The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMIN 11.14.2017 CC-WMinutes of Meeting of the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas Tuesday, November 14, 2017 The Georgetown City Council will meet on Tuesday, November 14, 2017 at 3:00 PM at the Council Chambers, at 101 E. 71 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 three (3) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or City Hall at 113 East 81 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 Nicholson, District 2 and Councilmember Gipson, District 5. Mayor Dale Ross, Anna Eby, District 1, John Hesser, District 3, Steve Fought, District 4, Rachael Jonrowe, District 6, and Tommy Gonzalez, District 7 were in attendance. Councilmember Nicholson joined the meeting at 3:05 PM. Policy Development/Review Workshop — Call to order at 3:00 PM A. Presentation and discussion on the feasibility of a joint aquatic facility between the City of Georgetown and the Georgetown Independent School District -- Kimberly Garrett, Parks & Recreation Director Parks & Recreation Director, Kimberly Garrett, spoke on the feasibility of a joint aquatic facility between the City and the Georgetown Independent School District (GISD). She explained that a study was conducted with an intent to look at future needs, and if the facility made sense, to determine a place and location for such a facility. Garrett introduced Keith Hayes, CFO and Principal of Barker, Rinker and Seacat Architecture, who provided the presentation. Hayes recognized the team that had worked on the study and the presentation and described the Vision Statement for the project. GEORGETOWN AQUATICS CENTER FEASIBILITY STUDY VISION STATEMENT With a long standing and distinct relationship as their guide, the City of Georgetown and the Georgetown Independent School District will explore the feasibility of a facility that is mutually beneficial in the purpose of partnering to provide multiple use aquatics programs unique to Central Texas and will directly benefit the Georgetown community in which they both serve. The aquatic feasibility study must demonstrate clarity in facility purpose, capital cost, proforma, location, and program which is mutually beneficial to both entities. Hayes spoke next on the Core Values of the Feasibility Study GEORGETOWN AQUATICS CENTER FEASIBILITY STUDY 'ORE VALUES The City of Georgetown and Georgetown ISD recognizes the following core values for the Georgetown Aquatic Center: The Georgetown Aquatics Center will... Provide higher quality of life services for all ages Be economically sustainable Elevate the Georgetown brand as a destination for better living Be a catalyst for economic development and tourism IIRI[R III:ER 4 4 81AC1T Hayes described the Project Goals. 1. Reflect the public wants and needs of the City and GISD a. Reflect the culture and character of Georgetown 2. Define the Aquatic Center program 3. Define the Aquatic Center budget 4. Define the Aquatic Center schedule for funding & construction 5. Assist in setting up a framework for the COG and GISD partnership 6. Present the findings and recommendations for the City Council and GISD Board to make a decision on the project future including a potential partnership 7. Explore other partnership entities that could add value to the Georgetown Aquatic Center Hayes said that the presentation would include the Program, the Schedule and the Budget and spoke on the question of how one would benefit from this process. He then provided a slide showing the proposed schedule. PROCESS FINAL DELIVER FINAL GOALS I VALUES PROGRAM PLANS CONCEPTS REPORT 0 In 1/31/2011 9%19/2011 10/11/2011 11/14/2011 12/15/2011 10/25/2011 11�[IR Iti611 Hayes spoke on the Steering Committee's Wish List pertaining to space and characteristics. STEERING COMMITTEE WISH LIST - SPACES A. 25M x 25 Yd competition pool; or, 50M x 25 Yd competition pool l i'lll 51:1i,{'.iI. d : wi (I i ..-..„ i. C. Right sized spectator seating for minimum 300 with desire for additional temporary seating f) �';1.�;,�1 s�l,l�rill�;:,l,: ;1 I: „ . :�I,�:�:,i;),.;I• ;f,i, (�� ,:��,��, E. Renovate existing lap pool to leisure pool with warm water lap lanes /program area, zero -depth beach. current channel, socialization spaces and spa F i.i)i;n(i� ftif)I41`; 'wd f�i illi),' G. Connection to existing facility on San Gabriel Site STEERING COMMITTEE WISH LIST - CHARACTERISTICS A. Tournament ready facility - management and coaching support' hospitality rooms 1i.1 lig k; r�?,t,l" ili C. Multiple water temperatures for multiple bodies of water ill,i, I-(11.ut1fi?v all !3 a priu'rltl E. Pools with lightning protection systems G. Locker Rooms i, Family changing rooms ii. Individual showers ...with ability to accommodate teams � `)��1�{(:il!''a'didiF" t�rfl�ll'S';It','s!'