Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN 08.09.2011 CC-WThe City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, met in Regular Session on the above date with Mayor George Garver presiding. Council Present.0 Patty Eason, Danny Meigs, Bill Sattler, Pat Berryman, Tommy Gonzalez, Troy Hellmann, Rachael Jonrowe Council Absent: All Council Present Staff Present. Paul E Brandenburg, City Manager; Rachel Saucier, Deputy City Secretary; Micki Rundell, Chief Financial Officer; Robert Fite, Fire Chief; Bridget Chapman; Acting City Attorney; Kathy Ragsdale, Environmental Services Director A Public Hearing on the proposed 2011 Property Tax Rate included in the 2011/12 Annual Budget -- Micki Rundell, Chief Financial Officer Garver called the meeting to order at 3:00 pm. All members were present with the exception of Ms. Berryman. He introduced Micki Rundell, the City's Chief Financial Officer. She introduced this meeting as the first of the required public hearings regarding the property tax rate. Rundell stated this presentation provides an overview of the property tax rate including an overview of property taxes, the 2011/12 General Fund Budget, and the tax highlights. To begin, Rundell introduced the ad valorem taxes (in proportion to the value) and noted that they are based upon the value of property which is determined by the Williamson Central Appraisal District (WCAD). The WCAD determines the "market value" and the City does not. WCAD does not set the tax rate, so the City's property tax rate set by the Council. The rate funds on-going General Fund operations, public safety, library, social services, parks & streets. The rate also funds payments on debt for general government (not utility related) improvements. Rundell noted that the calculation used is: Tax rate x taxable value/$100 = the City tax levy. Rundell continued that there are property tax exemptions in place for some owners that lower the taxable value of your property. She said these do not affect the WCAD market value, and the City has the option to grant exemptions to groups of property owners. She said the exemptions that the City currently offers includes a General Homestead Exemption at $5,000, an exemption for those Over 65 Homestead at $12,000, for the disabled at $40,000, and a mandatory but variable exemption for disabled veterans. She noted that revenue is frozen for Over 65 & Disabled. She indicated that the "freezes" revenue for a 1` year exemption which was adopted in 2004 for 2005 Tax Year. Rundell added the overview of the 2010/11 General Fund Budget total General Fund budget is $40 million and a 2.8% increase from 2010/11 was projected. She added that this included $985,000 for 1 -time projects. She noted the increased Contingency Reserve Funds to $7.1 million. Rundell commented that there is a requirement for 90 days operating expenses and $6.847 million in 2010/11. Rundell commented on the "Status Quo' budget and indicated that revenues remain relatively flat with slight increases in sales & property tax. She said the development related revenues continue to lag. Rundell noted there are no operational increases without a warranted need and service levels remain stable. She added that City Council Meeting Minutes/ Page 1 of 9 Pages there were not no employee COLA or merit bonus, but this will be reviewed again at mid -year. She also noted that revenues have been greater than anticipated. She introduced the 2011/12 General Fund Increases that included the opening of Fire Station 5 with 12 Firefighters. She continued that the City will add 3 new firefighters to fund in addition to the previously 9 firefighters from granted funded positions. She continued that station operations, fire training facility operations, the construction of Fire Stations 5 & 2, the debt impact of Fire related facilities and the public safety step plan, as well as the annual compensation increase for police & fire all contribute to the noted increases. Rundell also noted that the Bookmobile projected called for a librarian to be added and a grant funded the position during Year 1. In general she added, there has been an increase in fuel costs of over $56,183. She commented that the City has seen increased health insurance costs but they have been offset by a decrease in retirement contribution. Rundell commented that the City has been working to offset rising costs by reallocating resources such as a temporarily transfer of 2 building inspectors to GUS for CIP inspections, a reduction in Associate Judge costs in Court, a "freeze" on additional positions, a warrant officer assigned to Municipal Court, and a frozen position for the director of community services. Overall, she indicated that 17 positions will be "frozen" for a year and 4 additional positions for 6 months. Rundell introduced some items that were eligible for 1 -time funding that were funded with excess funds in General Capital funds. She indicated interest earnings and remaining bond funds as well as repairs to the San Gabriel Park restrooms and the restrooms at Grace Church. She added another component of equipping Fire Stations 5 and 2 