03.08.22 Council Minutes

THE STATE OF UTAH
COUNTY OF SEVIER
CITY OF RICHFIELD

At the City Council
In and For Said City
March 8, 2022

Minutes of the Richfield City Council meeting held on Tuesday, March 8, 2022,
at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Richfield City office building located at 75 East Center, Richfield, Utah. Mayor Bryan L. Burrows presiding.

  1. OPENING REMARKS
  2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
  3. ROLL CALL
  4. MINUTES
  5. TOK SUBDIVISION APPROVED
  6. PURCHASE OF NETTING FOR GOLF COURSE APPROVED
  7. PURCHASE OF MOWERS FOR THE GOLF COURSE APPROVED
  8. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
  9. PUBLIC HEARING FOR REZONE – PEARSON PROPERTY
  10. AGREEMENT WITH CSS FOR 100 EAST APPROVED
  11. 600 NORTH DRAINAGE PROJECT AWARDED
  12. ORDINANCE 2022-8 ADOPTED
  13. ORDINANCE 2022-10 ADOPTED
  14. ORDINANCE 2022-12 REZONE
  15. ORDINANCE 2022-13 ADOPTED
  16. CDBG FUNDS DISCUSSED
  17. SKATE PARK IMPROVEMENTS
  18. DESIGN OF NEW BUILDING FOR POOL APPROVED
  19. OTHER BUSINESS
  20. MEETING ADJOURNED
  21. OPENING REMARKS were offered by Councilmember Gleave.
  22. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Mayor Burrows.
  23. ROLL CALL. Present: Mayor Burrows, Todd Gleave, Kip Hansen, Elaine Street, Tanner Thompson, Michele Jolley, Tyson Hansen, Brayden Gardner.
  24. MINUTES APPROVED. The Council reviewed the minutes of the meeting held on February 22, 2022. Motion: Approve the minutes of the meeting held on February 22, 2022, Action: Approved, Moved by Elaine Street, Seconded by Tanner Thompson. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 5). Yes: Brayden Gardner, Elaine Street, Kip Hansen, Tanner Thompson, Todd Gleave.
  25. TOK SUBDIVISION APPROVED. Mayor Burrows stated that this subdivision is being proposed for the construction of 4 townhomes just west of the Poulson Estate subdivision. Kendrick Thomas stated that as development occurs, they will subdivide other phases of the project. Councilmember Gleave wanted to clarify that this is to the north of KFC. Mr. Thomas stated that they are just subdividing enough to develop 4 units.

He built a triplex on 600 South and 200 West which he sold and he will be selling these also. Councilmember Gleave noted that this has been discussed and the Council has changed the zoning on the property to accommodate this type of development so he did not see any reason why we should not approve this. Motion: Approve the subdivision for TOK Developments, Action: Approved, Moved by Todd Gleave, Seconded by Elaine Street. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 5). Yes: Brayden Gardner, Elaine Street, Kip Hansen, Tanner Thompson, Todd Gleave.

  1. PURCHASE OF NETTING FOR GOLF COURSE APPROVED. Todd Mullen stated that the storm we had in November tore down the netting that we have had for 20+ years and when they tried to put it back up, it just fell apart. He had 3 quotes, with Judge Netting giving the best price. They have been down to measure. We have 2 private individuals that will help pay for this with a third each.

The poles have been increased in height and it will be much safer for golfers that are playing while others are on the driving range. Councilmember Hansen noticed that they made a recommendation to put a baseboard feature in addition to the netting and he wondered if we are going to do that in-house on our own. Mr. Mullen stated that we can do this in-house and it will save costs.

The 2 donors will pay $24,000 and Mr. Mullen stated that the cost to the City will be slightly more because we have had to add some additional footage. Councilmember Gleave asked if we have the money to do this. Mayor Burrows stated that we have some good people in this community and he knows that the golf course means a lot to a lot of people. When they see improvements, they are willing to step up and that says a lot for the people who live here.

Motion: Approve the purchase and installation of new netting for the driving range at the golf course, Action: Approved, Moved by Kip Hansen, Seconded by Elaine Street. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 5). Yes: Brayden Gardner, Elaine Street, Kip Hansen, Tanner Thompson, Todd Gleave.

