How many Let's see. >> I know that's what that is. Make me Just stay locked in. I don't know that it matters that much because the gap is
90,000 fine or something. What difference does you know, right? Because we can change the budget later anyway. [Music]
Okay, >> no running late. >> Oh, okay. >> Keith will we'll just start without. >> Okay. Um, I'm going to call to order the community redevelopment agency meeting. It's Monday, August 18th, 5:30 p.m.
Councilwoman Tugert has informed me she's running late. Uh, hopefully uh, Councilman Britain will show up. So, to start, we've got approval of the minutes. What's the pleasure of the board? >> Make a motion to approve the minutes.
>> Is there a second? >> Second. >> All those in favor say I. >> I. Any opposed? None opposed. Okay, the minutes passed. Now we've got public comment. Is there anyone that wishes to speak out there in the public? Hearing none. We're on to the consent
agenda. What's the pleasure of the board? >> Make a motion to approve the consent agenda. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> There's a motion and a second. All those in favor of approving the consent agenda say I. >> I. Any opposed? Consent agenda passes.
Okay, everyone. Got two items. A resolution for the budget and then a discussion on Franklin Street. It may be that the discussion on Franklin Street could affect our discussion on the budget. So, how about we start with that
first and Mr. Cobb, who's going to present? >> I think we I'm going to lead it off. >> Okay. And uh then we have Miss Jones here uh to also assist from the from the finance perspective. We also have with
us Mr. Joel Tindle who is our financial adviser and he was the one that put together the uh tables for you that I believe are in attachment to. And then we also have Mr. George Smith who is our bond council and he he provided you with
the memorandum as well. Um, and I'll let I'll let the deputy mayor get seated and then okay, >> we can get started. >> Let the record reflect the deputy mayor is now in attendance. So, we have everybody. >> Hello. whenever you're ready.
>> All right. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. When we were at our at our last meeting, uh there was a discussion about the Franklin Street extension and we informed uh the board that the project it lies both inside and outside of the
CRA boundary. Uh Mr. Bose had taken a look at it and had determined that the project needed the CRA could only fund the portion of the project that was inside the boundary. uh that the city would have to fund the out the portion outside the boundary and the um the
board asked us to look into some different items for them. Uh Mr. Rod, you asked us to look at from a 10,000 foot level. What's the overall looking at it? Mr. Schladder, you brought up, you know, financing. Mr. Absel discussed financing if we needed to look at
financing. uh and if it would be something that we could do uh what would be you wanted to understand the allocations between what the CRA would be funding what the city would be funding uh there was also uh some uh
questions of you know well how would the city fund its portion of it and you know could the city help the CRA fund portion of it. Uh, Elelliana, if you could, would you pull up the uh the file that was called cost allocation for Franklin Street? The Franklin Street cost
allocation. We'll hit that one first. Uh as you can see um the staff took a look at the cost allocation for the for the project. Uh the CRA is is looking at a a total cost of around 2.245 million.
Uh the city's cost is around 1.8 million86,000. Uh the primary reason is the big thing I think on the CRA side of it is is that the CRA has the signal improvements at Franklin Street because we're going to be adding a fourth leg to that signal
and the current currently as you can see up there that the the we have we have 1.4 million that is allocated in the current budget. Uh that leaves us with approximately a need of approximately 773,4029. So that's that's rude when we started
when we met we met we met with Mr. Tendle we met with Mr. Smith Mr. Bose was with us uh Mr. Boob, Miss Jones, and we started talking about the possibilities. Okay, what can we do? Uh, as far as financing, I can tell you the consensus of the group is that we really
don't need to finance this. Uh, we feel that the city has sufficient cash on hand that we can the city can fund its portion of the project either. We identified at least three uh different funding sources through mobility fees
and impact fees. Uh fourth generation sales tax, third generation sales tax. Uh and we looked at the CRA as well. And the CRA in looking at how our our uh increments have been trending that we felt like that next fiscal year there's
a good chance that we would have that we would be able to cover that 700,000. We did look at other things regarding uh whether or not the city could the city we could do like an internal loan where the city would loan the 700,000 to the CRA so that we could get it into this
