WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:10.060 We have determined that a quorum has been met. 00:00:10.060 --> 00:00:14.680 The downtown Denton tax increment finance reinvestment zone number one board of the 00:00:14.680 --> 00:00:19.760 city of Denton Texas will now convene in a regular meeting at 12.04 p.m. this Wednesday, 00:00:19.760 --> 00:00:22.960 the 23rd day of September 2020. 00:00:22.960 --> 00:00:27.600 Our first order of business is 1A to consider approval and our corrections of the meeting 00:00:27.600 --> 00:00:33.900 minutes from the July 23rd, 2020 downtown Denton TIF reinvestment zone number one board 00:00:33.900 --> 00:00:35.780 of the city of Denton Texas. 00:00:35.780 --> 00:00:41.960 Are there any corrections to the minutes as distributed? 00:00:41.960 --> 00:00:47.960 Do we have a motion? 00:00:47.960 --> 00:00:52.360 Motion to approve. 00:00:52.360 --> 00:00:53.360 Was that a first and a second? 00:00:53.360 --> 00:00:55.360 Gerard is the first. 00:00:55.360 --> 00:00:58.200 Was that Alex as a second? 00:00:58.200 --> 00:01:00.400 Alex first, Gerard second. 00:01:00.400 --> 00:01:01.400 Okay. 00:01:01.400 --> 00:01:03.920 So we have a motion and a second. 00:01:03.920 --> 00:01:07.240 All those in favor of adopting the motion say aye. 00:01:07.240 --> 00:01:08.240 Aye. 00:01:08.240 --> 00:01:10.360 Those opposed say no. 00:01:10.360 --> 00:01:13.640 Melissa, could you please go around the horn? 00:01:13.640 --> 00:01:14.640 Yep. 00:01:14.640 --> 00:01:16.440 Thank you. 00:01:16.440 --> 00:01:19.200 Ben approve or opposed? 00:01:19.200 --> 00:01:20.200 Approve. 00:01:20.200 --> 00:01:21.200 Paul? 00:01:21.200 --> 00:01:22.200 Approve. 00:01:22.200 --> 00:01:23.200 Alex? 00:01:23.200 --> 00:01:25.720 Approve. 00:01:25.720 --> 00:01:27.600 Gerard? 00:01:27.600 --> 00:01:30.520 Approve. 00:01:30.520 --> 00:01:34.420 Melissa approve. 00:01:34.420 --> 00:01:38.440 The motion passes by unanimous vote. 00:01:38.440 --> 00:01:41.680 The next order of business is to receive a report and hold a discussion and give staff 00:01:41.680 --> 00:01:46.680 direction regarding the downtown Denton TIF reinvestment zone number one study and analysis 00:01:46.680 --> 00:01:49.880 being conducted by TXP Inc. 00:01:49.880 --> 00:01:57.120 Melissa also before I hand it over, I guess, am I handing it to you, Christina? 00:01:57.120 --> 00:02:01.800 It will be Erica. 00:02:01.800 --> 00:02:02.800 Okay. 00:02:02.800 --> 00:02:07.680 I just wanted to really just say thanks for staff for putting this together and I think 00:02:07.680 --> 00:02:08.680 it's terrific. 00:02:08.680 --> 00:02:12.120 We just really appreciate the work being done on this project. 00:02:12.120 --> 00:02:16.520 Thank you. 00:02:16.520 --> 00:02:21.240 The chair recognizes Jessica Rogers, Director of Economic Development. 00:02:21.240 --> 00:02:26.360 Actually, I will be facilitating for Jessica Rogers today. 00:02:26.360 --> 00:02:27.520 Thank you, Erica. 00:02:27.520 --> 00:02:29.280 She's on a much needed vacation. 00:02:29.280 --> 00:02:31.000 Good for her. 00:02:31.000 --> 00:02:32.840 No vacations allowed. 00:02:32.840 --> 00:02:33.840 I'm sorry? 00:02:33.840 --> 00:02:34.840 No vacations allowed. 00:02:34.840 --> 00:02:37.240 Oh, yeah. 00:02:37.240 --> 00:02:39.320 So many of you know me, but I'm Erica Solomon. 00:02:39.320 --> 00:02:43.680 I'm the analyst here and I also wanted to take the opportunity to introduce two new staff 00:02:43.680 --> 00:02:45.840 members that we have here. 00:02:45.840 --> 00:02:47.720 I want to introduce Dan Rosenfield. 00:02:47.720 --> 00:02:49.920 Maybe you can wave. 00:02:49.920 --> 00:02:55.380 He's our new ED analyst and I'd also like to introduce Kay Brown-Patrick, our business 00:02:55.380 --> 00:02:57.640 development administrator. 00:02:57.640 --> 00:03:01.600 We're really happy to have him on our team and Kay replaces Michelle Cunningham for those 00:03:01.600 --> 00:03:02.600 of you who remember her. 00:03:02.600 --> 00:03:06.480 She retired this summer. 00:03:06.480 --> 00:03:12.960 And I'd also like to recognize our consultant, Travis James from TXP. 00:03:12.960 --> 00:03:18.100 It's an economic development consulting firm out of Austin, and they presented to this 00:03:18.100 --> 00:03:22.920 board late last year, if we can all remember, the time before COVID. 00:03:22.920 --> 00:03:34.360 And he's going to be telling, giving an update on the status of the TIRS study. 00:03:34.360 --> 00:03:41.640 All right. 00:03:41.640 --> 00:03:42.640 Well thank you, Erica. 00:03:42.640 --> 00:03:48.920 Are you ready for me to start walking through my presentation? 00:03:48.920 --> 00:03:52.360 So I'll start the presentation and then I will pause after every slide. 00:03:52.360 --> 00:03:56.520 It's about a 15-minute presentation, but I know with the delay might make it a little 00:03:56.520 --> 00:03:58.680 bit easier if there are any questions. 00:03:58.680 --> 00:04:03.720 On the next slide that Erica will pull up, we were fortunate to be retained at the end 00:04:03.720 --> 00:04:11.640 of 2019, and the primary focus of our effort at that point was to determine if the TIRS 00:04:11.640 --> 00:04:14.760 could fund PEC 4 Phases 3 and 4. 00:04:14.760 --> 00:04:21.440 There was a project located along West Mulberry that needed that drainage flow control project 00:04:21.440 --> 00:04:24.720 to be completed to allow them to proceed. 00:04:24.720 --> 00:04:28.160 There was also a potential request for some parking facilities. 00:04:28.160 --> 00:04:33.840 And so the focus at that time at the end of November, with the cost of PEC 3 and 4 being 00:04:33.840 --> 00:04:40.480 about $21 million, it's subsequently been refined down to about $15, $16 million, was 00:04:40.480 --> 00:04:46.400 if we went ahead with this project and did PEC Phases 3 and 4 with the TIRS, was there 00:04:46.400 --> 00:04:49.800 going to be sufficient funding to pay for that project? 00:04:49.800 --> 00:04:52.880 And if so, what did that mean in terms of the financing plan? 00:04:52.880 --> 00:04:57.360 So I came up in November 20th, met with this board, and that was some developers to go 00:04:57.360 --> 00:05:00.800 over what was happening in the TIRS. 00:05:00.800 --> 00:05:05.440 Obviously, COVID has occurred and the timeline got delayed. 00:05:05.440 --> 00:05:10.520 In addition, that project on Mulberry and another project that was in the pipeline for 00:05:10.520 --> 00:05:15.040 a variety of reasons, those projects have been put on hold or canceled. 00:05:15.040 --> 00:05:21.680 And so the focus of what I was asked to do was let's step back and look at the TIRS overall 00:05:21.680 --> 00:05:27.560 and maybe we fund PEC Phases 3 and 4 and if we don't, what else could we do with the money? 00:05:27.560 --> 00:05:33.040 So that's a little bit of background or how we got here with the focus getting shifted. 00:05:33.040 --> 00:05:40.520 On the next slide, I'm going to ask Erika if you don't mind to remind the folks about 00:05:40.520 --> 00:05:42.800 the TIRS and how it's structured. 00:05:42.800 --> 00:05:43.800 Sure. 00:05:43.800 --> 00:05:49.440 The Downtown TIRS was created in 2010, shortly after the Downtown Implementation Plan was 00:05:49.440 --> 00:05:53.680 adopted and it took effect on January 1, 2011. 00:05:53.680 --> 00:06:00.000 It will terminate on December 31st, 2041, or when 24.8 million has been collected. 00:06:00.000 --> 00:06:04.320 The City of Denton, unlike the West Park TIRS, is the only participating jurisdiction in 00:06:04.320 --> 00:06:10.400 the Downtown TIRS and it's structured at a decreasing ratio participation from 100 down 00:06:10.400 --> 00:06:11.720 to 80%. 00:06:11.720 --> 00:06:17.440 We are in the second cohort there, year 6 to 10 at 95%. 00:06:17.440 --> 00:06:22.160 As of the previous annual report, the TIRS revenue was 2.4 million and the total TIRS 00:06:22.160 --> 00:06:27.980 expenditures was 1.9 million. 00:06:27.980 --> 00:06:36.240 So that leaves about $21 million, $22 million left with that $24.8 million cap. 00:06:36.240 --> 00:06:41.120 So that's an important number as we think about funding projects and talking later in 00:06:41.120 --> 00:06:45.640 the presentation about how we prioritize and looking at the return on investment. 00:06:45.640 --> 00:06:51.800 Unlike other TIRS, this TIRS has a cap, both the timeline, duration, and the cap. 00:06:51.800 --> 00:06:56.820 On the next slide, this is to repeat what I said earlier. 00:06:56.820 --> 00:07:00.760 We got to about step five before COVID hit. 00:07:00.760 --> 00:07:05.320 In the past couple of months, we've had about five or six stakeholder input sessions to 00:07:05.320 --> 00:07:10.240 get additional feedback from the stakeholders. 00:07:10.240 --> 00:07:15.500 And now we're looking to provide you all an update and get direction on how to proceed. 00:07:15.500 --> 00:07:17.000 So that's where we are in the process. 00:07:17.000 --> 00:07:22.100 Originally, it was about a four-month process and obviously now it's been delayed. 00:07:22.100 --> 00:07:26.120 On the next slide, just to remind everybody, I think you all know this. 00:07:26.120 --> 00:07:30.060 This is the current boundary of the downtown TIRS. 00:07:30.060 --> 00:07:34.120 This is how it was created and nothing has changed. 