WHEN WE GET TO THAT. THANK YOU JOHN. FOR. YEAH. EVERYBODY HERE. THERE. OKAY. THIS IS THE MEETING
[Call to Order]
[00:00:12]
OF THE IDAHO FALLS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY. WELCOME TO THOSE IN ATTENDANCE AND TO ANYBODY ONLINE. I'M BRANT THOMPSON. I'M THE VICE CHAIR. LEE RADFORD, OUR CHAIR IS OUT OF TOWN TODAY, SO I'LL BE CONDUCTING THE MEETING. RIGHT? YES. CONGRATULATING GRANT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT. OH. OF COURSE. YEAH. DO I NEED TO START OVER? NOPE. YOU'RE GOOD. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. FIRST ITEM IS, ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONS OR CHANGES TO THE AGENDA? HEARING NONE WILL MOVE FORWARD. HAS[2. ACTION ITEM: Approval Of Minutes: March 20, 2025]
BEING AS HOW EVERYBODY'S HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE MINUTES. IS THERE ANY CHANGES TO THE MINUTES? IF NOT, I'LL SUPPORT A MOTION THAT THEY BE APPROVED. MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM MARCH 20TH. SECOND. OKAY. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE.OPPOSED? OKAY. OH. I'M SORRY. THERE IS ONE. JUST THE DATE 2024 TO 2025. IN THE I FORGOT. I DID LOOK AT THE RADFORD PRESENTED THE FINANCIAL REPORT. ITEM THREE. ITEM THREE. I THINK THAT'S JUST A TYPO. YEAH. YEAH. OKAY. WELL, I SUBMITTED ONE TYPO ALSO. IN A HEADING OVER HERE JUST TO SPELL IT. SO WITH THAT TO APPROVE AS AMENDED. OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES, AS AMENDED. SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? OKAY. THOSE PASSED. THE NEXT THING IS THE
[3. ACTION ITEM: Approval Of Expenditures And Finance Report]
FINANCIAL FORECAST. CAN YOU JUST JUST RUN THROUGH THOSE ITEMS REAL QUICKLY, PLEASE? YEAH. CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, MISTER CHAIR. SO FOR THIS MONTH, WE HAVE ON OUR FINANCE REPORT COMING OUT OF THE RIVER COMMONS FUND. WE HAVE $100 TO REBECCA THOMPSON FOR HER SERVICES PROVIDED. WE HAVE $4,413.75 GOING TO BRAD KRAMER PERSPECTIVE PLANNING AND CONSULTING FOR HIS EFFORTS. AND THEN WE HAVE $5,928 GOING TO ELAM AND BURKE. $902.44 GOING TO THE CITY OF IDAHO FALLS. THAT CONSISTS OF A CITY ADMINISTRATION FEE, AS WELL AS A POST REGISTER REIMBURSEMENT THAT THE CITY PAID FOR THAT WE ARE REIMBURSING BACK TO THEM. AND THEN A SEPARATE INVOICE FOR A POST REGISTER FOR $406.36. COMING OUT OF THE EAGLE RIDGE, WE HAVE $100 FOR CITY OF MASON CITY ADMINISTRATION FEES. AND THEN COMING OUT OF THE JACKSON HOLE JUNCTION DISTRICT, WE HAVE ELAM AND BURKE FOR $225 FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, AS WELL AS $100 SERVICE FEE FOR CITY ADMINISTRATION COSTS. AND THEN THOSE JUST TRANSFER OVER TO THE BUDGET TO ACTUAL REPORT. THOSE SAME FIGURES, THOSE SAME FIGURES. OKAY. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE FINANCE REPORT? IF NOT, I'LL MOVE OR I'LL ASK THAT FOR A MOTION TO ACCEPT THOSE. I WOULD MOVE THAT. WE APPROVE THE EXPENDITURES AND FINANCE REPORT. SECOND. OKAY. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? THAT PASSES. OKAY. WE HAVE OUR FIRST[Item 4 & Item 5]
ACTION ITEM IS AN AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTING WITH RENEE MCGEE. MEGAN, CAN YOU TELL US WHERE WE ARE WITH THAT? WE HAVE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT AND A TASK ORDER. YES. THANK YOU, MISTER CHAIR. COMMISSIONERS. AND I THINK IT DOES MAKE SENSE TO HANDLE THE PRESENTATION ON ACTION ITEMS FOUR AND FIVE TOGETHER. YOU RECALL THAT THERE IS AN EXISTING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH BRAD KRAMER'S ENTITY. WE HAVE HAD SPECIFIC AGREEMENTS WITH RENEE MCGEE OVER THE YEARS, BUT I THINK IT MAKES SENSE TO MOVE IT TO A SIMILAR MODEL THAT WE'RE TREATING OUR OTHER CONSULTANTS WITH. SO ATTACHED YOU WILL SEE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT. IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE MODEL THAT WE'RE USING TO DATE. AND AS WELL[00:05:06]
THERE'S ALSO A TASK ORDER, WHICH IS THE SCOPE OF WORK RELATED TO THE PREPARATION OF THE ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR THE PROPOSED WILLOW CREEK PROJECT AREA, WHICH IS ANTICIPATED TO COME BACK BEFORE THE BOARD SOMETIME THIS SUMMER FOR THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION OF THE PLAN AND ATTACHMENTS THERE TO. SO THIS IS REALLY JUST TO PROVIDE A LEVEL OF FORMALITY AND JUST MAKING SURE WE'RE TREATING OUR CONSULTANTS CONSISTENTLY AS WE MOVE THROUGH THIS PROCESS. SO I'M HAPPY TO STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE AGREEMENT OR THE TASK ORDER. SO THE TASK ORDER IS FOR THE ELIGIBILITY REPORT ON WILLOW CREEK. ARE WE SO IN. SO IT SAYS THERE'S AN ESTIMATED COST OF $7,000. ARE WE JUST GOING TO GET A STATEMENT FROM RENEE SAYING THAT THERE'S X NUMBER OF HOURS AT THE RATE THAT IS SPECIFIED IN THE SERVICES AGREEMENT? YES THAT'S CORRECT.SO IN THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT, THERE IS A SECTION THAT ADDRESSES THE INVOICES AND THE FORMAT OF THE WHAT'S INCLUDED IN THE INVOICE. AND SO SHE WILL TRACK HER TIME AND SHE WILL SUBMIT AN INVOICE IN THE AMOUNT IS AN ESTIMATE. BUT THIS WILLOW CREEK PROJECT IS ALSO UNDER A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THAT DEVELOPER WHO IS PAYING THE COST OF THE PLANNING EFFORT. SO, YOU KNOW, ULTIMATELY THOSE FUNDS SHOULD COME OUT OF OR THE FEES SHOULD COME OUT OF THOSE FUNDS AS THEY'RE PAID. ULTIMATELY, AS WE MAKE THE TRUE UP ON EACH OF THESE PROJECTS AS THEY MOVE FORWARD. BUT YES, THERE IS AN OUTLINE OF HOW THE INVOICING PROCESS SHOULD WORK AND THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT. SHOULD THESE BE SIGNED TODAY? THAT WOULD BE GREAT IF THEY'RE ONCE APPROVED, THEN THEY CAN BE SIGNED TODAY. YEP. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ARE THERE DO WE ARE WE GOING TO. DO WE HAVE TO ACCEPT THESE BY VOTE? YES. SO THE FIRST ONE WOULD BE AN ACTION ITEM ON THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT ITSELF. AND THEN IF APPROVED, THEN WE MOVE FORWARD TO AN ACTION ITEM ON THE TASK ORDER ITSELF. OKAY. MR. CHAIR, I MOVED TO APPROVE AND ACCEPT THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE AGENCY AND RENEE MCGEE. SECOND. THANK YOU FOR THAT MOTION. AND SECOND, ARE THERE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION? I, I JUST APPRECIATE HAVING A FORMALIZED THIS WAY. I THINK IT'S GOOD TO HAVE THEM BOTH IN IN LINE. SO MEGAN, THANK YOU FOR DOING THAT AND THE CONSISTENCY. YEAH. YEAH. SO THEY'RE BOTH OPERATING UNDER A CONSISTENT MODEL. OKAY. I'LL CALL FOR A VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT AS PRESENTED? SAY AYE. AYE. AYE.