fiscal year and then the CRA would pay the city back uh when when it was time there would be an interlocal agreement between the city and the CRA and you know working with that. Uh we also uh looked at the possibility and Mr. Tindle
did an analysis for you. He looked at where the city and that we' financed the entire project. The city side of it which we would pledge uh the sales tax dollars would be for 10 years. The the CRA side of it would be for the 15
years. Uh and then we also looked at it from a perspective of what if we just finance the 2.2 million for the CRA. And the thing about it is is that in both cases, one of the things that Mr. Mr. Tendle advised was that the city would
actually be the borrower and that there would be an agreement between the city and the CRA that the CRA would make the payments. So, we're here tonight to uh if there's something that you want to go over, uh like I said, Mr. Smith is here. He our
bond council, Mr. Tindle is here. he can review the financing with you as well, Miss Miss Jones, as far as the available funding. Uh, we're we're here tonight to support you in any type of questions that you may have, but that I wanted to give you just sort of the nutshell of
what our discussions were, what we were able to find. And our recommendation with that would be that we continue on using existing resources rather than going out for financing. So, Mr. Chairman, I'll turn it back over to you. >> Okay. So, so basically we have a choice
and before we go look at every single permutation, I'd rather get a sense of the group here and it looks like there's a couple ways to proceed with with so to speak cash. One way is to borrow from the city and proceed this year. Another
way is to wait till October of 26. Right, Mr. Cob? >> Uh yes, sir. >> So that's the the two ways without going out into the financial markets. And I think uh the both of these methodologies involve the city council stepping up for
its share. So I think we need to hear everyone's thoughts uh so we know what to come back with that you know to move this project forward. Are we sitting still or are we inclined to try to get this rolling this year and and pay the
city back if the city's willing to borrow the money uh next fiscal year? And I when I say next fiscal year, I mean not the the one we're talking about tonight which starts October one but October 126 right Mr. Cob >> if we were to wait and try to make up
the 770,000 with the next with the next increment that would be waiting till next year. >> So if there's any questions for staff but I'd like to just uh run down the line and get kind of first impressions from everybody starting with uh Councilman Britain. >> Um I' I'd be in favor of starting now
and uh Whoops. starting now and borrowing from the city. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Mr. Bford, >> I concur. >> Okay, Mr. O. >> Yeah, that seems that seems favorable to me.
>> Okay, mayor. >> I concur, but I I like the idea of pulling in the 1% sales tax in one form or fashion. U seems like a sensible way to use that and it would be a big feather inner cap that we could show for it rather than just repaving. Councilwoman Tuker.
>> Yeah, I think we all know waiting costs money, so I'm in favor of now. >> Mr. Slattery, >> I am in favor of moving forward immediately. >> Okay. So, I guess that takes actual actions of both the CRA and the council
and we necessarily can't finish that till we go out to bid. Correct. Because we don't really know the real price. >> That would be Yes. That would be the thing to do. Yes. So, so, um, I guess are you ready at our next meeting to discuss this further or we'll take maybe a couple meetings?
>> I I think from the standpoint of us going through the bid process and actually I I I would have to confer with with Mr. Gain on where we are in the process as far as getting that getting that process going. Uh, because I want to make sure I know last time we
reported that we were at 100% plans, but we still had some permitting that needed to be done. We still have to approach the state about crossing the trail and uh so but that gives us the direction to move forward and in the meantime what we can be doing is setting up the financial
side of how to implement once we start. >> So so the only direction really needed now is let's proceed and you have a sense of the group to proceed here. >> Yes. And then my if I understand correctly, the group would like us to set up a financial plan such that the
city will front it and then the the CRA would reimburse the city for what it fronts >> which we can't act on till we get permits and bid the project. Right. >> I would think that would be the best and >> it may be several months before anyone come before you come back to us. >> It could be some time. >> Okay. Does anyone have any further
questions? It appears we've given the the staff direction. What does that financial instrument look like? Can the CRA have a line of credit with the city instead of just a lump sum?
