City Council - Regular Meeting

Recording in progress.

Yeah, that works. I think we don't have any batteries. Turn this on. Yeah, just sort of now.

Okay. 17th. If you could lead us in the pledge. Okay. Great. I don't think Colin's going to be here.

I saw Bill earlier.

Bill should probably be here. I know Dave won't be.

Colin's not coming?

I thought he told me he was going to be out of town. But I remember right. I thought he... I may... Maybe I'm thinking wrong, but Well, if I read this right, I don't understand. Is that right? We're, our budget is, where'd it go?

Total, that's total.

It's down $23 million. What? That's cheap. $23 million? $23 million it's down from last year?

Yeah. But we have to amend last year's budget still. And it's going to drop quite a bit. Because remember, we had all of the fire and ambulance services. We need to pull some of that back out because we didn't end up so the number is going to be smaller smaller okay yes it's going to come down um but i haven't went through the the final amendment process but yeah it's going to come down i mean substantially down well i mean if you think of that 10 million dollars down maybe because you think of that fund that funds you um because you're you're doing all of the expenses for fire district ambulance district and city fire combined and so that's all in there you've got wild lands in there it's a pretty big fund you've got the fire district in there it's a couple million bucks we did have some budget that has to stay in there because we we had to do a And so, so I got to go through that whole process. That's my next fun budget process. Um, and then you do have a few, we're trying to think what else could be major in there. There might be a few super big sewer projects that didn't quite happen. It could come a little bit lower. There's a big budget though. Like the 118 is huge. And it's bigger than what you passed because we increased the budget. Oh, and then another thing related to major, major. Oh, yeah. Hey, did you pay?

I did pay. How much was it?

It was $4. Me and my husband both went, so it was $8. And I was like, if that wasn't worth $8.

It's a little high. I think he does have some.

I mean, some of it's pretty interactive. But having the guy follow me around, it was like he was right there with us. It doesn't give you a lot of latitude to want to stay or feel like you can stay and do the things. So I would maybe encourage not having somebody write with somebody. Is that just that maybe they were trying to get us through fast because we came about 3.20, but I don't know.

Let's just get an Xbox and be like, I'll be in the corner until you tell me your question.

I don't know.

I just, you know what I mean? I was like, I don't know. It was good to have that, but at the same time, like it may be a little bit.

Yeah. Anyways, that's just an experience thing.

Yeah.

It was good though, but.

Once we get started something that you guys can kind of think about. I am going to just ask the city council right before we start kind of like high level if there's specific things that you guys want to make sure that we address specifically and then. If i'm already addressing them in the paperwork i'll say okay we're going to cover that.

things that we're not addressing i'm just going to want to know that we can try to.

yeah so I can't cover all. 100 and whatever pages.

I was trying to figure out how you're going to cover 400 pages.

136 pages in two hours.

What's that? I can't even remember how big the budget was.

Are we supposed to go get dinner now or at 5?

No, they're going to bring it at like 5, 5.15.

I was confused because we got two emails.

At least that's what they asked me, and I said, well, why don't we dig in for a little while, and then we'll take a break.

Okay, that's good.

We got plenty of time to take a break, I think.

Where did my stuff go?

It was surprising to me the differences in city governments and how, you know, some of their priorities, some of their... Oh, like from AIC? Yeah. Yeah.

We are such a much bigger city.

Hello, dear friends. How are you? Good. Nice to see you. Nice to see you.

Ready for a marathon tonight? What's that? You ready for a marathon tonight? We're ready.

We're ready to go.

I've been running solid since we got back.

Matt's only going to take three minutes.

By law, we have to look at every account on 136 full pages. And that's the right way to do it.

On the treasury report? No, he's gone. It's on the treasury report.

I think.

I think.

I can't remember which one it was.

I better make sure they know that.

You mean on the.

Matt? On the treasury report, there was one that was like they had spent like 1,000% of the time.

it's a small part of construction 1984 yeah so what I have to do there well it's possible because basically there was well no there well there was no budget so we have five thousand budget and we did the pickleball we were supposed to do it last year this fiscal year and so we that's a budget yeah we got to do it it says it's like fifteen hundred percent over yeah it's like nineteen

the timing right you're always like we have the best intentions but yeah well it's just i was just looking at that i was like oh that's yeah it was high there's usually always an explanation yeah i'm not usually worried i guess in case yeah and that one yeah you guys will address that and he's got to come back and finish it still too so i think so

I'm going to go. Colin's online. He says he's waiting for a code to get on.

Hey, Colin, can you hear us? You can accept the invite now.

Because I think it's just the four of you. I can hear you now. OK. Can you hear me? Yeah.

Where you at, Colin? Colin, can you hear me?

Yeah, I can hear you.

Where are you at?

I'm over here in Star Valley. Oh, good work. I'm in charge of this.

You're cutting out Colin. We must not have very good internet in Starville. Yeah.

Okay, I just texted Brianna. Do you guys want to start?

What do you guys want to do? Well, yeah, probably.

I'm good just to go. That way we don't run up against the clock. I've got a feeling we might.

Okay.

Brianna going to be here today? I don't know.

She's responding right now. I'll tell you what she says.

Dave's out of town. Oh, he is? Yeah. Calling, so... Colin, we've barely got a corn.

So she said she'll be here in a few minutes. She's stuck in the traffic.

That main street is going to be pretty backed up.

She rode the bike.

They have it on one lane.

Do they have it on one lane?

Same.

So do you hear me better now?

That's much better.

Oh, good.

Yeah, should we begin? Yeah, I'm good to start. Okay. Well, let's, uh, let's begin the city council meeting and turn the time over to Matt.

Okay.

To work us through it.

Yeah. So, um, obviously there's lots of documents if you want to dive into details and, and I can pull up any budget. discussion funds areas whatever we want online and so um so before we jump in a couple things um number number one i just want you guys to just throw out if there's like a certain topic related to budget that you're like, let's make sure we talk about this. Just throw it out there. I have discussed police station options. So we'll hit that. Make sure we hit that at some point. And then I have tried to add a little bit for utilities, capacity fees, those kind of things. We'll hit that section. I don't think I have necessarily anything specific about the police building in this packet. But we can pull up. some information and talk through that. Anything else that people want to make sure that we have? Or do we just dive in?

It looks to me like we're going to hit the things that...

Okay. All right. So this first page, the reason why I have that on there is just kind of gives you a roadmap on what the process is that's left in the budget. Oh, she what?

She says the food's ready.

Oh, we're eating right now? So, should we just go eat? Do you want to go for a little while? Let's do the first page and then we'll... A couple pages, okay.

Actually, page one and... What is it? Page one and two, and then the details, right?

Yeah, maybe I'll go through that real quick. So the only reason why I show this front page is you can see that we're here to June 17th. Really, this whole process will take through September 2nd. One thing that Councilmember Erickson and Tijan were talking about earlier was, is that high budget for 2026 correct? And right now it is, but we'll see some changes when we come back to you with the amended budget that will actually bring those numbers down. and then of course there's several public hearings that still need to happen including the utility rates this actual public hearing on July 15th for the budget and then there'll be another public hearing for the amended budget and really that should be it so So flip it over on the highlights total budget as Proposed and keep in mind that this is just as proposed and we'll show you how we kind of got here You guys really have the power and authority to recommend changes that number can change But it but we have to know what that is today So that I can advertise it in the newspaper for a public hearing or at least hopefully within a week so so you can see um operating budget we're at about 43 million and that actually came down a little bit and some of the reasons for that like we some of the transition with the fire affected some of those numbers is probably the biggest thing and then cost came out before yes where you have a total budget 95 million yeah down 23 million yes uh will will the

Will the public know why it reduced $23 million? Is there enough information for them to recognize the fact, one, to recognize it, that you're down $23 million, and the reason why?

if they really dug in yes but as they we go through the budget amendment process that will add clarity because we're gonna reduce that 23 million even down farther but some some of the big reasons you had a five million dollar amount for that ice rink we had to add this year and so even though it was a donation it still has to show up in your budget number for $5.2 million or whatever it was. And then another big reason is just the changes with the fire department because we used to have all their budgets. Oh, yeah.

Makes sense.

Okay. So operating budget, about $43 million. COLA is in there of 2.73%. We still have a fairly large increase on health insurance of 22.5% in there. we did get uh our report this month was that that trended down over the last month and as we talked with the agent we're just like we're going to push it clear to september to try to re-bid because every month that we can trend down the more room we have to negotiate and so yeah i mean my understanding is is that there's

there's been some pretty heavy health expenses in the city. And some of those are going, kind of going away.

Correct.

To some extent. So, I mean, a 22.5% increase, that's, we're certainly gonna shop that, right?

Yeah, yeah, so we can put it out to bid.

So we can, because that's huge.

Yeah, and now you're- Because of the fire department though, right?

Well, that didn't help us because your group size went down. And I mean, they're generally healthy. I mean, I can't say they've always been healthy. I mean, they have their share of claims as well. But those are a couple of things that we'll look at. And as we get closer, our agent can kind of give us an idea of whether it's worth shopping or not. But right now, yes, in our initial conversations, it's, hey, you got to come down a lot, Select Health, or else we probably will shop it. OK, so general fund is about $20 million, just over $20 million. It accounts for about 21% of the total budget. We put $80,000 in the contingency. And in order to balance the general fund, we had to show a carryover of $735,000. So basically, that's $735,000 that you have to dip further into reserve just to balance that budget, which puts us at just under 21% in reserve. And our policy has been to try to keep it between 25 and 33.

So how does the $80,000 compare to other years that requires contingency?

it's pretty close um some years will be like more like 150 originally we wanted to try to get it to a hundred thousand uh but we lowered it just a little bit as we we cut some things out But the other thing that we've done in the past that's kind of a big deal is if we can, for some reason, and I could not get this on Percy's website, but if we can figure out, like, if Percy, for example, says, hey, we're not going to raise our rates, we're going to defer it another year, or if the health insurance comes back at 16 in the past what i've done is i've went in and i've actually done a budget adjustment to reduce people's spending budget and then increase contingency and so so i'm hopeful that that will happen again so um so this increase in health is an estimate totally an estimate that's yeah it's an estimate but it's a pretty i mean it's a pretty analyzed estimate based on what we have in savings what we're setting aside looking at a fairly large increase not only for the city but also for the employee side of things now the employer covers 86 of the cost So in order to keep that ratio where the employee covers 14%, you actually have to have a bigger increase on the employee side than the employer side. And we'll go through all of that as we get closer so that you guys are aware where we're at. okay and then the I want to talk a little bit about property tax I would say if there was actually one like positive growth area on the revenue side property tax actually came back pretty good because new construction came back much stronger than prior years And I would anticipate new construction will be pretty strong for several years going forward as well. And so we had a total projected increase in property tax of about 5%. Remember, by state statute, you can increase it by 3%. So the difference, that 2% difference, is because of new construction and annexation. And so that was a positive. One negative, which is in there, is your sales tax was super flat. I'm projecting a 1.9% increase. which is, what was it, $60,000 to $80,000 somewhere in that ballpark. So it's not going to help us much. And then as you go into the next section, I can't remember where I talked about it. Yeah, I think it's right here. So any more questions on general fund? Can I jump into streets for a second? So streets has actually a tremendous amount of projects in this budget. It's about $22.5 million. But one thing we are going to experience is about a 26% decrease in what fuel tax next year, according to the estimates from the state, which is like, I think it was almost $900,000 reduction.

Is that due to legislation? They've cut the fuel tax or is it, or is it, uh, there's less trucks on the road?

What's no, I think it's, I think it's just due to, um, My understanding is, so they were giving us some extra money the last few years, and I think it was coming out of their general fund, if I remember right. And so because of their budget cutbacks, they've reduced what they're going to send. And so I think we're really honestly probably just getting our typical gas or fuel tax amount with none of that extra money so what was a few years ago is what you're saying it was comparable to what it was a few years ago then that's what you're saying yeah before they started doing that extra amount and i and i have a projection sheet if anybody wants to go through it in detail that aic sends out and shows it by the quarter and so you can see you know where that reduction kind of comes in and it's it's across the board You can talk to Madison County. You can talk to any entity. We're all seeing huge reductions. And I know the state, you know, it was quite a struggle for them to balance their budget as well.

Is there any way of knowing whether they're robbing from Peter to pay Paul? I mean, is all this taken from us to construct these major projects in Boise Valley? Is there any way to know if that's the case?

Yeah, I mean, I'm sure you could dig in and probably determine that. I've not done that to that level.

It'd be something to talk to our legislators about if we see that that's happening.

Yeah, and it would be a good question for them, right? They may know exactly why.

That's a huge decrease. That hurts.

