Commission - Regular Meeting

and everybody quiet down. Eric was telling me about this at the last quiets down and then you kind of are like, "Okay, okay. I'm going to call to order this joint study session of uh Monday, April 13th with the Trevor City Commission and the DDA. All please rise for the pledge of allegiance. To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

We begin as always by acknowledging the land on which we gather as the territory of the Ottawa and Chipua peoples who have stewarded this land throughout the generations. Thank you for strength and resilience in protecting this land and inspiring us to uphold our responsibilities to do the same. With that, um, we usually do our roll call, but as you can see, it's a packed house up here. So, I know staff is taking that from the side on for both boards. And with that, I will then turn it over to Ben to get our discussion of TIFF um, and the proposed plan right now kicked off.

Yes, good evening. Uh, thank you everyone for being here. It's nice to meet with the DDA board. Uh, we don't get a chance to do this very often. Uh tonight's presentation of course uh focuses on the impacts and outcomes related to TIFF 97 as the plan approaches its scheduled expiration coming up just the end of next year in 2027. Uh the purpose of this joint study session between the city commission and the DDA board uh is to think together about the future of TIFF 97. The DDA board of course uh is appointed by the city commission has been working uh currently is still working to develop a proposed plan to present to the voters and now is the time to hear from the city commission as the elected leaders of the city to provide guidance to the DDA board following the presentation. We are looking for interaction and consensus among the city commission and DDA board. This discussion is of course incredibly important because ultimately the city is the urban core for this region with substantial infrastructure pressure as a result of that role serving as the urban core and tiff is the only regional cost sharing tool available to the city. Our downtown, which is at the center of the urban core, provides increased value to the surrounding areas and generates notable and extraordinary tax per acre, which help fund ser city services. Plainly stated, our downtown generates more funding for public services through taxes per acre than any other part of the city, offsetting what could necessitate a higher tax rate if we didn't have such a productive tax revenue generating downtown. So bringing it back home, the city commission needs to provide guidance to the DDA board to help ensure the ultimately proposed plan is poised to align with the feedback of the elected commission that they receive from the electorate they represent. And so today's discussion uh is outlined here. The goal is to begin identifying a preferred tiff

approach for potential voter consideration while ensuring alignment, as I said, between the city commission and the DDA board. I'll walk through some follow-up information from the February study session, review investments within the district, and look at projected revenues, expenditures, and funding structures. We'll also share progress from the DDA ad hoc committee and seek direction on priorities and strategic alignment. And ultimately, this is about understanding what level of investment is appropriate and how that investment is funded. Before discussing impacts, it's important to clarify how tax increment financing works in Traverse City. TIFF captures growth and taxable value within a defined district and reinvests it locally. It's not a new tax and it applies only within the district. A key change since the original plan is the 2024 charter amendment. Moving forward, all TIF plans or amendments must be approved by a vote of the people. Additionally, I want to share that the DDA is a component unit of the city. And for those that aren't sure aren't aware of this, its budget and individual infrastructure projects are approved by the city commission and its funding comes the DDA's operational funding comes from a millillage approved by property owners within the district and paid solely by the property owners within that district. We'll provide some downtown context here. This slide provides context context for the role of the TIFF 97 district. And as I've shared before, while the district represents approximately 2.6% of the city's land area, it accounts for about 13% of the total taxable value. It's also an area with a high concentration of infrastructure, public spaces, and activity supporting residents, businesses, and visitors. And it receives a lot of pressure on infrastructure due to daily use and visitation. Currently, TIFF97 captures approximately $4.5 million annually,

including about 2.6 million in city originated revenue and 1.9 million from other taxing jurisdictions. And these funds influence both downtown investments and broader general fund capacity. Now, to talk about TIFF 97 revenue, historical and projected. Uh this slide looks at the full life cycle of the current TIFF plan and addresses inquiries from the February 9th city commission meeting. Uh over 30 years, the total captured revenue is projected to be 50.9 million at the end of next year compared to the original estimated 32.8 million. Uh the projections, the original projections were based on historically observed taxable value growth and conservative assumptions. Uh while the methodology is designed to be conservative in nature, it's unpredictable when a large building such as the fifth third goes on the market and is uncapped. A portion of the revenue supported debt service of 17 million for the Hardy parking structure and approximately 3.5 million has been contributed to the general fund through administrative and service fees from TIFF 97. Uh the 3.5 million also supports rather service city services citywide. I now want to talk a little bit about what TIFF 97 has accomplished. That was a question that was asked and this highlights a range of projects supported by TIFF 97. It includes infrastructure improvements such as streets, bridges, and utilities as well as strategic investments like parking, riverwalks, and public spaces. TIFF has also supported ongoing operations such as planning, excuse me, uh planning, beautifification, public safety, and maintenance. The list on this slide is not comprehensive, but it illustrates that TIFF has functioned as both a capital investment tool and an operational support mechanism for the district. Of note, the TIF 97 plan has been amended by the city commission in the past to fund infrastructure

projects. It had the flexibility to do so, but I want to remind everyone that any future TIFF amendments or TIFF plans again require voter voter approval. to talk just a little bit about the service agreement that I mentioned and operational costs. This slide emphasizes that TIFF is not only used for capital projects. Currently, there is an annual service agreement of approximately $630,000 and it supports services uh city services such as treasury, engineering, HR, and parks. And as previously mentioned, TIFF 97 will have contributed approximately 3.5 million to the general fund at the end of the plan. Additional services such as trash, beautifification, and public realm maintenance are also supported, but not included in these totals. And these are ongoing costs that will continue regardless of the funding mechanism. And I want to highlight that fact. So maintaining downtown, these are city responsibilities. Uh, this slide outlines long-term maintenance needs over the next 30 years. These costs estimated at over $41 million include streets, sidewalks, utilities, snow removal, snow removal, and replacement. It's important to note that these estimates do not include inflation or staff time, and they do not represent all future potential needs. The key takeaway from here is that maintenance is a long-term ongoing financial obligation in the district independent of new investments. Talk a little bit about maintaining downtown what's currently funded by the DDA. This slide shows services currently funded by the DDA totaling about $42 million over the next 30 years. These include the service agreement, downtown policing, farmers market operations, public restrooms, beautifification, and placemaking amenities. And if TIFF were to expire, these responsibilities would have to of course be uh evaluated and potentially absorbed somewhere else. I'll talk a little bit about CIP or

capital improvement plan projects in the district. This slide highlights the capital improvement projects within the TIFF 97 district and these total approximately $34 million. Uh some of these projects are already planned and may move forward regardless of tiff while others are dependent on available funding. It's also important to note that honoring the city's commitment to complete streets will increase overall investment needs and those considerations are reflected in the estimates shown here. And this list doesn't include general maintenance but only represents a portion of total needs. It also illustrates where TIF could be one of several funding tools. Talk a little bit about the uh proposed moving downtown forward plan major projects, but Harry's going to talk more about those in a little bit. This slide uh projects identified projects identified through the moving downtown forward process totaling about 120 million and they include again major capital investments such as streetscapes, public spaces, mobility improvements and infrastructure and again Mr. Burke Holder will review these projects in detail later in the presentation. Uh this slide uh represents the TIFF uh scenarios that were overviewed, four of them that were overviewed at the city commission's February 9th study session. And uh these will any of them except for option one, which uh would be allowing TIFF 97 to expire. The other three scenarios all require voter approval. Each scenario reflects a different approach to balancing funding for core services, investment capacity, and return of revenue to taxing jurisdictions. I'll again walk briefly through each scenario to understand the trade-offs. TIFF 97 expiring, TIFF 97 resets, TIFF 97 extends, TIFF 97 extends, but with an amendment to reduce the amount of the

capture, and scenarios two through four are calculated as if TIFF resets or extends in some way before expiration. So, we'll walk through scenario one, and this is TIFF 97 expiring. In this scenario, TIFF 97 would expire and no increment is captured. The city's general fund would receive additional revenue, approximately 1.42 million annually, but the DDA or TIFF would no longer capture approximately 1.9 million from other taxing jurisdictions for these projects and other items that I mentioned. The city would become fully responsible for funding all services, maintenance, and capital investments in the dis within the district. there would be no cost share with other taxing jurisdictions. This trade-off does increase uh general fund flexibility uh but there is a loss of dedicated funding mechanism and increased financial responsibility and required would require some additional employee resources. The next scenario, scenario two is if TIFF 97 resets. In this scenario, TIFF 97 would reset in 2028 and capture only new growth. There is a near-term reduction with this scenario in funding capacity with capture rebuilding over time over the 30 years. The projected capture is approximately 64.5 million. And in a slide in a few slides, it'll put all these side by side for you. Uh the trade-off is a delayed ability to fund projects in exchange for returning existing value growth to taxing jurisdictions. Scenario three is if TIFF 97 extends and it would continue as currently structured. This results in the highest projected capture approximately $213 million over 30 years and it provides the maximum investment capacity but also represents the lowest return of incremental growth to taxing jurisdictions. And as with scenarios 2 through 4, uh this would require

coordination and voter approval. And the last scenario, scenario four, is to extend TIFF 97 but with a reduced capture. So not a 100% capture and this introduces a hybrid approach. Uh the plan could be extended while reducing capture either through a percentage split adjusted uh uh for the base year. For example, a 5050 model would return a portion of revenue to the general fund in other jurisdictions while still allowing for investment capacity. Uh this approach uh provides flexibility but requires clear alignment on structure and priorities because it would significantly and substantially reduce revenue to the city from other jurisdictions. And this sort of puts the the different uh uh split scenarios 50/50 or 8020 side by side. Uh this slide compares the outcomes for scenario four where the caption is reduced in terms of how much revenue is captured versus returned in a 50/50 split and as I said an 8020 and it's intended to frame the financial implications not suggest a preferred option. Each scenario of course represents a different balance between investment capacity and revenue distribution. And as I keep saying any tiff plan or amendment must be approved by voters under the 2024 charter amendment. And that applies to all scenarios except expiration which is option one. And this fact reinforces the importance of aligning on a clear supportable approach before advancing uh to a ballot or the election. So uh now the tiff ad hoc committee. I'm going to turn it over to uh DDA executive director Harry Burkholder who's going to go through the work of the tiff uh ad hoc committee and provide context to the proposed project list. So Harry,

good evening everyone and I want to echo Benjamin's thoughts and thank you for the opportunity to talk about TIFF. Uh the DDA and its ad hoc committee has been working very hard for the last several months on the list of proposed projects that you have in your packet beginning on page six and then a more in-depth discussion or description of each project beginning on an eight. Um just to talk a little bit about how we got this list of projects. As Ben Benjamin mentioned, in 2022, the DDA um did the moving downtown forward planning process uh which involved over 1300 community inputs from a variety of stakeholders throughout the community, both residents and downtown stakeholders through individual interviews, roundt discussions, openhouse meetings. We actually had a joint meeting of the DDA board and the city commission then to really articulate a vision for downtown and some of those infrastructure priorities. We also then in 2024, as you know, uh approved the first iteration of the moving downtown forward tiff plan. Uh and that occurred over several months and had a lot of public discussions at our meetings about which projects should be in our plan. As you recall, one of the biggest ones was should we have the parking deck, the third parking deck in the plan or not. And so we had a lot of debate on all those projects. And then more recently, as the ad hoc committee and the DDA board have picked up discussions, really looking at this list of projects, trying to evaluate the value of each project as it pertains to natural resources, economic impact, the social impact, and then also looking at the alignment with the strategic action plan that was recently approved by the city commission. And if you notice in the far right column, we work to identify which one of those strategic pill uh pillars, excuse me, aligns with each one of those projects. The other thing I want to add about the list again on page six is that all these public infrastructure projects represent estimates uh with the help of city staff, previous studies and then other

previous experiences or projects related to some of these items. Uh some of the projects um have gone through both the conceptual and schematic design process. So we have a little bit more calibrated estimates on some projects. Uh and then some projects like the farmers market pavilion and Rotary Square, which we're working on right now, could be removed from this plan if we move forward with those those projects um uh in the next couple months. The final thing I want to say about each one of these projects is that the final implementation would first come to the city commission for approval. As Benjamin mentioned, our budget gets approved by the city commission. Then any project really that involves a shovel in the ground ultimately gets approved by the city commission. So, what I'd like to do is go through each one of these projects and I think uh this could be an opportunity to ask questions as we go through them. Um the Garland Street green infrastructure um

really quick I'm going to um moderate for a moment because this has been asked of all staff. We can definitely ask questions as we go. Let's try to keep them high level. I think we could get into the weeds and spend the next two hours just on detailed questions about the project list. So, please do take Harry's invitation up if you have questions, but let's keep them as high level as we can to make sure we keep get through all the discussion points we want to before like 11 o'clock tonight. So, with that, Harry, please continue.

