[00:00:01]
OKAY, SO NOW, UH, I'LL CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER AT SEVEN 39 AND STATE THAT THE NOTICE OF THE MISSOURI CITY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING WAS DULY POSTED.[Item 1]
NAME.PLEASE STATE HERE OR PRESENT VICE CHAIR PRESTON.
PRESENT DIRECTOR, STERLING DIRECTOR, BONEY RESIDENT DIRECTOR.
MY IS HERE, DIRECTOR THE EMERY HAIR.
NOW WE'LL CALL ROLE OF CITY STAFF AND MEETING PRESENTERS.
PLEASE STATE HERE ARE PRESENT.
INTERIM GENERAL MANAGER, BILL ATKINSON, ASSISTANT SECRETARY MARIA JACKSON, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER GLEN MARTEL.
PRESENT DIRECTOR OF FINANCIAL SERVICES.
PRESENT DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS.
IS THERE ANYONE PRESENT THAT I DID NOT CALL YOUR NAME? IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE
[Item 2]
THE MARCH 2ND, 2020 20 MINUTES? SO I HAVE A MOTION BY FLOYD EMORY, A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER RULERS.I WILL NOW DO A ROLL CALL VOTE.
VICE-CHAIR PRESTON DIRECTOR EDWARDS DIRECTOR.
AND THE SECOND AND THIS IS MAYOR FORD.
WE DON'T HAVE ANYONE WHO HAS SIGNED UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR CONSIDER AUTHORIZING
[Item 4]
A REIMBURSEMENT FOR BAY COUNTY FROM TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT.ZONE NUMBER TWO AND ELENA PORTIS WILL BE PRESENTING.
THIS IS ONLY AN IMPORTANT DIRECTOR OF FINANCIAL SERVICES.
UH, I WANTED TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BACKGROUND.
UH, ON DECEMBER 31ST, 2013, THE CITY ENTERED INTO AN INTER LOCAL AGREEMENT FOR REGIONAL ROAD IMPROVEMENTS WITH FORT BEND COUNTY TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE.
THE TERMS NUMBER TWO MCDA AND TWO MUD MUD.
47 AND 48 WAS AGREEMENT PROVIDED FOR SHARED COST OF THE EXPANSION AND APPROVEMENT OF VICKSBURG BOULEVARD AND ASSOCIATED DRAINAGE.
THESE AGREEMENTS WERE ATTACHED TO THIS AGENDA ITEM.
THE TOTAL ESTIMATED COST OF THE IMPROVEMENTS WAS 3,000,001 25 NINE 63 OF THIS AMOUNT, THE COUNTY CONTRIBUTED 1,530,000 TO THE PROJECT OF WHICH 1 MILLION OF THE PROJECT WITH SOME COUNTY FUNDS WITHOUT REIMBURSEMENT AND $530,000 WAS TO BE REIMBURSED FROM THERESE REVENUE.
AGAIN, THIS IS WRITTEN IN THE EXECUTED AGREEMENT.
THE VICKSBURG PROJECT WAS COMPLETED IN 2016 WITHIN 90 DAYS OF THE COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT.
THE FINAL ACCOUNTING WAS TO BE SUBMITTED TO EACH PARTY WITH MCDA AND THE MUDS REMITTING PAYMENT TO THE CITY OF IMPROVEMENTS WERE MORE THAN THEIR ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION OR REFUNDS.
IF THE IMPROVEMENTS WERE LESS.
BOTH MUDS INITIALLY PAID $491,654 INTO THE PROJECT AND THEY RECEIVED REFUNDS OF 100 2007 94 24 AND THIS WAS IN FISCAL YEAR 2017 AT THAT TIME THE COUNTY DID NOT RECEIVE ITS REIMBURSEMENT.
THE TOTAL PARTICIPATION IN THE PROJECT TURNS TO CONTRIBUTED 1,056,000 FORT BEND COUNTY 1,530,000 WHICH OF WHICH 530,000 WANTS TO BE REIMBURSED AND THE MUDS CONTRIBUTED $777,720 AND 22 CENTS THE TOTAL SOURCES A 3,000,003 63 SEVEN 2022 THE AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY INCLUDES A CRUDE INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 2% PER YEAR AND THAT WAS FROM THE DATE OF DEPOSIT, WHICH WAS IN OCTOBER OF 2014 THROUGH APRIL 30TH THE INTEREST THAT ACCRUED FOR THEIR REIMBURSEMENT IS $58,692 AND THE INTEREST ACCRUES AT A RATE OF 29 OH FOUR PER DAY, WHICH ADDED $116 SO AS OF TODAY, THE REIMBURSEMENT
[00:05:01]
IS $588,808 THIS INTEREST PAYMENT THAT THE COUNTY RECEIVES IS TO BE DEPOSITED INTO A SPECIAL ACCOUNT THAT IS TO BE ALLOCATED FOR FUTURE COUNTY MOBILITY PROJECTS THAT ARE LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY.THE TERMS BOARD MET AND APPROVED THIS REIMBURSEMENT ON APRIL 30TH, 2020.
