5 o'clock. Welcome, everyone. Let's go ahead and get started. We have a quorum here in person. And we
have one individual on Zoom. So why don't we start with a roll call vote, please, or a roll call. Laurie
McRobbie, present. Randy Cassidy, present. John? John, you're muted. Sorry about that, John West.
So you scambler here. And staff present? Costina Finley, Hand Department. Tammy Caswell, Hand Department.
Jane Coopersmith, Economic and Sustainable Development. Margie Rice, City Legal. Kenoki Engineering.
Great. Good to have you all here on this sparsely populated week. But we have approval of minutes before
us, including an executive session summary for February 23, 2026.
minutes for February 23rd, 2026, and March 2nd, 2026. Are there any corrections or changes that anyone
wants to note? If not, may I have a motion to approve? I'll make a motion to approve as noted. Second.
It's been moved and seconded. Oh, sorry. We'll actually take a roll call vote on approving that. Laurie
McRobbie, yes. Brandi Cassidy, yes. John West, yes.
Sue Scambaleri, yes. Thank you. That passage unanimously. Moving to the claims register for February
27th, 2026. Are there any questions? I have one question. I know Christine directed us accordingly to
call or email, of which I did call. I did call. I got your voice. You did? I did. So consequently, I
don't have any major questions. But some of these reoccurring ones that occur, the habitat
for Humanity, the Osage one. Yeah, it's the Osage, the Summit Hill development. These ones that are
continuing long-term that we have, trying to figure out from as we look through an approval process,
these are agreements that were made that have long-term effect in regards to the finances. Just kind
of curious as we look through those ones that have with the Summit Hill, Osage,
the, forgive me, the name is evading me at the present moment. Yeah, the other stage is the infrastructure,
so. Right, I understand what it is. I'm just looking at, as we have these continuations, if there's
a tabulation, I know previously Jessica had done something for Hopewell, so these ones, so we have,
we know what that long-term overall effect would be. Yeah, I think Stephanie's the one that takes care
of those, so I can get with her and get some sort of timeframe for you.
Cause it's kind of like, we know the tip, you know, I know some of these are CBDG and are outside of
the tip itself, but just so everybody has an idea what the overall financial commitment is. Not a problem.
All right, thank you. Any other questions? Okay. Seeing none, may I have a motion for approval of the
claims register for 22726? So moved. And is there a second? Second. It's been moved and seconded.
We'll do a roll call vote. Lori McGrady, yes. Randy Cassidy, yes. John West, yes. Steve Scambaleri,
yes. That passes unanimously. Thank you. That takes us to our payroll register for March 6, 2026. Are
there any questions or comments on the payroll register? No. I'll make a motion to approve as noted.
Second. It's been moved and seconded. We'll vote by roll call.
Lori McRobbie, yes. Randy Cassidy, yes. John West, yes. C. Scambaleri, yes. That passes unanimously.
Payroll register is approved. Takes us to reports. I know Director Kellyanne Hanson is not with us today,
but is there any report on her behalf? No report today. Okay. Legal? None for me. I know Kendall's here
to give a staff report though at some point. I don't know if you want the controller to go first. May
I just mention that
My report was going to be re-presenting the annual report, which is mandatory and extremely important,
but they're not here yet. So I may have to ask you to postpone that report till after your agenda item.
So let me defer, and I'm going to go out in the hall and see if they're wandering around waiting for
us. Thank you. And is there a business development report? I don't have a business development report,
but I did want to say to the commissioners,
It's because all of the business development activities are bundled up and meshed in all the
other development activities. So I think they tend to fall under the other work that the commission
is doing. So I just wanted to share that because I never have that day for you. Thank you. But she is
definitely very busy. Yeah. Sometimes. OK. Any questions for any of those?
hit the controller when he comes back. Okay. All right, we'll actually postpone, per Jeff's request,
we'll postpone the Treasurer's Report and the TIF Report from Reedy, and we'll move ahead and take up
new business. Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't see Hopewell on here. No, he's just gonna give it in staff updates,
if that's okay. PG.
Yeah, so just as requested with the contract for the Hopewell South engineering and subdivision, just
want to keep continuing to give you all updates. So kind of the biggest update is based on the last
City Council meeting. We are charging forward with design. We did not see any real red flags that indicated
to us that City Council is going to change substantially what's being proposed. They may make some changes.
But we felt like the risk was low enough to continue to charge forward. So I wanted to bring that in
front of you and make sure that you're all in agreement with that. But based on what we saw at City
Council, we feel confident to continue moving forward. And we have to move forward if we want to stay
on the schedule that we have. So I guess that's the other side of this thing. But I just wanted to kind
of bring that in front of you and hear any discussion you may have on should we continue to charge forward,
which means we're spending money in that contract.
or should we hold off, we believe as staff that we should continue charging forward. And I can tell
you legally, at a PUD, the council can approve it or not approve it. They can, you know, reasonable
conditions can be put in place, but legislatively, council doesn't have the authority to amend a PUD.
