City Council Minutes

Thursday, March 14,2002

MARCH 14, 2002, 4:00 P.M.

Mayor Daniel McArthur
Council Member Rod Orton
Council Member Larry Gardner
Council Member Bob Whatcott
Council Member Suzanne Allen
City Manager Gary Esplin
City Attorney Jonathan Wright
City Recorder Gay Cragun

Council Member Sharon Isom

Mayor McArthur called the meeting to order and welcomed all in attendance. The salute to the flag was led by Council Member Whatcott and the invocation was offered by Council Member Orton. Mayor McArthur introduced Steve Harmsen, a Salt Lake County Councilman who is running for a House seat.

Mayor McArthur and Council Member Whatcott gave an update on their recent trip to Washington D.C.

Mayor McArthur advised that he spoke with Marcus Faust about grants through various appropriations earmarked for sewer and water projects to extend utilities to the airport site, and to obtain HCP mitigation funding. Mayor McArthur advised he and Mr. Faust also discussed FAA discretionary funding.

Consider award of bid for the West City Springs water project.

City Manager Gary Esplin advised that even though several companies picked up plans and attended a pre-bid meeting, only one bid was received from Sunroc in the amount of $348,000. Staff felt this bid was too high and negotiated a reduction in the bid to $282,914, and recommends award.

Water and Power Engineer Barbara Berrett explained the bid amount was reduced by having City crews develop the springs, a premanufactured pump was obtained, and the pump station will be relocated by the old maintenance building to minimize the impact on the golf course. She advised the project is scheduled for completion by June or July.

A motion was made by Council Member Gardner and seconded by Council Member Orton to award the bid to Sunroc in the amount of $282,914. Mayor McArthur called for a vote, as follows:

Council Member Gardner - aye
Council Member Orton - aye
Council Member Whatcott - aye

The vote was unanimous and the motion carried.

Consider award of bid for the Bloomington Interchange landscaping project.

St. George City Council Minutes
March 14, 2002
Page Two

City Manager Gary Esplin advised this matter had previously been discussed in a work meeting, and the Council must decide on what scale the landscaping should be done, costing from $154,000 to $266,000 for the entire project. The City is waiting for the final settlement with Walmart.

Mayor McArthur stated that since the area was an entrance to the City, he felt the entire project should be done.

Council Member Orton stated he would like to see the entire project done.

Council Member Whatcott stated that if the City has $130,000 set aside for the project, in the best case scenario it would only have to spend an additional $24,000 extra.

City Manager Gary Esplin advised in that event the City would then landscape the middle sections of the roundabouts only, and in three or four years apply to the State for grant funds for additional landscaping on a 80/20 split, with the City having to pay 20%.

Mayor McArthur commented that the City is getting to the point that in a few years extra funds will not be available because of airport matching funds. He stated he would prefer to see it all done now.

Council Member Whatcott inquired if it was worth it to finish the entire project now, if in three or four years the City could complete it with a 20% match of grant funds.

City Manager Gary Esplin advised that the State may not authorize funding for this enhancement project in the future.

Parks Superintendent Lynne Scott stated that if the City Council's decision was to landscape only the middle of the roundabouts now, the remaining portions would be left as dirt.

Council Member Gardner inquired if full landscaping could be done on the Bloomington side of the interchange, and only the teardrop landscaped on the Bloomington Hills side.

Ms. Scott replied that whatever the City Council directed would be done, but no financial assistance would be forthcoming from the Bloomington Community Council as they do not have any funds at this time.

City Manager Gary Esplin advised there is a possibility of money coming back from Walmart which could be used.

Mayor McArthur commented the City could landscape the middle of the roundabouts only at this time, and if money comes back from Walmart, it could be earmarked to landscape the additional area in the roundabouts.

Council Member Orton commented that a lot of people have made a commitment to this intersection and it is a main entrance to the City. He commented he would like to see it all done, and he made a motion to award the bid in the amount necessary to finish the entire project. The motion was seconded by Council Member Gardner.

