Live stream not working in Chrome or Edge?

Bookmark list

  • Start Position
  • Chair Fullmer opened the meeting at03 PM. She gave the invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance.            PRESENTATIONS/RECOGNITIONS/AWARDS/PROCLAMATIONS2.1.    RDA Update RDADirectorJoshDanielswillgiveabriefupdateontheRDA.   Chair Fullmer turned the time over to RDADirectorJoshDaniels.
  • Mr. Daniels gaveabriefupdateontheRDA.
  • Board Member Clawson asked if the24 numbers were actuals, and25 and newer were projections. Mr. Daniels replied that he was correct. A discussion ensued.
  • Mr. Daniels continued his update.
  • Board Member Holdaway asked who had put the shortfall into the budget. Mr. Daniels explained how the mitigation plan worked.
  • Board Member Holdaway explained that if the RDA did not produce, this was an insurance policy for the school district to have sufficient funds. He noted that the city did not have a mitigation payment included in the plan. A discussion ensued. Mr. Daniels explained why there had not been a mitigation payment.          CONSENT ITEMS1.   Approvalof February,2025, RDAMeeting Minutes   Chair Fullmer called for a motion.
  • Motion: BOARD MEMBER CAMERONMOVED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT ITEM AS PRESENTED. BOARD MEMBER CLAWSON SECONDED THE MOTION. CHAIR FULLMER, BOARD MEMBERS CAMERON, CLAWSON, AND HOLDAWAY VOTED YES. BOARD MEMBER SIFUENTES WAS EXCUSED. THE MOTION CARRIED WITH ONE (1) ABSENT.            CLOSEDSESSION TheRDABoardpursuanttoUtahCode52-4-205mayvotetogointoaclosedsessionfor the purpose of (these are just a few of the items listed, see Utah Code-4-205 for the entire list): a.      strategy sessionstodiscusspendingorreasonablyimminentlitigation.
  • Board member Holdaway asked if they could disclose the topic of the closed session. City Attorney Jayme Blakesley replied that they would do a presentation following the closed session. A discussion ensued.   Chair Fullmer called for a motion to go into a closed session.
  • Motion:BOARD MEMBER CAMERON MOVED TO GO INTO A CLOSED SESSION IMMEDIATELY IN THE CONFERENCE ROOM FOR A STRATEGY SESSION TO DISCUSS PENDING OR REASONABLY IMMINENT LITIGATION.BOARD MEMBER CLAWSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ROLL CALL WENT AS FOLLOWS: CHAIR FULLMER, BOARD MEMBERS CAMERON, CLAWSON, AND HOLDAWAY VOTED YES. BOARD MEMBER SIFUENTES WAS EXCUSED. THE MOTION CARRIED WITH ONE (1) ABSENT.   The RDA went into a closed session at42 PM. The RDA Board meeting resumed at05 PM.            BUSINESSITEMS5.1.   DiscussionandAction-SettlementAgreement CityAttorneyJayme Blakesleywillpresent asettlementagreement.   Chair Fullmer turned the time over toCityAttorneyJayme Blakesley.
  • Mr.Blakesley explained the reason for the settlement and then reviewed the settlement agreement.
  • Board Member Holdaway commented on the settlement agreement. He said that in May of14 hundreds of residents opposed this development agreement. He stated that he agreed with the settlement but felt that people of the Water’s Edge development should have a say. He felt that moving forward they needed to take things slower and have contractual things in place. (Note - Councilmember Holdaway was discussing the Water’s Edge development but the settlement agreement that was on the agenda referred to the Lakefront at Vineyard Town Center development which started in19.)
  • Mr. Blakesley said that settlement agreements were tough, and this development predated him, so he did not want to speculate as to what occurred at that time. He felt that they would take some lessons from this with future reimbursement agreements. He explained that this settlement agreement would allow the RDA to make the necessary improvements. He noted that if they wanted to, they could involve residents in the landscape process.
  • Chair Fullmer agreed with Mr. Blakesley and said that the dispute had been going on for a long time and added that they had made improvements to the approval process. She noted that this agreement would be a cost savings to the city.
  • Board Member Clawson supported the discussion and felt that it was unfortunate that residents had to go through this.
  • Board Member Cameron agreed with the comments and felt it was good to help the residents understand the process.
  • Board Member Holdaway felt that this agreement freed Edge Homes from doing the landscaping but allowed the city to move forward.
  • Chair Fullmer noted that the landscaping would be an open process. She felt that there were clear things that happened and not settling would come as a loss to the community.   Chair Fullmer called for a motion.
  • Motion: BOARD MEMBER CAMERON MOVED TO APPROVE THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AS PRESENTED. BOARD MEMBER CLAWSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ROLL CALL WENT AS FOLLOWS: CHAIR FULLMER, BOARD MEMBERS CAMERON, CLAWSON, AND HOLDAWAY VOTED YES. BOARD MEMBER SIFUENTES WAS EXCUSED. THE MOTION CARRIED WITH ONE (1) ABSENT.            ADJOURNMENT
  • Chair Fullmer adjourned the meeting at25 PM.     MINUTES APPROVED ON:    April,25   CERTIFIED CORRECT BY:        Pamela Spencer, CIty Recorder
* use Ctrl+F (Cmd+F on Mac) to search in document
Unable to preview the file. Make sure you have Adobe Reader installed
* use Ctrl+F (Cmd+F on Mac) to search in document
Unable to preview the file. Make sure you have Adobe Reader installed
Unable to preview the file.