�`r:, .'i%llff7�f 71�11�'f ll;f 5�?Illl;f': 3f1�'•. (��lifl-ti)-ti'.1""i)�':)(jr'{fll 1. Lazy river is highlight of experience K. Good access control and ability to minimize staffing dunna low -use Deriods �� Hayes described the difference in water temperature needs and water depth needs. • 78-82 Degrees for Competition Swimming, Training and Water Polo ■ 82-87 Degrees for Diving ■ 86-95 Degrees for Instruction, Recreation, Wellness and Therapy ■ 100-104 Degrees for Whirlpools and Spas WATER DEPTH - -air .... .. I II ».... _ its. 5tartsng S; cks Over d Miri.: AW-'. uSA Swint mtr#g — 64' for TcaChinrg Srarta . i.: ,{,rd-Winio _ 17 Mr 1 rnoHer Depth Contours 3.1 SAVe 0 Derp areas 12'1 S" IM q' : -0.4s Hayes provided images of various pool types and sizes, as well as images of various areas included in a pool facility, such as spectator seating, scoring space, wet classrooms and locker rooms. He described the flexibility of the wet classroom, which can also be used for a party room, providing a good revenue opportunity. He provided images of lap swimming pools with play structures, lazy rivers and beach like entries. He explained that the beach like entry is good for therapy in a recovery process and important to the quality of life for elder citizens. Hayes spoke on the Market & Operations Analysis and explained the necessity to determine the market to be served and understand other providers in the area, whether public, private or non-profit. Hayes provided a slide depicting 2010 demographics for population, households, families, average household size, ethnicity, median age and median income. He said it would be impossible to service all, but many actually could be serviced. Hayes spoke next on the Operations Analysis and provides graphs of a similar project. OPERATIONS ANALYSIS UNDERSTANDING • Fees • Budget • Staffing CURRENT OPERATIONS NEIN OPERATIONS BUDGET • Fees • Expenses • Revenues PARTNER ROLES AND EXPECTATION'S Hayes described two Options for comparison and contrast. ELpenwn 2% 28% trio "% ■p - -Z& ridd a commodsim ca"bladual c5ow AW -1 sena" "F"* a00 w] 2010 DEMOGRAPHICS 10 `Icmiut (]:., 916,;11 WF,,a Ire 1w, H i1fi W 1 -4-4 -1 4 #]Le flowwboid Sr J-11 — .71 Irl ldcA" 0 N --Rw4i. M.&" Alp: it 116 20 r 439 311 446 1K w L GEORGETOWN AQUATIC CENTER FEASIBILITY STUDY Hayes spoke next on the Operations Analysis and provides graphs of a similar project. OPERATIONS ANALYSIS UNDERSTANDING • Fees • Budget • Staffing CURRENT OPERATIONS NEIN OPERATIONS BUDGET • Fees • Expenses • Revenues PARTNER ROLES AND EXPECTATION'S Hayes described two Options for comparison and contrast. ELpenwn 2% 28% trio "% ■p - -Z& ridd a commodsim ca"bladual c5ow AW -1 sena" "F"* a00 w] Option A — Renovate existing indoor 25yd body of water into leisure water and expand or construct a new 25m x 25yd competition pool, as presented. Option B — Renovate existing indoor 25yd body of water into leisure water and construct a new 50m x 25yd outdoor competition pool, assuming that the pool will be attached to the center, be operated year round, and the water heated. Hayes spoke on the Assumptions of the Aquatic Center Operations Analysis • The first year of operation will be 2020 or later. This budget represents the second full -year of operation • The presence of other providers in the market will remain the same. • Access to the new competitive pool will be through the existing main entry to the recreation center. The only direct access to the new pool area will be for swim meets. • Operation of the center is shown by the City of Georgetown with all costs and revenues included. This is based on City staff guarding the pool during all hours of use. ■ The operations estimate is based on the program for the facility as developed by Barker Rinker Seacat Architecture • Full time staff rates are based on existing staff rates for the same basic positions inflated to 2020. Part time rates are based on a minimum wage projection of $9 hour by 2020. • Custodial services are shown as being provided by in-house staff (full time and part time) but could possibly be a contracted service • The admission fees for the center are the same as the existing recreation center. Rates are for the entire center, not just aquatics A reasonably aggressive approach to estimating use and revenues from pass sales and programs taking place at the center has been used for this pro -forma. The center will need to draw well from the Secondary Service Area on a consistent basis. AQUA 116 RN i tK UrtKA HUNS ANALYSIS -ASSUMPTIONS Hours of Operation: The projected hours of operation of the aquatic center portion of the building will be as follows: Days I Hours Hours usually vary some with the season (longer hours in the winter, shorter during the summer), by programming needs, use patterns and special event considerations. AQUATIC CENTER OPERATIONS ANALYSIS -ASSUMPTIONS Projected Fee Schedule: Revenue projections and attendance numbers were calculated from this fee model. This is the projected rate for 2020 (or later) based on the possible opening date for the renter. F_. The non -resident rate is approximately 25% higher. 