Yeah, it definitely hurts. Okay, and then I wanted to add this year in that section, like, hey, where's this $22.5 million coming from, right? Well, about $6 million of it is from carryover and streets. We have a very healthy carryover right now. You'll see later, as I show you forecasted carryover, that they are essentially spending almost all their carryover. And then you have federal grants. We've got about $5.5 million in there. Urban renewal has over $5 million in there. And then franchise and right-of-way charges are about $1.7 million. So those are kind of your core revenues that are paying for that. Major street construction projects, you can see there. We do have a fairly large number, really, on LIDs. And so 4.6 million in the budget to finish out LID 55, which is the one that's going to start this summer. And then the new one includes Trejo Street, 4th West, 5th South, and 1st North. And, you know, that could change, right, between now and the time that you do those OIDs. But we're going to budget that way, at least recommend that at this point if we're going to include those streets. And those were the streets that were included in that five-year plan that Keith presented, I think, two meetings ago.

How does that compare to last year?

It's a pretty big number, but last year was large as well. Let me just show you. It's right here. But we've had a couple of pretty big ones. Yeah, so this year is really big. Right now we're forecasting about over $5 million going to LIDs.

Yeah, it's a little bit bigger.

Yeah, last year was, I can't remember.

Like what projects? Is that what you're saying?

Yeah, total reconstruction projects.

Oh, I don't have it right in front of me, but it was mostly those LIDs. So I can, let me just pull the expenses here and I'll tell you. um this isn't all of them but reconstruction is about 6 million in 26 26 and then about 5 million in 20 next year so they're actually down from last year's slightly down yet but still a big number yeah the the really big one next year is in fund 44 which is showing right down here at $10.9 million. It's the 9th East crossing and bridge that would connect Barney Dairy to 7th North. But that one also has some really good funding partners. It has $4 million from the federal government, $4 million from urban renewal, with basically the remaining coming from what we've saved in impact fees. You do have a traffic signal where Home Depot's just broke ground over by the temple, so that would be in there. We do anticipate half of that cost coming back from urban renewal, but You're going to be waiting a few years before you see that because they're going to really be tapped out after covering the cost on that sewer line, their share of that cost. And then you do have Second East and Yellowstone that's part of a federal grant, $1.6 million. So that one, if you think of going down Second East, you go over the railroad tracks. There's no median for a little while, so it would help widen the road out there, put a median.

You mean like a middle lane?

Like a middle lane, yeah.

That can get kind of confusing in there.

Yeah, like if people are using the middle lane right now, they're actually on the other side of the highway. Okay, and then... there's a few i'm not going to hit every single one if you guys want to jump in personnel we'll cover later there was five requests and we're saying approve one and when i say were that is a recommendation to balance the budget from myself and the mayor and you say we're going to talk about those yeah we're going to go through them in detail um utility rates we'll go through in detail Dave Kuntz, And then major construction water projects on that next page, you can see there's a few actually not like a crazy amount there, but few million dollars worth of projects their sanitation has a few smaller ones now. wastewater will continue to have some fairly large projects uh with the bulk of them being at the the plant itself about 4.82 million there almost 5 million and then they have a couple of a big fairly good size uh adds up to about 825 000 for those two lift stations and so adera which they i think they were able to Dave Kuntz, If I remember right, I think they were able to get their whole Doug before the sub came up, and then you have the other one over by. Dave Kuntz, trellis right there by the highway and main street. Dave Kuntz, I believe they had to halt there's they don't think they got it done before the sub came up too high so but.

through this, I was wondering the other day, the wastewater budget.

Yes.

Do they have funds budgeted in here to get that up to standard because of that lawsuit and that kind of stuff? Are we going to be able to, are they going to be able to meet the requirements from the federal government, state government on that?

Well, I don't know that this year's budget alone is going to do that. It'd probably be a Keith question. But I know that the projects that are in the capital improvement plan will get us there. It just might be a few years.

But they're going to be working on it.

Yeah. Oh, yeah. Absolutely. Yeah, and we're going to be working directly with DEQ, right, rather than being in a lawsuit. And some things to keep in mind, like I know that on the big headworks project, we had applied for a loan from DEQ. And if I remember right, I think Justin told me that we ranked like number 16, and they awarded up to nine. And so we were pretty close. And that was before all this happened. And so as we continue to apply for that, that's actually the best way for us to fund it, rather than a revenue bond, because typically those come with lower interest rate, longer terms. And sometimes they come with principal forgiveness, which is essentially a grant. So if you remember, the water is on a 1.75% for 30 years. That was a DEQ loan, and it forgave $2 million in that project. And so as your finance person, I'm actually hopeful that we'll get that loan versus trying to go out and get a revenue bond that will be likely more expensive interest rate. Okay. So as we go through here, I'm not going to hit too many of them. We are going to talk about the police station, so it's up to you guys if you want to talk about that now or if you want to hold off. But I do have a section in there that talks a little bit about it. You want to hit that now real quick? Or is that something you want to cover after dinner? They said they brought lunch or dinner and it's ready.

Just a quick question. Do we still, is that committee still functioning? That was, you know, to kind of prepare for the bond?

Yeah, it can be. The last time we met was at the end of May. After the bond election we met once.

Yeah, I just wonder what they're, What their take is. You probably know. You're on that committee, aren't you?

Well, I didn't hear about any meeting after the bond, so I thought I was on that committee. Yeah, it was just a meeting. A council member's on it, or...?

it was um it was just that typical thursday meeting that we did at 10 a.m and so we were doing a thursday meeting we actually had it on the schedule every week and so but it was mainly honestly it was mainly with staff and consultants so headwaters zions

uh portman square just kind of wrapping up things with all those groups and settling up i'd like to talk about it now i i had a conversation with josh yesterday so i actually have quite a few questions about yeah i think it's great yeah so on that meet sorry on that meeting it was it was the ones that was going on uh for the bond uh committee that was doing the advertisement for the bond right it wasn't the advisory committee So I never knew about it. So I wasn't there.

Yeah. So that's true. Sorry. It was the one that we did every week for the police bond. So it was like a coordination meeting between consultants, staff. We would basically go through everything we were posting on social media, planning, how to get the education out there to the citizens. So the one where we formally come together, yeah, we haven't done that.

And the stuff I heard from Josh, I was thinking it would have been really nice if council members were there. for that conversation. I don't know how far in you are on those plans, but I would. Which plans? That Josh was telling me about with this new city hall.

Oh, well.

I would hope council members are involved in that.

Yeah, and no group has met on that.

OK.

But I do want to talk about it. Yeah, I'd love to hear. So I think that's a great starting point. Let's talk about it. So one of the things that, there's lots of moving pieces here, right? But we we have been setting aside money and that fund has always been called for municipal city hall or police building. Right. And we've been doing that, what, five years or something. We've been putting money from the general fund in there. We've also been we're also putting money from impact fees in there to help cover the. purchase of that land for the potential police location on Pioneer Road. And then another part of that is that fund, and you can see it online, I pulled it up here, has also purchased the land in the downtown, the whole 0.75 acres, and then you have close to the five acres on Pioneer, right? And so those are all moving pieces there. So what I have done internally, and I have talked to Josh about this, I have talked to the mayor about it, is I've went in and kind of did an analysis of said, what if we were to go back to what we had originally discussed, what, three years ago, which was potentially looking at building a city hall slash office building. and then moving the police potentially into this building. And really, it is a better option than even saying, well, let's go buy another building that exists and remodel that building because we already own this building. And so you would have that added cost. Now, there's three kind of major things that I think you have to understand between the difference between building a police building and a city hall. Number one, you have to understand all of your funding sources. So when you talk about building a police building, you basically have two funding sources. You have the general fund and you have police impact fees. That's it. When you're building a municipal building that is like a city hall that houses all of the departments that service all of the departments within the city. So for example, overhead departments. You think about what are those major overhead departments? Finance. You've got HR. You've got your department. You've got legal. You've got IT. etc etc there's a few other smaller ones and so you guys are are well aware that part of our revenue source in the general fund is an overhead charge to those respective departments another big one that i missed is building an inspection They're not an overhead department, but they're charged in overhead. So as you think about, well, who do we charge and who are we talking about for funding sources, if you build a city hall, you could have the building department participate. You could have water, sewer, sanitation participate. You could use general fund dollars that participate. And then you have a few other smaller departments. Like you think about like shop or engineering that we house in City Hall. Those are overhead departments. Now they have their own overhead rate that's not part of the general overhead rate. so my point is is that you know instead of having just two revenue sources now all of a sudden you're opening it up to a handful probably you know six to eight different potential revenue sources and then the other thing that you're doing is you're looking at how much money can i come up with for a down payment well if you go and you want to build a new police station you have about one million dollars right here plus you own the land and we know that that new police station when we went through that process was close to 18 million dollars right i can't remember if it was 18 or 19. and so so my point is is that that there's a pretty big deficit in what you have to borrow now the other thing we know is that if you're building an office type space an office type space is cheaper per square foot And so now you can get crazy and make it more expensive. And if you do, then you may put even that possibility out of what we can afford, right? And so my point is, is that I believe in just doing kind of an internal assessment of what departments would need to be in a city hall. I believe that based on the square footage analysis that I did, which is very quick and dirty, I think you need to go through a whole formal process if that's the route you want to go, that I believe you could probably build something for less than $11 million. But I also believe that you could probably come up with almost half of that with a down payment, which now means that if you're borrowing only $5 or $6 million versus $14 or $15 million, now all of a sudden that annual lease appropriation option becomes viable. Because when we ran the lease appropriation option for the police, it was like an $800 to $1 million a year payment. When I run it for $5 million borrowed, it's more like $380,000.

But you're missing the renovation of a building that's going to cost $2 or $3 million.

Well, and I want to know...

I'm not, though. And I can show you how.

How do you come up with the down payment? Like, we're sitting here talking about how tight our budget is, and we don't charge millions in overhead costs, right? We don't charge $5 million to our departments in overhead costs. So how could you come up with that kind of a down payment? And I even... After it failed twice, to me, this is more of a viable option, but I just have concerns because I think to residents, that looks...

poor that we tried to bond for a police station they're not going to understand that then we're like oh but we can build a new city hall with our budget and i'm not saying we can do it for sure i'm saying that we would have to go through a process a planning process and an analysis to see if it's even feasible but you're saying we charge that much overhead to all those departments to come up with several million dollars so we charge it's right here i'll just show you um so it's on this the screen up there So overhead charge right now in the proposed budget is about, oh, you can't read that screen, $2.7 million roughly.

A couple of years of that and you were at $5 million.

Yeah, but here's the difference. I'm not saying that we charge them that down payment upfront. I'm saying that they pay their proportionate share of the down payment out of their own reserves upfront. And then over the next 20 years or whatever the life of that lease is, you would include it in the overhead rate. So if your payment was $380,000, then you would be adding maybe $260,000 or whatever that is. to the overhead rate that you would collect back from those respective departments. Does that make sense? Because they're basically 69% of City Hall, the business or the departments that are overhead departments, is being covered by that overhead rate. And so that means that you would have to pay, in fact, I just, let me grab this. so basically if you had a 300 and and i'm not just making this number up by the way i worked with michael keith from zions to get these numbers if you had a 380 000 lease appropriation amount that means you would owe that much money each year over 20 years Basically, in my calculation, which we would, as I said, we'd have to go through and vet and make sure that everything pencils out and is correct through a planning process, 69% of that annual payment could be covered in the overhead rate, which means that the general fund's picking up maybe around $125,000 a year. So Matt, are there other...

are there more creative financing options for a municipal building than there were for the police i mean is there a difference well you're still gonna have the diff the difference no no the difference is your funding sources that's the difference okay what were we using the overhead before i guess i'm not i'm not understanding like where did all that overhead money

what was it for before then i guess that's not making any sense to me what was that no no the overhead money that comes into the general fund is what balance helps balance your general fund but i'm saying how can we afford to just take that money and then put it towards a building i'm i'm so sorry i'm not understanding yeah what i'm saying is if you do a lease purchase option you're going to add that to what we collect on overhead So in other words, instead of 2.7, you might be charging 3 million every year for 20 years. Does that make sense? Does that make more sense? And then the down payment, the down payment, we would look at their reserves. So for example, if streets is one of those that we have an overhead, right? We would have to probably go to streets and say, hey, you need to put a proportionate share of a down payment on a new city hall that houses all of those departments that support those overhead.

So then you are taking money from each department, right? You're going to be taking more money in overhead from each department. Yeah, you would. How do we afford that then when we say that the budget is so tight? How are we going to afford that?

that is the process that's why you have to go through a planning process and you have to determine how much that would be for each of those respective departments and then you have to sit back and you have to say do we feel comfortable pulling that much out of those reserves yeah you do just like the federal government you just base it on growth i mean that's that's the only

You know, but I think we hope that we're going to continue to grow so that those revenues continue to grow.