Transcript

Event transcript
All right. Thank you for coming to our Redevelopment Agency Board meeting. 00:00:01
It's February 26, 2025 and the time is 603. 00:00:07
I'm going to start by offering an invitation and then I'll stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. 00:00:12
Kind heavenly Father, we're so grateful for this time to gather together his community and we pray that thy spirit will be with us 00:00:17
and that we will be able to be thoughtful and. 00:00:22
Make decisions that are good for today and build for generations to come. We love these and say this name of Jesus Christ, Amen. 00:00:27
All right, we're going to start with a few presentations. Josh is going to give us an RDA update. 00:00:56
And let's see. 00:01:03
We'll go from there. 00:01:06
Great. Thank you. 00:01:08
We're really, I should say chair as you sit in the. 00:01:10
Board of the Rea. 00:01:13
I'm going to share my screen here, so in your packet there's a memo. 00:01:15
I just have two informational items. I'm going to try to do a few of these types of informational updates from time to time as we. 00:01:20
Sort of gather data and can kind of update you on. 00:01:27
Activities in the Geneva urban renewal area project area. 00:01:31
Including sort of financial outlooks and. 00:01:36
And that sort of thing. So the first set of data I want to share. 00:01:40
Is. 00:01:45
Related to the total. 00:01:46
So. 00:01:52
This item is related to the total. 00:01:53
Value in the project area from the original. 00:01:57
Adopted proposed budget for the RDA versus kind of where we're at currently based on. 00:02:01
Recent data and forecast data. 00:02:08
So just as kind of a refresher. 00:02:10
When the. 00:02:13
Geneva Urban Renewal. 00:02:15
Project Area Plan was adopted in 2011. 00:02:17
One of the components of that plan was a proposed budget. 00:02:21
And in the proposed budget, there were. 00:02:26
Estimates of what? The value of the land. 00:02:29
And the improvements on that land, the development within the project area would be overtime. 00:02:33
Of course, the the RDA receives revenue in the form of tax increment financing from. 00:02:40
Those parcels that have been triggered. 00:02:46
Within various phases of the project area and so if you look at. 00:02:49
That original budget and the original projections and estimates. 00:02:55
That is the red line. 00:03:01
So this is the total. 00:03:04
Land value and value of the improvements. The total taxable. 00:03:06
Assessed taxable value within the project area. 00:03:11
Overtime. Over the life. 00:03:14
Of the project area, the green line is the base value, and so just as another refresher, the base value for the project area was 00:03:17
set in 2006. 00:03:22
And, umm. 00:03:28
What the base? Why? The reason the base value is important is because that's the value of the land as it was assessed prior. 00:03:30
To the. 00:03:37
Beginning of the project area. The adoption of the project area plan. 00:03:38
And the eventual triggering of various phases of parcels in that area. 00:03:42
To collect tax increment financing revenue, increment revenue well, the base area is important because. 00:03:48
The base value All tax revenues from the base value of the land, 100% of those tax. 00:03:55
Revenues go to all of the taxing entities that are impacted, the city, the county, the water district, the school district, et 00:04:02
cetera. 00:04:06
So what happens over time is that land as it's remediated, prepared for development and ultimately developed, and structures are 00:04:10
built on it, both commercial and residential. 00:04:15
The assessed taxable value of that land goes up overtime. 00:04:20
And. 00:04:23
The original estimates for. 00:04:24
Tax increment financing revenue to the RDA. 00:04:27
Were based on this original plan, if you will, so that red line is the original estimate. 00:04:30
Of what they thought in the future. 00:04:36
The increased value of the development would be overtime. 00:04:39
And so you can see how you know. 00:04:43
The idea of tax increment financing is that. 00:04:45
You invest in the development of the area. 00:04:48
And the value goes up, which means that the total tax value of that land is far greater than if the land was left vacant and 00:04:52
unremediated as a former industrial ground site. 00:04:58
So using the most recent 2024. 00:05:04
UMM assessed value from the counting of all of the parcels that are within the project area. 00:05:10
And then forecasting our trend of. 00:05:16
Economic growth and growth in the value of land overtime. 00:05:20
We have an updated current forecast. 00:05:25
Which you can see it's kind of a. 00:05:28
More of a straight line because it's just based on some some assumptions. For example. 00:05:30
Nationally. 00:05:36
The the rule of thumb on the increased value of real estate overtime is 4%. 00:05:37
If you actually look at the average. 00:05:43
In our region, in Utah County, in nearby communities, we've actually been outpacing 4%, so 4%. 00:05:46
Which is the assumption in this model is fairly conservative. 00:05:55
For what's actually been happening. 00:05:59
When you look at the. 00:06:01
To date, development within the project area, it's about half residential, half commercial. 00:06:03
We've taken that into account as we've. 00:06:08
Built this model. 00:06:11
So I just wanted to show you this set of data. There's a lot of data points here, but I think it's helpful to look at it visually. 00:06:12
In a chart like this, this is LinkedIn the packet. 00:06:19
This online live chart so you can go back and look at the data and kind of interact with it. 00:06:23
I just wanted to pause there and see if there's any questions about this particular. 00:06:29
Piece of data in this update. 00:06:33
Any questions from the board? 00:06:37
So, a clarification or a clarifying question? 00:06:40
In this chart, is it safe to assume that 2024 and previous are actuals and everything? 00:06:44
2025 and newer, is the projection correct? Yeah, great question and that's kind of why you see a lot of. 00:06:51
Sort of organic if you will, movement in the data points up until 2024 and then from 2024 more of a straight line just prediction. 00:06:59
More of a trend line, if you will. So yeah, that's a great clarification. These blue figures here are. 00:07:07
Are all actual values over time. 00:07:15
The dips here that you see in 2023 have a lot to do with the centrally assessed. 00:07:17
Values of the equipment that's installed at the power plant. 00:07:23
Those are assessed as real estate values, but they're actually assessed by the state. That's why they're called centrally 00:07:27
assessed. 00:07:31
And as you recall, Rocky Mountain Power Pacific Corp. 00:07:34
They appealed their evaluation of their equipment and they won a settlement which was a reduction in the assessed value of that. 00:07:38
Of that property and that's why you see a dip here in valuation and you also saw. 00:07:48
A correlating dip in the actual revenue to the RDA as a result. 00:07:53
Great question. And where did you say you're going to find this? Is it on the? 00:08:03
Website, yes, well, eventually we're going to get this posted on the city website, but right now this particular online chart, 00:08:08
it's, it's publicly available and it's LinkedIn. The memo that's part of the tonight's agenda packet for the RDA meeting. So in 00:08:15
that memo, there's a hyperlink to each of the charts that I'll share so that you can also access them online. 00:08:22
Perfect. 00:08:29
Any other questions about this particular? 00:08:34
Item. 00:08:36
OK. I'll move to the next item in the memo. 00:08:38
Now this this item is about. 00:08:41
What is called the mitigation payment to the Alpine School District. 00:08:44
So when the project area was set. 00:08:48
One of the concepts was that. 00:08:51
If residential development. 00:08:54
Outpaced commercial development. 00:08:57
And if there was a high amount of residential development, that was? 00:08:59
Occurring prior. 00:09:03
To the development of commercial. 00:09:05
