CALL THAT PART OF IT WHERE EVERYBODY KIND OF MEETS AND START SIZING UP. ALL RIGHT. 
          [CALL TO ORDER]
          [00:00:09]
LET'S GO TO. WE NOW HAVE QUORUM. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE. ARE WE READY? CHARLIE'S HERE. OH, HE IS THE CHAIRPERSON. SO I WAS DOING THAT JUST TO LET HIM KNOW THAT WE ARE READY FOR HIM TO BEGIN THE MEETING. THAT'S WHY HE HAS THE REAL CAMERA. THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S. THAT'S WHY I HAVE THE BABY GAVEL. SHOW HIM YOUR GAVEL. SHOW HIM YOUR BIG GAVEL OVER THERE. GREAT DAY FOR TRUANCY. YES. YES AND THEN I WOULD CALL THIS MEETING OF THE MCKINNEY REINVESTMENT ZONE 
          [PUBLIC COMMENTS ON AGENDA ITEMS (For Non-Public Hearing Items)]
NUMBER ONE TO ORDER, FIRST ITEM OF BUSINESS WOULD BE PUBLIC COMMENTS ON AGENDA ITEMS FOR NON PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. NOT SEEING ANYONE EAGER TO VOLUNTEER. I'LL MOVE ON TO OUR FIRST ITEM OF 
          [Consider/Discuss the Project Plan and Administration Policy for Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone No. 1 (TIRZ No. 1)]
BUSINESS. ITEM NUMBER 20 4-1906. CONSIDER DISCUSS THE PROJECT PLAN AND ADMINISTRATION POLICY FOR TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE NUMBER ONE. THAT WILL BE BROUGHT TO US BY MISS JENNIFER ARNOLD AND THE FLOOR IS YOURS. THANK YOU, MISTER CHAIRMAN. JENNIFER ARNOLD, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING, AS YOU READ, THIS IS A DISCUSSION ITEM ONLY. SO I DO WANT TO UNDERSCORE THAT WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANY ACTION FROM THE TOUR'S BOARD WITH THIS. JUST SOME UPDATES AND MAYBE SOME GENERAL DIRECTION AND FEEDBACK FOR US AS A STAFF AS WE CONTINUE ADMINISTERING THE REINVESTMENT ZONE OR THE TOURS AS WE LIKE TO CALL IT. SO FOR TODAY, WE WANT TO GIVE A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE EXISTING PROJECT CATEGORIES WITHIN THE PROJECT PLAN OF THE TOURS, AS WELL AS THE ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY THAT WE USE FOR ADMINISTRATING THE TOURS, HIGHLIGHT A BIT OF WHERE WE ARE IN TERMS OF CURRENT OPERATION FUND BALANCE AND WHAT WE WOULD CONSIDER THE SUCCESS OF THE TOURS, AND THEN LOOKING FORWARD INTO THE FUTURE FOR WAYS THAT WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO CAPTURE OR CAPTURE SOME OPPORTUNITIES OR ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT, FOR BOTH THE PROJECT PLAN AND THAT ADMINISTRATION POLICY. SO WE ALWAYS LIKE TO START WITH JUST A BRIEF BACKGROUND, NOT JUST FOR THE BOARD, BUT FOR ANYBODY WHO MIGHT BE WATCHING ONLINE OR IN THE AUDIENCE, BUT THE TOURS DOES INCLUDE THE HISTORIC DOWNTOWN CORE, AS WELL AS THAT HIGHWAY FIVE CORRIDOR ALL THE WAY DOWN TO WHAT WE KNOW AS THE GATEWAY OR SOUTH GATE SITE. THERE AT 121 AND HIGHWAY FIVE, WHERE THEY MERGE AND CONNECT. JENNIFER, MAY I ASK? YES, SIR. YOU USE THE TERM INCREASE IN TAX REVENUE IN YOUR FIRST BULLET POINT THERE. IT'S THE INCREASE OVER WHAT? SO GREAT QUESTION. SO TAX REINVESTMENT ZONE IS NOT A NEW TAX. IT IS A REINVESTMENT OF EXISTING TAXES OR TAX REVENUE BASED ON GROWTH THAT OCCURS FROM A SNAPSHOT IN TIME. SO THE TOURS WAS ESTABLISHED IN 2010. AND AT THAT POINT IN TIME WE LOCKED IN THE AMOUNT OF TAX REVENUE THAT WAS BEING CAPTURED WITHIN THAT TOUR'S BOUNDARY FROM 2010 UNTIL TODAY. ANY TAXES THAT ARE COLLECTED ABOVE AND BEYOND THAT BASE GET REINVESTED INTO THE ZONE, AND CAN BE USED FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE PROJECT PLAN AND PROJECTS THAT MAY BE REQUESTING FUNDING OR PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY USING THOSE FUNDS. DON'T HAPPEN TO KNOW WHAT OUR TAX RATE WAS. AND THAT'S JUST YOUR CITY OF MCKINNEY TAXES, CORRECT? WELL, WE DO HAVE CITY OF MCKINNEY TAXES, BUT WE ALSO HAVE COLLIN COUNTY, 50% OF COLLIN COUNTY TAXES ARE CONTRIBUTED INTO THE TOURS. THOSE ARE SPECIFICALLY EARMARKED FOR TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS ONLY. AND I BELIEVE WE ALSO INCLUDE SALES TAX. DO YOU KNOW WHAT OUR TAX RATE WAS IN 2010? I'M SORRY, I DO NOT. I DIDN'T EXPECT YOU TO, BUT I JUST THOUGHT I'D ASK. 
          THANK YOU. OKAY SO WITH WITH THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE TOURS, STATE LAW ACTUALLY REQUIRES TWO FOUNDATIONAL DOCUMENTS FOR ADMINISTRATION OF THE TOURS. THE FIRST IS THE PROJECT PLAN, WHICH ALLOCATES THE TYPES OF PROJECTS AND THE GOALS OF THE TOURS. THE SECOND IS WHAT WE CALL A FINANCING PLAN, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY A PROFORMA OF HOW WE ANTICIPATED THE TOURS WOULD PERFORM AT THE TIME WE CREATED IT IN 2010, THAT FINANCE PLAN IS REALLY A SNAPSHOT IN TIME AT THE TIME WE CREATE THE TOURS, BUT THAT PROJECT PLAN IS WHAT WE WOULD CONSIDER A LIVING DOCUMENT. SO OVER THE LIFE OF A TOURS WHICH THIS PARTICULAR TOURS WAS ORIGINALLY ESTABLISHED FOR 30 YEARS, IT ACTUALLY HAS JUST BEEN RENEWED FOR AN ADDITIONAL. I'M LOOKING AT MAYBE TEN YEARS. SO THAT PROJECT PLAN IS SORT OF WE ANTICIPATE AN ADDITIONAL 15 YEARS. YEAH SO HE'LL FACT CHECK ME ON THAT. BUT THE PROJECT PLAN IS ANTICIPATED TO BE MORE OF A LIVING DOCUMENT. 
          SO WHILE WE HAD ESTABLISHED PROJECT CATEGORIES AND TOURS, ELIGIBLE EXPENSES IN 2010, WE 
          [00:05:01]
HAVE MADE SOME AMENDMENTS TO THAT PROJECT PLAN OVER THE LIFE OF IT THUS FAR. AND WE ANTICIPATE WE'LL MAKE MORE AS WE CONTINUE TO UTILIZE THAT TOURS PROGRAM. IT WAS AN ADDITIONAL 15 YEARS. THERE WE GO. SO UNDER THE CURRENT TOURS PROJECT PLAN, WE HAVE THREE WHAT WE CALL PROJECT CATEGORIES. THE FIRST IS A CATALYST PROJECT AND THERE IS A LOOSE DEFINITION WITHIN THE PROJECT PLAN OF WHAT A CATALYST PROJECT IS. GENERALLY SPEAKING, IT IS A SIGNIFICANT PROJECT THAT HAS $5 MILLION WORTH OF INVESTMENT OR MORE. THERE ARE SOME EXAMPLES OF CATALYST PROJECTS LISTED IN THE PROJECT PLAN. IT'S NOT AN ALL INCLUSIVE LIST, BUT GENERALLY GIVES THE SCALE AND SCOPE OF WHAT MIGHT BE CONSIDERED A CATALYST PROJECT SO LARGE ENTERTAINMENT DESTINATIONS. CIVIC USES PARKING GARAGES, THINGS OF THE LIKE WOULD BE CAPTURED UNDER THAT CATALYST PROJECT AND THEN VACANT AND UNDERUTILIZED SITES OR BUILDINGS, WHICH ARE WHAT WE WOULD CONSIDER SMALLER PROJECTS. SO UNDER THAT $5 MILLION INVESTMENT THRESHOLD, TRUTH BE TOLD, EVERYTHING WITHIN THE TOURS BOUNDARY WOULD MEET THAT VACANT AND UNDERUTILIZED CATEGORY. SO PRETTY MUCH ANYTHING THAT COMES FORWARD AND MEETS THAT ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA OUTLINED IN THE PROJECT PLAN WOULD BE ELIGIBLE. AND THEN THE THIRD CATEGORY, WHICH WE DON'T SEE USED VERY OFTEN YET, IS THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING PROJECT CATEGORY. I WILL TELL YOU THAT FOR THE LIFE OF THE TOURS SINCE 2010, 90% OF THE PROJECTS THAT WE'VE SEEN BEFORE THE BOARD HAVE BEEN UNDER THAT VACANT AND UNDERUTILIZED PROJECT CATEGORY, AND WE HAVE HAD 2 OR 3 CATALYST PROJECTS, ONE WAS A PARKING GARAGE OUT AT THE COTTON MILL PROBABLY EIGHT YEARS AGO OR SO. 