require the 1 -time funding. Rundell noted the review of the Sanitation/Recycling contract & RFP as well as the conversion of the City's email system to Microsoft Exchange were eligible for the 1 -time funding. Rundell provided a chart to indicate the General Fund revenue sources that include property taxes (24%), sales taxes (21 %), charges for service (27°1%), environmental services(12%), and the returns on investment (16%). She also provided a General Fund Revenue Comparison chart between 2009/10, 2010/11, and 2011/12 that indicated a stable comparison for transfers in, returns on investment, franchise fees from utilities, environmental services, administrative charges, sales tax, property tax, and all other revenues. Rundell began the discussion on 2011 tax highlights with an introduction to the Ad Valorem Property Taxes including the assessed valuation, the components of the tax rate, the effective tax rate, the rollback rate, and the proposed tax rate. She noted what the tax increase fund does as well as the impacts to homeowners. Rundell commented on the 2011 Assessed Valuation that includes the certified valuation of $4.318 billion, a net of $35.1 million in the TIF districts, the inclusion of $92.5 million for new and annexed property, the inclusion of $1.256 billion in frozen property, and this equals 29% of total valuation. Rundell noted the 8.5% increase in 2011. She said the 2010 final taxable value equaled $4.229 billion, the 2010 frozen value equaled $1.157 billion, and this equaled 27% of the total valuation. Rundell provided a chart for the assessed valuation between 1996 and 2011 along a linear curve. The second chart she provided addressed the assessed valuation per capita with a height of $89,273 in 2009 and a slight drop to $86,450 in 2011. Rundell noted the Taxable Value by Property Class to include single (68.09%) and multi -family residential (2.84%), commercial (21%), and personal property (7.41%) of assessed value. The 2011 certified assessed valuation was 4, 196,184,135 and the 2011 total assessed valuation was 4,318,148,209. She continued by noting the components of the Tax Rate include Operations and Maintenance (O&M), the General Fund (Fire, Police, Parks, Library, Streets), Interest and Sinking (1&S), tax supported debt payments, bonds issued for capital improvements, and this does not include self funded utility and GTEC debt. Rundell introduced the Effective Tax Rate as the rate necessary to derive the same amount of revenue as the previous year based upon the current year assessed valuations. She added that the Effective rate equals $0.36901. She said the adopted 2010 tax rate equaled $0.35622, and the proposed 2011 tax rate equals $0.38750. This includes $0.032 sales tax for property tax relief. Rundell noted the Rollback Rate is a calculated maximum rate allowed by law without voter approval. She provided the calculations as: 8% increase in O&M effective rate plus the current year I&S rate. Rundell concluded that the 2011 Rollback Rate is $0.41232. For the 2011 Proposed Tax Rate of $0.38750, Rundell noted a 5% increase over the effective rate, a 1.4% increase in O&M rate, and this equals $70,000 in new General Fund Revenues. This rate provides a 20.7% increase in i & S (debt service) with applying $0.026 due to Nov 2011 bonds from the 2008 voter bond authorization and a $0.005 increase in 2011 CO for fire facilities due. Rundell noted the $94 million increase in "Frozen" property costs the city around $100.5 thousand in lost revenue. She also added there is an increase in abated property and Citicorp, for example, abated 100%. Rundell offered a Comparison of Rate Components between 2010 and 2011. The Operations & Maintenance (General Fund) difference included 2010 = $0.21987 and 2011 = $0.22290. The Interest & Sinking (Debt Service) was 2010 = $0.13635 and in 2011 - $0.16460. The total proposed tax rate in 2010 = $0.35622 and in 2011 = $.038750 was an 8.7% Actual Tax Rate Increase primarily related to debt service. Rundell provided a comparison of proposed rates among other central Texas City Council Meeting Minutes/ Page 2 of 9 Pages municipalities, and Georgetown's rate at .3875 was the lowest. She commented on the Average Home Values and noted that the 2011 taxable average value equals $184,959. She added this is the taxable value before exemptions. Furthermore, these figures indicated a 1.18% increase over prior year taxable average of $182,799. She noted the 2011 market average value equaled $197,260 and compared it to the 2010 average market of $194,857. The impacts on Homeowners indicated a property tax increase by 10%. Rundell noted that the 2010 Average Taxable Value was $182,799, 2010 Taxes at $0.35622 equaled $651.17. She provided the 2011 figures for the 2011 Average Taxable Value at $184,959 and the 2011 Taxes at $0.38750 equaling $716.72. Rundell concluded that the difference equaled $65.55 annually, or a 10% increase. She added that the increase was due in large part to the 2008 Voter Approved Bonds at $55.49. In conclusion, Rundell provided the timeline for the Tax Rate Adoption. She noted that the required public