Aug 26, 2026 Board of Directors Special Meeting Agenda

[1. Invocation / Pledge of Allegiance;]

[2. Call meeting to order;]

[3. Receive, consider and act upon adoption of the meeting agenda;]

[4. Recognize public officials;]

[5. Public comment;]

[00:08:03]

OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA IS LIMITED TO CLARIFICATION AND

[00:08:07]

BUT NOT PERMITTED IN THE DEBATE OF AN ISSUE -- THEY WILL NOT USE PROFANITY AS IT IS A BOARD OF OFFICIALS, PLEASE PUT YOUR CELL PHONES ON SILENT, AS I CALL THE FIRST NAME. --

>> PERSONALLY I AM DISAPPOINTED THAT THE TOWNSHIP BOARD IS ON TRANSPARENT, AND RELIANCE ON A COMMUNITY IMPACT ORDER.

INTO THIS AMENDMENT DEAL. AND NOT TO MENTION GIVING RESIDENTS A BUNCH OF NOTICE, WHERE THEY CAN MAKE PUBLIC COMMENTS. BENEFIT OF THE DETAILS OF THE DEAL. I FOR ONE HAVE MANY QUESTIONS.

WHERE I WOULD LIKE ANSWERS BEFORE THERE IS A VOTE ON A PROPOSED AMENDMENT. AND THIS IS A MATTER OF A TOWN HALL MEETING WHERE THE BOARD CAN PRESENT THE DEALS AND THE CONSEQUENCES AND IF THE MONEY TO THE PAY IS THE ADDITIONAL PROJECTS, WHY IS IT GIVING 100% OF THE 22.6 MILLION TO THE CITY OF HOUSTON? WHAT TO DO WITH AS THEY PLEASED WITH IT. FROM WHERE WILL THE $9 MILLION PAYMENTS IN 2020 AND 2029 COME FROM, WILL THE RESERVE BE MAKING THE PAYMENTS. IF THIS IS THE TOWNSHIP RESERVES REPLENISHED. FOR ME, SAYING THE DEAL SAVES THE TOWNSHIP $140 MILLION IN TAX REVENUE OVER THE FIRST 45 YEARS IS TOO SIMPLE AND ANSWER. I WOULD LIKE THE TOWNSHIP TO SHARE THE FULL ECONOMICS OF THE DEAL.

ALSO HAVE ALL OF THE LEGAL ISSUES BEEN FULLY EXPLORED RELATIVE TO THE STATE ENABLING LEGISLATION IN 2010 AND THE SUBSEQUENT LEGISLATION IN 2017. HOW WILL THE IPJS BE AFFECTED? IF ALL OF THESE QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN THOROUGHLY ANALYZED WITH

[00:10:02]

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, STEVE.

PLEASE DON'T LEAVE AFTER PUBLIC COMMENT.

YOU WILL GET ALL OF YOUR QUESTIONS ANSWERED.

CHRIS DAVISON, IS THAT RIGHT? WELCOME, CHRIS.

>> MY NAME IS CHRIS DAVISON, I WOULD HAVE SUBMITTED THESE COMMENTS TO Y'ALL VIA EMAIL OR PHONE, BUT UNLIKE THE 1204 MUNICIPALITIES IN THE AREA, YOU ARE THE ONLY ONES THAT I CAN FIND THAT YOU HAVE TO GO TO AN APP TO SUBMIT A COMMENT OR A QUESTION. ON THAT NOTE TO, I DID SUBMIT A COMMENT TO END QUESTION TO MISS GIBBS ON AUGUST 12TH 2025 NUMBER 6236 WHICH WENT UNANSWERED, SO I WILL TOUCH ON THAT.

I AM HERE AS FAR AS THE HOUSTON METRO TIME OF THE HOUSTON MONEY TO IT MAKES NO SENSE TO ME BECAUSE YOU ALREADY HAVE AN AGREEMENT THAT WE CAN'T BE INCORPORATED UNTIL 2057 WITH HOUSTON, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY IF YOU INCORPORATE, YOU KNOW HOW MUCH YOU OWE HOUSTON? ZERO, BECAUSE ONE CITY IS NOT OBLIGATED TO GIVE ANOTHER CITY ANYTHING.

NOW OTHER THAN THE $50 MILLION WE SAVED IN INCORPORATE IF INCORPORATED COME THE LAST TIME WE VOTED ON THIS, WE DID NOT HAVE THE ISSUE OF PEOPLE RIDING ELECTRIC MOTORCYCLES ON OUR PATHWAYS AND RUNNING US OVER A. THAT WAS NOT AN ISSUE FOUR YEARS AGO. I GUESS IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN AN ISSUE LIVING ON FALLING COURT, AND PEOPLE BLOW THROUGH THE STOP SIGN RAMPANTLY ON THE DRIVE.

AND I CALL THE NOTE TODAY, SORRY, I'M A LITTLE BIT NERVOUS.

AND HE TOLD ME I WOULD HAVE TO CALL THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT TO GET SOME ENFORCEMENT OUT THERE.

THERE IS NO CITY I'VE EVER LIVED WHERE PEOPLE CAN DRIVE RAMPANTLY LIKE THEY DO HERE COULD SPEED COME A RUNNING RED LIGHTS.

THAT'S NOT ALL THE COUNTY HAS, SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENTS FAULT, PART OF IT IS THE MONTGOMERY COUNTY HAS ONE PRIORITY IN THEIR MODE OF GETTING PEOPLE FROM POINT A TO POINT B. THEY MOVE AS MUCH PEOPLE EAST AND WEST AS YOU CAN FROM 45 TO 2978 TO, THEY DO NOT CARE NOR PRIORITIZE THE PEOPLE LIKE ME THAT GET ON PANTHER CREEK AND NEED TO MAKE A LEFT ON WOODLANDS PARKWAY.

SO I SIT THROUGH FOUR LIGHT CYCLES WHEN THE TRAFFIC ON THE OTHER TWO DIRECTIONS GETS ONE LIGHT CYCLE.

THAT'S ON PURPOSE, BECAUSE THEIR PRIORITY IS NOT MOVING ME.

IT'S MOVING THE MASSES FROM 45 AND BACK AND FORTH FROM EAST AND WEST. ANOTHER PROBLEM Y'ALL HAVE WITH NON INCORPORATING IS YOU LACK ON THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT.

A QUICK STORY A FEW YEARS AGO OUR MAILBOX WAS BROKEN INTO.

EVERYONE'S MAIL WAS STOLEN, I CALLED THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT.

THAT'S A FEDERAL MATTER, CALLED THE POST OFFICE.

SWEAR TO GOD COME A TRUE STORY. GO TO THE POST OFFICE AND THEY SAY CALL THE POSTAL INSPECTOR. I GO TO THE POSTAL INSPECTOR, THEY SAY GO TO THE POST OFFICE. IRONICALLY ABOUT A YEAR AGO MY IDENTITY WAS STOLEN IN JERSEY VILLAGE FROM A HOUSE I USED TO OWN THERE APPEARED THE PERSON THAT LIVED IN THE HOUSE WAS GOING THROUGH PEOPLE'S MAIL. THIS IS A FEDERAL CASE NOW, YOU KNOW HOW HE WAS CAUGHT? HE WAS CAUGHT BECAUSE JERSEY VILLAGE CAUGHT WIND OF IT AND THEIR OWN POLICE DEPARTMENT, NOT THE FEDS SET UP A SURVEILLANCE TEAM AND FOLLOWED THIS GUY STEALING PEOPLE'S MAIL. IT'S NOW A MAJOR FEDERAL CASE AGAINST THIS JERSEY VILLAGE AND MAIL THEFT.

THAT IS A CRIME THAT DOES NOT GO REPORTED IN THE WOODLANDS DESPITE MAKING MULTIPLE EFFORTS TO DO SO GETS CAUGHT THERE, YOU ARE LEAVING THIS HUGE VOID BY NOT INCORPORATING BECAUSE YOUR SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT EITHER CANNOT OR WILL NOT ENFORCE RULES LIKE TRANSPORTATION NUMBER, THE TRANSPORTATION 547-604, NOT ALLOWED TO DRIVE CARS, WHERE WE HEAR THAT IN THE WOODLANDS.

PEOPLE DRIVING UP AND DOWN PANTHER CREEK, UP AND DOWN LAKEWOOD'S PARKWAY, ALL NIGHT LONG, POP, POP, POP, WE HEAR IT, CALL THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT COME DO YOU ENFORCE THAT? THE DEPUTY ARNOLDS ANSWER TO THAT WAS IT'S OFFICER DISCRETION COME IF THERE'S ANY MEDIA HERE, IF YOU DO A PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUEST I WOULD GUESS THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THAT GET A TICKET THAT IS ENFORCED IS A WHOPPING ZERO, NOW GO TO JERSEY VILLAGE WITH MANY CITIES AROUND THE AREA AND GO DOWN THERE REGISTRY --

>> ARE COMING YOU ARE PAST YOUR 3 MINUTES.

>> GO DOWN THERE FOR TWO SECONDS TO SEE HOW LONG YOU CAN REV UP YOUR SUPERCAR WITHOUT THE COPS COMING TO TAKE YOU STRAIGHT TO JAIL OR GO TO ANY PARK IN HOUSTON TO SEE HOW LONG YOU CAN RIDE AN ELECTRIC MOTORCYCLE UP AND DOWN THE STREET AND HAVE ABSOLUTELY ZERO CONSEQUENCES THAT IS UNIQUE TO THE WOODLANDS

AND IS GOING TO BE -- >> SIR, THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU FOR COMING.

>> JOHN TAYLOR, IS THAT RIGHT? GOOD TO SEE YOU, JOHN.

[00:15:12]

>> I GET A LITTLE NERVOUS, POLITICIANS UP HERE, SO MIGHT

NEED TO PUSH US TO THE BACK. >> ENDING THE TREASURER

APPEARED. >> PUT THIS BY THE POLICE OFFICER, SOMEBODY APPEARED ESTEEMED BOARD MEMBERS AND FELLOW GUESTS, I'M GOING TO KEEP THIS SIMPLE.

NOT BECAUSE IT IS UNIMPORTANT, BUT BECAUSE I HAVE ONLY GOT 3 MINUTES, I HAVE ONLY HAD ONE WEEK TO LEARN WHAT IS GOING ON, AND OTHER THAN A FEW NEWSPAPER ARTICLES, THIS BOARD HAS RELEASED VERY LIMITED INFORMATION COMES TO MOST OF WHAT I THINK I KNOW IS FROM INTERNET SEARCHES, SO PLEASE, IF I MAKE A MISTAKE, IT IS MINE AND I APOLOGIZE.

I'M JOHN TAYLOR, I'M A LONGTIME RESIDENT AND HAVE A FEW SIMPLE THINGS I WOULD LIKE EVERYONE TO THINK ABOUT GOOD SIMPLE POINT NUMBER 1, THERE IS NO EMERGENCY. FOR STATE LAW WE CANNOT BE ANNEXED WITHOUT OUR CONSENT. SHOULD THE LAW BE OVERTURNED? THE EXISTING REGIONAL PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT PROHIBITS ANNEX UNTIL DECADES AWAY.

SO WITHOUT AN EMERGENCY, WHAT IS THE RUSH? INSTEAD OF VOTING TODAY, WHY NOT GIVE US THE INFORMATION THAT DETAILS THIS DEAL AND LET US UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE DOING BETTER. HOUSTON IS DELAYING THEIR DECISION FOR AT LEAST A WEEK, WHY NOT US? SIMPLE POINT NUMBER TWO, I EXPECT WE WILL HEAR SOME CONFUSING NUMBERS IF WE HAVE A DISCUSSION TODAY.

HERE ARE SOME THINGS TO REMEMBER, YES, WE CAN TREAT TO THAT FUND, LAST YEAR ABOUT TWO AND A HALF MILLION DOLLARS, BUT THAT MONEY DID NOT DISAPPEAR. IT'S NOT HOUSTON'S.

PER THE AGREEMENT AS I UNDERSTAND IT IT'S TO BE USED FOR PROJECTS FOR THE MULTIPLE FUND.

AND IN FACT, HOUSTON HAS TO MANAGE THOSE PROJECTS.

SO OUR MONEY IS THERE IT'S NOT DISAPPEARED IN HOUSTON HAS TO MATCH IT. I EXPECT WE ALSO HEAR A, AS MENTIONED, 140, $150 MILLION OVER THE NEXT 30 SOME YEARS.

I DON'T KNOW THE ASSUMPTIONS THAT WENT INTO CREATING THAT NUMBER. WAS THE $50 MILLION THAT WE ARE GOING TO PUT UPFRONT, WAS THAT IN THE CALCULATION? BECAUSE THAT WOULD AFFECT THE LONG TERM DISCOUNT VALUE OF THOSE PAYMENTS. WHAT IF WE DO A BETTER DEAL LATER, THERE'S NO RUSH, WE CAN DO THE DEAL IN A YEAR, TWO YEARS, WHAT DO WE LOSE? I DON'T KNOW, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THOSE ASSUMPTIONS. AND NUMBER THREE, IF WE INCORPORATE. I THINK I UNDERSTAND THAT ALL OF THESE FUTURE PAYMENTS WILL STOP. SO WHERE WAS THE ASSUMPTION IN THAT STREAM OF PAYMENT ANALYSIS THERE? SO AND THE LAST QUESTION IS, WE HAVE HEARD, WE ARE GOING TO INFER THIS DEAL, WE HAVE TO PAY $27 MILLION IN CASH OVER THE NEXT THREE AND A HALF YEARS, WHERE THOSE FUNDS COMING FROM? AND WHAT IS NOT GOING TO BE FUNDED? SIMPLE POINT NUMBER 3, I'M GUESSING SOMEWHERE ALONG THE LINES WE WILL HEAR THAT THIS IS A GREAT DEAL.

