Sentinel Media records · public agendas and minutes, text only, refreshed nightly from each body's own site · not a newspaper

City Council Work Session

minutes meeting date 2026-04-06 · fetched 2026-09-17 · 26179 characters · official file · plain text

City Council Work Session
Meeting Minutes

680 Park Avenue
Idaho Falls, ID 83402
Monday, April 6, 2026
3:00 PM
City Council Chambers

Call to Order and Roll Call
There were present:
Mayor Lisa Burtenshaw

Council President Jim Francis
Councilor Michelle Ziel-Dingman

Councilor Jim Freeman
Councilor Kirk Larsen

Councilor Brandon Lee
Councilor John Radford (Arrived 3:07 PM)

Also present:
Kerry Hammon, IFDDC

PJ Holm, Parks and Recreation Director
Wade Sanner, CDS Director

Bryce Johnson, Police Chief
Brandi Newton, IFDDC Board Member

Matt Jacobsen, IFDDC Board Member
Zack Jones, City Attorney

Jasmine Marroquin, Deputy City Clerk

Mayor Burtenshaw called the meeting to order at 3:02 p.m. with the following items:

Mayor, City Council – Discussion: Citywide updates, concerns, questions, reports:
•
Council President Francis
1. Pilot “town meeting” / listening session
•
Following prior discussion and general support from Council, he asked Councilor Radford to organize a
pilot public meeting.
•
The intent is to create a listening session format, not a formal presentation by Council, so it feels less
authoritative and more open to community input.
•
Chief of Staff Margaret Wimborne will assist in coordinating and shaping the approach.
2. Delivery truck parking concerns
•
A citizen raised concerns about delivery trucks parking on streets (e.g., Park) and impacting traffic.
•
Council President Francis emphasized the issue is not about banning deliveries, but possibly restricting
delivery times (e.g., avoiding peak hours).
•
He noted this is a common practice in other cities and something delivery companies are used to.
•
Potential ideas include time-based delivery windows (early morning or off-peak hours), and
designated delivery zones that may convert back to regular parking outside certain hours
•
The issue may be referred to the Streets Division, since they manage parking and signage.
•
He expects this topic to come up more frequently and wants the Council to begin thinking about a
policy approach.
•
Councilor Lee - Nothing
•
Councilor Radford - Nothing
•
Councilor Larsen – Gave updates from him time helping in the legislature. Will be meeting with IFDDC.
•
Councilor Freeman - Nothing
•
Councilor Dingman - Nothing

Mayor’s Office
1. Report: Idaho Falls Downtown Development Corporation (IFDDC) Business Improvement District (BID).
(Director Hammon, Ms. Newton, Mr. Jacobsen)

City Council Work Session
Meeting Minutes

680 Park Avenue
Idaho Falls, ID 83402

BID Revenue is approximately $103,000. The IFDDC presentation outlined current activities, priorities, and
challenges related to managing and renewing the downtown Business Improvement District (BID).
Key projects and operations
•
Ongoing infrastructure and maintenance work includes alleyway power upgrades, parking signage
repairs, sidewalk paver replacement, and parking lot maintenance.
•
Public art efforts are active again, including updating traffic cabinet art and restarting the pet
mural fundraiser project.
•
Continued downtown beautification efforts will ramp up in the coming months.
Events, marketing, and programming
•
Focus has shifted from rebuilding events (after a staff turnover year) to expanding attendance,
improving quality, and securing sponsorships.
•
Loss of a major $20,000 sponsor has created funding pressure, but new sponsors and partnerships
(media, local businesses) are helping offset costs.
•
Events are being streamlined to reduce expenses, including replacing large brew events with
smaller pub crawls.
•
Ongoing and planned events include seasonal festivals, fitness classes, teen events, and family-
focused activities paired with adult programming.
•
Marketing efforts are expanding through media partnerships, social platforms, merchant
collaboration, and a new branding message: downtown as “the City’s living room.”
Business and merchant engagement
•
Participation in promotions (like “Find the Easter Bunny”) is voluntary, with mixed merchant
perspectives—some value increased foot traffic, others are less enthusiastic.
•
IFDDC is providing marketing guidance to help merchants convert foot traffic into sales.
•
Communication has increased through newsletters, in-person outreach, stakeholder meetings,
and advisory groups.
Organizational improvements
•
Staff has been rebuilt and trained, with new systems implemented (project management
software, digital tools, paperless processes).
•
Committees (public art, parking, BID renewal) have been reestablished.
•
Efforts are underway to better define priorities and improve efficiency despite limited staffing.
BID renewal and funding challenges
•
Major focus is on the 2027 BID renewal, including educating stakeholders and addressing
confusion about how the BID works.
•
Current funding is constrained because:
o
Assessments are based on 2007 property values, not current values.
o
Government and nonprofit properties do not contribute.
o
Revenue (~$103,000) is not keeping pace with inflation or expanded responsibilities.
•
Changes to mill rate, valuation method, or caps are possible but require majority property owner
approval.
•
Without increased BID revenue, alternative funding sources may be needed to sustain operations.
Additional issues and coordination
•
IFDDC is actively coordinating with City departments on issues like delivery truck access, ADA
parking effectiveness, signage, and downtown infrastructure.
•
ADA parking supply exceeds requirements, but placement and usability are being evaluated.
•
Partnerships with City departments and organizations have improved responsiveness and
problem-solving.

