HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda_GGAF_08.27.2014Notice of Meeting for the
General Government and Finance Advisory Board
of the City of Georgetown
August 27, 2014 at 3:00 PM
at Georgetown Public Library Friends of the Library Room, located at 402 West 8th
Street, Georgetown, TX
The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
If you require assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the
ADA, reasonable assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. Please
contact the City at least four (4) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or City
Hall at 113 East 8th Street for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711.
Consent Agenda
The Statutory Consent Agenda includes non-controversial and routine items that may be acted upon
with one single vote. An item may be pulled from the Consent Agenda in order that it be discussed and
acted upon individually as part of the Regular Agenda.
A Review minutes from the June 19, June 25 and July 15, 2014 GGAF meetings - Danella Elliott,
Executive Assistant
B Consideration and possible action to approve the purchase of two Dodge 4500-Diesel transitional
response vehicles (TRV’s) from Dallas Dodge Chrysler Jeep through the Buy-Board contract
purchase price of $367,740.00 for both unit - ClayShell, Assistant Fire Chief
C Grant award and related funding for Outdoor Warning System from Federal Signal Corporation
Alerting & Notification Systems for contract purchase price of $499,845.12 as planned in the
2014-15 GCP Budget - Clay Shell, Assistant Fire Chief
D Consideration and possible approval of annual appropriations to several large Information
Technology vendors for maintenance services during the FY 2015 fiscal year Mike Peters, IT
Director
E 2015 renewal of MyPermitNow - Tamera Baird, Chief Plans Examiner
F Consideration and possible action for the approval of the annual payment for the operation of the
county wide radio communications system to Williamson County in the amount of $134,989.00 -
Stan Hohman, Fleet Services Supervisor and Micki Rundell, Chief Financial Officer
Legislative Regular Agenda
G 2014-15 Fire Department Operations Service Fees and Fire & Life Safety Service Fees - John
Sullivan, Fire Chief
H Discussion and possible direction to staff regarding the long-term financial impacts of “frozen”
Property Values due to new age-restricted developments within the City - Micki Rundell, Chief
Financial Officer
I Presentation and discussion of the Westside Service Center - Wesley Wright, Director of Systems
Engineering and Jim Briggs, General Manager of Utilities
J Update and discussion of the Conservation Educational Facilities - Kathy Ragsdale, Conservation
Services Manager and Mike Babin, Deputy General Manager
K Project update regarding major general capital projects – Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager;
Kimberly Garrett, Parks Director
L Review/Discuss recommendations for Employee Compensation Market Comparators - Tadd
Phillips, HR Director
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice
of Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public
at all times, on the ______ day of __________________, 2014, at __________, and remained so
posted for at least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
____________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Review minutes from the June 19, June 25 and July 15, 2014 GGAF meetings - Danella Elliott,
Executive Assistant
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUBMITTED BY:
Danella Elliott, Executive Assistant
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
June 19, 2014 Draft Minutes Cover Memo
June 25, 2014 Draft Minutes Cover Memo
July 15, 2014 Draft Minutes Cover Memo
Minutes of the Meeting of the
GENERAL GOVERNMENT AND FINANCE ADVISORY BOARD (GGAF)
City of Georgetown, Texas
June 19, 2014
The General Government and Finance Advisory Board met at 2:00 p.m. on Thursday, June 19, 2014 in the
Georgetown Public Library Classroom, located at 402 West 8thth Street, Georgetown, Texas.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Keith Brainard, Chair, Joe Pondrom, Jerry Hammerlun, Ralph Mason
MEMBERS ABSENT: Tommy Gonzalez
STAFF PRESENT: Paul Brandenburg, Micki Rundell, Susan Morgan, Laurie Brewer, Jackson Daly,
Kimberly Garrett
A copy of these minutes, containing detailed information on the items listed below will be available in the Finance
and Administration Office, located at 113 East 8th Street, Georgetown, TX and can be found online at
http://agendas.georgetown.org/
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.
Regular Session – Called to order at 2:00 p.m.
The GGAF Board may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene an Executive Session at the request of the
Chair of the GGAF Committee for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code
Chapter 551.)
Public Wishing to Address Council
On a subject that is posted on this agenda: Please fill out a speaker registration form. Clearly print your name and
the letter of the item on which you wish to speak and present it to the Chair or Board Liaison, preferably prior to the
start of the meeting. You will be called forward to speak when the Board considers that item.
On a subject not posted on the agenda: Persons may add an item to a future Board agenda by contacting the Liaison
prior to the creation of the agenda for the following meeting, with the subject matter of the topic they would like to
address and their name. The Board Liaison can be reached at 512-930-3676 or by email at
danella.elliott@georgetown.org
Statutory Consent Agenda
The Statutory Consent Agenda includes non-controversial and routine items that Board may act on with one single
vote. A board member may pull any item from the Consent Agenda in order that the Board discuss and act upon it
individually as part of the Regular Agenda.
Legislative Regular Agenda
A. Review and discuss certain sections of the Fiscal and Budgetary Policy changes – Micki Rundell,
CFO
After the detailed review of the Fiscal and Budgetary Policy and proposed updates at the April 23, 2014
GGAF meeting, several items continued to be reviewed with comments provided by members.
After a lengthy discussion and clarification, the GGAF Board’s recommendations on the four areas
discussed are highlighted in yellow:
• Use of unexpected and unappropriated General Fund balances
L. Use of Unanticipated and Unappropriated General Fund Balances - Within 90 days after fiscal
year end, staff will report the projected general fund balance to Council. In the event that unexpected,
unbudgeted amounts are determined to be available in the General Fund after year end, these funds
may be used for any of the following purposes, as approved by the City Council:
1. to fund capital projects;
2. to fund equipment purchases in lieu of issuing debt;
3. to reduce outstanding city debt, including bonded indebtedness and unfunded pension liabilities;
4. to fund contingent liabilities such as the benefit payout reserve, cemetery trust fund, and similar
obligations of the city;
5. to take other steps to reduce property tax rates or mitigate any future increases;
6. to hold those funds in reserve for future commitments or contingencies that may be pending,
and/or
7. to fund an economic uncertainty reserve of up to three (3) percent of annual General Fund
operating expenditures.
• Retirement plan funding targets and retire COLA provisions
1. The City has established 80% as the minimum funding goal for the City’s unfunded pension liability.
The City’s funded pension liability is 81.3% as of December 31, _2013, as disclosed by TMRS. The
City’s ultimate goal is 100%, but will be achieved reasonably over time.
2. The City may elect to make an annual 1-time payment prior to further fund the City’s unfunded
pension liability. Such payment will be approved and authorized by the City Council prior to
December 31 in order to be recognized in the following year’s TMRS employer contribution rate
calculation.
3. Retirement Cost-of-Living Adjustment
a) Within 60 days of when the TMRS annual funding update becomes available each year, staff will
review and prepare a summary of costs and options for potential cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) for
City of Georgetown retirees.
b) Consistent with state statutes governing the Texas Municipal Retirement System, the city may provide
an automatic COLA for members of the TMRS who are retired from the City of Georgetown and
receiving a monthly retirement benefit from the TMRS.
c) The city council may adjust the COLA provided to city retirees based upon the funding level of the
city’s pension plan, as calculated by the TMRS, as follows:
When the funding level of the city’s
pension plan is
The COLA should
be
Less than 70.0%
Zero
70.0% to 79.9%
0.3% of CPI
80.0% to 89.9%
0.5% of CPI
90.0% and greater
0.7% of CPI
d) Adjustments made pursuant to subsection b. should reflect the effect of the prospective change in the
COLA on the funding level of the city’s pension plan.
• Surplus property
A. Departmental Capital Maintenance & Replacement – The City also utilizes department capital
maintenance and replacement schedules for specialized assets and equipment necessary to
provide services.
1. Parks and Recreation - As part of the City’s on-going maintenance program, the City also
recognizes the need to regularly maintain and replace grounds, equipment and facilities that are
part of the City’s Parks and Recreation system. Separate replacement and maintenance schedules
will be maintained for these items including, but not limited to, playground equipment, buildings,
sport courts, trees and grounds, and restroom facilities. The City’s goal is to provide level on-
going funding to ensure safe, well-maintained facilities for its citizens.
2. Public Safety Equipment – As part of the City’s on-going maintenance program, the City also
recognizes the need to regularly maintain and replace specialized equipment in Police and Fire.
Separate replacement and maintenance schedules will be maintained for these items including but
not limited to for Fire: SCBA’s and other firefighting equipment and protective gear; and for
Police: bullet proof vests, armaments and other tactical equipment. The City’s goal is to provide
level on-going funding to ensure proper protection for employees and citizens.
B. Surplus Property
1. From time to time it is necessary to dispose of certain vehicles or equipment that have been
procured with City funds and used in City services. Individual surplus property items with
expected sales value in excess of $10,000 must be approved by the City Council prior to
disposition.
2. City staff will maintain reports and records of all surplus property dispositions in accordance with
good internal controls. A report of all disposed items in excess of $1,000 will be included with the
quarterly financial reports provided to City Council.
• Internal audit program
GGAF’s recommendation is for Council to direct staff to work with the new external auditors after they are
hired to outline the needs and expectations of that function. This direction will be used to develop a plan
and estimate costs to implement that function effectively over the next two to three years, whether it be a
contract or an internal city position.
The GGAF Board also made a few changes to the Debt section of the Fiscal and
Budgetary Policy.
A. Types of Debt –
1. General Obligation Bonds (GO’s) – General obligation bonds must be authorized by a vote of the
citizens of Georgetown. They are used only to fund capital assets of the general government and
are not to be used to fund operating needs of the City. The City’s full faith and credit of the City
as well as the City’s Ad valorem taxing authority backs general obligation bonds. Conditions for
issuance of general obligation debt include:
• When the project will have a significant impact on the tax rate;
• When the project may be controversial even through it is routine in nature; or
• When the project falls outside the normal bounds of projects the City has typically done.
For debt programs that include multiple projects that will be issued over multiple years at the
discretion of the City Council, the City will may approve a Contract with the Voters to manage
future property tax rate impacts. The Contract with the Voters will be included in educational
information for all applicable GO Bond elections, and will include a maximum annual tax rate
increase and a cumulative total per bond authorization maximum tax rate increase. The City will
include these impacts in its annual Debt Condition report.
The City Council will carefully manage the unissued GO Bond authorization through annual
review of related projects to ensure full disclosure on future timing of projects included in the
bond package. Timing of authorized projects and related bond issuance will be included in the
Annual Budget and published on the City’s website. Any changes to this schedule require specific
Council authorization.
The recommendations will be presented at a Council Workshop and placed on the City Council
Agenda on June 24th.
B. Presentation, discussion, and direction regarding the phasing, funding, and priorities for the 5-Year
Capital Improvement Plan for Parks, Downtown, Sidewalks and City-wide Facilities – Laurie
Brewer, Assistant City Manager; Micki Rundell, Chief Financial Officer
Laurie explained that General Capital Projects planning is a collaborative effort among several
departments. Staff has been meeting since February to discuss projects and funding sources. The five-year
plan, and any recommended changes, will be reviewed at the June 24, 2014 regular Council workshop and
included in the five-year business plan update.
She noted that staff was requesting direction and guidance, and that this item will be discussed at next
week’s Council meeting. Ron Hobbs has provided better ideas in reference to costs, as well as, flexibility
in doing different things. She went over the information listed below:
The proposed Parks CIP for 2014/2015 includes funds for the River Trails expansion design, VFW Park
renovation, Founder’s Park improvements, Village Park improvements, Blue Hole design, Emerald Springs
improvements, constructing a new splash pad, and the Williams Drive Pool improvements.
The Downtown Master Plan and Infrastructure CIP will address items identified in the Downtown
Master Plan as priorities for Downtown. For 2014/2015 the proposed funds will be used for on-going
funding for general repair and maintenance, ADA sidewalk repairs, streetlights, tree replacement, and
burying downtown utilities. New capital improvements include historic district street signs, design work
for the Grace Heritage Center rehabilitation and design work for a canopy in the library courtyard.
The Sidewalk CIP works in conjunction with the streets department to add appropriate sidewalks and
streetscaping. In 2014/2015 the streets department is requesting to renovate 11th Street between Main and
Rock Streets and 2nd Street between Austin Ave. and College Street. To capitalize on the work that is
already proposed to be completed, this CIP request funds to complete the sidewalks on 11th and 2nd Streets.
The Fire Stations/Public Safety CIP for 2014/2015 requests funds for the Fire Station 6 ESD partnership
and for the emergency warning system. The General and Utilities Facilities CIP requests funds for the
conservation department’s facility at the Westside Service Center. The City Center CIP requests funds for
portions of phase I of the City Center project. This includes renovating the current GCAT building, design
work to turn the current Council Chambers into the Visitor Center, design work to renovate the old library,
and design work for the old police station.
Jerry feels that the Project Manager is moving too fast and we need to slow down and research a little more.
Keith noted that this is a lot of information and there are a lot of questions. The GGAF Board suggested
holding a Special GGAF meeting to go further into detail on the projects, requests, etc. and thus be able to
provide direction. The Special Meeting will be scheduled within the next week or two and Board members
will be informed.
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 4:20 pm.
_____________________________________
Board Chair
Minutes of the Meeting of the
GENERAL GOVERNMENT AND FINANCE ADVISORY BOARD (GGAF)
City of Georgetown, Texas
June 25, 2014
The General Government and Finance Advisory Board met at 3:30 p.m. on Wednesday, June 25, 2014 in the
Georgetown Public Library Classroom, located at 402 West 8thth Street, Georgetown, Texas.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Keith Brainard, Chair, Tommy Gonzalez, Jerry Hammerlun, Joe Pondrom, Ralph Mason
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Micki Rundell, Susan Morgan, Wayne Nero, Keith Hutchinson, Clay Shell, Steve
Fought, Bridget Chapman
A copy of these minutes, containing detailed information on the items listed below will be available in the Finance
and Administration Office, located at 113 East 8th Street, Georgetown, TX and can be found online at
http://agendas.georgetown.org/
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.
Regular Session – Called to order at 3:30 p.m.
The GGAF Board may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene an Executive Session at the request of the
Chair of the GGAF Committee for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code
Chapter 551.)
Public Wishing to Address Council
On a subject that is posted on this agenda: Please fill out a speaker registration form. Clearly print your name and
the letter of the item on which you wish to speak and present it to the Chair or Board Liaison, preferably prior to the
start of the meeting. You will be called forward to speak when the Board considers that item.
On a subject not posted on the agenda: Persons may add an item to a future Board agenda by contacting the Liaison
prior to the creation of the agenda for the following meeting, with the subject matter of the topic they would like to
address and their name. The Board Liaison can be reached at 512-930-3676 or by email at
danella.elliott@georgetown.org
Statutory Consent Agenda
The Statutory Consent Agenda includes non-controversial and routine items that Board may act on with one single
vote. A board member may pull any item from the Consent Agenda in order that the Board discuss and act upon it
individually as part of the Regular Agenda.
Legislative Regular Agenda
A. Review minutes from the May 28, 2014 GGAF Meeting - Danella Elliott, Executive Assistant
These minutes were unanimously approved.
B. Authorize City staff to negotiate contract with vendor chosen by selection committee for the Website
Assessment and Redesign of City websites – Keith Hutchinson, Public Information Manager
The current budget includes funds for the redesign of City websites. The goal of the website redesign is to align
the City’s online presence with best practices in municipal services and to better integrate the design and
navigation of City websites. The City issued a request for proposals for website assessment and redesign on
April 2, 2014. Nine firms submitted proposals in response to the RFP; only three met the minimum
requirements. Public Communications assembled a committee of City staff representing each City division to
review and score the proposals, and this committee also will be in place for phase two of the project, which is
the assessment and redesign phase. In addition, a Citizen Advisory Board will be created to help guide the City
and the selected vendor.
On June 12, City representatives were given access to review the proposals from nine vendors. On June 18,
feedback was collected from staff via one of two meetings or via email on the proposed vendors. The committee
selected Steel Branding unanimously as the top choice. He noted that this firm also did the City of Austin’s
website, which is very impressive.
Tommy asked if the website would be in Spanish as well. Keith noted that they can negotiate the pricing, since
$100,000 is budgeted, and their price is below the budgeted amount.
Joe asked if the Library would be a part of this redesign as well. Keith explained that there are common
elements.
Motion to authorize City staff to negotiate contract with Steel Branding, including addressing the Spanish
language issue with the additional funds. Unanimously approved.
C. This item was moved after Item E.
D. Consideration and possible recommendation to amend the Contract for Architectural Services with ADG
to expand the scope of services to include design of the Tactical Training Facilities and increase the lump
sum fee in the amount of $139,954—Wayne Nero, Chief of Police
Chief Nero and Bridget explained that the requested component is included in the total budget. It is not a
budget issue, it is a contract issue and we need a contract amendment.
The original contract for Architectural Services did not include architecture and engineering services related to
the Tactical Training Facilities. This proposed amendment will expand the scope of services to cover the
Tactical Training Facilities design and increase the lump sum fee according.
After discussion and clarification on how this was missed and how to prevent it in the future, Tommy asked
Chief for after-action report with “lessons learned” and asked that the changes begin immediately.
Joe asked if a report could be provided for citizens showing a complete breakdown of what the $29.5M is
covering, and what it is not. Keith asked that this be provided in a one page (possibly front to back) format.
Motion to amend the contract for Architectural Services with ADG was unanimously approved as requested.
E. Discussion on proposed changes to the Alarm Ordinance – Council Member Keith Brainard
Proposed changes to the Alarm Ordinance, requested by Council Member Brainard were:
• require that burglar alarm permits be updated every three years, rather than annually
• reduce the permissible number of false alarms that do not result in a fine, from three to two
• establish a fine of $100 for the third through the fifth false alarm each year
• establish a fine of $250 for each false alarm after the fifth
• authorize the chief of police to waive or reduce fines, and to reduce permit fees, for non-profit, educational,
and governmental entities
Objectives were:
• to reduce the incidence of false alarms;
• to more closely match the fines with the cost (financial and otherwise) to the city of responding to them;
• and to reduce the burden on alarm permit holders.
Keith explained that he originated the item above, but he has since been informed by our Legal department that
this is not allowed by State Law. State of Texas regulates the fine structure and we are limited to what we
charge for false alarms. The costs associated with having officers respond to these alarms vs. what we are
allowed to charge doesn’t come close to recovering expenses or risking the officer’s lives.
He went over his original proposed changes and suggested that everyone communicate with the legislature in
Austin to get the law changed, as well as, sending a letter to representative Farney to get the process started.
We can’t really address the fiscal component, but we can see if it is possible to get legislation changed.
Motion to move from a one to three year renewal on burglar alarm permits as specified in the alarm
ordinance, and recommend that Council contact our representatives and other organizations to see if
the legislature can be changed to allow it to have an economic impact on false alarms that occupy
municipality’s resources.
Unanimously approved.
C. Consideration and approval to contract Revenue Rescue, Inc. and Advanced Data Processing, Inc. for the
collection of fees for services provided by the Georgetown Fire Department – Clay Shell, Assistant Fire
Chief
Assistant Chief Shell explained that this was a request to contract Revenue Rescue, Inc., and Advanced Data
Processing, Inc., for the collection of fees for services provided by the Georgetown Fire Department. This
contract will provide revenue recovery for services as stated in Ordinance 2001-75. The contract administers the
billing and collection through a systematic and standard recovery process with insurance providers and citizens.
The contractor will bill for fire services at a rate of 15% commission of the total amount collected, and for
emergency medical services at a flat rate of $18.00 for each incident collected. They provide routine reports on
all accounts and records, and allow for revenue recovery for services requiring the utilization of specialized fire
equipment.
The original contract was awarded on May 17, 2002. In 2007 an RFP was sent out and the contract was
awarded to Revenue Rescue, Inc.
Georgetown received two responses from the recent Request for Proposal. One of those received is from our
current provider, Rescue Recovery Inc., and Advanced Data Processing, Inc. Due to the requirements met in the
Georgetown’s Request for Proposal, low commission rate, the billing procedures governed by laws and
regulations, and the stability of this company, Georgetown Fire Department feels that Revenue Rescue, Inc.,
and Advanced Data Processing, Inc., meet all the requirements set for contracting revenue recovery billing for
fire services.
The GGAF Board requested a recovery rate percentage report for board members and Council. Shell
said he will get that information sent out.
Motion to approve the Revenue Rescue, Inc. and Advanced Data Processing, Inc. contract was unanimously
approved.
F. Discussion on the age restricted development SIP fee project – Micki Rundell, Chief Financial Officer
Micki informed the Board that the law that allows the Over 65 and Disable Property Tax freeze was authorized
by the state in 2003 and approved by Georgetown voters in May 2004. Williamson County elected to approve
the freeze by resolution shortly thereafter.
Since 2004, the City’s “frozen” valuation has grown significantly to $1.6B or 30% of the City’s total $5.2B tax
base, thus having a substantial impact to the City’s tax revenues.
The City has been successful in developing strategies to mitigate this financial tax rate impact. New
commercial growth has historically helped in offsetting the increasing growth in frozen value as a percentage of
TOTAL assessed valuation. But as the Frozen Valuation percentage grows, it will be harder to offset the tax
rate and related revenue impacts. The results will be higher taxes for non-frozen residential and commercial
properties. Other strategies that have been implemented include diversifying the City’s revenue sources with
less General Fund dependence on Property Tax revenue (currently approximately 20% of the $45M GF budget
is funded by property taxes), as well as, working to control increases in operational costs.
She explained that discussion was necessary to discuss financial policy issues and related options for potential
new age restricted developments that may be established in the future, that she is not trying to discourage age-
restricted development, just making the Board award of the potential financial impact.
The Board was concerned that this was being researched without being given direction to do so. It was
mentioned that before any time is spent on items such as this, it should be taken to a Board who will provide
direction to either continue with an analysis, or not. Until direction by a Board or Council has been authorized,
it is considered internal and should not be discussed. Tommy suggested that a policy be written for this type of
circumstance.
The Pulte annexation impact will not be completed until after mid-July. City Staff will then complete an “issue
analysis” and bring it back to GGAF in July or August (depending on when staff finishes the project). This
way, the GGAF Board can further discuss the “big picture”, then proceed to Council.
The GGAF Board agreed.
G. A motion that GGAF direct Staff to accomplish an analysis of a 3-year rolling average of property
assessments as the basis for the city tax levy and to present that analysis to GGAF within 90 days -
Council Members Hesser (Originator) and Fought (Co-Sponsor)
Below is information provided:
• Background: Georgetown property values have increased considerably in the past few years following a
period of decline/stagnation. These fluctuations obviously have an impact on the city budget as well as the
property owners’ annual taxes. Variations, both up and down, are natural. However, variation in the
extreme can cause difficulties. Specifically, rapid increases provide a false sense of prosperity for city
planners that may be short-lived and be followed by punishing revenue reductions when market corrections
or downturns occur. These same rapid increases can have dramatic and detrimental effects on property
owners, especially those on fixed income or otherwise tight budgets. It therefore seems reasonable to seek
some modicum of stability and predictability in both city revenues and property owner costs. One way to
accomplish that objective would be to dampen these variations by basing the property tax levy on a rolling
average of assessed value rather than an annual revision.
• Proposal: We propose using a rolling 3-year average on property assessments as the basis for levying city
property tax. The hypothesis behind this proposal is that net impact would be to lessen the increase in city
revenues during a period when property assessments are increasing, and to lower the reduction in city
revenues during a period where property taxes are decreasing. This would increase the stability, and
predictability, of both the city revenues and the property owner taxes.
