The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMIN 01.24.2017 CC-WMinutes of a Meeting of the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas Tuesday, January 24, 2017 The Georgetown City Council will meet on Tuesday, January 24, 2017 at 3:00 PM at the Council Chambers, at 101 E. 71s St., Georgetown, Texas The city of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you require assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reasonable assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. Please contact the City Secretary's Office, at least four (4) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or City Hall at 113 East 8a' Street for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711. Mayor Ross called the meeting to order at 3:00 PM. All Councilmembers were in attendance, with the exception of Councilmember Tommy Gonzalez, District 7. Gonzalez joined the meeting at 3.55 PM. Policy Development/Review Workshop — Call to order at 3:00 PM A. Overview presentation and discussion of the City's Debt Program -- Leigh Wallace, Finance Director Leigh Wallace, the City's Finance Director, provided a presentation and discussion on the City's Debt Program. She began the presentation with a description of debt policies. Wallace said that she wanted Council to be aware and comfortable with the debt process, debt policies and the current debt held by the City. - GCORGETA\VFX i(%A\ Debt Policies • Provide debt update annually • Balance needs of the City between pay as you go and debt financing — Stability of tax rate • Explore all funding options for a capital item • Finance a capital item over its useful life • Method of sale — competitive Wallace described the Types of Debt next. Types of Debt • General Obligation Bonds — Used for large projects — Approved by the voters — Repaid with property taxes over long terms • Certificates of Obligation — Used for required or routine items — Public notice required — Repaid with property taxes or other revenue — Term over the life of the asset Wallace provided a slide of current bond ratings. She explained that the City has excellent bond ratings. —iib^ - (rt OAGRO\VK� Current Bond Ratings • Independent review of city's management and financial condition to determine creditworthiness • Impacts the interest rate • Standard & Poor's 2016 Rating — General obligation AA+ — Revenue bonds AA Wallace spoke on the current tax rate and the debt coverage ratio, which the agencies look at closely. (i]ORGIi�ilrA� Current Tax Rate • Total 42.4 cents per $100 assessed valuation — Interest & Sinking 22.7 cents — Operations & Maintenance 19.7 cents • Contract with the voters — 2015 Transportation Bond — No increase more than 10 cents total — No increase more than 2 cents in one year Debt Coverage Ratio • For revenue bonds • Combined water and electric • Number of times net operating revenue can cover debt service — Bond covenants 1.35x — Fiscal and Budgetary Policy 1.5x — 2017 coverage is 3.07x Wallace provided charts and graphs of the current tax obligations, the historical GO/CO debt payments, the current utility revenue obligations, the historical utility revenue obligations, the debt per capita, the debt per customer and the historical assets net of debt. Wallace explained that the growth in blue shows major projects approved by the voters. She said that utility revenue obligations such as electric and water tend to fluctuate and the size can vary greatly from one year to another. Wallace noted that the debt per capita increased somewhat over 10 years, mainly in 2012, from obligation bond projects. She noted that the acquisition of Chisholm Trail is also significant in these fluctuations. Wallace also noted the increase in assets over the last 10 years and explained that assets increase with capital project completions. _ - giurai iun.ns Current Tax Obligations General Gmenm...I Tax 5appned IX•bt 5125M _ uxn. GIORI I.AI YNR Historical GO/CO Debt Payments 1ta.M,m 120ss W WD mo- Up00000 ssao0wo UE00000 3240000p L Tax Supported General Obligation Debt Payments e.ry ere.e.pwoma n .ep.w — Gnn:r.l riiia� Current Utility Revenue Obligations WafleYraler 25% Airport 1% Enterprise Debt 58IM rigation 1% 5tormwater Drainage 5% V: public Safety iF 19% . Pads Y. Ree 7% _ uxn. GIORI I.AI YNR Historical GO/CO Debt Payments 1ta.M,m 120ss W WD mo- Up00000 ssao0wo UE00000 3240000p L Tax Supported General Obligation Debt Payments e.ry ere.e.pwoma n .ep.w — Gnn:r.l riiia� Current Utility Revenue Obligations WafleYraler 25% Airport 1% Enterprise Debt 58IM rigation 1% 5tormwater Drainage 5% Historical Utility Revenue Obligations noaeaa .