Hey all uh there's no audio in case they're supposed to.

Is that better?

Oh.

Yep.

Zach, you're looming above my shoulder above my head, but I don't can't really see you the direction I'm looking.

So make sure you get our attention.

Alright, okay.

Just making sure I wasn't missing something, but very much appreciated all.

Thank you.

Um, so we're just we're just looking at the um at these criteria.

The the way the the way these are set up is that every urban renewal plan is adopted by ordinance of the City Commission, and it has broad kind of goals about what the district is trying to accomplish, and it's related to the statutory provisions of blight that were found in the blight study.

In this district, which is primarily industrial districts, it's about infrastructure deficiency, right?

There wasn't a lot of infrastructure, and because of where it sat, the district sits between an interstate highway and a state highway, um, get just getting access into the property was a multi-million dollar lift.

Um, and in addition to that, just from an economic development's perspective, um, we struggle to get some of these more industrial kinds of employers and jobs in the city of Bozeman, because they can often build cheaper buildings on cheaper land outside the city.

So, this this district in particular is part of our effort to potentially level the playing field.

Um, and and make us competitive to have primary employment near primary housing, which, you know, we we hope to be people's first choice for a good place to live in the area.

So, um, so each of so really what we try to do is look at look at the goals of the plan and come up with um ways that from a development perspective, we can actually accomplish those goals.

So, really, put put some meat on the bone and say when we're trying to accomplish the goal, this is what we're looking for, developer.

This is what we're going to evaluate.

Um, a little bit about how this gets used.

Again, approving a TIFF project is a discretionary choice for the City Commission.

Recommending a TIFF project is a discretionary choice for this board.

But I think it's important for communicating to the development community, for communicating to the public, that we try to explain what it is we're looking for, and then consider rewarding that when it comes in, right?

And then also if we are no longer looking for something that we that we want, um, make incremental changes to our in to our policies to reflect what it is we are looking for.

So in this case, we haven't received a TIFF assistance application in this in this district.

This is a draft that we worked on a few years ago, but we've just haven't been able to put it put it out there and to a board yet.

And so this is an opportunity, I think, to work through the criteria and get it adopted if an application does come in.

So that's that's really where we're at with this.

And we'll we will be, you know, as as time allows, we'll be coming to some of these other ones during the next biennium work plan for this district.

So that's where we're at.

Um I wanna I do want to say just for every members of the public, the second piece of this, this criteria for TIFF assistance part, didn't get uploaded into the packet.

This is not an action item, right?

Um we will add it to the materials online after the meeting.

We will take action at a future meeting.

So this is really about discussion, us hearing from you, you getting your questions answered, you know, potentially even you suggesting homework to me or just redrafting or those kinds of things.

Um, but that's that's what we're doing.

So does anyone have any questions before I kick off and just jump into the the criteria for TIFF assistance?

Okay.

I'm gonna go through this here in case anyone is following along.

Um, so the the first goal of the Urban Renewal Plan is to promote economic development with a focus on value adding commerce.

So that's um, this is coming out really of our long-term economic development strategy principles.

We really are often looking for commercial development that um that is, you know, value adding isn't is in the statute, so we're using that term, but if you're if you're looking at traded sector businesses, that's kind of the term we also use in the in the development plan.

The reason we focus on kind of that traded sector, that value added sector is if when you have local dollars spent in a local economy.

There is a modest multiplier effect, but really you're not adding, you're not really adding new dollars to the economy.

When you operate a business that brings in money from outside of your economy into your economy, that gets multiplied as you spend it at local sector businesses.

So, you know, maybe maybe you're a remote worker getting a California salary, uh, and that means you really like going to Natalie's coffee shop, um, possibly, right?

Like that's a that's an example of a multiplier effect because then that business is able to um to pay their employees, their employees spend money on the economy and and and that and that does that.

So value-adding industries, in this case, we're really focusing because it's M zone property on manufacturing, uh, kind of that trade basic sector manufacturing, other manufacturing and other businesses that are appropriate to the zoning.

