Jan 09, 2023 Economic Development Corp. (Type A)

[1. Call to Order]

[00:00:02]

GOOD AFTERNOON, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.

IT'S 3:00 P.M., AND AT THIS TIME I'LL CALL TO ORDER THE JANUARY 9TH MEETING OF THE BURLESON TYPE A ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION.

FIRST ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS CITIZEN APPEARANCES.

THIS IS A POINT IN A MEETING WHERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THE BOARD ON AN ITEM NOT POSTED ON THE AGENDA MAY DO SO.

IF ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE BOARD, NOW IS YOUR MOMENT.

AND I SEE NO SUCH REQUESTS.

SO WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM 3A, WHICH IS TO CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM OUR DECEMBER 12TH, 2022

[3.A. Consider approval of the minutes from the December 12, 2022 Economic Development Corporation (Type A) meeting. (Staff Contact: Amanda Campos, City Secretary)]

IF THE MEMBERS HAVE HAD TIME TO LOOK AT THOSE AND ARE READY TO MAKE A MOTION, I WILL TAKE THE MOTION.

MOVE TO APPROVE.

SECOND.

MOTION BY JOHNSON, SECOND BY GREEN, TO APPROVE ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SIGNIFY.

MOTION PASSES BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.

NEXT UP ON THE AGENDA IS ITEM 3B TO CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A CHAPTER 380 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BURLESON 4A ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND CHC

[3.B. Consider approval of a Chapter 380 Agreement Between the Burleson 4A Economic Development Corporation and CHC Development for the development of 130 East Renfro Street, Burleson, Texas (Staff presenter: Alex Philips, Economic Development Director)]

THIS WILL BE PRESENTED BY ALEX PHILIPS, OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR AND GENERAL PRINCE OF THE CITY.

[LAUGHTER] APPRECIATE THAT.

NEW YEAR, NEW ME, I GUESS.

ABSOLUTELY. BUT GOOD AFTERNOON PRESIDENT, BOARD MEMBERS OF THE 4A HERE TO BRING IT FORWARD AN AGREEMENT ON 130 EAST RENFRO STREET THE HILL COLLEGE SITE. JUST KIND OF GIVE YOU ALL SOME BACKGROUND WE PRESENTED JUST THE HISTORY.

THE CITY PURCHASED THE SITE FROM THE FIRST UNITED METHODIST CHURCH IN 05.

THE CITY AND BISD AND HILL COLLEGE AGREED TO RENOVATE THE OLD KERR MIDDLE SCHOOL TO MOVE HILL COLLEGE TO.

THE EDC PURCHASED THE PROPERTY FROM THE CITY BACK IN JANUARY OF 21, THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THE RFP FOR THE SALE OF THE PROPERTY AND THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY IN APRIL OF LAST YEAR.

THE RFP CLOSED. WE DID HAVE ONE SUBMISSION WITH CHC IN JULY AND THEN IN SEPTEMBER, COUNCIL VOTED TO ENTER INTO NEGOTIATIONS WITH CHC.

THE VISION THAT WAS PRESENTED TO COUNCIL IN APRIL OF 22 WAS TO ALLOW FOR RETAIL RESTAURANT OFFICE USE NO MORE THAN 32 FEET IN HEIGHT, NO MULTIFAMILY OR RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT. ALL OPTIONS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE OLD TOWN ARCHITECTURE, MARKET BASED RENT AND WALKABILITY OF THE DISTRICT.

THE COUNCIL WOULD CONSIDER ALL OPTIONS RECEIVED.

ABOVE IS JUST WHAT WAS REPRESENTED IN THE RFP THAT COUNCIL APPROVED FOR THE RFP.

WE DID RECEIVE THAT ONE SUBMISSION FROM CHC.

THIS WAS KIND OF SOME RENDERINGS THAT THEY PROVIDED DURING IN THEIR SUBMISSION.

RETAIL RESTAURANT, 15,500 SQUARE FEET, TWO BUILDINGS WITH THE PASEO IN THE MIDDLE OFFICE OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET ON THE SECOND STORY, A LITTLE BIT OVER NINE AND A HALF MILLION CAPITAL INVESTMENT THAT IS WITHOUT THE LAND.

AND PRIVATE PARKING AND PUBLIC PARKING 186 PARKING SPACES PROVIDED ON THE SITE, ON AND AROUND THE SITE.

SO HERE'S A SITE SUMMARY FROM ABOVE SHOWING RENFRO THERE WOULD BE THE BUILDINGS WOULD BE PUSHED TOWARDS RENFRO WITH SIDEWALK OUT FRONT AND THEN ALL THE PARKING IN THE BACK AND THEN THE RIGHT OF WAY.

HERE'S SOME MORE RENDERINGS OF THE SITE.

HERE'S THE PASEO, KIND OF A SHARED PATIO BETWEEN THE TWO BUILDINGS ON THE FIRST FLOOR.

HAVE THE NAME THE GROVE ON THE DEVELOPMENT RIGHT NOW.

THE VISION FOR THE PROJECT NEW TO MARKET MUTUALLY AGREED TENANTS.

THE PROJECTED SALES ANNUALLY BEING A LITTLE BIT OVER 9.6.

SITE HAS BEEN ZERO TAX REVENUE SINCE BEFORE 1963.

NO PROPERTY OR SALES TAX OFF THE PROPERTY.

SO WE'RE REALLY EXCITED TO SEE WHAT THIS PROPERTY CAN PRODUCE.

VISION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT, THE USE, THE DESIGN AND THE WALKABILITY FIT WITH THE OLD TOWN VISION.

THE PROPOSED TIMELINE, PRE-CONSTRUCTION AND PRE-LEASING, 9 TO 12 MONTHS.

CONSTRUCTION 12 TO 14 MONTHS.

COMMENCE CONSTRUCTION NO LATER THAN THE FOURTH QUARTER OF 2024.

WE GAVE PLENTY OF LEEWAY IN THERE TO GET CONSTRUCTION STARTED.

I THINK ONCE WE HAVE SOME TENANTS ON THE HOOK, THE CONSTRUCTION TIMELINE WILL GET PUSHED FORWARD.

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS THAT THEY WOULD BE DOING.