Properties. 00:09:07
The concern was that because residential properties have a tax exemption. 00:09:09
Their assessed value Whether taxable value is lower. 00:09:14
It could create a situation where the school district is serving the students that might come from the various households that 00:09:18
move into the community into the residential areas. 00:09:22
And because of that residential exemption on residential property, this residential development, if it outpaced commercial 00:09:27
development, would create a scenario where the school district was serving a lot of students but not receiving a whole lot of 00:09:32
revenue as a result. 00:09:37
And so one of the agreements that the RDA made. 00:09:42
Process of adopting the plan and setting the original. 00:09:45
Proposed Budget. 00:09:49
Was they agreed to a mitigation payment? 00:09:50
And the mitigation payment was to be calculated. 00:09:53
Based on a what they call in the documents a shortfall. 00:09:56
And the shortfall was defined as. 00:10:00
The what they call the expenses of the school district, which was set. 00:10:03
An amount of. 00:10:08
Uh, 700 and. 00:10:10
$39.80 or something like that per. 00:10:12
Household unit or per. 00:10:15
You know, housing unit. 00:10:18
And by the way, just as a precursor. 00:10:20
This does not happen. 00:10:24
Include uh. 00:10:25
Or have anything to do with the base value? So just again as a refresher, the base value of the land set in 2006. 00:10:27
The Alpine School District and all the other taxing entities continue to receive 100% of the tax revenues from the base value of 00:10:36
$120 million for the whole price. 00:10:41
Project area. So the idea was that if the land was just left vacant and not developed, this base value of $120 million, whoever 00:10:47
owned that land, private developers, et cetera, would still have to pay taxes and 100% of those taxes. 00:10:55
That that base value would go to all the taxing entities, school district included. 00:11:02
Well, on top of that, tax revenue. 00:11:07
The idea was that well. 00:11:10
The growth in the value of the. 00:11:12
Taxable land in the project area. 00:11:15
Umm, the increment, which is the tax increment financing, that's the revenue that is diverted in the sense to the RDA for the for 00:11:18
the. 00:11:23
You know, for the financing of redevelopment. 00:11:27
75% of that incremental additional taxable value and taxable and tax revenue. 00:11:30
75% of it would go to the RDA. 00:11:37
And only 25% of that incremental tax revenue would go to the various taxing entities the school district included. 00:11:40
So they came up with this mitigation formula where they said okay. 00:11:47
Well, if we look. 00:11:51
At this ASD Alpine School District expense amount of the $739.80 per housing unit. 00:11:53
As our kind of baseline expense on top of what we're receiving on that base revenue. 00:12:03
If we look at that expense. 00:12:08
And the difference between that expense? 00:12:10
And the incremental revenue to the. 00:12:12
To the school district that they're 25% share if you will. 00:12:17
If the difference between those two things was high. 00:12:22
The the school district might be incurring this shortfall, and so the mitigation payment was 40% of that shortfall. 00:12:25
And So what this chart shows is. 00:12:33
Overtime. 00:12:36
That what that shortfall would be calculated as based on. 00:12:38
Housing units that are developed and given certificate of occupancy. 00:12:43
Along with the amount of revenue that the school district receives as their 25% share of the increment. 00:12:49
Plus the 100% they receive. 00:12:56
Once phases have expired or prior to phases being triggered. 00:12:59
OK, so the red line is what that? 00:13:04
Assumption of revenues would be to the school district. 00:13:07
Both actuals to date with projections for the future. 00:13:11
And then the green line is what that expense amount would be? 00:13:16
So the mitigation payment would be equal to 40%. 00:13:19
Of the total gap. 00:13:24
When you look at it over the life of the project area. 00:13:26
So you look at it from the beginning to the end of the project area. 00:13:30
You look at the total revenues that would pass through to the school district plus this expense calculation. 00:13:35
And 40% of the gap. 00:13:42
Would be the mitigation. 00:13:44
So when they originally adopted the plan and adopted the budget, there was discussion among the taxing entity committee about 00:13:46
whether or not the mitigation payment was necessary. 00:13:51
Some thought, based on their own forecasting, that the mitigation payment was unnecessary because it wouldn't materialize, that 00:13:57
there was a shortfall. 00:14:01
But they went ahead and included the mitigation payment as a sort of insurance policy, if you will. 00:14:07
Just in case. And so can we put names of who put that shortfall in? 00:14:12
I I've been reviewing the minutes and it's not clear. 00:14:19
A person that put it in it was part of the original plan. 00:14:23
And so the mitigation payment was part. But why didn't it come in until now though? Or until just a few years ago? 00:14:27
No, it's in the original plan. 00:14:35
So the original plan adopted in 2011 had an addendum which included a bunch of information that are addendum then OK. 00:14:37
Yeah. So it's not, it's a good point. So I was going to say it's not in the original and I saw the addendum and it's wise. I mean 00:14:45
we're very lucky that that was put in. 00:14:50
Yeah, it's a good point. So the original plan doesn't talk about the mitigation payment, but again, the plan is really confined to 00:14:54
more the vision and the plan for the area and the development. 00:15:00
The mitigation payment portion comes in in the form of advice. 00:15:05
Budget. So the budget that was adopted along with the plan. 00:15:08
Includes a note. 00:15:12
And the note in the budget spells out the mitigation payment and then if you look at. 00:15:13
The meeting of the Tax Entity Committee in 2011, there was some discussion about that budget and about the calculation of that 00:15:18
mitigation payment. 00:15:21
And that's where you see some discussion about what will the mitigation payment be necessary or not. Well, it really depends on 00:15:25
the performance and and the value. 00:15:30
Can I make a comment? 00:15:35
I think it's really important that people understand what what this means, because if the RDA did not. 00:15:37
Produce. 00:15:44
This is like a insurance policy. 00:15:45
To ensure that Alpine School District would have sufficient funds. 00:15:49
To pay because. 00:15:53
They are saying we're not going to get. 00:15:55
We're going to give up our money for our schools. 00:15:57
But in case the RDA is not functioning to that level. 00:16:00
We're going to have a mitigation thing to say. 00:16:03
We're still going to get paid and we're not going to give it. 00:16:06
And I think that's really important because there's five entities within the RDA. 00:16:10
The only person that has a mitigation payment. 00:16:15
Is the school district. 00:16:17
A city doesn't. 00:16:19
And so as the RDA hasn't functioned to the levels of what it was the. 00:16:20
It's kind of like the five of us were going down the road and they said. 00:16:26
We're concerned about this might not function. 00:16:29
And one of the five put that in to say, if it doesn't, we still want to make sure that there's a base minimum. 00:16:33
Because Vineyard doesn't have. 00:16:39
A mitigation in there. 00:16:41
When it has underperformed. 00:16:43
There is no mitigation to separate. 00:16:46
So for the past couple years, our city has said in order to overcome that shortfall, we don't have a mitigation. 00:16:49
The only results we have is to increase other sales tax or property taxes. 00:16:56
And I did know this mitigation payment was and I think it's wise to be honest with you. 00:17:02
We would be screwing our school district and our students would be. 00:17:06
Because we we all hope that the RDA would. 00:17:11