AT THIS TIME WE ARE REQUESTING AUTHORIZATION FOR REIMBURSEMENT TO FORT BEND COUNTY IN THE AMOUNT OF FIVE 88 SIX 92 PLUS 2,900 FOR INTEREST PER DAY FOR EACH DAY AFTER APRIL 30TH UNTIL PAYMENT IS MADE.
I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
ELAINE, AND THIS IS A COUNCIL ON THE STERLING.
UM, THEY MAY, IT MAY BE JUST IN THE PROCESS, BUT IS THERE ANY PARTICULAR REASON WHY THEY WILL NOT REIMBURSE AND JUST NOW COME IN OR REIMBURSEMENT? I DO NOT HAVE ANSWER TO THAT.
THERE HAS BEEN TURNOVER, UM, WITHIN FINANCE AND UM, I'M NOT QUITE SURE WHY THAT PAYMENT WASN'T MADE IN FISCAL YEAR 2017.
CAN YOU GIVE ME THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THEM, BETWEEN THE REIMBURSEMENT? UH, AS OF AS OF APRIL 30TH, UH, THE DIFFERENCE IS 58,692.
THAT IS THE AMOUNT OF INTEREST THAT WE ARE TO PAY TO THE COUNTY, WHICH IS 2% PER YEAR.
UM, THAT INTEREST WILL GO INTO A SPECIAL POT TO BE USED, UH, FOR PROJECTS WITHIN THE CITY.
SO ALTHOUGH WE'RE PAYING THEM THE INTEREST, WE DO BENEFIT FROM THE INTEREST PAYMENTS.
STERLING WERE YOU, DID YOU HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS? UM, NO, SHE ANSWERED MY QUESTION IF THAT'S ALL YOU DO.
SO IS THIS ANOTHER, I GUESS SITUATION WHERE WE DON'T HAVE ANY PROCESSES IN PLACE TO CATCH ANYTHING LIKE THIS? UM, I REALLY CAN'T SPEAK TO THAT.
I DO KNOW THAT, UM, SOMEONE THAT COMES NEW, LET'S SAY INTO THE POSITION, UH, WHETHER IT BE A FINANCE DIRECTOR, CITY MANAGER, THERE ARE A LOT OF CONTRACTS THAT MAY HAVE BEEN EXECUTED PRIOR TO THEM COMING.
AND UNLESS SOMEONE BRINGS IT TO THEIR ATTENTION, THEY MAY NOT KNOW ABOUT IT.
UM, SO I CAN'T SPEAK TO, I JUST, I REALLY CAN'T SPEAK TO, AS, AS TO WHY THE, THE PAYMENT WASN'T, WASN'T MADE.
SO DO WE NOW HAVE SOMETHING IN PLACE TO CATCH ITEMS LIKE THIS? WELL NOW, WELL I WOULD SAY WHEN I CAME WE KNEW ABOUT THESE ITEMS AND LET'S SAY THE CITY KNEW ABOUT THESE ITEMS. UM, BUT WE HAD TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING ALL OF THE EXPENDITURES, UH, REVIEWING ALL OF THE CONTRACT INFORMATION.
UH, WE INCLUDED THESE REIMBURSEMENTS AND THE TOURIST FORECASTS WHENEVER WE WERE LOOKING AT THE TERMS BUDGET.
UM, AND IT'S JUST NOW THAT WE'RE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH, UM, THE REIMBURSEMENT.
GENERALLY, MOST OF THESE CONTRACTS INCLUDE A TRIGGER AND SO THAT TRIGGER IS USED, USUALLY THE DEVELOPER SUBMITTING A REQUEST FOR REIMBURSEMENT.
SO MOST OF THE AGREEMENTS ACTUALLY INCLUDE A SPECIFIC TRIGGER.
HOW ARE WE SAYING THE TRIGGER? WE DIDN'T RECEIVE THE, UH, THE NOTICE.
WHICH IS THE, AS YOU SAID, WAS THE TRIGGER OR REIMBURSEMENT.
THIS, THIS AGREEMENT, UH, SEEMS TO BE DIFFERENT THAN OTHER DEVELOPER AGREEMENTS IS THIS IS JUST A REIMBURSEMENT TO FORT BEND COUNTY FOR THEIR CONTRIBUTION TO A PROJECT THAT WAS MANAGED BY THE CITY.
UH, WITHIN THE AGREEMENT, IT STATED THAT PAYMENT WAS TO BEGIN, UM, TO THE COUNTY JANUARY, I THINK FIRST OF 2016.
THERE WASN'T ANYTHING THAT STATED THAT THE COUNTY NEEDED.
WELL THAT I, I MUST SAY JOYCE TO SEE IF YOU RECALL ANYTHING.
THERE WASN'T ANYTHING THAT STATED THAT THEY NEEDED TO COME TO US TO REQUEST THE REIMBURSEMENT? NO, I DON'T RECALL ANYTHING ON THIS CONTRACT.