hearings are August 9 and August 18. Council will need to vote on levying 2011 tax rate with a First Reading on August 23 and the Second Reading on September 13. Rundell mentioned that the new fiscal year will begin October 1. Garver thanked Rundell for her presentation and opened the public hearing. He recognized two individuals who requested an audience with Council. Speaker, Dennis Martindale, mentioned his original perspective for speaking to Council was quite different before and after Rundell's presentation. After hearing the specifics of the proposed rate, he indicated he had no problem with the proposed figures. He added that the City is an awesome little town. He requested of Council that when doing budgets, if the City can't afford something don't buy it and use common sense and logic. He said tax payers aren't getting any cost of living increase. Speaker, Robert Sauter, noted that his neighbor encouraged him to speak with Council regarding the tax rate. He said he was very happy they came to the meeting, and is in agreement with the policies set forth by Rundell in the proposed tax rate. He also mentioned that his wife Beverly is a member of the Friends of the Library and they have raised money for bookmobile which is a great addition. He said Council is doing a great job and he is happy to live here. Garver closed public hearing at 3:22pm and asked if Council had questions. Sattler asked and Rundell responded regarding the TML numbers for retirement and health insurance. Rundell noted TMRS, in the last legislative session, changed the methodology on how retirement was calculated. Now, everything is combined into one pool, this caused savings, 13.24% to 11.84%. This saved over $231,000 in the General Fund. She continued this was a minimal amount, as a one-time pick up but the savings will continue and allows further funding. She said the savings will continue. The City's Fiscal & Budgetary policy states that we have 80% target for funding. She continued that the City is at 81.1 %, and the retirement plan in good condition, so no changes are requested. She added that a few years back, the City decided to make a contribution to further fund the City's unfunded liability. Sattler clarified that the 231 debt is savings to TMRS, $237,000 was the City's rate to contribute. He asked if its a wash and she concurred. Gonzalez asked and Rundell responded regarding the target amount of 80%. Rundell clarified that the requirement, an actuarial calculation 11.84% is necessary to advertise long-term liability. Gonzalez asked if the City would exceed 100%. Rundell noted that age, tenure affect the retirement contributions. She noted that there are outside actuarial calculations made and TMRS reviews. Gonzalez asked if we could save tax payers any more money from retirement. Garver noted that there is a historical precedent of excellent financial services at the City that tracks and evaluates funds and resources, and he thanked staff for their hard work. He noted the next public hearing is August 18th. B Discussion and possible action regarding funding allocations for contracted social services and youth programs for 2011/2012 budget year-- Mayor George Garver Garver suggested beginning on the far left with Eason to share her recommendations and rationale, then item two Hellmann would present the next organization. He noted Rinn will tabulate. Garver noted that the motions should not be made until we know the funding for the groups in aggregate. Garver asked Eason to begin with the Assistance League of Georgetown Association. Eason recommended the same funding as last year at $5000. She said her thinking on each of the organizations takes into account the guidelines and limited funding available this year. She said council should refer to the funding from last year as a guide. Berryman arrived at 3:31 pm on dais. City Council Meeting Minutes/ Page 3 of 9 Pages Eason continued that the services providing basic needs such as food, shelter, transportation, are necessary for consideration of City funding. She noted the Assistance League does these things for children. She would like to see basic needs funded for as many people in the City as possible. Garver asked and Sattler commented, like Eason, there are more people that need assistance from the Assistance League. Motion by Sattler, second by Berryman to fund the Assistance league at $7500.00. Garver indicated that Sattler made a motion, seconded by Berryman, and Eason asked about making a motion. Garver asked and Sattler withdrew his motion but added a suggestion to allocate $7500.00. Garver asked Council if Eason's $5000.00 figure or Sattler's $7500 option should be considered in the final tabulation. Gonzalez noted that settling on average could be a starting point because all members have different perspectives. Garver asked and Gonzalez commented that if each member shares their figures for the organization being discussed, Council could then identify an average for Rinn to input into the tabulation sheet. He said this will give consensus in the average.Rinn noted that she can plug in the suggestions in and divide an