Produce more of a business revenue. 00:17:14
Then what it has, but I'm glad that that was for sale. 00:17:17
My only thing is is. 00:17:22
Who in Vineyard was there and we why we didn't put something in there to safeguard us when it started to fail or the other 00:17:24
entities? 00:17:28
Why the other four of the five? Is there any proof that the other. 00:17:33
For why they didn't, why they were the only ones that were able to carve out and the other four weren't. 00:17:36
It really seems that the discussion and the taxing entity committee was about the the concept that the school district would would 00:17:42
have to serve students that would come from the Vineyard area and so as household units started to. 00:17:49
Develop and families moved in, they would still have to serve students and if there was this shortfall in revenue. 00:17:56
That would create a pinch for the school district. I don't know that that specific conversation about sort of the level of service 00:18:03
was discussed by other members of the tax sanity committee. To your point about representatives in the city, the county, the water 00:18:08
district. 00:18:12
ETC. 00:18:17
And one of my issues is that the documentation of like the exact person from the who's representing Vineyard in that tagging 00:18:19
entity committee and who was representing the school district is really. 00:18:25
Vague. It's just like, hey, we have the document, but it's like. 00:18:31
Who who actually did that? And then the other thing is, is. 00:18:34
I mean, these are forecasts. So these are all really good people, but we all. 00:18:39
Back in the day it was hoped that businesses would would be front loaded and not so many houses, right? 00:18:44
And so we're actually grateful that the mitigation was school district because with more houses comes more schools. 00:18:51
And because it was population that came so much more heavily than businesses. 00:18:58
We're grateful that our that our schools are protected. 00:19:04
However, it puts us in a. 00:19:07
Bind as a city where we're. 00:19:09
You know, hoping for businesses, it kind of hurts us more, right? 00:19:12
So and today kind of based on where I was discussing with the last chart to date, the development in the project area has been 00:19:17
5050 in terms of acreage, commercial and residential. And so the concern was that it might be even more unbalanced. 00:19:23
In the favor of residential which? 00:19:30
Largely didn't materialize, which is why there's not been. 00:19:32
Necessity to make a mitigation payment, and likely won't be. 00:19:36
Because the red line is the ASD revenues and the green lines the expenses. The reason the expenses decline over time. 00:19:40
Is because some of the phases in the project area will expire. 00:19:47
And then the school district and other tax amenities will receive 100% of the tax revenues for those. 00:19:53
For those parcels. 00:19:59
And so if you look at the burden, if you will, on the school district. 00:20:01
Of current housing units that are producing increments. 00:20:06
Revenue. 00:20:12
Those will decline when those phases expire and when those phases expire. 00:20:13
The revenue to the school district balloons and so that that was kind of the hope is that that that's the model of tax increment 00:20:18
financing. So. 00:20:22
And the reason you see this gap kind of in the mid middle years is because that's when. 00:20:26
The large chunk of most of the parcels in the phases are all being triggered for increment revenue. 00:20:31
But then as they expire, then those housing units are no longer. 00:20:39
In a shortfall. 00:20:42
Sort of scenario for the school district. 00:20:44
So let me make sure I got this right. So the. 00:20:48
The technicality of that money is, is that it? 00:20:51
It is still paid for by. 00:20:54
The property owner. 00:20:57
Yes, that money goes to the Tax Commission. 00:20:59
A tax Commission then rebates that back to us. 00:21:03
And we look at that and go because of the shortfall. 00:21:06
This mitigation applies and so instead of giving that to the RDA. 00:21:09
It then cuts a check to Alpine School District to cover the cost of the students right. It would be an obligation of the RDA to 00:21:13
make a payment to the school district if and when the shortfall applies. Applies right and. 00:21:20
When did it start to apply? The first year? It hasn't. It hasn't yet. 00:21:27
We're here in 2024, right here. There was this crossover for a time that has largely to do with that centrally assessed value. 00:21:32
But there was a surplus given to the school district prior to this time. 00:21:41
And so when that surplus? 00:21:46
Is exceeded by future revenues, then we'll have an obligation to potentially make a 40% payment. 00:21:48
But when? But you have to look at it. 00:21:55
Over the lifetime of the. 00:21:57
Of the existence of those tax increment financing horizons. 00:22:00
And when you forecast it right now, there's unlikely to be a mitigation payment. 00:22:04
There is. There's unlikely to be 1. It won't be. There likely will not be a mitigation pay. 00:22:08
Until 2035. Well, forever, because. 00:22:14
This is this surplus here that the school district receives exceeds the the shortfall here. 00:22:17
And the mitigation, the mitigation payment is 40% of the shortfall. 00:22:24
So you would take this green area. 00:22:29
And multiply that by 40%. 00:22:32
And then weigh it against the surplus areas. 00:22:35
In the red Oh, they get to take positives from previous years. 00:22:38
That's tough. Yeah. It's over the whole, the way it's outlined is it's over the whole lifetime of the project here. 00:22:43
So we're going to be in the we're going to be in the negative, but because they were positive in. 00:22:50
Oh, 10 to 2020 Something 3. 00:22:55
They're going to bank off of that. 00:23:00
And what is our school districts do during that time? They just go, hey, you. 00:23:02
You're out of luck. 00:23:08
Right, Yep, it's that's that's the way it's outlined is it's it's you know, over the lifetime of the project area does our school 00:23:09
districts and split like they. 00:23:14
That's one of the things that they've been. 00:23:18
On the calls for me is. 00:23:21
How little revenue is coming from Vineyard for the split? 00:23:22
On the school district side, so. 00:23:28
That gap, they're looking at it going well, you already got previously paid at a higher clip. 00:23:30
And so therefore. 00:23:35
Here to 2035. 00:23:36
They're gonna be. 00:23:39
They're not shortened because they were paid previously, but. 00:23:42
No revenues are coming in. 00:23:46
On the financial side? 00:23:48
Right. 00:23:51
They're still getting revenue. 00:23:52
Right, right. But just the ASD expense of what it actually cost. So would they then? 00:23:54
Because they've got to make their budget so. 00:24:02
Do they have the power to then up our tax their tax rate to? 00:24:04
The whole tipping out the new Timpanogos district to. 00:24:10
Because they've got to be able to make up that shortfall of the cost per student, right? 00:24:14
Well, I mean, it depends. What we don't really actually know is how many students are they serving per household in Vineyard? 00:24:18
There's a lot of younger families that are moving in that don't yet have school age children. 00:24:26
So overall, just estimates, you know that. 00:24:31
Were baked into a payment amount. 00:24:36
But you know how much they actually. 00:24:38
Require or spend on this area. Those are sort of data points the school district would be maintaining. 00:24:40
But of course, there's the the windfall, if you will, that comes later. 00:24:47
I'd like to see. 00:24:53
And I know we don't have the. 00:24:55
Organizational structure. Yet to see this. 00:24:57
But as soon as we have any information about how any of this translates to the new school district. 00:25:00
It would be really informative to the community for us to actually see that analysis. 00:25:05
And the other. 00:25:11
Question I had. I guess that was a comment, not a question. 00:25:13
