All the meeting to order is 9.31, if that's helpful for the recorder there.

And excited to have everybody here.

It seems like a pretty interesting project for the application review committee for the city.

So with that, maybe we'll start with introductions if that's okay.

Just so folks kind of, I think know everyone around the table what their what their background is and their role.

So my name is Charles Wood.

I'm the CEO for the Chattanooga Area Chamber of Commerce, and before that spent um about tenure serving as vice president of economic development there.

So happy to see another pretty interesting project come before us.

Audio, you want to I am on the IDB since 2023.

Um have my MBA from the University of Tennessee Chattanooga, undergrad there as well, um representing district six in the Tyler area.

I'm just the court reporter Laurie Robertson.

Just I'm David Hudson uh architect and here in town, I found my own firm back in 1985 R Tech Design Group, and last October we merged with Tinker Maw, so I'm no longer an owner, I'm just an employee, but still an architect.

Christy Manorino, I am the executive director of local services for signal centers.

Uh a little background, uh quite a bit of um time working with the city, uh growing the arts um a number of years ago.

And uh currently our organization has is statewide, but it has offices all over town, including the Eastgate area, which is gonna be interesting to just hear what could possibly be happening on the Northgate side.

My name is Greg Tyler.

Uh I am uh I'm in the advertising business, but not really here in Chattanooga in New York and California.

But I am president of uh Frenza Hickson, president of the uh uh Valley Brook uh HOA, president of the Hickson Coin's Club and a lot of things in Hickson.

So uh Jeff asked me to participate in this, and I'm glad to be here.

I'm Susan Gilmore, I'm a realtor with real estate partners Chattanooga, and I also serve on the Board of Zoding Appeals, proudly representing District 7.

Uh my name's Jim Floyd.

Um I serve on the IDB Rivnadia, and um I guess my history is I worked with an engineering firm that uh manage numerous infrastructure projects for the state and the city around the town and currently own the home business.

So I'm Daisy Madison.

I am a retired CFO for the city of Chattanooga for 29 years, and I um in Joy 9 and um retired.

I I I say I'm no longer paid, but I still love working for the city and on behalf of the city.

My name is John Michelle.

I'm a developer for CBL properties.

I've worked on developing and redeveloping malls for almost 30 years, and I'm excited to be here to explain a little bit about what we're hoping to partner with the city on.

I'm also here just to let you know with colleagues, um Stacey Keating, David Newhoff, Kurt Hammond Tree of CBL, Dan Cannon is our civil engineer with Miller McCoy locally, and Mark Smith is representing us um on the legal side.

Great.

Thanks so much.

Um with that, I think um it's okay.

We'll go ahead and turn it over for the let me just uh introduce the folks on the screen.

Oh, thank you.

Sorry.

Go ahead now, Betsy.

Hi, um good morning everyone.

I'm Betsy Knott.

I'm an attorney with Bass Barry and Sims.

I'm here with my colleague Mark Mavenhoff, I believe he's on the phone number that called in.

We represent the city 90.

Thanks so much.

Um with that, we'll go ahead and move to kind of a uh general, I think introductory and educational session on kind of what is a TIFF.

Um, and that'll be Winston that'll cover that.

So thanks so much.

Thank you, uh meeting.

Well, uh it's lucky yeah.

Let me see if I can't just pull up a document real quick here.

Um we started in earnest.

Hopefully this won't take too long.

Has every anybody ever been um on an application review committee before?

Uh Daisy maybe has then.

Not in this capacity, but I have moved application.

Well, so um I'm Winston Brooks, and I'm the director of economic development here for the city of Chattanooga, and this is uh a great opportunity for us to discuss this morning and uh looking forward to working with you.

First of all, I want to thank you so much for uh taking your valuable time to come and serve on on this committee because it's really important um for many reasons.

Um I just want to talk a little bit about increment financing so everybody understands the the basics of it, and everybody probably may have if they did their homework science, but if not, this is the time we'll kind of um run through it real quick.

Um so on this uh here what's interesting is um when you have tax increment financing, it's a it's a it's a financing agreement, and um it sounds really complicated, but it's really not.

So the the base property tax.

So if you think about um a potential um property sitting there and it's paying its base taxes, and it it could be a greenfield, it could be a brown field, it could be um a mall, it could be an office building.

Um this um program was put in place originally for blight, but it's come a long ways because it's such a popular and such an easy way to finance development that a lot of times cities haven't planned for in our capital budget.

So, what happens is you have your your base tax, okay, and that base tax, by the way, is retained by the city all the time.

They don't for the life of this program for 20 years.

And then when development happens, uh the assessor goes back out every four years, makes an assessment, and now they've created an increment.

So if it was worth a million dollars, and then they do some development, and now it's worth five million dollars.

There's a four million dollar increment in an agreement that's guaranteed revenue that a developer then can go get bonded against or take to the bank.

That's why it is so important, right?

That financing agreement right there.

And then at the end of the term, um it uh becomes complete, uh, it goes to the general funds of uh the city.

And um, there's also it's not like all the money, all the taxes go to the development project.

There's a lot of taxes that are retained for schools for debt service and and other things.

And uh the developer, right?

People often want to know where the money comes from.

What happens is the developer continues to pay the property tax as they normally would into the um the assessor's office, and then the agreement is that when it comes back in, the um the city then would uh pay um toward back to the developer to service that debt or to reimburse for the infrastructure project.

So that's TIFF in general in a nutshell.

Um questions.

Everybody's right, and then so um I have a colleague, um, a great attorney, Betsy Knotts, and she calls the economic impact plan the constitution of the agreement.

And so today we're going to talk about um the application and the economic impact plan.

And so we've been working closely, thank you, uh, with um our council to advise us, and so you know we're confident that the application and economic impact plan are compliant to state law and to city policy, but we did have to ask for a a couple of waivers, which we'll we'll discuss a little bit longer in a minute.

And um also uh one of those waivers was not granted, and we'll talk about the third-party review again, just making sure everything's transparent and everybody understands uh what's happening for uh this important site uh uh for Higson, right?

It's been uh has a legacy of being a very important area commercial site, Northgate Mall for 50 some odd years.

So if if it's the nobody has any questions about TIFF, um I'll uh turn it back over to Charles.

No other questions.

Um it is a it is a pretty powerful financing tool for municipalities and and uh as well as other kind of local governments that's used around the country.

So um for for Chattanooga, relatively recent in kind of more significant use, just as a bit of background.

Um and so I think uh next item on the agenda.