I WAS JUST STATING THAT MOST OF OUR OTHER CONTRACTS, I THINK THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT THE PROCESS AND MOST OF THE OTHER CONTRACTS ACTUALLY HAVE A SPECIFIC TIMEFRAME TO REQUEST REIMBURSEMENT.
MAYOR, MAYOR AND COUNCIL IS SPO ATKINSON.
UH, I WILL SAY THAT, UH, WITH A LITTLE HISTORY AND MEMORY, UH, THAT DURING THE TIME FROM, UH, AND I DON'T KNOW THE SPECIFIC TIMEFRAME, BUT IN THE 16 TO 17 TIMEFRAME THAT, UH, THERE WAS REVIEW GOING ON OF THE, UH, TERS ACCOUNTS TO, UH, LOOK AT THAT, WHAT THE OBLIGATIONS WERE TO WHAT WAS IN THE ACCOUNTS.
[00:10:01]
AND SO, UH, I KNOW THAT FINANCE HAD, UH, ONE OF THE THINGS THEY HAD ON THEIR PLATE AT THAT TIME WAS TO GET SOMEONE TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT.AND SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT EVER OCCURRED WITH THAT.
I DO KNOW THAT PROCESS WAS BEING UNDERTAKEN AT THE TIME.
I BELIEVE THE AGREEMENT WAS EXECUTED IN 2013, DECEMBER 31ST, 2013.
UM, AND THEN THERE WAS ANOTHER AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY, UH, THAT SPOKE A LITTLE MORE TO THE REIMBURSEMENT THAT WAS EXECUTED IN JULY OF 2014 AND I DON'T KNOW WHO WAS, UM, THE SUPERVISOR AT THAT POINT IN TIME AND STAND, NO ONE WAS MONITORING IT.
WE DON'T HAVE ANY TYPE OF INTERNAL, UM, JUST WAIT A WATCH THOSE TYPES OF PROJECTS FROM OCCURRING OR JUST HAVING, JUST THE ABILITY TO MONITOR THOSE TYPE OF PROJECTS.
WE, WE, WE DO HAVE THAT IN PLACE.
WHEN I CAME ON BOARD, ONE OF THE TASKS THAT I HAD WAS TO REVIEW ALL OF THE, UH, DEVELOPER AGREEMENTS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS TO ENSURE THAT WE WERE PAYING AS WE SHOULD.
UM, SO IT WAS IN THE PROCESS PRIOR TO ME COMING ON BOARD.
NO, THIS PROJECT ON 2013, DO YOU HAVE AN IDEA WHO WAS MONITORING THIS PROJECT IN 2013 OR ACTUALLY WAS GOING BACK AND FORTH WITH THE PROCESS EVEN AFTER 2013? WELL, FROM 2013 TO 2014, UH, THAT WAS THE INITIATION OF THE, UM, TERMS FOR IT.
AND THEN, UH, THE PROJECT ITSELF DIDN'T GET BUILT FOR, UH, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A TIME PERIOD IN WHICH THE AGREEMENT WAS MADE.
AND THE, THE, UH, UH, THE CONSTRUCTION, AS I RECALL, DIDN'T TAKE PLACE IMMEDIATELY.
AND THEN, AS I WAS SAYING EARLIER IN SPEAKS TO WHAT ELENA WAS TALKING ABOUT, THE, UH, CITY UNDERTOOK, UH, AS OUR CALL, LIKE IN THE 17 TIMEFRAME, 16, 17 TIMEFRAME OF REVIEWING.
THAT WAS WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT WITH REGARD TO THE TERRORS, ACCOUNTS AND LINING UP WHAT'S COMING IN VERSUS WHAT WAS OBLIGATED TO GO BACK OUT WITH RESPECT TO THE DIFFERENT, UH, PROJECTS OR AGREEMENTS.
AND THAT'S WHAT ELENA WAS JUST SPEAKING TO AS ONE OF THE TASKS THAT SHE UNDERTOOK WHEN SHE GOT HERE WAS TO, TO FINISH THAT UP.
SO, UM, I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE WHICH FISCAL YEAR IT WAS.
IT COULD HAVE BEEN IN 2017 BUT THERE WAS A CONSULTANT, MARCY, MARCY, MARCY DOG, DARCY CONSULTANTS THAT WENT THROUGH AND PUT TOGETHER, UM, AN ANALYSIS OF ALL OF THE TERMS AND SOME OF THE AGREEMENTS THAT WERE, UM, OUTSTANDING OR PAYMENTS THAT WERE OUTSTANDING.
UM, THEY ALSO, UH, DID THE CALCULATION FOR DIFFERENT POT, UM, FOR THE PROPERTIES TO DETERMINE HOW MUCH COULD BE REIMBURSED TO EACH DEVELOPER WITHIN CERTAIN SECTIONS OF THE TERM.
SO IT'S POSSIBLE THAT, UM, I KNOW THAT THIS WAS, UH, THE, THE, THE EVALUATION WAS TAKING PLACE AND IT PROBABLY WAS AFTER FISCAL YEAR 2017, UM, THAT IT STARTED.