FOR HOUSTON I. THINK IT IS. HOUSTON IS BROKE, THEY RUN 150 TO $175 MILLION DEFICIT ANNUALLY.

THIS BEAUTIFUL BOARD RUNS A BALANCED BUDGET FOR ONCE.

THEY NEED THE CASH. HOUSTON HAS TO MATCH THE MONEY THAT IS ALREADY IN OUR ACCOUNT, AND THEY WILL HAVE TO MATCH ANY FUTURE PAYMENTS WE MAKE. THIS IS A WONDERFUL DEAL FOR HOUSTON IF THEY ARE CASH STRAPPED AND DON'T HAVE TO MATCH OUR MONEY COME I'M WONDERING HOW GOOD THE DEAL IS FOR US.

WE PAY HOUSTON $50 MILLION FOR ANNEXING US AFTER 2057, THINK ABOUT THAT FOR A SECOND, $20 MILLION IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS FOR SOMETHING FOR THREE DECADES AWAY.

WE GET NO MONEY COMING NO MORE MONEY FOR BENEFICIAL PROJECTS FROM HOUSTON AND IF YOU TOOK THAT $50 MILLION STUCK ON THE INTEREST BEARING ACCOUNT, YOU WOULD HAVE $162 MILLION.

SO I HAVE TRIED TO KEEP THIS SIMPLE, THERE IS NO EMERGENCY AND THERE IS NO RUSH, WE DON'T HAVE THE FULL ECONOMIC PICTURE FOR TOUGH FOR THE RESIDENTS TO UNDERSTAND HOW GOOD THIS DEAL IS, THIS DEAL SEEMS ONE SIDED, BUT IF YOU GIVE US MORE INFORMATION, PERHAPS WE WILL UNDERSTAND BETTER AND DELAY VOTING ON THIS ISSUE APPEARED TO KEEP IT SIMPLE, IT IS OUR MONEY AND WE NEED TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE DOING.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. I APPRECIATE THE BIG BEAUTIFUL BOARD COMMENT. WE WILL TALK ABOUT THIS A LOT.

LET HER BE, THANK YOU, WELCOME. >> THIS IS GOOD NEWS.

DEAR FRIENDS, SOON TO BE FRIENDS OF THE BOARD, I HAVE BEEN A CITIZEN OF THE WOODLANDS FOR FOUR YEARS NOW.

WHAT I FOUND HERE IS THAT THIS CAN EXIST WITH REFLECTION, THAT LEADERSHIP DRIVES THE URBAN EXCELLENCE THAT GOES THROUGH THOSE MEETINGS WHERE IT CAN BE FRAMED BY SUNSETS AND THAT THE CENTER IS GOOD FOR THE SOUL. LAST MAY I ATTENDED AN EVENT AT THE WOODLANDS RESORT WITH NONE OTHER THAN THE UNITED SECRETARY

[00:20:01]

THROUGH ONE OF THE BREAKS, I RAN INTO NICK WHO WAS NOT AT THIS EVENT, BUT WAS VISITING THE RESORT AS A PART OF VISITING THE WOODLANDS, AND WHEN I TOLD HIM THE LEVEL OF EVENT I WAS ATTENDING, WE WERE BOTH QUITE SHOCKED THAT ANY OTHER CITIES OTHER THAN THE WOODLANDS WAS THERE BUT ME.

ALL OF THIS GOT ME THINKING, HOW DO WE CONNECT THIS AMAZING COMMUNITY WITH THE REST OF THE WORLD, BUT ALSO HOW TO BRING THE WORLD BACK TO THE WOODLANDS, BECAUSE I CAN CLEARLY SEE THE DISCONNECTION. THE WOODLANDS AREA COULD NOT BE A DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP IS DEDICATED TO ATTRACT BUSINESSES TO SET UP THE WOODLANDS AS A SUPPORT OF THE LOCAL EXPANSION, BUT IT DOES NOT OPERATE AS A VEHICLE TO SYSTEMATICALLY CONNECT INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE CAPITAL FOR THE SPECIFIC COMMUNITY INVESTMENT PROJECTS. SO BY DESIGN THE BRIDGE.

IT CREATED A RELATIONSHIP DRIVING PLATFORM CONNECTED INTERNATIONAL CAPITAL WITH HIGH QUALITY OPPORTUNITIES IN THE WOODLANDS. THE BIGGEST PROBLEM WITH INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT IS THE LACK OF TRUST TO THE INCOMING CAPITALS. THE RICH ARE PRECISELY THAT.

WE ARE LOOKING TO CONNECT TRUSTED ULTRA HIGH NET WORTH INVESTORS, PERSONAL FROM MY NETWORK WITH TRANSFORMATIONAL HIGH QUALITY OPPORTUNITIES IN THE WOODLANDS.

WE ARE NOT AN INVESTMENT FUND. WE ARE A BRIDGE.

OUR MODEL IS SIMPLE, INTRODUCE HIGH NET WORTH INTERNATIONAL INVESTORS AND ALIGN WITH THE VISION AND VALUES, TO CAREFULLY SELECT A HIGH QUALITY OF OPPORTUNITIES IN THE WOODLANDS WITH THE SUPPORT OF THE TOWNSHIP AND THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP. I'M GOING TO HELP THEM SUCCESSFULLY INTEGRATE INTO THE COMMUNITY.

WHAT I AM ASKING FOR IS A MEETING A FORMAL MEETING WITH THE TOWNSHIP OR WITH GAVIN TO ELABORATE ON THE FINE DETAILS.

AND TO CREATE THE GLOBAL INVESTMENT COUNCIL OF THE WOODLANDS WITHOUT AUTHORITIES, LEADERS AND OBSERVERS.

THESE ARE BIG AMOUNTS OF MONEY, TRUST ME AND, SO WE NEED OBSERVERS HERE OR WHATEVER YOU PREFER.

WE HAVE ALREADY BUILT THE INVESTOR SITE ON THE EQUATION.

WE NEED THE LOCAL INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITIES AND TRUSTED INSTITUTIONAL RELATIONSHIPS. ARE YOU IN?

THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH, WE APPRECIATE IT. ADAM COHEN, WELCOME.

>> THANK YOU, ADAM COHEN, PRESIDENT OF THE WOODLANDS.

AND TO BE KIND OF CLEAR, I SUPPORT THE REVISED AGREEMENT BASED ON LIMITED INFORMATION THAT HAS BEEN RELEASED TO DATE.

IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE KEEP OUR SALES TAX LOCAL AND I THINK THAT THERE IS A LOT OF EMPHASIS ON THIS HEADLINE NUMBER OF 50 MILLION, BUT AS IT WAS POINTED OUT, TWO AND A HALF MILLION PLUS THIS YEAR ALONE IS LEAVING THE WOODLANDS FOR PROJECTS THAT DON'T NECESSARILY BENEFIT DIRECTLY TO THE WOODLANDS. SO I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT THE NUMBER AND YOU ADJUST IT TO OUR GROWING TAX BASE COMING YOU INDEX IT FOR INFLATION, THAT NUMBER IS GOING TO FAR EXCEED 50 MILLION THAT WILL LEAVE THE WOODLANDS.

SO I THINK THAT IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT WE KEEP THAT HERE LOCALLY IF WE GET OTHER BENEFITS AS A PART OF THAT AGREEMENT, THEN THAT IS GREAT. IT MIGHT BE GOOD FOR HOUSTON WHERE IT IS BETTER FOR US. I ALSO JUST WANT TO MAKE A SUGGESTION ON A PROCESS IMPROVEMENT WHERE I FEEL LIKE HAVING PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE SUCH A REPORTED ISSUE IS REALLY CHALLENGING. SO IN THE FUTURE WHEN THERE IS A KEY AGENDA ITEM LIKE THIS COME I THINK IT WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL TO HAVE A STAFF PRESENTATION AND THEN TO HAVE THE PUBLIC COMMENT AFTER THE STAFF PRESENTATION AND THEN THE BOARD DELIBERATION.

I THINK THAT THAT WOULD LEAD TO A LOT MORE INFORMED COMMENT AND ENGAGEMENT AMONG THE PUBLIC. THANK YOU.

>> I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA. >> GREAT.

>> GOOD IDEA. >> ANNA CASCIO, HOW ARE YOU? WELCOME BACK. SPEAKER GOOD AFTERNOON, MY NAME IS ANNA CASCIO AND I PROMISE I DID NOT GET TOGETHER WITH ANYBODY BEFOREHAND TO SAY SOME OF THE SIMILAR THINGS THAT I'VE DRAFTED ALL AFTERNOON. I DID LISTEN TO THE MEETING THIS MORNING THAT YOU ATTENDED MR. REILLY, THE TOWNSHIP BOARD HAS ALWAYS BEEN EXTREMELY TRANSPARENT IN EVERYTHING, ALL OF YOUR AGENDAS INCLUDE ALL OF THE RFP S., EVERY SINGLE BID YOU CAN CLICK ON IT AND READ WHO IS BIDDING FOR WHAT AND THAT IS THE BIGGEST TRANSPARENCY YOU CAN HAVE IN GOVERNMENT.

NOW, THIS TIME, THIS AGENDA POSTED ZERO, THERE WAS NOT A SINGLE DOWNLOADED DOCUMENT FOR ME TO LOOK AT, NOT EVEN THE ORDINANCE THAT YOU ANNOUNCED BACK AT THE BUDGET MEETING ON

[00:25:01]

I HAD TO GO TO THE HOUSTON CITY PAPERWORK ON THE WEBSITE AND PRINT IT OUT SO I COULD READ IT MYSELF AND UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT HERE THERE IS A LOT OF NEBULOUS KIND OF WORDING THAT I DON'T APPRECIATE. SO MY UNDERSTANDING, ALTHOUGH IT COULD BE SHORT SIGHTED BECAUSE I DO NEED TO HEAR MORE INFORMATION IS I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE RUSH COME I DON'T UNDERSTAND GIVING THE $50 MILLION SPECIFICALLY WHEN IT IS UNRESTRICTED.

IT IS NOT GIVING US ANYTHING, THIS IS NOT A PARTNERSHIP.

THEY WILL BE USING IT FOR WHAT THEY NEED, YES, THERE ARE $182 MILLION BEHIND. WE ARE ALWAYS EXTREMELY BUDGET AND FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE. OUR RPA ALSO WAS DEVELOPED BY A STATE STATR. I'M NOT SURE THAT HOUSTON CAN HAVE AN ORDINANCE AND CANCEL THAT OUT TO, BUT I AM NOT A LAWYER, I'M CERTAINLY CANNOT COMMENT ON THAT.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS POSSIBLE.

MR. BAILEY, I WOULD LOVE FOR YOU TO ALSO ASIDE FROM ADDRESSING WHEN YOU GO TO THE LEGISLATURE THE ENFORCEMENT.

I THINK WHAT IS MORE IMPORTANT IS TO DRAFT NEW LEGISLATION ABOUT THE RPA, BECAUSE WE NEED VERBIAGE THAT DOES NOT SPECIFICALLY JUST GIVE MONEY TO HOUSTON, BUT ELIMINATES THERE OF THE WOODLANDS TOWNSHIP, BECAUSE IT'S ALSO INVOLVED WITH THAT RPA, IT'S NOT JUST WOODLAND CITY, SO WHAT IS TO KEEP CONROE FROM GOING AHEAD AND DOING THE SAME THING? SO I WANT THE WOODLANDS REMOVED FROM ANY CITY ETJ IF POSSIBLE, AND ALSO, LET'S BE MORE CLEAR AND OPEN WITH THE RESIDENTS HERE THIS IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT AND THERE SHOULD BE MEETINGS WHEN MORE PEOPLE CAN ATTEND AND MORE DOCUMENTS AS WE HAVE TIME TO DIGEST. SO DON'T RUSH TO IT, AND EVERYTHING THAT SPARKLES IS NOT GOLD, THIS IS HUGE FOR THE TOWNSHIP, HUGE FOR RESIDENTS FUTURE, THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, ANNA. >> IS IT CARLOS? WHAT IS YOUR LAST NAME? I COULD NOT READ THE LAST NAME.

>> WEBBIE. >> MR. WEBBIE, WELCOME.

>> I USED TO COME HERE FOR TEN YEARS, BUT I HAVE BEEN ABSENT, STILL GOOD PEOPLE. I'M NOT GOING TO REPEAT EVERYTHING THAT EVERYBODY SAID, BUT I AM IN AGREEMENT WITH WHAT EVERYBODY SAID. THERE IS NO RUSH.

IT IS A GOOD DEAL FOR HOUSTON. YOU KNOW, IF IT WORKS, I WOULD EVEN ASK FOR MORE, BUT IT SEEMS THAT THERE IS A RUSH OVER HERE TO DO SOMETHING COMING IN OH, AFTER YOU GUYS DECIDE TO APPROVE, MAYBE WE WILL GO BACK AND SHARE MY BANK ACCOUNT, I CHANGED MY MIND, ONLY 50, MAYBE 75.

WHY NOT 100? BECAUSE APPARENTLY WE ARE IN A RUSH AND THEY ARE NOT. IT HAS BEEN MENTIONED BEFORE THAT WHEN THE RPA WAS CREATED, IT WAS A PART OF THE LEGISLATURE. I DON'T KNOW THAT THIS IS LEGAL WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO HERE FOR HOUSTON AND THE WOODLANDS, AND LIKE I SAID, I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY, BUT MAYBE AN ATTORNEY COULD SHARE SOME LIGHT ON THAT. AND -- IT IS TRUE THAT CONGRESS IS NOT INCLUDED AND IF WE ARE NOT MINDFUL, IT WILL BE KNOCKING ON OUR DOOR AND SAYING COME ON WHERE'S MY FEE? WHERE IS MY 50 MILLION, WHERE IS MY 20 MILLION, BECAUSE THEY ARE ALSO A PART OF THE RPA.