They could just put in place reasonable conditions. So we think it's a good idea to continue to move
forward. And that appears to be what they've
raised in their first session for several reasonable possible amendments. When is their next council
meeting? It is March 25th. Right, so it's not that long off. And is that the final here? It could be.
It's the second reading. So they could take a vote and approve it. They might not. They could postpone
it. OK. And then the other question I have is, what's our burn rate so far as far as dollars?
We haven't even gotten our first invoice yet. That's good. The consultant is definitely charging along.
We're moving. We're spending money. Just checking to see what that metric was on a consistent basis.
I can't tell you exactly how much we've spent. And what will you require of this body going forward?
Well, so the next approval that I'll bring in before you is essentially permission to file and go to
plan commission for the primary plat, which is scheduled for May 11th, apparently.
So prior to that May 11th date, I'll just request permission to submit that primary plat and have it
heard by plain commission on your behalf. So that's kind of the next step. And then after that, if the
plat's approved, we'll submit for our permits for our secondary plat. And eventually, I'll come back
and ask for construction funding for the build out of all the infrastructure. So on the current schedule,
we can start construction mid-August. And we're still on that schedule.
Given the current contract that is let, not for this particular Hopewell, but the one we approved previously
for Second Street? Second Street is... The sewer and such that's occurring. Oh, yeah. That sewer work,
that's already completed. Okay. So all of that is complete accordingly. And what I'm curious in regards
to is where we had done the park and they had put the grass and such, where they put a temporary walkway
around it. If you take a look at that,
while the sidewalk was out, we now have a nice little rainbow arc in the grass. It's minor stuff, but
if you drive by Roger Street, take a look. It's trying to make sure that as the spring comes that we're
able to have vegetation cover. Oh, you're saying there's exposed soil. Well, what occurred while they
were working in that particular area on Roger Street
There was a sidewalk that was out, and they put a temporary sidewalk around in an arc. Oh, right, yes.
And they've done the sidewalk, but the restoration has not occurred. So it's just this nice little arc
that's in there. With spring coming up, making sure we get some vegetative cover. I know exactly what
you're talking about. Appreciate that. So our consultant, we have filing for the development review
committee at the end of the month this Friday. So they're going to be submitting grading plan, preliminary
utility layout,
you know, site plan, first draft of the plat, that's all going to get submitted to our planning department
this Friday. And then all of the city departments will have the opportunity to review and discuss, I
think it's the 30th of this month, is the DRC, not RDC, DRC meeting where we'll discuss all of that.
So just moving through that process, that's for the May 11th Planning Commission meeting. And that's
DRC stands for Design Review Committee? Yeah, it's the Development Review Committee.
All the departments are part of that fire, you know, police, engineering, everybody. So a few other
updates. Based on the grading, we are likely going to impact one of the adjacent centerstone lots. And
so we have a meeting set up to kind of talk to them about that. We don't have to impact their property,
but we think it's going to be beneficial to both projects. We get to lower the road a little bit, which
helps our grading out.
And then they basically get a new parking lot out of it because we'll have to reconstruct their parking
lot in order to do that. So I think it's going to be beneficial to both parties. We're going to talk
to them. We don't know if we're moving forward with that, but just wanted to make you aware. And then
I did want to, I'm going to see if I can share my screen on the zoom. So John can see this as well.
is. So we have some contract amendment coming up as well that we'll be bringing to you and this is to
address some additional off-site improvements that have come up in the design. So the first one is on
the south side of this exhibit, this blue line that I've drawn here. This is a new or it's an existing
water main that needs to be replaced. So this water main down here where I've drawn this blue line is
1937 right now.
And CBO has requested it be replaced as part of this project in order to serve the new development.
So we are going to have to include the design and construction of a new water main in Wiley. So that's
what's shown on the south end. And then another request from CBU is we did not have room to do any detention
or water quality on the west portion of the site. So the east portion all drains down to the 714 building,
but the west portion,
drains to the west and we had initially proposed over detaining in this area to accommodate that. But
CBU has come back and said, you know, in the mobile home community down here, there's flooding issues
and they'd really like to see this project do some kind of detention water quality treatment. So we
do have some room along Wiley in the right of way. So they've requested that we take a look at that
and evaluate if we can do some detention in there to serve this project. So because of that,
We'll have to include some additional survey of this area to do the design. And then we need to get
utilities out of this area. And that's proven to be a bit difficult with our stormwater. So we'll have
to come up either through down first or through this existing platted alley with some utilities. So
we'll need to survey those locations. And then there's also been talk about potentially doing some kind
of a sidewalk or alley connection in the existing alley.
