HAD TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL AND SAY, WE NEED A BUDGET AMENDMENT. I DID GO TO, YOU KNOW, I'M 
          [CALL TO ORDER]
          [00:00:05]
PULLING. YEAH. IT IS. 549 ON TUESDAY, JUNE 16TH, 2026. I HEREBY CALL THE REINVESTMENT ZONE NUMBER ONE MEETING TO ORDER. WE ARE AT CITY HALL CHAMBERS, 401 EAST VIRGINIA STREET, MCKINNEY, TEXAS. FIRST ITEM IS PUBLIC COMMENTS ON AGENDA ITEMS. IF THERE'S ANYBODY THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, PLEASE COME FORWARD. HAVING NONE. WE'LL MOVE ON TO 
          [26-0558 Minutes of the Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone Number One (TIRZ1) Board Meeting of June 2, 2026]
THE REGULAR AGENDA. FIRST ITEM IS 26-055 EIGHT MINUTES OF THE TAX INCREMENT REFINANCE ZONE NUMBER ONE BOARD MEETING OF JUNE 2ND, 2026. MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES. 
          I'LL SECOND THAT. I HAVE A MOTION BY MR. LEBO, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CLOUTIER. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE, AYE. ANY OPPOSED THAT PASSES? NEXT ITEM IS 26-0501. CONSIDER DISCUSS ACT 
          [26-0501 Consider/Discuss/Act on a Resolution Amending the Administration Policy and Guidelines for Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone Number One]
ON A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE ADMINISTRATION POLICY AND GUIDELINES FOR TAX INCREMENT REFINANCE ZONE NUMBER ONE. GOOD EVENING BOARD. I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE THIS EVENING. MY NAME IS LUCAS REILLY. I'M THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING HERE TO PRESENT ON THIS ITEM. SO JUST TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT FOR WHY WE'RE HERE, I'LL GO THROUGH THE AGENDA. IT LOOKS LIKE THIS IS ON. THERE IT IS. WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE BACKGROUND. WHY DO WE HAVE GUIDELINES? WHAT WERE THE INITIATING REASON FOR THE GUIDELINES THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE REGARDING THE TOURS? ONE AREA, WHAT DO THEY ACCOMPLISH? SOME HISTORY, EXPENDITURE HISTORY. THE 2026 POLICY UPDATE GO BRIEFLY OVER THE UPDATED LANGUAGE THAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED IS BEING PROPOSED THIS EVENING, AND THEN WE'LL GO INTO SOME DETAILS ON SPECIFIC CATEGORIES AND DISCUSSION ON SOME OF THE POLICIES THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE. SO AGAIN, JUST TO GIVE THE CONTEXT, WE'VE HAD A COUPLE DIFFERENT ITEMS COME THROUGH RECENTLY IN THAT VACANT AND UNDERUTILIZED CATEGORY THAT HAVE ASKED FOR FUNDING THAT EXCEEDS OUR CURRENT GUIDELINES, NAMELY, UNION BEAR AND THE PARKS CHURCH HAVE BOTH RECEIVED FUNDING IN THIS FISCAL YEAR THAT EXCEED OUR CURRENT GUIDELINES, WHICH IS AT THE BEHEST OF TOURS AND THE CITY COUNCIL TO ALLOW THOSE FUNDS IN EXCESS OF THOSE GUIDELINES. BUT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE CAME BACK AND HAD A CONVERSATION INTENTIONALLY WITH YOU ALL SO THAT WE CAN CHECK IN, MAKE SURE THAT WE UNDERSTAND THE GUIDELINES, THE REASON FOR THEM, AND IF WE THINK THAT THEY ARE ADEQUATE AS WRITTEN, OR IF WE NEED TO MAKE ANY CHANGES. SO FIRST, WHY DO THESE EXIST? THE POLICIES WERE CREATED AT THE DIRECTION OF THE TOURIST BOARD. AS THE NUMBER OF APPLICATIONS AND THEIR AMOUNTS OF FUNDING REQUEST INCREASED. SO THE TOURS REALLY KICKED OFF IN 2009, 2010. 
          FOR THE FIRST SEVERAL YEARS, ANY TOURS IS PRETTY STAGNANT. THERE'S NO MONEY IN IT. YOU HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE REINVESTMENT TO OCCUR FOR THOSE INCREMENT TAXES TO GO INTO THAT FUND BEFORE YOU HAVE ANY MONEY THAT YOU CAN SPEND OR ALLOCATE TO ANY PROJECTS. SO 2014, WE SAW THAT PROJECT REQUESTS STARTED INCREASING. WE SAW A LOT OF THE PROJECTS COMING IN. 
