Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN 12.11.2007 CC-RThe City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, met in Regular Session on the above date with Mayor Gary Nelon presiding. Council Present: Patty Eason, Gabe Sansing, Keith Brainard, Bill Sattler, Pat Berryman, Farley Snell, Ben Oliver Council Absent: All Council Present Paul Brandenburg, City Manager; Tom Yantis, Assistant City Manager; Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations; Patricia E. Carts, City Attorney; Sandra D. Lee, City Secretary; Micki Rundell, Director of Finance and Administration; Anthony Lincoln, Fire Chief; Glenn Dishong, Elizabeth Cook, Principal Planner; Rachel Osgood, Environmental Services; Carla Benton, Planner 11; Terry Jones, Finance construction Manager; Mark Miller, Transportation Services Manager; Bobby Ray, Planning Director; Valerie Kreger, Planner 11; Marsha Iwers, Purchasing Manager; Cari Miller, CVB Coordinator; Clay Shell, Assistant Fire Chief; Kathy Ragsdale, Utility Office Manager; Keith Hutchinson, Public Information Officer; Jennifer Bills, Housing Coordinator; Kimberly Garrett, Parks and Recreation Director Regular Session to convene and continue Executive Session, if necessary In compliance with the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551, Government Code, Vernon's Texas Codes, Annotated, the items listed below will be discussed in closed session and are subject to action in the regular session that follows. A Sec.551.071: Consultation with Attorney - Advice from attorney about pending or contemplated litigation and other matters on which the attorney has a duty to advise the City Council, including agenda items Discussion and possible action regarding the threatened litigation against LCRA relating to the Wholesale Power Agreement - Discussion and possible action regarding Williamson County MUD No. 19, request for sewer Certificate of Convenience and Necessity (Application No. 35375-C) (SOAH Docket No. 582-07-0786; TCEQ Docket No. 2006 - 1810 - UCR) Regular Session ® To begin no earlier than 06:00 P (Council may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene an Executive Session at the request of the Mayor, a Councilmember, or the City Manager for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code Chapter 551.) B Call to Order Mayor Nelon called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. C Pledge of Allegiance Mayor Nelon led the Pledge. D Comments from the dais Mayor Nelon welcomed the audience and gave a brief outline of meeting procedures. E Announcements and Comments from City Manager Brandenburg made the following announcements: The City is still accepting applications for vacant or expiring terms on its Boards & Commissions. Information and applications can be obtained on the City's Website at www.cleorgetown.org or at City Hall which is located at 113 E. 8th Street, the Public Library and other City Offices. The Deadline for filing City Council Meeting Minutes/December 11, 2007 Page 1 of 11 Pages applications is January 2008. The City of Georgetown will be closed for the Christmas Holidays on Monday, December 24th and Tuesday, December 25th. City offices will also be closed on Tuesday, January 1, 2008 in observance of New Year's Day. There will be no trash pickup Tuesday, December 25th and Tuesday, January 1st. Trash pickup slides one day for the remainder of the week. F Public Wishing to Address Council As of the deadline, there were no persons who requested to address the Council on items other than already posted on the Agenda. G Action from Executive Session There was no action from Executive Session. Statutory Consent Agenda The Statutory Consent Agenda includes non -controversial and routine items that Council may act on with one single vote. A councilmember may pull any item from the Consent Agenda in order that the council discuss and act upon it individually as part of the Regular Agenda. H Consideration and possible action to approve the minutes of the City Council Workshop on Monday, November 26 and the City Council Meeting on Tuesday, November 27, 2007 -- Sandra D. Lee, City Secretary (correction by Brainard) Consideration and possible action to extend the lease with Georgetown Independent School District for the Football Stadium in San Gabriel Park thru May 31, 2008 -- Kimberly Garrett, Parks and Recreation Director and Randy Morrow, Director of Community Services (question from Brainard) Brainard confirmed with Garrett that the 25 -year lease at $1 per year had just expired. Brandenburg explained that it was mutually decided by the City and GISD to formally prepare an extension to allow the school district to use the stadium for approximately six more months to accomodate soccer; and mentioned that the City will be preparing a Parks Master Plan that will include proposed uses for the stadium. J Consideration and possible action to approve a professional services contract with Fisher Hagood Structural Engineers to perform design work for structural repairs at River Ridge Pool in an amount not to exceed $20,700.00 -- Terry Jones, Support Services Construction Manager and Micki Rundell, Director of Finance and Administration K Consideration and possible action to reconcile the contract between the City and Operations Management International (OMI) for the management, operation, and maintenance of its water treatment facilities for fiscal year 2006-2007 for $25,124.73 -- Glenn Dishong, Water Services Director and Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations (question from Sattler) Sattler asked if the extra funds were needed because of an increase in volume. Dishong explained that there was actually a decrease in volume, but the flooding created an unusual circumstance of organic loading which required additional water treatment. L Consideration and possible action to direct Environmental Services staff to apply for the Capital Area Council of Governments (CAPCOG) FY 2008/2009 Regional Solid Waste Management Funding Plan to improve, expand and create programs for City, residential and commercial recycling; household hazardous waste recycling; electronic waste recycling; means to promote these programs -- Rachel Osgood, Environmental Services Coordinator and Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations M Consideration and possible action to cancel the second City Council Meeting in December, 2007, because it falls on Christmas Day, Tuesday, December 25, 2007 -- Mayor Gary Nelon Motion by Oliver, second by Berryman to approve the Consent Agenda with the correction to the minutes. Approved 7-0. Council will individually consider and possibly take action on any or all of the following items: N Consideration and possible action to authorize an Automatic Aid Agreement between the City of Round Rock and the City of Georgetown for fire, rescue and emergency medical service responses to certain areas of each community -- Anthony Lincoln, Fire Chief Lincoln explained the item, saying Round Rock will gain a fire apparatus, but the City of Georgetown will gain more from Round Rock for their assistance with the auto dealerships. He said both of these issues may gain City Council Meeting Minutes/December 11, 2007 Page 2 of 11 Pages the City additional points or. a ISO score. Motion by Eason, second by Sa,_ .