Yes. So, we've talked a lot about Garland Street as a DDA and a and an ad hoc committee and really just the lack of landscaping tree canopy we have on that street. Uh there's really none. Um and I know that we've talked to some of the uh developers that are working along that road about incorporating vegetation into their overall site plans. And then we have the corridor that's going between the two hotels that will add some green infrastructure. But there is a desire to see at least some tree canopy and some green infrastructure on Garland Street. I mentioned the farmers market pavilion that will actually be coming to you for approval in the next couple weeks. Uh and then Rotary Square, which we have completed the conceptual design and schematic design and have pretty accurate estimations in terms of those costs. Again, if these projects move forward under our current iteration, these could be removed from the tiff plan. I want to point out that the farmers market pavilion also talks about the grounds itself. Many of you have been to the birdhouse and seen the kind of the condition of that building. So yes, we're talking about the pavilion, but we have the opportunity to make other improvements on that site. I do want to take a moment just to talk about the Borman Ottawa River Restoration and Infrastructure, which is a big project. Um, I want to point out that this project was developed over many years. Some of you, Mitch, I think you went to every one of those meetings uh through the unified plan of the Lord Borman, which was over four or three-year process through the pandemic that included again a lot of civic engagement with residents, downtown stakeholders, was led by a leadership team that included neighborhood residents, uh members from the tribe, property owners, and representatives from the watershed center. They met 32 times over those three years to develop this plan. um that included again online survey, workshops, open houses, meetings, pop-up meetings. Um the all the vision and goals articulated in that process are what you see in terms of those specific descriptions. Uh I also want to point

out that the conceptual design for the 10200 block was another thorough civic engagement process that really gave great specificity to the 100200 block in terms of those improvements. And then we are just wrapping up the schematic design for what I'm calling phase one and reach five which is essentially a on that list. Uh so number or letter A is the first phase which includes uh the JSmith walkway uh alley embankment improvements uh incorporation of some storm water infrastructure and then a new pedestrian bridge. Uh, reach B is the section between Park Street and Merchie Bridge and that called for improved access and habitat at the mouth of the river. Uh, but also talked about improvements to the repairarian landscape and then potentially an enhancement at the Wellington Street Plaza and that boardwalk. Uh C is also reach five, that's the 100 block, and I think that's timely. If you were uh along that alley today, you probably saw the pay station actually falling into the ground. Um we've had a history of subsidance on that block and so we've talked about the process of potentially pulling back that sheep piling um having more pedestrian access to the river. Obviously that comes with a lot of infrastructure implications especially when we talk about storm water and those soils that are behind um that that sheep piling. Um but a potential a huge investment and opportunity within that block. Uh the remaining components of what we're calling a reach five is the 200 block. Um, we talked about a new pedestrian bridge and potential boardwalk along that section. And then the reaches four and three really kind of go up river and really talk about again repairing habitat restoration, but also making that pedestrian connection between the 1.6 miles that connects the Borman Lake and the bay. And that was really the central theme that we had of that lower

Borman Unifi process is pedestrian accessibility along the entire river corridor and then through the downtown area as it connects to all the neighborhoods that connect to the river and then also the Borman Lake Loop. I mean we've seen the the amount of people who are traveling around the loop on an annual basis pretty substantial. Most of those are residents of Traverse City. We've seen that same opportunity with the boardwalk as we go in through uh the downtown area. Um moving ahead to item number five. Um this is obviously a conversation that we've been having over the last uh two and a half years and that is the future of State Street, Pine Street, and uh Borman Avenue, whether that's going to be two-way traffic. Um the DDA is committed to the process of studying that corridor as it relates to changing into two-way um traffic, but also is committed then funding the implementation of conversion if that's so decided by the city commission. Uh the State Street midblock pedestrian crosswalks could be part of that transition whether it remains uh two-way or it goes back to one way. Um, but we've made a commitment to making sure that we have a pedestrian amenities along that entire section of State Street. East Front Street reconstruction, streetscaping and gateway is actually something that we've been talking about for several years. We actually worked to develop a conceptual design and plan for that section of uh Front Street. It's the last street within downtown to receive any streetscaping. So you won't see any trees or decorative lighting or really the brick ribbon and even room for sidewalk cafes on that section of East Front Street. Uh front street reconstruction and state tree reconstruction I'll just kind of pull together. Um but as we talked about TIFF 97 created in 1997 we're at 30 years started this some of this infrastructure is showing its age as 30 years. So, we're starting to look at ways that we can um repurpose these

streets uh to look at a more complete network that accommodates both bicycles and pedestrians, but also traffic. The Bayfront Trail project is really an extension of some of the work that's already been done over the last couple years. As many of you know, that trail in terms of the widening of the trail ends at the east side of Clinch Park. This would then continue that trail through Clinch Park and then essentially through to Division Street. Um we've had several conversations very informal to start but uh want to continue to have more about burying the utilities on the front street alley. If you've been down that alley not only is the congestion with traffic and deliveries but the overhead utilities are really all over the place. And so we've had some conversations about the potential of burying those utilities and adding green infrastructure along that alley. One conversation that I know that's uh come up probably for more than 30 years is the opportunity for a district-wide snow melt system. Right now we have really a peacemeal approach to snow melt upon a new development or reconstruction from the city. The DDA funds 50% of the snow melt for those projects. What we really have is one block with snow melt and the half a block without snow melt. So this patchwork is not really the best approach. So, the DDA board in terms of looking at approving those kind of incremental approaches have talked about the need for a more comprehensive district-wide approach to heated sidewalks. Um, and so that is included in this plan. That obviously includes a lot of investigation in terms of the options for capturing that heat to make that system work. Um, but we're open to new ideas and innovative ideas um uh to make that happen. And then the the last one on page seven of your document really came out of that strategic action plan that you've been working on and which is the stabilization of the West Bay Lakes Shore.

There any specific questions on null's projects? Amy, go ahead. Not a question really quick area, but just to note because of the ad hoc and the conversations at DDA level and bringing it up here. The state street and the front street and the that you mentioned those are now 30 years old and starting to show their age. My understanding from what you shared with us then was that's actually been brought up by city engineering as something that will need attention over the next 10 to 30 years. So, I I want to underline that these aren't all just dreamt up in the DDA office that these were in conjunction in conversations with the city and city staff on identifying where some of this work will happen andor where the needs will appear. That's exactly right. Yes.

Go ahead. Okay. Uh earlier this or early middle to end of last week, there was a survey that went out that wanted us to rank the prioritization of these projects. We we're going to go through that in a couple slides. You're foreshadowing. I'm just super excited to see what that's kind of the consensus. That's a major drum roll. Yeah, we'll see. Do we have any more specific questions? Go ahead, Jackie. And and will that include um priorities recommended by the DDA board members also? Yes, you'll you'll see city commission results, DDA results on a slide and then side by side on where where there is some alignment. Thank you. Yeah,

the next uh couple things I want to go over begin on page 11. Um, and this was not, I think, fully articulated in our first iteration of the moving downtown forward tiff plan in 2024, but it really speaks to the annual maintenance and services that the DDA does um for downtown. So on page 11, you'll see nine items there. And I won't go through each one of them, but um the annual cleaning green services uh we partner with seeds um to really put boots on the ground and especially in the summertime to make sure that sidewalks are cleaned, trash is removed, um graffiti is removed, um plants are watered, weeding happens, the maintenance of the Jmith walkway, which is actually a city park, uh happens on an annual basis. And this is a relatively new service over the last 5 years prior to that that we didn't have this uh as a program of the DDA. Um but it's one of the things that I think we hear the most is how downtown looks on a day-to-day basis. And so um this represents the investment that we're making um today. Um but these are costs that could uh increase if we wanted to allocate more resources to it. Um and those resources will acrew time costs over time as well. Um the annual service agreement is listed in here. Benjamin mentioned that in his presentation uh which is also a relatively new agreement between the DDA and the city which pays for uh a series of um essentially the expertise of the departments of the city for all the work that happens downtown. The downtown community police officer which is a very successful program is part of that city agreement. And then I want to mo note that the the farmers market um has both kind of the day-to-day administration but then behind the scenes administration. So uh it's one of the largest farmers markets in terms of food assistant programs in the state of Michigan. So the DDA office does all that administration work with the state to make sure that those food

assistant programs uh are maintained. I do want to note that several of these items are shared in terms of overall cost with the Oldtown TIF. uh but some are just born just specifically out of TIFF 97. On page 12 uh again something that the ad hoc committee has really talked about is uh allocating essentially maintenance dollars on an annual basis for some primary features within downtown infrastructure. The first one is kind of annual infrastructure repairs and maintenance. And so we've noticed this as a commission. you know, there's cracked sidewalks, there's broken benches, um small infrastructure projects that might not be headed by the city, but the DDA could tackle. And so, we've been allocating dollars towards those small in um infrastructure fixes for the last two years. We are, as we talked about, uh actively working on the um farmers market pavilion and Rotary Square. If those projects come to fruition, those will have maintenance costs. uh the ad hoc committee has talked about making sure that we have resources to maintain those facilities on an annual basis. Uh the estimates are listed here also on page 12. And then the last uh item that I want to talk about uh on page 13 is a concept that we've been talking about the ad hoc committee about essentially an annual percentage designation to one, two, or all three of these items. Um, we've heard a lot talk about stormwater infrastructure investment and I know the city is about to embark on update of their storm water management plan. So, the DDA and the ad hoc committee have talked about would it make sense to do a let's say for example a 5% allocation of the captured dollars from the DDA would go to the city specifically towards stormwater infrastructure that could be spent that year or it could be saved over multiple years to make investments.

Um the same thing with other city infrastructure investments. We've been doing this the last two years where we essentially set aside a light item. This is for infrastructure that the city's working on that just kind of comes up that's unexpected. Um if you think about the North Union Street Bridge repair that's about to come forward. That was an unexpected project. The city has asked the DDA to contribute to that. And so this would essentially lock in a percentage that would always go to towards those projects. And then the last one is the what we're calling it's kind of a catchall here, but placemaking, mobility, and public space improvements. Could we set aside a certain percentage every year where dollars are spent on mobility, whether that's part of the complete streets program or part of some of these other uh street projects that we've talked about that would be invested every year. And so I can tell you that the ad hoc has not settled on all one of two or all three of these or the percentage, but that's what we want to get some feedback from uh the city commission on tonight. And then the last item I just want to talk about, I know we're going to talk about this in more depth, is again those funding scenarios. So the DDA and the ad hoc committee have really looked at what a 5050 split look like. This is scenario four, what a 8020 split might look like. And I know we're going to talk a little bit about those specifically. And then again looking at how all of these projects and services and the maintenance align with the strategic priorities of the city. um at least when we have looked through this, we don't see a lot of gaps in terms of the things that we're talking about providing or doing as it relates to the prioritization that you see here on the slide. The last thing I just want to talk about is in addition to the funding scenario in terms of a split, we've also talked about the length of the plan with the split be let's say 50/50 but for 20 years. So, we're looking at all of those combinations and would love to hear again some of that feedback for tonight.

Um, one really quick other point from the ad hoc, Harry. Um and and then it was asked at the DDA level. And so I just wanted to make sure it was clear if a project that you know if this were to pass with the project list that's in it and you know the Ottawa restoration or the front east front street reconstruction included storm water as part of it. That would be part of the project cost not taken from that 5% or whatever might be set aside. That would be an additional pot of money that would be available to the city. any project that's on here that has that already could potentially have that as part of it would already be part of that project cost not come from that additional percentage that's correct yeah I wanted to make underline that that was important part of the conversation

and along those lines with that additional percentage Harry mentioned for instance like 5% allocation for storm water I just want to highlight that say that move forward and it was a priority of and it got approved by the voters this plan and it was a priority of the city commission you could uh make a big splash a series of storm water improvements upfront and fund the bond and issue bonds and fund the bond payments through that tiff capture. So, a lot of work could be done upfront if that was a desire by sort of cash flowing it that way uh through very low interest bonds. And I just wanted to mention that just to highlight that for folks. Uh so with the uh drum roll, we'll move. And I mentioned that we'd have different slides. This is all of them together. And I want to thank

Caitlyn, did you put your hand up though for a question? I thought it's okay. Sorry. I just want to make sure I didn't miss anybody before we continue. Sorry.