OPPOSED? HEARING NONE THAT PASSES. NOW WE CAN LOOK AT THE TASK ORDER FOR THE WILLOW CREEK ELIGIBILITY REPORT STUDY. AND IT'S THE ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY STUDY. THE ELIGIBILITY WAS ALREADY. OH, WE ALREADY KNOW. YEAH, WE ALREADY DID THAT. YEAH, I GOT THE WRONG LINE THERE.
YEAH. THE ECONOMIC THE FEASIBILITY STUDY, WHICH FOLLOWS THE ELIGIBILITY REPORT. OKAY.
I'D ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THE TASK ORDER. I WOULD MOVE THAT. WE APPROVE THE TASK ORDER NUMBER ONE FOR RENEE MCGEE TO PREPARE THE ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR WILLOW CREEK. SECOND. OKAY, THAT'S BEEN A MOTION AND SECONDED. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE. I'LL CALL FOR A VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY I. I. I. OPPOSED? OKAY. THAT PASSES AS WELL. THANK YOU. OKAY. NOW WE MOVE ON TO. OH, WE HAVE A RESOLUTION. OKAY. THIS IS THE.
[6. ACTION ITEM: Consider Resolution Approving The First Amendment To The River Commons Urban Renewal Plan (De-Annexation)]
THIS IS THE ANNEXATION OF THE RIVER COMMONS URBAN RENEWAL PLAN. THIS IS A. WAIT, IS THIS SOMETHING THAT YOU WANT TO PLAY THIS THROUGH? OH, MEGAN, I'LL LET YOU TAKE US THROUGH IT.MEGAN. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. COMMISSIONERS. SO WE HAD HOPED TO HAVE THE FULL AND FINAL PACKET ON THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE RIVER COMMONS URBAN RENEWAL PLAN TO ADDRESS THE INTENDED ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN PARCELS, WHICH SETS THE STAGE FOR A FUTURE PROJECT. THAT IS
[00:10:03]
CURRENTLY UNDER CONSIDERATION BY THIS BODY AS IT'S MOVING FORWARD. IT'S BEING REFERRED TO AS THE RIVERSIDE PLAN. WE HAVE ENCOUNTERED SOME COMPLEXITIES ON THE MAPPING SIDE. WE ARE WORKING THROUGH THOSE. AND SO THIS THIS ITEM JUST WASN'T GOING TO BE FULLY READY FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION TODAY. WE DO EXPECT IT WILL BE BACK ON THE NEXT AGENDA. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO WE'LL JUST SET IT ASIDE UNTIL THEN. YES. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. NO ACTION TAKEN ON THIS. OKAY.[7. ACTION ITEM: Consider Resolution Approving The Grant Participation AgreementWith Participant For Site Remediation (River Commons District)]
THANK YOU. SO NOW WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO THE AGREEMENTS REGARDING THE RIVER COMMONS AREA AND THE REMOVAL OF THE DEBRIS THAT'S IN THAT AREA. AND SO. THE FIRST DOCUMENT, CAN YOU TAKE US THROUGH THAT, MEGAN? SURE. THANK YOU. SO. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. COMMISSIONER. SO AS YOU RECALL, THERE WAS A PRESENTATION THAT WAS MADE BY BALL VENTURES. I BELIEVE IT WAS AT THE LAST MEETING REQUESTING AGENCY PARTICIPATION IN SITE REMEDIATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY.THAT'S REFERRED TO THE BONEYARD. THERE IS AN EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS THAT MAKE THAT PROPERTY CHALLENGING TO DEVELOP. IT CERTAINLY HAS NOT DEVELOPED TO DATE. SO REMEDIATION OF THE SITE CONDITIONS IS CRITICAL TO BEING ABLE TO SUPPORT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IN THAT AREA. AS PART OF THAT PROCESS, THE BOARD DID CONSIDER MOVING FORWARD AND DIRECTED LEGAL COUNSEL TO COME BACK WITH AN AGREEMENT. SO WHAT YOU HAVE IN YOUR PACKET IS THE PROPOSED GRANT PARTITION PARTICIPATION REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT, WHICH ANTICIPATES OR IT CONFIRMS THE. DO NOT EXCEED AMOUNT FOR THE SCOPE OF WORK IS $2,575,850. THIS REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT IS PRETTY TYPICAL TO THE STANDARD OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT THAT THIS BOARD IS CONSISTENT WITH OR, YOU KNOW, HAS CONSIDERED BEFORE IN THE PAST AND RECOGNIZES THE TERMS THERE IN THE DIFFERENCES HERE IS HOW THE FUNDS WILL BE REIMBURSED IN THIS RIVER COMMONS PROJECT AREA. THERE IS SENIOR INDEBTEDNESS AND THE REVENUE ALLOCATION PROCEEDS ARE BEING USED TO REIMBURSE TWO NOTES IN THE PROJECT AREA. SO THERE ARE THESE SENIOR OBLIGATIONS THAT COME FIRST, BUT THE AGENCY HAS EXISTING ITS