Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda CC 11.14.1995
NOTICE OF MEETING OF THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS TUESDAY, November 14, 1995 The City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, will meet on Tuesday, November 14, 1995, at 5:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, located at the northeast corner of Seventh and Main Street in Georgetown, Texas. If you need accommodations for any type of disability, please advise in advance. Detailed explanatory information on the items listed below is compiled in an agenda packet which is distributed to the Mayor and each member of the Council. An agenda packet is also available at the Public Library, for the use of interested citizens. Workshop - Call to order at 5:30 p.m. A Governance discussion on the use of bows and crossbows within _the City Limits/Hartley Sappington B Presentation of the annual investment report for 1994/95/Micki Rundell and Susan Morgan C Report from Councilmembers on TML/Doris Curl Regular Session - to convene Executive Session (will begin no earlier than 6:30 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 that follows. D Sec.551.071 consultation with attorney E Sec.551.072 deliberation on real property F Sec.551.074 personnel matters (appointment of Assistant Municipal Court Judge) G Sec.551.075 conference with employee Regular Session - to begin no earlier than 7:00 p.m. H Action on Executive Session items I Citizens wishing to address the Council J Mayor, Council, City Manager, and staff comments and reports City Council Agenda/November 14, 1995 Page 1 of 4 Pages Public Hearing K Conduct a public hearing on proposed Texas Capital Fund infrastructure improvements for Advanced Metal Systems/Hartley Sappington Consent Agenda Consent agenda includes non -controversial and routine items that council may act on with one single vote. A councilmember may pull any item from the consent agenda in order that the Council discuss and act upon it individually as part of the regular agenda. L Consideration of approval of meeting minutes --Regular Meeting of October 24, 1995/Sandra Lee M Consideration of.a resolution approving the application for funding through the Infrastructure Program of the ---Texas Department of Commerce on behalf of Advanced Metal Systems, Inc./Acting City Manager Hartley Sappington N Consideration of an award of bid in the amount of $48,033.00 for reconstruction of a home at 907 East 20th Street, funded by the HOME Grant/Hartley Sappington O Consideration of approval to purchase computer equipment through an existing Interlocal Purchase Agreement from the Texas Department of Information Resources/Terry Jones and Elizabeth Gray P Consideration of authorizing the City to pay a deductible payment to the National Casualty Company/Hartley Sappingon Q Consideration of approving a resolution to authorize the Mayor to execute an Airport Land Lease with Gayle Peery for the construction of a private aircraft storage hangar/Travis McLain and Hartley Sappington R Consideration of approving a resolution to authorize the Mayor to execute an Airport Land Lease with D. E. Rhodes for the construction of a private aircraft storage hangar/Travis McLain and Hartley Sappinigton S Consideration of a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an Airport Land Lease with Marvin Cressman for the construction of a private aircraft storage hangar/Travis McLain and Hartley Sappington T Consideration of a declaration of the light fixtures at the Grace Heritage Center as surplus and authorizing the Heritage Society to dispose of the fixtures, with the stipulation that the Heritage Society will install fixtures from the Gothic Period/Bob Hart U Consideration of approving the bid award to Williams and Thomas, Inc., d.b.a. Jamail Construction, to construct concrete curb and gutter, driveways, sidewalks, and radius units along various city streets in the amount of $116,704.88/Jim Briggs City Council Agenda/November 14, 1995 Page 2 of 4 Pages V Consideration of approving Amendment #20 to the agreement between Camp, Dresser & McKee and the City of Georgetown for engineering services related to the design of the 1996 Wastewater System Improvements in the amount of $56,000.00/Jim Briggs W Consideration of approving Amendment #21 to the agreement between Camp, Dresser & McKee and the City of Georgetown, for engineering services related to the design of the 1996 Water System Improvements in the amount of $24,200.00/Jim Briggs X Consideration of approving Amendment #22 to the agreement between Camp, Dresser & McKee and the City of Georgetown for engineering services related to the design of the Railroad Street and Country Club Road improvements, in the amount of $122,950.00/Jim Briggs Y Consideration of .approving an amendment to the contract between the City of Georgetown and Roming-Parker -Associates, for engineering- services related to paving, drainage and utility improvements of Northwest Blvd., Quail Valley Drive, and 15th Street in the amount of $174,200.00/Jim Briggs Z Consideration of a resolution to authorize a license to encroach into the public utility easement located along the east property line of Berry Creek, Section 9, Phase III, Block A, Lot 43, located at 30406 La Quinta Drive/Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry AA Consideration of a resolution to authorize a license to encroach into the public utility easement located along the east property line of Berry Creek, Section 9, Phase I, Block A, Lot 11, located at 31000 Clearwater Court/Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry BB Consideration of a resolution authorizing the City Attorney to issue a quit claim deed to be filed abandoning the platted Public Utility Easement (PUE) located along the east side lot line of Lot 2, P.W. Properties Subdivision/Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry CC Consideration of rejecting all bids relative the San Gabriel River Hike and Bike Trail; and instructing staff to revise the specifications/Randy Morrow DD Consideration of approval of a resolution revising the current City of Georgetown Investment Policy to comply with new state law and clarify requirements/Micki Rundell and Susan Morgan EE Consideration of revisions to reciprocal agreement with Round Rock Public Library/Elizabeth Gray Rezular A enda Council will individually consider and possibly take action on any or all of the following items: (Council may, at any time, recess the regular session to convene in executive session at the request of the Mayor, a councilmember, or the City Manager.) FF Second reading of an ordinance updating TMRS (Texas Municipal Retirement System) employee service credits/Teresa Hersh City Council Agenda/November 14, 1995 Page 3 of 4 Pages GG Second Reading of an ordinance to rezone Sun City Georgetown, Neighborhoods One, Two and Three from A, Agricultural to RP, Residential Planned C-1, Local Commercial, and C-2B, Commercial First Height/Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry HH Consideration of approval of a resolution calling a Special Election on January 20, 1996, for the purpose of electing a councilmember for the vacant position for District 2; ordering a runoff election, if necessary, and establishing procedures for said election/Sandra Lee Adjournment CERTIFICATE OF POSTING I, , City Secretary of the .City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of Meeting was posted on the - day of , 1995, at a.m./p.m. City Council Agenda/November 14, 1995 Page 4 of 4 Pages «yr-z,: +n -�r�' ati�eTri• a :,- xx� .3�-aa.: ,�. �e�n �s..�r.�,`..';+�;"�' 3�- �?"�-r�r .-as K - '!'z, �'x,� .- _ Council Meeting Date: 11 /14/95 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT A workshop governance discussion on use of bows and crossbows within City limits. ITEM SUMMARY Staff has become aware of incidents within the City limits of the use of bows and crossbows. The only restrictions, by ordinance, the City has on bows and crossbows is in Chapter 12.20.060, which prohibits use of bows within city park boundaries. Discussion items include: ► Ordinances by other cities. ► Crossbows are not legal for hunting. Should they be allowed for any type of use within the City? ► Should limitations, by ordinance, be defined regarding 1. Hunting or target shooting? 2. Distances from residences, streets, commercial buildings? 3. Minimum acreage required before hunting can occur? 4. Establishment of target shooting ranges? SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS None FINANCIAL IMPACT None COMMENTS None ATTACHMENTS None Submitted By: ("r U Hartley Sappington, Director of Community SUBJECT Presentation of the annual investment report for 1994/95. ITEM SUMMARY The annual investment report from staff for 1994/95 as required in the Investment Policy. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS None. FINANCIAL IMPACT None. COMMENTS None. ATTACHMENTS 1994/95 Investment Report Glossary of Terms Subm* Micki Rundell, Accounting Director r ' 1 Susan L. Morgan, Director of Finance and Administration INVESTMENT GLOSSARY AAA RATED: A performance measurement set by Standard & Poor's or Moody's designating the highest financial criteria has been met, resulting in less risk for the investor. AGENCIES: Informal name used to refer to securities issued by agencies of the United States government, and guaranteed as to the principal and interest. Including: Federal Home Loan Banks (FHLB) Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA) Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (FHLMC) Federal Farm Credit Bank (FFCB) BASIS POINT: Unit of interest rates or yields expressed as a percentage. 100 basis points equal 1 percent. BOND PROCEEDS: The funds received from the issuance of debt obligations (bonds). CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT: A secured deposit of funds in a bank for a specified term that earns interest at a specified rate. CITY DEPOSITORY: The local bank that processes daily cash deposits, distribution of vendor payments and city employee payroll disbursements. COVENANTS: Contractual terms of an indenture agreement that prohibit the issuing firm (the City) from taking actions that might hurt the bond holders' interest. COLLATERAL: Securities, evidence of deposit or other property which a borrower pledges to secure repayment of a loan. Also refers to securities pledged by a bank to secure deposits of public monies. COUPON RATE: The cost to the issuer for notes and bonds paying semiannual interest DEBT SERVICE: The amount necessary to pay principal and interest requirements on outstanding bonds for a given year or series of years. DEBT RESERVE FUND: The fund into which moneys are placed which may be used to pay debt service if pledged revenues are insufficient to satisfy the debt service requirements. DELIVERY VS. PAYMENT (DVP): The safest method of settling a trade involving a book entry security. In a DVP settlement, the funds are wired from the buyer's account and the security is delivered from the seller's account in simultaneous, interdependent wires. DERIVATIVES: Financial instruments whose value depends on the values of underlying assets or indexes. It is a common misconception that all derivatives are high -risk, speculative instruments. Some are and some are not. Large financial institutions use derivatives for capital markets hedging. For hedging purposes, common derivatives are options, futures, swaps, and swaptions. All CMOs are derivatives. There are many derivatives instruments, and new ones are developed often. DISCOUNT: The amount by which the price for a security is less than par (face value) DISCOUNT SECURITIES: Securities that do not pay periodic interest. Investors earn the difference between the discount issue price and full face value paid at maturity (Treasury bills). DIVERSIFICATION: Dividing investment funds among a variety of securities offering independent returns and maturities. ESCROW: Funds or deposits held on behalf of another party. FDIC PUBLIC TRUST: A publicly held investment pool created for municipalities that invests in only U.S. government securities, and maintains a $1 for $1 market value. INVESTMENT RATE RISK: The risk that changes in prevailing interest rates will adversely affect assets, liabilities, capital, income, and/or expense at different times or in different amounts. INVESTMENT POOL: The aggregate of all funds from political subdivisions that are placed for investment. LIQUIDITY: A liquid asset is one that can be converted easily and rapidly into cash without a substantial loss of value. Liquidity is the capacity to meet future monetary outflows from available resources. MARKET VALUE: The price at which a security is trading and could presumably be purchased or sold. MARKETABILITY: Describes a security that is readily salable to buyers in an active secondary market. MATURITY: The date upon which the principal or stated value of an investment becomes due and payable. MOODY'S: A nationally recognized financial service company that provides ratings for municipal securities and other financial information to investors. OPERATING RESERVES: Unrestricted funds available for investment in excess of funds necessary for day to day operations. PAR: The value of an instrument at maturity. PORTFOLIO: Collection of securities held by an investor. PREMIUM: The amount by which the price for a security is greater than its par amount. PUBLIC FUNDS INVESTMENT ACT: The legislation governing how a municipality may invest its public funds. (Texas Government Code Section 2256) RATE: The cost of debt service paid by an issuer to an investor. RATE OF RETURN: The yield obtainable on a security based on its purchase price or its current market price. This may be the amortized yield to maturity on a bond or the current income return. REGISTERED: A form of ownership of certificate bonds. The name of the owner is listed on the certificate and in the records of the issuers' agent. RISK: The possibility of loss. SAFEKEEPING: A service to customers rendered by banks for a fee whereby securities and valuables of all types and descriptions are held in the bank's vault for protection. SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION (SEC): Agency created by Congress to protect investors in securities transactions by administering securities legislation. SIP (SERVICE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM) FEES: Fees paid to the City by Del Webb for the construction of infrastructure improvements for Sun City Georgetown on a per unit basis. STANDARD & POOR'S (S&P): A nationally recognized financial service company that provides ratings for municipal securities and other financial information to investors. TEXPOOL: An investment pool managed by the State Treasury that offers safe, efficient and liquid investment of funds to local governments within the State of Texas. TREASURY BILLS: A non -interest bearing discount security issued by the U. S. Treasury to finance the national debt. Most bills are issued to mature in 3, 6 or 12 months. TREASURY BONDS: Long-term obligations issued by the U. S. Treasury with initial maturities greater than 10 years. TREASURY NOTES: Medium term obligations issued by the U. S. Treasury with initial maturities of 1 to 10 years. WEIGHTED AVERAGE MATURITY (WAM): The average maturity date of the securities in a pool weighted by the size of each security. YIELD: The rate of annual income return on an investment expressed as a percentage. YIELD CURVE: A graph which plots the market yield on securities with different maturities at a given point in time. ZERO BALANCE ACCOUNT (ZBA): A bank account that funds disbursements at the time of presentation to the bank, thus eliminating check "float" and allows investment use of those funds until they are paid. I I _� CITY OF GEORGETOWN Investment Report for 1994195 November 14, 1995 To: Mayor, Council Members, & City Manager From: Director of Finance & Administration CITY OF GEORGETOWN 1994/95 INVESTMENT REPORT YEAR-END REPORT Portfolio Comparison (Graph A) The objective of the City's investment program has been to increase interest income through the safe, secure investment of City funds while maintaining the availability of sufficient cash to meet obligations when they come due. Items of note are outlined below: • The City's portfolio has been diversified to include both U.S. Agency securities and FGIC investment pool, as authorized by Council last year. • Overall balances are higher at September 30, 1995 because of recent bond issues. • The 1995 Series Revenue Bond (TWDB) requires unapplied funds be held in a restricted escrow account until an approved project is underway. The City has designated Hartland Bank as custodian of these bond proceeds. • The City only invests in authorized securities that meet the City's investment policy and has no derivative securities in its portfolio. A detail listing of securities outstanding at September 30, 1995 is provided on page 3. 1994/95 Investment Report 1 PORTFOLIO COMPARISION SEPTEMBER 30, 104 TEXPOOL 5,910,786 US TREASURIES 5,886,867 FIRST TEXAS (Operating) 343,535 TOTAL $12,141,188 09/30/94 BALANCES (48.7%) Texpool (2.8%) Depository (48.5%) US Treasury SEPTEMBER 30, 1995 TEXPOOL 9,492,194 US TREASURIES 2,659,603 US AGENCIES 1,395,266 FGIC 2,310,173 HARTLAND (Escrow) 2,287,291 HARTLAND (Operating) 711,913 TOTAL $18,856,440 09/30/95 BALANCES — j (50.3%) Texpool (3.8%) Depository (14.1%) US Treasury (12.1 %) Escrow (7.4%) US Agencies (12.3%) FGIC Diversification of portfolio to include U.S. Agency securities and FGIC (both approved November 1994) Hartland Bank Escrow of restricted proceeds from '95 Series Revenue Bond (TWDB) proceeds Balance increase due to May 1995 and August 1995 bond issues Only authorized investments (NO DERIVITIVES) Graph A CITY OF GEORGETOWN 1994195 ANNUAL INVESTMENT REPORT As of 09130/95 :>MarkfValie>» Unrealized Purchase Coupon Investment Date Description Maturity Yield Cost Yield >>930%95`%> :::::...... ...................................... ...................................... ...................................... GAIN/LOSS 03/08/94 U. S. Treasury Note 05/15/96 4.25% $986,093.75 ...................................... ................................. ...................................... ...................................... ...................................... 4.93°� $9'10000 5,406.25 Source: Debt Reserves 05/23/94 U. S. Treasury Note 04/30/96 5.50% $994,296.88 5.81 % $999 000.. 4,703.12 Source: Operating Funds (long-term reserves) 08/31 /95 Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) Note 02/21 /96 6.91 % $598,207.42 5.73% `. $ $0 (�) (827.42) Source: 94 CO Proceeds 08/31 /95 Federal Home Loan Bank FHLB Note (FHLB) 02/21 /96 6.91 % $296,590.23 5.73% (410.23) Source: Debt Reserves 09/05/95 Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) Note 12/05/96 6.20% $500,468.75 5.82%50a78000 311.25 Source: Operating Funds p g (12/05/95)call ..... ....... 09/22/95 U. S. Treasury Note 10/31 /96 6.82% $679,212.50 5.56°�7678? (1,534.30) Source: Debt Reserves TOTAL INVESTMENT SECURITIES $4,054,869.53 -4QG180 $7,648.67 FGIC 09/30/95 * 5.36% $2,310,172.65 <;$2141<E TEXPOOL 09/30/95 * 5.77% $9,492,194.00 ..... ) 4 O(3 (1) HARTLAND ESCROW 09/30/95 3.88% $2,287,291.28 . 2 287 a TOTAL INVESTMENT BALANCES $18,144,527.46 $18t'[521'7I'f $7,648.67 (2) CITY DEPOSITORY (HARTLAND) 09/30/95 5.00% $711,912.54 TOTAL CASH AND INVESTMENT BALANCES 09/30/95 $18,856,440.00 * Balances and rates as of 09/30/95 (�> Restricted investment of'95 Series Revenue Bond (TWDB) proceeds (2) Funding of outstanding checks issued, interest earned netted against bank service changes CITY OF GEORGETOWN 1994/95 INVESTMENT REPORT Balance Comparison (Graph B) As indicated by Graph B, the balance comparison by types of funds at September 30 notes substantial differences from the prior year: • Bond proceeds are higher due to recent bond issues. The City will expend much of this balance by January 1996 leaving approximately $2.5 million which is earmarked for 1995/96 and future projects. • Debt service funds are higher in the current year due to increased reserve requirements for the new debt issues. These funds are restricted by the bond covenants and can only be invested in U.S. Treasury securities. • Operating balances remained constant but will increase in the upcoming year because of SIP fee revenue from Sun City Georgetown. 1994195 Investment Report 4 SEPTEMB`ER 30, 1994 OPERATING BOND PROCEEDS DEBT SERVICE TOTAL 8,828,122 1,877,517 1,435,549 $12,141,188 09/30/94 BALANCES BALANCE COMPARISON (72.7%) Operating (11.8%) Debt Service (15.5%) Bond Proceeds SEPTEMBER 30, 1995 OPERATING 8,958,087 BOND PROCEEDS 7,459,209 DEBT SERVICE 2.439.144 $18,856,440 09/30/95 BALANCES (39.6%) Bond Proceeds " Bond proceeds increase due to recent bond issues, anticipated expenditures by Jan 1996 will lower balance to $3 million " Debt service increased due to additional debt reserves required with new debt issues Operating balances remain constant but will increase due to SIP fees from Sun City Georgetown Graph B CITY OF GEORGETOWN 1994/95 INVESTMENT REPORT Interest Earnings (Graph C) Overall interest rates were higher in 1994/95 than in 1993/94. The City took advantage of some short-term rises in the market to increase the yield during the spring and summer of 1995. • Due to cash flow requirements for infrastructure construction, we were unable to take advantage of the rise in rates into the fall. Overall yield dropped at year-end as market rates have begun to decrease. • Interest income for 1994/95 was $648,000, a 51.4% increase over the 1993/94 income of $428,500. The increase in interest income results from higher market rates, larger fund balances and 12 months of investment management in 1994/95 compared with 7 months for 1993/94. • Interest income for 1995/96 will decline as bond proceeds are expended. • The yield curve remained flat during most of 1994/95. For example, the difference between the interest rate on a 6 to 9 month investment was only a few basis points (hundredths of a percent) less than a 18 to 24 month investment. Therefore, the City generally limited its investments to shorter term securities. 1994195 Investment Repot 6 * Interest rates higher in 94/95 * Able to take advantage of short-term rises in the market * Yield dropped at year end due to falling market Graph C CITY OF GEORGETOWN 1994/95 INVESTMENT REPORT Performance Benchmark (Graph D) The primary purpose of investment reporting is to give Council an overview of the cash and investment management activities of the City and the appropriateness of those activities. • One way to gauge performance is to compare the yield, or average interest rates, received by the City to a benchmark portfolio. • Since Texpool is the City's primary cash management tool, the yield for that fund as a whole has been chosen as a benchmark. • Graph D measures the City's yield against Texpool, a AAA rated investment pool, throughout the year. • Any significant variance higher or lower should be a warning flag that there could be potential problems with how the City handles its funds. • Yield restricted funds for arbitrage purposes (bond proceeds) can artificially lower overall portfolio yield and long-term investments of reserve funds can artificially raise the yield. 1994195 Investment Report 8 * Gauge for portfolio performance - VARIANCE SHOULDN'T BE SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER OR LOWER * TEXPOOL AAA RATED $1 per $1 INVESTMENT POOL Graph D CITY OF GEORGETOWN 1994/95 INVESTMENT REPORT Investment Activity The Investment Activity report presents a detailed list of all investment purchases and maturities in 1994/95. • The Securities Listing describes all transactions that occurred during the fiscal year, showing the coupon and investment yields, market values as of September 30, 1994 and 1995, and any unrealized gain or loss. The City purchases securities to be held until maturity and therefore no gain or loss was realized during the year. • The Investment Pool Listing provides the balance and market value of the City's investment in each pool as of September 30, 1994 and 1995. Any changes in market value during the year are within minimum guidelines of the Public Funds Investment Act. • This format is similar to the quarterly reports that staff will provide to Council beginning this year. 1994195 Investment Report 10 CITY OF GEORGETOWN 1994/95 ANNUAL INVESTMENT REPORT TRANSACTION LISTING - SECURITIES Purchase Discount / Purchase Investment Market Value Market Value Date Description Maturity Coupon Cost Yield 09/30/94 09/30/95 Comments _. PRIORY .. A1�k..S3J 4 :PU. RC . S <:::::; ::;::;:<:::;::; ;>::;::::: ;>:::: ;:::::;:;:>::; ;:::;:....: ::....:........... :>:::;:>:;»>;;>;:: ;::>:z:: ; :<•:::::;:.:.. z:»:: » ::>: %::: <:::>:::z:::.>: ::> ::::>: ;:::::; ::; ss: >:::::::: ;; >: ;::; ::>:::::z:>::>; ::;: ::::::< ......................... 01-Sep-94 U. S. Treasury Note 01-Dec-94 4.55% $988,498 4.67% $954,200 matured Proceeds used for completion of Source: 94 CO Proceeds Rec Center / Partially reinvested 08-Mar-94 U. S. Treasury Note 15-Dec-94 4.03% $969,607 4.38% $953,900 matured Proceeds reinvested Source: Operating Funds 08-Mar-94 U. S. Treasury Note 28-Feb-95 3.88% $996,094 4.29% $995,900 matured Proceeds used for CIP projects Source: Operating Funds (long-term reserves) 01-Sep-94 U. S. Treasury Note 02-Mar-95 4.87% $975,354 5.07% $949,100 matured Proceeds used for CIP/Bond projects Source: Operating Funds 23-May-94 U. S. Treasury Note 30-Apr-96 5.50% $994,297 5.81 $982,300 $999,000 Source: Operating Funds (long-term reserves) 08-Mar-94 U. S. Treasury Note 15-May-96 4.25% $986,094 4.93% $962,300 $991,500 Source: Debt Reserves CU.RREN• T::Y . EAR:94/95:PU . ... - 15-Dec-94 Federal Farm Credit Bank (FFCB) Note 25-Apr-95 6.35% $634,980 6.59% N/A matured Proceeds used for CIP/Bond projects Source: Operating Funds 15-Dec-94 Federal Home Loam Mortgage Corp (FHLMC) Note 15-May-95 6.35% $1,314,043 6.61 % N/A matured Proceeds used for CIP/Bond projects Source: Operating Funds 19-Dec-94 Federal National Mortgage Assn (FNMA) Note 19-Jun-95 6.45% $1,030,000 6.76% N/A matured Proceeds used for CIP/Bond projects Source: Operating Funds 31-Aug-95 Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) Note 21-Feb-96 6.91% $598,207 5.73% N/A $597,380 Funds for Right -of -Way purchase Source: 94 CO Proceeds 31-Aug-95 Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) Note 21-Feb-96 6.91% $296,590 5.73% N/A $296,180 Source: Debt Reserves 05-Sep-95 Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) Note 05-Dec-96 6.20% $500,469 5.82% N/A $500,780 Source: Operating Funds (12/05/95)call 22-Sep-95 U. S. Treasury Note 31-Oct-96 6.82% $679,213 5.56% N/A $677,678 Required by Bond Covenents Source: Debt Reserves ALL SECURITIES REDEEMED AT MATURITY, THEREFORE NO GAIN OR LOSS WAS REALIZED (Any changes In market value during year are within minimun guidelines unless noted) CITY OF GEORGETOWN 1994/95 ANNUAL INVESTMENT REPORT Balance Description 09/30/94 TRANSACTION LISTING - INVESTMENT POOLS Texpool FGIC $5,886,867 N/A TRANSACTION LISTING - ESCROW ACCOUNT Hartland Bank N/A Balance 09/30/95 $9,492,194 $2,310,173 $2,287,981 (Any changes in market value during year are within minimum guidelines unless noted) Comments AAA Rated Pool - $1 per $1 value AAA Rated Pool - $1 per $1 value Invested December'94 Restricted investment of '95 Series Revenue Bond Proceeds (TWDB) 1994/95 CONDITIONS Portfolio Diversification To increase investment opportunities resulting in better returns and reduce the effects of market fluctuations, the City diversified its investment portfolio beginning in 1994/95. The new investments include U.S. Agency securities and FGIC Public Trust, a money market mutual fund similar to Texpool. Texpool Controversy Last winter, Texpool faced uncertainties resulting from the Orange County, California bankruptcy. As a result, Texpool's operating guidelines have been changed. The Texas Legislature included these changes in the Public Funds Investment Act to require all pools and similar funds to meet more restrictive criteria. Liquidity is now maintained and assured with a weighted average maturity (wam) of less than 90 days (Texpool's wam was 25 days at 9/30/95). This requirement minimizes any losses in portfolio value due to sudden changes in the interest rate market. Texpool obtained AAA status as an investment pool by meeting the stringent guidelines necessary to achieve this rating. The City continues to believe that Texpool is a good option for City funds. Rates offered at Texpool are currently at or above long-term options in the market. The cost for the services offered by Texpool is less than other investment pools. CIP / Bond Issues During 1994/95 the City issued $12,025,000 in bonds for utility construction projects. The large construction projects along with related bond proceed restrictions affected the City's cash management strategies. The City utilized operating reserves in order to delay bond issuance until late summer 1995 when interest rates were more favorable. The use of monies on hand reduced potential interest earnings; however, the reduction in revenue was more than offset because interest expense was not incurred. 