If we don't have any more questions, uh I'll ask uh John to go ahead and give it over and do the project.

Thanks, Carl.

Would you mind pulling up the plan that shows the 14th?

The properties, yes, and the mall.

Thank you.

Is that correct?

Yep, perfect.

Well, thank you all for the opportunity uh today.

I'm excited to uh present and to be here to answer any questions along with with all of my colleagues who I introduced.

What we're looking at here on the screen is the site plan of the existing mall with the property, um, the different properties that are on the mall campus highlighted in the numbers one through 14.

I think it's important to note that there are currently 14 different properties on this campus.

Um before I get into the significance of that, I thought I would take a second to describe the state of the enclosed mall business.

I think that that's the reason why we're here.

Enclosed malls have um certainly changed a lot in the last 40 years or 50 years since this mall was developed.

And Chattanooga currently has two enclosed malls that are existing, um Hamilton Place and Northgate.

Chattanooga is going to be a one mall city, and that is not a positive or a negative for Chattanooga, it's just related to the size of the city and the evolving nature of the enclosed mall business.

It's just related to the size of the city and the evolving nature of the enclosed mall business.

When I think of other cities like Nashville, Nashville proper is a one is going to be a one-mall city itself.

There are other malls that are in suburban Nashville, but Nashville itself has is going to have one mall.

And I think that that is related to the deterioration of the department store sector, which I think is pretty well documented in the media.

Happy to talk about it, but there's consolidation.

It doesn't mean that department stores are going away, but they're getting smaller.

Their usefulness across asset types has changed.

And at Hamilton Place, we have healthy thriving department stores.

At Northgate, we have closed department stores with one left, which makes the enclosed mall model not viable.

Department stores have traditionally anchored enclosed malls, and they're no longer functioning as anchors at a place like Northgate.

So the sector is changing, and the reason for this conversation, I think, is mostly related to the change of in the sector.

Looking at this plan, I think it's really critical to understand that there are 14 different properties.

The main mall owns the water and the sewer lines and the storm system.

These systems were put in place in the early 1970s before Hickson was incorporated into the city of Chattanooga.

The significance of that is the mall was developed with private lines right before the city was incorporated, or before Hickson was incorporated into the city.

Had the mall been developed four or five years later, the mall would have been developed with public lines, and the utility companies would be responsible for the maintenance and the upgrade of the lines, and we probably wouldn't be having this conversation.

When I talk about the private lines serving the 14 different properties, it's important to note that all of the properties around the perimeter are served.

It's not a desirable situation for us as the owner of those lines, and I don't think it's a desirable situation for the city or the utility district.

However, I don't want to speak for them, and I think that's why, but I do think that's why we're here with what I call consider a joint initiative to fix this problem.

So that's sort of the outline of the boots on the ground situation.

We have a private line that services a number of public properties.

It services over 20 businesses, in addition to the malls, 40 or 50 businesses.

The lines are in various states of disreport disrepair.

They need to be replaced and brought up to public standards from a consumption standpoint, from a safety standpoint, and most importantly for the future of the mall from a redevelopment standpoint.

So ultimately, the capacity and the quality of the line, the degradations of the lines do not support any redevelopment.

And without new utility lines, there's no business case to invest in the campus.

The campus, the mall in particular, has seen its tax base erode over the last seven or eight years from about 1.1 million city-county taxes to $175,000 in city and county taxes.

And again, we're talking about 13, 11, 14, and 12, the main mall campus is where the where the values have eroded, and this allows us.

This proposed public-private partnership allows us to start investing in the re-imagination of the campus, and without this investment, uh the campus is heading sort of toward a lowest common denominator future.

With that, I open it up for any questions and uh happy to the two new developments.

Did y'all have a workaround there or did it have to go into the existing uh infrastructure?

So they go into the existing infrastructure on the ring road, but they've installed new infrastructure to their businesses.

They're relatively low intensity water and sewer uses.

They're also high visibility retail positions on the site plan, and by that I mean they're in highly desirable locations.

11 is at the front door of the property, number nine is at the real front door of the property.

Number 13, number 14 are in the middle to the back of the property, and they do not lend themselves to the sort of redevelopment that took place on number 11.

Uh we are looking for more of a mixed-use town center type of redevelopment, stuff that involves higher intensity water and sewer uses, stuff like apartments, um, hospitality, potentially office, all of none of which would be developable on the existing lines like number 11 was with its low intensity use.

Does that make sense?

I I know I'm sort of going kind of quick, but there's a lot of different reasons why we're here today.

And one of them is that everything around the outside, all of the out parcels, one, two, three, four, five, seven, eight, nine, ten, number nine, and number eleven, have all been redeveloped.

All of the useful increment, all of the useful um value that could be applied to the redevelopment of the system has actually been purchased by those end users, and that's one of the things that makes this significantly different from a ground field from a green field.

If this was a new development, I think you could argue that those properties might fund some of the infrastructure that we're looking to fund.

Here we're talking about the weakest piece of property, not that it's a weak property, but the weakest of the whole property from a commercial standpoint, trying to be responsible for the infrastructure that supports the entire campus.

Yes.

So under normal circumstances, who would own that infrastructure and who would have put it in?

Would that have been the city?

I thought I heard you say that.

Well, I don't think there's any normal, but if this was a good thing, if this was a new piece of property in 2025 or 2026, and we were planning to develop this or something like it, the development plan would probably include the infrastructure being installed by the developer and dedicated to the city.

Right.

And so and let me just kind of point to the plan.

The the challenge, the development plan would include selling these out parcels, the most valuable real estate to third parties or developing them ourselves.

Those are the most valuable pieces of property.

Those would be part of the overall campus plan in which you would fund the infrastructure and the other things that go on the site.

In this case, the infrastructure is installed, all of those properties have been sold.

They're all using the infrastructure.

The redevelopment of the middle cannot support a investment in new public lines.

Does that make sense?

It does.

I have one other question.

It sort of if I compare that to Hamilton Place.

Yeah, that would be sort of the central core, the Hamilton Place Mall.

And then all of the peripheral.

So explain how Hamilton Mall compares to what we're proposing here with respect to the infrastructure.

So the utilities at Hamilton Place are public.

They were built as public infrastructure.

The reason this isn't public is because it was built before Hickson was incorporated into the city of Chattanooga.

So the Hickson was incorporated in the early 1970s, basically right after this mall was built.

So this mall was built with private lines.

And it's not really a function, it's just a function of timing.

And the infrastructure?