Council Member Whatcott inquired of Ms. Scott as to cost vs. value aesthetically for other projects in the City

St. George City Council Minutes
March 14, 2002
Page Three

City Manager Gary Esplin commented this project could be compared to the two interchange landscaping projects now going in.

Ms. Scott replied that one interchange landscaping project was half a million dollars, and the other is $680,000 with the City's match at $150,000.

Council Member Allen arrived.

Mayor McArthur commented it could make a difference in the motion if the Council knew how much money it was getting back from Walmart.

Council Member Gardner withdrew his second to the motion, and commented he would prefer to see only the middle of the roundabouts landscaped now, and if funds are received from Walmart, the entire project be completed.

Council Member Whatcott inquired about the timeline to hear from Walmart.

City Manager Gary Esplin advised he would contact them again.

A motion was made by Council Member Gardner to landscape the middle of the roundabouts only at this time, but landscape the entire project if money is received from Walmart.

Council Member Whatcott seconded the motion with the stipulation that whatever is received from Walmart will be used for additional landscaping of the roundabouts.

Parks Superintendent Lynne Scott advised that the City retained the right to negotiate with the landscape contractors for a cost on a square footage basis.

Mayor McArthur called for a vote, as follows:

Council Member Gardner - aye
Council Member Whatcott - aye
Council Member Orton - aye
Council Member Allen - aye

The vote was unanimous and the motion carried.

Consider approval of a resolution approving the State of Utah Municipal Wastewater Planning Program Self-Assessment Report for the City of St. George.

A motion was made by Council Member Whatcott and seconded by Council Member Gardner to approve the resolution. Mayor McArthur called for a roll call vote, as follows:

Council Member Whatcott - aye
Council Member Gardner - aye
Council Member Allen - aye
Council Member Orton - aye

The vote was unanimous and the motion carried.

Paul Landell stated there was a growing need for the project as there were no places left to shoot in the County with the exception of the LaVerkin facility which had one shooting bench. He stated the interlocal agreement

St. George City Council Minutes
March 14, 2002
Page Four

involves an advisory board comprised of a representative from each city in the county, one from the state, and one from the county. The board will determine the method of funding and participation by the various agencies in its operation. The prime objective of the agency is its eligibility for a $250,000 grant ($50,000 a year for five years) from the federal government, derived from tax monies on ammunition, guns, and other sporting equipment. Formation of this agency will make it eligible to receive this grant. The proposed site consists of 512 acres located below the Purgatory correctional facility and fair grounds, between there and the landfill. At present there is gun shooting, archery, paintball, and cowboy pistol shooting, but nothing that requires backstops or ranges with baffles. An engineering firm has begun to do aerial mapping of the site, preparing contour maps and locating existing utilities and drainage so a master plan can be started. The agreement has been reviewed by the County Attorney, the State, and some of the various cities. Under the board of directors there will be an advisory board made up of those who have direct expertise in different shooting venues. They will serve as advisors to the board of directors and will also be responsible for the day-to-day operations of the facility, maintenance, clean-up and security. A first class facility is proposed, one which will draw people to the area. The facility will also be used for hunter education and will have ranges for the general public to use for practice, competitive events, and recreation. A local group has pledged to construct a building to consist of storage, a classroom, barbecue, and outdoor patio.

Mayor McArthur inquired if all the communities in the County had joined, and where funding would come from.

Mr. Landell replied that the board will have a representative from each community, either a council member or citizen with expertise in the area, who will look at methods of funding. The advisory board will also look into grants and other methods of funding such as obtaining sponsors for individual ranges, as commonly done in other areas. The facility will be family oriented, not just for professionals.

An unidentified man advised that Hurricane, Washington, Santa Clara, and the County had signed the interlocal agreement.

Mayor McArthur commented that the budgets would have to be approved by each City Council.

Council Member Orton inquired if any of the communities who signed the agreement had committed financial support.

Mr. Landell replied that they had not as the board had not yet been formed. However, a lot of them are looking at in-kind support.

Washington County Commissioner Alan Gardner commented that when the agency is formed, they will be the sponsoring agency and the RPP lease would be with them.

Council Member Gardner clarified that the board would create the budget and then pass it to each city council to be ratified.

