City Council
Regular MeetingIdaho Falls, ID · May 18, 2020
Minutes
May 18, 2020
The City Council of the City of Idaho Falls met in Council Work Session, Monday, May 18, 2020, in the Council
Chambers in the City Annex Building located at 680 Park Avenue in Idaho Falls, Idaho at 3:00 p.m.
Call to Order and Roll Call:
There were present:
Mayor Rebecca L. Noah Casper
Councilmember Michelle Ziel-Dingman (by WebEx)
Councilmember John Radford (joined by WebEx at 3:20 p.m.)
Councilmember Thomas Hally
Councilmember Jim Freeman (by WebEx)
Councilmember Jim Francis (by WebEx)
Councilmember Shelly Smede
Also present:
Pamela Alexander, Municipal Services Director
Ed Morgan, Civic Center for the Performing Arts Manager
Duane Nelson, Fire Chief (by WebEx)
Dana Briggs, Economic Development Coordinator
Bryce Johnson, Police Chief (by WebEx)
Bill Squires, Police Captain (by WebEx)
Chris Fredericksen, Public Works Director (by WebEx)
David Richards, Water Superintendent (by WebEx)
Randy Fife, City Attorney
Kathy Hampton, City Clerk
Mayor Casper called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. with the following items:
Acceptance and/or Receipt of Minutes:
There were no minutes to receive.
Calendars, Announcements and Reports
Mayor Casper announced the Human Resources item listed on the agenda will not be addressed at this time, this item
was listed in error.
May 20, Bonneville Metropolitan Planning Organization (BMPO); Idaho Falls Luncheon presentation; and, Civic
Center for the Performing Arts Committee Meeting
May 21, City Council Meeting
May 23-25, Memorial Day weekend including the traditional Field of Honor display at Freeman Park (will be held
in a slightly different format due to the Coronavirus)
Mayor Casper stated a series of graduations will be occurring at the Motor-Vu Drive-in Theatre. Councilmember
Smede briefly reviewed the schedule for the graduations. Mayor Casper stated community requests are being received
for July 4 events (these events will be dependent upon the ideas and needed resources); Director budgets are being
developed during the month of May (these discussions will be based on what’s best for the community); and, an
officer with the Bonneville County Sheriff’s Office (BCSO) was killed during a response call on May 18. Chief
Johnson has extended an offer for any services needed from the Idaho Falls Police Department (IFPD) to the BCSO.
Coronavirus (COVID-19) Update:
Mayor Casper stated 25-30 new cases have been reported for the State each day in the previous few days, which is a
slight up-tick. She believes the wearing of masks makes the situation better. She indicated no changes are expected
within the week regarding the Stay Healthy Order. She indicated the Rebound Idaho cash grants, which began being
administered on May 11, have been taken from a $300M fund from the State from the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and
1
May 18, 2020
Economic Security (CARES) Act. 2,600 applications were received for these grants. Self-employed individuals can
begin applying for grants, in the amount of $7,500, beginning May 27. Chief Nelson stated three (3) cases have been
reported over the course of the previous weekend in Bonneville County. Ms. Briggs believes the Eastern Idaho Public
Health (EIPH) weekly calls are continuing.
Liaison Reports and Council Concerns:
Councilmember Dingman stated the Airport continues with their COVID measures and any passengers flying into
Idaho Falls are doing so safely. Mayor Casper noted the air fares are currently very low.
Councilmember Francis had no items to report.
Councilmember Freeman had no items to report.
Councilmember Radford had no items to report.
Councilmember Hally stated the Association of Idaho Cities (AIC) has distributed the budget manuals.
Councilmember Smede had no items to report.
