001Welcome. This is the um special August 5th meeting of the Geneva 34 school board. Bonnie, would you call the role? >> Here. here. >> Here. >> Nice to have you all here. Next item is the pledge. The flag is back there in the corner. I'll lead it. I pledge 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. I guess anybody who wanted to sign the attendance sheet has done so. Item two, recognition, awards, presentations, and public hearings. Seems like the last one might be the most relevant. Andy? Yeah, thanks uh uh for the opportunity to share tonight. And so, first, thanks to the board for uh being willing to uh figure out how to get
002a special meeting on the books. This is um an issue we've been uh working on and working through for a good chunk of the summer now at this point. Um and we're really nearing the finish line and so we're grateful uh to be able to have this opportunity for um a discussion about this uh project. Um also want to thank um and I'm sure we'll hear from uh him in a bit, Ken Flory from Robin Schwarz who's really been instrumental in helping us work through this. he and his associate Britney Ty have really done so much work to help us uh help Todd and I as we've been working through this whole process. So, um I want to share with you kind of where we're at at this point. Um I'm happy to answer as
003many questions as I can and um I know Ken uh is available and and happy to answer questions, too. So, here's here's where we're at. Uh just start with a little background and context um to as a recap. remember that uh the developer show has proposed and been working uh with Captain Hills for potential annexation of this large property out west known as the Ryan property. It's been potentially several developments uh over the last 30 years um settlements of Lox at one point most recently the uh PI development that St. Charles was considering annexation for and now um the name of this potential development is Lefox of Canton Hills. Um so approximately 900 units any of the units that would be uh built in any of these parcels as you see are within uh Geneva
004304 only. Um while some of the land in this development, particularly up here in the northeast corner, um is uh not in our district. Um you can see they don't have plans at this time to put any homes in there. So any of the homes uh residences in this development would be within our district. Uh it's a 15 to 20 year time horizon. So we hear and you know theoretically it could be hundreds of new hundreds of new students for Geneva 304. Um so we had as you know as we've shared a lot of discussions about this over the summer several ongoing meetings with the village um and the developer. Um as you know we sought cash considerations in lie of land as outlined in the ordinance by the village of Campton Hills. um because
005we know that new students will have impact right on the district on facilities on um technology needs, transportation, any of the resources that we have obviously you know teachers anything right um and obviously you know we want to make sure we're maintaining a high quality education for all of our current students and any new students that are generated by this development. So, um, at this point, what we've got before you tonight, uh, and what we're happy to dig into and answer more questions about, if you have them, is a a developer donation agreement, um, that we've worked through, uh, with the developer um, to theoretically put the district on sound financial footing, um, if this development comes to fruition. So, there's several things we can talk to, but really kind of three key details that
006I think are most important for us to consider. First is uh a financial contribution of uh $6,800 per residence paid to the district uh at the time of permit. Um, so at the time any new residence, you know, gets that permit, there's a $6,800 per residence um, contribution made to the district uh, by the developer with a uh, annual CPI adjustment because we know if this is going to be a 15 to 20 year timeline, um, you know, $6,800 is going to be a different amount of money 15 20 years from now. Um, so we've uh built into this uh you know uh CPI adjustment. This would amount to approximately $6.1 million over the course of the development construction. And that's before CPI growth. Again, obviously a lot of this depends on um how many
007homes they build per year and when they permit those homes um and all that kind of stuff, but it would be approximately 6.1 million before that CPI growth. So more than that, uh, the next big piece, and we we touched on this a little bit at our previous meeting, um, but we've spent more time digging into this, uh, with them and and building this into the the agreement. So, there are potential tiff implications. We understand and learned just right before our last meeting that um the the village and the developer are are considering um creating a tiff to complete this project. I don't we don't know for sure that that will happen. They've not gone through any of the formal things to make that happen yet at this point. Um but it's on the table
008and us knowing it was on the table meant we wanted to make sure we were protecting the district if that came to fruition. Uh so the language that's built into that is to note that uh the tax increment right that's remember when they construct when they start a tiff uh if a tiff was started we would get the baseline property value uh in taxes at the start of that tiff. That's what we would get and then any new growth is called the increment and that would come that would be on top. We would keep getting that base amount and the increment would be used to for infrastructure things and you know mostly what we're hearing is is um some of the water aspects of the project. >> Yeah, the increment is thanks Ken. the increment
