City Council - Regular Meeting

All right, good evening, everybody. Welcome to the August 25th, 2026 City Council meeting at 530. Will you please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance?

Ready to begin? 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. Can we get a roll call, please?

Gillis?

Here.

Merrill? Here. May? Here. Kwame? Here.

Thank you. Are there any additions, deletions, or modifications to this agenda?

No.

All right. Seeing none, we're going to move right into our public comment. This time is reserved for the public to address their elected officials regarding topics not on the agenda of general interest or concern. This is not the time slot to give formal testimony on a public hearing matter or comment on pending applications or proposals. public hearings of land use testimony is to be made during the open public hearing for that said item in accordance with the Idaho code. We desire to all interactions between the public staff and elected officials to be conducted in a professional and civil manner. Therefore, comments are to be addressed solely to the council as a whole and focus on the issue, avoiding personalized debate and should not be made, not make any personal impertinent or slanderous or profane remarks to any member of the council, staff, or other members of the public. Out of courtesy for all who wish to speak, the city council requests that each speaker be limited to three minutes. I will open it up right now for public comment.

CHRISTIE WOODARD- Mr. Mayor, before you start on that, I apologize. We did amend the agenda yesterday, so I would ask for a motion to accept the amended agenda, adding agenda item. I apologize for not having that ready. 9F. Yeah, 9F.

And I apologize because I didn't highlight that one. Sorry about that. Okay, I need a motion to amend that.

A motion. Mr. Mayor?

Motion for 9F.

Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve the amended agenda adding item 9F.

Thank you. Motion to have a second? Second. Any more discussion? And since let's do a roll call since it's, I'll wait for you, but since there's financial stuff on there. Okay.

Gillis.

Aye.

Merrill.

Aye.

May. Aye. Kwame. Aye. Marge Kerr.

Thanks. More of the one-way skin of the cat, right? All right, first is James, and I'm sorry, you can tell us your name, but the second name, or last name, but if you state your name and address for the record, thank you.

My name is James Humphries. I reside at 1391 West Chance Court here in Eagle.

Okay, go ahead.

Mayor and council members, I place formal notice into the record of a tracking investigation into misuse of public funds, hidden conflicts of interest, and active facilitation of civil trespass. On July 28th, this council voted four to one to give 40,000 taxpayer dollars to Clyde Capital under Idaho code 74-404 and 67-6506. Officials are barred from voting on matters involving their business associates. Four of you serve as a city liaison to the developer's infrastructure district, making Clyde Capital your legal business associate. You failed to disclose, failed to recuse, and violated the local land use planning act. The claim that LLUPA does not apply because this was an agreement, not a rezone, is administrative deception. In land use law, the label on the paper does not control the physical object of the transaction. I'm sorry, the physical object of the transaction does. The loan no vote proves ordinary procurement rules were ignored to favor a private corporation. The city claims it cannot stop the toxic sewage contract between Eagle Sewer District and Farmers Union Ditch Company for fear of being sued. That is a false excuse. Under restatement second of torts, number 767, the city is protected when it acts to protect public safety. This council still controls local zoning and site approvals. When Echo Haka States denied direct easement, the pipeline was blocked. By coordinating utility approvals for a detour route, you are actively facilitating multi-mile civil trespass over a ditch company that holds only a water easement, not a fee simple title. The city and sewer district claim they are waiting on government guidance. They already have it. Eagle Sewer District requested, co-signed, and paid for the 1981 EPA Environmental Impact Study. That study explicitly warned that our shallow groundwater and aquifer cannot handle these wastewater lines without catastrophic contamination. They have known this danger for over 40 years. Your duty is to prevent damage, not wait for a higher agency to clean up a local failure. I formally notify the law enforcement officer present of these potential criminal violations. Under Idaho law, you are required to report them. Structured supporting briefs are being sent to state and federal investigations. Investigators, excuse me. Because of this council is entangled with the developer, our filings will demand the Ada County prosecutor refer the matter to an independent special prosecutor. We demand, one, immediate freeze of every utility approval, site encroachment, easement, and land use action supporting Val Nova, Spring Valley CID, Clyde Capital, Eagle Sewer District, and the Farmers Union ditch pipeline. Two, full public accounting of every title defect and easement overreach tied to those same parties. Three, immediate enforcement of LLUPA on both the Eagle Sewer District actions and the land swap agreement as the law required.

You can continue if you got more.

I'm asking you to enact your police powers.

all right okay well thank you appreciate your comments all right gina mulhern good evening i've been here before i'm from star i support everything that mr humphries just stated i'd like to know if i could come before you to hand you the packet that will document everything he said

Okay, you can bring it to the clerk and then she can distribute it out for you. Yeah. Is there anything else you want to add to that?

There's nothing. Thank you very much for your time. Okay.

All right. Thank you. All right. That's the only two people that signed up on that. Is there anybody else in the audience that would like to come and testify on anything? I mean, outside of the land use items. All right. We'll move on then to reports. I'm gonna ask Laura, our PIO, to come up and she's got a special announcement that I think is gonna be enjoyable for everybody to hear.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. I'm Laura, the Public Information Officer for the record. So last week I reported to you guys and I said that we were unable to get the Liberty Bell for Harvest Fest like we were hoping, however, I got a call from Paul Perez from the state treasury office today and he said that the schedule has changed and they have now blacked out the day to come to Eagle on October 10th for Harvest Fest. Now I don't know all the details. I don't know if it'll be here the whole time or just part of the time, but we will have the Liberty Bell here before it gets reinstalled in the Capitol. So I'm super excited about that and I hope everybody else is super excited and comes down October 10th to see the Liberty Bell in downtown Eagle. Thank you.

That is good.

Thank you, Laura.

Yeah, she couldn't wait to let me know.

That was big news.

All right. I know this isn't report night, but is there anything that came up special that somebody would like to speak on prior to the other items that you're going to come up and do presentations on?

Mr. Mayor, I just had one reminder for people because public comment is going to be closing on September 4th. but it is for the statewide transportation improvement program. Whenever they make changes, budgetary, design, adding or dropping a project, they have to do an amendment. So they're taking public comment, closes on September 4th for amendment number H6, and that is the STIP program, statewide transportation improvement program. So just wanted everybody to remember in case they had comments they wanted to make. Thank you.

Okay, perfect. Anything else? Staff, any last minute things you want to report on that needs to be? All right, we'll wait until next week for those other reports. All right, we'll move right along to consent agenda. All consent agenda items are considered action items. Consent agenda items are considered to be routine and acted on in one motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless the mayor, council member, or member of the city The staff requests an item to be removed from the consent agenda for discussion. Items removed from the consent agenda will be placed on the regular agenda in a sequence determined by the city council. Any item on the consent agenda which contains written conditions of approval from the city EGLE staff, planning and zoning commission, or design review board shall be adopted as part of the city council's consent agenda approval of motions unless specifically stated otherwise. So this evening we have seven A through D I'll bring it to council first. Does anybody want something pulled? Mr. Mayor? Rob? 7B, B as in boy. OK. And D for a question. D. OK. Anybody else? All right. Does anybody on staff want something pulled? All right. I'll start off with a motion request for 7A through D with the exception of B, boy, and D, David.

Mr. Mayor? I make a motion that we approve items seven, a through D for the exception of B and D. Thank you.

I have a motion to have a second second. Okay. Any more discussion? Roll call please. Thank you. All right. We'll start off with seven B. All right, Mr. Mayor, just, uh, in keeping with,

consistency with what I've said about my support or lack thereof of the Eagle Regional Sports Park. I saw that this donation was coming through. I saw it was for $15,000. I saw that it was coming from one of our urban renewal board members, Macomber, who we just supported to waive our term limit to keep him on. And I was one of the people that supported that. But I see that he's donating $15,000 towards the sports park. My only concern with that is that with the sports park not having additional funding, the guaranteed, I'm still in the same position where I feel bad taking $15,000 from a constituent. Um, although it is intentioned for the sports park, it also says in the contract that it can be used for other parks or the capital projects if the sports park doesn't proceed. So in there lies a problem for me too, that it's, it's just too much of a gray area right now without funding guaranteed for the future phases of the park, the land use issues that I have with that park. And for that, I cannot support taking that money. Although I support Mr. McComber, I appreciate him. I just don't think that right now would be the appropriate thing for us to do is to take 15,000 when we need 27 to 30 million. I know it's just part, I know it's just a phase. I know it's for the dugout for the name on the dugout. I get all that. But in good conscience, when I'm voting no on everything else related right now, because I'm not seeing the funding, I can't, except the 15,000 from my seat.

So thank you. And for clarification, that is a donation and I don't know in the conditions and Tracy or Victor, if a donation, if there's some reason things fall apart for the sports park for some catastrophic reason, wouldn't we just give back those monies to the donor?

