Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN 12.12.2017 CC-WNotice of Meeting of the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas Tuesday, December 12, 2017 The Georgetown City Council will meet on Tuesday, December 12, 2017 at 3:00 PM at the Council Chambers, at 101 E. Th 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 Bch 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. Mayor Dale Ross, Anna Eby, District 1, Valerie Nicholson, District 2, John Hesser, District 3, Steve Fought, District 4, Ty Gipson, District 5, Rachael Jonrowe, District 6 were in attendance. Gonzalez joined the meeting at 4:15 PM. Policy Development/Review Workshop — Call to order at 3:00 PM A. Review of the City's Investment Policy and discussion of recommended changes for 2018 -- Elaine Wilson, Controller Elaine Wilson, the City's Controller, spoke on recommended changes for the City's Investment Policy for 2018. Wilson described the Purpose of the Investment Policy • The Investment Policy sets the objectives and strategies for investing the City's available cash and reserves • The Policy follows all of the rules in the Public Funds Investment Act (PFIA) and is recommended by the Investment Advisors • Council required to review and adopt the policy annually • Last reviewed and adopted in December 2016 Wilson spoke on the proposed Administrative Changes • Adding the Treasurer as an authorized Investment Officer • Stating which funds can invest in State and Municipal bonds o Operating funds o Contingency reserve funds o Debt service funds o Capital improvement funds (bond proceeds) • Verbiage changes to more closely match the PFIA wording Wilson explained the Substantive Changes. ELL F rN31 t ern �,y Substantive Changes • Changes to PFIA • Section 4.1.4 Money Market Mutual Funds • PFIA removed requirement of Net Asset Value of 1.0000 to correspond to SEC removal of this requirement for Prime funds last October • City choosing to keep this requirement which will be found in Government Funds • PFIA changed wording to comply with SEC Rule 2a-7 from a stated weighted average maturity - City policy will be to comply with this change • Section 5 — Broker/Dealers Certifications • PFIA removed requirement for broker/dealer certifications except for local government investment pools and discretionary investment advisors • City is removing portions of Section 5 that no longer apply Wilson described Broker/Dealer List changes. • Remove Coastal Securities • Add FTN Financial B. Presentation and discussion regarding policy for placement of small cell nodes by wireless network providers within public rights-of-way -- Glenn Dishong, Utility Director Utility Director, Glenn Dishong, spoke about policy for the placement of small cell nodes. He first described the Communications Scenario Pre -SB 1004 ■ Applied to "wired" communications companies Franchise Requirements o Customers known o Franchise fee to the General Fund ■ City Electric Utility required to allow attachment o Pole attachment agreement o Pole attachment fee to electric utility Dishong then explained the new Small Cell World • Wireless technology o Need density • No franchise needed o Unable to determine what customers are "connected" • Texas Local Government Code Ch. 284 applies o Requires expanded installation o Expanded use of utility poles o More than just utility poles o Required processing times o Fee limitations Dishong described the SB 1004 Requirements. ii mo I Ill'(,'I1Pi!•tIIII('11tL� City still controls ROW ROW use goes beyond utility poles Street lights Triftic lights I:n•(- standingpoles Pees for use Utility Poles - Electric Fund Other Poles - General Fund Design Manual Required Appropriate standards Where What How ) lm)_j ('owillticd Expanded use of utility poles Design requirements must be set Traditional pole attachment for wire connections to males I Tse of lades for devices tion -discriminatory rites Pole attachment rates apph' Dishong spoke on Policy Enactment Ordinance o Sets out legal requirements including • Permitting • Processing times • Fees • Pole Attachment agreement (if needed) • Reference to Design Manual o Readings in January Design Manual o Referenced by Ordinance o Amended and approved by staff Dishong provided the guidelines for the Design Manual. Desi(j-II Manual • Locations for Node Support Poles or attachment Restricted ROW • Pants • Residential Amu • Histone Districts Preferred ROW • IndusttialAreas R Highways = Retch and Conunerdal Reasonable design or concealment Ifist; i Ilat ic,n <300 from historic site or structure is discouraged Must comply