Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Minutes - March 19, 2025 (208) 359-3020 35 North 1st East Rexburg, ID 83440 Rexburg.org | Engage.Rexburg.org City Council Minutes – March 19, 2025 Mayor Jerry Merrill Council Members: Bryanna Johnson Eric Erickson Robert Chambers David Reeser Colin Erickson Mikel Walker 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 6:30 P.M. Council Member E. Erickson said the prayer. Council Member Chambers led the pledge. Roll Call of Council Members: Attending: Council Member Johnson, Council Member Chambers, Council Member C. Erickson, Council Member E. Erickson, Council Member Reeser, Council President Walker and Mayor Merrill Welcome New Employees: Melissa Jensen – Information Technology Department Melissa Jensen introduced herself and said she started with the city as a part-time IT employee in 2022; however, left because she needed full-time work. A full-time position became available, so she decided to come back to work for the city’s IT Department. Presentation: Business Competition First Place Winner – Interval AI, Kaysen Klinger  Mayor Merrill and city Economic Development Assistant Aaron Denney presented the Business Competition First Place Winner Kaysen Klinger with a $5,000 check. Mr. Klinger thanked the city for sponsoring the business competition. He said it was exciting to be a part of the competition, especially because he grew up and lives in Rexburg. He said he appreciates the city for investing in new up and coming businesses. He said the name of his business is called Interval AI, and it is a software program that helps businesses collect past due balances from clients owing them money. The software automates the entire process of reaching out to clients that owe money to that company and collects those balances owing. Mr. Klinger said during his business pitch at the business competition last week he talked about the best way they can help grow business here in Rexburg is not actually by helping businesses make more money, but rather by helping them collect all the money that they have already earned. Interval AI has helped businesses collect about $100,000. They have been in business for about eight months and with the funds received from the competition, they can continue to build out their product and hopefully collect millions of dollars for companies here in Rexburg. Mayor Merrill said there were 23 business competition applicants and six of those applicants presented their business proposals in front of a panel of judges. The business competition promotes new ideas to encourage and help grow the city’s business base in the community. Public Comment: Items not on the agenda; limit of 3 minutes; issues may be considered for discussion on a future agenda. Please keep comments on point and respectful. NONE Items from Council: (01:33:34) Committees: MEPI, Cultural Arts, Grants, School Board, MUSIC, MYAB, Emergency Services Board, Beautification, Trails/Parks & Recreation, Urban Renewal, Airport, Golf Board, ADA Oversight Board, Historical Preservation Committee, and Legacy Flight Museum Council Member C. Erickson reported the Golf Board met and he had the opportunity to go to the Teton Lakes club house to check the progress of the remodel. The work that has been completed looks great. The carpet has been replaced, they are almost finished with the restrooms and the deck is being reconstructed after it was hit by a vehicle during a traffic accident. They are also working on the stormwater drainage issue in the parking lot at Teton Lakes. He said they are trying to complete all the work before the golf season starts. Council Member Johnson reported that the Trails Committee will meet next month. The Beautification Committee will be meeting soon to plan a park cleanup event this spring. Council President Walker reported the Mayor Youth Advisory Board met last week and they will be meeting again next week for their mock City Council Meeting. He said they will hold a mock City Council to learn how city government functions. The ADA oversight Board will not meet until April. Council Member Chambers reported the Urban Renewal Agency met today and were able to approve a successful audit. The Urban Renewal Agency’s accounting is accurate and there were no non-compliance issues. Council Member Chambers reported the Cultural Arts Department is hosting the Heritage Youth Symphony performance on April 9th at the Tabernacle starting at 7 o’clock in the evening. The cost of the ticket is six dollars and can be purchased online. The Historical Preservation Committee did not meet. Council Member E. Erickson reported a situation arose with obtaining approval from the Army Corps of Engineers to begin construction of the new Teton River Park. The Rexburg Canal may have items of historical value; therefore, the Army Corps of Engineers requires an archaeological study of that area which could cost the city more money. Council Member Reeser reported that the Cultural Arts Department did not meet; however, he invited Rexburg Museum Curator Alisha Tietjen into his classroom yesterday to discuss some of her responsibilities as museum curator. He teaches an advance Holocaust Class at the Madison High school and his students are going to build a museum in one of the trailers the school owns. Council Member Johnson asked for clarification regarding the archaeological study at the Teton River Park. Mayor Merrill clarified the State Department has been sued by environmental groups and historical groups because the federal code requirements for environmental and archaeological studies were not met. An archaeological study determines if there are historical items present at certain locations. An archeological study is required at Teton River Park because the Rexburg Canal was dug by pioneers. The cost of the study is about $9,500 and it will cause a delay in the construction start date of the park by several weeks because the study cannot be completed until the snow is melted off the ground. Other Reports: Zoom Presentation 6:45 P.M.: Fiscal Year 2023 and 2024 Audit Report – Theresa Flannery, Rudd & Company Motion to Approve Restated/Reissued Fiscal Year 2023 Audit - Action Item Theresa Flannery with Rudd & Company explained that the audit report was reviewed during the Special City Council Meeting on March 14th, 2025. There are three parts of the audit report that belong to Rudd and Company and the rest of the report belongs to the city. The first part of the audit is a letter of the independent auditor’s report, the item the City Council will want to focus on is Rudd & Company’s opinion on the financial statements. She said she believes the financial statements are presented fairly in all material aspects. The Finance Department has completed a really good job of keeping track of everything. There was dialogue back and forth between the city and auditor. The auditor received all the material necessary to give their opinion free and clear.  Ms. Flannery pointed out there is good information in the MDNA which Finance Officer Nielson put together. The MDNA has some comparisons between this year and last year. The city has increased in current assets across both the business type activities which are mostly supported by property taxes. Ms. Flannery said the statement of net position comparison (2024 vs 2023) report illustrates the city’s growth over time, both in the assets and the liabilities. The report also illustrates how well those two items are progressing. The liabilities have grown as well as the short-term payments that are waiting to be made and other items in the city’s books.  Ms. Flannery explained page nine of the report is good information on the revenues and expenditures. She clarified that this is the accrual basis and not the day-to-day operations.  Ms. Flannery reviewed the statement of activities report which is a different version of the statement of changes in net position comparison. The expenditures are side to side with the direct revenues to support those expenitures. The net overall cost of different pieces of government and how those are supported. She said for example, in the water fund the city’s expenses are 4.06 million dollars and the charges for those expenses are 4.05 million dollars which illustrate how much those charges are going to support those actual costs.  