The utilities, I thought there were two parts here that when it's finished, portions would go to the city, and others would go to the public utilities, is that correct?

So the city is the owns the sewer, would own the sewer lines, and the water line would be owned by Hickson Utility District.

So the city would have installed those under normal circumstances, if that's what I'm here.

I think the developer would have installed them and dedicated them to the city when they were installed.

Okay.

The situation is they were installed before the city took would take ownership.

I understand.

And I would imagine the city annex the property afterwards because of the sales tax potential.

Are there any other are there any other places in the city that have this kind of dynamic where it's privately owned lines serving multiple um multiple entities?

Is that something that exists today?

Or is this really one of the few things like this?

I do not know the answer to that.

Okay.

Interesting.

I have a quote a question.

Um does the private sewer system, like do you collect like a private sewer fee?

No.

Do they pay and they pay the city?

So they you just kind of pass on that expense that you're incurring from the city currently.

We don't pass on the expense.

We we bear the burden of the expense.

And and we get no income.

Okay.

So do you have an obligation to service these properties as part of the sales agreement when those properties were purchased?

Unclear.

Okay.

What was what did you say?

Unclear.

What was your question?

Do the are they obligated to maintain this infrastructure to service these properties?

In other words, eventually the infrastructure is going to fail.

Right.

What happens then?

And so is an extension of that question.

When do these properties when does ownership of this property transfer to the city?

The infrastructure, the utilities, as soon as they're built to city standards and accepted by the city inspectors.

So as owner of it, can I assume that the city would be responsible for maintenance?

Yes.

Yeah.

And talking to Greg Butler, you know, he's you know, he says that's a real problem for them, obviously.

But do they own that or do I know they have to service it now, currently, uh Higgs utility here?

Utility district.

Yeah, I mean, it's it's a problem for everybody.

He definitely ongoing problem for, you know, we we pay to maintain the sewer.

I think Hickson Utility does the maintenance on the water line.

And there are old lines that are he tells me they're down sometimes that businesses there don't have water.

Yeah, I mean it's hours days sometimes.

That was my question.

Like, do we have documented issues to support like if we did nothing at all that this was is going to fail very soon based on your documented issues that have been reported.

I'm gonna ask our civil engineer Dan Cannon.

He he's an expert and he's been with the property since we reacquired it in 2011, 2012.

And I wouldn't be surprised in five minutes occurred, and I got a text that the water would be common.

Okay.

It's common and it things these things break.

Nothing breaks at a convenient time.

And do you think it's just like the is it you know, just the age or the quality of the materials you use?

Like I think it's the age.

Um the materials, the storm, recorded metal, water, cast iron.

We're talking, you know, 55 years of service.

That's beyond any lot of really any material.

What was your name again?

I'm Dan Cannon.

Who's the pro who's the public utility that would water utility that would be mixed in?

So they have just not maintained the system because I'm assuming they're all I wouldn't say that.

So that's the question then.

Um if the water utility becomes an issue anywhere else, there would not be the expectation that the city would finance that improvement of what there be.

And uh because maintenance is because maintenance is the issue here.

Maintenance may have meant replacing it, but over time this too will become whatever.

Yeah, same state, age.

Yeah.

And I'm assuming the city will then that utility will at that time hopefully do whatever is necessary.

And the longer they the better they maintain it, I assume the longer to last.

I don't know.

You've got engineers here too, but the nature of construction in 2025-2026 is a lot different than it was in 1970, and I think that the quality of the materials that are used to build the utilities have more longevity.

Um again, I point you back to the fact that there are 14 different property owners.

Um, we're not the person or the entity that owns the lines, number 13, is supplying the lines for all of the property owners that are paying the city and the utility district for the use of those lines.

And I to me that's kind of the fundamental challenge that you have going on here is that all of these businesses are reliant on private lines for whatever reason for what whenever it was built, however, we got here.

Um I don't think anybody expected to be here talking about this challenge.

Uh the challenge really puts these businesses, the there's over 20 businesses on the other parcels that will be operating whether or not the mall continues to operate.

Um and they're reliant on these services, these city services, and and they pay the city and the utility district uh for the water in the sewer.

But correct me if I'm wrong, but the water that actually gets through there to them runs through private lines.

That is correct.

So at some point at the property line, you have a meter that's owned by Hickson Utilities, and then from that point to these other entities throughout this entire property is ultimately owned and maintained by private entity.

I think that they have meters at the specific properties.

There's no master meter that reads the that what goes into the private system.

But but your point is not my point is that it you know it's all being fed by private lines.

All all of the all of the public consumption to these properties runs through a private line that is owned by number 13.

And you know, on top of that, and correct me if I'm wrong, on top of that usage, right?

They are paying a tax, a fee for it to go into the sewer system.

You are correct.

Right.

Which is also maintained until it gets off the property by a private entity.

Which correct to just take it further.

That there's taxes being paid by the users, or there's a usage fee paying being paid by the users that we don't collect and we are paying to maintain the line.

That is that that is to get it off the property to the to the public facilities that will ultimately treat it.

Yes.

Yes, sir.

I understand.

Okay.

I think I understand too.

What he what you're saying is it's back to my original question.

Under normal circumstances, let's say Hamilton Place, that scenario would be different.

Correct.

That's what I'm getting to.

On to Hamilton Place, those line utility lines would have been maintained by the utility, is that correct?

Yes.

And the city because they're spending on the city because of the public lines.

Right.

And what's what's being proposed in the plan itself and in the application is basically utilize future tax revenues to fund redevelopment of the infrastructure, which I would say as someone who's worked in economic development, sometimes economic development is very cool and sexy, and sometimes it's not, and in this case, probably not, but the infrastructure that goes into the ground is incredibly important to make it all work, is what it looks like.

So I hate to keep that because I just I want to understand the concept.

So that this system is treated like the others, to the extent that Hamilton Place actually paid for the or did they pay for the construction?

Absolutely.

They did.

They did, and just like North Gate.

They paid for the I'm sorry.

Well, Northgate paid for the construction too.

It just they paid for it at the wrong time.

Yeah.

And that that's you know, it's not like we didn't do what the other one did.

We're just in a different, you know, situation because of a variety of like facts that not were that are not some sort of scheme or controlled by anybody, they're just the facts on the ground.

They so had that had they constructed it at the time and turned it over to the city like Hamilton Place did always they wouldn't have to play.

We'd be in the same place.

But the city didn't exist or the city wasn't there.

Yeah, absolutely.

