Common Council - Special Meeting

Okay, I'm going to call the Frankfort Redevelopment Commission to order. Roll call, please.

Joe Palmer.

Present.

Chris Votter. John Virtue. Present. Eric Woods. Present. Jeremy Newcomer. Present. Bud McQuaid.

Present. Okay, did everybody get a chance to read the minutes? I don't have a lot of time.

I'll move to accept the minutes as presented. Second.

Okay, I have a motion and a second to accept the minutes as presented. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed?

John, did you second that or Jeremy?

Jeremy did. Okay, no public comments.

um claims we were discussing the claims there yeah uh question on the bill miller claim we approved a claim last week for for the front of his building it wasn't 20 000 this one's for 20 000 is this reimbursement for the roof that we approved a year ago i believe so wasn't it yes that's a different building that's that's the reimbursement for his roof Roof at 260 South Jackson. It should have been 210 South Jackson.

I think it's 210 where they're doing the windows.

260. One's Goodyear. That's where we put the roof on. Yes. Okay. All right.

And I will apologize. I did not send the claims out. I did not have them already. I didn't know we were doing those tonight. I thought we were doing them next week.

You didn't get the email?

You know, but I didn't get the email.

She was in a lot of meetings, but, you know.

Absolutely. Can't do much with the help you got, Joe.

Yeah, the only big question was on the taxes, or if you want to call them the assessment.

Ditch assessment.

Ditch assessment. There we go.

Bye.

Yeah, while you've got the bill up, this is on the police cars. Three of them are cars that we agreed to purchase. They're getting ready to go pick them up. The one on there is an insurance claim from, what is it, Deputy Chief Caesar. It's an accident.

That has nothing to do with us. That's it.

Caesar's first name. It would have been his car, and that was an insurance deal. So that's something that we're not paying.

That's those taxes we were just talking about, which I don't understand that at all.

I think we could probably table that one, let you do your thing, and then bring them back up because we're going to have claims on next week's meeting.

Yeah.

So we could actually bring that back next week.

Yeah, that should be fine, assuming that I have gotten through the research on it and everything in time. But you could just approve all of the claims except for that one if you wanted to.

Look at that.

So, Joe, can we, on the tax one, are you disputing all of them? No.

What we're going to do is have Alicia looking to it to see how the law breaks down, whether it's because we don't actually own the grounds that this is on, but we do have a TIF over that grounds. Correct.

So there are two questions that we're looking into. The first one is whether or not we are required to pay a ditch assessment because we are exempt from property taxes. I believe the answer to that is yes, but I will verify that. The second question is whether or not we are required to pay a ditch assessment over ground that we don't actually own. Because right now, it appears that they are charging us a ditch assessment for our TIF allocation area. And most of the ground within that area, the Redevelopment Commission doesn't actually own. We just have the TIF over it. And so we're looking into whether or not that is appropriate or if it's only on the ground that we actually are the owners of.

Okay, so suggestion. Based on what the mayor said earlier, that you don't have to own it, it just has to be in the TIF district. Can we go ahead and just sign that tonight? I can change the appropriation number if she were to come back and say that we don't need to. And then that way, if it does need to be paid, I already have the signatures or because it may not be next week before she comes back.

I will try very hard.

But it's a holiday weekend.

I mean, there are no holidays. It's not next week. This is holiday weekend. Right.

But next, it's a holiday weekend and next Thursday is the meeting. So I'm just saying, can it be signed? And then we just change the appropriation number if she says it's not ours.

What do you think, Councilor?

I don't have a problem with you approving it contingent upon the lawyer's research coming back and saying that you have to pay it. And then we'd have it signed and ready to go. But I would make that, I would put that in the motion that it's contingent upon attorney approval. Okay. You could do that if you wanted.

I'll make a motion to accept claims if the counselor finds out that we're legally obligated to pay this. Otherwise, it's not the money amount. It's just the principle.

It's the principle of it. Yeah, exactly. Don't want to set a precedent if we don't have to. Right. I'll second Eric's motion.

Okay. We have a motion to second. the motion the way it was written and you got it Wanda okay all in favor signify by saying aye aye opposed claims passed okay um old business um we've got uh the prairie creek estimates on it I did get a second estimate um My apologies to the board for letting the other estimate last meeting come through. That one has been put on indefinite hold right now. That was a project that we were looking at on a city sidewalk that is going, like I said, it's going to be put on hold. So if you have a chance to look at these other two, this is the one. And I know that the one is from Camp Post, but they're bringing in a, my understanding, like a camel truck or something, a back truck and suck all the gravel back up out of there. is what their plans are and that's included in that estimate on them. So everybody get a chance to look at it.