Um, I'll go through this one and then maybe we'll have a conversation about it.

So then the second thing is job creation and training, you know, if there's a specific job creation component to this one.

I think with any of these, um, it's really unlikely that any one project will get all the points on all the goals.

In fact, it might be that they do really well on one goal and really don't qualify for anything else, you know, and that's okay.

I think it's really about showing how the project interacts with the goals of the plan.

Um so job creation could be part of it, partnerships, um, things that could encourage public private partnerships that could add value to the district, and then ultimately tax generation.

Um that's really the long game, right?

It's part of how we remediate the blight and address the infrastructure deficiency.

It's also about how we engage this um kind of delayed gratification strategy we have for the taxing entities to increase the tax base over time.

So I'll stop there and maybe we can have a conversation about this goal, and then we can move on to some of the other goals.

Do I have to say something to get people to engage?

You can have no questions, that's also allowed, but I I do want you to have an opportunity to engage.

And we can come back to this at some point.

Like I did perhaps like what one thing to think about is not necessarily just the goals themselves, but also like the particular level of emphasis that we're placing on the goals.

Again, the points really matter in terms of helping frame what we said we valued and how much of it we're getting.

Um but like you know, at the end of the day, we can choose how many points these various things get, and they don't have to add up to a nice tidy number like 100.

It's really just about putting some weighting into it in terms of what we're looking for.

Um we can come back to any of these.

I'll move on to invest in efficient delivery of infrastructure.

This is this is really the big one here.

David, can I I'll take the bait on that.

Can you just speak a little bit?

I see three, five, three, ten points.

Can you just speak a little bit to the relative weighting and how those numbers were arrived at?

Yeah.

So and again, this is our this is our draft.

We're we're doing our best to throw this out there.

Um, when I look at this district, I see an intense amount of infrastructure deficiency, and I see sectors where we're really underperforming, right?

So if I I'm like, yes, we want these things.

We want specific jobs, we want partnerships, we would love value-adding industries.

These are these are all important things.

Um at the end of the day, unless a developer makes an investment for something and puts in the infrastructure, we we're at risk of getting 100% of nothing, which has been going on here for a while.

And in fact, um, before I even worked for the city, I went to a conference and Britt had to keep jumping out of sessions that he was in.

I think it was like the first time I'd ever met Britt, um, because we were trying to unload this piece of property for an industrial purpose, and that was like 14 15 years ago.

So, like this is there really are barriers to getting something done here and have been for a long time.

Um, so so I think for from our perspective, like tax generation will do.

You know, we are trying to get infrastructure.

We'd like to see certain kinds of commerce, but like at the end of the day, like the zoning to some extent takes care of that, and we would like it to be very taxable so that we can make good on that that delayed gratification strategy and also um and I think also like just because of the way it's likely that industrial parks develop, it's likely the developer and the businesses are going to be separate.

Um, so like this is not unlike the South Bozeman technology district.

You you you put in the infrastructure, and then the developer tries to attract tenants, and they're often not going to be able to attract any tenants with an infrastructure-free industrial park.

And so that's that's really what um what's at it.

So like all of this really comes to the end is like get the infrastructure in and get things going.

And within the 40-year life of of one of these, these districts were, you know, perhaps a quarter of the way into it, um, some movement, but still not a lot of movement.

So I think, you know, once we get more of that flywheel spinning, I think we can be more specific about what we want.

Like one, especially once the infrastructure's in and we've got lots, we can be more specific if um as individual projects are coming in.

But that's that's kind of how I'm thinking about it.

Yeah, uh David, for number three partnerships, public and private, and uh can you elaborate a little on that?

Maybe give me an example of it says what that would add value to the district.

Sure.

Um I'm I'm not sure that I have a huge amount of clarity on that exactly.

Like I mean, I think we are looking for if something can have a greater public benefit, we we'd want to encourage that and reward that, but I'm not sure I have something really specific in mind.

Um, you know, I think if this if this was if this was more of a mixed-use district, like if they were doing something like really innovative with the public realm or with parks or those kinds of things, I think that'd be the kind of thing I was we would we would be looking at.