But I mean, like, we tell residents, like, we don't have more money in the streets for and then we're like, but we do have more money to pull for this municipal bill.

Yeah, but we're also saying we're going to pull it like the down payment just one time, right? It's a one-time down payment. You're done with that down payment. It's not, hey, we're going to pull that every year. And then every year thereafter, they would pay their proportionate share. So for example, when I ran through this, their payback on the lease each year would be like $47,000. So it's not as massive of a number as you think, because you're breaking it up between all of those departments, right? And I mean, and there's also some other areas that, I mean, I'm going to be up front, like I would strongly recommend that the city look at not putting recreation in that building. Because we have an ice rink now. We have a swimming pool over there. We have a parks building that has offices in the top that's maybe underutilized. And so I think part of that practice would be to say, can we better utilize the current spaces that we have and put some departments there to minimize how big that square footprint is, which brings the cost down to what we can afford? And so that's all going to have to be part of that that analysis. And so so I guess what I'm looking for is. I believe there's a way to feasibly do it as long as the cost doesn't get too much. But I don't I don't want to just go do it without you guys saying, hey, let's look at that. Let's go through a planning process and let's see if it's a viable option.

And would that include the renovations on the?

Yes.

OK. And then I have one other thing that Josh shared with me that he was pretty concerned about the idea of leaving like the arts department in City Hall after it's turned into a police station.

Yeah.

And I don't I mean, I was trying to look. I can't find another police station in the country that keeps part of their employees. So so to me, that's like a nonstarter to have the arts department still in. Yeah. And that would turn into a police station.

And that would be part of the discussion, right, is what can we afford to keep or not keep?

But police stations don't have other personnel in them. So to me, like that would be from the beginning. How could you have arts working in your police station? Well, keep it secure. That's what Josh said. Yeah, I can tell you the rafters, they're going to do something like that just doesn't happen. So to me, like from the get go, it has to be understood that we're not going to have the arts department in

REC or whoever else yeah and and those are all decisions that may drive the cost up and make it so it's not a viable option but it's not viable to have them in there either i don't think i don't know anyone else secure part of the building and have an

as part of the renovations, separate entrances, just to, you know, and have it totally secure. I mean, it could feasibly be done. I agree. I don't think it's right.

And it will drive the cost up of what you have to renovate because you have to fix the rafters even so people can't climb through and all this stuff. So Josh just had serious concerns about that. And I mean, he is the police chief, so I really value his opinion.

Yeah, and we need to, and that's part of the process, right, is to go through all those concerns.

And he's really, really, you know, he's a,

pleaser i feel like sometimes josh doesn't know how to share his true feelings because he wants to please people he's a very polite individual and as i looked at it um this building is substantially larger than the police building you would have built if you passed a bond i mean this is closer to 30 000 square feet This space over here, if you were to keep it for the next five to 10 years with other functions, you'd still be handing over the police basically the same square footage they would have built in their new building from day one. and then they could feasibly grow into this space over time and as i looked at it i i talked to brett and i said can you close off this whole back side he said yes you can can you have separate entrances in the front for the two buildings he said yes you can

Yeah, and that will just drive up the cost of renovations to do things like that.

Well, that would be a wall, a small wall.

You're going to have to renovate anyway.

Well, I know, but you can't tell me that it wouldn't cost more to try to make them two separate buildings.

Well, how much more are we talking? I don't know.

That's what I'm asking. I'm saying those are the things that we'd have to look at.

Right.

And that's the point. We'll look at those. That's fine.

I don't think it's time.

this is the time to make a decision about what's going in what building right let's talk about this part of the list i think we have to rule yeah and we sit down and actually talk reality yes and that's what and that's why we need to get a committee and everything this is just a brief throw out it's not a decision making now it's just saying okay we need to sit down and say what's feasible and what's the smartest thing for the future of our city

Yeah, can we see other options, too, just so we can compare, like, if we bought another building? You know how we talked about that when we were looking at viable options before we bonded? Do you remember how that was one of the options? Like, oh, we find a different building and we renovate it. Like, could we compare?

If we have a building, sure.

Yeah.

We can do that. So really what I guess I'm asking for is if you look back up at this budget, hopefully you can see it to the right. I've included, so basically we're gonna carry over a million dollars in that fund, right? we're going to already own the land over here by the school district we're going to still own the police land which could be potentially sold off right for 1.3 to probably 1.6 million in that ballpark so i've included in here for next year i put 190 000 under hired work to simply say do we want to go through a planning exercise to look at the option of doing a new city hall over on this junior high property and moving the police into this building and then renovating this building over time, which could be phased. Because if you think about it, like, yes, you're going to need probably a few million bucks to do some renovations in this building, right? But then you're going to have impact fees that are going to continue to come in. And so as their demand for more space grows and we're like, OK, we can't have people in this side of the building. We've got to give it to the police. Those impact fees could potentially build another phase, right? And so you have to think of it that way as a phased approach. The other thing that I look at is I look at where they are now from day one. If you move them into this building, they're already in a better situation. yes it's similar in terms of some of the insufficiencies right um as far as security and some of those things but i believe that those things could be addressed and they could potentially be phased in you know as more money becomes available through impact fees matt i'm i'm i'm all for you know starting a process to look but but as long as we're open-minded enough

yeah to look at a lot of different things i mean there's there's a lot of there's been a lot of discussion about a combined city county building which to me makes a lot of sense if we're if we're going that route to build a city building let's put combine it with the county and get some of their money and and and have a you know have a joint so Those kinds of things, I think we've got to be open-minded enough through the process to at least entertain those.

And we did buy that piece of property with the county. So the issue, of course, would be for them to have the money to be building at the same time we're building and all that kind of stuff.

So what I'm hearing is that basically what we want is maybe three to four options of different. Right. Is that what we're looking for is like, like, like not just one solution, but two or three other solutions, like up to three, at least three solutions of how to handle this situation.

I know that everybody's Yeah, I know that there are those who, who get a little bit blinders on, because Well, I'll just say the mayor has some some blinders on this because he wants a city building, which is and that may be where we end up. You know, that may be just where we end up. But I just think we can be a little more open minded about this and look at other options rather than just going going down this this tunnel, you know, having tunnel vision. And this is where we want to end up.

Yeah.

Which is why I asked about I'd rather take a little more time, you know, rather than

You said you have some money in the budget to study this, right, Russ? Is that what you said?

Yeah.

To study?

Yeah, and can you remind me the state's stipulations that they put on county buildings? It can't be over $5 million if we were to combine with the county? I'm trying to remember what that stipulation is.

Oh, are you talking about...

If it's a county building, it can't be over $5 million unless it goes to bond. Do you remember that from a couple years back?

TODD BANDUCCI. Oh, are you talking about the lease appropriation that they would have to go to vote?

TODD BANDUCCI. Yeah, if we combined with the county. Do you remember what you were talking about?

TODD BANDUCCI. So if we're using the lease appropriation method, there is, I don't remember, I can't remember if it's the amount or the years that you borrow, but the county, I believe, does have to have a vote of the people to use that lease appropriation method. Cities do not.

So we just have to look at that when we're talking about the same county building. Keep it all out.

So would it be fair then, like are you guys open to maybe what we could do is come back? And keep in mind, this is next fiscal year. I mean, we could start meeting now. But would you be open to maybe just saying, hey, let's have a group of people, a committee, that could help working on these options?

I don't know.

I'm all for that, personally.

As long as there's multiple options, I'm all for it, too.

Yeah. And so, and are there, who do you want on that committee? Do you want it to be similar to what we had before, or do you want to give it some thought, and then we kind of circle back through council meetings and start to formalize some things?

Well, I think there needs to be council representation, certainly. Okay.

Oversight committee, I think, makes sense. Yeah.

Yeah. So, I mean, we have to advertise like that, too, so... And that's not a problem. If we only have one or two council members? It becomes a more formal meeting. Is that over three?

We have to just put out agendas is what she's saying.

That's just what we're doing. We're going to advertise it.

That it's an open public meeting.

Again, it's not that big of a deal.

So what would it take to have these without violating the What would the makeup of that meeting be? From an interactive official standpoint, right? One council member? Did that change?

It's just, you know, you're having, it's a problem when you have two that are deliberating with each other. So, yeah, we've not, we've not really been as appropriate as we could.

Okay, that's what I was going to say, because in the past, I feel like we said if there was only three.

Yeah, that's like a decision, right? You can't make a decision.

Push to declaration.

So, yeah, but that's not, that's going to be an advisory committee, not a decision.

Well, are you guys comfortable if we had one council members and then we just came back with updates through city council meetings?

I mean, will that prove that? Council member will be accountable to the rest of us. Yes, we're all. I mean, that's routine. I'm comfortable with that. I trust any of these guys.

We can put those on your reports that you do every month, the second. And that could just be one of the things.

I'm comfortable with that. How about you, Colin? You OK with that?

Yes, I'm okay with that, but I think it's going to take more than just three options. I think it's going to have to be a really serious look at now and the future where we're going to go with the police chief in mind and the whole basis of what we need to be doing, not just a patch approach.

I also think we need to include a lot of the different apartments. If arts is going to be put in a different part of the building, arts needs to be part of that. If that's Donella, if that's Jed, whoever that is. But I think we need to spread it out, the committee, because it's going to impact not just a few. We need to have more say from all the staff.

I'm thinking about a committee, right? Get somebody who's familiar with building and get somebody who's familiar with real estate.

Get somebody who's familiar with police work.

Somebody from the police department. Get somebody who's familiar with these things that have eyes to see.

I feel like the community could come in later. I think we need to add the community a little bit later.

Are you guys good? I mean, are you good if I at least start with Josh? and get a list of people that we think would be good on a committee.

And I'm fine with one council member, but if it really is that we get those updates regularly, because if we're like getting an update after six months or a year of their deliberations and then we hear Oh, we don't actually agree with the direction you're taking that, but you've already wasted a year's time. So I feel like if you're having one council member on there, we're going to have to have really regular updates.

Just make it a council, every council meeting.

No, that's fine. The council member has to, there has to be at least one. So if the council member who's assigned can't go, then somebody, one of us needs to attend. We need to have at least one.

Yeah, I think that's great. I think that's the process.

Are you okay with the once a month recordings? I mean, you might not, at the beginning, you might not have more than one meeting.

Yeah. Yeah, we probably don't meet every two weeks.

No more meetings. What I meant was, don't meet for six months and then bring us what you've been working on really hard. I totally agree. Yeah, because then it's just a waste of time for everyone.

Well, and I appreciate this. And where I think I can come in and help you, right, is we can look at the options. then i can say i believe that these are your funding sources and this is how much it would cost and i've got michael at zions that said he's more than willing to to help give us kind of estimated costs based on what we would borrow because and it depends right like and that's why i keep going back to remember your funding sources because if we do go look at an option like let's say that melaleuca building or another building is available in the downtown and it costs six million dollars to buy and six million dollars to renovate i can already tell you that if it's a police station you can't afford it because we've already went through that process and so so that's my point is we'll be able to bring you back the funding sources and how it could be paid for legally

It'd be nice to have somebody on the committee who is excellent at diagramming words, who can put a flow chart together for you. We can show you, I mean, what you were just sharing with us, for example, if we have that on a flow chart, if you are able to show that, then you can see it. So somebody who's willing to, you know, who's good at it, you can, diagrams, words, right? Just helps you see it. Yeah.

And let us remember. Yeah, AI. But let us remember what was our number one goal here is and what's our need is the new Police Department. I mean there there are years past that should already had one. That is our number one goal is to get them the facilities they need to make sure city stays safe so.

Yep. OK, we good there. okay um just the last two things on this summer and then let's take a break uh so parks impact or so parks i just want to bring up that the steiner park in the budget is for the back half to be developed next year and then the front half all we would probably do is do the path to connect it to fifth west so that all those apartments neighborhoods there could connect and use that park and then um the other thing with the park is this this next year we have this huge porter park irrigation project which i'm going to show you in more depth later but that's like a 610 000 project that right now is being funded half by a grant from the federal government which means that you have to come up with 303 000 out of your general revenues

This is what we voted on here a few weeks ago, right, wasn't it? We spoke about it. We talked about it. This is one that Keith brought up. Yeah.