Ms. Flannery reviewed the budgetary comparison schedule general fund. The general fund is the city’s flexible funding for the city and flexible is a loose term because usually the general fund has a lot of places where those funds are trying to go to at the same time. She suggested looking at the general fund to actual comparison to determine how much the city intends to spend, how much is intended to be receive and where those numbers actually fell for the year. The overall intent for the final budget amount was 1.3 million dollars out of the coffers to be spent 1.3 over what the city was going to receive for the year and the actual came in just under that 1.0 or 1.1 million dollars. The amout of variance is $292,000 compared with the budget, which means your were under budget, which is required by the state requirements. The Finance Department did a good job of managing where those expenses were. The line items also line up well which suggests highly of the people in charge of setting those budgets and watching over those budgets throughout the year. She said it is important to watch over those budgets because setting the budget is only step one of the process.  Ms. Flannery pointed out the last two letters of the three that belong to Rudd & Company, the reporting of the internal controls of the city. When an audit is completed, they spend time understanding how the expenditures and revenues flow through the organization. They looked at who in the city is in charge of receiving, depositing, cutting checks, and approving invoices. She said if the auditor finds anything glaringly to them about the internal controls that information would be located in the auditors report. Ms. Flannery explained there was one finding that the auditors found related to the COVID money the city received. The COVID money was received by the city fast for a while. Those funds were budgeted to be used and because those funds were not fully used, they were missed in the reporting a couple years ago. The reporting was corrected this year so those funds were finalized and they were cleaned up at the end. This was the only issue that the auditor found in the internal controls. Over all the city received a good score. The last item in the audit report describes; since the city received federal funding and received over the $750,000 threshold, the city was required to have a single audit. The threshold is moving up to one million dollars next year. Ms. Flannery mentioned as the audit looked at those federal dollars, they picked two programs to test. One was related to the Community Improvement Block Grant and the other was the COVID funding. The auditor looked at those for any issues in compliance and internal controls related to the use of those funds and the proper adherence to the agreements the city must follow to receive those funds and there were no issues found. The city received another perfect score as far as the major funds are concerned. Mayor Merrill expressed his appreciation for the city’s Finance Department and auditor Theresa Flannery with Rudd & Company. Council Member E. Erickson added he attended the City Council Meeting on March 14, where the audit was reviewed in greater detail. Finance Officer Nielson recommended the City Council to officially adopt the audit and adopt a restated fiscal year 2023 audit. There were changes made when they moved items out of the combining statements into the governmental as a major fund. Council President Walker moved to approve to Restated/Reissued Fiscal Year 2023 Audit; Council Member C. Erickson Chambers seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Johnson none Council Member Chambers Council Member C. Erickson Council Member E. Erickson Council Member Reeser Council President Walker The motion carried. Motion to Approve Fiscal Year 2024 Audit - Action Item Council Member Chambers moved to approve Fiscal Year 2024 Audit; Council Member E. Erickson seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Johnson none Council Member Chambers Council Member C. Erickson Council Member E. Erickson Council Member Reeser Council President Walker The motion carried. Public Hearing 7:00 P.M. Creation of Local Improvement District 54 (LID 54). Designated as Ordinance No 1330 if motion passes and considered first read – Keith Davidson - Action Item Mayor Merrill opened the public hearing. Public Works Director Davidson reviewed the locations included in the proposed Local Improvement District 54 (LID 54) Mayor Merrill said he and the City Council have received written input pertaining to the proposed creation of Local Improvement District 54 (LID 54) public hearing. He asked the Councilmembers to declare any conversations that took place outside of the public hearing regarding the consideration to create Local Improvement District 54. Open Meeting laws require transparency, and everyone has the same information discussed outside of the public hearing.   Council Member E. Erickson declared he discussed the city’s Local Improvement District policy with Todd Grant, Mr. Grand participated in LID 50 which was on Park Street. They discussed the pros and cons of LID’s and the costs that LIDs impose on homeowners.  Council Member Reeser said he had a conversation with several colleagues at work, particularly Ryan Snellgrove because he participated in the Park Street LID 50. He said he asked Mr. Snellgrove about his perspective regarding the city’s LID Ordinance.   Council Member Reeser said he also spoke with Dan Stewart, Logan Romney, Zach Lambs because they were curious about his thoughts regarding LIDs. They discussed the pros and cons of LIDs and received insight from their perspectives as city residents.   Public Testimony in favor of the proposal (5-minute limit): Steve Oakey stated he has a property on 1st West and is in favor of the creation of LID 54 because the work completed in LID 54 will greatly enhance his property and his surrounding neighbor’s properties.   Public Testimony neutral to the proposal (5-minute limit): Aaron Denney said he is excited to see S 5th W reconstructed because the road is in bad condition; however, it is unfair for the city to make home and business owners install and repair their own sidewalks. He said if the city is not making improvements to increase property values, which to him would be narrowing the road and making the neighborhood more walkable.  Mr. Denney asked the City Council to consider redesigning the road to a safer more livable street for his neighborhood. First, safety by narrowing the lanes would slow the traffic speed and lessen severe vehicular accidents. Currently, the traffic moves at an incredibly fast speed on S 5th W. The narrowing of roads would create cost savings for the city because it would reduce paving materials and future maintenance costs. There are organizations like Redfin and Zillow that have found statistically significant correlations between walkability and home values, he believes it is especially important for Rexburg because there is a university in the city.  Public Testimony opposed to the proposal (5-minute limit): Todd Grant stated he owns a house on Park Street and the proposed LID 54 is impacting him financially and unfairly; therefore, he is opposed to LID 54. The house he owns is not his primary residence and he paid over $4,000 in property tax last year. He believes the Road and Bridge tax should cover the cost of LIDs and if there is not enough money from those taxes to cover the costs of LIDs, the City Council needs to petition the state for an increase in the road tax. He said he learned the city spent $56,000 to subsidize Rexburg Rapids, $80,000 was spent and wasted on a feasibility study for a Madison County Recreation Center. The city also subsidizes the Romance Theater, Tabernacle, Legacy Flight Museum, etc., he does not believe this is the proper role of government.   