HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-09-04-8:30AM-WORKSHOP
BRAZOS COUNTY.- - BRYAN, TEXAS ~~ex~~~~~-a
NOTICE OF MEETING
AND AGENDA
SI2AZOS COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT
WORKSI30P SESSION
THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF BRAZOS COUNTY WILL MEET IN A
WORKSHOP SESSION ON THURSDAY 4 SEPTEMBER 2008 AT 8:30 A_M_ IN THE COMMISSIONERS COURTROOM OF TAE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
BUILDING, 200 SOUTH TEXAS AVENUE, SUITE 106, BRYAN, TEXAS.
1. Call to Order
2_ Discussion regarding Brazos County's Economic Development Iaceatives_
3_ Adjourn
The County Administration Building is handicap accessible. Handicap parking spaces are available- Any request for sign interpretive services must be made two working days before the meeting. To make arrangements, please call (979) 361-4102_
Office of the County Judge • 200 South Texas Ave. • Suite 332 Bryan, Texas 77803 • Fax: (979) 361-4503
I loo. IIQ
I of 24
COMMISSIONERS' COURT
WORKSHOP SESSION
September 4th, 2008
The Commissioners' Court of Brazos County, Texas met
in a Workshop Session on Thursday the 4th of September, 2008
at 8:30 a.m. in the Commissioners' Courtroom of the County
Administration Building, 200 South Texas Avenue, Suite 106,
Bryan, Texas, 77803, with the following members of the
Court present:
Randy Sims, County Judge, Presiding;
Lloyd Wassermann, Commissioner of Precinct 1; absent.
Duane Peters, Commissioner of Precinct 2;
Kenny Mallard, Commissioner of Precinct 3;
Carey Cauley, Commissioner of Precinct 4;
Karen McQueen, County Clerk.
Attached is a list of the citizens and officials in
attendance.
Attached is a transcript of the meeting.
Vol 0 Page I b)-,
2 of 24
BRAZOS COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT
Brazos County Economic Development Incentives
September 4th, 2008
Sims: I will call this workshop into session. The Commissioners' Court of
Commissioner Cauley, Commissioner Mallard, myself and
Commissioner Peters are all in attendance. It is 8:30 and this has to do
with the budget of the RVP. With that in mind, I'm assuming that yall
have some ...as you well know, so far, we have not put in the $300,000.00
for the incentive fund to be used here in Brazos County. So, if you will,
please let me give a few instructions; please turn your cell phones off or
put them on mute and when you make your presentation come up to the
speakers podium so that we can get it where we can record it.
Commissioners, do you have any comments to make before we start with
RVP?
Mallard: Judge, I appreciate it, I'm the one that kind of set up this workshop to
visit. I know there have been some concerns about the incentive
guidelines and how they were set up and the process so I thought it would
be good to have a workshop and have members from the RVP come by
and visit with us about those guidelines. I think we had some folks that
wanted to speak to go over some of that and tell us about how the
guidelines have worked in the past and what we're working with. So if
that is ok with you.
Sims: That's fine. Just give us your name and address as you come up to the
speaker's podium so that we can get that on the recording.
Anderson: Good morning, my name is John Anderson, I reside at 200 Fireside
Circle, College Station, Brazos County, Texas. As further information,
not only do I own property in College Station, but I own property in
Bryan so I consider myself a citizen of Bryan and College Station. I
appreciate the opportunity to be here this morning.
I want to give you a little background on the Research Valley Partnership
which had been in the past, the Bryan/College Station Economic
Development Corporation. Prior to the establishment of what was the
EDC, by some visionary people in the community, Bryan/College Station
were at odds over economic development. Intercommunity strife ...this is
a fact, I've seen it...caused desirable capital investors/employers to look
Vol 11 a\ Page I t03
3 of 24
elsewhere. The RVP...or the EDC, at the time ...was created to help us
present at unified front, to recognize that we are all in this together, and
to provide the tools for coherent controls and appropriate growth.
Many of us...and I'm almost 64 this month ...look back, fondly, on the
good `ole days. And, yes, I was there during the good `ole days. But I
also believe that these are the good `ole days. A lot of us think of the
good `ole days as before growth and changes. However, there is
evidence, hard evidence, that if a community does not grow, it dies. And
further, because of Texas A&M University and our geographic
location... we always talk about how we're three and a half hours from
over 17 million people; we can not help but grow. The Research Valley
Partnership's charge is to direct that growth so that more A&M graduates
can remain here with attractive careers. Spouses of A&M professors and
leaders can have career opportunities.
And we're charged with attracting clean enterprises with high capital
investment, high salaries, and employment that does not overly tax our
infrastructure; that is fire departments, roads, and schools.
The whole time that I have been in Bryan/College Station... 1985 is when
I got here ...we have not had high unemployment. But we have had
underemployment at times and, when appropriate, we addressed that.
The Economic Development Corporation and the Research Valley
Partnership have been good stewards of the resources with which they
have been entrusted. None of our competitive successes have cost us...I
mean you and me...more than half of what the competition has offered.
Now, would it be better to achieve our designed growth with no
incentives? Absolutely. When I was on the board of the then EDC, none
of us wanted there to be great incentives... it was in no one's best interest
to go overboard on incentives. And we didn't. But the world in which we
live doesn't allow for us to deal in zero incentives. We use the least
expensive incentives first such as tax abatement for a limited time one
capital investment which would not otherwise happen.
Now bottom line is that incentives are not an expense; they are an
investment. Investment which has generated enormous return for Bryan,
College Station, Brazos County, and our citizens of about 25% a year
since 1997.
We require certain performance standards by those who receive
incentives and, overall, they have greatly exceeded those requirements.
By any measure, the EDC/RVP has been a success.
Vol I i d\ Page 10
4 of 24
We have mentioned the guidelines that we have for economic
development. They are intentionally just that... guidelines. We rely on
honorable, wise people to exercise good judgment and to be good
stewards of those resources. The guidelines, occasionally, have been
changed but they have stood us in good stead.