Yeah, I just want to thank the city commission and DDA board members uh who completed the prioritization survey. Uh this was completed by again DDA board and the commission to help inform how projects could be prioritized in the district. And I want to note something important and that these results uh look a bit different uh than each other because we asked the city commission uh to prioritize each phase of the boardman Ottawaway infrastructure and restoration project individually uh whereas the DDA board was just looking at that in its totality. So that level of detail of course sort of naturally uh shifts how responses are distributed. And I also want to uh acknowledge the importance of the sample size particularly on the city commission side. Uh we have only seven uh respondents because there are seven members of the city commission. Uh and so uh not a high level of alignment among those seven. Averaging can sometimes produce uh results that don't really fully uh reflect the range of perspectives. Uh for example, within the farmers market project uh specifically, four commissioners rated it as a low priority and three rated as high with no medium uh rankings. But when averaged uh that result appears as low uh even though the group itself, the city commission is clearly uh split on that. So it's a good reminder to look beyond the numerical outcome and consider uh uh how responses are distributed. And candidly, uh, as you can see, there isn't a strong alignment across all priorities, and that's okay. Uh, the DDA board, of course, uh, serves as stewards for, uh, the downtown district, and their perspective is naturally focused on that. And the city commission on the other hand is balancing priorities across the entire city. Uh, just like a parks commissioner might advocate for parks uh, and really focus on their each group brings a lens shaped by your role. Uh, and this variation again was expected. uh it is helpful. It highlights where perspectives do align

uh where they differ and where you know maybe some further discussion might be uh warranted uh as we work toward a shared approach. So the city commissioners were asked to evaluate and prioritize projects uh through the lens of the strategic action plan. And so uh you can see the items on there that are uh low. Farmers Market Pavilion and surrounding grounds improvements. Boardman Riverway restoration and infrastructure CDE and F. State Street Pine Street two-way traffic conversion. Also low front street reconstruction streetscaping bayfront trail and district-wide snow melt system. Again, keep in mind the caveats that I mentioned. Medium Garland Street green infrastructure. Boardman River restoration and infrastructure A and B. State Street Midblock crossings uh and East Front Street Reconstruction uh streetscaping and gateway and state street reconstruction. Streetscaping high is Rotary Square uh Front Street Alley and utility improvements and relocation and not surprisingly because it's high in your strategic action plan. West Bay Lakeshore stabilization and Harry do you want to roll quickly through the DDA board results? I would just echo uh I think the DDA board had the same exercise where we had there was not consensus on each one of these and so it's not always a true reflection of how every board member felt about whether it's a low, medium or high. But in terms of the kind of on average the low items were the Garland Street green infrastructure, the state street reconstruction and streetscaping district-wide snow melt system and then the West Bay Lakeshore stabilization. To be fair, we haven't had a lot of discussion about the West Bay Lakes Shore stabilization. That's been more of the city process. In terms of uh medium priorities, the state street mid block, pedestrian crosswalks, east front street reconstruction and streetscaping and also this gateway um front street reconstruction and streetscaping and the bayfront trail. In terms of high uh farmers market pavilion and surrounding grounds improvements, Rotary Square, obviously we're in the midst of those

two projects. uh Boardman way restoration infrastructure and then State Street the two-way conversion and then the Front Street alley and utility improvements and I think you can see Rotary Square and the Front Street Alley both score high with the DDA board and the city commission. So yeah, again just to drive it home the alignment appears to be medium between both boards street midblock pedestrian crosswalks east front street reconstruction streetscaping and gateway high. There is alignment between both boards for Rotary Square and the Front Street uh alley and utility improvements and relocation. We're going to move, we're almost done with the presentation and uh to help guide the discussion, I think that it could be useful to think about investment levels in three general buckets. Uh maintain, partially invest, and fully invest. Uh at the core of this conversation I just want to highlight is that a healthy downtown contributes to a healthy city while also recognizing that investments must be balanced across the entire community. When you think of maintain that level focuses on sustaining what exists today. Uh it prioritizes core services and ongoing maintenance such as existing streets, existing utilities, public safety and basic infrastructure ensuring that the existing assets remain functional and safe. And at this level of course there is limited capacity for new or expanded investments uh and improvements are generally reactive uh or preservation focused. And this approach emphasizes fiscal stability and maintaining current service levels. Partially invest represents what I would characterize as a balanced approach. It includes maintaining core services while uh making targeted strategic investments in priority areas such as key corridors, public spaces or mobility improvements. And this approach reflects a prioritization aligning investments with our strategic action plan while also recognizing some

financial constraints. And then fully invest I would characterize as a more comprehensive investment strategy. Uh in addition to maintaining core investments, it goes beyond that and supports critical uh investments and transformative potentially transformative projects within the district. It could include a full implementation of uh streetscape uh enhancements, mobility improvements, and placemaking investments. This approach of course maximizes impact and investment capacity. It also requires a higher level of funding commitment and long-term financial planning. And so these categories aren't decisions of course uh in and of themselves, but they're intended to be a framework to help guide discussion around priorities, funding approaches, and the level of investment that aligns with community goals and long-term uh sustainability. So, the last slide I have is uh the discussion piece. Uh at this time, uh and I'm going to turn it over to the mayor in just a moment. We're seeking direction specifically what level of investment you see is appropriate, maintain, partially invest, fully invest, the funding approach, uh uh what funding approach aligns with commission priorities, and what approach you see is most viable uh with our voters. And this includes of course uh maintaining core services while advancing strategic investments. And the goal tonight one last time is just to ensure uh a coordinated approach between the city commission and the DDA board uh with consideration of a potential ballot proposal. And I'll turn it over to Mayor Shamro. Thank you for listening to us.

Of course, and thank you for the great presentation. I appreciate from both Harry and Ben. One thing I did want to um say as we're talking about the level investment is thinking back on TIFF 97 the last 30 years. If you look at the original TIFF97 plan first of all it's been amended about seven times I think as well as um you know the promise made was there was going to be a parking deck on the west end. That has not happened. And I say that to all say when we look at the level of investment you might say well I don't want to spend that much on the river and that puts us way over budget if we do it but the river is a priority and so we want to have some investment or I guess what I would say is there's no even if uh we keep the plan and and everybody likes certain aspects of it doesn't mean it's all going to happen if everybody if there's things that people just really don't think deserve to be on the list or don't want to see we want to hear that. there's things you're very excited about. We want to hear about that as well. And that's going to help everything get a picture too of of where this is going to go. I think if we just look at price tags and assume that everything will happen, that's not very realistic based on history. So, I just wanted to set that up as we have this conversation um to kind of guide the conversation a bit and and get us to kind of where everybody's heads are at. And so I I wanted to pull and I'm going to say this um we usually have very free flowing conversations and I do want to hear from everybody but we have a very large representation here and again we don't want to be here till midnight and so I'm going to pose some questions. I want to um allow for some conversation that might move some others. I'm asking everybody though at least to initially start try to keep some brief answers um because we do want to give everybody a chance to speak on these questions and then we'll kind of play the conversation as and I'll be looking for p uh threads to pick back up so that we'll keep we won't be just rushing through everything and skipping over. But I also don't want us to get super in the weeds and miss some bigger questions. I know staff is looking at us for guidance. May I just jump in and say I think the hope is just

to provide some sort of uh pace is for everybody with each of the questions since the mayor is going to call on each city commissioner and each board member 90 second responses trying to keep yourself to that to to keep it high level uh and that will help us move through these questions uh if possible

and I set Benjamin up for that because that is what he asked for but I didn't want to look like the bad guy so so our former clerk who has his stopwatch used to always have his stop clock has now put a 90 second on us. So, um I think the first question I wanted to ask is, you know, where do we see alignment between the city commission and the DDA board both in the list and keeping in mind our strategic plan, especially the city commissioners. So, I'm going to just start with Mitch for this one and work our way down and we'll go around and then I'll randomly change up the order from there. So, Mitch, do you want to start and talk into your mic? Remember, everyone remember to talk into their mic. go back to the the the projects just so it's up on the screen. Yep. Thank you.

The project prioritization or the whole list? The whole list. Okay. I go too far. Colleen, you might be better to do this. Well, I don't know what that means. Uh, can you just roll through? Thank you. While they're doing that, c can while they're doing that, can you reiterate what you just said as far as like what your intention with all of us going across is like what our thoughts on projects that we should

Well, I'm going to be asking specific questions and and getting kind of general thoughts and then from there we'll we'll formulate other questions. There are some that staff has asked for some guidance to help guide it. So, we'll kind of it's not prescribed. There wasn't a list of questions and we're only going to ask those. I wanted to keep it flexible that if you know Mitch makes a point that everybody kind of seems to refer back to, we can dig into it a little bit more with additional questions. I'm using Mitch because he's the first one, not just Mitch. But um but also getting some broader ideas so that both the city staff has an idea of where where everybody's head's at and Harry and the DDA board have an idea of what ultimately the city commission does and doesn't like about the currently proposed plan and where we think this could be going. So Mitch, with that I think we're on the right side now. So go ahead.

Yeah. Well, looking at the prioritization, I found it interesting that there were some things that uh there was an apparent disconnect. And I'm I'd be interested if you put all the results of the DDA board and the city commission in one pool together if uh different things would come out. because for example the DDA board on that chart uh ranked uh the farmers market fill in highly the city commission ranked it low and I don't know if that is uh a common thread um between the two or just uh how some people filled out the results differently.

Good point. Go ahead other well Rotary Square was like the only thing that appeared on both of our What was the other one? What was the other East Front Street? If you go to the next No, it was the alley. Alley, South Front Street Alley. Well, that's where we appear to align. I mean, our our uh Thanks. West Bay Lakes Shore Stabilization got a you know a zero from DDA. So, that got added to the list that meeting.

Yeah. And Yeah. And it's kind of, you know, unclear because the million dollars that is cited in the project list is it says brownfield money and not brownfield brown trust fund money and that's true. It's not DD DA money at all. Well, but there would be it cost beyond that, right? Yeah. Beyond the Brown Bridge funding. I I only see Rotary Square and Front Street. I don't see anything.

So, let me um kind of pull this out a little bit more. I'm this was a prepared question but as we're already doing this and Mitch if you want to add something based on this reframing is um you know the the alignment I I guess what I'd like to see too though is you know where you're I guess I'm going to put we've been doing a lot with conversations and and agreements and convers and things like that as you're looking at the list and you see the unalign or the where we're not aligned. Do you see some where there could be some interpretation where DDA might have thought this is our priority because of this part of the city commission? I guess kind of think openly. Um we're we're going to I'm not I'm not Lucille so I'm not doing this as well as she does but um Mayor, can I add just a little bit? Please go ahead.

So I think when we had this discussion at the DDA board, we were looking at

I think the DDA board is in line with all of these projects, right? What we're trying to figure out is if TIFF is extended, we look at the first five years. What projects would we want to work on first? Those are the high priorities. So, it's not necessarily if it's scored low that we wouldn't want to do it. It just might not be the first five years of the work that we're doing. So, I don't know if that adds context to the discussion, but it's not so much aligning which ones we want to get rid of. I think again, we're in favor of all these projects. Which ones would the DDA and the city want to work on first? And I would put to commissioners if there are any that you really are opposed to, you can share that as well. But yeah, so like the high priority being a time frame more than absolutely wanting it get done as well. So um but Heather, I appreciate that insight too of of there's a couple that overlap. With that in mind, do you see the uh is there anything else you wanted to add of a different perspective? I'm not putting you on the spot for it, but because it was redefined while you were answering, I didn't want to make you wish you could reanswer. the hypothetical extension tiff. Uh I'm I filled this out. I had the farmers market. I had Rotary Square. I had West Bay Lake stabilization

and I had State Street Reconstruction. That's what I put down. Okay. And that you were kind of looking at that the media or those are the only ones off the list that you really supported just to as high priority. Okay. As high priority. Perfect. Thank you, Lance. I think it might be helpful, and I know we started with Mitchell, but if if commissioners are willing to say, as you sort of started to ask, are there projects on this list that you absolutely do not want to see happen or be um they're not at all a priority for you? So, I don't know, Mitchell, if if you're prepared to answer that. Mitch is going with the flow.

Well, kind of from the opposite perspective, um I see in the range of maintain um small and large. Uh things like districtwide snow melt as fitting in the maintain category since they're not a transformational project. is investing in what has been something pe done peace meal so far compared to say the river stabilization or even Rotary Square are taking a big chunk of money in one specific location. Well, that's a good thank you for that clarification on yours. Mitch Lance.

Yeah. So, uh, on our aligned, I mean, just what I'm looking at here, it's about $22.5 million, um, in projects. Um, and so I do see I like that there's some alignment, uh, within the projects. I don't think any of these are things that I would say absolutely no. Um, I think some of them are really uh, uh, really cool projects. Um but at the same time I also see us needing to use money for more maintenance uh as we've already done a lot of projects uh in the past and those still cost money parking garages like I think we're spending a million dollars on one this year alone uh in maintaining it. Um, and so I'm I'm a little bit more conservative in my uh let's just do it all project list. Uh, and more of a like, you know, how can we align on what the projects look like, but also then what the I really like the slides about the um adding percentages.