The question I have. 00:25:16
Is I understand that it's cumulative. 00:25:18
But what we're seeing that large gap between, you know, starting in, you know, 2026 ish and going through. 00:25:23
2035. 00:25:30
I I'm struggling to understand how that can be balanced by future projections. 00:25:32
Even if his king would have. 00:25:40
Because at the point in time when that happens, that shortfall. 00:25:42
Is a true shortfall, even if it gets made-up in the in the future. 00:25:46
Well, keep in mind that the shortfall is not. 00:25:51
An actual thing. It's a concept. 00:25:55
It's a concept that drives the agreement that forms the basis of the mitigation payment. 00:25:58
We don't know what they actually spend, right? 00:26:04
But a couple of other things to keep in mind about the projected revenues. 00:26:07
You can see how these lines are kind of straight, whereas these lines prior to 2024. 00:26:12
More organic. Again, that's because these are. 00:26:17
Conservative projections, One of the things that. 00:26:20
That is actually happening with values and one of the reasons that. 00:26:24
Values in the project area have actually gone up faster than originally predicted. 00:26:27
Is because of the addition of business personal property. 00:26:32
As well as commercial property. 00:26:36
If you think about the horizon, the future horizon of the things that are most likely to be developed in the near future. 00:26:38
There's a lot of commercial properties about to be developed. 00:26:45
And so it is quite possible that this. 00:26:48
Projected gap. 00:26:50
Would shrink even from this projection I'm showing right now. 00:26:51
And that would come because of two major reasons. 00:26:55
One being. 00:26:59
Business personal property that is taxed as commercial entities come online. Even as home based and other small businesses come 00:27:00
online, they have to pay business personal property tax. A lot of these estimates are just based on real estate values. 00:27:07
And business personal property is part of property taxes that also go to all the taxing entities, school district included. 00:27:13
And then the other component of this is commercial property, which is taxed at 100% rather than the residential exemption of 60%. 00:27:20
So, uh. 00:27:28
So those two factors might actually shrink this projected gap. 00:27:29
But because those are. 00:27:34
Hard to predict, they're not baked into our model here. 00:27:35
My concern and I actually saw these numbers from the folks that came to me about the mitigation was. 00:27:44
That it's. 00:27:52
It's easy to hide the shortfall when we're talking about 16 to 18 cities and Alpine school districts. It's a massive thing in 00:27:56
vineyards, rather small. 00:28:00
With now us going to a small school district with four cities. 00:28:05
It magnifies that that budget short gap fall of the RDA and it and it amplifies like why isn't Vineyard? 00:28:09
You know, paying their share of the student cost, right and. 00:28:18
You know, and I know you can say, hey, we got paid higher in 2010, but now it's not coming in. 00:28:22
And the documents that I saw. 00:28:27
It's Rob Smith and. 00:28:30
And those it was like this argument of like. 00:28:33
Just get it done. 00:28:37
And it'll come. 00:28:39
And like. 00:28:42
I don't know, it just it didn't. 00:28:43
And so it's like instead of focusing on the negativity, it's like, well, what what, what do we now? And, and my other argument is 00:28:47
like. 00:28:50
I think it would have been, I think that person from the school district to say, hey, let's have mitigation. 00:28:57
Plan The city should have had a mitigation plan if it didn't succeed. 00:29:03
To that level just because it's an insurance policy. It's like if the Rd. isn't. 00:29:07
Successful that money still is coming in and the. 00:29:11
Citizens would and it would motivate the developer dramatically and that that's actually the motivation that I'm looking for of 00:29:15
like. 00:29:19
Great. We're giving you this money in 2011 and now in 2025, fourteen years later, it's like it didn't happen. 00:29:23
And Alpine School District. 00:29:31
Thank heavens has that medication policy but but we don't. 00:29:33
And so we are in and. And so it's like. 00:29:36
Can we? 00:29:40
Legally put in a mitigation plan. 00:29:41
For us to protect our taxpayers and our base like the school district did, if one of four of them did it, why? 00:29:44
Why can't we? And I see that as motivation. 00:29:50
You better start selling your property. 00:29:53
You know, quickly or. 00:29:55
Because why wouldn't that be motivating that to them? One thing to think about is that. 00:29:58
The RDA is accelerating. 00:30:02
The development of the city's infrastructure, that would be a city financial obligation anyway. And so the city in many ways is is 00:30:04
winning. 00:30:09
Because the city is able to use this tax increment financing revenue. 00:30:14
To actually build streets and roads. 00:30:18
Sidewalks and public infrastructure that the city would have to pay for anyway, so. 00:30:21
What did he actually get? A huge windfall in the form of upfront. 00:30:26
Financing and development of infrastructure, well, I get that. But when you say the city. 00:30:30
Most developers pay for their infrastructure, not the city. We they just put that as part of an impact fee. 00:30:35
I mean, cities can finance to some, right? But. 00:30:42
But we would be smart enough to say you're paying for your roads, not, not us. I mean, right now our RDA money is paying for their 00:30:45
infrastructure. And I think that's the other thing that's a little bit different with us, it's like. 00:30:50
We need Utah City and others developers to pay for their own infrastructure, not our not our tax base. We wouldn't even have the 00:30:56
ability to build out. 00:31:00
Because we would not have the homes or the businesses here without the. 00:31:05
Remediation, right, but the impact fees would pay for it. 00:31:10
The impact of what? To the developer? What developer? 00:31:14
The current developer, just like there's needed remediation for any development. 00:31:18
There would be no development. 00:31:24
OK. Yeah, keep going. 00:31:28
Well, just to refer back, you know, in terms of what the model was to the original model. 00:31:31
Was with the Conservative estimates that there would be a total mitigation payment over the life of the RDA 12.2 million. 00:31:36
Based on current forecasts, there's zero mitigation payments, so in a lot of ways the school district has performed better to the 00:31:43
tune of over $12 million. 00:31:48
By not having the gap, and that's kind of what this chart shows, is where this gap between the red line and the blue line. 00:31:53
Is the original estimate versus where we're on track actually so. 00:31:59
Because there's been a lot faster and higher growth in value. 00:32:03
The school district has received more revenue than they were. 00:32:08
Expecting from the original estimate. 00:32:12
Which is why there hasn't been a mitigation payment. 00:32:14
That was originally estimated to be upwards of 12.2 million. 00:32:16
Even though there is this gap in the chart. 00:32:21
This gap originally would have been much larger. 00:32:23
All right. Any further questions? 00:32:33
Do you have more sides? Nope. That's it. So both of these charts are ripped and pasted in your in your memo. They're available 00:32:39
online and we'll continue to update this data as we get more data each year. 00:32:44
And as we sort of update our our forecasting models. 00:32:50
But I thought these two slides would be helpful based on a lot of previous discussions. 00:32:54
Excellent. Thank you for sharing. 00:32:58
All right, can I get a motion to approve the consent items? 00:33:00
Or discussion. 00:33:04
I move to approve and adopt the consent items as presented. Thank you. We have a first by Sarah. Can I get a second? 00:33:12
Second. Second by Brett. All in favor, aye. 00:33:20
Listen, at this time we have to go into a closed session. We will be back for our business item right after. 00:33:23
