Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z Minutes 10.08.26(208) 359-3020 35 North 1st East Rexburg, ID 83440 Rexburg.org | Engage.Rexburg.org Planning and Zoning Minutes – October 8, 2026 P&Z Commissioners: City Staff: Jim Lawrence Tammy Geddes Alan Parkinson – P&Z Administrator Bruce Casper Rick Robinson Elise Rasmussen – P&Z Administrative Assistant McKay Francis Tina Lesh Kyle Baldwin – Planner 1 Brian Thackeray Candi McFadden Natalie Powell – Compliance Officer Vern Muir Deidra Smith Spencer Rammell – Commissioner Attorney Dan Hanna Chairperson Francis opened the meeting at 6:30 PM. Planning & Zoning Meeting: 1. Welcome & Pledge of Allegiance - Chairman McKay Francis called the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting to order on October 8, 2026. He welcomed those in attendance and led the Commission in the Pledge of Allegiance. Following the pledge, roll call was conducted by Elise Rasmussen. 2. ROLL CALL of Planning and Zoning Commissioners: Present: McKay Francis, Brian Thackeray, Vern Muir, Dan Hanna, Tammy Geddes, Tina Lesh, & Candi McFadden Absent: Jim Lawrence, Rick Robinson, Bruce Casper, & Deidra Smith 3. Approval of the P&Z Minutes for August 20th, 2026 (Action) MOTION: Motion to approve the Planning & Zoning minutes for August 20th, 2026 (Action) Action: Approve/Deny, Moved by Dan Hanna, Seconded by Brian Thackery. Commissioner Discussion on the Motion: VOTE: Motion carried. (Summary: Yes = , No= , Abstain = ). Yes: McKay Francis, Brian Thackeray, Vern Muir, Dan Hanna, Tammy Geddes, Tina Lesh, & Candi McFadden No: Abstain: 1. Commissioner Training Part 1 – Alan Parkinson Presentation: Alan Parkinson recommended adjusting the agenda order while the Commission waited for an individual expected to participate in the Urban Renewal (208) 359-3020 35 North 1st East Rexburg, ID 83440 Rexburg.org | Engage.Rexburg.org discussion. He explained that, in the meantime, the Commission would begin a training session. Alan Parkinson informed the Commission that the Association of Idaho Cities had developed a series of ten short training videos designed to help Planning and Zoning Commissioners better understand their roles and responsibilities. He explained that the videos covered topics including the duties of the Commission, actions that could and could not be taken by the Commission, and other guiding principles related to land use decision-making. He further noted that several new members had recently joined the Commission, making the training a valuable opportunity for review. Alan stated that Spencer was unable to attend the meeting and indicated that the training would begin with introductory videos before progressing into more detailed subject matter. He explained that questions would be welcomed following each video presentation. Alan then opened the training session. Alan Parkinson led a discussion following the training video and emphasized the significant responsibility of the Planning and Zoning Commission in shaping the future of Rexburg. He explained that the Commission's role extended beyond individual decisions on rezonings and new developments and involved considering the long-term vision for the community. Alan discussed the importance of planning for future growth, including infrastructure needs such as roads, water systems, and sewer services, and noted that the Comprehensive Plan serves as a guiding document for achieving the City's vision while allowing for adjustments as conditions change. Alan Parkinson also highlighted the rapid growth occurring in Rexburg, referencing new commercial developments, major retailers locating in the city, and continued housing growth. He explained that the City's increasing population was attracting larger businesses and creating new opportunities and challenges for the community. He noted that these trends reinforced the importance of thoughtful long-term planning by the Commission. Alan then invited questions from the Commission regarding the introductory training video. Commissioner Discussion: Candi McFadden asked where the City's Comprehensive Plan could be found. Alan Parkinson responded that the Comprehensive Plan was available on the City's website through the Planning and Zoning page. He explained that the plan had been updated in 2023 and noted that, while state guidance recommends reviewing the plan every ten years, the City also evaluates it at the five-year mark to determine whether any adjustments are needed. Alan stated that a major rewrite is typically completed after ten years to address significant changes that have occurred within the community and to ensure the plan continues to reflect the City's long-term vision. (208) 359-3020 35 North 1st East Rexburg, ID 83440 Rexburg.org | Engage.Rexburg.org Alan Parkinson asked if there were any additional questions regarding the training video. Hearing none, he stated that the meeting would transition to the Urban Renewal presentation and noted that the Commission would determine later whether time remained to continue with additional training videos. Elise Rasmussen addressed the Chair and noted that Commissioner Vern Muir had arrived after roll call. She requested that his presence be entered into the record to accurately reflect attendance. Vern confirmed he was present, and the record was updated accordingly. 