I like to look at this process ...and it is a process ...as one that applies with
the rotary four-way test. I don't know if yall are familiar with the rotary
four-way test; is it the truth, is it fair to all concerned, will it build good
will and better friendships, and will it be beneficial to all concerned? At
least to the extent possible. I think that is what we have done.
What we want here is a win, win, win, win, win...I don't know how
many times you can say that but we want it to be a win for Bryan,
College Station, Brazos County, our citizens, and the companies that look
to us to locate to grow their businesses. Thank you.
Sims: Thank you. Anyone else?
McDaniel: Good morning, my name is Todd McDaniel, President and CEO of the
Research Valley Partnership. And when Kenny suggested that we host
this workshop... from a staff perspective, we felt that was really a great
idea. What we really want to focus on and would love to hear from the
Commissioners' Court and get some direction is on the guidelines. The
incentive fund ...we understand the constraints that the County faces this
fiscal year and we'll defer to the wisdom of the Commissioners' Court on
that. We appreciate the fact that the Commissioners' Court and the
budget, at present, does allow for an increase to our funds for operations.
So we stand ready to work on that. There are obligations but, again, we
understand the situation at hand.
As it relates to the guidelines, I think John as a past chairman really kind
of echoes the staff s perspective in a sense that these are guidelines.
Those are the rules that we play by. So whether it's a new company or an
existing industry... here are our guidelines. It's literally at the discretion
of all three of our funding partners the two cities and the County to
ultimately decide whether or not the incentives is a good deal, it makes
sense, it's the right policy, etc.. And we try to take every project and treat
it as a unique independent project. So whether it's a new company or if
it's the expansion of an existing company, we're looking at what it means
today versus what the opportunities are in the future.
So, for example, if you look at our guidelines and take a project ...and I'll
just use Weatherford Corporation as an example ...two years ago we
Vol I 9~, Page I b5
5 of 24
worked to locate Weatherford into the community and they are now in
the Brazos County Industrial Park which is some 30 million dollars worth
of investment. Well, if you read our guidelines, they would have been
eligible for an eight year tax abatement starting at 70% or 80% or
whatever. We actually gave them a four year tax abatement. So we could
have under the guidelines gone as high as eight years but we, through
economic impact analysis and negotiation and working with our partners,
felt like that was a fair and appropriate incentive package for that project.
So we're looking at not only what is at some point purely negotiable but
also what is in the best interest of us trying to serve our partners at the
County and two cities. So we do treat these as guidelines, we work
through it, we work through our Board etc.. If you review our
guidelines... due to the wisdom of our past leadership... they felt like the
guidelines needed to give favored treatment to our existing industry. If
you think about what we do; business attraction, business retention and
expansion, and our innovation efforts then I would argue that business
retention and expansion is really job one. Keeping the companies here
growing, thriving, moving forward, is very, very important. Frankly, it is
the low cost alternative. Attraction, as you all know, if very competitive
and it is also very, very expensive. Not only in terms of operation but also
in terms of actual incentives. Because we do live in a hyper competitive
incentive environment.
You have in your packet an incentive study that we did going back to
2004 where we compared ourselves to other geographies specifically in
Texas. And if you look at that and read those recommendations what
you'll see is that when you compare our incentives to those in other
comparable markets that we compete with... especially on the more
traditional side of our economic developments efforts...
Mallard: Can you tell me where that is Todd? It's not the Carter-Burgess part of it.
McDaniel: That is the Carter-Burgess study, yes sir. Page two is the
recommendations. The Executive Summary is on page one and the
recommendations are on page three. Again, I don't want to belabor the
details of the incentive study but, again, essentially as the past Chairman
Anderson suggested, we traditionally are able to win projects and
facilitate the expansion of existing industry at a much lower level of
incentive than most of our competitors do. So, again, we're looking at a
return on our investment. I would tell you that there are certainly always
opportunities to review the guidelines and the policies. There are things
in the policy today that may be more appropriate, whether it's threshold
adjustments... quite candidly, as a professional economic developer, that I
am not a big fan of in our guidelines is allowing for the either/or
Vol (i ~ Page b~
6 of 24
provision (inaudible) either capital investment or payroll. I believe that it
should be both. And so that is something that is certainly open and I
would encourage. What we're looking for today is more just some
guidance and direction, go back and revisit it.
But with that said, these are guidelines. And as a matter of police the
Commissioners' Court says, `Ok, for this project, due to the level of
capital investment, we really need to see some new payroll.', then so be
it. And that is certainly something that we're prepared to work through on
behalf of our partner and clients.
To close, I would just say that I don't believe our guidelines are broken.
Again, I think there are certainly opportunities to review and we should
do that from time to time. So this is a very health exercise, I think. But at
the same time, if you look at what our competitors do and where we
stand, I would argue that we are very conservative but I think successful.
And I think that we'll continue to be successful with the current structure
of our guidelines. Any questions for me?
Mallard: Were there some comments about existing businesses... on getting
incentives or some comments on that? I don't know if there were some
thoughts.
Sims: No, but let me ask a couple of questions. I hear where you're coming
from but as you well know, we're the only governmental entity that gives
you incentives or cash incentives... let me put it that way. And over the
last few years it has been $300,000.00, $300,000.00, $200,000.00,
$200,000.00, $200,000.00, $200,000.00 and $300,000.00 and that is what
the request is this year. I guess what I'm saying... and I understand where
John came from having to do with the two cities but there an inequity
there that the County is putting up these large sums of money that comes
out of our budget every year. I don't see anything in the balance sheet
where Bryan/College Station has given any incentive money ...is that
correct?
McDaniel: No sir. Not necessarily.
Sims: They may run infrastructure and this type of thing but...
