City Council

Copy of the City of Ivins record for City Council, preserved by OwnUtah.com Ivins Meetings. Official source: City of Ivins Granicus archive.

CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES
May 21, 2009

MAYOR AND COUNCIL: The meeting was called to order at 5:29 p.m. and announced there was a quorum present.

All present included Council Member Elwell, Council Member Blair, Council Member Jolley, Council Member Hart, Council Member Rusick, and City Recorder Kari D. Jimenez.
STAFF: City Manager Judy Gubler, City Engineer Charles Gillette, and Chairman Mehr.
EXCUSED: None.

Mayor Barney was excused.

AUDIENCE: Linda Elwell, Matt Marten, Mark Cox, Lori Brown, Ashlee Brown, Ralph & Judy Hall, Roger Siddaway, Tracey Welsh, Margie Stout, Mike Spehar, Lance Anderson, Dennis Mehr, Noel Broadbent, Cheyne McDonald, George Stoddard, Melanie Grant, Rebecca Schroath, Joanie Panganiban and others who did not sign in.

Council Member Jolley led the Flag Salute.

Council Member Jolley gave the Invocation.

Mayor Pro-Tem Elwell and the City Council Members stated they had no conflicts of interest with items on this meeting’s agenda.

Rebecca Schroath is the Princess, Joanie Panganiban is the 1st Attendant and Ashlee Brown is Miss Congeniality and the 2nd Attendant. They stated they are looking forward to being involved in the community.

Mark Cox with Rocky Mountain Power came forward and provided a presentation relating to the Rocky Mountain Power Blue Sky Renewable Energy Program. A copy of the presentation is available by request through Ivins City Hall. There are 103 individuals in Ivins that are currently participating in the program. The money goes into a fund to purchase renewable energy. Council Member Hart inquired as to why Ivins residents pay approximately fifty-percent (50%) more for electricity than customers who are with Dixie Escalante and a one-third more than customers who are with St. George. Mr. Cox indicated Dixie Escalante and St. George obtain their power through the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) off of the dam. Rocky Mountain Power is not permitted that same benefit. They tried several years ago to obtain that benefit but were denied by WAPA.

City Engineer Charles Gillette provided an Engineering Staff report and a report on behalf of the Public Works Department to the City Council. A copy of the reports are available by request through Ivins City Hall. Charles Gillette reported a Notice to Proceed was issued for the project on 400 South; the developer in Shadow Canyon, Gary Nelson, will combine his improvements with the city's efforts to finish his portion of the improvements; the City submitted the LOMR (Letter of Map Revision) to FEMA and received notification from FEMA that they had received and are reviewing the LOMR; the City has identified an opportunity to save money on water by moving water into the Snow Canyon wells. The cost savings for the water system is approximately $8,000.00 a year.

Chairman Dennis Mehr reported the Planning Commission had a light agenda and they are continuing to work on the Zoning Ordinance.

Traci McDonald came forward and spoke. She requested the issue regarding bringing public transportation to Ivins City be addressed on a future agenda. She indicated that she is blind and that her biggest obstacle is getting in and out of Ivins. The City Council determined this issue will be addressed at the City Council meeting on June 18, 2009.

Judy Gubler referred to the Minutes from the Planning Commission meeting and a Staff Report from Kevin Rudd, a copy of which are available by request through Ivins City Hall. It is important to understand the density reduction calculations on the sensitive lands. Mayor Pro-Tem Elwell opened the Public Hearing.
Roger Siddaway a resident residing on Agave Way came forward and spoke. He objects to building on the ridge due to concerns with rock slides and showed several slides of a recent rock slide. Elizabeth Cottam a resident residing on Shinava Court spoke with Kayenta management and Kevin Rudd. She is not in opposition to the zone change as long as the sensitive lands are not affected. She suggested that a permanent easement that forbids building in the northeastern portion surrounding Shinava Court be created. Lance Anderson with Kayenta Development came forward and spoke. He referred to tables in the ordinance and how zoning affects the densities. Sensitive lands calculations are based on the base zone and one needs to look at the base zone without the topography. Sensitive Lands takes the topography into consideration. Based on the calculations, if the zone is changed to RE-25, in a fifteen percent (15%) zone, only ten percent (10%) of that base can be used. The base is needed for the property owner to have transferable rights. There needs to be a plan in place to assist in making the decision on the water tank that may be placed in Kayenta. The goal is to determine how to build the same type of lots that are there now and to retain the value. A rock fall study has been done by GTS Engineering and there is building criteria for each lot. There being no further comments, Mayor Pro-Tem Elwell closed the Public Hearing.