009is controlled by the village and not the developer. Um so the village controls that increment. Um and what we've built in is if a tiff is established, it would be that increment would be used to pay the district full per capita tuition amount for each and every student enrolled in the district that resides in any uh residence. Right? So a simple way to think about it is um you know kids in seats in the district right so if in the first year of that development there's 10 kids from the boundaries of that development who come to Geneva 304 we will get our per capita you know per pupil expenditure for each of those 10 kids uh if the every year right so if the next year it's those 10 plus 10 more then we would
010get that for 20 kids, right? Um >> the fi So the financial contribution at the top, right? That's a onetime payment. >> The the the per per pupil expenditure would be, you know, ongoing throughout the duration of the tiff. Um for context, our you know recent per pupil expenditure is uh around 18,000 between 18 and $19,000 and that will obviously that grows every year. That would continue to grow. Um and whatever that amount was in the most recent year is the amount we would get per student generated by the development. Um part of >> I just Oh, sorry. Go ahead. >> Please go ahead. >> Okay. So what you're saying is our base tax amount that we would get no matter what because they can't they can't take that. So whatever the base um property
011value is at the time the tiff is created that's what the taxes amount is created from and then we get our portion and anything extra would go to the the tiff essentially but that base amount wouldn't cover tuition essentially and so whatever amount of tuition it doesn't cover they still have to pay us is that >> that would come from the increment and maybe Ken if you just want to stand at the mic so that they Yeah, record you and any time you want to jump in and say I know more than Andy on this, feel free. >> So before it would go to the TIFF, it would come to us. So we got that full 18,000. >> There's no offset from the original taxes that you'll continue to receive. This you'll receive the baseline
012taxes and the per tu per student tuition. >> So your question I think I understand your question. question is what if in the first year? >> Uh there's 10 kids generated. >> Yeah. >> Or and that would there isn't enough in the increment to or you're saying there is enough in the increment to cover that but then that the increment would basically cover just those 10 kids. >> Is that what you're >> right? So then so what if like whatever the increment is what um >> the increment is like the new growth on top >> and that's what goes to the tiff or to whatever the >> tiff fund >> that goes to the tiff fund is the increment so we get what whatever the base value was which is what we're getting now >>
013you continue to get that throughout the life of the test >> right so then we just don't get any growth but our expectation is then that that might not meet our base needs to to educate those kids. So, we're going to take from the increment the amount that we need for tuition first. Is that am I understanding that correctly? Okay. >> Regardless of the the original base that you'll continue to receive. >> So, we might not get full growth, but we'll at least get what it will cost to put a one of those students through school for a year. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Correct. For every year. >> For Yeah. And that would happen every year until the tiff ended. >> Yes. And then and then you access all that new value, >> the
014growth again. >> That's that's the investment of sorts. If tiffs the concept is they couldn't tiff this >> um unless it would develop without the tiff money, right? >> It has to be contingent on it. Otherwise, it's not a legal tiff. >> Okay. >> And that's all qu that's all a question that needs to be answered yet by >> The village not to do a study. It takes it takes a good year or so. >> Yeah. And we don't know that, but that's why we built this in here to make sure we are protected should that happen. >> Yeah. So that we at least have the amount that it's going to cost to educate those kids even if we don't have full growth. >> Yeah. And the tiff, their justification for the tiff is that
015the cost for the water uh sewer and water from the water district, that cost is so high. There's probably going to be a water tower um that they couldn't develop this without tiff money to build that infrastructure. >> Okay. Thanks. Sometimes tips get a little bit confusing, so I wanted to clarify. >> You did say if they go to the tip. If they for whatever reason decided not to go to the tip and then they went ahead with the project, then we the district would have access to the full value of the tax assessment. Then >> that's correct. And would not get the per pupil expenditure. >> Financial contribution. Yes. But then there's no need for the tuition because you're getting property taxes. >> Yeah. The financial contribution is built into this regardless of of
