Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Minutes - July 07, 2021 Mayor Jerry Merrill Council Members: Christopher Mann Jordan Busby Mikel Walker Tisha Flora Brad Wolfe Bryanna Johnson City Staff: Stephen Zollinger – City Attorney Matt Nielson – Finance Officer Keith Davidson – Public Works Director Alan Parkinson – Planning & Zoning Administrator Scott Johnson – Economic Development Director Deborah Lovejoy – City Clerk 5:00 P.M. Work Meeting to Review Local Improvement District 51 (LID 51) Public Works Director Davidson reviewed a map of the location included in LID 51. They canvased the steets to determine the criteria to create the LID. Some of the aspects to determine if the curb and gutter needs to be replaced are bad drainage and does the slope meet the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. Council Member Walker asked if some of the streets are in worse condition than others. Council Member Flora asked if LID will be addressed similar to LID 50. The sidewalks need to meet the ADA standards. Some of the costs associated with an LID are $1,500 for sprinkler system, plus top soil and sod and the cost of the landscaping stripe. Council Member Flora questioned the formula used for the narrowing of the road. Public Works Director Davidson explained 50 percent of the cost is to replace curb and gutter. When looking for comparibles in costs the driveway approach should be considered. She asked why the costs aren’t decreasing like they did for Park Street. She said the cost are increasing instead. City Engineer McDermott said moving the approach is what is driving the cost of the assesements. Council President Busby asked if the city’s contribution should be higher due to the addition of the landscaping stripes. Discussion regarding the time and date to schedule a meeting with the citizens who’s property is included in the LID 51. 6:30 P.M. City Hall Council Member Flora said the prayer. Council President Busby led the pledge. Roll Call of Council Members: Attending: Council Member Flora, Council Member Johnson, Council Member Mann, Council Member Walker, Council President Busby, and Mayor Merrill. Council Member Wolfe asked to be excused from attending the meeting. Mayor Merrill Presentation: Recognizing Roscoe Orton for 16 years of service on the Traffic Safety Committee. He expressed his appreciation to Mr. Orton for his many years of service and for making the community safer on the roadways of Rexburg. Welcome/Introduce New Employee: Sarah Kennett-Cromwell – Social Media Strategist Mayor Merrill said new city employee Sarah Kennett-Cromwell was unable to attend the meeting. Public Comment: not scheduled on the agenda (limit 3 minutes); issues may be considered for discussion on a future agenda. Please keep comments on point and respectful. Staff Reports: Finance: - Matt Nielson Review Proposed Fiscal Year 2022 Utility Rates and Set Public Hearing for August 4, 2021 Finance Officer Nielson reviewed the proposed 2022 Utility Rates. / Finance Officer Nielson reviewed the proposed rate fee increases for water. / / / / Finance Officer Nielson reviewed the proposed increases for the wastewater treatment. / / Finance Officer Nielson reviewed a sample utility bill with the proposed increase. / Council Member Walker moved to approve to set a Public Hearing for the Proposed Fiscal Year 2022 Utility Rates on August 4th, 2021 at 6:45 P.M.; Council Member Flora seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Johnson None Council Member Flora Council Member Mann Council Member Walker Council President Busby The motion carried. Review Amended Fiscal Year 2021 Budget and Set Public Hearing for August 4, 2021 Finance Officer Nielson reviewed the following Budget Adjustments: / / / / / / / / Council Member Mann expressed his concerns with using all the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Grant funds on the Fiber Initiative. He would prefer some of the funds be used on items such as park equipment, improving trails to beautify the city. These are items that would benefit the entire community. Mayor Merrill explained there are many restrictions placed on the grant funds and they can only be used on specific items. Council Member Mann suggested a work meeting be scheduled to review the different options of how the ARPA funds could be utilized. Council Member Flora moved to approve the Budget Adjustments as stated; Council President Busby seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Johnson None Council Member Flora Council Member Mann Council Member Walker Council President Busby The motion carried. Finance Officer Nielson reviewed the Budget Amendments for Fiscal Year 2021. / / Finance Officer Nielson reviewed the Budgeted Revenues and Expenitures for Fiscal Year 2021. / / / Council President Busby moved to approve the Public Hearing for consideration of an Amendment to the 2021 Fiscal Year Budget on August 4th, 2021 at 