2. Urban Renewal – Proposed West Highway Urban Renewal Plan – Scott Miller (Action) Presentation: https://laserfiche.rexburg.org/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=715400&dbid=0&repo=Re xburg&cr=1 City Staff Scott Miller introduced himself as the administrator for the Rexburg Urban Renewal Agency and explained that the Agency was pursuing the creation of a new urban renewal district. He introduced Brad Kramer, a consultant with Perspective Planning and Consulting, and turned the time over to him for the presentation. Brad Kramer introduced himself and thanked the Commission members for their service to the community. He explained that he had been hired by the Rexburg Urban Renewal Agency to assist with the creation of the proposed West Highway Urban Renewal District, located west of Highway 20 and north and south of Highway 33. Brad provided an overview of the urban renewal process, explaining that the district had already undergone several statutory review steps, including the preparation of an eligibility report that had been approved by the Urban Renewal Agency, Madison County, and the Rexburg City Council. He stated that the Commission's role was to review the proposed plan and determine whether it was consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan before forwarding a recommendation to the City Council for final consideration. Brad Kramer discussed the purpose of the proposed district and explained that tax increment financing would be used to help fund infrastructure improvements and economic development projects within the designated area. He noted that the district had been determined to be economically feasible due to the significant growth and development anticipated in the area. Brad reviewed several qualifying conditions supporting the district's creation, including inadequate roadway infrastructure, costly transportation improvements, lack of pedestrian facilities, outdated street patterns, regional utility needs, lot layout challenges, and the complexity of coordinating improvements among numerous property owners. Brad Kramer further explained that the Urban Renewal District would not alter the City's Comprehensive Plan or existing zoning designations. He reviewed how the proposed district supported several goals identified in the Comprehensive Plan, including (208) 359-3020 35 North 1st East Rexburg, ID 83440 Rexburg.org | Engage.Rexburg.org infrastructure improvements, utility expansion, economic development, housing opportunities, and business growth. He stated that tax increment financing could help offset extraordinary development costs and provide incentives for investment in areas where infrastructure expenses might otherwise discourage development. Dan Hanna commented that it would be helpful to further explain the tax increment financing process. Brad Kramer responded by describing how tax increment financing works. He explained that when an urban renewal district is established, the current taxable value of properties within the district becomes the base value, with taxes from that base continuing to be distributed to the existing taxing entities. As development occurs and property values increase, the additional tax revenue generated above the base value is directed to the Urban Renewal Agency and reinvested into eligible projects within the district boundaries. He noted that these funds can be used for improvements such as roads, utilities, water and sewer infrastructure, parks, and other qualifying projects. Alan Parkinson asked Brad to further clarify how property taxes are affected by the district. Brad emphasized that urban renewal does not create a new tax or increase existing taxes, but instead redirects a portion of future tax revenue growth to fund improvements within the district. He also explained that school districts continue to receive their tax revenues and that certain special districts may be exempt from participation unless they choose to opt in. Dan Hanna remarked that tax increment financing serves as a significant economic development tool because it helps fund necessary infrastructure improvements, making development projects more feasible and encouraging future business investment and growth within the community. Scott Miller reminded those speaking to use the microphone so their comments could be accurately recorded. He then displayed a map of Rexburg's existing urban renewal districts and provided an overview of each district's history and accomplishments. Scott Miller explained that Rexburg currently has four urban renewal districts, with the proposed West Highway District becoming the fifth. He reviewed the downtown district and discussed how urban renewal funding has been used to support infrastructure improvements and redevelopment projects in that area. Scott noted that one of the earliest urban renewal efforts helped fund the construction of the bridge on 2nd East, which removed a significant infrastructure barrier and helped facilitate commercial development, including the arrival of major retailers such as Albertsons and Walmart. Dan Hanna referenced the University Boulevard/Yellowstone Highway area and noted the importance of infrastructure improvements associated with growth near the high school and surrounding development. Scott Miller continued discussing the University Boulevard District and explained how urban renewal funding had assisted with transportation improvements, utility relocations, canal modifications, and other extraordinary infrastructure costs needed to support development. Scott Miller then reviewed the North Interchange District, discussing growth in the area surrounding the new LDS Temple, Home Depot, WinCo, and other commercial developments. He also highlighted projects planned within the North Central District and (208) 359-3020 35 North 1st East Rexburg, ID 83440 Rexburg.org | Engage.Rexburg.org described how urban renewal funding has helped prepare infrastructure needed to support future growth and development throughout those areas. Scott Miller concluded by reiterating that urban renewal does not create a new tax. He explained that the program