City Manager Gary Esplin stated that participation would have to be approved by each city council.

An unidentified man stated that each of the other entities who signed the interlocal agreement have appointed a member to be on the board of directors, and someone was needed from St. George.

St. George City Council Minutes
March 14, 2002
Page Five

City Manager Gary Esplin advised that staff's original concern had been addressed, and its only other concern is not involving the police department in the program. The City already has a similar facility and has invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in it. Another issue of concern is there could be pressure on the City Council if they are the only entity not supporting it, and how the City's level of participation is determined.

Mayor McArthur commented the project appeared to be a good one, and the only question was funding.

City Manager Gary Esplin commented that City staff supported the concept, but the question remained that the City does not know what it will be committing to down the road.

Council Member Orton inquired if other cities' law enforcement agencies would be using the facility.

Mr. Landell replied that ground will be provided for a law enforcement training center. Former Chief of Police Bob Flowers was supportive of this as he felt the City's present facility would only be viable for a few more years and was limited in its present usage. This training center has been discussed with other chiefs of police, including the Sheriff, and all are enthusiastic.

An unidentified man commented that costs had yet to be determined, and the board will be relied upon to determine that. There will be some cost outlay, but it is difficult to identify at this time as there is no idea of how many in-kind donations will be made or how many entities will participate. He stated he hoped that any cost outlay would be offset by revenue coming to the area.

Council Member Gardner commented that it made sense to locate the facility at its planned location.

City Manager Gary Esplin advised that City participation would have to be done by a resolution approving the interlocal agreement, and it would be scheduled on the next City Council agenda.

Present from the Washington City Council were: Mayor Clove and Council Members Jean Arbuckle, Rick White, Roger Bundy, and Mike Heaton.

Mayor McArthur commented that protection of the airport site was of the utmost importance, and boundaries between the two cities could be decided as the project develops. He commented he hoped a planning group could be formed to work together on the issues.

Mayor Clove commented that Washington City was in attendance to work together with St. George. He advised Washington City has been approached by property owners wanting to annex, but if the City of St. George is going to protest the annexation, Washington will not annex the property.

Mayor McArthur advised it was proposed a consultant be hired with each city paying $50,000 for such service.

Mayor Clove stated he thought the matter could be handled better by the two cities, rather than hiring a consultant at this point.

St. George City Council Minutes
March 14, 2002
Page Six

Mayor McArthur advised that SITLA is a large participator in the project as they own a great deal of land adjacent to the airport, and if they are willing to help fund the project, the cities should take advantage of it.

Mayor Clove questioned if other property owners should be invited to participate.

Council Member Gardner commented he had no problem with private property owner participating, and it was never the City's intention to create a feeling of exclusion.

Mayor McArthur stated it was planned that private property owners would become involved in the process when the study was completed.

Public Works Director Larry Bulloch commented that staff supports a study because it will create a forum to bring everyone together, and an independent party is needed to do that; someone with the skills to bring the facts to the table. A professional is needed to do the homework and present the information so intelligent decisions can be made.

Russ Gallian advised that dancing around the major issues has caused a lot of contention, and whether intentional or not, private property owners were excluded. He stated that what bothered him most was that he was led to believe repeatedly there wasn't going to be a second or general runway, and his property was planned according to that information. The plan for a second runway has destroyed his plan and is not favorable to economic development, as it will affect the most prime property which would generate the most economic development for the entire area. He commented that Washington City does not want the second runway, and it is not a good use of the property. Further, the City of St. George may be unable or unwilling to purchase the property, and the current maps which show the second runway and access point destroy his plans. Washington City shares his vision of the property in question and he has received a favorable response from them with regard to annexation, similar to the response previously received from St. George.

Mayor McArthur commented that the second runway has always been a part of the City's plans for the site, however, it may never be built. In the meantime the land affected could be built upon and used. The City does not know what will happen in the future, but it must provide an opportunity for the second runway. He advised he felt a consultant was needed, and the City routinely uses consultants on all its major projects.

Washington City Council Member Jean Arbuckle advised that the only people who can speak for the Washington City Council are its Council Members. She inquired if the initial runway would also be used as a general aviation runway.