3 Month and Annual Pass Benefits: Basic fitness classes (land and water) are included AQUATIC CENTER OPERATIONS ANALYSIS -REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS Pool programming includes: 25N1x25Yd t4; 2 ddy USA TF,ain (duets i4`1 1 Higil School 0[;& "Mews 50Mx25Yd (6 i dq USA Tearn (4; 1 -day d1,,;11 Schooj! lh,-i1 �Jee�s Club Swim Team Practices & Meets Swimming lessons Life guard training Pool Rental for Events °lR4LF or AQUATIC CENTER FEASIBILITY STUDY Hayes provided Conceptual Plan Diagrams for Option A and Option B and described the floor plans of each. CONCEPTUAL PLAN DIAGRAM - OPTION A 5 0') cps F Hnry C tj I I -yff t1j; t1 I kl I A90.1 AJ0010ii P;oqccitr. Am-iT: OTO T 0 F Roncjv4tol Lomwe Pool Program Aiots% 0 OPTION B L41 m Ioi1 CONCEPTUAL PLAN DIAGRAM -OPTION B 0 4 r1:—_ ---I 4 � a r 1.1 Soo GSF ' NVIh £r,clu Nad cVrr.ulu arurr Araa Ouldow PvoQrarn Aram ..�r: I� 1f :i �.: t-rn•i •:gin, '.:.'M :'rrt7t7r tire•-. - d.; Y II' ry'4'.e . i4—Oh4! _ Hayes provided Site Discussion and several images of proposals for the Site at San Gabriel Park. He spoke on proposed parking and parking plans. Hayes went on to speak on the budget of the project and provided comparison and contrast options. He spoke on future considerations. COMPARE AND CONTRAST OPTIONS 7 407. OPTION A —INDOOR 251`4 x 25YD 1 .l,olF'r_f ri!lIl[1:?i ;i[If'==:;iC;`y j ��' l}(�li At;:.;!••.i:'=11;�`: ! .i5�' OPTION B — OUTDOOR 5049 x 25YD $,e76 :' t' A rwu,,; n t Hayes completed the presentation and asked the Council for their feedback City Manager, David Morgan, said the study is an exploration process. He noted that even though this is a high level of detailed information, there is actually a lot of flexibility. He said this study was to explore initial possibilities. Morgan said the exploration was conducted in order to get Council reaction and if there is potential to move forward with this type of project. Councilmember Fought said he appreciates the study, but would like to continue to explore. He said that is not enough information to say yes or no at this point. Fought said he would like to see examples of the outside events that would come in to judge and needs to see the funding between the City and the School District. He noted that this would be specific information of who pays what. Fought said he does like the idea of working together on such a project. Councilmember Jonrowe thanked the presenter for his presentation. She asked how much the project would cost if the school district built it on their own. Hayes said the dollars would be the same as presented. City Manager, Morgan, said there would be a possibility that the costs would be lower, but the maintenance fees would be higher for them without the competitive water factor. He noted that it makes sense to combine the waters. Councilmember Jonrowe asked Garrett if the aquatics program is currently at capacity at the Rec Center. Garrett said yes - at all of the pique times and said these plans would expand the offerings. Jonrowe asked if the expansion would double. Garrett said there would be a need for additional personnel and other expenses, but she did not have exact figures at this time. Jonrowe asked about minimizing disruption at the current facility during any construction of a new facility. Garrett said that would certainly be the intent, but it is not yet known. Hayes explained the difference if a facility was combined with an existing structure or built separately. He spoke on costs that the City would contribute to the school facility Jonrowe said it is all interesting but the cost is very high. She noted that this is assuming that a bond package would pass. She said she would support exploring this project further, but only if it does not cost money. Mayor Ross asked if there would be additional cost if the project was explored further. Councilmember Gonzalez said he agrees with Jonrowe that there cannot be further cost to the exploration of the project. He noted that the Parks and Recreation Departments is already doing a lot with very large projects in the works and this would be too much of an addition to what is already being done He suggested re -exploring the project in 10 years. Gonzalez added that $330,000.00 of maintenance cost per year does not seem like a wise return on