with underground requirements Dositi) `I"111tl�tl Installation Preference Micro Net%vork Node lashed to communication lint' between wility Doles t?tilitN. polus Service poles Stmt Lights Traffic Signals • Street Signage New Nyle Support Pale Ground equipment Desig11 Mantttll Qther RNulrements Cannot obstruct, impede, or hinder travel or public safety Obstruct or hinder ability to ascend or do maintenance Cannot violate NESC for utility service poles Size limitations Lead analvsis Interference analysis Relocation or removal for maintenance Relocation or removal for safety Removal for obsolescence A review of the process was provided by Dishong. • Design Manual o In progress o Ready upon 2nd reading of the ordinance • Ordinance readings in January 2018 • Pole Attachment Agreements o Already exist for some "wired" companies o May need to amend to address the equipment • Permitting process o Need to amend to include equipment, service poles and node support poles Councilmember Nicholson asked about carrier accountability and if the unused poles would be removed. Dishong said the teeth of the process would be added in the new agreements. He explained that obsolete equipment would be required to come down and the pole removed. Mayor Ross asked if carriers are charged rent. Dishong said there is a pole attachment fee and there is a specific formula that is used. He added that the maximum fee is $20 for a single attachment. Councilmember Hesser asked if fees would be consistent and non-discriminatory among all carriers. Dishong confirmed. Hesser asked when the new fees would be first seen. Dishong said this could take place any time now, once the ordinance is approved. C. Update and discussion regarding possible termination of or amendment to the Development Agreement Regarding Annexation and Development of Cowan Springs and possible new utility agreement between Pulte and the City -- Wayne Reed, Assistant City Manager and Wesley Wright, Systems Engineering Director Wayne Reed thanked Jim Briggs and Wesley Wright and said their input was integral in this team approach. Reed said he is seeking Council direction and feedback. He explained that the agreements date back to 2006 and it is time for amendments. Reed said this would be a tool to form a relationship with property owners, allowing them predictability and insuring the City efficient and effective development of the land. Reed provided an overview of the presentation. • Why Amend the Agreement? • Cowan Springs Summary • Development Agreement o Status: Completed and Ongoing • Recommendation • Next Steps e Feedback and Direction Reed described why an amendment was recommended • Identify and recognize terms that have been satisfied • Remove artificial triggers related to wastewater utility infrastructure and replace with actual utility demand • Assign, allocate and distribute the remaining terms and responsibilities among the multiple developers and City o Parks and Recreational Facilities o Electric Services o Wastewater and Easements Reed provided maps and a Summary of Cowan Springs. He noted that Pulte already has a Master Plan for the area. Cowen Springs Summary • 1,269 acres • 4,650 Residential Units (under consideration) — Sun City Somerset PUD... 2,220 max units — Somerset PUD... 1,630 max units — Highland Village PUD... 800 max units • 75 acres commercial (under consideration) GECIRTEE_T YN Development Agreement Terms Status ✓ Property Annexed ✓ Subject to City's development standards per PUDs and UDC ✓ Subject to Impact fees ✓ Property Owners' Association ✓ No New Special Districts ✓ Parks and Recreational Facilities ✓ Schools ✓ Fire Station ✓ Utilities GE(]Rli E T Usti u TEXAS He described the wastewater lines, main lines, lift stations and wastewater treatment plant. Reed said that all is consistent with the Parks and Recreation Master Plan of the City. He explained that it would be in the City's best interest to construct the lift station and wastewater treatment plant only when needed. Reed said he will bring an amendment agreement to the Council for approval next month. Councilmember Fought said he has been working with staff and developers regarding this for about 2 years. He said developers were concerned about when water and wastewater would come in. Fought explained that Pulte changed their plans which determined that the necessary density would not be met and this agreement would remove the uncertainties. Councilmember Nicholson asked about pedestrian walkways. Reed said there will be a trail along Ronald Reagan Blvd. D. Presentation on annexation requirements and