Mayor McArthur replied that yes, it is the City's intention that it to be used for this purpose.

Public Works Director Larry Bulloch commented that in reality, the primary runway would be used for both until such time as traffic demanded the second runway.

Mayor McArthur advised that the second runway is very short, 4,000 feet, and will be used for small aircraft and to separate them from the larger aircraft.

St. George City Council Minutes
March 14, 2002
Page Seven

Council Member Gardner commented that the City wishes to bring the two cities together to resolve differences and identify common goals, and part of the City's discussion has always been that the City needed a second runway. The consultant removed the second runway from the initial plan because the FAA will not approve anything 20 years out, as it is not close enough to be a viable part of the plan. It was then dropped from the planning process for that reason. Private property owners are saying that if the site needs to be secured, the City should step up to the table and purchase the property. If the City does not plan on using the property, then they should not be prevented from using their property by downzoning which would prohibit them from doing what they want to do. If in 20 years the City needs the property for the second runway, it could condemn it and purchase it. He stated he hears concern that the City is not willing to make a commitment up front, yet it wants to reserve the right to use the property indefinitely. He stated the property owners should have the right to develop their property, and he felt in 20 to 50 years, if the property was developed, the City would not condemn and take the property as it would be too expensive.

City Manager Gary Esplin advised that the protection zone limits use, but does not prohibit construction of a corporate campus. The FAA says only that protected uses cannot include convention centers, assembly halls, churches, schools, etc. He stated he felt Council Member Gardner was correct that once the project is built, it probably is not feasible to think the City will condemn it. However, the project can be accommodated with the way the proposed runway is lined up and given the lay of the land. The property within the overlay protection zone of the second runway should be developed according to what the FAA will allow in that area.

Mayor McArthur commented the City could not afford to be shortsighted.

Council Member Gardner commented in that case the City should step up and purchase the property.

Public Works Director Larry Bulloch commented that the City would be doing a feasibility study identifying precise costs and funding sources, and it would then know whether it can afford to purchase the land in question, and it will let the property owners know. For clarification he displayed a picture of the primary runway and advised that the Klein property is within the influence area of the primary runway. The influence area of the second runway only double covers that same area, so the second runway does not add any more limited uses to the property than the primary runway.

Council Member Rick White inquired what would prohibit the second runway from being located on the other side.

Mr. Bulloch replied that the property on the other side is on a steep incline and runways have to be flat.

Jeff Klein stated there appeared to be contradicting viewpoints, and the apparent conclusion that a secondary runway is in the best interest of the community is questionable in terms of economic development opportunities or benefit to aviation in terms of developing the location and impacts to the City of Washington. He stated the maximum benefit would be had not by the second runway, but in bringing corporations to the area. He expressed concern that SITLA helped choose the planner and was on the steering committee where landowners were not involved.

Council Member Jean Arbuckle commented it was her understanding that the second runway was far off in the future, and it would not preclude

St. George City Council Minutes
March 14, 2002
Page Eight

development in any event. Therefore, when the second runway comes into play at that time, whatever is developed on the site would have to be purchased at market value. She stated she did not see second runway as a hindrance to development. She inquired about the possibility of a third runway.

Public Works Director replied that there was no room for a third runway.

Washington City Manager Kevin Watt stated it was the property owners' understanding that there is an idea that the second runway does not preclude them from development, but their concerns will always loom as they try to attract corporate clients to come and look at the property. St. George will always say, without having to buy the land, that there is the possibility of a second runway, which deprives the property owners of some of their ability to solicit clients. Washington City had a tough time convincing its community that the airport is in their best interests, as they have the impression that St. George will have the runway and airport, and Washington will get all the flight patterns. Washington City has two property owners who wish to annex, and the question is, and reason for coming here tonight, is to determine if St. George will protest the annexation, as this is an opportunity for Washington City to capitalize on economic development.

Mayor McArthur replied that personally, he would say that if the area is not protected as required by the overlay zone, the City of St. George would absolutely oppose an annexation, as its main objective is to protect the airport site. This is the reason for the City's interest in creating a joint board to plan the airport influence area.