Yeah, it's basically to get Porter Park off of their well and onto the irrigation water. And so keep that in mind. That's part of the conversation. We'll talk a little more about it in a minute when we get there. And then there's pretty minimal capital that is currently in this budget. Now, there was more capital requested for cultural arts. There was a lot more. And I'll go through and show you what they requested and what we're recommending you approve. But part of that is a fairly big amount for the Tabernacle of $285,000. Well, the good news is I believe they're going to carry over over $170,000 from donations raised and grants because they got that Eccles grant for $100,000. so they're they're pretty well on their way to hopefully raising enough to just do that with donations and so that's that's great yeah just be probably the bathrooms and connecting it right like a hallway or whatever yep we're gonna look at it here in just a minute so then we have the ice rink in there ice rink we there's a little bit there's a subsidy obviously on that we've got it at about 135 000 and there is a zamboni in there yeah we we did lower i think from 65 to 50 000 in the budget And then Rexburg Rapids has a really big capital project to replace the boilers, so $225,000. And you will see Rexburg Rapids is just going to take more transfers in the future. And you'll see that that increased as well. Gulf has quite a bit of capital. But honestly, Gulf, the only thing that we're asking from the city is to set aside $40,000 for irrigation replacement. And that's it. So, okay. Do you want a break? Yeah. Let's go. Or do you want to keep going? I don't care. Well, that food's going to get cold. Go eat.

What time is it?

We can bring it here and keep talking. Yeah.

I think I just got blisters or something.

Do you know what a camera is? It's a hot box.

Call on you back with this. Did you get your dinner? You can't hear you.

No, I didn't get no dinner, so I'm starving and yes, I'm back with it OK.

There's plenty in the other room calling.

There's always gotta be a smart out, huh?

OK, let's let's jump in. So this next section is really focused on the general fund. Because of course, that's the most difficult and hardest to balance each year. So. Colin, I'm on the one that says general fund balance carryover. So as you guys look at that, I just want to kind of take you from where we were to where we're headed. So 2024, we carried over about $5.8 million in the general fund, which is about 30%. which is great. That's within your 25% to 33%, right? 2025, we carried over about 29%. And then at the end of 2026, we were actually budgeted last year to be below the 25%, if I remember right. But I believe we're going to be just over it. And then when you guys look at this, when I do this forecasting, you have to keep in mind that If it's in the budget, then I'm going to assume it's going to be spent. And so when you look at 2026, right, it's like, well, we still got four months left in 2026. And so I have to just estimate that, hey, if it's in there. Now, if I know we're not going to spend it, I take it out of the forecast. But for the most part, it's typically conservative in the sense that generally we will spend a little less than what I show. now if we were to take all of the budget requests that came in for 2027 through the budget meetings we would have dropped that reserve clear down to 14.72 percent or just over three million dollars and so as the mayor and i looked at that um we came in with some recommended cuts which we'll go through in detail here in a minute And essentially, the question was, how are we going to balance a deficit of $1.8 million? We were able to come up with cuts that brought it down to about $734,000 that you would have to carry over. And even with that carryover, you'll still be around 21%. which is still under our minimum reserve. And it's still trending in a bad direction, right? Which basically signals to me that we're probably going to have a few very tough years to balance this budget, especially if we actually have a recession and sales tax goes down, which is a real possibility. And so keep all that in mind. Now flip it over, unless you have questions. Okay, flip it over and look at the transfers. So when you think about, well, where's all this general fund money going? Well, outside of really the difference of what it costs to provide all those overhead departments versus what we bring in on overhead rate, This is where that money's going. And you can see in 2024, we transferred out 4.2 million. In 2025, it was 3.2 million. 2026, we forecast about 3.4 million, 3.38. or whatever that is yeah 3.38 and then in 2027 if we accept this recommended amount that we're going to show you it would be about 3.15 million and so as you look through there obviously your your biggest one is your fire um so it's about 2.2 million and Part of what I had to do is when you think of FIRE going forward, FIRE is actually no longer a fund transfer because we don't have that within our purview anymore. They have their own funds. So I actually have to call it a contribution is what I have to call it or subsidy, however you want to call it. But anyways, that's your biggest number. And then as you go down through that list, you can see where all the other numbers are. But the newest one, of course, is that ice rink. So you can see that 134,800 that I was talking about earlier. And so really, as you guys think about, hey, maybe we don't want to take those recommendations that you're about to show us, but we do want to make sure that we still cut out that amount in the budget. These are some of the areas where you can cut it. And so we can dive into those if that's what you want to, if you want to go back to those. So any questions on that?

Matt, is this with the ice rig being open all year or is this just? Yes.

Yeah. Yeah. And I think if, as you guys go forward, if you determine after running it this full year, and you're like, it's probably not worth it, that could save you a little, right? You could potentially save some there.

Do we know what the numbers have been for this last month, with it being summer?

I don't have the final numbers for last month, but I believe... i believe last time i saw it because they were still working on their rentals i believe last time i saw it was around 20k which i think is about a five thousand dollar drop from the prior month if i remember right and that's all revenue the 20k yeah that'd be revenue okay in the sorry just in the fire station you know yeah is it what did they are we going to go through what they asked for this budgeting or is that mostly just personnel or did they ask for We're going to hit it just a little bit. But they did not ask for any new personnel. And they asked for about a 4% increase, which, honestly, I thought was pretty reasonable. OK, if you flip it over, I want to take you through reserves for a second. So when you look at the reserves in the street fund, In 2024, we carried over $7 million. In 2025, we carried over $9.3 million. I think by the end of this year, if they spend everything that's in the budget, we'll carry over about $6.3 million. Next year, if we spend everything in the budget, I think you'll carry over about $400,000. So I mean, we are spending that down. um same thing as you go down you're going to see this trend throughout all these so sanitation you can see where we were in 2024 we were almost 2 million by the end of 27 i think we'll be at about 536. now that one we know why it's because we saved and built that new shop for sanitation for them to be in Water, I want to point out the biggest thing there to me that kind of stands out is the capital reserve fund. So, you know, you can see that we went from about 9.6. I'm projecting us to go clear down in the five and a half million range by the end of 2027. But you're basically going to run out of money in your capital reserve. So it will almost carry over nothing. And that's the same story for sewer. So when you look at sewer, sewer is substantially dropping. I mean, they're going from almost $11.6 million down to $3.8 million. But same story, capital reserve is pretty much 100% spent. And so those... mean there's pros and cons to this there's good things and there's bad the good thing is is that you you had the money available to pay for those projects and there was a lot of big ones the bad thing is is that if you look at the capital improvement plan those projects keep coming and so so you will and I've mentioned this several times you will have to look for funding for water and sewer probably within a few years and that would be in the form of a revenue bond Either a revenue bond or if we can get it a DEQ loan would be fantastic.

How is a revenue bond different from what we just did?

A revenue bond does not require a vote of the people. It requires judicial confirmation. So you have to go through a process, go to a judge, and they have to say that this is ordinary and necessary and you're authorized to borrow money. Dave Kuntz, yeah and and banks and financial institutions are they're comfortable with it right because they know that you can set rates to cover that repayment. Dave Kuntz, Okay, so here's the cats so. As you look at this, I'm going to go as quick as I can. So airport relocation reserve, we wanted to put 30,000 in. We're recommending that we only put 10,000 in. Part of that is because they have over a million dollars. We're investing it very well. And so I believe they're going to increase it probably 50K, even with us only putting 10K, because there's tons of interest being earned. uh airport operations we reduced that by 9200 they had a security system quote that was huge and we we said hey let's let's either reduce the scope of that project or let's look for an alternative system and that savings would be for us and the county because we split costs between

construction and operations and then air yep at some point in this process I think we need to reevaluate that additional consultant what that we hired for the airport relocation Oh

Yeah, and that is in this budget.

You're going to have to show me, the airport board's going to have to show me that he is, what we're paying him, we're getting something. That we're moving this project along better than we would have done without him.

And that's $75,000, $80,000.

Yeah, you're right on.

Yeah, and we're paying half that, right? OK, so ball diamonds, I pulled out. They wanted to do dugout enclosures. So we pulled that out. We just felt like it's great, but it's not necessary. Cultural arts subsidy. So what we did there is they were asking for a subsidy of about $146,000. We reduced it to $131,000. and how we did that is we we increased the transfer from arts promulgation by about 10k they could afford that and then we're basically saying we're going back to their department and saying you could either cancel something that doesn't produce revenue or you can produce revenue you know maybe you get contributions but we're basically asking them to come up with that five thousand dollar difference through their plans for those events it doesn't have to be these events i just put those events on there just as an example of you know three events that have no revenue and so so though i mean if they said hey Let's not do Oktoberfest anymore. That'd save you $5,600 of direct costs.

They're already not going to be doing any musicals or any plays. So I'm just wondering, if we take away these events, then what is the Culture Arts Department planning to be doing?

I mean, the biggest thing they do, right, is manage those two buildings. Okay. And there is, I mean, we do have some of our own events in there. And then a lot of it's just managing the groups that rent them.

Okay. So we wouldn't be hosting. So if they don't find sponsors, then we just won't have any events for the next year.

No, I'm not saying that. I'm just saying, I'm only saying 5,000. I'm just saying, we're just saying, hey guys, find, you know, do something different for this 5,000. You know, whether you find a sponsor for one of these key events or whether you charge. It's kind of like what we did with Tabernacle Orchestra last year. Remember, we went to them and we said, hey, something, we got to charge for tickets or admission because we need to generate some revenue. And they said, well, can we just raise it with contributions? And we said, yeah, absolutely. And that's what they did. And so it's kind of that same thing is where we're not, we're not necessarily saying this is what you will do. We're saying you need to find $5,000 of either savings and expense or increased revenues.

I guess I'm just a little worried about if they don't find a sponsor for Oktoberfest or something. Because that's something that the community really looks forward to. And if we're starting to cancel all these events, then it just looks bad, too. Those are things that the community like to do. It shows that we... Do you know what I'm... And so that's why I'm just a little concerned about that, if they aren't able to find a sponsor. Because we've really hit our sponsors really hard. last year, and so I'm just a little concerned about that. It's going to be being creative, of course, and I'm not opposed to it. I'm just putting forth a little concern about it.

And that's where you guys can voice your opinion. If you guys feel like, hey, no, let's keep doing Oktoberfest, you need to voice that concern or that consideration. But I think our point is we're not going to adopt this budget for till we three read it, right? So we're several months out. And so we're just saying, hey, look through your budget, find $5,000. And we just felt like that was reasonable.

Wait, can you help me understand that? I'm sorry, I'm not understanding. The recommendation is $131, and the total request was $146.

Yeah.

So isn't that more than $5,000?

Yeah. So I said it really fast, but I recommended that we increase the subsidy that comes from our promulgation. Oh, we got it.

So that's the other thing.

yep okay um customer service we we just oh i didn't put what it is it's so we reduced that with some part-time wages um same thing with finance when we get down there there was some part-time wages deborah and i have worked out something where we're going to kind of trade we're going to share marcy up front and she's going to start doing some more finance things and so we worked out that Economic Development, they originally needed a subsidy of about $4,000 for their entrepreneurial programs. I am recommending to them that instead of subsidizing MEPI for $10,000 that helps sponsor those, that we only give them $6,000. Or we give them $10,000, but they put $4,000 back into the entrepreneurial programs. And part of that is we are providing the workforce behind that, fully subsidizing those employees. I think it's a pretty reasonable request. um overhead charge on engineering so you can see i as we made these these cuts it just reduced some of those expenses and so i showed that there Financial management, I want to talk through that. So you had a little bit in part-time labor, a little bit in supplies and travel. The big one, of course, is the roof reseal and resurface. So we cut out the $150,000 to basically redo this roof because we felt like we needed to move forward on this HVAC replacement project first because that may require them to cut into that liner. And I talked to Tim. I had him go up and look at it. He thinks we're fine to hold off until that project's done, and then we can reassess. So that was 150K. We did leave in the HVAC, as I just mentioned. Now on fire, the only thing that we showed there for savings is we want to go back to them. Instead of putting $40,000, we want to put $30,000 into the building set aside for them to, they're looking to save money to do the addition on their downtown here building. And when you think about that building, you got to remember city pays one third, fire district pays a third, ambulance district pays a third. So we're all basically putting in that $40,000. we're going to recommend that we do $30,000 and then we're going to recommend that they subsidize it more with their wildland fund, which is a great way because that wildland is, you know, that was one of my, one of the things that I didn't love about the fire budget process and I'm going to recommend from them is they never actually showed us a line item breakdown for wildland. they just said they showed it in summary and and my point is i just want to make sure that they're paying their expenses they're bringing in their revenue and then they're benefiting all three parties and so i'm just recommending they increase that transfer to the building i think it's a fair request that's a great i've been sitting in that meeting

And then choosing to remove that. Yeah, that's not going to count as part of a budget. Are you kidding me?

No, it has to.

Right. So that's a really good.

Yeah. And that that's one of my requests back to them. We have to let them know by the 20th if we're going to cut some things out. And when I reach back out to them, I'm going to say, number one, let's reduce this. Number two, we still actually want to see the wildland budget because we never really saw it. Okay, sorry, I'm going to skip the ones that we didn't change. So golf irrigation system, we were going to try to put aside 60. I reduced it to 40. I think that's fine. Golf is pretty successful right now, and we've been able to ramp up from their operations what they put in there. And so I think it's fine. We're still setting aside hundreds of thousands of dollars a year into that, which is fantastic.

