HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_GGAF_12.02.2010
L:\Division\finance\Share2\GGAFSub\GGAF Meetings\2011\2.1.11\2.1.11DRAFTMinutes12.2.10.doc
The General Government and Finance (GGAF) Advisory Subcommittee established by the
Georgetown City Council met at 1:30 p.m. on Thursday, December 2, 2010, in the City of
Georgetown Council Chambers, located at 101 East 7th Street, Georgetown, Texas.
MINUTES
These minutes were approved at the February 1, 2011 GGAF Meeting.
Dale Ross called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m.
1. Review minutes from the October 5, 2010 GGAF Meeting – Danella Elliott
The minutes were approved.
2. Summary regarding “Other Finance Agenda Items and Items of Interest” – Micki Rundell
a. Consideration and possible approval of a printer maintenance and supplies contract to Office Store Depot (OSD)
for a price not to exceed $49,368. Mike Peters explained that the 25% increase was a “worse-case” scenario,
based on all “brand” supplies. This probably will not be the case, as some using departments are able to use
“refurbished” supplies, but others are unable to due to causing issues with their print quality.
b. Discussion and possible recommendation to renew the contract with Dataprose, Inc. as the City’s vendor for utility
bill printing and mailing services and approve funding at an annual cost of $188,000. Kathy Ragsdale explained
that it is not necessary to go out for bid. We are currently under an interlocal agreement with Plano, and get very
good rates. She noted that we are keeping the same rate, even though postage is going up. We are able to stay
at this rate for one more year.
c. Consideration and possible action for approval to purchase a 2011 Ford camera van from Philpott Ford through
the State of Texas Buyboard in the amount of $139,408. No questions for this item.
d. Consideration and possible action for approval to purchase a 2011 John Deere backhoe from RDO Equipment
through the State of Texas Buyboard in the amount of $80,500. Terry Jones explained that the actual cost was
actually $79,554, which was less than expected.
e. Consideration and possible action for the award of the bid for a three wheel turret trailer to Sauber Manufacturing
in the amount of $105,357. Terry explained that the cost is actually $56, 288, which is cheaper due to not taking
all options.
f. Consideration and possible action for award of the bid for vehicles to Philpott Ford in the amount of $403,058.00,
Mac Haik Ford in the amount of $167,973.87, and Caldwell Country Chevrolet in the amount of $77,051.00. Terry
clarified that the $403K was for Police, $167K was for pickups and hybrids, and $77K was for Fire – PD Tahoes.
Members Present: Dale Ross, Chair, Danny Meigs, Patty Eason
Members Absent: None
Staff Present: Micki Rundell, Laurie Brewer, Leticia Zavala, Mike Peters, Terry Jones, Robert
Fite, Glenn Dishong
L:\Division\finance\Share2\GGAFSub\GGAF Meetings\2011\2.1.11\2.1.11DRAFTMinutes12.2.10.doc
L:\Division\finance\Share2\GGAFSub\GGAF Meetings\2011\2.1.11\2.1.11DRAFTMinutes12.2.10.doc
3. Technology Update - Overview of AMI/CIS project contracts and related matters.
A. Discussion and possible recommendation to approve an upgrade in the existing Meter Data Management
(MDM) Software with ElectSolve Technology Solutions and Services for a not to exceed amount of
$300,000.
B. Discussion and possible recommendation to approve a software upgrade to the existing Customer
Information System (CIS) and Financial Information System (FIS) with Tyler Technologies, Incode Division
for a not to exceed amount of $500,000.
Leticia Zavala gave a brief overview and update on the project. The City began the CIS replacement process in
late 2009 to align with the AMI project to support the new enhancements that are available with the new AMI
technology. Providing such data to the customer base will lay the foundation for new services such as billing
Time of Use (TOU) rates and help customers with “green” initiatives.
The Request for Proposal (RFP) was released in December of 2009. Staff completed the evaluation of the
proposals submitted by CIS vendors with the assistance of Westin Engineering as part of the contract for
evaluation and project management services approved by City Council on May 12, 2009. Proposals from 5
vendors were received in January. Following evaluations of the proposals for compliance with system
specifications, cost, schedule, and other factors, three (3) firms were selected to make follow-up presentations
to staff. Following those presentations, two firms were short-listed for reference checks and site visits. Staff
completed the site visits in August – September 2010.
During the site visits, staff was able to evaluate the software in a “live” environment and spent several days
with the users of each software to gain insight into the functionality of the software. In many cases, the
software did not perform at the level indicated during the vendor “on site” demonstrations held in Georgetown.