          THE OTHER WAS THE PUBLIC PARKING GARAGE. WHEN THE CITY UTILIZED TOURIST FUNDING TO TAKE OVER THAT PROPERTY. BUT MOST OF WHAT WE SEE, MOST OF WHAT WE AS A STAFF PRIMARILY ADMINISTER, FALLS UNDER THAT VACANT AND UNDERUTILIZED CATEGORY. SO A LAYER BENEATH THAT IN THE PROJECT PLAN ARE WHAT ARE SPECIFICALLY ALLOCATED AS TRES ELIGIBLE EXPENSES. SO THESE ARE VERY SPECIFIC EXPENSES THAT ARE CALLED OUT THAT WOULD BE ELIGIBLE ONCE YOU IDENTIFY WHETHER OR NOT IT'S A CATALYST PROJECT OR A VACANT UNDERUTILIZED PROJECT OR A MIXED INCOME HOUSING, THE NEXT THING WE AS A STAFF ARE GOING TO LOOK AT ARE WHAT ARE THE SPECIFIC ELIGIBLE EXPENSES THAT WE COULD LOOK AT. SO THIS INCLUDES ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION, HISTORIC FACADE IMPROVEMENTS, STREET UTILITY STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS, LAND ACQUISITION, CRITICAL MAINTENANCE AND FIRE SUPPRESSION. SO I'VE GOT A QUICK BULLETED LIST THERE FOR YOU ON THE SCREEN. BUT THE PROJECT PLAN DOCUMENT ACTUALLY GIVES SOME PRETTY, CLEAR PARAMETERS OF WHAT ALL IS INCLUDED WITHIN WITHIN EACH ONE OF THOSE CATEGORIES. YES SIR. THE CRITERIA FOR GOING OUTSIDE OF THE CHURCH, FOR MIXED INCOME HOUSING. I DON'T WANT TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT, BUT DO YOU COULD YOU SUMMARIZE THAT WHETHER OR NOT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO GO OUTSIDE OF THE TOUR'S BOUNDARY FOR THAT? WELL, IT SAYS INSIDE OR OUTSIDE THE TOWN CENTER TOURS. AND SO THAT IS CORRECT. 
          AND I WILL BE HONEST WITH YOU AND TELL YOU, WE HAVE NOT EXPERIENCED ANY MIXED INCOME HOUSING REQUESTS. SO WE ARE CERTAINLY NOT GROWN EXPERTS IN THAT YET. BUT IN TALKING WITH COUNTERPARTS IN OTHER CITIES WHO ADMINISTER TOURS, TOURS AND THEIR COMMUNITIES, MIXED INCOME HOUSING IS SORT OF A TRUMP CARD WHERE YOU CAN REALLY USE TOURIST FUNDING ANYWHERE FOR MIXED INCOME HOUSING PROJECT, WHETHER IT'S INSIDE OR OUTSIDE THE TOURS, BUT I WILL TELL YOU, THAT IS ANECDOTAL, BASED ON CONVERSATIONS I'VE HAD WITH SOME COUNTERPARTS, NOT ANYTHING THAT WE HAVE RESEARCHED OR BECOME EXPERTS ON HERE IN MCKINNEY'S TOURS. GOOD TO KNOW. THANK YOU. 
          SO, IN ADDITION TO THE PROJECT PLAN. SO NOW WE KNOW WHAT OUR PROJECT CATEGORIES AND ELIGIBLE AND DEFINED ELIGIBLE EXPENSES ARE, WE THEN ALSO LOOK AT OUR ADMINISTRATION POLICY, WHICH IS WHAT GOVERNS FOR US AS A STAFF. THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT SOMEBODY CAN ASK FOR AS PART OF THEIR TOURS PROJECT. SO WE HAVE SOME CLEAR FUNDING CAPS ESTABLISHED. MOST OF YOU ARE PRETTY FAMILIAR WITH THESE BECAUSE THEY'RE THE COMMON REQUESTS THAT YOU SEE COME BEFORE THE BOARD. SO FOR A FACADE REQUEST, $25,000 IS THE MAX REIMBURSEMENT PER PROJECT, THE TOURS HAS ESTABLISHED AN ANNUAL CAP OF $100,000 A YEAR UNDER THAT PROJECT CATEGORY OR ELIGIBLE CATEGORY, $50,000 FOR MAINTENANCE, $50,000 MAX PER FIRE SUPPRESSION PROJECT, AND 50 OVER 50 MATCHES ARE ESTABLISHED FOR THOSE PROJECT CATEGORIES. SO WHEN WE SEE REQUESTS COME FORWARD AS A STAFF, OF COURSE, THAT'S SORT OF OUR REGULATOR FOR HOW MUCH SOMEBODY IS ELIGIBLE TO ASK FOR THAT. WE AS A STAFF WOULD SAY, OH, THIS IS GREAT. WE EASY TO PROCESS VERSUS A PROJECT THAT MAYBE FALLS OUTSIDE OF THOSE LIMITS OR BOUNDS, WHICH WE WOULD STILL BRING TO THE BOARD 
          [00:10:05]
FOR CONSIDERATION, BUT THEN YOU ALL WOULD BE CONSIDERING IT BASED ON THAT MERITORIOUS EXCEPTION, WHICH IS, HEY, THE PROJECT IS MERITORIOUS IN NATURE. WE MAY WANT TO GO OUTSIDE OF THOSE ESTABLISHED LIMITS FOR ONE REASON OR ANOTHE. SO ONE THING THAT YOU MIGHT NOTICE IS MISSING FROM THE SPECIFIC ELIGIBILITY LIST IS JUST THIS IDEA OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND HOW PROJECTS MAY OR MAY NOT BE CONTRIBUTING TO THE ECONOMY OF THE TOURS DISTRICT AND ECONOMIC SUPPORT FOR THE TOURS DISTRICT. SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS NOT EXPLICITLY CALLED FOR IN THE PROJECT PLAN OR OUTLINED IN THE PROJECT PLAN. AND WE HAVE AS OF LATE BEEN RECEIVING QUITE A FEW CALLS AND QUESTIONS FROM FOLKS THAT MAY BE LOOKING TO UTILIZE THAT TOURS PROGRAM TO HELP WITH MAYBE A SMALL BUSINESS SUPPORT OR A PROJECT THAT MAY JUST BE DEEMED AS AN ECONOMIC DRIVER OR AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY FOR THE TOURS BOUNDARY, OH, I SKIPPED AHEAD, SO WE'LL SKIP THAT. AND SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WANTED TO BRING FORWARD TO THE BOARD IS THE IDEA OF INTRODUCING SOME SPECIFIC, PARAMETERS OR ELIGIBILITY ALLOWANCES FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS. SO WHAT YOU HAVE HERE ON THE SCREEN IS, A LOOSE PROPOSAL FROM STAFF FOR WHAT THAT COULD LOOK LIKE IN THE PROJECT PLAN THAT HELPS PROVIDE MORE CLARITY FOR US AS A STAFF ON THOSE TYPES OF PROJECTS. WHEN THEY DO COME IN, I'LL BACK UP JUST BRIEFLY AND SAY THE ELIGIBLE EXPEGINSES THAT WE LOOKED AT ON THIS SLIDE AS A STAFF, WHEN WE HAVE A REQUEST THAT COMES IN AND IT MEETS ONE OF THOSE VERY CLEAR ITEMS ON THE LIST, IT'S VERY EASY FOR US TO SAY THIS IS CLEARLY FIRE SUPPRESSION. IT'S CLEARLY WITHIN THE FUNDING LIMITS. EASY PEASY FOR US. WE WILL PACKAGE YOUR APPLICATION AND PRESENT IT TO THE BOARD, AND 99% OF THE TIME WE'RE ABLE TO OFFER A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION WHEN WE MOVE INTO THOSE, HEY, THIS MAYBE DOESN'T FALL UNDER FIRE SUPPRESSION OR CRITICAL MAINTENANCE, BUT IT IS A PROJECT THAT COULD HAVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BENEFIT OR VALUE TO THE TOURS OR TO THE TOURS AREA. IT BECOMES A LITTLE BIT MORE DIFFICULT FOR US AS A STAFF TO KNOW HOW TO PACKAGE THAT AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO YOU ALL AS A BOARD, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ANY GUIDING DOCUMENTS FOR THAT IN THE PLAN. RIGHT NOW. AND SO IF THERE IS A DESIRE TO INTRODUCE THE IDEA OF WHAT WE CALL SMALL BUSINESS LOANS OR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES WITHIN THE TOURS, WE DO RECOMMEND THAT WE CAPTURE THAT IN THE PROJECT PLAN, WHAT WE'RE SHOWING AS A POSSIBLE, ADDITION TO THE PROJECT PLAN ARE TWO DIFFERENT