutral. Paul Webster. Who would like to speak and we have a ray that was not wanting to speak tonight. Unless you change your mind.

Good evening mayor and council thank you for the opportunity to speak. My name is Paul Webster I work for Caldwell School District. and it's a privilege to serve the great families and kids in Caldwell. In fact, I work at Lewis and Clark Elementary, which would serve this neighborhood if it's developed. We do have room to serve new students in Caldwell, so I just wanted to clarify that. Not in this meeting, but elsewhere you may hear otherwise. We have plenty of room for new students. While Caldwell has grown, Quite a bit. A lot. Surprisingly not a lot of new housing has been put in the middle of Caldwell where the Caldwell school district is zoned. And so that's one of the reasons we do have room for new kids. So in particular we've added some lots of apartments in Caldwell. We've added lots of large houses but we have not added many houses in the middle that really serve kids and families working families at Idaho wages. And so this looks like at least it may lean in that direction and in support of kids and families that need places to live where they can afford it. This looks like a decent proposition. I think I can leave it at that. I think all of us are concerned with sprawl well outside of Caldwell. We're concerned with farmland. And if those are our concerns, we need to keep looking in the middle to fill in gaps and look for infill instead. And this is kind of an opportunity for that. Not exactly infill, but it's close. Maybe as close as we're going to get.

Thank you very much.

I'm happy to stand for questions. And you can count this as my testimony for the Hill Avenue development coming up next.

Anything from council?

All right, thank you. We're going to move on to those opposed. So Ms. Sue already spoke. Peter Anderson, but Mark Noe for speaking. All right, Bob Birch, no. Gene Anderson, no. Paul McLean? And we'll have one additional speaker or opposition after this.

Paul McLean, 113 Appalachian Street, Caldwell. Just to make a point at the beginning, I'm using this piece of paper as reference. And it does not match what he's talking about up there in the number of acres for commercial. Up there it's 6.3. On this, I believe, unless it's a mistake and I can't read correctly, is 8.42. Travis has been great. Did meet with him. And he definitely agreed with me that I would not change my mind. As he stated to us when he bought this property, he thought it was great for commercial. The problem that he has come up with is that the powers that be don't think there's enough traffic. And the issue, I think, with that is a lot of the stuff they don't know is what you've already passed, with over 2,000 more homes coming in easily or more in the south part of town. Granted, there's going to be commercial down there, which you've already put into state. But you're looking at over 2,000 homes coming into the south. commercial that's going in for that area is going to be very helpful with that 2,000. But there's also all the thousands of people that already exist in this area and farther west, which you've approved more homes out that way. And there's probably going to be more later. So they don't see the future of this area. And I think some of us agree that this particular lot and the one next door is prime for commercial. It's just the powers that be that would be going in there for commercial don't see it as yet. So that's where I stand. Also, I mentioned that the Walmart is the grocery store that serves the area. That place is always crowded. I've talked to people that go there the first part of the month, and its place is stripped because there are so many people buying at one time. And so anyway. Sidebar, I kind of wish the state had done what they promised over 60 years ago and put in off-ramps on Linden and Eustick, which would allow the traffic to come down in the middle of the southern part of town and the northern part of Nampa. And I wish people would get on the state to do that instead of putting it all on the south end. This area is a five-mile stretch of no exits between Karcher and 21st. That is the largest stretch on 84 between Caldwell and Boise. I'm just saying it's kind of ridiculous.

So, thank you.

Yes, Councilor Register.

Just real quick, because I know you spoke before. If the council votes against this and restricts that to the commercial, Councilor Williams brought up an interest, or maybe it was Councilor Allgood, one of them brought up a very interesting point at the last public hearing about how if you had a 24-hour business there as opposed to homes that was noisy, let's say, you know, a late-night drive-through or something like that. I understand. Would you prefer that over homes?

Well, if you don't mind, kind of a story. We moved into that area, and I presume everybody that moved into this area knew that this was supposed to be commercial, was planned to be commercial. I know that if you look far enough down in the plan here, It says you can do this other stuff. But up here, it says commercial. That's what I keep thinking about. Well, I don't care if it says you can do it. What do we really want? Years ago, down south of Chico, California, there was a golf course put in. People bought homes in there. Then they went ahead and tried to take to court the farmer on the north side of the canal because his hogs smelled up the place. They moved in an area that knew there was a farm there, and they tried to go to the county to tell him to not farm cows. The county came back and said, I mean, he was there before you, so you knew it was going to be a farm there, so you have to live with it. So luckily, he got to stay, and then he painted hog farm on the top of his barn. So knowing that was supposed to be commercial, I'm willing to live with whatever goes in there. But I still think this is Beautiful place for a community gathering place, plaza, okay, farmers markets. You know, not just a line of some smaller units. As I said before, this whole area could be an entryway to the vineyards out there, tourist attraction. Something like a Indian Creek, place for big gatherings. And small shops, but still shoppable. Thank you.

Thank you.

Anything else for council? All right, Mr.

Bartley you're next this will be our last speaker for tonight for this particular request Thank You mayor Philipson so they council members my name is Brian Bartley I live at 46 18 Gap Creek Avenue in the Cumberland estate subdivision I've lived in Caldwell for the past five years and in those five years we have been saying how badly we need commercial establishments along you stick Road and 10th Avenue We've been told time and time again by both the city and developers, commercial is coming. Yet here we are again, no commercial in sight, no development going on for the commercial, and yet another city council meeting with another development asking to rezone to residential. Only a month ago, the city council denied an application for Soterra, which is adjacent to Ambrosia, for the same thing. You guys denied them for rezoning to residential. because of a desperate need for commercial in that area. We have to stop letting them rezone to residential. While I'm not against residential expansion, within a five-mile radius of Ustick and 10th Avenue, between 24 and 2,600 new homes have been approved already. In addition to what's already being built, the last thing we need here is more residential in that area. We need commercial establishments desperately. This is a part of the East Houston commercial corridor that we're just wasting away. We're not using it. This area has a Walgreens, the aforementioned Walmart neighborhood market, which is a disaster right now. It was just stated that it was, it's sold out of everything within the first week of the month. It is, it's insane. We need additional help in that area. We have a bank, a dentist office and a gas station and a veterinarian office. That is it. That's the extent of commercial in that area. We don't have coffee shops, a hair salon, any shopping establishments, or a single restaurant in that area. Whether it's fast food, a drive-through, a sit-down restaurant, nothing. There's nowhere to shop which forces residents of Caldwell to go shop in Napa or surrounding areas. And yes, there is commercial coming to Caldwell further south on Karcher. I get that. It doesn't help the area along the Euston corridor, though. I'm asking that we hold developers to their original plans of building commercial. When they bought the land, they knew it was zoned as commercial. Build commercial. We've been told time and time again residential does better. That's what sells. Of course it does. It's the only thing being built. There is no commercial being built. Build commercial establishments and businesses come in. Build residential, yeah, that's what's going to sell, obviously. I understand and appreciate that the developer wants to work with the neighbors, He claims he's willing to implement and agree to a development agreement. History is proving that commercial development is not a priority to developers. They buy the land and immediately want it rezoned. More homes are not what's needed along the east use the commercial corridor. What's desperately needed in this area is exactly what the land's already zoned for, commercial establishments. I appreciate that he wants to work with us. I understand he held a meeting with residents of Cumberland estates. I was not able to attend that. Unfortunately, I had a family thing that I had to deal with my daughter going through a cancer treatment. So I wasn't able to be there, please. We're begging for commercial in the area. That's what's needed. Not more residential homes. Thank you.