00:07:34.120 --> 00:07:38.880 But part of the original project and finance plan you all did years ago, another consultant 00:07:38.880 --> 00:07:39.880 did. 00:07:39.880 --> 00:07:45.400 On the next slide, they identified five catalytic areas. 00:07:45.400 --> 00:08:01.600 So in the next slide, Erica, they were labeled A through E. Go back one more. 00:08:01.600 --> 00:08:07.480 So one of my tasks was to examine these four or five areas, see what has occurred, what 00:08:07.480 --> 00:08:13.360 hasn't occurred, and see how that would impact the financing plan to date and what would 00:08:13.360 --> 00:08:15.280 likely happen in the future. 00:08:15.280 --> 00:08:22.320 On the next slide, it provides a summary from that other consultant's report about the type 00:08:22.320 --> 00:08:30.120 of development that would likely happen, the value, and the timeline when it would occur. 00:08:30.120 --> 00:08:36.860 And so some of these zones shouldn't be developing based on the timeline until today. 00:08:36.860 --> 00:08:38.940 Some of them should have already seen development. 00:08:38.940 --> 00:08:45.100 There hasn't been a lot of new development in any of these zones except area A in a slightly 00:08:45.100 --> 00:08:46.820 different location. 00:08:46.820 --> 00:08:53.400 And I'm referring to the residential that was built next to the transit center. 00:08:53.400 --> 00:09:00.720 So there was projected to be about $126 million of new development within these five zones 00:09:00.720 --> 00:09:05.560 that are within the downtown TIRS. 00:09:05.560 --> 00:09:14.160 On the next slide, what's interesting is that due to redevelopment and appreciation throughout 00:09:14.160 --> 00:09:21.200 the TIRS, but primarily outside of those five zones, the TIRS is tracking the projections 00:09:21.200 --> 00:09:23.120 of the original plan. 00:09:23.120 --> 00:09:27.760 So even though we haven't seen that development occur yet, the projections are still on pace. 00:09:27.760 --> 00:09:34.840 About $3 million has been collected to date, about $21 million left. 00:09:34.840 --> 00:09:40.680 Assuming no new development and a 2.5% appreciation of what's there today, the TIRS will hit that 00:09:40.680 --> 00:09:47.080 $24.8 million cap by about year 28-29. 00:09:47.080 --> 00:09:54.800 So if nothing else gets built today, 2.5% appreciation, we're going to hit the cap in about year 30. 00:09:54.800 --> 00:10:00.640 So we don't need to see any new development to take place to get to that revenue stream. 00:10:00.640 --> 00:10:10.280 On the next slide, this shows you the annual taxable value growth from year 2010 up to 00:10:10.280 --> 00:10:12.200 the year 2020. 00:10:12.200 --> 00:10:17.040 I might defer to David if you have questions about 2020, I know people are protesting values 00:10:17.040 --> 00:10:21.660 all over the state within Denton as we deal with COVID, I see some smiling. 00:10:21.660 --> 00:10:26.040 New construction according to what the appraisal district has given us was about $28 million 00:10:26.040 --> 00:10:27.040 in the zone. 00:10:27.040 --> 00:10:31.480 Now it gets a little bit confusing when they show partial one year and then the next year 00:10:31.480 --> 00:10:33.680 it's completed where it shows up. 00:10:33.680 --> 00:10:37.520 But based on the reports from the appraisal district, the growth in the TIRS has been 00:10:37.520 --> 00:10:41.240 about $150 million over the past 10 years. 00:10:41.240 --> 00:10:48.640 $28-30 million has come from new construction, $124 million from appreciation. 00:10:48.640 --> 00:10:56.600 Does that make sense to everybody, are there any questions on that? 00:10:56.600 --> 00:11:05.840 On the next slide, this will depict the annual revenue when it pops up, the annual TIRS revenue 00:11:05.840 --> 00:11:06.840 per year. 00:11:06.840 --> 00:11:13.600 We're approaching $800,000, $900,000 a year, so we've got 20 years to go, we're getting 00:11:13.600 --> 00:11:18.760 about a million dollars a year, that's how we hit the revenue cap. 00:11:18.760 --> 00:11:25.240 The next slide is cumulative revenue, it's based on actuals plus projections and again, 00:11:25.240 --> 00:11:26.740 this is appreciation only. 00:11:26.740 --> 00:11:31.240 As I said, when I was brought in, there were two projects in the pipeline that were pending 00:11:31.240 --> 00:11:35.580 and I ran a number of scenarios and shared those with city staff. 00:11:35.580 --> 00:11:41.280 You hit the cap sooner, is the short answer, if any new project gets built, but especially 00:11:41.280 --> 00:11:42.920 those projects. 00:11:42.920 --> 00:11:51.400 So we'll hit that $24.8 million cap in about 20 years. 00:11:51.400 --> 00:11:55.120 Next slide. 00:11:55.120 --> 00:12:00.720 So stakeholder input, so we got input from local business owners, developers, we talked 00:12:00.720 --> 00:12:02.660 to the TIRS board. 00:12:02.660 --> 00:12:06.440 The consensus was that more downtown parking is not a priority. 00:12:06.440 --> 00:12:10.280 One of the projects that had kind of been talked about when I was brought on was maybe 00:12:10.280 --> 00:12:11.720 the need for a parking garage. 00:12:11.720 --> 00:12:16.840 The general consensus was that it's not needed in the short or medium term. 00:12:16.840 --> 00:12:20.640 Downtown businesses said they're struggling obviously with COVID and if you think about 00:12:20.640 --> 00:12:25.920 starting a new big infrastructure project, please think about how that will impact our 00:12:25.920 --> 00:12:32.160 businesses as we're trying to reopen, as COVID hopefully is ending sooner than later. 00:12:32.160 --> 00:12:38.080 They thought that smaller projects focused on lighting and sidewalk improvements are 00:12:38.080 --> 00:12:43.800 more important in the short term than a big hickory street type project. 00:12:43.800 --> 00:12:49.320 Drainage improvements are necessary to create development opportunities, but new projects 00:12:49.320 --> 00:12:51.360 might not occur in the short term. 00:12:51.360 --> 00:12:55.920 So other than the one or two projects I looked on at the beginning, there isn't necessarily 00:12:55.920 --> 00:13:03.360 a project related to PEC phase three and four that would be imminent if that project was 00:13:03.360 --> 00:13:05.960 completed tomorrow. 00:13:05.960 --> 00:13:11.760 The next slide, we heard that downtown needs more daytime office employment and traffic 00:13:11.760 --> 00:13:14.400 to balance the nighttime activity. 00:13:14.400 --> 00:13:18.640 The flip side is that office rents are not high enough to justify those new construction 00:13:18.640 --> 00:13:19.640 costs. 00:13:19.640 --> 00:13:24.600 So you would likely need to incentivize office users to come downtown. 00:13:24.600 --> 00:13:28.600 Tourists said they'd like to use the tourist funds to incentivize larger economic development 00:13:28.600 --> 00:13:29.600 projects. 00:13:29.600 --> 00:13:33.720 Look to other city revenue streams to pay for infrastructure. 00:13:33.720 --> 00:13:39.160 Leave the tourist funds to incentivize those catalytic projects that I went over earlier. 00:13:39.160 --> 00:13:43.160 Existing businesses said they'd like to use the tourist fund on expanding the building 00:13:43.160 --> 00:13:45.900 improvement and facade programs that are there today. 00:13:45.900 --> 00:13:50.920 I think when I was there on November 20th, y'all were approving some of those grant programs 00:13:50.920 --> 00:13:53.460 to businesses in the downtown. 00:13:53.460 --> 00:13:57.840 And I think in general, there was a feeling that downtown lacks an overall vision, making 00:13:57.840 --> 00:14:02.960 prioritizing any of the improvements that we're about to talk about challenging. 00:14:02.960 --> 00:14:10.040 It's not clear what's more important and why, that it lacks that vision. 00:14:10.040 --> 00:14:11.400 So I'll pause there again. 00:14:11.400 --> 00:14:21.040 Is there any comment or questions on the feedback we heard or for folks to like clarification? 00:14:21.040 --> 00:14:28.120 Okay, and I'll keep going with the presentation. 00:14:28.120 --> 00:14:33.960 Given your existing, when Erica goes back to the slide deck, the way the project plan 00:14:33.960 --> 00:14:39.720 was written, a lot of the projects we're going to talk about can be funded without making 00:14:39.720 --> 00:14:45.280 changes to the types of projects that are eligible for reimbursement. 00:14:45.280 --> 00:14:55.120 So on slide 14, parking, complete streets, support for grant projects, whether it's 380 00:14:55.120 --> 00:15:01.680 maintenance loans, utility drainage improvements, those would all be eligible given the current 00:15:01.680 --> 00:15:02.680 plan. 00:15:02.680 --> 00:15:03.680 All right. 00:15:03.680 --> 00:15:08.120 So on the next slide, this is, I apologize for a confusing map, but I think it's easier 00:15:08.120 --> 00:15:11.120 to maybe visualize all this at once. 00:15:11.120 --> 00:15:15.640 So based on the feedback, we mapped the types of projects that people told us that tourists 00:15:15.640 --> 00:15:17.000 should think about funding. 00:15:17.000 --> 00:15:22.840 One would be maybe Oak Street, do kind of hickory street-like improvements along Oak 00:15:22.840 --> 00:15:23.840 Street. 