So, so the donation policy that the council adopted, it, it's very detailed about this stuff. So in it, it says like you fill out a form and you say, I want to give a truck or you want to give money. And then you say where you want it to go. And basically all of the caveat languages, we will do our best. And so we've earmarked this. The treasurer's got it in a line item for the athletic park right now. At the end of the day, there's always that caveat language that we could use it forever. But I think as good stewards, we know that we're going to leave it in that line item. as the pot builds, the gold pot, the leprechaun pot of money builds and that's what it would be for. I do not believe that there's anything in our existing policy. I can't remember anything that speaks to giving it back. I think as good stewards of public money that we would, I mean, to a degree, like if we get 10 years down the road and he goes, you remember when? And we pull the receipts and I mean, I think there's some common sense associated with the things we do even though we are, I am a bureaucrat. So, There's the language. The policy says we'll do our best to use it what you want it for. If not, it may be moved somewhere else. But we also... So that's kind of how it works. Not the best answer, but that's the answer I have.

And at that point, if that was the way it was written, I would, too, have concerns that I would not want somebody to donate some money to a specific thing and that it goes... I don't want it to get re... directed to some other funding mechanism. So if there could be some verbiage added or some legal stuff, maybe that, I don't know, Victor, is that some legal or, I mean, keep going Tracy on that, but yeah.

Actually, I'll just jump in here, Mr. Mayor and council. It's actually, and council member Gillis noted it's paragraph six. So if the city is unable to construct the sports park, the party donating has consented that the monies can be used for other park facilities.

Yeah, if they make a consent, they agree to that in their donation application.

Yes, but it's also in this agreement before you to approve right now. It's on paragraph six.

Does that help you at all, though, with that part of it? Mr. Mayor, I read that, and I concur with what the city attorney just said. I understand that. Okay, all right.

Mr. Mayor, the McCombers were aware of that, and they just wanted to help, but then, when the dugout would be constructed, their name would definitely be on there. It wouldn't preclude that from happening.

Okay, all right, well, appreciate the perspective and those comments on that. So was there anything else you wanted to add to that? Okay, I will call for a motion on 7B then for the amount of $15,000 to be donated The McCumber family has a monetary contribution of 15,000 for the regional athletic park. Naming rights for 10 years in the dugout located on the Eagle Regional Park. Second.

Are you still moved?

Was that a motion? Motion that we approve it. Motion and a second? Yeah. Okay, any more discussion? Let's do a roll call on that then.

Merrill? May? Aye. Kwame?

Aye. Gillis? Aye. Motion carries. All right, thank you. And then we'll move right on to 7D.

This is David. Mr. Mayor, just a question on this one. I didn't see any elevations in the packet. Are we supposed to see those at this point with this type of a thing on a consent agenda? Do we already have that stuff? I saw that there were conditions, some that are still in the works. I don't know if there's somebody that could answer the question to it, but from PNZ.

Mr. Mayor, members of the council, this is an item that you would not typically see the elevations at. You would see the elevations with the development agreement and or the PUD, and sometimes only with the development agreement and the PUD. This is the final plot, which is the conclusion of the process that only deals with the map aspect of the subdivision.

Okay, then, Mr. Mayor, just one follow-up. Um, I don't know if the chief can answer this, but one of the, the, uh, item numbers in there 37 talks about the trucks that are over there doing construction with their compression, their air breaking system. I actually had a constituent that reached out to me complaining about, um, the trucks up there and no enforcement going on with the trucks that are revving down and revving up and disturbing the neighborhoods that are up there off of beacon light. Is there any, While this project moves forward, is there any intent to have any kind of traffic enforcement up there? Do we know from the sheriff's office or from ISP commercial to deal with that issue since now we're receiving a complaint about it?

Good evening, Mr. Mayor and Councilman. Gillis Travis review police chief for the state of Eagle for the record. Um, we do traffic enforcement along beacon line. Um, and we received compression break complaints in the past. Uh, I believe the mayor and council is, has worked to put up additional signage. Um, and we, we do traffic enforcement out there. It's, it's part of our city that, that receives regular attention for that. Um, We haven't eradicated it, but we can continue. I can notify my supervisors that we need some more attention due to complaints.

Okay. That's all I'd ask for is just for the public to understand, especially if somebody's watching that reached out to me, that you're aware of it, you're dealing with it, and it's something that's on the radar. I appreciate it. Thank you.

All right. And I'll continue with an add-on to that. I believe you did have volunteers go out and do a traffic study on how many times their compression brakes were actually activated at Linder and Park on Beacon Line.

Is that not correct? Mr. Mayor, yes, that is correct. Thank you for reminding me. Sergeant Elliott coordinated with our volunteers, and we've done several traffic studies, internal traffic studies. It's not to the level that ACHD does, but simply sitting out there with a clicker counting cars, and it's very specific. what we want them to identify whether it's stop light stop sign violations compression breaks or speeding type issues but we have to limit the scope of it because well they're people and there's only so many things they can track at once so with the smoke we did have a lot of smoke and with the smoke and health concerns we we weren't putting our volunteers out but they have been back out in the community along the green belt not for traffic studies but certainly in the We'll pick that up. I'll talk to Sergeant Elliott tomorrow morning and find out what his plan is.

And if you could work with me to make sure that those constituents are not similar to the ones we've been working with. The chief and I went out to an HOA meeting actually and addressed a whole community on this stuff and the impacts that were associated with it. And I have reached out to ACHD and asked them for things like separating the white lines we've been asking for to keep an intersection clear and also what the probability and the opportunity for a temporary signal light to have green and red stagger the traffic and to help with that as well. It's just that's offset of the compression brake things. But ACHD is not able to acquire that. They don't have their own, so they have to purchase it. and for that temporary impact that's happening with Linder, in a couple of months the project will be done and it should mitigate the whole problem. It will not mitigate the trucks going through there. I have reached out to ACSD and asked them if we can have a capacity weight limitation to rigs on that because it is tearing up the shoulder a lot because they're only so wide. And so we've been doing a lot of, lay work, I guess, into it. And we will continue to do that. But so for those constituents, we could talk afterwards to see if they line up with the same people, because I can show you some of the correspondence we've had as well and make sure we're addressing them. If there's somebody different, we can address them with the same information we provided the other neighbors. So, okay. Thanks, Chief, on that. Yeah, Mary.

I just wanted to reiterate what you were just saying. This has been going on for a long time, and I know ITD's been involved, ACHD, we had extra signage put out there, the city's been involved, so unfortunately with the development and the building, and it'll be, you can see the light at the end of the tunnel, but right now everybody has to deal with it day to day, but there have been many things done. I think it's been about the last 10 years, so it's good to know, and I think that would be great to include if these are new residents, to make sure that they're, yeah, so that was a great idea. So, thank you.

Yeah, you got a follow-up?

Yes, Mr. Mayor and Councilman Gillis, just one more mechanism that the city does have in place is, as you saw in this packet, there was the exhibit that shows the heavy truck traffic that's going to be serving this development. With every final plat, we require that a traffic plan be submitted to the city for review, and with that comes the route of travel, how they will access the site, along with the contact information of the of the crew so that if we can associate any disturbances of these things with a specific development, we have the contact information and we can work along with our development compliance inspectors along with city of Eagle police to ensure that they are complying with those requirements a bit closer. Thank you.

Okay.

Mr. Mayor for a motion. Okay.

A motion that agenda item seven DFP dash two zero two six dash one zero final platform. Sintra subdivision, Todd Campbell, custom homes, uh, B. Approved and time forward.

Motion to have a second? Second. Any more discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Thank you. All right. Let's move right into our public hearings. All public hearing items are considered action items. Public testimony will be taken on these items listed in this section. Public hearings are legally noticed hearing required by state law. The public may provide formal testimony regarding the application of the issue before the city council. This testimony will become part of the hearing record for that application or matter. Public hearing testimony will be limited to three minutes for non-repetitive. And I usually add to that, if somebody has something they would like to continue with and somebody forgoes their three minutes so that person can complete a narrative that they've written down, that's totally admissible. So I'll grant that if that does happen. And just for your knowledge, if one person wants to speak on behalf of two or three people, that'd be all right. And is there any disclosure or ex parte or conflict of interest for any of these public hearings? All right. See, I'm going to open Public Hearing 8A, which is a CUP, Conditional Use Permit 2026-16. It's an industrial, custom and industrial limited. It's gunsmith equipment of Eagle Distribution, LLC, and K-Land, LLC. Welcome, and the floor is yours.