And I don't know that those are necessarily out of place in an industrial park, but they are definitely things that cost money, and you know, we're we're already working uphill to get an industrial park done.

So I think that's um something to keep in mind in terms of the the we the weighting we put on that.

Okay.

Um so the big the big ones in this are invest in efficient delivery of public infrastructure.

So again, this is this is looking at the infrastructure, uh, particularly if there's, you know, identify the capital improvement plans, if it is efficient layouts, if um if it's not so specific that it only serves one project.

Um so the this is just very basic infrastructure stuff, and then and then specifically with infrastructure transportation access, you know, um it's likely as this builds out that one, if not two signalized intersections are gonna have to be added um into the park.

And so I think that's the those are big future lifts, and we want to say, yeah, we know that we're encouraging someone to front the money to do that and be paid back over time.

That's like part of what we're trying to do here.

Um just kind of taking a general look at this first part.

Um, kind of seems like tax generation or money is kind of like the more heavily weighted.

Um, I think value added industries um also kind of has that same effect, um, just in a maybe less tangible way.

Um, I don't know, just kind of seeing the score of three on there is one of my thoughts that uh that could possibly be increased.

It seems like uh um it is a more of an economic capture.

Um, like this district is competing with Belgrade, four corners, lower cost properties, less uh, you know, barrier to development as far as you know oversight and on the you know municipal level.

So um, you know, I'm just kind of thinking of you know, both as Bozeman develops into a town where we can't get our muffler replaced in Bozeman.

Um how do we how do we uh make those opportunities better or something like that?

Yeah.

Yeah.

Okay.

And I guess maybe maybe that that's a point of clarification for me.

When when you when you think about, I t I tend to think a little bit more.

Um when I'm when I'm thinking about value adding, I tend to think more where they take uh like a raw material or product and they add value in through like a manufacturing process and they turn it into an output, which is not necessarily what's happening with like we'll use your example of like the muffler shop.

Um, but when we think about like M zone property and the fact that like many of our mixed use districts land has gotten so expensive that let's say you're a mechanic or a tire shop or whatever, like you may be if you if you don't own your location or if you don't love your relocation, you may be looking for a new location.

Like do we want to be encouraging capturing some of this in this park?

Is that part of what we're trying to do here?

I mean, quick response would be yes.

Um, you know, even with the new zoning changes and stuff, we're we've seen a lot of M1 property be changed over into like a residential type use.

Um very few districts with M1 zoning in town.

Um so I I could see a consolidation and and this area would be the most likely with access and kind of a centralized location.

So, okay, great.

Can I ask one more question?

It's a little bit off topic, I guess.

But um in this district, uh, long-term, is there another access point, another ingress egress point they're gonna get somehow?

So I know, and I mean this would definitely be something that would be TIFF eligible potentially.

There's there's some discussion with MDT and state highways about potentially.

I mean, this is very a long slog for them as they have these conversations, but like potentially reorienting the uh North 19th exit.

And you know, they've they've they've they've shown us some like massing over the years of like uh design over the years of schematically of you know, changing that so that it kind of flows into the property, goes into a roundabout and then goes up so that you have access um to the interstate into the property.

That's a that's a big hard lift, and it'll be an expensive modification, but it's also the kind of thing that opens up, you know, 350 acres that have been in the city for a really long time.

So I I think that's something they're looking at in addition to kind of the the wheat drive and Mandeville Lane accesses to the property.

You can all let me know if a map would be helpful at any point.

I'm gonna pull that up.

Okay, and then just moving into supporting planned urban density and design.

Um we we you know it's going back to the growth policy.

This is a place we we do want to encourage uh dense uses, although to some extent um dense industrial is not impossible, but like you do tend to see you know more single story development, storage facilities, those kinds of things in industrial contexts.

Um but I I think there are some opportunities for for mixed use uh with it within this zoning um and and complementary uses.

So that's there.

Again, mixed uses.