016the tiff, right? The financial contribution is there as an agreement no matter what. The per pupil expenditure for uh you know students in seats is a you know if it's if there's a tiff then we would get that. If there's not then we would not. Does that make sense? In some scenarios, the tuition would exceed that what you're getting from property parents depending on how many kids come from the house. >> Yeah, that's the interesting thing to really think about and it is I think um we don't know, right? There are there could be some scenarios where uh depending on how many kids are generated through this agreement, the district could be actually getting capturing more revenue than we than we would be from, you know, especially maybe early in the development before, you know,
017the full value of of the whole development is established. though. Um, and then so one more piece of of that to note is that built into the language also is that we're we we would be acknowledging as a district, okay, we're agreeing to this uh um you know this per pupil expenditure, we're also noting that we as a district will not formally object to the creation of the TIFF. um doesn't mean that we're saying we would throw it a parade or you know you know it doesn't mean that we we would be cheerleaders for it. It just says we're agreeing to this if we're going to take the per pupil expenditure we're agreeing to not object as they go through the process >> and and that I think the expectation would be a positive vote
018at the joint review. >> Yes, I think that's correct. >> Okay. So I did have a question. So we would be part of the joint review board just like we are in Geneva then. Okay. And then is there a timeline on a point where we weren't able to object to a tiff? Because I couldn't tell from the language in the contract. Like if they wanted to create a tiff to build this development, we wouldn't object. But let's say in like 10 years they're like, "No, now we need to create a tiff." Are we still not objecting? Or if they create a tiff and then like we've had recently where they were like, "We need to extend the tiff." Would we still just not have a say in that? like so I'm thinking more like 10
01915 25 years down the road. >> So the tiff goes for 23 years and then it gets extended only by agreement of the school. So that's a whole separate you'd be asking for more money at that point. >> Okay. So we wouldn't be bound by this contract to still not disagree or to still not challenge the >> treation not the extension. >> Okay. Okay perfect. >> Could have said creation and extension but we saved that. >> Yeah. If they do, if they go that way, then they have to talk to us again. >> Then we'll do it. Yeah. Okay, perfect. >> Willard. >> Yeah, I had a question. So, >> yes, sir. >> When you brought up the waste water, I was looking into that and thinking about it. Uh, so would there be in
020some cases I I did some research just looking into these kinds of um annex annexations, if you will. Um so is there a risk that there may be overlapping water and waste water um utility infrastructure with this um development? I mean you say that they're going to possibly put up a water tower, but how do you is it going to be self-contained or are they going to get with double expenses? >> They're separate just like in any other village. You could mix up waste water and >> oh not waste water but I'm just saying will they be overlap because it the research shows that there are some cases where there are overlapping expenses for people who have annexed into existing districts but it's just that's just the science looking at it. I'm just wondering >>
021yeah I mean there when there there's going to be some I think if your question is are there both waste water and and sewage and water supply >> can't be self-contained. It has to be self utilities. Yeah. They're going to dig the same trench for a lot of these utilities. They usually stack them on top of each other. >> So will that cost that expense. Would that be just for the people in Cantham Hills or would that be part of our expense? >> So the tiff increment is used to pay for that. >> So that's the big if that's a condition, right? Uh so what if they don't I mean so then what do we what >> if they don't go with the tip. Yeah. Then theoretically developer >> the developer would be figuring out
022how to pay for that out of whatever their financial plan is for the development >> and that's they have to show a plan without the tiff then they pay for all that util the infrastructure and it won't make money it's not feasible but if the tiff comes in and pays for that then it is feasible they have to show that those calculations it's called a but for test but for the tiff this wouldn't Yes. Be feasible. >> Exactly. Yes. Right. >> Thank you. >> Anybody else? Okay. And the la the last component here um and this is a a fairly new um wrinkle. Uh the district would included in the agreement would be the district granting the developer a utility easement um through a district-owned property at the corner of Keslinger on Brundage. So, let
023me show you this um and talk you through this a little bit. So, here is the whole development. Again, we were just looking at this. Um, you see, you know what I'm going to do is I'm going to end the show um so that this can be a little bigger and I can point. So, this is this is the whole development right here. Um, this is the train tracks, right? And right down here at the very bottom is Keslinger Road. Okay. So, right here is Mil Creek School. Right where my cursor, you see that? This yellow box roughly is a 25ish acre parcel um that the district owns and has owned for some time. Um and there were potentially a few potential different uses for it over the years. the district, as I understand, put