All right. My name is Michael Kahn. I'm the owner of Eagle Distribution. And we're just right down the street in the Parkinson new little condos that they built. And what we do is we're a firearms wholesale distribution company, along with some other various products, armor for law enforcement and stuff like that. And we're looking for a conditional use permit to bring in some equipment to be able to do a little bit of customization on the firearms. We use a product called Cerakote. So it's a spray on, you know, like onto a gun and, you know, turn a black gun camouflage or something like that. Gold, all sorts of different colors. And the equipment that we're gonna be using is, I've found the most silent air compressor that I could find on the market. It's supposed to be the noise level of like a office. So it's not the typical one where it's banging and going crazy all day. And these customizations aren't happening every day either. They'd be once a week, maybe twice a week, something like that. And they're not for very long. but that's really the main piece of equipment. There's an oven just to bake the product on there. So it gets all the qualities of the hardness and scratch resistant and chemical resistance and a paint booth. So nothing too wild, but we are here because the compressor has a little bit of a higher horsepower than what you would need without an improvement.

Okay, and that kiln, how big is that kiln? It's a standalone kind of?

It's literally a plug-in oven.

Okay, kind of like a safe?

Yeah.

Yeah, okay. All right, kind of that dimension. Okay. All right, anything for the, is that everything, Michael, at this point? Or you got more? Yes, sir. Okay, great. Is there any questions for the applicant at this time?

Mr. Mayor, just one quick question. You said that it's not going to be like an everyday thing. They have specific hours, and so do they make an appointment to come in and?

So we would be doing it for the dealers. So we wholesale to, like, gun stores. So if we happen to have a gun and they said, hey, I want to do a run of 15 pistols with this cool, you know, old school aircraft carrier style, you know, paint job on it, then we can do that for them. But the main business is really shipping and receiving. This is kind of a little secondary add-on that guys, yeah, it's nothing too crazy.

Okay. Thank you very much.

And then Michael, I want to emphasize right now, you didn't talk about it, but I want to let the public understand there's no ammo involved, there's no powder involved, there's no mechanisms to actually be able to discharge the weapon, though you're not storing Ammo as well.

We're not storing ammo. We will have ammo on site because we do testing with firearms. So we'll go out to like double tap range.

Yeah.

And you know, so we'll have a box of ammo there or two boxes and bring it out with us when we go shoot. Okay.

Yeah. But it's all within the limitations anyhow, but so it's not irrelevant to. Yeah.

And the ammo is completely separate from firearms. There's nothing that could set it off.

Yeah. Okay. No powders. No. Yeah. No black powder at all. It'd be cased ammo. Yeah. Okay. Perfect.

Any other questions at this point? Mr. Mayor, I'll follow up. Just to confirm, do you guys have a security system that's on site on the premises, just due to what you're dealing with?

Yeah, we have surveillance cameras, alarm systems, fire, everything's all central dispatch. We got security gates. We got, like, super thick tint on the windows for shatterproofing. I'm actually looking at a fog system that when someone opens a door, if they don't turn off the alarm, the room will literally fill with fog in, like, 12 seconds. where you can't even see, and it's completely, doesn't leave a residue or anything like that. Thank you.

All right, we'll have you probably back up for rebuttal if there's any need for that.

Question, can you go back to the slide on the Serco compressor? Compressor? Yeah. Does the manufacturer have any published decibel levels coming out of this thing? And I am assuming it's going to be located indoors.

Yeah, so they say the office is at 60 to 70 decimals, and that's what this compressor is rated at.

Okay. All right, so that's below cure protection requirement.

Oh, yeah, definitely. Thank you. And most any other compressors up in the 75 to 80 range.

All right, thank you. Thanks for putting the diagram up next to it for the decibels. That does help. Appreciate it. All right. If there's no other questions, I'll have you, if there's a need for rebuttal, I'll have you come back up. But at that point, I'll just turn it over to staff for a presentation. Sounds good. Thank you.

all right good evening mayor and council just give me one moment to pull up my presentation my name is haley durham with planning and zoning staff the application before you this evening is for a conditional use permit and the applicant is requesting approval to allow the industry custom and industry limited uses on the site. So as Mike stated, the site is located off of Parkinson and Dunyon. If you remember the Parkinson mixed use condos that have come through, you've seen the design review applications The building was recently constructed, so should be somewhat on the forefront of your mind. The applicant is not proposing any exterior modifications and very minimal interior modifications. And furthermore, they actually have an approved business license for the distribution use itself. So the primary use of the building Eagle distribution, LLC is flex space. So, uh, flex space is a permitted use in the mixed use zone. The building is approved for flex space. So as it stands today, Mr. Khan could, um, occupy that space as Eagle distribution, LLC and, and run his business as usual. It's permitted. Uh, the reason that we're here this evening is because he would also like to utilize those two pieces of equipment, the kiln, and the, um, the air compressor. So because city code defines industry custom and industry limited based on the type of equipment that's used, we are here this evening requesting approval of a conditional use permit. So as far as the parking goes, as I said, the exterior of the building, nothing is proposed to change. No requirements with parking are necessitated by this conditional use permit. So really the approval this evening is based on the use of this air compressor and the curing oven. I think I said kiln earlier, but it is a curing oven. So I think that is... all I have to share with you this evening. This did go before the Planning and Zoning Commission on July 20th, and they recommended approval with the site-specific conditions on page 10 of the findings. Other than that, I'd be happy to stand for any questions.

All right, thanks, Haley. Is there any questions at this point?

Yeah, Haley, just to confirm, I understand that the approval would be limited to this particular individual and his business.

Yes, Mr. Mayor, Councilman Kwame, that is correct. It would not run with the land. So if Mr. Kahn or Eagle Distribution left the facility and another gunsmith came in, they would be required to come through the same process to modify the conditional use permit.

Thank you. Any other questions for staff? All right, thanks. Let's go ahead and open the public testimony. And if you change your mind and you did not sign up for this item, you are welcome to at the end. Just come and state your name and address for the record, and we'll get you on that list. All right, nobody signed up. So again, if you want to testify on this, you can come up to the podium at this point. All right, seeing none, I'm going to close the public testimony portion of it. I'm going to bring it back. Is there anything else you wanted to add, Michael, to this in a rebuttal form? Anything that was different from what you presented? Okay, no need to add anything then. You're good to go. Okay, perfect. Well, then I'm going to bring it back to the council for consideration.

Mr. Mayor, for a motion.

Okay, go ahead.

I move we approve item 8A, CUP 2026-16, Industry Custom and Industry Limited Gunsmithing Equipment for Eagle Distribution, LLC, K-Land, LLC, to include site-specific conditions of approval on page 10 and the standard conditions listed on page 11.

Perfect. Thank you. Motion to have a second? Second. Any more discussion? Just for a comment, Mr. Mayor. Yep, go ahead.

I just want to say I think it's a pretty unique and cool a business to have here for EGLE, especially for all the gun people that are out there, and it offers something for our city that's unique, so I like it.

I'm sure you're going to get some customers, maybe from us as well. All right, I have the motion and the second. The discussions are over. Let's do all in favor. Aye. Aye. Thank you. Okay. The motion passes. Okay. We'll close that public testimony. I'm going to open the next one. Uh, eight B, which is RZDA dash two zero two five dash one three dash about D six. It's a modification and redevelopment agreement for legacy plan development. A red Butte LLC is, yeah, his applicant here.

I'm wondering the same thing. Um, if anybody here is here from our Dura, no, So it doesn't seem like the applicant sent a representative for this evening. Oh, here comes Dave Sterling as we speak.

Perfect timing.

I'll give you a chance to drop the backpack, but give you a chance to breathe. But we'll open the public testimony, have the applicant present when he's ready.

Sorry about that.

Can we just pause here?

Luckily, it's really simple. So for the record, David Sterling with Ardura representing Red Butte LLC, the owner of the property. So let's see if I can get the map here. So Snoqualmie Basin is this base over here, right here at the corner of Palmer and Broken Arrow. So this was pre-plotted in 2021, I believe. And then the final plot was recorded last year in 2025. And it's part of the overall legacy development agreement. So the development agreement covered all this property. And in Snoqualmie Basin, there's four lots that are commercial. And in the development agreement, nothing specifies what the setbacks are for commercial properties. And the underlying zoning is R2. And so now that this has been plotted and there's lots there that can be sold for commercial, people are asking what's the setbacks. And so when we looked at the development, we're like, oh, that's not in there. And so on here, this is the final plot showing those four lots. And on the pre-plot, this was shown on the pre-plot. So we showed four buildings with a conceptual parking lot. And so we just want to clean this up and actually define these setbacks. So all these buildings fit within the setbacks for the mixed use zoning. And so we're asking for the city to add a section to the development agreement that specifies those setbacks to match mixed use. The only change would be this building A would have to have a little notch in it. So it's 20 feet away from the right of way right here. So these are the setbacks that we're asking for, and it just matches the mixed use. The only difference is the minimum lot coverage instead of being 60% would be 50%. But those lots are really big. Parking lot takes up most of the lot anyway. So that's kind of it. I can answer any questions that you guys have. All right. Well, do you have any questions at this point for the applicant?