`to approve. Approved 7-0. O Consideration of an award of the annual bid for ground maintenance services for unimproved parkland and detention ponds to Champion Temporaries, Inc. dba We Mow It Plus in the amount of $77,165.00 -- Marsha Iwers, Purchasing Manager; Kimberly Garrett, Parks and Recreation Director and Mark Miller, Transportation Services Manager Iwers explained the item, saying We Mow It has provided excellent service in the past. She said in the event that their performance becomes unsatisfactory, the contract contains a 30 -day cancellation clause. Iwers said local preference and best value were used to evaluate the bid. She said the estimated total of the unimproved parkland ground maintenance cost is $53,225.00; and funds were budgeted in the Parks Mowing Account in the amount of $54,800.00. She said the estimated total for the detention pond ground maintenance service is $23,940, and $10,000 was budgeted in the Stormwater Drainage Detention Pond Maintenance account, with the remaining $13,940 out of the Stormwater Spraying Account, that was budgeted for $20,000 Motion by Snell, second by Berryman to approve. Sattler asked about the pond in Georgetown Village. Iwers explained that there has been some confusion with two smaller ponds in Georgetown Village which are maintained by someone else. Brainard asked Iwers if the City requires contractors to state that those providing the services are in this country legally. Iwers said that has been discussed, but the City does not yet require that workers show their green cards. She said the City does require that the worker wear a uniform or in some way be identified as being with a specific company. Motion by Brainard, second by Sansing to amend the previous motion to establish a process that requires vendors, or those who are providing services for the vendors with which the City contracts, to be in this country legally. Sansing clarified that Brainard was moving to approve the contract along with that added statement. Snell said he would like to keep "that" separate. Motion by Snell, second by Oliver to amend to remove the portion added by Brainard. Nelon clarified that Brainard's intention was to amend the original motion by Snell to approve the contract by adding language to all contracts regarding legal workers. Oliver said Council is dealing with a specific contract, and Brainard is adding something that will have universal applications. There was discussion as to whether this item was posted for the extra provision. Carls said she feels there are actually two issues; one being whether the stipulation can be added to the contract if it wasn't bid that way; and the second would be direction to staff to bring back suggested language to be added to future contract language. Nelon said he thought he had heard that there should be Council policy that this provision would be added to all future contracts. Council asked to re -do the motions. All previous motions withdrawn. Motion by Snell, second by Eason to approve the contract. Motion by Brainard, second by Sansing to amend, in respect to this and all future contracts entered into by the City of Georgetown, to direct staff to establish a policy saying those providing services are in this country legally. Snell asked for clarification of the motion and expressed concern that the item was not posted for the previous motion. Carls said each contract comes before Council; and if Council wished, staff could bring the contract form to Council and show them that provision. She said she assumed this motion pertained to contracts bid in the future, and she and Iwers will create that provision to be a part of any future contract. Nelon confirmed that Carls needs to research this particular contract to make sure the job was bid to include that provision. Carls confirmed that if it can be included in this contract, it will be, and if not, she will report back to Council. Motion by Snell, second by Eason to amend to remove the caveat about illegals. Snell said he understood that Brainard had moved to approve the contract with the caveat. Nelon explained that motion was withdrawn and at this time, they were to deal with Brainard's amendment to Snell's motion to approve the contract. Oliver said he would be more comfortable if Council approves this contract and takes up as a separate matter at a future meeting the policy issue regarding illegals. Motion by Berryman, second by Oliver to amend to change the wording of the amendment to give staff direction to create a policy preventing our city from employing illegal aliens and bring it back for Council's decision at a future meeting. Approved 7-0. Vote on the amended amendment: Approved 7-0. Vote on the original motion as amended: Approved 7-0. Brandenburg clarified that staff is to bring back a draft policy at a future meeting. He noted that there could be many issues involving that policy that might need further discussion and direction, so it might take more than one meeting to develop the policy. P Consideration and possible action to authorize payment of $122,398 for the City's pro -rata portion of the cost of operation of the Williamson Central Appraisal District (WCAD) -- Micki Rundell, Director of Finance and Administration Rundell explained the item, saying the expenses were basically the same as last year, but the City's costs have increased because of the Legislative change to lower the school district tax rate, which forced the City to take a larger portion of the pro -rata amount. She said this will require a budget amendment because staff had originally estimated approximately $94,000. Sattler asked if the City must use the WCAD and was told that it is state law. He said his constituents have complained to him about the kind of customer service they have received when they have gone in to appeal. Rundell noted that the City can appoint members to the Board, and could communicate with the Director. Brainard asked if there were assurances that WCAD is spending money City Council Meeting Minutes/December 11, 2007 Page 3 of 11 Pages prudently, and Rundell ans, )d that the City receives an audit report. Moti. )y Sansing, second by Eason to approve the payment. Sansing said when he has had questions of Director Carroll at WCAD, he has been very responsive. Approved 7-0. O Discussion and review of the definition of building signage as outlined in the Unified Development Code (UDC) -- Pat Berryman, Councilmember District 5 Berryman explained there have been problems with parts of buildings being named as signage. She read a section of UDC Chapter 16 defining a sign, saying it is very subjective and the inclusion of the use of color, as being part of signage is problematic. She said she is proposing to remove the subjective portion that begins "The term "sign" shall also include...... which comprises more than one (1) percent of any facade or visible roof face shall be considered a sign." Nelon explained this would be taken up in one of two ways, either as an emergency or as a part of the UDC amendment process which is handled at a specific time of year. Speaker, Chris Damon, with extra minutes from Jim Hickman, said there has been an issue with this particular UDC definition that has caused the business community some problems. He said it is extremely vague. With a slide presentation, he displayed specific sections of the Unified Development Code about which he takes exception. He said it is difficult to determine what kind of color is referenced in "any use of color" in the definition. He said he thinks what was intended was to specifically target national brands or national color schemes, but that is not what it actually says. He demonstrated with a grid that 1 % is a very small portion of a total building facade. He said the 1 % rule puts many buildings already in Georgetown in violation of the Code. He said he thinks the business community would like to see some tighter language so it can be understood what is permissable based on the Code. Mayor Nelon asked and Yantis replied the administration of the Code is complicated. He said what is not being referenced is the total chapter about signage which has standards for how much signage is allowed. He said there is a table regarding how much signage is allowed on a building. Yantis clarified that the practise has been to differentiate the second sentence in the definition into two parts. The first part regarding use of color, such as trademark color scheme where a specific part of that color scheme is allowed. He said the second part of the definition is determined by the Building Official as to whether the color is drawing attention to the business. He said they have not really had any problems with that portion of the Code, but have received opposition to the second sentence which refers to the corporate colors. Sansing