  1. PURCHASE OF MOWERS FOR THE GOLF COURSE APPROVED. Mr. Mullen reported that he was unable to get a quote from Toro because they will not have one until 2023. John Deere gave us some prices, but we could not get mowers from them until August. We are in desperate need of another rough mower. RMT is the company we are looking at leasing from. A rough mower through them would be $75,000 and we added a greens mower because they will give us a deal if we get both. It would be better for us to get a loan and pay it off in 5 years than to lease the equipment from them. It costs more to lease than to purchase. The loan would have a payment of $2,000 a year. Mr. Mullen stated that the rough mower is breaking down every time it is used.

Councilmember Street stated that her husband used to sell equipment and he looked at the quotes and he agrees that the Jacobsen mowers are the best. Mr. Hansen stated that the golf carts were just paid off so we have those funds we can use to pay on this lease. Motion: Approve the purchase of mowers for the golf course from RMT, Action: Approved the purchase of equipment for the golf course with RMT, Moved by Elaine Street, Seconded by Kip Hansen. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 5). Yes: Brayden Gardner, Elaine Street, Kip Hansen, Tanner Thompson, Todd Gleave.

  1. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT. Kendrick Thomas reported on the Planning Commission held on March 2, 2022. They discussed residential setbacks in the general plan portion of the meeting and they are looking at changing the front setback from 30 feet to 25 feet. They also discussed the RM-24 zone with the map that will be going into the general plan. The Planning Commission would like to make a few adjustments to the areas the planner proposed for the RM-24 zone. They are proposing that there be a 1,000 square feet separation between RM-24 developments so that they cannot be congregated and clustered. They feel that they are close to being ready to adopt the general plan update. They just have a few things for the planner to revise.

The Planning Commission held a public hearing on allowing a detached accessory dwelling unit in the RR-1 and RR-5 zones. They thought this would be okay as long as some size restrictions were required and it would only be in the zones of larger lots.

Another hearing was held on the Pearson United development. They are requesting a rezone to RM-24 and the north and the south most building would be zoned CS to allow some flexibility in how they use this building, like short-term rentals or long-term rentals. What they are requesting complies with the mixed-use ordinance, so that is the reason for the different zoning. They would use this building in connection with their hotel.

They had a public hearing to discuss a proposal to increase the height in RM-11 and RM-24 zones from 35 feet to 42 feet. This will not be a change just a clarification on how it will be measured.

They approved a short-term rental request located in one of the townhouses on North Plaza Drive. Patriot Storage elevations for their storage facilities were approved. Conditional use for a pet store on Main Street was approved. There will not be dogs and cats housed and sold there.

Pearson United’s concept plan was reviewed and approved. Les Schwab submitted plans for a business on the corner of 1300 South and Main Street just south of the new car wash. Jared Jensen wanted approval to put an RV park on 100 East. He did not have any site designs so he was asked to have those prepared before approval was given.

Councilmember Gardner asked about the Pearson development and what the Planning Commission recommended. They are recommending that the north be approved as RM-24 and the south as commercial shopping.

  1. PUBLIC HEARING FOR REZONE – PEARSON PROPERTY. Mayor Burrows opened a public hearing at 5:33 p.m. to receive comments on a request to rezone property on the east side of 100 West between 500 South and 600 South to RM-24 (high-density multi-family residential) on the north and CS (commercial shopping) zone on the south. Larry Pearson stated that they want to be able to allow extended stays for professionals who come to work here. Councilmember Hansen asked if they would anticipate anyone staying more than 90 days, citing the City’s new extended-stay ordinance. Mr. Pearson did not foresee anyone staying longer than 90 days at this time. Councilmember Thompson asked when they anticipate starting construction. They indicated that they would like to start by May, if possible. They also noted that they have asked the City to consider the height of the buildings. As stated by the Planning Commission, it is a point of clarification. Mayor Burrows closed the hearing at 5:40 pm.
  2. AGREEMENT WITH CSS FOR 100 EAST APPROVED. Trent Brown discussed the development of 100 East from 1100 South to 1300 South. He explained how the project would work and what the City would be responsible for. He indicated that he, Mayor Burrows, and Ms. Jolley met with Larsens about the improvements along their property. Mayor Burrows stated that we are going to have some ongoing conversation about Larsens, but they do not have to participate in any of it. We would have some things put in place for any future development they may have and they said that they were going to see what they could do. We need to be prepared to pay for the whole thing if we are going to see this project completed. Dan Farley from Patriot Storage was not planning on this, but he is willing to step up because he wants to see it completed as well.

Mayor Burrows stated that there are a couple of other items discussed. We would want to stub the sewer and the water on the 1300 South intersection so that we do not have to dig up that intersection.