City Manager Gary Esplin commented that it makes no difference to the City of St. George which city the property owners annex to, as the City only cares about protecting the site, and there can be no encroachment. If it could be agreed that the proposed annexation to Washington City would meet the guidelines per a pre-annexation agreement and have compatible uses, then the City of St. George would not protest the annexation.

Jeff Klein questioned if the plan provided to Washington City was required by FAA code as an approved standard for airports.

City Attorney Jonathan Wright replied that the City's plan has been accepted by the FAA.

Mr. Klein responded that while that may be, it was not the FAA's standard code and is not dictated by them.

City Manager Gary Esplin replied that the City relied upon its consultants in preparation of the plan, and it was approved by the FAA.

Mayor McArthur advised that the City of St. George had this same discussion with Leucadia, and they had to modify their plan to be compatible with the overlay zone. The City also has an agreement to purchase some land from them at market value. He proposed that perhaps there could be some sharing of costs and revenues generated in the overlay zone.

Washington City Council Member Roger Bundy commented that with respect to the proposed annexation, if in fact the area is annexed to Washington and the second runway is built, the economic base may end up being gone and this could negatively impact the City of Washington. He commented that perhaps the annexation was not the best thing for Washington City.

St. George City Council Minutes
March 14, 2002
Page Nine

Dallin Gardner commented that he was confused about the overlay zone
issue in which the FAA imposes different standards for airports without a general runway, and this makes a significant difference to property owners and Washington City in how private development is dealt with adjacent to the airport. He inquired if the City of St. George were planning to acquire the flight zone in Washington City.

Mayor McArthur replied that yes, the City of St. George was planning to acquire the flight zone as it cannot be built upon.

Mr. Gardner inquired if Washington City had been involved in discussions about intrusion of the flight zone.

Public Works Director Larry Bulloch replied that the City of St. George has always said it would have to purchase the flight zone area within Washington City.

Jeff Klein commented that an entry way to the airport has already been identified through Leucadia property, and this has not been discussed by the joint planning committee to see what the maximum benefits would be. He inquired if the committee would work together in an unbiased manner to identify the highest and best use to maximize benefits in the master plan for the airport.

Council Member Orton responded this was the reason a consulting firm is needed.

Washington City Manager Kevin Watt stated that long term the effect of tax dollars may not be as significant to St. George as it is to Washington City. Washington City feels that commercial development is a better use of the property than a second runway and will provide the most advantage twenty to thirty years in the future. He commented that the idea of a second runway is more important to St. George, and Washington City is trying to watch out for what is best for Washington City.

City Manager Gary Esplin commented that while he agreed, St. George City is spending $100 million and not asking Washington City for any contribution. St. George is not opposed to sharing the benefit, but if it does not do some planning to protect the integrity of its investment, then a difficult problem is created. He stated the landowners could develop commercially as long as they don't put the City in a situation where it has to address the FAA or create long term problems for the airport.

Mayor Clove clarified that the City of St. George would not protest the annexation if the uses were permitted by the FAA.

Mayor McArthur agreed, as long as the uses fit the overlay zone.

City Manager Gary Esplin commented that if St. George were to annex the property, it would not let the property come in without having an annexation agreement spelling out the uses for development of the property.

Council Member Gardner commented that he recalled in the very beginning dialogue about annexation of the area in question, and in deference to the hesitation of Washington City, St. George chose not to proceed with the annexation. One of the issues which needs clarification is the benefit to both communities as far as economic development, and both communities should work together to develop a plan beneficial to both. The City is well aware of the economic impact the airport will have, and this is just as significant for

St. George City Council Minutes
March 14, 2002
Page Ten

St. George proportionately. St. George has tried to be a good neighbor and be cooperative to make the project work for both communities. However, if Washington City is going to take action and annex the property without economic consideration for St. George, St. George will protest the annexation, and that would not be well suited for either community. The communities should work together, decide where the boundary line should be drawn, and then proceed with joint annexation. He inquired about Carter Burgess involvement.

