Nov 25, 2025 City Council Meeting

[1. Call to Order]

[00:00:09]

GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE, AND WELCOME TO THE IDAHO FALLS CITY COUNCIL MEETING FOR THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 25TH. WE APPRECIATE ALL THOSE WHO ARE JOINING US AT THIS SPECIAL MEETING TIME.

GIVEN THAT THURSDAY WAS DEEMED A DAY WHEN NOBODY REALLY WANTED TO BE HERE. SO WE ARE HERE ON TUESDAY. THIS WEEK, I'D LIKE TO CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER AND INVITE OUR CITY CLERK TO CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE. THANK YOU. MAYOR, COUNCIL PRESIDENT BURTENSHAW HERE. COUNSELOR.

RADFORD. PRESENT. COUNSELOR. DINGMAN HERE. COUNSELOR. FREEMAN HERE. COUNSELOR.

FRANCIS. HERE. COUNSELOR. LARSON HERE. MAYOR, YOU HAVE QUORUM. THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME, ALL THE PEOPLE WHO ARE INCLINED TO JOIN WITH US, I WOULD INVITE YOU TO STAND AND JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. OUR FLAG IS UP HERE ON THE DAIS. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. THANK YOU FOR THAT. ALL RIGHT. NOW IS THE TIME WHEN I SHOULD POINT OUT THAT IF YOU DON'T HAVE A COPY OF THE AGENDA AND YOU WANT ONE, IF YOU HAVE YOUR PHONE, YOU CAN POINT IT OVER THERE TO THE QR CODE ON THE WALL, AND IT WILL TAKE YOU TO A LINK WHERE YOU CAN CLICK ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA. IT HAS A LOT OF PAGES. I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE FOUR OR MORE THAN 400. I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT. AROUND 500. SO YOU CAN SEE WHY WE DIDN'T WANT TO PRINT THAT OUT. BUT ANYWAY, IF YOU WOULD LIKE THAT, THERE MAY BE SOME COPIES OF JUST THE ACTION ITEMS AND THE THE BASIC AGENDA OUT IN THE BASKET, BY THE DOOR, IN THE HALLWAY. IF YOU DON'T HAVE THAT, YOU CAN CHECK THERE. SO WITH THAT, I WILL NOTE THAT THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA, ITEM NUMBER THREE IS PUBLIC COMMENT. AND THIS IS A TIME WE MAKE AVAILABLE FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL. MOST PEOPLE IN THE ROOM ARE STAFF, BUT IF THERE'S ANYONE WHO IS IN THE ROOM WHO WOULD LIKE TO COME TO THE PODIUM AND SPEAK TO THE COUNCIL, WE HAVE A FEW SIDEBOARDS GUIDELINES THAT WE SUGGEST THAT YOU FOLLOW, BUT WE WILL BE HAPPY TO LISTEN. ALL RIGHT. THERE IS NOT A RUSH FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE WATCHING ONLINE. THERE'S NOT A RUSH OF PEOPLE TO THE PODIUM. AND SO I'M GOING TO ASSUME THAT WE

[4. CONSENT AGENDA]

OKAY. BUT BUT YOU DON'T BENEFIT FROM WHETHER OR NOT THE CONTRACT IS APPROVED OR NOT.

CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. THERE'S NO MONETARY VALUE. VERY GOOD. ALL RIGHT. SO WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO TURN TO OUR CITY CLERK AND ASK THAT THE CONTENTS OF THE CONSENT AGENDA BE READ INTO THE RECORD. AND THEN FROM THAT WE WILL TURN TO OUR COUNCIL PRESIDENT, WHO SERVES AS A LIAISON TO MUNICIPAL SERVICES AND HAVE HER MAKE THE MOTION. I WOULD JUST MENTION THAT THE CONSENT AGENDA IS SIMPLY A LONG LIST OF ACTIONS THAT ARE DOCUMENTED APPROPRIATELY IN THE AGENDA PACKET. BUT IT'S JUST THESE THINGS ARE NOT CONTROVERSIAL.

THEY'RE VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD, AND THEY ARE SUCH THAT THE COUNCIL DOESN'T FEEL LIKE THERE'S GREAT NEED FOR DEBATE. THEY'RE EITHER ROUTINE OR PRETTY SELF-EXPLANATORY IN NATURE. SO WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO TURN TO THE CITY CLERK. THANK YOU MAYOR. SO WE'VE GOT NINE ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA TONIGHT. FIRST, FROM THE OFFICE OF THE MAYOR IS THE APPOINTMENT OF COLTER WILSON TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, THE APPOINTMENT OF MARY SCALES TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AND THE REAPPOINTMENT OF TJ NATTESTAD TO THE IMPACT FEE ADVISORY COMMITTEE FROM MUNICIPAL SERVICES. WE HAVE THREE, THE FIRST BEING THE REPLACEMENT OF THE PHONE SYSTEM USING RINGCENTRAL AND VLC FOR A TOTAL COST OF $117,708.60. NEXT IS A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH THE IDAHO FALLS ARTS COUNCIL, FOR A TOTAL COST

[00:05:05]

SECOND. VERY GOOD. CITY CLERK, WILL YOU CONDUCT THE VOTE? BIRKENSHAW. YES. DINGMAN. YES.

FRANCIS I. FREEMAN. ABSTAIN. LARSON. YES. BRADFORD. ABSTAIN. MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. VERY GOOD.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. IT ONLY TAKES FOUR VOTES TO PASS SOMETHING. SO HERE WE GO. WITH

[5.A.1) Addition to Public Works Fleet - One 2026 John Deere Wheel Loader]

DO YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL INSIGHT YOU WANT TO SHARE WITH YOUR COLLEAGUES? ALL RIGHT.

THEN THE CHAIR WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. MAYOR, I HAVE A QUESTION. OKAY. WHAT IS A WHEEL LOADER? FOR PICKING UP VEHICLE? YOU KNOW WHAT? I'M LUCKY TONIGHT THAT I HAVE DIRECTOR FREDERICKSON HERE. I'M PRETTY SURE I KNOW WHAT IT IS. OKAY, BUT I DIDN'T LOOK AT THE PICTURE. BUT I'M PRETTY SURE I REMEMBER WHAT IT IS. BUT I'M GOING TO ASK HIM IF HE CAN JUST KIND OF CLARIFY THAT FOR US. I DON'T LIKE IN PUBLIC. EMBARRASS MYSELF. OKAY. YEAH. SO IF I COULD DESCRIBE A PICTURE, SPEAK A THOUSAND WORDS. SOMETIMES THE PICTURES ARE IN HERE. YEAH. WE HAVE REALLY TWO PIECES OF EQUIPMENT THAT HAVE FRONT LOADERS GENERALLY IN CITY. ONE IS A BACKHOE THAT IS MORE LIKE A TRACTOR THAT HAS A REAR DIGGING DEVICE. THIS IS A LARGE LOAD LOADER. SO ALL FOUR TIRES ARE THE SAME SIZE. THIS IS PRIMARILY SEEN IN GRAVEL PITS AND THOSE TYPES OF THINGS TO LEARN TO MOVE LARGE AMOUNTS. SO THE UPPER LEFT THAT'S THAT'S THE LOADER THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT TONIGHT. YEAH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. TERRIFIC. ALL RIGHT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. ALL RIGHT. NOW THE CHAIR WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. I MOVE THAT COUNCIL ACCEPT AND APPROVE THE PURCHASE OF ONE 2026 JOHN DEERE WHEEL LOADER FROM THE SOURCEWELL COOPERATIVE PURCHASING NUMBER ONE, NUMBER 011723J FROM JOHN DEERE, FOR A TOTAL OF $285,215.40 AND AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS. SECOND.

ALL RIGHT, CITY CLERK, WE ARE READY FOR A VOTE. FRANCIS I. FREEMAN. YES. DINGMAN. YES.

LARSON. YES. RADFORD. AYE. BURTENSHAW. YES. MOTION CARRIES. VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

[5.B.1) Proposed Changes to Personnel Policies 330, 410, and 500]

AS PART OF A PERIODIC REVIEW OF THE PERSONNEL POLICIES FOR THE CITY WE ARE BRINGING, I'M BRINGING THREE POLICIES FOR UPDATE TONIGHT. IN SEPTEMBER, WE BROUGHT THEM FOR A FIRST REVIEW AND THEN WENT OUT TO THE CITY EMPLOYEES TO ASK FOR FEEDBACK FROM CITY EMPLOYEES.