Uh, so I'm looking forward to that conversation. Uh, because that's kind of where my head's at. Great. this Jackie. Um I have to say that I'm a bit uncomfortable prioritizing under scenario three because that's not necessarily um a direction that I think we have agreed upon. But um my personal priorities out of the project list were um Garland Street, Rotary Square, uh Beayshore, Lakeshore Stabilization, and um Front Street Alley improvements. Great. Thank you,

Ken. the the project that kind of interested me the most and I tell me if I'm wrong but I haven't heard a lot about it is it relatively new the front street alley and utility improvements and relocation is that is it always been on one of the last pages of the plans because it's kind of news to me again this list of projects was kind of developed over the course of last five years that wasn't listed in the original Tiff 97 plan as part of our ongoing conversation about improvements that we can do downtown. Part of that was impetus was looking at green infrastructure in the alley that led to a broader discussion about the utilities and that just the way the alley functions.

I mean, you're you're there's a lot of very creative people that'll come up with something. I I don't know how we'd fit tons of green stuff in there, but when we talked about if you've looked at that alley at all, it's in n like it is bladed. Mhm. It is bladed and that could technically be something that would be very easy to justify DDA funds and expenditure towards. So when I saw it, I instantly thought, "Yeah, let's highly prioritize that." And I think um maybe one of our TCLMP um board members could talk about the potential funding from TCLMP to do all that underground in there. Maybe. I don't know. I don't think we can talk about that on the spot.

Well, I was out. Let me give a a two second as the former TCLP because we came up with this when we were doing the fiber and when we did red we did Station Street actually. Um yes, TCLP fiber or TCLP uses those lines. So does every other utility and because of the uh metriccom act I believe it is you can't tell like consumers you have to bury the line and pay for it. Okay. Um so they there's a lot of um utility rights on polls that we don't control. So, a brief answer that can be going go into more details if the project's completely.

There's there's a lot of interest in like um like business interest and costs in in in regard to that alley. So, it seems like that would be a a pretty good project. And I mean, when we did the the pedestrian bridge right by JS Hamburger, that was a nice project and TCL did a bunch of underground underneath that bridge as well. So, I like piggybacking opportunities together. That one just kind of jumped to mind. Um, that's all I got. No, that's great. I appreciate the comment line anyway. Well, and there's more questions to come. Don't worry, Laura.

So, I think it's important to note that I think the city commission and the DDA responded to this survey from very different lenses. So, as Harry indicated, and I wasn't aware of this, um the DDA was responding to it from a timing perspective, looking at all basically all projects being a high priority. The city commission, the instructions we were given wasn't related to timing. It was related to analyzing this from the lens of whether or not it aligned with the strategic plan. So, I'm not surprised we don't see total alignment here because the question was different. So, I just wanted to point that out. Um, in terms of my analysis, I went back to the public engagement work that the DDA did in July of 2022, um, looking to see what did our residents say and what were they interested in. And then I tried to line that up with our strategic action plan, the pillars, and I actually thought they aligned really well. So there were over,70 responses to that survey. Again, I I think when we ask questions of our residents, we kind of need to go back and listen. Um, and what they said, 89% said they wanted to see storm water and waste management improvements. Well, that that's consistent. That checks that checks with our strategic action plan. So, I ranked anything that said storm water got a high when I filled out this particular survey. 79% said they wanted to see lower boardman improvements. Um, now I don't know the specifics on what those improvements are, but I think that that definitely begs the question for some additional conversation around the lower boardman improvements and what aspects of that um, we might see as high storm water habitat restoration. Paying attention to the river just like is in our strategic plan. Our freshwater

resources I think are really important and being good environmental stewards to those resources. And then the third that ranked really high on that survey was making downtown more pedestrian friendly and accessible that aligns with the complete streets policy that aligns with our mobility action plan. That aligns with our strategic action plan as well. And so I ranked all of those very high. Um really the only one that I didn't rank in the medium to high category was the snow melt system. And that's because I have a lot of questions about it. I have questions about whether or not the technology is ready to support it. How will it work? Like what's the power source? Is it going to be a fossil fuel like natural gas? In that case, I would be opposed to it. Is it um going to be fueled through electricity? How expensive is that going to be? Is it reliable? Um is it are we ready for geothermal? Can we partner with light and power and understanding how will this thing work? Because when you research snow melt systems, they're kind of all across the board. I I see mobility improvements from snow melt for sure. I also see it would reduce our um salt use of salt, which I think is important from an environmental standpoint. It could reduce our operational costs, but gosh, if it doesn't work, is it just going to increase our maintenance costs? And and that's a concern that I have. I'd want to know a whole lot more before I ranked that real high.

Okay, great. I think and just going with kind of tradition of chairs allowing the boards to speak first. We just had a very quick side conversation and we're going to hold off and see if there's anything we add at the end of all of these um to allow it to be more board focused than chair focused. So, we'll skip ahead to Todd for right now. We will come back and give some input, but we want to make sure that the voices of the boards are loud and clear first and foremost and two cents from us for what they're worth. Of course, as a merchant uh downtown of 40 years, my uh actually I'm really tickled. I think we actually in many ways line up more than what you what you see here. But uh I'm more of a downtown guy. I'm more about placemaking. I believe if we bring enough people together, things come to fruition. So, one of my highest priorities was Rotary Square and it was the street state street, excuse me, the state street con uh connectivity. um and rated medium were the two that you see on on the DDA side. So, um I like I said, just listening to you guys, I think it's kind of interesting to see that we're actually lined up. I think maybe you're right, two different questions, two different depths, but I think we're coming to the same results.

Great. Thanks, Dad. Go ahead.

Thank you. Yeah. Similarly, I I feel the alignment on the front street alley and improvements and the Rotary Square really represents the the work that the DVA uh you know has done and can do and that it's good. It's encouraging to see that the city agrees with that. Particularly for me, uh as a newer board member coming in, um I'm a contractor. I do a lot of contracting downtown. Uh the the alley improvements is something that stood out to me as when I've talked to the city engineering. It's nowhere in the capital improvement uh plan. there is no money going to be allocated in any plan by the city uh for the alley. So if you're waiting for when that's going to be done uh you know you can just keep waiting because it's never going to be done currently. So, and that's something maybe that you know I think the voters are looking to us and saying why you know do this and to me that's one of the big wise is there are things that the city just doesn't have a a budget for has no intention of budgeting for it because they already have those resources you know fully allocated and it's an area that we really need as a city and we all I think uh the residents you know everyone up here generally agrees it needs attention and as a contractor it's you know been sad to see you know all now downtown businesses when you do a new uh electric service You're required to underground your electric. And I just saw a downtown business spend about $60,000 on a project, which was very ownorous, way above what you would expect to bring in electric service just to underground it. And it was in a very nonsensical way. It should never have happened that way, but you're required to do it. But not one pole came down due to their undergrounding. That money, the poles will all remain because there's no plan to underground the infrastructure. And that's really upsetting. Like why make that person do that? take that money in, you know, go make it a plan to do it in a proper way. So, the city's passed an ordinance requiring people to do it. Um, but we have no plan. And this to me represents something we should move forward on and we should uh look to something like TIFF to really address those. And then like you know, Todd mentioned the parks. That's the kind of thing as well that can be transformative. It can help uh you know, bring so much to our town and I hope

we'll invest in it. Great. Thank you. Go ahead, Jeeoff.

Thank you. Um, so for me, I, you know, I'm same. I'm I'm a downtown business owner, uh, property owner, and, uh, really my my kind of top three that I picked was, uh, was Rotary Square, and and for me, the farmers market. I I really feel like, uh, the farmers market, being a downtown business owner, uh, you know, anytime that there's a farmers market, just brings more people downtown. Uh, I personally, that's one of my favorite places to shop. And, uh, and pretty much you can go there and see see everyone that that you know. It's it's it's really it's a it's a it's a place. It's to me the farmers market's kind of like it's my third place where where I go to uh to kind of see the city of Traverse City. So, and um and the Borman Ottawa was another one of mine. Um and really, you know, I I've been on the DDA for a long time and it's always interesting. We have, you know, um different consultants that come to us from from all over the country and they always talk about uh you know the the San Antonio uh riverfront and I feel like you know here we have this boardman river and maybe one day it can be the same. So

thank you Caitlyn.

Um yes I'd like to echo a lot of what's already been said. Um I did I took it upon myself to add highest as a option when ranking. I also ranked everything all the boardwin autoway restoration projects by their specific reach. Um so um looking at uh Rotary Square farmers market and reach a of the Borbin autoway uh restoration infrastructure efforts um both with our emp emphasis as placemaking transformational plans to placem projects um which has not really been um at the forefront of a lot of uh executed projects um in the recent history of the DDA and just what that would do um in terms of gathering spaces, third spaces um for our residents and visitors um as well as the fact that so many resources both financial and human have gone into all three of those projects. Um it would just to not see those projects come to fruition. Um would be a huge disappointment I think not only for our board but also for um the thousands of residents that have engaged uh in stakeholder sessions um for those

um we do seem to have an alignment in that district-wide snow melt system um that it is low on both. So, I'm uh in agreement with Laura just needing to learn a lot more about what that looks like um in terms of maintenance. Um and then also on high was the front street alley and utility improvements and relocation. So, very very similar. Great. Thank you, Caitlyn. Mr. How

no, they're nowhere near as thorough as those four. Um, but I I I will say u I think Commissioner Nes and Harry brought up that this how I approach this list as well and how I approach my role as DDA member or whatever member role I play. Um, these aren't just pulled out of hats because people like them. They came from engineering or they came from planning or they came from a public process. Um, so they all have value in in that sense. So it's it really comes down to it doesn't really matter what I think in terms of like or dislike. I'm trying to analyze here in prioritization um what's the biggest return on investment combined with looking at it in terms of where are we at the stage of the project and what is the need like just basic bare bones need like east front street we might not think it's a huge priority to do street scraping on it but that street's going to it needs replacing and the water man needs replacing so it's going to get tore up eventually in the next 10 years so we might as well do leverage that project and do the stuff on top as well. So that and that in return has a return on investment um both socially, environmentally, but also economically. And I I think we forget this sometimes. The city is in the business of harvesting tax revenue. If we do not continue to increase and outpace inflation, we we have more stressful times. Obviously, Trevor City is blessed, right? Everyone wants to move here. That's uncapping a lot of taxable value. I don't think that's something we can just count on in perpetuality forever. Um, at a certain point there's only so much that gets uncapped. We need buildings and those buildings are actually infrastructure, but we need private investment to do it. And by improving downtown, we improve and make uh available space and opportunity for private investment that has the biggest return on value. Um, so that's how I approach this list. So when you look at

those streets, State Street, East Front Street, down Main Street downtown, right downtown, those in the next 10, 15 years need major reconstruction. Um, but I also at the same time, Rotary Square can help drive us to get there to get the taxable revenue um and the investment that we need to get there. So that's how I approach those lists. Um, I'm trying to keep under 90 seconds. So um, so there's a lot to say. This is a great conversation. Um I did if I have 10 seconds I also did want to echo um Commissioner Lance sorry Bulmer um you know the idea I'm interested in the percentage as well because that's a way to kind of like recognize that all these projects have all these part of it. We don't just address storm water by going let's do a storm water project. No, we go let's redo the alley. Oh we were doing the alley. Let's do redo the storm water. Um, I don't want to be a part of a group that just drives because of storm water. That's a that's a recipe for failure.

But can we leverage all these things? Great. Two seconds from each of us. You can go now.

The quick thing I wanted to say if I have my numbers correct. So, um, then you estimated that the sort of the on andm cost of downtown over 30 years would be roughly $83 million. And if you look at the fact that we're taking in $4.5 million a year, that's 18 years. So 18 years out of 30 if you would have tiff keep on going on as the same um is strictly for on andm. Um so we're not talking loads of money for new projects first of all. Um the second thing is you know most of you know that I moved to Traverse City. Um, I came to Traverse City because people in Traverse City invested in Traverse City and then I invested in Traverse City and um, so I kind of look at these projects but be economic perspective as well. Um, yes, we need to have improve our storm water and we want to build a community, but we also want to have people come to our community and to invest in our community. And so I kind of looked at that pretty a little bit maybe a little bit more of a higher priority lens than some of the other factors involved here. And when I looked at that, the three projects, at least for me, that kind of came to to me were the um uh State Street uh reconstruction, the reconstruction of the entire street, um the East Front Street reconstruction and the gateway, and then the front street alley. And then particularly with the East Front Street um reconstruction, you know, we've already made a significant investment in that in 2021 2022. It was called uh reimagine East Front Street and we had a really strong planning effort and essentially it died because we couldn't agree on how we were going to share the usage of that street. But since that time, the city has invested in the mobility plan and the mobility plan actually came out of that effort, right? And now we're talking about having um excuse me the name of the committee

complete streets complete streets. So you know we've made investments in that particular stretch and I would hate for us to to lose that opportunity to continue that investment.

