HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_GTEC_08.18.2010Minutes of the Meeting of
Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation
and the Governing Body of the
City of Georgetown, Texas
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
The Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation of the City of Georgetown, Texas, met on
Wednesday, August 18, 2010.
Board Members Present:
Ray Armour, Richard Anderson, Dale Ross, Tommy Gonzalez, Gabe Sansing, Kevin Kelly arrived at
2:15
Board Members Absent:
Matt Painter
Staff Present:
Bill Dryden, Laura Wilkins, Mike Stasny, Terri Calhoun, Mark Thomas, Lorie Lankford, Laurie Brewer,
Paul Brandenburg, Elizabeth Cook, Tom Benz, Mark Sokolow, Trina Bickford
Others Present: Iva McLachlan – Wolf Family, Gary Gemar – HDR Engineering, Jamal O’Neal – The
Williamson County Sun
Minutes
Regular Meeting
Board may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene in Executive Session at the request of the
President, a Board Member, the City Manager in his capacity as General Manager of the GTEC
Corporation , the Assistant City Manager, 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.
Call to order 2:02 p.m. - Kevin Kelly will be late (Painter absent)
A. PUBLIC HEARING by the Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation (GTEC)
regarding the Proposed 2010/2011 Budget for GTEC
Public Hearing Public Hearing called to order at 2:03 p.m. by Sansing
Brewer presented 2010/2011 GTEC Budget
$2,250,000 total budget
No comments from the public – public hearing closed 2:05 p.m.
Regular Session called to order at 2:05 p.m.
I. STAFF BOARD COMMENTS/QUESTIONS:
(This is a short informational time regarding items where specific actions are not requested or needed)
B. Introduction of visitors.
Everyone introduced themselves: Visitors were: Iva Wolf-McLachlan –
Wolf Family, John Duncan – Pastor 1st Baptist Church, Gary Gemar –
HDR Engineering
C. Project Progress Reports
Dryden gave updates - Only change on NW Blvd overpass project –met
with TxDOT on requirements from Williams Drive to NW Blvd. also memo
from Jim Briggs related to Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension.
Terri Calhoun – Gave update/info regarding Wolf Ranch Parkway Extension.
Referred to memo from Jim which is staff’s recommendation.
Gonzalez – why does staff feel that southern route is best option?
Answered by Calhoun/Benz – more defined see notes at the bottom of
the estimate. Question Ross – have we run numbers on the estimated increase
in tax revenues. Answered Thomas – not yet but he can do that.
A guess would be $100,000 - $150,000 sales tax revenue or commercial
property taxes. McLachlan spoke regarding the position of the Wolf Family
and the Church. They support Alternative 2. Feel it is best option for all
concerned. Discussion continued. Gemar addressed the environmental side.
Some environmental could come into play. They have done a preliminary and
have not noticed anything – but there is still a potential but we won’t know until
we get out there and begin the assessment. The land has always been AG use –
so we don’t anticipate anything major – but again that is just an initial observation.
Thomas – could run some numbers on a 100,000 SF project – Gabe suggests we
throw in a SWAG factor... Ross believes we should eliminate option 1 and go with
option 2. Gonzalez thinks it is a good investment to go with option 2 for the return
over time. Ross would like to see tighter numbers. Armour would like to see final
numbers first before Board makes a recommendation. Gabe asked Ms. McLachlan
to work with staff – get more defined numbers and come back for a decision by the
Board. Benz – said we can tighten up the numbers surveying and determining the
need for bridge or culverts and the environmental – so we will have some
consulting fees in order to tighten up the numbers. Estimated $20,000 to do the
environmental to get better numbers for the project. Benz will bring a task order
forward for the next meeting (September) we will have an answer by the October
Meeting. Gabe suggests they move forward with the MSA in place now.
Ross would rather they bring a task order to ensure it is all done correctly and
they could still have an answer in 60 days. Staff agreed to bring package of
information with recommendation will be brought by staff at next meeting in
September.
NO ACTION
D. Monthly Financial Report and Quarterly Investment Report
Lankford presented the financials for July.
NO ACTION
E. Industry/CAMPO/Updates
No updates - Polasek absent.
NO ACTION
II. LEGISLATIVE REGULAR AGENDA:
(This is for specific action items considered by the Board – greater than $50,000 in value)
F. Review and possible action to approve the minutes from the regular GTEC Board meeting held
on July 21, 2010. -- Paul Brandenburg
Sansing - Why take out wording “ensure public trust through responsible action”
Answered by Brandenburg – same discussion came up at the Council meeting also of
whether it should be in or not. Sansing suggested we deal with it later. Motion to
approve by Gonzalez, second by Armour Approved 3-2 (Painter absent – Sansing,
Kelly abstained as they were not at the last meeting - Ross was out of the room during
this item)
G. Discussion and possible action to review the current GTEC by-laws and recommend any
proposed changes to the City Council.
Brewer presented the item. Latest change in 2004 – things related to meetings.
No changes to recommend at this time – but any changes the Board wants to make
would need to be ratified by Council. Sokolow – does not recommend any changes at
this time – maybe at a later date if changes happen to Local Government Code.
NO ACTION
H. Project eligibility findings regarding the Northern Extension of Wolf Ranch Parkway - Mark
Thomas
Item was prepared by Ed Polasek but presented by Mark Thomas. Brandenbur g
explained how the process has worked in the past. Have to find that it is eligible for
funding before it can be put on the project list for TIP/OTP. Thomas and Benz showed
presentation on the proposed project. (Summit @ Rivery Park). Kelly/A nderson
completed Conflict of Interest Forms and did not vote on this item. Discussion followed.
Question #1. Answer is YES
Question #2. 2-A Ross and Gonzalez believe 2A through 2L = YES
Question #3 Ross – 3A – 3G = YES
Question #4 = YES Ross stated that it falls into the first category because it is not in the
OTP yet.
Motion by Ross, second by Gonzalez to find that- The project “Northern Extension of
Wolf Ranch Parkway” conforms to the ballot language establishing the sales tax.
The project constitutes one or more authorized by statute: Item 2 includes: 2A, 2B,
2F, 2G, 2H, 2I, 2J, 2K, 2L; Item 3 includes: 3A, 3B, 3C, 3D, 3E, 3F and 3G as documented
by the motion. Further discussion before the vote. Ross amended his motion to remove
3F and 3G. Approved 4-2 as amended (Anderson and Kelly abstained. Painter Absent)
I. Consideration and possible recommendation to authorize a real estate Purchas e Contract
with Robert and Bonnie Molnar in the amount of $300,000.00, plus closing costs not to exceed
$2,000.00, for the purchase of 1.64 acres of land and improvements for the construction,
operation and maintenance of public road improvements in connection with the Southeast
Arterial One Road Project. – Terri Glasby Calhoun, Real Estate Services Coordinator, and
Thomas R. Benz, P.E., Systems Engineering Director
Calhoun presented the item. Handed out budget sheets for bot h real estate items
(were not available when packets were assembled). Armour - Why mineral rights not
also transferred? Sokolow – not unusual in this part of the State for owners to keep the
mineral rights. Oil and gas issues in this state – it is just basic. Kelly said if it was 100
acres instead of 1.64 acres it might be important for the owners to keep. In the future
we will address it. Motion by Ross, second by Anderson to approve the real estate
purchase for Molnar property. Approved 6-0 (Painter absent.)
J. Consideration and possible recommendation to authorize the deposit of $325,000.00 into the
registry of the court pursuant to the Award of Special Commissioners rendered in Cause
No. 10-0104-CC1, City of Georgetown vs. Roger E. Caluette and Patricia A. Caluette, et al.,in
connection with the acquisition by condemnation of 11.99 acres of real property and
improvements from Roger E. Caluette and Patricia A. Caluette for the construction,
operation and maintenance of public road improvements, plus Special Commissioners
Fees in the amount of $900.00, in connection with the Southeast Arterial One Road
Project. – Terri Glasby Calhoun, Real Estate Services Coordinator, and Thomas R.
Benz, P.E., Systems Engineering Director
Calhoun presented the item. Appraised value – we did not reach agreement so we are
going to condemnation. They did not come to the hearing but they did object. We
have not deposited money yet – but Caluettes have asked us to deposit the money.
Once we deposit the money we take immediate possession of the property. But the
case is not completely closed. Sokolow – you can take possession but owners can
challenge if they remove the money.. Calhoun if they challenge they can still object on
the value of the land. How long do they have to object? Sokolow depends - it could go
to jury trial. Calhoun - They have not stated what they would want as a dollar value -
but they want us to go ahead and deposit the money. Gonzalez – is there a date in time
as a foundation to base the value of the land? Calhoun – not a date set in time –
probably would use the date of the hearing. Motion by Armour, second by Gonzales to
authorize the deposit. Approved 6-0 (Painter absent)
III. STRATEGIC PLANNING/ISSUES:
MOTION by Armour, second by Gonzales to adjourn Regular Session Approved 6-0 (Painter
absent)
Regular Session Adjourned at 3:24 p.m.
EXECUTIVE SESSION: Called to Order
Called to order at: 3:25 p.m. by Sansing
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 that follows.
Section 551.087 Government Code - Economic Development Negotiations
K. Discuss incentives as it pertains to Project Apple. -- Mark Sokolow/ Mark Thomas
L. Discuss incentives as it pertains to Project Rivery -- Mark Thomas
Section 551.072 Government Code - Real Property
M. Discuss the value of land as it pertains to Project Infrastructure -- Mark Thomas
All Executive Session Items on Tape
Executive Session adjourned 4:12 p.m.
Regular Session resumed at 4:13 p.m.
RETURN TO REGULAR SESSION
N. Action from Executive session if necessary - NO ACTION from EXECUTIVE SESSION
MOTION TO ADJOURN Motion by Armour second by Gonzalez Approved 6-0 (Painter
absent)
Meeting Adjourned at 4:15 p.m.
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 04:15 PM.
Approved : Attest:
_______________________ ________________________
Board Member Name Secretary