Council Member Hart isn’t opposed to re-zoning the land but is concerned that if the land was no longer owned by Kayenta, there is the possibility of development occurring that citizens may not want to see. Lance Anderson indicated that if 12 lots are built on, a developer can only disturb three (3) of the seventy (70) acres. With the zone change to RE-25, the community can enjoy the area and Kayenta would receive a tax credit and the transfer of value would go into a conservation easement. Council Member Rusick stated she has no problem with the zone change to RE-25 and that the Planning Commission did a good in-depth analysis. Council Member Blair is concerned with there being 21 lots rather than 12 and isn’t satisfied that RE-25 makes sense. Council Member Jolley sympathized with Council Member Hart and has the same concerns as Council Member Hart but he is not opposed to the zone change. Council Member Elwell is not opposed to the zone change but would like clarification relating to the conservation easement and the number of homes that could potentially be built. Judy Gubler indicated the RE-25 zone would allow 21 lots that could potentially be developed. A Development Agreement would be prepared and once it is recorded as part of the subdivision process, it continues with the land. Council Member Hart stated that it would be tough or impossible to get 21 homes on those lots. Council Member Rusick indicated a developer would be hard pressed to get more than 21 lots and that an RE-25 zone provides very little risk to the City and gives the best benefit to a respected developer in the community.

MOTION: Council Member Rusick moved to approve the Zone Change from RA-5 Residential Agriculture minimum 5-Acres to RE-25 Residential Estates, minimum 25,000 sq. ft. on various parcels adjoining Taviawk subdivisions Phase 2, Phase 3, Phase 4, Phase 5, Phase 6, Phase 8 and Summit Ridge Phase 2. Kayenta Development Inc. Owner and Lance Anderson Applicant. The above being, all the aforesaid being Ordinance No. 2009-07
SECOND: Council Member Jolley

VOTE: The motion carried.

Roll call. Three Council Members voted in favor and two Council Members voted in opposition. The Motion passed three to two.

Matt Marten with the Ivins Tourism Council gave a PowerPoint presentation to the City Council. A copy of the presentation is available by request through Ivins City Hall. The objective of the signage is to assist visitors and residents in finding destinations of interest; promote Ivins as a destination; establish a consistent visual theme and encourage commerce. There have been comments that the temporary signs and letters are too small. Going forward the letters will be 5" and will have reflective lettering. Funding is through the Ivins Tourism Council by means of grants, membership application and signage beneficiary participation. There is limited funding available from Snow Canyon State Park. Ivins Tourism Council is requesting that Ivins City provide installation of the signs in the city’s right-of-ways and participate in public areas of interest. The Council discussed sizes of signs, lettering, number of lines and information to be included, type of materials used for building the signs and funding options. The City Council applauded the Ivins Tourism Council’s efforts.

Judy Gubler indicated Elaine Brinkerhoff was unable to attend tonight to address this item and requested it be tabled to the next City Council meeting.

MOTION: Council Member Jolley moved to table discussion item 5B to the next scheduled City Council meeting.
SECOND: Council Member Blair

VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.