Um there may be some opportunity for live work, um, you know, I was at a ULI conference recently, you know, they had some some interesting like live work apartments, like one-bedroom apartments that are on the ground floor where someone can you know cut hair and also live there.

Um and apparently they were very popular in this particular uh neighborhood project.

So I mean I think we could look for opportunities like that.

And then placemaking, you know, even though it's an industrial park, you can do small things that make it more attractive than other places.

And then and then finally, you know, these are these are a little bit more subjective goals, but you know, the kind of the relationship of the project to the overall plan and the district, um, and then just kind of a ratio of investment.

Um, you think about the the like I think this ratio is a good one.

This is like suggested by our consultants, but but also um thanks, Jesse.

I forgot you had power over me.

Um I think this is also a place where um we we've kind of been applying a priority as we talk to developers where we can't give you more than you're gonna generate, so like this ratio partly gets you there, but also just doing some of the tax generation analysis, it's as a general but not hard rule.

Um it's it's usually not a good idea to give um a lot of subsidy to a project that's not bringing a lot in a lot of taxes.

You can do it every once in a while.

Um, like there's there's more to these districts than just making money and generating taxes, but um considering where where the money comes from is is an important part of the analysis process for any project.

Can you just talk a little?

I don't know the ratios as well.

When is that measured?

When at what point would an eight to one ratio be determined, like the minute they're done or five years down the road?

Usually they're showing us pro forma.

So they're they're showing us the cost of the infrastructure that they're requesting and how much money they're spending on it and how much money they're getting from both both the infrastructure but also like the project itself.

Um so let's say they're building a big warehouse building, and we're giving them five million for for infrastructure, you know.

Um, we'd want to see the ratio between their private investment and warehouse and other things related to the project and our investments in um paying them back for public infrastructure.

Do we I don't know on the map might be helpful to look at at some point, but um are there currently any projects in the works, as well as do we know how many projects we're trying to achieve in this area?

Like is this like we're looking for like one developer, like 20 developers?

Like what's the sort of scope on the amount of things happen here?

This district has evolved in terms of property ownership since we um created the district.

So when we created the district, there were three, four, or five property owners in the district.

Um there's really we're really down to two main ones at this point.

So um one is I'll turn on parcels too.

Um so this stuff up here, Simpkins is on it.

This is like fee simple parcels.

Interestingly enough, these are parcels that used to be owned by the city that we sold.

Um we we purchased them a long time ago, before I worked here for a transfer station, and we sold them when I've kind of first got to the city.

Um something uh city management and city commission had tasked us with at the time.

Um, and and they weren't even the easy to sell because they didn't even have legal access.

So we we really had to to work to get that done.

Um, but a di a different development group bought these, they did additional work to get them accessed, and then they sold them to the current developer, um, which is Casey Tippins with with York Developments.

Um, and then that group um has done a um uh master lease with the state of kind of like everything up to the creek.

And I think they're working on master leasing over here.

Um I think I mentioned they they were hoping to be in for an application for reimbursement much sooner, but they didn't go through public bidding.

They listening to me is always very important if you're a developer.

So we we aren't able to reimburse them for that, um, but their next phase they're very and painfully aware of that, and so um they'll likely be seeking reimbursement for a next phase at some point.

These matrix have always been helpful, previous midtown projects that have come forward for approval, so highly like these things.

It does help everybody come on to the same page of discussion, what we're looking at, and it makes us talk about what we do value, and then of course, getting the third party review of their what is gonna be their payout and tax increment.

That's always that's a tangible that's hard to argue.

Yeah, so it just if if you haven't kind of been under the hood of one of these before, I'm I'm focusing on on this because it's kind of the policy level.

What do we focus on?

But we we asked them to provide mere related to the public benefits of the project, really describing it, their timeline uh site and building maps, right?

And then we're um we're also asking them if they're applying for over $50,000.

This is where we really get into uh below $50,000, it costs enough to do the analysis.

It's not necessarily a good value to do it, um, but um, but above above 50,000, we're we're doing that pro forma level analysis, the sources and uses the funds.

