Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda CC 10.09.2018 WorkshopNotice of M eeting of the Governing B ody of the City of Georgetown, Texas O ctober 9, 2 0 1 8 The Ge orgetown City Council will meet on October 9 , 2018 at 3:30 PM at Co uncil Chambers - 101 East 7th Street The City o f Georgetown is committed to co mpliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you re quire assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reasonable assistance, adaptations, or ac c ommo datio ns will be provided upo n request. P lease contact the City Se c retary's Office, at least three (3 ) days prio r to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930- 3652 o r City Hall at 113 East 8th Street fo r additional information; TTY use rs ro ute through Relay Texas at 7 11. Policy De ve lopme nt/Re vie w Workshop - A Prese ntation and discussion on the pro posed fees for the IOOF Ceme tery and Co lumbarium -- Kimberly Garrett, Parks and Recre atio n Director B Prese ntation and update on use agre e ment for Grace Heritage Cente r with Preservation Geo rgeto wn -- Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager C Prese ntation and discussion of the Public Improvement District (PID) P olicy -- Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager D Prese ntation and discussion regarding a review and future adoption o f a legislative agenda for the City of Geo rgetown during the 86 th Legislative Session -- Jack Daly, Assistant to the City Manager and David Morgan, City Manager E Prese ntation and discussion on a request fo r a development agreement for a development to be kno wn as Chapel Hill located at 55 1 Westingho use Road -- Sofia Nelso n, P lanning Director Exe cutive Se ssion In compliance with the Open Meetings Ac t, Chapter 551, Government Co de , Verno n's Texas Codes, Annotate d, the items listed below will be discussed in closed session and are subject to action in the regular se ssio n. F Se c . 55 1.0 71 : Consul tati on wi th Atto rney Advic e from attorney about pending o r contemplated litigation and othe r matters on which the attorney has a duty to advise the City Co uncil, including agenda items Se c . 55 1:0 72 : Del i berati ons about Real Pro perty - Parcel 7 & 8 , Northwest Blvd. -- Travis Baird, Real Estate Services Co ordinator - South Lake Water Treatment Plant -- Travis Baird, Real Estate Servic e s Coo rdinator Se c . 55 1:0 74 : Personnel Matte r s City Manager, City Attorney, City Se c retary and Municipal Judge: Consideration of the appointment, employment, evaluatio n, reassignment, duties, discipline, o r dismissal Se c . 55 1.0 87 : Del i berati on Regardi ng Eco nomi c Devel opment Ne go ti ati ons - Wolf Lakes Update - Pro ject Deliver Update Page 1 of 111 Adjournme nt Ce rtificate of Posting I, Shelley No wling, City S ecretary for the C ity of Geo rgeto wn, Texas , do hereby c ertify that this Notic e o f Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a p lac e read ily acc es s ib le to the general pub lic at all times , o n the _____ day of _________________, 2018, at __________, and remained so p o s ted for at leas t 72 c o ntinuo us ho urs p receding the s cheduled time of s aid meeting. __________________________________ Shelley No wling, City S ecretary Page 2 of 111 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop October 9, 2018 SUBJECT: P resentation and discussio n on the proposed fees fo r the IOOF Cemetery and Columbarium -- Kimberly Garrett, Parks and Recreation Dire cto r ITEM SUMMARY: The purpose of this presentation is to get feedback and directio n on the proposed fe e s fo r the new columbarium that is being constructe d and fo r the cemetery lots. FINANCIAL IMPACT: NA SUBMITTED BY: Kimberly Garrett, Parks and Recreation Director ATTACHMENT S: Description Cemetery Pres entatio n Page 3 of 111 IOOF Cemetery & Columbarium Fee Proposal City Council Workshop October 9, 2018 City of GeorgetownPage 4 of 111 Purpose of the Presentation •Obtain feedback and direction on the proposed fees for the columbarium and traditional cemetery lots. Page 5 of 111 Agenda •Background/History –Cemetery and Columbarium location •Fee Analysis Comparison •Current & Proposed Cemetery fees –Traditional lots & Columbarium –Resident & Non Resident Fees •Parks & Rec Board Recommendation •Next Steps/Direction