Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_GGAF_09.01.2009Notice of Meeting of the General Government and Finance Advisory Board and the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas Tuesday, September 1, 2009 The General Government and Finance Advisory Board will meet on Tuesday, September 1, 2009 at 01:30 PM in the City Hall Main Floor Conference Room, located at 113 East 8th Street, Georgetown, Texas. If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance. General Government and Finance Advisory Board Members: Keith Brainard-Chair, Patty Eason, Dale Ross General Government and Finance Advisory Subcommittee regular meetings are held at least quarterly or as needed at the request of the chair. AGENDA 1. Approval of minutes from the last GGAF meeting - Danella Elliott 2. Report finding of initial IT Assessment & Recommendations - Leticia Zavala 3. Overview and update on the City's internal audit program. - Laurie Brewer 4. Discussion of rate methodology regarding the proposed water conservation rate block changes - Chris Foster and Jim Briggs 5. Discussion of funding/usage/purposes for the Council Discretionary Fund (i.e. Council Contingency) - Micki Rundell 6. Discussion of an ordinance terminating the Wolf Ranch Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone (TIRZ) to be presented to City Council on the September 8, 2009 agenda - Micki Rundell 7. Presentation and discussion for possible purchase of mobile handheld ticket devices from Brazos Technology, Inc. for $49,028 to replace existing units in Police Services - Patrick Hurley and Leticia Zavala Call to Order at 01:30 PM Board may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene in Executive Session at the request of the Chair, a Board Member, the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, City Council Member, or legal counsel for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code Chapter 551, and are subject to action in the Regular Session that follows. Certificate of Posting I, Jessica Hamilton, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street,a place readily accessible to the general public at all times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2009, at __________, and remained so posted for at least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting. __________________________________ Jessica Hamilton, City Secretary L:\Division\finance\Share2\GGAFSub\GGAF Meetings\2009\9.1.09\Minutes 9.1.09.doc MINUTES GENERAL GOVERNMENT AND FINANCE (GGAF) ADVISORY SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS The General Government and Finance (GGAF) Advisory Subcommittee met at 1:30 p.m. on Tuesday, September 1, 2009, in the City Hall Main Floor Conference Room, located at 113 East 8th Street, Georgetown, Texas. 1. Keith Brainard welcomed everyone to the meeting and called the meeting to order at 1:38 p.m. 2. Approval of minutes from the July 7, 2009 meeting. (Danella Elliott) The minutes were approved with the recommended changes underlined in red. Terry Jones noted that in the 2008/09 budget, there is approximately $877,000 set aside to do renovations of the interior of the Georgetown Municipal Complex to better utilize the space. Council approved the purchase of modular furniture for the Planning and Development area earlier in the year; this has been done. We would like to do this same type of configuration to the GUS side of the building. The plan is to take down a lot of the walls and utilize modular furniture. Staff solicited RFQ’s from architectural firms and received 10 responses. A committee consisting of Glenn Dishong, Terry Jones and Michael Seery reviewed the responses. The top four firms were selected and compared to each other. Terry provided information material on the criteria used, as well as the ratings page from each committee member. Eleven Thirteen and PBS&J were the only firms that were in the top four of each of the selection team member’s choices, so those were selected as the finalists. The point totals of the selection team for each firm were compared and they were identical. (Keith wanted clarification on this sentence regarding point totals being identical. After verifying with Terry Jones, it is noted that the top two firms, as well as, the point totals for each were indeed identical). Eleven Thirteen is a Georgetown firm and we have used them in the Members Present: Keith Brainard, Chair, Patty Eason, Dale Ross Members Absent: None Staff Present: Micki Rundell, Chief Financial Officer, Laurie Brewer, Assistant Director of Finance and Administration, Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager, Leticia Zavala, Patrick Hurley, Police, Chris Foster, Lorie Lankford, Kathy Ragsdale, Glenn Dishong L:\Division\finance\Share2\GGAFSub\GGAF Meetings\2009\9.1.09\Minutes 9.1.09.doc past (Community Center, Airport Terminal, Planning and Development office space) and have been satisfied with their work. Their current workload would allow them to devote most of their resources to this project. Terry called Williamson County for references, as they were the architect of record on the Courthouse and on the County Interloop Annex. They were very satisfied with their work. Patty asked if it could be more environmentally friendly. Terry explained that they had installed an energy management system at the GMC, but they were not planning on doing anything additional to the floors or exterior of the building. Keith asked Terry to request that Eleven Thirteen identify where energy savings might be implemented. Terry will do this. Keith suggested that we include 3-4 firms instead of 2 for additional consideration in the future, and that the evaluation committee include one or more non-city employees. The committee agreed that it was a fair process and a good choice. It is the recommendation that Eleven Thirteen be the architect to design renovations for the Municipal Complex. 