          AND SO THERE WAS AN INITIAL FRAMEWORK THAT WAS REQUESTED BY THE TOURS BOARD TO HAVE A POLICY ON FUNDING FOR PROJECTS, SPECIFICALLY IN THE VACANT UNDERUTILIZED CATEGORY. AND THAT'S WHERE WE CAME UP WITH AN INITIAL $25,000 PROJECT CAP AGAIN IN 2020. AND I'LL GO INTO SOME MORE DETAIL ON ALL OF THESE. WE ADDED SOME DIFFERENT POLICIES 2024 AND 2026. SO I'M JUST GOING TO KIND OF BRIEFLY GO THROUGH THESE TO GIVE YOU THAT TIMELINE, THE GOAL OF THE GUIDELINES. WHAT ARE WE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH IS TO PROVIDE A TRANSPARENT AND CONSISTENT BASIS FOR EVALUATING THE DIFFERENT PROJECTS THAT COME FORWARD. WE WANT TO ESTABLISH THOSE CAPS SO THAT WE CAN PROTECT THE FUND BALANCE, BECAUSE AS THAT AS THAT GROWS, AS REINVESTMENT GROWS, THERE'S A LOT MORE DEMAND ON THAT FUND BALANCE. AS WE'VE SEEN OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS. WE ALSO WANT TO ALIGN THE EXPENDITURES IN THAT TOURS WITH THE APPROVED PROJECT PLAN AND FINANCE PLAN, AND THEN ONCE AGAIN RETAIN FULL AUTHORITY FOR THIS BOARD TO GRANT EXCEPTIONS AND AMEND THE POLICY AS NEEDED. SO THAT HISTORY, AS I MENTIONED IN 2014, THAT WAS KIND OF THE INITIAL ADOPTION APPLICATIONS STARTED ROLLING IN, THE FUND BALANCE 
          [00:05:02]
STARTED TO GROW. AND SO THERE WAS THIS INITIAL CAP OF $25,000 PER PROJECT WITH AN ANNUAL CAP OF $100,000. IN 2020. THERE WERE FOUR ADDITIONS TO THE POLICY. THOSE SPECIFIC EXPENDITURE TYPES, THE CRITICAL MAINTENANCE, FIRE SUPPRESSION. AND THEN THERE WERE SOME DEFINITIONS AROUND THE ANNUAL CARRYOVER THAT WOULD GO INTO THE FUND. AND IF YOU WANTED TO FUND ABOVE THAT $50,000 CAP, WHAT WAS THE POLICY FOR FUNDING IN EXCESS OF THAT CAP? AT THE TIME, IT WAS $100,000, AGAIN AT A 5050 MATCH, MEANING THE PROJECT WOULD HAVE TO HAVE EXPENDED AT LEAST 200,000 IN 2024, CAME BACK TO THOSE SAME POLICIES, AND BASICALLY JUST DOUBLED ALL OF THE EXISTING EXPENDITURES. OBVIOUSLY, PRICES HAVE RISEN 2020 TO 2024. WE WENT THROUGH THE CORONAVIRUS SITUATION THAT SAW LOTS OF COSTS RISE ACROSS ALL FIELDS. 
          AND SO YOU SAW THESE PROJECT CAPS WERE DOUBLED WITH DIFFERENT MAXES. AND AGAIN, REDEFINING THOSE CARRYOVERS. AND SO HERE WE HAVE BEFORE YOU A VERY BASIC BASIC CLEANUP OF THE EXISTING POLICIES AND GUIDELINES. THERE ARE SEVERAL PROJECT CATEGORIES THAT ARE OUTSIDE OF VACANT UNDERUTILIZED THAT REFER TO SPECIFIC CRITERIA THAT WE DON'T HAVE. AND SO THE AMENDMENTS PRESENTED THIS EVENING IN YOUR PACKET DURING THE RED LINES, YOU'LL SEE IT'S VERY MINIMAL, BUT WE REALLY WANTED TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A LARGER CONVERSATION ABOUT IF WE THINK THAT THE POLICY BROADLY LOOKING AT THE 2024 CAPS AND. WELL, I'VE GOT ANOTHER CHART LATER IN THIS PRESENTATION, ARE ADEQUATE FOR THE CURRENT STATE OF THE TOURS. 
          SO JUST TO GIVE A LITTLE BACKGROUND ON THE EXPENDITURE HISTORY, THIS IS LIFETIME EXPENDITURES OF THE TOURS. AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE IN 2014 WHEN THAT FIRST POLICY WAS ADOPTED, THERE'S A LITTLE UPTICK IN AND 18. THEN WE SEE AN INCREASE AGAIN IN 2019, 2021. AND THEN AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE ANOTHER BIG JUMP IN 2024. I BELIEVE THAT WAS RELATED TO SOME CITY HALL IMPROVEMENTS. SO THERE'S SOME SOME REASONS FOR THAT, BUT I WANTED TO ALSO NARROW DOWN ON SPECIFICALLY THE VACANT AND UNDERUTILIZED CATEGORY. AND SO YOU CAN SEE THIS TREND IS QUITE DIFFERENT THAN THE PREVIOUS ONE, WHERE YOU DO STILL HAVE AN OVERALL INCREASE. BUT THESE LAST FEW YEARS SPECIFICALLY, WE'RE SEEING THE EXPENDITURES FOR THIS CATEGORY REALLY SKYROCKET JUST ON THIS CHART. AND SO YOU CAN SEE THAT IN 2024, OVER 600,000 IN FISCAL YEAR 25, WE WERE JUST UNDER THAT $400,000 CAP, WHICH IS WHERE WE ARE NOW. AND THEN THIS YEAR, SO FAR, THERE'S BEEN JUST OVER $1 MILLION ALLOCATED TO PROJECTS IN THIS CATEGORY. SO SOME OF THE SPECIFICS ON THE POLICIES AND GUIDELINES, THESE ARE ALL THE SPECIFIC FUNDING CATEGORIES THAT WE HAVE. AND SO THESE ARE EXPENDITURE TYPES THAT FALL UNDER THE VACANT AND UNDERUTILIZED PROJECT CATEGORY. AND IT'S JUST THOSE FIRST THREE COLUMNS OR EXCUSE ME, THOSE FIRST THREE ROWS. YOU HAVE ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION, DEMOLITION AND HISTORIC FACADE, FACADE. EXCUSE ME. THERE'S NO REQUIRED MATCH, BUT WE HAVE A $50,000 FUNDING CAP PER PROJECT. 