If we do approve that, Joe, what's their time frame? Can they get that done before anything starts over?

I'm going to call her tonight if it's approved. Because we've got now, that'll be three projects, one, two, three in that area that she's going to be doing or they're going to be doing.

I'm of the opinion. It seems this estimate's a whole lot less than we thought. Obviously, it does need to be done. I think we should do it. Okay.

I guess, and you may have said this at the previous meeting, was that done as a cost savings method in the beginning?

It was. Well, the project itself was, and I'm not going to say misrepresented, but it is. That gravel was supposed to be as hard as the top of this counter. It wasn't the first time. They come back and redid it a second time, and you see what it's doing now. It's still breaking down. So that was the reason by it. Again, the Board of Works, I'm dealing with them. They would like to see that part of it more for ADA compliance rather than just somebody in... Yeah, that's what I went up and took a look, and you definitely can't put a wheelchair in that.

Right. So is it specified in the contract how the surface is supposed to be? I mean, hard enough for wheelchair. I mean, you can look back about the gravel part of the gravel part. I mean, that's where you're having problems with breaking down twice. But in the scope of work, are we specifying? what the surface should be. Did they give you a sample or anything? They just kind of waved their hands and said, that's the way it's going to be. And we said, okay.

Well, that was back at the original, but... But we've done it twice now. Yeah, same company come in and did it twice.

I'm just saying, are we being specific towards them? Or are we just saying, yeah, we trust you?

I... This one... I don't know.

When did we do it the second time, Joe?

When was it done the second time? It was really right before the thing was opened again.

Really?

Yeah. It wasn't done right the first time. Now, back where the beer garden is, that's a little different. It took back there, but there in the front, it didn't.

At this point, there's no recourse against the person who did that. Right.

Nope. I agree.

I'm at the opinion that, in fact, I'll make a motion that we approve this claim for compost for the concrete for Perry Creek Park.

At $37,000. $37,000. I'll second. Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the estimate from Campos Construction. I got a question before you go to vote.

That's fine. We're going to go ahead and bring it to a vote here. But are we specifically telling Campos what surface is going to be there?

Yes, it's concrete. It's all on the thing.

All on this? It should be, yes, isn't it? 4,500 psi exterior mixing fiber. I don't mean anything. 4,500 PSI. Oh, that's the type of concrete. But what are we talking about is surface. What's breaking down is the surface, and that's causing it to fall apart. I'm saying, do we sit back and say it's going to be finished, you know, does it say broom finished? Yes, it does. Yes. This says broom finished?

Yep.

Yep, I see that.

I'm just saying, you know.

But you got a crushed limestone up there right now. compared to a concrete 4,500 PSI. That's two different products.

I understand what you're saying, Jeremy. I'm just saying, 35 years of experience with this, you need to be specific. If not, you're going to get what they want you to get, but they're going to tell you that's what you asked for. We need to tell them.

Well, I don't know. I haven't had any problem out of them yet. No, I know that, but it only takes the once.

It's not going to be any difference when they do a sidewalk, correct? I don't know. I mean, it's going to be the same criteria as far as when they put a sidewalk down for us.

Yep.

And they've done good work.

Well, I'm not saying they don't work. I'm just saying. I think the company would stand by if there's a problem. Well, they've already done it.

This will be their... No, the compost didn't do this. The compost didn't do it the first time? They had nothing to do with this.

Yeah, this was a company hired by the general contractor back under the manufacturing of the thing. So...

Well, I'm just saying after voice of experience here, when I gave estimates, I was specific in what we were doing, not saying we're going to put, you know, some people say we're going to put cement down. No, you're not. You're going to put concrete in there. But how many times do people always call it cement? I'm just saying just because they know what they're saying, does that mean that we know or do they know what we want?

We're talking two different things here, bud. The original company that put that in both times, I wouldn't recommend that project for anybody again. To go back and fix that problem, we need to put the concrete in where a wheelchair could be rolled across it over to the seats and watch concerts from there. So that is the purpose behind this, is that.

I understand. I mean, obviously, I have no say in this, what you do with it. It's your vote. I'm just voicing my opinion.

I understand. I appreciate that. Okay, we have a motion and a second on the floor. Call for a vote, everybody. Motion to approve. Aye. Aye. Opposed? Aye. I haven't.

Thank you. But in the future, what should we be looking for in an estimate on concrete that specifies what we want?