Does that mean the county is going to drop to $40,000?

Yeah, we would recommend that they do that as well. Yeah, we always try to match each other. um okay and then we looked at hr uh hr is able to drop it because of all this turnover that we are now know you know who the replacements are i think you guys are going to meet brandon tonight so that was about 15k and then it had requested a new employee we will go through in detail all the employees as well in a minute but that was 101 000 we recommended that we just continue to use part-time as we have for now and um so anyways that's 101 000 and then we did small bumps on some infrastructure there and and as those things come in i told todd like if if we really need that money for a server come to us we can do a contingency adjustment right if it's necessary um marin council this is a okay this is a really big one i want to talk about and i'm going to show you this on the in a couple pages too so if we are to determine that that pump house on second east and first south is actually the cities, from a financial standpoint, I would highly recommend that you sell it. And that is something that you had already surplused before we got into the whole deed stuff. And so anyways, I just want you to keep that on your radar that

know potentially that's 300 000 plus that you could put back into your general fund to help build it back up i will say this the historical society though has been kind of talking with me on a monthly basis about the pump house and they are are they feel that the council kind of already not promised it to them but that they were in favor of them having that at when they made that presentation so i'm just i'm just this is the conversations i'm having and so i'm just and i'm just letting them know i've i've been pretty blunt about it with them that it's probably not going to happen but he anyways like because he came and did that presentation he felt that the council is in very favor of that so we just need to be careful of how we handle that well and i just i'm just as a

yeah no and that's fine and I think if there was a way like for them to raise money and buy it you know that's that's a different conversation right so the the problem I see is from from where I sit is I you you cannot afford to buy another public building no we can't with no revenue source I mean we got to take care of the one that we own Okay, so then I'd cut out a little in travel and training with the mayor and a little bit in part-time labor with Parks. I feel like we're fine on both those. The other thing that I did on Parks, if you flip the page, and this is where you guys might not like this, so let's have some conversation about it. So we've been setting aside money in the Parks Capital Reserve Fund for several years, generally around $50,000 to $100,000 a year. We had set aside a fairly big chunk a couple of years ago for pickleball. So we're going to have about 162,000 in there. And that's even after converting Smith Park tennis to pickleball. And so I strongly recommend that you use 132,000 of that towards this Porter Park irrigation project. And then just leave about 32,000 or 30,000 in carry over in there. Uh, because really that, you know, we kind of filled that pickleball need by converting the Smith park. And we are by the way, again, he still has to come and do some fixes and resurface on that. So it should only get better. But I mean, if you've driven by there, I mean, people are using it and we only have four of the six nets up right now. So.

but what are your thoughts yeah we're gonna buy I told John let's go ahead and buy we're gonna buy two two sides that face that where the houses are to try to lighten that that noise when we started at this road there were limited opportunities for pickleball in town. There's a lot more opportunities out there now than there were then.

yeah i'm fine with it too but you love my skis all right you're what you love my skis along with the golf course though right yeah for now yeah they're there yep okay so you guys are good to keep going yep okay parks capital set aside we're not going to set anything aside there So let me talk about police for a minute. So police, they had requested three new full-time positions. They had a priority of detective, then patrol, then parking attendant. Those are kind of the big ones. So obviously like that top one there, you can see the 121,500. I'm not gonna hit all the little ones by the way, but if you wanna talk about them, we can. And then the parking attendant one, you can see we saved about $48,200 if we cut that position out. Part of the reason why is that's about a $93,000 position, but they were like, hey, if we have this position, we can issue more tickets and bring in more revenue. So they offset that difference. But we just felt like we probably shouldn't approve any new positions in the general fund. And then in the big one down below, you can see is the detective, which is their priority. They've expressed that. That was about $135,000 to add that position. And then we also cut out the Pharaoh scanner in detectives. That was the one where we said, hey, let's have you go reach out to other communities. Let's see if we can share the cost and then come back to us. And so maybe, for example, if they could go to Madison County and say, hey, will you cover half the cost?

So what is the scanner?

It's for like investigation of the scene. And it's basically, it's like a camera system. We'll just call it that, that basically scans it all.

Yeah, it goes, you map up the whole crime scene where everything's at and it shows kind of more realistic exactly where it is. And you go back and make that crime scene exactly.

So kind of like in real time?

Yeah.

They what? I think so. Yeah, when they need it. I think they have a – didn't they say Bonneville County has one?

And the state police has, and they bring the state police in or the Bonneville or Meadow Falls.

but concern about the detective position. I just want to say, because I talked to Josh about this, and I think he told me he talked to Colin, he does not know what his thoughts are after talking to Josh, but he feels like he has concerns about the detective position. And I guess to me, I feel like we're increasing our population, but we're not, I know, because the money is hard to come up with, but I don't feel like we're keeping up with our police positions to match the population. And so to me, I feel like that one's really important. And I don't know how you, I wasn't in the wastewater, so I don't know how we made the determination that that one was more important, but like, to me, the police are one of like the highest priorities because our community needs them. And when we were in those meetings and they went through what they need to do with the BYU Idaho devotionals and things like that, to me, I feel like they need that detective position.

yeah and i and i think that part of what i i would say the message that the mayor and i would probably share with them is is If there was a way internally to use the budget that they had and increase the number of people in that department, I mean, that would be the ideal thing, right? Do I know if there's a way to do that? No. Do the detectives have to be the ones that do the BYUI devotionals? I don't know that answer. You know, maybe there's maybe there's a way to do that through community policing or another division and reduce that burden. And so I think that what we're saying is, because of the financial position that we're in. We, we want them to kind of take a deeper look at is there a way to maybe prioritize that with the money that they have right that's available. And and maybe there is maybe there isn't, but. But we're just kind of saying that financially increasing the budget that much is probably not. Something we can do or would recommend it this time. But if that is there, then maybe they can figure that out.

And I met with Matt on this, I have a concern with that too, and I brought up several times with Matt. is when we move a detective over to drugs and move a detective over to child sex crimes, we lose a detective. So I was worried about that too. I think Josh needs to come back and maybe say, Hey, I got to have it because this and this and this, you talk about some funding coming in from a grant. Let's, let's look at that. Then we get half of it paid for by a grant. Yeah. So I, I, I, I'd like to see that. I'm worried that we're undermining our police department if we just not give them something. And maybe it's not this year, but at least next year, we need to step this up because we're increasing so rapidly. They're going to be buried more than they are now.

Yeah, and they had said, right, that they may be able to get a grant.

Yeah, but Josh said it was a nice grant, and he doesn't know what the requirements were.

Right. And I guess what I would say is let's follow through on that. Let's see what that grant is. and then come back and let's see if, you know, if that's $30,000, $40,000 a year and you guys are like, you know what, let's do this, then do a budget adjustment and approve it. But I think we need to go through that process.

I think it's prudent to go back to Josh and say, Josh, this is reality. We just don't have the money. Which I do. You do your due diligence. You go out and then you come back and show us that that, that we're gonna be in real deep trouble without that position, then we'll, because we got time, we'll re-look at things, maybe we can move things around a little bit, but I think it's good to put the ball in his court, let him see what he can do internally, if anything, and if it just doesn't work, then come back to us and then we'll.

But can we hear that report before we start voting on this in our public meetings from Josh? That's like in a month, right?

So the only way you could do that is you would increase it now, and then you would increase the carryover on the revenue side. So if that's what you wanted to do, you could do that now. Or the other approach you can take is that you have them go back, look into all those things, and then they come back to you at the beginning of October and say, hey, We can't make it work. Here's what we found. This is what we need. And then you could do that same budget adjustment.

So why was wastewater chosen over the police department?

So wastewater is a little easier because they have a revenue source, right? And so they have a rate. You set a rate. and so we felt like it was okay to increase that because we could cover that in the rate unfortunately i can't do that with the general fund i'd love it if i could it'd be great but it just it was just because of the funding source it was just not there so can that be made clear to josh though that if he feels like he can't function without it yeah i think so and i don't know what you meant by the community policing but i mean like

As a mother with children in the public schools, I'm really happy that we have officers at the school, so I wouldn't want to take an officer out of the school.

Oh, yeah, and I'm not saying permanently take him out. I mean, I think he was only saying on that handout that it was about 120 hours that they do a year up at those.

Oh, yeah, but I mean, so you're saying you'd use someone just for that one part of what the detective did?

yeah i'm just i'm just saying like is it more important to have the detectives work on detective stuff and it could another division cover up there i'm not saying i know that answer yeah i i don't i'm not a police officer i'm just saying like i i want police officers in my children's schools no no high priority to me

yeah and i'm not saying take them out of the schools i'm just saying is there a way to to prioritize that department over maybe a different department and allocate some of the resources here to there so they have what they need and so that that's it and i mentioned this matt they maybe could do it during the summer but during the school year i don't see i was over the community policing i don't see them doing it during the school year that'd be very tough but maybe during the summer to look to alleviate that stress on them during summer maybe

Okay. Well, let me talk with Josh, and I think what we do is just say, hey, Josh, you look at what you can, and within the budget we're allocating at this point, and then if you feel like we can't get there, you can't get the additional grant funding, et cetera, et cetera, You can always come back to the city council in October. Maybe it delays it a month, right? Instead of hiring it in October, maybe hire it in November. That saves us a month anyways. And so is that okay with that approach?

Yeah, as long as he knows that.

Yeah, I'll chat with him.

I feel like we can't neglect the police to the point where we can't keep up with that population, so.

Yeah, I'll talk with him on it. And then you guys are welcome to talk to him as well. So, okay. All right. Ice rink. So that one also had the security cameras was extremely high. So we ratcheted that down. And I think what we're saying is we either maybe we go down to one or two cameras. Maybe we use some aftermarket ones as well. We're just saying find an alternative solution for now.

That's fine. Oh, can I ask one more question about the police, though? Yeah. They left everything in for their dash cams, right, that we talked about in that meeting.

So we reduced, that's the one that, I'm just trying to find it. That was patrol. So it's the one up there that says small tools SWAT under police patrol on line 37. So we reduced the total down by 12.3. So they were asking for 157.3. And we reduced it to $145,000. And so we just said, hey, look for areas that you can save. Maybe not necessarily the video camera, but maybe there's other small tools, because there's certainly more than just the cameras in that budget. OK, ice rink. I already talked about the reduction for Zamboni. As you go down that list, there's a small one for Rexburg Rapids, not much. And then romance theater. So Jed wanted to remodel downstairs for a catering and rehearsal space. We took it out, 20,000 bucks there. And then there was in the romance theater, if you flip it over, There was an $18,500 request for the three windows in the back. We've talked about this one for a couple of years. We cut that down to $15,000. And we're also hopeful that he'll continue to apply for grants that can maybe help supplement that. And then we also cut out the chandeliers. He had $25,000 in there for the lighting, where basically, as you look up on the ceiling, I think there's six of them possibly. I can't remember. did I write it here four large four small so there's eight we just said hey let's cut that out look for grant opportunities at this point on that and then they wanted to replace the TV marquees 50 grand we basically said there Use them until they're dead.

We're getting close.

So tabernacle remodel downstairs, I reduced it by 15,000, so from 300 to 285. That one, we're really saying don't start on until they raise more money anyways. And so they've got some money to raise.

And so you're talking about the whole downstairs?

No, no, just the bathroom.

Just the bathroom area, not the reception area.

No, yeah. I mean, if we can do more than the bathroom for $300, yeah.

So the bathrooms are going to be $300 is what you're estimating.

$285 is what we're moving it to.

Just the bathrooms.

The hallway, basically, imagine coming down the stairs. You make that right down to the bathrooms, just kind of finishing that so that people can use those as the main bathroom.

Is that providing a way for wheelchair access down there, or are we just going to have them use the bathroom upstairs?

No, so part of it is we would look at your upstairs bathrooms and potentially make one of those an ADA bathroom.

so but you're saying they already have 170k from donations as part of that 285 yeah i'm projecting they'll carry over 170 with a hundred thousand of that being uh that grant from eccles and so but then they're going to need that you're saying that the rest of that would come out of the budget yeah and that's another one i i don't have a problem waiting on that either i mean to me that's not a priority

Yeah, and I think that's basically the message, right, that we're saying is you can only spend what you raised. And so if they come in and they're like, hey, Matt, we want to put this out to bid. We only have $170,000. I'll be like, great, see if you can do it for $170,000. But if it comes back at $500,000, I'll be like, looks like you got to keep raising money.

OK, so you're saying zero from us, basically.

Yeah, pretty much. I mean, we're still subsidizing the building, but we're saying we're not going to subsidize that capital improvement.