Community Partnership Grant Discussion:
Mayor Casper stated this program has been allocated $130,000 in the previous years. She questioned if the program
should be offered during this scarce time. She indicated if the program works as is intended, these funds can help a
small organization improve the community in a way that the City could not do by itself, however, the City is trying
to save money. Mayor Casper stated this program is typically presented at this time of year in order to make the funds
available at the new Fiscal Year (FY) on October 1. She also stated the program dates could be altered pending any
budget decision. Ms. Briggs reiterated $130,000 has been allocated for the previous three (3) years. She believes a
lesser amount may not be worth staff time and resources to conduct the program. She noted there is an excess of
$130,000 in requests each year. She reviewed the requested amounts for the previous four (4) years, stating an average
of 20-30 organizations apply for these grants each year. She realizes this program may put constraints on the City
budget although she also realizes there may be an increased need in this particular year. Ms. Briggs stated program
application refinements are occurring each year. Possible changes being implemented in the current year include
decreasing the cap of $35,000 per organization to $15,000. Ms. Briggs questioned if the Council desires this program
to move forward. Councilmember Radford believes many organizations are currently struggling. This money may
make or break some organizations. Councilmember Francis believes many organizations may not be receiving an
income on a regular basis. He prefers to tentatively move forward. He is also in favor of reducing the cap amount and
delaying the application time. Councilmember Freeman concurs with the cap reduction and delaying the application
time. He believes this is money well spent and the need is greater now than has ever been. Councilmember Hally
believes this is a good investment for the City. He concurs to delay and he believes the program should continue. To
the request of Mayor Casper, Ms. Briggs reviewed organizations that have previously received funding including the
Idaho Falls Arts Council, the Idaho Falls Downtown Development Corporation (IFDDC), the Museum of Idaho, the
symphony, the Humanitarian Center, Habitat for Humanity, the Senior Citizens Center, and, the Snake River Animal
Shelter. Councilmember Dingman stated she supports the program to continue as this may be a difficult year to
eliminate it. She also stated she is interested in program changes and she is in favor of delaying the timeframe.
Councilmember Smede believes this may not be the best year to give money away. She also believes individuals in
Idaho Falls are doing a lot of giving and supporting. Ms. Briggs reviewed the timeline of the program. She believes
delaying the program would be okay. Mayor Casper recommended delaying the timeline of the program as this would
not pre-commit budget dollars. Ms. Briggs stated she will move forward with a delayed process pending any changes
of the budget discussion of $130,000. She will also inform the Council of any changes to the application.
Child Care Licensing Discussion:
Captain Squires stated the proposed ordinance amendment will break down the requirements that did not give
allowances to those who have committed a crime with an adequate timeframe. The break down is by the severity of
the crime into three (3) tiers. The first tier would never allow a license (crimes including rape, homicide, child
molestation), the second tier would allow a 10-year timeframe (crimes including serious felonies such as domestic
violence, battery, burglary, robbery), and, the third tier would allow a 5-year timeframe (less serious offenses such
as drug possession, misdemeanor battery, misdemeanor assault). Captain Squires stated this would allow to error on
the side of child safety and the ability to scrutinize these individuals. Councilmember Francis stated, per follow-up
2
May 18, 2020
discussions, the proposed ordinance has been adjusted versus the ordinance that was included in the packet. Mr.
Kirkham stated the proposed ordinance amendments reflect changes that occurred in the State legislature that
amended the State licensing requirements, including changing the term of a license from two (2) to five (5) years. To
the response of Mayor Casper, Captain Squires stated fingerprint background requirements are set by the State.
Councilmember Smede stated she would like the fingerprint background to be a one-time occurrence. Mayor Casper
stated she will pursue this issue with the State. Councilmember Francis stated several proposed changes would make
the City ordinance more strict than State. Mr. Kirkham stated the State requirements have two (2) levels of crimes
and this proposal, in most cases, will double the amount of time for ineligibility of a child care license. He also stated
the temporary time restrictions for a license cannot be tied to a desire to punish the person for criminal behavior, it
must be tied to a rational reason per the ordinance. He believes the ordinance is for the protection of children.
Councilmember Radford questioned the need for this ordinance as he believes the State is doing an adequate job of
protecting children. He also believes this is onerous on City businesses. Councilmember Hally believes day care is a
competitive enterprise which has a financial impact. He also believes this is the State’s responsibility. He is in favor
of eliminating the ordinance. Councilmember Smede stated she does not want the City to be more lax than the State,
however, she believes the waiting period for a City license is too lengthy for quality individuals. She is in favor of
eliminating the ordinance. Mr. Kirkham stated a background check is also required for facilities outside of the City
and he does not believe, per the criticism received, there is a long wait time for a City license. He noted the City
previously issued a temporary license although this was discontinued per the Attorney General. He also clarified the
City cannot have an ordinance that is more lax than what the State would require. To the response of Mayor Casper,
Councilmembers Freeman and Dingman requested a comparison of State requirements versus City requirements. Mr.
