Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem #6 Auditorium District,....AMEC MOuNIUN VIEW July 51h 2022 E V E N T C E N T E R Chubbuck City Council 290 East Linden Chubbuck City Council Chubbuck, Idaho 83202 Dear Council, The Pocatello-Chubbuck Auditorium District has requested a hearing for a PETITION FOR DECLARATORY JUDGEMENT on Monday August 81h at 2pm at the Bannock County Courthouse with District Judge Rick Carnaroli. The purpose of the hearing is to expand the current District boundary that will include the Northgate Project which is projected to include both hotels and motels. The addition of such properties will allow the Mountain View Event Center to continue to serve not only our communities but also the entire region. I would ask you to please write a LETTER OF SUPPORT to Judge Carnaoli and to express how much the MEC means to the community and also the economic impact it brings when we host events like basketball and volleyball tournaments. Send your support letter to Judge Rick Carnaroli at the Bannock County Courthouse 624 East Center Pocatello. If you are available on August 81h please join us. Thanks for your support. All my best, Raul Cano Executive Director Pocatello-Chubbuck Auditorium District Mountain View Event Center. 1567 Way To Grace ■ Pocatello, ID 83201 0 208-235-7659 MECEventCenter.com GARY L. COOPER* *licensed in Idaho, Utah and Wyoming REED W. LARSEN J.D. OBORN TONY B. BUDGE COOPER & LARSEN 151 NORTH aro AVE. - 2"" FLOOR P.Q. BOX 4229 POCATELLO, ID 83205-4229 Attorneys at Law .Tune 28, 2022 CERTIFIED MAIL — RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Kevin England, Mayor City of Chubbuck 290 E. Linden Avenue Chubbuck,ID 83202 Re: The Pocatello-Chubbuck. Auditorium District Dear Mayor England: RON KERL - Of Counsel TELEPHONE (248) 235-1145 FAX (208) 235-1182 Enclosed is a Petition for Declaratory Judgment and Notice of Hearing. documents are being set to you pursuant to Idaho law. If you have any questions, please let us know. Very truly yours, BARBIE SNELL, Paralegal bs Enclosures (2) 011 RSI These Electronically Filed 6/22/2022 8:58 AM Sixth Judicial District, Bannock County Jason Dixon, Clerk of the Court By: Ella Andersen, Deputy Clerk Gary L. Cooper - Idaho State Bar #1814 COOPER & LARSEN, CHARTERED 151 North Third Avenue, Second Floor P.O. Box 4229 Pocatello, ID 83205-4229 Telephone: (208) 235-1145 Facsimile: (208) 235-1182 Email: gary@cooper-larsen.com E -filing: cooperobomfiline(a,cooper-larsen com Counsel for The Pocatello-Chubbuck Auditorium District IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF BANNOCK IN RE: THE POCATELLO-CHUBBUCK AUDITORIUM DISTRICT Case No. CV -1998-2242 (CV -OC -1998-01350B) PETITION FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT COMES NOW The Pocatello-Chubbuck Auditorium District by and through counsel of record and petitions this Court as follows: JURISDICTION 1. This Petition is brought pursuant to the Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act (I. C. §§ 10- 1201 et seq.) and Rule 57 of the Idaho Rules of Civil Procedure for a Declaratory Judgment declaring the boundaries of the Pocatello-Chubbuck Auditorium District ("PCAD") by interpreting the language contained in this Court's January 10, 2006 Order Nunc Pro Tune. PETITION FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT 1 I P a g e 2. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to I. C. § 1-705; Title 67, Chapter 49 of the Idaho Code; and the Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act (I. C. §§ 10-1201 et seq.). 3. Venue is proper in Bannock County, Idaho because PCAD is located within Bannock County, Idaho. BACKGROUND FACTS 4. PCAD is a public body organized, existing and operating as an auditorium district pursuant to Title 67, Chapter 49 of the Idaho Code, as amended (the "AW), and as such is a "political subdivision." S. PCAD was formed after the Greater Pocatello Chamber of Commerce petitioned this Court in accordance with the Act on September 9, 1998 to initiate the process for organizing an auditorium district in Bannock County with boundaries consisting of "the city limits of the cities of Pocatello, Idaho and Chubbuck, Idaho." 6. As required by the Act, a Notice of Hearing was published in the Idaho State Journal on September 28, 1998 and October 3, 1998, notifying the residents of the cities of Pocatello and Chubbuck that the boundaries of the auditorium district would be the "city limits of the cities of Pocatello, Idaho and Chubbuck, Idaho." 