          AGAIN, WITH CRITICAL MAINTENANCE AND FIRE SUPPRESSION. WE HAVE A 50/50 MATCH REQUIREMENT, AND THOSE CAPS ARE $100,000. AND THEN FOR ALL OF THOSE EXPENDITURE TYPES, WE ALSO HAVE THE MERITORIOUS EXCEPTION. SO IN ANY CASE, A PROJECT COMES IN WE WANT TO FUND ABOVE THOSE CAPS. THE $200,000 LIMIT IS WHAT'S CURRENTLY IN THOSE THAT POLICY AND GUIDELINE DOCUMENT AGAIN WITH THAT 5050 CAP. SO A $200,000 FUNDING ALLOWANCE WOULD REQUIRE A PROJECT THAT HAD EXPENDED AT LEAST $400,000. ALL THE OTHER PROJECT TYPES AND EXPENDITURES. CURRENTLY, THIS DOCUMENT DOESN'T HAVE A MATCH REQUIRED OR ANY FUNDING CAPS. 
          SO TAKING INTO CONTEXT, WHAT ARE THE DEMANDS ON THE TOWERS FUND? OBVIOUSLY, WE'VE SEEN AN INCREASE IN REQUESTS TO THIS FUND, THIS BODY IN THE LAST 1011 MONTHS ALONE HAS DISCUSSED LOTS OF PROJECTS THAT ARE FAR REACHING AND HAVE HIGH PRICE TAGS. A FEW NAMED HERE, FIRE SUPPRESSION PROGRAM, 4 TO $6 MILLION EXPECTED EXPENDITURE. WE HAVE A DOWNTOWN PARKING MANAGEMENT PROGRAM THAT WE JUST FUNDED A PILOT FOR, AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FULL EXPENSE WOULD BE. DEPENDING ON THE SUCCESS OF THAT PILOT. AND THEN A NEW DOWNTOWN PARKING GARAGE, WHICH OBVIOUSLY WAS DISCUSSED EARLIER TODAY DURING THE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION. 
          AND SO IF YOU DID COMBINE ALL OF THOSE, THERE'S A RANGE OF 28 TO $36 MILLION VERSUS A CURRENT UNRESTRICTED BALANCE OF ROUGHLY 25 MILLION, WHICH DOESN'T EVEN INCLUDE FUNDS THAT HAVE TO BE 
          [00:10:02]
SET ASIDE. OR IT DOES ACTUALLY, THE RESTRICTED TRANSPORTATION COSTS. SO THIS IS A CHALLENGE WITHOUT A FORMAL RESERVE. EACH NEW REQUEST IS KIND OF WEIGHED AGAINST THIS FULL BALANCE OF ROUGHLY 20 PLUS MILLION DOLLARS. AND SO IT'S HARD TO CONSIDER WHAT MIGHT BE THE THINGS COMING DOWN THE LINE. SO THESE ARE THE QUESTIONS. ARE THE CURRENT POLICIES STILL WORKING WITH THESE EXISTING CAPS AND ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA. ARE THEY ADEQUATE FOR THE SITUATION THAT WE'RE IN RIGHT NOW WITH THE TOURS, GIVEN THE RECENT PACE AND SCALE OF REQUESTS, DO WE HAVE THE RIGHT GUARDRAILS AND SHOULD WE THINK ABOUT A DIFFERENT WAY TO STRUCTURE THE FUNDING FOR THE TOURS, SHOULD WE THINK ABOUT FLIPPING THE SCRIPT AND AND ALLOCATING SET ASIDE FUNDS FOR THESE LARGER PROJECTS SO THAT WHEN WE COME WITH REQUESTS, WE CAN SAY, HEY, THE FUND BALANCE IS $20 MILLION, BUT THIS BOARD HAS DECIDED OR OPTED TO ALLOCATE HOWEVER MUCH FOR SOME OF THESE OTHER PRIORITY PROJECTS. THAT WAY, IT'S JUST SIMPLER, EASIER MATH FOR US TO CONSIDER. RATHER THAN A $200,000 OVERAGE FROM VACANT UNDERUTILIZED VERSUS A $20 MILLION FUND BALANCE. WELL, WE TAKE OUT SOME OF THOSE PRIORITY PROJECTS. MAYBE IT'S EASIER TO ACTUALLY COMPARE THAT TO ONLY 2 OR $3 MILLION LEFT AFTER THOSE PROJECTS HAVE BEEN SET ASIDE OR EARMARKED. THESE ARE ALL QUESTIONS FOR YOU ON HOW YOU'D LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD. WHAT ARE THE THINGS THAT YOU'D LIKE TO SEE AS WE'RE TRYING TO ADMINISTER THIS FUND? AND SO WE HAVE DIFFERENT OPTIONS HERE. WE CAN ADOPT THE RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE UPDATED ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY AND GUIDELINES AS PRESENTED. WE THINK THAT THEY ARE ADEQUATE. 