Councilmember Hansen asked about Larsens connecting to the sewer. We did have the line stubbed out so that the road would not have to be dug up. We are waiting for costs from CSS. Larsens connecting to that would be separate from the road project.

Councilmember Gleave wanted to clarify that the City is looking at paying $160,000 for this project.

Motion: Approve an agreement with CSS Composites and Patriot Storage for the development of 100 East, Action: Approved, Moved by Kip Hansen, Seconded by Elaine Street. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 5). Yes: Brayden Gardner, Elaine Street, Kip Hansen, Tanner Thompson, Todd Gleave.

  1. 600 NORTH DRAINAGE PROJECT AWARDED. Micklane Farmer discussed the bid for the 600 North drainage project. Mr. Farmer noted we had 3 bids. Baldauf Excavating gave a bid of $34,237.57. A & D Jensen gave a bid of $35,778. KB Construction gave a bid of $39,431.50. Councilmember Gardner asked if the prices are locked in and Mr. Farmer indicated they were. Motion: Award the contract on the 600 North Drainage project to Baldauf Excavation with a bid of $34,237.57, Action: Approved, Moved by Tanner Thompson, Seconded by Brayden Gardner. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 5). Yes: Brayden Gardner, Elaine Street, Kip Hansen, Tanner Thompson, Todd Gleave.
  2. ORDINANCE 2022-8 ADOPTED. The Council reviewed the ordinance to rezone the property at 2115 South Cove View Road from R1-10 (single-family) to RM-11(multi-family). Councilmember Hansen stated that we had already come to a consensus on this and it made sense. Motion: Approve Ordinance 2022-8 rezoning the property located at 2115 South Cove View Road to RM-11, Action: Adopted. Moved by Kip Hansen, Seconded by Elaine Street. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 5). Yes: Brayden Gardner, Elaine Street, Kip Hansen, Tanner Thompson, Todd Gleave.
  3. ORDINANCE 2022-10 ADOPTED. The Council reviewed the ordinance to amend the short-term rentals and set a limit for the number in each zone. Councilmember Gleave asked Mr. Thomas if we are going to count the rentals that are already in play as part of the 5% in each zone. Mr. Thomas stated that those are already in play and would count toward the 5%. Councilmember Thompson asked if we know what percent of the zones are filled. Mr. Thomas stated that none of the zones are very full yet. Mr. Thomas stated that the 3 zones roughly have the same number of residential units which would allow approximately 45 short-term rentals in each zone. Councilmember Hansen stated that he liked the wording that this is not a transferrable right.

The Planning Commission felt that they needed to put some kind of restriction on this based on what they learned from other communities. This could be looked at again if we get close to the cap.

Councilmember Gardner asked about the restriction that short-term rentals could only be allowed on properties having a single-family home on its own parcel and if the intent is to eliminate condos. Further, how is this going to conflict with what Pearsons are doing? Mr. Thomas stated that because it is in a CS zone with a conditional use of a mixed-use. Councilmember Gardner would agree with the restriction on condos, but he has some concerns about apartments because they are typically owned by one owner. He felt that this should be changed because the apartment complex owner should manage any conflicts so they would not come to the City.

Mr. Thomas felt that this was a good point and he is not aware of any requests from apartment owners, so it is something they could easily address and research. He would just like to get this in place and then it could be modified. Councilmember Hansen would like to try with what we have and then when that issue comes up, that would be a good time of maybe amending that. We need to start somewhere.

Motion: Adopt Ordinance 2022-10 amending short-term rentals and setting a limit for the number in each zone, Action: Adopted, Moved by Kip Hansen, Seconded by Todd Gleave. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 5). Yes: Brayden Gardner, Elaine Street, Kip Hansen, Tanner Thompson, Todd Gleave.