- uewom uo.ao.ao aeaewa uoaaaa uo Mona u Guu-i.I otc�t Debt per Capita Total Tax -Guaranteed Debt per Capita shot law Nnnf Vm alio. ' u.m sitnl 1].]ID sf�.] YJ59 MID" M<b;1 swE1 MIN Acta; S: Nnn Nun Nw NYn Nil. N14. awn Main MMa 11:. Gf(1R<i1T\(: Debt Per Customer Oulflanding Debt per Utility Customer N v.w9 rtun Il,fry n.W i5y S1 Ca I1 .10 ti Wi 1]'ii 11:. Gf(1R<i1T\(: Debt Per Customer Oulflanding Debt per Utility Customer N 2115 2114 7013 2112 Nil 2010 2009 2003 2007 2003 MMIIIIMem017 annul euLaVeMMOF Historical Assets Net of Debt any Assam Net of Iterated Deb. S- 5100 4200 5300 Wo $500 Swo v:n;on: .G.raml •Utq Wallace spoke on the FY2017 Proposed Debt. She noted that the Garay Park impact will be spread over 2 years and that the Downtown West and Transfer Station Pond have been added since the budget adoption. She spoke of the Council feedback directing the $13 million dollar project. Wallace said that $5.7 million dollars will need to be issued, after monies from City building sales is looked at. Wallace also noted that the electric fun is included, as discussed and approved by Council. Gtou;rmwNas FY 2017 Proposed Debt General Obligation Bonds Garey Park 5,500,000 San Gabriel 1,000,000 Sidewalks [2015 Referendum) 2,632,000 General Obligation Bonds Total 9,132,000 Garey Park structured to spread impact over two tax years srm,aai.,m FY 2017 Proposed Debt Certificate of Obligation City Wide Radio Replacement 500,000 ADA Phase 11 300,000 Grace Heritage Phase 11 140.000 Public Safety Vehicles 1,987,999 Downtown West' 5,730,000 Transfer Station Pond' 150,000 Certificate of0bligationTotal 8,807,999 Project added todebt sale since H2017 budget adoption __ G,rwcrinl,.� FY 2017 Proposed Debt self-supporting Debt GTEC- Airport Road 1.850,000 Self-Supportingi ebt Total 1,eS0,000 UtilityRevenua Debt Electric CIP (as amended) 7,025,000 Water/Wastewater CIP 20,00.000 Total Utility Revenue Debt 27,025,000 Total City Wide Debtlssue 46,810,999 Paul Diaz, the Budget Manager, spoke on how this will affect the tax rate over the next five years. He provided a tax impact analysis slide, a slide depicting how the model works and two slides showing the five year CIP. He explained that the Five Year CIP charts include Garay Park, San Gabriel Park, Downtown West and Transportation Initiatives. Tax Impact Analysis • Developed in FY2016, the Five Year Debt Model is a tool to better understand the impacts of issuing debt. • Allows for scenario testing and the adjustment of multiple variables including assessed value, sales tax, tax rate distribution, and debt service requirements. How the Model Works Five Year CIP AOd l . NAAgGmp Izaactm 4MOOO SMA000 Gpxup.S*. F.Ifizai Gt.-Cfem.del F.,ht,o Fire Sutim 7 FK.hbts 300" 3=000 ssg..Wt..y F.,hs.t Flan. PI". 1984= 2,DWAM ZMM ZODUW 2.UAM ADATI.,iti"Aii,i Nib I%WD ISO)OW 350.000 354000 MCDO me We P.k, =.OW G..,P.k Pars: SISK= M,=, Pk Put Summ fie. oA Pert 250= N..T,*IDi,,,Im Pert, 5000 LOWOOD LOOM LSMODD F.L M,1W, RN Part - Sat GaGnq Pak P4,t LODCL= Z700= -mm ZODQZW 2.== Pert MODO weStlftpvk vat LCOQOOO 35MODO IUI%II Ilr\�.F�. �r. Five Year CIP Diaz described assumptions with the model. • Short term growth will continue with more moderate growth in the out years (based on statewide sales tax information, development pipeline, and Dallas fed report in January) • The ratio of frozen to non -frozen assessed value will continue to hold at a two to one ratio • New assessed value is set at $200 million annually • Every $1 million of debt requires around $70,000 of debt service Diaz next provided a Forecast of I &S Tax Impact in Cents- He explained that there was a 12% increase in sales tax in Georgetown from 2015 to 2016. Diaz cautioned that other cities are not seeing this and Georgetown would want to be conservative in their approach. rUFGI rON.� Forecast: I&S Tax Impact in Cents Conservative Projection: Tax Impact 0.09 2.55 2.48 2.57 Middle Projection: Taxlmpact -0.01 2.38 1.98 1.97 Diaz said that there are several tools that staff uses to keep the overall tax rate low. He noted that if sales tax increases, the overall tax rate and base can be sufficient to absorb the debt impact. - lOthSt.IMkin-nodi Sidewalk 9+,000 11th St.