Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN 05.22.2012 CC-WMinutes of the Meeting of the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas Tuesday, May 22, 2012 The City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, met in Regular Session on the above date with Mayor George Garver presiding. Council Present: Council Absent: Patty Eason, Danny Meigs, Bill Sattler, Tommy All Council Present. Gonzalez, Troy Hellmann, Rachael Jonrowe, Jerry Hammerlun Staff 'resent: Paul E. Brandenburg, City Manager; Bridget Chapman, Acting City Attorney; Jessica Brettle, City Secretary; Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager; Micki Rundell, Chief Financial Officer; Valerie Kreger, Principal Planner Minutes A Presentation and discussion of the Charter Review Committee's Final Report -- Bridget Chapman, Acting City Attorney Gonzalez absent. With a Powerpoint Presentation, Chapman presented the report of the Charter Committee to the City Council. She said this topic would best be presented section by section and questions can be addressed at the end of each section. She thanked the City staff, especially Shelley Nowling, Jessica Brettle and Rachel Saucier for their assistance with this project. She noted there were weekly meetings in February, March and April. She said she would also like to take the chance to say it was a pleasure to work with this group of individuals. She noted a hard copy of the report was given to the Council but noted this presentation is intended to be an overview of the findings of the committee. She said, for Section 2.01, the proposed charter revision was to add term limits for council members and said the committee recommended that term limits for Councilmembers not be included in the City Charter at this time. She said the committee recommended that the City revise the charter in this section for consistency and clarity. Eason asked and Chapman spoke about cleanups and if cleanups need to go to the voters. Eason asked and Chapman said, either way, it would still require an election. Hellmann asked and Chapman said the ballot will have the sections and actual language of the Charter. She spoke about Section 2.02 and the proposed charter revision to review the twelve month residency requirements for Council Elections. She noted the proposed change is that the Charter be revised to address the effective redistricting change to address the residency. She said Section 2.06 concerns the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem and added the committee recommends that the Charter be revised to provide for a term for the Mayor Pro Tem. She said they recommend they change the language that the Mayor Pro Tem shall serve until the next annual designation. Jonrowe asked and Chapman said the Council can reappoint the same Mayor Pro Tem. She spoke about Section 2.07 City Secretary and added that the committee recommended the City Secretary continue to report to the Council. She described the committee's reasoning behind this finding. She also mentioned the committee also recommended that they revise the provision to include a residency requirement for the City Secretary as well. She noted existing employees will be grandfathered in to this provision. Eason asked and Chapman spoke about residency requirements and said it is legal to include this provision in the City Council Meeting Minutes/ Page 1 of 4 Pages Charter. She said the committee also asked that the, assistants of all council appointed employees be approved by the Council. Jonrowe spoke about the residency requirement and why the City Secretary is excluded. Chapman said they did a survey of other cities and noted the primary issue was pay. Jonrowe said it does make sense but wonders if it should be a legal requirement. Mayor asked and Chapman said the position is grandfathered in. Brandenburg asked about the assistants and clerical or secretarial help as well and who they report to. Chapman said that is not part of this project. She spoke about how that is a dilemma. Mayor asked and Chapman described why the committee thought it appropriate to have the assistants be approved by the Council. She said Section 2.09 and 2.10 go hand in hand a bit. She said these are the provisions where there are voting requirement inconsistencies. She described the recommendation for how to revise the charter to clarify and remove inconsistencies. Sattler asked and Chapman said a quorum would have to be five members of the council or four members of the council and the Mayor. She noted another recommendation in Section 2.10 is to simplify the procedure for the publication of Ordinances and she described this for the council. Jonrowe asked and Pondrum said many people do not read the newspaper nowadays and publication of Ordinance in the newspaper is probably obsolete. Jonrowe said we may want to wait until we have firm data that people are not getting ordinances from the newspaper. Meigs said he attended a TML meeting and noted they are looking into the issue of publication in newspapers. Chapman said one thing they may want to do is take the requirement out of the Charter but adopt the publication requirement by Ordinance. She noted, that way, it can be changed more readily in the future. Eason asked and Chapman confirmed the committee determined Ordinances do not need two readings. Eason asked and Chapman said the Council would have to vote on having two readings of an Ordinance. There was much discussion regarding whether or not to have two readings of Ordinances. Eason said there has been a lot of concern recently about open government and noted this could be a red flag for some. Jonrowe said she does wonder how much time the City loses with having second readings on items that are not controversial. She said she also wonders about the politicizing of an Ordinance between first and second reading. She said she is leaning toward having consistency where the same rules apply for everything. Hellmann said maybe Council could put second reading on the consent. Mayor said, as a student of government, organizations get themselves into difficulty