Roll call, please.

Coleman here.

Jost?

Here.

Naker.

Here.

Yang.

Here.

Chair Johnson and Commissioners Bowie and Kim are excused.

Approval of minutes.

Item number one.

Minutes twenty-five dash fifty.

Approval of the November twenty twenty-five HRA meeting minutes.

I will uh take a motion from Council President Naker to approve the meeting minutes.

Is there any discussion?

All right, no discussion.

All those in favor say aye.

I all those opposed.

The minutes are approved.

Item number one for discussion.

Resolution twenty-five dash nineteen oh eight.

Resolution authorizing short-term extensions to parking operation and management agreements.

Collectively, ramp agreements at one Robert Street Municipal Ramp at Ninety Five East Seventh Street.

Two, Lower Town Municipal Ramp at 316 Jackson Street.

Three, Lawson Municipal Ramp at 10 West 6th Street.

47A Ramp at 13 West Exchange Street.

Five, Block 19 Ramp at 145 East 7th Street.

And six WTC Ramp at 477 Cedar Street, all in District 17, Ward 2.

And I'll turn it over to Director McMahon for an explanation about this item.

Chair Commissioners, this item authorizes the HRA to extend current contracts with our parking ramp management companies for one year.

We are in the process of releasing an RFP for parking ramp operators next year.

And the timing is such just that we need to extend our current contracts until that RFP is completed.

Thank you, Director Mupin, for that.

Any questions from my colleagues?

All right, I'll take a motion from Council President Naker to approve this item.

I guess any discussion.

All right, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

Four in favor, none opposed.

The resolution is adopted.

Public hearings.

Item number three, resolution public hearing 25-280.

Resolution approving and authorizing the sale and conveyance of a vacant lot at 77 Congress Street East to Iglesia Niclizo Church in West Side, District 3, Ward 2.

All right, this item was presented to us previously, and this is the public hearing for that item.

So if you are here to speak on item number three, this is a public hearing, and you can come forward and you'll have two minutes.

So this is a public hearing.

Is there anyone here to speak to this item?

All right.

Seeing no one, I'll take a motion from Councilmember Coleman to close the public hearing and approve this item.

All of those in favor say aye.

Aye aye.

All those opposed.

Four in favor, none opposed.

The public hearing is closed, and the resolution is adopted.

Item number four, resolution public hearing 25-278.

Resolution approving and authorizing the conveyance of three parcels located in Chestnut Plaza and along the riverfront to the city of St.

Paul, District 9, Ward 2.

All right, again, this is another public hearing item for number four.

So if you're here to speak to this item, this is your public hearing, and please come up.

All right.

Seeing no one, I'll take a motion from uh council member Yang to close the public hearing and approve this item.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

Four in favor, none opposed.

The public hearing is closed, and the resolution is adopted.

Staff report.

Item number five, SR25-268.

Introduction to Ames Lake Property, RWMWD flood mitigation project.

And I'll turn it over to Director McMahon for a presentation on this item.

Hi, thank you, and welcome for that.

This is introduction link to the Ames Lake Property Flood Mitigation Project.

You can see here this HRA owned property is in Ward 6.

We've owned and maintained this property for nearly 30 years.

And we originally acquired it to achieve components of the Phaheline Village Small Area Plan that was adopted by the St.

Paul City Council in 1995.

And so it's over two acres and it is prone to flooding.

You can see the um in teal is the property specifically we're talking about.

So here again you can see the parcel in red there.

So the Phahelan Village Small Area Plan shows it as the one that was adopted in the 90s.

It shows it as open space surrounded by residential uses to the south.

And the goal for the land was to restore Ames Lake and also to preserve wetlands and create wetlands in low areas, such as the parcel in question here, since they were unsuitable for development due to it being low-lying and prone for flooding.

Again, here you can see separated by Magnolia.

So sort of that northern and the southern part for Ames Lake here.

There is identified a total of over eight Lakers for wetland mitigation, divided again by Magnolia.

So North of Magnolia did successfully result in the restoration of Ames Lake.

The watershed was heavily involved in that project, and so they have familiarity with the history of the area, the adopted plans for the area, and the environmental needs of the area.

You can see here the watershed proposal came forward.

The watershed completed the Ames Lake flood control feasibility study just a few years ago in 2023.

