WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:09.060 Good morning. My name is Marty Rivers. I'm the chair of the Economic Development Partnership 00:00:09.060 --> 00:00:18.100 Board. It is 1117 and we're going to call our meeting to order. Thank our television 00:00:18.100 --> 00:00:22.740 audience for being patient. We're getting off to a late start. I'm sure there's a lot 00:00:22.740 --> 00:00:27.900 of people out there that are disappointed we got started late. All eight of them that 00:00:27.900 --> 00:00:35.500 are watching. So I've got a kind of a long agenda today so we'll get with it. Our first 00:00:35.500 --> 00:00:43.360 item for consideration is EDP 19-009 to receive a report and hold the discussion and make 00:00:43.360 --> 00:00:47.200 a recommendation to City Council regarding an ordinance on the expenditure of the fund 00:00:47.200 --> 00:00:53.920 balance of the general fund account related to the downtown reinvestment grant program. 00:00:53.920 --> 00:00:58.280 Thank you Mr. Chairman. I'm Caroline Booth, Director of Economic Development with the 00:00:58.280 --> 00:01:04.520 City of Denton and I have a quick presentation for you about this item which is really housekeeping 00:01:04.520 --> 00:01:10.600 related to spending down the remaining funds in the general fund for the downtown reinvestment 00:01:10.600 --> 00:01:19.960 grant program. So excuse me prior to fiscal year 2018-19 the program was funded with mixed 00:01:19.960 --> 00:01:41.480 beverage, sorry. So before the current fiscal year the program was funded with mixed beverage 00:01:41.480 --> 00:01:48.280 tax revenue in the general fund. In September 2018 council approved changing the funding 00:01:48.280 --> 00:01:55.640 source for this grant program from that source to the downtown TIF fund and updated the grant 00:01:55.640 --> 00:02:00.080 review process so that the expenditures for the program are reviewed by the downtown TIF 00:02:00.080 --> 00:02:05.800 board. The council at the same time expressed their desire for us to go ahead and spend 00:02:05.800 --> 00:02:12.840 those funds in the general fund account down to zero and so we need to have an ordinance 00:02:12.840 --> 00:02:19.160 that gives us a process and a procedure for spending those remaining funds. So this is 00:02:19.160 --> 00:02:24.440 really very straightforward. The ordinance up for your consideration it just establishes 00:02:24.440 --> 00:02:31.200 that process. The amount in the fund is a little over $108,000 and the way this is going 00:02:31.200 --> 00:02:38.680 to go is that those grants will still be subject to final approval by the city council but 00:02:38.680 --> 00:02:43.920 they will first be reviewed by the downtown task force and then come here to the economic 00:02:43.920 --> 00:02:50.120 development partnership board. So task force, EDP and then final vote by council. When those 00:02:50.120 --> 00:02:56.040 funds are spent down to zero the grant approval process will be downtown task force, downtown 00:02:56.040 --> 00:03:02.560 TIF board and final approval by council. So it's really straightforward but I'm happy 00:03:02.560 --> 00:03:06.460 to answer any questions that you have. Like I said this is really a housekeeping matter 00:03:06.460 --> 00:03:11.920 to make sure that we have a stated approval process in place to spend the remaining funds. 00:03:11.920 --> 00:03:19.560 Kiwi? You may have touched on this but I know that the requirements and the allowed uses 00:03:19.560 --> 00:03:24.160 for the money have changed when it goes over to the other funding mechanism. Will this 00:03:24.160 --> 00:03:30.640 ordinance allow those things to be included or is it for the original? We're going to 00:03:30.640 --> 00:03:35.840 proceed under the prior ordinance. I think really the only difference is that we added 00:03:35.840 --> 00:03:44.040 asbestos abatement and sprinkler fire suppression systems and so we'll just continue without 00:03:44.040 --> 00:03:49.680 those things until these funds are spent down. And then start? Yes ma'am then switch it completely 00:03:49.680 --> 00:03:59.920 over to the new process and new projects that can be included. One of the things we might 00:03:59.920 --> 00:04:08.040 remind everybody the downtown task force is actually a subcommittee of this board. That's 00:04:08.040 --> 00:04:12.480 why it's coming up here. It's a downtown economic development task force and we've always had 00:04:12.480 --> 00:04:18.920 a representative on this board on that task force. Jill Jester is that person right now. 00:04:18.920 --> 00:04:25.320 So it's an economic development task force related to downtown which is one of our original 00:04:25.320 --> 00:04:35.920 priorities when the EGP partnership was created. Any other questions for me? So we need to 00:04:35.920 --> 00:04:42.880 make a recommendation for that. I would entertain a motion. I'll move approval. We got a motion 00:04:42.880 --> 00:04:50.360 for approval. Does anybody have a second? Second. Second Mr. Eames. Anybody have any 00:04:50.360 --> 00:04:55.680 further discussion? I did have a question just for the sake of clarification. The $108,000 00:04:55.680 --> 00:05:04.680 will go to another fund? It stays where it is and is just spent down to zero as the grants 00:05:04.680 --> 00:05:09.680 are approved through the process. It's not moving anywhere. It's just staying right where 00:05:09.680 --> 00:05:17.800 it is. So how does that change? What are we changing here? Well when the funding source 00:05:17.800 --> 00:05:25.960 changed over to the downtown TIF fund we sort of wiped out the process that existed prior 00:05:25.960 --> 00:05:36.560 to that. So this is a clean up of wiping out that process. Any other discussion? All those 00:05:36.560 --> 00:05:44.360 in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. And it's a good thing 00:05:44.360 --> 00:05:49.840 we passed that because we've got a few downtown grants and I would like to call Julie Glover 00:05:49.840 --> 00:05:58.200 up. She will go over EDP 19, 1, 10, and 8. I don't know how we came up with those numbers 00:05:58.200 --> 00:06:04.080 but... You've got to be quick to get them in order. We'll look at those individually 00:06:04.080 --> 00:06:22.040 and then vote on those, make a recommendation. Thank you. So I am Julie Glover, Economic 00:06:22.040 --> 00:06:28.800 Development Program and Administrator for the city, aka Downtown Person. I passed, distributed 00:06:28.800 --> 00:06:35.760 these because Marty asked for a little bit of clarification on the scoring process and 00:06:35.760 --> 00:06:45.120 how this goes. I don't think you've seen one of these in a while because the old process, 00:06:45.120 --> 00:06:50.600 if it was up to $10,000 and under, the city manager could just sign off on it under the 00:06:50.600 --> 00:06:56.920 other program. Because of just the way it's working right now and we're kind of in limbo, 00:06:56.920 --> 00:07:00.760 we decided it'd be best just to go through the entire process no matter the amount on 00:07:00.760 --> 00:07:06.880 these grants. So just to review that these projects are reviewed with the considerations 00:07:06.880 --> 00:07:13.240 in mind that they, of course, comply with the building standards, the need for the renovations, 00:07:13.240 --> 00:07:18.200 the historical accuracy and design, the compatibility and relationship to the other buildings and 00:07:18.200 --> 00:07:24.680 streetscape and downtown development goals. And the new one is interior code improvement 00:07:24.680 --> 00:07:30.880 which is asbestos and mold removal and fire suppression. That's the new category. We took 00:07:30.880 --> 00:07:35.240 out location if you remember right on that because we used to say proximity to the courthouse 00:07:35.240 --> 00:07:41.080 or to the transit center. Since everything is going to be within the TIF because according 00:07:41.080 --> 00:07:44.960 to state law, we can only spend the TIF money within the TIF boundaries. The location thing 00:07:44.960 --> 00:07:51.000 was kind of redundant. And these are on the back of the sheets that I just gave you. So 00:07:51.000 --> 00:07:57.640 these are some definitions about facade rehabilitation, awnings and signs, just kind of making sure 00:07:57.640 --> 00:08:05.320 everybody knows. Impact fee reimbursement, utility upgrades. I think the mold and asbestos 00:08:05.320 --> 00:08:12.160 abatement and the fire suppression is pretty clear what that involves. So this is the scoring 00:08:12.160 --> 00:08:15.920 sheet that I just gave you. I know it's hard to see up here. That's why I went ahead and 00:08:15.920 --> 00:08:22.520 passed those out to you. Just how this works is there are these categories and the downtown 00:08:22.520 --> 00:08:29.120 task force is the first group to look at it. They score these on zero to five. The economic 00:08:29.120 --> 00:08:34.720 impact which would mean is this building creating more property tax? Is it creating sales tax? 00:08:34.720 --> 00:08:40.320 That sort of thing. The historic accuracy and design, we did add the design a few years 00:08:40.320 --> 00:08:46.040 back because we had some new construction that we're applying for this grant, too. Utility 00:08:46.040 --> 00:08:51.400 upgrades and impact fees that includes improvements to water, sewer, electrical improvements. 