WE WOULD BE REIMBURSING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS WOULD JUST COINCIDE WITH THINGS THAT WE ALREADY HAVE DONE IN OLD TOWN TO TO FIT AROUND THE PLAZA AND THE PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE'VE DONE ON ELLISON AND MAIN STREET IN THE PAST.

SO THE PROPOSED INCENTIVES, THE DEVELOPER WOULD PURCHASE THE PROPERTY FOR $2 MILLION DOLLARS BY THE 1ST OF MARCH OF THIS YEAR AND APPLY FOR ENTITLEMENTS AND ZONING

[00:05:05]

DEVELOP 25,500 SQUARE FEET, 15 FIVE OF THAT BE IN RETAIL RESTAURANT.

10,000 SQUARE FEET BEING AN OFFICE ON THE SECOND FLOOR.

BEGIN CONSTRUCTION BY THE END OF 24.

THE CAPITAL INVESTMENT BEING THAT 9.6.

SECURE A QUALIFYING OFFICE TENANT CORPORATE OR REGIONAL HEADQUARTERS WITH WAGES ABOVE $55,000.

WORK COOPERATIVELY WITH THE EDC TO SECURE MUTUALLY ACCEPTABLE NEW TO MARKET RETAIL RESTAURANT TENANTS.

THE OBLIGATIONS THERE THAT YOU SEE ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE FROM THE 4A, WE'D REIMBURSE THE DEVELOPER UP TO $750,000 FOR THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS THAT THEY WOULD BE DOING ON THE PROPERTY WITH THE RIGHT OF WAY, LIGHTING, SIDEWALK THAT WOULD BE IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.

WE WOULD DELIVER A CLEAN SITE UPON CLOSING, AND THEN YOU SEE THOSE $450,000 CASH PAYMENTS TO THEM AT DIFFERENT PERFORMANCE MEASURES THROUGH THE FIRST 3 TO 4 YEARS OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND TIED TO THAT QUALIFIED OFFICE TENANT AT THE SITE.

THE PROJECT PROFORMA, WE BUILT IN ALL OF THOSE COSTS, INCLUDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL COST, AND WE HAVE AN ESTIMATE ON TO TAKE THE BUILDING DOWN.

IT'S PRETTY IT'S PRETTY HOT WITH ASBESTOS IN THAT BUILDING.

EVEN THE CAULKING AROUND WINDOWS HAS ASBESTOS IN IT.

AND THAT ESTIMATE THAT WE GOT, WE DON'T BELIEVE WOULD BE ABOVE A HALF MILLION DOLLARS, $500,000 TO REMOVE THE ASBESTOS AND TO DEMO THE BUILDING TO DELIVER THE CLEAN SITE. THE RETURN ON INVESTMENT, THE ROI ON TEN YEARS TO THAT INCLUDES THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL IS 35% AFTER TEN YEARS, 139% AFTER 20.

IF YOU TAKE OUT THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS, IT'S 71% AFTER TEN AND 204% AFTER 20.

THIS CLEANS UP AN OLD SITE THAT HAS BEEN THAT NEEDS TO BE DEALT WITH ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

THE ENVIRONMENTAL IS A PART OF THAT.

AND WE WANTED TO JUST SHOW ALL THE TOOLS THAT WE HAVE HERE AND ALL THE NUMBERS THAT WE HAVE HERE FOR THIS SITE.

SO TONIGHT IS TO APPROVE OR DENY THE 380 AGREEMENT WITH CHC FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 130 EAST RENFRO STREET AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.

HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU, ALEX. QUESTIONS? I'M CURIOUS. SO AS I UNDERSTAND, WE'RE GOING TO SELL THE PROPERTY FOR 2 MILLION.

YES, SIR. AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO PAY THEM 3.5 MILLION.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO ULTIMATELY PAY.

IT'S A LITTLE BIT OVER THREE. YES, SIR.

I'M A LITTLE RELUCTANT.

I DON'T LIKE GIVING AWAY PROPERTY.

I REALLY DON'T LIKE PAYING PEOPLE TO TAKE PROPERTY OFF OUR HANDS, ESPECIALLY A PRIME PIECE OF PROPERTY.

WELL, SOME OF IT.

THE $750,000 ON THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IS THE RIGHT OF WAY PARKING THAT THEY'RE GOING TO PUT IN WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE.

THAT'LL BE PUBLIC PARKING ALONG WITH THE SIDEWALKS THAT WOULD BE PUBLIC.

THE STREET LIGHTING AND LANDSCAPING THAT WOULD BE PUBLIC TO MATCH THAT WE'VE ALREADY DONE THROUGHOUT THE DISTRICT.

THEY WOULD BE THERE ON THE SITE DOING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THAT, WHERE WE WOULDN'T BE WE'RE JUST REIMBURSING THEM THE COST OF DOING ALL THE RIGHT OF WAY WORK.

BUT IS THERE ANYTHING TO PREVENT THEM FROM BLOCKING THAT OFF AND USING IT SPECIFICALLY FOR THEIR TENANTS? NO, SIR. IT'LL BE RIGHT OF WAY PARKING IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.

AND HOW MANY SPACES IS THAT? IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S QUITE A FEW IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.

LET'S SEE. 22? ABOUT 30, APPROXIMATELY.

BASED ON WHAT I'M LOOKING AT RENDERINGS, AND THEN.

DO YOU ALL KNOW HOW MANY PARKING SPOTS IT'S ON? SO 15.

THAT'S 37 SPOTS.

IT INCLUDES THE SIDEWALK, SOME DRAINAGE WORK THAT WILL BE ON ELLISON AND LIGHTING TO COINCIDE WITH WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE DISTRICT.

SO ROUGHLY $20,000 PER SPACE? ROUGHLY, IF YOU INCLUDE ALL THE LIGHTING, SIDEWALK, LANDSCAPING, IRRIGATION, THAT WOULD BE INCLUDED THAT WE'VE DONE IN OTHER PORTIONS OF OLD TOWN WHERE WE'VE REIMBURSED DEVELOPMENTS FOR THAT AS WELL.