Thank you. Anything from council. Appreciate that. Closes out our speakers for tonight now.

We'll have a five-minute rebuttal for the applicant Thank you so much mayor Phillips council members appreciate the the comments from the neighbors really appreciate the the feedback that we've received and and and those that have come to support the The the change in the plans to address their concerns that were heard And but also appreciate the comments where they still got concerns. And so I want to try to focus on those. So Mr. McClain pointed out the acreage difference. And I think staff can weigh in on that. But it's a difference of where you've got right of way. The zoned area versus the developable footprint, I believe, is the difference in that in that acreage. And so that's why we've got the zoning amount that's just under eight acres. But the developable footprint is a little less. That's true for the site now as it exists as well. But Mr. McLean was talking about really that there's a great deal of residential development to the south. And that's part of why we pointed out that there are other commercial developments going in there near there as well. And he mentioned that as well. That really does eat into this trade area. And so when commercial developers are looking at opportunities to site, they're going to look at the trips along the roadways, where the residential is going in, not just where it already is. And they have determined, and based on those factors and including that growth, this site just doesn't support that major anchor that gives that depth. There is larger commercial that is going that will capture those trips from the additional development that he mentioned to the south. And Mr. Bartley, he made some good comments about how what they really want is these neighborhood commercial uses. The uses that he listed off are exactly the types of uses that Travis feels like he has a very good opportunity to get in here if he can get this kind of right sized commercial here. Those neighborhood serving uses such as personal service shops banks coffee shops retail things that neighbors can walk to or bike to or capture close to their trip home so that they're not going a long distance like you would for a major shopping expedition. And unlike some others that are seeking reasons that were mentioned by those opponents. This is actually a commercial developer. As somebody who represents a lot of developers in the Valley, I can tell you that one's unique to come in and have a commercial developer seek a rezone from a commercial site to have a mixed-use development. And that's because they really have determined what could succeed to bring those uses that I think both the city and the neighbors are looking for. And finally, I just wanted to comment on that transition. And, you know, Laura Shannon talked about this. David Kroll talked about this. Um, it's that what we're bringing here by not only bringing that, that interior of the site into a developable use that supports the commercial and that neighborhood serving commercial, but we're also bringing transition to these existing neighbors. And, you know, while Mr. McClain might've been aware of the uses and comfortable with it, not everybody does want the 24 seven. And we've heard that from the neighbors. And so it, it does bring that transition to give a little separation with the commercial. and those existing residents.

Travis, anything else you want to add?

Okay, we would stand for any additional questions the mayor and council has, and thank you so much for listening to us.

Anything from council? Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, does council have anything additional before we close the public hearing? Councilor Register? All right. I'm going to go ahead and close the public hearing. Declare the hearing closed. Council can discuss the application before making any motions. Council.

Council register.

Just real quick. I'm wondering if IT can put another picture on here, the one that blocks out where the commercial is. It's shaded though. Looking at the one that we just had up there there was a lot 17 and I'm just trying to see what that was. There was another one where it was shaded gray where all the commercial was.

Maybe I imagined it.

Maybe. Oh maybe it was the other presentation.

No, I think I think it was a different presentation, but yeah So what is lot 17?

Mayor counselor register that is common lot So there's a condition that only passive amenities are there so, you know No pickleball or dog park or anything that would be loud and obnoxious potentially to the neighbors.

Okay.

Thank you Anything else from council All right, let's go ahead and move on to any recommendations for motions.

Mr. Mayor. Councilor Allgood. First of all, I want to start off by saying I really appreciate all the work that's gone into this, both the people that live there, the developer. This has been probably one of the most difficult ones I've seen in this situation, but My opinion is that this is a quality neighborhood, and I appreciate the plan that's in place. And based on that, based upon Colwell City Code comprehensive plan and upon testimony, evidence, and record, facts presented, and applicable City Code approval criteria, I move that the proposed rezone from C2 to R2 be approved to include the approval of the development agreement subject to the conditions as presented and I Don't know if I need to make an extra note, but the commercial forward-facing During the if that's possible mayor and council are all good.

Yeah, if you could just make a condition if you want the The buildings to or the park I guess the parking lot facing Yes, that would match the other businesses in the area

And so if that's possible, yes. Please, that is part of it. So anyway. I'll wordsmith that.

Just to clarify, the parking will face Ustick and 10th Avenue and the buildings at Setback.

Mr. Mayor. Thank you.

Councilor Register.

Wondering if Councilor Algo would be willing to amend his motion to include the percentages where we talked about 60, no more than 40% being strictly office space and the other 60% being

things that we talked about with gathering spaces and retail shopping if I understood that right that was okay they think it would be gathering spaces retail shopping restaurant that you record that as well okay that would be a part of my motion as well second motion a second madam clerk just to clarify the zon25 dash

0 0 0 0 5 correct That motion carries moving on to the

Preliminary platts mr. Mayor comes rugged Based on upon coal city code and comprehensive plan upon testimony evidence and record in fact presented in the applicable city code approval criteria I move that the preliminary plat requests be approved subject to the conditions as presented Thank You council all good second motion a second madam clerk

All right, that motion carries four to two. Then we're going to move on to item number four, I believe.

Mr. Mayor.

Councillor Dittenberg.

All sponsor bill number 60, ordinance number 3720 associated with zoning 25-0005 and request to move by passage by title only and approve the summary for publication.

Councillor Denver on the motion and we have a second say council Williams on a second madam clerk All right the motion carries With that are we madam clerk we Keep it down, please. Thank you. Correct me if I'm wrong, moving on to item number six to jump ahead. All right, for those following along, the next item under new business is action item, public hearing for case number ANN 26-00004. This is public hearing. First, we're going to hear from the applicant representative. We'll have about 10 minutes to speak.