discussion on establishing an annexation strategy -- Sofia Nelson, Planning Director, Charlie McNabb, City Attorney and Wesley Wright, Systems Engineering Director Planning Director, Sofia Nelson, began the presentation on annexation requirements and establishing an She noted that the purpose of the presentation was to seek direction from the City Council for areas that the Council would like staff to advance with annexation proceedings. Nelson noted that there would be a resolution for an annexation plan for Council action on the regular council meeting, scheduled for later that evening. She listed the 4 areas discussed by the Council previously and described each. Nelson said staff was suggesting annexation for these 4 areas and possibly 2 more. She said that staff had not yet heard from any Councilmember regarding their suggestions additional areas. She noted that there would be 18 areas for today's discussion and a yellow star indicates areas that would need an annexation plan, while a green star indicates areas that would not. She then spoke on the four current areas of focus. Annexation Area at a Glaile Utit+ties Electric. PEC ( 3 properties In GUS service area) Water GUS (planned 16') • Wastewater GUS (planned BCI) Streets M rnmal Undeveloped Properties 128 0 in the 11 floodplain m of 27 dwelling units Assessed 5144,326,054 Value Est. Tex $611,942 Revenue Annexation Area at a Gland utilities Electric GUS and Oncor • Water GUS • Wastewater: GUS Streets None/undeveloped Properties 11 M in the 0 floodplain e of 1 dwelling units Assessed $924340 Value Est. Tex $3,919 Revenue rr 1 r � t �..�• •_ � u5 s crtnaeNwquovw Annexation Area at a Glance :SUS Lectrlc Utilities Electr,c GUS Oncnir .r ` f•ti 1c but GUS ar: • Water GUS � r� ....... area Streets I R sealedrg000 avera'� corditior -very GUS r1 no curb and gutteccundefired t drainage Sweets NJor.e urdevetcped # of ` Properties N ' # of dwelling 3 1 .Y units F # In the 0 �� �-• floodplain 8 rrr Lrav 9 a1.35, W of 1444 Assessed $6 916 984 Value Est. Tax $29.3-10 Revenue Annexation Area at a Glance I Utiktws :SUS Lectrlc • GUS Water • Prmaniy Septic. but GUS 'Nastewater available in the area Streets Recently chip sealedrg000 avera'� corditior -very narfow-su DStandaid no curb and gutteccundefired drainage Properties 42 # of 3n dwelling units M in the o floodplain Assessed Value Est. Tax Revenue Sb4 1F Systems Engineering Director, Wesley Wright, said each of these 4 areas of development is served or has the capability of being served in the City's UDC policies. He explained that the expansion of Shell Road would be a major CIP and that the area is already served or planned to be served with utilities. Wright said most of the 18 other possible areas for annexation have infrastructure in place, but are not necessarily meeting standards for roads, even though most of the roads are in decent shape. He noted unimproved roads in the Haverland area including Sedro Trail. Wright said even though these are unimproved roads, they are, by and large, in great shape. He said that Council will need to decide if they would like to annex the area. Wright explained that street maintenance would come about in 5 years. He explained that all of the areas have been well thought out regarding drainage. Wright said that drainage could be localized in developments such as Serenada. He spoke on flooding and flood plains. Wright said that all of the areas are served by water with few exceptions, Shell Road being one. Wright noted that wastewater is also served in most areas already, with some on septic. He explained that the City would not have to take wastewater to these areas and would not redevelop these areas. These areas would instead be grandfathered. Wright explained that areas already setup with septic are considered served. Wright said that some streets do not meet width requirements and standard street maintenance would be applied to any annexed areas. He noted that drainage problems would likely exist in some areas, whether annexed or not and funding drainage improvements can be costly. Councilmember Gipson asked about Serenada. He wanted to know if the buyer of a sold property would then have to upgrade the property to meet standards. Wright explained that if someone were to buy multiple properties to develop something different, they would be required to meet the UDC requirements, otherwise the new owner would not be required to upgrade. He said if a property owner was rebuilding, they would be required to build to the current building codes. Wright noted that the City's building codes extend