3. Report finding of initial IT Assessment & Recommendation. (Leticia Zavala) Westin Engineering interviewed key staff throughout the City departments that rely on the IT Department for technology services and resources. Initial review identified the following weaknesses in IT Department’s staff skills and services. Leticia passed out a “Summary of Assessment” of services typically provided by IT Departments, services provided by our IT Department, services provided outside our IT Department, and a diagram of the major gap in services that we currently have.  The IT Department as currently structured does not provide many of the business functions necessary for effective IT services. Nor do other business units within the City “own” the missing functions.  There is a significant mistrust in IT Department’s capabilities and/or willingness to provide appropriate technology support.  IT staff does not support critical applications. Its support is limited to the service desk and network support.  IT employees do not have the skills necessary to support the future Customer Information System (CIS), AMI system and other expected future applications.  Many barriers to doing City business efficiently exist that effective IT services could alleviate.  IT Department’s leadership is deficient in skills and the experience to lead the City to achieve its future technology objectives.  IT staff does not have the skills to design and support a complex network environment with Active Directory services.  The City lacks consistent, adequate technology standards and practices.  Significant reliance is placed on outside vendors to support the existing technology. The final IT Plan document will provide a more in-depth assessment and direction to apply technology to meet the business needs of the City. Some preliminary recommendations are:  Improve IT Governance within the City  Change Organization and Scope of Services provided by City IT Department Westin believes that the City’s vision and technology direction is consistent with the “best in class” cities that are leveraging information technology to provide high quality and efficient services to their citizens. Micki noted that after the Master Plan is completed and it has been presented and accepted by Council, the goal is to include it in the 2030 Plan so that it will always be followed and provide more guidance. L:\Division\finance\Share2\GGAFSub\GGAF Meetings\2009\9.1.09\Minutes 9.1.09.doc Leticia said that there is a lot of “buy-in” and enthusiasm across various departments to make it work the way a “best practices” city’s IT department should. Micki said that the consultant’s take on the IT Director position is a change management leader..someone to lead the processes. We want someone with the technical skills, as well as, the leadership and organizational skills to communicate across divisional lines and initiate the change management that is needed. Dale asked about disaster back-up/recovery procedures. Past instances were discussed and it was noted that something that is expected to come out of the Master Plan is what we need to take to make sure the integrity of our data is protected. We need specific guidelines across the board. Dale asked that until this process is completed, we discuss with the consultants what steps we could take now to protect the data and to evaluate all of the back-up systems. Micki said that she would asked them to do so. The final report is expected mid to end of September. Flow charts and processes for all departments will be documented and part of this report. Hopefully the new IT Director will be on board by November. Keith skipped to the original Item #7 for discussion. 4. Presentation and discussion for possible purchase of mobile handheld ticket devices from Brazos Technology, Inc. for $49,028 to replace existing units in Police Services - Patrick Hurley and Leticia Zavala Patrick Hurley presented information on the request to replace existing handheld ticket devices. City traffic officers have been using mobile handheld computers for citation issuance, since the creation of the first traffic unit in 2001/02. The technology behind the current vendor’s mobile ticket equipment and software is outdated and has not been modified in several years. Our existing vendor requires expensive custom programming costs to enhance existing software to meet current mandates; the new vendor includes such programming costs in their annual base maintenance fee. Staff recommends replacing 10 mobile citation units through Brazos Technology. A key reason is no change will be required in the existing IT infrastructure to implement this solution. Brazos Technology provides full administrative functionality to manage all users, devices, business rules, and fields without IT assistance. Brazos Technology also partners with our existing Municipal