[00:10:01]

SO THEY'RE COMING TO ASK US IF THEY GOT PAID WHEN THEY WERE GOING TO COURT FOR PERSONAL MATTERS. SO WE'RE NOT INTENDING TO CHANGE THE POLICY. WE'RE SIMPLY CLARIFYING THE WORDING SO THAT IT'S CLEAR FOR EMPLOYEES THAT IT'S ONLY WORK RELATED DUTIES. THE THIRD POLICY IS POLICY 500 SALARY SCHEDULE, PAY GRADE, AND POINT. FACTORING IN THIS ONE, LAST JANUARY, WHEN WE BROUGHT THE POLICY IN AND UPDATED IT, WE WERE UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT OUR PAYROLL AND HR SYSTEM WOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE CHANGES EFFECTIVE IN THE MIDDLE OF A PAY CYCLE, SO THAT YOU BECOME EFFECTIVE AT ANY POINT IN TIME. AND SUBSEQUENT TO THAT TIME, IN AN IN AN EFFORT TO IMPLEMENT THAT, WITH THE NEW POLICY CHANGE, LEARNED THAT THE SYSTEM COULDN'T DO THAT. SO WE'RE BRINGING THE POLICY BACK TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE BEING THE FIRST DAY OF THE PAY PERIOD. FOLLOWING THE CHANGE. WE'LL PROBABLY BE BRINGING THIS BACK AGAIN WHEN WE GO LIVE WITH WORKDAY, BECAUSE WORKDAY CAN IMPLEMENT THE CHANGES WITH PAY CYCLE. BUT FOR NOW, WE NEED TO GET THIS POLICY CORRECTED. ANY QUESTIONS? COUNCILOR FRANCIS, COULD YOU JUST EXPLAIN ONE CLAUSE IN THERE? FOR THE RECORD, THERE'S A STATEMENT. IF I REMEMBER IT, THE WAY I READ IT WAS, IT WOULD BE ON THE INDIVIDUAL IF THEY WERE IN COURT, IF THEY WERE BEING SUED, EVEN IF THE CITY WAS ALSO PART OF THE SUIT. YOU REMEMBER THAT PIECE? YES. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? HOW COULD THAT THEY'RE BEING SUED AS AN INDIVIDUAL AND THE CITY IS ALSO PART OF THE SUIT. WELL, IT'S POSSIBLE THAT SOMEBODY COULD BE NAMED AS A DEFENDANT IN A LAWSUIT OR A PARTY IN A LAWSUIT FOR THEIR OWN PERSONAL, NON-WORK RELATED ISSUES WHERE THE CITY WAS ALSO BEING NAMED. SO THE ONLY TIME THEY WOULD BE COMPENSATED FOR THAT IS IF, AS PART OF THEIR OFFICIAL DUTIES FOR THE CITY. SO THAT'S HOW IT'S SEPARATE THEN, BECAUSE THE CITY WOULD BE A SEPARATE ENTITY IN THAT COURT CASE, CORRECT? IF THEY WERE BEING SUED AND NAMED AS A SEPARATE PARTY IN THE SUIT RELATED TO THEIR WORK DUTIES, THEN IN THAT CASE, THEY WOULD BE COMPENSATED. BUT IF THEY HAD A SEPARATE BUSINESS OR SOME OTHER REASON WHY THEY WERE NAMED IN THE LAWSUIT, THEY WOULDN'T BE COMPENSATED.

COUNCILOR FRANCIS, WE HAVE HAD PAST LAWSUITS WHERE A DIRECTOR HAS BEEN NAMED INDIVIDUALLY, AS WELL AS THE CITY. OH, OKAY. BUT IN TOTALLY SEPARATE ENTITIES IN THE CASE. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND IF I CAN CLARIFY IF THE DIRECTOR'S NAME IN THE LAWSUIT, BECAUSE THEY ACTED AS PART OF THEIR DUTY AS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE CITY, IT WOULD BE FINE IF THEY HAD A SEPARATE BUSINESS OR SEPARATE REASON WHY THEIR PROPERTY OR SOMETHING, WHY THEY'RE BEING NAMED SEPARATE FROM THEIR EMPLOYMENT. IT WOULD BE WORKED. OKAY, OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. WELL THEN COUNCILMEMBER, COUNCILOR, IS THERE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO SHARE WITH YOUR COLLEAGUES ABOUT THIS? NO, I THINK THESE ARE ALL PRETTY SELF-EXPLANATORY. AND IF THEY WEREN'T, DIRECTOR JONES DID A GREAT JOB EXPLAINING THEM TO US. AND. BUT I'M HAPPY TO LEAVE ANY DIALOG. ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE, I'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE TO APPROVE THE CHANGES TO PERSONNEL POLICIES. THREE 3410 AND 500. SECOND. ALL RIGHT, CITY CLERK, WE ARE READY FOR THAT VOTE. FREEMAN. YES, BRADFORD. HI. BURTENSHAW. YES. DINGMAN. YES. FRANCIS I. LARSON.

[5.C.1) Surplus used Demand Shifter to the College of Eastern Idaho (CEI)]

TONIGHT WE HAVE OUR CFO, JOSH BRUCE, PRESENT TO INTRODUCE THE ITEM. WE HAVE OUR COUNSELORS, DAMON AND JUNE FREEMAN, WHO ARE LIAISONS TO THAT DEPARTMENT WHO WILL BE ABLE TO LEAD OUT AND WORK WITH THE MOTION. SO WE'LL TURN IT TO YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. AND GOOD EVENING. AND

[00:15:04]

AND SO IT'S BEEN THERE IN USE. BUT AFTER A TIME LIKE SOMETIME, THE VENDOR, THE BATTERY VENDOR, THEY WENT OUT OF BUSINESS. AND SO WE LOST ALL OF OUR TECHNICAL SUPPORT WITH THEM. AND SO BECAUSE OF THAT, THE EQUIPMENT IS NOW OBSOLETE AND NO LONGER PROVIDES ANY VALUE TO IDAHO FALLS POWER. AND SO AND WE ALSO WE NEED TO TO MOVE IT IN PREPARATION FOR OUR PARKING LOT EXPANSION THAT WE'LL BE DOING HERE THIS COMING YEAR. AND SO WE WENT OUT AND FOUND THAT THE COLLEGE OF EASTERN IDAHO, THAT THEY HAVE EXPRESSED INTEREST IN THIS EQUIPMENT SO THEY CAN USE IT FOR THEIR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. AND ACCORDING TO THE PERSONAL PROPERTY SURPLUS RESOLUTION, WE CAN DONATE THIS EQUIPMENT TO THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE. AND SO WE ARE SEEKING FOR APPROVAL FOR THE SURPLUS RETIREMENT OF IF I USE DEMAND SHIFTER TO THE COLLEGE OF EASTERN IDAHO OR TAKE OTHER ACTIONS TO BE APPROPRIATE. ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT IT? COUNSELOR? FREEMAN. YES. JUST SO I'M CLEAR, THIS DIDN'T COST US ANYTHING IN THE FIRST PLACE. IT WAS ALL DONE WITH A GRANT. IT WAS ALL THROUGH THE GRANT FUNDING. YEAH. OKAY. AND IS IT SAFE TO ASSUME THAT GIVEN ITS AGE AND ITS INABILITY TO BE SERVICED, THAT IT REALLY HAS NO MARKET VALUE, NO MONETARY. YEAH, OR MARKET VALUE ANYMORE? YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU. DID WE GET VALUE OUT OF IT BEFORE IT? I MEAN, OR DID WE JUST HAPPEN TO BUY SOMETHING THAT WAS AT THE VERY END OF ITS CAREER WITH THIS COMPANY WHEN WE PURCHASED IT? IT WASN'T AT THE TIME, BUT WITH TECHNOLOGY JUST RAPIDLY CHANGING, IT IS OBSOLETE NOW. BUT IT DID SHOW IT DID HAVE VALUE BECAUSE OF THE GENERATION THAT IT PROVIDED. AND THEN IT WAS STORED IN THAT BATTERY AND WE WERE ABLE TO TO DEPLOY IT WHEN NEEDED. AND SO MOST OF THAT ENERGY OR THE GENERATION THAT IT DID, WAS JUST PUT RIGHT BACK INTO IDAHO FALLS POWER ADMINISTRATION BUILDING. VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. WELL WITH THAT THANK YOU, MR. RUSS. AND WE'LL ASK OUR LIAISONS IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING. IN ADDITION, YOU WOULD LIKE TO SAY. ALL RIGHT. THE CHAIR WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. I'D BE HAPPY TO MAKE THAT MAYOR. I WOULD MOVE THAT COUNCIL APPROVE THE SURPLUS RETIREMENT OF FALL TOWERS USED TO MANCHESTER TO THE COLLEGE OF EASTERN IDAHO. I'LL SECOND.