And as mentioned, again, the area being low-lying is prone to flooding, and even more so due to lack of stormwater management on that HRA parcel that's south of Magnolia.

The watershed is proposing proposing improvements to three different parcels.

You can see them there, the West Ames Lake Berm, the main basin options, and then the South Basin options.

Storm Mother and other mitigation or what's being proposed in order to better prevent flooding to the adjacent properties.

You can see here, as part of the proposal for that West Basin, that they are proposing to do a new berm there to restore it with the prairie vegetation to replace trees as needed and have the back flow preventer as an outlet pipe from that townhouse pond.

You can see adjacent there on Ames Lake.

Within the main basin, this is for that parcel south of Magnolia that you saw on the earlier slides.

The watershed's proposing significant investment to improve water management and stormwater management on that parcel.

And you can see listed some of the specifics of the technical things that they would be doing there.

So as the watershed continues or technical work to refine what would be needed on that parcel, you can see a few different options emerging here.

Both are really similar and provide the same benefits to the surrounding neighborhood and to that land immediately adjacent to the HRA parcel.

You can see here some more details of the options that the watershed is exploring.

I really just wanted to note here that the public amenities, and I'll actually go back a slide to show some of those.

I think the visuals may be a little easier than the list form to see the public amenities for the surrounding neighborhood.

And to me, it's a really great example of forward thinking work that we're doing on sustainability.

That's exciting to see.

So instead of just going in and having a stormwater pond or something that oftentimes just sort of sits there, isn't really usable, ends up being vacant space for the community.

What happens is you have all those technical improvements.

You have the stormwater management, you have the flood mitigation, but you're doing it in a way that's an amenity for the community.

You can see here the potential of having a path that goes around some benches for seating, trees there for shade, a space that people can really go and you know explore.

If you've got some green space there for playing, kids can run around, that sort of thing, as opposed to again what it is now, which is just prone to flooding, low-lying areas.

That's essentially unusable.

So that design, again, there's some more of the details will continue to be refined as that technical work continues from the watershed.

On the south basin here, you can see additional stormwater management improved um improvements that are proposed with again native vegetation restoration.

So, while the proposal for improvements to HR land, HRA land is always great to see.

I think this slide is especially exciting because it shows that this work will be entirely funded by the watershed.

And I think that's something that is a wonderful partnership we have.

I'm really thankful to the watershed for that partnership and for the work that they're proposing on this land.

They're doing a great job of applying for grants and finding additional non-HRA, non-city resources to help fund this and really important work for the community and for sustainability goals.

You can see here some of the timelines and some of the results.

Again, noting that the improvements for the property go beyond just taking care of the flooding and that risk mitigation on the property itself.

But there's some really real and direct benefits for the adjacent properties, either by reducing or removing entirely some of those properties from the floodplain and from the flood risk.

So next week, what will be before you is this action and the HRA action requested is a resolution of support for this partnership and for moving this uh work forward.

And that would then give the watershed the ability as they apply for grants to be able to, you know, attach the resolution and show yep, we're working in partnership, we're all in support for moving this forward.

And then in the future, eventually would be back before you with a request to then convey the land to the city.

So the watershed would come in, they would entirely fund all of the improvements and do the work.

And that parcel just north, the actual Ames Lake Restoration, north of Magnolia.

The intent has always been for that to be owned by the city, and the same would be true of this parcel south of Magnolia as well, then to the city, and would be operated by parks.

Are there any questions on this?

Council Young.

Thank you, Chair Joel.

So I don't have questions, but I want to say thank you, Director McMahon, to you and their staff for meeting with me beforehand, getting me familiar with the proposal here.

I am very pleased with the proposal and also very supportive of it.

In my time on the council here, I've been asked by a few developers about whether they can buy this property and develop on it and what would we want to see developed, but it is very challenging with the flooding that happens.

And um, and so this is a really great proposal that uh provides a public amenity for our community members.

And one of the asks that I did share with our staff is really to um make sure that when we are ready to have conversations and do engagement about what sort of features you would want, like for example, if we're gonna have a bench, where would we have it?

Like that would be engagement that I want to see happen so that um the community members can utilize the um just those uh that money the way that they would like to, and to also be really clear that this isn't going to be a space where we're gonna see um a playground, for example, or just you know, full-blown uh transformation, and to just be really um clear about uh what we uh what is actually possible here, and that that's something that they are uh very committed to and also bringing the watershed district on on board for hopefully to do the engagement as well.

