[0:11] Oh,

[0:25] center stage.

[0:28] zoomed in right at

[0:32] Oh, I guess you guess you can turn them on now.

[1:02] Let's

[1:11] go

[1:33] Hello.

[2:00] Good.

[2:34] All righty, we'll call the meeting to order. Tiffany, please take the role.

[2:37] » Councilman Harjo, >> present.

[2:39] » Councilman McCarthy, >> present.

[2:41] » Councilman Sanders, >> present.

[2:42] » Councilwoman Workla, >> uh, absent.

[2:44] » Mayor Sykes, >> present. Let the record reflect. We do

[2:47] have a quorum for Tuesday, September 22nd, 2026. Uh, going to run down to

[2:51] recognizing persons. Oh, actually before I do that, um, council, I have a last

[2:55] minute ask to add to the agenda. Um, the ad is an OLDCC grant approval and

[3:03] authorized the mayor to sign. Um, it came in literally today. Um, and it

[3:09] needs to be signed by the 30th of September.

[3:19] Mr. Mayor, Councilman Sanders,

[3:24] Uh, I'm in agreement to approve this item to the agenda tonight.

[3:28] Second. It's been motioned and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none,

[3:32] I'll call for the question. Councilman Sanders. Hi.

[3:34] » Councilman McCarthy. >> Hi.

[3:35] » Councilman Harjo. >> Hi.

[3:37] » We'll place that in new business number three.

[3:49] Okay. All right. Um, sorry about that everybody. We'll run down to recognizing

[3:53] person. It's the purpose of this agenda item is to provide an opportunity for

[3:56] members of the public to address the city council on matters that are not

[3:59] listed on this current agenda and are within the subject matter jurisdiction

[4:04] of the municipal purview of the city. Comments may not involve personnel

[4:07] matters, legal disputes, or private non-municipal affairs of the

[4:10] constituency. Comments regarding zoning or land use issues may only be made

[4:14] during uh properly noticed public hearings. Would anybody like to get up

[4:17] and speak? Come on down.

[4:23] How you doing? Oh, you're all good. What's your name?

[4:27] » Phoenix. >> Phoenix.

[4:28] » Yep. Phoenix.

[4:36] Beginning

[4:42] of the school year, my kindergarten I would walk daily to West

[4:48] and that would require us to cross over Airbase Road. We live just on the other

[4:52] side next to Richard McKenna, another school.

[4:56] Walking saves money, gas keep us active and it's a way for my son to make his

[5:00] journey to school special too close for the bus. We stopped because in four

[5:06] weeks my son and I had multiple vehicles white house while crossing the road

[5:10] lights still. We also had numerous vehicles zooming by any given day while

[5:15] we were on the corner lightsing press to go. The final straw that convinced me

[5:21] that this was a serious issue that needed to be addressed swiftly was

[5:24] witnessing an Elmer who could not slow down, stop or even acknowledge us as we

[5:29] were waiting and they passed through the flashing lights. I called non-emergency

[5:33] dispatch that day to let them know what I witnessed and expressed my concerns of

[5:37] how unsafe crossing was. Officer on the other side of the line shared my

[5:41] concerns and stated it was a route he often took and had issues at as well. He

[5:45] also let me know that the flashing lights had previous reported issues and

[5:49] he would send someone to check to make sure they were still working.

[5:52] Ironically, the next day while walking, none of the lights were flashing.

[5:57] Um, we were lucky there wasn't the usual dense on being trafficked and quickly

[6:01] took our chance to. It's already unsafe and with the low visibility sun glare on

[6:06] the small lights or in driver's eyes, but without them flashing entirely, I

[6:11] didn't want to keep playing a game of my child.

[6:15] Opting for driving has its risks on that street, too. Business signs in the

[6:18] parking lot of baristas impacts our lefthand view of oncoming traffic to

[6:22] cross towards West Elementary. With the parking lot filled, there's no

[6:25] visibility at all. I believe we either need a full stop light at air base

[6:30] casket to control traffic or we need better visibility such as a pedestrian

[6:35] hybrid beacon bar the length of the crosswalk reflective paths and raising

[6:39] the business signs to allow site restoration for oncoming traffic

[6:43] especially for those leaving South Pasket or crossing air base road. I've

[6:47] called multiple departments in our city as well as IT to bring awareness um of

[6:52] these issues and seek guidance for what I needed to pursue.

[6:56] I've made a post on our community Facebook page to see if other citizens

[6:59] share my concerns and a lot of replies show that they do. I'm actively

[7:03] gathering petition signatures to show just how serious we are about this

[7:07] change. We understand that mountain the city of mountain homem has limited funds

[7:12] in a longer list of projects but this has been an identified issue spot for

[7:16] many years now according to a master transportation plan document reference

[7:20] the impact for you we shouldn't be waiting for a

[7:24] traumatic accident and make it safer there have been many near misses and I

[7:29] don't think continuing put this on the back burner

[7:36] » thank you for your time >> thanks Phoenix thanks Thanks.

[7:46] » Mayor Sil

[7:50] This is going to be good. I'm very concerned for the street

[7:54] lighting in this city. The horrible tragedy taking the life of a young lady

[7:57] in our community could possibly have been avoided if there had been more

[8:00] lights, especially around our parks. I drove around this city last night and

[8:04] noticed how little lightning there actually is. I know the parks are open

[8:07] from dawn to dusk. That does not prevent our residents from using them after

[8:11] dark, but we need to make the park safe with better lighting. With winter

[8:15] coming, the darkness is earlier and earlier, and soon it will be dark around

[8:19] 6:00 p.m. There also comes the time when our littles are walking to school in the

[8:23] dark. I think the safety of the residents should come before any money

[8:26] is spent on other projects in the city. I drove on Airbase Road last night and

[8:30] it seemed that all the lighting there was being provided by the lights from

[8:33] the business. I know lighting is expensive, but Something needs to be

[8:36] done to protect our community. These yellow lights are not effective,

[8:40] especially with the city's roads and so many people going faster than the speed

[8:44] limit. I live on South Pin and people on that street all the time. Take a drive

[8:49] down 10 miles in Meridian. The street lights are amazing. The whole city of

[8:53] Boise in that area is lit so much better than Mount Hope. And I know there's more

[8:56] money there. I do not know what the solution is, but I have a couple of

[9:00] ideas. The research I have done said that white or clear lights are generally

[9:04] better for pedestrian safety. We have many people here that walk regularly and

[9:08] our sidewalks give plenty of use and kids are everywhere. Perhaps change to