Yes, my name is Jason Anderson 13601 West McMillan Road and we're helping Ashley Castile own just annex her property into the city of Caldwell It's in the middle of a residential subdivision as built in 1967 It's a half acre and from the streets It's I mean, it's clearly not part of the subdivision because everything's dirt kind of going into the lot there but we went to PNZ and just all we want to do is be able to connect city sewer and city water and get off of septic and well and And with that, I'm open for any questions you might have.

Councilor Register.

Sorry, I just want to confirm, you own this property, right? I do not.

No, I'm just helping her out.

Okay, but the resident is asking to be annexed? Correct. Okay. Sorry, I missed the first part. Thank you.

Mr. Mayor.

Councilor Tillman.

Just real quick, does the applicant have any desire to join us? If they're annexing in, are they going to become a member of the HOA that they are benefiting from?

Probably not. No, that's not a desire of her at this time. So she has a half-acre parcel, and they're using it to park a lot of their – they have two big trailers on there. And I don't know what the CC&Rs are in that neighborhood now, but I would bet it would be prohibited in that subdivision the way it stands. So she's not going to have a desire to do that.

Go ahead.

So question based on what he just said. So she wouldn't be in the middle of the subdivision but not following the same CCNRs as the rest of the subdivision?

That is correct. The house has been there prior to the development of this subdivision. And I think she bought it last year. It was a holdout. And so it used to back up to Middleton Road. but they have cut off access. So now that lot has to go through the city or through the subdivision. It was like that when she bought it. With our PNZ meeting, when we went before the council, PNZ said, hey, you're going to have to put in a paved driveway because currently it's dirt. And we said, that's fine. And they said, and we would like to see some beautification to be in kind with the HOA. And they said, yeah, that's fine. We can do that. So nothing specific was written down, but that's all has been agreed upon.

Well, you said the house was there since, the sixties, but when she bought it, there was a subdivision there, right?

Yeah. The subdivision has been there. Yep. I mean, it's probably the last five years.

Okay. So if she wants to annex into the city in that subdivision, it would make sense that she would then join the HOA and follow those CCNRs if there's a, so I would disagree the purpose.

The reason she bought this property is because it had no HOA and wasn't part of any HOA and there's no benefits. i've driven around this hoa there's not a clubhouse there's not a community pool so there's no there would be no benefit to her to to join this hoa and pay dues to them to access i mean she can pay the city their impact fees to connect to sewer and city city water and stuff like that but the hoa doesn't serve to provide her any benefit yeah it does mayor mayor

If I can interject mayor and council register, maybe I can help clarify a little bit this house is an out parcel So it is not part of the subdivision plat so it wouldn't be able to Join the HOA or anything because it's not actually part of the subdivision. They built the subdivision around it if that helps clarify Counselor registers at all Thank You councillor tell me

Just for clarification on that Robin They did build a lot and a block to gain access to this property, correct?

So mayor and councillor Typically when there is a subdivision and there's an out parcel they will make sure that that parcel has access and everything but it doesn't it's not part of the actual subdivision plat and

Okay, and the subdivision that is around them minus the one to the north, which they don't have access to because they access into the subdivision to the south, is all R1, correct?

Yes.

And they're requesting an R2 zone for this, correct?

That's correct.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor Tillman. Councillor Allgood.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Just to clarify because we missed part of this. The applicant is Anders and Company LLC on behalf of Ashley, can you pronounce the last name? Castileon. Castileon. Is requesting annexation of parcel R343-060000 with initial designation of R2 community residential. The parcel is designated as neighborhood two within the comprehensive plan future land use map. There's an existing family dwelling on the parcel and the owner would like to annex and seek limits so they may access municipal sewer service. No other development is proposed at this time. 0.52 acre parcel is addressed at 19241 Piaggio. Yep. Spent a little time in Italy. And located on the east side of Middleton Road, approximately 1,100 feet north of the intersection with Linden and Caldwell. Application was recommended for approval at June 10th, 2026. PNZ meeting. Any additional? Councillor Dittmer.

Mr. Mayor, thank you. I have some questions for staff. If you if you would. With the request for zoning R2, I mean, R2 is still consistent with the comprehensive plan in that area. And with regard to the property as it is now, I think the representative said that there was a single family structure and maybe a couple of trailers on the property or something. How would the ADU laws or the ADU codes help comply with This being an R1 as opposed to an R2. I stumped them.

So Mayor and Councilor Dittenberg, we'll try to help you through these questions. So R1 and R2 are very much similar in their zoning. There's a couple different land uses that you can have in an R2 zone that you can't have in an R1. I believe the other difference would be just those density requirements. So I'm corrected here. It's just in the comp plan that there's the minimum density requirements. So can they help?

Okay, so while you're thinking about that question, the other question I have is I would suspect at some point when the subdivision was developed around that house, as a concession, they made a dirt road into there, and as a concession, they kind of gave it that access. Is that correct or a fair statement?

Mayor and Council Member Dittenberg, that's correct. The city can restrict the access to a classified roadway, as long as we provide public access to a public road. So that's what we did here on Piaggio Way. So we would have required that developer to provide access there, but then they wouldn't have access to Middleton.

Okay, so the developer was required to make access there.

I'm suspecting there. That's just what it appears. I'd imagine originally they probably had access to.

And we've been doing this long enough to know that that's usually what happens. When somebody comes in and says, I have no opposition to it, as long as my irrigation canal is protected, My access is connected. My fence is saved. I mean, we do that all the time. Was there any conditions at that time that the road or that access be paved upon her annexation?

I'm not aware of that now. But I do believe the applicant did agree to. Is that what you said?

Yeah. At the last PMZ meeting with the council there, they did say we would have to pave the entryway, which is the intention anyways. And so that wasn't. Cause right now it's just, it's just dirt. So it hasn't been done yet because the garage side of the house is on the other side against Middleton, which no longer has access. So it's just going to require some work.

Thank you.

I will add council member didn't burn mayor. Um, that address is Piaggio Avenue. It's no longer Middleton. So it didn't keep that address. So I just think that's worth noting.

So it's this one, anything else from council? Thank you. Next, we'll hear from staff.

Mayor, I have an answer to Councillor Dittenberg's. I was a little confused because he was saying that there's a couple trailers on there. The house is just a single family residence, so I am unsure as to why the applicant requested an R2 zone instead of an R1 zone.

So a follow-up question, Mr. Mayor. So can we approve it today as an R1?