Great and I'll just add that um my two cents on this one. Um you know I think it's been well addressed in some of the comments here that there isn't alignment when we look at it but we were all asked very different questions um in a way. And so what I do see though and when I heard the conversations at the DD DDA level a lot of it was the we're all concerned about infrastructure and mobility and um I think that's all very important. I think one thing I did want to address and I've been kind of a I've been a major advocate for this and I've said it in meetings and interviews and I think at the city commission and DDA is as a as a as a city we have turned away from the river for a very long time and we have done work to try and recently to do that we've completed the loop around the boardman we've got a lot of non-mobility or sorry non-motorized ways of accessing it so I appreciate how the city commission ranked it because even though some of the projects are low. It didn't fall off the list completely. This was we had it as a large conversation with the DDA in the middle and it kind of landed in the middle. Um, but I do think that one thing I wanted to address in this is, you know, there was a couple years ago we were doing uh addressing one part of the Boardman restoration that we've already been working on, the Ottawaway restoration we've already been working on. And um I I remember a public comment was a member of the tribe who is also a scientist got up and said, "Look, this is really important. this is a huge first step and um at that actual project I think is what ended up getting us the Noah grant too for our cooperation and our work on that and a commissioner that was up here not up here at the time and I think maybe Mitch was on the board but nobody else who's up here um said well this is the disification and this isn't what we need in and I just almost cringed because here we had somebody from the tribe who was a scientist who was invested in this and it got dismissed and I don't think that's where most people who have been using that phrase or have talked about that over the years are taking it from. I don't think

they're saying in comparison to that comment, this is what I think. I think it has gotten out there in the vernacular and used a lot. And I think what I will say with what the detailed list of the river that we have that we've been working from, the time we spent on the ad hoc, there's some very concrete things here. And so that is something that I think aligns with the um environmental impact that we are all concerned about through our strategic planning that the DDA wants to see us as a as a community turn towards. And so I just wanted to um say that I think that that's one of those things where there's some alignment. I think there's some this is why we're having this meeting so we can all have these conversations together and it's not bits and pieces that people are picking up here and there and we're having these robust conversations. So that's my last two cents on it and um you know we've got the rankings here and the other other thing I would say is the reason why I brought it up um the third whether it's 30 years 15 years 25 years 8020 split having the list shows the public what we where our intentions are and it's showing where we're all coming from being a list that comes from staff it comes from the board members themselves and out there however gets what does and doesn't get funded and where we end up as part of this further conversation. But I think that's what's important about putting it out there. I think a lot of people have seen the the end of this last tiff and think that nothing gets done. We saw a huge list and things didn't some things didn't get done and that is also the reality of a tiff. So I wanted to focus that in too. So

yeah, if I may too, just a sort of working to summarize what I've heard. I know mayor you you said that you have seen among the boards it appears to be some alignment for infrastructure and mobility. I would also add there was strong uh what appears to be consensus for Rotary Square. Yes, definitely just to try and if anybody the the point is to summarize these questions and have folks raise their hand and say that is not what I think I heard from everybody. So if I'm saying something that doesn't appear to generally reflect the consensus, this is a time this isn't the final discussion necessarily for everybody but this is a time to raise it. So infrastructure mobility and board me excuse me infrastructure mobility and Rotary Square.

Mhm. Okay.

Okay. And so now we'll move on to another kind of high level input moment and that is um when we think about funding where do you land with prioritization and it was kind of out it was outlined by Benjamin as part of his presentation of maintenance core services and new or expanded investment. Did you have a question Gary? Yeah, I just had a real quick add-on if I could. Um, you you me you mentioned the list and its importance, but it's also really important because that is actually the plan. It's the budget. Like you it if it's not in the plan when it's approved to move forward if it is renewed or reset and renewed, then it has to be amended to actually do it. So, it literally is like a one-year budget, but it's for 30 years and it needs to be in the plan to actually do it. So, that's why sometimes it can be a little vague.

Yes. I just wanted to point that out because that's a key piece to tiff that I think gets lost. That's a good point. And I would say too, you know, of course we know that a tiff plan amendment or new one has to be approved by the voters first. Uh for larger projects, if there's bonding, there is a right to a referendum. So, I want to point out that there's like this for certain things, if they were so significant that they required bonding, the voters have the right to circulate petitions, call for a referendum, and have a public vote on whether or not those bonds are issued to fund that larger scale thing.

Yeah, thank you for that reminder about that extra check on it, Ben. All right. And so, this and thank you, uh, Colleen has this question up on the board in front of all of us. And this one, I'm actually going to start with the DDA side and start with Gary. I got to read the question. I'll read the question for everyone. Oh, sorry. I read it.

As we think about funding, how should we prioritize between ongoing maintenance and core services and new or expanded strategic investments? That's a pretty broad question. So, I really don't know how to take this. Um, obviously, I mean, maintenance is you put a street down, it's brand new. Guess what? It's just like a brand new car. It's worth less the next day. So, all these infrastructure investments are liabilities. And I think that just has to I think it was mentioned a couple times we have to be aware of it every time we build something. What is the resilience of that and you know how anti-fragile is it or how fragile is it um as we move forward. So I think you have to look at it all kind of in the whole from our perspectives. Thank god we have a great staff. Um engineering can dial in on the um specifics of things. Um so that that's where I kind of work with that balance of prioritization is it's not always just what we want. It's also, yeah, that water man's going to bust if we don't do it. So, I think that comes into play and might be why like the water stabilization one for me, you know, yeah, I would love it if we had all the money in the world. Let's do it, throw it down. But we I also know we have some real ongoing maintenance issues um that would rise above that.

If that answers a question on that. No, that's true,

Kaitlyn. Um, yeah, this is a challenging question to answer. I mean this is it's quite a delicate balance and certainly with any new or expanded strategic investment maintenance considerations need to be considered within the I think core budget of those projects um to ensure funding and ongoing maintenance over the next 30 years or whatever the lifespan is. Um I am in the spirit of putting an emphasis on new or expanded strategic investments. Um, I think that that's that's something that um is a sentiment that at least I understood from um all of the incredible work that you've all done from our uh stakeholder input for the strategic plan um for the city um and those placemaking um incentives uh within different neighborhoods, but specifically downtown um as it's a place that we all share. Um a delicate balance. Yeah, certainly.

Yeah. I think this one's asking us for a little bit more hot takes. So, I don't think anybody should feel their burden to give detailed answers. Yes. Don't want to be flippant and say like we're only doing new things. Yes. Make it I was going to make it easy. I was going to be like I agree with both of you. Excellent. Well, to me, I mean, you know, like Brent Street, I think it was in 2010, is considered one of the great streets of in the United States. And I mean, that's a that was like a big achievement. And for me, it always comes down to maintenance. Like we, you know, I I know the city is working hard to the roads and sidewalks and uh but we we also need to kind of keep growing as well.

Good with what you guys said. So

yeah, I think the DDA budget it really seems like it's been trending towards more maintenance and I think that that's you know a good thing and uh and it should continue. Uh it's ab absolutely needed. The feedback from the public is really that, you know, we need to see more of that downtown. When you walk around, I when we all walk around, we can easily find, you know, quite a few projects that just obviously uh need more maintenance. And at the same time, I think that I'd like to see, you know, and I and I think we've done a good job of leveraging, you know, the funding that we have uh to get outside investment uh grants and, you know, other investments for some of these transformative projects. And I think that's uh that's also important for a downtown like Traverse City that there's still a lot of areas that you know really could use uh you know things like the Rotary Square and the Farmers Market Pavilion. I think those are going to be great improvements to downtown and I think there's more opportunities like that in the future uh that having this pot of money and having some real intention and planning around.

Great. Thank you. I think that the key to the key words that I'm reading in this statement is expanded strategic investments. Um when I think of TIFF 97 when it began when the city commission decided on these were the goals in which TIFF 97 would do just like the goals in which we just spoke about with our first round. Um I it comes to mind two things come to mind. One, when that got started and and the public and the community started investing in its downtown area, the first thing that happened was Rotary Charities bought the Park Place at a loss when they got all the I mean, it was at a big loss, but that showed right there that all of a sudden the community was willing to step up and involve itself in the community. And the other one that comes to mind right off the bat is shortly thereafter a small bookstore went into our J C Penney. They just went up to Paskki today and they're turning their J C Penney into apartments, condos. But a small business took a risk and invested in filling a bigger spots. And so when I think of expanded strategic investments, I think once we make those kind of investments, then all of a sudden the next builder comes in, puts in the infrastructure that causes the storm water, you know, issues and the underground utilities. That's that's the most pertinent part of that statement for me.

Great. And actually for this one, I just leaned over. We're going to do quick hot two hot takes for us so we're not always on the last word and then we'll continue down the line. So go ahead, Ed. I mean to me it's I think everyone probably agree that you know we need to uh pick up the trash

and we should have police services and and so there's we talk about sort of that sort of core services and ongoing maintenance. I think of course that needs to be done. I think really what we're the reason why we're here is sort of like where do we sort of prioritize on our strategic investments and you know I mentioned ROI and I was mentioning it from an economic perspective but I mean at the end of the day our strategic investments um are going to be an environmental investment um they may be an economic investment they may be an investment for um increased mobility in our community um and so to me it's the question is almost kind of moot you know we try to maintain what we have but the relative core is what do we believe our strategic investments need to be

great and I would say for mine like I think about it this way of like a I look at it in my instinct and what I thought initially on this question was um 6040 maintenance core services and expanded strategic investment um when we talk about uh the tiff 97 and the work it did and as was shown in some of the projects here it did a lot of work it did a lot of work that repaired things that were already aging from the postw World War II boom. Um, which you know I side note I think ARPA is going to go down as like the WPA is something that was so desperately needed that had we not had we'd all be many more communities would be going bankrupt and struggling. I see that as the future of if whatever the future of this next tiff might look like is what it's going to be. We've had a whole generation that have had 30 years now of this assistance and maintenance and repair that the next generation will not have if it goes away. And so I think that is very important to point out. We get fees as the city. We get fees from the DDA that no other taxpayers pay. Um we do that as part of their taxes. And there's just other investments that we've made. I also though think that expanded services and strategic investments are why this community looks completely different than when I grew up here. Um you don't see whether it's NMC, uh local businesses, whether they're in the city or not. um all the community. If you go to websites for people in this community, they're using pictures of Front Street. They're using pictures of our downtown. That's what draws people here. It's not and no offense to it, but it's not the Grand Traverse Mall. It's our downtown that we've invested in. And that is something that I think is very important. So, what TIFF will allow us to do is we might have to replace that bridge no matter what, but it allows it to make it a bridge that people might be able to sit and enjoy the river on or fixes the streets and allows us to do the storm water under it. And as someone my my background is specializing in Russian and East Central Europe, the opposite of that is brutalism, right? The opposite of that is a concrete bridge or a you know a pedestrian bridge

that has a car a handrail and not much else. we can do that going forward if the you know if the bill falls on all of us but I think what we've built here is very special and if we want to maintain that there does have to be a little bit of this forward thinking and um kind of the the maintenance and the responsibility portion that then gets reinvested into the next step to keep us the town that we are thank you mayor I I guess I think they go hand in hand

um ongoing maintenance and core services obviously are are critical and we have an obligation as local elected officials to provide for that ongoing maintenance. Um, and we've seen what happens when we defer maintenance. I live on Madison Street, which was just reconstructed last year. It was decades overdue. Um, and the longer you wait, those costs go up, right? So, I think we need to remember that over 50,000 people use our downtown every day for jobs, services, recreation, entertainment. With that type of activity comes real infrastructure demands. Streets, utilities, storm water, public spaces, all those things require ongoing investment and maintenance whether we like it or not. So the real question really to me isn't h whether or not we maintain our downtown and our infrastructure, but how are we going to fund it? Great. Ken,

when I think about this question, the first kind of thing that pops in my mind is the wants and needs. Is something that is something that we're prioritizing something that we want or is it something that we need? And I know that I don't like the idea of neglecting the boardman. And I don't like the idea of neglecting some of these They're they're more fun than than an alley than redoing an alley. Redoing an alley is not fun. It's not sexy. You know, East Front Street, it could be a little bit,

but it's still not as fun as like a lower boardman restoration. And that has been a lot of the discussion. It's probably the largest spending item potentially a part of this whole package. And it just kind of it makes me think of like we can prioritize things, but are are you using this input to kind of shape what you're going to ask on this ballot in November? Because I mean that's that's the biggest thing. I almost feel like this conversation is a needs to accelerate to that point where what do you think is going to what do you guys think is going to is going to we have we have more questions

ring with the voters. I I know that but this just feels like I I loved what absolutely everything every one of you said I loved. I thought it was like I like the idea of community and placemaking and incentivities in town that incentivize economic activities and just the way that brings a community together. I love that kind of stuff. But I think people really recognize the need for the hard infrastructure replacement and that I'm I'm just uh I don't want to talk about fun stuff as much as I need to talk about important stuff.

That's fair. And that's that maintenance core services that you're talking about. So yeah. Yeah. Jackie.

