Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003.12.03 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL MINUTES CITY OF REXBURG December 03, 2003 STATE OF IDAHO ) ) SS. County of Madison ) Present were the following: Mayor: Mayor Bruce Sutherland Council Members: Glen Pond Shawn Larsen Marsha Bjornn Paul Pugmire Donna Benfield Nyle Fullmer Financial Officer Richard Horner P&Z Administrator: Kurt Hibbert City Clerk: Blair D. Kay PFC: John Millar City Attorney: Stephen Zollinger Pledge to the Flag Mayor Sutherland welcomed the Scouts to the meeting. Troop 47 & Troop 418 were represented. Mayor Sutherland welcomed County Commissioner Reed Sommer to the meeting. 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. a.Minutes from the November 19, 2003 meeting b.Approve City of Rexburg bills th Correction on Page 5 of the minutes for November 19 indicating that the Developer will pay the entire cost of the street light by reimbursing the City after the final costs are Donna Benfield determined. moved to approve the Consent Agenda with the above correction to the minutes; Nyle Fullmer seconded the motion; all voted aye, none The motion carried opposed. . 1 Non Controversial Items Added to the Agenda: Rona Lee Flansburg represented a group that is forming a nonprofit corporation to purchase the Romance Theater on Main Street. They are planning a theater with live performance with music, dance, and drama. The theater could be used for visual arts and other Community events. She mentioned that the Colonial Theater in Idaho Falls is used for a Theater, Art Gallery, and Conference Center for receptions. Local businesses are allowed to rent space in the Theater. The Idaho Falls Theater has drawn people to the Downtown area for the different events that are provided at the Theater. It has helped revitalize the Downtown area in Idaho Falls. She mentioned the possibility of applying for a grant for the renovation of the Theater in Rexburg. David Bell Chairman of the Romance Theater Board gave some specifics on the Romance Theater Board. The idea is to make the Downtown area look better. The City can help in this effort by doing the following: 1) Provide vocal, verbal, and written help to promote the Theater. This will help the Board secures donations for the project. 2) Facilitate the Grant writing process by the City of Rexburg giving consent for the project. This will be especially helpful in the first year. 3)Consider a matched donation or some other type of contribution from the City of Rexburg. Paul Pugmire asked what would be possible to be done in this building that could not be done in the Tabernacle. David mentioned that the Tabernacle is not readily availability for plays, dance, live theater, and drama performances. The building is slow to be heated. Paul asked if the Tabernacle board was in support of this project. David indicated that this effort has been supported by the Tabernacle Board from the inception of the idea. Discussion on the stage and equipment that is currently available in the Romance Theater. The stage is about 25 to 40 feet deep. Shawn Larsen asked when they planned to have the building purchased. David indicated that they plan to have it purchased by the end of February, 2004. They are planning to do a feasibility study. There is asbestos in the building. The group has raised enough to purchase the building. The Board is seeking the support of the City to facilitate this project. Marsha Bjornn thought that it is a wonderful effort to help support the downtown area. She encouraged the Council to support this effort. Donna Benfield commended the group for their efforts. She asked about the liability of the City supporting the effort. 2 Stephen Zollinger mentioned that the group is asking for co-sponsorship of grant writing. Without the City’s support in the grant writing effort, the people that provide the grants would be less likely to provide a grant for this project. Marsha Bjornn moved to offer both verbal and written support from the City of Rexburg to the Romance Theater Board for the purpose of helping them write requests for grants; The motion carried. Donna Benfield seconded the motion; all voted aye, none opposed. Approval of 2004 Beer & Wine Licenses: Mayor Sutherland read the list of Beer License requestors. Glen Pond moved to approve the Beer License requests; Nyle Fullmer seconded the motion; The motion carried. all voted aye, none opposed. Mayor Sutherland read the list of Wine License requestors. Nyle Fullmer moved to approve the Wine License requests; Glen Pond seconded the motion; The motion carried. all voted aye, none opposed. Public Hearings: 7:35 p.m Consider the Downtown District Redevelopment Plan – Rexburg Redevelopment Agency Glen Pond excused himself from the Council for this hearing because he is the President of the Rexburg Urban Renewal Agency. Marilyn Fife, Vice President of the Rexburg Urban Renewal Agency (Redevelopment Agency) introduced: Ryan P. Armbruster from Boise, who is legal council for the Urban Renewal Agency; also, Harlan Mann, the Community Development Consultant was also introduced to the Council. Both of these individuals have worked with the City on two prior nd Redevelopment Plans. One Redevelopment Plan was on North 2 East and the other Redevelopment Plan was for the Washington School property (Broulims) on West Main Street. Marilyn indicated that Jon Weber and Reed Sommer are also members of the Redevelopment Agency. Mayor Sutherland mentioned that Terry Butikofer also was present for the discussion. Mayor Sutherland had the proposed Redevelopment Plan for a seven block area displayed . on the overhead screen Ryan Armbruster, an Attorney from Boise gave a brief overview of the Redevelopment Plan and the process used to develop the Plan. The Plan started in early 2003. The Eligibility Report for the area was prepared in January 2003. The Redevelopment Agency adopted the Eligibility Report in February of 2003. The City Council agreed with the 3 eligibility criteria of this project area in March of 2003. The following four or five months were when the body of the document was prepared that is before the Council at this time. The Redevelopment Agency approved the Redevelopment document on October 29, 2003. The City of Rexburg received the Redevelopment Plan on November 03, 2003. The Planning and Zoning Commission adopted a Resolution accepting the Plan as being in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Ryan continued to review the need to have the Urban Renewal Area Plan to help develop new projects. He requested that the City Council approve the Redevelopment Plan by Ordinance 910. The purpose of the Urban Renewal Project is to refocus the investments and the values of properties within the Renewal area back into the same area. This allows the investments in those properties to enhance the Redevelopment Area with traditional public improvements. Ryan mentioned that the Redevelopment Plan covers changes in the State Statutes since 1997, one of which can not exceed a period of 24 years, second, provides a formal termination process, third, Budgetary processes and fourth, the Public Works processes. This project is to anticipate potential development of the downtown area instead of focusing on a particular project in the Downtown area. Ryan mentioned that some of the parking places in downtown area will be lost. This plan will help in the development of additional parking for the Downtown area. This plan does take into account the tax increment, plus leveraging those incremental tax dollars with other money that may be available. The Idaho Transportation Department (ITD), Community Development Block programs, and other entities may have funding options in the future that may be joined with the Redevelopment money to provide enhancements to the area. Ryan reviewed the map on the overhead screen and explained the reason for the exclusion of the Melaleuca property. This property was removed from the Plan to keep the City under the 10 percent cap rule in the State Statute. The Redevelopment Plan can not exceed 10% of the total of the City’s Urban Renewal Areas assess values by Statute. The Plan relies on the Current Comprehensive Plan for the City. The Redevelopment Ordinance 910 summarizes the actions that have taken place to date and authorizes the Plan to go forward with implementation. Harlan Mann, Community Development Consultant from Boise reviewed the base value for the Plan. He commented on the Base Value of the Plan which is $382,000,000 in 2003. They mentioned the value of the North Highway Plan was 2.7 million and the Washington School Plan was 2.7 again for a total of 5.4 million. Ten percent of the City value is $38,000,000. The Plan stayed within that amount by excluding the Melaleuca property. Tax increment financing was discussed. Harlan reviewed the North Highway project with the Council. He mentioned that the original estimated Urban Renewal value for that project in 2003 was $10,650,000; however, the actual value is $16,250,000. The Washington School Urban Renewal value was estimated at over $4,000,000; however, the actual property value this year was $6.4 million. Those two projects brought improvements to the City. Widening the Bridge on the Teton River, the addition of a street light at Wal-Mart, and the addition of a st street light at Main and 1 West were mentioned. 