7. Following a hearing before this Court on October 13, 1998, an Order and Notice of Election on October 19, 1998, was entered in which it was ordered that the issue of whether an auditorium district should be formed should be placed before the eligible voters within the cities of Pocatello and Chubbuck by ballot containing the following question, in pertinent part: "Should an Auditorium District be formed encompassing the Cities of Chubbuck and Pocatello, Idaho in order to obtain and administer funding for tourism and related promotional activities." PETITION FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT 2 1 P a g e 8. The measure passed by just over 60% of the vote in the election which was held on November 3, 1998. 9. For unknown reasons an order forming PCAD was not entered immediately after the election, but PCAD began operating as a political subdivision auditorium district under the Act immediately after the election. 10. On January 10, 2006, this Court entered an Order Nunc Pro Tune which was filed on February 10, 2006, recognizing that the electorate voted in favor of the formation of the Pocatello-Chubbuck Auditorium District in the election which was held on November 3, 1998 and ordering, among other things, that the "boundaries of the district shall be contiguous with the combined boundaries of the cities of Pocatello, Idaho and Chubbuck, Idaho. 11. On October 10, 2012, PCAD filed a Petition for Modification of the Order Nunc Pro Tune seeking an order allowing PCAD to increase the sales tax on the receipts derived by hotels and motels within the district from the famishing of hotel and motel rooms as allowed by Idaho Code § 67-4917B. 12. As stated in the Petition, PCAD sought the increase in the hotel/motel room sales tax from 2% to 5% so that it could build, operate, maintain, market and manage a suitable facility as required by the Act and Idaho appellate decisions. 13. After notice as required by the Act for such a modification, this Court held a hearing on November 20, 2012, entered Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and entered an Order on November 30, 2012 permitting PCAD to "collect a hotel/motel room tax up to five (5) percent as permitted by I. C. §67-491713 and up to the maximum allowed by statute in the event the Legislature amends the statutory authority in the future." PETITION FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT 3 P a g e 14. In August of 2015, PCAD and the Bannock County Commissioners gave consideration to entering into an agreement as permitted by I. C. § 67-4912 (d) which would allow the building, operating, maintaining, marketing and managing of a facility at the Portneuf Wellness Complex which was within what is known as the Bannock County Fairgrounds ("Fairgrounds"). The Fairgrounds have never been annexed into the cities of Chubbuck and Pocatello because that property is owned by the County and is located in the County. Idaho Code § 67-4912 (1) gives auditorium districts the authority to "petition to enlarge the district by obtaining the consent of not less than ten percent (10%) of the qualified electors of any area to be so included, and then to follow the procedure set forth herein for creating said district." 15. With the support and joinder of Bannock County, on August 25, 2015, PCAD filed a Petition with this Court to "enlarge" PCAD to include the Fairgrounds and Portneuf Wellness Complex because it was located in Bannock County and not within the city limits of Chubbuck or Pocatello. 16. PCAD and Bannock County abandoned that effort shortly after it was filed for a variety of reasons which are not important to the issues to be resolved by this Declaratory Judgment petition. 17. In October 2015, PCAD entered into an Annual Appropriation Lease Agreement with the Grace Lutheran Evangelical Lutheran Congregation of Pocatello, Idaho, Inc. ("Grace Lutheran"), the result of which was that Grace Lutheran built the Mountain View Event Center ("MEC') which PCAD has leased, operated, maintained, marketed and managed since its opening in the fall of 2016. PETITION FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT 4 1 P a g e 18. The MEC is located at 1567 Way to Grace Avenue near Baldy Avenue off Olympus Drive in Pocatello. It consists of three full size basketball courts located on 28,000 square feet of open floor space and an additional 12,000 square feet of space where locker rooms, a conference room, a concession area, a medical area and office space are located. The MEC hosts trade shows, conferences, meetings, court events (pickleball, wrestling, dance, gymnastics, volleyball, basketball), weddings, concerts and banquets. These events bring participants from far and wide who rent motel and hotel rooms in Pocatello and Chubbuck. The 5% hotel/motel room sales tax which PCAD collects comes from motel and hotel rooms rented in Pocatello and Chubbuck. 