Because right now our development is building an east-west kind of thoroughfare that dead ends right
here at this existing alley. And so especially if we have to do a utility in there, it might make sense
to do some kind of a sidewalk or an alley build out. That's still something we have to evaluate. So
right now I'll probably be coming to you with a request for additional survey in an upcoming meeting
and then potentially an additional design depending on what we determine is feasible.
When we look at this existing water line that's got to be replaced, what kind of dollars are we talking
at? Because as we move forward on Hopewell, trying to get into an affordable housing situation, each
one of these things, while it's necessary for public infrastructure, also goes into the overall density
and the amount of cost per unit. I don't have a cost for you yet. I will try to get something together
so I can let you know approximate. I will say that
You know, these kinds of infrastructure improvements are pretty typical on a development. But yeah,
I'd like to get a price for both of them before I come and ask about it. But we still need to evaluate.
So the first step will be additional surveying. As we look through the infrastructure's critical
redevelopment of this thing, but as we've got other things in the community where we require all the
private people to also be cognizant of what those overall costs are,
since we are the most expensive place in the state. So appreciate that. And what about timing? Is that
something that will do the survey and presumably if everything looks like it's on track, you'll just
proceed to do that replacement and it'll be done? It'll just be done as part of the project. But at
what point? I mean, obviously early on. So before ground was broken for the housing or?
Yes, so the infrastructure will be done before ground is broken for the housing, with the exception
of those two or three lots that we're trying to do early. But all the infrastructure is going to be
done at once, and utilities will be first. So they'll be getting into the site. They'll be masquerading.
They'll be installing storm sewer water, sanitary. And then they'll get into the adjoining streets and
do the utility work. I mean, there's going to be all kinds of connections and things going in. Right.
So it'll all just be done at once. Yeah.
on that vein as we go through this in order to try to move things forward, providing the council approves
everything. Where, as you're having these discussions on utilities, where any of the other utilities
that can tend to hold up some projects might be, we're already having coordination discussions with
those. Yeah, so CBU, you know, does the Big Three water, storm, and sanitary, and these are the only
things that came out of those conversations.
We're not going to be installing any new gas mains on this project based on the PUD not allowing gas
service in these developments. So it's really just, we still have to meet with Duke Energy to talk about
how to serve it from an electric standpoint. But otherwise, all the communications will be able to fit
in. OK. From your preliminary basis, you're not going to have massive relocations that could actually
hold up this project? No. No, we're not going to be waiting on anybody to relocate their utilities that
we're aware of.
Any other questions for Ken? Seeing none. Okay. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Let's circle back
to the Treasurer's Report and the TIF Report from Reedy Financial. Jeff, do you want to take us into
that? Fantastic. Thank you very much. I would like to introduce Justin Chang from Reedy Financial. He
is going to present the Annual Report for the Redevelopment Commission.
very important and mandatory step that this will fulfill. Yes, so to start off, my apologies. I thought
the meeting started at 5.30. I was actually in the parking lot about 5.05 waiting for the clock to run
down. So I do apologize. But yesterday, we're going to go over the April reporting requirement. A lot
of you may have done this in the past, but just
Just as a quick overview, this is to show a lot of the RDC's information from the prior year. Most of
it is around financials, but also RDC members, underlying units, parcel list, information like that.
The way that we format the Airport Reform Department is going to look very similar to the financial
plan that we presented and we provided in previous
previously with the core of the update. So a lot of this will look very familiar, but today we're going
to focus mainly solely on 2025. Last time I was here, I think I presented for nearly an hour, so I'll
try not to do that this time. Are we going to share, or is there anything to share? And just to clarify
this, what is being presented here was also part of your packet and has also been available to the public as well.
So table of contents, again, it'll look very similar to the TIF financial plan. The only addition that
we've added here that isn't on the normal TIF financial plan is that one will go through all the annual
reporting requirements required for the RDC, as well as, and you'll see a list of all the parcel lists
for all tip allocation areas in the RDC. So that's one of the reporting requirements that's required
for this reporting, but that won't be included in future financial plan packets. Next page, page three,
is the annual requirements. This will look similar if you guys remember last year from
The annual TIF impact reporting, we've put together a list of all the reporting that the RDC has to
do. This is essentially that list, but we break it out into more detail for the RDC. Today, we're doing
that very first one under that green column.
That says prior to April 1st, clerk treasures any report to the RDC that will be this report. And then
no later than April 15th, we'll have to provide this to the mayor and the city council either through
an email or in their meeting packets, as well as we'll work on the gateway uploads and we'll work with
Jeff to submit it once we've uploaded it. The rest are just all the other report requirements. You guys
should know these for the most part, but if there are any questions, please feel free to let me know.