4 Harlan mentioned the increased value in 2003 to a property of $516,000 that is in the current Plan. He looked at each block in the Plan. Harlan discussed possible developments of some of the blocks in the Plan. He thought a growth factor of 2.5 percent in 5 years would happen, or ½ percent per year. He anticipated that the school property could convert to commercial use in 2007 or 2008. He reviewed the possible funding allocation of Redevelopment money for City infrastructure; (Downtown parking, alley improvements, and Local Improvement Districts, and street lights on side streets were mentioned). Mayor Sutherland opened the Public Hearing for public comments. st Verna Gneiting - 130 West 1 South -was concerned about some parts of the plan. She was concerned about the Redevelopment Agency have Eminent Domain authority and she was concerned with additional taxes being added to her property. Verna mentioned the possibility of her property being negatively affected through the valuation process if the Redevelopment Plan was put in place. She requested the Council to delay any decision on the proposal until she and others had some time to review the plan in more detail. Ryan Armbruster indicated that the taxing process would not change. All that happens is that the increases in taxes from the change in property valuation would go to the Redevelopment Agency for infrastructure improvements for the area within the Redevelopment Plan. Mayor Sutherland explained that the property valuation changes would only happen to those properties that have changes in value due to changes caused by new development or redevelopment. Discussion on the Redevelopment Plan for properties within the redevelopment area. Stephen Zollinger reviewed the process for using the money to build new infrastructure in the “Renewal area”. Stephen explained that property owners are not required to participate in the Redevelopment Plan; however, they can ask to be partners in the renewal effort for the area contained in the Redevelopment Plan. Those properties within the designated renewal area will have the opportunity to access funding for property development that would not be available to them otherwise. Stephen mentioned that “Being within an Urban Renewal District is not an adverse position to find yourself in; to the contrary, it is beneficial to the properties that lie within the Urban Renewal District, because it gives them the availability of resources that were not ‘prior to that would not be’ available to them”. Verna Gneiting was concerned with the possibility of her property being devalued. She asked for more time to study the Plan. Discussion on the possibility of the Redevelopment Agency joining with other entities like the Idaho Transportation Department to provide parking or other infrastructure enhancements within the Redevelopment Area. 5 th Boyd Webster – 369 East 4 South asked if the Plan is covering the parallel parking on Main Street. Mayor Sutherland indicated that the parallel and diagonal parking on Main Street are being discussed with the Idaho Transportation Department at this time. The Redevelopment Plan gives the Downtown businesses the opportunity to access some financial aid to get more parking. Mayor explained to Boyd that this Plan will not change the taxes on his property. The State of Idaho Transportation Department will make a proposal to the City in the next th meeting concerning parking on the 17 of December. David Stein – 1090 Barney Dairy road – was in favor of the Redevelopment District. He commented on Fort Collins, Colorado, that did take advantage of the program to renew an area where there were both commercial and residential zones. Ryan Armbruster mentioned that Boise and Idaho Falls have done these Redevelopment Plans in areas that have turned out very good. They are examples of successful applications of this process. Jon Weber – 2863 West Hwy 33 in Rexburg – was in favor of the Plan to enhance the Downtown area. He said this Plan is long overdue. He did not want to wait on the Plan. Jon indicated that there have been some lost opportunities to help fund improvements in the Downtown area by not having a Plan in place. He encouraged the Council to pass the Plan this year. The Public Hearing was closed. Paul Pugmire explored Section 11 on page 3 which talks about passage of the Ordinance tonight by suspending the rules. He asked Richard Horner to explain. Richard Horner explained that any building improvements for this year would be captured back to January 01, 2003. It would become the base year for the Redevelopment Plan. Paul Pugmire mentioned that the tax process is an annualized process. Paul asked to have the numbers quantified for 2003. Gringos Mexican Restaurant was used as an example of the property value being increased due to property improvements. Harlan Mann indicated that the increased value for their new building would provide an estimated $5,887 of additional tax revenue that could be used by the Redevelopment Agency. Paul Pugmire mentioned that Eminent Domain discussed in section 8 on page 2. He asked Ryan Armbruster to respond to the Eminent Domain issues. Paul was concerned with the Eminent Domain powers being controlled by the Redevelopment Agency. 