Sentinel Media records · public agendas and minutes, text only, refreshed nightly from each body's own site · not a newspaper
minutes meeting date 2026-03-09 · fetched 2026-09-09 · 20431 characters · official file · plain text
BOCC Mar 9 2026 Regular Meeting FREMONT COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING MINUTES March 9, 2026 Present for the meeting were: Commissioners Blair Dance, Rick Hill, and Mark Chandler Also attended by: Clerk Meredith Mattingly, Deputy Clerk Kim Fletcher, and Civil Attorney Blake Hall Commissioner Dance called the meeting to order and welcomed those in attendance. Treasurer Lori Beard RE: Tax Cancellations – action item Ms. Beard presented the tax cancellations for the month of February 2026 in the amount of $84.68. Commissioner Hill made a motion to approve the tax cancellations for the month of February 2026 in the amount of $84.68. Commissioner Chandler seconded the motion. A full voice vote was heard with all commissioners voting in favor. Elections Clerk Bonita Sutton RE: Solidifying Polling Locations for May Election – action item Ms. Sutton discussed the new polling locations for the May 19, 2026 election. We’ve made some adjustments with our polling locations; the LDS church has asked us to move, so we have no polling locations in churches. Egin, 8, 9, and 10 will be in the Junior High Gym. 11, 12, and 13 will be at the High School in the Auditorium. We sent out about 3500 postcards about these changes and received a few phone calls with concerns, but after being able to give some explanation, they have been very understanding. We will have to deliver equipment later in the day rather than in the morning on Monday the 18th, and poll workers will come in to help set up later in the evening. Commissioner Hill made a motion to approve the polling places for the May 19, 2026 election as presented. Commissioner Chandler seconded the motion. A full voice vote was heard with all commissioners voting in favor. Probation Kent Dummer RE: Bannock County MOA – action item Mr. Dummer presented the Memorandum of Agreement with Bannock County Juvenile Detention Center and Fremont County Juvenile Probation in regards for housing for our juvenile probation kids now that 5C has closed. Blake Hall stated this contract is virtually identical to the contract the Commissioners signed with 3B last week, including the price of $450 per day. This will be a backup in case 3B doesn’t have enough beds. We’ll also be looking for a 3rd option but he isn’t sure about the progress on this. Commissioner Hill made a motion to accept and approve the Memorandum of Agreement between Bannock County and Fremont County regarding the District 6 Juvenile Detention Center. Commissioner Chandler seconded the motion. A full voice vote was heard with all commissioners voting in favor. Commissioner Chandler asked about the situation with other counties, and if it is true that 3B has been full a number of times. Mr. Dummer stated Madison County and Jefferson County have been denied access to 3B. From his understanding, in those cases their juveniles have been kept on probation and put on house arrest and safety plans. We are concerned this could happen to our kids as well. In discussions with Darrin Burrel, the preference would be to send them to Bannock first; the facility is better, he has a good relationship with their director, and it would be better for our kids. If we can take kids there, we will, and 3B will be the back-up. They have had talks with Brian Meacham, who did some of our assessing at 5C as well as for Bonneville County; according to him 3B is always full and he isn’t sure how they will be able to take in kids from our 5 counties. The worry is that our kids will be kicked out if their needs supersede ours and we won’t have any way to stop it. Commissioner Dance asked Mr. Dummer to document how many of our kids are denied and/or removed from 3B, as well as the dates and their reasonings, if and when it happens. He feels at some point we will need this documentation. Mr. Dummer stated he would be happy to do that. He is aware of other counties that have had issues with them in the past. Mr. Hall asked Mr. Dummer if 3B would be willing to cooperate, they might ask 3B to document the requests from the 5 Counties for housing, and how many they deny, as well. It would be helpful. Mr. Dummer stated he could talk to Clark, Jefferson, Teton, and Madison counties as well. He talked to the dispatcher in Teton County last week; the Teton County Sheriff’s Office was completely unaware of the closure of 5C. Sheriff Bart Quayle and Chief Deputy Sheriff Cody Gudmunson RE: MOA Between ITD And Sheriff’s Office – action item; Signatures for Boat Grant – action item Mr. Quayle presented an MOA with ITD for team training in facilities they have purchased along the Ashton corridor until they need it. There are about 9 properties listed in the MOA that ITD will allow us to access and train in. Most are residential which we don’t often get the opportunity to train in. A couple of them will be used for storage. Commissioner Hill made a motion to enter into the memorandum of agreement between the