Honestly, almost no one applies for less than 50,000 anymore because infrastructure costs more than that.

Um but uh when we when we were kicking this off, we were doing a lot of smaller board, you know, facade grants and and things like that that we aren't doing in our districts anymore.

Um, and then um just their development budget, what things are TIFF eligible, and then you know, showing they have the financial wherewithal to do the project.

Kind of an interesting question, but I have um so who would be the applicant in this case, like if a business was coming um in a leasehold arrangement with the current developer, would the prospective user like a business looking to land lease and then do improvements asking for infrastructure with the would the would the lessie be the applicant or would the developer be the applicant?

I think I think it's much more likely that the horizontal infrastructure developer is gonna be the applicant because they're they're trying to create shovel ready lots for end users.

Um I'd love it if someone was the end, if I knew exactly who the end user was at the beginning, and and we were able to do that, but you know, a lot of times they're I think the first phase was like over 10 million dollars in infrastructure lift, so it's um it's gonna be interesting because we'll have a potential leasehold use kind of in the mix asking for infrastructure.

Well, I I think I think as likely as not what we'll see is that the infrastructure is all in already in in the leasehold use.

Um leasehold use might have something TIFF eligible they could apply for, but either A, it's already done because we'll have we'll have gotten the infrastructure in B in the short to medium run.

If we make a if we make an agreement with a kind of a the horizontal land developer, um we're they're gonna be fronting a lot of money.

This district doesn't have a lot of money, and it's gonna be a long time before they get paid back.

So they're gonna be heavily incentivized to get people leasing their property and and making that work for them in order to get reimbursed.

And I I see that as um putting the risk in the right spot.

Which is on them.

Thank you, David.

All right.

Any other suggestions?

Can I excuse me, can I ask a question?

Um can you just for my brain give me an example of round numbers for this eight to one ratio for commercial and five to one for sure.

Yeah.

Yeah, yeah.

So like I mean, let's let's say you um you're building an eight million dollar project, right?

And that's eight million dollars is in inclusive of the public infrastructure as well as the vertical construction on the site.

We'd you know, if you had uh two million dollars of ask, we might say, hmm, we're gonna back you off down to a million, right?

Thank you.

But if you're doing 16 million dollar project, we'd be like, and you had two million, we'd be like, it's great.

And again, this is one criterion for helping think about the project.

Any more advice from my advice report?

Um one more.

I'm just gonna circle back to public-private.

Um, and this goes back to a lifelong obsession of mine with soccer and all kinds of stuff.

And you know it's been very hard to have a indoor soccer facility or indoor sports facility of any kind work in this valley.

We've seen some pop up and collapse during the uh pandemic.

Um, would that be kind of like a the city could partner with somebody like the developer here?

Would that be I know that's a wild pipe dream of mine.

I'm sorry, but um, would that be like kind of an example of a public private partnership?

I haven't thought deeply about that, but yeah, I mean I think that's the kind of thing we could, and it's it's not it's not that weird in that like there wasn't a TIFF conversation about it, but we like within the 12 years I've been here, we have had indoor soccer facility developers approach us about this property.

So this would this wouldn't be a bad place to do something like that.

Um yeah, it's just you know charging people enough to make it pencil um yeah is is I think always the reason we don't have one.

I think about it six times a day, so yeah.

There's a little one out in kind of four corners area.

Oh, is it gone?

Maybe we could approach one of the landowners when they get busy to do it and dedicate it to the county city.

That along with skateboard park, yeah.

I love that you guys are thinking about that, like community benefit aspect of something.

David, how does this um matrix differ from without going into too much detail the the matrices for other TIFF districts in the community?

Is there significant differences or it it's the same format?

Um so again, in order to adopt a project as an urban renewal project, it needs to be in conformance with at least one of the adopted goals of the plan.

Um so every these are all different because every district has a different plan, and then I think within each district, um kind of the facts on the ground about what's necessary to get it going are gonna be different.

So this one has extreme infrastructure deficiency.