City Council Work Session
Meeting Minutes

680 Park Avenue
Idaho Falls, ID 83402
Overall, the IFDDC is transitioning from a rebuilding phase to a more strategic and optimized operation,
but faces structural funding and staffing challenges that make the upcoming BID renewal critical to
maintaining and expanding downtown programs and services.

2. Update: IFDDC Downtown Parking
Current parking system and revenue
•
No liability claims were reported in the last fiscal year.
•
On-street parking is not permit-based (except temporary construction permits).
•
Several off-street lots are managed with permits, generating steady monthly revenue, and most
lots are fully or near fully utilized.
•
Permit prices ($40–$50/month) have not been increased in years and are lower than comparable
private lots.
•
Total annual parking-related revenue (permits + citations) is about $288,000.
Operations and system limitations
•
Parking management relies on aging equipment and outdated systems, including manual tracking
(Excel) and failing hardware.
•
The IPS parking software has strong capabilities, but staff need more training to fully utilize its
data and reporting tools.
•
Current City funding for parking management (~$92,200) is likely insufficient to sustain operations
and upgrades.
Advisory group and near-term approach
•
A Parking Advisory Group has been reestablished with representation from the City, county,
IFDDC, and merchants.
•
Focus right now is on minor improvements and coordination, not major policy changes.
•
A more comprehensive parking review is planned after the 2027 BID renewal, likely around 2028.
Data and future policy considerations
•
Council discussion emphasized the importance of occupancy data (block-face utilization) to guide
future decisions.
•
High occupancy (90–100%) can hurt businesses by limiting access, potentially justifying tools like
meters in the future.
•
IFDDC is open to improving data collection to support evidence-based parking policies.
Challenges and stakeholder concerns
•
The biggest barrier to parking changes is not data, but fear and resistance from businesses
concerned about impacts on customers and revenue.
•
Existing rules (like block-face enforcement) help discourage all-day parking by employees, but are
not foolproof.
•
Merchants are increasingly helping by directing employees to off-street parking.
Coordination and improvements underway
•
Bonneville County and other partners are cooperating to free up parking and improve
management.
•
Enforcement has resumed in key areas like the courthouse.
•
Some maintenance and operational issues (e.g., lot conditions, weed control) are being addressed
through City coordination.
Requests to Council & next steps
•
Renew the BID MOU and parking management agreement annually.
•
Consider increasing parking management funding based on actual costs.
•
Review and update the downtown parking ordinance (including block-face rules).

City Council Work Session
Meeting Minutes

680 Park Avenue
Idaho Falls, ID 83402
•
Clarify responsibilities for certain parking areas and maintenance.
•
Hold biannual special event coordination meetings.
•
Seek legal and policy guidance for the upcoming BID renewal.
Overall, the IFDDC is maintaining and incrementally improving the parking system, but deferring major
changes until after the BID renewal. Key issues include aging infrastructure, underfunding, and the need
for better data to support future policy decisions like metering or pricing adjustments.