[9:13] light. Some people may not like because they will be brighter. But curtains are

[9:17] a real thing or well if you're really bothered by

[9:22] ask community members to put LED light standards in their yards though I do not

[9:26] know if these would light up the streets. These are generally solar

[9:29] operated. I have them up and down my driveway because there is no lighting by

[9:33] my home. Perhaps the PSA to the schools to go home to parents would help light

[9:38] these kids up somewhat. We need to educate the community on the safety

[9:42] issues. I'm going to speak with James Gilbert also and give some PSC can be

[9:46] done for our kids. I spoke with a police officer last night on site at Virginia

[9:51] Park and he did say part of the problem is these kids are always wearing dark

[9:55] colors and I also see the kids walking and riding around town in the dark with

[9:59] nothing bright on. While we were standing there, two people came by on

[10:02] electric scooters. All we could see was a tail light. We could not even see if

[10:07] it was an adult or a child that was riding on there. I think safety needs to

[10:11] be first and foremost in the city, especially the way we are filming it.

[10:14] People know that. Thanks.

[10:19] » Anybody else? Come on down, sir.

[10:43] » Light down. Main Street.

[10:57] Highways

[11:06] have nice lights.

[11:18] and you guys work with them fixed

[11:24] lot of concrete up here issues I believe some of it

[11:33] still bring people down here school that corner from the

[11:39] person he will not send I don't know who You guys

[11:49] think somewhere else

[11:55] get rid of I told you guys about ideas maybe fix it

[12:02] wants to listen that's the kind of stuff I hope

[12:09] after that one meeting the other showed up out there

[12:15] probably last

[12:43] I got this myself.

[12:58] A lot of things

[13:06] more people

[13:10] Two lane, three lane turn.

[13:21] Get up. We're going to head to work. Things should show up.

[13:35] Anybody else?

[13:40] you doing? [clears throat]

[13:49] » It's getting there. [laughter]

[13:54] » On the other side of that parking lot, there is a

[13:59] Oh, sorry. There's a well that was just completed

[14:05] last week that two lovely ladies did the masonry work on and

[14:11] a gazebo. That little area needs to be kind of

[14:18] um the area around the well is just like you know dirt. Maybe you guys

[14:29] or whatever fill that in and maybe put some ants around that. I would

[14:36] looking really good and that's been the last 50 years I'm sure. Thanks to the

[14:43] ladies Jenny and you guys. Thank you very much.

[14:50] » Thanks Kathy.

[14:55] » Anybody else? >> All right, we're going to run down to a

[15:00] conflict of interest declaration. Has any council member received information

[15:03] pertaining to or otherwise had any contact with any persons regarding any

[15:06] items on this city council agenda? If so, please set forth nature of contact.

[15:12] All right. Hearing none, we'll run down the consent agenda. Is there

[15:17] [clears throat] excuse me, anything on the consent agenda that needs more

[15:19] clarification or you want to pull or any of that council?

[15:25] Hearing not, do I have a motion to approve the consent agenda as printed

[15:30] there? Councilman Harjo make a motion to approve the consent agenda as printed.

[15:36] » Second. >> It's been motioned and seconded. Any

[15:39] further discussion? >> Mayor,

[15:40] » Councilman McCarthy. >> Question for because of a few items on

[15:46] the 6 7 8 9. Just curious on our city council packet.

[15:52] Nothing was provided regarding cost or any of that information. I was

[15:57] just curious clarification if we can understand why nothing was provided

[16:02] in our city council packets.

[16:07] Um I think that one was uh same groups. Um the work comp is the same group and

[16:14] then the blue shield is this. Let's see here. So, Levit Group is the and correct

[16:18] me if I'm the broker and then the Blue Shield is the city's insurance for all

[16:24] the uh the um same with Delta Dentl and WAMT VSP. Um that's for the insurance

[16:32] for all the staff. >> Mayor.

[16:35] » Yes, sir. >> No information provided though of is it

[16:38] a increase in cost or anything? What the total cost any of that information? Yes,

[16:43] there was an increase but it was to the dependent

[16:48] care. Um there was a a credit also given if memory serves me correctly of4,000

[16:58] to offset that cost from regents,

[17:03] right? Yeah.

[17:08] Go ahead, Tiff. We finally got um the numbers from regions yesterday. That

[17:16] email finally come in yesterday, late Friday. I was off Friday. So um on the

[17:20] regions, but the mayor is correct. Um the dependent will dependent side of our

[17:25] health plan will the employees that have dependence on will have an increase to

[17:29] them that's out of pocket for the employee. Um there was a um Regents gave

[17:36] us a credit on it um for premium and then the Delta Dental um and WAMIT

[17:44] stayed I think Delta Dental went up 2%. But the city covers that portion and

[17:50] then um I crimp went up um because we brought the pool aboard um so our

[17:56] property went up slightly um percentage wise but that was that's it. The other

[18:02] ones don't have any costs beared with them. Um we don't we just pay state

[18:06] insurance fund as claims come in. So that's no change. Um quintessentially

[18:11] and levit group is brokered into every other like it delta dental pays

[18:16] percentage in regions. So we don't pay anything to levit group. Does that

[18:21] answer all your questions? And then the the city just pays the thousand,

[18:26] right?

[18:30] Like that's what we allocated all pre prior years. So we just pay the the

[18:34] thousand per employee. >> Yes.

[18:39] » Yep. >> So that hasn't gone up.

[18:42] » Nope. Same. >> It's been motioned and second. Any

[18:47] further discussion? >> Hearing none. I'll call for the

[18:49] question. Council Harjo. I councelor McCarthy

[18:53] » uh due to not having that information and not being there not seeing that

[18:57] again and I'm not against the benefits but I cannot vote for something that I

[19:00] do not have all the information that so I am going to vote nay on this

[19:03] councilman Sanders >> I run down to old business action item

[19:07] deliberation decision uh discussion sorry deliberation decision regarding

[19:11] grape vine 7 uh inc objection to water and wastewater edu's determination

[19:17] um I do believe we gave you the gallons that was requested a two-year run total

[19:26] if I do believe

[19:36] » mayor >> Councilman

[19:38] » Chris have a question on this and this come back to it have we ever gotten word

[19:42] from Keller what our actual EDU is based on per gallons

[19:47] how do we measure the EDU >> is it the 5,000

[19:50] » is 5,000 >> 5,000 gallons. Correct. Keller has

[19:55] confirmed that. >> Keller has

[19:57] council had an email that seemed that we weren't getting a specific number. So, I

[20:02] wanted to make sure that through this research we had an actual 5,000 was the

[20:06] number for you to use. >> Okay.