Kirkham stated there are three (3) primary differences with the State and City regulations: 1 – the City licenses
individual workers, the State does not. He believes this created a method of enforcement for a background check at
a facility. The State only checks for background checks at a facility when the facility is relicensing every five (5)
years. This was an unsatisfactory approach to the City. 2 – the City requires green space for larger facilities, the State
has no green space requirements. 3 – the City licensing had additional crimes that could make an applicant ineligible.
Mr. Kirkham reviewed these crimes with general comments throughout including crimes against nature, felony
domestic violence, felony drug-related possession offense (Captain Squires does not believe a drug offense should
be a life-time ban), and voluntary/involuntary patient (institutionalized patient). Mr. Kirkham also reviewed changes
for a 10-year timeframe with general comments throughout including aggravated assault and aggravated battery. He
noted the City regulates small in-home facilities, the State does not. Councilmember Dingman does not remember
this item, when originally discussed, being data driven. She believes a more robust discussion may need to occur
following the comparison the State and City ordinances. She also believes there is no reason for this ordinance if the
State is regulating child care. Mr. Kirkham stated he would provide a comparison of the State and City ordinances.
He believes the Code Enforcement officers, based on inspections, would encourage the Council to keep the City
ordinance. Mr. Fife stated there are differences about the scope of the State and, the City regulates more than the
State. He also stated there have been a number of appeals to the Council after staff determined those individuals did
not qualify for a license. Due to the City ordinance language, Council is allowed to override staffs’ decision. Mr. Fife
believes the ordinance should give an idea of expected behavior with the rarity of Council to change those
requirements. Following additional comments, there was consensus to place this item on the June 15 Council Work
Session agenda.
Review of Water Tower Public Meeting and Commentary:
Director Fredericksen stated the Public Works Department has been working on public outreach for the previous
year. He expressed his appreciation to Public Information Officer Kerry Hammon and the elected officials. Mr.
Richards reviewed the Water Tower Recap including existing water tower deficiencies (base coat paint issues, seismic
concerns, cracking foundations, deterioration of welds, corroding pipe, undersized to support future growth, spatial
constraints, not compliant with current codes); additional water tower considerations (overall age and anticipated
design life, cost to refurbish, establishes pressure benchmark for entire water system, provides reliable water in
needed times, prevents contamination of water system); four (4) types of water towers (the composite tower was
recommended due to the concrete pedestal and lower cost over the life cycle); siting analysis (six (6) preferred sites
were reduced to three (3) feasible sites); renderings of the composite tower at the three (3) feasible sites; public
outreach (public presentations, open houses, and, public comment period); and, media and social media outreach. Mr.
3
May 18, 2020
Richards reviewed public comment results including total comments received; commenter residence; method of
comment; and, site preference/comment. The site preference/comment, as well as staff recommendation, is for Site 1
at South Capital Park. Mr. Richards reviewed the construction schedule, which is currently in the conceptual design
and permitting phase (April 2020 to January 2021). To the response of Mayor Casper, Director Fredericksen prefers
Council review all public comments and submit any concerns/comments to him for future discussion. Mr. Richards
reviewed the construction cost comparison stating new tower costs = $6M and existing tower project costs = $2M. It
was noted this presentation is included on the City’s website. General comments followed regarding the structure and
the design of the new tower as well as using a smaller mimicked version of the existing tower at another location.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 5:14 p.m.
s/ Kathy Hampton s/ Rebecca L. Noah Casper
CITY CLERK MAYOR
4
Agenda
Bryce Johnson
Wednesday, April 8, 2020
Child Care Licensing
Council Action Desired
☒ Ordinance ☐ Resolution ☐ Public Hearing
☐ Other Action (Approval, Authorization, Ratification, etc)
Approve the Ordinance amending the child care licensing to the City Code under a suspension of the
rules requiring three complete and separate readings and direct that it be read by title and
published by summary (or consider the Ordinance on the first reading and that it be read by title, or
reject the Ordinance).