          MAYBE WE NEED TO DO A BETTER JOB FROM STAFF OF PRESENTING A BIGGER PICTURE OF WHAT THE FUND BALANCE IS. WE'RE CERTAINLY WILLING AND ABLE TO DO THAT, OR WE HAVE A DIFFERENT OPTION. WE CAN MODIFY THE ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY AND GUIDELINES AS NECESSARY. IF THE CURRENT GOALS AND PRIORITIES OF THIS BOARD AND CITY COUNCIL HAVE CHANGED, AND WE WANT TO SEE A DIFFERENT DIRECTION IN ORDER TO GUARD THOSE FUNDS FOR SPECIFIC USES. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. AGAIN, THIS IS A DISCUSSION, SO I WANT TO OPEN IT UP TO YOU ALL. HAD A QUESTION ON ONE OF YOUR SLIDES, SHOWED EXPECTED EXPENDITURES AND HOW THEY HAVE GROWN OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS. I DID NOT SEE A SLIDE OF HOW THAT BALANCE HAS GROWN. GREAT POINT. AND SO THAT'S SOMETHING I COULD CERTAINLY PUT TOGETHER. I THINK THAT WE'RE ROUGHLY ADDING BETWEEN 6 AND 8 MILLION A YEAR. 
          NO, THIS IS WHY I ASKED HOLLOWAY TO STAY. YEAH. IF YOU HAD A SLIDE THAT SHOWS EXPENDITURES GOING UP, YOU MAYBE HAVE ONE IN THAT THAT SHOWS THE BALANCE AND HOW IT'S BEEN DOING WHATEVER IT'S BEEN DOING. YES, THE FUND BALANCE OF THE TOURS HAS BEEN GROWING OVER, OVER TIME. WE'RE PUTTING, AS YOU SAID, REVENUES ARE AROUND SIX, 6 OR $7 MILLION A YEAR. 
          NOW. WE ARE STARTING TO HAVE MORE EXPENDITURES AGAINST THAT. AND IF YOU WANT TO SEE THE EXPENDITURE DATA, WE'LL BE HAPPY TO WORK WITH THEM AND PUT TOGETHER EXACTLY THE REVENUE EXPENSE AND, AND, AND LINE ITEM OVER TIME, BE ABLE TO SHOW YOU ALL THAT THE, THE OFFSETTING REVENUES THAT HE SHOWED IT WAS IT WAS INTERESTING BECAUSE HE SHOWED THE EXPENDITURES FOR THE CITY HALL BUILDING. HE DIDN'T WE DIDN'T SEE THE REVENUES THAT THAT OFFSET THAT BECAUSE THAT WAS A BOND SALE THERE IN THE IN 22 OR 23 THERE. SO YOU WE'D BE HAPPY TO TO SHOW YOU THOSE OVER TIME AND SHOW YOU HOW THE FUND BALANCE HAS GROWN OVER TIME. MARK, WHAT HAVE BEEN, I GUESS THE BIG COMMITMENTS THAT WE'VE MADE OUT OF CITY HALL BEING A BIG ONE, CITY HALL IS. THAT'S THE DEBT SERVICE ON CITY HALL, WHICH IS ABOUT $1 MILLION A YEAR. IT WAS A IT WAS ABOUT A $16 MILLION OVERALL NOTE AGAINST AGAINST THE PROPERTY. THE THE OTHER ONE REALLY IS, IS THE COMMITMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE TO, TO PROJECT VENUE THAT THAT WOULD BE ONE OF THE MAJOR ONES THAT I WOULD POINT OUT. ALSO PARKING GARAGE BACK WAS IT 7 OR 8 YEARS AGO THAT THAT WE DID DOWNTOWN WAS ALSO ANOTHER BIG EXPENSE OUT OF THE TOURS. AND IF WE LOOK AT. FORGIVE ME FOR INTERRUPTING, MARK, BUT IF WE LOOK AT FIRE SUPPRESSION IN TOTALITY, THAT'S A PRETTY BIG TICKET ITEM. YES. AND, YOU KNOW, I'VE SEEN DIFFERING NUMBERS ON THAT. I KNOW WHAT I'M PLANNING FOR OVER THE NEXT THE LIFE OF THAT. I WOULD SAY THAT IT'S, YOU KNOW, BETWEEN OR PLANNING FOR ABOUT A $5 MILLION EXPENDITURE OVER FIVE YEAR TIME. SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S ALL GOING TO HIT AT ONCE, RIGHT? BUT IN TERMS OF WE, WE, WE'VE COMMITTED SOMETHING LIKE $22 
          [00:15:02]