00:15:23.840 --> 00:15:25.840 That was a project that came up. 00:15:25.840 --> 00:15:30.880 The new streets, as you see highlighted there in gold on the screen, would be the kind of 00:15:30.880 --> 00:15:36.920 project that could be funded through a tourist that people thought would help drive visitor 00:15:36.920 --> 00:15:42.160 activity and business sales, may not increase property values, but would be an important 00:15:42.160 --> 00:15:45.220 project to help existing businesses. 00:15:45.220 --> 00:15:50.160 Another thing we heard from developers was, instead of doing hickory street-like improvements 00:15:50.160 --> 00:15:55.380 along Oak, maybe we should think about doing those along Elm and Locust, that there's areas 00:15:55.380 --> 00:16:02.380 more ripe for redevelopment in the long-term from Eagle Drive down to the courthouse along 00:16:02.380 --> 00:16:04.400 Elm and Locust. 00:16:04.400 --> 00:16:09.600 You also see I've highlighted PEC phase three and four, which you notice is that most of 00:16:09.600 --> 00:16:11.920 it is outside of the tourist. 00:16:11.920 --> 00:16:18.360 To be eligible as a tourist project, we would have to expand the boundaries of the tourist 00:16:18.360 --> 00:16:21.680 to be able to fund that project. 00:16:21.680 --> 00:16:28.380 In purple, you see the parcels that are impacted that are within the floodplain that could 00:16:28.380 --> 00:16:36.320 be taken out of the floodplain once that project is completed. 00:16:36.320 --> 00:16:42.020 What I tried to summarize on this map was these are the projects that we heard from 00:16:42.020 --> 00:16:47.460 the stakeholders that they would like to see funded or should be eligible to be funded 00:16:47.460 --> 00:16:52.640 through a tourist, and that then directed the next phase of analysis. 00:16:52.640 --> 00:16:59.000 So is everybody clear on that map, so if you wanted to fund, for example, PEC phase three 00:16:59.000 --> 00:17:01.200 and four, you'd have to expand the boundaries. 00:17:01.200 --> 00:17:07.120 If you wanted to pick up all of the parcels that are taken out of the floodplain, you 00:17:07.120 --> 00:17:11.880 have to draw it even larger to pick up those purple parcels. 00:17:11.880 --> 00:17:13.680 So again, no right or wrong answer. 00:17:13.680 --> 00:17:20.480 That's why we want to get your feedback is what would make sense in terms of expanding 00:17:20.480 --> 00:17:21.480 a tourist. 00:17:21.480 --> 00:17:22.480 Yes, Melissa? 00:17:22.480 --> 00:17:29.760 What are some of the hurdles for expanding the area to include the floodplain from downtown 00:17:29.760 --> 00:17:31.500 to Eagle? 00:17:31.500 --> 00:17:35.680 You would just have to make sure there are caps on residential, the amount of residential 00:17:35.680 --> 00:17:36.680 within a tourist. 00:17:36.680 --> 00:17:39.280 I think we could add those, and that wouldn't be a problem. 00:17:39.280 --> 00:17:44.960 It would require city council to formally amend the boundaries, and those properties 00:17:44.960 --> 00:17:49.560 would have a different base value than the rest of the tourists. 00:17:49.560 --> 00:17:59.400 You'd have an expanded tourist with two different base values. 00:17:59.400 --> 00:18:09.880 On the next slide, which would be slide 16, I know return on investment is always an important 00:18:09.880 --> 00:18:11.400 question as you think about this, right? 00:18:11.400 --> 00:18:13.320 That makes sense when you're using the public's money. 00:18:13.320 --> 00:18:18.200 So what we tried to do, we tried to both quantify what we could. 00:18:18.200 --> 00:18:23.120 So what we found out as part of this process is that PEC4 phase three and four, I still 00:18:23.120 --> 00:18:27.960 don't know that I get that wording correct, we thought was going to cost about $21 million. 00:18:27.960 --> 00:18:31.800 The revised numbers are about $15 million. 00:18:31.800 --> 00:18:38.440 We also discussed Corps of Engineers, EDA, some other funding sources for that project. 00:18:38.440 --> 00:18:40.920 None of those have been finalized. 00:18:40.920 --> 00:18:45.740 If you wanted to fund this project with the tours, and assuming you don't get any other 00:18:45.740 --> 00:18:50.360 funding source, PEC4 would be the only project you could fund. 00:18:50.360 --> 00:18:56.960 So if you expanded the boundaries, we didn't bust the cap, then with interest, working 00:18:56.960 --> 00:19:02.360 with David kind of high level, the interest on that $15 million, it would consume the 00:19:02.360 --> 00:19:04.040 balance of the tourist funds. 00:19:04.040 --> 00:19:09.440 Plus, you still need to fund those small business grants out of the tourist fund as well. 00:19:09.440 --> 00:19:13.600 I believe that was shifted from the general fund over to the tour, so that still needs 00:19:13.600 --> 00:19:15.760 to get funded as well. 00:19:15.760 --> 00:19:22.040 It's not linked to a specific project per se, it has a longer term impact or properties 00:19:22.040 --> 00:19:25.840 there today that are residential, that are being rented, that are being cash flow. 00:19:25.840 --> 00:19:30.960 So it would likely take time for those to redevelop, but it would improve the value 00:19:30.960 --> 00:19:32.280 long term. 00:19:32.280 --> 00:19:36.740 City staff did a study before I was brought on, they looked at this to look at the return 00:19:36.740 --> 00:19:38.280 on investment. 00:19:38.280 --> 00:19:43.120 They found that when you take the properties within the floodplain compared to the properties 00:19:43.120 --> 00:19:48.220 adjacent that are outside of the floodplain, if you did this project, those properties 00:19:48.220 --> 00:19:53.040 would increase in value by about $17 million. 00:19:53.040 --> 00:19:56.480 That translates to about $100,000 per year. 00:19:56.480 --> 00:19:59.400 So is everyone clear on that? 00:19:59.400 --> 00:20:04.680 So based on the city analysis, looking at the parcels within the floodplain compared 00:20:04.680 --> 00:20:10.480 to what's not in the floodplain adjacent, once the project is completed, those properties 00:20:10.480 --> 00:20:16.100 should be worth about $17 million more today than they are today, which translates using 00:20:16.100 --> 00:20:22.820 this current city tax rate to about $100,000. 00:20:22.820 --> 00:20:25.480 Another project was the Mew Streets. 00:20:25.480 --> 00:20:32.960 That's a $7 million project, again, not linked to a specific redevelopment opportunity. 00:20:32.960 --> 00:20:39.240 Has a shorter term impact, and the real benefit to that is helping drive activity to the existing 00:20:39.240 --> 00:20:42.440 businesses downtown, make it more appealing. 00:20:42.440 --> 00:20:47.360 Unlikely that you would see four properties torn down and something else getting built. 00:20:47.360 --> 00:20:53.840 So this one isn't going to have the property value impact that the PEC project would have. 00:20:53.840 --> 00:20:58.280 I use the generic term corridor improvements because I know a lot of folks talk about Hickory 00:20:58.280 --> 00:20:59.280 Street. 00:20:59.280 --> 00:21:04.620 Since the Hickory Street project has been completed, and we can get into a but for debate, 00:21:04.620 --> 00:21:09.480 the parcels along Hickory Street have increased in value by $50 million over the past five 00:21:09.480 --> 00:21:11.640 years. 00:21:11.640 --> 00:21:16.040 So if you did another corridor improvement like Hickory, that was a $7 to $8 million 00:21:16.040 --> 00:21:17.040 project. 00:21:17.040 --> 00:21:21.480 It was about half a mile long, and it is a more disruptive project. 00:21:21.480 --> 00:21:27.060 It just takes longer to complete and would have an impact on the businesses located along 00:21:27.060 --> 00:21:28.960 there. 00:21:28.960 --> 00:21:31.680 Developer incentives was something else that we talked about. 00:21:31.680 --> 00:21:35.400 Again, when I was brought on, there were two developers looking for incentives. 00:21:35.400 --> 00:21:40.600 That's going to vary by project probably in the $5 to $10 million range. 00:21:40.600 --> 00:21:44.600 The return on investment is difficult to calculate because you just don't know what the specific 00:21:44.600 --> 00:21:51.920 project would be, but it's likely you're reimbursing for infrastructure, parking, those kinds of 00:21:51.920 --> 00:21:52.920 things. 00:21:52.920 --> 00:21:57.160 $5 to $10 million means you could probably do two or three of those depending on how 00:21:57.160 --> 00:21:59.560 much you offered. 00:21:59.560 --> 00:22:04.560 All businesses said they'd like to see an expanded grant program, maybe in the $50 to 00:22:04.560 --> 00:22:05.560 $100,000 range. 00:22:05.560 --> 00:22:11.000 Again, it has an immediate impact, but the return varies by project. 00:22:11.000 --> 00:22:14.360 Another thing we heard from stakeholders was that general maintenance. 00:22:14.360 --> 00:22:19.800 We should use tourist funds for general maintenance, beautification, street sweeping, those kinds 00:22:19.800 --> 00:22:21.600 of things. 00:22:21.600 --> 00:22:25.840 Probably doesn't have a return on investment that you could measure, but was something 00:22:25.840 --> 00:22:32.640 that folks said we should use tourist funds to take care of. 00:22:32.640 --> 00:22:33.800 So I know I've covered a lot. 00:22:33.800 --> 00:22:41.280 So PEC 4, phase 3 and 4, based on city analysis, property values could go up $17 to $20 million, 00:22:41.280 --> 00:22:47.320 translates to about $100 million to $100,000 a year in new property tax revenue. 