If the applicant is agreeable to it because that's what he applied for, then I would assume you could approve it for a lesser zone. Otherwise, you'd have to deny the approval and he'd have to come back with an R1 request. But if he's okay with the R1, then that's fine.

yeah we to answer that we have no objection to an r1 or r2 when we started the process that when we were speaking to the city just on the phone they suggested hey you may as well you can go for an r2 because you may as well that would be the highest and best use but there it was noted that it's not a whole lot of difference so just go for it and if you guys say no r1 it doesn't really change anything for us because we still get access to those city services so yes or no i can make a motion to approve it as an r1

So, Councillor Dittenberg, yes, you could, since the applicant's agreeable to that, when you get to that motion, you could approve, if that's what Council decides to do, you could approve the annexation, and then you could approve the zoning as an R1 zoning.

Okay.

Mr. Mayor, based upon Caldwell City Code... Councillor... Dittenberg, just need to get through the public comments. Sorry, staff, and then public comments.

Good evening mayor and council and council members. Garlene Davis, Planner 125 South 6th Avenue. Before you today is the Piaggio annexation ANN 26-04. It is an application for annexation of one parcel to connect to municipal services. The site is approximately 0.52 acres. It is located approximately .22 miles north of the Middleton Road and Linden Road intersection. The parcel remained as an out parcel after the development of the Mason Creek subdivision. Frontage improvements along Middleton Road were completed with that subdivision and direct access to Middleton was removed and access to the parcel was established through the subdivision. The site contains an existing single-family residence, and it is surrounded by established residential subdivisions to the north, south, east, and west. The parcel is designated neighborhood two on the future land use map. Neighborhood two is the city's primary residential place type, and it supports low to medium density housing. The parcel is currently within the county. It is going to go to city limit and within the city's impact area. The applicant is requesting an initial zoning of R2. The property is currently developed with a single family residence and no expansion or additional residential development is proposed at this time. Staff finds that the R2 zoning is appropriate given the existing residential use, but R1 would also be appropriate as both zones are compatible with the neighborhood two place type. The applicant is now proposing to redevelop the site. At this time, there is no increase in residential intensity proposed. The existing single-family home will remain, and the annexation request is solely for the purpose to connect to city services. Staff reviewed the site for compliance with applicable development standard, including setback, lot sizes, and access requirement. The property generally complies with city standards. We are recommending a condition that the driveway must be paved at least 25 feet into the site and must be at least 10 feet wide. Any future development of the site will be subject to review by city staff and must comply with all applicable code at that time. Utilities are available for the site and public subdivisions including school districts were notified of this application. Um, city staff found no issue with the app, uh, with the application and approved the proposal. We received no public comments. After our review, we find that the proposed annexation complies with all applicable city code. Can't plan at her code and city adopted master plans and city policies. With that, I will stand with any question you may stick. You may have.

Thank you. Council. Those are all good.

All right. Yes, so last council meeting, we approved a development just to the west of this one.

I apologize, I wasn't here, but you may have to.

What I was wondering is what did, I cannot remember what we approved that as. Was that an R1 or an R2? It was just to the west along between Hill and Georgia, and we just heard it last meeting.

That's on the other side. That's on the north side of 2026.

No, no, no, it's right here. Yes, right here.

No, no, no, you're on the wrong one. We're on the single access. We skipped. We skipped. To item. Wait.

We moved to item six. Okay, now I see it. Thank you. Never mind. We'll draw that question. That's fine. Any other questions?

Councilor Tillman.

Mr. Mayor, you said that all improvements along Middleton had been done by the previous... By the subdivision from which this remained in that parcel.

That was a condition of that subdivision's approval.

But they didn't.

Along Middleton?

What page is that? All it is is a sidewalk. The improvements and setback all stop at this parcel. So is that going to continue if this gets annexed in? Or does, when would that be done? Or is that going to fall on the taxpayers to do when this develops? I'm just trying to figure out when that's going to be completed because right now I've driven past it and it's a weed patch between the concrete sidewalk and the fence.

I want to clarify. Are we discussing the frontage improvement along Middleton? Correct. Okay.

Yeah. It stops at this parcel. All the landscaping, all the setback, everything stops at this parcel. The only thing that continues is a sidewalk.

Yes. Well, that was what that development was required to accomplish. But if council has additional requirement that you may want to put on this parcel.

Director.

Mayor and council. The sidewalk is there. You're correct. The landscaping is not there. Our city code does not require landscaping for a single family dwelling. but it does for a subdivision. However, council could put an additional condition on it as part of the annexation to have landscaping on the frontage.

Councilor, all good. Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, we have a minimal amount of people signed up to testify. Just a reminder, you have three minutes. Clock's up here. Jason, right, already spoke in favor. We don't have any neutral. And we have Sue Smallwood that was against, and I believe she left. So with that, I'm going to go ahead and, correction. Council have any other questions at this time? We'll close the public hearing. All right. I'm gonna go ahead and close the hearing. All right, I will entertain any motions.

You stopped my momentum. I don't know if I want to make it now or not. I mean, not, I mean, we just heard stuff. Okay, Mr. Mayor, based upon the city code, the comprehensive plan upon the testimony, evidence and record, and the facts presented, I move that the annexation be approved subject to some additional consideration of landscaping along Middleton Road and subject to the approval of the proposed zoning designation.

I have a motion and a second. Correction, do we have a second?

That's in the next one, right?

It's just for the annexation.

That's correct.

Do we have a second?

Second.

Motion second. Madam Clerk? Sorry, any discussion on that motion?

Mr. Mayor?

Councillor Tillman?

Councillor Dentonburg, that would include, just to be clear, that they would have to match existing landscaping along Middleton and improve with that improvement, correct?

I guess I said, you know, consistent with, so... I'm not sure match and consistent are the same, but they're probably close, so.

Okay, would you mind putting a condition that it would have to be within a year?

Okay, within a year, I'm okay with that.

Or can we do that, staff?

Mayor and council, yes, you certainly could. I would probably recommend saying as close to The existing landscaping, and the reason I say that is when I look at the width of the existing landscaping, their house is a little bit more far forward. So in some areas, it may not be as thick as the existing landscaping. So as consistent as possible with the existing landscaping.

Everything I said, including being as consistent as possible with the existing landscaping within a 12-month period.

Would council like to just briefly speak with the applicant? I believe he may have something. Sorry, the applicant's assistant. Sorry, yeah, stand by. We'd have to open the public testimony, right?

Mr. Mayor, it depends on what he wants, what it is that he wants to say.

I'm talking about landscaping, and I didn't get a chance to chime in there.

And so I wanted to offer comments because the landscaping that I... Then, Mr. Mayor, you better open the public hearing back up again.

So do we need to withdraw the motion or just go ahead and open it up?

I think you can table the motion and open the public hearing up. All right.

Do we have... Mr. Mayor, I'll table my motion.