Mr. Grant read a section on the proper role of government by Ezra Taft Benson. He questioned the $4,269 estimated LID cost for his property because he received a quote from a private contractor for $2,600 for the entire footage of sidewalk, curb and gutter in front of his house that needs to be replaced. He wondered why the city’s estimate is 40% higher than the quote he received from the private contractor. He said if this LID is approved, he will pay over $8,000 this year in property taxes and LID costs.   Mr. Grant urged the Mayor and City Council to vote no to create LID 54 based on the reasons he has described. He said as an overtaxed and over regulated Idahoan; he asked the Mayor and City Council to re-examine the way money is being spent in Rexburg and stop competing with private enterprises.  Larry Rigby stated he is here tonight representing the Continental Park HOA. He received the letter the city mailed to the property owners included in LID 54 a week ago because it was sent to Karchner Homes of Idaho, they have owned this property for over 20 years. They are in the process of forwarding the LID letter to their unit owners. There are 49-unit owners in that complex and about 2/3 of them live out of town. He said he is the property manager and owns several units; therefore, he is not necessarily opposed to the project because it would be nice to see that road reconstructed.   Mr. Rigby said the LID letter he received states the allocation of the project cost is based on linear square footage. There is about 18 feet of the total 180 square feet of linear curve that needs to be replaced, the rest is still in great condition. The two driveways that the assessment is proposing to be replaced have a few cracks; however, they are in good condition. The sidewalk behind the driveways is perfect. The square footage the assessment is proposing to be replaced is estimated at $32,000; the HOA is allocating the $32,000 costs to the unit owners; it represents about a $2,400 cost per unit. There is, however, a portion of sidewalk and curb the assessment indicates needs to be replaced that he does not believe needs replaced. Nathan Blumenberg stated he echoes some of those same issues that have already been expressed. When he reviewed his assessment, he noticed that there is a fair amount of sidewalk on his property in fair condition and does not need to be replaced. There is curbing that needs to be replaced. There is no debate about whether the city needs to reconstruct the road on 5th W.  Mr. Blumenberg expressed his concerns about the economic impact the cost of the LID will have on the homeowners, especially when there is talk about a recession. He urged the City Council to consider the lives the proposed LID will have on homeowners and the impact of having a lien on their property. A lien on a property prohibits the property owner to refinance their home for the next 10 years. He asked the City Council to keep in mind the residents will have less money because of the LIDs costs; therefore, they will have less money to spend in the city which equals less tax revenue coming into the city.   Bill Johnson said he and his wife Tammy have owned two properties in Rexburg for several years. These two properties are rentals. Their concerns are the prohibitive costs LIDs cause. The estimated LID cost for their two properties is about $11,000 for each property; however, this is not the only LID he has participated in, the last LID was in 2008 and the cost for that LID was about $8,000.   Mr. Johnson expressed his concerns about the way LIDs are managed. On his first LID he opted to have the city contractor install the sidewalk and driveway apron because he wanted to make sure the work was completed correctly; however, issues arose with the driveways. The work was not completed correctly but he was told he needed to cover those costs, which seems ridiculous. He said between the previous LID and the two proposed LIDs; the costs are close to $30,000. The LID costs are an over burden on property owners. Mr. Johnson said he is in favor of improvements; however, he does not think the property owners should be funding those improvements. The money to fund the LIDs should come from taxes. Mr. Johnson wondered why there is a vast difference in costs between the previous LID and the proposed LIDs for his properties. The costs have doubled in price.   Chase Spackman said his property is not included in the proposed LID 54; however, his property could be included in an LID in the future. He asked the City Council to consider completing a study on how to more equitably distribute the LID costs among the property owners. There are a couple of studies stating that 30% of Americans cannot handle a $500 financial emergency and 60% of Americans cannot handle a $1000 emergency. In the city there are about 50% of the citizens that are going to have to take out a loan to pay for their LID assessment.   Michael Thompson said he is the facility manager for Melaleuca and is opposed to the LID cost; however, he is not opposed to the upgrades. The business owners pay an additional share above and beyond what they pay in taxes. He stated Melaleuca owns a building on both sides of the street; therefore, Melaleuca will have to pay for two LID assessments, totaling about $80,000.  Mr. Thompson asked if city staff apply for grants to offset the costs of LIDs. Mayor Merrill explained the city staff often apply for grants for street repairs and reconstruction and the city is awarded some of those grants; however, the city is still about 20 years behind on street repairs.  The city’s tax levy is the third lowest in the State of Idaho, if the city’s levy were higher the city could afford to pay for more of the share to reconstruct a road. Over 80 years ago the past City Councilmembers passed a city ordinance to allocate the expenses of sidewalks, curb and gutter improvements to the property owners. There have been changes to the policy; some of those changes include the city funding 30% of the curb and gutter improvement costs to be able to stretch out the street reconstruction budget. Mr. Thompson suggested cutting out other budget items to increase the street budget.   Trevor Plastow asked the City Council to increase the base tax rate, so the LID costs are spread out to all property owners at the same time. He said his opposition is not towards improving the road, it is 100% towards the burden LIDs cause to families. The fact that the city government is relying on 80 years' worth of history to be able to say that this is how the city operates is archaic and the City Council should revamp how LID assessments are funded. He added the principle that city government is using legal code for LID assessments, there are many things that are legal that government should not do, LID assessments are one of those items.   Rob Wilson stated his property is not included in the proposed creation of LID 54; however, he 100% concurs with Mr. Plastow. The 80 years of precedent does not mean that is the way city government should be going forward. He suggested the City Council look at different ways to spread the load the LID assessments cause to property owners. The purpose of saying Rexburg is a family community means that citizens look after each other. He wondered if the City Council has considered the tax load put on city residents. He asked the City Council to consider looking at different options to help with funding street reconstruction other than LIDs. There are other cities in Idaho that fund street improvements differently than Rexburg to spread the load and allow for growth in their cities.   Katie Watson stated her property is not included in the proposed LID 54; however, her property could be included in a future LID. She questioned if it has been 80 years since the city government passed the city ordinance pertaining to LIDs, it has been a long time ago. She asked if a group of residents show up every time an LID is proposed? She said her guess is that many residents that show up are against the creation of the LIDs. She wondered why LIDs are still being created if many residents are against the LIDs. Mayor Merril explained the city could change the city ordinance pertaining to LIDs to fund street reconstruction through passing a bond; however, all the property owner's taxes would increase substantially and the property owners that have already paid for an LID would pay again through taxes.   