00:22:47.320 --> 00:22:54.160 New streets, that costs about $7 million, not an obvious or significant increase in 00:22:54.160 --> 00:23:00.920 property values, then generic corridor improvements like Hickory Street, developer incentives, 00:23:00.920 --> 00:23:03.280 expanded grant programs, general maintenance. 00:23:03.280 --> 00:23:08.800 If the direction from this group is to fund PEC 4, phase 3 and 4, there is no money for 00:23:08.800 --> 00:23:15.960 these other projects, given how the tourist has a cap, or you could fund two or three 00:23:15.960 --> 00:23:20.800 of these other projects. 00:23:20.800 --> 00:23:30.440 Paula, you're muted. 00:23:30.440 --> 00:23:36.440 Okay, that tends to work better when I'm unmuted. 00:23:36.440 --> 00:23:38.920 I have a couple of questions. 00:23:38.920 --> 00:23:47.320 Would it be conceivable and maybe advantageous to create a second TURS that encompasses the 00:23:47.320 --> 00:23:56.880 PEC 3, PEC 4 areas that aren't in the current one, that is not structured with a cap, and 00:23:56.880 --> 00:24:03.080 allow both to invest in PEC 3 and PEC 4, would that have some advantages? 00:24:03.080 --> 00:24:08.640 Yeah, let me hear the answer to that one, then I've got another related question. 00:24:08.640 --> 00:24:12.240 So maybe, Erica, if you don't mind, could you pull up slide 15 so I could answer the 00:24:12.240 --> 00:24:14.640 council member's question? 00:24:14.640 --> 00:24:15.640 I think you could. 00:24:15.640 --> 00:24:21.920 I think the more common and easier thing to do would be just to expand the current TURS 00:24:21.920 --> 00:24:28.360 on slide 15. 00:24:28.360 --> 00:24:31.760 It's an easier process, there's not a separate TURS board. 00:24:31.760 --> 00:24:40.000 You could do it that way, now you'd have to figure out how to, it'd be easier to expand 00:24:40.000 --> 00:24:44.660 the current TURS, you could use all of the growth that's already occurred, because if 00:24:44.660 --> 00:24:49.880 you keep that TURS the way it is, with the downtown TURS, all you could fund would be 00:24:49.880 --> 00:24:56.040 that little stretch down mulberry of phase three. 00:24:56.040 --> 00:25:01.760 You couldn't use the downtown TURS to pay for what's outside of it. 00:25:01.760 --> 00:25:11.680 Okay, so if we, I have to be on camera, I think, while I'm speaking. 00:25:11.680 --> 00:25:22.520 So, if we did that, wouldn't that then also increase the earning rate of the TURS, like 00:25:22.520 --> 00:25:26.960 you're saying, it would consume all the money, but wouldn't there be more coming into it 00:25:26.960 --> 00:25:30.920 if we expand the boundaries too? 00:25:30.920 --> 00:25:36.440 Yes, there would be more, and in addition, I should have said this, if you go, I guess 00:25:36.440 --> 00:25:43.760 have to talk on camera, but if you look at the map, the improvements along Elm and Locust, 00:25:43.760 --> 00:25:50.440 you wouldn't see the increase in those properties without taking, without doing PEC 4. 00:25:50.440 --> 00:25:53.440 They're still in the floodplain, it's a little bit confusing to describe, if you go back 00:25:53.440 --> 00:25:59.480 to that map, those parcels along that corridor would still be in the floodplain. 00:25:59.480 --> 00:26:05.200 So as you think about prioritizing projects and expanding the TURS, just keep that in 00:26:05.200 --> 00:26:07.820 mind as well, right there, there you go. 00:26:07.820 --> 00:26:11.520 And sorry, I'm kind of pressing ahead, Melissa, but if I could just ask one more on the same 00:26:11.520 --> 00:26:15.800 topic. 00:26:15.800 --> 00:26:22.440 What do you think about the ratio of inputs to outputs, and to put it differently, how 00:26:22.440 --> 00:26:31.960 much should we be interested in investing to garner $100,000 a year income stream, and 00:26:31.960 --> 00:26:40.520 could that guide us toward how much other resources we need to bring to bear, right? 00:26:40.520 --> 00:26:46.360 Let's say, I mean, maybe that's great to invest $20 million and get $100,000 a year income 00:26:46.360 --> 00:26:50.960 stream, or if there are other, I mean, maybe if there are other resources, we should get 00:26:50.960 --> 00:26:51.960 them anyway. 00:26:51.960 --> 00:26:57.720 But might that be a guideline, like we need to fund half of it in order for the return 00:26:57.720 --> 00:27:01.160 to be attractive, that kind of thing, is that completely unclear? 00:27:01.160 --> 00:27:03.000 No, it makes total sense. 00:27:03.000 --> 00:27:08.480 I mean, I think that's sort of a philosophical debate about TURS and how you use them. 00:27:08.480 --> 00:27:13.280 Is it to fund infrastructure that have a longer term payback, or do you want to use your TURS 00:27:13.280 --> 00:27:19.760 dollars to fund higher impact catalytic projects like developer incentives? 00:27:19.760 --> 00:27:24.600 So I do think return on investment should be taken into account. 00:27:24.600 --> 00:27:27.920 What makes this one tricky, and it's harder to answer your question, is that there is 00:27:27.920 --> 00:27:31.480 that $24.8 million cap. 00:27:31.480 --> 00:27:40.120 So if you didn't have the cap, I think it might change how you prioritize these. 00:27:40.120 --> 00:27:46.480 But if you were able to get, I'm making up numbers here, no basis for any of this, if 00:27:46.480 --> 00:27:50.760 you were able to get 10 million from the Corps of Engineers because they like writing checks, 00:27:50.760 --> 00:27:56.240 and then, in fact, did you say something about how there's revised numbers that now it's 00:27:56.240 --> 00:27:58.480 only 15? 00:27:58.480 --> 00:28:02.960 Originally we thought it was closer to 20 million when we were talking about it, and 00:28:02.960 --> 00:28:07.960 I think the numbers now are 15 to 16, maybe revised isn't the right word, but as we delved 00:28:07.960 --> 00:28:11.560 into and pulled the specifics, I know it's part of a larger project. 00:28:11.560 --> 00:28:14.680 It's about 15 to 16 million. 00:28:14.680 --> 00:28:19.880 So let's say for argument's sake, Corps of Engineers magically wants to give us 10 million, 00:28:19.880 --> 00:28:27.160 so now it's 6 to 7, do we like those returns then? 00:28:27.160 --> 00:28:31.200 And then that leaves room, it's kind of a portfolio, so I think of it, in fact, in my 00:28:31.200 --> 00:28:39.440 very first TIFF board meeting, we very carefully worked out an agreement that was completely 00:28:39.440 --> 00:28:48.120 steamrolled by council, but we talked about a portfolio approach where a certain percentage 00:28:48.120 --> 00:28:54.800 would be for some unspecified big thing, and a certain percentage would be for more immediate 00:28:54.800 --> 00:29:00.760 things, and I don't remember where we landed, I think it might have been 60/40, and maybe 00:29:00.760 --> 00:29:08.880 if there are, in fact, other sources, investment sources toward this, we could get to some 00:29:08.880 --> 00:29:13.200 kind of a portfolio like that and like the basket of returns. 00:29:13.200 --> 00:29:18.200 No, and I see Alex has a question, but I would say yes, I think the portfolio makes sense, 00:29:18.200 --> 00:29:22.920 and again, then you have to decide, do we wait and not do anything to see if that other 00:29:22.920 --> 00:29:23.920 money comes in. 00:29:23.920 --> 00:29:29.440 Sort of, there's a lot of circular, if this, you know, but that's, sorry, Alex, so. 00:29:29.440 --> 00:29:30.440 Okay. 00:29:30.440 --> 00:29:31.440 I'm done. 00:29:31.440 --> 00:29:32.440 Thanks. 00:29:32.440 --> 00:29:36.480 Yeah, I can kind of weigh in probably a little further than I could initially because I was 00:29:36.480 --> 00:29:45.520 involved in one of the projects that Travis referenced on Moulby that's dead at this point, 00:29:45.520 --> 00:29:49.000 so to me, I don't have a problem talking about it. 00:29:49.000 --> 00:29:54.720 That project could have funded alone, just the tax revenue alone on that project could 00:29:54.720 --> 00:30:02.240 have funded a big chunk of the drainage improvements for potentially some public garages, so you 00:30:02.240 --> 00:30:09.200 could almost look at this and say, expand the boundaries, you know, the city could incentivize 00:30:09.200 --> 00:30:16.880 development to occur, the type of development to occur where they want it along that, you 00:30:16.880 --> 00:30:21.720 know, flood corridor within that flood corridor so that the funds generated just off those 00:30:21.720 --> 00:30:27.240 projects could fund those improvements over time, you know, that was kind of the direction 00:30:27.240 --> 00:30:35.840 it was headed, a few factors, you know, there was a desire to stall and use and study the 00:30:35.840 --> 00:30:42.000 turs which maybe that, you know, again, that was probably needed, then you had the seller 00:30:42.000 --> 00:30:45.600 signed a long-term lease on the property because he wasn't willing to wait for a study and 00:30:45.600 --> 00:30:51.880 then COVID, so quite frankly, I'm glad to not have taken a big leap on a project, you 00:30:51.880 --> 00:30:55.960 know, right then, you know, at this timing, but there are ways, I mean, you could look 00:30:55.960 --> 00:31:01.240 at, you know, even dollars from the TIF acquiring parcels needed to make that a reality if you're 00:31:01.240 --> 00:31:05.880 talking about an assemblage, you know, so it's just, I mean, other parts of that, of 00:31:05.880 --> 00:31:11.440 that drainage corridor, it's like, well, a big chunk was available and ready to do something, 00:31:11.440 --> 00:31:17.760 but the turs could say, well, we need these two little used car lots, you know, that are 00:31:17.760 --> 00:31:24.160 ugly anyway and combine that with this big parcel and then those, you know, let's put 00:31:24.160 --> 00:31:29.360 a bow on it and put RFPs out for developers to come in and develop a mixed-use project 00:31:29.360 --> 00:31:35.240 that meets the design guidelines we want and then that, that in turn helps fund the drainage 00:31:35.240 --> 00:31:38.960 improvements because that's definitely a but for, there's not going to be a 30 million 00:31:38.960 --> 00:31:43.440 dollar development on Mulberry as long as there's a floodplain there, it's impossible, 00:31:43.440 --> 00:31:44.440 so. 00:31:44.440 --> 00:31:48.640 I think that's a great point and if you look at, I'm sorry, Ben. 00:31:48.640 --> 00:31:49.640 Go ahead. 