IS THERE LANGUAGE IN HERE THAT STRICTLY PROHIBITS A MULTIFAMILY FROM COMING IN? YES, SIR. I MEAN, THE THE AGREEMENT IS SPECIFICALLY STATES OFFICE TENANTS ON THE SECOND FLOOR, RETAIL RESTAURANT ON THE BOTTOM FLOOR.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE'S NOT AND THEY'RE TIED TO DIFFERENT NECS CODES WITHIN THE 4A STATUTE IN THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE OF WHAT TYPE OF JOBS CAN BE ALLOWED ON THE SECOND FLOOR

[00:10:08]

SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU SAW THIS.

THIS IS WHY HE WAS ASKING.

I SEE THIS ON PAGE SIX.

IT SAYS PREFER NO MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES.

THAT WAS WHAT WAS IN THE RFP THAT WE PUT OUT.

THAT'S NOT WHAT WE GOT IN THE SUBMISSION BACK FROM CHC.

CHC IS NOT PROPOSING ANY MULTIFAMILY OR ANY RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT COMPONENT ON THE SITE.

YOU WOULD ALSO HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE ENTITLEMENT PROCESS FOR THE PROPERTY.

YES. SO THAT'S A SEPARATE PROCESS THAT WILL BE COMING BACK TO P&Z AND THE FULL COUNCIL AS WELL.

AND THAT WOULD BE IN THEIR ZONING APPLICATION.

WHY ARE WE TYING INCENTIVES TO THE OFFICE TENANT EVERY YEAR? TO ME, THAT'S. THAT'S TYING IT TO THE OFFICE TENANT TO UTILIZE 4A DOLLARS FOR PRIMARY JOBS RATHER THAN GENERAL FUND OR 4B FOR INCENTIVES.

AND I GUESS I'M STILL WONDERING WHY WE NEED TO GIVE SO MUCH INCENTIVES.

THIS IS A PRIME PIECE OF PROPERTY.

WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT CONTROLLING WHAT GOES IN THERE NECESSARILY BECAUSE THIS IS IN THE OLD TOWN OVERLAY.

WE ARE ALREADY HAVE HIGH RESTRICTIONS.

THIS IS A LOT.

BASED ON THE RFP THAT COUNCIL APPROVED THAT THEY WANTED TO PUT OUT ON THE STREET, THIS IS A SUBMISSION AN THE VISION THAT FITS THAT.

AND FOR THEM TO MAKE THE DEVELOPMENT WORK, THEY ASK FOR THESE INCENTIVES AND WE FEEL LIKE IT'S A GOOD DEAL FOR THE CITY TO CLEAN UP A SITE, GET PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE ON THE SITE WITH NEW PARKING, NEW LIGHTING, NEW SIDEWALKS IN OUR PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.

ALSO BEING INVOLVED IN THE MUTUALLY AGREED UPON TENANTS AND THE RETAIL RESTAURANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S NOT JUST DEVELOPMENT THAT GOES IN, THAT'S NON SALES TAX PRODUCING ON THE BOTTOM FLOOR, AND WE CAN BE MORE OF DECISION MAKERS IN THAT.

AGAIN, WE'RE BASICALLY PAYING THEM TO TAKE THE PROPERTY.

AT SOME POINT WE HAVE TO LIMIT OUR EXPOSURE AND THINGS LIKE THIS WHERE WE'RE GETTING BIGGER AND BIGGER AND BIGGER.

AND I THINK THAT'S UP TO COUNCIL AND THE BOARD'S DECISION.

I'M THERE WITH TAMARA ON THIS.

I'M NOT COMFORTABLE CONTINUING TO PAY PEOPLE TO TAKE PROPERTY OFF OUR HANDS FOR NOT ONLY ON THIS PROPERTY, BUT I WORRY ABOUT THE PRECEDENT IT SETS DOWN THE ROAD WHEN PEOPLE COME TO SAY, HEY, HOW MUCH ARE YOU GOING TO PAY ME TO TAKE THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY OFF YOUR HANDS? I'M NOT GOOD WITH THAT.

I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS.

I THINK THE WAY THE STAFF HAS LOOKED AT IT IS PRESENTING THIS TO YOU AND THEN TO THE CITY COUNCIL HAS BEEN THIS IS A VISION ORIENTED PROJECT OF WHAT IS THE VISION FOR WHAT YOU WANT TO HAVE AT THAT PROPERTY.

I THINK THE CONSENSUS HAS BEEN TO HAVE SOME TYPE OF MIXED USE WITH OFFICE, RETAIL AND RESTAURANT.

IF THE INTENT WAS TO HAVE SIMPLY A PAD SITE WITH A RETAIL OR COMMERCIAL USE, I THINK THAT POTENTIALLY CHANGES THE DYNAMICS AND THE MARKETABILITY OF THE SITE.

BUT TO GET ALL OF THOSE USES, THE CONVERSATIONS WE'VE HAD WITH CHC AS WELL AS THE OTHER DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY PARTNERS THAT WE'VE HAD, IS THAT THIS NEEDS SOME ASSISTANCE TO GET THERE. SO THAT'S THE REASON FOR IT.

I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES, BUT WANT TO MAKE SURE WE AT LEAST TRY TO ARTICULATE THE REASONS WHY HERE SO IT'S A VISION CONCEPT FOR WHAT YOU WANT TO HAVE ON THAT SITE THAT'S DIFFERENT CERTAINLY, THAN WHAT'S THERE AND PERHAPS SOME OTHER USES THAT YOU MIGHT NOT WANT TO SEE.

I LOVE THE VISION, BUT I DON'T LOVE PAYING PEOPLE TO TAKE PROPERTY OFF OUR HANDS.

I MEAN, IF IT COMES DOWN TO THAT, I WOULD ALMOST JUST ASSUME BITE THE BULLET AND BULLDOZE THE BUILDING AND PUT IT IN OUR OWN PARKING LOT AND CALL IT GOOD.

I WOULD I THINK I LOOK AT THIS A LITTLE BIT LIKE IF WE WERE TO PUT THESE INCENTIVES OUT THERE WITH THE RFP, WE WOULD HAVE HAD A WHOLE LOT OF OTHER PEOPLE COME FORWARD.

I MEAN, THIS IS A PRIME PIECE OF PROPERTY, BUT NOBODY KNEW REALLY WHAT THEY WERE GETTING.

