WEBVTT 00:00:00.450 --> 00:00:09.749 - So we will begin the October 20th, 2026 Economic Development Commission meeting. And this meeting has 00:00:09.749 --> 00:00:19.138 - been posted in accordance with Indiana Open Door laws. And it's about 4.02 in the afternoon, the first 00:00:19.138 --> 00:00:28.711 - order of businesses roll call. And I will turn to my right. Liz Vidal. And to my left. Vanessa McCleary. 00:00:28.711 --> 00:00:30.078 - And Kurt Zorn. 00:00:31.266 --> 00:00:39.090 - And the second order of business is approval of minutes. And we don't have minutes this meeting, so 00:00:39.090 --> 00:00:47.071 - I think we've accumulated a backlog, and I'll look to clear that in the next. We only have two months 00:00:47.071 --> 00:00:55.208 - left this year, so we'll deal with that. So the next order of business is Seminary Park area abatement. 00:00:55.208 --> 00:00:59.902 - And I know something about this, but Jane, you want to give 00:01:00.514 --> 00:01:12.656 - us the in-depth discussion? Yes, I'm just going to verify that the right, I'm going to stop and reshare 00:01:12.656 --> 00:01:25.032 - to make sure the public is seeing the tab that I want them to see. Okay. Yes, this memo is doing a couple 00:01:25.032 --> 00:01:27.134 - of things. First, 00:01:27.906 --> 00:01:36.181 - kind of describes the condition, what's happening with our properties around in the area surrounding 00:01:36.181 --> 00:01:44.784 - and south of Seminary Park. There's been some reduction in value based on appeals through the assessor's 00:01:44.784 --> 00:01:53.059 - office. And then it also enumerates the different strategies and incentives that are in place around 00:01:53.059 --> 00:01:56.254 - this area. So maybe what I could do is 00:01:56.834 --> 00:02:04.658 - walk through the memo, but keep it kind of high level. And then we can dive into detail wherever that's 00:02:04.658 --> 00:02:12.180 - desired. Our assessor, Judy Sharp, was going to attend the meeting today, but she may not have been 00:02:12.180 --> 00:02:19.853 - available. But I thought that her voice would be important since she's the one hearing appeals. She's 00:02:19.853 --> 00:02:26.398 - talking to all the property owners. So she's been engaged with this. And that's where, 00:02:26.978 --> 00:02:37.407 - I became familiar with this because Jane and Judy and I met. I'm on the Property Tax Assessment Board 00:02:37.407 --> 00:02:47.937 - of Appeals now, so I know Judy's been talking quite a bit about the concerns that property owners have 00:02:47.937 --> 00:02:54.174 - in the Seminary Park area and further south. Yes, and so the 00:02:54.882 --> 00:03:02.151 - You know, the work of the Economic Development Commission largely is to deploy incentives to drive growth 00:03:02.151 --> 00:03:09.214 - in the community where we need it. And we know that there's been, again, a reduction in property value 00:03:09.214 --> 00:03:16.140 - here. So the question kind of arises, what tools are available? What can we do to incent development 00:03:16.140 --> 00:03:18.814 - and turnover of some of these parcels? 00:03:20.866 --> 00:03:28.466 - It is a critical gateway area. So if we think about development in Bloomington overall, we've got downtown 00:03:28.466 --> 00:03:35.924 - happening. Hopewell is in the works. We've had some nice redevelopment along the beeline south of Morton 00:03:35.924 --> 00:03:43.168 - Street. Kroger's made significant investments in their store. And then, of course, Switchyard Park is 00:03:43.168 --> 00:03:47.998 - a huge investment. But there's really a gap in terms of development 00:03:48.226 --> 00:03:55.862 - between the areas south of First Street and to Grimes Street. So this area is not developing for a number 00:03:55.862 --> 00:04:03.497 - of reasons. The primary reason is that a lot of these parcels are in the floodplain. They're technically, 00:04:03.497 --> 00:04:10.772 - hey Tim. Hi, it's Raleigh. You're good. We're just walking through this memo, kind of high level. So 00:04:10.772 --> 00:04:14.302 - a lot of these parcels are in the floodplain and 00:04:14.818 --> 00:04:21.019 - That means that it's difficult to get insurance. And of course, you're assuming a lot of risk if you 00:04:21.019 --> 00:04:27.219 - try to build anything there. And so is that a good idea? Well, probably not. And that's why no one's 00:04:27.219 --> 00:04:33.420 - been building anything there. CBU this year has commissioned a feasibility study for the Clear Creek 00:04:33.420 --> 00:04:39.621 - Corridor Renewal Project that has the end goal of increasing stormwater capacity and ultimately down 00:04:39.621 --> 00:04:43.550 - the road, removing as many of those parcels from the floodplain 00:04:43.874 --> 00:04:51.392 - as possible. The first part is increasing stormwater capacity. That's the primary goal, right? It's 00:04:51.392 --> 00:04:58.909 - to address. We built increased capacity downtown. We had that horrible flood in what must have been 00:04:58.909 --> 00:05:06.427 - 2021. And then we increased capacity downtown to eliminate that. But now it's all coming downstream 00:05:06.427 --> 00:05:11.614 - down here. So now we need to really address it here in a way that is 00:05:11.746 --> 00:05:19.405 - sustainable and will be manageable. The secondary impact of that would be hopefully pulling some of 00:05:19.405 --> 00:05:27.448 - these parcels out of the floodplain. We just don't know what the outcome will be yet, but that's a goal. 00:05:27.448 --> 00:05:35.337 - Sorry, I'm gonna read this one so I can face you guys when I'm chatting with you. And then a secondary 00:05:35.337 --> 00:05:41.694 - kind of driver of the, or another driver of kind of the challenges in redeveloping 00:05:41.794 --> 00:05:49.161 - developing this area, we have a lot of unhoused impacts. And just framing this, I'm not assigning value 00:05:49.161 --> 00:05:56.387 - to that. I'm just saying this is a direct impact. So really the presence of beacons day shelter there 00:05:56.387 --> 00:06:03.967 - causes just a ton of activity. And then there's a lot of daytime activity in the park. And we've obviously 00:06:03.967 --> 00:06:09.918 - seen that the post office has erected their fence, which isn't a really great sign. 00:06:10.146 --> 00:06:16.205 - Um, and then there are a lot of behaviors there that are challenging. Um, many of you probably saw that 00:06:16.205 --> 00:06:22.205 - there was a significant drug bust there a few weeks ago, but this just isn't the kind of, um, activity 00:06:22.205 --> 00:06:28.089 - that really attracts, um, you know, businesses or so it's, yeah, people, it's just been challenging. 00:06:28.089 --> 00:06:34.147 - It's not like you don't want to stroll through the park if you're not sure if there's a drug deal going 00:06:34.147 --> 00:06:39.390 - down. Um, so the city's done a number of things to kind of try to mitigate this. The big. 00:06:39.778 --> 00:06:47.556 - The big effort is really the city's partnership with Heading Home, and they are going through the process 00:06:47.556 --> 00:06:54.967 - of the Streets to Stability program to comply with, I think it's how, yeah, Senate Enrolled Act 285. 