Were you wanting to make the motion? No, I wanted to make a comment. I I feel the need to. 00:33:31
Jamie, if there's any way that we can disclose the topic of the closed session? 00:33:37
Or at least some of. 00:33:41
Outside, because I feel citizens have a right to know at least some of it. Does all of it have to be there? 00:33:43
The board can't take any action in closed session, so the purpose of the closed session would be to update you all. 00:33:48
And then after the update when you take action we can. 00:33:55
Do a presentation and a summary for the public before the Council takes its. 00:33:59
What you're saying? Yes, when you go into a motion, you always state what the purpose is for. 00:34:05
In this case, it's item a strategy sessions to discuss pending a reasonably imminent litigation. 00:34:11
And when you make the motion, whoever that is, you will state that as our purpose. 00:34:17
Right. I'm not saying the reason, I'm just saying that I really believe, um. 00:34:21
A great percentage of this should be debated or talked about prior to the closed session. Maybe not the dollar amounts or 00:34:27
different sums, but like. 00:34:30
The overall idea or concept? 00:34:36
Of the systems and the third party of the right to know. 00:34:39
Is that available? Isn't that what the discussion when we come back is about? 00:34:42
Correct. 00:34:47
So, so we'll, we'll have the discussion. 00:34:48
Privately. 00:34:51
And then? 00:34:53
We'll be able to discuss openly, yeah. 00:34:55
OK, can I get a motion? 00:34:59
Can I? I might. 00:35:01
I might clarify the reason why. 00:35:03
For Councilmember Holdaway, because I think it's important. 00:35:06
Anytime you're confronting litigation, you have to be careful about. 00:35:08
What the city is an entity or representatives of the city say about a matter. 00:35:12
Because what you say could be used as evidence in a court proceeding against you. 00:35:18
And so the reason for the closed session discussion is that you can. 00:35:22
Receive openly legal advice on a matter and you can discuss the matter. 00:35:26
Within that closed session without fear of your discussion. 00:35:31
Being used against you in a court and so that's why we do the closed session conversation, talk about the contours of the matter. 00:35:35
You can't approve a settlement agreement or. 00:35:42
You know any kind of action in a closed session, so we would come back after depending on. 00:35:45
How the discussion goes and if the Council. 00:35:50
Wants to pursue settlement on the matter. 00:35:54
Then we can present the details to the public at that time. 00:35:56
You'll you'll remember. 00:36:00
Was probably 6 to 12 months ago we had a matter with Comcast. 00:36:03
That we settled and this is the same format that we. 00:36:08
Yeah, I just I. 00:36:11
I just know being in this position, I feel that. 00:36:15
The citizens right to know on the topic prior but so we'll go into a closed session. 00:36:20
Talk about it and then we can come out and debate it before we vote on the merits of a settlement. 00:36:25
Correct. So you would come into open session and then if if the board. 00:36:33
Of the RDA decides to move forward with the settlement agreement and that agreement will be presented. 00:36:37
I can provide a summary of what the agreement provides for and the summary of the dispute. 00:36:42
And then at that point in time you can. 00:36:47
Vote and discuss as part of that voting process. 00:36:50
Whether to support settlement or not in open meeting. 00:36:55
But I. 00:36:59
I don't want to. 00:37:00
Make a promise that maybe wouldn't occur if in the closed session, the council decides not to move forward with settlement. 00:37:02
Then we would be left in a situation where the city would face litigation and I would not recommend. 00:37:09
An open discussion of the topic. 00:37:15
In that way. 00:37:17
We have to protect the city against. 00:37:18
Its enemies in Obligation matter. 00:37:22
Yeah, I I definitely agree with not opening us up to litigation. I'm just wondering like how the citizens would be able to opine 00:37:25
during or like have a question and answer period of. 00:37:30
Of the problem because I know just. 00:37:36
How much this? 00:37:38
Umm, a certain group that I'm like. 00:37:41
I would, I would, I would want to know prior issue and petition my elected officials is all. And I'm like, I don't know how to do 00:37:44
that. I think it's been made clear that anything that the council would move on or make a decision on would go before the public. 00:37:51
And so if there was a need to have further discussion or action items, the public would have that same engagement that we do with 00:38:00
any items we move forward on. 00:38:05
With that being said, it looks like those are the parameters that we work inside of, so we need to go into a closed session. 00:38:11
Can I get a motion? 00:38:17
Before I make the motion, will you change it from Council? 00:38:18
Yes. 00:38:22
OK, can I get a motion from someone? 00:38:25
I moved to go into a closed session immediately in the. 00:38:31
Conference room. 00:38:35
For a strategy session to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation. 00:38:36
All right, we have a 1st place. Sarah, can I get a second? 00:38:41
Second, all in favor? 00:38:44
I'll roll call Jake. 00:38:46
Now. 00:38:48
Aye, aye, Sarah. Aye. All right. 00:38:50
We will be that. 00:38:54
The settlement agreement. 00:38:58
And Jamie will present. 00:39:00
Tony, are we back recording? 00:39:04
Yes, great. 00:39:06
OK. 00:39:16
Let me I just want to introduce the. 00:39:18
Legal matter and then. 00:39:21
The council wishes to discuss things they can. 00:39:22
What? 00:39:26
Is on the agenda is. 00:39:28
The proposed approval of a settlement agreement between the city. 00:39:31
The RDA and edge homes. 00:39:35
It relates to. 00:39:37
A development in Vineyard that Edge Homes constructed the lakefront development. It's the Vineyard Shores. 00:39:40
Area. 00:39:45
When the project was developed. 00:39:47
The RDA entered into a reimbursement agreement in 2021. 00:39:50
Where the RDA and H Holmes agreed to share and paying the costs of certain infrastructure improvements. 00:39:55
Some of that included construction and landscaping work between the project and the Lakeshore. 00:40:02
Under the terms of the agreement, edge homes agreed to provide the work and install certain improvements. 00:40:09
In exchange for the right to receive reimbursement payment from the city and a total amount not to exceed 647,000. 00:40:14
Those payments were to be made. 00:40:21
In one year, partial reimbursement payments to edge homes. 00:40:23
Under the reimbursement agreement in the amount of 129,000. 00:40:28
Dollars each year. I'm using round numbers. The figures aren't round numbers, but it's roughly $129,000. 00:40:32
There was a remaining balance on that reimbursement. 00:40:39
Of just under $520,000. 00:40:44
That would be owed to Edge Homes under the agreement. Have they completed the work? 00:40:47
There was a dispute about. 00:40:51
What work was done? What instructions were given? 00:40:54
About that work in that project. 00:40:57
From the city's Vantage and the Rda's Vantage. 00:41:00
The developer had done the work on three of the four items. They had not done the work on the more significant of the. 00:41:03
4 items. 00:41:11
And so we needed to come to some resolution that would allow the city to have some resources to move forward with the work and 00:41:13
would allow. 00:41:16
Us to separate from edge homes and that reimbursement agreement. 00:41:20
There was a parallel dispute between the city and Edge Homes about. 00:41:24
Certain entitlements related to their land use approvals. 00:41:29
When? 00:41:32
Projects are approved by cities. There are discussions between developers and the city about. 00:41:33
The shape and dimension of the public improvements. 00:41:40
And there's a legal principle. 00:41:43
It's a Fifth Amendment protection called an exaction. 00:41:45
That is, if the city demands. 00:41:49