Police, Human Resources - Approval: Employee Time-Off Without Pay. (Chief Johnson presented)
The Police Chief requested Council approval for an employee leave extension:
•
The request involves an Emergency Communications Officer who has already used the 15 days of
unpaid leave the Chief is authorized to grant under City policy.
•
The employee needs additional unpaid leave through May 16, 2026, while maintaining benefits
eligibility and continuous service status.
•
The leave is already in progress, and Council approval is needed quickly to avoid any gap once the
Chief’s authorized leave period ends.
•
Due to confidential medical reasons, details were only shared privately with Council liaisons.
Council discussion highlights:
•
Council members indicated they were comfortable with the request after being briefed.
•
They opted to approve it immediately at the work session rather than delay to a later meeting.
•
It was noted this type of request is rare but not unprecedented, having been approved previously
for another police employee.
•
There was brief discussion about fairness, clarifying that this is specifically about unpaid leave
extensions, not paid time off.

Motion: Extend leave without pay to an Emergency Communications Employee through May 16 and
maintain her eligibility for benefits and her continuous service period
o
Moved by: Councilor Dingman
o
Second: Councilor Lee
o
Vote: Aye: Francis, Dingman, Freeman, Larsen, Lee, Radford. Nay: none.
o
Motion carries.

Police, Legal – Discussion: Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) for implementation of AI software usage for 911
call system. (Chief Johnson, Attorney Jones presented)
What the technology is:
•
The system, provided through Bonneville County, uses AI to assist dispatchers during 911 calls.
•
It does not replace dispatchers or take control of calls.
•
Instead, it listens in the background and provides real-time prompts or suggested questions if
something may be missed.
Purpose and benefits
•
Designed to improve efficiency, helping reduce the time between a 911 call and dispatching
responders.
•
Provides support for less experienced dispatchers, especially important due to high turnover and
ongoing training needs.
•
Helps ensure consistency and completeness in emergency call handling without removing human
judgment.

City Council Work Session
Meeting Minutes

680 Park Avenue
Idaho Falls, ID 83402
Dispatcher role and control
•
Dispatchers remain fully in control at all times.
•
The AI is strictly an assistive tool, and staff can ignore or use its suggestions as they see fit.
•
Emphasis was placed on preserving human intuition and decision-making.
Implementation and cost
•
The system will be implemented through Bonneville County’s contract, funded by the E911
surcharge, so no direct cost to the City of Idaho Falls.
•
The tool was requested and supported by the multi-agency dispatch board, including police, fire,
and other partners.
Legal and liability considerations
•
The memorandum is simply an acknowledgment, not a full agreement, confirming the City is
aware of the county’s contract amendment.
•
Liability remains with the entities using the system (primarily the City for its employees), and the
AI provider disclaims responsibility for decisions made based on its suggestions.
•
Idaho law prevents shifting liability entirely between agencies, so issues would be handled case-
by-case if they arise.
Council discussion points
•
Interest in seeing how the system works in practice.
•
Questions about liability, redundancy, and whether reliance on AI could affect dispatcher
performance.
•
Reassurance that the tool is supplemental and particularly helpful for training newer staff.
Chief Johnson clarified that this type of item isn’t typical for City Council, but would be coming before them on
Thursday for awareness.

Police – Discussion: Flock Cameras (Chief Johnson)
Chief Johnson’s presentation focused on the City’s use of license plate reader (LPR) technology—
particularly the Flock system—and how it fits into modern policing, legal standards, privacy concerns, and
operational results. He began by explaining how policing has always involved tracking vehicle movement
through public spaces, originally done manually by officers stationed at intersections or driving
neighborhoods to record license plates. He described license plate readers as simply a more efficient
version of long-standing police practices, enabled by technology rather than changing the underlying
method.
He outlined the City’s evaluation process for selecting an LPR vendor in 2024. After testing
multiple companies, including Motorola and Flock, the department chose Flock based on lower cost,
better interoperability with nearby agencies, and stronger customer service. He noted that regional law
enforcement partners—such as Pocatello, Twin Falls, and agencies in Utah—were already using Flock,
which supported coordinated regional data sharing.
The City initially deployed 13 cameras using a federal grant and later budgeted continued funding.
A separate camera trailer was also purchased for video surveillance (not license plate reading) for public
safety needs at large events and protests.
Chief Johnson addressed privacy and cybersecurity concerns at length. He emphasized that LPR
data is governed by federal CJIS security standards and Idaho state law. Data retention is limited to 30
days, and access is restricted to active criminal investigations, warrants, missing persons cases, and similar
lawful purposes. He stressed that officers cannot freely browse data and that all access is logged and
auditable.
He also explained that LPR systems are used across law enforcement nationwide and are considered
constitutional by courts because they collect information from public roads where there is no expectation