00:06:54.967 --> 00:07:02.745 - So that's the state Senate Enrolled Act that closes the state to sleeping outside. So that is in process, 00:07:02.745 --> 00:07:08.542 - and the downtown zone is now officially closed. So I think that this will also 00:07:09.186 --> 00:07:16.336 - take time, and it'll be longer than any of us want. But the goal is for people to be. I think the downtown 00:07:16.336 --> 00:07:23.152 - zone was in four sections, as I remember. So they've done one, as I remember. They've done one, yeah. 00:07:23.152 --> 00:07:30.035 - So the goal of this program is to get people housed. It's very much the Bloomington way, where they're 00:07:30.035 --> 00:07:36.718 - getting apartments for 12 months and counseling and support to make sure that, with the end of that 00:07:36.718 --> 00:07:37.854 - 12-month runway, 00:07:38.338 --> 00:07:44.325 - residents aren't just kicked back out onto the street, but that they're really teed up to be in a more 00:07:44.325 --> 00:07:50.253 - stable position. Not to go too far into that, but that's just to say that the big investment from the 00:07:50.253 --> 00:07:56.123 - city is really in heading home. We made those investments with ARPA funding and that, when that came 00:07:56.123 --> 00:08:02.343 - out in 2021 and 2022. Um, and then on the smaller level out of this department, we're funding the seminary 00:08:02.343 --> 00:08:07.806 - park portalette, which has been really important for the businesses in the area. They've, um, 00:08:08.002 --> 00:08:15.856 - been cleaning up a lot of human waste. So that started last year. And then we also fund the small business 00:08:15.856 --> 00:08:23.491 - safety, security, and cleanliness grants, which gives businesses funds to like if a window gets smashed 00:08:23.491 --> 00:08:30.905 - or they need to invest in cameras, whatever, lighting, anything related to that, they're able to get 00:08:30.905 --> 00:08:34.942 - some small dollar grants for that. And then unrelated, 00:08:35.362 --> 00:08:41.700 - to the city's efforts, Beacon has always been planning to move. And they recently announced that they're 00:08:41.700 --> 00:08:48.099 - going to go ahead and begin phase one of their move, which is for the permanent supportive housing units. 00:08:48.099 --> 00:08:54.377 - So the day shelter will stay in place, but Beacon is going to start their project. I don't have details 00:08:54.377 --> 00:09:00.534 - on the remaining gap. Well, I guess it's $4 million, but I don't have a lot of detail about that. The 00:09:00.534 --> 00:09:02.526 - county allocated a million. Yes. 00:09:02.722 --> 00:09:10.088 - So maybe it's down to three. I know it's down to three. It could be less, but I know it's down to three. 00:09:10.088 --> 00:09:17.804 - That's great. Thank you. And then the next issue, let me scroll down. The next issue that's really preventing 00:09:17.804 --> 00:09:24.398 - this area from redeveloping is the limited compliance requirements with the UDO. So these are 00:09:24.398 --> 00:09:30.782 - the requirements that are triggered when a property has been vacant for 12 months or more. 00:09:31.298 --> 00:09:37.631 - It basically means that the property is treated. It's still limited compliance. Like they're not having 00:09:37.631 --> 00:09:43.964 - to do everything, but they're having to bear a really significant burden with parking lot updates, tree 00:09:43.964 --> 00:09:50.174 - replacement, all kinds of things pop up for this. So in response to that, the planning department has 00:09:50.174 --> 00:09:56.690 - proposed changes to the UDO. They were approved by the plan commission and then were heard by city council 00:09:56.690 --> 00:09:58.334 - last week. And actually I, 00:09:59.874 --> 00:10:07.296 - don't know the status of that and he's not here. I've been trying to find out too. I don't think it 00:10:07.296 --> 00:10:15.312 - was maybe I think it was the first reading. So just a real quick. Yeah. So it should go back this Wednesday 00:10:15.312 --> 00:10:22.735 - and I can share an update on that when I'm back in the office tomorrow. So this helps. So basically 00:10:22.735 --> 00:10:29.118 - it adjusts several regulations that trigger site improvements on a property and would 00:10:29.730 --> 00:10:35.169 - adjust the items required to bring a property into compliance. The proposed amendments do three things. 00:10:35.169 --> 00:10:40.452 - They adjust the activities that trigger the UDO's full or limited compliance. They reduce the burden 00:10:40.452 --> 00:10:45.891 - of improvements, so they narrow the scope of improvements that are required when compliance regulations 00:10:45.891 --> 00:10:51.226 - are triggered. And then finally, they remove the requirement that an entire developed site be brought 00:10:51.226 --> 00:10:56.614 - up to current code when only a portion of it is to be improved or altered. So if you're only improving 00:10:56.614 --> 00:10:58.078 - or altering part of a site, 00:10:58.210 --> 00:11:06.620 - You're only required to bring that part of it up to code. So these are proposed. It's not approved yet. 00:11:06.620 --> 00:11:14.707 - But those are kind of the key strategies that the city is implementing to adjust the current state. 00:11:14.707 --> 00:11:23.198 - And then in terms of impacts on property value, Kurt might be able to say more about this. But the total 00:11:23.198 --> 00:11:27.646 - reduction in property tax revenue based on the appeals 00:11:28.930 --> 00:11:38.281 - I didn't give a year, but I think this is so far this year is $347,131. So the total reduction in AV 00:11:38.281 --> 00:11:47.540 - is almost $17 million. So that's a hit. We feel that as a community. So we talked about the current 00:11:47.540 --> 00:11:57.447 - state, why things aren't developing here, the reduction in property value, and then the existing financial 00:11:57.447 --> 00:11:58.558 - incentives. 00:11:58.690 --> 00:12:06.954 - We just had a big win with getting opportunity zone approval. This is a complicated incentive. Developers, 00:12:06.954 --> 00:12:14.908 - especially out of town developers who have access to opportunity funds will know how to deploy it. But 00:12:14.908 --> 00:12:22.786 - we're working on the city side to build a website that will promote our opportunity zones. It's a two 00:12:22.786 --> 00:12:27.806 - step incentive that if a fund is established, then that fund can 00:12:27.906 --> 00:12:36.527 - invest in a qualified opportunity zone and that fund can receive 10 years of protections from capital 00:12:36.527 --> 00:12:44.979 - gains tax. So they have to park their money in that zone that is highly distressed census tract for 00:12:44.979 --> 00:12:53.600 - 10 years. So it's a federal incentive that really seeks to drive private dollars into places of need. 00:12:53.600 --> 00:12:57.150 - And I think it's been somewhat successful 00:12:57.378 --> 00:13:04.688 - Last year it was made permanent, so that's why it's been such a big to-do when they announced the new 00:13:04.688 --> 00:13:11.497 - opportunity zones. These zones will