ALLOCATION OF EXISTING FUNDS IN THIS DISTRICT. AND SO IT'S CONTEMPLATED THAT ONCE THE SCOPE OF WORK IS COMPLETED, THEY WILL SUBMIT THE COST DOCUMENTATION TO THE AGENCY FOR ITS REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION. ONCE REVIEWED BY STAFF, THE TOTAL ACTUAL ELIGIBLE COSTS INCURRED UNDER THIS PROJECT WILL BE MEMORIALIZED IN A CONFIRMATION OF REIMBURSEMENT FORM, BUT REIMBURSEMENT IS CONTINGENT UPON NOT ONLY EXECUTION OF THAT REIMBURSEMENT FORM, BUT ALSO THAT THERE ARE THESE AGENCY NON OBLIGATED FUNDS FROM THIS PROJECT AREA THAT ARE REMAINING AFTER PAYMENT OF THESE SENIOR OBLIGATIONS AND THE ALLOCABLE SHARE OF THE AGENCY'S ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS. SO IT IS CONTEMPLATED THAT OVER THE REMAINING LIFE OF THIS DISTRICT, WHICH IS ANTICIPATED TO TERMINATE OR THE TERMINATION DATE IN THE PLAN IS DECEMBER 31ST, 2028. SO THERE COULD BE SEVERAL YEARS OF REIMBURSEMENT PAYMENTS. IT'S NOT QUITE LIKE A LUMP SUM SURPLUS REIMBURSEMENT BECAUSE THERE ARE SEVERAL YEARS. THERE ARE NOT SUFFICIENT FUNDS CURRENTLY TO PAY OFF THIS OBLIGATION IN A LUMP SUM. IT COULD TAKE SEVERAL YEARS, BUT IT'S NOT LIKE OUR LONG TERM OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENTS WHERE, YOU KNOW, WE REIMBURSE 75% OF THE PROCEEDS OVER AN EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME. SO IT'S A LITTLE BIT IN THE MIDDLE, BUT OTHERWISE THE TERMS ARE ARE VERY STANDARD TO WHAT YOU'VE SEEN IN IN OUR STANDARD OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT. SO IN THE PACKET AS WELL, THERE'S A RESOLUTION. AND THEN THERE'S THE TEMPLATE FORM CONFIRMATION OF REIMBURSEMENT FORM, WHICH IS AN ATTACHMENT TO THE GRANT PARTICIPATION REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT. SO WITH THAT I'M HAPPY TO STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS PROJECT. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU BY THE WAY. OKAY. MEGAN, CAN YOU HELP HELP ME UNDERSTAND THE TWO SENIOR LOAN? I MEAN, THOSE WERE I'M INTERESTED IN IN THE AMOUNTS THOSE ARE AND WHAT THE PAYBACK IS AND ALL OF THAT AS WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS. YES. SO THANK
[00:15:07]
YOU. THERE ARE. AND IF KASEY'S AVAILABLE AS WELL, SHE CAN JUMP IN IF I, IF I MISSPEAK. BUT THERE IS THE EXISTING NOTE WITH BALL VENTURES FROM WORK PERFORMED A LONG TIME AGO THAT WAS MEMORIALIZED IN AN OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT THAT ULTIMATELY WAS ROLLED INTO AT THE TIME, THIS CONCEPT OF A NOTE WAS USED, SO THERE'S ACTUALLY A NOTE MEMORIALIZING THE AMOUNT DUE AND OUTSTANDING FROM THAT OBLIGATION. AND SO THE REVENUES FROM THIS, YOU KNOW, THIS SITE ARE PLEDGED AND 75% OF THE PROCEEDS ARE REIMBURSED TO BALL VENTURES. UNDER THAT SPECIFIC NOTE, THERE IS ALSO A SMALLER PROJECT IN THE PROJECT AREA THAT IS SIMILARLY SITUATED. AND SO 75% OF THE PROCEEDS FROM THAT SITE ARE BEING USED TO REIMBURSE THAT NOTE. AND KASEY IS THE ABANDONED PROJECT, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. YES. SO EACH YEAR IN THE AUDIT, IT SETS FORTH THE AMOUNT REMAINING DUE AND OWING UNDER THOSE NOTES. BOTH OF THOSE NOTES DO CONTAIN AN INTEREST RATE COMPONENT. SO IT IS UNLIKELY I BELIEVE. AND AGAIN, KASEY, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT IT'S UNLIKELY THAT THE BALANCE, THE PRINCIPAL BALANCE WILL BE PAID OFF PRIOR TO DISTRICT TERMINATION JUST BECAUSE SO MUCH OF IT HAS GONE TO PAY OFF THE ACCRUED INTEREST OVER TIME. KASEY. DID I MISSPEAK THERE? NO, THAT. THAT'S RIGHT. SO. SO THEN HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE DISTRICT CLOSES. THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CONTINUES TO PAY. IT GETS REIMBURSED BACK TO. DO YOU MEAN THE LIKE THE. NO. YEAH. IT SHOULD BE DONE RIGHT. MEGAN.WHEN THE DISTRICT IS DONE AT THAT POINT, TERMINATE AT, YOU KNOW, AT THE TIME THE DISTRICT TERMINATES, I BELIEVE IT'S DECEMBER 31ST, 2028. AND IF THE NOTE DOES NOT GET PAID OFF, THE NOTE DOES NOT GET PAID OFF. THE DISTRICT DOES NOT STAY OPEN TO PAY OFF THOSE OBLIGATIONS. OKAY.
BUT THERE ARE CASH FLOWS FROM THE THAT ARE THERE ACTUALLY FROM 2028 THAT CONTINUE ON INTO 2029.