Larger dedication on the part of a developer or larger contribution on the part of the developer than would be proportionate to 00:41:53
the impacts of their development. 00:41:57
Then the city has to pay for that. So to give an example. 00:42:03
If the development requires an 8 inch sewer pipe. 00:42:06
And the city demands a 12 inch sewer pipe to provide for adjacent communities or for the system as a whole. 00:42:09
Then the city has to pay the delta between. 00:42:17
The cost of the 8 inch pipe and the cost of the 10 inch or the 12 inch pipe. 00:42:20
The same principle applies to roads. So if the width of the road that would be required for the development is. 00:42:24
Of a certain width and the city demands more. 00:42:31
Then the city would have to pay for that, both the real property and the road width. 00:42:34
There has been. 00:42:39
A long standing dispute with Dutch homes over the width of the roads. 00:42:40
That they were required to build and Edge Homes had asserted that the city owed it. 00:42:44
An amount just shy of $900,000 for. 00:42:49
The road width that it constructed. 00:42:53
We decided to take these matters and negotiate them all together with hedgehogs. 00:42:56
And the resolution we arrived at was that the city would make. 00:43:02
A partial reimbursement to edge homes but would reserve for itself. 00:43:07
290,000 of the remaining 520. 00:43:11
And again I'm using round numbers. The numbers have. 00:43:15
They're not round numbers. 00:43:19
But the settlement amount is around number. 00:43:21
That the RDA would reimburse to Edge Homes for the work it did complete. 00:43:23
230,000 And then we could hold for ourselves. 00:43:29
The remaining 290. 00:43:33
And at a later point in time, the Council and the RDA board can decide what to do with that resource. 00:43:36
As it relates to the unfinished landscaping and grading. 00:43:41
On the site. So the proposed resolution and what's? 00:43:45
In the settlement agreement that the RDA board and the council will vote on IS. 00:43:48
A payment under that reimbursement agreement to Ledge Homes. 00:43:53
Of 230,000. 00:43:57
We would resolve our dispute, walk our separate ways. 00:43:59
And then? 00:44:06
The city can pick up the pieces of what it needs to complete on the project. 00:44:07
OK. Any questions from the board? Any comments? 00:44:15
Magic. I'm going to start with you. 00:44:23
I'm not supposed to talk till after we settle right? Is the public comment before or after it's public right now? 00:44:27
Well. 00:44:33
You can discuss your action. 00:44:36
Justice settlement part. 00:44:39
Can I say anything I want to do right now? 00:44:41
I would just ask you to be careful before the Council votes on things. Well, we have that tone signature, so I. 00:44:43
Because I have a lot to say, I just don't want to. 00:44:51
I just don't want to say it before. 00:44:54
I'll I'll politely raise my hand if I feel like you're saying. 00:44:55
Well, God, I don't think I. 00:45:04
Yeah, umm. 00:45:06
In May of 20. 00:45:12
14. 00:45:14
This was proposed. 00:45:16
And hundreds of. 00:45:19
Vineyard City residents opposed. 00:45:21
The Edgewater development. 00:45:25
They thought that it was rushed, they thought that it was disorganized. 00:45:28
They thought the plan for parking wasn't right. 00:45:32
They wanted the contract better. 00:45:36
James Booth and others went on to Facebook and many other people went and said this is. 00:45:40
Totally rushed. 00:45:45
And I mean, now today it's coming back to fruition because we've we've settled the Comcast settlement. 00:45:46
And now we're. 00:45:55
Settling the. 00:45:56
A contract that has Gray area that we didn't really know what was going to happen with the landscaping and I feel. 00:45:59
Horrible for the. 00:46:06
Residents of the Edge. 00:46:08
Water's Edge community, but I think that was what the citizens were so concerned about. 00:46:11
During that. 00:46:18
Was just slow down, get it right. 00:46:19
And this is not only. 00:46:21
You know we have this problem but. 00:46:24
The marketing of edge homes of who owns the parking spot. 00:46:26
And them. 00:46:32
And I don't want to get sued here. 00:46:33
The marketing of the owners of those properties saying that they own 300 W and then having it. 00:46:35
Written down on the plat that the city does. 00:46:43
And so my apprehension of the closed door meeting and also this issue is that. 00:46:47
We didn't have. 00:46:53
The contract and stuff in place. 00:46:55
And now because of the. 00:46:58
I agree with the settlement in that because it would open us up to further litigation. 00:47:00
But and so I can see why. 00:47:06
The need for it. 00:47:12
However. 00:47:13
I feel the public. 00:47:15
Especially the people of Water's Edge. 00:47:17
Umm have a right to. 00:47:20
I don't even know if it's before the settlement or after to have a. 00:47:24
Umm hearing or citizens for them to grapple with the settlement. 00:47:29
And how that impacts them because? 00:47:36
When they were sold, now we're talking about we thought we owned the road of 300 W, but now we also bought under the condition 00:47:39
that. 00:47:42
This entire. 00:47:47
Portion would be landscaped and this settlement will relieve edge homes of doing any of that. 00:47:48
And that opens them up to who will ever do that? 00:47:55
The city, Oregon. 00:48:00
You know whenever because that is a very large 800,000. 00:48:02
Dollars to that's a big thing for our city budget so. 00:48:05
I think that it's also important not to name. 00:48:08
Names or to. 00:48:11
Point fingers but you learn from mistakes and I said this in the closed door meeting of like looking towards the future so that 00:48:14
this. 00:48:17
Never happens again That we learned the speed of what government? 00:48:20
Governments don't move quick. Very good. We don't, we don't. We're not good at. It's hard on staff and it puts them in a difficult 00:48:24
situation. 00:48:28
And so. 00:48:33
If it's not. 00:48:35
If it's not good, just wait on it a couple weeks later on a couple months, get it in place. And so those are my comments is like. 00:48:36
I think. 00:48:43
Moving forward, we need to have. 00:48:44
And I think, Jamie, you've articulated that of like. 00:48:47
And I would I would welcome you to. 00:48:51
Share your comments of like. 00:48:54
We're going to have these things in place like contract. 00:48:56
Short things and delineated and I. 00:48:59
Your comment of We've learned from this. 00:49:01
Which is important and I and I look at this as all developers. 00:49:04
There are broken promises. 00:49:09
And problematic contracts. 00:49:12
Throughout all of the holdaway parcels where it was gone so fast and then came back. 00:49:14
And things weren't thought of. 00:49:19
Because of the speed. 00:49:21
And. 00:49:23
Go, go, go. And it's like, let's just let's look at the contract and double check. So those are my comments and. 00:49:24
Yeah, and just. 00:49:32
What? What is the future after this and putting it on the agenda for the Edgewater? 00:49:34
Community to come and voice their concerns and their thoughts. 00:49:40
Do you want me to respond a little bit to that, Mayor? Sure. I'll, I'll be brief and thank you for being measured and what you 00:49:44
said so that we don't. 00:49:48
Invite another fight with this developer. 00:49:52
I am. 00:49:55
Settlement agreements are tough. 00:49:58
And a lot of the details of the approvals and of both the Rdas. 00:50:00
Reimbursement agreement and the development itself. 00:50:06
Predate my time with the city and so I don't want to speculate as to what occurred. I didn't live through that. 00:50:10
I don't know all those details. 00:50:15
But I do know from the documents themselves that there are some lessons we can take away and. 00:50:18
Certainly a reimbursement agreement like the one. 00:50:24
The RDA approval of that challenge was too spare. 00:50:26
In its details about what work needed to be completed, on what timeline, who would be responsible, what the remedies would be, how 00:50:30