Correct. We're back up to the rebuttal. This is a new addition, obviously, with the landscaping requirement.

Mr. Mayor, if you just opened up the... Yep. So I think... If I'm understanding right, there hasn't been a second yet. There's a proposed motion. Is that where I'm understanding? Are you, Councillor Dittenberg, you're okay if we go ahead and open it back up and we pause as you make your motion? Yes, I'm okay with that.

All right, thank you, Councillor Dittenberg. We're going to withdraw the motion. We'll go ahead and open back up the public hearing of the applicant with the additional information that looks to be requested and have a rebuttal.

I don't know if you guys have a copy of the application that we put on file, but the weed patch you're referring to is on that southwest corridor. That's all city property, to the best of my knowledge, or to the HOAs. Everything that my client owns has been fenced in because we're probably, I think, maybe within three or four feet of that city sidewalk with the new fence that they installed. And so I think my point would be is if part of the development agreement was, hey, we're requiring you guys to put in landscaping, and that previous developer didn't, the spot that we could landscape is between the fence that they own and their property line and the rest is the city property up into the sidewalk so i'm not i'm not clear as to why the burden would fall upon my um our client to get that taken care of when the previous developer and the city had an agreement and it was sold as such to her in that condition if it was if it was a requirement from the city then they should have we should have done it then instead of saying hey as part of your annexation we're now going to require you to landscape the city's property or the HOA's property that's not your property on the other side of the fence. That wouldn't seem fair to me. That's my comments. Thank you.

Councilor Tillman.

The weed patch I was referring to, just as clarification, was there is a strip between the fence and the sidewalk. I drove by it. There's weeds halfway up the fence. That's just what I saw when I drove by over the weekend.

So we all can see the same thing. Can we bring that up on a map?

Actually, I have a question. Yes. So it sounds like he knows a lot about this property. We have no visual or anything like that. Would you be willing to come back with a presentation so we can see what we're talking about here?

Mr. Mayor, Councilor, Register, there may be the ability for Director Collins to bring up an image on

And just based on that real quick They didn't annex in during the subdivision so we couldn't have required any kind of setback or Landscaping be done across this property at that time, correct?

Yes mayor and councilman Tellman no, we couldn't have required the site to be landscaped at that time. What we did require was Frontage improvement like sidewalk and stuff. Yes.

They are asking for annexation now. Correct. We can do it now, correct? Correct.

Thank you Yeah Just to point something out can we zoom in just a tiny bit more Tillman is referring to I'm not sure how wide that is. It's probably three or four feet. And it's probably when you're standing on it, like a two or three foot drop onto my client's property. And it's all just dirt, loose field dirt. And then my client has a fence there. Um, I'm not sure what kind of landscaping you would put there. because in order to level it out also, now we're talking, you have to, I guess, adjust the dirt level, put trees and stuff in there. And again, to me, it's, I understand what you're saying. You want it to look beautiful and you're saying, Hey, you want to be annexed into the city, then you should do this. Um, I think that changes the calculus a little bit because I feel like this would be a pretty expensive endeavor. That's, that's no longer just annexing into the city. I think the city does benefit from getting those impact fees from having her join it. And if it's like that already, I'm not sure what solution we can offer you there.

And just in rebuttal, unfortunately, it's not just that side. It's all along the back fence. And it's also the point that if they come in, you bring this into the city, you annex it in, at what point Does that landscaping then need to be continued? Does it fall on the city taxpayers to do? Yeah, that's their property. We would require that of any developer or anybody who wants to annex into the city, whether they are a single family home or a large developer. Yes. Um, we would require the same thing of any, landowner to do that.

Absolutely. I guess my point to rebuttal that is you're saying you want us to landscape the city's property, not my client's property, because they have a fence on the property line. So the dirt patch you're referring to is not their property.

You're talking about this right here. No.

Can you point to the line we're referring to? Because they have a fence.

Along the fence line. I just said there's a strip of dirt.

That is not my client's property, that is correct. It is the city's property. My client's property has, there is a fence on the property line right there where the black line is.

Can you zoom into that line?

I guess my point is that there is landscaping that comes up to both sides of your client's property and it ends. There is then a fence that pops out to the sidewalk.

Director Collins, can you zoom in further?

Correct?

That is correct.

And any other development that would come in

That is correct. If it was on their property though. Correct. And then also if we start getting into the beautification, there's no space to put trees and bushes there. I mean, it's gotta be like this big so we can put rocks down in kind with the other subdivisions. I mean, if you want another strip of rocks there, instead of if you look, they have no trees or no bushes in the same amount of space on either of the previous HOA or subdivisions in the north or the south. So anyways,

Thank you, Councilor Tillman. Councilor Denver?

You know, this is... This is somebody just trying to do the right thing to be annexed, and there's a lot of moving parts here, and I don't think we have to solve all the moving parts, so I will go back to my original motion.

Do we want to go ahead and close public testimony and then make the motion?

Yeah. Okay, I'm out.

Anything else for the applicant?

You know, one time a very smart person said the adherence to strict rules sometimes impedes progress, so...

Trying to follow the rules. Trying. All right, we're going to close public testimony with that. Council. Council Williams.

Robin, is it accurate that that is city property? You've got the land map up there?

Mayor and Councilor Williams, if you look right here when I, oh. Right. I remember it. Yes. The front this little frontage area right here between the sidewalk and the property line is city right away.

Can you zoom in all the way just to give us. Councilor Tillman said about three inches but that looks bigger.

Yeah. So you'll see where this line shows up so it's off a little bit here or there. Right. The map is off probably a few feet either way. But this little area on the back side of the sidewalk is probably part of city right away. In our codes, when subdivisions come in or commercial properties come in, the code is very specific that they have landscape buffer requirements, but they also have to landscape the right of way between the property line and the sidewalk. We just don't have any code requirements for a single family home, just singular, coming in without a development.

Right, which is what makes this tricky because I agree with the council if this was a subdivision, if this was something greater, we would have greater depth for requirement. But we gain nothing by not annexing it because it's going to stay that way regardless. So it doesn't solve the problem by saying we won't annex it because you won't put landscaping there. So I'm in favor of just allowing this applicant to annex and connect to the city Services so let me find the sheet that's pertinent to this one and I'll make a motion. This is number seven This will be number six Thank you Based upon Caldwell City code the comprehensive plan upon the testimony evidence and record and the facts presented I move that the annexation request be approved subject to the conditions presented by staff and support to the approval of the proposed zoning designation of R1. So moved.

And the second, Madam Clerk. Correction. Any further deliberation on that? Council Register.