CATEGORIES. SO YOU'LL SEE UP HERE THAT ONE SAYS SMALL BUSINESS LOAN OR SMALL BUSINESS SUPPORT GRANTS. AGAIN, THAT WOULD BE UNDER THAT VACANT AND UNDERUTILIZED SMALLER PROJECT CATEGORIES. SO IT'S A SMALLER BUSINESS OR A SMALLER INVESTMENT THAT MAY BE LOOKING FOR TOURIST FUNDING TO HELP SUPPLEMENT IT, VERSUS SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD CONSIDER MAYBE AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GRANT, WHICH MIGHT BE A LARGER PROJECT OR PART OF A CATALYST PROJECT THAT HAS THAT $5 MILLION THRESHOLD OR MORE. OUR RECOMMENDATION, IF THIS GETS INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT PLAN, IS TO KEEP THE PROJECT CATEGORY DESCRIPTION RATHER GENERAL, AS YOU SEE WRITTEN UP HERE. HOWEVER, WE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THERE BE A STRONG APPLICATION PROCESS, OR VETTING PROCESS FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF THAT. WHAT I MEAN BY THAT IS OUR APPLICATION PROCESS RIGHT NOW IS VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD. YOU TELL US WHAT YOUR PROJECT IS. TELL US WHAT YOU'RE ELIGIBLE EXPENSES. TELL US WHAT YOUR FUNDING REQUEST IS, AND WE PACKAGE IT AND SEND IT TO YOU ALL. HOWEVER, WHEN IT'S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, THERE MAY BE SOME ADDITIONAL FINANCIAL INFORMATION THAT NEEDS TO BE VETTED OR UNDERWRITTEN, EITHER BY STAFF OR AN OUTSIDE ADMINISTRATOR TO HELP ENSURE THAT THE TOURS IS CREATING GAP FINANCING AND NOT JUST, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO SAY THIS, NOT IT'S GAP FINANCING AND NOT JUST MAKING IT EASIER. RIGHT? IF THE PROJECT COULD HAPPEN WITHOUT TOURS, FUNDING VERSUS THE PROJECT REQUIRES TOURS FUNDING TO BE FEASIBLE FOR THEM. WE DO FEEL LIKE THAT'S AN IMPORTANT QUESTION TO HAVE ANSWERED AS PART OF THAT APPLICATION PROCESS. SO I MIGHT STOP THERE BEFORE I MOVE INTO THE COMMENTS OR THOUGHTS THAT YOU ALL WANT TO SHARE WITH US ON THAT POTENTIAL ADDITION TO THE PROJECT PLAN. I HAVE A QUESTION AND HYPOTHETICAL, OF COURSE. 
          LET'S SAY WE BUILT A CITY HALL ACROSS HIGHWAY FIVE, AND WE WANTED TO USE TERS FUNDING TO REBUILD VIRGINIA STREET IN FRONT OF THE CITY SO THAT WE COULD PRESERVE OUR MAINTENANCE DOLLARS FOR OTHER ROADWAYS IN THE CITY. WOULD THAT BE AN ELIGIBLE EXPENSE? YES, SIR. IT WOULD BE. 
          [00:15:01]
THANK YOU. DO YOU HAVE ANY EXAMPLES OF REQUESTS FOR FUNDING THAT HAS NOT FIT THE TYPICAL CRITERIA THAT WE SEE HERE THAT MAY BE STEMMING THIS REQUEST THAT WE CONSIDER THESE TWO GRANTS? SURE. AND THERE'S ACTUALLY A HANDFUL. AND WE PROBABLY GET A HANDFUL A COUPLE TIMES A YEAR. AND USUALLY IT HAS TO DO WITH SOMEBODY WHO IS FINISHING OUT A SPACE THAT IS GOING FROM ONE TYPE OF USE TO ANOTHER. THE GO TO EXAMPLE THAT I LIKE TO USE IS IT'S AN OFFICE OR RETAIL SPACE THAT IS NOW CONVERTING TO A RESTAURANT, AND IN ORDER TO CONVERT TO A RESTAURANT, YOU HAVE TO ADD A GREASE TRAP OR UPGRADE YOUR PLUMBING OR FIRE PROTECTION OR TAKE FIRE PROTECTION OFF PLUMBING OR ELECTRICAL IN ORDER TO SERVE THAT HIGHER OCCUPANCY AND HIGHER INTENSITY OF USE. AND UNDER THE EXISTING TERS, THAT IS IT'S NOT AN EXPLICIT ELIGIBLE EXPENSE BECAUSE YOU'RE UPGRADING TO MAKE READY FOR A NEW USE. IT DOESN'T FIT NEATLY IN THE CRITICAL MAINTENANCE CATEGORY, BECAUSE CRITICAL MAINTENANCE IS INTENDED TO DEAL WITH ISSUES LIKE YOUR ROOF IS, IS HAVE HAVE LEAKS OR YOUR FOUNDATION IS IN A STATE OF DISREPAIR, OR YOU'RE DOING A FACADE IMPROVEMENT. THOSE ARE VERY CLEAR. CLEARLY DEFINED IMPROVEMENTS, WHEREAS THAT FINISHING OUT OF SPACE DOESN'T REALLY FIT NEATLY IN ONE OF THE BOXES. AND SO THERE'S A LOT OF, THERE'S A LOT OF DISCONNECT, I WOULD SAY, WITH HOW WE MIGHT WANT TO PROCESS THOSE, OR IF THERE'S EVEN A DESIRE TO PROCESS THOSE AS PART OF THE TERS. DO YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION IN TERMS OF THE LIMIT THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE GRANTING? NOT TODAY, ONE OF THE THINGS WE WANT TO DO WITH YOU ALL TODAY IS REALLY GET MORE OF A SENSE OF THE APPETITE, WE WOULD COME BACK TO THE TERS BOARD WITH THAT RECOMMENDATION. I THINK THERE'S A COUPLE OF WAYS THAT YOU COULD DO IT, ONE, IF THE TERS BOARD IS AGREEABLE TO HAVING IT SERVE STRICTLY AS GAP FINANCING FOR A PROJECT, THERE MAY BE AN ARGUMENT TO HAVE NO LIMIT BECAUSE THE GAPS WOULD BE DIFFERENT FOR EACH DIFFERENT PROJECTS. AND AS THE PROJECT SCALE IN SIZE. BUT IF THE CHURCH WANTS TO HAVE CLEAR GUARDRAILS IN PLACE SO THAT FOLKS KNOW THESE ARE THE LIMITS FOR THOSE SMALL BUSINESS GRANTS, WE CERTAINLY COULD EXPLORE THAT AS WELL. I WOULD LIKE TO JUST MAKE SURE WE MAKE A DISTINCTION IN WHAT TYPES OF PROJECTS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, BECAUSE WE'VE HAD, AT LEAST I THINK, TWO REQUESTS, MAYBE, APPROVALS FOR GREASE TRAPS THAT HAVE COME THROUGH THE CDC. AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE VERY CLEAR ON WHICH ENTITY IT SHOULD BE REQUESTED FROM. SO IF WE CAN KIND OF GET A LIST OF THOSE ELIGIBLE PROJECTS, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. ABSOLUTELY. THIS WOULD THIS WOULD TAKE US FROM HAVING TO BE A CDC. YOU KNOW, THE ONLY THING YOU SAID, JENNIFER, THAT I IT STRUCK ME, YOU CATEGORIZE THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GRANTS. YOU PUT IT UNDER THE CATALYST PROJECT AS FAR AS GREATER THAN $5 MILLION. I WOULD NOT WANT TO DO THAT MYSELF. I WOULD WANT WOULD WANT TO LOOK AT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GRANTS. SOME OF THAT COULD QUALIFY FOR THAT IN A LESSER THAN $5 MILLION PROJECT. SO AND THAT'S WHERE THE SMALL BUSINESS SUPPORT GRANTS COME THROUGH. SO IF I COULD TRY AND CAPTURE HOW WE AS A STAFF LOOK AT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO, IF IT'S A CATALYST PROJECT, A LOT OF THE NOT A LOT THE FUNDING GUARDRAILS THAT ARE IN PLACE UNDER THAT TERS POLICY. SO THE THESE CAPS HERE JUST DON'T APPLY EVERY CATALYST PROJECT IS VIEWED ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS, AND DEPENDING ON THE PROJECT, THE REQUEST, THE PARTICIPATION THAT TERS PARTICIPATION CAN BE FINE CRAFTED FOR THAT PROJECT. 