to city limits only, except for some plumbing standards. He explained that the City would offer inspection services if wanted, but a builder would not be compelled to do so. Councilmember Fought asked if it is the staffs recommendation to proceed with only the first 4 areas discussed for annexation. City Manager, David Morgan, confirmed that the first 4 would be staffs recommendation for annexation at this time. He explained that, because of changes in annexation laws, staff would recommend these areas because of them being major corridors and trying to prevent future donut holes. Fought asked if some of the other areas had been taken out because of populations. Morgan said it is because the areas with existing populations do not necessarily point to future development. Morgan noted that the 4 areas would not require an annexation plan. He said there would be an action item for Council on that evening's agenda. Councilmember Fought advised taking the first 4 because the principal is population and not engineering. Wright noted that significant infrastructure has already been spent in these 4 recommended areas. Nelson said there would need to be public hearings and notices for any areas Council would like to proceed with. Mayor Ross asked the Council if they agreed to focus on the 4 areas discussed. Councilmember Jonrowe said her understanding was that there would be 3 years to bring things up to code when annexed. Wright said that the City has 3 years to provide them like services for similar properties in the City. He noted that utilities must be made available within 3 years. He reminded the Council that these properties are already served or can easily be served. Wright said that additional upgrades are generally done by developers in the area and properties already existing do not need to be brought to code within 3 years, because they would be grandfathered, such as Serenada, which is already served by septic. Mayor Ross said Serenada would not be a good proposition for the City. Morgan said the new fiscal impact model will be able to evaluate this. Ross noted that most Serenada owners do not want to be brought into the City. Morgan said it could happen in future, if it was requested by the owners. Councilmember Hesser said he believed the original thoughts on annexation had been to close the donut holes in the City. He asked why the City would not want to pursue this and what would be the benefit. Morgan said the benefit would be the ability to provide orderly services, such as emergency services. He explained that, currently, the County has to provide services to the donut-hole areas and it becomes inefficient. Ross asked about the pink areas on the maps. Morgan said Georgetown EMS serves these areas, but police services in these areas are handled by the County. Morgan said the County has to serve a Swiss-cheese effect which, increases property tax. Ross instructed staff to take the top 4 areas, as discussed, and move forward. Morgan said that no action would be needed on the resolution later that evening. E. Discussion of possible projects to be considered for application submission in response to CAMPO Call for Projects related to TxDOT funding sources available for funding years FY19 to FY22 -- Edward Polasek, Transportation Planning Coordinator Transportation Planning Coordinator, Ed Polasek, discussed possible projects to be considered for application submission in response to a CAMPO Call for Projects related to TXDOT funding sources for FY19 to FY22. Polasek spoke on the Project Call Expectations and described the Project Call Timeline. ^are loerrr _ . I2r8i20, 7 Sponsor Webinar ion Form Review) 1211112017 ApplkBuon Period Opera 111612018 Applrcauon Period Closes (5:00 pm. Central rine) a i 9 Qr 0 i 8 Scoring and Por foko Development 26+20 i 6 Technical Advisory Cor n ittes - Information 'I'' 0'8 Public Comment Period Opera 4.9.10"'g Transaortabon Polity Board -Information 4.9;2016 Public Hearing 8 Technical Advisory Committee - Recommendation 4:30'2016 P ae Comment Penrod Closes Transportation Policy Board - Approval 6- 5"20 : 6 Project Car Sportisor Workshop (Awarded Sponsors) Polasek described previous City of Georgetown STP -MM Projects. • Williams Drive Corridor Study o STP -MM Planning Study • FM1460 Construction o STP -MM Partial Funding for ETJ/RR Portion • SE Inner Loop Corridor Study o STP -MM Planning Study • Williams Drive Widening o STP -MM Construction • Lakeway Bridge Reconstruction o STP -MM Construction Polasek spoke on Possible Project Submittals • Focus on 2008 and 2015 Voter Approved Bond