But if not, we could go to the next page. I've got one silly question. Yeah. We show no employee information,
yet we approve a payroll register every time. There is a employee information? No. I'm just asking.
It shows none. And I understand it's probably just under general. And what's your question? No. Well,
just where we go employee information. It shows none in our report.
And while we don't have any employees, we pay employees. Do you approve payroll and claims? And you
approve payroll for employees that aren't employees of the RDC? Exactly. Yes. OK. Yeah. So this is very
clear. If the RDC pays employees. If the RDC had a separate employee. Yes. That would be listed there.
Yes. Thank you. Most of the time we see maybe economic directors that are solely for the RDC would be
listed here. OK. So these are.
Again, a lot of this information is what's required of this reporting, but you guys all may know this
already. One last question. Yeah. When we go to local council, and on all your report, it's got Kerlaw
PC. So I'm just trying to make sure. We could update that is. Should that just be city and local council?
Yeah. OK. He's not in private practice. And John has a question.
And John? This answer, thank you. Okay, yes, we will fix that for future. Yes, we can definitely fix
that. Normally we see a lot of local council being private practice, so that's why we looked it up on,
looked it up sort of thing. But yes, we'll make sure that gets updated. Excellent, thank you. But that
isn't actually brother. What about the commissioner terms? Is that the wrong year? This is for 2025.
Are these not the commissioners for 2025?
Yes. These are, right? This is last year's report. I'm pretty sure I've heard about Jeff or someone.
So this is for last year's offer. This year's will update one for 2026. Yes, again, everything in this
report is in a year, so we're looking at all of 2025. Any changes made in 2026 won't be shown just yet,
but they will be in, I guess, next month's financial plan. And can I just, I know this came up last
year as well, but Sam Fleener, who is a sort of ex-official member of the
RDC, is that, how do we, just remind me how we understand Sam Cleaner's role. So Sam is the school member
from MCCSE. So he's- Appointed by them. Yes, yes. So he's, we still have to include him on here even
though he's not a non-loan member and we'll still include him in the gateway reporting, but that's-
Doesn't count towards quorum, obviously. Yeah. Okay. Yes. We just have to, since he's technically a
member of the RDC, we have to include him on here. Count towards quorum.
And just if you read the statute that refers to this annual report, Justin's pretty much ticking through
all the things that the statute says need to be included. Yes, yes. Perfect. But yeah, we try to make
the financial plan that's similar to this, so to cut down on initiated costs. But yeah, a lot of this
is ticking through the boxes of the report on the statute.
So to the next page, that's the monthly balance for the Wilmington consolidated TIF allocation area.
Big picture, what we're seeing is that the RDC's cash grew by $15 million. I think I mentioned this
when I came last time, but really this page is more useful for units that might be a little tighter
in cash, where yes, it looks like they'll end the year in the positive, but there may be a month or
two where they go negative, and this is where we can show that kind
kind of cash flow, but the RDC has pretty healthy cash flow, so this page is very much for informational
purposes, not even needed for the April report requirement. If we go to the next page. Just to verify,
as of October 31, we've got outstanding obligations, but we're still looking at $32,511,325. And leftover
cash. And leftover cash.
can be allocated for future projects. Yes, and we'll go over that in a couple of pages. There's a fun
tab that we'll look at that as well. OK. North Kinser Pike, this is one of the allocation areas that
is in public consolidated TIF. Like Jeff mentioned, each TIF needs to have their own fun tab parcel
list. So this is separating that out between North Kinser Pike and the consolidated area. Just as a
reminder, this TIF is set to expire
after this year. So we currently have 767. I believe that should be close, maybe 850, $900,000 by the
end of 2026. So that's money that we can look into spending as this TIF expires. So from an allocation
standpoint, dollars, 800 and some thousand, we just need to identify the projects that need to be done.
Because will they have to be closed out in order to work this, Jeff, by next year?
By the end of this year, will the allocations have to be allocated prior to? No, they can stay in there.
Even though it expires, you just don't start, you don't continue to collect money. Okay. But you don't
have to spend it all. But we don't have to have it? No. How about everything all completely spent on
it? That's, well, to verify so then it wouldn't be distributed back to the different taxing units. Correct.
All right, thank you. Yes, and it's that process of letting the county know that its tip expires, we
will do that with the functionalization. We'll let them know this tip is expiring.
And we won't neutralize it for the upcoming year. The next page, again, this follows a lot of what is
on the TIP financial plan, which is why this fund is on here. But 2519 technically doesn't go on the
April 4. So we don't need to spend a whole lot of time here. But when we do the gateway submissions,
we won't include the financial information from this fund. And I think it is useful for everybody to
see the cash balance. Because you all ask about the cash balance from time to time.