the city would accept the work. 00:50:34
How the city would give direction on the work and so. 00:50:40
We have to learn from that, right? We don't want to be in the same situation again. 00:50:43
But at the risk of using too simple an analogy, if you go to a Barber and get a bad haircut. 00:50:47
You don't have the same Barber to repair it. 00:50:53
And I think that's the situation we find ourselves in with the landscaping that we could we could try to twist edges. 00:50:56
Visa vie the reimbursement agreement and have them do the work. 00:51:04
But we know. 00:51:08
That the resources they've expended have been significant. They've been well over the reimbursed. 00:51:10
Reimburse eligible. 00:51:15
Amount. 00:51:18
And my concern frankly is that. 00:51:19
If you have them, the Barber who gave you the bad haircut, try to fix the issue. We're going to be in a little bit deeper. 00:51:22
So the settlement allows us to. 00:51:28
Avoid 2 fights. 00:51:31
On two amounts that are dramatically bigger than the amount of the resolution. 00:51:32
We keep the larger share. 00:51:38
Of the remaining RDA funds. 00:51:40
Pay edge an amount that is supported by their receipts and by their. 00:51:43
Invoices and then we can. 00:51:48
We collectively the city can take that to 90 and then. 00:51:50
If at that point in time, you want to involve the community and what you do and what those plans look like and how you do that 00:51:54
work. 00:51:57
Then by all means, do it. That can be part of that process. 00:52:01
So just to make a comment on this, I I agree so many lessons that needed to come from this. And one of the really interesting 00:52:05
things just to give a time frame of this is since that time. 00:52:11
The dispute had gone on for so long, so many years, so many councils going back and forth between this. 00:52:17
Where internal structural changes were made, financial policies were updated. 00:52:24
Umm, since 2018 there were a lot of different changes that occurred. 00:52:30
The way we do approvals were changed, the way we do RDA investments were adjusted. 00:52:36
And. 00:52:42
I love the idea and the concept of moving forward and even learning from our agreements today and all of those changes that we 00:52:44
made as we move forward now will continue to learn and will continue to have 2020 in hindsight and it's a great comment. 00:52:52
It's a great comment and a great point for how we make all agreements moving forward. I would say the benefit. 00:53:01
Of this particular. 00:53:09
Settlement. 00:53:11
Is that? 00:53:12
The costs and the disputes that had gone on for so long that we saw differently on. 00:53:13
Will be a cost savings. 00:53:20
And no longer a burden. 00:53:24
Not only in those costs, the inability to move the project itself, anybody who's walked along that trail. 00:53:26
Has experienced this. 00:53:33
And many of you that are sitting before us have come in and talked about this. So you've been active in these conversations as 00:53:35
we've tried to. 00:53:38
Deal with and mitigate these issues and now we have an opportunity and so to. 00:53:43
Have our staff and our team work so diligently on this and get to this point is is really great. 00:53:48
And I believe that even if somebody wanted to come in and say, hey, can we go back and, and we open a dispute because we. 00:53:55
We feel. 00:54:04
Wronged by the things that Jake brought up like. 00:54:05
Them say stating that. 00:54:09
In the sails that the road belonged to them, but then us having documentation that it was in the city. 00:54:11
I don't think would be profitable to the city. I think it would come at a loss to the city and so I believe there is. 00:54:17
Better opportunity in. 00:54:24
Settling so that we can move forward. 00:54:26
At a savings and a benefit to the residents. 00:54:29
Sarah Brett, did you have a comment? 00:54:32
If not, I want to go through a motion. 00:54:34
I want to make one more. Oh, no, we're gonna wait for them and then you can. Oh, I thought you guys weren't. 00:54:37
The only thing that I would say is. 00:54:43
I mean just just to support everything that both Jake and. 00:54:48
And Jamie have said. 00:54:51
It really is unfortunate that. 00:54:55
The people who live over there have had to suffer through this. 00:54:58
And it sounds like we really have. 00:55:01
Some better processes in place and. 00:55:05
It's only one making the same mistake twice. 00:55:11
Thank you. Sarah. Did you have anything to add? 00:55:14
Agreed, and I think a lot of people that live over there haven't understood why. 00:55:16
Why the delay in landscaping that piece? So I think it's good to help them understand that. 00:55:21
You know, this was the process and the settlement will allow us to move forward and. 00:55:26
Get that taken care of. 00:55:30
OK, well I want to be clear, this doesn't actually I mean it allows us but it but it frees edge from doing the landscaping and so 00:55:32
now the 800,000. 00:55:37
Which is what? 00:55:43
You know did, for the fire is now upon the burden of the city to fix or remediate to make to make them whole. 00:55:45
And I think. 00:55:53
Part of me is what? 00:55:55
Is what bleeds into why I'm so. 00:55:57
Open to allowing parking on 300 W and trying to help this. 00:56:01
Believe your community of like. 00:56:06
This, I mean, this is where the fighting of Vineyard is has happened and it's like I've I've struggled at having this conversation 00:56:09
in closed door meeting. 00:56:13
In a way because I go. 00:56:18
There were so many sales promises. 00:56:20
And marketing things and what ended up getting. So anyway, I don't want to go into the negativity, but I think. 00:56:24
This gives by settling this this. 00:56:30
We should have a. 00:56:34
Community Roundtable Be open and honest about mistakes and where and how and I think I would hope that the council would be. 00:56:36
More open toward being flexible. 00:56:44
And even bringing that community into the design. 00:56:46
Of what they could do in that space and putting them more in a as a driver's seat to to make them whole. 00:56:49
And Board, I think it's important to talk about that as we do talk about landscaping that will come to the public. Jamie kind of 00:56:57
articulated that earlier, but that will be a public process. 00:57:02
I think the mistakes have been discussed openly for many, many years and the disputes have come back and forth publicly. I know I 00:57:08
have said this people multiple times having very hard discussions about this. 00:57:14
And changed so many processes because of it and. 00:57:21
And the other thing that's a challenge is while we. 00:57:26
Are settling. 00:57:30
So we're not sitting there saying. 00:57:31
Even though there was a salesperson doing something. 00:57:35
And we don't like that they were doing that to you. What we can be sure of. 00:57:39
Is that? 00:57:43
There is, there are clear things. We had an agreement that they weren't fulfilling. 00:57:44
In a way that was meaningful to our community and this was why it's become such a dispute. 00:57:51
And they felt like they gave enough. We felt like they didn't give. 00:57:57
But not settling comes at a loss to the community and the only way I see it when I'm looking at the dollar amount to move forward. 00:58:01
To give an opportunity for design and to use the new techniques that we've put in and this forward momentum is to settle so that 00:58:10
we can take that cost. 00:58:15
And no longer continue to pour a loss onto the people of Vineyard so. 00:58:20
At that, I'm going to ask for a motion for this so we can get to. 00:58:27
Our next meeting. 00:58:31
I move to approve the settlement agreement as presented. Thank you. I have a first by Sarah. Can I get a second? 00:58:37
2nd. 00:58:43
Second by Brett. 00:58:44
Any discussion? 00:58:45
All right, I'm going to go ahead and take this by roll call. 00:58:47
Take Aye, Brett. 00:58:50
Aye, aye, Marty's excused, Sarah. 00:58:53
All right. This meeting is adjourned and in a couple of minutes we'll open our City Council meeting. Thank you. 00:58:56