7:00 P.M.; Council Member Johnson seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Johnson None Council Member Flora Council Member Mann Council Member Walker Council President Busby The motion carried. Public Works: – Keith Davidson Bid Acceptance for Nature Park Playground Preparations Public Works Director Davidson said only one bid was received for the excavation of the Nature Park Playgound from Vanguard LLC; it’s the same company working on the Hydrant Replacement Project. The amount of the bid was $42,076.55. The Nature Park Playgound Project is going to exceed the budgeted amount by about $10,000. / / Council President Busby moved to approve the low bid of $42,076.55 from Vanguard LLC for the Nature Park Playground Preparations; Council Member Johnson seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Johnson None Council Member Flora Council Member Mann Council Member Walker Council President Busby The motion carried. Public Hearing 7:00 P.M. Ordinance No. 1261 Fiscal Year 2022 Appropriation Budget and Considered 1st Read – Matt Nielson Finance Officer Nielson reviewed the 2022 Budget Highlights. / / / Mayor Merrill opened the Public Hearing. Public Testimony in favor of the proposal (5-minute limit): None Public Testimony in neutral to proposal (5-minute limit): None Public Testimony opposed to the proposal (5-minute limit): None Council Member Flora moved to approve Ordinance No. 1261 Fiscal Year 2022 Appropriation Budget and consider first read; Council Member Walker seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Johnson None Council Member Flora Council Member Mann Council Member Walker Council President Busby The motion carried. Mayor’s Report: Mayor Merrill reported he attended a meeting in St. Anthony regarding Cloud Seeding. This year is a good indicator of the reasons why the city is participating in the Cloud Seeding Program. In the local basin the reports indicate a 9% increase in moister levels from pervious snowpacks. He believes the Cloud Seeding Program is a good investment. In dry years such as this current year, we need all the water storage possible. He said one of the processes with cloud seeding he found interesting is when it appears that the water levels are high and too much moister is going to cause flooding operations are suspended. The process includes the spreading of silver iodide into the clouds. In order for the process to work correctly there needs to be a storm front coming through the area and other conditions will need to be met. Items for Consideration: Planning & Zoning Recommendation to Rezone approximately 301 S 12th W from Rural Residential 2 (RR2) to Low Density Residential 1 (LDR1), Low Density Residential 2 (LDR2), and Low Density Residential 3 (LDR3) #21-00310. Designated as Ordinance No 1263 if Motion Passes and Considered 1st Read – Alan Parkinson. Mayor Merrill explained the process of a rezone request by the property owner or developer. City Staff meets with developers on a daily basis. City Staff does not plan the development for the developer, they inform the developer of what is allowed in a particular zone. As the rezone process moves forward a public hearing is held in Planning and Zoning. During the public hearing, surrounding property owners have the opportunity to voice their opinion in favor, neutral or opposed to the proposal. A recommendation regarding the proposal from the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Staff is given to City Council. Planning and Zoning Administrator Parkinson explained on April 21, 2021, the property owners had requested the property be rezoned from Rural Residential 2 (RR2) to Low Density Residential 2 (LDR2) and Medium Density Residential 1 (MDR1). He said the initial rezone request was denied. The property owners are currently requesting their property at approximately 301 S 12th W be rezoned from Rural Residential 2 (RR2) to Low Density Residential 1 (LDR1), Low Density Residential 2 (LDR2), and Low Density Residential 3 (LDR3). He reviewed a map of the property. The rezone request meets the Comprehensive Plan Map designation and Public Works requirements. / Council Member Walker said because of the small amount of Rural Residential 2 (RR2) property in the city he prefers the property to maintain its current zone. Council Member Johnson read a quote from a resident who was quoting a previous City Council Member when this zone went into effect “for the development and protection of stable country neighborhoods”. She said she agrees with Council Member Walker in maintaining the current zone of the property. Currently, the city’s emphasis is on renters and she believes the emphasis should also be on stable long term residents as well. Council Member Flora said this presentation, although she was granted permission to give it, was not approved by or written by anyone in the city. She said she did not receive any information from the city; it