Description, Background Information & Purpose
The amendment proposed to the City’s daycare licensing regulations are intended to clarify what past
criminal acts will limit an individual the ability to receive a day care licensing. The amendments also
mirror the State’s approach to background checks and update the City’s daycare licensing to comply
with 2019 House Bill No. 549, which was adopted in the last legislative session.
Relevant PBB Results & Department Strategic Plan
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
The amendment of the door-to-door licensing regulations supports good governance community
oriented results by supporting City’s compliance with State law. The amendment also supports the
public safety oriented result by improving the City’s background check procedures.
Interdepartmental Coordination
Interdepartmental coordination will be Police and Legal Departments.
Fiscal Impact
The action will have no known fiscal impact to City finance.
Legal Review
The Legal Department drafted this Ordinance.
2
ORDINANCE NO. _________
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF IDAHO FALLS, IDAHO, AMENDING
TITLE 6, CHAPTER 3 TO CLARIFY THE VIOLATIONS OF LAW AND
REGULATION THAT PROHIBIT OR REVOKE A CITY CHILD CARE
LICENSE; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY, CODIFICATION, PUBLICATION
BY SUMMARY, AND ESTABLISHING EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, children are a priceless asset of our community; and
WHEREAS, in order to regulate child care, the City established a child care ordinance pursuant
to authority delegated to cities by the Idaho Code; and
WHEREAS, as part of the authority delegated to cities, the City requires a criminal background
investigation of persons who will provide child care services to families; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of the criminal background investigation is, in part, to determine
whether a child care worker or provider of child care should be allowed to provide such care;
and
WHEREAS, recently, there has been some concern that the standards for disqualification for
child care are not clear; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to make it clear to all under what conditions child care may be
provided; and
WHEREAS, the changes to the City’s Day Care Chapter contained in this Ordinance are meant
to clarify conditions of disqualification from providing child care.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF IDAHO FALLS, IDAHO, THAT:
SECTION 1. Title 6, Chapter 3, Section 3, of the City Code of the City of Idaho Falls, Idaho, is
hereby amended as follows:
...
(D) APPLICATIONS FOR LICENSE: The applicant shall obtain an application for a
license from the City Clerk. Once an application for a license has been submitted, the City Clerk
shall review the application and determine whether or not the application is complete. If the City
Clerk deems that the application is complete, then the applicant and City will arrange for all
necessary inspections to obtain the certificates required by such Section in subsection (A), (B) or
(C) above. Once all certifications are obtained and all requirements of either subsection (A), (B)
ORDINANCE – DAYCARE PAGE 1 OF 8
or (C) above and there is compliance with all provisions of this Chapterare met, the City Clerk
shall issue a license. If the application is incomplete in any respect, the City Clerk shall promptly
notify the applicant that the application is incomplete and shall specify the items which the City
Clerk has determined are not complete or which do not otherwise comply with the provisions of
subsection (A) hereof. Applications shall be made to the City Clerk in the form and manner
prescribed by the City Clerk.
...
(I) RENEWALS: At least thirty (30) days before a License is to expire, the Applicant must
apply for a renewal license. The fees for a renewal license are the same as set forth in subsection
(H) above. Depending on the type of License, all information required under Sections 6-3-3(A),
6-3-3(B), and 6-3-3(C) and proof of compliance with this Chapter shall be provided with the
application in order to qualify for the License. The following items do not need to be shown on
renewal licenses:
SECTION 2. Title 6, Chapter 3, Section 4, of the City Code of the City of Idaho Falls, Idaho, is
hereby amended as follows:
6-3-4: CERTIFICATION OF INDIVIDUAL CHILD CARE WORKERS OR ON-SITE NON-
PROVIDERS:
...
(E) The term of the certificate is for two five (2 5) years.