Public Works Director Larry Bulloch replied that they are not involved in this study, as this study is led by the consultants. Carter Burgess will be coordinating with them in implementation of what comes from the study.

Council Member Gardner advised that Jeff Reber has done a lot of consulting for airports around the country. He suggested that both cities sit down together as part of a committee, and not hire a consultant.

Council Member Whatcott commented that a decision had already been made to use a consultant.

Public Works Director Larry Bulloch advised the decision was that professional expertise was needed, and a consultant was selected.

Jeff Klein stated he supported Council Member Gardner's position, and a much better plan can be had if more people are involved.

Mayor McArthur commented that the involvement by both communities was viable, and a decision had already been reached and a recommendation made.

Jeff Klein stated that SITLA had a vote in deciding the planner, but other landowners were not involved in the selection process.

Mayor McArthur replied that all parties will be invited to be a part of the discussion and decision after the consultant's report is made.

Washington City Council Member Rick White advised that the consultant SITLA voted for was not selected.

Council Member Whatcott stated he did not feel one vote would have made a difference in any event, and he questioned why Mr. Klein felt left out.

Jeff Klein responded that he should have been a part of the process and included from the beginning.

Russ Gallian commented that there had been no public process.

Council Member Whatcott responded that this is what is happening now - putting together a committee to begin the public process.

Washington County Economic Development Director Scott Hirschi advised that the Washington County Economic Development Council Executive Committee has withdrawn their participation in the proposed project. He commented this in no way reflects on the level of support for the new airport, as they are 100% supportive of it and will do what they can to help the process. They felt their participation has worked in the opposite direction, has raised new controversy, and has worked toward lessening of a satisfactory relationship between the cities. This is the exact opposite of

St. George City Council Minutes
March 14, 2002
Page Eleven

what the planning process should do, and Economic Development does not want to be a tool to slow down the process or make it more controversial.

Council Member Orton commented the goal is simply to have someone come in from the outside with a plan feasible for both cities.

Public Works Director Larry Bulloch inquired if both city councils voted for the study, if Economic Development would come back in and be involved.

Mr. Hirschi replied that they would.

Mayor McArthur advised that 16 years ago the St. George and Washington City Councils met to discuss where the boundary should be between the two cities, and that the airport would be located at this site. A determination was made at that time that the boundary would be around the airport property, with the main runway being in St. George. This issue is not new and has not just recently been brought up. It is imperative that the site be protected, and if Washington City will approve the overlay zone, the process can move forward.

Washington City Council Member Jean Arbuckle commented that while she was one of the airport's opponents from the beginning, she came to the realization that the airport was a reality and was going to happen. Therefore, she feels it is in Washington City Council's best interests to make it work as best as possible for Washington. She commented this meeting was long overdue and there should be more of them because lack of communication breeds contempt and concern and gives rise to rumors. She suggested that perhaps the committee would be better off with three members from each community, and no swing vote, as it would have to come to a consensus. It appears there is some concern about the consulting firm, as the first choice was eliminated because someone resigned and was not available.

Council Member Orton commented that right or wrong, the study will give ideas and information, and while some have tried to cloud the issues, it would be unfortunate not to do the study. He stated he has never thought of the new airport as a St. George project, but as a County project, as its benefits will be far-reaching.

Washington City Council Member Jean Arbuckle commented that the study would not be binding, but simply informative.

Washington City Council Member Roger Bundy commented he thought of the study as an extension of the General Plan.

Washington City Manager Kevin Watt inquired if it would be possible to reach a compromise and resolve the concerns of the landowners by agreeing to begin the project at the starting point, remove the second runway, and allow an engineering firm to develop it as an alternative. He commented that while the study is a good idea, it should be started further back without the second runway.

Council Member Orton commented he was not sure the City Council ever spoke about the airport without mentioning the second runway.

Public Works Director Larry Bulloch stated the reason the City is doing the project is so it will have room to expand - that is the driving force of the seven year effort. The decision for the second runway has already been made, and it is now time to see how to best meet the needs of the community and property owners within that framework.

St. George City Council Minutes
March 14, 2002
Page Twelve

Washington City Manager Kevin Watt stated that until two months ago, he did not think the Washington City Council was aware of a second runway.