All right. We'll have you back up, Dave, for rebuttal. If there's a need, again, sit right next to Michael. All right, Daniel, we'll open for the staff portion.

Good evening, Mayor and members of the council. Daniel Miller, Planning and Zoning Administrator. I don't have a whole lot extra to add on to that. The application was made to modify the development agreement to establish the commercial setbacks. I've conferred with Ardura, the applicant's representative, about the setbacks proposed. As you see here on the screen, they are commensurate with What really is within our code is limited office, except for the maximum lot coverage is more restrictive than the 60%. So all that would really do would be to request the council to modify the DA to add a condition 3.4.37 to add the setbacks as shown on the screen here. And with that, staff would be happy to answer any questions.

All right, Daniel. Is there any questions for Daniel? All right, thanks, appreciate it. All right, let's open up the public testimony. And once again, if you're here and you change your mind to testify, you're welcome to do so. All right, I don't see anybody, but anybody would like to testify? Okay, I'm gonna close the public testimony portion of it. Is there any need for rebuttal? Dave, you've heard and done everything, so all right. I'm gonna bring it back to council for consideration and comments.

Mr. Mayor, I'll go ahead and make a motion then to approve Public Hearing 8B, RZDA-2025-13-MOD6, Modification of Development Agreement for Legacy Plan Development, Red Butte, LLC, to add condition of development 3.4.3.7 as stated and presented.

I think you have a motion to have a second? Second. Any more discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Thank you. Motion approved. Close that public testimony. That was all the public hearings we had for this evening. We'll move on to new business. I am a request for annexation reevaluation for A-2026-01-RZDA-2026-01-CPA-2026. dash zero one slash CUP dash two zero two six dash zero five slash PPUD dash two zero two six zero dash zero one slash PP dash two zero two six dash zero one. It's a wellspring subdivision and uh, we'll start off. Good evening.

Good evening Mr. Mayor and members of the council. Uh, this is a request for an annexation reevaluation following the meeting that the council had on July 28th, 2026. the applicant and staff were visiting about, and recapping that evening's hearing, the applicant was wanting to ask the council for reevaluation of the annexation, given four points of change, and those are listed in both the applicant's, they're noted on the agenda, they're noted on the applicant's letter to you, and they're noted on the staff memo. The request this evening, if you're interested in doing this annexation reevaluation, would be a motion from you to accept the request to do so and direct staff to schedule another public hearing for your consideration of those four items. If you have any questions, Mayor and Council, I'd be happy to answer them. Okay, thanks, Bill.

Is there any comments or questions for Bill? Nancy? Yes? Oh, sorry. Go ahead, Mary. Go ahead.

No, I'll just make a motion.

Go ahead. Mr. Mayor and Council, I looked at the items of which the applicant is looking for to ask for a reconsideration or a reevaluation on it. And it seems to me like everything that they're asking for is going to their regular density. They're going to want to give up some lots. They're looking at the two feet above the base flood elevation. They're asking for offering another six inches. They've got some ideas for the storage for, for the snow, and I can't remember the last one here.

I believe you got them all.

Yep. Yes. And so I think that with these new offers, I would say that I would like to see this be re-evaluated with this application.

Mr. Mayor? I am always in support of any time we can have an extended conversation with an applicant to extend the conversation, come up with a solution that's going to benefit all parties, so I'm supportive of this reevaluation and am happy to make a motion if we're ready.

Okay, because we could always have other comments in the discussion phase, so I'll entertain a motion then.

Okay, Mr. Mayor, I move we approve item 9A, request for annexation reevaluation for A2026-01 slash RZDA-2026-01 slash CPA-2026-01 CUP 2026-05 PPUD-2026-01 slash PP-2026-01 Wellspring subdivision, Rob R. Nash, and direct staff to bring this back at a future date. Not yet certain for another public hearing. A second.

Okay, I have a motion and a second. Any more discussions? All in favor, say aye. Aye. Aye. Thank you. All right, thanks, Bill. All right, let's move on to the other 9B, new business. It's Orville Jackson House, and... There's a letter of intent, terms, and who's gonna speak on this behalf outside of me? I think I'm just gonna present it, but. Elena can start off and make sure.

My access is denied.

Yeah.

That is me. Yes. Thank you, guys. Thank you. Mayor, members of council, I wanted to speak today just really quickly on the historical facade easement for the Jackson House. This term has been kind of thrown around, and I wanted to give you just a really quick overview of what a facade easement is, and maybe just a really brief rundown of historic preservation. So as Victor and I are working on this, A historical facade easement, I don't want you to think that I'm just arbitrarily pulling things out of the air to put on the Jackson House. These are actual things that come from the Department of the Secretary of the Interior's office. So these are federal stipulations, guidelines, standards that are used in historic preservation. I have... two or three law books in my office on historic preservation law procedure and how historical properties are supposed to be, uh, supposed to be held. So what, uh, what I proposed when we talked about how to put some deed restrictions on the Jackson house, we already have deed restrictions, which is cannot be torn down. It cannot be moved. but we had talked about the council and mayor talked about putting extra protections on it. So a facade easement is basically where the new owner of the house has an agreement with the city of Eagle that they would maintain the facade in a historical preservation manner. So what I'm bringing to you today is just a sampling of what I've come up with and what Victor has come up with. We met last Monday and we decided that while these are great, that they need to be fleshed out a little bit more. And so I have a working document that has like 10 pages Obviously, we're not doing 10 pages, but I just want to go over just a few things that would be on a facade easement going through a municipality, a city. This won't go through SHPO, which is the State Historical Preservation Idaho. It will go directly through us as a city. Now, SHPO would like a copy of this so that they can kind of keep track of the historical buildings throughout the state of Idaho. So, first of all, I just would like to say, just to start here, it's a legal document of deed, and it is put on the property in perpetuity. So once this is sold to someone from the URA to someone else to someone else to someone else, you can't remove it. It is in perpetuity. So a facade easement will stay with the house, not with the person, if that makes sense. owners cannot change, modify, paint protected architectural, cultural, or the structural integrity of the property. What that means is that there will end up being, well, myself, who will be kind of the, arbiter of this facade. Probably every six months I would go, do a checklist, and make sure that everybody is in compliance. That's where Victor and I still have to figure out the legalities of what would happen if they do break the facade easement. Let's see, partial and full demolition is forbidden. New construction is heavily regulated. The owners must maintain the structure in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior standards for the treatment of historic properties. Here's the thing. There's a big old book on it. So I am going to try to put it down in two layman's terms what the Secretary of the Interior, what they're looking for. must maintain roof, windows, exterior envelope must be watertight. In the event of a minor fire, storm, the owner must commit to rebuilding or repairing and they have to use historically accurate materials and methods. That's gonna be a little more expensive, but if a person wants to maintain a historic house, that's what we have to do. So legal terms. Again, like I'm saying, these are just very few. All of these different points are going to be really fleshed out and we are going to have even more specific points under everything you see here. City has granted legal access to the property on regular inspections to check its baseline condition. If the owner violates a condition, the easement holder has the right to legally compel the owner to undo the unapproved work, often forcing the owner to pay for the legal fees incurred. I looked up the active mortgage clause because I didn't know for sure. A lender must sign a legal agreement stating that the easement takes precedence over the mortgage so that whatever it says in the mortgage, our facade easement trumps that. Exterior features and interior features. I wanted to, because the city is doing this, this facade easement, we can tailor it. So I'm coming to you, I'm bringing you these things of what we can do and what we don't have to do, but this can be tailored because it's not being overseen by SHPO or federal government. So the windows, the door panes, masonry, repointing, the paint, the color palette, all of that has to be adhered to procedures and standards. But on the very last sentence, certain interior features can be placed within a facade easement. Let's say you want to keep the 100-year-old staircase of the Jackson House. You can do that. You can put certain millwork, certain staircases, certain architectural features of the inside with the facade easement, but you don't have to. This is kind of something that you can tailor-made. We have to adhere to the foundations of historic preservation, but there are little bits and pieces and fun stuff you can put in, you can take out, and that's gonna be up to council and mayor. of what you would like to have in. So, the next view shed, because we had talked about preserving the view shed. A view shed is as you drive by Eagle Road, you look over at the Jackson House, what you see is the view shed. It's an iconic view shed, people love driving by it and looking at it, and we want to protect it, preserve it. The easement, it prohibits planting dense tree lines, building high fences, erecting structures that block properties visible from specific roads, which would probably be Aikens and Eagle. And then it forbids cutting down specimen trees, unless that tree is documented as diseased or hazardous. So these are just, like I said, this is not an exhaustive list, but it covers the major areas that need to be addressed in this preservation effort. And just really quick, I'll ask Vic if he has anything to add before I stand for questions. Please, Vic, come on. I'll stand for any questions.

Thank you for the PowerPoint presentation. Is there any questions? I think Craig, you had something.

Elena, when I read the deed, I didn't recall seeing that there's a facade easement. Is there a facade easement currently?