Yes, you you you do understand it and it's just timing.

Okay.

Just really out of curiosity, because I know like Kava and Starbucks and all those are on the perimeter, but has this not made it difficult to attract national um at this point it it hasn't.

Um and that's that's why you see all that redevelopment.

Um what what we have and what the city has would be a potential problem.

And and you know, one one thing going back to my presentation on the nature of the mall.

When the mall is successful, the mall can pay the maintenance.

There's there's cash flow, um, there's money to pay.

The mall is doing this, it's doing this on an assessed basis, and it's doing this in reality.

Um, if you walk through it, you know, it's a good walking trail.

Yeah.

The occupancy is declining.

The the business of the mall is declining, and and there is no saving, you know, it's gonna take some time to unwind them all, but there's no saving them all.

There's no business plan that's going to fix this mall.

And and one thing we've heard in the in the public is you know, well, why would we make a investment into uh a mall that's in trouble?

And and this investment is not into the mall.

This mall, this is an investment into the horizontal infrastructure for the other business owners who are using the public services, and I mean it will allow us to create a follow-up business plan that involves redeveloping the shopping center, which will utilize a extremely important piece of property to a higher or highest and best use.

Um, it should stabilize and increase the tax base over time on the middle of the property.

Um, so for all of those reasons, you know, we're really without this, none of that will happen.

Without that, without it, and I've been accused by um a number of people internally, my friends over here of threatening too much.

So this take this, you know, for take this, you know, just as sort of like an explanation of what could happen would be the mall continues to decline, it becomes no longer, doesn't make any money to support the infrastructure.

So then everybody's looking at everyone else like how are we going to feed the kava?

Um, how how is that gonna work?

And you know, is the mall gonna be able to support it?

There's another thing that's going on in our industry, which is called zombie malls, and this is not that yet.

And CBL is not a zombie mall landlord.

We're we take a lot of pride in our malls, and we operate our malls um highest and best in the in the industry.

This is a home talk a hometown property, and you know, certainly you all know us, um, our company, our principals and our uh Hamilton Place, and you know that that that obviously we take a lot of pride in it.

There are companies who buy these properties for the lowest possible amount of money, they bleed them dry, they operate them, and then ultimately you know look at the city and say, you know, what are you gonna do?

Are you gonna buy this for me?

You know, what are what are the reasons for the city to step in?

And and that's not where we're at, and I'm not saying that's what's going to happen, but this intervention prevents that conversation from starting, and it also starts the property to being redeveloped to a higher highest and best use.

Yes.

Just an observation.

It seems like Hickson is growing.

I think that's that's true statement.

And there's a lot of development that's attractive around the mall.

Um I think I looked ahead to see some potential uh residential, maybe rental property around that, and there are senior living facilities surrounding that area.

So are we gonna hear at some point maybe I'm getting ahead of myself of kind of the vision of how those how this is gonna tie in and complement the existing development even beyond that footprint.

Yeah, I think that that's a super question, and there's another plan that we'll show you, which is the beginning of the redevelopment.

One of our challenges is we can't contemplate investment into the demolition of the property, the unwinding of the enclosed mall until we know that there are public utilities here serving the other customers of the property.

So we agree that this is a fantastic piece of property.

We know it well, we're we're local to Chattanooga.

Uh we do see a mixed-use town center, which is a pretty vague description.

Um, but what it means to me is mixed use, um, multi-family.

So here as part of the phase one, which would be immediately actionable with the upgraded utilities, is a apartment project shown between the former JCPenney and the existing movie theater.

And and I would say that project will be duplicated when the mall gets torn down, and it will be complemented by um retail commercial, um, perhaps more food, more beverage, perhaps some amenity space, walkability, uh, modern concepts that are consistent with mixed-use development, they're consistent with the planning visions that have been circulated, approved through about the Hickson Corridor and the North Gay property, uh hospitality is big on our list.

So all of those ideas are things that we're work will be working toward when we know that we have a solution for the infrastructure challenge.

Is there any uh talk of the library maybe doing something?

I know they they want to expand that's a apparently that library is used more than any other library in town or something.

Definitely a conversation that we're aware of, and we've been um I don't want to say a part of, but but if you actually look at if you blew up this phase one plan, the library we're showing a relocated library in the bottom right of the building.

Um if I can do it, but up right here, we're showing this is the word library.

So in the corner, there's certainly an opportunity to include a new library in that project, and that's something that we've evaluated at this point, and we would love to accommodate if um if if the city's ready to do that.

You said phase one is a multifamily it's proposed as a multi-family, yes.

And so that that project that you see on the screen is a surface park three-story multi-family um project, similar to what's on North Park.

Yeah, yeah, I'd say so.

Excuse me, and these are planned to be um rental apartments or yes, and then whenever these new facilities were installed, um, I'm assuming permits obviously are pulled.

So, was that was this sewer um inadequacy brought up?

I mean, when these, for instance, I think is it BJs or all of these new facilities that are you know almost set to open, you know, when they hooked into the sewer, what was that conversation like?

I I don't want to speak for the city, but it's it's a conversation.

I think everyone's looking at it, they're evaluating it, and um so when they hooked in and they knew that this sewer wasn't adequate.

I mean So I I I again I don't want to speak for the city.

I don't think that the city wants to prevent economic development and the low-intensity usage of BJs, which you know is a big commercial building, but it doesn't use a ton of water, it doesn't use a ton of sewer.

Okay.

Um I I think that it can be connected into the system at BJ's risk with respect to what's going to happen around the outside without creating too much change to what's going on, recognizing that what you're talking about would be a 90,000 square foot BJs replacing 150,000 square foot sears that was there previously.

So it's not like the um usage and the intensity of the use is any different.

It's actually lower than what was there.

Okay.

Um so it didn't really seem and so whenever that um facility was built, they were aware that it was a private um cereal article.

I I honestly don't know what they're aware of or not, but there's documentation that they could be aware of it.

They should be aware of it.

Yeah, I'd say that.

Yeah.

Okay.

I was just yeah, curious about it.

Because when we talk about redevelopment, I mean that's a that's kind of a big shift from going to you know, these big box stores, which obviously we know aren't successful at this time.

Um, and I see the need to increase the the sewer capacity, and obviously transferring that over makes sense, but to add in a bunch of um apartments, I mean that's that's kind of changing the whole landscape in my mind of that area.

I know we do have some of the um assisted living facilities, I think, um 55 plus uh buildings back behind there, but I'm not sure of how that compares to what we'll be making.

