WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.330 Interrupt the presentation for questions if that's 00:00:02.330 --> 00:00:04.759 something that would help the discussion along the way so 00:00:05.519 --> 00:00:07.839 Don't hesitate to raise your hand and the chair will 00:00:07.839 --> 00:00:11.419 recognize you and we can move through it that way. So 00:00:12.119 --> 00:00:14.119 Let's go ahead and get started 00:00:15.279 --> 00:00:18.980 With everybody's favorite thing state laws and statutes, so 00:00:18.980 --> 00:00:21.640 we're just we're just jumping right into the fun stuff 00:00:22.199 --> 00:00:25.800 But it is important in this case to begin at the beginning 00:00:26.440 --> 00:00:30.390 With the recognition that the power to enter into these 00:00:30.390 --> 00:00:33.159 types of agreements whether they're tax 00:00:33.399 --> 00:00:36.469 Abatements or chapter 380 rebates or special assessments 00:00:36.469 --> 00:00:38.759 through public improvement districts 00:00:39.039 --> 00:00:43.679 That's granted to the city by the state and I just want you 00:00:43.679 --> 00:00:46.039 guys to see this brief chart 00:00:46.920 --> 00:00:51.759 About the tax type that is in question the program that is 00:00:51.759 --> 00:00:53.939 used and then the statute there 00:00:54.359 --> 00:00:56.479 Under which the regulations fall 00:00:57.359 --> 00:01:00.710 I'm gonna define a couple things for you starting with the 00:01:00.710 --> 00:01:01.479 tax abatement 00:01:02.119 --> 00:01:06.329 That's an agreement that exempts from taxation all or part 00:01:06.329 --> 00:01:08.840 of the value of a taxpayer's 00:01:09.000 --> 00:01:12.200 Real or business personal property for up to ten years 00:01:12.799 --> 00:01:16.519 So that's under chapter 312 and that specifies that in 00:01:16.519 --> 00:01:17.879 order to authorize 00:01:18.280 --> 00:01:21.500 Tax abatements a city must adopt a tax abatement policy 00:01:21.500 --> 00:01:24.590 every two years. So that's why we're starting this 00:01:24.590 --> 00:01:26.040 conversation now 00:01:26.439 --> 00:01:30.319 Because our two years are up in April of 2018 00:01:31.200 --> 00:01:34.689 So everybody clear on tax abatement. That's a reduction to 00:01:34.689 --> 00:01:36.640 a taxpayer's bill in 00:01:36.959 --> 00:01:39.810 Whole or in part before they read before they even have to 00:01:39.810 --> 00:01:42.920 pay it. So it's just taken off the top 00:01:43.560 --> 00:01:45.560 Carolina would you? 00:01:45.799 --> 00:01:50.959 Mind reminding some of us an example of those that here in 00:01:50.959 --> 00:01:53.000 Denton maybe for all three of these 00:01:53.799 --> 00:01:58.299 Sure, that's a great. That's a great point. Um, so since mr 00:01:58.299 --> 00:01:59.319 . Fikes is here in the room 00:01:59.760 --> 00:02:01.760 We can use Peter built as an example 00:02:02.719 --> 00:02:04.719 they have 00:02:05.000 --> 00:02:08.240 Done some expansion to their plants and have requested tax 00:02:08.240 --> 00:02:11.909 abatements related to those expansions and been granted 00:02:11.909 --> 00:02:12.259 them 00:02:13.039 --> 00:02:17.199 So that is tax abatements can be done on new construction 00:02:17.199 --> 00:02:20.300 like brand new construction or on expansion projects 00:02:20.300 --> 00:02:22.599 But Peter built is an example of that 00:02:23.240 --> 00:02:26.000 type of project that's received a tax abatement 00:02:27.199 --> 00:02:30.939 So when we're looking at what best practices and economic 00:02:30.939 --> 00:02:32.479 development are 00:02:33.240 --> 00:02:35.000 related to incentives 00:02:35.000 --> 00:02:37.849 They dictate that a policy should address all of the 00:02:37.849 --> 00:02:40.120 incentive tools that a city plans to use 00:02:40.199 --> 00:02:44.129 Which is why our incentive policy also includes chapter 380 00:02:44.129 --> 00:02:44.900 agreements 00:02:45.879 --> 00:02:49.639 So chapter 380 agreements give cities really broad 00:02:49.639 --> 00:02:53.189 discretion to make loans or grants of public funds to 00:02:53.189 --> 00:02:54.159 promote business 00:02:54.479 --> 00:02:56.080 development in 00:02:56.080 --> 00:03:00.199 Denton our chapter 380 agreements have historically taken 00:03:00.199 --> 00:03:02.039 the form of tax rebates in 00:03:02.400 --> 00:03:05.099 Which a taxpayer pays their full tax bill 00:03:05.319 --> 00:03:08.879 But then is refunded all of the portion all or a portion of 00:03:08.879 --> 00:03:12.319 the taxes that they paid for a certain number of years 00:03:12.680 --> 00:03:16.580 So unlike tax abatements, there is not a 10-year limit on 00:03:16.580 --> 00:03:19.900 chapter 380 rebates if you 00:03:20.439 --> 00:03:24.009 Were so inclined to go and look at the statute that talks 00:03:24.009 --> 00:03:25.759 about chapter 380s 00:03:25.759 --> 00:03:30.400 It is a very short little paragraph and it is very broad 00:03:30.680 --> 00:03:35.330 So cities use it in different ways, but as I said typically 00:03:35.330 --> 00:03:37.560 here in Denton our chapter 00:03:37.560 --> 00:03:39.960 380s are in the form of rebates 00:03:41.159 --> 00:03:44.400 so an example of an entity that's 00:03:45.439 --> 00:03:47.439 received chapter 380 is 00:03:48.800 --> 00:03:51.949 O'Reilly Hospitality Management the Convention Center their 00:03:51.949 --> 00:03:56.360 incentive agreement is structured as a chapter 380 rebate 00:03:57.240 --> 00:03:59.240 any questions about 00:03:59.599 --> 00:04:01.439 chapter 380s 00:04:01.439 --> 00:04:05.759 Okay, and then finally something that we haven't talked 00:04:05.759 --> 00:04:09.180 very much about recently with this board our public 00:04:09.180 --> 00:04:10.520 improvement districts and 00:04:11.479 --> 00:04:14.719 Those are districts that offer a means for improving 00:04:14.719 --> 00:04:18.360 infrastructure to promote economic growth within a certain 00:04:18.360 --> 00:04:19.480 defined area 00:04:19.639 --> 00:04:22.319 and a city is authorized to 00:04:22.800 --> 00:04:26.189 Levy and collect special assessments or fees special 00:04:26.189 --> 00:04:30.540 assessment just means fee on properties within that type of 00:04:30.540 --> 00:04:31.319 area and 00:04:31.920 --> 00:04:35.939 The city of Denton does have one kid right now and it's the 00:04:35.939 --> 00:04:38.560 razor ranch kid and we're going to talk more about that 00:04:38.560 --> 00:04:40.560 When we come to the section about 00:04:41.480 --> 00:04:43.480 Pids later on in the presentation 00:04:48.959 --> 00:04:53.360 Okay, so as you know from looking at the backup 00:04:53.920 --> 00:04:55.399 we have 00:04:55.399 --> 00:04:58.250 policies and guidelines that outline the use of tax abat 00:04:58.250 --> 00:05:01.480 ements chapter 380s and Pids the 00:05:02.680 --> 00:05:05.600 Tax abatement and incentive policy was first approved by 00:05:05.600 --> 00:05:09.399 the City Council in 1989 and it's most recently 00:05:09.759 --> 00:05:13.120 Been approved in April 2016 as I mentioned 00:05:13.720 --> 00:05:17.480 So we're due in April 2018 in 2016 00:05:17.480 --> 00:05:20.800 It was reauthorized with no significant changes 00:05:20.800 --> 00:05:23.759 I think one of the only changes we had was updating a map 00:05:23.759 --> 00:05:25.000 that's included in it 00:05:25.160 --> 00:05:28.149 so this is going to be the first time in several years that 00:05:28.149 --> 00:05:32.120 there's been a discussion and real re-examination and 00:05:32.279 --> 00:05:35.480 proposed changes to that policy 00:05:36.160 --> 00:05:39.639 the public improvement district guidelines were first 00:05:39.639 --> 00:05:44.259 approved in 2007 at the request of the 00:05:45.680 --> 00:05:49.680 Developer of Hunter Ranch, which is a large master planned 00:05:50.519 --> 00:05:54.079 Community or I mean it is not in existence, but it is a 00:05:54.079 --> 00:05:56.839 master plan community to the south 00:05:57.439 --> 00:06:01.480 Along I-35, but that was the impetus for the council 00:06:01.480 --> 00:06:04.060 adopting a public improvement district 00:06:04.439 --> 00:06:08.360 Guideline and it was amended in April 2014 00:06:08.600 --> 00:06:11.750 At the request of red development the developer of razor 00:06:11.750 --> 00:06:15.519 ranch to add the option of revenue bond sales for 00:06:15.680 --> 00:06:18.110 Construction financing when it was first adopted it only 00:06:18.110 --> 00:06:21.839 had two options for financing and then this amendment in 00:06:21.839 --> 00:06:24.240 April 2014 added the third option 00:06:26.000 --> 00:06:30.040 For clarification back at the top the city didn't policy so 00:06:30.560 --> 00:06:35.029 This will be in 2018 the first update since 1989. No, I'm 00:06:35.029 --> 00:06:36.720 sorry if I wasn't clear about that 00:06:38.240 --> 00:06:40.240 The the last 00:06:40.639 --> 00:06:43.120 Content update was in 2014 00:06:43.120 --> 00:06:46.240 I mean there were some additions and changes made in 2014. 00:06:46.240 --> 00:06:48.839 They just there weren't any made in 2016 00:06:48.839 --> 00:06:52.170 So yeah, we have to approve it every two years. So it's 00:06:52.170 --> 00:06:56.189 been updated every two years. No significant changes last 00:06:56.189 --> 00:06:56.779 time 00:07:00.920 --> 00:07:03.939 So the economic development partnership board plays a key 00:07:03.939 --> 00:07:06.399 role under both of these documents 00:07:06.800 --> 00:07:09.680 Because it is the first entity to review 00:07:10.240 --> 00:07:13.620 Incentive or pit applications and make a recommendation on 00:07:13.620 --> 00:07:15.959 those applications to council 00:07:16.720 --> 00:07:20.139 The EDP board is also tasked with reviewing and 00:07:20.139 --> 00:07:23.540 recommending the city's incentive policies to the council 00:07:23.540 --> 00:07:24.519 for approval. That's 00:07:25.519 --> 00:07:30.290 That's a responsibility that's outlined in the EDP boards 00:07:30.290 --> 00:07:31.740 enabling ordinance 00:07:32.439 --> 00:07:36.120 So since the incentive policy must be reapproved in 2018 as 00:07:36.120 --> 00:07:36.920 I've said 00:07:37.120 --> 00:07:40.370 We're bringing staffs recommended changes to the policy to 00:07:40.370 --> 00:07:43.019 you today for your review and discussion 00:07:44.079 --> 00:07:45.160 further 00:07:45.160 --> 00:07:48.160 our understanding is that City Council members are 00:07:48.959 --> 00:07:50.959 wanting to have a work session about the current PID 00:07:50.959 --> 00:07:53.579 guidelines because there has been an uptick in 00:07:53.959 --> 00:07:56.740 Developers contacting council members to ask about the 00:07:56.740 --> 00:07:58.079 establishment of pins 00:07:58.079 --> 00:08:01.220 And so it's a good time to just go ahead and bring these 00:08:01.220 --> 00:08:04.800 two things up together and talk about them and review them 00:08:07.959 --> 00:08:09.959 As 00:08:10.279 --> 00:08:13.759 We in the economic development department develop our 00:08:14.240 --> 00:08:15.959 detailed work plan for the year 00:08:15.959 --> 00:08:19.220 the first thing that we do as a department is ensure that 00:08:19.220 --> 00:08:22.850 our projects and activities align with the city's strategic 00:08:22.850 --> 00:08:23.839 direction and 00:08:24.639 --> 00:08:27.100 I'm sure that many of you are aware that when the City 00:08:27.100 --> 00:08:30.279 Council adopts its annual budget each September 00:08:30.279 --> 00:08:30.279 It also adopts the annual strategic plan and the strategic 00:08:30.279 --> 00:08:36.279 plan is organized around 00:08:36.480 --> 00:08:39.200 five key focus areas or KFAs 00:08:39.720 --> 00:08:43.100 Which are long-term defined priorities for the city 00:08:43.639 --> 00:08:46.879 the third KFA in the strategic plan is 00:08:47.440 --> 00:08:50.269 Economic development and has been for a number of years and 00:08:50.269 --> 00:08:54.899 one of the commitments under that strategic plan KFA is to 00:08:54.899 --> 00:08:55.600 develop 00:08:56.200 --> 00:08:59.279 targeted policies and incentives that boost economic growth 00:09:00.840 --> 00:09:04.440 This fiscal year my department also crafted a departmental 00:09:04.440 --> 00:09:06.220 level strategic plan 00:09:06.759 --> 00:09:09.990 to complement the city's overall plan and to add some 00:09:09.990 --> 00:09:13.080 details under those really broad KFAs and 00:09:13.440 --> 00:09:15.679 Our plan is organized under four goals 00:09:15.879 --> 00:09:18.799 The first of those is business development and one of the 00:09:18.799 --> 00:09:21.679 objectives that we have under the goal of business 00:09:22.000 --> 00:09:25.139 Development is to revise the city's incentive policy and 00:09:25.139 --> 00:09:27.320 application. So again, that's 00:09:27.919 --> 00:09:30.470 yet another reason why we're here today talking to you 00:09:30.470 --> 00:09:33.809 about it because it is a strategic goal of the city and of 00:09:33.809 --> 00:09:34.879 the department and 00:09:35.600 --> 00:09:39.480 Finally as we're examining our projects and activities 00:09:39.679 --> 00:09:42.610 We want to compare them to the city's core values and make 00:09:42.610 --> 00:09:46.080 sure that we're aligned with those core values of integrity 00:09:46.080 --> 00:09:47.840 fiscal responsibility 00:09:48.799 --> 00:09:50.080 transparency and 00:09:50.080 --> 00:09:51.679 outstanding customer service 00:09:51.679 --> 00:09:55.389 So in the case of review and revisions to the incentive and 00:09:55.389 --> 00:09:57.419 PID policies and guidelines 00:09:57.840 --> 00:10:00.759 We not only have clear ties to the city and departmental 00:10:00.759 --> 00:10:02.840 strategic plans and core values 00:10:03.320 --> 00:10:05.649 Particularly those of fiscal responsibility and 00:10:05.649 --> 00:10:06.360 transparency 00:10:06.559 --> 00:10:09.070 But we have an obligation under state law and a mandate 00:10:09.070 --> 00:10:12.120 under best practices in the field of economic development 00:10:13.039 --> 00:10:17.120 So that's all the background and now we are going to 00:10:18.559 --> 00:10:22.919 delve into the policy for tax abatement and incentives I 00:10:24.759 --> 00:10:28.399 Want to make sure that you all have an understanding of 00:10:28.399 --> 00:10:31.720 what our review and revision process at the staff level 00:10:32.360 --> 00:10:33.919 entailed as 00:10:33.919 --> 00:10:37.610 part of the policy review and revision process we reflected 00:10:37.610 --> 00:10:40.639 on lessons learned from prior incentive agreements 00:10:41.840 --> 00:10:44.950 from recent initiation of a number of incentives as well as 00:10:44.950 --> 00:10:47.000 the recent termination of 00:10:47.559 --> 00:10:51.559 Several incentives and our ongoing incentive administration 00:10:51.559 --> 00:10:53.919 , which is one of our department's responsibilities 00:10:54.360 --> 00:10:57.470 Just so you guys know we have 17 active incentives right 00:10:57.470 --> 00:11:00.330 now. So there's a significant amount of administration that 00:11:00.330 --> 00:11:00.580 we do 00:11:01.200 --> 00:11:04.659 We also reviewed incentive policies from other cities 00:11:04.659 --> 00:11:09.039 including Frisco Garland Flower Mound, Louisville and Plano 00:11:10.320 --> 00:11:13.250 We've also incorporated total impact 2.0 into the 00:11:13.250 --> 00:11:14.840 application process 00:11:14.919 --> 00:11:18.559 And total impact as some of you may remember is the city's 00:11:18.559 --> 00:11:21.639 fiscal and economic impact analysis 00:11:22.080 --> 00:11:25.759 Software that has been customized specifically to our 00:11:25.759 --> 00:11:29.350 particular situation as a full-service city and allows us 00:11:29.350 --> 00:11:30.519 to perform a true 00:11:30.519 --> 00:11:33.720 cost-benefit analysis on a proposed project that's 00:11:33.720 --> 00:11:35.039 requesting incentives and 00:11:35.759 --> 00:11:38.610 Finally, we discussed our proposed policy changes with our 00:11:38.610 --> 00:11:42.179 colleagues in the finance and legal departments as well as 00:11:42.179 --> 00:11:43.960 the city manager's office and then 00:11:44.279 --> 00:11:46.279 incorporated their comments 00:11:50.759 --> 00:11:53.879 So we're gonna start with the formatting changes 00:11:54.840 --> 00:11:58.279 We want to make some revisions to improve the organization 00:11:59.200 --> 00:12:01.720 clarity and readability of the document 00:12:02.679 --> 00:12:06.049 We propose expanding the general provisions section to 00:12:06.049 --> 00:12:09.840 define our economic development goals and target industries 00:12:09.840 --> 00:12:13.240 And then we further propose expanding the definitions 00:12:13.240 --> 00:12:16.840 section and bringing all the existing incentive programs 00:12:17.279 --> 00:12:21.519 We have an incentive program under a separate ordinance 00:12:21.519 --> 00:12:24.860 That's called the ED investment fund as well as another one 00:12:24.860 --> 00:12:27.240 called the based aircraft incentive 00:12:27.360 --> 00:12:30.450 We want to roll those all under this policy so that all of 00:12:30.450 --> 00:12:34.080 that information and guidelines are in one place 00:12:35.120 --> 00:12:37.759 At this point in time, we're not proposing any changes to 00:12:37.759 --> 00:12:41.820 those other policies the ED investment fund or the based 00:12:41.820 --> 00:12:42.240 aircraft 00:12:42.720 --> 00:12:44.720 incentive policy 00:12:45.080 --> 00:12:47.950 Can you tell me where the funds come from that are 00:12:47.950 --> 00:12:50.990 administered through the ED investment fund and the based 00:12:50.990 --> 00:12:52.399 aircraft incentive? 00:12:52.399 --> 00:12:55.889 I'm just I'm not as familiar with those and right that's a 00:12:55.889 --> 00:12:56.940 great question. No 00:12:57.360 --> 00:13:00.659 They the easy why we would or not would not put them under 00:13:00.659 --> 00:13:01.120 this right? 00:13:01.120 --> 00:13:04.919 We'll do the easy one first the base aircraft incentive. It 00:13:04.919 --> 00:13:08.080 's facilitated as a chapter 380 agreement 00:13:08.080 --> 00:13:12.350 So they're the funds for that are they come in from the 00:13:12.350 --> 00:13:15.919 taxpayer and then they would be refunded the ED investment 00:13:15.919 --> 00:13:16.240 fund 00:13:16.440 --> 00:13:20.919 That is funded through mixed beverage sales tax, correct? 00:13:21.000 --> 00:13:24.419 Yes, mix beverage sales tax is a certain amount is set 00:13:24.419 --> 00:13:24.840 aside 00:13:25.559 --> 00:13:27.830 It's like a hundred and fifty thousand dollars a year. So I 00:13:27.830 --> 00:13:28.600 'm looking at Erica 00:13:29.639 --> 00:13:33.639 150 thousand dollars a year is set aside into that specific 00:13:33.639 --> 00:13:34.120 fund 00:13:35.000 --> 00:13:39.809 so it's really just it's kind of a house cleaning measure 00:13:39.809 --> 00:13:40.399 so that 00:13:41.000 --> 00:13:44.450 When someone looks at our policy, they don't have to go 00:13:44.450 --> 00:13:45.960 look at three different policies 00:13:45.960 --> 00:13:49.059 They see it all in one place and the point being it's all 00:13:49.059 --> 00:13:50.639 taxpayer. So that's right 00:13:55.559 --> 00:13:59.700 Yes, ma'am, that's really more of a comment than a question 00:13:59.700 --> 00:14:02.600 on this a readability is a big one 00:14:03.039 --> 00:14:06.759 For me understanding what it is that we're being asked for 00:14:06.759 --> 00:14:10.200 and when we talk about the umbrella policy everything 00:14:10.840 --> 00:14:14.440 Being under one umbrella. I'm wondering if it's possible if 00:14:15.799 --> 00:14:17.960 we can create a scorecard an 00:14:18.480 --> 00:14:22.509 actual scorecard with all of the the items or criteria on 00:14:22.509 --> 00:14:24.200 one side and if 00:14:24.639 --> 00:14:26.639 that that 00:14:26.759 --> 00:14:28.759 business that's asked for the incentive 00:14:31.120 --> 00:14:35.190 Is a yes or no on those criteria's mm-hmm just something 00:14:35.190 --> 00:14:37.279 physical and simple for us to see 00:14:38.559 --> 00:14:41.039 That might be a tool that we could develop 00:14:42.120 --> 00:14:46.879 To help the EDP board and the council in their analysis 00:14:46.879 --> 00:14:49.460 I mean, is that what you're talking about instead of 00:14:49.460 --> 00:14:51.960 incorporating something into the policy itself? 00:14:52.360 --> 00:14:55.049 Because we're gonna kind of get to something along those 00:14:55.049 --> 00:14:57.840 lines that we're proposing as it changed to take something 00:14:57.840 --> 00:14:58.159 out 00:14:59.360 --> 00:15:02.559 But I like that idea of something real simple and 00:15:02.559 --> 00:15:03.399 straightforward 00:15:04.799 --> 00:15:08.340 Kind of does it hit this or not? Yeah. Yeah, and the other 00:15:08.340 --> 00:15:09.840 thing too is that 00:15:11.360 --> 00:15:13.360 Our total impact 00:15:13.919 --> 00:15:17.730 Analysis software produces a one-page summary as well as 00:15:17.730 --> 00:15:20.000 like a ten-page sort of 00:15:20.320 --> 00:15:24.149 Mediary report and then a 30 page really significantly long 00:15:24.149 --> 00:15:27.320 and involved report so that you could lay out 00:15:27.840 --> 00:15:32.039 This is a project. This is this is what it looks like under 00:15:32.039 --> 00:15:33.000 total impact 00:15:33.000 --> 00:15:35.679 You know how many jobs it will create how many? 00:15:36.559 --> 00:15:39.159 New housing units it would generate with this level of 00:15:39.159 --> 00:15:40.000 investment 00:15:40.159 --> 00:15:43.500 How long the payback period would be if we offered them an 00:15:43.500 --> 00:15:47.340 incentive? So it's kind of a one-page infographic 00:15:48.320 --> 00:15:49.720 style 00:15:49.720 --> 00:15:51.519 piece of information 00:15:51.519 --> 00:15:54.879 That is very helpful for looking at 00:15:56.639 --> 00:16:00.460 Projects next to each other even okay, so but I appreciate 00:16:00.460 --> 00:16:03.320 the suggestion. I made a note and we'll discuss that 00:16:03.840 --> 00:16:05.840 Jim's got a question 00:16:09.720 --> 00:16:13.679 Would that be an element in the approval process or 00:16:14.639 --> 00:16:17.330 Would that kick a business completely out as far as being 00:16:17.330 --> 00:16:18.120 qualified? 