• Request for Analysis. Staff is asked to provide GGAF with an analysis of the impact this approach would
have had on both city revenues and property owner taxes over the 10-year period of 2005-2014 and a
prediction of the impact on those same areas for a 10-year period, beginning in 2015. The predictive
portion of the analysis should incorporate a reasonable range of variations both up and down. In addition to
aggregate comparisons, we would like to see specific cases displaying the impact on the tax levy (going
forward) for a home valued at $200,000 in 2005 and for a home valued at $200,000 in 2014. If the rolling-
average approach is deemed feasible and advisable GGAF would have the prerogative of forwarding the
analysis, along with its recommendations, to Council.
• Comments: Although this analysis is intended to examine only two factors (city revenues and property tax
levy), there are obviously collateral or spillover effects of any tax policy and issues with regard to
legislative requirements. Staff is encouraged to include these factors in their completed analysis as well as
present other approaches to achieve the same objectives of stability and predictability.
Micki explained that Truth and Taxation rules are determined by state law, and certified by WCAD.
Joe Pondrom explained that a three-year rolling average is a “no-no”, and that the law is very specific.
There is nothing in T&T that would allow for this. Keith said that if Council wished it to be “in the true
spirit of the request”, he suggested an analysis be completed within 90 days.
Motion was made to develop a tax strategy to provide stability and limit or manage violability and
bring this information back to the GGAF Board within the next few months.
Unanimously approved.
Item E was reopened for clarification on that the Board was requesting.
Additionally, a motion to complete, analyze and come up with options for the alarm ordinance.
Motions unanimously approved.
H. Adjourned at 5:05 p.m.
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 5:40 pm.
_____________________________________
Board Chair
Minutes of the Meeting of the
GENERAL GOVERNMENT AND FINANCE ADVISORY BOARD (GGAF)
City of Georgetown, Texas
July 15, 2014
The General Government and Finance Advisory Board met at 1:00 p.m. on Tuesday, July 15, 2014 in the
Georgetown Public Library Classroom, located at 402 West 8thth Street, Georgetown, Texas.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Keith Brainard, Chair, Tommy Gonzalez, Jerry Hammerlun, Joe Pondrom, Ralph Mason
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Paul Brandenburg, Micki Rundell, Laurie Brewer, Susan Morgan, Wayne Nero, Trish
Long, Jackson Daly, Ron Hobbs, Architect, Wadona Stich
A copy of these minutes, containing detailed information on the items listed below will be available in the Finance
and Administration Office, located at 113 East 8th Street, Georgetown, TX and can be found online at
http://agendas.georgetown.org/
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.
Regular Session – Called to order at 1:00 p.m.
The GGAF Board may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene an Executive Session at the request of the
Chair of the GGAF Committee for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code
Chapter 551.)
Public Wishing to Address Council
On a subject that is posted on this agenda: Please fill out a speaker registration form. Clearly print your name and
the letter of the item on which you wish to speak and present it to the Chair or Board Liaison, preferably prior to the
start of the meeting. You will be called forward to speak when the Board considers that item.
On a subject not posted on the agenda: Persons may add an item to a future Board agenda by contacting the Liaison
prior to the creation of the agenda for the following meeting, with the subject matter of the topic they would like to
address and their name. The Board Liaison can be reached at 512-930-3676 or by email at
danella.elliott@georgetown.org
Statutory Consent Agenda
The Statutory Consent Agenda includes non-controversial and routine items that Board may act on with one single
vote. A board member may pull any item from the Consent Agenda in order that the Board discuss and act upon it
individually as part of the Regular Agenda.
Legislative Regular Agenda
A. Walking tour of the old Public Library building located at 808 Martin Luther King Jr, the Police Station
at 809 Martin Luther King, Jr, and the Georgetown Communications and Technology facility at 510
West 9th Street. (no action item)
The City is preparing for the next phase of the Facilities Plan. The Police Department will move to its new
facility in the Fall, which will vacate 6,500 square feet in the Georgetown Communications and Technology
facility, 8,000 square feet on the first floor of the Police Station (Historic Light and Water Works Building), and
2,400 square feet on the second floor of the Police Station. Additionally, the old Public Library facility is
currently vacant (17,000 square feet).
A feasibility report was prepared by Nore Winter Company for redevelopment of these three facilities.
Additionally, a facilities master plan study was prepared by Ron Hobbs architects to determine the most suitable
immediate and future uses for these facilities.
GGAF members toured the facilities to familiarize themselves with the three facilities under review in order to
prepare for the discussion with Ron Hobbs Architects on recommendations for the sites.
The meeting reconvened at 1:45 pm in the Library Classroom.
B. Presentation, discussion and possible direction regarding phasing, funding and priorities for major
projects in the Five Year General Capital Improvements Program (CIP) for Parks, Downtown,
Sidewalks and Facilities. Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager and Micki Rundell, Chief Financial
Officer
Laurie explained that the five year CIP for fiscal years 2015-2019 was initially presented to the GGAF in June
The committee scheduled future discussion for projects that were considered to be beyond routine maintenance
and considered major improvements.
While the GGAF and the City Council review the CIP based upon the five year planning horizon, only the first
year is adopted during the budget process. This presentation on major projects will focus on the first fiscal year,
2014/15, as that is what will be considered during the budget adoption; however it is expected that more in
depth review will be taken for the City’s facilities plans, as a phasing of renovations for facilities in the City’s
Downtown West area are included as comprehensive redevelopment of the area.
Staff requested recommendations for next year and looking at the first step of a multi-phase project.
Included in the discussion were:
• Major Parks improvements that were recommended by the Parks Advisory Board.
• Downtown Master Plan improvements,
• Sidewalk Improvements
• Public Safety improvements
• Facility improvements.
The relocation of City services to the Downtown West area was recommended in the 2003 and 2014 Downtown
Master Plans. More detailed studies were completed in 2014 by an urban planning firm (Winter & Co) and an
architectural firm (Ron Hobbs Architects). Those studies were provided to GGAF members.
Parks:
Williams Drive Pool – discussion:
• Do an economic study – turn into commercial site?
o Money from pool sale has to be used for buying parkland, not to rebuild the pool
• Get an appraisal on the property
• Get utilization numbers
• Rebuild equivalent to a 50 M pool with adequate parking, taking into consideration that it is close to
Williams Drive and the Tennis Center and combine to add money back to the tax roll; do an Aquatic
Study
• Partner with GISD, etc to build social/competitive facility
• Pool is in good shape; structures are what is in bad shape
Motion made to get an appraisal on the property, and if relocation is the answer, it must be equivalent to 50M and
explore the possibilities of partnering with GISD
Unanimously approved.
VFW Park – discussion:
• Funded with bonds sold 2 years ago
• Construct in 2015
No motion needed.
West Side Park - discussion:
• Make this part of the study
• Possibility of using West Side Park as location for the new pool
• Price not to exceed $1.3M for VFW Park renovations
Unanimously approved.
Splash Pad discussion:
• Try to use existing parkland on Southeast side
• Make sure there is equitable distribution in the 4 quadrants of the city
• Suggest looking into locating an aquatic center on the Eastview campus
• $300,000 probably isn’t enough, so use the budgeted amount with the caviat to come back to GGAF with
additional requests before issuing CO’s
• Do a full analysis on the Williams Drive pool before making a decision
Unanimously approved
Downtown Master Plan discussion:
• $300,000 is budgeted to use where needed
• What is the parking lot value on the tax roll
o 40’ X 120’ for 11 spaces and $193,000 seems lot a lot of money
o Provide an appraisal and tax statement; bring back to GGAF for further discussion
The GGAF Board is concerned about the price. They would like for staff to continue discussion to substantially
lower the price on the price
Unanimously approved.
Sidewalks discussion:
The GGAF Board proposes to hold off on new sidewalks until the study is completed, but the match is proposed to
be bond funded from 2nd and Austin to College and 11th street rehab.
Emergency Warning System discussion: $1 Million (sirens and flood gauges)
• 75% is grant funded ($750,000) – FEMA; 25% match ($250,000)
• The Fire Dept with bring this to GGAF in August, as $250,000 will be needed
Facilities Master Plan discussion:
• Completed in 2003, updated in 2007
• Municipal Court is way too tight
• City Hall needs to be addressed
• Parking structure
West Side Service Center discussion:
• Additional $750,000 is requested
o Change the scope; originally it was to be for Utilities only
o This would add Conservation to the scope – 5,000 sq ft - $750,000
o The Conservation fee funds debt service
The GGAF Board is uncomfortable using community resources to a location that is far outside of town.
The purpose of Conservation is community outreach, and this is “not handy” and not a common source.
GGAF would like to review in August.
The board doesn’t support this idea. This will be brought back to GGAF for further discussion at a later meeting.
Downtown West discussion:
Repurpose:
• Library
• GCAT
• Police Station
Mr. Hobbs gave a presentation and an overview of the study, showing the different options available. Discussion
included:
• Note: This is not a five year fix
• Use HOT funds and move CVB
o The GGAF Board recommends leaving CVB where it is and sell current Council Chambers
• Each phase is “stand alone” and can be implemented as time and funding allows
After discussion amongst the GGAF members, their recommendation is to recommend Option B:
• relocate City Hall to the Old Library
• move Municipal Court to the GCAT Building, with the possibility of adding on to that
• leave CVB where it is currently housed
• give a 24 month maximum window to sell or repurpose the Police Building
Unanimously approved.
C. Discussion and possible direction to provide feedback on the potential Request for Qualifications for the
engineering and design services for downtown parking structure study, site study and conceptual plans.
Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager
Laurie explained that the City is seeking professional architectural and engineering consultants to provide
preliminary design services for a downtown parking structure that is proposed to be located on the city-owned
surface parking lot at 9th and Main Streets. This study will include traffic impacts, a site study and an estimate
of construction and operating costs. $400,000 is budgeted in the General Capital Projects Fund for this
preliminary work on the proposed parking structure. It is anticipated that this report will provide information
that will be the basis for final project plans, construction costs and operating costs for future budget impact.
These qualifications were developed and reviewed by staff, including engineering and transportation services.
This information was provided to the GGAF to determine if there are additional qualifications that should be
considered in procuring these professional services.
The Board agreed that this is a great opportunity, and that the RFQ was well done.
• Jerry suggested “investigating aggressively” to see if there is any interest in a design/build concept
• Seek additional help and resources (public/private input) to help get a definition of what we want, i.e.
looking at the downtown area, etc.
• Do an analysis to find the best location and retain an architect to develop the concept, i.e., possibility
of first floor retail, etc.
• The members suggested that we take a broad, conceptual approach, and seek an
architectural/engineering firm with very specific expertise.
Unanimously approved.
D. Adjourned at 5:05 p.m.
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 5:40 pm.
_____________________________________
Board Chair
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Consideration and possible action to approve the purchase of two Dodge 4500-Diesel transitional
response vehicles (TRV’s) from Dallas Dodge Chrysler Jeep through the Buy-Board contract
purchase price of $367,740.00 for both unit - ClayShell, Assistant Fire Chief
ITEM SUMMARY:
Dallas Dodge Chrysler Jeep is the authorized dealer for the manufacturer, Frazer, LTD.
Currently, Georgetown Fire Department responds to all medical calls in a BRT (big red truck) and
this is often cited as being an “excessive” response for routine medical calls.
We are proposing the implementation of two (2) transitional response vehicles (TRV’s) to allow
for a more cost-effective and efficient medical response. Moreover, these vehicles will be capable
of transporting sick and/or injured people to the hospital or alternate care facility.
The primary role of the TRV will be medical response, care, and transport. The secondary role will
include operational deployment at fire or other specialized emergency incidents. This will allow
the fire department to improve its ability to assemble an effective firefighting force (EFF) within
8-minutes. Currently, we are only capable of providing the EFF within 8-min at approximately
39% of the fire incidents. Our goal is to meet the national standard of 8-minutes at 90% of the fire
incidents.
Cost breakdown:
$179,975.00 – each unit
$3,660.00 – one (1) spare Onan generator
$3,100.00 – one (1) spare self-contained AC unit
$230.00 – one (1) spare Onan fuel pump kit
$800.00 – Buy-Board fee
$367,740.00 - TOTAL
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Funding is allocated in 2014-15 proposed budget and payment due upon delivery. Expected
delivery date is late January or early February of 2015.
SUBMITTED BY:
Clay Shell, Assistant Fire Chief
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Grant award and related funding for Outdoor Warning System from Federal Signal Corporation
Alerting & Notification Systems for contract purchase price of $499,845.12 as planned in the
2014-15 GCP Budget - Clay Shell, Assistant Fire Chief
ITEM SUMMARY:
In 2010, a Citizens Committee recommended to City Council that the existing system be replaced
and expanded to meet the needs of the community.
This is to replace and expand the existing outdoor warning system with a new state of the art
system. Our current system is antiquated and inadequate to meet the needs of the community with
only seven (7) locations. The new system will expand to 23 locations.
In 2012, Federal Signal Corporation through DH Marketing completed a preliminary study and
cost analysis. Direction was given to find grants to assist with this project moving forward. The
final study and pricing was completed in July 2014.
In 2013, this project was included in the Georgetown Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP).
As of July of 2014, the draft HMP was under review with the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) for final approval. Once approved, it will be brought before City Council for
adoption.
In 2008, the City received funds through a federal grant under FEMA for natural disaster
mitigation. A portion of the funds were used to create the Georgetown Hazard Mitigation Plan,
which must be in place before other FEMA projects can be approved. The remaining money is
eligible for use on the outdoor warning system.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Funding is through an existing grant that will require a 25% match. This match will be met using
in-kind monies and budget allocation.
SUBMITTED BY:
Clay Shell, Assistant Fire Chief
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Outdoor Warning System Proposal Cover Memo
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Consideration and possible approval of annual appropriations to several large Information
Technology vendors for maintenance services during the FY 2015 fiscal year Mike Peters, IT
Director
ITEM SUMMARY:
This item is for the annual IT software maintenance agreement renewals for several recurring
vendors for the FY 2015 fiscal year. All items relate to previously purchased products and
maintenance renewals have been requested each year at this time.
1. Sungard Public Sector, Inc. (Sungard) in the amount of $143,000 for IT
software maintenance expense for the Sungard OSSI CAD/RMS system (Public
Safety Computer Aided Dispatch System). OSSI is a sole-source system.
2. Presidio Networked Solutions, Inc. (Presidio) in the amount of $135,000 for IT
hardware/software maintenance expense ($60,000) and VOIP Phone System
Maintenance ($65,000). This item is for the annual IT software maintenance
agreement renewals for Cisco networking equipment, Cisco phone system (servers
and software), Cistera call recording system and Xmedius Fax server system. Presidio
is a Department of Information Resources (DIR) vendor.
3. SHI Government Solutions (SHI) in the amount of $120,000 for IT software
maintenance expenses related to the Microsoft Enterprise Agreement (Microsoft-
branded server, database and client software licensing and maintenance). SHI is a
Texas Department of Information Resources (DIR) vendor.
4. Verizon Wireless (Verizon) in the amount of $115,600 for wireless data services.
Wireless data services involve communication from City systems to computers in
Police and Fire vehicles, GUS field vehicles, Code Enforcement and other
miscellaneous users. GPS tracking for certain vehicles is also included. Verizon is a
Department of Information Resources (DIR) vendor.
5. Tyler Technologies (Tyler) in the amount of $105,000 for IT software
maintenance expense for the Incode system (Financial, Court and Utility Billing
Systems). Incode is a sole-source system.
6. Infor Public Sector, Inc., (Infor) in the amount of $67,500 for IT software
maintenance expense related to the Infor Enterprise Asset Management (EAM)
system. Infor is a Federal General Services Administration (GSA) Schedule 70
vendor.
7. Electsolve Technology Solutions and Services, Inc. (Electsolve) for the amount
of $50,400 for annual software maintenance of the City’s Meter Data Management
System. Electsolve is a sole-source system.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
All items were budgeted during the FY 2015 budget process. Expenses will be recorded in account
570-5-0641-51-341 (Annual Contracts), except for Verizon services which are allocated to the
relevant departments using the service.
SUBMITTED BY:
Mike Peters, IT Director
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
2015 renewal of MyPermitNow - Tamera Baird, Chief Plans Examiner
ITEM SUMMARY:
MyPermitNow is the system that Permit and Inspections and Planning are currently using to
process, track, and store all development related applications. Currently, our volume of
applications has us subscribing to the 8000-10000 projects for an annual cost of $45,000.00.
Additionally, we subscribe to the Addressing/GIS Integration as well for an annual cost of
$2,760.00. This brings the total for the system use to $47,760.00 annually.
There are additional modules and products that are being analyzed that may increase productivity
and customer service, such as a GPS module that could facilitate inspection scheduling and add
some reporting capabilities. This system would add an additional $3,456.00 to our annual cost.
Additionally, the project volume is tracked to be sure we are in the correct rate volume. SCPDC
allows for the adjustment of our rate level during the year, if needed. If our analysis shows that our
project volume will push us to the next rate that would be an additional $6,000 per year.
In the event our project volume pushes us into the next rate level and we add the GPS module, this
would increase our annual cost to $57,216.00.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The MyPermitNow system has been paid for by technology fees assessed to each project and paid
by the builders and developers. We will continue to monitor project intake against the cost of the
system and adjust technology fees if needed to continue to insure that this system remains revenue
neutral.
SUBMITTED BY:
Tamera Baird, Chief Plans Examiner
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Consideration and possible action for the approval of the annual payment for the operation of the
county wide radio communications system to Williamson County in the amount of $134,989.00 -
Stan Hohman, Fleet Services Supervisor and Micki Rundell, Chief Financial Officer
ITEM SUMMARY:
In February 2008 the City Council approved entering into an interlocal agreement with
Williamson County for the establishment, operation and maintenance of the Williamson County
Radio Communications System. This agreement dissolved the old CWICS group which consisted
of Williamson County, Georgetown, Round Rock, Cedar Park and Hutto, and established a
Williamson County Radio Communication System. The agreement created an organizational and
management structure for on-going administration, operation and maintenance of the system; and
creates a budget process, strategic planning/budget forecasting process, as well as allocation of
costs associated with operating, maintaining and upgrading the system. In accordance with the
agreement, Williamson County bills the City quarterly for operations and maintenance at a cost of
$23.29 per radio per month. The City currently has 483 radios on the system.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Total amount of the City’s portion of the Williamson County RCS for fiscal year 2014/15 is
$134,989.00 based upon the rate of $23.29 per radio for 483 City of Georgetown radios.
$183,000.00 was budgeted in account 520-5-0351-51-310 Fleet Contracts and Leases.
SUBMITTED BY:
Stan Hohman, Fleet Services Supervisor and Micki Rundell, Chief Financial Officer
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Rate Increase Official Notification Cover Memo
Williamson County
Radio Communications System (RCS)
OFFICIAL NOTIFICATION
4-1-14
____________________________________________________
Members:
Judge Dan Gattis, Chairperson, Williamson County
John Sneed, Program Manager
Catherine Roberts, System Manager
Rick White, Round Rock (Primary)
Leigh Carrico, Round Rock (Alternate)
Patrick Hurley, Georgetown (Primary)
Clay Shell, Georgetown (Alternate)
Marvin Harris, Cedar Park (Primary)
James Mallinger (Alternate)
Dwain Jones, Hutto (Primary)
Rob Bocanegra, ESD 3 (Alternate)
RE: Radio Subscriber Fee FY 2015
This Official Notification is to allow for preparation of all agencies for the FY 2014 with regards to their
budget allowances for radio subscriber fees. In accordance with the ILA drafted in 2008 for the
establishment, operation and maintenance of The Williamson County Radio Communications System
reference Subsection 14.02 “Cost for RCS Party or Associate to Participate in RCS during First Five
Fiscal Years.”
Subsection 14.02: Cost for RCS Party or Associate to Participate in RCS During First Five Fiscal Years. For the first five Fiscal
Years of this Agreement, beginning October 1, 2007, the only cost chargeable to RCS Parties and Associates is $17.50 per
Subscriber Unit per month in order for the RSC Party or Associate to gain and enjoy full participation in the RSC System. All
parties expressly acknowledge and agree that the annual Subscriber Unit Fee shall, without exception, be frozen at $17.50 per
Subscriber Unit per month for the first five Fiscal Years of this Agreement, beginning October 1, 2007.
Please note at this time the County is exercising its right for potential increase set forth in Subsection
14.05.
Subsection 14.05: Potential Increases in Subscriber Unit Fees. Following the first five Fiscal Years of this Agreement, during which time the
annual Subscriber Unit Fees will have remained frozen at $17.50 per Subscriber Unit per month, the annual Subscriber Unit Fee which is assessed
for each Subscriber Unit may be increased by the Program Manager/Williamson County in an amount not to exceed ten percent (10%) per year
per Subscriber Unit.
In the event that the Program Manager/Williamson County makes a determination that an increase is necessary which exceeds such
ten percent (10%) limit, then and in that event the Program Manager/Williamson County shall submit the matter to the Advisory Board. After a
hearing, the Advisory Board shall make known in written form its determination as to whether an increase above such ten percent (10%) limit is
warranted and, if so, an appropriate percentage of increase to the Subscriber Unit Fee. Following receipt of such determination by the Advisory
Board, the Williamson County Commissioner’s Court shall set the actual amount of increase, if any. The Program Manager/Williamson County
shall notify the RCS Parties and Associates of same.
Subscriber fees set forth for the FY 2015 will be as such: $23.29 per subscribing unit per month.
You may direct any questions or concerns regarding this increase to the RCS System Manager Catherine
Roberts 512-943-3575 or Julie Kiley at County Auditor’s office 512-943-1552.
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
2014-15 Fire Department Operations Service Fees and Fire & Life Safety Service Fees - John
Sullivan, Fire Chief
ITEM SUMMARY:
Pursuant to Ordinance No. 2014-41 amending Chapter 2.28 entitled “Fire Department,” the Fire
Chief is required to present the Fire Department Operations Service Fees and Fire & Life Safety
Service Fees and related policies to the City Council for approval.
This fee schedule is attached to the document for your review. We have evaluated numerous fire-
based systems to ensure market competitiveness within the Fee Schedule. Moreover, it is our
intent to review the fee schedule on an annual basis to ensure market competitiveness and/or
relevance.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Conservative revenue projections were included within proposed FY2014/15 budget. The
estimated breakdown is as follows: Fire Department Operation Fees: $92,000 (2013)
EMS Fees have been newly revised so there is no historic data from GFD
Budget estimates are $683K in FY2014/15 and $1.3M in FY15/16
Fire & Life Safety Fees: ($20,550) (2013)
SUBMITTED BY:
John Sullivan, Fire Chief
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Fire Fee Schedule Cover Memo
GGGGFDFDFDFD
I.I.I.I. TITLETITLETITLETITLE
All rules and regulations contained herein, together with additions and amendments as may
be hereafter adopted, are hereby designated as the “Georgetown Fire Department Fee
Schedule.”
II.II.II.II. AUTHORITYAUTHORITYAUTHORITYAUTHORITY
This Fee Schedule is adopted by Ordinance of the City of Georgetown which reads as follows:
Sec. 2.28.140. Fire Department Operation Service Fees.
The City Council authorizes the Fire Chief to establish Fire Department Operations Service
Fees, and policies and regulations governing the collection of those fees. The Fire Chief shall
provide the City Council with an annual updated fee schedule with a summary of changes
adopted during the previous year, if the fees, or policies and regulations are changed within
the preceding year.
Sec. 2.28.150. Fire & Life Safety Service Fees.
The City Council authorizes the Fire Chief to establish Fire & Life Safety Service Fees, and
policies and regulations governing the collection of those fees. The Fire Chief shall provide the
City Council with an annual updated fee schedule with a summary of changes adopted
during the previous year, if the fees, or policies and regulations are changed within the
preceding year.
Sec. 2.28.160. Special Events Fees.