Yeah.

Okay.

So like instead of the mall area, we're gonna kind of tear that down and create apartments.

It's gonna be mixed mixed use.

So there'll be some apartments, there'll be a lot of retail, everything that exists on Hickson Pike and 153.

That's gonna continue to exist.

And then I would say that the characteristics of the site.

If you drew a line down the middle of the mall, just pretending that we tore down the whole mall, the stuff from around the middle that faces out, has very solid commercial characteristics.

Everything in the back does not.

Um, and I think they're gonna see a blend of housing, hospitality, and complementary commercial.

So it'll be a little bit of everything is is how I would say it in in a modern walkable green sort of uh format.

Okay, yeah.

And then there you don't foresee any kind of like zoning issues with switching, as long as the currently zoned um CC, so it's currently zoned to support um that phase one project, and we're not trying to do anything that wouldn't be contained in the CC zoning classification.

So no like public outcry of don't build this here is gonna be able to.

There's these malls have been in the community, this mall's been using apartments a long time.

I I I can't tell you how people feel about everything.

Um I certainly know that there's certain groups who don't want to see densification in places like Hickson, and what I would what I would offer is this is a dense, it's already a densely developed site, it's an infill site, which is kind of a weird concept.

Um so what we're talking about would be just changing the way the density is utilized from a challenged um older format enclosed mall that's not generating property taxes and sales taxes like it once was to a modern um tax generator that the community will have and be proud of and be able to use.

I think of um I don't know if you're familiar with the development, there's a number of them all over Charlotte, and um one in Northport Florida that's just this huge, I mean it's a lot of residential, but it's all mixed use, you know, commercial, there's parks, there's you know, concerts at night, it's almost like there's just a really um vibrant, dynamic um community, you know, kind of structure, and it seems like there's enough real estate there that that could possibly be but you know, the vision, because right now it's just hodgepodge to me.

You know, and I I love Northgate Mall grew up first job orch at Miller Brothers.

Um so I mean I remember when it was vibrant, wonderful, but you know, to your point, I mean that's not what people want anymore.

And so, but these these communities where their concerts and there's green space and that type of thing seems like, and I realize that the residential won't bring in probably as much tax space as the commercial, so you've got to figure out that that mix, but um as a city, I would assume the city would want to see increased kind of density of uses on what are now kind of brownfield sites.

I mean, that this to me makes that property I think much more viable long term for the city, um, and rather than taking green field sites in outlying areas, I mean the infrastructure as far as roadway infrastructure, traffic infrastructure is there to support it.

I mean, it's a logical path, I would imagine, for the city.

Actually, I agree.

And I I recognize the vision and appreciate the vision and the answers.

I'm just trying to figure out because the area is growing, the economy is doing its thing, and you are putting this to make sure that we continue in modern day rather than you know 50 euro once that to me seems to be a vision that is supported economically.

So my can my overall question isn't the project itself, because it it sounds like a great project, is um this isn't my typical bronchial in.

So my question, I guess, gets down to the but for test.

And I'm not sure that the but for test is met, although I know there are certifications out there that it is, but it just seems like this project could support itself, like any other routine developer, but maybe not.

So in that regard, my one question there is I'm assuming you have presented this project to your bankers and they've denied your loan, you fund it.

We have not presented it to financial institutions because there's currently zero return on the utility investment.

So let me let me try to explain that in a way that everyone can understand.

The infrastructure that we're talking about, the water sewer and storm, costs approximately nine million dollars.

Zero dollars the the um improvements need to be made to support the other properties before we can get to anything.

So that there's there's absolutely no return at this point associated with the infrastructure.

I also point out that the demolition of the mall costs a substantial amount of money.

So when I look when I look at it, I I'm looking at about 15 million dollars of costs before we can start a project.

So we're we're and I think people are studying this for the city, third-party reviewers are, and I I think there's negative equity value in the land because of the infrastructure and the cost of demolishing the structure the the law.

I don't I don't think there's a business plan that could even start without the utilities.

Okay, um again, so at the end of the day, you have not presented this, so you did you don't have a documented bankers' refusal because I consider this part of a bigger plan, just like any other, just like let's say maybe I'm wrong, maybe just like Hamilton Place.

When they came in, they had to do exactly what you're talking about, and then turn it over to the city, right?

So that financing plan included things other than the infrastructure.

That's just my thoughts on the issue, but I think for this committee, we've only got a couple roles.

I do think the butt for I think the butt for test is a question that certainly the IDB and city council have to be comfortable with.

I think for this committee, though, we've got basically two things to vote on.

Um you know, is advising city council if um if the documents are compliant um with IDB board act of the state and then the city's TIFP policy, and then to vote to set the um public hearing with IDB.

Um thank you for that kind of attention.

So okay, so we're not really uh recommending one thing or the other.

It's just that we're just deciding whether or not we think this is a good project.

Well, we're deciding whether or not this meets the so it's not even that we're not actually even advising city council that we think this is a good project.

We're advising city council has this met the process that was established in the TIFP guideline and the TIFP policy of the city, and then if it meets the state's tax or uh meets the state's industrial development board act, and then we're also voting on approval of a date for the IDB um public hearing.

So those are the kind of the two things this committee is tasked with that we have to do.

So the butt for TIF is not something I need to be concerned with.

That's my understanding.

I would say that that is true, however, that's a great point.

And so the butt for is where we're looking at but for upgrading and replacing this infrastructure, highest and best use would never happen.

And that's based on the numbers of the third-party reviewer has come up with.

We do have a draft, a one-page draft that was sent to us.

Has the committee received that?

So that was that third-party reviewer that was looking at the value of the project, the the value of the property, the future investment in it, and then what this what this infrastructure would look like, keeping in mind historically all of our TIFFs have been tied to vertical projects.

This is a TIFF that is only for the infrastructure, which is different, um, which is why this has been such an anomaly when we're looking at projects.

It's also why we asked for waivers, we asked the county and the city to review the waivers on this particular project.

Again, it's new.

We're using TIFFs for infrastructure only, which we've never done in the past.

In the past, we've always done TIFFs for projects that had infrastructure associated with the project.

In this particular case, there is no project.

The project is actually the sewer.

And so what we're saying is, or the infrastructure, what we're saying is but for the nine million for the water, the sewer, the stormwater, the additional future development would not happen.

So the outparcels, that's limited infrastructure.

That's limited development that can happen because it's so limited on water sewer use.

So the laterals that are coming off, that's what the current infrastructure can support.