I just want to, so I think the thing that I just want to point out is that I believe that when somebody wants to be annexed, even if it's for an easy reason like this, They should want to be part of the community and they're not willing to join the HOA they're not willing to landscape the right away, so That's something that I take into consideration Thank You council register council Williams you have any additional Sorry like was on Anything else from council?

All right, madam clerk Wow. All right. Well, I believe I'm going to go ahead and vote in favor of the single annexation. So I'll vote in favor of the motion. With that, we'll move on to item number seven. Yeah, that'll be item number seven.

Item number seven. Okay.

Did we read through the motion? I'm sorry. I might have missed it. I might have been sleeping Did we move through the motion on the actual initial zoning or what? Did you do it all in one motion with the in one motion? Can we do a second motion for the zoning, please?

Based upon Caldwell City Code the comprehensive plan upon the testimony evidence in record and the fact presented and the applicable city approval criteria I move that zoning are one be approved for the subject matter subject to the conditions as presented by staff.

Motion. Do we have a second? All right. Any discussion? Seeing none, Madam Clerk. All right. That motion filled, and I'll vote in favor of the motion. With that, we're going to take a 10-minute break. Correction, sorry. Yeah, we did part number two of six, and we'll move on to bill number 16, Councillor Dittenberg.

Mr. Mayor, I'll sponsor bill number 16, ordinance number 3750, associated with annexation 26-04, with request for its moving...

Request to move by passage by title only and approve the summary for publication All right, that's a motion second any discussion All right, madam clerk All right that motion carries all right, we'll take a five-minute break All right, welcome back. We'll move on to item number five. All right, the next item is a new business, is an action item, public hearing for case number SPP26-00004. This again is an action item number five, applicant, hatch design and architecture on behalf of Daniel, Yes, Isbell? Isbell. Okay, sorry, I wanted to make sure I pronounced that correctly. It's requesting preliminary plot approval for Isbell Townhome Subdivision, a single-family subdivision with 12 townhome lots and one single-family detached lot. The site is zoned R1, neighborhood residential, and is located within the neighborhood two place type within the future land use map. The approximately 1.56 acre site is addressed as 403 Hill Lane. It's located on the east side of Hill Lane, approximately 240 feet south of the intersection with Syringa Lane and 206 feet north of Interstate 84 in Caldwell. Application was recommended for approval at the May 26 hearing examiner meeting. All right, would the applicant like to come forward? It has 10 minutes.

clock up here and thank you for being here tonight good evening mayor phillips and council members my name is steve thesen i'm with hatch design architecture at 200 west 36th street in boise 83714 thank you for hearing our isbell townhomes plenary plat this evening this is the location of our project As you mentioned, it's off a hill lane northwest of Florida and Hawaii. It's the closest across streets. This is the site plan. Like you mentioned, we are proposing 12 townhome lots with one single family lot. We've worked with staff quite a bit on figuring out access to the site, which will be coming in from the southeast. and connecting to Hawaii Street and talking with the neighbors and with staff. It was determined that they would like to close Hill Lane to traffic. And that's why we're proposing bollards and fencing, but the pedestrians will still be able to access that. And that is up in the northwest corner. South of the Hammerhead, there is a connection proposed to, as Council Member Allgood mentioned, Patriots Landing that was approved recently to the west, and we're proposing a pedestrian access that attaches to theirs and goes south to Hawaii Street. This is the landscape plan that we're proposing. There is approximately 12,000 square feet of open space. I think it comes to about 16% of the site. We're proposing tree-lined streets, shade trees in the large grassy areas, and landscaping along the pathway connection and also pathway, which will eventually be Patriot Landing's pathway to the west. We're landscaping that. This is a front elevation of the townhome product with the three units. This is the floor plan. We're proposing three bedroom, two bath, two car garage units, approximately 1,400 square feet. And I'll stand for questions.

Thank you. Questions from council? Council, all good? Sorry, I just wasn't sure if you were making your way towards one. All right, thank you for that. Staff.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. Katie Wright, Senior Planner, 205 South 6th Avenue. The applicant, Steve Thiessen, on behalf of the property owner, Daniel Isbell, submitted an application for a preliminary plot for 12 single-family attached lots and one single-family detached lot. on parcel R02664 in the R1 zone. The site is 1.66 acres and is located north of Owyhee Street and approximately 675 feet west of Florida Avenue with a property address of 403 Hill Lane. The subject parcel is currently vacant land surrounded by single family residential to the north, south, and west with the interstate along the southern boundary. This is also near the Canyon Crossing duplex development and self-storage units. And to the west, as the applicant mentioned, Patriot's Landing was just approved here recently with duplexes and single family. The subject site was annexed into the city of Caldwell in 1960 as part of the Hillcrest subdivision from 1917. parcels under 10 acres and is located in a largely developed area in which municipal services are already available and therefore is classified as infill the applicants proposing 12 single family attached residential lots and one single family detached residential lot which conforms with the purpose statement as specified within the caldwell city code for r1 neighborhood residential which states that the r1 zone accommodates townhomes and single-family detached homes The proposed density of 7.8 dwelling units per acre is within the allowable density of 2.8 dwelling units per acre and therefore complies with code. The subject parcel is located in the neighborhood two place type within the comprehensive plan. The neighborhood two place type is the primary residential place type in Caldwell. This encompasses residential areas that provide an array of low to mid-dense housing options. These neighborhoods are located outside of most commercial centers but still should be well connected to nearby services. And the existing R1 zone is a compatible zoning district within the neighborhood two place type. The preliminary plat request is for 13 buildable lots, again consisting of 12 single family attached and one single family detached lot. The attached products are proposed to be three attached together. That project is also proposing one common lot with 17.6% open space, which exceeds the code minimum of 10%. The development will take access off of Owyhee Street, which is a local road to the south. Hill Lane along the west boundary of the development will be closed and not extend south to Owyhee Street. Homeowners north of this development will remain to have access to Syringa Lane via Hill Lane. Staff has conditioned that the applicant apply to vacate the adjacent right-of-way to the west on Hill Lane, outlined in red on the plan, as this will no longer be used as a road and will be left unmaintained. The private internal road proposed within this development that connects to the southeast to Owyhee Street will not be wide enough to include sidewalk, so staff's requiring the applicant provide pedestrian connectivity to Owyhee at another location. Staff has conditioned that when this portion of Hill Lane is vacated that the applicant shall provide a pathway that connects to the east to Patriots Landing, which is showing a pedestrian connectivity to Owyhee. Due to the size and the scope of the development, a traffic impact study was not required. As conditioned the project is compliant with all required codes. All utilities are available or will be made available to serve the proposed single family attached and detached development. Political subdivisions including school districts were notified and provided opportunity to comment. No agencies submitted any comments with concerns and public notices were sent to all property owners within 500 foot radius of the property. By the time of this hearing staff has received no public comments. And on May 26, the hearing examiner recommended approval of the requested preliminary application. Staff's initial review found the proposed project is in conformance with all applicable city codes as amended, all applicable approval criteria per city and Idaho code, the adopted comp plan and future land use map, and all other applicable city adopted master plans. The city council has the authority to approve or deny applications based on the approval criteria within Caldwell City Code once they've reviewed the record and evidence and heard all public testimony. And thank you I stand for questions.