AND I WANT TO SAY THAT THAT'S WHAT I'M SPEAKING TO IS MORE STARCY WAS THE FARM THAT UNDERTOOK THAT.
AND THEN, AS I SAID, I DON'T KNOW WHAT OCCURRED DURING THAT PROCESS, BUT I KNOW THEY WERE UNDERTAKING IT AND GETTING THE WORK COMPLETED SO THAT THEN THE CITY COULD PAY AGAINST WHAT THOSE, UH, OBLIGATIONS WERE.
AND KNOWING THAT WE HAD THE PROPER AMOUNTS IN THE ACCOUNT OF THE DIFFERENT TERRORS COUNTS IN ORDER TO PAY THOSE OBLIGATIONS.
SO, UH, AGAIN THAT, THAT TIES BACK TO WHAT ELENA WAS SAYING EARLIER AS FAR AS WHAT SHE DID WHEN SHE CAME IN.
UM, I UNDERSTANDING THAT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE SOMEONE COMING IN TO AUDIT THOSE TERMS ACCOUNTS.
WE WAITED TWO YEARS AND NOW WE'RE HAVING TO PAY THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY AND INTEREST BECAUSE WE WAITED TWO YEARS, THREE YEARS RATHER ALMOST.
WELL, AND AGAIN, I'M NOT TRYING TO UH, MAKE LIGHT OF IT, BUT FORTUNATELY WITH THE WAY THAT WE HAVE THE, UH, AGREEMENT, UH, CONSTRUCTED THAT INTEREST WILL COME BACK INTO THE POT THAT WE'LL BE GOING BACK INTO PROJECTS FOR THE CITY.
SO IT'S NOT GOING TO BE INTEREST ON TOP OF COST.
IT WILL BE SOMETHING THAT WILL BE USED INSIDE CITY, MISSOURI CITY FOR THE TRANSPORTATION COST.
AH, NOW I HAVE TO CONCUR WITH MY COLLEAGUES.
[00:15:01]
UM, WE NEED TO HAVE SOME PARAMETERS IN PLACE BECAUSE IT COULD BE A SITUATION WHERE IT WOULD NOT BE COMING BACK INTO THE CITY AND IF IT'S TAKEN THIS LONG.AND, UM, MY NEXT QUESTION IS I'M WITH YOU, UH, COUNSEL EDWARDS, WHO WAS MONITORING, WHO WAS OVERSEEING THE PROJECT.
AND I THINK THE REPORTS TO THE SYSTEM MANAGER, RIGHT? UH, THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT OR WHOEVER, BECAUSE YOU CAN'T MAKE ME BELIEVE THIS AS A PROJECT GOING ON FOR SEVERAL YEARS AND NOW AT SEVERAL YEARS LATER WE'RE REQUESTING REIMBURSEMENT WHERE IT COULD BE AGAINST THE CITY.
YOU KNOW, I'M JUST LOOKING FOR WHATEVER, UM, POLICIES AND PROCEDURES WE HAVE IN PLACE SO THAT IT WON'T HAPPEN AGAIN.
CAUSE IT'S KINDA THE FARFETCH TO HAVE SOMETHING THIS LONG AND STILL WITH, AND THIS IS MAYOR FORD UNDERSTANDING THAT YES, IT'LL GO BACK INTO A TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, BUT IT WON'T GO INTO A PROJECT OF OUR CHOICE.
IT'LL GO INTO A PROJECT OF THE COUNTY'S CHOICE NOW.
SO, UM, WE REALLY NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE SOME TYPE OF PROCESSES IN PLACE AT THIS POINT TO CATCH STUFF LIKE THIS.
AND, OR IF THERE IS A PROCESS, UM, EVEN IF WE ARE HAVING, UH, THERESE ACCOUNTS AUDITED OR REVIEWED, WE SHOULD NOT BE WAITING TWO OR THREE YEARS AND PAYING PENALTIES AND INTEREST BECAUSE OF THAT.
UM, I, I THINK WE COULD HAVE GOTTEN A REVIEW IN PROBABLY A MONTH OR TWO, IF NOT THREE MONTHS TO AT LEAST, YOU KNOW, MAKE THAT PAYMENT.
UH, AND I KNOW EVEN IF WE HAD REVIEWED IT, UM, AND COME BACK AND MAYBE WE NEEDED TO PAY MORE OR LESS, UM, THE COUNTY WOULD HAVE REFUNDED US.
SO I DON'T, I DON'T THINK US WAITING WAS, UM, A GOOD IDEA OR, AND I'M NOT REALLY SURE WHY WE DID IT THAT WAY, BUT WE NEED NOT TO MOVE THAT WAY IN THE, IN THE FUTURE.
AND, UH, AGAIN, WE WILL, UH, TAKE A LOOK AND I THINK ATLANTA HAS BEEN WORKING ON THAT VERY PROCESS AND WHEN WE HAVE OBLIGATIONS LIKE THAT, THAT THE TRIGGERS AND MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE STAYING ON TOP OF THOSE TRIGGERS SO THAT WE DO THEM IN A TIMELY FASHION.