Mayor Merrill explained the reason the city cannot raise taxes by more than 3% is because the state legislature limited the city to a 3% maximum each year. When the legislature set the city’s levy, they intentionally set it low because they desired to be responsible government and not tax the citizens too much. He said the City Council and city residents could lobby the legislature to allow cities to raise taxes more than the current 3% cap. The LIDs allow the city to take care of the streets and partner with the property owners to improve their property with new sidewalks, curb and gutter.   Discussion regarding the LID on Park Street, they were able to narrow the road to lower the property owner’s assessments. The new sidewalks were moved away from the curb to make it easier to keep the sidewalks clear from snow during the winter. The narrow road also keeps vehicles speed lower than a wider road.  Mayor Merrill said he, the City Council and city staff are working on ways to lower the costs of LID assessments by lowering the interest rate to finance the LID, increasing the city’s participation percentage, and narrowing the road so there is less asphalt. LID provides a method for the property owners to pay for their assessments over a 10-year period, if a bond were to be passed, it would raise taxes to cover the street reconstruction in perpetuity. Krista Flamm said she does not believe anyone who has been through an LID desires it to happen to somebody else. There are 199 municipalities within the State of Idaho, there are only seven cities that use LID assessments. She said she believes there are other ways to fund LID assessments.   Mrs. Flamm shared the following experience regarding her grandparents’ LID assessment; they were quoted a $2,500 assessment, when they received their final assessment, it was $10,000. It was discovered that her sidewalk was a fraction of an inch off according to ADA compliance, so they wanted to tear up that section of sidewalk. When the construction workers showed up to tear out the driveway, her 80-year-old grandmother stood in the driveway for hours until they left. She said there are 192 other municipalities that are not using LIDs, there are better ways the city could fund LIDs.   Matt Miles suggested creating a task force to find other options to replace the LIDs. The Rexburg Community is raising money to fix the Tabernacle. There are charitable people who live in the community. He said he is opposed to LIDs and is in favor of finding a better way to fund street reconstruction.   Gracie Ferguson asked if it was possible for the citizens to vote for other options to fund LID improvements. Most people are opposed to LIDs because they have a big impact on property owners. She asked if it is possible to have other options and have all the citizens vote on what they feel more comfortable doing. She said she understands the money must come from somewhere so raising taxes would be one option. By raising taxes, the money would be collected over time instead of in a large sum. Public Works Director Davidson explained generally for street bonds the city would have to specifically layout where the bond payment is going directly. A permanent levy override could be placed in perpetuity. The street levy override election would raise every property owner’s taxes. He asked all to keep in mind that bonds and levies are difficult to pass.   Lisa Tanner said she has driven, and her kids ride their bicycles on the sidewalks on Park Street. She expressed her appreciation for the sidewalks and said she would be happy to help lift her neighbor’s burden of their LID assessment.  Aaron Denney said he used the Madison County / Rexburg parcel viewer and measured the lane width of one of the highway’s lanes, it is 12 feet with a standard speed limit of 70 miles per hour. The lane width on 5th W is an 11-foot lane width. He asked the City Council to consider narrowing roads to save on costs. Melissa Allen said she lives on Park Street and there are many children, college students, etc. that use the sidewalks daily. There is a city ordinance pertaining to sidewalks and the property owner’s responsibility of keeping the sidewalks walkable. One of the reasons she is opposed to LIDs is the lien that is place on the house. She is highly against the city narrowing the road because the narrowing of Park Street has created a hazard. When there are cars parked on both sides of the road it is impossible for two cars to pass each other. She asked the City Council to consider not narrowing the roads. Mayor Merrill said the narrowing of the road creates slower traffic speed. Bill Johnson reiterated the point that he went through one LID in 2018 and paid it off in 10 years through the loan option and now he is going through another LID. The concept of not having to go through two LIDs in a ten-year time frame is incorrect. Mayor Merrill asked if the if the LIDs were on the same property. Mr. Johnson said it was two separate properties on S 5th W. Nathaniel Rowden said he is representing a client that owns property on S 5th W. He asked if the property owner uses a different contractor, then the contractor the city is using. The property owner will have to pay that contractor up front and will not be able to use the 10-year loan option. Mayor Merrill said if the property owner received a lower price bill, they can still put those costs in the 10-year financing plan. Mr. Rowden asked that property owners receive notice several years in advance when a LID assessment is being considered on their property. Finance Officer Nielson said if the property owner is going to finance the LID assessment through the 10-year loan, their first payment would not be due until the final closed date of the LID which is generally a year from when the LID was created. Mr. Rigby asked the City Council to consider patching the road that would save a lot of money versus tearing up the road. Another option would be to defer the work of this LID. The road is not going to get worse, and it is not going to get better. He said he is not against LIDs; he is against the allocation of the costs of the LIDs. A dollar deferred is a dollar saved. Mayor Merrill expressed caution when deferring LIDs because the construction costs continue to increase each year. The last LID the City Council deferred; the costs increased three times more than what was quoted the year the LID was considered. Mr. Denney said he measured both lanes of N 5th W and they measure 11 ½ feet, when the lanes are this wide no driver is going to travel at 20 miles per hour, they will drive at higher speeds. On S 5th W where his house is located, he would like the traffic to move slower. There are sections on that road that do not have sidewalks. He suggested narrowing the road and making the lanes less wide by pulling in the curb. Gracie Ferguson asked for the interest rate to finance the LID over the 10-year period. Finance Officer Nielson said the interest rate is set on the final assessment which is about a year from when the LID was created. The city’s policy has been to charge what the market rate is on a 10-year bond treasury and then it is generally about 1% higher than that rate. The last couple of years the interest rate has ranged from 5 to 5 ½ percent. The City Council has been discussing whether to lower the interest rate more so that is helpful for the citizens. William Clements expressed his concerns with LIDs. The LID improves the property value of the said property; therefore, increases the property taxes. The property owner is being double charged, one would the LID fee and the other in increased taxes. He said he would rather have the tax spread throughout all property owners. The sidewalks improve safety for all pedestrians. An audience member asked if a street bond has been voted upon. Staff Accountant Phethean said in 2000 the City Council tried to pass a street bond; however, it only received a 25% vote. Finance Officer Nielson added when the city tried to pass a bond specifically for street improvements and not sidewalk, curb and gutter. There are two bond options the City Council could try to pass one is a two-year override which is temporary, and the second option is called a permanent override. The