reallocates a portion of future tax revenue growth generated within the district and reinvests those funds into public infrastructure and eligible projects within the same area. He noted that there is often confusion regarding the program and emphasized that tax increment financing serves as a tool to encourage economic development by helping fund improvements that might otherwise be cost-prohibitive. Chairman McKay Francis asked how the Urban Renewal Agency collaborates with the City and residents when determining which projects should be prioritized. He used the example of potential future crossings over Highway 20 and asked how decisions are made regarding which infrastructure needs receive attention and funding. Scott Miller explained that project priorities are driven by ongoing evaluations of community needs and development activity throughout the city. He noted that while the Urban Renewal Agency has its own governing board that makes final decisions, city staff and administrators provide recommendations and information regarding projects that would have the greatest benefit to the community. Scott stated that Urban Renewal works closely with City departments, particularly Public Works, to identify infrastructure needs and determine where available resources can have the most impact. Alan Parkinson referenced sewer infrastructure as an example of the collaboration between the City and the Urban Renewal Agency. Scott Miller explained that the City regularly identifies key infrastructure projects and works with Urban Renewal to determine whether tax increment financing can be used to assist with funding. He cited a sewer line project within the North Interchange District as an example of Urban Renewal helping provide infrastructure necessary to support future development. Vice Chair Tammy Geddes asked about the number of Urban Renewal Districts currently in Rexburg, noting that the proposed district would become the fifth district, and inquired about any limitations on the number of districts that can be created and how they affect the allocation of tax revenues. Scott Miller responded that Idaho law limits the total taxable base value contained within all Urban Renewal Districts to no more than ten percent of the municipality's value at the time the districts are established. He explained that although the districts appear to cover a large geographic area, their original base values represented a much smaller portion of the City's overall valuation when they were created. Scott also discussed the lifespan of the existing districts, noting that the Downtown Urban Renewal District is scheduled to expire in 2027, with funding for projects continuing through 2028 as the district is brought to a close. Megan Conrad provided additional clarification regarding the impact of urban renewal districts on overlapping taxing entities. She explained that revenue allocation areas do not take existing dollars away from taxing districts. Instead, urban renewal may temporarily delay the ability of taxing districts to recognize additional budget capacity generated from new construction until the district expires. Megan emphasized that the (208) 359-3020 35 North 1st East Rexburg, ID 83440 Rexburg.org | Engage.Rexburg.org process does not remove funding from the affected entities but rather delays the distribution of a portion of future growth in tax revenues. Chairman McKay Francis referenced information contained in the report and noted that the statutory ten percent limit for urban renewal districts equated to approximately $273 million in taxable value. He observed that, including the proposed West Highway District, the combined total would be approximately $115 million and asked if that figure was accurate. Scott Miller confirmed that the estimate appeared accurate and then reviewed the anticipated expiration dates of the City's existing urban renewal districts. He explained that the University Boulevard District is expected to expire around 2032, while the North Interchange and North Central Districts still have many years remaining before reaching their statutory expiration dates. Chairman McKay Francis asked for clarification regarding the expiration of the Downtown Urban Renewal District. Scott Miller confirmed that the district is nearing the end of its lifespan and explained that, although the district officially expires in 2027, project funding and closeout activities are expected to continue through 2028. Tina Lesh asked whether urban renewal districts are generally established for twenty- year terms. Scott Miller responded that current Idaho law limits new urban renewal districts to twenty years. He noted that some older districts, including the Downtown District, were created under previous regulations that allowed for longer durations. Candi McFadden asked how the proposed district could affect property owners located adjacent to, but outside of, the district boundaries. Scott Miller explained that urban renewal districts do not directly increase taxes for neighboring properties. However, he noted that infrastructure improvements funded through the district can benefit surrounding areas and may positively affect property values. He further explained that any impact on tax rates would be indirect and dependent upon factors such as property valuation changes and decisions made by individual taxing entities. Megan Conrad added that revenue allocation areas are generally considered a tax- neutral mechanism. She explained that changes in property values and levy rates are influenced by a variety of factors, making it difficult to directly attribute any future tax changes to the existence of an urban renewal district. Megan agreed that the district itself does not