Court software company thus ensuring compatibility with our existing system. The police department received a grant from the Justice Department through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 in the amount of $25,000 to be used for equipment replacement. Excess savings in the Police department, due to operational savings, will be used to fund the additional amount needed. L:\Division\finance\Share2\GGAFSub\GGAF Meetings\2009\9.1.09\Minutes 9.1.09.doc 5. Discussion of funding/usage/purposes for the Council Discretionary Fund (i.e. Council Contingency) - Micki Rundell Micki led the discussion of the use of these funds and other related processes. Each year, Council Discretionary funds are included in the Annual Budget. Over the years, the amount of appropriation has ranged from $100,000+ to the current $25,000. These use and authorization for these funds are included in the City’s Fiscal and Budgetary Policy: Council Discretionary Account – The budget may contain appropriated funds to be used at the discretion of the City Council. Actual expenditure of these funds is specifically approved by the City Council on an item by item basis. The Council Discretionary Account for 2009/10 is $25,000, included in the General Fund. Over the years, these funds have been spent on a variety of expense, most notably for special social service or festival requests. Micki’s recollection of the largest expenditure was for the Community Clinic for $55,000. Other uses were for festivals, unknown expenditures at the time the budget was adopted, special Council projects. All expenditures are always voted on and approved by Council. In the event the funds are not allocated or spent, the remaining balance becomes part of the year- end “excess funds” and therefore available for re-allocation in the following year. Unexpended monies go into a pot that becomes available for Council to spend in subsequent years on a one-time basis, as opposed to lapsing into the General Fund and needing to be re-appropriated for any purpose that the Council wishes to appropriate it. (Keith asked - For example, if at the end of the Fiscal year, there is $20,000 remaining in the Council Discretionary Account, is it possible for the $20,000 left over to be spent on a one time expenditure such as a piece of equipment. Micki explained that we currently treat the Council Discretionary Fund as an operating expense. We do not treat it as a one-time expense per the policy. That can be changed if Council wants to, but right now it is part of the compliance coverage – it is included in operational expenses vs. one-time discretionary expense. They can be used to replenish the account in the following year’s budget. Keith thinks that the unspent Council discretionary money should not go into that pot. It should go into the GF pot and not available for one time expenditures, but rather be available for future appropriations as the Council sees fit. Micki said that whatever the “net” balance is - whatever “cash” we have at the end of the year, whether it be over-collection or under-spending, in the next year’s budget, it is used for one-time money. We start over again with a -0- balance; operating dollars are covered one to one. 6. Overview and update on the City's internal audit program. - Laurie Brewer Laurie Brewer gave an overview presentation on our current internal controls and audit practices, and anticipated changes and enhancements to improve the internal audits to minimize the City’s risk for loss through employee fraud. She also provided the committee with actual procedures for their review, as well as reviewing the purpose for the Fiscal and Budgetary Policy. Laurie explained that one accounting position is currently dedicated primarily to the internal control/internal audit function. We are currently evaluating the possibility of utilizing an anonymous fraud reporting service and expect the cost to be approximately $800 annually. Keith thanked Laurie and said it was a good presentation. He is impressed with all of the efforts being made. Dale agreed and said that they have done a great job of balance to have controls in place. The committee agreed that adding a one-pager in the Quarterly Report would be welcomed. L:\Division\finance\Share2\GGAFSub\GGAF Meetings\2009\9.1.09\Minutes 9.1.09.doc 7. Discussion of an ordinance terminating the Wolf Ranch Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone (TIRZ) to be presented to City Council on the September 8, 2009 agenda - Micki Rundell The Wolf Ranch Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone (TIRZ) was put in place as a financing vehicle to reimburse Simon for the $15 M of public improvements that were put in as part of the Development Agreement. The Wolf Ranch TIRZ is a continuous geographic area within the City of Georgetown generally located at the Southwest Corner of IH 35 and SH 29 W as a Reinvestment Zone for Tax Increment Financing purposes pursuant to Chapter 311 of the Texas Tax Code. In October 2004, the City created the Wolf Ranch Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone (TIRZ) that included $15 million in public improvements at Wolf Ranch that were funded by the developer, Simon Properties. As part of the development agreement, the City will repay the $15M + 10% interest through a sales tax rebate to Simon. The development agreement also included a provision