1994195 Investment Report 13 • The use of bond proceeds must be closely monitored and documented to meet bond covenant and federal taxation requirements. • The timing of large projects must be monitored to ensure cash is on hand for large contractor payment requests. • Bond reserve funds are yield restricted and covenants require that some of these be invested in U.S. treasuries. Effects of Public Funds Investment Act Legislation The Texas Legislature revised the code by which municipalities and other public entities may invest public funds. This action was a direct result of the losses sustained in Orange County and the following market upheaval. The revised legislation provides specific guidelines for which a municipality must follow: • A defined investment policy and investment strategy must be approved by the governing body of the municipality; • Limits are now imposed on the types of securities a City may purchase, as well as, the percentage of funds allowed in any investment pool; • Training for City officials and investment officers is now required; and • A compliance audit of specified criteria by the City's external auditors must be performed annually. The implementation of this legislation will require additional cost and staff time for training, additional reporting requirements and policy compliance auditing. The City of Georgetown Investment Policy and the recommended changes are presented as a separate report. 1994195 Investment Report 14 1995/96 STRATEGIES City staff will continue to pursue the best rate of return for City investments, while adhering to the City's investment policy and objectives. Several areas to be noted include: • Rates are expected to remain relatively flat. • The City will continue its strategy of staggered maturities to meet cash flow requirements and increase yield. • The completion of capital improvements for Sun City by January 1996 will lower the bond proceed balances resulting in less funds available for investment, and thus lowering interest income in the upcoming year. • The remaining bond proceeds from the 1995 Series Revenue Bonds (TWDB) have been be invested in a Certificate of Deposit at Hartland Bank in order to achieve the highest allowable yield. • City staff continue to look for ways to increase rate of return and efficiency of cash management. Some options that will be considered include: • Take advantage of cash flow provided by Sun City SIP fees and consider some limited longer term investments to increase average yield, and • Utilizing a "Zero Balance Account" (ZBA) with the City depository to increase returns on daily operating cash balances. 19941951nvestment Report 15 COMPLIANCE The investment activity and strategies described in this report are in compliance with the City's Investment Policy and state law. Michelle A. Rundell, Accounting Director Susan L. Morgan, Director of Finance & Administration i 1994195 Investment Report 16 Council meeting date: 11-14-95 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Meeting Minutes of Regular City Council Meeting on Tuesday, October 24, 1995. ATTACHMENTS 1. Minutes of Regular City Council Meeting of Tuesday, October 24, 1995 Subm,i�fed By: _ Sandra D. Lee, City Secretary MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS TUESDAY, October 24, 1995 Council Present: Council Absent: George Arroyos (Councilmember Position Lee Bain for District 2 is vacant due to Doris Curl death of Winfred Bonner) Susan Hoyt F erd Tonn Dick Vincent Staff Present. - Bob Hart, City Manager Hildy Kingma, Chief Planner Marianne Banks, City Attorney Clyde von Rosenberg, Chief Planner Sandra Lee, City Secretary Wendy Walsh, Senior Planner Ed Barry, Dir. of Development Svcs. Susan Morgan, Dir. of Finance & Admin. Jim Briggs, Dir. of Community Owned Utilities Hartley Sappington, Dir. of Community Svcs. Randy Morrow, Dir. of Parks & Recreation Teresa Hersh, Dir. of Employee & Organizational Svcs. Larry Hesser, Police Chief Regular Session - Called to order at 5:35 p.m. Executive Session A Sec.551.071 consultation with attorney B Sec.551.072 deliberation on real property C Sec.551.075 conference with employee Regular Session - Reconvened at 6:15 p.m. D Action on Executive Session items There was no action on Executive Session items. City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 1 of 12 Pages E Citizens wishing to address the Council Wood inquired and was told that the citizens who had registered to speak preferred to wait until the discussion of a particular item on the Agenda. F Mayor, Council, City Manager, and staff comments and reports • Joint Meeting with Parks Board on November 9 at 5:30 p.m. Wood asked Mayor Pro Tem Curl to preside over the Council Meeting of November 14, 1995, as he would be in Washington, D.C. Hart noted that the time for the possible Personnel Hearing on November 1 would be 6:00 p.m. Consent Agenda G Consideration of approval of meeting minutes --Regular Meeting of October 10 and Special Meeting of October 18, 1995/Sandra Lee a H Consideration of award of semi-annual bid for poleline hardware to various bidders in the estimated amount of $66, 354.76/Terry Jones and Susan Morgan I Consideration of authorizing staff to negotiate a partnership contract between the City of Georgetown and Central & Southwest Communications, Inc., to provide a Customer - Controlled Load Management System (CCLM) to the City/Jim Briggs J Consideration of approval of payment to the United States Geological Survey (USGS) under the joint funding agreement for water resources investigations, for the period October 1, 19951 through September 30, 1996, in the amount of $6,080.00/Jim Briggs K Consideration of award of bid in the amount of $26,500.00 to Join Kyser Construction for reconstruction of a home at 1814 Main Street, funded by the HOME Grant/Hartley Sappington L Pulled. (See Regular Agenda) M Consideration of a Final Plat of 24.17 acres in the John Sutherland Survey, to be known as Fountainwood Estates, Phase 5, located on Nicole Way/Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma Bain questioned and was told that all the technical issues had been met on this item. City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 2 of 12 Pages N Consideration of a resolution to authorize a license to encroach into the public utility easement located along the northeast property line of Berry Creek, Section 9, Block A, Lot 46/Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma O Consideration of approval of Amendment No. 1 to Contract No. 714072 between the City of Georgetown and the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs on behalf of Reedholm Instruments, Inc. /Bob Hart Motion by Tonn, second by Hoyt to approve the Consent Agenda with the exception of Item L. Approved 6-0. (Councilmember seat for District 2 was vacant due to the death of Winfred Bonner.) Regular Agenda L Consideration of award of bid in the amount of $48,033.00 to John Kyser Construction for reconstruction of a home at 907 East 20th Street, funded by the HOME Grant/Hartley Sappington (Pulled by City Manager to be placed on an upcoming Agenda) P Consideration of action relative to supplying water to the City of Leander/Doris Curl and George Arroyos Mayor Wood recused himself due to possible conflict of interest and turned the gavel over to Mayor Pro Tem Doris Curl. Curl deferred to Arroyos, her partner on the Council Subcommittee to meet with Leander Officials, to brief the Council on the meeting. Arroyos said that the City of Georgetown had shared their concern about causing an increase to Georgetown rate payers and asked Hart to further explain. Hart said that they had discussed the limitations in being able to supply capacity to Leander, noting that Georgetown has sufficient treatment capacity for the current demand, but that the number of new homes at Sun City is increasing very rapidly, so capacity would be further limited. He spoke of having met with LCRA officials, and has suggested that the City of Leander work with LCRA for an intermediate (10 to 15 years) water supply. He said that eventually Georgetown would be able to participate in a Regional Water Supply System. At this point, because the Trans -Texas Study is not yet complete, it would be difficult to ensure capacity to Leander. The City Council decided to take no action at this time. Q Second reading of a rezoning of River Hills, Section 4A, Lot 1, from RS, Residential Single Family to RM-3, Office and Service District, or any more restrictive classification/Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 3 of 12 Pages Kingma read the caption. Mayor Wood called upon the citizens who had registered to speak at this item. Maura Crichton, 201 River Hills Drive, President of the River Hills Neighborhood Association, noted that the residents of the River Hills Subdivision had no representation on the Council due to the death of District 2 Councilmember Winfred Bonner. She told Council that she opposed any apartments, and the proposed change to Intensity Level 5. She recalled that the previous Council had denied a request for Intensity Level 5. She also questioned the settlement of legalizing a particular lot, and asked who would be paying for the proposed lift station. Jim Redwine, 108 Hillview, told Council that his property adjoins the proposed new subdivision. He spoke of traffic concerns, vandalism, transients, and objection to the proposed increased density. Pam Moore, 111 N. Oak Hollow Rd., spoke of being concerned about decreasing property values and the undesirable qualities of a transient population. Dick Seemann, 211 River Hills Drive, said he was not against development, but wished that the proposed development were to be consistent with the existing development. He spoke of having worked with the previous developer to reach compromises. Marilyn Seemann, 211 River Hills Drive, told Council she and her husband had chosen the River Hills neighborhood for specific reasons when they transferred here, but now she's sorry they didn't move somewhere else. She said she anticipates apartment dwellers to have many cars and many children, saying the increased traffic would make the frontage road more like another lane of the interstate highway. Doug Cota, 201 N. Oak Hollow Rd., said he bought his house in River Hills because of the location. He said this is his first house, and he bought it to get away from apartments, but now there would be apartments around him anyway. He said he also has located his business in Georgetown, and as a resident and business owner he appealed to the Council to disapprove the proposed apartments. Robert Carlisle, 113 N. Oak Hollow, told Council that he needed to leave quickly to pick up his son from a soccer game, so he only wanted to say that he also was opposed to the rezoning. Roland Schroeder, 212 River Hills Drive, gave Council copies of the layout for the subdivision back when he bought his property from W. Carrington Properties, the original developer of what is now known as River Hills, saying that he would prefer that the original City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 4 of 12 Pages plan were followed, noting that a research and business park had been proposed for the lots abutting the frontage road. Ilene DeLuca, 208 River Hills Drive, told Council that she has concerns about increased traffic on the access road, decreasing property values, and increased crime. Kay Ingham, 100 Hillview Drive, told Council that her back yard will adjoin the new subdivision. She read a poem that she had written about her concerns. Donna Winter, 203 N. Oak Hollow, told Council that she is concerned about the increased traffic and the blocking of her view of downtown Georgetown if apartments are built on Section 4. Wood thanked the citizens for expressing their opinions. Arroyos addressed the residents of River Hills and other residents of District 2, saying that all of the seated Councilmembers were concerned about all of the issues in the City, no matter what district, and would make their decisions based on the effect that an item would have on all the citizens in Georgetown. He spoke of being a resident of a district where the former Councilmember had resigned in February, 1994, leaving the position open until the following May Election. Curl expressed the same sentiments regarding representation on the Council, and asked if the owner of the property were present. Current owner, Greg Hall, noted that he had not been the owner when the River Hills Subdivision was developed. He spoke to Council about not being aware, until a little earlier in the day, of a controversy over the request for the intensity change. He said one of the residents of River Hills had even signed the application. He told Council that in defense of his position as the developer, he had gone through all the proper City procedures. He assured everyone that he is a Georgetown resident and that he cares very much about the quality of Georgetown. He said he feels Georgetown lacks any high quality apartments for the type of technical people that are being attracted to live here. He told Council that he owns the Rivery property which will adjoin the apartments, and he would not build a sub- standard complex. He also noted that the terrain makes it difficult to use for other types of buildings. Bain asked if the property owners could get together with Hall. Hall explained that he had not yet reached the stage where input could be given. He said that until the zoning issue is decided, ideas would not be put on paper. City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 5 of 12 Pages Redwine, from the audience, said that he had, in fact, signed the application because he was told that he was thereby legalizing his lot. He told Council that he was not aware that the item had been on the previous Council agenda for the first reading or he would have attended and voiced his concern at that time. Maura Crichton said she had been given the information that Hall could not develop a particular lot without the permission of Mr. Redwine and a Mr. Day. City Attorney Banks said that the property is still not a legal lot and is not legally subdivided because it was not done in a court judgment. She said it was settled out of court. Kingma said that the announcement was made numerous times at the Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting that Hall did, in fact, still have an illegal lot, and it was never intended to be assumed otherwise. When asked why the River Hills residents had not been informed by the City of the item coming before the Planning and Zoning Commission, Ed Barry stated that the normal procedure was that the applicant is required to submit a list of adjacent property owners to whom notices are to be sent. He also stated that they are required to post the notice of the meeting on the property and in the newspaper. Curl reminded the other Councilmembers that they could place special requirements or conditions on the detailed development plan and read, from the agenda packet item, information the conditions of RM-3 zoning. Vincent thanked the residents who had commented and said he could sympathize due to similar issues in his district along Williams Drive. Tonn said he wanted to make sure that the detailed development plan (DDP) would be brought back to the Council for approval. Banks explained that the zoning ordinance allows that the DDP could be approved administratively if no variances were requested, and it would not require Council approval if the requirements of the ordinance were met. Motion by Vincent, second by Arroyos to approve Ordinance 95-54 on second reading and to require that the detailed development plan be brought back to the Council for approval. Approved 5-1 (Hoyt opposed). R Second reading of an ordinance amending Exhibit 1 of the Century Plan - Development Plan for the Glasscock Addition, Block 22, Lots 5-8, locally known as Main Street Baptist Church from Intensity Level Four to Intensity Level Five/Ed Barry and Clyde von Rosenberg City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 6 of 12 Pages von Rosenberg read the caption. Barry distributed to Council copies of a memo regarding the meeting between the neighboring property owners and the church officials. Arroyos verified with Charles Steger, in the audience, that the memo was representative of the meeting. Motion by Tonn, second by Hoyt to approve Ordinance 95-55 on second reading. Approved 6-0. Curl thanked Steger for meeting with the neighbors to resolve issues. S Second reading of an ordinance amending stormwater drainage rates/Susan Morgan Morgan read the caption. Motion by Hoyt, second by Tonn to approve Ordinance 95-56 on second reading. T Consideration of a Concept Plan for a 144.73 acre tract in the William Addison Survey to be known as Rolling Prairie Settlement/Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma Kingma explained to Council that at the last Council Meeting they had heard the report about the roadway alignments concerning this development. Kingma explained that this tract will be composed of 25 large single-family lots and there were two major Century Plan issues involved: 1) the future alignment of the proposed MOKAN expressway (State Highway 130), and 2) the realignment of County Roads 110 and 111 to smooth out the sharp turns. Bain asked for clarification of what the Council would be approving if they approved the Concept Plan. Kingma replied that Council was being asked to consider the density of the land use, the road alignment, and the phasing plan of the utilities. Bain confirmed with Kingma that Council was not being asked to approve lot layout or road access. Kingma pointed out that the lot layout does conflict with the City ordinance, so it will need to be addressed when Council is asked to approve the Preliminary Plat. Hart noted that there were other issues involved as determined at the last Council Meeting, and Barry distributed to Council copies of a letter from Don Bizzell on behalf of the Brady Trust. Barry gave Council a brief summary of the conditions stated in the letter and whether he thought the City/County might have a responsibility to comply with the applicant's request. Curl asked how the issues would fit into the City's as yet incomplete Transportation Plan and how the City would be able to afford the acquisition of right of way. Barry replied that the financing had not been discussed. Barry told Council that he feels that the current City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 7 of 12 Pages Subdivision Regulations would allow the City to attach greater setbacks in order to obtain sufficient right of way. Hart told Council that acquisition of right of way would become a future standard budgetary item. Barry spoke of the proposed method of presenting roadway issues on a monthly basis to the Planning and Zoning Commission and then bringing to Council on a quarterly basis those important roadway segments that needed to be addressed; thereby allowing Council to be able to prioritize the money allocated to roadway improvements in the budget. Curl also asked and was told that there would be a workshop on transportation in the first quarter of 1996. Bain asked if the Council approved the Concept Plan, how that would affect the conditions in the letter from Bizzell. Barry stated that the charge to the Council on this item was only the approval of the Concept Plan, and that the letter is a statement of the applicant's proposed conditions for Council to consider; but he didn't feel Council needed to address those issues at this time. Wood asked Charles Steger, in the audience, if he had spoken to the County and if he could share any further information regarding the issues addressed in the letter. Steger replied that Bizzell had been in contact with the County, but Steger had no information to share at this time. Motion by Curl, second by Vincent to approve the Concept Plan. Approved 6-0. U First reading of an ordinance updating TMRS (Texas Municipal Retirement System) employee service credits/Teresa Hersh Hersh read the caption only on first reading after having satisfied the requirements in the Charter. Arroyos asked Hersh to do an overview of what this ordinance would accomplish. Hersh explained that this ordinance was like the one last year, in that it updates the service credits, but will be different in that it will provide for a yearly renewal of the update without going through the ordinance process each year. She added that if the Council should decide to change their policy, a new ordinance could be initiated. As a retired municipal employee, Mayor Wood, recused himself from presiding during this item and turned the gavel over to Doris Curl. Motion by Tonn, second by Vincent to approve this ordinance on first reading. Approved 6-0. V Consideration of authorizing the City Manager to submit a grant application for two police officers under the Community Policing Federal Hiring Program/Bob Hart City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 8 of 12 Pages Hart asked Police Chief Larry Hesser to give Council an overview of the grant application. Hesser explained that the City would be able to accomplish two goals if they receive this grant: 1) increased attention to narcotics problems, and 2) promotion of community -oriented policing strategies. Arroyos congratulated Chief Hesser for the recent national award for community -oriented policing. Motion by Arroyos, second by Bain to approve the application for the grant. Approved 6-0. Hesser thanked Arroyos and said that he would pass on the compliment to the three officers who were involved in the project and deserve the congratulations. W Consideration of a resolution authorizing the Mayor to sign a contract for a joint use agreement between the City of Georgetown and the Georgetown Independent School District for a joint school/park playground at Frost Elementary/Randy Morrow Morrow spoke of having met with School Superintendent Gunn to work out the arrangements for this agreement. Bain asked about the zones referred to in the agenda item cover sheet. Morrow stated that the City is divided into twelve zones, that developers are required to pay a parkland fee or donate parkland, and the land or the fee can be used only in the particular zone in which the development occurs. Vincent remarked that this requirement was a recent addition to the Subdivision Regulations. When asked which entity would be responsible for the safety issues, Morrow replied that the liability would be shared by both the City and the School District. Motion by Vincent, second by Curl to approve the resolution. Approved 6-0. X Consideration of instructing staff as to procedure to follow regarding vacancy of District 2 Council position due to death of Councilmember Winfred Bonner/Bob Hart Hart asked Council for their direction as to the procedure they wished to follow in this regard. Wood noted that in the past the position was left open to allow the citizens of the district to determine who they want to prepare for the election. Vincent stated that he felt a special election in January would be unnecessary time and money spent for just a short period of service (until the May election), and that he would not feel comfortable appointing someone to serve in the interim. City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 9 of 12 Pages Curl stated that she also did not feel comfortable appointing someone to fill the position, but she felt it wouldn't hurt to go ahead and place an item to call a special election on the November 14 Agenda, so they could go forward with an election unless they hear from the District 2 residents. She suggested that the press assist the Council in asking for input from the citizens. Bain said that he would also like to have the Special Election called on the November 14 Agenda, so the option would be available. Wood said that he had heard that the residents of District 2 preferred to select their own representative. Ed Steiner, in the audience, said that the neighborhood prefers to have a Special Election in January. Arroyos recalled when he ran for the unexpired term of the previous Councilmember for his district, saying that it was difficult; and in this particular situation, would put the candidates in the precarious position of having to run again for the May Election. He also brough to Council's attention the difficulty due -to the approaching holidays. He felt it would be unfair for the candidates to have to campaign for funds during the holidays. He stated that he felt sure the seat could remain vacant and the District could be represented by the remaining Councilmembers. Tonn stated that he would like to see an item on the next agenda to call the Special Election until he hears from the district residents who may prefer otherwise. Hoyt said she definitely did not think the Council should appoint someone. She agreed to ask that the Special Election be called on the next Council Agenda, but expressed that she wants feedback from the district residents. Motion by Tonn, second by Bain to place an item on the November 14 agenda to call a Special Election in January, 1996. Approved 6-0. 