00:08:51.400 --> 00:08:54.840 Increases population sometimes is a little confusing, but that just means are you going 00:08:54.840 --> 00:09:00.200 to bring more people down here? That is daytime and nighttime. So if you have mixed use with 00:09:00.200 --> 00:09:05.160 apartments, that, you know, that counts with people being down here after work and if you're 00:09:05.160 --> 00:09:09.880 a restaurant, you have after hours people coming and going. The interior code improvements 00:09:09.880 --> 00:09:14.680 is the new category. Then we added this other category because sometimes the project is 00:09:14.680 --> 00:09:24.960 really good and they don't hit all these benchmarks and gives them a little bit of leeway to award 00:09:24.960 --> 00:09:32.760 a few extra points for a really good project. So just a little background. We've been doing 00:09:32.760 --> 00:09:40.720 this program since 2007. And 2012 we did do some changes to the program. We changed the 00:09:40.720 --> 00:09:46.320 name and a few other things at that point. And I think we adapted the scoring system 00:09:46.320 --> 00:09:52.520 at that point, too. And then recently the council approved the changes to the program, 00:09:52.520 --> 00:09:59.480 including the funding change that Caroline just talked about. And right now we just approved 00:09:59.480 --> 00:10:08.600 the draft ordinance that will go to council on February 26th. So no one touched Amy or 00:10:08.600 --> 00:10:15.660 Joey because they are sick, but they're here. Julie, can I ask you maybe just a clarification 00:10:15.660 --> 00:10:22.200 on the score sheets. Each of the task force members scores that on their own and then 00:10:22.200 --> 00:10:28.560 staff adds those up collectively and see where the average comes out in one of those categories. 00:10:28.560 --> 00:10:33.480 So staff adds, you know, we're usually doing staff reports or something. Christina and 00:10:33.480 --> 00:10:37.680 Michelle add them up. They divide it by the number of people who filled them out, and 00:10:37.680 --> 00:10:42.520 we get an average score that way. And some people grade hard and some people grade easy, 00:10:42.520 --> 00:10:49.440 so it kind of works out. So 106 North Locust Street. It's hard to believe this was over 00:10:49.440 --> 00:10:53.680 a year ago. This is the fire that happened on the east side of the square on the day 00:10:53.680 --> 00:11:02.000 after Christmas, actually the early morning the day after Christmas on December 26th. 00:11:02.000 --> 00:11:05.360 I don't know who took this picture. I didn't take it, but at this point I heard that the 00:11:05.360 --> 00:11:12.560 fire department was putting about 4,000 gallons of water a minute into the site. This is right 00:11:12.560 --> 00:11:18.240 before the fire, obviously, since the mini-mall wall is still there. Joey and Amy Hawkins, 00:11:18.240 --> 00:11:22.780 who own the business, they do not own the building, they own the business, had remodeled 00:11:22.780 --> 00:11:31.880 in 2017 before the fire. The new plans include putting in a full kitchen. They have recently 00:11:31.880 --> 00:11:38.280 closed Royals Bagels, so they made bagels and sweet, you know, cinnamon rolls and all 00:11:38.280 --> 00:11:43.080 those things up there. So now when Jupiter House reopens, maybe it's something up here 00:11:43.080 --> 00:11:48.520 that we're allergic to. So when they reopen, they're going to have a full kitchen. I have 00:11:48.520 --> 00:11:56.360 no idea where they can do their baking. They have some really nice plans for the inside 00:11:56.360 --> 00:12:02.800 that are going to make it look different, but still kind of feel the same, we think. 00:12:02.800 --> 00:12:08.760 So their eligible expenses, thank you, are $100,000 on the facade, $20,000 on awnings, 00:12:08.760 --> 00:12:14.760 $10,000 on signage. Still estimating the impact fees at this time was $10,000. Utility upgrades 00:12:14.760 --> 00:12:21.200 is $23,247, and we did put the asbestos in here, but even without that, it would still 00:12:21.200 --> 00:12:30.720 be above the $50,000 mark, which is $23,500. A total of eligible expenses is $186,747. 00:12:30.720 --> 00:12:34.400 We had at this point, when he first filled it out, the total cost of the project was 00:12:34.400 --> 00:12:42.760 $500,000, but I think that brings a smirk now. So they're asking for $25,000. So back 00:12:42.760 --> 00:12:47.840 in October, the downtown task force looked at this and they recommended a $25,000 grant. 00:12:47.840 --> 00:12:54.400 That was a 9 to 0. The average score on this was 27.3. If you'll see up here in the black 00:12:54.400 --> 00:13:00.360 part of this sheet, it tells you how that's broken down at 25 to 30. They can recommend 00:13:00.360 --> 00:13:10.320 up to 25,000, 20 to 24, up to 10,000, 15 to 19, up to 5,000, and under 14 does not warrant 00:13:10.320 --> 00:13:21.840 a grant. So I'd be happy to answer any questions. Like I said, Joey and Amy are here. If you 00:13:21.840 --> 00:13:25.160 would like to speak or if you would like to ask some questions. 00:13:25.160 --> 00:13:30.720 >> Do you guys got some questions? >> On the scoring sheets, are those ever made 00:13:30.720 --> 00:13:36.640 like listed in the backup, or is it just? >> We haven't in the past. You know, I mean, 00:13:36.640 --> 00:13:40.720 usually what we do is we just average them. I do have them in all the files. I mean, they're 00:13:40.720 --> 00:13:45.200 public record. If anybody wants to see them, they don't have anybody's name on them. You 00:13:45.200 --> 00:13:51.920 know, they're anonymous, so. >> And so the process is these bills that 00:13:51.920 --> 00:13:58.040 the invoices have already been paid, and so that this is just a reimbursement to the? 00:13:58.040 --> 00:14:02.560 >> So the way this works is it is a reimbursement, and they have not submitted these yet because 00:14:02.560 --> 00:14:08.640 they don't have a CO yet. Once they get a CO, and then we go through the invoices and 00:14:08.640 --> 00:14:12.120 kind of match them up, you know, category to category, and make sure everything's been 00:14:12.120 --> 00:14:16.560 done the way they said it was going to be done, it is a reimbursement at that point. 00:14:16.560 --> 00:14:22.720 >> But it's actually to the business owners, not the company. I only ask because there 00:14:22.720 --> 00:14:27.040 are some companies in there that I may have a conflict with, and so I just wanted to make 00:14:27.040 --> 00:14:31.760 sure that it's going to the? >> In this case, the building is owned by 00:14:31.760 --> 00:14:37.520 Frank Zangrel. So Mr. Zangrel did some work, and he got some insurance money, but this 00:14:37.520 --> 00:14:42.560 grant is specifically to the Hawkins, and the check goes to them. They have to pay for 00:14:42.560 --> 00:14:46.040 everything, and they have to prove that they have already paid for everything and had the 00:14:46.040 --> 00:14:49.200 work done before the reimbursement check can be issued. 00:14:49.200 --> 00:14:56.680 >> Thank you. I was just clarifying. I appreciate it. 00:14:56.680 --> 00:15:04.280 And I maybe have been dreaming this. Did you guys add a level or square footage in there? 00:15:04.280 --> 00:15:09.880 >> Don't breathe on the microphone. >> Just curious. 00:15:09.880 --> 00:15:26.520 >> They applauded, Steve. Chill gesture. Yeah, we added a mezzanine level on there, so square 00:15:26.520 --> 00:15:32.760 footage was, if I was guessing, I think it's probably like 15 by 30, and there's the windows 00:15:32.760 --> 00:15:40.920 on the top there, so it's just ultimately like a patio or something like that. 00:15:40.920 --> 00:15:49.680 >> You recessed the front right. >> Yes. When we do open, you all will be amazed 00:15:49.680 --> 00:15:57.160 with what this looks like. It is pretty interesting. Amy and I did remodel the place, I think it 00:15:57.160 --> 00:16:02.360 was four months before the fire, so that was like, we thought that was cool, and it's just 00:16:02.360 --> 00:16:08.760 very funny when you are being forced to live your dream of what you've always envisioned 00:16:08.760 --> 00:16:15.200 Jupiter House to be like. So now we have a grease trap, and we have a full kitchen, and 00:16:15.200 --> 00:16:18.880 we have a front patio area. It's kind of like everything that we've ever envisioned that 00:16:18.880 --> 00:16:24.800 place to be, it is finally happening, and it's been a struggle for a number of reasons 00:16:24.800 --> 00:16:30.840 last year, the fire, and then closing Royals, too, but even a lot of pretty cool things 00:16:30.840 --> 00:16:37.000 have happened. A lot of the things that we had at Royals, like some shelving that my 00:16:37.000 --> 00:16:41.400 dad had welded up, we took down, and we just even hung them up yesterday. They look like 00:16:41.400 --> 00:16:46.200 they were made for Jupiter House, and they were made six years ago, and all the wood 00:16:46.200 --> 00:16:50.800 that came from Royals, we chopped it up, and there are all these little wood tiles now, 00:16:50.800 --> 00:16:55.520 we did this whole herringbone thing, and it's just, things like that are happening over 00:16:55.520 --> 00:17:03.000 and over again. I just, the fire did not actually get into our building, it was all smoke and 00:17:03.000 --> 00:17:10.240 water damage, but what we didn't realize is just the effect asbestos has on a building, 00:17:10.240 --> 00:17:16.480 so ultimately, it was a shell. The fire could have been inside of our building, too, and 00:17:16.480 --> 00:17:21.960 this grant is, it could be huge for us. We kind of started out upside down, because we 00:17:21.960 --> 00:17:28.320 still had the debt from the remodel that we did four months before the fire, so, anyway, 00:17:28.320 --> 00:17:33.520 sorry, I've just had the flu for like five days, 82, so. 00:17:33.520 --> 00:17:41.800 >> Anybody have any other questions for Mr. Hawkins? All right, thanks. 