AND BASICALLY THEY'RE GETTING A FREE PIECE OF PROPERTY AND US HELPING THEM PAY FOR A PORTION OF DOING THE WORK.

I WOULD JUMP ON IT.

I JUST DIDN'T.

HOW DO WE KNOW THE COST OF THE PARKING AND THE SIDEWALK TO BE THE $750,000? THAT'S THE PRICE THAT THEY'VE BID OUT AND GOTTEN FROM THEIR SUBCONTRACTORS ON THE WORK OF DOING THAT WORK ON CLARK, ELLISON, AND DOBSON AND ALSO RENFRO FOR THE SIDEWALK AND LIGHTING OUT FRONT THAT'S IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.

THOSE ARE COSTS THAT THEY GAVE US AND THAT'S WHY IT'S UP TO 750.

IT'S NOT ANYWHERE OVER THAT.

ALEX I HAD EXACTLY THE SAME CONCERNS WHEN I DID THE NUMBERS ON IT.

AND MY THINKING IS VERY SIMPLE.

[00:15:01]

I DON'T LIKE TO GIVE THINGS AWAY EITHER.

I DON'T THINK IT'S I DON'T THINK THIS IS A, IT'S A BEAUTIFUL PROJECT, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S IN OUR BEST INTEREST TO DO IT BECAUSE OF WHAT WE HAVE TO GIVE UP. SO THE HALF MILLION DOLLARS FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL TO TAKE DOWN THE PROPERTY THAT WAS ALREADY COUNCIL HAD DIRECTED US WHEN WE PUT OUT THE RFP AND THE RFP WAS TO DELIVER A CLEAN SITE.

SO THE HALF MILLION DOLLARS WAS ALREADY KIND OF, I WOULD SAY, A PART OF THE PROJECT.

AND WHEN THE RFP WENT OUT THAT THE EDC WOULD BE PAYING FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL TO DO THE ASBESTOS REMOVAL AND TAKE THE BUILDING DOWN.

NOW THAT $500,000 CAME IN A WHOLE LOT HIGHER THAN WHAT WE FIRST THOUGHT BECAUSE OF HOW HOT THE BUILDING IS.

THE $750,000 IS PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE.

WE COULD DO THAT WORK ON OUR OWN OUTSIDE OF THIS PROJECT.

BUT I GUARANTEE YOU, I'M PRETTY SURE IF THE CITY GOES AND BIDS THAT PRICE STRUCTURE WOULD COME BACK QUITE HIGHER TO GET THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PARKING, LIGHTING, SIDEWALK, AND LANDSCAPING TO MATCH THAT.

IF YOU TAKE OUT THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WE'RE JUST REIMBURSING THEM FOR AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL WORK THAT WAS ALREADY A PART OF THE PROJECT BEFORE WHEN THE RFP WAS APPROVED TO PUT OUT ON THE STREETS, I MEAN, THAT'S 1.25 MILLION OFF OF THAT.

SO IT'S NOT WE'RE NOT PAYING THEM.

I MEAN, I DON'T SEE IT AS WE'RE PAYING THEM TO TAKE THE PROPERTY OFF OUR HANDS.

I SEE IT AS A PARTNERSHIP TO CLEAN UP A PROPERTY, TO CAPTURE THE VISION THAT COUNCIL APPROVED FOR US TO PUT OUT ON THE STREET TO ACCOMPLISH THAT GOAL. THE $750,000 PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE AN THE $500,000 ENVIRONMENTAL IN MY MIND, THAT IS THAT IS THE CITY'S CONTRIBUTION ON PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENVIRONMENTAL THAT WE WERE PUTTING INTO THIS PROJECT.

THE INCENTIVES ON THE QUALIFIED OFFICE TENANT IS TO GET INTO THAT REGIONAL CORPORATE OFFICE PERSON COMPANY TO BE A PART OF OUR COMMUNITY, THAT COMPANY THAT WOULD GROW HERE AND KEEP GROWING HERE, HOPEFULLY INTO THEIR OWN BUILDING JUST THAT WAY.

THAT'S WHAT THE 4A DOLLARS WERE TIED TO THAT QUALIFIED OFFICE TENANT.

SO I SEE IT A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN JUST IT'S IT'S MULTIPLE PIECES.

BUT I THINK IF YOU TOOK THE ENVIRONMENTAL OUT OF IT AND THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE OUT OF IT, YEAH, THIS DEAL LOOKS A WHOLE LOT DIFFERENT.

JUST LIKE WITH THE 10 YEAR AND THE 20 YEAR PROFORMA OF TAKING THOSE JUST THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DOLLARS OUT OF IT, 71% AND 200% IN 20 YEARS.

THIS PROPERTY HASN'T PRODUCED ANYTHING SINCE 1963 BEING A CHURCH OF PROPERTY OR SALES TAX.

I FEEL LIKE IT IS A GREAT PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY TO CAPTURE THE VISION THAT COUNCIL WANTED ON THE SITE, BUT THAT'S JUST MY OPINION.

WELL, A COUPLE OF THINGS WE'RE NOT TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION, WHICH WOULD TAKE A LOT OF GOING BACK IS HOW MUCH DID WE PAY FOR THE PROPERTY IN THE FIRST PLACE? 2.4 MILLION.

OKAY. WE PAID 2.4 AND THEN WE BASICALLY LEASED IT TO HILL COLLEGE FOR? 2000 A MONTH. I WANT TO BE CLEAR, THE 2.4 WAS THE CITY THE 4A CORPORATION BUYING IT FROM THE CITY.

SO THE CITY BOUGHT IT IN 2005.

THE GENERAL FUND.

HOW MUCH FOR? ABOUT $800,000.

YEAH, I THINK THAT'S CORRECT.

YES, SIR. SO 800.

I GOT YOU. THAT'S GOOD.

THAT'S GOOD. THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO GET BACK TO WAS THAT ORIGINAL PRICE.

RIGHT. AND THEN WE WE BASICALLY LEASED IT BACK FOR VIRTUALLY NOTHING AND MAINTAINED THE BUILDING THAT FOR ALL THOSE YEARS THAT HILL HAD IT.

YES, MA'AM. RIGHT. I ALSO WANT TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THAT WE SOLD OUR OLD SERVICE CENTER PROPERTY OVER OFF OF I-35 JUST LAST YEAR.