programmed improvements which are on the state system with federal environmental requirements • Focus on 2017 Williams Drive Corridor Study Implementation • Focus on Partnerships with Williamson County and TXDOT to advance projects Polasek described the voter Approved Bond Projects • On State System and programmed funding in 2019-2022 o Leander Road widening (Norwood Drive to SW Bypass) • 2 lane to 4 land segment • TXDOT anticipated schematic FY2018 • No environmental approvals or ROW maps • City would pick up project with TXDOT as a cosponsor Polasek described the Williams Drive Study Implementation next • CAMPO sponsored Platinum Planning Study • 2015 Road bond Intersection/Capital Pool as a possible match o Traffic Operations: Corridor Wide Driveway/post box consolidation study o Traffic Operations: Intersection Engineering and Construction at Lakeway/Booty's, Wildwood, and/or Woodlake o Traffic Operations: Upgrade signals and operations in preparation for Traffic Management Center Polasek discussed Partnerships with Williamson County and TXDOT • SW Bypass/SE Inner Loop intersection with IH -35 o Implements SE Inner Loop Corridor Study o Advance Mobility 35 Project • Bridge and Intersection Improvements currently unfunded in Mobility 35 • Williamson County would complete application for joint submittal by City and County • Equal participation by City/County with possible funding sources for City: • GTEC • 2015 Road Bond Intersection Pool • 2008 Road Bond SW Bypass Corridor Study Polasek summarized. He explained that he was seeking feedback and direction from the Council. He noted that staff would need to complete the applications prior to the January 9, 2018 Council meeting, because the submittal deadline would be January 18, 2018. He said that letters of support would be requested as needed. Mayor Ross asked the Council if anyone objected to these suggestions. Council agreed to the provisions in the presentation. F. Update and direction regarding the City Council's Vision and Strategies -- David Morgan, City Manager and Jack Daly, Assistant to the City Manager City Manager, David Morgan, spoke on the City Council's Vision and Strategies. He explained that the presentation would be a follow-up from the November goal setting sessions. Morgan provided an agenda for the presentation. • Background on Council Goal Setting Process • Review Role, Rules, Goals, Vision, Strategy • Direction and Next Steps Morgan explained that Council goals help ensure clear direction to staff regarding the vision and priorities of the Council. He said that there had been 4 Council Visioning Sessions in November 2015, which had resulted in 14 strategies and 42 tactics. He noted that presentation updates were provided to the Council on March 22nd and June 28th of 2016 and January 10th and August 8th of 2017, with Memos to Council on October 18, 2016 and October 30, 2017. Morgan went on to say that Council revisited Council goals on November 1st and 2nd, 2017, where they confirmed the role of Council, rules of engagement, vision statement and Council goals. He said the Council had also refined 9 Council strategies. Morgan spoke on the Role of Council • As a representative democracy, we provide a voice for, and communication to, each district so that the Council can make decisions that serve the best interests of the City of Georgetown as a whole. o Set policy, and exercise sound financial responsibility, and hold staff accountable for results o Ensure alignment between vision, goals, and strategies o Identify and define key challenges and opportunities o Establish the organizational culture of the City by leading with integrity and upholding legal and ethical standards o Ensure that City services emphasize public health, safety and opportunity Morgan spoke next on the Rules of Engagement • To treat everyone with respect, courtesy, and civility • To act collaboratively and promote and solicit an open, honest, transparent, respectful and professional dialogue with each other, our citizens, city staff, and other interested parties • To honor our communities ■ To actively advocate for our point of view, but also to recognize and respect the decisions of Council, even though we might not agree with that decision (we will not undermine the decisions of Council) • To recognize any preconceptions that we may have about certain individuals, groups, or organizations Morgan reviewed the Council Goals • Culture o Georgetown is a truly diverse, vibrant, inclusive and socially dynamic city where everyone has the opportunity to participate in and benefit from our