Bookmark1
Bookmark2
Bookmark3
Bookmark4
Bookmark5
Bookmark6
Bookmark7
Bookmark8
Bookmark9
Bookmark10
Bookmark11
Bookmark12
Bookmark13
Bookmark14
Bookmark15
Bookmark16
Bookmark17
Bookmark18
Bookmark19
Bookmark20
Bookmark21
All right, we're going to go ahead and get rolling. Today is June 12th, the time is 606 and we're going to start our Redevelopment 00:00:01
Agency board meeting. Marty support us, will give us our invocation and lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance. 00:00:09
Our dear, kind Heavenly Father, we are so very grateful to be here today as a community, as a group of people working towards the 00:00:24
better and benefit of our Vineyard city. Please bless and watch over us, help us work well together, help us understand what's 00:00:30
brought before us and make the best possible decisions. 00:00:36
It would benefit Venue City residents and our future. We are so very grateful for the hard work of the staff, the members of the 00:00:43
community that support and work so hard to bring forth ideas and values. And please bus and watch over our servicemen, our police 00:00:50
and fire, all of our emergency personnel, and watch over our families and protect them. And we say these things in the name of thy 00:00:58
Son, Jesus Christ, Amen. All right. 00:01:05
Of the United States, of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and 00:01:17
justice for all. 00:01:23
That brings us to our consent agenda. This is the approval of the May 22nd RDA meeting minutes. I need a motion. 00:01:31
I move to approve item 2.1. Thank you first by Amber. 00:01:41
Second. Second by Sarah. All in favor, aye. 00:01:47
All right, we'll move on. 00:01:52
Would you like to wait? Well, I don't know what do you have for it? I don't know. There is a recording, but we can wait just in 00:01:58
case. 00:02:01
I don't know, Jamie. Do we need to wait for our recorder to return? 00:02:05
Is the meeting being recorded? That's what we understood, OK. 00:02:09
Please. 00:02:20
Yes, OK, good. You're updated. OK. All right. Last meeting, we had a public hearing on our RDA tentative budget. We continued that 00:02:22
and kept the public hearing open in case more people had additional questions. 00:02:31
So since last time, maybe it would be good to go and see if there were any changes. What I'm going to do is I'm going to ask the 00:02:42
board members to open up the public hearing allow. 00:02:47
Oh, because it's already open. We left it open. We don't need to do that. So if you have anything additional that you would want 00:02:55
to say otherwise, this is time for the public to come and. 00:02:59
Comments and then we can discuss at the board, so. 00:03:05
Just in case, I don't want you to sit through potentially a long meeting if you're waiting for that moment in time. So we're just 00:04:18
doing the RDA tonight. That's right. Thank you. 00:04:21
All right. Thank you. 00:04:26
Josh, were there any additional comments from the public? 00:04:30
Don't forget to state your name where you're from. 00:04:36
I Vineyard City Council, my name is John Barrack. I am from a resident of Orem and I'm concerned. I'm a concerned parent and 00:04:39
taxpayer in the Alpine School District, which is the largest contributor of tax increment funding to your RDA. After the 2022 00:04:46
Alpine School District bond failed in November 2022, the board, the Alpine School District board had a work meeting in February of 00:04:53
2023. 00:04:59
I don't know if that's me or air conditioning. And they said they would never build a secondary education, junior high or high 00:05:07
school in the city of Vineyard. And the reason was is because of the Vineyard. RDA takes all the taxes away from Vineyard. And 00:05:14
that was concerning to me as a parent because I think Vineyard is large enough that it should have those things. And your students 00:05:20
are important and they shouldn't have to go to Orem for everything because you've built a beautiful community here. 00:05:27
I do have a few questions about the budget, the proposed budget for the for the public hearing. My first question, and by the way, 00:05:35
I am a certified public accountant. I'm also a PhD in accounting and I like public finance and I've taught public finance for 23 00:05:42
years. But I do have a couple of questions with respect to the proposed budget. Did the Vineyard RDA agency receive consent from 00:05:50
the Taxing Entities Committee as required under state law? 00:05:57
And if so, I'd like an affirmative response to that. 00:06:05
Does. 00:06:11
Let's see, did the agency receive consent for phase four? I was looking over some of the documents from the last couple of years 00:06:14
and I didn't see the resolution that authorized phase four. I thought mentioned in meeting notes during COVID when they talked 00:06:19
about potentially phase four, but I would like to know the resolution number. If you could let me know that, I would appreciate 00:06:23
it. 00:06:27
Umm did the agency receive consent of the Taxing Entities Committee for the Resolution 2023, Dash 02 or other extensions of the 00:06:33
RDA that were granted by this body in 2023? 00:06:40
And then a couple of items related, well, one item related to your bond. Why did the agency have an untimely filing of its 00:06:49
2021-2022 and 2023 financial statements that were produced by Gilbert and Stewart for the agency in which you provided notices to 00:06:56
bondholders and through Emma the the. 00:07:03
Consolidator of those eight items and what were the consequences of having non timely filed financial statements? 00:07:12
Like you have to pay higher interest rates as a violation of your covenants. I think that's probably a failure on some portion and 00:07:19
we should know why. 00:07:23
And then the second, the last thing I kind of wanted to know was does the taxing entity committee, which is required under state 00:07:30
law and is referenced in your resolution 2011 or 2011 Dash 03, does that taxing entity committee follow Utah public open meeting 00:07:36
laws? And if so, where can I find all of them? 00:07:43
And documents related to their consent in votes. Thank you so much for your time. 00:07:50
Good evening. 00:08:04
Vineyard Redevelopment Agency Board. My name is John Gadd. I'm a resident of Pleasant Grove. I've lived. I bought my home with my 00:08:06
wife there in 2000. So we've lived there for 23 years. And just like residents of Vineyard, every year when I get my property tax 00:08:13
notice, the bulk of that goes to Alpine School District. My understanding is that last year about 65% of people's property tax in 00:08:21
Vineyard went to Alpine School District. 00:08:29
And so the other thing that I've noticed every year when I get my property tax notice in the mail is that every year it seems to 00:08:36
go up and I've tracked it and I've charted it and it's going up faster than inflation. So I understand that things get more 00:08:42
expensive, but. 00:08:48
The the tax that I paid to Alpine School District over the last 20-3 years that I've owned my home in Pleasant Grove has gone up 00:08:54
faster than inflation. So recently I've started to look into why that might be. 00:09:00
And there's a lot of reasons. 00:09:08
You know, I think there's some wasteful spending and whatnot going on in Alpine School District, but. 00:09:11
One of the reasons that I've recently become aware of is. 00:09:16
This Vineyard Redevelopment Agency, so my understanding is that back in the 2006, 2009, 2011 time frame, you guys fired this thing 00:09:20
up with an initial idea that you would give some tax incentives to businesses for 25 years. 00:09:28
And up to $300 million. Now, if you're giving property tax rebates up to $300 million and 65% of property tax ghost Alpine School 00:09:37
District, that means that around 200 million of that 300 million is money that Alpine School District is rebating. In other words, 00:09:46
that's $200 million that's not flowing into Alpine School District. Now, I'm no fan of taxes. 00:09:55
And I would love for taxes to be lower than they are, But if we're going to have a tax, I think it should be fairly distributed 00:10:06
across everyone who pays the tax. And here's the problem what I see happening here with the Vineyard Redevelopment Agency. 00:10:14
Is you're taking $200 million of tax revenue that businesses would otherwise be paying, you're giving it back to them. 00:10:23
That's $200 million that would have gone into Alpine School Districts General Fund. 00:10:33
And they don't just say, well, we'll just do without that $200 million. They make it up elsewhere. And where do they make it up 00:10:39
from my property tax and your property tax and senior citizens on fixed incomes property tax. And young mothers and fathers who 00:10:45
can barely afford housing. And when they finally get that little starter home and they get their property tax bill, that property 00:10:52
tax is higher. 00:10:58
Because of this Vineyard Redevelopment Agency, because businesses that I understand you want to grow your community. I get that. 00:11:06
And you want to incentivize businesses to come in. 00:11:11
But you're rebating 75% of their property tax back to them as an incentive to come in and build in vineyards. 00:11:16
But you're doing that on the backs of homeowners, taxpaying taxpayers and other businesses. So you're picking winners and losers. 00:11:23
The winners are the people who get 75% of their tax, property tax back. The losers are all the poor citizens, including Vineyard 00:11:28
citizens, but Pleasant Grove citizens and Lehigh citizens and Fairfield citizens and everybody who lives in Alpine School 00:11:34
District. 00:11:40
Because when that $200 million is given back to the businesses in Vineyard, and that's only in Vineyard, that $200 million doesn't 00:11:46
go into Alpine School District and they make up that $200 million on the backs of all the rest of us. So that doesn't seem right. 00:11:55
The other thing that I'm concerned about is what started out. 00:12:05
With the idea of it's going to go 25 years and we're going to do up to $300 million, seems to keep growing from that. I'm holding 00:12:09
in my hand Resolution U2023O2. This is for Phase 5A of the Vineyard Redevelopment Agency and I'm reading right here that. 00:12:18
Allowed for and we'll do that each one. So keep an eye on the clock. It should be right up here actually. 00:13:06
And then if you're speaking and you're hoping to hear back, please leave your name and your e-mail or your number on the seat as 00:13:11
you comment. If you didn't or as you come in. Thank you. 00:13:18
My name is Doria Evans. I am a Vineyard resident, and I would just like to thank these two gentlemen for what they have brought 00:13:31
up. I it's very interesting to me and it makes me concerned. And I, I would hope that you would answer these questions tonight 00:13:38
instead of emailing them separately on their own because I think the rest of the audience would like to hear your responses to 00:13:45
their questions. Thank you. 00:13:52
I'm sorry. 00:14:00
Carson Walker, retired Alpine School District teacher, and I just want to echo the same concern. I live in Orem. Yep, I'm just up 00:14:07
the hill. So I read through the bond documents through the Vineyard City RDA and it has on page, I think 30 through 35. It has all 00:14:15
the risk that it mentions that things that could go wrong in the RDA, like 'cause if I'm a bond investor, I want to know in the 00:14:23
prospectus, like the risk reward ratio and the potential for this investment to go bad. 00:14:31
And I think what could go bad is going bad. The district could split, the economy has changed, the interest rates are up. So 00:14:40
commercial real estate is down, leasing, you know, mixed developments down. And so and this I think we're seeing that in evidence 00:14:47
that all these risks are perfect storm is happening and that and that's why we're extending, you know, to make it pencil out for 00:14:54
these developers. And I just wonder. 00:15:01
One, are you covered? 00:15:10
As an RDA board with like directors and board insurance, are you personally liable? Like if you add your attorney and city manager 00:15:12
like look at the risk and then to what? What happens if you fell if these bonds fell like like the development doesn't go as 00:15:18
promised or as thought because of the economy like we had a recession or. 00:15:24
And then what happens is are you insured? Like is your bonds insured? So just some of those things that I just, I just think 00:15:31
maybe. 00:15:35
It was a good idea that has gone maybe like too big and too far. And then I I noticed there's a mitigation part where you're 00:15:40
supposed to pay the school district if you collect too much or it goes too well. And when does that kick in? If you could go over 00:15:45
that, that would be really awesome. Thank you. 00:15:50
So if you agree with people, feel free to raise your hand. 00:16:05
Thank you. 00:16:09
Hope everyone's enjoying the summer. That's great out there. I'm Karen Cornelius, Vineyard resident. I just want to be on record 00:16:18
as saying, not raising my hand, but saying that I agree with Daria. We need answers on the record, not emails. I have waited 00:16:25
months for answers to questions that I have asked at this point. 00:16:32
So I would like those answers here in this meeting so that they are public record. Thank you. 00:16:40
But without clapping, please raise your hand just so we can keep the quorum in the meeting. Thank you. 00:16:50
OK, are there any other comments? 00:16:57
If not, I would need a motion to close the public hearing. So moved. Thank you Amber, can I get a second? 00:17:00
Second. Second by Sarah. All in favor, aye. 00:17:08
Any opposed all right. 00:17:12
All right, Board, this is a time to discuss some of the things that you have questions on that you heard. From the conversation 00:17:15
that I'm looking at right now, it looks like some of these things will have to go and pull these documents to understand them. 00:17:22
There's a lot of complex things. Of course, you can always reiterate or ask and we can talk to Josh about it. Josh, do you have 00:17:29
any comments on some of the questions that were asked just barely? Yeah, sure. 00:17:36
Yep, I do, and I'd be happy to share. 00:17:45
Let me, I'll start with. So there are three things that stuck out to me. There's a comment and question about the tax and the 00:17:49
taxing entity committee, which is the. 00:17:55
It's actually called a special purpose local government entity. The taxing entity committee is the committee of taxing entities 00:18:02
that potentially could participate in an RDA. So in in the in the case of the Geneva Urban Renewal area, those taxing entities are 00:18:12
the Alpine School District 2 Water District, Central Utah Water, and Northern Utah County Water. 00:18:23
The city of Vineyard and Utah County. So in order for. So it might be helpful if I just kind of go back a little bit to the 00:18:34
beginning. There's been a lot of discussion, comments, questions about RDA, what is an RDA? How did it start, all these sorts of 00:18:39
things. 00:18:45
So let me just give a quick kind of overview of the history. So in 2005, Geneva Steel goes out of business and is sold. 00:18:51
And and then it's it's decided that it's going to be, you know, dismantled, demolished pieces are going to be sold off. You know, 00:19:02
investors and owners of of the steel mill sell off components of it. And, you know, there's an environmental mitigation component 00:19:09
of this, which US Steel has a significant amount of responsibility. 00:19:16
Towards and, and then so as the demolishing of the steel plant happens, then the question arises, what will happen to this area? 00:19:24
What will happen to this industrial site? It's what you might call a brownfield former industrial site where there's, you know, 00:19:32
environmental issues and, and so it's not ready for something new. It's not, you know, you demolish a steel mill and then then 00:19:40
what what could be, what could be on the steel mill side. So these are the conversations that begin in Vineyard Town and. 00:19:49
This is exactly one of the the prime candidates of the type of site that would necessitate or or trigger the idea of community 00:19:57
reinvestment or redevelopment. It was called community reinvestment previously and RDA or redevelopment more more recently. So 00:20:03
then what happens is there first has to be the creation of an RDA, which is a separate legal entity, which you all are the board 00:20:10
of the RDA. You are board members of the RDA, which is today's meeting. You're not council members. That's a separate meeting, 00:20:16