00:31:49.640 --> 00:31:56.560 No, so if you look at that map on 15, there's two considerations, I think Alex had described 00:31:56.560 --> 00:32:02.480 them perfectly, you can narrowly expand the boundaries that just picks up the geographic 00:32:02.480 --> 00:32:04.560 boundaries of PEC three and four. 00:32:04.560 --> 00:32:09.120 I would recommend you look at going further south because you've taken a bunch of properties 00:32:09.120 --> 00:32:14.880 along Elm and Locust out of the floodplain, so I would pick up that area as well as a 00:32:14.880 --> 00:32:19.920 way to help repay yourself council member to your point about that return on investment. 00:32:19.920 --> 00:32:25.000 I'd pick up that larger boundary I've drawn, but that would obviously have to be a council 00:32:25.000 --> 00:32:27.480 decision. 00:32:27.480 --> 00:32:31.840 It's probably a moot point if I can speak, I guess, but the south Elm and Locust, yes, 00:32:31.840 --> 00:32:36.440 I agree, but you know, the point about using the funds for big, I can't remember how you 00:32:36.440 --> 00:32:41.680 turned them into like hickory street type projects and how disruptive they are, it could 00:32:41.680 --> 00:32:46.860 have been done, it's a big disruption right now, you know, some beautification could have 00:32:46.860 --> 00:32:50.040 been done with what's happening as we speak. 00:32:50.040 --> 00:33:00.400 I'm driving this Ben. 00:33:00.400 --> 00:33:05.600 One that that keeps hitting me and I guess this is, this is more for Councilman Meltzer 00:33:05.600 --> 00:33:16.480 and Councilman Hudson, if, if we, if we expanded, if we recommended expanding, we recommended 00:33:16.480 --> 00:33:25.440 going full in on the drainage issue, this, we're, we're done, we have no more recommendations 00:33:25.440 --> 00:33:27.480 to make for the life of this thing, right? 00:33:27.480 --> 00:33:31.320 Travis, you're saying that's, that's the end, right? 00:33:31.320 --> 00:33:39.560 So to Paul and Gerard, what, what are the chances that we can, if we're expanding the 00:33:39.560 --> 00:33:45.840 physical scope of, of the TURS, what are the chances we can, we can expand the financial 00:33:45.840 --> 00:33:49.960 or the time frame as well? 00:33:49.960 --> 00:33:52.920 Would Council be willing, do you think they'd be willing to do that? 00:33:52.920 --> 00:33:57.480 Or can you even speak, speak to that? 00:33:57.480 --> 00:34:03.280 So I'll, if I may, Melissa, okay. 00:34:03.280 --> 00:34:04.280 Thank you. 00:34:04.280 --> 00:34:05.280 Yeah. 00:34:05.280 --> 00:34:14.840 So no, I'll tell you, predicting the future on council decisions is ominous at best, but 00:34:14.840 --> 00:34:19.440 that being said, I think the challenge for me or what, what I would like to hear from 00:34:19.440 --> 00:34:26.520 staff is I know there's that particular mix of residential to commercial uses or percentages 00:34:26.520 --> 00:34:31.800 in that area and that's where I get a little nervous and I hadn't heard from staff. 00:34:31.800 --> 00:34:37.680 I think you have to, if we include, we've got to carve out and so I don't, I just want 00:34:37.680 --> 00:34:46.840 to make sure that one, we can dance that dance and stay with the right mix, but then take 00:34:46.840 --> 00:34:50.240 that a step further to answer your question. 00:34:50.240 --> 00:34:55.480 I think, yes, it really is a matter of having the right, so when those detractors that I've 00:34:55.480 --> 00:35:01.800 heard, it's always been centered around existing versus new growth and what that new growth 00:35:01.800 --> 00:35:02.800 looks like. 00:35:02.800 --> 00:35:08.120 So I think if we can enhance the new growth and it not be apartments or that sort of thing 00:35:08.120 --> 00:35:15.000 and truly be a commercial type use, I think there's traction for that and I've heard people 00:35:15.000 --> 00:35:16.280 that support that. 00:35:16.280 --> 00:35:21.600 I think the detractors lock on to the fact that it's, if there's any new growth, it's 00:35:21.600 --> 00:35:25.880 been apartments and hadn't been commercial and there's a myriad of reasons for that. 00:35:25.880 --> 00:35:29.920 I'm just telling you, I'm just repeating what I hear. 00:35:29.920 --> 00:35:34.000 Chapter 311 of the tax code does put a cap on residential. 00:35:34.000 --> 00:35:38.280 When we created the TURZ, the cap was 10%, so it was very difficult at that time, but 00:35:38.280 --> 00:35:40.420 the cap has since been increased. 00:35:40.420 --> 00:35:41.420 So we've looked at that. 00:35:41.420 --> 00:35:43.800 It doesn't look like it'll be a major issue. 00:35:43.800 --> 00:35:45.920 I believe it's 30% now. 00:35:45.920 --> 00:35:46.920 Great. 00:35:46.920 --> 00:35:52.760 So Ben, succinctly to answer your question from my perspective, it's yes, I think there's 00:35:52.760 --> 00:36:00.680 an appetite to expand that, but then it would, I think the caveat then becomes what new growth 00:36:00.680 --> 00:36:12.640 and how we can incentivize commercial kind of uses versus residential uses and give some 00:36:12.640 --> 00:36:16.080 council members peace of mind in that space. 00:36:16.080 --> 00:36:18.620 That's just one person's read on it. 00:36:18.620 --> 00:36:24.440 Ben, does that answer your question or Paul, can you answer it as well? 00:36:24.440 --> 00:36:29.200 Yeah, it's also asked as well, like your response. 00:36:29.200 --> 00:36:38.040 So first of all, I'm very motivated personally about the idea of a greater downtown that 00:36:38.040 --> 00:36:40.840 would be live, work and play. 00:36:40.840 --> 00:36:44.680 So the residential thing is kind of a little tricky. 00:36:44.680 --> 00:36:52.320 If you're building multi-purpose, I don't know if that's kind of a problem, but as far 00:36:52.320 --> 00:36:57.640 as whether, I think the point of your question was could we lift the dollar cap? 00:36:57.640 --> 00:37:06.880 And I think if it was part of a coherent plan that said we need to be this big in order 00:37:06.880 --> 00:37:13.600 to do the drainage and do the development and spur the development that goes with it 00:37:13.600 --> 00:37:17.560 and then have something to pretty up the area beyond it. 00:37:17.560 --> 00:37:19.560 And that's X size. 00:37:19.560 --> 00:37:23.400 So there's a particular dollar amount we're aiming for to achieve that. 00:37:23.400 --> 00:37:24.400 I think that's palatable. 00:37:24.400 --> 00:37:30.040 The reason you wouldn't want it to be completely open-ended is because the city itself as a 00:37:30.040 --> 00:37:38.120 whole is counting eventually on having growth from property tax, from property values increasing 00:37:38.120 --> 00:37:39.120 in the future. 00:37:39.120 --> 00:37:40.820 The city's needs grow too. 00:37:40.820 --> 00:37:45.160 So if it's all just contained in the tourist, at some point you've got to kick in back toward 00:37:45.160 --> 00:37:48.120 police and fire and all those other good things. 00:37:48.120 --> 00:37:53.760 So I think it can't be unlimited or in my opinion, it wouldn't be palatable. 00:37:53.760 --> 00:37:59.360 But I think if, just to restate, I think if it's part of a coherent plan, I think that'll 00:37:59.360 --> 00:38:00.360 be saleable. 00:38:00.360 --> 00:38:07.120 Now, whether Mayor Portem and I are sitting there at the time the vote comes up, we'll 00:38:07.120 --> 00:38:12.120 find out November 3rd. 00:38:12.120 --> 00:38:14.760 And does that answer your question? 00:38:14.760 --> 00:38:19.480 I think that's, I think that's why a lot of cities also have, as you all have the declining 00:38:19.480 --> 00:38:22.700 percent contribution council member to address that issue. 00:38:22.700 --> 00:38:27.920 So figuring out with city staff, what's the appropriate level and how you phase it out 00:38:27.920 --> 00:38:30.600 over time is something you definitely need to think about. 00:38:30.600 --> 00:38:35.120 I'd also make this point, Ben, and I think Alex said this as well. 00:38:35.120 --> 00:38:40.440 Given that cap, and to the other council member, if you do an economic development incentive 00:38:40.440 --> 00:38:44.920 to a business, then you don't have enough money to fund the drainage. 00:38:44.920 --> 00:38:47.720 So that that's just sort of a little bit where we're stuck. 00:38:47.720 --> 00:38:53.080 If you sort of pay it likely for anything other than drainage, which is all important, 00:38:53.080 --> 00:38:56.600 you then can't afford to pay for drainage. 