be 10 years. The zones will live 10 years and then they'll 00:13:11.497 --> 00:13:18.950 - get reevaluated. But the program will be permanent. So that's a big one. The enterprise zone investment 00:13:18.950 --> 00:13:24.254 - deduction is eligible in this area. So this is basically an 80% buy right 00:13:24.802 --> 00:13:32.512 - personal property abatement, that's what it acts like within this footprint. It's not officially an 00:13:32.512 --> 00:13:40.299 - abatement though, it's completely through the enterprise association and that's why these deductions 00:13:40.299 --> 00:13:48.009 - don't come through to EDC. You guys don't evaluate these, these are by right. They technically have 00:13:48.009 --> 00:13:53.406 - a personal property program, but it's not applicable when it's in the 00:13:53.858 --> 00:14:01.693 - footprint of a TIF district. So if there's an enterprise zone and a TIF, then the TIF trumps the enterprise 00:14:01.693 --> 00:14:09.239 - zone. So you can't claim that real property deduction in the TIF, but you can still claim your personal 00:14:09.239 --> 00:14:16.711 - property deduction in the TIF. And just for the public or anyone who's super excited about this topic, 00:14:16.711 --> 00:14:22.878 - the personal property is anything that you use in your business to generate revenue. 00:14:23.202 --> 00:14:31.559 - a restaurant that would be all of your kitchen equipment and any of your wares. So it's huge for companies 00:14:31.559 --> 00:14:39.759 - like Novo. It's modest for companies like whatever restaurants and grocery stores, but still meaningful. 00:14:39.759 --> 00:14:47.648 - And then... Jane, I'm sorry, I missed your first couple sentences, but this program is only personal 00:14:47.648 --> 00:14:51.006 - governing, not... Yes, personal, not real. 00:14:54.594 --> 00:15:01.715 - And then there's a ton of grant funding, or not a ton, I'm sorry, that's not specific. There is grant 00:15:01.715 --> 00:15:08.836 - funding available for this area also through the Enterprise Association. So the BUBA, the Bloomington 00:15:08.836 --> 00:15:16.027 - Urban Enterprise Association, they approve these deductions. The deductions are for 100% for 10 years. 00:15:16.027 --> 00:15:23.288 - But in order for the business or property owner to participate, they have to remit a 20% fee. So that's 00:15:23.288 --> 00:15:24.126 - why I said, 00:15:24.290 --> 00:15:31.665 - it's like an 80% abatement. So the Enterprise Association collects those 20% fees, and then they dole 00:15:31.665 --> 00:15:38.462 - those out for business grant making, arts, whatever. That's where they get their budget from. 00:15:38.462 --> 00:15:46.054 - So in this area, the relevant grants would be the Business Building Improvement Grant, which is $10,000, 00:15:46.054 --> 00:15:53.502 - Minor Improvement Grant, which is $1,000, the Small Business Safety and Security, which is 10,000 max, 00:15:53.602 --> 00:16:00.052 - There's an accessibility modification grant. So this one's really important. If you are required to 00:16:00.052 --> 00:16:06.759 - upgrade your property through that limited compliance requirement, then you could get access to funding 00:16:06.759 --> 00:16:13.209 - to improve your sidewalks or make your front door handicap ADA accessible. And then there's also an 00:16:13.209 --> 00:16:20.304 - historic facade preservation grant, but that's not relevant here because I don't think we have any qualifying 00:16:20.304 --> 00:16:22.174 - properties. So these grants, 00:16:22.466 --> 00:16:28.542 - would be tiny for a real estate developer. A real estate developer is not going to care about them, 00:16:28.542 --> 00:16:34.861 - but a business operator is really going to care about them. So we're kind of operating at two different 00:16:34.861 --> 00:16:40.998 - levels. The opportunity zone is really going to be for real estate developers. All the BUBA stuff is 00:16:40.998 --> 00:16:47.256 - going to be for smaller players, the operators. And then the last thing, this area is currently in the 00:16:47.256 --> 00:16:48.350 - consolidated TIF. 00:16:50.114 --> 00:16:57.157 - And that's managed, of course, by the Redevelopment Commission. Their charge is to facilitate economic 00:16:57.157 --> 00:17:04.199 - development through disposition of real estate and investment in infrastructure, primarily. That's not 00:17:04.199 --> 00:17:11.242 - a quote. That's me summarizing. There are no discussions for the RDC to make investments in this area, 00:17:11.242 --> 00:17:18.558 - but it is what they do. So I'm not sure. Where do they get their funding? So their funding, I can pull up. 00:17:20.130 --> 00:17:42.092 - Let me see if I can pull up. There's a good tiff. And I'll share this for the public too, if it comes. 00:17:42.092 --> 00:17:48.702 - Yep. Okay. Stop sharing. Okay. 00:17:53.538 --> 00:18:04.339 - I'm sorry, I'm trying to expand this. Okay. Oh, it's still not doing it. It's showing the wrong screen. 00:18:04.339 --> 00:18:14.725 - Hold on. So basically when a TIFF is established, that sets the baseline for assessed value in that 00:18:14.725 --> 00:18:19.710 - area. So the base AB you can see in blue there. 00:18:21.218 --> 00:18:30.340 - that's everything that is already going to all the regular taxing districts, then the top of that blue 00:18:30.340 --> 00:18:39.638 - line would signify the TIF being created and there would be bonding against it perhaps or infrastructure 00:18:39.638 --> 00:18:48.494 - investments. But after there is a commitment from the TIF, debt leveraged from the TIF, it's really 00:18:48.494 --> 00:18:50.974 - the bonding against the TIF 00:18:51.138 --> 00:18:59.598 - that sets the green up arrow in process. But then that incremental AV, the property tax revenue generated 00:18:59.598 --> 00:19:07.579 - by that incremental AV goes back into the TIF fund for a set period of time. I think it's 25 years. 00:19:07.579 --> 00:19:15.959 - And this cycle is really what allows investment, it's one of the avenues that allows a lot of investment 00:19:15.959 --> 00:19:19.710 - in infrastructure and redevelopment to happen. 00:19:19.906 --> 00:19:29.259 - This green incremental AV is how the community is getting hope well. So Jane, if I may, so you have 00:19:29.259 --> 00:19:39.079 - the base AV and then that basically is frozen once the TIF comes in. And then you anticipate that you're 00:19:39.079 --> 00:19:47.870 - going to have development. Quite often it's infrastructure that is improved and the increased 00:19:48.290 --> 00:19:54.967 - AV and the revenues coming from that go to pay the bonds that generally pay for that infrastructure. 00:19:54.967 --> 00:20:01.710 - So that's what the incremental AV is basically financing quite often municipal bonds. Sorry, yes, and 00:20:01.710 --> 00:20:08.652 - that's why it's triggered by the issuance of debt. So my question, I think you've answered it, the Green 00:20:08.652 --> 00:20:15.395 - Development Commission is managing that green money to pay the bonds and so on. Yep. Okay, let me get 00:20:15.395 --> 00:20:17.246 - back. And then once the TIF 00:20:18.050 --> 00:20:24.601 - goes away, then that AV then goes back to the taxing units, the new AV. Yeah, the entire community. 