Are we anticipating that the HVAC will bring down the cost of like the heating and things over there? I noticed like in the line budget that it was still like pretty high.

I was a little reluctant for sure to change that because AC, right? If you run an AC in the summer, that's pretty expensive. I mean, it's a difference between natural gas and power, right? Typically, natural gas is a cheaper source. Right. Or it's a cheaper source, right? And so I was a little reluctant to change that until you really go through a summer. Okay. Okay, and then there's a couple of trails. I didn't want to completely take that out, but I took it from $5,000 to $2,000. But Trails has a very healthy reserve. We've got plenty of money for the projects that are in there. And we included even that Porter, or sorry, Steiner Park project using some of those funds. And so I feel like they're in good shape. And then keep in mind, we also put $30,000 from impact fees in there every year for those projects. And most of those trail projects are being 93% funded by FAA grants right now. Or not FAA, but federal grants. Yeah. And then I did this city hall police reserve. I took it from 150 to 125. And then I dropped the contingency from 100 to 80. So now if you look it down in the blue, So basically, after all these changes, we were $1.8 million short at 14.72%. We cut out $1.25 million in expenses. We increased the revenues because of that park transfer, that $132,000 for that Porter Park project. And then we increased the property tax projection, so I got those numbers. And then I had to reduce the overhead rate just a little bit, because I had to recalculate as we cut out things.

So total carryover needed is 734.7.

And then if you look down below, projected carryover at 27 is 20.81. And if you look all the way down, if you were to really be able to sell that pump house for 300,000, you would be at 22.31. So any questions on that? Nope. Dave Kuntz, Okay i'm going to keep going because we'll run out of time. Dave Kuntz, So this next one i'm not going to spend time on unless you have a specific question on the department one, but I put it in there as a method for you to just kind of see what their two year changes with or without the cuts. Dave Kuntz, But anyways, that one. I'm not gonna, we could take a while on that one. So I'm gonna skip it unless you have specific questions that come up. So next one is the personnel requests. So I just wanna show you what those cost. So in the general fund, if we would have approved the IT position, you know that was about a hundred and twenty one thousand so we said pull that out one thing to keep in mind with IT is right we talked about this overhead rate so if you if you do hire an IT there is some revenue source that comes back right from the overhead rate doesn't cover the full cost but I still felt like we needed to not approve that for the same reason as the police as well. So police, as you look there, you see the priorities. Like definitely the priority for them was detective, then patrol. Detective is about $135,000 in the first year. Patrol, you're looking at about $121,000. And then that parking attendant was about $93,000. Now, of course, they had factored in some increase if they did hire a parking person. The one thing I want to say as well is that that patrol one is tough because we hired three patrol officers in the last four years, new ones. And we have a grant and that grant stops in 2027, at the end of 2027. So we're already going to take a hundred and something thousand dollar hit to the general fund in reduced revenue from that grant. And so I was like, I don't think you can afford to lose that revenue plus add another $125,000.

And then there's the, he's actively pursuing other grants.

Yeah.

To continue that.

Yeah. I don't know if he is on the personnel, uh, other than the ICAC, uh, grant, right. For the detective position, potentially, if he can get that, which would be awesome. Like if he can come back to us and say, Hey, they approved 30,000 a year, that makes your decision a lot easier. There's the operator and training, so that's about $93,000 per year. So really pretty slim recommendations when it comes to adding personnel. all right if you flip it over really fast with i.t like what was their are they why what's the need there i guess so they i mean officially they they felt like they needed what's called a technician infrastructure technician and they just felt like there was enough demand on all their other full-time employees that they needed someone pretty soon with that specialty And I had the conversation with Todd. I mean, I was like, can you I mean, are you already kind of doing that with your existing employees? And yes, he is. But it was more of freeing up time for those employees to focus on other areas by having an infrastructure technician. Right. But I think he was okay with it. I think he understood it. Now, he may come back next year and say, I need it now.

So this is somebody to help with the streetlights and what infrastructure?

No, no, not streetlights. No, it's strictly just everything IT, so database, infrastructure, connections, networks, those kind of things. Like servering? Yeah, yeah. And so I think it was more of a need to, they're spread thin, if you will. Right, right. And we need to free up some of their time.

Okay.

Okay, so if you flip it over, capital assets. I'm not going to go through every one, but I just give this to you so that you kind of have an idea. I put to the right what's supported by general assets. revenues or the general fund. And granted, some of these expenses have been saved for. So like as you look at like Rexburg Rapids on the second page, $225,000, well, that's definitely been paid for by the general fund, but it's been done by transferring money over many years, right, to build it up. And so it gives you an idea where those capital expenses are. So if you get to the last page, you can see it's a pretty substantial number, about $39 million in what we call capital assets. all right let's let's jump into rates real quick um so rexburg utility rates so aic came out with a study they emailed it to me a few weeks ago so i took their study they had a few cautions they said number one every city provides a different set of utilities to fit their residents needs So there's no one size fits all model. And then they were very clear that we advise you not to set your rates based on what other cities charge. By law, a city's utility rates must reflect the cost of operating their specific system, its unique needs, and future expense and then system upgrades. And setting rates based on what other cities charge can be a tragically costly decision. So really, you should follow your rate study, which, of course, we just went through. And as you look at this, we are one of the 11 Idaho cities that fall in that 15,000 to 50,000 range. And we're kind of on the upper tier of that, threshold of that. But 10 out of those 11 cities responded. So it was pretty good. You know, you had 91% response rate in our category. So if you flip it over to water on the next page, What they did, they didn't look at like a large user. So they looked at a user of 5,000 gallons of water on a three quarter inch meter. So this is like a typical resident that probably doesn't really have a yard, right? So these rates are at 2025. The rate that I'm gonna show you at the end is if we were to adopt the 2027 rate that would happen in October. So you can see that the average rate for a 15,049.99 city is about $32.06. If we take our current rate, we're at 24.07. If we take our rate in October, we're at 29.82. so so it just kind of gives you an idea of where we would be which is still what three dollars under that average and so i think we're pretty reasonable place on water um and then that's the cost per year right now that's the what that's the cost per year the 29 no that's the cost per month that'd be your monthly cost Okay, everybody, that makes sense? And then so kind of the same theory on wastewater. Wastewater was $55.61 in that category. We, this year in 2025, January, We're currently, we changed that in January. We're currently at $47.48. After the study, if you guys adopt it, we'll be at $46.80. And I know that's lower, but we know that the average is closer to 23,000 gallons in our city because people water their lawns. And so... But we just wanted to show you the comparison to the way they did their study. Once again, we were quite a bit lower than that average. Solid waste is a little different story. I don't know why, but they did it based on a 65-gallon trash bin. And I was like, doesn't everybody have a 90 gallon? But anyways, we have a 90 gallon, 38% bigger, right? And so just keep that in mind. We also provide recycling service as part of our trash service. So the average was $18.82. You'll see that we, if we adopt the rate in October, I'm just going to jump to the bottom, would be at $29.21. But if you take the recycling out, $20.81. So we're a little bit on the high side there. And we know why. The number one reason why is what your counties charge you for tipping fees. And we're a little on the high side compared to a lot of other counties. And so, and there's not much you can do about that.

Without recycling, can people opt out of recycling?

No, we're not giving them that option, but we've talked about doing some surveys and considering it, and we certainly could.

It would still be lower if we just went strictly to garbage and no more recycling. It'd be lower, is what you're saying.

Oh, yeah. It would drop quite a bit. Now, there would be some added cost because that would then be going to the transfer station, right, instead of the recycle bin? Yeah. But that would add our revenue too, so we would take your money. So anyways, we did this scenario, and it's been several years since I've done it. But I think the first time I did the analysis, we would save, it was like $225,000 to $240,000 a year, if I remember right. And that's been several years ago. And so, I mean, it is no small number.

It seems to me like we were sold a bill of goods with the county and the new landfill.

I mean I just I remember those discussions and it was oh we're gonna be able to save so much money by not going to Jefferson County and I just of course you know yeah and I in long in long term they may be right right because they can control that cost going forward now whereas you can't control that cost if you're going to Jefferson County so Okay, I'm gonna skip the next one. I'm gonna go right to the beautiful colored Rexburg utility sample bill. So this, keep in mind that this comparison is from when we changed it last, which was January of this year, to if we change it in October. And the reason why I'm going through these is I actually won't be here on the public hearing next council, but Keith and Noah and others will be there that can answer questions, but this is, This is what you're deciding in that meeting. And so the rate change for a typical resident would be about a $5.83 a month increase. So from January to October, right? And 4.3%. A typical apartment complex increase would be closer to 10%. And then a small business or a Rexburg business example with a small meter, three-quarter inch meter, would be about a 9.2% increase. And then keep in mind that the other thing that we're doing is we eventually want to go to the classes. So remember we talked about multifamily, commercial, and residential classes. We can't do that right now until we go through a lot of programming and updating. So we advertise that at the $1.15 on the volume rate. But as we incorporate that for commercial and multifamily, they will drop a little bit. And so these rates are a little high, but that's what's going to happen in the beginning. And then as we put those things in play, they'll save. They'll start to save a little. So any questions on that one? OK, so if you flip it over, I And I showed this to Colin earlier, and I was going to call it Twin Falls, and honestly, I didn't have time to. So as you look at this comparison, what this is is this is a single family dwelling. What would they pay if they wanted to build a new residence, right, in impact and capacity fees? Now, these rates, I went and I looked and all of these cities that are represented here, I would say that honestly, a majority of them probably haven't updated these rates for probably three, four years. Some of them did update them last year. And then the one on Twin Falls, I almost want to pull Twin Falls out because I need to give them a call. They show their sewer at 513, but I almost wonder if the reason why is I think they might have a regional sewer plant. And if that is the case, then it may be very well that you're paying 513 to the city for collection. but then probably paying an additional amount to the treatment side through the contractor. So I need to verify that, but with Twin Falls included, you can see the average impact fee is quite a bit higher than where we sit. So we're at $2,610. Average comes in at $6,500, with post-falls kind of being the crazy number, to be honest. It's super high. and then as you go down and you look at capacity fees we are pretty close to the average my guess is that we'll be at or lower if what i'm telling you about twin falls proves to be true and the you can see there once again um post falls is is the biggest one of the biggest But even some of our neighbors, right, Pocatello is about 10,470. Idaho Falls was about 4,365. Chubbuck, 5,600. And then some of these others are like cities, like Provo. People, I don't know why, but developers oftentimes want us to compare to Provo and other university places because they're probably used to developing in those places. And so... So if you get, and keep in mind that that's if you guys adopt these new capacity fees at 2,151 for sewer, 4727 for water. So once again, I feel like if you take the total, it's not terrible. Now, we have not updated our impact fees for a while, and we will be bringing those to you in the fall, probably at the, I'm guessing,

These are based on any size single family dwelling. Yeah. Tiny home to a half acre lot.

Yeah. Same fees. Pretty much. Yep. Cause typically they all have the smallest meter anyways. Yeah. And so, and that, that's why, that's why sometimes when people come in and they're like, Hey, I really want to get a one inch meter. And it's like, I don't think you do. Cause that's that whole conversation we had about being able to hit the peaks. If somebody has a one inch meter, then that means we have to be able to provide the volume for a one inch meter. and so there's an added cost because that means we have to have more water in storage we have to be able to pump more water to be in storage etc etc and that's why that base rate is higher okay so the next one's just simply it's just the graph it's the same numbers but a graph okay i do want to show you um I almost elected not to show you this, just because we don't have impact fees done. But I'm going to show you anyways. So a single family, if you guys adopt these changes for capacity fees, you're going to go up about 37% about $2,600. If you flip it over, then you get into the multifamily. multifamily is not quite as bad and that that one is it would be about a 15% increase or four hundred and twenty five dollars per unit but then when you look at dormitory which is on the right side remember we do dormitory by the bed so the increase would be about ten point three percent or a hundred and nine dollars per bed This one, sorry.

Let me just flip it back here just to make sure.

That's going quick.

What about that? I don't know.

See it? These comparisons, as you showed us, are based on the newly not yet adopted rates, right? Oh, no, that's the last one.

So I'm on that one. OK, sorry.

The comparisons are based on if we adopt it. OK, that makes sense. Yeah, and keep in mind that they may adopt changes as well. Because I'm using their old numbers.

Did you talk about the single family one on here?

Yeah, I went quick. Let's pull it back, though. I can pull it up. You're talking about this?

The increase that says like 96.7%. I'm just confused about that.

oh yeah yeah i can go through that so so what it is is is water if you guys adopt the fees which are going to be on that public hearing um so we have that public hearing on is it the first of july deborah i think it's the stuff we talked about at that work yes so if you guys adopt that capacity fee for a single family residence it's going to go from 2403 to 4727 which is a 97 increase in water right And then the capacity fee for sewer would be about a 15% increase. So overall, and this is what the developers care about, is just give me the overall. It's gonna go up about 38%. Does that make sense? Yeah, just capacity. These are not your monthly fees. These are only to buy, it's basically to buy in, right, to our system.