SO, UH, I WILL SAY THAT THE TWO COUNCIL THAT WE WILL BE DOING THAT, AND I KNOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE TAKING STEPS TOWARDS MAKING SURE WE HAVE THOSE PROCESSES IN PLACE SO THAT WE HAVE A GOOD, TIGHT PROCESS GOING FORWARD.
SO THOSE ARE DONE IN A MORE TIMELY MANNER.
ADDITIONALLY WE ARE, WE'LL BE MAKING CONTRACTUAL POLICY CHANGES SO THAT WHENEVER WE DO HAVE THESE AGREEMENTS, WE ARE CAPPING THAT INTEREST PAYMENT TO TWO YEARS.
SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE ADOPTED AS WELL GOING FORWARD.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I JUST WANTED TO GET SOME QUICK CLARITY ON, UH, CAUSE IT'S, IT, IT GOING BACK TO 2013 IS WHEN THIS CONTRACT WAS EXECUTED.
AND AROUND THAT TIME, I GUESS FROM OVERSIGHT STANDPOINT, UM, A LOT OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS THAT PROBABLY COULD HAVE OVERSEEN THIS ARE NO LONGER HERE, WHETHER THEY BE IN FINANCE OR I THINK THE CITY MANAGER AT THAT TIME WAS AT BROUSSARD.
AND I KNOW SCOTT ELMA WAS HERE AND I DON'T KNOW WHERE HE OVERSAW.
BUT, UM, I THINK THAT AT THIS POINT IN TIME, I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUES FROM A PROCEDURAL STANDPOINT, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE, UM, YOU KNOW, JUST ALL OF OUR DUCKS IN A ROW, CROSS THE T'S DOT.
THE I'S TO ENSURE THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NOTHING THAT'S GOING TO PUT THE CITY IN A, IN HARM'S WAY, IN ANY WAY FROM A FINANCIAL STANDPOINT.
SOUNDS TO ME AS IF THIS PARTICULAR CONTRACT, UH, IS NOT A, IT'S NOT ONE THAT'S GOING TO COST THE CITY MONEY, IF YOU WILL, IN THAT YOU'RE GETTING THOSE, UH, THAT INTEREST DEDICATED TO TRANSPORT FUTURE TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS.
UH, BUT WE DO NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT ANY OTHER CONTRACTS THAT WE HAVE ON THE BOOKS THAT WE'RE LOOKING INTO IT AND BUILD.
IF YOU SAY THAT THAT'S CURRENTLY WHAT'S BEING DONE, UM, BY FINANCE AND ELENA, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S GOOD TO HEAR.
UM, BUT I HAVE ONE OTHER QUICK QUESTION.
THE REIMBURSEMENT, WAS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE'RE ONLY REIMBURSING BECAUSE OF THE INTEREST? ARE WE SUPPOSED TO GIVE A REIMBURSEMENT ANYWAY? WE WERE, WE WERE SUPPOSED TO GIVE THEM $530,000 FROM TARA'S REVENUE.
THE CONTRACT INCLUDES THE ONLY DIFFERENCE WITH THE 58,000.
SO, SO THIS WAS A REIMBURSEMENT REGARDLESS OF TIME, UH, THAT WAS DUE THEM ANYWAY, CORRECT? CORRECT.
SO, SO THE ONLY THING THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FROM A, I GUESS PROBLEMATIC STANDPOINT WHEN IT COMES TO THE TIMEFRAME AND HOW LONG IT TOOK IS THE INTEREST THAT 58 SOMEBODY CHANGE AND ENTRUST EVERYTHING ELSE REGARDLESS OF WHETHER WE PAID IT BACK IN 2017 OR WHETHER WE PAID IT TODAY WAS DO THE COUNT.
SO, UM, ELENA, UH, BUT THE ACTUAL
[00:20:01]
REIMBURSEMENT WASN'T DOING TO 2017, RIGHT.UH, THE CONTRACT STATED THAT PAYMENTS WERE TO BEGIN JANUARY 1ST, 2016.
BUT OKAY, SO 2016 WAS WHEN THE REIMBURSEMENT WAS DUE AND WE DID NOT PAY THE REIMBURSEMENT.
JANUARY 1ST, 2016, THAT'S WHAT'S STATED IN THE CONTRACT.
AND THE, THE INTEREST ACCRUED FROM THE POINT WHEN WE DIDN'T PAY IT IN 2016? NO, THE INTEREST ACCRUED FROM DATE OF PAYMENT, WHICH WAS OCTOBER, 2014.
IT'S ALMOST LIKE THE TOUR'S RECEIVED A LOAN FROM THE COUNTY OF 530,000.
UM, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IF NOT, IS THERE A MOTION TO AUTHORIZE A REIMBURSEMENT TO FOR BEING COUNTY FROM TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE NUMBER TWO, MOVE TO ADOPT COUNCIL MEMBER BONI.