THANK YOU, CITY CLERK. WE'RE READY FOR A VOTE ON THIS MOTION. CLARKSON. YES, FRANCIS I BURTENSHAW. YES. DINGMAN. YES. FREEMAN. YES. BRADFORD. ALL RIGHT. MOTION CARRIES. ALL

[5.D.1) Legislative Hearing for Consideration of an Ordinance approving the Urban Renewal Plan for the Riverside Urban Renewal Project and a Resolution approving an Intergovernmental Agreement with Bonneville County]

[00:20:06]

AND ASSOCIATED WITH THAT WOULD BE THE CREATION OF AN URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT AND PROJECTS THAT ARE LOCATED WITHIN AN URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT. THEN IT OPENS THEM UP FOR THE USE OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING, OR TIF FINANCING FOR THEIR PROJECTS. THIS WENT BEFORE THE IDAHO FALLS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND IT WENT, LET'S SEE, IT WENT BEFORE THEM ON SEPTEMBER 18TH.

THEY DID APPROVE IT ON THAT DATE. AND DURING THAT MEETING, THE ANTICIPATED DURATION FOR THIS PROJECT IS A 20 YEAR PLAN FOR THE DISTRICT. THAT'S AND THAT'S THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED UNDER IDAHO STATE STATUTE. WITH THAT, I KNOW MR. KRAMER HAS A PRESENTATION THAT WE HAVE, AND HE WILL BE PRESENTING NEXT TO SHOW YOU THAT PLAN, PROJECT SCOPE AND ALL THOSE ELEMENTS TO THAT PROJECT. SO I'LL TURN IT. OVER. OH, FORGIVE ME, IT'S MEGAN CONRAD WHO'S ON THAT WILL BE PRESENTING THIS. CONRAD IS CONRAD. WELCOME TO THE MEETING. WE DON'T SEE YOU ON OUR SCREEN YET. CAN WE HEAR YOU? YOU CAN HEAR ME. OKAY. I THINK WE'RE GOOD THERE. THANK YOU. MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS, I DO BELIEVE, EMILY, THERE SHOULD BE A POWERPOINT THAT. MEGAN. IT'S ON THE SCREEN RIGHT NOW. OH, PERFECT. THERE IT IS. I SEE IT, I GOT IT, SO SHOULD I JUST TELL YOU WHEN TO ADVANCE IT? WOULD THAT WORK? NO. BRAD HAS YOU COVERED. HE'S GOT THE CLICKER OUT IN THE AUDIENCE. AND BECAUSE JUST SO YOU KNOW, MEGAN, BECAUSE OF THIS POWERPOINT, I WON'T HAVE YOU ON THE SCREENS. OH THAT'S GREAT. OKAY, PERFECT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU.

MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS AND MR. SANTER, I'M EXCITED TO BE HERE TODAY TO HAVE A PRESENTATION ON THIS PLAN THAT IS BEFORE YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. SO WHAT WHAT WE'RE CONSIDERING TODAY IS THE URBAN RENEWAL PLAN FOR THE RIVERSIDE URBAN RENEWAL PROJECT. AND YOU'LL SEE THE MAP OF THE PROPOSED REVENUE ALLOCATION AREA BOUNDARY IS ON THE SCREEN. IT'S APPROXIMATELY IT'S A LITTLE OVER 214, PROBABLY CLOSER TO 215 ACRES AND INCLUDES RIGHTS OF WAY. AND IT'S RIGHT ALONG THE IT'S BOUNDED BY THE SNAKE RIVER ON THE EAST, THE SNAKE RIVER PARKWAY IN JACKSONVILLE JUNCTION PROJECT AREA ON THE WEST, AND THEN SUNNYSIDE ROAD ON THE SOUTH AND PANCARI DRIVE ON THE NORTH. THIS IS A MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL PROJECT AREA WHICH IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. I DON'T BELIEVE WE'VE HAD ONE OF THESE IN IDAHO FALLS FOR A LITTLE BIT. SO THERE ARE PARCELS THAT ARE BOTH WITHIN THE JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARY OF THE CITY, BUT ALSO INCLUDE PARCELS WITHIN UNINCORPORATED BONNEVILLE COUNTY. NEXT SLIDE. SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE PROCESS OF THIS PLAN, IT TAKES A SIMILAR PATH TO WHAT WE HAVE PROVIDED BEFORE IN TERMS OF THE TWO STEP PROCESS. SO THE FIRST IS THE ELIGIBILITY PHASE WHERE GEOGRAPHIC AREA IS REVIEWED FOR DETERMINATION WHETHER OR NOT THERE ARE CONDITIONS PRESENT THAT WOULD SUPPORT AN URBAN RENEWAL PROJECT AREA. AND SO THAT REPORT WAS PREPARED BY PERSPECTIVE PLANNING AND CONSULTING AND WAS ACCEPTED BY

[00:25:04]

IN BETWEEN THAT TIME, BECAUSE AGAIN, IT IS A MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL PROJECT AREA, THERE IS STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS IN 50 DASH 2906 THAT REQUIRE AN AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE CITY, AS WELL AS THE COUNTY TO ENTER INTO A TRANSFER OF POWERS ORDINANCE. AND WHAT THAT DOES IS IT PERMITS THE REVENUE ALLOCATION FROM THE INCREMENT VALUE TO BE ALLOCATED TO THE AGENCY TO PERFORM THE IDENTIFIED PROJECTS UNDERNEATH THE PLAN. AND SO THE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ACTUALLY APPROVED THAT INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT.

AND THE TRANSFER OF POWER IS AT ITS OCTOBER 16TH MEETING. SO IT'S APPROPRIATELY NOTICED. AND BEFORE YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION TODAY, ON NOVEMBER 25TH OR AS MENTIONED, NOT ONLY THE PUBLIC HEARING BUT CONSIDERATION OF THE ORDINANCE AS WELL AS CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPROVAL OF THAT INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN SIGNED BY THE COUNTY. NEXT SLIDE. SO WHAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU HERE IS A LIST OF THE OVERLAPPING TAXING DISTRICTS TO THIS PROJECT AREA. AND YOU'LL SEE A COUPLE OF THE TAXING DISTRICTS ARE ITALICIZED. SPECIFICALLY, THE BONNEVILLE COUNTY AMBULANCE DISTRICT, AS WELL AS THE FIRE DISTRICT. I WANTED TO CALL THOSE OUT SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE THERE WAS A CHANGE TO THE IDAHO CODE, WHICH NOW REQUIRES FOR NEW REVENUE ALLOCATION AREAS THAT THE AMBULANCE DISTRICT AND THE FIRE DISTRICT ACTUALLY HAVE TO CONSENT BY RESOLUTION TO BE INCLUDED IN THE FINANCING PROVISIONS UNDER THIS PLAN. AND TO THE EXTENT THOSE RESOLUTIONS ARE NOT RECEIVED, THEN THOSE LEVIES ARE NOT GOING TO GENERATE REVENUE FOR THIS DISTRICT. SO TO BE CONSERVATIVE, IT'S ANTICIPATED THAT THE AGENCY WILL NOT BE RECEIVING

[00:30:02]