SECTION 3. Title 6, Chapter 3, Section 6, of the City Code of the City of Idaho Falls, Idaho, is
hereby amended as follows:
6-3-6: DENIAL OR REVOCATION OF CHILD CARE FACILITY LICENSE, CHILD CARE
WORKER CERTIFICATION OR NON-SITE NON-PROVIDERS CERTIFICATION:
(A) The following shall constitute grounds for denial or revocation of a Child Care Facility
license, Child Care Worker certification or On-Site Non-Providers documentation, or shall
constitute grounds for a misdemeanor citation:
...
(B) In the event there is good cause to believe that a Child Care Facility, Child Care Worker
or On-Site Non-Provider has knowingly violated the provisions of subsection (A) hereofof this
Subsection, the City Clerk shall notify the licensee or certificate holder of the nature of the alleged
violation and shall notify the licensee of the time and place of a hearing before the City Council to
consider whether or not the licensee's license or certification should be revoked. At such hearing,
the licensee shall be afforded an opportunity to produce witnesses, submit documentary evidence
and to otherwise submit testimony and evidence in opposition to the proposed revocation or
suspension. At the conclusion of the hearing, the City Council may suspend or revoke the license
or certification for such period of time as it deems appropriate. In the event any license or
ORDINANCE – DAYCARE PAGE 2 OF 8
certification is revoked, the licensee or certificate holder shall not apply for or receive a new license
or certification within one (1) year after the date of such revocation.
...
SECTION 4. Title 6, Chapter 3, Section 8, of the City Code of the City of Idaho Falls, Idaho, is
hereby repealed in full and replaced with the following language:
6-3-8: LICENSES/CERTIFICATION, DENIAL, SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION: A license
or certification applied for or issued under this Chapter shall be denied, suspended, or revoked:
A. Where Applicant; Licensee; Owner; Operator; Child Care Worker; Resident; Volunteer, On-
Site Non-Provider; spouse or significant other of an Owner:
1. Has been found guilty of, plead guilty to, received a withheld judgment, or admitted to the
elements of any offense involving neglect, any physical injury, or other abuse of a child,
including the following enumerated crimes, or any substantially similar provision of a
foreign criminal violation, notwithstanding the form of judgment(s):
a. Felony injury of a child, section 18-1501, Idaho Code.
b. The sexual abuse of a child under sixteen (16) years of age, Section 18- 1506, Idaho
Code.
c. The ritualized abuse of a child under eighteen (18) years of age, Section 18-1506A,
Idaho Code.
d. The sexual exploitation of a child, section 18-1507 or 18-1507A, Idaho Code.
e. Sexual abuse of a child under the age of sixteen (16) years, Section 18- 1506, Idaho
Code.
f. Lewd conduct with a child under the age of sixteen (16) years, Section 18-1508,
Idaho Code.
g. The sale or barter of a child for adoption or other purposes, Section 18- 1511, Idaho
Code.
h. Murder in any degree, Section 18-4001 or 18-4003, Idaho Code.
i. Assault with intent to murder, Section 18-4015, Idaho Code.
j. Voluntary manslaughter, Section 18-4006, Idaho Code.
k. Rape, Section 18-6101, Idaho Code.
l. Incest, Section 18-6602, Idaho Code.
ORDINANCE – DAYCARE PAGE 3 OF 8
m. Forcible sexual penetration by use of foreign object, Section 18-6608, Idaho Code.
n. Abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult, Section 18-1505, Idaho Code.
o. Aggravated, first degree, second degree, and third-degree arson, Sections 18-801
through 18-805, Idaho Code.
p. Crimes against nature, Section 18-6605, Idaho Code.
q. Kidnapping, Sections 18-4501 through 18-4503, Idaho Code.
r. Mayhem, Section 18-5001, Idaho Code.
s. Poisoning, Section 18-4014 or 18-5501, Idaho Code.
t. Robbery, Section 18-6501, Idaho Code.
u. Stalking in the first degree, Section 18-7905, Idaho Code.
v. Video voyeurism, Section 18- 6609, Idaho Code.
w. Enticing of children, Section 18-1509 or 18-1509A, Idaho Code.