IS THERE A SECOND?
VICE-CHAIR PRESTON DIRECTOR EDWARDS DIRECTOR STERLING DIRECTOR.
BONNIE MADE THE MOTION DIRECTOR MARULA IS THE DIRECTOR IN REMADE THE SECOND AND THIS IS CHAIR FOR IT.
[Item 5]
MOVE ON TO CONSIDER AUTHORIZING A REIMBURSEMENT TO HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM FROM TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE NUMBER THREE.I'M A LITTLE HISTORY ON THIS ONE.
UH, ON DECEMBER 15TH, 2008 AND INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WAS EXECUTED BETWEEN THE CITY HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM AND UH, TERMS NUMBER THREE, THE AGREEMENT PROVIDED FOR THE COMMUNITY COLLEGES PARTICIPATION IN THE ZONE WITH THE LIMITATION THAT THEIR TAX INCREMENT PARTICIPATION WAS TO BE USED SOLELY FOR THE PAYMENT OF PROJECT COSTS RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROJECT PLAN WITH RESPECT TO THEIR EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES, MEANING THAT ANY INCREMENT THAT THEY PAID INTO THE SYSTEM, WHAT THEY WERE TO RECEIVE, UM, FOR ANY CONSTRUCTION THAT THEY, OR ANY PROJECTS THAT THEY HAD WITHIN THE PROJECT PLAN.
UH, THAT PROJECT PLAN WAS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL IN 2008 BY MEANS OF ORDINANCE NUMBER OH EIGHT 22, UH, HARRIS HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM IS REQUESTING A REIMBURSEMENT OF TAX INCREMENT FUNDS FOR THE MISSOURI CITY CAMPUS THAT WAS BUILT WITHIN THE ZONE.
ALTHOUGH THIS FACILITY WAS LATER SOLD AND RELOCATED TO AN AREA NOT LOCATED IN THE ZONE, UH, WHICH IS HERE NEXT TO CITY HALL IS DETERMINED THAT THEY ARE STILL ENTITLED TO THE REIMBURSEMENT.
THE AGREEMENT, UH, STATED THAT REIMBURSABLE COSTS WERE TO BE REVIEWED AND AUDITED BY AN INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT OR REVIEWED AND VERIFIED BY AN INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT.
UM, WE HAD MCCALL GIBSONS, WETLAND BARFOOT, A CPA FIRM COME AND COMPLETE THE AGREED UPON PROCEDURES REPORT.
THE TOTAL COSTS THAT WERE SUBMITTED BY THE COLLEGE SYSTEM WERE REVIEWED AND VERIFIED WITH A TOTAL, UH, COST OF 900, APPROXIMATELY $946,000.
THE ONLY INSTRUMENT AVAILABLE FOR REIMBURSING THE COLLEGE SYSTEM IS $350,424 AND 9 CENTS, WHICH IS THE INCREMENT THAT THEY CONTRIBUTED THROUGH MAY 19TH, 2016.
SO THE REIMBURSEMENT IS A REIMBURSEMENT BASICALLY OF THE FUNDS THAT THEY, THAT THEY, UM, CONTRIBUTED INTO THE, UH, TARA'S FUND.
UH, IF YOU LOOK AT THE DOCUMENTATION IN THEIR REQUEST, THEY QUOTED A CERTAIN DOLLAR AMOUNT, BUT IT DIDN'T INCLUDE ONE OF THE PAYMENTS THAT WAS MADE IN MAY.
UH, SO IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE TOTAL AMOUNT, AS I STATED PREVIOUSLY, THAT WE HAVE A, THE PAYMENTS THAT THEY RECEIVED PLUS WHAT THEIR RECORDS AND WHAT OUR RECORDS SHOW IS 350,000, $424.
UH, WE DID BUILD THEM FOR THEIR INCREMENT FOR TAX YEAR 2015 TAX YEAR 2016, BUT THEY REQUESTED NOT TO PAY THOSE INCREMENTS UNTIL THEY, UH, RECEIVED THEIR REIMBURSEMENT.
AND IF THEY WERE TO PAY THESE INCREMENTS, THE TOTAL AMOUNT THAT THEY WILL BE ENTITLED TO WOULD BE $546,457 AND 89 CENTS.
AGAIN, THEIR TOTAL COST FOR THIS FACILITY WAS OVER 945,000, BUT THEY WOULD ONLY BE ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE, BUT THEY ACTUALLY CONTRIBUTED AS THEIR TAX INCREMENTS INTO THE TERMS. UM, IF THIS WERE NOT TO BE APPROVED, UH, THE INNER LOCAL AGREEMENT STATES THAT THEY'RE ENTITLED TO THE BALANCE OF ANY INCREMENT THAT THEY PAID THAT REMAINS ON SPENT.
SO, UM, WHETHER THE REIMBURSEMENT IS APPROVED OR NOT, THEY WOULD STILL RECEIVE A $350,000, UH, THAT'S INTACT IN THE TAX, UM, INCREMENT SIGN.