investment at this time. Councilmember Nicholson thanked Hayes for the presentation. She said she works with school districts and agrees with Councilmember Jonrowe. She asked if the capital expense would be provided by the district and the maintenance taken care of by the City. City Manager, Morgan, said a school bond would be issued from the district and they would need city support for increases. He explained that it has not yet been decided who would pay for what. Morgan said the numbers could change accordingly and there are no operating agreements yet. He said a starting point would be a school bond, with the City taking care of operational expenses, because the City is experienced in the operational factor. Councilmember Nicholson said the proposed site makes sense and she does not see a need to look at other sites. She said there are currently a lot of Parks and Rec projects. She noted that the community offers a lot of support for youth and youth programs currently. She said, if there is no additional cost, she would support proceeding, but there is a lot more to discuss regarding responsibilities. Councilmember Eby said this is at a conceptual stage and she is not opposed to further exploration. She asked for the next step and more information. David Morgan said this could be a future project with a growing city and growing school district. He said staff would look for ways to make sure City costs are reduced and the scope of the project is scaled back. He said they would look more at the revenue assumptions. He reminded Council that this would not come to fruition until at least 2020, and fee changes would be likely by then, with additional changes, as well. He said staff needed to know if Council wants to continue pursuing such a project. Mayor Ross said he wants more information if it does not cost anything. He noted staff time being used by the current large park projects. Councilmember Hesser said he likes the location and working with the school district, but this would be a big load on staff at this time. He said the $365,000.00 per year in costs should be better explained and understood. Hesser said, if this is going forward, the numbers would need to make sense. Mayor Ross said this is the conceptual phase and said he has heard from Council that they would not want to explore the project further if that would cost money. He asked Garrett if it would cost to go further and also asked her for an estimation of staff time. Garrett said additional research would cost extra in consultant time. Morgan said the school district needs to see the presentation also and the City needs their feedback on costs and responsibilities. He noted that if it does not make sense at that point, staff would not bring it back to Council. If it does make sense, it would be brought back. Leigh Wallace, Finance Director, asked if she could present Item C, prior to Item B, as it would flow better. Mayor Ross said that would be fine. Wallace spoke on Item C and then spoke on Item B. B. Presentation and discussion regarding the proposed FY2017 budget amendment for the Annual Budget for year- end obligations that were not known at the time the budget was adopted -- Leigh Wallace, Finance Director Finance Director, Leigh Wallace, spoke on amendments to the FY 2017 budget and explained the purpose. • The City Charter allows for budget amendments when circumstances were unforeseen at the time the original budget was adopted • Expenditure overages at the fund or division level must be addressed before closing the fiscal year Wallace said that the Council Discretionary fund had shown an available balance of $298,000.00. She noted Council direction to spend $10,000.00 on the Hospice Study and $5,000.00 for airport fuel for the Harvey storm relief efforts, leaving a new available balance of $283,000.00. Wallace spoke on the Airport fund and said the $5,000.00 from the Council Discretionary fund had been recognized. Wallace provided slides and descriptions of the General fund, the EMS Fund, the Transportation Fund, the Electric Fund and the Water Fund General Fund • Fund as a whole is under budget • Fire Division exceeded by $20K due to overtime from vacant positions; cover costs with fuel savings in Police Division • Solid Waste services over budget $323K due to customer growth; offset by contract revenue • Receive transfer in $10K from Council Discretionary and approve expenses for hospice study - - �t1Il1R6IIl11YP� EMS Fund • Recognize $100,000 of additional revenue from increased transports • Authorize $100,000 of expense over budget due to personnel overtime costs R:oI7 AMUO &+dam 77 Transportation Fund • Fund accounts for County segment of Southwest Bypass project • Expenses were not anticipated