In essence, the software had many “bells and whistles” that were not relevant to the daily functionality
expected for a capital outlay of this magnitude. The site visits proved to be disappointing. Staff decided to
look at our current vendor, Tyler Technologies. They spent most of last year developing and preparing to
release a new product that provided the additional functionality (Time of Use rates), as well as updated their
software platform to move from a proprietary-based (COBAL) to a more standardized platform (.Net, C-Sharp).
The cost of upgrading our existing software with Tyler Technologies is 1/3 of the original CIS replacement
budget of $1.5M. By choosing this option, the City is able to upgrade all of the existing modules (such as
financials, human resources, cash collections, etc) based on a predetermined timeline. The original
functionality requirement is achieved by upgrading rather than replacing the software.
The savings allows the City to focus on another much needed project for the implementation of an Enterprise
Asset Management System that can interface with this existing software and provide automated work order
and asset management assistance for the GUS division which currently does not have an automated solution
for this daily process.
Leticia answered questions and explained that maintenance costs are ongoing and built into the project.
There will be no major costs for 7-10 years. Dale noted that the money spent on travel was well worth it and a
wise decision to be able to see the product “live”. Micki thanked the committee for their support to be able to
make the trips.
4. Presentation and review of methods of construction to be used for Fire Station Five. Information from the
Architect was not complete, so this item was skipped. Terry Jones noted that it will be below budget. This item will
go to Council for review on December 14th.
5. Review of proposed changes to the City’s Investment Policy. Laurie Brewer explained that an annual review of
the Investment Policy is required by PFIA. The City’s financial investments are guided by the City’s investment
policy, which was created in compliance with Chapter 2256 of the Texas Government Code. This state law
requires that a governing body review its investment policy annually. The City’s policy was last reviewed on
November 24, 2009. She introduced Bill Cook from Valley View Consultanting to answer any questions.
L:\Division\finance\Share2\GGAFSub\GGAF Meetings\2011\2.1.11\2.1.11DRAFTMinutes12.2.10.doc
The proposed changes to the policy include:
Section 2.3 – Delegation of Authority
The current policy is not clear that the Assistant Director and Accounting Manager are also investment officers.
Investment decisions are made with at least two investment officers’ authorization.
Section 4.1.1 – Authorized Investments
The language was redundant with Section 5.5, therefore language is being clarified to follow that section.
Section 4.4 – Length of Investments
This language was redundant, as Section 3 clearly outlines the maximum maturities by different types of
funds.
Section 5.5 –Collateralization
This language clarifies that collateralization of public funds is guided by the Texas Public Funds Collateral Act.
Danny Meigs asked if there were any other options other than CD’s. Mr. Cook explained that CD’s were the
preferred choice at this time, due to the interest rates.
6. Review of declaration of condominium for the City’s public library being utilized to separate the uses between the
coffee shop and the library uses for property tax purposes. Laurie Brewer explained that we had met with WCAD
regarding the regarding the Red Poppy Café. The Red Poppy Coffee Company has a lease with the City for the
space occupied by the business within the City’s public library. The Williamson County Appraisal District has
determined that the state law requires the property occupied by a “for profit” business be on the tax rolls. In
order to separate the portion being leased by a business from the public benefit portion of the library, WCAD
suggested a condominium declaration be filed, which would legally separate both portions of the property,
allowing WCAD to place property with the business use on the tax rolls. The model used for this declaration
was the “Cabela’s” model (Buda, Texas), which had similar circumstances where there were both public and
business-type uses for the library. WCAD has reviewed a draft of these documents and have stated this
format will meet their needs. This declaration will allow WCAD to calculate a value on the portion of the library
that is leased by the Red Poppy Coffee Company. The City will recover the property taxes through the lease
revenue from the business. The current five year lease was approved by council January 2007. The terms
are $1.50 per square foot ($885 per month) plus 6% of gross receipts. This is a compromise and will not be
retroactive. We will just move forward and in the future, we will always take this into consideration to be
compliant. Williamson County Appraisal District asked that we complete this before January 1, when they
begin the review of the tax rolls.
7. Reports to Council. Laurie Brewer and Lorie Lankford gave examples of current reports that Council receives, as
well as suggestions for additional reports. The committee agreed that the Fast Facts was very helpful and easy to
read. The Accounting group will expand this report with some additional graphs for future reporting.
3. The meeting adjourned at 3:00 p.m.