I think it's going to be more of a there would be some form of an agreement between the almost like with our you know how we do we have the interlocal agreement and we do theouus for funding of the project and so I think it would be that we would establish a special
type of document whether it was an actual agreement or if it was an or theou working underneath the the agreement that we have now and that it would specify by I would think in my opinion it would it would specify when
the CRA actually reimbures the city. the city would we would say then we would put it into the document that the city would front the cost and that when the increment became available the CRA would reimburse the city for that is the way I would that's how I see it happening now
once the financial folks get it they may have something more technical to bring forward to you but that to me that would be the mechanism I would think >> that'll that'll be only be clean if we finish it before October of 26
Otherwise, you you're fronting all this money and then we are sitting on our cash waiting to pay you back. So, I just wondered how that worked. Trying to save the CRA as much interest as possible. >> Well, well, we wouldn't actually borrow
from the general fund until we went to bid and awarded a project, right? >> I would think that's it. >> I guess no money moves hands till we're rolling. >> Correct. >> And then and then if we could ask public works when how long does this project take and when do you actually make the big
payments if if someone can answer that? >> And while you're at it, couldn't we also borrow against the third gen sales tax if we still have money sitting in there? >> I think from the standpoint of one, we we have to put it on the list first, >> of course, >> to make it an eligible project. Uh then
we would have to obviously we would work with Mr. Tindle and work with Mr. to see if that was a possibility, but it may be that we may have enough in there to just move forward with cash. >> So these guys have to stay involved even if it's a loan as between the CRA and the city to make sure that's papered
right. Is that am I understanding that correct? >> Okay. >> Maybe. >> So So Mr. Yurgane, with the direction tonight, we're moving forward. There's still some permitting and land issues to deal with. >> That's correct. >> So when might bids go out and come back?
I mean, what what just spitballing, what do you think? >> I would think three months, something like that. >> Okay. >> I would think in three months we should have the DOT permit, whatever we need to work out with the trail. The one last thing that Bobby and I were just talking about, we still have to um officially
acquire the rightway from the church. I mean, we have a developers agreement regarding the rightway, but that would be that would be one thing we still have to do. >> So So then going out to bid, that's another couple of month process. >> Correct. And then construction I think is one of the other questions you had.
Um would be approximately 10 to 11 months something like that. >> So it may be we don't need to borrow money till the end of the period anyway. So if things happen in kind of an organic fashion we may stay ahead of that that curve. >> I would think so.
>> Okay. Does anyone have any further questions before we move to the budget? Mr. Is the acquisition of the rideway in this budget? >> It it it wouldn't I mean from what I understand it's in the developers agreement that this the church is obligated to provide that to the city
and I don't think there's a cost associated with that from what I understand. >> Anyone else? >> Okay. I guess we're going back to our budget item and
I guess that's Kelly. Oh yeah. The attachment for the budget. The attachment for the budget. Yes. Uh good evening uh Mr. Chairman, mayor, and members of the council ZRA board. Um what I have before you is what
we are recommending for your fiscal year 2526 budget. Um the the first column is the proposed budget that we presented to you back in July. Um and then the 2526 is our recommended. So what has changed
uh since we last met was the property appraiser did give us our our final values in July and they were slightly lower than initially projected. So when we recalculated the tiff revenue to the CRA based on the values provided by the
property appraisers office there was a slight decrease in the tiff revenues. Um, what we did to offset that decrease is we did reduce slightly the funding to the Franklin Street project. So, if you scroll down just a little bit,
um, we had to reduce it about 15,000 or so. Um, so the final uh, budget for the CRA for next fiscal year would be 1,758,918. Everything else has remained the same. Um so tonight we are asking you to
approve the budget for next fiscal year uh based on the recommended budget. >> Do we have any questions from the board? >> I have just just one and it's really for everybody here. We've got two new
projects >> and we can't pay for a project we have going on right now. So the just a a question, how much trouble is it once we know the cost of Franklin Street to move that money around? Is that a big deal? Not a big deal.
>> It's not a big deal. Um the projects are recommended by public works, so I don't know where they lie in the priority of things that need to get done, but moving the budget is not an issue. >> Okay. Anyone else have any other questions? Okay, I'll
>> I've got a quick question and that is on the Sweetwater Creek multi-use path. So, it's like $28,000 and this is probably not so much for you is for somebody who knows the cost of cement. I I'm just trying to wrap my brain around if that's even a realistic number because it's
like 28 grand to do the little missing part of the sidewalk on Wood Street, but then we're thinking we're going to get all the way from Soler Park all the way to Sweetwater for 75. 75 is not a construction cost. >> Okay. >> That's a analysis. Yeah, exactly.
>> Okay. >> So, yeah, I I agree with you. That wouldn't be the cost. >> That would be like amazing. >> That would be amazing. But no, that's not that would just be for the technical part of the analysis. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. >> Anyone else? >> Okay. I'll entertain a motion.
>> I I will say I will say really fast, um, budget's not a problem as long as it hasn't started. So, so if if they're looking to start these projects in October and you're looking to wait till design costs or estimates come in, >> that's just something.