Page 6 of 111 Background/History •A cemetery reserve fund established during FY14 with $100K •Since FY15, $75K transferred annually from the GF to build reserve cemetery fund •In response to an increase in cremations and requests for urn burial, building a columbarium in the cemetery was approved in the FY17 budget City of GeorgetownPage 7 of 111 Background/History •The design and construction of the columbarium was funded from the cemetery reserve fund •As niches are sold, revenue will go back into the cemetery reserve fund to replenish the initial investment and build the fund to help with on-going maintenance •In setting the columbarium fees, a fee review was done for traditional lots as well City of GeorgetownPage 8 of 111 Columbarium Location City of GeorgetownPage 9 of 111 Columbarium Layout City of GeorgetownPage 10 of 111 Fee Comparison Analysis •Single burial space cost –$900 to $3,000 for public –$3,500 to $4,400 for private/church •Columbarium (niche cost -single urn) –$875 to $3,000 for public –$1,000 to $3,500 for private/church City of GeorgetownPage 11 of 111 Fee Comparison Analysis •Each cemetery and community are unique –Difficult to compare –Public vs Private vs Church owned •The approach staff took in setting fees was to ensure maintenance costs are covered, there is a plan to fund going future maintenance in perpetuity and Central Texas market pricing. City of GeorgetownPage 12 of 111 Current and Proposed Fees Lot Size & Description Current Resident Fee Current Nonresident Fee Propose One Fee Double Lot $1,550 $1,800 $2,500 Single Lot $1,025 $1,175 $1,500 Urn Lot $575 $625 $900 Columbarium Niche –2 urns ____$2,500 City of GeorgetownPage 13 of 111 Additional Fees Collected •Cemetery Lot Marking Fee -$100 –Funeral Service (open/close) –Headstone Placement –Curbing –ensure correct lot boundaries •Inscription Plate Engraving for niche –$600 estimated cost –Actual cost passed on to owner City of GeorgetownPage 14 of 111 Parks & Recreation Advisory Board Recommendation •Parks & Recreation Advisory Board recommended the proposed fees at their September 13, 2018 meeting City of GeorgetownPage 15 of 111 Next Steps •Work with the funeral homes in Georgetown to communicate new rates and that columbarium is complete. •Update the City’s website. •Work with Legal to revise cemetery ordinance to reflect the columbarium •New fees to be effective when columbarium construction is complete Page 16 of 111 Direction •Feedback on proposed fees for traditional burial lots and for the niches in the columbarium Page 17 of 111 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop October 9, 2018 SUBJECT: P resentation and update on use agreement for Grac e Heritage Center with Preservation Geo rgetown -- Laurie Brewe r, Assistant City Manager ITEM SUMMARY: The City currently leases the Grace Heritage Cente r, lo cated at 811 Main Street, to Preservation Georgetown (forme rly the Georgetown He ritage Society) to operate and promote history and historic tourism in Geo rgetown. The current lease is effective No vember 1 , 2 01 5 for a three year period and has an o ption to renew at the curre nt terms for an additional 3 year perio d. At previous worksho ps o n January 9 and July 24, 20 18 , the Council directed staff to work with Preservatio n Ge orgetown to enhance rentals and o ther activity for the GHC and to review cost recovery options. Summary of cur r e nt ag reement: City provides interio r and exterior maintenanc e , including HVAC and plumbing. GHS/PG pro vides insurance and quarterly rent payments of $975. GHS/PG shall provide space for an exhibition gallery, instruc tional space, meeting facilities, a gift display, and/or other te mpo rary exhibits at the Property. Minimum hours o f operation shall be Thursday and Friday, 9-5, Sunday, 1-4; and operatio n during the fo llowing do wntown events; First Fridays, Red Poppy Festival, the Lighting of the Square and Christmas Stro ll. All hours of operation are subje c t to change when they conflic t with venue rental. GHS/PG shall be allowed to rent the P roperty or a portion thereof for meetings or events. Suc h rentals shall be subject to all applicable Operating Requirements contained in this Exhibit and subject to the provisions of the Agreement. GHS/PG shall have a minimum of six public eve nts per year, free