in FY2017 but the project started early • Authorize expense of $609K and recognize $505K billable revenue from County • Corresponding amendment to update FY2018 at a later date Electric Fund • A second year of cooler, wetter weather resulting in depressed energy market • Purchased Power costs exceed budget by $9.6 million (includes congestion revenue credit) • Offset partially by PCA, existing fund balance and meter allocation from Water Fund • Additional short and long-term measures needed to rebuild fund balance in FY2018 Water Fund to Reimburse Electric Fund for costs related to water meter installation and maintenance programs $1.5 million • Available from Water Fund balance Wallace said that Fire Chief, John Sullivan would be bringing the EMS Services Update presentation to the Council at the next workshop. She said the County Funds shown in the Transportation Fund will be used for their portion of the Southwest Bypass project. Wallace said she anticipates bringing the CIP Roll Forward program and changes to the Electric Fund to the Council on December 12th. Councilmember Gonzalez asked where the water fund was at. Wallace said she does not have exact figures with her at this time but will be able to provide them at the regular city council meeting that evening. City Manager, David Morgan, said it is a healthy fund. Gonzalez said he wants to make sure the City does not rob Peter to pay Paul. Wallace said the action items would be on the night meeting's agenda as the first reading and the second reading would be on November 28"' and at that point staff would be able to close fiscal year 2017. C. Presentation of the City's Quarterly Financial Report, which includes the Investment Reports for the City of Georgetown, Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation (GTEC), and the Georgetown Economic Development Corporation (GEDCO) for the quarter ended September 30, 2017 -- Leigh Wallace, Finance Director Finance Director, Leigh Wallace, provided a presentation on the City's Quarterly Financial Report. She began the presentation with an explanation of the Preliminary Year -End. • Bring information to Council sooner • Overall, a solid picture, but subject to change • FY2017 will close in late November • One month of sales tax still to receive • Unaudited numbers Wallace said staff had received the sales tax collection information that day and it was up 7% compared to the same period last year. She noted that property tax collections were at 100% for the year. Wallace said the Utility ROI was up 3% compared to the same period last year. She said development fees were ahead earlier in the year, but finished at about the same as 2016. Wallace noted that expenditures were on track for the year and the overall fund was under budget by 3%. She explained that there were overages in Fire and Environmental Services. Wallace spoke on Major Enterprise • Electric o Revenue up 2% compared to last year o Purchase Power expenditures exceeded budget and projections — discussed in amendment workshop Water o Revenue up 26% year over year, mostly due to development impact fees o Operations expenses under budget; CIP expenses under budget and will roll forward due to project timing and capacity Hotel Occupancy Tax revenue up 24% year over year Airport Revenue up 14% year over year Wallace provided a list of CIP Highlights • Sidewalk improvements completed downtown, along Williams Drive and 135 • Garey Park and San Gabriel Park improvements continue • Completion of Grace Church rehab • Substantial progress on Southwest Bypass ■ New residential development continues in Electric ■ Design phases complete for major water projects, construction to begin in 2018 Investment Highlights were shown next. f Y 2[77 7 1 m%Xt Investment Highlights v7 xyivat' •I atNSVaI t.TanR.• Total Nook Valw SIT`J.i>7►?. :315 S 1}132:2.176 S Average Yield 11751 1.4% ... , GTfC _ 6/90/2011 9/70/2011 Chang. - total Hook Value ,1 _. _ t„'. l-; t• r.,. .. ..... Average Y.eld G►OCO 6/70/2011 9/70/2017 Lhanye Total Hook Value , '3 tia ., t;3!.Sa;• Average Yield d 1.1 Wallace spoke on changes in interest rates and said the City has been able to take advantage of good money market rates. She ended the preliminary year end presentation and said she was not expecting any major changes. D. Update to City Council on Downtown West Civic Center Project -- Eric Johnson, CIP Manager and Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager Eric Johnson, CIP Manager, provided an update on the Downtown West Civic Center Project. Johnson recognized the design team, the signage masterplan team, and the executive finishes team for the project. Johnson spoke on the background of the project. Johnson said that the City Council had