THE ONE WITH THE CONCRETE AND ALL OF THAT STUFF ON THERE FROM YEARS AND YEARS AGO TO THE CHURCH ON I-35 OR I DON'T FORGET WHO IT WAS.

WE SOLD IT TO THE CONCRETE COMPANY FOR $1.2 MILLION DOLLARS.

IT WAS $900,000.

I THOUGHT IT WAS 1.2.

BUT STILL, THAT'S A I MEAN, AND WE DIDN'T HAVE TO GIVE THEM INCENTIVES TO DO ANYTHING ELSE TO IT.

AND, YOU KNOW, IT WAS JUST.

BUT WE GOT A CONCRETE PLANT.

SO I DON'T SEE THE PURPOSE AND IT PERSONALLY DOESN'T.

AND I UNDERSTAND BUSINESS.

I DON'T GET THE WHOLE WE HAVE TO HAVE THIS LARGE TENANT IN THERE WHEN THEY COULD CHOP THAT UP AND SELL IT TO MULTIPLE BUSINESSES AND THAT WOULD REMOVE THE $450,000.

I DON'T I JUST DON'T SEE THE PURPOSE OF THAT.

THAT REMOVES THE BEST.

IF WE'VE GOT A. IF WE BASICALLY HAVE TO DO THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND WE BASICALLY HAVE TO DO THE $500,000 BECAUSE THAT WAS IN THE RFP.

[00:20:03]

BUT IN THE OLD TOWN AREA, YOU KNOW, WE DIDN'T PUT THAT STIPULATION ON THE RA DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY DOWN THERE IN VETERANS SQUARE.

WE DIDN'T PUT THAT STIPULATION ON THE THREE STORY ONE THAT THE RIM IS IN.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF I UNDERSTAND THE PURPOSE OF PUTTING THAT STIPULATION ON THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY.

IT WAS TO BE ABLE TO OPEN UP THE 4A DOLLARS THAT WE COULD USE TO INCENTIVIZE THE PROJECT THAT WAS NOT OUT OF ANOTHER FUND.

NOW, THE OLD TOWN STATION DEVELOPMENT HAS A PRETTY HEFTY INCENTIVE PACKAGE ON IT.

SO DID THE BRANSOM DEVELOPMENT ON THE CORNER DOWN ON 35 TO GET THE OLD TOWN DEVELOPED, REDEVELOPMENT STARTED.

BOTH OF THOSE HAD INCENTIVE AGREEMENTS ON.

SURE, BUT IT WASN'T TIED TO A SPECIFIC TENANT.

AND AGAIN YOU'RE DOING IT SO YOU CAN USE THE EDC MONEY.

I JUST DON'T SEE IT.

I THINK THAT THIS IS.

OKAY. WE'RE SETTING A VERY BAD PRECEDENT MOVING FORWARD WITH ANY PROPERTY THAT WE OWN AS A CITY NOW, WHICH WE IN THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS WE'VE DONE A LOT OF THIS AND I GET THE 10 YEAR RETURN AND THE 20 YEAR RETURN.

BUT THAT'S GIVEN THAT EVERYTHING HAPPENS THE WAY WE HOPE IT HAPPENS AND THE BUILDING DOESN'T SIT EMPTY AND THEY'RE ABLE TO AND IT STAYS LEASED THE WHOLE TIME, THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS TO COME INTO PLAY HERE.

THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THE 380 AGREEMENT.

IF THEY DIDN'T GET THE TENANT, THEY WOULDN'T GET THE $450,000.

BUT ONCE AFTER.

THE FOURTH YEAR WHAT HAPPENS THEN? THEY'VE ALREADY GOT THEIR INCENTIVE MONEY.

THEN AFTER THAT IT WOULD GO TO FAIR MARKET.

IT'S TO HELP INCENTIVIZE GET THAT QUALIFIED OFFICE TENANT.

NOW, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO SIGN A 12 MONTH LEASE WITH AN OFFICE TENANT.

I KNOW THEY'LL SIGN A 5 YEAR 10 YEAR.

THEY'LL SIGN A 5 YEAR DEAL WITH ONE OF THEM.

IT'S TO I MEAN, I'VE SAID IT AGAIN, IT'S JUST TO BE A PARTNER AND TO ACCOMPLISH THE VISION THAT COUNCIL SET IN FRONT OF US WITH THE RFP.

THE OTHER THING I WANTED TO POINT OUT IS FOR THE RFP, IT WAS CLEAR THAT ANY DEVELOPER THAT WANTED TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROJECT, THEY NEEDED TO PROVIDE US WITH WHAT THEIR INCENTIVES NEEDED TO BE, WHAT WAS THE PARTNERSHIP THAT THEY WANTED TO BE.

SO THAT WAS CLEAR IN THE RFP.

THIS IS THE COMPANY THAT CAME FORWARD.

THEY TRIED TO GIVE US, I THINK, A VERY TRANSPARENT LOOK INTO THEIR BOOKS ABOUT WHAT THEY BELIEVE THE GAP WAS TO DO A DEVELOPMENT OF THIS TYPE WITH THESE TYPES OF USERS.

AND THAT'S THE PROCESS THAT WE USE TO GO THROUGH TO COME UP WITH THE INCENTIVE ARRANGEMENT WAS TO HELP MAKE IT WORK FOR THEM AND WORK FOR US AS WELL.

BUT WITH THAT SAID, IF THE BOARD WANTS TO HAVE A DIFFERENT APPROACH, WE COULD CERTAINLY LOOK AT IT.

I THINK I WOULD TELL YOU, IF YOU WANT TO DO THAT, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CHANGE THE VISION TO GET A DIFFERENT TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT PARTNER HERE, AND THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT THE BOARD WOULD NEED TO TALK ABOUT.

WHAT WOULD THAT VISION WOULD BE? WELL, AGAIN, I GO BACK TO THE LOCATION.

WE'RE GETTING READY TO HOPEFULLY REDO HIDDEN CREEK DOWN THERE.

THIS IS IN THE HEART OF OLD TOWN.

IT'S A VERY VALUABLE PIECE OF PROPERTY.