Council Members Orton and Allen disagreed with Mr. Watt.

Mayor Clove advised that the second runway was not on the plan submitted to them.

Council Member Gardner commented that Mr. Bulloch and Mr. Esplin both stated that with regard to the second runway, eventually it might happen, but in the meantime perhaps it should be eliminated from the dialogue.

Public Works Director Larry Bulloch replied that the way to protect the airport is through land use. The overlay zone does not mean "no development;"
development must be compatible with the facility.

Washington County Economic Development Director Scott Hirschi expressed support of the proposal to appoint three council members from each city to create a new committee and throw out everything done to this point and begin again.

Council Member Orton and Mayor McArthur expressed hesitation at this suggestion.

Mayor Clove inquired if the consultant would actually consult with everyone. He was informed that he would.

Russ Gallian suggested that the annexation issue be solved first, as it made more sense to come up with an acceptable annexation agreement first, utilizing the committee as a recommending body.

Mayor McArthur replied that the planning process is done to protect the overlay zone. The City can proceed with the project once Washington City approved the overlay zone.

Mayor Clove inquired what else would be needed from Washington City if it approved the overlay zone and agreed to participate in the study so that St. George would not protest the annexation.

City Manager Gary Esplin commented that the issue of planning and the overlay zone must be considered together, and it would be difficult to approve an annexation before seeing what the uses would be.

City Attorney Jonathan Wright advised that infrastructure issues must also be considered.

Public Works Director Larry Bulloch commented that the process will produce an annexation plan everyone will agree upon.

Washington City Council Member Mike Heaton inquired what would happen if the study indicated all of the property should end up in St. George.

Council Member Gardner replied in that event the City of St. George would pay for all of the study, refunding Washington City its $50,000.

Council Member Whatcott commented that the benefit of the study will be to give direction on the overlay zone and overall direction of the airport. In that event, it would seem that special interest groups and local municipalities should not be involved, but someone who has no clue where personal

St. George City Council Minutes
March 14, 2002
Page Thirteen

property lines lie. Direction can then be given to the two City Councils, without allowing special interest groups to muddy the waters since their only interests are their own. The City, however, has to look at the bigger picture, and it has a lot more to lose by having an outside consultant than anyone else. St. George is the one spending the most to make the airport a reality.

Mayor Clove commented that the Washington City Council needed to meet and decide if it wanted to participate in the study, discuss the overlay zone, and the annexation petition.

Mayor McArthur suggested the two City Councils meet again in another month or two. Another meeting was scheduled for April 25 at 5:00 p.m. at the St. George City Office.

Washington County Economic Development Director Scott Hirschi advised he has been working with a plastics manufacturing firm who is looking at eight acres in the Ft. Pearce Industrial Park. They would like to option an additional 12 acres, and are proposing a 100,000 sq. ft. manufacturing facility with an assessed value of $6 million dollars. This facility would create 100 new jobs in the first phase. They are in negotiations for the land, and have submitted an application to the state for assistance. They are petitioning the City for incentives. Mr. Hirschi proposed that the City offer them 50% of the property tax through the EDA for five years. This would address their capital improvements and help with move-in costs. Additionally, in order to encourage them to pay more, he proposed that the City pay them annually 1% of their total payroll for five years in the form of an incentive, which calculates to be $15,000 a year. He advised the manufacturing firm is looking at other places, but St. George is their first choice because of its low power rates. Mr. Hirschi advised there were no problems from a clean air standpoint, as there is no burning.

City Manager Gary Esplin explained that the City's program of providing free plots for veterans was not an economically sound decision and he recommended it be done away with.

Council Member Orton suggested the veterans be honored in a different manner.

Council Member Whatcott suggested that a wall be erected similar to the Vietnam War and Korean War veteran walls in Washington, D.C.

Mayor McArthur advised that he received a complaint about how cold the water was at Sand Hollow, and the restroom facilities were dirty and plugged.
The matter will be investigated and a report made back to the City Council.

The meeting then adjourned.

Gay Cragun, City Recorder