that the City could possibly refinance this obligation if it wished. This TIRZ was put in place as the mechanism for that refinancing since the TIRZ can issue bonds that would be separate from the City and which would be repaid through the revenue collected on the tax increment. The City’s repayment agreement requires the City to pay 53% of the General Fund sales tax collected at the shopping center towards the repayment of the $15M. The unpaid balance accumulates at 10% interest annually. The term of the agreement is 20 years from when Wolf Ranch opened (2005). The agreement does not include a “true up” provision. Meaning, if the 53% collected over the 20 years is less than the balance owed at the end of the 20 year term, including interest, the City is not required to pay that balance. And since the revenues at Wolf Ranch are substantially less than projected, Simon will not fully recover their costs ($15M). A TIRZ district does impact the City’s effective tax rate calculation, as the value captured within the TIRZ is deducted from total valuation for calculation purposes. Therefore, since this particular TIRZ does not have a purpose beyond refinancing the Simon investment, staff recommends that the City terminate this entity. Currently, there is $77.5M of incremental value that is captured within the Wolf Ranch TIRZ. The revenue generated by this TIRZ (approximately $275K annually) is allocated to the General Fund as directed by the Wolf Ranch TIRZ Board of Directors. Should this TIRZ be terminated, the captured value will no longer be deducted in the 2010 property tax calculation and should have a positive impact on the City’s effective rate calculation. Bill Hammer with Simon Properties has been notified (8-13-09) that this action was being recommended and had no comment. 8. Discussion of rate methodology regarding the proposed water conservation rate block changes - Chris Foster and Jim Briggs Jim Briggs, Glenn Dishong, Kathy Ragsdale and Chris Foster answered questions and provided explanations for members of the committee. Keith had prepared written questions and staff had answered them ahead of time. There was a lengthy discussion on the proposed rate changes. Jim said that the new rates need to be in set by January to have time to educate the public and be able to take effect in April, which is the beginning of the peak demand period. The committee decided that L:\Division\finance\Share2\GGAFSub\GGAF Meetings\2009\9.1.09\Minutes 9.1.09.doc they were not ready to take action on this item. Keith suggested and encouraged committee members to put any questions that need answering in writing ahead of time prior to the next meeting and they will be discussed at that time. 9. Meeting adjourned at 3:54 p.m. Minutes of the Meeting of General Government and Finance Advisory Board and the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas Tuesday, September 1, 2009 The General Government and Finance Advisory Board of the City of Georgetown, Texas, met on Tuesday , September 1, 2009 presiding. Board Members Present: Keith Brainard-Chair, Patty Eason, Dale Ross Board Members Absent: None Staff Present: Micki Rundell, Laurie Brewer, Leticia Zavala, Chris Foster, Patrick Hurley Minutes Regular Meeting MINUTES GENERAL GOVERNMENT AND FINANCE (GGAF) ADVISORY SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS The General Government and Finance (GGAF) Advisory Subcommittee met at 1:30 p.m. on Tuesday, September 1, 2009, in the City Hall Main Floor Conference Room, located at 113 East 8th Street, Georgetown, Texas. Keith Brainard welcomed everyone to the meeting and called the meeting to order at 1:38 p.m. Approval of minutes from the July 7, 2009 meeting. (Danella Elliott) The minutes were approved at the September 1, 20009 GGAF Meeting with the recommended changes underlined in red. Terry Jones noted that in the 2008/09 budget, there is approximately $877,000 set aside to do renovations of the interior of the Georgetown Municipal Complex to better utilize the space. Council approved the purchase of modular furniture for the Planning and Development area earlier in the year; this has been done. We would like to do this same type of configuration to the GUS side of the building. The plan is to take down a lot of the walls and utilize modular furniture. Staff solicited RFQ’s from architectural firms and received 10 responses. A committee consisting of Glenn Dishong, Terry Jones and Michael Seery reviewed the responses. The top four firms were selected and compared to each other. Terry provided information material on the criteria used, as well as the ratings page from each committee member. Eleven Thirteen and PBS&J were the only firms that were in the top four of each of the selection team member’s choices, so those were selected as the finalists. The point totals of the selection team for each firm were compared and they were identical. (Keith wanted clarification on this sentence regarding point totals being identical. After verifying with Terry Jones, it is noted that the top two firms, as well as, the point totals for each were indeed identical). Eleven Thirteen is a Georgetown firm and we have used them in the past (Community Center, Airport Terminal, Planning and Development office space) and have been satisfied with their work. Their current workload would allow them to devote most of their resources to this