          IT'S THE SMALL BUSINESS SUPPORT ONE WHERE PERHAPS AND THAT'S A SMALLER PROJECT, I UNDERSTAND, BUT WE HAD A PROJECT FOR EXAMPLE, THAT QUALIFIED. WE DETERMINED IT QUALIFIED AS A CATALYST PROJECT, NOT TOO LONG AGO. THAT WAS NOT A $5 MILLION PROJECT, BUT IT WAS ABSOLUTELY A CATALYST PROJECT. AND WE ALL DEEMED IT TO BE SUCH. AND WE FUNDED A ACCORDINGLY. ARE YOU REFERRING TO THE HARVEST PROJECT? OKAY YEAH. AND I YEAH. AND SO TO ME THAT THAT'S A PRIME EXAMPLE OF A PROJECT THAT, MAYBE WOULD NOT HAVE COME FORWARD IF THERE WERE HARD GUARDRAILS IN PLACE THAT, THAT QUALIFIED YOU ONLY OR, YOU KNOW, QUANTIFIED IT HAVING TO BE A $5 MILLION PROJECT. AGREED. THAT'S THAT'S WHAT SPARKS THAT WE DO THAT FUNDING THROUGH TERS OR WE DID, WE DID. AND I THINK TRUTHFULLY IT PROBABLY WOULD HAVE QUALIFIED AS A CATALYST PROJECT. BUT I THINK EARLY ON THERE WERE SOME DECISIONS MADE NOT NOT WITH THE BOARD BUT JUST BEHIND THE SCENES. AND IT ENDED UP COMING FORWARD AS THAT VACANT AND UNDERUTILIZED. AND THEN THE MERITORIOUS EXCEPTION. YEAH CATALYST PROJECT. YEP. ABSOLUTELY. AND THAT'S ONE OF THE LESSONS WE'VE LEARNED IN THE LAST TWO YEARS OF WHY, MAYBE SOME ADDITIONS TO THE PROJECT PLAN COULD HELP CLARIFY PROJECTS JUST LIKE THAT. I'LL START THE DIALOG BY SAYING I THOROUGHLY AND COMPLETELY SUPPORT AMENDING. THIS IS SOME OF THIS IS BORN OUT OF A CONVERSATION I HAD WITH 
          [00:20:03]
MARK HAUSER A WHILE BACK ABOUT A PROJECT THAT HAD COME THAT I FELT WAS A WAS AN IMPORTANT PROJECT AND WOULD BE A BENEFICIAL PROJECT TO A LARGER PROJECT THAT WE'RE INVOLVED IN, BUT IT DIDN'T QUALIFY NEATLY, BUT IT CERTAINLY HAS THE ABILITY TO UNDER STATUTE AS AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OR A SMALL BUSINESS SUPPORT GRANT. YEAH I'M IN FAVOR OF LOOKING AT THESE ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS. OKAY. I WANT TO KEEP THE DISCRETION TO YES OR NO ON ANY PROJECT THAT'S NOT UNDER OUR CURRENT GUIDELINES. BUT OUTSIDE OF THAT, ALL FOR IT. OKAY VERY GOOD, I GATHER THERE'S A GREAT EAGERNESS TO MOVE FORWARD, AND I SHARE IT. I'M GOING TO MAKE ONE COMMENT AFTER I SAY THIS, THOUGH. THIS TERM IS ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY IN OUR DISTRICT ONE AND OUR DISTRICT ONE REPRESENTATIVE ISN'T HERE TODAY. AND I'D LIKE FOR HIM TO HAVE A CHANCE TO WEIGH IN ON THIS, BECAUSE THIS IS IMPORTANT, AN IMPORTANT ISSUE TO HIM. THE OTHER THING THAT I WANT TO SAY IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S BEEN A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT HAVE HIT ME RECENTLY IN TERMS OF FIRE SUPPRESSION. AND I HAVE AN APPETITE TO I'VE SEEN LET ME JUST SAY IT THIS WAY. I'VE SEEN A LOT OF APPETITE FOR TOURISM MONEY LATELY, AND IT'S GOTTEN ME THINKING IN TERMS OF PRIORITIZATION AND, YOU KNOW, I'D LIKE TO EXAMINE HOW WE CAN BETTER ADDRESS FIRE SUPPRESSION DOWNTOWN IN OUR CENTER, BECAUSE I VIEW THAT AS A PERHAPS UNLIKELY BUT EXISTENTIAL THREAT DOWN HERE, BUT YEAH, I'D LIKE FOR JUSTIN TO BE ABLE TO WEIGH IN ON THIS BEFORE WE HARD AND FAST MOVE FORWARD WITH ANY FIRM RECOMMENDATION. BUT I'M LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE UP HERE. WE SHOULD BE HAVING A PRESENTATION ON FIRE SUPPRESSION IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA SOON, CORRECT, PAUL. BECAUSE THAT'S KIND OF BEEN A QUESTION. OH, GOOD. OKAY. SO I SHOULD HAVE SAID SOMETHING EARLIER. WELL, AND I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT IT UP. SO THERE'S A SMALL INTERNAL TEAM THAT'S WORKING THROUGH THAT WITH HCM BARRY SHELTON. AND I'M ON THAT TEAM AS WELL. SO THE TERS FUNDING AND TERS UTILIZATION HAS DEFINITELY COME UP. AND IT WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE PRESENTATION. 
          PERFECT. THANK YOU MA'AM. SO AND THEN I'D ALSO. OKAY. SORRY. I ALSO WANTED TO MAKE SURE, COUNCILMAN BELLER DID REACH OUT. HE SAW OBVIOUSLY THE TERS AGENDA COME OUT AND REACHED OUT TO US. 
          SO WE WERE ABLE TO TOUCH BASE WITH HIM BRIEFLY TO GIVE HIM A BIT OF A PREVIEW ON THAT. HE'LL BE REACHING OUT TO PAUL OR HIS COUNTERPARTS UP THERE ON THE DAIS TO SHARE HIS THOUGHTS, BUT WE DID GET A LITTLE BIT OF INSIGHT FROM HIM AS WELL AS PART OF THAT PREVIEW WITH HIM, SINCE HE WASN'T HERE. THANK YOU FOR DOING THAT. BEFORE YOU GO ON, CAN YOU GO BACK ONE SLIDE FOR ME REALLY QUICK? I JUST HAVE TWO QUICK QUESTIONS. THE $21 MILLION IN 2022. WHAT WHERE DID THAT COME FROM? GREAT QUESTION. SO WE DID GET SOME BOND PROCEEDS WITH THE CITY HALL PROJECT. AND SO THAT ALL HAS TO DO WITH THE CITY HALL PROJECT AND HOW IT WAS BONDED OUT WITH THE TERS. I DID CHECK IN WITH FINANCE BECAUSE I HAD THAT SAME QUESTION AS WELL, THEY ANTICIPATE THAT WE'LL SEE A FAIRLY SIGNIFICANT EXPENDITURE WITHIN THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR AS PART AND PARCEL TO THAT. 