x. Inducing individuals under eighteen (18) years of age into prostitution, Section 18-
5609, Idaho Code.
y. Inducing person under eighteen (18) years of age to patronize a prostitute, Section
18-5611, Idaho Code.
z. Any felony punishable by death or life imprisonment.
aa. Attempt, Section 18-306, Idaho Code, conspiracy, Section 18-1701, Idaho Code, or
accessory after the fact, Section 18-205, Idaho Code, to commit any of the crimes
designated in this subsection.
bb. Domestic violence, Section 18-918(2), Idaho Code.
cc. Any offense requiring registration on a state sex offender registry or the national
sec offender registry.
dd. [A felony drug-related offense. Note: State Code would only prohibit someone
with a felony drug-related offense for five years.]
ee. Attempt, Section 18-306, Idaho Code, conspiracy, Section 18-1701, Idaho Code,
or accessory after the fact, Section 18-205, Idaho Code, to commit any of the
crimes designated in this Subsection.
2. Been classified as a voluntary patient or involuntary patient pursuant to Title 66, Chapter 3,
Idaho Code, or similar provision in another jurisdiction, unless:
ORDINANCE – DAYCARE PAGE 4 OF 8
a. Such Person has been released from, and is no longer under, any form of treatment
in relation to such classification, and
b. Such Person has been examined by at least one (1) professional licensed to evaluate
mental health and such professional certifies that the Person is no longer mentally
ill and presents no threat or danger to any Child. Such examination shall not be at
City expense.
3. Had his or her parental rights restricted or terminated by a Child protection action under
Idaho Code, Section 16-1601 et seq., or Child custody termination action under Idaho
Code, Section 16-2001 et seq.
4. Where a registered sex offender resides on the Premises where Day Care services are
provided.
B. Where Applicant; Licensee; Owner; Operator; Child Care Worker; Resident; Volunteer, On-
Site Non-Provider; spouse or significant other of an Owner has been found guilty of, plead
guilty to, or received a withheld judgment, or admitted to the elements of any of the
following enumerated crimes, or any substantially similar provision of foreign criminal
violation, notwithstanding the form of judgment(s) for any offense involving neglect, any
physical injury to, or other abuse of a child, or any of the following offenses or a similar
provision in another jurisdiction, for a period of five (5) years immediately preceding the
date of application for license or renewal:
1. Aggravated assault, Section 18-905, Idaho Code.
2. Aggravated battery, Section 18- 907(1), Idaho Code.
3. Burglary, Section 18-1401, Idaho Code.
4. Felony theft, Sections 18-2403 and 18-2407(1), Idaho Code.
5. Forgery of a financial transaction card, Section 18-3123, Idaho Code.
6. Fraudulent use of a financial transaction card or number, Section 18-3124, Idaho Code.
7. Forgery or counterfeiting, Chapter 36, Title 18, Idaho Code.
8. Misappropriation of personal identifying information, Section 18-3126, Idaho Code.
9. Insurance fraud, Section 41-293, Idaho Code.
10. Damage to or destruction of insured property, Section 41-294, Idaho Code.
11. Public assistance fraud, Section 56-227, Idaho Code.
ORDINANCE – DAYCARE PAGE 5 OF 8
12. Provider fraud, Section 56-227A, Idaho Code.
13. Attempted strangulation, Section 18-923, Idaho Code.
14. Misdemeanor injury to a child, Section 18-1501(2), Idaho Code.
15. Disseminating obscene material to minors, as defined in Sections 18-1513 through 18-
1515, Idaho Code.
16. Transporting a minor in a motor vehicle while under the influence, Section 18-1501(3),
Idaho Code.
17. Driving under the influence of alcohol, drugs, or other intoxicating substances, Section
18-8004, Idaho Code.
18. Excessive alcohol concentration, Section 18-8004C, Idaho Code.
19. Aggravated driving while under the influence of alcohol, drugs, or any other intoxicating
substances, Section 18-8006, Idaho Code.
20. Reckless driving, Section 49-1401(1), Idaho Code.
21. [A misdemeanor drug-related offense. Note: State licensing would permit a misdemeanor
drug offender to pass a background check.]