economic, political and social activities • Employee o Our outstanding and innovative City Employees work diligently to bring the Vision of Council to life and deliver exceptional services to our customers while exemplifying our Core Values • Internal Process 0 Our policies and procedures are easy to understand, and are consistently and professionally applied. Our internal processes are effective, efficient, fair, inventive and transparent, and make us a desired destination for residents and businesses • Customer 0 Anyone interacting with the City will have such a positive experience that they will tell everyone about it • Financial o To maintain a fiscal environment conducive to attaining the goals of the City Morgan went on to speak on the Vision Statement Process • One-on-one meetings with Council • Two surveys 0 551 responses and 616 responses • Community Workshop • Council Workshops on September 12th and October 10th • Confirmed Vision at Council goals setting meetings on November 1 st and 2"d Morgan said that the Council's new Vision Statement was "Georgetown: a caring community honoring our past and innovating for the future". He explained the vision statement helps with alignment across the City, serves as a building block for updating the City's Comprehensive Plan, and drives future branding initiatives. Strategies were discussed next. Morgan explained that it was currently a staff narrative and he hopes that Council will advise and provide feedback. He also asked the Council to determine if they find it to be consistent. Morgan spoke on the current staff understanding of each strategy. 1. Become a destination for unique experiences City Council recognizes the shifting trends related to how people spend their time and money. People are increasingly interested in "experiential entertainment". Changes in retail growth and sales tax collections reflect these trends. People want authentic and memorable experiences. Georgetown is well-positioned to promote itself as a destination city, distinct and unique from other cities in the state. 2. Create a strategy to increase mobility The MOS' :t3 ;a? 'I;Zer: Sur;e;' riiq lits I;ootAI!v as 'I F'ev e0" 11eric7e 1_r; C.:no(cetov.... Ire t3nr 17'tCV."a volfas ?apl,roved to c1 17 r1 b-o,Bd i Me'Cityr s iiisIor'f. 7 tie c"oUr:cil r, ns oeein 3•triiieu ir it4 'sctri prioO.mm 16 OPS;I rf.' aco..gUat In inff%lslv?94'urF',va,,fIe manaCi4nL, 111V Iii;p41c.t w� debt un laxpaver•s. The, ,,T': •loc'1r",' ncs �:Crk is I )o;;t+;al r� 'c as;:t r;zlso ' 4s ccntinUcs tQ d'd,S%70 skins re;7ardrg innovall'Ve aprro.a• hr ; ?:) street n!cilr'.er 3nCe andlo he n,4ilrelej3J[li $ lr4 rc9'1';. F;;rthern�cre, (.ie} Cnr.'.^cil reccgniy(�s the -of pa,'tnersf«'rps Mthir; the;eyion to mike transoo0alienmfraStr NLJIS GsOre feasible. Coiiabo"atior on wa.ste.r planning effcrts and slha ring costs .viil ^,r?IF; Gaor('etev.- U?epive for increasec dernand on tl'ie ?ranspert.rtzor, Vlervrcrl'.. Aithong^ a majority of the investment will obe on r•oadwal, infsast's :cturo, this also includes ccllabcrating �or m:3iti-mcda'i pro e,.t.5 suc as si0e•v:alk and bicycle ir)fraSIruct-j5'e. 3. Promote greater diversity in our population and our businesses City Council recognizes that diversity across all aspects of society helps ensure better decision making. Diversity in thought leads to better outcomes. Diversity helps the City hedge against changes in the environment and economy. A broad range of businesses and employers should be recruited to Georgetown. Generally, growing the commercial tax base in the City will help alleviate over reliance on residential property taxes. A diverse business sector necessitates a diverse housing stock. A variety of services, resources. and amenities should be made available to residents. including seniors. families, and young professionals. 4. Create and maintain outstanding aesthetics and a welcoming appearance and spirit Georgetown has several key gateways leading into the City. Moreover, Georgetown serves as the northern gateway to the Austin region. As such, particular attention and resources need to be directed towards ensuring gateways are well-maintained and adhere to a high development standard. As the City progresses through the comprehensive plan update, specific focus needs to be placed on developing a more refined vision and master plan for the City's gateways. Costs associated with maintaining publically owned rights-of-way (including state- owned property) need to be appropriated and expended at a level consistent with Council's vision. 