          HOWEVER, THE ANTICIPATED FUND BALANCES WITHIN THE TERS IS STILL A VERY IT'S A SIZABLE AMOUNT. SO IN THE EARLY PART OF WELL, EITHER WITHIN THE LAST QUARTER OF 2024 OR THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2025, YOU WILL BE GETTING AN UPDATED ANNUAL REPOR. SO YOU WILL GET TO SEE THOSE ANTICIPATED FUND BALANCES AT THAT TIME FROM FINANCE. DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA THE PORTION OF THE BUDGET THAT HAS TO BE ALLOCATED TO INFRASTRUCTURE FROM THE 50% FROM THE COUNTY TAXES? HOW MUCH OF THE BUDGET DOES THAT ACCOUNT FOR, OR THE FUND BALANCE DOES THAT ACCOUNT FOR? HERE? I WOULD HAVE TO. I'D HAVE TO LOOK AND GET BACK TO YOU ON THAT. I DON'T KNOW IF I DON'T KNOW, BUT WE CAN GET THAT TO YOU. OKAY. YEAH. THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO MAKE A COUPLE COMMENTS BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH STAFF QUITE A BIT ON THIS, THIS PROJECT PLAN, AND A LOT HAS HAPPENED SINCE 2010, AND BECAUSE OF SOUTHGATE BEING IN THE TERS, IT'S CREATED WHAT WE WERE HOPING WOULD HAPPEN, AN INFLUX OF CASH INTO TERS, ONE WHICH WILL HOPEFULLY BE HELPFUL FOR ALL THE PROJECTS. 
          BUT, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE WORKED ON NOTES LIVE, WE ANTICIPATED AND WE WROTE INTO THE DOCUMENT THAT DETERS COULD BE A FUNDING SOURCE IN AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT. AND WHEN YOU THINK OF THAT IN THE DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT THAT'S ALSO UNDERWAY WITH M2, G, YOU KNOW, THOSE ARE THE KINDS OF USES THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE SOMETHING THE COUNCIL WANTS TO USE TOURIST FUNDS FOR. BUT WHEN YOU GET INTO THOSE KINDS OF PROJECTS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, YOU BEGIN TO LOOK AT THINGS LIKE EMPLOYMENT AND OTHER THINGS THAT YOU DON'T SEE IN A NORMAL, HISTORIC, YOU KNOW, RENOVATION BECAUSE YOU HAVE A LOT OF EMPLOYEES, PARTICULARLY IN THE NOTES LIVE PROJECT, THAT, YOU KNOW, WILL BE EMPLOYED. SO THOSE ARE THE REASONS. AND BECAUSE OF THE CASH THAT'S, YOU KNOW, BECOMING A MORE, YOU KNOW, HIGHER IN THIS PARTICULAR FUND 
          [00:25:07]
THAT THE COUNCIL WE THOUGHT WOULD BE INTERESTED IN LOOKING AT IT CLEARLY YOUR DISCRETION, YOU KNOW, THERE'S OTHER THERE'S OTHER WAYS TO, YOU KNOW, TO CHANGE THE FUNDING SOURCES. I MEAN, THIS IS 100% OF AD VALOREM AND 100% OF SALES TAX, WHICH I THINK WAS THE INTENTION BACK THEN TO SEE HOW MUCH WE COULD CAPTURE TO PUT INTO TOURISM. BUT THOSE ARE THE KINDS OF THINGS THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT INTERNALLY WITH STAFF. AND YOU KNOW IT. YOU KNOW, THOSE DAYS ARE NOW AND BACK IN 2012, WE WOULDN'T BE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION. YEAH, IT'S A GREAT POINT. AND IN 2010, WHEN WE ESTABLISHED THE TERS, WE WERE VERY DELIBERATE IN THE PROJECT PLAN AND THE ADMINISTRATION POLICY BECAUSE THE GOAL AT THAT POINT WAS TO HELP GROW THE FUND BALANCE AND NOT WHAT WE WOULD CONSIDER SORT OF NICKEL AND DIME IT ON SMALLER PROJECTS ALLOW FOR THAT USE FOR THOSE SMALLER PROJECTS, BUT ALSO BE ABLE TO GROW IT SO THAT WE CAN MAKE MEANINGFUL IMPACTS THROUGH THAT TOURIST FUND. AND I THINK WE'RE IN A REALLY GOOD POSITION. THIS IS A GOOD PROBLEM TO HAVE, BUT I AGREE WITH HAUSER AND YOUR COMMENTS AS WELL THAT WE NEED TO EXPAND THAT PROJECT PLAN SO THAT WE HAVE OR YOU ALL, NOT WE, BUT YOU ALL HAVE THE ABILITY TO STRATEGICALLY DRIVE WHERE AND HOW THE FUNDING WITHIN THAT TERS BALANCE GETS SPENT. AND TO THAT POINT, WE TALKED ABOUT THE WAY IT'S ADMINISTERED BECAUSE THE BIG ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS TYPICALLY COME THROUGH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE. AND SO WE TALKED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHO'S GOING TO HANDLE THOSE PARTS AND WHO'S GOING TO HANDLE THE TYPICAL, THE TRADITIONAL. 
          AND THAT'S HELPFUL THAT YOU GIVE US DIRECTION, YOU KNOW, ON WHAT WE'RE GOING TO SPEND IT ON AND WE CAN FIGURE OUT HOW TO PUT IT IN FRONT OF THE BOARD. YEAH OKAY. SO THE LAST PROJECT CATEGORY IS A LITTLE BIT EASIER. SO HOPEFULLY, EASIER TO GET THROUGH, IN ADDITION TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OR SMALL BUSINESS SUPPORT GRANTS, THE OTHER IDEA IS TO INCLUDE WHAT WE WOULD CONSIDER DISTRICT ENRICHMENT PROJECTS OR PROGRAMS. SO RIGHT NOW, AGAIN, WE'VE GOT THOSE VERY SPECIFIC LIST OF ELIGIBLE EXPENSES. THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DRIVERS. BUT AS THE TERS FUND GROWS OR AS THE VIBRANCY OF THE TERS AREA GROWS, THERE ARE OTHER TYPES OF PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS THAT COULD POTENTIALLY BE FUNDED OUT OF THAT TERS BALANCE, THINGS LIKE PUBLIC PARKING, PUBLIC SAFETY. WE DON'T NECESSARILY KNOW WHAT THE PUBLIC SAFETY IDEA LOOKS LIKE YET, BUT PUBLIC SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE DISTRICT, IF WE EVER WERE TO GET PARKING METERS OR PAID PARKING LOTS THAT REQUIRE EQUIPMENT TERS FUND BALANCES COULD BE USED TO OPERATE AND MAINTAIN THOSE AS WELL. SO CREATING THAT NEW, BROADER CATEGORY OF DISTRICT ENRICHMENT ALLOWS FOR THE BOARD TO CONSIDER THOSE TYPES OF PROJECTS, AS WELL AS ELIGIBLE FOR FUNDING. SO THOSE ARE THE TWO MAJOR CATEGORIES OF ADDITIONS THAT WE WOULD PROPOSE TO BE INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT PLAN. AGAIN, IF THERE'S A GENERAL NOD OF APPROVAL FROM THE BOARD, WHICH I THINK THAT THERE IS, WE WILL COME BACK AT A LATER DATE WITH EXACTLY WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE IN THE PROJECT PLAN, AS WELL AS MAYBE SOME ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDELINES TO PACKAGE WITH IT. SO THAT WE'RE CLEAR IN HOW WE'RE ADMINISTERING THAT FOR YOU ALL, AND WITH THAT, THAT'S THE END OF MY PRESENTATION. THAT'S GREAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. JENNIFER 
          [Consider/Discuss/Act on a Resolution Approving a Chapter 380 Economic Development Agreement and Project Plan Implementation Agreement with CPJK Management, LLC for a Façade Improvement Project at 207 East Virginia Street]
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MOVE ON TO ITEM 20 4-015DA CONSIDER, DISCUSS ACT ON A RESOLUTION APPROVING IN CHAPTER 380 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND PROJECT PLAN IMPLEMENTATION AGREEMENT WITH AK MANAGEMENT, LLC FOR A FACADE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AT 207 EAST THIRD STREET, GOOD AFTERNOON, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME. MY NAME IS CAMERON CHRISTIE. I'M THE DOWNTOWN PLANNER FOR THE CITY OF MCKINNEY AND TODAY I WILL BE PRESENTING ON BEHALF. EXCUSE ME, PRESENTING THIS PROJECT BROUGHT FORWARD BY KPJK MANAGEMENT TO RENOVATE 207 EAST VIRGINIA STREET, COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE GAITHER BUILDING. HEATHER. SORRY, WHAT DID YOU SAY IT WAS COMING? I GATHER A PEOPLE FREQUENTLY CALL IT THE GAITHER BUILDING, GATHERS THERE. YOU SEE, THERE, THERE'S, THE SIGN. OKAY, SO FOR A LITTLE BACKGROUND ON THIS PARTICULAR BUILDING, IT WAS CONSTRUCTED APPROXIMATELY 1925, IT LIES IN THE HISTORIC OVERLAY DISTRICT, SPECIFICALLY THE COMMERCIAL AREA, ALONG WITH THE HISTORIC CORE OF THE MCKINNEY TOWN CENTER ZONING DISTRICT. IT IS LOCATED IN THE VACANT, UNDERUTILIZED PROPERTY ZONE, SO NO PROBLEM ON THAT. 