average to add to the chart. Berryman said in the past council reviewed the funding for each group, input a number and then reviewed the allocations and adjusted them as necessary, and Eason added this is what Rinn could do in the spreadsheet. Gonzalez noted that each member may have differing views on what initial number to allocate. Hellmann suggested we start with the allocations from last year, then evaluate the new requests, and if any funds are left Council could add or subtract funds to balance the requests and available funding. Sattler noted there are new requests and Hellmann responded that a new request should be evaluated when it comes up for discussion. Garver clarified Hellmann's suggestion to start with last year's allocations as the preliminary point of discussion. Garver asked to review organizations not participating last year. He introduced CASA. Gonzalez noted that CASA serves a purpose and should allocated their requested funding CASA at $5000.00. Berryman disagreed because CASA does not serve many in this area or in Georgetown. She said they misrepresented their responsibilities at the presentation regarding finding and placing children in homes. Berryman noted that CPS, not CASA, is responsible for placing kids in homes. Eason agreed with Berryman that CASA does not fit under the City's guidelines, and the service did not help a substantial number of children are helped as well as this isn't the only agency that performs these services for Georgetown. Eason agreed with Berryman about not funding. Berryman said this is not a city function. Garver asked about funding and the challenges to the funding criteria. Hellmann, suggested we leave this off now since it is disputed and return at the end of the discussion to revisit funding. Garver asked for a motion to see if this agency qualifies for any funding. Berryman suggested to review all new requests for funding. Jonrowe suggested deliberation among Council regarding the criteria qualifying organizations for funding. Berryman requested a motion, Eason second, to not fund CASA this year. Motion by Berryman, second by Eason, to not fund CASA. Approved 4 - 3 (Hellmann, Meigs, Gonzalez opposed). Garver noted the CASA request is removed from funding this year. Garver introduced the Georgetown Citizens Police Academy Alumni Association Silver Bells Program. He noted they requested $10,000. Eason said the Silver Bells does not meet criteria for funding, and there was not a clear purpose for how the money would be allocated. She added that Faith in Action already provides basic needs such as home visits, transportation, and other the basic needs. She said the daily needs for life such as food, shelter, and medication are the prime criteria. Jonrowe agreed with Eason that this program does not meet the criteria. She's participated in "adopt a grandparent program" but she does not think this meets the criteria, so the allocation is not justified. Berryman suggested if Council does not fund Silver Bells, perhaps another charity doing similar work could receive some extra funds. Motion by Eason, second by Jonrowe to remove Silver Bells Program from consideration. Approved (7-0). Garver introduced Light Texas. Sattler commented that Light Texas is eligible for funds since their service is not being provided in the city now. He said it is similar to the Exceptional Georgetown Alliance, but they withdrew their request. Motion by Sattler, second by Berryman to fund Light Texas at $10,000. Meigs asked for clarification on the program mission of Light Texas, and Berryman responded that they host day camps for people with handicaps. Berryman recommended Light Texas since there has been requests for more programs through the parks department for those with disabilities, and Light Texas can serve year-round programs for the disabled. She said there are not special programs for disabled children, and Garver asked for City Council Meeting Minutes/ Page 4 of 9 Pages clarification that this program is for those over 18 years. Garver commented that a program outside of Houston in Brookshire will be the model for the Georgetown program. He noted that once a child graduates they are no longer eligible for support and this program will help. Berryman noted this will be a good faith effort to the Americans with Disabilities that Georgetown supports those with special needs. Gonzalez stated his support for the $10,000 allocation since it fills a niche not being addressed. He noted the people are integral to serving this special population. Eason noted that there was a different pot of money for allocating to the Exceptional Georgetown Alliance since they applied under youth funding and Light Texas has applied under social service funding. Rinn clarified about the two different funds. Gamer reintroduced motion by Sattler. Vote on the motion: Approved (7-0) to fund $10,000 to Light Texas. Garver introduced Williamson County on Alcohol and Drugs in the LifeSteps program. Eason commented that the criteria was not met by this organization. This request is for funding a position and not a program or services. She continued that Council