Special events sponsors shall be charged for any and all services required by the fire
department, as determined by the fire department in its sole discretion, working in
conjunction with the City's special events personnel, including, but not limited to standby fire
apparatus and its personnel, and/or fire/medical crews and vehicles. Such special events fees
shall be due and payable with the special events permit application, and shall be in addition to
any fees incurred for other fire department services rendered.
Sec. 2.28.180. Fee Collection.
A. Fire Department is authorized to collect fees for services provided inside the city limits
as well as those provided outside the city limits pursuant to all applicable rules,
regulations, and state law.
SERVICE FEE SCHEDULESERVICE FEE SCHEDULESERVICE FEE SCHEDULESERVICE FEE SCHEDULE
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENTGEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENTGEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENTGEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT
B. Fees that are the result of any actions listed in section 2.28.140, 2.28.150, 2.28.160 and
2.28.170 are the responsibility of the property owner or occupant and are due and
payable immediately upon receipt of an invoice from the fire department or its
authorized agent.
C. Fire Department is authorized to obtain the requisite incident information to collect
fees through internal and/or contractual services.
D. Fire Department shall coordinate with development services for applicable fee
collection along with utilizing fire records management for the collection of any
additional fees not collected by development services.
Sec. 2.28.190. Exemptions from fees.
Calls for service at residential structure fires shall not be subject to any fees unless it is
determined to be for cause, as is identified in Section 2.28.170.
III.III.III.III. PURPOSEPURPOSEPURPOSEPURPOSE
The purpose of the Fee Schedule is to provide for the reimbursement of costs for emergency
and/or non-emergency responses by the Georgetown Fire Department for certain
emergency incidents, special events, malicious incidents, hazardous material incidents,
technical or specialized rescue incidents, motor vehicle collisions, and incidents caused by
negligence and/or willful disregard for established fire and life-safety codes. Additionally, the
Fee Schedule shall be applied to responses to non-City residents and/or those responses not
covered under an approved mutual or automatic-aid agreement.
IV.IV.IV.IV. LIABILITY LIABILITY LIABILITY LIABILITY
The Georgetown Fire Department shall, at its sole discretion, determine whether or not Fire
Department resources and/or personnel are available for reimbursable services cited within
this document. Furthermore, all persons responsible for the enforcement or application of the
Fee Schedule, shall not be liable for any damage or injury to persons or property arising out of
or relating in any way to the application or enforcement of this Fee Schedule.
V.V.V.V. DEFINITIONSDEFINITIONSDEFINITIONSDEFINITIONS
Unless the context specifically indicates otherwise, the meaning of terms used in the Fee
Schedule shall be as follows:
a. Emergency Incident shall mean those incidents that require fire, rescue and/or medical
response in an immediate fashion, following established emergency response
protocols.
b. Fire Department shall mean the Georgetown Fire Department.
c. Emergency Personnel shall mean personnel who are employees of the Georgetown
Fire Department during their involvement in an emergency or non-emergency
incident.
d. Hazardous Material Incident shall mean those incidents involving the release of any
product that could prove a danger to health or the environment.
e. Malicious Incident shall mean those emergency incidents which stem from an
individual’s intentional purpose to cause property damage, endanger lives, and/or
cause the response of emergency personnel for other than an actual emergency.
f. Medical Call shall mean those emergency incidents in which the Georgetown Fire
Department responds and functions as the primary care provider.
g. Motor Vehicle Collision shall mean incidents involving one or more motorized vehicles
including cars, trucks, buses, planes, helicopters, trains, motorcycles, and the vehicles
and trailers being pulled by motorized vehicles.
h. Non-Emergency Incident shall mean those incidents which allow for fire, rescue
and/or emergency medical response in a less urgent fashion, following established
non-emergency response protocols.
i. Non-Permitted Burns shall mean the intentional disposal of debris without the written
permission from the Georgetown Fire Department.
j. Nuisance Incident shall mean those incidents that are of the same nature, on a
repetitive basis, at the same location, due to the lack of servicing to mechanical and/or
electrical equipment of an emergency system, or the failure to correct a previously
documented fire hazard, or false reporting of an emergency incident or any other fire
department response that is deemed unnecessary by the Fire Chief, including but not
limited to false alarms caused by carelessness.
k. Special Event shall mean those non-emergency events that occur within and/or
outside the City of Georgetown that require the presence of Emergency Personnel
employed by the Fire Department, or as requested by owner/coordinator of the
involved property.
l. Technical Rescue Event shall mean incidents that require rope rescue, water rescue,
confined space rescue or technical rescue services and/or extrication.
m. Wildland Fire shall mean any outside fire involving general natural combustible
materials, other than a permitted burn, with no restriction concerning area involved, or
size of any damaged area.
VI.VI.VI.VI. ELIGIBLE EXPENSES/INCIDENTSELIGIBLE EXPENSES/INCIDENTSELIGIBLE EXPENSES/INCIDENTSELIGIBLE EXPENSES/INCIDENTS
The following types of occurrences and incidents that involve the response of Georgetown
Fire Department personnel and/or resources are eligible for invoicing pursuant to this
document.
a. Fire protection services
b. Services for preservation of life (hazardous material, technical rescue, mva, etc.)
c. Medical services
d. Plan reviews (includes plan review, inspection, citation, permit, and investigative)
e. Standby charges (special events, fire watch, etc.)
f. User fees (classroom fees, community outreach fees, etc.)
g. Other charges (nuisance, negligent or malicious incidents)
h. Non-permitted Burns
i. Responses or use of Fire Department personnel and/or resources to non-City
properties or persons not covered under an approved mutual or automatic-aid
agreement.
VII.VII.VII.VII. EEEENFORCEMENTNFORCEMENTNFORCEMENTNFORCEMENT
All enforcement, invoicing, and application of the Fee Schedule is the responsibility of the Fire
Chief and/or his designee. Furthermore, the Fire Chief is authorized to conduct investigations
and take other steps necessary and provided by law to enforce.
VIII.VIII.VIII.VIII. INVOICINGINVOICINGINVOICINGINVOICING
The invoice must contain, at minimum, the date on which services were rendered by the
Georgetown Fire Department, due date for payment of invoice, mailing address for payment,
the type of incident under the Fee Schedule that serves as the basis for the invoice, an
explanation of the services provided, and the cost of rendered services.
a. Responsible Party
i. Special Events may be invoiced per occurrence, with the property owner or
event organizer(s) responsible as indicated at the time of the event planning.
ii. Malicious Incidents may be invoiced per occurrence to the responsible party.
iii. Hazardous Material Incidents may be invoiced per occurrence for negligent
events, with the property owner and/or responsible party.
iv. Technical Rescue Incidents may be invoiced per occurrence for negligent
events that result in rendered services.
v. Motor Vehicle Collisions where extrication is performed may be invoiced per
occurrence. In the event multiple vehicles are involved, responsibility for costs
may be prorated, as determined by the Fire Chief, among the person(s),
operator(s), or vehicle owner(s).
vi. Non-Permitted Burns may be invoiced per occurrence to responsible party.
vii. Permitted Burns that get out-of-control due to negligence may be invoiced to
the person that was issued the permit.
viii. Wildland Fires caused by negligence may be invoiced per occurrence to the
individual responsible for starting the fire.
ix. Nuisance Incidents may be invoiced per occurrence, after three occurrences
within a calendar year. The property owner shall be considered the responsible
party.
x. Medical Calls may be invoiced per occurrence, with the individual being treated
held responsible for the costs. Invoices shall be the sole discretion of Fire Chief.
xi. Out-of-City Responses may be invoiced to the property owner or person
receiving assistance from Fire Department resources and/or personnel.
b. Reimbursement rates shall be invoiced at the determined rate for each resource
and/or employee. Additional time shall be prorated to the nearest ½-hour increments.
The established reimbursement rates are published in the accompanying Georgetown
Fire Department FY2014/15 Fee Schedule. Payment of the invoice shall be due within
30-days of the invoice date, and interest shall accrue at a ten percent (10%) Annual
Percentage Rate (APR) beginning the thirty-first (31st) day.
IX.IX.IX.IX. EFFECTIVE DATEEFFECTIVE DATEEFFECTIVE DATEEFFECTIVE DATE
The Georgetown Fire Department Fee Reimbursement schedule is effective October 1, 2014
and shall remain in effect until repealed. The Fire Chief is authorized to modify and/or amend
the schedule per the adopted Ordinance.
John Sullivan, Fire Chief Date
FIRE PROTECTION &FIRE PROTECTION &FIRE PROTECTION &FIRE PROTECTION & EMERGENCY RESPONSE FEESEMERGENCY RESPONSE FEESEMERGENCY RESPONSE FEESEMERGENCY RESPONSE FEES
a.a.a.a. EquipmentEquipmentEquipmentEquipment
TypeTypeTypeType Taxpayer (T)Taxpayer (T)Taxpayer (T)Taxpayer (T) NonNonNonNon----Taxpayer (NT)Taxpayer (NT)Taxpayer (NT)Taxpayer (NT) NoteNoteNoteNote
Ladder Truck $300/Hour $300/Hour 1hr min (T) / 2hr min (NT)
Fire Engine (Type I) $250/Hour $250/Hour 1hr min (T) / 2hr min (NT)
Fire Engine (Type III) $200/Hour $200/Hour 1hr min (T) / 2hr min (NT)
Fire Engine (Type VI) $100/Hour $100/Hour 1hr min (T) / 2hr min (NT)
Equipment/Support Unit $200/Hour $200/Hour 1hr min (T) / 2hr min (NT)
Water Tender Unit $150/Hour $150/Hour 1hr min (T) / 2hr min (NT)
Ambulance (No Trans) $100/Hour $100/Hour 1hr min (T) / 2hr min (NT)
Ambulance (BLS Trans) $690 Base Rate $690 Base Rate Base Rate + Fees
Ambulance (ALS1 Trans) $745 Base Rate $745 Base Rate Base Rate + Fees
Ambulance (ALS2 Trans) $765 Base Rate $765 Base Rate Base Rate + Fees
Command Unit $75/Hour $75/Hour 1hr min (T) / 2hr min (NT)
Fire Investigation Unit $75/Hour $75/Hour 1hr min (T) / 2hr min (NT)
b.b.b.b. PersonnelPersonnelPersonnelPersonnel
RankRankRankRank Taxpayer (T)Taxpayer (T)Taxpayer (T)Taxpayer (T) NonNonNonNon----Taxpayer (NT)Taxpayer (NT)Taxpayer (NT)Taxpayer (NT) NoteNoteNoteNote
Chief Officer Actual + ERE $65/Hour + ERE ERE = 23.29%
Inspector/Investigator Actual + ERE $45/Hour + ERE ERE = 23.29%
Officer (LT or CPT) Actual + ERE $45/Hour + ERE ERE = 23.29%
Driver/Engineer Actual + ERE $35/Hour + ERE ERE = 23.29%
Paramedic Actual + ERE $35/Hour + ERE ERE = 23.29%
Firefighter Actual + ERE $30/Hour + ERE ERE = 23.29%
c.c.c.c. SuppliesSuppliesSuppliesSupplies
SuppliesSuppliesSuppliesSupplies Taxpayer (T)Taxpayer (T)Taxpayer (T)Taxpayer (T) NonNonNonNon----Taxpayer (NT)Taxpayer (NT)Taxpayer (NT)Taxpayer (NT) NoteNoteNoteNote
All supplies used or
damaged
Cost + 10% Cost + 10% Supplies may include
water, foam, hose, tools,
fuel, personal protection
equipment, medical
supplies, and any other
equipment that was used
or damaged as part of
the response.
NotesNotesNotesNotes
a. Fee schedule applies to billable responses to non-taxpayers and/or non-emergent
standby request
b. After the full hour, all fees will be prorated to the next half-hour
c. ERE calculated at 12.50%TMRS, 7.65% FICA,3.26% ICA, Unemployment Insurance 2.30%
d. EMS Fees is set at $12/mi, consumable supplies cost, and $45 for Oxygen
OPERATION SERVICE FEE SCHEDULEOPERATION SERVICE FEE SCHEDULEOPERATION SERVICE FEE SCHEDULEOPERATION SERVICE FEE SCHEDULE
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENTGEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENTGEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENTGEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT
Regional Fire Training FeesRegional Fire Training FeesRegional Fire Training FeesRegional Fire Training Fees
a.a.a.a. Training TowerTraining TowerTraining TowerTraining Tower
ItemItemItemItem RateRateRateRate NoteNoteNoteNote
Training Tower (without Burn
Room or props) $75.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours
Training Tower with use of
props $100.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours
Training Tower w/ Burn Room $150.00 per hour
Minimum charge of two (2) hours,
plus cost of GFD Safety Officer and
Supplies
b.b.b.b. TowerTowerTowerTower Prop Use (if used individually)Prop Use (if used individually)Prop Use (if used individually)Prop Use (if used individually)
ItemItemItemItem RateRateRateRate NoteNoteNoteNote
Wall Breach Prop $25.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours,
responsible for supplies
Confined Space Tubing Prop $25.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours,
plus use of GFD Safety Officer
Movable Maze $25.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours
Rebar Prop $25.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours,
must supply rebar
Garage Door Prop $25.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours,
must supply garage door panels
FDC / Sprinkler Prop $25.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours
Forcible Entry Prop $25.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours
must supply flat stock, rebar, etc.
Rappelling Tower $25.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours,
must use GFD Safety Officer
c.c.c.c. Ventilation PropVentilation PropVentilation PropVentilation Prop
ItemItemItemItem RateRateRateRate NoteNoteNoteNote
Ventilation Prop (Flat or
Pitched roof) $75.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours,
must supply OSB/2x4
Ventilation Prop with use of
other movable props $100.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours
d.d.d.d. MiscellaneousMiscellaneousMiscellaneousMiscellaneous
ItemItemItemItem RateRateRateRate NoteNoteNoteNote
Safety Officer $75.00 per hour Minimum charge of two (2) hours,
Moveable Props $25.00 per hour/prop Minimum charge of two (2) hours
OPERATION SERVICE FEE SCHEDULEOPERATION SERVICE FEE SCHEDULEOPERATION SERVICE FEE SCHEDULEOPERATION SERVICE FEE SCHEDULE
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENTGEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENTGEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENTGEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT
Community Outreach FeesCommunity Outreach FeesCommunity Outreach FeesCommunity Outreach Fees
a.a.a.a. CPR TrainingCPR TrainingCPR TrainingCPR Training
CourseCourseCourseCourse RateRateRateRate NoteNoteNoteNote
Healthcare Provider $35/person
$40/person
City Resident
Non-resident
Heart Saver $35/person
$40/person
City Resident
Non-resident
Family & Friends No Charge
$20/person
City Resident
Non-resident
CPR/First-Aid Combo $50/person City Resident/Business
b.b.b.b. FirstFirstFirstFirst----AidAidAidAid
CourseCourseCourseCourse RateRateRateRate NoteNoteNoteNote
First-Aid Course $25/person
$40/person
City Resident
Non-resident
c.c.c.c. Babysitter CourseBabysitter CourseBabysitter CourseBabysitter Course
CourseCourseCourseCourse RateRateRateRate NoteNoteNoteNote
First-Aid Course $35/person
$45/person
City Resident
Non-resident
d.d.d.d. Fire Extinguisher CourseFire Extinguisher CourseFire Extinguisher CourseFire Extinguisher Course
CourseCourseCourseCourse RateRateRateRate NoteNoteNoteNote
Fire Extinguisher Class No Charge
$10/person
City Resident – Scheduled Class
Non-resident/Unscheduled/Off-site
(min. 10ppl)
e.e.e.e. Residential Lock BoxResidential Lock BoxResidential Lock BoxResidential Lock Box
CourseCourseCourseCourse RateRateRateRate NoteNoteNoteNote
Residential Lock Box $60/box City Resident
f.f.f.f. Speaker & Teacher BureauSpeaker & Teacher BureauSpeaker & Teacher BureauSpeaker & Teacher Bureau
CourseCourseCourseCourse RateRateRateRate NoteNoteNoteNote
Life Safety Education No Charge
Salary + ERE*
City Resident – Scheduled
Class/Event
Non-resident/Business
NotesNotesNotesNotes
a. Calculated hours shall include travel time and be prorated to the next half-hour
b. Salary shall be calculated at actual cost + ERE
FIFIFIFIRRRREEEE &&&& LIFE SAFETY SERVICE FEE SCHEDULELIFE SAFETY SERVICE FEE SCHEDULELIFE SAFETY SERVICE FEE SCHEDULELIFE SAFETY SERVICE FEE SCHEDULE
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENTGEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENTGEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENTGEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT
Fire Code Compliance FeesFire Code Compliance FeesFire Code Compliance FeesFire Code Compliance Fees
a.a.a.a. Fire Code PermitsFire Code PermitsFire Code PermitsFire Code Permits
PermitPermitPermitPermit RateRateRateRate NoteNoteNoteNote
Automatic Extinguishing Systems
Alternative Automatic Extinguishing a
$250
$100
New system installation
Modification
Automatic Extinguishing Systems
Commercial Cooking Systems a
$150
$100
$100
New single system installation
Each additional system installation
Modification
Automatic Extinguishing Systems
Commercial Sprinkler New a
$250
$500
$250
$250
New system installation 1-10,000sqft
10,000-52,000sqft
Each addt’ 52,000sqft or fraction thereof
Each floor above or below first floor
Automatic Extinguishing Systems
Commercial Sprinkler Modification a
$100
$200
$350
$100
1-20 Heads
21-100 Heads
101-500 Heads
Each 100 heads or fraction thereof over 500
Automatic Extinguishing Systems
Fire Pump and Related Equipment a
$500
$250
$150
New single pump, includes tank
Each additional pump
Modification
Automatic Extinguishing Systems
Residential Sprinkler a
$100
No Fee
One- two-family dwelling
Voluntary installation, not required by code
Automatic Extinguishing Systems
Standpipe Systems a
$200
$100
System with 1-4 outlets
Each additional 4 outlets or fraction thereof
Automatic Extinguishing Systems
Underground Fire Line Supply a
$200
$100
$100
First 150 lineal feet
Each additional 150 feet
Fireline stubout when submitted separately
Blasting - Explosives a $200 Operational permit, each 30 day period
Burning
Open Burn, Open Flames, Candles,
Torches, Recreational Fire (Wildfire
Risk Area) a
$100
$100
$50
$25
$25
Air Diffuser Operation (per 30 days)
Commercial open burn (per 30 days)
Open flames, candles, torches (annual)
Public assembly fire (event)
Residential fire (permit period)
Fire Alarm and Detection Systems
New Installation a
$250
$500
$250
$250
New system installation 1-10,000sqft
10,000-52,000sqft
Each addt’ 52,000sqft or fraction thereof
Each floor above or below first floor
FIRE & LIFE SAFETY SERVICE FEE SCHEDULEFIRE & LIFE SAFETY SERVICE FEE SCHEDULEFIRE & LIFE SAFETY SERVICE FEE SCHEDULEFIRE & LIFE SAFETY SERVICE FEE SCHEDULE
GEORGETOWN GEORGETOWN GEORGETOWN GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENTFIRE DEPARTMENTFIRE DEPARTMENTFIRE DEPARTMENT
PermitPermitPermitPermit RateRateRateRate NoteNoteNoteNote
Fire Alarm and Detection Systems
Modification to Existing System a
$150
$250
1-10 Devices
Greater than 10 devices
Fire Alarm and Detection Systems
Monitoring System a
$150 Fire protection monitoring system when
submitted separately
Fire Apparatus Access a
$100
$50
$75
Access and fire lane marking
Each fire apparatus access gate
Annual gate operation inspection (per site)
Fireworks and Pyrotechnics
Display/Show
$250
Per display or show Includes review and insp
(Additional fee for fire protection
operational standby as determined by Chief)
Flammable and Combustible Liquids a
$200
$100
$75
New installation single tank
Each additional tank install at same time
Annual inspection of tanks not regulated by
State Fire Marshal
Hazardous Materials a $100/hr
$100/hr
$150
New system, storage area, tank, includes
HMIS and HMMP review, min 2hr.
Revision/Modification of approved submittal
Annual inspection and HMIS, HMMP review
LP-Gas a $150
$75
New installation
Annual inspection (exception-containers
with 500-gallon capacity or less serving one-
and two-family dwellings)
Tents and Membrane Structures a $150
$50
Single tent
Each additional tent on site
Mobile Food Vendor Fee $125 Annual permit w/ up to 1-hour of inspection
Other Operational Permits - IFC a
(permit not separately indicated)
$75
$75/hr
Annual permit w/ up to 1-hour of inspection
Per rounded hour of addt’ inspection time
Other Construction Permits – IFC a
(permit not separately indicated)
$150
New system installation
b.b.b.b. Inspection / Response FeesInspection / Response FeesInspection / Response FeesInspection / Response Fees
TypeTypeTypeType RateRateRateRate NoteNoteNoteNote
Business Inspection No Fee
No Fee
$75
$150
$150
Annual Business Inspection Fee
First re-inspection
Second re-inspection due to non-compliance
Third re-inspection due to non-compliance
Business may be issued a Stop Work Order
pending compliance w/ code /or Citation.
Re-inspection - restore business operation
Certificate of Occupancy Inspection $100
$75
$75
Includes up to 2-hours
Per hour of additional inspection
Re-inspection per hour (minimum of 1-hr)
Code Consultation
Interpretations, Pre-Submittal
Consultations, and Technical Services
with Documented Record/Report
$150
$75
Includes initial meeting and up to two hours
of research and documentation.
Per hour fee for follow up meeting or
additional time and documentation
(not intended for simple/minor issues)
TypeTypeTypeType RateRateRateRate NoteNoteNoteNote
Construction Inspection
New and/or modification construction
No Fee
$75
$150
First inspection included in permit fee
First re-inspection
Second and/or each subsequent re-
inspection
Construction Document Review
Development, Preliminary, and
Concept
$150
$75
Each development submitted as a whole
Additional, each separately submitted unit,
or phase
Construction Document Review
Building Construction - New Building
$200
$200
$75
0-52,000sqft, includes two reviews
Each addt’ 52,000sqft or fraction thereof
Per hour of additional review to achieve
code compliance or due to revisions
Construction Document Review
Building Construction - Modification
Tenant Improvements
Landlord Improvements
$100
$100
$75
0-52,000sqft, includes two reviews
Each addt’ 52,000sqft or fraction thereof
Per hour - For additional review to achieve
code compliance or due to revisions to
approved plan
Licensed Inspection/Re-Inspection
Care Center, Nursing Home, Hospital,
etc.
$75
$75
Up to one-hour of inspection
For each subsequent hour, portion thereof
Expedited Permit/Plan Review 300% 300% of regular permit fee, written request
required, when available and pre-approval
by Chief required.
Fire Alarm Response $150
$1000
$500
Each false alarm exceeding 3/yr, due to
"failure to notify" when working on or
testing sprinkler and / or fire alarm system,
and alarm malfunctions
Intentional false alarm
Burning or hazardous operation without
permit causing emergency response
Fire Watch/Standby – Fire Code
Official
$75/hr Minimum 2hrs., when available and pre-
approval by Chief required. Does not
include operational response equipment,
additional fee may be required
Inspection After Business Hours $75/hr
Minimum 2hrs., when available and pre-
approval by Chief required
Inspection No-Show $150 Failure to attend a scheduled inspection
after 30 minute Fire Code Official wait time
Work Without Approved Permit 500% 500% of regular permit fee
NotesNotesNotesNotes
a. Fee includes fire code compliance review, and inspections during business hours
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Discussion and possible direction to staff regarding the long-term financial impacts of “frozen”
Property Values due to new age-restricted developments within the City - Micki Rundell, Chief
Financial Officer
ITEM SUMMARY:
The law that allows the Over 65 and Disable Property Tax freeze was authorized by the state in
2003 and approved by Georgetown voters in May 2004. Williamson County elected to approve the
freeze by resolution shortly thereafter.