MILLION FOR VENUE OUT OF TOURS, THAT THAT WOULD BE PRETTY CLOSE. I KNOW THAT I HAVE $3 MILLION A YEAR FOR THE NEXT SIX YEARS. AND THEN THE UPFRONT, THE INFRASTRUCTURE STUFF, YOU HAD THAT ON THE FRONT END OF THE, OF THE. AND THEN. 12 SOME ODD TO CITY HALL. SO I MEAN, THAT WAS A 16 MILLION TO, TO CITY HALL PROJECT. AND I GUESS THE, THE KIND OF PARAMETERS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING AROUND IS, IS THE EXPENSE OF ABOUT $1.5 MILLION OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS ON THREE KIND OF ODD PROJECTS THAT CAME TO US WHEN WE'RE I MEAN, COMPARATIVELY, WE'RE WE'RE 5% OF WHAT WE'VE SPENT ON THOSE TWO THINGS. YEAH. I'LL BE REAL HONEST. I'VE KEPT MY EYE ON THE LARGER PROJECT BALL ON THIS ONE. BUT YES, I HAVE SEEN SOME OF THE OTHER EXPENDITURES THAT, THAT HAVE BEEN MADE BY THE, BY THE BOARD. YEAH, YEAH. OKAY. YEAH. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WAS GOING TO BRING UP, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HAD ASKED. CITY MANAGER GRIMES ABOUT, WHICH WAS, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT ARE THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE TOURS? YOU KNOW, AS WE BECOME MORE SUCCESSFUL AND WE GENERATE MORE PROJECTS AND, YOU KNOW, THE, YOU KNOW, SAY THE VENUE TURNS OUT FANTASTIC, THERE'S GOING TO BE ADDITIONAL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT THAT'S ENCUMBERED BY THE ENTIRE CITY AND NOT JUST IN THE TOURS. I MEAN, IT'S ACTUALLY INVISIBLE TO THE TOURS BECAUSE ALL THE NEW GROWTH THAT HAPPENS INSIDE THE TOURS ATTRIBUTES BACK INTO THE TOURS. SO POLICE AND FIRE, WHILE THAT MIGHT INCREASE FOR THE TOURS AREA, IT'S PAID FOR BY THE GENERAL FUND, WHICH IS OUTSIDE BOTH TOURS ONE AND TOURS TWO. 
          SO NOT ONLY IS IT THE INFORMATION THAT HE SENT BACK ON THE EMAIL TO US RECENTLY ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE BASE AMOUNT HAVING SHRUNK IN THE DOLLAR AMOUNT THAT'S ALLOCATED TO THE GENERAL FUND, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY WE'RE ACTUALLY DELIVERING PROJECTS INSIDE THE TOURS, WHICH IS DOING ITS JOB TO REINVEST, BUT THERE'S INCREASED COSTS THAT I BELIEVE THE TOURS SHOULD BE ALLOCATING BACK OVER TO THE GENERAL FUND. OTHERWISE, IT'S BEING PUT ON THE BACKS OF THE CITIZENS OUTSIDE THE TOURS BECAUSE THERE'S NO I MEAN, THERE'S TWO WAYS TO SOLVE THAT. EITHER WE PROPORTIONATELY PAY IT OUT OR WE ACTUALLY LOWER THE PERCENTAGE OF THE TOURS. YOU KNOW, BOTH ARE WAYS TO HAVE THE SUCCESS OF THE TOURS BENEFIT THE REST OF THE CITIZENS OF MCKINNEY, I WOULD SAY. AND HISTORICALLY, THE THE GENERAL FUND HAS NOT ASKED FOR FOR ANY OF THAT TYPE OF SUBSIDY, BUT I CAN I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND AND JUST, YOU KNOW, PUT PUT MY CARDS ON THE TABLE FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR THAT'S GOING TO BE UPCOMING, NOT FOR TOURS ONE, BUT FOR TOURS TWO, WHICH WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW, BUT WE WILL BE ASKING FOR POLICE AND FIRE COSTS THAT ARE GOING TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH THE AIRPORT, WHICH IS THE TOURS TO, TO, TO BE BE PAID FOR OUT OF TOURS TO THE, THE ADDITIONAL COST, THE COST OF THAT PROJECT. SO AND THAT MAKES SENSE. I MEAN, THAT'S A PROJECT THAT'S COMING TO FRUITION. IT'S IN PLACE. EVERYONE SEES THE VENUE STILL BEING BUILT. SO THE ADDITIONAL POLICE PRESENCE DOESN'T. IT'S IT'S NOT AS LARGE AS IT MIGHT BE, YOU KNOW, TWO YEARS FROM NOW. AND, YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS MAKING THE POLICY FOR, FOR THIS BOARD OR FOR THE CITY COUNCIL, IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO PURSUE, WE WANT TO LOOK AT AS WE ADD SOME OF THESE LARGER PROJECTS, IF TOURS ONE, YOU KNOW, WANTS