Um well, when it comes to funding allocations, um I think the needs versus wants is a very appropriate question for us to be asking. So where I come down on that of course is prioritizing maintenance and preservation. Um when we start talking about new investments or discretionary spending, I would ask that we look at this through the lens of um return to our residents. You know, what is the ROI of our spending for residents? Um, you know, the work that was done on the strategic plan not only resulted in some pretty specific objectives and possible action plans, but I think it also showed the values of our community and and our community values things like preservation and inclusion and um community. And so I would ask that we be prioritizing discretionary spending in a way that aligns with those values of the residents.

Thank you. That's a good point, Jackie. Go ahead, Lance.

Yeah. Um, quick note when we get back to the DDA board members, if you could all speak into your mics. Uh, I just got a text saying it's really hard to hear you at home. Um, so I I'm going to put a number to this. Um, just like you did, mayor. uh and you know I think it goes down to in my mind it's more like a 7030 core services maintenance uh towards then expanded strategic investments being you know a 30% is how I kind of see an importance level um and I I echo what my fellow commissioners have said that um you know thinking about from a a project standpoint or strategic investment standpoint which is a good way to put it right what is the return on uh resident investment Um because ultimately if we don't have tiff uh or if it's not extended or one of the theories and it just expires right that money goes back to the residents of both our county and our city. Um and so if we are capturing that we really do need to think of it as like a what is that investment return for the residents and I think the projects if we just looked at that list of prioritization even though the question may be skewed um I kind of did some quick math and it was around uh kind of the high higher end alignment of what we did was around $32 million whereas then looking at the packet the core services and maintenance uh over the course of tiff was about uh83 $3 million. So the number kind of works out 70 7030 if you think about it that way. Um you know for bringing this to the residents to to vote on.

Great. Thank you Lance. Heather um

so this is kind of a this is very general question. Um, and I think that uh 6040 maintenance versus investment is ideal, but 7030 is probably more realistic. But I'm looking at this question and thinking why are you asking this question? Uh what what does this do? This is a is a it's a little bit like the last question which is assuming that we are extending the tiff as it is with the structure that is already there and and so I'm looking back at uh the packet that we got all the page numbers that you mentioned Harry don't line up with what I see in the packet but um it's toward the oh it's the last two pages investment levels to guide decision making I'm looking at do we maintain which is 83 million do we partially invest which is also So 83 million dependent on project selection or do we fully invest which is the whole banana 237 which is

your number or even more um and and I would say partially invest would be great as long as we can use other tools doesn't have to be the continuation of it be other tools there are many other tools and and so that's how I'm that's I think that's really the question that we're being asked as asked to answer.

And if I can jump in, Commissioner Shai, I just want to say that um uh the idea is that this whole conversation is going to help shape the direction. Uh and you will have a question coming up, which scenario do you prefer? And then based on the totality of the input, the idea is to back into well what's the direction that appears to have uh the most viability. So it it is not it's genuinely not meant to presume that it extends or any of the scenarios. You'll be responding to those, but we need to take all the feedback in totality really as far as how to move forward. Mitch. Well, uh, to this point, yes, maintenance is important, echoing what everybody has said, but I see this as getting at, uh, what are both the impacts of, uh, new investments on long-term maintenance costs and, um, the extent to which through the promise of um, TIFF in the first place, these are enhancing the general area, downtown specifically, and Traverse City as a whole in a way that increases uh revenue long term by increasing property values. Uh for something like um the east front street improvement or the alley reconstruction, if uh we replace poor condition um pavement with better condition pavement that will last longer, then that will end up saving uh maintenance over the long term uh because there will be fewer potholes that need patching. If we bury electrical lines um then yes that's improving the aesthetics but it's also reducing the risk of outages or other issues. On the other hand um something like Rotary Square can be nice and can be a good enhancement. It can generate value

but it also generates additional uh maintenance expenses for the duration of the project. Thank you Mitch. Um, so to the point we've got, just to let you know, we've got two other questions that get Can I just ask a quick question? The the different infrastructure maintenance priorities that are listed in your packet. These are the color sheets with the icons. We had one that was an annual percentage dedicated out of the capture from the DDA towards potentially three different priorities.

The DDA has had this kind of conversation rolling. We've not settled on that or a percentage. So, I'd love to get some feedback from the city commission on yes, we do feel like, for example, 5% of the capture should be devoted to storm water infrastructure on an annual basis. Some direction from the city commission on that one specifically, I think would be helpful. Um, that will be in the question after this next one. Okay. Sorry. And I just want to summarize uh generally what I think I heard on the last question is u emphasis on maintenance. uh some uh many are saying some strategic investments but he heavy emphasis on maintenance. Just want to summarize that that's generally what I heard.

Well, yeah, I'd say there's consensus on maintenance. We did have a couple people throw out those 60 40 7030. So I I if depends on how you're defining heavy I guess. So it's it's really sort of both. first preferring that generally, but then of of the two, it's more like a 60 70% preference on maintenance. Mayor, yep. I just I would just add I don't know if maybe it's just me, but what I heard, but also I'll introduce the first hot take of the night combating Commissioner Funk's approach that the Alley project can't be sexy. Um,

I think that is actually and I bring it up in to make a laugh because it's late. Um but also example of a project that can be seen as maintenance, but that's where the DDA has really achieved great things over the last 30 years. Taking those basic things and saying, "What can we do better?" Right? I think the Clinch Park tunnel, which I was somewhat involved with, Harry was on the board then, that was just going to be replaced the way it was a dark, scary tunnel. the DDA was able to step in and provide about $750,000 to make it have that approach to it, have that sign there, widen it, add the art. So, I think I know we can want to talk 60, 40, 70, 30,

but the real approach is, hey, we have this maintenance issue, water stabilization. How do we make it something that's special and unique and does all these other things that we want to see happen? I agree with that, Gary. Thank you. And, um, term

fail. Okay, the next question and then I promise we're getting the percentages after this one and I want this to be I know we said 90 seconds originally. We've we've been generous with that. So this one I'd like you to try and keep it to 30 seconds. Um what are the of the four scenarios expiration reset extension or extension with reduced capture. So like those 8020 etc things that we were looking at. um what's the most important to you and what tradeoff do you are you willing to accept with that? So um briefly you might say expiration I get we might not have all the maintenance funds or something based on our conversation here. Keep it very briefly. So we'll start with you Mitch. I was going to change it up more on this side but I'll lose track. So,

uh, I would say I'd like an extension, but, um, just considering what might be feasible, an extension with reduced capture, uh, can be a goal, can be a way that we achieve many of the goals.

Thank you, Heather. Um I I think that the uh that tiff 90 needs to end because we there was a promise made to our taxing jur uh jurisdictions that it would end after 30 years and promises must be kept. Um it could reset. I would I would I would go for that. I think uh you know with really clear parameters or projects um I think that you might get voter support for that. I I do not um I don't like the um the the one that partial the partial one. I I I was a I was kind of uh for that at first, but I think it's way too complicated and um it still leaves so much power in the DDA's hands, which I think that that that our uh residents have said that they don't want it. They want to see things more transparent and so I don't think that you're going to win on that one either. So for me it's end the tiff or reset it.

Thank you. Lance. Yeah, I'm generally in favor of uh based on just our conversation that we've had so far. Um an extension uh of tiff with reduced capture. Uh I think we we do owe it to our our tax and jurisdictions.

I think that's scenario four. Yes. Yes. Thank you. Um, and I think we owe it to our taxing jurisdictions to to uh what's the word I'm looking for? Unlevy unlevy some of that those funds. Um, and I think we can do that uh just based on our conversation that we've had tonight where if we limit our project scope and we do have a bigger focus on maintenance. Um, I think and I can't play funny money uh off the top of my hand right here. Um, so I don't know what that number looks like or what what that is exactly, but um I think we have the opportunity just based on our conversation that and I I feel like the public might support that. Um because ultimately it's not really up to us. We're just providing direction. It is up to the voters.

Jackie, the voice of the voters that we have heard from so far have been pretty loud in terms of scenario one allowing TIFF to expire. Um I see some possibilities in scenario four but with a lot of limitations. You know perhaps the responsibility for maintenance and infrastructure returns to the city along with the funding for that. Perhaps the discretionary funding um you know discretionary projects remain through some version of scenario 4 and and we try to um reconsider our approach to both the the longevity of the of the approval as well as the the split between DDA funding and city funding.

Thank you. Ken.

Um, we wouldn't I like in the spirit of compromise like I think that we wouldn't be here right now if if you were willing to consider scenario one because it would just you know that you would cease to exist. So that's not an option for you. Um me personally, I don't like the extension. I know that that eliminates the option of doing all of the projects, but that's something that I'm not comfortable with. Um, I've said that I'm comfortable somewhere between a reset. So, scenario two and scenario four. Um, when when we've been presented with these scenarios with the revenue sharing, when it says 3070, is that 30 back to the taxing jurisdictions, 70 to the DDA.

Okay. I I would propose that the other way potentially. 70 back to the city and the taxing jurisdictions, 30 back to the DDA. Um, and I and in my opinion that kind of goes back to kind of my personal feelings on what went wrong with public sentiment towards the DDA. When the DDA was early in its existence, it was focused on, and I've heard people explain it this way before as like their event planners, their party planners, and they do the fun things, the Friday Night Lives, U, men's night, women's night, all the activities that get people to come to town and be part of a community and enjoy it. And I don't want to see that stop. And I know that the DTCA could continue to do that, but I think that the DDA is able to enhance that and take that burden off of the business owners. So I would propose a greater revenue sharing because I I think that in infrastructure focused DDA like with these largecale planning activities, I think that's kind of where people it it may have been in the original plan to hey, we're going to do a parking deck. We're going to do this farmers market pavilion. we're going to do these things, but they weren't going to happen till the end. And that's kind of where we're at now when we started looking at doing these West End parking decks and the farmers market pavilion. And the the reality of some of these large projects becoming real, I think really made people go, "Ah, we don't want you anymore." But we liked everything you did before. We don't want you to do these things anymore. So, I would effectively like to take away a lot of your financial ability to do largecale infrastructure projects. So instead of the 3070, I would go 7030 with you getting much much less capture, keeps you in existence, keeps you able to do activities and events. And I would think that 15 years would probably be the most I would want to stomach on that because I think that's an opportunity for them those 15 years

build new relationships where we can demonstrate that we really do want to work together and that we can provide a really good product for the community through collaboration because it feels like I I didn't like that we there was this sense that we were coming together tonight as competing entities because we everybody at this table wants everyone in Trevor city to be successful. We want all our businesses to do well. You know, we want to enjoy that high quality of life that we enjoy because we live in Northern Michigan. So, I guess as far as the scenarios go, that's kind of my thoughts on those. Thank you, Ben. Laura,

great. So, I appreciate Ken your um emphasis on the the fun activities and the placemaking, but I think it's important to remind everyone that you can't do those placemaking activities without the infrastructure in place. That's what supports those activities. Um, and I fully respect the will of the voters at the ballot box in November, and ultimately this is going to be their decision. But I I'm going to try and avoid predicting voter voter behavior. I think it's our responsibility to present a plan that's transparent, that balances maintenance and strategic investment into our downtown and that aligns with community priorities as we've seen through the public engagement that the DDA did in 2022 and our strategic plan, which is why we're here tonight at this joint session. So voters deserve a clear understanding of the trade-offs and the facts, not assumptions about outcomes that we're individually making. Um, in terms of my preference, I um lean towards the extension with reduced capture. I'd be curious about um

that's this question, right? Yeah. Yep. Okay. So, extension with reduced capture. Um I think that aligns best with my personal perspective and the trade-offs I've already discussed.

Yeah. Thank you. Um we're just going to continue on the line and get back to 30 seconds here. Um mine would be extension with reduced capture. Um it's the trade-offs, yes, are we're still capturing, we're giving some back. I'm going to say a little bit of I'm going to push back a little on the U used by um Commissioner Funk because at the end of the day, as it was pointed out, other than Rotary Square, the city commission ultimately votes on whether something happens or not. So, it is still the cons the city commission voters voted that they wanted the chance to decide if they want to extend or not. And so, that doesn't mean that they won't. Um, and I think that when I look back at the bridge work we did over two years and the millions and millions of dollars that went in that that between grants and DDA funding, we only paid I think $300,000 into it as a city budget. Um, as a taxpayer myself, I don't want to suddenly get stuck with the bill when we just when we have to tear up Front Street to take care of it because it's been its it's hitting its time and now we have to do um the storm water and that's going to take away from those neighborhoods over that time. And right now the DDA is paying us for some of the regular maintenance that goes along with the um tax bills that they pay that other other citizens don't. And so I think there are some trade-offs to yes, it's still a long cap term capture. It's a little bit more sharing. Um, and until I see a millage come from the county that says we're going to give this much money for infrastructure to help out the city. Right now, all the funds they the services they provide to us are provided through millages that we put on ourselves, veterans, mission on aging, all of that. We don't have that option here to do to the county. So until I I see that, I'm really concerned about where we would find this funding that isn't an unfair burden on some parts of our population and not distributed equally or more fairly amongst our all of our citizens as we know a lot come in and use ours, not just city residents. Go ahead. Uh, so I like to say I would actually much if I had my brothers, I'd much

rather have attacks on hotel rooms, attacks on rental cars, but we also know that in Michigan that's not going to happen. You know, we're not going to get I know there's there's there's seeds of of change. Uh they're attempting to uh change this, but the way things are in Lancing now, that's not going to happen. So it really depends upon us. And so for me, I I I don't want to lose $1.9 million every every year um back to the county.