(MinRockl Sidewalk 15L000 - - - - 2nd5lreet Sidewalk - 82.000 3.000 - 8thStreet(Church/AyNle) Sidewalk 37,010 - - - BNSlreet(WK-Rock) Sidewalk 84.000 - - - Austin Ave (90,University) Sidewalk 17&000 - - - - Austin Ave t51Q%Fh42A3) Sidewalk 70,OM 370.000 - - - Chv<hStreet (800thl Sidewalk 105.007 - - - - SN29 (IN 35 -IN 130)) Sidewalk - - - 2100[00 hlin St.(7N-2nd) Sidewalk 35,000 255,007 - - old To" NOOheaat Sidewalk 960001 - - - - old To" Southeast Sidewalk - - - - 11500100DPhase Improver Sidewalk l- SiBnst&& Coro Ramp Improve D0 5om 250,000 102.000 - - Remainin8Downtown R=3in, Sidewalk - 671.007 504.000 114000 - RockSt(Sth-15th56) Sidewalk - - 23.000 13LCCD - t 1Year Sidewalk Sidewalk 353000 Road Bond Street$ 10000,000 10007.000 10000t'OD 10,000000 FIS Teonndo8y 2.507,000 - - - Radio TeOmology 5006000 500000 .500.000 , Diaz described assumptions with the model. • Short term growth will continue with more moderate growth in the out years (based on statewide sales tax information, development pipeline, and Dallas fed report in January) • The ratio of frozen to non -frozen assessed value will continue to hold at a two to one ratio • New assessed value is set at $200 million annually • Every $1 million of debt requires around $70,000 of debt service Diaz next provided a Forecast of I &S Tax Impact in Cents- He explained that there was a 12% increase in sales tax in Georgetown from 2015 to 2016. Diaz cautioned that other cities are not seeing this and Georgetown would want to be conservative in their approach. rUFGI rON.� Forecast: I&S Tax Impact in Cents Conservative Projection: Tax Impact 0.09 2.55 2.48 2.57 Middle Projection: Taxlmpact -0.01 2.38 1.98 1.97 Diaz said that there are several tools that staff uses to keep the overall tax rate low. He noted that if sales tax increases, the overall tax rate and base can be sufficient to absorb the debt impact. Leigh Wallace provided the takeaways from the presentation. • City's debt has increased over the past decade • Correlates to population growth and voter approved projects to improve services and the quality of life • City has excellent credit ratings • Economic conditions and fiscal management ensure ability to pay debt • Current economic forecast shows assessed value will cover tax rate for debt Wallace described the next steps. • February 28 Council Agenda — authorize financial advisors to proceed with bond sale schedule and documents and approve a notice of intent to issue certificates of obligation. • March 2017 — offering statements reviewed by staff and a staff meeting with the bond rating agency Mayor Ross thanked Wallace for the presentation. Ross asked the Council if they had any questions. No questions were posed. B. Presentation and discussion of the CAMPO/City of Georgetown Williams Drive Study — Nathaniel Waggoner, AICP, PMP, Transportation Analyst, Jordan Maddox, AICP, Principal Planner, and Andreina Davila -Quintero, Project Coordinator Nathaniel Waggoner, Transportation Analyst, provided a presentation and discussion on the CAMPO and City sponsored Williams Drive Study. Waggoner recognized Jordan Maddox, Principal Planner, and Andreina Davila -Quintero, Project Coordinator, who have also worked on the project. Waggoner said the presentation would include the purpose and goals of the project, progress to date, primary issues that have been identified, project timelines and next steps. Waggoner said the feedback needed from the City Council would be concurrence with the primary issues identified, concurrence with the next steps and any additional opportunities suggested to engage stakeholders. Purpose: Develop a plan of action that will incorporate safety, efficient transportation operations, safeaccommodations of all modes, and integration of smart transportation and land use, community needs, and the future economic growth of Williams Drive. The goats for Williams Drive include: • Enhance multimodal movements and transportation operations • Support corridor -wide and regional sustainable growth and economic development. • Protect and enhance the corridor's quality of life. • Encourage development that creates a variety of context sensitive mixed-use services that are accessible to neighborhoods. Technical Data Collection Two Public Meetings — Open House — Charrette