project. Terry called Williamson County for references, as they were the architect of record on the Courthouse and on the County Interloop Annex. They were very satisfied with their work. Patty asked if it could be more environmentally friendly. Terry explained that they had installed an energy management system at the GMC, but they were not planning on doing anything additional to the floors or exterior of the building. Keith asked Terry to request that Eleven Thirteen identify where energy savings might be implemented. Terry will do this. Keith suggested that we include 3-4 firms instead of 2 for additional consideration in the future, and that the evaluation committee include one or more non-city employees . The committee agreed that it was a fair process and a good choice. It is the recommendation that Eleven Thirteen be the architect to design renovations for the Municipal Complex. Report finding of initial IT AssessmentReport finding of initial IT AssessmentReport finding of initial IT AssessmentReport finding of initial IT Assessment &&&& RecommendationRecommendationRecommendationRecommendation. (. (. (. (Leticia ZavalaLeticia ZavalaLeticia ZavalaLeticia Zavala )))) Westin Engineering interviewed key staff throughout the City departments that rely on the IT Department for technology services and resources. Initial review identified the following weaknesses in IT Department’s staff skills and services. Leticia passed out a “Summary of Assessment” of services typically provided by IT Departments, services provided by our IT Department, services provided outside our IT Department, and a diagram of the major gap in services that we currently have. The IT Department as currently structured does not provide many of the business functions necessary for effective IT services. Nor do other business units within the City “own” the missing functions. There is a significant mistrust in IT Department’s capabilities and/or willingness to provide appropriate technology support. IT staff does not support critical applications. Its support is limited to the service desk and network support. IT employees do not have the skills necessary to support the future Customer Information System (CIS), AMI system and other expected future applications. Many barriers to doing City business efficiently exist that effective IT services could alleviate. IT Department’s leadership is deficient in skills and the experience to lead the City to achieve its future technology objectives. IT staff does not have the skills to design and support a complex network environment with Active Directory services. The City lacks consistent, adequate technology standards and practices. Significant reliance is placed on outside vendors to support the existing technology. The final IT Plan document will provide a more in-depth assessment and direction to apply technology to meet the business needs of the City. Some preliminary recommendations are: Improve IT Governance within the City Change Organization and Scope of Services provided by City IT Department Westin believes that the City’s vision and technology direction is consistent with the “best in class” cities that are leveraging information technology to provide high quality and efficient services to their citizens. Micki noted that after the Master Plan is completed and it has been presented and accepted by Council, the goal is to include it in the 2030 Plan so that it will always be followed and provide more guidance. Leticia said that there is a lot of “buy-in” and enthusiasm across various departments to make it work the way a “best practices” city’s IT department should. Micki said that the consultant’s take on the IT Director position is a change management leader..someone to lead the processes. We want someone with the technical skills, as well as, the leadership and organizational skills to communicate across divisional lines and initiate the change management that is needed. Dale asked about disaster back-up/recovery procedures. Past instances were discussed and it was noted that something that is expected to come out of the Master Plan is what we need to take to make sure the integrity of our data is protected. We need specific guidelines across the board. Dale asked that until this process is completed, we discuss with the consultants what steps we could take now to protect the data and to evaluate all of the back-up systems. Micki said that she would asked them to do so. The final report is expected mid to end of September. Flow charts and processes for all departments will be documented and part of this report. Hopefully the new IT Director will be on board by November. Keith skipped to the original Item #7 for discussion. Presentation and discussion for possible purchase of mobile handheld ticket devices from Brazos Technology, Inc. for $49,028 to replace existing units in Police Services - Patrick Hurley and Leticia Zavala Patrick Hurley presented information on the request to replace existing handheld ticket devices. City traffic officers have been using mobile handheld computers for citation issuance, since the creation of the first traffic unit in 2001/02. The technology behind the current vendor’s mobile ticket equipment and software is outdated and has not been modified in several years. Our existing vendor requires expensive custom programming costs to enhance existing software to