And so as at to some extent, whether it's a um extension extension with reduced capture, I could with either. But I think um we as Traverse City should not be taking the burden for the entire region. And tiff, as far as I know, it's the only really uh I guess uh tax mechanism that we have to get that funding. Todd, u I'm for extension with reduced capture. Thank you.

I'm for extension with reduced capture. And the one thing I would just say is that I you the reason why I came got on the board was kind of what Laura brought up is just we need to listen to the the the people that have spoke, our voters. And when I saw, you know, so many people and the people I talked to were concerned about the environment. Uh, and we've addressed things like parking garages, I didn't want to see continued investment of that. And I I'm really I'm hopeful that we would extend TIFF and we would look to think about the return to residents. And I think most residents want to see those things. And I don't really see the city budget affording those things. So I really hope we would, you know, would think about that. And um, thank you, Mike. Jeff, I'm lean into your mic, Jeff.

Oh, I'm sorry. I'm for uh extension with a reduced capture and um just listening to the commission, you know, I mean we we are an we are an entity of you and you know we report to you and you give the DDA projects that essentially you don't want to deal with. So So I'm kind of I don't know to to Ken, you know, I kind of Yeah, I kind of was kind of stunned when when you were talking about that. So, okay. Thank you, Kaylin. Thank you. Um, yeah, I echo surprise with us versus the mentality. Uh, I live in the city. I'm a voter if I vote for you. Um, appreciate it.

Um, I'm for extension with reduced capture. Okay, Gary, I want to pick on Commissioner Funk. No, no more picking on Commissioner Funk. We are all having

Yeah, I I'm a I'm a proponent of TIFF. I think it takes a lot to understand it. I spent five years on Brownfield, which extensively deals with TIFF. I still don't think I quite understood it the whole time. Um, but one thing I do, what I love about TIFF, whether it's a corridor tiff, a DDA tiff, a brownfield tiff, is you have a plan. There's nothing more transparent than a TIFF because you're not spending the money unless it's in the plan. And you're also not spending the money if you don't have the growth to pay for it. If downtown isn't successful, the tiff doesn't grow and the money isn't spent. And I wish as sitting as a former city commissioner, I wish the general budget had more of that. Every year you're going to look at a general budget, and I understand um Benjamin is going to a three-year outlook, but it's not going to you're going to be voting on the one-year plan or the one-year budget, and that's all you get. And then in two years, new commissioners come. There is no 15, 30-year plan unless it lives in the planning department. Um, but it gets changed all the time based on politics. What I really appreciate about TIFFs is that stability and that partnership with the community because if you don't get the private investment, you don't get the projects, whether they are maintenance, whether they're environmental, or whether they're a fancy Rotary Square that's going to bring everyone together for Santa Claus.

Is Santa Claus going there? Yeah. Um, bring for Santa Claus. So, I just think that needs to be reiterated over and over and I understand Commissioner Shaw there's been some issues with the DDA and the perception and I think those are old having been around a while. I believe a lot of those are old legacy kind of arguments that still exist. I still believe the DDA is actually, and I don't mean this in any personal way, is more transparent just by default of its budgetary where it's getting its funds from.

You can actually go look at the plan. Um, and so that's what we're really here is how how do you project a 30-year plan or a 20-year plan? It's really hard. You have to be vague. There's going to be some things that get kind of moved around. There's going to be opportunities that come that you have to jump on that, you know, kind of stress test what was in the plan, but we make it work because it's together we come together and say, "Hey, this is going to be better for the community." So, I took way longer time than you wanted. Um, but I I'm I'm supportive of extending. If it's reduced, fine. Um, but whatever we do, I think we shouldn't give up on this tool because to other people's points, there are no other replacement tools right now.

Um, and the commercial districts are the economic engine of the city and the county and we need to remember that as we move forward. Ben, do you want to summarize? I mean overall there is uh among both groups there is appears to be consensus for uh not unanimously consensus is not unanimous but what I'm hearing from most is extend with reduced capture. I certainly heard uh the commissioners that said preference for expiration. Uh but the overall consensus that I heard was extend with reduced capture. Yes. Um, and then I I I just want to say I I did support extension with Yes. with reduced capture. It was just the devil is in the details of

Yes. who and how much. That's so very very fair. Ken, thank you. And and I am sorry that you got called out by name a few times. I know you're you're very listening. You're very cooperative and listening. said it 100% here in the spirit of collaboration and I don't think that ending is the healthiest way to go about it but it is a potential way and like I don't think any of you brought us to this point where we're going to have to where the community is going to vote on this now but we're the ones that are faced with dealing with it so what's the best product that we can put together to put in front of voters that will or will not pass

and Ken just teed this last question up beautifully so thank you Ken Um all night the last question ignore the last part of the question because I think we have touched on that through other answers. I want and I will use the gavvel if I need to. They gave me one tonight. Um I would like everybody to just say we've looked at the different scenarios. We've had them presented a few times. What your percentage you would like to see it be? Um you know is it zero is or you know stay the same 5050 8020. And then also to Harry's question, I will add, what do you think is the fair amount to put or a good idea for an amount to put into that general storm water fund? And so those are your two questions on this one. So sorry, I know that Colleen had the prepared slide. So in addition to what's on the slide, ignore part two, but let us know what you'd like to see as a percentage. Admittedly, without all the numbers in front of everybody, I don't expect everyone to give me a five or a six or an 8%, but just the idea of a dedicated percentage of some sort for those specific topics.

I I would actually just say even if it's not bind super binding, I think five was thrown out there to give an idea of what's doable. You might say I want to see seven. You might say three is fine, but let's kind of keep it in that reasonable realm. And if you're saying a you're giving a number for a split other than 5050 which you know is clear uh the the higher number just in terms of how we've been thinking about this is how much would continue to be captured. So if you for instance commissioner funk you mentioned 7030 or 3070 I think uh if if you say 7030 it's 70 captured by DDA 30 going back to the jurisdiction. So, I just want to be clear on that definition.

And I'm And as we're writing, I'm going to start with Gary and go back down this way. Again, brief answers or I'm going to gavvel you, not you specifically, Gary. I'm warming to the idea of storm water or or percentages kind of approach. Um, I think 5% is probably too high. It's a lot of money once you start kind of adding it up. Well, just gavvel me. Um, and then 8020 or higher. 8020 or higher. Okay. 8020 2%. Okay. 8020 two to 4%. Okay. Mike,

I'm right in there. I Yeah, such a hard one, but sure. 8020 two%. Okay. 80 22%. Ed 70 30 5%. Okay. 80 25%. 70 35%. 60 45%. Wait real quick. Going so fast. He's using his clerk skills after a while here. Uh, Commissioner Funk, could you repeat what you said? 6040. Thank you. And 5%. You said 5% storm water. I'm sorry. 6040 5% storm water. Okay. Thank you.

2080 I have uh with the understanding that infrastructure and maintenance returns to the purview of the of the city itself. The more discretionary spending remains at the DDA. Um and I think those are in the interest of efficiency and accountability. I have no opinion at this point on the percentages. can't can't offer that. But I do have um a suggestion for time frame, which is we have a strategic plan that has a three-year time frame. Um perhaps TIFFs should also have three-year time frames, particularly if they're focused on discretionary spending.

Thank you, Jackie. L I just want to clarify the uh when you say three-year timeline for a strategic plan, you're talking about our OKRs and that one specifically. Okay. Thank you. Five year plan. Yeah, Lance. Uh so just doing the the math very quickly, uh in the shotgun round, uh which I absolutely loathe shotgun rounds, uh as you'll watch any of my interviews, I don't say yes or no. Uh it comes down to if we were to do the projects on the list uh as well as with our and then rebalance core services and maintenance to the city. Uh my math really quickly comes down to about uh 4555. Okay. With 2%.

Oh, sorry. Thank you. Um I'm I'm on the 2080 side. I think that I would prefer the DDA focus on supporting businesses and a healthy downtown and keeping things clean. Um, also be aware that uh extending this with this kind of split does not release our vaccine jurisdiction partners. Mitch,

yes. and I'll say 8020 and going in a different direction I'll go 7% for storm water but including um greenscaping roof improvements um things changes to Rotary Square Lynch Park that are increasing the amount of uh pvious surface and thus decreasing the net contribution of storm water. Thank you. Um and I think I won't make you average out the numbers Benjamin. And so if you want to give a general overview of where you landed with that just for us to check in. Uh general that's that's

I mean I would argue like we can say there's consensus on this side. If I were super generalizing it, it looks like there would be if you were doing like a Well, I shouldn't go that way. Um because we didn't do rank choice voting, but um it it appears to be somewhere around overall like a 5050ish. That's you know, if I'm I'm taking kind of averages. I'm not ask Yeah, but I I wouldn't say average. Uh the consensus I think is for a higher uh somewhere around 80 2030.

Okay. So that that just is again this is nothing set in stone. This is just what will be brought back to ad hoc DDA. We've had all this conversation together right now. Um which we haven't had for a while. Ultimately the voters decide on this. Um, and so I want to just actually I'm hesitate to do this, but um I'm not going to do the final question that was asked, but I would like to say that um I guess uh you know as staff and everybody are going back to examine this. Is there a final thought

in like two sentences? I don't want to gabble anybody from everyone that um you would like to have a takeaway that's your summary almost of where you're at with this. And I'll start with you, Mitch. I think that we need to have more not necessarily more joint sessions, but more conversations um across our boards and trying to uh stop this thinking within the silo of our organization since there are some differences in uh viewpoints and Okay, great. We need to consider that. if anybody wants to direct a more at this topic, but general is fine, too. Go ahead, Heather.

Um, as as was stated in the executive summary, the real issue here is how to fund the urban cores in infrastructure. Uh, not simply whether the DDA should continue capturing taxes. Um, there are other viable tools. There's targeted special assessments. There's project-based funding and grants. And more import most importantly, there's a county revenue sharing agreement which already has a pol policy framework in place. These approaches are more transparent and more directly tied to who benefits. I I think that if we believe in regional cost sharing, and I do, then let's just go directly in there. It's uh and it's and um and get some kind of agreement with the county and uh not through an automatic tax capture that most people don't fully understand. Thank you, Lance.

Um, hopefully this was helpful uh for the ad hoc uh and for the board. Um, it was great to uh at least get some alignment uh and see some alignment uh with everybody in the room. Uh it it feels less like we're just in we're disjointed. Um, you know, and hopefully the advice, uh, you consider it deeply because, you know, ultimately the 2024 charter amendment requires voter approval, uh, and which will then come back to the the commission and one thing that I know that we all ran on was being very transparent and also listening uh, to our community. Uh, and so that will ultimate ultimately be the test. Uh, so it is in your hands uh to hope if if we don't see this again, it's in your hands really to to shape what what that product looks like.

Thank you, Lance. Jackie. Um I would echo Commissioner Shaw's um concerns that we fully explore some of the funding alternatives um specifically those that would um allow us not to be tapping voterapproved millages like those for seniors and veterans and public transportation. that that those those voterapproved millages remain intact and that we find other other approaches to funding our discretionary projects for downtown. Um I would like to include on that list of explorations, how to power up the downtown Trevor City associations effectiveness, leverage their funding, um focus on on merchant um driven actions that I that I think will also result in resident return on investment.

Ken, I hope I didn't hurt anybody's feelings. I just I really wanted to I really wanted to like sometimes the the best thing that you can tell somebody is the truth regardless of how it how it comes across. Um, I I think I offered some suggestions that just input that will maybe help you get it across the finish line. Um, I we'll see. We'll see how it turns out. I'm I'm excited that the voters are going to have a say on this and I think it'll be very um it's going to change a lot of directions we go in in a lot of things.

So, we'll we'll see what the public sentiment is on this. All right. So, one of our strategic pillars is fostering a regional collaborative approach. And at its core, TIFF is a regional cost sharing tool and it's used to care for and improve a regional asset, which is our downtown. And I fully recognize there are many different perspectives on this tool and people are right to ask hard questions, but I don't think the answer is to walk away from the tool. I think it has proven um success over the last 30 years. I think the answer is to use it with clear priorities, with accountability, with a plan as Mr. House said, and to focus on projects that deliver real public value. And that really is the charge for this group. At the end of the day, this is going to come down to a pretty simple choice. Do we share the costs of downtown regionally or do we shift it onto city taxpayers and add these infrastructure needs to all of the competing priorities that we have with our general fund. So for me that's the fundamental question ultimately the question that will go to voters.