provided feedback at their August 23, 2016 meeting to proceed with a renovation plan that is worthy of our City and exemplifies our Values, with a budget of $13,000,000.00. He provided renderings of the New City Hall and Council Chambers and provided a virtual video of the Court Room. Johnson next described the campus and landscaping of the site and its features. He showed images of the signage on the buildings and images of the entry doors. Johnson provided descriptions and images of the floor plans. Johnson spoke on the Downtown West Project Budget, Contracted Services and Professional Services. Square Feet 19.708 16 745 364,53 CONSTRUCTION Construction $ 4-b4 , _830 S 5-011.355 S 9.553,181-, 5itewDrli S 575,537 $ 4qO 768 S 1.065 800 TOTAL, _ ( S 5.117,3621 $ 5,501,6231 $ 10 M S& CONTINGE6 .. Gontractor 21% 5 102, ? S 110.032 S 212 380 ,vnef 4% $204,694 $ 220.065 S424.759 TOTAL 1 $ 307,0421 $ 330,0971 $ 637,139 Mayor Ross asked if this is guaranteed pricing and if the total could increase over time. City Manager, David Morgan, said the guaranteed maximum price on the night's agenda is the final cost, as long as the project stays within scope. Morgan said there are contingencies for both the contractor and the City that are loaded in the agreement. Johnson explained that, in addition to design modifications, possible alternate funding sources are being evaluated to supplement the sale of the Downtown buildings at $6,249.000.00 and provided funding options and a funding summary. Bond Issued in 2016 - Deign of Greenspace $ 460,000 PEG Fund Balance through 2017 $ 315,000 PEG Fund 2018 $ 130,000 Court Security Fee $ 20,000 11'Tree Fund $ 15,000 'Parkland Dedication/Parks $ 85,000 Funding Summary • Cash Funding • Other Funding • Certificate of Obligation 2017 • TOTAL FUNDING Next Steps • Ground Breaking Ceremony — November 28, 2017 @ 10.30am • W6 Martin Luther King Jr. Street • Begin Construction - - Early December 2017 • 12 month construction time • Update Council — Spring 2018 • Sale of Buildings — Spring 2018 $ 0,249.000 $ 1,025,000 $ 5,726,000 $13,000,000 Mayor Ross asked to see the image of City Hall again and asked about the possibility of branding by having the City of Georgetown Logo on city buildings. Morgan said renovations are being looked at and staff will look into unifying the Georgetown brand on City buildings. He said the Police Chief and Fire Chief are already looking into putting the logo on the Public Safety Facility buildings, as well. Councilmember Jonrowe asked how many kids recognize the brand since kids don't use cursive anymore. Gonzalez said they would still recognize the symbol. Morgan said he wants to add the City logo to all of the buildings. E. Presentation on annexation requirements and discussion on establishing an annexation strategy -- Sofia Nelson, Planning Director Planning Director, Sofia Nelson, spoke on annexation requirements, recent changes to annexation regulations and the establishment of an annexation strategy. She began the presentation with a recognition of the Presentation Team and an Overview of the Presentation. Presentation Overview • Purpose of the Presentation and Feedback Requested • Value in Annexation • Georgetown Annexation History • Overview of 2017 SB 6 — Update to Annexation Law • Annexation Options and Tools to Study • Areas for Consideration • Request Feedback from the City Council Nelson spoke on the purpose of the presentation Purpose of Presentation -*-City Council Strategy- . -Create Comprehensive Annexation and MUD Strategy •: Update City Council on change in state law and change in options in accomplishing City Council strategy •: Seek Direction from City Council on the following; :• Is there additional information you would like staff to bring back to you? -*-Are there areas that the City Council would staff to study for potential annexation? YG4E o u �E Part 1. Georgetown Annexation History -.-Previous Annexation Plans •: 1999 Annexation Plan — no areas in plan :•2005 Annexation Plan- 34 areas identified for annexation ***Involuntary Annexations you Aaft Part 2 of Nelson's presentation was an overview of 2017 SB 6 and an update to the annexation law. She described the new requirements and what they mean to Georgetown both today and in the future. She noted that Georgetown is on the brink of becoming a Tier 2 community with the rapid growth it is experiencing and it is wise to look at this so as not to lose opportunities. She said, when classified as a Tier 2 Community, there will be a more restrictive annexation processes. She noted that currently Williamson County is a Tier 1 Community, based off of the 2010 Census, but this will change with the 2020 Census. I- than ICM, 1ru.lautul dnvllmp, Ida, r:ntw+n•,n Parm.,n r+ -a rxmryrx,n T,at1(,,,mtti IPIU, ,vbrrlxmp4•,n,t;ol'Ih} A Ob Y„ rpm 5Cl,, lift, wad dwt bA,n I ho d r Twr \ •,ptWM I NV ]lnr Ua mna :r,adrW uJ �Arli:r,a, 1 %ear VIM &IW -.t P" erd a, pre S B 6 - vnxrpLm wow? two b urn o, tix % rWn V i mw"Jtrti and VI ipr��•a,1rr.