  1. ORDINANCE 2022-12 REZONE. The Council reviewed the ordinance that would rezone the property along Airport Road and south of 1800 South from CG, CS, and R-10 to R1-6 single-family residential, 6,000 square foot lots with the condition that the property owner/developer grant the City an avigation easement. Mayor Burrows stated that this is Mike Jorgensen’s property/subdivision. Motion: Adopt Ordinance 2022-12 rezoning the property along Airport Road and south of 1800 South from CG, CS, and R-10 to R1-6 single-family residential, 6,000 square foot lots with the condition that the property owner/developer grant the City an avigation easement, Action: Adopted, Moved by Tanner Thompson, Seconded by Elaine Street. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 5). Yes: Brayden Gardner, Elaine Street, Kip Hansen, Tanner Thompson, Todd Gleave.
  2. ORDINANCE 2022-13 ADOPTED. The Council reviewed an ordinance to rezone the property on Centennial Plaza on North Main from CG to RM-24 (high-density multi-family residential). Mayor Burrows stated that there was some concern about what liability the City might have and we checked with our attorney and there is not an issue. Councilmember Gleave asked Mr. Thomas if the new zoning map extends the high-density into this area. Mr. Thomas stated that the Planning Commission had identified this area as future high-density housing. The Planning Commission recommends this change. Motion: Adopt Ordinance 2022-13 rezoning the property on Centennial Plaza on North Main from CG to RM-24 (high-density multi-family residential), Action: Adopted, Moved by Brayden Gardner, Seconded by Tanner Thompson. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 5). Yes: Brayden Gardner, Elaine Street, Kip Hansen, Tanner Thompson, Todd Gleave.
  3. CDBG FUNDS DISCUSSED. Shay Morrison discussed funding from CDBG for the Senior Citizens’ remodel project. Mr. Morrison stated that the City’s application was 5 out of the top projects. Six County has $690,000 to fund projects. After the first four projects were funded, Richfield has enough to partially fund their request. The City’s cost for the project was $418,000. We requested $250,000 from CDBG and offered $168,000 as a match. The funding available from CDBG is $115,350. It was discussed that the City could not change the scope of the project if it accepts these funds. That means if the cost of the project is more than the $418,000, we would have to cover those costs because we cannot alter the project for what was presented to CDBG. If we took the money and did not go forward with the project, we would be required to give the funding back to CDBG. The downfall of this is that it may not be spent in our region.

Mayor Burrows would suggest to the Council that we not take the funds because he thinks that the increased cost of the $418,000 is going to be significantly more. He felt that with some creativity we could do the things that need to do the things in the building and do the parking lot at a later date. Hopefully, the costs will come down on the outside items.

Councilmember Hansen stated that it would be the best option to pass these funds down to someone else.

Councilmember Thompson asked what would be our plan B. We will need to look at what needed to be done. Mayor Burrows stated that there is the possibility that some of the capital projects funds could be moved around. Councilmember Hansen stated that the inside of the building could even be broken down into phases as well.

  1. SKATE PARK IMPROVEMENTS. Brady Edwards to discuss the issues with the aging skate park. It is almost beyond repair and a liability issue. He would like the Council to decide and give us a direction. He felt that we have 2 reasonable options. We need to plan and develop this project in phases. Option one would be to use the current funds available, $150,000, and install a pro-series skate park that would fit on the current cement slab at the Lion’s Park which would be phase I. Then we would start budgeting for phase II which would be the cement skate park. He noted that Kanab installed their cement facility in 2015 for $115,000. That same park today would cost $350,000 to construct. So, we would need to budget $350,000 to $450,000 to complete phase II. Phase III would be a bicycle playground which is just another portion of that and would cost approximately $150,000. Option 2 we could do nothing and continue to budget and do nothing and build our dream park 4, 5, 6 years and we will have nothing on the ground and at that point, we would be looking at a cost of about 1 million dollars.

Councilmember Thompson felt that if we get the funding for the pump track that Mr. DeMille has planned at Centennial Park it would be a disconnect and he would like to have this all at the Centennial Park. Would it be possible to put down a new pad and move this equipment there?

Mr. Edwards explained that it is portable and we could move it. Everyone is looking to put in a second system so it would not be the kiss of death to have both. Councilmember Hansen asked outside of vandalism what the projected life is on this equipment. Mr. Edwards stated that this actually has a 20-year warranty.

Mr. Edwards recommended that we go with option 1 because it has been some time since we have done anything to this. We would be able to put this down and have the kids skating on it this summer. Motion: Approve option one which would be to purchase new skate park equipment and put a plan in place for phase II and phase III, Action: Approved, Moved by Kip Hansen, Seconded by Todd Gleave. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 5). Yes: Brayden Gardner, Elaine Street, Kip Hansen, Tanner Thompson, Todd Gleave.

  1. DESIGN OF NEW BUILDING FOR POOL TABLED. Mayor Burrows stated that he wanted to give a little history on this and may clear up some misconceptions. There is a saying he was told a long time ago, “Don’t assume that you know what you don’t know.” There has been a lot of effort for the past 12 years put into trying to come up with a pool or an aquatics center. About 8 years ago, we had come to a consensus for an outdoor facility and an indoor facility.