>> So, so just my observation, this 150,000 isn't going to change our $800,000 shortfall very much. So, what difference does it make? We got something new to start. >> Okay. >> Uh, I'll entertain a motion. >> I move we duct the budget. Second. We
have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Hearing none, I I'll call the vote. All those in favor of passing the budget say I. >> Any opposed? Opposed? Okay, we have our next meeting, September 15th. Uh Mr. Cobb, given
today's discussion, do do you think we need that meeting? >> Let let us let's keep it on the agenda for now and then I can let you know uh later if we're going to have the meeting or not. >> Okay. Okay. Well, everyone, I thought this meeting would take longer, but it didn't. I apologize that council's here
early. >> Well, we didn't get into discussion about CRA and uh its extinction next year possibly. >> Yeah. So, we didn't have to get into that. We should talk about that pretty soon. I I had asked >> Well, I didn't adjourn yet, so let's talk about it.
>> Well, I had sent some questions ahead of time. I said, well, how could we even possibly finance this for 15 years when the thing stops existing before 15 years? Um, so We can't extend it under state law. Am I misunderstanding something about that?
>> Well, I know it was something I know Mr. Smith left, but in Mr. Smith's uh memorandum to the board, he mentioned that there was something in a statute that was done a few years ago that reduced us from 2040 to 2039. But he
said also said that the this the city, the council can enact a resolution putting it back to 2040. And so it's just something that uh I'm gonna have to work with Mr. Bose on and if we can bring forward that resolution and move
it back to 2040 then yes we can do that. So >> okay >> we we will do that. I >> I think the question may have also related to the the legislation that failed last year that would stop a CRA that didn't have debt. >> Right. Yeah.
>> So we need to try to stay ahead of that. Borrowing money for no reason seems silly, but keeping the the county revenue share isn't so silly through 2039, 2040. So, do we have uh I mean, is the city
lobbyist keeping an eye on these things? >> Yes. >> Anyone have any further question about that? No further question, but is there something big out there that we should speed up through this process in order
to actually be able to borrow before they stop our ability to borrow? >> All of those things. I'm talking like a do we have a $10 million project out there or a $15 million project that we want to try to tackle
>> right >> now instead of later. >> So So with that, Mr. Cobb, is it possible maybe if we keep this September 15th meeting that you sit down with your folks from public works and come up with
a project plan of some nature or is that too quick? And I'm also curious from an accounting perspective the extent to which we can borrow unused
1 cent sales tax revenue and you know perhaps borrow at an exceptionally favorable if we need to borrow early that that that seems like an easier place to borrow from than the general fund and then when it's repaid if we papered it correctly it could be because
that's an accept could become an acceptable use for the one cent sales tax if we amended the agreements uh when it's repaid. Yeah. I'm just curious if it could be repaid back to the general fund instead of to it can't. You don't think so? Okay. Because that would be an
interesting thing. Sort of like the ARPA funds how we were able to do a little accounting shuffle to to give additional flexibility to to the funding. >> Yeah. if you're following what I'm saying. >> The ARPA funds were set to expire and we
had just a small amount of funding left and we were allowed to the the law permitted us to move money to reimburse for salaries. So, we had an acceptable use. So, we were able to transfer it back. Once it got into general fund, it was a reimbursement. It could be used as
we wanted. Um, but if you're borrowing against the sales tax fund, I'm pretty certain the repayment has to go back to the sales tax fund. >> Okay. Yeah. >> So, back to that initial question, Mr. Cobb. Um, I think to Mr. Slatterie's question,
perhaps we need a little internal update to our redevelopment plan. What project should we look at? >> Right. >> And I presume you guys have been thinking about this to some extent. >> We have. Yes. I mean that's been one of the things that I don't know if you remember three or four meetings ago one
of the things the topic that was sort of mentioned but didn't really gather a whole lot of discussion was what do we do after Franklin Street and that's been one of the things that we've been looking at okay where do we go from here I know one of the things that we've
often talked about was okay when we go into the neighborhoods what do we what would we be doing what kind of infrastructure do we bring to the neighborhoods we've been concentrating in downtown, but we have the surrounding neighborhoods that are also part of the CRA and what what what is needed in there. Uh we've been looking at, you
know, obviously storm water is an issue. You saw the the for sweet water. Um but looking at all those Mr. Slattery, I'm not I'm not so sure there is a 10 to$15 million >> big one out there, but uh we can definitely we'll definitely be looking
looking for those types of things. So, I have one in mind, but it may be way out there. Infrastructure is not sexy. You can't hang your hat on it. You can't, you know, brag about it. What if we built a senior center downtown?