6 Ryan Armbruster explained that the State Statute does allow the Redevelopment Agency to exercise the Eminent Domain power. He explained that the Eminent Domain power is likely less for the Redevelopment Agency than other political entities that have it. The Agency does not have a quick take provision. Ryan explained that in the 20 years that he has been involved with Renewal Agencies, he has never done an Eminent Domain action. Ryan indicated that without the Eminent Domain authority, the City could get stymied, in providing for a parking structure, a public facility, a sewer line, or a water line. He said that normally this type of action is taken care of by the City Council. This Agency has this provision to provide for infrastructure. It does not have enough money to take an Eminent Domain action. The Plan is fairly traditional in terms of public improvements. Paul Pugmire wanted the Eminent Domain provision to fall under and be exercised by the elected officials. Paul supports the plan to help the Downtown develop through this process; however, he is concerned with timing and suspension of the rules for this Ordinance. Ryan Armbruster indicated that the Plan could be changed to allow an elected body to have the Eminent Domain provision authority. Paul Pugmire does support the aims and goals of the Plan; however, he does not support moving this Plan through the process by suspending the rules. Marsha Bjornn had questions in Section 2 which may indicate that the City Council could have a say in the Open Lands issue. Stephen Zollinger explained the role of the Renewal Agency in this process. If the City Council approves this Plan, they are giving the Renewal Agency authority to proceed with the Plan. Discussion on the origin on the Open Lands provision in this document. The intent of this clause seems to be aimed at lands that have not been developed. It does not apply to lands within the City. Shawn Larsen asked Harlan about tax exempt properties that are inside the Plan area. Harlan Mann indicated that there would be no effect on the Plan with a property that does not remain on the tax roles. If a $100,000 building does not remain on the roles, the base amount of the Redevelopment Plan would be reduced by $100,000; therefore, there would be no negative effect to the Plan. It only captures the increases from the base amount. Nyle Fullmer asked if this example could participate in the Plan if they were non profit. Harlan Mann indicated that they could request to participate in the program if there was a need to upgrade infrastructure at their location even though they were a non-profit entity. Shawn Larsen asked about mixed use development from the Agency’s prospective. He asked about the time limit of 24 years that was mentioned for the duration of the Plan. 7 Discussion on the new constructed apartments on the south side of Main Street. They were discussed in terms of lost opportunity to be included in this Plan. Harlan Mann reviewed the North Hwy Redevelopment Project and discussed the funds that were made available to help the City take care of unexpected needs. He expected this Redevelopment area to have unexpected items come up that would need funding. Richard Horner indicated that non profit development would not have a negative effect. If it goes off the roles there is no negative effect. Instead of $5,900 increase for 2003 for this Plan, Richard expects a $20,000 increase in tax revenues that would be missed in the year 2003. The $20,000 would be available for 24 years. If Council does not pass this Plan this year, the lost revenue would be 24 X $20,000 or $480,000; which would be gone forever if you loose the current year increases on property values in this Redevelopment Area. Richard indicated that the base value will change in January, 2004, to a new level and the revenue increase from the 2003 year base will be a lost revenue opportunity for the City forever. Nyle Fullmer gave an example of a home valued at $100,000 now with a tax assessment of $500, and then it gets revalued to $110,000, due to improvements; the new tax assessment could be $700. The additional tax revenue of $200 or a percentage of it would go to the