If we want higher and better use, and again, that's the hospitality, the multifamily, all of that requires new infrastructure.

And so that's the butt for that we're looking at in this particular case.

And staff feels like we've met the butt for, we've gone out and um secured the third-party reviewer to validate that butt for the yeah, and just you're looking at this from a logical standpoint.

I'm trying to anyway.

Um the development was done in the early 70s before the city annexed it.

Okay, after that huge tax base came up, the city annexed it.

So they've been collecting taxes for what is it, 50 years, right?

Okay, or a fee, whatever you want to call it, but the city's also been reaping some benefits off of and it's based on the water usage of those properties.

They get you know a significant fee, but it runs through private lines, which you know this only makes sense to me to to utilize some tax increment funding in order to improve the infrastructure.

You know, you're talking about the infrastructure here, y'all.

If we don't do this, and these guys default, the sewers start backing up at Aubers.

You know, it's never a problem until the commodes don't flush.

I think you you completely understand it, and I I'm happy that the explanation.

Now, this isn't really a discussion to what they want to build, and in reality, what I see in here is that it's not written in stone what you want to build.

That's still on the table.

Correct.

Right?

So that's not a point of discussion today.

They're just giving us our best guess.

Is that correct?

Yeah.

Yeah.

It may change.

It may and there's gonna be other discussions about that in the future, I'm sure.

That that's correct.

That happens at the IDB with a development and financing agreement, and that's where restrictions can be put into place as to were this project to be funded, there could be restrictions on the type of development that happens to prevent anything the city would not like to see.

So we are only looking at, you know, a use of tax increment funding for a failing infrastructure.

Correct.

And you know, 153 flooded the other day.

I had a friend that's car, you know, there's there's some stuff around there that need to be addressed.

I live in that area.

And knowing what I know, you know, water lines that are 50 years old that are being maintained by a private business or a private entity, you know, they're not gonna make a significant, they're gonna put a band-aid on it and move on.

That means aubreys, that means whatever your other properties over here may or may not function on a regular basis.

And as I said, if the commodes don't flush, we got a serious problem.

So I'm just trying to make sure we stay focused on the issue at hand here.

I mean, there are no concerns.

I mean, you're you there's health concerns that could affect the Hickson community or this right.

If this stuff isn't addressed, yeah, I mean we had even talked about that, but I guess that that's pretty significant.

And so I do want to iterate it's reiterate it's a private system, and so we have a private developer coming to the table asking for public dollars to replace and upgrade the private system that would then be dedicated to the city, to the municipality.

At that at that point, it becomes a public system, but again, it's a private developer taking the risk, funding it on the front end, and then asking for reimbursement and then dedicating it, building it to city standards and then dedicating it back to the city.

And and in an emergency type scenario or something like that, if say CBL isn't around, the city's gonna probably end up taking it anyway.

So I think we're being proactive here.

So just my thoughts on the matter.

Um other questions on the project itself, and if not, I'll I'll move to um item five here on the agenda.

Almost out of an hour.

Okay.

Um I I hope everyone had uh opportunity to review the application and and the other information that was out ahead of time.

I think maybe I'll just start by asking Betsy Knotts, who's uh contracting.

Okay.

Okay, thanks, Betsy, who's contracted counsel for the city.

Um is it your understanding that um the application meets uh city uh TIF policy guidelines?

Yes, we've reviewed the application and the current TIP policies.

Okay, and uh we believe it's being finished, and then an application doesn't necessarily have to meet the state IDB Act, correct?

That'd be the economic okay.

Um what does that mean when you say it didn't have to meet the state?

It the state doesn't have a requirement around the application, just around the plan itself, does it make sense?

The city has a requirement around the application.

Uh I'm just wanting to make sure that buttons are test is not an issue for us.

And my biggest thing is while I I'm totally in agreement with uh all the comments.

I was just I'm trying to see how it would be different for any other developer that were handful of infrastructure.

How it would be different for how I could then not say yes to any other developer who's wanted to come in and do all of the good things in terms of paying the upfront cost for that infrastructure being given it to the city so that the city can maintain it.

Because that's why it's given to the city.

So that the city can maintain it.

That's all.

I'm just wanted to make sure that that's not the issue here for me to be concerned about.

Because I do know for sure.

It is definitely advantageous in terms of project development.

I just you know I just see so much of that happening across the city.

And most of them aren't asking for TIF.

So I can add some color, Daisy.

Um and by the way, nice to see you in a minute.

I used to run the local government finance division, the comp troller's office, so we we talked.

Um now I'm over in the private sector, so good to see you.

Um so the butt for test is not a legal requirement.

Um it is a requirement that you guys have self-imposed in your TIF policies for good reason.

Um and so we are complying because we've hired a third party reviewer, um, and he's in the process of uh you know crunching all the numbers and coming up with a final uh how much is a reasonable return on investment for the developer.

Um we spoke to him over the weekend, and we did get kind of a preliminary analysis on if there were no subsidies whatsoever, no public subsidies on this project, it would be a negative negative return uh for the developer.

So it proves that there is a case for the developer asking for subsidies in this project.

Can I ask a question?

Sure.

Um then can any other developer then essentially divide my project into infrastructure and then vertical later and then get this same sort of thing because the infrastructure by itself is not intended to, but it's just the vertical complement in it that makes it advantageous for any body to do to provide that infrastructure.

So I will I will add that the legislature in the last legislative session did broaden the TIFF Act, and so now infrastructure can be done as a standalone project in tax increment financing that was not allowed prior to this last legislative session.

Okay, um, and so the landscape is changing a little bit as a result.

Um but numbers-wise, I don't think we can say that you know every single standalone infrastructure project um would meet like the butt floor test, like this is appearing to.

Um, I think every case would be different.

Okay.

I think you just told me for my mind was different in that the state has now allowed the separate.

Correct.

Okay, all right.

Okay.

No problem.

Um, and then Betsy, I'm gonna move down the list here, so it sounds like application to policy uh economic impact plan.

Um can you confirm that meets the state IDB uh act as well as the city's TIF policy?

Yes, I can confirm that we drafted it.

Um and then the process has been undertaken to date.

I know we've had a couple meetings so far, so we are we in line with the TIF policy for the city so far.

Correct.

Okay, and there was an additional meeting that the city held related to the waivers that was not required.

Okay.

So that was extra cover, extra transparency.

Okay, and then I'm assuming you also drafted the resolutions of intent.

Correct, Mark and I did.