Well, you know, just because you say we're going to build it towards sidewalk standards. I understand, but what are you saying should be in that? Well, you actually know what 4,500 pounds stands for? I have no clue. There's part of the problem right there. Probably 80% or 90% of the population out there doesn't. That's right. So it's just that, you know, ask the questions, you know, what do you mean by that? If nothing else, get a hold of IMI or somebody, whoever your supplier, their supplier is going to be. And is it going to be vendor supplied or are they going to be out there with a wheelbarrow and a hoe and making their own concrete? I've seen that happen before too. I'm just saying you've got to be specific. Say vendor-supplied, 4,500 pounds, concrete, whatever, you know. Just do what you want. Do a scope of work, to be honest with you.

And I probably can get more in-depth on that the next time, but – I mean, I've worked with the company quite a bit, so I know what kind of capabilities they have. And I can appreciate that, you know.

But I'm just saying, as we move forward, it's just my opinion that when we're going to be doing projects, we should be doing a scope of work, telling them exactly what's going to be happening. That way it segregates your estimates better. You can tell, does this guy include that or does this guy? Because they're going to be bidding the same piece of paper.

Sure. Okay. Okay. Under old business again, I thought I seen an email from Kim Stevens today for you guys. Yes. Did you get that all worked out or we needed it? She's probably.

I think so.

Okay. Yeah. Well, at one point I called her because it had the inventory still on that one. And she said this was something about there's two different types of contracts here or something.

I think she's going to take that inventory thing off.

Okay. And everything else is good with you guys then. Yes, go ahead. Yeah, I just seen it. I just wanted to make sure that, you know, we're all good. So anyway, any other old business? Anybody got anything? Let me click my phone up here before. Okay, new business. We've got the resolutions. I'll call the counselor up.

Do you guys have copies of these or do you need copies of these? Okay, awesome. I have the originals here. Okay. I have a bunch, so if we need more, I've got them. But I wasn't sure if they would get printed because I was a little delayed in getting them to you. So... The first one that I'm going to do is I'm going to do the one regarding the police department. The city council determined that it would be willing to transfer the old police station, which was located at 201 West Washington Street, to the Redevelopment Commission so that you all could make decisions on what the best use of that property would be in the future for economic development purposes. They executed a resolution. Similar to this one, this one has a little bit more language regarding the RDC specifically, but they executed a similar resolution transferring the property to you all, and then you all have to do a resolution accepting the property and ownership and control. And then this also provides Joe the ability to sign any documents necessary. If we were to sell the property, he could sign the closing documents and that sort of thing. So that just takes care of that in advance. Any decision to sell the property would have to go before this board, before that could be Completed but that gives him the authority to actually sign any documents that we need to sign So if you are willing to accept that police department Then we would need this approved Well, I think we've talked about this before I think the general consensus was that we do want to do this Yes, so I guess you'd be looking for a motion to accept this resolution.

I I would. I'll make a motion that we accept Resolution 26-02 and pass it as presented. Okay. Do I hear a second?

I'll second.

Okay, I have a motion and a second to accept Resolution 26-02. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? And I need everybody's signature on this. We just need the one copy? Yes. Okay.

Are we funding on hearing from the gentleman with the presentation?

Next Thursday, yes.

Is it appropriate then to maybe just start the conversation as to what our intentions would be as far as an economic... there. I assume we would hear something as far as an ask for it to be given free, somewhere in between there and fair market value. And I understand that's what happens. The question I have, and hopefully the councilor can weigh in here, is it appropriate for us to put a caveat on such a incentive as far as not allowing it to be sold within a certain timeframe without us having first right of refusal. I say that after the Ironman property sold so quick. I mean, yes, it's still an operating outfit, but I'm just concerned about our initiative here to try to enhance the downtown

I think there need to be a lot of safeguards put into any kind of contract. If we would end up basically selling the property for practically nothing, there needs to be a lot of language put in there on what they're going to do within a specific time frame.

And as far as buying the property back, have first option, yeah, I think that's another good idea. You know, you always hope something would sell and they'd keep it going, not unlike nickel plate flats. I just, I feel like maybe back then we didn't have proper safeguards and now we don't.