00:17:41.800 --> 00:17:45.480 >> Cool, thanks. Thank you. 00:17:45.480 --> 00:17:46.480 >> Yeah. 00:17:46.480 --> 00:17:53.280 >> Okay. I'm Jill Jester, and I serve as Chair of the Downtown Task Force, which is a cross-section 00:17:53.280 --> 00:18:00.200 of those people and community members, as well as business leaders, that are interested 00:18:00.200 --> 00:18:05.760 in the downtown and have some kind of stake in the downtown area. As you can see here, 00:18:05.760 --> 00:18:10.560 Amy Hawkins and Joey Hawkins came and gave a much more even detailed, because we have 00:18:10.560 --> 00:18:17.600 a little more time in the Downtown Task Force being a limited focus group there, of past, 00:18:17.600 --> 00:18:24.480 present, and future of Jupiter House. As you can see, we did recommend the $25,000. I'd 00:18:24.480 --> 00:18:31.480 like to note that it is not often that this group does recommend on that side of the amount, 00:18:31.480 --> 00:18:37.560 because we know there's a finite amount that can be granted in this specific area. Some 00:18:37.560 --> 00:18:46.580 of what went into that unanimous vote was the increase in foot traffic to the downtown 00:18:46.580 --> 00:18:50.680 area that they felt Jupiter House had had in the past, and that these renovations would 00:18:50.680 --> 00:18:57.560 facilitate in the future. The fact that Jupiter House has been a unique place for young and 00:18:57.560 --> 00:19:04.440 old, white-collar, blue-collar, a lot of community leaders, it's a hub of where they meet up 00:19:04.440 --> 00:19:12.720 and discuss ideas for the future of Denton, and that it is a unique place, and that that 00:19:12.720 --> 00:19:20.040 was something worth investing in to have again. As we look at the makeup of the central downtown 00:19:20.040 --> 00:19:26.360 area of Denton, while there are coffee shops, I don't think we're overrun with coffee shops 00:19:26.360 --> 00:19:33.360 and with the student population as well as the city buildings as well as county buildings 00:19:33.360 --> 00:19:38.880 that are all in this area. We thought that it did have a historical significance as well 00:19:38.880 --> 00:19:43.840 as potential for the future. I just wanted to note on behalf of the Downtown Task Force 00:19:43.840 --> 00:19:51.280 that this was a unanimous vote. In the amount that it was, that is not often given. It's 00:19:51.280 --> 00:19:57.240 been a few votes since we've given the, or recommended the max amount for the numbers 00:19:57.240 --> 00:20:02.760 that are presented. And just to, if anyone has any questions regarding the decision the 00:20:02.760 --> 00:20:08.080 Downtown Task Force made, that they are welcome to ask myself or Julie. Thank you. 00:20:08.080 --> 00:20:15.600 - Anybody else? Anybody want to jump out there with a motion? 00:20:15.600 --> 00:20:22.640 - I'll motion to approve. - I'll second. 00:20:22.640 --> 00:20:31.880 - Motion and a second. Mr. Baines. Any further discussion? 00:20:31.880 --> 00:20:34.200 - I just want to make one comment. - Yes. 00:20:34.200 --> 00:20:39.080 - That I have been following their story along on Facebook and I know that there's a lot 00:20:39.080 --> 00:20:45.360 of people that, in the community, that support you guys and are ready to see you open. 00:20:45.360 --> 00:20:54.640 - Open open work. - All right. We got a motion and a second. 00:20:54.640 --> 00:20:56.600 All those in favor say aye. - Aye. 00:20:56.600 --> 00:21:02.000 - Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. Item number 10. 00:21:02.000 --> 00:21:08.160 - You want to read it? - No. I think I did all three of them. Let 00:21:08.160 --> 00:21:19.040 somebody over here says I have to. - Okay. So 115 South Elm, another long ago beloved 00:21:19.040 --> 00:21:23.680 site of Sweetwater. Just a little map in case you've been living in a cave and don't know 00:21:23.680 --> 00:21:29.800 where Sweetwater is. It's right there at the corner of Walnut and Elm Street. This is how 00:21:29.800 --> 00:21:39.760 it looked prior to the sale a few years ago when it became Agua Dulce for a few years. 00:21:39.760 --> 00:21:47.400 So this is the people outside repainting the snake and the murals on the outside. Unfortunately, 00:21:47.400 --> 00:21:50.960 some of the work had begun before they turned in the grant so you will not see some of this 00:21:50.960 --> 00:21:55.880 exterior work listed as an eligible expense. They needed to turn in the grant prior to 00:21:55.880 --> 00:22:00.400 beginning the work. So just to let you know that. So this is just a little picture now 00:22:00.400 --> 00:22:10.920 of the signage. The side here. And this building did, when the reeds bought the business, they 00:22:10.920 --> 00:22:18.080 received $5,000 for some work they did. And there's a $25,000 cap per building, per address. 00:22:18.080 --> 00:22:23.760 So that meant that the building, when they came forward, was eligible for a max of $20,000. 00:22:23.760 --> 00:22:27.680 As like I say, some of the exterior and facade work was started prior to the application 00:22:27.680 --> 00:22:37.760 process so it was not eligible for the grant. Awnings, $10,815. Signage, $14,105. And utility 00:22:37.760 --> 00:22:46.240 upgrades of $9,348 for a total of $34,268 was eligible. The total cost was $100,000. 00:22:46.240 --> 00:22:56.720 So half of that $34,000 figure, they requested $17,134. They met, task force met on December 00:22:56.720 --> 00:23:02.560 13th and they recommended a grant in the amount of $5,000. That was a big group that day. 00:23:02.560 --> 00:23:08.040 So that was 15 to zero. They did score 16 points. And again, this building previously 00:23:08.040 --> 00:23:14.120 received $5,000. I will tell you that this body has the right to, as long as it's not 00:23:14.120 --> 00:23:18.320 the maximum amount, you have the right to change the amount that you're recommending 00:23:18.320 --> 00:23:23.080 to council. Just wanted to put that in there. Some of the discussion that happened with 00:23:23.080 --> 00:23:29.960 this as far as the score was, it was a restaurant going to a restaurant. There wasn't a lot 00:23:29.960 --> 00:23:36.880 of big changes happening. You know, the reeds had put in some new bathrooms and plumbing 00:23:36.880 --> 00:23:42.680 and some electrical stuff that qualified under the last grant. So that was sort of the general 00:23:42.680 --> 00:23:47.760 discussion during this. If you have some questions about that, we'd be happy to answer it or 00:23:47.760 --> 00:23:53.800 Jill could. Any comments or questions? And Joey is also a partner in that restaurant, 00:23:53.800 --> 00:24:02.560 so he is here on their behalf as well. Go ahead. I'll just kind of second what Julie 00:24:02.560 --> 00:24:08.360 said as far as the conversation that was had in the prior to the vote where you can see 00:24:08.360 --> 00:24:13.800 the average score was 16 out of the available points of, I think, 30 in the downtown task 00:24:13.800 --> 00:24:19.020 force. The problem being some of the amount that they couldn't ask for, just like Julie 00:24:19.020 --> 00:24:23.880 said, had already been done, so some of it was not eligible. They have made significant 00:24:23.880 --> 00:24:33.320 changes. Foot traffic, it seems, has increased since this restaurant has changed format, 00:24:33.320 --> 00:24:38.600 changed a lot of the interior. As you can see, the downtown task force recommended the amount 00:24:38.600 --> 00:24:45.440 of $5,000 versus the full amount that would be eligible. And just like was noted by Ms. 00:24:45.440 --> 00:24:51.920 Glover, that was because a lot of what we look at is is this going to increase who comes 00:24:51.920 --> 00:24:57.160 downtown and spends money downtown and is it a good investment? But of course, this 00:24:57.160 --> 00:25:03.520 body, this is just a recommendation from the downtown task force to this body, so we are 00:25:03.520 --> 00:25:08.600 certainly, you know, there's certainly never any sour grapes as far as not taking up our 00:25:08.600 --> 00:25:14.880 recommendations. This is just the recommendation of the, it looks like unanimous 15 downtown 00:25:14.880 --> 00:25:19.520 task force members that were available that day. So if anyone has any questions regarding 00:25:19.520 --> 00:25:29.880 why that was the amount or from the task force, please feel free to ask any questions. Any 00:25:29.880 --> 00:25:39.000 other comments or questions? I did have one question. How many partners are there in this 00:25:39.000 --> 00:25:47.040 endeavor? Joey? Excuse me, Mr. Hawkins. This is the only other presentation. You're right. 00:25:47.040 --> 00:25:52.760 Let's see. There's Steph and Ron Ranke. There's Jimmy and Karen Meredith. And then there's 00:25:52.760 --> 00:25:59.440 Amy and myself. Okay. Very good. Yeah. No, it's been good to bring Jimmy and Karen Meredith 00:25:59.440 --> 00:26:09.760 back into the spotlight there. Thank you. Anything else? Anybody else? Did you hire 00:26:09.760 --> 00:26:17.520 any local artists to do the work on the outside? Yes. Oh, shoot. Warrant. Yeah. Yes. Awesome. 00:26:17.520 --> 00:26:21.720 Thank you. But that was, that was my mistake. I was kind of learning this process. I should 00:26:21.720 --> 00:26:27.680 have filled out the paperwork before I gave him the paintbrush. So, but it turns out beautiful. 00:26:27.680 --> 00:26:37.800 Yeah. Thank you. Yeah. I would entertain any motions at this time. I just have a question 00:26:37.800 --> 00:26:46.400 because I know some of the owners pretty well. Is that a conflict or? Matt, did you hear 00:26:46.400 --> 00:26:52.200 her comment? No. Yeah, a couple of them. Any business relationship? No business relationship, 00:26:52.200 --> 00:26:59.760 just good friendships. Legal conflict. Not a legal conflict. I just need to make sure 00:26:59.760 --> 00:27:05.440 I have an orientation. She needs to be on the mic. So no legal conflict. I don't have, 00:27:05.440 --> 00:27:11.760 I just know them very well. I'm just letting you all know that. Thank you. That's it. Mr. 00:27:11.760 --> 00:27:17.080 Hawkins, having served on council, I think that most of us are familiar with Mr. And 00:27:17.080 --> 00:27:22.680 Mrs. Hawkins. I think it's a very valid question. And my thought is so long as that you're not 00:27:22.680 --> 00:27:28.680 part of either of these business endeavors nor represented businesses that they, we should, 00:27:28.680 --> 00:27:33.320 anyone that's familiar with the, any of the partners personally should be fine to use 00:27:33.320 --> 00:27:38.160 their best discretion in whatever personal relationship might cloud their decision. Is 00:27:38.160 --> 00:27:47.240 that right? Okay. Thank you. Oh, I know them so well. I was going to vote no. Just kidding. 