and open to the public , related to history, to urism or culture . GHS/PG shall pro vide the brochures and publications on history to provide to the public. GHS/PG shall pro vide all regular ho usekeeping of the pre mises, including gift display, instructional space, and public space. Quarterly Reports. The GHS/PG shall submit to the City Manager quarterly, written reports with info rmation that includes: Do or count, any public events, number of event rentals, number of volunteer hours, a financial report, and atte ndance o f special events. Annual Report. GHS/P G shall prepare and submit to the City Council and the City Manager an annual report no t later than thirty (3 0) days following the annive rsary date each year during the te rm o f this Agreement. The annual re port shall pro vide totals fo r the information c ompiled in quarterly reports and shall present a strategic plan to the City Council by the end of the first year of the term of this Agreement. Subse que nt annual repo rts will include an update d strategic plan. The City Manage r and the President of the Geo rgeto wn Heritage Society will ho ld an annual meeting to discuss the annual report. B ased upon Counci l ’s di recti on and di sc ussi o n w i th Preservati o n G eo r geto w n, the fol l o w i ng chang es are proposed: No exclusive lease agreement. PG will be allowed to utilize the spac e fo r regular membership mee tings, Preservation Fund Workshop and committe e meetings, the Historic Ho me Tour and o ther preservation activities at no c ost. The estimated number of days is 24. In re turn, PG will provide vo lunteer or staff docents for regular open ho urs and first Friday events to promote he ritage tourism and allow the public to tour the facility. PG will have office space in the GHC. City staff will marke t and promote the facility as an event venue fo r weddings, rehearsal dinne rs, baby showe rs, birthday parties, etc . All revenues fro m rentals will be used to o ffset mainte nance costs. Any excess reve nue s will be rese rved fo r future major capital maintenance and repairs. Page 18 of 111 City visitor center staff will provide access to the GHC fo r visitors who wish to tour the building during visitor center hours thro ugh a key-card system and self –guided tour brochures. FINANCIAL IMPACT: P reservation Georgetown pays rent to the City in quarterly payments of $975, fo r an annual total of $3,900. Estimated annual maintenance cost fo r the facility is $11 ,000, and is budge ted in the Facilities Maintenance Fund. Utilities are estimated at $4,0 00 annually. A pro-forma for re venues and expenses is included in the presentation. SUBMITTED BY: ATTACHMENT S: Description S ummary of P ro p o s ed Changes Current Leas e Agreement Latest Rep ort from PG P res entation Page 19 of 111 Grace Heritage Center/Preservation Georgetown – Operating Agreement Changes October 2018 Current Proposed Notes/Change Rentals and marketing PG manages website for weddings and allows for room rentals City staff manage all rentals; city markets through website and with similar plan as Garey Park (bridal shows, wedding magazines and social media, etc) For consistency and additional marketing/rental opportunities Outside/Room/Wedding Rental Revenue PG collects revenue City collects revenue City would deposit all funds in facilities account to offset maintenance costs Quarterly Rent of Building paid to City by PG $3900 annually $0 See above – all revenues will offset maintenance costs Maintenance City responsibility for all outside maintenance, including HVAC City pays – approximately $11K annually for regular maintenance (does not include major capital maintenance No change Utilities PG pays (around $4,000 annually) City pays Rental fees will offset the utilities Insurance PG pays for additional policy Responsibility of City – covered by TML policy Use of Space by PG for PG meetings/committees Council proposed to allow PG to use of the building at no cost as follows: Regular monthly member ship meetings – 12 Additional committee meetings for Preservation Fund and Workshop - 4 Week of Spring Home Tour - 7 Annual Picnic 1 Days to be reserved by City staff in automated booking system Per Council Direction – provide PG use of facility towards historic preservation activities Page 20 of 111 Grace Heritage