� Aa u_rvw, Itrm, tie.• tiv to -m IN Pry eV d 3, Fee S B 6 - ? ,rai {+Ian brtrmp ww.,tuhnn tion v,-n:Hs V Iaiulr'n,nf NMI YII :pnv nLn v,I PoLL Aru Ucwm Ilrsn, W * n" IN Councilmember Jonrowe asked how "area" is determined or defined. City attorney, Charlie McNabb clarified the information. McNabb said there are some restrictions on the size of an area that a city can annex. He said the area must be contiguous and wider than 1000 feet. He said, other than this, area is just the "area" defined to come into the city limits. Nelson spoke on what this means to Georgetown today. She explained that, on December 1, 2017, municipal annexation, as it has existed for over a century, will be over. The new bill requires landowner or voter approval of • -r • A,p.,I�A a :,! arva \lucr bnld Appen•.ai ale: luh t .�mt5 >t>>tf +OP U00nr �� , t+r auoaaed n Ir>•Y u, ,m>rru,yt iplu�. '�e�rr latuLraoo ,r6,] It►qr tl �� rnrr �n,ca: 17R ` r Rrnlww�o R,y„larrh,:�tur., y titit,tltAtrlwtt�:n:,(nrto Vnk.a4at+ l Quart' [bat h:e t., F.,r ann-tnl i, lhao ',-J peri eat m reul'tarrd br6A as okcwu e, J.", thAn 'rn, ,ter, plu, L,n L,,rvr %vt 1 +rpt d a, a TM -at.ntv and . VI P_J AAWX2ts,n ItMV4 Saa S-rs"n IN I- than ICM, 1ru.lautul dnvllmp, Ida, r:ntw+n•,n Parm.,n r+ -a rxmryrx,n T,at1(,,,mtti IPIU, ,vbrrlxmp4•,n,t;ol'Ih} A Ob Y„ rpm 5Cl,, lift, wad dwt bA,n I ho d r Twr \ •,ptWM I NV ]lnr Ua mna :r,adrW uJ �Arli:r,a, 1 %ear VIM &IW -.t P" erd a, pre S B 6 - vnxrpLm wow? two b urn o, tix % rWn V i mw"Jtrti and VI ipr��•a,1rr.� Aa u_rvw, Itrm, tie.• tiv to -m IN Pry eV d 3, Fee S B 6 - ? ,rai {+Ian brtrmp ww.,tuhnn tion v,-n:Hs V Iaiulr'n,nf NMI YII :pnv nLn v,I PoLL Aru Ucwm Ilrsn, W * n" IN Councilmember Jonrowe asked how "area" is determined or defined. City attorney, Charlie McNabb clarified the information. McNabb said there are some restrictions on the size of an area that a city can annex. He said the area must be contiguous and wider than 1000 feet. He said, other than this, area is just the "area" defined to come into the city limits. Nelson spoke on what this means to Georgetown today. She explained that, on December 1, 2017, municipal annexation, as it has existed for over a century, will be over. The new bill requires landowner or voter approval of Part 2. What does this mean to Georgetown today? + Tier 1 Status — 2010 Census population for Williamson County 422,679 -.*-Annexation Process — More than 100 residential dwellings • A 3 year annexation plan is required. — Less than 100 residential dwellings • Not required to have 3 year annexation Plan, Cf 4 uRITE T16W N i1xA5 Part 2. What does this mean to Georgetown's future ? ❖ 2020 Census population will Trigger Tier 2 Status - Estimates predict 630,000 + residents •:• Annexation Process - Population of area isrQ eater than 200 residents • Election prior to annexation required - Population of area is less than 200 residents • Petition of more than 50 % of registered voters is required 01 IRIiE EhH'N r[rs Part 3 of Nelson presentation spoke on Involuntary Annexation Requirements. • Continuation of Land Use: prevents a city from prohibiting a person from continuing to use land in the manner in which it was being used prior to annexation • Width Requirements: area must generally be at least 1,000 feet wide unless the boundaries of the city are contiguous to the area on at least two sides, with certain exceptions. • Maximum Amount per Year: limiting the maximum amount of annexation each year to ten percent of the incorporated area of the municipality with certain exceptions. Nelson described the Annexation Plan Process and explained that any area with 100 dwelling units must be listed. Nelson explained that a city may not annex an area that is appraised for ad valorem tax purposes such as agricultural, wildlife management or timber management unless the city offers a development agreement to the landowner that would guarantee the continuation of the extraterritorial status of the area and authorize the enforcement of all regulations and planning authority of the city that do not interfere with the use of the area for agriculture, wildlife or timber. Nelson summarized: ■ Following the 2020 Census, Williamson County will become a Tier 2 County and involuntary annexation without consent will not be permitted in the county. • Now is the time to act on an annexation plan if Council desires to explore areas that require a plan. Part 4 of Nelson's presentation spoke on areas for consideration. She