8:40 p.m. Recess - 8:47 p.m. Resumed Y Consideration of a resolution casting City of Georgetown votes for the election of the Williamson County Appraisal District Board of Directors/Bob Hart Hart explained that the City is entitle to cast 60 out of a total of 5,000 votes to be cast, and he read the resolution. Tonn reported that the school district will cast their votes for Carl Doering, and the County Commissioners will cast their votes for Commissioner Boatright. City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 10 of 12 Pages Motion by Tonn, second by Curl to cast all 60 votes from the City to Carl Doering. Approved 6-0. Z Consideration of an appointment to the Planning and Zoning Commission/Leo Wood Wood explained that his recommendation would be made known to the Council in time for them to make a decision on the November 28 Agenda. AA Consideration of an appointment of a representative to the Capital Area Planning Council (CAPCO)Bob Hart Motion by Bain, second by Curl to appoint Councilmember Arroyos as representative to CAPCO. Approved 6-0. Public Hearings BB Public Hearing for the annexation of an approximately 300.6 acre portion of the Sun City Georgetown Planned Unit Development, Phase 2, located in the W. G. Wilkinson, George Thompson, Abner Short, R. T. Jenkins, Mary Ann Lewis, and Daniel Monroe Surveys/Ed Barry and Clyde von Rosenberg The Public Hearing was opened at 8:50 p.m. von Rosenberg explained that this was the second of the two public hearings required before the initiation of annexation proceedings. He reminded Council that the service plan was provided in the agenda packet and told them that the first reading of the annexation ordinance would be on the November 14 Council Agenda. There were no questions or comments from Council or citizens. The Public Hearing closed at 8:52 p.m. CC Public Hearing on proposed impact fees (to start no earlier than 7:00 p.m.) Barry gave an overview of the proposed impact fees as proposed by the Impact Fee Advisory Committee. David Sawyer of Sawyer Development Company shared his experience with impact fees in other areas, and told Council that he felt the competitive impact was not being considered. He asked if the Committee had looked at the surrounding areas to see what their action has been on impact fees. Hart replied that the Council had instructed the staff to do a competitive study of all development fees, which has been done, and will be brought to the Council when the issue is to be decided. City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 11 of 12 Pages Sawyer asked what method had been devised for "grandfathering?" Wood asked Chairperson Ercel Brashear to speak to that question. Brashear explained the Committee's proposed schedule to "grandfather" those lots that were platted and built prior to January 11 1989, with staggered fees and yearly payments for those lots platted and built after 1989. Sawyer expressed that he was pleased with the suggested method. Jack Pittman, a local builder, stated that he felt the proposed impact fees were "at odds" with the promotion of affordable housing in Georgetown, and asked if the Council would make special provisions for developers of affordable housing. Brashear replied that state legislation requires that the fee be tied to the cost of service, and that the City would have no authority to base the fee on the cost of the house to be built. Pittman asked how these fees would be applied to the City supplying sewer service to the residents of Serenada. Brashear spoke of the Committee's recommendation that if the property owner chose to tie in, the fee would be charged; if the City forces the property owner to tie in, the fee would not be charged Pittman asked about the plan to provide sewer to Serenada. Hart replied that the staff and Council have recognized the issue, but no discussion has been held. He added that water quality studies show that the septic tanks in Serenada pollute the aquifer, but no plans have been formulated to deal with this. The public hearing was closed at 9:09 p.m. DD Final comments and evaluation of meeting process • TML Conference Schedule Approved: Leo Wood, Mayor City Council Minutes October 24, 1995 Page 12 of 12 Pages Hart encouraged Councilmembers to attend the Development Planning Workshop to be held at the Texas Municipal Leadership Institute in Dallas in conjunction with the TML Conference. The meeting was adjourned at 9:12 p.m. Attest: Sandra D. Lee, City Secretary _.. e-Y^".-;<a?'a^ _.s .:-- ���M+;� �F..-r. ... ..�-,�""�.... `""'-".�7, '� v. _ >T,r �a .�-�.�•. -.s � �—•+s�:� 'a��`��.---e- .. _: �,-.ws>...��-�. .._ s�a�, _�"---x' ,� �-:- �-'�`T��+,'�-. �a•�E. ....v >-,:�,.; ...,..q'.r�..�_ �u�� �� _ '}Yra _�. S3yiz„ z�'.� - ..m....� .�r!!tr,�„-';t��»:.: _ •4��i _�G�'.. -. a.iJ'x+vi __ vt-ea.r yixy.-. _ ��.ia.¢'-5•v !J i __. i .e •;eF.� i -sw _ - _ JI r , �r Council meeting date: 11-14-95 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT A resolution to approve the application for funding through the Texas Department of Commerce Infrastructure Program on behalf of Advanced Metal Systems, Inc. ITEM SUNEVLkRY This company manufactures pre-engineered steel buildings. They are expanding their operation, and will create 14 new jobs, in addition to the 16 positions they have currently. The funding through the Department of Commerce will total $280,000. ATTACHMENTS 1. Proposed resolution Submitted by: Hartley Sappington, Acting City Manager RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR FUNDING THROUGH THE INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM OF THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACT ON THE CITY' S BEHALF WITH REGARD TO THE SUBMISSION OF THIS APPLICATION; AGREEING NOT TO PARTICIPATE IN PROGRAM INCOME RECAPTURE; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ValEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and approves an application for Advanced Metal Systems, Inc. in the following amounts: Engineering $ 3 6, 75 0 Construction $2081250 Administration 35,000 Total $280,000 WI-EREAS, the City Council has reviewed and agrees to comply with all assurances executed in connection with the application and, if funded, the award. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1. The facts and recitations contained in the preamble of this resolution are hereby found and declared to be true and correct, and are incorporated by reference herein and expressly made a part hereof, as if copied verbatim. The City Council hereby finds that this resolution implements Economic Development Policy 1 of the Century Plan - Policy Plan Element, which states: "The City has a broad tax base with minimal impact from economic fluctuation, through diversified growth and business opportunities to create jobs."; and further finds that the adoption of this resolution is not inconsistent or in conflict with any other Century Plan Policies, as required by Section 2.03 of the Administrative Chapter of the Policy Plan. SECTION 2. The City Manager is authorized to execute the application and otherwise act on the City's behalf in all matters pertaining to the submission of this application. SECTION 3. The City Council hereby agrees not to participate in program income recapture and will return all program income to the State to be placed in a statewide Revolving Loan Fund to be used by the State to fund future economic development awards. By agreeing to this measure, the City understands that it will be eligible to receive as many Texas Capital Fund awards per program year as it has eligible projects. This determination must be made at the time the original award is Advanced Metal Systems Resolution No. Page 1 of 2 made and cannot be changed with subsequent awards for this program year or retroactively in subsequent program years. SECTION 4. The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute, and the City Secretary to attest this resolution on behalf of the City of Georgetown. SECTION 5. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption. RESOLVED this day of , 1995) by the following vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ATTEST: THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: X Council Meeting Date: 11/14/95 Item No. ___N AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Award bid in the amount of $48,033.00 to John Kyser Construction for reconstruction of a home at 907 East 20th Street, funded by the HOME Grant. ITEM SUMMARY Two bids were received for this reconstruction project: John Kyser Construction $457746.00 Fred Otto III Builder, Inc. $501600.00 The City's cost estimate for this project was $45,800.00. Under the State of Texas guidelines for the HOME Grant program, a homeowner may select any bidder who is -within 10% (plus or minus) of the City's cost estimate. Ruth & Benito Frias, the homeowners, selected John Kyser Construction for this reconstruction project. It is recommended the Council award the bid to John Kyser Construction as follows: $45,746.00 Base Bid + 2,287.00 Contingency $ 48,033.00 Total Bid SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS None FINANCIAL IMPACT Funds for the HOME Grant projects come from the Texas Department of Community Affairs, which receives the funds through HUD. COMMENTS This is the last project to be funded under the current HOME grant program awarded to the C ity. ATTACHMENTS 1. Contractor Selection Form Submitted By: Hartley Sappington, Director of Community Services HOMEOWNER CONTRACTOR SELECTION RE: 02 1 /t� ZLopertyAddress u" t' Homeowner Name I. Maximum Amount Assistance Available (I lomeowner/City Contract):If. City's Construction Estimate:0y 00 Listed below, in descending order, is a list of qualified bidders, the amounts of their bids, and additional moneys needed to complete the work. Name Amount Contract Portion of Bid Amount, of Bider of Bid Contingence Amount Pro��ided by o meowner �I 00 �- �6� 1 30 ° 7272-6 --O After review of the above bidders, I freely and without duress select: kAl kV 5e N' rn01 S7tt--L410A) to be the Construction Contractor for the work to be performed on m roe Y property. rtY. Date: �L Signature of I iomcm%mer Date: S �_ fitness ** DO NOT COMPLETE BOTTOM SECTION IF ADDITIONAL MONEY IS NOT REQUIRED ** ADDITIONAL MONEY I acknowledge by my signature below that in selection the Construction Contractor it will be necessary for me to provide either a cashier's check or a letter of commitment for additional funds in the amount of $ prior to the execution of a construction contract with the Contractor which I have selected. Date: Signature of Homeowner Deadline Date for Deposit of Additional Funds with the City: RHB_47 l "November 14`1995`. M7 Ite AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Approval to purchase computer equipment through an existing Interlocal Purchase Agreement from the Texas Department of Information Resources. ITEM SUMMARY The staff is requesting approval to purchase computer equipment from the Department of Information Resources (DIR). The DIR annually solicits bids for various types of computer equipment for use in their agency and to allow other governmental entities the opportunity to purchase at reduced prices. The program is designed so that the purchasing entity chooses a piece of equipment from the contract list and submits a purchase order to the DIR. The ordering entity is invoiced for the cost of the equipment plus a 2 percent handling fee. The Information Services (IS) Internal Service Fund has approximately 19 PCs, software, and 3 printers budgeted for this fiscal year. By utilizing the DIR contract the City can utilize the following benefits: * Eliminate staff time and cost involved in bid advertisement, specification writing, evaluating bids and testing equipment. All equipment is bid and awarded in accordance with State law. In addition, an extensive testing and monitoring program is used to ensure that quality equipment is on the contract. Compaq, NEC, Digital,and Zenith are a sample of equipment on this contract. * The flexibility of being able to purchase equipment throughout the year at a predetermined price. We can purchase and install machines periodically as time allows instead of making a single large purchase and leaving the equipment in our warehouse, with warranty in effect, until time is available for installation. This also allows us to take advantage of changing technology without having to rebid. * Standardizing our equipment by selecting specific brands from the contract. Standardization allows for uniform training, simplifies the transfer of software between PC's and reduces the amount of inventory needed for repairs. * Extended on -site warranties are approximately half the cost of those available on the open market. * Based on pricing information available to us we can expect to spend between 15 to 20 Percent less using this contract than if we solicited bids for these products ourselves. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS In May 1995 a bill was passed by the Texas Legislature clarifying the use of Department of Information Resources and The General Services Commission (GSC) purchasing contracts. The bill states that a local government that purchases goods and services under an agreement with another local government, the GSC or DIR satisfies the competitive bidding requirements. If approved, this will be the third year we have utilized this contract. FINANCIAL IMPACT (cost of item, fund and division name, budgeted amt.) $142,000.00 was budgeted in the 1995/96 Internal Service Fund. Staff is requesting approval for expenditures of an amount not to exceed $142,000.00. COMMENTS (from City Attorney, staff, boards and commissions) none ATTACHMENTS (list individually) none Submitted By: Terry Jones, Purchasing Director lizabeth Gray, Director of Information Resources Council Meeting Date: 11 /14/95 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Authorize the City to pay a deductible payment to the National Casualty Company. ITEM SUMMARY The City had a claim filed by Harold Leverson in December, 1993. The public official liability insurance policy carried by the City at that time had a $15,000.00 deductible. Expenses related to this case have reached that limit, and the City has been requested by the National Casualty Company to pay this deductible. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS None FINANCIAL IMPACT The City pays this deductible out of reserves set aside in its General Insurance Account. COMMENTS None ATTACHMENTS None Submitted By: Hartley Sappington, Director of Community Services Council Meeting Date: 11/14/95 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT A resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an Airport Land Lease with Gayle Peery for the construction of a private aircraft storage hangar. ITEM SUMMARY The proposed lease for approximately 44,000 square feet of Airport property is the standard 20-year lease with a 10-year option to renew. The proposed rental rate is $0.10 per square foot per year. This is the rental rate that has been recommended by the Airport Advisory Board. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS None FINANCIAL IMPACT This lease, if approved, would generate an additional $4,400.00 per year for the Airport Fund, and approximately $440.00 per year in ad valorem taxes. COMMENTS Since 19851 the Airport Advisory Board has recommended, and the Councils have approved, a land rental rate of $0.07 per square foot per year for private aircraft storage hangars at the Georgetown Municipal Airport. However, at the October 23, 1995, Board Meeting to discuss this new lease proposal, it was the unanimous opinion of the Board that the rental rate in this new area be increased. to $0.10 per square foot per year. This increase is fair and reasonable due to the cost of the new road, water line, and electric line to this area, the cost of the stormwater detention facility that must be built this year to serve this new area, and the fact that the rate has not been adjusted for inflation in ten years. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution 2. Site Plan 3. Copy of the Lease Agreement is available from the City Secretary for review. Travis McLain, Airport Manager Hartley Sappington, Director of Community Services RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH GAYLE PEERY FOR 44,000 SQUARE FEET OF AIRPORT PROPERTY. WHEREAS, the City has available land at the Georgetown Municipal Airport for the construction of private aircraft storage hangars; and, WHEREAS,Mr. Peery desires to lease a portion of this land to construct a private aircraft storage hangar; and, WHEREAS,the Airport Advisory Board has recommended that the City Council approve this land lease; and, WHEREAS, the City Council hereby finds that this lease is in the best interests of the development of the Georgetown Municipal Airport; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1. The facts and recitations contained in the preamble of this resolution are hereby found and declared to be true and correct, and are incorporated by reference herein and expressly made a part hereof, as if copied verbatim. The City Council hereby finds that this resolution implements Facilities and Services Policy 1 of the Century Plan - Policy Plan Element, which states: "The City will endeavor to increase the quality of life through the upgrading of existing facilities and services and the provision of new services to met the specific needs of the community"; and further finds that the adoption of this resolution is not inconsistent or in conflict with any other Century Plan Policies, as required by Section 2.03 of the Administrative Chapter of the Policy Plan. SECTION 2. The Mayor is hereby directed to execute, and the City Secretary to attest thereto on behalf of the City of Georgetown, the Airport lease agreement. SECTION 3. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon adoption. RESOLVED this 14`' day of November, 1995. Resolution No. Gayle Peery Lease Agreement Pagel of 2 ATTEST: THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS Sandra Lee By: Leo Wood City Secretary Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney CADATMTRAVLSTEERY UM Resolution No. Gayle Peery Lease Agreement Page 2 of 2 Council Meeting Date: 11/14/95 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT A resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an Airport Land Lease with D. E. Rhodes for the construction of a private aircraft storage hangar. ITEM SUMMARY The proposed lease for approximately 22,000 square feet of Airport property is the standard 20-year lease with a 10-year option to renew. The proposed rental rate is $0.10 per square foot per year. This is the rental rate that has been recommended by the Airport Advisory Board. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS None FINANCIAL IMPACT This lease, if approved, would generate an additional $2,200.00 per year for the Airport Fund, and approximately $266.00 per year in ad valorem taxes. ti COMMENTS Since 1985, the Airport Advisory Board has recommended, and the Councils have approved, a land rental rate of $0.07 per square foot per year for private aircraft storage hangars at the Georgetown Municipal Airport. However, at the October 23, 1995, Board Meeting to discuss this new lease proposal, it was the unanimous opinion of the Board that the rental rate in this new area be increased to $0.10 per square foot per year. This increase is fair and reasonable due to the cost of the new road, water line, and electric line to this area, the cost of the stormwater detention facility that must be built this year to serve this new area, and the fact that the rate has not been adjusted for inflation in ten years. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution 2. Site Plan 3. Copy of the Lease Agreement is available from the City Secretary for review. Travis McLain, Airport Manager Hartley Sappington, Director of Community Services RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH D. E. RHODES FOR 22,000 SQUARE FEET OF AIRPORT PROPERTY. WHEREAS, the City has available land at the Georgetown Municipal Airport for the construction of private aircraft storage hangars; and, WHEREAS�Mr. Rhodes desires to lease a portion of this land to construct a private aircraft storage hangar; and, WHEREAS,the Airport Advisory Board has recommended that the City Council approve this land lease; and, WHEREAS, the City Council hereby finds that this lease is in the best interests of the development of the Georgetown Municipal Airport; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, THAT. - SECTION 1. The facts and recitations contained in the preamble of this resolution are hereby found and declared to be true and correct, and are incorporated by reference herein and expressly made a part hereof, as if copied verbatim. The City Council hereby finds that this resolution implements Facilities and Services Policy 1 of the Century Plan - Policy Plan Element, which states: The City will endeavor to increase the quality of life through the upgrading of existing facilities and services and the provision of new services to met the specific needs of the community"; and further finds that the adoption of this resolution is not inconsistent or in conflict with any other Century Plan Policies, as required by Section 2.03 of the Administrative Chapter of the Policy Plan. SECTION 2. The Mayor is hereby directed to execute, and the City Secretary to attest thereto on behalf of the City of Georgetown, the Airport lease agreement. SECTION 3. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon adoption. RESOLVED this 14' day of November, 1995. Resolution No. D. E. Rhodes Lease Agreement Pagel of 2 ATTEST: THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS Sandra Lee By: Leo Wood City Secretary Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney C:\DATA\TRAVLS\RHODES.ITM Resolution No. D. E. Rhodes Lease Agreement Page 2 of 2 ' '..�--�+�.�..,:?�inc�'"". r.-.`. �;._TG�"..- �er *�a..5e:.-pr- .-s3 : xi'`s•:=.emw�, .«,.s..:...-.. g ' ,�.. -� _w'�. �.. we5 wZa,��^LSr.�.�v+ "�...+..-.= ��.-+�.+. .s.�.- �n`S� aL.—.. :<� .«Gn 7..'_.�'sY" -"3- � ra.:• 4 ..ea_sv'i'- h._Z`�S"r.- i4§'Sx" �*C +� _e._ Council Meeting Date: 11/14/95 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT A resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an Airport Land Lease with Marvin Cressman for the construction of a private aircraft storage hangar. ITEM SUMMARY The proposed lease for approximately 22,000 square feet of Airport property is the standard 20-year lease with a 10-year option to renew. The proposed rental rate is $0.10 per square foot per year. This is the rental rate that has been recommended by the Airport Advisory Board. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS None FINANCIAL IMPACT Since 1985, the Airport Advisory Board has recommended, and the Councils have approved, a land rental rate of $0.07 per square foot per year for private aircraft storage hangars at the Georgetown Municipal Airport. However, at the October 23, 1995, Board Meeting to discuss this new lease proposal, it was the unanimous opinion of the Board that the rental rate in this new area be increased to $0.10 per square foot per year. This increase is fair and reasonable due to the cost of the new road, water line, and electric line to this area, the cost of the stormwater detention facility that must be built this year to serve this new area, and the fact that the rate has not been adjusted for inflation in ten years. COMMENTS The Airport Advisory Board, at a meeting on May 23, 1994, voted unanimously to recommend that the City Council approve this lease. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution 2. Site Plan 3. Copy of the Lease Agreement is available from the City Secretary for review. Travis McLain, Airport Manager Hartley Sappington, Director of Community Services RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH MARVIN CRESSMAN FOR 22,000 SQUARE FEET OF AIRPORT PROPERTY. WHEREAS, the City has available land at the Georgetown Municipal Airport for the construction of private aircraft storage hangars; and, WHEREAS, Mr. Cressman desires to lease a portion of this land to construct a private aircraft storage hangar; and, WHEREAS,the Airport Advisory Board has recommended that the City Council approve this land lease; and, WHEREAS, the City Council hereby finds that this lease is in the best interests of the development of the Georgetown Municipal Airport; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, THAT: . SECTION 1. The facts and recitations contained in the preamble of this resolution are hereby found and declared to be true and correct, and are incorporated by reference herein and expressly made a part hereof, as if copied verbatim. The City Council hereby finds that this resolution implements Facilities and Services Policy 1 of the Century Plan - Policy Plan Element, which states: The City will endeavor to increase the quality of life through the upgrading of existing facilities and services and the provision of new services to met the specific needs of the community"; and further finds that the adoption of this resolution is not inconsistent or in conflict with any other Century Plan Policies, as required by Section 2.03 of the Administrative Chapter of the Policy Plan. SECTION 2. The Mayor is hereby directed to execute, and the City Secretary to attest thereto on behalf of the City of Georgetown, the Airport lease agreement. SECTION 3. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon adoption. RESOLVED this 14" day of November, 1995. Resolution No. Marvin Cressman Lease Agreement Page 1 of 2 ATTEST: THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS Sandra Lee By: Leo Wood City Secretary Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney C:\DATA\TRAVMCRESSMAN.r M Resolution No. Marvin Cressman Lease Agreement Page 2 of 2 t IiF - f f • % I ♦• % • Q� Council meeting date: 11-14-95 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Declare the light fixtures at the Grace Heritage Center as surplus and authorize the Heritage Society to dispose of the fixtures, with the stipulation that the Heritage Society will install fixtures from the Gothic Period. ITEM SUNVVIARY The Heritage Society is working on the next phase of the restoration of the Grace Heritage Center building. The light fixtures that are currently contained in the building were put in within the last 3 0 years, and are not consistent with the time period of the building. The Heritage Society has requested that they be allowed to dispose of the lights, either through - sale or trading them in on new reproductions from the Gothic Period. This item has been placed in order to allow you to declare the fixtures as surplus, and to allow the Heritage Society to dispose of the lights provided that the trade or the proceeds of the sale be used to replace the lights. ATTACHMENTS None py: ►Z Bob Hart, City Manager aw r Council Meeting Date: November 14, 1995 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Council approval of bid award to Williams and Thomas, Inc., d.b.a. Jamail Construction, to construct Concrete Curb and Gutter, Driveways, Sidewalks and Radius units alona Various City Streets, in the amount of $116,704.88. ITEM SUMMARY: On Wednesday, October 18, 1995, bids were received -and opened for the Concrete Curb and Gutter, Driveways, Sidewalks and Radius units along Various----CityStreets projects of the City of Georgetown. The engineering firm responsible to handle this project, Roming-< Parker Associates, L.L.P., verified that the low bid, received from Williams and Thomas, Inc. d.b.a. Jamail construction, does conform to the project specifications and recommends that the bid be awarded to Jamail Construction as per their letter, attached. Therefore, staff recommends award of the bid for this project to Jamail Construction in the amount of $116,704.88 SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: NONE FINANCIAL IMPACT• Funds in the amount of $116,704.88 to be paid as follows: Account #110-101-6001 $30,000.00 Account #110-101-6103 $50,000.00 Account #110-101-6004 $25,000.00 Account *110-101-6300 $11,704.88 COMMENTS: NONE ATTACHMENTS: 1. Letter and bid tabulation from Roming-Parker Associates S Jim Briggs, Director Community Owned Utilities RPROMING - PARKER ASSOCIATES, L.L.P. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 3513 Southwest H.K. Dodgen Loop, Suite 103 Temple, Texas 76502 (817) 773-3731 Fax (817) 773-6667 W. CLAY ROMING, P.E. WM. MACK PARKER, P.E. RICK N. KASBERG, P.E. October 26, 1995 Mr. Don M. Rundell, P.E. Manager, Systems Engineering Community Owned Utilities City of Georgetown 1101 N. College - P.O. Box 409 Georgetown, TX 78627-0409 Re: City of Georgetown Concrete Infrastructure Improvements Georgetown, Texas Dear Mr. Rundell: JAMES E. LAUGHLIN, P.E. Staff Consultant Bids were publicly opened and read aloud in your offices at 1101 North College on Wednesday, October 18, 1995 at 2:00 P.M. for Concrete Curb & Gutter, Driveways Sidewalks and Radius units along Various City Streets. The Tabulation of Bids is attached for your review. Williams and Thomas, Inc. dba Jamail Construction was the low bidder with a total bid of $116,704.88. We contacted a portion of the references submitted by Jamail. A copy of the reference list is enclosed. All the references we contacted gave excellent endorsements of Jamail as contractors, project managers and business people. Therefore, we recommend that the award of the contract be made to Jamail Construction; 720 Bastrop Hwy, Suite 211; Austin, Texas 78741; (512) 385-8787. If you have any questions or comments about this recommendation, please call. Sincerely, tv". yrv--tk PaAhr Wm. Mack Parker, P.E. WMP/tmm 95-120-20 BID TABULATION SHEET CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER, DRIVEWAYS, SIDEWALKS AND RADIUS UNITS ALONG VARIOUS CITY STREETS CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS OCTOBER 18, 1995 - 2: 00 P.M. Bid Security Addendum No. 1 Acknowledged JAMAIL DAYCO VALOREM Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Item No. Quantity Description Unit Price Extension Total Unit Price Extension Total Unit Price Extension Total A 100 % Barricades $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 B 1,000 CY Excavation $6.60 $6,600.00 $22.00 $22,000.00 $9.00 $9 000.00 C 6,000 LF Curb & Gutter $4.90 $29,400.00 $7.25 $43,500.00 $8.50 $51,000.00 D 150 SY 6" Driveway $18.55 $2,782.50 $34.66 $5,199.00 $35.00 $5,250.00 E 4 EA 15' Radius $1,325.00 $5,300.00 $109.00 * $436.00 $1,500.00 $6,000.00 F 4 EA 20' Radius $1,525.00 $6,100.00 $250.00 $1,000.00 $1,400.00 $5,600.00 G 100 SY 6" Flatwork $18.55 $1,855.00 $34.00 $3,400.00 $30.00 $3,000.00 H 4,000 SY 4" Flex Base $3.85 $15,400.00 $4.07 $16,280.00 $3.65 $14,600.00 I 7,000 LF Asphalt Saw Cut $2.86 $20,020.00 $0.47 $3,290.00 $1.00 $7,000.00 J 300 LF Concrete Saw Cut $3.30 $990.00 $2.25 $675.00 $3.00 $900.00 K 10,000 SF 5" Sidewalk $1.97 $19,700.00 $2.35 $23,500.00 $3.55 $35,500.00 Subtotal $111,147.50 $122, 280.00 $140, 850.00 Bonds & Insurance $5,557.38 NA NA TOTAL $116,704.88 $122,280.00 $140,850.00 * This Extension Total has been corrected due to an error in the original bid submitted. This is to certify that the above tabulation is a true and correct representation of the bids received on October 18, 1995 at 2:00 P.M. by the City of Georgetown, Texas. �yw /0 -a, '? 5-- Wm. Mack Parker, P.E. Date .'t 'W100, 6 A L tXWN&n: BID TABULATION SHEET CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER, DRIVEWAYS, SIDEWALKS AND RADIUS UNITS ALONG VARIOUS CITY STREETS CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS OCTOBER 18, 1995 - 2: 00 P.M. Bid Security Addendum No. 1 Acknowledged JAMAIL DAYCO VALOREM Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Item No. Quantity Description Unit Price Extension Total Unit Price Extension Total Unit Price Extension Total A 100 % Barricades $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 B 1,000 CY Excavation $6.60 $6,600.00 $22.00 $22,000.00 $9.00 $9,000.00 C 6,000 LF Curb & Gutter $4.90 $29,400.00 $7.25 $43,500.00 $8.50 $51,000.00 D 150 SY 6" Driveway $18.55 $2,782.50 $34.66 $5,199.00 $35.00 $5,250.00 E 4 EA 15' Radius $1,325.00 $5,300.00 $109.00 * $436.00 $1,500.00 $6,000.00 F 4 EA 20' Radius $1,525.00 $6,100.00 $250.00 $1,000.00 $1,400.00 $5,600.00 G 100 SY 6" Flatwork $18.55 $1, 855.00 $34.00 $3,400.00 $30.00 $3,000.00 H 4,000 SY 4" Flex Base $3.85 $15,400.00 $4.07 $16,280.00 $3.65 $14,600.00 I 7,000 LF Asphalt Saw Cut $2.86 $20,020.00 $0.47 $3,290.00 $1.00 $7,000.00 1 300 LF Concrete Saw Cut $3.30 $990.00 $2.25 $675.00 $3.00 $900.00 K 10,000 SF 5" Sidewalk $1.97 $19,700.00 $2.35 $23,500.00 $3.55 $35,500.00 Subtotal $111,147.50 $122,280.00 $140, 850.00 Bonds & Insurance $5,557.38 NA NA TOTAL $116,704.88 $122,280.00 $140,850.00 * This Extension Total has been corrected due to an error in the original bid submitted. This is to certify that the above tabulation is a true and correct representation of the bids received on October 18, 1995 at 2:00 P.M. by the City of Georgetown, Texas. .•;�.0 nr \ � oR 1 vz-*� - M�4 Wm. Mack Parker, P.E. Date W WK PARKER 442M o ��hAL t� -. wt, 4 ;*'rku`.� ,.-.;;w li. ,ny+x. �..-� -.� ram^ ,••v.— ..� Tsdc� .4.:uta :�,+.�+ t'» - ... - ., - .'�` - °Stt-^� ' v-�.i �iTa_ ;ei_u"St2! i .-.;�..:: ..._,.v •. - ".s � n`tii'• a :r �e ro ��'� 'tiff - . -+.+,;=. t - - _ - - .�� Council Meeting Date: November 14, 1995 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Council approval of Amendment #20, to the agreement between Camp, Dresser & McKee and the City of Georgetown, for engineering services related to the design of the 1996 Wastewater System Improvements in the amount of $56,000.00. ITEM SUMMARY: In order to stay current with our five and ten year Capital Improvements Projects Program and provide excellent wastewater services, it is necessary to update and enhance the City's wastewater system annually. This year the planned improvements include upgrades to Oak Crest and Hart Street and construction of Phase I of the Smith Branch Wastewater Interceptor. Staff has requested that the engineering firm of Camp, Dresser & McKee prepare an estimate to complete the design of the 1996 Wastewater System Improvements for the City. The estimate has been completed and is attached. Therefore, staff recommends approval of Amendment #20 to complete the design of the 1996 Wastewater System Improvements, in the amount of $56,000.00. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: NONE FINANCIAL IMPACT: Funds in the amount of $56,000.00 are to be paid as follows: Account #651-101-6200 $18,666.66 Account #651-101-6201 $18,666.67 Account #651-101-6202 $18, 666, 67 COMMENTS: NONE ATTACHMENTS ,�. Amendment #20 from Camp, Dresser & McKee S T1tt-1d t. Jim Briggs, Director Community Owned Utilities AMENDMENT NO. 20 TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND ENGINEER FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO DESIGN THE 1996 WASTEWATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS The General Services Agreement between OWNER and ENGINEER last authorized on November 26, 1991, is hereby amended as follows: The scope and cost of the anticipated services are set forth in the attached Exhibit 1. The fee for the work in Amendment No. 20 is to be paid on a lump sum basis. Your signature below will constitute your acceptance of Amendment No. 20. EXECUTED in duplicate original this day of , 1995 at Georgetown, Texas, where this contract is performable and enforceable. Approved as to form: Party of the First Part: CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney Party of the Second Part: CAMP DRES R & McKEE C. i By: Allen D. Woelke, P.E. Principal Engineer STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TRAVIS Leo Wood Mayor Attest: Sandra D. Lee City Secretary This instrument was acknowledged before me on this the 0& day of B Dlo -19—& by Mr. Allen D. Woelke in his capacity as Principal Engineer of Camp Dresser & McKee Inc. Printed name: du -i A, nv► N tary P ic, tate o Texas Commission Expires: A 1281 AMD.N20 JULIA FINNBY '* NOTARY PUBLIC State of Texas Comm. Exp. 02-03- P EXHIBIT 1 SCOPE OF WORK Project Description: The 1996 Wastewater System Improvements consist of three sewer replacement projects that will be built in one construction contract. The first project is the replacement of 2,245 l.f. of 6-inch sanitary sewers in the Oak Crest area near the San Gabriel River. The second project is the replacement of 560 l.f, of 8-inch sanitary sewer on Hart Street, between West 13th Street and West 15th Street, with a 10-inch sanitary sewer. The third project is the replacement of 1,192 l.f. of the 12-inch Smith Branch Interceptor with a 21-inch line. Preliminary Engineering Phase. This phase involves determination of project scope and economic and technical evaluation of feasible alternatives. Services during this phase include: 1) Reviewing available data and consulting with the OWNER to clarify and define the OWNER's requirements for the project. 2) Advising the OWNER as to the necessity of providing or obtaining from others additional data or services. These additional services may include photogrammetry, reconnaissance surveys, property surveys, topographic surveys, geotechnical investigations and consultations, compilation of hydrological data, traffic studies, materials engineering, assembly of zoning, deed, and other restrictive land use information, and environmental assessments and impact statements. 3) Identifying and analyzing requirements of governmental authorities having jurisdiction to approve the design of the project, and participating in consultations with such authorities. 4) Providing analyses of the OWNER's needs, planning surveys, and comparative evaluations of prospective sites and solutions. 5) Providing a general economic analysis of the OWNER's requirements applicable to various alternatives. 6) Preparing a letter report presenting alternative solutions available to the OWNER with the consulting engineer's findings and recommendations. The letter report may contain schematic layouts, sketches, conceptual design criteria with appropriate exhibits to indicate clearly the considerations involved (including applicable requirements of governmental authorities having jurisdiction), and the consulting engineer's conceptual opinion of probable costs for the project. The number and distribution of report copies will be as stipulated in the agreement with the OWNER. 7) Consulting with the OWNER, reviewing preliminary reports, clarifying and defining the project. requirements, reviewing available data, and discussing general scheduling. Conferences may also be required with approving and regulatory governmental agencies and affected utilities. A1281aMID.N20 EX 1-1 8) Advising the OWNER as to whether additional data or services are required, and assisting the OWNER in obtaining such data and services. 9) Preparing preliminary design documents consisting of final design criteria, preliminary drawings, outline of specifications, and written descriptions of the project. The number and distribution of copies will be as stipulated in the agreement with the OWNER. 10) Preparing revised opinions of probable total project costs. Final Design Phase. This phase of project development is undertaken only after the OWNER has approved the preliminary engineering phase material. The basic services for the final design phase includes: 1) Preparing construction drawings and specifications showing the character and extent of the project based on the accepted preliminary engineering documents. 2) Preparing and furnishing to the OWNER a revised opinion of probable total project costs based on the final drawings and specifications. 3) Furnishing the necessary engineering data required to apply for regulatory permits from local, state, or federal authorities. This is distinguished from and does not include detailed applications and supporting documents for government grant-in-aid or planning grants that would be furnished as additional services. 4) Preparing basic documents related to construction contracts for review and approval by the OWNER (and the OWNER's legal and other advisors). These may include contract agreement forms, general conditions and supplementary conditions, invitations to bid, instructions to bidders, insurance and bonding requirements, and preparation of other contract -related documents. 5) Furnishing to the OWNER the specified number of copies of drawings, specifications, and other contract documents. Bidding Phase. Services under this phase include: 1) Assisting the OWNER in advertising for and obtaining bids for each separate prime construction contract, maintaining a record of prospective bidders to whom bidding documents have been issued, attending pre -bid conferences, and receiving and processing deposits for bidding documents. 2) Issuing addenda as appropriate to interpret, clarify, or expand the bidding documents. 3) Assisting the OWNER in determining the qualifications and acceptability of prospective constructors, subcontractors, and suppliers. A 1281 AMD.N20 EX 1-2 4) When substitution prior to the award of contracts is allowed by the bidding documents, consultation with and advising the OWNER as to the acceptability of alternate materials and equipment proposed by the prospective constructors. 5) Attending the bid openings, preparing bid tabulation sheets, and providing assistance to the OWNER in evaluating bids or proposals and in assembling and awarding contracts for construction, materials, equipment, and services. Construction Phase. Services under this phase involve consulting with and advising the OWNER during construction and are limited to those services associated with performing as the OWNER's representative. Such services comprise: 1) Preparing for and conducting a preconstruction conference and issuing a Notice to Proceed on behalf of the OWNER. 2) Reviewing shop and erection drawings submitted by the constructors for compliance with design concepts. 3) Reviewing laboratory, shop, and mill test reports on materials and equipment. 4) Visiting the project site monthly as construction proceeds to observe and report on the progress and the quality of the executed work. 5) Issuing necessary interpretations and clarifications of contract documents, preparing change orders requiring special inspections and testing of the work, and making recommendations as to the acceptability of the work. 6) Preparing sketches required to resolve problems due to actual field conditions encountered. 7) Determining amounts of progress payments due, based on degree of completion of the work, and recommending issuance of such payments by the OWNER. 8) Preparing record drawings from information submitted by the CONTRACTOR. 9) Making a final inspection and reporting on completion of the project, including recommendations concerning final payments to constructors and release of retained percentages. A1281AMDN20 EX 1-3 CITY OF GEORGETOWN 1996 WASTEWATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ENGINEERING FEE ESTIMATE • Preliminary Engineering Phase: $15,700.00 • Design Phase: $19,350.00 • Bid Phase: $ 1,500.00 • General Services During Construction Phase: $ 4,950.00 • Other Direct Costs, including: $ 1,500.00 Travel Telephone Copying/bluelines Postage/facsimile Computer time Total Basic Engineering Services $439000.00 • Surveying $ 5,000.00 • Geologic Assessment $ 2,500.00 • TNRCC SCS Submittal Preparation $ 5,500.00 Total Special Services $139000.00 TOTAL $569000.00 A1281AMD.N20 EX 1-4 Council Meeting Date: November 14, 1995 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Council approval of Amendment #21, to the agreement between Camp, Dresser & McKee and the City of Georgetown, for engineering services related to the design of the 1996 Water System Improvements, in the amount of $24,200.00. ITEM SUMMARY • - - In order to stay current with our five and ten year Capital Improvements Projects Program and provide excellent water services, it is necessary to up -date and enhance the City's water system annually. This year the planned improvements include two new 16- inch water lines, one from the Central Elevated Storage Tank to a point near the intersection of Country Club Road and the proposed Rivery Blvd. and the other to cross IH-35 between Williams Drive and S.H. 29. Staff has requested that the engineering firm of Camp, Dresser & McKee prepare an estimate to complete the design of the 1996 Water System Improvements for the City. The estimate has been completed and is attached. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the 1996 Water System improvements, in the amount of $24,200.00. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: NONE FINANCIAL IMPACT• Funds in the amount of $24,200.00 to be paid as follows: Account.#661-101-6112 $12,100.00 Account #661-101-6111 $12,100.00 COMMENTS: NONE e Jim Briggs, Director Community Owned Utilities AMENDMENT NO. 21 TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND ENGINEER FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO DESIGN THE 1996 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS The General Services Agreement between OWNER and ENGINEER last authorized on November 265 1991, is hereby amended as follows: The scope and cost of the anticipated services are set forth in the attached Exhibit 1. The fee for the work in Amendment No. 21 is to be paid on a lump sum basis. Your signature below will constitute your acceptance of Amendment No. 21. EXECUTED in duplicate original this day of 1995 at Georgetown, Texas, where this contract is performable and enforceable. Approved as to form: Party of the First Part: CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney Party of the Second Part: CA DRESS R & McKEE IN . By: Allen D. Woelke, P.E. Principal Engineer STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TRAVIS Leo Wood Mayor Attest: Sandra D. Lee City Secretary This instrument was acknowledged before me on this the 2,4-M-- day of 19 V,, by Mr. Allen D. Woelke in his capacity as Principal Engineer of Camp Dresser & McKee Inc. Printed name: Not ry Pu 'c, ate of exas Commission Expires: 2 3 A 1281 AMD.N21 JULIA FINNEY _* NOTARY PUBLIC "OF State of Texas Comm. Exp. 02-03-97 EXHIBIT 1 SCOPE OF WORK Project Description: The 1996 Water System Improvements consists of two 16-inch treated water pipeline projects that will be built in one construction contract. The first project commences at Central Elevated Storage Tank and crosses Williams Drive in the vicinity of Country Club Road. The line then runs along Country Club Road and terminates near the proposed Rivery Blvd. The second project is a crossing of IH-35 between State Highway 29 and Williams Drive. This project will connect a 16-inch water line west of IH-35 to a 12-inch water line east of the highway. Preliminary Engineering Phase. This phase involves determination of project scope and economic and technical evaluation of feasible alternatives. Services during this phase include: 1) Reviewing available data and consulting with the OWNER to clarify and define the OWNER's requirements for the project. 2) Advising the OWNER as to the necessity of providing or obtaining from others additional data or services. These additional services may include photogrammetry, reconnaissance surveys, property surveys, topographic surveys, geotechnical investigations and consultations, compilation of hydrological data, traffic studies, materials engineering, assembly of zoning, deed, and other restrictive land use information, and environmental assessments and impact statements. 3) Identifying and analyzing requirements of governmental authorities having jurisdiction to approve the design of the project, and participating in consultations with such authorities. 4) Providing analyses of the OWNER's needs, planning surveys, and comparative evaluations of prospective sites and solutions. 5) Providing a general economic analysis of the OWNER's requirements applicable to various alternatives. 6) Preparing a letter report presenting alternative solutions available to the OWNER with the consulting engineer's findings and recommendations. The letter report may contain schematic layouts, sketches, conceptual design criteria with appropriate exhibits to indicate clearly the considerations involved (including applicable requirements of governmental authorities having jurisdiction), and the consulting engineer's conceptual opinion of probable costs for the project. The number and distribution of report copies will be as stipulated in the agreement with the OWNER. 17) Consulting with the OWNER, reviewing preliminary reports, clarifying and defining the project requirements, reviewing available data, and discussing general scheduling. Conferences may also be required with approving and regulatory governmental agencies and affected utilities. A1281AJ DMMI EX 1-1 8) Advising the OWNER as to whether additional data or services are required, and assisting the OWNER in obtaining such data and services. 9) Preparing preliminary design documents consisting of final design criteria, preliminary drawings, outline of specifications, and written descriptions of the project. The number and distribution of copies will be as stipulated in the agreement with the OWNER. 10) Preparing revised opinions of probable total project costs. Final Design Phase. This phase of project development is undertaken only after the OWNER has approved the preliminary engineering phase material. The basic services for the final design phase includes: 1) Preparing construction drawings and specifications showing the character and extent of the project based on the accepted preliminary engineering documents. 2) Preparing and furnishing to the OWNER a revised opinion of probable total project costs based on the final drawings and specifications. 3) Furnishing the necessary engineering data required to apply for regulatory permits from local, state, or federal authorities. This is distinguished from and does not include detailed applications and supporting documents for government grant-in-aid or planning grants that would be furnished as additional services. 4) Preparing basic documents related to construction contracts for review and approval by the OWNER (and the OWNER's legal and other advisors). These may include contract agreement forms, general conditions and supplementary conditions, invitations to bid, instructions to bidders, insurance and bonding requirements, and preparation of other contract -related documents. 5) Furnishing to the OWNER the specified number of copies of drawings, specifications, and other contract documents. Bidding Phase. Services under this phase include: 1) Assisting the OWNER in advertising for and obtaining bids for each separate prime construction contract, maintaining a record of prospective bidders to whom bidding documents have been issued, attending pre -bid conferences, and receiving and processing deposits for bidding documents. 2) Issuing addenda as appropriate to interpret, clarify, or expand the bidding documents. 3) Assisting the OWNER in determining the qualifications and acceptability of prospective constructors, subcontractors, and suppliers. A1281AMD.N21 EX 1-2 4) When substitution prior to the award of contracts is allowed by the bidding documents, consultation with and advising the OWNER as to the acceptability of alternate materials and equipment proposed by the prospective constructors. 5) Attending the bid openings, preparing bid tabulation sheets, and providing assistance to the OWNER in evaluating bids or proposals and in assembling and awarding contracts for construction, materials, equipment, and services. Construction Phase. Services under this phase involve consulting with and advising the OWNER during construction and are limited to those services associated with performing as the OWNER's representative. Such services comprise: 1) Preparing for and conducting a preconstruction conference and issuing a Notice to Proceed on behalf of the OWNER. 2) Reviewing shop and erection drawings submitted by the constructors for compliance with design concepts. 3) Reviewing laboratory, shop, and mill test reports on materials and equipment. 4) Visiting the project site monthly as construction proceeds to observe and report on the progress and the quality of the executed work. 5) Issuing necessary interpretations and clarifications of contract documents, preparing change orders requiring special inspections and testing of the work, and making recommendations as to the acceptability of the work. 6) Preparing sketches required to resolve problems due to actual field conditions encountered. 7) Determining amounts of progress payments due, based on degree of completion of the work, and recommending issuance of such payments by the OWNER. 8) Preparing record drawings from information submitted by the CONTRACTOR. 9) Making a final inspection and reporting on completion of the project, including recommendations concerning final payments to constructors and release of retained percentages. A1281AMDN21 EX 1-3 CITY OF GEORGETOWN 1996 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ENGINEERING FEE ESTIMATE • Preliminary Engineering Phase: $ 7,440.00 • Design Phase: $ 9,495.00 • Bid Phase: $ 1,000.00 • General Services During Construction Phase: $ 2,165.00 • Other Direct Costs, including: $ 1,000.00 Travel Telephone Copying/bluelines Postage/facsimile Computer time Total Basic Engineering Services Surveying $ 3,100.00 Total Special Services TOTAL $219100.00 $ 39100.00 $249200.00 A 1281 AMD.N21 EX 1-4 Council Meeting Date: November 14, 1995 AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET Item No. SUBJECT: Council approval of Amendment #22, to the agreement between Camp, Dresser & McKee and the City of Georgetown, for engineering services related to the design of the Railroad Street and Country Club Road improvements, in the amount of $122,950.00. ITEM SUMMARY • - Council has identified transportation as a top priority and focus for the 1995/1996 budget year. In keeping with Council objectives .and in order to enhance the City's transportation system, staff has proposed road enhancements on Railroad Street and Country Club Road. - Staff has requested that the engineering firm of Camp, Dresser & McKee prepare an estimate to complete the design of these road improvements,. The estimate is completed and is attached. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the Railroad Street and Country Club Road improvement designs, in the amount of $122,950.00. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: NONE FINANCIAL IMPACT• Funds in the amount of $48,750.00 are to be paid as follows: Account #110-101-6302 $48,750.00 account #110-101-6902 $74,200.00 COMMENTS: NONE ATTACHMENTS: 1. Amendment #22 from Camp, Dresser & McKee 9 6v Jim Briggs, Director Community Owned Utilities AMENDMENT NO. 22 TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND ENGINEER FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO DESIGN THE IMPROVEMENTS TO RAILROAD STREET AND COUNTRY CLUB ROAD The General Services Agreement between OWNER and ENGINEER last authorized on November 26, 1991, is hereby amended as follows: The scope and cost of the anticipated services are set forth in the attached Exhibit 1. The fee for the work in Amendment No. 22 is to be paid on a lump sum basis. Your signature below will constitute your acceptance of Amendment No. 22. EXECUTED in duplicate original this day of , 1995 at Georgetown, Texas, where this contract is performable and enforceable. Approved as to form: Party of the First Part: CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney Party of the Second Part: CAMP DRESSER & McKEE INC. �i - / By: Allen D. Woelke, P.E. Principal Engineer STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TRAVIS Leo Wood Mayor Attest: Sandra D. Lee City Secretary This instrument was acknowledged before me on this the A+A,- day of &b-6ev-, 1913-by Mr. Allen D. Woelke in his capacity as Principal Engineer of Camp Dresser & McKee Inc. Printed name: Jill iq tary ic, tate o Texas Commission Expires: qQ �Y 4 . °--�, JULM FINNEY r A1281AMD.N22 s * NOTARY PUBLIC ''may State of Texas Comm. Exp. 02-03-97 EXHIBIT 1 SCOPE OF WORK Project Description: The Railroad Street Improvements consist of the construction of 4,000 l.f. of a 40-foot (back to back) wide roadway from University Avenue to Leander Road. Storm drainage improvements will also be included on Railroad Street. The Country Club Road Improvements consist of the widening of the first 50011 ± southwest from Williams Drive from two lane to three lane, and the resurfacing of the remainder of the street to the intersection of Gabriel View Drive. Storm drainage improvements will also be included at the connecting streets of Willow Lane and Cottonwood. Preliminary Engineering Phase. This phase involves determination of project scope and economic and technical evaluation of feasible alternatives. Services during this phase include: 1) Reviewing available data and consulting with the OWNER to clarify and define the OWNER's requirements for the project. 