Honestly, I don't think this one is that much different than um than the one for the pole yard district.

Um, because they have they have similar challenges, like not a lot of infrastructure, and um the infrastructure lift being a big, and just basic access being part of the reason they haven't been developed, really long water and sewer runs, railroad constraints in both parks, um those kinds of things.

So um I think that's what I'd say.

Whereas like um the the goals in midtown and northeast particularly are a lot more human scale.

You know, they're um about the the interplay of commerce and walkability and a mix of uses and serving the neighborhood and serving as a commercial corridor and gateway to the city and and those kinds of things.

So that that's that's how they differ.

It's like they um those ones are gonna are a little bit less about infrastructure and a quite a bit more about placemaking.

Um I'm I'm I'm amused now that I'm seeing hotels that aren't even quite in midtown branding themselves as being in midtown because like we created Midtown, Midtown wasn't a thing, like it's uh this I'm dating myself here, but you know, it's like in Mean Girls, he's like, stop trying to make fetch a thing.

Um I I felt like that's what we were doing with Midtown.

It's like Jeff Krauss wanted to call it Midtown, and we kept saying midtown in every meeting until the developer of Midtown Tavern called it midtown tavern and then suddenly it stuck.

Um but I mean I I think part of calling it a place, part of calling midtown midtown, and part of the work that we're doing from an infrastructure perspective is people were looking at me like I was crazy that we are gonna try and do downtown style vertical mixed use development in midtown, like we're seeing at the Rue Building, for example, like we're seeing at Aspen Crossing, and so um, and so like you have to make some of these public infrastructure things up front for people to kind of get the vision and start heading that way um before you see any investment at all.

And so like that that's the way in which every one of these districts is different.

Okay, if we unless there's further discussion, all right.

Well, I appreciate appreciate the feedback.

We'll take this uh tweak it and bring it back as an action item for a future meeting.

Okay, and then um we'll we'll be getting through the other four districts um as we move forward.

Um I do have some FIIs for for the board, just um, great.

Just um, you might want to take a look at public comment.

Yeah, is there any public comment?

Check check.

Cool.

Uh hi there, Mark Campanelli, uh Bogert Park resident.

Uh you've heard me before.

Um so over winter break after class is ended.

I had a little time to imagine, and I came up with the East Gelaton Watershed Trust, which is a nonprofit that I'm thinking about starting.

Um so we're in the formation phase right now.

Uh in short, its mission statement is mitigating conflicts between neighborhoods and water courses for the benefit of both.

Um, and I think I'll keep that to just the short version.

Um, I do have a website.

Uh the second part of the dream is that I become independently wealthy and can buy a properties as they come for sale along the uh creeks.

But anyways, um let me switch here to my um to my other notes.

So um you might have noticed Mandeville Creek runs right through the center of this property.

Um actually um Holly from Gellaton Valley Watershed Council or Gallatin Watershed Council, if I said that right.

Uh she just notified me they're planting some trees, I think, there today with Trout Unlimited, which I think is great.

Um, so I was just gonna talk about that a little bit.

Um, so for um I do BS and beer, which is building science and beer, uh, with a little BS thrown in.

And um we actually do often go out towards Belgrade to go visit contractors' uh places, right?

It's just they set up out there.

Um so I'd be curious to see if there's any survey data, though, to back up like what are the factors like creating incentives not to settle in Bozeman.

Um also I worked at Resin on their photonics company in town they built um on commercial drive right at the end, right near the East Gelaton River, and I could walk at lunchtime along those trails and even all the way over to the East Gelaton Recreation Area and go to map brewing for lunch.

That was the draw, like a huge draw.

The best part about that job was Rand Swanson, my boss.

The second best part about that job was that access, and there is an opportunity here for that type of development.

You also have Cherry, uh what is it called?

North Cherry Creek, yeah, just north.

Um maybe the development on the right side has already done too much to create connectivity directly, but maybe we can make connectivity to that for walking at lunch uh for the people getting, you know, if they get a break.

I always like to see it in today's day and age, right?