AND IF -- WE ARE LEFT OPEN WHEN IT COMES TO THE ATJ, WE ARE LEFT OPEN. BECAUSE OF HOUSTON DOES NOT DO WHAT THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO DO, WE HAVE NOT SEEN THE PAPERWORK, THEN THAT MEANS THAT THEY COULD ANNEX ANYTHING NORTH OF 242.

AND MAYBE THEY WOULD DO SOMETHING COMES AT THE BOTTOM LINE IS LIKE EVERYTHING IS SAYING HERE, WE NEED MORE TRANSPARENCY AND KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IS ON THERE.

AND ALIGN THAT NO ONE HAS SEEN. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> THANK YOU, CARLOS. >> THANK YOU.

>> VINCE STOLE TEN, WELCOME B BACK.

>> GOOD EVENING. TODAY I WANTED TO SPEAK ABOUT PRESERVATION REGARDING THE GOLF COURSE THAT IS GOING TO BE DEVELOPED. BEFORE I SPEAK, I WOULD LIKE TO -- I AM JUST WONDERING IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS REGARDING THE FOUNTAIN THAT I PRESENTED LAST TIME? THERE IS NO PRESSURE TO SAY ANYTHING OR -- I WILL JUST GIVE IT A FEW

SECONDS FOR THAT. >> WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO

RESPOND. >> I'M GOING TO SEND THAT TO THE NECESSARY DOMAINS AND SEE IF THEY CAN CHECK IT OUT.

MOVING ON TO MY SPEECH. I HAVE A PICTURE WITH 18 DIFFERENT BOX TURTLES THAT I HAVE DISCOVERED GOING OUT IN THE

[00:30:03]

THE DOCUMENT. >> SO THROUGHOUT THE PAST TWO-POINT YEARS, OCCASIONALLY WANDERING THROUGH SPECIFIC PARTS OF THE NATURE PRESERVES, SAFELY NEAR NATURAL PATHS.

I AS A RESIDENT OF THE WOODLANDS HAVE UNWITTINGLY AND ALSO DELIBERATELY DISCOVERED AT LEAST 50 DIFFERENT NATIVE THREE TOED BOX TURTLES INHABITING VARIOUS AREAS OF ABOUT 17 ACRES THAT IT MUST BE TRUSTED AS PROVEN WITH THE PHOTO EVIDENCE ANECDOTAL THAT MY PERSON HAS GATHERED OVER SAID TIME AS AN ENTHUSIAST.

IT STRONGLY THEORIZED THAT HIS OBSERVATIONS ENACTED ESTABLISHMENT POPULATION OCCUPYING LAND AT THE 50-ACRE FOR THE PUBLIC GOLF WHICH HAS BEEN OFFICIALLY DIAGNOSED AS AN UNMET NEED, THIS DEVELOPMENT WOULD CAUSE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF ARMAGEDDON TO BOX TURTLE HABITAT AND I MUST ASSUME ALSO INTEGRATES IN THAT AREA DUE TO BEING SO CLOSE TO THE OFFICIAL NATURE PRESERVES AS A FLOODPLAIN.

BECAUSE OF THIS, WE MUST CONSIDER HABITAT FRAGMENTATION AND FORMAL EXTENDED WILDLIFE PROTECTION PROTOCOL IS NECESSARY TO PREVENT AVOIDABLE MORTALITY. THESE CREATURES ARE SACRED, GENTLE, AND STURDY. HARM TO THEM SHALL SHALL BE PREVENTED AND NOT TOLERATED. I ASK TOWNSHIP ENVIRONMENT OFFICIALS TO RESPOND FORMALLY IN PREPARATION BEFORE DEVELOPMENTS OCCUR. FOR THIS SPECIFIC DEMAND HERE, WHERE VERY FEW VARIOUS ARE TUNING INTO THE SPECIAL MEETING, I SHOULD MENTION WITH THE VERY PROCESS LAYOUT OBSTRUCTION HERE INTO THE DOCUMENT THAT THE ACTIONS REQUESTED TO REMAIN CONCEALED AND COVERT SO AS TO PREVENT THE PUBLIC OR COMMUNITY FROM GOING OUT AND LOOKING FOR THE SENSITIVE SPECIES WHICH WOULD USUALLY BE LEFT ALONE. AS AMUSING AS THEY ARE, AND SEVERAL STATES IT'S UNLAWFUL TO KEEP THEM CAPTIVE AS PETS, ONE OF THE REASONS TO PREVENT POACHING THAT IS UNLAWFULLY COLLECTING AND SELLING WILDLIFE. SO THAT SAID, THEY MUST ENSURE PROTECTION FOR THIS PROPOSAL REQUESTED THE WOODLANDS TOWNSHIP A MULTIMONTH WILDLIFE FUND MONITORING AND RELOCATION PROGRAM ACROSS THE FULL 50-ACRE TRACK FOLLOWED BY

PRECONSTRUCTION -- >> MR. DALTON, WE NEED TO WRAP

IT UP HERE AT. >> AS WELL AS RECOVERING CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WHO REMAIN OBSERVANT AND AWARE OF BOX TURTLES THAT CERTAINLY STILL ARE WANDERING AROUND THE SITE AFTER THESE ARE FINISHED. THIS APPROACH ASSURES THAT BOX TURTLES ARE NOT OVERLOOKED DURING A SEASONAL MOVEMENT CYCLES AND THAT THE TOWNSHIP'S ENVIRONMENTAL ADMINISTRATION OBSERVANCES ARE UPHELD I EXPECT THIS TOWN OUT OF ALL PLACES ANYWHERE TO TURN FOR THIS SORT OF DECENCY REQUESTED HERE.

>> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

SPEAKER WE APPRECIATE IT. >> INTERESTING.

SPEAKER GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIRMAN, BOARD MEMBERS, SENIOR STAFF, OUR PUBLIC VETS HERE AND MILLIONS WATCHING FROM HOME. TONIGHT MY COMMENTS RELATE TO HERE AS A CITIZEN IMPACTS TAXPAYER, LAST WEEK WE HAD A GREAT BUDGET WORKSHOP, A LOT OF SPREADSHEETS AS WE TALKED ABOUT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, WE TALKED ABOUT LAW ENFORCEMENT.

AND I HAVE TO TELL YOU, THE GREAT NUMBERS ON A PIECE OF PAPER, BUT WE EXPERIENCE THIS MONDAY IN COTTAGE GREEN, WE SAW THE NUMBERS ON THE PAPER TRANSFERRED INTO ACTION BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND SHERIFF THAT RESPONDED TO A GENERATOR FIRE THAT SAVED STRUCTURE, KEPT PEOPLE SAFE, AND HAD FOUR COMPANIES RESPOND. WE ALSO SAW THE VALUE OF THE MUTUAL AID. WE IN FIRE UNITS FROM MAGNOLIA AND FROM LEON THAT SUPPORTED THE WOODLANDS FIRE.

AND SHERIFFS CAME DOWN TO THE SECURITY SITUATION AND THERE WERE AT LEAST 12 RESIDENTS INCLUDING NICK WALDER WHO WE ARE REALLY FORTUNATE IN COTTAGE GREEN THAT NICK IS ONE OF OUR RESIDENTS THAT SAW THE VALUE OF YOUR COMMITMENT THAT IS A COMMITMENT THAT CONTINUES SINCE BASICALLY STARTED AT WOODLANDS THAT FIRE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO US.

SO IT WAS REALLY GOOD TO SEE AND SEE PEOPLE IN ACTION WHERE THE INVESTMENT IS CONTINUED TO SERVE THE COMMUNITY.

THE OTHER THING THAT WE EXPERIENCED AT THE SAME TIME OVERLAID THIS ENTIRE SITUATION, WE HAD A POWER OUTAGE WHERE WE WERE PART OF 3700 RESIDENTS THAT DID NOT HAVE POWER AT THE SAME TIME. WE SAW A VERY QUICK RESPONSE BY

[00:35:03]

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU, ARTHUR, WE

APPRECIATE IT. >> THAT IS PUBLIC COMMENT.

WE WILL BE GOING INTO CLOSED SESSION MOMENTARILY.

BUT I WILL BRING SOMETHING UP. WE HAVE THE RPA AGREEMENT.

IT IS FIVE PAGES PLUS TWO SIGNATURE PAGES, SO IT IS VERY, VERY SIMPLE TO UNDERSTAND. I'VE ALSO ATTACHED THE ORIGINAL RPA AGREEMENT, AND EVERYONE IS GETTING A COPY.

WE WILL GIVE EVERYONE A COPY TO READ AND LOOK AT AND WE HAVE OUR ATTORNEY HERE TONIGHT FROM SCHWARTZ PAIGE THAT DID THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT, AND THEY DID THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE RPA AGREEMENT, AND THEY DID THE THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE RPA AGREEMENT. WE WILL STAY HERE UNTIL 4:00 IN THE MORNING AND ANSWER EVERY QUESTION YOU HAVE.

I WILL HAVE A WAY OF SUBMITTING QUESTIONS TO OUR BEAUTIFUL LEGAL COUNSEL OVER THERE, AND SOME QUESTIONS ON STICKY NOTES IF YOU HAVE AS WE GO THROUGH IT, EVERYTHING YOU GUYS HAVE ASKED FOR, WE WANT TO COVER IN DEPTH. IN DEPTH.

THIS IS NOT A RUSH. WE DID NOT KNOW THAT THE TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT WERE GOING TO BE RELEASED IN AN AGENDA BY THE CITY OF HOUSTON AND NEGOTIATING CONTRACTS.

SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO BE BEHIND CLOSED DOORS, WE DID NOT KNOW THAT THEY WERE GOING TO DO THAT. SO NOW THAT IT IS OUT IN THE OPEN AND THEY DISCLOSED IT, WE ARE GOING TO DISCLOSE IT.

SO I WANT EVERYONE TO READ THIS WHILE WE ARE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION AND GOING OVER A FEW THINGS BEFORE WE COME OUT.

WE WILL STAY HERE TILL 4:00 IN THE MORNING AND ANSWER EVERY

[8. Recess to Executive Session to discuss matters relating to real property pursuant to §551.072, Texas Government Code; deliberation of economic development negotiations pursuant to §551.087, Texas Government Code; discuss personnel matters pursuant to §551.074, Texas Government Code; discuss IT network or critical infrastructure security pursuant to §551.089, Texas Government Code; and to consult with The Woodlands Township’s attorney pursuant to §551.071, Texas Government Code;]

MOVING TO AGENDA ITEM FOR CLOSED SESSION WE WILL RECESS BRIEFLY FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION, LOOKING AT 551.074, TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, SECTION 551.087, AND 551.07, CRITICAL WITH 551.089 OF THE CODE, AND 551.071 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE.

IT IS 4:37. >> NOW RECONVENING FROM

[6. Receive, consider and act upon the Third Amendment to Regional Partnership Agreement between The Woodlands Township and the City of Houston, Texas (C-2007-3517);]

[9. Reconvene in public session;]

I WOULD LIKE FOR EVERYONE TO FIRST -- I WANT EVERYONE TO HEAR THIS, PLEASE, PLEASE -- HANG ON ONE SECOND. IF WE COULD COME UP PLEASE LET MONIQUE WHO HAS BEEN HERE HOW MANY YEARS?

>> JUST HAD MY 34TH ANNIVERSARY. >> 34TH UNIVERSITY AND HAS WORKED FOR THE CITY, P I'D -- EVERYTHING.

SO NO ONE KNOWS MORE ABOUT IT THAN SHE DOES.

SHE HAS BEEN THROUGH A CORPORATION VOTES, SHE HAS BEEN THROUGH GOLF COURSE NEGOTIATIONS, AND SHE HAS BEEN -- NO ONE IS A BETTER STEWARD OF OUR MONEY THAN MONIQUE SHARP AND I THINK THAT EVERYBODY WOULD AGREE WITH ME IF YOU KNOW ABOUT HER AT ALL.

SO I'D LIKE FOR HER TO GIVE A HISTORY LESSON FOR EVERYONE HERE IN THE ROOM AND THE MILLIONS THAT ARE WATCHING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT RPA 1 IS, WHAT RPA 2 IS, WHAT RPA 3 IS, BUT ALSO WHAT WAS GOING ON BEFORE ANY RPA WAS AROUND AND THEN WE WILL START GOING INTO THE DOCUMENT. WE WILL TAKE QUESTIONS THAT ARE WRITTEN DOWN HERE THEY WILL BE SUBMITTING THOSE AROUND HERE SO YOU CAN WRITE THEM DOWN AND WE WILL ASK, BUT I ASK EVERYONE TO PLEASE LISTEN TO MONIQUE'S REPORT.

THE BOARD IS GOING TO BE ASKING SEVERAL QUESTIONS OUT IN THE OPEN AND WE WILL DISCUSS THIS IN DEPTH.

AND I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE VERY WISE FOR US TO DO THAT.

SO THIS DOCUMENT THAT WE HAND OUT TO YOU WILL BE -- IS BEING CURRENTLY PUT UP ON DIGITALLY FOR EVERYONE TO SEE.

BUT WITH THAT I WILL TURN IT OVER TO MONIQUE.

>> THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN BAILEY. SO AS YOU MENTIONED, I WILL START OFF. BECAUSE IT IS IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THE HISTORY OF THIS STYLE IN ORDER TO UNDERSTAND

[00:40:01]

IN 1974, THE WOODLANDS WAS FOUNDED AS WE ALL KNOW BY GEORGE MITCHELL. IN 19 -- NOW ALL THE WAY TO 1992, THE WOODLANDS COMMUNITY SERVICE CORPORATION WAS ESTABLISHED TO PROVIDE STAFFING AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR THE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATIONS.

THIS IS ACTUALLY THE YEAR THAT I STARTED IN 1992, SO PRIOR TO THEN IT WAS A SERIES WHERE WE HAD HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATIONS COMMERCIAL OWNERS ASSOCIATION IN 1992 OF WHAT WAS CALLED THE SERVICE CORPORATION WAS FORMED IN ORDER TO PROVIDE MANAGEMENT OVER ALL OF THE HOME ASSOCIATIONS.

IN 1993, THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE CREATED THE TOWN CENTER DISTRICT TO SUPPORT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE GEOGRAPHIC BOUNDARIES OF THAT DISTRICT, WHICH WAS BASICALLY WHAT WE KNOW AS PART OF TOWN CENTER TODAY. IN 1999, FOLLOWING HOUSTON'S 1996 ANNEXATION OF KENNELWOOD, THE WOODLANDS -- WHEN KINGWOOD GOT ANNEXED IN 1996, THE LEADERS OF THE WOODLANDS RECOGNIZED QUICKLY THEY DID NOT WANT THAT TO HAPPEN TO THE WOODLANDS. SO DISCUSSIONS BEGAN ON WHAT WE COULD DO AS A COMMUNITY LOOKING AT OUR GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE IN ORDER TO PROTECT OURSELVES FROM SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

WHAT HAPPENED IS THEN IN 1999-96-97 WE HAD CONVERSATIONS STARTING WITH THE CITY OF HOUSTON, AND THE RESULT OF THAT IS WE ENTERED INTO A MORATORIUM AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF HOUSTON THAT PREVENTED ANNEXATION THROUGH YEAR 2011.

AND THEN IN 2007, THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE AUTHORIZED THE WOODLANDS TO ENTER REGIONAL PARTICIPATION AGREEMENTS WITH HOUSTON IN CONROE RELATING THE PAST TO ANNEXATION NOW UNTIL 2057. AND THEN USED THAT TIME IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH ANY NEW GOVERNANCE FRAMEWORK.

IN 2010, FOLLOWING APPROVAL OF THE 2007 TRANSITION, THE TOWN CENTER IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AND THE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATIONS WERE CONSOLIDATED INTO ONE GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION WHICH WAS WHERE WE ARE TODAY, THE WOODLANDS TOWNSHIP.

THE 2007 AGREEMENT CREATED A LONG TERM FRAMEWORK BETWEEN THE WOODLANDS AND THE CITY OF HOUSTON.

IT DEFERRED ANNEXATION, THE CITY AGREED TO DIVERT ANNEXATION OF THE WOODLANDS FOR 50 YEARS THROUGH 2057.

IT ESTABLISHED THE REGIONAL PARTICIPATION FUND, SO THE TOWNSHIP AGREED TO CONTRIBUTE 0.625.

SO THAT'S 1/16 OF THE BASE OF THE SALES TAX REVENUE GENERATED WITHIN THE PORTION OF THE WOODLANDS THAT IS THOSE FUNDS WERE RESTRICTED. THE FUNDS DEPOSITED INTO THE REGIONAL PARTICIPATION FUND WERE RESTRICTED IN TERMS OF USE.

HOUSTON COULD USE THE REGIONAL PACKAGES FUND ONLY FOR QUALIFYING REGIONAL PROJECTS UNDER THE TERM OF THE AGREEMENT.

THEY ALSO HAD TO MATCH THE FUNDS THAT WE PLACED IN THERE.

>> I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT TO POINT OUT.

SO ANY PROJECT THAT WAS IDENTIFIED THAT WAS MUTUALLY AGREED UPON IF THEY TOOK A MILLION DOLLARS OUT OF THE FUNDS TO GO DO THIS PROJECT THE CITY OF HOUSTON HAD TO MATCH DOLLAR FOR DOLLAR THE MONEY COMING OUT OF THAT FUND, CORRECT?

>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> OKAY.

>> IT MAINTAINS-- SO THIS AGREEMENT GAVE US A MORATORIUM ON THEM NOT ANNEXING-- THE WOODLANDS AGREEING NOT TO ANNEX THE WOODLANDS UNTIL 2057 BUT DID NOT REMOVE THE WOODLANDS FROM HOUSTON'S ETJ AND THEY REMAINED WITHIN THE JURISDICTION AND IT PRESERVED THE GOVERNANCE OPTION FOR THE WOODLANDS.

IT GAVE US THE 50-YEAR TIME TO EVALUATE OUR LONG-TERM GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE INCLUDING THE POSSIBILITY OF INCORPORATION. SO WHY ARE WE REVISITING THIS AGREEMENT NOW? THE ORIGINAL RPA HAS SEARCHED ITS PURPOSE BUT THE PRIORITIES OF BOTH ORGANIZATIONS HAVE CHANGED. HOUSTON HAS NEAR-TERM FINANCIAL PRIORITIES THAT CAN BE ADDRESSED MORE EFFECTIVELY THROUGH ACCESS TO FUNDS NOW RATHER THAN THROUGH THE LONGER TERM CURRENT RPA FUND STRUCTURE. WE ON THE OTHER HAND ARE SEEKING GREATER CONTROL OVER LOCALLY GENERATED SALES TAX REVENUES AND ABILITY TO USE THOSE INSTEAD OF SENDING THAT 1/16TH OF 1% TO THE CITY OF HOUSTON BEING ABLE TO KEEP THEM HERE LOCALLY FOR

[00:45:01]

SO US CURRENTLY AND THE FUTURE GENERATION OF THE WOODLANDS.

SO THROUGH-- THROUGH LOOKING AT ALL OF THIS, DOING THIS ANALYSIS, BOTH ORGANIZATIONS IDENTIFIED AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESTRUCTURE THE AGREEMENT IN A WAY THAT IS BENEFICIAL TO BOTH WHILE CONTINUING OUR LONG-TERM PARTNERSHIP.

SO BEFORE I GO INTO SORT OF A COMPARISON, ANY QUESTIONS WHERE

WE ARE NOW FROM THE BOARD? >> HOLD ON.

>> OKAY. >> ONE QUESTION IS, WE'VE BEEN PUTTING MONEY INTO THAT FUND. HAS HOUSTON-- HAVE THEY PUT

MONEY INTO THAT FUND? >> THEY HAVE NOT.

SO THE FUNDS THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN THERE ARE-- HAVE ALL BEEN CONTRIBUTED BY THE TOWNSHIP. ACCUMULATED OVER TIME.

WE'LL SEE HERE IN A MINUTE, THERE'S ABOUT $22.6 MILLION IN THERE. HOW THE-- HOW IT WORKS WITH THE CITY OF HOUSTON IS WHEN THEY WANT TO FUND A JOINT PROJECT IT'S AT THAT TIME THAT THEY WILL MATCH THE FUNDS.

THEY'RE REQUIRED THEN TO DEPOSIT THOSE FUNDS IN THERE IN ORDER TO

BE ABLE TO TAKE ANY OUT. >> MONIQUE, WHEN WAS THE LAST PROJECT THAT THE CITY OF HOUSTON AND THE WOODLANDS TOWNSHIP OUT OF THIS RPA FUND WHAT WAS THE LAST PROJECT THAT WAS FUNDED?

>> IN 2018, PRIOR TO THAT IT WAS 2014.

SO IN TOTAL WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS JOINT FUND I THINK THERE'S BEEN SIX PROJECTS THAT ARE DONE ALTOGETHER.

THE 2018 FUND WAS IMPROVEMENTS TO HERMAN PARK COUNTRY CLUB.

>> DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH THEY TOOK OUT AT THE TIME?

>> AFC A MILLION DOLLARS. -- IT WAS A MILLION DOLLARS.

>> I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU BUT WE JUST FOUND THIS OUT THIS WEEK DOING OUR RESEARCH, FOR THE MILLIONS LISTENING, IN 2018 A MILLION DOLLARS WAS TAKEN OUT OF THIS FUND TO IMPROVE HERMAN PARK GOLF CLUB. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT ANYBODY ELSE IN THIS BOARD BUT I HAVEN'T BEEN TO HERMAN PARK SINCE I RODE A YELLOW SCHOOL BUS TO GO ON A FIELD TRIP.

I DON'T KNOW THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THAT BUT I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE MAKING PARKS IMPROVE THERE, I THINK THEY CAN DO THAT WITHIN THEMSELVES. THAT'S SOMETHING I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE POINT OUT. BUT 2018 WAS THE LAST TIME THIS

WAS TAPPED. >> I'M LOOKING HERE...

ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE PROJECTS SINCE THIS FUND GOT

CREATED. >> SINCE 2011?

>> 2007. 2007.

>> YEARS. >> CORRECT.

>> SO HERMAN PARK. LAKE HOUSTON PARK.

WAS ANOTHER ONE. LAKE HOUSTON WILDERNESS PARK.

RECONSTRUCTION OF NORTH MCGREGOR WAY BACK IN 2010.

THE LAKE HOUSTON PARK WAS 2010. LAKE HOUSTON WILDERNESS PARK WAS IN 2014. BAYOU DRIVE PROJECT WAS BACK IN 2010. SO MOST OF THESE PROJECTS HAPPENED FAIRLY SOON AFTER THE FUND WAS ESTABLISHED IN 2007.

THEN WE HAD A FOLLOW-UP PROJECT IN 2014 AND THEN WE JUST HAD THE PROJECT WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT IN 2018 SO NOT USED WIDELY

FOR PROJECTS. >> WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS ON THE TYPES OF PROJECTS WOULD BE, LIKE, HARDIE TOW ROAD

IMPROVEMENT -- >> PROJECTS THAT WOULD BENEFIT BOTH THE WOODLANDS RESIDENTS AND HOUSTON RIGHT-HAND SIDE.

SO IT'S PRETTY WIDE OPEN BECAUSE, AGAIN, HERE THE IDEA IS THAT THE WOODLANDS RESIDENTS WOULD GO AND ENJOY THE GOLF COURSE AT HERMAN PARK. OR THE WOODLANDS RESIDENTS WOULD USE MCGREGOR WAY LANE. SO IT'S VERY-- IT'S PRETTY WIDE

OPEN. >> SO WOODLANDS, IF YOU KNEW WHERE THAT WAS, THE WOODLANDS PARK.

EVERYBODY HERE KNEW THAT? YES.

>> WHEN I WAS REPRESENTED KINGWOOD AND LIVED IN CLEARLAKE I EXPERIENCED A LOT OF CONCERN ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED AND HOW DID THE RESIDENTS IN THOSE COMMUNITIES LET THAT HAPPEN AND WHY IN THE WORLD DID NOT SOMEONE STOP THE CITY OF HOUSTON FROM ANNEXING THEM? AND THEN I WOULD WATCH THE WOODLANDS IN AWE AND WONDER AND GO, THOSE PEOPLE ARE REALLY SMART.

THOSE PEOPLE KNOW WHAT'S HAPPENING AND THEY ARE PREPARING

[00:50:02]

>> THE KING WITH ANNEXATION WAS A REAL SHOT ACROSS THE BOW.

>> IT WAS. IT WAS.

>> WHAT THE FUTURE HELD POTENTIALLY.

>> WHEN I DID WHEN I GOT HERE AND READ THE RPA AND THE ENABLING LEGISLATION IT SURPRISED ME THAT ONE OF THE STIPULATIONS THAT WAS IN THE 2007 AGREEMENT AND I'D LIKE YOU TO PULL THAT UP OR DANIEL GOLDMAN PULL IT UP AND READ IT TO US, EVEN IF WE WERE TO BECOME A CITY THAT WE WOULD STILL BE ON THE HOOK, SO TO SPEAK, TO PAY THE SALESPACKS PIECE TO THE CITY OF-- SALES TAX PIECE TO THE CITY OF HOUSTON FOREVER.

THAT SHOCKED ME. I SAID, WAIT A MINUTE, MAYBE THEY WEREN'T AS SMART AS I THOUGHT, THAT NEVER SHOULD HAVE BEEN ALLOWED BUT IT WAS. CAN WE READ THAT TO PEOPLE SO THEY UNDERSTAND THAT WE ARE GETTING OUT OF A PERPETUAL OBLIGATION. CAN YOU READ THAT TO US INTO THE

RECORD? >> I THINK IT'S AN IMPORTANT POINT, ONE OF THE SPEAKERS EARLIER IN PUBLIC COMMENT MADE A

COMMENT -- >> WE HAVE TO DO THIS.

>> -- IF THE WOODLANDS INCORPORATED WE WOULD STILL BE REQUIRED TO PAY THIS 1/16TH OF THE PENNY TO THE CITY OF HOUSTON

FOREVER. >> GO AHEAD, DANIEL.

>> MANY I RIGHT, DANIEL IN SAYING THAT.

>> THE CURRENT TERM OF THE RPA IS UNLIMITED AND THE DEFERRAL PERIOD WAS FOR 50 YEARS AND THE RPA HAS AN UNLIMITED TERM AND 1/16TH SALES TAX SUPPORT THE TERRITORY.