previously determined to not fund anything other that programs or services. Garver added that he attended a graduation ceremony for prior inmates who have been served by this program, but while the program is impressive, there could have been communication errors in their application. Gonzalez noted Council should move to not fund. Motion by Eason, second by Gonzalez to deny funding to LifeSteps. Approved (7-0). Garver asked and Rinn responded that the grants in green are challenge grants. She said there are challenges to find another entity to recruit more money to match the allocated city funds. Rinn noted that the Williamson County Crisis Center has found matching grant sponsors. She added that the prior Council approved challenge grants for the Crisis Center. Garver asked and Rinn responded that women and children are assisted through the Center. Gonzalez asked and. Rinn responded that after denying the new requests, based on last years funding, the available is $311,331, the amount out right now including the challenge grants is $313,750. He added Council could cut about $2000 and reach a budget. Berryman suggested that $10,000 could be transferred from the Exceptional Georgetown Alliance, but Gonzalez noted that already is included. Sattler noted there is a differential of $1200 assuming everything is funded as requested. Council deliberated on how to adjust the allocations from last year. Hellmann suggested freezing youth spending like with social services to last years and would have $12, 500.00. Garver suggested review of children and youth ranking sheet that was not funded last year. Eason commented that two groups dropped their requests, the Boy Scouts and the Exceptional Georgetown Alliance. Rinn noted there are no new youth programs. Gonzalez said the budget looks same but two associations dropped their request and one association was allocated significantly more funding. Sattler asked and Rinn responded that Council is at $313,750, including the challenge grant, for social service funding if it's kept at the same level as last year and include the Light Texas $10,000 allocation. She responded that $311,331 was available. Eason stated her preference to move forward to discuss funding for each item. Berryman asked what else should be adjusted. Eason responded that there should be a review of each item. Jonrowe asked about the challenge grant that was not requested by this year. Rinn noted that instead of the challenge grant, an allocation for $18,000 was submitted. Council deliberated over the allocations of challenge grants. Jonrowe and Council concluded that challenge grants should not automatically be filled with allocated funding. Gonzalez added that we should allocated based on last years funding without the challenge grant. Berryman asked about the Bluebonnet Trails Early Childhood Intervention, Eason responded that Bluebonnet Trails was one of the first applying for grants prior to splitting social and youth service funding. Eason suggested council move Bluebonnet to youth funding. Meigs requested that next year the funding should be requested under youth funding instead of social services. Berryman asked if the City should be testing for autism since schools already provide this testing with a special education and section 501 protection for children with disabilities. She asked that this is a very specialized funding and probably already is provided under the school system. Garver noted that schools are responsible and obligated to provide services for students. Garver added that there are quite a few funding requests that the school system already is responsible for autism testing. Berryman noted that we should question funding the program at all since there are protections. Jonrowe stated that there is a serious problem with autism, and more information would be useful before removing this program from consideration for funding. Meigs noted that early childhood may denote prior to school aged. Hellmann stated his apprehension at defunding programs that have historically received financial assistance from the City. Eason noted her accord with many council comments and suggested funding at $4000 with a requirement for a more in depth application and information in the future. She would like to fund the $4000 this year, but require more specific information for consideration next year. Garver asked for a motion and clarified that $4000 be funded for now but more information be submitted next year. City Council Meeting Minutes/ Page 5 of 9 Pages Motion by Eason, second by Berryman, to allocate $4000 for FY11/12 but with a request that more detailed information be provided for future funding opportunities. Hellmann inquired as to the $4250 challenge grants and take a step back in funding and Eason agreed. She said we fund as we have in the past prior to challenge grants. Approved 4-3 to fund BlueBonnet Trails Community MHMR Center at $4000 this year with a request for more information next year prior to funding (Hellmann, Meigs, Gonzalez opposed). Gamer asked and Rinn calculated the current budget figures as allocated to include under budget by $1831 