Idaho Transportation Department and the Fremont County Sheriff’s Office for the use of 9 properties ITD has acquired for the use of training and storage of county property. Commissioner Chandler seconded the motion. A full voice vote was heard with all commissioners voting in favor. Mr. Gudmunson requested signatures for our annual agreement with the Idaho Department of Parks and Rec for our recreational boating safety program. This is a grant application to allocate dollars to every county; this year we should be getting roughly $22,185, and is a 50% match grant program. It is a very good partnership we have with them. Commissioner Chandler made a motion to approve the grant application of $22,185 for the Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation to Fremont County for FY2026. Commissioner Hill seconded the motion. A full voice vote was heard with all commissioners voting in favor. Commissioners RE: Commissioners RE: Executive Session IC 74-206(1)(a) – action item; Appoint Planning and Zoning Board Members – action item Commissioner Dance made a motion to go into executive session pursuant to IC 74-206(1)(a) To consider hiring a public officer, employee, staff member or individual agent, wherein the respective qualities of individuals are to be evaluated in order to fill a particular vacancy or need. This paragraph does not apply to filling a vacancy in an elective office or deliberations about staffing needs in general; at 10:11 a.m. Commissioner Hill seconded the motion. A roll call vote was taken with Commissioner Dance voting “Aye”, Commissioner Hill voting “Aye”, and Commissioner Chandler voting “Aye”. Commissioner Dance declared the meeting open at 12:04 a.m. Commissioners tabled a decision until next week. Two of our interviews needed to be rescheduled for next week’s meeting, so a decision will be made after their session. ITD Eli Robinson RE: Draft MOA Relinquishing Property to County – action item Mr. Robinson and Curtis Calderwood discussed a draft agreement they have created for ITD to purchase the right of way for the Chester to Ashton project, and then giving it to Fremont County for upkeep and maintenance after the project is finished. They would like to know if this agreement is something the Commissioners are comfortable moving forward with; if their designs match the agreement and scope; and what our next steps would be. They would like to have a working meeting to discuss the language and answer any questions or concerns we might have and make any modifications to the agreement if we feel like any need to be made. Commissioner Dance expressed some concern because of our previous experience with the south interchange and the closure of some of our at-grade crossings. This project also appears to have some at-grade crossing closures. The closures on the south end still haven’t gotten resolved; the ends of those roads just end with no room to turn road graders around, let alone any other vehicle. This is a big concern for us. We assumed these things were taken care of from several previous meetings prior to Mr. Robinson and Mr. Calderwood being involved in these projects or discussions. Brandon Harris stated this was a miscommunication with the state and we are working with them to fix those at-grades to fix them and make them usable for the county. The frustration with the state is that they have kept changing what they are doing with the right-of-way. Nothing has ever been done as we’ve been told it would be done from the beginning of this project. Mr. Calderwood stated they have an agreement from the state to provide funding to the county to make those improvements on 300N (this is a separate agreement); they are waiting for the county to tell them what improvements we want and an estimate for what those improvements will cost so they can determine if they can cover that cost. Commissioner Dance feels we need to get clear understanding about what is going to happen with 300N before we move forward with a discussion about Chester to Ashton. We thought we had a clear understanding before, and none of those things were done. He doesn’t blame these gentlemen; they are coming late to this process. He just wants to be sure this issue is taken care of before we move on to something else. Mr. Hall asked for clarification about the agreement for 300N; has the state already purchased the right-of-way, but they will pay the county to put in a cul-de-sac? Mr. Calderwood said no; the contract they had allowed them to build the interchange with a change order to cut off access to 300N and put barricades up to restrict the access. They are waiting for the county to give them a design to purchase right of way, but it will fall on the county to make those purchases, and then let them know how much it will cost, and they will cover the cost if they can find the funding. Mr. Hall asked if the county acquires the right-of-way, the state will reimburse us? Mr. Calderwood said yes, if they agree on the price. It will depend on the cost. He doesn’t currently have funds allocated to this project, so he needs to know what the estimate is so he can request those funds and find out if they