[0:02] I just didn't want to work side to go into a different way. Sorry. We see you now. There you go, poor guys. You

[0:17] pulled the agenda.

[0:20] Larry, you can kick us off whenever you're ready. Okay. Well, let's begin by welcoming everybody to the August 10th board meeting for the power district, public infrastructure district number one.

[0:36] Do we need to do a roll call?

[0:40] I think we're good.

[0:42] Sort of why there's only the three of us.

[0:45] I'd like to make a motion to approve the December 15th board meeting minutes.

[0:53] I'll second that.

[0:56] Awesome.

[0:59] By casting a vote, let's vote on it then.

[1:02] So all those in favor say yes.

[1:05] Yes.

[1:06] Yes.

[1:06] Any opposed?

[1:11] Let the records show that the meeting minutes from December 15th have been approved.

[1:19] I'd like to turn the time over now to Ben Beis. He'd like to make a presentation on RFQ or RFP

[1:25] for a municipal service thond advisor. Great. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm going to share

[1:33] document. I said to you guys previously, the Inland ports RFP they did for financial

[1:45] municipal advisor. So I used that as my template. I made some changes. Really

[1:51] the purpose of this meeting is just so we can talk about this without breaking any

[1:55] open meetings laws. So I left most of the same. I just made some cleanup and some

[2:02] application of this one. So again, this would be issued so that we can get another contract

[2:10] as we're working on a agreement between Larry Miller and UFARE and the Fair Park to

[2:22] do some development of Fair Park Land, which will involve some bonding. So we'll want

[2:26] and municipal service advice around to help guide those discussions.

[2:34] So I'll just kind of go through this document.

[2:36] I can go as slow or fast as you want.

[2:40] I'll point out maybe some of the changes I made to import this document,

[2:46] and we can go through that.

[2:49] So back on purpose statement.

[2:52] Again, the two things that we're looking that we'd want to finance through this PID right

[3:01] now that we're talking about would be the new animal barns, which would be financed

[3:06] through tax increment revenues, there would be a tax sharing agreement between UFARE and

[3:12] the Power District to fund those.

[3:14] The second would be a multi-level parking garage, there would be financed through sales tax

[3:19] revenues that you for has, again, that would pledge to the district to build that.

[3:27] So, communications

[3:32] and question answer period pretty straightforward.

[3:35] This just says that I have to be done during certain time, that I have to go through.

[3:41] So my plan or my thinking was that we would use division of purchasing to do a courtesy

[3:50] posting of this. I think that's the best way to get it out. We can like contacts in the

[3:55] world know that it's out there, but then question answers can come through that system

[4:04] that they use. I think it's called bonfire and then whoever we like can be in charge

[4:13] of answering those questions and they would be available to all people that are looking

[4:18] to answer this RFP. This is pretty straightforward. I just

[4:26] standard language. I don't think I changed any of this from

[4:29] M and ports.

[4:32] Scope of work. We're looking for registered

[4:35] municipal advisory firms.

[4:41] We're closely with, obviously, this

[4:44] group as well as underwriters that they would help us get under

[4:48] contract with bond council to obtain some bonds, just kind of general scope of work.

[4:58] Again, this is pretty generic, for any sort of PID bond issuance, looking for a cover

[5:09] letter, some information on their firm, answers technical questions and their cost proposal.

[5:15] So the way this would be done was they would submit those first three items as one file and

[5:20] the cost proposal is nothing second.

[5:23] We would score the first three and then consider that the cost is a separate item just so

[5:33] there's no influence on that cost on the technical scoring.

[5:39] This just goes through what we're looking for in those three sections.

[5:46] Again, I didn't really change this from import, so it seems like that RFP served them well,

[5:55] and it should be good for our purposes as well.

[6:00] Manitory minimum requirements, if there's anything else that you have in mind that you would

[6:04] like to add to these, happy to talk about that.

[6:09] They must be registered with the MSRB and the SEC,

[6:13] demonstrate documented experience,

[6:16] serving as MA on rated and non-rated bond issuances.

[6:21] Just a note on that, that is a slight change I made.

[6:27] The tax increment bond that we look to do

[6:29] for the Barnes would be a non-rated bond issuance,

[6:31] Most likely, that means it's going to have a higher rate and then have the same sort of security of free payment as you would get on a rated bond.

[6:44] I think we can get the rated bond for the parking garage just because of the surety of those sales tax revenues that you first getting.

[6:54] So I want to make sure that they know that we'll have each and have experience with each.

[6:59] I don't think that should be an issue with the big MAs that typically are handling

[7:04] these type of bond issuances, but I just want to make sure that there's that differentiation.