00:20:24.601 --> 00:20:31.218 - Or all the taxing units. Okay, I'm gonna stop sharing and come back over here. We're gonna jump over 00:20:31.218 --> 00:20:38.031 - to the other share. It's like a person who knows what they're doing. And then you said consolidate TIF. 00:20:38.031 --> 00:20:45.106 - Redevelopment Commission manages all TIFs that we put in place. That's correct. That's the way I understand 00:20:45.106 --> 00:20:47.006 - it. And we don't even really 00:20:47.234 --> 00:20:53.725 - need to stay consolidated anymore, but it's just a holdover from the fact that Lewington used to have 00:20:53.725 --> 00:21:00.217 - a bunch of smaller TIFFs, and in 2016 they were consolidated sort of in order to reset that clock. So 00:21:00.217 --> 00:21:07.218 - it's a big, it's a biggie. Okay, so they manage that. It's technically in the TIFF, but there's no discussion 00:21:07.218 --> 00:21:13.900 - of infrastructure investments down here at this time. And per our previous chatter, well anyway, I won't 00:21:13.900 --> 00:21:16.382 - go there. So other positive pressures, 00:21:17.154 --> 00:21:24.912 - What did I even say in here? Yeah, the convention center. So this neighborhood, I think it's on the 00:21:24.912 --> 00:21:32.670 - verge. There's a lot of positive happening. We kind of focused on what the negative is. Hopewell is 00:21:32.670 --> 00:21:41.203 - in development. Those ground will be broken in 2027, and really 2027 is what we're hoping for. The convention 00:21:41.203 --> 00:21:42.910 - center, I don't know. 00:21:43.010 --> 00:21:48.837 - number right the convention center is expected to welcome that that number is not correct i'm sorry 00:21:48.837 --> 00:21:54.723 - i quoted the hunden study but anyway the convention center is getting ready to open and that will be 00:21:54.723 --> 00:22:00.608 - bringing people into the neighborhood that's going to push people toward kroger even the location of 00:22:00.608 --> 00:22:06.610 - the convention center hotel which is now on the south side of that property along second street that's 00:22:06.610 --> 00:22:10.398 - that's the fact that the hotel is down there it's drawing people 00:22:10.690 --> 00:22:17.694 - into the neighborhood more. So they're naturally gonna be connected to the square. Pedestrians are going 00:22:17.694 --> 00:22:24.364 - to find the square and they're gonna find the beeline trail. And now they're gonna start out across 00:22:24.364 --> 00:22:31.367 - the street from Seminary Square, which is the Kroger development and then also from the park. So there's 00:22:31.367 --> 00:22:38.237 - gonna be a lot more activity in that area. So what I wanted to talk to you all about today was whether 00:22:38.237 --> 00:22:39.838 - the EDC should consider 00:22:40.418 --> 00:22:49.242 - something like a short-term tax abatement to grease the wheels and see if there's a way to incent some 00:22:49.242 --> 00:22:57.894 - development in this area and whether a short-term tax abatement, which seems like it would be pretty 00:22:57.894 --> 00:23:06.633 - low risk because there's nothing, the properties are losing value if we do nothing. And if properties 00:23:06.633 --> 00:23:09.374 - were abated, they would have to 00:23:10.082 --> 00:23:18.337 - claim the property owner would have to make that investment in order to actually trigger the abatement. 00:23:18.337 --> 00:23:26.512 - So it's kind of low risk. And then the fact that it's short term, I think would mean that it would not 00:23:26.512 --> 00:23:34.846 - harm the TIF. So long term funds would ultimately flow back into the TIF, which is that's the plan since 00:23:34.846 --> 00:23:36.830 - this area is in the TIF. 00:23:38.146 --> 00:23:45.372 - but the short duration rather than a 10-year looking at a five-year, that's a little more aggressive, 00:23:45.372 --> 00:23:52.599 - which is kind of, you know, sorry, I'm coming in cold from a trip. I think what Jane's saying is it's 00:23:52.599 --> 00:24:00.250 - a way to prime the pump for developing that area. If we do nothing, we're going to continue to see property 00:24:00.250 --> 00:24:07.902 - values decline in that area. The county assessor is very sensitive to this from property owners, and I know 00:24:08.162 --> 00:24:15.241 - When the appeals come in, one of the things we look at is we look at the neighborhood factor, what's 00:24:15.241 --> 00:24:22.741 - happening in the neighborhood. So I can't speak for the Board of Appeals, but it's likely that the appeals 00:24:22.741 --> 00:24:29.750 - will become successful if the neighborhood continues to go on the blighted way. So this is a way to 00:24:29.750 --> 00:24:32.414 - hopefully reverse that blight without 00:24:32.610 --> 00:24:39.587 - As Jane said, and I didn't think about the TIF, but without affecting the TIF significantly. In fact, 00:24:39.587 --> 00:24:46.496 - you could argue that by reversing the blight, you're actually helping the TIF become more prosperous 00:24:46.496 --> 00:24:53.473 - as time goes forward. Right now, there's a reduction in tax revenue with no benefit. I know when Judy 00:24:53.473 --> 00:25:00.381 - and Jane and I met, we talked about various options, and this one seemed to be one that would be the 00:25:00.381 --> 00:25:01.886 - easiest to implement. 00:25:03.490 --> 00:25:10.360 - So that's the reason she's here talking about it. Would you all like me to pause? Or do you want me 00:25:10.360 --> 00:25:17.848 - to continue going through what I'm saying? I'm saying it's a recommendation, but it's really for discussion. 00:25:17.848 --> 00:25:24.855 - I want to know. I think what Jane wanted to do is, and we talked about this, is changing our criteria 00:25:24.855 --> 00:25:32.000 - for abatements to include light remediation. I think that's the terminology you're using here. And we'd 00:25:32.000 --> 00:25:33.374 - have to change our. 00:25:33.538 --> 00:25:41.920 - the language in our criteria. And is it just us that would have to change it? The city council would 00:25:41.920 --> 00:25:50.302 - have to. Yeah. Yeah. They'd have to approve it. So right now, it's employment and affordable housing 00:25:50.302 --> 00:25:58.850 - are the only two options for abatement in the current law. Yeah, I'm seeing a critical error. I didn't 00:25:58.850 --> 00:26:00.510 - link to our current 00:26:02.530 --> 00:26:11.460 - Criteria but yeah here it's you have the wording. Yeah anyway jobs wages affordable housing and then 00:26:11.460 --> 00:26:20.744 - what I propose here is that we specify that we want to remediate blight in this geography and we include 00:26:20.744 --> 00:26:30.558 - a map and so I made a draft map that is just Me guessing I mean making an educated guess and then recommending 00:26:30.882 --> 00:26:38.992 - So what are the boundaries of that educated guess now? Uh-huh. About? Here we go. Oh, is it there? 00:26:38.992 --> 00:26:47.185 - I'm sorry. Yeah, it's OK. It didn't print in yours, Liz. Let me do my stop share and reshare again. 