is leftover. Gonzalez asked and Rinn agreed social services is under budget by $1831. Eason requested finishing social services to get a hard line number. Garver asked and Eason responded that Council should confirm the tentative allocations to each social service request. Eason requested confirmation about CARTS allocations. Motion by Gonzalez, second by Jonrowe, to allocate $9000 to the Capital Area Rural Transportation (CARTS). Berryman asked about the City's relationship with CARTS as the population growth shifts away from rural classifications. Eason noted population changes are calculated into the service of CARTS only at the census population data. Garver asked and Brandenburg noted that this program will not change until next census. Berryman asked and Brandenburg noted that things do change but this coming year will not be impacted. Vote on the motion: Approved (7-0). Garver asked Council for a motion related to Faith in Action Caregivers. Berryman noted that this group is great at outreach with their volunteers. She continued that they take people off the streets through a total volunteer organization. She added that there is a huge need for seniors and CARTS can't meet the need as easily. She said Caregivers stays with the individual through the service such as staying with seniors at a meetings. Berryman requested an additional $1000 with a total of $16,000. Eason stated that Council should evaluate all requests before making motions to solidify the allocations. She added that her preference would be to fully fund Caregivers at $20,000. Berryman agreed with the $20,000 allocation. Garver asked and Gonzalez responded that a review of each organization can cut money from others prior to voting. Eason agreed with Gonzalez, and she noted that others haven't requested much over last years funding. Garver asked about Council's consensus for Caregivers. Council deliberated as to fully funding Caregivers at $20,000. Garver asked and Rinn responded that Council would be $3169 over budget.Garver asked about Caring Place, and Council agreed to keep funding at $55,000. Garver asked about Habitat for Humanity, and Eason requested $45,000 due to completion of the Old Mill Village. Gonzalez noted this will cause $8,000 shortage. Jonrowe disagreed and doesn't want to take money from the children's funding. Rinn noted that budgets were crossed last year to fund more in children's and less in social funding. Rinn stated only $88,718 is available for funding children's programs. Garver inquired about funding Habitat at $45,000, and objections were raised by Jonrowe, Hellmann, and Gonzalez who want to know who gets defunded to give Habitat the extra $5,000. Jonrowe is opposed to reducing children's funding. Garver concluded from Council deliberations that Habitat will stay at the $40,000 funding level of last year. Garver asked for $10,000 for Light Texas, and Council agreed to allocate funding at $101000. Garver introduced the Literacy Council, and Council agreed to allocate funding at $3,500. Garver introduced Lone Star Circle of Care, and Council agreed to allocate funding at $100,000. Garver introduced the Senior Center at Stonehaven, and Council agreed to allocate funding at $12,000. Garver introduced the Williamson County Crisis Center, and Council agreed to allocate funding at $45,000. Rinn commented that a $5000 challenge grant is included. Berryman would like to include the challenge grant and Jonrowe clarified that they are expanding and building so a challenge grant is an appropriate allocation to raise the funding to a total of $50,000. Gamer and Rinn commented that the $5000 challenge grant is already included in the total Garver introduced the Williamson -Burnett Co. Opportunities, and Council agreed to allocate funding at $6,000. Garver asked for the total and Rinn stated over budget $3,169 for available social services funding. She added City Council Meeting Minutes/ Page 6 of 9 Pages that Council is already over budget to fund children's and youth based on the budgeting done in the past. Gonzalez stated that Council is over budget by around $10,000. Garver introduced youth funding for Council's consideration. Garver introduced the Boys & Girls Club, and Council agreed to allocate funding at the requested $40,000. Garver introduced the Cultural Citizen Memorial Association. Hellmann suggested $3,000 allocation. Berryman asked about the building and Eason responded the Willie Hall. Berryman likes this organization and are just down street from Boys & Girls Club. Jonrowe said these target different age groups. She said Boys & Girls only over 7 and the cultural is younger kids and is central for large African American population Council agreed to allocate funding for the Cultural Citizen Memorial Association at $3,000. Garver introduced Partners in Education, and Council agreed to allocate funding at $15,000. Garver introduced Getsemani, and Council agreed to allocate funding at $11,000. Garver introduced the Georgetown Project. Garver asked and Rinn responded that the Georgetown Project is requesting $25,000 this year over last year's allocation of $15,000. Jonrowe