00:27:47.240 --> 00:27:59.200 You need to recuse. I will say that Sweetwater is a much used venue for community events 00:27:59.200 --> 00:28:03.960 in that back room, especially that they have, there are many, many, many community events 00:28:03.960 --> 00:28:12.560 that need just that size that is used. So it is a benefit to the community. We didn't 00:28:12.560 --> 00:28:22.000 even mention squash enchiladas, did we? So that's a benefit to me. We need a motion. 00:28:22.000 --> 00:28:29.040 I move that we approve the and take the recommendation of the downtown task force that $5,000 be 00:28:29.040 --> 00:28:36.160 granted out of this fund for the renovations and per the application of the partners at 00:28:36.160 --> 00:28:43.860 Sweetwater. Second. We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All those 00:28:43.860 --> 00:28:52.200 in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. And next we have item 00:28:52.200 --> 00:29:01.760 19008. Okay, so this is 119 West Hickory, the loophole. I think back in the 80s this 00:29:01.760 --> 00:29:05.800 was one of the very first renovations that kind of started. It wasn't the loophole at 00:29:05.800 --> 00:29:09.600 the time. It was Ellington's. But I think this was one of the first nice kind of not 00:29:09.600 --> 00:29:14.720 fast food restaurants that happened in downtown. We did find some historic photos here. It 00:29:14.720 --> 00:29:20.720 was La Mode, a ladies clothing store in the 40s and 50s. And they're just in the collegiate 00:29:20.720 --> 00:29:28.760 shop prior to that. I will tell you this building has a local designated marker on it, a historic 00:29:28.760 --> 00:29:35.160 marker on it. So the Historic Landmark Commission has also approved this prior to going forward 00:29:35.160 --> 00:29:41.200 to the task force. This is just some dry and we do have Cliff here who's their contractor. 00:29:41.200 --> 00:29:45.840 So he's here to answer questions if you have it. I believe the sign is up at this point. 00:29:45.840 --> 00:29:51.800 One of the main concerns here is since the smoking ordinance is passed and a lot of these 00:29:51.800 --> 00:29:56.320 buildings are just flush with the sidewalk and don't have an opportunity for a patio 00:29:56.320 --> 00:30:02.240 situation like Sweetwater and some of the others do, they are also are going to recess 00:30:02.240 --> 00:30:07.640 the opening. On the interior there is a brick wall, an original brick wall back there that 00:30:07.640 --> 00:30:13.080 when they recess it, that original brick wall will be visible from the street. They will 00:30:13.080 --> 00:30:18.880 have accordion doors that go across this front so it can be closed and inclement weather. 00:30:18.880 --> 00:30:23.320 This signage I can say is already up. They were trying to do a little something like 00:30:23.320 --> 00:30:30.200 to kind of mimic the Morrison sign, the signage. It's a little Moulin Rouge too if you're 00:30:30.200 --> 00:30:36.040 familiar with that maybe. This is just an interior sketch showing how that patio area 00:30:36.040 --> 00:30:42.680 in the front would work. And this line across here would be those accordion doors that are 00:30:42.680 --> 00:30:49.480 here that could open or close depending on the weather. Just a sketch here showing how 00:30:49.480 --> 00:30:57.640 that might look with the doors closed and again with the doors open. Just a couple of 00:30:57.640 --> 00:31:01.560 different angles here. Of course the architects never put the other buildings in around it, 00:31:01.560 --> 00:31:06.720 they just do blank walls. So on this one, and I will tell you that your numbers that 00:31:06.720 --> 00:31:12.440 you have in your backup are different than this slide, so these are updated. The facade 00:31:12.440 --> 00:31:18.760 of eligible expenses is $49,000. The awnings are $3,500. The signs are $1,100. Again, the 00:31:18.760 --> 00:31:23.800 impact fees are an estimate at this point, $5,000. Utility upgrades $8,000 for a total 00:31:23.800 --> 00:31:31.600 of $64,500 of eligible expenses. And the total cost of the project has been updated as well. 00:31:31.600 --> 00:31:40.000 Is that right? It's more than $64,500. Right. So I would add this total was just they'd 00:31:40.000 --> 00:31:44.440 added up the numbers this way and didn't take into consideration the entire project so it's 00:31:44.440 --> 00:31:53.880 more than that. So they did request $25,000. The task force met on October 10th and recommended 00:31:53.880 --> 00:32:00.720 a grant in the amount of $5,000, passed 9-0. Their average score on this was 15.9. A lot 00:32:00.720 --> 00:32:06.560 of the same discussion happened on this building as happened on Sweetwater that it was a restaurant, 00:32:06.560 --> 00:32:13.560 it's remaining a restaurant. The facade had not been updated in a very long time. I want 00:32:13.560 --> 00:32:19.280 to say maybe the early 90s was the last time that it had been done. This building also, 00:32:19.280 --> 00:32:27.000 I believe, had some fire damage from a fire back in the 1930s. And it does, like I say, 00:32:27.000 --> 00:32:32.040 it does have a landmark designation that was given to it, ironically, with the slip, the 00:32:32.040 --> 00:32:36.640 inappropriate slip cover on it back in the 80s. But HLC did look at this and approve 00:32:36.640 --> 00:32:48.600 all the changes to this. What was the HLC's vote? Do you know on that or did they have 00:32:48.600 --> 00:32:56.840 any comments? Just another question. Did this building switch owners or is it the same owner 00:32:56.840 --> 00:33:00.580 that's just doing everything? It's the same owner that has had it for probably a decade 00:33:00.580 --> 00:33:06.880 or so, am I saying right? Is that right? 23 years. So he bought it from the original, 00:33:06.880 --> 00:33:11.200 when it was Ellington's, it became the loophole after that. And then I think Anita Bruno and 00:33:11.200 --> 00:33:17.040 her husband had it at that point and then they sold it to Charlie. Just on a personal 00:33:17.040 --> 00:33:23.080 note, Ellington's is where I met my in-laws for the first time. A lot of the stark things 00:33:23.080 --> 00:33:30.760 that went on in that building. I believe the HLC vote was unanimous, but I don't know it 00:33:30.760 --> 00:33:38.240 off the top of my head. I apologize. Okay. I did have a question. Joan? So I was looking 00:33:38.240 --> 00:33:44.720 at the packet and it said eligible expenses, but I was looking for the total renovation. 00:33:44.720 --> 00:33:52.360 Is it included here? No, that's what I just said. They added up the eligible expenses, 00:33:52.360 --> 00:33:59.320 not the total project cost. Do you have an idea, Clint, of what the total project cost 00:33:59.320 --> 00:34:10.360 might be? Thanks for having me up. I was just over there this morning meeting with Charlie. 00:34:10.360 --> 00:34:18.680 They're always updating things. Nothing to do with construction really, but they spent 00:34:18.680 --> 00:34:24.360 so much more money. I'm going to say he's probably going to be about 150,000 there. 00:34:24.360 --> 00:34:32.580 And the main reason why, and I'm just finding this out too, is because they want to kind 00:34:32.580 --> 00:34:38.240 of change the demeanor of the loophole. So in the front part of the morning, because 00:34:38.240 --> 00:34:42.600 they have great food, they want to peel to the families. And then after nine o'clock 00:34:42.600 --> 00:34:47.880 at night, then they want to peel back to the bar scene, the nightclub scene. And so they're 00:34:47.880 --> 00:34:52.960 making it more user-friendly and hopefully get more foot traffic in in the front part 00:34:52.960 --> 00:34:57.840 of the day, early morning part of the day. So they kind of said, "I don't know what the 00:34:57.840 --> 00:35:01.680 heck with that budget. We're going to spend this and do this." And it's just mostly interior 00:35:01.680 --> 00:35:13.840 stuff. It's not construction. That's very impressive. The designer is great. The questions I had 00:35:13.840 --> 00:35:20.560 is, because we've talked about it on the last project, you have to have your application 00:35:20.560 --> 00:35:25.240 in before you start work, because you guys have the new sign up already. So work is going 00:35:25.240 --> 00:35:29.920 on there, but they had the application in prior to that. So all those expenses are eligible. 00:35:29.920 --> 00:35:34.920 I actually think they turned this in in the summer last year, maybe May, because we had 00:35:34.920 --> 00:35:39.040 talked to them and made sure everything, they got the papers in before they started. 00:35:39.040 --> 00:35:45.680 So can you help me again with the design and what the intention is of the front patio? 00:35:45.680 --> 00:35:50.640 And as far as our smoking ordinance, isn't there, you have to be a certain amount of 00:35:50.640 --> 00:35:54.920 feet away from the entrance? And does that meet the requirements of the intention of 00:35:54.920 --> 00:35:59.720 the ordinance? 00:35:59.720 --> 00:36:09.000 Yeah, again, so there's a lot of smokers and they hang out outside now. But the intent 00:36:09.000 --> 00:36:16.720 with Charlie and Lynn, the owners of this, is to have a non-smoking patio. Now, you know, 00:36:16.720 --> 00:36:20.720 people hang it out in front of smoke and they have the little place to put the butts when 00:36:20.720 --> 00:36:26.760 they're done. But it's going to be a non-smoking establishment throughout. And they have their 00:36:26.760 --> 00:36:31.360 folks out there go clean up the cigarette butts during the day and night. But again, 00:36:31.360 --> 00:36:32.360 they're going for non-smoking. 