AGREEMENT AND IT DOES NOT GET-- THE IT BE ENTIRE AGREEMENT AND

IT DOES NOT GET RID OF THAT. >> WHAT YOU JUST SAID HERE, LET'S ADDRESS THE RPA AGREEMENT NUMBER 3 THAT WE HAVE BEFORE US TODAY AND THE SAME LANGUAGE THAT IT HAS IN HERE AND I WANT YOU TO GO INTO DEPTH WITH THE BOARD AND THE CROWD HERE ABOUT WHAT THAT

TERM IS AND WHAT THAT MEANS. >> THE THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE RPA GETS RID OF THE 50-YEAR TERM ON THE ANNEXATION MORATORIUM AND MAKES IT RUN FOR THE TERM OF THE AGREEMENT WHICH THE UNLIMITED TERM. IT ALSO GETS RID OF THE 1/6, THE OBLIGATES TO DEPOSIT THE ONE/16TH OF ONE CENT OF SALES TAX REVENUE INTO THE REGIONAL PARTICIPATION FUND ONCE THE $50 MILLION OVER FOUR YEARS IS PAID OUT.

SO AT THAT POINT 1/16TH OF ONE PENNY OF SALES TAX THAT WOULD OTHERWISE GO INTO THE REGIONAL PARTICIPATION FUND IS NOW AVAILABLE FOR USE BY THE TOWNSHIP FULL DISCRETION OF HOW

THIS BOARD DECIDES -- >> FOREVER MONEY GOING FORWARD.

>> -- TO DEPLOY THOSE FUNDS. >> CAN YOU READ OR I'LL READ WE DON'T RUN THE RISK OF BEING ANNEXED UNLESS WE SOMEHOW BREAK THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT, CORRECT? I'M READING IN SECTION 5.1, ANNEXATION DEFEDERAL AND ETJ MATTERS IT SAYS... PURSUANT TO THE EXPRESS AUTHORITIES SET FOR THE IN SECTION 43.3754C OF THE ACT, THE CITY, WHICH IS HOUSTON, COVENANTS AND AGREES THAT SO LONG AS THE TOWNSHIP CONTINUES TO PERFORM ITS OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE AGREEMENT AND I I WANT YOUO HIGHLIGHT WHAT THOSE OBLIGATIONS ARE, AS AMENDED THE CITY WILL NOT TAKE ANY ACTION OR PROCEEDINGS TO ANNEX THE TOWNSHIP OR THE TERRITORY IN WHOLE OR IN PART FOR FULL LIMITED OR OTHER PURPOSES FOR THE TERM OF THIS AGREEMENT. WHICH YOU JUST SAID IS IN

PERPETUITY. >> UNLIMITED TERM, YES.

>> TELL US THE FAILURE TO PERFORM ITS OBLIGATION PC MEANS IN COMMON-- OBLIGATIONS MEANS IN COMMON LANGUAGE.

>> SO AFTER THE THIRD AMENDMENT ASSUMING THAT THE THIRD AMENDMENT IS PASSED THE FAILURE TO PERFORM OBLIGATIONS IS THE PAYMENT OBLIGATIONS OF THOSE PAYMENTS LAID OUT IN AGREEMENT TO THE CITY AT THE END OF THIS YEAR, NEXT YEAR, THE FOLLOWING YEAR AND THE YEAR OFFER THAT. THE FOUR-- AFTER THAT.

THE FOUR PAYMENTS THAT COMPRISE THE $50 MILLION.

>> AFTER THE $50 MILLION IS PAID WILL THERE BE ANY MORE OBLIGATIONS TO THE CITY OF HOUSTON?

>> NO, BECAUSE ALL OF THE PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE REGIONAL PARTICIPATION FUND AND THE FUNDING OF THAT GO AWAY.

THE ENTIRE SECTION OF THE AGREEMENT IS NULL AND VOID.

>> AND ACTUAL, IF THE CROWD AND THE BOARD COULD LOOK AT SECTION 5.1 WAS SOMETHING, DANIEL, THAT WE INSISTED ON HAVING TO ADDRESS

[00:55:01]

IN AUSTIN -- >> CORRECT.

>> -- AND NEW GOVERNOR COMES IN AND A NEW SPEAKER AND A NEW LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR AND MEMBERS AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY GET-- SOCIALISM IS GOING CRAZY AND THEY WANT TO START DOING ANNEXATION AGAIN, STATE LAW CHANGES THINGS AND BY HAVING THEM ADDRESS THAT IN THIS DOCUMENT IN SECTION 5.1 HELPS THE WOODLANDS. AM I CORRECT?

>> NOTWITHSTANDING ANY CHANGES TO STATE LAW YOU HAVE A CONTRACT WITH THE CITY OF HOUSTON UPON APPROVAL OF THE AGREEMENT.

>> THIS IS A PROTECTIVE AGREEMENT AND TAKES US OFF THE HOOK FOR SALES TAX AND ELIMINATES ANNEXATION IN PERPETUITY AS LONG AS WE PAY THL TELL US EXACTLY HOW THAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN. SO-- THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> MONIQUE, FINISH YOUR PRESENTATION, THESE POLITICIANS KEEP TALKING AND SCREWING IT ALL UP.

SORRY ABOUT THAT. >> ALL GOOD.

OKAY, SO I'M GOING TO DO A SIDE-BY-SIDE COMPARISON OF THE EXISTING REGIONAL PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT AND THEN WHAT THE THIRD AMENDMENT IS CHANGING REGARDING THAT.

SO UNDER THE EXISTING RPA, IN TERMS OF ANNEXATION THERE IS A MORATORIUM ON ANNEXATION BY THE CITY OF HOUSTON THROUGH THE YEAR 2057. IT HAS BEEN NOTED THAT WE DO HAVE CURRENT STATE LAW THAT PROHIBITS ANNEXATION UNLESS VOTERS APPROVE TO BE ANNEXED. IT'S A BIT MORE COMPLICATED THAN THAT BUT THAT'S GENERALLY WHAT IT IS.

AS WE JUST DISCUSSED SO RIGHT NOW PEOPLE MAY SAY, WELL, YOU'RE PROTECTED, WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS EVEN WITHOUT THE RPA, YOU'RE ALREADY PROTECTED BECAUSE OF STATE LAW, BUT AS DANIEL JUST MENTIONED, THAT'S TRUE TODAY BUT WE DON'T KNOW IN-- IN 15 YEARS, 20 YEARS IF THAT WOULD STILL BE THE CASE.

SO WHAT THIS DOES BY REMAINING UNDER THE ETJ AND THE WAY THAT THIS AGREEMENT IS SET OUT WE CONTINUE TO HAVE THOSE PROTECTIONS EVEN IF STATE LAW WERE TO CHANGE.

IN TERMS OF THE REGIONAL PARTICIPATION FUND-- LET ME ACTUALLY SINCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ANNEXATION IN THE THIRD AMENDMENT, WHAT IS CHANGING FROM THAT INSTEAD OF THE MORATORIUM THROUGH 2057, THIS AGREEMENT ELIMINATES THE POSSIBILITY OF ANNEXATION BY THE CITY OF HOUSTON INCLUDING IN THE EVENT OF FUTURE CHANGES TO STATE LAW LIKE I JUST SAID.

SO THAT'S THE HUGE BENEFIT IN TERMS OF ANNEXATION RIGHT NOW.

WE ARE PROTECTED THROUGH 2057 BUT WE STILL HAVE THAT LOOMING OVER US, WE STILL HAVE THAT CLOUD OVER US THAT ONE DAY WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE THIRD AMENDMENT THE POSSIBILITY OF ANNEXATION BY THE CITY OF SHOUSE ELIMINATED.

-- THE CITY OF HOUSTON IS ELIMINATED.

IN TERMS OF THE REGIONAL PARTICIPATION FUND CURRENTLY IT REQUIRES THE TOWNSHIP DEPOSIT 1/16TH OF 1% OF SALES TAX REVENUE HELD BY THE CITY OF HOUSTON FOR QUALIFYING REGIONAL PROJECTS, AS MENTIONED THE CITY HAS TO MATCH THOSE.

THE FUNDING OBLIGATION CONTINUES BEYOND THE 2057 ANNEXATION MORATORIUM WITH NO SPECIFIED END DATE AND AS WE JUST TALKED ABOUT EVEN IF WE, EVEN IF THE WOODLANDS WERE TO DECIDE TO INCORPORATE OR SOME ALTERNATIVE FORM OF GOVERNANCE UNDER THE CURRENT AGREEMENT WE WOULD STILL HAVE TO CONTINUE TO PAY THE CITY OF HOUSTON THE 1/16TH OF SALES TAX.

SO NOW LET'S CARE IN TO WHAT THE THIRD AMENDMENT ACHIEVES.

IT REMOVES THE MATCHING AND PROJECT-USE RESTRICTIONS FROM THE FUND WHERE MONEY IS SITTING CURRENTLY PROVIDING THE CITY OF HOUSTON WITH IMMEDIATEACK ACCESS TO FUNDS-- ACCESS TO FUNDS HELD IN THE FUND. THAT WAS PART OF THE DEAL AS WE TALKED ABOUT, THEY HAVE A NEED FOR SHORT-TERM CASH.

THAT IS WHERE THEY ARE. SO IN THE NEGOTIATIONS THIS IS WHERE A SOURCE OF THEIR SHORT-TERM CASH IS GOING TO COME FROM. I'LL TALK MORE ABOUT THAT IN A SECOND. THEN UNDER-- IN TERMS OF THE THIRD AMENDMENT BEGINNING IN 2030, IT ELIMINATES THE TOWNSHIP'S ONGOING OBLIGATION WHICH WE JUST TALKED ABOUT FOREVER ONGOING OBLIGATION TO CONTRIBUTE A PORTION OF OUR SALES TAX REVENUE INTO THAT-- INTO THAT FUND.

SO PROVIDING US THEN A SIGNIFICANT SOURCE OF ADDITIONAL ANNUAL REVENUE ONCE WE GET TO 2030.

SO LET'S LOOK AND SEE HOW ALL OF THIS IS BEING FUNDED.

WE'VE SEEN THE HEADLINES, IT'S TALKED ABOUT THE $50 MILLION, BUT IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND WHERE THOSE SOURCES OF FUNDS ARE COMING FROM FOR THE $50 MILLION. SO FIRST OF ALL, WE JUST TALKED

[01:00:06]

WE JUST TALKED ABOUT HOW HARDLY ANYTHING HAS BEEN TAKEN OUT OF THAT. THE TOWNSHIP UNDER THE RPA RIGHT NOW IS OBLIGATED ON A QUARTERLY BASIS TO FUND THIS-- THIS FUND.

>> WHERE DOES THIS FUND SIT? >> IN THE CITY OF HOUSTON.

>> SO THE $22.6 MILLION OF OUR SALES TAX MONEY, IT'S IMPORTANT FOR EVERYONE TO HEAR THIS, $22.6 MILLION OF OUR SALES TAX MONEY IS ALREADY SITTING IN A HOUSTON BANK ACCOUNT.

>> THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S RIGHT.

FOR US IN THE ACCOUNTING WORLD IT'S A SET COST.

IT'S DONE, IT'S GONE. IT'S NOT ADDITIONAL MONEY.

IT'S NOT ANYTHING ELSE. IT'S ACCUMULATED FUNDS OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS THAT HAVE BEEN SENT THERE FOR THE CONTRACT.

THAT'S ONE PAYMENT. THAT'S ONE-- THAT'S ONE SOURCE OF THE FUNDS OF THE 50. THE SECOND ONE IS A $7.9 MILLION WHICH IS THE TOTAL PAYMENTS TO THE CITY OF HOUSTON FOR '27 THROUGH '29 BASED ON 1/16TH OF THE 1% SALES TAX.

WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY HERE THIS, SUNNED THE CURRENT RPA THIS IS ALREADY AN OBLIGATION. THIS ISN'T A NEW OBLIGATION, THT SOMETHING WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO COME OUT OF POCK FOR IN ORDER TO-- POCKET FOR IN ORDER TO FUND.

WE WERE ALREADY UNDERSTOOD THE CURRENT AGREEMENT-- WE WERE ALREADY UNDER THE CURRENT AGREEMENT WE WERE GOING TO FUND THIS ANYWAY. THIS IS NO DIFFERENT THAN THE THIRD AMENDMENT AND WE WERE ALREADY CONTRACTUALLY OBLIGATED TO FUND THIS. THEN WE HAD $19.5 MILLION.

THIS IS WHAT REALLY THIS COMES DOWN TO.

THE FIRST TWO POTS OF MONEY THAT HE WITH JUST TALKED ABOUT HAVE

ALREADY BEEN FUNDED -- >> AND TOTALLY OUT OF OUR

CONTROL. >> TOTALLY OUT OF OUR CONTROL.

THIS ONE, THE $19.5 MILLION THE TOWNSHIP IS LEVERAGED $19.5 MILLION CURRENTLY AVAILABLE IN CASH RESERVES IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THE GOALS THAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT MORE IN TERMS OF FREEDOM FROM ANNEXATION AND ONGOING REVENUE SOURCE THAT WE NO LONGER HAVE TO PAY AFTER 2030.

>> AND THAT $19.5 IS PAID OUT OVER THREE YEARS.

WE DON'T WRITE A CHECK. >> THAT'S CORRECT.

PAID OUT OVER THROUGH YEARS. >> WE WOULDN'T DO THAT TODAY.

WE'RE NOT WRITING A CHECK FOR $19.5 MILLION, THAT COULDN'T HELP. IT'S PAID OUT.

>> ABOUT $6.5 MILLION OVER THREE YEARS.

AGAIN, I POINT OUT THAT THESE RESERVES THAT WE HAVE IS A VERY HEALTHY PART. IT'S ONE OF THE TOWNSHIP'S FINANCIAL CONDITION. WE TALKED ABOUT IT JUST LAST WEEK. A TON IN THE BUDGET WORKSHOPS.