THEY'RE JUST THE RECEIPTS OF THOSE CASH FLOWS FROM THE TAXES THAT ARE ACTUALLY. RECOUPED BACK TO THE AGENCY IN 2029. ISN'T THAT CORRECT? SO YES, UNDER UNDER CURRENT LAW, THE AGENCY DOES RECEIVE THE FINAL YEAR OF REVENUE IN THE YEAR FOLLOWING TERMINATION. AND WITHOUT HAVING THE NOTES IN FRONT OF ME, I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK INCORRECTLY, BUT TYPICALLY THE THESE TYPES OF OBLIGATIONS HAVE THE SAME TERMINATION DATE AS THE TERMINATION DATE IN THE PLAN. SO THE REVENUES THAT FLOW IN IN 29 ARE MORE USED FOR WIND UP AND ARE NOT NECESSARILY PLEDGED FOR REIMBURSEMENT UNLESS SPECIFICALLY STATED IN THOSE AGREEMENTS. OKAY. YEAH. THE REASON FOR MY QUESTION. I JUST DON'T WANT TO OVERCOMMIT. I MEAN, WE'VE TALKED WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT. SO THANK YOU, MEGAN. BUT THE GIST OF THE PART OF THIS DOCUMENT IS THAT WE'RE NOT OBLIGATED IF WE RUN SHORT OF MONEY OR THERE'S NOT IF WE AREN'T ABLE TO REIMBURSE THE FULL AMOUNT, WE'RE NOT OBLIGATED TO GO BEYOND THAT. TO DO THAT, YOU KNOW, TO REIMBURSE UP TO THE $2.5 MILLION. IS THAT THAT'S CORRECT, ISN'T IT? YES, THAT'S THAT'S CORRECT. SO THIS THIS AGREEMENT WOULD BE SUBORDINATE TO THE EXISTING AGREEMENT. SO REIMBURSEMENT UNDER THOSE EXISTING AGREEMENTS PURSUANT TO THEIR TERMS IS A PRIORITY. AND THEN SECOND, THE AGENCY HAS TO HAVE ITS ALLOCABLE SHARE OF ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS FROM THIS DISTRICT. SO WE CAN'T PLEDGE EVERY SINGLE DOLLAR FOR REIMBURSEMENT. AND SO THIS REALLY IS MORE LIKE A THIRD IN LINE IN TERMS OF ITS ALLOCATION OF FUNDS, AND IS REALLY INTENDED TO JUST USE ANY OF THESE NON OBLIGATED FUNDS THAT ARE REMAINING TO ALLOW FOR TO PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE FOR THIS SITE REMEDIATION EFFORT. OKAY. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS THAT TERRY, YOU OR ANYBODY FROM SNAKE RIVER WOULD LIKE TO MAKE AT THIS POINT? I JUST WE JUST WANT TO THANK YOU AND AFFIRM WHAT IT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING. AS MISS CONRAD EXPLAINED, IT IS EXACTLY OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THE AGENCY'S OBLIGATION IS ONLY TO US TO THE EXTENT THERE ARE FUNDS AND IT'S SUBORDINATE TO THE EXISTING LOANS THAT ARE IN PLACE AND THE AGENCY'S ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS AND MAYBE OTHER THINGS THAT MIGHT EITHER HAVE PRIORITY IN FRONT OF IT. SO THIS THIS IS,
[00:20:04]
MISS CONRAD EXPLAINED, IS TRYING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF WHAT MIGHT BE LEFT OVER. RIGHT. OKAY. WELL, I THINK WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE. AND WE APPRECIATE COUNCIL'S CONSIDERATION FOR THIS. I THINK SHE DID A GOOD JOB MOLDING IT AND CAPITALIZING IT IN THE DOCUMENT. SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WAS AND THAT'S THAT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING AS WELL. OKAY.GREAT. THANK YOU TERRY. OKAY. ARE WE AT A POINT WHERE WE NEED TO VOTE ON THIS AS A THIS GRANT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT? DO WE VOTE TO ACCEPT THIS AS IT IS WRITTEN? SO, MR. CHAIR, THE ACTION ITEM WOULD BE FOR APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NUMBER 22. I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT IT 2020 205 WHICH WOULD BE APPROVING THE GRANT PARTICIPATION REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT. I SHOULD EITHER I SEE THIS. MEGAN. THAT THAT NUMBER CAME AS A LITTLE BIT OF A SURPRISE. THE RESOLUTION NUMBER. I JUST ON MY END THE TWO AND THE FIVE ARE SEPARATED. SO IT JUST LOOKS ODD. IT LOOKS LIKE IT WAS NUMBER 202. WE JUST HAVE. THE AGREEMENT, NOT THE RESOLUTION.
THERE'S A RESOLUTION. OH. WE HAVE THE GRANT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT. SO THE FIRST LINK IN UNDER THAT ACTION ITEM IS THE RESOLUTION. AND THEN AS ATTACHMENTS TO THE RESOLUTION ARE THE GRANT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT AND THEN THE ATTACHMENT THREE TO THE GRANT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT IS THE CONFIRMATION OF REIMBURSEMENT FORM. SO THAT DOESN'T COME INTO PLAY UNTIL AFTER THE COST DOCUMENTATION IS SUBMITTED UNDER THE AGREEMENT. SO THE RESOLUTION APPROVES EVERYTHING. THERE WAS A LITTLE MISUNDERSTOOD WHEN YOU SENT IT TO ME. IT SAID RESOLUTION NUMBER 2023. SO I CHANGED IT TO 2025. AND IT WAS THE FIFTH RESOLUTION FOR INFRA FOR THE OKAY. OKAY. SO IT'S THE CORRECT RESOLUTION. I JUST HAVE TO CHANGE THE NUMBER. IF YOU LOOK ON THE SCREEN UP AT THE TOP RIGHT HERE OKAY. SO THIS ONE DOWN AT THE BOTTOM IS THE 2025 DASH. YES. DASH ZERO FIVE. ALL RIGHT OKAY OKAY OKAY. SO WE'RE READY. WE'RE READY TO TAKE A VOTE ON ON THE RESOLUTION. AND MEGAN DO YOU WANT TO READ THAT TO US BY TITLE. SURE. RESOLUTION NUMBER 2020 505 BY THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY OF IDAHO FALLS, IDAHO. A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY OF IDAHO FALLS, IDAHO, ALSO KNOWN AS THE IDAHO FALLS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AUTHORIZING AGENCY TO ENTER INTO THE GRANT PARTICIPATION REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT WITH SRL DEVELOPMENT, LLC, AUTHORIZING THE CHAIR OR VICE CHAIR AND THE SECRETARY OF AGENCY TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST SAID AGREEMENT AND ANY NECESSARY DOCUMENTS SUBJECT TO CERTAIN CONDITIONS, AUTHORIZING THE CHAIR, VICE CHAIR, OR ADMINISTRATOR TO TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION TO IMPLEMENT THE AGREEMENT AND MAKE ANY NECESSARY TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO THE AGREEMENT SUBJECT TO CERTAIN CONDITIONS. AUTHORIZING THE APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS PURSUANT TO THE AGREEMENT, AND PROVIDING FOR THIS RESOLUTION TO BE EFFECTIVE UPON ITS PASSAGE AND APPROVAL. OKAY, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE OR THAT WE ACCEPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. SO MOVED SECOND. OKAY, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. AND DO YOU WANT TO CALL FOR A ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE. LISA BURTENSHAW. YES.
CHRIS COOLEY. YES. BRANT THOMPSON. YES. JOHN WALKER. YES. MOTION PASSES. OKAY. THANK YOU.