00:36:32.360 --> 00:36:36.760 Okay. Okay. Thank you. I misunderstood the intention of it. I appreciate it. 00:36:36.760 --> 00:36:41.280 The main thing was just to get the patio and bring about that, because it was original 00:36:41.280 --> 00:36:47.120 patio when it was limoed, right? And so bring back that era. And we got down to the Trazzo 00:36:47.120 --> 00:36:51.440 and some of it's just terrible. So we're going to have to recoat that and we'll visit 00:36:51.440 --> 00:36:56.720 that with Roman, that HLC fellow again. But as far as everything else goes, it's kind 00:36:56.720 --> 00:37:00.640 of on point, bringing back the historic accuracy of that building. 00:37:00.640 --> 00:37:03.560 Okay. Thank you. 00:37:03.560 --> 00:37:08.280 Any more questions or comments? 00:37:08.280 --> 00:37:15.960 But just to kind of reiterate, as far as what Ms. Glover said, it was a lot of the similar 00:37:15.960 --> 00:37:22.920 conversation as far as new investment and bringing new people or bringing more people 00:37:22.920 --> 00:37:29.400 to the downtown area that this, you know, a lot of a lot of us grew up going to Ellington's. 00:37:29.400 --> 00:37:34.940 It is a historical landmark that it was the changes were recommended by the historical 00:37:34.940 --> 00:37:41.560 landmark commission here, but that, you know, it is a restaurant to a restaurant. However, 00:37:41.560 --> 00:37:49.080 they are expanding their capabilities of seating and the fact that they are allowing the view 00:37:49.080 --> 00:37:53.880 into the historical broke from the outside. So all of that was considered in the decision 00:37:53.880 --> 00:38:03.200 that the task force recommendation was made at $5,000. 00:38:03.200 --> 00:38:11.760 Thank you. Any more comments or questions or emotions? So they want to go out there. 00:38:11.760 --> 00:38:26.200 Did most of the points come from the historic? Or I guess, no, that's just five points. Okay. 00:38:26.200 --> 00:38:36.800 I think they scored in all the categories, but I don't, I mean, I can start including 00:38:36.800 --> 00:38:43.240 this if you're curious to see each one, but like I said, there's no names on it. I like 00:38:43.240 --> 00:38:51.960 anonymous better. It looks like just glancing at a few here that it was a score of mainly 00:38:51.960 --> 00:39:01.000 three or under on the historic accuracy and design. There was a lot of discussion about 00:39:01.000 --> 00:39:06.280 the historic accuracy because we do have some folks on there who are prior HLC people. But 00:39:06.280 --> 00:39:12.240 I did tell them, if you decide to make recommendations to change the design, then they're going to 00:39:12.240 --> 00:39:17.040 have to go back to the historic landmark commission again and run those back through them. And 00:39:17.040 --> 00:39:21.440 so I think some of the people I've got, the first one on top has a one on historic accuracy, 00:39:21.440 --> 00:39:28.320 but some of them did do threes to fives. Well, it's not just historical accuracy. It's that 00:39:28.320 --> 00:39:31.680 and or is it blend in with what's down there already? The design elements. Something wouldn't 00:39:31.680 --> 00:39:36.200 be completely weird, whatever that would be. You don't want a mirrored building in the 00:39:36.200 --> 00:39:42.160 middle of all that. So it's not. I just wanted to make sure that we weren't losing points 00:39:42.160 --> 00:39:48.200 there because of historic accuracy. If the design quality is very good. I was just curious 00:39:48.200 --> 00:39:52.320 to make sure that those points weren't lost somewhere. It's kind of all over the board. 00:39:52.320 --> 00:39:57.000 Like I said, some people, I could probably tell you who scored what by looking at the 00:39:57.000 --> 00:40:02.960 scores. But some of them score very harder than others. I'll put it that way. Some of 00:40:02.960 --> 00:40:07.280 them are some people are traditionally have a very low score for everything. And some 00:40:07.280 --> 00:40:12.000 people score higher for everything. But like I said, that average score was almost 16 points. 00:40:12.000 --> 00:40:17.640 But you have to get up to 20 to be in the next year. Yeah. And you have to get at least 00:40:17.640 --> 00:40:26.920 14 before any money can be recommended. Yes, I move approval of the recommendation. Second 00:40:26.920 --> 00:40:36.160 to have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. 00:40:36.160 --> 00:40:42.040 Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Thank you. Thanks for going through all that. Thanks 00:40:42.040 --> 00:40:45.960 for going through the process since June. I know that's been a long, long time coming. 00:40:45.960 --> 00:40:54.840 It looks good. All right, our next item is EDP 19002 to receive a report, roll discussion 00:40:54.840 --> 00:40:59.720 and give staff direction regarding the 2017 Economic Development Incentivized Projects 00:40:59.720 --> 00:41:07.240 Net Revenue Report for the City of Denton. I will say before Erica gets started, that's 00:41:07.240 --> 00:41:12.320 the best report, most entering report I've seen that I've been involved in this process. 00:41:12.320 --> 00:41:17.200 It's some really good numbers. We hadn't had a chance to take a look at the prior projects, 00:41:17.200 --> 00:41:24.960 the incentives that were given, and where we stand through 2017. It's pretty interesting 00:41:24.960 --> 00:41:51.720 reading and I would highly recommend everybody get familiar with that. Did somebody check 00:41:51.720 --> 00:42:06.080 your math? I actually did, our finance department did. David Gaines. My name is Erica Sullivan, 00:42:06.080 --> 00:42:10.840 I'm the economic development analyst for the city and I'm going to be talking to you today 00:42:10.840 --> 00:42:15.760 about our net revenue report, previously called the return on investment report and this will 00:42:15.760 --> 00:42:21.520 be a high level overview and we'll move rather quickly. So I'll start by providing the background, 00:42:21.520 --> 00:42:31.040 the structure, what makes up the report, and then quickly summarize the 2017 results. Incentives 00:42:31.040 --> 00:42:35.180 are an important tool that we use to attract and retain investment here in the City of 00:42:35.180 --> 00:42:41.240 Denton. This report measures the fiscal impact of these incentives, evaluates how effective 00:42:41.240 --> 00:42:46.920 these are, this public investment, and will guide our future policy decisions. Like most 00:42:46.920 --> 00:42:51.200 of you know, we do not have type A, type B here in the City of Denton, so we have to 00:42:51.200 --> 00:42:57.960 be a little bit more creative, so we rely on performance tax-based incentives. So preparing 00:42:57.960 --> 00:43:07.400 this cost benefit also helps educate and creates transparency. Here we have the background of 00:43:07.400 --> 00:43:12.440 how it has evolved over time, so the policy was initially established in '89 to attract 00:43:12.440 --> 00:43:17.800 new business and encourage expansions. The intent was to establish public-private partnerships 00:43:17.800 --> 00:43:24.380 that would create a diversified tax base. In 2009, the initial return on investment 00:43:24.380 --> 00:43:30.280 report was created and that's what it was labeled at that time. State and DCTA sales 00:43:30.280 --> 00:43:37.680 tax were added in 2010. In 2013, it was expanded to include the ad valorem revenue for Denton 00:43:37.680 --> 00:43:41.680 County, which includes both the incentives the county partnered with and the incentives 00:43:41.680 --> 00:43:47.600 the county did not partner with. And then the report comprised all the taxing entities 00:43:47.600 --> 00:43:54.440 with the inclusion of the ISD back in 2015. What's not represented here is in 2016, we 00:43:54.440 --> 00:44:00.360 did a complete redesign, both myself and Christina Davis, and the report can now be distributed. 00:44:00.360 --> 00:44:06.280 It's about a 30-page report that most people would not want to digest, except for me, maybe. 00:44:06.280 --> 00:44:10.840 So it can now be distributed depending on audience. So we have a single one-page summary, 00:44:10.840 --> 00:44:14.960 we have the meat of the report, and then the entire report with the project descriptions 00:44:14.960 --> 00:44:22.600 of all the businesses and with the methodology. So now it can reach, I think, a broader audience. 00:44:22.600 --> 00:44:28.200 The structure of the report essentially captures nine points for every incentive presented 00:44:28.200 --> 00:44:34.280 here. So we have the date and the term of the agreement, the cumulative property valuation, 00:44:34.280 --> 00:44:42.440 and that creates the property tax generated, and then sales tax generated if it's applicable. 00:44:42.440 --> 00:44:47.160 And then the cost-benefit percentage and the ratio of return. I'm going to talk about those 00:44:47.160 --> 00:44:52.240 in more detail on the next slide. And then the new jobs created by the project. So we 00:44:52.240 --> 00:44:58.560 track all of these for 10 years for more apples-to-apples comparison as best we can because all of our 00:44:58.560 --> 00:45:03.960 incentives are unique. But, for example, so if you have an incentive that has a term of 00:45:03.960 --> 00:45:09.920 six years, we subtract the incentive for those six years and then continue monitoring their 00:45:09.920 --> 00:45:15.120 investment and what they generate for the remaining four. If a business is here longer 00:45:15.120 --> 00:45:20.840 than that, we still keep it at 10 years, so it goes both ways. And then, finally, expansion 00:45:20.840 --> 00:45:28.240 projects are based on new value only, so we subtract the base year. And we'd be remiss 00:45:28.240 --> 00:45:36.080 without mentioning jobs as well. So here's a summary basically of our methodology that 00:45:36.080 --> 00:45:45.360 we have from the net revenue and cost-benefit. Net revenue is simply the revenue property 00:45:45.360 --> 00:45:51.280 only and/or sales tax if applicable less the incentive. And the report carries the calculations 00:45:51.280 --> 00:45:57.520 a step further. The cost-benefit percentage is the net revenue above divided by the incentive 00:45:57.520 --> 00:46:02.180 times 100 to get the percent. And the rate of return provides the revenue of the taxes 00:46:02.180 --> 00:46:06.440 generated relative to the cost of the incentive as a ratio. So the ratio of return is the 00:46:06.440 --> 00:46:13.440 net revenue property only and/or sales tax generated minus incentive divided by the incentive. 