024it on the market for a while, took it off the market um when we felt a while back we couldn't get our asking price. And so this property is sitting here. What we've agreed to is um and this kind of goes to uh Dr. Hook's point, um the developer would be getting the the water for this from the Mil Creek Water Reclamation District, which is all over here, right? So, uh, and potentially some of the utilities from over here, too. So, they would like an easement to this property to get the water and the utilities at all the appropriate setbacks and everything um through this property to their development. Um, we agree to that or we propose agreeing to that and we believe that's in the best interest of the district because the other thing
025that that does is that makes that property much more valuable to us because now that property has all those utilities there. Um, and whether we decide down the road that there's something we need to do with that 30 acres of land, we now have utilities and don't have the cost of running all those utilities to that property. We decide we need to do something else with it. Maybe, you know, there's somebody else who this has been developed and there's something else that would be valuable there. that makes that property more valuable to a buyer that the utilities are already there and they wouldn't have to do the very heavy lift to get utilities there and the easement uh will only go within the the open space between a building theoretical building and the lot line
026the setback. So let's say it's a 30 foot setback it would have to go within that 30 foot non-buildable area. So it's the ease of it's not going to interfere with any future building plans by you or anybody else. >> So uh if I may. So, this is part of the overlap issue I was wish I was talking about because um those that live in Mil Creek like I do and other taxpayers um there have been over the years, the last 20 years at least that I've been there 23 years. Um there are occasions where the water reclamation district does changes like taking out radium. They will do other kinds of things. This is what I was talking about in terms of the possible overlap >> where it's not just really self-contained because that makes
027me wonder is that going to have I don't know I won't say tax implications but would it add to the cost of those residents in Mil Creek? >> Um >> yeah because that's where they get the water from. >> Yeah. You're you're asking could this have implications on um could the utility extension have implications on other residents who are currently accessing those utilities? Yeah, fair question. >> Yeah. The answer is no. That's going to be paid for by the tiff or the developer >> if they go with the tiff. >> Well, the tiff the the tiff will pay for that extension or the developer will. Nobody else is going to fund that extension. >> Okay. I mean I guess >> okay the worst case scenario the fire the water district >> pays for it >>
028and then would tax everyone take from the the tax it already >> uh receives from every resident not just Mil Creek >> well >> which I think which is why the tiff is on the table which is why they're talking about it because the water district in their conversations like we've been having would say there's no way to fund that without some different mechanism to fund that. The water district can't fund that from their current >> they demanding multiple millions of dollars for that infrastructure from the developer. >> Right. That is why I brought that up because over the the last at least my history last 23 years they will increase the rate you know because of what's happening internally in Mil Creek as it stands. So that's why I'm wondering it's inherently going to
029be an overlap because they deal with the waste water and the the water that we drink. So um yeah this is interesting. So th those are the those are the big pieces. Um, I don't know if there are other questions or concerns or um, comments the board wants to have. Um, one I could throw in a couple comments about the agreement and glad to answer any questions. >> Thanks, Ken. >> Significantly, you can use the the uh, financial contribution, the $6,800 per house for any educational expenses. uh if traditional impact fees are have more limited usage. So, they've agreed to uh expand the allowed uses of of the impact fee, which is which is very important because you you're not likely going to build a new school over there. >> And to clarify again, that
030$6,800 whether or not they have students coming to the school, it's just once you get the permit to build the house, >> correct? >> Plus plus CPI growth, >> right? >> Yes. But no matter what, just when that house when that residence has a permit for it and it doesn't um uh there's no uh qualifier on size either. Sometimes in instances like this there's you know qualifiers on the size of the residence or you know >> two bedroom three bedroom right? Or if it's a multi-unit because they're they are doing some multi-units I This is just if it's a residence, it's $6,800 plus the CPI. >> So if it's a multi-unit, let's say it's four unit, >> that would be four times 6,800, >> correct? >> Not one for the >> That's four residents. Yep.