[8. ACTION ITEM: Approval Of The Confirmation Of Reimbursement #1 Pursuant To TheOwner Participation Agreement With Sentinel Properties, LLC (Pancheri-East Bank District)]
MEGAN. THE CONFIRMATIONS I'M NOT REALLY FAMILIAR WITH THESE. WHAT ARE WE SEEING IN THE CONFIRMATION THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN THE THAN THE RESOLUTION. YEAH. SO THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.THE CONFIRMATION OF REIMBURSEMENT. THE. SO IN THE OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT, WE ARE REALLY DEALING WITH ESTIMATED ELIGIBLE COSTS BECAUSE THE WORK HAS NOT YET BEEN PERFORMED. AND SO AS WORK PROGRESSES AND COSTS ARE INCURRED, SOMETIMES THAT END
[00:25:02]
NUMBER IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WAS ESTIMATED. SO WE HAVE A PROCESS IN THE OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT TO CONFIRM THE ACTUAL ELIGIBLE COSTS, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT REIMBURSING FOR, YOU KNOW, SAY AN ESTIMATE WAS 500,000 OF THE ACTUAL ELIGIBLE COST WERE 300,000. WE'RE ONLY REIMBURSING FOR WHAT WAS ACTUALLY INCURRED. AND SOMETIMES WE PUT A CAP ON IT. SO, YOU KNOW, IF THERE IS AN EXCESS OR AN OVERAGE, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE REIMBURSING THAT EITHER UNLESS THERE'S BEEN SPECIFIC CONSIDERATION IN AN AMENDMENT BY THE BOARD. SO ONCE THE COSTS ARE INCURRED, THE OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT HAS A PROCESS OUTLINED IN IT WHERE THE DEVELOPER SUBMITS VERY SPECIFIC COST DOCUMENTATION IN TERMS OF INVOICES. OFTENTIMES IT'S LINE ITEM COSTS. AND THEY'RE EVEN COMPARED TO THE ORIGINAL ESTIMATE. AND WE REQUEST AN EXPLANATION AS TO WHY THERE'S A DIFFERENCE. AND SO ONCE AND THAT'S REALLY TO CONFIRM THE REASONABLENESS OF THE COSTS INCURRED AND TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT REIMBURSING FOR COSTS OF PRODUCT AND MATERIALS THAT MAY HAVE BEEN USED ON THE PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT, BUT THAT WE'RE ONLY REIMBURSING COSTS THAT WERE USED TO REIMBURSE THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE COMPONENT OR THE ELIGIBLE PROJECT COSTS. SO ONCE WE GET AND REVIEW THE COST DOCUMENTATION, GET WHAT WE NEED FROM THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM, THAT IS, THAT RESULTS IN A NUMBER WHICH IS THE CONFIRMED ACTUAL ELIGIBLE COST, WHICH ALSO BECOMES THE REIMBURSEMENT OBLIGATION UNDER THE AGREEMENT. SO THE CONFIRMATION OF REIMBURSEMENT FORM IS A WAY TO SET FORTH IN WRITING WHAT THAT ACTUAL COST IS THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE REIMBURSING AGAINST SO THAT EVERYBODY'S ON THE SAME PAGE AND WE GET THESE DONE BEFORE THEY'RE ACTUALLY OFTENTIMES BEFORE THEY'RE ELIGIBLE FOR REIMBURSEMENT. BECAUSE IF WE COLLECT THE INFORMATION FIVE, TEN YEARS LATER, A LOT OF THAT DETAIL IS LOST. AND IT'S REALLY HARD TO RECREATE THE WHEEL AT THAT POINT. SO THIS IS REALLY JUST A WAY TO MEMORIALIZE. AND IT'S NOT A NOTE, BUT IT'S JUST MORE OF A CONFIRMATION AS TO, OKAY, THIS IS DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WAS IN THE OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT. THIS IS WHAT WE'RE REIMBURSING YOU FOR. SO IT'S BASICALLY JUST A RESULT OF THE AUDIT OF THE COSTS OF THE DIRECT COSTS. PRETTY MUCH. OKAY, OKAY.DO WE NEED TO VOTE TO ACCEPT THIS CONFIRMATION AGREEMENT? YES. SO THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS SPECIFIC TO THE PANCARI EAST BANK OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT. AND AS PART OF THAT, THERE WAS A NUMBER OF ELIGIBLE COSTS IDENTIFIED IN THE OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT. THE COST DOCUMENTATION WAS RECENTLY SUBMITTED. AND YOU'LL SEE IN YOUR PACKET THERE IS AN INVOICE THAT OUTLINES. THE COST AMOUNT. I DON'T KNOW, AND IF YOU CAN HOLD THAT ITEM UP. ON THE SCREEN AND YOU CAN SEE AND THERE WAS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SUPPORTING THIS SUMMARY, BUT WE ONLY INCLUDED THE SUMMARY IN THE PACKET JUST BECAUSE OF THE LEVEL OF DETAIL. BUT THIS RESULTED IN A REQUESTED REIMBURSEMENT AMOUNT OF 363,539 AND ONE, AND FOLLOWING REVIEW OF THE ITEM AND ITEMS, DID PUSH BACK ON THE DEVELOPER GROUP AND DID NOT INCLUDE SOME OF THE REQUESTED COSTS IN THE CONFIRMATION OF REIMBURSEMENT FORMS, SPECIFICALLY THOSE INCURRED RELATED TO ATLAS, WHICH WERE SOIL REVIEW TYPE COSTS, AS WELL AS THE HARPER 11 ENGINEERING. SO THE OF THE AMOUNT REQUESTED. THE CONFIRMATION OF REIMBURSEMENT FORM INCLUDES $356,562.76. AS YOU MIGHT RECALL, THAT OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WAS AMENDED BECAUSE WHEN THE SCOPE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DEMOLITION REMEDIATION WAS PUT OUT TO BID, THE COSTS WERE COMING IN SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN ORIGINALLY PROJECTED. SO THERE WAS AN AMENDMENT TO THE ORIGINAL OPA TO CAPTURE THOSE ANTICIPATED INCREASE COSTS. SO THE TOTAL AMOUNT ELIGIBLE FOR REIMBURSEMENT UNDER THE OPA, AS AMENDED, IS 445,133. THIS CONFIRMATION FOR THE SCOPE OF WORK THAT WAS SUBMITTED IN THE AMOUNT OF 356,000 IS A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN WAS ORIGINALLY ANTICIPATED FOR THE THIS PARTICULAR REIMBURSABLE ITEM