McDaniel: There are cases where they have shared in...and TIPS is a good example
where both cities are contributing from their own funds to help support
the TIPS incentive package. And there is a history of that with Sanderson
Farms and Reynolds and Reynolds is an example where the County
contributed dollars in the incentive fund and you also have the City of
College Station contributing dollars to the incentive fund. A very fair
Vol 11)~ Page 10
7 of 24
point and that's something that we may want to explore as it relates to the
incentive fund; is how we might be able to have a more equitable
balance. What I will tell you... and again, I would ask that maybe John or
Celia to address this as a Chairman but from a staff perspective, the
wisdom of our leadership in working with the County to establish the
incentive fund ...Brazos County, quite honestly, is neutral. So when we
work a project and we're going back to what our mission is...which is to
do economic development without regard to municipal
jurisdiction ...when we do an incentive project, whether it's in College
Station or Bryan, because we're working through Brazos County, where
it is located in either city is not relevant. So that's part of the reason that
if you go back and look at the history of the formation of the incentive
fund why it was decided to take it to the County level. Now, over the past
six years the two cities have contributed (inaudible) of $50,000.00 to our
operations budget above and beyond what Brazos County does. So, yes,
there is a little bit of differential there in operational budget but you're
actually correct, Judge, there is no question that in terms of just the
incentive fund and who actually funds it...it's Brazos County. So I do
think that is something to explore and discuss with our other partners.
But, to me, the incentive fund ...the history of it was really an attempt to
try to address our lack of having the economic development sales tax. I
think that under the circumstances I believe that we have been very
prudent and that the economic development fund has been a valuable
resource for Brazos County and for the two cities.
Sims: Let me ask you a question, I noticed you had Abilene written down
here ...Abilene does have a sales tax.
McDaniel: Yes.
Sims: Yes, that's what I thought. And that is independent of that county's
general fund budget.
McDaniel: Yes sir.
Sims: And as you well know, our benefit from some of these are not near as
good as the benefit to the two cities. Our half cent sales tax, whatever, we
collect and have so whatever business comes in or company that comes in
that has a sales tax attached to it...our half a cent goes to offset ad
valorem taxes, period. Theirs does not. The last half cent they got does go
to offset ad valorem taxes. But anything else, sales tax, that they get all
goes to the general fund. And it certainly does make it a lot easier to keep
taxes down on the citizens of the two cities as opposed to the citizens of
the County. Because we are not privileged to that. That is one of the
things that in looking at this, the $300,000.00 and $200,000.00 that we
Vol ll Page 163
8 of 24
have given over many years here has all come out of our general fund
budget. That is really difficult at times like this when people are looking
at us and saying, "We don't want any more taxation." That is very
difficult. I have had several people when they heard about this meeting
that we were going to have that made the comment to us, "Man, if these
companies can't afford to open a business here then they probably need
to go some place else."...good, bad, or otherwise. As a matter of fact, I
had one gentleman in my office yesterday talking about it and made the
comment, "You know, I don't get any incentives and I've been a
businessman in this community for the last 25 years." It makes a lot of
sense. It's hard to refute it...let me put it that way Todd. It's hard to
refute that. That is basically my concern ...the economics of all of it...that
we're providing a substantial amount of money to the RVP. Granted, we
get a little reduction of $50,000.00 in their operating expenses but
$50,000.00 doesn't add up to $200,000.00 or $300,000.00. I really think
that the cities have got to get passed some of this and participate in this
incentive fund if we're going to continue on in that way. Say to them,
"We'll put up whatever is equal to the operating expenses... we'll do our
share and then whatever you're requesting for incentives then I think the
cities should step up and do the same thing as we do." If you're asking
for $200,000.00 from each of us then everybody put their money on the
table. Regardless of whether it goes in College Station or it goes in
Bryan, it'll probably equal out over a period of ten years. Bryan will get
their share, Brazos County will get ours, and they would probably equal
out over ten years. That is a concern of mine and I'll let the
Commissioners speak for themselves. But that is a concern of mine
because it is all coming out of our general revenue fund and that comes
from taxes and taxes alone.
Anyway, that is one of my big concerns and one of the other concerns is
that since we have been the only supplier of incentive funds then I would
like for us to be in control of what we are requiring these companies to do
to receive incentive funds. Not that we won't listen to RVP but it
shouldn't be the way of the RVP guidelines, it should be by the way of
Brazos County guidelines... for an incentive fund expenditure for them
But I understand and I don't think that would be too unmanageable to be
honest with you.
It is really difficult in this day and time ...as you well know ...with what
inflation has done over the past two years with gasoline and even
personnel. My concern is that in looking at the operational budget, we're
hiring two new people and we're talking about incentive funds up here
and the two new people are proposed to get salaries of $231,000.00. That
is a little hard to swallow. As a matter of fact, not very many people that
work for Brazos County make that kind of money. So with that in mind,
Vol 11 Page l bq
9 of 24
that is my challenge and that is some of my concerns. So, gentlemen, if
you would like to make some comments about it then please do and ask
questions or whatever.
McDaniel: The only thing I would say is in terms of the incentive fund, again, that is
something that from a staff perspective I would say is absolutely open for
exploration and I certainly understand the situation. If you look at
whether it's Waco or Tyler, I believe if my memory serves that Abilene
was the only city that we used that did have the economic development
sales tax. McClendon County uses the general fund ...they have an
incentive fund just like Brazos County does.
As it relates to the guidelines, that is a slippery slope. I certainly
appreciate where the County comes from in terms of working through a
process and we'll do everything that we're required to do on behalf of
Brazos County to do that. But if you go and look at our guidelines, I
mean, literally, the heading of our guidelines says, `City of Bryan, City of
College Station, Brazos County. So when we have a project, whether it's
an existing industry or a new project that says, `Hey, we're looking to
make new investment.', and they're looking at Bryan or College Station,
the guidelines are unified. So if you say that the County is going to have a
set of guidelines and the City of Bryan is going to have a set of guidelines
and the city of College Station are going to have a set of guidelines, they
could be completely different and that could pose some real challenges in
terms of our unified effort; giving one city or the other city a competitive
advantage, putting the County in a situation where it is doing something
that is quite different. So again, it goes back to the unified effort of the
model and what past Chairman Anderson was referring to. So, it's
something to think about. Again, it's entirely... these are guidelines and
the way I view it is that this isn't really a legal concern as much as this is
policy and policy is applied to the law. So these are policy questions that
I think the Commissioners' Court should help us and guide us. Whether
it's related to existing industry and future incentives or terms or whatever
it might be. That's where I think these guidelines come into play from our
perspective because as I said at the very beginning; these are the rules of
the game that we play by. So when an existing industry comes to us, they
already know what the guidelines say. So if they are doing a new
investment where we are talking about the potential of substantial capital
investment that is a new investment that is associated with a new product
line or whatever, they understand what the guidelines say. So our job is to
take those guidelines and to work through the process, work with our
partners, the appropriate city and the County to work through that
process. And so, again, it's just a function of direction and policy from
the Commissioners' Court.