[20:07] » Thank you, Mayor. >> Hey, go ahead. It also states that on on

[20:12] the bills we receive from service

[20:16] it like in plain English defines that out. So, we also had uh had a meeting

[20:22] with Clearwater to ask him about our

[20:27] ordinance and uh section A and and as as Councilman Sanders said, look at section

[20:32] B and it wasn't. So Clearwater looked at it as well. And so Councilman Sanders

[20:38] was correct that if if you look at section I think it was B at the time. He

[20:44] was correct. But then section A, it doesn't it didn't say and or it says if

[20:49] it's not available like if you're not on the table for that section A portion. So

[20:55] um am I am I butchering Clearwater's synopsis of our ordinance that we have

[21:00] to clean that up? Um,

[21:05] I think there's a lot of interpretation to be done. Um, we do need to clean the

[21:09] ordinance up, I do believe, is the guidance we've been given. Um,

[21:15] however, I'm not an attorney. Um, >> you're pretending to be an awful lot.

[21:21] » I have lobbed several questions to our attorney regarding this ordinance and my

[21:26] concerns. Um, so, >> so what's our attorney's synopsis of uh,

[21:31] our ordinance? >> That was a Jeff delegation thing, but

[21:36] uh, you're talking about the ordinance that has to be first

[21:40] » equivalent units. Yeah,

[21:45] » go ahead T or let you. So the problem I guess there in lies the issue is the

[21:49] ordinance says this but if it's not on the table it's

[21:55] per gallon is like you guys were correct on that one. So the problem right now is

[21:59] they are in the table per our ordinance. So do you go with

[22:04] section A or section B and I'm probably butchering it's probably like C

[22:09] somewhere in there you know but um it is C.

[22:12] » Yeah. >> See so like I said I'm butchering it. So

[22:15] that there in lies our issue. Um the ordinance isn't clean. We're going to

[22:20] have to to re-engage that. Um Clear Water is re-engaging that currently uh

[22:25] through the the the water study, the edus, all that good stuff. So a little

[22:29] bit more food for thought on that one. So council, um I'm going to lob it back

[22:32] to you. And >> Mr. Mayor

[22:34] » Councilman Sanders, I would have loved to have been sitting

[22:38] in the room with Clearwater and an attorney because I find the language in

[22:43] section A to be very clear. It talks about using the table,

[22:49] but it also says that if a type of use is not

[22:53] specifically listed, the city staff will determine the appropriate edu

[22:57] calculation based upon comparable uses, engineering estimates, and other

[23:02] relevant information. in consultation with the user.

[23:07] » Mayor, >> go ahead T.

[23:09] » The key to that is the current proposed the current challenge that is before you

[23:15] is defined in the .edu table. So therefore, the rest of the subsections

[23:21] are mute, but there's no and or to a. And then the next is section C says that

[23:27] the person would request within 12 months of opening the account to

[23:31] challenge the usage. the said person isn't challenging it. They're appealing

[23:37] the edu table and the edus that were assessed to them, which is section A.

[23:43] So, there's a lot of

[23:47] Are you guys Are you tracking me? [laughter]

[23:50] » Yeah. So, and that I I will tell you at our

[23:55] last city council meeting, I leaned over to our attorney and said, "The way I

[24:00] read a the user and the person who's appealing is listed in the table.

[24:06] Therefore, the edu stay." And he said, "Read your sentence aloud, Tiffany." And

[24:10] I did not. I told him he could do it. Like, we're school children here.

[24:15] » And so, here we are. and I track what you're saying and then I go down to D

[24:22] because if you go through and start cherrypicking sentences, you can make it

[24:25] say whatever you want >> for sure.

[24:27] » So in D, any alteration to a business premise which the building permit is

[24:32] required the expansion of the property or the expansion or alteration of the

[24:36] operations shall trigger an automatic review of the account and recalculation

[24:41] of the number of EDUs. That didn't occur. Well, mayor did in the

[24:46] reassessment. Councilman Harjo,

[24:50] » understanding the language in D, the language in B also then states city of

[24:54] Mountain Home will audit the accounts of all commercial users after the first

[24:58] year of operation and approximately every 3 years after that,

[25:02] » which is the step that occurred here that alerted city staff to the point of

[25:08] understanding that there were fewer edus allocated than the spots that then

[25:12] correlated to the number of spots in that RV park.

[25:19] that that onus is on the city to go back and audit the accounts. This is a

[25:24] commercial use in a C3 zone and it may not have fallen in in the

[25:33] requesttor's favor. But in this case, the accuracy of the .edu count relies on

[25:41] the table. I disagree with section B when it says

[25:46] that every approximately every three years after that the average monthly

[25:50] consumption will be calculated to ensure that the consumption of water and the

[25:54] setu rate used for the monthly user fee is consistent.

[25:59] You go back to how much they use to make sure they're paying the number of edus

[26:03] consistent with that usage. Mayor >> Councilman Harjo,

[26:07] » I'll use the same example that I did two weeks ago in the sense that you have

[26:10] downtown businesses with a handsink and a toilet that pay a full .DU, but in

[26:16] what was proposed last last meeting was a quarter EDU blanket across what

[26:22] equates to doiciles year round in the RV park. And frankly, it doesn't matter who

[26:28] inhabits that particular spot. It's the fact that that spot is inhabited year

[26:32] round. We have no mechanism per our own uh

[26:38] resolution from 2022 that says hey over six months you're going to be you're

[26:43] going to be build for one .edu under 6 months of inhabitants under that spot

[26:47] you're going to be build at a quarter EDU for the property owner. We have no

[26:52] mechanism to track that thing but it is very clear by their by their own

[26:57] statements that that RV park is at capacity nearly year round.

[27:03] So again, the spot is occupied more than six months

[27:08] that by our own table is defined as 1.0 EDUs per unit.

[27:17] So there I I I think the council we have we need to clean our ordinance up.

[27:26] Um,

[27:29] so before you obviously you guys got to make the the favorable decision on on on

[27:34] the how you guys wanted to determine this one.

[27:38] You're moving forward.

[27:43] What was Jeff's synopsis on this? Uh, Paul.

[27:50] » Oh, I thought you said you lobed this to Jeff.

[27:52] » Oh, mayor. Councilman Harjo. I had a discussion with Jeff today on this very

[27:56] thing. He said the of the utmost importance is that we are equal and

[28:03] defensible

[28:07] without giving any guidance of what that means in plain language.