are available, then they can be added to the agreement, and the agreement can be signed. $100,000 would be easier to get than $1M, so he needs to know what he needs to ask for. Mr. Harris explained the frustrations we have had through this process. We were told from the beginning we had 5 years after the construction of the interchange before those accesses would be closed on 200N and 300N. Then, as it was getting closer to being finished, he was called into a meeting and was told they were being closed in the fall (2025), so that changed. Something else that changed in the design process of that project, the state was going to buy all of the right-of-way so that we could come in and construct it; then he was called into another meeting, and he was told we had to take care of the right-of-way. He told them in every meeting he believed the right-of-way was the state’s responsibility and not ours. They kept changing what they were doing on this project. We’ll build it, because the county can build it cheaper than the state can, but he doesn’t feel the purchase of the right-of-way is our responsibility and that the state should handle it. Nothing has ever been what was promised from the beginning, and that’s why we’re frustrated. Mr. Calderwood appreciates our perspective on these issues. When he was put on this project, it was already through the design phases. He feels things might have been expedited because of the access to funding at the time. He knew there had been discussions at the time about the connections around it, but wasn’t aware of the changes that had been made. Commissioner Dance stated we had clear understandings from those early meetings, but those understandings were never carried out. Mr. Harris stated that it started with the state not wanting to provide frontage roads, and instead wanted to give us money to help build our infrastructure. Then it changed because of the right-in/right out at 200N, and he was told ‘we solved the issue so now we don’t have to pay anything.’ And then they closed 300N and created more issues. Mr. Calderwood stated the direction he has been given is that they thought they had the contractor on board to start addressing the issues at the at-grade interchanges; a change order was written into the contract to do the right-in/right out on 200N and to close 300N with the existing contract and contractor. Commissioner Dance stated that in that process we lose a turnaround at 300N, and the issue was just set aside and ignored, which has left us feeling a little bruised. He doesn’t blame these gentlemen; they’ve come to this project late, but he does want to find a resolution for this issue before we agree to move forward with another project. Mr. Calderwood agrees. The county should be able to feel confident with what ITD is doing, which is why they have approached the Chester to Ashton project the way they have and have been so open with their design plans and would like to create the agreement with us and address any concerns we might have. He looked for an agreement for the south interchange but didn’t find one. Mr. Harris stated there wasn’t one. He likes the design for the Chester to Ashton project and the way they are doing this process; they are addressing the at-grade closures and the impact they will have, which wasn’t done for the interchange. They have cul-de-sacs designed in the plans, and they’re buying right-of way, so we shouldn’t have to worry about those things being done. We didn’t get that same treatment down here; they just closed 300N, put up barriers and said they were done. He doesn’t understand why they pulled away and left it unfinished. Mr. Calderwood asked for clarification that ITD hired a consultant to handle the right of way, but he’s never seen any of these plans. Mr. Harris stated we were told for 2 years they had hired Keller Associates to do the work. He submitted a map of the area of impact and how many millions of dollars it would cost the county if they closed these roads, and they scoffed at it and said they didn’t believe him, and they would hire a consultant. We waited for 2 years and asked about progress multiple times, but Keller told him they were never hired. We were told for 2 years something was getting done, and then suddenly the accesses were being closed with no information about the study or anything else. Mr. Calderwood state Keller was hired to address the at-grade intersections north and south, and then pulled them off the north at-grades just to focus on the right-in/right-out at 200N and the closure at 300N. Mr. Harris said yes, but then they didn’t do anything at 300N, it was just cut off and barricaded. He doesn’t understand why they are taking care of the at-grades from Ashton to Chester appropriately, but it wasn’t done the same for 300N. Mr. Calderwood feels it might have been the expedited timeline; they had the funding and the design for the interchange as well as the right-in/right-out on 200N, but the design didn’t include 300N. Mr. Harris doesn’t understand why they had no problem doing all of that but then washed their hands of 300N. They just decided it needed to be closed and then closed it