THESE ARE WHAT-- THESE RESERVES ARE WHAT ARE LOOKED UPON FAVOURABLY BY THE CREDIT AGENCIES AND WHY WE HAVE THE HIGHEST CREDIT RATING FOR A SPECIAL-PURPOSE DISTRICT IN THE STATE OF TEXAS. THIS THESE ARE NOT-- THESE ARE NOT FUNDS WE HAD TO BORROW TO GET THEM.

THESE ARE REPLENISHED ON A ANNUAL BASIS.

>> WHICH IS WHY WE STRUCTURED THREE YEARS.

>> EXACTLY. THESE RESERVES ARE NOT FUNDED BY THE PROPERTY TAX. THIS IS PART OF THE OVERALL STRATEGY TO HAVE RESERVES AVAILABLE FOR WHEN OPPORTUNITIES SUCH AS THIS COME UP. TO BE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES. THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY AND WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT THAT HERE IN A MINUTE.

WHY IT'S SUCH A GREAT OPPORTUNITY.

THAT'S EXACTLY WHY THIS BOARD HAS ESTABLISHED THESE RESERVES AND HAS BEEN SO DISCIPLINED ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT THEY STAY FUNDED EXACTLY FOR A REASON LIKE THIS.

>> IT'S A GREAT ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY GOING FORWARD.

>> ABSOLUTELY. >> WE DO NOT CONTROL AT THIS

POINT. >> MONIQUE, THE $7.09 THAT IS JUST A PROJECTION, RIGHT, BASED UPON --

>> IT IS. THAT IS BASED ON-- CURRENTLY WE PAY ABOUT $2.5 MILLION PER YEAR. I PROJECTED ALL THE NUMBERS THAT YOU'RE GONNA LOOK AT TODAY. I CAN'T REMEMBER, MAYBE I FORGOT TO FOOTNOTE IT ARE BASED ON A 3% ANNUAL GROWTH FACTOR WHICH IS CONSERVATIVE. WE TIP CHANGE HAVE A GREATER THAN 3% GROWTH FACTOR IN SALES TAX.

>> THEREFORE IF OUR SALES TAX ARE GREATER THAN WHAT THIS

NUMBER IS SHOWING THEN THAT'S -- >> WE'RE ONLY LIMITED TO THIS.

THAT IS CORRECT. >> CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATE --

>> IT LOCKS THESE NUMBERS IN. >> LOCKS THESE NUMBERS IN, THAT

IS CORRECT. >> MONIQUE, ARE THESE PAYMENTS GOING TO BE PAID SIMILAR TO THE WAY WE PAID THE RPA DISTRIBUTIONS IN THE PAST. THE NUMBER IS DIFFERENT, THE AMOUNT IS DIFFERENT BUT DOES IT GO INTO THE SAME FUND OR IS A NEW TYPE OF FUND ESTABLISHED OR AT THAT POINT DOES IT REALLY NOT

[01:05:01]

MATTER? >> I DON'T THINK THESE NEW FUNDS WILL BE PLACED IN THE CURRENT FUND.

I THINK FROM MY UNDERSTANDING THEY BECOME FOR THEIR GENERAL USE SO MY GUESS IS THAT WE JUST TRANSFER TO WHEREVER THEY TELL US TO. THEY'RE NOT RESTRICTED TO THEM.

>> SAME MONEY, DIFFERENT FUND. >> THAT'S A GREAT WAY TO PUT IT.

SAME MONEY BUT JUST A DIFFERENT FUND.

>> WHAT I WAS GETTING AT IS 19.5 COULD SHRINK IF YOU'RE SALES TAX

NUMBERS ARE HIGHER THAN -- >> THANK YOU.

>> -- THAN WHAT WE PROJECT. >> THAT IS CORRECT.

IF OUR SALES TAX NUMBERS ARE HIGHER THAN WE PROJECT AND I BELIEVE THEY LIKELY WILL BE, THEN WE DON'T HAVE TO TAKE THAT

MONEY OUT OF THE RESERVES. >> THIS IS A CONSERVATIVE NUMBER

LOOKING FORWARD. >> BUT, BUT IF COVID HITS, ANOTHER COVID 2.0 HITS, GOD HELP US, AND SALES TAX TAKE A DIP WE'RE STILL OBLIGATED TO PAY THIS AMOUNT.

>> CORRECT. >> HOUSTON GETS A GUARANTEE ON THIS VERSUS BETTING ON SALES TAX.

>> THEY DO. EXACTLY.

>> GOOD POINT. LET'S LOOK AT THIS IN TERMS OF WHAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT HERE IN THE THREE DIFFERENT WAYS THAT WE'RE GOING TO FUND THEM AND LIKE AS I SAID REALLY WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE LEVERAGING THIS $19.5 MILLION THAT WE HAVE IN RESERVES IN ORDER TO FUND THIS OPPORTUNITY TO GET THE BENEFITS OF THIS OPPORTUNITY. SEE WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE.

SO THE TOP PART OF THIS GRAPH, OF THIS CHART SHOWS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE, WHAT OUR PAYMENTS LOOK LIKE UNDER THE EXISTING REGIONAL PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT.

RIGHT NOW IF WE PAY-- IN 2027 WE ARE PROJECTING THAT 1/16TH OF 1% IS GOING TO BE EQUAL TO $2.6 MILLION.

'28, THE SAME THING. THERE IS A GROWTH FACTOR IN THERE BUT THEY BOTH END UP BEING 2.6.

'29 2.6, IN 2030, THE NEXT 30 YEARS AND PAYMENTS DONE IN '29 BUT GOING FORWARD, IT'S NOT 2060, WE JUST TALKED ABOUT IT, UNLIMITED. ONLY SO FAR I CAN GO ON THIS GRAPH BUT YOU HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THIS UNLIMITED TERM.

WE ARE REQUIRED UNDER THE AGREEMENT TO PAY THAT TO TO TE CITY OF HOUSTON. THE 1/16TH OF 1% SALES TAX IS AN ONGOING OBLIGATION. UNDER THE THIRD AMENDMENT.

REGIONAL PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WE TALKED ABOUT THE THE SECOND COMPONENT OF THE PAYMENT. THERE IT IS ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE AT THE BOTTOM. FOR THE NEXT THREE YEARS, '27, '28, '29 THESE ARE THE MONIES UNDER THE CURRENT AGREEMENT WE STILL HAVE TO PAY. NOTHING HAS CHANGED BETWEEN THE EXISTING RPA AND WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH THIS AMENDMENT.

THAT'S 7.9 BUT ONCE WE REACH 2030 THE BENEFIT KICKS IN TO US.

THIS IS WHAT WE'RE LEVERAGING THOSE RESERVES FOR IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE WHAT YOU'RE SEEING THERE FROM 2030 TO 2060 AND IF I HAD A LONGER GRAPH FROM 2060 TO INFINITY.

THE TOWNSHIP IS GOING TO GET TO RETAIN THOSE FUNDS.

NOT THE CITY OF HOUSTON LIKE AT THE TOP PART OF THIS, THE TOWNSHIP GETS TO DO THAT AND I DIDN'T PROVIDE ALL THE NUMBERS HERE BUT WE HAVE THEM. WE'VE DONE DISCOUNT RATES AND ALL OF THAT. WE PROJECTED OUT.

AND THE TOWNSHIP ON AVERAGE WILL START OFF LOWER, RIGHT, AROUND AROUND $2.8 MILLION BUT ON AVERAGE OVER 30 YEARS THEY RETAIN ANNUALLY IN SALES TAX REVENUE.

WE HAVE CONTROL OVER THAT MONEY NOW INSTEAD OF IT GOING TO THE CITY OF HOUSTON. ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS?

>> IMPORTANT SLIDE. >> OKAY.

SO AGAIN TO SUM THIS ALL UP, IN TERMS OF THE BENEFITS THAT WE GET FOR LEVERAGING OUR RESERVE, OUR AVAILABLE RESERVES, THE FINANCIAL BENEFITS, WE'RE GOING TO USE $30.5 MILLION THAT IS ALREADY OBLIGATED UNDER THE CURRENT RPA.

THAT'S THE CURRENT BALANCE THE $22.06 IN THE REGIONAL PARTICIPATION FUND RIGHT NOW AND THE 7.9 THAT WE'RE GONNA PAY OVER THE NEXT THREE YEARS NO MATTER WHAT.

THEN WE ARE LEVERAGING THE $19.5 MILLION IN RESERVE BALANCES THAT I'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT.

IF WE DO THAT WE'RE LEVERAGE THAT GO TO END THE REGIONAL SALES TAX PAYMENTS UNDER THE REGIONAL PARTICIPATION FUND, THE GRAPH THAT WE JUST LOOKED AT AND KEEPS MORE LOCALLY GENERATED REVENUE AVAILABLE FOR OUR PRIORITIES.

IN TERMS OF GOVERNANCE, WE ARE ELIMINATING THE POSSIBILITY OF FUTURE ANNEXATION BY THE CITY OF HOUSTON AND WE'RE PROVIDING GREATER CERTAINTY CONTROL OVER OUR FUTURE GOVERNANCE.

>> SO IF THE TOWNSHIP BOARD WERE TO VOTE ON THIS TONIGHT, WE

[01:10:06]

TO HAVE THIS MEETING? >> IT WAS POSTED FOR ACTION TONIGHT. YES, MA'AM.

>> SO WHEN IT SAYS "ACTION" THAT MEANS THAT THE RESIDENTS KNOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON THIS, COULD VOTE.

AND CAN YOU ADDRESS A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT ACTUALLY THE CITY OF HOUSTON DID WHEN THEY TAGGED THIS ITEM? WHAT DOES THAT ACTUALLY MEAN? I KNOW WHAT IT MEANS.

>> YOU'RE MORE OF AN EXPERT. SO MY UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IT MEANS IS WHEN THEY TAG SOMETHING, IT AUTOMATICALLY DELAYS A VOTE ON THAT ITEM UNTIL-- FOR ONE WEEK.

SO RIGHT NOW MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT AGENDA ITEM FOR THEIR CONSIDERATION OF THE THIRD AMENDMENT WILL BE ON THEIR

AGENDA FOR NEXT WEDNESDAY. >> AS SOMEONE WHO HAD A FRONT-ROW SEAT TO TODAY'S HEARING, I THINK THE BIG CONCERN WITH MY TAKE IN TALKING TO SEVERAL DIFFERENT COUNCIL MEMBERS AND SEVERAL DIFFERENT STAFF WAS, WHERE IS THIS MONEY GOING? LIKE WHAT PROJECTS ARE THEY GOING TO GET IN THEIR DISTRICTS, IN THEIR AT LARGE POSITIONS CAN I GET A SIDEWALK, A DOG PARK? THAT KIND OF THING.

THAT'S FOR OUR BOARD TO UNDERSTAND AND EVERYONE IN THE CROWD AND THE MILLIONS LISTENING, WE'RE NOT IN CONTROL OF WHERE THE MONEY GOES. THIS IS GIVEN TO HOUSTON AND THEY DECIDE IT FROM THERE. THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL CAN TALK AND GO ABOUT IT. I THINK THAT WAS THE MAIN CONCERN ABOUT THE TAGGING OF MAKING SURE WHERE THE FUNDS ARE DIRECTED ONCE THE CITY OF HOUSTON RECEIVES THEM.

>> SO IN OTHER WORDS, YOU DON'T THINK THAT IF WE DID VOTE TODAY THAT THERE WOULD BE SHOWING TOO MUCH WILLINGNESS TO NEGOTIATE OR REVIEW THIS CONTRACT IN ANY WAY, IT WOULD BE MORE OF A GOOD FAITH THAT WE THINK IT'S MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL AND WE'RE READY TO

MAKE A DEAL. >> WE HAVE MET AND AGREED UPON CONDITIONS FOR THIS TO HAPPEN TODAY.

WE HAVE DONE OUR PART. >> THERE'S A LOT-- THERE'S QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS, AND I GUESS ONE QUESTION THAT'S KIND OF COUPLE A FEW TIMES IS WHAT IS THE URGENCY? THE URGENCY I WANT TO GIVE THE BACKSTORY OF HOW THIS ALL TRANSPIRED. DR. SHELLEY AND I WERE IN A NORTH HOUSTON TRANSPORTATION MEETING AND MAYOR WHITMIRE WAS SPEAKING AND THE MAYOR'S COMMENTS WITH A WE'RE BROKE.

THE CITY OF HOUSTON, WE'RE LOOKING UNDER EVERY ROCK WE CAN POSSIBLY FIND TO FIND MONEY. IF YOU HAVE AN IDEA PLEASE BRING IT TO US. ANY IDEAS ARE GOOD IDEAS AND WE'RE LOOKING FOR IDEAS. I KNEW HIS DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF AND I HAD AN IDEA AND I TALKED TO THIS BOARD ABOUT APPROACHING THEM. IT'S A GOOD IDEAS, SEE WHAT THEY SAY. TO MY SURPRISE, THEY WERE VERY INTERESTED. THE MAYOR SAID HE WAS COMING TO CONROE TO SPEAK TO THE LEADERSHIP OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY CLASS ABOUT LEADERSHIP AND WE MET AFTER HE SPOKE AT THE MONTGOMERY COUNTY COMMISSIONER'S JUDGE CONFERENCE ROOM AND WE WENT OVER THE RPA FUND. HE DIDN'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT, I'LL BE HONEST WITH YOU, BUT WE WENT AND TALKED ABOUT IT IN GOOD FAITH AND WENT BACK AND FORTH, BACK AND FORTH.

NEGOTIATED BACK AND FORTH. THE URGENCY IS AS EVERYONE SAW HERE, THE URGENCY IS HOUSTON RIGHT NOW.