meet current mandates; the new vendor includes such programming costs in their annual base maintenance fee. Staff recommends replacing 10 mobile citation units through Brazos Technology. A key reason is no change will be required in the existing IT infrastructure to implement this solution. Brazos Technology provides full administrative functionality to manage all users, devices, business rules, and fields without IT assistance. Brazos Technology also partners with our existing Municipal Court software company thus ensuring compatibility with our existing system. The police department received a grant from the Justice Department through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 in the amount of $25,000 to be used for equipment replacement. Excess savings in the Police department, due to operational savings, will be used to fund the additional amount needed. Discussion of fundingDiscussion of fundingDiscussion of fundingDiscussion of funding////usageusageusageusage////purposes for the Council Discretionary Fundpurposes for the Council Discretionary Fundpurposes for the Council Discretionary Fundpurposes for the Council Discretionary Fund ((((iiii....eeee.... CouncilCouncilCouncilCouncil ContingencyContingencyContingencyContingency ) -) -) -) - Micki RundellMicki RundellMicki RundellMicki Rundell Micki led the discussion of the use of these funds and other related processes. Each year, Council Discretionary funds are included in the Annual Budget. Over the years, the amount of appropriation has ranged from $100,000+ to the current $25,000. These use and authorization for these funds are included in the City’s Fiscal and Budgetary Policy: Council Discretionary Account – The budget may contain appropriated funds to be used at the discretion of the City Council. Actual expenditure of these funds is specifically approved by the City Council on an item by item basis. The Council Discretionary Account for 2009/10 is $25,000, included in the General Fund. Over the years, these funds have been spent on a variety of expense, most notably for special social service or festival requests. Micki’s recollection of the largest expenditure was for the Community Clinic for $55,000. Other uses were for festivals, unknown expenditures at the time the budget was adopted, special Council projects. All expenditures are always voted on and approved by Council. In the event the funds are not allocated or spent, the remaining balance becomes part of the year-end “excess funds” and therefore available for re-allocation in the following year. Unexpended monies go into a pot that becomes available for Council to spend in subsequent years on a one-time basis, as opposed to lapsing into the General Fund and needing to be re-appropriated for any purpose that the Council wishes to appropriate it. (Keith asked - For example, if at the end of the Fiscal year, there is $20,000 remaining in the Council Discretionary Account, is it possible for the $20,000 left over to be spent on a one time expenditure such as a piece of equipment. Micki explained that we currently treat the Council Discretionary Fund as an operating expense. We do not treat it as a one-time expense per the policy. That can be changed if Council wants to, but right now it is part of the compliance coverage – it is included in operational expenses vs. one-time discretionary expense. They can be used to replenish the account in the following year’s budget. Keith thinks that the unspent Council discretionary money should not go into that pot. It should go into the GF pot and not available for one time expenditures, but rather be available for future appropriations as the Council sees fit. Micki said that whatever the “net” balance is - whatever “cash” we have at the end of the year, whether it be over-collection or under-spending, in the next year’s budget, it is used for one-time money. We start over again with a -0- balance; operating dollars are covered one to one. Overview and update on the CityOverview and update on the CityOverview and update on the CityOverview and update on the City''''s internal audit programs internal audit programs internal audit programs internal audit program.... ---- Laurie BrewerLaurie BrewerLaurie BrewerLaurie Brewer Laurie Brewer gave an overview presentation on our current internal controls and audit practices, and anticipated changes and enhancements to improve the internal audits to minimize the City’s risk for loss through employee fraud. She also provided the committee with actual procedures for their review, as well as reviewing the purpose for the Fiscal and Budgetary Policy. Laurie explained that one accounting position is currently dedicated primarily to the internal control/internal audit function. We are currently evaluating the possibility of utilizing an anonymous fraud reporting service and expect the cost to be approximately $800 annually. Keith thanked Laurie and said it was a good presentation. He is impressed with all of the efforts being made. Dale agreed and said that they have done a great job of balance to have controls in place. The committee agreed that adding a one-pager in the Quarterly Report would be welcomed. Discussion of an ordinance terminating the Wolf Ranch Tax Increment ReinvestmentDiscussion of an ordinance terminating the Wolf Ranch Tax Increment ReinvestmentDiscussion of an ordinance terminating the Wolf