[00:25:01]
I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.DOES THE COUNSELING AND EMORY, SO WHAT IS THE TOTAL, UH, UH, REIMBURSEMENT THING? UH, UH, CONSIDERED THE, THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF EXPENDITURES THAT WERE REVIEWED BY THE INDEPENDENT AUDITOR FOR THE FACILITY WAS $945,815 AND 9 CENTS ON THE AGENDA.
THERE'S ALSO AN ITEM FOR, UH, TERMINATING THEIR PARTICIPATION IN THE TERMS. SO THE AMOUNT THAT THEY WOULD RECEIVE WOULD BE BASED ON WHAT THEY PAY IN.
IF THEY ARE NO LONGER REQUIRED TO PAY PRIOR, UM, TAX INCREMENTS, THEN THEIR, THEIR REIMBURSEMENT WOULD BE LIMITED TO WHAT'S IN THE INCREMENT IN THE SIGN NOW, WHICH IS 350,000 TO 42 OH NINE AGAIN, FLOYD EMERY, AND WHAT WAS THEIR, UH, COMMITMENTS IN 15 AND 16 THAT THEY DIDN'T EXPECT? AND, AND A TAX YEAR 2015 WHICH WAS FISCAL YEAR 16, UH, 70,000, $41 AND 93 CENTS.
AND IN TAX YEAR 2016 WHICH WAS FISCAL YEAR 17 125,009 91 97 WHICH HAS A TOTAL OF $196,033 AND 80 CENTS AND THEY HAVE NOT BEEN BILLED FOR TAX YEAR 2017 2018 OR 2019 ELAINA COUNCIL AND MR LOU, UH, JUST A QUICK QUESTION AND YOU SAID THEY HAVE NOT BEEN BILLED FOR THOSE LAST THREE YEARS? NO, THEY HAVE NOT BEEN BILLED BECAUSE THEY REQUESTED NOT TO PAY SINCE THEY'RE WAITING ON THEIR REIMBURSEMENT.
SO IF THEY GIVE US THE MONEY, WE WOULD TURN AROUND AND GIVE THE MONEY BACK TO THEM.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS IF THEY'RE NOT ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IS THERE A MOTION AUTHORIZING A REIMBURSEMENT TO HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM FROM TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE NUMBER THREE? I DID HAVE A QUESTION OF ELENA.
DOES FINANCE HAVE A RECOMMENDATION ON BOTH THIS AND THE TERMINATION OF THE ANALYTICAL AGREEMENT? UH, AGENDA ITEM, UH, MY RECOMMENDATION IS TO REIMBURSE THEM THE $350,424 AND 9 CENTS.
THE MONEY IS IN THE TERSE FUND.
IT'S THEIR MONEY FOR THEIR PROJECT, THEY'RE UM, ENTITLED TO IT.
SO MY RECOMMENDATION IS TO PAY IT AND UM, IF THEY DON'T HAVE, AND I THINK JOYCE MAY BE ABLE TO SPEAK A LITTLE MORE TO THIS, BUT IF THEY DON'T HAVE ANY PROJECTS WITHIN THE TERMS, UH, WHATEVER MONEY THEY CONTRIBUTE, IF THE CONTRACT ISN'T TERMINATED, WILL UM, BE GIVEN BACK TO THEM AT THE END OF THE, UH, OR TERMINATION.
UM, BECAUSE THE MONEY CAN ONLY BE USED FOR THEIR PROJECTS.
AND SAY, JOYCE, THIS STILL, UH, THAT WAS SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS, THE EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES.
IS THERE A MOTION, A MOVE TO ADOPT COUNCIL MEMBER BONEY CAROLYN? SECOND.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
UH, IF THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS, I'LL NOW DO A ROLL CALL.
VOTE VICE CHAIR, PRESTON DIRECTED EDWARDS AND DIRECTOR STERLING MADE THE SECOND DIRECTOR.
BONY MADE THE MOTION DIRECTOR MARULA.
[Items 6 & 8]
ITEM IS DISCUSS THE TERMINATION OF THE INTER-LOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE REINVESTMENT ZONE NUMBER THREE, CITY OF MISSOURI CITY, THE CITY OF MISSOURI CITY, TEXAS, AND THE HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM FOR THE HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEMS PARTICIPATION IN REINVESTMENT ZONE NUMBER THREE, CITY OF MISSOURI CITY, IE.GOOD EVENING MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL OR I APOLOGIZE, MEMBERS OF THE MCDA.
THIS ITEM IS BEING BROUGHT TO YOU ALL BECAUSE THE MISSOURI CITY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IS CHARGED WITH ASSISTING THE CITY AND THE REINVESTMENT ZONES WITH IMPLEMENTING THE PROJECT PLANS FOR REINVESTMENT ZONE NUMBER THREE.
AS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, THE HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM HAS REQUESTED THAT THE CITY AND THE TURF, UH, ESSENTIALLY TERMINATE ITS EXISTING PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT.