THEY'RE LOOKING-- THEY HAVE ISSUES RIGHT NOW WITH THEIR BUDGET THAT THEY'RE LOOKING TO FILL.

THE BENEFIT TO US IS THAT THE SLIDE MONIQUE HAD BEFORE THIS THAT SHOWS FOREVER THAT WE'RE GETTING TO KEEP OUR SALES TAXES HERE IN THE WOODLANDS INSTEAD OF PAYING TO IT THE CITY OF HOUSTON. THE URGENCY IS ON THE CITY OF HOUSTON'S PART BECAUSE THEY NEED THE MONEY NOW.

BUT THAT BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE AND WE'VE BEEN DOING THINGS, MONIQUE AND GOOD NEWS KILLIAN AND THEIR DEPARTMENT HAVE BEEN VERY GOOD STEWARDS OF THE TAXPAYERS' MONEY AND WE'RE IN GOOD FINANCIAL POSITION TO BETTER OUR COMMUNITY AND ADVOCATE FOR OUR COMMUNITY. THAT'S WHY WE'RE IN THIS SITUATION. BUT THAT'S HOW-- THE URGENCY QUESTION THAT WE GOT FROM A FEW PEOPLE, THE URGENCY IS ON THE CITY OF HOUSTON'S PART MORE SO THAN OUR PART BECAUSE THEY NEED SHORT-TERM MONEY AND WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS LONG-TERM

POSSIBILITIES. >> AND I WOULD ALSO ADD THAT I SEE URGENCY ON OUR PART, RIGHT? THE WHOLE, YOU KNOW, BIRD IN THE HAND IS WORTH TWO IN THE BUSH, RIGHT? THE SOONER WE DO THIS THE SOONER WE STOP PAYING THE CITY OF HOUSTON AND KEEP THE MONEY FOR OURSELVES.

THAT'S THE URGENCY IN MY IN . I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT ANNEXATION, THERE IS TIME FOR THAT BUT THIS IS MY URGENCY.

>> THIS IS A WIN-WIN FOR US. A WIN-WIN FOR HOUSTON.

>> WE HIJACKED, WANTED TO KNOW IF YOU

[01:15:04]

YOU FIRE AWAY ON THIS. >> I'M GLAD THAT YOU ADDRESSED THE URGENCY ISSUE BECAUSE IT CAME UP SEVERAL TIMES AND I THOUGHT ABOUT THAT MYSELF. THIS TO ME SOUNDS LIKE A MUTUAL WIN AND MAINTAIN OUR GREAT RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CITY OF HOUSTON. WE REALLY DO.

SO I BELIEVE THAT I CAN VOTE ON THIS TONIGHT IN GOOD FAITH.

IF WE DO WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> I THINK IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT-- I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HEARD FROM MANY RESIDENTS IS THIS SEEMS FAST. I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS FOR A LONG TIME.

WE'VE NEGOTIATED GOOD NEWS KILLAN SHAW AND MONIQUE.

THERE'S A SERIOUS PENCIL SHARPEN TO PUT THE NUMBERS TOGETHER THE

WAY THEY DID. >> IT'S A DELIBERATION.

>> AIL LONGER THAN THAT. -- A LOT LONGER THAN THAT.

THIS IS A WIN-WIN AND WE FIGURED OUT HOW TO MAKE AT THAT WIN FOR EVERYBODY IN THE DEAL. I WANT THE RESIDENTS AND THE CITY OF HOUSTON KNOWS THAT WE ALL SPENT TIME TO MAKE SURE THIS IS THIS IS TO A TEE.

WE WENT THROUGH RENDITIONS TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING WAS CORRECT AND SO THAT EVERYBODY WINS AND THIS WAS A LOT OF TIME INTENT ON THIS. -- SPENT ON THIS.

THIS ISN'T SOMETHING THAT WE JUST THOUGHT OF WEEKS AGO.

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S SUPER IMPORTANT.

LIKE BRAD SAID IT'S A GREAT TIME AND IT SOLVES A PROBLEM FOR

HOUSTON AND IT'S A GREAT DEAL. >> I THINK ALSO ANOTHER QUESTION IS WHAT ABOUT THE CONROE RPA? YOU'RE DEALING IN NEGOTIATIONS AND I'LL SAY WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY, MONIQUE MAY KICK ME BUT IF CONROE IS INTERESTED IN A DEAL, WE'D LOVE TO VISIT FOR THEM.

AS TOM BOY SAID, WE'LL LEAVE THE LIGHT ON FOR THEM.

IF THERE'S A DEAL, SOMETHING WE CAN TO.

LOOK, I WANT EVERYONE TO UNDERSTAND, WE WANTED TO ADDRESS THE ANNEXATION SITUATION, AND I HEAR IT ALL THE TIME.

WELL, YOU KNOW, IF SUCH AND SUCH HAPPENS YOU STILL GET ANNEXED.

THIS DOCUMENT-- THIS DOCUMENT DOES THAT.

WE WANTED TO ADDRESS OUR SALES TAX AND KEEPING 100% OF OUR SALES TAX WE GENERATE IN THE WOODLANDS IN THE WOODLANDS.

BETTERING OUR COMMUNITY, BETTERING OUR FINANCIAL SITUATION. WE WANTED TO DO IT AND THIS AGREEMENT DOES THAT. NOW WE'RE OUR OWN CHAMPIONS FOR OUR OWN FORM OF GOVERNMENT WHETHER IT'S THIS FORM OF GOVERNMENT OR ANOTHER FORM OF GOVERNMENT WE'RE MORE IN CONTROL WITH THIS RPA AMENDMENT THAN WE WERE BEFORE.

I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT. >> I AGREE.

WE WANT TO BE IN THE DRIVER'S SEAT FOR THE FUTURE OF THE WOODLANDS AND THIS PUTS THE BOARD IN THE DRIVER'S SEAT AS OPPOSED TO JUST PAYING A RANSOM FOR THE NEXT PURPOSE TO AITY.

IN THE NEXT 100 YEARS. WE THEN HAVEN'T DONE OUR DUE DILIGENCE TO THE RESIDENTS. WE OWE THE RESIDENTS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF ESCAPING ANNEXATION IF WE'RE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY AND IT'S HERE. SO I THINK IT'S TIME THAT WE TAKE IT. I WANT TO ADDRESS AND ASK, SINCE I'M NOT ON THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, THAT MATTERS OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS ARE OFTEN DONE, USUALLY DONE EITHER IN EXECUTIVE SESSION --

>> NOT THIS ONE. >> NO, I KNOW BUT I'M SAYING THAT THEY ARE AND THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU DO THEM IN EXECUTIVE SESSION, YOU DO HAVE YOUR HANDS TIED ABOUT WHAT YOU CAN SHARE. WITH RESIDENTS.

THAT'S THE RULES OF EXECUTIVE SETTLE.

ONCE SOMETHING IS PUBLISHED IN THE PAPERS THEN YOU'RE MORE RELEASED TO DISCUSS AND THAT'S JUST THE NATURE OF GOVERNMENT THAT YOU'RE ALLOWED TO DO THINGS IN EXECUTIVE SESSION IN ORDER TO NEGOTIATE THE BEST DEAL FOR YOUR CONSTITUENTS.

THAT'S WHAT WAS DONE HERE. >> AGREED.

>> IF THAT LOOKS LIKE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY THEN IT'S AN UNFORTUNATE SIDE EFFECT OF DOING A GOOD NEGOTIATION.

SO I THINK THAT WE'RE IN A GOOD SPOT AND THAT'S WHY I CAN S'MORE THIS-- THIS NEW AMENDMENT BECAUSE I THINK IT'S THE BEST WAY TO GO FOR THE RESIDENTS OF THE WOODLANDS.

NOT JUST THIS DECADE BUT FOR FUTURE DECADES.

>> THE FUTURE GOING FORWARD. >> THERE'S QUESTIONS AND I WANT ALL OF THESE ANSWERED. MONIQUE, DOES THE LOWERING OF THE CASH RESERVES YOU LAID OUT HERE DOES IT HURT OUR CREDIT RATING IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OAR FORM?

>> NOT AT ALL. NOT AT ALL.

WE HAVE ADEQUATE RESERVES AND A SYSTEM WHERE THEY GET REPLENISHED ON AN ANNUAL BASIS. THESE RESERVES IN PARTICULAR ARE

[01:20:02]

THE SHORT ANSWER IS NO. NO IMPACT.

>> CAN YOU ALSO TALK ABOUT WHAT IS GETTING READY TO HAPPEN WHEN WE PAY OFF THE BONDS FOR THE CONVENTION CENTER, WHAT YEAR THAT START AND WHAT IT DOES TO THE CASH SITUATION.

>> GOOD POINT. 2027 IS OUR VERY LAST PAYMENT AFTER 35-- HOW MANY YEARS? SINCE 2001 OF PAYING THE BOND PAYMENTS ON THE CONVENTION CENTER.

AT THAT POINT $2.8 MILLION IN ANNUAL DEBT SERVICE THAT WE PAY GETS FREED UP TO EITHER REPLENISH RESERVES OR TO BE USED

FOR OTHER PURPOSES. >> SO 2027 IT ENDS AND THIS STARTS. SO I MEAN IT'S KIND OF GOOD TIMING FOR US WHEN IT COMES TO THAT.

>> IT IS. YES, SIR.

>> SO RESERVES ARE GOOD AND A BIG THANK YOU TO YOU AND KELLAN AND YOUR TEAMS FOR DOING THAT. THIS IS A SUGGESTION FOR RACKET WE HAVE TO TALK TO OUR-- LANGUAGE.

WE HAVE TO TALK TO OUR LAWYERS ABOUT THAT.

WHAT ABOUT THE ETJ. WAS THAT ANSWERED? CARLOS YOU ASKED THAT? DO YOU STILL HAVE QUESTIONS OR

DO YOU WANT TO COME -- >> RIGHT NOW...

[INAUDIBLE] >> CAN YOU ADDRESS THAT, DANIEL?

>> [INAUDIBLE] >> NO, THEY WILL.

THEY MAINTAIN. >> THE EFFECT OF THE THIRD AMENDMENT IS NOT TO REMOVE THE LAND FROM THE CITY OF HOUSTON'S ETJ. IT WOULD REMAIN IN THE CITY'S ETJ. YOU JUST HAVE A CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT FROM THE CITY NOT TO TAKE ANY ACTION TO ANNEX THAT LAND. NOTHING CHANGES WITH RESPECT TO

THE ETJ. >> POINT OUT, PLEASE, DANIEL, THAT THE REASON THAT'S IMPORTANT IS BECAUSE IF WE WERE AS AN UNINCORPORATED AREA OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY AND HARRIS COUNTY JUST SITTING THERE WITHOUT BEING IN AN ETJ OF SOME CONTINGENT CITY ANOTHER CONTINGENT CITY COULD PUT US IN THEIR ETJ, RIGHT? WE DON'T WANT THAT.

>> I THINK THAT'S IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE WOODLANDS TO REMAIN WITHIN THE CITY OF HOUSTON'S ETJ AND HAVING THESE ADDITIONAL CONTRACTUAL SECURITIES.

>> REPORTER: YES. >> --

>> YES. >> CARL SAID ANOTHER ONE, DO YOU HAVE A LEGAL OPINION ON WHETHER THE LEGISLATION PASSED IN 2017 OVERRIDES THE ORIGINAL LEGISLATION OF 2016?

DANIEL, THIS IS YOU. >> GOOD QUESTION.

>> I'M NOT SURE THAT I FULLY UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION.

>> CARLOS, CAN YOU... >> I BELIEVE-- YEAH, CARLOS, COME UP AND CORRECT THAT. I BELIEVE THAT THE LAW THAT RESTRICTS THE ANNEXATION TO A VOTE SINCE THAT IS A NEW STATE LAW AND THAT HAPPENED AFTER WE WERE IN A CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF HOUSTON DOES THAT PERTAIN TO US, THAT VOTE? TO BE ANNEXED. IS THAT-- CARLOS, IS THAT --

>> [INAUDIBLE] -- LEGAL OPINION ON WHETHER ANNEXATION PASSED IN 2017 OVERRIDES THE ORIGINAL...

>> 2010. I THOUGHT IT SAID 2016.

2010. >> BECAUSE THERE WAS SOME COMMENT ABOUT THAT YEARS BACK THAT-- THE FACT THAT THE AGREEMENT IN 2010, -- [INAUDIBLE]

>> SO I'M NOT PREPARED TO APPEAR TONIGHT TO PROVIDE A LEGAL OPINION ON THE LEGAL EFFECT AND I WANT TO STAY ON THE THIRD AMENDMENT AND WHAT ITS EFFECT IS NOT WITHSTANDING STATE LAW TODAY OR IN THE FUTURE YOU YOU HAVEA CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT THAT FOR AN UNLIMITED TERM YOU'RE AGREEING NOT TO ANNEX.

THAT'S IN THE THIRD AMENDMENT. >> I WILL TELL YOU THERE WERE SEVERAL CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS OF HOUSTON THAT THIS AGREEMENT WAS PROPOSING AND ANNEXING THE WOODS AND WERE CONCERNED.

THEY DID NOT WANT THAT. BELIEVE IT OR NOT.

THEY DID NOT WANT THAT. THEY SAID THAT KINGWOOD AND CLEARLAKE ANNEXATION DIDN'T WORK OUT.

VERY INTERESTING. WE WILL MAKE THE POWERPOINT,

[01:25:04]

NEXT UP, DO YOU HAVE AN ESTIMATE SALES TAX THAT WE WILL PAY INTO THE RPA IF IT'S NOT AMENDED? YES, YOU HAD THAT EARLIER, CORRECT? DID THAT QUESTION GET ANSWERED?

>> CORRECT. >> DID YOU ALL SEE THAT? OKAY. OKAY.

THIS IS A GOOD QUESTION. WHAT AREAS IN THE WOODLANDS ARE

NOT IN THE HOUSTON ETJ? >> I DON'T HAVE THE BOUNDARY MAP IN FRONT OF ME BUT IN GENERAL HARPER'S LANDINGS IN CONROE'S ETJ. AND YES, THE WALMART AREA 242 AND I-45. I'M DRAWING A COMPLETE BLANK.

>> THE FIRE TRAINING CENTER. >> YES, ANYTHING EAST, ANYTHING EAST OF I-45 IS IN CONROE. IT'S NOT IN HOUSTON'S ETJ.

>> WOODLANDS' FIRE STATION 6 IS IN CONROE.

>> YES, THAT IS IN CONROE. >> OKAY, I THINK THIS WAS ANSWERED. JUST MAKE SURE, WHAT IS IT MEAN TO BE IN AN ETJ WITHOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF ANNEXATION? DID HE ANSWER THAT QUESTION FOR YOU?

>> NOT EXACTLY. I APPRECIATE THE SUPPORT OF THE NATURE OF THIS QUESTION AND ANSWER.

WE'LL BE IN -- [INAUDIBLE] >> ETJ.

WE'RE GOING TO BE IN THAT WITHOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF ANNEXATION. WHAT CONTROL IF ANYWAY DOES HOUSTON HAVE BEING TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION WITHOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF THE ANNEXATION? THAT'S THE...

>> I CAN'T GIVE YOU AN EXHAUSTIVE LIST OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD HERE TONIGHT. THAT'S WITHIN THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. THERE'S A CHAPTER ON ETJ AND WHAT THAT MEANS. THERE'S A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT AUTHORITIES THAT A CITY HAS WITHIN ITS EXTRA TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION. ANNEXATION IS ONE OF THOSE.

A LOT OF IT HAS TO DO WITH PLANNING FOR EVENTUAL ANNEXATION. AGAIN, NOTHING WILL CHANGE OTHER THAN THE MORATORIUM ON ANNEXATION EXTENDS FROM 50 YEARS

TO THE UNLIMITED TERM. >> HANG ON, DANIEL, DON'T GO TOO FAR. HOW DOES THE REMOVAL OF THE 2057 YEAR CHANGE? CAN WE INCORPORATE AT ANY TIME AND ARE WE NOT UNDER HOUSTON'S CONTROL?

>> NOTHING CHANGES WITH RESPECT TO TIMING OF WHEN THE WOODLANDS COULD INCORPORATE IF THAT'S THE WILL --

>> THEY COULD DO THAT NEXT YEAR IF THEY WANTED TO, CORRECT? BUT THE 2057 NUMBER, THIS-- THE RPA, HOW DOES IT CHANGE THE 2057

DATE? >> IT ONLY DEALS WITH ANNEXATION

BY THE CITY OF HOUSTON. >> SO 2057 IS GONE --

>> GONE. >> -- FOR PERPETUITY FOREVER.

DID THAT ANSWER THE QUESTION THERE? ALL RIGHT. WE GET A LOT OF VERBIAGE QUESTIONS-- SUGGESTIONS ON HOW WE SHOULD MAKE IT SOUND.

WE HAVE NEGOTIATED THIS WITH HOUSTON WITH DANIEL AND SCHWARTZ PAGE AND HARDING WHICH I REFLECT THEY DID RPA 1, THEY DID RPA 2, THEY DID RPA 3. MIKE PAGE, THE FOUNDER OF HIS FIRM GOT THE WOODLANDS INCLUDED INTO THE CONROE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT AT SOME AT . HE'S A TRUE HERO AND DID A LOT OF WORK FOR THE WOODLANDS OVER THE YEARS.

SO THEY KNOW THIS BETTER THAN ANY SINGLE PERSON IN THIS ROOM OR OUTSIDE. THEY'RE EXTREMELY VERSED ON IT AND THEY HAVE NEGOTIATED OUR BEST INTERESTS.

I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY CATCH-- LITTLE CATCH THINGS IN HERE. A LOT OF IT IS LEGAL STUFF THAT'S DONE RIGHT. I'VE NEVER BEEN ON A CONFERENCE CALL WITH 14 LAWYERS UNTIL THIS LITTLE AGREEMENT HERE VIA ZOOM BUT IT WAS VERY WELL THOUGHT OUT AND NEGOTIATED BACK AND FORTH.

SO I THINK IT WAS VERY-- NEGOTIATED IN VERY GOOD FAITH AND WE HAD GREAT REPRESENTATION. SO IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE YOU

COULD TALK? >> SECOND OBSERVATION.

>> WE DID HAVE TERMINOLOGY CHANGES THAT WE ALREADY

ADDRESSED. >> THERE WAS A LOT OF BACK AND

[01:30:01]

THIS WAS DONE BY THE ENTIRE BOARD OF DIRECTORS.

WE MET ON THIS TEN PLUS TIMES -- >> NOT TEN PLUS TIMES.

>> HAVE WE NOT? >> IT'S BEEN A LOT.

>> IT'S BEEN A LOT. WE'VE ALWAYS BEEN BRIEFED AND WE'VE ALWAYS TALKED ABOUT WHEN YOU HAVE CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS WITH SOMEONE YOU CAN'T GO OUT AND SPILL THE BEANS TO THE ENTIRE PUBLIC BECAUSE OF IT. WE WEREN'T TRYING TO BE SECRETIVE AND WE WERE SHOCKED THAT THE AGREEMENT WAS PUT OUT TO THE PUBLIC ON THE AGENDA. WE WANTED HOUSTON TO TAKE THE LEAD ON IT AND COME BACK AND TALK ABOUT IT DONE ONE OF THESE.

THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN TODAY AND WE WANTED TO COME BACK AND NOT LEAVE EVERYBODY IN LIMBO OF WHAT IT IS AND IS NOT.

WE WANTED TO GO IN DEPTH TODAY AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING TODAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> I DON'T HAVE A QUESTION BUT I DO WANT TO GO BACK TO WHAT DIRECTOR SEKULA-GIBBS SAID IN THE VERY BEGINNING.

WHEN SHE WAS WITH KINGWOOD SHE LOOKED AT THE WOODLANDS AND ASKED WHY WEREN'T THEY BEING ANNEXED AT THIS TIME? WE WERE FORWARD THINKING AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW, WE'RE FORWARD THINKING SO IN TEN YEARS WE'RE NOT CAUGHT OFFGUARD AND BECOME PART OF SOMETHING WE DON'T WANT TO BE PART OF. I WANT TO GIVE CREDIT RIGHT NOW TO CHAIRMAN BAILEY WHEN WE HEARD WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO HELP HOUSTON OUT. IT HAS TO BE KNOWN, HOUSTON IS GETTING SOMETHING FROM THIS. THEY ARE REALLY STRAPPED FOR MONEY RIGHT NOW AND IF SOMEONE CAN HAND THEM $50 MILLION WHERE THEY CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH SOME OF THEIR REALLY IMPORTANT INITIATIVES I WOULD HOPE THAT THEY WOULD SAY LET'S JUST TAKE THIS AND MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT. THE WOODLANDS IS DEFINITELY GETTING SOME GREAT BENEFITS BUT HOUSTON IS TOO.

WE HAVE TO LOOK AT IT BOTH WAYS. I THINK CHAIRMAN BAILEY TOOK THE LEAD AND RAN WITH IT AND HE'S A BULLDOG WHEN HE WANTS TO BE A BULLDOG AND I'M GLAD HE WAS WITH THIS ONE BECAUSE I THINK IT'S REALLY A CHANGING FOR THE WOODLANDS AS WELL.

>> THIS AGREEMENT -- >> A TOTAL TEAM EFFORT.

EVERYONE HAD INPUT, MONIQUE AND HER TEAM AND DANIEL AND THEY WERE JUST INCREDIBLE. A LOT OF GOOD IDEAS COMING FROM HERE BUT THIS IS A PARADIGM SHIFT FOR THE WOODLANDS TOWNSHIP. MONIQUE IS CONSERVATIVE WITH

MONEY. >> YOU SAT THROUGH EVERY BUDGET HEARING AND YOU KNOW HOW CONSERVATIVE SHE IS.

INCREDIBLE. SAT THERE AND YOU WERE ABLE TO

SEE IT. >> I NEVER SAW HER EYES LIGHT UP AS MUCH AS WHEN THIS WAS PROPOSED.

WE ALL LOOKED AT HER AND SHE SAID, WELL, THIS WILL BE GREAT FOR BOTH HOUSTON AND THE WOODLANDS.

I AGREE. >> THIS AGREEMENT SECURES OUR FUTURE AND IN FACT ENHANCES OUR ECONOMIC VIABILITY LOOKING FORWARD. GENERATIONS FROM US I LIKE TO SAY, ARE GONNA HAVE THE SUCCESS OF THIS ACTION THAT'S BEING

TAKEN. >> I WANT TO ECHO THE COMPLIMENT TO MONIQUE AND HER TEAM. THERE'S TRULY A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF EFFORT TO GET DOWN TO THIS NUMBER IN THE WAY THAT MONEY CAN MOVE, IS THE ONLY WAY THIS DEAL GETS DONE.

I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY TOOK THE BULK OF THE TIME.

IDEALLY WE LIKED THE IDEA OF THIS AND I THINK JUST SO THE RESIDENTS KNOW LIKE IT TOOK A LOT OF EFFORT TO FIGURE OUT HOW MONEY COULD BE DISTRIBUTED AND I WOULDN'T SAY IT'S TIGHT BUT I WOULD SAY IT'S-- IT TOOK A LOT OF TIME TOO FIGURE THAT OUT AND MAKE THIS THING WORK SO THANK YOU TO THEM.

>> I WANT TO END WITH THIS, I WANT TO END WITH THIS REAL QUICK... I SEEK COUNSEL FROM EVERY SINGLE CHAIRMAN OF THIS BOARD. EVERY SINGLE WITH UNFROM MELVA BLAIR TO BRUCE TUFF TO ED ROB AND GORDIE BUNCH AND ED SCHNEIDER. YESTERDAY MOW KNEE AND I HAD A CALL WITH GORDIE BUNCH AND WE HAD HARD QUESTIONS.

WE HAD TO CALL IN DANIEL ON AN HOURLY BASIS TO ANSWER SOME OF GORDIE'S QUESTIONS BUT EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM SAID IT WAS AN INCREDIBILITY DEAL FOR THE WOODLANDS.

EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM. THAT'S A TEXT TESTIMONY.

WHEN YOU GET ANN SCHNEIDER AND GORDIE BUNCH TO AGREE ON SOMETHING THAT'S PRETTY GOOD. SO I FEEL PRETTY-- VERY,-- WE GOT A LOT OF GREAT INPUT FROM AA LOT OF GREAT LEADERS THAT SEE THIS DEAL. ANYONE ELSE HAVE QUESTIONS OR

COMMENTS? >> YEAH, I JUST WANT TO AGAIN ECHO, I KNOW HOW THE PUBLIC FEELS THIS IS RUSHED BECAUSE IT WAS KIND OF SPRUNG ON THROUGH THE MEDIA THE WAY THAT CHAIRMAN BAILEY MENTIONED. BUT AS DIRECTOR LAMB ORIGINALLY SAID THERE'S BEEN THOROUGH DISCUSSION WITH EXECUTIVE

[01:35:02]

THIS A GAME CHANGER FOR THE WOODLANDS AND THAT WEIGHS HEAVY ON US AND WE REALIZE THAT AND RECOGNIZE THAT.

SO WE REALLY APPRECIATE ALL THE INPUT AND THE PARTICIPATION THIS

AFTERNOON, THIS EVENING. >> ALL OF THESE FORMS WILL BE POSTED ONLINE. IF THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS, NO OTHER COMMENTS, I CALL A MOTION AND SECOND TO APPROVE THE THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE REGIONAL PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITHIN BETWEEN THE WOODLANDS TOWNSHIP AND THE CITY OF HOUSTON.

>> SO MOVED. >> SECOND.

>> MOVED BY DIRECTOR FRANKS AND SECONDED BY DIRECTOR NELSON.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR RESPONDS BY SAYING AYE.

>> AYE. >> ALL OF THOSE OPPOSED.

>> THE MOTION IS CARRIED 7 TO 0. THANK YOU, GUYS.

ITEM 7, THERE WAS A-- THERE WAS AN ERROR, THERE IS NO ON THE

POSTING -- >> THERE IS NOT.

>> THE MYSTERY ITEM. >> NO MYSTERY ITEM.

TRYING TO PULL THE OLD WOOL OVER YOUR EYES.

IT WAS AN ERROR. >> WHAT WERE YOU GOING TO MAKE

UP FOR THE ITEMS? >> NO MORE CLOSED SESSIONS AND DISCUSS FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS.

IF I HEAR NONE, ANY BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS? IF I HEAR NONE WE'LL SEE EVERYBODY HERE SEPTEMBER 3RD.

IS THAT CORRECT? >> CORRECT.

>> NEXT WEEK, SEPTEMBER 1ST IS THE HEARING WITH THE CITY OF HOUSTON. AND SEPTEMBER 2ND IS THE CITY

COUNCIL MEETING NEXT WEDNESDAY. >> CORRECT.

>> AT-- YOU'VE GOT TO LEAVE AT THE BREAK OF DAWN BECAUSE I DID IT THIS MORNING. IF NOT I CALL FOR A SECONDED

MOTION TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. >> DIRECTOR FRANKS AND

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.