No.

So this would be something put in place before the city would sell the property?

Correct.

Okay, got it. Thank you.

Any other comments or questions?

Mr. Mayor, thank you, Elena. We really appreciate you doing that, putting it in layman terms. User-friendly.

You're welcome. No problem.

Thank you.

I won't put you on the spot for timeline, but there's been quite a process with the Jackson House after we purchased it. So did you want to just do a recap for the public's familiarity to it?

Sure. Absolutely. So it was, okay, someone's got to help me here. It was bought in, it's been five years now? Is that five years? 2022. We're in 2026, so 2001 then. At that point in time, it was a prior administration. We were thinking about possibly an event center. There were a few people that were thinking about actually a museum that got circled around a little bit. which terrified me. The event center though, as that idea came to fruition and as that was studied more and more and more, we realized that the monies it would take for say even the ADA compliance and making sure there was parking and the event center was going to be so cost prohibitive for the city. So as the new administration came in, we thought of different ways that possibly we could utilize the Jackson House. And so we had a company called JUB come in and they did a giant study on how the Jackson House could be utilized, in what way. There were five different There were five different options. And the option that council and mayor approved was the selling of the Jackson House via RFP. RFP is request for proposal. And that from there we went from that request for proposal to possibly speaking with the URA in conjunction that we could make a partnership, have the URA, then take the Jackson House and they would do the request for proposal process for selling the jackson house i however will be going along with the ura and then with the new owner and probably till i retire out of here as well as i'll be with the jackson house so um we have currently come to this stage where we feel like the Jackson House is just going to be so cost prohibitive for the city that we definitely need to go ahead and move it along to a different owner that can still take care of it and can still work with us, me, for the historic preservation. then that's kind of where we are tonight is putting a facade easement so it can be historically preserved.

Mr. Mayor, thank you. Elena, we've had several discussions about some sort of commemoration for Orville and his service in World War I. Is that something that needs to be included in these conditions?

so um i was i was thinking about that and i know exactly what you're talking about we were talking about either a statue or a sign or an interpretive panel or there was even the pathway along the canal so all of those can be added as long as we don't interrupt the view shed that is our only thing is we just need to make sure where it where it is placed and where it is placed properly but memorials absolutely can be added to the jackson house thank you you're welcome any other comments or questions

All right, Elena, thank you for that. I'll open, Eric, is there anything you wanted to add on the maintenance side so the public would understand our participation? I know you're gonna be working with that, and there's gonna be some other details coming up with this in the future meeting, but we'll take the opportunity right now, and maybe Mark, if you want to say, okay. Go ahead, Eric, yeah.

Mayor and council, I guess we worked with the URA on kind of what the maintenance costs would look like. and what was asked of us was mow the grass keep it green kind of what we've been doing now what that would all entail so that got submitted over and being reviewed one of the things was the canal there's there's some water rights there's a canal lateral line that comes back behind the dollar store and kind of feeds through to a couple different properties we are working with other partners on that lateral line for them to take over that ownership I'm going to screw this up, but at Berlin Village, I think is how it's pronounced, they were interested in taking that over, so they took over the maintenance and all that to get that off of our hands. One of the challenges was in this conversation is that if Jackson House is sold to the URA and that back parcel is that we really wouldn't own any of that property, and so that canal agreement, because it doesn't water anything that the city owns or it's not public property, anymore that we wouldn't be able to basically own any part of that lateral line. So we wanted to make sure that was sewn up. Is that kind of all the maintenance questions?

I think so. And the water on, we'd be, I mean, the whole maintenance, grass watering, all that kind of stuff.

Yeah, we submitted numbers to mow the grass, I mean, kind of keep the facade that was there and keep it green. There was really not a lot of conversation of like tree replacement or any extensive landscaping stuff. Obviously, we'd be open to doing that for the URA. It would just be kind of on like a bid basis of, you know, what needs to be done there, so.

Okay, perfect. Is there any other detailed questions or comments? All right, Eric, thank you on that one. I know Mark Butler is the chair for Urban Renewal. He's here tonight, so you might as well speak. Yeah.

Mark Butler, 1675 East Bishop Way, chairman of the Eagle Urban Renewal Agency. Thank you, Mayor, members of the council. Representing the buyer or the seller, that's me. I only need like 40 or 50 minutes to go over some details.

You'll have to come back. I'm sorry. Hey.

That's good. Thank you. And then in a minute, you put up this other one. Why does it click on B?

Okay, I'll figure it out. So just to familiarize everybody, I'm sure you are.

This property that's addressed as 127 Eagle Road is the property that's encumbered with the deed restriction. That's where the house is. that was owned by sherry sharp and the city purchased that from sherry the one that's addressed is 97 aiken was owned by sherry sharp's daughter and that was purchased from her the one that's in the back is where the roadway is planned and i'll show you a concept plan for that actually it's a 98 completed plan that hiko has done with achd so i guess a lot of things i'll kind of jump around a little bit as far as the conditions go the agencies find with conditions in the deed. They have to be in the deed. That's where they're going to stand strong. All those conditions that Elena read, I can tell you that the agency is fully in support. We'll work with Victor. Todd will work with Victor and get all the language right. I think you need some language in there, though, that says something like on the facade improvements subject to city review so that you get the city, the city, the city in there in the conditions. And I'm sure Victor would be good at that. Um, I like the idea of the city being able to come over and review the, you know, inspect the outside. I don't like the idea and I don't hear that. I didn't hear that mentioned, but I couldn't support the city anytime they want coming inside. Um, I don't think that's appropriate for whoever owns it. It might end up being a home, might be a couple with some kids or whatever, uh, interior improvements as far as, uh, retention of interior. I understand the staircase. That's, that's something that should be retained. If we can write some language on that, I'm sure it'll be fine with the agency. The cabinets are going to go. The carpets are going to go. The ugly curtains are going to go. It's going to be repainted. So there's going to be stuff happening inside. There might be change if it does go to a group that wants to use it for more of an open type use other than residential. There will probably have to be some amendment to a couple of the walls to get to the bathroom and modify the bathroom. So I want it understood on the record that some interior improvements might happen, and I don't want to see any restrictions on the interior unless it's something like the staircase. But that's just me. I'm representing the agency, and I think I speak fairly secure on the agency's position also. So those are the two properties, and I'm going to try to pull up an exhibit that So understand this is just a concept. Nobody is proposing this. The only reason why I put this together is because in my work, when I evaluate value of a property, I do what's called the highest and best use scenario, figure out what's the best use on this according to the comp plan, the code, the utilities that are available and so forth. So in this and meeting with Elena, the line for the existing lot is right about here. Okay. the deed restriction restricts any use on that property. Because the deed restriction isn't for the house only, it's for the property. So we want to work with your legal staff to be able to modify that line if we have to, so that it's more open for some development. Leaving the view shed, we've walked this, myself, Elena, and the chairman of Urban Renewal. So we want some sort of an option in there to do a lot line adjustment. so that we can get a little bit more room for potential developments. In doing that, the concept also is that someday if this becomes a residence, they may want to build a garage in here. So I've calculated enough room to either take access off the site if this becomes an alley, or access off of Aiken. I did both because Aiken, as you know, someday may get vacated. It depends on what happens. So the concept there would be that if somebody built a separate garage, not connected. What's it called bill? Uh, one's not going to assess detached. Sorry. Thank you bill. If somebody built a detached garage, um, there needs to be conditions also in the deed or something that says the materials shall be like the materials of the house. Okay. Um, so that's, that's kind of an overview of the conditions and, uh, you've got a revised, Oh, last I spent a lot of time, running this back and forth past Steve Noyes, who used to be your pathway guru, and walked it with Elena, trying to determine how do we preserve an easement adjacent to the property that's owned by the Ballantine Ditch Company, so that you have control of an easement area, and it doesn't block the view shed, and there's an ability to put in there some statues or memorials or whatever to medics from past wars. So there needs to be a condition I think also in the deed or somewhere that says a minimum 14 foot wide easement shall be provided. We can't have this pathway immediately connect to Eagle Road because it slopes about five feet. You can't fit it in there. You'd need a bunch of fill. And so the best thing to do would have a parallel easement. And in talking with Steve Noyce, we were thinking an eight foot wide crushed gravel, you know, something that was not intrusive, not impactful. you put an asphalt pathway or concrete, it really takes away from the look. It's yucky. That's a technical planning term. So some sort of language, 14 foot wide easement in this area, and then it would connect to this roadway, this plan. So I think there's still a lot more language to be worked on with regard to conditions, but I want to jump into the LOI. Do you have any questions at this point about that? Okay. So the first letter of intent you got from the agency, has been modified a little bit. We've modified the conditions on the ditch maintenance, talking with Eric. Hopefully your council can work through that. Is my 40 minutes up? I've got another 30.