00:38:56.600 --> 00:38:58.160 That makes sense. 00:38:58.160 --> 00:39:06.680 So and then I had another slide on slide 17 that I think summarizes what we've talked 00:39:06.680 --> 00:39:14.120 about, which is should the tourist issue the debt and David could explain that, but should 00:39:14.120 --> 00:39:20.400 the tourist issue debt to pay for for pack four phases three and four, if yes, then there 00:39:20.400 --> 00:39:23.920 is not any money to do anything else. 00:39:23.920 --> 00:39:28.080 If you all say the answer to that question is no, or we want to wait to see if we can 00:39:28.080 --> 00:39:33.680 find another funding source, then how should the money be you should to be used for strategic 00:39:33.680 --> 00:39:38.160 corridor improvements for new street, the new streets. 00:39:38.160 --> 00:39:43.560 What about the request for developer incentives and how much of that should be set aside knowing 00:39:43.560 --> 00:39:48.000 that we don't have a specific project that we're trying to fund. 00:39:48.000 --> 00:39:52.280 But that's one thing the developer said is if you want commercial, if you want office, 00:39:52.280 --> 00:39:57.300 we're likely going to have to provide an incentive because of the rent structures today. 00:39:57.300 --> 00:40:02.520 And then finally, under what conditions might the city extend the life of the tourist. 00:40:02.520 --> 00:40:05.560 I just picked five years, maybe it's 10 or seven years, whatever, whatever the right 00:40:05.560 --> 00:40:16.800 number is, or exceed the revenue cap. 00:40:16.800 --> 00:40:23.240 I think it would be a good idea to hear from Alex about because Alex, you said that you 00:40:23.240 --> 00:40:30.440 can't really fund a development project unless you get the PEC4 project moving because there's 00:40:30.440 --> 00:40:36.600 not any space to develop or spend development money. 00:40:36.600 --> 00:40:41.320 I was just frankly saying they won't allow you to build in the floodplain. 00:40:41.320 --> 00:40:45.880 So it's not going to happen on that parcel of land without it being fixed. 00:40:45.880 --> 00:40:47.720 You were talking about that particular parcel. 00:40:47.720 --> 00:40:48.720 Right. 00:40:48.720 --> 00:40:49.720 Yeah. 00:40:49.720 --> 00:40:55.040 There's others that are affected in the same way, but I'm just saying it was a prime example 00:40:55.040 --> 00:41:00.760 of a pretty good chunk of land that had the opportunity to add a lot of value to downtown. 00:41:00.760 --> 00:41:11.620 It's very, very sparsely developed in terms of way too much surface parking and low density, 00:41:11.620 --> 00:41:14.440 one and two stories tops. 00:41:14.440 --> 00:41:17.840 So it was definitely somewhere where you could have taken buildings three and four stories 00:41:17.840 --> 00:41:20.800 high, garage parked. 00:41:20.800 --> 00:41:22.400 I mean, that's the thing. 00:41:22.400 --> 00:41:25.960 I mean, to Gerard's point about apartments, I get it. 00:41:25.960 --> 00:41:26.960 I do. 00:41:26.960 --> 00:41:30.120 I mean, you don't want to do this and all we get is a bunch of apartments. 00:41:30.120 --> 00:41:37.480 I mean, if you create a good incentive policy, figure out a way to fix the deficiencies in 00:41:37.480 --> 00:41:44.160 the area to even allow for it to occur, whether that be code or floodplain. 00:41:44.160 --> 00:41:49.800 But then to incent then you can incent by saying, okay, we're going to do this, make 00:41:49.800 --> 00:41:54.320 it economically feasible, but in return, we want these types of quality things. 00:41:54.320 --> 00:41:59.760 We want retail where it's going to work or we want a percentage of office in this. 00:41:59.760 --> 00:42:04.960 If you're going to do a $40 million project, we don't want it to be 2 million of retail 00:42:04.960 --> 00:42:07.400 and 38 million of apartments. 00:42:07.400 --> 00:42:12.480 We want this percentage of office, this percentage of retail, this percentage of maybe hotel. 00:42:12.480 --> 00:42:19.080 Again, I'm using these examples in assuming we've got good economic conditions again, 00:42:19.080 --> 00:42:24.440 but to me, all of those things, in my mind, two years ago were feasible. 00:42:24.440 --> 00:42:30.000 Today I don't know how much of them are, would I or anyone go finance those things. 00:42:30.000 --> 00:42:38.280 But hopefully by the time we're ready to spend these dollars, that's different. 00:42:38.280 --> 00:42:42.680 And Travis, maybe you could speak to some of the development programs, and I think that 00:42:42.680 --> 00:42:45.280 was bullet point three that are possible. 00:42:45.280 --> 00:42:53.080 I know based on the original ideas, it looked to me only like number E or letter E was something 00:42:53.080 --> 00:42:57.000 that was maybe in the wheelhouse today. 00:42:57.000 --> 00:43:02.960 And I think that the only other thing that I would say is maybe where the mini mall was, 00:43:02.960 --> 00:43:08.480 that is another opportunity for development that's not in the floodplain. 00:43:08.480 --> 00:43:15.600 And the rest of them seem to maybe be too far along for cost to develop. 00:43:15.600 --> 00:43:17.080 But that's just what I'm seeing. 00:43:17.080 --> 00:43:18.840 No, I think that's right. 00:43:18.840 --> 00:43:24.000 I think you're referring to the map on slide six, which shows those development zones. 00:43:24.000 --> 00:43:30.120 C still has floodplain issues for the northern end of the TURS as other floodplain issues. 00:43:30.120 --> 00:43:33.080 They're likely going to have to provide those economic development incentives. 00:43:33.080 --> 00:43:38.920 They would come in the form of a grant or a rebate based on conversations with some 00:43:38.920 --> 00:43:41.880 of those projects and the pipeline. 00:43:41.880 --> 00:43:46.840 The city could choose to find another source of money other than the TURS, which is probably 00:43:46.840 --> 00:43:48.200 unlikely. 00:43:48.200 --> 00:43:54.680 But again, if the five or six or $7 million has to come from the TURS, it just means you 00:43:54.680 --> 00:44:00.680 now have $14 million as an example to spend in other places. 00:44:00.680 --> 00:44:05.320 So especially if you want parking, parking garages are always expensive, they're never 00:44:05.320 --> 00:44:07.680 easy to finance. 00:44:07.680 --> 00:44:10.000 That's the kind of project that Gallus is right. 00:44:10.000 --> 00:44:14.640 You could assemble land, TURS can assemble land and then issue an RFP or sell it down 00:44:14.640 --> 00:44:15.640 the road. 00:44:15.640 --> 00:44:21.960 So there's different ways you could do economic developments, grants or programs. 00:44:21.960 --> 00:44:24.880 Paul? 00:44:24.880 --> 00:44:27.160 Unmute? 00:44:27.160 --> 00:44:34.680 Yes, something you said just doesn't make sense, or at least I don't understand it yet. 00:44:34.680 --> 00:44:43.440 And I'd forgotten that the idea was to potentially use the TURS to hold debt. 00:44:43.440 --> 00:44:50.200 You said if we issued debt held by the TURS, that that would use up all the money. 00:44:50.200 --> 00:44:57.720 But the carry cost on $15 million can't be the same as paying cash for $15 million. 00:44:57.720 --> 00:44:59.600 What's the carry cost? 00:44:59.600 --> 00:45:05.840 How would debt financing it use up all the TURS? 00:45:05.840 --> 00:45:14.520 I think that might be a really good opportunity, unless there's something I'm missing here. 00:45:14.520 --> 00:45:17.080 This is David Yanes, Assistance Aid Manager. 00:45:17.080 --> 00:45:22.240 I think what Travis was referring to is if we issued the debt for the $15 million, over 00:45:22.240 --> 00:45:25.320 the life of that debt over the 20 years, it would be about $21 million. 00:45:25.320 --> 00:45:31.400 So you would exhaust with interest cost the entirety of up to the cap. 00:45:31.400 --> 00:45:37.000 So just interest cost alone is going to kind of take that total from $15 million to $21 00:45:37.000 --> 00:45:38.000 million. 00:45:38.000 --> 00:45:40.000 If that answers your question. 00:45:40.000 --> 00:45:44.280 Okay, over the life of it, but does that make a difference that it's over the life of it? 00:45:44.280 --> 00:45:52.520 For instance, you know, if you if you do if what is what is roughly the carry cost on 00:45:52.520 --> 00:45:53.520 $15 million? 00:45:53.520 --> 00:46:03.880 You got to have an assumed interest rate, but it's about 70,000, an annual debt service 00:46:03.880 --> 00:46:06.600 payment is about 70,000 per million. 00:46:06.600 --> 00:46:08.600 So for $15 million. 00:46:08.600 --> 00:46:17.640 About a million bucks or so that's about where we are. 00:46:17.640 --> 00:46:19.960 So yeah, are the rules different? 00:46:19.960 --> 00:46:26.280 If you say we're committing a million a year, we're also getting, you know, revenue into 00:46:26.280 --> 00:46:27.280 the TERS. 00:46:27.280 --> 00:46:33.320 But how much do we get a year, I think we get, what are we getting about half a million 00:46:33.320 --> 00:46:34.320 a year? 00:46:34.320 --> 00:46:38.600 So close to 800,000, close to 800,000 right now. 00:46:38.600 --> 00:46:44.920 Well, that's kind of interesting. 00:46:44.920 --> 00:46:52.040 But with an expanded TERS, could you get a million in, that'll cover the debt service? 00:46:52.040 --> 00:46:53.040 Right. 