1 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:02,330 Interrupt the presentation for questions if that's 2 00:00:02,330 --> 00:00:04,759 something that would help the discussion along the way so 3 00:00:05,519 --> 00:00:07,839 Don't hesitate to raise your hand and the chair will 4 00:00:07,839 --> 00:00:11,419 recognize you and we can move through it that way. So 5 00:00:12,119 --> 00:00:14,119 Let's go ahead and get started 6 00:00:15,279 --> 00:00:18,980 With everybody's favorite thing state laws and statutes, so 7 00:00:18,980 --> 00:00:21,640 we're just we're just jumping right into the fun stuff 8 00:00:22,199 --> 00:00:25,800 But it is important in this case to begin at the beginning 9 00:00:26,440 --> 00:00:30,390 With the recognition that the power to enter into these 10 00:00:30,390 --> 00:00:33,159 types of agreements whether they're tax 11 00:00:33,399 --> 00:00:36,469 Abatements or chapter 380 rebates or special assessments 12 00:00:36,469 --> 00:00:38,759 through public improvement districts 13 00:00:39,039 --> 00:00:43,679 That's granted to the city by the state and I just want you 14 00:00:43,679 --> 00:00:46,039 guys to see this brief chart 15 00:00:46,920 --> 00:00:51,759 About the tax type that is in question the program that is 16 00:00:51,759 --> 00:00:53,939 used and then the statute there 17 00:00:54,359 --> 00:00:56,479 Under which the regulations fall 18 00:00:57,359 --> 00:01:00,710 I'm gonna define a couple things for you starting with the 19 00:01:00,710 --> 00:01:01,479 tax abatement 20 00:01:02,119 --> 00:01:06,329 That's an agreement that exempts from taxation all or part 21 00:01:06,329 --> 00:01:08,840 of the value of a taxpayer's 22 00:01:09,000 --> 00:01:12,200 Real or business personal property for up to ten years 23 00:01:12,799 --> 00:01:16,519 So that's under chapter 312 and that specifies that in 24 00:01:16,519 --> 00:01:17,879 order to authorize 25 00:01:18,280 --> 00:01:21,500 Tax abatements a city must adopt a tax abatement policy 26 00:01:21,500 --> 00:01:24,590 every two years. So that's why we're starting this 27 00:01:24,590 --> 00:01:26,040 conversation now 28 00:01:26,439 --> 00:01:30,319 Because our two years are up in April of 2018 29 00:01:31,200 --> 00:01:34,689 So everybody clear on tax abatement. That's a reduction to 30 00:01:34,689 --> 00:01:36,640 a taxpayer's bill in 31 00:01:36,959 --> 00:01:39,810 Whole or in part before they read before they even have to 32 00:01:39,810 --> 00:01:42,920 pay it. So it's just taken off the top 33 00:01:43,560 --> 00:01:45,560 Carolina would you? 34 00:01:45,799 --> 00:01:50,959 Mind reminding some of us an example of those that here in 35 00:01:50,959 --> 00:01:53,000 Denton maybe for all three of these 36 00:01:53,799 --> 00:01:58,299 Sure, that's a great. That's a great point. Um, so since mr 37 00:01:58,299 --> 00:01:59,319 . Fikes is here in the room 38 00:01:59,760 --> 00:02:01,760 We can use Peter built as an example 39 00:02:02,719 --> 00:02:04,719 they have 40 00:02:05,000 --> 00:02:08,240 Done some expansion to their plants and have requested tax 41 00:02:08,240 --> 00:02:11,909 abatements related to those expansions and been granted 42 00:02:11,909 --> 00:02:12,259 them 43 00:02:13,039 --> 00:02:17,199 So that is tax abatements can be done on new construction 44 00:02:17,199 --> 00:02:20,300 like brand new construction or on expansion projects 45 00:02:20,300 --> 00:02:22,599 But Peter built is an example of that 46 00:02:23,240 --> 00:02:26,000 type of project that's received a tax abatement 47 00:02:27,199 --> 00:02:30,939 So when we're looking at what best practices and economic 48 00:02:30,939 --> 00:02:32,479 development are 49 00:02:33,240 --> 00:02:35,000 related to incentives 50 00:02:35,000 --> 00:02:37,849 They dictate that a policy should address all of the 51 00:02:37,849 --> 00:02:40,120 incentive tools that a city plans to use 52 00:02:40,199 --> 00:02:44,129 Which is why our incentive policy also includes chapter 380 53 00:02:44,129 --> 00:02:44,900 agreements 54 00:02:45,879 --> 00:02:49,639 So chapter 380 agreements give cities really broad 55 00:02:49,639 --> 00:02:53,189 discretion to make loans or grants of public funds to 56 00:02:53,189 --> 00:02:54,159 promote business 57 00:02:54,479 --> 00:02:56,080 development in 58 00:02:56,080 --> 00:03:00,199 Denton our chapter 380 agreements have historically taken 59 00:03:00,199 --> 00:03:02,039 the form of tax rebates in 60 00:03:02,400 --> 00:03:05,099 Which a taxpayer pays their full tax bill 61 00:03:05,319 --> 00:03:08,879 But then is refunded all of the portion all or a portion of 62 00:03:08,879 --> 00:03:12,319 the taxes that they paid for a certain number of years 63 00:03:12,680 --> 00:03:16,580 So unlike tax abatements, there is not a 10-year limit on 64 00:03:16,580 --> 00:03:19,900 chapter 380 rebates if you 65 00:03:20,439 --> 00:03:24,009 Were so inclined to go and look at the statute that talks 66 00:03:24,009 --> 00:03:25,759 about chapter 380s 67 00:03:25,759 --> 00:03:30,400 It is a very short little paragraph and it is very broad 68 00:03:30,680 --> 00:03:35,330 So cities use it in different ways, but as I said typically 69 00:03:35,330 --> 00:03:37,560 here in Denton our chapter 70 00:03:37,560 --> 00:03:39,960 380s are in the form of rebates 71 00:03:41,159 --> 00:03:44,400 so an example of an entity that's 72 00:03:45,439 --> 00:03:47,439 received chapter 380 is 73 00:03:48,800 --> 00:03:51,949 O'Reilly Hospitality Management the Convention Center their 74 00:03:51,949 --> 00:03:56,360 incentive agreement is structured as a chapter 380 rebate 75 00:03:57,240 --> 00:03:59,240 any questions about 76 00:03:59,599 --> 00:04:01,439 chapter 380s 77 00:04:01,439 --> 00:04:05,759 Okay, and then finally something that we haven't talked 78 00:04:05,759 --> 00:04:09,180 very much about recently with this board our public 79 00:04:09,180 --> 00:04:10,520 improvement districts and 80 00:04:11,479 --> 00:04:14,719 Those are districts that offer a means for improving 81 00:04:14,719 --> 00:04:18,360 infrastructure to promote economic growth within a certain 82 00:04:18,360 --> 00:04:19,480 defined area 83 00:04:19,639 --> 00:04:22,319 and a city is authorized to 84 00:04:22,800 --> 00:04:26,189 Levy and collect special assessments or fees special 85 00:04:26,189 --> 00:04:30,540 assessment just means fee on properties within that type of 86 00:04:30,540 --> 00:04:31,319 area and 87 00:04:31,920 --> 00:04:35,939 The city of Denton does have one kid right now and it's the 88 00:04:35,939 --> 00:04:38,560 razor ranch kid and we're going to talk more about that 89 00:04:38,560 --> 00:04:40,560 When we come to the section about 90 00:04:41,480 --> 00:04:43,480 Pids later on in the presentation 91 00:04:48,959 --> 00:04:53,360 Okay, so as you know from looking at the backup 92 00:04:53,920 --> 00:04:55,399 we have 93 00:04:55,399 --> 00:04:58,250 policies and guidelines that outline the use of tax abat 94 00:04:58,250 --> 00:05:01,480 ements chapter 380s and Pids the 95 00:05:02,680 --> 00:05:05,600 Tax abatement and incentive policy was first approved by 96 00:05:05,600 --> 00:05:09,399 the City Council in 1989 and it's most recently 97 00:05:09,759 --> 00:05:13,120 Been approved in April 2016 as I mentioned 98 00:05:13,720 --> 00:05:17,480 So we're due in April 2018 in 2016 99 00:05:17,480 --> 00:05:20,800 It was reauthorized with no significant changes 100 00:05:20,800 --> 00:05:23,759 I think one of the only changes we had was updating a map 101 00:05:23,759 --> 00:05:25,000 that's included in it 102 00:05:25,160 --> 00:05:28,149 so this is going to be the first time in several years that 103 00:05:28,149 --> 00:05:32,120 there's been a discussion and real re-examination and 104 00:05:32,279 --> 00:05:35,480 proposed changes to that policy 105 00:05:36,160 --> 00:05:39,639 the public improvement district guidelines were first 106 00:05:39,639 --> 00:05:44,259 approved in 2007 at the request of the 107 00:05:45,680 --> 00:05:49,680 Developer of Hunter Ranch, which is a large master planned 108 00:05:50,519 --> 00:05:54,079 Community or I mean it is not in existence, but it is a 109 00:05:54,079 --> 00:05:56,839 master plan community to the south 110 00:05:57,439 --> 00:06:01,480 Along I-35, but that was the impetus for the council 111 00:06:01,480 --> 00:06:04,060 adopting a public improvement district 112 00:06:04,439 --> 00:06:08,360 Guideline and it was amended in April 2014 113 00:06:08,600 --> 00:06:11,750 At the request of red development the developer of razor 114 00:06:11,750 --> 00:06:15,519 ranch to add the option of revenue bond sales for 115 00:06:15,680 --> 00:06:18,110 Construction financing when it was first adopted it only 116 00:06:18,110 --> 00:06:21,839 had two options for financing and then this amendment in 117 00:06:21,839 --> 00:06:24,240 April 2014 added the third option 118 00:06:26,000 --> 00:06:30,040 For clarification back at the top the city didn't policy so 119 00:06:30,560 --> 00:06:35,029 This will be in 2018 the first update since 1989. No, I'm 120 00:06:35,029 --> 00:06:36,720 sorry if I wasn't clear about that 121 00:06:38,240 --> 00:06:40,240 The the last 122 00:06:40,639 --> 00:06:43,120 Content update was in 2014 123 00:06:43,120 --> 00:06:46,240 I mean there were some additions and changes made in 2014. 124 00:06:46,240 --> 00:06:48,839 They just there weren't any made in 2016 125 00:06:48,839 --> 00:06:52,170 So yeah, we have to approve it every two years. So it's 126 00:06:52,170 --> 00:06:56,189 been updated every two years. No significant changes last 127 00:06:56,189 --> 00:06:56,779 time 128 00:07:00,920 --> 00:07:03,939 So the economic development partnership board plays a key 129 00:07:03,939 --> 00:07:06,399 role under both of these documents 130 00:07:06,800 --> 00:07:09,680 Because it is the first entity to review 131 00:07:10,240 --> 00:07:13,620 Incentive or pit applications and make a recommendation on 132 00:07:13,620 --> 00:07:15,959 those applications to council 133 00:07:16,720 --> 00:07:20,139 The EDP board is also tasked with reviewing and 134 00:07:20,139 --> 00:07:23,540 recommending the city's incentive policies to the council 135 00:07:23,540 --> 00:07:24,519 for approval. That's 136 00:07:25,519 --> 00:07:30,290 That's a responsibility that's outlined in the EDP boards 137 00:07:30,290 --> 00:07:31,740 enabling ordinance 138 00:07:32,439 --> 00:07:36,120 So since the incentive policy must be reapproved in 2018 as 139 00:07:36,120 --> 00:07:36,920 I've said 140 00:07:37,120 --> 00:07:40,370 We're bringing staffs recommended changes to the policy to 141 00:07:40,370 --> 00:07:43,019 you today for your review and discussion 142 00:07:44,079 --> 00:07:45,160 further 143 00:07:45,160 --> 00:07:48,160 our understanding is that City Council members are 144 00:07:48,959 --> 00:07:50,959 wanting to have a work session about the current PID 145 00:07:50,959 --> 00:07:53,579 guidelines because there has been an uptick in 146 00:07:53,959 --> 00:07:56,740 Developers contacting council members to ask about the 147 00:07:56,740 --> 00:07:58,079 establishment of pins 148 00:07:58,079 --> 00:08:01,220 And so it's a good time to just go ahead and bring these 149 00:08:01,220 --> 00:08:04,800 two things up together and talk about them and review them 150 00:08:07,959 --> 00:08:09,959 As 151 00:08:10,279 --> 00:08:13,759 We in the economic development department develop our 152 00:08:14,240 --> 00:08:15,959 detailed work plan for the year 153 00:08:15,959 --> 00:08:19,220 the first thing that we do as a department is ensure that 154 00:08:19,220 --> 00:08:22,850 our projects and activities align with the city's strategic 155 00:08:22,850 --> 00:08:23,839 direction and 156 00:08:24,639 --> 00:08:27,100 I'm sure that many of you are aware that when the City 157 00:08:27,100 --> 00:08:30,279 Council adopts its annual budget each September 158 00:08:30,279 --> 00:08:30,279 It also adopts the annual strategic plan and the strategic 159 00:08:30,279 --> 00:08:36,279 plan is organized around 160 00:08:36,480 --> 00:08:39,200 five key focus areas or KFAs 161 00:08:39,720 --> 00:08:43,100 Which are long-term defined priorities for the city 162 00:08:43,639 --> 00:08:46,879 the third KFA in the strategic plan is 163 00:08:47,440 --> 00:08:50,269 Economic development and has been for a number of years and 164 00:08:50,269 --> 00:08:54,899 one of the commitments under that strategic plan KFA is to 165 00:08:54,899 --> 00:08:55,600 develop 166 00:08:56,200 --> 00:08:59,279 targeted policies and incentives that boost economic growth 167 00:09:00,840 --> 00:09:04,440 This fiscal year my department also crafted a departmental 168 00:09:04,440 --> 00:09:06,220 level strategic plan 169 00:09:06,759 --> 00:09:09,990 to complement the city's overall plan and to add some 170 00:09:09,990 --> 00:09:13,080 details under those really broad KFAs and 171 00:09:13,440 --> 00:09:15,679 Our plan is organized under four goals 172 00:09:15,879 --> 00:09:18,799 The first of those is business development and one of the 173 00:09:18,799 --> 00:09:21,679 objectives that we have under the goal of business 174 00:09:22,000 --> 00:09:25,139 Development is to revise the city's incentive policy and 175 00:09:25,139 --> 00:09:27,320 application. So again, that's 176 00:09:27,919 --> 00:09:30,470 yet another reason why we're here today talking to you 177 00:09:30,470 --> 00:09:33,809 about it because it is a strategic goal of the city and of 178 00:09:33,809 --> 00:09:34,879 the department and 179 00:09:35,600 --> 00:09:39,480 Finally as we're examining our projects and activities 180 00:09:39,679 --> 00:09:42,610 We want to compare them to the city's core values and make 181 00:09:42,610 --> 00:09:46,080 sure that we're aligned with those core values of integrity 182 00:09:46,080 --> 00:09:47,840 fiscal responsibility 183 00:09:48,799 --> 00:09:50,080 transparency and 184 00:09:50,080 --> 00:09:51,679 outstanding customer service 185 00:09:51,679 --> 00:09:55,389 So in the case of review and revisions to the incentive and 186 00:09:55,389 --> 00:09:57,419 PID policies and guidelines 187 00:09:57,840 --> 00:10:00,759 We not only have clear ties to the city and departmental 188 00:10:00,759 --> 00:10:02,840 strategic plans and core values 189 00:10:03,320 --> 00:10:05,649 Particularly those of fiscal responsibility and 190 00:10:05,649 --> 00:10:06,360 transparency 191 00:10:06,559 --> 00:10:09,070 But we have an obligation under state law and a mandate 192 00:10:09,070 --> 00:10:12,120 under best practices in the field of economic development 193 00:10:13,039 --> 00:10:17,120 So that's all the background and now we are going to 194 00:10:18,559 --> 00:10:22,919 delve into the policy for tax abatement and incentives I 195 00:10:24,759 --> 00:10:28,399 Want to make sure that you all have an understanding of 196 00:10:28,399 --> 00:10:31,720 what our review and revision process at the staff level 197 00:10:32,360 --> 00:10:33,919 entailed as 198 00:10:33,919 --> 00:10:37,610 part of the policy review and revision process we reflected 199 00:10:37,610 --> 00:10:40,639 on lessons learned from prior incentive agreements 200 00:10:41,840 --> 00:10:44,950 from recent initiation of a number of incentives as well as 201 00:10:44,950 --> 00:10:47,000 the recent termination of 202 00:10:47,559 --> 00:10:51,559 Several incentives and our ongoing incentive administration 203 00:10:51,559 --> 00:10:53,919 , which is one of our department's responsibilities 204 00:10:54,360 --> 00:10:57,470 Just so you guys know we have 17 active incentives right 205 00:10:57,470 --> 00:11:00,330 now. So there's a significant amount of administration that 206 00:11:00,330 --> 00:11:00,580 we do 207 00:11:01,200 --> 00:11:04,659 We also reviewed incentive policies from other cities 208 00:11:04,659 --> 00:11:09,039 including Frisco Garland Flower Mound, Louisville and Plano 209 00:11:10,320 --> 00:11:13,250 We've also incorporated total impact 2.0 into the 210 00:11:13,250 --> 00:11:14,840 application process 211 00:11:14,919 --> 00:11:18,559 And total impact as some of you may remember is the city's 212 00:11:18,559 --> 00:11:21,639 fiscal and economic impact analysis 213 00:11:22,080 --> 00:11:25,759 Software that has been customized specifically to our 214 00:11:25,759 --> 00:11:29,350 particular situation as a full-service city and allows us 215 00:11:29,350 --> 00:11:30,519 to perform a true 216 00:11:30,519 --> 00:11:33,720 cost-benefit analysis on a proposed project that's 217 00:11:33,720 --> 00:11:35,039 requesting incentives and 218 00:11:35,759 --> 00:11:38,610 Finally, we discussed our proposed policy changes with our 219 00:11:38,610 --> 00:11:42,179 colleagues in the finance and legal departments as well as 220 00:11:42,179 --> 00:11:43,960 the city manager's office and then 221 00:11:44,279 --> 00:11:46,279 incorporated their comments 222 00:11:50,759 --> 00:11:53,879 So we're gonna start with the formatting changes 223 00:11:54,840 --> 00:11:58,279 We want to make some revisions to improve the organization 224 00:11:59,200 --> 00:12:01,720 clarity and readability of the document 225 00:12:02,679 --> 00:12:06,049 We propose expanding the general provisions section to 226 00:12:06,049 --> 00:12:09,840 define our economic development goals and target industries 227 00:12:09,840 --> 00:12:13,240 And then we further propose expanding the definitions 228 00:12:13,240 --> 00:12:16,840 section and bringing all the existing incentive programs 229 00:12:17,279 --> 00:12:21,519 We have an incentive program under a separate ordinance 230 00:12:21,519 --> 00:12:24,860 That's called the ED investment fund as well as another one 231 00:12:24,860 --> 00:12:27,240 called the based aircraft incentive 232 00:12:27,360 --> 00:12:30,450 We want to roll those all under this policy so that all of 233 00:12:30,450 --> 00:12:34,080 that information and guidelines are in one place 234 00:12:35,120 --> 00:12:37,759 At this point in time, we're not proposing any changes to 235 00:12:37,759 --> 00:12:41,820 those other policies the ED investment fund or the based 236 00:12:41,820 --> 00:12:42,240 aircraft 237 00:12:42,720 --> 00:12:44,720 incentive policy 238 00:12:45,080 --> 00:12:47,950 Can you tell me where the funds come from that are 239 00:12:47,950 --> 00:12:50,990 administered through the ED investment fund and the based 240 00:12:50,990 --> 00:12:52,399 aircraft incentive? 241 00:12:52,399 --> 00:12:55,889 I'm just I'm not as familiar with those and right that's a 242 00:12:55,889 --> 00:12:56,940 great question. No 243 00:12:57,360 --> 00:13:00,659 They the easy why we would or not would not put them under 244 00:13:00,659 --> 00:13:01,120 this right? 245 00:13:01,120 --> 00:13:04,919 We'll do the easy one first the base aircraft incentive. It 246 00:13:04,919 --> 00:13:08,080 's facilitated as a chapter 380 agreement 247 00:13:08,080 --> 00:13:12,350 So they're the funds for that are they come in from the 248 00:13:12,350 --> 00:13:15,919 taxpayer and then they would be refunded the ED investment 249 00:13:15,919 --> 00:13:16,240 fund 250 00:13:16,440 --> 00:13:20,919 That is funded through mixed beverage sales tax, correct? 251 00:13:21,000 --> 00:13:24,419 Yes, mix beverage sales tax is a certain amount is set 252 00:13:24,419 --> 00:13:24,840 aside 253 00:13:25,559 --> 00:13:27,830 It's like a hundred and fifty thousand dollars a year. So I 254 00:13:27,830 --> 00:13:28,600 'm looking at Erica 255 00:13:29,639 --> 00:13:33,639 150 thousand dollars a year is set aside into that specific 256 00:13:33,639 --> 00:13:34,120 fund 257 00:13:35,000 --> 00:13:39,809 so it's really just it's kind of a house cleaning measure 258 00:13:39,809 --> 00:13:40,399 so that 259 00:13:41,000 --> 00:13:44,450 When someone looks at our policy, they don't have to go 260 00:13:44,450 --> 00:13:45,960 look at three different policies 261 00:13:45,960 --> 00:13:49,059 They see it all in one place and the point being it's all 262 00:13:49,059 --> 00:13:50,639 taxpayer. So that's right 263 00:13:55,559 --> 00:13:59,700 Yes, ma'am, that's really more of a comment than a question 264 00:13:59,700 --> 00:14:02,600 on this a readability is a big one 265 00:14:03,039 --> 00:14:06,759 For me understanding what it is that we're being asked for 266 00:14:06,759 --> 00:14:10,200 and when we talk about the umbrella policy everything 267 00:14:10,840 --> 00:14:14,440 Being under one umbrella. I'm wondering if it's possible if 268 00:14:15,799 --> 00:14:17,960 we can create a scorecard an 269 00:14:18,480 --> 00:14:22,509 actual scorecard with all of the the items or criteria on 270 00:14:22,509 --> 00:14:24,200 one side and if 271 00:14:24,639 --> 00:14:26,639 that that 272 00:14:26,759 --> 00:14:28,759 business that's asked for the incentive 273 00:14:31,120 --> 00:14:35,190 Is a yes or no on those criteria's mm-hmm just something 274 00:14:35,190 --> 00:14:37,279 physical and simple for us to see 275 00:14:38,559 --> 00:14:41,039 That might be a tool that we could develop 276 00:14:42,120 --> 00:14:46,879 To help the EDP board and the council in their analysis 277 00:14:46,879 --> 00:14:49,460 I mean, is that what you're talking about instead of 278 00:14:49,460 --> 00:14:51,960 incorporating something into the policy itself? 279 00:14:52,360 --> 00:14:55,049 Because we're gonna kind of get to something along those 280 00:14:55,049 --> 00:14:57,840 lines that we're proposing as it changed to take something 281 00:14:57,840 --> 00:14:58,159 out 282 00:14:59,360 --> 00:15:02,559 But I like that idea of something real simple and 283 00:15:02,559 --> 00:15:03,399 straightforward 284 00:15:04,799 --> 00:15:08,340 Kind of does it hit this or not? Yeah. Yeah, and the other 285 00:15:08,340 --> 00:15:09,840 thing too is that 286 00:15:11,360 --> 00:15:13,360 Our total impact 287 00:15:13,919 --> 00:15:17,730 Analysis software produces a one-page summary as well as 288 00:15:17,730 --> 00:15:20,000 like a ten-page sort of 289 00:15:20,320 --> 00:15:24,149 Mediary report and then a 30 page really significantly long 290 00:15:24,149 --> 00:15:27,320 and involved report so that you could lay out 291 00:15:27,840 --> 00:15:32,039 This is a project. This is this is what it looks like under 292 00:15:32,039 --> 00:15:33,000 total impact 293 00:15:33,000 --> 00:15:35,679 You know how many jobs it will create how many? 294 00:15:36,559 --> 00:15:39,159 New housing units it would generate with this level of 295 00:15:39,159 --> 00:15:40,000 investment 296 00:15:40,159 --> 00:15:43,500 How long the payback period would be if we offered them an 297 00:15:43,500 --> 00:15:47,340 incentive? So it's kind of a one-page infographic 298 00:15:48,320 --> 00:15:49,720 style 299 00:15:49,720 --> 00:15:51,519 piece of information 300 00:15:51,519 --> 00:15:54,879 That is very helpful for looking at 301 00:15:56,639 --> 00:16:00,460 Projects next to each other even okay, so but I appreciate 302 00:16:00,460 --> 00:16:03,320 the suggestion. I made a note and we'll discuss that 303 00:16:03,840 --> 00:16:05,840 Jim's got a question 304 00:16:09,720 --> 00:16:13,679 Would that be an element in the approval process or 305 00:16:14,639 --> 00:16:17,330 Would that kick a business completely out as far as being 306 00:16:17,330 --> 00:16:18,120 qualified? 