00:16:18.600 --> 00:16:23.600 No, it's just to emphasize that these are the targeted 00:16:23.600 --> 00:16:26.440 industries and and that there there is some additional 00:16:26.440 --> 00:16:27.000 weight 00:16:27.080 --> 00:16:30.639 But I I don't think that anybody would want to just 00:16:30.639 --> 00:16:33.620 discount a potential project because it wasn't a target 00:16:33.620 --> 00:16:34.200 industry 00:16:34.480 --> 00:16:36.940 It's just to call out the ones that are particularly 00:16:36.940 --> 00:16:41.600 desirable as determined by this board and by the council 00:16:46.039 --> 00:16:51.179 Okay, so we have on our incentive application we do have a 00:16:51.179 --> 00:16:52.720 list of criteria of 00:16:53.559 --> 00:16:56.179 Not quite a scorecard, but kind of a scorecard that they 00:16:56.179 --> 00:16:58.940 check a box on it says I'm doing this this this and this so 00:16:58.940 --> 00:17:00.940 That maybe could be expanded 00:17:01.720 --> 00:17:03.720 Within that because we have some 00:17:04.240 --> 00:17:06.670 Targeted not industries, but things we want to make sure 00:17:06.670 --> 00:17:08.480 that they meet on the application 00:17:08.480 --> 00:17:10.680 We don't have an application. I don't know if everybody 00:17:10.680 --> 00:17:11.960 seen the application in here 00:17:12.839 --> 00:17:16.759 Um, I think that we include and I think we include a copy 00:17:16.759 --> 00:17:21.000 of the application with people's orientation materials 00:17:21.000 --> 00:17:23.829 But it could have been it could be a while and the other 00:17:23.829 --> 00:17:28.000 thing too is we've actually we've revised the incentive 00:17:28.000 --> 00:17:28.119 application 00:17:29.000 --> 00:17:32.349 just on an administrative level to make sure that we're 00:17:32.349 --> 00:17:35.369 capturing all the information that we need to do our total 00:17:35.369 --> 00:17:36.559 impact analysis and 00:17:37.559 --> 00:17:40.740 Capturing the information that our utilities need to help 00:17:40.740 --> 00:17:43.359 us gauge the kind of impact a project would have 00:17:43.559 --> 00:17:47.880 So we've tweaked that on an administrative level. I mean it 00:17:47.880 --> 00:17:49.759 doesn't have anything to do with policy 00:17:49.759 --> 00:17:52.789 So we just changed it to capture what we needed with our 00:17:52.789 --> 00:17:54.000 new analysis 00:17:54.960 --> 00:17:57.720 But if everybody would like to see a copy of that we can 00:17:57.720 --> 00:18:00.099 email it out after the meeting 00:18:01.440 --> 00:18:05.599 The ED investment fund how long have we had that I 00:18:06.559 --> 00:18:09.630 Think this is the third year third fiscal year. We've had 00:18:09.630 --> 00:18:10.200 it and that is 00:18:10.920 --> 00:18:14.279 Correct me if I'm wrong money that we've set aside so that 00:18:14.279 --> 00:18:16.799 if a big project comes up and we need to 00:18:17.119 --> 00:18:19.359 I'm trying to think what the project what it came up with a 00:18:19.359 --> 00:18:20.319 few years ago, but 00:18:23.119 --> 00:18:25.799 Help pay for something that were able to 00:18:26.880 --> 00:18:29.450 Provide an incentive. We've got cash to be able to do that 00:18:29.450 --> 00:18:31.160 when we're competing with 00:18:32.359 --> 00:18:35.349 Other cities a lot of those people have a 4a or 4b sales 00:18:35.349 --> 00:18:38.380 tax this thing where they have money set aside that they 00:18:38.380 --> 00:18:38.759 can buy 00:18:38.759 --> 00:18:41.079 a piece of land or help it in infrastructure and 00:18:45.400 --> 00:18:47.039 Okay 00:18:47.039 --> 00:18:50.069 So that's money that the council that we recommended the 00:18:50.069 --> 00:18:52.339 council agreed to set aside so that we can 00:18:53.160 --> 00:18:55.819 Build that up to be able to maybe offset some costs as 00:18:55.819 --> 00:18:57.759 somebody's coming in there 00:18:59.160 --> 00:19:01.279 That would have to come through here and it have to go to 00:19:01.279 --> 00:19:03.279 City Council before any of that money was spent 00:19:03.839 --> 00:19:06.509 And the aircraft and Cindy was a new policy that we've only 00:19:06.509 --> 00:19:07.759 had a couple of years 00:19:08.559 --> 00:19:12.019 As well that for specifically for the airport. We've had a 00:19:12.019 --> 00:19:13.039 couple of folks that came out 00:19:14.279 --> 00:19:17.359 With some projects out there that we wanted to make sure 00:19:17.359 --> 00:19:17.819 that was 00:19:19.200 --> 00:19:21.200 Something we can do out there 00:19:21.359 --> 00:19:24.200 right and just to reiterate 00:19:25.240 --> 00:19:26.640 any 00:19:26.640 --> 00:19:29.869 incentive agreements that would be entered into using ED 00:19:29.869 --> 00:19:32.960 investment fund funds or a 00:19:33.200 --> 00:19:36.130 based aircraft incentive would go through the exact same 00:19:36.130 --> 00:19:39.279 process that any other chapter 380 agreement or 00:19:40.279 --> 00:19:43.579 tax abatement would would go through and would be governed 00:19:43.579 --> 00:19:46.680 by the same kind of contracts with thresholds and 00:19:46.880 --> 00:19:50.000 Verification and all of that stuff, but Marty makes a good 00:19:50.000 --> 00:19:50.319 point 00:19:51.079 --> 00:19:54.440 The ED investment fund is intended to put us on a better 00:19:54.440 --> 00:19:58.000 competitive footing with other communities that have 00:19:58.759 --> 00:20:03.240 For a or type a type B sales taxes and there are some 00:20:03.240 --> 00:20:04.160 higher level 00:20:04.960 --> 00:20:07.720 very clearly defined requirements that 00:20:08.599 --> 00:20:11.460 Go along with the project's eligibility to be considered 00:20:11.460 --> 00:20:13.460 under the ED investment fund 00:20:13.759 --> 00:20:17.099 It's a minimum capital investment of 15 million dollars 00:20:17.099 --> 00:20:20.150 instead of five million dollars like under the regular 00:20:20.150 --> 00:20:20.640 policy 00:20:21.200 --> 00:20:25.799 We've defined what a higher paying job is or skills 00:20:26.839 --> 00:20:30.269 Skills based jobs, so they have to meet two out of three 00:20:30.269 --> 00:20:31.160 criteria 00:20:32.440 --> 00:20:35.880 That are clearly defined to be eligible and we have not 00:20:35.880 --> 00:20:39.000 used the ED investment fund to date 00:20:39.680 --> 00:20:41.759 So just a little bit more background for y'all 00:20:42.920 --> 00:20:45.160 Any more questions? Thanks good 00:20:49.759 --> 00:20:52.619 Okay, so on to the proposed content changes 00:20:55.160 --> 00:20:58.970 We are and this just gets right into what we're we're 00:20:58.970 --> 00:21:00.519 talking about here but um 00:21:01.279 --> 00:21:05.380 We want to put forward the proposed change to limit 00:21:05.839 --> 00:21:09.940 Chapter 380 tax rebate agreements to terms of 10 years or 00:21:09.940 --> 00:21:10.240 less 00:21:10.799 --> 00:21:14.440 To make those consistent with the limitation on the term of 00:21:14.440 --> 00:21:15.599 tax abatements 00:21:17.000 --> 00:21:20.150 There are a couple different reasons behind our suggestion 00:21:20.150 --> 00:21:20.640 for this 00:21:22.039 --> 00:21:26.400 One of which is beyond a term of 10 years. It becomes 00:21:26.400 --> 00:21:28.359 difficult to do an analysis on 00:21:29.440 --> 00:21:31.759 The accuracy of an analysis on a project 00:21:32.599 --> 00:21:35.680 Significantly declines outside of the time frame of 10 00:21:35.680 --> 00:21:36.039 years 00:21:45.039 --> 00:21:49.000 I just heard what you said sign on the door. I'm gonna have 00:21:49.000 --> 00:21:51.339 to get a basket and take up everybody's phone 00:21:56.680 --> 00:21:58.880 All right, we'll use it to buy cookies for the next 00:22:15.039 --> 00:22:17.039 Disrupted the meeting 00:22:21.799 --> 00:22:24.519 Okay getting back on track because we don't want to be here 00:22:24.519 --> 00:22:25.279 until 2 o'clock 00:22:26.039 --> 00:22:29.640 So the first proposed content change that we have as I said 00:22:29.640 --> 00:22:33.660 is limiting chapter 380 tax rebate agreements to terms of 00:22:33.660 --> 00:22:34.240 10 years 00:22:34.240 --> 00:22:37.890 Or less to be consistent with the limitation on the term of 00:22:37.890 --> 00:22:38.960 tax abatements 00:22:40.200 --> 00:22:43.480 We also propose excluding retail projects 00:22:45.599 --> 00:22:47.599 Some questions on that 00:22:47.839 --> 00:22:50.430 We have 17 that we're working on and I can't remember the 00:22:50.430 --> 00:22:51.480 details on all those 00:22:51.480 --> 00:22:54.839 So how many did we have that were longer than 10 years? 00:22:55.640 --> 00:22:57.640 Or do we have in place? 00:22:58.039 --> 00:22:59.559 there are 00:22:59.559 --> 00:23:01.279 two 00:23:01.279 --> 00:23:03.359 That are 25 year terms 00:23:04.559 --> 00:23:06.559 That I can think of right now 00:23:07.240 --> 00:23:09.470 If you're gonna if you're gonna add to it you got gonna 00:23:09.470 --> 00:23:12.200 have to come up here and talk into the microphone 00:23:15.160 --> 00:23:17.160 My 00:23:17.559 --> 00:23:20.259 Name's Erica Solomon which we all know but for the public 00:23:20.259 --> 00:23:23.450 the analysts so I actually administer the incentive 00:23:23.450 --> 00:23:23.900 agreements 00:23:23.900 --> 00:23:25.799 So we would have four 00:23:25.799 --> 00:23:28.309 That would be our sales tax agreements. So it'd be Golden 00:23:28.309 --> 00:23:30.819 Triangle razor ranch tent and crossing in Unicorn Lake 00:23:32.319 --> 00:23:37.049 Those are all longer than 10 are they all 25 years Erica, 00:23:37.049 --> 00:23:38.039 okay, so 00:23:40.559 --> 00:23:40.700 Okay between 15 and 25 years you had mentioned excuse me 00:23:40.700 --> 00:23:44.859 Erica 00:23:45.359 --> 00:23:47.359 mentioned Golden Triangle razor ranch 00:23:48.039 --> 00:23:50.039 Bossing and what was the fourth? 00:23:50.359 --> 00:23:52.359 Thank you very much 00:23:53.759 --> 00:23:56.400 So none of those projects would have qualified under this 00:23:57.019 --> 00:23:59.660 No, they would have they would have qualified but they 00:23:59.660 --> 00:24:02.480 would have been limited to a 10-year term 00:24:04.839 --> 00:24:09.640 Jill thank you. So my question is 00:24:11.200 --> 00:24:13.200 First of all is 00:24:13.799 --> 00:24:17.039 If we make this change does it limit 00:24:17.640 --> 00:24:20.839 council from approving outside those guidelines or can they 00:24:20.839 --> 00:24:22.160 make a variation and 00:24:23.160 --> 00:24:24.119 secondly 00:24:24.119 --> 00:24:27.039 If every single time we go through a vote and they're all 00:24:27.039 --> 00:24:29.839 looked at on a case-by-case basis as we all know 00:24:29.839 --> 00:24:32.480 Why would we limit ourselves outside of? 00:24:33.000 --> 00:24:36.250 the laws of Texas to what we can't can't do I can see 00:24:36.250 --> 00:24:38.240 discouraging it because of 00:24:38.480 --> 00:24:41.240 the issues that come up with over 10 years, but 00:24:42.039 --> 00:24:45.119 Just so mark that off the list doesn't I don't know why 00:24:45.119 --> 00:24:47.240 this is an adjustment to 00:24:48.119 --> 00:24:50.119 kind of 00:24:50.440 --> 00:24:54.799 The guidelines there just aren't any in our own policy that 00:24:54.799 --> 00:24:56.440 being said 00:24:57.680 --> 00:25:01.640 the policy as it is written allows the council to 00:25:02.400 --> 00:25:05.480 have discretion to go outside of 00:25:05.920 --> 00:25:08.759 what's stated in the policy and we're not proposing a 00:25:08.759 --> 00:25:11.359 change to that because we understand that 00:25:11.880 --> 00:25:15.309 We want to have clear guidelines so that companies know 00:25:15.309 --> 00:25:17.920 what to expect and kind of what the norm is 00:25:18.960 --> 00:25:22.279 However, there can be situations that we cannot anticipate 00:25:23.000 --> 00:25:25.460 When the council would want to have the flexibility to go 00:25:25.460 --> 00:25:29.440 beyond that so I don't think it's reasonable to 00:25:30.519 --> 00:25:33.980 Remove that language that would allow the council to make 00:25:33.980 --> 00:25:35.900 the kind of decision that it needs to make in an 00:25:35.900 --> 00:25:37.160 extraordinary circumstance 00:25:37.440 --> 00:25:40.200 to do something different and to boil it down the 00:25:41.000 --> 00:25:43.549 Limiting that would be because of the difficulty in 00:25:43.549 --> 00:25:44.359 administering 00:25:46.000 --> 00:25:49.119 After a 10-year mark is that the reason that that's limit 00:25:49.119 --> 00:25:52.140 that's one of the issues and it's not difficulty in 00:25:52.140 --> 00:25:53.079 administration 00:25:53.079 --> 00:25:56.680 It's difficulty in judging what the real value of a project 00:25:56.680 --> 00:25:59.640 is outside of the time frame or in a time frame beyond 10 00:25:59.640 --> 00:25:59.920 years 00:26:00.440 --> 00:26:03.279 Somebody's gonna be here administering something if we 00:26:03.279 --> 00:26:05.359 enter into an agreement with an entity 00:26:05.359 --> 00:26:08.640 It has to be administered for the life of the agreement 00:26:09.640 --> 00:26:13.519 So the the administration is not the problem 00:26:14.039 --> 00:26:15.839 I 00:26:15.839 --> 00:26:17.839 think that 00:26:18.119 --> 00:26:21.400 There's also there's also an issue with you know 00:26:22.119 --> 00:26:25.180 The issue of foregoing revenue for an extended amount of 00:26:25.180 --> 00:26:27.839 time. I mean frankly that is an issue 00:26:29.839 --> 00:26:33.210 So these are the things that as we talk through these 00:26:33.210 --> 00:26:36.880 things as we look at what our challenges have been as we 00:26:37.240 --> 00:26:39.480 Talk to other staff members 00:26:40.319 --> 00:26:42.720 These are the issues that come up over and over again. So 00:26:42.720 --> 00:26:45.799 we're bringing these to you for your discussion 00:26:46.400 --> 00:26:48.400 Jim 00:26:52.599 --> 00:26:57.279 But a unicorn lake and raise your range with the build-out 00:26:57.279 --> 00:26:59.519 is over a longer period of time 00:27:00.240 --> 00:27:03.880 Is there some way we can put a provision in there so that 00:27:03.880 --> 00:27:05.400 you do it in phases? 00:27:05.400 --> 00:27:07.480 Like we did Russia range we did the North side 00:27:09.200 --> 00:27:12.369 I think there needs to be something there to give you a 00:27:12.369 --> 00:27:13.400 little flexibility 00:27:14.359 --> 00:27:17.130 To not force somebody to think they've got to get it all 00:27:17.130 --> 00:27:20.559 done in 10 years. Although that that would be the goal 00:27:22.559 --> 00:27:25.759 Some of these bigger projects might not be feasible 00:27:28.160 --> 00:27:30.160 Okay, thank you 00:27:31.880 --> 00:27:35.460 Anybody else have any comments or questions I guess 00:27:36.559 --> 00:27:39.119 Just to make sure everybody's on the same page on 380 00:27:39.119 --> 00:27:41.759 agreement. We use Denton Crossing as an example 00:27:42.319 --> 00:27:45.660 they collect sales tax revenue from from Best Buy when they 00:27:45.660 --> 00:27:46.960 sell a computer and 00:27:47.720 --> 00:27:50.500 We agree up front to give them some of that money back over 00:27:50.500 --> 00:27:52.119 a certain period of time 00:27:53.000 --> 00:27:58.109 That can be 50% goes back years one through five that it's 00:27:58.109 --> 00:28:00.279 40% and then it's 20% or whatever 00:28:00.279 --> 00:28:04.160 So the years and how much money they get reimbursed or are 00:28:04.160 --> 00:28:07.119 both part of that equation. And so while we are 00:28:07.839 --> 00:28:11.730 giving money back over time 15 to 25 years down the road 00:28:11.730 --> 00:28:12.359 that may be 00:28:13.319 --> 00:28:16.809 10% or 20% or whatever the deal is so it's not just a year 00:28:16.809 --> 00:28:17.559 's thing. It's a 00:28:18.119 --> 00:28:20.279 when somebody comes and asks for a 00:28:21.480 --> 00:28:24.599 Rebate its years and how much are we giving them over time? 00:28:24.599 --> 00:28:26.220 And when we have these discussions 00:28:26.220 --> 00:28:30.339 We usually have several scenarios to talk about they want 00:28:30.339 --> 00:28:33.779 100% for 100 years and we want 00:28:34.359 --> 00:28:36.359 You know 20% for three years 00:28:37.000 --> 00:28:39.210 And so we kind of come up with something that works out 00:28:39.210 --> 00:28:40.039 there. So I 00:28:41.720 --> 00:28:46.019 Don't mind 10 years being a goal if we had that as a stop 00:28:46.019 --> 00:28:49.000 then the ones that we have right wrong or different wouldn 00:28:49.000 --> 00:28:49.279 't have 00:28:49.640 --> 00:28:52.039 Gotten a great wouldn't have gotten an incentive or what 00:28:52.039 --> 00:28:53.920 they have may or may not have happened 00:28:54.160 --> 00:28:56.279 Raise a ranch wouldn't have worked on 10 years 00:28:57.400 --> 00:28:59.869 Well, and that's that's why it's important to retain the 00:28:59.869 --> 00:29:02.200 flexibility for the council to make 00:29:03.039 --> 00:29:05.039 The decision that they deem appropriate 00:29:05.880 --> 00:29:09.559 Outside of the 10-year time frame, but I guess I don't know 00:29:10.759 --> 00:29:13.289 Outside of we're trying to line it up with the tax abat 00:29:13.289 --> 00:29:17.000 ement policy, which I don't even know if that's relevant 00:29:19.440 --> 00:29:22.589 In my world I have to look at rules and regulations and how 00:29:22.589 --> 00:29:25.329 often we make exceptions to those and if you're making 00:29:25.329 --> 00:29:25.960 exceptions to 00:29:25.960 --> 00:29:27.859 Them all the time then you need to look at whether that's a 00:29:27.859 --> 00:29:28.599 reasonable rule 00:29:29.160 --> 00:29:31.599 Regulation and if I look at our current five 00:29:32.279 --> 00:29:35.390 Chapter 380 agreements, they're all over this. So what are 00:29:35.390 --> 00:29:38.200 we really getting ourselves into we're asking the council 00:29:39.720 --> 00:29:42.410 We put ten years in there and we make a recommendation for 00:29:42.410 --> 00:29:44.000 15 and council 00:29:44.480 --> 00:29:47.119 Next week or ten years from now says what's our rule? 00:29:47.119 --> 00:29:49.200 I don't want to make an exception because what does that 00:29:49.200 --> 00:29:49.640 look like? 00:29:50.400 --> 00:29:52.400 To the council people and putting 00:29:53.200 --> 00:29:55.410 Words in your mouth. I guess they don't want to make the 00:29:55.410 --> 00:29:57.759 exception because it's outside the policy and people are 00:29:57.759 --> 00:29:58.420 mad because we're 00:29:58.720 --> 00:30:00.720 outside the policy I 00:30:00.759 --> 00:30:02.759 Don't know that's really reasonable 00:30:06.960 --> 00:30:09.519 I don't know if this is a comment or a question or what? 00:30:11.519 --> 00:30:14.400 But the city of Denton has changed over the last ten years 00:30:16.000 --> 00:30:19.799 Significantly and as we're proposing 00:30:20.880 --> 00:30:22.559 content changes 00:30:22.559 --> 00:30:24.559 Does this really? 00:30:25.079 --> 00:30:29.119 Capture what we want to do over the next ten years. I mean 00:30:29.960 --> 00:30:31.559 the city and 00:30:31.559 --> 00:30:34.849 Surroundings have changed significantly. So is this really 00:30:34.849 --> 00:30:36.720 going to meet our need? 00:30:37.359 --> 00:30:40.509 For the years to come. I don't know the answer. I'm just 00:30:40.509 --> 00:30:41.079 asking a question 00:30:41.599 --> 00:30:44.309 Well first the other part of this all these are retail 00:30:44.309 --> 00:30:47.490 projects on the next item is to exclude retail projects. I 00:30:47.490 --> 00:30:47.559 don't 00:30:48.480 --> 00:30:51.430 It's a question of whether we get into the details of that 00:30:51.430 --> 00:30:52.119 one a little bit 00:30:52.119 --> 00:30:54.670 We're looking at more retail projects because we have so 00:30:54.670 --> 00:30:57.569 many going towards that is probably a really good question. 00:30:57.569 --> 00:30:58.119 I guess I'm 00:30:59.440 --> 00:31:01.839 From the you know first time really taking a chance to talk 00:31:01.839 --> 00:31:02.880 about this. I'm 00:31:03.880 --> 00:31:06.079 Opposed to having ten years out there and I think that 00:31:06.079 --> 00:31:07.559 makes it harder for us to get things done 00:31:08.240 --> 00:31:10.240 Understand we've got some flexibility 00:31:10.480 --> 00:31:13.559 But when you look at the ones that are on the books were 00:31:13.559 --> 00:31:13.839 all 00:31:14.799 --> 00:31:16.799 15 to 25 years. Why would we? 00:31:18.640 --> 00:31:19.839 Ten years 00:31:19.839 --> 00:31:22.900 Well, there are a significant number of them that are less 00:31:22.900 --> 00:31:26.480 than that. I mean we've had some that have been three years 00:31:26.480 --> 00:31:28.480 I mean I can think of several that have been three years 00:31:28.480 --> 00:31:29.359 recently 00:31:29.359 --> 00:31:32.730 So but those are the I mean razor-edge a big deal didn't 00:31:32.730 --> 00:31:34.559 crossing was a big deal at the time 00:31:34.559 --> 00:31:36.720 No one tried them all those are I 00:31:37.599 --> 00:31:40.000 Just don't want to I just want us to be able to have 00:31:40.000 --> 00:31:42.279 options and I don't want to make those options exceptions 00:31:42.960 --> 00:31:44.960 my personal opinion 00:31:46.240 --> 00:31:48.240 Carolina 00:31:48.920 --> 00:31:52.259 Does that limit this board from being able to say that we 00:31:52.259 --> 00:31:53.079 recommend 00:31:54.759 --> 00:31:57.200 Additional I mean in my opinion it doesn't 00:31:58.480 --> 00:32:01.240 It would I mean the flexibility could would be there at the 00:32:01.240 --> 00:32:03.660 board level and the council level 00:32:06.119 --> 00:32:08.670 For the sake of being a devil's advocate we could set it at 00:32:08.670 --> 00:32:11.720 25 years and we could make them recommend less than that 00:32:15.079 --> 00:32:18.240 Or you could send it John Baines or you could set it at 10 00:32:18.240 --> 00:32:21.720 and say that at the discretion of council they could 00:32:22.079 --> 00:32:25.559 Expand it right and that's already built into the policy. I 00:32:25.559 --> 00:32:26.519 'm and we 00:32:27.119 --> 00:32:30.319 We would retain that language in my opinion is that 00:32:30.319 --> 00:32:33.950 language could stay it should stay in there to allow for 00:32:33.950 --> 00:32:34.359 that 00:32:35.039 --> 00:32:37.039 Jim 00:32:41.400 --> 00:32:44.480 Have a different start date for different places approve it 00:32:44.480 --> 00:32:45.200 all at one time 00:32:46.279 --> 00:32:49.119 And first the first phase would be ten years and then when 00:32:49.119 --> 00:32:51.579 the second phase kicked off then that would be the start 00:32:51.579 --> 00:32:52.420 date for that one 00:32:52.960 --> 00:32:55.359 And there could be thresholds 00:32:57.640 --> 00:32:59.390 Associated with the first phase that would have to be met 00:32:59.390 --> 00:33:01.920 in order to initiate second phase 00:33:04.319 --> 00:33:07.690 John Baines so Jim what you're saying is that it would 00:33:07.690 --> 00:33:10.940 basically come back to some review board of some sort after 00:33:10.940 --> 00:33:11.140 the 00:33:21.839 --> 00:33:24.319 Yeah, that's that's what razor ranch is doing now 00:33:25.200 --> 00:33:28.000 They have a threshold they have to meet to get an extension 00:33:28.000 --> 00:33:31.000 and then they have their final threshold 00:33:31.799 --> 00:33:34.359 Jill jester and I think that that's something that we you 00:33:34.359 --> 00:33:34.920 could word 00:33:34.920 --> 00:33:37.549 I mean if if that's the ends up being