permanent override needs a 2/3 majority to pass. Rachel Mullins said she would rather have the taxes she pays go to Rexburg. She added she does not mind beautifying the city by putting in new sidewalks and making the infrastructure great. The paying of higher taxes to help take care of neighborhoods needing new sidewalk, curb and gutter is not a burden. When paying ten thousand dollars in LIDs which could increase to twenty thousand dollars with inflation is a burden. Mayor Merrill closed the public hearing. Deliberation: Council Member Johnson explained since becoming a City Council Member, she has disagreed with the LID policy. The purpose of LIDs has been cited over and over that they are “a benefit to the homeowner”, she said she disagrees with that idea because the reason property owners pay taxes is so that the city can subsidize things everyone uses. The sidewalks are not different than the other things the city subsidizes. The city does not need to raise taxes because the City Council sets the budget by prioritizing the part of the budget that pays for LIDs. There are nine to eleven million dollars in the street budget and every year there are carryover funds. Some of the funds in the street budget are earmarked; however, there is a big street budget. The money in the General Fund can also be used to fund LIDs by cutting or changing the amount of funds allocated to other accounts. Council Member Johnson said it is disingenuous for anyone to say it is impossible for the city to completely fund LIDs because the City Council can change the budget. She added she is not comfortable giving property owners a $15,000 bill because a lot of residents can not afford that high of a bill. Council Member Reeser said he agrees that the curbing and gutters need to be covered by the city. He added he is open to working with Councilmember Johnson on trying to figure the city’s budgeting for the city to cover the sidewalks. The tax dollars the property owner pay take care of the roads, and the curb and gutter are part of the road. He said he feels comfortable advocating for increased funding through the city budget or collectively through increased taxes rather than the increased LID assessments. Mayor Merrill mentioned the City Council budget meetings will begin soon. He said they can certainly discuss allocating more of the tax dollars towards LIDs. When the City Council is setting the city’s budget during those meetings the budget is generally two million dollars over budget. They will need to figure out what items to cut out of the budget. There have been suggestions during this meeting to cut out subsidies like Rexburg Rapids, they may have to cut out park and trails funds as well. These are some of the types of items that they may need to budget cut to allocate more funds to the streets budget. Council Member E. Erickson said not all residents are in favor of raising taxes and they are not in favor of paying their portion of the LID. He explained two points to consider, the first point is the city is limited on what items they can raise taxes for, and the state legislature has limited that raising of taxes to 3% of the city’s budget. The second point is if the City Council reallocates funds towards the street, sidewalk, curb and gutter, they will need to make difficult decisions about what services the city is going to limit or eliminate to move those funds into other places. There are many tax dollars that flow into the city that are earmarked for specific purposes and cannot be reallocated to the street fund because of state laws. Council Member E. Erickson said he is in favor of looking at different methods to fund LID improvements; however, He doesn’t know a more equitable way to fund those improvements then through an LID. There are property owners against LIDs because they may have to borrow money against their home to pay for the LID. LIDs are more directly attributed to the individuals who are benefiting from the improvements. He said until the City Council can make some of those tough decisions and decide what services that the city is no longer going to provide, he is going to support the LID policy. He said he is in favor of increasing the city’s participation percentage as can be afforded and the cost of the curb. By increasing the city’s participation percentage and covering the curb costs will help to alleviate some of the LID costs to the property owner. Council Member C. Erickson explained that the City Council has discussed LIDs through many meetings to determine how to make the LID policy better and fair. He said he walked through every property included in this LID, there are some sidewalks that do not need to be replaced in his opinion. The city staff need to work closely and have better communication with the property owners. City Staff should also be notifying the property owners far in advance about proposed LIDs. He said city staff held an open house last week to discuss LID 54 with the property owners and only some of the property owners came to the open house, there are more property owners here tonight. Council Member C. Erickson said he is in favor of increasing the city’s participation cost for the curb and gutter and letting the property owners cover the costs of the sidewalk. He added he would like to form an LID taskforce to come up with better ideas to fund LIDs. Council Member Chambers thanked the property owners for their comments, their civil conduct and the ideas they have shared about LIDs. There are unknowns that still exist about those ideas. He asked Public Works Director Davidson how soon the City Council must act upon these ideas and how long is the bid for the LID good for? Public Works Director Davidson replied, the costs of the LID are estimated costs; however, city Staff would like to move forward with obtaining the bids. The City Council’s determination of what policy they want to pursue for payment can come later. The City Council could approve the creation of LID 54 and set the policy later or they can wait to approve LID 54; however, City Council approval to create LID 54 would authorize city staff to obtain bids for the LID work. The actual cost of the LID comes back when the LID work is finished. After the LID work is finished the property owners are sent a notice of their bill. Public Works Director Davidson said his concerns are the street budget, the number of streets the city has, and the maintenance of those roads. The costs are a significant amount for the property owners because of the cost escalation. He said he is in favor of the idea for a levy override to try and bolster the city’s street budget. There are meetings planned with the Madison County Commissioners to discuss the decreased road and bridge tax. The road and bridge tax to the city has decreased by $700,000. He said he is concerned with the amount of funds the City Council allocates to the street budget to complete street projects. Council Member Chambers expressed his concerns with the escalated costs on LID 54 compared to the three previous LIDs. Public Works Director Davidson said he is hoping the actual costs are lower; however, they will not know until the bids are received. Council Member Chambers asked to defer the decision to approve LID 54 until they can look at the budget to determine if the city can pay for the entire project or determine the city’s cost share for the sidewalk, curb and gutter. Council President Walker said he is in favor of the city participating in the costs of the curb and the sidewalk. The interest rate of the LID loan could also be decreased. Council Member Johnson said the City Council could delay an LID for an entire year. She suggested looking at the carryover funds in the street budget. Sometimes there are too many projects that can be completed within a year and sometimes there are too many funds earmarked than can be used in a year. Council Member E. Erickson said he is in favor of delaying LID 54; however, he is not in favor of postponing the LID for a year. The road surface, some sidewalks and curb are deteriorating. Discussion regarding the different scenarios of city cost shares for LIDs. Council President Walker explained all the City Council Members are homeowners