BACK IN DECEMBER OF 20 2008, AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WAS EXECUTED, AS ELENA MENTIONED, THAT PROVIDED FOR THE SYSTEM'S PARTICIPATION IN THE CITY'S TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE.
[00:30:01]
UH, IN ABOUT 2015 OR 2016, THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM SOLD ITS PROPERTY INTEREST.NUMBER THREE, AS ELENA MENTIONED, THE CONTRACT LIMITED THE EXPENDITURE OF THE INCREMENT TO EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES BY OR OWNED BY IN CONSTRUCT CONSTRUCTED BY THE HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM.
BECAUSE THE COLLEGE SYSTEM NO LONGER OWNS PROPERTY IN THE AREA, DOES NOT INTEND TO DO SO IN THE FUTURE.
THEY HAVE REQUESTED, UM, ESSENTIALLY THE TERMINATION OF THE PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT.
THIS MATTER WAS CONSIDERED BY THE REINVESTMENT ZONE BOARD LAST WEEK.
ON APRIL 30TH, THE BOARD DID VOTE TO TERMINATE THE CONTRACT.
THIS ITEM IS BEING BROUGHT TO THE MISSOURI CITY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES.
IT WILL BE PRESENTED AT THE COUNCIL MEETING AS WELL FOR ACTION.
IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.
UH, IF WE TERMINATE THE INNER LOCAL AGREEMENT NOW, WILL THAT HAVE ANY BEARING ELAINA PROBABLY ON OUR COLLECTION OF THE FUNDS FROM UM, THE 196,000 OR WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING TOTALLY DIFFERENT SINCE THEY'VE MOVED IT TO CAMPUS? THE CONTRACT PROVIDES THAT THEY WOULD NOT HAVE TO FULFILL ANY OBLIGATIONS OF THE CONTRACT ONCE IT'S TERMINATED.
AS YOU WILL RECALL, ELENA MENTIONED THE INCREMENTS.
THE PAYMENTS CAN ONLY BE USED FOR THEIR FACILITIES BECAUSE THEY NO LONGER OWN FACILITIES OR HAVE ANY FACILITIES IN THE ZONE.
THE COLLECTION OF THE DOLLARS WOULD SIMPLY SERVE TO, UM, FOR THIS, UH, IT WOULD SIMPLY SERVE TO GIVE THEM SOMETHING THE CITY TO UM, A MEANS OF REIMBURSING THEM.
UM, SO THERE REALLY WOULDN'T BE AN IMPACT ON THE ZONE ITSELF, NOT IN THE ZONE BUT ON THE REIMBURSEMENT.
SO, BUT THE CITY, THE CITY WOULD EXPEND DOLLARS REIMBURSING SOMETHING WHEREAS THE CONTRACT PROVIDES A RELEASE STATING THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY.
SO BECAUSE THEY NO LONGER OWN A FACILITY, IT DOESN'T, UM, IT'S NOT EFFICIENT FOR THE CITY TO COLLECT THE MONEY AND THEN TO SIMPLY PAY IT BACK BECAUSE THEY NO LONGER OWN A FACILITY AND WE KNOW THAT THEY'VE ALREADY, THEY'VE ALREADY, I BELIEVE, SUBMITTED ABOUT $900,000 IN EXPENSES.
SO INSTEAD OF THE CITY COLLECTING THE FUNDS AND ITS RESOURCES TO PROCESS THAT REIMBURSEMENT, THE CONTRACT PROVIDES A RELEASE SO THAT THERE'S NOT A COLLECTION OF THE FUNDS ONLY TO REIMBURSE THE FUNDS.
AND ELENA, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THE INEFFICIENCY OF IT, FEEL FREE TO HOP IN.
UM, SO WE WOULD HAVE TO, AS FAR AS OUR RESOURCES AND FINANCE, WE WOULD HAVE TO BUILD THEM FOR THE ADDITIONAL YEARS.
AND THEN OF COURSE WE'D HAVE TO PROCESS THE PAYMENT THAT WE RECEIVED FROM THEM AND THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF GOING TO THE TERMS BOARD FOR THEM TO APPROVE PAYMENT TO HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE, UM, AND THEN POSSIBLY COMING TO YOU AGAIN FOR THE PAYMENT BECAUSE OF THE DOLLAR AMOUNT.
AND THEN WE WOULD HAVE, UH, FINANCE GENERATE A CHECK JUST FOR THE EXACT SAME AMOUNT THAT THEY GAVE US.
SO, UM, IT WOULD, IT WOULD BE MORE EFFICIENT TO ALLOW THEM TO DISCONTINUE PAYMENTS AND WE PAID THEM $350,000 IN, TERMINATE THE AGREEMENT, IN MY OPINION.
SO THIS, THE POST TERMINATION AGREEMENT INCLUDES LANGUAGE TO THAT EFFECT.
AND THIS IS FOR ME, JUST TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND.
THE, UH, ACC IS ASKING FOR, UH, THE LOCAL AGREEMENT, UH, TO BE, UH, TO BE TERMINATED.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? WE WILL NOW JOIN THIS MEETING.