19. The NEC is a well -operated public auditorium, exhibition hall, convention center, sports arena facility which provides a significant benefit to the public in the cities of Pocatello and Chubbuck. It benefits hotels and motels in the cities of Pocatello and Chubbuck by "putting heads in beds" in those hotels and motels by attracting events which bring visitors and participants from outside the area. The 5% hotel/motel room sales tax which PCAD receives from the rental of rooms in hotels and motels is crucial to the continued operation of the MEC at the level and standard at which it is currently operating. 20. From the inception of PCAD through 2019, the administrative staff of PCAD collected the hotel/motel room sales tax from the hotels and motels in Pocatello and Chubbuck. However, commencing January 1, 2020, PCAD entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Idaho State Tax Commission for it to administer the collection of the hotel/motel room sales tax. 21. IDAPA 35.01.06 requires the Idaho Tax Commission to maintain maps showing the district boundaries of the auditorium districts for which it administers the collection of PETITION FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT 5 1 P a g e the sales tax on hotel/motel rooms. The initial map published and used by the Idaho Tax Commission included the city limits of Pocatello and Chubbuck as those boundaries existed on January 1, 2020. 22. PCAD's legal counsel communicated with the Idaho Tax Commission and advised that although no hotels/motels in Bannock County near the city limits of Pocatello and Chubbuck had been built and operated outside the city limit boundaries of Chubbuck and Pocatello as those boundaries existed in January 1999, PCAD preferred that the Idaho Tax Commission use the 1999 boundaries for collection of the auditorium district hotel/motel room sales tax until PCAD could either expand its boundaries or obtain Court approval to use the current boundaries of Pocatello and Chubbuck which had expanded by annexation over the years. 23. The reason for this discussion with the Idaho Tax Commission was that legal counsel for PCAD felt there was an ambiguity in the description of the boundary of PCAD in the January 10, 2006 Order Nunc Pro Tune and legal counsel did not want to create a liability for PCAD by collecting the sales tax on hotel/motel rooms built outside the 1999 boundaries of Pocatello/Chubbuck before an interpretation of the January 10, 2006 Order Nunc Pro Tune could be obtained. 24. Currently the Idaho Tax Commission uses a map which shows the boundaries of PCAD based on the city limits of Pocatello and Chubbuck as they existed in January 1999. 25. Currently there are no hotels or motels which have been permitted for construction or which are being constructed on property that is within the current city limits of Pocatello and Chubbuck, but outside the boundaries of the city limits of Pocatello and Chubbuck which existed in January of 1999. PETITION FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT 6 1 P a g e 26. PCAD, however, was approached recently by a party that was in the very early stages of considering a development in the Northgate area that would include one or more hotels to be constructed on property that has recently been annexed by the city of Pocatello. This party suggested that if it could not obtain cooperation from PCAD to enter into some kind of agreement regarding the development and use of auditorium tax revenues from the hotels it was considering, it would create its own auditorium district to collect auditorium district hotel/motel room sales tax from motels/hotels constructed in the Northgate area to aid the development it was considering. 27. It seems inevitable now that new hotels/motels will be constructed within the current city limits of Pocatello and Chubbuck, but on property that was not annexed in 1999 when PCAD was formed. Hence, the decision to pursue interpretation of the January 10, 2006 Order Nunc Pro Tune to confirm the boundaries of PCAD. REQUEST FOR INTERPRETATION OF THIS COURT'S JANUARY 10, 2006 ORDER NUNC PRO TUNC 28. The language which was used in the Petition, the ballot and the Order creating PCAD in 1998, namely that the boundaries of the Auditorium District would be the "city limits of the cities of Pocatello, Idaho and Chubbuck, Idaho" was not so precise as to require the boundary of PCAD to remain static and to not expand/contract with the expansion/contractioh of the city limits of Pocatello and Chubbuck by annexation/de- annexation. 29. For formation of PCAD, Idaho Code § 67-4904 only required a "general description of the boundaries of the district or the territory to be included therein, with such certainty as to enable a property owner to determine whether or not his property is within the PETITION FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT 7 1 P a g e district." The description that the boundaries of the Auditorium District would be the "city limits of the cities of Pocatello, Idaho and Chubbuck, Idaho" served that purpose. 