and walked away. Mr. Calderwood asked if the County would be interested in changing the scope of the project and start with a resolution of 300N, and then move forward with the Ashton to Chester project. They could plan a work meeting later in the week. Commissioners and Mr. Harris were happy with this idea. Mr. Harris stated he does have design plans for a cul-de-sac for 300N that is ready to go, but part of it is on a conservation easement, so he wonders how far our prescriptive easement goes. The plans may need to be discussed before they can be finalized. There are some things in this MOA he wonders about; he feels the distance on some of the roads may need to be marked how much the state will be giving to the county. Also, 1000N is currently our right-of-way and they are going to fix it, but would we need to give them permission to do the work on our right-of-way. He just feels some of these questions may need to be addressed. There was a discussion about certain things that would change; some private driveways could change to public right-of-ways, but they will not be maintained by the county. People will need to be made aware of that change. Commissioner Dance asked Mr. Harris and Mr. Rigby if they are comfortable waiting to make any decisions on this MOA today. Mr. Harris and Mr. Rigby said yes. Mr. Calderwood stated the intent was only to present the draft agreement today to see if we like it and are comfortable with it, and if there are questions, we can have the working meeting to modify or improve it. Mr. Calderwood presented another agreement between ITD, the Railroad, and the County for the railroad company to add lights and gates to E 400 N near the south interchange. There is no cost to the county because the roadway is already complete. Commissioner Dance made a motion to approve the tri-party agreement for the E 400 N railroad crossings between ITD, Fremont County, and Eastern Idaho Railroad. Commissioner Hill seconded the motion. A full voice vote was heard with all commissioners voting in favor. Public Works Director Brandon Harris RE: Executive Session IC 74-206(1)(c) – action item; Repairs to St. Anthony Transfer Station Bid – action item Commissioner Dance made a motion to go into executive session pursuant to IC 74-206(1)(c) To acquire an interest in real property which is not owned by a public agency; at 1:51 p.m. Commissioner Hill seconded the motion. A roll call vote was taken with Commissioner Dance voting “Aye”, Commissioner Hill voting “Aye”, and Commissioner Chandler voting “Aye”. Commissioner Dance declared the meeting open at 2:10 p.m. Mr. Harris discussed a bid from Steel Vision to repair the St. Anthony transfer station in the amount of $71,589, which includes $57,000 from their insurance company and $8,000 from our insurance. We would also like to raise the door. Commissioner Chandler made a motion to accept the bid from Steel Vision in the amount of $71,589.00 to repair the St. Anthony transfer station and raise the door. Commissioner Dance seconded the motion. A full voice vote was heard with all commissioners voting in favor. Miscellaneous Commissioner Hill made a motion to approve the claims for March 9, 2026 as presented. Commissioner Chandler seconded the motion. A full voice vote was heard with all commissioners voting in favor. Commissioner Chandler made a motion to approve the minutes from March 2, 2026 as amended. Commissioner Hill seconded the motion. A full voice vote was heard with all commissioners voting in favor. Clerk Mattingly discussed the contribution request letter for the Board of Guardians. She reached out to Madison County; they received the same letter and paid this amount of $2400. They are trying to get the Board of Guardians up and active again as it hasn’t been in a few years. In future years, they will be asking for this same amount. Commissioner Kamachi previously served on the board and had found someone to help serve our area, but that person backed out. Commissioner Chandler was designated to serve on the board but his name may not have been submitted to the Guardians. Commissioner Dance has an idea of someone out of Ashton who may be able to serve our area; he will reach out to them, and Commissioner Chandler’s name will be submitted officially to the Board of Guardians. Commissioner Dance made a motion to pay the $2400 to the Upper Valley Board of Guardians, to be paid from the General Fund. Commissioner Hill seconded the motion. A full voice vote was heard with all commissioners voting in favor. Commissioner Dance made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 2:24 p.m. Commissioner Chandler seconded the motion. A full voice vote was heard with all commissioners voting in favor. There being no further business to come before the board the meeting was adjourned. _________________________________ Blair Dance, Chairman Fremont County Commissioner Attest: _____________________________ Meredith Mattingly, Clerk HISTORY Recorded by Min. 612041 Regular Commissioner Meeting 03-09-2026 on 3/16/2026
Text is extracted by machine from the official file linked on each page; the official file is the record. Sentinel Media, LLC.