Since 2004, the City’s “frozen” valuation has grown significantly to $1.6B or 31% of the City’s
total $5.2B tax base, thus having a substantial impact to the City’s tax revenues. When the City
issues bonds for roads and other public amenities, the property tax burden associated with those
bonds are not spread evenly across the City’s entire tax base. Over time, the increase in “frozen”
homeowners has resulted in a tax inequity or imbalance of over $2M annually in redistributed
property tax burden.
As mentioned previously noted, 31% of the TOTAL City property tax base is frozen. While a
large portion of the frozen property was limited to Sun City, the remainder of the City’s Assessed
Valuation (net of Sun City) is still frozen at approximately 23.5%. In comparison, Cedar Park’s
frozen assessed value is 5.9% of total assessed valuation and Leander is 6.4% of total assessed
valuation.
The City has been successful in developing strategies to mitigate this financial tax rate impact.
New commercial growth has historically helped in offsetting the increasing growth in frozen value
as a percentage of TOTAL assessed valuation. But as the Frozen Valuation percentage grows, it
will be harder to offset the tax rate and related revenue impacts. The results will be higher taxes
for non-frozen residential and commercial properties. Other strategies that have been implemented
include diversifying the City’s revenue sources with less General Fund dependence on Property
Tax revenue (currently approximately 20% of the $45M GF budget is funded by property taxes),
as well as, working to control increases in operational costs.
This item is to discuss financial policy issues and related options for potential new age restricted
developments that may be established in the future
Option could include:
Assessing a per unit fees on new age-restricted development that could be reserved for
future property tax relief o Collected funds would be reserved and amortized against future
losses in tax revenue due to those frozen properties assessed
Limit percentage or number of units in future developments that can be age-restricted
through changes to UDC
This item was previously discussed by GGAF at its June meeting, whereby; staff was directed to
review the issue holistically and to bring back the item to GGAF for further discussion at the
August meeting.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Detailed historical data
SUBMITTED BY:
Micki Rundell, Chief Financial Officer
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Historical Data Cover Memo
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Presentation and discussion of the Westside Service Center - Wesley Wright, Director of Systems
Engineering and Jim Briggs, General Manager of Utilities
ITEM SUMMARY:
The Westside Service Center is part of the approved Facility Master Plan. Its construction is
intended to serve GUS operations by relieving overcrowding in the Georgetown Municipal
Complex (GMC,) as well as provide for more timely and efficient service to customers west of IH
35.
The Westside Service Center will function as a satellite office for the GMC, with a focus on
operational effectiveness and sustainability. All GUS departments will have representation at this
facility, in order to provide the full range of GUS services.
COMMENTS:
With the volume of growth taking place on the west side of IH 35 over the next few years, the
obvious benefits of the Westside Service Center are a reduction in drive time for GUS staff
working on the west side of IH 35 and the reduction in fuel and maintenance costs for vehicles
making the trip regularly, providing both operational efficiency and cost effectiveness.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Land Purchase December 2012 Final Plat $630,000 Infrastructure Extensions: Water, Wastewater,
Driveway $440,000 Architectural RFQ and Selection: PGAL, Austin $176,000
SUBMITTED BY:
Wesley Wright, Director of Systems Enginering and Jim Briggs, General Manager of Utilities
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
PowerPoint Cover Memo
GGAF – AUGUST 27, 2014
WESTSIDE SERVICE
CENTER
Wesley Wright, Director of System Engineering
General Government and Finance Advisory Board
August 27, 2014
Georgetown Utility Systems
GUS FACILITIES
•Georgetown Municipal Complex
•Office and operations HUB
•Existing facility
•Industrial Avenue
GUS FACILITIES
•CTSUD Facility
•Pending consolidation
•Florence
GUS FACILITIES
•Westside Service Center
•Williams Drive & Jim Hogg
HISTORY - WSSC
•Land Purchase
–Dec 2012
–$630,000
–Final Plat
•Infrastructure Extensions
–Water, Wastewater, Driveway
–$440,000
•Architectural RFQ and Selection
–PGAL, Austin
–$176,000
CURRENTLY - WSSC
•Scoping/Modeling
•Finalizing site layout and floor plan
•Finalizing budget
•Ready to begin full architectural design
•Bid Fall 2014
•Construction to begin Spring 2015
•Occupancy Fall 2015
WESTSIDE SERVICE CENTER
WESTSIDE SERVICE CENTER
•Operational Annex of the GMC
•Water
•Wastewater
•Electric
•Streets
•Drainage
•Inspection
•Conservation
WESTSIDE SERVICE CENTER
•Approximately 17,000 SF of a/c space
•Conference room
•Training room
•Lobby
•Offices
•Cubical area
•Operations bullpen
•Breakroom, showers, lockers, restrooms
WESTSIDE SERVICE CENTER
•Shop space
•3 pass- through bays (approx 80’ deep)
•Inside secured storage
•Additional covered outside storage
COMBINED WATER UTILITY & SERVICE CENTERS
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Update and discussion of the Conservation Educational Facilities - Kathy Ragsdale, Conservation Services
Manager and Mike Babin, Deputy General Manager
ITEM SUMMARY:
Currently, Conservation Services uses three different facilities for Education and Demonstra-tions, all
located on the east side of IH 35:
Community Collection Station – 250 WL Walden Dr
(Recycling and solid waste)
Parks and Rec Admin Classroom / Parking Lot – 1101 College St
(Provide public classes and rain barrel distribution events)
Williamson County Extension Office – 3151 SE Inner Loop\
(Partner with Williamson County to provide presentations and classes)
Options for facilities on the west side of the GUS service area include the CTSUD Woods Pump Station and
the Corp of Engineers offices on DB Wood Rd. The Dove Springs Wastewater Treatment Plant, located on
the far, east side of the GUS service area, is also being considered as an educational facility location.
A strategic consideration in the siting of Conservation Service’s educational facilities is the proximity to
available volunteer labor. Additional and expensive staffing that would ordinarily be necessary for adequate
coverage at multiple locations will be managed through the use of local volunteers, delaying the need for
funding of additional paid Conservation staff. This dedicated and competent workforce is readily available
through local garden clubs and organizations, such as the Master Gardeners and Native Plant Society.
COMMENTS: Conservation Services finds that the most effective and successful programs and classes take
place in the environment they address. Having multiple educational facilities located around the GUS service
area allows staff to reach out to those customers that will gain the most benefit from targeted classes, as well
as make it more convenient for the target audience to attend.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None. Conservation Services makes incremental use of existing facilities. Costs of specific Educational
programs or Demonstrations are covered under specific projects in ongoing budgets.
SUBMITTED BY:
Kathy Ragsdale, Conservation Services Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
PowerPoint Cover Memo
GGAF – AUGUST 27, 2014
CONSERVATION EDUCATIONAL
FACILITIES
Kathy Ragsdale, Conservation Services Manager
General Government and Finance Advisory Board
August 27, 2014
Georgetown Utility Systems
CONSERVATION EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Project update regarding major general capital projects – Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager;
Kimberly Garrett, Parks Director
ITEM SUMMARY:
Brief status update regarding general capital projects for fiscal year 2014/2015:
Downtown parking garage
Williams Drive Pool
Southeast Splash Pad
Downtown West renovations
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None at this time
SUBMITTED BY:
Laurie Brewer, Assist City Manager and Kimberly Garrett, Parks Director
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
DT Parking Garage Final Parking Study RFQ Cover Memo
Downtown Parking Map Cover Memo
Aerial of Downtown Overlay Cover Memo
WD Pool Parkland Conversion Process Memo Cover Memo
Broker's Appraisal Cover Memo
WD Pool Attendance Numbers Cover Memo
WCAD Datasheets Cover Memo
Splash Pad Presentation Cover Memo
CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS
REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS
FOR
Professional Services for Comprehensive Parking Study and Conceptual
Design of Parking Structure
RFQ #201450
Dated August 15, 2014
DUE DATE FOR RESPONSES
October 1, 2014
2:00 PM
Central Standard Time
RFQ #201450
Professional Services for Comprehensive Parking Study and Conceptual Design of Parking Structure
2 | P a g e
Table of Contents
1.0 Notice to Respondents 3
2.0 Background and Current Circumstances 3
3.0 Project Purpose and Objectives 4
4.0 Key Event Schedule 4
5.0 Submission Requirements 4
6.0 Evaluation/Selection Process 8
7.0 Scope of Required Professional Services 9
8.0 Project Scope and Required Services 10
9.0 Additional Requirements 11
Exhibit A – Terms and Conditions 13
Exhibit B –City Owned Parking Areas 22
Exhibit C - Downtown Overlay District 23
RFQ #201450
Professional Services for Comprehensive Parking Study and Conceptual Design of Parking Structure
3 | P a g e
1.0 Notice to Proposers
The City of Georgetown (the “City”) is soliciting sealed Statements of Qualifications (SOQs) for Request for
Qualifications (RFQ) No. 201450 for Professional Services for Comprehensive Parking Study and Design of
Parking Structure.
All addenda, notices, additional information, etc. will be posted to the City of Georgetown Purchasing
Department’s web site, http://purchasing.georgetown.org/bid-information/. Two originals one digital copy on
CD/DVD or flash drive of SOQs must be sealed and returned to the City of Georgetown, Attention: Purchasing
Manager, P. O. Box 409, Georgetown, Texas 78627 (mailing address) or 300-1 Industrial Avenue, Georgetown,
Texas 78626 (physical address) by 2:00p.m. Central Standard Time, on October 1, 2014. All SOQs must be plainly
marked with the RFQ name and RFQ number: “Professional Services for Comprehensive Parking Study and
Design of Parking Structure, RFQ #201450“.
Respondent is responsible for delivery of response by the date and time set for the closing of the SOQ
acceptance. Responses received after the date and time set for the closing will not be considered.
The information contained in these specifications is confidential and is to be used only in connection with
preparing SOQs for this RFQ.
The City reserves the right to reject any and all SOQs and waive informalities in SOQs received.
All questions concerning this RFQ must be addressed to the following point of contact:
Trina Bickford
Purchasing Manager
300-1 Industrial Ave.
Georgetown, Texas 78627
Phone: (512) 930-3647
Fax: (512) 930-9027
Email: purchasing@georgetown.org
2.0 Background and Current Circumstances
2.1 City of Georgetown
The City of Georgetown has a population of 50,000, is located on Interstate 35, and is the northern most
“gateway” to the gently rolling hills of Central Texas. While Georgetown offers the amenities and charm of a
small community, it is strategically and centrally located in the middle of the four major metropolitan areas of
Texas. Austin is 26 miles south of Georgetown, Dallas is two hours north, Houston is three hours southeast and
San Antonio is just one-and a-half hours south, placing Georgetown in a very advantageous position for cultural
and economic development.
2.2 Downtown and Community Services
The Downtown and Community Services Department oversees all aspects of downtown development, including
historic preservation, economic development, tourism and infrastructure support. The staff/programs included
in the department are the Assistant City Manager, Main Street Program, Public Communications, Historic
Preservation Office, City Parks and Recreation, Library and Convention and Visitors Bureau.
2.3 As a part of the 2013 Downtown Master Plan and the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, the City is planning for
the location, site analysis and conceptual design for a parking structure in the Downtown Overlay District. The
proposed parking structure is an extension of the City’s goal of providing infrastructure to the community and
enhancing development opportunities.
RFQ #201450
Professional Services for Comprehensive Parking Study and Conceptual Design of Parking Structure
4 | P a g e
3.0 Project Purpose and Objectives
3.1 Scope of Procurement
In accordance with the provisions of Texas Government Code, Chapter 2254, Texas Professional Procurement
Act, the City is requesting qualifications to contract with a qualified team of professionals with considerable
experience in the delivery of professional architectural and engineering services to a municipality. The responses
shall be submitted to the City in a sealed submission. The submission must be submitted in compliance with
Texas Government Code 2254. This is a two-step selection process, and the City shall award a final contract or
contract(s) to the most qualified firm(s), upon successful negotiated agreement, to fulfill the identified needs of
the City.
The City requires the services of qualified architectural consultants for the development of a comprehensive
parking study, analysis of current and future parking requirements and design of a parking structure. The
selected firm shall provide professional architectural services including planning and site analysis. After site
selection by the governing body, the selected firm shall provide conceptual drawings, estimates of construction
and operational costs as well as an analysis of financing alternatives including public/private partnerships.
4.0 Key Events Schedule
Issue RFQ August 15, 2014
Presubmittal meeting September 2, 2014, 2PM CST
Deadline for questions on RFQ September 5, 2014, 5PM CST
SOQs Due October 1, 2014, 2PM CST
Presentations/Interviews if necessary October 6-8, 2014
City evaluation of SOQs completed (approx.) October 8, 2014
Selection of most qualified firm, issuance of RFP (approx.) October 15, 2014
A non-mandatory pre-submittal meeting be held on September 2, 2014, 2PM CST at City of Georgetown City
Hall, 2nd Floor Conference Room, 113 East 8th Street, Georgetown, TX 78626.
5.0 Submission Requirements
5.1 Submission Format
The Purchasing Department will not accept oral responses, or responses received by telephone, FAX machine, or
telegraph.
The SOQ must be submitted in hard copy and shall be a maximum of 15 pages in length. The respondent shall
submit two originals and plus one digital copy on CD/DVD or flash drive, to consist of:
• Signed cover letter including complete name, location of headquarters, mailing address, point of contact
and contact information, location of offices where work will be performed
• Detailed description of firm’s technical approach describing firm’s understanding of the project and the
scope of requested services, and an outline of the process to implement the requirements as described
in this RFQ
• Detailed observations based on previous experience with public projects similar in scope and complexity
addressing potential problems and possible solutions, including supporting documentation as necessary
RFQ #201450
Professional Services for Comprehensive Parking Study and Conceptual Design of Parking Structure
5 | P a g e
• Detailed SOQ demonstrating experience in performing projects similar in scope and complexity
• Detailed description of qualifications of each team member to be assigned to this project including the
area of assignment on this project, all licensing and certifications
• Detailed description of firm’s qualifications to successfully complete this project including a detailed
description of related experience, a detailed description of technical and professional staff, anticipated
workload during the time this project is anticipated to occur, and a detailed description of all resources
(professional and technical) available in support of this project
• List of references, including complete contact information (name, address, phone, email), for projects
similar ins scope and complexity
• List of successfully completed projects similar in size and complexity (including a minimum of one
successfully completed publically owned project) detailing:
o Owner’s name, type of entity and contact information
o Project location
o Detailed description
o Project construction cost (budget versus actual)
o Date of construction
o Services provide on project
o Contact name and information for owner’s representative
o Adherence to budget and schedule (original budget and award date; final costs and
completion date)
o Quality assurance program including documentation as necessary
o Demonstrated commitment to client service such as availability for meetings and
conferences, timely response and delivery of work product and communications,
internal procedures for quality assurance and cost control, success in minimizing the
number of change orders resulting from design and construction projects managed by
the firm, and long term client/firm relationships
• From the list of successfully completed projects detailed above, a comprehensive description of
at least one publically owned project most closely matching the effort required for this project
• Detailed description of past experience in public-private partnerships
• A draft timeline for a project of this scope and complexity
• Proof of registration and licensing
• Details of all relevant litigation involving projects for public entities; of any default or failure to
complete a project under the current firm’s name or any other name; and of any contract
terminations by owner
• Details of any exceptions to the information contained in this RFQ
• Affirmation that firm maintains insurance appropriate for professional services as described in
this RFQ, and details of coverage(s) (Reference Section 5.7).
RFQ #201450
Professional Services for Comprehensive Parking Study and Conceptual Design of Parking Structure
6 | P a g e
The respondent may also provide supplemental marketing or technical materials, to be packaged separately
from the SOQ. No materials provided by the respondent will be returned at any time during or following this
procurement.
5.2 Time Stamp
The time SOQs are received shall be determined by the time clock stamp in the Purchasing Department.
Purchasing Department personnel will promptly timestamp submissions as they are received. Respondents are
responsible for insuring that their SOQs are received and stamped by Purchasing Department personnel by the
deadline indicated.
5.3 Representations and Responsibilities
By submitting an SOQ in response to this RFQ, the respondent represents that it has read and understands all
elements of this RFQ and has familiarized itself with all federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, and rules and
regulations that in any manner may affect the cost, progress, or performance of the contract work.
By submitting an SOQ in response to this RFQ, the respondent represents that is has not relied exclusively upon
any technical details in place or under consideration for implementation by the City, but has supplemented this
information through due diligence research and that the respondent sufficiently understands the issues relative
to the indicated requirements.
The failure or omission of any respondent to receive or examine any form, instrument, addendum, or other
documents or to acquaint itself with conditions existing or other details shall in no way relieve any respondent
from any obligations with respect to its SOQ.
5.4 SOQ Withdrawal
An SOQ may be modified or withdrawn by the respondent any time prior to the time and date set for the receipt
of SOQs. The respondent shall notify the Purchasing Department in writing of its intentions.
1. Modified and withdrawn SOQs may be resubmitted to the Purchasing Department up to the time and
date set for the receipt of SOQs.
2. No SOQ can be withdrawn after the time set for the receipt of SOQs and for sixty (60) days thereafter.
5.5 Late SOQs
All SOQs received in the Purchasing Department on time shall be accepted. All late SOQs received by the
Purchasing Department shall be returned upon request to the respondent unopened. SOQs shall be open to
public inspection only after award of the contract.
5.6 Respondent Questions
Respondents may contact the individual listed in Section 1 with any questions regarding this RFQ. Respondents shall
not attempt to contact City Council members, the City staff or management directly during the RFQ or
subsequent request for proposal processes.
5.7 Insurance Requirements
The selected firm must maintain insurance appropriate for professional services as described in this RFQ. At a
minimum, the coverage must include the following – additional coverages are required if necessary to provide
adequate coverage for the professional services described in this RFQ and the minimums indicated are not
intended to limit the responsibility or liability of the selected firm. Any consultants of the selected firm must
maintain the same coverages or be named by the selected firm on their insurance policies. Original
endorsements affecting coverage shall be furnished with certificates of insurance. Failure to procure and
maintain required insurance shall be grounds for termination.
RFQ #201450
Professional Services for Comprehensive Parking Study and Conceptual Design of Parking Structure
7 | P a g e
• Commercial General Liability Insurance including but not limited to
Premises/Operations, Personal and Advertising Injury, Products/Completed Operations,
Independent Contractors and Contractual Liability with a minimum combined bodily
injury (including death) and property damage limits of not less than $1,000,000 per
occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate. If the insurance is written on a claims-made
form, coverage shall be continuous (by renewal or extended reporting period) for not
less than 24 months following the later of a) completion and City’s acceptance of all
services; or b) termination. Coverages, including any renewals, shall have the same
retroactive date as the applicable original agreement.
• Business Automobile Liability Insurance, including bodily injury and property damage
liability and covering all owned, non-owned or hired vehicles, with a minimum
combined bodily injury (including death) and property damage limit of not less than
$1,000,000 per occurrence.
• Workers Compensation Insurance in accordance with statutory requirements for
projects for public entities as described in this RFQ, covering all employees involved in
the services described in this RFQ. Successful firm must meet each stipulation required
by the Texas Workers Compensation Commission. A waiver of subrogation in favor of
the City must be included.
• Professional Liability Insurance with limits not less than $2,000,000 per claim and a
deductible not to exceed $50,000. Coverage must be continuous (by renewal or
extended reporting period) for not less than 24 months following the later of: a)
completing and City’s acceptance of all services; or b) termination. Coverage, including
all renewals, shall have the same retroactive date as the applicable original agreement.
• The City and its elected officials, officers, directors, employees, representatives and
volunteers must be listed as additional insured on all policies and the coverage must not
contain any special limitations on the scope of protection afforded the City, its officials,
employees or volunteers. The additional insured status must cover completed
operations as well and the policy covering completed work must remain in effect until
the expiration of the statue of repose.
• Proof of coverage must be provided to the City prior to commencement of services;
acceptance and/or approval of any insurance shall not relieve or decrease the liability of
any the selected firm and shall not be construed to be a limitation of liability.
• Coverage must be provided by a company licensed and authorized to do business in the
State of Texas before policies are issued and shall be written by companies with A.M.
Best rating A VIII or better.
• The selected firm’s insurance shall be considered primary with respect to any insurance
or self-insurance carried by the City, and the City’s insurance shall apply separately to
each insured against whom a claim is made and/or lawsuits brought, except with
respect to the limits of insured’s liability. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by
the City shall be considered in excess of selected firm’s insurance and shall not
contribute to it.
• If insurance policies are not written for the specified amounts, the selected firm shall
carry Umbrella or Excess Liability Insurance for any differences in amounts specified. If
Excess Liability Insurance is provided, it shall follow the form of the primary coverage.
RFQ #201450
Professional Services for Comprehensive Parking Study and Conceptual Design of Parking Structure
8 | P a g e
• City shall be entitled, upon request and without expense, to receive certified copies of
policies and policy endorsements and may make and may make any reasonable requests
for deletion or revision or modification of particular policy terms, conditions, limitations
or exclusions except where policy provisions are established by law or regulations
binding upon either party or the underwriter of such policies.
• City reserves the right to review the insurance requirements during the term of any
agreement and to make reasonable adjustments in insurance coverage, limits and
exclusions when deemed necessary and prudent to the City. The City may request the
selected firm provide additional insurance coverage, increased limits or revised
deductibles more protective than originally specified and the selected firm shall obtain
and shall require any of its consultants to obtain such additional insurance coverage,
different limits or revised deductibles for such periods of time as requested by the City
in the form of an amendment.
• The selected firm shall not allow any insurance to be canceled nor permit any insurance
to lapse during the required term. The policies must contain the following language:
“This policy shall not be cancelled or not renewed until after thirty (30) days prior
written notice to the additional insured, the City of Georgetown.” Additionally, the
selected firm shall provide the City thirty (30) days written notice of erosion of the
aggregate limits below occurrence limits for all applicable coverages indicated.
• The selected firm shall be responsible for all premiums, deductibles and self-insured
retentions, if any, as stated in policies. All deductibles and self-insured retentions shall
be disclosed on the Certificates of Insurance. Certificates must be prepared and
executed by the insurance company or its authorized agent and must provide for and
warrant the following:
o The insurance company is licensed and admitted to do business in the
State of Texas;
o The insurance is underwritten on forms approved by the State of Texas
Board of Insurance or ISO;
o All endorsements and insurance coverage complies with the
requirements and instructions required by the applicable agreement;
and
o The Certificates of Insurance, and all endorsements, waivers and notices
shall indicated: City of Georgetown, 300-1 Industrial Avenue,
Georgetown, TX 78626, Attn: Contract Manager
6.0 Evaluation/Selection Process
The City has attempted to provide potential respondents with a comprehensive statement of requirements
through this RFQ for the required services. Respondents are requested to make written SOQs which present the
respondent’s qualifications and understanding of the work to be performed. Respondents are asked to address
each evaluation criteria and to be specific in presenting their qualifications. SOQs should be as thorough and
detailed as possible so that the City may properly evaluate respondent’s capabilities to provide the required
professional services.
RFQ #201450
Professional Services for Comprehensive Parking Study and Conceptual Design of Parking Structure
9 | P a g e
6.1 Evaluation Criteria
The City has established specific, weighted criteria for selection. This section presents the evaluation criteria,
their description, and the relative weight assigned to each (100 points maximum).
6.1.1 Ability and qualifications of firm and team to provide required technical expertise – 30 points
6.1.2 Experience of key team members to be assigned to project – 20 points
6.1.3 Quality of references and previous projects– 20 points
6.1.4 Quality of previous projects similar in scale and complexity to the City’s project – 30 points
6.2 Evaluation Process
Each SOQ will be reviewed, evaluated, and scored as part of the formal selection process. Each SOQ will be
reviewed independently based solely on the merits of the SOQ, then be scored and, if necessary, a short list of
respondents will be selected for presentations, interviews, and reference checks.