031Good question. >> And we have that they must pay the uh it's the developer's responsibility to pay the the fee before the permit when it applies for the permit. So to double check, you know, another check and balance, we will ask the village to require proof of payment before they issue the permit. And the best we'll do that through the zoning process is a conditional approval of the zoning. >> Are there other other key things you think we should note, Ken? >> Uh let's see. So we talked about the financial contribution. um talked about the tiff talked about it's mutual releases u which is important because no future homeowner can come back and say the $6800 payment wasn't right or the tuition payment wasn't right. No one else can benefit from this. There's no there's
032no third party beneficiaries to this. Um there's a couple like uh even though this is signed by the developer, there's a couple typos when the developer made some edits that we'll fix and then get it resigned and then signed by the board if the board approves it tonight. And this will be recorded. So if some other builder buys land, they know what they're that what the fees uh what the cost for the permit fee or the impact fee as well as the tuition fee was. Yeah, I think it's also worth noting um and we kind of talked about this at a previous meeting, but uh the reason we had a special meeting tonight is because the village will be considering the annexation agreement next week. I think at the same time that we have a
033board meeting. Um, and we recognize I think they recognize and we recognize that uh it's in everybody's best interest to have this um in place by the time the village is considering that annexation agreement. It's in everybody's best interest to have this in place. So, we wanted to have this meeting this week um and be able to have some of these important conversations now. If we're going to get this in place, uh, that puts everybody in the best position possible before the village of Campton Hills has their annexation potential annexation discussion next week. That's right, Ken. >> Yeah. >> And another point about will we what happens 10 years from now, who's watching this? Uh, because it's recorded, it'll show up on every home's title report and they want to release from us that that
034it's been paid so the title company doesn't object. So that's that's we won't give them the release until they they pay us. So, it's a couple different ways to make sure we get paid. One quick question on the we we do not know how Captain Hills is planning to set up the tiff because there are some existing homes in that lox area that we are not that that currently are in our sub in our district and I assume are paying taxes to us. So, if they is there a possibility that they could make a little bit wider um area there to cover some of those homes and would that impact us negatively in any way? >> So, we're only agreeing to a tiff that addresses the showain property not not in anything. If they tried
035to expand it, we'd say, "Listen, that's not the deal." >> Okay. then it's then it's a good oldfashioned fight. >> It still might end up doing it, but it would be over our objections and we'd have the same ability to object that we would anyways. >> We're not waving that objection. >> Oh, go ahead. >> Yeah. Um, want to kind of continue the line of thought that Willard had in regard to the water utility. Um, have we had conversation with the water district in regard to their their current plant and the capacity to be able to service these 900 homes over the next 25 years or whatever? Because I think that's what Willer's trying to get at is is >> will there have to be some at the plant itself not I get what's happening
036at the at the development but at the plant itself is there enough capacity or will they have to do some expansion in order and so that cost >> I think is what Willer is trying to get at will be will be extended out to the current users of Mil Creek water utility and so you know that cost will be passed on basically to the current residents So because that anyway that is my question. I don't know if that's >> and so I just wonder if a conversation has been has been made with the water utility in regard to their ability at as the plant currently stands. Are they able to handle the wastewater and the water that comes with putting it 900 homes? >> So Jodine and the village have been talking with the water
