10-28-2025 Council Regular Meeting [42:39-45:09]

100% had gone to the economic development group. I think if we're going to have a blanket statement, I would rather see it split between the two organizations. And then any shift could be adjusted on a case-by-case basis as abatement are presented. That's using the fiber-checking for an example. I'm going to agree with Jeff. I think RDC stepped up during a good time when we needed it. And you're going to have an option. You're going to live it. And there's nothing to say that RDC would have to come back and do those things. But you had an option there. There's nothing saying that RDC has to regard us. That's why I just said. I have a question for the sheriff. Have they contributed RDC for any kind of cars or for you or giving you money on that? I think that's from the budget. We did the $200,000. That was included in that case. But going forward, we have the option now. I mean, the city realizes this money a lot for their projects. I talked to a mayor for an hour or longer about the money they use. And they do it not like, well, they do it basically like Rick's proposing here. If we could have had more time, even prior to budget time, there was other things we could have done in the U.S. more money. But we were kind of a pinch-finding projects that fit the mold that has to be used when you're using the redevelopment. And you also have a bomb that that organization has to stay in good for. Care to meet with that, yeah. So, I mean, if you're taking the money away from that bomb, you put that on the box and you know. Who got us in that? You guys coming for it? I went in here. I was gone. Okay. What to say. This one is just, this is not going backwards on any existing abacments. This is forward only from this point. Right now, to my knowledge, I mean, you two, we probably know more. I don't know if anything, even on the table, have been talked about. That's what we're in fact.