After evaluations are complete, the City will issue an RFP to the most qualified firm and negotiate final pricing,
terms and conditions based on their proposal. The City may elect to conduct discussions, request clarifications
and/or request presentations concerning the project approach and firm’s abilities as a part of the negotiation
process. In the event the City cannot successfully contract with the most qualified firm, the City will end
negotiations with that firm and may elect to proceed to negotiations with the other qualified firm(s) in order of
ranking, until a contract is successfully negotiated as allowed under Texas Government Code 2254.
The recommendation for award will be presented to the appropriate Board for review and to the City Council for
approval.
7.0 Scope of Required Professional Services
7.1 Minimum Qualifications
The City requires a team with a demonstrated ability for innovative design and experience in working on large
publically owned projects of significance. The demonstrated ability to provide cost efficient design and comply
with deadlines is a prime consideration. The City requires planning and design complementary to the themes
established by the City’s Downtown Master Plan (https://dtmasterplan.georgetown.org) and Downtown Design
Guidelines (https://historic.georgetown.org). All facilities in the downtown area must be consistent with the
City’s history and the character of downtown. The firm must be have demonstrated ability to apply and
integrate the use of current and cutting edge technologies in the development and design of the project
described in this RFQ, including utilization of green building technologies when cost effective. The team
assigned to this project must have documented experience and knowledge of state, federal and local regulations
as well as building codes applicable to this project.
Respondent must be registered by the State of Texas to provide any services which are required to complete this
project, and must have all professional licensure required by the State to provide any services required to
complete this project. Proof of this registration must be included as part of the SOQ. Additionally, respondent
must have experience with City or County parking structures.
RFQ #201450
Professional Services for Comprehensive Parking Study and Conceptual Design of Parking Structure
10 | P a g e
7.2 Project background
7.2.1 Proposed Sites
The City currently owns two major sites under consideration, both of which are currently in use for structured
parking. One site is at the southeast corner of 9th and Main Streets; the other is located at the southwest corner
of Austin Avenue and 5th Street. A map of City owned parking is attached as Exhibit B.
The City is willing to consider additional sites identified during the parking study analysis.
7.2.2 Downtown Overlay District
The City created a Downtown Overlay District in 2003, identifying an area of historical downtown for
redevelopment (reference map attached as Exhibit C). The District serves as the boundaries for the Historic and
Architectural Review Commission’s (HARC) Downtown historic district, the Main Street Program District and the
recently established Arts and Culture District. Although the district encompasses approximately forty city
blocks, the focal point of the district is the nine block area surrounding the Williamson County Courthouse.
The City also adopted the Downtown Master Plan in 2003, with an update completed in 2013. The Downtown
Master Plan identifies the core strategies for the continued growth and redevelopment of the Downtown
Overlay District. The 2013 update of the Downtown Master Plan identified parking strategies to support
continued activity within the District including possible construction of a parking structure.
The Downtown Master Plan emphasizes a walkable pedestrian environment with multiple street edge activities.
The proposed parking structure shall include a first floor retail component to continue development of the
pedestrian core and promote walkability throughout downtown. The proposed parking structure shall comply
with all design standards established in the City’s Unified Development Code and Old Town Design Guidelines
(https://historic.georgetown.org).
8.0 Project Scope and Required Services
8.1 Phase One
Quantify and qualify the parking needs in the study area to determine the current and future parking demands
though field work, parking utilization studies, surveys and a projection of parking demand. This phase must
consider and address:
• The number of available parking spaces, the number of public parking spaces and the occupancy
rates of the spaces during different time periods of the day in the area
• The parking demand in the Town Square area and the influence with regard to parking demand
and use of parking spaces of the transit station located adjacent to the sites under consideration
for the parking structure
• The transportation impacts and routes for effective traffic management generated by a
structured parking facility as the sites under consideration are located in an area serviced
primarily by local streets, including proposed modifications to the existing transportation
network as a result of new facility’s impact
• The parking requirements of future developments and the impact on peak hour parking and
traffic
RFQ #201450
Professional Services for Comprehensive Parking Study and Conceptual Design of Parking Structure
11 | P a g e
• The amount of additional parking space required to satisfy the existing and projected needs for
future development in the area, considering the parking spaces currently in existence that will
be lost to the footprint of a parking structure
• The optimal design for a parking structure on the proposed site considering the various user
groups (downtown employees, downtown visitors, county office customers, special events, etc.)
and the integration of the parking structure with the new development from a
pedestrian/vehicle flow perspective
8.2 Phase Two
Analyze optimum sites for a parking structure including the two City owned properties as well as identification
of any additional sites that should be considered, and present the results to the City Council in a public forum for
site selection.
8.3 Phase Three
Provide conceptual drawings for selected site including construction cost estimates, operational costs estimates
and analysis of potential financing opportunities including public private partnerships.
8.4 Additional Required Services
The selected firm shall provide additional services including, but not limited to, the following, in conjunction
with this project:
• Attend regular, special and emergency meetings in conjunction with this project as required
• Attend other meetings and bid related conferences as required
• Prepare and/or review and evaluate reports, permits, applications, correspondence and bid
documents as requested by the City, or any regulatory agency, as required
• Review and preparation of correspondence referred by the City as required
• Interact with applicable City personnel, contractors, other consultants and governmental
agencies, as required
• Attend meeting with affected landowners and interested parties as required
• Provide support, as necessary, in the obtaining of any right-of-way and easement acquisitions as
requested by the City (Note: The City is responsible for ROW and easement acquisition)
• Project management, construction management and inspections services as required
• Provide other specialized Professional Services which may be required in conjunction with this
project
8.5 Team Assigned to Project
The firm selected for this project must assign a team for the entirety of the project unless the City agrees to any
change in key personnel in writing.
9.0 Additional Requirements
9.1 The City may, in its sole discretion, request and/or require any additional information from respondent
deemed relevant to selection of the most qualified provider with respect to this RFQ.
9.2 All SOQs become the property of the City and will not be returned.
RFQ #201450
Professional Services for Comprehensive Parking Study and Conceptual Design of Parking Structure
12 | P a g e
9.3 By submitting an SOQ, respondent certifies they are a duly qualified, capable and otherwise bondable
and insurable business entity not in receivership or contemplating the same, and has not filed for bankruptcy.
9.4 Submission of an SOQ in response to this RFQ shall affirm that the respondent shall not discriminate
against any employee or applicant for employee because of race, religion, sex, sexual preference, color or
national origin, and that the firm shall make efforts to ensure that employment is offered to applicants without
regard to their race, religion, sexual preference, color or national origin.
9.4 The City may request presentations and/or interviews with one or more firms.
9.5 The City’s standard terms and conditions are attached as Exhibit A – any exceptions must be noted in
response as these terms will govern as applicable to any subsequent contract.
9.6 For purposes of any cost estimates, Prevailing Wage Requirements shall apply.
RFQ #201450
Professional Services for Comprehensive Parking Study and Conceptual Design of Parking Structure
13 | P a g e
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF GEORGETOWN
Standard Terms and Conditions
By acceptance of a purchase order or agreement, or response to a solicitation, Vendor agrees the following terms and conditions, without modification,
will govern:
I. DEFINITIONS
The following definitions shall be used to identify terms throughout procurement documents:
A. AGREEMENT/CONTRACT – A mutually binding legal document obligating the Vendor to furnish the goods, equipment or services
specified within the solicitation and obligating the City to pay for the goods, equipment, or services specified. .
B. BID/PROPOSAL /RESPONSE/OFFER/QUOTATION– A complete, properly signed response to a solicitation that, if accepted, would
bind the Respondent to perform the resulting contract.
C. BIDDER/PROPOSER/RESPONDENT/OFFERER – The Respondent identified throughout the solicitation that they consider themselves
qualified to provide the goods, equipment or services specified herein, and are interested in making an offer to provide the goods,
equipment or services to the City.
D. CITY – The City of Georgetown, located in Williamson County, Texas.
E. GOODS –Materials, supplies, commodities and/or equipment.
F. PIGGYBACK CONTRACT – A contract or agreement that has been competitively bid in accordance with State of Texas statutes, rules,
policies and procedures and has been extended for the use of state and local agencies and active State of Texas CO-OP entities.
G. PURCHASE ORDER – An order placed by the City for the purchase of goods or services issued on the City’s standard purchase order
form and which, when accepted by the Vendor, becomes a contract. The purchase order is the Vendor’s authority to deliver and
invoice the City for goods or services specified, and the City’s commitment to accept the goods or services for an agreed upon price.
H. SERVICES – Work performed to meet the requirements and demand of the purchase order. The furnishing of labor, time, or effort by
the Vendor and their ability to comply with promised delivery dates, specification and technical assistance specified.
I. SOLICITATION/INVITATION TO BID/REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS/REQUEST FOR QUOTES – The solicitation document issued by the
City containing terms, conditions and specifications for the service or commodity to be procured.
J. SUBCONTRACTOR – Any person or business enterprise providing goods, labor, and/or services to a Vendor if such goods,
equipment, labor, and/or services are procured or used in fulfillment of the Vendor’s obligations arising from a contract with the
City.
K. VENDOR/CONTRACTOR – Person or business enterprise providing goods, equipment, labor and/or services to the City as fulfillment
of obligations arising from an agreement or purchase order.
II. SOLICITATIONS
A. CONFLICT OF INTEREST:
Effective January 1, 2006, Chapter 176 of the Texas Local Government Code (HB 914) requires an entity contracting or seeking to
contract for the sale or purchase of property, goods, or services with a local governmental entity to disclose any affiliation or
business relationship which might create a conflict of interest with a local government entity. The Conflict of Interest Questionnaire
is available from the Texas Ethics Commission at www.ethics.state.tx.us, and completed forms must be submitted to the appropriate
records administrator of the City not later than the seventh business day after the date the entity begins contract discussions or
negotiations with the local governmental entity, or submits to the local governmental entity an application, response to a Request
for Proposals or Bids, correspondence, or another writing related to a potential Agreement with the local governmental entity. If
responding to a Solicitation, the Conflict of Interest Form may be submitted with the Response. The completed forms may be mailed
or hand delivered to the City Secretary at the following address: The City of Georgetown, Office of the City Secretary, City Hall, 113
East 8th Street, Georgetown, TX 78626. This legislation is subject to change and each entity should consult its own attorney
regarding the current law. Any attempt to intentionally or unintentionally conceal a conflict of interest may result in disqualification
of any response to a solicitation. The validity of the Contract is not affected solely because of failure to comply with the conflict of
interest disclosure requirements.
B. COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE CITY:
To insure the proper and fair evaluation of a Solicitation, the City prohibits ex parte communication (e.g., unsolicited) initiated by the
Offeror to the City Official or Employee evaluating or considering the Responses prior to the time an award has been made.
Communication between Offeror and the City will be initiated by the appropriate City Official or Employee in order to obtain
information or clarification needed to develop a proper and accurate evaluation of the Solicitation. Ex parte communication may be
grounds for disqualifying the offending Offeror from consideration or award of the Solicitation then in evaluation, or any future
Solicitation.
Unless otherwise specified, all requests for clarification or questions regarding a Solicitation must be directed to the City of
Georgetown Purchasing Department, Attn.: Purchasing Manager, PO Box 409, 300-1 Industrial Avenue, Georgetown, TX 78627,
512-930-3647, FAX: 512-930-9027, purchasing@georgetown.org.
C. DISCLOSURE OF PENDING LITIGATION:
Each Respondent shall include in its proposal a complete disclosure of any material civil or criminal litigation or pending investigation
which involves the Respondent or in which the Respondent has been judged guilty.
D. CONFIDENTIALITY OF RESPONSES, PUBLIC INFORMATION ACT:
All Responses are subject to release as public information unless the Response or specific parts of the Response can be shown to be
exempt from the Texas Public Information Act. Respondents are advised to consult with their legal counsel regarding disclosure
RFQ #201450
Professional Services for Comprehensive Parking Study and Conceptual Design of Parking Structure
14 | P a g e
issues and take the appropriate precautions to safeguard trade secrets or any other proprietary information. The City assumes no
obligation or responsibility for asserting legal arguments on behalf of potential Respondents.
If a Respondent believes that a Response or parts of a Response are confidential, then the Respondent shall so specify. The
Respondent shall stamp in bold red letters the term "CONFIDENTIAL" on that part of the Response, which the Respondent believes
to be confidential. Vague and general claims as to confidentiality shall not be accepted. All Responses and parts of Responses that
are not marked as confidential will be automatically considered public information. Notwithstanding, responses to Requests for
Proposals shall be opened in a manner that avoids disclosure of the contents to competing offeror and keeps the proposals secret
during negotiations as provided for in Section 252.049 of the Local Government Code.
E. CLARIFICATIONS, WAIVER OF MINOR TECHNICALITIES OR DISCREPANCIES:
The City reserves the right to request clarification or additional information specific to any response after all Responses have been
received and the Solicitation due date has passed. Additionally, the City reserves the right to accept or reject all or part of any
Response, waive any formalities or technical inconsistencies, delete any requirement or specification from the Solicitation, or
terminate the Solicitation when deemed to be in City’s best interest.
F. COST OF PREPARATION OF RESPONSE:
All costs directly or indirectly related to preparation of a Response to this Solicitation or any oral presentation required to
supplement and/or clarify a Response which may be required by the City shall be the sole responsibility of the Respondent.
G. RESPONSES BECOME PROPERTY OF THE CITY:
Submissions received in response to a Solicitation become the sole property of the City.
H. WITHDRAWAL OF A RESPONSE:
A Response may be withdrawn prior to the submission deadline by submitting a written request for its withdrawal to the Purchasing
Manager. A new Response may be submitted and must be received prior to the submission deadline to be considered.
Modifications offered in any manner will not be considered if submitted after the submission deadline.
I. DETERMINATION OF AWARD, RESULTING AGREEMENT:
In determining award, the City reserves the right to select the acceptable Respondent who will offer contractual terms and
conditions most favorable to the City. All requirements stated in the Solicitation shall become a part of any Contract, Agreement or
Purchase Order awarded as a result of the Solicitation, and any deviations from these requirements must be specifically stated and
defined by the Respondent in their Response. Requests for clarification and the responses(s) shall also become a part of any
Contract, Agreement or Purchase Order resulting from the Solicitation.
J. AFFIRMATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS:
By signature on and submission of a Response, Respondent certifies they have not conspired with any other potential supplier in any
manner to attempt to control competitive pricing. By signature on and submission of a Response, Respondent certifies they are duly
qualified, capable and a bondable business entity not in receivership or contemplating same, and has not filed for bankruptcy. By
signature on and submission of a Response, Respondent affirms that they will not discriminate against any employee or applicant as
prohibited by law.
K. REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBMISSION OF RESPONSE:
1. All Responses must be submitted on the form provided by the City, and accompanied by all required attachments. Each
Response shall be placed in a separate envelope and properly identified with Solicitation Number and Opening Date.
Responses must be time-stamped at the Purchasing Department, 300-1 Industrial Avenue, PO Box 409, Georgetown, TX 78626,
on or before due date and time shown on the Solicitation form. Late Responses will not be considered.
2. If applicable, Respondent will show exact cost to deliver. Responses must specify unit price on the quantity specified, extend
and show total. Unit prices shall govern, including in case of errors. Pricing will be considered firm for acceptance for a
minimum of 60 days after the due date unless otherwise specified in the Solicitation. The validity period may be extended
beyond that date on agreement of parties. Cash discounts will not be considered in determining award; all cash discounts
offered will be taken if earned. Respondent will list and deduct all discounts not based on early payment from prices quoted.
3. The City is exempt from all federal excise, state and local taxes unless otherwise stated. The City claims exemption from under
Texas Tax Code §151.309, as amended. Texas Limited Sales Tax Exemption Certificates will be furnished upon request. Do not
include taxes in Response to any Solicitation.
4. Unless stated otherwise, any catalog, brand name or manufacturer's reference used in the Solicitation is descriptive (not
restrictive), and is used to indicate type and quality desired. Responses on brands of like nature and quality will be considered.
If quoting on other than referenced specifications, the Response MUST show manufacturer brand or trade name and
description of product offered. Illustrations and complete descriptions of product offered should be made part of the
Response. If Respondent does not identify exceptions to the specifications shown in this Invitation, Respondent will be
required to furnish brand names, numbers, etc., as shown in the Solicitation.
5. Response must show the number of days required to deliver items or provide services to the City’s designated location under
normal conditions. Unrealistically short or long delivery promises may cause Response to be disregarded. Failure to state
delivery time obligates Respondent to complete delivery in 14 calendar days.
III. PURCHASE ORDERS
A. GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS
1. ACCEPTANCE:
A Purchase Order is the City’s commitment to make procurement and is subject to Vendor’s acceptance of the City’s terms and
conditions
2. ABSENCES OF PURCHASE ORDER OR AGREEMENT:
The City is not responsible for delivery of any materials or services without a proper Purchase Order
3. VENDOR’S OBLIGATIONS:
The Vendor shall fully and timely provide all deliverables described in the Solicitation and in the Vendor’s Offer in strict
accordance with the terms, covenants, and conditions of the Agreement and all applicable Federal, State, and local laws, rules,
and regulations.
RFQ #201450
Professional Services for Comprehensive Parking Study and Conceptual Design of Parking Structure
15 | P a g e
4. EFFECTIVE DATE/TERM:
Unless otherwise specified in the Solicitation, this Agreement shall be effective as of the date the City issues and signs the
Purchase Order, and shall continue in effect until all obligations are performed in accordance with the Agreement.
5. SUBCONTRACTORS:
If the Vendor utilizes Subcontractors in providing the goods and/or services under this Purchase Order, the Vendor shall be
fully responsible to the City for all acts and omissions of the Subcontractors just as the Vendor is responsible for the Vendor’s
own acts and omissions. The Vendor shall:
a. Require that all deliverables to be provided by the Subcontractor be provided in strict accordance with the provisions,
specifications and terms of the Agreement;
b. Prohibit the Subcontractor from further subcontracting any portion of the Agreement without the prior written consent
of the City and the Vendor. The City may require, as a condition to such further subcontracting, that the Subcontractor
post a payment bond in form, substance and amount acceptable to the City;
c. Require Subcontractors to submit all invoices and applications for payments, including any claims for additional
payments, damages or otherwise, to the Vendor in sufficient time to enable the Vendor to include same with its invoice
or application for payment to the City in accordance with the terms of the Agreement;
d. Require that all Subcontractors obtain and maintain, throughout the term of their contract, insurance in the type and
amounts specified for the Vendor, with the City being a named insured as its interest shall appear;
e. Require that the Subcontractor indemnify and hold the City harmless to the same extent as the Contractor is required to
indemnify the City; and
f. Shall pay each Subcontractor its appropriate share of payments made to the Vendor not later than ten (10) calendar days
after receipt of payment from the City.
6. DELAYS:
The City may delay scheduled delivery or other due dates by written notice to the Vendor if the City deems it is in its best
interest. If such delay causes an increase in the cost of the work under the Agreement, the City and the Vendor shall negotiate
an equitable adjustment for costs incurred by the Vendor in the Agreement price and execute an amendment to the
Agreement. The Vendor must assert its right to an adjustment within ten (10) calendar days from the date of receipt of the
notice of delay. Failure to agree on any adjusted price shall be handled under the Dispute Resolution Process specified in
Section Z. However, nothing in this provision shall excuse the Vendor from delaying the delivery as notified.
7. FORCE MAJEURE:
Neither party shall be liable for any default or delay in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement if, while and to
the extent such default or delay is caused by acts of God, fire, riots, civil commotion, labor disruptions, sabotage, sovereign
conduct, or any other cause beyond reasonable control. In the event of default or delay in performance due to any of the
foregoing causes, then the time for completion of the services will be extended; provided, however, in such an event, a
conference will be held within three (3) business days to establish a mutually agreeable period of time reasonably necessary to
overcome the effect of such failure to perform.
8. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS:
Unless specific insurance requirements are noted, Vendor shall maintain insurance coverage appropriate for the fulfillment of
the Purchase Order. In the event the Vendor, its employees, agents or subcontractors enter premises occupied by or under
the control of the City, the Vendor agrees to maintain public liability and property damage insurance in reasonable limits
covering the obligations set forth in this Purchase Order, and will maintain Workers’ Compensation coverage (either by
insurance or if qualified pursuant to law, through a self-insurance program) covering all employees performing on premises
occupied by or under control of the City. Upon request, Vendor shall provide a copy of its insurance policies to the City.
9. EXCEPTIONS TO SPECIFICATIONS:
Any deviation from the specifications must be clearly indicated in the Response to the Solicitation or promptly documented in
writing at or before the time of the award. Any deviations or exceptions are subject to review by the City and may be grounds
for rejection.
10. TRAVEL EXPENSES:
All travel, lodging and/or per diem expenses associated with providing the materials, equipment or services specified must be
included in the original Quotation and/or the resulting Purchase Order or Agreement. All travel expenses are subject to review
by the City and documentation of actual itemized expenses may be requested. No reimbursement will be made without prior
authorization, or for expenses not actually incurred. Airline fares in excess of coach or economy will not be reimbursed.
11. HUB REQUIREMENTS:
The City complies with the requirements of the State of Texas Local Government Code, Chapter 252, Section 252.0215.
12. SPECIAL TOOLS AND EQUIPMENT:
If the price stated in the Offer includes the cost of any special tooling or special test equipment fabricated or required by the
Vendor to fulfill the Agreement, such special tooling and/or equipment and all process sheets associated thereto shall become
the property of the City and shall be identified by the Vendor as such.
B. SERVICES
1. PLACE AND CONDITIONS OF WORK, ACCESS TO SITE:
If Services are to be performed principally on the City’s premises or in public rights of way, the City shall provide the Vendor
access to the sites where the Vendor is to perform the Services as required in order for the Vendor to perform in a timely and
efficient manner, in accordance with and subject to applicable security laws, rules and regulations. The Vendor acknowledges
that it has satisfied itself as to the nature of the City’s service requirements and specifications, the location and essential
characteristics of the work sites, the quality and quantity of the materials, equipment, labor and facilities necessary to perform
the Services and any other conditions or states of fact which could, in any way, affect performance of the Vendor’s obligations
under the Agreement. The Vendor shall promptly notify the City if the actual site or service conditions differ from the
expected conditions and failing to do so, hereby releases and holds the City harmless from and against any liability or claim for
damages of any kind or nature.
RFQ #201450
Professional Services for Comprehensive Parking Study and Conceptual Design of Parking Structure
16 | P a g e
2. VENDOR TO PROVIDE ALL MATERIAL, EQUIPMENT, LABOR:
Vendor shall provide all goods and labor necessary to perform Services. All material must be new and all equipment utilized
must be in good safe working condition and suitable for Services. Vendor shall employ all personnel for Services in accordance
with the requirements of applicable local, state, and federal law.
3. WORKFORCE:
If Services are to be performed principally on the City’s premises or on public right-of-ways:
a. Vendor shall employee only orderly and competent workers, skilled in the performance of the Services which they will
perform under the Agreement.
b. Vendor, its employees, subcontractors and subcontractor’s employees while engaged in participating in a Solicitation or
while in the course and scope of delivering goods and services under City Purchase Order or Agreement may not:
i. use or possess a firearm, including a concealed handgun that is licensed under state law, except as required by the
terms of the Agreement; or
ii. use or posses alcoholic or other intoxicating beverages, illegal drugs or controlled substances, nor may such workers
be intoxicated or under the influence of alcohol or drugs while on the job.
c. If the City or the City’s representative notifies the Vendor that any work is incompetent, disorderly or disobedient, has
knowingly or repeatedly violated safety regulations, has possessed firearms, or has possessed or was under the influence
of alcohol or drugs on the job, the Vendor shall immediately remove such worker from Agreement Services and may not
employ such worker again on Agreement Services without the City’s prior consent.