[28:15] You would think, right? It was very short for Jeff. Um love you Jeff. um

[28:22] taking that and applying it in this in this instance. What is equal is that

[28:27] we've been applying the same logic of the resolution since 2022 since then

[28:33] with zero deviation. That is the most equitable formulation

[28:38] that we apply to everybody. And in this case, now that it is being applied

[28:42] appropriately, understanding that there was some

[28:45] sticker shock to that value, um, it is still appropriate in the

[28:53] allocation of edus per our own resolution that predates any of us

[28:57] sitting up here except for Mayor Sykes and staff.

[29:04] » Mayor, Councilman McCarthy, >> clarification. Tiffany, I know you sent

[29:08] the email, but I want to make sure because councilwoman workled brought

[29:11] this up last meetings for Clearwater. They are going to be evaluating our edu

[29:16] table. Correct. >> Just for the record. Make sure,

[29:20] » mayor, >> yes, I uh reached out to Clearwater to

[29:24] make sure they will be assessing the table. Now, whether that is a full

[29:29] revamp, I didn't get that out of our Thursday. they would just use it as part

[29:33] of our connections and evaluate the process forward.

[29:38] So it it won't be just completely modified. Chris, am I correct by that?

[29:42] » No, that's exactly correct. They're going to evaluate it as part of the

[29:46] bigger process. They're not going to readress specifically that table and

[29:49] sign it.

[29:54] » Okay. Follow up. So with that being said with Keller, I had brought this up on

[29:58] our last city council meeting. We paid them quite a considerable amount of

[30:02] money for that declining balance sheet >> which takes into account our edus and

[30:07] everything. We reached out to Keller to you know

[30:11] justify with the calculation and everything. I know they're using this

[30:16] the discussion tonight is basing on this table, but I guess I'm trying to curious

[30:20] is one .edu we're saying is 5,000 gallons, which we count as a residential

[30:25] home, but we're saying a camper now uses >> same as a reserve says exactly.

[30:34] » And for clarification, sorry, mayor, for clarification, the declining balance

[30:38] tool was the was not tied to a specific RV use. It was designed to the overall

[30:46] Yes. Exactly. So >> to all of our usages.

[30:48] » Yeah. >> That's where I'm cur.

[30:51] » That's where I'm coming back with Keller is the professional that we paid

[30:56] for. They're looking at the edu, but we're not reamping. I I guess I would

[31:01] like to understand how we can have one camper is assembling equivalent to one

[31:07] residential home. Like I I don't see how we're

[31:12] » Go ahead T. >> My understanding is according to the edu

[31:16] table they're not one after a quantity they become halves.

[31:20] » Yes. >> If you look at the resolution so and and

[31:26] again the we had did a we did a workshop early in

[31:34] right when you took office. It was 24 >> and we spent hours with Keller in here

[31:43] because Council Member Brennan at that time was adamant the table is incorrect.

[31:47] We made no modifications to the table after those several discussions.

[31:51] Um, and Paul has quoted several times that on Super Bowl Sunday at halftime

[31:57] when everyone flushes their toilets, that's how your edu system and your

[32:02] capacity is based off of. And the same goes in the water system. So as you're

[32:10] if everyone uses all one time, the last thing you want is it all to be at max

[32:13] capacity if that helps at all. And I didn't I butchered your

[32:19] but let me pull the resolution, but I do believe Hank's calculation is off

[32:23] halves. >> These are the Yeah. So

[32:32] they're at a quarter >> or a quarter. Yep.

[32:34] » Less than two months is at a quarter. So I don't

[32:38] go get Hank's math, but I know he didn't go through and do every one of them at

[32:43] one edu. >> Hey, sorry here. I was going to ask

[32:48] » Tiffany since you brought that up. So I have the email from Hank that we where

[32:52] here's the breakdown of edus. Are you referring to something else with the

[32:55] quarter? So, a resolution with business edu table that's attached. That's what

[33:00] I'm referencing. Yes. And that's that's how Hank does his math is off of this

[33:04] resolution. >> I just wanted to make sure there wasn't

[33:07] some other email or something that no >> didn't make into the packet.

[33:11] » No.

[33:30] Hank's not here. >> No. Thought it was a water guy back

[33:35] there. [laughter] You don't want to answer that one for

[33:38] us? >> No.

[33:45] Mayor, >> Councilman Harjo,

[33:46] » with the understanding that we have forthcoming uh data and information from

[33:52] Clearwater uh which is encompassing aspects of of edu

[34:00] of the edu table. Um, I'd be willing to table this

[34:06] conversation further until we have that data again with the concept that every

[34:12] every application of our of our resolution and the .edu table now has

[34:17] been has been fair and equivalent to everybody. to make one exception at this

[34:22] juncture with a limited value of information I believe would

[34:28] open Pandora's box that every other water and wastewater consumer could walk

[34:34] through this door and ask for the same deviation or some level of deviation

[34:40] which makes no part of our table defensible at that point. Consistency is

[34:45] the defensible part. We've applied equally and fairly amongst all

[34:51] Hank and our in his capacity as building official has assessed that 196.5 edus is

[34:56] the appropriate amount per the table. Um I would like to stick with that table

[35:04] this um for review after such a point that we

[35:09] get any uh edu data back from clear water.

[35:15] Make that a motion. There's been a motion to table this until uh the

[35:18] information comes back from Clearwater. Do I have a second?

[35:23] » Second. >> It's been motioned and seconded. Any

[35:26] further discussion? >> Mr. Mayor,

[35:28] » Councilman Sanders.

[35:33] » The applications as it's been done since I understand 22 when this was passed may

[35:37] have been done equally, but I think there's been more than adequate

[35:40] discussion about whether or not that has been done fairly. I'll leave that as a

[35:45] open question pending additional data.

[35:50] » Sir, I'm concerned by the um approach taken where we've established

[35:57] the .edu yet when those get questioned, our

[36:02] current regulatory practices, they go back to the monthly usage.

[36:08] So, when we take a second look at this, I really hope the council will take the

[36:13] time and the staff will provide us the um information that can be used to help

[36:19] us be confident that when we're talking

[36:24] about an enterprise type program where folks are supposed to pay for what they

[36:28] use, no more, no less,

[36:32] with the notion that there has to be the ability to

[36:37] to expand those services for everyone and take care of the maintenance for the

[36:41] services of anyone. There's always going to be a little bit more that's going to

[36:45] be required to keep the machine running in order to serve everybody it serves.