stated that the new Eagles Nest program is for homeless kids after-school. She suggested recalling the $5000 extra allocated to Caregivers and split it between Caregivers and Georgetown Project. She said we could put both organizations at a base allocation of $15,000 and split any surplus funds between them. Gonzalez, Meigs, and Sattler agreed. Eason expressed concerned with taking funding from seniors and giving to kids. She said taking essential services such as transportation to medical appointments, prescriptions, and groceries are vital for the seniors. Gonzalez clarified both organizations be funded at last years level and any extra money will be split. Jonrowe asked for Rinn to update the math. Rinn stated there is $4718 in excess funds in children's and youth budget. Rinn evaluated the calculations and Rinn stated that $17500 for Georgetown Project leaves an excess of $2218 in children's funding. Rinn evaluated the calculations and Council deliberated on the balances remaining between social and youth service funding. Garver suggested splitting the excess funds between the two agencies. Garver reviewed the social services allocations suggested by Council as follows: Assistance League at $6,549 Bluebonnet at $4000 CARTS at $9,000 Faith in Action Caregivers at $17,500 Caring Place at $55,000 Habitat for Humanity $40,000 Light Texas at $10,000 Literacy Council at $3,500 Lone Star at $100,000 Stonehaven at $12,000 Crisis Center $45,000 with a $5000 challenge grant WBCO $6,000 Garver asked and Rinn responded the total is $313,549. She said the budget was $311,000. Garver asked Council and Council concurred with the amounts as set. Berryman suggested getting more money to the Assistance League. Garver asked for a review of youth funding and Rinn responded: Boys and Girls Club at $40,000 Scouts and the Exceptional Georgetown Alliance withdrew their requests. Georgetown Cultural Citizens Memorial at $3,000 Partners in Education at $15,000 Getsemani at $11,000 Georgetown Project at $17,500 Eason asked and Rinn responded that the balance on the children's fund is $86,500. Council deliberated on the totals of each fund and allocating the excess. Jonrowe suggested moving the Georgetown Project to $15,000 and $15,000 in Faith in Action Caregivers. Jonrowe noted the surplus funds and Berryman suggested allocating City Council Meeting Minutes/ Page 7 of 9 Pages the excess between the Assistance League, the Georgetown Project, and Caregivers. She suggested giving the Assistance League $1549 and split the remaining $5000 between the Project and Caregivers. Motion by Berryman, second by Gonzalez to accept the numbers as allocated. Approved (7-0) Meeting recessed at 5:00 PM Meeting 6 Fire Chief Jim Lowell, and resumed at 5:05 PM C Citygate Study and Presentation --Robert Fite, Fire Chief and Micki Rundell, Chief Financial Officer Garver introduced Robert Fite, Fire Chief to begin the Citigate Study. Fite introduced Emergency Service District 6 Fire Chief Jim Lowell, and he is part of Citigate who conducted the study. Fite said the study is a four-month process that produced three manuals. He said this is a preview of what the fire department would look like in the next 5-10 years. He said previous studies only addressed administration but not deployment. He said this study helps the City identify the best locations for building fire stations including the City and the ETJ. Fite offered the summary details of study and the process followed. He indicated the standards reviewed included the existing deployment, community expectations, community risk, critical time study, distribution study, concentration, and historical response. He added that occupancy types and land use, fire station and crew deployment, station and staffing triggers, the magnitude of costs, a review of three-year summary of data, and the current procedures and dispatching were evaluated throughout the study. Fite said when the City switched over to OSSI, it instantly shaved a minute of dispatch time and the times are 90% in less than one minute and this was a great decision by the City. He added two critical measures of evaluation include speed (the drive time to an incident, with 4 minutes being the maximum) and weight (how long it takes to get an apparatus to the location). He said the City relies on partnerships with the County, Round Rock, and mutual to respond to emergencies and seeks to be equitable to all neighborhoods calling for service. Fite added that Georgetown is unique with the massive quantity of hazardous materials transported, the lake as both a recreational and water supply, and wildland fires, flooding, hi -tech businesses, regional airport, residential care facilities, the historic areas, downtown, and the college. He said the findings and recommendations include the need for measurement standards on responding to calls. He added how long it takes to get geared up and travel time that will be brought back to Council as measurement standards to be approved. Fite added that the ESD is not dense enough to cover the suburban areas and the drive time could be upwards of eleven minutes. He noted