the recommendation 00:33:37.549 --> 00:33:41.960 that although it's a you know up to by law 25 years 00:33:42.640 --> 00:33:46.200 potential that it is the recommendation or that it is 00:33:46.759 --> 00:33:48.759 strongly recommended that 00:33:49.319 --> 00:33:52.359 It be divided up into phases no more than 10 years or 00:33:52.359 --> 00:33:54.680 something like that if that's the way we choose to go 00:33:54.680 --> 00:33:56.680 Okay, all of these projects are 00:33:57.680 --> 00:34:00.089 Different and a case by case. So when we come when we have 00:34:00.089 --> 00:34:02.690 somebody doing that again, they all want all the money in 00:34:02.690 --> 00:34:03.279 the world for 00:34:03.720 --> 00:34:06.980 Forever and there's also a dollar limit on all these so 00:34:07.559 --> 00:34:09.239 It's all 00:34:09.239 --> 00:34:10.840 negotiation 00:34:10.840 --> 00:34:12.840 Economic Development Department comes to us with a 00:34:12.840 --> 00:34:14.980 recommendation and we have a talk about like we're doing 00:34:14.980 --> 00:34:16.920 here about each each project and then make 00:34:16.920 --> 00:34:18.920 a recommendation to City Council 00:34:20.079 --> 00:34:22.079 So, I guess 00:34:22.119 --> 00:34:24.849 Do we need to all say raise our hand and say we're okay 00:34:24.849 --> 00:34:26.519 with this right now or 00:34:27.679 --> 00:34:31.139 I think that's up to you how you want to do that. I mean, 00:34:31.139 --> 00:34:34.159 we're all making we're all making notes as we're talking 00:34:35.199 --> 00:34:40.000 But if you want to specify by each point what the board's 00:34:40.000 --> 00:34:43.000 consensus is that's definitely one way to go 00:34:45.920 --> 00:34:47.920 No, we need to 00:34:48.719 --> 00:34:51.949 Vote on that or not or we're just providing comments and 00:34:51.949 --> 00:34:55.280 feedback right now. It's it's really comments and feedback 00:34:55.559 --> 00:34:58.380 There's not action to be taken. So 00:34:59.679 --> 00:35:03.280 Yeah, just we're taking the direction as you're giving it 00:35:05.119 --> 00:35:07.000 John Baines 00:35:07.000 --> 00:35:11.320 Just a little clarification here on the 15 million. So with 00:35:11.320 --> 00:35:11.800 these particular 00:35:20.320 --> 00:35:23.909 Okay, one thing Jill you you said something that I want to 00:35:23.909 --> 00:35:27.920 clarify not that this would ever come up but just because 00:35:29.320 --> 00:35:32.800 Under the state statute that governs chapter 380s. There is 00:35:32.800 --> 00:35:35.599 literally no time limit on how long the incentive can be 00:35:35.599 --> 00:35:39.429 It could be a hundred years long. So 25 is just where some 00:35:39.429 --> 00:35:41.659 of our agreements have landed 00:35:42.599 --> 00:35:45.940 Because that was that was what was deemed necessary to make 00:35:45.940 --> 00:35:48.199 the deal work for both sides 00:35:48.559 --> 00:35:50.829 Thank you for that clarification. I appreciate that. You're 00:35:50.829 --> 00:35:50.920 welcome 00:35:51.400 --> 00:35:55.619 Okay, can we move on to the retail project bullet? Okay 00:35:56.460 --> 00:36:00.010 So we're proposing to exclude retail projects except those 00:36:00.010 --> 00:36:03.880 that address a gap or leakage in the Denton market 00:36:03.880 --> 00:36:08.420 So a gap means we don't have it and we want it. It's not 00:36:08.420 --> 00:36:08.719 here 00:36:08.719 --> 00:36:13.340 And so if you have a gap you have leakage of people going 00:36:13.340 --> 00:36:15.199 to where that retail is 00:36:15.719 --> 00:36:18.420 If it's not in Denton, they're going to another community 00:36:18.420 --> 00:36:19.760 to shop there 00:36:19.760 --> 00:36:24.159 and so we want to be able to close those gaps and 00:36:25.559 --> 00:36:28.440 Keep that leakage from happening in our market 00:36:28.960 --> 00:36:32.599 I have two examples of that. So 00:36:33.679 --> 00:36:37.130 Say Nebraska Furniture Mart wanted to open a second North 00:36:37.130 --> 00:36:38.000 Texas location 00:36:38.119 --> 00:36:41.090 Of course, we would want to talk to them about their 00:36:41.090 --> 00:36:44.900 project and that would be retail that would address a gap 00:36:45.360 --> 00:36:48.480 the example on the other side of that is 00:36:49.559 --> 00:36:53.679 Kroger how many Kroger's do we have three two and a half? 00:36:53.679 --> 00:36:54.960 How many are we about to have? 00:36:55.480 --> 00:36:59.719 We're gonna have we're gonna have another one and they came 00:36:59.719 --> 00:37:03.360 very aggressively wanting to be incentivized 00:37:04.480 --> 00:37:07.639 We have already Kroger's we don't need to incentivize 00:37:07.639 --> 00:37:09.079 another Kroger 00:37:09.760 --> 00:37:12.460 So that's the kind of thing that we want to we just want to 00:37:12.460 --> 00:37:13.679 head that off at the pass 00:37:14.199 --> 00:37:16.760 Because that that's not a constructive use of anybody's 00:37:16.760 --> 00:37:19.500 time and while we want to help them and support them and 00:37:19.500 --> 00:37:20.760 answer their questions 00:37:21.039 --> 00:37:23.400 We don't need to have a conversation about incentivizing 00:37:24.480 --> 00:37:27.429 Somebody to build another Kroger depends on the cheese 00:37:27.429 --> 00:37:27.960 selection 00:37:31.119 --> 00:37:33.880 Give us your cheese list and we can we can add that 00:37:37.079 --> 00:37:39.079 Keely has a question 00:37:40.800 --> 00:37:44.190 But just to address what we're talking about now so gap or 00:37:44.190 --> 00:37:45.199 leakage I assume 00:37:45.719 --> 00:37:49.420 Identifying those will set priorities and will that be this 00:37:49.420 --> 00:37:50.239 economic 00:37:51.000 --> 00:37:54.079 Department that does that or is that like a study that we? 00:37:56.039 --> 00:37:57.639 Well, we put an RFP up in the high 00:37:57.639 --> 00:38:00.719 I mean is that who pays for that if we want to if we want 00:38:00.719 --> 00:38:02.239 to get that information right now 00:38:02.239 --> 00:38:04.869 We have to get it ourselves at the staff level because we 00:38:04.869 --> 00:38:08.159 don't have I mean you can spend quite a bit of money to get 00:38:08.159 --> 00:38:11.559 A very sophisticated analysis of what leakage you have in 00:38:11.559 --> 00:38:12.559 your community 00:38:13.639 --> 00:38:17.110 But frankly, we don't have the budget to pay for those 00:38:17.110 --> 00:38:18.639 kinds of studies 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 00:38:23.559 --> 00:38:24.480 understand 00:38:25.039 --> 00:38:28.989 Basically where our leakage is so and so the next question 00:38:28.989 --> 00:38:31.699 is I have underlined didn't market 00:38:31.699 --> 00:38:35.039 What exactly when you say didn't market does that mean are 00:38:35.039 --> 00:38:37.760 we defining that by zip code by an area by drive time? 00:38:38.320 --> 00:38:40.440 I'm defining denton market as 00:38:41.360 --> 00:38:44.170 The areas in which we capture sales tax because that's 00:38:44.170 --> 00:38:47.840 really our key. Yeah, we should be city of Denton 00:38:49.119 --> 00:38:51.119 That I can rephrase that 00:38:53.679 --> 00:38:57.320 Yeah, but it's where we capture the sales tax 00:39:04.679 --> 00:39:07.909 Okay, did you have Keely did you have another question on 00:39:07.909 --> 00:39:09.739 the next point on the next point? Okay 00:39:10.480 --> 00:39:14.050 Okay, so let me let me finish with a couple of some bullets 00:39:14.050 --> 00:39:14.760 there. Um 00:39:15.840 --> 00:39:18.920 We are suggesting that the project must generate at least 00:39:18.920 --> 00:39:22.480 15 million dollars in annual taxable sales to be considered 00:39:22.480 --> 00:39:23.199 and we did some 00:39:23.320 --> 00:39:25.239 comps on that 00:39:25.239 --> 00:39:27.119 like what 00:39:27.119 --> 00:39:30.650 The kinds of sales that Academy is generating as well as 00:39:30.650 --> 00:39:33.480 looking at what some other cities policies 00:39:33.960 --> 00:39:37.420 specified as far as a minimum amount of annual sales to be 00:39:37.420 --> 00:39:41.039 generated and then we also proposed capping a 00:39:41.239 --> 00:39:44.760 sales tax rebate at 50% of sales tax receipts and 00:39:45.519 --> 00:39:47.519 again, it's because we're 00:39:48.880 --> 00:39:52.159 Comparing what other cities policies have we're looking at 00:39:53.159 --> 00:39:55.829 Cases that we have on the ground right now and what's 00:39:55.829 --> 00:39:58.409 reasonable and trying to kind of put forward some 00:39:58.409 --> 00:40:00.159 parameters around 00:40:01.760 --> 00:40:06.239 What what we're willing to enter into as a starting point 00:40:06.239 --> 00:40:08.940 But again, the flexibility would remain to do something 00:40:08.940 --> 00:40:10.920 different if the situation 00:40:19.159 --> 00:40:22.920 These sub bullets of the exclude retail projects the last 00:40:22.920 --> 00:40:23.719 two 00:40:25.519 --> 00:40:29.199 Yeah, it's just further detail about how we would structure 00:40:29.199 --> 00:40:31.159 it and if that's the case 00:40:31.280 --> 00:40:35.039 Do you need to reference a gap for leakage and they didn't 00:40:35.039 --> 00:40:37.519 market? I mean as long as they're hitting those two 00:40:37.519 --> 00:40:37.880 thresholds 00:40:38.800 --> 00:40:40.159 Do you care? 00:40:40.159 --> 00:40:44.340 Well, you know, I guess if we got mega giant Kroger and it 00:40:44.340 --> 00:40:47.840 was generating 20 million dollars in annual taxable sales 00:40:47.960 --> 00:40:50.679 We still wouldn't want to incentivize the fourth Kroger 00:40:51.679 --> 00:40:52.880 necessarily 00:40:52.880 --> 00:40:54.440 so I 00:40:54.440 --> 00:40:57.760 Would I think I think that this I? 00:40:58.679 --> 00:41:01.480 Mean my inclination is to leave that language 00:41:02.000 --> 00:41:05.800 In but again, this is an opportunity for y'all's feedback. 00:41:05.800 --> 00:41:09.219 So do you think it's redundant? Is that your I just don't 00:41:09.219 --> 00:41:10.039 know that it's necessary 00:41:11.000 --> 00:41:13.000 I'm sorry 00:41:17.360 --> 00:41:21.199 Both of those a gap and 15 million dollars in annual sales 00:41:29.159 --> 00:41:30.920 So 00:41:30.920 --> 00:41:34.179 We would consider retail projects that address the gap or 00:41:34.179 --> 00:41:36.599 leakage. So it's the exclude word that 00:41:37.920 --> 00:41:39.730 Just I was thinking as a matter of fact instead of exclude 00:41:39.730 --> 00:41:42.559 maybe target retail projects that blah blah blah 00:41:42.559 --> 00:41:45.480 Just so that because when the public is gonna read this and 00:41:45.480 --> 00:41:46.800 think about moving here 00:41:46.800 --> 00:41:49.800 I just same thing with kind of the 10-year we just even 00:41:49.800 --> 00:41:51.360 though they're guidelines 00:41:51.360 --> 00:41:51.500 We don't want them to not approach us. Okay, you're all 00:41:51.500 --> 00:41:55.280 right 00:41:57.920 --> 00:42:01.320 Yeah, so my thought is along those same lines they exclude 00:42:01.320 --> 00:42:04.360 jumps out at me because it seems a little restrictive and 00:42:05.599 --> 00:42:11.800 Gap or leakage is a little ambiguous because it's 00:42:14.400 --> 00:42:17.980 Who ultimately decides I mean I understand your department 00:42:17.980 --> 00:42:18.840 makes a recommendation 00:42:18.840 --> 00:42:22.820 But a gap or leakage to you may not be to me, you know, so 00:42:22.820 --> 00:42:24.880 I think if there is some I 00:42:26.880 --> 00:42:29.159 Think it I think it's even I mean 00:42:29.719 --> 00:42:31.800 Unfortunately, it's a little ambiguous. I'd go way of 00:42:31.800 --> 00:42:34.880 ambiguous because I just don't think there's a way to 00:42:34.880 --> 00:42:36.239 detail it, you know 00:42:37.039 --> 00:42:40.039 correctly, so if I if I say, you know 00:42:41.719 --> 00:42:46.159 Those that you know retail projects will be considered on a 00:42:47.039 --> 00:42:50.519 You know application basis or apply, you know that sort of 00:42:50.519 --> 00:42:51.760 thing with those other two 00:42:53.239 --> 00:42:56.260 Sub points that it needs to be this is a suggested 00:42:56.260 --> 00:42:58.320 threshold 50% 00:42:58.320 --> 00:43:01.159 you know, but I think because I think you can get into 00:43:03.159 --> 00:43:04.849 Understanding that the purpose and trying to get their 00:43:04.849 --> 00:43:08.269 rightwards guidelines and understand that and fold that 00:43:08.269 --> 00:43:10.280 into my thinking but it's just 00:43:10.719 --> 00:43:12.719 It's difficult. I 00:43:12.880 --> 00:43:15.340 Take the perspective of people that are gonna be anti 00:43:15.340 --> 00:43:16.880 anything we do right? 00:43:16.880 --> 00:43:19.079 So if I'm on council and I got someone it's like hey, I don 00:43:19.079 --> 00:43:20.000 't want to do any of it 00:43:21.280 --> 00:43:23.719 Then I don't know that 00:43:24.519 --> 00:43:27.090 The thresholds are gonna help right? So then you kind of 00:43:27.090 --> 00:43:30.449 move to the to the center of that discussion those that may 00:43:30.449 --> 00:43:30.679 be 00:43:31.599 --> 00:43:35.199 Malibu, okay. Well, what would let's have that conversation 00:43:35.199 --> 00:43:36.460 , you know, so that sort of thing 00:43:36.460 --> 00:43:38.500 So I throw out the extremes look at the middle and I don't 00:43:38.500 --> 00:43:39.500 know that that language 00:43:40.760 --> 00:43:42.760 helps me 00:43:43.039 --> 00:43:46.639 Communicate to those that are asking asking questions. Okay 00:43:46.639 --> 00:43:47.360 , just my thought 00:43:47.360 --> 00:43:50.320 so the gap or leakage could mean we don't have a 00:43:50.960 --> 00:43:53.559 business in our city that sells that 00:43:54.239 --> 00:43:56.239 product and everybody's going to 00:43:56.800 --> 00:43:59.199 Dallas or whatever whatever that whatever that would be 00:44:00.599 --> 00:44:04.590 And probably a good example of how this comes into play at 00:44:04.590 --> 00:44:08.280 least on the retail side is when razor ranch came and there 00:44:08.280 --> 00:44:08.639 were talks 00:44:08.639 --> 00:44:11.599 of you know Dillard's moving well, we don't want to 00:44:12.440 --> 00:44:15.429 Incent we the ED board at the time the city didn't want to 00:44:15.429 --> 00:44:16.519 incent them to 00:44:17.199 --> 00:44:20.400 Move Dillard's across town because they're already here. 00:44:20.400 --> 00:44:23.039 And so we actually excluded any existing stores 00:44:23.039 --> 00:44:26.500 they so that we exclude that I don't even know where that D 00:44:26.500 --> 00:44:28.199 illard's whole thing is but 00:44:28.920 --> 00:44:31.880 If Dillard's I know where it is now, but where they were 00:44:31.880 --> 00:44:33.280 moving to razor ranch or not 00:44:33.280 --> 00:44:35.079 There's been a lot of back and forth 00:44:35.079 --> 00:44:36.239 if 00:44:36.239 --> 00:44:38.880 They did move as an example 00:44:38.880 --> 00:44:41.639 We they were not going to get any incentive for the sales 00:44:41.639 --> 00:44:44.159 on that store because we didn't think that's fair 00:44:44.159 --> 00:44:47.760 So this to me is a similar thing. We're full of with retail 00:44:48.280 --> 00:44:52.010 If something comes that we we don't have or missing a 00:44:52.010 --> 00:44:53.079 market and everybody's driving 00:44:53.880 --> 00:44:56.139 To somewhere else to get that then we've got an out but it 00:44:56.139 --> 00:44:57.960 's got to be a really big project 00:44:58.599 --> 00:45:00.599 Then we're limiting that so 00:45:13.000 --> 00:45:15.650 Basically, you've got two markets you're at yeah, you're 00:45:15.650 --> 00:45:15.960 adding 00:45:16.719 --> 00:45:19.849 You're not cannibalizing one to get the other one. So would 00:45:19.849 --> 00:45:21.480 you incentivize that one? 00:45:23.480 --> 00:45:25.480 Like that's a 00:45:26.440 --> 00:45:29.400 Board question that comes here we talk about it 00:45:31.559 --> 00:45:33.280 Keeley 00:45:33.280 --> 00:45:34.880 so I 00:45:34.880 --> 00:45:39.420 Think changing the exclude to target is is okay is good. I 00:45:39.420 --> 00:45:41.039 'm okay with gapper leakage 00:45:41.039 --> 00:45:43.519 I mean as a city council person and improving incentives 00:45:43.519 --> 00:45:47.119 that is one thing if we're missing I'm all for you know, 00:45:47.119 --> 00:45:48.599 approving the incentive and I think 00:45:49.400 --> 00:45:51.909 Those are market terms. Those are terms that people 00:45:51.909 --> 00:45:54.599 understand that are in the retail business 00:45:55.440 --> 00:45:59.539 So I don't have an issue with those and we can as I was 00:45:59.539 --> 00:46:03.159 talking earlier about expanding our definitions section 00:46:03.280 --> 00:46:07.719 we could we could find a working definition of gap and 00:46:08.039 --> 00:46:11.179 leakage and include those in the definition section if that 00:46:11.179 --> 00:46:14.880 would help address the issue that some people have and 00:46:15.400 --> 00:46:19.820 So on the must generate 15 million. Is that a projected 00:46:19.820 --> 00:46:22.039 amount over a certain time? 00:46:22.039 --> 00:46:24.760 I mean and who does that projection? I just want to clarify 00:46:24.760 --> 00:46:25.199 on 00:46:25.840 --> 00:46:30.000 That's something that we would do the projection with my 00:46:30.000 --> 00:46:33.280 office would do the projection with in conjunction with the 00:46:33.840 --> 00:46:36.079 applicant themselves, I mean they would have to 00:46:37.239 --> 00:46:40.719 They would have to provide us documentation that comparable 00:46:40.719 --> 00:46:43.860 stores would produce at or over that amount 00:46:43.860 --> 00:46:46.940 And then they would be held to that in their agreement as a 00:46:46.940 --> 00:46:48.239 threshold 00:46:51.719 --> 00:46:54.840 When they ask for rebate they ask for an amount based on 00:46:54.840 --> 00:46:57.730 the projections and so either ten years without amount 00:46:57.730 --> 00:46:58.599 comes and if they 00:46:58.880 --> 00:47:01.360 Over project and don't get there then they don't get the 00:47:01.360 --> 00:47:03.159 money if the time comes up 00:47:03.159 --> 00:47:07.119 So they have to be realistic when they're doing that right? 00:47:08.519 --> 00:47:11.469 If they do they won't get it right because we do we do we 00:47:11.469 --> 00:47:13.559 have the mechanism for third-party verification 00:47:14.239 --> 00:47:17.900 in the case of sales tax and in the case of ad valorem 00:47:17.900 --> 00:47:18.880 taxes because 00:47:19.159 --> 00:47:21.940 The central appraisal district handles ad valorem taxes and 00:47:21.940 --> 00:47:25.050 the comptroller's office provides information about sales 00:47:25.050 --> 00:47:25.260 tax 00:47:25.260 --> 00:47:27.260 So it's a very straightforward 00:47:27.480 --> 00:47:29.039 verification mechanism 00:47:29.039 --> 00:47:31.159 That we have in these cases 00:47:32.000 --> 00:47:35.019 My next question is about the sales tax rebates right now 00:47:35.019 --> 00:47:37.559 I mean you said it will be capped is there not they're not 00:47:37.559 --> 00:47:40.400 a cap right now. It's it's agreement by agreement 00:47:41.760 --> 00:47:44.440 It has been the way that has been approached 00:47:49.920 --> 00:47:54.840 I just I never worked retail so I don't recognize gap and 00:47:54.840 --> 00:47:57.320 leak is so I would like those definitions 00:47:57.760 --> 00:47:59.760 and then also I think 00:48:01.519 --> 00:48:03.519 Really I struggle with I mean 00:48:04.079 --> 00:48:06.079 Retail right I mean everything 00:48:06.760 --> 00:48:08.800 Technically could fall under retail 00:48:08.800 --> 00:48:11.880 I mean if you if you word it right or if you it's just no 00:48:11.880 --> 00:48:12.800 no different than that 00:48:12.800 --> 00:48:15.639 I look forward I look back on the conversation we had about 00:48:16.239 --> 00:48:18.239 tech businesses tech enabled 00:48:19.039 --> 00:48:22.539 There's not much that won't fit under that category now and 00:48:22.539 --> 00:48:23.760 so for me again 00:48:24.559 --> 00:48:29.000 If we're going to have broad terms, which I I could be 00:48:29.000 --> 00:48:31.239 wrong, but I see that as a broad term retail 00:48:31.239 --> 00:48:34.320 I just I'm ignorant to the definition and if someone were 00:48:34.320 --> 00:48:36.960 to come to me and say this business or that 00:48:37.880 --> 00:48:41.280 And it and it's close. I don't know a defining line to say 00:48:41.280 --> 00:48:42.679 no that is not retail 00:48:42.800 --> 00:48:45.780 Yes, that is retail and so if there's a clear line that I'm 00:48:45.780 --> 00:48:48.199 missing I'd love you to articulate that to me 00:48:48.199 --> 00:48:50.519 But if there if those are blurred lines 00:48:50.519 --> 00:48:54.239 I don't know that a regulation that straddles the line is 00:48:54.239 --> 00:48:57.920 or is left up interpretation of just 00:48:58.239 --> 00:49:01.579 That person's experience is great and that could just be an 00:49:01.579 --> 00:49:02.760 ignorance on my part 00:49:02.760 --> 00:49:05.710 But I just look at that conversation we had about people 00:49:05.710 --> 00:49:09.840 feeling misled about technology tech enabled and trying to 00:49:10.760 --> 00:49:13.369 You know we need to pin it down and say here's the clear 00:49:13.369 --> 00:49:13.639 line 00:49:13.639 --> 00:49:17.769 And if you cross it then you're out and if you decide you 00:49:17.769 --> 00:49:21.000 're in so I'm hearing that you would be more comfortable if 00:49:21.000 --> 00:49:21.159 we 00:49:21.239 --> 00:49:24.880 Included a definition of what what our definition of retail 00:49:24.880 --> 00:49:25.039 is 00:49:25.880 --> 00:49:29.639 Versus a service well yes, I'd like a definition and an 00:49:29.639 --> 00:49:32.400 example of what's out you know because I think that's where 00:49:32.400 --> 00:49:32.920 we get in trouble 00:49:32.920 --> 00:49:35.449 It's like okay. Why read this definition again, and I go to 00:49:35.449 --> 00:49:38.000 this all the time if we can we had a 00:49:38.719 --> 00:49:42.059 National argument about the definition of is is so I don't 00:49:42.059 --> 00:49:45.480 you know there's no there's no level of 00:49:45.840 --> 00:49:49.480 wording that think that is will be exhaustive enough for 00:49:49.480 --> 00:49:52.119 some right so but if there's an example of 00:49:52.519 --> 00:49:55.719 Because I'll give you a great example of leakage, and that 00:49:55.719 --> 00:49:59.239 's main event that that that type business 00:49:59.239 --> 00:50:02.800 And I consider that retail and I know we had that in the 00:50:02.800 --> 00:50:04.039 works in Andy B's 00:50:04.039 --> 00:50:05.960 But assuming that's not in the works 00:50:05.960 --> 00:50:10.289 I would give half of everything to get that here because we 00:50:10.289 --> 00:50:13.280 're losing that money every day 00:50:13.280 --> 00:50:17.400 You know and so I don't know if anyone else would agree 