[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.