00:46:53.040 --> 00:47:01.160 I guess, I guess, but I take your point that you would still that would still consume. 00:47:01.160 --> 00:47:02.160 I think that's part of the question. 00:47:02.160 --> 00:47:03.160 Right. 00:47:03.160 --> 00:47:07.120 So the question is if you expand the TERS and you increase the limit, do you get more 00:47:07.120 --> 00:47:09.400 capacity with this project? 00:47:09.400 --> 00:47:12.560 Now when you expand the TERS, I think as Travis mentioned, you're also starting with a new 00:47:12.560 --> 00:47:14.840 base there for those that you bring in. 00:47:14.840 --> 00:47:18.640 So you're going to have to have some catch up time, but that would be a benefit of this 00:47:18.640 --> 00:47:20.520 project if it worked out that way, right? 00:47:20.520 --> 00:47:24.640 Where you, you expand the TERS and you get more, more revenue in and you can do more 00:47:24.640 --> 00:47:25.640 things with it. 00:47:25.640 --> 00:47:27.740 So it just kind of changes the discussion. 00:47:27.740 --> 00:47:33.040 Once we start thinking about that, but I think you're right, you know, if somehow there was 00:47:33.040 --> 00:47:38.960 $15 million and there was no interest, you would have five or $6 million left over. 00:47:38.960 --> 00:47:43.000 But that interest payment is what was what consumes the difference between the project 00:47:43.000 --> 00:47:45.000 cost and the cap. 00:47:45.000 --> 00:47:46.000 Yeah, that's right. 00:47:46.000 --> 00:47:47.840 And the 15 million isn't sitting there now. 00:47:47.840 --> 00:47:48.840 So correct. 00:47:48.840 --> 00:47:49.840 Okay. 00:47:49.840 --> 00:47:50.840 Now I understand. 00:47:50.840 --> 00:47:51.840 Thank you. 00:47:51.840 --> 00:47:52.840 And it's all right. 00:47:52.840 --> 00:47:53.840 I should have been clear on that. 00:47:53.840 --> 00:47:54.840 No, no, I should have been clear on that. 00:47:54.840 --> 00:47:57.440 And that's where you have to decide is, and this is why it's a little bit circular. 00:47:57.440 --> 00:48:02.360 Do you want to wait a year and see if some of these grant opportunities come in, which 00:48:02.360 --> 00:48:06.280 then reduce the amount of debt the city would have to issue? 00:48:06.280 --> 00:48:08.440 You know, do you try to wait and pay cash? 00:48:08.440 --> 00:48:13.740 So I think that first decision about does this group want to recommend, or is it the 00:48:13.740 --> 00:48:21.560 desire of this group to focus on that drainage project that consumes the balance of the funds 00:48:21.560 --> 00:48:26.600 without any changes to the duration and the cap? 00:48:26.600 --> 00:48:30.720 We keep on talking about these other grants and other sources. 00:48:30.720 --> 00:48:34.560 Are there any, I mean, waiting won't make it happen. 00:48:34.560 --> 00:48:39.720 You know, are there things we would go after that exist, or is this just a purely theoretical 00:48:39.720 --> 00:48:40.720 topic? 00:48:40.720 --> 00:48:44.280 I think Erica could probably go into some detail on that. 00:48:44.280 --> 00:48:49.440 But there certainly are a couple of avenues, even one that has come up recently associated 00:48:49.440 --> 00:48:50.480 with the CARES Act. 00:48:50.480 --> 00:48:54.760 So those are things we're obviously going down the route of and exploring. 00:48:54.760 --> 00:48:58.000 And if we ever, if we get news on that, we'd obviously bring it back and it would change 00:48:58.000 --> 00:48:59.000 the discussion quite a bit. 00:48:59.000 --> 00:49:04.400 But I can hand it over to Erica to get to the specifics on those. 00:49:04.400 --> 00:49:08.720 The Economic Development Administration, we wouldn't normally qualify because we're not 00:49:08.720 --> 00:49:12.920 a distressed community, but all communities are now distressed because of COVID and the 00:49:12.920 --> 00:49:14.280 CARES Act. 00:49:14.280 --> 00:49:19.560 So we're putting together, I've got three projects put together and I've got opinion 00:49:19.560 --> 00:49:22.920 and probable construction costs and timelines back from engineering. 00:49:22.920 --> 00:49:26.640 So I'm putting together a PowerPoint and we're going to bring something to council to see 00:49:26.640 --> 00:49:29.520 what, which project we want to pursue. 00:49:29.520 --> 00:49:34.640 One of them is the PEC-4, one of them is Meuse Streets, and the other one is the McKinney 00:49:34.640 --> 00:49:43.840 property across the street and the William Trades Square combined as more of a pedestrian 00:49:43.840 --> 00:49:44.840 project. 00:49:44.840 --> 00:49:49.400 But again, this was a competitive funding source and we don't know if we'd be funded. 00:49:49.400 --> 00:49:50.400 It is federal. 00:49:50.400 --> 00:49:53.880 It would take a little while before we would. 00:49:53.880 --> 00:49:59.920 But we've been working with the North Central Texas Economic Development District and EDA, 00:49:59.920 --> 00:50:06.460 the local office for the region on possible projects and they seem in line and we'll be 00:50:06.460 --> 00:50:08.920 moving forward with that. 00:50:08.920 --> 00:50:15.280 You're asking to have them fully funded and what's the timeframe? 00:50:15.280 --> 00:50:19.320 What I'm hearing from EDA is they won't fund more than about six million. 00:50:19.320 --> 00:50:21.240 So that's what we're looking at. 00:50:21.240 --> 00:50:23.680 There's a 20% match requirement. 00:50:23.680 --> 00:50:27.920 So it would be a little over seven million, about 7.2 million is what we would be looking 00:50:27.920 --> 00:50:28.920 at. 00:50:28.920 --> 00:50:38.280 So it would only fund the majority of Meuse Streets partial on PEC-4, almost a phase basically 00:50:38.280 --> 00:50:39.280 of PEC-4. 00:50:39.280 --> 00:50:41.880 But timing wise, it wouldn't affect it much more. 00:50:41.880 --> 00:50:47.080 That's one of the questions I had back to engineering, even if we just did one phase. 00:50:47.080 --> 00:50:50.540 Time to find out? 00:50:50.540 --> 00:50:52.760 Timing on how long it would take to construct. 00:50:52.760 --> 00:51:06.520 They're looking at obligating, I believe in the fall of 2022 by 2027. 00:51:06.520 --> 00:51:10.240 What's the timing to find out if you're going to get it? 00:51:10.240 --> 00:51:14.440 There is no deadline to apply, so they're taking them as they receive them, but they 00:51:14.440 --> 00:51:19.240 want to obligate funds by 2022, the economic development administration, and they want 00:51:19.240 --> 00:51:22.800 to have them completed by 2027, last I heard from there. 00:51:22.800 --> 00:51:25.480 So you wouldn't hear until 2022? 00:51:25.480 --> 00:51:28.440 You might hear before, but they wouldn't be obligating, but that's the only timeframe 00:51:28.440 --> 00:51:29.920 they're really giving us. 00:51:29.920 --> 00:51:34.080 I know that they review them on a monthly basis as they receive them. 00:51:34.080 --> 00:51:35.080 Okay. 00:51:35.080 --> 00:51:38.520 Or my conversations with the Economic Development District at the COG. 00:51:38.520 --> 00:51:41.280 I'm going to really, really try to be quiet now. 00:51:41.280 --> 00:51:49.040 I think in line, though, with Paul's question, you asked for money for multiple development 00:51:49.040 --> 00:51:51.000 type projects. 00:51:51.000 --> 00:51:58.400 It's not an all or nothing, and if we funded PEC4, then the monies that you receive could 00:51:58.400 --> 00:52:01.880 go to other projects, correct? 00:52:01.880 --> 00:52:04.280 Erica? 00:52:04.280 --> 00:52:12.760 I have to unmute, yes. 00:52:12.760 --> 00:52:16.260 But again, it's a competitive grant, we can't rely on that. 00:52:16.260 --> 00:52:22.160 They have some non-competitive, and they're typically going to economic development districts, 00:52:22.160 --> 00:52:27.760 and they're trying to get those out first, and also to, in the past, they had a revolving 00:52:27.760 --> 00:52:31.740 loan fund, and that's their priority as well because of distress, and typically it's only 00:52:31.740 --> 00:52:37.400 in areas that have experienced distress, hurricane areas and that sort. 00:52:37.400 --> 00:52:42.600 So they're not really getting new ones, it's just funding previous ones, from what I understand. 00:52:42.600 --> 00:52:45.840 No, I have a question for Travis. 00:52:45.840 --> 00:52:56.680 On the list of projects that are being considered, what experience do you have with, you know, 00:52:56.680 --> 00:53:01.680 I think it's probably a pretty big thing that Denton has flood zones on both the north and 00:53:01.680 --> 00:53:11.320 south sides of Denton that are hurting the development of downtown, and I'm sort of one 00:53:11.320 --> 00:53:17.800 of those people who think that the corridors and the entrances need to be further developed 00:53:17.800 --> 00:53:23.360 so that, as opposed to like, for me, I feel like new streets are more like an overflow 00:53:23.360 --> 00:53:29.200 from the square, and so I'd like to get them there as opposed to take it, you know, have 00:53:29.200 --> 00:53:37.240 an overflow type thing, but I was just curious how often do you see turds having to take 00:53:37.240 --> 00:53:44.040 care of just the infrastructure to be able to have development projects happen? 00:53:44.040 --> 00:53:49.140 That's pretty common in older downtown areas like this. 00:53:49.140 --> 00:53:54.160 Just the infrastructure is older, and so someone needs to maintain it or upgrade it. 00:53:54.160 --> 00:53:56.160 So I think that's the tension with these. 