Thank you. And I'll we'll just keep going down the line. Um, yeah, I think um, look, I I voted for all the millages that we're paying right now and I support them, but I also think that we've been talking about TIFF renewal now for seven, eight years, and I haven't seen anything from the come from the county as an offer of, hey, we've got this tool over here. Why don't you stop that and let's discuss what this might look like? Let us offer to help. Um, I haven't heard a proposal for a millillage that would help us. I haven't. As a matter of fact, I think some people don't realize that when the road mill passes, it's literally what's yours is yours and what's ours is ours. So what city pack taxpayers pay into the road millillage comes back to the city. What goes from the county goes back to the county. So they don't help us with projects like 8th Street. They don't help us with East Front Street if we go and do that or front tearing up Front Street when we need to do the repairs. Um, so as much as I want I agree with the regional um approach that we've talked about for months now, this is the most guaranteed regional approach that I think we have and I think other options put the burden on taxpayer city taxpayers only even in some cases that have been suggested working uh people working in the city and no one else. And all of that equals an unfair burden onto us as residents who welcome in our surrounding county people to work and to shop and to do all these other things. And so I that's why I'm also for the split. I think some of the money should go back to the jurisdictions. They have their property values, everything else have been increased because of these investments over the last 30 years though. So they're already seeing the benefit in other parts. Um but I also want to point out that this is where where we get it. like we we are carry without this we carry the county and I love our county I think we've had the best relationship we've had in the last couple years that could change again in two more years um you know it was kind of Gary's point of this is we budget for a year but we have a forecast we're going to have a forecast now bodies change every couple of years and we might be able to get a five-year

agreement we're not going to get a 10 year or a 20 year or a 30 year from the county and so I think that we have to look at this as taxpayers as what's going to help us at the end of the day you know Some of this money goes back could be in the neighborhoods, but when the big bills come, are we gonna have a couple years where we don't do anything in the neighborhoods that we know need to be done? This creates a fund. This allows us to do this infrastructure and this uh this needed work. And that's when I was on the ad hoc, that's why I was pleased to see the list that came out this time for let's call our stretch goal of those projects, but the maintenance as well being accounted for because I don't see superolous things here. And in the past, there hasn't really been an opportunity to present it at a public meeting like this with input from both boards. And so I think sometimes in the the ether out there, it's been these are DDA projects for the DDA. I think if we look at this list, all of this is maintenance. And I would argue that Front Street, East Front Street, and those other projects that are on the wish list project list are maintenance as well. Those are things that the city needs to address. They're things we need to address with this complete streets projects. All of that stuff. This isn't just for the DDA. the DDA adds maybe some of the bells and whistles to it, but at the end of the day, these are all things that need to be done for us to have a healthy city that doesn't have giant potholes. And I'm going to be a little out of line for a second and say, so we don't have to fix the damn roads because we're fixing them the whole time. So, that's my two cents on it. Go ahead, Ed. Um, I appreciate the list that you put together, Harry and Ben put together of all the things that DDA has done uh and sort of paid for. Uh, I think that was the first time I've seen that list and I think it's pretty impressive and I just think it's kind of interesting because, you know, not as again not being a long-term resident of Traverse City, I see that list and then I also hear some of the back talk about the DDA and what the DDA did or didn't do. And at that point, I'm very disinterested because like I don't care what happened in the

past. I think we need to look at what we need to do for the future. And one of the things again being a uh a person who hasn't grew up in Michigan and knowing what other revenue opportunities that cities have in other states. Um if we talk about something like a county revenue share agreement, then damn it, our predecessor should have been working on that five years ago. And the fact is we're all here now, right? and we're trying to figure out what we need to do and how we're going to sort of resource our city for the foreseeable future. And so for me, I mean, as much as I would love to get into the the nuts and bolts of just looking at revenue sharing and how that could impact us to be, it hasn't been on the table. And we're essentially we are now at the point where we have to figure out how we want um to manage our incoming revenue at least for the next few years. And so for me, it's just um it's a no-brainer.

Uh thank you, Gary, for all your work. I just want to say thank you for this opportunity for all of us to come together and speak this evening. It's nice to know where the board with our commission stands with our DDA. Thank you, Mike.

Yeah, I agree. This has been really helpful. Really nice to hear uh the feedback. To me, it's just really clear. Um the city just has such great need and especially downtown and uh the DDA is a tool of the city commission. It's a tool of the city residents and I hope they will continue to use it because I believe it's a really important tool. Um there's just too many things that we're not even we're not addressing. It's not in the budget won't be in the budget and it's going to be a burden to the citizens and I really fear that letting this tool go is going to be a real loss. U so I hope Jeff

Yeah. Thank you. Um, you know, I was just thinking like let's say we put all the projects aside, all you know, the whole list, just if you look at the expense that the DDA covers of running downtown, I mean, we pay for the trash. So, I mean, without the DDA, um, it's on it's on the city and and and I'm also I'm a taxpayer within the TI district and I'm a taxpayer outside of the Tiff Tiff district. And I just think I'm like, man, like I hope my taxes don't go up. Thank you, Caitlyn. Thank you so much for the opportunity to come together this evening. It's been really helpful um to listen and learn from you all. I just appreciate it and hope for the best.

Thank you, Gary.

Oh, nice. Um, I just want to give a little context to because I keep hearing like other revenue shares or other states maybe need to add, but if we were we're considered a metropolitan area 50,000 um and that would be Trevor City, Growville, most of Garfield and then some of East Bay. In any other state, that's would be the size of the city. We would have extended our borders. Um, so because we're Michigan, we don't get to do that very easily. Um, and it probably won't be happening in my lifetime. So that is another reason why we we look at these uh TIFF. It's really why TIFF's been successful around the state because it helps address that deficiency um in our funding our funding, right? And allowing cities to grow as they as they need to. Um and I guess I just want a reminder that this isn't just about downtown. um the tax I I'm concerned about this is kind of had not fully thought out but when we start reducing the share right well we're also have to reduce the revenue projected revenue because that means you're going to be investing less in that engine of downtown which is also going to reduce the not just the downtown's taxable value but the adjacent areas because we've seen that we've seen that Fifth Street, Sixth Street, Seventh Street over here in Boardman their taxable values isn't just because they all invested in their houses is because they're next to a really strong economic engine of downtown that has helped their property values increase. So, if you bought in 188, sorry, 1989 and you still own your house, you you've seen a huge lift in your property values, even if you did nothing to your house. Um, and that's because of the strong downtown. And so, these all have ripple effects and cascading effects. It isn't in a vacuum of downtown. A strong downtown means all of our city residents

um enjoy some benefit to that. It it means the general fund is larger even outside of um counting the DDA impact in that sense. There's that adjacent stuff. So I think you know in 60 seconds that's about all I can cover on that but I know that to be true. Thank you. Yeah. I'll now Benjamin got up but I'll go ahead and put it to um well we'll start with you Harry since Benjamin's tech fixing although he's quick any questions like a good interview any questions that Harry or Ben have for us to clarify anything or anything that would help you

I just want to thank you for the opportunity I think we should do this annually whether there's a tiff on the ballot or not I think this is a good conversation I would also point out that based on tonight's conversation and subsequent DDA board conversations We will be doing some more civic engagement about some of the concepts we've talked to you tonight. So, please stay tuned for more information about those. Thank you. Anything? Nothing. Thank you. All right. Well, then with that, I'm going to open up public comment. Please approach the podium if you would like to make any public comment right now. Technically, this is a final public comment, so it can be about tonight's or anything under the sun. And the city clerk's going to announce the rules for public comment. Well, do we have do we have any They gave me a mic.

Okay. Do we have any public comment before? Okay, perfect. We'll give Sarah reason to read the rules. Go ahead, Sarah. We ask that you state your name and address. Indicate if you're a city resident, non- city resident, and or city business owner. We have a three-minute time aotment per speaker. When your time is elapsed, when your time has elapsed, the timer will beep. And finally, we request that all language be respectful to all parties.

Okay. My name is Grant Parsons. I live at uh 895 Washington Street in Traverse City. And uh it's been an interesting discussion and I do think two boards are complimentary but not the same at all. This is this this side is thinking they're talking about voting getting over that hurdle of getting TIP approved. You guys are talking about the plan if TIF is approved. I came here tonight with one thing to say and of course it's expanded since I've listened to you. The one thing I'd say is read and trust Judy Nelson's email that went out to you. I think all of you today, I know the city commission. Judy was a financial analyst in the federal government for years. She has expertise in finance and she has grown up here and returned here and she has fabulous discussion points even if you don't agree with with what what her conclusions are. Uh, finally, I hate to be smmerged and funk by agreeing with him, but I will tell you that voters effectively a year ago, as Shamro, the chairman Shamro said, uh, voted that they want to say,

they want to say for specific reasons, they won that vote. And if you don't know what their reasonings were, you're probably going to lose the next vote. And on a positive basis, because TIFF and DDA have been terrifically divisive in this community for years, really, sincerely, positively, I want you guys to succeed because I don't think anybody loves this community more than I do. And it's failing on the unity level. And so if you have asked voters why they voted against TIFF when they voted, but they want the say, they don't trust DDA to have the say, they want to vote before you approve. In other words, if you don't know why they made that vote, ask the leaders of the opposition who encouraged and and worked for that vote. They can tell you what their pitch was. They can tell you what their ideas were. For example, go back to the original mission statement for TIFF 97 from 1997. You won't there is no virtually no relationship of that mission statement of the promise of it and what you're doing today. If you think that you want to continue the 1997 base rate, how much time do I have, Ben? Okay, you're making a mistake.

Thank you, Grant. And I want to say thank you for your first comment, I believe, as as a city resident. So, thank you.

I can't see the clock. 30.

Thank you. Rick Buck Alter, 932 Kelly Street and Travis City resident. Boy, I was dazzled with your brilliance, but I have no idea what you're talking about, even though I know every subject in great detail, but as a member of the public, I have no idea what this two-hour session accomplished. We're going to sum it up. They want to do what and why. I have no idea. So, good luck to you on that. Second, I'd like to point out that the DDA has become an entitlement program. Like you feel the community owes you something and you're going to find out the hard way in November that that's not true. In the meantime, since I have only two minutes and 30 seconds, I want to point something out. The DD act DDA act was created in 1975 to solve a concern that statewide and that was that malls were going to take stores out of downtown the downtowns would decline and it may have been happening in Detroit at the time. So, one of the conditions in 1978 when the Traverse City decided to create the ordinance to create the DDA, I'm doing some research right now and honestly I'm not done with it. I've been digging into this for a year, including news articles going back to that date. The DDA was required in their determination about whether to create the DDA. that were required to prevent evidence to the city commission, not the DDA, that there was in fact a problem with declining property values. That hurdle had to be cleared in order for the city to create a downtown development authority. And there is no evidence whatsoever that that was ever

the situation in Traverse City at all. So the DDA technically has no right to exist even though nothing's going to be done about just almost 40 years ago. But that was the situation and not one of you tonight showed any concern whatsoever to have a a substantial meeting with the the boards of nine or 11 different taxing jurisdictions who have been without money since 1970 1985. Excuse me. The second issue is that's a requirement that the city provide before creating the DDA provide time for the boards of all these taxing jurisdictions to meet with you probably with each one with their attorneys and accountants in in hand at the meeting for each of these boards to determine if they want to pull out of it before the DDA's created this before any discussion about tiff and that opportunity from what I can find to this date today they were never afforded the opportunity and with what you're deciding they have unless you let it terminate in November

book your time for comment has elapsed we want to provide equal I'll defer to the mayor but we do generally provide equal time for everyone it's up to the mayor though yes please finish your sentence not what you're talking about tonight is again, not giving each of the boards with their attorneys and accountants a chance to understand the implications to them because this meeting has been about Thank you, Rick. You finished your sentence. Thank you. Your time is elapsed. Thank you very much. Any other public comment?

Okay, seeing none, I'll bring it back. Um, we have a large board, so I will not go for final thoughts for anybody, but I just wanted to thank everybody for coming, the public for coming and listening. Um, the both boards for meeting together. I agree with the sentiment. We should probably do this annually, if not more often as things arise. Um, I'm very grateful for the new newish leadership at both uh boards bringing us all together. And I hope everyone has a wonderful evening. And we don't have a meeting here next week, but we have our um shared agreements. We do. We have a regular meeting next a regular commission meeting is this coming Monday.

Oh yeah, sorry. This is the 13th. We do have a regular commission meeting next week on the 20th. It is a regular business meeting. It will be here at 7 p.m. It's We have a shared agreements at the end of the month. So, thank you all very much and have a great night.

Question.