22. Attempt, Section 18-306, Idaho Code, conspiracy, Section 18-1701, Idaho Code, or
accessory after the fact, Section 18-205, Idaho Code, to commit any of the crimes
designated in this Subsection.
C. For any Child Care Facility, unless all applicable codes, and other pertinent provisions of all
City ordinances, including health requirements herein, as far as can be determined, are being
complied with.
D. For any Applicant; Licensee; Owner; Operator; Child Care Worker; Resident; Volunteer, On-
Site Non-Provider; spouse or significant other of an Owner, where there is evidence
demonstrating to the City that health or safety problems exist or are probable. No Applicant;
Licensee; Owner; Operator; Child Care Worker; Resident; Volunteer, On-Site Non-Provider;
spouse or significant other of an Owner shall be qualified to receive a license under this
Chapter for a period of no less than one (1) year from the date of the health and/or safety
problems which resulted in denial or revocation of a license under this Chapter.
E. For any Applicant; Licensee; Owner; Operator; Child Care Worker; Resident; Volunteer, On-
Site Non-Provider; Spouse or significant other of an Owner presiding at the Premises, who
has supplied false or misleading information, failed or refused to disclose any information
required on the application form, or refused to authorize the police investigation required
herein. Applicant; Licensee; Owner; Operator; Child Care Worker; Resident; Volunteer, On-
Site Non-Provider; spouse or significant other of an Owner presiding at the Premises shall be
ORDINANCE – DAYCARE PAGE 6 OF 8
able to apply to receive a license under this Chapter for a period of less than six (6) months
from the date of the denial, suspension, or revocation of the license under this Subsection.
F. For any Applicant; Licensee; Owner; Operator; Child Care Worker; Resident; Volunteer, On-
Site Non-Provider; spouse or significant other of an Owner presiding at the Premises, who
has violated any of the provisions of this Chapter during licensure other than of 6-3-8(A) of
this Chapter. No Applicant; Licensee; Owner; Operator; Child Care Worker; Resident;
Volunteer, On-Site Non-Provider; spouse or significant other of an Owner presiding at the
Child Care Facility shall be qualified to receive a license under this Chapter for a period of
less than six (6) months from the date of the denial or revocation of the license under this
Subsection.
SECTION 4. Savings and Severability Clause. The provisions and parts of this Ordinance are
intended to be severable. If any section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance should be
held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or
unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence,
clause, or phrase of this Ordinance.
SECTION 5. Codification Clause. The City Clerk is instructed to immediately forward this
Ordinance to the codifier of the official municipal code for proper revision of the Code.
SECTION 6. Publication. This Ordinance, or a summary thereof in compliance with Idaho Code,
shall be published once in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect immediately
upon its passage, approval, and publication.
SECTION 7. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its
passage, approval, and publication.
PASSED by the City Council and APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Idaho Falls, Idaho,
this _____ day of __________, 2020.
CITY OF IDAHO FALLS, IDAHO
____________________________________
REBECCA L. NOAH CASPER, MAYOR
ATTEST:
_____________________________________
KATHY HAMPTON, CITY CLERK
(SEAL)
ORDINANCE – DAYCARE PAGE 7 OF 8
STATE OF IDAHO )
) ss:
County of Bonneville )
I, KATHY HAMPTON, CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF IDAHO FALLS, IDAHO,
DO HEREBY CERTIFY:
That the above and foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of the Ordinance
entitled, “AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF IDAHO FALLS, IDAHO,
AMENDING TITLE 6, CHAPTER 3 TO CLARIFY THE VIOLATIONS OF
LAW AND REGULATION THAT PROHIBIT OR REVOKE A CITY CHILD
CARE LICENSE; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY, CODIFICATION,
PUBLICATION BY SUMMARY, AND ESTABLISHING EFFECTIVE DATE.”
_______________________________________
(SEAL) KATHY HAMPTON, CITY CLERK
ORDINANCE – DAYCARE PAGE 8 OF 8
Get email alerts for Idaho Falls
A daily email when new agendas and minutes are posted.