right? 00:20:22
So Vineyard Town creates a redevelopment agency which consists of the board, which are the council members, doesn't have to be the 00:20:30
council members, but it is. So first the RDA is created, but then once the RDA is created, there needs to be a finding made by the 00:20:37
RDA board of Bright. And so you know that that was the nature of Utah's Community Reinvestment Act, that there has to be a finding 00:20:44
of blight and then the designation of a project area. 00:20:50
And so the Vineyard RDA has a finding of blight in 2009 and then in 2009, they undertake a survey of the area to kind of determine 00:20:58
what the project area should be. And then later in 2009, they designate the project area. They adopt A project area plan and they 00:21:05
adopt A project budget. 00:21:11
But part of that, so once you have the RDA unit, the legal board, that doesn't mean that redevelopment is going to happen. You 00:21:18
have to designate an area that is a project area. 00:21:24
And then what a lot of people are talking about with the the tax incentives, that's a tool that an RDA can use. So first you 00:21:30
create a legal entity, an RDA. An RDA designates an area to be a project area. Within that project area, the RDA decides to. 00:21:39
Leverage the utilization of a legal tool called tax increment financing. Tax increment financing is where a portion of property 00:21:48
tax revenues that are collected in that area can be directed back towards the cost of redevelopment activities, and so the RDA 00:21:56
proposes to utilize tax increment financing well. Tax increment financing necessitates sign off or approval by the other taxing 00:22:03
entities. 00:22:10
Who would be giving up property tax revenue for a period of time? And so the legal mechanism at the time to do that is that you 00:22:18
create or or call together a committee of people that represent those taxing entities. That's the taxing entity committee, the 00:22:25
TEC. So the TEC then meets, it is a public body and there are public notices for their meetings and the TEC has to approve the 00:22:33
utilization of tax increment financing and in this scenario. 00:22:40
What you have is a vote of the members of this taxing entity committee, which include representatives in Alpine School District, 00:22:48
then your town, Utah County and the water districts. And they have to agree to the terms, which in this case was a 25% retained 00:22:56
revenue for the taxing entities, but a 75% portion that could go to the RDA. So that process was followed throughout 2910 and 11. 00:23:04
By 2011, they actually have the final adoption. 00:23:12
Of the plan for the project area. And then sort of Fast forward to today, there's been a lot of those activities that have 00:23:21
happened within the scope of that plan up to the to the current day. So that's kind of the idea of the TEC. So the TEC adopts that 00:23:28
master budget back in 2009 and, and, and then in 2011. And that master budget is where that the 300 million figure comes from, 00:23:36
which is kind of that upper bound of the total amount of tax revenue that can be redirected. 00:23:43
To the redevelopment activities with within the project area umm. 00:23:51
The mitigation fund so one of the. 00:23:57
Insurance policies, if you will, that Alpine School District wanted was to ensure that the existence of the RDA did not drive 00:24:02
their tax revenues below a certain assumption, a certain floor, if you will, of revenue per household. With the theory being that, 00:24:08
you know, students that enroll in schools largely come from households. They, as I understand, very few school children live in 00:24:15
grocery stores. 00:24:21
It's a joke. You can laugh, but they live under household roofs, right? And so there's a formula that says, well, based on the 00:24:29
number of households in the city, the school district wants to ensure almost like an insurance policy, that they're going to 00:24:35
receive a certain minimum amount of revenue per household. And so there was a mitigation fund created. Well, a mitigation formula 00:24:40
that basically said the tax revenue that comes from the increment to the RDA can be used for, you know, obviously the 00:24:46
redevelopment. 00:24:52
A portion has to actually be given back to the school district above and beyond what they would have otherwise gotten if the total 00:24:58
revenue to the school district falls below that threshold where there's an assumption of how much per household they might need as 00:25:06
a minimum to educate students. And for the last two years, the revenue from the 25% that is retained by Alpine School District has 00:25:13
been high enough that it has not triggered the utilization of that mitigation fund. 00:25:20
So for the first number of years of the RDA, the revenues were not high enough naturally to the school district to meet the 00:25:28
threshold. And so there was an additional subsidy, if you will, or an additional give back, if you will, to the school district as 00:25:34
part of that mitigation fund. So that that's kind of explaining the the mitigation fund. And So what we're seeing right now is 00:25:40
that the theory of how the economic development that is happening, which then creates economic activity, which then increases the 00:25:46
value of this real estate. 00:25:53
75% of the revenue and fortunately actually prepared a little bit of data. I'm doing some additional analysis for the whole RDA, 00:26:37
but Councilmember Sifuentes wanted to actually look at some of this data. So I ran the model that you asked for, which was just to 00:26:44
look at an example within the RDA, which in this case is the Megaplex parcel. Let me make sure I'm connected to the presentation. 00:26:51
I can show the slide up here. 00:26:58
The megaplex parcel would be the only good example though. 00:27:09
Of all of the projects, right? 00:27:13
Because we looked at all the other projects and it's the only successful one. 00:27:16
I mean, like I said, I can look at all the parcels. I just haven't, I haven't looked at the whole. I just want to make sure 00:27:22
everyone understands that we're looking at one of many. Oh, because you're saying it's that commercial? Yeah, it's the only 00:27:26
successful one in the RDA. 00:27:30
He's saying the only successful commercial person. Are you saying that the residential isn't successful? I mean, I think the 00:27:35
residential is is successful in bringing it a little bit back, but it's not as a whole, right. I'd look at I didn't look at this 00:27:41
fairpoint to say that commercial property. 00:27:47
I mean, you'd say Mega player Top Golf will be, Yeah, it's probably the only two, I mean, I think. 00:27:54
And and there's a variety of other things. 00:28:42
But in terms of your question and council member hold away or board member hold away, right because we're meeting as a board is. 00:28:46
The commercial developments probably generate more property tax than residential, generally speaking. That's true. And then you 00:28:56
don't have the residential exemption. Obviously commercial properties tax at the full taxable value, whereas residences there's a 00:29:01
deduction of that value. 00:29:06
But it is interesting to note that recently what has happened economically on the Wasatch Front is that. 00:29:13
Have borne a greater share of property tax than residential properties. But because of the demand for residential units and the 00:29:56
lack of supply and, and just population growth, there's been this tax shift which a lot of county assessors have discussed 00:30:04
significantly over the last two or three years. Because what you're seeing is the average homeowner might feel like they're 00:30:11
bearing a higher property tax burden. And in fact they are. 00:30:18
And those sales tax revenues are also collected by local government entities. And so, you know, that's all part of the theory of 00:30:57
why, why would you invest property tax dollars through this, through this tax increment financing plan, you know, essentially 00:31:06
redirecting a portion of property tax to the RDA for a period of time. Why would you do that, Right. And the reason is, well, 00:31:14
maybe it's the only way to fund redevelopment or to accelerate redevelopment that would take a long time. 00:31:22
In the case of the Geneva site, it's it helps to fund the environmental remediation that is required before the site is ready for 00:31:30
other development. One of the other reasons that happens around the state and in other states is job creation. So for example, one 00:31:37
of the other large tax increment finance recipients in Utah County was the Intel Micron Flash Technologies manufacturing Center up 00:31:44
in Highland, you know, Highland Alpine area. And you know the theory behind that one was that it was predicated on the idea that 00:31:51
that particular company. 00:31:58
Was going to hire a certain number of employees at a certain average salary which was above the median salary for the area. And so 00:32:05
that qualified them to receive this subsidy of a rebate of their property tax dollars. There was another kind of comment about. 00:32:12
Kind of giving money to private entities or it's like like an incentive or rebate to businesses. To be clear, the vast majority of 00:32:21
the agreement that the RDA has made with developers to reimburse them for certain costs using tax increment financing revenues is 00:32:31
geared towards paying for environmental remediation and city infrastructure and not a whole lot of dollars for just pure sort of. 00:32:42
Economic incentives for business activity, so, but that's because the 150 million of cleanup is first, the second-half phases four 00:32:53
and five are at the end. So we would be facing all the spend in the future, right? Well, no, 'cause all along every phase a 00:33:01
portion of the revenues have gone to reimburse the cost of infrastructure, which is not related to environmental mitigation, 00:33:09
right. But when we started 150 million US for cleanup and 150 million is for businesses or whatnot. 00:33:18
And the 100 and infrastructure, infrastructure and it's weighted heavily on cleanup at the beginning. We're now just gonna be 00:33:26
starting the big infrastructure and helping businesses section of the RDA, right? Yeah, I don't know if I get you're saying for 00:33:32
the vast majority's been this way, but that's 'cause it four and five haven't hit. 00:33:39
Yeah. I, I'd have to look, you know, I plan on looking at the, the balance between those types of reimbursements, but I know that 00:33:46
a significant sum has been infrastructure all along and and as is also environmental remediation, I don't see environmental 00:33:51
remediation I guess. 00:33:56
There will come a moment where environmental remediation is largely finished, but it's not now. And so I think environmental 00:34:02
remediation is ongoing and will likely be ongoing to the end because there's some significant things that start to occur. There's 00:34:08
significant pieces of concrete that be removed. I think one of the challenges in the early days of the RDA was that the first 00:34:14
developers kind of developed the easiest to develop areas first, which is fine. That makes sense, right? That's pretty efficient 00:34:20
use of their resources. 00:34:26
OK, so here's here's a little bit about this chart. 00:35:04
So using the Megaplex parcel, which is 18 acres, that's phase two. So the phase two that was triggered in 2015. 00:35:06
What I did was I looked at the 25% share that is retained specifically by Alpine School District. This chart would look a little 00:35:19
bit different for other taxing entities than the water district, Utah County, largely because their tax rates are different and 00:35:27
different entities might raise their tax rates in in different years. And in this case, over the course of this particular period 00:35:36
of time from 2006 until 2023, Alpine School District I think adopted an increased property tax rate nine of those years. 00:35:45
So this is this chart is just the 25% of all the property taxes that Alpine School District always retains and not the 75% that 00:35:55
goes to the RDA. Because the question that members of Fuentes had was, well, how much is the school district losing? And how does 00:36:03
that compare as you look at the the share that they get to keep? And if you just look at maybe Megaplex as the example, what does 00:36:10
that look like? And so that's what this chart is. 00:36:17
So 2006 is the base value year, and So what they would have collected or what they did collect would have been just under $2000 in 00:36:24
property taxes from those 18 acres. Now it's kind of flat for the next few years because what happened was you're talking about 00:36:32
one giant parcel of land, not 18 acres. You're actually talking about a parcel of land that was like 100 acres. And within that 00:36:40
100 acres you eventually have a section that's 18 acres. 00:36:47
Upon which megaplex was was placed, right. So what we don't necessarily know and it wasn't granularly assessed, what we know is we 00:36:56
know the whole parcel, we know the average per acre value over time and and what you see is that until we trigger it, you know 00:37:03
that's when the commercial development is complete. And so that was triggered in 2015. So I imagine there's a little bit of 00:37:11
assumption in this flat line that you could think of this flat line as kind of ascending up to the 2015. 00:37:19
You could think of it as you know, it might have been a little bit above the 2015 and then it comes down to the 2015 because. 00:37:27
What those first few years are from 2006 to 2014? 00:37:35
Though those numbers is a 100%, so that's what Alpine School District would have actually received. That's the 100% that they got 00:37:41
because none of the revenues were being siphoned off, so to speak, until the triggering of tax increment financing on those 00:37:48
parcels in 2015. Once you trigger the beginning of the tax increment financing period, then you begin the 7525 split. So what 00:37:56
you're seeing is how much money. 00:38:04
Did Alpine School District receive in property tax revenue for 100% of their share of the revenue for those first few years from 00:38:11
the base value year until the year in which these parcels were triggered as tax increment financing beginning? And so that's what 00:38:19
that first section of the chart is now in 2015. Once the parcels are triggered, then Alpine School District only receives 25% of 00:38:26
the property tax revenue well in that first year. 00:38:34
They're 25% share is significantly higher, almost double what the first year was, when the reason for that is because you went 00:38:41
from a brownfield site that needed remediation that was basically it was given AG exemption to a fully taxed commercial 00:38:49
development. And that fully taxed commercial development is worth significantly more than a brownfield in AG, right. And so this 00:38:56
begins to answer the question of why would Alpine School District give up 75% of its tax revenue? 00:39:04
Well, because they're looking at it in 2006 saying how much tax revenue are we going to get on this industrial site? Not very 00:39:12
much. But if we could accelerate the redevelopment of this industrial site, the industrial site would be worth far more. And when 00:39:19
it's worth far more, we'll get a ton of revenue. And what's great is we don't have to wait 30 years to get that revenue. We'll 00:39:26
start to get 25% of the revenue beginning in year one, in this case 2015 and in this particular case. 00:39:34
That first year was almost double what they received in the base year. So that's good. And then you see what begins to happen as 00:39:41
the development continues, other shops begin to open, other utilization happens, the economy begins to grow in the area. And then 00:39:50
what you're seeing the last few points, this is the 25%. So if you look at last year, Alpine School District received for the 00:39:58
Megaplex site $46,000 in property tax revenue, which represents 25%. 00:40:06
You know their share and then 75% not on this chart went to the RDA. And so in that case you're looking at a 24 time increase over 00:40:15
the base year. And so the question becomes, well, did Alpine School District get a good deal? 00:40:22
I mean, I think that the model is working out the way that they anticipated and this is precisely why school districts all around 00:40:30
the state when they participate in tax entity committees, taxing entity committees, they often times approve giving tax increment 00:40:37
financing to various projects because I think. 00:40:43