So I appreciate you all in uh the communication you've been doing with the watershed district, and uh and again I'm very supportive of this.

Thank you.

Thank you, Council Yang.

Um, all any other comments from colleagues?

I'll just uh make a comment about this.

Thank you, Director McMahon.

I really appreciate the different options and and again the amenities, the loop trail at the site because I think that anytime we can take you know what is a um of flood mitigation infrastructure, you know, that's maybe not very exciting, but turn it into an amenity and something that the community can enjoy and also learn more about, you know, more education and awareness around what um you know how these how these uh how these ponds work.

I think is is really exciting to me, especially as an engineer.

I just spent some time yesterday at the stormwater feature at Highland Bridge again, uh which has won many awards, and so I'm just really uh appreciative of all of uh all of our staff's work on this project and um look forward to the next steps next week.

So thank you.

All right.

Item number six staff report 25-269 introduction to Grand and Victoria Redevelopment TIFF district.

All right, I'll welcome up uh Jenny Wolf to give a presentation on this item.

Uh good afternoon, Vice Chair Joe's uh commissioners.

Uh, Jenny Wolf with PED, and I will be presenting an introduction to the proposed Grand and Victoria TIF District financing request.

Uh so here's a quick project overview.

This is an ill illustrative rendering of the project, which includes one six-story mixed-use building with 90 rental apartments, 12,800 square feet of commercial space, and additionally, the project includes structured parking with 22 public parking spaces to benefit the commercial space.

By way of comparison, here is the are the current conditions for the two properties to be redeveloped.

857 grand and 841 Grand Avenue.

This is a map of the proposed TIFF district and project area, which includes the two properties to be redeveloped.

The developer and owner of the property is 845 Grand LLC, and Ari Peritts is the managing member.

Ari is the president and founder of Afton Park Development and has 10 years of development experience.

Ari partnered with Reuter Walton to develop the Kenton House project just east of this development site on Grand and St.

Albans.

The developer applied to the HRA requesting tax increment financing, otherwise known as TIFF, to advance the redevelopment.

An initial step in this process is to ensure that the statutory requirements to create a redevelopment TIFF district can be met.

The HRA retain the services of LHB, a professional engineering firm with decades of experience to complete an assessment of the property to ensure that the statutory blight test is met.

LHB confirmed the property meets the requirements with three substandard buildings exhibiting significant code deficiencies.

A redevelopment plan was prepared by the HRA outlining the goals and objectives to advance the proposed creation of the TIFF district, including the removal of lighting conditions, increasing the housing supply, and creating jobs for local residents, to name a few.

Additionally, the development objectives outlined in the redevelopment plan include public realm, energy efficiency and stormwater, transportation and parking, housing, and employment.

The proposed project to be constructed in the TIFF district is consistent with the development objectives.

On November 14th, the St.

Paul Planning Commission reviewed the HRA's proposed redevelopment plan and determined the redevelopment plan is consistent with the 2040 comprehensive plan, including multiple land use policies as well as the development of new housing in our city.

Now I want to step back a bit here and cover broader TIFF topics.

TIFF is a locally approved financing tool authorized under state law.

The state law enables redevelopment authorities and municipalities across the state to capture increased local property taxes to advance development in their community that would not otherwise occur but for the assistance.

The creation of a TIFF district captures the increased value from the redevelopment and the value that was in place prior to the TIFF district is frozen before it declines further, resulting in a steady tax revenue, as the TIFF Authority then captures the increment.

This illustration here is from the Minnesota Department of Revenue to demonstrate the benefit to the taxing jurisdictions.

The incremental property taxes are used to finance or reimburse eligible costs related to the development, including administrative costs.

The property owners within a TIFF district still pay their property taxes, like any other property owner.

The property taxes are divided as shown here.

The TIFF Authority captures the local taxes from the increased value with the taxes from the value in place prior, still paid to the taxing jurisdictions.

Additional non-local property taxes are not captured in TIFF.

Those include market value based taxes levied by the school district and state commercial taxes.

The proposed TIFF district to be created is a redevelopment TIFF district.

The maximum duration is 26 total years, and this type of TIFF district requires certain conditions in place prior to the proposed redevelopment to meet the statutory requirements.