said he doesn't understand why it would be wrong for a business to try to attract attention to itself, saying the City benefits by increased sales at the businesses. Yantis said it becomes a policy decision to be determined by the Council, saying Georgetown has a history of being very restrictive on signage because the Council in 2000 wanted to have an image as a City that celebrates the architecture of a building not the color scheme or signage of a building, and that was a way to differentiate Georgetown from cities that don't have as strict sign standards. He said that was further done in the Williams Drive Corridor Sign Standards which say buildings can only have monument signs that cannot exceed a heighth of five feet. He said that is a policy that can be appropriately determined by the Council. Motion by Berryman, second by Brainard that the portion of the UDC that defines signs be corrected or amended to leave out the sentence that reads: "The term 'sign' shall also include any use of color such as bands, stripes, patterns, outlines, or deliniations displayed for the purpose of commercial identification or to create the effect of calling attention to the business or product, and which comprises more than one (1) percent of any facade or visible roof face shall be considered a sign" and leave in the first portion that defines commercial and non-commercial messages. Snell said he is sympathethic with the longstanding frustration about the sign ordinance, but he feels this motion is too specific, and suggested there should be more general instruction to have staff or task groups study the problems. Snell said this is relevant to a case that is currently before the Municipal Court, saying he thinks anything the Council does would potentially compromise that proceeding. Motion by Snell, second by Eason to make a substitute motion to postpone consideration until after the court case is resolved. Eason said she also feels that Berryman's motion is too specific. Sattler asked Carls if Berryman's motion compromises the court case that is at Municipal Court at this time. Carls said this information creates a record and could be used by either side in the case. She said the action to be taken by the Council, if the original motion is approved, will not happen immediately because there is a process for amending the UDC. Snell said he feels that anything the Council does tonight could be interpreted as influencing the current court case. Carls said there have been interim rulings, and she believes they have declared that the language is constitutional, meaning it's not unconstitutionally vague. Oliver said he supports Snell's motion, and he feels there is a problem to be addressed and would like to give direction to staff, but prefers to postpone until after the case is decided. Sansing suggested that this could be postponed and could be added to the group of UDC amendments that would come back to the Council in March. Snell said he would accept that as a friendly amendment. Berryman said she is against postponing because she is trying to initiate a process that should have been handled a long time ago. She said she feels by postponing it, the Council is saying they really don't want to deal with it. There were more Council comments. Vote on the subsitute motion to postpone. Denied 4-3 (Sattler, Sansing, Berryman and Brainard opposed) Sansing asked Berryman to change her motion to direct staff to bring back suggested language to assist with the problems. Nelon suggested Berryman go back beyond the definition into the supporting regulation and administration. Motion by Snell, second by Eason to make another substitute motion to direct staff to research the issue of color in signage in the context of the larger ordinance and its application and bring back a proposed revision. Berryman said she spoke with Yantis earlier in the week, and she feels he didn't believe there was a problem. City Council Meeting Minutes/December 11, 2007 Page 4 of 11 Pages She said the problem is the gond portion of the language, saying it has be. problem for the staff to implement it. There was further Council comment and a discussion regarding the timeframe. Yantis confirmed that even if this is considered an emergency, the earliest it could be brought to the Planning and Zoning Commission would be February, and then to Council the second meeting in February and first meeting in March, so it would almost be the same timeframe as the regular amendments to be considered by Council in the regular cycle in April. Vote on the substitute motion: Denied (Sattler, Sansing, Berryman and Brainard opposed) Vote on the original motion by Berryman: Approved 4-3 (Eason, Oliver and Snell opposed) Vote to consider the UDC amendment as an emergency: Approved 4-3 (Eason, Oliver and Snell opposed) Oliver clarified that with this action Council has instructed staff to remove any consideration of color. Nelon noted that Council will have a first and second reading to consider that. R Discussion and possible action regarding the creation of a zoning district for car dealerships along major highways -- Pat Berryman, Councilmember District 5 Berryman explained the item saying there needs to be a special zoning district. Motion by Berryman, second by Sansing to direct staff to have dialogue with the car dealerships on IH35 with the intent of creating an overlay district with rules and regulations designed specifcally for that type of business. Snell asked and Yantis confirmed that it will be a UDC amendment to add a new zoning district and will require a rezoning that causes notification of all property owners in the proposed district. There was discussion regarding the parameters of this district. It was determined that Council could make this overlay geographic specific. Brandenburg said the City attempted to deal with the dealerships before, but there was little interest from the dealerships. There was further Council discussion. Yantis noted that in Georgetown, overlay districts are specific to certain geographic areas, and the zoning regulations apply only within that district. Vote on the motion: Approved 7-0. Nelon asked and Berryman responded that she was not asking that this be handled on an emergency basis. Yantis reviewed the procedure regarding proposed amendments to the UDC. He noted there is not enough time to advertise this proposed amendment to the public and receive feedback to determine if Council should create a task force to address these amendments. Nelon noted that there would be a public hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission and a first and second reading of the ordinance to create the zoning district. S Consideration and possible action to approve a performance agreement between GTEC (Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation) and the Georgetown Housing Authority for the Sierra Midge project -- Tom Yantis, Assistant City Manager Yantis explained the item, and said the GTEC determined in July that this project qualifies for 413 funding. He said, in September the GTEC determined that $694,000 should be allocated for transportation -related improvements for this project; and in November, GTEC approved the performance agreement for the extension of two city streets, Washam and Janis Drives, and approved the utility and drainage improvements associated therewith. He said affordable housing is a specifically authorized project under the 4B. He noted that Item T is also related to this project. Yantis invited Naomi Walker, Executive Director of Housing Authority to explain the proposed project. Naomi Walker, noted this project would be adjacent to the current project known as Shady Oaks. She said they are proposing a total of 188 residential units, 179 of those that would be subsidized apartments for working families who make from $25,000 to $50,000 annual salary, such as people who work for the school district, the City, and Southwestern University. She said this project will have residential and retail space. She mentioned that Gavurnik Builders, Tom Nichols of 1113 