is completely her own and does not represent anyone’s perspective but her own. To her friends and neighbors: Your organization, community spirit and the time and effort you have expended are more than commendable. The first proposal to put in Low density Residential 2 and Medium Density Residential 2 did not pass largely because of your efforts, your organization, your compelling arguments, and your passion for your community. That first proposal although it was allowed in the city’s vision and comprehensive plan, in my opinion, did not at this time fit in our rural residential neighborhoods. Because of your thoughtful presentations, I thought it only appropriate to expend as much time and energy on my own presentation as you spent on yours. I want to address many of the issues on both sides of this zone proposal as I can so that whatever decision is made all parties are heard and know true consideration was given in the decision tonight. Before I start I want to clarify that I do have a conflict of interest in this decision. I currently live in the Willowbrook neighborhood and although have stayed clear of ALL conversations regarding this matter during the two public hearings at planning and zoning, in the past 7 days I have had several members of my neighborhood ask me clarifying questions regarding the processes of planning & zoning, and informational questions regarding zoning rules. I have included in my presentation today anything that was discussed. If this prevents me from voting, please make that judgment after my presentation and know that I did my best to keep things informational and did not discuss how I thought the council would vote. This process of growth is exhausting. At times the residents don’t feel heard, feel dismissed, and/or not valued as long-time community members. This is why regular people like those sitting before you get involved. Let’s first talk about growth. Here is a zoning map of Rexburg’s current zones. Starting at the center of town you have the purple and blue zones that represent commercial and mixed use, here is BYU-Idaho. Notice the light brown areas around that represent high-density housing. This dark outline is what is called the Pedestrian Emphasis Zone or PEZ for short. This zone is where the city designates and encourages high-density housing. The medium density housing are the dark and light orange colors. The shades of yellow are all low-density housing and the green is the rural residential housing. For your information the pea soup areas are public facilities like schools, county/city buildings, parks etc. / I’d like to discuss Tammy Geddes’ findings of rental properties verses stable single family housing. Knowing Tammy like I do, she spent hours of her time making sure her information was factual and true. She reported that 68% of housing was occupied by rentals and homeowners occupied 32%. Compared to the state of Idaho with 70% owner occupied housing and 30% rental occupied. This is a cause for concern, at least for me. Let me remind each of us that government does not drive demand. What I’m saying is that our city does not seek out developers for certain types of residential housing. Instead market drives demand. What could potentially drive the demand for so many rentals? Madison County’s median age is 22 years old. Our population is young, almost the youngest in our country. At the younger stages of life, jobs aren’t permanent and most do not purchase homes. Likewise, young adults cannot afford larger lots and larger homes. Over the past 5 years BYU-Idaho has expanded. Several times while I have sat on city council, BYU representatives have come to city council letting us know they are short beds. People are moving to Rexburg. Whether they are coming for jobs, following their children, work online; there has been an increase of population which then creates demand. So why the huge flip flop in statistics? Why are we not more comparable to Pocatello, Boise, or Provo? The answer lies with the makeup of our community. Close to 60% of our population are our wonderful BYU-Idaho citizens. In our 2020 census we are guessing 20,000 of our 34,0000 people are students. This aligns with our renter statistics. As for the statistic of 26% being vacant, I am unaware of the reasons behind the vacancies. However, if that statistic is within the past year I am guessing this has to do with covid, the shutdown of face-to-face classes and the ability to come to BYU-Idaho regardless of where you live. I do know that our market demand has also flip-flopped in the past year and while previous years have seen a large amount of new apartment complexes being built, this past and current year more residential houses are being built to address the demand for single-family dwellings. What is the city doing about the surge of growth? We continue to look to the future and make sure our water, sewer, and other essential services are