Their, their analysis and their assumption and their modeling and their forecasting is that it'll work out for them in the end. 00:40:51
And so in the case of of, you know, using this as one example within the larger thing. 00:40:56
It has worked out for them. So, so that helps answer the question. You wanted members support this and thanks for the opportunity 00:41:02
to kind of go through it. Any questions, comments about that? 00:41:07
So some people make the argument. I just want to reiterate and maybe hear it from you again that I I've heard, well, businesses 00:41:14
would have come anyway, but in order for a business to build on that land, it would have required extensive investment in the 00:41:20
cleanup, correct? 00:41:26
Could that land have been developed without investment from an RDA? No one knows. It's a hypothetical. I agree. Yeah, well, it's a 00:41:33
hypothetical as well. So it's all hypothetical. We're doing it. So you're talking about no chemicals where that was. There's no 00:41:39
settling ponds there. 00:41:45
So the argument could be made that a company could have come in, they could have broken up all that concrete minimal remediation, 00:42:21
according to Jacob's opinion, and built without an RDA. Yeah. I mean, I think that's the fundamental argument of the necessity of 00:42:26
the RDA was that. 00:42:32
The significant investment in just preparing the site for different types of development would have been a bar prohibition to 00:42:39
investors and I mean, you know, if you're familiar just with investing generally. 00:42:45
The highest and best use of those of those acres of real estate, right? 00:43:26
I have several more questions that might take us off of this specific topic. So does it? Does the Council want to ask more? 00:43:32
God, Marty, Marty, can Ioffer an observation that that relates to the question you just asked? I, I have kind of a unique vantage 00:43:42
where contract city attorney in that I do work for a lot of different cities up and down the Wasatch Front. And my observation on 00:43:49
RDA work is that we're talking here about a site that was contaminated. And so some of the resources went toward contamination 00:43:56
more often than not in the state. 00:44:03
RDA resources don't go to brownfield sites. We just don't have a lot of brownfield sites in the state. They go towards sites that 00:44:11
either need renewal or there needs to be some kind of investment to jumpstart development in an area. It's always hard to know. 00:44:21
And the example Josh uses when we talk is it, is it going to develop as a a Dollar Tree and a Taco Bell or is it going to develop 00:44:33
as a regional destination? 00:44:37
And when I analyze legal problems, two of the things I usually look to besides what does the law say and what are the parameters 00:44:43
for what's legal and illegal is what is the structure of the transaction, who has the control, and where is the risk? 00:44:51
I think Artie is dealing a lot with that risk question. But the other thing that they help cities with is the control question. 00:45:01
Because when you as an RDA board decide where do you want to put the RDA funds into? What kind of reimbursables do you want to put 00:45:09
them toward? And how do you want to use them to develop the city in the way that you plan and the way that you want it to be? RDA 00:45:16
resources are one of the really big tools that you can use to do that. 00:45:24
And so. 00:45:33
I see some advantage on the part of cities of being able to say we have this revenue that we can use to jumpstart development. 00:45:33
What kind of development do we want to jumpstart? 00:45:38
The other thing that should be that is part of the city's analysis when it looks at the use of RDA revenues is not just the 00:45:44
property tax equation. And Josh has done a really artful job of showing what the tax base was at the lower assessed value of 00:45:52
property that is undeveloped in this brownfield and how even when you provide 75% of that. 00:46:00
To jumpstart and create the development. 00:46:10
That you end up with a larger tax revenue than what you did. So I think it's a false argument to say well the school district got 00:46:13
100% which would be X and now they only get 25%, which you would think is X -, 75. It doesn't end up being that your amount at the 00:46:23
beginning doesn't end up being the same as the amount at the end because of the appreciation on the property. 00:46:33
And then the other part of the equation from a city perspective is the sales tax revenue which for commercial sites far exceeds 00:46:44
what the property tax revenue. And then my my final observation statewide is that even in the more affluent areas and I an example 00:46:51
would be the Cottonwood Mall development in holiday. 00:46:58
One of the more affluent cities in the state, a site that has been fallow since the late 90s, early 2000s. And without RDA money, 00:47:06
that development doesn't occur because of the public infrastructure and other things that need to go into it. And so it's not just 00:47:13
a meeting with steel site that needs this. You're competing with other locations up and down the state and within your county and 00:47:21
having things that are regional destinations matter. 00:47:28
For your community in ways that don't show up necessarily in tax revenue, but do show up in the quality of life for your cities. 00:47:36
Thank you. No, I couldn't agree with you more. 00:47:45
So often it's been pretty constant that this question has been brought up where we've had criticism or concern or things with the 00:48:19
RDA where people are like, we're doing this wrong or it's not what we intended it to be or all of these different things. And my 00:48:26
thought is, OK, well, hundreds of millions of dollars of bonds have been, what do you call it? 00:48:33
Issued, issued and taken on by different people to end and close this, we would have to pay those off, right? Like we can't just 00:48:40
say oh, we don't like. 00:48:46
Yeah, so. 00:48:56
There are existing bond obligations that the RDA has committed to. And so you have to make the payments on those bots and you 00:48:58
know, with the tax increment financing, those those dollars, those revenue dollars come to the RDA. You use those dollars to pay 00:49:05
those monthly or annual bond obligations. So, So yeah, it's interesting when you think about the idea of bonding, the reason that 00:49:13
the RDA was able. 00:49:20
To get the bonds is because they have a predictable revenue source in the form of the increment revenues from tax increment 00:49:28
financing. If you don't have the tax increment financing revenue, then you're not going to qualify for the loan. You know the 00:49:37
underwriters of the bond are not going to abbreviation bonds to the city. So typically when a city is building infrastructure. 00:49:46
They bond, you know, they take out a loan, they take out a mortgage of sorts. 00:49:57
To build a road and then they pay off that road over time, just similar to getting a mortgage on a house, right? The reason that 00:50:01
you do that is twofold #1 you need the road today, not 20 years from now. So you don't really have time to sort of save money for 00:50:09
20 years and be like, hey guys, just use your bicycle. 20 years from now, we're going to have a road, right? That doesn't work. 00:50:17
But the other important thing is that in government, you don't tax other people for the thing that you're using, right? 00:50:24
If I'm using a Vineyard Rd. and I'm in a vineyard, I should pay for the Vineyard Rd. whatever my share of the Vineyard Rd. is. 00:50:33
Should we have people in Payson pay for the Vineyard Rd. Probably not. Well, OK, should we have people today pay for a road that 00:50:40
people will use tomorrow? And there's a similar equity and fairness and sort of taxation without representation and taxes without 00:50:47
services kind of argument that says actually. 00:50:54
Bonding for public infrastructure is very wise as a policy, but I want to separate that. You're talking about city bonds. We all 00:51:02
agree with that. We need to be talking about RDA bonds. But there's the reason I bring up city bonds, though, is because I want to 00:51:09
analogize, right? I think we all agree on that. But I think it would be OK for him to finish what he's saying so that they can 00:51:17
understand. Go ahead. The purpose of the bond is to pay for the thing you need today, today. 00:51:24
That you need today and you need in the future, but it's going to take time to pay it off. So that's the traditional way a city 00:51:32
develops. But here's the problem. For a city like Vineyard that doesn't really exist in 2009 with, you know, a few 100 people that 00:51:38
live here, there is no revenue source that would enable you to finance the building of a road. So you wouldn't have been able to 00:51:44
bond to build any roads. And and if you didn't build any roads, you couldn't have any houses. And so how could you get the revenue 00:51:50
necessary? 00:51:56
To actually build a city from scratch quickly, you wouldn't be able to. And so this is where the RDA is almost like bonding but 00:52:03
differently because instead of the city taking on the risk of a loan. 00:52:11
Where bond purchasers have to buy those bonds, you have to go out and get a loan from investors, right? You instead are allowing 00:52:20
developers to be your investors. And you're telling the developer if you come in and build it and you take the risk of building 00:52:28
it, we promise that we're going to pay you a share of the revenues we're going to get in the future. So rather than going on to 00:52:35
the municipal bond market and getting, you know, institutional retirement funds and Wall Street. 00:52:43
You have existing RDA bond obligations. You will continue to pay those until they're paid off, and you have dedicated revenue 00:53:59
sources in the form of your tax incurrent financing that you get every year. OK, I just want to clear out the record because we 00:54:06
were able to build a city without the RDA. The entire holdaway parcel, the entire CLAG, the entire Gamma, the entire church, all 00:54:14
of the entire infrastructure was done off of taxes, off of Geneva. So we could have, we're only talking about the RDA. 00:54:22
I mean, I'm not aware of another. I'm sorry you had a comment, so I'll shut my mouth. Go ahead. 00:55:52
I was just remarking that all water's edges included in the RDA, and that's, you know, there's a significant part. I think it's a 00:55:57
fairpoint that I shouldn't. What I said shouldn't be taken globally, that there's no development without the RDA. It's just, yeah, 00:56:03
when Vineyard was very, very new, you had the operating steel mill. Who's paying? 00:56:09
A lot of property taxes, which then is helping to build infrastructure in the city. But then of course, once that goes out of 00:56:16
business, then it's sort of then what, right? 00:56:20
Just call us. 00:56:26
Back to this discussion for a second. I am going to recognize a few things. I understand that many of you who are coming and 00:56:28
looking at the budget on the board are deciding how to spend money on the board and I I respect that. I think that there's some 00:56:34
good questions that were asked tonight and there's a educational. 00:56:41
Kind of packet that Josh is putting together. I got to dress a lot of these things and that will continue to be brought forward. I 00:56:50
would say that concerning this budget. 00:56:55
If you have questions in general about how you want to spend, budget or not spend. 00:57:00
Let's address those. If it's educational and you need to learn more, let's go and let's meet together and then just can continue 00:57:08
to build something that comes back to the public to understand it better and to address some of these questions. And then if you 00:57:13
have something that you want to offer on the budget, let's come back to that so that we can get through the business of the RDA 00:57:18
tonight. 00:57:24
And we'll go ahead and move forward with that. A lot of great questions were asked. I haven't even done a lot of great questions 00:57:30
were asked. And I feel like we can, we can get to that. And I think before you ask your questions, Joss, what I'm, I mean, not 00:57:36
Josh, Jake, what I'm asking you is if it pertains to what you do or don't want to spend on the budget, let's discuss that because 00:57:42
that's what we're here to discuss. And if it pertains to questions that you have to understand the RDA better, let's do that 100% 00:57:48
wrong. 00:57:54
Like you just allowed Marty an entire section and I allowed I? I agree. 00:58:01
OK, I haven't even gone yet. 00:58:08
It's not that I am trying to silence you from getting your questions asked. It's that I felt like we were trying to get somewhere 00:58:11
with questions for the budget and what I'm what I'm understanding from the questions that are coming here. It's about 00:58:17
understanding the RDA, but it's it's a point on an agenda that we can bring. Yeah, it's very important if you even want to fund 00:58:23
the RDA, it's a good question on it. And so that's why before you get to the budget, you need to say is it absolutely something 00:58:29
that should and I feel like. 00:58:35
I feel like one of the things that is important is that you need to come to meetings and learn about this so that you understand 00:58:41
these questions and then we can talk about them here in a meaningful way. And one of the things that we're doing is we're going 00:58:47
outside of the business that's on the agenda. I, I will allow you to have some comments, but what I'm, what I'm asking you is if 00:58:53
it's not pertaining to the business on the agenda, let's set up something where you guys can get deeply rooted and ask these 00:58:59
questions. 00:59:05
And have it be really meaningful and answer your questions and go through the books and the information so that you understand it 00:59:11
so that when we come to the business on the agenda, it is meaningful for this agenda item. And if as a city and our neighbors who 00:59:17
are here have questions that they want to learn about, Josh is gathering that as we talk to them about for, you know, a little bit 00:59:23
ago and the last meeting to say, hey, here's some more stuff we want to learn about. Let's do that and let's bring it to the 00:59:29
table. 00:59:35
Was having been here from the beginning of the RDA. 01:00:50
It's a completely different thing to live through it. At the beginning of the RDA, it was challenged to take this property out of 01:00:56
Vineyard into Orem. If you didn't sign this, we will try to get out, right. You can go back to Randy Farnsworth, Nate Walk, Nate 01:01:04
Riley and all of them are saying look, we we will get a better tax rate to get into Orem. So understanding the the difficulty of 01:01:11
what deal or or Geneva sell property could get is really, really important. 01:01:19
When the RDA was created. 01:01:27
They put out a #150 million per cleanup. Everybody knows that number was just taken out of a best guess off of 2000 and six 2011 01:01:30
numbers. Changes in cleanup costs of cleanup trucks change dramatically from 2011 to 2024. The modeling of that, right? So it's 01:01:38
just hey, so understanding are we going to be able to clean up the entire project and parcel with that original 150 million or not 01:01:46
is an easy question. 01:01:54
But it's also not necessary, according to President Farnsworth. I'm sorry, if you want to speak, you'd have to be invited by the 01:02:42
mayor. But if you're, if you're taking the money out and the total is 52,292,000 from the beginning, you wouldn't have the money 01:02:49
to build a school. And I agree with you, maybe you don't have a demand, but 52,000,000 removed from education is a really large 01:02:56
amount and it's grown. And we don't talk about that, right, in terms of in terms of what's going on. And so coming in as a, as a 01:03:03
brand new City Council member. 01:03:10
And RDA and reassessing it and coming through an election of going, hey, we've got Utah City and we've got all these other things 01:03:17
to go in. And I agree with you, Josh, probably the only good example in the of all the RDA projects is the one that you shared. 01:03:23
The second one would be Top Golf, but all the others in revenue would be dramatically. There's some really bad ones. And there's 01:03:29
also others where we've put out a lot of money like the Forge with no conditions where we build all this infrastructure and then 01:03:35
it just sits for tenure. 01:03:41
Right. And so we've made mistakes on various things to go through and do that. And as a body, you know, going out and studying all 01:03:47