>> We wouldn't be able to use the CRA money to operate it. And I think we came up with a price tag of about a half million a year to staff it, keep it open. So I I think that would be a council question to figure out are we willing to raise taxes or find a re revenue source to to do that.
>> Well too we we also have Riverside Park that we're operating as a senior center right now. Just opened it. >> So So can we ask you to come back and throw a few ideas at us if we meet September? >> We can we can we can we can start to we
can bring we can continue with our brainstorming and and look at different things. So between now and then, if anyone on the board has ideas, please reach out to Mr. Cobb and let him know what you think to add to the list. Go ahead, Alan. >> Um, I wanted to ask one more thing about
the um the thing you were saying that the the state perhaps could um dissolve CRAAS that don't have debt. What What exactly are the details of that? There was a bill that was floating through the
legislature that basically said you terminate on your termination date and that's it. No extensions. Uh it also said no new projects after I think October of this year. And
it said um however if you have debt you can stay alive or you can keep it. You don't have to terminate until the debt terminates >> is basically what it said. So the idea is that if you let's say that there was a bill that came in and said we're not
going to give you to 2040, we're only give you to 2030. The idea is that if you had debt that went out to 2040, the CRA would stay intact until the debt would >> When you say the termination date, our termination date is currently that 2040. That's not with an extension or
something like that. >> Yes. Okay. And that so that would say it would that wouldn't really change anything for us, right? Because our termination date is already >> it would not the termination date the no
new projects >> the no new project. >> So so to Mr. Slatterie's point, if we don't have a list of projects and we don't borrow for them and this type of bill that failed last year passes, there'll be no more county revenue coming into the CRA. >> Right. And just looking at this math
here, that's U Seino County, $779,000. And let's not presume it's going to be flat. We've got till 2039. It makes a little more sense perhaps to borrow money for projects we can think of. >> Yeah. >> If the legislaturator is really going to
do this because then they're not new projects. >> Correct. >> Okay. And no new projects means no new projects being added to the list, not commencing. Right. Okay. >> But it's hard to know what they'll write. >> Right. Yeah. But the way that it was previously.
>> Yes. I >> I don't know that we ever had to figure out what it meant. Right. >> Yeah. That it was very up in the air about what it what it really meant, you know. So, but it made us start to really start looking at projects and looking at the CRA and what can be done within the
CRA. >> So, when does the legislative session start? I believe I know that uh we just got noticed that the um the allocation forms are now available so that we can start filling them out.
But usually they they meet in committees during the fall and then the actual session either will start in January or March. >> So it's kind of important that we get a project list quickly. >> Yes.
>> And consider this scenario. It is Dave because this is not going to go away. They're going to bring it back again next year. >> Can we add something to the analysis? I'm wondering if it would be better if we have this project list and we take
out the debt for the entire list of projects and compare that to what it would be if we waited and had the inflation on the construction costs and where where that middle ground is. So I I think the big loss the projects have
would have to get designed and permitted and all these things which takes time. >> That's part of the analysis. But I'm just saying if we if we got a project that's that we want to do five years from now, let's say, and we want to borrow the money for it now. Uh we don't know what that project's really going to
cost. It's going to cost more than what we think it is. So the and I I'm not sure Brian if we if we take on the loan if we incur the interest until we start acrewing uh costs on it or if it starts
as soon as we we have the loan. >> Generally the only time that ever the best I've ever seen is that we only made interest payments in the beginning. That's been the best the best scenario that I've seen. They usually expect us to start making payments either the
following January or October. >> Okay. >> But but if you have the cash, you're paying out of your you're earning interest. You're paying interest. Hopefully, it's not that huge spread, right? >> Hopefully, it's not. >> Okay. >> So, I I think the big fear is losing the
county share of the revenue to the CRA, which means all these improvements enhancing county tax base the county doesn't participate in. That's probably not a very good thing. Well, they hypothetically could still choose to do that, but we would no longer be able to compel them to do
this. >> Any further comments or requests for the staff? >> First day of session is January 13, 2026 for anybody who's wondering. >> Yeah, that was it. Some some years it's January, some years it's March. We just
>> Let's just try to stay ahead of this this problem >> and see if a bill's introduced and then we better jump fast. Right. >> It'd be too late at that point. We got to have it ready to go. >> Well, right. But but have it teed up, so
to speak. All right. Thank you, Mr. Cobb. We'll see everybody September, unless the meeting is called off. The meeting is now adjourned.