Council Member Elwell reminded the audience that this is not a Public Hearing. The residents have made their thoughts and concerns well known through communications to the City Council and through the use of the open forum at the last meeting. This will be a discussion amongst the Council Members to determine what action they desire to take.  It was requested of the audience that they use appropriate demeanor regardless of which direction the Council decides. Their interests and concerns are appreciated. City Engineer Charles Gillette provided a presentation outlining the timeline of events. A copy of the presentation is available by request through Ivins City Hall.  An audience member wanted to speak but was reminded that this is not a Public Hearing and the City Council will not take public comment on this matter tonight.  The Council Members’ respective positions are as follows:
Council Member Elwell has been on-site several times to establish a firm foundation of what the City previously adopted and decided to do. His concluding thoughts are that he doesn’t see the situation necessarily as diminishing property values when the situation is considered as a whole. The city will be providing pedestrian access, fence, curb, gutter and improvements to 200 East, which is an increased value to the homes. He doesn’t know if that offsets completely other types of monetary loss but is comfortable with vehicles entering from the rear of the yards.  The City has improved 175 East with curb and gutter on both sides. There is vehicular access that is being used on 175 East. Changing the addressing to 175 East isn’t necessary if the City has provided pedestrian access for each of the homes from 200 East. Parking doesn’t need to be restricted on 200 East. It is an enhancement to the City and the people if there is pedestrian access off the appropriate improvements of curb, gutter, sidewalk or trail, with a fence of approximately four feet (4’).  Restricted access from 200 East is not a severe inconvenience when weighed against the needs of the City as the City grows. Charles Gillette indicated the City could consider restricting parking on the east side of the road, allow parking on the west side of the road and still be able to have three (3) lanes, which includes a turning lane. That is cross-section 7. There are two different cross-sections, sections 6 & 7. Cross-section 6 has no median and no center turn lane. The City could also consider a hybrid of both cross-sections to accommodate parking and retain the turning lane.
Council Member Hart counted approximately eleven (11) homes on 200 East that are going to continue to access 200 East no matter what and half of them have half circle drives. He has been on-site and disagrees with Council Member Elwell. The home on 430 South has been there a long time and he didn’t feel the City should tell that owner they no longer have the right to access the front of the home from 200 East.  That situation is different from the newer homes built with the understanding that 200 East was going to be closed.  It would have been great for individuals to come forward at the Planning Commission when they were addressing (the Transportation Master Plan) because there would have been something in the Planning Commission minutes reflecting his opinion on this issue. The City represents people and not roads and these people have some legitimate concerns.  There is no less of a claim for access onto 200 East for the two homes located on 430 South and 450 South than the individuals north of 400 South. When it comes to the homes that Troy (Dennett) built, those have been purchased by individuals who are using the access from 200 East and he doesn’t see that as a dangerous situation. He indicated 430 South and 450 South are the two hardships and the City owes them paying the cost of the change order to provide curb cuts and access to their homes from 200 East. He offered that any of the homes on 200 East that desire to maintain access to 200 East be obligated to sign a deed restriction indicating if there was every any substantial remodel or a replacement of that home that the facing would then be to 175 East and that access would be terminated. The homes have been there a long time before 200 East was determined to be as indicated in the Transportation Master Plan. Regarding the homes that Troy Dennett placed, it isn’t fair for the City to incur the cost of providing a change order to the contractor to provide access where the access is legally from 175 East. That is not a dangerous situation given the fact that the vehicles are visitors going into a half circle drive and exiting driving forward rather than backing out into the roadway. There should be some participation on Troy Dennett’s part to take care of the cost that’s going to be incurred by the City to create that access. He suggested looking at speed limits that would vary from Highway 91 up to 600 South and then be reduced from thereon where the majority of the accesses onto 200 East occur. A block wall doesn’t look as good as looking into someone’s landscaped and well maintained yard. He would like to see half circle driveways for the homes that access 200 East.