Speak faster. You're good.

So we want to buy it sooner than later. We got a developer who's ready to do a, request for proposal. Our contingency, the agency's contingency, would be we would put out a request for proposal for development with us, the agency, putting up this property and the property we own where the gas station was, 20,000 square feet, and start getting a request for proposals. We know we have one interested party. There may be others. We don't know. We do a 60-day turnaround. And, of course, any developments all subject to city review and approval. but if we have to wait until the city acquires the land next to Walgreens, that was looking like four or five months. Now it looks like it might be longer. We don't want to wait. We want to put out the request for proposal. We want to buy it. Now we're offering $1.6 million and I explained how we came up with that and we're taking out the condition that says conditioned upon the city getting that piece of land. We're ready to buy it as soon as all this language is written up. We do however, Because the council's kind of split. We would like an MOU or something that tells the agency that the council agrees to continue moving forward to get this road through. I don't know how you're going to deal with that. But it's kind of a deal killer if that road doesn't go in. And I think the last thing is I believe you paid $2.1 million total. So I took the appraisal that was done by IRR, I think they are, Williams, and so I ran some numbers. After doing this, I figured, well, the city's gonna keep about 40,000 square feet. That's about what they'll need for the road. Okay, so if you look at the remainder piece of property, it's worth somewhere between 1.5 and 1.7 million using the appraisal numbers and modifying it based upon the land area compared to what the land area was in his. So we think 1.6 is fair. If you look at your 40,000 square feet of property, if you sell this to us for 1.6, you're going to have about $5 million in the 40,000 and 40,000 square feet. That is a reasonable price for land in Eagle. That's about 23, $24 a square foot. A couple of years ago, Caleb group bought 40,000 square feet. The tri-city meets at $30 a square foot. The agency a couple years ago bought Sandy Smith's property at $50 a square foot, and I can give you a whole bunch of other comparable sales. So it won't be like you made a mistake financially, in my opinion, other than the fact that you had to maintain it for five years. So I'm trying as a buyer to sell to you the idea that we're good buyers, we'll agree to conditions, and we think $1.6 million is good, but we would like to have some sort of an MOU that the road's going to go in. And with that, I'll stand for questions.

All right, thanks for the presentation, Mark. Questions or comments for Mark?

Mr. Mayor, Mark, I'm looking at this LOI on number four on it where you're talking about this deed restriction and wanting to negotiate with the former owner to reduce the size of the portion of the subject property encumbered by the deed restrictions. Do you really think that that would happen?

Good question. I understand where your question is coming from. So let's say it doesn't happen, then any developer will have to be bound by this line and have to develop on the other side. We still want to buy it. But we want the option to work with Sherry to modify that line. She says she will only work with me and nobody else. But, you know, if she's listening, she knows she's a tough cookie. So it might not happen. But, again, if it doesn't happen, that's why it says we might do that. If it doesn't happen, we're still buyers.

what would the need be for that?

Pardon me?

What would the need be for that deed restriction on that?

Uh, the need would be, I'm sorry, interrupted.

Yeah. How much land on that deed restriction?

Uh, about what's a hundred by a hundred 10,000 square feet. It'd be about a 10,000 square foot different difference roughly. So to go from around 35,000 square feet to 25,000 square feet.

there wouldn't be anything else that they could do with that if it was encumbered.

No, that's correct. So if it was encumbered, then whoever buys the house will have more land. They can't take down the, what is back there that can't be removed? Old fireplace or something?

Yeah, but they can take away the broken down jacuzzi.

Okay.

So it's not a deal killer. It's just something, if we can work it out, that'd be good. Understand, too, Nancy, if we're able to work it out, a couple of those trees in the back are going to have to come out.

No.

No? Okay, well, there we go. So, yeah, that's something. If you decide as a council that you don't want to change that line, that needs to be.

Are you talking about the big sycamore trees in there?

No, not, no.

Okay.

I testified in court. Remember the red signs?

Mark, yeah.

All right. Any other comments or discussions? There's gonna be a lot more involved with this, but Mark, thank you for that urban renewal presentation side of it, because I think it's important there.

All right, anything else? Yeah, Mr. Mayor, just a comment on what was presented. For those that might worry that at this offer of 1.6 million for the property that's being proposed and that the housing close to the half acre that's being held out, which would be worth half a million, and the 1.6 that would be given to the city, that comes at 2.1 million, which is basically the value that the city paid for it five years ago, so the city is not losing any money on the sale. If it were to go through.

And I know we didn't highlight this map the way, everybody knows I like colors and overlays, Look at the dark part of the road. There's some lines there, but that's the part the city's maintaining. But you're purchasing everything to the east or the right side of that road, basically.

Mr. Mayor, members of the council, I'm glad you said basically. There's a little remnant piece over here that's going to be a drainage facility. And in talking with Bill and the city engineer, we felt that that piece would be best owned by the agency also because then the developer would have to maintain it. What's the city going to do with a little piece?

No, good, good clarification on that. All right. Appreciate that. All right. Well, this was a action item that if you guys, we discussed already, but the possibility action would be on the letter or the LOI terms between the urban rental agency and the city. regarding the property located at 127 South Eagle Road, commonly referred to as Orville Jackson House. Do we want to move forward with this? Have we got a motion for this?

Mr. Mayor, I got additional discussion before we do a motion.

Okay.

Go ahead and you can make your comment. Was there any... other rfps put out like was anybody else extended the same offer to purchase the property besides the urban renewal board or was this specifically only presented to them so that they're going to seek up somebody purchasing the property yeah we did not put an rfp out for this and bill do you want to elaborate on that at all or mark do you want to elaborate on that at all with the reasons behind mr mayor council member gillis i watch the meetings

I don't know how much I need to say that. And when I was hearing you say you wanted to sell it, I thought, well, the way that works is if you decide to sell it, you have to have a public hearing, and you have to put it out in the newspaper, and anybody and their brothers can come in and buy it. And I thought, I don't want anybody and their brothers coming in to buy this. I want control. Sorry. I want it to stay under some sort of government control. So the city didn't reach out to me. I reached out to the city and say, hey, I'd like to buy it. So if it goes to an agency, it goes under a different process. If you put it out for proposal, Victor can explain that process. I might also mention that another government agency had some land that they were gonna sell, and instead they approached the city, and that government agency, ITD, sold, how big is Gerber Park? Six acres? Sold five or six acres to the city for a dollar. So usually government agencies give other agencies a deal. Sorry, I had to squeeze that in there. Yeah, so if you put it out, it's just more complicated. Mr. Mayor, can I follow up?

Go ahead.

So my understanding is that with it having so many deed restrictions on it, with it being a historical landmark, it's going to have whatever restrictions it has. So it's not like somebody could just come in and level it and build condos anyway. There are restrictions on that property, are there not? Absolutely, there are restrictions. So what I'm saying is not just anybody can come in if URA doesn't do it and it's out there for other people. We had one person that showed up, I think, that I put in touch with you that was interested in potentially doing the property and then expressed concern because the property was going to be parceled out and the intention was to put this road through. So my question was just, has it really been put out to anybody else? It hasn't really. And I guess my concern would be, and to Mark's, you know, I mean, he's being very transparent, but I mean, there, there is a nexus to potential development. And the whole reason why URA is doing this is they've already, you know, there is a developer. And I know this is just an example we talked about at the last meeting that we had of everything going through with this old park place extension. And I know when I talked to Bill, one of the meetings, the grant that was proposed hadn't been, received yet or something with this extension. I know we still owe a million dollars on it. I've talked about it at length at different meetings. But I guess my concern is that if we're just gonna give it to URA as a 1.6, we're recouping the money that we lost or we potentially could lose the 2.1 that we bought it for however many years ago. And we're trying to mitigate some of that. They then deal with parceling it off and then they're working with the developer who's already interested in potentially developing this area along Old Park Place Everything's kind of contingent and it seems like it's all attached. There's a reason why URA wants to buy it and I'm just curious if there is anybody else out there that want to keep it as it is instead of parceling it out. And I feel like there's a big push to really get this through so that everybody can get their agenda established to push this road through that I'm against. Obviously there's a hiccup with Walgreens. I still don't support that road coming through the Walgreens parking lot. I've made that clear. And with everything kind of being attached to each other and with what Mark even said, that they're looking for an MOU or something to guarantee that they can get this through if they make the deal happen, I'm not comfortable with it. So that's where I stand on this issue.

Mayor, you could put the house and the lot up for sale with all the same conditions on it. You can protect the house if you don't want to sell it to us. Taking off my URA hat, putting on more of a citizen hat and a developer hat and a land buyer and seller hat, you could sell the house on that lot conditioned and do a public process and put it up for sale and then see what happens with the road. If for some reason council changes and you don't do the road, then you could sell the back piece to somebody at some point too. So we're not the only buyer.

Go ahead, Nancy.