create a direct tax increase for neighboring property owners. Scott Miller asked if Candi's question had been adequately answered. After receiving confirmation, Chairman McKay Francis directed the meeting back to the agenda item, and the presentation continued. Brad talked about supporting economic development and improve connectivity. Talked about how both the plans correlate. Opened for questions (208) 359-3020 35 North 1st East Rexburg, ID 83440 Rexburg.org | Engage.Rexburg.org Brad Kramer explained how the proposed West Highway Urban Renewal District supports the goals of the City's Comprehensive Plan. He discussed planned infrastructure improvements, including road widening, intersection upgrades, sewer improvements, sidewalks, and pedestrian connections needed to accommodate future growth. Brad Kramer stated that these projects would improve safety, connectivity, accessibility, and economic development opportunities while supporting the City's long-term vision. He concluded that the proposed Urban Renewal Plan was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and reminded the Commission that its role was to determine whether it agreed with that finding. Brad then opened the floor for additional questions. Commissioner Discussion: Brian Thackeray asked what would happen if property values did not increase and the district experienced economic hardship after being established. Brad Kramer explained that if property values and development activity do not increase, no tax increment would be generated, resulting in little or no funding being available for district projects. He noted that urban renewal districts are typically created in areas where growth and development are anticipated and acknowledged that there is some risk if expected development does not occur. Vern Muir asked what happens to the tax revenues associated with a district once it reaches its expiration date, using the Downtown Urban Renewal District as an example. Brad Kramer explained that any unspent funds remaining in the district are returned to the county and redistributed among the appropriate taxing entities. He further stated that once a district expires, all future tax revenues generated within the area are distributed to the taxing entities as they would have been prior to the creation of the district. Megan Conrad provided additional clarification regarding the expiration of urban renewal districts. She explained that the increment value is merged back into the base value when a district terminates, allowing the full taxable value to be recognized by the affected taxing entities. She noted that this process can increase budget capacity and affect future levy calculations for those entities. Tina Lesh asked whether Urban Renewal Agencies can apply for federal grants. Alan Parkinson responded that urban renewal can support grant applications and help facilitate projects, but grant applications are typically submitted by the City or other entities rather than the Urban Renewal Agency itself. Scott Miller explained that the Urban Renewal Agency does not typically apply directly for grants. He stated that grant applications are usually coordinated through the City or through project partners, although urban renewal funding may play a supporting role in those projects. Brad Kramer added that he has worked on several projects where urban renewal agencies partnered with grant-funded efforts. He explained that while urban renewal agencies are generally not the direct applicants, they can serve as valuable partners by contributing funding or resources that strengthen grant applications and help make projects feasible. Chairman McKay Francis asked what specific improvements residents could expect to see from the funds generated through the proposed district. Brad Kramer explained that the West Highway Urban Renewal Plan contains a list of priority projects and other eligible improvements identified by the City and Urban Renewal Agency. He noted that (208) 359-3020 35 North 1st East Rexburg, ID 83440 Rexburg.org | Engage.Rexburg.org these projects would be funded as revenue becomes available and could be adjusted as needs change over time. Scott Miller highlighted the intersection of 12th West and Highway 33 as one of the priority projects identified for future improvement. He explained that while it will take time for tax increment revenues to accumulate, the Urban Renewal Agency has the ability to issue bonds to begin infrastructure projects before all of the revenue has been collected. Chairman McKay Francis asked how bonding would work in conjunction with future district revenues. Scott Miller explained that any bond issued by the Urban Renewal Agency would not be a levy bond or create a new tax. Instead, future tax increment revenues generated within the district could be used to repay the bond, allowing critical infrastructure projects to begin sooner while the district continues to develop. Vern Muir asked for additional clarification regarding some of the projects listed in the plan, specifically the proposed improvements at the 7th South intersection. Alan Parkinson explained that the project involved improvements near 7th South and 12th West and did not include extending the roadway across Highway 20. He noted that improvements crossing the highway would involve additional coordination with state agencies and funding sources but could potentially receive support from Urban Renewal in the future. Alan Parkinson provided examples of projects that have benefited from Urban Renewal assistance, including utility relocations, traffic signal improvements, and major sewer infrastructure projects. He discussed the planned signal near Home Depot, utility improvements associated with