4. COMPLIANCE WITH ALL SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS:
If Services are to be performed principally on the City’s premises or on public rights of way, the Vendor, its subcontractors and
their respective employees, shall comply fully with all applicable federal, state and local health, safety and environmental laws,
ordinances, rules and regulations in the performance of the Services, including but not limited to those promulgated with the
City and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). In the case of conflict, the most stringent safety
requirement shall govern. The Vendor shall defend, indemnify and hold the City harmless from and against all claims,
demands, suits, actions, judgments, fines, penalties and liabilities of any kind or nature arising from the breach of the Vendor’s
obligations under this paragraph.
5. STOP WORK NOTICE:
The City may issue an immediate Stop Work Notice in the event the Vendor is observed performing in a manner that is in
violation of Federal, State or local guidelines, or in a manner that is determined by the City to be unsafe to either life or
property. Upon notification, the Vendor shall cease all work until notified by the City that the violation or unsafe condition has
been corrected. The Vendor shall be liable for all costs incurred by the City as a result of the issuance of such Stop Work
Notice.
6. WARRANTY OF SERVICES:
Vendor warrants and represents that all Services to be provided to the City under the Agreement will be fully and timely
performed in good and workmanlike manner in accordance with generally accepted industry standards and practices, the
terms, conditions and covenants of the Agreement and all applicable Federal, State and local laws, rules or regulations. This
warranty may not be limited, excluded or disclaimed and any attempt to do so will be without force or effect. Unless
otherwise specified, the warranty period shall be a minimum of one year from acceptance by the City of Services. In the event
any applicable warranty is breached, the Vendor shall promptly upon receipt of demand of performance, perform the Services
again in accordance with the above standard at no additional costs to the City. All costs incidental to such additional
performance shall be borne solely by the Vendor. The City shall endeavor to give the Vendor written notice of the breach of
warranty within thirty (30) calendar days of discovery of the breach of warranty, but failure to give timely notice shall not
impair the City’s rights under this section.
In the event the Vendor is unable or unwilling to perform the Services in accordance with the above standards as required by
the City, then in addition to any other available remedy, the City may reduce the amount of Services originally required to
purchase from the Vendor under the Agreement and procure conforming Services from other sources. In such event, the
Vendor shall pay the City upon demand the increased cost, if any, incurred by the city to procure such services from an
alternative source.
C. COMMODITIES/EQUIPMENT
1. MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEETS:
Under the “Hazardous Communication Act,” commonly known as the “Texas Right to Know Act,” a Vendor must provide to the
City WITH EACH DELIVERY Material Safety Data Sheets, which are applicable to hazardous substances as defined in the Act.
2. GOODS:
Goods furnished shall be the latest improved model in current production, as offered to commercial trade, and shall be of
quality workmanship and material. The Vendor represents that all goods and equipment offered shall be new. Unless
otherwise specified, used, shopworn, demonstrator, prototype or discontinued models are not acceptable.
3. PACKAGING OF DELIVERABLES:
Vendor must package deliverables in accordance with good commercial practice and shall include a packing list showing the
description of each item, the quantity and the unit price. Unless otherwise provided in writing by the City, each shipping
container shall be clearly and permanently marked with the Vendor’s name and address, and the City’s name, address and
Purchase Order number. Vendor shall bear all costs of packaging. Deliverables must be suitably packed to secure lowest
transportation cost, conform with requirements of common carriers and ensure safe delivery. The City’s count or weight shall
be final and conclusive on shipments not accompanied by packing lists.
4. WARRANTY:
The goods or equipment specified shall be warranted against defects in material or workmanship for a period of not less than
twelve (12) months from date of acceptance by the City. If the manufacturer’s warranty exceeds twelve (12) months, then the
manufacturer’s warranty shall be in effect. Vendor shall furnish a copy of the manufacturer’s warranty at the time of delivery.
5. NO LIMITATION OF MANUFACTURERS’ WARRANTIES:
RFQ #201450
Professional Services for Comprehensive Parking Study and Conceptual Design of Parking Structure
17 | P a g e
Vendor may no limit, exclude or disclaim any warranty provided by manufacturer.
D. DELIVERY
1. DELIVERY TERMS, TRANSPORTATION CHARGES, FOB:
Deliverables shall be shipped FOB point of delivery unless otherwise specified on the Purchase Order or in the Solicitation. The
Vendor’s price shall be deemed to include all delivery and transportation charges. The City shall have the right to designate
what method of transportation shall be used to ship deliverables. The place of delivery shall be specified in the Purchase
Order.
2. NO SUBSTITUTIONS OR CANCELLATIONS:
Unless specifically permitted in writing by the City, no substitutions or cancellations shall be acceptable.
3. NOTICE OF DELAY IN DELIVERY:
If a delay in delivery is anticipated, Vendor shall give written notice to the City. The City has the right to extend the delivery
time/service date, or to cancel the Purchase Order or Agreement. Vendor shall keep the City advised at all times of the status
of the order. Default in promised delivery, service or failure to meet specifications authorizes the City to procure the goods or
services from an alternate source and charge the full increase, if any, in cost and handling to defaulting Vendor. Default on
delivery may result in legal action and recourse.
4. DELIVERY LOCATION, HOURS, DAYS, HOLIDAYS:
Unless otherwise specified, all deliveries must be made to City of Georgetown, Central Receiving, 300-1 Industrial Avenue,
Georgetown, TX, between the hours of 8AM and 4PM (CST), Monday through Friday except regularly observed state and
federal holidays (see http://georgetown.org/contact-us/holiday-schedule/ for schedule). Receipt of goods or materials does
not signify acceptance.
5. NO SHIPMENT UNDER RESERVATION:
Vendor is not authorized to ship deliverables under reservation and no tender of bill of lading will operate as a tender of
deliverables.
6. TITLE/RISK OF LOSS:
Title to and risk of loss of the deliverables shall pass to the City only when the City actually receives and accepts the
deliverables (no delivery, no sale).
7. RIGHT OF INSPECTION AND REJECTION:
The City expressly reserves all rights under law, including but not limited to, the Uniform Commercial Code, to inspect the
deliverables at delivery or at a reasonable time subsequent to delivery, and to reject defective or non-conforming deliverables.
If the City has the right to inspect the Vendor’s or the Vendor’s subcontractors facilities, or the deliverables at the Vendor’s or
the Vendor’s subcontractors premises, the Vendor shall furnish or shall cause to be furnished without additional charge all
reasonable facilities and assistance to the City to facilitate such inspection.
8. ACCEPTANCE OF INCOMPLETE OR NON-CONFORMING GOODS:
If, instead of requiring immediate correction or removal and replacement of defective or non-conforming deliverables, the City
prefers to accept such deliverables, the City may do so. The Vendor shall pay all claims, losses and damages attributable to the
City’s evaluation of and determination to accept such defective or non-conforming deliverables. If any such acceptance occurs
prior to final payment, the City may deduct such amounts as are necessary to compensate the City for the diminished value of
the defective or non-conforming deliverables. If discovery that the deliverables are defective or non-conforming occurs after
final payment, Vendor may be required to refund such amounts to the City.
E. PAYMENT
1. TAX EXEMPT STATUS:
The City is exempt from all federal excise, state and local taxes unless otherwise stated in this document. The City claims
exemption from all sales and/or use taxes under Texas Tax Code §151.309, as amended. Texas Limited Sales Tax Exemption
Certificates are furnished upon request. Vendor will not charge for such taxes. If billed, the City will not remit payment until a
corrected invoice is received.
2. INVOICING REQUIREMENTS:
Unless otherwise specified, all invoices shall be submitted to City of Georgetown, Accounts Payable, PO Box 409, Georgetown,
TX 78627, and issued as required by the Purchase Order or Agreement. Each invoice must reference the unique Purchase
Order number, and include the Vendor’s complete name and remit to address. If applicable, transportation and delivery
charges must be itemized on the each invoice. A copy of the bill of lading and the freight waybill must be submitted with the
invoice if applicable. Invoices for labor must include a copy of all time sheets with labor rate and Purchase Order or Agreement
number clearly identified. Invoices for labor shall also include a tabulation of hours worked at the appropriate rates and
grouped by work order number, if applicable. Time billed for labor shall be limited to hours actually worked at the work site.
3. PAYMENT TERMS:
All payments will be processed in accordance with Texas Prompt Payment Act, Texas Government Code, Subtitle F, Chapter
2251. The City will pay Vendor within thirty days after acceptance of goods, supplies, materials, equipment or the day of
performance of services was completed, or the day of receipt of a correct invoice for goods, supplies, materials, equipment or
services, whichever is later. The Vendor may charge a late fee (fee shall not be greater than that permitted under the Texas
Prompt Payment Act) for payments not made in accordance with this prompt payment policy; however, the policy does not
apply to payments made by the City in the event: (a) there is a bona fide dispute between the City and Vendor concerning the
goods, supplies, materials, equipment delivered, or the services performed, that causes the payment to be late; (b) the terms
of a federal agreement, grant, regulation or statute prevents the City from making a timely payment with Federal funds; (c)
there is a bona fide dispute between the Vendor and a subcontractor and its suppliers concerning goods, supplies, material or
equipment delivered, or the services performed, which caused the payment to be late; or (d) the invoice is not mailed to the
City in strict accordance with instructions on the Purchase Order or Agreement, or other such contractual agreement.
4. RIGHT TO AUDIT:
The Vendor agrees that the representatives of the City shall have access to, and the rights to audit, examine, or reproduce, any
and all records of the Vendor related to the performance under this Agreement. The Vendor shall retain all such records for a
RFQ #201450
Professional Services for Comprehensive Parking Study and Conceptual Design of Parking Structure
18 | P a g e
period of four (4) years after final payment on this Agreement or until all audit and litigation matters that the City has brought
to the attention of the Vendor are resolved, whichever is longer. The Vendor agrees to refund to the City any overpayments
disclosed by any such audit.
5. FIRM PRICING:
The price shall remain firm for the duration of the Purchase Order or Contract, or extension periods. No separate line item
charges shall be permitted for either bidding or invoice purposes, which shall include equipment rental, demurrage, fuel
surcharges, delivery charges, and cost associated with obtaining permits or any other extraneous charges. Vendor further
certifies that the prices in the Offer have been arrived at independently without consultation, communication, or agreement
for the purpose of restricting competition, as to any matter relating to such fees with any other firm or with any competitor.
6. PRICE WARRANTY:
The Vendor warrants the prices quoted are not materially higher than the Vendors current prices on orders by others for like
deliverables under similar terms of purchase. In addition to any other remedy available, the City may deduct from any amounts
owed to the Vendor, or otherwise recover, any amounts paid for items materially in excess of the Vendor’s current prices on
orders by others for like deliverables under similar terms of purchase.
7. VENDOR OWING TAXES OR FEES TO THE CITY:
Payment will not be made to any person, firm or in arrears in taxes or fees to the City.
IV. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
A. VENDOR’S OBLIGATION:
Vendor shall fully and timely provide all deliverables described in Solicitation, Vendor’s Offer in strict accordance with the terms,
covenants and conditions of the Agreement and all applicable federal, state and local laws, rules and regulations.
B. DEFAULT:
Vendor shall be in default under the Agreement if the Vendor (a) fails to fully, timely and faithfully perform any of its material
obligations under the Agreement, (b) becomes insolvent or seeks relief under the bankruptcy laws of the United States or (c) makes
a material misrepresentation in Vendor’s Offer, or in any report or deliverable required to be submitted by Vendor to the City.
C. ABANDONMENT OR DEFAULT:
A Vendor who abandons or defaults the work on the Agreement and causes the City to purchase the services elsewhere may be
charged the difference in service if any and may not be considered in the re-advertisement of the service and may be rejected as an
irresponsible bidder and not considered in future Solicitations for the same type of service unless the scope of work is significantly
modified.
D. TERMINATION/CANCELLATION:
1. TERMINATION FOR CAUSE:
In the event of default by the Vendor, the City shall have the right to terminate the Agreement for cause, by written notice
effective ten (10) calendar days, unless otherwise specified, after the date of such notice, unless the Vendor, within such ten
(10) day period cures such default, or provides evidence sufficient to prove to the City’s satisfaction that such default does not,
in fact, exist. In addition to any other remedies available under law or in equity, the City shall be entitled to recover all actual
damages, costs, losses and expenses incurred by the City as a result of the Vendor’s default, including without limitation, cost
of cover, reasonable attorneys’ fees, court costs and prejudgment and post-judgment interest at the maximum lawful rate.
Additionally, in the event of default by the Vendor, the City may remove the Vendor from the City’s Vendor List and any Offer
submitted by the Vendor may be disqualified for up to three (3) years. All rights and remedies under the Agreement are
cumulative and not exclusive of any other right or remedy provided by law.
2. TERMINATION WITHOUT CAUSE:
The City shall have the right to terminate the Agreement, in whole or in part, without cause any time upon thirty (30) calendar
days’ prior written notice. Upon receipt of a notice of termination, the Vendor shall promptly cease all further work pursuant
to the Agreement, with such exceptions, if any, specified in the notice of termination. The City shall pay the Vendor, to the
extent of funds appropriated or otherwise legally available for such purposes, for all goods delivered and services performed
and obligations incurred prior to the date of termination in accordance with the terms hereof.
3. NON-APPROPRIATION:
The resulting Agreement is a commitment of the City’s current revenues only. It is understood and agreed that the City shall
have the right to terminate the Agreement at the end of any City fiscal year (September 30th) if the governing body of the City
does not appropriate funds sufficient to purchase the estimated yearly quantities, as determined by the City’s budget for the
fiscal year in question. The City may effect such termination by giving the Vendor a written notice of termination at the end of
its then current fiscal year.
4. CANCELLATION:
The City reserves the right to cancel the Agreement for default all or any part of the delivered portion of the deliverables if the
Vendor breaches any term hereof including warranties, or becomes insolvent or commits acts of bankruptcy. Such right of
cancellation is in addition to and not in lieu of any remedies which the City may have in law or in equity.
E. FRAUD:
Fraudulent statements by the Vendor on any Offer or in any report or deliverable required to be submitted by the Vendor to the city
shall be grounds for termination of the Agreement for cause by the City and may result in legal action.
F. INDEMNITY:
VENDOR SHALL DEFEND, INDEMNIFY AND HOLD HARMLESS THE CITY, ITS OFFICERS, AGENTS, SERVANTS AND EMPLOYEES FROM
AND AGAINST ANY AND ALL SUITS, ACTIONS, LEGAL PROCEEDINGS, CAUSES OF ACTION, CLAIMS, DEMANDS, DAMAGES,
JUDGMENTS, LOSSES, LIENS, COSTS, EXPENSES, ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND ANY AND ALL OTHER COSTS, FEES AND/OR CLAIMS OF ANY
RFQ #201450
Professional Services for Comprehensive Parking Study and Conceptual Design of Parking Structure
19 | P a g e
KIND OR DESCRIPTION ARISING OUT OF, IN CONNECTION WITH OR RESULTING FROM THE AGREEMENT OR THE GOODS OR SERVICES
PROVIDED UNDER THE AGREEMENT.
IF THE VENDOR AND THE CITY ARE CONCURRENTLY NEGLIGENT, EACH PARTY’S LIABILITY SHALL BE LIMITED TO THAT PORTION OF
NEGLIGENCE ATTRIBUTABLE TO IT AS DETERMINED UNDER THE APPLICABLE PROPORTIONATE RESPONSIBILITY RULES OF THE STATE
OF TEXAS.
G. LIABILITY:
Any person, firm or corporation performing services pursuant to this Agreement or Purchase Order shall be liable for all damages
incurred while in the performance of such services. Vendor assumes full responsibility for the work to be performed hereunder and
hereby releases, relinquishes, and discharges the City, its officers, agents and employees from all claims, demands and causes of
action of any nature including the cost of defense thereof, for any injury to, including death of, any person whether that person be a
third party, supplier or an employee of either of the parties hereto, and any loss of or damage to property, whether the same be
that of either of the parties, caused by or alleged to have been caused by, arising out of or in connection with the issuance of the
Agreement or Purchase Order to the Vendor and the negligence of the Vendor, whether or not said claims, demands and causes of
action in whole or in part are covered by insurance. Certificates of insurance may be required for, but not limited to, Commercial
General Liability, Business Auto Liability, Workers Compensation and Professional Liability Insurance.
H. INFRINGEMENT:
Vendor represents and warrants to the City that: (a) Vendor shall provide the City good and indefeasible title to the deliverables and
(b) the deliverables supplied by the Vendor in accordance with the specifications of the Agreement shall not infringe, directly or
contributory, any patent, trademark, copyright, trade secret or any other intellectual property right of any kind of any third party;
that no claims have been made by an person or entity with respect to the ownership or operation of the deliverables and the Vendor
does not know of any basis for any such claims. Vendor shall, at its sole expense, defend, indemnify and hold the City harmless from
and against all liability, damages and costs (including court costs and reasonable fees of attorneys and other professionals) arising
out of or resulting from: (a) any claim that the City’s exercise anywhere in the world of the rights associated with the City’s
ownership, and if applicable, license rights, and its use of the deliverable infringes the intellectual property rights of any third party;
or (b) Vendor’s breach of any of the Vendor’s representations or warranties stated in this Agreement. In the event of any such
claim, the City shall have the right to monitor such claim or, at its option, engage its own separate counsel to act as co-counsel on
the City’s behalf. Further, Vendor agrees that the City’s specifications regarding the deliverables shall in no way diminish Vendor’s
warranties or obligations under the Section, and the City makes no warranty that the products, development or delivery of such
deliverables will not impact such warranties of Vendor.
I. DAMAGE TO CITY PROPERTY:
Vendor shall be responsible for any and all damage to the City’s equipment and/or property, the workplace and its contents, by its
work, negligence in work, its personnel and equipment. Vendor shall be responsible and liable for the safety, injury and health of its
working personnel while its employees are performing service work.
J. OVERCHARGES:
Vendor hereby assigns to the City any and all claims for overcharges associated with this Agreement which arise under the antitrust
laws of the United States, 15 USCA Section 1 et seq., and/or which arise under the antitrust laws of the State of Texas, Business and
Commerce Code Ann., Section 15.01, et seq.
K. CONFIDENTIALITY:
In order to provide the deliverables to the City, Vendor may require access to certain of the City’s and/or its licensors’ confidential
information (including, but not limited to, inventions, employee information, trade secrets, confidential know-how, confidential
business information and other information which the City or its licensors consider confidential)(collectively, “Confidential
Information”). Vendor acknowledges and agrees that the Confidential Information is the valuable property of the City and/or its
licensors, and any unauthorized use, disclosure, dissemination or other release of the Confidential Information will substantially
injure the City and/or its licensors. The Vendor (including its employees, subcontractors, agents or representatives) agrees that it
will maintain the Confidential Information in strict confident and shall not disclose, disseminate, copy, divulge, recreate or otherwise
use the Confidential Information without the prior written consent of the City, or in a manner not expressly permitted under this
Agreement, unless the Confidential Information is required to be disclosed by law or as a result of an order of any court or other
governmental authority with proper jurisdiction, provided the Vendor promptly notifies the City prior to disclosing such information
so as to permit the City reasonable time to seek an appropriate protective order. The Vendor agrees to use protective measures no
less stringent than the Vendor uses within its own business to protect its own most valuable information, which protective measures
shall under all circumstances be at least reasonable measures to ensure the continued confidentiality of the Confidential
Information.
L. CODES, PERMITS, LICENSES:
Vendor shall comply with all federal, state and local standards, codes and ordinances and the terms and conditions of the services of
the electric utility, as well as other authorities that have jurisdiction pertaining to equipment and materials used and their
application. None of the terms or provisions of the specification shall be construed as waiving any rules, regulations or requirements
of these authorities. Vendor shall be responsible for obtaining all necessary permits, certificates and/or licenses to fulfill contractual
obligations to the City.
M. ADVERTISING/PUBLICITY:
Vendor shall not advertise or otherwise publicize, without the City’s prior written consent, the fact that the City has entered into the
Agreement, except to the extent required by applicable law.
RFQ #201450
Professional Services for Comprehensive Parking Study and Conceptual Design of Parking Structure
20 | P a g e
N. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR:
The Agreement shall not be construed as creating an employer/employee relationship, a partnership or joint venture. The Vendor’s
services shall be those of an independent contractor. The Vendor agrees and understands that the Agreement does not grant any
rights or privileges established for employees of the City. Vendor shall not be within protection or coverage of the City’s Worker
Compensation insurance, Health Insurance, Liability Insurance or any other insurance that the City, from time to time, may have in
force.
O. LIENS:
Vendor shall defend, indemnify and hold the City harmless from and against any and all liens and encumbrances for all labor, goods
and services provided under this Agreement. At the City’s request, the Vendor or its subcontractors shall provide a proper release of
all liens or satisfactory evidence of freedom from liens shall be delivered to the City.
P. ASSIGNMENT/DELEGATION:
The Agreement shall be binding upon and endure to the benefit of the City and the Vendor, and their respective successors and
assignees, provided however, that no right or interest in the Agreement shall be assigned and no obligation shall be delegated by the
Vendor without the prior written consent of the City. Any attempted assignment or delegation by the Vendor shall be void unless
made in conformity with this Section. The Agreement is not intended to confer any rights or benefits on any person, firm or entity
not a party hereto; it being the intention of the parties that there be no third party beneficiaries to the Agreement.
Q. INTERPRETATION:
The Agreement is intended by both parties as the final, complete and exclusive statement of the terms of their agreement. No
course of prior dealing between the parties or course of performance or usage of the trade shall be relevant to supplement or
explain any term used in the Agreement. Although the Agreement may have been substantially drafted by one party, it is the intent
of the parties that all provisions be construed in a manner fair to both parties, reading no provision more strictly against one party of
the other. Whenever a term defined by the Uniform Commercial Code (the “UCC”), as enacted by the State of Texas, is used in the
Agreement, the UCC definition shall control unless otherwise defined in the Agreement.
R. GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE:
This Agreement is made under and shall be governed by the laws of the State of Texas, including when applicable, the UCC as
adopted in Texas, VTCA, Business & Commerce Code, Chapter 1, excluding any rule or principle that would refer to and apply the
substantive law of another state or jurisdiction. This Agreement is fully performable in Georgetown, TX, and the venue for any
action related to this Agreement shall be Georgetown, TX. All issues arising from this Agreement shall be resolved in the courts of
Williamson County, Texas and the parties agree to submit to the exclusive personal jurisdiction of such courts. The foregoing,
however, shall not be construed or interpreted to limit or restrict the right or the ability of the City to seek and secure injunctive
relief from any competent authority as contemplated herein and does not waive the city’s defense of sovereign immunity.
S. INTERLOCAL COOPERATIVE PURCHASING/PIGGYBACK CONTRACTS:
Other governmental entities may be extended the opportunity to purchase from Solicitations of the City, with the consent and
agreement of the awarded Vendor(s) and the City. Such consent and agreement shall be conclusively inferred from lack of
exception to this clause in Vendor’s Response. However, all parties indicate their understanding and all parties hereby expressly
agree that the City is not an agent of, partner to or representative of those outside agencies or entities and that the City is not
obligated or liable for any action or debts that arise out of such independently negotiated piggyback procurements.
T. SURVIVABILITY OF OBLIGATIONS:
All provisions of the Agreement that impose continuing obligations on the parties, including but not limited to the warranty,
indemnity and confidentiality obligations of the parties, shall survive the expiration or termination of the Agreement.