of these things, these are education dollars that I care about. And I want to be so educated on it to be like, am I going to fund 01:03:55
a teacher or am I going to be funding? And you guys already know I don't agree with lobbying. So is it in the budget? Because I'd 01:04:02
rather fund a teacher than a lobbyist or vice versa. Or I at least would like it on the record. 01:04:10
That I am voting for a teacher against the lobbyists and that it's in the paper so people know that at least I was trying to fight 01:04:18
for it, right? And then and then the other thing on the RDA is. 01:04:23
Getting into the governing or interlocal agreement, I know we've gone back and forth on the emails of how this was created or 01:04:30
whatnot and and Jamie, we can't find the interlocal contract that set up this organization and even tells our body how to operate, 01:04:37
right? It doesn't exist. No, I think what you've asked for is a document that's the wrong label. So Josh is working to find for 01:04:45
you all the formative documents of the RDA and I saw. 01:04:52
So we're going to have a big school district split, maybe, maybe not. And understanding, you know, in reaching out to, I mean, 01:05:35
Orem and Pleasant, Orem and Lehigh and Saratoga Springs were the ones that were like. 01:05:41
Who would want you in a split because your education dollars are horrible? And I, I was like, whoa, okay, why are they bad? And 01:05:49
that's when it kind of hit me. Granted that they have to take us, which is good. They, they, they, they can't kick us out. But the 01:05:57
other thing, though, that I think people need to understand is that we have more leverage against this property because we are 01:06:04
kind of an investor in the cleanup and we've ever had on any other property because we can choose if we want to clean it up. 01:06:12
And we can choose if we want to build their infrastructure with them where they can go around their, their, their own way, right. 01:06:20
And, and I think in going through and studying all of this, we do own our own destiny on if we want things and we get to vote that 01:06:25
way. And if, and it's not our hands are tied, hey, they get the density or they get the water, it's we get to build the 01:06:31
infrastructure that we want. 01:06:37
And, and so, yeah, those are my comments for today. The other thing though, and I'll send you an e-mail over some things. 01:06:44
Getting to the budget. 01:06:52
I still don't feel comfortable signing or agreeing on a budget of 470,000 of of admin. I know last year those if I'm not mistaken 01:06:53
the lobbying was in the admin fee of the RDA. 01:07:01
Right. Can we be given a breakdown of what that $437,000 in administration fees is? Has that been provided at all? No, it's just 01:07:10
the high level. That's the revenue. So that's a revenue source. So in other words, So what are you looking at, Jake, if that's 01:07:17
revenue, that's the revenue that we get to spend. And I would like that broken down into a budget as to what we're spending it on. 01:07:24
Well, so, yeah, the revenues are the top section and then the expenditures are the bottom section. 01:07:31
So but the admin RDA admin. 01:07:40
So the RDA admin fee is 437,000, right? So that's what we get to administer the admin to pay you and to pay all the costs of 01:07:44
running the RDA. Yeah, if you look at the very bottom of the second section, which is the expenses, the 2nd to last entry, the 01:07:54
transfer to general fund admin. So what that means is that you are the RDA is spending its. 01:08:03
Admin revenues by giving those revenues in the form of an expenditure to the city, right, because the RDA is a separate legal 01:08:14
entity from the city and the way the admin fee works, and this is common in public finance throughout the country. 01:08:22
The really common example, and in fact that's an important example because it's the one that drives the way in which financial 01:08:33
compliance is imposed upon local government, is federal rules about how. 01:08:40
You can build federal grant monies for your internal overhead and service sort of administrative service costs. So for example, if 01:08:47
the city of Salt Lake is big and they get federal funds in various ways, if Salt Lake City receives half, $1,000,000 a year in 01:08:55
federal funding, there's a federal law that says you're only allowed to use no more than 10% of those half, $1,000,000 that we 01:09:02
give you to defray the cost of administering the programs that we are funding through this grant. 01:09:10
And so this concept of administrative overhead and that there's always a share of any revenues that a local government might get 01:09:18
that has to go towards administering that program is limited. And so in in Utah's case, there's a limitation on how much the city 01:09:26
can bill against its increment revenues for the purpose of admin. And so that's where the admin revenues are at the top. And then 01:09:33
how you're spending those revenues is you're giving them to the city in. 01:09:41
In the idea that the city has to actually do work to administer the entity that is the RDA. So for example, community development, 01:09:49
economic development, public works, you know, there's elements of the city's administrative team that is using its time and effort 01:09:57
and the resources of the general fund of the city to administer the RDA well. So it wouldn't make sense to make the property 01:10:04
taxpayers who pay into the general fund. 01:10:12
In the city of Vineyard, defray the cost of this separate activity of the RDA. So that's why the RDA has an assigned revenue 01:10:20
source and then that revenue source is used to defray the cost of administrative costs. I, I, I don't need to argue that we have 01:10:27
to pay for it. I need you to. I'm arguing that even, and I don't care if it's the RDA. OK, now you give it to the city. 01:10:34
The two things on here that need to be broken down are the 437,000 that you're going to transfer. 01:10:42
Great. Then the city needs to breakdown what that's going to and that's not broken. And why wouldn't that be broke down here? 01:10:48
General fund for the city. So when you look at your city budget and you look at the general fund, your general fund budget is 01:10:57
going to say 437,000 dollars, $500 as revenue to the general fund and then that general fund revenues. But why are you just not 01:11:04
breaking that down since you know what the city services are rendering for you like? 01:11:11
Rather than be like, oh, well, you know, this was 25 minutes of the city recording staff and 25 minutes of the economic 01:12:31
development staff. There's just a percentage assumption about how you account for the utilization of those funds. But I don't know 01:12:38
that there's really line item expenditures per SE. So for last year, 50,000 was for World Trade Center Utah and 100,000 for Sage. 01:12:45
So what you're saying is, is that though they are Vineyard. 01:12:53
The RDA is reimbursing for. 01:13:01
So what does the RDA have to do with World Trade Center Utah and SAGE? 01:13:06
Debt interest, I mean, I suppose if you're, if you're looking for like what money is the RDI spending on specific things that are 01:13:45
somehow not listed here? I think you really just would want to look more at the city's general fund expenditures. Because what the 01:13:52
RDA is doing is it's taking, it's taking the admin revenue, it's turning it into an expense, it's giving it to the city's general 01:14:00
fund. The city's general fund is then listing that as a revenue on its. 01:14:07
Budget and then you'd have to look at the city's general fund expenses to have an idea of how is the city spending its general 01:14:14
fund. And of course there's a lot of things in the general fund and, and, and the reason for that is, well, there's a lot of 01:14:21
general fund activities that are in a sense subsidizing the activities of the RDA and the Rdas just paying for that. Yeah. And as, 01:14:28
as the board goes through the budget items, if you have any questions about something that's itemized or on the, on the budget at 01:14:35
all, you can ask. 01:14:41
Those types of questions about isn't within the scope. Is it within the plan that we've approved? How are we investing in it if 01:14:48
you're not seeing it on here? 01:14:52
Then it's probably not on here. And if you're looking for percentages, you can look in your detailed packet for the City Council. 01:14:57
OK. Well, I was told last meeting I wouldn't get it, so that's a different story, but I look forward to getting it. I think all 01:15:05
City Council did receive it. And I think the difference that I remember in the meeting was the difference between transactional 01:15:12
items versus itemized, just what's being spent. And I think that was clarified. 01:15:20
I think it was pretty clear that I wanted the 437,000 broken down for the admin. And then the second thing and I'll I'll end is. 01:15:29
For contract services, the 525, if you can promise me that you'll get with Christie and you'll break those down and say we have 01:15:37
this look, I'm probably going to get outvoted on it, but I would like it to be very clear that. 01:15:44
We knew about what these things were with the RDA and it's not this some lump sum of half, you know, half a million or a total of 01:15:53
1,000,000 for contract services and, and the admin fee and just send me an e-mail just those two things and I'll be grateful. Feel 01:15:59
like it would be really helpful. And I've said this at a few meetings, if there could be an in person meeting, even if you had to 01:16:05
do it by zoom, where you guys could talk about these things together. I, I think that doing the work in the public is probably the 01:16:11
best thing we can do. 01:16:17
Is very important, especially as you move forward and you you have. 01:17:59
Good questions that need to be answered. We want to make sure that you are getting the answers. So can I ask you a clarification? 01:18:06
Yeah. Jake, you were saying that you want meetings with department heads, which would be like the RDA director. Then you just said 01:18:12
you didn't want meetings with I I'd love to meet with you guys more, but but being able to meet with the department heads, you're 01:18:17
getting integral information. 01:18:23
This is why I don't agree with this. And then the rest of us can say, oh, thank you. And maybe we can get those documents from you 01:19:35
beforehand. Or maybe we're all taking our meetings so we're seeing it beforehand. And then when we come here, it's not a long 01:19:41
discussion about something that's not here. It's I have the documents. And so when our residents or our neighbors come and say we 01:19:47
want the questions today, we have them and we can answer them today because you ask the questions and we got those documents for 01:19:53
you before the meeting. 01:19:59
You said that you've asked in public meetings to meet with all the department heads and you're not getting those meetings. And I'm 01:21:10
and I'm trying to figure out ways to help you get those meetings by saying, well, maybe you should. No, I think I yeah, I think up 01:21:17
to this point on the RDA or any City Council, I'll, I'll reach out if I have something, but you guys gotta realize like they're. 01:21:24
Our culture and our City Council and RDA is broken. OK, so the vast majority when we, when you set up a city, let's let's take it 01:21:31
like a family. A family will say, hey, we make 100,000. 01:21:38
And some families will say I want to budget and go 120,000 and get some credit cards. 01:21:46
Other families will say, hey, I want to spend 100,000 and others will say I want to spend 80 and self 20 and they'll get in the 01:21:52
same room as a council because we're the body and we'll and our our departments are like children. I want to go to dance. I want 01:21:59
this. I want a fire truck. I want this, I want that. 01:22:05
And we have not sat down as a City Council to say what is the total line item and how much are we saving and how much are we going 01:22:11
to spend. 01:22:15
And also what are the priorities that we have? We've never met once for six months and gone. We, we, we met for an hour up in, up 01:22:19
in here on a, what is it a 12? Well, and you've got to do that. You have to come in and say, well, and I gotta get out voted and I 01:22:27
might get outvoted and say, well, you're not getting out voted. You have, you've been outvoted on very few things. And when you're 01:22:35
outvoted, it's typically just you, It's not the whole council. 01:22:43
It's like it's not a split, it's not the three-way where I'm the swing vote like we all thought it might be. It's we're having 01:22:51
discussions, things come up and every now and then you vote no. And it honestly hasn't been on these big ticket items that you've 01:22:56
been so concerned about. Yeah, I know, but. 01:23:02
And a lot of times it's because we've all done our homework. So I met with the fire and the police this week because I want to 01:23:08
understand their needs for budget better. So then I can come to this room. And if that comes up, I'm going to get, oh, I did my 01:23:14
homework. So I can tell you I've already met with fire. I've already met with police. Fantastic. What about planning engineering, 01:23:20
public works? Don't have any questions on the budget. They submitted. OK, so when that comes up, you're you're good. 01:23:26
If I had something, I would reach out to your questions right now around the RDA. So would you please meet with Josh to do your 01:23:32
homework so that when we come in here, you can explain, right? You can even educate me better from what you've learned from your 01:23:38
homework, right? What we've been fighting over is before I get a line item, I have no questions, right? 01:23:44
Gone back and forth and OK so I'm I'm going to stop the conversation. Thank you. It's I don't understand the point. The point of 01:23:53
it is this and I think we've exhausted it and thank you Marty for sharing it It's. 01:23:58
The difficulty with bringing anything is that your experts need time to put something together to bring to the public in a timely 01:24:05
fashion and if you don't take the opportunity to meet with the people that are offering the meetings and then you don't get what 01:24:12
you want. It's sad not only for you but for all of us because you are a representative. 01:24:19
That's fine. If you disagree, like I think this is the point is you're saying I'm not getting what I need and we're saying this is 01:24:27
how we can get it to you. 01:24:31
And RDA, if you're sitting there, Mayor, and you're saying we're traveling around the world last year and nobody knows about it, 01:24:35
that's what it was in the last year and it's not, it wasn't. And you just put things on the record without. And what I'm saying is 01:24:43
that I want a granular understanding and we're getting $1,000,000. 01:24:50
I'm not going to get this, no. Even in the last meeting when you said you weren't going to get it and they said it was a 01:24:57
transactional thing, I said we have to get together. 01:25:02
Did that happen? It didn't. And you were invited and you did not take the meeting, the five of us. Did you send out an invite for 01:25:07
the five of us? 01:25:12
I don't have to give for our attorney, for the RDA director, for the city manager to sit down and get you the documents that you 01:25:17
need so that we could clarify for this Board and for the public. If you can't take the meetings, we can't help you. And that's the 01:25:23
point of this discussion. But I have to move on from it. I need an emotion. 01:25:29
To close the public hearing? No. Did we close it? No, we didn't close it. We did close it. Everybody's sure. OK then do we need to 01:25:36
adopt anything? No. So your adoption for the approval of the final budget is? 01:25:43
OK. Then I'm going to and I just want to say for the record, the $1,000,000 you're going to get me and not a line item, but just a 01:25:52
breakdown of. 01:25:56
100,000 here, 100,000 there. 01:26:02
The meeting is adjourned, so you guys go ahead and talk about it. 01:26:06
Let's just check with Jamie if we could for tentative budget because we continued the hearing. Do we need to have an action item 01:26:10
on the tentative budget? No, because we already adopted it, right. And so we don't need to adopt it fully. We just needed to hold 01:26:15
the public hearing. All right, we are adjourned. 01:26:21
Link
Start video at
Social
Embed

* you need to log in to manage your favorites

My Favorites List
You haven't added any favorites yet. Click the "Add Favorite" button on any media page, and they'll show up here.