TO DO THAT, WE CAN CERTAINLY MAKE THOSE COSTS, TRY TO TRACK SOME OF THOSE COSTS AND MAKE THOSE AVAILABLE TO YOU. THEN YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE THOSE CHOICES. THE ONLY REASON I BROUGHT UP THAT QUESTION IS BECAUSE I PARTICIPATE IN PROBABLY A HALF DOZEN OTHER TOURS AROUND THE COUNTY, AND I SEE WHERE SOME OF THE OTHER TOURS ARE BECOMING HIGHLY SUCCESSFUL AND ARE BRINGING IN A LARGER PERCENTAGE OF THE REVENUE OF THE CITY FOR ALL NEW REVENUE. IT'S ALMOST SOMETHING YOU HAVE TO DO, BECAUSE OTHERWISE IT PUTS THE WEIGHT ONTO THE BACKS OF THE CITIZENS OUTSIDE THE TOURS. AND, AND, YOU KNOW, AS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, IT WAS MENTIONED BEFORE, THIS TOURS IS NOW ONE OF THOSE TOURS THAT'S BECOME FAIRLY SUCCESSFUL. AND NOW THERE ARE A LOT OF, OF DRAWS AGAINST THIS TOURS THAT, THAT HAVEN'T, YOU KNOW, BEEN THERE HISTORICALLY BECAUSE IT IS, IT HAS BECOME, YOU KNOW, FAIRLY SUCCESSFUL OVER THE LAST FIVE FISCAL YEARS. AND IF WE MAKE AN ALLOCATION FROM THE TOURS TO PAY FOR ITS SHARE OF ADDITIONAL POLICE AND FIRE PUBLIC SAFETY, WHICH IS CALL IT 50% OF WHAT IT BRINGS IN, AND THEN WE SAY, YOU KNOW, ANOTHER 20% ON PUBLIC WORKS AND THE STUFF. WHAT'S THE POINT OF HAVING A TOURS THAT, YOU KNOW, AND I'M NOT DISAGREEING WITH WITH THAT EITHER. I'M JUST TELLING YOU THAT'S, THAT'S A POSSIBILITY THAT, THAT SOME PEOPLE HAVE HAVE GONE AND LOOKED AT. WE HAVE NOT FOR TOURS ONE, BUT FOR TOURS. TWO, WITH THE DIRECT COST OF THE AIRPORT. THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS WE WILL WILL BE ASKING FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR. IT'S SOMETHING YOU CAN CONSIDER, BUT IT'S JUST SOMETHING WE HAVE NOT IN THE PAST. AND THAT'S SOME OF THE PROBLEMS YOU GET INTO WITH HAVING IT BE 100% TOURS. AND IT 
          [00:20:01]
ALSO IS 100% OF THE SALES TAX AS WELL. SO YOU GET HIT ON BOTH ENDS, WHEREAS IF IT WAS A LESSER PERCENTAGE ON ONE OR BOTH OF THEM, THEN THE TOURS STILL CONTINUES TO GROW. BUT YOU'RE GROWING TO WHERE THE CITY, THE CITY AT LARGE BENEFITS AS WELL AS THE TOURS BENEFITING. SO IT IT'S JUST A COUPLE DIFFERENT SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT. HOW DO YOU ACCOUNT FOR IT? IT'S KIND OF SIX ONE HALF DOZEN ANOTHER. YOU KNOW, TO ADD ONE MORE POINT TO YOU HAD ASKED THE QUESTION ON, YOU KNOW, PRIORITY PROJECTS. I THINK IT WOULD BE SMART TO START SETTING ASIDE MONEY FOR DIFFERENT, DIFFERENT PROJECTS TO ACTUALLY LIKE, BUDGET IT OUT AND GO AHEAD AND APPROPRIATE IT, SO TO SPEAK, AND ALMOST EVEN SEND IT TO DIFFERENT ACCOUNTS TO PULL IT OUT TO WHERE IT'S NOT AVAILABLE. OTHERWISE, AT ANY GIVEN MEETING, WE COULD TURN AROUND AND VOTE AND OVER, YOU KNOW, BLOW OUT THE BUDGET FOR THAT PARTICULAR YEAR ON ANY PARTICULAR PROJECT. I HAVE A QUESTION. COULD YOU ON THIS SLIDE RIGHT HERE, COULD YOU GO OVER SOME OF THE OTHER PROJECT TYPES AND EXPENDITURES THAT HAVE NO MATCH AND NO CAP WHAT YOU HAVE? YES. LET ME PULL THAT UP RIGHT HERE. SO IN THE POLICY WE HAVE CATALYST PROJECTS. 
          THAT'S ONE OF THE PROJECT TYPES THAT DOES NOT HAVE ANY CAPS OR MATCH REQUIREMENTS. AND THEN WE HAVE VACANT UNDERUTILIZED, WHICH ALL OF THESE FALL UNDER. WE HAVE MIXED INCOME HOUSING IS ANOTHER PROJECT TYPE INNOVATION AND PILOT PROJECTS, WHICH WE CAME FOR FUNDING FOR THE DOWNTOWN PARKING MANAGEMENT PILOT. AND THEN WE HAVE DISTRICT ENHANCEMENT PROJECTS. 