Okay, so those are those need statute as well.

Yeah, okay.

Properly noticed to the meeting.

Okay, thank you.

The meeting has been properly noticed as according to staff.

With that, any other questions on um kind of review of the materials in the committee.

So I guess just from the purpose of this meeting is based upon what Betsy has just said, we're gonna vote whether this is in compliance correct with the laws.

We're not we don't know the laws.

Correct.

So okay.

I mean you might, but no, we don't.

But that is correct.

I'm with you, David.

Any other questions on this?

All right, with that, um, I'd like to entertain a motion to buy city council the documents are compliant with the IDB Act and the city's TIF policy and are qualified to be submitted to City Council for approval.

So make a motion we approve.

We approve.

Second.

Okay.

Any other discussion?

All in favor?

Any opposed?

All right.

Um and then we'll move on to item seven to vote to approve a date for the industrial development board to hold a public hearing on the economic impact plan.

That date is November 3rd during the regular IDB meeting.

Is that correct?

Okay.

Um so I could um kick me out the board.

Uh this would not be a time or place or appropriate, I'm assuming, for us to from to ask question about the waivers.

And the waiver themselves has really nothing to do.

I won't say nothing to do with, but with respect to what we're doing here today, the waiver doesn't come into play.

Technically, it doesn't come into play with the review committee.

That doesn't mean it's not fair for you to ask staff.

I wasn't I was interested.

I noticed you know, but let's finish the meeting.

Okay, got it.

Um, and so that again that uh public hearing would be set for November 3rd at the regular industrial development board meeting.

Uh so if I could ask for a motion, move to approve.

Second uh any other discussion?

If not, ask for a vote to approve.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Aye.

All right.

Umstentions?

That's fair.

Any abstentions as well.

Thank you very much.

Um do you want me to leave meeting open to answer that dialogue?

Okay, finish with it.

We'll finish with it.

Okay.

I'm curious about the waivers too.

So just for any any other questions for the group, including um for Bayesian Madison.

I think we can handle that before we adjourn.

Right.

And then we did go through kind of the process, but typically what happens with a TIF is the application would start at the Industrial Development Board.

The City of Chattanooga adopted policies, allowed the IDB and or the city council to waive any policies in in the acceptance of application.

As an example, city backed TIFFS typically don't go through this process, they waive it.

Uh, but developer back tips with the developers accepting the risk, we take them through this process.

Again, typically starts with the IDB.

Based on sort of the last two years of of working with the IDB, we knew that the IDB would want to have the city approve the waivers.

So we started at the city this time.

And so we started at the city and said, hey, we have a developer, they're interested in this infrastructure tip.

It's not something we've done before, it's going to require some waiv of policies.

City, would you weigh in on waiving those policies before we even take the application to the IDB?

So that's where we started at the city, and the city reviewed uh a request for three waivers.

It approved two of those waivers, and the last one, which was that third party review, the butt four, the city said, Hey, we're not willing to waive that.

You've got to show us if they meet the butt floor.

And so that's where this third party review that our outside TIFF legal council has been working with the third party reviewer to get that.

We did receive a draft of that over the weekend.

So we have kind of the draft cover page that that kind of explains high-level the butt four.

Um, and we're comfortable with that.

And so that was one of the waivers.

And then uh Winston, if you have the other two, would you like to go over?

Do you have a particular question about one of the waivers or just uh one of them is the term, yeah.

I think it has to do with the percentage of the increment that goes to the project or something like that.

That's that's right.

So what are you doing?

You extension when you waived it meaning what all of it now goes or what to me, what does that waiver mean?

So and um a normal um increment financing that we we've all seen where you you have a project at the end, it's got per construction, and it's just safe as uh 100 million dollars uh total project value.

Then um one of the um waivers was the uh policy says that the uh increment uh can only be 15 percent of the total project.

So in this case, there's not like a a ratio to be created um from the project because the project is the um the the infrastructure that needs to be replaced, which I think you said was around nine million dollars.

Correct.

So it's like the big is it nine or fifteen?

It's nine million uh present value, the cost of the 20 year um tax was 15.

Yeah, okay.

So that's yeah, I thought I'd remember a bigger number here.

Well we're they they're both right, but they're used sort of into interchangeably.

And then the other one you it was the the other term.

Correct.

So that first one was a maximum percentage of total cost because there's no vertical against which to compare the infrastructure, that one didn't apply.

And so with that's where we asked for a waiver on that one, and that's the explanation that Winston just gave.

The second one was a limit on allocation of gross incremental tax revenues, and so again, that one was where we're looking at a choice of either a 10 year 10 years of increment at 75% or 20 years of increment at the 60%.

And so this is where we were asking for that to be waived to allow the 20 years of increment for this particular project.

The 20 year at 60 or 20 year without the 60.

20 years at the 60.

At the 60, up to 60.

I'm going off memory.

It's the 20, it's a 75 25 split or 20 yeah.

Okay, it's fine enough to make it wasn't it?

So whatever the policy says.

I know they have the right.

The policy says that um it's 10 years or under it's uh the increments 25 percent.

Yeah, and if it's over that, then it's uh 40 percent.

So we asked them to waive it since we were uh trying to uh give the money together for the infrastructure.

So it's they wouldn't they went to 20 years, but they give them a more favorable percentage.

Which is 60.

What is it?

The city retains 60 and all of 40%.

They gave it the okay, okay.

I'm sorry.

It would have been normally been the 15 year, but you gave them the 20 year to allow them to have more favorable.

Uh it's it's it can go from 10 to 15 and we ask for the 20 on this one.

Correct.

Okay.

So that those are the those are the two waivers that the city council approved in order to move it forward.

Have they not approved those?

We would not we would be bringing an entirely different project to the table, but we needed those two waivers to make the infrastructure numbers work.

And so that's again where we we started and said, hey, approve these waivers, and then from there we can then come back and accept the application.

And then we went to the IDB and said, IDB, we have an application, it has waivers with it.

The waivers have been approved.

IDB said yes, we'll accept the application, and the application fee, the $8,000 fee application fee.

And then the IDB says, okay, now set up an application review committee to review the application and the associated documents, which is the packet that we sent to you.

And then this your approval then goes back to city council, and then see um, and then we also have a public hearing, and then all of that gets gets finalized in December, and then there's a development and financing agreement that typically will happen in January.

And so, all in all, our process for a TIF typically, I mean, we started in October, we'll end in December.

Um we may have started in September.

It's all a blur, but our process typically takes about four months to go through.