* use Ctrl+F (Cmd+F on Mac) to search in document
Loading...
Unable to preview the file.
Loading...
Unable to preview the file.
All right, we're going to go ahead and get rolling. Today is June 12th, the time is 606 and we're going to start our Redevelopment 00:00:01
Agency board meeting. Marty support us, will give us our invocation and lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance. 00:00:09
Our dear, kind Heavenly Father, we are so very grateful to be here today as a community, as a group of people working towards the 00:00:24
better and benefit of our Vineyard city. Please bless and watch over us, help us work well together, help us understand what's 00:00:30
brought before us and make the best possible decisions. 00:00:36
It would benefit Venue City residents and our future. We are so very grateful for the hard work of the staff, the members of the 00:00:43
community that support and work so hard to bring forth ideas and values. And please bus and watch over our servicemen, our police 00:00:50
and fire, all of our emergency personnel, and watch over our families and protect them. And we say these things in the name of thy 00:00:58
Son, Jesus Christ, Amen. All right. 00:01:05
Of the United States, of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and 00:01:17
justice for all. 00:01:23
That brings us to our consent agenda. This is the approval of the May 22nd RDA meeting minutes. I need a motion. 00:01:31
I move to approve item 2.1. Thank you first by Amber. 00:01:41
Second. Second by Sarah. All in favor, aye. 00:01:47
All right, we'll move on. 00:01:52
Would you like to wait? Well, I don't know what do you have for it? I don't know. There is a recording, but we can wait just in 00:01:58
case. 00:02:01
I don't know, Jamie. Do we need to wait for our recorder to return? 00:02:05
Is the meeting being recorded? That's what we understood, OK. 00:02:09
Please. 00:02:20
Yes, OK, good. You're updated. OK. All right. Last meeting, we had a public hearing on our RDA tentative budget. We continued that 00:02:22
and kept the public hearing open in case more people had additional questions. 00:02:31
So since last time, maybe it would be good to go and see if there were any changes. What I'm going to do is I'm going to ask the 00:02:42
board members to open up the public hearing allow. 00:02:47
Oh, because it's already open. We left it open. We don't need to do that. So if you have anything additional that you would want 00:02:55
to say otherwise, this is time for the public to come and. 00:02:59
Comments and then we can discuss at the board, so. 00:03:05
Just in case, I don't want you to sit through potentially a long meeting if you're waiting for that moment in time. So we're just 00:04:18
doing the RDA tonight. That's right. Thank you. 00:04:21
All right. Thank you. 00:04:26
Josh, were there any additional comments from the public? 00:04:30
Don't forget to state your name where you're from. 00:04:36
I Vineyard City Council, my name is John Barrack. I am from a resident of Orem and I'm concerned. I'm a concerned parent and 00:04:39
taxpayer in the Alpine School District, which is the largest contributor of tax increment funding to your RDA. After the 2022 00:04:46
Alpine School District bond failed in November 2022, the board, the Alpine School District board had a work meeting in February of 00:04:53
2023. 00:04:59
I don't know if that's me or air conditioning. And they said they would never build a secondary education, junior high or high 00:05:07
school in the city of Vineyard. And the reason was is because of the Vineyard. RDA takes all the taxes away from Vineyard. And 00:05:14
that was concerning to me as a parent because I think Vineyard is large enough that it should have those things. And your students 00:05:20
are important and they shouldn't have to go to Orem for everything because you've built a beautiful community here. 00:05:27
I do have a few questions about the budget, the proposed budget for the for the public hearing. My first question, and by the way, 00:05:35
I am a certified public accountant. I'm also a PhD in accounting and I like public finance and I've taught public finance for 23 00:05:42
years. But I do have a couple of questions with respect to the proposed budget. Did the Vineyard RDA agency receive consent from 00:05:50
the Taxing Entities Committee as required under state law? 00:05:57
And if so, I'd like an affirmative response to that. 00:06:05
Does. 00:06:11
Let's see, did the agency receive consent for phase four? I was looking over some of the documents from the last couple of years 00:06:14
and I didn't see the resolution that authorized phase four. I thought mentioned in meeting notes during COVID when they talked 00:06:19
about potentially phase four, but I would like to know the resolution number. If you could let me know that, I would appreciate 00:06:23
it. 00:06:27
Umm did the agency receive consent of the Taxing Entities Committee for the Resolution 2023, Dash 02 or other extensions of the 00:06:33
RDA that were granted by this body in 2023? 00:06:40
And then a couple of items related, well, one item related to your bond. Why did the agency have an untimely filing of its 00:06:49
2021-2022 and 2023 financial statements that were produced by Gilbert and Stewart for the agency in which you provided notices to 00:06:56
bondholders and through Emma the the. 00:07:03
Consolidator of those eight items and what were the consequences of having non timely filed financial statements? 00:07:12
Like you have to pay higher interest rates as a violation of your covenants. I think that's probably a failure on some portion and 00:07:19
we should know why. 00:07:23
And then the second, the last thing I kind of wanted to know was does the taxing entity committee, which is required under state 00:07:30
law and is referenced in your resolution 2011 or 2011 Dash 03, does that taxing entity committee follow Utah public open meeting 00:07:36
laws? And if so, where can I find all of them? 00:07:43
And documents related to their consent in votes. Thank you so much for your time. 00:07:50
Good evening. 00:08:04
Vineyard Redevelopment Agency Board. My name is John Gadd. I'm a resident of Pleasant Grove. I've lived. I bought my home with my 00:08:06
wife there in 2000. So we've lived there for 23 years. And just like residents of Vineyard, every year when I get my property tax 00:08:13
notice, the bulk of that goes to Alpine School District. My understanding is that last year about 65% of people's property tax in 00:08:21
Vineyard went to Alpine School District. 00:08:29
And so the other thing that I've noticed every year when I get my property tax notice in the mail is that every year it seems to 00:08:36
go up and I've tracked it and I've charted it and it's going up faster than inflation. So I understand that things get more 00:08:42
expensive, but. 00:08:48
The the tax that I paid to Alpine School District over the last 20-3 years that I've owned my home in Pleasant Grove has gone up 00:08:54
faster than inflation. So recently I've started to look into why that might be. 00:09:00
And there's a lot of reasons. 00:09:08
You know, I think there's some wasteful spending and whatnot going on in Alpine School District, but. 00:09:11
One of the reasons that I've recently become aware of is. 00:09:16
This Vineyard Redevelopment Agency, so my understanding is that back in the 2006, 2009, 2011 time frame, you guys fired this thing 00:09:20
up with an initial idea that you would give some tax incentives to businesses for 25 years. 00:09:28
And up to $300 million. Now, if you're giving property tax rebates up to $300 million and 65% of property tax ghost Alpine School 00:09:37
District, that means that around 200 million of that 300 million is money that Alpine School District is rebating. In other words, 00:09:46
that's $200 million that's not flowing into Alpine School District. Now, I'm no fan of taxes. 00:09:55
And I would love for taxes to be lower than they are, But if we're going to have a tax, I think it should be fairly distributed 00:10:06
across everyone who pays the tax. And here's the problem what I see happening here with the Vineyard Redevelopment Agency. 00:10:14
Is you're taking $200 million of tax revenue that businesses would otherwise be paying, you're giving it back to them. 00:10:23
That's $200 million that would have gone into Alpine School Districts General Fund. 00:10:33
And they don't just say, well, we'll just do without that $200 million. They make it up elsewhere. And where do they make it up 00:10:39
from my property tax and your property tax and senior citizens on fixed incomes property tax. And young mothers and fathers who 00:10:45
can barely afford housing. And when they finally get that little starter home and they get their property tax bill, that property 00:10:52
tax is higher. 00:10:58
Because of this Vineyard Redevelopment Agency, because businesses that I understand you want to grow your community. I get that. 00:11:06
And you want to incentivize businesses to come in. 00:11:11
But you're rebating 75% of their property tax back to them as an incentive to come in and build in vineyards. 00:11:16
But you're doing that on the backs of homeowners, taxpaying taxpayers and other businesses. So you're picking winners and losers. 00:11:23
The winners are the people who get 75% of their tax, property tax back. The losers are all the poor citizens, including Vineyard 00:11:28
citizens, but Pleasant Grove citizens and Lehigh citizens and Fairfield citizens and everybody who lives in Alpine School 00:11:34
District. 00:11:40
Because when that $200 million is given back to the businesses in Vineyard, and that's only in Vineyard, that $200 million doesn't 00:11:46
go into Alpine School District and they make up that $200 million on the backs of all the rest of us. So that doesn't seem right. 00:11:55
The other thing that I'm concerned about is what started out. 00:12:05
With the idea of it's going to go 25 years and we're going to do up to $300 million, seems to keep growing from that. I'm holding 00:12:09
in my hand Resolution U2023O2. This is for Phase 5A of the Vineyard Redevelopment Agency and I'm reading right here that. 00:12:18
Allowed for and we'll do that each one. So keep an eye on the clock. It should be right up here actually. 00:13:06
And then if you're speaking and you're hoping to hear back, please leave your name and your e-mail or your number on the seat as 00:13:11
you comment. If you didn't or as you come in. Thank you. 00:13:18
My name is Doria Evans. I am a Vineyard resident, and I would just like to thank these two gentlemen for what they have brought 00:13:31
up. I it's very interesting to me and it makes me concerned. And I, I would hope that you would answer these questions tonight 00:13:38
instead of emailing them separately on their own because I think the rest of the audience would like to hear your responses to 00:13:45
their questions. Thank you. 00:13:52
I'm sorry. 00:14:00
Carson Walker, retired Alpine School District teacher, and I just want to echo the same concern. I live in Orem. Yep, I'm just up 00:14:07
the hill. So I read through the bond documents through the Vineyard City RDA and it has on page, I think 30 through 35. It has all 00:14:15
the risk that it mentions that things that could go wrong in the RDA, like 'cause if I'm a bond investor, I want to know in the 00:14:23
prospectus, like the risk reward ratio and the potential for this investment to go bad. 00:14:31
And I think what could go bad is going bad. The district could split, the economy has changed, the interest rates are up. So 00:14:40
commercial real estate is down, leasing, you know, mixed developments down. And so and this I think we're seeing that in evidence 00:14:47
that all these risks are perfect storm is happening and that and that's why we're extending, you know, to make it pencil out for 00:14:54
these developers. And I just wonder. 00:15:01
One, are you covered? 00:15:10
As an RDA board with like directors and board insurance, are you personally liable? Like if you add your attorney and city manager 00:15:12
like look at the risk and then to what? What happens if you fell if these bonds fell like like the development doesn't go as 00:15:18
promised or as thought because of the economy like we had a recession or. 00:15:24
And then what happens is are you insured? Like is your bonds insured? So just some of those things that I just, I just think 00:15:31
maybe. 00:15:35
It was a good idea that has gone maybe like too big and too far. And then I I noticed there's a mitigation part where you're 00:15:40
supposed to pay the school district if you collect too much or it goes too well. And when does that kick in? If you could go over 00:15:45
that, that would be really awesome. Thank you. 00:15:50
So if you agree with people, feel free to raise your hand. 00:16:05
Thank you. 00:16:09
Hope everyone's enjoying the summer. That's great out there. I'm Karen Cornelius, Vineyard resident. I just want to be on record 00:16:18
as saying, not raising my hand, but saying that I agree with Daria. We need answers on the record, not emails. I have waited 00:16:25
months for answers to questions that I have asked at this point. 00:16:32
So I would like those answers here in this meeting so that they are public record. Thank you. 00:16:40
But without clapping, please raise your hand just so we can keep the quorum in the meeting. Thank you. 00:16:50
OK, are there any other comments? 00:16:57
If not, I would need a motion to close the public hearing. So moved. Thank you Amber, can I get a second? 00:17:00
Second. Second by Sarah. All in favor, aye. 00:17:08
Any opposed all right. 00:17:12
All right, Board, this is a time to discuss some of the things that you have questions on that you heard. From the conversation 00:17:15
that I'm looking at right now, it looks like some of these things will have to go and pull these documents to understand them. 00:17:22
There's a lot of complex things. Of course, you can always reiterate or ask and we can talk to Josh about it. Josh, do you have 00:17:29
any comments on some of the questions that were asked just barely? Yeah, sure. 00:17:36
Yep, I do, and I'd be happy to share. 00:17:45
Let me, I'll start with. So there are three things that stuck out to me. There's a comment and question about the tax and the 00:17:49
taxing entity committee, which is the. 00:17:55
It's actually called a special purpose local government entity. The taxing entity committee is the committee of taxing entities 00:18:02
that potentially could participate in an RDA. So in in the in the case of the Geneva Urban Renewal area, those taxing entities are 00:18:12
the Alpine School District 2 Water District, Central Utah Water, and Northern Utah County Water. 00:18:23
The city of Vineyard and Utah County. So in order for. So it might be helpful if I just kind of go back a little bit to the 00:18:34
beginning. There's been a lot of discussion, comments, questions about RDA, what is an RDA? How did it start, all these sorts of 00:18:39
things. 00:18:45
So let me just give a quick kind of overview of the history. So in 2005, Geneva Steel goes out of business and is sold. 00:18:51
And and then it's it's decided that it's going to be, you know, dismantled, demolished pieces are going to be sold off. You know, 00:19:02
investors and owners of of the steel mill sell off components of it. And, you know, there's an environmental mitigation component 00:19:09
of this, which US Steel has a significant amount of responsibility. 00:19:16
Towards and, and then so as the demolishing of the steel plant happens, then the question arises, what will happen to this area? 00:19:24
What will happen to this industrial site? It's what you might call a brownfield former industrial site where there's, you know, 00:19:32
environmental issues and, and so it's not ready for something new. It's not, you know, you demolish a steel mill and then then 00:19:40
what what could be, what could be on the steel mill side. So these are the conversations that begin in Vineyard Town and. 00:19:49
This is exactly one of the the prime candidates of the type of site that would necessitate or or trigger the idea of community 00:19:57
reinvestment or redevelopment. It was called community reinvestment previously and RDA or redevelopment more more recently. So 00:20:03
then what happens is there first has to be the creation of an RDA, which is a separate legal entity, which you all are the board 00:20:10
of the RDA. You are board members of the RDA, which is today's meeting. You're not council members. That's a separate meeting, 00:20:16
right? 00:20:22