And this is included in all our tip and action plans. So when we provide the Q1 in April, this one will
be on there. Any questions on the monthly cash balance before we go into the? On the 25-19, I'm just
looking at the February portion of it, where we received 4.6 and we cash outlayed 4,593,000. Is that
a specific instance on that?
So that is tied to that revenue of 4.6. I believe that funds sold the property. That was first deposited
here and then deposited into the, yeah. So that's our trades district basis. Then that fund that receded
in and then got transferred. And then it's been transferred back out into a different fund.
It was transferred into the consolidated tip fund. So you'll see in February for this green,
green page. There is 4.5, almost like exactly. There's interest in there. The next three pages is similar
to what the monthly cash balance is showing, but instead of a monthly cash balance, we show this as
individual projects, and the reason we do this is when we go on to
gateway to do the submissions. Let's say we spent $294,000 on First Street. We have to show that. So
we have to do capital outlays, First Street, and then the dollar amount. Same thing with debt payments
and other services and charges. We have to separate that out. The one difference is that under debt
payments, we have that as a total debt. But when we do go in and do the gateway submissions, that will
be broken out into each individual debt. And we have to break that out into principal portion and interest portion.
Overall, the largest expenditures for the RDC last year, number one, were all the debt payments. Number
two was the hope well, which that's expected for 2026 as well with conversations. For informational
purposes into 2026, where if you guys look, there's $20.2 million in TIF revenues collected in 2025.
Still finalizing the abstract. We're still waiting on that from the state, but we're looking at closer
to maybe $24 million. Don't quote me on that if it comes out different, but as of numbers today.
But yes, we will try to get that in the next financial plan. Hopefully, we'll have those finalized numbers.
Any questions on this page for me? And I'll pause here for a second, just because this is an important
page. I just want to give everybody a chance to formulate any questions.
So what you're telling me is as of 12-31, we have $32 million in cash, so. Yes, yes, 32 and a half.
Now, we've got expenditures planned that is not just cash to be utilized. It's already got payments
and such that'll be happening. You certainly, you have obligations, yes. You have obligations that you're
committed to. OK. And this obviously does not include the Kinser Pike
That is completely separate. That's not in this number. Correct. That's actually in the next page. Right.
Yeah, sorry. I know it doesn't show from the top, but that's consolidated allocation area. Yeah. And
then the 2519 fund. That's also separate. It's also separate. Yes. That would be the page after Kinser
Pike. Based on those two broke up where we got the Kinser Pike and then we got our consolidated TIP
area then.
Of the consolidated TIF, there's other TIF areas. It's everything that is not North Kins or Pike or
Meridian. Is all consolidated, and we don't have allocation based upon what those other TIF areas are.
Allocation as in? The old individual TIFs before they were consolidated. What the revenue is that each
one of those is collecting accordingly, like the Adams Crossing TIF. We have that, yes we do. So that
could be an appendage that could be added to.
Yes for informational purposes only not not because of what needs to go into gateway gateway has specific
Items that have to be put in yes. Yes, and we can do that if you think about look at this as an Excel
It would be like all the way up here is where all those rubies would be calculated I'm just looking
at as we put these particular areas and those tip allocation areas where dollars that have been utilized in those
TIF areas are. Consolidated TIF was put together years ago for specific reasons to font bond things.
So we could get that as an appendage somewhere or? Yes, yeah, of course. We couldn't include that in
a separate file just because there's so many. This will make this a much larger document. You could
just provide that in some fashion, not in this particular one. Yeah, we can definitely do that.
Thank you, Justin. Any other questions? One thing I want to point out.
You see that 5.3 million in interest slash miscellaneous revenues, that does include the 4.5 that the
trades district plans for. So that won't be 4.5 in 2026 and going forward. That's a one time hit. Unless
you sell anything else. Yes. We have some to sell. Any other questions on this page before we keep going?
No. No? Okay.
Next page is that North Kinser Pike allocation area. We received $91,000 in TEF revenue collections
that's expected to stay the same in 2026, and that will be gone after 2026. So you'll see at the bottom,
we're looking at 767 by the end of last year. If we add another roughly 90,000 to it, we're at just
over $850,000 to spend out of this allocation area.
Next one is the Meridian allocation area. We don't have a monthly cash balance page for it because there
has been nothing coming into this fund as of 2025 and it doesn't look like there are assessed values
in 2026. It is a personal property so we don't get to see that until they show it to us really so if
there is anything we will let you all know but as of
January or February, there weren't anything, and there were no assessed values in the meridian tip.
That says it comes in from the county assessor. Yes, but that is self-reported by the taxpayer. Right.
But I mean, it's not something with the information that we generate. We receive it from the county.