EVEN IF I TAKE THE INCENTIVE, EVEN IF I TAKE THIS, THE 500 AND THE 750 OFF, WE'RE STILL PAYING THEM A QUARTER MILLION DOLLARS TO TAKE THE PROPERTY OFF OUR HANDS.

AND, YOU KNOW, I JUST I'M NOT COMFORTABLE PAYING PEOPLE TO TAKE VALUABLE, VALUABLE LAND.

IF THIS WAS A THIS WAS A TOXIC WASTE FILL AND, YOU KNOW, THEY WERE GOING TO DO THE CLEANUP AND THEY WANTED OKAY, I'M GOOD WITH IT.

BUT WE'RE DOING ALL THE CLEANUP AND WE'RE PAYING $250,000 ON TOP OF IT, IF I TAKE THAT NUMBER OFF.

SO I'M NOT COMFORTABLE AT THIS TIME WITH THIS.

I WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT OR TWO HERE.

I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD ARE SAYING HERE, BUT I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THERE ARE PROJECTS THAT ARE IMPORTANT BECAUSE OF THEIR STRATEGIC VALUE TO CREATING THE VISION FOR OLD TOWN THAT WE HAVE SIMILARLY TO THE WAY THAT WE CREATED THE VISION OF HIGH POINT BUSINESS PARK BY INVESTING, PURCHASING LAND, GIVING IT AWAY AND ASKING PEOPLE, AS YOU PUT IT, TO TAKE IT OFF OUR HANDS IN ORDER TO BUILD FACTORIES THAT EMPLOY MANY, MANY PEOPLE, JOBS TO THE COMMUNITY, AND TO TRIGGER THE KIND OF DEVELOPMENT THAT WE'VE SEEN COME SUBSEQUENT TO THAT, YOU KNOW, THE PORTION OF HIGH POINT DEVELOPMENT THAT WE DID IS NOW THE SMALLER PORTION AND THEN BIGGER, NEWER PORTIONS ARE TAKING UP MORE LAND AND BRINGING IN MORE BUSINESS ALL THE TIME.

THIS IS A TRANSFORMATIONAL PIECE OF PROPERTY.

WE HAVE THE OLD TOWN CORE AND THEN WE HAVE THE OLD TOWN STATION OUT ON THE HIGHWAY.

THIS IS A PROPERTY IN BETWEEN.

IT CAN SET THE TONE FOR WHAT'S GOING TO TAKE PLACE ALL THE WAY AROUND IT.

AND I AGREE THAT IF YOU PUT THE PROPERTY OUT THERE WITH NO RESTRICTIONS ON IT OF THE USE OF THE PROPERTY, THE HEIGHTS OF THE BUILDINGS OR ANY SUCH THING, WE WOULD GENERATE

[00:25:07]

BUT IF WE WANT IT TO BE WHAT WE, THIS COUNCIL HAS CLEARLY VOICED THAT WE WANT IT TO BE, THEN WE HAVE A RESPONSE HERE THAT IS IN LINE WITH THE VISION THAT WE ASKED THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY TO LOOK AT, AND THEY'VE COME BACK TO US WITH AN ATTRACTIVE PROJECT.

WHAT I LOOK AT, JUST LIKE I LOOK AT ANYTHING THAT I PUT MONEY INTO, IS WHEN DOES THE MONEY COME BACK TO ME AND TO WHAT EXTENT.

THIS HAS A RETURN ON INVESTMENT DOWN THE ROAD THAT WILL PUT THIS MONEY THAT WE'RE PUTTING OUT BACK INTO THE CITY COFFERS.

A CHURCH, ESPECIALLY A DECREPIT CHURCH WITH NO TENANT IN IT, IS NOT GOING TO DO ANY OF THAT.

IT'S NOT GOING TO CREATE THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS THAT PEOPLE HAVE TOLD US OVER AND OVER AGAIN THAT WE NEED MORE PARKING CLOSE TO OLD TOWN, ETC., ETC..

IT'S NOT GOING TO DO ANY OF THAT.

IT'S GOING TO SIT THERE AND HOPEFULLY SOMEDAY DEVELOP INTO SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE.

BUT IT COULD BE DEVELOPED RIGHT NOW INTO SOMETHING THAT THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY WOULD LIKE TO BUILD, EXCEPT WE JUST DON'T WANT IT.

SO WE HAVE TO ACCEPT THAT IF WE WANT THIS TO BE SOMETHING ATTRACTIVE AND SOMETHING BENEFICIAL TO THE COMMUNITY, THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO IT WITH A DEVELOPMENT PARTNER, BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET A DEVELOPMENT THAT WANTS TO COME IN HERE, BUILD TO A MAXIMUM OF 32 FEET, BUILD ONLY TO RETAIL AND OFFICE USES BECAUSE THE DOLLARS JUST AREN'T THERE.

PERHAPS THEY WILL BE ONCE THIS GETS STARTED AND THEN A CORE DEVELOPS AROUND IT, BUT NOT FOR THE FIRST TIME IN.

I LIKE THIS PROJECT.

I LIKE THE WAY IT'S BEEN RENDERED.

I LIKE THE WAY IT APPEARS.

AND I THINK IT WOULD BE A VERY WISE INVESTMENT FOR US TO MAKE.

AND I THINK WE HAVE EVERY REASON TO EXPECT THAT WE'LL GET OUR MONEY BACK.

AS USUAL DAN, VERY ELOQUENTLY STATED ALWAYS.

I WOULD PROBABLY DISAGREE WITH THE FACT THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE A CORE.

WHEN YOU LOOK ACROSS THE STREET AND YOU LOOK AT FISH CITY AND THAT ENTIRE NOBODY INCENTIVIZED THAT.

WELL, NOT IT WASN'T OUR PROPERTY.

OKAY. WE DIDN'T HAVE TO GIVE THEM THE PROPERTY AND THEN INCENTIVIZE THEM.

SO PART OF THE.

WHAT WAS BUILT, LOOK AT WHAT WAS BUILT.

YOU GUYS, WE DON'T HAVE TO BEG PEOPLE TO COME TO OUR CITY SOMEHOW WE'RE STILL IN THE MINDSET THAT WE WERE 15 YEARS AGO, THAT WE HAVE TO BEG DEVELOPERS TO COME HERE.