00:50:17.400 --> 00:50:20.679 that an entertainment complex like that is 00:50:21.360 --> 00:50:24.559 Retail you know, but I see it as that you know so that's 00:50:24.559 --> 00:50:27.019 where kind of it kind of gets to where we 00:50:27.320 --> 00:50:30.659 There's examples of what's in what's out by suggestion 00:50:30.659 --> 00:50:33.800 obviously everything is flexible. Okay? Thank you 00:50:33.800 --> 00:50:36.679 well, we'll we'll take that under consideration and 00:50:37.280 --> 00:50:39.800 See what we can do to get closer to a place where you're 00:50:39.800 --> 00:50:41.159 comfortable with it 00:50:45.199 --> 00:50:47.199 Alright 00:50:47.199 --> 00:50:49.199 Next bullet point 00:50:50.320 --> 00:50:54.719 Do we want to do this bullet point and then yes, mr.. Chair 00:50:54.719 --> 00:50:56.420 break for lunch, okay? 00:50:57.079 --> 00:51:00.519 Okay, so our final proposal 00:51:01.840 --> 00:51:04.150 Under this slide for content changes is to remove the 00:51:04.150 --> 00:51:07.889 existing capital investment based framework and the 00:51:07.889 --> 00:51:09.659 additional factors 00:51:11.079 --> 00:51:15.000 While at the same time retaining the five million dollars 00:51:15.000 --> 00:51:17.340 minimum value of investment 00:51:17.920 --> 00:51:19.920 in business personal property 00:51:20.719 --> 00:51:23.340 Or or real property. I'm sorry not real property, but 00:51:23.340 --> 00:51:26.639 structures to be considered for a tax incentive and 00:51:27.760 --> 00:51:29.760 the reasoning behind that 00:51:30.760 --> 00:51:34.000 Is there are several reasons behind that the first one 00:51:34.000 --> 00:51:35.199 being that? 00:51:36.440 --> 00:51:38.940 removing the existing framework for length and percentage 00:51:38.940 --> 00:51:42.039 of the incentive allows for more flexibility to 00:51:42.480 --> 00:51:45.940 Determine a potential incentive based on the projects 00:51:45.940 --> 00:51:48.159 actual merits and how it fares 00:51:48.440 --> 00:51:51.400 under our total impact cost benefit analysis 00:51:52.320 --> 00:51:55.550 There's been some concern expressed that the existing 00:51:55.550 --> 00:51:57.960 framework and additional factors 00:51:58.599 --> 00:52:02.329 lead people to believe or businesses to believe that an 00:52:02.329 --> 00:52:03.519 applicant is 00:52:04.079 --> 00:52:07.420 Entitled to an incentive of a certain length or certain 00:52:07.420 --> 00:52:09.969 percentage if they make a certain level of capital 00:52:09.969 --> 00:52:10.480 investment 00:52:12.079 --> 00:52:13.480 so 00:52:13.480 --> 00:52:17.320 We think that this move would allow us to really look at 00:52:17.320 --> 00:52:20.780 projects based on their own merits instead of 00:52:21.239 --> 00:52:25.030 Just kind of saying oh well if you make this type of 00:52:25.030 --> 00:52:28.039 investment the chart says you get this 00:52:29.800 --> 00:52:33.119 And and I do think that we have run into run into 00:52:33.800 --> 00:52:37.250 People who have come to us and said well, I'm doing this 00:52:37.250 --> 00:52:39.559 type of project. It's I'm gonna invest this much money 00:52:39.559 --> 00:52:43.719 So I'll be getting I'll be getting my incentive at X level 00:52:44.719 --> 00:52:47.449 So I think it sets up some expectations that are not 00:52:47.449 --> 00:52:49.760 necessarily reasonable in all cases 00:52:50.800 --> 00:52:52.920 So please discuss 00:52:54.119 --> 00:52:57.760 Yeah, I just want to make and thought I would show page 3 00:52:57.760 --> 00:52:59.440 of 18. So this is the framework 00:52:59.440 --> 00:53:02.440 We're discussing correct and are these the factors those 00:53:02.440 --> 00:53:03.860 are the recommending right? 00:53:03.860 --> 00:53:09.260 So what Jill has is additional factors in a big list there 00:53:09.260 --> 00:53:12.440 And make it building things like yes 00:53:12.440 --> 00:53:15.449 And those are things that have sort of they've evolved and 00:53:15.449 --> 00:53:18.159 been added over time to address 00:53:18.639 --> 00:53:21.940 particular needs or priorities and the list has become 00:53:22.699 --> 00:53:26.119 extensive the other thing with those additional factors is 00:53:26.960 --> 00:53:29.920 applicants can check them and use them as 00:53:30.760 --> 00:53:33.380 You know use them to bolster their argument that their 00:53:33.380 --> 00:53:35.760 percentage of incentive should be higher 00:53:36.440 --> 00:53:37.760 however 00:53:37.760 --> 00:53:40.539 We have not in the past 00:53:41.280 --> 00:53:44.269 Had a mechanism to hold them to actually doing any of those 00:53:44.269 --> 00:53:44.840 things 00:53:46.280 --> 00:53:49.980 Some of that can be addressed in contracts some of is very 00:53:49.980 --> 00:53:51.199 hard to verify 00:53:53.119 --> 00:53:55.969 So it's an interesting situation that's that's created 00:53:55.969 --> 00:53:59.010 because those things those additional factors are 00:53:59.010 --> 00:53:59.679 beneficial 00:53:59.679 --> 00:54:03.130 I mean, it's it's making a commitment to you know support 00:54:03.130 --> 00:54:06.239 local nonprofits or didn't schools or public art 00:54:06.239 --> 00:54:08.940 I mean, I don't think anyone would argue that those are not 00:54:08.940 --> 00:54:13.199 necessarily valid or good intentions, but the question is 00:54:13.920 --> 00:54:17.130 How do we hold the company to actually fulfilling what they 00:54:17.130 --> 00:54:20.239 say they're gonna do and how do we verify it? 00:54:20.480 --> 00:54:24.519 If we try to hold them to it the community involvement was 00:54:25.320 --> 00:54:27.320 one that I 00:54:27.320 --> 00:54:29.320 lobbied for many years ago 00:54:30.000 --> 00:54:33.340 And really I've said this several times Peter built is my 00:54:33.340 --> 00:54:36.579 willingness to ask for anybody that comes here and asked 00:54:36.579 --> 00:54:37.440 for an incentive 00:54:37.440 --> 00:54:40.039 Because of how what they do for the community 00:54:40.559 --> 00:54:44.840 We have some examples of companies that received incentives 00:54:44.840 --> 00:54:47.400 and all the numbers work out great and they get here 00:54:47.400 --> 00:54:49.750 And then they don't return phone calls don't do anything 00:54:49.750 --> 00:54:51.579 that I don't join the chamber. They're not involved in 00:54:51.579 --> 00:54:51.840 anything 00:54:52.519 --> 00:54:55.550 It's nice to have the numbers but part of what makes us a 00:54:55.550 --> 00:54:57.000 great place to live is 00:54:57.639 --> 00:55:00.039 Having all the people out doing all the things that we're 00:55:00.039 --> 00:55:00.719 all out doing 00:55:02.599 --> 00:55:06.880 So, you know with that being said how do you measure that 00:55:08.599 --> 00:55:11.750 How much money you gave to United Way how many people were 00:55:11.750 --> 00:55:12.679 involved in the 00:55:13.159 --> 00:55:16.679 5k runs or whatever the deal is so I can see where that's 00:55:16.679 --> 00:55:18.119 hard to keep up with 00:55:19.639 --> 00:55:21.639 And if so, what's the point right? 00:55:24.400 --> 00:55:26.400 It could just be a report that 00:55:28.440 --> 00:55:30.440 That we have to give us 00:55:31.360 --> 00:55:34.530 It would be hard and I look at it as a what have you what 00:55:34.530 --> 00:55:36.000 are you doing? 00:55:36.000 --> 00:55:38.329 And what can we expect there was somebody that flat-out 00:55:38.329 --> 00:55:39.880 told me because I asked a question 00:55:39.880 --> 00:55:41.849 We're gonna do United Way campaigns and they don't do 00:55:41.849 --> 00:55:42.280 anything 00:55:46.440 --> 00:55:50.840 So if somebody is not doing it or if they're not 00:55:51.440 --> 00:55:53.469 Doing enough. How do you take the incentive away or if they 00:55:53.469 --> 00:55:56.119 're not doing that? I mean, I think that's the hard part 00:55:56.199 --> 00:55:59.409 Yes, they may report that we did this this and this but was 00:55:59.409 --> 00:56:00.119 that enough? 00:56:01.199 --> 00:56:03.840 Or no, it's just subjective. It's a nice idea 00:56:05.480 --> 00:56:08.300 Basis for the decision if there's no 00:56:10.239 --> 00:56:12.960 Follow through right or because they do that's all they do 00:56:12.960 --> 00:56:15.519 do they qualify for X percent 00:56:17.400 --> 00:56:20.280 John Baines, are we discussing additional factors? Is that 00:56:20.280 --> 00:56:21.599 what we yes. Yes, sir. All right 00:56:23.199 --> 00:56:26.409 So with that being the case do we need to add some ampl 00:56:26.409 --> 00:56:27.599 ification or some 00:56:28.239 --> 00:56:30.599 You know some more texture to that 00:56:31.239 --> 00:56:33.599 to that phrase so people are 00:56:34.239 --> 00:56:37.750 Well, we're talking about removing all of them removing it. 00:56:37.750 --> 00:56:37.920 Yeah 00:56:38.920 --> 00:56:43.800 right, and so in an application there is a way for people 00:56:43.800 --> 00:56:44.079 to 00:56:45.199 --> 00:56:46.750 If they feel like they want to include that kind of 00:56:46.750 --> 00:56:50.239 information about their community involvement, that's that 00:56:50.239 --> 00:56:51.719 's great. And you know, we can 00:56:52.320 --> 00:56:55.840 We can say this is a community that values 00:56:56.880 --> 00:56:58.360 involvement in 00:56:58.360 --> 00:57:04.250 X and Y and support of X and Y and wants to see companies 00:57:04.250 --> 00:57:05.639 undertake green initiatives 00:57:05.639 --> 00:57:08.440 So if you would like to add any of that information to your 00:57:08.440 --> 00:57:11.599 application, that's good color commentary to have 00:57:12.199 --> 00:57:14.719 But that's not necessarily something we would 00:57:15.800 --> 00:57:18.750 You get five additional percentage points because you were 00:57:18.750 --> 00:57:19.880 going to do this 00:57:22.599 --> 00:57:25.340 Jill Jester right now there is a number tied to it if you 00:57:25.340 --> 00:57:25.920 meet 00:57:27.000 --> 00:57:30.170 For each of these not to exceed I think I think something 00:57:30.170 --> 00:57:32.000 like you can pick three 00:57:32.000 --> 00:57:35.429 Then you get an additional or they can consider granting an 00:57:35.429 --> 00:57:37.579 additional five percent abatement 00:57:37.639 --> 00:57:40.809 so I think as far as I think it's possible to include some 00:57:40.809 --> 00:57:42.800 of these and say these things are 00:57:43.480 --> 00:57:45.000 What make you attractive to us? 00:57:45.000 --> 00:57:49.079 But as far as tagging elements that you can check off a box 00:57:49.079 --> 00:57:52.639 and expect to check off these numbers in return 00:57:52.760 --> 00:57:55.199 If we have no way to confirm 00:57:55.960 --> 00:58:00.119 That then they should not get a specific monetary amount 00:58:00.119 --> 00:58:03.400 increase tied to that element 00:58:03.400 --> 00:58:06.230 I think is where we're going. However, I think miss Simmons 00:58:06.230 --> 00:58:09.550 here is saying but these are things that we are wanting to 00:58:09.550 --> 00:58:11.099 attract and would give 00:58:11.440 --> 00:58:14.389 special attention to because they're meeting some of these 00:58:14.389 --> 00:58:15.099 factors, so 00:58:16.099 --> 00:58:17.300 Is there a way to do both? 00:58:17.300 --> 00:58:20.000 And as I said, you know we we allow 00:58:20.840 --> 00:58:23.320 space and when we discuss 00:58:24.360 --> 00:58:27.340 Filling out incentive applications with companies. That's 00:58:27.340 --> 00:58:29.760 something that I know I personally communicate 00:58:30.320 --> 00:58:33.369 Look, this is the kind of community we are and if you are 00:58:33.369 --> 00:58:36.639 the kind of company that aligns with these things 00:58:36.639 --> 00:58:39.699 I encourage you to mention it in the 00:58:40.480 --> 00:58:42.599 extra section of your application 00:58:44.320 --> 00:58:49.079 Just for our consideration but not tied to a guarantee of 00:58:49.079 --> 00:58:50.639 any additional percentage 00:58:52.000 --> 00:58:53.760 So I just 00:58:53.760 --> 00:58:56.940 Discovered that this is where and I don't know correct me 00:58:56.940 --> 00:58:59.519 if I'm wrong. Is this the only place where percentage? 00:58:59.920 --> 00:59:03.599 For using renewable energy or anything like that is in the 00:59:03.599 --> 00:59:05.760 contract and that is awesome 00:59:05.760 --> 00:59:08.159 That's what you're projecting you want to take out as well. 00:59:08.159 --> 00:59:09.960 It's one of the additional factors 00:59:10.599 --> 00:59:13.199 so that in our incentive policy a 00:59:13.960 --> 00:59:16.800 business who comes in and does all these things wouldn't 00:59:17.679 --> 00:59:19.840 going forward be considered for 00:59:21.840 --> 00:59:23.730 It wouldn't be applied to their criteria to get the 00:59:23.730 --> 00:59:27.739 incentive is that it wouldn't be directly tied to an 00:59:27.739 --> 00:59:28.800 additional 00:59:29.199 --> 00:59:32.400 Percentage or an increased percentage of an incentive 00:59:33.519 --> 00:59:35.840 It could still be taken under consideration 00:59:37.679 --> 00:59:41.519 But you know renewables are one of those few additional 00:59:41.519 --> 00:59:43.079 factors that would be 00:59:44.679 --> 00:59:49.480 Easier than others to apply an actual measurable parameter 00:59:49.480 --> 00:59:50.360 to right 00:59:50.360 --> 00:59:53.489 You will install X number of solar panels on your building 00:59:53.489 --> 00:59:56.239 and you either do it or you don't or you know 00:59:56.239 --> 00:59:58.239 you will participate in 00:59:58.840 --> 01:00:02.679 DME's green sense program. I'm just I know that's really at 01:00:02.679 --> 01:00:04.039 the residential level 01:00:04.039 --> 01:00:07.489 But you know and that could be verified but there are so 01:00:07.489 --> 01:00:10.960 many other things on that list that can't be verified 01:00:11.199 --> 01:00:14.119 Well, I would like to keep the conversation open for those 01:00:14.119 --> 01:00:18.000 because they can be measured and we can go back and see if 01:00:20.159 --> 01:00:23.500 Because those are certain things that companies do and I 01:00:23.500 --> 01:00:25.360 would like to make sure that 01:00:25.960 --> 01:00:28.829 Those are the ones that we're attracting to our community. 01:00:28.829 --> 01:00:31.119 So right now if you look down that list, it's 01:00:31.639 --> 01:00:34.059 And that's what's on the application. You can check I'm 01:00:34.059 --> 01:00:36.679 doing these three things and that automatically gives you 01:00:37.519 --> 01:00:40.769 Percentage you get 15% tax rebate because I checked three 01:00:40.769 --> 01:00:41.880 things that say 5% 01:00:43.039 --> 01:00:47.280 And so not that these things still aren't important to us. 01:00:47.280 --> 01:00:48.519 That's why they're in there 01:00:48.639 --> 01:00:50.840 But we're just you're saying we don't want to tie them to 01:00:50.840 --> 01:00:53.510 it because you do this it could be that you're a renewable 01:00:53.510 --> 01:00:53.800 energy 01:00:54.679 --> 01:00:57.510 Company and that's that you're doing that and we can still 01:00:57.510 --> 01:00:58.460 give you a big thing 01:00:58.460 --> 01:01:01.280 I'd like to figure out a way to keep these as part of 01:01:01.960 --> 01:01:04.159 the conversation other than staff telling you here's what 01:01:04.159 --> 01:01:06.880 we think it is but have it involved in the application or 01:01:07.199 --> 01:01:09.199 Here's some guidelines for things that 01:01:10.320 --> 01:01:13.019 That will help your application but not tie the percentage 01:01:13.019 --> 01:01:14.280 directly. Yeah 01:01:14.280 --> 01:01:18.550 and I think that that could be a good middle ground and we 01:01:18.550 --> 01:01:19.760 actually have 01:01:20.880 --> 01:01:23.340 Internally had some discussions about how we could condense 01:01:23.340 --> 01:01:26.769 that list a little bit without you know, kind of losing the 01:01:26.769 --> 01:01:27.579 the general 01:01:28.280 --> 01:01:31.210 Idea that we want to encourage green energy community 01:01:31.210 --> 01:01:33.679 involvement, etc, etc. So 01:01:34.239 --> 01:01:36.239 Maybe it's a condensed list 01:01:36.920 --> 01:01:39.559 You can check the boxes then we expect a little bit of an 01:01:39.559 --> 01:01:43.360 explanation, but it's not tied directly to a percentage 01:01:43.360 --> 01:01:43.800 increase 01:01:57.519 --> 01:02:00.000 The application is part of their narrative 01:02:02.920 --> 01:02:04.920 John 01:02:05.639 --> 01:02:09.369 In keeping the conversation going let's say you take all of 01:02:09.369 --> 01:02:10.400 these items and 01:02:11.559 --> 01:02:14.019 The companies that come forth and say hey, we want to do 01:02:14.019 --> 01:02:15.440 some of these things 01:02:16.039 --> 01:02:21.000 Can we not ask them to tell us how they're going to? 01:02:21.960 --> 01:02:24.440 to monitor these and provide us with 01:02:26.920 --> 01:02:28.920 Instances of their 01:02:29.639 --> 01:02:30.840 Performance 01:02:30.840 --> 01:02:32.840 So rather than us being the police 01:02:33.360 --> 01:02:36.130 Let them police themselves and say this is what we're gonna 01:02:36.130 --> 01:02:38.679 do and then we hold them to what they say they're gonna do 01:02:40.000 --> 01:02:43.000 I take your point it is 01:02:44.159 --> 01:02:46.460 And we can try to do that 01:02:47.119 --> 01:02:48.880 but again, it's 01:02:48.880 --> 01:02:51.599 We need to have something that's verifiable by a third 01:02:51.599 --> 01:02:51.960 party 01:02:51.960 --> 01:02:54.989 that's the ideal standard for any kind of threshold in a 01:02:54.989 --> 01:02:55.800 contract and 01:02:56.400 --> 01:02:58.989 We want to believe that everybody would be honest about 01:02:58.989 --> 01:03:02.760 what they're doing and not inflate their participation 01:03:02.880 --> 01:03:04.880 Everyone's honest other not right 01:03:06.559 --> 01:03:08.559 You live in a really nice world 01:03:12.159 --> 01:03:14.159 I 01:03:14.199 --> 01:03:16.679 Understand what you're saying, but you know, unfortunately 01:03:16.679 --> 01:03:21.260 in the cold hard world of contracts and you know having to 01:03:21.760 --> 01:03:24.940 Having to agree on how something is verified independently. 01:03:24.940 --> 01:03:28.960 That's a little bit difficult and we do have 01:03:30.880 --> 01:03:34.519 We we do have verification forms with some of our most 01:03:34.519 --> 01:03:36.920 recent contracts that people have to fill out 01:03:37.239 --> 01:03:39.760 But those are things that we can then turn around and go to 01:03:39.760 --> 01:03:42.400 a third party and verify 01:03:42.400 --> 01:03:44.670 But they do have to sign it these certificates of 01:03:44.670 --> 01:03:45.280 compliance 01:03:45.840 --> 01:03:48.880 But we still want to be able to verify it independently 01:03:48.880 --> 01:03:50.360 possible. We've had people 01:03:51.760 --> 01:03:54.599 Check the box for community involvement. They want a 5% 01:03:54.599 --> 01:03:58.000 part of that incentive and they have an annual bike rally 01:03:59.159 --> 01:04:01.789 They have a what an annual bike rally is their community 01:04:01.789 --> 01:04:03.719 involvement, which is nice 01:04:04.239 --> 01:04:06.440 But compared to a lot of the people in this room and things 01:04:06.440 --> 01:04:09.679 that you're doing in the community is then old water 01:04:14.440 --> 01:04:16.440 Your land 01:04:16.639 --> 01:04:18.760 couple of other things here that I think really important 01:04:18.760 --> 01:04:20.199 to is the 01:04:21.199 --> 01:04:24.539 Statement where they would hire Denton residents and their 01:04:24.539 --> 01:04:27.639 jobs and hire local contractors and subcontractors 01:04:29.079 --> 01:04:31.079 That's important 01:04:33.199 --> 01:04:36.599 My opinion is I don't want to remove these from the process 01:04:37.320 --> 01:04:40.440 Maybe we don't tie the 5% of doing that stuff and how do we 01:04:40.440 --> 01:04:42.599 mean we can verify if they hired somebody or not 01:04:42.599 --> 01:04:45.469 But I think it needs to be part of the process. Here's what 01:04:45.469 --> 01:04:47.639 we hold as important to our community 01:04:48.159 --> 01:04:51.039 If you want an incentive the more of these things that you 01:04:51.039 --> 01:04:53.679 're doing and you can put in your application to prove to us 01:04:53.679 --> 01:04:53.840 that 01:04:53.840 --> 01:04:56.239 You're doing and plan to do and how you're gonna do it the 01:04:56.239 --> 01:04:58.199 better your chance of getting incentive is 01:04:58.199 --> 01:05:00.199 Maybe just special emphasis on 01:05:06.639 --> 01:05:09.000 Anything else on this bullet point 01:05:10.519 --> 01:05:14.039 All right, we're gonna take a short break and 01:05:15.760 --> 01:05:17.760 Reconvene here in a few minutes 01:05:18.280 --> 01:05:20.280 so 01:05:29.480 --> 01:05:30.409 Conversation to go over proposed content changes and we'll 01:05:30.409 --> 01:05:35.199 let Caroline pick it back up 01:05:35.559 --> 01:05:38.840 Okay, I hope everybody has been fortified by lunch 01:05:39.320 --> 01:05:42.269 Please feel free if you need to get drink refills or cake 01:05:42.269 --> 01:05:43.679 just help yourselves 01:05:45.000 --> 01:05:49.679 We are gonna move into a discussion about the addition of 01:05:49.679 --> 01:05:51.159 minimum thresholds 01:05:51.960 --> 01:05:54.119 for valuation to our 01:05:54.719 --> 01:05:56.719 incentive policy 01:05:56.840 --> 01:06:00.800 So minimum thresholds are intended to encourage submission 01:06:00.800 --> 01:06:02.119 of accurate information 01:06:02.800 --> 01:06:05.719 about investment and job creation data in the incentive 01:06:05.719 --> 01:06:08.099 applications because those 01:06:08.519 --> 01:06:11.340 Applications and the information they contain they serve as 01:06:11.340 --> 01:06:13.079 the basis for the threshold 01:06:13.079 --> 01:06:16.119 So we're asking the company to give us their best 01:06:16.119 --> 01:06:18.969 projections about what their investment and job creation 01:06:18.969 --> 01:06:21.079 numbers are gonna be and then we're going 01:06:21.079 --> 01:06:24.519 To use that information that they provide to establish 01:06:25.079 --> 01:06:27.079 minimum thresholds in the agreement 01:06:27.679 --> 01:06:29.679 for new development projects 01:06:30.599 --> 01:06:33.800 We propose and again this kind of comes back to our third 01:06:33.800 --> 01:06:36.489 party verification that we do through the central appraisal 01:06:36.489 --> 01:06:38.000 district for new development 01:06:38.000 --> 01:06:41.960 projects we're proposing that the valuation by 01:06:41.960 --> 01:06:45.469 DCAD needs to be at least 80% of the eligible investment 01:06:45.469 --> 01:06:48.579 that the applicant submitted in their application 01:06:50.199 --> 01:06:52.000 The reason why 01:06:52.000 --> 01:06:53.480 we don't 01:06:53.480 --> 01:06:55.769 Propose that it be a hundred percent of what they