00:26:47.185 --> 00:26:55.377 - Makes public. So Jane, I'm embarrassed, but I don't recognize this document. Did you send that out? 00:26:55.377 --> 00:27:00.702 - It was a link in the email she sent. I didn't say it. I'm sorry. 00:27:00.930 --> 00:27:14.945 - You know what, the new system is that we send, the agenda contains links to everything. And so it might 00:27:14.945 --> 00:27:28.286 - just look like an old agenda. Like a plain old agenda. That's okay. So we have second street here. 00:27:29.762 --> 00:27:37.975 - The park is right here. This scoops. I mean, these are decisions that commissioners could make. This 00:27:37.975 --> 00:27:46.188 - scoops the Kroger parcel. Maybe you want to do that. Maybe you don't. This comes up to Smith Avenue. 00:27:46.188 --> 00:27:54.726 - Some of these areas or some of these parcels could stand to some redevelopment. And I don't mean raising 00:27:54.726 --> 00:27:59.198 - the historic properties, but I mean investing in them. 00:27:59.618 --> 00:28:08.746 - And then I carved out properties that have already been redeveloped. And then these are primarily commercial 00:28:08.746 --> 00:28:17.539 - properties all along. This is Walnut Street. So scooped the commercial properties. And then these become 00:28:17.539 --> 00:28:26.081 - residential. So I came back into Walnut, grabbed this commercial property. And then this is just down 00:28:26.081 --> 00:28:29.598 - to Dodd Street. But in hindsight, I think 00:28:29.762 --> 00:28:36.546 - There was some discussion of taking it all the way down to Hillside. Yes, to Hillside or to Grimes. 00:28:36.546 --> 00:28:43.736 - Because Hillside was one that Judy mentioned. Yeah. She was looking at helping property. So I'm wondering 00:28:43.736 --> 00:28:50.656 - if I included the wrong map. But again, this is for discussion. So I could also pull up Beacon and we 00:28:50.656 --> 00:28:57.439 - could look at that together. So this is a very small footprint. And again, we could take it further 00:28:57.439 --> 00:28:59.678 - south to get closer to the park. 00:28:59.842 --> 00:29:07.943 - So is down to Hillside also floodplain? Do we know? So the floodplain, yeah, not all the way down to 00:29:07.943 --> 00:29:16.124 - Hillside. The floodplain is the worst in this block north of Dodds and south of First Street. So this 00:29:16.124 --> 00:29:24.385 - is kind of the epicenter. But it does happen. It comes in down here south of Dodds over by Warren Wood 00:29:24.385 --> 00:29:29.438 - Builders. And really, it follows that Clear Creek all the way. 00:29:30.082 --> 00:29:43.558 - down to the park. Well, in the old days, we called this urban renewal, and we've been out of that business 00:29:43.558 --> 00:29:56.655 - for a long time. I'm just going to stand here. I don't want to try to juggle all the different screens, 00:29:56.655 --> 00:29:59.678 - but yeah. And they only 00:30:00.354 --> 00:30:07.668 - The real rub against urban renewal, I think, mostly has been gentrification. I don't think that applies 00:30:07.668 --> 00:30:14.912 - that much on commercial properties, or this location. No, urban renewal and also dividing communities, 00:30:14.912 --> 00:30:22.438 - because that was part of it. Because urban renewal included the interstate highways going through downtown 00:30:22.438 --> 00:30:30.174 - cities. So you're right, Tim. I'm thinking back to early in my career, there were all kinds of programs to do 00:30:31.362 --> 00:30:39.104 - rehab buildings and housing and so on that the point was to improve the neighborhood and the building. 00:30:39.104 --> 00:30:46.771 - It wasn't, it did provide some affordable housing, but there was never affordable housing necessarily 00:30:46.771 --> 00:30:53.986 - attached to it. It was all about the improvement, which is, you know, it has its place. I think 00:30:53.986 --> 00:30:56.542 - it disappeared quite a while ago. 00:31:00.642 --> 00:31:09.949 - Yeah, and maybe just detaching from the vocabulary of urban renewal, because I don't have that expertise. 00:31:09.949 --> 00:31:18.992 - I'm not a planner, so I don't want to speak to a technical term. But in terms of economic development, 00:31:18.992 --> 00:31:27.859 - I think we need all the tools on the table to incentivize any investment. We're years into not a lot 00:31:27.859 --> 00:31:30.142 - happening here, although, 00:31:31.170 --> 00:31:38.268 - you know, stall furniture's on the market. I know they have an interested buyer. So there's, you know, 00:31:38.268 --> 00:31:45.366 - I think there's, I think there's good opportunity in the moment. And if we could push toward a tipping 00:31:45.366 --> 00:31:52.326 - point. Today, speaking of opportunity, first I heard about the Opportunity Zone. We were awarded. We 00:31:52.326 --> 00:31:58.046 - were awarded three. All three that we applied for. All three. And we were, I mean, 00:31:59.042 --> 00:32:07.304 - It's kind of a big deal. And the program becomes official the first of the year. That is a big deal. 00:32:07.304 --> 00:32:15.567 - Could be a very big deal. Yeah. Yes, and it's a complicated, it's a complex program. So I don't know 00:32:15.567 --> 00:32:23.748 - whether it's realistic that there would ever be a local opportunity fund. The city cannot establish 00:32:23.748 --> 00:32:27.838 - an opportunity fund, only the private sector can. 00:32:28.770 --> 00:32:40.301 - However, as of January 1, our three Opportunity Zones will be able to receive investment from Qualified 00:32:40.301 --> 00:32:51.722 - Opportunity Funds. So the issue on the floor, I think you already realized that I think this is a good 00:32:51.722 --> 00:32:57.598 - idea. We may want to play with the map a little bit, 00:32:58.274 --> 00:33:07.434 - The basic idea, I think, is a good one that we should seriously consider. That's my personal perspective. 00:33:07.434 --> 00:33:16.335 - Was there a preference on the 10 or the 5-year? Sorry, the 10-year is our standard abatement term, and 00:33:16.335 --> 00:33:25.150 - the 5-year is what I recommend for this. So recommended the 5-year, so it has less impact on the TIF. 00:33:25.282 --> 00:33:36.685 - Because if you have the... Less long-term impact. That's right. Okay. You set those. Anytime an abatement 00:33:36.685 --> 00:33:47.981 - is proposed, you review the terms and recommend them to council. So I think the idea of... Any applicant 00:33:47.981 --> 00:33:54.974 - can request any term, but I think that by advertising this term, 00:33:56.642 --> 00:34:03.779 - the commission could take a stance and say, you know, we don't really want to consider 10-year abatements 00:34:03.779 --> 00:34:10.782 - for this blight project. We want development to happen. So we're really interested in short abatements. 