Correct. So what we do to functionalization is we explicitly remove personal property because we can't
neutralize that. That's just what it is. Yes. So when we get into the personal property reporting,
basis and Jeff to the fact that the city doesn't have anything in regards to doing that. How do we identify
when that personal property will be reported? You mean when we start seeing AV? Yeah, when we start
seeing AV and I understand based upon how this spider tiff was put out, you know, the allocations of
the dollars will go right back out. But just trying to identify because it's been, what, two years now?
You know, I don't know the answer, but I can talk to the assessor tomorrow and try to get an answer.
Just trying to identify, because we know that they've got facilities put in, and I think there's still
some outstanding issues that we have with Meridian as a community. So try to resolve that. And if there's
nothing being paid in, there's, yeah. Right, nothing that goes out. Exactly. But yeah, I will find out
from the assessor when we anticipate seeing some. Yeah, personal property, because of the self-reporting
situation. I mean, if they don't report it, we don't see it, it doesn't come back in.
All right, thank you. Appreciate it. Yeah, so yeah. Once there is any revenues to expand, revenues come
in, we'll make sure that that gets updated. 2519, again, not required for the Gateway impulse submissions,
but this is the information that we currently have for it. If there's any questions on here,
let us know. But this isn't a TIF fund, so it's really different. It's controlled by the REC, but it's
not a TIF revenue fund.
fairly different from the three other TIF funds that we track for the RDC. When we look at this from
a revenue standpoint, the realities of the lease rental revenue is only $491,000 on what we have at
the present moment. And then our $5 million is actually the trade's sale. Is that correct in regards to it?
Yeah, so we take out the 4.5 in trade sale. We're looking at 500 in interest slash miscellaneous revenues.
Now, what are the breakouts, breakdowns of the interest slash miscellaneous? I have to look on the Excel
version, but if we take out the sale, we're looking at a million dollars. Okay, so we're in a million
without the sale. That's what I was trying to see neutralized, because that's an inter-fund transfer,
but that 4.5 went into the consolidated. And that's a one-time infusion.
reality where we are, we started at 2.1 and we're at 4 points. So we've got 490,000, so we're a couple
hundred thousand in a deficit spend. Yeah, if we look at this as a whole, we could really take, you'll
see that inter-fund transfer of $4.5 million. If we remove both of those top and bottom revenue and
expenditures, we're still looking at a deficit of about $700,000. So you can just look at that bottom number.
because that nets out from the top line and bottom line. Any questions? Next page, debt overview. One
of those check boxes that we have to have as part of the report requirement, but again, we track this
throughout the year as well, because when we look at the city's reports, we match debt payments with
amortization schedule to make sure the city is paying the correct amounts. But the DLGF does require
us to input this information on Gateway, all the debts that the RDC are paying, what is the outstanding
amount of those debts as of 1-125. So this, we're looking really a year and a half backwards. And then
the actual amount that the RDC paid for those bonds.
So what I mean by we're looking at a year and a half backwards is, as of 1-1-2025, so the last payment
would have been 7-15-2024. So really it's looking at after the July 2024 payment, how much that is still
outstanding. So it's significantly less than what is shown here right now. But again, we're looking
back. Can we take the refunding amount at the bottom on that? Basically, it's the 27-4-50 minus the
32-40. Three million, 2-40 is 8-75.
Yes. Well, not exactly, because a big portion of that is interest. The interest aspect, so. Yes. So
for like the 2024, interest might take up more than half of that. The scopes are so early on in that.
It goes early on in the bottom. But essentially, we've got 16 years is when everything's going to hit.
Yes, and that actually ties up with the exploration of most of the consolidated outpatient areas.
No questions here. The rest of the pages are all the parcels in the allocation area. I printed them
out. That's why this thing is so thick. But there's nearly 60 pages of parcels. Again, feel free to
take a look. Ask us if there are any questions. But we will upload all those parcels onto Gateway as
well. There's an upload section for that specifically. So let me ask one question. Just as we look at
these from a debt standpoint and then
Is there any of them based on what interest and time frame is that you could try to pay ahead or just
like the refunding bond we did in order to reduce our interest rate? What's the calculation or time
frame we look at what that? So there really isn't a calculation. It's more what is on the bond transcript.