Yeah, Mr. Mayor. Mark, don't go away. Don't go away. I think that the thing that's difficult for people to understand is the role of the URA and the reason why cities and URAs work together in facilitating blight properties or redevelopment properties or whatever it is with that tax and financing that's available for that. Any of us that's been here for a while knows how many years Sherry Sharp tried to sell that property and for a lot less money than what we're being offered at this point right now. And it went for year after year after year after year and there just were not any buyers that wanted to do that. We have a buyer that wants to buy it, that wants to take care of all of the financial issues that are all around it, all of the legal issues that roll around it, and be able to work with developers on the other side of it, that's what the URA does. And they're that separate entity from the city, so even though we're speaking to them as if we are involved with them, we're not. We are not involved in any way whatsoever with the URA, and that we need to make sure that their decisions and our decisions are separate decisions in how this works. I just appreciate you, Mark, all the work that you guys have done on this, and I know that we need to roll forward with it. We've heard from the public that so many of the people said we need to not get rid of it, but get rid of it to move on and to recoup our money, which is exactly what we bought it for, and be able to see something happen there that's going to increase the economic vitality of the city. So I appreciate all your efforts in that. Thanks.

I'm here if you have other questions.

All right.

But I think it's also important. That's why I asked Elena to give kind of a historical background on this because we've done some, some collaborative committees put together ad hoc committees and other things to try to get this thing going from the inception. But the inception of the, the original votes were for the two parcels to get purchased independently, and the second one was much for, and I was on council when we did this, my vote was for the second parcel so we could have the utilization of a roadway through there. So there was never any, miscommunications of the desires to have these two parcels purchased in collaboration with each other. So, and we've done, I think we've really done an extensive background and historical, this has been going on for a long time and I don't want the audience or the public to have any misperceptions that this is 11th hour. They were just trying to force something through. The hiccup with Walgreens is, one of those things we do have to address but um i feel very confident that the herb renewal eagles herb renewal agency is is if they didn't have a true desire to make this thing a benefit for the community as a whole they wouldn't have stepped forward and offered any of their funding for this so i really i really think this has been a well thought out plan we know that Nancy, I'm glad you brought up the historical part because yes, she did try to sell this for a number of years and there was no takers. So I'm really encouraged that Herb Renewal saw it, had a vision for what their purpose is with the community and stepped forward and is trying to make something an enhancement to the community. I appreciate the economic vitality portion because that's really what we're trying to do with the downtown as a whole. So this will play right into the whole vision as we produce this final project. But right now, this is basically for the LOI, and if you guys agree to that, let's go ahead and maybe get a motion on that.

Yeah, Mr. Mayor. Okay. I'll go ahead and make a motion that we approve new business number nine, item B, regarding the Orville Jackson House that the city accept the letter of intent as presented to us by the Eagle Urban Renewal Agency. to the city of Eagle regarding property located 127 South Eagle Road, commonly referred to as Orville Jackson House. OK, thank you.

I have the motion to have a second.

Second.

OK, any further discussion?

Discussion.

Nancy?

Although I am extremely excited about moving this project along with the Jackson home and that, I still have issues with the road going through. And so I've tried to figure out how can I separate my vote How do I separate my vote? So I'm for part of it and I'm not so for the other part of it and that I see a lot of issues that need to be taken care of but before I can support that. So I'm asking if maybe the council would consider amending the vote to include the sale of the property to the URA for the amount of which they're asking for and withhold the information on the MOU for the road as a separate vote. Can we vote on separate, on the one and the other? Because I will abstain from the second one that I would like to vote for this first part. Does that make sense?

Yeah, it makes sense, but I want to make sure, legal, is that?

Can I do that?

Can that be done, addressed in that format?

Mayor and council members, again, this is just a letter of intent. and you can however you would like to vote to change any of these terms it's not a binding contract you can always send it back to to the urban renewal thereafter and with an explanation of this is what we wanted and since i have the mic if so if the motion maker would also think about adding allowing me to add the facade easement language into this agreement, too, if it does get sent back or presented back to Urban Renewal.

Mr. Mayor, I think that with Mark's comment that this is important to the URA to know that the future connection is going to go through, that will come back to the council for further discussion. So at that point, you would certainly have input there. So I don't see any real problem or downside to keeping the language as is. He had said that was a deal breaker, I think. As the mayor said, this has been going on for years. It didn't just start. This isn't a spur of the moment thing. The ERA has been a great partner, not just with this project, but several in the city, and has been a great benefit. So I am all in favor of voting to approve this letter of intent as it stands.

Okay. Any other comments or questions?

I'll make a comment. My concern is still the same that the URA's intention to buy it is for the purpose of knowing that that road's going to go through and knowing it's going to be parceled off and that there's a developer already interested. And I feel like we always are concerned about density in the city. We hammer down on developers for density in residential areas and they're knocking houses off of their projects and adding open space and parks and water features and stuff like that, but yet for some reason for the downtown area, we're completely content with packing stuff in. And my concern is how that back road is gonna get put through and what's gonna get developed on it and it being contingent upon this sale the way it stands, I cannot support it.

Okay, well I appreciate those comments. I'm gonna go ahead and call for the question then. We have a motion and a second. So let's do a roll call. Oh, you got some further? Mr. Mayor, I will amend. Sorry, I got ahead of myself. Yeah, let's go ahead and amend.

I'll amend my motion to add the clause for a facade easement as part of this LOI. Okay.

Second concurs. Okay.

All right. So the motion with the new amendment and the second concurring. Now I'll call for the question. Let's do a roll call, please.

Kwame? Okay. Aye. May? Aye. Meryl?

Abstain.

Gillis?

Nay. Abstain. I'll have to.

Motion passes.

Yeah, because of the abstainment. Okay. All right. We're going to move on to a 9C. It's an action item again. It's ordinance number 975. It's a rezone ordinance, Eagle Marketplace. Andrew, who's going to do that? Daniel? Sorry. Or Bill's could do it. Okay, go ahead. Or Daniel's could do it. Where's the baton?

I think, yeah, just thinking about stuff here. Mr. Mayor, members of the council, Daniel Miller, planning and zoning administrator. This item came before you as a development agreement modification for the, let me open it up here on a map, I suppose. But, uh, It is the ordinance to rezone a portion of the property for the Habit Burger, which is what came before you for a public hearing recently, and a portion of that site is being rezoned from C1 to C2, and this is just the ordinance that would solidify that rezone. So with counsel's motion and waving of the three readings, I just ask that you make a motion on that and move forward with it.

All right, and the clarification for the C1DA is a neighborhood business versus the C2DA, which is general business. So just for the public's knowledge on that. Okay, first of all, let's go ahead. Is that all you had for us?

That's all I have unless you have any questions for me.

All right, is there any questions for Daniel? I'll ask for a waiving of the three readings first, please, for the ordinance. Go ahead, Mary.

Go ahead.

Go ahead for 975. Mr. Mayor, I move pursuant to Idaho Code Section 50-902 that the rule requiring ordinances to be read on three different days with one reading to be in full be dispensed with and that ordinance number 975 be considered after being read once by title only.

Okay, I have a motion for the waiving. Do I have a second? Second. Any more discussion? Roll call, please.

May? Aye. Merrill? Aye. Gillis?

Aye. Quine? Aye. Motion carries. Thank you. Will you continue with the ordinance 975?

Okay, Mr. Mayor, I move that ordinance number 975 be adopted. ordinance number 975, rezone ordinance, Eagle Marketplace, an ordinance changing the zoning classification of a portion of the property from C-1-DA, neighborhood business district, with a development agreement, to C-2-DA, general business district, with a development agreement, and amending the zoning map of the city to reflect said change, providing a severability clause, and providing an effective date. The 1.40 acre site is located on the north side of East Chinden Boulevard, approximately 400 feet East of South Eagle road on a portion of parcel number S 0 5 2 1 3 3 6 4 0 0. Thank you.

You have a motion to have a second second. Okay. Any more discussion? Roll call please.

Okay. Aye.

Aye.

Merrill Gillis.

Aye. Thank you. All right, let's move on to nine D David. It's a cost-share agreement between the City of Eagle and Ada County Highway District. Bill, would you take that one too?

Good evening again, Mr. Mayor and members of the Council. This item is a cost-share agreement between the City and ACHD for the landscaping improvements that are going to be constructed with the Linder Road project. The City and ACHD have been working on this together for several years now, and this is a cost reduction from where it started. The original design was about $2.5 million, and in this last year with the budget... with the budget and that amount was subsequently reduced through an initial design element changes and down to about 1.5 million or thereabouts. And then when we finished the city's budget this last month or so, the amount for the project was capped at $1 million. So our staff and ACHD staff went back and forth along with Mr. Bayer to redesign it to fit within that budget number and the redesign along with the credit provided by ACHD that you can see on the screen, provided a total cost to the city at $713,962.50. And so that's significantly below the $1 million target that we were trying to stay below, which I think is a fantastic result of everybody's efforts. With that, Mayor and Council, I would stand for questions. And if there are none, I would ask for your support of this cost share agreement with ACHD.