5. Annexation and MUD strategy Changes in state law and significant population growth have accelerated the need for City Council to adopt new annexation strategies The continued influx of Municipal Utility District (MUD) requests is triggering the need for the Council to revisit its policies and procedures related to these types of developments These two challenges in tandem exacerbate the need for the City to address its strategies. policies. and procedures related to MODS and annexation The City has worked extensively with developers to assist them in delivering creatively financed residential products to Georgetown As laws related to annexation change. the City must be thoughtful in its approach to permitting development in the extraterritorial jurisdiction that may negatively impact the City in the future Promoting high quality growth and equitable taxation and services is a priority for the City 6. Monitor, promote, and communicate a long-term water and utilities plan and strategy City Council recognizes the importance of thoughtful utility management. As a purveyor of water, electricity, and wastewater services, it is imperative that the City both effectively manage and communicate plans associated with all city -owned and operated utilities. Acknowledging that the Texas electric and water markets are continually in flux and will always experience changes. solutions need to be presented to ensure the City's financial position remains strong, rates remain competitive. high-quality customer service is emphasized, and ample resources are available to serve the continually growing population in the City's service area. 7. Expand on our reputation as a City of Innovation The City executed purchased power agreements to cover Georgetown's energy usage with 100% renewable energy, making Georgetown one of the largest city -owned utilities to do so. This alone has helped Georgetown brand itself as an innovative city and garnered international acclaim. City Council recognizes that in an environment where taxation is limited and there is increasing regional competition for taxable value and natural resources, the City must find effective solutions and inventive methods of service delivery. Being a forward -thinking organization will allow Georgetown to elevate its profile in the region and recruit like-minded businesses and residents. 8. Increase our influence with State Government The City of Georgetown and the State of Texas are partners. Increasingly, the Texas Legislature has raised concerns about city decision making, and State pre- emption of local authority continues to be a topic of interest at the State Capitol. As Georgetown continues to elevate its presence in the region and in the state, the City Council recognizes the importance of dedicating time and resources to ensure the City's interests are protected. The City must work with State officials to find common ground and shared goals. That said. there will be disagreements. However, it is important that the City work to build and maintain positive relationship with state agencies and elected officials. Mayor Ross asked who wrote most of this. Morgan credited Jack Daly, but said it was a true team effort. Ross suggested giving Council until Friday to provide any feedback they would like to provide. Morgan spoke on the next steps • Feedback from Council o Modifications and adjustments to goals or strategies o Staff to take input and incorporate tactics into the work plan, and will report back to Council • Post on Website • Update in Early 2018 o Staff teams will develop tactics to achieve strategies o Some tactics will work to achieve several strategies Morgan told the Council that their feedback by the end of calendar year would be appreciated. Mayor Ross recessed the meeting to Executive Session under Section 551.071, Section 551.072, Section 551.074 and Section 551.086 at 4.30 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. G. 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 - Western District Water Agreement with Orchard Ridge -- Wesley Wright, P E. Systems Engineering Director - Texas Crushed Stone Industrial Agreement Sec. 551.072: Deliberations about Real Property - Cowen Creek Interceptor Easement Acquisitions -- Travis Baird, Real Estate Services Coordinator 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. 551:086: Certain Public Power Utilities: Competitive Matters - Quarterly Purchase Power Update Adjournment Mayor Ross adjourned the meeting to begin the Regular City Council meeting at 6:00 PM. Approved by the Georgetown City Council on ("b -Q, Com. Dale Ross, Mayor a-Ol Date Attest: City Secrery