Um, some municipalities do it in six weeks.

Staff has already heard me say that the Oracle TIFF in Nashville is two public meetings.

That was it.

Yeah.

For the largest TIFF in state history.

So we have a very onerous taxing refinancing process.

And some of that is just for it's it's clarity, it's um transparency, and so that's why we have roughly seven steps to approve a TIFF to get a TIF district designated and in place.

And so what that does is it it puts us in a situation where there are times when developers would like to see public financing of public-private partnership, but they're not willing to go through this process.

Because at the end of the day, you have a developer and a development team that's coming to the table in seven different public meetings in order to discuss the project.

It's great for transparency, and we get to hear we hear different questions every time, which is fantastic.

And then we take the feedback and the questions that we heard from this committee.

Um, there are minutes that will be drafted from the from the this meeting.

We incorporate all of those those questions and those responses into the next presentation that will be the public hearing that will go through city council and IVV.

For clarification, the policy says that we can ask the city council for waivers.

Yeah, I thought that I just want to know what they're not saying.

Um last thing we'll finish, right?

One last thing.

I just no.

No, we are we're still open.

We're still open.

I haven't I have another one yet.

No, I just wanted to uh let the developers know that we appreciate them doing what they're doing.

Our question, mine in particular, has to do with the fact that this is a public entity.

It is something that the citizens want to feel like they're being treated fairly with respect to other developers.

So I ask questions that they will ask.

And then I need to basically be able to respond in a way that I feel comfortable and not make up responses, if you will, on behalf of developers.

I'm not trying to defend the developer.

I'm really trying to explain and understand why the city is doing this, because for this developer versus another.

So I hope you guys understand that.

I think they're honestly, I think they're great questions.

It's it's a you know confusing topic, and we don't take our position in any community, um, specifically this community lightly.

Yeah, and and we we we definitely are the huge taxpayer here, and also we all live here, or most of us live here, so it's it's a big deal for us to appreciate the board, appreciate the city and appreciate your questions.

Yeah, I just have two comments.

Um I appreciate your questions, Daisy.

Um, and appreciate you know, you're interested in in doing this, and I would love to see um you know we move forward to have a larger public process in terms of envisioning what can happen around that entire area because I do think there's a lot of opportunity there.

Um, and I think many many minds could contribute it to some really good ideas that would make it very attractive, and therefore, you know, we recuperate the investment quicker if it's if it's something that appeals to everyone and attracts folks.

I would agree with that because it's important to get the community that you're involved in on board with your with what you're doing, you know.

And I know this has been a controversial kind of topic, like you know, do we come in and fix this private?

Well, yeah, why wasn't it planned ahead for it, for instance?

But I to that point that you were making, Jim, was that you know this is kind of a requirement at this point just to keep to keep things moving down as they're supposed to.

Um yeah, I get that the need is definitely there, and I think just you know, Chattanooga just does like to really thoroughly analyze and make sure that we're making the right moves with our tax dollars.

Yeah, totally appreciate that.

Krista, this has been sort of publicly in an overall um discussion for the regional planning committee for the Higgs and Corridors.

So there has been public input, not specifically, well, there has been some specifically for this, just kind of like envisioning what it could be, and it's very similar to a town center type situation.

So there has been some thought brought into this this area already.

Right.

Yeah, to me, as far as Chattanooga's vision, this fits it entirely.

I mean, they're all into the mixed use and things of that nature, so yeah.

And and this kind of comes full circle in it in response to one of your other questions about this project versus another project that might come to the table.

So typically on the economic development side, we look at all of the regional and economic development plans that come through both the regional planning agency, Chattanooga Chamber of Commerce.

We take those plans and all the economic development partners in the ecosystem.

What we do is we flag particular projects so that for instance under the RPA regional plan for Red Bank Hickson, one of the recommendations was to redevelop the North Gate Mall.

And so again, we flag those items so when a project comes to the table, we can say, hey, the community fed into this plan and provided some input.

So if a developer comes in and they're they're either on the mall or touching anywhere in close proximity, we examine those applications, and and we've done that for other areas around town as well.

And so that that kind of you know, those plans, while they're sometimes broad, they also provide some scope and direction for us when it comes to entertaining public financing projects because we know okay, this fits into a plan that was approved and adopted by either the city council or the county commission when it comes to looking at is this a project that we would want to entertain.

So that provides us some guardrails so that if another project were to come to the city and present a project, we would first look to see are they in any of those sort of 11 approved plans that have been adopted by city council, and then we would move from there.

But you know, to that point.

I saw it on the application.

I thought there were two boxes to the to that effect, and neither one of them was checked.

One was was it already in the capital plan?

See it was not in the capital.

And then I thought the other one was something else.

to entertain so that provides us some guardrails so that if another project were to come to to the city and present a project we would first look to see are they in any of those sort of 11 approved plans that have been adopted by city council and then we would move from there you know to that point I thought on the application I thought there were two boxes to the to that effect and neither one of them was checked one was was it already in the capital plan see it was not in the capital plan and then I thought the other one was something else I don't remember and I didn't think that was but but that's that's perfect that's what I would have expected but I thought I didn't see that but I probably missed it well if you find that later on that particular point the application there's two boxes you get the one that's under the capital plan we maybe so we did say um so it was not in the city of Chattanooga's capital plan right to do any kind of infrastructure improvement improvements for the Northgate mall area and then it was also not in the Hickson utility district capital plan because we did reach out to um the president and general manager of the Hickson utility district on those pieces and so typically the way that works is if it's in the capital plan then it's already being planned for so there's no reason to do it to and so this in this particular case it is not in the capital plan.

I would argue against that either way if it's if it's in the capital plan that's all the more reason to leverage taxing for financing the budget.

That's as someone who set them up in multiple places otherwise that would be a very normal thing to do for whatever reason it is not viewed that way aren't capital plans developed on what the city owns they are they are they are they don't own this not right now correct which is why I wasn't in a plan.

Right I just I'd like to thank the committee I know you guys spent some time going through some some material that is not um not exactly fun reading and so definitely want to thank the committee for your time and effort in that and taking your time out today on this project.

I think um I think what you heard from this group especially from folks who are pretty engaged in the Hickson community is this has a lot of potential it's in the county for Hickson so having having this move forward I think is pretty exciting so thank you for that thank you committee members uh with that unless anyone has anything else they want to cover I'll adjoin right on the journal the meeting I mean for no take a bagel coffee with you all right this meeting is adjourned as I thank you all for welcome