As mentioned, this includes blighting conditions with substandard buildings.

The tax increments must be used to remedy the conditions that allowed the qualification of the TIFF district.

So removal of those substandard buildings and completion of related site improvements and installation of public improvements.

Additionally, tax increments may be pooled and spent outside the TIFF district boundary but within the project area.

However, qualifying affordable housing expenditures may occur anywhere within the city and are not limited to an associated project area.

A TIFF district is located within a project area.

The TIFF district includes the parcels that will generate the tax increments, and the project area is the area where expenditures must occur.

As outlined in the redevelopment plan, the proposed Grand and Victoria project area is coterminous with the TIFF district.

This will result in the maximum pooling to invest in affordable housing anywhere within the city.

Any proposed TIFF district must meet statutory requirements for its creation.

It must demonstrate that the BUT 4 test has been met, requiring a determination that the proposed project would not happen solely through private means within a reasonable time frame.

It must include TIFF eligible expenditures consistent with the adopted TIFF plan and associated budget, which budget will establish the maximum amount of tax increments to be collected and spent.

A TIFF development agreement is then presented to the HRA board for approval.

It will include the maximum amount of tax increment and specific requirements therefore, including TIFF eligible expenditures of the development are financed on a pay-as-you go basis.

This means the developer pays up front all the costs and is reimbursed over time from the tax increments as they are collected.

The developer bears the risk that they will be repaid for their upfront investment, and the development agreement includes language to evaluate the appropriateness of the financial assistance throughout the term of the agreement, resulting in a potential reduction in the TIFF assistance.

There has been quite a bit of conversations around how we use TIFF in St.

Paul.

For example, there have been claims that city taxpayers are at risk for TIFF district obligations.

This is not true, especially regarding this current request, which includes the proposed issuance of a pay as you go TIFF note.

The collected and pledged tax increments are the sole revenue pledged to the TIFF district obligation.

Nor is TIFF a gift to a developer.

As previously mentioned, the developer must secure the funds necessary and complete the project, including incurring the TIFF eligible costs, and then be reimbursed over time for their original investment.

The city benefits from the completed development, including the removal of blight and increased housing options for residents.

Now back to the Grand and Victoria Redevelopment TIFF district and TIFF plan.

The TIFF plan and budget utilizes the following assumptions.

The expected taxable value at completion is $26.5 million, and that's compares to the recent 2025 assessed value of around $6.5 million.

This results in over $20 million of increased value.

The first receipt of increment will be delayed until pay 2028, resulting in a final collection year of 2053, which is the maximum 26 total years.

The tax increments collected by the HRA are estimated to total $363,076 annually beginning in tax pay year 2030, with lower amounts in the prior two years while the project is constructed and stabilized.

The total projected tax increments collected in the TIFF district is just over $9 million.

The budget included in the TIFF plan is shown on this slide, with the proposed pay as you go note listed under site improvement prep costs and other qualifying public improvements and interest.

The budget also includes expenditures for HRA administration and the construction of affordable housing of nearly $3 million.

Council President has a question.

Thanks, Chair.

Ms.

Wolf, before we go on, um, I know we're going to get to the analysis that the project requires $2.956 million in gap financing, and that I assume is the number that's written here.

Um it it yeah.

Is that the number that is that why that's this is 2.956?

Okay, we'll get to that.

So maybe when as we get to that, just to explain the difference between the total amount of increment and project costs here compared to what is the gap needed for the project.

Vice Chair Joe's uh Commissioner Naker.

So what is shown on this slide is the um TIFF plan budget, and there's site improvement prep costs of 1,288 and other qualifying public improvements of 1,668, those combined to total 2 million 956.

That is the amount of assistance that we would reimburse, the that's the principal amount, and then the balance of the payments on the pay go note would be under the interest expense.

So got it.

So it just so happens that the affordable housing is also 2956.

Okay, got it.

Thank you.

Um, and then is that that construction of affordable housing that's the pooled amount for affordable housing elsewhere in the city because this development is market rate housing.

Uh correct.

Um, Vice Chair Joseph Commissioner Naker, this is market rate housing, and the um pledge of tax increments to the developer will be set such that we maximize the amount we can pool.

So the um I and that's on a future slide, but yeah, that's the intent.

And then one last question, Chair.

Thank you.

Um, where do the up on the estimated sources of revenue?