30. This Court has the authority to interpret its orders. Vierstra v. Vierstra, 153 Idaho 873, 880, 292 P.3d 264, 271 (2012) (Holding that every court has the authority to interpret and enforce its own orders). 31. This Court's January 10, 2006 Order Nunc Pro Time provided that the "boundaries of the district shall be contiguous with the combined boundaries of the cities of Pocatello, Idaho and Chubbuck, Idaho." 32. This Court has the authority to determine whether the language in the January 10, 2006 Order Nunc Pro Tunc should be interpreted as fixing the boundaries as such existed in 1998/1999 or whether the language should be interpreted as allowing the boundaries to grow/contract with the annexation and de -annexation of property by the cities of Pocatello and Chubbuck. 33. The Idaho Supreme Court has held that a "district court's interpretation of its own order is properly accorded deference on appeal when its interpretation is reasonable." Citizens Against Range Expansion v. Idaho Fish And Game Dept, 153 Idaho 630, 634, 289 P.3d 32, 36 (2012); Vierstra v. Vierstra, 153 Idaho 873, 881, 292 P.3d 264, 272 (2012). 34. If the January 10, 2006 Order Nunc Pro Tunc is reasonably subject to conflicting interpretations it is ambiguous, but this Court's interpretation of its own ambiguous order would be accepted on appeal unless clearly erroneous. Suchan v. Suchan, 113 Idaho 102, 107, 741 P.2d 1289, 1294 (1986). Clearly erroneous applies where factual findings are not supported by substantial and competent evidence. Floyd v. Bd. of Ada Cnty. Commissioners, 164 Idaho 659, 668, 434 P.3d 1265, 1274 (2019). PETITION FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT 8 1 P a g e 35. If the January 10, 2006 Order Nunc Pro Tune is unambiguous, this Court's interpretation of its own unambiguous order will be accepted on appeal unless the record shows an abuse of discretion. Citizens Against Range Expansion v. Idaho Fish And Game Dept, 153 Idaho 630, 634, 289 P.3d 32, 36 (2012). An abuse of discretion standard examines whether the district court acted within the boundaries of its discretionary decision and applicable legal standards, and reached a decision by exercising reason. Floyd v. Bd. of Ada Cnty. Commissioners, 164 Idaho 659, 668, 434 P.3d 1265, 1274 (2019). 36. The rules of construction applicable to contracts and written documents apply to the interpretation of court orders. Sam Valley Ranches, Inc. v. Prairie Power Co-op., Inc., 124 Idaho 125, 131, 856 P.2d 1292, 1298 (Ct. App. 1993). When the language of a contract is unambiguous, its interpretation is a question of law. An unambiguous contract will be given its plain meaning. The purpose of interpreting a contract is to determine the intent of the contracting parties at the time the contract was entered. In determining the intent of the parties, the contract must be viewed as a whole. If a contract is arnbiguous, interpretation of the contract is a question of fact that focuses on the intent of the parties. Nelsen v. Nelsen, 508 P.3d 301, 333 (Idaho 2022). 37. A reasonable interpretation of the order establishing the PCAD boundary as being "contiguous with the combined boundaries of the cities of Pocatello, Idaho and Chubbuck, Idaho" is that the boundary would grow or decline with the boundaries of Pocatello and Chubbuck. There is nothing in the Act or the formation documents which suggest or require that the boundary remain static. It is reasonable to conclude that this Court, the parties forming PCAD and the electorate intended and understood that the PETITION FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT 9 1 P a g e boundaries of PCAD would grow or decline over time with the boundaries of the cities of Pocatello and Chubbuck. 38, While PCAD has the power to enlarge the district by petition and election (Idaho Code § 67-4912 (1)), requiring it to follow the petition/election procedure every time Pocatello and Chubbuck annexed or de -annexed property would be time-consuming and expensive for PCAD and would not serve any useful purpose. Since 1998 when the formation papers were filed with this Court, Pocatello and Chubbuck combined have annexed property in excess of 30 times. Thus, to maintain its boundaries as contiguous with the boundaries of Pocatello and Chubbuck, PCAD would have been required to go through the petition and election procedure one or more times in every year of its existence. 