00:46:13.440 --> 00:46:20.000 So the easiest way to put the ratio of return in '17, the example is 3.3. So another way 00:46:20.000 --> 00:46:25.800 of putting it is the city received three times the revenue of the incentive foregone. It's 00:46:25.800 --> 00:46:31.220 also important to note the report only gathers sales tax for the sales tax entities. It also 00:46:31.220 --> 00:46:41.840 captures evaluation. And this would be for our floor developments. And also Christina 00:46:41.840 --> 00:46:46.660 Davis created these infographics. So at a very quick look you can see the summary of 00:46:46.660 --> 00:46:53.520 all that goes into the report. The city awarded a total of 28 incentives. 18 are represented 00:46:53.520 --> 00:46:59.080 in the report and 17. Some were not initiated and then others were terminated so they weren't 00:46:59.080 --> 00:47:05.400 included. The slide illustrates benefits to the city only. The city has invested 16.5 00:47:05.400 --> 00:47:10.280 million in tax-related incentives since the inception in '99. And the return is benefited 00:47:10.280 --> 00:47:13.880 from a net increase in property and sales tax revenues on the far right you'll see 00:47:13.880 --> 00:47:21.600 of 62.4 million. So the cost benefit for incentives awarded is 327%, you see with the money bag 00:47:21.600 --> 00:47:28.480 in the middle there, and have been a total of 7,536 jobs created or retained by the incentivized 00:47:28.480 --> 00:47:35.440 projects. Now you see this in table form. We just went over the city that's in that 00:47:35.440 --> 00:47:39.520 first column there. And you'll see on the far left the total of all incentives. So we 00:47:39.520 --> 00:47:44.600 have the valuation which is cumulative, the property tax, sales tax, the cumulative of 00:47:44.600 --> 00:47:50.440 those two together, less the incentive, and then the net, cost benefit, and the ratio 00:47:50.440 --> 00:47:56.880 of return. Denton County, since we covered in the infographics the city, has participated 00:47:56.880 --> 00:48:02.200 in six Denton incentives to promote development in our community, and they invested a total 00:48:02.200 --> 00:48:08.980 of 1.1 million in tax-related incentives, and they have benefited from a net increase 00:48:08.980 --> 00:48:15.840 of 6.5 million since inception. The cost benefit for all the incentives, both joint and city, 00:48:15.840 --> 00:48:25.600 is 615%. If you look on the far right, Denton ISD participated in two of our tax abatements. 00:48:25.600 --> 00:48:30.560 Texas school districts were not able to participate in tax abatements as it was repealed from 00:48:30.560 --> 00:48:34.600 the Texas legislature, but they were early on, so they were two that they participated 00:48:34.600 --> 00:48:43.240 in, United Copper and Sally. DISD has invested 622,000 in tax-related incentives and has 00:48:43.240 --> 00:48:49.400 benefited from a net increase of 50.5 million since inception. The return investment from 00:48:49.400 --> 00:48:55.880 the tax abatements alone was over 5,000, and the cost benefit from all the incentives is 00:48:55.880 --> 00:49:02.080 over 8,000. But school finance is pretty complicated, so I would be remiss if I didn't mention that 00:49:02.080 --> 00:49:06.800 the different federal, state, and local funding sources and how they're separated. This report 00:49:06.800 --> 00:49:11.800 includes both the maintenance operation and the interest in sinking. So the interest in 00:49:11.800 --> 00:49:20.820 sinking is the only portion of the tax rate that's not affected by funding from the state. 00:49:20.820 --> 00:49:26.240 You have the entire 30-plus page report in your packet. It's also available on the website, 00:49:26.240 --> 00:49:28.840 and I'd be happy to entertain any questions. 00:49:28.840 --> 00:49:37.480 Eric, on the jobs numbers, do you call Peter Bildt and say how many jobs you have? I mean, 00:49:37.480 --> 00:49:40.360 we know what they started with at whatever year, and are we getting that out there? 00:49:40.360 --> 00:49:45.160 We start with what they provide in the application. There's several updates that are done periodically. 00:49:45.160 --> 00:49:50.420 The Chamber actually calls and does that. They do our annual updates. Karen can speak 00:49:50.420 --> 00:49:56.320 to that personally. But also, sometimes I get updates and request updates. We included 00:49:56.320 --> 00:50:02.520 some temporary positions for construction in there as well, and that I have to ask for 00:50:02.520 --> 00:50:04.920 the developers for that, like at Razor Ranch. 00:50:04.920 --> 00:50:08.320 If I have a question, please. 00:50:08.320 --> 00:50:15.440 When these companies are asking for these tax abatements, there's usually an inclusion 00:50:15.440 --> 00:50:21.320 for employment and other considerations. And I remember I had kind of raised this question 00:50:21.320 --> 00:50:26.840 previously about who audits those numbers. You know, if a company says this is what we're 00:50:26.840 --> 00:50:33.400 going to do, who goes back and makes sure that there's actual follow-through on what 00:50:33.400 --> 00:50:40.040 was proposed. Can you talk about the procedure a little bit and how that results in this 00:50:40.040 --> 00:50:41.040 report? 00:50:41.040 --> 00:50:46.280 Sure. Since I administer the incentives, I can talk about compliance in general. 00:50:46.280 --> 00:50:51.400 We do have a certificate of compliance that we've instituted. We haven't had it historically 00:50:51.400 --> 00:50:56.080 for all the incentives, but we have for a lot of our incentives. So that requires them 00:50:56.080 --> 00:51:00.720 to verify certain things, to sign the form, obviously, and to provide certain documentation 00:51:00.720 --> 00:51:09.760 from the central appraisal or their tax bills. So we do that. We also have now instituted 00:51:09.760 --> 00:51:17.680 a federal IRS form that they already supply to the IRS that provides the labor information. 00:51:17.680 --> 00:51:23.960 So we keep improving over time, our process we've refined over time. We just now recently 00:51:23.960 --> 00:51:30.120 have internal auditors. We've had external auditors in the past. 00:51:30.120 --> 00:51:32.080 To assist with that process? 00:51:32.080 --> 00:51:33.080 Yes. 00:51:33.080 --> 00:51:34.080 Okay. 00:51:34.080 --> 00:51:37.880 I'm just going to add something if you don't mind. 00:51:37.880 --> 00:51:38.880 Sure. 00:51:38.880 --> 00:51:39.880 Go ahead. 00:51:39.880 --> 00:51:46.200 Good question about compliance and Erica and partners with our finance staff on some of 00:51:46.200 --> 00:51:52.320 that as well, so that we make sure that we're really getting what we need, verifying it. 00:51:52.320 --> 00:51:57.840 And I'm sure that most folks in the group recall that we have had to terminate three 00:51:57.840 --> 00:52:04.840 incentive agreements in recent years for noncompliance. So we don't want to have to do that, but we 00:52:04.840 --> 00:52:10.440 take it very seriously. And if they're not meeting the requirements under the contract 00:52:10.440 --> 00:52:15.560 and we're not able to verify that, then we do have to terminate the agreements. 00:52:15.560 --> 00:52:16.560 Thank you very much. 00:52:16.560 --> 00:52:17.560 Kaylee? 00:52:17.560 --> 00:52:24.400 Just a couple of questions. I see that the incentive term for Denton Crossing is expiring 00:52:24.400 --> 00:52:31.120 this year, 2019. What month does that fall under? I mean, is that just kind of more towards 00:52:31.120 --> 00:52:32.120 the end of the year? 00:52:32.120 --> 00:52:33.120 I believe it's in August. 00:52:33.120 --> 00:52:41.240 In August? And so then from that point on, what we're seeing here in the sales tax, the 00:52:41.240 --> 00:52:46.680 less the sales tax, that $6 million will come straight back to the city rather than going 00:52:46.680 --> 00:52:47.680 to them. 00:52:47.680 --> 00:52:48.680 That's correct. 00:52:48.680 --> 00:52:49.680 That's really good. 00:52:49.680 --> 00:52:51.680 Does finance know that? 00:52:51.680 --> 00:52:55.320 Yes, I prepare five-year forecasts. 00:52:55.320 --> 00:52:56.320 It's already spent. 00:52:56.320 --> 00:53:02.140 Actually, I'm the staff liaison. I work very closely with finance. It's like my second 00:53:02.140 --> 00:53:08.880 extension of my arm, really. But I prepare five-year forecasts that demonstrate when 00:53:08.880 --> 00:53:13.600 they're going to fall off, all the incentives, and what we anticipate the payment to be. 00:53:13.600 --> 00:53:20.320 Yeah, so I have a question about Sally, because the incentive there, I think, was for -- part 00:53:20.320 --> 00:53:25.680 of it was for the building that we just heard about, that is -- can you kind of explain 00:53:25.680 --> 00:53:29.560 what happens in that situation with an incentive? 00:53:29.560 --> 00:53:35.400 Sally that's included here is an old Sally agreement. The other one hadn't initiated 00:53:35.400 --> 00:53:41.560 -- it was supposed to -- it just initiated this year, tax year '18. In that case, they 00:53:41.560 --> 00:53:46.760 get their first year's payment, because they were there as of January 1st of January '18, 00:53:46.760 --> 00:53:52.000 but we are in the process of terminating that incentive, because they are no longer operating 00:53:52.000 --> 00:53:56.520 on the premises. And that's part of our contract and the compliance. They have to continually 00:53:56.520 --> 00:54:00.040 operate in the same manner in which they applied under. 