The gentleman is going to put putting on the presentation next week if we choose to go that way. The questions I put to him was one is you give us a time frame of how long you think it's going to take you to get this building up and back into production. He's going to put his money into it and If he would fall short of that, and I use that back to the counselor again on the original contract with him, if we choose to go that way would be that if he fulfills or doesn't fulfill the obligation, it converts back to us with everything that he, even with no matter what he puts into it. So, and he agreed to that. So, I mean, I'm going to kind of leave it at that till you have the presentation and we can ask all the questions we want next week. But yeah, Yeah, I was looking at the fail safe for us, protecting us, that we just don't do something.

That just wasn't the conversation I wanted to have right in front of him. Right, right.

I think it would be appropriate to get a financial statement from this gentleman. And if he's worried about confidentiality, we can just put in there, just reviewed by counsel. But I think that's a must.

Yeah, I think it's all going to come out next week anyway.

But I think we need to see a financial statement. Or council does. Okay. And somebody make an opinion on that.

See if I can't get that worked out by next week.

Okay.

I have a question before we move on. Talking about school boards here. If this is purchased by this gentleman, does it automatically revert back to the property tax? It can down the road once it's out of our control. Right. When we leave, we actually sell it to him or whoever. It will be assessed a property tax. So then the school will. It goes back on tax roll is what it does.

So it would be beneficial to the schools to have that.

Yeah, I'm just kind of curious, because that may be a question they're going to ask me.

It must be different.

I'm sorry?

It must be different.

Well, exactly. Yeah. Yeah.

So, and I can't answer them, but, you know, at some point, when everything's worked out, it could possibly go back on the tax roll. I'll put it that way.

Yeah, I'm just curious, because that's one question they could ask me, because right now, you know, money is a very hot topic for us. And we want to make sure that we're not asking the right questions.

Counselor, you want this dated for today?

The resolution for the purchase agreement. Yes.

I agree. I think our goal ought to be that this is back on the tax roll. Absolutely. It's not a nonprofit. It's a business. That ought to be our goal, whatever the path to get there, whether it's a, I don't know if we're talking about a lease to own or anything like that, but we should have that goal.

I just want to have a clear direction. Yeah. Go from there.

Well, and I'll go back to my statement. Once he puts his presentation on, at that point, if the board chooses to go that way, then the details is going to fall back to the counselor and let her try to help work out the details and get everything squared away for us. So, and I know that she's got our best interest at heart, so.

Wait a minute, she's kind of, are you sure?

What, that I have your best interest at heart? I mean, I have an ethical obligation to, so if that's not enough.

So you're saying you're ethical, is that what you're saying?

I'm saying I try to be. We all try to be, don't we?

Let's go on to the next resolution.

Just one quick question for her that's probably relevant for the presentation is, If we were able to purchase that, or take possession of that building, because we know it'll serve the tax allocation area, are we actually able to. Do anything with it, you know, to actually deed it to someone else. It's not in a district.

Yes, we can because it would serve the economic development allocation area. So because it fits in, there's an exception that gives us a little bit of leeway, even if it's not in our TIF allocation area. If it serves the economic development allocation area and would benefit it, then we can take action even if it's not in our TIF district. Yes. But you might want to TIF it just so that you get the revenue. But, yeah, we should be fine if we wanted to sell it or, you know, whatever you all decide to do with it, we should be able to do that, no problem.

Okay. Any other questions? Okay, ma'am.

All righty. The next resolution is a resolution establishing an interest in purchasing real property. This is a resolution that we're required to do before we enter into any purchase agreement. It just lets the public know that we're interested in buying a piece of real property and that we promise that we'll get the appraisals that are required by Indiana law. We actually already got the appraisals on this property and we're ready to go on it, but this is just a formality that we're required to do per Indiana Code to make sure that we meet all of our legal obligations. So I would be seeking approval of that resolution so that we can move forward if you want to with the purchase agreement that I have next.

This would be Resolution 26-03? Yes. Okay. I will make a motion that we approve Resolution 26-03.

I'll second it.

We have a motion and a second to approve Resolution 2603, which is a resolution establishing an interest in the purchasing of real property. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed?

Okay.

Now that is Mac Machine and the church, is that correct?

Yes.

Correct. Pass that back down to you, Mr.

Okay. Now, any other new business?