          THIS IS THE CURRENT STATE AS OF ABOUT SIX WEEKS AGO. THIS PHOTO IS TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM THEIR 
          [00:30:03]
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. THAT WAS AWARDED EARLIER THIS MONTH FOR THE PROJECT THAT I'M GOING TO TELL YOU ABOUT. SO A LITTLE MORE ON THE BUILDING. IT'S A BRICK STYLE COMMERCIAL BUILDING, IT IS LISTED AS HIGH PRIORITY AS OF OUR MOST RECENT HISTORIC RESOURCE RESOURCE SURVEY, WHICH WAS UNDERTAKEN LAST YEAR, AT SOME POINT AFTER 1985, THE ROOF WENT FROM THIS KIND OF WAVE PATTERN TO ITS MORE CURRENT FLAT CONFIGURATION, THE AWNINGS HAVE CHANGED MULTIPLE TIMES OVER THE COURSE OF THE BUILDING'S LIFE, AND THE EXISTING WINDOWS ARE NON-HISTORIC VINYL AND IMPORTANT FOR TODAY. FAILING SO WHAT THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING IS THE REMOVAL OF THOSE 24 EXISTING VINYL WINDOWS AND REPLACING THEM WITH VINYL FRAMED, INSULATED WINDOWS, THIS WOULD FALL UNDER THAT FACADE REHABILITATION CATEGORY IN THE VACANT AND UNDERUTILIZED PROJECTS, THE TOTAL COST HAS BEEN ESTIMATED TO BE $24,204, AND $0.89, THAT INCLUDES THE ELIGIBLE WORK. IT DOES MEET THE FUNDING POLICY LIMITS, AS JENNIFER SAID BEFORE, FOR A LOT OF THESE VACANT, UNDERUTILIZED PROJECTS, IT'S VERY SIMPLE. IF IT MEETS ALL OF OUR CRITERIA, IT'S RELATIVELY STRAIGHTFORWARD FOR US TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL. AND THAT IS THE CASE TODAY. IT MEETS ALL THE CRITERIA. IT'S A VERY STANDARD FACADE REHABILITATION PROJECT. 
          SO WITH THAT, STAFF IS OFFERING OUR RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. AND I STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN IT FAILING BECAUSE OF ABC ISSUES, TEMPERATURE, OR STRUCTURAL OR I KNOW SEVERAL YEARS AGO THERE WAS A STORM THAT DID A NUMBER ON A LOT OF THE WINDOWS, THE OTHER ISSUE BEING THAT THEY'RE JUST QUITE OLD TO BEGIN WITH, AND THEY'RE STARTING TO FAIL IN GENERAL. THE STORM REALLY JUST PUSHED IT OVER THE EDGE. CERTAINLY I WAS THERE FOR A WHILE. THOSE WINDOWS ARE INSULATED, MY CONCERN IS THAT SOME BOARD IN THE FUTURE IS GOING TO BE REPLACED ON THAT. LET'S SEE. JENNIFER, ARE YOU JENNIFER CLARKSON? OKAY, I APOLOGIZE, I WAS I UNDERSTOOD THE APPLICANT WAS GOING TO BE HERE, I GUESS SHE'S NOT, I WILL SAY THAT THIS THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY OUR HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLANNER, THEY DID THE WHOLE COA PROCESS. THEY LOOKED AT THE WINDOWS, THAT WERE BEING PROPOSED. THE OLD ONES, WHEN WE DO A REPLACEMENT OF HIS FEATURES ON A HISTORIC FACADE, IF THE NEW FEATURES ARE NON HISTORIC, IT'S GENERALLY NOT CONSIDERED A PROBLEM. IF THEY IF THEY ARE REPLACING, NON HISTORIC FEATURES THEMSELVES. I CAN'T SPEAK TO MORE OF THE IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS ON THAT BECAUSE IT'S NOT QUITE MY WHEELHOUSE, BUT THAT'S HOW I UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS TO GO. ANYONE HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? MOTION MAKE A MOTION. WE APPROVE THIS ITEM. SECOND. MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM FELTUS. SECOND BY MAYOR PULLER. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY BY THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          [Consider/Discuss/Act on a Resolution Approving a Chapter 380 Economic Development Agreement and Project Plan Implementation Agreement with Haddington Fund, LLC for the Flour Mill Roof Replacement Project (Critical Maintenance Project) Located at 415 East Louisiana Street]
GOOD TO MEET YOU. LIKEWISE WE'LL MOVE TO ITEM 24016DA CONSIDER DISCUSS ACT ON A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CHAPTER 380 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND PROJECT PLAN IMPLEMENTATION AGREEMENT WITH HADDINGTON FUND LLC FOR THE FLOUR MILL ROOF REPLACEMENT PROJECT. CRITICAL MAINTENANCE PROJECT LOCATED AT 415 EAST LOUISIANA STREET. THANK YOU. MR. THE FLOOR IS YOURS. 
          THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. AGAIN, JENNIFER ARNOLD DIRECTOR OF PLANNING, AS YOU READ, THIS IS A REQUEST FOR CRITICAL MAINTENANCE FUNDING FOR THE FLOUR MILL SITE. THIS IN PARTICULAR IS THE FOUR STORY BUILDING THERE AT 415 EAST LOUISIANA STREET, FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE ROOF ON THIS BUILDING. SO THE PROPERTY ITSELF OBVIOUSLY IS ON THE, ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES. IT'S A MOUTHFUL, AND IT CERTAINLY IS A TESTAMENT TO MCKINNEY'S INDUSTRIAL AND AGRICULTURAL PAST. THE APPLICANT IS CITING THAT THERE IS A NUMBER OF ROOF FALTERS ON, OR THERE'S A 
          [00:35:05]
NUMBER OF ROOF FAULTS ON THE BUILDING THAT IS CAUSING, LEAKAGE AND DAMAGE TO THE STRUCTURE OVERALL. AND THEY ARE TRYING TO REPLACE THAT ENTIRE ROOF. THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR, APPROXIMATELY $175,000 FROM THE TERS BOARD TO FUND THE COMPLETE COST OF THAT ROOF REPLACEMENT, AND OUTLINE OF THE SCOPE OF WORK IS UP HERE ON YOUR SCREEN. NOW, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE PARAPET REPAIR, COMPLETE ROOF REPAIR, AND NEW MATERIALS. AND THEN THE COST OF TEMPORARY ROOFING REPAIRS THAT HAPPENED AFTER THE NEW SIGN WAS PUT UP ON THE BUILDING. SO WE DO HAVE A COUPLE OF PHOTOS HERE WHERE YOU CAN START TO SEE SOME OF THE DAMAGE THAT'S OCCURRING ON THE ROOF, AS WELL AS THAT WHERE THOSE FRACTURES ARE HAPPENING, HOW THE LEAKS AND WATER BREAKS ARE HAPPENING INSIDE AND AFFECTING THE INTERIOR OF THE BUILDING. SO WHILE THE PROJECT REQUEST OR THE WHILE THE PROJECT ITSELF IS TERS ELIGIBLE, WE DEFINITELY SEE IT AS A CRITICAL MAINTENANCE ITEM. AS WE NOTED IN THE PREVIOUS PRESENTATION, WE DO HAVE FUNDING CAPS OUTLINED IN THAT ADMINISTRATION POLICY. AND THE REQUEST THAT IS BEFORE US TODAY, UNFORTUNATELY, IS OUTSIDE OF THAT FUNDING CAP. SO AS A STAFF, WE AREN'T ABLE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE FUNDING REQUEST, IF THE BOARD DESIRES TO FUND THE PROJECT, OUR RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO FUND IT WITHIN THE LIMITS OUTLINED IN THE FUNDING POLICY GUIDE OR FOR YOU TO EXPLORE THAT MERITORIOUS EXCEPTION ROUTE. IF THERE IS A DESIRE BY THE BOARD TO FUND THE ENTIRE COST OF THE ROOF REPLACEMENT, WITH THAT, I WILL STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS. AND I KNOW THAT OUR APPLICANT IS HERE AS WELL. CAN YOU GO BACK A COUPLE OF SLIDES FOR ME, JENNIFER? YES, MA'AM, TO THE THAT ONE. SO THE PART OF THE ROOF, BECAUSE THE SIGN THERE IS ALSO AN INVESTMENT BY THE CDC, TO ADD SOME CHARACTER TO OUR SKYLINE. RIGHT. SO THE PART OF THE ROOF THAT'S THERE HAS THAT, THAT I'M ASSUMING THERE WAS A LOT OF PREPARATION THAT WENT INTO THAT SECTION BEFORE THEY INSTALLED IT. CORRECT? I WOULD BELIEVE SO, BUT I'D HAVE TO DEFER THAT TO MR. BRESNAHAN. 