Vol ft _ Page 1-70.
10 of 24
Peters: Some of Brazos County's guidelines are based on statute. I haven't had a
chance to really look at the RVP guidelines and compare them to what
statute says we have to do. I know cities are a lot more liberal in the way
that they can handle things. The State lays out laws about how Counties
deal with tax abatements or anything else. And that is one of the things
that I want to be sure of in the guidelines is that the guidelines that RVP
is operating under meet Brazos County's guidelines which are based on
State law. This Commissioners' Court are the ones that have to answer to
the taxpayers and make sure that the money that we tax for and is used
that we're the ones that are answerable for it. I'm not questioning
anybody's integrity or honesty or anything but I know our County
Attorney sent out a questionnaire with one of the tax abatement incentive
companies that is being requested and there were some questions on there
that, frankly, under statute we have to comply with. One of them was for
that company to allow inspection of the property to be sure that what they
say they are going to put in there, they're going to put in there. And that
is in the statute. That is something that Brazos County has to do. It's part
of it.
I haven't had a chance to read through the whole thing and compare the
two but I just want to be sure that as we move through the process that we
are conforming with what State statute says.
McDaniel: Sure. And to that question ...and I'd have to visit with Bob in more
detail ...but as I understand it, that is a role that the Appraisal District
plays very well on behalf of Brazos County. When we work through a tax
abatement process and do an annual compliance, we go directly to the
Appraisal District. They are the ones that give us the information relative
to what the new investment was over and above. Because, remember,
with tax abatement, the existing investment is not eligible for a tax
abatement ...it is only new investment made. So it's that new valuation
above and beyond the existing investment. And so I believe that is taken
care as a matter of course through the Appraisal District and what they do
every year when they go. Because they do have our tax abatement
agreements and they understand what those agreements require. So some
coordination between the County and the RVP and the Appraisal District
is absolutely appropriate. But I'll defer to Bob because he is the one that
works on it on a day to day basis. But it is our understanding that happens
as a matter of default. I mean they do that on behalf of the citizens of
Brazos County.
Mallard: I don't think that our attorneys or our auditor or our budget officer have
the expertise to go out and determine how much valuation a business has.
The Appraisal District... that's what they're here for...to determine that
information. To put it out there. And if they say they are putting 8 million
Vol 11a Page I'll
11 of 24
dollars in there and the Appraisal District says they only put 6 then that is
all they get credit for.
Malaise: My name is Bob Malaise; I live in College Station at 9309 Bloomfield. In
response to that question, the way Conoco responded back ...when you
read the question it indicated that there was at least four different groups
that could come in and audit or inspect equipment. From Conoco's
standpoint... what they were looking at is; "We have no problem. We
have no problem with coming in and auditing or looking at the books
what so ever." Their response was that right now the tax Appraisal
District in all the counties and all the states that they work with ...that's
been the process. "We're happy with that."
One of the concerns that they have is that there is certain equipment out
there that is highly proprietary and they don't want to open it up where a
half a dozen people could be coming in to every facility. They have no
problem at all with having a tax appraisal or anyone else as long as they
know who they are. But I will be happy to sit down with that
questionnaire and go over any answers with Brazos County, Brazos
County Legal if there are questions or concerns about the answers.
Sims: I do think, Bob, that we are going to have to sit down and talk about that
because there is an ownership question mark that we had as to who owns
what out there and whether a time frame has gone by when tax abatement
is no longer available to them.
Malaise: Yes, I'll be happy to answer that. At the last meeting that we had down
there, I believe the Court said the legal representation and we haven't
looked at it and Brazos County would get together. I think some of that
has happened. And I think that the questionnaire has been looked at but
my understanding right now from the legal end of it is it's been resolved.
There is a transfer to the warranty deed. So Conoco/Phillips Specialty
Products is in ownership. To give you a little bit of background... when
we went through the due diligence process, one of the things that I asked
when the documents were being put together for the tax abatement in
Bryan, they came back and put it in the name of Conoco/Phillips
Specialty Inc. I have an email and I can give it to whomever that it says,
"Is this the company that we want on the contract?" and they said, "Yes,
it is." In their mind, the title had been transferred. Conoco/Phillips
Specialty Inc. they owned it and, in fact, they were operating with their
books in that term. So I'm not saying that is right or wrong or whatever
but, basically, it was an oversight on their part. That oversight has been
corrected legally.
Vol 11 d~ Page l 7
12 of 24
In terms of the equipment that is there now; the equipment that they are
putting in is personal property. Yes, some of it is large equipment and
things like that but it is also seen by the Appraisal District as
equipment... it could be taken, removed, and moved somewhere else.
That's why it's personal property and not real property. Personal
property ...when the property is installed, when it is finished then at that
point in time it is recognized as being there. What Conoco/Phillips did
was prepare at this point in time based on the questionnaire of all the
equipment that was which was around 3.6 million dollars in
equipment... they showed where they stood in terms of completion. There
is one part of the project that has been completed and it was for around a
little bit less than $400,000.00. On the proposal to go forward, that would
not be subject to tax abatement.
There was also one other piece in the questionnaire that they have
decided right now to not go forward with. So the total recommendation or
what they're asking for would be around 3 million dollars with tax
abatement. In essence, what will happen is that because of going forward
with the project and moving forward with the project, they're going to
spend more than 3 million dollars. They're also going to create more jobs
than they anticipated. I'd be happy to explain anything that is in that
questionnaire that is sill at issue or if there are still questions in the Court.
Peters: Bob, do you verify on the number of employees and the salaries and that
sort of thing?