Where do the interest and investment earnings come from?

Um Vice Chair Joseph Commissioner Naker.

So when we collect tax increments, we hold them with the city, and the city invests all of our our funds, and so interest is um generated and those are tax increments, the interest that is collected, generated from the tax increments as they're held with the HRA.

Thank you.

And so that's just a rough estimate.

Okay.

Okay, sorry.

The HRA board will consider the approval of a TIFF development agreement for the project.

The HRA retained LRS as our municipal advisor to determine the need for the financial assistance proposed through the creation of the new TIFF district.

Ellers is a full service independent financial advisory firm and works with multiple cities across the metro area analyzing requests for TIFF assistance.

Ellers evaluated information provided by the developer, including their estimated cost to complete the development and the expected operating revenues and expenses.

Ellers concluded that the project requires two million, a $2,956,000 TIFF note to attract adequate capital and debt financing to complete the project.

The following slide includes the proposed sources and uses with a total development cost of uh 44,605,000 with sources including the private debt, a TIFF note, developer equity, and a $350,000 deed grant.

That's this table here.

Ellers reviewed Ellers review signifies adherence to the BUT 4 test.

Their recommendations are shown here.

This review is based on current market conditions and concludes the proposed development is not feasible without the TIFF assistance of 2,956,000.

The TIFF development agreement includes the following terms regarding the issuance of a TIFF note for the project.

The maximum principal amount of $2,956,000 to be issued upon completion of the project.

Pledging 85% of tax increments collected in the first year, which is pay 2028, and then stepping down 5% each year to 60% in the sixth year, and then beyond.

It'll stay at the 60%.

The principal amount will be limited to the TIFF eligible costs identified here, including the cost of the public parking spaces.

The proposed TIFF plan will authorize 35% of the tax increments to be expended outside the TIFF district, enabling maximum maximum pooling for affordable housing.

The agreement will include language to allow the HRA to confirm the BUT 4 test, which is commonly known as a look back, and compliance will be triggered, including prevailing wages for construction and living wage ordinance for the project operation, as well as adherence to our city's sustainable building ordinance.

Council President Achars one.

Thank you, Chair.

Just looking at the first bullet, Ms.

Wolf, so just to make sure I'm understanding if 85% of the tax increment is pledged for the first year.

That means that the city will realize 15% of the new tax increment in the first year and an additional 5% every year going forward.

That is correct.

Okay.

And then 40% of the new increment will be coming in distributed amongst all the jurisdictions starting in the sixth year and beyond.

Oh uh Vice Chair Joseph Commissioner Naker.

No, the the HRA will collect 100%.

And what's shown here is the amount that's pledged to the TIFF note.

And then that means the HRA retains the balance.

And that's what we use for the pooling for affordable housing and for our admin.

Got it.

Okay, thank you.

Um the city council and the HRA board will consider resolutions in one week on December 17th to authorize the following.

Approval of the redevelopment plan and uh redevelopment project area and redevelopment plan, establishment of the redevelopment TIFF district, and TIFF plan.

A public hearing will be held prior to approval of either resolution.

The HRA board resolution will include authorization for execution of a TIFF development agreement, providing the tax increment assistance as outlined to the developer for the project.

The project construction is anticipated to commence in February and uh complete in the summer of 27.

Um, I list here our outside team for contact information.

Uh, Carla and Stacy are both in attendance here, as is uh Ari Perrett's the developer, if there's any questions for him.

Do you have any questions?

Jenny.

Ari, come on.

Oh, council president.

Thanks, Ms.

Joseph I thank you so much, Ms.

Wolf.

I don't have specific questions, but I do think if the developer is here, it would make sense to hear from the yeah, that's what we were just talking about.

So um uh Ari Garretts, the developer is gonna come up, just introduce himself.

Thank you, Vice Chair and Commissioners.

It's a pleasure to be with you in this capacity today.

Um, I'm Ari Perretts.

I'm the founder and president of Afton Park Development.

I think I'd qualify as about as local and neighborhood of a developer as you could be.

I live in the Summit University neighborhood of St.

Paul.

Uh I've previously been fortunate to develop in our city.

And it really is a privilege to be able to work on such an important site, not just in our neighborhood, but the city and the metro area overall.

We started this process six months ago in June of this past summer, as the financial realities of financing development construction crystallized for this specific project.

