So, an 862% increase in market value. Um that adds, you know, about $450 million of taxable market value once those districts are uh decertified or are no longer um part of the TIF district.

So, this was very specifically put in for us um, as a lever or tool for us to be able to use without hurting our populace.

And I do know that uh our major employer in uh Rochester who is embarking on a $6 billion project pays prevailing wage. So, that it that is a that really does overwhelm this area and so uh so, I want to be very careful about what we do for our projects by but also make sure that we're paying attention to our workers and people who actually make a living doing uh the trades.

One, it allows us to pay the wage that is um most pertinent for specific region to ensure that those folks who are working on those jobs can live in the community that they're working in. But a second part of it is I think what I mentioned from more of a legal perspective, the ability to receive those payroll reports and make sure that we're adhering to those standards so that we don't end up in the middle or end of a project and get any reports that the appropriate wage was not being paid.

Having a prevailing wage I I I'm I'm hard, you know, cuz we talk about affordability in this community over and over and over again, but yet we want to pay the highest wage. That's very counterproductive. Very counterproductive. So, let it sort itself out and and it will.

Part of the problem we have is we have prevailing wages that it does increase the cost of housing and and you can't have like like like Miss Frederick said, you can't have both at the same time.

Councilmember Palmer, staff's not here to say what they support and don't support. They're providing you information about a a city council-adopted policy that is currently at $175,000 or more for any city-funded project.

Just going from the state commercial carpenter rate to the residential carpenter rate, it would save that project $235,000 on labor. There's another project not far away that's 75 units. That's an affordable housing project. It would save them 120,000 in labor. So, substantial um savings just based on the a different Davis-Bacon prevailing wage rate.

So, is the objective to reduce the cost of working downtown and or change how people get downtown? I think this is like the catalyst of the conversation and maybe an underlying theme as we go. Um and uh as we think about mode shift and as we think about these priorities that that we're we're setting upon, does this program support that?

I think that there's one other consideration, which is we all hear constantly there's no parking downtown, and do we want to create a scenario where there isn't? Um because your data clearly shows there is parking downtown, and we all have known that, but getting that message out to the community is difficult. And if we fill our garages, for instance, with employees, are we going to negatively affect the ability for folks who've been complaining for years that there's no parking?

I would say one of my goals any program would be to address the problem that Council member Palmer is raising that we know, that we hear, that employees are parking along the most valuable street parking, and our current policy is not preventing them from parking there and providing an alternate lucrative option. So, getting employee parking off the street so that that is available to customers and visitors would be a primary goal of mine.

I'm going to go off what Mr. Miller was saying and and for me it's the cost for workers to work downtown. They can work out in the suburbs or they can work down there. Um, I would think that the downtown business association would want to help us with that. So, I think we could probably run a program for them.

I don't know why you wouldn't do both to just give options cuz that appeases our business community that has been very vocal about pain and things that have been going on.