development projects, and the relocation of the canal along 12th West to accommodate future roadway widening. Alan explained that Urban Renewal helps address extraordinary infrastructure costs that would otherwise create barriers to development. Vice Chair Tammy Geddes asked whether Urban Renewal becomes involved when the City identifies a need for infrastructure improvements related to development. Alan Parkinson explained that both the City and private developers can approach the Urban Renewal Agency with potential projects. Tammy also asked how project coordination occurs between the various entities involved. Scott Miller confirmed that coordination regularly occurs between the Urban Renewal Agency, City departments, and developers. He explained that Urban Renewal has its own board that serves as the decision-making body, while City staff provide information and recommendations regarding community needs and project priorities. Brian Thackeray then summarized the purpose of the Commission's review and asked whether the Commission's responsibility was simply to determine if the proposed Urban Renewal District was consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Scott Miller confirmed that this was the Commission's role in the review process. Dan Hanna asked whether urban renewal districts generate enough revenue to fund their own projects. Scott Miller responded that they do and discussed several projects that have benefited from urban renewal funding over the years, including bridges, sewer infrastructure, and other community improvements. He also noted that urban renewal had previously assisted with fire station improvements, although changes in state regulations have made that type of funding more difficult today. McKay Francis asked whether it was merely coincidental that a district with an approximate value of $33 million was nearing expiration while a proposed district of a similar size was being created. Scott Miller explained that it was not a specific target, but that the timing made sense given the City's available capacity and the need to (208) 359-3020 35 North 1st East Rexburg, ID 83440 Rexburg.org | Engage.Rexburg.org evaluate where urban renewal resources would be most beneficial. Alan Parkinson added that the increased demand and development occurring within the proposed district area was the primary factor driving the district's creation. McKay Francis then asked about the Commission's role in the process and whether its recommendation would be forwarded to the City Council for final consideration. Scott Miller explained that the next step would be a public hearing before the City Council, currently anticipated for November 18, 2026. Brad Kramer outlined the remaining approval process, explaining that if the Commission found the proposed district consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, additional public notice requirements and statutory procedures would still need to be completed before the City Council could take final action. Megan Conrad further explained that the City Council public hearing would be the final major step in the process. She noted that notice of the hearing would be published, affected taxing entities would receive copies of the plan, and additional agreements and post-adoption filings would be completed if the district were approved. Brad Kramer concluded by emphasizing the importance of completing the approval process before the end of the calendar year. He explained that establishing the district before year-end would preserve the intended base property values and allow the district to function as planned once created. Dan Hanna asked for clarification on the proper language needed for the motion regarding the proposed Urban Renewal District. Scott Miller deferred the question to Megan Conrad, who explained that the motion should be to approve Planning and Zoning Resolution No. PZ 2026-01, finding that the proposed West Highway Urban Renewal Plan was in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Tina Lesh asked whether she should recuse herself from voting because she owns property within the proposed district boundaries. Megan Conrad explained that the Commission's action was limited to determining whether the plan conformed to the Comprehensive Plan and that, because Tina was similarly situated to other property owners within the district, a recusal was likely not necessary. However, Megan noted that the City Attorney would be the appropriate person to provide a formal legal opinion. A discussion followed regarding property ownership within the district, with Chairman McKay Francis and Tammy Geddes also acknowledging that they owned property in the area. Alan Parkinson explained that the primary consideration was whether a commissioner could make a fair and impartial decision. Following discussion, the Commission determined that no conflict existed that would require recusal, and the Commissioners remained eligible to vote on the item. Brian Thackeray attempted to formulate a motion and proposed recommending approval of the plan to the City Council based on its consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. Alan Parkinson, Scott Miller, and Megan Conrad clarified that the Commission's action was not a recommendation to create the district, but rather a finding that the proposed Urban Renewal Plan conformed to the Comprehensive Plan. During the discussion, Elise Rasmussen assisted the Commission by reading back the proposed motion language and helping clarify the wording of the resolution. The Commission worked collectively to refine the motion language to accurately reflect the action being considered. Brian Thackeray then made a motion to approve Planning and Zoning