Council Member Blair took the opposing view to Council Member Hart. He looked at it as a Traffic Engineer. The (Transportation Master) Plan that was developed was done so to move traffic as the City develops.  If the City doesn’t plan for the next 20 or 30 years, the City won’t be ready when it’s needed.  200 East has been and will continue to be a major collector road and will provide primarily for traffic moving north and south through the City. It will continue to be Ivins most voluminous street for north/south traffic. If the City doesn’t plan and provide for that, it is hurting the City and the Council is not doing their jobs.  The problem with driveways is two-fold. 1) It is cars stopping to make a turn and somebody rear-ending a vehicle and 2) it is cars backing up out in the roadway which is by far the most dangerous situation possible. The turn-arounds are better and can generally accomplish an entire situation but the City Council and Staff have properly acted in this matter.  The City has told individuals as development has occurred in the last 10 years, that their access was only temporary on 200 East. The access off of 175 East is good. There are fences in that area that need to be replaced and, if done right, would serve the property in a very good fashion. He sees no reason to change what the City has already set forth. Council Member Hart inquired of Council Member Blair regarding the 11 homes that are going to continue to have access to 200 East. Council Member Blair indicated that is more than the City should allow but they are there and for the most part are setback and do not have a secondary access. There is no roadway behind those homes. If the City can minimize vehicles accessing onto 200 East, the City should do that.
An audience member, Melanie Grant, wanted to speak but was reminded that this is not a Public Hearing and could not speak.
Council Member Rusick agreed with Council Member Elwell and Council Member Blair. The City has been working on the Transportation Master Plan for years. Council Member Hart was Chairman of the Planning Commission when the Transportation Master Plan passed the Planning Commission so the argument should have been brought up at that time. The notification has been appropriate. Some of the things brought forward by individuals were talking about homes on Center Street and homes on Mesa Vista. Those are homes without a secondary access. The City has not gone behind all of the other places and invested in an alternative street with secondary access. She drove up and down 175 East several times and it seems that the individuals on the west side of 175 East are put in a strange situation as well because they are looking at the backs of homes. The whole thing is unfortunate. The reasons for going ahead with what the City has been working on for a couple of years are compelling enough that the City should continue.
Council Member Jolley indicated this is a difficult situation. He is torn with whether to listen to his heart or listen to his mind. He agrees with Council Member Hart that this is a difficult and unfortunate situation that individuals are being placed in. He doesn’t see any safety issue right now but also appreciates the expertise and background of Council Member Blair. Change is difficult but the City needs to look to the future. He would vote with his mind rather than his heart because the City is looking to the future and would go with the decision that has been previously made.
Council Member Elwell inquired of Judy Gubler if the City Council previously agreed to change addressing to 175 East. Judy Gubler indicated yes, it would need to be changed because the addressing is confusing. It needs to be re-addressed so that the odd numbered addresses are on one side and the even numbered addresses are on the other. Council Member Jolley inquired of Charles Gillette and Council Member Blair of the possibility of eliminating the turning lane and a third lane added to where the owners could turn into or back out of or pull into on the west side and allow the owners to retain their 200 East frontage. Charles Gillette indicated that instead of creating a hazard for the right turns, a hazard is created for the left turns. Council Member Blair agreed. Council Member Jolley would like to see a study or something with the possibility of allowing the owners to retain their 200 East frontage, allowing a lane on the west side. Council Member Blair indicated the idea of continuing the 3 lane section through 400 and 600 South makes sense, especially with the convenience store on the other side of the street. You would still be backing out into the lane. Council Member Rusick indicated the Council is getting into a looped discussion and considering items that the Council was all set on before, now trying to find compromises to satisfy the heart. It is a difficult thing to make a decision that is contrary to what people want. The Council has had to do it on a lot of things. The Council has made zone changes that were unpopular with a lot of people but the Councils charge is to do the best for the City and for the future.  The Transportation Master Plan that was labored over and that Council Member Blair spoke so eloquently about is what the City should be doing for the future. If the City can make compromises on the address or the height of the fence going forward, the City should make those compromises. The City has no vested interest in a six, three or four foot (6’, 3’ or 4’) wall, and the City wants to make it as aesthetically pleasing as possible. The Council is here tonight to discuss and reconsider closing vehicle access. The consensus from Council Member Elwell, Council Member Blair, Council Member Jolley is that the Council does not want to change the decision moving forward.
An audience member, Melanie Grant, began speaking again and was again told the Council could not take her comments. She continued to speak and approached the City Council. Council Member Elwell told Ms. Grant that if she did not take a seat, she would be removed from the Council room.