So Vineyard Town creates a redevelopment agency which consists of the board, which are the council members, doesn't have to be the 00:20:30
council members, but it is. So first the RDA is created, but then once the RDA is created, there needs to be a finding made by the 00:20:37
RDA board of Bright. And so you know that that was the nature of Utah's Community Reinvestment Act, that there has to be a finding 00:20:44
of blight and then the designation of a project area. 00:20:50
And so the Vineyard RDA has a finding of blight in 2009 and then in 2009, they undertake a survey of the area to kind of determine 00:20:58
what the project area should be. And then later in 2009, they designate the project area. They adopt A project area plan and they 00:21:05
adopt A project budget. 00:21:11
But part of that, so once you have the RDA unit, the legal board, that doesn't mean that redevelopment is going to happen. You 00:21:18
have to designate an area that is a project area. 00:21:24
And then what a lot of people are talking about with the the tax incentives, that's a tool that an RDA can use. So first you 00:21:30
create a legal entity, an RDA. An RDA designates an area to be a project area. Within that project area, the RDA decides to. 00:21:39
Leverage the utilization of a legal tool called tax increment financing. Tax increment financing is where a portion of property 00:21:48
tax revenues that are collected in that area can be directed back towards the cost of redevelopment activities, and so the RDA 00:21:56
proposes to utilize tax increment financing well. Tax increment financing necessitates sign off or approval by the other taxing 00:22:03
entities. 00:22:10
Who would be giving up property tax revenue for a period of time? And so the legal mechanism at the time to do that is that you 00:22:18
create or or call together a committee of people that represent those taxing entities. That's the taxing entity committee, the 00:22:25
TEC. So the TEC then meets, it is a public body and there are public notices for their meetings and the TEC has to approve the 00:22:33
utilization of tax increment financing and in this scenario. 00:22:40
What you have is a vote of the members of this taxing entity committee, which include representatives in Alpine School District, 00:22:48
then your town, Utah County and the water districts. And they have to agree to the terms, which in this case was a 25% retained 00:22:56
revenue for the taxing entities, but a 75% portion that could go to the RDA. So that process was followed throughout 2910 and 11. 00:23:04
By 2011, they actually have the final adoption. 00:23:12
Of the plan for the project area. And then sort of Fast forward to today, there's been a lot of those activities that have 00:23:21
happened within the scope of that plan up to the to the current day. So that's kind of the idea of the TEC. So the TEC adopts that 00:23:28
master budget back in 2009 and, and, and then in 2011. And that master budget is where that the 300 million figure comes from, 00:23:36
which is kind of that upper bound of the total amount of tax revenue that can be redirected. 00:23:43
To the redevelopment activities with within the project area umm. 00:23:51
The mitigation fund so one of the. 00:23:57
Insurance policies, if you will, that Alpine School District wanted was to ensure that the existence of the RDA did not drive 00:24:02
their tax revenues below a certain assumption, a certain floor, if you will, of revenue per household. With the theory being that, 00:24:08
you know, students that enroll in schools largely come from households. They, as I understand, very few school children live in 00:24:15
grocery stores. 00:24:21
It's a joke. You can laugh, but they live under household roofs, right? And so there's a formula that says, well, based on the 00:24:29
number of households in the city, the school district wants to ensure almost like an insurance policy, that they're going to 00:24:35
receive a certain minimum amount of revenue per household. And so there was a mitigation fund created. Well, a mitigation formula 00:24:40
that basically said the tax revenue that comes from the increment to the RDA can be used for, you know, obviously the 00:24:46
redevelopment. 00:24:52
A portion has to actually be given back to the school district above and beyond what they would have otherwise gotten if the total 00:24:58
revenue to the school district falls below that threshold where there's an assumption of how much per household they might need as 00:25:06
a minimum to educate students. And for the last two years, the revenue from the 25% that is retained by Alpine School District has 00:25:13
been high enough that it has not triggered the utilization of that mitigation fund. 00:25:20
So for the first number of years of the RDA, the revenues were not high enough naturally to the school district to meet the 00:25:28
threshold. And so there was an additional subsidy, if you will, or an additional give back, if you will, to the school district as 00:25:34
part of that mitigation fund. So that that's kind of explaining the the mitigation fund. And So what we're seeing right now is 00:25:40
that the theory of how the economic development that is happening, which then creates economic activity, which then increases the 00:25:46
value of this real estate. 00:25:53
75% of the revenue and fortunately actually prepared a little bit of data. I'm doing some additional analysis for the whole RDA, 00:26:37
but Councilmember Sifuentes wanted to actually look at some of this data. So I ran the model that you asked for, which was just to 00:26:44
look at an example within the RDA, which in this case is the Megaplex parcel. Let me make sure I'm connected to the presentation. 00:26:51
I can show the slide up here. 00:26:58
The megaplex parcel would be the only good example though. 00:27:09
Of all of the projects, right? 00:27:13
Because we looked at all the other projects and it's the only successful one. 00:27:16
I mean, like I said, I can look at all the parcels. I just haven't, I haven't looked at the whole. I just want to make sure 00:27:22
everyone understands that we're looking at one of many. Oh, because you're saying it's that commercial? Yeah, it's the only 00:27:26
successful one in the RDA. 00:27:30
He's saying the only successful commercial person. Are you saying that the residential isn't successful? I mean, I think the 00:27:35
residential is is successful in bringing it a little bit back, but it's not as a whole, right. I'd look at I didn't look at this 00:27:41
fairpoint to say that commercial property. 00:27:47
I mean, you'd say Mega player Top Golf will be, Yeah, it's probably the only two, I mean, I think. 00:27:54
And and there's a variety of other things. 00:28:42
But in terms of your question and council member hold away or board member hold away, right because we're meeting as a board is. 00:28:46
The commercial developments probably generate more property tax than residential, generally speaking. That's true. And then you 00:28:56
don't have the residential exemption. Obviously commercial properties tax at the full taxable value, whereas residences there's a 00:29:01
deduction of that value. 00:29:06
But it is interesting to note that recently what has happened economically on the Wasatch Front is that. 00:29:13
Have borne a greater share of property tax than residential properties. But because of the demand for residential units and the 00:29:56
lack of supply and, and just population growth, there's been this tax shift which a lot of county assessors have discussed 00:30:04
significantly over the last two or three years. Because what you're seeing is the average homeowner might feel like they're 00:30:11
bearing a higher property tax burden. And in fact they are. 00:30:18
And those sales tax revenues are also collected by local government entities. And so, you know, that's all part of the theory of 00:30:57
why, why would you invest property tax dollars through this, through this tax increment financing plan, you know, essentially 00:31:06
redirecting a portion of property tax to the RDA for a period of time. Why would you do that, Right. And the reason is, well, 00:31:14
maybe it's the only way to fund redevelopment or to accelerate redevelopment that would take a long time. 00:31:22
In the case of the Geneva site, it's it helps to fund the environmental remediation that is required before the site is ready for 00:31:30
other development. One of the other reasons that happens around the state and in other states is job creation. So for example, one 00:31:37
of the other large tax increment finance recipients in Utah County was the Intel Micron Flash Technologies manufacturing Center up 00:31:44
in Highland, you know, Highland Alpine area. And you know the theory behind that one was that it was predicated on the idea that 00:31:51
that particular company. 00:31:58
Was going to hire a certain number of employees at a certain average salary which was above the median salary for the area. And so 00:32:05
that qualified them to receive this subsidy of a rebate of their property tax dollars. There was another kind of comment about. 00:32:12
Kind of giving money to private entities or it's like like an incentive or rebate to businesses. To be clear, the vast majority of 00:32:21
the agreement that the RDA has made with developers to reimburse them for certain costs using tax increment financing revenues is 00:32:31
geared towards paying for environmental remediation and city infrastructure and not a whole lot of dollars for just pure sort of. 00:32:42
Economic incentives for business activity, so, but that's because the 150 million of cleanup is first, the second-half phases four 00:32:53
and five are at the end. So we would be facing all the spend in the future, right? Well, no, 'cause all along every phase a 00:33:01
portion of the revenues have gone to reimburse the cost of infrastructure, which is not related to environmental mitigation, 00:33:09
right. But when we started 150 million US for cleanup and 150 million is for businesses or whatnot. 00:33:18
And the 100 and infrastructure, infrastructure and it's weighted heavily on cleanup at the beginning. We're now just gonna be 00:33:26
starting the big infrastructure and helping businesses section of the RDA, right? Yeah, I don't know if I get you're saying for 00:33:32
the vast majority's been this way, but that's 'cause it four and five haven't hit. 00:33:39
Yeah. I, I'd have to look, you know, I plan on looking at the, the balance between those types of reimbursements, but I know that 00:33:46
a significant sum has been infrastructure all along and and as is also environmental remediation, I don't see environmental 00:33:51
remediation I guess. 00:33:56
There will come a moment where environmental remediation is largely finished, but it's not now. And so I think environmental 00:34:02
remediation is ongoing and will likely be ongoing to the end because there's some significant things that start to occur. There's 00:34:08
significant pieces of concrete that be removed. I think one of the challenges in the early days of the RDA was that the first 00:34:14
developers kind of developed the easiest to develop areas first, which is fine. That makes sense, right? That's pretty efficient 00:34:20
use of their resources. 00:34:26
OK, so here's here's a little bit about this chart. 00:35:04
So using the Megaplex parcel, which is 18 acres, that's phase two. So the phase two that was triggered in 2015. 00:35:06
What I did was I looked at the 25% share that is retained specifically by Alpine School District. This chart would look a little 00:35:19
bit different for other taxing entities than the water district, Utah County, largely because their tax rates are different and 00:35:27
different entities might raise their tax rates in in different years. And in this case, over the course of this particular period 00:35:36
of time from 2006 until 2023, Alpine School District I think adopted an increased property tax rate nine of those years. 00:35:45
So this is this chart is just the 25% of all the property taxes that Alpine School District always retains and not the 75% that 00:35:55
goes to the RDA. Because the question that members of Fuentes had was, well, how much is the school district losing? And how does 00:36:03
that compare as you look at the the share that they get to keep? And if you just look at maybe Megaplex as the example, what does 00:36:10
that look like? And so that's what this chart is. 00:36:17
So 2006 is the base value year, and So what they would have collected or what they did collect would have been just under $2000 in 00:36:24
property taxes from those 18 acres. Now it's kind of flat for the next few years because what happened was you're talking about 00:36:32
one giant parcel of land, not 18 acres. You're actually talking about a parcel of land that was like 100 acres. And within that 00:36:40
100 acres you eventually have a section that's 18 acres. 00:36:47
Upon which megaplex was was placed, right. So what we don't necessarily know and it wasn't granularly assessed, what we know is we 00:36:56
know the whole parcel, we know the average per acre value over time and and what you see is that until we trigger it, you know 00:37:03
that's when the commercial development is complete. And so that was triggered in 2015. So I imagine there's a little bit of 00:37:11
assumption in this flat line that you could think of this flat line as kind of ascending up to the 2015. 00:37:19
You could think of it as you know, it might have been a little bit above the 2015 and then it comes down to the 2015 because. 00:37:27
What those first few years are from 2006 to 2014? 00:37:35
Though those numbers is a 100%, so that's what Alpine School District would have actually received. That's the 100% that they got 00:37:41
because none of the revenues were being siphoned off, so to speak, until the triggering of tax increment financing on those 00:37:48
parcels in 2015. Once you trigger the beginning of the tax increment financing period, then you begin the 7525 split. So what 00:37:56
you're seeing is how much money. 00:38:04
Did Alpine School District receive in property tax revenue for 100% of their share of the revenue for those first few years from 00:38:11
the base value year until the year in which these parcels were triggered as tax increment financing beginning? And so that's what 00:38:19
that first section of the chart is now in 2015. Once the parcels are triggered, then Alpine School District only receives 25% of 00:38:26
the property tax revenue well in that first year. 00:38:34
They're 25% share is significantly higher, almost double what the first year was, when the reason for that is because you went 00:38:41
from a brownfield site that needed remediation that was basically it was given AG exemption to a fully taxed commercial 00:38:49
development. And that fully taxed commercial development is worth significantly more than a brownfield in AG, right. And so this 00:38:56
begins to answer the question of why would Alpine School District give up 75% of its tax revenue? 00:39:04
Well, because they're looking at it in 2006 saying how much tax revenue are we going to get on this industrial site? Not very 00:39:12
much. But if we could accelerate the redevelopment of this industrial site, the industrial site would be worth far more. And when 00:39:19
it's worth far more, we'll get a ton of revenue. And what's great is we don't have to wait 30 years to get that revenue. We'll 00:39:26
start to get 25% of the revenue beginning in year one, in this case 2015 and in this particular case. 00:39:34
That first year was almost double what they received in the base year. So that's good. And then you see what begins to happen as 00:39:41
the development continues, other shops begin to open, other utilization happens, the economy begins to grow in the area. And then 00:39:50
what you're seeing the last few points, this is the 25%. So if you look at last year, Alpine School District received for the 00:39:58
Megaplex site $46,000 in property tax revenue, which represents 25%. 00:40:06
You know their share and then 75% not on this chart went to the RDA. And so in that case you're looking at a 24 time increase over 00:40:15
the base year. And so the question becomes, well, did Alpine School District get a good deal? 00:40:22
I mean, I think that the model is working out the way that they anticipated and this is precisely why school districts all around 00:40:30
the state when they participate in tax entity committees, taxing entity committees, they often times approve giving tax increment 00:40:37