available. We increase staff in our police, fire and other departments as our city grows Our school district continues to make plans for additions on existing buildings and additional buildings in the growing areas of our city We update our comprehensive plan and vision for what our city could look like in 10 years We have additional roads and streets planned and continue to work on our 10-year-streets plan for upgrades and maintenance. As of this week this is the amount of zoned acreage allotted within the city limits and impact areas in Rexburg. If we add the high and medium density zones we have just over 663 acres. Our low-density acreage is 1,817 and there is 1,643 acres of rural residential zoned acres. / As you might be aware, most of the land within the city center is built out. So of course the cheapest land lies on the outskirts of our city. In a growing city this is where the growth mainly happens. What are the city’s options? Do not grow at all – keep everything the same Continue to annex and provide for the needs of the individuals and families who are moving here As a city we have opted for to continue to annex and grow. How do we manage growth? Our city has a comprehensive plan. This is the vision of where different zones should go and where the city should hold developers accountable. Yet even with a comprehensive plan each proposal brought into the city is looked at on an individual case by case. Just because a zone is allowed in the comprehensive plan, does not mean it is the right thing to do. The city staff’s job is to see if it fits the comprehensive plan and if we have the infrastructure to accommodate the proposal. The P&Z/City Council’s job is to make sure it makes sense and they have the ability to approve or to deny. Remember the comprehensive plan is a future vision and what zones are allowed in that vision. The zoning is more of a tool to help developers understand what is allowed. Tonight the city council has to decide to either approve or deny the zone change from RR2 to LDR1, LDR2 and LDR3. / I spent some time looking at our current zoning and driving around with my phone and taking some very professional pictures of different zoned neighborhoods. (Show slides) / / / / / / / / / / / / Are these types of stable neighborhoods a fit for this area? That is not as simple as it might appear. On the one hand, yes they are! These neighborhoods are low-density stable family homes. These are great places to live and would fit into this area and enhance the stable environment. Because the property doesn’t sit next to either of the Rural residential neighborhoods on either side, in my mind almost dictates that the other two fields have to buffer between the Rural residential and the Low density. This creates a protection for the neighborhoods on either side because a developer will not be able to reasonably request a medium or high density. In fact in my opinion the developers would need to buffer between what is proposed and what is currently there. / But it is not that simple. After hearing all the testimonies and reading all the letters, I went back and read the planning and zoning and the city council minutes from September 2002 till March 2003. This was the period when the city proposed and then annexed 12th west and everything east of 12th west. Lawyers were involved, petitions were signed, town hall meetings were held, heated debates and angry citizens wrote letters to contest this proposal. At this point just the first part of Willowbrook neighborhood was built along with the Parson’s neighborhood, most of the homes on 12th west and Widdison. The city was also in a time of huge growth. These community members had actually built in the county and were now being annexed to the city. They already had septic tanks and wells and the cost to switch over to city water and sewer was expensive. As part of the compromise of annexation the city reduced hook-up fees and created the Rural Residential zone to protect the neighborhood. Most residents looked on this as a promise to protect their area from the encroachment of higher densities. From all my research though I cannot find any verbal promises that it would remain that way forever, I feel like the city implied that promise. Many of these same residents are here now fighting again for that promise to be fulfilled. So now the dilemma! There is a demand for single family housing in good stable neighborhoods. Currently all the low-density housing areas are full and are hard to find. Due to the low supply people are going out to the county to build. They are building in Rigby and other growing local communities because Rexburg’s inability to provide neighborhoods with an LDR1 or 2 that meets those needs. Yes we do have summerfield neighborhood, which is a great neighborhood. Although Summerfield has an LDR 2 zone, this is what the city calls a planned unit development or a PUD. A PUD is a way to build