Architects, Union State Bank, the County, and the City have all agreed to assist the Housing Authority with this project, just north of the Gateway Master Plan. She noted that Tom Nichols and someone from Steger and Bizzell Engineering were present in the audience if there were questions about the extension to be done. She said they are hopeful that the engineering for this project will help alleviate some of the regional water problems along Northwest Blvd. She said they will also be rehabilitating the Shady Oaks Development, the low-income housing area for people who have extremely low incomes, such as seniors on social security, and those receiving incomes below the poverty level, while retaining it's affordability. She said they are looking at a number of different sources for funding, such as tax credits for Shady Oaks, and applying for bonds for Sierra Ridge, along with tax credits and funds from GTEC and other foundations. She told Council there have been four public meetings, and the Authority continually provides information on the their Website. She said they have received feedback from several who attended the public meetings saying they would support this project if it is built the way it is designed. Berryman asked about non -citizens according to federal guidelines. Walker responded that the residents, by federal law, are required to be U.S. citizens; however, the fees are pro -rated to a higher amount for families who are not U.S. citizens, but are related to a citizen. She said the Housing Authority is not allowed to deny assistance as long as there is one member of the family who is a legal citizen. Brainard asked if affordable housing was included when the citizens were asked to vote on the potential use of 4B money, and Yantis explained that the ballot language read: transportation improvements, but this project is definitely an allowed eligible project. Sansing recalled recent 413 training, and noted that he had spoken with Jim Cummins of Steger and Bizzell, and was told there is no money in the $694,000 to pay for engineering to resolve the drainage issues on adjoining properties. Motion by Sansing, second by Eason to approve the performance agreement with the additional language that all drainage issues on related properties on Northwest Blvd., offsite improvements, be required to be handled as part of this package; and if there's no way to get those drainage City Council Meeting Minutes/December 11, 2007 Page 5 of 11 Pages issues handled, the money ild revert back to GTEC. He discussed a pos: � engineering problem that may require easements from nearby property owners or assistance from TXDOT, saying it may be cost -prohibitive because of the drainage difficulties with the offsite properties. Snell asked Yantis if the performance agreement could be modified to include the drainage issues. Yantis said Exhibit C contains a list of the items to be funded by the $694,000, but apparently, the listed drainage improvements are "on-site" and therefore, there is no funding included for "off-site" improvements. He said he was given to understand that the "on-site" improvements would allow the City to be able to continue with drainage improvements for adjoining properties, saying the City of Georgetown has been working with drainage issues in that area for many years. He clarified, according to Sansing's motion, there would need to be a line item added to the list to specifically fund the "off-site" improvements. There was further discussion. Carls said it will be necessary to make sure the drainage improvements paid for with the GTEC money are somehow connected with the road. She said it might have to be a separate condition of approval. Yantis said it was his understanding from City Transportation Services Manager, Mark Miller, that there has never been somewhere for the water to go; but with the improvements being proposed by the Housing Authority, there will now be a detention pond and the City could install improvements to convey the drainage. Sansing said he found out the City doesn't have easements from the nearby property owners, so there's no way to convey the water. Sattler said, at a recent meeting with his constituents, they expressed concern about spending GTEC funds on affordable housing. He said his constitutents think the GTEC money should be used to bring in more industry in order to reduce the amount of ad valorem tax needed from residential properties. Nelon noted that this particular item for Council's consideration is the performance agreement between GTEC and the Georgetown Housing Authority. Berryman said she heard the same expression of concern at that meeting. She said if this money is spent on affordable housing, it won't be available to use to entice large employers to Georgetown. She compared the percentage of free or reduced lunches at GISD with that of Round Rock, Leander, and Austin. She said she thinks Georgetown has taken on more than their fair share of people with low-income needs. She said there are questions that can't be asked of people who apply for affordable housing, and she doesn't think Georgetown should become a sanctuary for illegal aliens. Nelon reminded Council that the item on the agenda is whether to approve the performance agreement to allow the GTEC contribution and not to determine whether this project goes forward. Sansing asked and Walker said if the GTEC performance agreement is voted down, the project will still move forward, but not in the design configurations as are being displayed. She said there would be a lot of "paring down," such as removal of the new urban concepts and the retail space concepts. She said the Housing Authority is committed to providing affordable housing, and whether it looks the same as being presented at this meeting, will depend on what they will be able to produce and how it will reflect on the surrounding area. Snell clarified that the proposed project is not "low-income housing," but affordable housing for the workforce at the City, school district, hospital, etc. He said this is not a charitable gift. He said he has been on the GTEC Board for five years, and they have never been without money to contribute toward an economic development project. He said every year GTEC has been able to fund special projects, saying there is over $1 million from GTEC dedicated to widen Williams Drive because TXDOT can't do it; $2.2 million to be spent on Lakeway Drive to IH35; and additional monies for roadways to Wolf Ranch, as well as other projects. He said there is $700,000 of new money per year revenue coming into GTEC that cannot be spent, but must be held in reserve because of the $1.5 million debt service policy. He said affordable housing is one of the projects allowed by the 413 provision and is also one of Council's priorities. Oliver said he will support this project and wants it to be done correctly, saying it will assist people who want to live and work in this community. Sattler said none of his constituents have ever said "don't build Sierra Ridge," saying they are in favor of helping Georgetown become a "better place to be." He said his constituents are concerned that the money should be used to attract a larger industry to reduce the ad valorem tax on the residential properties in order to reduce the cost of living in Georgetown. He said they thought when they voted for the 4B sales tax that the money would be used to attract industry in order to reduce their taxes. Nelon reminded the Council that the motion by Sansing is to approve the performance agreement with the condition that if the on-site and off-site drainage issues cannot be solved, the $694,000 reverts to GTEC. Snell confirmed that Sansing is telling the Housing Authority to do the roadway and drainage improvements as listed on Exhbit C; and is adding an "undefined clawback" that if the drainage issues for the adjoining properties are not accomplished by doing the roadwork and on-site drainage, the GTEC money goes back to GTEC. Sansing said he's not sure that the drainage problem can be solved, and would need to be