Yes, I got the purchase agreement. Okay. So for that property that we just indicated we had an interest in purchasing, I have a purchase agreement that I am proposing to you tonight for 408 East Washington Street, which is the Mac Machine Building and the church. We have... Purchase price of two hundred and ten thousand dollars the title We would have to go through a title company after we get this purchase agreement approved for the taxes and assessments there was some back and forth between the seller regarding the taxes and they requested that we the seller would pay the 2026, the taxes due and payable in 2026, which are the 25 taxes, and then the RDC would take over the taxes after that point. That was a compromise that was recommended because originally they wanted us to pay all of those taxes. The closing date would be 90 days after the execution of this agreement. That was also a compromise that was made. The seller originally wanted to continue to have possession 60 days after closing. I did not like that because if the building got damaged or destroyed or something like that, we would be the owners and he would be able to continue to utilize it. You never know what happens when people are using property that they don't own. So what my recommendation was is that we give him a little bit of extra time before closing. He has some property that he needs to move out of that building and um this would give him the time to do that so that would set up the closing date a little bit further out so he would have time to do that um the other part uh that was important the closing costs would be split um 50 uh by you all and 50 by him um he would be responsible for uh negotiation of the agreement on his end. So if he had any attorney's fees or anything associated on his end of this agreement, he would pay those. You all would pay for my services with regard to that. He would pay any costs associated with releasing a mortgage or a lien on the real estate. He would pay for the owner's policy of title insurance and the premium. And then, like I said, 50% of the closing costs, you all would pay for the cost of the preparation of the deed. any costs associated to due diligence. So if you wanted to do any due diligence, you would pay for those. The cost of negotiating the agreement, the cost of a title search and exam, and then 50% of those closing costs. The other important part about this is that he had a concern that if the deal fell through, he had to move a bunch of his equipment and he's going to have to get storage for that. He was concerned that because we had extended the closing date, if that all fell through, then he was going to be out expenses and the property wouldn't have sold. So what I thought thought was a good compromise is that if the closing would fail to occur due to the sole fault of you all, you guys decide to back out, you would agree to pay up to $5,000 of his actual costs paid for the storage and the moving. He had wanted to increase the price by $5,000. I thought this was a better option because then we're not necessarily on the hook for it. We're only on the hook for it if we would back out for some reason. And that's pretty much the highlights of the agreement.

I say we've waived the inspection, which I have no problem with. But I assume you've looked at the inside of the building, Joe? I've been in it. And I think a walkthrough needs to be done after he gets his stuff out to make sure everything that should be intact is still intact. Okay.

Yeah. I do have a question then.

Mm-hmm.

We're saying that this address is 408 what?

408 East Washington Street, and then it's got the parcel number, too.

But that includes the church.

Let me double check real quick on Beacon, but I'm pretty sure, yes.

You know, what this means, I mean, the front doors of the church are on Clay Street.

Hold on one second.

I'm guessing when that was built, there wasn't a lot of work done that should have been. Exactly.

Let me double check. I think that the parcel number includes both parcels or includes both buildings. But let me verify that real quick and I will tell you.

Should we have some clarifications about the church building also in this document?

Well, if the parcel number includes the church building, then I think that that's sufficient because we've got the address just as an identification thing, but the parcel number is what we're going to be going off of in order to actually... Is it still our intention to allow the church at a monthly rate to occupy that building?

As of right now, yes. Yeah, as of now. That's going to be a question I'm going to ask her here in a few, so...

Yeah, that parcel includes all of the entire triangle.

Okay, okay.

Yep.

So we're going to have to make sure that our renter has the proper insurances.

That is going to be my question was, did you ever get a...

I did not, but my recommendation would be that we do a new lease with them anyway.

And that's fine. Mm-hmm. Because I was going to ask if he has the contract with them now, how that was written in reference to are they supplying their own insurance or does he have it? Right.

Well, my understanding from conversations is I believe that that's a month-to-month contract.

It is on a month-to-month lease.

So what my recommendation would be is regardless of what he has, we would be under his contract for one month. We'd give them notice that we'd need to redo that contract, and then we would do the contract under our own terms. And once we decide what those are, I think that that's a better option for us because then we can ensure that we have insurance that we approve of. We can ensure that if we want them to pay utilities, we can put all of that in there.

Well, and just from the board's information, I have. Uh, the court treasurer's office is currently looking at getting it as an appraised value, or not so much appraised value, but the cost of what insurance is going to cost us because I know when we had the main hotel, we paid insurance paid insurance. On that structures, so. The old police station right now is currently under the city anyway, but this property will not be. So, again, I've got, I think Carol had Wanda doing it, but we're in the process of going with the city insurance to find out what it's going to cost us for insurance on both structures over there. Yeah.

I also will tell you that I did send a copy of this to the seller and they did agree with this. So if you are in favor of this tonight, they have already reviewed it and they are in favor of it. And so I think we can get it signed fairly quickly on that end.

