September 25, 2025 (P.A.G.E. update, September 24, 2025)
NEW CITY HALL RFQ – No public or council input to date
This post is to inform you that an action item regarding the “new City Hall” topic to gather any additional information or to relocate City Hall to any particular property has not been noticed on any city agenda nor been discussed or deliberated in any public meeting and Council did not publicly direct or approve the publishing of an RFQ. The “need” for a new City Hall has been mentioned in the past (usually during budgetary discussions) and a plan to relocate it to historic downtown was incorporated into approved city plans. However, these plans are guidelines, are not binding and have no formal appropriation commitments assigned to them. This is not to be construed as advocating for one decision over another. It is a post about the need for elected mayoral leadership to involve Council in decisions and improvement of transparency.
Today (09/24/25), the city posted a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for architectural services to design/engineer a NEW CITY HALL FACILITY in the historic Federal building. Per the posting:
“The City of Pocatello is seeking responses from qualified licensed architects (“Firm”) to provide architectural services and related engineering services to complete the feasibility analysis, design and renovation administration of a new City Hall facility located at 150 S. Arthur Ave., Pocatello, also known as the Historic Federal Building.”
Obviously – this in an early step with little financial commitment. Council’s approval would be required to accept and sign any contract recommendations resulting from RFQ submissions after they are received and evaluated.
The issue? Yet another example of the lack of communication from the Mayor to the public. The idea has been raised in the past to move the City Hall downtown, and it was incorporated into some city approved plans, but no formal action item agenda item has been noticed to move forward with this project. No data has been shared with the Council about the preliminary estimated costs or potential economic impact.
It raises a lot of questions, doesn’t it?
- Why now, is this really the right time?
- Have other alternatives been explored?
- What are the estimates and timeframes involved?
- What evidence is there of estimated economic impact?
NOTE: Sources tell us very preliminary cost estimates are $35M ($15M for the acquisition/renovation of the building and another estimated $20M for acquisition, potential demolition and a parking garage.) For comparison (per ISJ article), Chubbuck spent about $15.3M to build their new 26,000 sq ft City Hall which also included retrofitting the former City Hall building for their police department and constructing a new animal control building. Twin Falls renovated a downtown building of similar size in 2016-2017 for approximately $10M.
- Does the project include a remodel of the existing City Hall for public services such as Fire and/or Police?
- What are the plans to pay for such a project?
- Will this be put to taxpayers via a bond vote?
- Will the City try to use “Certificates of Participation” like Chubbuck used to avoid a public bond vote?
- Is the PDA’s newly approved urban renewal area in Historic Downtown being created to help finance the project?
One would think the Mayor would prioritize communication with the public during the last six weeks of a mayoral campaign – not double-down on his usual exclusion of the Council/public when it comes to important decisions. Or is his candidacy really only a sham campaign?
FULL RFQ POSTING available here.
Pocatello for Accountable Government Entities: Keeping Government Accountable