00:53:56.160 --> 00:53:59.360 I mentioned your question between, let's say, a greenfield development where you're not 00:53:59.360 --> 00:54:04.560 as worried about older infrastructure costs that are part of it or flood. 00:54:04.560 --> 00:54:08.000 Like one $15 million project like PEC4. 00:54:08.000 --> 00:54:09.000 Right. 00:54:09.000 --> 00:54:10.000 Yeah. 00:54:10.000 --> 00:54:11.000 But they all vary. 00:54:11.000 --> 00:54:13.840 I would say it's probably not as common to see a cap. 00:54:13.840 --> 00:54:18.480 I mean, there are caps, obviously, and these have to go back to city council for approval, 00:54:18.480 --> 00:54:22.260 but that's a little bit different on this one as well. 00:54:22.260 --> 00:54:27.320 But San Antonio, if you know where the pearl is, all along Broadway, I mean, they use their 00:54:27.320 --> 00:54:33.880 turds to provide 15-year, 100% tax abatements to encourage residential, then a residential 00:54:33.880 --> 00:54:39.640 first strategy, and then we're going to stop doing those and then focus on commercial. 00:54:39.640 --> 00:54:42.800 They felt like they had to focus on getting the residents down and then the businesses 00:54:42.800 --> 00:54:43.960 will follow. 00:54:43.960 --> 00:54:47.960 So they all vary. 00:54:47.960 --> 00:54:49.800 This is not uncommon to struggle between. 00:54:49.800 --> 00:54:51.480 Do we save money for infrastructure? 00:54:51.480 --> 00:54:53.720 Do we use it for incentives? 00:54:53.720 --> 00:54:58.840 We try to fix up sidewalks and lighting to help drive traffic to the existing retailers. 00:54:58.840 --> 00:55:05.880 And that's sort of a philosophical debate that has to get answered on what is the priority. 00:55:05.880 --> 00:55:10.960 Some of that goes back to what is the overall vision for downtown. 00:55:10.960 --> 00:55:18.840 So I know in San Antonio, speaking of that, they have like an executive director kind 00:55:18.840 --> 00:55:22.400 of driving that vision in a place like San Antonio. 00:55:22.400 --> 00:55:28.320 Is that something that's been on the table for Denton or for our turds? 00:55:28.320 --> 00:55:29.640 We haven't discussed that specifically. 00:55:29.640 --> 00:55:34.280 I mean, downtown San Antonio uses Centro, which is funded through a PID, and so they 00:55:34.280 --> 00:55:37.160 overlap duties between the PID and the turds. 00:55:37.160 --> 00:55:40.960 I don't know, depending on what's decided by this group and then by city council, I 00:55:40.960 --> 00:55:43.280 don't know if that role would be necessary. 00:55:43.280 --> 00:55:49.240 It might be, depending on if you expand the boundaries and increase funding. 00:55:49.240 --> 00:55:54.640 But if you, let's say, spend all the money on flood control, then I don't know that that 00:55:54.640 --> 00:55:55.640 role would be needed. 00:55:55.640 --> 00:55:59.780 And I think you have Erica and Jessica and other folks that are sort of capable, given 00:55:59.780 --> 00:56:08.320 the size and scope of this, to manage it. 00:56:08.320 --> 00:56:11.400 So that puts us on slide 18, which is- 00:56:11.400 --> 00:56:13.820 Alex, did you have a question I saw on the half hand? 00:56:13.820 --> 00:56:20.200 I've had experience personally with the Fort Worth South, their TIF district, and they 00:56:20.200 --> 00:56:22.920 have staff that helps drive that vision. 00:56:22.920 --> 00:56:23.920 They do. 00:56:23.920 --> 00:56:29.160 Again, they're bigger, a lot more money, so I don't know that it's, I don't know that 00:56:29.160 --> 00:56:33.280 we could handle that, but it certainly is helpful. 00:56:33.280 --> 00:56:34.760 That's it. 00:56:34.760 --> 00:56:39.200 All right, Travis, I think it's yours. 00:56:39.200 --> 00:56:42.760 So I'll take it back, slide 18, which is next steps. 00:56:42.760 --> 00:56:52.160 So where we are today is to get feedback today or come back, but get feedback from this group 00:56:52.160 --> 00:56:57.240 on how they want to prioritize or provide direction on how to spend the balance of the 00:56:57.240 --> 00:56:58.920 funds. 00:56:58.920 --> 00:57:01.120 Maybe ask the county to formally join the terms. 00:57:01.120 --> 00:57:08.360 I know that's been talked about informally the past couple months I've been on the project. 00:57:08.360 --> 00:57:12.360 And then whatever this group does, you would need to make a formal recommendation to the 00:57:12.360 --> 00:57:18.560 city council, I think, on potential changes to the terms in terms of boundaries, number 00:57:18.560 --> 00:57:23.160 of years, cap, and then they would have to go through, I know we have legal here today, 00:57:23.160 --> 00:57:27.320 but they'd have to go through the public hearing process and the formal updating of the project 00:57:27.320 --> 00:57:28.320 and finance plan. 00:57:28.320 --> 00:57:33.120 There's some paperwork that I think staff could handle on those two, but I think where 00:57:33.120 --> 00:57:40.440 we are today is how does this board want to proceed with prioritizing the funding that's 00:57:40.440 --> 00:57:49.160 available? 00:57:49.160 --> 00:57:51.560 Should I just go around the whore and get everyone's opinion? 00:57:51.560 --> 00:57:52.560 Sure. 00:57:52.560 --> 00:57:55.240 I think that's as good as any. 00:57:55.240 --> 00:57:56.360 Okay. 00:57:56.360 --> 00:58:00.000 Let's start with Paul. 00:58:00.000 --> 00:58:05.560 I'd prefer to go last and rather hear from others. 00:58:05.560 --> 00:58:10.400 Alex, you want to go first? 00:58:10.400 --> 00:58:11.880 Sure. 00:58:11.880 --> 00:58:12.880 I will. 00:58:12.880 --> 00:58:15.400 I also may have to jump, but at 115. 00:58:15.400 --> 00:58:21.140 So I gave a lot of my feedback to Travis in various forums. 00:58:21.140 --> 00:58:25.160 And so he's heard from me before, but for the group, and I think a lot of you've heard 00:58:25.160 --> 00:58:26.160 my opinions as well. 00:58:26.160 --> 00:58:34.680 I would be probably one that's going to say expand the boundaries, extend the term, not 00:58:34.680 --> 00:58:39.560 so big that it's a detriment to the remainder of our city. 00:58:39.560 --> 00:58:46.720 But if you believe that the downtown area and the core of that being the central business 00:58:46.720 --> 00:58:51.880 district, TURS district is really kind of our showpiece, right? 00:58:51.880 --> 00:58:58.040 And if it's nice and it brings in visitors and redevelopment, it brings up the city as 00:58:58.040 --> 00:58:59.160 a whole. 00:58:59.160 --> 00:59:05.040 So I would say that I would say expand it. 00:59:05.040 --> 00:59:14.240 And then don't just let it get used to suck away at, suck its funds right into like right 00:59:14.240 --> 00:59:17.120 down the drain, if you will. 00:59:17.120 --> 00:59:23.480 And then, you know, or for fixing sidewalks and just while those things are important 00:59:23.480 --> 00:59:29.040 and necessary, there's other ways of getting that done and encouraging, incentivizing new 00:59:29.040 --> 00:59:34.540 development is what enables, you know, and then using those dollars to pay for improvements 00:59:34.540 --> 00:59:40.080 in the district is what we'll get those other smaller things done, at least the sidewalks 00:59:40.080 --> 00:59:44.960 and that sort of thing and street trees, figure out another way to pay for drainage and just 00:59:44.960 --> 00:59:51.320 realize that it's going to, you know, make the, you know, make the balances of the, of 00:59:51.320 --> 01:00:01.680 the TURS go that much higher when you put them in play. 01:00:01.680 --> 01:00:13.640 Ben, I don't see Ben anymore, but I thought that was maybe just my screen. 01:00:13.640 --> 01:00:20.960 I don't see Gerard anymore either. 01:00:20.960 --> 01:00:22.840 And this is Matt in the city attorney's office. 01:00:22.840 --> 01:00:26.480 I'm just trying to check Erica, do you know, we've only, I only see four members. 01:00:26.480 --> 01:00:29.120 Do we still have a quorum currently? 01:00:29.120 --> 01:00:30.960 We need four for a quorum. 01:00:30.960 --> 01:00:31.960 Okay. 01:00:31.960 --> 01:00:32.960 So four is the quorum. 01:00:32.960 --> 01:00:34.240 We're good then. 01:00:34.240 --> 01:00:35.240 Okay. 01:00:35.240 --> 01:00:43.560 I don't see Gerard, I see three of us. 01:00:43.560 --> 01:00:50.640 Melissa Paul and Alex lost your quorum. 01:00:50.640 --> 01:00:54.560 How long do we have to get back a quorum? 01:00:54.560 --> 01:00:59.560 Well, we had a quorum for the minutes at least. 01:00:59.560 --> 01:01:00.560 Yeah. 01:01:00.560 --> 01:01:05.960 You can take a recess if you wanted to get the quorum back together, but we can't continue 01:01:05.960 --> 01:01:09.100 with the meeting unless we have one. 01:01:09.100 --> 01:01:13.720 If we take a recess, Christina, can you reach out to the two that fell off? 01:01:13.720 --> 01:01:14.720 I will. 01:01:14.720 --> 01:01:15.720 All right. 01:01:15.720 --> 01:01:17.640 And Alex, when do you have to go? 01:01:17.640 --> 01:01:18.640 Okay. 01:01:18.640 --> 01:01:19.640 All right. 01:01:19.640 --> 01:01:22.640 We'll recess. 01:01:22.640 --> 01:01:45.800 It is 1 10 and we are officially closing the meeting for lack of quorum, but we will be 01:01:45.800 --> 01:01:50.440 sending out a meeting notice to change the rescheduled dates for at least the November 01:01:50.440 --> 01:01:57.440 meeting.