City Council Work Session
Meeting Minutes

680 Park Avenue
Idaho Falls, ID 83402
of privacy. He acknowledged concerns about misuse but pointed to audit systems, disciplinary actions,
and criminal penalties as safeguards against abuse.
On immigration, he stated the system is not used for civil immigration enforcement (such as ICE
detainers), only for criminal violations. He also said the department does not track ordinary citizens or
respond to requests like “how many times a person’s plate was seen,” since data can only be queried
under specific legal thresholds tied to investigations.
He addressed misinformation and security claims circulating online about Flock being “hacked,”
stating the company denies such incidents and undergoes regular penetration testing and security audits.
He acknowledged that all software has vulnerabilities but argued that CJIS-compliant systems are
designed with strong safeguards and continuous testing.
Finally, he highlighted results from the system, reporting roughly 42 arrests in recent months
involving warrants, violent offenders, child recovery cases, drug crimes, and other serious offenses. He
described LPR technology as one of the most impactful recent law enforcement tools, comparable in
importance to DNA evidence in terms of investigative value.
The presentation ended with a brief discussion of transparency, interagency data sharing, and
ongoing public concerns about privacy, oversight, and potential misuse, with Chief Johnson reiterating
that strict policies, audits, and legal limits govern the system’s use.

Community Development Services, Parks & Recreation – Presentation: Park Zone (Director Sanner, Director Holm)
City staff presented a proposed new framework to create a “Park Zone” system, responding to a
City Council priority to better support how parks are planned, built, and managed. The central issue is that
current zoning and development standards—largely based on commercial construction rules—do not fit
the unique and evolving nature of parks.
Staff explained that parks differ from typical developments because they are publicly owned,
develop in phases, and often increase in intensity of use over time. Existing standards can create
unnecessary constraints (such as commercial-style landscaping requirements) and limit flexibility in how
parks are designed or adapted. Additionally, parks vary widely from one another, making a one-size-fits-all
zoning approach impractical.
To address this, staff proposed removing parks and recreation facilities from the standard zoning
code and replacing that framework with individualized Park Development Plans. Each park would have its
own plan that sets out design intent, layout, and standards, while still complying with state and federal
requirements (such as ADA and engineering codes). These plans would serve as the primary governing
document for how each park is developed and updated over time.

The proposed process would include:
•
Initial neighborhood notification and public input
•
Review and input from a Parks and Recreation Commission (potentially as a stronger advisory or
steering body)
•
Final approval by City Council
•
Administration by Parks and Recreation staff
•
Future amendments returning for review, depending on scope
Staff emphasized that this approach is relatively unique, with limited evidence of other
municipalities using a fully similar system. The goal is to create greater flexibility, improve responsiveness
to community needs, and better align park development with capital improvement planning and impact
fees.
A major focus of the discussion was how detailed park plans should be. Council and staff debated
the risk of plans becoming too rigid versus too vague. The emerging consensus favored “flexible

City Council Work Session
Meeting Minutes

680 Park Avenue
Idaho Falls, ID 83402
conceptual plans”—documents that define general zones, intended uses, and standards (such as trails,
buffers, or amenities), rather than fixed, highly detailed designs. Final technical design would occur later
through construction documents, allowing parks to evolve over time.
Examples from other cities were discussed to illustrate this approach, including master plans that
evolve through public input, simplified technical standards (like trail widths), and conceptual layouts that
identify broad areas rather than exact features. Staff also shared a rough internal example showing
phased park development, where amenities and infrastructure (such as parking, lighting, or sports
facilities) could be added over time as funding becomes available.