We've gotten questions before about why this wasn't a part of public discourse prior to that.

The truth is we were totally focused on our uh approvals and the the land use approvals and entitlement prior this summer when the financial realities crystallize, that's when we put forward our application.

Um and we've been spending quite a bit of time as as city staff will attest, making sure this is right.

Um there have been uh questions asked about how much we need this, and is it true that at an intersection as important and iconic in many ways as Granit Victoria?

Why would an intersection like that need this kind of public support?

The truth is is that in today's economy, just about every market rate project needs this kind of public support.

It doesn't matter how good of an intersection it is.

The best intersection just gets you to the table to be able to have this kind of conversation.

That's how hard it is to uh assemble financing for new developments today.

Uh I'll I'll share a statistic uh that just came across my desk in the last couple days that I think will help illustrate this point, specific to the Minneapolis-St.

Paul MSA.

We are ranked dead last of the top 50 MSAs in the country in availability of market rate multifamily housing.

And that counts both the inventory that exists and the vacancy rates, which in our market are very low, and uh the availability of new supply, how many projects are in the pipeline under construction.

We are at the end, the very very last of the top 50 metros.

And that shows you that we have no new supply.

This is the reason, is because it is this hard to develop in today's economy without the kind of assistance that redevelopment TIFF districts can offer, even if it's at as important of an intersection as Granite Victoria.

I also want to share that because many of us have been fortunate to spend time in and around that intersection, it's not immediately apparent to you or to anyone why this site in particular is blighted or why something at Granite Victoria would count as blighted.

So above and beyond the report that LHB did, which is the statutorily required analysis.

I would invite anyone who's curious to come in and tour the inside of these buildings, and you will see with your own eyes why these buildings must be torn down, why they cannot be reused, and why they qualify as blight.

Elements on the outside anyone can see just by standing at the sidewalk, and then there's much more inside that help paint this picture.

So I just wanted to extend that offer if anybody would like to come see it.

I'm happy to show you around.

So I that covers sort of why here and why now and why this is a unique feature and function of today's uh economy in this particular site.

A lot of the public benefits, including the pooling for affordable housing, have already been discussed.

I just want to reiterate how much of a driving factor that was in our whole conceptualization of this site, the ability to not just provide needed new housing units, but also to provide a major improvement to the public realm at this corner and at this intersection overall.

New commercial space, which includes uh a tenant that's coming back into the space and able to re-up for the next 10 to 20 years.

They've been in this location for a long time, but their space has deteriorated like much of the rest of the physical infrastructure.

They're able to come back and we're able to create two new spaces for two new tenants together with public parking, which which has been a pretty significant issue at this intersection.

Uh many of the criticisms that have been uh I know shared with you all and have kind of circulated in in the media have a lot to do with this project not meeting but four, I think, based off of the information in front of you.

Hopefully, you see it very clearly does meet the butt for, and you hear coming from me we don't have an ability to create this project without this.

Um, but also this concept of a precedence set.

And I just wanted to state for the record the six months that my team has spent working with city staff should illustrate that there is no precedence set.

Every project has to stand on its own merits, defend its own assumptions in its own time and place to make the case for why but four applies to it and then my project has done that.

That doesn't mean that me or any other developer six months or twelve months from now in a location that's perceived to be just as nice or or in a different spot, would be able to just somehow as a gimme come in and say, Well, they got it, me too.

That's not how this works.

Like based on my own experience in the last six months, I can guarantee you that's not how this works.

And I just want to state that for the record.

Um, and and be able to address that concern as it continues to circulate in in the public discourse.

Uh so I'm glad to take any questions.

I really appreciate your time and attention to this matter, and I thank you in advance.

Uh, thank you, Mr.

Parents, for being here.

Any questions from commissioners?

All right.

Um, well, this item is thank you for being here, Mr.

Perrots.

Um, this item again will be before um the HRE in the council.

Um, at the eight at the council meeting next week, we'll be convening the HRA within the council meeting to take action, and at that time before we take action will be the public hearing for this item.

Um, not today, there will be a public hearing next week.

Well, the developer would be able to make a comment.

Um, yes, we have the the the developer come in and just introduce themselves and speak, but the public hearing um on this item is next week.

Okay.

Thank you.

All right.

Well, um, that is the last item on our agenda, and with nothing else to come before us, we are adjourned.