Center/Preservation Georgetown – Operating Agreement Changes October 2018 Events PG manages all events PG manages and staffs 1st Friday event to promote heritage tourism Office Space PG has office space in the GHC for pt office manager PG to continue to have office space in facility Regular hours for GHC for heritage tourism activities PG utilizes volunteer and/or staff to cover opening hours (except during weddings/other events) Thursdays 9-5 Fridays 9-5 PG to utilize volunteers and/or staff to cover opening hours Thursday 9-5 Friday 9-5 City visitor center staff will be available to issue entry pass to visitors upon request during CVB hours City visitor center staff will be available to issue entry pass to visitors upon request during CVB hours City will also explore opportunities with other partners, such as museum and art center for access for bus tours, etc. Reporting Quarterly and Annually Continue as outlined in agreement; City will install door counter to give better count of visitors; City staff will provide updated budget to actual financials during regular budget cycle Other PG will work with Library staff to index heritage records. Records will be made available to the public at the library during normal library hours Page 21 of 111 Page 22 of 111 Page 23 of 111 Page 24 of 111 Page 25 of 111 Page 26 of 111 Page 27 of 111 Page 28 of 111 Page 29 of 111 Page 30 of 111 Quarterly Report | May/June - August 2018 Page 31 of 111 Grace Heritage Center Utilization ACCOUNTABLES June July August Total Visitors 406 277 353 Door Count (casual visitors)239 200 217 Events First Friday - 24 Author Talk - 50 First Friday - 22 First Friday - 22 Art Show - 47 Third Thursday - 40 Book Lovers Tour - 15 Rentals Weddings - 82 Weddings - 55 - PG Meetings Board - 11 Board - 8 Preservation Fund Committee - 4 Volunteer Hours 120+100+140+ 2Page 32 of 111 Preservation Georgetown - Financial Report 3 P&L | May - July 2018 Income Expense Preservation Fund Donations 158.02 Board Expense 260.57 Preservation Fund Donations 1300 GHC Income 3590 Events 1541.72 Preservation Fund Grant Payments 2000 Home Tour Income 5505.61 Finance Fees 158.10 Preservation Fund Net -700 Membership 3475 GHC Expense 2323.07 Other Income 418.78 Home Tour 701.23 Interest Earned 16.53 Membership 89.14 Merchandise 160 Office Expense 1677.70 Payroll Expense 2152.47 Postage 22.42 Total Income 13,163.94 Total Expense 9086.42 Net Income 3377.52Page 33 of 111 Preservation Georgetown - Financial Report 4 Balance Sheet | as of July 31, 2018 Assets Liabilities & Equity Austin Telco Savings 21534.68 Current Liabilities 100.00 Austin Telco Preservation Fund 24176.39 Net Assets 55126.46 First Texas Checking 12168.33 Net Income 3,377.52 Petty Cash 168.83 Employee Advance 555.75 Total Assets 58,603.98 Total Liabilities & Equity 58,603.98 Page 34 of 111 Preservation Georgetown - Membership & Reach 5 Channel Totals Facebook 826+ followers 12,000+ reach 5000+ engagement Instagram 396+ followers preservationgeorgetown.org 1390 page views 25 states graceheritagecenter.org 673 page views 16 states Membership Totals Paid Memberships (as of Aug 22)183 Individual Members 286 eMail Totals Subscribers 312 Open Rate (avg 6 emails/mo)35.8% Page 35 of 111 City Council Workshop October 9, 2018 Grace Heritage Center Page 36 of 111 Location -Downtown 9th and Main City of GeorgetownPage 37 of 111 Agenda –Update from 7/9 work session •Current Lease Agreement •Proposed Changes City of GeorgetownPage 38 of 111 Background/History •City owns the Grace Heritage Center •City leases to Preservation Georgetown since 1994 to operate –Preservation activities –Fund raising for preservation activities –Current lease expires Oct 2018 •City spent $419K to renovate facility in Fall 2017 •Council direction to increase utilization of facility –Promote downtown activities and further recover costs for maintenance City of GeorgetownPage 39 of 111 Updated –city staff management of facility rentals •City staff to promote the space as a venue and for rentals •City collects revenue •Revenues used to offset maintenance – any excess reserved for future capital maintenance •City pays utilities, insurance, maintenance costs City of GeorgetownPage 40 of 111 Update •Evaluate market and adjust fees for rentals •Honor existing commitments •Increase event fee over time •Any excess revenues