[00:30:07]
UNDER THE OPA. BUT BECAUSE IT'S LESS THAN THE TOTAL NOT EXCEED AMOUNT, IT IS APPROPRIATE. SO WITH THAT, WHAT YOU HAVE IN YOUR PACKET IS THIS CONFIRMATION OF REIMBURSEMENT FORM MEMORIALIZING THAT 356,000 AMOUNT. OKAY. SO IT IS IN YOUR PACKET IF THAT AMOUNT. IS YOU KNOW, IF THIS MEETS WITH YOUR APPROVAL THEN YES, PLEASE PROCEED WITH AN ACTION ITEM ON IT. AND WADE, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS. NO I DON'T. SO AT THIS TIME, DO WE NEED TO VOTE TO ACCEPT THE GRANT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT? FOR RIVER COMMONS? SO THAT WAS DONE BY RESOLUTION IN THE LAST LAST ACTION ITEM. THIS ACTION ITEM IS JUST GOING TO BE VOTING TO APPROVE THE CONFIRMATION OF AGENCY REIMBURSEMENT NUMBER. FORM NUMBER ONE. OKAY. NUMBER EIGHT. WELL, WE'RE LOOKING WE'VE GOT THE CONFIRMATION AGREEMENT FOR RIVER COMMONS FIRST. AND THEN WE CAN WE HAVEN'T WE HAVEN'T APPROVED THIS. WE HAVEN'T APPROVED. THAT WAS JUST A SIMPLE. RIGHT. WE DON'T HAVE TO VOTE ON THE CONFIRMATION AGREEMENT FOR RIVER COMMONS AT THIS TIME. THAT'S CORRECT. THAT IS JUST A TEMPLATE FORM. THAT'S AN ATTACHMENT TO THAT AGREEMENT.IT'LL COME INTO PLAY IN THE FUTURE. BUT THAT'S NOT BEFORE YOU TODAY, OKAY. IT'S AFTER THE AUDIT. THEN THE COST AUDIT IS WHEN WE'LL VOTE ON THAT. YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. YEAH OKAY. SO THE NEXT ACTION ITEM IS THE. PANCARI EAST. REIMBURSEMENT CONFIRMATION. AND THE ATTACHED INVOICE WHICH YOU'VE JUST TAKEN US THROUGH. AND SO I GUESS AT THIS POINT IN TIME WE NEED TO VOTE ON APPROVING THE CONFIRMATION AGREEMENT WITH THE FINAL AMOUNT OF 356 FIVE 6276.
IS THAT CORRECT, MR. CHAIR, I MOVE TO APPROVE THE CONFIRMATION OF REIMBURSEMENT NUMBER 1% ON PROPERTIES IN THE EAST BANK DISTRICT. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION. SECOND. SECOND. THANK YOU. DO WE NEED A ROLL CALL? VOTE ON THIS. YES, PLEASE. YEAH. LISA BURTONSHAW. YES. CHRIS LEE.
YES. BRANT THOMPSON. YES. JOHN WALKER. YES. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. OKAY. URBAN RENEWAL
[9. DISCUSSION ITEM: Discussion On Naming Urban Renewal Districts]
DISTRICTS. NAMING. RENAMING. THAT'S ME. OKAY. YEP. THAT'S ME. SO WE AS STAFF AND WITH MEGAN AS WELL AS WE HAVE A NUMBER OF THESE DISTRICTS COMING THROUGH. WE WERE LOOKING FOR DIRECTION ON NAMING CONTINGENCIES. HOW YOU WOULD LIKE TO GO ABOUT DOING THAT FROM HERE ON? THE JOKE IS THAT WE HAVE A LOT OF RIVER NAMES, AND ALSO WE FIND SOME WILL HAVE A PRELIMINARY NAME THAT STARTS TO MOVE THROUGH THE PROCESS, AND THEN THAT NAME WILL CHANGE. AND JUST TO KEEP IT CONSISTENT THROUGHOUT, THAT'S PRETTY EASY, BUT MORE SO WHAT HOW YOU WOULD LIKE US TO GO ABOUT IT'S MORE DIRECTION FOR STAFF FROM THE BOARD ABOUT HOW YOU WOULD LIKE US TO GO ABOUT NAMING THESE. IF THERE'S ANYTHING SPECIFICALLY LIKE IN TERMS OF GEOGRAPHY OR THOSE TYPE OF THINGS. SO THAT'S WHAT WE WERE LOOKING FOR, DIRECTION. WE BROUGHT THIS UP IN OUR LAST MONTH'S MEETING, BUT WE RAN OUT OF TIME. IT'S JUST REALLY DIRECTION FOR US. HOW YOU WOULD LIKE TO GO ABOUT DOING THAT? WE'RE FINDING SOME OF THE NAMES ARE GETTING CONFUSING, SO ANY DIRECTION WOULD BE HELPFUL ON THIS. DO YOU HAVE ANY GUIDANCE AS TO LIKE HOW WE CREATE A QUADRANTS OF THE CITY THAT THEY MIGHT FALL UNDER? NO, MOST OF THEM ARE NEXT TO THE RIVER, SO THAT'S WHY THEY HAVE THE RIVER IN THE NAME. BUT NOT ALL OF THEM HAVE NAMES OF THE RIVER. WE COULD USE INTERSECTIONS, OR THAT'S WHY I MENTIONED A GEOGRAPHIC FEATURE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. IF YOU WOULD ALSO LIKE, WOULD YOU LIKE STAFF TO NAME THEM, OR WOULD YOU LIKE THE APPLICANT TO DO THAT? THERE'S JUST NOT REALLY KIND OF A SYSTEM THAT WE HAVE FOR NAMING ANY OF THESE DISTRICTS. ARE THEY CURRENTLY BEING NAMED UNDER THE SUBDIVISION NAME? NO, NO, IT'S JUST A NAME THAT'S GIVEN TO THEM BY THE USUALLY BY THE APPLICANT OR BY STAFF IS HOW IT USUALLY COMES ABOUT. MEGAN, WHAT HAVE YOU SEEN IN SOME OF THE OTHER DISTRICTS OR THE OTHER COMMUNITIES FOR NAMING OF DISTRICTS? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. COMMISSIONERS, THERE REALLY IS[00:35:10]
ZERO CONSISTENCY ON HOW THIS IS HANDLED IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS. I THINK IT'S SOMETIMES IT'S A STAFF DECISION, SOMETIMES IT'S A VERY EASY GEOGRAPHIC AREA THAT IS JUST KNOWN IN THE COMMUNITY.BUT I THINK HERE THE ISSUE THAT WE'RE FACING A BIT ON FROM A STAFF AND LEGAL SIDE IS WITH EVERYTHING HAVING RIVER IN IT, IT'S GETTING VERY HARD TO MANAGE KEEPING ALL OF THEM STRAIGHT. SO JUST AS I MEAN, I'M JUST THROWING THIS OUT FOR DISCUSSION. OKAY, SO HERE'S JUST AN IDEA. SO LIKE IT'S HARD FOR ME TO REMEMBER YELLOWSTONE SQUARE. LIKE I KIND OF HAVE TO REMEMBER LIKE, OH YEAH, THAT'S THE ONE WHERE THEY'RE DOING THIS PROJECT OVER WHERE THE OLD MCDONALD'S WAS DOWN, YOU KNOW, LIKE THERE'S IT'S VERY VAGUE. THE SAME THING WITH SNAKE RIVER WEST AND EVEN RIVER COMMONS, THOSE ONES. AND YET SOMEHOW I KNOW EXACTLY THE JACKSON HOLE JUNCTION. RIGHT. LIKE I CAN KEEP THAT ONE STRAIGHT. I COULD NOT REALLY. IT'S LIKE, OH, YEAH.