moving too rapidly. He suggested Council be cautious on this. Chapman spoke about Section 2.14, Boards, Commissions and Committees. She described the proposed changes and said the committee recommends that the composition of the Boards, Commissions and Committees not be mandated by the Charter. Sattler said, if the Mayor nominates someone for a Board and it comes before Council, it requires four votes out of seven to approve it. Sattler asked and Chapman said it would take a majority vote to overturn Mayor's recommendation. Sattler asked and Chapman said if the Mayor is not recommending someone, it takes five of seven votes to appoint someone to a Board. She reviewed Section 2.15, remuneration of Mayor and Council and said the committee's recommendation was to not make a change to the current provision but also allow the Council to reduce their compensation at any time. Jonrowe said, if we allow reductions, the Council can restore what was taken away. She noted that could be considered an increase. Chapman said if Council would like to accommodate that, the language would need to be tightened. Sattler addressed the same issue and added he likes Jonrowe's statement. Eason said she has a question about this too because she believes the committee was recommending restoration this June. Chapman clarified the committee's recommendation for the Council. Chapman addressed Section 3.01 regarding the General Election to change the date from May to November. She summarized the discussions of the committee. She said it is the only Charter Amendment recommendation that was not unanimous. She noted the majority of the committee members recommended that the Charter not be amended and that the election should continue in May and she she described the reasons behind that decision. She expressed the minority of the committee and their opinions about moving the election to November. There was much discussion on this issue. She spoke about Section 3.05 and said it is a clarification. She spoke about Section 5.01 and Section 5.02 regarding the City Manager. She described the proposed revisions and how they are to make these consistent with the other Council appointed staff. She spoke about the section regarding the City Attorney and said it is similar to the City Manager section in terms of consistency and noted the recommendation is to have the City Attorney appoint directly to the City Council. She addressed Section 6.11 on Purchase Procedure Article VII Franchise/Public Utility. She spoke about the proposed changes to this section and there were many questions about the changes to this provision. Chapman described other recommended changes and provided a summary of a report on lobbying. She spoke about lobbying and noted the committee agreed the Council needs to be proactive about lobbying. She noted the committee recommend the City handle this issue by Ordinance. Jonrowe described why she brought this up. Mayor thanked Chapman and the committee for all of their hard work. B Discussion regarding the annual amendment process for the Unified Development Code (UDC) -- Valerie Kreger, AICP, Principal Planner and Paul E. Brandenburg, City Manager Brandenburg briefly summarized the UDC process and when it was created. He said the process has evolved and has become a full time job for staff. Brandenburg said one thing he has heard from the development City Council Meeting Minutes/ Page 2 of 4 Pages community is when changes are made to the UDC, they are not made aware of them. He said, tonight, the purpose is to go through the UDC, the process and recommended changes. With a Powerpoint Presentation, Kreger said gave a brief history of the UDC amendment process. She said the UDC is a document that holds all of the development regulations for the City including zoning, regulations, drainage and street standards. She summarized other issues it covers. She said it also establishes the procedures for development review. She said the idea is to have one document for all development regulations. She noted the UDC was designed to be a living document to accommodate growth and changes in the community. She spoke about the amendment process and how it was developed in 2004. She briefly described the process for the City Council. She noted, over time, there were instances where there were special cases that were reviewed separately. Gonzalez arrived at the dais. She said in 2008, staff started looking at the document and realized that it had been in operation for five years and needed changes. She spoke about some concerns brought forward in 2008 and added a new process was adopted where a task force was created by Council to come up with amendments. She spoke about how they created a website to advertise the meetings of this task force. She noted the 2008 and 2009 list was very complex and took over two and a half years to complete. She said it can be difficult because they will not have the same attendees at each task force meeting. She said it takes up a lot of staff time. She spoke about the positives and negatives of amending the UDC. She said it has morphed into something today that is different than what it was meant to be. She said the first round of the 2011-2012 cycle is complete and they have had three or four meetings with little participation. She spoke about amendments can be initiated outside of the normal process. She described both the positives and negatives of the current process. She said staff is looking to receive feedback from Council on how to move forward with the amendment process. Mayor said it seems there are some anamolies here. He noted the city has received superb help from citizen committees. Kreger spoke about the first task force that was put together but noted, after a while, so many items were brought forward that they thought it best to open it up to the public. Gonzalez spoke about the UDC and said it seems like a lot of amendments starting bunching up and have taken a long time, which was not the initial intention of the process. Kreger said, in the original amendment process in 2008, there were a lot of major