submitted 01:06:55.769 --> 01:06:56.800 in their application 01:06:56.800 --> 01:06:59.579 Is that as you all are aware these projects can take 01:06:59.579 --> 01:07:02.960 between 12 and 24 months to complete and there are a lot of 01:07:02.960 --> 01:07:03.400 things that 01:07:03.400 --> 01:07:06.019 Can happen in that time that are outside of a businesses 01:07:06.019 --> 01:07:09.289 control things with the economy or industry specific 01:07:09.289 --> 01:07:11.480 changes that might affect 01:07:11.960 --> 01:07:14.610 Their plans and they're still moving forward. They're still 01:07:14.610 --> 01:07:16.760 making the investment. They're still going to create the 01:07:16.760 --> 01:07:16.960 jobs 01:07:17.800 --> 01:07:20.030 But it might not hit that exact number that they put 01:07:20.030 --> 01:07:21.960 forward in their application 01:07:22.480 --> 01:07:26.159 So for new development and for jobs we're wanting 01:07:26.760 --> 01:07:31.199 To hold them to 80% of what they submit an application now 01:07:31.199 --> 01:07:33.519 for expansion or redevelopment 01:07:34.039 --> 01:07:36.239 projects we have learned recently 01:07:37.360 --> 01:07:40.679 That there can be a significant discrepancy in 01:07:42.159 --> 01:07:45.010 The investment amount that a business makes in that 01:07:45.010 --> 01:07:49.840 expansion or redevelopment and the way that the value is 01:07:50.599 --> 01:07:52.719 Is calculated by DCAD? 01:07:53.800 --> 01:07:57.139 It's often significantly lower than what the actual 01:07:57.139 --> 01:07:58.960 investment amount is 01:07:59.880 --> 01:08:02.800 And we have had to in fact 01:08:04.159 --> 01:08:06.719 Terminate several incentives that were given for expansion 01:08:06.719 --> 01:08:07.920 or redevelopment 01:08:08.360 --> 01:08:11.190 Projects because the threshold that was put forward in the 01:08:11.190 --> 01:08:14.000 contract was not met and our opinion is that we were 01:08:14.000 --> 01:08:15.559 putting we were setting it too high 01:08:16.520 --> 01:08:17.760 so 01:08:17.760 --> 01:08:21.010 Here under the this bullet about expansion and redevelop 01:08:21.010 --> 01:08:21.079 ment 01:08:21.359 --> 01:08:24.760 We're proposing that the threshold for those kinds of 01:08:24.760 --> 01:08:25.880 expansion or redevelopment 01:08:26.159 --> 01:08:28.819 Projects be 50% of the eligible investment that was 01:08:28.819 --> 01:08:31.039 submitted in the incentive application 01:08:31.760 --> 01:08:33.760 to account for the fact that 01:08:34.159 --> 01:08:36.960 The company is making the investment they're doing what 01:08:36.960 --> 01:08:38.159 they say that they're gonna do 01:08:38.359 --> 01:08:41.779 But DCAD does not value those types of projects the same 01:08:41.779 --> 01:08:44.119 way that it values a new development 01:09:04.600 --> 01:09:06.600 Yes, that's a very good point 01:09:07.880 --> 01:09:09.760 Very very good point 01:09:09.760 --> 01:09:12.960 Those and that has happened in a couple of other situations 01:09:12.960 --> 01:09:16.680 that that we've had and and we have had some interesting 01:09:16.680 --> 01:09:17.960 conversations with 01:09:18.880 --> 01:09:21.550 accounting departments our financial folks from some of 01:09:21.550 --> 01:09:22.279 these companies 01:09:24.000 --> 01:09:26.600 Where we have this conversation about well 01:09:27.119 --> 01:09:28.439 your 01:09:28.439 --> 01:09:30.720 Recourse is to go and protest your valuation 01:09:30.720 --> 01:09:34.010 But you'd be protesting it to be higher and that's sort of 01:09:34.010 --> 01:09:35.760 a strange conversation to have 01:09:36.319 --> 01:09:39.119 But at that point it becomes a business decision for the 01:09:39.119 --> 01:09:39.920 company 01:09:40.220 --> 01:09:43.210 Do they want their valuation higher so that they pay more 01:09:43.210 --> 01:09:46.729 taxes so that they get their incentive or is it actually 01:09:46.729 --> 01:09:47.319 better? 01:09:47.840 --> 01:09:50.369 On the whole for them to take the lower valuation and fore 01:09:50.369 --> 01:09:53.319 go the incentives or tax burden would be lower. So 01:09:54.439 --> 01:09:58.039 These are things that we reflect on as we go through the 01:09:58.039 --> 01:10:02.159 administration process and have these experiences. So 01:10:02.920 --> 01:10:06.420 We wanted to put that out there for y'all's discussion and 01:10:06.420 --> 01:10:08.640 and just so that we can talk about it 01:10:15.640 --> 01:10:17.640 Everybody loves this idea 01:10:20.800 --> 01:10:23.050 Right, so I mean this is I've covered everything that's on 01:10:23.050 --> 01:10:24.239 the slide so 01:10:25.880 --> 01:10:28.920 So I have the question about the jobs created and 01:10:29.520 --> 01:10:34.050 Just help me understand. Why is it 80% and not a hundred 01:10:34.050 --> 01:10:36.880 percent of jobs create? 01:10:36.880 --> 01:10:39.199 I mean that comes what they say they're going to do then 01:10:39.199 --> 01:10:41.739 why aren't we holding right that comes back to the fact 01:10:41.739 --> 01:10:42.159 that 01:10:42.680 --> 01:10:45.439 The lag time between when an incentive application is 01:10:45.439 --> 01:10:48.729 submitted and when a project actually opens it could be it 01:10:48.729 --> 01:10:49.920 could be up to 24 months 01:10:50.600 --> 01:10:53.470 And operational things or environmental factors that are 01:10:53.470 --> 01:10:57.420 outside of the company's control could change in that ens 01:10:57.420 --> 01:10:58.199 uing time 01:10:59.119 --> 01:11:01.119 and there 01:11:02.439 --> 01:11:04.649 We've just discovered that we need to have a little bit of 01:11:04.649 --> 01:11:06.640 flexibility for the companies 01:11:08.399 --> 01:11:10.000 Because it's 01:11:10.000 --> 01:11:13.180 it's a really bad situation when a company is is doing 01:11:13.180 --> 01:11:15.840 everything that they say that they're going to do and 01:11:16.279 --> 01:11:19.239 They're making the investment but factors that are outside 01:11:19.239 --> 01:11:22.439 of their control change the situation on the ground 01:11:23.239 --> 01:11:24.800 and 01:11:24.800 --> 01:11:27.899 You know having to terminate an incentive is not where 01:11:27.899 --> 01:11:29.680 anybody wants to end up, right? 01:11:31.079 --> 01:11:33.079 and 01:11:33.079 --> 01:11:35.079 It could alter 01:11:35.520 --> 01:11:38.350 It could alter the decisions that a company makes in the 01:11:38.350 --> 01:11:40.760 future and it's not that we don't want them to do what they 01:11:40.760 --> 01:11:41.000 say 01:11:41.000 --> 01:11:42.800 They're gonna do. Of course we do 01:11:42.800 --> 01:11:44.800 but as we all know 01:11:45.199 --> 01:11:48.000 Things happen that are outside of anyone's control 01:11:48.960 --> 01:11:51.760 that nobody would have wanted to have happen and 01:11:53.039 --> 01:11:55.239 So that's just trying to account for this 01:11:55.800 --> 01:11:58.239 So 80% is the floor 01:11:58.840 --> 01:12:04.329 Right, right that that would be if you dropped below 80% of 01:12:04.329 --> 01:12:07.159 what you said the number you said you were gonna hire in 01:12:07.159 --> 01:12:08.640 your incentive application 01:12:08.640 --> 01:12:10.039 that would be 01:12:10.039 --> 01:12:12.039 cause for 01:12:12.319 --> 01:12:14.319 non-receipt of the incentive 01:12:15.319 --> 01:12:17.319 Okay, and so 01:12:17.399 --> 01:12:20.140 Since this is all new to me earlier. I heard you say the 01:12:20.140 --> 01:12:21.479 word clawback and so 01:12:23.079 --> 01:12:25.680 On this part of it, how do we how do we check and at what 01:12:25.680 --> 01:12:27.420 point do we check? 01:12:27.420 --> 01:12:31.409 Is it every year that we we check that? Yes before there's 01:12:31.409 --> 01:12:34.279 a payment made or whatever their payment 01:12:34.920 --> 01:12:36.920 Schedule is but just let's say it's annually 01:12:37.680 --> 01:12:40.680 We verify every year all of the thresholds no matter what 01:12:40.680 --> 01:12:44.439 they related to if it's related to jobs or if it's related 01:12:44.439 --> 01:12:44.640 to 01:12:45.359 --> 01:12:49.119 the evaluation or a certain number of sales certain amount 01:12:49.119 --> 01:12:50.119 of sales tax 01:12:50.319 --> 01:12:53.000 We verify that every time before a payment is made 01:12:55.720 --> 01:12:57.720 Jim 01:13:09.720 --> 01:13:11.720 And they finished it in 2007 01:13:20.319 --> 01:13:22.319 Personal 01:13:22.479 --> 01:13:24.479 Right 01:13:25.079 --> 01:13:27.079 Somehow I think figure out 01:13:29.000 --> 01:13:31.000 Put it on hold for a year 01:13:32.520 --> 01:13:36.630 Have a mechanism that allows you to move forward at a lower 01:13:36.630 --> 01:13:37.199 percentage 01:13:39.279 --> 01:13:42.199 Instead of termination some kind of there's a 01:13:43.039 --> 01:13:45.039 evidence of good faith to 01:13:45.319 --> 01:13:49.619 Some of our agreements are structured that way where if you 01:13:49.619 --> 01:13:52.239 miss your threshold in a certain year 01:13:52.239 --> 01:13:55.380 You don't receive your incentive for that year, but it you 01:13:55.380 --> 01:13:58.560 have a chance to try again in subsequent years 01:13:59.840 --> 01:14:03.489 Some other of them are set up where you miss you miss a 01:14:03.489 --> 01:14:06.079 year and that agreement is terminated 01:14:06.520 --> 01:14:10.119 From that point forward you could have an application that 01:14:11.560 --> 01:14:15.550 Is a new development and jobs are going to be created and 01:14:15.550 --> 01:14:17.760 we're making a decision based on both of those things and 01:14:17.760 --> 01:14:18.340 if they 01:14:19.119 --> 01:14:21.520 added 50 million dollars in new development to the tax 01:14:21.520 --> 01:14:24.460 rolls, but they missed their employment by 01:14:25.319 --> 01:14:28.880 79% or we're really going to take away their incentive and 01:14:28.880 --> 01:14:31.880 I guess just kind of getting back to your comments does 01:14:32.239 --> 01:14:35.000 As we're writing contracts does it have to be? 01:14:35.840 --> 01:14:39.680 all or none or that reduces instead of you getting 01:14:40.600 --> 01:14:42.039 proportional reduction 01:14:42.039 --> 01:14:47.930 $20,000 a year and an incentive back that now $15,000 or 01:14:47.930 --> 01:14:48.680 skip I mean 01:14:49.159 --> 01:14:50.880 because I 01:14:50.880 --> 01:14:53.640 They're all different. They're all big everything can 01:14:53.640 --> 01:14:55.720 happen and I don't like the idea 01:14:56.600 --> 01:14:59.939 Maybe that there's certain circumstances where it does if 01:14:59.939 --> 01:15:03.279 you don't do this then you don't get get the money and 01:15:03.840 --> 01:15:08.000 You can reapply or can we amend because we have there's 01:15:08.000 --> 01:15:10.560 nothing prevents us from amending somebody's 01:15:11.600 --> 01:15:14.579 Incentive agreement, that's correct. We have had the 01:15:14.579 --> 01:15:18.800 experience where we've run into time constraints where we 01:15:19.600 --> 01:15:21.710 these are these little things that are strange 01:15:21.710 --> 01:15:23.119 circumstances, but 01:15:26.159 --> 01:15:27.720 Disputes of 01:15:27.720 --> 01:15:29.880 DCAD valuation ARB reviews 01:15:30.479 --> 01:15:33.760 We inevitably have a handful of companies with incentives 01:15:33.760 --> 01:15:34.119 that 01:15:34.760 --> 01:15:37.079 Go for ARB reviews every year 01:15:37.399 --> 01:15:41.819 So we can't verify if they met their threshold until the AR 01:15:41.819 --> 01:15:43.039 B review is complete 01:15:43.039 --> 01:15:46.729 and then it's getting to the end of the calendar year and 01:15:46.729 --> 01:15:47.439 we have to 01:15:48.359 --> 01:15:51.840 You know, we are advised by our legal department that we 01:15:51.840 --> 01:15:52.960 have to you know 01:15:53.159 --> 01:15:56.079 Take action on the contract if there's gonna be an 01:15:56.079 --> 01:15:58.569 amendment it has to happen before the end of the calendar 01:15:58.569 --> 01:15:58.800 year 01:15:58.800 --> 01:16:00.779 Well, what happens at the end of the calendar years? 01:16:00.779 --> 01:16:03.680 Everybody stops having meetings. We can't get anything done 01:16:03.680 --> 01:16:04.159 . So I 01:16:05.279 --> 01:16:09.039 Understand exactly what you're saying about amendments and 01:16:09.039 --> 01:16:10.199 that is an option 01:16:10.840 --> 01:16:14.250 but like practically that can roll out in a strange way 01:16:14.250 --> 01:16:17.220 because of the review process that the company is 01:16:17.220 --> 01:16:19.000 undergoing the DCAD and 01:16:19.600 --> 01:16:21.920 That kind of thing. So just something else to think about 01:16:22.479 --> 01:16:24.479 the two that we just had to 01:16:25.319 --> 01:16:27.039 Terminate because they're 01:16:27.039 --> 01:16:29.090 Nothing to prevent them to come back and ask for an 01:16:29.090 --> 01:16:31.760 incentive. That's less or whatever 01:16:31.760 --> 01:16:34.359 There's nothing to prevent them from coming back again 01:16:35.840 --> 01:16:38.050 Well, I was just gonna add that we do have extensions 01:16:38.050 --> 01:16:41.680 because council approved certain extensions when 01:16:43.039 --> 01:16:46.130 Right, so the business has an ability to come and say well 01:16:46.130 --> 01:16:49.020 we're about to meet this or we have it 01:16:49.020 --> 01:16:52.300 But we will right so if can you extend this out a little 01:16:52.300 --> 01:16:53.359 bit further? 01:16:53.840 --> 01:16:55.199 That's that's true 01:16:55.199 --> 01:16:58.369 but in the example that I just mentioned where there's that 01:16:58.369 --> 01:17:01.479 kind of calendar constraint between their ARB review and 01:17:01.479 --> 01:17:01.800 and 01:17:02.079 --> 01:17:04.079 the end of the fiscal year 01:17:04.479 --> 01:17:07.939 They have the ability to come and do that. But sometimes we 01:17:07.939 --> 01:17:09.779 run out of meeting, you know, they're 01:17:10.479 --> 01:17:13.560 The the body that would have to make the decision is is not 01:17:13.560 --> 01:17:14.600 available 01:17:16.399 --> 01:17:18.300 Unfortunately, you know that that can be a circumstance 01:17:18.300 --> 01:17:19.359 that we run into 01:17:34.479 --> 01:17:39.369 But it could be a dissatisfier for how they spread the word 01:17:39.369 --> 01:17:42.079 somebody else if I come to them I 01:17:47.079 --> 01:17:49.079 Just I 01:17:49.479 --> 01:17:53.380 Don't like the idea of if they've missed it by a certain 01:17:53.380 --> 01:17:56.699 percent if they say they're gonna employ so many people and 01:17:56.699 --> 01:17:57.239 they are 01:17:57.239 --> 01:17:58.479 off by 01:17:58.479 --> 01:18:00.479 10% or 5% or whatever 01:18:02.000 --> 01:18:04.689 That may be different if it's 10,000 people you're gonna 01:18:04.689 --> 01:18:08.439 employ you don't employ you only employ 9,000 or 190 01:18:08.439 --> 01:18:10.649 That's not gonna have a huge impact talking about different 01:18:10.649 --> 01:18:11.279 kind of numbers 01:18:11.840 --> 01:18:13.840 But I hate this yanking it 01:18:14.600 --> 01:18:17.079 From folks is that gets pretty tough. I was 01:18:18.760 --> 01:18:21.420 Happy to see the last couple of deals that happened with 01:18:21.420 --> 01:18:22.520 yeah, I 01:18:23.439 --> 01:18:25.439 Understand this gives a threshold 01:18:26.680 --> 01:18:31.119 And it is you know, it's it's stated upfront it and 01:18:32.000 --> 01:18:35.810 There are other people who feel very strongly that if they 01:18:35.810 --> 01:18:38.520 don't do exactly what they said 01:18:38.520 --> 01:18:40.279 They were gonna do in the application 01:18:40.279 --> 01:18:42.810 They shouldn't get anything and we shouldn't waiver from 01:18:42.810 --> 01:18:44.159 what the application states 01:18:44.159 --> 01:18:47.319 So there are definitely a range of opinions on these things 01:18:47.319 --> 01:18:48.760 and you know 01:18:48.920 --> 01:18:52.479 Oftentimes what our role is is to seek it's to seek 01:18:52.479 --> 01:18:54.659 something in the middle that you know 01:18:54.659 --> 01:18:57.359 Maybe everybody doesn't get everything they want but we 01:18:57.359 --> 01:18:59.000 come to a reasonable compromise 01:19:00.720 --> 01:19:02.720 Jill 01:19:02.960 --> 01:19:05.880 Jill gesture I've got two questions first. Is there a 01:19:05.880 --> 01:19:06.800 current minimum? 01:19:07.920 --> 01:19:10.939 Are we going from zero to this or is there one and this is 01:19:10.939 --> 01:19:14.239 there there is not one in the policy? Okay 01:19:15.239 --> 01:19:19.970 One has been inserted at the request of council members in 01:19:19.970 --> 01:19:21.279 the Sally Beauty 01:19:21.800 --> 01:19:27.689 expansion incentive at the 80% is is that was the first 01:19:27.689 --> 01:19:28.760 instance of that 01:19:29.840 --> 01:19:31.840 threshold arising 01:19:32.079 --> 01:19:35.779 Second question. Can you for some of us tell us what an ARB 01:19:35.779 --> 01:19:36.520 review is? 01:19:37.199 --> 01:19:38.600 it 01:19:38.600 --> 01:19:41.810 I'm not gonna call Erica up here, but I can't I don't know 01:19:41.810 --> 01:19:43.960 what ARB stands for but it's the protest 01:19:44.640 --> 01:19:47.529 What'd you say appraisal review board? So it's the protest 01:19:47.529 --> 01:19:50.930 of your valuation for tax perks. Thank you appraisal review 01:19:50.930 --> 01:19:51.220 board 01:19:51.220 --> 01:19:53.220 Thank you 01:19:53.920 --> 01:19:57.750 Thank you, so this what this is doing correct me if I'm 01:19:57.750 --> 01:19:59.319 wrong is gives us some wiggle room 01:19:59.319 --> 01:20:01.319 If they don't meet that 100% 01:20:02.760 --> 01:20:06.520 Decad value or employment or improvement that gives it so 01:20:06.520 --> 01:20:07.800 we don't have to pull it 01:20:08.479 --> 01:20:10.479 If they fall a little short 01:20:10.880 --> 01:20:12.880 Yes, that's for this 01:20:13.960 --> 01:20:16.949 Is intended to be more favorable so we don't have to we can 01:20:16.949 --> 01:20:18.279 continue with the 01:20:20.600 --> 01:20:23.840 That's correct, you know we want 01:20:24.920 --> 01:20:28.189 If if we think a project is significant enough that this 01:20:28.189 --> 01:20:31.859 board makes a recommendation to the council and the council 01:20:31.859 --> 01:20:32.359 approves it 01:20:32.359 --> 01:20:35.199 I think everybody's intention is that they would be 01:20:35.199 --> 01:20:36.720 successful in achieving 01:20:37.159 --> 01:20:40.090 Their thresholds to get their incentive and I see this as a 01:20:40.090 --> 01:20:41.520 way to help us 01:20:41.920 --> 01:20:45.750 Get our expectations all aligned and know, you know what 01:20:45.750 --> 01:20:48.319 what needs to be done to to keep things moving forward 01:20:53.279 --> 01:20:55.279 Anybody else 01:21:01.319 --> 01:21:03.079 Okay 01:21:03.079 --> 01:21:05.079 think this is our last slide on 01:21:05.479 --> 01:21:08.600 proposed content changes and this one is I 01:21:09.439 --> 01:21:12.000 Feel like this is a positive addition 01:21:13.039 --> 01:21:14.439 so 01:21:14.439 --> 01:21:16.159 as we look at 01:21:16.159 --> 01:21:18.640 The economy as it is now where it's heading in the future 01:21:19.359 --> 01:21:22.800 The ability to only incentivize businesses that generate 01:21:22.800 --> 01:21:25.119 significant ad valorem or sales taxes 01:21:25.479 --> 01:21:28.479 puts us at a disadvantage when we're competing for 01:21:28.479 --> 01:21:31.539 businesses that create high-paying and knowledge-based jobs 01:21:31.539 --> 01:21:31.880 and 01:21:32.960 --> 01:21:34.960 desirable sectors like technology 01:21:36.039 --> 01:21:39.680 So what we're proposing here is the addition of a jobs 01:21:39.680 --> 01:21:43.039 based incentive option for businesses that 01:21:43.960 --> 01:21:46.739 Do not meet either the five million dollar 01:21:47.520 --> 01:21:50.039 Minimum value of structures and business personal property 01:21:50.039 --> 01:21:53.539 or that 15 million dollars in annual taxable sales that we 01:21:53.539 --> 01:21:54.840 talked about earlier 01:21:55.720 --> 01:21:57.720 but that create 01:21:57.920 --> 01:22:02.000 What would be defined under the policy as knowledge-based 01:22:02.000 --> 01:22:05.520 high-skilled jobs that meet a certain wage criteria? 01:22:07.000 --> 01:22:09.000 So we wanted to put that out there 01:22:09.520 --> 01:22:12.760 There are so many communities that have this kind of option 01:22:12.760 --> 01:22:15.319 and it does allow us to 01:22:16.079 --> 01:22:19.939 Address recruitment in certain desirable fields that we're 01:22:19.939 --> 01:22:23.119 just not able to incentivize certain types of businesses 01:22:23.880 --> 01:22:25.880 Without this kind of an option 01:22:29.720 --> 01:22:31.239 Jill 01:22:31.239 --> 01:22:34.359 So my question is, you know why we have the criteria in the 01:22:34.359 --> 01:22:36.000 first place the minimum 01:22:36.640 --> 01:22:39.560 Value and the minimum in annual taxable sales 01:22:39.560 --> 01:22:41.539 Is it because of the cost effectiveness of the 01:22:41.539 --> 01:22:42.560 administration of it? 01:22:42.560 --> 01:22:45.260 That's kind of what I assumed as to why we say, okay, it's 01:22:45.260 --> 01:22:48.840 not gonna be really worth what the city has to spend in 01:22:49.920 --> 01:22:53.239 compliance and the studies and everything else so long so 01:22:54.399 --> 01:22:57.399 Am I along the right lines and if so so 01:22:58.720 --> 01:23:00.720 What we've 01:23:01.079 --> 01:23:04.560 What we have come to understand is that 01:23:06.079 --> 01:23:09.000 The five million dollar minimum capital investment is 01:23:11.720 --> 01:23:16.039 The investment that allows a business to cover its cost of 01:23:16.039 --> 01:23:16.720 service 01:23:18.000 --> 01:23:20.000 for city services 01:23:20.079 --> 01:23:24.029 And at the same time it helps supplement cost of service 01:23:24.029 --> 01:23:27.199 for other other businesses and residential 01:23:27.720 --> 01:23:32.520 Units so it it pays for itself at that point in time 01:23:33.119 --> 01:23:35.119 That's an analysis that was done 01:23:35.640 --> 01:23:37.640 through our utility department 01:23:37.880 --> 01:23:41.800 Many moons ago and it has held up over time 01:23:41.800 --> 01:23:44.649 So that's where that initial threshold came from for the 01:23:44.649 --> 01:23:47.810 five million dollars the 15 million dollars in annual tax 01:23:47.810 --> 01:23:48.399 able sales 01:23:48.479 --> 01:23:50.939 That's something that we're proposing for this revision 01:23:50.939 --> 01:23:54.789 based on our review of other communities policies and 01:23:54.789 --> 01:23:55.800 comparable 01:23:57.520 --> 01:24:00.439 Projects that are on the ground here in Denton does that 01:24:00.439 --> 01:24:02.000 answer your question? 