WHICH ONE WAS WILLOW CREEK? BUT PANGKOR EAST THAT, THAT GEOGRAPHICAL LIKE IT'S ASSOCIATED WITH A PROJECT IN MY MIND. SO I DON'T KNOW BECAUSE WE WHEN WE DO THE, THE FINANCIAL ELIGIBILITY, IT SEEMS LIKE BY THAT POINT WE HAVE A PROJECT THAT'S GOING IN THERE. SO I DON'T KNOW IF EVEN PANCARI EAST, IF IT WAS LIKE, IT'S GOING TO BE A HOTEL, YOU CAN SEE IT'S GOING UP. I DON'T I DON'T KNOW WHETHER WE CAN NAME IT ACCORDING TO THE PROJECT THAT'S THAT'S HAPPENING THERE AS WELL. WE NAME IT ACCORDING TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AND LIKE WHAT'S KIND OF GOING ON IN VARIOUS AREAS OF THE CITY, YOU CAN REALLY NAME IT ACCORDING TO WHATEVER YOU WANT.
I WITH PROJECTS SOMETIMES, OF COURSE, THOSE PROJECTS FALL OUT A LITTLE BIT AND OR A DEVELOPER THAT PROJECT FALLS OUT, BUT WE COULD USE THAT AS THE GUIDELINE AS WELL. SOMETIMES THOSE PROJECTS KIND OF GO DEFUNCT. AND SO THEN THAT NAME WOULD BE A LITTLE OBSOLETE. BUT AND WE ALSO THOUGHT ABOUT NUMBERS JUST NUMBERING THEM. BUT I THOUGHT THAT WOULD BE KIND OF CONFUSING BECAUSE YOU WOULD HAVE DISTRICT ONE AND LIKE WHAT IS DISTRICT LIKE HOTEL DISTRICT SIX, HOTEL DISTRICT SEVEN OR WAREHOUSE DISTRICT ONE OR, YOU KNOW, JUST KIND OF GENERALLY WHAT THE AREA IS. YEAH. AND THAT'S OR WE COULD DO IT BY INTERSECTION LIKE OF STREETS. ANYWAYS. IT WAS JUST WE WERE BOUNCING IT AROUND AND THEN AND WE HAD A GOOD DISCUSSION IN OUR PLANNING MEETING ON THIS AND WE THOUGHT, OH, WE SHOULD BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD AND SEE WHAT THEY WANT US TO DO ON. IT FEELS LIKE ALONG THE RIVER. I UNDERSTAND EVERYONE WANTS TO SAVE RIVER OR WHATEVER, BUT THE CITY COULD EASILY SAY THIS PART OF THE RIVER OR THAT PART OF THE RIVER GEOGRAPHICALLY IS WHERE IT FALLS AND RENAIXEMENT YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? LIKE A I THINK ANYTHING THAT DIFFERENTIATES IT BY NUMBERS WOULD GET JUST AS CONFUSED WITH. I DON'T THINK WE KEEP TRACK OF THOSE. I THOUGHT ABOUT THAT, BUT. INTERSECTIONS. I HAPPEN TO AGREE WITH ANDERSON BUSH. YEAH, I CAN SEE THAT IN MY HEAD. I SEE PANCARI EAST. I DON'T LIKE WILLOW CREEK, AND THAT'S PROBABLY NOT GOING TO CHANGE. YEAH, YEAH, YEAH. UNLESS YOU START CHANGING STREETS. YEAH THEY DON'T. AND STREET NAMING DOESN'T CHANGE ALL THAT MUCH IN MOST PARTS. EXCEPT HIT WAS IT. HIT ROAD IS 25TH. YEAH. NO THAT'S GOOD. ANYBODY NEWER THAN. 65. YES OKAY. 8070. YEAH. CAN WE DO YOU NEED LIKE A SPECIFIC DIRECTION IF YOU'D LIKE TO THINK ABOUT IT. THAT'S TOTALLY FINE TOO. I WONDER IF WE COULD HAVE A LITTLE DISCUSSION LIKE THIS AS EACH ONE COMES ALONG AND JUST SAY, WHAT SHOULD WE CALL IT? OKAY. SOMETHING THAT'S AGREEABLE. MAYBE. I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S A GOOD WAY I LIKE I LIKE COMMON NAMES. THAT. WELL, ANDERSON BUSHES, THAT'S THAT'S GOOD. THAT'S EASY. YOU'RE NOT ALWAYS GOING TO HAVE AN INTERSECTION. I MEAN, I ASSUME BUSH JUST RELATES TO THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL THAT'S THERE. I MEAN, IT'S LIKE OFF ANDERSON. AND SO THAT CAN ANDERSON BEAR.