MOTION: Council Member Rusick moved for the Council to stand in recess until Public Safety arrives.
SECOND: Council Member Jolley

VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.

The City Council meeting recessed at 7:50 p.m.

MOTION: Council Member Hart moved reconvene
SECOND: Council Member Jolley

VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.

The City Council meeting reconvened at 8:00 p.m.
Council Member Elwell indicated there was no argument on the re-addressing of the homes and it will stand as the City Council had previously determined and the homes will be re-addressed to 175 East.

MOTION: Council Member Rusick moved to not reconsider closing vehicle access to residents on 200 East between 400 South and 600 South Street
SECOND: Council Member Blair

VOTE: The motion carried.

Roll call vote. Four Council Members voted in favor and one Council Member opposed. The motion passes.

Josh Mower stood up and made a comment (not appropriate for public minutes) and was removed by the Public Safety officer.

Judy Gubler requested that the Council consider re-arranging the agenda to address item 5G next, which is the consideration of waiving the impact fees for the Coyote Gulch Cabaret Theatre.

MOTION: Council Member Rusick moved to consider Item 5G next
SECOND: Council Member Blair

VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.

Judy Gubler indicated this was discussed in 2008 but it requires formal action by the City Council to officially waive impact fees. Terry Marten came forward on behalf of Coyote Gulch Cabaret Theatre. The Cabaret Theatre was approved at the City Council meeting on May 7, 2009. Mr. Marten is requesting the City waive the Impact Fees for the Cabaret Theatre for the good of the community. The largest part of the theatre isn’t enclosed so he isn’t sure that an impact fee pertains to this situation. Impact fees are for building roads and for businesses that are operating year round. The Council is concerned with setting a precedent if they waive the impact fee and they want to be fair to everyone. The Council recognizes the value of the arts to the City but doesn’t see much of an impact except with regard to Public Safety. Judy Gubler indicated that the impact fee for Public Safety is $147.02 per 1000 square feet. Terry Marten stated that the foot print of the theatre is 2000 square feet. The Council determined they would waive all of the impact fees except for the Public Safety impact fee, which is $294.04.

MOTION: Council Member Hart moved to waive all of the Impact Fees, except for the applicable Public Safety Impact Fees, which are slightly under three hundred dollars ($300.00) for Coyote Gulch Cabaret Theatre
SECOND: Council Member Rusick

VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.

Council Member Rusick indicated this revision is not what she expected when it was sent back to be revised. The Council clearly said the City was going to allow septic fields in Kayenta only. Charles Gillette indicated that is what the ordinance says. Council Member Rusick disagreed and referred to page 2 to the portion of "when a public sewer is not available" and indicated that is not what the City Council determined. There was a lengthy discussions regarding this. Charles Gillette indicated the Subdivision Ordinance addresses what is allowed in a subdivision. Council Member Hart referred to the leapfrogging issue not be addressed. There were lengthy discussion regarding this issue, as well as suggested clarifying verbiage throughout the document. It was determined that the City Attorney will re-draft this ordinance with the suggested changes and then bring it forward to the City Council in conjunction with the Subdivision Ordinance.

MOTION: Council Member Hart moved to table item 5D until it can be re-written.
SECOND: Council Member Rusick

VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.

Charles Gillette indicated this agreement was originally presented to the City Council in December, 2008. The City Council had questions and concerns about the agreement at that time. All of the other communities have passed this agreement. Judy Gubler indicated the primary reason to pass this is that it allows the City to be reimbursed in the event of a FEMA qualifying incident. Ivins would help the other agencies and those agencies would help Ivins. Council Member Rusick indicated that the main reason the City Council didn’t pass it initially was because there was a question of whether it conflicted with the 2007 agreement. Judy Gubler indicated the City Attorney has reviewed this agreement and does not see any conflicts.

MOTION: Council Member Rusick moved to approve the Mutual Aid and Assistance Agreement between the Washington County Water Conservancy District, St. George City, Washington City, Ivins City, Hurricane City, LaVerkin City and Toquerville City.
SECOND: Council Member Jolley

VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.

2.	Debt Service Fund

3.	Special Revenue Funds

4.	Capital Projects Fund

8.	Perpetual Care Fund

9.	Redevelopment Agency

10.Mu

nicipal Building Authority

Judy Gubler reminded the City Council of where they are in the process of the budget. This is on the agenda for approval but not adoption. What is approved tonight will be noticed for a Public Hearing. Council Member Elwell inquired as to #9, the Redevelopment Agency and Judy Gubler indicated that should actually read "Economic Development Agency". Council Member Hart had questions but will look at the budget closer and contact Judy at a later date if he is unable to resolve his questions. Judy Gubler stated she will provide a combined budget comparison to the City Council for their reference.

MOTION: Council Member Hart moved to approve the Tentative Budgets for Fiscal Year Ending 06/30/2010 and Estimate to Complete Budgets for the Fiscal Year Ending 06/30/2009
SECOND: Council Member Rusick

VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.

Council Member Rusick requested the minutes be removed from the Consent Agenda.

MOTION: Council Member Jolley moved to approve Consent Agenda item A
SECOND: Council Member Hart

VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.