39. In addition, the Act provides a procedure in I. C. § 67-4919 for owners to have their real property excluded or taken from the district, so no real property owners in property annexed by Pocatello or Chubbuck will not be prejudiced from interpreting the boundaries of PCAD as growing or declining with the boundaries of Pocatello and Chubbuck as those cities annex and/or de -annex property into and/or from their city limits. Those owners of property annexed by Pocatello or Chubbuck always have the option of petitioning to be excluded or taken from the district. 40. There is substantial and competent evidence supporting an interpretation by this Court of its January 10, 2006 Order None Pro Time as providing that the boundaries of PCAD grow or decline with the boundaries of Pocatello and Chubbuck as those cities annex and/or de -annex property into and/or from their city limits. In other words, such an interpretation would not be "clearly erroneous." PETITION FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT 10 1 P a g e 41. Interpreting this Court's January 10, 2006 Order None Pro Tune as providing that the boundaries of PCAD grow or decline with the boundaries of Pocatello and Chubbuck as those cities annex and/or de -annex property into and/or from their city limits would be consistent with the legal standards applicable to interpretation of court orders and such an interpretation would be consistent with an exercise of reason by this Court in reaching that interpretation. In other words, such an interpretation would not be an abuse of this Court's discretion. 42. PCAD requests that this Court interpret its January 10, 2006 Order Nunc Pro Tune as providing that the boundaries of PCAD grow or decline with the boundaries of Pocatello and Chubbuck as those cities annex and/or de -annex property into and/or from their city limits. NOW THEREFORE, PCAD requests this Court to enter the following orders: 1. Enter an order setting the time and place for a hearing on this Petition for Declaratory Judgment not less than twenty (20) days no more than forty (40) days after the filing of this Petition; 2. Enter an order requiring publication of notice of the hearing on this Petition in the Idaho State Journal once a week for four (4) consecutive weeks before the hearing in this matter; 3. Enter an order requiring that notice of the hearing on this Petition be mailed by U. S. certified mail, return receipt requested, to the board of county commissioners for Bannock County and to the city council and mayors of Chubbuck and Pocatello; 4. Following a hearing on the Petition, enter an order interpreting this Court's January 10, 2006 Order Nunc Pro Tune as providing that the boundaries of PCAD grow or decline PETITION FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT 111 P a g e with the boundaries of Pocatello and Chubbuck as those cities annex and/or de -annex property into and/or from their city limits; and 5. For such other and further relief as maybe appropriate under the circumstances. DATED this 22 day of June, 2022. /s/ Gary L. Cooper GARY L. COOPER Attorney for Pocatello-Chubbuck Auditorium District PETITION FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT 12 1 P a g e Gary L. Cooper - Idaho State Bar #1814 COOPER & LARSEN, CHARTERED 151 North Third Avenue, Second Floor P.O. Box 4229 Pocatello, ID 83205-4229 Telephone: (208) 235-1145 Facsimile: (208) 235-1182 Email: gary@cooper-larsen.com E -filing: cooperobornfilinlT-ia,cooper-larsen.com Counsel for The Pocatello-Chubbuck Auditorium District IN RE: Electronically Filed 6/24/2022 4:41 PM Sixth Judicial District, Bannock County Jason Dixon, Clerk of the Court By: Shelly Cromie, Deputy Clerk IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF BANNOCK Case No. CV -1998-2242 (CV -OC -1998-01350B) THE POCATELLO-CHUBBUCK AUDITORIUM DISTRICT NOTICE OF HEARING TO: ALL INTERESTED MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, BANNOCK COUNTY, THE CITY OF POCATELLO AND THE CITY OF CHUBBUCK PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Pocatello-Chubbuck Auditorium District will bring on for hearing its Petition for Declaratory Judgment before the Honorable Rick Carnaroli, District Judge of the above entitled Court, on Monday, August 8, 2022, at the hour of 2:00 P.M., or as soon thereafter as counsel can be heard. The purpose of the hearing is to request Judge Carnaroli to interpret the order which formed the Pocatello-Chubbuck Auditorium District as providing that the boundaries of the Auditorium District grow or decline with the boundaries of Pocatello and Chubbuck as those cities annex and/or de -annex property into and/or from their city limits. If you agree with or oppose such an interpretation you should attend and make your position known so that the Coma can be fully informed before making a decision. DATED