          SO THOSE ARE THE OTHER PROJECT TYPES OUTSIDE OF VACANT UNDERUTILIZED THAT ARE WITHIN THE OVERALL TOURS PROJECT PLAN, BUT DON'T HAVE ANY FUNDING CAPS IN ANY EXPENDITURES UNDER THOSE CATEGORIES. THEN SAY THAT AGAIN, ANY EXPENDITURES UNDER THOSE CATEGORIES, THE ONLY EXPENDITURES WE HAVE OUT OF THOSE CATEGORIES ARE THE DOWNTOWN PARKING MANAGEMENT PILOT FOR THE PILOT INNOVATIVE. AND THEN EVERYTHING ELSE IS FALL UNDER THE CATALYST PROJECTS CATEGORY. THANK YOU. LUCAS. YEP. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I'LL JUST SAY I LIKE THE IDEA OF US COMING UP WITH SOME ALLOCATIONS FOR SOME PROJECTS THAT WE EITHER FEEL ARE COMING. 
          AND I'LL SAY THAT WITH THE PARKING GARAGE, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT DESIGNED AND QUANTIFIED YET. 
          AND FOR THE FIRE SUPPRESSION AND BEING ABLE TO PARTITION THOSE WHEN WE COMMUNICATE WITH THIS BOARD ABOUT, YOU KNOW, OVER AND ABOVE THE COMMITMENTS YOU'VE MADE, HERE'S WHAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION QUESTIONS? WHAT IS IT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR THAT EXACTLY THE DISCUSSION THAT YOU'VE JUST HAD. RIGHT. AND SO I'VE HEARD NOW FROM TWO MEMBERS THAT YOU WOULD BE INTERESTED IN SEEING WHAT A POLICY WOULD LOOK LIKE TO HAVE AN ALLOCATION FOR SOME OF THESE ANTICIPATED LARGER PROJECTS. IF THAT'S THE DIRECTION OF THE BOARD, THAT'S WHAT WE CAN DO AS STAFF IS GO BACK TO THIS POLICY. I WOULD ASK THAT YOU TABLE THE REQUEST TO ADOPT IT AS WRITTEN HERE. WE CAN TABLE IT THIS EVENING. WE CAN GO BACK AS STAFF AND LOOK AT THE POLICY, GET WITH HOLLOWAY ON SOME EXPECTED COSTS FOR SOME OF THOSE PROJECTS, AND THEN WE CAN BRING THAT BACK FOR A FOLLOW UP DISCUSSION ON HOW WE COULD SEE THAT PLAYING OUT IN AN UPDATED POLICY AND GUIDELINE DOCUMENT. SOUNDS GOOD AS AS PART OF LOOKING AT POTENTIALLY EARMARKING SOME THINGS, CAN YOU LOOK AT WHAT, YOU KNOW, AN EARMARK OR AN APPROPRIATION WOULD BE FOR SOME KIND OF PROPORTIONALITY OF COSTS FOR, YOU KNOW, POLICE AND FIRE INSIDE THE TOURS RELATIVE TO OUTSIDE THE TOURS, YOU KNOW, SAY IF IT'S $100 MILLION CITY WIDE FOR, YOU KNOW, POLICE AND FIRE, IF IT'S, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT'S THE COST OF, OF THAT THAT IS INSIDE THE AREA? ABSOLUTELY. YEAH, WE CAN DO THAT RESEARCH AS WELL. SO, I MEAN, IN THAT CASE ARE THE ONLY THING WE'RE GOING TO CAPTURE IS PARKS DOLLARS TO KEEP FROM THE GENERAL FUND. LIKE WHAT ARE WE DOING IF 50% OF OUR BUDGET DOESN'T GO GO INTO THE TOURS? THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. AND AGAIN, IT'S A POLICY DECISION. IF THE DIRECTION IS FOR US TO RESEARCH AND SEE WHAT THAT ALLOCATION WOULD BE SO THAT Y'ALL CAN MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION, WE'D BE HAPPY TO DO SO. ABOUT 50% OF OUR GENERAL BUDGET, IT IS 50% GENERAL. 
          LET'S JUST CALL IT IF IT'S IF WE'RE MAKING 6 MILLION A YEAR, THEN CALL IT $3 MILLION THAT WE GIVE BACK TO THE GENERAL FUND. YEAH. SO, I MEAN, I KNOW WHAT THE NUMBER IS. I DON'T WANT TO 
          [00:25:06]
DO IT. I'LL MAKE AN OVERARCHING STATEMENT HERE. AND THIS ISN'T TO YOU, LUCAS. YOU'RE JUST STANDING THERE. THIS EVERYBODY ELSE ON THE TOURS BOARD. EVERYBODY UP HERE INHERITED THIS TOURS BOARD, RIGHT? THIS WAS STARTED IN 2010. WE WEREN'T AROUND. AND IT HAS A JOB TO DO THAT'S GOING TO LAST FOR A COUPLE MORE DECADES. PLUS I THINK WHAT DO WE WANT THIS TO HAVE LOOKED LIKE WHEN THIS IS DONE? WHAT DO WE WANT IT TO LOOK LIKE WHEN WE HAND IT OVER THE NEXT COUNCIL? AND THAT'S A QUESTION WE ALL HAVE TO ANSWER INDIVIDUALLY. BUT I WILL CERTAINLY SAY I WANT TO SEE A PARKING GARAGE DOWNTOWN, AND I WANT TO SEE FIRE SUPPRESSION DOWNTOWN, WHICH WHICH PROTECTS THE CROWN JEWEL OF THIS THING TO THE EXTENT THAT WE CAN, YOU KNOW, MOVE THE BALL FORWARD A LITTLE BIT AND SAY, HEY, IF WE DID CARVE THESE THINGS OUT, WHAT DOES THIS LEAVE US WITH? IT PUTS US IN A POSITION TO REALLY CRITICALLY THINK EACH TIME WE'RE MAKING AN AWARD. AND I THINK THAT'S A THAT'S A VALUABLE WAY TO GRIND ON THIS. 