          OKAY SO OUR APPLICANT HERE. YES. WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK WITH US? WELCOME. HELLO EVERYONE. JAMES BRESNAHAN, MANAGER OF THE MCKINNEY FLOUR MILL PROJECT. DID YOU WANT ME TO ANSWER? THERE WAS A LOT OF PREP WORK, RIGHT? THAT WENT INTO THE AT LEAST THE PART OF THE ROOF THAT IS SUPPORTING THE SIGN. YEAH. YOU CAN SEE THE WHITE MATERIAL. THAT'S RIGHT UNDERNEATH THE SIGN THAT WAS DONE RIGHT BEFORE. WELL, IT WAS PREPARED BEFORE THE SIGN WENT DOWN. BASICALLY TORE OFF THE MATERIAL THAT WAS ON THE ROOF, WHICH IS ABOUT AN INCH THICK OF 100 YEARS. ACCUMULATION OF MATERIAL THAT THEY'VE THEY'VE PUT ON THE BUILDING AND THEN THE SIGN WAS LAID ON THE SUB ROOFING, WHICH IS A WOOD MATERIAL, AND THEN THEY COVERED IT WITH THAT WHITE TPO WAS WHAT THEY CALL IT MATERIAL. HOWEVER, IT'S, IT'S WOOD. WHEN IT RAINS HARD WATER DOES FIND ITS WAY IN ALL KINDS OF LITTLE CRACKS AND CRANNIES AND IN 100 YEAR OLD ROOF. AND SO WE STILL HAVE AN EXASPERATED, REALLY LEAK PROBLEM THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE PRIOR TO THE SIGN GOING DOWN. SO IT'S IT WAS CRITICAL BEFORE, AND NOW IT'S LIKE HYPER CRITICAL IN A WAY. WE ALSO, JAMES DID SAY THAT THERE'S A LOT OF STRUCTURAL THINGS THAT HAD TO BE DONE TO BE ABLE TO PUT THAT SIGN UP AND THAT REQUIRED, SOME IN ESSENCE, SHIFTING OF PREVIOUSLY DEFLECTED MATERIALS AND WHATNOT THAT I THINK YOU'RE SAYING HAS CONTRIBUTED TO NOW ADDITIONAL LEAKING. THAT'S THAT'S HAPPENING. YOU HAD TO STRUCTURALLY FIX THE ROOF, ABLE TO HOLD THE SIGN. AND THAT BROUGHT ON SOME ADDITIONAL. 
          ISSUES. YES. THEY HAD TO PERFORATE THE ROOF WITH BOLTS TO SECURE THE SIGN IN PLACE. AND SO JUST BY PERFORATING THROUGH THE ROOF AND ACTUALLY SOME OF THE WOOD MEMBERS UNDERNEATH THE, THE SUB ROOFING SO THAT IT WOULD, IT WOULDN'T CAUSE THE, THE SIGN FROM FALLING BECAUSE OF WIND OR HIGH WINDS OR SNOW OR ICE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. THEY HAD TO PERFORATE THROUGH THE, THE CEILING. AND IN SO DOING, IT'S JUST ANYTIME YOU PERFORATE THROUGH ANY, ANY ROOFING MATERIAL, IT'S JUST GOING TO BE DIFFICULT TO RETURN IT BACK TO THE WAY IT WAS. AND THAT'S THE CASE THAT THAT'S HAPPENED. SO IT'S GOTTEN WORSE. YOUR ROOFING CONTRACTOR IS NOT GOING TO NEED TO REBUILD THE STRUCTURAL WORK DONE UNDERNEATH THAT SIGN. THEY'RE JUST GOING TO WORK THROUGH IT. CORRECT? RIGHT THEY'RE GOING TO NOT NOT THE SIGN SPECIFICALLY JUST AROUND THE WHOLE ROOF. THEY'RE GOING TO ADD MATERIAL WOOD. MATERIAL TO WHEREVER THE, THE, THE SUB ROOFING HAS FAILED THE, THE WOOD MATERIAL. AND THEY'RE JUST GOING TO MAKE IT ALL EVEN WITH 
          [00:40:02]
SUPPLEMENTING WITH, INSULATION SO THAT IT'S ALL WHEN THEY'RE, WHEN THEY'RE DONE, IT'S ALL GOING TO BE A FLAT ROOF. AND THE ROOF ACTUALLY LEANS TO THE EAST SIDE. SO WHEN IT DOES RAIN, THE WATER AUTOMATICALLY RUNS TO THE EAST AND IT CATCHES IN THE IN THE METAL TROUGH. YOU CAN'T SEE IT HERE, BUT THERE'S A METAL TROUGH RIGHT ON THE EDGE. THE MIDDLE PICTURE IS THE CLOSEST TO IT. AND THEN THE WATER ALL GOES DOWN ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE GROUND FLOOR IN IN METAL, DRAIN PIPES THAT, THAT ARE LITERALLY 100 YEARS OLD. SO THEY'RE GOING TO REPLACE ALL THAT AS WELL WITH THE TROUGH AND THE DRAIN PIPES WERE DESIGNED TO FOR RAINWATER RUNOFF. CORRECT THAT'S CORRECT. 
          SO I GUESS MY POINT IS THAT THIS ROOF REALLY IS A 100 YEAR OLD ROOF. AND IT'S WORKED FANTASTIC. 
          IT'S JUST THAT LATELY IT'S GOTTEN WEAR AND TEAR THAT JUST BEYOND THE PATCHING AT THIS POINT. ARE YOU REPLACING THAT COLLECTION SYSTEM AS WELL? THAT'S CORRECT. YES ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I HAD ANOTHER QUESTION FOR MISS ARNOLD. IF YOU WOULD NOT MIND. IT'S ACTUALLY MORE THAN ONE QUESTION. YES SIR. OUR CURRENT FUNDING LIMIT IS THAT SET AT THE 50% OF THE $50,000? IT. NO, IT'S 50% OF THE TOTAL PROJECT COST. SO UP TO $50,000. SO IT COULD BE A $100,000 PROJECT, BUT THE TOURS WOULD FUND 50. AND YOUR RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WE FUND THIS TO $50,000 PER THAT POLICY. YES, SIR. NOT YOURS. BUT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. VERY GOOD. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I WAS CLEAR ON THAT. THANK YOU. JENNIFER, COULD I ASK A QUESTIO? YES, SIR. THE PROCESS AND METHOD TO GO BEYOND THAT AGAIN, JUST FOR THOSE OUT THERE LISTENING THIS EXCEPTION, COULD YOU EXPLAIN THAT AGAIN? SURE. SO WITHIN THAT ADMINISTRATION POLICY, THERE IS A MERITORIOUS EXCEPTION CLAUSE THAT ALLOWS THE BOARD TO CONSIDER ANY REQUEST THAT IS MERITORIOUS IN NATURE TO GO AND EXCEED WHATEVER THE FUNDING CAPS ARE THAT ARE OUTLINED. NOW. THERE ARE SOME GENERAL GUARDRAILS THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THAT MERITORIOUS EXCEPTION CLAUSE. HOWEVER, IT IS ENTIRELY AT THE BOARD'S DISCRETION. HOW THEY WANT TO ADMINISTER THAT PARTICULAR, SET OF PARAMETERS. SO I HAVE A QUESTION FOR JAMES. AGAIN, JAME, THERE'S OF COURSE, THE ROOF. AND THEN THERE'S ALL THE INTERIOR DAMAGE THAT YOU ARE HAVING TO DEAL WITH. YES, SIR. I'VE, I'VE CLIMBED THOSE RICKETY STAIRS TO THE TOP, AND I'VE LOOKED AT THE UNDERSIDE OF THAT AND ALL THE DAMAGED, WOOD AND EVEN THE DAMAGED SUBFLOOR AND FLOOR OF THE BELOW THAT BASED ON THE. SO THAT'S, THAT'S ALL PROJECT THAT YOU'RE TAKING ON, CORRECT? THAT'S RIGHT. YEAH IT HAS TO BE DONE. SO IT'S ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE IF WE DON'T DO SOMETHING NOW. AND THAT'S THE CRITICAL NATURE OF IT. WHAT IS YOUR ABILITY NOW? I MEAN YOU HAVE A DO YOU HAVE ANY KIND OF RESERVE FUND AVAILABLE FOR THIS PROJECT? NO. WE DON'T. I'M GUESSING THAT, WELL, I KNOW THAT MUCH OF THIS BUILDING IS CURRENTLY VACANT BECAUSE YOU'RE HAVING TO YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO LEASE SPACE THAT HAS LEAKING ROOFS AND DAMAGED SUBFLOORS AND ALL THAT. THAT'S CORRECT. SO YOU'RE YOU'RE CARRYING ON THE MAINTENANCE OF THIS BUILDING AS YOU, LIMITED ABILITY TO ESTABLISH REVENUE. CURRENTLY, I KNOW THAT YOU