BUT IT GIVES US A REALLY GOOD INDICATION THAT WE'RE WELL WITHIN THAT 10% LIMIT. SO EVEN IF PROPERTY VALUATIONS INCREASE, THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE AN ISSUE WITH THE 10% TEST. AND THEN THERE'S A STATEMENT LISTING THE KIND NUMBER AND LOCATION OF THE PROJECTS. SO THAT IS DONE IN A NARRATIVE FORMAT, SPECIFICALLY IN SECTION 301. AND THEN THERE'S A LIST OF PROJECTS ALSO OUTLINED IN ATTACHMENT FIVE, WHICH IS THE ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY STUDY. THE THIRD ELEMENT IS AN ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY STUDY THAT CAN BE FOUND AS ATTACHMENT FIVE TO THE PLAN. AND THAT'S PREPARED BY AN INDEPENDENT THIRD PARTY CONSULTANT. PERSPECTIVE PLANNING AND BRAD KRAMER. AND THEN NUMBER FOUR IS A DETAILED LIST OF THE ESTIMATED PROJECT COST. THOSE PROJECT COSTS ARE ALSO FOUND IN ATTACHMENT FIVE. AND THEN A FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT SHOWING THE IMPACT OF THE REVENUE ALLOCATION AREA ON THE OVERLAPPING TAXING DISTRICTS THAT IS MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED IN A NARRATIVE FORMAT IN SECTION 502.8, AND THEN THE DATA THAT SUPPORTS IT IS FOUND IN ATTACHMENT FIVE. AND WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE IMPACT ON THE OVERLAPPING TAXING DISTRICTS, REALLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS A DEFERRED ACCESS TO A BUDGET CAPACITY INCREASE FROM NEW CONSTRUCTION THAT'S OCCURRING WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE REVENUE ALLOCATION AREA. THE DESCRIPTION OF METHOD OF FINANCING ARE ALSO DESCRIBED IN. THE PLAN IS PRETTY MUCH CONSIDERED A PAY AS YOU GO PLAN, OR ALTERNATIVELY, WORKING IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE PRIVATE DEVELOPER AND OR ANOTHER PUBLIC ENTITY WHO MAY ADVANCE FUND CERTAIN PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS. THOSE WOULD BE REIMBURSED WITH REVENUE ALLOCATION PROCEEDS AS THEY COME IN. SO THOSE PARTICIPATION AGREEMENTS THAT IS DESCRIBED IN SECTIONS 303 AND THEN DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS ARE IN 309. AND THEN GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT HOW PROJECTS ARE FINANCED CAN ALSO BE FOUND IN SECTION 500 OF THE PLAN, AS WELL AS ATTACHMENT FIVE. AND THEN FINALLY WE TALK ABOUT THE TERMINATION DATE. THERE HAS TO BE ONE IN THE PLAN. IT'S 20 YEARS. SO TO THE EXTENT THIS IS ESTABLISHED, THE TERMINATION DATE WOULD BE DECEMBER OF 2025 OR 2045.

RECOGNIZING THAT THE FINAL YEAR REVENUE WOULD FLOW TO THE AGENCY IN 2046 AND THEN IN SECTION 800. THERE'S ALSO A DESCRIPTION OF THE DISPOSITION OF ASSETS AT TERMINATION. NEXT SLIDE. MISS CONRAD, COULD YOU GO BACK A SLIDE? BEFORE THIS ONE TO THE IS THAT THAT'S GOT TO BE A TYPO, RIGHT. WE'RE NOT DEALING WITH BANNOCK COUNTY ROAD AND BRIDGE. NO, THAT'S A TYPO. YEP. IT IS BONNEVILLE COUNTY. YEAH OKAY. YEAH OKAY. YEP. SORRY ABOUT THAT. NO, NO, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T HAVE ANOTHER AGENCY HERE WE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT. NO. AND DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY TIMES I'VE LOOKED AT THAT SLIDE AND NOT SEEN THAT? THAT'S EMBARRASSING.

BUT THANK YOU FOR. YES, IT'S BONNEVILLE COUNTY. YEAH. OKAY. SO THEN WE TALKED ABOUT THE 10% VALUATION TEST. THERE'S THE THE SLIDE THAT SHOWS WHAT THE ASSESSED VALUE IS AND THE CURRENT ASSESSED VALUE OF THE RIVERSIDE. AND IT SHOWS THAT THE TOTAL IS $107 MILLION. AND

[00:35:04]

THANK YOU, MISS CONRAD. WELL, WE'RE WAITING FOR BRAD TO GET STARTED. COUNCIL MEMBERS, IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS NOW, YOU CAN ASK THEM. BUT WE ALL WE WILL ALSO MAKE SURE THAT WE TAKE TIME FOR QUESTIONS BEFORE WE CLOSE THE HEARINGS. GO AHEAD, MR. KRAMER. OKAY. THANK YOU.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL GRANT KRAMER, PERSPECTIVE PLANNING. AS MAGGIE MENTIONED, I DID PREPARE THE ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY STUDY, AND I WILL TRY NOT TO GET DEEP INTO THE WEEDS. HOWEVER, IF YOU WANT MORE DETAIL, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO TO STOP ME AND ASK A COUPLE OF NOTES. I WOULD JUST SAY UP FRONT, IS THAT JUST BECAUSE OF THE TIMING OF WHEN THIS IS PREPARED VERSUS WHEN IT'S FINISHED? THE NUMBERS HERE DO REFLECT 2024 LEVIES AND VALUES, NOT 2025. THOSE. THOSE WERE PASSED AND UPDATED AFTER THE STUDY WAS WELL UNDERWAY. SO IT IS A LITTLE BIT OLDER DATA BUT NOT NOT INCONSISTENT. SO THE THE REALLY THE MAIN PURPOSE OF THIS STUDY IS TO DETERMINE IF REVENUES, TAX REVENUES FROM PRIVATE INVESTMENT WILL BE SUFFICIENT TO COVER THE ANTICIPATED COSTS OF BOTH PUBLIC PROJECTS AND OTHER ELIGIBLE EXPENSES, SUCH AS SITE REMEDIATION, DEMOLITION, THAT SORT OF THING. SO WE'LL LOOK AT THE THE PRIVATE INVESTMENT THAT THE DEVELOPERS INTEND TO MAKE, THE PROJECTS THAT WE CAN IDENTIFY, AND THEN LOOK AT WHAT THE REVENUES ARE ANTICIPATED TO BE. I'M GOING TO SKIP THIS STUDY AREA BOUNDARIES AND GO STRAIGHT TO THE OPEN AREAS. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT ABOUT THIS STUDY FROM OTHERS THAT YOU MAY HAVE SEEN BEFORE, IS THAT BECAUSE THERE ARE TWO MAIN PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN THIS STUDY AREA, I DIVIDED THIS INTO TWO DIFFERENT OPA AREAS. EVERYTHING EAST OF PIONEER ROAD THAT YOU SEE AS AREA ONE IS, FOR THE MOST PART OWNED AND CONTROLLED BY BELLE VENTURES. AND SO IT'S ANTICIPATED THAT AN OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WOULD BE THEN WITH THEM, AND THAT ALL TAXABLE REVENUES FROM AREA ONE WOULD GO TOWARDS PROJECTS ONLY WITHIN AREA ONE. AND THEN LIKEWISE WITH AREA TWO, THERE WOULD BE SEPARATE AGREEMENT WITH THAT OWNER. SO LOOKING AT JUST A SUMMARY OF THE PRIVATE INVESTMENT VERSUS ANTICIPATED PUBLIC PROJECT COSTS OVER THE 20 YEARS, THERE'S AN ANTICIPATED $600 MILLION WORTH OF PRIVATE INVESTMENT THAT'S BEEN IDENTIFIED. THERE'S ALSO WITH BOTH AREAS COMBINED, ROUGHLY $63.3 MILLION WORTH OF ELIGIBLE AND PUBLIC COSTS. AND THAT INCLUDES A VARIETY OF THINGS OF CONSTRUCTION OF ROADS, GREENBELT SITE. THERE'S SERIOUS SITE REMEDIATION THAT HAS TO BE DONE IN SEVERAL AREAS. SO IN ORDER TO LOOK AHEAD AT WHAT THE ANTICIPATED REVENUES WILL BE, WE TAKE THAT $600 MILLION OF INVESTMENT AND SPREAD IT OUT OVER THE ANTICIPATED TIME THE DEVELOPER HAS IDENTIFIED TO CONSTRUCT IT, AND WE START TO BUILD INCREASES IN VALUE AND REVENUES. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S BEEN CHALLENGING WITH THESE REPORTS, AS I'VE STARTED TO LOOK INTO CHANGES IN LEVY AND VALUATION DATA FOR THE CITY, AND THIS IS TRUE OF ALL THE CITIES THAT I WORK WITH, IS THAT IT'S BECOMING LESS PREDICTABLE. MOST OF THE MODELS THAT WE BUILT WERE, YOU KNOW, 2% ANNUAL INCREASE IN VALUATION, 1% DECREASE IN LEVY SINCE 2020, AND TWO FACTORS, THE THE GROWTH THAT WE'VE HAD, AS WELL AS HOUSE BILL 389 THAT THE LEGISLATURE PASSED, THAT HAS REALLY INFLUENCED HOW BUDGETS ARE MADE AS YOU AS YOU'RE WELL AWARE OF THAT VALUATION AND LEVIES DON'T DON'T HAVE THAT PREDICTABLE TREND. AND SO WHAT I'VE DONE, AGAIN, IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT I'VE DONE IN THE PAST IS RATHER THAN JUST HAVING ONE REVENUE MODEL, ALTHOUGH I DO STILL HAVE THE 2% VALUATION, 1% LEVY CHANGE. I ALSO DID A MODERATE REVENUE GROWTH THAT LOOKS AT 5% ANNUAL VALUATION INCREASE AND A 2% DECREASE. IF I WERE TO DO THAT, THE TOTAL AVERAGES OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS, IT WOULD BE HIGHER. BUT THOSE NUMBERS ARE LIKELY NOT SUSTAINABLE. SO YOU JUST HAVE TO. SO YOU'LL SEE TWO DIFFERENT CASH FLOWS AS YOU READ THROUGH THE REPORT. AND THAT'S JUST TO REFLECT THAT. IT'S PROBABLY BECAUSE THESE AS THESE LEVIES AND VALUES SETTLE INTO A MORE PREDICTABLE PATTERN THAT WILL BE A RANGE OF PREDICTED REVENUE. THE ONE OTHER THING I WOULD POINT OUT HERE ON THIS SLIDE THAT I HAVEN'T SAID ALREADY, IS THAT SECOND LAST BULLET POINT IS THAT IF YOU LOOK AT THESE TABLES, REVENUES ARE COLLECTED THE YEAR AFTER THE VALUATION. I