2) Advising the OWNER as to the necessity of providing or obtaining from others additional data or services. These additional services may include photogrammetry, reconnaissance surveys, property surveys, topographic surveys, geotechnical investigations and consultations, compilation of hydrological data, traffic studies, materials engineering, assembly of zoning, deed, and other restrictive land use information, and environmental assessments and impact statements. 3) Identifying and analyzing requirements of governmental authorities having jurisdiction to approve the design of the project, and participating in consultations with such authorities. 4) Providing analyses of the OWNER's needs, planning surveys, and comparative evaluations of prospective sites and solutions. 5) Providing a general economic analysis of the OWNER's requirements applicable to various alternatives. 6) Preparing a letter report presenting alternative solutions available to the OWNER with the consulting engineer's findings and recommendations. The letter report may contain schematic layouts, sketches, conceptual design criteria with appropriate exhibits to indicate clearly the considerations involved (including applicable requirements of governmental authorities having jurisdiction), and the consulting engineer's conceptual opinion of probable costs for the project. The number and distribution of report copies will be as stipulated in the agreement with the OWNER. 7) Consulting with the OWNER, reviewing preliminary reports, clarifying and defining the project requirements, reviewing available data, and discussing general scheduling. Conferences may also be required with approving and regulatory governmental agencies and affected utilities. A1281AMD.N22 EX 1-1 8) Advising the OWNER as to whether additional data or services are required, and assisting the OWNER in obtaining such data and services. 9) Preparing preliminary design documents consisting of final design criteria, preliminary drawings, outline of specifications, and written descriptions of the project. The number and distribution of copies will be as stipulated in the agreement with the OWNER. 10) Preparing revised opinions of probable total project costs. Final Design Phase. This phase of project development is undertaken only after the OWNER has approved the preliminary engineering phase material. The basic services for the final design phase includes: 1) Preparing construction drawings and specifications showing the character and extent of the project based on the accepted preliminary engineering documents. 2) Preparing and furnishing to the OWNER a revised opinion of probable total project costs based on the final drawings and specifications. 3) Furnishing the necessary engineering data required to apply for regulatory permits from local, state, or federal authorities. This is distinguished from and does not include detailed applications and supporting documents for government grant-in-aid or planning grants that would be furnished as additional services. 4) Preparing basic documents related to construction contracts for review and approval by the OWNER (and the OWNER's legal and other advisors). These may include contract agreement forms, general conditions and supplementary conditions, invitations to bid, instructions to bidders, insurance and bonding requirements, and preparation of other contract -related documents. 5) Furnishing to the OWNER the specified number of copies of drawings, specifications, and other contract documents. Bidding Phase. Services under this phase include: 1) Assisting the OWNER in advertising for and obtaining bids for each separate prime construction contract, maintaining a record of prospective bidders to whom bidding documents have been issued, attending pre -bid conferences, and receiving and processing fees for bidding documents. 2) Issuing addenda as appropriate to interpret, clarify, or expand the bidding documents. 3) Assisting the. OWNER in determining the qualifications and acceptability of prospective constructors, subcontractors, and suppliers. A1281AMD.N22 EX 1-2 4) When substitution prior to the award of contracts is allowed by the bidding documents, consultation with and advising the OWNER as to the acceptability of alternate materials and equipment proposed by the prospective constructors. 5) Attending the bid openings, preparing bid tabulation sheets, and providing assistance to the OWNER in evaluating bids or proposals and in assembling and awarding contracts for construction, materials, equipment, and services. Construction Phase. Services under this phase involve consulting with and advising the OWNER during construction and are limited to those services associated with performing as the OWNER's representative. Such services comprise: 1) Preparing for and conducting a preconstruction conference and issuing a Notice to Proceed on behalf of the OWNER. 2) Reviewing shop and erection drawings submitted by the constructors for compliance with design concepts. 3) Reviewing laboratory, shop, and mill test reports on materials and equipment. 4) Visiting the project site monthly as construction proceeds to observe and report on the progress and the quality of the executed work. 5) Issuing necessary interpretations and clarifications of contract documents, preparing change orders requiring special inspections and testing of the work, and making recommendations as to the acceptability of the work. 6) Preparing sketches required to resolve problems due to actual field conditions encountered. 7) Determining amounts of progress payments due, based on degree of completion of the work, and recommending issuance of such payments by the OWNER. 8) Preparing record drawings from information submitted by the CONTRACTOR. 9) Making a final inspection and reporting on completion of the project, including recommendations concerning final payments to constructors and release of retained percentages. A1281AMD.N22 EX 1-3 CITY OF GEORGETOWN IMPROVEMENTS TO RAILROAD STREET AND COUNTRY CLUB ROAD ENGINEERING FEE ESTIMATE • Preliminary Engineering Phase: • Design Phase: • Bid Phase: • General Services During Construction Phase: • Other Direct Costs, including: Travel Telephone Copying/bluelines Postage/facsimile Computer time Total Basic Engineering Services • Surveying • Geologic Assessment • TNRCC WPAP Submittal Application • GeotechnicalInvestigation • ROW Field Notes Total Special Services TOTAL Railroad Street Country Club Rd. $17,180.00 $121000.00 $21,015.00 $15,190.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 15500.00 $ 5,505.00 $ 3,560.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500.00 $46,700.00 $339750.00 $1300.00 $ 85500.00 $ 2,500.00 $ 200.00 $ 5,500.00 $ 4,500.00 $ 2,500.00 $ 0 $ 4,000.00 $ 0 $279500.00 $159000.00 $749200.00 $489750.00 A1281AMD.N22 EX 1-4 Council Meeting Date: November 14, 1995 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Council approval of an amendment to the contract between the City of Georgetown and Roming-Parker Associates, for engineering services related to paving, drainage and utility improvements of Northwest Blvd., Quail Valley Drive and 15th Street, in the amount of $174,200.00. ITEM SUMMARY In order to maintain and enhance the City's streets and drainage capacity, it is necessary to construct drainage improvements -and to. pave portions of streets around the City. Staff has requested that Roming-Parker Associates prepare a` proposal for engineering services related to paving and drainage and utility improvements to Northwest Blvd. (approximately 1600 linear feet, from Whisper Oaks -Lane to Northwood Drive), Quail Valley Drive (approximately 1400 linear feet, from Tower Drive to Maple Street) and 15th Street (approximately 2000 linear feet, from maple Street to Hutto Road). Therefore, staff recommends approval of the proposal, from Roming- Parker Associates for the above mentioned project, in the amount of $174,200.00. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: NONE FINANCIAL IMPACT• Funds in the amount of $55,475.00 are to be paid as follows: Account #110-101-6301 $55,475.00 Account #110-101-6900 $63,400.00 Account #110-101-6901 $55,325.00 COMMENTS: NONE TS Letter of proposal from Roming-Parker Associates y: Jim Briggs, Director Community Owned Utilities Exhibit A (Updated October 31, 1995) This updated Exhibit A provides for the scope of services required for the preliminary engineering phase, design phase, bid phase, construction phase and special services required for developing construction drawings and implementing construction of paving, drainage and utility improvements to Northwest Boulevard, Quail Valley Drive and 15th Street in Georgetown, Texas. The attached letter details the services and associated fees for the work. RPROMENG - PARKER ASSOCIATES, L.L.P. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 3513 Southwest H.K. Dodgen Loop, Suite 103 Temple, Texas 76502 (817) 773-3731 Fax (817) 773-6667 W. CLAY ROMING, P.E. WM. MACK PARKER, P.E. RICK N. KASBERG, P.E. October 31, 1995 Mr. Jim Briggs, Director Community Owned Utilities City of Georgetown 1101 N. College P.O. Box 409 Georgetown, TX 78627-0409 Re: City of Georgetown Capital Improvements - Streets Georgetown, Texas Dear Mr. Briggs: JAMES E. LAUGHLIN, P.E. Staff Consultant This letter proposal is in response to your request for engineering services required to produce construction drawings for the paving, drainage and utility improvements to Northwest Boulevard (approximately 1600 linear feet from Whisper Oaks Lane to Northwood Drive), Quail Valley Drive (approximately 1400 linear feet from Tower Drive to Maple Street) and 15th Street (approximately 2000 linear feet from Maple Street to Hutto Road). The following is a scope of services and a fee schedule that we have developed for the anticipated work: PRELEVIINARY ENGINEERING PHASE. This phase involves determination of project scope and economic and technical evaluation of feasible alternatives. Services during this phase include: 1. Reviewing available data and consulting with the CITY to clarify and define the CITY's requirements for the project. 2. Advising the CITY as to the necessity of providing or obtaining from others additional data or services. These additional services may include photogrammetry, reconnaissance surveys, property surveys, topographic surveys, geotechnical investigations and consultations, compilation of hydrological data, traffic studies, materials engineering, assembly of zoning, deed, and other restrictive land use information, and environmental assessments and impact statements. 3. Identifying and analyzing requirements of governmental authorities having jurisdiction to approve the design of the project, and participating in consultations with such authorities. Mr. Jim Briggs October 31, 1995 Page Two 4. Providing analyses of the CITY's needs, planning surveys, and comparative evaluations of prospective sites and solutions. 5. Providing a general economic analysis of the CITY's requirements applicable to various alternatives. 6. Preparing a letter report presenting alternative solutions available to the CITY with the consulting engineer's findings and recommendations. The letter report may contain schematic layouts, sketches, conceptual design criteria with appropriate exhibits to indicate clearly the considerations involved (including applicable requirements of governmental authorities having jurisdiction), and the consulting engineer's conceptual opinion of probable costs for the project. The number and distribution of report copies will be as stipulated in the agreement with the CITY. 7. Consulting with the CITY, reviewing preliminary reports, clarifying and defining the project requirements, reviewing available data, and discussing general scheduling. Conferences may also be required with approving and regulatory governmental agencies and affected utilities. 8. Advising the CITY as to whether additional data or services are required, and assisting the CITY in obtaining such data and services. 9. Preparing preliminary design documents consisting of final design criteria, preliminary drawings, outline of specifications, and written descriptions of the project. The number and distribution of copies will be as stipulated in the agreement with the CITY. 10. Preparing revised opinions of probable total project costs. FINAL DESIGN PHASE. This phase of project development is undertaken only after the CITY has approved the preliminary engineering phase material. The basic services for the final design phase includes: 1. Preparing construction drawings and specifications showing the character and extent of the project based on the accepted preliminary engineering documents. 2. Preparing and furnishing to the CITY a revised opinion of probable total project costs based on the final drawings and specifications. 3. Furnishing the necessary engineering data required to apply for regulatory permits from local, state, or federal authorities. This is distinguished from and does not include detailed applications and supporting documents for government grant-in-aid or planning grants that would be furnished as additional services. Fees for any local, state or federal construction permit applications are not included as part of the professional fee charges. These will be paid by the CITY. Mr. Jim Briggs October 31, 1995 Page Three 4. Preparing basic documents related to construction contracts for review and approval by the CITY (and the CITY's legal and other advisors). These may include contract agreement forms, general conditions and supplementary conditions, invitations to bid, instructions to bidders, insurance and bonding requirements, and preparation of other contract -related documents. 5. Furnishing to the CITY the specified number of copies of drawings, specifications, and other contract documents. BIDDING PHASE. Services under this phase include: 1. Assisting the CITY in advertising for and obtaining bids for each separate prime construction contract, maintaining a record of prospective bidders to whom bidding documents have been issued, attending pre -bid conferences, and receiving and processing fees for bidding documents. 2. Issuing addenda as appropriate to interpret, clarify, or expand the bidding documents. 3 Assisting the CITY in determining the qualifications and acceptability of prospective constructors, subcontractors, and suppliers. 4. When substitution prior to the award of contracts is allowed by the bidding documents, consultation with and advising the CITY as to the acceptability of alternate materials and equipment proposed by the prospective constructors. 5. Attending the bid openings, preparing bid tabulation sheets, and providing assistance to the CITY in evaluating bids or proposals and in assembling and awarding contracts for construction, materials, equipment, and services. CONSTRUCTION PHASE. Services under this phase involve consulting with and advising the CITY during construction and are limited to those services associated with performing as the CITY's representative. Such services comprise: 1. Preparing for and conducting a preconstruction conference and issuing a Notice to Proceed on behalf of the CITY. 2. Reviewing shop and erection drawings submitted by the constructors for compliance with design concepts. 3. Reviewing laboratory, shop, and mill test reports on materials and equipment. 4. Visiting the project site monthly as construction proceeds to observe and report on the progress and the quality of the executed work. Mr. Jim Briggs October 31, 1995 Page Four 5. Issuing necessary interpretations and clarifications of contract documents, preparing change orders requiring special inspections and testing of the work, and making recommendations as to the acceptability of the work. 6. Preparing sketches required to resolve problems due to actual field conditions encountered. 7. Determining amounts of progress payments due, based on degree of completion of the work, and recommending issuance of such payments by the CITY. 8. Preparing record drawings from information submitted by the CONTRACTOR. 9. Making a final inspection and reporting on completion of the project, including recommendations concerning final payments to constructors and release of retained percentages. GEOTECBNICAL INVESTIGATION. Attachment A outlines in detail the geotechnical services that are proposed for each of the street projects. The fee schedule for this scope of services is shown on Attachment B. The totals shown on Attachment B are not -to -exceed amounts unless the scope of services is changed. All work will be billed at time and materials rates as established by the March 14, 1995 contract between the City of Georgetown, Texas and Roming-Parker Associates, L.L.P. Any work beyond the approved scope will be accomplished only after written authorization is received by RPA from the City of Georgetown. Finally, preliminary opinions of probable costs for each of the three street projects are attached for your review. Mr. Jim Briggs October 31, 1995 Page Five If this proposal is agreeable, please provide two copies of the completed authorization to our office. Sincerely, " � M"j, �'� Wm. Mack Parker, P.E. WMP/tmm Signed this day of CITY OF GEORGETOWN M Leo Wood, Mayor Attest: Sandra D. Lee, City Secretary Approved as to form: Marianne Landers Banks, City Attorney STATE OF TEXAS ) COUNTY OF BELL ) 1995 ROMING-PARKER ASSOCIATES, L.L.P. BY: 4qC Romin;gP. Attest: Wm. Mack Parker, P.E. Attest: Rick N. Kasberg, P.E. ACKNOWLEDGMENT This instrument was acknowledged before me on this se day of LL,1995, by W. CLAY ROMING, in his capacity as Managing Partner of Roming-Parker Associates, L.L.P., a Texas Limited Liability Partnership, on behalf of said Partnership. T01 M. MADDOX t•` Notary Pvbk • >3ft of Texas CiO� �in�: 6D118197 ; Notary Public in and for the State of T E X A S ATTACHMENT A PAVEMENT INVESTIGATION 15TH STREET RECONSTRUCTION GEORGETOWN, TEXAS DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES UNITS Field Investigations Site Visit by Technician 3 hrs Site Visit by Engineer 4 hrs Field Crew & Equipment Mobilization 30 mi Five 10-foot Borings 50 ft Grouting of Borings w/Bentonite Pellets 5 bags Observe Backhoe Excavations for Water (5 hrs) (Monitor Well Installation, 3 sets of 2 pipes) (Lump Sum) Laboratory Investigations Logging of Samples 2 hrs Atterberg Limits & Minus 200 Mesh Sieve 6 ea Unit Dry Weight 4 ea Sulfate Detection Tests 2 ea pH Lime Series 1 ea Moisture/Density Curve 1 ea CBR 2 ea Engineering and Repoil Geotechnical Engineer (P. E.) 12 hrs Drafting 3 hrs Secretary 1 hr Bound Report (Copies & Postage) 3 cps ATTACHMENT A (Continued) PAVEMENT INVESTIGATION NORTHWEST BOULEVARD GEORGETOWN, TEXAS DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES UNITS Feld Investigations Site Visit by Technician 3 hrs Field Crew & Equipment to Conduct 100 % 5-foot Max. Pavement Borings Laboratory Investigations Logging of Samples 1 hrs Atterberg Limits & Minus 200 Mesh Sieve 4 ea Sulfate Detection Tests 2 ea Engineering and Repot Geotechnical Engineer (P.E.) 8 hrs Drafting 1 hrs Secretary 1 hr Letter Report (Copies & Postage) 3 cps ATTACHMENT A (Continued) PAVEMENT INVESTIGATION QUAIL VALLEY DRIVE GEORGETOWN, TEXAS DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES UNITS Field Investigations Site Visit by Technician 3 hrs Field Crew & Equipment Mobilization 30 mi Five 15-foot Borings 75 ft Grouting of Borings w/Bentonite Pellets 5 bags Laboratory Investigations Logging of Samples 2 hrs Atterberg Limits & Minus 200 Mesh Sieve 6 ea Minus 200 Mesh Sieve 2 ea Sulfate Detection Tests 2 ea pH Lime Series 1 ea Engineering and Report Geotechnical Engineer (P.E.) 8 hrs Drafting 2 hrs Secretary 1 hr Letter Report (Copies & Postage) 3 cps ATTACHMENT B PROFESSIONAL FEE SUMMARY 1995-1996 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECTS - STREETS CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS Northwest Blvd Quail Valley 15th Street 1500 LF 1250 LF 2200 LF TASK ($330,000)* ($430,000)* ($381,000)* I. Basic Services A. Preliminary Engineering Phase: $10,500.00 $13,600.00 $11,300.00 B. Design Phase 13,840.00 16,530.00 13,850.00 C. Bid Phase 1,400.00 1,400.00 1,400.00 D. General Services During Construction Phase: 5,400.00 5,600.00 3,600.00 E. Other Direct Costs 1,300.00 1,300.00 1,300.00 Travel Telephone Copying /Bluelines Postage/Facsimile Computer Time TOTAL BASIC SERVICES $32,440.00 $38,430.00 $31,450.00 II Special Services A. Surveying $6,340.00 $6,200.00 $9,515.00 B. Geologic Assessment 2,400.00 2,400.00 2,000.00 C. TNRCC WPAP 5,500.00 5,000.00 4,500.00 Submittal Application D. Geotechnical Investigation 1,445.00 2,610.00 4,860.00 E. Row Surveys/Field Notes 3,250.00 4,460.00 NA TOTAL SPECIAL SERVICES $18,935.00 $20,670.00 JZQ,$75.00 TOTAL $51,375.00 $591100.00 $52,325.00 M. Texas State Plane Coordinate System Field Survey/Field Note Data 4,100.00 4,300.00 $3,000.00 TOTAL STATE PLANE SYSTEM $ 4,100.00 $ 4,300.00 $ 3,000.00 * Preliminary opinions of probable cost for construction of projects under current scope of work as prepared by City of Georgetown staff and RPA. Item No. Z Council meeting November 14, 1995 I t AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Consideration of a resolution to authorize a license to encroach into the public utility easement located along the east property line of Berry Creek, Section 9, Phase III, Block A, Lot 43, located at 30406 La Quinta Drive. ITEM SUMMARY: All utility providers have agreed to allow a license to encroach into the public utility easement as illustrated in Exhibit A. This request is being made to allow the proposed driveway which leads to a side entry garage. Side entry garages are required by the deed restrictions -.of the subdivision. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. COMMENTS: None. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A Resolution Submitted By: Edward a ry, AICP 4 Director D Division of evelopment Services <J�� �'l Hildy L. ' ngma, AICP Chief Planner RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS OF FACT AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN AND SCOTT FELDER HOMES, PERTAINING TO THE ENCROACHMENT OF A DRIVEWAY INTO THE PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED ON THE EAST PROPERTY LINE OF LOT 43 OF BERRY CREEK SUBDIVISION, SECTION 9, PHASE M. AS RECORDED IN CABINET K, SLIDE 316 OF THE PLAT RECORDS OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS AND LOCATED AT 30406 LA QUINTA DRIVE; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Georgetown has received an application for a license to encroach into the public utility easement; and WHEREAS, the City of Georgetown has enacted Ordinance No. 1645 regulating, controlling, and governing encroachments; and WHEREAS, in order for a license to be granted by the City Council of the City of Georgetown, the Council must make certain findings of fact; and WHEREAS, after hearing the application of Scott Felder Homes to encroach into the public utility easement, the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, finds the following facts: 1. That there are no utilities which would be interfered with by the utilization of the property in the proposed manner. 2. That there are no utilities which would interfere with the utilization of the property in the proposed manner. 3. That the proposed structure is in such a manner that it would not be feasible to relocate it outside the public utility easement. 4. That the land use in the neighborhood appears to be stable and the use to which this property is being put is not likely to change within the foreseeable future and is compatible with other uses in the neighborhood; and WHEREAS, the City Council after hearing the application and finding the specific facts as stated above now concludes and finds that: Lot 43, Berry Creek, Section 9, Phase III, Block A License Resolution No. Page 1 of 3 1. The fact that the proposed structure is in such a manner that it would not be feasible to relocate it outside the public utility easement constitutes special circumstances and conditions affecting the property which if not taken into consideration would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of their property. 2. The fact that the land use is not likely to change within the foreseeable future and that it is not economically feasible to remove the part of the proposed structure that will encroach into the public utility easement does provide a basis for granting the license necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of the substantial property rights of the applicant. 3. The fact that the use of the easement area by the property owner does not interfere with the utilities or access to the utilities and is not detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or injurious to the property in the area; and WHEREAS, the applicant agrees to accept the terms of the license agreement as presented to them. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1. The facts and recitations contained in the preamble of this resolution are hereby found and declared to be true and correct, and are incorporated by reference herein and expressly made a part hereof, as if copied verbatim. The City Council hereby finds that this resolution implements the following policies of the Century Plan - Development Plan Element: 1. Growth and Physical Development Policy 1, which states: "The City will ensure that future land use patterns provide economic, cultural, and social activities to all residents, businesses and organizations;" and 2. Utilities/Energy Policy 2, which states: "The City will establish utility policies which take into consideration the needs of all citizens of the community and take necessary precautions to prevent harmful ecological impact to the environment;" and further finds that the adoption of this resolution is not inconsistent or in conflict with any other Century Plan Policies, as required by Section 2.03 of the Administrative Chapter of the Policy Plan. SECTION 2. The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute, and the City Secretary to attest thereto on behalf of the City of Georgetown a License Agreement with Scott Felder Homes, pertaining to the encroachment of a proposed driveway located on Lot 43 of Berry Creek Subdivision, Section 9, Phase III, Block A, as recorded in Cabinet K, Slide 316 of the plat Lot 43, Berry Creek, Section 9, Phase III, Block A License Resolution No. Page 2 of 3 records of Williamson County, Texas and located at 30406 La Quinta Drive, into the public utility easement on the east property line. SECTION 3. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption. RESOLVED this day of ATTEST: Sandra D. Lee City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney Lot 43, Berry Creek, Section 9, Phase III, Block A License Resolution No. Page 3 of 3 1995. THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: By: LEO WOOD Mayor EXHIBIT A S � 40 3 � 57' E ` 133 � 39.39, t4 N 70058'30"E SS S 120-92 S SS 10-29 C,.95 -y, 52 - 0 B.L. 9- 0 te 4 if -A5- 7- 45 CD Ob CD OD 4, License to encroach in P.U.E. -4 N) 40 LP CO 1 0 SS 43 0 41 ', o I 42 Cr10-00 * 00 -94. L C. 16 O!T A.6 M' loot' w 120.00 S �56- Is ��, 109.0f, C a t2O 00' Cc 7CLCld 50.00 0. .30000 50 '55 E 169 01 A a lZaOa' A- TO 590 20 E. IV E LA 5A %,57- to 00 5 E 169.01, 59 0 20 0 13300 j!57 2 120.0c; 55 ORAL FSIA loa0l 47.00 ----SC if .00 1 7- xc(�� - S .700,%O.w S66044'3 -W W6 z2JE v- C = j 5 00' C, M.00 9 C=73.19 t5* SL 30 ' Imm. -73-21 A z 15-00, 25'&L. 07' f Loa al -Z N) CP z 32 \'5- 0 7- CU 35 t, T ao 34 0. Z25 S C ,6LL rl 33 CD 0 9p 1 t o i/ 55�.�5 ? 8 b4c) g. S 84q* 907, 319 130 , ;v Ilk ,C) 0 S blb EXHIBIT B LA QUINTA DRIVE Council meeting November 14, 1995 Item No. - AA AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Consideration of a resolution to authorize a license to encroach into the public utility easement located along the east property line of Berry Creek, Section 9, Phase I, Block A, Lot 11, located at 31000 Clearwater Court. ITEM SUNIlVIARY: All utility providers have agreed to allow a license to encroach into the public utility easement as illustrated in Exhibit A. This request is being made to allow the proposed driveway which leads, to a side entry garage. Side entry garages are required by the deed restrictions- of the subdivision. O SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. COMMENTS: None. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A Resolution Submitted Bv: Edward J. Barry, AICP - irector Divisio of Development' Services Hildy L. 'ngma, AICP Chief Planner RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS OF FACT AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN AND SCOTT FELDER HOMES, PERTAINING TO THE ENCROACHMENT OF A DRIVEWAY INTO THE PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED ON THE WEST PROPERTY LINE OF LOT 11 OF BERRY CREEK SUBDIVISION, SECTION 9, PHASE I, AS RECORDED IN CABINET K, SLIDE 275 OF THE PLAT RECORDS OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS AND LOCATED AT 31000 CLEARWATER COURT; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Georgetown has received an application for a license to encroach into the public utility easement; and WHEREAS, the City of Georgetown has enacted Ordinance No. 1645 regulating, controlling, and governing encroachments; and WHEREAS, in order for a license to be granted by the City Council of the City of Georgetown, the Council must make certain findings of fact; and WHEREAS, after hearing the application of Scott Felder Homes to encroach into the public utility easement, the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, finds the following facts: 1. That there are no utilities which would be interfered with by the utilization of the property in the proposed manner. 2. That there are no utilities which would interfere with the utilization of the property in the proposed manner. 3. That the proposed structure is in such a manner that it would not be feasible to relocate it outside the public utility easement. 4. That the land use in the neighborhood appears to be stable and the use to which this property is being put is not likely to change within the foreseeable future and is compatible with other uses in the neighborhood; and WHEREAS, the City Council after hearing the application and finding the specific facts as stated above now concludes and finds that: Lot 11, Berry Creek, Section 9, Phase I License Resolution No. Page 1 of 3 1. The fact that the proposed structure is in such a manner that it would not be feasible to relocate it outside the public utility easement constitutes special circumstances and conditions affecting the property which if not taken into consideration would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of their property. 2. The fact that the land use is not likely to change within the foreseeable future and that it is not economically feasible to remove the part of the proposed structure that will encroach into the public utility easement does provide a basis for granting the license necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of the substantial property rights of the applicant. 3. The fact that the use of the easement area by the property owner does not interfere with the utilities or access to the utilities and is not detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or injurious to the property in the area; and WHEREAS, the applicant agrees to accept the terms of the license agreement as presented to them. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1. The facts and recitations contained in the preamble of this resolution are hereby found and declared to be true and correct, and are incorporated by reference herein and expressly made a part hereof, as if copied verbatim. The City Council hereby finds that this resolution implements the following policies of the Century Plan - Development Plan Element: 1. Growth and Physical Development Policy 1, which states: "The City will ensure that future land use patterns provide economic, cultural, and social activities to all residents, businesses and organizations;" and 2. Utilities/Energy Policy 2, which states: "The City will establish utility policies which take into consideration the needs of all citizens of the community and take necessary precautions to prevent harmful ecological impact to the environment;" and further finds that the adoption of this resolution is not inconsistent or in conflict with any other Century Plan Policies, as required by Section 2.03 of the Administrative Chapter of the Policy Plan. SECTION 2. The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute, and the City Secretary to attest thereto on behalf of the City of Georgetown a License Agreement with Scott Felder Homes, pertaining to the encroachment of a proposed driveway located on Lot 11 of Berry Creek Subdivision, Section 9, Phase I, as recorded in Cabinet K, Slide 275 of the plat records of Lot 11, Berry Creek, Section 9, Phase I License Resolution No. Page 2 of 3 Williamson County, Texas and located at 31000 Clearwater Court, into the public utility easement on the west property line. SECTION 3. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption. RESOLVED this day of ATTEST: . 1995. THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: Sandra D. Lee By: LEO WOOD City Secretary Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney Lot 11, Berry Creek, Section 9, Phase I License Resolution No. Page 3 of 3 EXHIBIT A r Y: 388, 7 73.64 343 30„E X: 2,834,a52.35 r . r . Y : 388,930 65 357.91488-98 6.89 --7N 65°44130`6E o �o- r_ X:2,634,---- 9.48 ,— - � 7.2 3 + ° 9 5.90 ° j-- 9 5.90_ t--' 88.8 9 l u ii N w� N r V p I o cp r �i i o tD C 1 ° "• I cD i 0 �. I W m r O 1 A p3 2 m A_ $ 3 I A_ A 4 U+ m � �. N I �� 1 10'PUE ( ` �20'8_L y I—�--N 650 4 5'3 0 "E -- �— ll 95.90--f t —95.90'i — 95 90'1 c ---1 c— o o —„ o • 11000^--}---1I000--}^ _--�16359'----1 CD N CT �' A 20' B L. f 0 °`'' 6� p- 0 . CDO rr I �_ W 5 N41�4✓E �. % A:4z4�c40'E e• VS8255'E 5gA�e0 S65 I4,30E Nt 9 NIC=51 S07, c=28.26' 25'8C - 20 41 JA: 54 E7' A: 31 41 A:2102'CIE �. 90.00 o i _ N65045 30 E,144 10 0 ° S2405'' LA �� CLEARWATER COURTS A 4G. N 0. ; E. _ pp 02 � N65°45�3iO'E.146.0 oO 8 w` O c° Z j 90 COCO 54.1t� J� / r i rn_ co_ N d _�N2rF4.''� T N�`S ��cJ e9° ?e r rn A C`3�`E. 2381 �.-�Uro'kir c�c'r 1 1 533°c5.�..w� A` �i � License to encroach in P.U.E. O(Jt �� 1 NN t0A0C13 p E} r* O 2 0' S L IO' P.0 E _ -- 110.00'- f i1000- --i o� �_' 6 5045'30"E 403.96'-- PUE Z-7- -- NZ T r u N ^' cr N �— 2 0' S L a N '� C I Ar= !3 oo ff� l L i 12 ;� �� CDC1 ((p�rJ o 0 1 O N4104C E 0_ 1 00' U C-.40 f r a'<2 C•c t I �-� 0 534p"� 1 I ' fSe,•2`...E ,6� �1,0 �` SE9cIa .E I r�s1`tic'E i;° C:51 25' 43 C.2826 _ 25'6L C c041'-_ 4:5361 34 /l `� uCl:�rn11 87� 0 A:'M 41' --- ---A=2102 O N • N65045 30 E,144.10 3 S22033 3„9 33 5z y 2. i S ST I LL'WAT E i� 9' COURT O 52 40. 1 3 r t`J N65°4530 E 144.10 3 S 65C, 3� V�• Cl-- -- -,----- d-------r-- aO I� / / 0 / 4 59.92� I 9C :fin i J 54.10 / �Q0 EQ �� % o t 5. JC)*"Qo..... N20145 y� :.I•C�_.-_�l�Y N r _ — C-28 ZE 256 � IL 41 c S SE°3E'N S 9•r lD N 6 S 1 A:S141 IA•21Gt C�408tSE tC_4E)1 620�2. o r, Zo:50e7? \ 32. N .- 7. h cD (j , Z n : 42 GC 3 ;0 N v' Cn R q i8 w� 1I A cr �v 1? I N�fl� `'E�� F� �_ �, 8 A f C I 0 � e r P ! J 6 e @ b!\ \ n f� iLP rn Pu E Q�41 CID CD 0 0 EI � m O rn (TI 25' E3L 24'14'30" E rn LA QUINTA DRIVE ?' _ �v�fi� J- 3. 1s: y� ✓ � k ^" �'��`.3-a�-'t Tt b _ _Councii--Meetingj—e. 11/14195- Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT A resolution revising the current City of Georgetown Investment Policy to comply with new state law and clarify requirements. ITEM SUMMARY The current investment policy has been reviewed by staff as part of the annual investment report process. Staff recommends revisions to the current policy to comply with H.B. 2459 which amended the Public Funds Investment Act (the Act). The City's current policy was substantially in compliance with the Act; however, staff recommends significant revisions to make the language used in the City's policy consistent with that used in the Act. A summary of the changes is provided with the report. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS None. FINANCIAL IMPACT None. COMMENTS New state laws require the governing body of a public entity to review its investment policy at least annually. ATTACHMENTS Proposed Resolution. Investment Policy. Submitted By: Susan L. Morgan, Director of Finance and Administration RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, AMENDING THE EXISTING CITY OF GEORGETOWN INVESTMENT POLICY EFFECTIVE NOVEMBER 14, 1995. WHEREAS, the goal of the City of Georgetown is to implement an investment policy that utilizes all current municipal investment practices, while ensuring the safety and availability of all funds entrusted to the City in compliance with state federal, state and local laws; and WHEREAS, the Public Funds Investment Act (the Act) was amended during the most recent state legislative session and became effective September 1, 1995; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Georgetown wishes to amend its Investment Policy (as last amended November 22, 1994) to reflect changes in the "Act"; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1. The facts and recitations contained in the preamble of this resolution are hereby found and declared to be true and correct, and are incorporated by reference herein and expressly made a part hereof, as if copied verbatim. The City Council hereby finds that this resolution implements Finance Policy 1 of the Century Plan - Policy Plan Element, which states: "The City will Conduct All Municipal Operations in an Efficient Business -Like Manner"; and further finds that the adoption of this resolution is not inconsistent or in conflict with any other Century Plan Policies, as required by Section 2.03 of the Administrative Chapter of the Policy Plan. SECTION 2. The Investment Policy attached as Exhibit "A" is hereby adopted by the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas. SECTION 3. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption. RESOLVED this 14th day of November, 1995. ATTEST: Sandra Lee City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney Investment Resolution No. Pagel of 2 THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: By: LEO WOOD Mayor CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS INVESTMENT POLICY Summary of Recommended Changes - November 1995 Background The City of Georgetown has historically done only limited investing in U.S. government backed securities, Certificates of Deposit (CD's) and investment pools. Several events have occurred over the last year that need to be reflected in our investment policy. The Orange County, California bankruptcy in December 1994 and the Texpool controversy caused the Texas Legislature to reconsider the Public Funds Investment Act (the Act). The Act was expanded significantly and provides much more detailed requirements for investing by local governments. The Act also has specific reporting requirements on the status of each entity's portfolio and compliance with investment policies. In addition, the City's growth, including the Sun City project, has increased the cash and investment management requirements. Numerous bond issuances, large infrastructure projects and increased fee, utility and tax revenues require staff to more proactively monitor cash requirements. Summary As a result of these changes, staff recommends a major revision of the City's investment policy. Most of the revisions are made to show clear compliance with state law. The policy has been codified for easier reference and updating. Several sections have also been added to reflect the more complicated nature of the City's cash management and reflect current prudent practice. However, none of the proposed revisions make a significant change in current investment philosophy or practice. The City continues to have a conservative and effective cash and investment management program. Significant Changes Section 1.3 Objectives. This section is expanded to clarify the City's objectives and word them consistently with the Act. The final statement on the City's policy of investing to maturity is important to the relatively low risk associated with the City's program. Section 2.2 Ethics & Conflict of Interest. Although this standard is understood, the policy did not specifically address this point. Section 2.3 Delegation of Authority. The language is expanded to reflect requirements of the Act. Section 3: INVESTMENT STRATEGIES. This section is new to the policy and is required by the "T Act. The policy must specify the investment strategy of each fund group including liquidity requirements, yield, maturity restrictions, marketability if the need arises to liquidate investments before maturity and diversification. The categories were determined by types of funds and bond covenants. Each of the strategies is consistent with current practice and investment policies. Section 4.1.1 Certificates of Deposit. This language is expanded to specify collateralization requirements. The language requiring CD rates to exceed U.S. treasuries is deleted because there are circumstances when a lower yield is desirable such as to accommodate federal arbitrage restrictions on bond proceeds. For example, proceeds from the Series 1995 Utility Revenue Bonds are yield restricted at 4.9% and current U.S. treasury securities are yielding more than 5%. Therefore, these funds are invested in a CD at 4.74%. Section 4.1.3 Investment Pools & Section 4.1.4 Money Market Mutual Funds. The authority to invest in these two instruments was previously combined into one section. They are segregated and the requirements reworded to be consistent with authorizing language in the Act. The Act now has very specific requirements for these types of investments. The language does not change the intent or practical application of the previous policy, but is somewhat more restrictive. The City's current investments in Texpool and FGIC Public Trust are not affected since these entities already met the more restrictive requirements. Section 4.2 Compliance with State Law. This section states the intent to comply with state law. Section 4.4 Length of Investments. A statement on maximum length of maturities is added to comply with the Act. Section 5.1 Authorized Dealers. This section is amended to provide clearer and more meaningful guidelines on eligible brokers. The section also adds the new state law requirement for all broker/dealers to sign a certification form stating their understanding of our policies before they are eligible to do business with the City. Section 5.2 Authorized Financial Institutions. The policy was silent on this area. This language is added to reflect current prudent practice. Section 5.4 Safekeeping. The policy was silent on this area. This language is added to reflect current prudent practice. Section 5.5 Collateralization. The policy was silent on this area. This language is added to reflect current prudent practice. Section 6.1 Quarterly Reporting. This section is added to comply with new reporting requirements of the Act to report specific information to the governing body of a public entity at least quarterly. All of the requirements are items already provided in the annual report to Council. Staff will begin submitting quarterly reports to Council on investment activities beginning with the quarter ending December 31, 1995. Section 6.3 Performance Standard. This section is added to require benchmark comparison of the City's portfolio yield. The comparison is important to help staff and Council determine the appropriateness of the City's investment program. Section 6.4 Compliance. This section is added to meet requirements of the Act to provide an annual audit on compliance with the investment policy and state law. This audit will be performed -- in conjunction with the City's annual financial audit. The compliance audits will begin with the fiscal year ending September 30, 1996. Section 7: POLICY REVIEW AND AMENDMENTS. This section is added to reflect the new requirement for Council to review the City's investment policy at least annually. This is consistent with current practice. Investment Policy Changes - November 1995 Page 2 CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS INVESTMENT POLICY Table of Contents Section 1: SCOPE & OBJECTIVES 1.1 Scope 1.2 Statement of Cash Management Philosophy 1.3 Objectives Section 2: STANDARD OF CARE 2.1 Prudence 2.2 Ethics & Conflict of Interest 2.3 Delegation of Authority Section 3: INVESTMENT STRATEGIES 3.1 Operating Funds 3.2 Contingency Reserves (or operating reserves) 3.3 Debt 3.3.1 Reserves 3.3.2 Interest & Sinking 3.4 Bond Proceeds (capital improvement funds) Section 4: AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS 4.1 Allowable Investments 4.1.1 Certificates of Deposit 4.1.2 US Treasuries and Agencies 4.1.3 Investment Pools 4.1.4 Money Market Mutual Funds 4.1.5 Other Investments 4.2 Compliance with State Law 4.3 Cash on Hand 4.4 Length of Investments Section 5: SAFEKEEPING AND CUSTODY 5.1 Authorized Dealers 5.2 Authorized Financial Institutions 5.3 Internal Controls 5.4 Safekeeping 5.5 Collateralization Section 6: REPORTING 6.1 Quarterly Reporting 6.2 Annual Reporting 6.3 Performance Standards 6.4 Compliance Section 7: POLICY REVIEW AND AMENDMENTS CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS INVESTMENT POLICY November 14, 1995 SECTION 1: SCOPE & OBJECTIVES 1.1 SCOPE This investment policy applies to all financial assets of the City of Georgetown, Texas, held in all funds. 1.2 STATEMENT OF CASH MANAGEMENT PHILOSOPHY The City of Georgetown will maintain a comprehensive cash management program to include the effective collection of all accounts receivable, the prompt deposit of receipts to the City's bank accounts, the payment of obligations to comply with state law and in accord with vendor invoices, and the prudent investment of idle funds in accord with this policy. 1.3 OBJECTIVES The City's investment program will be conducted to accomplish the following objectives, listed in priority order: Safety,. The City will give priority to the preservation and safety of the principal invested. Investments will be made in a manner that will mitigate credit risk and interest rate risk. 2. Liquidity. The City will maintain the availability of sufficient cash to pay obligations of the City when they are due. 3. Yield The City will investment -of idle cash at the highest possible rate of return, consistent with state and local laws and the two objectives of safety and liquidity listed above. It is also the objective of the City of Georgetown to diversify its investments to eliminate the risk of loss resulting from over concentration of assets in a specific maturity, a specific issuer or a specific class of securities. It is the intent of the City of Georgetown to invest its funds`to maturity, SECTION 2: STANDARD OF CARE w- 2.1 PRUDENCE Investments will be made with judgment and care, under circumstances then prevailing, that persons of prudence, discretion, and intelligence exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation, but for investment, considering the probable safety of their capital and the probable income to be derived. The City Council recognizes that in maintaining a diversified portfolio occasional measured losses due to market volatility are inevitable and must be considered within the context of the overall portfolio's investment return, provided that adequate diversification has been implemented. 2.2 ETHICS & CONFLICT OF INTEREST Officers ;and employees involved m the investmen process will :refrain from personal business activity that could conflict with the proper executio%n of,the investmentprogram, or which ;could impair their.ability to make...impartial investment decisions 2.3 DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY The Director of Finance and Administration, as the City's chief financial officer, is responsible for overall management of the City's investment program and is designated as the City's Investment Officer. Accordingly, the Director of Finance and Administration is responsible for day-to-day administration of the investment program and for the duties listed below: Maintain current information as to available cash balances in City accounts, and as to the amount of idle cash available for investment; 2. Make investments and maintain.writt6n procedures for the operation -an d internal control of he investment. program consistent with this policy; 3. Ensure that all investments are adequately secured; and 4. Attend training as required by Section 2256.008 (a) of the Texas Government Code and ensurethat any staff 'executing transactions covered by this policy attend the required training. SECTION 3: INVESTMENT STRATEGIES 3.1 OPERATING FUNDS City of Georgetown Investment Policy Page 2 3.3 DEBT:;` 3.3.2 Interest & Sinking (or debt service funds). Interest and sinking fundsMaredefined as those funds accumulated to meet periodic payments required' by bond°and note. maturity schedules.. The investment maturities are limited by pertinent debt service requirements and tax laws limiting accumulation and earnings for such funds.. Involuntary,Iiquidation;of investments is highly unlikely due to the nature of these funds:`;:` Interest and sinking fund investments will be diverse and include C.D.'s,..U.S. treasuries and agencies, investment pools and money market mutual funds. 3.4 BOND PROCEEDS (capital improvement funds) Bond proceed funds are defined as those funds received from the sales of City of Georgetown bonds or notes and not otherwise set aside for debt service or reserve purposes. These funds typically include money to fund infrastructure constructionor other large ;projects. The investment maturities are limited by pertinent project draw requirements and tax laws limiting earnings for,''.such funds: Involuntary liquidation of investment is highly unlikely. Bond proceed investments will be diverse and include C.D.'s, U:S treasuries and agencies, investment pools and money market mutual funds. SECTION 4: AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS 4.1 ALLOWABLE INVESTMENTS The City of Georgetown funds may be invested in the following instruments: 4.1.1 Certificates of Deposit. Certificates of Deposit issued by the City's Depository/Depositories. having an interest rate exeeeding the yield of U.S. Trea3tiry biII3, notes or bonds for a Sin*af rriattirity at the time of isstie.., All certificates of deposits in excess of the FDIC insured amount must City of Georgetown Investment Policy Page 3 be collateralized 'as Aescribed by Section 2256.009 (a) of the Code Collateral must' be held by a third party and in accordance with Section 5.4 of this policy. 4.1.2 U.S. Treasuries and Agencies. Securities issued by the United States Treasury or its Governmental Agencies, which are guaranteed as to principal and interest by the full faith and credit of the United States of America. 4.1.3 Investment Pools. interleeal governmental Investment pools and other Comparable that meet the following criteria: a. An. investment Eaeh pool er other earnpefable investm must be ..tali,.". ndef body:provide an . offering circular or other similar disclosure instruments and provide monthly and trap"saction reporting as required by Section 2256.016 of. -.the Texas Government Code. with ratings of AAA fFern both Standard & Poor's Gerporation and Moody's investef e. investment polieies of the peol or inve3trnent vehicle shall be in seeordanee with State Law and follow the gdidelines of the Gity'3 Investment Polier. db. Investment in a new pool or other investment vehiele will require the approval of the Gity . City�Council. c. A public funds investment pool created to function'as a'money market mufual fund must (1) mark itsportfolio to market daily, (2) include in its investment. objectives the maintenance of astable net asset value of $1 for each share and (3) be continuously rated no lower than AAA or at an'e equivalent ratin b at least one nationally q 9 _ :by ...:.at rating service. 4.14. ,Money Market Mutual Funds. No-load money market mutual funds;if the fund a. Is regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission b. Marks its portfolio to market daily; C. Includes in its investment objectives the maintenance of a stable `net asset_value of $1 for each share; d. Has a dollar -weighted average stated maturity of 90 days or fewer; e. Is continuously rated no lower than AAA or at an equivalent rating by at least one nationally recognized rating service. The City may not invest more than 80 percent of its monthly average fund balance,. excluding bond "proceeds; reserves and other debt service monies, in money market mutual funds.j 4.1.45. Other Investments. Other investments as approved by the City Council and not prohibited by law. 4:2 COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW All authorized investments outlined above must meet the requirements of the Public` , Funds Investment Act, Section 2256 of the Texas Government Code No investment may be ;made in ;any instrument except as provided above. City of Georgetown Investment Policy Page 4 4.3 CASH ON HAND Cash resources required for the immediate needs of the City and not otherwise available for longer term investment will be placed in checking account(s) at the City's Depository/ Depositories. Such checking account(s) will earn interest at the highest rate(s) provided in the respective depository contract(s). 4.4 LENGTH OF INVESTMENTS The following general constraints will apply: maturities exceeding 24 months will require authorization by the City Manager. Maturities will be staggered to avoid undue concentration of assets in a specific maturity sector and maturities selected will provide for stability of income and reasonable liquidity. In no instance shall the maximum, stated maturity.,be greater than its longest stated debt service requirement` unless further. restricted in Section 3, Investment_ Strategies, of this policy, bond covenants or state law. SECTION 5: SAFEKEEPING AND CUSTODY 5.1 AUTHORIZED DEALERS Authorized investments in U:S treasuries and agencias may be purchased only through Reports Divi3ion of the FedeFal Reserve Bank of New York or as approved by the Gity Gatineil and autherized by . brokers/dealers who are licensed and in good standing with the Texas Department of Securities, the 'SecuritiesExchange Commission, the National Association of Securities Dealers or other'applicable self -regulatory. organization The Investment Officer will maintain a list of approved security broker/dealers selected` principally on the basis of evidenced credit worthiness who are authorized to provide investment services: Before. engaging in investment `transactions with a broker/dealer, the Investment Officer twill have received from said firma signed Certification Form. This form will attest that the., individual responsible for the City's' account with that firm has reviewed the City's Investment Policyand that the brokerage firm has implemented` reasonable procedures and controls in`an effort to preclude: imprudent activities arising out of investment transactions conducted between the City, and the: brokerage firm. 5.2 AUTHORIZED FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS Certificates of Deposit may be purchased at qualified City depositories. The City must have a written agreement with the qualified depository and that`. depository must meet all State Law for deposit of public funds. IThe C ty's .Deposito.ry/Depositories will be selected every,two years, unless otherwise: provided by law. 5.3 INTERNAL CONTROLS All investment transactions will be documented by the Investment Officer. The Investment Officer may make investments orally, but will follow promptly with a written confirmation to the financial institution or broker/ dealer, with a copy of such confirmation retained in the City's files. City of Georgetown Investment Policy Page 5 On investments whiein US treasuries, and agencies, the Investment Officer will take competitive bids. At least two (2) quotations will be taken for each such investment made. 5.4 SAFEKEEPING All securities purchased by the City under this policy must be designated as assets of the City, must be conducted on a delivery=versus=payment .