as well and have the same concerns regarding LIDs. They have the same cause as homeowners to keep their home up and going. The City Council is in a tough position because they are fiscally responsible for taking care of the taxpayers’ money the best they can; however, the city needs to be able to provide the services needed. He thanked everyone for their input and as Councilmembers they do listen to the resident’s concerns. Council Member Reeser explained as citizens we are all going to pay for the street reconstruction one way or another whether it is through a LID or increased taxes. He said he would like to see the costs of an LID versus a street bond and information regarding the process to shift from using LIDs to passing a street bond. The increase of the street bond per $100,000 of property value. Discussion regarding the options for a levy override, the discretionary funds in the General Fund, and less street reconstruction. Discussion regarding how other cities not using the LID policy fund street reconstruction. City Attorney Rammell said it is worth noting for the record that the city is a unique circumstance where the largest property owner within city limits is tax exempt making Rexburg different than other municipalities. City Attorney Rammell clarified the following for the record, the disclosures that were made by the Councilmember as to ex-parte communications as they would be put legally. The Supreme Court of Idaho prohibited so long as meaningful disclosure is made. The court has stated that it would require the identity of who the conversation took place with for the record and a general description of the conversation. He said he was comfortable with the disclosure made by City Council Member E. Erickson. City Attorney Rammell asked for clarification regarding the ex-parte communication City Council Member Reeser had with two individuals and possibly more people that he spoke to regarding the creation of LID 54. Council Member Reeser explained that he spoke with Ryan Snellgrove about the Park Street LID he participated in. They did not discuss LID 54 specifically, they talked about Mr. Snellgrove experience on the last LID, the challenges and frustrations he had so that Council Member Reeser had a better idea being that this is the first time he is voting on an LID creation. Council Member Reeser said he spoke with members of his department where he teaches, they were Dan Stewart, Logan Romney, Alvaro Lanez, Zach Lamson and Jonathan Chavez. They asked questions about the upcoming LID and his thoughts about the LID. He used that also as an opportunity to elicit some responses and additional perspectives from them as to what they thought about LIDs versus increased property taxes.  City Attorney Rammell said it is important to note for the welfare of the individuals present, the City of Rexburg follows and is subject to open meeting laws. Council Member Chamber moved to table the Creation of Local Improvement District 54 (LID 54); Council President Walker seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Johnson none Council Member Chambers Council Member C. Erickson Council Member E. Erickson Council Member Reeser Council President Walker The motion carried. Staff Reports: Finance: – Matt Nielson Financial Reports Finance Officer Nielson reviewed the Cash and Investment Report. The city’s investment portfolio is at about 52.7 million dollars with about 15 million dollars of that in liquid assets. The Finance Department is looking at 40 million dollars in the one-to-two-year term because there are large capital improvement projects in water and wastewater. They will need to determine how much of those funds they can reinvest in a two to three ladder in the four to five percent return.  Finance Officer Nielson reviewed the Treasurer’s Report. The city is about 41% through the fiscal year and currently at about 22 or 23% of actual expenditures.   Presentation of contracts for Construction Manager/General Contractor CM/GC and Architect for the Police Station Facility - Action Item Finance Officer Nielson explained that the committee tasked to provide oversight of obtaining a Construction Manager/General Contractor CM/GC has selected Headwater Construction Company as the CM/GC. The committee prior to selecting the CM/GC submitted Request for Qualifications (RFQs), the RFQs received went through a selection-based process. They have negotiated a contract, and the contract is available in the City Council Meeting Packets. Currently, they are in the pre-bond phase and are offering a zero cost until the city reaches the bond phase. The bond phase would determine the amount of funding available. He said assuming the bond phase is approved, the new police station would enter the construction phase. The contract would be at 4.25% of the estimated construction costs. Finance Officer Nielson asked the City Council to keep in mind the CM/GC has a line item that is a part of that construction cost because they subcontract most of the work. The CM/GC bill their direct time for their project manager and the 4.25% contract cost is added on top of those costs. He said he asked other cities about the 4.25% contract amount and was informed that the contract percentage is a fair contract price. He recommended the City Council move forward and authorize Mayor Merrill to sign the contract. They are planning a kickoff meeting for the 1st of April if the contract is approved. Council Member Johnson said as one of the oversight committee members she believes a thorough job was completed during the CM/GC selection process. Mayor Merrill thanked the oversight committee for thoroughly vetting the CM/GC and architect firm. He appreciates their efforts in gathering the information and the selection process. Council Member Johnson moved to approve the Contracts for Construction Manager/General Contractor CM/GC for the Police Station Facility; Council Member Chambers seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Johnson none Council Member Chambers Council Member C. Erickson Council Member E. Erickson Council Member Reeser Council President Walker The motion carried. Finance Officer Nielson explained the oversight committee was also involved in the selection process of the architect for the police facility building. City Staff submitted the Request for Qualifications for the architect for the police facility building. There were six applicants that went through the selection process; after narrowing down the applicants, they selected Hummel to negotiate a contract. The oversight committee has been negotiating the contract over the last several weeks. They received the initial contract price last week. The pre-bond services costs came in at $252,000 lump sum and Hummel has asked for 9% of construction costs. He asked the City Council to keep in mind the architects generally cost more than the construction managers and they do not add that additional cost of a subcontractor in the construction costs. The architect collects their costs up front in a lump sum plus that percentage.   Finance Officer Nielson said he contacted other cities and was informed that school districts have been able to negotiate a 5 ½% construction fee on large projects like schools. He said he than inquired specifically about construction fees for police facilities. They informed him the construction fees for police facility range between 12% and 13%. The most recently built police station was the Idaho Falls Police Station, and their construction fee was 8 ¼%.     Finance Officer Nielson explained the oversight committee received Humble’s original offer in May, it had too much conceptual design and more bond support than the city needed. The committee members felt like some of the design and bond support could be completed in-house and Headwaters could also assist with that work. They were able to negotiate with Humble to complete the programming, which is the evaluation of the square footage needed, costs, and schematic design. He said the design is not a full building, it is more like an aerial view, where space is what is seen and how the square footage is set on the site. They felt that programming was sufficient and were able to negotiate the price down to $85,000 and were able to negotiate a 8 ¼% construction fee. He recommended approval of the architect contract as negotiated.   