[00:40:05]

GROWTH, THEY AGAIN SPLIT AROUND THE SAME POINT. BUT YOU'LL NOTICE IT'S REALLY NOT THAT TREMENDOUS DIFFERENCE IN THE REVENUE BECAUSE OF THAT. I THINK THAT DECREASING LEVY AS WELL, EVEN THOUGH REVENUES OR THE VALUATION MAY INCREASE QUICKER. BUT THERE IS A SPLIT AND IT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE. AND OVER YOU KNOW, THE STATUTE STILL ALLOWED 28 YEARS. THERE'D BE QUITE A WIDE GAP THERE BETWEEN THESE TWO. ONE ONE ADDITIONAL CHANGE THAT I WOULD POINT OUT HERE IS, AGAIN, THAT SECOND TO LAST BULLET POINT IN THIS PARTICULAR STUDY, I DID PUT A CAP ON THE 10% REVENUES THAT THE AGENCY WOULD COLLECT. TYPICALLY THAT'S JUST BEEN A FLAT 10% WITH THE SMALLER DISTRICTS. THAT MAKES MORE SENSE WITH A LARGER DISTRICT.

WITH THIS VALUE, IT MADE A LITTLE BIT MORE SENSE TO ME TO ASSUME THAT THE AGENCY WOULD NOT NEED MORE THAN $200,000 ANNUALLY. THAT MAY CHANGE, BUT THAT WAS JUST BASED ON LOOKING AT SOME OF THEIR MORE RECENT BUDGETS AND ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS. SO JUST QUICKLY, A COUPLE OF I'M NOT GOING TO POINT OUT ALL OF THESE NUMBERS, JUST A COUPLE OF HIGHLIGHTS.

THIS IS THE CONSERVATIVE CASH FLOW CHART. SO IF YOU WERE TO LOOK AT WHAT'S THE IMPORTANT DATES ON ON ANY NUMBERS ON THIS PARTICULAR CHART IN THE YEAR COLUMN, YOU'LL NOTICE IF YOU LOOK AT 2044, THAT IS THE FIRST YEAR WHICH ALL ANTICIPATED DEBTS ARE REPAID TO THE DEVELOPER. AND SO THAT LEAVES TWO AND A PORTION WORTH OF REVENUES IN YEARS WORTH OF REVENUES TO PUT TOWARDS ADDITIONAL PROJECTS. IF THE CITY AND AGENCY WERE TO SO CHOOSE ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE, THE FUND CARRYOVER FOR PUBLIC PROJECTS THAT THAT IS ANTICIPATED CASH AVAILABLE ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT'S WHAT NEEDS TO GO TOWARDS OPIATE BALANCES THAT COULD BE USED FOR THOSE PUBLIC PROJECTS THAT THE CITY AND AGENCY MAY WANT TO TACKLE. YOU'LL NOTICE THAT THERE'S ROUGHLY $1 MILLION BY YEAR 2034, AND THEN BY THE END OF THE DISTRICT, THAT LAST NUMBER OVER $23 MILLION IN EXCESS. AND SO THOSE THOSE THINGS CAN BE THIS IS A TIME PERIOD WE CAN BEGIN TO WATCH FOR PROJECTS THAT MAY BE OF INTEREST AND NEED IN THAT AREA. SO SIMILAR TO THREE NUMBERS OR THREE AREAS I'LL POINT OUT HERE, WITH THE MODERATE CASH FLOW, THE DEBTS ARE PAID OFF ONE YEAR EARLY IN 2043, YOU STILL CROSS THE MILLION DOLLAR THRESHOLD FOR PUBLIC PROJECTS OR FUNDS FOR PUBLIC PROJECTS IN 2034.

AND THAT NUMBER IS ACTUALLY AT THE BOTTOM NUMBER THAT SAYS 20 MILLION SHOULD SAY 26 MILLION.

I'M NOT SURE WHAT HAPPENED THERE, BUT IT'S $26 MILLION THAT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC PROJECTS. REALLY THE KEY FINDING IS THAT SECOND BULLET POINT THAT BOTH OPAS WILL HAVE SUFFICIENT FUNDING FOR ALL READING, ALL FOR FULL REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE ANTICIPATED COSTS. AND THAT BOTTOM BULLET IS ALSO IMPORTANT FOR THE CITY AND AGENCY. JUST TO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE SHOULD BE SIGNIFICANT EXCESS TAX INCREMENT REVENUES FOR USE ON OTHER PROJECTS. I KNOW MAYBE IT HAS A COUPLE OF SLIDES, BUT THERE REMAIN. BUT IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS I CAN ANSWER ABOUT ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY AND HAPPY TO. COUNCILOR BRADFORD, JUST ONE QUESTION. WHEN IT SAYS PROJECTS, YOU'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT THE DEALERSHIPS AND THEN THE YOU'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT ALL THE PROJECTS UNDER EFRA. RIGHT. IF YOU GO BACK UP TO THE 23. YEAH, THE 26 MILLION THAT'S AVAILABLE WHEN IT SAID PROJECTS, I WONDERED IF THAT MEANT ALL PROJECTS WITHIN REDEVELOPMENT. THAT'S ACTUALLY A GOOD QUESTION BECAUSE IT'S ACTUALLY NEITHER OF THOSE THINGS. INTERESTING. SO THE PROJECTS THAT HAPPEN AROUND THE DEALERSHIPS, FOR EXAMPLE, THOSE WOULD BE COVERED IN OPA BALANCE NUMBER TWO. OKAY. SO WE KNOW THAT THERE'S A PATHWAY AND A HALF OF A BRIDGE THAT NEEDS TO BE CONSTRUCTED AS AN EXAMPLE. THAT'S THAT'S COVERED IN OPA TWO. EVERYTHING ABOVE VENTURES KNOWS THAT THEY NEED TO DO AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES. OPA ONE. AND THAT'S THEIR REPAYMENT. THAT FINAL COLUMN ON THE RIGHT, THE CARRYOVER, ARE FUNDS THAT SHOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECTS THAT THE CITY AND AGENCY IDENTIFY THEMSELVES, THAT ARE NOT PART OF THAT NORMAL DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. SO THE SNAKE RIVER DISTRICT, FOR EXAMPLE, IS STILL OPEN. THIS IS STUFF LIKE THE ROCK GARDENS OR THE DOWNTOWN ON BROADWAY PROJECTS THAT WE SAW. THIS WOULD BE SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN ANYTHING WE'VE EVER HAD FOR THAT KIND OF EXCESS RATE FOR A 20 YEAR DISTRICT.