Then things changed and went in a different direction. There was a lot of effort put in by a former mayor who put a lot of time in and worked really hard to try and make something work.

About 8 months ago he was asked by the Council to find a solution to fix the pool. It has a leaky roof, the façade is falling off, we have water leaking between the brick and the stucco, we have black mold, etc.

They came up with a plan and he wanted everyone to understand that this is not a substitute for a recreation center. This is to maintain and take care of what we have. That building is falling apart. He had not been there for a few years and he went up and looked around and he was embarrassed at the shape of that facility; that it has gotten to the point that it has gotten to. This plan and this conversation that we have been having have been for nothing more than to try to maintain what we own. We are not trying to substitute it for something it is not. We are not trying to turn it into something it isn’t. We are just trying to maintain what we have.

We have a company that has done most of the work on that facility. They have been in that pool and they said that the pool is sound. It is solid. Our problem is everything around the pool. Councilmember Hansen noted that it was in such good shape that we got an extended warranty on the plaster job. That is how confident they were on the soundness of it.

We have done a lot of extensive repairs up there in the last year. We put in new sand filters, we re-plastered the pool, we put in a new inlet, we put in some ventilation equipment, we put in new lockers. The Council committed a year, year and a half ago, to try to keep the pool we have in shape until whatever the future brings.

He has yet to receive any comments and he has put himself out there for those comments, for that input, and those suggestions. Then we went to the next phase where people wanted more. That’s great, he is all for more if it is our realm of what we can afford. So, we started talking about doing something outside and there has been a lot of ideas tossed around and there are a lot of options out there. Unfortunately, we have another issue and it did not just pop up, but it kind of did because if we are going to dig a hole up there and put in an outdoor pool or an outdoor feature, we have an issue with our spring. Before we can do anything major up there, we have to figure out what to do with that spring.

What this has turned into now is a pool project to replace what we have and a spring project. Mayor Burrows stated that he is not a swimmer, but he loves the pool and he loves what it is for. He would like to see some changes up there. He thinks there is still a bad persona out there as to what our pool is. He knows that Janet and George Siggins have tried to make it fun and tried to make it welcoming, but there is still the perception out there that it is not. His vision was to get a new building on it. Let’s do something to make it nice and make it a little higher so that we can get some seating in there for the swim team and make it a little bigger so we can have a party room, concessions, better dressing rooms, and a better facility to come into and out of.

It is not going to give us everything that we want. He stated that we have a limited budget. We are hoping to go to CIB and try to get some help that way and maybe get some grant money that we do not have to pay back. We have been putting money away for the last 6 or 7 years.

The proposal is to go back 2 feet from the pool all the way around and cut everything away and tear everything down. It will have all new concrete and the plan would put a new building over the top of the pool that is wider, longer with upstairs training facilities, some additional seating, and better storage.

Morgan Shaver asked if the Council was all in favor of this. Mayor Burrows stated that it is something we have been talking about. A final decision has not been made. Let’s come to a consensus on something, but let’s be realistic about what we are dealing with. His own opinion is that he wants to create something inclusive for everyone. He does not want to create something that 90% of the mom’s in this town cannot afford to take their 3 or 4 kids there at $5 o $6 each. We live in an area where we have a median income of $40,000+, so if we get too out there most people will not be able to afford to use it.

Councilmember Thompson asked if this is the same 2-million-dollar project we talked about last time or is it different. Mayor Burrows stated that it is somewhat different. There are going to have to be some changes to the scope of this and we may have to go at it from a different direction.

Ryan Savage discussed the changes that had been made since the last discussion. With the additional height, the quote is now 3.7 million dollars. Some bids are time-sensitive.

Councilmember Thompson wondered if the school has any interest in helping with the seating. Mr. Edwards has not happened that he is aware of. In the past, the school district was approached and they did not have the money to participate. He discussed features we could have in an outdoor facility and suggested that the Council come up with an amount and then staff could put together some options that would cost that amount.

