Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Storefront Grant topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
HCEDC discusses revitalized Storefront Improvement Grant; board tables program for further edits and research
Summary
Economic development staff presented a revised Storefront Improvement Grant at the Feb. 4 HCEDC meeting. The board requested edits (title change, add parking-lot eligibility, remove technical assistance language, clarify franchise preference and recapture provisions) and unanimously voted to table the item for review and comparative research.
Economic development staff presented a cleaned-up version of the previously paused Storefront Improvement Grant program at the Feb. 4 Haslet HCEDC Type B board meeting, prompting detailed edits and a motion to table the item pending further research.
Elizabeth, the presenter, said the draft was "essentially identical to the program that the Board had before" with only formatting and reference updates. Board members asked clarifying questions about the required match (applicants would match awarded funds 1:1), scope (why the draft limited eligibility to exterior improvements), and whether parking-lot improvements should be eligible.
Several members urged allowing parking-lot improvements for businesses with gravel lots, arguing such improvements would improve customer access. One member suggested removing the phrase "technical assistance" from the document; Elizabeth agreed to remove or relocate technical-assistance language and to keep a single sentence inviting applicants to contact the board president through the website for assistance.
Board members also debated preference language that currently favors "independent businesses not required by contractual arrangement to maintain standardized decor." One member argued franchises should be eligible because local franchise locations are independently owned; Elizabeth said the preference language could be changed if the board preferred.
The draft includes a recapture clause requiring recipients to return grant funds if facade improvements are removed within three years; board members asked for flexibility to accommodate rebranding or ownership changes, and Elizabeth said recipients can request prior written approval to avoid recapture in such cases.
After detailed discussion and a request to compare neighboring cities' programs, the board voted unanimously to table the grant-process update and assigned members to research comparable cities (Saginaw, Keller, Roanoke, Southlake) and return a revised draft at the next meeting.
Action taken: motion to table the grant program was moved and seconded and recorded as unanimous.