All right. Any comments or questions for Bill on that? Nancy?

Mr. Mayor, Council Member Merrill, that's a fancy name for soil that you can put plants in and then that will grow in. When you put a road out, you have road mix. You X that out and then you put this bioretention soil in there and that provides for a better base for the plants to grow.

Mr. Mayor, I just wanted to call out and say kudos for bringing that down that that's quite a decrease from 2.1. So good job to you and the team.

and of course Bill and I worked pretty hard on this to get the cost down, but I think the initial thought was back in the day to enhance it to kind of the Hill Road model a little bit, and remember too in the future if there is other funding available, we can always ask ACC to collaborate with us and enhance some of the vegetation, so it's not like one and done type thing, Yeah, that's a significant savings and it's imperative we did that with the budget we had this year. And yeah, I'm very proud that the whole team worked really hard to get this down because it's a significant reduction. And it's not just, you're gonna see rocks and a couple of twigs out there. It's gonna be still a beautiful boulevard-type setting. So with that, if there's no other questions, I call the motion. I'll call for a motion.

Mr. Mayor? I move we approve item 9D, cost share agreement between the City of Eagle and Ada County Highway District. The city's contribution is not to exceed $713,962.50. Thank you. I have a motion and a second.

Any more discussion? Roll call, please, on that one.

Kwame? Aye. May? Aye. Merrill? Aye. Gillis?

Aye. Motion carries. Thank you. Let's move on to 9E. Discussion regarding, excuse me, potentially supporting Ada County creation of emergency abatement district to address the rat issue countywide. We will have, we've had numerous communications with Our citizens as well, if you'll recall, we kind of jumped on this right away when the citizens of Eagle were saying that there was some kind of rodent issue going on in certain areas of the community. So we, um, uh, provided and facilitated an open, um, forum for the public to come and discuss this, have some expertise, uh, members come and discuss, um, the rat issue within the city of Eagle. And, um, I put out a letter on June 3rd of this year to Ada County commissioners, um, telling, um, basically supporting the fact that we do see a need for the, the County. I understand they've received, um, from, um, Health and Human Services, I think, is that? Thank you, Central District Health. I knew that was coming out right. Yeah, but for $250,000 to work on the initial eradication of the rats, and they will be having a Ada County meeting unfortunately it's on the very same night that we are having our, uh, Eagle hot, our Boise Hawks game in the, for the city of Eagle. And that's been planned on the books for quite a while. So this one came up afterwards and, um, We'll see if we have the opportunity for some kind of representation there, but we've already sent letters of support and we've had numerous conversations with them. It's unfortunate that our timing schedule conflicts with what they've come up for a meeting, but there will be a countywide discussion on these things and they already know our position from the city, but they were asking for either financial contributions or labor contributions. And I've spoken with our Public Works Director, Eric Ziegenfuss, about the potential for, we'll see what this plays out, if there's any need for some labor involvement, but at this time, we don't financially have any ability to that, and I'm also, they've got quarter million dollars to put towards this already, so I wanna see where that ends up and how effective that is with that portion of it, and then we'll come back and do a reassessment after that gets brought up, but at this time, I told them unfortunately, we really do not have any discretionary funds to put out to something like this, and I really think it's, The support part of it from the city is valid, but as far as financial contributions, I really don't think that we're able to contribute on that part outside of what we've already done over the last year with trying to promote education to the public. So I'll open it up for you guys to have a discussion and questions, and we'll go from there.

Mr. Mayor, I agree. I think it's premature to commit funding or staffing, especially with the... the budget already having been discussed and approved. I would like to, and this has come up several times and I know it came up during the legislative discussions about it, but possibly expanding their existing pest abatement levies and responsibilities to address the rats through that. They've got that divided up into three different agencies with the general fund and then the two levies. It just seems like that would probably be maybe a very uncomplicated way to address this. But I do agree that we should be at the table. I haven't heard, if there are many other commitments or any other cities, what they have come up with, but it's a little premature without a scope. But that would be something that I think maybe could come to fruition. Great.

Nancy? Yeah, I can agree with Mary, too.

Sorry, sorry. Okay, I do agree that we need to do something here. I will tell you from a personal, from a personal experience that one rat can kill an egg farm of 500,000 chickens and three million dollars with one chewed line of electricity. And we've seen it happen. I know the damage that they can do besides being the pests that they are in other areas. So I'm kind of, yeah, I kind of am after the rats, I guess I would say. But I do think that this is maybe a little premature in our action item. And I think that we should go to the county. If you want me to split off and miss the ball game, go to the county. I'll be happy to represent the city and listen to what they have to say. I think we've got some good information coming in from Mr. Miles, who Mary said was a development services for Meridian, and he offers some opportunities and some advantages there for expanding the abatement districts. So I think that there will be a good lively discussion, and I think that we should have somebody there, and I would volunteer to do that, Mayor, but I would ask that we continue this action item. We don't make an action tonight on this until we hear back from the county.

And I'm totally comfortable with that. But I do appreciate you with that. It's just with a conflict, like I said, we had scheduled this with the Boise Hawks every year. So we really can't. And so if somebody wants to go and represent us on behalf of that, let them know we've had support letters and we'll provide any additional information to assist you. I think, thank you for offering your services for that. And we can move forward with that. But if you'd like to have this table until after that, that's probably the motion that I'd like to hear from.

Do you have something? No, I concur with everything you and the mayor said.

Okay, Mr. Mayor, I move that we... We continue the action item E, the discussion regarding the potentially supporting Ada County creating an emergency abatement district to address the RAT issues countywide until our next regularly scheduled council meeting.

Second. I have a motion and a second. Any more discussion?

Yeah, Mr. Mayor, just a comment. I plan on going to that meeting of the county commissioners on September 2nd. I agree that we don't need to take an action right now because I think that meeting will be telling on what we can or can't do in terms of supporting what goes on.

Okay, so if both of you represent, that'll be fine. I'll notify them tomorrow, Ada County Commissioner's Office, and let them know we will have representation from the City of Eagle there. That works out great. I just did not want to force anybody to miss something because it's a fun activity for the City of Eagle. It's an annual thing, so.

I will miss you throwing out the ball, though.

Oh, you'll get it on video, don't worry. Art's gonna make sure of that. Thank you. All right, so we had the motion and the second. If there's no more discussion, all in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Thank you. All right, we got one more thing on 9F. It's gonna be a prime guard coatings roof repair agreement for $84,000. And Eric, you wanna talk about that real quick? the details of a warranty or whatever?

Mayor and Council, this shouldn't be too big of a surprise. We talked about this in the budget workshop. We checked references. We've reached out to the company. They've replied with everything here and they actually lowered the bid. The first initial one was $88,000 and we went down to $84,000. The agreement's gone through, Victor. The warranty has not changed of the 15-year I was there and we're just needing kind of your final blessing on this to move forward. What happens if it's approved here tonight is that we need to give him a deposit so that way you can order the material. And if it is approved tonight, the nice thing is that this will all be done before the weather starts to turn. We're looking at completion probably by the end of September. So that'll be great. Any other questions I can answer while I'm here?

Any comments or questions for Eric? All right. Thanks, Eric. And we'll entertain a motion for this then.

Mr. Mayor, I make a motion that we approve the Prime Guard Coding Roof Repair Agreement and not to exceed $84,000 as a budgeted item.

I think you have a motion to have a second. Second. Any more discussion? Roll call, please.

Merrill? Aye. May? Aye. Gillis? Aye. Kwame? Aye. Motion carries.

Thank you. All right. Next, the executive session need a motion to go into executive session with the letters attached.

Mr. Mr. Mayor, I'll make a motion in accordance with code 74 dash two Oh six. We go into executive session to discuss action, items to acquire an interest in real property which is not owned by the public agency and also to communicate with legal counsel for the public agency to discuss the legal ramifications of and legal options for pending litigation or controversies not yet being litigated but immediately likely to be litigated. The mere presence of legal counsel at an executive session does not satisfy this requirement.

All right, thank you. I have a motion to have a second. Second. Any more discussion? Roll call, please.

Kwame. Aye.

May.

Aye. Merrill. Aye. Gillis. Aye. Marcia Perez.

Thanks. We'll be back after executive session.

Did they do it? Did Trump do that?

I have.

They did? Oh, OK. You're safe. All right. Let's get back in there. Yeah.

All right, we're coming out of executive session. Do we have any motions from executive session?

No.

All right, seeing none, we're going to move on to the last item, and I need a motion to adjourn.

Mr. Mayor, I move we adjourn.

Okay, I have a motion to add a second. Second. Any more discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Thank you, meeting adjourned.