Urban Renewal District for improvements to the Renewal District area. He mentioned decorative lighting as an example that would improve the area. It would help the whole area including the areas around the Redevelopment Area. This is not a vehicle to raise taxes. It is only to capture taxes on any improvements that are made to properties within the Redevelopment District. Donna Benfield asked if Jon Weber could explain the Redevelopment process to Verna. Jon Weber reviewed the plans for the funds that would come through the Redevelopment Plan. He mentioned parking, sidewalk improvements, beatification, infrastructure, and improvements in the alleys. Our main focus on the improvements is for Main Street. There are four blocks on the south side and three blocks on the north side of Main Street. It is primarily for the benefit of the businesses on Main Street. The businesses on Main Street have discussed the need to find improvement funding for several years. We think this proposed method for funding improvements to the Downtown area is a great plan. Jon was not aware of any business in the Downtown area that was against this plan. Discussion on the Zoning of Medium Density Residential (MDR) that has been applied to the property for Verna Gneiting. Mayor Sutherland indicated that Verna could request a Zone change through the Planning and Zoning Department if she wanted to re-zone her property. 8 Paul Pugmire moved to consider Ordinance 910 as first read with the intension of passage th on the Ordinance on the 17of December if there is compelling reasons to suspend the rules at that time and pass the Ordinance; Paul added the following conditions to the motion: 1)Move the Eminent Domain powers from the Redevelopment Board to the elected officials (City Council). 2)Document the projected revenue anticipated from the Redevelopment Plan. 3)Allow two weeks for interested parties to digest and learn about this issue. Donna Benfield seconded the motion; Discussion: Marsha asked Paul about the three items as being part of his motion. Paul explained that they are things that need to be accomplished before the Council takes action on the Plan. The Council can reconsider (in light of those answers) a suspension of the rules to pass the Ordinance at the next meeting. Question: all The motion carried. voted aye, none opposed. Shawn Larsen asked Jon Weber when the next meeting for the Redevelopment Board would be held. Jon indicated that it would be after the first of the year. New Business: Towing and Parking Enforcement Ordinance: Stephen Zollinger reviewed the changes to the original proposed Ordinance 911. The ordinance is the result of concerns from citizens, students, and police concerning parking enforcement. A committee helped right this Ordinance 911. Some apartment owners and property owners are not happy with the Ordinance as it is written. The towing industry showed reasonable support for the Ordinance. The consequences of the first 8 sections deal with general principles and practices. Section 9 deals with the non-consensual towing or booting practices in private apartment parking lots. The non-consensual towing and booting incidents generate 95 % of the complaints to the City. Parking enforcement Officers (booters) are concerned with the section of the Ordinance where the owner of the property or the apartment manager is required to be present during the booting process. Section 9.2 deals with unlawful towing unless directed by the property owner, managers, agents or the Rexburg City Police. In the past the towing and parking enforcement companies could remove vehicles without permission. This is called predatory towing. The agent of the property owner or manager can not be the towing company. Shawn Larsen reviewed Section 9.4 which allows 72 hours before action can be taken. Stephen indicated that if the parking area is posted with a sign, it is an unnecessary Section due to the fact that this situation is controlled by a State Statute. Stephen reviewed the State statute and the fact that it is more severe that the proposed Ordinance. nd Ross Farmer - 456 East 2 South (Past President of the Student Housing Alliance) discussed the predatory booting clause. He suggested that the Council meet with interested parties to work on the Ordinance in January. 