And so when we had that work meeting, the reason we didn't see that, I don't remember something as shocking as the 96%, but that's probably because we were just looking at the total, right?

You were just looking at the recommended rate. We were not comparing it to the existing rate.

So I wanted to show you the existing compared, right?

So yeah, and it is. It is a big increase, but as you saw in that comparison sheet, water is typically substantially more expensive. And I think that, because right here, right, you saw...

Am I saying that right?

Yeah. Not substantially, but it's more expensive than sewer typically for connection fee. And so anyways, make sense? No. Okay. Any questions on the single family or multifamily or dormitory? Okay. The last one is commercial and... industrial so there's two pages there so remember we have both rates and the only reason why we have both rates is because we do impact fees they're they're a little different for police and fire based on institutional and commercial so this one's a little tough it's a really hard comparison to give you because there is just a wide swath of how these changes, these rates change, particularly for impact fees for streets based on the use, right? Like if it's a car wash, it's going to be totally different than if you said it's a business building, right? And so what I did is I just kind of said, hey, I'm going to give you a general office building example at 1,000 square feet, so pretty small office building. That's probably going to go up about 9.1% on the capacity fee, right? And then impact fees, of course, wouldn't change, but Oh, I'm sorry. I did the wrong rate. It's about a 61% increase. Get that right. Sorry. Now, the gallons per day rate is a 9% increase, and that's because if you look at the gallons per day, you're going to go from $1.33 to $2.59. And that's a big deal for a big user of water, right? It's going to cost them more in those capacity fees for water. And then for sewer, the rate actually drops from $11 to $10.86 that you see there. And So yeah, as I mentioned before, it depends on the use and how much they're using. Commercials, you have to just take it case by case. That's all you can do. And then the institutional is kind of the same thing. It's almost a repeat, but the little bit different percentages just because the rates are slightly different for police and fire. okay does that help does that help you guys kind of understand where we were and where we're going though if we adopt those okay all right so the next one is um i don't i don't want to get too in the weeds on this but I just wanted to include the process that you can kind of see the process we go through for charging overhead. And I mean, when you look at some of these overhead departments, some of them are a little tough, right? Because you look at like economic development, right? Well, there's a cost to economic development, but should I be charging that to the golf course? would probably say no um you know then there's there's one that's like uh legal services well that that one's pretty obvious right that's should be covered same thing with finance same thing with hr same thing with it in my opinion and so there's a couple things that you guys just have to keep understand is that just because we calculate the rate doesn't mean that we necessarily charge the full rate and so as you go down where that green is you can see what we do is we pull in those operating budgets so here's the people we charge overhead to right so it starts at streets you can see the utilities there and then it goes all the way down to the building department right Well, if you look out to the right, this is where we have kind of these political battles, I'll call them. So if you look at the actual second from right, you look at Gulf Teton Lakes and Gulf Legacy, well, when I calculate their overhead, If I include everything but, well, so if I include this overhead, let's just put it that way, you're close to $200,000, right, that I could potentially charge them. But we don't. We charge them, if you go over there and look, we charge them $52,000 plus $11,000, so $63,000. So we really are kind of discounting that in a way. But I can tell you every golf meeting that I go to that's a budget meeting and the county says, you're charging us $63,000 to do what? And it's like, well, I should actually be charging you $200,000. So that's just something that I want you to understand that there's some give and take. The other one is fire is a big difference. So fire has come out basically. So we're only showing about 5,000 in the budget because we're essentially going to be doing very little for them next year. And then the other big one that I started the conversation with this year is GIS. So as you think about GIS, we have a joint partnership with the county where we basically take the full expense minus the whole $600 revenue they bring in. We divide it in half, and we each pay our share, right? Well, the argument I made this year is I said, you know, we've been given away – eighty thousand dollars a year for overhead and you know their response was well we do things too you know maybe we need to take a deeper look at this and i'm like well you don't do payroll and you don't do hr and to me it was like saying you sure you want to take it over for 20 grand and i'm not saying we want to go there but i started that conversation with them i talked to commissioner smith and i said hey let's continue to have these conversations because Because I think it is very fair that the city collect some of that overhead rate back. Because if you don't, it just puts that much more strain on your general fund. And so I want you guys to just be aware of that process and that some of those things become more political questions than anything. So if you flip it over to page two, I just want to show you on the GIS overhead charge What I did is I actually, originally in the budget meeting, I said I was going to charge 25%. Well, I decided to charge 50%. And I did not charge the county. But I had the city cover their half of that overhead rate through our regular overhead process. The what?

The county's half?

The city's half. And so I just want you to be aware that that's a topic that I have on their radar and I think we need to talk about. And so I think it's fair. so okay the next one I'm not gonna go through it but these are just gives you an idea of the Madison County joint ventures things that we do with them right and I give that to them every year just so they know how to balance or sorry budget those respective amounts so I'll get back to them because some of those amounts have changed since our department meetings and I'll give those to them

Okay, statement of understanding budget management.

This is, I actually, the only thing I did here is I changed the language under capital purchases to reflect the new purchasing policy that we adopted like a month ago. So basically what I'm saying is that if there's expenditures, or sorry, shortfalls, so for example, if we hit a recession, And we're like, hey, we're going to lose a million dollars in sales tax. Well, we're going to have to go back to some of these departments and make some decisions to cut back. Capital purchases, there's a process where it has to come to you if it's over the 250 because we have to go through the whole procurement process and you need to approve it, et cetera, et cetera. Hiring of positions, we're basically saying if a position vacates, meaning somebody retires or terminates, whatever it is, that the mayor can you know, go say, hey, let's get that out. Let's rehire that position. Then we will come and report to you guys those changes. But we won't give power and authority to the mayor to say, we're going to add a new full-time position. You have to have that authority to approve that. Does that make sense? The only thing I changed was that procurement $250,000 amount from the prior year.

Because what was it before?

I think it was $100,000 if I remember right.

Yeah, I thought it was a lot.

It was that resolution that we just passed.

Yeah, because the state raised it from $100,000 to $250,000.

Oh, it was probably the meeting I was gone.

Yeah. And we raised, so yeah, we raised our whole policy. And so we don't, like, for example, we don't require people to get bids if it's under 10,000 now. So things like that. Okay, so this last one, finish on time? Pretty close. So this last one is really what I would put in the newspaper. And so we would put it in the newspaper twice. Public hearing would be on July 15th, which is already on their tax notices that it's here at City Hall on July 15th. And then we are required by law, we have to show the revenue for property tax. But other than that, you'll just see a revenue and expense for all the respective funds that we just kind of covered. And then if you go to the last page, that's where we get that 95, 281, 200. So that would be it. And so I mean, unless you have further questions, I'm just basically looking for, are you comfortable to move forward with publishing it in that manner and having a public hearing? And then you will have the opportunity to three read the ordinance. You can change it. You cannot increase it. And so if you guys feel like you need to have something in there right now, we need to change it right now. unless you want to do another public hearing, which we've had to do before. I try to avoid it. But anyways, that's kind of where we're at.

Yeah, my only thing is what I already said, that detective position.

It's up to you guys. I mean, that's where I'm at.

I'd like to see Josh re-look and see what he can do. If he can't, then we'll step up.

And then are you good to address it with a budget amendment in October? So, I mean, it defers it a little bit, right? Everybody okay with that? Okay.

I'm good with that.

Okay, well, I'll chat with him, and that will give him an opportunity to kind of look at ways that they might be able to move some things around internally, and then maybe he comes back with a different cost proposal, right?

Well, from my point of view, Matt, nobody enjoys this process. It's just not fun. But it makes it doable when all the work that you and all the department heads have done to make to make this all come together so hats off to you thanks so much yeah yeah no problem so i i actually like it it's one of the responsibilities i like so i just want to put that on the record

Okay, that's how we'll move forward, appreciate it. We probably should have you just do, do we have an action item, though? Maybe we don't. Okay, that's okay. Well, that's fine, because you will make it formal by adoption of an ordinance, right? So you've got a process to do that. Okay, thank you.

Okay, thank you. Can you give our open prayer?

Yeah.

Recording stopped.

She's like, what do you guys need?

Do you need milk?

And at first she...

recording in progress you're good to go okay well welcome uh everyone to our city council meeting this evening uh june 17th 2026. i appreciate all of your being here we've just concluded a work meeting uh with our chief financial officer who's steered us expertly through our 2027 budget and it's been a big a big job but we're nearing the end of that process so We would like to begin this meeting with a word of prayer, as is our habit. And we've asked Councilman Riggins to offer that prayer. Following that, Councilperson, what is it, Council?

Councilmember.

Councilmember T. Jim will lead us in the pledge of allegiance.

Father in heaven, we're grateful for this opportunity to meet together as friends, neighbors, as a city council. Grateful for the opportunity that we have to live in this beautiful place. We're grateful to be surrounded by so many good people. We ask you to bless us as we meet together tonight, that we may be able to listen carefully, be able to respond wisely, that we may be able to be guided and directed by the Spirit in all that we do. We love thee, we're grateful for thee, in the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

Amen.

Please stand.

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,

we'll have a roll call council members just for your information mayor merrill is out of town tonight and he's asked that i conduct tonight's meeting as council president and we have colin council member colin erickson on the yeah zoom zoom listening in he'll be participating in the meeting and Council Member Reeser is excused. He's in Germany. Go ahead.

Council Member Johnson. Here. Council Member Teejan. Here. Council Member Riggins.

Here.

Council Member Collins.

that's all of us okay we'd like to begin our meeting with a welcoming a couple of new employees to the to this group Oh, no, it's not. Sorry. We'll welcome a couple of new employees. Brandon Smith, new to the HR department. He's got some big shoes to fill. And then Christina Gilman in the planning and zoning department. So, Brandon, if you'd like to take a moment, come to the dais and just kind of give us a brief introduction.

Yeah, sure. Absolutely. Brandon Smith. So, HR director. I've been here about a week. So luckily, Terry was very gracious, and she's going to spend the next few weeks still employed. So we're going to have a great transition. She's already taught me a lot in a week. I've been out, met with a bunch of different departments. So it's been really cool and refreshing to meet a bunch of employees and just kind of see their dedication to the city. I came from kind of the private sector. So I worked at a local bank about 18 years. 15 of those was in HR. So I got a bunch of HR experience and I'm really excited and looking forward to continuing my career here in the city. Personal note, Mary got four kids. If I'm not watching their sports, I'm coaching their sports. So that's just what I love to do and forever ago got started in it and it's just kind of kept with me. So yeah, just a little bit about me.

Great. Thank you.

Are you from the area, Brandon? Yeah, I grew up in Idaho Falls. Okay. Yeah, so... Went to school here in Rexford College quite a few years ago. But yeah, so definitely familiar here for sure. Love it here. Really, after I graduated, moved away, didn't spend that long away. Came back to the rural world, kind of raised my family. So I've been here ever since. Great.

Okay. Well, thank you. Thanks. Welcome. And Christina, if you could... Introduce yourself to us.

My name is Christine Gilligan, and I just started on Monday, so it's only been a few days. Learning all about public works. I'm sorry, not public works. I need to show you. I've only lived in Idaho Falls since February when I got married. So my previous position, I worked for the city of Eagle, the area. Great well, we're excited to have you with us helping us navigate the growth of Rexburg So, thank you for your willingness

OK, we'll go to item number five on the agenda. That is a public hearing. This public hearing is to vacate a portion of the Sky Meadows Platte of the City of Rexburg at 1228 Stone Drive, and this action will be designated as ordinance number 1348 if the motion passes and considered first read. So, Alan, from the Planning and Zoning Commission, if you'd take us through this. I guess technically we've got to open public hearing at this point, so we'll open this public hearing.

members, what has happened here is in this situation, we're looking at this area right here. And this is part of the whole Skye Meadows subdivision. They've completed that first part of it. And they're now coming in and going, we want to make modifications to it. Recently, just a little while ago, they had this rezoned LBRT. You guys are aware of that.

One of the things that the person that's looking at purchasing that, this one ran onto a neighbor's property.

They had signed on the plat that they were OK with that, but now they have decided to not be involved. So they would like to vacate this because these are public roads and it's already dedicated to the city. that they need to be vacated so they can come in and redesign this to fit within those parameters better and so that's what they're asking you to do tonight just vacate it takes it away and then they will submit a whole new application for a new subdivision to go in there so that's what they are asking for okay any questions of mr parkinson do we do we have uh

input from from anyone in the area?

We have not had any correspondence on this. And so but it isn't a published. It isn't a public hearing. Sorry, my mistake. So yeah, we have not received any correspondence at this point. Okay. Yeah.