But anyways, those those that is the draw for the extra cost for being in Bozeman, right?

I don't think we should look at that as being uphill.

I should look, we should almost look at that as being downhill, right?

Like it is such a draw for the workers, and I think that's where Bozeman should set itself apart because the commission priority is to protect Bozeman's heritage, neighborhoods, and natural environment, right?

That creek is the natural environment.

A lot of um totally used up my time.

Um there's also the that's this idea of again economic vitality of of using that natural resource as part of your economic development.

Um I'm kidding, all over the place, trying to keep on my uh my list here.

Um, so anyways, I guess they're already doing this, but branch out Bozeman with the Gallatin Watershed Council is an opportunity to restore this riparian area.

It looks like there was agricultural around it.

So I'm guessing a lot of trees were probably cleared off that.

Um the origin of that creek, by the way, is a spring creek south of town.

It runs through MSU and the Bozeman High School, I believe, both of which have done significant restoration efforts along that creek to keep that water cold.

So it'd be a shame to put a huge heat island there, right?

Right before it dumps into the East Gelaton River, which I don't know if any of you fish, but there are great fish in that river.

Right north of the tracks there, it dumps into the river.

Um, and I'm out of time, so I'll just wrap this up.

Um, I do want to compare it to that stretch of Bozeman Creek that runs just west of Story Mill Park, which just runs through like a bunch of warehouses.

And I know that the drainage is done now so that they don't dump the water from the hot asphalt right into the creek.

They usually put it into a uh a holding tank and and either try to let it run slowly, but those are issues with this these types of developments.

Um, and again, I just say drive a bargain for the health of future workers, um, since tax funding is helping this development.

Um, it is the placemaking of the urban density and design goal that is in that.

I don't think that should be thought of as secondary in these types of developments.

So, anyways, thank you for your time and listening.

Thank you.

Any other public comment uh here or online?

Our sole online person is left.

Great.

It's just us.

All right.

What's next on our agenda?

So just not just not just agenda, but just kind of a little bit of a um recap.

So the the city commission um heard the work plans and budgets you recommended, they adopted all of them.

Um significant change for this this district was a they moved some money out of the uh parking garage design fund into a hundred thousand dollars to work from midtown action plan update.

Um it's been almost a decade since we worked on worked on that, and I think there's a there's a real opportunity in this district to do some public realm planning uh for that district, you know.

Where are the parks?

Where are the uh uh where are we highlighting corners, some of the wayfinding things um I think particularly the what one thing I I miss from the design and connectivity plan, but it's definitely on my personal uh work list.

For example, is uh there was an idea that like put a trail along uh behind those five hotels off off Oak and Baxter, um, along is it Mandeville Creek there.

I think it might be um kind of an interesting midtown uh and and north park collaboration there.

Um, and maybe even get some parkland over there because it's probably about to be a thousand people living back there and a number of multifamily projects.

Um so I think that's an opportunity where we can um do some do some placemaking, looking for some public run.

Like I'm throwing that one out there.

I'm sure we'll do public engagement and work engage this board in that planning effort.

Um, but I think that's good, while still kind of maintaining a focus on um ROI and how we continue to grow the tax base in the district.

I think with good and thoughtful planning, we can we can do more than one thing at once.

Um, so that's uh that's on our agenda for the biennium.

Uh I guess I'd let our lady uh say if there's anything else you wanted to kind of report out on from the city commission meeting.

Yeah, no, that was the big the big win in my book, so yeah.

Um excited for this board to um help facilitate that update to that plan.

So yeah, all right.

Well then I will I'm I will be uh coming back with this one as an action item, and then we'll try to do um looks like time-wise we might be able to do two at the next meeting.

Um just uh bring this back to an action item, talk about a couple more of these, and just try to get some of our foundational work uh pointed in the right direction.

That's all we have.

Great.

If we're finished, and then that's it, we're done.

We can adjourn.

All right, that was in record time, team.

Good job, everybody.

Thank you.

Have a good afternoon.

We're adjourned.