into a development some open space and then allows the developer a higher density. Because of this higher density in some areas it resembles more of an LDR3 and MDR2. Again this is a PUD and this higher density is allowed because they have over 700 acres in this community. What is in this development is not currently proposed for the 25-acre parcel we are discussing tonight. While some people love a larger lot, others still want the nice stable neighborhoods, larger homes on smaller lots. Where now do we put LDR1 and LDR2 neighborhoods? While our city does need more Rural residential neighborhoods, what about Low density 1? If we deny this proposal are we pushing stable neighborhoods elsewhere? Living on the outskirts of town is HARD! There are lots of hard decisions to be made and until there is something built in the ground there is no law against anyone coming to the city and making their proposal. The only way for a neighborhood to control what is put in next to them is for the members to buy the property themselves and develop it the way they want. Developing land is a gamble. In order to put the financial backing to a project, it must pencil out as they say. The developer has to put in the infrastructure and then hope they are able to sell the lots to recoup the cost plus they also want to make a profit. Costs for building have skyrocketed yet low-density housing is still being demanded right now. Do we chance the prices come down and some developer will eventually want to develop another rural residential neighborhood? What do we do? I would like to conclude with a Memo written by Winston dyer who was the chair of the planning and zoning commission when Ricks College announced the 4 –year BYU-Idaho decision and all the annexations were being proposed and approved: // / / / Council Member Flora said her decision is neutral because she understands the resident’s concerns and the developer’s. The Low Density Residential 1 (LDR1) and LDR2 may assist to keep the Rural Residential Zone safe. On the other hand, she understands there was a promise made to the residents in the Rural Residential Zone that the surrounding properties would maintain the RR Zone. There are concerns a different developer may decide to request a rezone of their property to a Medium Density Residential 1 (MDR1) or MDR2. Mayor Merrill asked Public Works Director Davidson to explain the cost associated with infrastructure due to growth. Public Works Director Davidson said the further the sprawl from the city infrastructure the less number of residents are paying into the infrastructure expenses causing an increased amount of cost to the current residents for the extended water and sewer lines. He said when the city is considering annexation of a certain area, he councils to not leapfrog a wastewater lift station. The higher the density the increased number of residents paying into the cost of infrastructure. The costs are balanced with zoning and the market. The larger the lots the higher demand on the city’s water system for irrigation. Mayor Merrill said he believes the rezone request is a good compromise between the property owner and surrounding residents. The city is in need of the LDR1 and LDR2 Zones and the LDR3 Zone is located along the freeway. He has noticed lots along the freeway have not sold in the Pine Brook Subdivision; it may be that the lots are less desirable because of their proximity to the freeway. Mayor Merrill clarified in the past minutes he has read he did not find wording eluding to a promise to keep this area Rural Residential. The City Council Members have the responsibility of balancing between upholding property rights and protecting neighborhoods. He mentioned the mixed desires of the residents living in the surrounding properties before the Starlight and Henderson Subdivisions were built. Some residents at that time weren’t pleased with losing some of the county feel; however, a lot of great residents now live in those subdivisions. Council Member Mann commended Council Member Flora on her presentation to City Council. He said growth is going to happen and it has to be planned wisely. When the original proposal was before City Council he voted against the rezone request. As a community he believes they should ensure there are various housing options for the residents of Rexburg. Council Member Flora said her presentation was given as a member of City Council; however, if she was making a decision as a citizen, she would prefer the lower density. She moved near this location to have the lower density. One of the aspects in the LRD2 and LDR3 Zones is that they allow for twin homes; however, there are LRD2 neighborhoods that only have single family homes. As City Council members they do not know the intention of the developer. City Council has to make a decision without knowing what is going to be built. They have to decide based on what the zone allows. She explained as a City Council member she agrees with Council Member Mann the city needs LDR1 and LDR2 Zones, she is not in favor of the LDR3; however, only four acres would be zoned LDR3. The rezone proposal would benefit our community; it has been a while since City Council has decided on a LDR1 proposal. Council Member Flora mentioned the property in this proposal is not abutting the RR1 Zone because there is property owned by different owners on both sides of this neighborhood. There is a possibility the developer could come back and request a high density in the future. She said if the developer comes back to request a higher density her vote will be nay and if the developer later asks for a Plan Unit Development her vote will be nay. In her opinion if this rezone is approved it will protect the RR1 Zone from medium and high densities because there would need to be a buffer between the zones. Council Member Johnson said she lives in an LDR2 Zone and does not consider it a stable neighborhood. There are four homes on her block that are rentals and about eight families have moved to the county to have a larger lot. She believes there is a need in the city for the larger lots allowed in the RR1 Zone. She said if the city doesn’t provide the larger lots, residents will move to the county and the city will lose tax dollars. The city will not be able to obtain RR1 Zones in the future. Mayor Merrill said as the city grows and more properties from the Impact Zone are annexed there is the potential of having more RR1 Zones. He said he is in favor of this request because the LDR1, LDR2 and LDR3 Zones allow for residents to have the option of different lot sizes. Council Member Walker said he agrees with Council Member Johnson once the RR1 Zone changes to a different zone; it will be difficult to recuperate this type of zone. The annexation of property into the city is unknown and could take longer than expected dimensioning the possibilities of having more RR1 zoned property. Council President Busby mentioned most developers will build to the maximum allowed in the zone for financial gain and that is a concern for him. He said he is also concerned with the additional traffic the higher density will cause on an already high traffic road. Council Member Johnson moved to deny the rezone at approximately 301 S 12th W from Rural Residential 2 (RR2) to Low Density Residential 1 (LDR1), Low Density Residential 2 (LDR2), and Low Density Residential 3 (LDR3); Council President Busby seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Johnson Council Member Flora Council Member Walker Council Member Mann Council President Busby The motion carried. Council Member Mann asked to be excused for the rest of the meeting. Planning & Zoning Recommendation to approve the Teton River Flats Planned Unit Development (PUD) at approximately 280 Lorene St #21-00177. The zoning of the property will remain the same at Medium Density Residential 2 (MDR2). – Alan Parkinson Planning and Zoning Administrator Parkinson reviewed the Teton River Flats Planned Unit Development (PUD). The original request was for 100 units which would have required the maximum allowed bonus points to be met. He said the developer decided to reduce the number of units not because the bonus points couldn’t be met, it was for the purpose of adding a park. The park would be an amenity for the residents. The PUD requirements were met through the bonus points. Council President Busby asked how many units will be removed to accommodate the park and has the Canal Company been notified of this development. Planning and Zoning Administrator Parkinson replied two buildings or a total of eight units were removed and the Canal Company has been contacted. One of the conditions of this PUD is for the surrounding land owners and farmers been notified. The ditch has not been used for 10 years. / Council Member Flora moved to approve the Teton River Flats Planned Unit Development (PUD) at approximately 280 Lorene Street with conditions; Council Member Walker seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Johnson None Council Member Flora Council Member Walker Council President Busby The motion carried. Review and approval of Iron Horse Plat – Division 1 located at 1076 S 12th W #21-00080 – Alan Parkinson Planning and Zoning Administrator Parkinson reviewed the Iron Horse Plat. There is a total of seven lots. The Plat met the requirements and a traffic study was conducted. The results of the study may require a stop sign. The infrastructure needed to support this development is available. / Council President Busby moved to approve Iron Horse Plat – Division 1 located at 1076 S 12th W.; Council Member Johnson seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Johnson None Council Member Flora Council Member Walker Council President Busby The motion carried. Review and approval of City of Rexburg Employee Committee Bylaws – Eric Parker This item was discussed at the beginning of the meeting when Council Member Mann was present. City of Rexburg Employee Advisory Committee President Eric Parker reviewed the committee bylaws. He mentioned he is the outgoing president and the incoming president is Noah Phethean. The proposed bylaws have been reviewed by City Attorney Zollinger and Human Resource Director Hill. A section was added to the bylaws that section is number four. The added section is to insure city employees on the committee understand their responsibilities. / / / Council Member Johnson moved to approve the City of Rexburg Employee Advisory Committee Bylaws; Council Member Walker seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Johnson None Council Member Flora Council Member Mann Council Member Walker Council President Busby The motion carried. Calendared Bills: Second Reading: Those items which have been first read: Ordinance No 1260 Mayor and City Council Salary Changes Effective January 1, 2022 Council President Busby moved to approve Ordinance No 1260 Mayor and City Council Salary Changes Effective January 1, 2022; Council Member Walker seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Johnson None Council Member Flora Council Member Walker Council President Busby The motion carried. Third Reading: Those items which have been second read: NONE Mayor’s Business: Reappoint Robert Chambers and Randall Porter to Rexburg Urban Renewal Board Council Member Walker moved to ratify the reappoint of Robert Chambers and Randall Porter to the Rexburg Urban Renewal Board; Council President Busty seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Johnson None Council Member Flora Council Member Walker Council President Busby The motion carried. Ratify Bruce Casper as a member of the Planning and Zoning Board Council Member Flora moved to ratify Bruce Casper as a member of the Planning and Zoning Commission; Council Member Walker seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Johnson None Council Member Flora Council Member Walker Council President Busby The motion carried. City Attorney Zollinger asked Mayor Merrill to make a change to the agenda to add the Design-Build Agreement for Municipal Fiber Optic Network Design Project. City Staff was able to negotiate the cost amount budgeted by City Council. The agreement is a time sensitive item. There are deadlines that need to be met for funding. The Design Phase Services cost are $48,000. City Attorney Zollinger commended City Employee Daniel Torres for his dedicated work and ability to negotiate the terms with Silver Star for the municipal fiber optic design project. Council Member Walker moved to amend the City Council Meeting Agenda to include the Design Build Agreement for Municipal Fiber Optic Network Design Project; Council President Busby seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Johnson None Council Member Flora Council Member Walker Council President Busby The motion carried. Council Member Flora moved to approve the Design Build Agreement with Silver Star for Municipal Fiber Optic Network Design Project in the amount of $48,000; Council President Busby seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Johnson None Council Member Flora Council Member Walker Council President Busby The motion carried. Discussion regarding the Employee Committee structure. Mayor Merrill said he would like to the see the Employee Committee Member be more involved with community outreach programs. The Police Department is involved is already involved in the community by hosting the Special Needs Luncheon at Porter Park and Shop with a Cop Program. Council Member Flora said she prefers the different City Departments be recognized for their hard work. Council Member Walker expressed his appreciation to Council Member Mann and the Chamber of Commerce Staff for their hard work in making the Fourth of July festivities a great success. Mayor Merrill reminded everyone about the D.A.R.E. Carwash on July 21st and the D.A.R.E. Night Golf Tournament on July 30th. Consent Calendar: The consent calendar includes items, which require formal City Council action, however, they are typically routine or not of great controversy. Individual Council members may ask that any specific item be removed from the consent calendar for discussion in greater detail. Explanatory information is included in the City Council’s agenda packet regarding these items. Minutes from June 23, 2021, Meetings Approve the City of Rexburg Bills Council Member Walker moved to approve the Consent Calendar containing the minutes, city bills; Council Member Johnson seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Johnson None Council Member Flora Council Member Walker Council President Busby The motion carried. 8:41 P.M. APPROVED: ________________________________ Jerry Merrill, Mayor Attest: _____________________________ Marianna Gonzalez, Deputy City Clerk