the gridded network of roads is missing in parts of the City, which is often valued by the residents, but makes emergency response challenging. Fite said Georgetown needs a seven total minute response and currently meets that about 70% of the time. He added Fire Station 5 will significantly help. He added the department covers 138 square miles and can be challenging when multiple incidents are occurring. Fite said 27% of calls occur when multiple calls are going on. Fite introduced a variety of maps, provided to Council for review, that include the five stations with equipment and response time. The maps indicate coverage areas with the 4 minute timeline to travel to an incident. He noted that the insurance rating is based on ISO requirement to have stations located with a 4 minute quick access to incidents. Fite mentioned the shift in purchasing for the department. He noted the historical machine was the quint, but it was too heavy and expensive to maintain. He added that ISO also rates on 2.5 mile coverage, and the City is working to keep insurance rates as low as possible. He said the study recommended moving the battalion chief to Fire Station 2. Fite added the hot spots for various fires including structure fire, residential fires, and other incidents. Fite identified the short term recommendations include an east side fire station. He noted that all future stations will be much smaller and cost less. He added the next recommendation is a partnership with the ESD 3405 station, a Sun City station could be built based on the development agreement or could partner with the ESD station for Sun City Service. The fourth recommendation is the Water Oak development and perhaps in Terra Vista in the future. Fite commented on the maps and summary.. He said OSSI made a huge impact and truly serves the residents and businesses. He said some of the practices include operational changes and do not cost extra funds. He said lean staffing models are important but safety must be kept in mind. He said the future growth will drive the need and location for new stations. Garver asked and Fite responded that this presentation is informational only but will be coming back in the future with some action items. Brandenburg mentioned in near future this study will be justification to both Council and voters on how and why decisions are made regarding fire protection. Sattler asked and Fite responded that training is necessary for GFD to work on high-rise buildings. He added that the City does have the equipment but not fully trained personnel. Berryman thanked Fite for the communication on how improvements have changed the City's responsiveness to incidents. D ESD/Council Budget Workshop -- Robert Fite, Fire Chief and Micki Rundell, Chief Financial Officer City Council Meeting Minutes/ Page 8 of 9 Pages Garver suggested picking up the garbage ordinance during the legislative regular agenda as posted. Gaver introduced Jim Briggs to review the Emergency Service District. Briggs noted there are four commissioners including Tony Callaway, Bobby Bunty, Chris Stanley, himself. ESD 8 provides fire protection services outside the city in the ETJ to county residents. There are monthly meetings of the commissioners on the 3`d Wednesday at the Main Street Fire Station. For more information, he said review the website at www.wilco8.org. Briggs added that the ESD contracts with the City for fire protection partnerships. Briggs indicated that the ESD paid $35,000 for the Citigate Study in 2011. He added there is coordination with GFD in planning and budgeting. There is a new fire apparatus assigned to GFD coming in the fall of 2011. Briggs added that the establishment of formal operating policies is beginning and the ESD is finalizing two and five year business plans. He added a proposed 0.0950c/100 tax rate for 2012 to cover the ESD services. He added all other Williamson County ESDs are at 10cents. Briggs noted a continued partnership with the City on staffing, facilities, and coordination of operations. Brandenburg noted the history with the ESD and noted that the City could dispatch fire apparatus out to the county got $50,000 annually. He said the budget with ESD is now close to million dollars and is equity in ESD contracts. Briggs added that the ESD utilizes a metric to evaluate the call volumes in relating to budget. He added that taxpayers can evaluate costs through the metric measurements of call volume and influence on budget. Garver asked and Rundell noted at least in the general fund, close to 45-50% are used for fire and police, which are the two largest departments, make up general fund. She said ESD contract will be on next agenda. E Garbage Ordinance Discussion -- Bridget Chapman, Acting City Attorney and Kathy Ragsdale, Environmental Services Director Item pulled for discussion on the Legislative Regular Agenda. Meeting recessed to Executive Session at 5:39pm under Sections 551.071, 551.072 and 551.087 of the Local Government Code. Meeting returned to Open Session at adjourned at 6:15 PM The meeting was adjourned at 06:15 PM. City Council Meeting Minutes/ Page 9 of 9 Pages Attest: