HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN 01.28.2020 CC-WNotice of Meeting of the
Governing Body of the
City of Georgetown, Texas
Tuesday, January 28, 2020
The Georgetown City Council will meet on Tuesday, January 28, 2020 at 3:00 PM at the Council Chambers,
at 510 West 9t" Street, Georgetown, TX 78626.
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 808 Martin Luther King Jr. Street for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas
at 711.
Mayor Ross called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. The following Council Members were in attendance.
Mayor Dale Ross; Mary Calixtro, Council Member District 1; Valerie Nicholson, Council Member District
2; Mike Triggs, Council Member District 3; Steve Fought, Council Member District 4; and Rachael Jonrowe,
Council Member District 6. Kevin Pitts, Council Member District 5 and Tommy Gonzalez, Council Member
District 7 were absent.
Nicholson arrived at 3:33 p.m. during Item B.
Policy Development/Review Workshop — Call to order at 3:00 PM
A. Presentation and discussion regarding the 2030 Update - Implementation and Public
Engagement -- Sofia Nelson, Planning Director
Nelson presented the item and noted that the plan is approximately 95% complete. She noted
that staff is seeking the feedback on the following: Will this action plan achieve the 2030 Goals;
and Is there additional information you need before finalizing the actions and beginning
public engagement on the Implementation Plan? Nelson reviewed the three major strategies
of regulator framework, decision framework, and plans, programs and partnerships. She
reviewed the regulatory framework, decision framework, and plans, programs, and
partnerships and their goals over the upcoming years through 2025 and beyond. Nelson
reviewed the on -going action steps for plans, programs, and partnerships including: actively
partnering with TxDOT, Central Texas Mobility Authority and Williamson County on
roadway improvements; publishing the Comp Plan Annual Report; evaluating the needs of
the Georgetown Housing Authority's programs and identify potential support the City can
provide including, but not limited to, the use of CDBG funds, and energy efficiency upgrades;
pursuing Strategic Partnership grants focused on agencies that promote aging in
place/community and a continued partnership with GISD on school site identification, annual
future land use map review, use of district property, and shared recreation facilities. She
noted the on -going actions steps for the decision framework including: utilizing the Utility
Master Plan and CIP process to weight/prioritize improvements in target areas; identifying
key capital improvements needed in Employment Centers and utilize economic development
tools (e.g., Business Improvement Districts, 4A and 4B sales tax revenues) to encourage target
industries within Employment Centers identified on the Future Land Use map; and
supporting the Low -Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) developments that meet the City's
defined process. Nelson reviewed the public engagement plan including: 1/14 -1/28 Public
Engagement on Implementation Plan and visiting the Planning and Zoning Commission,
Housing Advisory Board, and Georgetown Chamber of Commerce; after 1/28 City Council
Workshop the full Plan posted online and a traditional Public Meeting on February 121", with
staff providing office hours; and future meetings with the following boards and commissions
- P&Z, HAB, GTAB, GEDCO, Commission on Aging, Library Board, Parks Advisory Board,
and Youth Advisory Board. She then noted the community partners that include: the non-
profit community; Georgetown Independent School District; Georgetown Ministerial
Alliance; Georgetown Chamber of Commerce; and On the Table Hosts. Nelson reviewed the
next steps for the project. She noted that staff is seeking the feedback on the following: Will
this action plan achieve the 2030 Goals; and Is there additional information you need before
finalizing the actions and beginning public engagement on the Implementation Plan?
Calixtro noted that there is a lot of good work that has been done and she is confident in the
plan.
Triggs stated that there is not enough information to answer the 2030 goals question and
needs additional information questions because he has received a lot of conflicting
information. He added that people have different opinions on what workforce housing
means and many people think there is adequate workforce housing. Mayor Ross asked Mr.
Triggs what information he needed. Triggs said that affordable housing needs a definition.
Nelson stated that the housing element provides lots of information related to definitions.
Mayor Ross stated that Mr. Triggs can the study information has been provided and then
weigh in on a later date.
Fought stated that staff provided a good document, but there is no way, with all competing
interest, that the City can lay out a plan to achieve everything. He added that this document
will help identify competing goals.
Jonrowe stated that the first question is difficult to answer. She continued that this document
is a good start with six elements identified. Jonrowe stated that the document reflects input
of community. She added that the City needs to constantly seek feedback and hopefully the
menu of options will grow.
Mayor Ross stated that he has met with many stakeholders regarding work force housing and
the City has a workforce that needs housing. He continued that the community is better if
people work and live here, and hopeful by 2030 most of the plan will be implemented.
Jim Johnson, Georgetown Chamber of Commerce President, stated that the Chamber has been
involved in updates and has participated in many ways. He added that last night the board
of directors heard the presentation and support the 2030 plan as presented.
B. Presentation, review, and discussion regarding the 2020 Citizen Survey -- Dr. Thomas
Longoria, Professor and Director of Center for Research, Public Policy, and Training at Texas
State University; and Jackson Daly, Community Services Director
Daly introduced Dr. Longoria with Texas State University and noted the City's great
partnership with Texas State since 2016.
Longria presented the item and provide a survey overview noting the use of Likert Scale
Survey Instrument. He noted the demographic and geographic portion of the survey and the
12 focus areas. Longoria noted that the survey has reduced repeated questions and allowed
for more opportunities for open-ended feedback. He then noted the 12 base focus areas of:
quality of life; mobility; development; public safety; service quality (utilities); service quality
(parks/library); service utilization; media usage; perception of government; employee
interaction; perception of safety; and value of taxes. Longoria noted that Council still has time
to change or add questions to the survey. He then reviewed the project timeline of: January
getting Council direction on survey; March Texas State finalizes survey instrument; April
Texas State mails the survey (early April) and makes open survey link available (late April);
May analyze the results; June utilize focus groups; and Summer provide a submission of full
report and presentation of findings made to Council. Longoria reviewed the efforts to
improve response as: continue direct mail survey; promote survey online to entire
community; analyze results to ensure data reflects household data; and have a more robust
efforts to improve renter response (e.g., customized message on mailing envelope and focus
group with renters). He then reviewed the direction needed from Council of confirming
survey questions, confirming the timeline, and confirming the efforts to improve results.
Nicholson asked about the online survey being available and if an online survey would hurt
or help the input. Longoria responded that an online survey have been done in the past and
does not lead to any cross contamination. He added that IP addresses can be checked for
multiple submissions. Nicholson noted the continued promotion online. She added that it
would be beneficial to see services included at a granular level.
Fought asked how an underrepresented portion of the population is determined. Longoria
stated that there are criteria to follow. Fought asked if the City is trying to match statistical
data. Longoria responded yes, to best extent possible. Fought asked about a part of the
population being overrepresented. Longoria responded that there would be a breakdown of
categories. Fought asked if those responses would be discounted. Longoria responded no,
that data is used for comparisons and differences that are found will be included.
C. Presentation and update regarding the Transfer Station design and rate impacts -- Eric
Johnson, Facilities Director and Ray Miller, Public Works Director
Johnson presented the item and reviewed why the City has a Transfer Station. He noted that
the at the Transfer Station materials must be direct -hauled in the collection vehicle or long -
hauled using transfer trailers. Johnson then noted that factors that affect financial feasibility
include collection cost; disposal cost; distance/travel time to landfill; fuel costs; annual
tonnage hauled; and payload of transfer trailers vs. collection vehicles. He stated that the
current landfill is approximately 90 miles round-trip. Johnson then reviewed the background
on the Transfer Station and that the City committed to the Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to make certain improvements at the transfer station that
include covering areas where waste is exposed and better storm water management. He
added that the existing facility was originally opened in 1984 and improvements made in
2006-2009 and prior to investing in improvements to the existing facility, City Council
provided guidance to compare that option to building a new facility at the same location.
Johnson reviewed the current vs. 2028 projections for usage at the Transfer Station. Johnson
reviewed the impacts of operating at or near capacity and that since the transfer station cannot
operate over its capacity, the operations would be impacted in several ways: collections
vehicles must wait longer to unload, impacting collection routes; collection operations would
have to shift to earlier in the day or later in the day; recycling trucks could not be unloaded
during peak hours since only one material stream can be managed at a time; and the site
becomes more congested, with less space for self -haulers. He reviewed Council direction
provided on April 24, 2019 that directed staff to look at a new facility that included: better
separation of customer drop off and collection vehicles; increased operational efficiency;
reducing wait time to unload vehicle; less downtime to process multiple streams; providing
for three waste streams (trash, recycle, and compost); and requiring a new TCEQ permit.
Johnson review Option A to get to minimum requirement and includes: a Transfer Station
Building; scale house; covered drop-off area; scales; site work; road alignment; water line;
compost area regrade; and truck wash. He noted that Option A could cost between $8,020,000
and $9,624,000. Johnson then reviewed aerial photos and renderings of the site. He then
reviewed Option B which includes all of Option A and an Operator Building and would total
between $8,220,000 and $9,864,000. Johnson reviewed the pros and cons of Option B with the
pros being a full package for the operator, meeting City standards, City would maintain the
building, and uniform appearance throughout facility while the cons would be that the City
may not meet future operator needs, City would have to maintain building, binds the
operator contract to building, and increased project cost. He reviewed Option C which
includes Option A, plus Option B, plus an Office Building, and plus an Outdoor Education
Area and the total cost would be between $8,590,000 and $10,308,000. Johnson then reviewed
the pros and cons of Option C with the pros being that is would allow City staff to operate at
the facility, allow education programming, and uniform appearance throughout facility,
while the cons are that it may not meet future operator needs, the City would have to maintain
building/pavilion, it ties down future flexibility of the site, and the increased project cost. He
also noted that all the option provided could be viewed as an ala carte menu.
Mayor Ross stated that he was unclear on office building and would we charge the operator
for the building. Johnson responded that the cost would be included in the operator contract.
Mayor Ross stated that the operator either needs it or they don't. Johnson responded that the
building would be more of a benefit to the City and would provide office space, meeting
rooms, and restrooms. Mayor Ross asked what percentage of the building would be for City
use. Johnson responded about 90%. Mayor Ross stated that it would make sense for the City
to build the office building.
Miller presented on budget and rates related to the Transfer Station. He reviewed the
Transfer Station Current Contract that was extended November 1, 2017; has a renew date by
November 1, 2022; TDS has administered the Georgetown solid waste contract for more than
20 years; and the current transfer station was constructed in 1989 and has lasted more than 30
years. Miller noted that the Transfer Station construction costs are up to 10 million dollars
and the debt is sold and repaid over a 20-year period with payments that are approximately
$700,000 per year and a new transfer station is expected to increase capacity and efficiency to
last to 2050 or longer. He then reviewed the following chart related to costs and revenue:
Combined External Commercial, Internal Commercial, and Residential
n.nual Monthly
evenue revenut
External 1,051,200 $0.30 per cy $315,360.00 $26,280.00
Commercial (Compactor, Roll -Off) per year
Internal 503,061 (dumpsters & $0.27 per cy $135,826.47 $11,318.87
Commercial carts) per month
COG Misc. $0.90 per $283,694.40 $23,461.20
Residential 26,268 accounts account
Totals $734,880.87 $61,060.07
Internal Commercial
Customer CY Week Mos1thly Annual Revenu
DiEEnp$EeF Cost reveSlE1Q
1x per r+
Individual 8 $2.16 $9.36 $112.32
Commercial
74 Total 592 $1278.72 $5,538.95 $66,493.44
Individual
Commercial
84 Total
Commercial Cart
1x per week
354
Total
Residential
Miller provided next steps.
6 $1.62 $7.02 $84.24
504 $816.48 $3,538.08 $42,456.96
0.5 $0.14 $0.60 $7.28
177
$24.78 $106.20 $1288.56
135,826.47
Jonrowe asked if the City has allowed for citizens to get a smaller recycling cart. Teresa
Chapman, Environmental Services Coordinator, responded that citizens can get a smaller
cart, but it does not reduce their monthly rate.
Johnson stated that staff is seeking feedback on design elements at this time.
Nicholson stated that she understands that the operator could change but the City's hasn't
change in some time. She asked if TDS has provided input on their preferences. Johnson
responded that TDS has been option to options. Nicholson asked what positions would office
out there. Johnson responded that it could be possible for Chapman to office out here with
additional expansion space. Nicholson stated that when reviewing overall use for the project
she doesn't want to add any additional expense where not needed. She added that the City
should hold off on what is nice but not needed.
Calixtro asked about the trucks and the truck wash. Johnson responded that the trucks belong
to the vendor and the truck wash is needed to prevent the dropping of trash remnants.
Mayor Ross noted that on the schematic composting is still shown. Johnson that yes, it is
included. Mayor Ross asked where the City was on composting. Chapman responded that
composting is on the City radar and the City is hosting home composting classes. She added
that the updated Transfer Station would allow the City to further its composting program.