00:54:00.040 --> 00:54:06.160 So just to be clear, the Sally project that is on here is for their headquarters building 00:54:06.160 --> 00:54:12.080 on Colorado, and it has completed. So, yes, and you'll be getting information in your 00:54:12.080 --> 00:54:18.560 council packet about how we are going to proceed with the current situation and the termination. 00:54:18.560 --> 00:54:21.280 The new incentive to clarify is for their morse property. 00:54:21.280 --> 00:54:26.280 Right. Yeah, okay. Thank you. I just wanted to kind of put that out there, because I saw 00:54:26.280 --> 00:54:33.400 it in the -- Was that information on the termination of that project come to this board before it 00:54:33.400 --> 00:54:39.560 goes to city council? The council doesn't vote on it. It just happens. 00:54:39.560 --> 00:54:45.780 But if you want me to send out the same paragraph that will be in their Friday packet, I'm glad 00:54:45.780 --> 00:54:50.200 to email it to the board. We make the recommendation that goes to city 00:54:50.200 --> 00:54:54.200 council. They approve it. We ought to be apprised of anything that's changing any of those things. 00:54:54.200 --> 00:54:57.960 I think I sent those out to y'all when we had to terminate the other three. So I'll 00:54:57.960 --> 00:55:06.760 make sure to do it this time, too. Any other questions or comments on the report? 00:55:06.760 --> 00:55:14.640 So for you new folks, it's a really good history lesson on incentives and where we're at. 00:55:14.640 --> 00:55:20.360 And also keep in mind, this is through 2017, so it's taking a while to get all this data 00:55:20.360 --> 00:55:27.240 gathered. But it's a good place to start and figure out what's happened in the past and 00:55:27.240 --> 00:55:32.640 get caught up pretty quickly. Mr. Chairman, do you mind if we give Erica 00:55:32.640 --> 00:55:39.640 and her staff a round of applause on this? That would be great. 00:55:39.640 --> 00:55:49.240 Thank you. All right. Item 19003, receive a report, hold discussion and give staff direction 00:55:49.240 --> 00:55:54.080 regarding the development of the coal ranch and hunter ranch master plan communities in 00:55:54.080 --> 00:56:18.880 southwest Denton. I know some of you have probably been following 00:56:18.880 --> 00:56:25.160 the discussion about the coal and hunter ranch master plan communities. This is an informational 00:56:25.160 --> 00:56:31.280 item for this board. Just going to run through some of the overall basics of the project 00:56:31.280 --> 00:56:35.680 and then I'm happy to answer questions if you have them. 00:56:35.680 --> 00:56:40.280 So we'll start out here, and I know this is a little bit difficult to see, maybe easier 00:56:40.280 --> 00:56:48.920 to look at it in your backup packet. But this is a depiction of coal ranch on the north 00:56:48.920 --> 00:56:55.280 here to this boundary and hunter ranch on the south here to this boundary. And to orient 00:56:55.280 --> 00:57:04.440 you a little bit, this is Robeson Ranch right here. And then up here is the Denton Enterprise 00:57:04.440 --> 00:57:12.920 Airport and this shows the future path of loop 288. And then this is obviously I-35W 00:57:12.920 --> 00:57:22.240 here. So the owners of hunter ranch actually have property on both the west and east sides 00:57:22.240 --> 00:57:27.200 of 35W. Does anybody have any questions about where we are and what we're talking about 00:57:27.200 --> 00:57:37.280 on the map? Again, some of you may remember that in recent years, coal ranch has approached 00:57:37.280 --> 00:57:42.880 the city council about establishing a public improvement district or a PID to finance the 00:57:42.880 --> 00:57:49.600 required public infrastructure for the development. In the past, council has declined to establish 00:57:49.600 --> 00:57:54.920 a PID primarily because of concerns about the debt that would be issued and included 00:57:54.920 --> 00:58:02.860 on the city's financials, among other issues. The current iteration of the project is coal 00:58:02.860 --> 00:58:08.080 and hunter ranch, both of which represent about 3,000 acres in that southwest quadrant 00:58:08.080 --> 00:58:13.400 of Denton. They're both zoned as master plan communities. They've come together to propose 00:58:13.400 --> 00:58:20.240 a coordinated 6,000 acre community with a municipal management district over the property 00:58:20.240 --> 00:58:26.480 instead of a public improvement district or another type of district. 00:58:26.480 --> 00:58:32.200 Summary of the project, as I mentioned, it's about 6,000 acres in total. They're estimating 00:58:32.200 --> 00:58:41.040 982 million in total project costs for infrastructure and amenities, 485 of which would be reimbursable 00:58:41.040 --> 00:58:47.520 through the MMD. And I want to also note that these are preliminary numbers that were provided 00:58:47.520 --> 00:58:54.120 by the developer. The city's financial advisors have not reviewed and verified these yet. 00:58:54.120 --> 00:58:59.800 I will tell you more about when that's going to happen a little bit later on in the presentation. 00:58:59.800 --> 00:59:05.880 The project is estimated to have a 40 year build out. They're talking about almost 16,000 00:59:05.880 --> 00:59:13.320 single family units, a little over 5,000 units of multifamily, about 420 commercial acres 00:59:13.320 --> 00:59:20.960 and 101 industrial acres in the project. 00:59:20.960 --> 00:59:26.880 The developers gave us some broad outlines for the revised master plan that they plan 00:59:26.880 --> 00:59:34.360 to develop. Each of the communities that they have in other places, including in North Texas 00:59:34.360 --> 00:59:40.200 around the Austin area, they tell us that they try to develop with character and amenities 00:59:40.200 --> 00:59:45.720 that are unique to the area and the communities. They do that through a process of stakeholder 00:59:45.720 --> 00:59:51.760 input. They want to preserve the natural open spaces and include a lot of hike and bike 00:59:51.760 --> 00:59:57.400 trail connectivity throughout the property. They're proposing diverse neighborhoods with 00:59:57.400 --> 01:00:02.720 a range of high quality housing types and prices. They want to have activity focused 01:00:02.720 --> 01:00:09.320 programming, which is a big feature of a lot of the newer master plan communities that 01:00:09.320 --> 01:00:14.720 are being developed now. Six elementary schools, two middle schools and one high school are 01:00:14.720 --> 01:00:22.160 planned for the property. Then there will also be retail and commercial centers. 01:00:22.160 --> 01:00:27.280 What a municipal management district does is enable the developers to recapture a part 01:00:27.280 --> 01:00:34.400 of the cost of the required public infrastructure. The developer would pay to put in all of the 01:00:34.400 --> 01:00:40.400 infrastructure and then be reimbursed for those costs through the bonds that would be 01:00:40.400 --> 01:00:47.440 issued by the MMD itself. An MMD is a political subdivision separate from the city that can 01:00:47.440 --> 01:00:52.400 collect property taxes from property owners within the districts under limitations that 01:00:52.400 --> 01:01:00.920 are set by the city itself. Reimbursement only occurs after the developer paid for and 01:01:00.920 --> 01:01:05.860 built the improvements and created the assessed value from homes, commercial and industrial 01:01:05.860 --> 01:01:13.680 buildings at a ratio of 10 to 1 before the bond can be issued. They have to create ten 01:01:13.680 --> 01:01:19.120 times the value of the amount of bond that's being issued. Again, the revenue from the 01:01:19.120 --> 01:01:23.280 property taxes collected from the property owners within the district is what's used 01:01:23.280 --> 01:01:32.640 to pay back the debt issued by the MMD. This is just a basic tax rate comparison of 01:01:32.640 --> 01:01:39.560 some of the other communities, some of the other master plan communities that have municipal 01:01:39.560 --> 01:01:44.680 management districts or special districts. In the immediate area mostly, and you can 01:01:44.680 --> 01:01:50.880 see some familiar names on that list there, but I do want to point out that Colon Hunter 01:01:50.880 --> 01:01:59.120 Ranch is this column right here. The number that we've been talking about as the maximum 01:01:59.120 --> 01:02:07.380 tax rate that the MMD would assess is 55 cents per hundred in valuation. That puts the total 01:02:07.380 --> 01:02:17.440 tax rate for that development at $2.93 approximately per hundred dollars in valuation. You can 01:02:17.440 --> 01:02:22.920 see that there are a couple of others that would have higher total tax stacks, some that 01:02:22.920 --> 01:02:31.160 are very close, and then a couple down here that are significantly less than that. There 01:02:31.160 --> 01:02:39.360 are several documents that are required to create the MMD. We did have a vote with the 01:02:39.360 --> 01:02:47.080 council last night to approve this resolution of support, which has to go to the Texas legislature 01:02:47.080 --> 01:02:55.200 as part of the legislative process because we have to have legislation signed into law 01:02:55.200 --> 01:03:01.140 to allow the MMD to be established. Without that, it cannot be established. Last night, 01:03:01.140 --> 01:03:08.920 a separate resolution of support was passed for both Cole and Hunter Ranch. That will 01:03:08.920 --> 01:03:17.640 then begin working its way through the legislative process. Assuming that that does get signed 01:03:17.640 --> 01:03:23.440 by the governor's office, there are three documents that have to be established or passed 01:03:23.440 --> 01:03:28.480 by the council then. First, the city consent ordinance, then the MMD operating agreement, 01:03:28.480 --> 01:03:33.400 which is between the city and the MMD itself, and then finally the developer agreement, 01:03:33.400 --> 01:03:40.520 which is between the city and the developers of the property. All of those documents provide 01:03:40.520 --> 01:03:46.360 limitations and parameters around different aspects of the project, and they all will 01:03:46.360 --> 01:03:52.440 be voted on together if we get to that point. If one of them doesn't make it through the 01:03:52.440 --> 01:03:57.440 process, none of them make it through the process and the district is not established. 