037uh reclam the >> water district. >> Yeah. Water reclamation district. water reclamation and >> that's the the water reclamation district said you have to pay us $20 million >> or whatever the number is and when they heard that number that's to expand existing facilities to run the lines everything all the impact >> okay >> so that it doesn't pass it on to the other home >> okay yeah so >> that's again that's that's that job is for the village and showing okay >> we've been aware of that and that's again that's a justification for the t if there is a tip, right? Or or is it >> If there's no tip, then shooting pays a shine pays. >> Yeah, I I think >> Go ahead. >> My sense would be I mean, I can't say
038this for sure. I don't know what would happen, but my >> um my my sense would be uh to your point, Dan, once once it's established that the water reclamation district would need this much new infrastructure, not just in the neighborhood, right? of course, >> but yeah, at the plant, all that kind of stuff once it's established that the water reclamation district would need that additional infrastructure to the tune of 20ome million dollars. And they're saying they're having the same discussion with the developer that we are, right? And they're saying, you've got to be able to give us this or we can't, you know, this is not sustainable and this won't work. And that I think was the impetus for this conversation. I think to your question, I mean, I can't say this for sure,
039but I think they they might say if there's that much financial need for um for the water reclamation district for the infrastructure and they can't figure out how to get the money from, say, the TIFF, then the project itself might not be feasible and they might just like several of the other projects that have come and gone over the that that could happen. Yeah, it could not materialize because yes, Chin would have to pay it, but maybe they would say they can't pay it because they they don't have it, right? >> Well, yeah, the water reclamation district has to agree to allow them to connect. So, they they have control over the development, >> right? So, um and I can say that over the last 23 years, they've expanded that capacity once. And I remember
040that per household they increased the bill for 12 months for $100. That was about 10 15 years ago, I believe. And so that's kind of jolt that we want to try to avoid for not just the people who are in this development, but also for the existing residents to use that district, right? A water reclamation district. >> Yeah. I think Ken's point was uh I'm glad he just said that the water recommend water reclamation district has the power to say yes or no. Right. If >> Yes. >> If they can't get to the pipe then you can't do the thing. Right. Right. >> So >> they don't have there's no right to hook up to them. They have to agree to allow them to hook up grant them a permit. >> So the only way
041they're going to agree is to you know >> right >> different question. And I hope it's in order. I'm not sure. So for this per household um assessment, uh I'm just trying to understand uh how people who are living in the district um east of the Fox River, does that mean that there's going to be more allocation of resources for these influx of students uh on the schools that are west of the the uh river? And would that create inequity uh or the appearance of an inequity in terms of upgrades, resources, things like that? >> Yeah, fair question. I think as Ken noted, one of the benefits um of the agreement that we've negotiated is that impact fee >> we can, you know, spend on on any educational cost. Um, and the same as that
042per pupil expenditure when that comes in, that goes to our bottom line and then that's on Todd to spend that as our district sees fit because we recognize that you could have kids there who need to come all the way over here to the high school and the needs might be at the high school or whatever, right? So, we can um, so I would not envision this being a scenario where this creates some kind of inequitable spend. I would take it that you would have to make that crystal clear to the the teachers, the students, the residents as well because again we want appear how you say reduce the appearance or the likelihood that would be the way people >> right while still recognizing there is a potential that um you know you you're probably
043going to need to spend more of that money in the places where those kids are. So, you know, if those kids are at, and we haven't even gotten that far yet, but say those kids were at Mil Creek School or at Fabian School, well, you're going to need to put more resources in those places for those kids in those places. But that's not um that's not any different than what it is right now where there might be more kids at, you know, X school where that means there's more teachers at that school because, you know, there's more kids or whatever. >> And you're just saying you have capacity that so that that helps. >> Yes. Correct. >> But logistically, as I'm thinking about the location, um, and I just kind of mapped it out. So,