Mayor Merrill offered the following explanation to the audience members regarding the contracts for the Construction Manager/General Contractor CM/GC and Architect for the Police Station Facility. The Rexburg Police Department has grown substantially along with the population of the city. They have outgrown the police station; the building is old and no longer functional for their needs. The Police Department has expressed their needs for a new police station. The oversight committee has stated the process of obtaining a new building design to accommodate the police force for 30 to 50 years into the future.   Council Member C. Erickson moved to approve the Architect Contract for the Police Station Facility; Council Member Reeser seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Johnson none Council Member Chambers Council Member C. Erickson Council Member E. Erickson Council Member Reeser Council President Walker The motion carried. Public Works: – Keith Davidson Bid Approval for Wastewater Headworks Expansion Project - Action Item Public Works Director Davidson reviewed the two bids received for the headworks expansion of the wastewater treatment plant. The expansion of the headworks will double the capacity of what the plant can currently handle from six million gallons roughly to 12 million gallons a day.      Council Member Chambers asked how the bids compare with the city engineer estimates. Public Works Director Davidson said the low bid is higher by about one million dollars than what the engineers had estimated.   Council Member Chambers asked for the estimated start and completion date of the headworks expansion. Public Works Director Davidson replied that Western Water Construction will begin the work within a month after they submit their bonds and have other items in place. Mayor Merrill explained the headworks system processes all the city’s wastewater and at certain points in the day, it is close to overflowing. The Headworks expansion is necessary, and, in the future, there will be even more wastewater to process. They are trying to get ahead of the capacity to make sure they do not have any issues with the Environmental Protection Agency or are fined.   Council President Walker moved to approve the low bid of $6, 062, 000 from Western Water Construction for the Wastewater Headworks Expansion Project; Council Member C. Erickson seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Johnson none Council Member Chambers Council Member C. Erickson Council Member E. Erickson Council Member Reeser Council President Walker The motion carried. Approval for Spring Cleanup dates starting April 7th to April 28th - Action Item Public Works Director Davidson recommended April 7th through April 28th as the Spring Clean-up date. Council Member C. Erickson asked that city staff advertise the Spring Clean-up date on the city’s social media outlets, newsletters, and electrical signs.   Council Member C. Erickson moved to approve the Spring Cleanup dates starting on April 7th to April 28th; Council Member E. Erickson seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Johnson none Council Member Chambers Council Member C. Erickson Council Member E. Erickson Council Member Reeser Council President Walker The motion carried. Discussion regarding the traffic signal on University and Yellowstone Highway. City Engineer Joel Gray is working on the cameras in that traffic signal. The light is on max recall causing the traffic to wait longer times. The Idaho Transportation Department is also working on the traffic signal cameras at the intersection of Moody and 2nd East by Wal-Mart.   Council Member E. Erickson asked how close they are to synchronizing the stop lights. Public Works Director Davidson replied there is still more fiber work that needs to be completed before they can synchronize all the traffic signal lights. One of the areas where a fiber line is needing to be installed is Main Street and 2nd. The fiber company does not have an exact date when they will have the fiber installed at that location.   Mayor’s Report/Business: Ratify Tammy Geddes as a member of the Planning & Zoning Commission - Action Item Mayor Merrill recommended ratifying Tammy Geddes as a member of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Council Member E. Erickson moved to ratify the appointment of Tammy Geddes as a member of the Planning and Zoning Commission; Council Member Reeser seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Johnson none Council Member Chambers Council Member C. Erickson Council Member E. Erickson Council Member Reeser Council President Walker The motion carried. Items for Consideration: Planning and Zoning recommendation to approve a rezone at approximately 238 & 243 Ella Lane from Medium Density Residential 1 (MDR1) to Medium Density Residential 2 (MDR 2) 25-00039. Designated as Ordinance No 1329 if motion passes and considered first read – Alan Parkinson - Action Item P&Z Administrator Parkinson reviewed the rezone at approximately 238 and 243 Ella Lane from Medium Density Residential 1 (MDR1) to Medium Density Residential 2 (MDR 2). The developer is requesting MDR 2 to be able to add two 12 plexes on the north side of the property making it a total of 24 units instead of the 20 it was previously platted for; they will need to amend the plat later. The plat amendment requires City Council approval.   Council Member Chambers moved to approve Ordinance No. 1329 a rezone at approximately 238 & 243 Ella Lane from Medium Density Residential 1 (MDR1) to Medium Density Residential 2 (MDR 2) and consider first read; Council President Walker seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Johnson none Council Member Chambers Council Member C. Erickson Council Member E. Erickson Council Member Reeser Council President Walker The motion carried. Discussion regarding a traffic light lying on the ground at 238 & 243 Ella Lane and it appears to have never been installed. Authorization to go forward with presentation and offer to purchase property from Madison School District Action Item Finance Officer Nielson explained the purchase of the property from the Madison School District would be a combination offer between the city, county and the Urban Renewal Agency. As representatives from the three entities reviewed the Envisioned Madison planning documents. The Envision Madison was the largest effort the city/county has had to obtain input from citizens and how they desire to see Rexburg develop downtown. Finance Officer Nielson reviewed the downtown redevelopment points in the Envision Madison study.     Finance Officer Nielson explained the purpose of consolidating government entities where possible is to partner on smaller acreage or footprint and then surplus other buildings or land in this case, five plus acres right in our downtown tax exempt that the school has own for a long time. They hope to get the majority of that property back into private development. They feel like this offer and partnering together with these public entities could make that happen. Their desire is to have those six acres be off the tax roll by redeveloping into private development. Finance Officer Nielson said the city should encourage the relocation of low density public uses and promote the consolidation of parking. The redevlopment plan, includes a parking garage which would be a large benefit, not just for a potential administrative building in the future, but it could also be used for private development. He added instead of having multiple parking structures building a bigger parking structure that is longer and taller. There are cost efficiencies that come to the public and to the private sector when consolidating. The parking garage would be a benefit to the Tabernacle and library for overflow parking. The propety is a great location for all of those aspects.   