DIRECTOR DEWOLF. Thank you. Councilor Gilman.

DIRECTOR GILMAN. Okay. Looking at the plot because I pulled it up for Patriot. If I'm looking at that one does Patriot. Trying to remember what it's called. I get it right. Patriot Ridge Lane. Does it line up exactly with this road on the other side. i remember when we were talking about this one they were talking about possibly plugging that road through and the only reason i really ask is because i hate single access subdivisions because if your road gets any kind of issue first responders or if there's any kind of sewer or drainage or anything that you need to do in the road now your residents can't get in and out mayor councillor tillmont that was a discussion we've met with the applicant

quite a bit on this as you can see you know the the condition for vacating right away and things like that as we probably discussed with Patriots Landing it's a little funky out here so unfortunately this private Lane does not match up with Patriots because of the where Patriots lot is actually about the top of their lot lines up with the top of that right-of-way the red So they are south of this. So for lot purposes, they were not able, neither project were able to realign to match and still have buildable lots.

Okay. I just remember when we were talking about Patriot that they were saying that there might be a possibility of tapping into this one.

Yeah, unfortunately, that was not able to be possible with lot sizes and things like that.

Okay, thank you.

But it was discussed, yes.

Thank you, Councillor Tillman. Anything else from council for staff? Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, we're going to go ahead and open the public hearing. Once again, I'm going to go and open the public hearing. Those that we wish to testify are going to have three minutes to speak. The clock's up here. We'll start off by giving your name and address for the record. With that, there was no one signed up in favor. for neutral mr webster correct me if i'm wrong you said that you already said you have room all right and christina please come forward thank you for being here tonight thank you for having me my name is christina wiener and i live at 421 hill lane so i am on the south west corner of the property just right adjacent to them so i'm

neutral for them with conditions. I'm okay with them building there, but I have concerns, especially because they are closing off my access to my property from any public road. So I understand Patriots Landing is coming in and Owyhee Lane is going to be extended, but my concern is that if Isbell Townhomes finishes before Owyhee Lane is finished, how am I going to get access to my property?

Can we bring... that up by any chance?

Sure. I've never used it.

We're going to get you trained tonight. Okay.

So I, so on the bottom left corner, that's my house. Um, so why he lands going to wrap kind of around our property. But if that road's not done and on city recognized as operational by the city and they finish their construction and close off the road, I'm concerned that I lose access to the public road. I can't go to work. You guys can't show up if there's an emergency. That's my biggest concern.

Absolutely fair question for city engineer like to answer.

Yeah, mayor and council members. Um, we had that in the staff report that at the time of civil plan review, we will work to, um, give you a proper access to a why he, um, that will be required as a part of this development. And in terms of timing, um, we can't restrict access. We can't prevent anyone from having access to a public road. So that would have to be done prior to Hill lane being closed.

So just to be clear, this will not be an issue as she's expressing concern over.

Correct. It's explicitly stated in the staff report.

And then my other second concern is because we, because the way maps and everything show a lot of people think Hill lane goes all the way through to Hawaii. Cause even though why he's not there yet, um, there's a lot of traffic that comes down and ends up turning around in my driveway. Cause there is no turnaround and going back out. So my concern is with all the construction, the heavy, heavy vehicles coming in and going into my driveway and tearing up my driveway that's dirt just to turn around because there is no turnaround there. So that's also something that I'm concerned about.

Mayor and council members, Hill Lane, as a part of the vacation as well as what Patriot's Landing is doing, you're worried about them turning around into Hill Lane and then going into your driveway. Is that correct? Yeah, so that'll be completely restricted.

Like there will be no... No, no, I'm talking about during construction.

Oh, during construction.

So like when the contractors come in with their heavy equipment, if they miss the turn for that property, they end up coming to my property and turning around in my driveway. The easement comes right up to my garage.

Right. Mayor and council members, I think that would be a good question to address with the applicant in terms of when this goes under construction.

Probably discuss it during the rebuttal. Okay.

And then the last request I would have is because it's been expressed that they were not intending to put privacy fences. Because the backyard of the townhomes would be facing my backyard as well, I would prefer to have privacy fence there as well.

Any additional? No. All right. Thank you once again for being here tonight and being here at the late hour. We're going to move on to oppose Ms. Smallwood. She's no longer here. And with that, would the applicant like to come up for rebuttal? And it's five minutes.

Mayor, council members, to answer Christina's questions, I believe that As a condition of approval, we have to extend Owyhee Lane to Hill Lane. Is that correct? So that we should be able to take care of any access. We'll definitely leave access, but I believe we do have to extend Hill or extend Owyhee Lane to Hill Lane to give access to Christina. And in regards to construction access, we can look at maybe conditioning to use the southeast corner as we build our new road to bring bring in trucks that way because I'm sure neighbors to the north on Hill Lane probably would appreciate that also. Going back to the backyards of the townhomes, on the townhomes we are proposing six foot vinyl fence so those yards will be fully fenced that are backing up the property and even to the north. All the residential lots will have fully fenced yards. And is there any, I'll stand for any questions.

Thank you for that. Any questions from council? All right, thank you. All right, thank you. All right, I'm going to close the public hearing, move on to council. Or staff? Any recommendations? I would entertain a motion. This is number five, correct? Yes. Just number five. No follow on from that. Until we get to financials later.

I'm looking for the right cheat sheet.

I think the cheat sheet actually says new business item number three because when I made these, the agenda was different.

I was looking at the same thing because...

Okay, if you've got the right page, go for it.

Mr. Mayor?

Councilor Dillman.

Okay, since I have the right sheet. Based on Caldwell City Code, the comprehensive plan, and upon the testimony, evidence, and records, the facts presented, and the... applicable city code approval criteria, I move that the preliminary plat request be approved subject to the conditions as presented.

We have a motion. Second. And a second. Any discussion on that motion? All right. Madam Clerk. All right, that motion carries. Move on to the finance report.

Mr. Mayor. Councillor Tillman. I move to approve accounts payable in the amount of $2,610,785.38 represented by checks number 1-9-4-6-1-6 through 1-9-4-8-1-2 and electronic payments and payroll for the amount of $958,836.16 represented by check numbers 4-0-8-7-7 through 4-0-9-0-4 and direct deposits be accepted, payments approved and vouchers filed in the office of the city clerk.