044it's like, uh, from that development proposed area to say the middle schools about 10 minute drive that is for the school buses. But my point is, would it be likely that you're going to have students from this development to go to school at Harrison Street? Not likely. >> Not likely. And that and that's why I said the appearance of inequity u because even though you're saying you're going to distribute it, you still have added cost maintenance um those kinds of things >> on those schools that are going to be west of the uh river. >> Correct. >> That's why I asked that question. >> Yeah. >> And we'll be talking about that. I mean our just our general capital needs a lot of talk coming up about that here over the next several meetings. And
045that goes to why again we thought it was so important to make sure that that money coming in was money we could use on kind of any cost for the district >> even though the cost will increase most likely west of the Fox River. >> Right. >> Yep. >> On on that note, is this going to um be on the budget as a separate line item or in a separate account or just like total bottom line kind of thing? What will that look like so when we see it? >> Yeah. So we already uh designate developer contributions into the operations of main accounts as segregated accounts so that we can um set those aside um because there are some uh contingencies placed upon the use of those funds. Um so when you see your typical
046reports from me you'll see where we have uh two asset accounts. One is the traditional operations and maintenance. One is a set aside from developer contributions that we received over time. This would be in a second account because it doesn't have the same restrictions. >> Yes. So we just create another asset account. So we go from two to three and that money comes into that. So we could account for it directly for that particular development. >> Okay. There's no further questions at the moment. Um, I think we need to move on to item three and then four would be an opportunity for the board to formally consider this. >> Item three is public comments. Would you like to say anything? Anyone like to say anything? Bonnie, is anybody request? No. Okay. Well, that item is
047then complete. Item four, board dialogue topics and pending action consideration. Item number one section is the developer donation agreement Fox of Campton Hills. Questions or discussion? Think we had a pretty robust one. Thank you. Thank you. So then the question would be vote to support it. >> We need a motion. >> Motion to approve the >> developer >> donation agreement. donation agreement >> subject to review by your attorney because we're going to have to tweak some of >> subject to review by our attorney. >> Would you would you say that motion again? I'm sorry. What? >> Sorry. >> It's motion to >> motion to approve the developer donation agreement for the Lefox of Captain Hills subject to the review of our attorney. >> Gotcha. Thank you, >> Andy. I'm sorry. I had one more question
048that I for I know we talked about it last board meeting but if you could refresh my memory in regard to that first amount. How do we come with that $6,800 or what how do we come to that dollar amount again? >> Yeah. So, um I mean I think one way to think of it is we we were looking at the land cash ordinance that's in place. Uh and that's kind of where that big 6.1 number came from, right? that 6.1 million came from and then we kind of backtracked that per residence. Does that sound about >> It's a negotiated number based on their ordinance. >> Okay. Okay. It was negotiated. >> Ken said it better than Andy. So that's why that's why Ken's here. >> Any other questions? We'll need a second for that.
049Okay. >> We have a motion by Paul and second by Dan. >> I nay. I >> I >> Okay, that completes item four. Is there any other questions rel relative to the agenda. I just wanted to thank Todd uh for all his work on this. Again, thank Ken and and his colleague Britney for all their uh time and effort. Um, and again, uh, thank you all for the support as we worked through this. So, um, really trying to work hard to just do the best for our district that we could. So, thanks for the thanks for the time and effort. It it is truly appreciated. >> True. The last item would be a motion to adjurnn. >> So moved. >> Second. >> I. All in favor? I I >> oppos same sign. >> Thank you
050so much everybody. See you Monday.