Council members raised several key considerations:
•
Ensuring flexibility so park features (e.g., converting tennis courts to pickleball) can adapt to
community input without excessive formal amendments
•
Determining how often Council approval is required for changes versus Commission-level
decisions
•
Clarifying whether and when neighborhood meetings are required, especially for modifications to
existing parks
•
Defining the role and membership of potential steering committees, with emphasis on including
appropriate subject-matter experts and community representatives
•
Differentiating processes based on park type (neighborhood, community, regional, or specialized
parks), with larger parks potentially requiring more formal oversight

There was also discussion about applying the framework not only to new parks but also to existing
parks when significant upgrades or expansions occur. Minor changes (like replacing equipment) would not
require full review, but larger changes (such as expansions or new facilities) would likely trigger the
process.
Staff outlined both benefits and risks. Benefits include improved flexibility, park-specific design
tailored to community needs, better alignment with funding tools, and stronger collaboration between
staff, commission, and Council. Risks include increased administrative burden, potential politicization of
design decisions, and possible scrutiny due to deviation from traditional zoning standards.
Finally, staff reviewed the implementation path, noting upcoming Planning Commission review,
Council hearings, and alignment with budgeting and capital improvement cycles. They also highlighted
ongoing park planning and grant efforts that would benefit from the proposed structure moving forward.

Legal – Discussion: Develop written decision to affirm City Council’s denial of the Willowss Place Townhomes PUD
(City Attorney Jones)
City Council and legal counsel worked through how to draft and refine the written decision denying the
Willows Place Townhomes PUD and how to separate that formal legal record from any future efforts to resolve
the project.
A major focus is how to structure a revised “reasoned statement” for judicial review. Counsel explains
that the court will not re-litigate the decision itself but instead review whether the Council’s findings of fact are
supported by substantial evidence and whether its legal conclusions logically follow from those findings. Because
of this, he recommends a single, clear, consolidated revised decision that incorporates all relevant testimony and
reasoning, rather than multiple or competing versions.
Council members debated how much detail to include. They discuss whether to simply defend their
original decision or to strengthen it by adding additional supporting reasoning (“belt and suspenders”). The

City Council Work Session
Meeting Minutes

680 Park Avenue
Idaho Falls, ID 83402
central legal foundation remains the Council’s discretion under the ordinance, especially the use of the word
“may,” which they interpret as granting authority rather than requiring approval when certain conditions are met.
A key point of contention is the “redevelopment” finding. Some members argue it should remain as part
of the legal reasoning, while others believe it may be unnecessary if the discretionary authority argument is strong
enough on its own. There is also disagreement about how “redevelopment” should be interpreted—whether
subdivision alone qualifies or whether meaningful reinvestment is required. Ultimately, counsel advised that any
retained legal conclusion must be supported by explicit factual findings, and that the Council should decide
whether to keep or remove that element based on how central they want it to be to their case.
In addition to discretion, members discussed supporting findings such as density concerns, streetscape
and parking impacts, and public amenity considerations. They agreed that some of these should remain in the
revised statement as reinforcing factors, even if not all are necessary for the legal outcome.
The Council also distinguishes between two separate tracks: the formal legal decision and potential post-
decision resolution discussions with the developer. Members suggested that while mediation or future
negotiation should not be embedded heavily in the legal findings, a brief reference or invitation to discuss
potential solutions could be included at the end of the document. Suggested mediation topics include density
reductions, street design, public amenities, neighborhood connectivity, and related development impacts.
Procedurally, legal counsel clarifies communication rules for this quasi-judicial matter: Council members
may discuss the case among themselves (within public meeting constraints), but must avoid ex parte
communications with parties such as the developer or affected citizens.
Finally, counsel outlines next steps. He will draft a revised, consolidated decision for the next work
session. Once the written decision is issued (anticipated April 23), a seven-day window would open for the
developer to request mediation, after which further discussions or a separate public process could occur.

Executive Session: The Council will not reconvene after the executive session.

Motion: Called pursuant to the provisions of Idaho Code Section 74-206(1)(j) to consider labor contract
matters authorized under Idaho Code Section 74-206A(1)(a).
o
Moved by: Councilor Francis
o
Second: Councilor Dingman
o
Vote: Aye: Francis, Dingman, Freeman, Larsen, Lee, Radford. Nay: none.
o
Motion carries.

START: 6:28 PM
There were present: Mayor Burtenshaw, Council President Francis, Councilor Dingman, Councilor
Freeman, Councilor Larsen, Councilor Lee, Councilor Radford, Zachary Jones and HR Director Darin Jones.
END: 6:44 PM

There being no further business, the regular Council meeting adjourned at 6:25 PM.

/s/ Jasmine Marroquin______________

/s/ Lisa Burtenshaw
_____________
Jasmine Marroquin, Deputy City Clerk

Lisa Burtenshaw, Mayor

Text is extracted by machine from the official file linked on each page; the official file is the record. Sentinel Media, LLC.