Resolution No. PZ 2026-01, finding that the proposed West Highway Urban Renewal Plan was (208) 359-3020 35 North 1st East Rexburg, ID 83440 Rexburg.org | Engage.Rexburg.org consistent with and in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Vice Chair Tammy Geddes seconded the motion. Chairman McKay Francis called for a vote. The motion passed unanimously, and Resolution No. PZ 2026-01 was approved. McKay thanked the presenters and participants before the Commission moved to the next agenda item. MOTION: Approving the p&z resolution 2026-01 the west highway plan because of the benefits to the community and it aligns with the current comp plans. Action: Approve/Deny, Moved by Brian Thackery, Seconded by Vice Chair Tammy Geddes. Commissioner Discussion on the Motion: rewrote the motion VOTE: Motion carried. (Summary: Yes= , No= , Abstain = ). Yes: McKay Francis, Brian Thackeray, Vern Muir, Dan Hanna, Tammy Geddes, Tina Lesh, & Candi McFadden No: Abstain: 3. Commissioner Training – Alan Parkinson – Alan postponed the rest of the training for a future meeting Alan Parkinson stated that the Commission had spent sufficient time on the training presentation for the evening and provided an update on upcoming Planning and Zoning business. Heads Up: October 22nd: Tamana Fields Plat talked about 3 or 4 other plats that might be coming in the future. Voluntary annexations in the next 3 or 4 months. Alan Parkinson explained that the City anticipated bringing the Tamina Fields project before the Commission on October 22, 2026, and noted that several additional plats were also expected in the coming weeks. Alan said that while few rezoning requests were currently anticipated, several voluntary annexation requests could be coming forward in the next few months as property owners seek to be incorporated into the city. He remarked that Rexburg continues to experience significant growth and thanked the Commissioners for their time and service. Vice Chair Tammy Geddes asked whether future training could include guidance on proper motion language and procedural terminology used by the Commission. Alan Parkinson responded that future training sessions would cover those topics, including the Commission's responsibilities, procedural requirements, conflicts of interest, (208) 359-3020 35 North 1st East Rexburg, ID 83440 Rexburg.org | Engage.Rexburg.org recusals, and other aspects of the approval process. He explained that the Association of Idaho Cities training series contains several additional videos that address those subjects in greater detail. Chairman McKay Francis suggested that training materials be distributed to Commissioners in advance when possible so members could review them and prepare questions. Alan Parkinson explained that access to some of the training materials is restricted through the Association of Idaho Cities and may not always be available for distribution. He stated that staff would provide materials when possible and would continue scheduling training during meetings with lighter agendas to allow time for discussion and questions. Candi McFadden asked whether the temporary change to the meeting schedule, which moved meetings to the second and fourth Thursdays of the month, would become the standard schedule. Alan Parkinson explained that the adjustment was made to accommodate the City Council meeting schedule and ensure adequate time for City Council members to review Planning and Zoning recommendations and meeting materials. He stated that the Commission would continue to meet on its normal first and third meeting schedule except in limited circumstances when scheduling adjustments were needed. Chairman McKay Francis recognized an audience member who had remained for the duration of the meeting and invited her to address the Commission if she had any questions or comments. Savannah, representing Mills Concrete Business Development, introduced herself and explained that she was attending the meeting to learn about upcoming development projects and potential business opportunities in the area. Alan Parkinson invited her to visit the Planning and Zoning office for additional information regarding future projects and development activity. McKay and Alan briefly commented on the continued growth occurring throughout Rexburg and the anticipated need for construction-related services. Dan Hanna commented that agenda language outlining the type of action expected from the Commission is very helpful during meetings, particularly when motions and recommendations are required. Alan Parkinson agreed and explained that the Urban Renewal item was an unusual case because it did not include a typical staff report. He stated that staff would continue providing clear guidance whenever possible and noted that Elise Rasmussen had quickly become proficient in supporting the Planning and Zoning process. Candi McFadden asked about the multiple emails Commissioners had been receiving regarding meeting notices. Vice Chair Tammy Geddes explained that she had recently contacted the City's Information Technology Department and provided screenshots of the issue so it could be investigated. Alan Parkinson discussed the various meeting- related emails Commissioners normally receive and explained that some notifications are intentionally distributed as reminders and requests for attendance confirmation. Chairman McKay Francis noted that the duplicate messages appeared to be a technical issue, while Dan Hanna added that he had observed the same repeated notifications. Alan acknowledged the issue and stated that Information Technology staff were working to correct it. With no further business before the Commission, Chairman McKay Francis adjourned the meeting. 4. Adjourned at 8:08PM.