YEAH. YEAH. SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN CORRECT. THAT'S WHAT I MEAN BY LIKE THAT LANDMARK PIECE THAT'S LIKE, OH YEAH, IT'S PART OF THE AND THEN WE CAN USE FOR MARKETING IN OUR ANNUAL REPORT, AS WE TALK TO FOLKS ABOUT. YEAH, YEAH, THAT'S AN EASY ONE TO REMEMBER BECAUSE
[00:40:01]
STREET AND LANDMARK. YEAH. THAT'S KIND OF THE RIVER IS A PROBLEM OKAY. OKAY. WELL LET'S LET'S BRING THAT UP TO AND LATER TIME WE'VE GOT A NEW DISTRICT. SURE WE HAVE. WE HAVE ONE I JUST MET WITH TODAY. WE'RE THAT WILL PROBABLY BE COMING BEFORE YOU IN THE NEXT FOR A MEETING THAT POTENTIALLY WILL BE A NEW DISTRICT. IT'S OVER JUST SOUTH OF I. IT'S JUST SOUTH OF I KNOW AND JUST IT'S THOSE VACANT PROPERTIES HIGHWAY 20 AND IOWA. NOW THEY'RE RIGHT UP AGAINST THE RIVER POTENTIALLY. AND INFRA DISTRICT COMING THERE WITH ONE OF THE FITZGERALDS. SO THAT ONE WE'D HAVE TO THINK ABOUT A NAME FOR THAT. BUT AS THAT COMES, WE CAN TALK THROUGH THAT. WHERE WHERE ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? YOU KNOW, THE HOSPITAL SHOULD HAVE BEEN JUST. OH, JUST MERGE ON US 20. IT'S WHAT IT'S NORTH OF THE BRIDGE ON US 20. SO LIKE. YEAH. OKAY. SO WE'RE ALL WHERE THE WHERE THE TRAIL WINDS THROUGH BEFORE IT GETS TO FREEMAN PARK AND ITS LAVA LATER. YEAH. OKAY.YEAH. OKAY. YEAH, YEAH. WE'RE GOOD IDEA. SHE'S PULLING UP. IS THAT RED RIGHT THERE? IT'S THIS RED. YEAH. OH, YEAH. THAT'S A GOOD BUNCH OF LAVA AND SAND. OH. RESEARCH THAT. THAT'S WHERE SHE'D GO. REALLY? YEAH. YEAH. WOULDN'T MAKE A LOT OF SENSE. WHAT WAS THAT? HOSPITAL. THE HOSPITAL WAS SUPPOSED TO BE. YEAH. NEXT TO THE FREEWAY, NEXT TO THE AIRPORT. THE OPEN SPACE THAT WAS THERE. BUT. THEN IT MOVED DOWN EAST. MONEY TALKS. WELL, MAYBE WE OUGHT TO JUST KIND OF THINK ABOUT THAT, BRING IT UP THE NEXT MEETING. SURE. THAT'S FINE. THAT'S FINE.
EVERYBODY, EVERYBODY THINK ABOUT THAT. COME UP WITH YOUR BEST IDEA FOR THE NAME FOR THAT DISTRICT. IF WE IF WE ON THE SOUTH SIDE. YEAH. FOLLOW THROUGH WITH IT. OKAY. YEAH. IT CANNOT HAVE RIVER ON IT. YEAH. WE BEAT THAT THING TO DEATH. ANYTHING AROUND THE WORLD? OKAY. LET'S
[10. DISCUSSION ITEM: Update On The Snake River West Urban Renewal District]
MOVE ALONG TO THE UPDATE ON THE SNAKE RIVER WEST. YEAH, THAT'S THAT'S JUST A SHORT UPDATE FOR YOU. NO PROBLEM. ON THAT CHAIR. THE JUST SO YOU KNOW, THAT GOT APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON THE 8TH OF APRIL. WE DID HAVE A LETTER OF OPPOSITION TO THAT LAST MINUTE. AND BRAD KRAMER, CHRIS FREDERICKSON AND MYSELF AND CHRIS RICHARDSON'S, THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR, WE SAT DOWN WITH THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER. WE HAD A NUMBER OF MEETINGS WITH HER. PUBLIC WORKS WAS ABLE TO WORK THROUGH SOME THINGS ON THE RIGHT OF WAY. NONETHELESS, SHE DROPPED HER OPPOSITION AND IT JUST WENT THROUGH AS NORMAL. BUT INITIALLY WE DID. WE DON'T USUALLY HAVE OPPOSITION TO THESE, SO THAT WAS ONE I JUST WANTED TO BRING UP. WE WERE ABLE TO RESOLVE, AND IT WAS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL. OKAY. SO AND THAT WAS ALL THE UPDATE I HAD ON THEM. IS THE STORAGE UNITS. YEAH. THE STRIP IT WAS THE. SO YOU HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY OF PIONEER ROAD.AND THERE'S A THIN STRIP OF LAND THAT WAS ON THE PROPERTY OWNERS. THAT'S THE PROPERTY OWNERS. AND SHE WAS SHE DIDN'T WANT US TO WIDEN IT BECAUSE IT CUT INTO HER PROPERTY. AND WE WERE ABLE TO RESOLVE THAT WITH PUBLIC WORKS. IS THE NEW BRIDGE THAT'S BEING BUILT INTEGRAL TO THAT, TO GETTING THAT? YEAH. YES. THAT BRIDGE IS THEY HAVE THE PYLONS DOWN AND I THINK THEY DON'T HAVE THE DECK ON. IS THAT RIGHT? I HAVEN'T BEEN OVER THERE ON BREITENSTEIN HAD THE FOUNDATION PADS IN AND THEY PUT THE ARCH SUPPORT IN AND THEN THEY'VE BACKFILLED, BUT THEY'RE, THEY'RE WAITING TO GET APPROVAL OF THE DISTRICT THROUGH CITY COUNCIL BEFORE THEY'RE GOING TO COMPLETE COMPLETED. THEY GOT EVERYTHING THEY NEEDED TO GET IN BEFORE THE WATER CAME, RIGHT. YES. THEY WERE ABLE TO GET ALL THAT IN. THAT'S CORRECT. I HAD A LONG CONVERSATION WITH MR. BREITENSTEIN ON THAT. OKAY, GREAT. BUT WE'RE COMPLETELY DONE WITH THEM NOW. I MEAN, OTHER THAN THE OWNER PARTICIPATION, I MEAN, FOR THE DISTRICT. YEAH. NOW WE'RE JUST MOVING THROUGH.
EVERYTHING'S BEEN APPROVED. EVERYTHING. THEY'RE JUST ON THERE. YEAH, IT'S JUST PERMITS
[11. DISCUSSION ITEM: RAI And Legislative Update]
JUST ON THEIR WAY. YEAH. OKAY. YEAH, YEAH. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. MEGAN, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO ADD ON OUR I AND LEGISLATIVE ISSUES? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. COMMISSIONERS, I THINK AS WE DISCUSSED AT THE LAST MEETING, HOUSE BILL 436 RELATED TO AMENDMENTS TO THE URBAN RENEWAL LAWS, IT DID ULTIMATELY PASS AND DID BECOME LAW. SO I THINK AS WE LOOK AT DISTRICTS MOVING FORWARD, WE'LL JUST HAVE TO PUT IN A NEW PROCESS TO THE EXTENT WE OVERLAP[00:45:02]
WITH ANY FIRE OR EMS DISTRICTS, THERE'S JUST A PROCESS INVOLVED THERE. AND THAT'S HAPPY TO STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS ON THE LEGISLATION, BUT NOTHING NEW TO ADOPT. IT WAS IT JUST FLEW THROUGH THE PROCESS. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE FOR MEGAN? OKAY. I'D ENTERTAIN A WE HAVE[12. Next Meeting: May 15, 2025]
ANOTHER MEETING ON MAY 15TH, AND WITH THAT, I'D ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN. SO MOVED.SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE, I OPPOSED. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANKS, MEGAN.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.