[36:49] Um, but I'm not to say that this is an

[36:53] exception case, but to me it is a clear we need to take a look internally as

[36:58] well and make sure that we are fairly going back through each of these

[37:02] accounts and making sure we just don't have a bunch of these stacked up waiting

[37:05] to come through the door to make that challenge.

[37:09] Thank you, Council Sanders. There's been a motion

[37:14] and a second. Any further discussion? Hearing none, I'll call for the

[37:18] question. Councilman McCarthy. >> Hi.

[37:19] » Councilman Sanders. >> Hi.

[37:21] » Councilman Harjo. >> Hi.

[37:23] » Okay. Going to run down to new business items

[37:26] removed from consent agenda. Um new business number one. There were none.

[37:29] We're going to run down to action item number two. Deliberation uh decision

[37:32] regarding instruction lessons compensation to golf professional.

[37:37] Um coun Mr. Mayor.

[37:40] » Councilman Sanders. Um, council members, the reason, one of

[37:45] the r, one of the reasons for having this particular item come forward, there

[37:49] has been work ad nauseium on getting this golf course ready to operate under

[37:56] city direct city control.

[38:00] Part of that is going through the process of trying to hire the

[38:06] appropriate PGA class A golf pro to come in, someone who would be willing to take

[38:13] on the project of bringing this system online and making it efficient and

[38:17] functional. And we have been fortunate. There have been as many as eight

[38:22] different applications that were actually uh brought to the city.

[38:27] I want to say we had six of those that we interviewed.

[38:33] We had six scheduled, two backed outs. We were down to four.

[38:36] » Five. >> Five. Five. Um, I tell you all that to

[38:40] tell you this. And every one of those interviews, every

[38:44] one of them raised the question about the lessons. Every one of them also

[38:50] talked about how the lessons were part of the system they used to funnel new

[38:54] players into. coming in and becoming lifelong users of

[38:59] that service as well as getting those who had left enticed to come back.

[39:07] Doing some casual research on my own and checking around.

[39:12] If we keep with the city owning 100% of those lessons, we'll be the only one in

[39:17] the state and only one of one two in the entire Pacific Northwest. It is an

[39:22] accepted industry practice that folks who are providing PGA lessons are

[39:28] getting a portion of their of that lesson fee as their own income.

[39:35] So knowing that I wanted the council to be

[39:40] aware and I was going to ask for their consideration to provide us latitude in

[39:44] discussions. We're down to two candidates that frankly if we could land

[39:48] either one of them, it'd be a quantum leap forward. Quantum leap forward.

[39:55] Um, but both of them are going to be watching very carefully what the council

[40:01] does this evening around the question of whether or not it's even allowable to

[40:06] have the discussion about splitting the cost of those instructional lessons

[40:12] here. Councilman Arjo,

[40:17] » two questions for you, Councilman Sanders. Um,

[40:21] first being this being a standard practice and we've

[40:26] experienced this before under a under a contract position. It is not abnormal to

[40:32] have a split in in lessons. Um, that being said, do you have a do you have a

[40:39] split percentage in mind? Council what I will say council Harjo is

[40:45] that in the discussions we've had with the candidates that have applied most of

[40:49] them are talking about a 8020 split the lowest that was discussed was 6040

[40:55] and that was hope that was one that the person expressed that that they would be

[40:59] willing to start at that but their anticipation would be that would grow.

[41:04] » Mayor Councilman uh Harjo follow up uh 8020 split 80

[41:09] » to the instructor. >> Okay understood. Thank you.

[41:15] » And I'll also mention Mr. Marie, I'm sorry. You're good. Uh I'd also like to

[41:19] mention that um the collateral add-on to that is the

[41:25] lessons seeing we're going to be seeing more

[41:28] range ball purchases along that same line. you're most likely to see

[41:32] additional rounds being purchased, especially if those lessons lead to

[41:38] successful experiences that encourages that person to come back or if they buy

[41:43] a series of lessons, which is not uncommon. They usually offer a package

[41:46] of up to three or four lessons at one time. Um, so there is the potential for

[41:52] some additional revenue we might not otherwise see if the city were taking

[41:57] 100% because the and this is one of the things one of the candidates brought up

[42:02] that if he's looking at an 8020 split and he charges this is an example only

[42:07] $100 an hour the city would give him $80 of that he's going to take $10 of it and

[42:13] buy that big bucket of range balls. So he's incurring u that expense. So the

[42:20] practical split that winds up being 7030 as far as the pros concerned.

[42:25] » Mayor Council Harjo, >> on that note

[42:29] specifically, um one of the things that comes to mind, uh TJ's most recent

[42:35] contract had, uh a carve out for 30 range ball or three 30 large buckets of

[42:41] balls for a month. understanding the schema very much

[42:45] changes with with our um incoming golf pro whoever we shall pick. Um

[42:53] I'd like to see them afforded some similar manner in the sense of

[42:59] providing them the opportunity and the tools to to grow the game. um being city

[43:04] employee. Uh what that looks like, I'm unsure. In in

[43:09] the in the relationship between city and contractor fulfilling that role, 30

[43:14] bucks balls was an appropriate was an appropriate thing. Um here, if we're

[43:20] doing an 8020 split with the notion that the pro will buy the bucket of balls, um

[43:30] it almost diminishes the value of the 8020

[43:35] and making it a 7030 informally. Um, I'd be willing to to have some discussion

[43:41] about that aspect separate from this because clearly that's not our that's

[43:45] not our uh our discussion item tonight and up for

[43:50] deliberation. But uh I think that is a that is a thing to consider because that

[43:56] would that will add up if we have a pro giving significant amount of lessons.