[7:15] This is the technical criteria.

[7:16] area. The criteria, I believe, is the same for the scoring is what Inland Port did. I

[7:23] did change a little bit the weighting of it, but it's broke down to these three, sorry,

[7:32] just, let's see, five areas. The Firm and Team Qualifications, the Bond Structuring and

[7:41] strategy, pricing and negotiation expertise,

[7:46] experience with tax increment revenue bonds,

[7:49] and then RFP management experience.

[7:51] That's the only one with the different possible points.

[7:54] I didn't think that was as big of a deal.

[7:56] We would just lean on them a little bit to help us

[7:59] as we do additional RFPs for underwriters,

[8:05] trustees, other vendors like Bond Council.

[8:10] But it's nice to shove some of that work off onto them, especially since this is none of our primary jobs, but if we can have them do that, that'd be great.

[8:19] So any questions on technical criteria, any thoughts on point values there?

[8:28] No, I think you're waiting what's good then.

[8:31] Yeah, I have any questions. I may solve over all of them or relative to a point where I was 500 or 10.

[8:39] Right. Yeah, exactly. Good.

[8:45] I did change a little bit on the cost submission guidelines.

[8:50] I think this part is by the same separate document.

[8:57] Oh yeah, so this is where I did it.

[8:59] But so, typically, what's done is they'll just do a cost for a bond issuance, that'll

[9:08] be paid out of bond proceeds, so no one will have to fund any costs for that.

[9:14] I think there are some MAs that have some fees outside of that that could include just

[9:19] hourly rates for consulting services, a fixed retainer, other advisory work.

[9:28] So this does include the option to do that.

[9:35] I just made it clear that if they do propose any of those costs,

[9:40] that they need to include the expected hours reaches those tasks.

[9:47] And then we'd ask to, you know, hold them to those costs so we don't get caught with.

[9:52] Oh, we thought it was only going to be 10 hours and we did 30 hours.

[9:55] and now you also a whole bunch should more thousands of dollars so that is a little bit different

[10:01] from the import. I know that at least with the vendor they went with, they just did a transaction

[10:07] based fee. If there are any fees beforehand that's something that the euphoric front and again we just

[10:14] probably do some fees including the bond issuance to repay whoever pays those upfront costs.

[10:25] So it ends up coming out of the bond at the end of the day.

[10:30] And then I made this one worth 15 points.

[10:33] So again, the other ones were 45 points total.

[10:37] So this would take us to 60 points total and they just get the lowest proposed price.

[10:45] Would get the full 15 points and then depending on how much higher there was, it kind of just

[10:52] fewer points the higher they go, so that's a pretty established formula I think

[10:58] for RFPs is something like that for the cost. We do talk about they would need a

[11:04] minimum point value of 30 points to advance to the scoring portion of the RFP so

[11:14] So it can be a really poor proposal and then have a really low price and get in.

[11:21] It still needs at least those 30 points to be considered on the price.

[11:28] I did have an optional stage three of 30 minute presentations.

[11:32] I don't know that we'll need that, but if there's vendors that we feel are very equal and we want to do that,

[11:38] we do have the option to do a 30 minute presentation there.

[11:46] If they want any information that proposal protected, this lays out the outlines for doing that.

[11:56] We would make an award, we would ask them to agree to the standard terms and conditions.

[12:06] You fare has that are based almost exactly on the state of Utah's, so probably just modify

[12:14] those and change the name on that, but not ensure that we have some of those same protections

[12:18] built in to also have Utah contracts on the terms and conditions, and it just says we

[12:24] would, you know, prefer that we keep those without any modifications, but if they do want

[12:33] any of this lays out the process for modifying those, and it says we can reject a proposal

[12:41] if we can come to terms on their requested changes to terms and conditions.

[12:50] Appendix A is just their claim of business confidentiality, if they want to claim that.

[12:56] And then appendix B just lays out how the cost proposal should be submitted, again it's

[13:03] separate document.

[13:06] Any questions on that? Maybe just backing up. Our district policies allow for

[13:13] Larry to issue RFPs as the board chair. So the purpose of this meeting, again, is to work on

[13:21] this document. Make sure we are on the same page. At the end of the day, Larry is the one that can give

[13:26] the go-or-no-go for issuing this RFP based on his decision alone. So does it require a vote of the

[13:32] board to do that.