Okay. Well, we will, thank you. We will then go to the public input portion of our hearing. Those, we'll first ask those who would be in favor of this action to come forward and express themselves. Then those who are neutral to the proposal. And then those who are not in favor opposed to the to the changes. So is there anyone here who would like to speak in favor of this proposal?

Yes, please. If you'd like to come to the.

Dias here. State your name and your address for us, please.

My name is Jordan Charrington and my address is 1227 Stone Drive. And I'm in favor of the vacation of this plot. Just a couple of months ago, the planning and zoning committee decided to rezone the remaining part of the undeveloped subdivision. that was met with overwhelming support from several members or owners property owners on stone drive and i think i think it will be well make sense that the farmer is taking back that portion that actually was initially decided to give to the city and the current plot doesn't um Allow for the full like capacity that LVR 2 zoning would allow for.

OK, thank you. Is there anyone anyone else in favor of this proposal? OK, anyone in the neutral position? Yes.

Can I read a message from someone else on the street?

um i think so can't can she i don't know spencer can she do that So basically, you'll be...

Okay, so he's unable to make the meeting. It's Jason Hunt, also lives on Stone Drive. He lives on that upper part. So it's actually the south, across from the south, like the north, but the south part of it.

Okay, okay.

Okay, his hopes and concerns, or he hopes that there will still be some larger lots, so there's less digging. He wants whole line road traffic to be considered, and we need a walking path along the whole line for safety, which I believe is in the development agreement. He's hoping for some level of covenants. We currently have covenants, and I guess I'm not sure if those will go away. And then he likes his view of the temple, and he'd like to keep that.

Okay.

Can I just ask you, did he say whether he was in favor of what his meetings allow, which is to vacate what's already planned?

Yeah, so I've talked to him a few times, and he's been pretty neutral. He hasn't expressed major concerns except I know that he really likes his view and I know that he has trouble with his irrigation or irrigating his grass. And so there's a water station I think planned that the developer will have to put in and I think that will help him.

I think his concern is maybe the traffic.

So he's a little bit.

So his concerns will be addressed as a new plat comes forward, right? Okay. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Is there anyone else in favor or neutral to this? See none. Anyone opposed to this proposal? Okay.

Yes. I don't know that I can say I'm opposed. I need more information before I can officially oppose. Can I ask, is this map Is this what it currently stands as?

That's the current plat, I believe.

This is the current plat, and are these the original starry meadows?

No, this is the original. Oh, this is the original.

Back in 2007 or 8. Okay, so this is the original.

This is the original flat.

Nothing's been changed yet. Later on in this meeting, there is an amendment for the part of the flat.

Okay, so even if we might not oppose the vacation of this current one, we can possibly oppose the next.

The new flat does not have a public area. I don't think there's a public area.

So if we vacate this, is this automatically going to the new one?

they will have to submit to staff, meet the requirements, present a public P&Z, and they will either recommend approval or denial to city council, who will then review it and decide whether to approve or not.

And there will be a public hearing on that plat, on the replat, the new plat?

However they can attend the meeting. So planning and zoning. But it's not a public hearing. Will they not have a public hearing, though? Plants do not require a public hearing statutorily. That's statutorily. So when will the citizens in that area have an opportunity to speak? They won't. Other than visiting, and they can't visit with you guys either prior to the meeting.

So they do not get the opportunity to. And here's the thing. You've got to look at it similar to a zone. If my zone is approved and I'm in a place, I don't have to go through a public meeting to put my house on and ask permission. Platting is allowed as long as they stay within the parameters of the zoning, what infrastructure is required, what road requirements, all of those different things. You're just making sure they meet those requirements moving forward.

Alan, is your mic on?

It is now. I'm sorry. Yeah. So that's how you've got to look at that platting process.

So as the neighborhood, as the homeowners in Sky Meadows, what exactly are our options if it's like this gets vacated and then they want to put in a bunch of small duplexes. Our neighborhood doesn't want that.

that's the challenge you run into because the zoning allows duplexes or twin homes so your only option at this point is try to contact the developer and just find out what they're doing and how they're going about it and if it fits your what you want to see happen but those that stuff that all has to be decided with a zone change and that's already happened okay so this is just more informational It is informational, but it's also the legal statutes that we have to go through. Because those roads were dedicated to the city, before they can modify them, we basically hand it back to them and say we no longer own it, control it. Now you go ahead and design what you want to, and then they will rededicate the new roads and the plat of where it needs to be and what's going on.

Okay. Well, I think those answer my question.

can i say one thing just because i hope residents lauren i know it's so confusing but we changed the zone a while back and that's when you would have had the opportunity to share about this and so i know it's really confusing but that already happened and so now it's already zoned to to have duplexes so okay is there yes thank you

Christine Bennion, just for more information for the people who have never gone through this process, which we see a ton in our area, 295 Shoshone Avenue. What developers will often do is come in and change the zoning and say, oh, it's not a big deal. We just want to change the zoning. And they have very big plans to completely change everything. So it's got to happen.

Excuse me. We've got to keep our remarks strictly on the vacation.

I would oppose it. I would oppose them changing the plot at all, because if this vacates and allows them to restructure it so that they can put in duplexes because of the new zoning, then I would say don't vacate it. Let it stay exactly as it is. I would oppose it because I can guarantee you that most of the people in there, even though they're not in here, I don't know how many of them even knew about the rezoning because that's happened in our area several times. Lots of rezoning. People aren't given the opportunity to actually ever be informed unless somebody in their area is informed and telling them that this is happening. most likely they're probably going to have tons of apartments in there. I think if you went and asked all of those people, hey, we're probably going to have lots of duplexes in here, they would probably be opposed to that. So again, I think it's important to inform the public that when you change the zoning like this, it's already been zoned. There's nothing that can be done other than, hey, maybe I mean, zoning, I don't know if you're allowed to rezone it back to what it was. It went from, what, RD1? What did it go to?

LDR1.

LDR1 to part of it. LDR1 to LDR2.

Again, I've got to bring you back to this. Right.

So I would just say that I would be opposed to this. Just for the sake of the people who are.

And you had an opportunity to oppose it when we asked for those who oppose. Yeah, so now it's those who were at about red opposition. I'm sorry, thank you. I'm sorry I'm my my fault.

No problem, so I would just say in behalf of those people who haven't been writing this one. I would oppose on their on their behalf just because I don't really understand.

OK, thank you. Just quickly.

Yes.

There are specific notice requirements that any public hearing, any planning and zoning action requires by state statute. We adhere strictly to those notice requirements and those posting requirements. If we're a day short, we push it back. We never test the boundaries on those posting limits. And then again, anybody who's reviewed any planning and zoning minutes recently will see me not yelling, but reminding everybody on every single zone change that we are considering the zone and not the specific plan. And again, it's statements like that, comments like that, that's why it's important to always, if a developer comes in and says, well, this is my plan, you have to consider The greatest density or what they can do within that zone because they're not bound By some informal plan at the beginning and that's why we remind commissioners and City Council members to focus on land use and not specific projects Thank you.

Thank you for that clarification Okay Is there anyone else opposed to this? Thank you

So I appreciate Mrs. Bennion's comments. As someone who does not know what's going on, I think it would be a good idea for me to stand up and make a fool of myself right now. I have not been following.

Name and address.

I was arriving there. My name is Joe Griffin. I live at 1366 Stone Drive. And with no acrimony, I would submit an objection to the vacation of the flat. Simply, I think This may be the horse is already out of the barn. It seems like it again.

I'm late coming to the meeting where the objection may actually have some purchase.

But I think there's a few reasons for multiple residents in that area. One, I don't think the argument about property value holds up very well. It's been shown that duplex housing does not necessarily decrease property value for neighbors. It's more of an aesthetic complaint, I guess, in terms of just the uniformity of the neighborhood, increased traffic, and more of an itinerant sort of neighborhood. It's been shown that duplex ownership in Idaho Hovers around 15% of occupancy by the owner. So this would be Less of a community feeling in the in the area. So I just wanted to, you know, again, I don't know if this is a good point at this this moment, but offer an objection. I did have a question. I was wondering if one of the zoning folks could answer. When part of an existing plat is rezoned, is that expressed or registered as a public instrument? I was reading there was an amendment or a variance or something. I'm not sure where we find that. because I was looking through the records. I couldn't find anything.

Well, we'd have to have legal answer that one for you because I'm not sure.

Mic drop. It showed that I was not touching it.

Now that's a serious mic drop Anyhow, I know I know some of that would have to be illegal I know what we're doing meets the statutes of coming in and they're basically this is what's considered a second or third phase depending on how they want to break it up and So it's been platted but they have not done the infrastructure yet. So this creates that opportunity for them to come in and vacate and come in with a modified one to replace that with all of the correct paperwork to do so.

Thank you.

Okay, anyone else in opposite? Yes, please. Sure.

I just guess with a new switch is opposed, they would have to get new roads, right? Name and address.

Name and address, please. Yes, thank you.

Here's 1354 Clover Court. Okay. But if they vacated, they would have to get new roads.

Yes, that would be a requirement. And there's things that we would require as a city that they have to do for roadways. Certain widths they have to put in. They have to have no more than two stacks. So you see in some of these where there's two rows of houses and then a road, things like that, that our statute says you have to do this. And that's what staff will review, and they will build to those standards. But new roads will be designed and built into all of that.

Does the developer do that part or does...

It's all the developer.

Everything. Does the developer have people... Because that stone drive corner that goes from that top to that bottom, where I sit is in that cul-de-sac. It's a blind corner. It is completely blind. Especially with snow piled up into that section and to have more traffic and all that stuff added to it Would they, do they even think of that kind of stuff?

They don't have any responsibility for that part of it. They're just responsible for the section that they are building. Because it's probably not going to be the same developer that did Sky Meadows. We don't know for sure who. We have some people talking to us. They have permission to make this change, but I don't know if there's been a land transfer yet or not.

Well, the developer who did Sky Meadows did not do a great job to begin with. with putting in the houses and all that. It's very mosh-posh, but that corner, it is literally a matter of time before a child gets hit. Not an adult, a child. And I just, more of that safety issues, that is more of my biggest concern with this whole thing that I don't think is being considered because it's a developer. And it's, to me, it's more money than actual the humanity of the people that are actually living there right now.

Yeah, they will have to meet traffic standards. They'll end up probably doing a traffic impact study, just depends on the number of units they put in there, which will then look at all of those aspects of it. And if they create a challenge somewhere else than in there, they will be held responsible for their portion of the modifications if it's required.

What does that mean?

That means that if they come in and says, oh, we've got to modify this corner because a lot more traffic's coming through, they look at it proportionally and say, well, there's a certain amount of sky metals already built out. They have their share of it. Founders are going to have a portion of it because they actually access through there, and they will have a portion. So there's a calculation they use to say, here's your responsibility.

But the developer will take that?

It depends on how that all works out. The traffic impact study would guide us down that pathway.

Would it be guaranteed that they would have a traffic study?

That's up to, it's going to be, we haven't seen any plans yet, so we don't know the number of units. And there's a certain number that triggers a traffic impact study.

But what if they're like a unit short?

Then they don't have to.

Yeah. I appreciate all of the concern it's just the reality is that these I'm afraid most of your concerns were addressed at the time of the of the zone change which happened a couple of months ago so We're here to just focus on the vacation of this property so a new plat, I guess, can be developed. So is there anyone else in opposition to this proposal? Okay. there anyone online that would like to i heard no no no okay well we'll close then the uh public input portion of the hearing and um discuss this proposal council member

I just had a question I don't know who it's for but could some of these things that they're worried about be addressed by the HOA like the covenant like if they like the way it looks and like their covenants can they put that into place a little bit like so that the aesthetic and all that will

existing or the one we're vacating the one that we're vacating can well basically when you vacate it then the HOA starts all over yeah that's all a matter of we don't know how that's going to do if they're going to modify the HOA okay and so it just takes that portion and there'll be a new one or whether they'll use this one and add that to it we have none of that information at this point so the HOA that's there for the existing homes is not it's not a qualifier for this land this It's not a decision point for what you're doing.

Right, right.

Yeah, that's the way I'd look at it because the HOA may or may not be involved with this and this may be a completely new plot, completely separate.

That's what I was, if it was a new development.

We don't know at this point whether it's going to be an extension or part of it.

All right. Thank you. So, Alan, a quick question. So this process then, there was a zone change, and now we're vacating a previous plat that was platted before the zone change. Correct. And then they will come back with another plat. Correct. That will comply with the LDR2. Correct. This complies with LDR1, correct, with what we're seeing here?

Keep in mind, up there on that wind song, there's that two lines there. That is already LDR2. That was prior to the zone change.

OK.

So it was from that point back that we actually changed to LDR2.