          IF WE CAN DO THAT, I'LL JUST LEAVE IT FOR EVERYBODY ELSE UP HERE TO AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THAT. I MEAN, IF WE'RE MAKING KIND OF BIG PICTURE STATEMENTS, I THINK THE, YOU KNOW, 2005, WHAT WAS IT THAT WE DID A MCKINNEY TOWN CENTER STUDY THAT LOOKED AT WHAT CAN DOWNTOWN BE? WHAT CAN THE COTTON MILL DISTRICT BE? WHAT CAN THE HIGHWAY FIVE CORRIDOR LOOK LIKE? AND THIS WAS THE TOOL THAT WAS IMPLEMENTED TO BRING THAT ABOUT. AND SO WHILE THAT HAS SEEN IMMENSE SUCCESS IN DOWNTOWN, I THINK THAT WE HAVE KIND OF WE HAVE LOTS OF OPPORTUNITIES IN OTHER PARTS OF THIS DISTRICT THAT THAT WE NEED TO BRING ABOUT CONTINUED EFFORTS TO, TO LIFT UNDERUTILIZED PROPERTIES OUT OF THEIR CURRENT STATE THAT WE HAVE TRANSPORTATION EFFORTS THAT CAN GO THROUGH WITH, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, REIMAGINING HIGHWAY FIVE AS NOT A, A, A FAST THOROUGHFARE THROUGH THIS CORRIDOR, BUT A NEIGHBORHOOD THING. I THINK THAT THERE ARE BIGGER THINGS THAN, YOU KNOW, THE TWO THAT THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. BUT, BUT I THINK IF WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, ALLOCATING TO THE GENERAL FUND WHAT WE CAN, THEN I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH ANY OF THOSE THINGS. SO BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT I SAID, JUST TO BE SURE. OKAY. SO BUT I MEAN, I DO THINK THAT I LOOK AT THE ENTIRE HIGHWAY FIVE CORRIDOR, I LOOK AT THE MAP OF THE TER ZONE. AND I THINK THAT THERE ARE LOTS OF POSSIBILITIES THAT WE HAVE NOT EVEN BEGUN TO UTILIZE THIS FOR, AND BRINGING ABOUT DEVELOPMENT AND USES IN THAT CORRIDOR THAT THAT MAKE THE CITY A BETTER PLACE IS WHAT THE TOURS WAS DESIGNED TO DO. 
          AND FINDING WAYS TO DO THAT, YOU KNOW, IS WHAT WE SHOULD BE DOING OVER THE NEXT 20 YEARS. 
          WELL, AND YOU ACTUALLY DO GET FREE MONEY FOR THIS, NOT FREE, BUT YOU GET ADDITIONAL MONIES THAT YOU WOULDN'T HAVE NORMALLY COMING THROUGH THE TOURS BECAUSE YOU DO GET 50% OF THE THE COUNTY CONTRIBUTION. SO YOU ARE GETTING SOME OF WHICH IS TRANSPORTATION DEDICATED. AND I THINK WE'VE GOT A LOT OF HIGHWAY. I MEAN, ONCE THE STATE DOES HIGHWAY FIVE, I THINK WE GOT A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE CAN GO BACK AND KIND OF FEED INTO. HOW DO WE MAKE THAT BETTER? PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS AND YEAH, THOSE SORTS OF THINGS THAT WE NEED TO BE LOOKING AT HOW TO SPEND THE COUNTY'S DOLLARS IN HERE. BUT I MEAN, TO ME, WE DID A TOWN CENTER STUDY THAT ENVISIONED WHAT DOWNTOWN AND WHAT THE HIGHWAY FIVE CORRIDOR SHOULD LOOK LIKE. THIS WAS THE TOOL THAT ENABLED US TO DO THAT, AND WE HAVE USED IT WELL IN DOWNTOWN. WE'VE USED IT WELL IN THIS EAST OF EAST OF FIVE REDEVELOPMENT. I THINK WE NEED TO WE USED IT WELL AT SOUTHGATE, AT THE AT THE VENUE. I THINK WE NEED TO USE IT WELL EVERYWHERE IN BETWEEN. SO. OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? DO WE NEED A MOTION. YEAH. I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION. THAT WE TABLED. ITEM SECOND, I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILWOMAN FELTUS SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BELLER. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. I'LL MAKE A MOTION. WE ADJOURN SECOND. SECOND MOTION BY COUNCILMAN BELLER, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN JONES TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. EVERYBODY IN FAVOR, S
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.