[44:00] Um, and we want to be able to support our city staff, right? So,

[44:07] if you have a if you have a a formula that you'd like

[44:11] to to propose, I'm all ears for sure. >> Mr. Mayor, Councilman,

[44:16] » um, Councilman Harjo, I don't know so much right now that we need to know that

[44:21] proportion as much as we need to have the latitude to have that discussion

[44:24] candidates. Um,

[44:28] that thatformational exchange may look to

[44:33] some like negotiation but it is a matter of looking at the business aspects of it

[44:37] and seeing what they would be comfortable with um coming in here. Um

[44:42] so I don't have a particular percentage in mind or the mechanics of how best to

[44:46] handle the range balls for example. I think that's the discussion that becomes

[44:51] the product of whether or not we have permission to even be having that

[44:55] discussion in the first place, which is kind of what the item is is before us is

[44:59] can the folks who are doing the interviews

[45:03] have the latitude to have those discussions with these candidates or are

[45:08] we going to be relegated to saying no, the council's not going to budge on

[45:12] this. It's 100% to the city. I would ask the council to give us a

[45:17] leniency of no low no lower than the 8020, but it gives us um in in those I

[45:24] won't say negotiations, but obviously they're kind of negotiations. We could

[45:27] do the when we talking to said candidates, it gives us the availability

[45:31] to ask them what they're comfortable with. So,

[45:34] » mayor, >> Councilman McCarthy,

[45:37] » thank you, Councilman Sanders, for sounds like bringing this up. Um I just

[45:42] have to go back. We discussed this at length during our budget session this

[45:46] year and we came to the agreement that this year we were going to keep 100% and

[45:51] talk about this next year. And so I'll just state for me I am going to be

[45:55] sticking to that. And while I respect the

[46:01] perspective on it or the opinion I think for me it's one of those of I'm sticking

[46:06] to what we discussed at length during budget session. So

[46:09] » Mr. Mayor, >> Councilman Sanders,

[46:11] » I I respect the position my fellow councilman has taken. I'm also reminded

[46:17] of a quote attributed to um Dwight Eisenhower.

[46:22] He said, "Any plan that doesn't allow for change is a bad plan."

[46:27] And the information we're being confronted with during the interviews

[46:32] tells us that we're not that I hate to say it this way, but we're going to get

[46:36] what we pay for when it comes to this professional. And if we can't find a way

[46:41] to put a quality pro into this formula starting out, then we might as well get

[46:46] the RFP ready because if we don't have a pro that can move this forward,

[46:52] we're not going to get anywhere. That's just the simplicity of it.

[46:59] » Mayor Councilman uh Arjo. So the ver verbiage of our new business action item

[47:05] number two is deliberation to decision regarding instruction lesson

[47:08] compensation to the golf professional. But we're

[47:15] we're not proposing a particular but asking for the leniency in the in the

[47:20] hiring and recruiting process to dangle the carrot quote unquote.

[47:25] Is that that

[47:28] » if you have something to say? [laughter] >> Tiff has something. I guess

[47:33] » as a staff member I and the person who probably will help draft the offer of

[47:39] employment. The ask would be to what is the percentage we can offer said

[47:45] employee when we are ready to do a condition of offer.

[47:49] » We'd like to pick one today. >> Yeah.

[47:51] » Understood. Thank you.

[47:59] So, Mr. Mayor, Councilman Sanders, in order to try to meet our staff's needs,

[48:06] your staff's needs, um, and move this forward.

[48:13] Our two leading candidates both have very specific things they want to

[48:18] accomplish between one October and the start of the next season. Would

[48:25] the council be amanable to granting us that latitude to have

[48:31] theformational discussion during interviews

[48:37] and then we hold a special meeting to have the discussion

[48:42] amongst us what that split will be and what the offer going to the candidate

[48:46] might be. And if there's no split to be done, then that's what we go back to him

[48:51] with. My my ask is because we have interviews

[48:57] tomorrow and I don't want you guys to feel I'm rushing you by any means, but

[49:02] I'd like to say, "Hey, this is uh um what we've been allotted to if it's

[49:07] 8020, 7030, you [clears throat] know, um but just

[49:11] give us the the the best one, but let the the golf hiring committee be able to

[49:18] talk to the candidates, said candidates, and kind of negotiate that. So it might

[49:23] be a 60/40, it might be a 7030, but worst case scenario be an 8020 and not

[49:29] worse, you know what I mean? Just for Councilman Sanders, um, thanks for

[49:35] saying the hiring committee had that kind of latitude, but it's really going

[49:38] to be your call at the end of the day and then not the committees. So, um, but

[49:44] the mayor does make the point, and I think it's a fair one, that if we're

[49:48] going to have it at all, it is incumbent upon us to know that he

[49:54] is going to negotiate that or have that conversation

[49:58] to take it as close to the best the highest percentage to the city as

[50:01] possible. But I don't want to run the risk of losing

[50:07] either of these two candidates if we can actually get them either one to agree.

[50:12] Um I I it takes a lot to impress me and

[50:17] both these gentlemen tremendously impress me. In fact, I'm not sure why

[50:22] we're talking with why they're talking to us. Um

[50:28] » wish I could share that information with you and perhaps the mayor would or

[50:33] you know those could be a available through the administrative channels. But

[50:38] bottom line comes back to all the five we talked to. This was an

[50:43] issue. This was a core issue for them. Um

[50:50] when we set our course around 100%

[50:55] we made the best decision we could at the time. I think new information has

[50:59] arised that should cause us to take a second look and should cause us to keep

[51:04] our options open. Um, I think this is a critical piece

[51:09] that I think that's a key component to what we're trying to do and to not give

[51:14] it our best effort to secure the highest likelihood of success is going to come

[51:19] back to bite us in the end. Councilman Harjo,

[51:26] Councilman Sanders, I would agree largely in the sense that uh

[51:32] say we're to get a pro today and that pro is told

[51:36] city takes 100% of the proceeds of your lessons. There's no incentive for a pro

[51:42] to go out and grow the game. And that's that's the term that we've thrown around

[51:47] for the last nine months and change as we talk about the golf course and the

[51:52] formulation of the future. Um, if this is the tool that gets that gets

[51:59] the class A pro that that moves numbers on this course and changes the overall

[52:07] revenue and expense schema, um, I amable to the

[52:13] to a split percentage. I would ask one thing, you be decisive. Just pick it

[52:18] now. you'll that you go into those interviews knowing um what your what

[52:24] your limit is uh rather than a negotiation point. We then can calculate

[52:30] based on on expense and revenue upon that. Um there are some some comparables

[52:38] throughout the region uh that I've come to understand that maybe less in revenue

[52:45] is not is not really exceeding maybe the the 20

[52:50] 30,000 annually mark just based on the volume of like lessons versus time on

[52:56] the clock, right? Uh, I think what we're dealing with right here is a is probably

[53:03] in the grand scheme of things a fairly trivial amount of of revenue and expense

[53:09] shift. Um, not so trivial that it doesn't make the difference. But where

[53:15] it will make the difference is if the if the game of of golf grows within the

[53:19] community and we get more utilization at the course at the full price for

[53:25] uh uh for greens fees, trail fees, cart rental fees, um then we're already

[53:31] ahead. So I'm willing to entertain somebody's

[53:36] motion to matter. [clears throat]

[53:43] Okay.