HAVE AN OVERALL PLAN TO ESTABLISH THIS AS A BOUTIQUE HOTEL RESTAURANT AND OTHER SPACE. THAT'S CORRECT. YEAH I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS PROJECT. I JUST WISH YOU WOULD HAVE BROUGHT IT FORWARD A LONG TIME AGO BEFORE WE INVESTED IN THAT SIGN, BECAUSE I COULD SEE THAT WHOLE THING COLLAPSING, AND IT BEING A DISASTER. SO I'M GLAD YOU'RE MAKING THE EFFORT TO GET IT REPAIRED. SO TO THAT POINT, WE DID HAVE A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER LOOK AT IT PRIOR TO THE SIGN GOING UP, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN. SO HE WAS VERY CONFIDENT. THE BUILDING IS BUILT VERY WELL, THANK GOD. AND SO HE WAS CONFIDENT AND THEN GAVE US US THE CONFIDENCE TO MOVE FORWARD. BUT THANK YOU FOR THAT. MR. MAYOR, I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF FUNDING IT TO 50% OF THE PROJECT COST BECAUSE THIS IS BECOME AN ICON IN DOWNTOWN MCKINNEY. IT'S GOING TO BE THE CENTERPIECE OF THE NEW PLAZA WITH THE CITY HALL AND SO IT WOULD BE I WOULD ENCOURAGE THAT THIS BOARD CONSIDER 50% OF THE ENTIRE FUNDING. I WAS I WAS GOING TO, I'M ACTUALLY IN SUPPORT OF A MERITORIOUS 
          [00:45:02]
EXCEPTION. I THINK THIS BUILDING IS CRITICAL TO DOWNTOWN. I THINK THAT, I LOVE THE FACT THAT WE PUT THE SIGN ON THERE, BUT I DO UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S CONTRIBUTED TO THE ISSUE THAT WE HAVE. AND I ALSO UNDERSTAND THIS IS A BUILDING THAT HAS BEEN MAINTAINED IN GREAT PART BY YOUR EFFORT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO FOR YOUR EXERCISE REGIMEN ONCE YOU ARE NO LONGER THE ONE RUNNING UP FOUR FLIGHTS OF RICKETY STAIRS AND MOVING FIVE GALLON BUCKETS ALL OVER THE PLACE TRYING TO CAPTURE THE WATER TO PREVENT FURTHER DAMAGE, YOU HAVE TO COME UP WITH A NEW REGIMEN. BUT ME, I'M. THIS IS A PROJECT THAT, THAT I THINK WARRANTS US STEPPING UP AND VIEWING THIS AS A MERITORIOUS EXCEPTION PROJECT. AND FUNDING THE PROJECT 100%, 100%. BECAUSE I DON'T FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, YOU DON'T HAVE ANY RESERVE TO FUND THIS. NO. WE DON'T. YOU KNOW, IN MY TIME ON THIS TOURIST BOARD, YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAD DIFFERENT INTERACTIONS. I THINK WE HELPED WITH SOME WINDOWS AND SOME FENCING, AND CDC'S DONE STUFF, I AM CONCERNED ABOUT OUR OVERALL DEMAND ON TERS FUNDING. I AM UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS IS IMPORTANT. IS A HOMEOWNER. I DON'T OWN A BUSINESS. BUT, YOU KNOW, I'M ON MY THIRD ROOF IN 17 YEARS, AND SO YOU GOT 100 OUT OF THIS ONE. THAT'S PRETTY GOOD, I KNOW THIS MUST HAVE BEEN AN ISSUE BEFORE, FROM WHERE I SIT RIGHT NOW, I'D BE GOOD WITH THE 50,000 CAP. THAT WHAT WE'VE GOT ON THERE? AND THERE WAS TALK ABOUT USING TERS AS A DEBT INSTRUMENT, AND I'D BE OPEN TO FURTHER DISCUSSION ON IT. BUT BASED ON WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW, I, I COULD GO THE 50,000. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? JAMES, IF WE DO 50,000, WHAT DOES THAT DO FOR YOU, IT WOULD CAUSE ME TO HAVE TO GO FIND THE FUNDING SOMEWHERE ELSE TO BE ABLE TO PAY THE CONTRACTOR TO DO WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS. I THINK EVERYBODY UP HERE WANTS TO SEE THIS PROJECT BE A HUGE SUCCESS. AND IT IS NOW THE FOCAL POINT OF THE EAST SIDE OF DOWNTOWN. AND SO I'M IN FAVOR OF THE MAYOR'S SUGGESTION OF FUNDING THE THING COMPLETELY. I JUST, I'LL BE FINE WITH IT, BUT THERE'S NO INSURANCE CLAIM THAT COULD BE HAD FOR THE ROOF. SINCE IT IS A ROOF, IT'S JUST NOTHING WE CAN DO. THERE THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. BUT NO, THERE ISN'T ANY INSURANCE FOR THAT. I THINK THE DEPRECIATION IS GOING TO EAT THAT UP. YEAH. SO THAT'S 100 YEARS OF DEPRECIATION I. YOU'RE PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE TO WRITE THEM A CHECK. THAT'S MY GUESS I'M FINE WITH THAT. IF EVERYBODY ELSE I MEAN I THINK YOU KNOW FOR ME THE WHAT I'M WEIGHING IS THE FACT THAT THIS WILL BE A HIGHLY UTILIZED SPACE ONCE YOU'RE DONE INVESTING A LARGE PORTION OF YOUR MONEY INTO TO GETTING IT WHERE YOU WANT TO SEE IT WITH THE RESTAURANT AND THE HOTEL. AND THAT IN AND OF ITSELF SHOULD GENERATE MORE THAN WHAT YOU'RE REQUESTING IN TERMS OF THE TAXES, THAT WE GET BACK IN TERMS OF SALES. SO I UNDERSTAND PATRICK'S CAUTION, AND WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE REQUESTS THAT COME FORWARD. THERE'LL BE A LOT OF REQUESTS HERE. MOVING FORWARD. SO WE HAVE TO BE PRUDENT IN TERMS OF WHAT WE DISTRIBUTE OUT, AND IT HAS TO BE EQUITABLE TO ALL. SO, BUT I THINK BECAUSE IT'S SUCH AN ICONIC BUILDING AND BECAUSE THERE'S ALREADY BEEN SUCH AN INVESTMENT FROM THE CITY, IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE DON'T LET IT THESE CRITICAL SORT OF ISSUES, STRUCTURAL ISSUES, YOU KNOW, KIND OF SNOWBALL AND GET EVEN FURTHER OUT OF CONTROL. SO THAT'S THE REASON I'M OKAY WITH FUNDING THE 100%. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE FUND IT AS A MERITORIOUS EXCEPTION AND FUNDED AT 100%. I'M GOING TO ASK A QUESTION IF I'M SORRY BEFORE THE SECOND. AM I RIGHT THAT YOU NEED FIVE YESES ON THIS? YEAH. SO UNLESS A MAJORITY, WHICH IS ALL OF US OUT OF THE 503 OF THE FIVE. OKAY, OKAY, THEN I WILL STAND DOWN AND LET SOMEONE ELSE SECOND THIS. I'LL SECOND MOTION BY MAYOR FULLER, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM FELTUS. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE ANY OPPOSED? NAY FOUR. ONE VOTE. CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YO. THANK THERE'S NO COMMENTS BY THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD I DO. WE HAVE ITEMS ON EXECUTIVE SESSION? NO, SIR. ALL RIGHT. VERY GOOD, IF THERE'S NO FURTHER COMMENTS, I'LL MAKE A MOTION OR ACCEPT A MOTION TO ADJOURN THIS MEETING. 
          [00:50:07]
SO MOVED SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. MEETING'S ADJOURNED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO BEHIND YOU. SO WE NEED TO. THANK YOU
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.