Mayor Ross noted that there are schools that are doing composting and asked if GISD is only
entity the City is doing composting with. Chapman responded that there are other entities
that are interested and that the composting would not be composted on site. She added that
there is mulching on site that would continue and composting would contribute to less
material in the landfill. More discussion between Mayor Ross and staff related to the future
of composting in Georgetown.
Jonrowe stated that she agrees with Nicholson and feels the education building is worth
investing in because the cost is reasonable. She asked about the realignment cost of the road
and if it is necessary. Johnson responded that the road realignment is necessary to increase
the safety of the intersection and allowing trucks to get back on the road faster. Jonrowe
stated that more information on the road realignment would be nice related to traffic and
safety in the area. Johnson noted that the City fuel site is used by City employees as well.
Morgan stated that the road is related to the fuel station. Jonrowe asked if traffic at the site
can be addressed with signage. Johnson stated that the turning movements of the trucks are
specific.
Mayor Ross asked about the cost estimates and the inclusion of 20% for every category for
contingency. Johnson responded that staff isn't sure what the future cost will be, so the 20%
provides a range. Discussion between Mayor Ross and staff about the need for actual
numbers to be presented to Council to allow for informed decision making. Morgan stated
that staff wants to verify that they are not heading in the wrong direction for the project.
Council had no additional comments.
D. Presentation and discussion regarding Georgetown Fire Department's Draft Strategic Plan
2020 -- John Sullivan, Fire Chief
Sullivan presented the item and provided a brief history of the fire department (FD). He then
noted that the FD includes the following areas: Professional Standards; Fire and Life Safety;
Medical Services; Planning and Support, Administrative Services; Operations; and Office of
Fire Chief. Sullivan then reviewed the City's growth trends base on Annual Incidents by Fire
Station/Planning Zones:
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
OOD FD1 FD2 FD3 FD4 FD5
Sullivan reviewed maps of the planning zones and noted the community input that has
occurred. He noted that the community input ranked the FD services in the following order:
Medical Services; Fire Suppression; Technical Rescue; Hazardous Material Mitigation;
Community Risk Reduction; Fire Investigation; and Fire and Life Safety Education. Sullivan
noted that the community expectations were ranked in the following order: fast response;
competent, trained workforce; community outreach; keep pace with growth; and customer
service. He noted that community concerns were ranked in the following order: growth and
demand on services; communication; sufficient tax base to support costs; and timely response.
Sullivan reviewed the FD strategic initiatives as being: Health and Wellness; Recruit and
Retain; Succession Planning; Tech/IT; Training; Staffing; Internal Communications; and Best
Practices. He then reviewed the FD goals that are: Recruit and retain qualified personnel to
continuously meet the needs of the department and community; Enhance and expand the
health and wellness program for our members to address the increased risks associated with
the physical and mental demands of our profession; Develop and maintain a high quality
training program for the members of GFD to best serve the City of Georgetown and
surrounding area; Succession planning. Implement a standard professional development
plan that monitors, trains, and ensures that employees have the KSA's to perform in future
leadership roles; Invest in technology to improve our overall service delivery; Ensure
adequate staffing that provides for the safety of our community and our members while
maintaining fiscal responsibility; Create clear, consistent, and transparent communication
throughout the organization; and Prepare for, pursue, achieve and maintain international
accreditation to better serve our community and embrace excellence. Sullivan reviewed the
mission and vision for the Georgetown Fire Department.
Fought noted the accomplishment achieved when the City took control of EMS services and
stated that he thought this was good plan.
Nicholson noted the positive work.
Mayor Ross recessed into Executive Session at 4:39 p.m.
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
- Litigation Update
Sec. 551.086: Certain Public Power Utilities: Competitive Matters
- Purchase Power Update
- Demand Response Joint Solution Agreement with Links EP LLC
Sec. 551.087: Deliberation Regarding Economic Development Negotiations
- Project Tortilla
Sec. 551.089: Deliberations Regarding Security Device or Security Audits: Closed Meeting
- Update on Cyber Security and Continuity Plan — James Davis, IT Operations Manager
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
Adjournment
Approved by the Georgetown City Council on ftboutalb l 6
Date
Dale Ross, Mayor Attest: City S retir