(DVP) basis, and must be protected through the;use of a third -party custody/safekeeping agent. The City; will ,enter into a formal `agreement, with `an institution of such size and expertise as is necessary to providethe services needed to, protect and secure the investment assets of the„City. 5.5 COLLATERALIZATION To the extent not insured by federal agencies that secure deposits,:City of Georgetown,funds (i;ncluding cash on hand and C.'D.'s) must be collateralized by collateral securities in compliance with the Texas' Public Funds Collateral Act. Only securities. proscribed as eligible investments under the Public Funds Investment Act qualify as 'pledged securities Securities pledged as collateral must be retained in a third party bank in the State of Texas n`tte City's name. The City will be provided the original safekeeping receipt on each pledged security. pre3ent Depositories if befofe that The City, financial institution, and the safekeeping bank(s) will operate in accordance with a master safekeeping agreement signed by each of the parties. The City's Investment Officer must approve in writing the release of collateral prior to its removal from the safekeeping account in accordance with the terms of depository agreement. The financial institution(s) with which the city invests and/or maintains deposits will provide monthly a listing of the collateral pledged to the City marked to current market prices. The listing will include total pledged securities itemized by name, type and description of the security; safekeeping receipt number; par value; current market value; maturity date, if available; and Moody's or Standard & Poor's rating, if available. SECTION 6: REPORTING 6.1 QUARTERLY. REPORTING The Investment Officer, shall prepare and submit to: the Council a quarterly Ireport on investment transactions for all funds covered by this policy. The report will be prepared in with the Public Funds Investment Act and cover the investment position of the City at the end "of ;the each fiscal quarter. The contents will include of a minimum: 1. Beginning,' ending and significant changes in market value of the portfolio; 2. Beginning and ending market value, maturity date, type of funds, and interest coupon and yield for each separate security; and 3. A statement as to the compliance with this policy and state law. City of Georgetown Investment Policy Page 6 6.2 ANNUAL REPORTING Within 60 days following the end of the fiscal year, the Investment Officer will present to the City Council a comprehensive annual report on the investment program and investment activity In addition equ to the information rired for quarterly reporting, the annual report will include a review of the activities and return for the twelve months, suggest policy revisions and improvements that might enhance the investment program, and include an investment plan for the ensuing fiscal year. 6.3 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS In. order to evaluate portfolio: performance of funds 'subject to this policy, the` City'of Georgetown portfolio will be compared against appropriately competitive and reasonable benchmarks,. including money market mutual funds or investment pools of similar make-up and maturities. 6.4 COMPLIANCE A compliance audit of 'management controls and adherence to this policy as it'`relates to the City of Georgetown's investments and investing activity will be performed on an annual basis 16.conjunction with the City's annual financial audit. SECTION 7: POLICY REVIEW AND AMENDMENTS This investment policy will be reviewed by the City Council of the City of Georgetown"on'at least an annual basis as required by the Public Funds Investment Act and make amendments as necessary The Council will review the policy as part of the annual investment report presented by staff. City of Georgetown Investment Policy Page 7 Council meeting date: 11/14 /95 Item No. Zl� AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Approve revisions to reciprocal agreement with Round Rock Public Library ITEM SUMMARY The Cities of Georgetown and Round Rock have had a reciprocal agreement in effect since 1990, whereby a card from one library is good for using the other Library without paying additional fees. This includes non-residents, who may obtain a card by paying a fee at one library, and use the other library without additional fees. This revision to the agreement eliminates the provision that non-resident fees at the two libraries be identical. - The City -of Round Rock .notified us that they had raised their non- resident family fee'from $25 (our current fee) to $35. Both cities still charge $15 for a single card. We will be reviewing our fees during this fiscal year, and would like to re-establish identical fees in the future. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS None FINANCIAL IMPACT None ATTACHMENTS 1. Reciprocal agreement with Round Rock Submitted By: Elizabeth Gray, i ector of Information Resources MEMORANDUM TO: V/Elizabeth Gray, Information Resources Marianne Banks, Legal FROM: Mary Pat McLaughlin, Library DATE: October 20, 1995 SUBJECT: Reciprocal Library Services Agreement with Round Rock Public Library I have review the agreement of 28 September, 1995 received from the City of Round Rock. It is a revision of the original agreement of 11 December, 1990. The revision represents changes agreed upon by Round Rock Librarian Dale Rickliffs and I. I also discussed the intent of the F change with the Library Advisory Board. I recommend the authorization of this agreement which will be automatically renewed yearly until terminated by either party. The reason for the revision is to allow Round Rock to increase their non-resident fees without requiring Georgetown to increase our fees this year. I discussed the change in their fees with Bob during the budget meeting held July 5. At that time we agreed that we would not raise our fees this year, but would prefer to have time to study what the fee should be. Deleting of paragraphs 1.5,1.6 and 3.1 of the original agreement would allow us to continue reciprocal services without requiring coordination of fees. The addition of the word qualified to paragraphs 1.1 and 1.2 addresses the customers who might not be in good standing because of unpaid fines, fees or lost book charges. If you have any other questions, I will be happy to review again. THE CITY OF ROUND ROCK 221 East Main Street Round Rock, Texas 78664 512-255-3612 October 17,1995 Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney City of Georgetown P.O. Box 409 Georgetown, TX 78627 Dear Ms. Banks: RECEIVED OCT 18 1995 CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Resolution No. R-95-09-28-10D was approved by the Round Rock City Council on September 28, 1995. Enclosed is a copy of the resolution and two original agreements for signatures. Please sign both agreements, retain one for your files and return one to the City of Round Rock. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, n Joanne Land Assistant City Manager/ Mayor City Secretary Charles Culpepper Mayor Pro-tem Earl Palmer Council Members Enclosures Robert Stluka Rod Morgan Birk Stewart • ..—tha Chavez !!!!!,ny Joseph City Manager Robert L. Bennett, Jr. City Attorney Stephan L. Sheets Fax 512-255-6676 1-800-735-2989 (TDD) 1-800-735-2988 (Voice) i`.. Y" •i'tW'.i�N. k:..-�. Mx'pd Wit. e;"'^ � , _..- .,.�...c -_-:a r._ _ ��.- ••-. __ - - � , .. i.•. ..r --•-.�.T.."^"1 __`—eAuy Staa--�.re.�+- - . -... Ewa. ..,'. -eix. pens via.�•raa�'"-c -s ,r_ .. �•.,s .as i- �a. ,�E� �`t+`. W"o«..�a :.er-..'`.•. - --2—x o RESOLUTION NO. R-95-09-28-10D WHEREAS, the City of Round Rock, via the Round Rock Public Library, provides library services to its residents and certain non- residents; and WHEREAS, the City of Georgetown, via the Georgetown Public Library, provides library services to its residents and certain non- residents; and WHEREAS, Round Rock. -and --Georgetown desire to combine their library services to their respective patrons pursuant to the terms of a Reciprocal Library Services Agreement; Now Therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROUND ROCK, TEXAS, That the Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to execute on behalf of the City a Reciprocal Library Services Agreement with the City of Georgetown, a copy of said agreement being attached hereto and incorporated herein for all purposes. RESOLVED this 28th day of September, 1995. CHARLES CULPTIPPER, Mayor City of Round Rock, Texas ATTEST: r4j A O-A -W RA N ZEN AN.. �• �.`LAND,ecretary K:\APS0LDTI\1kS50929D.WPD/sls RECIPROCAL LIBRARY SERVICES AGREEMENT This Agreement is made this '4 9 day of 1995, by and between the City of Round Rock, Texas (hereinafter referred to as "Round Rock") and the City of Georgetown, Texas, and the Georgetown Public Library (hereinafter referred to as "Georgetown"). WHEREAS, Round . Rock, via the Round Rock Public Library, provides library services to its residents and certain non- residents; and WHEREAS, Georgetown, via the Georgetown Public Library, provides library services to its residents and certain non- residents; and WHEREAS, Round Rock and Georgetown desire to combine their library services to the patrons; NOW, THEREFORE, the said parties agree as follows: RECIPROCITY 1.1 Qualified resident card-carrying patrons of Round Rock shall be entitled to utilize the library services of Georgetown without paying fees in addition to fees imposed by Round Rock, if any. 1.2 Qualified resident card-carrying patrons of Georgetown shall be entitled to utilize the library services of Round Rock without paying fees in addition to those imposed by Georgetown, if any. 1.3 Qualified non-resident card-carrying patrons of Round Rock, who have paid their annual non-resident fee, shall be entitled to utilize the library services of Georgetown without paying Georgetown non-resident fees. K:\ROUNDROC\AGRELIBR.WPD/kq 1.4 Qualified non-resident card-carrying patrons of Georgetown who have paid their annual non-resident fee, shall be entitled to utilize the library services of Round Rock without paying Round Rock non-resident fees. TERM 2.1 The term of this Agreement shall be for one (1) year, beginning October 1, 1995, and ending September 30, 1996. Said term shall be automatically renewed on a similar year-to-year basis until either party terminates this Agreement by giving written notice of its - intent to terminate at least ninety (90) days prior to the expiration of. -the then current yearly term. FEES 3.1 Each party may charge fees for usage of materials or� equipment that require an additional charge and may charge damaged or overdue book fees, other than the non- resident fee. Each party shall be entitled to retain all such fees collected related to the use of its own library facilities, regardless of the home library status of the user. 3.2 Each party may prosecute library ordinance violations in its own municipal court. Each party shall be entitled to retain all costs and fines collected related to the use of its own library facilities, regardless of the home library status of the user. BUDGET 4.1 Each party shall maintain a minimum level budget of one dollar ($1.00) per capita to fund all library materials, including, but not limited to, written, audio, or visual materials; public access micro -computing software; automated reference services; and special collections. This shall not include costs to maintain each party's integrated computer systems. RECORD KEEPING 5.1 Each party shall amend its membership registration form to encompass the provisions of this Agreement, including an express written agreement of each patron to obey all rules, policies and procedures of the library from which 2. materials are borrowed or other library services are rendered. 5.2 Each party shall maintain a current list of patrons and shall furnish the other party, on a monthly basis, the names of newly registered patrons originating from the other party. 5.3 Each party shall, on a monthly basis, furnish the other party a list of those patrons with fines outstanding and/or materials overdue. 5.4 Each party shall maintain detailed statistical records pertaining to. circulation counts of patrons utilizing the reciprocal srvices of this Agreement. Each party shall, on a monthly basis, furnish the other party a written report containing said circulation counts. 5.5 The parties hereby agree to jointly develop, implement and maintain any and all operating procedures necessary to carry out the provisions of this Agreement. POLICY CHANGES 6.1 Each party shall send the other party written notification of changes in its rules, policies, or procedures which may effect patronage usage. Said notice shall be sent within seven (7) days of the date said changes are adopted. NOTICES 7.1 All notices, reports, lists, etc. required to be sent under this Agreement shall be sent to the following: GEORGETOWN: Georgetown Public Library Mary Pat McLaughlin, Library Director 800 Martin Luther King Georgetown, Texas 78626 ROUND ROCK: Round Rock Public Library Dale Ricklefs, Library Director 216 East Main Street Round Rock, Texas 78664 7.2 The above addresses and addressees may be amended upon seven (7) days written notice. 3. t-h EXECUTED this (J dayof 1995. CITY OF GEORGETOWN LEO WOOD, Mayor ATTEST: SANDRA LEE, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: MARIANNE LANDERS BANKS, City Attorney 4. CITY OF ROUND ROCK By: , CHARLIE CU PPER, Mayor ATTEST: OLNNIE LAND, City Secretary ` APPROVED AS TO FORM: STEPH N L. SHEETS, City Attorney RECIPROCAL LIBRARY SERVICES AGREEMENT -E1V This Agreement is made this Cis day of Q 1995, by and between the City of Round Rock, Texas (hereinafter referred to as "Round Rock") and the City of Georgetown, Texas, and the Georgetown Public Library (hereinafter referred to as "Georgetown"). WHEREAS, Round Rock, via the Round Rock Public Library, provides library se.rvices to its residents and certain non- residents; and WHEREAS, Georgetown, via the Georgetown Public Library, provides library services to its residents and certain non- residents; and WHEREAS, Round Rock and Georgetown desire to combine their library services to the patrons; NOW, THEREFORE, the said parties agree as follows: RECIPROCITY 1.1 Qualified resident card-carrying patrons of Round Rock shall be entitled to utilize the library services of Georgetown without paying fees in addition to fees imposed by Round Rock, if any. 1.2 Qualified resident card-carrying patrons of Georgetown shall be entitled to utilize the library services of Round Rock without paying fees in addition to those imposed by Georgetown, if any. 1.3 Qualified non-resident card-carrying patrons of Round Rock, who have paid their annual non-resident fee, shall be entitled to utilize the library services of Georgetown without paying Georgetown non-resident fees. K:\ROUNDROC\RGRELIBR.WPD/kg 1.4 Qualified non-resident card-carrying patrons of Georgetown who have paid their annual non-resident fee, shall be entitled to utilize the library services of Round Rock without paying Round Rock non-resident fees. TERM 2.1 The term of this Agreement shall be for one (1) year, beginning October 1, 1995, and ending September 30, 1996. Said term shall be automatically renewed on a similar year-to-year basis until either party terminates this Agreement by giving written notice of its intent to terminate at least ninety (90) days prior to the expiration of the then current yearly term. FEES 3.1 Each party may charge fees for usage of materials or equipment that require an additional charge and may charge damaged or overdue book fees, other than the non- resident fee. Each party shall,be entitled to retain all such fees collected related to the use of its own library facilities, regardless of the home library status of the user. 3.2 Each party may prosecute library ordinance violations in its own municipal court. Each party shall be entitled to retain all costs and fines collected related to the use of its own library facilities, regardless of the home library status of the user. BUDGET 4.1 Each party shall maintain a minimum level budget of one dollar ($1.00) per capita to fund all library materials, including, but not limited to, written, audio, or visual materials; public access micro -computing software; automated reference services; and special collections. This shall not include costs to maintain each party's integrated computer systems. RECORD KEEPING 5.1 Each party shall amend its membership registration form to encompass the provisions of this Agreement, including an express written agreement of each patron to obey all rules, policies and procedures of the library from which 2. materials are borrowed or other library services are rendered. 5.2 Each party shall maintain a current list of patrons and shall furnish the other party, on a monthly basis, the names of newly registered patrons originating from the other party. 5.3 Each party shall, on a monthly basis, furnish the other party a list of those patrons with fines outstanding and/or materials overdue. 5.4 Each party shall maintain detailed statistical records pertaining to circulation counts of patrons utilizing the reciprocal services of this Agreement. Each party shall, on :-a monthly basis, furnish the other party a written report containing said circulation counts. 5.5 The parties hereby agree to jointly develop, implement and maintain any and all operating procedures necessary to carry out the provisions of this Agreement. POLICY CHANGES 6.1 Each party shall send the other party written notification of changes in its rules, policies, or procedures which may effect patronage usage. Said notice shall be sent within seven (7) days of the date said changes are adopted. NOTICES 7.1 All notices, reports, lists, etc. required to be sent under this Agreement shall be sent to the following: GEORGETOWN: ROUND ROCK: Georgetown Public Library Round Rock Public Library Mary Pat McLaughlin, Dale Ricklefs, Library Director Library Director 800 Martin Luther King 216 East Main Street Georgetown, Texas 78626 Round Rock, Texas 78664 7.2 The above addresses and addressees may be amended upon seven (7) days written notice. 3. i EXECUTED this � day of 1995. CITY OF GEORGETOWN By LEO WOOD, Mayor ATTEST: SANDRA LEE, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: MARIANNE LANDERS BANKS, City Attorney m CITY OF ROUND ROCK By: / CHARLIE CU PPER, Mayor ATTEST: r TNNE LAND, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: g3�3T -8F.?h '..• MAgv¢ 4v't-Y'�rG9Y:� .t' tn'Sa�il9Cist� _ - - - � ' - '.'2a9c�I"S-'acC .=.Ba�t�ilc"iPR'^']^ "�ci'J�4 M"`c!C�pp_np�i - .. Council meeting date: November 14 1995 Item No. rr AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Second reading of an ordinance updating TMRS (Texas Municipal Retirement System) employee service credits. ITEM SUMMARY TMRS benefits are an important part of the City's employee benefit package. The formula used to calculate TMRS benefits is based on "service credits", which take into account both length of the employee's service and average salary over a predetermined three-year period. - Each year the City may choose to update the three year period over which the employee's salaries are averaged. This update makes the benefit more valuable to the employee. Because salaries tend to increase over time, an updated three year average salary results in an increased retirement benefit. Upon adoption of this ordinance, TMRS members' accrued retirement benefits will be recalculated based upon each member's average monthly salary for the three year period 1992-1994. It would become effective January 1, 1996. (Service credits were last updated for three-year period 1991-1993). FINANCIAL IMPACT The City matches the employee's contribution 2:1. Based upon current actuarial predictions the City's actual contribution required to meet obligations will be 6.08%. The contribution amount will be approximately $29,647. COMMENTS None ATTACHMENTS TMRS Ordinance Submitted By: Teresa Hersh Director of Employee and Organizational Services ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, REVISING CHAPTER 3.04 "TEXAS MUNICIPAL RETIREMENT SYSTEM" OF THE GEORGETOWN CODE OF ORDINANCES REGARDING UPDATED SERVICE CREDITS; PROVIDING FOR INCREASED PRIOR AND CURRENT SERVICE ANNUITIES; REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE FOR SUCH ACTIONS. WHEREAS, the City Council has identified as a principal goal the need to maintain a qualified City Staff, and; WHEREAS, the Texas Municipal Retirement System is viewed as an integral portion of the City's employee benefits package; and; WHEREAS, the City Council deems it appropriate to properly reward retired City employees for their years of loyal service; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1 The facts and recitations contained in the preamble of this ordinance are hereby found and declared to be true and correct, and are incorporated by reference herein and expressly made a part hereof; as if copied verbatim. The City Council hereby finds that this ordinance implements Finance Policy 1 of the Century Plan - Policy Plan Element, which states: "The City will conduct all municipal operations in an efficient, business -like manner", and further finds that the enactment of this ordinance is not inconsistent or in conflict with any other Century Plan Policies, as required by Section 2.03 of the Administrative Chapter of the Policy Plan. SECTION 2 Authorization of Updated Service Credits (a) On the terms and conditions set out in Sections 853.401 through 853.404 of Subtitle G of Title 8, Government Code, as amended (hereinafter referred to as the "TMRS ACT"), each member of the Texas Municipal Retirement System (hereinafter referred to as the "System") who has current service credit or prior service credit in the System in force and effect on the 1 st day of January of the calendar year preceding such allowance, by reason of service in the employment of the City, and on such date had at least 36 months of credited service with the System, shall be and is hereby allowed "Updated Service Credit" (as that term is defined in subsection (d) of Section 853.402 of the TMRS Act). (b) On the terms and conditions set out in Section 853.601 of the TMRS Act, any member of the System who is eligible for Updated Service Credits on the basis of service with this City, who has unforfeited credit for prior service and/or current service with another participating municipality or municipalities by reasons of previous service, and was a contributing member on the 1 st day of January of the calendar year preceding such allowance, shall be credited with Updated Service Credits pursuant to, calculated in accordance with, and subject to adjustment as set forth in said Section 853.601, both as to the initial grant hereunder and all future grants under this ordinance. © The Updated Service Credit hereby allowed and provided for shall be 100% of the "base Updated Service Credit" of the member (calculated as provided in subsection © of Section 853.402 of the TMRS Act). (d) Each Updated Service Credit allowed hereunder shall replace any Updated Service Credit, prior service credit, special prior service credit, or antecedent service credit previously authorized for part of the same service. (e) In accordance with the provisions of subsection (d) of Section 853.401 of the TIVIRS Act, the deposits required to be made to the System by employees of the several participating departments on account of current service shall be calculated from and after the effective date of this ordinance on the full amount of such person's compensation as an employee of the City. SECTION 3 Increase in Retirement Annuities (a) On terms and conditions set out in Section 854.203 of the TMRS Act, the City hereby elects to allow and to provide for payment of the increases below stated in monthly benefits payable by the System to retired employees and to beneficiaries of deceased employees of the City under current service annuities and prior service annuities arising from service by such employees to the City. An annuity increased under this Section replaces any annuity or increased annuity previously granted to the same person. (b) The amount of the annuity increase under this Section is computed as the sum of prior service and current service annuities on the effective date of retirement of the person on whose service the annuities are based, multiplied by 70% of the percentage change in Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers, from December of the year immediately preceding the effective date of the person's retirement to the December that is 13 months before the effective date of this Section. © An increase in an annuity that was reduced because of an option selection is reducible in the same proportion and in the same manner that the original annuity was reduced. (d) If a computation hereunder does not result in an increase in the amount of an annuity, the amount of the annuity will not be changed hereunder. (e) The amount by which an increase under this Section exceeds all previously granted increases to an annuitant is an obligation of the City and of its account in the municipality accumulation fund of the System. SECTION 4 Dates of Allowances and Increases The initial allowance of Updated Service Credit and increase in retirement annuities hereunder shall be effective on January 1, .1996, subject to approval by the City Council. An allowance of Updated Service Credits and an increase in retirement annuities shall be made hereunder on January 1 of each subsequent year until this ordinance ceases to be in effect under subsection (e) of Section 853.404 of the TMRS Act, provided that, as to each subsequent year, the actuary for the System has made the determination set forth in subsection (d) of Section 853.404 of the TMRS Act. SECTION 5 All ordinances and resolutions, or parts of ordinances and resolutions, in conflict with this Ordinance are hereby repealed, and are no longer of any force and effect. SECTION 6 If any provision of this ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions, or application thereof, of this ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are hereby declared to be severable. SECTION 7 The Mayor is hereby authorized to sign this ordinance and the City Secretary to attest. This ordinance shall become effective and be in full force on the 1 st day of January 1996. PASSED AND APPROVED on First Reading on the day of , 1995. PASSED AND APPROVED on Second Reading on the day of , 1995. ATTEST: Sandra Lee City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: By: LEO WOOD Mayor Council meeting November 14, 1995 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Second Reading of an ordinance to rezone Sun City Georgetown, Neighborhoods One, Two and Three from A, Agricultural to RP, Residential Planned C-1, Local Commercial, and C-2B, Commercial First Height. ITEM SUMMARY: This request has two components to it. The first component will change the tract designations given to the lots already rezoned by action approved by the City Council on April 11, 1995. The final plat for Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Neighborhood One, (separate agenda item) indicates different tract designations than those given to the non-residential tracts in the initial rezoning of this property. Therefore, in order to ensure that the rezoning ordinance carries the same designations as the legal descriptions given to the tracts by this plat, this action is necessary. The approved zoning districts enable the property to be developed consistent with the approved Concept Plan, Preliminary Plat, and Development Agreement. The second reason for this rezoning request is to consider the rezoning of a new tract from Al Agricultural to C-1, Local Commercial. Tract U, Block 441 was not shown on either the Revised Concept Plan or the Preliminary Plat. This tract is taken out of Tract D, Block 44, one of the agricultural tracts. The proposed use of this tract is for office space. While this use seems appropriate for the location, the applicant should be aware that the utility demands estimated as part of the Development Agreement did not include provisions for this additional commercial development. Therefore, as Sun City develops it is possible that the utility demands created by any commercial development on this property will take capacity programmed for other parts of the development. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. COMMENTS: At a special P&Z meeting held on June 21, 1995, the Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the requested rezoning of a 983.539 acre tract, to be known as Phase I of Sun City Georgetown, from A, Agricultural to C-1, Local Commercial (Block 43, Tract A, Block 44, Tract U, and Block 46, Tract C - this lot restricted to the entry feature described in the Development Agreement), C-2B, Commercial Second Height (Block 11, Tract J), and RP, Residential Planned (all other lots). Block 43, Tract B and Block 44, Tract D will remain A, Agricultural. At the June 27, 1995, meeting the City Council voted 7-0 to approved the First Reading of the ordinance. The ordinance proposed for Second Reading at this time contains only those lots that are in the recorded plats of Neighborhoods One, Two and Three. This ordinance was withheld from Second Reading until the Final Plats for Neighborhoods One, Two and Three were recorded. They were recorded on September 5, 1995. ATTACHMENTS: Staff report and Ordinance Submitted By: Edward: Barry, AICP/- Director Divisio of Develovm0ht Services Hildy L. Kqngma, AICP Chief Planner REZONING OF A 983.539 ACRE TRACT IN THE W. ROBERTS, M. LEWIS, L. RUSSELL, A. SHORT, G. THOMPSON, W. WILKINSON AND D. MONROE SURVEYS TO BE KNOWN AS SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, PHASE 1, FROM A, AGRICULTURAL TO RP, RESIDENTIAL PLANNED, C-1, LOCAL COMMERCIAL AND C-2B, COMMERCIAL SECOND HEIGHT OWNERS: Del Webb Corporation Mr. Theron E. Bradford APPLICANT: Mr. Robert L. Eck Del Webb Corporation 203 South IH-35, Suite 100 Georgetown, Texas 78628 930-5424 FAX 930-6770 AGENT: Mr. Scott Smiley, P.E. Turner, Collie & Braden, Inc. 5000 Plaza On The Lake, Suite 150 Austin, Texas 78746 512/329-0802 REQUEST: Rezoning of a 983.539 acre tract in the W. Roberts, M. Lewis, L. Russell, A. Short, G. Thompson, W. Wilkinson, D. Monroe Surveys, to be known as Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, as recorded in Volume 1898, Page 597, Volume 2679, Page 744, Volume 2687, Page 945, and Volume 2712, Page 103 of the Official Deed Records of Williamson County, Texas from A, Agricultural to RP, Residential Planned, C-1, Local Commercial and C-2B, Commercial Second Height. Location: Located northeast of F.M. 2338. SEE EXHIBIT A Existing Site: Undeveloped land. A filed plat for the Wilding Subdivision, which was included in this tract, was vacated by City Council on May 23, 1995. Existing Zoning: Annexation of this property was effective on May 13, 1995. The first rezoning of this property was approved by City Council on April 11, 1995. A second request is being processed due to the change in the legal description of the tracts. Rezoning - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1 June 21, 1995 RZ 95-14/File:SUNCTYIA.REZ Page 1 CM:HK Proposed Use: 1,375 lots, including 1,331 single family residential lots, with the remaining lots used as commercial, recreational, open space, park land, habitat preserve and golf course. Surrounding Uses North: Undeveloped land (out of City) and Zoning: South: Undeveloped land and Chaparro Estates Subdivision, single family residential (A and out of City) East: Undeveloped land, (out of City) West: Undeveloped land and Lakewood Estates Subdivision, single family residential (A and out of City) Century Plan: The Century Plan -Development Plan designates this location as Intensity Level 2 by a Plan Amendment approved by City Council on February 14, 1995. The subject development is consistent with the overall development approved as part of that development. Notification: The notification requirements have been completed. HISTORY: A Revised Concept Plan was approved by the City Council on October 25, 1994. The City Council approved a Preliminary Plat of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1 on February 28, 1995. ANALYSIS: This request has two components to it. The first component will change the tract designations given to the lots already rezoned in the action considered by the Commission in March. In order to ensure that the rezoning ordinance carries the same lot designations as the legal descriptions given to the lots by the plat, this action is necessary. The second component rezones a new lot created by the Neighborhood One Final Plat (and considered by a separate agenda item). Following are the rezoning districts that are created by the change in the lot designations and a brief description of the intended use of each of the zoning districts. SEE EXHIBIT B The former designations are shown in parentheses. Block 43, Tract A (Lot 1): C-1, Local Commercial Block 46, Tract C (Lot 1): C-1, Local Commercial Block 11, Tract J (Lot 1): C-2B, Commercial Second Height Block 43, Tract B (Lot 2): A, Agricultural Rezoning - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1 RZ 95-14/File:SUNCTYIA.REZ CM:HK June 21, 1995 Page 2 Block 44, Tract D (Lot 1): A, Agricultural All remaining lots: RP, Residential Planned C-1, Local Commercial Block 43, Tract A is currently being used as the Temporary Sales and Construction Administration office. This use is expected to be in place for approximately two (2) to three (3) years. The City is currently reviewing a detailed development plan for Block 46, Tract C, for an entry house. This will be a small building with an information center. C-2B, Commercial Second Height Block 11, Tract J is a 26.2124 acre lot shown on the Preliminary Plat to be used for the central recreation center, which will include a social hall, swimming area, crafts and other buildings. A, Agricultural These lots (Block 43, Tract B and Block 44, Tract D) are proposed to remain undeveloped in order to create a large open space at the main entrance of the development. The applicant also proposes to graze a longhorn on the lots, so has requested the A, Agricultural zoning designation. RP, Residential Planned The remainder of the property included within Phase I of Sun City Georgetown is zoned RP, Residential Planned district. This district is consistent with the approval of the preliminary plat as a planned unit development (PUD) under the Subdivision Regulations. The uses that will be developed in this district include the single family residential lots, golf courses, golf club house, park pavilion, and golf maintenance facility. The second reason for this rezoning request is to consider the rezoning of a new tract from A, Agricultural to C-1, Local Commercial. Tract U, Block 44, was not shown on either the Revised Concept Plan or the Preliminary Plat. This tract is taken out of Tract D, Block 44, one of the tracts zoned A, Agricultural as described above. The tract is approximately 0.50 acres in size and is located at the south edge of the property along RM2338. SEE EXHIBIT B The proposed use is for office space. The C-1 zoning district allows all residential uses, as well as general retail, service shops, and indoor recreation uses. Commercial uses are appropriate along FM2338, a major arterial, as Rezoning - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1 RZ 95-14/File:SUNCTYIA.REZ CM:HK June 21, 1995 Page 3 long as they conform to the design standards contained in the Subdivision Regulations. While the location seems appropriate for a C- 1 zoning classification, the applicant should be aware that the utility demands estimated as part of the Development Agreement did not include provisions for this additional commercial development. Therefore, as Sun City develops it is possible that the utility demands created by any commercial development on this property will take capacity actually programmed for other parts of the overall Sun City development. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the requested rezoning of a 983.539 acre tract, to be known as Phase 1 of Sun City Georgetown, from A, Agricultural to C- 1, Local Commercial (Block 43, Tract A, Block 44, Tract U and Block 46, Tract C - this lot restricted to the entry feature described in the Development Agreement), C-2B, Commercial Second Height (Block 11, Tract J), and RP, Residential Planned (all remaining lots). Block 43, Tract B and Block 44, Tract D will remain A, Agricultural. P & Z ACTION: At a special P&Z meeting held on June 21, 1995, the Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the requested rezoning of a 983.539 acre tract, to be known as Phase I of Sun City Georgetown, from A, Agricultural to C-1, Local Commercial (Block 43, Tract A, Block 44, Tract U, and Block 46, Tract C - this lot restricted to the entry feature described in the Development Agreement), C-2B, Commercial Second Height (Block 11, Tract J), and RP, Residential Planned (all other lots). Block 43, Tract B and Block 44, Tract D will remain A, Agricultural. June 21, 1995 Page 4 EXHIBIT B SUN CITY GEORGETOWN PHASE 5905 _. L '�_ `` a.// �♦ `,tom;, ra -,\ _ L _ . ` -. r^\ �� _ .. ^;\ :� _ •Y .gay ., r,,,, ` . � ,. ' '� " �� �` ' -. ....... - 1• i� .ems .. ..r ` c - .. �. .. l,Y.. .: --. foo' _ / A ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE PASSED AND ADOPTED ON THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 1968, AND AMENDING PART OF THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP OF THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE, TO CHANGE SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, NEIGHBORHOODS ONE, TWO AND THREE, AS RECORDED IN CABINET M, SLIDES 95-129 OF THE OFFICIAL PLAT RECORDS OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS, FROM A, AGRICULTURAL TO RP, RESIDENTIAL PLANNED C-1, LOCAL COMMERCIAL, AND C-211, COMMERCIAL FIRST HEIGHT ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATIONS; REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS; INCLUDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, an application has been made to the City Council for the purpose of changing the zoning district classification of the following described real property ("the Property") : SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, NEIGHBORHOODS ONE, TWO AND THREE, AS RECORDED IN CABINET M, SLIDES 95-129 OF THE OFFICIAL PLAT RECORDS OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS, hereinafter referred to as "the property"; WHEREAS, the City Council has submitted the proposed change in the Base Ordinance to the Planning and Zoning Commission for its consideration in a public hearing and for its recommendation or report; and WHEREAS, notice of such hearing was published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City; which stated the time and place of hearing, which time was not earlier than fifteen (15) days for the first day of such publication; and WHEREAS, written notice was given not less than fifteen (15) days before the date set for the meeting before the Planning and Zoning Commission to all the owners of the lots within two hundred feet of the property, as required by law; and WHEREAS, the applicant for such zoning change placed on the property such sign(s) as required by law for advertising the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing, not less than fifteen (15) days before the date set for such hearing; and WHEREAS, the City Planning and Zoning Commission in a meeting held on June 19, 1995, recommended changing said zoning district classification of the above described property Sun City Georgetown, Neighborhoods One, Two and Three Rezoning Ordinance No. Page 1 of 3 from the A, Agricultural district zoning classification to the RP, Residential Planned, C-1, Local Commercial, and C-2B, Commercial Second Height district zoning classifications. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1. The facts and recitations contained in the preamble of this ordinance are hereby found and declared to be true and correct, and are incorporated by reference herein and expressly made a part hereof, as if copied verbatim. The City Council hereby finds that this ordinance implements the following Policies of the Century Plan - Policy, Plan Element: 1. Growth and Physical Development Policy 1, which states: "The City will ensure that future land use patterns provide economic, cultural, and social activities to all residents, businesses and organizations"; and 2. Growth and Physical Development Policy 2, which states: "The City's regulatory actions will efficiently and effectively implement the Policy Statements and provide the opportunity to seek change with reasonable effort and expense"; and 3. Growth and Physical Development Policy 4, which states: "The City will encourage new development and infill redevelopment in the community"; and 4. Environmental and Resource Conservation Policy 1, which states: "The City will take the steps necessary to protect the physical attributes that make Georgetown attractive"; and further finds that the enactment of this ordinance is not inconsistent or in conflict with any other Century Plan Policies, as required by Section 2.03 of the Administrative Chapter of the Policy Plan. SECTION 2. The Base Ordinance and the Zoning Map of the City, as well as the Zoning District for the property shall be and the same is hereby changed from the A, AGRICULTURAL district, to the C-1, LOCAL COMMERCIAL district on Block 43, Tract A, Block 44, Tract U, and Block 46, Tract C (this lot restricted to the entry feature described in the Development Agreement between the City of Georgetown and the Del E. Webb Development Company); to the C-2B, COMMERCIAL SECOND HEIGHT district on Block 11, Tract J; and to the RP, RESIDENTIAL PLANNED district on all other lots in Neighborhoods One, Two and Three, in accordance with Exhibit "A", which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein, and is hereby adopted by the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas. Block 43, Tract B and Block 44, Tract D shall remain in the A, AGRICULTURAL district. SECTION 3. All ordinances and resolutions, or parts of ordinances and resolutions, in conflict with this Ordinance are hereby repealed, and are no longer of any force and effect. Sun City Georgetown, Neighborhoods One, Two and Three Rezoning Ordinance No. Page 2 of 3 SECTION 4. If any provision of this Ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions, or application thereof, of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby declared to be severable. SECTION 5. The Mayor is hereby authorized to sign this Ordinance and the City Secretary to attest. This Ordinance shall become effective and be in full force and effect in (10) ten days on and after publication in accordance with the provisions of the Charter of the City of Georgetown. PASSED AND APPROVED on First Reading on the day of , 1995. PASSED AND APPROVED on Second Reading on the day of ,1995. ATTEST: THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: Sandra D. Lee By: LEO WOOD City Secretary Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney EXHIBIT A _� r� � r _��f"• :.-fir ^.- � ., - -- l \��; ;ter � � 11 _ , -�j V \y .'.�•: / qw- 1 Q : • :.�. . •...:::::: .:::=:::::.. o .....: . ;1.::::.::::.: .......... , .: J . . r� Council meeting date: 11-14-95 AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET .. -_ Item No . SUBJECT A resolution calling a Special Election on January 20, 1996, for the purpose of electing a councilmem6er for the vacant position for District 2; ordering a Runoff Election, if necessary; and establishing procedures for said election ITEM SUMMARY If you decide to call a Special Election for the District 2 Councilmember position, as required by State Law, the attached resolution orders the Special Election for January 20, 1996, (the next uniform election d y following the occurrence of the vacancy). Because this election is specifically for District 2, the only Election Day Polling Place will be t Georgetown Public Library. Early voting by personal appearance will be conducted at City Hall. , - Attached are calendar pages for November through February, showing the prescribed dates for filing for early voting. The, Canvass of votes would take place at the regularly scheduled Council Meeting January 23, 1996, at which time the declared winner would be sworn and would begin filling the unexpi term for that position. I have also included in the resolution, provisions for a Runoff Election, if necessary. The calendar pages for January and February include prescribed dates for a Runoff Election to be held on February 17, 1996). If a Runoff Election is necessary, the Canvass would take place at a Special Council Meeting on Februar 20. The declared winner would then be sworn and would begin filling the unexpired term. The new full -term Councilmember position for District 2 is scheduled to be a part of the General Electio in May, 1996. The positions of Mayor and Councilmembers for Districts 6 and 7 are also scheduled to b decided by the voters in May of 1996. I have not yet contacted anyone about serving as the Precinct Judge and Alternate Judge on Election Day'. If, in fact, the Special Election is called, I will secure qualified persons as soon as possible. I will also neell to obtain, from the County Voter Registrar's Office, an updated list of registered voters in District 2. Prio to the May, 1995 Election, the County listed 898 registered voters in District 2. There is the goo probability that there have been more people registered since that time. Due to the lack of sufficient election -trained personnel in the City Hall office on a regular basis, I will 1 to hire a part-time Deputy Early Voting Clerk, depending on the number of candidates. If one candi runs uncontested, I will not need to hire extra help. ATTACHMENTS l . Calendar Pages for November through February 1. Proposed Resolution Subm' d By: Sandra D. Lee, City Secretary 1995 SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SATURDAY I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 Council Meeting CALL SPECIAL ELECTION 15 CANDIDATES MAYFILE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Council Meeting 29 30 I� 1995 SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SATURDAY 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 If 12 Council Meeting 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 31st day before Election 20 LAST DAY TO FILE 21 22 23 AS WRITE-IN LAST DAY TO FILE 5:30 PM DRAWING AS CANDIDATE FOR PLACE ON BALLOT 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 A 1996 Januaiy 1996 SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SATURDAY 119th day before Election 2 3 4 5 EARLY VOTING AT 6 FIRST DAY FOR EARLY VOTING by CITY HALL pers. appearance / 9:OOAM-I:00 PM City Hall 7 8 9 10 II 8th day before Election 12 EARLY VOTING AT 13 LAST DAY TO CITY HALL Council Meeting RECEIVE APPLICATION FOR 9:00 AM-1:00 PM BALLOT BY MAIL 14 15 4th day before Election 16 17 18 19 20 LAST DAY FOR ELECTION EARLY VOTING DAY 21 22 Council Meeting 23 24 25 26 27 CANVASS OF ELECTION/DRAW FOR PLACE ON BALLOT IF RUNOFF 28 19th day before Runoff Election 29 30 31 FIRST DAY FOR EARLY VOTING FOR RUNOFF ELECTION 1996 Februaty 1996 SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SATURDAY ' 2 RUNOFF EARLY 3 VOTING AT CITY HALL/9:00 AM TO 1:00 PM 4 5 6 7 8 9 RUNOFF EARLY 10 VOTING AT CITY HALL/9:00 AM TO 1:00 PM II 12 4th day before Runoff Election 13 14 15 16 RUNOFF 17 LAST DAY FOR ELECTION RUNOFF EARLY VOTING DAY 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING TO CANVASS RUNOFF 25 26 27 28 29 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION ORDERING A SPECIAL ELECTION IN GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, TO BE HELD ON JANUARY 20, 1996; ORDERING A RUNOFF ELECTION, IF NECESSARY; AND ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES FOR SAID ELECTIONS. WHEREAS, the laws of the State of Texas and the Charter of the City of Georgetown, Texas provide that on Saturday, January 20,1995, there shall be elected the following officials for this City: One (1) Member of the Council to be elected by the registered voters who reside within the boundaries of City of Georgetown Council District 2, for the purpose of filling the unexpired term of Councilmember for District 2, due to the untimely death of Councilmember Winfred Bonner; and WHEREAS, the laws of the State of Texas and the Charter of the City of Georgetown, Texas further provide that the Election Code of the State of Texas is applicable to said election, and in order to comply with said Code, a Resolution should be passed establishing the procedure to be followed in said elections, and designating the voting places for said elections. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS THAT: SECTION 1 The facts and recitations contained in the preamble of this resolution are hereby found and declared to be true and correct, and are incorporated by reference herein and expressly made a part hereof, as if copied verbatim. SECTION 2 The City Council has found that this action implements Governmental Affairs Policy 2 of the Century Plan - Policy Plan Element, which states: "All citizens actively participate in governmental functions. "; and has found that this action is not inconsistent or in conflict with any other Century Plan Policies, as required by Section 2.03 of the Administrative Chapter of the Policy Plan; SECTION 3 All candidates for the election to be held on Saturday, January 20, 1996, for the above - mentioned position shall file their application to become a candidate with the City Secretary at the Special Election Resolution No. Page 1 of 4 Pages City Hall, 609 Main Street, Georgetown, Texas, on or before 5:00 p.m. on the thirty-first day before the election, such date being December 20, 1995, and that all of said applications shall be on a form as prescribed by Section 141.031 of the Election Code of the State of Texas. The order in which the names of the candidates are to be printed on the ballot shall be determined by a drawing by the City Secretary on Thursday, December 21, 1995, at 5:30 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, located at 101 E. 7th Street, Georgetown, Texas. SECTION 4 As provided in the City Charter, in the event that no candidate can be declared the winner of the Special Election, a runoff election shall be held not less than three nor more than four weeks after the Special Election, that date being Saturday, February 17, 1996. In such Runoff Election, the two candidates who received, in the preceding election, the highest number of votes, shall be voted on again, and the candidate who receives the majority of the votes cast in the Runoff Election shall be elected as Councilmember. SECTION 5 Voting shall be conducted with paper ballots prepared in conformity with the Texas Election Code. SECTION 6 As City Secretary, Sandra D. Lee is hereby appointed as the Clerk for Early Voting. Elizabeth Gray, Cari Speegle, Marianne Landers Banks, Hartley Sappington, and Bob Hart are hereby appointed as Deputy Early Voting Clerks. Early voting by personal appearance shall, take place at City Hall, 609 Main St., Georgetown, Texas. The hours for early voting by personal appearance shall be the normal business hours for City Hall (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) each day specified for early voting, which is not a Saturday, a Sunday, or an official State holiday, beginning on the 18th day preceding the date of the Election, which is Tuesday, January 2, 1996, and continuing through the 4th day preceding the date of the Election, which is Tuesday, January 16, 1996. Early voting shall also be conducted on Saturday, January 6, 1996, from 9: 00 a.m. to 1: 00 p.m. and Saturday, January 13, 1996, from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. at the Georgetown City Hall, 609 Main Street. $pecial Election Resolution No. Page 2 of 4 Pages If a Runoff Election is necessary, early voting by personal appearance shall take place at City Hall, 609 Main Street, Georgetown, Texas. The hours for early voting by personal appearance for the Runoff Election shall be the normal business hours for City Hall (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) each day specified for early voting, which is not a Saturday, Sunday, or an official State holiday, beginning on the 19th day preceding the date of the Runoff Election, which is Monday, January 29, 1996, and continuing through the 4th day preceding the date of the Runoff Election, which is Tuesday, February 13, 1996. In the event of a Runoff Election, early voting by personal appearance shall also be conducted on Saturday, February 3, 1996, from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. and Saturday, February 101 1996, from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. at the Georgetown City Hall, 609 Main Street. SECTION 7 For both the Special Election and in the event of a Runoff Election, Election Day voting shall take place at Polling Place "A", the Georgetown Public Library, 808 Martin Luther King Blvd., for the voters residing in City of Georgetown Single Member District 2. All election officials shall be compensated at a rate of $6.00 per hour, and the official who delivers the ballots and election supplies to the City Hall at the end of the voting day shall be compensated an additional flat fee of $25.00 over the hourly rate for their service. SECTION 8 The City Secretary shall conduct an unofficial tabulation of results after the closing of the polls on Saturday, January 20, 1996. The official Canvass and tabulation of the results of the Election shall be conducted by the City Council at the next regularly scheduled Council Meeting on Tuesday, January 23, 1996. Following the Canvass, the newly -elected Councilmember will be sworn and will begin serving the remainder of the unexpired term for Council District 2. If a Runoff Election is required, the City Secretary shall conduct an unofficial tabulation of results after the closing of the polls of the Runoff Election on Saturday, February 17, 1996. The official Canvass and tabulation of the results of the Election shall be conducted by the City Council at a Special Council Meeting on Tuesday, February 20, 1996. Following the Canvass, the newly -elected Councilmember will be sworn and will begin to serve the remainder of the unexpired term for Council District 2. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption. RESOLVED this 14th day of November, 1995. Special Election Resolution No. Page 3 of 4 Pages Attest: Sandra D. Lee City Secretary Approved as to form: Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney Special Election Resolution No. Page 4 of 4 Pages THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: By: LEO WOOD Mayor