Week Numerous Stakeholder Engagements — Internal (City boards, Council, etc.) — External (GISD, Health Foundation, WilCo, etc.) Ongoing Public Communication and Updates Developed an Existing Conditions Report Initiated Conceptual Design Waggoner said he is proud of the public outreach, which has been by phone, email and social media. He explained that nearly 33,000 people have been reached and there were over 100 attendees at the first open house. Waggoner spoke on the primary issues with the study. He said these are across five different categories and he will be showing possible solutions later in the presentation. The categories mentioned included: • Traffic congestion and circulation • Traffic operations and safety • Redevelopment and reinvestment barriers • Aesthetic enhancements • Pedestrian and bicycle improvements Councilmember Fought said Williams Drive is a motor vehicle transit drive and pedestrians and bicycles might be a problem. He noted the City must look at improving the motor vehicle safety and efficiency and there would be better ways to serve bicyclists and pedestrians. Councilmember Hesser said he is receiving feedback from merchants who do not feel like they are being heard. He explained that they feel as if everything has been predetermined. Hesser said he wants to know what has been suggested and if these suggestions are feasible or not. Waggoner said all comments and suggestions have been logged and all are possible solutions. He noted that no suggestion or comment has been ignored. Waggoner said if there are merchants who have not had the opportunity to meet, he will be happy to be available to them. Waggoner explained that the desire is to capture all comments and solutions. Waggoner said he be will sharing the solutions and suggestions with Council in the near future. Hesser noted that if the City does a good job with the study and growth, there should not be traffic issues. Hesser said he has been researching converging diamonds. He said that he found an organization, an engineering firm, which shows a list of converging diamonds - 81 in the Country. He said that most have two open ends on both sides and only one converging diamond, in St. George Utah, compares to the one proposed in Georgetown. Hesser explained that if there is a stop sign at the end, the road will still clog up. He said he wants to know what would happen at Austin Avenue to prevent this. Mayor Ross said this would be brought to Council in the future and no decisions have been made. Ross said perceptions might be that decisions have been made, but they have not. Waggoner said there is much more,opportunity to meet with those with concerns. Waggoner continued with the primary issues and provided charts with possible solutions. He explained that Williams Drive was originally built to rural standards, but now has urban traffic. Primary Issues (continued) Traffic Congestion/Circulation 29K vehicles use Williams Possible Solutions j Dr. Improve traffic flow 7K area residents commute Recognize the importance of elsewhere land use decisions on traffic 95% area residents have at volume, street design and least 1 car; 80% drive alone access management Lack of alternative routes to 1-35/destinations I Develop alternate routes Consider additional future traffic capacity Heavy traffic volume at intersections Continuous two-way center turn lanes ccess manageme p a Set block standards for street/driveway connection Traffic Operations and Safety 150+ curb cuts (and Possible Solutions j growing) along the corridor Establish a unified signal Lack of alternative streets management plan and connectivity Establish new street design Unsynchronized traffic criteria signals A nt [an Heavy traffic volume at intersections Continuous two-way center turn lanes ccess manageme p a Set block standards for street/driveway connection Primary Issues (continued) , Redevelopment and Reinvestment Barriers Redevelopment of older Possible Solutions parcels challenging due to Create development strategy new development that is not "one -size -fits -all" requirements Land Use Fragmented ownership and smaller, disjointed parcels Development Standards Zoning districts and land 'Utilities/Public uses not customized to Improvements corridor Partner with landowners of catalytic sites Recruit retailers INPrimary Issues (continued) Aesthetic Enhancements Older