Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_GEDCO_07.17.2006Minutes of the Meeting of the Georgetown Economic Development Corporation City of Georgetown, Texas Monday, July 17, 2006 The Georgetown Economic Development Corporation of the City of Georgetown, Texas, met on Monday , July 17, 2006, Members Present: Ron Shelly, Ben Oliver, Henry Carr, Farley Snell Members Absent Rick Smith Staff Present: Mark Thomas, Economic Development Director, George Gomez, Program Specialist, Barbara Qnirck, City Attorney, Leticia Zavala Regular Meeting REGULAR SESSION: Meeting was called to order at 2:02 o'clock p.m. Recessed into Executive Session at 2:03 o'clock p m Reconvened into Regular Session at2:38 o'clock p.m. Board may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene in Executive Session at the request of the Chair, a Board Member, the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, City Council Member, or legal counsel for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code Chapter 551, and are subject to action in the Regular Session that follows. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Georgetown Economic Development Corporation will meet in closed executive session as allowed by Texas Open Meetings Act (Texas Government Code Chapter 551), as follows: A. Section 551.072. DELIBERATION REGARDING REAL PROPERTY Discussion and possible action to deliberate the purchase, exchange, lease or value of real property for purposes authorized by Section 4A of Economic Development Act of 1979 (as amended) which discussion in open session would have a detrimental effect on negotiations with third persons. B. Section 551.087. DELIBERATION REGARDING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEGOTIATIONS. Deliberation regarding commercial or financial information that the corporation has received from a business prospect that the Georgetown Economic Development Corporation seeks to have locate, stay, or expand in or near the territory of the City of Georgetown and with which the Corporation is conducting economic development negotiations; and/or deliberation regarding the offer of a financial or other incentive to a business prospect that the Corporation seeks to have locate, stay, or expand in or near the territory of the City of Georgetown. C. Section 551.071. CONSULTATION WITH ATTORNEY Consultation with attorney regarding legal issues related to agenda items and other matters in which the duty of the attorney to the Georgetown Economic Development Corporation under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas. REGULAR SESSION: The Board will reconvene in regular open session to take any action necessary related to any of the above -posted executive session items. D. Action from Executive Session. D-1. Discussion and possible action to approve a Resolution regarding "Project Lee" — Paul Brandenburg, General Manager and Mark Thomas, Director of Economic Development Motion by Carr, second by Oliver to approve a Resolution regarding "Project Lee" under the terms and conditions outlined in Executive Session, including the terms contained in a confidential letter, and the 4A Board having found that "Project Lee" meets the criteria for expending 4A funds under the Development Corporation Act, as stated m the draft resolution presented to the Board which references, among other sections, Section 2(11)(C) of the Act, resolves to approve Project Lee to expend up to a maximum amount of $1.3 Million for water/wastewater infrastructure subject to certain financial determinations including that this amount will not exceed the 4A Board's borrowing capacity, and subject to the approval of a Performance Agreement by the 4A Board and the Georgetown City Council. Approved 5-0. I he Board asked staff to review the following* The Board would like to see a calculation of the 4A Board's borrowing capacity. The Board would like to know if the infrastructure repayments can flow back directly to the 4A Board's budget or whether they can be used to pay off the debt early and free up the funding. The Board would like to review the possibility of the developer sharing in the cost of the water/wastewater infrastructure, particularly a scenario whereby the City would incur the cost of supplying the infrastructure to the perimeter of the development site and the developer incurring the cost of providing the infrastructure from the perimeter to the actual building site. Look into the water/wastewater department's ability to participate in the project. Development of the Performance Agreement around certain parameters, including people, capital investment and electric department utilization. E. Discussion regarding utility infrastructure improvements for the Downtown Square - Tom GEDCO Agenda/April 17, 2006 Page 2 of 4 Yantis, Assistant City Manager and Mark Thomas, Director of Economic Development Thomas addressed the Board and told them about the Boyington/Vista Solutions development, which includes a restaurant, the Loading Dock. He told the Board that the new owners of old buildings in the downtown area now have to meet the new UDC requirements, including fire suppression systems, which are expensive. Thomas told the board that the Boyington's agreed to build a larger more comprehensive fire suppression system that would eventually have the capability of tying into future water lines. However, in the meantime, they have discovered that the current 1/2 inch line behind their building does not supply enough water pressure to accommodate the larger fire suppression system. They have been told that they can use the current line to get a temporary CO, but it isn't permanent. Thomas told the Board that he would like for the Board to consider supplying funding for water/wastewater infrastructure improvements that would have the capability of serving all downtown business/properties to utilize the water, similar to the Regional Downtown Detention Ponds. There was discussion regarding the rules for expenditure of 4A funds, and that in certain circumstances, 4A funds can be used for water/wastewater infrastructure for retail. Thomas told the Board that he felt that the Downtown area fits this criterion because of its importance to Economic Development in Georgetown. He said that he might not feel the same way about a different retail project in a different area, but that the Downtown area is very important in this instance. He said that in this particular case, there is a company that is housed upstairs providing primary jobs and a retail restaurant downstairs. there was additional discussion regarding the need to coordinate with other utilities, i.e. electric so that when the streets are dug up, that all utilities be placed at the same time so that the streets would not have to be dug up again at a later time in order to save costs. There was also a question as to whether or not water/wastewater has recapitalization ability in the same manner as the electric utility. There was additional discussion regarding the TIF District downtown and whether it could utilized as well. The Board also discussed the need to have a long range plan in place for these types of projects so that the board can plan better for its expenditures. There was additional discussion regarding ability to spend 4A dollars in relation to the contingency fund and the Board's borrowing ability The Board went on to discuss the diversity of ownership of the buildings downtown and the impacts related to the old ownership vs. the new ownership, as well as the safety of the buildings in the downtown area and the need to ensure the safety of those buildings The Board indicated that it would like to see some cost sharing and a long range plan for this type of project. GEDCO Agenda/Apnl 17, 2006 Page 3 of 4 F. Consideration and approval of the minutes from the Regular Board Meeting held Monday, May 15, 2006--Farley Snell, Secretary Motion by Snell, second by Oliver to approve the minutes from the Regular Board Meeting held Monday, April 17, 2006. Approved 5-0. G. Consideration of the June 30, 2006 Financial Report - Micki Rundell, Finance Manager Leticia Zavala presented the Financial Report to the Board and explained the details in the report, which included monthly sales tax revenues, monthly expenditures, a budgetary report, and other relevant financial information. - She told the Board that a large portion of the sales tax collected was related to building materials. There was also discussion regarding the impacts of Wolf Ranch and Zavala told the Board that Wolf Ranch s projections are where the City thought they would be, but not what the company thought they would be. Meeting Adjourned at 3:05 o'clock p.m. Attest: Shirley Rhin, D p City Secretary Farley Snell, Secretary GEDCO Agenda/April 17, 2006 Page 4 of 4