Council Member Rusick referred to page 1 of the minutes the "Audience" portion was left out but the Recorder has since added that information. On page 3 referring to what Council Member Hart said about the closing of the access on 200 East struck her as not a correct summation of his position but in reading the exact words, she thinks it is fine as it is. On page 6, line 28 where it talks about the Master Plan Development Agreement, the first version of the minutes said that "the City Council requested Dale Coulam look at the language and make changes with warranty security and security agreement wording". That isn’t what happened. The Council made the corrections and then approved the document as corrected. The minutes now read "the City Council determined to use the term "warranty security" and so on. On page 7, line 8 she thought the Professional Services Agreement between the City and E CUBED Engineers was the one that Dale (Coulam) was supposed to review. Judy Gubler indicated that is correct and that there was a question of "International" and "National" code language and that was addressed. That agreement was tabled and will be addressed at a later date. On page 9, the spelling of Matt Marten is changed. In her report about the presentation by Bill Sorensen on page 9, line 21 or 22 she wasn’t asking why Washington County doesn’t test for vehicle emissions control. She indicated that a lot of people constantly ask why the County doesn’t test. The issue she had was with the wording that Council Member Blair indicated "there are only 3 counties in the State of Utah that meet the requirements for air quality monitoring". Council Member Blair clarified that everybody monitors and suggested that the following be added for clarification "only 3 counties in the State of Utah require vehicle emission testing." Council Member Rusick would like it added in the minutes that Council Member Blair said the monitoring ought to be in downtown St. George.

MOTION: Council Member Rusick moved to approve the Ivins City Council Minutes for May 7, 2009 as corrected
SECOND: Council Member Blair

VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.

7)	CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION

Council Member Rusick attended the Paiute event in Cedar City.  Approximately 35 people attended. Ivins City bought a table of six seats for $50.00. They had some great entertainment. The Paiute Princess for 2008-2009 played the hand drum and sang and a Cree Indian told stories.  The event was thoroughly enjoyed.  She attended the Flute Festival on Friday and on Sunday and went to the concert.  The concert was absolutely excellent. Aside from the musical presentations at Tuacahn, it is the best thing she has ever seen at Tuacahn.  She received an email from the Humanities Council on a new literature program where if you can guarantee an audience of 15 people, they will send an author to discuss a book. Mayor Barney may be interested in this because he had talked about trying to do that a couple of few years ago. One of the listed authors is Marilyn Arnold.  Council Member Jolley indicated Marilyn Arnold no longer lives in Ivins, but is in Kanab. Council Member Rusick indicated the City may need to pay for a room. The Humanities Council picks up the other expenses. She suggested the City look into this. She will forward the email to Judy Gubler.
Council Member Hart - The Regional Waste Management meeting was held and they received a prestigious award for their innovative recycling program. That program is moving forward and mini basket/bins will be offered for individuals to buy for a nominal cost, to place recycled materials in for easier handling. The bins will now be weighed and each community will be compensated based on how much a community recycles and not by the population. The animal shelter is hoping to celebrate the re-opening of the remodeled shelter on July 4th.
Council Member Jolley - no report
Council Member Blair - He attended a DTEC meeting on May 20th. He appreciated having the 911 tour also on that date. The estimate for the Valley View Bridge project was $6.8 million. The actual award was $1.8 million less.  The difference in the funds was able to be placed onto another project. The four (4) submittals that were made for the stimulus money by the cities, made it through the first cut and are still in the process. Ivins submitted the 200 East project, St. George submitted the Washington Fields around the new airport and the underpass under I-15 for Dixie College projects and Washington City submitted the Washington Dam Road project.
Council Member Elwell handed out a menu for the Pound Puppy Gala.  Reservations for the Gala have picked up over the last week. They have sold over 70 tickets and anticipate over 100 individuals to attend.

Judy Gubler reminded the City Council of the assembly that is going to occur at Red Mountain Elementary tomorrow. From City Staff perspective, the individuals with the Flute Festival were good to work with. They didn’t have the attendance they would have liked but because it was their first year in Ivins and they weren’t sure what to expect. Regarding grants, the City is still in the running for the Cops Fast grant. There are 81 billion requests with 38 billion to be awarded. Matheson’s office has called for additional information on 200 East but is primarily interested in the round-about. At the next City Council meeting there will be discussion regarding staffing and job descriptions for review. There are gaps in the Accounting area that need to be filled. Dave Glenn prepared and sent a letter to individuals in Padre Canyon regarding ground water, tearing up the roads and results on the audit of the high water use homes.

9)	EXECUTIVE MEETING

10)

ADJOURNMENT

MOTION: Council Member Rusick moved to adjourn
SECOND: Council Member Jolley

VOTE: The motion carried unanimously.

The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.

Respectfully,

Kari D. Jimenez
Ivins City Recorder

Council Member Elwell	AYE
Council Member Jolley	AYE
Council Member Rusick	AYE
Council Member Blair	NAY
Council Member Hart	NAY