[53:48] I move that the mayor and u the hiring committee that he has

[53:55] chosen be authorized to discuss with

[54:01] candidates.

[54:05] The ability to split fees for instruction

[54:11] not to exceed 80% to the pro, 20% to the city, and to

[54:18] the lowest ratio agreeable

[54:22] between the city and the candidates. >> Second. It's been motioned and seconded.

[54:28] Any further discussion? Hearing none, I'll call for the question. Council

[54:32] Harjo, >> I.

[54:33] » Councilman McCarthy, I. >> Councilman Sanders,

[54:36] » I. All right, we're going to run down to action item new uh number three, new

[54:40] business, oil DCC grant authorized mayor to sign contract.

[54:48] » Um it's a fantastic prospect for the community. I'm glad that OLDC uh

[54:54] uh sent the invitation over to apply for this and we're within the window. Um

[54:59] make a motion to approve uh signing the letter uh to OLDCC.

[55:06] before the due date.

[55:15] Been a motion. Do I have a second? Second.

[55:20] Motion and second. Any further discussion

[55:23] hearing? Now, I'll call Oh, Councilman McCarthy.

[55:25] » Sorry, just looking through your letter since we just got this.

[55:28] » The due date is September 24th. >> No, 30th. I have to sign it by the 30th

[55:34] is what I got from Alexa this morning and she got it

[55:40] this morning. Let me find it here. Mayor Councilman Harel,

[55:45] » the letter says, "Timely submissions will ensure we can issue an award to be

[55:49] counter signed no later than September 24th

[55:52] 6." >> Oh, yeah. Why did she tell me the 30th?

[55:58] » Curious. Mayor, you said the 30th, but it says on the other 24th for counter

[56:02] signs. >> Let me find it here. Sorry.

[56:09] » Yeah. Okay. Well, 24th 30th, >> Mr. Mayor, um looking at that paragraph,

[56:16] fellow members, this is their um

[56:21] they're asking us to make sure we have a timely submission

[56:27] so they can try to obligate funds with count and they have the counter side by

[56:31] 24th. But to make the point, they want to obligate the funding available before

[56:35] it expires at the end of the fiscal year. So 24 is the target date,

[56:41] but they would have technically up until midnight on the 30th to obligate those

[56:47] funds. It was just their big concern to get these fiscal year funds obligated.

[56:52] » Mayor, >> Councilman McCarthy,

[56:54] » clarification. I thought during budget we had discussed that we were already

[56:57] applying for that. We were waiting to hear for if we were awarded in September

[57:01] and October. Is this a different one, Chris?

[57:03] » Oh, same one. Um, they allow you to, so you win the, how do I say this? They

[57:10] allow you the opportunity. You can apply all you want, but then

[57:15] what happens the next go around, then they allow you the opportunity to put in

[57:18] a grant or an application. Correct me if I'm wrong. And then once you put in the

[57:23] application, they do all their the background, they do all their stuff,

[57:25] then they'll say, "Hey, congratulations." And then hence um this

[57:30] stuff. So it's always one of those you know, congratulations. You're

[57:35] allowed to just apply for it now. It's weird.

[57:38] » It's really weird. >> Did I Did I Did I butcher that?

[57:40] » You know, well, I mean, it's a complicated process. So, anybody can

[57:44] apply, >> and then which is what we we brought

[57:48] forward. We'd like to apply. Anybody can apply. But then at a certain point,

[57:51] which this point was in September, they said, "Okay, all of you that applied,

[57:56] now you can actually submit an application." So that's when we started

[58:00] putting together the package that has the lagoon design, has

[58:05] all the the um environmental and all that kind of stuff. That's the second

[58:10] step. That's what >> no different than the tap program. It

[58:13] » it's very similar. Yeah. >> Just want to make sure. I know we had

[58:15] discussed that during budget. So I wanted to make sure. Did we apply or did

[58:19] we submit >> this? Yes, this is the application.

[58:24] » Okay. >> All right. Any further discussion?

[58:27] Hearing none, I'll call for the question. Council Sanders.

[58:29] » Hi. >> Council McCarthy.

[58:30] » Hi. >> Council Harjo.

[58:31] » Hi. >> All right. We're going to run down to

[58:33] final comments. I got a couple. So, the the big potholes down in Legacy will be

[58:38] done Thursday. Um they uh scheduled that with the asphalt plant. So, they'll get

[58:44] the asphalt. Um APHAD. Phenomenal job. All the the APAD uh people that put that

[58:49] together, phenomenal. Killed it. Um, and then, uh,

[58:56] Alexa, our grant administrator, and myself and,

[58:59] uh, Tiffany went to the Land of Water Conservation

[59:04] Foundation today, and Alexa did a fantastic job in doing a presentation

[59:08] for a another grant. And then the last I have on the F-111 in Carmela Park. We've

[59:14] been waiting and waiting and waiting and waiting.

[59:16] So, I had uh Pawns reach out and I called him back and he was like, "I'm so

[59:21] sorry." And this is um he had a his lead guy have a heart attack and then he had

[59:28] a guy uh and then he has like another I think six more jets out there. He said,

[59:33] "I'm going to try to get a certain section of these jets done and then in

[59:38] two weeks if the weather's still good, I'll come do the F-111." worst case

[59:42] scenario because he had a guy quit and the other guy had a heart attack. He'll

[59:46] come in springtime to finalize the F11. Just wanted to make sure everyone knew

[59:50] about the F11 because I've had countless citizens asking me about it because we

[59:54] budgeted a long time ago and we just been waiting on um him to come back from

[59:58] DC and so then he's got a ton of jets out at the Air Force base. So F11

[1:00:05] hopefully, fingers crossed, done in two weeks or or started in two weeks. Worst

[1:00:09] case scenario, uh, he said springtime. Did I butcher that, Tiff? Okay.

[1:00:15] All right. Anything else, council? Mayor, Councilman McCarthy,

[1:00:20] » where are we at with a follow-up meeting with ITD? I think we've had a

[1:00:25] considerable outreach from the public regarding some

[1:00:29] intersections, which Thank you, Phoenix. Um,

[1:00:34] yeah, I'm curious where we're at with it. I I don't know where do you have

[1:00:38] when was the last time you talked to uh Vincent?

[1:00:41] » We we the last interaction we had was we sent an email to Vince with available

[1:00:46] dates and we have not heard back from them yet.

[1:00:50] » Go ahead.