determined during engineering. Snell said, therefore, no money would have been expended at that point except for engineering fees. It was determined that there is no engineering money for offsite improvements designated in the $694,000. Sansing said he is looking at this as economic development because there are vacant properties in that area that could be used for businesses if it weren't for the flooding problems; there are existing businesses that have flooding problems in their parking lots; and there is one building that cannot be used right now because of mold build up. Vote on the motion; Approved 4-3 (Sattler, Berryman and Brainard opposed) T Consideration and possible action to approve a request by the Georgetown Housing Authority for fee waivers for the Sierra Ridge project -- Tom Yantis, Assistant City Manager Yantis explained the item, saying this is another piece of financing for the previous project, fee waivers totaling City Council Meeting Minutes/December 11, 2007 Page 6 of 11 Pages $840,469; including the Cit; planning related fees such as application and ew fees, permitting fees, utility connect and tap fees, impact fees for water and wastewater, and the parkland dedication fee. Sansing asked if the other privately -held affordable housing projects had been given waivers. Yantis said he didn't think so, but could find out. Snell noted that Council consistently does not give waivers except when they are priorities for the City, such as for downtown projects using GTEC funds. Motion by Snell, second by Oliver to approve the request for fee waivers. Sattler asked and Yantis confirmed that this would be fee -related revenue that would not go into various City funds. Sattler said since this money would not go into the fund that could be used to entice industry, he thinks this is a reasonable amount for the Georgetown tax payers to contribute to help the Sierra Ridge project go forward. Sansing said this is one of the tools in the economic development tool box. Motion by Sansing, to friendly amend that the $60,625 ($481990 & $11,635) should come out of the $840,469, because those are "hard" costs. Snell and Oliver approved to accept as a friendly amendment. It was determined that the new total would be $779,844. Approved 4-3. (Eason, Berryman and Brainard opposed) 8:20 p.m. -- recessed Mayor Nelon presented City lapel pins to some Boy Scouts who were in attendance in the audience. 8:30 p.m. -- resumed U Consideration and possible action on a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement releasing Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) property by and between the City of Hutto, Texas and the City of Georgetown, Texas -- Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Director of Planning and Development Polasek noted that the next two items are related and concern the ETJ agreements with the City of Hutto. Motion by Snell, second by Eason to approve the resolution. Approved 7-0. V Consideration and possible action on a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement regarding the establishment of the Extraterritorial Jurisdiction boundary between the City of Hutto, Texas and the City of Georgetown, Texas -- Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Director of Planning and Development Polasek explained the item. Motion by Sansing, second by Eason to approve the resolution. Approved 7-0. W Consideration and possible action on a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement releasing Extraterritorial Jurisdiction property by and between the City of Liberty Hill, Texas and the City of Georgetown, Texas -- Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Director of Planning and Development Polasek noted that the next two items are related and concern the ETJ agreements with the City of Liberty Hill. He said the City Council of Liberty Hill last night approved the agreement with conditions as requested by County Engineer Joe England. He said the agreement has been modified to accomplish an agreement for this year with the intention of doing another agreement early next year to avoid splitting some parcels. Motion by Eason, second by Sansing to approve the resolution. Sattler asked and Polasek explained that Georgetown is not really giving up anything that is not already in a municipal utility district, and is actually gaining the properties around Lake Georgetown. Approved 7-0. X Consideration and possible action on a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement regarding the establishment of the Extraterritorial Jurisdiction boundary between the City of Liberty Hill, Texas and the City of Georgetown, Texas -- Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Director of Planning and Development Polasek explained the item. Motion by Eason, second by Snell to approve. Approved 7-0. Y Consideration and possible action to approve a consent agreement for the creation of an in -city municipal utility district (MUD), and to amend the Development Agreement and the Offsite Utility Construction and Cost Reimbursement Agreement for the Water Oak (fka ABG) Subdivision -- Tom Yantis, Assistant City Manager Yantis explained the item, saying this is the second "clean up" related to the previous development agreements due to the fact that the financing method has changed from a PID to a MUD. He said this item amends the Development Agreement and the Offsite Utility Construction and Cost Reimbursement Agreement. He explained the differences in the agreements. There were questions and comments from the Council. Motion by Sansing, second by Oliver to approve a Consent Agreement, and amendments to the Development Agreement and the Offsite Utility Construction and Cost Reimbursement Agreement for Water Oak Subdivision. Approved 7-0. City Council Meeting Minutes/December 11, 2007 Page 7 of 11 Pages C1, and to establish a proj(,- _)udget of $2,672,541.08 -- Glenn Dishong, WG Services Director and Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations Dishong explained the item and noted it is related to the previous item. He noted that the GUS Board and staff recommend that Council approve at $2 million plus to do the oversizing now, rather than delaying and getting a possible increase to $16 million. Motion by Sansing, second by Berryman to approve to proceed with the oversizing. Approved 7-0. AA Discussion and possible action to approve a Performance Agreement between the Georgetown Economic Development Corporation and AirBorn, Inc. -- Mark Thomas, Economic Development Director and Paul E. Brandenburg, City Manager Thomas explained the item, saying AirBorn is scheduled to purchase a 21 (+/-) acre tract located near the Citigroup Datacenter site, and plans to construct a new 50,000 square foot facility on the property by the end of 2008. He said they have represented that they will relocate their existing business to the new facility on the property, and expand the business by adding and retaining a total of 190 new jobs over the next five years. Thomas said AirBorn's capital investment in the new facility will be approximately $3.1 million. He said after GEDCO had approved the performance agreement, AirBorn requested additional revisions to reflect an initial employment of 300 employees and the creation of 190 new jobs to be retained over a five-year period, ending in 2012. He noted that Carls has attached an undocumented worker agreement. Motion by Berryman, second by Sansing to approve the Peformance Agreement. There was discussion. Approved 7-0. BB Consideration and possible action to approve a Property Tax Abatement Agreement between AirBorn, Inc. and the City of Georgetown and the County of Williamson -- Mark Thomas, Economic Development Director and Paul Brandenburg, City Manager Thomas explained that this item is related to the previous item. Thomas recalled that the Council, at the April 24, 2007 Council Meeting, directed the City Manager and Director of Economic Development to present an offer of economic development incentives to AirBorn, Inc. and to take other actions necessary to bring