01:24:02.119 --> 01:24:05.630 So with having this variation and I'm not I'm not against 01:24:05.630 --> 01:24:06.520 it. I'm just 01:24:07.079 --> 01:24:09.079 questioning 01:24:09.079 --> 01:24:11.779 The math as to you know, how small of a 01:24:12.560 --> 01:24:14.560 Group we would consider 01:24:14.600 --> 01:24:16.840 Making a variation here if they don't meet these 01:24:17.840 --> 01:24:20.760 Minimums because of the types of jobs. I feel like I'm not 01:24:22.760 --> 01:24:27.600 Number of jobs, right there it could be a minimum I 01:24:29.479 --> 01:24:33.199 Don't think this this to me is not about number of jobs 01:24:33.199 --> 01:24:36.760 It's about quality of jobs like there would be there would 01:24:36.760 --> 01:24:38.460 be tied to you know 01:24:38.460 --> 01:24:41.340 There we would want to see these types of jobs pay above 01:24:41.340 --> 01:24:43.960 the Denton County median wage or 01:24:44.680 --> 01:24:48.050 you know a certain percentage above the city of Denton's 01:24:48.050 --> 01:24:49.159 median wage or 01:24:50.359 --> 01:24:53.279 You know, we would need to we would need to define that if 01:24:53.279 --> 01:24:57.560 this is this is not this is not the end of the conversation 01:24:57.560 --> 01:25:01.000 this is the beginning of the conversation and under the 01:25:02.119 --> 01:25:05.279 Edie investment fund we already define 01:25:05.760 --> 01:25:10.130 High wage and knowledge-based jobs. So the the precedent 01:25:10.130 --> 01:25:12.840 exists just under a different capacity 01:25:13.359 --> 01:25:17.279 This would not require them to meet other factors, too. 01:25:17.279 --> 01:25:17.659 Okay 01:25:19.159 --> 01:25:22.439 This is exactly this is for tech. I mean really the best 01:25:22.439 --> 01:25:24.399 example of this is technology companies 01:25:24.399 --> 01:25:28.039 Okay, you know I'm speaking with a couple of homegrown 01:25:28.039 --> 01:25:29.600 technology companies 01:25:30.439 --> 01:25:34.199 That are on the cusp of expanding that are legitimate 01:25:34.199 --> 01:25:35.119 companies 01:25:35.119 --> 01:25:37.989 They've been through two and three rounds of venture 01:25:37.989 --> 01:25:41.399 capital funding and they're ready to hire new engineers at 01:25:42.359 --> 01:25:45.720 $75,000 a year salaries. Do we want the ability to 01:25:45.720 --> 01:25:49.489 encourage that when we're encouraging other types of 01:25:49.489 --> 01:25:50.560 investment? I 01:25:51.680 --> 01:25:53.930 Think we do want that and I think if we don't have that 01:25:53.930 --> 01:25:57.119 ability it puts us at a competitive disadvantage to other 01:25:57.119 --> 01:25:57.760 communities 01:25:59.760 --> 01:26:01.760 I would agree with what you just said 01:26:02.640 --> 01:26:05.810 So we have here didn't County medium and then just then in 01:26:05.810 --> 01:26:08.319 your conversation you said or city of Denton 01:26:08.319 --> 01:26:11.819 Do we know which one is higher wage and why are we focusing 01:26:11.819 --> 01:26:12.079 ? 01:26:12.079 --> 01:26:14.899 I mean, are we focused on on the higher wage is that didn't 01:26:14.899 --> 01:26:17.399 County or it didn't County media 01:26:17.399 --> 01:26:20.960 That would be a higher wage without knowing the figure off 01:26:20.960 --> 01:26:21.840 the top of my head 01:26:21.960 --> 01:26:24.439 It's gonna be higher at the county level. So that's why 01:26:24.439 --> 01:26:24.600 that's 01:26:29.760 --> 01:26:31.760 Go back to the number of jobs 01:26:33.000 --> 01:26:38.279 The type of company you just described could be for people 01:26:39.399 --> 01:26:43.239 And it takes a minimal amount of investment for them to 01:26:43.239 --> 01:26:45.239 have a company like that 01:26:45.840 --> 01:26:47.840 You know in most cases 01:26:48.840 --> 01:26:52.420 And they could get an incentive for one year and then 01:26:52.420 --> 01:26:53.960 decide well, we're gonna pick up 01:26:54.479 --> 01:26:56.479 far amount 01:26:58.159 --> 01:27:00.159 I struggle with that a little bit 01:27:01.439 --> 01:27:06.010 because I think we're more in the business of trying to 01:27:06.010 --> 01:27:07.479 fund something that 01:27:08.279 --> 01:27:09.920 Is bigger? 01:27:09.920 --> 01:27:13.970 It's gonna provide more jobs. Maybe they're not the highest 01:27:13.970 --> 01:27:15.800 paying jobs, but 01:27:16.439 --> 01:27:17.800 it's 01:27:17.800 --> 01:27:19.800 200 jobs not 01:27:20.319 --> 01:27:24.869 I think there's room for both types of things for sure 01:27:24.869 --> 01:27:25.920 because 01:27:26.840 --> 01:27:30.600 Quantity and sort of scale is definitely important 01:27:31.199 --> 01:27:33.000 I 01:27:33.000 --> 01:27:35.800 Think that we can address 01:27:37.399 --> 01:27:39.399 contractually the concerns about 01:27:41.600 --> 01:27:44.359 Being incentivized here and staying here 01:27:45.399 --> 01:27:48.409 But I hear I hear the concern because if you have a large 01:27:48.409 --> 01:27:51.760 capital investment in a plant or a facility 01:27:52.560 --> 01:27:55.930 Much harder to just pick up and leave. I understand that 01:27:55.930 --> 01:27:57.119 concern certainly 01:28:06.439 --> 01:28:09.520 John Baines, so in the instance of jobs 01:28:10.520 --> 01:28:12.520 There may need to be a minimum 01:28:13.239 --> 01:28:14.800 You know, so 01:28:14.800 --> 01:28:18.300 Like Jim was saying you don't want to incentivize someone 01:28:18.300 --> 01:28:20.399 with two or three jobs that can move so easily 01:28:21.119 --> 01:28:23.119 You know 01:28:23.199 --> 01:28:26.539 Well, if you had a if you didn't you get everybody that has 01:28:26.539 --> 01:28:27.479 four employees could imply 01:28:28.760 --> 01:28:32.119 For an incentive and then the nightmare to keep up with I 01:28:32.119 --> 01:28:32.560 have eight 01:28:33.800 --> 01:28:35.800 It's gonna at least be nine 01:28:40.800 --> 01:28:43.279 With the number you may be looking for is payroll 01:28:44.439 --> 01:28:47.130 So you maybe you have to have a hundred employees if your 01:28:47.130 --> 01:28:49.199 salary is here and if your salaries up here or less 01:28:49.199 --> 01:28:49.539 employee 01:28:49.539 --> 01:28:52.000 I mean there may be some kind of deal there. I like having 01:28:52.840 --> 01:28:55.710 Something that is not tied to capital investments, but we 01:28:55.710 --> 01:28:58.119 need to come to an agreement on 01:28:59.520 --> 01:29:02.359 What that could be and what you know how to run those traps 01:29:02.359 --> 01:29:02.359 ? 01:29:05.079 --> 01:29:06.720 Again anything 01:29:06.720 --> 01:29:09.060 Somebody came and we want to do that. It's all coming here 01:29:09.060 --> 01:29:10.659 to talk about out loud and we have to 01:29:11.239 --> 01:29:13.470 Work through all those issues of what the likelihood of 01:29:13.470 --> 01:29:16.260 them leaving and what kind of traps we can put in place if 01:29:16.260 --> 01:29:16.840 they did 01:29:20.279 --> 01:29:23.140 Okay, well we'll we have to have a minimum we'll work on 01:29:23.140 --> 01:29:28.260 some refinements to this particular point 01:29:31.640 --> 01:29:35.079 Are you saying a minimum if you're gonna have 01:29:35.800 --> 01:29:38.420 Less than this many employees you have to pay them at least 01:29:38.420 --> 01:29:41.520 this much per year. That's my thought is because if 01:29:43.640 --> 01:29:45.079 If you're bringing 01:29:45.079 --> 01:29:47.609 Ten people with making million dollars to that company do 01:29:47.609 --> 01:29:50.239 you get that incentive or if you bring in a hundred people 01:29:50.239 --> 01:29:50.920 that they make? 01:29:50.920 --> 01:29:54.439 minimum wage that still may be maybe hundreds not the right 01:29:54.439 --> 01:29:56.199 number but that there still may be a 01:29:58.199 --> 01:30:01.390 You know if you're at the same time if it's a high number 01:30:01.390 --> 01:30:03.000 of people was probably a capital investment 01:30:03.000 --> 01:30:05.000 That's what I was just gonna say 01:30:05.800 --> 01:30:08.989 Yeah, this is really impact. This is really intended to 01:30:08.989 --> 01:30:11.689 address the space that is not addressed at all at this 01:30:11.689 --> 01:30:12.039 point 01:30:12.039 --> 01:30:14.859 I mean, that's what our thought was if they're able to be 01:30:14.859 --> 01:30:17.800 incentivized based on sales tax or capital investment 01:30:17.800 --> 01:30:20.199 We would not be we might consider 01:30:20.800 --> 01:30:23.720 We might consider the fact that they were adding jobs as a 01:30:23.720 --> 01:30:25.840 part of their overall package 01:30:25.880 --> 01:30:28.979 But they wouldn't sort of get the jobs incentive and a 01:30:28.979 --> 01:30:33.229 capital based incentive to that. That was not our intention 01:30:33.229 --> 01:30:33.520 here 01:30:35.640 --> 01:30:38.489 Just to follow up on that and one of the things as a 01:30:38.489 --> 01:30:40.380 council member I hear is that you know 01:30:40.380 --> 01:30:42.880 There's just not enough high paying jobs here and then if 01:30:42.880 --> 01:30:45.319 this addresses that in some way we can find a way to 01:30:46.079 --> 01:30:48.779 Do that. I think that we should we should explore those 01:30:48.779 --> 01:30:49.359 options 01:30:49.359 --> 01:30:52.699 I mean, it's also a way people say people are leaving the 01:30:52.699 --> 01:30:55.199 universities, you know, how do we retain our students? 01:30:55.199 --> 01:30:58.359 I mean this may be you know way that we can do that 01:30:59.359 --> 01:31:02.279 Yeah, and then you heard me talk about the strategic plan 01:31:02.279 --> 01:31:06.520 earlier one of our longer term strategic initiatives is to 01:31:06.960 --> 01:31:11.170 Raise the percentage of jobs in Denton that pay $75,000 a 01:31:11.170 --> 01:31:11.800 year or above 01:31:11.800 --> 01:31:14.539 I mean that that's a long term further down the road, you 01:31:14.539 --> 01:31:16.880 know 2020 kind of initiative 01:31:16.880 --> 01:31:19.720 But you know this speaks to that 01:31:29.399 --> 01:31:31.560 I guess before we move on if 01:31:32.199 --> 01:31:34.840 Staff or council or the combination come up with that we 01:31:34.840 --> 01:31:37.619 want to do that. That's coming back here to talk about 01:31:38.560 --> 01:31:44.109 the way that I think this should go is we're on the agenda 01:31:44.109 --> 01:31:46.319 next week for a work session and 01:31:46.840 --> 01:31:49.949 I'd like to bring the feedback from that work session back 01:31:49.949 --> 01:31:52.279 to this group and that you know 01:31:52.279 --> 01:31:54.859 We can't sort of do that endlessly, but I think this is a 01:31:54.859 --> 01:31:56.439 big enough discussion that 01:31:56.960 --> 01:32:00.520 Bringing it back one more time to this group is reasonable 01:32:01.439 --> 01:32:02.840 That sound okay. Yeah 01:32:02.840 --> 01:32:04.949 I mean if we're gonna come up with a minimum number of 01:32:04.949 --> 01:32:07.850 employees or a payroll or whatever do I'd like to this 01:32:07.850 --> 01:32:08.119 group? 01:32:08.119 --> 01:32:10.729 Bill will say we're all on board with that here. Then here 01:32:10.729 --> 01:32:12.760 's why and make that recommendation to council. Okay 01:32:13.560 --> 01:32:15.079 Okay 01:32:15.079 --> 01:32:19.630 So quickly here. This is a very simplified overview of the 01:32:19.630 --> 01:32:22.720 incentive application and approval process 01:32:22.720 --> 01:32:25.539 I just wanted to put this on here because not everybody in 01:32:25.539 --> 01:32:29.319 this room right now has been through one of these yet 01:32:31.159 --> 01:32:32.479 So 01:32:32.479 --> 01:32:36.220 We're starting up here with the application is received by 01:32:36.220 --> 01:32:37.119 our department 01:32:37.720 --> 01:32:42.279 we vet its viability based on our policy and 01:32:43.199 --> 01:32:45.199 the application itself 01:32:45.600 --> 01:32:48.970 It that could either go forward or not if we're not able to 01:32:48.970 --> 01:32:52.159 bring it forward for policy reasons 01:32:52.520 --> 01:32:55.449 We always offer the business other assistance and we don't 01:32:55.449 --> 01:32:57.359 just say no, we can't help you by 01:32:58.479 --> 01:33:00.979 So we would be working with them in other capacities at 01:33:00.979 --> 01:33:03.319 that point if it does move forward 01:33:03.680 --> 01:33:06.399 We would run it through our total impact system 01:33:07.039 --> 01:33:09.859 brief legal finance and city manager's office about the 01:33:09.859 --> 01:33:12.640 application and the project and 01:33:13.039 --> 01:33:16.720 then we would bring it to this body for its review and 01:33:17.520 --> 01:33:20.630 Recommendation to counsel or not at which point it would 01:33:20.630 --> 01:33:21.880 stop the process 01:33:21.880 --> 01:33:26.189 but again, we would be offering other kinds of assistance 01:33:26.189 --> 01:33:26.399 if 01:33:27.640 --> 01:33:30.600 This board does recommend it it would go to council for 01:33:30.600 --> 01:33:34.350 review and vote and please remember in in the midst of all 01:33:34.350 --> 01:33:34.720 this 01:33:34.720 --> 01:33:36.720 There's a lot of back-and-forth 01:33:37.159 --> 01:33:39.159 negotiations refinements 01:33:39.520 --> 01:33:42.479 And it could go through these 01:33:43.279 --> 01:33:46.079 steps back and forth a few different times 01:33:47.119 --> 01:33:49.789 Then if the council does approve it the incentive is 01:33:49.789 --> 01:33:50.880 administered 01:33:51.479 --> 01:33:54.720 By economic development for the term of the incentive. So 01:33:54.720 --> 01:33:58.020 does anyone have any questions about the basic steps that 01:34:03.840 --> 01:34:06.300 Okay, you guys are being really patient I know this is a 01:34:06.300 --> 01:34:09.500 lot today this presentation part of the presentation is a 01:34:09.500 --> 01:34:10.079 lot shorter 01:34:10.079 --> 01:34:12.079 But Jill said she has a lot of questions 01:34:16.079 --> 01:34:18.079 All right, so we're going to talk about kids 01:34:21.640 --> 01:34:22.760 As I said earlier our council members and economic 01:34:22.760 --> 01:34:28.359 development staff have been receiving an increased number 01:34:28.359 --> 01:34:28.680 of 01:34:28.960 --> 01:34:32.510 Inquiries regarding kids a lot of them are regarding 01:34:32.510 --> 01:34:36.760 residential kids as opposed to specifically mixed-use 01:34:37.520 --> 01:34:39.520 or commercial kids 01:34:40.159 --> 01:34:43.029 Only one public improvement district has actually been 01:34:43.029 --> 01:34:45.560 established in the city of Denton today 01:34:45.560 --> 01:34:49.720 That's the razor ranch kid number one is its official name 01:34:49.720 --> 01:34:52.960 and that was set up in March of 2014 01:34:53.920 --> 01:34:56.840 The reimbursement agreement for that kid was approved by 01:34:56.840 --> 01:34:59.020 council in March 2016 01:34:59.680 --> 01:35:03.279 However, the service and assessment plan that's required 01:35:03.920 --> 01:35:08.470 Under state law as part of a kid has not yet been submitted 01:35:08.470 --> 01:35:10.399 by the developer. So 01:35:11.199 --> 01:35:13.199 we're kind of 01:35:13.479 --> 01:35:18.630 At a holding point until they produce that plan because we 01:35:18.630 --> 01:35:21.720 cannot move forward with having it approved by council 01:35:21.720 --> 01:35:23.720 Which is the next step? 01:35:23.840 --> 01:35:25.840 Until they produce the plan 01:35:28.159 --> 01:35:30.399 Do we know why that's happening 01:35:30.399 --> 01:35:33.220 I mean is it is there a time limit on that and is there an 01:35:33.220 --> 01:35:36.539 issue that they're trying to work out there has to be 01:35:37.119 --> 01:35:39.970 An approval of a service and assessment plan within five 01:35:39.970 --> 01:35:42.319 years of the establishment of the PID 01:35:42.479 --> 01:35:43.520 Okay 01:35:43.520 --> 01:35:47.319 As my understanding of the state law as to why it hasn't 01:35:47.319 --> 01:35:50.399 been done yet. I don't know the answer to that 01:35:50.399 --> 01:35:54.079 So is this the last year? It's 2019. It would have to be 01:35:54.079 --> 01:35:55.560 done by March of 2019 01:35:56.479 --> 01:35:58.479 Next year. Okay 01:36:04.560 --> 01:36:08.659 So again we have gone through a review and revision process 01:36:08.659 --> 01:36:10.600 of the existing PID guidelines 01:36:11.199 --> 01:36:14.300 Kind of looking back over the types of requests that we've 01:36:14.300 --> 01:36:14.880 received 01:36:15.520 --> 01:36:18.380 Did a review of policies from comparable communities 01:36:18.380 --> 01:36:20.319 including Dallas Fort Worth 01:36:21.039 --> 01:36:25.600 Grand Prairie Kyle and Sealy and then we discussed our 01:36:26.840 --> 01:36:29.399 proposals and you know issues that we've 01:36:30.199 --> 01:36:32.760 Encountered ourselves in economic development with the 01:36:32.760 --> 01:36:35.960 finance legal and city management departments 01:36:39.239 --> 01:36:42.649 So you all had a chance to look through the existing PID 01:36:42.649 --> 01:36:43.479 guidelines 01:36:44.520 --> 01:36:47.449 Very first thing that jumped out at me is as we say they 01:36:47.449 --> 01:36:49.109 have to submit an application, but we don't have an 01:36:49.109 --> 01:36:49.479 application 01:36:50.199 --> 01:36:53.159 Which is a little odd and seems like a good first step to 01:36:53.159 --> 01:36:56.090 develop an actual application to make sure that we're 01:36:56.090 --> 01:36:57.000 collecting all the information 01:36:57.000 --> 01:36:58.800 that we need 01:36:58.800 --> 01:36:59.960 then 01:36:59.960 --> 01:37:03.449 We felt like it was important and we saw in some of the 01:37:03.449 --> 01:37:04.439 other communities 01:37:04.840 --> 01:37:08.800 PID guidelines that they have these interdepartmental task 01:37:08.800 --> 01:37:11.840 forces that are pulled together to review applications 01:37:12.399 --> 01:37:14.399 Now we're already 01:37:14.560 --> 01:37:16.000 working together 01:37:16.000 --> 01:37:19.640 On most everything that we do very closely with legal and 01:37:19.640 --> 01:37:20.239 finance 01:37:20.800 --> 01:37:23.399 But we think it would be important to pull in development 01:37:23.399 --> 01:37:27.329 services in this case because the existing PID guidelines 01:37:27.329 --> 01:37:28.039 talk about 01:37:28.159 --> 01:37:30.159 You know providing 01:37:31.000 --> 01:37:34.430 You know products in the case of housing in particular that 01:37:34.430 --> 01:37:36.739 go above and beyond what's required by 01:37:37.399 --> 01:37:41.170 the development codes and so we we think it would be 01:37:41.170 --> 01:37:44.520 beneficial to pull in some high level high level staff from 01:37:44.880 --> 01:37:47.090 development services to be a part of that task force to 01:37:47.090 --> 01:37:49.079 review the applications to make sure that 01:37:49.479 --> 01:37:51.479 What the developers proposing? 01:37:51.800 --> 01:37:53.800 Does indeed exceed 01:37:54.279 --> 01:37:57.399 the existing code requirement 01:37:58.720 --> 01:38:01.130 To address the issue that we're in right now where we don't 01:38:01.130 --> 01:38:02.720 have a service and assessment plan 01:38:03.960 --> 01:38:05.960 But we have a reimbursement agreement 01:38:06.439 --> 01:38:09.430 We think it is reasonable to require that the service and 01:38:09.430 --> 01:38:13.399 assessment plan be developed and submitted prior to the 01:38:13.399 --> 01:38:15.220 establishment of the PID itself 01:38:16.600 --> 01:38:20.039 That's just I think that's putting things in the correct 01:38:20.039 --> 01:38:20.640 order 01:38:23.399 --> 01:38:26.399 As just a reasonable step 01:38:28.119 --> 01:38:32.000 We also recommend requiring a developer funded and city 01:38:32.000 --> 01:38:34.630 administered fiscal impact analysis prior to the 01:38:34.630 --> 01:38:35.819 establishment of a PID 01:38:36.600 --> 01:38:38.600 to provide some 01:38:39.279 --> 01:38:42.439 Independent verification and this says city administered 01:38:42.439 --> 01:38:45.220 but that means that we would select a third party to 01:38:45.220 --> 01:38:45.760 perform 01:38:46.359 --> 01:38:49.520 this fiscal impact analysis because these are very complex 01:38:49.520 --> 01:38:50.640 instruments and 01:38:51.279 --> 01:38:54.640 You know, there are lots of moving parts and pieces 01:38:55.640 --> 01:38:59.640 So we would we would want to turn to a qualified 01:39:01.479 --> 01:39:04.750 Consulting firm to do that kind of analysis and then 01:39:04.750 --> 01:39:05.800 finally 01:39:06.520 --> 01:39:09.949 We think it might be reasonable to add a home value 01:39:09.949 --> 01:39:11.000 threshold 01:39:12.199 --> 01:39:14.399 Because again, we kind of talk about going above and beyond 01:39:14.399 --> 01:39:18.359 but we don't really define what that means and you know as 01:39:18.720 --> 01:39:20.840 As we all are aware, you know 01:39:20.840 --> 01:39:25.109 We do have a lack of some higher end housing in our 01:39:25.109 --> 01:39:27.399 community and you know 01:39:27.399 --> 01:39:30.800 A PID is a mechanism that you would use to try to encourage 01:39:30.800 --> 01:39:33.079 that type of higher end development 01:39:33.359 --> 01:39:37.630 So perhaps tying a threshold to the median home value of 01:39:37.630 --> 01:39:40.079 the city of Denton or the median home value of Denton 01:39:40.079 --> 01:39:40.439 County 01:39:40.640 --> 01:39:43.279 Again, the county median home value is higher 01:39:44.079 --> 01:39:48.640 The city median right now according to the last ACS is 01:39:49.720 --> 01:39:51.800 254,000 the county median is 01:39:52.680 --> 01:39:55.609 251,000 so there are just a couple of data points that can 01:39:55.609 --> 01:39:59.279 be looked at for the establishment of a minimum threshold 01:40:00.119 --> 01:40:03.119 and those are I believe 01:40:04.359 --> 01:40:08.359 Those are all of the changes that we wanted to bring to you 01:40:20.439 --> 01:40:22.649 And as time goes on that's just going to continue to drag 01:40:22.649 --> 01:40:26.680 the median down 01:40:28.199 --> 01:40:31.659 And then the infrastructure that the city's required to 01:40:31.659 --> 01:40:36.399 participate with going forward after it's built out 01:40:38.000 --> 01:40:38.000 Puts a burden unnecessary burden on the city as well as 01:40:38.000 --> 01:40:41.680 school district 01:40:42.760 --> 01:40:44.359 so I 01:40:44.359 --> 01:40:48.609 Think we need to look at something that better defines than 01:40:48.609 --> 01:40:51.199 just the median of the city of Denton or the median of the 01:40:51.199 --> 01:40:51.479 county 01:40:51.479 --> 01:40:55.520 We need to define what are we really looking for in those 01:40:55.520 --> 01:40:56.199 developments 01:40:57.119 --> 01:40:59.119 If I could take a step back 01:40:59.800 --> 01:41:03.140 the reason this was this happened this policy came about in 01:41:03.140 --> 01:41:04.359 2007 is because 01:41:05.199 --> 01:41:07.829 That was the time where a bunch of the larger residential 01:41:07.829 --> 01:41:09.720 developments were coming this direction 01:41:09.720 --> 01:41:13.140 The economy crashed and all that stuff nothing happened. So 01:41:13.140 --> 01:41:15.979 nothing's happened. Apparently it's coming back again. So 01:41:15.979 --> 01:41:17.359 we put this policy in place 01:41:18.159 --> 01:41:22.260 Back then with really the idea that we as an ED board at 01:41:22.260 --> 01:41:24.720 that time weren't real excited about 01:41:26.039 --> 01:41:27.560 incentivizing 01:41:27.560 --> 01:41:29.560 residential housing developments 01:41:30.079 --> 01:41:33.199 And if we were going to do anything like that 01:41:33.199 --> 01:41:35.199 There would have to be something that was extraordinarily 01:41:35.199 --> 01:41:37.819 above and beyond anything we would have in here not just 01:41:37.819 --> 01:41:38.600 because you get her home 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 01:41:41.939 --> 01:41:43.600 see now have pools and 01:41:44.720 --> 01:41:46.720 That's a normal type 01:41:48.520 --> 01:41:50.520 Situation but it needs to be 01:41:51.359 --> 01:41:54.770 If we have a lack of high-end housing whatever that 01:41:54.770 --> 01:41:57.399 definition is, I mean low-end housing to me is 01:41:58.279 --> 01:42:00.859 You know starter home to me still $100,000, but it's 01:42:00.859 --> 01:42:02.159 actually like 220 01:42:04.239 --> 01:42:07.210 So, I don't know where we come up with that value, but and 01:42:07.210 --> 01:42:08.899 I think it has to be a value not a 01:42:10.720 --> 01:42:14.640 Size of home or size of law or those kind of things and and 01:42:14.640 --> 01:42:17.119 that value will change over time 01:42:17.119 --> 01:42:19.119 So we've got to peg it to something that is 01:42:19.600 --> 01:42:21.079 that 01:42:21.079 --> 01:42:25.050 And I've been my opinion significantly higher than that. I 01:42:25.050 --> 01:42:26.600 don't think we want to incent 01:42:27.399 --> 01:42:29.399 my opinion 01:42:29.720 --> 01:42:32.359 Normal housing projects there's they're gonna come one way 01:42:32.359 --> 01:42:33.920 or another and they're 01:42:34.239 --> 01:42:36.239 not 01:42:36.439 --> 01:42:38.439 Creating jobs and 01:42:38.479 --> 01:42:42.199 Have a warm taxes. They're creating kids going to school 01:42:42.199 --> 01:42:44.430 I mean they're creating uses of all the things that we're 01:42:44.430 --> 01:42:46.079 having to pay for so yeah 01:42:46.760 --> 01:42:48.760 residential developments 01:42:48.840 --> 01:42:51.760 Residential developments do not cover their own cost of 01:42:51.760 --> 01:42:54.760 service period in our community at all 01:42:56.000 --> 01:42:58.000 so just 01:42:58.720 --> 01:43:02.649 One thing that I want to make sure that is clear is the way 01:43:02.649 --> 01:43:05.239 the way that these work with I mean 01:43:05.279 --> 01:43:07.489 PIDs work with either commercial or residential 01:43:07.489 --> 01:43:08.600 developments is 01:43:09.119 --> 01:43:11.439 that the property owner is assessed a fee and 01:43:12.119 --> 01:43:13.479 there are 01:43:13.479 --> 01:43:15.479 rules about excuse me 01:43:16.399 --> 01:43:19.649 The fees being disclosed and the fees are sensibly used to 01:43:19.649 --> 01:43:23.000 you know, make nicer things amenities in a residential 01:43:23.000 --> 01:43:24.479 development or commercial development 01:43:25.640 --> 01:43:30.359 But over time what happens as homes are sold and new 01:43:30.359 --> 01:43:32.960 residents come in that thread of 01:43:33.640 --> 01:43:36.810 I'm paying for additional amenities in my community via 01:43:36.810 --> 01:43:39.880 this assessment on my house that thread gets lost 01:43:39.880 --> 01:43:43.560 And so people just see additional fees that they have to 01:43:43.560 --> 01:43:44.560 pay but they don't really 01:43:45.359 --> 01:43:49.359 Connected and it can become it can become a real source of 01:43:50.239 --> 01:43:53.359 frustration for residents in these communities 01:43:53.840 --> 01:43:56.420 Over time really kind of like Jim was saying, you know 01:43:56.420 --> 01:43:58.479 these these they start somewhere 01:43:58.680 --> 01:44:02.000 They end up somewhere else in a lot of different senses 01:44:03.119 --> 01:44:06.279 So it's just another interesting thing to think about is is 01:44:06.279 --> 01:44:10.579 that is setting that up to exist over time. So 01:44:13.560 --> 01:44:16.399 Anybody have any other questions or comments 01:44:23.840 --> 01:44:26.500 My question is about the fiscal impact analysis and how 01:44:26.500 --> 01:44:29.270 that would be different from running it through the total 01:44:29.270 --> 01:44:30.439 impact 2.0 01:44:31.239 --> 01:44:34.680 Software is that not something similar? No, that's that 01:44:34.680 --> 01:44:37.039 program is for 01:44:37.560 --> 01:44:40.800 tax related incentives and PIDs are 01:44:41.399 --> 01:44:43.119 PIDs are 01:44:43.119 --> 01:44:46.279 They're they're done by fee assessments 01:44:47.159 --> 01:44:50.729 So I misspoke earlier. We're not giving incentives. We're 01:44:50.729 --> 01:44:51.819 allowing a bid to be 01:44:52.319 --> 01:44:54.319 brought in well and and 01:44:56.399 --> 01:45:00.180 People people would say that PIDs are incentive tools. They 01:45:00.180 --> 01:45:02.600 're just a different type of incentive tool. I mean 01:45:02.600 --> 01:45:03.279 basically when 01:45:04.279 --> 01:45:06.279 during the last 01:45:06.479 --> 01:45:08.479 financial crisis 01:45:08.560 --> 01:45:11.479 Developers stopped being able to get bank loans for these 01:45:11.479 --> 01:45:12.479 huge large-scale 01:45:14.720 --> 01:45:18.130 Development projects especially for residential and so they 01:45:18.130 --> 01:45:18.840 turn to 01:45:20.159 --> 01:45:23.399 cities as as a different financing mechanism 01:45:24.239 --> 01:45:26.239 through the sale of bonds PID bonds 01:45:26.840 --> 01:45:30.050 To help get their developments to a higher level. So it's 01:45:30.050 --> 01:45:33.579 the different it's a different type of resource for a 01:45:33.579 --> 01:45:34.359 developer 01:45:35.399 --> 01:45:37.399 But yeah total impact doesn't apply 01:45:38.279 --> 01:45:40.279 to PIDs 01:45:45.159 --> 01:45:47.560 I just wanted to add a little bit of color for that on the 01:45:47.560 --> 01:45:50.239 PIDs. So it is different than the total impact 2.0 01:45:50.680 --> 01:45:53.159 In PIDs as Caroline said they're very complicated 01:45:53.159 --> 01:45:55.850 instruments. And so you're faced with a situation with a 01:45:55.850 --> 01:45:57.000 developer coming in saying 01:45:57.640 --> 01:45:59.640 We would like to do this development 01:45:59.960 --> 01:46:02.239 Whatever type and character that they're talking about 01:46:02.640 --> 01:46:05.510 But we're short by 50 million dollars or a hundred million 01:46:05.510 --> 01:46:08.159 dollars for all this infrastructure that's needed 01:46:08.279 --> 01:46:11.250 We need a detailed analysis an independent third-party 01:46:11.250 --> 01:46:14.640 analysis that says really what are the financials of this 01:46:14.640 --> 01:46:14.960 development? 01:46:15.439 --> 01:46:17.850 What's how much money are you making on each one of these 01:46:17.850 --> 01:46:18.359 lots? 01:46:18.359 --> 01:46:19.800 What's your profit margin? 01:46:19.800 --> 01:46:22.359 How much is really needed from a PID versus how much can be 01:46:22.359 --> 01:46:24.159 financed through the development? 01:46:24.159 --> 01:46:26.399 And to truly have an independent view of that because 01:46:26.399 --> 01:46:28.779 otherwise you really don't know what you what you really 01:46:28.779 --> 01:46:29.479 need to issue 01:46:29.479 --> 01:46:32.119 And how much really needs to be assessed how much of this 01:46:32.119 --> 01:46:34.279 is for profit for the developer versus? 01:46:35.680 --> 01:46:38.079 What's really needed there the other thing is you're trying 01:46:38.079 --> 01:46:39.039 to understand 01:46:39.600 --> 01:46:42.409 What's the value of the enhanced amenities? We're talking 01:46:42.409 --> 01:46:44.199 about home values as an example 01:46:44.199 --> 01:46:46.210 that's kind of one of those it's probably easier to put 01:46:46.210 --> 01:46:46.960 your finger on but 01:46:47.800 --> 01:46:50.380 Really these all the PID assessments have to be paid in 01:46:50.380 --> 01:46:53.840 that development to have higher level amenities 01:46:53.840 --> 01:46:56.399 So that could be parks. It could be trails. It could be 01:46:57.079 --> 01:46:59.079 What you're talking about pools and those kinds of things 01:46:59.079 --> 01:47:01.239 like that. What's the cost of those? 01:47:01.239 --> 01:47:03.350 How do we know that cost is accurate and that you really 01:47:03.350 --> 01:47:04.840 know what you're getting for the PID? 01:47:04.840 --> 01:47:07.680 So that's the kind of work we're looking at and as we've 01:47:07.680 --> 01:47:10.140 had these developments come through you're kind of you're 01:47:10.140 --> 01:47:11.439 struggling to understand 01:47:11.760 --> 01:47:14.000 Really what those details are without looking at it? 01:47:14.439 --> 01:47:16.279 So hopefully that helps provide a little color 01:47:16.279 --> 01:47:19.229 I did want to mention one other thing about the home values 01:47:19.229 --> 01:47:21.119 is I think as we we've looked at this 01:47:21.119 --> 01:47:24.000 There's an average across the city or across the county, 01:47:24.000 --> 01:47:25.600 but that's all kinds of product 01:47:25.600 --> 01:47:28.449 It's some of its old some of us knew as we've seen new home 01:47:28.449 --> 01:47:31.039 developments come in and new homes being built 01:47:31.039 --> 01:47:33.890 The average value is much higher that we're getting without 01:47:33.890 --> 01:47:35.640 any kind of incentive or any kind of 01:47:36.279 --> 01:47:38.479 PID or development incentive 01:47:38.640 --> 01:47:41.119 So it really I think the starting place should be the 01:47:41.119 --> 01:47:43.829 market values that you're getting on an average that are 01:47:43.829 --> 01:47:45.039 coming in and what? 01:47:45.039 --> 01:47:47.039 Above that would you want to get? 01:47:47.359 --> 01:47:49.439 And what would that number look like and maybe there's a 01:47:49.439 --> 01:47:51.199 way to look at that as percentage terms 01:47:51.560 --> 01:47:54.020 Rather than a fixed number because this policy can be put 01:47:54.020 --> 01:47:56.239 in place and it may be a few years before you ever come 01:47:56.239 --> 01:47:56.640 back to it 01:47:56.960 --> 01:48:01.399 Is is landtown within the ETJ of the city of Denton? Yes, 01:48:01.399 --> 01:48:01.520 sir 01:48:01.520 --> 01:48:05.710 It is it is a it's a mud a municipal utility district. 01:48:05.710 --> 01:48:07.960 There's actually several of those and that development 01:48:07.960 --> 01:48:10.520 So it doesn't have a pin. It's a little bit different 01:48:10.520 --> 01:48:11.680 financing mechanism 01:48:12.319 --> 01:48:16.840 And actually have a tax rate, which is basically a dollar 01:48:17.720 --> 01:48:20.880 It's a full 1% of the value of those properties that are 01:48:20.880 --> 01:48:24.920 paid back for that mud. I used to do lids 01:48:26.319 --> 01:48:28.319 WC IDs 01:48:28.760 --> 01:48:32.359 In my former life water control and improvement districts 01:48:33.399 --> 01:48:35.970 Levy improvement districts, so I'm familiar with the 01:48:35.970 --> 01:48:38.649 complexity of financing, but they were tied to the Texas 01:48:38.649 --> 01:48:40.560 Water Rights Commission and 01:48:41.800 --> 01:48:45.180 They had authority over the the water rights and then 01:48:45.180 --> 01:48:47.800 allowing these subdivisions to have taxation 01:48:47.800 --> 01:48:51.390 so all the rights would then stay with the city of Denton 01:48:51.390 --> 01:48:52.079 rather than 01:48:53.119 --> 01:48:55.479 Yeah, I'm not sure on that particular piece 01:48:56.319 --> 01:48:59.239 PIDs but pids are different than that. They're not tied to 01:48:59.239 --> 01:49:01.239 the water rights. Okay, just about infrastructure 01:49:01.239 --> 01:49:03.239 So sorry to get you off track 01:49:03.399 --> 01:49:05.399 information 01:49:06.159 --> 01:49:09.079 Question more of a statement just a generalization and kind 01:49:09.079 --> 01:49:09.199 of 01:49:10.199 --> 01:49:12.199 basic hit it's 01:49:12.319 --> 01:49:16.390 The city allowing a developer to charge the person who buys 01:49:16.390 --> 01:49:18.840 the home an extra tax really so there 01:49:18.840 --> 01:49:20.840 It's an extra fee or it's an extra tax 01:49:21.079 --> 01:49:24.279 For that person in that area as opposed to the person who 01:49:24.279 --> 01:49:26.640 may be on the other side of the street 01:49:27.000 --> 01:49:29.000 So right, okay 01:49:29.079 --> 01:49:31.079 Yeah, that's what it is and 01:49:31.720 --> 01:49:34.149 You know some people coming into these master plan 01:49:34.149 --> 01:49:34.880 communities 01:49:34.880 --> 01:49:37.810 They feel there's value in that and that's worth whatever 01:49:37.810 --> 01:49:40.140 it might be a five hundred to a thousand dollar fee on an 01:49:40.140 --> 01:49:40.840 annual basis 01:49:40.840 --> 01:49:42.779 They think that's worth it because of the level of 01:49:42.779 --> 01:49:44.199 amenities that they're getting 01:49:45.439 --> 01:49:47.720 Justified in some way, but if they don't then they're 01:49:47.720 --> 01:49:49.079 obviously gonna be dissatisfied 01:49:49.279 --> 01:49:53.050 But it's different than an HOA fee. It is right it is and 01:49:53.050 --> 01:49:56.359 so you can have a PID assessment and an HOA 01:49:56.479 --> 01:49:58.479 on top of it and 01:49:58.479 --> 01:50:02.399 In many cases they do have both so you might have the HOA 01:50:03.279 --> 01:50:05.829 Doing some common area maintenance or pool maintenance or 01:50:05.829 --> 01:50:07.380 those kinds of facilities 01:50:08.039 --> 01:50:10.039 And then the PIP would be other things 01:50:10.520 --> 01:50:12.520 It's kind of a one-time 01:50:12.800 --> 01:50:16.140 Typically used to issue bonds as as Caroline's mentioned so 01:50:16.140 --> 01:50:18.689 you finance some improvements or infrastructure and then 01:50:18.689 --> 01:50:19.880 pay that off over time 01:50:20.199 --> 01:50:22.199 But the bonds are issued by the city 01:50:26.760 --> 01:50:29.710 What thank you Brian one follow-up though, I don't I don't 01:50:29.710 --> 01:50:31.100 know that that character 01:50:31.720 --> 01:50:34.970 Characterization is exactly accurate in most instances. 01:50:34.970 --> 01:50:37.720 They're they're removed from other neighborhoods, right? 01:50:37.720 --> 01:50:40.319 I mean, it's not you're not right next there. They're not 01:50:40.319 --> 01:50:41.600 coming to North Lakes and saying hey 01:50:41.600 --> 01:50:43.920 We're gonna put be right next to a neighborhood is 01:50:44.479 --> 01:50:47.399 Traditionally, I mean so you I think 380 Savannah 01:50:47.399 --> 01:50:50.840 That's right at one point in time was out by itself 01:50:50.840 --> 01:50:53.189 Then there's that other the other neighborhood subsequent 01:50:53.189 --> 01:50:53.500 to that 01:50:53.500 --> 01:50:56.739 So I don't is is there an instance that I'm missing where 01:50:56.739 --> 01:50:57.079 it's 01:50:57.640 --> 01:51:01.029 Right next to a development because I don't think that 01:51:01.029 --> 01:51:02.640 comparison is accurate if you're talking 01:51:02.920 --> 01:51:04.920 Hey, my neighbor just across 01:51:07.039 --> 01:51:10.689 What is that what give me that's I'm saying there's not any 01:51:10.689 --> 01:51:13.000 indented right now well even outside of it 01:51:13.000 --> 01:51:15.789 I don't know that that because they're the primary argument 01:51:15.789 --> 01:51:16.800 is the infrastructure 01:51:16.800 --> 01:51:19.630 So if you're saying the infrastructure is right across the 01:51:19.630 --> 01:51:20.680 street, but I need 01:51:21.640 --> 01:51:24.840 Help bankroll in the infrastructure. That's not gonna hold 01:51:24.840 --> 01:51:25.159 water 01:51:25.159 --> 01:51:27.390 I'll give you an example is one that we've talked about 01:51:27.390 --> 01:51:29.100 with a council in the past is coal ranch 01:51:29.100 --> 01:51:32.050 It's out on the southwest side of the city really undevelop 01:51:32.050 --> 01:51:33.560 ed part of the city right now 01:51:33.720 --> 01:51:36.819 So for right now there would really be no one across the 01:51:36.819 --> 01:51:38.100 street that would be an issue 01:51:38.239 --> 01:51:41.500 But over time 10 20 30 years is that area develops you 01:51:41.500 --> 01:51:43.159 could have another development next to it 01:51:43.199 --> 01:51:46.199 They could have different costs and different amenities 01:51:46.760 --> 01:51:49.689 But typically they're pretty large self-contained master 01:51:49.689 --> 01:51:50.439 plan communities 01:51:50.439 --> 01:51:52.520 But you could have something across the street. That's not 01:51:52.960 --> 01:51:55.489 Yeah, and I'm not aware of one right now that exactly and I 01:51:55.489 --> 01:51:56.680 know am I and so yeah 01:51:56.680 --> 01:51:59.000 You're telling me there's a premium for being the first one 01:51:59.000 --> 01:52:02.000 sure I mean that that is that's 01:52:03.800 --> 01:52:06.199 Par for the courses I understand you don't have to be the 01:52:06.199 --> 01:52:08.199 first one there you can wait it out and then move 01:52:08.520 --> 01:52:11.600 Later and not pay that or that's my thing 01:52:11.600 --> 01:52:13.729 I just wanted to make that distinction that it's not I've 01:52:13.729 --> 01:52:17.239 not I'm not aware of one which right across the street and 01:52:17.920 --> 01:52:21.460 Two people initially are paying different rates down the 01:52:21.460 --> 01:52:24.340 road. You're absolutely correct happen. Yes, so Brian. Yes, 01:52:24.340 --> 01:52:24.539 sir 01:52:25.760 --> 01:52:28.819 Tell us why the city cares or there's we have pids or not 01:52:29.520 --> 01:52:32.640 The city's issuing bonds. I mean there's the risk is right 01:52:32.640 --> 01:52:33.220 with that 01:52:33.220 --> 01:52:34.880 So I guess I think that's probably what we're all 01:52:34.880 --> 01:52:38.579 struggling with. I think there is some rest to the city 01:52:38.579 --> 01:52:40.720 There's certainly a reputational risk of 01:52:41.439 --> 01:52:44.149 City's names on the bonds and if they were to default there 01:52:44.149 --> 01:52:46.680 's some administrative things that we could talk about later 01:52:46.800 --> 01:52:48.800 and we have to handle with that but 01:52:49.439 --> 01:52:51.439 another aspect of that is 01:52:51.640 --> 01:52:54.149 Maybe touched on this is there is a political element to 01:52:54.149 --> 01:52:54.760 this of 01:52:55.800 --> 01:52:58.609 Someone's paying whatever it might be a thousand dollars in 01:52:58.609 --> 01:53:01.689 taxes and in this development you might be paying two 01:53:01.689 --> 01:53:02.439 thousand dollars 01:53:02.760 --> 01:53:04.720 Because you have the PID 01:53:04.720 --> 01:53:08.909 Is there going to be a push by that community not approved 01:53:08.909 --> 01:53:11.600 bond packages to prove packages for schools? 01:53:11.600 --> 01:53:13.600 Are they going to have a different set of? 01:53:15.119 --> 01:53:17.359 Really kind of thoughts about how they want to approach 01:53:17.359 --> 01:53:19.159 government and some of the things that are there 01:53:19.159 --> 01:53:21.380 Is that politically are you creating a different group that 01:53:21.380 --> 01:53:23.640 's going to really struggle to approve things in the future? 01:53:23.640 --> 01:53:26.840 I think that's a concern. I don't know if that would happen 01:53:26.840 --> 01:53:27.199 or not 01:53:27.680 --> 01:53:30.560 But I can tell you talking to some people I know who live 01:53:30.560 --> 01:53:32.569 in different developments. Sometimes they don't they really 01:53:32.569 --> 01:53:33.079 can't distinguish 01:53:33.800 --> 01:53:36.920 What's what who's who's paying what fee or what tax or what 01:53:36.920 --> 01:53:39.279 assessment or what mud or whatever? 01:53:39.279 --> 01:53:42.170 It's just one number to them and they kind of attribute it 01:53:42.170 --> 01:53:43.600 all just to the government 01:53:43.600 --> 01:53:46.750 So I think that's an issue we need to think about going 01:53:46.750 --> 01:53:47.319 forward 01:53:47.319 --> 01:53:50.159 I think the discussions that we had recently with the 01:53:50.159 --> 01:53:51.760 council over the last couple of years 01:53:52.199 --> 01:53:54.750 They were really concerned about doing it for primarily a 01:53:54.750 --> 01:53:57.600 single-family residential development and coal ranch 01:53:57.600 --> 01:53:58.840 without really understanding 01:53:58.920 --> 01:54:01.430 What that true amenity was going to be that they felt like 01:54:01.430 --> 01:54:02.359 was a higher level 01:54:02.359 --> 01:54:05.479 I think their thought was at the time that they were really 01:54:05.479 --> 01:54:07.720 saw these as more like commercial tools 01:54:09.079 --> 01:54:12.199 And that was the feedback I got at that point a commercial 01:54:13.600 --> 01:54:16.399 You could even have a bit of business improve in district 01:54:16.399 --> 01:54:19.720 the commercial you could pay for things like their own 01:54:19.720 --> 01:54:20.939 street cleanup and 01:54:21.199 --> 01:54:23.560 trash collection some stuff like that the right 01:54:24.279 --> 01:54:27.399 Businesses are are paying for and I think that even though 01:54:27.399 --> 01:54:31.359 razor ranch does have a potentially a small component of it 01:54:31.359 --> 01:54:34.699 It is residential most of that's a commercial development. 01:54:34.699 --> 01:54:35.920 So that's kind of the differences 01:54:35.920 --> 01:54:38.420 They saw but we've gotten a lot of interest recently on p 01:54:38.420 --> 01:54:38.619 eds 01:54:38.760 --> 01:54:41.350 most of them are single-family housing developments very 01:54:41.350 --> 01:54:43.840 large developments and we're kind of looking for some 01:54:43.840 --> 01:54:45.840 policy direction from this board and 01:54:45.840 --> 01:54:47.840 Council how you want to approach it? 01:54:48.000 --> 01:54:50.000 They are complicated 01:54:50.920 --> 01:54:53.149 Hope that adds a little I hope I didn't make it more more 01:54:53.149 --> 01:54:53.840 confusing 01:54:59.840 --> 01:55:04.649 I like the idea of having a multiple of the current new 01:55:04.649 --> 01:55:06.720 home market value 01:55:09.760 --> 01:55:11.760 I 01:55:14.640 --> 01:55:17.119 Like the idea of having a value threshold instead of the 01:55:17.119 --> 01:55:19.760 average value making that 01:55:20.640 --> 01:55:23.359 The average new home value whatever the definition is and 01:55:23.359 --> 01:55:25.239 having a multiple, you know 01:55:25.239 --> 01:55:27.560 It's got to be one and a quarter one and a half times that 01:55:28.079 --> 01:55:31.210 They're bringing enough amenities in but it's a big enough 01:55:31.210 --> 01:55:34.479 impact that you want to do that versus just somebody 01:55:36.279 --> 01:55:39.159 Return it to market rate as what? 01:55:56.439 --> 01:55:58.439 Yeah, no I am I 01:55:59.880 --> 01:56:03.170 Think there has to be a I don't know what it is and now how 01:56:03.170 --> 01:56:04.000 yield to you know 01:56:04.000 --> 01:56:06.689 Your expertise what other communities are doing but some 01:56:06.689 --> 01:56:09.159 sort of component that gives back to the community 01:56:09.159 --> 01:56:12.920 So for example in Austin, there's they required, you know 01:56:12.920 --> 01:56:15.579 low and moderate income housing to be a component of a 01:56:15.579 --> 01:56:16.359 percentage of 01:56:17.279 --> 01:56:20.739 one thing that jumps in my mind is a freeze of the 01:56:22.000 --> 01:56:26.409 HOA fees to have that manageable not skyrocket on those 01:56:26.409 --> 01:56:29.439 individuals, but some kind of component that says 01:56:30.319 --> 01:56:33.800 If we do make a decision to go down this road with you know 01:56:33.800 --> 01:56:37.220 , then there needs to be some kind of value add 01:56:37.920 --> 01:56:41.079 to those that are purchasing the house and then to in the 01:56:41.079 --> 01:56:44.439 community and then I guess a third part of that would be 01:56:44.960 --> 01:56:49.199 I like I would like to see what the residents are 01:56:50.359 --> 01:56:51.760 what 01:56:51.760 --> 01:56:53.529 Documentation is presented. So I don't know if there's a 01:56:53.529 --> 01:56:53.760 way to 01:56:54.640 --> 01:56:56.850 Standardize that because what my concern is in other 01:56:56.850 --> 01:56:59.079 neighborhoods. It's it's hey 01:56:59.560 --> 01:57:02.279 The realtor didn't tell us we're gonna be part of this HOA 01:57:02.279 --> 01:57:06.439 the opt-out period has passed or or hey that the PID 01:57:06.520 --> 01:57:09.119 paperwork wasn't clear didn't say and so 01:57:10.600 --> 01:57:12.390 Before you close on the house you have to get all that 01:57:12.390 --> 01:57:13.960 information that we 01:57:14.720 --> 01:57:18.590 It's all it's regulated by the federal government. Well, 01:57:18.590 --> 01:57:19.079 yes 01:57:20.439 --> 01:57:23.520 Control certain HOOA parameters because that's something 01:57:23.520 --> 01:57:23.680 that 01:57:24.600 --> 01:57:27.199 Is over and above what the city can do? 01:57:28.079 --> 01:57:30.079 Well better said 01:57:31.399 --> 01:57:32.560 I'm 01:57:32.560 --> 01:57:34.909 Unable to see it right now. I'm assuming they bury it some 01:57:34.909 --> 01:57:35.239 degree 01:57:35.239 --> 01:57:38.479 But if a resident comes to me and says hey, I wasn't told 01:57:38.479 --> 01:57:40.960 and I if they're borrowing money 01:57:40.960 --> 01:57:43.630 I promise you 100% they're not closing alone without 01:57:43.630 --> 01:57:46.159 knowing that information. They might not pay attention to 01:57:46.159 --> 01:57:46.279 it 01:57:48.960 --> 01:57:51.720 But still I don't get a chance where you see it every day 01:57:51.720 --> 01:57:55.560 right I don't and so I don't have it and it happened 01:57:55.560 --> 01:57:58.100 I'm sitting in HOA meeting like hey, I didn't I didn't know 01:57:58.100 --> 01:58:00.039 and the realtor didn't disclose that 01:58:00.039 --> 01:58:02.250 I'm just signing away or whatever and so it would be 01:58:02.250 --> 01:58:05.479 finished beneficial for me as a representative to say well 01:58:05.479 --> 01:58:06.399 the document 01:58:07.039 --> 01:58:10.060 Would look like this and it's traditionally here, you know, 01:58:10.060 --> 01:58:11.619 so it could be just an 01:58:12.439 --> 01:58:15.609 Educational session for me to sit down and say hey, here's 01:58:15.609 --> 01:58:17.239 how the documents organized traditionally 01:58:17.239 --> 01:58:18.439 Here's what they are, you know 01:58:18.439 --> 01:58:20.859 Because if you're talking about a subpoena a citation this 01:58:20.859 --> 01:58:23.449 Saturday other like another legal document that I'm 100% 01:58:23.449 --> 01:58:23.920 with you 01:58:23.920 --> 01:58:26.920 And I know how those flow but I just I'm ignorant to that 01:58:26.920 --> 01:58:28.960 and that question has come up words 01:58:30.119 --> 01:58:33.489 What did they get the document? I don't know. I mean did 01:58:33.489 --> 01:58:35.460 the realtor do his job or her job? 01:58:35.460 --> 01:58:36.119 I don't know 01:58:36.119 --> 01:58:39.640 But if I knew hey here's the form look like and it has to 01:58:39.640 --> 01:58:43.159 be presented to you then it just makes it easy conversation 01:58:43.720 --> 01:58:46.560 For me and I may be alone in that but that's just 01:58:46.560 --> 01:58:48.020 conversations I've had 01:58:49.119 --> 01:58:52.640 John Baines as a person who's had to do the auditing of 01:58:52.640 --> 01:58:55.359 several of these entities the 01:58:55.680 --> 01:58:58.260 Being a pain in the weave, you know 01:59:05.520 --> 01:59:07.520 More often than not 01:59:07.520 --> 01:59:10.800 More often than not people do not read the documents as 01:59:10.800 --> 01:59:12.039 they do as they should 01:59:12.640 --> 01:59:15.810 Yeah, I know for me if people are gonna do alone or 01:59:15.810 --> 01:59:16.359 anything 01:59:16.359 --> 01:59:18.760 I say give me the documents a couple of days ahead of time 01:59:18.760 --> 01:59:19.319 so I can read 01:59:19.640 --> 01:59:21.949 Because I'm not gonna just go in there and just say just 01:59:21.949 --> 01:59:23.619 sign this page, you know, this is what it says 01:59:23.619 --> 01:59:24.760 I don't like that 01:59:24.760 --> 01:59:27.310 So a lot of this happens though because this is the 01:59:27.310 --> 01:59:29.840 procedure that happens in a lot of these institutions 01:59:30.079 --> 01:59:33.819 So but like you say people need to make sure that they 01:59:33.819 --> 01:59:36.880 understand what they're signing on for it be it PID 01:59:37.479 --> 01:59:39.479 HOA, etc. Etc. Yes 01:59:47.359 --> 01:59:52.079 Please disregard prior comment audience at home. Thank you 01:59:54.760 --> 01:59:58.560 You have enough feedback from us and I think so 02:00:00.159 --> 02:00:02.520 So to just keep moving 02:00:03.239 --> 02:00:04.920 You guys have this in your backup 02:00:04.920 --> 02:00:04.920 This is the same kind of diagram about what the PID 02:00:04.920 --> 02:00:05.060 application process would look like if we made these 02:00:05.060 --> 02:00:11.840 particular 02:00:12.399 --> 02:00:14.399 suggested changes 02:00:14.560 --> 02:00:16.560 and 02:00:16.880 --> 02:00:21.119 Next steps for both the incentive policy and the PID 02:00:22.479 --> 02:00:24.770 Guidelines we're going to incorporate the feedback that y' 02:00:24.770 --> 02:00:28.319 all have given us today and we're gonna have a work session 02:00:28.840 --> 02:00:32.279 With council next week to share with them 02:00:32.960 --> 02:00:34.600 all of this 02:00:34.600 --> 02:00:39.479 great feedback and get their direction and then as I said 02:00:39.479 --> 02:00:40.119 earlier 02:00:40.760 --> 02:00:44.359 Will incorporate council's direction come back to EDP board 02:00:44.359 --> 02:00:47.800 and then eventually it will go to council for their final 02:00:48.560 --> 02:00:49.960 approval as 02:00:49.960 --> 02:00:51.960 individual consideration items, I 02:00:52.359 --> 02:00:55.880 Don't see on next steps come back to the DDP board. I just 02:00:55.880 --> 02:00:56.920 added that I 02:00:58.680 --> 02:01:02.409 Think when we come up with a direct minimum number of jobs 02:01:02.409 --> 02:01:03.140 or whatever 02:01:03.140 --> 02:01:05.670 I think we need to know what that is. I think you have a 02:01:05.670 --> 02:01:07.359 sense of what we want to do and 02:01:08.039 --> 02:01:11.840 Council may be 100% in agreement or not, but I'd like to 02:01:11.840 --> 02:01:15.119 think we left some things undefined that we'd like to be 02:01:15.119 --> 02:01:15.439 able to recommend 02:01:15.600 --> 02:01:19.560 We did and we'll we'll get that stuff incorporated make 02:01:19.560 --> 02:01:22.560 some suggestions so that y'all have something to react to 02:01:23.079 --> 02:01:25.649 At the next meeting and we'll make sure to get you your 02:01:25.649 --> 02:01:27.800 backup plenty of time ahead of time 02:01:27.800 --> 02:01:29.800 and I just want to take a second to 02:01:30.880 --> 02:01:33.340 Reiterate that anytime you get back up and you've got 02:01:33.340 --> 02:01:34.960 questions ahead of time 02:01:34.960 --> 02:01:37.159 I understand there are definitely some things that you 02:01:37.159 --> 02:01:39.119 would want to bring up in the course of the meeting 02:01:39.720 --> 02:01:42.989 With the group for discussion, but you're also always 02:01:42.989 --> 02:01:46.159 welcome to ask us for clarification in advance 02:01:46.640 --> 02:01:49.670 If if that can help you get more comfortable with the 02:01:49.670 --> 02:01:52.260 material you can still ask the question in the meeting, too 02:01:52.260 --> 02:01:54.960 But we're here to help be a resource 02:01:56.199 --> 02:01:58.619 Not just during the meeting but outside of it, too 02:02:00.960 --> 02:02:03.220 Yeah, okay, I think we already did that part 02:02:04.720 --> 02:02:09.000 May I make a suggestion in interest of time? 02:02:09.560 --> 02:02:13.199 I think y'all have probably heard me talk enough and Adam 02:02:13.199 --> 02:02:14.920 has a report to give but 02:02:15.159 --> 02:02:18.340 Are you comfortable with taking it out of order to let him 02:02:18.340 --> 02:02:20.119 come and give his report now? 02:02:20.640 --> 02:02:23.439 Or do you want to just stick with what's on the agenda? 02:02:24.399 --> 02:02:28.279 I am comfortable with leaving this along as fast as we can 02:02:30.680 --> 02:02:36.000 So I will I will offer to forego making my verbal report 02:02:36.000 --> 02:02:38.960 And I'll just send an email to the group with some detail 02:02:38.960 --> 02:02:40.359 about our activity 02:02:40.359 --> 02:02:45.130 I know that Jim had specifically requested last time that 02:02:45.130 --> 02:02:45.479 we 02:02:46.279 --> 02:02:50.039 Produce a report about all of the RFPs that we responded to 02:02:50.039 --> 02:02:53.739 in the last fiscal year that was included in your backup 02:02:54.680 --> 02:02:57.079 I'm glad to answer any questions about that, but I don't 02:02:57.079 --> 02:03:00.060 feel like in the interest of time. I need to go over it 02:03:00.060 --> 02:03:02.060 but 02:03:02.239 --> 02:03:04.239 Glad to answer any questions offline 02:03:04.239 --> 02:03:07.810 I think it'd be nice to maybe have that we have that back 02:03:07.810 --> 02:03:10.130 up we have questions when you add it to the agenda next 02:03:10.130 --> 02:03:10.640 time also 02:03:10.640 --> 02:03:12.640 Sure, sure 02:03:13.800 --> 02:03:15.800 Okay 02:03:16.199 --> 02:03:18.199 He's anybody 02:03:18.239 --> 02:03:21.119 Have any questions or we have all the backup on the reports 02:03:21.119 --> 02:03:23.279 . We have all the information. Do you want to hear more? 02:03:24.079 --> 02:03:26.880 Or you want to look at and have questions? I would like to 02:03:26.880 --> 02:03:29.239 if you have an update on the downtown fire 02:03:29.239 --> 02:03:30.760 I would like to hear that 02:03:30.760 --> 02:03:34.100 Yes, Julie is here to do that update and I just want to 02:03:34.100 --> 02:03:37.319 thank all of you again for your great review and comments 02:03:37.319 --> 02:03:37.720 and feedback 02:03:38.520 --> 02:03:41.569 It was a great discussion. So thank you. So we're done with 02:03:41.569 --> 02:03:45.000 our work session. We need to start our regular meeting 02:03:46.119 --> 02:03:48.960 with EDP 18 - 002 02:03:49.720 --> 02:03:51.720 We're going to forego any 02:03:52.399 --> 02:03:56.020 comments on staff reports except for number four 02:03:56.920 --> 02:03:58.920 update on the downtown fire 02:03:59.479 --> 02:04:02.460 Well, believe it or not. It has only been two weeks 02:04:02.460 --> 02:04:04.359 yesterday since that fire 02:04:04.359 --> 02:04:07.180 It feels like about two months to me and to other people I 02:04:07.180 --> 02:04:10.239 'm sure and even though it looks like nothing is happening 02:04:10.239 --> 02:04:12.760 There's a lot of stuff going on in the background. So 02:04:13.840 --> 02:04:15.840 Things we have done since the day of the fire 02:04:16.319 --> 02:04:18.720 Compiled a list of businesses and contact information for 02:04:18.720 --> 02:04:20.960 the fire department and police departments 02:04:21.279 --> 02:04:25.210 we gave the folks that were affected with the fire and in 02:04:25.210 --> 02:04:27.119 the line of smoke, etc a 02:04:27.399 --> 02:04:31.439 List of city businesses and I'm sorry services that they 02:04:31.439 --> 02:04:32.399 may find helpful 02:04:32.399 --> 02:04:35.800 Like if you need a dumpster call don't call the main number 02:04:35.800 --> 02:04:37.300 call this person. Here's her name 02:04:37.300 --> 02:04:40.470 Here's her direct line tell her who you are and she's gonna 02:04:40.470 --> 02:04:43.050 move you to the front of the line and expedite that service 02:04:43.050 --> 02:04:43.439 for you 02:04:44.800 --> 02:04:48.199 We've put in an application with the National Trust for 02:04:48.199 --> 02:04:50.880 Historic Preservation for an emergency grant 02:04:51.199 --> 02:04:53.760 For 108 North Locust, which is the mini mall 02:04:54.060 --> 02:04:57.050 we've also put in one for preservation Texas very small 02:04:57.050 --> 02:05:00.279 grant that would cover some engineering cost for them and 02:05:01.560 --> 02:05:05.079 As of yesterday, we started working on one for Jupiter 02:05:05.079 --> 02:05:06.279 House as well 02:05:07.520 --> 02:05:10.960 To look at the wall there that has maybe some issues 02:05:10.960 --> 02:05:13.619 I sent a bunch of information to the Texas Main Street 02:05:13.619 --> 02:05:17.470 Architect and they have provided some information back to 02:05:17.470 --> 02:05:17.720 us 02:05:18.239 --> 02:05:21.010 about other cities that have had fires and how they dealt 02:05:21.010 --> 02:05:21.720 with it and 02:05:22.439 --> 02:05:25.220 Here's some ideas that when as you go to redevelop this 02:05:25.220 --> 02:05:27.609 property, here's some ideas that the owners might be able 02:05:27.609 --> 02:05:27.880 to use 02:05:28.260 --> 02:05:30.720 You know the courthouse took on a lot of smoke and soot 02:05:30.720 --> 02:05:34.149 through their HVAC system and the fact the wind was blowing 02:05:34.149 --> 02:05:34.479 that way 02:05:34.479 --> 02:05:38.689 That day so they have spent a couple of weeks cleaning up. 02:05:38.689 --> 02:05:39.880 They were back in their offices yesterday 02:05:40.680 --> 02:05:44.600 the museum will be closed for several months as they have 02:05:44.600 --> 02:05:44.800 to 02:05:45.319 --> 02:05:49.760 Take every artifact out of its box unwrap it clean it if 02:05:49.760 --> 02:05:49.899 necessary 02:05:50.560 --> 02:05:53.279 rewrap it in new bubble wrap put it back in a new box and 02:05:54.159 --> 02:05:57.270 Then update their system where they know where everything 02:05:57.270 --> 02:05:57.479 is 02:05:58.760 --> 02:06:02.409 We've been I've been in contact everybody's been in contact 02:06:02.409 --> 02:06:03.420 with them through emails 02:06:04.119 --> 02:06:06.579 Text phone calls if you saw me run out a couple of times. 02:06:06.579 --> 02:06:09.199 That's what it was. It was Joey calling about something 02:06:09.859 --> 02:06:13.340 We still have downtown mini mall Jupiter House Lottie dot 02:06:13.340 --> 02:06:15.439 and shop the barn remain closed 02:06:17.119 --> 02:06:21.130 There we need a structural engineer to go look the firewall 02:06:21.130 --> 02:06:23.600 s held which was amazing and wonderful 02:06:23.880 --> 02:06:26.359 But some damage may have been done to those walls that need 02:06:26.359 --> 02:06:30.039 to be fixed before those businesses can can reopen 02:06:30.359 --> 02:06:33.550 We do have a partial closure of Austin Street and the fence 02:06:33.550 --> 02:06:37.220 goes out into Lucas Street taking up those parking spaces 02:06:38.119 --> 02:06:40.319 We know that fence is an issue and we're working to resolve 02:06:40.319 --> 02:06:43.439 that as quickly as possible. But until we can get 02:06:44.399 --> 02:06:48.319 until the wills can get a structural engineer and 02:06:48.800 --> 02:06:51.819 Get their plans to over to development services at which 02:06:51.819 --> 02:06:54.720 time their permit will be forthwith 02:06:56.800 --> 02:06:59.039 We've got to have some plans before we can move that fence 02:06:59.039 --> 02:07:02.399 back secure the walls and move the fence back at this time 02:07:02.399 --> 02:07:05.489 If anything were to happen and either of those walls 02:07:05.489 --> 02:07:06.560 decided to come down 02:07:06.640 --> 02:07:09.210 Hopefully that fence would contain it and protect people 02:07:09.210 --> 02:07:12.119 passing by so that's that's why that's still there 02:07:14.560 --> 02:07:17.479 That's pretty much it unless you have questions 02:07:17.479 --> 02:07:19.000 Okay, we have a question 02:07:19.000 --> 02:07:22.359 I do have a question because I've heard structural engineer 02:07:22.359 --> 02:07:25.319 like for the past two weeks from the very beginning 02:07:25.720 --> 02:07:29.510 So is that the who who is that whose responsibility is that 02:07:29.510 --> 02:07:32.239 is it the city structural engine? 02:07:32.239 --> 02:07:35.619 Is it the because each individual from what I gather is 02:07:35.619 --> 02:07:39.010 there the difficulty that it's having is that there's 02:07:39.010 --> 02:07:40.039 different? 02:07:40.359 --> 02:07:42.920 Insurances there's a tenant and then there's the building 02:07:42.920 --> 02:07:43.279 owner 02:07:44.079 --> 02:07:47.720 Is it the the insurance adjuster who's sending the 02:07:47.720 --> 02:07:50.800 structural engineer out and that what we're waiting for or? 02:07:51.279 --> 02:07:53.989 In the case of the wills and I have not spoken to their 02:07:53.989 --> 02:07:56.520 insurance people. I've just been in direct contact with 02:07:56.520 --> 02:07:56.720 them 02:07:56.720 --> 02:08:00.199 I understood they needed three different bids from three 02:08:00.199 --> 02:08:03.039 companies and there are private companies that links 02:08:03.039 --> 02:08:04.199 construction looked at that 02:08:04.199 --> 02:08:06.560 I know a couple of others did as well 02:08:07.479 --> 02:08:09.479 But I think it's up to them to get the bids and then take 02:08:09.479 --> 02:08:12.159 it to the insurance company and say here's our bids and 02:08:12.159 --> 02:08:12.479 make a 02:08:12.479 --> 02:08:15.159 Decision but it's not the city's obligate 02:08:15.159 --> 02:08:18.130 It is not our obligation and the fencing that is up right 02:08:18.130 --> 02:08:19.520 now was covered by their 02:08:20.319 --> 02:08:23.109 Their insurance and serve appropriate that fence up the day 02:08:23.109 --> 02:08:25.670 of the fire once they got it under control and they are 02:08:25.670 --> 02:08:26.760 paying for that 02:08:26.760 --> 02:08:29.800 I just want to make sure that as the city we are doing and 02:08:29.800 --> 02:08:31.819 and I think on like Jupiter house 02:08:31.880 --> 02:08:34.560 Well both buildings on each side. There's a tenant. There's 02:08:34.560 --> 02:08:35.359 a building owner 02:08:36.239 --> 02:08:38.960 I've talked to Frank Zangrel several times about Jupiter 02:08:38.960 --> 02:08:40.279 house and Joey. I 02:08:41.159 --> 02:08:44.109 Think that Frank is the one taking the lead on that because 02:08:44.109 --> 02:08:46.460 I believe Joey has like content insurance 02:08:46.460 --> 02:08:49.640 But Frank has the building insurance. So yeah, there's some 02:08:49.640 --> 02:08:50.939 there's a few complex things 02:08:50.939 --> 02:08:53.800 But it's just gonna take a little time before we can work 02:08:53.800 --> 02:08:54.279 through it 02:08:55.359 --> 02:08:58.520 Are we any closer to knowing the cause of the fire? 02:08:58.520 --> 02:09:02.029 Is that still invest and until we can get those front and 02:09:02.029 --> 02:09:04.720 back facades kind of shored up and we're trying to do 02:09:04.720 --> 02:09:04.880 everything 02:09:04.880 --> 02:09:08.359 We can to save the historic facade on the front side until 02:09:08.359 --> 02:09:09.880 we can get those shored up 02:09:09.880 --> 02:09:13.220 It's really not safe to let anybody in there including the 02:09:13.220 --> 02:09:13.720 firemen 02:09:13.880 --> 02:09:16.810 So once that happens the fire department will go back in 02:09:16.810 --> 02:09:18.479 and make see if they can make an assessment 02:09:18.479 --> 02:09:21.930 I've been told that we may not know because it was a long 02:09:21.930 --> 02:09:23.680 hot fire, you know 02:09:24.199 --> 02:09:27.369 And then the cleanup crews can come in after that after the 02:09:27.369 --> 02:09:28.199 firemen look at it 02:09:28.199 --> 02:09:30.779 See if they can find a cause make sure everything safe for 02:09:30.779 --> 02:09:32.100 the cleanup crews to come in 02:09:32.560 --> 02:09:34.560 And so who does that? 02:09:35.239 --> 02:09:38.520 The initial step with the walls the shoring up of the walls 02:09:38.560 --> 02:09:41.920 That will be the whoever the company is that the wills hire 02:09:41.920 --> 02:09:44.159 to do that. They'll draw some plans up. I 02:09:45.119 --> 02:09:47.640 imagined it's gonna be like scaffolding and then they'll be 02:09:47.640 --> 02:09:48.000 a 02:09:48.680 --> 02:09:51.609 Almost like a box like you see in some bigger cities when 02:09:51.609 --> 02:09:52.439 they're doing stuff 02:09:52.439 --> 02:09:55.479 So the pedestrians can walk under it and be protected in 02:09:55.479 --> 02:09:58.810 case anything were to fall from the you know from the 02:09:58.810 --> 02:09:59.659 construction 02:09:59.920 --> 02:10:01.840 Thank you 02:10:01.840 --> 02:10:03.840 Thanks, Julie 02:10:05.000 --> 02:10:07.000 Appreciate the update 02:10:07.279 --> 02:10:09.279 All right last item 02:10:09.399 --> 02:10:12.739 On the business agenda is our considered the minutes of our 02:10:12.739 --> 02:10:13.760 December 13th 02:10:14.640 --> 02:10:18.239 2017 meeting item EDP 1803 02:10:20.119 --> 02:10:22.520 Distributed advance and attached to the back of your packet 02:10:22.520 --> 02:10:24.659 . I'll love to take a motion 02:10:29.159 --> 02:10:34.720 Prior to today's meeting of the December 13th 2017 meeting 02:10:35.600 --> 02:10:39.239 We have a motion by Jill and the second by Carol Anne any 02:10:39.239 --> 02:10:40.680 further discussion 02:10:41.680 --> 02:10:45.159 All those in favor say aye. Aye any opposed? 02:10:46.039 --> 02:10:49.250 Minutes are approved unanimously and we are adjourned. 02:10:49.250 --> 02:10:50.600 Thank you for being here today