[00:45:04]

WAS THAT A DISCUSSION POINT OR WAS IT JUST NOT BECAUSE IT WAS SO MUCH A PART OF THE RIVER? WHAT ARE YOUR WHAT WERE THE THOUGHTS? DO YOU THINK THERE ACTUALLY WERE SOME? THERE WAS A PAUSE PUT ON THIS PROJECT BECAUSE OF THAT. WELL, NOT BECAUSE OF THE ISLAND SPECIFICALLY. IT WAS MORE TO GO FURTHER WEST ALL THE WAY I-15, BECAUSE THERE'S SO MUCH VACANT LAND AND OPPORTUNITY TO DO ADDITIONAL PROJECTS. BUT AFTER WE DISCUSSED IT AND LOOKED AT THE REALITY OF WHEN THOSE FUNDS COME TO FRUITION, IT'S SO FAR DOWN THE ROAD. I THINK THE FEEDBACK I WAS GETTING WAS MAYBE NOT THE RIGHT TOOL OR THE RIGHT TIME, BECAUSE WE'D WANT TO DO IT EARLIER, IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? OR MAYBE IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? YOU WERE SAYING IT WAS SO FAR IN THE FUTURE THAT THERE MIGHT BE A BETTER TOOL EARLIER TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS. TRUE. FOR THE KIND OF PROJECTS WE WERE TALKING ABOUT SPECIFICALLY. YES.

OKAY. DIDN'T MAKE AS MUCH SENSE TO WAIT. AND THESE ARE AMENDABLE. SO IF AT SOME POINT WE WANT TO DO THIS, WE CAN DO THAT, RIGHT? KIND OF YOU CAN AMEND IT WITHIN A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE AREA OF YOU COULD EXPAND YOUR BOUNDARIES A VERY SMALL PERCENTAGE BEFORE IT RESETS THE BASE. SO YOU WOULDN'T GET TO I-15, BUT YOU MAYBE COULD GET TO THESE ISLANDS. YOU COULD MAYBE GET TO THE ISLANDS. RIGHT? OKAY. IF, IF, IF YOU AMENDED IT, DOES IT CHANGE THE MATURITY DATE? THE EXPIRATION DATE ON THE DISTRICT? NO. OKAY. NOW THE RISK IS THAT YOU RESET THE BASE, WHICH IS THE BASE VALUE THAT YOU DO NOT WANT TO DO. OKAY. JUST SORRY.

JUST ONE OTHER QUESTION. THE NUMBERS ARE KIND OF STAGGERING. CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT? I DON'T THINK WE'VE SEEN HALF $1 BILLION BEFORE IN INVESTMENTS. YEAH. WAS SNAKE RIVER LANDING CLOSE TO THAT? THAT'S INTERESTING TO ME. YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS THEIR ORIGINAL INVESTMENT, I DON'T RECALL WHAT THEIR INVESTMENT WAS, BUT IT JUST SPEAKS TO ALL THE PROJECTS THAT ARE IN THE PIPELINE OR LANDING. YEAH. AND LOOKING AT THEIR TIMELINES, THEY WERE THEY WERE FAIRLY. AGGRESSIVE AND QUICK TO, TO START CONSTRUCTION. AND I MEAN, JUST IN TERMS OF OUR TOTAL VALUATION OF BEING 8 BILLION AND TO HAVE HALF OF 1,000,000,000 IN 1 DEVELOPMENT IS PRETTY INCREDIBLE. AND MOMENTOUS TO ME. AND IN A, IN A PROJECT AREA WHERE THERE'S A LOT OF CONTROL AND A LOT OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR PEOPLE TO MAKE GOOD DECISIONS. SO INTERESTING, SO AREA WISE, DOES THIS SOUND WOULD THIS QUALIFY AS ONE OF THE LARGEST URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICTS THAT THE CITY WILL HAVE PARTICIPATED IN, OR IS IT NOT AS LARGE AS I FEEL LIKE IT LOOKS? YEAH, IT IS LARGE. IT'S PROBABLY COMPARABLE TO THE SNAKE RIVER DISTRICT WHICH WENT. AROUND THE SHILOH AREA DOWN TO. GARY DRIVE. THAT'S PROBABLY THE LARGEST ONE YOU'VE EVER SEEN. AND THEN ADDED DOWNTOWN ABOUT HALFWAY THROUGH. AND RIVER COMMONS, WHICH IS THE FIRST PORTION OF SNAKE RIVER LANDING, IS THE SECOND LARGEST ONE. SO IT'S SECOND OR THIRD LARGEST ONE WE'VE EVER HAD THAT I'M AWARE OF. THANK YOU. OTHER QUESTIONS.

COUNCILOR LARSON, I WAS LOOKING AT YOUR PROJECTIONS AND HOW THEY WENT OUT ABOUT, I CAN'T REMEMBER 15 YEARS AGO OR 20 AND THEN THEY STARTED TO SPLIT. IS SOME OF THAT UNCERTAINTY WITH THE FURTHER OUT YOU GO, OR IS THAT JUST BECAUSE THE MODEL IS. THE THE. THEY'RE BOTH THEY'RE BOTH STEADY CHANGES. RIGHT. 2%, 5%. THAT'S ANNUAL. I THINK WHAT THE DIFFERENCE STARTS TO BECOME IS AS PROJECTS COME ONLINE AND AND THEIR VALUE STARTS TO GAIN MOMENTUM, I THINK ABOUT JUST KIND OF A COMPELLING INTEREST TYPE OF EFFECT, WHICH YOU KNOW BETTER, FAR BETTER THAN I DO AS A FORMER BANKER. IT'S A PRETTY SIMPLE CONCEPT REALLY. SO BUT BUT IT'S ALONG THOSE LINES. IT ALL. IT ALL IS AFFECTED BY WHEN HIGHER VALUE PROJECTS COME ONLINE AND START TO BE TAXED,

[00:50:06]

YOU CAN CONTINUE WITH WHAT YOU WERE DOING OR I THINK I'M PASSING THE BATON BACK TO MEGAN.

ALL RIGHT, MISS CONRAD, YOU'RE BACK ON. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. COUNCIL MEMBERS. AND JUST TO POINT OUT, IN THE ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY STUDY ITSELF, THERE'S AN EXTREMELY ROBUST LIST OF SPECIFIC PROJECTS THAT ARE OUTLINED THAT FORM THE BASIS FOR, YOU KNOW, THE EXPENDITURE OF THOSE FUNDS FOR PUBLIC PROJECTS OVER THE LIFE OF THE DISTRICT. I JUST HAVE A COUPLE MORE SLIDES. ONE JUST TO REMIND AND ACTUALLY, AFTER THE AGENCY HAD ACCEPTED THE PLAN AND MOVED IT FORWARD, THERE WAS ONE AT CONSENT THAT WE NEEDED FROM A PROPERTY OWNER IN ORDER TO BE INCLUDED IN THE DISTRICT THAT WASN'T OBTAINED. SO THAT PARCEL WAS REMOVED. SO WHAT YOU HAVE IN YOUR PACKET IS THE IS THE PROPER MAP THAT SHOWS THE EXCLUSION OF THAT SPECIFIC PARCEL. AND THEN JUST QUICKLY, IN LOOKING AT THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND ZONING AND OVERLAYING THE BOUNDARY ON THOSE TWO PARTICULAR MAPS, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE GOALS, THE CITY'S PLANNING GOALS FOR THIS AREA REALLY ARE FOCUSED ON COMMERCIAL AND AND OR MIXED USE.