Finance Officer Nielson reviewed the list of interested entities. The reasons they are making the proposal is because the Urban Renewal District where that property is located closes in 2027 with final funding in 2028. He said it is important to know and understand as a city and county, if they were able to get this project completed and private development comes in, then there is a tax benefit almost immediately. The city, county, library, cemetery and all of the taxing districts would benefit from those taxes. Finance Officer Nielson explained the property in the green area on the map would be purchased by the city and county. The property in the blue area is an acre and is the location of where the proposed parking garage would be built. The Urban Renewal Agency would demolish the school located on the property in the yellow area and would put that property on the market for redevelopment to a private developer.   Finance Officer Nielson reviewed the initial funding proposal. The Madison School District had the property appraised and the appraisal was barely over eight million dollars.  Finance Officer Nielson explained the revenue source to pay the city portion of the land. The city has been saving for several years for a potential municipal building. In the beginning they did not know if they should build a municipal building and move the Police Department into the current city hall building or build a new police station. The decision has been made to move forward with a new police station. He said he looked at how much money had been saved for the potential municipal building with the police impact fees included, there is approximately 4.2 million dollars. Council Member E. Erickson expressed his concerns with the purchase of this property from the School District. The project itself is ambitious, and a lot of things would have to line up. The School District has tried to sell the property, and they have not been able to sell that property. He said he does not feel comfortable paying a premium for that property when the taxpayers bought the property in the first place. Mayor Merrill said if the city does not pay the School District market rates for the sale of that property, it has the potential of becoming convoluted for both parties. The city, county and the School District have made the decision that they would do their best to mitigate costs and give each other the best deal they feasibly can; however, staying with the market rates. Finance Officer Nielson added they have discussed the purchase of the property with the School District superintendent, and he has expressed the responsibility of the School District to the taxpayers to take their assets and sell at a fair rate. The money the School District receives from the sale of their assets can be put into the cost to build a new administration building instead of going to the taxpayers to obtain that funding. Council Member Johnson said there are a lot of advantages to purchasing the property; however, there are a few things she disagrees with, including the need for a new city hall. She also disagrees with building a joint city/county administrative building. The police station is an actual need and the 4.2 million could be used for the police station that would be less money the city would ask to bond. She said having more money for the police station will increase the city’s chances of passing the bond. The School District’s property is overpriced. Council Member E. Erickson expressed the following concern regarding the purchase of the School District property. The city, county and Urban Renewal are speculating that a developer is going to come in and develop that property. He said if a developer does not come in and develop that land the three entities are left with bare land. Council Member Reeser asked what happens to the Urban Renewal Agency money if they do not use it to purchase that property? Does that money go away? Finance Officer Nielson replied, with Urban Renewal those funds can be used on a different project within that district before it expires, after the district expires any remaining funds would be returned to the taxing entities. Discussion regarding the development scenarios for School District property. Finance Officer Nielson said in his professional opinion the purchase of the School District property is a great deal for the city and the county, it is good long-term planning. Council Member Johnson said if the property was purchased by a private developer, the property would go back on the tax rolls. Mayor Merrill said the opportunity the city may lose is to have a parking structure at that location for the Tabernacle and library. The parking garage would give the city a more usable and serviceable downtown. Council Member Chambers stated the Urban Renewal Agency members were unanimous in supporting the purchase of the School District Property for the reasons Finance Officer Nielson has mentioned. One of the reasons to purchase the property is that it serves as a great long-term planning tool to have that property set aside. The city may or may not need a new city hall in 20 years; however, eventually the city will need a new city hall. He said to be able to purchase land at $650,000 is a great deal. Council Member Chambers said the purchase and or investment in the frontage piece of property, puts Urban Renewal in control of the type of development that goes in, which is appealing because they can pursue the highest and best use that will net the greatest amount of tax revenue. Discussion regarding the reason the School District property has not sold. Finance Officer Nielson said he believes the size of the property is too large for a single developer. Council Member C. Erickson said he is in favor of purchasing the property if it does not take away funding from the new police station. Council President Walker said the price of the property at $650,000 is a great deal; however, he is also concerned about the purchase of that property taking away funding for the police station. Discussion regarding the benefit of having a parking garage in the downtown area. Council Member E. Erickson moved to approve to offer to purchase the property from Madison School District as discussed; Council Member Chambers seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Chambers Council Member Johnson Council Member C. Erickson Council Member E. Erickson Council Member Reeser Council President Walker The motion carried. Calendared Bills: (02:02:12) Second Reading: Those items which have been first read: NONE Third Reading: Those items which have been second read: Ordinance No 1328 Rezone at 4 W Moody Road from Light Industrial (LI) to Medium Density Residential 2 (MDR2) #24-01171 – Alan Parkinson - Action Item ORDINANCE NO. 1328 Rezone 4 W Moody Rd from Light Industrial (LI) to Medium Density Residential 2 (MDR2) Zone AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND CHANGING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF REXBURG, IDAHO, AND PROVIDING THAT THE ZONED DESIGNATION OF THAT CERTAIN PROPERTY HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED, SITUATED IN REXBURG, MADISON COUNTY, IDAHO, BE CHANGED AS HEREINAFTER DESIGNATED; AND PROVIDING WHEN THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.  Discussion: Council Member C. Erickson moved to approve Ordinance No 1328 the rezone at 4 W Moody Road from Light Industrial (LI) to Medium Density Residential 2 (MDR2) and consider third; Council Member Johnson seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill asked for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Johnson none Council Member Chambers Council Member C. Erickson Council Member E. Erickson Council Member Reeser Council President Walker The motion carried. 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 March 5th, 11th, 14th, 2025, Meetings - Action Item Approve the City of Rexburg Bills - Action Item Council President Walker moved to approve the Consent Calendar containing the minutes and city bills; Council Member Reeser seconded the motion; Mayor Merrill for a vote: Those voting aye Those voting nay Council Member Johnson none Council Member Chambers Council Member C. Erickson Council Member E. Erickson Council Member Reeser Council President Walker The motion carried. Adjournment 9:58 P.M. APPROVED: ________________________________ Jerry Merrill, Mayor Attest: _____________________________ Marianna Gonzalez, Deputy City Clerk