Thank you, Councillor Tillman. Do I have a second?

Second.

Motion to second. All those in favor? Correction. Madam Clerk, sorry. Oh. All those in favor, vote aye. Aye. All right, the motion carries. Now we're going to move on to council comments. Councillor Dittenberg.

All right, thank you, Mr. Mayor. I would just like to take the opportunity to thank all my fellow city council members, the staff, and the mayor, you too. We've had a really busy couple months I mean, we've had a number of budget hearings. The staff has been remarkable at answering everyone's questions. Rochelle, thank you so much. You're very timely in responding to everyone's questions about the budget. And we've talked about a lot here a couple weeks ago or a couple months ago. Councillor Allgood said if you want to really know how sausage is made and if you really want to know the direction the city is moving, you should attend the budget meetings. And so I applaud all of you who have been here during those meetings and sat through and watched the sausage being made. And the council members, each of you have done a remarkable job in participating and showing up. And I don't even know what everyone does. You're on other committees, you're on other assignments. And I appreciate your help and your work in making this city function. So the city of Caldwell is still a great city, and we're moving in the right direction. So thank you.

Thank you, Councillor Denton. Mayor, Councillor Tillman.

Only thing I really wanted to mention was that we do have fair coming up this week. I did talk to Diana out at the fair. got brought up before I'm the new guy on the council. So I wasn't a hundred percent sure, but apparently there's a wall out there that needs to be dealt with. And it got brought to me saying that it was our issue. I've heard that it's URA's issue. I've heard that it's a bunch of different things, um, personally looking at it and somebody who is in civil engineering, that is our land. And that would be something that would be highly beneficial to us to have because that would,

increase the amount of land we have out there just my take but just wanted to bring it up that it's been brought up to me and see where it can go from there that's all i've got do you mind if i comment on that real quick um i did meet with the fair director recently and inquired once again as to the status of that i my understanding is they had a set budget the design and such came in higher through that process i said what we need to know what does that look like are you going to bring that back before the URA for additional funds? Do you need to come before us? So I've asked that we please, whatever it is, whatever we need, especially with it being our property and it could very much benefit us to come forward with that. So we were just in standby for that, but it was the overage and then just figure out who's gonna pay for it. So that's where that is at. So thank you for that. And I do agree, it would be great. Cause there's a lot of fairly unusable area when we could be utilizing that. And as soon as I hear back, to you folks.

All right, Councillor Stoddart. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just want to extend the comments that Mr. Weiss made. I disagree with him, too. One of the projects he had was at Grace Lutheran Church, which I'm a member of, and I did see their work. They did a great job, and the church is going to make a donation to Team Rubicon, so we're in the loop. We just don't have time to be there all the time that they're there, so that's all.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor Stoddart. Councillor Allgood.

Just following up on the fair wall, the conversation you had with the fair director, I had that same conversation several months ago and said, get us a number because we're going into budget if we need to budget some extra money. And I have been waiting on that number for several months now.

difference between what urban renewal has available and what's remaining to finish the wall so yeah it'd be great to get that number so we can act on it i will thank you for that i will go back again and i know that we had them once before they were supposed to come before council and then that got cancelled so um we'll go ahead and reiterate it once again and i'll put it in writing too council williams council register All right. Well, I just want to follow up on what Councillor Ditmer said. We've spent a lot of time together, especially with council. So thank you for all the extra hours you put in. I know it was challenging, especially for those that work very hard and just in general. Thank you, staff. We've had some changes, but staff have been performing very admirably. And we thank you for all you do and all the extra hours you put in and your comments, especially Justin. We thank you for all the expertise you bring with us and all the other staff in the room today. Just want to follow up real quick. There has been a great deal of public discussion on renewing the lease for the Cullinan Rodeo. Lease was first sent to the city in November 2025 is my understanding. I want to just take this opportunity to reaffirm the city's commitment to working with the rodeo to find a mutually acceptable and beneficial outcome. The city has formed a working committee which consists of staff, myself, and two counselors. And the committee has already begun working. We've had a meeting and we'll follow up with additional City understands the rodeo is pressing needs and the city must make sure any commitments It makes our commitments can keep over the length of the lease extension request especially where we've seen that this is going to be a long-term lease and We do welcome that request. We just want to make sure that we're able to stay true to that and it's not changed Later on the convince we must make also The commitments we make must also take into account the taxpaying residents of city and other major partners who use the call event center facilities and grounds which includes a Kenney County Fair and the College of Idaho Athletics. As mayor, I want to assure everyone who's interested in this issue that my goal and our goal is to maintain and improve the relationship between the rodeo, the city, and all the partners that do use that event center. And I'm committed to making sure the city's partnership with the rodeo remains strong and continues well beyond my time as mayor and, to be honest, past my lifetime. I want future generations to enjoy a local rodeo on a national stage where the Cowboys are the stars. And just to follow up on some citizen comments earlier, just know that not only did staff the night of the weather event, the flood event, you want to call it, spent lots and lots of hours. We've spent hours since then. We've been working with our community partners, our local agencies. I did attend the Salvation Army. I forgot the acronym right now, but it was the VOAD that they had. And it was great to see all the partners that were there. We were in constant communication. worked out with republic services thank you to them to get several large dumpsters that we were able to place over on 21st and keep out of the way of the fair with that this has given us great insight into if we were to have a larger event hopefully it never happens fingers crossed knock on wood we've started understanding really what that would look like what's available who we need to work with where good locations to place items like dumpsters and such would be. So I just want to thank you to all of our partners, to the staff that have been working tirelessly to do that. We do thank those like Team Rubicon and others that have come in. And it is nice to be able to meet with folks, but sometimes we are very busy ourselves dealing with our side of things, and we have a lot going on. So if there was any feeling of them not being important to us, please don't misunderstand that as them not being important, but we have a lot of things to do. As we try and work through this so we thank them for their service the Red Cross Multiple other organizations that stepped up to help out especially our emergency management of the feds the state and others so With that we do have the state of the city. I've sent you all invites on August 6. It'll be at Valley View we had reserved that quite some months ago so we're working out the final details on that and With that, I have nothing else tonight other than thanking our staff and our council. We've been working great together. We have a lot of great things coming. And I would entertain a motion to enter executive.

Mr. Mayor.

Councilor Alder.

I move to enter into executive session pursuant to Idaho Code 74-2061, A, B, D, and F. Second.

Motion to second. Madam Clerk. thank you all for those that attended tonight especially those that are regular all right that motion carries we are now into executive thank you