developments constructed without zoning codes or evolved through iterations of codes Landscaping, signage, parking lots front yard/gateway treatments - nonconforming to today's standards Possible Solutions j Consider new Gateway design standards Consider zoning solutions for older properties to offer flexibility for redevelopment Adjust nonconforming site requirements to ensure incremental improvements and upgrades Primary Issues (continued) LA Pedestrian/Bicycle Improvements Sidewalks are neitherPossible Solutions continuous nor desirable Focus attention through CIP Lack of dedicated bicycle planning paths and lanes Provide incentives/grants Existing and new driveways, -Consider on- and off-street speeds and site design are bike improvements where.. not conducive to non- - - vehicular modes of appropriate transport Councilmember Brainard asked Waggoner if the City owns all of Williams Drive. Waggoner said the City owns the portion out to Jim Hogg Road. Brainard asked why traffic signals have not been better synchronized. Waggoner said they have been, but growth keeps changing the demands. Management of the traffic, as now needed, has changed. City Manager, David Morgan explained that synchronizing has a fraction of drift on the timing. He explained that the ability to link through a centralized place would be an advance that could be made. Morgan said the City anticipates that this would be a major short term solution to improved traffic on Williams Drive. Mayor Ross asked about the 150 curb cuts. Waggoner said there would be split curb cuts in the future and strategy to create shared access in the new developments. Morgan said both the amount of curb cuts and the locations will be improved Waggoner provided a Project Timeline. M....... Project Kick -Off Task 1. Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment • Revieve existing studies and plans, and evaluate t; emsting conditions Public Meeting No. 1 ••• Task 2. Develop Concept Plan '®' Corridor performance. land use, private realm and the transect, and connections to subdivisions. OEMi.: Circulation and connectivity, economic and urban development, housing, environment and place. Public Meeting No. 2 (Charrette) ••• Task 3. Recommendations, Implementation ' Strategies and Prioritization . Refinement of primary issues and possible .. solutions • Draft recommendations; measures of effectiveness; ' and evaluation of cost-effectiveness, impacts and priorities • Public Meeting No. 3 •••• Task 4. Final Report with Recommendations • Public Meeting No. 4 Waggoner spoke on the next steps. Develop Concept Plan and Draft Recommendations - GTAB (February 2017) - P&Z (February 2017) - Public Meeting No. 3 - Open House (March 2017) - City Council (March/April 2017) Public Comment Period (month of March) Finalize Recommendations - GTAB (April 2017) - P&Z (April 2017) - Public Meeting No. 4 - (April 2017) - City Council (May 2017) Waggoner asked the Council if they concurred with the primary issues identified and the next steps. He said he would also ask them for any additional opportunities to engage with the public. Waggoner said there is a willingness to engage the public and provided links where information and comments and concerns are collected. httos: //tran s oortati on.aeo roetown. o ra/wi I I i a ms -d rive/ hfto://wikimar)Dina.com/wikimaDANiIliams-Drive-Studv.htmI Councilmember Brainard asked if traffic circles or roundabouts are being considered. Jim Briggs, General Manager of Utilities, came forward to discuss. Briggs said there will be traffic circles in the City but they would not bean effective use on Williams Drive. Briggs said there will be one utilized on Rivery Road. He explained that these are being visited by the Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board (GTAB). Brainard asked if there are areas on Williams Drive that could have an additional lane added. Briggs confirmed that this could happen in certain areas. Briggs noted that DB Wood was originally built to mitigate an earlier Campo plan that indicated Williams Drive as 8 or 9 lanes across. He explained that Williams Drive is geographically disconnected because of the lake. Briggs said there are other solutions to moving traffic. City Manager, David Morgan, added that Williams Drive has areas that the City does not have right of way and thus it is difficult to be able to