Councilmember Hansen stated that he is also a Sevier School District employee. He thinks that we should revisit this with the School District. He also has another really unique perspective from serving on another city council who to this day still operates a joint venture between the school district and the municipality. Iron County Schools and Cedar City Corporation, their aquatics center is a joint venture. He served on that committee when they tore down the old pool and agreed to build a new one. It is more than just competitive swimming. Some of the lowest peak use times at the pool are right in the middle of the day when the kids are in school. In Cedar City, they actually use this as part of their key curriculum. The schools from Parowan bus kids to Cedar City. They teach swimming lessons as part of high school PE class. They also offer classes for lifeguard certification through the school, so it is an educational thing. That has been a win, win for everyone. He has seen this work in other places as well. Is it perfect? Is it a 50/50 deal? Who cares. It may not be fully equitable, but it is fair and benefits everyone. Just because they said “no” does not mean that we cannot come back with a reasonable proposal. We are not going to ask them to go 50%, but they do have a dog in the fight and they should have some skin in the game.

Mr. Edward is putting together a spreadsheet that has information about the interlocal agreement the City has with the School District and what the City is giving and what the School District is giving. He felt that if the City fights and fails, then we all fail. He thinks he can bring communication, cooperation because he has done this before.

Mayor Burrows stated that there are 2 issues needing to be addressed when or if this happens. He is not sure how to go about this. He stated that we have got to come to some kind of solution on this and quit running in circles.

A question was asked by someone in attendance and Mayor Burrows explained that we are looking at a master plan that includes a renovation of the whole Lion’s Park. Mr. Edwards stated that the spring would feed down directly so that whatever we do south of the existing pool would be the concern.

Councilmember Thompson asked if we can capture the water thought to be coming from the spring if that would save us money that would have been used to purchase water rights. Mayor Burrows thought that this could save money.

Councilmember Thompson asked Mr. DeMille if he had any idea what this might cost to solve. Mr. DeMille thought that it might cost about $400,000.

A lady asked if the spring feeds the pool. Mayor Burrows stated that it does feed the pool. The boiler is by the spring and we are pumping the water across the parking lot into the pool, which is why relocating the boiler was proposed with this project. By updating the boiler to a newer more efficient boiler and moving it closer to the pool would be a huge saving. There are things like that that will help recover some of the costs as well.

Someone asked how long this has been an issue. Mayor Burrows became aware of it about a year ago.

Mr. Savage asked the Council how they would like him to proceed. They were not sure what to do and indicated that they would need to compensate Mr. Savage for his services to this point. For right now, we need to concentrate on the spring first.

Someone asked about the money that the Council has been setting aside and if it would go to the spring before it could go to the pool. Mayor Burrows stated that the money is in a capital improvement fund for the pool. The Council could transfer that to another account.

The question was asked if the water is seeping under there if it would cause us to not invest anything in the pool or keep this same structure. It is not affecting the pool now, but it might be affecting what we are proposing to do alongside the existing pool.

Another question asked was if the City would still look at doing a new building. Mayor Burrows stated that we would like to, but it will not happen as soon as we would like. We want to coordinate this with the swim team because we do not want to shut them down, but we need to figure this out first and it may put us back a year.

A comment was made about all the people there who are obviously interested in this and wondered how they would know when the next meeting is that they need to come to talk about the pool. All of the meetings are noticed in advance on the City’s website and the public meeting notice website.

Mayor Burrows told the audience that he wants them to the meetings because 2 equally informed people very seldom disagree. We want your ideas and we want your input, but we need to be realistic about what we are doing. We are not building a recreation center, we are trying to save what we have. He challenged anyone to go to the pool as see what the issues are there. He asked everyone to be patient stating we are going to get there.

Someone asked if we have a capital facilities plan and if this is part of that. The pool is part of the recreation master plan and the capital facilities plan deals with the water and sewer.

Councilmember Thompson asked when we will start discussing fixing this spring. Mayor Burrows indicated we would start immediately.

Motion: Table the design of a new pool building, Action: Tabled, Moved by Elaine Street, Seconded by Kip Hansen. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 5). Yes: Brayden Gardner, Elaine Street, Kip Hansen, Tanner Thompson, Todd Gleave.

  1. OTHER BUSINESS. Councilmember Street stated that at 1:00 p.m. on Friday and the Visitor’s Center the Spanish Trail Committee will be there and the new kiosk is in and they will be taking pictures.
  2. MEETING ADJOURNED. At 7:14 p.m., Motion: Adjourn, Action: Adjourned, Moved by Todd Gleave, Seconded by Elaine Street. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 5). Yes: Brayden Gardner, Elaine Street, Kip Hansen, Tanner Thompson, Todd Gleave.

PASSED and APPROVED this 22nd day of March 2022.