AND SO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS IS VERY MUCH IN LINE WITH THOSE GOALS. AND THEN, AS MR. KRAMER SAID, THIS IS A POST JULY 1ST, 2016 PLAN. AND SO TO THE EXTENT IT IS AMENDED IN THE FUTURE BY CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE, THAT COULD TRIGGER A BASE RESET TO THE EXTENT THERE IS A MODIFICATION THAT IS AN EXCEPTION TO THAT BASE RESET REQUIREMENT. AND THERE ARE FOUR EXCEPTIONS. AND ONE OF THEM IS TO AMEND ONE TIME TO ADD UP TO 10% OF THE ACREAGE. SO IN A 215 ACRE DISTRICT, YOU COULD BRING IN ONE TIME 21 ACRES CONTIGUOUS TO THE EXISTING BOUNDARY OF THE DISTRICT WITHOUT RISK OF A BASE RESET. AND WITH THAT, AND AS INDICATED, THERE'S YOU KNOW, NOW IS THE TIME SET FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING. IN ADDITION TO THE ORDINANCE, THERE IS THE SEPARATE RESOLUTION, THE CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION THAT WOULD APPROVE THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY THAT IS ALSO INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET. SO WITH THAT, HAPPY TO STAND FOR QUESTIONS AND APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MISS CONRAD AT THE TIME? MR. EXCUSE ME, COUNSELOR LARSON. YES, MEGAN, ON THAT PRIOR SLIDE WHERE IT SHOWED THE VALUE, THAT'S THE ONE THAT SHOWS NEW AREA OF 34 MILLION. IS THAT ONLY THE AREA THAT'S ACTUALLY WITHIN THE CITY AND NOT THE PARTS THAT ARE IN THE COUNTY? THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. I THINK, ACTUALLY, TO BE CONSERVATIVE, WE ADDED IN BOTH THE COUNTY VALUE AND THE CITY VALUE INTO THAT CALCULATION, AS IF IT'S GOING TO BE DEVELOPED ONCE IT'S BEEN ANNEXED INTO THE CITY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COUNSELOR? MISS CONRAD, I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE I'M READING PART OF THE AGREEMENT CORRECTLY. SO IT REFERENCES ALL CONSTRUCTION OF PROJECT AREA SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE STATE LAWS. IDAHO FALLS CITY CODE THAT COULD BE AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME. SO IF SOMETHING CHANGES IN THE CITY CODE THAT AFFECTS THIS AREA, IT'S NOT. GRANDFATHER DIDN'T DO WHAT EXISTS NOW. MODIFICATIONS BY THE COUNCIL WOULD APPLY. LIKE IF WE AND I GUESS I SHOULD BE VERY SPECIFIC. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT DOING AN OVERLAY ALONG THE RIVER CORRIDOR. THAT ISN'T THEN WE HAVEN'T DONE THAT YET.

BUT IF IT GOES INTO EFFECT, WOULD IT ALLOW THE DEVELOPER? WOULD THE DEVELOPER BE REQUIRED WHATEVER GOES WITH THAT OVERLAY, OR WOULD THEY BE GOING WITH ONLY THE STANDARDS WE HAVE SET AS OF NOW? YES. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER. THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. SO WE IN THE URBAN RENEWAL PLAN HAVE ALWAYS DEFERRED TO THE CITY PLANNING DOCUMENTS FOR PURPOSES OF DEVELOPMENT AND PERMITTING. AND SO TO THE EXTENT THERE IS AN OVERLAY ALONG THE RIVER, WHEN THE DEVELOPER COMES IN TO OBTAIN A PERMIT OR GO THROUGH DESIGN REVIEW, THAT'S ALL GOING

[00:55:05]

THANK YOU FOR THAT CLEAR ANSWER. THANK YOU SO MUCH. VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THAT WAS A GOOD QUESTION AND A GOOD ANSWER. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. I THINK AT THIS TIME THEN, MISS BARNEY, IS THERE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO COME FORWARD AND SHARE? OKAY. AND AT THIS TIME, THEN WE'LL TURN IT OVER TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO WISH TO OFFER TESTIMONY, IF ANY KIND OF APPEARS, THAT THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS DON'T HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THEM. AND SO WE ARE GOING TO THEN ASSUME THAT THERE IS NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY TO BE GIVEN, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYONE ELSE ONLINE. AND SO WITH THAT, COUNCIL MEMBERS, BEFORE WE CLOSE THE HEARING, JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU'VE ASKED ALL THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU NEED TO OF DIRECTOR SANNER. MR. KRAMER, MISS BARNEY OR MISS CONRAD. ALL RIGHT. WELL, WITH THAT, THEN WE WILL CLOSE THE HEARING AND I WILL TURN IT TO OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR DELIBERATION. THIS DOES FALL UNDER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES IN THE WAY WE ORGANIZE OUR WORK. AND SO OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS, RADFORD AND LARSON, OUR LIAISONS TO THAT DEPARTMENT. DO YOU WANT TO KICK OFF ANY CONVERSATION OR MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS, SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS WITH YOUR COLLEAGUES.

COMPOSITION. YEAH, I JUST I JUST REALLY EXCITED TO SEE THIS TOOL BE USED IN SUCH AN EFFECTIVE MANNER. I MEAN, YOU LOOK AT LEVERAGE AND OF COURSE THERE IS NO RISK TO THE CITY OR THE TAXPAYERS BECAUSE IT'S, YOU KNOW, THEY THEY FUND IT, THE DEVELOPER FUNDS ALL THE UPFRONT MONEY AND THEY JUST GET PAID BACK AS THE TAX REVENUE PROVIDES THAT ABILITY. AND EITHER WHEN THEY PAY IT ALL BACK OR WHEN THE DISTRICT EXPIRES, THE DEAL'S DONE. SO I THINK THIS IS A, YOU KNOW, A GREAT THING TO SEE BALL VENTURES USING AND THE POTENTIAL BENEFIT TO THE CITY. WE'VE SEEN, YOU KNOW WHAT THAT COULD MEAN. SO I'M EXCITED ABOUT IT. COUNCILOR RADFORD, I HAVE VERY VIVID MEMORIES OF COMING ONTO COUNCIL AND TOM HALLEY JUST TELLING US HOW EXCITED HE WAS THAT THERE WOULD BE 2 MILLION MORE DOLLARS IN REVENUE COMING AFTER THIS WIN FOR DISTRICT CAME IN, AND HOW WE WERE GOING TO SPEND THAT NOW, WE WEREN'T. IT'S JUST REALLY A COMPELLING CONVERSATION FOR PEOPLE TO TO JUMP INTO THE REDEVELOPMENT WORLD AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING WORLD. SO MANY TIMES WE WE TALK ABOUT TAX REVENUE AND WE DON'T TALK ABOUT INVESTMENTS. BUT THIS IS TRULY INVESTING IN OURSELVES. RIGHT.

AND THIS THIS REVENUE. I WAS I JUST LEANED OVER AND TOLD COUNCILOR FREEMAN THAT IT PROBABLY TOOK US 80 YEARS TO GET TO HALF A BILLION VALUATION IN THE CITY OF IDAHO FALLS FROM 1900. RIGHT? BECAUSE IT'S JUST AN AMAZING AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT IS GOING TO BE INVESTED INTO OUR AREA. AND I JUST AGAIN, WE'RE INCREDIBLY FORTUNATE TO HAVE SOMEONE OF THE QUALITY OF BALL VENTURES TO BE ABLE TO ACTUALLY TAKE THIS ON, ALONG WITH THE OTHER PARTNERS THAT ARE INVOLVED, WORLD CLASS DEVELOPERS THAT DEVELOP ALL ACROSS THE COUNTRY. AND SO WE'RE SO AMAZINGLY BLESSED WITH THAT. AND ALSO TO HAVE THE SNAKE RIVER RUN THROUGH THIS AREA IS ALSO AN AMAZING BLESSING THAT WE HAVE. IT'S THE SOURCE OF OUR POWER. IT'S THE SOURCE OF OUR BEAUTY. IT'S THE SOURCE OF SO MANY THINGS FOR OUR CITY. BUT WHAT I THINK IS REALLY FUN IS WHEN I CAME ON COUNCIL, WE WERE DOING A STUDY ON PARKS AND REC, AND WE MET A GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO WERE DOING THE DEVELOPMENT DRAWINGS FOR THE SNAKE RIVER PARK HERITAGE PARK AND SAID THEY WOULD. THEY WOULD HAVE JUMPED OVER ALMOST ANY HOOP TO BE ABLE TO DESIGN A CITY PARK ON THE SNAKE RIVER LIKE IT WAS JUST A LIFE TIME OPPORTUNITY IN THEIR CAREERS TO BE ABLE TO DEVELOP A PARK ON THE SNAKE RIVER. AND SO JUST SO MANY AMAZING THINGS THAT CONVERGE HERE. AND FOR ALL OF THOSE WHO'VE BEEN USING SNAKE RIVER LANDING AND MOUNTAIN AMERICA CENTER AND ALL THE THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING ON THIS SIDE OF TOWN, IT'S JUST EXTREMELY EXCITING AND GRATEFUL FOR ALL THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN INVOLVED. SO THANK YOU, COUNCILOR. COUNSELOR FREEMAN, I'D JUST LIKE TO, YOU KNOW, WE TALK ABOUT THE MONETARY BENEFITS, AND JOHN'S REACHED INTO SOME OF THE OTHER GOOD THINGS THAT HAPPENED. BUT IT'S NOT JUST THE MONETARY THING FOR ME TO PROTECT THE RIVER CORRIDOR. AND I THINK THIS IS A WAY OF DOING THAT. IT FITS NICELY IN WITH OUR DISCUSSIONS LATELY ABOUT PROTECTING THE