expand. Mayor Ross confirmed to Waggoner that staff is on the right track C. Update on Unified Development Code amendment process and presentation of recommendations from the Unified Development Code Advisory Committee and Planning and Zoning Commission — Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director Sofia Nelson, Planning Director, spoke on the Unified Development Code amendment process and provided a presentation of recommendations from the Unified Development Code Advisory Committee and the Planning & Zoning Commission. She noted that the Council has received a number of these presentations and this will be one of the last brought before Council for action at the regular City Council meeting to be held that evening. Nelson said she would be discussing a recap of action taken, an update on direction given at the November 26, 2016 workshop, next steps and questions and direction from Council Nelson provided slides of the process recap. Nelson provided a summary of process. Nelson spoke on the discussion points of the October and November 2016 workshops. • Development Plats • Specify types of trees permitted as street trees • Examine appeal process for connectivity variances • Connectivity challenges of existing neighborhoods Nelson said that staff is pulling back on the Development Plats portion in order to put in further work. Nelson spoke on street trees and provided on optional street tree section slide and a slide showing the approved street tree species. Nelson explained that sometimes approved trees are selected correctly, but then not enough right of way space is reserved for the tree to develop. This is why the City has established choices that a developer may choose from in an effort to eliminate these issues. Nelson said that Council had previously asked if there are trees whose roots can penetrate down instead of spreading. She said that the City's Arborist, Heather Brewer, was present for any questions. Councilmember Brainard asked if the tree list had changed. Brewer said it is now a smaller list. She explained that trees with low arches and trees that have nuts have been eliminated from the list. These are on the preferred plan list and the number of trees to choose from has been reduced. Brewer explained that the root barrier system has been examined for all trees on this list and a list of tap root systems does not exist here. Councilmember Hesser said this would not eliminate root problems. Brewer said the space required is what eliminates the issue. Councilmember Gipson asked about the species in Georgetown Village. Brewer noted that trees had been planted there without the distance requirements. City Manager, David Morgan, explained the sidewalk construction and how that standard will now illuminate root structure problems. Mayor Ross asked if this goes against the normal growth pattern of the tree. Brewer said the trees will have organic matter and an infrastructure of water, etc. that encourages a different growth. Councilmember Gipson asked how it will be addressed, if these trees don't work and what would be the next step. Brewer said the required distance is the key. Brainard asked about Bartlett Pear trees. Brewer said they are not a desirable long term tree because of poor growth habits. Sofia Nelson, Planning Director, continued with the UDC presentation and spoke on connectivity challenges in existing neighborhoods. She discussed proposed connectivity tools. • Retain link to node • Distinguish between actual connections and future connections • Measure intersection spacing in lieu of block length • Calculate required connections based on accumulated lots vs. subdivision lots • Require pedestrian connections and mid -block connections for long blocks and cul-de-sacs Nelson provided a slide showing Actual Connections in comparison with Future Connections Nelson provided a slide showing actual minimum street connection requirements for existing major streets and minimum connection requirements for future streets. She spoke on providing a new street connection formula to ensure adequate existing connections and future connectivity. Nelson spoke briefly on the variance process for connectivity requirements. She explained that Council had previously asked if a variance could allow a super majority vote from Council. Nelson said the variance is reviewed by the Planning & Zoning