an incentive package back to Council for final review and possible approval. He said the City and the County have each adopted guidelines and criteria governing a property tax abatement agreement in their respective jurisdictions. Thomas recalled on September 11, 2007, the Council adopted a resolution in favor of a property tax abatement for AirBorn, Inc.; and after proper notice and a public hearing, the City designated an area, including the AirBorn Tract, as a Reinvestment Zone, qualifying it for tax abatement. He pointed out the tax abatement schedule in the agreement. Motion by Sansing, second by Berryman to approve the Property Tax Abatement Agreement, Approved 7-0. CC Second Readings 1. Second reading of an ordinance designating a contiguous geographic area generally described as being approximately 21.18 acres out of the Lewis Dyches Survey, Abstract No. 180 in Williamson County, Texas, being a portion of a 122.19 acres conveyed to H. B. Longhorn Junction Phase III L.P. in Document No. 2006074656 of the Williamson County, Texas Official Records, and being further described by metes and bounds and by sketch on attachments to this ordinance, as Reinvestment Zone for Property Tax Abatement Purposes, pursuant to Chapter 312 of the Texas Tax Code — Mark Thomas, Economic Development Director and Paul Brandenburg, City Manager Thomas read only the caption of the ordinance on second reading. Motion by Sansing, second by Berryman to approve Ordinance 2007-90. Approved 7-0. 2. Second reading of an ordinance designating approximately 67 acres at the northwest corner of Rivery Blvd. and IH -35 as a tax increment reinvestment zone (TIRZ) to be known as the Rivery Park TIRZ -- Tom Yantis, Assistant City Manager Yantis explained the item and read only the caption of the ordinance on second reading. He said staff recommends pursuing a Chapter 380 Agreement in lieu of the TIRZ, but because the agreement is not finalized, and it is important to establish 2007 as the base year for the TIRZ and create it now, in case it is chosen to use in the future. He said there will be an ordinance to create this zone. He said an automatic termination clause has been added that will terminate the TIRZ if the 380 agreement is approved. He said the language has changed to "all or a portion" instead of 100%. He said the Council will appoint the board at a future date, and the Board will recommend a financing plan to the Council. He said outside legal counsel was consulted, and the project plan remains as it was previously. He said there will be a nine -member board of directors, two of which are the local state senator and local state representative, one is a county representative, and the rest would be designated by the Council. He said the developer has requested representation on the Board. Nelon noted that approval of this TIRZ is a backstop if the 380 agreement is not done. Rundell said it would be important to the City to have this or the 380 agreement in place by October 1, when the Williamson County Appraisal District will set the assessed valuations because it will affect the City's effective tax rate. Motion by Sansing, second by Brainard to approve Ordinance 2007-91. Approved 7-0, City Council Meeting Minutes/December 11, 2007 Page 8 of 11 Pages 3. Second Reading of an Ordinance rezoning from C-3, General Commercial District to PUD, Planned Unit Development District for approximately 31.935 acres out of the Nichols Porter Survey, Abstract Number 497; being The Rivery Park 11, Block A, Lots 1-7 and The Rivery Park, Block A, Lot 2, located on the east side of Rivery Boulevard, to be known as The Summit at Rivery Park -- Elizabeth Cook, Principal Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Director of Planning and Development Cook read only the caption of the ordinance on second reading. Cook explained that the reason the developer is asking for the change in zoning is because of modifications allowed in the PUD process, saying this new zoning would allow the extra heighth proposed for the buildings on the site. Snell asked and Yantis responded that the City settled a lawsuit with the prior owner of this property, and the calculation of how to deal with trees was a part of those negotiations, and that supersedes the tree ordinance. Motion by Sansing, second by Berryman to approve Ordinance 2007-92. Oliver asked about the parking issue and asked about access to the park, and Cook said that would be brought out in the site plan process. Snell asked whether the parking garage can be used free of charge. *Semeene The developer in the audience said there will be less funding available for the parking structure because the *hGtel conference center will cost more than was expected, but the parking will be made available to the public. Nelon confirmed that the 380 agreement is the chosen financing vehicle and has more flexibility than the TIRZ. Nelon asked that public access be factored into the design of the project. Vote on the motion: Approved 7-0. (*as corrected by Snell at the January 8, 2008 Council Meeting.) Someone in the audience said there will be less funding available for the parking structure because the hotel will cost more than was expected, but the parking will be made available to the public. Nelon confirmed that the 380 agreement is the chosen financing vehicle and has more flexibility than the TIRZ. Nelon asked that public access be factored into the design of the project. Vote on the motion: Approved 7-0. 4. Second reading of an Ordinance amending electric rates to reflect the cost of providing services -- Kathy Ragsdale, Utility Office Director and Micki Rundell, Director of Finance and Administration Ragsdale read only the caption of the ordinance on second reading. Motion by Berryman, second by Brainard to approve Ordinance 2007-93. Approved 6-0. (Oliver off the dais) 5. Second Reading of an Ordinance to rezone from RS, Residential Single Family district to MU -DT, Mixed Use -Downtown district for City of Georgetown, Block 39, Lot 5(pt), Lot 8(pt), located at 106 East 6"' Street. -- Carla Benton, Planner II and Bobby Ray, AICP, Director of Planning and Development Benton read only the caption of the ordinance on second reading. Motion by Sansing, second by Berryman to approve Ordinance 2007-94, Approved 7-0. 6. Second Reading of an Ordinance amending the Unified Development Code (UDC) pertaining to the installation of Columbaria associated with Places of Worship -- Bobby Ray, AICP, Director of Planning and Development Ray read only the caption of the ordinance on second reading. Motion by Sansing, second by Oliver to approve Ordinance 2007-95. Approved 7-0. 7. Second Reading of an Ordinance on a rezoning from AG, Agriculture district to IN, Industrial district for approximately 15.051 acres, more particularly described as 8.951 acres out of the D. Wright Survey, located at 3105 Airport Road, and 6.10 acres being Lots 5 and 6 of the Airport Industrial Park, located at 116 and 111 Halmar Cove -- Valerie Kreger, Planner III and Bobby Ray, AICP, Director of Planning and Development Kreger read only the caption of the ordinance on second reading. Motion by Berryman, second by Sattler to approve Ordinance 2007-96. Approved 7-0. 