revisions proposed. Hammerlun said he is sitting here listening and was reminded that the last set of changes were made in March. He said the thing that is difficult in his business is the continuing nature of the changes. He said he likes the idea of Council being responsible for identifying a group of people to address possible changes. Eason said, in the old process, Planning and Zoning Commission was highly involved in the UDC and it was their responsibility, along with Council and staff to review the UDC. She said, in the newer process, it seems there is a lack of involvement and understanding at the City Council level. She said she wants City Council to be more involved in this. She noted the three key participants need to be staff, Planning and Zoning and the City Council. Sattler said he likes what both Hammerlun and Eason said and added he asked if there should be a standing committee to review and discuss these things. He noted there needs to be a third party committee review. Hammerlun said he thinks a GUS structure would be superb, along with Council participation in the process. Gonzalez agreed. He said it would be good not making it a 35 person group. He said keeping the membership somewhere between 9 and 10 people may be good. Brandenburg agreed and said he would be glad create a group and bring it back for the Council. Brandenburg noted it would also be good to know what the charge of the committee will be. C Workshop presentation and discussion on revisions to the Fiscal and Budgetary Policy for the 2012/13 budget cycle -- Micki Rundell, Chief Financial Officer With a Powerpoint Presentation, Rundell said this afternoon is the annual review of the fiscal and budgetary policy. She said the policy was originally adopted in 2001/02 and is based on recommended Best Practices by GFOA. She said it eliminates the What It Takes to Balance (WTTB) which was an old policy that allowed up to 33% of general fund operations funded by a transfer from utility funds. She said Scenario H was the three year plan approved and was fully implemented in 2003/04. She said policy compliance is the main reason for the policy. She described what the policy requires and she reviewed the different policy areas. She spoke about the fund structure and basis of budgeting. She described the fund balance policy and how it was implemented last year. She said it establishes limitations for governmental fund balance necessary for GASB 54. She spoke about revenue management and said administrative allocations are reviewed annually by the Clty's external auditors. She said for water, wastewater and stormwater, return on investments is 7% of the operating revenue and for franchise fees are 3% operating revenues. She spoke about expenditure policies and added point of control for appropriations is at the department level. She said the expenditure policies also include the social service and youth funding program and she described the policy of the social service program for council. She said the expenditure policies also covers public art funding and bad debt limitations. She noted Section 6 is also City Council Meeting Minutes/ Page 3 of 4 Pages about purchasing policy and she briefly described the purchasing policy for the Council. She noted Section 6 also includes the City's retirement benefits. She said this was something Council voted on and addressed years ago. She spoke about Section 7, the budget contingency plan, which established the guidelines for managing revenue shortfalls. She said it determines the use of "contingency reserves." She said Section 8 is the Capital Improvement Program and is prepared on a five year schedule and she briefly described the CIP for Council. She spoke about Section 9, capital maintenance and how Parks and Recreation is being added to the facilities to make sure the parks are maintained. She described Section 10, the accounting and financial reporting section to the City Council. She spoke about the debt management section of the policy as well. She said this section indicates when the City uses debt, how to use debt and debt restructuring. She said Section 14 is about financial conditions, reserves and stability ratios. She said the City will maintain a one to one operating revenue. She said there is a minimum of 75 days worth of operating contingency funds. She said, in the general fund, they have 90 days of contingency funds and she described these for the Council. She said the policy also outlines when they will use the reserves. She spoke about Internal Controls and how it is an important part of her job. She described the audit process in the City. She concluded and said this policy was vetted by the General Government and Finance committee. Mayor asked and Rundell said the recommended changes to the policy will be in an Ordinance on the regular agenda. There were a few brief questions from Council. D New selection process for City Council membership on Advisory Boards -- Mayor George Garver Mayor described the previous process for appointing City Council members to City Boards and Commissions. He spoke about the benefit of rotating the talents of the City Council on each of the boards. He summarized his suggested for how each Councilmember will choose a number and, in order, select their positions on the boards. He said it is understandable if a Council member can not serve as well. There was some discussion regarding the proposed process. Jonrowe spoke about the importance of institutional knowledge on each of the boards. Hammerlun said, as the new kid on the block, he would like to go through a process since he would not have any spot on a board. He proposed choosing positions based on tenure on the Council. Mayor agreed with that selection and the City Council selected positions on the boards according to tenure. Meeting recessed to Executive Session under Sections 551.071, 551.072, 551.074 and 551.087 -- 5:10PM Meeting returned to Open Session and adjourned -- 6:40 PM Ap ed Mayor Teorge Garver City Council Meeting Minutes/ Page 4 of 4 Pages Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 06:40 PM.