[01:00:04]

SORRY. THAT JUST REMINDS ME OF ONE THING THAT I KEEP HEARING, AND I HOPE THAT WE'RE NUANCED ABOUT, IS THAT WHEN WE PROTECT THE RIVER CORRIDOR, THAT WE DO THINK OF IT AS MORE THAN JUST ONE THING. LIKE, I DON'T THINK WE'RE PROTECTING THE RIVER CORRIDOR JUST FOR GREEN SPACE OR FOR JUST NATURAL SPACES. BUT WE ALSO THERE IS A PLACE FOR COMMERCIAL AND OTHER MARINA, ALL KINDS OF THINGS THAT WE CAN USE. THE SNAKE RIVER AS THAT SOURCE THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT. SO GRATEFUL FOR THAT CONVERSATION. I WENT BACK AS THE COUNCIL'S PRIORITY OF PROTECTING THE RIVER, AND ALL OF ITS THE NATURAL ASSETS THAT IT BRINGS TO US, OR THE INHERENT ASSETS THAT IT BRINGS TO THE COMMUNITY. SEVERAL THINGS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED BEYOND RECREATION. THERE'S RECREATION, THERE'S ESTHETIC, THERE ARE ESTHETICS. THERE IS SORRY, SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS. THERE ARE. OH, NOW I'M STARTING TO LOSE MY TRAIN OF THOUGHT.

BUT THERE ARE GREAT MANY CONSIDERATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS. BUT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT THE RIVER REMAINS THE AMENITY THAT IT IS TO THE COMMUNITY AND, AND THE POSITIVE INFLUENCE THAT IT IS ON GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE COMMUNITY AND NOT. AND WE WANT TO DO WHAT WE CAN TO LOCK ALL THOSE PROTECTIONS IN SO THAT IT DOES NOT EVER TURN INTO AN EYESORE, AN INDUSTRIAL WASTE SPACE OR SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN IMAGINE FROM THE PAST. WE WANT IT TO BE VERY JUST AN ASSET. SO JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY, BECAUSE YOU KNEW WHAT YOU WERE REFERRING TO, AND I WANTED TO BE A TINY BIT MORE EXPLICIT ABOUT SOME OF THAT. ANY OTHER COMMENTS, COUNCIL MEMBERS? OKAY, BEFORE I TURN TO YOU FOR A MOTION, I JUST WANT TO SAY ONE MORE THING, AND THAT IS THAT I KNOW THAT THERE ARE OUT THERE DETRACTORS WHEN IT COMES TO USING URBAN RENEWAL AS A TOOL, BUT IT IS ONE OF THE ONLY TOOLS AVAILABLE TO COMMUNITIES TO BE ABLE TO DO EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE DOING, WHICH IN THIS CASE, WE ARE ACCELERATING GROWTH.

THERE'S NO QUESTION THAT THIS PART OF THE TOWN WOULD EVENTUALLY DEVELOP, BUT IT HAS ELEMENTS TO IT THAT HAVE PRECLUDED IT FROM BEING DEVELOPED THUS FAR. YES, IT'S PART OF OR CLOSE TO THE RIVER, AND THEREFORE WE WOULD THINK THAT IT WOULD BE SUPER ATTRACTIVE. AND WHY DOES IT NEED GOVERNMENT HELP TO TO DEVELOP? BUT THERE ARE PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH LAVA ROCK PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH OTHER GEOLOGIC FEATURES THAT HAVE MADE THIS TOO EXPENSIVE FOR SOMEONE TO DEVELOP. SO FAR, URBAN RENEWAL IS AN ACCELERATOR.

IT WILL ALLOW THE COMMUNITY TO BE ABLE TO REAP THE BENEFITS OF THIS SITE AS DEVELOPED SOONER THAN WE OTHERWISE WOULD, AND THAT BRINGS REVENUE IN, THAT GROWS THE TAX BASE AND LOWERS EVERYONE'S TAX BILL. SO THERE'S REALLY NO THERE'S NO REASON NOT TO PURSUE URBAN RENEWAL. IT DOES NOT ADVANTAGE ANYONE. IT RESULTS IN EXCELLENT PLANNING, EXCELLENT OUTCOMES AND THE CREATION OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S NEEDED. AND IT GUARANTEES THAT THAT INFRASTRUCTURE WILL BE THE RIGHT INFRASTRUCTURE AND NOT CHEAPENED BY, YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY CUTTING CORNERS LATER ON. THIS IS JUST A WIN WIN FOR THE COMMUNITY. SO I'M EXCITED ABOUT IT. THOSE REVENUE PROJECTIONS THAT WERE ON THE SCREEN, IN CASE ANYBODY IS FEELING STILL KIND OF FEISTY ABOUT THIS, I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT THOSE ARE CONSERVATIVE NUMBERS. WE DON'T PUT UP NUMBERS THAT ARE PIE IN THE SKY NUMBERS. WE PUT UP NUMBERS THAT ARE BASED ON REASONABLE ESTIMATIONS. SO THIS IS THIS IS JUST A GOOD THING. AND I DON'T FORESEE THAT THE COUNCIL WILL PROBABLY RAISE TOO MANY OBJECTIONS TO THIS ONLY WHEN WE HAVE THE VOTE. COUNCILOR FRANCIS DID I DID I PUSH ON A BUTTON THERE RIGHT OFF WHAT YOU SAID AND ADD TO IT. AND THAT'S KIND OF A DEFENSE OF WHY THIS REDEVELOPMENT MAKES SO MUCH SENSE. BUT IT'S THOSE WHO WALK THROUGH THIS AREA OR RIDDEN THEIR BIKES THROUGH THIS AREA, OR EVEN DRIVEN DOWN MILLIGAN ROAD. KNOW THAT WHAT WAS PUT IN, NOT THE ECONOMIC ELIGIBILITY, BUT WHAT MADE THE STATE STANDARDS. THIS IS AN AREA WAS UNDER DEPRECIATION OR WITHOUT A DOUBT. AND ONE OF THE REASONS FOR THAT IS HISTORICALLY RIVERS USED TO BE THAT'S WHERE WE JUST TAKE OUR JUNK AS A SOCIETY. AND WE JUST PUT IT THERE. AND I THINK ONE OF THE ESTIMATES IS THERE MIGHT BE 18FT OF DEBRIS IN PART OF THIS THAT WAS PUT THERE BY A SOCIETY WHEN THAT USED TO BE THE WAY WE USE THE RIVER. NOW THE SOCIETY IS SAYING WE WILL HELP A DEVELOPER MAKE THAT INTO SOMETHING ATTRACTIVE FOR THE 21ST CENTURY. THAT'S WHY REDEVELOPMENT MAKES SO MUCH SENSE, BECAUSE DIGGING OUT 18FT OF WHO KNOWS WHAT KIND OF DEBRIS NEEDS HELP, AND IT

[01:05:07]

FRANCIS I. FREEMAN. YES. MOTION CARRIES. VERY GOOD. WE'VE APPROVED THE ORDINANCE. DO WE NEED TO READ IT BY TITLE? AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IDAHO FALLS, IDAHO, APPROVING THE URBAN RENEWAL PLAN FOR THE RIVERSIDE URBAN RENEWAL PROJECT, WHICH PLAN INCLUDES REVENUE ALLOCATION, FINANCING PROVISIONS AUTHORIZING THE CITY CLERK TO TRANSMIT A COPY OF THIS ORDINANCE AND OTHER REQUIRED INFORMATION TO COUNTY AND STATE OFFICIALS AND THE AFFECTED TAXING ENTITIES, PROVIDING SEVERABILITY, CODIFICATION AND PUBLICATION BY SUMMARY. APPROVING THE SUMMARY OF THE ORDINANCE, PROVIDING FOR A WAIVER OF THE READING RULES, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. VERY GOOD. AS SOON AS WE CAN GET THIS PUBLISHED, IT WILL BE BEEN APPROVED. AND WITH THAT, WE HAVE A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE.

I MOVE THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE RESOLUTION APPROVING THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH BONNEVILLE COUNTY, AND GIVE AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS. SECOND. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH, CITY CLERK. WE'RE READY FOR A VOTE ON THE RESOLUTION. DAMON. YES. FREEMAN. YES, FRANCIS. I. BRADFORD. AYE. BURTENSHAW. YES.

LARSEN. YES. MOTION CARRIES. VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBERS, WE HAVE REACHED THE

[6. Announcements]