01:03:57.440 --> 01:04:05.480 There are a lot of opportunities for feedback from the community, from the city council 01:04:05.480 --> 01:04:09.680 as this project goes forward, and I think that's something that's very important for 01:04:09.680 --> 01:04:15.880 everybody to realize is that what happened last night just enables us to continue through 01:04:15.880 --> 01:04:21.320 the discussion and the vetting of whether or not this is the right project for Dutton, 01:04:21.320 --> 01:04:28.080 and there are many steps in the process before it reaches its completion. So what I just 01:04:28.080 --> 01:04:34.920 said about the council having many opportunities to set expectations and give that direction. 01:04:34.920 --> 01:04:43.240 So we moved through bullet number one here. We'll be moving into bullets number two and 01:04:43.240 --> 01:04:50.520 three over the months, taking the time that we need to get it done. So this is a little 01:04:50.520 --> 01:04:55.400 outdated because we did have that meeting last night. The developers requested the resolutions, 01:04:55.400 --> 01:05:00.200 the council passed them. The other thing that the council approved last night is the city's 01:05:00.200 --> 01:05:07.760 ability to enter into an escrow agreement that will be funded by the developer, $25,000 01:05:07.760 --> 01:05:15.400 apiece for a total of $50,000 that will allow the city to hire a consultant to conduct an 01:05:15.400 --> 01:05:20.920 independent fiscal analysis, an independent legal analysis. We're talking about bringing 01:05:20.920 --> 01:05:27.200 in professional administrators of municipal management districts to review the project 01:05:27.200 --> 01:05:33.840 to get a full and complete view of the costs and the benefits to the city of Dutton for 01:05:33.840 --> 01:05:44.640 this project over time. And that is where it stands today. City staff is working to 01:05:44.640 --> 01:05:51.280 find the escrow agent, get that fund going and continue moving through the process. So 01:05:51.280 --> 01:05:55.480 I'm happy to answer any questions about that. I know it's a lot of information at kind of 01:05:55.480 --> 01:06:00.960 a high level. There's plenty more of it in your backup, but I'm glad to take questions 01:06:00.960 --> 01:06:07.560 if you all have them. >> So are this is informational purposes 01:06:07.560 --> 01:06:12.480 only? >> Correct. This doesn't require a recommendation 01:06:12.480 --> 01:06:17.000 from this board. >> Any comments or questions? 01:06:17.000 --> 01:06:27.040 >> I have three. Is that within my allotment? >> That's your limit. 01:06:27.040 --> 01:06:33.400 >> Firstly, thank you for the presentation. And just from my own perspective, as I'm driving 01:06:33.400 --> 01:06:37.480 towards Fort Worth, it's going to be the area to the left? 01:06:37.480 --> 01:06:43.040 >> To the right. >> Okay. It's on the same side as Robeson? 01:06:43.040 --> 01:06:46.060 >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. Perspective. Thank you. 01:06:46.060 --> 01:06:52.040 >> I'm sorry. I'll amend that a little bit. It's mostly to the west. But here I'll go 01:06:52.040 --> 01:07:01.400 back to the map. Some of the commercial is on the east side. So here's 35. And here's 01:07:01.400 --> 01:07:09.080 the west side. Here's Robeson. And then here is some of the commercial land on the other 01:07:09.080 --> 01:07:14.560 side of 35. >> And is that currently city limits or ETJ? 01:07:14.560 --> 01:07:21.840 >> All of this is within the city limits. >> Okay. And I guess I'm not much of a roamer. 01:07:21.840 --> 01:07:29.320 I don't roam out in the raw land. So I wasn't aware that you had enough land there for six 01:07:29.320 --> 01:07:33.800 elementary schools, two middle schools, and one high school all in that area. 01:07:33.800 --> 01:07:37.520 >> Yes, sir. >> That's quite a build out. Yeah. Okay. I 01:07:37.520 --> 01:07:43.200 think I had one more question. >> You only got permission for three. 01:07:43.200 --> 01:07:51.480 >> Was that three? Thank you. Jill. >> I have a couple of just curiosity questions 01:07:51.480 --> 01:07:57.680 really. And you may or may not have the answers. First, there's no obligation for our representative 01:07:57.680 --> 01:08:02.160 or senator to present this legislation. Is that correct? Or is there an obligation for 01:08:02.160 --> 01:08:06.920 one of them to take it up? Because it will have to be sponsored by? 01:08:06.920 --> 01:08:13.800 >> Right. The word obligation is I think is what's tripping me up a little bit. So Representative 01:08:13.800 --> 01:08:19.640 Stuckey is going to introduce the bill. I don't think he has to. But he has agreed to 01:08:19.640 --> 01:08:24.320 do so. >> Okay. The second question is as far as 01:08:24.320 --> 01:08:29.520 the schools in these communities, I would assume that DISD would still have to purchase 01:08:29.520 --> 01:08:39.520 that property from the developers. >> DISD has purchased one school site. Purchase 01:08:39.520 --> 01:08:45.120 or donation is a negotiating point that has not been worked out yet. 01:08:45.120 --> 01:08:51.680 >> Okay. Again, just kind of curious. Don't mean to get in the weeds. Thank you. 01:08:51.680 --> 01:09:00.120 >> I noticed the taxing graph that you had on the comparable communities that the Canyon 01:09:00.120 --> 01:09:04.680 Falls, which is if you haven't driven through there, is really nice. I'm curious if the 01:09:04.680 --> 01:09:11.400 part that's in Flyer Mound is not as nice as the part that's in the ETJ because I guess 01:09:11.400 --> 01:09:16.360 Flyer Mound did not agree to do that in the part that's within their city limits. 01:09:16.360 --> 01:09:30.560 >> Right. I can't speak to the quality differences. >> That's a big development. I will say and 01:09:30.560 --> 01:09:37.800 I meant to bring up to think we're looking at maybe having a joint city council and economic 01:09:37.800 --> 01:09:41.500 development board meeting down the road. I think I proposed that to council yesterday 01:09:41.500 --> 01:09:47.320 and hopefully that will work out. But housing is a -- it's a big life cycle. Housing is 01:09:47.320 --> 01:09:51.520 a part of the equation whether we need to do this or not. But it's when you bring people 01:09:51.520 --> 01:10:00.520 here and they bring employees and of all wage type earners, housing is a big deal. A lot 01:10:00.520 --> 01:10:05.400 of people come here and live in Flyer Mound or Argyle and places like that and need housing 01:10:05.400 --> 01:10:11.680 and they need affordable housing too. So it's part of our equation. We're not doing anything 01:10:11.680 --> 01:10:15.720 today. But it's a big part of it. It needs to be on our radar. 01:10:15.720 --> 01:10:20.640 >> I will just add to the joint meeting. I did request that at the end of the meeting 01:10:20.640 --> 01:10:25.200 for council recommendations. So I hope that will be coming soon. 01:10:25.200 --> 01:10:30.680 >> We're working on scheduling that now. >> Thank you. Any comments or questions? 01:10:30.680 --> 01:10:43.600 All right. Thank you. All right. Moving right along. Our next item is to consider our minutes 01:10:43.600 --> 01:10:54.360 from our November 14th, 2018 meeting. That's item 19-004. Any questions, comments, motions? 01:10:54.360 --> 01:11:04.120 >> I'll make a -- on page 128, just to clarify, it's correct in the header as far as the chairperson 01:11:04.120 --> 01:11:10.080 and vice chairperson. But Briggs nominated John Baines to continue as vice chairperson 01:11:10.080 --> 01:11:15.200 at this time. >> Okay. So is that a motion -- 01:11:15.200 --> 01:11:25.040 >> I move that we accept the minutes as presented with the exception of adding the word vice 01:11:25.040 --> 01:11:31.440 to A -- section 1A. >> Somebody like to second that? 01:11:31.440 --> 01:11:37.240 >> I'll second. >> We have a motion and a second. 01:11:37.240 --> 01:11:41.000 Any more discussion? All those in favor say aye. 01:11:41.000 --> 01:11:49.680 Any opposed? The minutes are approved. And as much as I would love to have our staff 01:11:49.680 --> 01:11:53.880 report today, is there anything that you guys additionally need to tell us that's not in 01:11:53.880 --> 01:11:58.880 the report that we couldn't go find ourselves given that we're behind schedule? 01:11:58.880 --> 01:12:06.840 >> I hope that everyone is aware that the city council approved the incentive for Tyson 01:12:06.840 --> 01:12:15.280 Foods -- was that last week, I think? And all signs point to that project moving forward 01:12:15.280 --> 01:12:23.020 positively and we'll keep you updated on that as more information becomes available. 01:12:23.020 --> 01:12:27.880 >> Anybody opposed to skipping the staff reports? We can move on. 01:12:27.880 --> 01:12:34.120 I don't want to discount all the work you all do to do that, but it's out there for our 01:12:34.120 --> 01:12:40.280 public review and we'll catch up on that. So if that's okay, we will skip item number 01:12:40.280 --> 01:12:47.320 five and I'll take a motion to adjourn. >> I'll move. 01:12:47.320 --> 01:12:51.280 >> Second. >> All right. 01:12:51.280 --> 01:12:52.480 We have --