Malaise: There are two different ways you go about it. Number one is if a
company is in Bryan or Brazos County or College Station and let's say
that they're not a major corporation then they have to turn a quarterly
report to the Work Force Commission. And that quarterly report is turned
into the State and that verifies employment. It verifies that it has Social
Security numbers and it verifies the salary that they receive. So that piece
of paper right there, that document, is what we use on (inaudible).
If you take a large company like Conoco/Phillips then they are not going
to have an accounting group that does that at a local level. It is
consolidated in Houston. What they do is prepare a report basically an
accounting report that would be simpler... and turn in the sum total of the
gross salary (inaudible) to verify by the employment and to verify the
total salary. So in this instance for the report or the questionnaire that was
turned in, they turned in the four quarters of 2007 which was last quarter
and if I remember, it's about 2.6 million dollars is what they're current
salary is with 45 people.
Vol I Page 1 13
13 of 24
What will happen then is they will show next year or at the end of
2008...let's say that they did get a tax abatement at the end of 2008, in
December, I send out a letter and the letter also attaches the contract, the
tax abatement agreement. But in it, it stipulates that it has the
performance measures for that year that they had to attain. And then what
they do is they send back verification with either the Texas Workforce
Commission report for four quarters or they send, basically, an
accounting summary.
For instances with Reynolds and Reynolds... what they end up doing is
they have 1,800 people or so and they have a report, they have a file for
the last eight years that shows the employees, it shows what they made,
and then the total. The question I would raise then would be, `How do
you verify this?' Number one is that in this year we will have made ...if
you look at the last 18 months... around probably 25 site visits. We
physically go out based on business and retention responsibilities I have
had... understand what is going on with these companies. And it's nothing
more, sometimes, than going out and spending an hour with them. For
instance with Conoco/Phillips, while you're out there we've taken plant
tours, we've been talking with them for a year about the possibility about
a much larger project and it looks like it's imminent. So you get a sense
for who is there. You get a sense for how many people are there. So it's a
matter of a relationship and actually being on the site. If you stay in the
office and you're not out there looking and you really haven't done
anything.
If we had someone that we were concerned about then we would
certainly recommend doing an audit which we have never really had to
do. I hope that answers your question.
Now, in terms of (inaudible). That one is just a little easier. Let's say
(inaudible)... what's going to happen when they finish? They have said
they are going to put in a 20 million dollar facility. What they will give is,
essentially, whatever that contractor has...he will work up at the
end... basically, a summary of what they spent. We will get a summary of
that. But then the next piece of that ...they can send it in and they can sign
it and they can say, `This is what we did.' Mary Landreth and I at least sit
down and verify ...when they have to render their property, when they
turn it in for verification they send me an itemized list. Maybe not every
piece but enough detail that I can take that to her and see what they
provide. So that's a cross check to see if it actually happened.
I'll give you a for instance... probably one of the bigger projects that we
have done in terms of capital requirements was Reynolds and Reynolds.
What we did with them was a retention expansion. When Reynolds and
Vol I I ~k Page 1,14
14 of 24
Reynolds happened, one of the concerns that we had was a possibility of
losing about 450 jobs out of this community. Because Reynolds and
Reynolds has spare capacity and they know how. We had been with
Arlen Cooper, we understood that there would be a possibility that
something could happen. We didn't know which (inaudible) could hit. So
when we put it together, we made the contract very simple; from a
payroll standpoint, they had to maintain... 18 million dollar payroll is
where they were at...and they had to have an investment of a little over
30 million dollars. You can go to the Tax Appraisal District right now,
pull it up and go back and look and see how much is out there; it was
something like 35 million. So what they ended up doing ...you know, we
think sometimes that the case of Conoco/Phillips or someone like that
that over time this thing is going to roll down to zero ...that is not really
what happens.
But a company that is thriving similar to that... first of all, the real
property depreciation schedule is not going to be nearly as severe as a
company in IT that would have, basically, computers. They're going to
depreciate in about three years and you're going to have to turn them
over. But it's going to fall off.
But these companies are continuing to upgrade. They're adding new
businesses; Reynolds and Reynolds has several businesses. The same
thing with Conoco/Phillips out there. They are going to add different
things as you go forward. What we did with them is they were getting
ready to make a major expansion and the possibility of having a much
larger plant that would be in synergy with the current plant they had. That
concept, at least temporarily when we signed this, didn't happen. But it is
back on the drawing board ...the different type of facility that could
happen. And that is the big target. Does that...?
Peters: Yeah, that helps.
Malaise: We take it very seriously. And I would say that from a tax abatement
standpoint, there is only one company that I know of that has failed in
their tax abatement and that was Roofing Co Industries; they built a 20
million dollar plant out at Bryan (inaudible) and it never did take off.
They decided it was not a core business and two months before it was
supposed to open... although it was finished... it just sat there. And they
went two years before they could sell it. But they had collected some tax
abatement of almost $120,000.00...I remember. We got two checks back;
one for the County and one for the City because we had fallback
provisions in our agreement that even though they sold the property we
collected on that. We have had some contracts that (inaudible) fallback or
had a proportionate share if they pick up...we got part of it...they had
Vol II 3-\ Page 175,
15 of 24
collected maybe 50% of the tax abatement. But we haven't had any tax
abatement that has just defaulted; they've taken the money, and then
walked.
Peters: When we ask for documentation, I hope yall don't feel offended and
think we're questioning your integrity or your honesty or anything. But
our auditor would not reimburse me for a dime if I didn't provide a
receipt for what I spent it on and all of that.
Malaise: Let me address that again; we take the transparency extremely serious. I
will tell you one thing right now that we had set up and we can set up the
same thing with Katie. We have all of our books on QuickBooks online.
And we have the ability to open that up to the County. The County can
have access. They can't get into it and change things.
Peters: And I really wasn't talking about that necessarily, but that is great and
I'm glad to hear that. I was even talking more into the tax abatement and
those companies and the documentation. For instance, the personnel and
the salaries and stuff, when you bring that forward, I'd like to see how
you verified that that in fact happened.