00:34:10.782 --> 00:34:17.717 - And that would just be what you approve when you get a live one. Do we think the council would be more 00:34:17.717 --> 00:34:22.430 - receptive to the five? I've spoken to a few council members about it. 00:34:22.594 --> 00:34:31.412 - I so I can't speak for them, but the individuals were receptive and then if you look at the average 00:34:31.412 --> 00:34:40.671 - If you look at the average rate It's It's less that we're foregoing less revenue than if for the 10-year 00:34:40.671 --> 00:34:49.754 - right I can do that. Yeah I think some of the concern that might be voiced might be for from financial 00:34:49.754 --> 00:34:51.518 - perspective because 00:34:52.546 --> 00:35:01.853 - As we said before, you issue bonds based on projected increases in AV and the revenue that comes, the 00:35:01.853 --> 00:35:11.069 - property tax revenue comes to that. So I think by doing it this way, you're doing less, I don't want 00:35:11.069 --> 00:35:20.376 - to say damage, but you're having less of an impact on the financial impact. So from my perspective as 00:35:20.376 --> 00:35:22.110 - a person who deals 00:35:22.306 --> 00:35:30.727 - in the finance area, I think it's a good compromise. You're trying to balance helping reduce blight 00:35:30.727 --> 00:35:39.232 - through development versus the impact it has on the existing TIF. And then you could re-evaluate it, 00:35:39.232 --> 00:35:43.358 - it seems to me, like after the five year, right? 00:35:44.898 --> 00:35:52.765 - Maybe something else will come up. You can evaluate. You can work on the guidelines any time. And I 00:35:52.765 --> 00:36:00.790 - think they were last updated in 2022. One of the things with the basement, sorry to interrupt, one of 00:36:00.790 --> 00:36:08.815 - the things with our basement is we require them to come in each year with information on what they've 00:36:08.815 --> 00:36:14.558 - done. So we'll have a look each year with the effect on AB and so forth. 00:36:14.786 --> 00:36:22.281 - What, compare if you could for just a minute, the affordable housing abatement, the 10-year abatement 00:36:22.281 --> 00:36:29.849 - that we have available now, that requires a process that goes through the city council first? It comes 00:36:29.849 --> 00:36:37.271 - to this body first. And then to the city council? Yes, so the applicant files an SB1, a statement of 00:36:37.271 --> 00:36:44.766 - benefits, and that's the formal document where they show what you would get for issuing an abatement. 00:36:44.930 --> 00:36:52.397 - It illustrates that but for test. And then if that's approved, if you all approve it, it's a recommendation 00:36:52.397 --> 00:36:59.587 - to the council. And then council would review and approve that. Sorry, and it's a two-step. So you have 00:36:59.587 --> 00:37:07.191 - legislation that approves the statement of benefits and creates the ERA, which is the economic revitalization 00:37:07.191 --> 00:37:14.174 - area. So that's the map of the abatement. And so then you recommend that to council and then council 00:37:15.490 --> 00:37:22.477 - I think they have a two hearing process for it to approve a new abatement. And then, so then that's 00:37:22.477 --> 00:37:29.743 - fine. Then the property owner has an abatement in hand and they go, they factor that into their capital 00:37:29.743 --> 00:37:36.800 - stack and they go build their building or make their investment or whatever. And then they come back 00:37:36.800 --> 00:37:42.110 - the year, they come back after they've made the investment to file the CF-1 00:37:44.866 --> 00:37:51.318 - Sorry, I'm thinking about all the forms. The 322RE form. So they file another form that says we did 00:37:51.318 --> 00:37:57.835 - it. And then annually after that, they'll file the compliance form. So then they file the compliance 00:37:57.835 --> 00:38:04.351 - form for all five or 10 years of their approved abatement. And we now have a track record of holding 00:38:04.351 --> 00:38:10.932 - property owners accountable when they're not performing according to standard. So we've done that. We 00:38:10.932 --> 00:38:12.158 - have had hearings. 00:38:13.954 --> 00:38:22.128 - We had a hearing in 2025 and we withheld the benefit in 2024 from a particular company. So I think that 00:38:22.128 --> 00:38:30.145 - we're, in my opinion, we're providing the transparency that's required. So that's our process for the 00:38:30.145 --> 00:38:38.713 - abatement we have today. You would expect this to follow the exact same process? Yes, because it's according 00:38:38.713 --> 00:38:42.014 - to state statute. Okay. And then the ERA, 00:38:43.362 --> 00:38:53.395 - would be property specific every time. Yes. You can make the ERA whatever you want. But it wouldn't 00:38:53.395 --> 00:39:03.828 - make sense to make it larger than the property where the incentive is requested. So my only point about 00:39:03.828 --> 00:39:12.958 - the five or 10 years is I've been through this process. That's a heck of a lot of process. 00:39:13.122 --> 00:39:20.192 - for a small project, I'm not sure it'd be worth it for a five-year payment. Not worth it what? I'm not 00:39:20.192 --> 00:39:27.194 - sure that that process would be worth, unless you stacked it with other benefits, which you might do, 00:39:27.194 --> 00:39:34.195 - it might be more process than it's worth doing for a five-year payment. It depends on the project and 00:39:34.195 --> 00:39:40.030 - how much improvement you're doing, because you only get debasing on the improvement. 00:39:42.562 --> 00:39:52.249 - So if you had a project where you're making it 20% better or 25% better or something like that, five-year 00:39:52.249 --> 00:40:01.571 - abatement would not probably, it's a lot of process, maybe not that much benefit. I don't know if you 00:40:01.571 --> 00:40:10.984 - could tier it based on the size of the project or the amount of the abatement. I just think it's worth 00:40:10.984 --> 00:40:12.446 - thinking about. 00:40:12.994 --> 00:40:22.913 - Well, I guess with the proposed schedule, the reason I proposed any schedule was to say, basically to 00:40:22.913 --> 00:40:33.220 - signal that if we do a shorter term abatement, we could be more aggressive with the deduction. But again, 00:40:33.220 --> 00:40:42.750 - this schedule is not fixed until you review individual applicants. So my question to you, Tim, is 00:40:43.842 --> 00:40:51.316 - Would it make a difference if the shorter term were more aggressive? It might. I mean, as you said, 00:40:51.316 --> 00:40:58.790 - you put your stack together. It depends. But the other thing that I'd point out, if you were trying 00:40:58.790 --> 00:41:06.413 - to put housing into this picture, I mean, it's a different scenario if you're trying to do commercial 00:41:06.413 --> 00:41:12.766 - development, where you can have retail business or who knows what kind. But housing. 00:41:13.474 --> 00:41:22.509 - You could really make, you may not have to bring very much else to the table if you had 10 year abatement. 