said there are 14 areas for consideration and these include corridors and donut holes. She noted that the areas she would be speaking on are noted with a green or yellow star. She explained that those areas with green stars would not require an annexation plan and those noted with a yellow star would require an annexation plan. •Gal en a:ik5 � ,_ 40 •r� b• V. }; Gai,ne I r L_:_L._ •�4 • e P*rk Vj" %states x Mayor Ross asked about requiring a development agreement and what this would look like. Nelson said the development agreement would be a requirement for a period up to 45 years, allowing the property owner to continue the use of that property. Nelson said a development's subdivision platting would trigger a voluntary request for annexation. Councilmember Fought asked about areas with houses and how it works with fire flow, sewer and other infrastructure. Nelson said if the area is still in the ETJ, it would not necessarily require provisions for utilities and would be handled on a case by case basis. Fought asked about a septic area and if there would be a requirement to connect to the sewer. City Attorney, Charlie McNabb, said it is possible that an on-site sanitation system would be grand- fathered in. Fought wanted to know if it would be expensive to provide services in these areas. McNabb said if the landowner wanted services, the City would need to provide them. Fought spoke on the Shady Oaks and Woodland Park developments and asked how this would involve city services. City Manager, David Morgan, said Council will be asked about specific areas they would like to examine and some of the areas are expensive to bring on board. Mayor Ross said staff will need to give pros and cons for each area considered and provide cost considerations for each. Councilmember Gonzalez asked about the 10 year R.O.I. on these projects. Fought said the Council will need more information in order to make valid decisions. City Manager, Morgan, said staff wanted Council to be informed. Morgan said he has understood Council direction to mean they would like staff to examine the areas for consideration and if something makes sense to bring it back to the Council. Ross asked about the Old Oak Subdivision. Morgan there will be a three year annexation plan, if Council wants to proceed. Ross asked how the 14 areas listed were chosen. Morgan said these are the top 14 areas, but more need to be looked at. Nelson said staff had looked at corridors and donut holes for tonight's purpose. Councilmember Jonrowe said the City will need to spend, but will need a threshold for breaking even. Ross asked when staff would need an answer from Council on what to go forward with. Morgan said the City would need to take action by the end of the year and staff will bring this back at the next workshop meeting. Councilmember Gonzalez suggested identifying all areas on the required list and then not proceeding with annexation for those areas that are later found not to be feasible. City Attorney, McNabb, said they just need to be on the list. Morgan said anyone put on an annexation plan list must be notified. He said it would not make sense to notify people who will never be annexed. Ross directed staff to make this thoughtful and reasonable. Councilmember Nicholson said there are only 5 of the yellow areas and asked about the urgency of the green areas. Nelson said there is no urgency until the 2020 census. Nicholson suggested looking at these. Gonzalez said staff needs to also examine some of those areas not yet listed today. Morgan said staff will provide Council with a financial analysis of the areas in question and asked Council to identify other areas they might want staff to look at. Morgan said Council will receive updates on November 281h and December 12tH Councilmember Hesser suggested recruiting students to help with the ROI analysis. He asked how this affects zoning. Nelson said anything annexed is zoned as agriculture and then is changed later. City Manager, Morgan, noted that this greatly impacts the decision making regarding MUDs. Mayor Ross recessed the meeting to Executive Session under Sec. 551.071, Sec. 551.072, Sec. 551.074 and Sec. 551.087 at 5.02 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. 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 - Hoskins Brown Update Sec. 551.072: Deliberations about Real Property - Downtown Real Estate Sale 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: Deliberations Regarding Economic Development Negotiations - Project Legacy Adjournment Mayor Ross adjourned the meeting to begin the Regular City Council meeting at 6:00 PM. Approved by the Georgetown City Council on 1 t 1 $ I t Date C- ' (L Dale Ross, Mayor <S�a S!!!�' Attest: GiZ!7 #ary