So it'll say this bond becomes callable where you could buy back the bonds in
let's say 2030, 2036, we'll have to look at the bond transcript for each individual bond to determine
that, yeah. From a municipal standpoint, as we retire bonds and we look at the other infrastructure
projects that we have to do, how do we calculate? Yeah, we can. Our interest rate environment is super
low right now, so that might not be a good idea, just because let's say we do it. What I'm looking for
right now, I'm just saying as we move forward with 16 years on those loans. Yeah, we should always be
looking for opportunities.
to refund when it makes sense. Yeah, when it's beneficial. Well, we'll bring it up to Jeff as well when
we see opportunities for interest savings. OK, thank you.
a little bit of a lag. This is just basically a list of parcels. As you go through the parcels, when
we look at these and you're looking back a year and then we have other properties that are coming on
in these consolidated TIF districts, what's our time frame when it starts to hit where you're looking
at it from the allocation standpoint just whenever the county
distributes accordingly or gives you your report? You understand what I'm trying to say? Because we've
got larger projects that we're in arrears always in the state of Indiana on our collection. Are you
saying where we'll see the parcels on the parcel list? Yeah, we'll see the parcels that then also create
the allocation that goes to the TIF. I'll just use an example of where somebody tears down a existing
multifamily and then rebuilds up and it has we increase our increment of course. Is that a one year,
two year lag situation before it hits you in a reporting standpoint where we actually are able to calculate
that into our financial plan? It's about a year and a half to two years lag so how it works it's
it's built, assessed, pay. So if something is built in 2026, it doesn't get assessed till 2027, and
then we're paying it in 2028. So if you look at sort of like a developer purchase deal with a bond,
we always have like two periods of capitalized interest to make up, to account for the built year assessment,
and then we pay. It'd be a two year capitalization time in order to get the revenues there. One and
a half to two years, yeah. Okay, thank you.
So I guess there really wasn't anything else in the long list of parcels. Anybody have any other questions
for me or for Justin? Two quick questions. When we look at this from our standpoint with this, we have
to do this in an approval rating. And then after we do this, then we'll start looking at what we're
looking to do future-wise, bond-wise.
Well, yeah, I mean, we have several bonds, I think, that you've already considered issuing. And so we'll
be working with Justin and the team on doing the modeling for that. On how the modeling of the financials
will be in regards to that. So is that something in the next three, six months, either? I don't know
that the projects are yet to that point of maturity. I think the police station is probably the most urgent.
But even that, we don't have a lot of the project details yet. Perfect. Do we need to accept? One other
question. So how again should we handle their responsibility for presenting to the city council and
to the mayor's office? Did you say just email it or do they actually have to do something on the record?
So there's two ways really.
If the time allows included in the city council's meeting packets by April 15th or certain units,
you know, the timeline doesn't match up, the city council doesn't meet till the end of the month, then
we'll just, we just tell our clients, they just email this to the city council and to the mayor. Would
you typically send it to the city clerk as the sort of the secretary for the council?
Yeah, or really, Jeff could send it out as well. It's really on Jeff's responsibility, technically.
All right. Well, as long as they get it, it's OK. Yes, as long as they get it. We're in a little weird
position where the city council actually doesn't have any staff right now. Yeah, I remember
this conversation. The question I would ask as far as email and coordination, is that something where
once we approve and if we approve it moves forward and then would it be something that we would need
to present to the council just to there's no legal requirement well i understand yeah i wasn't looking
for a legal requirement i was looking for if that's the situation and it would be i don't think i've
really presented to the council of city council before no but again not a legal requirement we can if
needed but we've never been asked to
You would be willing to if it's needed based upon staffing concerns. Or Jeff could do it. I would be
happy to. Thank you. But it's good to know what the legal requirements are. Thanks. Yeah. Thank you.
Appreciate it, Jesse, very much. And to Laurie's question, do we need a vote to accept this order? I
would put it, yeah, I would like that in the minutes.
Okay. Just on the record, too. So I will move to accept the Livingston Redevelopment Commission,
the report, as presented by a reading financial. I'll second it. Moved and seconded. We'll do a roll
call vote. Warren McGrady, approved. Miranda Gaste, yes. Down to West, yes. Sue Scambler, yes. That's
four to zero. Thank you. Thank you very much.
Quick question, since we're still in the financials. Where does the Housing Development Fund fall into
redevelopment? Does it have anything at all in there or not? I'm just curious. It has nothing to do
with the redevelopment. OK. It just comes in. It's a city fund. OK. I was just reading through where
it previously thinks it was there, and that's been a while. It's not moved. It's moved a little bit,
I think. Thank you. Appreciate it.
That takes us to new business resolution 2621, or the everyone's really busy resolution. That's exactly
right. So who would like to speak to this? I can speak to this. Thanks so much. So staff put this together
because we're not sure who's going to be available for the closing on the property that the hotel is
going on in the trades district. And so this resolution is short-lived.
If you pass it, it will expire March 31st, but it provides the legal authority for the president, vice
president, secretary, or as a last resort, the executive director, Anna Kellyanne Hansen, to sign documents
for the closing. And so again, it's something in writing that the title company can rely upon.