WE DON'T HAVE TO BEG DEVELOPERS AND GIVE THEM THE, YOU KNOW, THE STORE FRONT AND THE BACK DOOR AS WELL.

AND YET WE APPROACH EVERY PROJECT LIKE THAT.

YOU KNOW, WE GIVE SOME INCENTIVES I AGREE, BUT WE'RE NOT GIVING THE PROPERTY AS WELL AND ON PAPER TO SAY THEY'RE BUYING IT FROM US.

IT'S JUST AN ON PAPER THING WE ARE STILL.

AND WE GET THINGS LIKE THE OLD TOWN PLAZA DEVELOPMENT, ALLEY CATS.

YOU KNOW, WE PUT MORE MONEY FOR RETURN OF INVESTMENT IN ALLEY CATS THAN WE HAVE ANYTHING ELSE.

IT'S GOT THE LOWEST ROI, AS I RECALL, THAN JUST ABOUT ANYTHING OUT THERE.

BUT WE DID IT BECAUSE THE COMMUNITY WANTS IT.

THAT'S BEST FOR THE COMMUNITY.

ABSOLUTELY. THIS IS, I WOULD SAY.

FOR THE COMMUNITY AS WELL. AS FAR AS THE DEVELOPMENT AND THE VISION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT, IT WAS A VISION YOU BROUGHT TO US.

I DON'T REALLY KNOW.

I DON'T CARE IF IT HAS A SECOND STORY.

FISH CITY, THAT WHOLE STRIP CENTER HAS ONE STORY.

I DON'T CARE. I THINK YOU PUT SOMETHING NICE IN THERE WITH A COUPLE OF RESTAURANTS AND THAT PASS THROUGH AND YOU'VE GOT A GREAT FACILITY.

I HOPE WE CAN FIND A DEVELOPER TO DO IT.

WELL, IF WE HAVE A DEVELOPER SITTING HERE.

IF THE PART OF IT IS THIS TENANT'S BUILD OUT AND THE SECOND STORY AND REMOVING THE SECOND STORY COULD HELP WITH THAT WITH THEIR COST AND BUILD OUT, THEN WHY WOULDN'T WE REMOVE THAT? THAT WAS AGAIN, I'M GOING TO JUST STATE FOR MY SAKE.

THAT WAS A VISION BROUGHT TO US AND WE, I ALWAYS JUST GO OK SEE WHAT THEY SAY.

SEE WHAT THEY SAY AND COME BACK NOW AND SAY WE'LL DO IT.

BUT HERE'S ALL OF THE THINGS THAT WE NEED AND THAT'S BASICALLY A LOT OF MONEY.

AS WE COMPLAIN, AS PEOPLE ARE COMPLAINING ABOUT THE MONEY WE'RE SPENDING TO GET MORE RESTAURANTS HERE.

WHEN WE NEEDED AN ALLEY CAT, THAT WAS A TOTALLY DIFFERENT THING.

THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS ABSOLUTELY NEEDED IN THIS CITY.

IT'S A MATTER OF DEGREES OF NEED.

IT'S A MATTER OF DEGREES OF DESIRE FOR A PARTICULAR THING.

AND IT'S A MATTER OF DEGREES OF THE VISION OF WHAT THE CITY WANTS TO BE LIKE WHEN IT'S BUILT OUT.

[00:30:06]

OKAY. AND THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE IT'S NOT GOING TO LOOK LIKE THIS.

THEY'LL MAKE THE MOST MONEY WITH RETAIL.

SOMEBODY WILL PUT ONE IN THERE IF YOU WANT THEM TO.

AND WE'RE NOT SAYING NO TO RETAIL AND RESTAURANTS.

IT'S ALSO WE'RE IN THE OLD TOWN OVERLAY, WHICH IS THE VERY THE BIGGEST BOUNDARY THAT WE HAVE FOR THAT AREA AS TO WHAT CAN AND CANNOT GO IN THERE.

SO THEY CAN'T PUT A TACO BELL IN THERE WITHOUT OUR APPROVAL.

WE'RE SAYING NO TO HEIGHT AND WE'RE SAYING NO TO MULTIFAMILY.

OK. WELL.

ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I'LL SAY ONE OTHER THING AND IT BOTHERS ME.

WE SEEM TO GET THE ANSWER OF, HEY, IN 20 YEARS WE'LL HAVE THIS AND THAT.

WE DON'T KNOW THAT.

WE ABSOLUTELY DON'T KNOW.

AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IN 20 YEARS.

I'M PRETTY SURE I KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO ME IN 20 YEARS.

BUT AS FAR AS THE CITY IS CONCERNED, WE CAN'T.

YES, WE CAN SAY THAT I UNDERSTAND WHAT DAN IS SAYING.

AND YES, YOU CAN SAY THAT.

AND OF COURSE, WE HOPE THAT ALL OF THIS HAPPENS, BUT IT MIGHT NOT.

NOW, RIGHT NOW, DO WE HAVE THE MONEY TO DO IT? YES, WE DO.

I THINK MY BIGGEST CONCERN ABOUT IT IS THE WAY YES, THE WAY WE'RE GOING ABOUT IT, ALEX, WE OFFER MANY, MANY INCENTIVES.

MAYBE AT TIMES WE DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT.

MAYBE IT'S TIME TO GO BACK AND EITHER RENEGOTIATE OR LOOK AT WHAT WE'RE DOING.

BUT I WILL I HAVE ALWAYS HAD HEARTBURN WITH GOING OVERBOARD.

AND IN MY JUST MY HUMBLE OPINION, I THINK WE'RE A LITTLE OVERBOARD ON THIS ONE.

I UNDERSTAND. I MEAN, IT JUST TAKES THIS INCENTIVE PACKAGE WITH THIS DEVELOPER TO ACCOMPLISH THE COUNCIL'S VISION FOR THE PROPERTY.

AND I'M WITH RONNIE ON ON THAT.

AS FAR AS DOWN THE ROAD, I MEAN, LOOK AT WHAT'S HAPPENED SINCE COVID.

COVID CHANGED A LOT OF THINGS.

WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUTURE IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE.

I MEAN, RETAIL IS CHANGING, OFFICE SPACE IS CHANGING, WORK FROM HOME ENVIRONMENT IS CHANGING.

WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE DOWN THE ROAD.

I DON'T WANT TO BE STUCK WITH AN ABANDONED OFFICE BUILDING IN THE HEART OF OLD TOWN IN THE NEXT 10 OR 15 YEARS WE'VE GOT AN ABANDONED CHURCH RIGHT NOW.

WELL, ABANDONED CHURCH IS EASIER TO DEAL WITH.

WE CAN BULLDOZE THAT, BUT IT'D BE A LOT MORE EXPENSIVE TO BULLDOZE AN ABANDONED OFFICE BUILDING.

WHAT'S OUR OCCUPANCY RATE ON OFFICE PROPERTIES RIGHT NOW? OFFICE PROPERTIES AND WE'RE SITTING IN THE 90 PERCENTILE ON RETAIL RESTAURANT WE ARE 98 PERCENTILE.

WE LEAD EVERY SUBMARKET IN THE DFW AREA.

PHONE RINGS EVERY WEEK FOR SPACE.

IT SEEMS HIGHLY UNLIKELY THAT ANY OF THIS SPACE IS GOING TO BE UNOCCUPIED.

WE CAN SIT HERE AND WE CAN SAY THIS ALL DAY LONG.

RIGHT NOW, WE'RE AT 90% OCCUPANCY RATE.

WE CAN'T SAY THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IN THE NEXT TEN YEARS.

NO WAY. WE'VE BEEN THAT WAY THE LAST 10.

I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT YOU CAN'T GUARANTEE THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN, ALEX.

YOU CAN SAY THAT AS LONG AS YOU WANT TO SAY IT.

NOW, YOU'RE UPSETTING ME.

I CAN'T. I CAN'T GUARANTEE YOU I'LL BE HERE TOMORROW.

I KNOW. WELL, I'M PRETTY, I'M NOT GOING TO GO INTO THAT.

BUT ANYWAY, I THINK YOU NEED TO SEE OUR POINT ON THIS, TOO.

I SEE IT. I'M JUST DELIVERING THE VISION AND THE INCENTIVE PACKAGE THAT IT TAKES TO ACCOMPLISH THE VISION THAT COUNCIL SET FORTH.

ALEX. I'M ALL FOR IT IF YOU CUT OUT THOSE INCENTIVES.

I TRUST YOU GO BACK AND MAKE IT HAPPEN.

[LAUGHTER] HARD TO DO.

HARD TO DO. I'LL HAVE TO HAVE COUNCIL CHANGE THE VISION OF THE PROPERTY.

I'D LIKE TO TAKE A QUICK CONSULTATION WITH THE CITY MANAGER OFFLINE.

OKAY. HOLD ON. ARE YOU TAKING A BREAK OR ARE YOU GOING INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION? SO JUST IF IT'S THE FULL COUNCIL, THEN YOU'LL NEED TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION, CORRECT? CITY ATTORNEY? YES, CORRECT.

IF YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A QUORUM OF THE COUNCIL TOGETHER OUTSIDE OF THIS, TALKING ABOUT THE BUSINESS THAT'S BEFORE US, I APOLOGIZE, MR. PRESIDENT, BUT YOU WILL HAVE TO HAVE EXECUTIVE SESSION.

I DON'T WANT TO HAVE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION WITH A MAJORITY OF THIS GROUP FOR THE QUESTION THAT I'D LIKE TO ASK OF BRYAN.

I JUST DON'T. THEN WE CAN TAKE A BREAK.

AND THEN THE TWO OF YOU. OKAY.

I'D LIKE TO TAKE A BREAK AND SOME THINGS WILL HAPPEN AND WE'LL COME BACK IN 5 MINUTES.

[00:35:05]

HERE AND THAT WE'VE GONE ALREADY INTO THE COUNCIL'S REGULAR MEETING TIME.

I WANT TO I UNDERSTAND THAT SOME OF THE MEMBERS FRUSTRATION WITH THE DEAL AS IT'S STRUCTURED NOW, BUT I ALSO AM FEELING FRUSTRATED THAT WE'VE GONE A LONG WAY TOWARDS MAKING THIS HAPPEN AND INVESTED A LOT OF TIME.

AND SO HAS OUR PRIVATE PARTNER TO BE HOPEFULLY INVESTED A LOT OF TIME, I DON'T WANT TO WALK AWAY FROM THIS WITHOUT EXAMINING ALL POSSIBILITIES FIRST.

SO WE'VE BEEN GIVEN A CLEAR SIGNAL FROM THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD THAT THIS IS A TROUBLESOME SITUATION FOR THEM.

SO BEFORE WE VOTE IT UP OR DOWN, I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE THE PARTNER AND OUR STAFF A CHANCE TO GO BACK OVER THIS DEAL AND SEE IF WE CAN RESTRUCTURE IT RETHINK THE NUMBERS PERHAPS GET SOME INPUT FROM ELSEWHERE IN THE MARKET.

IF WE WANT TO TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME TO DO IT, WE DON'T HAVE TO SOLVE THIS RIGHT NOW, TONIGHT.

SO WITH THAT SAID, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS ITEM TO TABLE THIS TO A FUTURE MEETING AND SEE IN THE MEANTIME, IF WE CAN RETHINK THE DEAL, RELOOK THE DEAL.

AND BEFORE WE JUST LET IT GET AWAY, SEE IF WE CAN IMPROVE IT TO WHERE THE MEMBERS ARE A LITTLE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH IT.

IS THAT FAIR? VERY WISE COUNSEL AND I SECOND THAT MOTION.

ALL RIGHT. I'VE MADE THE MOTION.

JIMMY SECONDED. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AND I SEE ALL HANDS GO UP.

ALEX, I'M SORRY WE COULDN'T GIVE YOU A STRAIGHT ANSWER, BUT LET'S GO BACK AND SEE WHAT WE CAN DO.

THAT'LL WORK. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

NEXT ON OUR AGENDA IS ITEM 4 REQUEST FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. ARE THERE ANY MEMBERS? I SEE NO REQUEST.

I DON'T BELIEVE WE HAVE A NEED FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION.

SO ITEM FIVE WILL BE DISPOSED OF, AND WE WILL ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 3:40.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.