Malaise: I could go two ways; I've got all of the records and we can have anyone
come out and look. Next year when we go through the process and
receive the information back and I make a report, I'll be happy to go
further to make a report that I will open up to your auditors, to anyone
that wants to look at it to see the verification. I'm that comfortable with
what we do.
Peters: Ok.
Sims: Bob, to be honest with you, as you well know, I'm very concerned with
having to do with upper level management salaries verse rank and file
salaries. You can have a very high salary schedule at a plant but most of
it is going to the top 10 people in the company.
Malaise: I can show you at Conoco/Phillips for instance I'm not sure what Greg
makes ...he is the manager at their very ...they don't have a lot of
managers at this particular facility. They hired an engineer in this last go
around and his starting salary with several years experience was
$75,000.00. The operators that they have hired are $40,000.00. These are
entry level starting positions. I can sit down and show you that exactly. It
doesn't just come into a lump sum, there is breakout... so you can look at
that.
Vol HA Page 1.7 ~
16 of 24
Sims: I think that tax abatement is one thing but hard dollars for incentive funds
is another. I can handle tax abatement a lot better than I can when I have
to pull $300,000.00 or $200,000.00 out of hard dollars out of our tax
revenues that funds the County. That is a little bit different ball game as
far as I'm concerned. But I would recommend that we participate to the
same thing that the two cities participate as far as dollars and cents to
your budget out there. I notice that we're $350,000.00 and they are
$400,000.00 and $400,000.00... if we put up $50,000.00 and put it into
that to make us equal then I wouldn't have a problem. But that means the
incentive fund is going away unless they want to participate like we
do...I know we're trying to stay at the same level. And we have been hit
with a lot of things that the cities charge us for this year, i.e. ambulance
out in the County ...it was $175,000.00 each department last year. And
one is $340,000.00 something and another one is $400,000.00 and
something. So I'm not saying that they are unreasonable but I'm saying
that is where some of this incentive fund could go to pay for ambulance
protection out in the County.
Malaise: I hear where you're coming from but let me say one thing; there has been
some of what your talking about that has transpired. If you go back and
look at Decision One when we sold the building ...the building was sold
for a profit. As soon as that sale came back in, we returned about
$460,000.00 to Brazos County. We returned the same amount to Bryan.
They had contributed 50%. From that, there was maybe around
$200,000.00 that remained but there was also ...one thing about Decision
One is that even though they didn't ever get to the employment level that
they had anticipated, there was a provision in that agreement that they
would have to pay rent at a ratio where they were to the target that they
were supposed to get (inaudible). What I'm getting to is at the end of the
day we had a little over a million dollars... about a million one...that was
our economic development fund. We had a couple of small projects that
the Board used the fund. But we asked College Station to step up and
match what Bryan and Brazos County had in there. And they have; they
put half a million dollars in. So that is the history behind it so...
Sims: That went into incentive fund or operations?
Malaise: No, it went not into the incentive fund but the economic development
fund. And that is how we have 1.3 million right now.
Sims: Ok.
Malaise: So there has been contributions equally to establish that.
Vol i l a Page I J 7
17 of 24
Peters: Bob, let me ask you... for instance, this check that came back today; how
does that work? Do you pay up front and then at the end of the year...?
Malaise: The way that our economic development agreements are structured... and
I believe we have a true professional in Patricia Maronoff who represents
us. She is truly ...I mean I've worked economic development all over the
State for sixteen years and she is a true economic development
professional. She understands the laws and has been doing it for a long
time and we're very proud to have her as our counsel and I believe, quite
frankly, that by serving as our counsel that she is helping serve as Brazos
County's counsel. So there needs to be, I think, a better connectivity and
we'll do a good job on our end to try to make sure that happens between
Patricia and the legal counsel of Brazos County. As it relates to the
agreements, these are performance based agreements... so you mentioned
Coke earlier. So if there is a default, then we have ability within that
agreement to pursue every remedy possible to recover our dollars as
being good stewards on behalf of Brazos County and the City.
In the case of Tomorrow Now...a very interesting story; Tomorrow Now
was acquired by SAP, one of the world's largest software companies.
And Oracle sued SAP claiming that Tomorrow Now was infringing on
their intellectual properties. The decision was taken by SAP, for whatever
reason, to just close Tomorrow Now down all together, period. They
ceased to exist as a company. So when we learned of this ...and we had
been tracking it which is why we're returning $60,000.00 verses
$15,000.00 and we knew that this litigation was ongoing. And Andrew
Nelson who is a citizen of our community and a very proud citizen was
very up front with us on making sure that we were aware of what was
happening. Last year, we intentionally did not pull the trigger on the
incentive. So when we learned of that, we immediately made the request
to SAP, Tomorrow Now for complete reimbursement of all incentives
that we provided to Tomorrow Now through Brazos County incentive
fund. And within a matter of about 30 days, we received a check and
we're now returning that check to Brazos County. Which we would
certainly hope would go back into the incentive fund ...but, again, that is
at the discretion of the Commissioners' Court.
A couple of things when you talk about the incentive fund; I do think that
it is important to understand and recognize the different roles. Yes, there
is a $300,000.00, $200,000.00 for a few years for the incentive fund that
is from the County, but recognize that the two cities also contribute in
their own unique ways. Historically, the two cities on major projects have
gifted land. So, for example, we'll just use Toyo Ink, the City of Bryan
gifted the land to Toyo Ink and that is competitive. Again, that's how it
is. Whether we like it or not that is the reality. If we're going to win a
Vol (la Page 119
18 of 24
project like Toyo Ink verses a Waco or Tyler or wherever... that's the
nature of the game. So in this case, the City of Bryan gifted the land per
incentive agreement to Toyo Ink so you have a value of that... whatever
number you want to use. In our case, we use $30,000.00 an acre. So there
is a value right there. Additionally they committed funds to extend a rail
spur out of the City of Bryan dollars above and beyond Brazos County.
So there are cases where in addition and above and beyond using the
County incentive fund, the cities step in and do their fair share. The
business center in College Station is a good example. Take a company
like SourceNet...again the same type of process. The City of College
Station gifted the land for that project above and beyond what the County
did relative to an incentive fund or tax abatement or anything else. So
there are other incentives that are potentially being utilized that are not
directly impacting Brazos County.