00:41:22.509 --> 00:41:30.699 - You could have some level of affordability if you had 10 year abatement. Many of our properties, 00:41:30.699 --> 00:41:38.974 - if it's new, property tax alone can be 25% of the rent. So you could accomplish a lot. Good luck. 00:41:40.930 --> 00:41:53.914 - The property tax alone could be 25% of the rent. Yeah, so if you took 25% of the cost away, then maybe 00:41:53.914 --> 00:42:07.024 - you could have an affordable project at some level. That's helpful feedback. But Tim, if you're talking 00:42:07.024 --> 00:42:10.302 - about affordable housing, 00:42:10.754 --> 00:42:18.280 - already exists, if somebody wanted to put affordable housing down that corridor. That's true. Yeah, 00:42:18.280 --> 00:42:25.881 - that's what I'm trying to figure out, to be honest. So this is really something to help the stall or 00:42:25.881 --> 00:42:33.708 - the Thai restaurant, if that business would change, to get people to come in. Because right now, people 00:42:33.708 --> 00:42:40.030 - don't want to put any investment in. So this is... Yeah, I hear what you're saying. 00:42:41.954 --> 00:42:50.131 - the affordable housing, what we get for affordable housing is usually a long-term affordability period 00:42:50.131 --> 00:42:58.388 - and very low-income people. I don't know how much that's required now. And do you know what I'm saying? 00:42:58.388 --> 00:43:06.644 - Well, typically, okay, so for, so the affordable housing developments that access our abatement program 00:43:06.644 --> 00:43:11.646 - use this 10-year deduction, and then typically they have other 00:43:13.762 --> 00:43:20.199 - they have other affordability requirements that they meet. So we will put that into our agreements that 00:43:20.199 --> 00:43:26.511 - they have to have X number of years affordability. I think under the previous administration, we were 00:43:26.511 --> 00:43:33.072 - saying like 100 years. I don't know what we're saying now. We're not saying 100, but I think we're saying 00:43:33.072 --> 00:43:39.323 - like 50. We haven't had anyone. But anyway, so it goes into the agreement. So that's already a fixed 00:43:39.323 --> 00:43:42.974 - process. And I don't think that this area, this footprint, 00:43:44.002 --> 00:43:51.677 - I mean, if the footprint is expanded significantly, it could include areas that might become affordable 00:43:51.677 --> 00:43:59.131 - housing, like retreated switchyard already happened. But in this smaller concentrated footprint just 00:43:59.131 --> 00:44:07.027 - around the park, I think that's going to be more likely to be smaller redevelopment projects. I'm thinking 00:44:07.027 --> 00:44:13.374 - about the business project that's going in at Dodds and College, which is going to be 00:44:14.498 --> 00:44:23.856 - a trades showroom and they've done significant work to invest in that property. I don't think they purchased 00:44:23.856 --> 00:44:32.612 - it yet, but that's like a locally owned commercial project that'll be bringing traffic into the area. 00:44:32.612 --> 00:44:41.111 - And then stall could be another good example too. Yeah. I mean, there's that kind of a commercial. 00:44:41.111 --> 00:44:44.030 - I was, I was picturing more about 00:44:44.802 --> 00:44:53.315 - affordable housing light because the current 10-year tax abatement, again, in the previous administration, 00:44:53.315 --> 00:45:01.510 - they wanted 99 years of affordability and rents at a certain level. And so the point was to serve very 00:45:01.510 --> 00:45:09.784 - low-income people for a very long time. I was thinking more, serve less low-income people for a shorter 00:45:09.784 --> 00:45:14.558 - time. You could use a 10-year abatement to accomplish that. 00:45:14.754 --> 00:45:24.902 - But I don't know that it's practical. I'm just throwing it out there. I think this is a great discussion 00:45:24.902 --> 00:45:34.857 - and it helps me understand. It's probably what I'm talking about should only be dealt with through the 00:45:34.857 --> 00:45:42.782 - affordable housing abatement. Maybe that could be looked at in a different light. 00:45:43.778 --> 00:45:51.934 - Because 99 years of affordability is really not a practical commitment. I mean, nobody really can make 00:45:51.934 --> 00:46:00.011 - that. I mean, people do. And then they sell the property, and they're gone. Well, and they make that. 00:46:00.011 --> 00:46:08.246 - I think that the affordability piece, like I'm trying to think what are the larger affordable projects, 00:46:08.246 --> 00:46:13.630 - are usually light tech. And so then they already have their federal 00:46:13.954 --> 00:46:21.140 - requirements baked in. Usually it's 30 years and then they refinance and then they make a new 30 year 00:46:21.140 --> 00:46:28.185 - commitment. And so they're pretty comfortable with the long term. 30 years is a different scenario. 00:46:28.185 --> 00:46:35.230 - Right, yeah. But the point is that what gets recommended to council, so you all approve the SB1 and 00:46:35.230 --> 00:46:42.346 - you approve the ERA and typically you approve, I'm sorry, I'm trying to think what type of agreement 00:46:42.346 --> 00:46:43.262 - it's called. 00:46:43.810 --> 00:46:51.295 - you approve an MOA, a memorandum of understanding, between the city and the developer. And that all, 00:46:51.295 --> 00:46:58.262 - that whole thing, it's recommended to council. So it's really an administrative decision what 00:46:58.262 --> 00:47:06.266 - the affordability, the affordability that gets baked into that MOA. So, I mean, this sounds like a question 00:47:06.266 --> 00:47:12.862 - that would be good to answer for this body anyway, so we can keep that discussion going. 00:47:13.826 --> 00:47:22.215 - And then for this seminary park discussion, Kurt, I heard you, and I think maybe it sounded like everyone 00:47:22.215 --> 00:47:30.129 - was supportive of a larger footprint than this kind of compact footprint. I should have brought you 00:47:30.129 --> 00:47:38.281 - both so we could A, B it. I'd like to drive around it. Yeah. I mean, I'm 100% in favor of an incentive 00:47:38.281 --> 00:47:43.742 - program to get things going down there. Yeah. But could you provide? 00:47:44.770 --> 00:47:51.175 - The problem with these links is sometimes it's hard to pull up in a separate document. So it's a little 00:47:51.175 --> 00:47:57.394 - bit cumbersome. I was able to get the document up, but I wasn't able to get the map. The irony being 00:47:57.394 --> 00:48:03.553 - that these are our new accessibility terms. But yeah, you want me to just send it as an attachment? 00:48:03.553 --> 00:48:09.711 - If you could send it as an attachment, because I too would like to take probably a walk around this 00:48:09.711 --> 00:48:13.406 - neighborhood, just to get an idea of the difference between 00:48:13.794 --> 00:48:21.299 - Hillside and what was it Dodd just said? Yeah. Yeah. There's Hillside, Grimes, and Dodds would be all 00:48:21.299 --> 00:48:28.731 - potential. Do you have a current floodplain map? I can share that. Because that'd be really helpful. 00:48:28.731 --> 00:48:36.531 - A nice day would be a nice walk up and down the street, seriously. Yeah. I wish we could all go together, 00:48:36.531 --> 00:48:43.742 - but that would constitute business. Yeah, it would be a meeting. But you could go in pairs. Yeah. 00:48:44.258 --> 00:48:51.927 - Okay. So floodplain map. Hopefully we could revisit this next month and possibly get some action on 00:48:51.927 --> 00:48:59.826 - it to get it moving. And then conceptually to do like the idea, are you supportive of the idea of just 00:48:59.826 --> 00:49:08.261 - adjusting these guidelines and including the map as our strategy? And then it's something we could advertise. 