financing to various projects because I think. 00:40:43
Their, their analysis and their assumption and their modeling and their forecasting is that it'll work out for them in the end. 00:40:51
And so in the case of of, you know, using this as one example within the larger thing. 00:40:56
It has worked out for them. So, so that helps answer the question. You wanted members support this and thanks for the opportunity 00:41:02
to kind of go through it. Any questions, comments about that? 00:41:07
So some people make the argument. I just want to reiterate and maybe hear it from you again that I I've heard, well, businesses 00:41:14
would have come anyway, but in order for a business to build on that land, it would have required extensive investment in the 00:41:20
cleanup, correct? 00:41:26
Could that land have been developed without investment from an RDA? No one knows. It's a hypothetical. I agree. Yeah, well, it's a 00:41:33
hypothetical as well. So it's all hypothetical. We're doing it. So you're talking about no chemicals where that was. There's no 00:41:39
settling ponds there. 00:41:45
So the argument could be made that a company could have come in, they could have broken up all that concrete minimal remediation, 00:42:21
according to Jacob's opinion, and built without an RDA. Yeah. I mean, I think that's the fundamental argument of the necessity of 00:42:26
the RDA was that. 00:42:32
The significant investment in just preparing the site for different types of development would have been a bar prohibition to 00:42:39
investors and I mean, you know, if you're familiar just with investing generally. 00:42:45
The highest and best use of those of those acres of real estate, right? 00:43:26
I have several more questions that might take us off of this specific topic. So does it? Does the Council want to ask more? 00:43:32
God, Marty, Marty, can Ioffer an observation that that relates to the question you just asked? I, I have kind of a unique vantage 00:43:42
where contract city attorney in that I do work for a lot of different cities up and down the Wasatch Front. And my observation on 00:43:49
RDA work is that we're talking here about a site that was contaminated. And so some of the resources went toward contamination 00:43:56
more often than not in the state. 00:44:03
RDA resources don't go to brownfield sites. We just don't have a lot of brownfield sites in the state. They go towards sites that 00:44:11
either need renewal or there needs to be some kind of investment to jumpstart development in an area. It's always hard to know. 00:44:21
And the example Josh uses when we talk is it, is it going to develop as a a Dollar Tree and a Taco Bell or is it going to develop 00:44:33
as a regional destination? 00:44:37
And when I analyze legal problems, two of the things I usually look to besides what does the law say and what are the parameters 00:44:43
for what's legal and illegal is what is the structure of the transaction, who has the control, and where is the risk? 00:44:51
I think Artie is dealing a lot with that risk question. But the other thing that they help cities with is the control question. 00:45:01
Because when you as an RDA board decide where do you want to put the RDA funds into? What kind of reimbursables do you want to put 00:45:09
them toward? And how do you want to use them to develop the city in the way that you plan and the way that you want it to be? RDA 00:45:16
resources are one of the really big tools that you can use to do that. 00:45:24
And so. 00:45:33
I see some advantage on the part of cities of being able to say we have this revenue that we can use to jumpstart development. 00:45:33
What kind of development do we want to jumpstart? 00:45:38
The other thing that should be that is part of the city's analysis when it looks at the use of RDA revenues is not just the 00:45:44
property tax equation. And Josh has done a really artful job of showing what the tax base was at the lower assessed value of 00:45:52
property that is undeveloped in this brownfield and how even when you provide 75% of that. 00:46:00
To jumpstart and create the development. 00:46:10
That you end up with a larger tax revenue than what you did. So I think it's a false argument to say well the school district got 00:46:13
100% which would be X and now they only get 25%, which you would think is X -, 75. It doesn't end up being that your amount at the 00:46:23
beginning doesn't end up being the same as the amount at the end because of the appreciation on the property. 00:46:33
And then the other part of the equation from a city perspective is the sales tax revenue which for commercial sites far exceeds 00:46:44
what the property tax revenue. And then my my final observation statewide is that even in the more affluent areas and I an example 00:46:51
would be the Cottonwood Mall development in holiday. 00:46:58
One of the more affluent cities in the state, a site that has been fallow since the late 90s, early 2000s. And without RDA money, 00:47:06
that development doesn't occur because of the public infrastructure and other things that need to go into it. And so it's not just 00:47:13
a meeting with steel site that needs this. You're competing with other locations up and down the state and within your county and 00:47:21
having things that are regional destinations matter. 00:47:28
For your community in ways that don't show up necessarily in tax revenue, but do show up in the quality of life for your cities. 00:47:36
Thank you. No, I couldn't agree with you more. 00:47:45
So often it's been pretty constant that this question has been brought up where we've had criticism or concern or things with the 00:48:19
RDA where people are like, we're doing this wrong or it's not what we intended it to be or all of these different things. And my 00:48:26
thought is, OK, well, hundreds of millions of dollars of bonds have been, what do you call it? 00:48:33
Issued, issued and taken on by different people to end and close this, we would have to pay those off, right? Like we can't just 00:48:40
say oh, we don't like. 00:48:46
Yeah, so. 00:48:56
There are existing bond obligations that the RDA has committed to. And so you have to make the payments on those bots and you 00:48:58
know, with the tax increment financing, those those dollars, those revenue dollars come to the RDA. You use those dollars to pay 00:49:05
those monthly or annual bond obligations. So, So yeah, it's interesting when you think about the idea of bonding, the reason that 00:49:13
the RDA was able. 00:49:20
To get the bonds is because they have a predictable revenue source in the form of the increment revenues from tax increment 00:49:28
financing. If you don't have the tax increment financing revenue, then you're not going to qualify for the loan. You know the 00:49:37
underwriters of the bond are not going to abbreviation bonds to the city. So typically when a city is building infrastructure. 00:49:46
They bond, you know, they take out a loan, they take out a mortgage of sorts. 00:49:57
To build a road and then they pay off that road over time, just similar to getting a mortgage on a house, right? The reason that 00:50:01
you do that is twofold #1 you need the road today, not 20 years from now. So you don't really have time to sort of save money for 00:50:09
20 years and be like, hey guys, just use your bicycle. 20 years from now, we're going to have a road, right? That doesn't work. 00:50:17
But the other important thing is that in government, you don't tax other people for the thing that you're using, right? 00:50:24
If I'm using a Vineyard Rd. and I'm in a vineyard, I should pay for the Vineyard Rd. whatever my share of the Vineyard Rd. is. 00:50:33
Should we have people in Payson pay for the Vineyard Rd. Probably not. Well, OK, should we have people today pay for a road that 00:50:40
people will use tomorrow? And there's a similar equity and fairness and sort of taxation without representation and taxes without 00:50:47
services kind of argument that says actually. 00:50:54
Bonding for public infrastructure is very wise as a policy, but I want to separate that. You're talking about city bonds. We all 00:51:02
agree with that. We need to be talking about RDA bonds. But there's the reason I bring up city bonds, though, is because I want to 00:51:09
analogize, right? I think we all agree on that. But I think it would be OK for him to finish what he's saying so that they can 00:51:17
understand. Go ahead. The purpose of the bond is to pay for the thing you need today, today. 00:51:24
That you need today and you need in the future, but it's going to take time to pay it off. So that's the traditional way a city 00:51:32
develops. But here's the problem. For a city like Vineyard that doesn't really exist in 2009 with, you know, a few 100 people that 00:51:38
live here, there is no revenue source that would enable you to finance the building of a road. So you wouldn't have been able to 00:51:44
bond to build any roads. And and if you didn't build any roads, you couldn't have any houses. And so how could you get the revenue 00:51:50
necessary? 00:51:56
To actually build a city from scratch quickly, you wouldn't be able to. And so this is where the RDA is almost like bonding but 00:52:03
differently because instead of the city taking on the risk of a loan. 00:52:11
Where bond purchasers have to buy those bonds, you have to go out and get a loan from investors, right? You instead are allowing 00:52:20
developers to be your investors. And you're telling the developer if you come in and build it and you take the risk of building 00:52:28
it, we promise that we're going to pay you a share of the revenues we're going to get in the future. So rather than going on to 00:52:35
the municipal bond market and getting, you know, institutional retirement funds and Wall Street. 00:52:43
You have existing RDA bond obligations. You will continue to pay those until they're paid off, and you have dedicated revenue 00:53:59
sources in the form of your tax incurrent financing that you get every year. OK, I just want to clear out the record because we 00:54:06
were able to build a city without the RDA. The entire holdaway parcel, the entire CLAG, the entire Gamma, the entire church, all 00:54:14
of the entire infrastructure was done off of taxes, off of Geneva. So we could have, we're only talking about the RDA. 00:54:22
I mean, I'm not aware of another. I'm sorry you had a comment, so I'll shut my mouth. Go ahead. 00:55:52
I was just remarking that all water's edges included in the RDA, and that's, you know, there's a significant part. I think it's a 00:55:57
fairpoint that I shouldn't. What I said shouldn't be taken globally, that there's no development without the RDA. It's just, yeah, 00:56:03
when Vineyard was very, very new, you had the operating steel mill. Who's paying? 00:56:09
A lot of property taxes, which then is helping to build infrastructure in the city. But then of course, once that goes out of 00:56:16
business, then it's sort of then what, right? 00:56:20
Just call us. 00:56:26
Back to this discussion for a second. I am going to recognize a few things. I understand that many of you who are coming and 00:56:28
looking at the budget on the board are deciding how to spend money on the board and I I respect that. I think that there's some 00:56:34
good questions that were asked tonight and there's a educational. 00:56:41
Kind of packet that Josh is putting together. I got to dress a lot of these things and that will continue to be brought forward. I 00:56:50
would say that concerning this budget. 00:56:55
If you have questions in general about how you want to spend, budget or not spend. 00:57:00
Let's address those. If it's educational and you need to learn more, let's go and let's meet together and then just can continue 00:57:08
to build something that comes back to the public to understand it better and to address some of these questions. And then if you 00:57:13
have something that you want to offer on the budget, let's come back to that so that we can get through the business of the RDA 00:57:18
tonight. 00:57:24
And we'll go ahead and move forward with that. A lot of great questions were asked. I haven't even done a lot of great questions 00:57:30
were asked. And I feel like we can, we can get to that. And I think before you ask your questions, Joss, what I'm, I mean, not 00:57:36
Josh, Jake, what I'm asking you is if it pertains to what you do or don't want to spend on the budget, let's discuss that because 00:57:42
that's what we're here to discuss. And if it pertains to questions that you have to understand the RDA better, let's do that 100% 00:57:48
wrong. 00:57:54
Like you just allowed Marty an entire section and I allowed I? I agree. 00:58:01
OK, I haven't even gone yet. 00:58:08
It's not that I am trying to silence you from getting your questions asked. It's that I felt like we were trying to get somewhere 00:58:11
with questions for the budget and what I'm what I'm understanding from the questions that are coming here. It's about 00:58:17
understanding the RDA, but it's it's a point on an agenda that we can bring. Yeah, it's very important if you even want to fund 00:58:23
the RDA, it's a good question on it. And so that's why before you get to the budget, you need to say is it absolutely something 00:58:29
that should and I feel like. 00:58:35
I feel like one of the things that is important is that you need to come to meetings and learn about this so that you understand 00:58:41
these questions and then we can talk about them here in a meaningful way. And one of the things that we're doing is we're going 00:58:47
outside of the business that's on the agenda. I, I will allow you to have some comments, but what I'm, what I'm asking you is if 00:58:53
it's not pertaining to the business on the agenda, let's set up something where you guys can get deeply rooted and ask these 00:58:59
questions. 00:59:05
And have it be really meaningful and answer your questions and go through the books and the information so that you understand it 00:59:11
so that when we come to the business on the agenda, it is meaningful for this agenda item. And if as a city and our neighbors who 00:59:17
are here have questions that they want to learn about, Josh is gathering that as we talk to them about for, you know, a little bit 00:59:23
ago and the last meeting to say, hey, here's some more stuff we want to learn about. Let's do that and let's bring it to the 00:59:29
table. 00:59:35
Was having been here from the beginning of the RDA. 01:00:50
It's a completely different thing to live through it. At the beginning of the RDA, it was challenged to take this property out of 01:00:56
Vineyard into Orem. If you didn't sign this, we will try to get out, right. You can go back to Randy Farnsworth, Nate Walk, Nate 01:01:04
Riley and all of them are saying look, we we will get a better tax rate to get into Orem. So understanding the the difficulty of 01:01:11
what deal or or Geneva sell property could get is really, really important. 01:01:19
When the RDA was created. 01:01:27
They put out a #150 million per cleanup. Everybody knows that number was just taken out of a best guess off of 2000 and six 2011 01:01:30
numbers. Changes in cleanup costs of cleanup trucks change dramatically from 2011 to 2024. The modeling of that, right? So it's 01:01:38
just hey, so understanding are we going to be able to clean up the entire project and parcel with that original 150 million or not 01:01:46
is an easy question. 01:01:54
But it's also not necessary, according to President Farnsworth. I'm sorry, if you want to speak, you'd have to be invited by the 01:02:42
mayor. But if you're, if you're taking the money out and the total is 52,292,000 from the beginning, you wouldn't have the money 01:02:49
to build a school. And I agree with you, maybe you don't have a demand, but 52,000,000 removed from education is a really large 01:02:56
amount and it's grown. And we don't talk about that, right, in terms of in terms of what's going on. And so coming in as a, as a 01:03:03
brand new City Council member. 01:03:10
And RDA and reassessing it and coming through an election of going, hey, we've got Utah City and we've got all these other things 01:03:17
to go in. And I agree with you, Josh, probably the only good example in the of all the RDA projects is the one that you shared. 01:03:23
The second one would be Top Golf, but all the others in revenue would be dramatically. There's some really bad ones. And there's 01:03:29
also others where we've put out a lot of money like the Forge with no conditions where we build all this infrastructure and then 01:03:35
it just sits for tenure. 01:03:41