So, it's important just to understand, holistically, that the framework of
how this is. It's not just the County incentive fund and nothing else. In
some cases it is. In those cases, it actually makes it pretty easy... it
simplifies the process a great deal. When you're dealing with a project
where you have free land, potentially, you have a tax abatement, you
have some cash, any other type of incentive that you're trying to utilize to
win a project ...then you're dealing, again, with the appropriate city and
Brazos County and a variety of different mechanisms that our partners
use to make these projects happen.
Mallard: Also, the point is that ...as everyone on this Court knows... it's really not
our money, it's not the County's money ...it's the citizen's money. And
when we have this incentive fund that we set up...and that is one of the
reasons why it was decided to let the County do it...because the County
is the taxing entity for all the citizens of Brazos County. And if we ask
the City of Bryan or the City of College Station to create and tax their
citizens as well, then aren't we taxing those twice? So that was the
decision at the time. I was on the committee when Judge Al Jones said,
"Maybe the best way to do it is to have the County take that role and tax
the citizens of Brazos County only once." So the County would have that
fund. Obviously, the City does put in other things; they put in land, they
put in infrastructure and all of those things. And if we tallied that up, it
might even equal what we've been doing. I can't answer that and I don't
know that for sure. But I know that was one other reason ...that we would
only hit the citizens one time through one taxing entity for that fund.
Peters: In response to that; cities have other sources of revenue other that just
property taxes. They actually get a pretty good chunk out of sales taxes
which, although each citizen is paying but it may be other folks outside
the City and outside the County that are paying those taxes. The County's
Vol 11d\ Page 17q
19 of 24
pretty much sole source of revenue is property tax. That is not the case
with the cities so they may be using sales tax money rather than property
tax money ...if they used it in an incentive fund. I'm just saying that it is
not necessarily that we would be taxing citizens twice because they have
other sources of revenue.
Sims: Let me jump in there too...as you well know ...these people have to have
water, sewer, gas which the cities provide at a cost to these companies
that are coming in so they are also making a profit in that respect.
Malaise: Absolutely. And, again, looking at this holistically ...we'll just use Toyo
Ink again; in the case of Toyo Ink, the City of Bryan agreed to extend a
water line so they were able to use revenues from their water utilities to
be able to do that. So, again, we certainly understand the funding of the
County and where it sits and why the sales tax to where it goes and as a
citizen of Brazos County I'll tell you that that is not a bad thing ...to have
low taxes. So I understand and sincerely appreciate. I would argue that
economic development is how you keep taxes low because you're
growing the tax base. That is the whole theory behind economic
development. And if we're doing it right and bringing return ...I went
back and sat down and I reviewed the numbers and if you look at the
eleven years and you look at what we estimate the actual cost to Brazos
County verses the actual net revenue ...the actual cost is about 1.2 million
we estimate verses a little over 8 million in revenue. That's about a 7
million dollar differential net proceed to Brazos County.
So, as I've told the Court before and we're absolutely committed to
continuing this; everything that we do we believe is designed to serve as a
profit center for Brazos County. Everything that we do. Even when we go
out and hire somebody, Judge, that is a highly skilled professional we
expect that person to do what they need to do to bring in revenue for our
partners and to work in that vein. So, for example, with our Bio Research
Valley initiative and the Life Sciences... massive opportunities as you
well know because you work closely with me with the University and the
University system. Where we are headed with is if you project out over
the next ten to fifteen years, I'm very, very excited about our future there.
The infrastructure is, finally, now coming into play for that. So it's a
function of trying to recognize the role that we play on behalf of our
partners. And, again, as it relates to the guidelines, understanding that
those are guidelines and that ultimately it's a policy decision by each of
the partners when you work through a process of incentives.
So any other feedback on the guidelines that we can take with us...I'm
not sure that the guidelines need to be amended. I think, again, that it is
Vol I P\ Page 1 w
20 of 24
just a function of the Commissioners' Court discretion based on a case by
case basis recognizing what we've recommended.
And that is the other point I would like to make is that just because we
make a proposal and our Board approves it, the companies that we work
with understand that that is not the end of the line. All that is, is a
recommendation to our partners. It ultimately has to be approved by the
elected officials of Brazos County and the two Cities. That is the role that
you play. So they understand that and you make that very clear. And we
also tell them that these are guidelines and that we'll make our best
recommendation and we'll make a case for the return on investment, do
our economic impact and all of that but, again, ultimately it is up to the
discretion of the Commissioners' Court and the two City Councils as to
whether or not they want to actually approve a project.
Sims: And I think that may be a fault of mine that we have not scrutinized it any
closer than we have ...and we should, because we're spending the tax
dollars. We're the ones that put our name on the line when we say, "Yes,
we are going to put this money into incentive funds." Maybe that is my
fault and we're going to probably rectify that ...we will rectify that. We
will scrutinize that a lot closer than we have in the past, because that is a
large chunk of money that we're providing the incentive fund.
One of the things that you said ...I understand that ...of course, as you
well know, Texas A&M University is to...through not doing anything
right or doing any wrong... they're going to bring economic development
in here to this community. I mean I've been here since 1957 and people
always ask me, "How is your economy doing?" and I say, "As long as we
have that big bear on the hill out there ...we're not going to have swings
like other parts of the nation or the State." And that is true. It benefits
them too when they start bringing investment in for research and this type
of thing. So these are just some things that I just wanted to say because I
do know whether we did anything or not, they're going to bring jobs in.
Malaise: Absolutely. And that is why we've hitched our wagon to the University
and the University system and you've helped lead that. The question in
my mind is, ok sure, they're going to do that... absolutely, we know they
are and we all know, we're effectively a service economy. Most of the
businesses in our market are small businesses that feed and survive, quite
frankly, off of Texas A&M University and the University systems.
Sims: That's true.