Ranch Tax Increment ReinvestmentDiscussion of an ordinance terminating the Wolf Ranch Tax Increment Reinvestment ZoneZoneZoneZone ((((TIRZTIRZTIRZTIRZ )))) to be presented to City Council on the Septemberto be presented to City Council on the Septemberto be presented to City Council on the Septemberto be presented to City Council on the September 8888,,,, 2009200920092009 agendaagendaagendaagenda ---- Micki RundellMicki RundellMicki RundellMicki Rundell The Wolf Ranch Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone (TIRZ) was put in place as a financing vehicle to reimburse Simon for the $15 M of public improvements that were put in as part of the Development Agreement. The Wolf Ranch TIRZ is a continuous geographic area within the City of Georgetown generally located at the Southwest Corner of IH 35 and SH 29 W as a Reinvestment Zone for Tax Increment Financing purposes pursuant to Chapter 311 of the Texas Tax Code. In October 2004, the City created the Wolf Ranch Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone (TIRZ) that included $15 million in public improvements at Wolf Ranch that were funded by the developer, Simon Properties. As part of the development agreement, the City will repay the $15M + 10% interest through a sales tax rebate to Simon. The development agreement also included a provision that the City could possibly refinance this obligation if it wished. This TIRZ was put in place as the mechanism for that refinancing since the TIRZ can issue bonds that would be separate from the City and which would be repaid through the revenue collected on the tax increment. The City’s repayment agreement requires the City to pay 53% of the General Fund sales tax collected at the shopping center towards the repayment of the $15M. The unpaid balance accumulates at 10% interest annually. The term of the agreement is 20 years from when Wolf Ranch opened (2005). The agreement does not include a “true up” provision. Meaning, if the 53% collected over the 20 years is less than the balance owed at the end of the 20 year term, including interest, the City is not required to pay that balance. And since the revenues at Wolf Ranch are substantially less than projected, Simon will not fully recover their costs ($15M). A TIRZ district does impact the City’s effective tax rate calculation, as the value captured within the TIRZ is deducted from total valuation for calculation purposes. Therefore, since this particular TIRZ does not have a purpose beyond refinancing the Simon investment, staff recommends that the City terminate this entity. Currently, there is $77.5M of incremental value that is captured within the Wolf Ranch TIRZ. The revenue generated by this TIRZ (approximately $275K annually) is allocated to the General Fund as directed by the Wolf Ranch TIRZ Board of Directors. Should this TIRZ be terminated, the captured value will no longer be deducted in the 2010 property tax calculation and should have a positive impact on the City’s effective rate calculation. Bill Hammer with Simon Properties has been notified (8-13-09) that this action was being recommended and had no comment. Discussion of rate methodology regarding the proposed water conservation rate blockDiscussion of rate methodology regarding the proposed water conservation rate blockDiscussion of rate methodology regarding the proposed water conservation rate blockDiscussion of rate methodology regarding the proposed water conservation rate block changeschangeschangeschanges ---- Chris Foster and Jim BriggsChris Foster and Jim BriggsChris Foster and Jim BriggsChris Foster and Jim Briggs Jim Briggs, Glenn Dishong, Kathy Ragsdale and Chris Foster answered questions and provided explanations for members of the committee. Keith had prepared written questions and staff had answered them ahead of time. There was a lengthy discussion on the proposed rate changes. Jim said that the new rates need to be in set by January to have time to educate the public and be able to take effect in April, which is the beginning of the peak demand period. The committee decided that they were not ready to take action on this item. Keith suggested and encouraged committee members to put any questions thatKeith suggested and encouraged committee members to put any questions thatKeith suggested and encouraged committee members to put any questions thatKeith suggested and encouraged committee members to put any questions that need answering in writing ahead of time prior to the next meeting and they will beneed answering in writing ahead of time prior to the next meeting and they will beneed answering in writing ahead of time prior to the next meeting and they will beneed answering in writing ahead of time prior to the next meeting and they will be discussed at that timediscussed at that timediscussed at that timediscussed at that time.... Meeting adjourned at 3:54 p.m. Board may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene in Executive Session at the request of the Chair, a Board Member, the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, City Council Member, or legal counsel for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code Chapter 551, and are subject to action in the Regular Session that follows. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 PM. Approved :Attest: _______________________________________________ Board Member Name Secretary