U. CLAIMS:
If a claim, demand, suit or other action is asserted against the Vendor which arises under or concerns the Agreement, or which could
have a material adverse effect on the Vendor’s ability to perform thereunder, the Vendor shall give written notice to the City within
ten (10) calendar days after receipt of notice by the Vendor. Such notice to the City shall state the date of notification of any such
claim, demand, suit or other action; the names and address of the claimant(s); the basis thereof; and the name of each person
against whom such claim is asserted. Such notice shall be delivered to the Purchasing Department as set forth below and to the City
Attorney at PO Box 409, Georgetown, TX 78627.
V. NOTICES:
Unless otherwise specified, all notices, requests or other communications required or appropriate to be given under the Agreement
shall be in writing and deemed delivered three (3) business days after postmarked if sent by US Postal Service Certified or Registered
Mail, Return Receipt Requested. Notices delivered by other means shall be deemed delivered upon receipt by the addressee.
Routine communications may be made by first class mail, fax, or other commercially accepted means. Notices to the Vendor shall
be sent to the address specified in the Vendor’s Offer or at such other address as a party may notify the other in writing. Notices to
the City shall be addressed to: City of Georgetown, Purchasing Department, PO Box 409, Georgetown, TX 78627 and marked to the
attention of the Purchasing Manager.
W. GRATUITIES:
The City may, by written notice to the Vendor, cancel the Agreement without liability if it is determined by the City that gratuities
were offered or give by the Vendor or any agent or representative of the Vendor to any officer or employee of the City with the
intent of securing the Agreement or securing favorable treatment with respect to awarding or amending or the making of any
determinations with respect to performing of the Agreement. In the event the Agreement is cancelled by the City pursuant to this
RFQ #201450
Professional Services for Comprehensive Parking Study and Conceptual Design of Parking Structure
21 | P a g e
Section, the City shall be entitled, in addition to any other rights and remedies, to recover the benefits or payments to the Vendor,
as a result of the gratuities.
X. PERSONAL INTEREST PROHIBITED:
No officer, employee, independent consultant or elected official of the City who is involved in the development, evaluation or
decision-making process of the performance of the any Solicitation shall have a financial interest, direct or indirect, in the resulting
Agreement. Any willful violation of this Section shall constitute impropriety in office, and any officer or employee guilty thereof shall
be subject to disciplinary action up to and including dismissal. In the event a member of the governing body or an appointed board
or commission of the City belongs to a cooperative association, the City may purchase equipment or supplies for the association only
if no member of the governing body, board or commission will receive pecuniary benefit from the purchase, other than as reflected
as in increase in dividends distributed generally to members of the association. Any violation of this provision with the knowledge,
expressed or implied, by the Vendor shall render the Agreement voidable by the City. Nevertheless, the City may obtain the
equipment or service if a conflict of interest affidavit is filed and the Council member recuses his/herself.
Y. WAIVER:
No claim or right arising out of a breach of the Agreement can be discharged in whole or in part by a waiver or renunciation of the
claim or right unless the waiver or renunciation is supported by consideration and is in writing signed by the aggrieved party. No
waiver by either the Vendor or the City of any one or more events of default by the other party shall operate as, or be construed to
be, a permanent waiver of any rights or obligations under the Agreement, or an express or implied acceptance of any other existing
or future default(s), whether of similar or different character.
Z. DISPUTE RESOLUTION:
If either the Vendor or the City has a claim, dispute or other matter in question for breach of duty, obligations, services rendered or
any warranty that arises under this Agreement, the parties shall first attempt to resolve the matter through this dispute resolution
process. The disputing party shall notify the other party in writing as soon as practicable after discovering the claim, dispute or
breach. The notice shall state the nature of the dispute and list the party’s specific reasons for such dispute. Within ten (10)
business days of receipt of the notice, both parties shall make a good faith effort, in person or through generally accepted means, to
resolve any claim, dispute, breach or other matter in question that may arise out of, or in connection with, this Agreement. If the
parties fail to resolve the dispute within sixty (60) days of the date of receipt of the notice of the dispute, then the parties may
submit the matter to non-binding mediation upon written consent of authorized representatives of both parties in accordance with
the Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association or other applicable rules governing mediation than in effect. If the
parties cannot resolve the dispute through mediation, then either party shall have the right to exercise any and all remedies
available under law regarding the dispute.
AA. INVALIDITY:
The invalidity, illegality or unenforceability of any provision of this Agreement shall in no way affect the validity or enforceability of
any other portion or provision of the Agreement. Any void provision shall be deemed severed from the Agreement and the balance
of the Agreement shall be construed and enforced as if the Agreement did not contain the particular portion or provision held to be
void. The parties further agree to reform the Agreement to replace the stricken provision with a valid provision that comes as close
as possible to the intent of the stricken provision. The provisions of this section shall not prevent the entire Agreement from being
void should a provision which is the essence of the Agreement be determined to be void.
BB. RIGHT TO ASSURANCES:
In the event the City, in good faith, has reason to question the intent of the Vendor to perform, the City may demand written
assurances of the intent to perform. In the event no written assurance is given within the time specified, the City may treat this
failure as an anticipatory repudiation of the Agreement.
RFQ #201450
Professional Services for Comprehensive Parking Study and Conceptual Design of Parking Structure
22 | P a g e
EXHIBIT B –
City Owned Parking Areas
RFQ #201450
Professional Services for Comprehensive Parking Study and Conceptual Design of Parking Structure
23 | P a g e
EXHIBIT C –
Downtown Overlay District
S
M
AI
N
S
T
S
AUS
T
IN
AV
E
W 4 T H S T
FO
R
EST
S
T
W 1 0 T H S T
W 6 T H S T
MA
RT
I
N L
UT
H
E
R
K
IN
G
J
R ST
E 1 1 T H S T
E 1 0 T H S T
W 8 T H S T
W 9 T H S T E 9 T H S T
E 8 T H S T
E 7 T H S T
E 6 T H S T
E 5 T H S T
E 4 T H S T
W 11THST
E 3 R D S T
S
CH
URCH
ST
F
O
R
E
S
T
S
T
W
E
S
T
ST
W 3 R D S T
W 7 T H S T
W 5 T H S T
T
I
N
BA
R
N
A
LY
W 5 T H ST
W
E
S
T
S
T ROCKST
0 360180Fee t
1 in ch = 25 9 feetE This pro duc t is for in formatio nal pur poses and may n ot have been prepared for or be suitable for lega l, engine ering , or s urveying p urp ose s. It doe s not r epresent a n on-th e-g rou nd surve y and rep res ents only the app ro xima te relativ e lo catio n of prop erty boundaries.
Pa rkin g Lot Study
Legend
City Parking Lots
WCA D Parcels
±Downtown District Overlay Map
August 6, 2014
Kimberly Garrett
Parks Director
City of Georgetown
PO Box 409
Georgetown, TX 78627
Re: Broker’s Opinion of Value
At your request, and acting in my capacity as a real estate broker, I have prepared for your review a Broker's
Opinion of Value for a roughly 2.05 acre parcel of land, owned by the City of Georgetown and utilized as
a public swimming pool and neighborhood park with 2 outdoor basketball courts. This Broker's Opinion
of Value is limited to the land and miscellaneous improvements that comprise the bulk of the property.
In establishing my Broker’s Opinion of Value for this property, I have chosen to focus on the sales and
pending sales of comparable properties. The true market value of any property will be determined by the
motivation of the parties to any transaction and usually reflects their basic understanding of the market and
their willingness to agree to the concept of "value" independently of the appraisal process.
Property Description
Located at a signalized corner, this parcel is an ideal retail property in the heart of Georgetown’s prime
growth corridor. Walgreens Pharmacy, Sonic Verizon Wireless and numerous other local and national retail
offerings are in the immediate area. The property sits on the away corner of the ‘going home’ side for
traffic headed toward the main entrance of Sun City– Georgetown. Immediately adjacent to the property
sits the Reata Trails neighborhood. The immediate area is fully developed.
Location: The property is located the north side of Williams Drive at the NW corner of
Williams Drive and Lakeway Drive in Georgetown, TX 78628 (the “Property”).
Legal Description: 1.147 acres of land, more or less, out of the David Wright Survey, Abstract #13,
Williamson County, Texas and Lots 9-12, inclusive, Block M, Reata Trails Unit I.
Owner: The City of Georgetown
Property Tax IDs: R362977, R089854, R089855, R089856 and R089857
Tax Assessed For the year 2014 the property tax assessment is $1,188,499; $13.30/sf.
Frontage: The site offers approximately 200’ of frontage on Williams Drive, approximately
337’ of frontage on Lakeway Drive and approximately 345’ of frontage on Broken Spoke. The intersection
of Lakeway and Williams is a signalized intersection.
Flood Plain: No, per the City of Georgetown’s website, dated 7/15/2013.
Topography: Essentially ‘at grade’ with the roadways with a gentle fall from east to the west
across the property.
LAND USE ENTITLEMENTS
Investors in real estate are investing in more than land, buildings, and equipment. They are investing
in a bundle of legal rights and protected interests. The value of their investment is influenced by the
degree to which these rights and ownership interests are present.
REcampus, Florida Real Estate Principles, Practices and laws
As a general rule a land use entitlement is defined as any kind of permission to use or develop land
nominally issued by a regulatory body. Land use entitlements can be granted (or denied) by local
governments like cities or counties, or by other bodies, like Fish & Wildlife, the Army Corps of Engineers
or the Department of Transportation, among others. There are entitlements by right such as a permitted use
under a zoning classification. There are special use entitlements such as special use zoning permit or storm-
water pollution abatement permit. Entitlements can also be approved building permits, or permission to
discharge storm-water runoff into a specific body of water, permission to a install a curb cut or median
opening, or any other range of regulatory approvals issued for an individual property.
Two adjacent parcels that appear identical may have substantially different economic values due to differing
land use entitlements accrued to each site. Because land valuations are inherently tied to the degree of land
use entitlements present, it is important to uncover, from a valuation process, the entitlements present on
the property – or that may be achievable by a future user. While the regulatory process makes the process
of increasing the value of the property’s "bundle of rights" more difficult, it also means greater rewards
when a property achieves full entitlements for the highest and best use of the land.
Utilities: The Property is currently served on-site by all City of Georgetown utilities,
including water, wastewater and electricity. Verizon supplies telephone service in the area. Gas services
are available from Atmos Energy with the line located in the south right-of-way line of Williams Drive on
the south side of the property.
Zoning: Per the City of Georgetown’s website, the property is currently zoned C-3,
commercial.
Subdivision Status: Lots 9 – 12, Block M, have gone through the subdivision process. The balance of
the property, the 1.147 acres has not gone through the subdivision process. A redevelopment of the property
into any other use will require the entire tract to be subdivided.
Gateway Overlay District: The property is within the City of Georgetown’s gateway overlay district.
All parcels of land inside the gateway overlay district are required to comply with an extra set of regulatory
approvals as a condition of any proposed change in use. The purpose of the District is to visually enhance
the entry corridors. Various corridors into the City are designated for the purpose of applying additional
landscape protections in a 25-foot wide landscaped area along the corridor.
Edward’s Aquifer Recharge Zone: The property sits on top of the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone
and will require approval of a Water Pollution Abatement Plan as a condition of site-development
permitting. Storm-water runoff will need to meet or exceed requirements set forth by the Texas
Environmental Quality Commission.
Environmental Issues: Public records do indicate the existence of suitable habitat for endangered karst
species throughout the northwest quadrant of Georgetown. Fish & Wildlife Service of the U.S. Department
of the Interior would have to make the final determination of potential impact any development of the
property might pose, but this is generally an area known to pose environmental risks to development
activity. It is unknown whether or not this property has been previously inspected for environmental
features. Fish & Wildlife has proposed listing the Georgetown Salamander as an endangered species; the
impact of that proposed listing is still to be determined. There are no indications that any springs are located
within the immediate area, but the full impact of the potential listing, including any proposed land
development limitations, are expected to focus on increasing storm-water runoff mitigations as a condition
necessary to enhance the salamander habitat. Those criteria are still to be determined as of the time of this
report.
General Market Conditions
In general, the 2014 land market is beginning to see signs of significant improvement in demand.
Historically, the demand for real estate is tied to the growth in the job sector. The Greater Austin
Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) has generated positive signs in the local employment picture. Per the
State of Texas publication “Texas Labor Market Review”, there are approximately 899,700 people
employed in July 2014 in the greater MSA; 31,200 more than in July 2013. The key to the demand for real
estate is a continued expansion in employment, in my opinion. This growth in employment is only positive
for local real estate demand.
Increasing demand for all types of real estate, but especially commercial real estate is most-reliably tied to
an increase in the population and employment inside a specific geographic area. More people with jobs
generally translate into a larger pool of disposable income – which leads to increasing demand for
commercial property.
In Georgetown for the last twenty years, the dominant growth corridor has been on the northwest side of
Georgetown in the Williams Drive corridor. During the last 10 years, Georgetown’s population growth
consists of two component parts, traditional single-family housing and age-restricted housing. The age-
restricted sector makes up roughly 50% of the historical activity since 2004.
As the attached chart indicates, the pace of new household formations in the Georgetown market is down
significantly from the 2006 peak, but the resurgence started in late 2012 continues unabated for 2014. Total
single-family permits issued through the first 7 month of 2014 virtually match the total number of permits
issued in 2012.
Ci
t
y
o
f
G
e
o
r
g
e
t
o
w
n
N
e
w
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
P
e
r
m
i
t
s
I
s
s
u
e
d
B
y
Y
e
a
r
01
/
0
1
/
2
0
1
4
-
0
6
/
3
0
/
2
0
1
4
(
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
F
i
l
t
e
r
e
d
T
o
G
I
S
D
O
n
l
y
)
Ye
a
r
To
t
a
l
P
e
r
m
i
t
s
T
o
t
a
l
E
s
t
V
a
l
u
e
To
t
a
l
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
M
u
l
t
i
f
a
m
i
l
y
Es
t
V
a
l
u
e
E
s
t
V
a
l
u
e
E
s
t
V
a
l
u
e
Tr
a
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
*
A
g
e
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
19
9
7
80
0
$
1
2
4
,
0
5
9
,
8
0
6
77
9
18
3
$1
0
5
,
5
3
9
,
8
9
6
$
1
3
,
3
9
3
,
1
0
0
$
5
,
1
2
6
,
8
1
0
26
4
5
1
5
19
9
8
72
0
$
1
4
2
,
1
3
5
,
6
8
8
68
0
37
3
$9
1
,
9
8
8
,
1
2
8
$
4
0
,
8
3
0
,
9
6
0
$
9
,
3
1
6
,
6
0
0
28
8
3
9
2
19
9
9
73
0
$
1
3
2
,
6
7
1
,
9
8
2
65
5
71
4
$9
8
,
8
7
3
,
6
9
4
$
2
5
,
3
5
7
,
7
8
8
$
8
,
4
4
0
,
5
0
0
36
8
2
8
7
20
0
0
95
5
$
1
8
3
,
6
4
2
,
5
8
0
91
1
20
2
4
$1
3
0
,
9
9
4
,
6
1
0
$
1
2
,
9
8
8
,
7
7
0
$
3
9
,
6
5
9
,
2
0
0
55
3
3
5
8
20
0
1
74
1
$
1
3
4
,
5
2
9
,
9
4
0
68
1
49
1
1
$9
5
,
4
1
6
,
7
5
0
$
3
6
,
6
3
4
,
7
2
8
$
2
,
4
7
8
,
4
6
2
48
8
1
9
3
20
0
2
73
2
$
1
7
6
,
9
9
1
,
2
5
6
68
7
45
0
$1
2
8
,
8
4
9
,
2
2
4
$
4
8
,
1
4
2
,
0
3
2
$
0
33
8
3
4
9
20
0
3
65
8
$
1
3
5
,
7
2
4
,
2
5
7
57
8
79
1
$1
0
6
,
7
3
7
,
5
4
4
$
2
4
,
5
3
5
,
1
6
3
$
4
,
4
5
1
,
5
5
0
27
7
3
0
1
20
0
4
1,
0
8
8
$
2
2
6
,
6
1
6
,
9
6
9
94
5
13
6
7
$1
7
4
,
4
1
9
,
0
4
8
$
4
9
,
8
9
4
,
0
8
1
$
2
,
3
0
3
,
8
4
0
43
1
5
1
4
20
0
5
1,
2
6
2
$
2
7
9
,
6
4
5
,
8
3
9
1,
0
7
4
18
3
5
$2
0
4
,
4
7
3
,
6
9
4
$
6
2
,
3
3
6
,
1
0
5
$
1
2
,
8
3
6
,
0
4
0
51
7
5
5
7
20
0
6
1,
3
2
0
$
3
3
8
,
7
9
8
,
5
2
2
1,
1
6
5
15
1
4
$2
3
0
,
4
5
2
,
0
5
0
$
7
1
,
3
1
5
,
4
3
9
$
3
7
,
0
3
1
,
0
3
3
53
6
6
2
9
20
0
7
1,
0
0
9
$
4
5
6
,
7
2
1
,
2
1
9
88
8
11
9
2
$2
2
3
,
1
3
9
,
3
3
9
$
2
3
3
,
2
0
8
,
4
2
4
$
3
7
3
,
4
5
6
42
3
4
6
5
20
0
8
73
9
$
2
0
5
,
3
8
9
,
9
9
1
60
6
12
1
1
2
$1
4
8
,
7
8
9
,
3
2
0
$
5
4
,
6
5
4
,
5
8
5
$
1
,
9
4
6
,
0
8
6
23
6
3
7
0
20
0
9
57
3
$
1
7
2
,
4
1
8
,
3
0
2
44
1
13
2
0
$1
0
6
,
0
4
6
,
8
0
3
$
6
6
,
3
7
1
,
4
9
9
$
0
21
8
2
2
3
20
1
0
55
6
$
1
3
8
,
5
7
1
,
8
3
0
46
2
93
1
$1
1
0
,
1
8
9
,
7
4
7
$
2
8
,
2
2
3
,
0
8
3
$
1
5
9
,
0
0
0
17
9
2
8
3
20
1
1
52
8
$
1
9
3
,
3
5
4
,
6
7
7
44
0
88
0
$1
0
7
,
0
0
9
,
6
7
1
$
8
6
,
3
4
5
,
0
0
6
$
0
16
3
2
7
7
20
1
2
64
4
$
1
7
8
,
9
4
0
,
5
8
9
53
9
77
2
8
$1
3
3
,
7
0
7
,
3
3
1
$
1
9
,
1
1
8
,
1
0
2
$
2
6
,
1
1
5
,
1
5
6
26
7
2
7
2
20
1
3
96
2
$
3
1
5
,
1
9
4
,
1
7
4
82
6
92
4
4
$1
9
0
,
8
2
9
,
6
5
2
$
7
6
,
8
5
3
,
6
7
9
$
4
7
,
5
1
0
,
8
4
3
48
0
3
4
6
20
1
4
57
1
$
1
8
3
,
2
3
7
,
5
1
6
53
6
34
1
$1
3
4
,
7
7
0
,
8
4
6
$
1
8
,
4
6
6
,
6
7
0
$
3
0
,
0
0
0
,
0
0
0
36
4
1
7
2
Pe
r
m
i
t
D
a
t
a
f
r
o
m
Ci
t
y
o
f
G
e
o
r
g
e
t
o
w
n
*
A
g
e
-
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d
p
e
r
m
i
t
s
p
r
i
o
r
t
o
2
0
0
6
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
o
n
l
y
D
e
l
W
e
b
b
S
un
C
i
t
y
;
t
h
e
r
e
a
f
t
e
r
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
g
e-
r
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d
s
u
b
d
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
a
r
e
i
n
cl
u
d
e
d
.
12
,
9
1
4
$
3
,
7
1
8
,
6
4
5
,
1
3
7
12
,
8
9
3
1
,
5
4
5
1
5
0
$2
,
5
2
2
,
2
2
7
,
3
4
7
$
9
6
8
,
6
6
9
,
2
1
4
$
2
2
7
,
7
4
8
,
5
7
6
63
9
0
6
5
0
3
To
t
a
l
*
D
a
t
a
f
i
l
t
e
r
e
d
t
o
a
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
I
S
D
i
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
y
e
a
r
o
n
l
y
.
Pa
g
e
1
o
f
1
Pr
e
p
a
r
e
d
:
7
/
7
/
2
0
1
4
1
1
:
3
6
:
3
4
P
M
29
5
5
D
a
w
n
D
r
i
v
e
,
#
B
,
G
e
o
r
g
e
t
o
w
n
T
X
7
8
6
2
8
(5
1
2
)
9
3
0
-
5
7
9
6
Co
u
r
t
e
s
y
o
f
B
r
a
s
h
e
a
r
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
,
L
t
d
er
c
e
l
@
b
r
a
s
h
e
a
r
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
.
c
o
m
Comparable Property Sales
The real test of any proposed land transaction is the appraised value of the property. Regardless of the
agreed value of the property between the parties to the deal, getting the property to appraise for the lender
has become the most critical step in the financing process. While most appraisals are sensitive to the time
between the sales comps and the date of the appraisal, the unique nature of this parcel allows me, in my
opinion, to extend the window of applicable sales. My purpose is to generate a realistic value of the
property, given the very few transactions for purely ‘apple-to-apples’ sales. From my database, there have
been several sales in the greater market area that, in my opinion, will have an impact on the appraised value
on this property. Those sales are:
1. 2913 Williams Drive, Georgetown, TX: Gantt Family Partnership sold a .94 acre tract to
Autozone in July, 2013. The sales price was $692,500; $16.91/sf. The buyer paid all the costs of closing,
effectively adding another $.25/sf to the transaction. The property has just over 159 feet of frontage on
Williams Drive, was flat, at-grade and shared access to a regional detention/filtration pond. All City utilities
were available on the site. The property was zoned C-3 Regional Commercial. The property was purchased
for the construction of the new retail auto parts store. (See file #13-8)
2. 2951 Williams Drive, Georgetown, TX: Lewis, Nassour & Leander 70 Partners a 1.0 acre tract
to Austaco II Real estate Partners in September, 2009. The sales price was $640,000.00; $14.69/sf. The
property has just over 165 feet of frontage on Williams Drive, was flat, at-grade and shared access to a
regional detention/filtration pond. All City utilities were available on the site. The property was zoned C-
3 Regional Commercial. The property was purchased for the construction of the a Taco Bell Restuarant.
(See file #09-15)
3. 3809 Williams Drive, Georgetown, TX: JL Enterprises sold a 1.264 acre tract to O’Reilley Auto
Parts in September, 2011. The sales price was $622,176.19; $11.30/sf/sf. The property has almost 200’ of
frontage on Williams Drive. All City utilities are available to the site. The property was purchased for the
construction of a new auto parts store. (See file #11-12)
4. 3614 Williams Drive, Georgetown, TX: Aldea Partners, LLC sold a 1.0 acre tract to Jaxbella,
LLC in May, 2011. The sales prices was $475,000; $10.00/sf. The property is part of a master-planned
development and the individual site has very little actual frontage on Williams Drive. City water and
electric were on-site at the time of the sale. The property was purchased for the construction of a dentist
office. (See file #11-09)
5. 4507 Williams Drive, Georgetown, TX: Arrington Storage sold a .934 acre tract to BSD
Associates, LLC in October, 2011. The sales prices was $365,899; $8.40/sf. The property is part of a
master-planned development and the individual site has very little actual frontage on Williams Drive. City
water and electric were on-site at the time of the sale. The property was purchased for the construction of
a dentist office. (See file #11-19)
6. 4515 Williams Drive, Georgetown, TX: Big Red Poppy, LLC sold a 1.232 acre tract to Adelman
Holding – Williams, LLC in December, 2012. The sales prices was $698,000; $13.01/sf. The property is
part of a master-planned development and the individual site has approximately 200’ of frontage on
Williams Drive. All City utilities were on-site at the time of the sale. The property was purchased for the
construction of a medial office. (See file #12-15)
7. 5317 Williams Drive, Georgetown, TX: Greg Hall sold a 2.059 acre tract to SCC Sun City
Partners in January, 2012. The sales prices was $1,500,000.00; $16.72/sf. The property is part of a master-
planned development and the individual site has approximately 200’ of frontage on Williams Drive. All
City utilities were on-site at the time of the sale. The property was purchased for the construction of a
Walgreen’s Drugstore. (See file #12-01)
Simply applying the result of the average recent transactions to this site projects an indicated market value
of $1,202,708; $13.53/sf. However, none of the parcels are an exact match for the subject property. All of
the parcels were undeveloped land, while your site will need to be scrapped, with the pool demolished and
compacted fines being brought in to level the site to match the surrounding grade of the roadway. All the
sites except Sale #4 have storm-water detention on-site, some have less road frontage and some were ‘in-
line’ sites and none were located at a signal light. Additionally, each of the sites sold had a more conducive
configuration then your site does. You do have the advantage of being at a signal light, frontage on three
roads and existing infrastructure in place. Consequently, an arbitrary adjustment to the sales price reported
and the subject property has to be applied, in my opinion.