will be put towards future capital maintenance City of GeorgetownPage 41 of 111 Update –PG license agreement •Preservation Georgetown reserves up to 24 days per year for meetings and other preservation activities for no cost •PG utilizes office space and opens center for regular visiting hours –Thursdays 9-5; Fridays 9-5 –PG hosts First Friday events at Grace to promote preservation and heritage tourism City of GeorgetownPage 42 of 111 Additional Info •Preservation Georgetown records to be indexed and kept at library for public use •Staff and PG continue to work together on joint events and promotion for downtown activities and preservation City of GeorgetownPage 43 of 111 Summary and Next Steps •New approach benefits PG and City by increasing opportunities to activate the building –Additional revenues to offset maintenance and utilized to preserve the facility •License agreement on agenda for 10/23 •City staff transition commitments and processes with Preservation Georgetown City of GeorgetownPage 44 of 111 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop October 9, 2018 SUBJECT: P resentation and discussio n of the P ublic Improveme nt District (P ID) Policy -- Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manage r ITEM SUMMARY: On March 27, 2018, the City Council received a presentation that provided information on the structure and purpose of P ublic Improvement Districts (P IDs). In this discussion, staff sought direction on the development of a P ID P olicy that could be used to evaluate requests. Staff has conducted research on P ID P olicies that have been enacted by various cities in the State of Texas, reviewed legislation, and drafted a preliminary policy for City Council's review. T he presentation will be organized in to three parts: 1. Recap basics of a P ID 2. Review the structure and contents of the draft policy 3. Questions and fe e dback Following this presentation, staff will inco rporate any feedback from the City Council and have our legal te am and consultants finally vet the po licy before bringing it back to the City Council for final re view and adoption. FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A SUBMITTED BY: Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager and Seth Gipso n, Management Analyst ATTACHMENT S: Description P ID Polic y P o werP o int Draft PID Polic y Page 45 of 111 City Manager’s Office Public Improvement District Policy City Council Workshop October 9, 2018 Page 46 of 111 City Manager’s Office Presentation Purpose •Purpose –staff has prepared a draft PID Policy based on discussion and direction at the March 27th City Council Workshop.Staff is seeking feedback on the proposed policy. Page 47 of 111 City Manager’s Office Presentation Overview •Part 1: Recap Basics of PIDs •Part 2: Overview of the proposed Policy •Part 3: Feedback and questions from City Council Page 48 of 111 City Manager’s Office Part 1 Recap Basics of PIDs Page 49 of 111 City Manager’s Office Public Improvement District -Basics •Allowable under Chapter 372 LGC •Created by City or County –Defined area in City or ETJ –Dependent District–financial responsibility •Reimburse costs of development –Can fund on-going maintenance of specified public improvements Page 50 of 111 City Manager’s Office Public Improvement District -Basics •Resources –Assessments are levied on property owners within the PID based upon % of benefited property –Liens placed on individual property owners – land/homeowner responsible for payment –Assessment liens subordinate only to taxes •Financings –PID (City or County) may sell assessment revenue bonds –Annual revenues pledged towards debt payment Page 51 of 111 City Manager’s Office Public Improvement District -Basics •Governance –Appointed by Council (dependent district) •Eligible Costs –public infrastructure and development –Landscaping, parks, lighting, signage –Transportation, parking –Utilities –Administration and Operations Page 52 of 111 City Manager’s Office PID Creation •Petition by landowner –Feasibility study and findings •Created by resolution –Service Plan w/ improvements & related costs •Public Hearing is required –Must evaluate feasibility before PH •Assessment Plan –Adopted by Ordinance Page 53 of 111 City Manager’s Office Types of PIDs •Cash Flow PIDs –Maintenance -similar to HOA in that it