Um, and I, that's up to the board here. 1 thing I was going to ask, and I need to step back just to hear the old police station is how long is that going to take on transferring? Or do we have to transfer the deed?

For the police station?

Yes.

No. The police station, what we did in the past is if the city had ownership of it, it's still in the city's name, even if the redevelopment commission owns it. So I double checked with the main hotel and what we did with that one. And that stayed in the city's name the whole time. What happened was the council gave the redevelopment commission the authority to make decisions on it. And in that resolution that the council approved, they did give the redevelopment commission the authority to make decisions on it, sign all the documents, all of that good stuff. So because that's in the resolution, we don't have to do a new deed to deed it to you all necessarily because you all are part of the city of Frankfurt anyway. So that's how that works out. So the paper trail basically is the resolution says that they're transferring it to you. They give you the authority to make all the decisions about it. And then you all accepted it and said, yes, we'll make those decisions.

i just wanted to make sure that even though we've accepted it and everything that we would be within our guidelines with the presentation next week to be able to go that way. Yes.

So what we'll need to do is if we do decide to sell the property and we go through a title company in order to do that, we will just have to provide a copy of the resolution that we have from the Redevelopment Commission and the resolution that we have from the city because both of those resolutions would then show the title company that you all have the authority to make that decision.

Okay. Now, back to Orway, East Washington. What's the pleasure on the purchase agreement?

Well, I'm in favor of doing this.

I'm in favor too. I just, do we have a timeline on a plan how to market that?

There's been a couple of things discussed. I mean, I would say once we approve this purchase agreement, I'll start working on it immediately with the city and everybody else, you know? So we're bringing in a realtor to do it for us, you know?

And do keep in mind that because of the moving in the storage and all of that, we won't close on it for 90 days. So we're going to have three months after we sign the purchase agreement before closing occurs. So you'll have a little bit of time there too. Yeah.

I'll make a motion to purchase agreement for 480s Washington Street.

Okay, do I hear a second?

I'll second.

I have a motion and a second to proceed with the purchase agreement. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? What do we need to sign to get her going?

So on the purchase agreement, don't date that. We'll have him date it. Okay. And then we will need to have the Redevelopment Commission, Joe will sign it because the resolution that we did said that you get to sign everything, Joe. So you'll just get to sign that and then get that to me and I'll get it to Patrick to get him to sign it.

Okay, guide me through whatever we got to do.

Absolutely. And then one other thing real quick, I did while I was sitting here, look at the research for the ditch assessment. From everything I am seeing, it is the owner of the property that would pay the ditch assessment. I will verify with the DLGF. because they're the ones that kind of run the TIF, that that is the case and that there's nothing special for a TIF allocation area that would require us to pay it. But I believe based on state statute that it's the owner of the property who is supposed to pay that ditch assessment.

I appreciate that. Yeah, I mean, this started off this morning with questions on it.

We've been doing this for like 12, 14 years. We've never paid for it. We have paid.

We have paid. And that was my question today. Wanda can verify that. I said, it's the first time I've ever seen it. And Greedy is the one that brought it to my attention, wanting to know what it was. So I researched it today and talking with Carol, it's been paid well. I don't know how long. I mean, I'm just saying. I told her in our meeting that it was the first time that when Reedy contacted me, that sent up the red flag. So I'm immediately questioning what is it, where, and what.

Reedy of the opinion we shouldn't be paying that?

He didn't say that. He just wanted to know because he was thinking that it possibly was on properties. If it was on properties, we are tax exempt. but the ditch assessments falls under a different.

The property owner would have been assessed for that. The property owner would have been assessed for that also.

Should have been.

So they're double different.

Maybe he'll give that money back. What do you think?

Okay, I'm not saying nothing on that one.

I will say that I want to verify with the GLGS because maybe there is a special rule that isn't in the state statute section pertaining to ditch assessments that applies to a TIF allocation area. So I'll double check that. But from what I see preliminarily, I don't believe that we should be paying.

And if that's the fact, then I go back to our treasurer's office and ask, wanted to look into it more. You know, I'm sure I know we own the parking lots, stuff like that. So, but, and we own Prairie Creek Parks, but I'm not guessing that we don't know some of the stuff we're getting charged with probably doesn't belong to us.

And I did confirm that it is separate from a property tax. So you are not exempt. So the land you do own, you will have to pay the ditch assessment on. I also looked that up and confirmed that.

Okay. So any other questions? If not, call the meeting adjourned. Thanks, everybody. And I'll see you next Thursday.

Not tomorrow, but a week.