[13:36] So once we're feeling this documents in a good spot, we're ready to

[13:41] issue this, which I think probably comes when we're ready to sign the

[13:46] master lease agreement. Larry, I don't know that we need to get too far ahead of

[13:49] ourselves on that. Once that sign or imminent, I think would be a good time for

[13:55] we're learning to give you the, to give to go ahead on that.

[14:00] Larry, if you'd like to assign me as,

[14:02] as the point person to work with purchasing

[14:04] on getting this posted, I'm happy to do that.

[14:07] But, but really, we just need your approval

[14:09] on a final document, once we're ready to go.

[14:12] Terrific.

[14:13] Yeah, I would welcome you if you were to take a lead on that,

[14:16] right?

[14:17] Great.

[14:18] I'm directing all the questions.

[14:20] Is there a selection committee

[14:21] on all three of us on the selection committee?

[14:22] So it's rated properly?

[14:25] That's a good question. That was my thinking is that we just had the three of us be the scores for the RFP.

[14:33] I'm happy if there's a better way to do that.

[14:39] Happy to talk about that, but I think that probably makes sense.

[14:42] Yeah, with just three of us, I think you've got to have an odd number, so that makes sense. If you're okay with that, Andy.

[14:47] Yep, and then you'll be the direct point on questions. That's great. I noticed that the inland port RFQ actually had a provision there for best and final pricing too, is that in.

[15:00] Including there as well.

[15:04] I took that out.

[15:08] I, you know, I see, I see the reason for that. I also think maybe you just have. Make people give them, give you their best offer right up front and. Don't play those games. They're both, they're both correct, right? Yeah. So what do you think the cost of this bond issue is going to be?

[15:29] And are this finance group usually the percentage of the bond?

[15:36] Yeah, yeah, usually they do, you know, a cost on that bond issuance.

[15:41] So I can't remember what it is now.

[15:45] I want to say it's like one or two percent or something.

[15:49] Let

[15:52] me just check something real quick and give you a better answer.

[16:02] Those are pretty standard fees.

[16:03] You'll have the same thing with the underwriter they'll have their cost of bond issuance

[16:07] that are going to be built into that.

[16:12] So I should have said 0.1 to 0.2%, so get out of the

[16:20] lot. We're looking at, you know, probably 60 to 70 million total in tax increment bond

[16:33] and then probably 30 to 40 million in the rated bond for the parking garage.

[16:39] So I don't know that we'll do the tax income bond on one.

[16:43] In fact, we probably won't do it all at once,

[16:46] but this will get us to MA that can help figure the best way to time bonds.

[16:50] This we're looking at a series of bonds for development at the Fair Park.

[17:00] Terrific. I read through that in the import RFQ,

[17:04] and I thought it was pretty detailed. It had everything you need to have, right?

[17:08] Yeah. Who did they select? Are we allowed? I guess we can talk about that. Who did they wind up picking to?

[17:13] They were with ScienceBank on theirs.

[17:19] And theirs was a little bit different. They wanted someone that was under contract

[17:25] that their different project areas could use.

[17:29] So I just want to kind of sell some of those already available and ready to go if someone

[17:35] came to that.

[17:35] I don't know that they were doing it for a specific bond issuance, but as more of having

[17:40] someone under contract if a developer or a community needed that, they would have someone

[17:45] already to go.

[17:47] I understand.

[17:48] Well, I think basically there's like 13 locations of inland port throughout the state or

[17:52] something.

[17:52] In the Arctic.

[17:53] It takes up to 15 now.

[17:55] They just adopted one last week.

[17:57] So yeah.

[17:58] they've got a lot.

[18:01] I've talked with when they're going through this process, I met with

[18:07] one of the municipal advisers when they were here. Science Bank is one I know pretty well

[18:13] and then there's another group that I met with a few times as well. So I've got relationships

[18:18] with at least three MAs so I can make sure where this RFP when it goes out. So I think we should

[18:25] have some good options to pick from.

[18:29] Perfect.

[18:30] Can we review the date again?

[18:31] Or did you have a list at the front?

[18:33] I didn't put any dates in yet.

[18:36] So once we're ready to post, we'll probably

[18:41] give a deadline for questions.

[18:44] You'd probably give them a couple of weeks for questions.

[18:47] I can review on imports and see kind of what they have.

[18:49] I can't remember what they had in terms of how

[18:51] in between each.

[18:52] but give them a couple of weeks for questions and probably a month or so total for getting

[18:58] the proposals in.

[19:02] What's about a six week from launch date to selection date?

[19:06] Is that fair?

[19:08] It certainly could be.

[19:09] Let me see if I've got in the imports handy real quick and I can see what they did.