Commissions and would only come to Council if the applicant wants to appeal the Planning & Zoning Commission's decision. Nelson spoke on developments and water bodies blocking connections. She said these have been structured to be flexible and to be allowed to receive public hearing. Nelson described the Next Steps • Public Hearing and Action o City Council Public Hearing and 15t Reading on February 14, 2017 o City Council 2ntl Reading on February 28, 2017 • Effective Date — 30 days from City Council action: March 31, 2017 deadline Nelson spoke on the street cross section changes, which had been reviewed with Council, and how this will allow staff to update the fire code so that the fire code is consistent with the street cross section changes, moving forward. Nelson said that she was seeking direction from Council regarding any additional work they would like to see prior to the first reading and public hearing. Jonrowe asked Nelson to go to connectivity challenges and why that slide had been dropped. Nelson said it is hard to encompass so many different variables with so many different codes. She said she wanted to speak about the challenges that staff has heard and how those have been addressed. She explained that the new standards are for new developments but do not apply to previous developments. D. Presentation on the Fiscal Impact Model -- Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager and Wayne Reed, Assistant City Manager Assistant City Manager, Laurie Brewer, began the presentation of the Fiscal Impact Model. She explained to Council that this is a request to approve a contract with TischlerBise for a fiscal impact model which would enhance the City's ability to better analyze the financial impact of development projects and land use policies and enhance long range financial planning. Brewer explained how establishing a fiscal impact model would answer a Council goal. She noted that the presentation would show the benefits, selection process, tasks and timeline of establishing the fiscal impact model. Brewer provided a slide depicting the Council Goals. Council Goals • Four Council Visioning Sessions in November — Role of Council — Vision — Goals — 14 strategies • Expand and diversify the tax base — Fiscal Impact Model strategy — Budgeted for 2017 at $120,000 OGEO;-G�OWN What is a Fiscal Impact Model? Benefit • Evaluate Fiscal Impact of Future Land Use Related Decisions — Future Land Use Scenarios (Comp. Plan) — Annexation Proposals — Rezoning Requests — Site Development Plans — Municipal Utility Districts — Financial Incentives GmF�iTalvn N O 7 N O r m 3 CLC N (D YaG Ni.n.MmmY.a�Y �I G'YYM Brewer spoke on the tasks and fees of the project. Brewer described the next steps: Contract and Licensing Agreement— On the January 24, 2017 agenda for consideration • Study kicks off in February • Approximately 6 months to complete Mayor Ross asked Councilmember Brainard if the General Government and Finance Advisory Board (GGAF) had looked at this. Councilmember Brainard said the General Government and Finance Advisory Board (GGAF) had studied this intently and had many questions and lively discussions. He explained that this has come about by Council's request to staff to diversify the tax base. Brainard said this is the tool they need. Councilmember Gonzalez added that the tool is multifaceted and it can be used by many departments in many areas. Gonzalez said this program would bring about a good return on investment. Mayor Ross recessed the meeting to Executive Session under Section 551.071, Section 551.072, Section 551.074 and Section 551.087 at 4.25 PM. Executive Session 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. E. 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 Sec. 551.072: Deliberation Regarding Real Property - Rivery Blvd Extension Project (Parcel 14, Northwest Blvd) - SW Bypass Project (Laubach, 4200 IH 35 South) Sec. 551.074: Personnel Matters - City Manager, City Attorney, City Secretary and Municipal Judge: Consideration of the appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal Sec. 551.087: Deliberation Regarding Economic Development Negotiations - Project CAT Adjournment Mayor Ross adjourned the workshop meeting to proceed to the regular City Council meeting at 6:00 PM. Approved by the Georgetown City Council on I j C4 I a0 Date ONV Da ss, Mayor Attest: City�e Mary