8. Second Reading of an Ordinance on a rezoning from OF, Office district to CN, Neighborhood Commercial district for approximately 4.75 acres in the J. Fish Survey, located at 4819 Williams Drive -- Valerie Kreger, Planner III and Bobby Ray, AICP, Director of Planning and Development Mayor Nelon and Mayor Pro Tem Sansing recused themselves and left the room. Motion by Oliver, second by Berryman to appoint Snell as Mayor Pro Tem Tem. Approved *76 -0. Kreger read only the caption of the ordinance on second reading, explained the ordinance, and gave the history of Council's action at the previous reading. (*as corrected by Nelon at January 8, 2008 Council Meeting) Speaker, John Stock, said he feels that rezoning is the issue in this matter and said there are a lot of vacant City Council Meeting Minutes/December 11, 2007 Page 9 of 11 Pages commercial properties ie area. He said he lives in Olde Oak Estates J as he drives on Williams Drive and sees the vacant spaces, he wonders why another tract of land should go from office to commercial and have vacant lease spaces again. He said he opposes the rezoning from office to commercial, because the business hours for commercial property will go longer than office hours, and will produce more traffic flow at a later time of the evening. Speaker, Linda Jamison, said she is not against progress and wants Georgetown to grow, but her fear is for the safety of each neighborhood on Williams Drive. She said they can't get help from anyone to get a turning lane or lights. She said the rezoning will make the traffic worse. Speaker, Jim Jamison, said he has lived in Olde Oak for nine years. He said he has been on the scene at three traffic accidents at his subdivision, including a death, and he is also concerned for the other subdivisions. He said the development of property next to Penny Lane probably won't result in that much more traffic, but the amount of vehicles attempting to enter into Penny Lane allows no opportunity to accelerate or decelerate and that is the source of the safety issue of changing the zoning of this property. He said he doesn't want to be a part of stopping progress, but he said he doesn't approve of rezoning this particular property, and asked that Council enforce the existing zoning. He said he sees no reason to change it at this time. Speaker, Wally Wilson, spoke as one of the developers, saying they have spent a lot of time working with the staff to create something that hasn't been done before on Williams Drive to capture the parking inside at the back of the project. He said the state has already condemned a portion of their property, so he feels they will go forward with the widening of the road. He said his partner, Roy Jones, lives on Sedro Trail, and they are sympathetic to the dynamics. He said he thinks their plan fits with the Land Use Plan, and fits on an arterial like Williams Drive. Speaker, Roy Jones, said he doesn't think people understand that an office zoning as currently zoned, brings people at 8:00 a.m. and releases them at 5:00 p.m., which are the most dangerous points of the day, but a commercial project would not bring people there during rush hour and might actually decrease traffic during rush hour. He said they are amenable to the traffic studies. Motion by Berryman, second by Sattler to approve Ordinance 2007-97. Brainard asked for the differences in what would be approved in both types of zoning. Kreger said personal services and offices are still allowed in both zoning districts and eating establishments, with limitations on size. Sattler asked what the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) would tell. Kreger said it will judge the increase in traffic generated by this development. He asked how soon the project would be started. Wilson, from the audience, said they would prefer to wait until the roadway is improved. Jones, from the audience, said some of their tenants may want to move forward, and if so, they will move forward with what the economics might dictate. Berryman said TXDOT didn't make any promises, but said they would try to work with the City; however, TXDOT was expecting to widen the road, but the money is no longer available from the state; so, the striping for a turn lane may be the only short-term remedy. She said, if the City could work with the developer, at least the striping may be accomplished. Brandenburg said if the TIA shows that a turning lane is warranted, then the developer would have to be responsible for that cost. Oliver confirmed that the striping would only effect the area at Penny Lane. When asked, Kreger confirmed that the TIA would be required at site plan phase. Vote on the motion: Approved 4-2. (Eason and Oliver opposed) Nelon and Sansing returned to the dais. 9. Second Reading of an Ordinance on a rezoning from AG, Agriculture district to PUD, Planned Unit Development for approximately 54.73 acres more particularly described as 34.82 acres in the Francis Hudson, William Addison, Joseph Robertson and J.S. Patterson Surveys and 19.91 acres in the Joseph Robertson and the William Addison Surveys, also known as the Wheeler Tract, located at 2211 County Road 111 (Westinghouse Road) -- Valerie Kreger, Planner 111 and Bobby Ray, AICP, Director of Planning and Development Kreger explained the Council action at first reading and read only the caption of the ordinance on second reading. Motion by Sattler, second by Brainard to approve Ordinance 2007-98, Approved 6-1. (Oliver opposed) DD Public Hearing/First Reading Public Hearing and First Reading of an Ordinance for a rezoning from AG, Agricultural, to IN, Industrial, in the A. Flores Survey, 10.8 Acres, located at 2500 NE Inner Loop -- Carla Benton, Planner II and Bobby Ray, AICP, Director of Planning and Development Benton explained the item, saying this site was in the development process during annexation. She said they have completed one of their buildings, and have begun the second building; but they need to bring their site into compliance with the correct zoning as was approved on their stormwater permit. She said the Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval. She read only the caption of the ordinance after having satisfied the requirements of the City Charter. The Public Hearing was opened at 9:50 p.m. There City Council Meeting Minutes/December 11, 2007 Page 10 of 11 Pages were no comments. The P. Hearing was closed at 9:50 p.m. Motion by using, second by Sattler to approve the ordinance on first reading. Approved 7-0. EE Appointment Consideration and possible action to reappoint Crystal Pratt as an 11th grade member and Amanda Hanson -Emerson as a 12th grade member of the Georgetown Youth Advisory Board -- Mayor Gary Nelon Motion by Eason, second by Berryman to approve the reappointments. Approved 7-0. The meeting was adjourned at 09:52 PM. City Council Meeting Minutes/December 11, 2007 Page 11 of 11 Pages Attest: Secretary Sandra Lee STATE OF TEXAS } } COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON } Meetin ^ date _ Ager .in No. CONFLICT OF INTEREST AFFIDAVIT reside at I am a member of the (City Council or name of City board, committee or comrnission)of the City of Georgetown, and I hereby make this affidavit and on my oath state the following: "I, and/or a person or business entity whose interest is imputed to me under Chapter 171 of the Local Government Code and/or Chapter 2.20 of the City of Georgetown Code of Ordinances, have a "substantial interest" in a business entity or in real property (as defined by Chapter 171 of the Texas Local Government Code and Sec. 2.20.020.M of the City of Georgetown Code of Ordinances) and/or an "economic interest" (as defined in Sec. 2.20.020.E of the City of Georgetown Code of Ordinances) in the matter that is identified and described on the above -referenced agenda item. "I have a conflict of interest in the above -referenced agenda matter for the following reason(s): (check all that are applicable). A. "Substantial Interest" I or a person related to me in the first or second degree have an ownership of 10% or more of the voting stock or shares of the business entity, or have an ownership of 10% or more of the fair market value of the business entity. I or a person related to me in the first or second degree have an ownership of $15,000 or more of the fair market value of the business entity. I or a person related to me in the first or second degree received funds from the business entity in excess of 10% of my/his/her gross income for the previous year. I or a person related to me in the first or second degree have an equitable or legal ownership or interest in real property with a fair market value of $2,500 or more. B. "Economic Interest" I or a person or entity whose interest is imputed to me under Chapter 2.20 of the City of Georgetown Code of Ordinances have a legal or equitable interest in real or personal property or a fiduciary obligation to such property