307 00:16:18,600 --> 00:16:23,600 No, it's just to emphasize that these are the targeted 308 00:16:23,600 --> 00:16:26,440 industries and and that there there is some additional 309 00:16:26,440 --> 00:16:27,000 weight 310 00:16:27,080 --> 00:16:30,639 But I I don't think that anybody would want to just 311 00:16:30,639 --> 00:16:33,620 discount a potential project because it wasn't a target 312 00:16:33,620 --> 00:16:34,200 industry 313 00:16:34,480 --> 00:16:36,940 It's just to call out the ones that are particularly 314 00:16:36,940 --> 00:16:41,600 desirable as determined by this board and by the council 315 00:16:46,039 --> 00:16:51,179 Okay, so we have on our incentive application we do have a 316 00:16:51,179 --> 00:16:52,720 list of criteria of 317 00:16:53,559 --> 00:16:56,179 Not quite a scorecard, but kind of a scorecard that they 318 00:16:56,179 --> 00:16:58,940 check a box on it says I'm doing this this this and this so 319 00:16:58,940 --> 00:17:00,940 That maybe could be expanded 320 00:17:01,720 --> 00:17:03,720 Within that because we have some 321 00:17:04,240 --> 00:17:06,670 Targeted not industries, but things we want to make sure 322 00:17:06,670 --> 00:17:08,480 that they meet on the application 323 00:17:08,480 --> 00:17:10,680 We don't have an application. I don't know if everybody 324 00:17:10,680 --> 00:17:11,960 seen the application in here 325 00:17:12,839 --> 00:17:16,759 Um, I think that we include and I think we include a copy 326 00:17:16,759 --> 00:17:21,000 of the application with people's orientation materials 327 00:17:21,000 --> 00:17:23,829 But it could have been it could be a while and the other 328 00:17:23,829 --> 00:17:28,000 thing too is we've actually we've revised the incentive 329 00:17:28,000 --> 00:17:28,119 application 330 00:17:29,000 --> 00:17:32,349 just on an administrative level to make sure that we're 331 00:17:32,349 --> 00:17:35,369 capturing all the information that we need to do our total 332 00:17:35,369 --> 00:17:36,559 impact analysis and 333 00:17:37,559 --> 00:17:40,740 Capturing the information that our utilities need to help 334 00:17:40,740 --> 00:17:43,359 us gauge the kind of impact a project would have 335 00:17:43,559 --> 00:17:47,880 So we've tweaked that on an administrative level. I mean it 336 00:17:47,880 --> 00:17:49,759 doesn't have anything to do with policy 337 00:17:49,759 --> 00:17:52,789 So we just changed it to capture what we needed with our 338 00:17:52,789 --> 00:17:54,000 new analysis 339 00:17:54,960 --> 00:17:57,720 But if everybody would like to see a copy of that we can 340 00:17:57,720 --> 00:18:00,099 email it out after the meeting 341 00:18:01,440 --> 00:18:05,599 The ED investment fund how long have we had that I 342 00:18:06,559 --> 00:18:09,630 Think this is the third year third fiscal year. We've had 343 00:18:09,630 --> 00:18:10,200 it and that is 344 00:18:10,920 --> 00:18:14,279 Correct me if I'm wrong money that we've set aside so that 345 00:18:14,279 --> 00:18:16,799 if a big project comes up and we need to 346 00:18:17,119 --> 00:18:19,359 I'm trying to think what the project what it came up with a 347 00:18:19,359 --> 00:18:20,319 few years ago, but 348 00:18:23,119 --> 00:18:25,799 Help pay for something that were able to 349 00:18:26,880 --> 00:18:29,450 Provide an incentive. We've got cash to be able to do that 350 00:18:29,450 --> 00:18:31,160 when we're competing with 351 00:18:32,359 --> 00:18:35,349 Other cities a lot of those people have a 4a or 4b sales 352 00:18:35,349 --> 00:18:38,380 tax this thing where they have money set aside that they 353 00:18:38,380 --> 00:18:38,759 can buy 354 00:18:38,759 --> 00:18:41,079 a piece of land or help it in infrastructure and 355 00:18:45,400 --> 00:18:47,039 Okay 356 00:18:47,039 --> 00:18:50,069 So that's money that the council that we recommended the 357 00:18:50,069 --> 00:18:52,339 council agreed to set aside so that we can 358 00:18:53,160 --> 00:18:55,819 Build that up to be able to maybe offset some costs as 359 00:18:55,819 --> 00:18:57,759 somebody's coming in there 360 00:18:59,160 --> 00:19:01,279 That would have to come through here and it have to go to 361 00:19:01,279 --> 00:19:03,279 City Council before any of that money was spent 362 00:19:03,839 --> 00:19:06,509 And the aircraft and Cindy was a new policy that we've only 363 00:19:06,509 --> 00:19:07,759 had a couple of years 364 00:19:08,559 --> 00:19:12,019 As well that for specifically for the airport. We've had a 365 00:19:12,019 --> 00:19:13,039 couple of folks that came out 366 00:19:14,279 --> 00:19:17,359 With some projects out there that we wanted to make sure 367 00:19:17,359 --> 00:19:17,819 that was 368 00:19:19,200 --> 00:19:21,200 Something we can do out there 369 00:19:21,359 --> 00:19:24,200 right and just to reiterate 370 00:19:25,240 --> 00:19:26,640 any 371 00:19:26,640 --> 00:19:29,869 incentive agreements that would be entered into using ED 372 00:19:29,869 --> 00:19:32,960 investment fund funds or a 373 00:19:33,200 --> 00:19:36,130 based aircraft incentive would go through the exact same 374 00:19:36,130 --> 00:19:39,279 process that any other chapter 380 agreement or 375 00:19:40,279 --> 00:19:43,579 tax abatement would would go through and would be governed 376 00:19:43,579 --> 00:19:46,680 by the same kind of contracts with thresholds and 377 00:19:46,880 --> 00:19:50,000 Verification and all of that stuff, but Marty makes a good 378 00:19:50,000 --> 00:19:50,319 point 379 00:19:51,079 --> 00:19:54,440 The ED investment fund is intended to put us on a better 380 00:19:54,440 --> 00:19:58,000 competitive footing with other communities that have 381 00:19:58,759 --> 00:20:03,240 For a or type a type B sales taxes and there are some 382 00:20:03,240 --> 00:20:04,160 higher level 383 00:20:04,960 --> 00:20:07,720 very clearly defined requirements that 384 00:20:08,599 --> 00:20:11,460 Go along with the project's eligibility to be considered 385 00:20:11,460 --> 00:20:13,460 under the ED investment fund 386 00:20:13,759 --> 00:20:17,099 It's a minimum capital investment of 15 million dollars 387 00:20:17,099 --> 00:20:20,150 instead of five million dollars like under the regular 388 00:20:20,150 --> 00:20:20,640 policy 389 00:20:21,200 --> 00:20:25,799 We've defined what a higher paying job is or skills 390 00:20:26,839 --> 00:20:30,269 Skills based jobs, so they have to meet two out of three 391 00:20:30,269 --> 00:20:31,160 criteria 392 00:20:32,440 --> 00:20:35,880 That are clearly defined to be eligible and we have not 393 00:20:35,880 --> 00:20:39,000 used the ED investment fund to date 394 00:20:39,680 --> 00:20:41,759 So just a little bit more background for y'all 395 00:20:42,920 --> 00:20:45,160 Any more questions? Thanks good 396 00:20:49,759 --> 00:20:52,619 Okay, so on to the proposed content changes 397 00:20:55,160 --> 00:20:58,970 We are and this just gets right into what we're we're 398 00:20:58,970 --> 00:21:00,519 talking about here but um 399 00:21:01,279 --> 00:21:05,380 We want to put forward the proposed change to limit 400 00:21:05,839 --> 00:21:09,940 Chapter 380 tax rebate agreements to terms of 10 years or 401 00:21:09,940 --> 00:21:10,240 less 402 00:21:10,799 --> 00:21:14,440 To make those consistent with the limitation on the term of 403 00:21:14,440 --> 00:21:15,599 tax abatements 404 00:21:17,000 --> 00:21:20,150 There are a couple different reasons behind our suggestion 405 00:21:20,150 --> 00:21:20,640 for this 406 00:21:22,039 --> 00:21:26,400 One of which is beyond a term of 10 years. It becomes 407 00:21:26,400 --> 00:21:28,359 difficult to do an analysis on 408 00:21:29,440 --> 00:21:31,759 The accuracy of an analysis on a project 409 00:21:32,599 --> 00:21:35,680 Significantly declines outside of the time frame of 10 410 00:21:35,680 --> 00:21:36,039 years 411 00:21:45,039 --> 00:21:49,000 I just heard what you said sign on the door. I'm gonna have 412 00:21:49,000 --> 00:21:51,339 to get a basket and take up everybody's phone 413 00:21:56,680 --> 00:21:58,880 All right, we'll use it to buy cookies for the next 414 00:22:15,039 --> 00:22:17,039 Disrupted the meeting 415 00:22:21,799 --> 00:22:24,519 Okay getting back on track because we don't want to be here 416 00:22:24,519 --> 00:22:25,279 until 2 o'clock 417 00:22:26,039 --> 00:22:29,640 So the first proposed content change that we have as I said 418 00:22:29,640 --> 00:22:33,660 is limiting chapter 380 tax rebate agreements to terms of 419 00:22:33,660 --> 00:22:34,240 10 years 420 00:22:34,240 --> 00:22:37,890 Or less to be consistent with the limitation on the term of 421 00:22:37,890 --> 00:22:38,960 tax abatements 422 00:22:40,200 --> 00:22:43,480 We also propose excluding retail projects 423 00:22:45,599 --> 00:22:47,599 Some questions on that 424 00:22:47,839 --> 00:22:50,430 We have 17 that we're working on and I can't remember the 425 00:22:50,430 --> 00:22:51,480 details on all those 426 00:22:51,480 --> 00:22:54,839 So how many did we have that were longer than 10 years? 427 00:22:55,640 --> 00:22:57,640 Or do we have in place? 428 00:22:58,039 --> 00:22:59,559 there are 429 00:22:59,559 --> 00:23:01,279 two 430 00:23:01,279 --> 00:23:03,359 That are 25 year terms 431 00:23:04,559 --> 00:23:06,559 That I can think of right now 432 00:23:07,240 --> 00:23:09,470 If you're gonna if you're gonna add to it you got gonna 433 00:23:09,470 --> 00:23:12,200 have to come up here and talk into the microphone 434 00:23:15,160 --> 00:23:17,160 My 435 00:23:17,559 --> 00:23:20,259 Name's Erica Solomon which we all know but for the public 436 00:23:20,259 --> 00:23:23,450 the analysts so I actually administer the incentive 437 00:23:23,450 --> 00:23:23,900 agreements 438 00:23:23,900 --> 00:23:25,799 So we would have four 439 00:23:25,799 --> 00:23:28,309 That would be our sales tax agreements. So it'd be Golden 440 00:23:28,309 --> 00:23:30,819 Triangle razor ranch tent and crossing in Unicorn Lake 441 00:23:32,319 --> 00:23:37,049 Those are all longer than 10 are they all 25 years Erica, 442 00:23:37,049 --> 00:23:38,039 okay, so 443 00:23:40,559 --> 00:23:40,700 Okay between 15 and 25 years you had mentioned excuse me 444 00:23:40,700 --> 00:23:44,859 Erica 445 00:23:45,359 --> 00:23:47,359 mentioned Golden Triangle razor ranch 446 00:23:48,039 --> 00:23:50,039 Bossing and what was the fourth? 447 00:23:50,359 --> 00:23:52,359 Thank you very much 448 00:23:53,759 --> 00:23:56,400 So none of those projects would have qualified under this 449 00:23:57,019 --> 00:23:59,660 No, they would have they would have qualified but they 450 00:23:59,660 --> 00:24:02,480 would have been limited to a 10-year term 451 00:24:04,839 --> 00:24:09,640 Jill thank you. So my question is 452 00:24:11,200 --> 00:24:13,200 First of all is 453 00:24:13,799 --> 00:24:17,039 If we make this change does it limit 454 00:24:17,640 --> 00:24:20,839 council from approving outside those guidelines or can they 455 00:24:20,839 --> 00:24:22,160 make a variation and 456 00:24:23,160 --> 00:24:24,119 secondly 457 00:24:24,119 --> 00:24:27,039 If every single time we go through a vote and they're all 458 00:24:27,039 --> 00:24:29,839 looked at on a case-by-case basis as we all know 459 00:24:29,839 --> 00:24:32,480 Why would we limit ourselves outside of? 460 00:24:33,000 --> 00:24:36,250 the laws of Texas to what we can't can't do I can see 461 00:24:36,250 --> 00:24:38,240 discouraging it because of 462 00:24:38,480 --> 00:24:41,240 the issues that come up with over 10 years, but 463 00:24:42,039 --> 00:24:45,119 Just so mark that off the list doesn't I don't know why 464 00:24:45,119 --> 00:24:47,240 this is an adjustment to 465 00:24:48,119 --> 00:24:50,119 kind of 466 00:24:50,440 --> 00:24:54,799 The guidelines there just aren't any in our own policy that 467 00:24:54,799 --> 00:24:56,440 being said 468 00:24:57,680 --> 00:25:01,640 the policy as it is written allows the council to 469 00:25:02,400 --> 00:25:05,480 have discretion to go outside of 470 00:25:05,920 --> 00:25:08,759 what's stated in the policy and we're not proposing a 471 00:25:08,759 --> 00:25:11,359 change to that because we understand that 472 00:25:11,880 --> 00:25:15,309 We want to have clear guidelines so that companies know 473 00:25:15,309 --> 00:25:17,920 what to expect and kind of what the norm is 474 00:25:18,960 --> 00:25:22,279 However, there can be situations that we cannot anticipate 475 00:25:23,000 --> 00:25:25,460 When the council would want to have the flexibility to go 476 00:25:25,460 --> 00:25:29,440 beyond that so I don't think it's reasonable to 477 00:25:30,519 --> 00:25:33,980 Remove that language that would allow the council to make 478 00:25:33,980 --> 00:25:35,900 the kind of decision that it needs to make in an 479 00:25:35,900 --> 00:25:37,160 extraordinary circumstance 480 00:25:37,440 --> 00:25:40,200 to do something different and to boil it down the 481 00:25:41,000 --> 00:25:43,549 Limiting that would be because of the difficulty in 482 00:25:43,549 --> 00:25:44,359 administering 483 00:25:46,000 --> 00:25:49,119 After a 10-year mark is that the reason that that's limit 484 00:25:49,119 --> 00:25:52,140 that's one of the issues and it's not difficulty in 485 00:25:52,140 --> 00:25:53,079 administration 486 00:25:53,079 --> 00:25:56,680 It's difficulty in judging what the real value of a project 487 00:25:56,680 --> 00:25:59,640 is outside of the time frame or in a time frame beyond 10 488 00:25:59,640 --> 00:25:59,920 years 489 00:26:00,440 --> 00:26:03,279 Somebody's gonna be here administering something if we 490 00:26:03,279 --> 00:26:05,359 enter into an agreement with an entity 491 00:26:05,359 --> 00:26:08,640 It has to be administered for the life of the agreement 492 00:26:09,640 --> 00:26:13,519 So the the administration is not the problem 493 00:26:14,039 --> 00:26:15,839 I 494 00:26:15,839 --> 00:26:17,839 think that 495 00:26:18,119 --> 00:26:21,400 There's also there's also an issue with you know 496 00:26:22,119 --> 00:26:25,180 The issue of foregoing revenue for an extended amount of 497 00:26:25,180 --> 00:26:27,839 time. I mean frankly that is an issue 498 00:26:29,839 --> 00:26:33,210 So these are the things that as we talk through these 499 00:26:33,210 --> 00:26:36,880 things as we look at what our challenges have been as we 500 00:26:37,240 --> 00:26:39,480 Talk to other staff members 501 00:26:40,319 --> 00:26:42,720 These are the issues that come up over and over again. So 502 00:26:42,720 --> 00:26:45,799 we're bringing these to you for your discussion 503 00:26:46,400 --> 00:26:48,400 Jim 504 00:26:52,599 --> 00:26:57,279 But a unicorn lake and raise your range with the build-out 505 00:26:57,279 --> 00:26:59,519 is over a longer period of time 506 00:27:00,240 --> 00:27:03,880 Is there some way we can put a provision in there so that 507 00:27:03,880 --> 00:27:05,400 you do it in phases? 508 00:27:05,400 --> 00:27:07,480 Like we did Russia range we did the North side 509 00:27:09,200 --> 00:27:12,369 I think there needs to be something there to give you a 510 00:27:12,369 --> 00:27:13,400 little flexibility 511 00:27:14,359 --> 00:27:17,130 To not force somebody to think they've got to get it all 512 00:27:17,130 --> 00:27:20,559 done in 10 years. Although that that would be the goal 513 00:27:22,559 --> 00:27:25,759 Some of these bigger projects might not be feasible 514 00:27:28,160 --> 00:27:30,160 Okay, thank you 515 00:27:31,880 --> 00:27:35,460 Anybody else have any comments or questions I guess 516 00:27:36,559 --> 00:27:39,119 Just to make sure everybody's on the same page on 380 517 00:27:39,119 --> 00:27:41,759 agreement. We use Denton Crossing as an example 518 00:27:42,319 --> 00:27:45,660 they collect sales tax revenue from from Best Buy when they 519 00:27:45,660 --> 00:27:46,960 sell a computer and 520 00:27:47,720 --> 00:27:50,500 We agree up front to give them some of that money back over 521 00:27:50,500 --> 00:27:52,119 a certain period of time 522 00:27:53,000 --> 00:27:58,109 That can be 50% goes back years one through five that it's 523 00:27:58,109 --> 00:28:00,279 40% and then it's 20% or whatever 524 00:28:00,279 --> 00:28:04,160 So the years and how much money they get reimbursed or are 525 00:28:04,160 --> 00:28:07,119 both part of that equation. And so while we are 526 00:28:07,839 --> 00:28:11,730 giving money back over time 15 to 25 years down the road 527 00:28:11,730 --> 00:28:12,359 that may be 528 00:28:13,319 --> 00:28:16,809 10% or 20% or whatever the deal is so it's not just a year 529 00:28:16,809 --> 00:28:17,559 's thing. It's a 530 00:28:18,119 --> 00:28:20,279 when somebody comes and asks for a 531 00:28:21,480 --> 00:28:24,599 Rebate its years and how much are we giving them over time? 532 00:28:24,599 --> 00:28:26,220 And when we have these discussions 533 00:28:26,220 --> 00:28:30,339 We usually have several scenarios to talk about they want 534 00:28:30,339 --> 00:28:33,779 100% for 100 years and we want 535 00:28:34,359 --> 00:28:36,359 You know 20% for three years 536 00:28:37,000 --> 00:28:39,210 And so we kind of come up with something that works out 537 00:28:39,210 --> 00:28:40,039 there. So I 538 00:28:41,720 --> 00:28:46,019 Don't mind 10 years being a goal if we had that as a stop 539 00:28:46,019 --> 00:28:49,000 then the ones that we have right wrong or different wouldn 540 00:28:49,000 --> 00:28:49,279 't have 541 00:28:49,640 --> 00:28:52,039 Gotten a great wouldn't have gotten an incentive or what 542 00:28:52,039 --> 00:28:53,920 they have may or may not have happened 543 00:28:54,160 --> 00:28:56,279 Raise a ranch wouldn't have worked on 10 years 544 00:28:57,400 --> 00:28:59,869 Well, and that's that's why it's important to retain the 545 00:28:59,869 --> 00:29:02,200 flexibility for the council to make 546 00:29:03,039 --> 00:29:05,039 The decision that they deem appropriate 547 00:29:05,880 --> 00:29:09,559 Outside of the 10-year time frame, but I guess I don't know 548 00:29:10,759 --> 00:29:13,289 Outside of we're trying to line it up with the tax abat 549 00:29:13,289 --> 00:29:17,000 ement policy, which I don't even know if that's relevant 550 00:29:19,440 --> 00:29:22,589 In my world I have to look at rules and regulations and how 551 00:29:22,589 --> 00:29:25,329 often we make exceptions to those and if you're making 552 00:29:25,329 --> 00:29:25,960 exceptions to 553 00:29:25,960 --> 00:29:27,859 Them all the time then you need to look at whether that's a 554 00:29:27,859 --> 00:29:28,599 reasonable rule 555 00:29:29,160 --> 00:29:31,599 Regulation and if I look at our current five 556 00:29:32,279 --> 00:29:35,390 Chapter 380 agreements, they're all over this. So what are 557 00:29:35,390 --> 00:29:38,200 we really getting ourselves into we're asking the council 558 00:29:39,720 --> 00:29:42,410 We put ten years in there and we make a recommendation for 559 00:29:42,410 --> 00:29:44,000 15 and council 560 00:29:44,480 --> 00:29:47,119 Next week or ten years from now says what's our rule? 561 00:29:47,119 --> 00:29:49,200 I don't want to make an exception because what does that 562 00:29:49,200 --> 00:29:49,640 look like? 563 00:29:50,400 --> 00:29:52,400 To the council people and putting 564 00:29:53,200 --> 00:29:55,410 Words in your mouth. I guess they don't want to make the 565 00:29:55,410 --> 00:29:57,759 exception because it's outside the policy and people are 566 00:29:57,759 --> 00:29:58,420 mad because we're 567 00:29:58,720 --> 00:30:00,720 outside the policy I 568 00:30:00,759 --> 00:30:02,759 Don't know that's really reasonable 569 00:30:06,960 --> 00:30:09,519 I don't know if this is a comment or a question or what? 570 00:30:11,519 --> 00:30:14,400 But the city of Denton has changed over the last ten years 571 00:30:16,000 --> 00:30:19,799 Significantly and as we're proposing 572 00:30:20,880 --> 00:30:22,559 content changes 573 00:30:22,559 --> 00:30:24,559 Does this really? 574 00:30:25,079 --> 00:30:29,119 Capture what we want to do over the next ten years. I mean 575 00:30:29,960 --> 00:30:31,559 the city and 576 00:30:31,559 --> 00:30:34,849 Surroundings have changed significantly. So is this really 577 00:30:34,849 --> 00:30:36,720 going to meet our need? 578 00:30:37,359 --> 00:30:40,509 For the years to come. I don't know the answer. I'm just 579 00:30:40,509 --> 00:30:41,079 asking a question 580 00:30:41,599 --> 00:30:44,309 Well first the other part of this all these are retail 581 00:30:44,309 --> 00:30:47,490 projects on the next item is to exclude retail projects. I 582 00:30:47,490 --> 00:30:47,559 don't 583 00:30:48,480 --> 00:30:51,430 It's a question of whether we get into the details of that 584 00:30:51,430 --> 00:30:52,119 one a little bit 585 00:30:52,119 --> 00:30:54,670 We're looking at more retail projects because we have so 586 00:30:54,670 --> 00:30:57,569 many going towards that is probably a really good question. 587 00:30:57,569 --> 00:30:58,119 I guess I'm 588 00:30:59,440 --> 00:31:01,839 From the you know first time really taking a chance to talk 589 00:31:01,839 --> 00:31:02,880 about this. I'm 590 00:31:03,880 --> 00:31:06,079 Opposed to having ten years out there and I think that 591 00:31:06,079 --> 00:31:07,559 makes it harder for us to get things done 592 00:31:08,240 --> 00:31:10,240 Understand we've got some flexibility 593 00:31:10,480 --> 00:31:13,559 But when you look at the ones that are on the books were 594 00:31:13,559 --> 00:31:13,839 all 595 00:31:14,799 --> 00:31:16,799 15 to 25 years. Why would we? 596 00:31:18,640 --> 00:31:19,839 Ten years 597 00:31:19,839 --> 00:31:22,900 Well, there are a significant number of them that are less 598 00:31:22,900 --> 00:31:26,480 than that. I mean we've had some that have been three years 599 00:31:26,480 --> 00:31:28,480 I mean I can think of several that have been three years 600 00:31:28,480 --> 00:31:29,359 recently 601 00:31:29,359 --> 00:31:32,730 So but those are the I mean razor-edge a big deal didn't 602 00:31:32,730 --> 00:31:34,559 crossing was a big deal at the time 603 00:31:34,559 --> 00:31:36,720 No one tried them all those are I 604 00:31:37,599 --> 00:31:40,000 Just don't want to I just want us to be able to have 605 00:31:40,000 --> 00:31:42,279 options and I don't want to make those options exceptions 606 00:31:42,960 --> 00:31:44,960 my personal opinion 607 00:31:46,240 --> 00:31:48,240 Carolina 608 00:31:48,920 --> 00:31:52,259 Does that limit this board from being able to say that we 609 00:31:52,259 --> 00:31:53,079 recommend 610 00:31:54,759 --> 00:31:57,200 Additional I mean in my opinion it doesn't 611 00:31:58,480 --> 00:32:01,240 It would I mean the flexibility could would be there at the 612 00:32:01,240 --> 00:32:03,660 board level and the council level 613 00:32:06,119 --> 00:32:08,670 For the sake of being a devil's advocate we could set it at 614 00:32:08,670 --> 00:32:11,720 25 years and we could make them recommend less than that 615 00:32:15,079 --> 00:32:18,240 Or you could send it John Baines or you could set it at 10 616 00:32:18,240 --> 00:32:21,720 and say that at the discretion of council they could 617 00:32:22,079 --> 00:32:25,559 Expand it right and that's already built into the policy. I 618 00:32:25,559 --> 00:32:26,519 'm and we 619 00:32:27,119 --> 00:32:30,319 We would retain that language in my opinion is that 620 00:32:30,319 --> 00:32:33,950 language could stay it should stay in there to allow for 621 00:32:33,950 --> 00:32:34,359 that 622 00:32:35,039 --> 00:32:37,039 Jim 623 00:32:41,400 --> 00:32:44,480 Have a different start date for different places approve it 624 00:32:44,480 --> 00:32:45,200 all at one time 625 00:32:46,279 --> 00:32:49,119 And first the first phase would be ten years and then when 626 00:32:49,119 --> 00:32:51,579 the second phase kicked off then that would be the start 627 00:32:51,579 --> 00:32:52,420 date for that one 628 00:32:52,960 --> 00:32:55,359 And there could be thresholds 629 00:32:57,640 --> 00:32:59,390 Associated with the first phase that would have to be met 630 00:32:59,390 --> 00:33:01,920 in order to initiate second phase 631 00:33:04,319 --> 00:33:07,690 John Baines so Jim what you're saying is that it would 632 00:33:07,690 --> 00:33:10,940 basically come back to some review board of some sort after 633 00:33:10,940 --> 00:33:11,140 the 634 00:33:21,839 --> 00:33:24,319 Yeah, that's that's what razor ranch is doing now 635 00:33:25,200 --> 00:33:28,000 They have a threshold they have to meet to get an extension 636 00:33:28,000 --> 00:33:31,000 and then they have their final threshold 637 00:33:31,799 --> 00:33:34,359 Jill jester and I think that that's something that we you 638 00:33:34,359 --> 00:33:34,920 could word 639 00:33:34,920 --> 00:33:37,549 I mean if if that's the ends up being the recommendation 640 00:33:37,549 --> 00:33:41,960 that although it's a you know up to by law 25 years 641 00:33:42,640 --> 00:33:46,200 potential that it is the recommendation or that it is 642 00:33:46,759 --> 00:33:48,759 strongly recommended that 643 00:33:49,319 --> 00:33:52,359 It be divided up into phases no more than 10 years or 644 00:33:52,359 --> 00:33:54,680 something like that if that's the way we choose to go 645 00:33:54,680 --> 00:33:56,680 Okay, all of these projects are 646 00:33:57,680 --> 00:34:00,089 Different and a case by case. So when we come when we have 647 00:34:00,089 --> 00:34:02,690 somebody doing that again, they all want all the money in 648 00:34:02,690 --> 00:34:03,279 the world for 649 00:34:03,720 --> 00:34:06,980 Forever and there's also a dollar limit on all these so 650 00:34:07,559 --> 00:34:09,239 It's all 651 00:34:09,239 --> 00:34:10,840 negotiation 652 00:34:10,840 --> 00:34:12,840 Economic Development Department comes to us with a 653 00:34:12,840 --> 00:34:14,980 recommendation and we have a talk about like we're doing 654 00:34:14,980 --> 00:34:16,920 here about each each project and then make 655 00:34:16,920 --> 00:34:18,920 a recommendation to City Council 656 00:34:20,079 --> 00:34:22,079 So, I guess 657 00:34:22,119 --> 00:34:24,849 Do we need to all say raise our hand and say we're okay 658 00:34:24,849 --> 00:34:26,519 with this right now or 659 00:34:27,679 --> 00:34:31,139 I think that's up to you how you want to do that. I mean, 660 00:34:31,139 --> 00:34:34,159 we're all making we're all making notes as we're talking 661 00:34:35,199 --> 00:34:40,000 But if you want to specify by each point what the board's 662 00:34:40,000 --> 00:34:43,000 consensus is that's definitely one way to go 663 00:34:45,920 --> 00:34:47,920 No, we need to 664 00:34:48,719 --> 00:34:51,949 Vote on that or not or we're just providing comments and 665 00:34:51,949 --> 00:34:55,280 feedback right now. It's it's really comments and feedback 666 00:34:55,559 --> 00:34:58,380 There's not action to be taken. So 667 00:34:59,679 --> 00:35:03,280 Yeah, just we're taking the direction as you're giving it 668 00:35:05,119 --> 00:35:07,000 John Baines 669 00:35:07,000 --> 00:35:11,320 Just a little clarification here on the 15 million. So with 670 00:35:11,320 --> 00:35:11,800 these particular 671 00:35:20,320 --> 00:35:23,909 Okay, one thing Jill you you said something that I want to 672 00:35:23,909 --> 00:35:27,920 clarify not that this would ever come up but just because 673 00:35:29,320 --> 00:35:32,800 Under the state statute that governs chapter 380s. There is 674 00:35:32,800 --> 00:35:35,599 literally no time limit on how long the incentive can be 675 00:35:35,599 --> 00:35:39,429 It could be a hundred years long. So 25 is just where some 676 00:35:39,429 --> 00:35:41,659 of our agreements have landed 677 00:35:42,599 --> 00:35:45,940 Because that was that was what was deemed necessary to make 678 00:35:45,940 --> 00:35:48,199 the deal work for both sides 679 00:35:48,559 --> 00:35:50,829 Thank you for that clarification. I appreciate that. You're 680 00:35:50,829 --> 00:35:50,920 welcome 681 00:35:51,400 --> 00:35:55,619 Okay, can we move on to the retail project bullet? Okay 682 00:35:56,460 --> 00:36:00,010 So we're proposing to exclude retail projects except those 683 00:36:00,010 --> 00:36:03,880 that address a gap or leakage in the Denton market 684 00:36:03,880 --> 00:36:08,420 So a gap means we don't have it and we want it. It's not 685 00:36:08,420 --> 00:36:08,719 here 686 00:36:08,719 --> 00:36:13,340 And so if you have a gap you have leakage of people going 687 00:36:13,340 --> 00:36:15,199 to where that retail is 688 00:36:15,719 --> 00:36:18,420 If it's not in Denton, they're going to another community 689 00:36:18,420 --> 00:36:19,760 to shop there 690 00:36:19,760 --> 00:36:24,159 and so we want to be able to close those gaps and 691 00:36:25,559 --> 00:36:28,440 Keep that leakage from happening in our market 692 00:36:28,960 --> 00:36:32,599 I have two examples of that. So 693 00:36:33,679 --> 00:36:37,130 Say Nebraska Furniture Mart wanted to open a second North 694 00:36:37,130 --> 00:36:38,000 Texas location 695 00:36:38,119 --> 00:36:41,090 Of course, we would want to talk to them about their 696 00:36:41,090 --> 00:36:44,900 project and that would be retail that would address a gap 697 00:36:45,360 --> 00:36:48,480 the example on the other side of that is 698 00:36:49,559 --> 00:36:53,679 Kroger how many Kroger's do we have three two and a half? 699 00:36:53,679 --> 00:36:54,960 How many are we about to have? 700 00:36:55,480 --> 00:36:59,719 We're gonna have we're gonna have another one and they came 701 00:36:59,719 --> 00:37:03,360 very aggressively wanting to be incentivized 702 00:37:04,480 --> 00:37:07,639 We have already Kroger's we don't need to incentivize 703 00:37:07,639 --> 00:37:09,079 another Kroger 704 00:37:09,760 --> 00:37:12,460 So that's the kind of thing that we want to we just want to 705 00:37:12,460 --> 00:37:13,679 head that off at the pass 706 00:37:14,199 --> 00:37:16,760 Because that that's not a constructive use of anybody's 707 00:37:16,760 --> 00:37:19,500 time and while we want to help them and support them and 708 00:37:19,500 --> 00:37:20,760 answer their questions 709 00:37:21,039 --> 00:37:23,400 We don't need to have a conversation about incentivizing 710 00:37:24,480 --> 00:37:27,429 Somebody to build another Kroger depends on the cheese 711 00:37:27,429 --> 00:37:27,960 selection 712 00:37:31,119 --> 00:37:33,880 Give us your cheese list and we can we can add that 713 00:37:37,079 --> 00:37:39,079 Keely has a question 714 00:37:40,800 --> 00:37:44,190 But just to address what we're talking about now so gap or 715 00:37:44,190 --> 00:37:45,199 leakage I assume 716 00:37:45,719 --> 00:37:49,420 Identifying those will set priorities and will that be this 717 00:37:49,420 --> 00:37:50,239 economic 718 00:37:51,000 --> 00:37:54,079 Department that does that or is that like a study that we? 719 00:37:56,039 --> 00:37:57,639 Well, we put an RFP up in the high 720 00:37:57,639 --> 00:38:00,719 I mean is that who pays for that if we want to if we want 721 00:38:00,719 --> 00:38:02,239 to get that information right now 722 00:38:02,239 --> 00:38:04,869 We have to get it ourselves at the staff level because we 723 00:38:04,869 --> 00:38:08,159 don't have I mean you can spend quite a bit of money to get 724 00:38:08,159 --> 00:38:11,559 A very sophisticated analysis of what leakage you have in 725 00:38:11,559 --> 00:38:12,559 your community 726 00:38:13,639 --> 00:38:17,110 But frankly, we don't have the budget to pay for those 727 00:38:17,110 --> 00:38:18,639 kinds of studies 728 00:38:18,960 --> 00:38:23,559 So it's you know, we can we can do it if we need to and we 729 00:38:23,559 --> 00:38:24,480 understand 730 00:38:25,039 --> 00:38:28,989 Basically where our leakage is so and so the next question 731 00:38:28,989 --> 00:38:31,699 is I have underlined didn't market 732 00:38:31,699 --> 00:38:35,039 What exactly when you say didn't market does that mean are 733 00:38:35,039 --> 00:38:37,760 we defining that by zip code by an area by drive time? 734 00:38:38,320 --> 00:38:40,440 I'm defining denton market as 735 00:38:41,360 --> 00:38:44,170 The areas in which we capture sales tax because that's 736 00:38:44,170 --> 00:38:47,840 really our key. Yeah, we should be city of Denton 737 00:38:49,119 --> 00:38:51,119 That I can rephrase that 738 00:38:53,679 --> 00:38:57,320 Yeah, but it's where we capture the sales tax 739 00:39:04,679 --> 00:39:07,909 Okay, did you have Keely did you have another question on 740 00:39:07,909 --> 00:39:09,739 the next point on the next point? Okay 741 00:39:10,480 --> 00:39:14,050 Okay, so let me let me finish with a couple of some bullets 742 00:39:14,050 --> 00:39:14,760 there. Um 743 00:39:15,840 --> 00:39:18,920 We are suggesting that the project must generate at least 744 00:39:18,920 --> 00:39:22,480 15 million dollars in annual taxable sales to be considered 745 00:39:22,480 --> 00:39:23,199 and we did some 746 00:39:23,320 --> 00:39:25,239 comps on that 747 00:39:25,239 --> 00:39:27,119 like what 748 00:39:27,119 --> 00:39:30,650 The kinds of sales that Academy is generating as well as 749 00:39:30,650 --> 00:39:33,480 looking at what some other cities policies 750 00:39:33,960 --> 00:39:37,420 specified as far as a minimum amount of annual sales to be 751 00:39:37,420 --> 00:39:41,039 generated and then we also proposed capping a 752 00:39:41,239 --> 00:39:44,760 sales tax rebate at 50% of sales tax receipts and 753 00:39:45,519 --> 00:39:47,519 again, it's because we're 754 00:39:48,880 --> 00:39:52,159 Comparing what other cities policies have we're looking at 755 00:39:53,159 --> 00:39:55,829 Cases that we have on the ground right now and what's 756 00:39:55,829 --> 00:39:58,409 reasonable and trying to kind of put forward some 757 00:39:58,409 --> 00:40:00,159 parameters around 758 00:40:01,760 --> 00:40:06,239 What what we're willing to enter into as a starting point 759 00:40:06,239 --> 00:40:08,940 But again, the flexibility would remain to do something 760 00:40:08,940 --> 00:40:10,920 different if the situation 761 00:40:19,159 --> 00:40:22,920 These sub bullets of the exclude retail projects the last 762 00:40:22,920 --> 00:40:23,719 two 763 00:40:25,519 --> 00:40:29,199 Yeah, it's just further detail about how we would structure 764 00:40:29,199 --> 00:40:31,159 it and if that's the case 765 00:40:31,280 --> 00:40:35,039 Do you need to reference a gap for leakage and they didn't 766 00:40:35,039 --> 00:40:37,519 market? I mean as long as they're hitting those two 767 00:40:37,519 --> 00:40:37,880 thresholds 768 00:40:38,800 --> 00:40:40,159 Do you care? 769 00:40:40,159 --> 00:40:44,340 Well, you know, I guess if we got mega giant Kroger and it 770 00:40:44,340 --> 00:40:47,840 was generating 20 million dollars in annual taxable sales 771 00:40:47,960 --> 00:40:50,679 We still wouldn't want to incentivize the fourth Kroger 772 00:40:51,679 --> 00:40:52,880 necessarily 773 00:40:52,880 --> 00:40:54,440 so I 774 00:40:54,440 --> 00:40:57,760 Would I think I think that this I? 775 00:40:58,679 --> 00:41:01,480 Mean my inclination is to leave that language 776 00:41:02,000 --> 00:41:05,800 In but again, this is an opportunity for y'all's feedback. 777 00:41:05,800 --> 00:41:09,219 So do you think it's redundant? Is that your I just don't 778 00:41:09,219 --> 00:41:10,039 know that it's necessary 779 00:41:11,000 --> 00:41:13,000 I'm sorry 780 00:41:17,360 --> 00:41:21,199 Both of those a gap and 15 million dollars in annual sales 781 00:41:29,159 --> 00:41:30,920 So 782 00:41:30,920 --> 00:41:34,179 We would consider retail projects that address the gap or 783 00:41:34,179 --> 00:41:36,599 leakage. So it's the exclude word that 784 00:41:37,920 --> 00:41:39,730 Just I was thinking as a matter of fact instead of exclude 785 00:41:39,730 --> 00:41:42,559 maybe target retail projects that blah blah blah 786 00:41:42,559 --> 00:41:45,480 Just so that because when the public is gonna read this and 787 00:41:45,480 --> 00:41:46,800 think about moving here 788 00:41:46,800 --> 00:41:49,800 I just same thing with kind of the 10-year we just even 789 00:41:49,800 --> 00:41:51,360 though they're guidelines 790 00:41:51,360 --> 00:41:51,500 We don't want them to not approach us. Okay, you're all 791 00:41:51,500 --> 00:41:55,280 right 792 00:41:57,920 --> 00:42:01,320 Yeah, so my thought is along those same lines they exclude 793 00:42:01,320 --> 00:42:04,360 jumps out at me because it seems a little restrictive and 794 00:42:05,599 --> 00:42:11,800 Gap or leakage is a little ambiguous because it's 795 00:42:14,400 --> 00:42:17,980 Who ultimately decides I mean I understand your department 796 00:42:17,980 --> 00:42:18,840 makes a recommendation 797 00:42:18,840 --> 00:42:22,820 But a gap or leakage to you may not be to me, you know, so 798 00:42:22,820 --> 00:42:24,880 I think if there is some I 799 00:42:26,880 --> 00:42:29,159 Think it I think it's even I mean 800 00:42:29,719 --> 00:42:31,800 Unfortunately, it's a little ambiguous. I'd go way of 801 00:42:31,800 --> 00:42:34,880 ambiguous because I just don't think there's a way to 802 00:42:34,880 --> 00:42:36,239 detail it, you know 803 00:42:37,039 --> 00:42:40,039 correctly, so if I if I say, you know 804 00:42:41,719 --> 00:42:46,159 Those that you know retail projects will be considered on a 805 00:42:47,039 --> 00:42:50,519 You know application basis or apply, you know that sort of 806 00:42:50,519 --> 00:42:51,760 thing with those other two 807 00:42:53,239 --> 00:42:56,260 Sub points that it needs to be this is a suggested 808 00:42:56,260 --> 00:42:58,320 threshold 50% 809 00:42:58,320 --> 00:43:01,159 you know, but I think because I think you can get into 810 00:43:03,159 --> 00:43:04,849 Understanding that the purpose and trying to get their 811 00:43:04,849 --> 00:43:08,269 rightwards guidelines and understand that and fold that 812 00:43:08,269 --> 00:43:10,280 into my thinking but it's just 813 00:43:10,719 --> 00:43:12,719 It's difficult. I 814 00:43:12,880 --> 00:43:15,340 Take the perspective of people that are gonna be anti 815 00:43:15,340 --> 00:43:16,880 anything we do right? 816 00:43:16,880 --> 00:43:19,079 So if I'm on council and I got someone it's like hey, I don 817 00:43:19,079 --> 00:43:20,000 't want to do any of it 818 00:43:21,280 --> 00:43:23,719 Then I don't know that 819 00:43:24,519 --> 00:43:27,090 The thresholds are gonna help right? So then you kind of 820 00:43:27,090 --> 00:43:30,449 move to the to the center of that discussion those that may 821 00:43:30,449 --> 00:43:30,679 be 822 00:43:31,599 --> 00:43:35,199 Malibu, okay. Well, what would let's have that conversation 823 00:43:35,199 --> 00:43:36,460 , you know, so that sort of thing 824 00:43:36,460 --> 00:43:38,500 So I throw out the extremes look at the middle and I don't 825 00:43:38,500 --> 00:43:39,500 know that that language 826 00:43:40,760 --> 00:43:42,760 helps me 827 00:43:43,039 --> 00:43:46,639 Communicate to those that are asking asking questions. Okay 828 00:43:46,639 --> 00:43:47,360 , just my thought 829 00:43:47,360 --> 00:43:50,320 so the gap or leakage could mean we don't have a 830 00:43:50,960 --> 00:43:53,559 business in our city that sells that 831 00:43:54,239 --> 00:43:56,239 product and everybody's going to 832 00:43:56,800 --> 00:43:59,199 Dallas or whatever whatever that whatever that would be 833 00:44:00,599 --> 00:44:04,590 And probably a good example of how this comes into play at 834 00:44:04,590 --> 00:44:08,280 least on the retail side is when razor ranch came and there 835 00:44:08,280 --> 00:44:08,639 were talks 836 00:44:08,639 --> 00:44:11,599 of you know Dillard's moving well, we don't want to 837 00:44:12,440 --> 00:44:15,429 Incent we the ED board at the time the city didn't want to 838 00:44:15,429 --> 00:44:16,519 incent them to 839 00:44:17,199 --> 00:44:20,400 Move Dillard's across town because they're already here. 840 00:44:20,400 --> 00:44:23,039 And so we actually excluded any existing stores 841 00:44:23,039 --> 00:44:26,500 they so that we exclude that I don't even know where that D 842 00:44:26,500 --> 00:44:28,199 illard's whole thing is but 843 00:44:28,920 --> 00:44:31,880 If Dillard's I know where it is now, but where they were 844 00:44:31,880 --> 00:44:33,280 moving to razor ranch or not 845 00:44:33,280 --> 00:44:35,079 There's been a lot of back and forth 846 00:44:35,079 --> 00:44:36,239 if 847 00:44:36,239 --> 00:44:38,880 They did move as an example 848 00:44:38,880 --> 00:44:41,639 We they were not going to get any incentive for the sales 849 00:44:41,639 --> 00:44:44,159 on that store because we didn't think that's fair 850 00:44:44,159 --> 00:44:47,760 So this to me is a similar thing. We're full of with retail 851 00:44:48,280 --> 00:44:52,010 If something comes that we we don't have or missing a 852 00:44:52,010 --> 00:44:53,079 market and everybody's driving 853 00:44:53,880 --> 00:44:56,139 To somewhere else to get that then we've got an out but it 854 00:44:56,139 --> 00:44:57,960 's got to be a really big project 855 00:44:58,599 --> 00:45:00,599 Then we're limiting that so 856 00:45:13,000 --> 00:45:15,650 Basically, you've got two markets you're at yeah, you're 857 00:45:15,650 --> 00:45:15,960 adding 858 00:45:16,719 --> 00:45:19,849 You're not cannibalizing one to get the other one. So would 859 00:45:19,849 --> 00:45:21,480 you incentivize that one? 860 00:45:23,480 --> 00:45:25,480 Like that's a 861 00:45:26,440 --> 00:45:29,400 Board question that comes here we talk about it 862 00:45:31,559 --> 00:45:33,280 Keeley 863 00:45:33,280 --> 00:45:34,880 so I 864 00:45:34,880 --> 00:45:39,420 Think changing the exclude to target is is okay is good. I 865 00:45:39,420 --> 00:45:41,039 'm okay with gapper leakage 866 00:45:41,039 --> 00:45:43,519 I mean as a city council person and improving incentives 867 00:45:43,519 --> 00:45:47,119 that is one thing if we're missing I'm all for you know, 868 00:45:47,119 --> 00:45:48,599 approving the incentive and I think 869 00:45:49,400 --> 00:45:51,909 Those are market terms. Those are terms that people 870 00:45:51,909 --> 00:45:54,599 understand that are in the retail business 871 00:45:55,440 --> 00:45:59,539 So I don't have an issue with those and we can as I was 872 00:45:59,539 --> 00:46:03,159 talking earlier about expanding our definitions section 873 00:46:03,280 --> 00:46:07,719 we could we could find a working definition of gap and 874 00:46:08,039 --> 00:46:11,179 leakage and include those in the definition section if that 875 00:46:11,179 --> 00:46:14,880 would help address the issue that some people have and 876 00:46:15,400 --> 00:46:19,820 So on the must generate 15 million. Is that a projected 877 00:46:19,820 --> 00:46:22,039 amount over a certain time? 878 00:46:22,039 --> 00:46:24,760 I mean and who does that projection? I just want to clarify 879 00:46:24,760 --> 00:46:25,199 on 880 00:46:25,840 --> 00:46:30,000 That's something that we would do the projection with my 881 00:46:30,000 --> 00:46:33,280 office would do the projection with in conjunction with the 882 00:46:33,840 --> 00:46:36,079 applicant themselves, I mean they would have to 883 00:46:37,239 --> 00:46:40,719 They would have to provide us documentation that comparable 884 00:46:40,719 --> 00:46:43,860 stores would produce at or over that amount 885 00:46:43,860 --> 00:46:46,940 And then they would be held to that in their agreement as a 886 00:46:46,940 --> 00:46:48,239 threshold 887 00:46:51,719 --> 00:46:54,840 When they ask for rebate they ask for an amount based on 888 00:46:54,840 --> 00:46:57,730 the projections and so either ten years without amount 889 00:46:57,730 --> 00:46:58,599 comes and if they 890 00:46:58,880 --> 00:47:01,360 Over project and don't get there then they don't get the 891 00:47:01,360 --> 00:47:03,159 money if the time comes up 892 00:47:03,159 --> 00:47:07,119 So they have to be realistic when they're doing that right? 893 00:47:08,519 --> 00:47:11,469 If they do they won't get it right because we do we do we 894 00:47:11,469 --> 00:47:13,559 have the mechanism for third-party verification 895 00:47:14,239 --> 00:47:17,900 in the case of sales tax and in the case of ad valorem 896 00:47:17,900 --> 00:47:18,880 taxes because 897 00:47:19,159 --> 00:47:21,940 The central appraisal district handles ad valorem taxes and 898 00:47:21,940 --> 00:47:25,050 the comptroller's office provides information about sales 899 00:47:25,050 --> 00:47:25,260 tax 900 00:47:25,260 --> 00:47:27,260 So it's a very straightforward 901 00:47:27,480 --> 00:47:29,039 verification mechanism 902 00:47:29,039 --> 00:47:31,159 That we have in these cases 903 00:47:32,000 --> 00:47:35,019 My next question is about the sales tax rebates right now 904 00:47:35,019 --> 00:47:37,559 I mean you said it will be capped is there not they're not 905 00:47:37,559 --> 00:47:40,400 a cap right now. It's it's agreement by agreement 906 00:47:41,760 --> 00:47:44,440 It has been the way that has been approached 907 00:47:49,920 --> 00:47:54,840 I just I never worked retail so I don't recognize gap and 908 00:47:54,840 --> 00:47:57,320 leak is so I would like those definitions 909 00:47:57,760 --> 00:47:59,760 and then also I think 910 00:48:01,519 --> 00:48:03,519 Really I struggle with I mean 911 00:48:04,079 --> 00:48:06,079 Retail right I mean everything 912 00:48:06,760 --> 00:48:08,800 Technically could fall under retail 913 00:48:08,800 --> 00:48:11,880 I mean if you if you word it right or if you it's just no 914 00:48:11,880 --> 00:48:12,800 no different than that 915 00:48:12,800 --> 00:48:15,639 I look forward I look back on the conversation we had about 916 00:48:16,239 --> 00:48:18,239 tech businesses tech enabled 917 00:48:19,039 --> 00:48:22,539 There's not much that won't fit under that category now and 918 00:48:22,539 --> 00:48:23,760 so for me again 919 00:48:24,559 --> 00:48:29,000 If we're going to have broad terms, which I I could be 920 00:48:29,000 --> 00:48:31,239 wrong, but I see that as a broad term retail 921 00:48:31,239 --> 00:48:34,320 I just I'm ignorant to the definition and if someone were 922 00:48:34,320 --> 00:48:36,960 to come to me and say this business or that 923 00:48:37,880 --> 00:48:41,280 And it and it's close. I don't know a defining line to say 924 00:48:41,280 --> 00:48:42,679 no that is not retail 925 00:48:42,800 --> 00:48:45,780 Yes, that is retail and so if there's a clear line that I'm 926 00:48:45,780 --> 00:48:48,199 missing I'd love you to articulate that to me 927 00:48:48,199 --> 00:48:50,519 But if there if those are blurred lines 928 00:48:50,519 --> 00:48:54,239 I don't know that a regulation that straddles the line is 929 00:48:54,239 --> 00:48:57,920 or is left up interpretation of just 930 00:48:58,239 --> 00:49:01,579 That person's experience is great and that could just be an 931 00:49:01,579 --> 00:49:02,760 ignorance on my part 932 00:49:02,760 --> 00:49:05,710 But I just look at that conversation we had about people 933 00:49:05,710 --> 00:49:09,840 feeling misled about technology tech enabled and trying to 934 00:49:10,760 --> 00:49:13,369 You know we need to pin it down and say here's the clear 935 00:49:13,369 --> 00:49:13,639 line 936 00:49:13,639 --> 00:49:17,769 And if you cross it then you're out and if you decide you 937 00:49:17,769 --> 00:49:21,000 're in so I'm hearing that you would be more comfortable if 938 00:49:21,000 --> 00:49:21,159 we 939 00:49:21,239 --> 00:49:24,880 Included a definition of what what our definition of retail 940 00:49:24,880 --> 00:49:25,039 is 941 00:49:25,880 --> 00:49:29,639 Versus a service well yes, I'd like a definition and an 942 00:49:29,639 --> 00:49:32,400 example of what's out you know because I think that's where 943 00:49:32,400 --> 00:49:32,920 we get in trouble 944 00:49:32,920 --> 00:49:35,449 It's like okay. Why read this definition again, and I go to 945 00:49:35,449 --> 00:49:38,000 this all the time if we can we had a 946 00:49:38,719 --> 00:49:42,059 National argument about the definition of is is so I don't 947 00:49:42,059 --> 00:49:45,480 you know there's no there's no level of 948 00:49:45,840 --> 00:49:49,480 wording that think that is will be exhaustive enough for 949 00:49:49,480 --> 00:49:52,119 some right so but if there's an example of 950 00:49:52,519 --> 00:49:55,719 Because I'll give you a great example of leakage, and that 951 00:49:55,719 --> 00:49:59,239 's main event that that that type business 952 00:49:59,239 --> 00:50:02,800 And I consider that retail and I know we had that in the 953 00:50:02,800 --> 00:50:04,039 works in Andy B's 954 00:50:04,039 --> 00:50:05,960 But assuming that's not in the works 955 00:50:05,960 --> 00:50:10,289 I would give half of everything to get that here because we 956 00:50:10,289 --> 00:50:13,280 're losing that money every day 957 00:50:13,280 --> 00:50:17,400 You know and so I don't know if anyone else would agree 958 00:50:17,400 --> 00:50:20,679 that an entertainment complex like that is 959 00:50:21,360 --> 00:50:24,559 Retail you know, but I see it as that you know so that's 960 00:50:24,559 --> 00:50:27,019 where kind of it kind of gets to where we 961 00:50:27,320 --> 00:50:30,659 There's examples of what's in what's out by suggestion 962 00:50:30,659 --> 00:50:33,800 obviously everything is flexible. Okay? Thank you 963 00:50:33,800 --> 00:50:36,679 well, we'll we'll take that under consideration and 964 00:50:37,280 --> 00:50:39,800 See what we can do to get closer to a place where you're 965 00:50:39,800 --> 00:50:41,159 comfortable with it 966 00:50:45,199 --> 00:50:47,199 Alright 967 00:50:47,199 --> 00:50:49,199 Next bullet point 968 00:50:50,320 --> 00:50:54,719 Do we want to do this bullet point and then yes, mr.. Chair 969 00:50:54,719 --> 00:50:56,420 break for lunch, okay? 970 00:50:57,079 --> 00:51:00,519 Okay, so our final proposal 971 00:51:01,840 --> 00:51:04,150 Under this slide for content changes is to remove the 972 00:51:04,150 --> 00:51:07,889 existing capital investment based framework and the 973 00:51:07,889 --> 00:51:09,659 additional factors 974 00:51:11,079 --> 00:51:15,000 While at the same time retaining the five million dollars 975 00:51:15,000 --> 00:51:17,340 minimum value of investment 976 00:51:17,920 --> 00:51:19,920 in business personal property 977 00:51:20,719 --> 00:51:23,340 Or or real property. I'm sorry not real property, but 978 00:51:23,340 --> 00:51:26,639 structures to be considered for a tax incentive and 979 00:51:27,760 --> 00:51:29,760 the reasoning behind that 980 00:51:30,760 --> 00:51:34,000 Is there are several reasons behind that the first one 981 00:51:34,000 --> 00:51:35,199 being that? 982 00:51:36,440 --> 00:51:38,940 removing the existing framework for length and percentage 983 00:51:38,940 --> 00:51:42,039 of the incentive allows for more flexibility to 984 00:51:42,480 --> 00:51:45,940 Determine a potential incentive based on the projects 985 00:51:45,940 --> 00:51:48,159 actual merits and how it fares 986 00:51:48,440 --> 00:51:51,400 under our total impact cost benefit analysis 987 00:51:52,320 --> 00:51:55,550 There's been some concern expressed that the existing 988 00:51:55,550 --> 00:51:57,960 framework and additional factors 989 00:51:58,599 --> 00:52:02,329 lead people to believe or businesses to believe that an 990 00:52:02,329 --> 00:52:03,519 applicant is 991 00:52:04,079 --> 00:52:07,420 Entitled to an incentive of a certain length or certain 992 00:52:07,420 --> 00:52:09,969 percentage if they make a certain level of capital 993 00:52:09,969 --> 00:52:10,480 investment 994 00:52:12,079 --> 00:52:13,480 so 995 00:52:13,480 --> 00:52:17,320 We think that this move would allow us to really look at 996 00:52:17,320 --> 00:52:20,780 projects based on their own merits instead of 997 00:52:21,239 --> 00:52:25,030 Just kind of saying oh well if you make this type of 998 00:52:25,030 --> 00:52:28,039 investment the chart says you get this 999 00:52:29,800 --> 00:52:33,119 And and I do think that we have run into run into 1000 00:52:33,800 --> 00:52:37,250 People who have come to us and said well, I'm doing this 1001 00:52:37,250 --> 00:52:39,559 type of project. It's I'm gonna invest this much money 1002 00:52:39,559 --> 00:52:43,719 So I'll be getting I'll be getting my incentive at X level 1003 00:52:44,719 --> 00:52:47,449 So I think it sets up some expectations that are not 1004 00:52:47,449 --> 00:52:49,760 necessarily reasonable in all cases 1005 00:52:50,800 --> 00:52:52,920 So please discuss 1006 00:52:54,119 --> 00:52:57,760 Yeah, I just want to make and thought I would show page 3 1007 00:52:57,760 --> 00:52:59,440 of 18. So this is the framework 1008 00:52:59,440 --> 00:53:02,440 We're discussing correct and are these the factors those 1009 00:53:02,440 --> 00:53:03,860 are the recommending right? 1010 00:53:03,860 --> 00:53:09,260 So what Jill has is additional factors in a big list there 1011 00:53:09,260 --> 00:53:12,440 And make it building things like yes 1012 00:53:12,440 --> 00:53:15,449 And those are things that have sort of they've evolved and 1013 00:53:15,449 --> 00:53:18,159 been added over time to address 1014 00:53:18,639 --> 00:53:21,940 particular needs or priorities and the list has become 1015 00:53:22,699 --> 00:53:26,119 extensive the other thing with those additional factors is 1016 00:53:26,960 --> 00:53:29,920 applicants can check them and use them as 1017 00:53:30,760 --> 00:53:33,380 You know use them to bolster their argument that their 1018 00:53:33,380 --> 00:53:35,760 percentage of incentive should be higher 1019 00:53:36,440 --> 00:53:37,760 however 1020 00:53:37,760 --> 00:53:40,539 We have not in the past 1021 00:53:41,280 --> 00:53:44,269 Had a mechanism to hold them to actually doing any of those 1022 00:53:44,269 --> 00:53:44,840 things 1023 00:53:46,280 --> 00:53:49,980 Some of that can be addressed in contracts some of is very 1024 00:53:49,980 --> 00:53:51,199 hard to verify 1025 00:53:53,119 --> 00:53:55,969 So it's an interesting situation that's that's created 1026 00:53:55,969 --> 00:53:59,010 because those things those additional factors are 1027 00:53:59,010 --> 00:53:59,679 beneficial 1028 00:53:59,679 --> 00:54:03,130 I mean, it's it's making a commitment to you know support 1029 00:54:03,130 --> 00:54:06,239 local nonprofits or didn't schools or public art 1030 00:54:06,239 --> 00:54:08,940 I mean, I don't think anyone would argue that those are not 1031 00:54:08,940 --> 00:54:13,199 necessarily valid or good intentions, but the question is 1032 00:54:13,920 --> 00:54:17,130 How do we hold the company to actually fulfilling what they 1033 00:54:17,130 --> 00:54:20,239 say they're gonna do and how do we verify it? 1034 00:54:20,480 --> 00:54:24,519 If we try to hold them to it the community involvement was 1035 00:54:25,320 --> 00:54:27,320 one that I 1036 00:54:27,320 --> 00:54:29,320 lobbied for many years ago 1037 00:54:30,000 --> 00:54:33,340 And really I've said this several times Peter built is my 1038 00:54:33,340 --> 00:54:36,579 willingness to ask for anybody that comes here and asked 1039 00:54:36,579 --> 00:54:37,440 for an incentive 1040 00:54:37,440 --> 00:54:40,039 Because of how what they do for the community 1041 00:54:40,559 --> 00:54:44,840 We have some examples of companies that received incentives 1042 00:54:44,840 --> 00:54:47,400 and all the numbers work out great and they get here 1043 00:54:47,400 --> 00:54:49,750 And then they don't return phone calls don't do anything 1044 00:54:49,750 --> 00:54:51,579 that I don't join the chamber. They're not involved in 1045 00:54:51,579 --> 00:54:51,840 anything 1046 00:54:52,519 --> 00:54:55,550 It's nice to have the numbers but part of what makes us a 1047 00:54:55,550 --> 00:54:57,000 great place to live is 1048 00:54:57,639 --> 00:55:00,039 Having all the people out doing all the things that we're 1049 00:55:00,039 --> 00:55:00,719 all out doing 1050 00:55:02,599 --> 00:55:06,880 So, you know with that being said how do you measure that 1051 00:55:08,599 --> 00:55:11,750 How much money you gave to United Way how many people were 1052 00:55:11,750 --> 00:55:12,679 involved in the 1053 00:55:13,159 --> 00:55:16,679 5k runs or whatever the deal is so I can see where that's 1054 00:55:16,679 --> 00:55:18,119 hard to keep up with 1055 00:55:19,639 --> 00:55:21,639 And if so, what's the point right? 1056 00:55:24,400 --> 00:55:26,400 It could just be a report that 1057 00:55:28,440 --> 00:55:30,440 That we have to give us 1058 00:55:31,360 --> 00:55:34,530 It would be hard and I look at it as a what have you what 1059 00:55:34,530 --> 00:55:36,000 are you doing? 1060 00:55:36,000 --> 00:55:38,329 And what can we expect there was somebody that flat-out 1061 00:55:38,329 --> 00:55:39,880 told me because I asked a question 1062 00:55:39,880 --> 00:55:41,849 We're gonna do United Way campaigns and they don't do 1063 00:55:41,849 --> 00:55:42,280 anything 1064 00:55:46,440 --> 00:55:50,840 So if somebody is not doing it or if they're not 1065 00:55:51,440 --> 00:55:53,469 Doing enough. How do you take the incentive away or if they 1066 00:55:53,469 --> 00:55:56,119 're not doing that? I mean, I think that's the hard part 1067 00:55:56,199 --> 00:55:59,409 Yes, they may report that we did this this and this but was 1068 00:55:59,409 --> 00:56:00,119 that enough? 1069 00:56:01,199 --> 00:56:03,840 Or no, it's just subjective. It's a nice idea 1070 00:56:05,480 --> 00:56:08,300 Basis for the decision if there's no 1071 00:56:10,239 --> 00:56:12,960 Follow through right or because they do that's all they do 1072 00:56:12,960 --> 00:56:15,519 do they qualify for X percent 1073 00:56:17,400 --> 00:56:20,280 John Baines, are we discussing additional factors? Is that 1074 00:56:20,280 --> 00:56:21,599 what we yes. Yes, sir. All right 1075 00:56:23,199 --> 00:56:26,409 So with that being the case do we need to add some ampl 1076 00:56:26,409 --> 00:56:27,599 ification or some 1077 00:56:28,239 --> 00:56:30,599 You know some more texture to that 1078 00:56:31,239 --> 00:56:33,599 to that phrase so people are 1079 00:56:34,239 --> 00:56:37,750 Well, we're talking about removing all of them removing it. 1080 00:56:37,750 --> 00:56:37,920 Yeah 1081 00:56:38,920 --> 00:56:43,800 right, and so in an application there is a way for people 1082 00:56:43,800 --> 00:56:44,079 to 1083 00:56:45,199 --> 00:56:46,750 If they feel like they want to include that kind of 1084 00:56:46,750 --> 00:56:50,239 information about their community involvement, that's that 1085 00:56:50,239 --> 00:56:51,719 's great. And you know, we can 1086 00:56:52,320 --> 00:56:55,840 We can say this is a community that values 1087 00:56:56,880 --> 00:56:58,360 involvement in 1088 00:56:58,360 --> 00:57:04,250 X and Y and support of X and Y and wants to see companies 1089 00:57:04,250 --> 00:57:05,639 undertake green initiatives 1090 00:57:05,639 --> 00:57:08,440 So if you would like to add any of that information to your 1091 00:57:08,440 --> 00:57:11,599 application, that's good color commentary to have 1092 00:57:12,199 --> 00:57:14,719 But that's not necessarily something we would 1093 00:57:15,800 --> 00:57:18,750 You get five additional percentage points because you were 1094 00:57:18,750 --> 00:57:19,880 going to do this 1095 00:57:22,599 --> 00:57:25,340 Jill Jester right now there is a number tied to it if you 1096 00:57:25,340 --> 00:57:25,920 meet 1097 00:57:27,000 --> 00:57:30,170 For each of these not to exceed I think I think something 1098 00:57:30,170 --> 00:57:32,000 like you can pick three 1099 00:57:32,000 --> 00:57:35,429 Then you get an additional or they can consider granting an 1100 00:57:35,429 --> 00:57:37,579 additional five percent abatement 1101 00:57:37,639 --> 00:57:40,809 so I think as far as I think it's possible to include some 1102 00:57:40,809 --> 00:57:42,800 of these and say these things are 1103 00:57:43,480 --> 00:57:45,000 What make you attractive to us? 1104 00:57:45,000 --> 00:57:49,079 But as far as tagging elements that you can check off a box 1105 00:57:49,079 --> 00:57:52,639 and expect to check off these numbers in return 1106 00:57:52,760 --> 00:57:55,199 If we have no way to confirm 1107 00:57:55,960 --> 00:58:00,119 That then they should not get a specific monetary amount 1108 00:58:00,119 --> 00:58:03,400 increase tied to that element 1109 00:58:03,400 --> 00:58:06,230 I think is where we're going. However, I think miss Simmons 1110 00:58:06,230 --> 00:58:09,550 here is saying but these are things that we are wanting to 1111 00:58:09,550 --> 00:58:11,099 attract and would give 1112 00:58:11,440 --> 00:58:14,389 special attention to because they're meeting some of these 1113 00:58:14,389 --> 00:58:15,099 factors, so 1114 00:58:16,099 --> 00:58:17,300 Is there a way to do both? 1115 00:58:17,300 --> 00:58:20,000 And as I said, you know we we allow 1116 00:58:20,840 --> 00:58:23,320 space and when we discuss 1117 00:58:24,360 --> 00:58:27,340 Filling out incentive applications with companies. That's 1118 00:58:27,340 --> 00:58:29,760 something that I know I personally communicate 1119 00:58:30,320 --> 00:58:33,369 Look, this is the kind of community we are and if you are 1120 00:58:33,369 --> 00:58:36,639 the kind of company that aligns with these things 1121 00:58:36,639 --> 00:58:39,699 I encourage you to mention it in the 1122 00:58:40,480 --> 00:58:42,599 extra section of your application 1123 00:58:44,320 --> 00:58:49,079 Just for our consideration but not tied to a guarantee of 1124 00:58:49,079 --> 00:58:50,639 any additional percentage 1125 00:58:52,000 --> 00:58:53,760 So I just 1126 00:58:53,760 --> 00:58:56,940 Discovered that this is where and I don't know correct me 1127 00:58:56,940 --> 00:58:59,519 if I'm wrong. Is this the only place where percentage? 1128 00:58:59,920 --> 00:59:03,599 For using renewable energy or anything like that is in the 1129 00:59:03,599 --> 00:59:05,760 contract and that is awesome 1130 00:59:05,760 --> 00:59:08,159 That's what you're projecting you want to take out as well. 1131 00:59:08,159 --> 00:59:09,960 It's one of the additional factors 1132 00:59:10,599 --> 00:59:13,199 so that in our incentive policy a 1133 00:59:13,960 --> 00:59:16,800 business who comes in and does all these things wouldn't 1134 00:59:17,679 --> 00:59:19,840 going forward be considered for 1135 00:59:21,840 --> 00:59:23,730 It wouldn't be applied to their criteria to get the 1136 00:59:23,730 --> 00:59:27,739 incentive is that it wouldn't be directly tied to an 1137 00:59:27,739 --> 00:59:28,800 additional 1138 00:59:29,199 --> 00:59:32,400 Percentage or an increased percentage of an incentive 1139 00:59:33,519 --> 00:59:35,840 It could still be taken under consideration 1140 00:59:37,679 --> 00:59:41,519 But you know renewables are one of those few additional 1141 00:59:41,519 --> 00:59:43,079 factors that would be 1142 00:59:44,679 --> 00:59:49,480 Easier than others to apply an actual measurable parameter 1143 00:59:49,480 --> 00:59:50,360 to right 1144 00:59:50,360 --> 00:59:53,489 You will install X number of solar panels on your building 1145 00:59:53,489 --> 00:59:56,239 and you either do it or you don't or you know 1146 00:59:56,239 --> 00:59:58,239 you will participate in 1147 00:59:58,840 --> 01:00:02,679 DME's green sense program. I'm just I know that's really at 1148 01:00:02,679 --> 01:00:04,039 the residential level 1149 01:00:04,039 --> 01:00:07,489 But you know and that could be verified but there are so 1150 01:00:07,489 --> 01:00:10,960 many other things on that list that can't be verified 1151 01:00:11,199 --> 01:00:14,119 Well, I would like to keep the conversation open for those 1152 01:00:14,119 --> 01:00:18,000 because they can be measured and we can go back and see if 1153 01:00:20,159 --> 01:00:23,500 Because those are certain things that companies do and I 1154 01:00:23,500 --> 01:00:25,360 would like to make sure that 1155 01:00:25,960 --> 01:00:28,829 Those are the ones that we're attracting to our community. 1156 01:00:28,829 --> 01:00:31,119 So right now if you look down that list, it's 1157 01:00:31,639 --> 01:00:34,059 And that's what's on the application. You can check I'm 1158 01:00:34,059 --> 01:00:36,679 doing these three things and that automatically gives you 1159 01:00:37,519 --> 01:00:40,769 Percentage you get 15% tax rebate because I checked three 1160 01:00:40,769 --> 01:00:41,880 things that say 5% 1161 01:00:43,039 --> 01:00:47,280 And so not that these things still aren't important to us. 1162 01:00:47,280 --> 01:00:48,519 That's why they're in there 1163 01:00:48,639 --> 01:00:50,840 But we're just you're saying we don't want to tie them to 1164 01:00:50,840 --> 01:00:53,510 it because you do this it could be that you're a renewable 1165 01:00:53,510 --> 01:00:53,800 energy 1166 01:00:54,679 --> 01:00:57,510 Company and that's that you're doing that and we can still 1167 01:00:57,510 --> 01:00:58,460 give you a big thing 1168 01:00:58,460 --> 01:01:01,280 I'd like to figure out a way to keep these as part of 1169 01:01:01,960 --> 01:01:04,159 the conversation other than staff telling you here's what 1170 01:01:04,159 --> 01:01:06,880 we think it is but have it involved in the application or 1171 01:01:07,199 --> 01:01:09,199 Here's some guidelines for things that 1172 01:01:10,320 --> 01:01:13,019 That will help your application but not tie the percentage 1173 01:01:13,019 --> 01:01:14,280 directly. Yeah 1174 01:01:14,280 --> 01:01:18,550 and I think that that could be a good middle ground and we 1175 01:01:18,550 --> 01:01:19,760 actually have 1176 01:01:20,880 --> 01:01:23,340 Internally had some discussions about how we could condense 1177 01:01:23,340 --> 01:01:26,769 that list a little bit without you know, kind of losing the 1178 01:01:26,769 --> 01:01:27,579 the general 1179 01:01:28,280 --> 01:01:31,210 Idea that we want to encourage green energy community 1180 01:01:31,210 --> 01:01:33,679 involvement, etc, etc. So 1181 01:01:34,239 --> 01:01:36,239 Maybe it's a condensed list 1182 01:01:36,920 --> 01:01:39,559 You can check the boxes then we expect a little bit of an 1183 01:01:39,559 --> 01:01:43,360 explanation, but it's not tied directly to a percentage 1184 01:01:43,360 --> 01:01:43,800 increase 1185 01:01:57,519 --> 01:02:00,000 The application is part of their narrative 1186 01:02:02,920 --> 01:02:04,920 John 1187 01:02:05,639 --> 01:02:09,369 In keeping the conversation going let's say you take all of 1188 01:02:09,369 --> 01:02:10,400 these items and 1189 01:02:11,559 --> 01:02:14,019 The companies that come forth and say hey, we want to do 1190 01:02:14,019 --> 01:02:15,440 some of these things 1191 01:02:16,039 --> 01:02:21,000 Can we not ask them to tell us how they're going to? 1192 01:02:21,960 --> 01:02:24,440 to monitor these and provide us with 1193 01:02:26,920 --> 01:02:28,920 Instances of their 1194 01:02:29,639 --> 01:02:30,840 Performance 1195 01:02:30,840 --> 01:02:32,840 So rather than us being the police 1196 01:02:33,360 --> 01:02:36,130 Let them police themselves and say this is what we're gonna 1197 01:02:36,130 --> 01:02:38,679 do and then we hold them to what they say they're gonna do 1198 01:02:40,000 --> 01:02:43,000 I take your point it is 1199 01:02:44,159 --> 01:02:46,460 And we can try to do that 1200 01:02:47,119 --> 01:02:48,880 but again, it's 1201 01:02:48,880 --> 01:02:51,599 We need to have something that's verifiable by a third 1202 01:02:51,599 --> 01:02:51,960 party 1203 01:02:51,960 --> 01:02:54,989 that's the ideal standard for any kind of threshold in a 1204 01:02:54,989 --> 01:02:55,800 contract and 1205 01:02:56,400 --> 01:02:58,989 We want to believe that everybody would be honest about 1206 01:02:58,989 --> 01:03:02,760 what they're doing and not inflate their participation 1207 01:03:02,880 --> 01:03:04,880 Everyone's honest other not right 1208 01:03:06,559 --> 01:03:08,559 You live in a really nice world 1209 01:03:12,159 --> 01:03:14,159 I 1210 01:03:14,199 --> 01:03:16,679 Understand what you're saying, but you know, unfortunately 1211 01:03:16,679 --> 01:03:21,260 in the cold hard world of contracts and you know having to 1212 01:03:21,760 --> 01:03:24,940 Having to agree on how something is verified independently. 1213 01:03:24,940 --> 01:03:28,960 That's a little bit difficult and we do have 1214 01:03:30,880 --> 01:03:34,519 We we do have verification forms with some of our most 1215 01:03:34,519 --> 01:03:36,920 recent contracts that people have to fill out 1216 01:03:37,239 --> 01:03:39,760 But those are things that we can then turn around and go to 1217 01:03:39,760 --> 01:03:42,400 a third party and verify 1218 01:03:42,400 --> 01:03:44,670 But they do have to sign it these certificates of 1219 01:03:44,670 --> 01:03:45,280 compliance 1220 01:03:45,840 --> 01:03:48,880 But we still want to be able to verify it independently 1221 01:03:48,880 --> 01:03:50,360 possible. We've had people 1222 01:03:51,760 --> 01:03:54,599 Check the box for community involvement. They want a 5% 1223 01:03:54,599 --> 01:03:58,000 part of that incentive and they have an annual bike rally 1224 01:03:59,159 --> 01:04:01,789 They have a what an annual bike rally is their community 1225 01:04:01,789 --> 01:04:03,719 involvement, which is nice 1226 01:04:04,239 --> 01:04:06,440 But compared to a lot of the people in this room and things 1227 01:04:06,440 --> 01:04:09,679 that you're doing in the community is then old water 1228 01:04:14,440 --> 01:04:16,440 Your land 1229 01:04:16,639 --> 01:04:18,760 couple of other things here that I think really important 1230 01:04:18,760 --> 01:04:20,199 to is the 1231 01:04:21,199 --> 01:04:24,539 Statement where they would hire Denton residents and their 1232 01:04:24,539 --> 01:04:27,639 jobs and hire local contractors and subcontractors 1233 01:04:29,079 --> 01:04:31,079 That's important 1234 01:04:33,199 --> 01:04:36,599 My opinion is I don't want to remove these from the process 1235 01:04:37,320 --> 01:04:40,440 Maybe we don't tie the 5% of doing that stuff and how do we 1236 01:04:40,440 --> 01:04:42,599 mean we can verify if they hired somebody or not 1237 01:04:42,599 --> 01:04:45,469 But I think it needs to be part of the process. Here's what 1238 01:04:45,469 --> 01:04:47,639 we hold as important to our community 1239 01:04:48,159 --> 01:04:51,039 If you want an incentive the more of these things that you 1240 01:04:51,039 --> 01:04:53,679 're doing and you can put in your application to prove to us 1241 01:04:53,679 --> 01:04:53,840 that 1242 01:04:53,840 --> 01:04:56,239 You're doing and plan to do and how you're gonna do it the 1243 01:04:56,239 --> 01:04:58,199 better your chance of getting incentive is 1244 01:04:58,199 --> 01:05:00,199 Maybe just special emphasis on 1245 01:05:06,639 --> 01:05:09,000 Anything else on this bullet point 1246 01:05:10,519 --> 01:05:14,039 All right, we're gonna take a short break and 1247 01:05:15,760 --> 01:05:17,760 Reconvene here in a few minutes 1248 01:05:18,280 --> 01:05:20,280 so 1249 01:05:29,480 --> 01:05:30,409 Conversation to go over proposed content changes and we'll 1250 01:05:30,409 --> 01:05:35,199 let Caroline pick it back up 1251 01:05:35,559 --> 01:05:38,840 Okay, I hope everybody has been fortified by lunch 1252 01:05:39,320 --> 01:05:42,269 Please feel free if you need to get drink refills or cake 1253 01:05:42,269 --> 01:05:43,679 just help yourselves 1254 01:05:45,000 --> 01:05:49,679 We are gonna move into a discussion about the addition of 1255 01:05:49,679 --> 01:05:51,159 minimum thresholds 1256 01:05:51,960 --> 01:05:54,119 for valuation to our 1257 01:05:54,719 --> 01:05:56,719 incentive policy 1258 01:05:56,840 --> 01:06:00,800 So minimum thresholds are intended to encourage submission 1259 01:06:00,800 --> 01:06:02,119 of accurate information 1260 01:06:02,800 --> 01:06:05,719 about investment and job creation data in the incentive 1261 01:06:05,719 --> 01:06:08,099 applications because those 1262 01:06:08,519 --> 01:06:11,340 Applications and the information they contain they serve as 1263 01:06:11,340 --> 01:06:13,079 the basis for the threshold 1264 01:06:13,079 --> 01:06:16,119 So we're asking the company to give us their best 1265 01:06:16,119 --> 01:06:18,969 projections about what their investment and job creation 1266 01:06:18,969 --> 01:06:21,079 numbers are gonna be and then we're going 1267 01:06:21,079 --> 01:06:24,519 To use that information that they provide to establish 1268 01:06:25,079 --> 01:06:27,079 minimum thresholds in the agreement 1269 01:06:27,679 --> 01:06:29,679 for new development projects 1270 01:06:30,599 --> 01:06:33,800 We propose and again this kind of comes back to our third 1271 01:06:33,800 --> 01:06:36,489 party verification that we do through the central appraisal 1272 01:06:36,489 --> 01:06:38,000 district for new development 1273 01:06:38,000 --> 01:06:41,960 projects we're proposing that the valuation by 1274 01:06:41,960 --> 01:06:45,469 DCAD needs to be at least 80% of the eligible investment 1275 01:06:45,469 --> 01:06:48,579 that the applicant submitted in their application 1276 01:06:50,199 --> 01:06:52,000 The reason why 1277 01:06:52,000 --> 01:06:53,480 we don't 1278 01:06:53,480 --> 01:06:55,769 Propose that it be a hundred percent of what they submitted 1279 01:06:55,769 --> 01:06:56,800 in their application 1280 01:06:56,800 --> 01:06:59,579 Is that as you all are aware these projects can take 1281 01:06:59,579 --> 01:07:02,960 between 12 and 24 months to complete and there are a lot of 1282 01:07:02,960 --> 01:07:03,400 things that 1283 01:07:03,400 --> 01:07:06,019 Can happen in that time that are outside of a businesses 1284 01:07:06,019 --> 01:07:09,289 control things with the economy or industry specific 1285 01:07:09,289 --> 01:07:11,480 changes that might affect 1286 01:07:11,960 --> 01:07:14,610 Their plans and they're still moving forward. They're still 1287 01:07:14,610 --> 01:07:16,760 making the investment. They're still going to create the 1288 01:07:16,760 --> 01:07:16,960 jobs 1289 01:07:17,800 --> 01:07:20,030 But it might not hit that exact number that they put 1290 01:07:20,030 --> 01:07:21,960 forward in their application 1291 01:07:22,480 --> 01:07:26,159 So for new development and for jobs we're wanting 1292 01:07:26,760 --> 01:07:31,199 To hold them to 80% of what they submit an application now 1293 01:07:31,199 --> 01:07:33,519 for expansion or redevelopment 1294 01:07:34,039 --> 01:07:36,239 projects we have learned recently 1295 01:07:37,360 --> 01:07:40,679 That there can be a significant discrepancy in 1296 01:07:42,159 --> 01:07:45,010 The investment amount that a business makes in that 1297 01:07:45,010 --> 01:07:49,840 expansion or redevelopment and the way that the value is 1298 01:07:50,599 --> 01:07:52,719 Is calculated by DCAD? 1299 01:07:53,800 --> 01:07:57,139 It's often significantly lower than what the actual 1300 01:07:57,139 --> 01:07:58,960 investment amount is 1301 01:07:59,880 --> 01:08:02,800 And we have had to in fact 1302 01:08:04,159 --> 01:08:06,719 Terminate several incentives that were given for expansion 1303 01:08:06,719 --> 01:08:07,920 or redevelopment 1304 01:08:08,360 --> 01:08:11,190 Projects because the threshold that was put forward in the 1305 01:08:11,190 --> 01:08:14,000 contract was not met and our opinion is that we were 1306 01:08:14,000 --> 01:08:15,559 putting we were setting it too high 1307 01:08:16,520 --> 01:08:17,760 so 1308 01:08:17,760 --> 01:08:21,010 Here under the this bullet about expansion and redevelop 1309 01:08:21,010 --> 01:08:21,079 ment 1310 01:08:21,359 --> 01:08:24,760 We're proposing that the threshold for those kinds of 1311 01:08:24,760 --> 01:08:25,880 expansion or redevelopment 1312 01:08:26,159 --> 01:08:28,819 Projects be 50% of the eligible investment that was 1313 01:08:28,819 --> 01:08:31,039 submitted in the incentive application 1314 01:08:31,760 --> 01:08:33,760 to account for the fact that 1315 01:08:34,159 --> 01:08:36,960 The company is making the investment they're doing what 1316 01:08:36,960 --> 01:08:38,159 they say that they're gonna do 1317 01:08:38,359 --> 01:08:41,779 But DCAD does not value those types of projects the same 1318 01:08:41,779 --> 01:08:44,119 way that it values a new development 1319 01:09:04,600 --> 01:09:06,600 Yes, that's a very good point 1320 01:09:07,880 --> 01:09:09,760 Very very good point 1321 01:09:09,760 --> 01:09:12,960 Those and that has happened in a couple of other situations 1322 01:09:12,960 --> 01:09:16,680 that that we've had and and we have had some interesting 1323 01:09:16,680 --> 01:09:17,960 conversations with 1324 01:09:18,880 --> 01:09:21,550 accounting departments our financial folks from some of 1325 01:09:21,550 --> 01:09:22,279 these companies 1326 01:09:24,000 --> 01:09:26,600 Where we have this conversation about well 1327 01:09:27,119 --> 01:09:28,439 your 1328 01:09:28,439 --> 01:09:30,720 Recourse is to go and protest your valuation 1329 01:09:30,720 --> 01:09:34,010 But you'd be protesting it to be higher and that's sort of 1330 01:09:34,010 --> 01:09:35,760 a strange conversation to have 1331 01:09:36,319 --> 01:09:39,119 But at that point it becomes a business decision for the 1332 01:09:39,119 --> 01:09:39,920 company 1333 01:09:40,220 --> 01:09:43,210 Do they want their valuation higher so that they pay more 1334 01:09:43,210 --> 01:09:46,729 taxes so that they get their incentive or is it actually 1335 01:09:46,729 --> 01:09:47,319 better? 1336 01:09:47,840 --> 01:09:50,369 On the whole for them to take the lower valuation and fore 1337 01:09:50,369 --> 01:09:53,319 go the incentives or tax burden would be lower. So 1338 01:09:54,439 --> 01:09:58,039 These are things that we reflect on as we go through the 1339 01:09:58,039 --> 01:10:02,159 administration process and have these experiences. So 1340 01:10:02,920 --> 01:10:06,420 We wanted to put that out there for y'all's discussion and 1341 01:10:06,420 --> 01:10:08,640 and just so that we can talk about it 1342 01:10:15,640 --> 01:10:17,640 Everybody loves this idea 1343 01:10:20,800 --> 01:10:23,050 Right, so I mean this is I've covered everything that's on 1344 01:10:23,050 --> 01:10:24,239 the slide so 1345 01:10:25,880 --> 01:10:28,920 So I have the question about the jobs created and 1346 01:10:29,520 --> 01:10:34,050 Just help me understand. Why is it 80% and not a hundred 1347 01:10:34,050 --> 01:10:36,880 percent of jobs create? 1348 01:10:36,880 --> 01:10:39,199 I mean that comes what they say they're going to do then 1349 01:10:39,199 --> 01:10:41,739 why aren't we holding right that comes back to the fact 1350 01:10:41,739 --> 01:10:42,159 that 1351 01:10:42,680 --> 01:10:45,439 The lag time between when an incentive application is 1352 01:10:45,439 --> 01:10:48,729 submitted and when a project actually opens it could be it 1353 01:10:48,729 --> 01:10:49,920 could be up to 24 months 1354 01:10:50,600 --> 01:10:53,470 And operational things or environmental factors that are 1355 01:10:53,470 --> 01:10:57,420 outside of the company's control could change in that ens 1356 01:10:57,420 --> 01:10:58,199 uing time 1357 01:10:59,119 --> 01:11:01,119 and there 1358 01:11:02,439 --> 01:11:04,649 We've just discovered that we need to have a little bit of 1359 01:11:04,649 --> 01:11:06,640 flexibility for the companies 1360 01:11:08,399 --> 01:11:10,000 Because it's 1361 01:11:10,000 --> 01:11:13,180 it's a really bad situation when a company is is doing 1362 01:11:13,180 --> 01:11:15,840 everything that they say that they're going to do and 1363 01:11:16,279 --> 01:11:19,239 They're making the investment but factors that are outside 1364 01:11:19,239 --> 01:11:22,439 of their control change the situation on the ground 1365 01:11:23,239 --> 01:11:24,800 and 1366 01:11:24,800 --> 01:11:27,899 You know having to terminate an incentive is not where 1367 01:11:27,899 --> 01:11:29,680 anybody wants to end up, right? 1368 01:11:31,079 --> 01:11:33,079 and 1369 01:11:33,079 --> 01:11:35,079 It could alter 1370 01:11:35,520 --> 01:11:38,350 It could alter the decisions that a company makes in the 1371 01:11:38,350 --> 01:11:40,760 future and it's not that we don't want them to do what they 1372 01:11:40,760 --> 01:11:41,000 say 1373 01:11:41,000 --> 01:11:42,800 They're gonna do. Of course we do 1374 01:11:42,800 --> 01:11:44,800 but as we all know 1375 01:11:45,199 --> 01:11:48,000 Things happen that are outside of anyone's control 1376 01:11:48,960 --> 01:11:51,760 that nobody would have wanted to have happen and 1377 01:11:53,039 --> 01:11:55,239 So that's just trying to account for this 1378 01:11:55,800 --> 01:11:58,239 So 80% is the floor 1379 01:11:58,840 --> 01:12:04,329 Right, right that that would be if you dropped below 80% of 1380 01:12:04,329 --> 01:12:07,159 what you said the number you said you were gonna hire in 1381 01:12:07,159 --> 01:12:08,640 your incentive application 1382 01:12:08,640 --> 01:12:10,039 that would be 1383 01:12:10,039 --> 01:12:12,039 cause for 1384 01:12:12,319 --> 01:12:14,319 non-receipt of the incentive 1385 01:12:15,319 --> 01:12:17,319 Okay, and so 1386 01:12:17,399 --> 01:12:20,140 Since this is all new to me earlier. I heard you say the 1387 01:12:20,140 --> 01:12:21,479 word clawback and so 1388 01:12:23,079 --> 01:12:25,680 On this part of it, how do we how do we check and at what 1389 01:12:25,680 --> 01:12:27,420 point do we check? 1390 01:12:27,420 --> 01:12:31,409 Is it every year that we we check that? Yes before there's 1391 01:12:31,409 --> 01:12:34,279 a payment made or whatever their payment 1392 01:12:34,920 --> 01:12:36,920 Schedule is but just let's say it's annually 1393 01:12:37,680 --> 01:12:40,680 We verify every year all of the thresholds no matter what 1394 01:12:40,680 --> 01:12:44,439 they related to if it's related to jobs or if it's related 1395 01:12:44,439 --> 01:12:44,640 to 1396 01:12:45,359 --> 01:12:49,119 the evaluation or a certain number of sales certain amount 1397 01:12:49,119 --> 01:12:50,119 of sales tax 1398 01:12:50,319 --> 01:12:53,000 We verify that every time before a payment is made 1399 01:12:55,720 --> 01:12:57,720 Jim 1400 01:13:09,720 --> 01:13:11,720 And they finished it in 2007 1401 01:13:20,319 --> 01:13:22,319 Personal 1402 01:13:22,479 --> 01:13:24,479 Right 1403 01:13:25,079 --> 01:13:27,079 Somehow I think figure out 1404 01:13:29,000 --> 01:13:31,000 Put it on hold for a year 1405 01:13:32,520 --> 01:13:36,630 Have a mechanism that allows you to move forward at a lower 1406 01:13:36,630 --> 01:13:37,199 percentage 1407 01:13:39,279 --> 01:13:42,199 Instead of termination some kind of there's a 1408 01:13:43,039 --> 01:13:45,039 evidence of good faith to 1409 01:13:45,319 --> 01:13:49,619 Some of our agreements are structured that way where if you 1410 01:13:49,619 --> 01:13:52,239 miss your threshold in a certain year 1411 01:13:52,239 --> 01:13:55,380 You don't receive your incentive for that year, but it you 1412 01:13:55,380 --> 01:13:58,560 have a chance to try again in subsequent years 1413 01:13:59,840 --> 01:14:03,489 Some other of them are set up where you miss you miss a 1414 01:14:03,489 --> 01:14:06,079 year and that agreement is terminated 1415 01:14:06,520 --> 01:14:10,119 From that point forward you could have an application that 1416 01:14:11,560 --> 01:14:15,550 Is a new development and jobs are going to be created and 1417 01:14:15,550 --> 01:14:17,760 we're making a decision based on both of those things and 1418 01:14:17,760 --> 01:14:18,340 if they 1419 01:14:19,119 --> 01:14:21,520 added 50 million dollars in new development to the tax 1420 01:14:21,520 --> 01:14:24,460 rolls, but they missed their employment by 1421 01:14:25,319 --> 01:14:28,880 79% or we're really going to take away their incentive and 1422 01:14:28,880 --> 01:14:31,880 I guess just kind of getting back to your comments does 1423 01:14:32,239 --> 01:14:35,000 As we're writing contracts does it have to be? 1424 01:14:35,840 --> 01:14:39,680 all or none or that reduces instead of you getting 1425 01:14:40,600 --> 01:14:42,039 proportional reduction 1426 01:14:42,039 --> 01:14:47,930 $20,000 a year and an incentive back that now $15,000 or 1427 01:14:47,930 --> 01:14:48,680 skip I mean 1428 01:14:49,159 --> 01:14:50,880 because I 1429 01:14:50,880 --> 01:14:53,640 They're all different. They're all big everything can 1430 01:14:53,640 --> 01:14:55,720 happen and I don't like the idea 1431 01:14:56,600 --> 01:14:59,939 Maybe that there's certain circumstances where it does if 1432 01:14:59,939 --> 01:15:03,279 you don't do this then you don't get get the money and 1433 01:15:03,840 --> 01:15:08,000 You can reapply or can we amend because we have there's 1434 01:15:08,000 --> 01:15:10,560 nothing prevents us from amending somebody's 1435 01:15:11,600 --> 01:15:14,579 Incentive agreement, that's correct. We have had the 1436 01:15:14,579 --> 01:15:18,800 experience where we've run into time constraints where we 1437 01:15:19,600 --> 01:15:21,710 these are these little things that are strange 1438 01:15:21,710 --> 01:15:23,119 circumstances, but 1439 01:15:26,159 --> 01:15:27,720 Disputes of 1440 01:15:27,720 --> 01:15:29,880 DCAD valuation ARB reviews 1441 01:15:30,479 --> 01:15:33,760 We inevitably have a handful of companies with incentives 1442 01:15:33,760 --> 01:15:34,119 that 1443 01:15:34,760 --> 01:15:37,079 Go for ARB reviews every year 1444 01:15:37,399 --> 01:15:41,819 So we can't verify if they met their threshold until the AR 1445 01:15:41,819 --> 01:15:43,039 B review is complete 1446 01:15:43,039 --> 01:15:46,729 and then it's getting to the end of the calendar year and 1447 01:15:46,729 --> 01:15:47,439 we have to 1448 01:15:48,359 --> 01:15:51,840 You know, we are advised by our legal department that we 1449 01:15:51,840 --> 01:15:52,960 have to you know 1450 01:15:53,159 --> 01:15:56,079 Take action on the contract if there's gonna be an 1451 01:15:56,079 --> 01:15:58,569 amendment it has to happen before the end of the calendar 1452 01:15:58,569 --> 01:15:58,800 year 1453 01:15:58,800 --> 01:16:00,779 Well, what happens at the end of the calendar years? 1454 01:16:00,779 --> 01:16:03,680 Everybody stops having meetings. We can't get anything done 1455 01:16:03,680 --> 01:16:04,159 . So I 1456 01:16:05,279 --> 01:16:09,039 Understand exactly what you're saying about amendments and 1457 01:16:09,039 --> 01:16:10,199 that is an option 1458 01:16:10,840 --> 01:16:14,250 but like practically that can roll out in a strange way 1459 01:16:14,250 --> 01:16:17,220 because of the review process that the company is 1460 01:16:17,220 --> 01:16:19,000 undergoing the DCAD and 1461 01:16:19,600 --> 01:16:21,920 That kind of thing. So just something else to think about 1462 01:16:22,479 --> 01:16:24,479 the two that we just had to 1463 01:16:25,319 --> 01:16:27,039 Terminate because they're 1464 01:16:27,039 --> 01:16:29,090 Nothing to prevent them to come back and ask for an 1465 01:16:29,090 --> 01:16:31,760 incentive. That's less or whatever 1466 01:16:31,760 --> 01:16:34,359 There's nothing to prevent them from coming back again 1467 01:16:35,840 --> 01:16:38,050 Well, I was just gonna add that we do have extensions 1468 01:16:38,050 --> 01:16:41,680 because council approved certain extensions when 1469 01:16:43,039 --> 01:16:46,130 Right, so the business has an ability to come and say well 1470 01:16:46,130 --> 01:16:49,020 we're about to meet this or we have it 1471 01:16:49,020 --> 01:16:52,300 But we will right so if can you extend this out a little 1472 01:16:52,300 --> 01:16:53,359 bit further? 1473 01:16:53,840 --> 01:16:55,199 That's that's true 1474 01:16:55,199 --> 01:16:58,369 but in the example that I just mentioned where there's that 1475 01:16:58,369 --> 01:17:01,479 kind of calendar constraint between their ARB review and 1476 01:17:01,479 --> 01:17:01,800 and 1477 01:17:02,079 --> 01:17:04,079 the end of the fiscal year 1478 01:17:04,479 --> 01:17:07,939 They have the ability to come and do that. But sometimes we 1479 01:17:07,939 --> 01:17:09,779 run out of meeting, you know, they're 1480 01:17:10,479 --> 01:17:13,560 The the body that would have to make the decision is is not 1481 01:17:13,560 --> 01:17:14,600 available 1482 01:17:16,399 --> 01:17:18,300 Unfortunately, you know that that can be a circumstance 1483 01:17:18,300 --> 01:17:19,359 that we run into 1484 01:17:34,479 --> 01:17:39,369 But it could be a dissatisfier for how they spread the word 1485 01:17:39,369 --> 01:17:42,079 somebody else if I come to them I 1486 01:17:47,079 --> 01:17:49,079 Just I 1487 01:17:49,479 --> 01:17:53,380 Don't like the idea of if they've missed it by a certain 1488 01:17:53,380 --> 01:17:56,699 percent if they say they're gonna employ so many people and 1489 01:17:56,699 --> 01:17:57,239 they are 1490 01:17:57,239 --> 01:17:58,479 off by 1491 01:17:58,479 --> 01:18:00,479 10% or 5% or whatever 1492 01:18:02,000 --> 01:18:04,689 That may be different if it's 10,000 people you're gonna 1493 01:18:04,689 --> 01:18:08,439 employ you don't employ you only employ 9,000 or 190 1494 01:18:08,439 --> 01:18:10,649 That's not gonna have a huge impact talking about different 1495 01:18:10,649 --> 01:18:11,279 kind of numbers 1496 01:18:11,840 --> 01:18:13,840 But I hate this yanking it 1497 01:18:14,600 --> 01:18:17,079 From folks is that gets pretty tough. I was 1498 01:18:18,760 --> 01:18:21,420 Happy to see the last couple of deals that happened with 1499 01:18:21,420 --> 01:18:22,520 yeah, I 1500 01:18:23,439 --> 01:18:25,439 Understand this gives a threshold 1501 01:18:26,680 --> 01:18:31,119 And it is you know, it's it's stated upfront it and 1502 01:18:32,000 --> 01:18:35,810 There are other people who feel very strongly that if they 1503 01:18:35,810 --> 01:18:38,520 don't do exactly what they said 1504 01:18:38,520 --> 01:18:40,279 They were gonna do in the application 1505 01:18:40,279 --> 01:18:42,810 They shouldn't get anything and we shouldn't waiver from 1506 01:18:42,810 --> 01:18:44,159 what the application states 1507 01:18:44,159 --> 01:18:47,319 So there are definitely a range of opinions on these things 1508 01:18:47,319 --> 01:18:48,760 and you know 1509 01:18:48,920 --> 01:18:52,479 Oftentimes what our role is is to seek it's to seek 1510 01:18:52,479 --> 01:18:54,659 something in the middle that you know 1511 01:18:54,659 --> 01:18:57,359 Maybe everybody doesn't get everything they want but we 1512 01:18:57,359 --> 01:18:59,000 come to a reasonable compromise 1513 01:19:00,720 --> 01:19:02,720 Jill 1514 01:19:02,960 --> 01:19:05,880 Jill gesture I've got two questions first. Is there a 1515 01:19:05,880 --> 01:19:06,800 current minimum? 1516 01:19:07,920 --> 01:19:10,939 Are we going from zero to this or is there one and this is 1517 01:19:10,939 --> 01:19:14,239 there there is not one in the policy? Okay 1518 01:19:15,239 --> 01:19:19,970 One has been inserted at the request of council members in 1519 01:19:19,970 --> 01:19:21,279 the Sally Beauty 1520 01:19:21,800 --> 01:19:27,689 expansion incentive at the 80% is is that was the first 1521 01:19:27,689 --> 01:19:28,760 instance of that 1522 01:19:29,840 --> 01:19:31,840 threshold arising 1523 01:19:32,079 --> 01:19:35,779 Second question. Can you for some of us tell us what an ARB 1524 01:19:35,779 --> 01:19:36,520 review is? 1525 01:19:37,199 --> 01:19:38,600 it 1526 01:19:38,600 --> 01:19:41,810 I'm not gonna call Erica up here, but I can't I don't know 1527 01:19:41,810 --> 01:19:43,960 what ARB stands for but it's the protest 1528 01:19:44,640 --> 01:19:47,529 What'd you say appraisal review board? So it's the protest 1529 01:19:47,529 --> 01:19:50,930 of your valuation for tax perks. Thank you appraisal review 1530 01:19:50,930 --> 01:19:51,220 board 1531 01:19:51,220 --> 01:19:53,220 Thank you 1532 01:19:53,920 --> 01:19:57,750 Thank you, so this what this is doing correct me if I'm 1533 01:19:57,750 --> 01:19:59,319 wrong is gives us some wiggle room 1534 01:19:59,319 --> 01:20:01,319 If they don't meet that 100% 1535 01:20:02,760 --> 01:20:06,520 Decad value or employment or improvement that gives it so 1536 01:20:06,520 --> 01:20:07,800 we don't have to pull it 1537 01:20:08,479 --> 01:20:10,479 If they fall a little short 1538 01:20:10,880 --> 01:20:12,880 Yes, that's for this 1539 01:20:13,960 --> 01:20:16,949 Is intended to be more favorable so we don't have to we can 1540 01:20:16,949 --> 01:20:18,279 continue with the 1541 01:20:20,600 --> 01:20:23,840 That's correct, you know we want 1542 01:20:24,920 --> 01:20:28,189 If if we think a project is significant enough that this 1543 01:20:28,189 --> 01:20:31,859 board makes a recommendation to the council and the council 1544 01:20:31,859 --> 01:20:32,359 approves it 1545 01:20:32,359 --> 01:20:35,199 I think everybody's intention is that they would be 1546 01:20:35,199 --> 01:20:36,720 successful in achieving 1547 01:20:37,159 --> 01:20:40,090 Their thresholds to get their incentive and I see this as a 1548 01:20:40,090 --> 01:20:41,520 way to help us 1549 01:20:41,920 --> 01:20:45,750 Get our expectations all aligned and know, you know what 1550 01:20:45,750 --> 01:20:48,319 what needs to be done to to keep things moving forward 1551 01:20:53,279 --> 01:20:55,279 Anybody else 1552 01:21:01,319 --> 01:21:03,079 Okay 1553 01:21:03,079 --> 01:21:05,079 think this is our last slide on 1554 01:21:05,479 --> 01:21:08,600 proposed content changes and this one is I 1555 01:21:09,439 --> 01:21:12,000 Feel like this is a positive addition 1556 01:21:13,039 --> 01:21:14,439 so 1557 01:21:14,439 --> 01:21:16,159 as we look at 1558 01:21:16,159 --> 01:21:18,640 The economy as it is now where it's heading in the future 1559 01:21:19,359 --> 01:21:22,800 The ability to only incentivize businesses that generate 1560 01:21:22,800 --> 01:21:25,119 significant ad valorem or sales taxes 1561 01:21:25,479 --> 01:21:28,479 puts us at a disadvantage when we're competing for 1562 01:21:28,479 --> 01:21:31,539 businesses that create high-paying and knowledge-based jobs 1563 01:21:31,539 --> 01:21:31,880 and 1564 01:21:32,960 --> 01:21:34,960 desirable sectors like technology 1565 01:21:36,039 --> 01:21:39,680 So what we're proposing here is the addition of a jobs 1566 01:21:39,680 --> 01:21:43,039 based incentive option for businesses that 1567 01:21:43,960 --> 01:21:46,739 Do not meet either the five million dollar 1568 01:21:47,520 --> 01:21:50,039 Minimum value of structures and business personal property 1569 01:21:50,039 --> 01:21:53,539 or that 15 million dollars in annual taxable sales that we 1570 01:21:53,539 --> 01:21:54,840 talked about earlier 1571 01:21:55,720 --> 01:21:57,720 but that create 1572 01:21:57,920 --> 01:22:02,000 What would be defined under the policy as knowledge-based 1573 01:22:02,000 --> 01:22:05,520 high-skilled jobs that meet a certain wage criteria? 1574 01:22:07,000 --> 01:22:09,000 So we wanted to put that out there 1575 01:22:09,520 --> 01:22:12,760 There are so many communities that have this kind of option 1576 01:22:12,760 --> 01:22:15,319 and it does allow us to 1577 01:22:16,079 --> 01:22:19,939 Address recruitment in certain desirable fields that we're 1578 01:22:19,939 --> 01:22:23,119 just not able to incentivize certain types of businesses 1579 01:22:23,880 --> 01:22:25,880 Without this kind of an option 1580 01:22:29,720 --> 01:22:31,239 Jill 1581 01:22:31,239 --> 01:22:34,359 So my question is, you know why we have the criteria in the 1582 01:22:34,359 --> 01:22:36,000 first place the minimum 1583 01:22:36,640 --> 01:22:39,560 Value and the minimum in annual taxable sales 1584 01:22:39,560 --> 01:22:41,539 Is it because of the cost effectiveness of the 1585 01:22:41,539 --> 01:22:42,560 administration of it? 1586 01:22:42,560 --> 01:22:45,260 That's kind of what I assumed as to why we say, okay, it's 1587 01:22:45,260 --> 01:22:48,840 not gonna be really worth what the city has to spend in 1588 01:22:49,920 --> 01:22:53,239 compliance and the studies and everything else so long so 1589 01:22:54,399 --> 01:22:57,399 Am I along the right lines and if so so 1590 01:22:58,720 --> 01:23:00,720 What we've 1591 01:23:01,079 --> 01:23:04,560 What we have come to understand is that 1592 01:23:06,079 --> 01:23:09,000 The five million dollar minimum capital investment is 1593 01:23:11,720 --> 01:23:16,039 The investment that allows a business to cover its cost of 1594 01:23:16,039 --> 01:23:16,720 service 1595 01:23:18,000 --> 01:23:20,000 for city services 1596 01:23:20,079 --> 01:23:24,029 And at the same time it helps supplement cost of service 1597 01:23:24,029 --> 01:23:27,199 for other other businesses and residential 1598 01:23:27,720 --> 01:23:32,520 Units so it it pays for itself at that point in time 1599 01:23:33,119 --> 01:23:35,119 That's an analysis that was done 1600 01:23:35,640 --> 01:23:37,640 through our utility department 1601 01:23:37,880 --> 01:23:41,800 Many moons ago and it has held up over time 1602 01:23:41,800 --> 01:23:44,649 So that's where that initial threshold came from for the 1603 01:23:44,649 --> 01:23:47,810 five million dollars the 15 million dollars in annual tax 1604 01:23:47,810 --> 01:23:48,399 able sales 1605 01:23:48,479 --> 01:23:50,939 That's something that we're proposing for this revision 1606 01:23:50,939 --> 01:23:54,789 based on our review of other communities policies and 1607 01:23:54,789 --> 01:23:55,800 comparable 1608 01:23:57,520 --> 01:24:00,439 Projects that are on the ground here in Denton does that 1609 01:24:00,439 --> 01:24:02,000 answer your question? 1610 01:24:02,119 --> 01:24:05,630 So with having this variation and I'm not I'm not against 1611 01:24:05,630 --> 01:24:06,520 it. I'm just 1612 01:24:07,079 --> 01:24:09,079 questioning 1613 01:24:09,079 --> 01:24:11,779 The math as to you know, how small of a 1614 01:24:12,560 --> 01:24:14,560 Group we would consider 1615 01:24:14,600 --> 01:24:16,840 Making a variation here if they don't meet these 1616 01:24:17,840 --> 01:24:20,760 Minimums because of the types of jobs. I feel like I'm not 1617 01:24:22,760 --> 01:24:27,600 Number of jobs, right there it could be a minimum I 1618 01:24:29,479 --> 01:24:33,199 Don't think this this to me is not about number of jobs 1619 01:24:33,199 --> 01:24:36,760 It's about quality of jobs like there would be there would 1620 01:24:36,760 --> 01:24:38,460 be tied to you know 1621 01:24:38,460 --> 01:24:41,340 There we would want to see these types of jobs pay above 1622 01:24:41,340 --> 01:24:43,960 the Denton County median wage or 1623 01:24:44,680 --> 01:24:48,050 you know a certain percentage above the city of Denton's 1624 01:24:48,050 --> 01:24:49,159 median wage or 1625 01:24:50,359 --> 01:24:53,279 You know, we would need to we would need to define that if 1626 01:24:53,279 --> 01:24:57,560 this is this is not this is not the end of the conversation 1627 01:24:57,560 --> 01:25:01,000 this is the beginning of the conversation and under the 1628 01:25:02,119 --> 01:25:05,279 Edie investment fund we already define 1629 01:25:05,760 --> 01:25:10,130 High wage and knowledge-based jobs. So the the precedent 1630 01:25:10,130 --> 01:25:12,840 exists just under a different capacity 1631 01:25:13,359 --> 01:25:17,279 This would not require them to meet other factors, too. 1632 01:25:17,279 --> 01:25:17,659 Okay 1633 01:25:19,159 --> 01:25:22,439 This is exactly this is for tech. I mean really the best 1634 01:25:22,439 --> 01:25:24,399 example of this is technology companies 1635 01:25:24,399 --> 01:25:28,039 Okay, you know I'm speaking with a couple of homegrown 1636 01:25:28,039 --> 01:25:29,600 technology companies 1637 01:25:30,439 --> 01:25:34,199 That are on the cusp of expanding that are legitimate 1638 01:25:34,199 --> 01:25:35,119 companies 1639 01:25:35,119 --> 01:25:37,989 They've been through two and three rounds of venture 1640 01:25:37,989 --> 01:25:41,399 capital funding and they're ready to hire new engineers at 1641 01:25:42,359 --> 01:25:45,720 $75,000 a year salaries. Do we want the ability to 1642 01:25:45,720 --> 01:25:49,489 encourage that when we're encouraging other types of 1643 01:25:49,489 --> 01:25:50,560 investment? I 1644 01:25:51,680 --> 01:25:53,930 Think we do want that and I think if we don't have that 1645 01:25:53,930 --> 01:25:57,119 ability it puts us at a competitive disadvantage to other 1646 01:25:57,119 --> 01:25:57,760 communities 1647 01:25:59,760 --> 01:26:01,760 I would agree with what you just said 1648 01:26:02,640 --> 01:26:05,810 So we have here didn't County medium and then just then in 1649 01:26:05,810 --> 01:26:08,319 your conversation you said or city of Denton 1650 01:26:08,319 --> 01:26:11,819 Do we know which one is higher wage and why are we focusing 1651 01:26:11,819 --> 01:26:12,079 ? 1652 01:26:12,079 --> 01:26:14,899 I mean, are we focused on on the higher wage is that didn't 1653 01:26:14,899 --> 01:26:17,399 County or it didn't County media 1654 01:26:17,399 --> 01:26:20,960 That would be a higher wage without knowing the figure off 1655 01:26:20,960 --> 01:26:21,840 the top of my head 1656 01:26:21,960 --> 01:26:24,439 It's gonna be higher at the county level. So that's why 1657 01:26:24,439 --> 01:26:24,600 that's 1658 01:26:29,760 --> 01:26:31,760 Go back to the number of jobs 1659 01:26:33,000 --> 01:26:38,279 The type of company you just described could be for people 1660 01:26:39,399 --> 01:26:43,239 And it takes a minimal amount of investment for them to 1661 01:26:43,239 --> 01:26:45,239 have a company like that 1662 01:26:45,840 --> 01:26:47,840 You know in most cases 1663 01:26:48,840 --> 01:26:52,420 And they could get an incentive for one year and then 1664 01:26:52,420 --> 01:26:53,960 decide well, we're gonna pick up 1665 01:26:54,479 --> 01:26:56,479 far amount 1666 01:26:58,159 --> 01:27:00,159 I struggle with that a little bit 1667 01:27:01,439 --> 01:27:06,010 because I think we're more in the business of trying to 1668 01:27:06,010 --> 01:27:07,479 fund something that 1669 01:27:08,279 --> 01:27:09,920 Is bigger? 1670 01:27:09,920 --> 01:27:13,970 It's gonna provide more jobs. Maybe they're not the highest 1671 01:27:13,970 --> 01:27:15,800 paying jobs, but 1672 01:27:16,439 --> 01:27:17,800 it's 1673 01:27:17,800 --> 01:27:19,800 200 jobs not 1674 01:27:20,319 --> 01:27:24,869 I think there's room for both types of things for sure 1675 01:27:24,869 --> 01:27:25,920 because 1676 01:27:26,840 --> 01:27:30,600 Quantity and sort of scale is definitely important 1677 01:27:31,199 --> 01:27:33,000 I 1678 01:27:33,000 --> 01:27:35,800 Think that we can address 1679 01:27:37,399 --> 01:27:39,399 contractually the concerns about 1680 01:27:41,600 --> 01:27:44,359 Being incentivized here and staying here 1681 01:27:45,399 --> 01:27:48,409 But I hear I hear the concern because if you have a large 1682 01:27:48,409 --> 01:27:51,760 capital investment in a plant or a facility 1683 01:27:52,560 --> 01:27:55,930 Much harder to just pick up and leave. I understand that 1684 01:27:55,930 --> 01:27:57,119 concern certainly 1685 01:28:06,439 --> 01:28:09,520 John Baines, so in the instance of jobs 1686 01:28:10,520 --> 01:28:12,520 There may need to be a minimum 1687 01:28:13,239 --> 01:28:14,800 You know, so 1688 01:28:14,800 --> 01:28:18,300 Like Jim was saying you don't want to incentivize someone 1689 01:28:18,300 --> 01:28:20,399 with two or three jobs that can move so easily 1690 01:28:21,119 --> 01:28:23,119 You know 1691 01:28:23,199 --> 01:28:26,539 Well, if you had a if you didn't you get everybody that has 1692 01:28:26,539 --> 01:28:27,479 four employees could imply 1693 01:28:28,760 --> 01:28:32,119 For an incentive and then the nightmare to keep up with I 1694 01:28:32,119 --> 01:28:32,560 have eight 1695 01:28:33,800 --> 01:28:35,800 It's gonna at least be nine 1696 01:28:40,800 --> 01:28:43,279 With the number you may be looking for is payroll 1697 01:28:44,439 --> 01:28:47,130 So you maybe you have to have a hundred employees if your 1698 01:28:47,130 --> 01:28:49,199 salary is here and if your salaries up here or less 1699 01:28:49,199 --> 01:28:49,539 employee 1700 01:28:49,539 --> 01:28:52,000 I mean there may be some kind of deal there. I like having 1701 01:28:52,840 --> 01:28:55,710 Something that is not tied to capital investments, but we 1702 01:28:55,710 --> 01:28:58,119 need to come to an agreement on 1703 01:28:59,520 --> 01:29:02,359 What that could be and what you know how to run those traps 1704 01:29:02,359 --> 01:29:02,359 ? 1705 01:29:05,079 --> 01:29:06,720 Again anything 1706 01:29:06,720 --> 01:29:09,060 Somebody came and we want to do that. It's all coming here 1707 01:29:09,060 --> 01:29:10,659 to talk about out loud and we have to 1708 01:29:11,239 --> 01:29:13,470 Work through all those issues of what the likelihood of 1709 01:29:13,470 --> 01:29:16,260 them leaving and what kind of traps we can put in place if 1710 01:29:16,260 --> 01:29:16,840 they did 1711 01:29:20,279 --> 01:29:23,140 Okay, well we'll we have to have a minimum we'll work on 1712 01:29:23,140 --> 01:29:28,260 some refinements to this particular point 1713 01:29:31,640 --> 01:29:35,079 Are you saying a minimum if you're gonna have 1714 01:29:35,800 --> 01:29:38,420 Less than this many employees you have to pay them at least 1715 01:29:38,420 --> 01:29:41,520 this much per year. That's my thought is because if 1716 01:29:43,640 --> 01:29:45,079 If you're bringing 1717 01:29:45,079 --> 01:29:47,609 Ten people with making million dollars to that company do 1718 01:29:47,609 --> 01:29:50,239 you get that incentive or if you bring in a hundred people 1719 01:29:50,239 --> 01:29:50,920 that they make? 1720 01:29:50,920 --> 01:29:54,439 minimum wage that still may be maybe hundreds not the right 1721 01:29:54,439 --> 01:29:56,199 number but that there still may be a 1722 01:29:58,199 --> 01:30:01,390 You know if you're at the same time if it's a high number 1723 01:30:01,390 --> 01:30:03,000 of people was probably a capital investment 1724 01:30:03,000 --> 01:30:05,000 That's what I was just gonna say 1725 01:30:05,800 --> 01:30:08,989 Yeah, this is really impact. This is really intended to 1726 01:30:08,989 --> 01:30:11,689 address the space that is not addressed at all at this 1727 01:30:11,689 --> 01:30:12,039 point 1728 01:30:12,039 --> 01:30:14,859 I mean, that's what our thought was if they're able to be 1729 01:30:14,859 --> 01:30:17,800 incentivized based on sales tax or capital investment 1730 01:30:17,800 --> 01:30:20,199 We would not be we might consider 1731 01:30:20,800 --> 01:30:23,720 We might consider the fact that they were adding jobs as a 1732 01:30:23,720 --> 01:30:25,840 part of their overall package 1733 01:30:25,880 --> 01:30:28,979 But they wouldn't sort of get the jobs incentive and a 1734 01:30:28,979 --> 01:30:33,229 capital based incentive to that. That was not our intention 1735 01:30:33,229 --> 01:30:33,520 here 1736 01:30:35,640 --> 01:30:38,489 Just to follow up on that and one of the things as a 1737 01:30:38,489 --> 01:30:40,380 council member I hear is that you know 1738 01:30:40,380 --> 01:30:42,880 There's just not enough high paying jobs here and then if 1739 01:30:42,880 --> 01:30:45,319 this addresses that in some way we can find a way to 1740 01:30:46,079 --> 01:30:48,779 Do that. I think that we should we should explore those 1741 01:30:48,779 --> 01:30:49,359 options 1742 01:30:49,359 --> 01:30:52,699 I mean, it's also a way people say people are leaving the 1743 01:30:52,699 --> 01:30:55,199 universities, you know, how do we retain our students? 1744 01:30:55,199 --> 01:30:58,359 I mean this may be you know way that we can do that 1745 01:30:59,359 --> 01:31:02,279 Yeah, and then you heard me talk about the strategic plan 1746 01:31:02,279 --> 01:31:06,520 earlier one of our longer term strategic initiatives is to 1747 01:31:06,960 --> 01:31:11,170 Raise the percentage of jobs in Denton that pay $75,000 a 1748 01:31:11,170 --> 01:31:11,800 year or above 1749 01:31:11,800 --> 01:31:14,539 I mean that that's a long term further down the road, you 1750 01:31:14,539 --> 01:31:16,880 know 2020 kind of initiative 1751 01:31:16,880 --> 01:31:19,720 But you know this speaks to that 1752 01:31:29,399 --> 01:31:31,560 I guess before we move on if 1753 01:31:32,199 --> 01:31:34,840 Staff or council or the combination come up with that we 1754 01:31:34,840 --> 01:31:37,619 want to do that. That's coming back here to talk about 1755 01:31:38,560 --> 01:31:44,109 the way that I think this should go is we're on the agenda 1756 01:31:44,109 --> 01:31:46,319 next week for a work session and 1757 01:31:46,840 --> 01:31:49,949 I'd like to bring the feedback from that work session back 1758 01:31:49,949 --> 01:31:52,279 to this group and that you know 1759 01:31:52,279 --> 01:31:54,859 We can't sort of do that endlessly, but I think this is a 1760 01:31:54,859 --> 01:31:56,439 big enough discussion that 1761 01:31:56,960 --> 01:32:00,520 Bringing it back one more time to this group is reasonable 1762 01:32:01,439 --> 01:32:02,840 That sound okay. Yeah 1763 01:32:02,840 --> 01:32:04,949 I mean if we're gonna come up with a minimum number of 1764 01:32:04,949 --> 01:32:07,850 employees or a payroll or whatever do I'd like to this 1765 01:32:07,850 --> 01:32:08,119 group? 1766 01:32:08,119 --> 01:32:10,729 Bill will say we're all on board with that here. Then here 1767 01:32:10,729 --> 01:32:12,760 's why and make that recommendation to council. Okay 1768 01:32:13,560 --> 01:32:15,079 Okay 1769 01:32:15,079 --> 01:32:19,630 So quickly here. This is a very simplified overview of the 1770 01:32:19,630 --> 01:32:22,720 incentive application and approval process 1771 01:32:22,720 --> 01:32:25,539 I just wanted to put this on here because not everybody in 1772 01:32:25,539 --> 01:32:29,319 this room right now has been through one of these yet 1773 01:32:31,159 --> 01:32:32,479 So 1774 01:32:32,479 --> 01:32:36,220 We're starting up here with the application is received by 1775 01:32:36,220 --> 01:32:37,119 our department 1776 01:32:37,720 --> 01:32:42,279 we vet its viability based on our policy and 1777 01:32:43,199 --> 01:32:45,199 the application itself 1778 01:32:45,600 --> 01:32:48,970 It that could either go forward or not if we're not able to 1779 01:32:48,970 --> 01:32:52,159 bring it forward for policy reasons 1780 01:32:52,520 --> 01:32:55,449 We always offer the business other assistance and we don't 1781 01:32:55,449 --> 01:32:57,359 just say no, we can't help you by 1782 01:32:58,479 --> 01:33:00,979 So we would be working with them in other capacities at 1783 01:33:00,979 --> 01:33:03,319 that point if it does move forward 1784 01:33:03,680 --> 01:33:06,399 We would run it through our total impact system 1785 01:33:07,039 --> 01:33:09,859 brief legal finance and city manager's office about the 1786 01:33:09,859 --> 01:33:12,640 application and the project and 1787 01:33:13,039 --> 01:33:16,720 then we would bring it to this body for its review and 1788 01:33:17,520 --> 01:33:20,630 Recommendation to counsel or not at which point it would 1789 01:33:20,630 --> 01:33:21,880 stop the process 1790 01:33:21,880 --> 01:33:26,189 but again, we would be offering other kinds of assistance 1791 01:33:26,189 --> 01:33:26,399 if 1792 01:33:27,640 --> 01:33:30,600 This board does recommend it it would go to council for 1793 01:33:30,600 --> 01:33:34,350 review and vote and please remember in in the midst of all 1794 01:33:34,350 --> 01:33:34,720 this 1795 01:33:34,720 --> 01:33:36,720 There's a lot of back-and-forth 1796 01:33:37,159 --> 01:33:39,159 negotiations refinements 1797 01:33:39,520 --> 01:33:42,479 And it could go through these 1798 01:33:43,279 --> 01:33:46,079 steps back and forth a few different times 1799 01:33:47,119 --> 01:33:49,789 Then if the council does approve it the incentive is 1800 01:33:49,789 --> 01:33:50,880 administered 1801 01:33:51,479 --> 01:33:54,720 By economic development for the term of the incentive. So 1802 01:33:54,720 --> 01:33:58,020 does anyone have any questions about the basic steps that 1803 01:34:03,840 --> 01:34:06,300 Okay, you guys are being really patient I know this is a 1804 01:34:06,300 --> 01:34:09,500 lot today this presentation part of the presentation is a 1805 01:34:09,500 --> 01:34:10,079 lot shorter 1806 01:34:10,079 --> 01:34:12,079 But Jill said she has a lot of questions 1807 01:34:16,079 --> 01:34:18,079 All right, so we're going to talk about kids 1808 01:34:21,640 --> 01:34:22,760 As I said earlier our council members and economic 1809 01:34:22,760 --> 01:34:28,359 development staff have been receiving an increased number 1810 01:34:28,359 --> 01:34:28,680 of 1811 01:34:28,960 --> 01:34:32,510 Inquiries regarding kids a lot of them are regarding 1812 01:34:32,510 --> 01:34:36,760 residential kids as opposed to specifically mixed-use 1813 01:34:37,520 --> 01:34:39,520 or commercial kids 1814 01:34:40,159 --> 01:34:43,029 Only one public improvement district has actually been 1815 01:34:43,029 --> 01:34:45,560 established in the city of Denton today 1816 01:34:45,560 --> 01:34:49,720 That's the razor ranch kid number one is its official name 1817 01:34:49,720 --> 01:34:52,960 and that was set up in March of 2014 1818 01:34:53,920 --> 01:34:56,840 The reimbursement agreement for that kid was approved by 1819 01:34:56,840 --> 01:34:59,020 council in March 2016 1820 01:34:59,680 --> 01:35:03,279 However, the service and assessment plan that's required 1821 01:35:03,920 --> 01:35:08,470 Under state law as part of a kid has not yet been submitted 1822 01:35:08,470 --> 01:35:10,399 by the developer. So 1823 01:35:11,199 --> 01:35:13,199 we're kind of 1824 01:35:13,479 --> 01:35:18,630 At a holding point until they produce that plan because we 1825 01:35:18,630 --> 01:35:21,720 cannot move forward with having it approved by council 1826 01:35:21,720 --> 01:35:23,720 Which is the next step? 1827 01:35:23,840 --> 01:35:25,840 Until they produce the plan 1828 01:35:28,159 --> 01:35:30,399 Do we know why that's happening 1829 01:35:30,399 --> 01:35:33,220 I mean is it is there a time limit on that and is there an 1830 01:35:33,220 --> 01:35:36,539 issue that they're trying to work out there has to be 1831 01:35:37,119 --> 01:35:39,970 An approval of a service and assessment plan within five 1832 01:35:39,970 --> 01:35:42,319 years of the establishment of the PID 1833 01:35:42,479 --> 01:35:43,520 Okay 1834 01:35:43,520 --> 01:35:47,319 As my understanding of the state law as to why it hasn't 1835 01:35:47,319 --> 01:35:50,399 been done yet. I don't know the answer to that 1836 01:35:50,399 --> 01:35:54,079 So is this the last year? It's 2019. It would have to be 1837 01:35:54,079 --> 01:35:55,560 done by March of 2019 1838 01:35:56,479 --> 01:35:58,479 Next year. Okay 1839 01:36:04,560 --> 01:36:08,659 So again we have gone through a review and revision process 1840 01:36:08,659 --> 01:36:10,600 of the existing PID guidelines 1841 01:36:11,199 --> 01:36:14,300 Kind of looking back over the types of requests that we've 1842 01:36:14,300 --> 01:36:14,880 received 1843 01:36:15,520 --> 01:36:18,380 Did a review of policies from comparable communities 1844 01:36:18,380 --> 01:36:20,319 including Dallas Fort Worth 1845 01:36:21,039 --> 01:36:25,600 Grand Prairie Kyle and Sealy and then we discussed our 1846 01:36:26,840 --> 01:36:29,399 proposals and you know issues that we've 1847 01:36:30,199 --> 01:36:32,760 Encountered ourselves in economic development with the 1848 01:36:32,760 --> 01:36:35,960 finance legal and city management departments 1849 01:36:39,239 --> 01:36:42,649 So you all had a chance to look through the existing PID 1850 01:36:42,649 --> 01:36:43,479 guidelines 1851 01:36:44,520 --> 01:36:47,449 Very first thing that jumped out at me is as we say they 1852 01:36:47,449 --> 01:36:49,109 have to submit an application, but we don't have an 1853 01:36:49,109 --> 01:36:49,479 application 1854 01:36:50,199 --> 01:36:53,159 Which is a little odd and seems like a good first step to 1855 01:36:53,159 --> 01:36:56,090 develop an actual application to make sure that we're 1856 01:36:56,090 --> 01:36:57,000 collecting all the information 1857 01:36:57,000 --> 01:36:58,800 that we need 1858 01:36:58,800 --> 01:36:59,960 then 1859 01:36:59,960 --> 01:37:03,449 We felt like it was important and we saw in some of the 1860 01:37:03,449 --> 01:37:04,439 other communities 1861 01:37:04,840 --> 01:37:08,800 PID guidelines that they have these interdepartmental task 1862 01:37:08,800 --> 01:37:11,840 forces that are pulled together to review applications 1863 01:37:12,399 --> 01:37:14,399 Now we're already 1864 01:37:14,560 --> 01:37:16,000 working together 1865 01:37:16,000 --> 01:37:19,640 On most everything that we do very closely with legal and 1866 01:37:19,640 --> 01:37:20,239 finance 1867 01:37:20,800 --> 01:37:23,399 But we think it would be important to pull in development 1868 01:37:23,399 --> 01:37:27,329 services in this case because the existing PID guidelines 1869 01:37:27,329 --> 01:37:28,039 talk about 1870 01:37:28,159 --> 01:37:30,159 You know providing 1871 01:37:31,000 --> 01:37:34,430 You know products in the case of housing in particular that 1872 01:37:34,430 --> 01:37:36,739 go above and beyond what's required by 1873 01:37:37,399 --> 01:37:41,170 the development codes and so we we think it would be 1874 01:37:41,170 --> 01:37:44,520 beneficial to pull in some high level high level staff from 1875 01:37:44,880 --> 01:37:47,090 development services to be a part of that task force to 1876 01:37:47,090 --> 01:37:49,079 review the applications to make sure that 1877 01:37:49,479 --> 01:37:51,479 What the developers proposing? 1878 01:37:51,800 --> 01:37:53,800 Does indeed exceed 1879 01:37:54,279 --> 01:37:57,399 the existing code requirement 1880 01:37:58,720 --> 01:38:01,130 To address the issue that we're in right now where we don't 1881 01:38:01,130 --> 01:38:02,720 have a service and assessment plan 1882 01:38:03,960 --> 01:38:05,960 But we have a reimbursement agreement 1883 01:38:06,439 --> 01:38:09,430 We think it is reasonable to require that the service and 1884 01:38:09,430 --> 01:38:13,399 assessment plan be developed and submitted prior to the 1885 01:38:13,399 --> 01:38:15,220 establishment of the PID itself 1886 01:38:16,600 --> 01:38:20,039 That's just I think that's putting things in the correct 1887 01:38:20,039 --> 01:38:20,640 order 1888 01:38:23,399 --> 01:38:26,399 As just a reasonable step 1889 01:38:28,119 --> 01:38:32,000 We also recommend requiring a developer funded and city 1890 01:38:32,000 --> 01:38:34,630 administered fiscal impact analysis prior to the 1891 01:38:34,630 --> 01:38:35,819 establishment of a PID 1892 01:38:36,600 --> 01:38:38,600 to provide some 1893 01:38:39,279 --> 01:38:42,439 Independent verification and this says city administered 1894 01:38:42,439 --> 01:38:45,220 but that means that we would select a third party to 1895 01:38:45,220 --> 01:38:45,760 perform 1896 01:38:46,359 --> 01:38:49,520 this fiscal impact analysis because these are very complex 1897 01:38:49,520 --> 01:38:50,640 instruments and 1898 01:38:51,279 --> 01:38:54,640 You know, there are lots of moving parts and pieces 1899 01:38:55,640 --> 01:38:59,640 So we would we would want to turn to a qualified 1900 01:39:01,479 --> 01:39:04,750 Consulting firm to do that kind of analysis and then 1901 01:39:04,750 --> 01:39:05,800 finally 1902 01:39:06,520 --> 01:39:09,949 We think it might be reasonable to add a home value 1903 01:39:09,949 --> 01:39:11,000 threshold 1904 01:39:12,199 --> 01:39:14,399 Because again, we kind of talk about going above and beyond 1905 01:39:14,399 --> 01:39:18,359 but we don't really define what that means and you know as 1906 01:39:18,720 --> 01:39:20,840 As we all are aware, you know 1907 01:39:20,840 --> 01:39:25,109 We do have a lack of some higher end housing in our 1908 01:39:25,109 --> 01:39:27,399 community and you know 1909 01:39:27,399 --> 01:39:30,800 A PID is a mechanism that you would use to try to encourage 1910 01:39:30,800 --> 01:39:33,079 that type of higher end development 1911 01:39:33,359 --> 01:39:37,630 So perhaps tying a threshold to the median home value of 1912 01:39:37,630 --> 01:39:40,079 the city of Denton or the median home value of Denton 1913 01:39:40,079 --> 01:39:40,439 County 1914 01:39:40,640 --> 01:39:43,279 Again, the county median home value is higher 1915 01:39:44,079 --> 01:39:48,640 The city median right now according to the last ACS is 1916 01:39:49,720 --> 01:39:51,800 254,000 the county median is 1917 01:39:52,680 --> 01:39:55,609 251,000 so there are just a couple of data points that can 1918 01:39:55,609 --> 01:39:59,279 be looked at for the establishment of a minimum threshold 1919 01:40:00,119 --> 01:40:03,119 and those are I believe 1920 01:40:04,359 --> 01:40:08,359 Those are all of the changes that we wanted to bring to you 1921 01:40:20,439 --> 01:40:22,649 And as time goes on that's just going to continue to drag 1922 01:40:22,649 --> 01:40:26,680 the median down 1923 01:40:28,199 --> 01:40:31,659 And then the infrastructure that the city's required to 1924 01:40:31,659 --> 01:40:36,399 participate with going forward after it's built out 1925 01:40:38,000 --> 01:40:38,000 Puts a burden unnecessary burden on the city as well as 1926 01:40:38,000 --> 01:40:41,680 school district 1927 01:40:42,760 --> 01:40:44,359 so I 1928 01:40:44,359 --> 01:40:48,609 Think we need to look at something that better defines than 1929 01:40:48,609 --> 01:40:51,199 just the median of the city of Denton or the median of the 1930 01:40:51,199 --> 01:40:51,479 county 1931 01:40:51,479 --> 01:40:55,520 We need to define what are we really looking for in those 1932 01:40:55,520 --> 01:40:56,199 developments 1933 01:40:57,119 --> 01:40:59,119 If I could take a step back 1934 01:40:59,800 --> 01:41:03,140 the reason this was this happened this policy came about in 1935 01:41:03,140 --> 01:41:04,359 2007 is because 1936 01:41:05,199 --> 01:41:07,829 That was the time where a bunch of the larger residential 1937 01:41:07,829 --> 01:41:09,720 developments were coming this direction 1938 01:41:09,720 --> 01:41:13,140 The economy crashed and all that stuff nothing happened. So 1939 01:41:13,140 --> 01:41:15,979 nothing's happened. Apparently it's coming back again. So 1940 01:41:15,979 --> 01:41:17,359 we put this policy in place 1941 01:41:18,159 --> 01:41:22,260 Back then with really the idea that we as an ED board at 1942 01:41:22,260 --> 01:41:24,720 that time weren't real excited about 1943 01:41:26,039 --> 01:41:27,560 incentivizing 1944 01:41:27,560 --> 01:41:29,560 residential housing developments 1945 01:41:30,079 --> 01:41:33,199 And if we were going to do anything like that 1946 01:41:33,199 --> 01:41:35,199 There would have to be something that was extraordinarily 1947 01:41:35,199 --> 01:41:37,819 above and beyond anything we would have in here not just 1948 01:41:37,819 --> 01:41:38,600 because you get her home 1949 01:41:38,600 --> 01:41:41,939 So I don't know how you get from A to B as most of them you 1950 01:41:41,939 --> 01:41:43,600 see now have pools and 1951 01:41:44,720 --> 01:41:46,720 That's a normal type 1952 01:41:48,520 --> 01:41:50,520 Situation but it needs to be 1953 01:41:51,359 --> 01:41:54,770 If we have a lack of high-end housing whatever that 1954 01:41:54,770 --> 01:41:57,399 definition is, I mean low-end housing to me is 1955 01:41:58,279 --> 01:42:00,859 You know starter home to me still $100,000, but it's 1956 01:42:00,859 --> 01:42:02,159 actually like 220 1957 01:42:04,239 --> 01:42:07,210 So, I don't know where we come up with that value, but and 1958 01:42:07,210 --> 01:42:08,899 I think it has to be a value not a 1959 01:42:10,720 --> 01:42:14,640 Size of home or size of law or those kind of things and and 1960 01:42:14,640 --> 01:42:17,119 that value will change over time 1961 01:42:17,119 --> 01:42:19,119 So we've got to peg it to something that is 1962 01:42:19,600 --> 01:42:21,079 that 1963 01:42:21,079 --> 01:42:25,050 And I've been my opinion significantly higher than that. I 1964 01:42:25,050 --> 01:42:26,600 don't think we want to incent 1965 01:42:27,399 --> 01:42:29,399 my opinion 1966 01:42:29,720 --> 01:42:32,359 Normal housing projects there's they're gonna come one way 1967 01:42:32,359 --> 01:42:33,920 or another and they're 1968 01:42:34,239 --> 01:42:36,239 not 1969 01:42:36,439 --> 01:42:38,439 Creating jobs and 1970 01:42:38,479 --> 01:42:42,199 Have a warm taxes. They're creating kids going to school 1971 01:42:42,199 --> 01:42:44,430 I mean they're creating uses of all the things that we're 1972 01:42:44,430 --> 01:42:46,079 having to pay for so yeah 1973 01:42:46,760 --> 01:42:48,760 residential developments 1974 01:42:48,840 --> 01:42:51,760 Residential developments do not cover their own cost of 1975 01:42:51,760 --> 01:42:54,760 service period in our community at all 1976 01:42:56,000 --> 01:42:58,000 so just 1977 01:42:58,720 --> 01:43:02,649 One thing that I want to make sure that is clear is the way 1978 01:43:02,649 --> 01:43:05,239 the way that these work with I mean 1979 01:43:05,279 --> 01:43:07,489 PIDs work with either commercial or residential 1980 01:43:07,489 --> 01:43:08,600 developments is 1981 01:43:09,119 --> 01:43:11,439 that the property owner is assessed a fee and 1982 01:43:12,119 --> 01:43:13,479 there are 1983 01:43:13,479 --> 01:43:15,479 rules about excuse me 1984 01:43:16,399 --> 01:43:19,649 The fees being disclosed and the fees are sensibly used to 1985 01:43:19,649 --> 01:43:23,000 you know, make nicer things amenities in a residential 1986 01:43:23,000 --> 01:43:24,479 development or commercial development 1987 01:43:25,640 --> 01:43:30,359 But over time what happens as homes are sold and new 1988 01:43:30,359 --> 01:43:32,960 residents come in that thread of 1989 01:43:33,640 --> 01:43:36,810 I'm paying for additional amenities in my community via 1990 01:43:36,810 --> 01:43:39,880 this assessment on my house that thread gets lost 1991 01:43:39,880 --> 01:43:43,560 And so people just see additional fees that they have to 1992 01:43:43,560 --> 01:43:44,560 pay but they don't really 1993 01:43:45,359 --> 01:43:49,359 Connected and it can become it can become a real source of 1994 01:43:50,239 --> 01:43:53,359 frustration for residents in these communities 1995 01:43:53,840 --> 01:43:56,420 Over time really kind of like Jim was saying, you know 1996 01:43:56,420 --> 01:43:58,479 these these they start somewhere 1997 01:43:58,680 --> 01:44:02,000 They end up somewhere else in a lot of different senses 1998 01:44:03,119 --> 01:44:06,279 So it's just another interesting thing to think about is is 1999 01:44:06,279 --> 01:44:10,579 that is setting that up to exist over time. So 2000 01:44:13,560 --> 01:44:16,399 Anybody have any other questions or comments 2001 01:44:23,840 --> 01:44:26,500 My question is about the fiscal impact analysis and how 2002 01:44:26,500 --> 01:44:29,270 that would be different from running it through the total 2003 01:44:29,270 --> 01:44:30,439 impact 2.0 2004 01:44:31,239 --> 01:44:34,680 Software is that not something similar? No, that's that 2005 01:44:34,680 --> 01:44:37,039 program is for 2006 01:44:37,560 --> 01:44:40,800 tax related incentives and PIDs are 2007 01:44:41,399 --> 01:44:43,119 PIDs are 2008 01:44:43,119 --> 01:44:46,279 They're they're done by fee assessments 2009 01:44:47,159 --> 01:44:50,729 So I misspoke earlier. We're not giving incentives. We're 2010 01:44:50,729 --> 01:44:51,819 allowing a bid to be 2011 01:44:52,319 --> 01:44:54,319 brought in well and and 2012 01:44:56,399 --> 01:45:00,180 People people would say that PIDs are incentive tools. They 2013 01:45:00,180 --> 01:45:02,600 're just a different type of incentive tool. I mean 2014 01:45:02,600 --> 01:45:03,279 basically when 2015 01:45:04,279 --> 01:45:06,279 during the last 2016 01:45:06,479 --> 01:45:08,479 financial crisis 2017 01:45:08,560 --> 01:45:11,479 Developers stopped being able to get bank loans for these 2018 01:45:11,479 --> 01:45:12,479 huge large-scale 2019 01:45:14,720 --> 01:45:18,130 Development projects especially for residential and so they 2020 01:45:18,130 --> 01:45:18,840 turn to 2021 01:45:20,159 --> 01:45:23,399 cities as as a different financing mechanism 2022 01:45:24,239 --> 01:45:26,239 through the sale of bonds PID bonds 2023 01:45:26,840 --> 01:45:30,050 To help get their developments to a higher level. So it's 2024 01:45:30,050 --> 01:45:33,579 the different it's a different type of resource for a 2025 01:45:33,579 --> 01:45:34,359 developer 2026 01:45:35,399 --> 01:45:37,399 But yeah total impact doesn't apply 2027 01:45:38,279 --> 01:45:40,279 to PIDs 2028 01:45:45,159 --> 01:45:47,560 I just wanted to add a little bit of color for that on the 2029 01:45:47,560 --> 01:45:50,239 PIDs. So it is different than the total impact 2.0 2030 01:45:50,680 --> 01:45:53,159 In PIDs as Caroline said they're very complicated 2031 01:45:53,159 --> 01:45:55,850 instruments. And so you're faced with a situation with a 2032 01:45:55,850 --> 01:45:57,000 developer coming in saying 2033 01:45:57,640 --> 01:45:59,640 We would like to do this development 2034 01:45:59,960 --> 01:46:02,239 Whatever type and character that they're talking about 2035 01:46:02,640 --> 01:46:05,510 But we're short by 50 million dollars or a hundred million 2036 01:46:05,510 --> 01:46:08,159 dollars for all this infrastructure that's needed 2037 01:46:08,279 --> 01:46:11,250 We need a detailed analysis an independent third-party 2038 01:46:11,250 --> 01:46:14,640 analysis that says really what are the financials of this 2039 01:46:14,640 --> 01:46:14,960 development? 2040 01:46:15,439 --> 01:46:17,850 What's how much money are you making on each one of these 2041 01:46:17,850 --> 01:46:18,359 lots? 2042 01:46:18,359 --> 01:46:19,800 What's your profit margin? 2043 01:46:19,800 --> 01:46:22,359 How much is really needed from a PID versus how much can be 2044 01:46:22,359 --> 01:46:24,159 financed through the development? 2045 01:46:24,159 --> 01:46:26,399 And to truly have an independent view of that because 2046 01:46:26,399 --> 01:46:28,779 otherwise you really don't know what you what you really 2047 01:46:28,779 --> 01:46:29,479 need to issue 2048 01:46:29,479 --> 01:46:32,119 And how much really needs to be assessed how much of this 2049 01:46:32,119 --> 01:46:34,279 is for profit for the developer versus? 2050 01:46:35,680 --> 01:46:38,079 What's really needed there the other thing is you're trying 2051 01:46:38,079 --> 01:46:39,039 to understand 2052 01:46:39,600 --> 01:46:42,409 What's the value of the enhanced amenities? We're talking 2053 01:46:42,409 --> 01:46:44,199 about home values as an example 2054 01:46:44,199 --> 01:46:46,210 that's kind of one of those it's probably easier to put 2055 01:46:46,210 --> 01:46:46,960 your finger on but 2056 01:46:47,800 --> 01:46:50,380 Really these all the PID assessments have to be paid in 2057 01:46:50,380 --> 01:46:53,840 that development to have higher level amenities 2058 01:46:53,840 --> 01:46:56,399 So that could be parks. It could be trails. It could be 2059 01:46:57,079 --> 01:46:59,079 What you're talking about pools and those kinds of things 2060 01:46:59,079 --> 01:47:01,239 like that. What's the cost of those? 2061 01:47:01,239 --> 01:47:03,350 How do we know that cost is accurate and that you really 2062 01:47:03,350 --> 01:47:04,840 know what you're getting for the PID? 2063 01:47:04,840 --> 01:47:07,680 So that's the kind of work we're looking at and as we've 2064 01:47:07,680 --> 01:47:10,140 had these developments come through you're kind of you're 2065 01:47:10,140 --> 01:47:11,439 struggling to understand 2066 01:47:11,760 --> 01:47:14,000 Really what those details are without looking at it? 2067 01:47:14,439 --> 01:47:16,279 So hopefully that helps provide a little color 2068 01:47:16,279 --> 01:47:19,229 I did want to mention one other thing about the home values 2069 01:47:19,229 --> 01:47:21,119 is I think as we we've looked at this 2070 01:47:21,119 --> 01:47:24,000 There's an average across the city or across the county, 2071 01:47:24,000 --> 01:47:25,600 but that's all kinds of product 2072 01:47:25,600 --> 01:47:28,449 It's some of its old some of us knew as we've seen new home 2073 01:47:28,449 --> 01:47:31,039 developments come in and new homes being built 2074 01:47:31,039 --> 01:47:33,890 The average value is much higher that we're getting without 2075 01:47:33,890 --> 01:47:35,640 any kind of incentive or any kind of 2076 01:47:36,279 --> 01:47:38,479 PID or development incentive 2077 01:47:38,640 --> 01:47:41,119 So it really I think the starting place should be the 2078 01:47:41,119 --> 01:47:43,829 market values that you're getting on an average that are 2079 01:47:43,829 --> 01:47:45,039 coming in and what? 2080 01:47:45,039 --> 01:47:47,039 Above that would you want to get? 2081 01:47:47,359 --> 01:47:49,439 And what would that number look like and maybe there's a 2082 01:47:49,439 --> 01:47:51,199 way to look at that as percentage terms 2083 01:47:51,560 --> 01:47:54,020 Rather than a fixed number because this policy can be put 2084 01:47:54,020 --> 01:47:56,239 in place and it may be a few years before you ever come 2085 01:47:56,239 --> 01:47:56,640 back to it 2086 01:47:56,960 --> 01:48:01,399 Is is landtown within the ETJ of the city of Denton? Yes, 2087 01:48:01,399 --> 01:48:01,520 sir 2088 01:48:01,520 --> 01:48:05,710 It is it is a it's a mud a municipal utility district. 2089 01:48:05,710 --> 01:48:07,960 There's actually several of those and that development 2090 01:48:07,960 --> 01:48:10,520 So it doesn't have a pin. It's a little bit different 2091 01:48:10,520 --> 01:48:11,680 financing mechanism 2092 01:48:12,319 --> 01:48:16,840 And actually have a tax rate, which is basically a dollar 2093 01:48:17,720 --> 01:48:20,880 It's a full 1% of the value of those properties that are 2094 01:48:20,880 --> 01:48:24,920 paid back for that mud. I used to do lids 2095 01:48:26,319 --> 01:48:28,319 WC IDs 2096 01:48:28,760 --> 01:48:32,359 In my former life water control and improvement districts 2097 01:48:33,399 --> 01:48:35,970 Levy improvement districts, so I'm familiar with the 2098 01:48:35,970 --> 01:48:38,649 complexity of financing, but they were tied to the Texas 2099 01:48:38,649 --> 01:48:40,560 Water Rights Commission and 2100 01:48:41,800 --> 01:48:45,180 They had authority over the the water rights and then 2101 01:48:45,180 --> 01:48:47,800 allowing these subdivisions to have taxation 2102 01:48:47,800 --> 01:48:51,390 so all the rights would then stay with the city of Denton 2103 01:48:51,390 --> 01:48:52,079 rather than 2104 01:48:53,119 --> 01:48:55,479 Yeah, I'm not sure on that particular piece 2105 01:48:56,319 --> 01:48:59,239 PIDs but pids are different than that. They're not tied to 2106 01:48:59,239 --> 01:49:01,239 the water rights. Okay, just about infrastructure 2107 01:49:01,239 --> 01:49:03,239 So sorry to get you off track 2108 01:49:03,399 --> 01:49:05,399 information 2109 01:49:06,159 --> 01:49:09,079 Question more of a statement just a generalization and kind 2110 01:49:09,079 --> 01:49:09,199 of 2111 01:49:10,199 --> 01:49:12,199 basic hit it's 2112 01:49:12,319 --> 01:49:16,390 The city allowing a developer to charge the person who buys 2113 01:49:16,390 --> 01:49:18,840 the home an extra tax really so there 2114 01:49:18,840 --> 01:49:20,840 It's an extra fee or it's an extra tax 2115 01:49:21,079 --> 01:49:24,279 For that person in that area as opposed to the person who 2116 01:49:24,279 --> 01:49:26,640 may be on the other side of the street 2117 01:49:27,000 --> 01:49:29,000 So right, okay 2118 01:49:29,079 --> 01:49:31,079 Yeah, that's what it is and 2119 01:49:31,720 --> 01:49:34,149 You know some people coming into these master plan 2120 01:49:34,149 --> 01:49:34,880 communities 2121 01:49:34,880 --> 01:49:37,810 They feel there's value in that and that's worth whatever 2122 01:49:37,810 --> 01:49:40,140 it might be a five hundred to a thousand dollar fee on an 2123 01:49:40,140 --> 01:49:40,840 annual basis 2124 01:49:40,840 --> 01:49:42,779 They think that's worth it because of the level of 2125 01:49:42,779 --> 01:49:44,199 amenities that they're getting 2126 01:49:45,439 --> 01:49:47,720 Justified in some way, but if they don't then they're 2127 01:49:47,720 --> 01:49:49,079 obviously gonna be dissatisfied 2128 01:49:49,279 --> 01:49:53,050 But it's different than an HOA fee. It is right it is and 2129 01:49:53,050 --> 01:49:56,359 so you can have a PID assessment and an HOA 2130 01:49:56,479 --> 01:49:58,479 on top of it and 2131 01:49:58,479 --> 01:50:02,399 In many cases they do have both so you might have the HOA 2132 01:50:03,279 --> 01:50:05,829 Doing some common area maintenance or pool maintenance or 2133 01:50:05,829 --> 01:50:07,380 those kinds of facilities 2134 01:50:08,039 --> 01:50:10,039 And then the PIP would be other things 2135 01:50:10,520 --> 01:50:12,520 It's kind of a one-time 2136 01:50:12,800 --> 01:50:16,140 Typically used to issue bonds as as Caroline's mentioned so 2137 01:50:16,140 --> 01:50:18,689 you finance some improvements or infrastructure and then 2138 01:50:18,689 --> 01:50:19,880 pay that off over time 2139 01:50:20,199 --> 01:50:22,199 But the bonds are issued by the city 2140 01:50:26,760 --> 01:50:29,710 What thank you Brian one follow-up though, I don't I don't 2141 01:50:29,710 --> 01:50:31,100 know that that character 2142 01:50:31,720 --> 01:50:34,970 Characterization is exactly accurate in most instances. 2143 01:50:34,970 --> 01:50:37,720 They're they're removed from other neighborhoods, right? 2144 01:50:37,720 --> 01:50:40,319 I mean, it's not you're not right next there. They're not 2145 01:50:40,319 --> 01:50:41,600 coming to North Lakes and saying hey 2146 01:50:41,600 --> 01:50:43,920 We're gonna put be right next to a neighborhood is 2147 01:50:44,479 --> 01:50:47,399 Traditionally, I mean so you I think 380 Savannah 2148 01:50:47,399 --> 01:50:50,840 That's right at one point in time was out by itself 2149 01:50:50,840 --> 01:50:53,189 Then there's that other the other neighborhood subsequent 2150 01:50:53,189 --> 01:50:53,500 to that 2151 01:50:53,500 --> 01:50:56,739 So I don't is is there an instance that I'm missing where 2152 01:50:56,739 --> 01:50:57,079 it's 2153 01:50:57,640 --> 01:51:01,029 Right next to a development because I don't think that 2154 01:51:01,029 --> 01:51:02,640 comparison is accurate if you're talking 2155 01:51:02,920 --> 01:51:04,920 Hey, my neighbor just across 2156 01:51:07,039 --> 01:51:10,689 What is that what give me that's I'm saying there's not any 2157 01:51:10,689 --> 01:51:13,000 indented right now well even outside of it 2158 01:51:13,000 --> 01:51:15,789 I don't know that that because they're the primary argument 2159 01:51:15,789 --> 01:51:16,800 is the infrastructure 2160 01:51:16,800 --> 01:51:19,630 So if you're saying the infrastructure is right across the 2161 01:51:19,630 --> 01:51:20,680 street, but I need 2162 01:51:21,640 --> 01:51:24,840 Help bankroll in the infrastructure. That's not gonna hold 2163 01:51:24,840 --> 01:51:25,159 water 2164 01:51:25,159 --> 01:51:27,390 I'll give you an example is one that we've talked about 2165 01:51:27,390 --> 01:51:29,100 with a council in the past is coal ranch 2166 01:51:29,100 --> 01:51:32,050 It's out on the southwest side of the city really undevelop 2167 01:51:32,050 --> 01:51:33,560 ed part of the city right now 2168 01:51:33,720 --> 01:51:36,819 So for right now there would really be no one across the 2169 01:51:36,819 --> 01:51:38,100 street that would be an issue 2170 01:51:38,239 --> 01:51:41,500 But over time 10 20 30 years is that area develops you 2171 01:51:41,500 --> 01:51:43,159 could have another development next to it 2172 01:51:43,199 --> 01:51:46,199 They could have different costs and different amenities 2173 01:51:46,760 --> 01:51:49,689 But typically they're pretty large self-contained master 2174 01:51:49,689 --> 01:51:50,439 plan communities 2175 01:51:50,439 --> 01:51:52,520 But you could have something across the street. That's not 2176 01:51:52,960 --> 01:51:55,489 Yeah, and I'm not aware of one right now that exactly and I 2177 01:51:55,489 --> 01:51:56,680 know am I and so yeah 2178 01:51:56,680 --> 01:51:59,000 You're telling me there's a premium for being the first one 2179 01:51:59,000 --> 01:52:02,000 sure I mean that that is that's 2180 01:52:03,800 --> 01:52:06,199 Par for the courses I understand you don't have to be the 2181 01:52:06,199 --> 01:52:08,199 first one there you can wait it out and then move 2182 01:52:08,520 --> 01:52:11,600 Later and not pay that or that's my thing 2183 01:52:11,600 --> 01:52:13,729 I just wanted to make that distinction that it's not I've 2184 01:52:13,729 --> 01:52:17,239 not I'm not aware of one which right across the street and 2185 01:52:17,920 --> 01:52:21,460 Two people initially are paying different rates down the 2186 01:52:21,460 --> 01:52:24,340 road. You're absolutely correct happen. Yes, so Brian. Yes, 2187 01:52:24,340 --> 01:52:24,539 sir 2188 01:52:25,760 --> 01:52:28,819 Tell us why the city cares or there's we have pids or not 2189 01:52:29,520 --> 01:52:32,640 The city's issuing bonds. I mean there's the risk is right 2190 01:52:32,640 --> 01:52:33,220 with that 2191 01:52:33,220 --> 01:52:34,880 So I guess I think that's probably what we're all 2192 01:52:34,880 --> 01:52:38,579 struggling with. I think there is some rest to the city 2193 01:52:38,579 --> 01:52:40,720 There's certainly a reputational risk of 2194 01:52:41,439 --> 01:52:44,149 City's names on the bonds and if they were to default there 2195 01:52:44,149 --> 01:52:46,680 's some administrative things that we could talk about later 2196 01:52:46,800 --> 01:52:48,800 and we have to handle with that but 2197 01:52:49,439 --> 01:52:51,439 another aspect of that is 2198 01:52:51,640 --> 01:52:54,149 Maybe touched on this is there is a political element to 2199 01:52:54,149 --> 01:52:54,760 this of 2200 01:52:55,800 --> 01:52:58,609 Someone's paying whatever it might be a thousand dollars in 2201 01:52:58,609 --> 01:53:01,689 taxes and in this development you might be paying two 2202 01:53:01,689 --> 01:53:02,439 thousand dollars 2203 01:53:02,760 --> 01:53:04,720 Because you have the PID 2204 01:53:04,720 --> 01:53:08,909 Is there going to be a push by that community not approved 2205 01:53:08,909 --> 01:53:11,600 bond packages to prove packages for schools? 2206 01:53:11,600 --> 01:53:13,600 Are they going to have a different set of? 2207 01:53:15,119 --> 01:53:17,359 Really kind of thoughts about how they want to approach 2208 01:53:17,359 --> 01:53:19,159 government and some of the things that are there 2209 01:53:19,159 --> 01:53:21,380 Is that politically are you creating a different group that 2210 01:53:21,380 --> 01:53:23,640 's going to really struggle to approve things in the future? 2211 01:53:23,640 --> 01:53:26,840 I think that's a concern. I don't know if that would happen 2212 01:53:26,840 --> 01:53:27,199 or not 2213 01:53:27,680 --> 01:53:30,560 But I can tell you talking to some people I know who live 2214 01:53:30,560 --> 01:53:32,569 in different developments. Sometimes they don't they really 2215 01:53:32,569 --> 01:53:33,079 can't distinguish 2216 01:53:33,800 --> 01:53:36,920 What's what who's who's paying what fee or what tax or what 2217 01:53:36,920 --> 01:53:39,279 assessment or what mud or whatever? 2218 01:53:39,279 --> 01:53:42,170 It's just one number to them and they kind of attribute it 2219 01:53:42,170 --> 01:53:43,600 all just to the government 2220 01:53:43,600 --> 01:53:46,750 So I think that's an issue we need to think about going 2221 01:53:46,750 --> 01:53:47,319 forward 2222 01:53:47,319 --> 01:53:50,159 I think the discussions that we had recently with the 2223 01:53:50,159 --> 01:53:51,760 council over the last couple of years 2224 01:53:52,199 --> 01:53:54,750 They were really concerned about doing it for primarily a 2225 01:53:54,750 --> 01:53:57,600 single-family residential development and coal ranch 2226 01:53:57,600 --> 01:53:58,840 without really understanding 2227 01:53:58,920 --> 01:54:01,430 What that true amenity was going to be that they felt like 2228 01:54:01,430 --> 01:54:02,359 was a higher level 2229 01:54:02,359 --> 01:54:05,479 I think their thought was at the time that they were really 2230 01:54:05,479 --> 01:54:07,720 saw these as more like commercial tools 2231 01:54:09,079 --> 01:54:12,199 And that was the feedback I got at that point a commercial 2232 01:54:13,600 --> 01:54:16,399 You could even have a bit of business improve in district 2233 01:54:16,399 --> 01:54:19,720 the commercial you could pay for things like their own 2234 01:54:19,720 --> 01:54:20,939 street cleanup and 2235 01:54:21,199 --> 01:54:23,560 trash collection some stuff like that the right 2236 01:54:24,279 --> 01:54:27,399 Businesses are are paying for and I think that even though 2237 01:54:27,399 --> 01:54:31,359 razor ranch does have a potentially a small component of it 2238 01:54:31,359 --> 01:54:34,699 It is residential most of that's a commercial development. 2239 01:54:34,699 --> 01:54:35,920 So that's kind of the differences 2240 01:54:35,920 --> 01:54:38,420 They saw but we've gotten a lot of interest recently on p 2241 01:54:38,420 --> 01:54:38,619 eds 2242 01:54:38,760 --> 01:54:41,350 most of them are single-family housing developments very 2243 01:54:41,350 --> 01:54:43,840 large developments and we're kind of looking for some 2244 01:54:43,840 --> 01:54:45,840 policy direction from this board and 2245 01:54:45,840 --> 01:54:47,840 Council how you want to approach it? 2246 01:54:48,000 --> 01:54:50,000 They are complicated 2247 01:54:50,920 --> 01:54:53,149 Hope that adds a little I hope I didn't make it more more 2248 01:54:53,149 --> 01:54:53,840 confusing 2249 01:54:59,840 --> 01:55:04,649 I like the idea of having a multiple of the current new 2250 01:55:04,649 --> 01:55:06,720 home market value 2251 01:55:09,760 --> 01:55:11,760 I 2252 01:55:14,640 --> 01:55:17,119 Like the idea of having a value threshold instead of the 2253 01:55:17,119 --> 01:55:19,760 average value making that 2254 01:55:20,640 --> 01:55:23,359 The average new home value whatever the definition is and 2255 01:55:23,359 --> 01:55:25,239 having a multiple, you know 2256 01:55:25,239 --> 01:55:27,560 It's got to be one and a quarter one and a half times that 2257 01:55:28,079 --> 01:55:31,210 They're bringing enough amenities in but it's a big enough 2258 01:55:31,210 --> 01:55:34,479 impact that you want to do that versus just somebody 2259 01:55:36,279 --> 01:55:39,159 Return it to market rate as what? 2260 01:55:56,439 --> 01:55:58,439 Yeah, no I am I 2261 01:55:59,880 --> 01:56:03,170 Think there has to be a I don't know what it is and now how 2262 01:56:03,170 --> 01:56:04,000 yield to you know 2263 01:56:04,000 --> 01:56:06,689 Your expertise what other communities are doing but some 2264 01:56:06,689 --> 01:56:09,159 sort of component that gives back to the community 2265 01:56:09,159 --> 01:56:12,920 So for example in Austin, there's they required, you know 2266 01:56:12,920 --> 01:56:15,579 low and moderate income housing to be a component of a 2267 01:56:15,579 --> 01:56:16,359 percentage of 2268 01:56:17,279 --> 01:56:20,739 one thing that jumps in my mind is a freeze of the 2269 01:56:22,000 --> 01:56:26,409 HOA fees to have that manageable not skyrocket on those 2270 01:56:26,409 --> 01:56:29,439 individuals, but some kind of component that says 2271 01:56:30,319 --> 01:56:33,800 If we do make a decision to go down this road with you know 2272 01:56:33,800 --> 01:56:37,220 , then there needs to be some kind of value add 2273 01:56:37,920 --> 01:56:41,079 to those that are purchasing the house and then to in the 2274 01:56:41,079 --> 01:56:44,439 community and then I guess a third part of that would be 2275 01:56:44,960 --> 01:56:49,199 I like I would like to see what the residents are 2276 01:56:50,359 --> 01:56:51,760 what 2277 01:56:51,760 --> 01:56:53,529 Documentation is presented. So I don't know if there's a 2278 01:56:53,529 --> 01:56:53,760 way to 2279 01:56:54,640 --> 01:56:56,850 Standardize that because what my concern is in other 2280 01:56:56,850 --> 01:56:59,079 neighborhoods. It's it's hey 2281 01:56:59,560 --> 01:57:02,279 The realtor didn't tell us we're gonna be part of this HOA 2282 01:57:02,279 --> 01:57:06,439 the opt-out period has passed or or hey that the PID 2283 01:57:06,520 --> 01:57:09,119 paperwork wasn't clear didn't say and so 2284 01:57:10,600 --> 01:57:12,390 Before you close on the house you have to get all that 2285 01:57:12,390 --> 01:57:13,960 information that we 2286 01:57:14,720 --> 01:57:18,590 It's all it's regulated by the federal government. Well, 2287 01:57:18,590 --> 01:57:19,079 yes 2288 01:57:20,439 --> 01:57:23,520 Control certain HOOA parameters because that's something 2289 01:57:23,520 --> 01:57:23,680 that 2290 01:57:24,600 --> 01:57:27,199 Is over and above what the city can do? 2291 01:57:28,079 --> 01:57:30,079 Well better said 2292 01:57:31,399 --> 01:57:32,560 I'm 2293 01:57:32,560 --> 01:57:34,909 Unable to see it right now. I'm assuming they bury it some 2294 01:57:34,909 --> 01:57:35,239 degree 2295 01:57:35,239 --> 01:57:38,479 But if a resident comes to me and says hey, I wasn't told 2296 01:57:38,479 --> 01:57:40,960 and I if they're borrowing money 2297 01:57:40,960 --> 01:57:43,630 I promise you 100% they're not closing alone without 2298 01:57:43,630 --> 01:57:46,159 knowing that information. They might not pay attention to 2299 01:57:46,159 --> 01:57:46,279 it 2300 01:57:48,960 --> 01:57:51,720 But still I don't get a chance where you see it every day 2301 01:57:51,720 --> 01:57:55,560 right I don't and so I don't have it and it happened 2302 01:57:55,560 --> 01:57:58,100 I'm sitting in HOA meeting like hey, I didn't I didn't know 2303 01:57:58,100 --> 01:58:00,039 and the realtor didn't disclose that 2304 01:58:00,039 --> 01:58:02,250 I'm just signing away or whatever and so it would be 2305 01:58:02,250 --> 01:58:05,479 finished beneficial for me as a representative to say well 2306 01:58:05,479 --> 01:58:06,399 the document 2307 01:58:07,039 --> 01:58:10,060 Would look like this and it's traditionally here, you know, 2308 01:58:10,060 --> 01:58:11,619 so it could be just an 2309 01:58:12,439 --> 01:58:15,609 Educational session for me to sit down and say hey, here's 2310 01:58:15,609 --> 01:58:17,239 how the documents organized traditionally 2311 01:58:17,239 --> 01:58:18,439 Here's what they are, you know 2312 01:58:18,439 --> 01:58:20,859 Because if you're talking about a subpoena a citation this 2313 01:58:20,859 --> 01:58:23,449 Saturday other like another legal document that I'm 100% 2314 01:58:23,449 --> 01:58:23,920 with you 2315 01:58:23,920 --> 01:58:26,920 And I know how those flow but I just I'm ignorant to that 2316 01:58:26,920 --> 01:58:28,960 and that question has come up words 2317 01:58:30,119 --> 01:58:33,489 What did they get the document? I don't know. I mean did 2318 01:58:33,489 --> 01:58:35,460 the realtor do his job or her job? 2319 01:58:35,460 --> 01:58:36,119 I don't know 2320 01:58:36,119 --> 01:58:39,640 But if I knew hey here's the form look like and it has to 2321 01:58:39,640 --> 01:58:43,159 be presented to you then it just makes it easy conversation 2322 01:58:43,720 --> 01:58:46,560 For me and I may be alone in that but that's just 2323 01:58:46,560 --> 01:58:48,020 conversations I've had 2324 01:58:49,119 --> 01:58:52,640 John Baines as a person who's had to do the auditing of 2325 01:58:52,640 --> 01:58:55,359 several of these entities the 2326 01:58:55,680 --> 01:58:58,260 Being a pain in the weave, you know 2327 01:59:05,520 --> 01:59:07,520 More often than not 2328 01:59:07,520 --> 01:59:10,800 More often than not people do not read the documents as 2329 01:59:10,800 --> 01:59:12,039 they do as they should 2330 01:59:12,640 --> 01:59:15,810 Yeah, I know for me if people are gonna do alone or 2331 01:59:15,810 --> 01:59:16,359 anything 2332 01:59:16,359 --> 01:59:18,760 I say give me the documents a couple of days ahead of time 2333 01:59:18,760 --> 01:59:19,319 so I can read 2334 01:59:19,640 --> 01:59:21,949 Because I'm not gonna just go in there and just say just 2335 01:59:21,949 --> 01:59:23,619 sign this page, you know, this is what it says 2336 01:59:23,619 --> 01:59:24,760 I don't like that 2337 01:59:24,760 --> 01:59:27,310 So a lot of this happens though because this is the 2338 01:59:27,310 --> 01:59:29,840 procedure that happens in a lot of these institutions 2339 01:59:30,079 --> 01:59:33,819 So but like you say people need to make sure that they 2340 01:59:33,819 --> 01:59:36,880 understand what they're signing on for it be it PID 2341 01:59:37,479 --> 01:59:39,479 HOA, etc. Etc. Yes 2342 01:59:47,359 --> 01:59:52,079 Please disregard prior comment audience at home. Thank you 2343 01:59:54,760 --> 01:59:58,560 You have enough feedback from us and I think so 2344 02:00:00,159 --> 02:00:02,520 So to just keep moving 2345 02:00:03,239 --> 02:00:04,920 You guys have this in your backup 2346 02:00:04,920 --> 02:00:04,920 This is the same kind of diagram about what the PID 2347 02:00:04,920 --> 02:00:05,060 application process would look like if we made these 2348 02:00:05,060 --> 02:00:11,840 particular 2349 02:00:12,399 --> 02:00:14,399 suggested changes 2350 02:00:14,560 --> 02:00:16,560 and 2351 02:00:16,880 --> 02:00:21,119 Next steps for both the incentive policy and the PID 2352 02:00:22,479 --> 02:00:24,770 Guidelines we're going to incorporate the feedback that y' 2353 02:00:24,770 --> 02:00:28,319 all have given us today and we're gonna have a work session 2354 02:00:28,840 --> 02:00:32,279 With council next week to share with them 2355 02:00:32,960 --> 02:00:34,600 all of this 2356 02:00:34,600 --> 02:00:39,479 great feedback and get their direction and then as I said 2357 02:00:39,479 --> 02:00:40,119 earlier 2358 02:00:40,760 --> 02:00:44,359 Will incorporate council's direction come back to EDP board 2359 02:00:44,359 --> 02:00:47,800 and then eventually it will go to council for their final 2360 02:00:48,560 --> 02:00:49,960 approval as 2361 02:00:49,960 --> 02:00:51,960 individual consideration items, I 2362 02:00:52,359 --> 02:00:55,880 Don't see on next steps come back to the DDP board. I just 2363 02:00:55,880 --> 02:00:56,920 added that I 2364 02:00:58,680 --> 02:01:02,409 Think when we come up with a direct minimum number of jobs 2365 02:01:02,409 --> 02:01:03,140 or whatever 2366 02:01:03,140 --> 02:01:05,670 I think we need to know what that is. I think you have a 2367 02:01:05,670 --> 02:01:07,359 sense of what we want to do and 2368 02:01:08,039 --> 02:01:11,840 Council may be 100% in agreement or not, but I'd like to 2369 02:01:11,840 --> 02:01:15,119 think we left some things undefined that we'd like to be 2370 02:01:15,119 --> 02:01:15,439 able to recommend 2371 02:01:15,600 --> 02:01:19,560 We did and we'll we'll get that stuff incorporated make 2372 02:01:19,560 --> 02:01:22,560 some suggestions so that y'all have something to react to 2373 02:01:23,079 --> 02:01:25,649 At the next meeting and we'll make sure to get you your 2374 02:01:25,649 --> 02:01:27,800 backup plenty of time ahead of time 2375 02:01:27,800 --> 02:01:29,800 and I just want to take a second to 2376 02:01:30,880 --> 02:01:33,340 Reiterate that anytime you get back up and you've got 2377 02:01:33,340 --> 02:01:34,960 questions ahead of time 2378 02:01:34,960 --> 02:01:37,159 I understand there are definitely some things that you 2379 02:01:37,159 --> 02:01:39,119 would want to bring up in the course of the meeting 2380 02:01:39,720 --> 02:01:42,989 With the group for discussion, but you're also always 2381 02:01:42,989 --> 02:01:46,159 welcome to ask us for clarification in advance 2382 02:01:46,640 --> 02:01:49,670 If if that can help you get more comfortable with the 2383 02:01:49,670 --> 02:01:52,260 material you can still ask the question in the meeting, too 2384 02:01:52,260 --> 02:01:54,960 But we're here to help be a resource 2385 02:01:56,199 --> 02:01:58,619 Not just during the meeting but outside of it, too 2386 02:02:00,960 --> 02:02:03,220 Yeah, okay, I think we already did that part 2387 02:02:04,720 --> 02:02:09,000 May I make a suggestion in interest of time? 2388 02:02:09,560 --> 02:02:13,199 I think y'all have probably heard me talk enough and Adam 2389 02:02:13,199 --> 02:02:14,920 has a report to give but 2390 02:02:15,159 --> 02:02:18,340 Are you comfortable with taking it out of order to let him 2391 02:02:18,340 --> 02:02:20,119 come and give his report now? 2392 02:02:20,640 --> 02:02:23,439 Or do you want to just stick with what's on the agenda? 2393 02:02:24,399 --> 02:02:28,279 I am comfortable with leaving this along as fast as we can 2394 02:02:30,680 --> 02:02:36,000 So I will I will offer to forego making my verbal report 2395 02:02:36,000 --> 02:02:38,960 And I'll just send an email to the group with some detail 2396 02:02:38,960 --> 02:02:40,359 about our activity 2397 02:02:40,359 --> 02:02:45,130 I know that Jim had specifically requested last time that 2398 02:02:45,130 --> 02:02:45,479 we 2399 02:02:46,279 --> 02:02:50,039 Produce a report about all of the RFPs that we responded to 2400 02:02:50,039 --> 02:02:53,739 in the last fiscal year that was included in your backup 2401 02:02:54,680 --> 02:02:57,079 I'm glad to answer any questions about that, but I don't 2402 02:02:57,079 --> 02:03:00,060 feel like in the interest of time. I need to go over it 2403 02:03:00,060 --> 02:03:02,060 but 2404 02:03:02,239 --> 02:03:04,239 Glad to answer any questions offline 2405 02:03:04,239 --> 02:03:07,810 I think it'd be nice to maybe have that we have that back 2406 02:03:07,810 --> 02:03:10,130 up we have questions when you add it to the agenda next 2407 02:03:10,130 --> 02:03:10,640 time also 2408 02:03:10,640 --> 02:03:12,640 Sure, sure 2409 02:03:13,800 --> 02:03:15,800 Okay 2410 02:03:16,199 --> 02:03:18,199 He's anybody 2411 02:03:18,239 --> 02:03:21,119 Have any questions or we have all the backup on the reports 2412 02:03:21,119 --> 02:03:23,279 . We have all the information. Do you want to hear more? 2413 02:03:24,079 --> 02:03:26,880 Or you want to look at and have questions? I would like to 2414 02:03:26,880 --> 02:03:29,239 if you have an update on the downtown fire 2415 02:03:29,239 --> 02:03:30,760 I would like to hear that 2416 02:03:30,760 --> 02:03:34,100 Yes, Julie is here to do that update and I just want to 2417 02:03:34,100 --> 02:03:37,319 thank all of you again for your great review and comments 2418 02:03:37,319 --> 02:03:37,720 and feedback 2419 02:03:38,520 --> 02:03:41,569 It was a great discussion. So thank you. So we're done with 2420 02:03:41,569 --> 02:03:45,000 our work session. We need to start our regular meeting 2421 02:03:46,119 --> 02:03:48,960 with EDP 18 - 002 2422 02:03:49,720 --> 02:03:51,720 We're going to forego any 2423 02:03:52,399 --> 02:03:56,020 comments on staff reports except for number four 2424 02:03:56,920 --> 02:03:58,920 update on the downtown fire 2425 02:03:59,479 --> 02:04:02,460 Well, believe it or not. It has only been two weeks 2426 02:04:02,460 --> 02:04:04,359 yesterday since that fire 2427 02:04:04,359 --> 02:04:07,180 It feels like about two months to me and to other people I 2428 02:04:07,180 --> 02:04:10,239 'm sure and even though it looks like nothing is happening 2429 02:04:10,239 --> 02:04:12,760 There's a lot of stuff going on in the background. So 2430 02:04:13,840 --> 02:04:15,840 Things we have done since the day of the fire 2431 02:04:16,319 --> 02:04:18,720 Compiled a list of businesses and contact information for 2432 02:04:18,720 --> 02:04:20,960 the fire department and police departments 2433 02:04:21,279 --> 02:04:25,210 we gave the folks that were affected with the fire and in 2434 02:04:25,210 --> 02:04:27,119 the line of smoke, etc a 2435 02:04:27,399 --> 02:04:31,439 List of city businesses and I'm sorry services that they 2436 02:04:31,439 --> 02:04:32,399 may find helpful 2437 02:04:32,399 --> 02:04:35,800 Like if you need a dumpster call don't call the main number 2438 02:04:35,800 --> 02:04:37,300 call this person. Here's her name 2439 02:04:37,300 --> 02:04:40,470 Here's her direct line tell her who you are and she's gonna 2440 02:04:40,470 --> 02:04:43,050 move you to the front of the line and expedite that service 2441 02:04:43,050 --> 02:04:43,439 for you 2442 02:04:44,800 --> 02:04:48,199 We've put in an application with the National Trust for 2443 02:04:48,199 --> 02:04:50,880 Historic Preservation for an emergency grant 2444 02:04:51,199 --> 02:04:53,760 For 108 North Locust, which is the mini mall 2445 02:04:54,060 --> 02:04:57,050 we've also put in one for preservation Texas very small 2446 02:04:57,050 --> 02:05:00,279 grant that would cover some engineering cost for them and 2447 02:05:01,560 --> 02:05:05,079 As of yesterday, we started working on one for Jupiter 2448 02:05:05,079 --> 02:05:06,279 House as well 2449 02:05:07,520 --> 02:05:10,960 To look at the wall there that has maybe some issues 2450 02:05:10,960 --> 02:05:13,619 I sent a bunch of information to the Texas Main Street 2451 02:05:13,619 --> 02:05:17,470 Architect and they have provided some information back to 2452 02:05:17,470 --> 02:05:17,720 us 2453 02:05:18,239 --> 02:05:21,010 about other cities that have had fires and how they dealt 2454 02:05:21,010 --> 02:05:21,720 with it and 2455 02:05:22,439 --> 02:05:25,220 Here's some ideas that when as you go to redevelop this 2456 02:05:25,220 --> 02:05:27,609 property, here's some ideas that the owners might be able 2457 02:05:27,609 --> 02:05:27,880 to use 2458 02:05:28,260 --> 02:05:30,720 You know the courthouse took on a lot of smoke and soot 2459 02:05:30,720 --> 02:05:34,149 through their HVAC system and the fact the wind was blowing 2460 02:05:34,149 --> 02:05:34,479 that way 2461 02:05:34,479 --> 02:05:38,689 That day so they have spent a couple of weeks cleaning up. 2462 02:05:38,689 --> 02:05:39,880 They were back in their offices yesterday 2463 02:05:40,680 --> 02:05:44,600 the museum will be closed for several months as they have 2464 02:05:44,600 --> 02:05:44,800 to 2465 02:05:45,319 --> 02:05:49,760 Take every artifact out of its box unwrap it clean it if 2466 02:05:49,760 --> 02:05:49,899 necessary 2467 02:05:50,560 --> 02:05:53,279 rewrap it in new bubble wrap put it back in a new box and 2468 02:05:54,159 --> 02:05:57,270 Then update their system where they know where everything 2469 02:05:57,270 --> 02:05:57,479 is 2470 02:05:58,760 --> 02:06:02,409 We've been I've been in contact everybody's been in contact 2471 02:06:02,409 --> 02:06:03,420 with them through emails 2472 02:06:04,119 --> 02:06:06,579 Text phone calls if you saw me run out a couple of times. 2473 02:06:06,579 --> 02:06:09,199 That's what it was. It was Joey calling about something 2474 02:06:09,859 --> 02:06:13,340 We still have downtown mini mall Jupiter House Lottie dot 2475 02:06:13,340 --> 02:06:15,439 and shop the barn remain closed 2476 02:06:17,119 --> 02:06:21,130 There we need a structural engineer to go look the firewall 2477 02:06:21,130 --> 02:06:23,600 s held which was amazing and wonderful 2478 02:06:23,880 --> 02:06:26,359 But some damage may have been done to those walls that need 2479 02:06:26,359 --> 02:06:30,039 to be fixed before those businesses can can reopen 2480 02:06:30,359 --> 02:06:33,550 We do have a partial closure of Austin Street and the fence 2481 02:06:33,550 --> 02:06:37,220 goes out into Lucas Street taking up those parking spaces 2482 02:06:38,119 --> 02:06:40,319 We know that fence is an issue and we're working to resolve 2483 02:06:40,319 --> 02:06:43,439 that as quickly as possible. But until we can get 2484 02:06:44,399 --> 02:06:48,319 until the wills can get a structural engineer and 2485 02:06:48,800 --> 02:06:51,819 Get their plans to over to development services at which 2486 02:06:51,819 --> 02:06:54,720 time their permit will be forthwith 2487 02:06:56,800 --> 02:06:59,039 We've got to have some plans before we can move that fence 2488 02:06:59,039 --> 02:07:02,399 back secure the walls and move the fence back at this time 2489 02:07:02,399 --> 02:07:05,489 If anything were to happen and either of those walls 2490 02:07:05,489 --> 02:07:06,560 decided to come down 2491 02:07:06,640 --> 02:07:09,210 Hopefully that fence would contain it and protect people 2492 02:07:09,210 --> 02:07:12,119 passing by so that's that's why that's still there 2493 02:07:14,560 --> 02:07:17,479 That's pretty much it unless you have questions 2494 02:07:17,479 --> 02:07:19,000 Okay, we have a question 2495 02:07:19,000 --> 02:07:22,359 I do have a question because I've heard structural engineer 2496 02:07:22,359 --> 02:07:25,319 like for the past two weeks from the very beginning 2497 02:07:25,720 --> 02:07:29,510 So is that the who who is that whose responsibility is that 2498 02:07:29,510 --> 02:07:32,239 is it the city structural engine? 2499 02:07:32,239 --> 02:07:35,619 Is it the because each individual from what I gather is 2500 02:07:35,619 --> 02:07:39,010 there the difficulty that it's having is that there's 2501 02:07:39,010 --> 02:07:40,039 different? 2502 02:07:40,359 --> 02:07:42,920 Insurances there's a tenant and then there's the building 2503 02:07:42,920 --> 02:07:43,279 owner 2504 02:07:44,079 --> 02:07:47,720 Is it the the insurance adjuster who's sending the 2505 02:07:47,720 --> 02:07:50,800 structural engineer out and that what we're waiting for or? 2506 02:07:51,279 --> 02:07:53,989 In the case of the wills and I have not spoken to their 2507 02:07:53,989 --> 02:07:56,520 insurance people. I've just been in direct contact with 2508 02:07:56,520 --> 02:07:56,720 them 2509 02:07:56,720 --> 02:08:00,199 I understood they needed three different bids from three 2510 02:08:00,199 --> 02:08:03,039 companies and there are private companies that links 2511 02:08:03,039 --> 02:08:04,199 construction looked at that 2512 02:08:04,199 --> 02:08:06,560 I know a couple of others did as well 2513 02:08:07,479 --> 02:08:09,479 But I think it's up to them to get the bids and then take 2514 02:08:09,479 --> 02:08:12,159 it to the insurance company and say here's our bids and 2515 02:08:12,159 --> 02:08:12,479 make a 2516 02:08:12,479 --> 02:08:15,159 Decision but it's not the city's obligate 2517 02:08:15,159 --> 02:08:18,130 It is not our obligation and the fencing that is up right 2518 02:08:18,130 --> 02:08:19,520 now was covered by their 2519 02:08:20,319 --> 02:08:23,109 Their insurance and serve appropriate that fence up the day 2520 02:08:23,109 --> 02:08:25,670 of the fire once they got it under control and they are 2521 02:08:25,670 --> 02:08:26,760 paying for that 2522 02:08:26,760 --> 02:08:29,800 I just want to make sure that as the city we are doing and 2523 02:08:29,800 --> 02:08:31,819 and I think on like Jupiter house 2524 02:08:31,880 --> 02:08:34,560 Well both buildings on each side. There's a tenant. There's 2525 02:08:34,560 --> 02:08:35,359 a building owner 2526 02:08:36,239 --> 02:08:38,960 I've talked to Frank Zangrel several times about Jupiter 2527 02:08:38,960 --> 02:08:40,279 house and Joey. I 2528 02:08:41,159 --> 02:08:44,109 Think that Frank is the one taking the lead on that because 2529 02:08:44,109 --> 02:08:46,460 I believe Joey has like content insurance 2530 02:08:46,460 --> 02:08:49,640 But Frank has the building insurance. So yeah, there's some 2531 02:08:49,640 --> 02:08:50,939 there's a few complex things 2532 02:08:50,939 --> 02:08:53,800 But it's just gonna take a little time before we can work 2533 02:08:53,800 --> 02:08:54,279 through it 2534 02:08:55,359 --> 02:08:58,520 Are we any closer to knowing the cause of the fire? 2535 02:08:58,520 --> 02:09:02,029 Is that still invest and until we can get those front and 2536 02:09:02,029 --> 02:09:04,720 back facades kind of shored up and we're trying to do 2537 02:09:04,720 --> 02:09:04,880 everything 2538 02:09:04,880 --> 02:09:08,359 We can to save the historic facade on the front side until 2539 02:09:08,359 --> 02:09:09,880 we can get those shored up 2540 02:09:09,880 --> 02:09:13,220 It's really not safe to let anybody in there including the 2541 02:09:13,220 --> 02:09:13,720 firemen 2542 02:09:13,880 --> 02:09:16,810 So once that happens the fire department will go back in 2543 02:09:16,810 --> 02:09:18,479 and make see if they can make an assessment 2544 02:09:18,479 --> 02:09:21,930 I've been told that we may not know because it was a long 2545 02:09:21,930 --> 02:09:23,680 hot fire, you know 2546 02:09:24,199 --> 02:09:27,369 And then the cleanup crews can come in after that after the 2547 02:09:27,369 --> 02:09:28,199 firemen look at it 2548 02:09:28,199 --> 02:09:30,779 See if they can find a cause make sure everything safe for 2549 02:09:30,779 --> 02:09:32,100 the cleanup crews to come in 2550 02:09:32,560 --> 02:09:34,560 And so who does that? 2551 02:09:35,239 --> 02:09:38,520 The initial step with the walls the shoring up of the walls 2552 02:09:38,560 --> 02:09:41,920 That will be the whoever the company is that the wills hire 2553 02:09:41,920 --> 02:09:44,159 to do that. They'll draw some plans up. I 2554 02:09:45,119 --> 02:09:47,640 imagined it's gonna be like scaffolding and then they'll be 2555 02:09:47,640 --> 02:09:48,000 a 2556 02:09:48,680 --> 02:09:51,609 Almost like a box like you see in some bigger cities when 2557 02:09:51,609 --> 02:09:52,439 they're doing stuff 2558 02:09:52,439 --> 02:09:55,479 So the pedestrians can walk under it and be protected in 2559 02:09:55,479 --> 02:09:58,810 case anything were to fall from the you know from the 2560 02:09:58,810 --> 02:09:59,659 construction 2561 02:09:59,920 --> 02:10:01,840 Thank you 2562 02:10:01,840 --> 02:10:03,840 Thanks, Julie 2563 02:10:05,000 --> 02:10:07,000 Appreciate the update 2564 02:10:07,279 --> 02:10:09,279 All right last item 2565 02:10:09,399 --> 02:10:12,739 On the business agenda is our considered the minutes of our 2566 02:10:12,739 --> 02:10:13,760 December 13th 2567 02:10:14,640 --> 02:10:18,239 2017 meeting item EDP 1803 2568 02:10:20,119 --> 02:10:22,520 Distributed advance and attached to the back of your packet 2569 02:10:22,520 --> 02:10:24,659 . I'll love to take a motion 2570 02:10:29,159 --> 02:10:34,720 Prior to today's meeting of the December 13th 2017 meeting 2571 02:10:35,600 --> 02:10:39,239 We have a motion by Jill and the second by Carol Anne any 2572 02:10:39,239 --> 02:10:40,680 further discussion 2573 02:10:41,680 --> 02:10:45,159 All those in favor say aye. Aye any opposed? 2574 02:10:46,039 --> 02:10:49,250 Minutes are approved unanimously and we are adjourned. 2575 02:10:49,250 --> 02:10:50,600 Thank you for being here today