9 Dan Eldge from the Rexburg Housing office agreed that a work meeting is needed. He agreed with Ross to have the meeting in January. st D. J. Barney - 410 West 1 North – was encouraged with the process to put the Ordinance in place. He also would like a workshop on the Ordinance. Daren Helm Rexburg Parking Security started the booting business in Rexburg because there is a need for it. He does not think an Ordinance will fix the problem. He requested accessible parking on roads year around to help the residents (students) have available parking. Brian - 226 ½ Shoshone Avenue - reviewed the need for the workshop to work with the City to reduce the complaints. Paul Pugmire moved to read Ordinance 911 for the first time; Nyle Fullmer seconded the motion; Discussion: Marsha Bjornn reviewed the Section that required the owner, designated agent, or a Rexburg City Police to be present for a car to be booted. Stephen Zollinger reviewed the need for a Business License that will allow the background check of The motion carried. the booters. Question: All voted aye, none opposed. Mayor Sutherland asked Glen Pond to conduct the meeting. th Design Standards for Hyde Park – 707 S. 5 W. - Rick Hancock & John Gregory John Gregory from Blackfoot reviewed the reason for asking the City to allow them to not comply with the Design Standards Ordinance. Stephen Zollinger reviewed the concessions that would be possible to work with the developer and allow them to exchange some expenditures for Design Standards without violating the setbacks if they did apply the Design Standards. The Staff recommends th allowing the developer to put in 10 to 15 foot pine trees every 25 feet on a berm on 7 th South. Stephen did not know if they planned to do 5 West with the berm and trees. They would follow through with external attachments (detail design) in the Design Standards. Building form requiring 2 foot offsets were not attainable without re-platting the development. Staff (Attorney’s Office, Planning and Zoning Office, and the Building Department) have asked to approve the compromise. Kurt Hibbert mentioned that three projects were caught in the middle of the implementation of the new Design Standards. Kurt mentioned that one way or the other, they will be in violation of the Design Standards Codes. Donna Benfield asked when the berm and trees would be installed. The spring time would be the best time according to the developer. David Stein was agreeable with the compromise from the Planning and Zoning Commission. 10 Paul Pugmire asked for a date certain in the spring of 2004. Discussion on when the entire project will be completed. The developer indicated that it would be completed in July, 2004. June 1, 2004 was agreed upon as a final date for the berm and the trees to be in place. Shawn Larsen asked if the trees would be placed every ththth 25 feet on 7 South. That would take 25 trees for 7 South and 50 additional trees for 5 West. The development would have a 6 foot vinyl fence on the south property line with a green area with some trees. The fencing will be located to separate the canal from the development. th Shawn Larsen and Paul Pugmire would like the berm and trees to be included on 5 West. Paul Pugmire moved to allow the Hyde Park Development to continue out of compliance of the Design Standards relative to building form pursuant to completing by June 01, 2004 the berm and tree mitigation as depicted in the green space drawing that were presented to the Council; Nyle Fullmer seconded the motion; all voted aye, The motion carried. none opposed. Planned Residential Development (PRD) PRELIMINARY PLAT: at 276 South Pioneer Road (Ray and Dean Peterson) Kurt Rowland Schiess Associates at 135 East Main Street - reviewed the need to have the PRD for Peterson Point Apartments approved. The Plat has 24 lots on it and the Zoning is MDR. It was approved by Planning and Zoning. Marsha Bjornn asked what the Planning and Zoning Commissions concerns were on this proposal. There was not any concern expressed from the Planning meetings after the additional access was provided on the south end of the development and the addition of an easement with the adjoining property on the north where there is a shared driveway with some storage units. Kurt Roland indicated that the green space is 50 % of the development and the covenants will not allow fences between buildings. The playground equipment will be placed along the highway with a vinyl fence along the canal. Kurt Hibbert asked if the north property was used to get the 50 percent area for green space. Kurt Rowland indicated that the north area was not used to obtain the 50 percent requirement. He said that there will be a 40 foot easement on the north end of the property to share a driveway area. 11 Nyle Fullmer moved to approve the preliminary plat based on the Staffs recommendation; Shawn Larsen seconded the motion; all voted aye, The motion carried. none opposed. Old Business: None Tabled requests: Sign Ordinance 908 – Kurt Hibbert Stephen Zollinger explained the changes to the Ordinance from the last reading. The primary change was to delete the definition of a billboard and refer the billboard definition to an off premise sign definition for a sign up to 32 square feet in area. st Russ Carlson – 165 South 1 West – representing Young Electric Sign Company commented on the issues of concern in Section 2. Sight Triangle definitions need to be changed to say the same thing in each notation that refers to a sight triangle. Russ went over some items that needed clarification in the document. He was concerned with the absence of an off premise sign definition. Russ requested that the off premise (billboard) signs definition be changed to allow 200 square feet in area of the sign. Stephen Zollinger explained that billboards are defined as off premise signs. Discussion on modifying the 32 square feet sign to a 200 square foot off premise sign. Discussion on using the descriptive word “rectangle” to describe the area that would be measured for the maximum area of signage allowed in the Ordinance. Discussion on the banners being limited to a 60 day period. They would require a permit. David Stein indicated that the Planning and Zoning Commission did not want billboard signs in the City. They are not attractive for the Community. Also, the County Sign Ordinance does not allow billboards except along highway 20. Stephen mentioned that the 32 foot signs would be used as identifier signs instead of advertising signs. Discussion on the existing Billboard signs within Rexburg at this time. Paul Pugmire moved to amend Ordinance 908 with amendments to technical changes noted by Stephen Zollinger to include Schedule 2A (Area of rectangle or combination of rectangles which encompasses the sign copy); Shawn Larsen seconded the motion; all The motion carried. voted aye, none opposed. rd Paul Pugmire moved to approve the 3 reading of Ordinance 908 as amended; Shawn Larsen seconded the motion; Discussion: respell site to sight in sight triangle. Banners are required to get approval. Temporary permits are required for temporary banners. The motion carried. All voted aye, except Nyle Fullmer. 12 Update on Projects: John Millar reviewed the nearly completed water study to determine where a new well and reservoir will be located. The City Water Department has been installing flow meters on the three existing reservoirs to determine actual water usage for the City. A Scada system will be used to monitor the flow of water in those reservoirs as well as all of the wells and pumping stations. John Millar mentioned the playground equipment has been ordered for the three City Parks and the equipment will be installed by the staff and certified by Staff. They are working to get a City employee (Jack) certified for this application. John Millar indicated that Driggs and Rexburg have ordered street sweepers that can share in the dual purchase saving and possible use the same inventory of parts. This will help keep maintenance cost lower. The City will sell the old street sweeper and apply the money towards the purchase of the new sweeper. The City is planning to sell some obsolete equipment in the near future along with the old street sweeper. John Millar indicated that the chemical placed on the roads for a deicer will remain effective for 24 hours if the application is not washed away with rain. Committee Reports: Paul Pugmire mentioned that the Golf Board has been discussing the new 9 hole addition to the Teton Lakes Golf Course. The concept is in the discussion phase. The plan is to have public meetings to obtain public comments in the near future. Donna Benfield indicated that the Traffic Safety Board met last night at 5:00 p.m. She will report on the meeting at the next Council meeting. Discussion on having a work meeting on the issues that surround the Commercial Design Standards Ordinance 907 which has had one reading by the City Council on November 19, 2003. Kurt Hibbert will coordinate a meeting with the Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission in the near future to work on Ordinance 907. Mayors Business: = Mayor SutherlandGarth Oakey asked the Council to approve as a member of the Downtown Vision Committee. Paul Pugmire moved to appoint Garth Oakey to the Downtown Vision Committee; Nyle The motion carried. Fullmer seconded the motion; all voted aye, none opposed. 13 Nyle Fullmer moved to go into Executive Session; Marsha Bjornn seconded the motion; Those voting Aye Those voting Nay Shawn Larsen None Marsha Bjornn Paul Pugmire Donna Benfield Nyle Fullmer The motion carried. Executive Session for land use: Executive Session ended. Employee pay scales : The item was deferred. Adjourned ___________________________ Bruce Sutherland, Mayor ______________________ Blair D. Kay, City Clerk 14