or contractual right in such property that is more than minimal or insignificant and would be recognized by reasonable persons to have weight in deciding a case or an issue. C."Other" For reasons other than those listed above, I have a conflict of interest, (Please specify, e.g. Sec. 2.24.170 or other ! N 3 reason) "Upon filing of this affidavit with the recording secretary and/or the City Secretary, I affirm that I will abstain from all participation, discussion and voting involving the matter identified in the above -referenced agenda item whatsoever. Further, Affiant sayeth not." Affiant's Signature: Printed Name: BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared the above-named person who on oath stated that the facts hereinabove stated are true to the best of his/her knowledge or belief. SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me on this 1 1� day of MY COMMISSION EXPIRES11 Notary Public in and for the State of January 3' 20`0 County of Williamson THIS AFFIDAVIT SHALL BE KEPT WITH THE OFFICIAL MINUTES OF THIS MEETING. IF AFFIANT HAS CHECKED ANY OF THE ITEMS UNDER SECTION "A" RELATING TO "SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST," A COPY OF THIS AFFIDAVIT MUST ALSO BE SENT TO THE CITY SECRETARY FOR THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN. Conflict of Interest Affidavit Rev. 8/25/2004 v CONFLICT OF INTEREST AFFIDAVIT reside at I am a member of the (City Council or name of City board, committee or comrnission)of the City of Georgetown, and I hereby make this affidavit and on my oath state the following: "I, and/or a person or business entity whose interest is imputed to me under Chapter 171 of the Local Government Code and/or Chapter 2.20 of the City of Georgetown Code of Ordinances, have a "substantial interest" in a business entity or in real property (as defined by Chapter 171 of the Texas Local Government Code and Sec. 2.20.020.M of the City of Georgetown Code of Ordinances) and/or an "economic interest" (as defined in Sec. 2.20.020.E of the City of Georgetown Code of Ordinances) in the matter that is identified and described on the above -referenced agenda item. "I have a conflict of interest in the above -referenced agenda matter for the following reason(s): (check all that are applicable). A. "Substantial Interest" I or a person related to me in the first or second degree have an ownership of 10% or more of the voting stock or shares of the business entity, or have an ownership of 10% or more of the fair market value of the business entity. I or a person related to me in the first or second degree have an ownership of $15,000 or more of the fair market value of the business entity. I or a person related to me in the first or second degree received funds from the business entity in excess of 10% of my/his/her gross income for the previous year. I or a person related to me in the first or second degree have an equitable or legal ownership or interest in real property with a fair market value of $2,500 or more. B. "Economic Interest" I or a person or entity whose interest is imputed to me under Chapter 2.20 of the City of Georgetown Code of Ordinances have a legal or equitable interest in real or personal property or a fiduciary obligation to such property or contractual right in such property that is more than minimal or insignificant and would be recognized by reasonable persons to have weight in deciding a case or an issue. C."Other" For reasons other than those listed above, I have a conflict of interest, (Please specify, e.g. Sec. 2.24.170 or other ! N 3 reason) "Upon filing of this affidavit with the recording secretary and/or the City Secretary, I affirm that I will abstain from all participation, discussion and voting involving the matter identified in the above -referenced agenda item whatsoever. Further, Affiant sayeth not." Affiant's Signature: Printed Name: BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared the above-named person who on oath stated that the facts hereinabove stated are true to the best of his/her knowledge or belief. SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me on this 1 1� day of MY COMMISSION EXPIRES11 Notary Public in and for the State of January 3' 20`0 County of Williamson THIS AFFIDAVIT SHALL BE KEPT WITH THE OFFICIAL MINUTES OF THIS MEETING. IF AFFIANT HAS CHECKED ANY OF THE ITEMS UNDER SECTION "A" RELATING TO "SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST," A COPY OF THIS AFFIDAVIT MUST ALSO BE SENT TO THE CITY SECRETARY FOR THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN. Conflict of Interest Affidavit Rev. 8/25/2004 Meeting'' 'e- t € d Agenda i No. STATE OF TEXAS ) } CONFLICT OF INTEREST AFFIDAVIT COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON ) 4E Zzvu reside at 6�a�x< X)re I am a mem er of the to 4" ('t t� (City ICouncil or name of City board, committee or conznlission)of the City of Georgetown, and I hereby make this affidavit and on my oath state the following: "I, and/or a person or business entity whose interest is imputed to me under Chapter 171 of the Local Government Code and/or Chapter 2.20 of the City of Georgetown Code of Ordinances, have a "substantial interest" in a business entity or in real property (as defined by Chapter 171 of the Texas Local Government Code and Sec. 2.20.020.M of the City of Georgetown Code of Ordinances) and/or an "economic interest" (as defined in Sec. 2.20.020.E of the City of Georgetown Code of Ordinances) in the matter that is identified and described on the above -referenced agenda item. "I have a conflict of interest in the above -referenced agenda matter for the following reason(s): (check all that are applicable). A. "Substantial Interest" I or a person related to me in the first or second degree have an ownership of 10% or more of the voting stock or shares of the business entity, or have an ownership of 10% or more of the fair market value of the business entity. I or a person related to me in the first or second degree have an ownership of $15,000 or more of the fair market value of the business entity. ownership or interest in real property with a fair I or a person related to me in the first or second degree received funds from the business entity in excess of 10% of my/his/her gross income for the previous year. I or a person related to me in the first or second degree have an equitable or legal ownership or interest in real property with a fair market value of $2,500 or more. B. "Economic Interest" I or a person or entity whose interest is imputed to me under Chapter 2.20 of the City of Georgetown Code of Ordinances have a legal or equitable interest in real or personal property or a fiduciary obligation to such property or contractual right in such property that is more than minimal or insignificant and would be recognized by reasonable persons to have weight in deciding a case or an issue. Co `; Other" For reasons other than those listed above, I have a conflict of interest (Please specify, e.g. Sec. 2.24.170 or other reason) � 110557" `/eY ✓ �'r"', }� 1�/ 0. lEef "Upon filing of this affidavit with the recording secretary and/or the City Secretary, I affirm that I will abstain from all participation, discussion and voting involving the matter identified in the above -referenced agendajem whatsoever. Further, Affiant sayeth not." Affiant's Signature: Printed Name: /c2 BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared the above-named person who on oath stated that the facts hereinabove stated are true to the best of his/her knowledge or belief. SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me on this ��day of L :� 't s r. " 200 SANDRA D. LEE My COMMISSION EXPIRES JOUNY 912010 Notary Public in and for the State of Texas County of Williamson THIS AFFIDAVIT SHALL BE KEPT WITH THE OFFICIAL MINUTES OF THIS MEETING. IF AFFIANT HAS CHECKED ANY OF THE ITEMS UNDER SECTION "A" RELATING TO "SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST," A COPY OF THIS AFFIDAVIT MUST ALSO BE SENT TO THE CITY SECRETARY FOR THE Conflict of Interest Affidavit Rev. 8/25/2004