Wednesday, February 08, 2012

COSA Development Corp to Revise Incentive Guidelines Again?

The City of San Angelo Development Corporation revised its Incentive Guidelines on December 14, 2011.  Another revision is on the agenda for February 8, 2012.  Two revisions in less than 60 days?

The first set the stage for City Council to hear MedHab's $3.6 million incentive package.  It involved deleting three requirements.

The minutes reflected the Development Corp's action, which occurred in two stages on December 14:

Mr. Brooks recused himself from this item. Development Coordinator Robert Schneeman presented staff recommendations for changes to the current COSADC Job Creation Incentive Guidelines. The first recommendation would change Eligibility of Applicants (page 9) to be consistent with State laws. The second recommendation would update contact information for the COSADC and Chamber of Commerce staff (page 10).
Motion, to table item until more board members were present, was made by Mr. Cornell and seconded by Mr. Villarreal.
Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Brooks rejoined the meeting.
After the Executive/Closed Session, where the Board approved a MedHab offer, they revisited the tabled item.

Community and Economic Development Director Shawn Lewis reviewed the recommended changes and clarified that the recommendations for changes to the Eligibility of Applicants language was to ensure COSADC guidelines were in compliance with State laws. Mr. Villarreal clarified the change would not affect
any companies currently under consideration for incentives
Motion, to approve, as presented, was made by Mr. Bariou and seconded by Mr. Cornell. 
Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Brooks abstained from the vote.

I consider Tony Villareal's representation as false.  Had this change not been made, MedHab's incentives could not go forward under COSADC or City Council, not given Mayor Alvin New's and COSADC Board member Randy Brooks' equity stakes in MedHab.

Mayor New recused himself from Council's vote on the $3.6 million MedHab package by crossing the Pacific.  New was in Australia, where MedHab's product is set to launch in June.

MedHab received Concho Valley Angel Network support, beginning in 2008.  AngelouEconomics had this to say about CVAN in their COSADC strategic plan:

Concho Valley Angel Network (CVAN)
The CVAN is a not-for-profit angel investment network with 13 paid members (as of December 2010), and is a member of the Central Texas Angel Network (CTAN) in Austin. CVAN works in collaboration with CTAN to identify the most viable investment opportunities for CVAN members and to invite companies to present these opportunities to CVAN members in San Angelo. CVAN held 8 presentation meetings between June 2009 and December 2010, in which 27 companies presented investment opportunities to the CVAN membership. 14 of these companies have received funding from the CVAN membership in the form of 38 different investments. In 2009, CVAN members invested $620,955 in seven companies, in addition to a second round of funding for one company. In 2010, CVAN members invested another $625,000 in seven more companies, representing a total investment for the first two years of $1,245,995. All of these companies are located in Texas, but outside of the San Angelo region; however, two of these companies are currently exploring opportunities to establish operations in San Angelo.

MedHab is the first or how many $3 million nondebt, nonequity capital injections?  How might the next change in Incentive Guidelines help Angel Network Company #2?  How many local city leaders hold an equity stake in it? 

Streamlined, transparent and well understood?  That might be true for equity stakeholders.


Anonymous said...

Actually this second round of changes to the COSADC incentive guidelines looks pretty mundane. If you have an internet connection, you can see what is proposed. Visit and click on either the February 8 meeting or the February 22 meeting coming up. Love those open records laws!

PEU Report/State of the Division said...

Most organizations don't update policies twice in 60 days. That means circumstances dictated a change, otherwise it would've been held and included in the larger batch. Obviously, the story isn't the second, minor well thought out change. It's the first one, done to make the MedHab deal fly.