[1:00:58] » I did not see that email so I wasn't included in it.

[1:01:02] » So we'll get you an answer tomorrow. >> We'll get it. He's he's been

[1:01:05] interactive. I'm not trying to throw him under the bus. We've just been going

[1:01:07] back and forth. Yeah. >> When was that email sent, Chris?

[1:01:11] » Last email I got from him was my email. I did not have that open.

[1:01:17] Sorry.

[1:01:23] It was less than that. I believe.

[1:01:28] And then another thing I want the the citizens to know that we have that on

[1:01:32] our master transportation plan that has get um it's working with ITD um

[1:01:39] their road. We have obviously one go out permits get get okays get funding for

[1:01:43] it. um the 18th Street light over uh when we redid 18th Street, I think that

[1:01:50] light was around, and don't quote me on it, but I think it was around $400,000.

[1:01:54] And then we ended up um ascertaining like a LTE um grant for that. Um that

[1:02:01] well, what we did is we re reached out to Eltech say, "Hey, do you have any

[1:02:04] funding?" Because we were about $800,000 short to finish uh 18th Street over by

[1:02:09] the junior high. Um, at the time we reached out to Deltech, they said, "Hey,

[1:02:12] we have I think it was like $750,000 left in our that we can award you guys."

[1:02:18] And so, um, if members sered, we were able to

[1:02:23] apply for it and we found, you know, obviously we didn't find, but we had

[1:02:26] $50,000 in our street department. And so, um, that one is no different. We'll

[1:02:30] we'll we'll still do the our due diligence and see if uh and we'll

[1:02:33] that'll be our it's one of our number one priorities uh for for LT or not for

[1:02:38] LTE but for ITD because that has been I work over or I don't work over there.

[1:02:44] My wife works over there. I have an office over there. I I I've seen I've

[1:02:49] seen exactly where you're coming from. So let us let us do this. We're going to

[1:02:53] find out um when we're going to meet with ITD anyways and then we'll reach

[1:02:58] out if you can stay here. Um I'll get your your number and your email and then

[1:03:03] we'll uh I'll reach out to you tomorrow once we get something more, you know,

[1:03:07] kind of more clarified. >> Uh Councilman uh McCarthy Chris, do you

[1:03:12] have >> I'm not finding it. It was sent by

[1:03:14] Tiffany and I'm trying to figure out what

[1:03:16] » So I spoke with IT and it sounds like there's some miscommunication going on

[1:03:21] between the city, >> okay,

[1:03:23] » and it and it's frustrating to me because

[1:03:27] » this needs to be addressed. We need to bring them back, not Vince Tranoli. We

[1:03:32] need to bring back the design team, which is Aaron Vargas, all of them here

[1:03:37] because they are the ones that are going to be giving us the approval when it

[1:03:40] comes to these. Chris, not to put you under the fire, but I'm sure you

[1:03:44] remember with our DFAC meeting last year, we had Wendy How here and we

[1:03:48] specifically discussed that Airbase Road and Hasuit intersection.

[1:03:52] She flat out said we would have to have an IDAP waiver because it is so close.

[1:03:59] I haven't seen anything with any progress on that, but we have all these

[1:04:04] intersections here. We need it, not Vince Trimolley, the real people that

[1:04:08] can make these decisions. And quite frankly, I'm frustrated that this seems

[1:04:12] to just be getting kicked down the road. So, I implore my fellow council members

[1:04:18] to it's time to put some feet to the fire and get another meeting with ITD

[1:04:23] going so that we can truly get it going. It's been over a year since the last

[1:04:26] IPAC meeting when we had them. Nothing has been done. Just talks of it's our

[1:04:31] number one priority. It's in the master transportation plan and quite frankly,

[1:04:35] I'm done with it. So, I'm asking now, let's get ITD here. Don't know why the

[1:04:40] communication mess up is not going to sit here and throw Vince under. I'm not

[1:04:44] going to sit in here and throw anyone on city staff. This needs to be done. We

[1:04:48] cannot do these things without IT ITD. It'd be like taking dirt and throwing it

[1:04:53] on someone else's property without their permission and thinking it's okay. We

[1:04:58] need ITD. We have the TAP program that we have that that's been part of. Chris,

[1:05:04] you remember we have to have it. So, I would like to see them. They said

[1:05:09] they're very open at the end of October.

[1:05:14] That's all I have. Thanks. Yep. All right. Mayor, Councilman Harjo,

[1:05:23] for mayor and staff, kind of building on that conversation, um

[1:05:28] would it be wise of us to engage Ardura, the

[1:05:34] engineer behind the master transportation plan in some of this

[1:05:36] conversation? >> Yeah,

[1:05:46] just a question. Sure. >> That's an easy ask.

[1:05:51] » Also, mayor. >> Yes, sir.

[1:05:53] » Um, Aphad was a was a big deal for this

[1:05:58] community this year. Um, we had dozens and dozens of volunteers. Um, hard to

[1:06:04] name them all, so I won't make an attempt to, but uh, this year was very

[1:06:09] special in the in the 250th year. was also very near um a significant

[1:06:14] milestone birth date of uh the US Air Force. So I think uh I think uh big

[1:06:20] thank you to to Aphad and the crew there is is

[1:06:24] um is very due. They they put a lot of work in to to make sure this year was

[1:06:29] very successful and it um it was very well attended in that way. Uh also um

[1:06:34] wanted to say thanks to the uh Daughters of the American Resolution. They did a

[1:06:38] they did a really cool presentation at the library the other day. Um

[1:06:43] um mayor's proclamation was read there. Uh they engaged with a lot of kids. It

[1:06:48] was timed great. Shasta, thank you. Um a bunch of kids getting out of school

[1:06:53] right at that moment and they were like very captured by that moment. um with

[1:06:58] our uh you know with our actors uh playing George Washington and and his

[1:07:03] wife. It was it was actually it was really entertaining to watch the kids

[1:07:06] engage with them. Um but thank you for putting that kind of stuff on Cheston. I

[1:07:11] really appreciate it. And then lastly um my folks are here want to say hi.

[1:07:15] They're from in from

[1:07:19] putting up with a this is a short show tonight so [laughter]

[1:07:23] » it's rare.

[1:07:30] I represent that [laughter] >> might happen once in a while.

[1:07:35] » Alrighty. Uh meeting a journ and and welcome back to Mountain Home.

[1:07:44] I carry group.

City Council Regular Meeting - Tuesday, September 22, 2026 at 5:00 PM

Transcript