[19:20] So yeah, if we need to, if you think we ought to move that up a little bit

[19:28] We can certainly issue a beforehand, especially if we are just going to do

[19:39] Something where we pay on a bond issuance then it's it's pretty low risk to

[19:45] Do a beforehand

[19:49] Well part of this process is also going to help us determine the amount that we can bond for is that correct?

[19:56] To some extent, I think that really

[19:59] probably more with the at the underwriter

[20:03] is going to be the biggest determiner of that.

[20:07] But the imply gets some some models to some extent.

[20:13] I don't know why it's not opening for me.

[20:19] It looked to me like on their issuance date was May 8.

[20:23] And then their proposal.

[20:24] I take it back. It doesn't really list the actual date that it was announced, just the

[20:31] presentation dates and proposal due dates.

[20:34] So how long do they have on the so they posted on May 8th? Deadline for questions was

[20:42] May 15th with pretty quick turnaround. Yeah, proposal due date was May 23rd, and then it

[20:49] just says if needed interview and presentation with June 7th. So they only had more like

[20:54] two weeks. It sounds like to get everything in a week for questions. Another week and a half

[21:00] or something. Yeah, they're moving pretty quick. I think there was one potential offer that

[21:08] missed the deadline. So I don't know if it was a little bit quick for them or they just

[21:11] didn't get around to it. But that's a good baseline. Yeah.

[21:21] That puts it, you know, a month from now, that's right in the middle of the

[21:24] Yeah, that's kind of why I was. Oh, yeah, I think we're probably at least a couple weeks away from getting the document signed. So we can read and certainly push to have this done after the fair. I don't think that's an issue at all.

[21:42] Terrific. Otherwise, I think it looks great.

[21:48] Perfect. Well, like I said, I'll send this document out to both of you. Larry, if you

[21:58] just want to make any final changes and give me the final thumbs up, maybe what we ought

[22:05] to do. Well, actually I'll just say Larry, I'll have you decide on the final dates of

[22:14] issuance. Okay. I think that's your progative as board chair to do that.

[22:22] If you just want

[22:22] to give me the dates that we want on that first page there, when we feel like we're ready

[22:30] to issue that, you just give me a thumbs up on the final version of the document and those

[22:34] dates and I'll work with purchasing at that point to get a posted. Okay, perfect.

[22:41] Perfence.

[22:43] Why not? This has been the year for our accused for us and our fees. I mean, you're next

[22:49] person. I'm sure you're doing it all the time too. Well, all the time, yep. But no, I'm

[22:57] excited for this. I do have an off topic question. Do we have bonds in place to protect defense

[23:05] and legal for the board members? We don't just because we were, when we set this up,

[23:11] we did it as a kind of an inactive district there's there's a few things we probably need to do

[23:20] we'll need to adopt a budget and and get some of those things in place once we start being active

[23:26] I don't know if that'll happen this physical year in which case we do a budget amendment or

[23:32] if it's more like next physical year so we will want to get like that I'll age to talk about like that

[23:40] like crime and liability insurance yeah we can do that pretty quickly do you

[23:49] go through local Utah government's trust I believe we do okay that's what you

[23:55] fair does too I think they're they're the big one there's another company

[23:59] I was looking at that I was trying to get some quotes from they never got back to

[24:05] me and so I went with that. I think that's what most municipalities and counties and

[24:11] stuff in the state use. So I definitely think that will be appropriate once we have a budget

[24:16] and actually have activity in the district.

[24:21] Terrific. I appreciate that information. It's just such a litigious society anymore that

[24:27] you have to have production. Yeah,

[24:31] make sense. I appreciate that reminder. And we will

[24:36] want to probably there's five other things I'm not thinking of right now that want to

[24:41] do ones who are actually active and are spending money out of this pit. But after the time

[24:46] being, it's I think we're okay. Excellent. Well, I don't have any further questions.

[24:57] That document sent it over and then I'll just look at some dates and we'll go from there.

[25:01] Okay.

[25:02] That sounds good.

[25:03] It doesn't require a vote.

[25:04] It's more of an informal.

[25:06] Yeah.

[25:07] More than anything.

[25:08] Yep.

[25:08] It's all to you to give us to go ahead, Larry, so.

[25:11] Let's do it.

[25:13] And with that, I'll take a motion to end the meeting.

[25:16] So moved.

[25:19] All right.

[25:20] The meeting's adjourned.

[25:22] Okay.

[25:23] Thank you both.

[25:24] Thanks.

[25:24] Appreciate it.

[25:25] Thanks for watching.

Power District Public Infrastructure District 1 August Work Meeting

Transcript