But it's a very simple resolution and very short-lived. So if you have any questions about it, I will
be happy to answer. Questions from commissioners? My understanding was that pure development was not
part of it at this point. That was a statement and a question. A question, I guess, is a quality.
whatever you call it. But originally they were. Yeah, originally they were. I think it's just a whereas.
He's just kind of going through the history. He's going the historic. But yeah, my understanding, it
came back to us when we did the agreement and that it did not have pure development in that. And I think
he's just giving, again, I don't think this whereas has changed anything in the resolutions. He's just
factually. Yeah, I'm good with it. I know there was a dispute with
development and I didn't want us to get tangled up. Oh I don't think we will be. I mean what are you
what is your fear of entanglement? Is there something you're proposing? Well I'm just looking at it
from resolution if I mean I guess, I don't know. It just states that we approved it. Yeah we approved
it I just yeah we approved it but it's got and there was resolution from two years ago. Right it's the
resolution two years ago. Which I think was
Are you saying it wasn't passed that way? I think that one was passed that way, but it was also brought
up by that AUN was no longer doing it with pure development, and pure development had some issues internally.
So when it says resolution 2478, the RDC entered a real estate conveyance and project agreement, that
I think is factually correct with AUN and pure development.
And then later, you're saying they got it. Well, that one, one of the resolutions that we had to sell
the property at that particular time fell off. It aged out. I don't have to ask Mr. Fernandez. So are
you saying that you think that whereas is incorrect? I'm just, it's got pure development in there with
whereas we approved the letter of intent. Can you pull off resolution 2478?
I'm sure that one has it. It's just the following one. So I'm not disputing what resolution 24. Yeah.
So he's just kind of going through the history. Yeah. I don't think there's even. So it's OK if they
fell off. For resolution 2478, I think they were on it. Almost there. Yeah. They probably were. I'm
sure they probably were.
Afterwards, the people we were actually selling it to was not including Pure Development because...
Right, it says the closing did not take place and then there was a new agreement. Right. Yeah, so I
think he's just actually going through the history. So, yeah, we're just approving who's going to sign.
Yeah, yeah, this is not... The whereas's are also not binding, they're just providing the history. No,
we're looking at the therefore be it resolved. Yeah, you're looking at paragraphs one, two, three, four.
Okay. Because those were razors are factually correct, I believe. Right. I just want to bring it up.
If you saw peer development in 1, 2, 3, and 4, you should raise a red flag, but I think we're good.
Because all 1, 2, 3, and 4 says that, you know, the RDC reaffirms its commitment to do the project agreement
with ALUN only.
And then has the whereas is have no bearing in regards to the lead anything that would come back from
a legal standpoint. No, they're not. They're not. I mean, and they are accurate. Yeah. So I think they're
fine. OK, so yeah. All right. Thank you. Additional questions. Yeah. Have you given yourself enough
time, as far as 31st, the deadline that you think we're going to be able to live with? Yeah. Because
if you don't have to come and do this again,
You know, I certainly would not be opposed to if you wanted to give it another two weeks in case there's
a hiccup. I don't expect any hiccups. But you've probably gone around this block a lot of times. And
you realize that the best laid plans might. So if you guys want to, if you want to, what's your next
meeting after this one? We don't have another one in March. It would be like April. The first Monday in April.
April 6th. Yeah, so if you want to change 4 to say, you know, a couple days after that, let's say April
10th. That'd be fine with me. I'll make it one day is April 10th.
Yeah, okay. I'll make a motion to amend the resolution to April 10th. I'll second. So it would read
how? So it would that April 31st date would say the authorization and appointment shall expire on April
30th. April 10th, 2026.
So there are some extra words in there anyway. Okay, is there a second for the John seconded, I believe?
Yeah, I did. All right, we'll take a roll call vote. Laurie McRobbie, yes. Randy Cass. Yeah, Randy Cassidy,
yes, is amended. We're just voting on the amendment. Oh, sorry. We're voting on the amendment, yeah.
Randy Cassidy, yes. Laurie McRobbie, yes. Yes, for the amendment. Cease Gambler, yes, for the amendment.
Okay, so that passes. So we now have an amended resolution 2621 before us. And line four now reads,
this authorization and appointment shall expire on April 10, 2026. Okay. Are there any other questions
from commissioners before we go to public comment? Okay. Is there any seeing none? Is there any public
comment either in person or online?
Seeing none, let's come back to commissioners. Is there a motion to approve? Move approval of resolution
2621 as amended. Second. Second. It's been moved and seconded. We'll take a roll call vote. Lori McRobbie,
yes. Brandi Cassidy, yes. John West, yes. Sue Scambaleri, yes. That's four to zero. Thank you. That passes.
Is there any additional business we need to think about? Okay. Is there a motion to adjourn? So moved.
Thank you and thank you. We're off. Thank you everyone.