00:49:08.261 --> 00:49:13.246 - I think so too. What do you guys think? We need to do something. 00:49:13.410 --> 00:49:25.199 - Yeah, we do. OK, great. Good talk. So we're not taking any action on that, but you'll provide us with 00:49:25.199 --> 00:49:37.567 - some of those maps, scenario maps. And I'll talk to Dana, who's our, EDC has a new attorney. We're working 00:49:37.567 --> 00:49:43.230 - with Dana. Oh my gosh, why have I lost his name? 00:49:43.458 --> 00:49:50.762 - Yes, sorry. Jane is suffering from jet lag. Oh, I know. It's true. Welcome back. It's a true statement. 00:49:50.762 --> 00:49:57.855 - Welcome back. That's right. It's tough when you get back. Yeah. It's like, oh, goodness. But anyway, 00:49:57.855 --> 00:50:05.019 - I can talk with Dana and make sure we have everything that. So we're good on this, Jane. So let's, we 00:50:05.019 --> 00:50:11.550 - don't have any old business, I don't believe. No. And anything you two want to bring up? No. 00:50:12.066 --> 00:50:19.292 - I'm not trying to push it. Oh, I did have two old business sites. Oh, I'm sorry. Can I just give you 00:50:19.292 --> 00:50:26.518 - guys updates? Yeah, please. OK, so strategic sites we were working on. I brought you guys a memo and 00:50:26.518 --> 00:50:34.101 - proposed matrix for strategic sites. And the commission was very supportive of extending service wherever 00:50:34.101 --> 00:50:41.470 - we can. And you wanted me to come back with a list of what the strategic sites are beyond the property 00:50:42.050 --> 00:50:51.299 - Vernal and Woodyard, which again, I'm sorry, the name of that property escapes me right now. So I talked 00:50:51.299 --> 00:51:00.548 - to my economic development partners and called properties and there were no additional sites. So I think 00:51:00.548 --> 00:51:09.885 - that we might not need to do that. So when I talked to the property owner at Woodyard and Vernal, anyway, 00:51:09.885 --> 00:51:11.294 - there was some, 00:51:11.554 --> 00:51:17.732 - indication that there had been conversations with CBU decades ago. So CBU is doing some research. So 00:51:17.732 --> 00:51:23.848 - it may be that service would be available there without using the strategic sites initiative, or it 00:51:23.848 --> 00:51:29.965 - may be that they would need this strategic sites initiative in order to get service. So when CBU is 00:51:29.965 --> 00:51:36.081 - done and has pulled all of the information that they have, then I'll come back to the commission. I 00:51:36.081 --> 00:51:39.262 - thought the city council had already taken this up. 00:51:40.930 --> 00:51:48.441 - I don't know why. Decades ago? No, the strategic sites. I thought I saw it in a debated city council 00:51:48.441 --> 00:51:56.027 - or discussion. Maybe not. Unless they were debating it without me, which they could totally do. Yeah. 00:51:56.027 --> 00:52:03.018 - Do whatever they want. So there's no action needed on that right now. And then, which is kind 00:52:03.018 --> 00:52:08.670 - of anticlimactic, but also it's good, ultimately. So there's just one site. 00:52:08.994 --> 00:52:16.659 - And then quick update on the three-way alcohol permits. I just wanted to share this since this has come 00:52:16.659 --> 00:52:24.103 - up a handful of different times that those were approved by city council a month ago and a month and 00:52:24.103 --> 00:52:31.768 - a half ago. And we're working on the application process. And I believe that if everything goes through 00:52:31.768 --> 00:52:38.622 - with ATC, we'll have a total of 17 permits added to our. 17 ecosystem. So I think that will, 00:52:39.138 --> 00:52:46.023 - make for some meaningful change. And then I have a question. I don't know if it's for you all or if 00:52:46.023 --> 00:52:53.390 - it's for me to come back and make a recommendation, but I need to put together a group. And I was thinking 00:52:53.390 --> 00:53:00.688 - it would be good to have some representation from the commission to review applications against a rubric. 00:53:00.688 --> 00:53:07.642 - So I don't need to put you on the spot in this meeting, but I wondered if a commissioner might be up 00:53:07.642 --> 00:53:08.606 - for the task. 00:53:09.026 --> 00:53:18.104 - Yeah, that's true. Or Esau, he didn't even, he's not here. So, and it was Esau's legislation, so I assume 00:53:18.104 --> 00:53:26.840 - he'll want to do it. But anyway, so that's moving forward. So, I don't understand 17 new permits, how 00:53:26.840 --> 00:53:35.404 - did that happen? So two, two were from what, what was SB 89, and I don't know what the enrolled act 00:53:35.404 --> 00:53:37.374 - number is. Those were, 00:53:37.666 --> 00:53:47.472 - That's the specific legislation where the state names Bloomington and says, Bloomington, you shall have 00:53:47.472 --> 00:53:57.279 - two more permits eligible for your downtown district. And then the 15 others would be allowable through 00:53:57.279 --> 00:54:06.142 - the historic Courthouse Square district. And this was discussed originally like 15 years ago. 00:54:06.242 --> 00:54:12.962 - and it kind of stalled out, it was controversial at the time. City Council just moved it through and 00:54:12.962 --> 00:54:19.749 - we've done a lot of work to determine and prove our eligibility for these 15 permits and the ATC will 00:54:19.749 --> 00:54:26.469 - unfortunately not just create the quota, but they will create it once they have live applications in 00:54:26.469 --> 00:54:33.854 - their process. So it will be determined when we have applications to move through, but all of the legal review 00:54:34.242 --> 00:54:42.889 - indicates that we meet these pretty stringent standards, which are having a jail, an opera house, and 00:54:42.889 --> 00:54:51.790 - a courthouse adjacent to each other. So the opera house was the fountain square mall. Had an opera house 00:54:51.790 --> 00:55:00.692 - on the northeast corner. So all of those 15 have to be in a pretty tight district? Not as tight as you'd 00:55:00.692 --> 00:55:03.998 - think. It's within a certain number of 00:55:04.162 --> 00:55:14.506 - feet of that area. So it ends up being most of the broader downtown area. And then the City Council's 00:55:14.506 --> 00:55:24.647 - developed this rubric, right? They listed some criteria that they want considered and then staff is 00:55:24.647 --> 00:55:33.470 - making a rubric so that we can kind of turn that into a math problem and to intake the 00:55:34.466 --> 00:55:43.196 - We want to remove bias. Some of the subjects here. Yeah. So hopefully that means we'll have new restaurants 00:55:43.196 --> 00:55:51.522 - opening. I've had a lot of questions from businesses. That's great. Good news. Yeah. OK. Thanks, Kurt, 00:55:51.522 --> 00:56:00.333 - for letting me rewind. I don't think we have anything for general discussion. Are you ready for adjournment? 00:56:00.333 --> 00:56:03.486 - I'll move adjournment. We can adjourn. 00:56:03.650 --> 00:56:05.470 - We are adjourned.