this 24`h day of June, 2022. /s/ Gary L. Cooper GARY L. COOPER Memo To: Honorable Mayor & City Council From: Ryan S. Lewis, City Attorney P -, Date: July6,2022 CITY /ATTORNEY 290 E Linden Ave., Chubbuck, ID 83202 208.237.2430 www.CltyofChu bbu ck.us Re: Petition for Declaratory Judgment, In Re: The Pocatello-Chubbucl<Auditorium District This Memorandum is written relative to a Petition and Notice of Hearing (August 8, 2022 at 2:00 p.m.) that I understanding the Mayor and City Council members have received, The Notice of Hearing has asked you to attend and make your position known as to this Petition if you so desire. Set forth below is the nature of the request so that you can be prepared to discuss what position, if any, you would like the City to take. Pocatello-Chubbuck Auditorium District Creation The Pocatello-Chubbuck Auditorium District was organized pursuant to Title 67, Chapter 49 of the Idaho Code and was formed after the Greater Pocatello Chamber of Commerce petitioned on September 9, 1998 to initiate the process for organizing an auditorium district in Bannock County with boundaries consisting of "the city limits of the cities of Pocatello, Idaho and Chubbuck, Idaho." Petition, 114-5. After public notice and hearing the District Court entered an Order and Notice of Election on October 19, 1998 to place the question on the ballot: "Should an Auditorium District be formed encompassing the Cities of Chubbuck and Pocatello, Idaho in order to obtain and administer funding for tourism and related promotional activities." Petition, J¶ 6-7. Pocatello-Chubbuck Auditorium District Boundaries Set The measure passed and ultimately the District Court entered an order on January 10, 2006 declaring the boundaries of the district to be "contiguous with the combined boundaries of the cities of Pocatello, Idaho and Chubbuck, Idaho." Petition, ¶¶ 8-10. Since then, the PCAD has continued to function and administer the funds as set forth in the Petition, until October 2015 when PCAD entered into an Annual Appropriation Lease Agreement with the Grace Lutheran church with the result being the building of the Mountain View Event Center ("MEC") which PCAD has operated since. Petition, ¶¶ 11-1.7. PCAD collects a 5% hotel/motel froom sales tax from motels and hotels in Pocatello and Chubbuck and is argued to be "crucial to the continued operation of the MEC at the level it currently operates." Petition, ¶j 1.8-19. From its inception and through 2019, PCAD collected the hotel/motel room sales tax from the hotels and motels in Pocatello and Chubbuck; however, commencing January 1, 2020, PCAD entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Idaho State Tax Commission for it to administer the collection of the hotel/motel room sales tax. Petition, 1120. Pursuant to the Idaho Administrative Code, IDAPA 35.01.06 the Idaho Tax Commission must maintain maps showing the district boundaries of the auditorium districts for which it administers the collection of the sales tax on hotel/motel rooms; there is some question as to the specific maps to use, and boundaries of the PCAD and which boundaries to use because of annexation/dearmexations that have occurred since the creation of the district. Petition, ¶20-21. Do the Pocatello-Chubbuck Auditorium District Boundaries Increase/Decrease with Annexations/De-Annexations PCAD has been approached by a party in the early stages of considering a development in the Northgate area that would include one or more hotels to be constructed on property that has recently been annexed by the city of Pocatello. Petition, ¶26 The PCAD states: "It seems inevitable now that new hotels/motels will be constructed within the current city limits of Pocatello and Chubbuck, but on property that was not annexed in 1999 when PCAD was famed. Hence, the decision to pursue interpretation of the January 10, 2006 Order Nunc Pro Time to confirm the boundaries of PCAD." — Petition, 127 PCAD set forth rules of interpretation to guide this decision (Petition, ¶28-36). Pocatello-Chubbuck Auditorium District Asks the District Court to Inter ret Its Prior Order to Have the Boundaries of the District Change with Boundaries of the Cities PCAD asks the District Court to interpret its January 10, 2006 Order which provided that the "boundaries of the district shall be contiguous with the combined boundaries of the cities of Pocatello, Idaho and Chubbuck, Idaho" and argues that a reasonable interpretation is that the Order allows for the continued growth or decline of the boundaries of the PCAD as Pocatello and Chubbuck continue to annex and/or de -annex properties. Petition, ¶37- 42. Please consider the PCAD Petition and be prepared to discuss what position, if any, you would like the City to take.