Right. And so we've made mistakes on various things to go through and do that. And as a body, you know, going out and studying all 01:03:47
of these things, these are education dollars that I care about. And I want to be so educated on it to be like, am I going to fund 01:03:55
a teacher or am I going to be funding? And you guys already know I don't agree with lobbying. So is it in the budget? Because I'd 01:04:02
rather fund a teacher than a lobbyist or vice versa. Or I at least would like it on the record. 01:04:10
That I am voting for a teacher against the lobbyists and that it's in the paper so people know that at least I was trying to fight 01:04:18
for it, right? And then and then the other thing on the RDA is. 01:04:23
Getting into the governing or interlocal agreement, I know we've gone back and forth on the emails of how this was created or 01:04:30
whatnot and and Jamie, we can't find the interlocal contract that set up this organization and even tells our body how to operate, 01:04:37
right? It doesn't exist. No, I think what you've asked for is a document that's the wrong label. So Josh is working to find for 01:04:45
you all the formative documents of the RDA and I saw. 01:04:52
So we're going to have a big school district split, maybe, maybe not. And understanding, you know, in reaching out to, I mean, 01:05:35
Orem and Pleasant, Orem and Lehigh and Saratoga Springs were the ones that were like. 01:05:41
Who would want you in a split because your education dollars are horrible? And I, I was like, whoa, okay, why are they bad? And 01:05:49
that's when it kind of hit me. Granted that they have to take us, which is good. They, they, they, they can't kick us out. But the 01:05:57
other thing, though, that I think people need to understand is that we have more leverage against this property because we are 01:06:04
kind of an investor in the cleanup and we've ever had on any other property because we can choose if we want to clean it up. 01:06:12
And we can choose if we want to build their infrastructure with them where they can go around their, their, their own way, right. 01:06:20
And, and I think in going through and studying all of this, we do own our own destiny on if we want things and we get to vote that 01:06:25
way. And if, and it's not our hands are tied, hey, they get the density or they get the water, it's we get to build the 01:06:31
infrastructure that we want. 01:06:37
And, and so, yeah, those are my comments for today. The other thing though, and I'll send you an e-mail over some things. 01:06:44
Getting to the budget. 01:06:52
I still don't feel comfortable signing or agreeing on a budget of 470,000 of of admin. I know last year those if I'm not mistaken 01:06:53
the lobbying was in the admin fee of the RDA. 01:07:01
Right. Can we be given a breakdown of what that $437,000 in administration fees is? Has that been provided at all? No, it's just 01:07:10
the high level. That's the revenue. So that's a revenue source. So in other words, So what are you looking at, Jake, if that's 01:07:17
revenue, that's the revenue that we get to spend. And I would like that broken down into a budget as to what we're spending it on. 01:07:24
Well, so, yeah, the revenues are the top section and then the expenditures are the bottom section. 01:07:31
So but the admin RDA admin. 01:07:40
So the RDA admin fee is 437,000, right? So that's what we get to administer the admin to pay you and to pay all the costs of 01:07:44
running the RDA. Yeah, if you look at the very bottom of the second section, which is the expenses, the 2nd to last entry, the 01:07:54
transfer to general fund admin. So what that means is that you are the RDA is spending its. 01:08:03
Admin revenues by giving those revenues in the form of an expenditure to the city, right, because the RDA is a separate legal 01:08:14
entity from the city and the way the admin fee works, and this is common in public finance throughout the country. 01:08:22
The really common example, and in fact that's an important example because it's the one that drives the way in which financial 01:08:33
compliance is imposed upon local government, is federal rules about how. 01:08:40
You can build federal grant monies for your internal overhead and service sort of administrative service costs. So for example, if 01:08:47
the city of Salt Lake is big and they get federal funds in various ways, if Salt Lake City receives half, $1,000,000 a year in 01:08:55
federal funding, there's a federal law that says you're only allowed to use no more than 10% of those half, $1,000,000 that we 01:09:02
give you to defray the cost of administering the programs that we are funding through this grant. 01:09:10
And so this concept of administrative overhead and that there's always a share of any revenues that a local government might get 01:09:18
that has to go towards administering that program is limited. And so in in Utah's case, there's a limitation on how much the city 01:09:26
can bill against its increment revenues for the purpose of admin. And so that's where the admin revenues are at the top. And then 01:09:33
how you're spending those revenues is you're giving them to the city in. 01:09:41
In the idea that the city has to actually do work to administer the entity that is the RDA. So for example, community development, 01:09:49
economic development, public works, you know, there's elements of the city's administrative team that is using its time and effort 01:09:57
and the resources of the general fund of the city to administer the RDA well. So it wouldn't make sense to make the property 01:10:04
taxpayers who pay into the general fund. 01:10:12
In the city of Vineyard, defray the cost of this separate activity of the RDA. So that's why the RDA has an assigned revenue 01:10:20
source and then that revenue source is used to defray the cost of administrative costs. I, I, I don't need to argue that we have 01:10:27
to pay for it. I need you to. I'm arguing that even, and I don't care if it's the RDA. OK, now you give it to the city. 01:10:34
The two things on here that need to be broken down are the 437,000 that you're going to transfer. 01:10:42
Great. Then the city needs to breakdown what that's going to and that's not broken. And why wouldn't that be broke down here? 01:10:48
General fund for the city. So when you look at your city budget and you look at the general fund, your general fund budget is 01:10:57
going to say 437,000 dollars, $500 as revenue to the general fund and then that general fund revenues. But why are you just not 01:11:04
breaking that down since you know what the city services are rendering for you like? 01:11:11
Rather than be like, oh, well, you know, this was 25 minutes of the city recording staff and 25 minutes of the economic 01:12:31
development staff. There's just a percentage assumption about how you account for the utilization of those funds. But I don't know 01:12:38
that there's really line item expenditures per SE. So for last year, 50,000 was for World Trade Center Utah and 100,000 for Sage. 01:12:45
So what you're saying is, is that though they are Vineyard. 01:12:53
The RDA is reimbursing for. 01:13:01
So what does the RDA have to do with World Trade Center Utah and SAGE? 01:13:06
Debt interest, I mean, I suppose if you're, if you're looking for like what money is the RDI spending on specific things that are 01:13:45
somehow not listed here? I think you really just would want to look more at the city's general fund expenditures. Because what the 01:13:52
RDA is doing is it's taking, it's taking the admin revenue, it's turning it into an expense, it's giving it to the city's general 01:14:00
fund. The city's general fund is then listing that as a revenue on its. 01:14:07
Budget and then you'd have to look at the city's general fund expenses to have an idea of how is the city spending its general 01:14:14
fund. And of course there's a lot of things in the general fund and, and, and the reason for that is, well, there's a lot of 01:14:21
general fund activities that are in a sense subsidizing the activities of the RDA and the Rdas just paying for that. Yeah. And as, 01:14:28
as the board goes through the budget items, if you have any questions about something that's itemized or on the, on the budget at 01:14:35
all, you can ask. 01:14:41
Those types of questions about isn't within the scope. Is it within the plan that we've approved? How are we investing in it if 01:14:48
you're not seeing it on here? 01:14:52
Then it's probably not on here. And if you're looking for percentages, you can look in your detailed packet for the City Council. 01:14:57
OK. Well, I was told last meeting I wouldn't get it, so that's a different story, but I look forward to getting it. I think all 01:15:05
City Council did receive it. And I think the difference that I remember in the meeting was the difference between transactional 01:15:12
items versus itemized, just what's being spent. And I think that was clarified. 01:15:20
I think it was pretty clear that I wanted the 437,000 broken down for the admin. And then the second thing and I'll I'll end is. 01:15:29
For contract services, the 525, if you can promise me that you'll get with Christie and you'll break those down and say we have 01:15:37
this look, I'm probably going to get outvoted on it, but I would like it to be very clear that. 01:15:44
We knew about what these things were with the RDA and it's not this some lump sum of half, you know, half a million or a total of 01:15:53
1,000,000 for contract services and, and the admin fee and just send me an e-mail just those two things and I'll be grateful. Feel 01:15:59
like it would be really helpful. And I've said this at a few meetings, if there could be an in person meeting, even if you had to 01:16:05
do it by zoom, where you guys could talk about these things together. I, I think that doing the work in the public is probably the 01:16:11
best thing we can do. 01:16:17
Is very important, especially as you move forward and you you have. 01:17:59
Good questions that need to be answered. We want to make sure that you are getting the answers. So can I ask you a clarification? 01:18:06
Yeah. Jake, you were saying that you want meetings with department heads, which would be like the RDA director. Then you just said 01:18:12
you didn't want meetings with I I'd love to meet with you guys more, but but being able to meet with the department heads, you're 01:18:17
getting integral information. 01:18:23
This is why I don't agree with this. And then the rest of us can say, oh, thank you. And maybe we can get those documents from you 01:19:35
beforehand. Or maybe we're all taking our meetings so we're seeing it beforehand. And then when we come here, it's not a long 01:19:41
discussion about something that's not here. It's I have the documents. And so when our residents or our neighbors come and say we 01:19:47
want the questions today, we have them and we can answer them today because you ask the questions and we got those documents for 01:19:53
you before the meeting. 01:19:59
You said that you've asked in public meetings to meet with all the department heads and you're not getting those meetings. And I'm 01:21:10
and I'm trying to figure out ways to help you get those meetings by saying, well, maybe you should. No, I think I yeah, I think up 01:21:17
to this point on the RDA or any City Council, I'll, I'll reach out if I have something, but you guys gotta realize like they're. 01:21:24
Our culture and our City Council and RDA is broken. OK, so the vast majority when we, when you set up a city, let's let's take it 01:21:31
like a family. A family will say, hey, we make 100,000. 01:21:38
And some families will say I want to budget and go 120,000 and get some credit cards. 01:21:46
Other families will say, hey, I want to spend 100,000 and others will say I want to spend 80 and self 20 and they'll get in the 01:21:52
same room as a council because we're the body and we'll and our our departments are like children. I want to go to dance. I want 01:21:59
this. I want a fire truck. I want this, I want that. 01:22:05
And we have not sat down as a City Council to say what is the total line item and how much are we saving and how much are we going 01:22:11
to spend. 01:22:15
And also what are the priorities that we have? We've never met once for six months and gone. We, we, we met for an hour up in, up 01:22:19
in here on a, what is it a 12? Well, and you've got to do that. You have to come in and say, well, and I gotta get out voted and I 01:22:27
might get outvoted and say, well, you're not getting out voted. You have, you've been outvoted on very few things. And when you're 01:22:35
outvoted, it's typically just you, It's not the whole council. 01:22:43
It's like it's not a split, it's not the three-way where I'm the swing vote like we all thought it might be. It's we're having 01:22:51
discussions, things come up and every now and then you vote no. And it honestly hasn't been on these big ticket items that you've 01:22:56
been so concerned about. Yeah, I know, but. 01:23:02
And a lot of times it's because we've all done our homework. So I met with the fire and the police this week because I want to 01:23:08
understand their needs for budget better. So then I can come to this room. And if that comes up, I'm going to get, oh, I did my 01:23:14
homework. So I can tell you I've already met with fire. I've already met with police. Fantastic. What about planning engineering, 01:23:20
public works? Don't have any questions on the budget. They submitted. OK, so when that comes up, you're you're good. 01:23:26
If I had something, I would reach out to your questions right now around the RDA. So would you please meet with Josh to do your 01:23:32
homework so that when we come in here, you can explain, right? You can even educate me better from what you've learned from your 01:23:38
homework, right? What we've been fighting over is before I get a line item, I have no questions, right? 01:23:44
Gone back and forth and OK so I'm I'm going to stop the conversation. Thank you. It's I don't understand the point. The point of 01:23:53
it is this and I think we've exhausted it and thank you Marty for sharing it It's. 01:23:58
The difficulty with bringing anything is that your experts need time to put something together to bring to the public in a timely 01:24:05
fashion and if you don't take the opportunity to meet with the people that are offering the meetings and then you don't get what 01:24:12
you want. It's sad not only for you but for all of us because you are a representative. 01:24:19
That's fine. If you disagree, like I think this is the point is you're saying I'm not getting what I need and we're saying this is 01:24:27
how we can get it to you. 01:24:31
And RDA, if you're sitting there, Mayor, and you're saying we're traveling around the world last year and nobody knows about it, 01:24:35
that's what it was in the last year and it's not, it wasn't. And you just put things on the record without. And what I'm saying is 01:24:43
that I want a granular understanding and we're getting $1,000,000. 01:24:50
I'm not going to get this, no. Even in the last meeting when you said you weren't going to get it and they said it was a 01:24:57
transactional thing, I said we have to get together. 01:25:02
Did that happen? It didn't. And you were invited and you did not take the meeting, the five of us. Did you send out an invite for 01:25:07
the five of us? 01:25:12
I don't have to give for our attorney, for the RDA director, for the city manager to sit down and get you the documents that you 01:25:17
need so that we could clarify for this Board and for the public. If you can't take the meetings, we can't help you. And that's the 01:25:23
point of this discussion. But I have to move on from it. I need an emotion. 01:25:29
To close the public hearing? No. Did we close it? No, we didn't close it. We did close it. Everybody's sure. OK then do we need to 01:25:36
adopt anything? No. So your adoption for the approval of the final budget is? 01:25:43
OK. Then I'm going to and I just want to say for the record, the $1,000,000 you're going to get me and not a line item, but just a 01:25:52
breakdown of. 01:25:56
100,000 here, 100,000 there. 01:26:02
The meeting is adjourned, so you guys go ahead and talk about it. 01:26:06
Let's just check with Jamie if we could for tentative budget because we continued the hearing. Do we need to have an action item 01:26:10
on the tentative budget? No, because we already adopted it, right. And so we don't need to adopt it fully. We just needed to hold 01:26:15
the public hearing. All right, we are adjourned. 01:26:21
scroll up