Map # Street # Street Name Acres Sales Price Per sf Sale Date
1 2913 Williams Drive 0.940 $692,500 $16.91 7/13
2 2951 Williams Drive 1.000 $640,000 $14.69 9/9
3 3809 Williams Drive 1.264 $622,176 $11.30 9/11
4 3614 Williams Drive 1.000 $475,000 $10.90 5/11
5 4507 Williams Drive 0.934 $341,750 $8.40 10/11
6 4515 Williams Drive 1.232 $698,000 $13.01 12/12
7 5317 Williams Drive 2.059 $1,500,000 $16.72 1/12
TOTAL: 8.429 $4,969,426
AVERAGE: 1.204 $13.53
Subject 2.04 $1,202,708 $13.53
Applying the averages
reported to the
subject property yields
the following
projection
Projected Site Value
Comparable Williams Drive Properties Sold
In my opinion, the adjustment in the economic differences between your property and the sold comparables
results in a net decrease in the projected economic value of your property by approximately $1.50/sf.
Consequently, it is my broker’s opinion that the property is market value of this property, assuming that the
buyer will pay all the costs associated with removing the improvements and bringing the site back level to
grade and construct the storm-water detention/filtration improvements, is about $1,100,000.00, or roughly
$12.37/sf.
Map # Street # Street Name Acres Sales Price Per sf Adjustment/
sf
Adjusted
Value
1 2913 Williams Drive 0.940 $692,500 $16.91 ($2.00)$14.91
2 2951 Williams Drive 1.000 $640,000 $14.69 ($2.00)$12.69
3 3809 Williams Drive 1.264 $622,176 $11.30 ($1.50)$9.80
4 3614 Williams Drive 1.000 $475,000 $10.90 ($1.00)$9.90
5 4507 Williams Drive 0.934 $341,750 $8.40 ($1.50)$6.90
6 4515 Williams Drive 1.232 $698,000 $13.01 ($2.00)$11.01
7 5317 Williams Drive 2.059 $1,500,000 $16.72 ($1.00)$15.72
TOTAL: 8.429 $4,969,426
AVERAGE: 1.204 $13.53
Comparable Williams Drive Properties Sold
1 2913 Williams Drive 0.940 $610,607 $14.91
2 2951 Williams Drive 1.000 $552,880 $12.69
3 3809 Williams Drive 1.264 $539,586 $9.80
4 3614 Williams Drive 1.000 $431,440 $9.90
5 4507 Williams Drive 0.934 $280,722 $6.90
6 4515 Williams Drive 1.232 $590,668 $11.01
7 5317 Williams Drive 2.059 $1,410,310 $15.72
TOTAL: 8.429 $4,416,214
AVERAGE: 1.204 $12.03
Subject 2.04 $1,068,819 $12.03
Broker's Adjusted Values
Projected Site Value
Applying the averages
reported to the
subject property yields
the following
projection
Please call me if you have questions or comments. Thanks for the opportunity to study this tract for you.
Sincerely;
Ercel Brashear
"THIS IS AN OPINION OF VALUE OR COMPARATIVE MARKET ANALYSIS AND SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED
AN APPRAISAL. In making any decision that relies upon my work, you should you know that I have not followed the guidelines
for development of an appraisal or analysis contained in the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal
Foundation."
1
2
34
5
6
7
S
RE
C
E
N
T
C
O
M
P
A
R
A
B
L
E
S
SITE
Land Database
PARCEL ID:R381095 ** to be divided into a separate lot
PROJECT:Autozone
LEGAL:Lot 3A, FINAL PLAT OF A REPLAT OF LOT 3, 2338 PLAZA-PHASE
TWO, a subdivision in Williamson County, Texas, according to the
map or plat thereof recorded in Document No. 2013017892, Official
2913 Williams Drive
78628
QUADRANT:GTN MAP PAGE:256MAP GRID:P
ACRES:0.940
SQ. FEET:40,946
ZONING:C-3
FRONTAGE:159' on Williams Drive
PHYSICAL
COMMENTS:
Flat, at grade with detension pond capacity already in place.
PROPOSED
USE:
Construction of an
Autozone
SALE DATE:7/3/2013 SALE PRICE:$692,500.00
$/SF:$16.91
TERMS:
TRANS.
COMMENTS:
Buyer paid for all costs of platting, brokerage fees, survey, title policy and other minor fees
GRANTOR:Gantt Family Partnership GRANTEE:Autozone
Print
this
recordLocation:
Site Information:
Sale Information:
OUR FILE #:13-8
# LOTS:1
UTILITIES:All City Services
$/ACRE:$736,702
$/LOT:$692,500
Source of Sale
Data:
UPDATE:
Confirming
Reference:
Confidential
Phone:
GTOR ADDR:GTEE ADDR:
Reference Information:
Georgetown Williamson
FOR SALE
Land Database
PARCEL ID:R504954
PROJECT:Taco Bell
LEGAL:Unit 3, 2338 Plaza Condominiums, Williamson County, TX
2951 Williams Drive
78628
QUADRANT:GT MAP PAGE:256MAP GRID:P
ACRES:1.000
SQ. FEET:43,560
ZONING:C-3
FRONTAGE:
PHYSICAL
COMMENTS:
Relatively flat rectangular lot created out ot the previous Auto Direct car sales lot.
PROPOSED
USE:
Build a Taco Bell
restaurant
SALE DATE:9/9/2009 SALE PRICE:$640,000.00
$/SF:$14.69
TERMS:Cash to Seller
TRANS.
COMMENTS:
GRANTOR:Lewis, Nassour & Leander 70
Partners
GRANTEE:Austaco II Real Estate Partners
Print
this
recordLocation:
Site Information:
Sale Information:
OUR FILE #:09-15
# LOTS:1
UTILITIES:All City services plus detension
$/ACRE:$640,000
$/LOT:$640,000
Source of Sale
Data:
UPDATE:
Confirming
Reference:
Confidential
Phone:
GTOR ADDR:GTEE ADDR:
Reference Information:
Georgetown Williamson
FOR SALE
Land Database
PARCEL ID:R046893
PROJECT:O'Reilley
LEGAL:Lot 1, Serenada Country Estates, Unit 1, Williamson County, Texas
3809 Williams Drive
78628
QUADRANT:GTN MAP PAGE:256MAP GRID:E
ACRES:1.264
SQ. FEET:55,060
ZONING:C-3
FRONTAGE:199' on Williams
PHYSICAL
COMMENTS:
A relatively flat, heavily treed lot with nearly 200' of frontage.
PROPOSED
USE:
Auto Parts
SALE DATE:9/29/2011 SALE PRICE:$622,176.19
$/SF:$11.30
TERMS:Cash to seller
TRANS.
COMMENTS:
GRANTOR:JL Enterprises, LLP GRANTEE:O'Reilley Auto Parts
Print
this
recordLocation:
Site Information:
Sale Information:
OUR FILE #:11-12
# LOTS:1
UTILITIES:All City services
$/ACRE:$492,228
$/LOT:$622,176
Source of Sale
Data:
UPDATE:9/29/2011
Confirming
Reference:
CONFIDENTIAL SOURCE
Phone:
GTOR ADDR:GTEE ADDR:
Reference Information:
Georgetown Williamson
FOR SALE
Land Database
PARCEL ID:R5044443
PROJECT:
LEGAL:Lot 4, Block 1, Sonrisa, Williamson County, TX
3614 Williams Drive
78628
QUADRANT:GTN MAP PAGE:256MAP GRID:K
ACRES:1.000
SQ. FEET:43,560
ZONING:C-1
FRONTAGE:Limited
PHYSICAL
COMMENTS:
PROPOSED
USE:
Build a dentist office
SALE DATE:5/30/2011 SALE PRICE:$475,000.00
$/SF:$10.90
TERMS:
TRANS.
COMMENTS:
Lender was Independent Bank
GRANTOR:Aldea Partners, LLC GRANTEE:Jaxbella, LLC
Print
this
recordLocation:
Site Information:
Sale Information:
OUR FILE #:11-09
# LOTS:1
UTILITIES:All City Services
$/ACRE:$475,000
$/LOT:$475,000
Source of Sale
Data:
UPDATE:8/1/2011
Confirming
Reference:
Steve Turner
Phone:
GTOR ADDR:GTEE ADDR:
Reference Information:
Georgetown Williamson
FOR SALE
Land Database
PARCEL ID:R480124
PROJECT:
LEGAL:Lot 8, Block A, West Georgetown Village, Phase I
4507 Williams Drive
78633
QUADRANT:GTN MAP PAGE:225MAP GRID:Z
ACRES:0.934
SQ. FEET:40,685
ZONING:C-1
FRONTAGE:
PHYSICAL
COMMENTS:
Sits adjacent to Wells Fargo; price includes access to regional stormwater detention pond
PROPOSED
USE:
Dental Office
SALE DATE:10/7/2011 SALE PRICE:$341,750.00
$/SF:$8.40
TERMS:Cash to Seller
TRANS.
COMMENTS:
GRANTOR:Arrington GRANTEE:BSD Associates, LLC
Print
this
recordLocation:
Site Information:
Sale Information:
OUR FILE #:11-19
# LOTS:1
UTILITIES:All City services
$/ACRE:$365,899
$/LOT:$341,750
Source of Sale
Data:
UPDATE:
Confirming
Reference:
Reagan Foster
Phone:(512) 814-9474
GTOR ADDR:GTEE ADDR:
Reference Information:
Georgetown Williamson
FOR SALE
Land Database
PARCEL ID:R480121
PROJECT:
LEGAL:Block A, Lot 5, West Georgetown Village 1
4515 Williams Drive
78633
QUADRANT:GTN MAP PAGE:225MAP GRID:Z
ACRES:1.232
SQ. FEET:53,666
ZONING:C-1
FRONTAGE:Williamson
PHYSICAL
COMMENTS:
PROPOSED
USE:
SALE DATE:12/14/2012 SALE PRICE:$698,000.00
$/SF:$13.01
TERMS:
TRANS.
COMMENTS:
GRANTOR:Big Red Poppy, LLC GRANTEE:Adelman Holding-Williams LLC
Print
this
recordLocation:
Site Information:
Sale Information:
OUR FILE #:12-15
# LOTS:1
UTILITIES:
$/ACRE:$566,558
$/LOT:$698,000
Source of Sale
Data:
UPDATE:
Confirming
Reference:
Steve Turner
Phone:
GTOR ADDR:GTEE ADDR:
Reference Information:
Georgetown Williamson
FOR SALE
Land Database
PARCEL ID:R513760
PROJECT:
LEGAL:Lot 1, Village Gate at Sun City
5317 Williams Drive
78633
QUADRANT:GT MAP PAGE:MAP GRID:
ACRES:2.059
SQ. FEET:89,690
ZONING:C-3
FRONTAGE:
PHYSICAL
COMMENTS:
PROPOSED
USE:
Construct a
Walgreen's
SALE DATE:1/17/2012 SALE PRICE:$1,500,000.00
$/SF:$16.72
TERMS:Cash to seller
TRANS.
COMMENTS:
GRANTOR:Greg Hall GRANTEE:SCC Sun City Partners
Print
this
recordLocation:
Site Information:
Sale Information:
OUR FILE #:12-01
# LOTS:1
UTILITIES:All City Services
$/ACRE:$728,509
$/LOT:$1,500,000
Source of Sale
Data:
UPDATE:
Confirming
Reference:
Confidential
Phone:
GTOR ADDR:GTEE ADDR:
Reference Information:
Georgetown Williamson
FOR SALE
Pool attendance numbers for 2012 - current year
June 12 July 12 Aug 12 June 13 July 13 Aug 13 June 14 July 14
Williams 2331 1822 2003 3413 2325 2091 2957 2891
River Ridge 847 579 318 1229 1004 428 1246 1200
Tennis Center 1301 956 491 1757 1363 200 1505 1409
Village 1421 1123 413 2342 1330 283 1913 1533
Aug 14
Proposed Southeast
Georgetown Splash Pad
August 27, 2014
2014-15 Parks CIP - $300,000
• What will a $300,000 splash pad look like
– APX 40’ x 50’ or 2,000 Square Feet
– 5 – 7 Above Ground Features
– 6 – 9 Below Ground Features
– Recirculation System
– Minor Site Improvements
City of Georgetown
2014-15 Parks CIP - $300,000
• Example 1
City of Georgetown
2014-15 Parks CIP - $300,000
• Example 2
City of Georgetown
2014-15 Parks CIP - $300,000
• Example 3
City of Georgetown
2014-15 Parks CIP - $300,000
• What is not included
– Additional Parking
– Additional Restrooms
– Pavilions or Large Shade Structures
– Major Utility Improvements
All can be included with a reduction in size and
features.
City of Georgetown
Possible Locations
• McMaster’s Athletic Complex
• San Jose Park
• Getsemani Community Center
• New Parkland
City of Georgetown
Possible Locations
City of Georgetown
McMaster’s Athletic Complex
City of Georgetown
McMaster’s Athletic Complex
City of Georgetown
• Advantages
– Available Parking
– Park Size – 46.16 acres
– Use Potential
• Disadvantages
– Lack of Restrooms
– Proximity of Utilities
– Use Potential
–Bark Park
San Jose Park
City of Georgetown
San Jose Park
City of Georgetown
• Advantages
– Available Parking
– Available Restrooms
– Proximity of Utilities
– Number of Residential Homes Nearby
• Disadvantages
– Park Size - 2.13 acres
– Loss of Practice Ball field
– Parking and Restroom Size
Getsemani Community Center
City of Georgetown
Getsemani Community Center
City of Georgetown
• Advantages
– Community Wide Center
– Number of Residential Homes Nearby
– Proximity of Utilities
• Disadvantages
– No Discussion of Partnership to Date
– Lack of Parking
– Private Property (Liability)
– Available Restrooms
New Parkland
City of Georgetown
• Advantages
– Starting From a Clean Slate
– Minimize Use Conflicts
• Disadvantages
– Finding a Suitable Location
– Cost of Acquisition
– Cost of Infrastructure Improvements
Questions?
City of Georgetown
City of Georgetown, Texas
SUBJECT:
Review/Discuss recommendations for Employee Compensation Market Comparators - Tadd
Phillips, HR Director
ITEM SUMMARY:
Human Resources staff will engage in review and discussion of the City’s employee compensation
market comparators for the purpose of GGAF input and eventual City Council endorsement of
both market comparators and strategy. The presentation objectives and outline are listed below.
Full details included in attached presentation and PDF.
Presentation Objectives
Review Compensation Program
Achieve GGAF feedback and buy-in on:
Compensation Market Comparators
Compensation Market Strategy
Answer any questions
Presentation Outline
Compensation Overview
Compensation Definitions
Market Comparators
Overview
Current
Recommended
Application
Market Position
Next Steps
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None at this time
SUBMITTED BY:
Tadd Phillips - HR Director
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
PowerPoint comp Market Comparators Cover Memo
Market Cities Cover Memo
Employee Compensation
Market Comparators
GGAF Presentation
August 27, 2014
Presentation Objectives
•Review Compensation Program
•Achieve GGAF feedback and buy-in on:
–Compensation Market Comparators
–Compensation Market Strategy
•Answer any questions
Presentation Outline
•Compensation Overview
•Compensation Definitions
•Market Comparators
–Overview
–Current
–Recommended
–Application
•Market Position
•Next Steps
Compensation Overview
•Municipal government service delivery occurs through
workforce, our #1 asset
•HR Major Department Goal:
–Attract, retain, develop and reward a quality workforce of
excellence
•Goal achievement requires we:
–Build compensation and benefits programs (Total Rewards)
aligned with goal
Total Rewards
Compensation Overview
•A Compensation program that attracts, retains, develops
and rewards a quality workforce considers:
–Internal Conditions
•Willingness and Ability to Pay
–Budget, Tax Rate, Management & City Council philosophies
•Internal Equity & Justice
–Classification, Salary Administration, and Rewards such as merit or steps
–External Conditions
•Labor cost trends
–Identified through salary surveys
–Assures that pay structures are competitive in order to increase recruitment and retention
Compensation Definitions
•Public Safety Steps
–Rewards service
–Consistent with market competitors
–Retention
–Inflexible
Compensation Definitions
•Merit Pay
–Ties pay to performance
–Individual pay range penetration
–Retention
–Methodology/delivery of reward can be confusing
Compensation Definitions
•COLA
–Intended to reflect cost of living increase, based on CPI
–Moves ranges
–Enhances recruitment
–Retains individual range penetration
Market Comparators - Overview
•External condition & labor costs trends identified through
salary survey
•Salary survey requires we define two things:
1.Benchmark positions to compare
2.Market Comparators
Market Comparators - Questions
•Who may we lose employees to?
•Who may employees leave to come to Georgetown?
•What employers do we believe are similar to the City of
Georgetown?
•What employers do we wish to emulate?
Market Comparators - Factors
•Relevant factors:
–Proximity
–Size
–Similarity in Services rendered
–Ability to pay
•Tax rate
•Total taxable value
–Similar characteristics such as:
•Adjacent to metropolitan area
•Growth community
Market Comparators - Current
Market Comparators - Recommended
Proximity
City of Austin
City of Cedar Park
City of Leander
City of Pflugerville
City of Round Rock
Williamson County
Similarity
City of San Marcos
City of New Braunfels
City of Sugar Land
City of Grapevine
City of Denton
Town of Flower Mound
Industry specific disciplines such as Utilities, Fire, and Police
would utilize good matches from this group + up to 5 additional
similar organizations.
Market Comparators - Application
Min Mid Max
Austin 43,597$ 55,930$ 70,512$
Williamson County 45,894$ 56,223$ 66,551$
Cedar Park 41,202$ 50,267$ 59,332$
Round Rock 44,844$ 50,448$ 56,052$
Pflugerville
Leander
San Marcos 41,933$ 52,416$ 62,899$
New Braunfels
Sugarland 39,021$ 44,866$ 50,710$
Grapevine 45,136$ 54,153$ 63,170$
Denton 49,000$ 60,001$ 71,002$
Flower Mound 50,773$ 60,424$ 70,074$
AVERAGE 44,600$ 53,859$ 63,367$
Georgetown 42,037$ 49,462$ 56,867$
Midpoint
Difference 8.9%
ACCOUNTANT
Market Position
•Philosophy to lead, meet, or lag the market when
comparing pay structures
–Flexibility still exists in non-public safety position to pay higher
for most qualified incumbents; reward best performers through
merit pay
–Less a reflection of caliber of employee we wish to recruit/retain
–The more competitive, the more pay becomes a non-factor
•Fundamental lag built in
•Most organizations choose to match market
•Those with proportionally more/less revenue typically
take lead or lag approach
Market Position - Recommended
•Philosophy to meet the market when comparing pay
structures
–Shows commitment to staying competitive while being fiscally
prudent
–Externally competitive pay is one element of Total Rewards
–Focus on systems to develop employees and reward
performance also key
Planned Next Steps
•Now - Your feedback
•Late September 2014 - Council Presentation
•October thru December 2014 – Review market position
•January 2015– Recommendations on Public Safety Pay
structure and maintenance to management, GGAF, and
Council for consideration April 1, 2015
•March 2015- Recommendations on market-based
adjustments to management, GGAF, and Council for
consideration October 1, 2015
Employee Compensation Market
Comparators
•Questions/Discussion
Recommended Market Comparators
City Georgetown Austin Williamson
County Cedar Park Round Rock Pflugerville Leander San Marcos New Braunfels Sugarland Grapevine Denton Flower Mound
Proximity 27.7 miles 15.2 miles 9.5 miles 16.2 miles 12 miles 72.4 miles 90.1 miles 183 Miles 192 Miles 198 Miles 198 Miles
2014 Population
(estimates)53,227 865,504 507,000 61,957 103,232 53,000 37,000 50,000 62,000 84,511 48,101 120,000 68,000
2010 Census
Population 47,400 790,390 422,679 48,937 99,887 46936 26,521 44894 57740 78,817 46,334 113,383 64,669
Avg Annual Pop
Growth 3.1%2.4%5.0%6.7%0.8%3.2%9.9%2.8%1.8%1.8%1.0%1.5%1.3%
Form of Govt Council-Mgr Council-Mgr County Council-Mgr Council-Mgr Council-Mgr Council-Mgr Council-Mgr Council-Mgr Council-Mgr Council-Mgr Council-Mgr Council-Mgr
FTE 573.75 13,000.00 1,542.00 412.75 850.25 300.50 215.50 590.00 538.00 694.00 646.00 1,491.00 559.00
Size [sq mi]52.10 320.97 24.07 34.43 22.26 28.70 32.00 44.00 32.73 35.90 94.90 45.00
ETJ [sq. mi]306.19 9.34 34.00 18.50 33.80
Adopted budget
(most recent)231 Mil 3.5 Bil 230 Mil 109 Mil 144 Mil 153 Mil 172 Mil 168 Mil 324 Mil 185 Mil 907 Mil 116 Mil
tax rate (proposed)0.4340 0.4809 0.4930 0.4165 0.5610 0.6539 0.5302 0.4982 0.3180 0.3320 0.6890 0.4390
Total Taxable Value 5.3 Bil 88.5 Bil 5.1 Bil 9.6 Bil 3.2 Bil 2.5 Bil 3.3 Bil 4.9 Bil 10.3 Bil 6.2 Bil 7.7 Bil 7.4 Bil
Unique
Departments
Utilities
Convention/Visitors
Airport
Cemetery
4A/4B
Airport
Solid Waste Services
Convention
HHS
Solid Waste
Services
Tourism
Solid Waste
Services
Convention/Visit
ors
Solid Waste
Services Airport
WIC
Airport
Convention
Solid Waste
Services
Airport
Solid Waste
Services
CVB
Historic
Preservation
Airport
Health
Utility Water/WW
Electric (Distribution)
Water/WW
Electric (Generation
and Distribution)
Water/WW Water/WW Water/WW Water/WW
Water/WW
Electric
(Distribution)
Separate Entity Water/WW Water/WW
Water/WW
Electric
(Distribution)
Water/WW
Health plan Self-Funded Self-Funded Self-Funded Fully Insured Self-Funded Fully Insured Fully Insured Self-Funded Self-Funded Self-Funded Self-Funded Self-Funded
Civil Service Fire
Police
Fire
Police No Fire
Police Fire No No Fire
Police
Fire
Police No No Fire
Police No
Fire Based-EMS Yes No No No No No EMS Provided by
Wil Co No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Retirement System TMRS COAERS TCDRS TMRS TMRS TMRS TMRS TMRS TMRS TMRS TMRS TMRS TMRS
Similarity
Proximity