Malaise: That said, I think where the University is headed benefits us from an
economic development diversification perspective. And so I'll just use
Vol I I 9~ Page 1 g
21 of 24
Ann Arbor, Michigan as an example; if you look at Ann Arbor, Michigan
thirty years ago, the University of Michigan ...one of the great
universities in the United States, very much focused and centered around
the University of Michigan... that was the economic driver. Well today,
they have a very diverse economy with manufacturing and research and
development and so on and so forth. And that is where we're headed and
what I think, again, credit to leadership like you Judge, is that the
University is finally on board with economic development beyond just
economic development directly related to Texas A&M University. They
understand that their future rests on their ability to have industry partners
and in a perfect world, those industry partners would not be located in
Houston or in San Jose, California, or in Ann Arbor, Michigan... they
would be located in Bryan/College Station, Texas. And they finally, I
believe, are understanding that the have a role to play in that. And that is
different. That is different from years past. So, sure, we're blessed to
have the University and the University system as the economic drivers of
market but if we want to continue to provide economic diversification for
Brazos County that adds tax base and jobs beyond just that of what Texas
A&M is doing then we need to be, in my opinion, we need to be
connected and partnered with the University. And we need to be working
together with them on industry partnerships and on relationships with
industries that bring research funds into our community. I think that is
where the real long term future economic development opportunities are.
I have heard this from Dr. McKinney and I think you have too that the
College Station campus is about as big as it is ever going to be. I mean
Texas A&M College Station ...I mean how many students can you,
literally, have? It's pretty much built out. That said, there is still
opportunities with the system and so forth. We recognize that. But again,
it is a function of how do you connect industry and do all of those kinds
of things. So you're absolutely right; the driver is the University and
that's where we have focused a lot of our energy and partners.
Sims: Well, my comment that I was trying to make is that we are going to grow
whether we want to or not. And that is going to happen because of the
University. I'm not saying we need to stop economic development... I'm
not saying that at all. But we, as a Commissioners' Court have just go to
look at what we spend money on because we have 160 or 170 thousand
taxpayers out there too. They want a return on investment and I'm sure
that these are here today to see that we are getting a return on investment
through the RVP. Ok? But there are some out there that don't know RVP
from Post Toasties and they want to know why we're putting
$300,000.00 into something that has nothing to do with them directly or
that they are benefiting from. So it is a juggling act that we go through.
Vol 113(- Page I 9X
22 of 24
So with that in mind... certainly I'm not cutting this off, I would like to
hear from anybody else on the Commissioners' Court or any other
questions and we'll probably put together some questions that we have
after we leave here because we probably forgot to ask some of them. But
we would like to make sure that whatever investment we make however
large or however small, that we get a return on our investment.
Peters: I had one more question about this check that came in. I'm not trying to
point any fingers or anything but...and that's why as we move
forward... and I appreciate yall being able to get four years of those funds
back ...but I've wondered and as we move forward with other companies
and anything else we do...at what point does it trigger that you realize
that we shouldn't pay that next year's incentive fund. In other words, it
appears to me that maybe we had four years that ...and I don't know at
what point that they didn't qualify but then if they pay it back then we've
got four years of back payment. I wondered and I'm not trying to point
any fingers at anybody or anything but as we move forward with the next
one; at what point do you recognize and how do you recognize that this
company is not meeting their qualifications so we don't make that next
payment.
McDaniel: The irony of this project is that they have blown their quality
performance requirements out of the water every year. If you go back and
look at the agreement compared to what they were obligated to do then
it's like five times as significant. Literally. But, again, the heart of our job
is to work with our existing industry on behalf of our partners and
understand the dynamics at play. So whether it's a Reynolds and
Reynolds where we know Reynolds and Reynolds is in the process or
UCS...you remember Universal Computer Systems did a reverse
acquisition of Reynolds and Reynolds out of Dayton, Ohio. Reynolds and
Reynolds is a publically traded company. We were very in tune with that
and knew there was exposure to Brazos County and the City of College
Station that we could actually see UCS stop and be relocated. In the case
of Tomorrow Now, they blew out their performance requirements but one
of Bob's primary responsibilities and I have to testify ...he is sincere
when he tells you how seriously he takes his job on behalf of our
partners. Frankly, it is a burden to the Research Valley Partnership. In
some ways it would be easier to just have our partners do that. But that is
a service that we provide. So that is something that we are honored and
grateful to do. Again, in the case of Tomorrow Now, their performance
requirements they blew them out of the water. So every year, they were
absolutely eligible for their incentive. But we happen to know that this
litigation was pending and then when we got word that SAP was going to
literally just shut or close down ...finish operations of Tomorrow Now,
Vol 11 Page I X63
23 of 24
we immediately pulled the trigger on that agreement in order to receive
reimbursement of the full value of the incentive pay by Brazos County.
Peters: Ok.
Malaise: There were four payments and the last payment ...you remember we got it
in April or around that time ...and we did not send that payment to the
company. We held on to that because we knew that something could
happen within the short period of time. So that is the history behind it. As
soon as the announcement was made, the day before it was made, we got
word it could be happening. Once that happened, we were in contact with
their senior vice president in a conference call. And at that time he said,
basically, "You will be repaid." We have documentation on that. So
that's how that process went. But, again, it was performance contract.
They got $10,000.00 up front and then each year as they performed then
they got the next $10,000.00
Peters: Ok. Thank you Bob.
Sims: Any further question or comments? No? Well, nothing can be decided
today. We will take this into consideration and I will close this workshop
session for the Commissioners' Court at 9:41.
Tape ends.
Vol I I ~ Page 19
`f
24 of 24
The foregoing minutes of the Commissioners Court
Workshop held September 4th, 2008, have been examined and
approved in open Court this the day of %V• , 200
in Bryan, Brazos County, Texas.
Lloy Wassermann
Commissioner,
Precinct No. 1
S: ~~~'/Q~ - " 14
Duane Peters Kenny Mall At
Commissioner, Commissione ,
Precinct No. 2
Precinct No. 3
57
ti O
Carey uley, Jr. 1k
Commi sinner,
Precinct 4
Attest:
Karen McQueen
County Clerk
Vol !R Page 195
BRAZOS COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT
MEETING ON 2008 AT
Name (PLEASE PRINT)
Organization/Department
q
p
k. v e amt .
r
/~c L^ iL~~