funds maintenance, fencing, landscaping –Capital cash flow –landowner constructs improvements, gets reimbursed over time through assessments –Annual assessments used on a cash basis 9Page 54 of 111 City Manager’s Office Types of PIDs •Debt PIDs –Dirt Bonds –bonds issued by city to fund improvements (up front) –Project Finance Bonds –bonds issued during development –Reimbursement Bonds –developer provides financing for infrastructure, city agrees to issue bonds after benchmarks are met 10Page 55 of 111 City Manager’s Office PID –Assessment Plan •“Levy” amount determined by either: –Set amount to repay proportional cost of infrastructure –Per valuation rate pay cost of maintenance of infrastructure –Assessment roll is prepared for property •Ordinance adopts Assessment Plan & levies the assessment –Can include interest and penalties Page 56 of 111 City Manager’s Office Part 2 Overview of Proposed Policy Page 57 of 111 City Manager’s Office Purpose of PID Policy •Outlines when the Council could support using a PID for development •Provides for a process to review and analyze •Establishes safeguards for successful debt issuance (if appropriate) •Provides administration guidelines •Protects future homeowner/property owner interests •Ensures consistency in review •Provides guidelines to ensure project is viable and sustainable Page 58 of 111 City Manager’s Office PID Policy -Overview •Overview –High-level of how a PID is established –Reimbursement PID Structure •Developer will fund improvements and once key benchmarks are met the City will issue bonds to reimburse the authorized expenses. Page 59 of 111 City Manager’s Office PID Policy –Community Benefits •Community Benefits: –Quality Developments –Extraordinary Benefits –Enhanced Public Service and Safety •The developer must clearly identify what the Special benefit is to the district and the City. Page 60 of 111 City Manager’s Office PID Policy –General •Authorized Public Improvements: –Landscaping; –Enhanced entry features; –Signage, distinct lighting, fountains; –Art; –Pedestrian trails and sidewalks; –Parks and recreational amenities; –Regional drainage improvements; –Off-street parking facilities; •Other improvements that are not listed, but are allowed by statute will be reviewed and considered individually by the City. Page 61 of 111 City Manager’s Office PID Policy –General cont. •Improvements not eligible for reimbursement: –Swimming pools; –Travel expenses; –Perimeter fencing; –Acquisition, construction, improvement or maintenance of privately owned facilities or land; and –Any trails, parks, streets, or other public amenities that are located within a gated community or are inaccessible. Page 62 of 111 City Manager’s Office PID Policy –General cont. •Miscellaneous General Items: –Must be self-sufficient –Use of assessments may be used to recover capital costs where an extraordinary benefit exists –Must include a title encumbrance that notifies the prospective buyer of the PID –Boundaries cannot overlap with another PID –PID improvements must be designed and constructed to City standards –Establishment of an HOA is encouraged –Rental multi-family unit assessments must be prepaid by the developer or builder Page 63 of 111 City Manager’s Office PID Policy –Application Requirements •Petition must contain the required elements outlined in Local Gov’t Code Section 372. •In addition to the petition, the following will be required in order for the City to evaluate the proposal. –Identification of the benefit; –Map of the district boundaries; –Market Feasibility Study; –Preliminary Service and Assessment Plan; –Financial Plan and phasing forecast; –Procedures for eventual termination of the district; and –Application Fee Page 64 of 111 City Manager’s Office PID Policy –Bonds and Financing Criteria •Min. value to lien ration at date of bond issue: 4:1 •Max. annual permitted increase in annual assessment installment: 2% •Max. maturity of each series of bonds: 25 years •Max. time allowed between the first and last bond issuance: 10 years. •Reserved Fund will be established. Page 65 of 111 City Manager’s Office PID Policy –Bonds and Financing Criteria cont. •The City will apply the same-post issuance compliance requirements to PID Bonds, as are required for GO and CO debt. •The City will require a PID agreement to be established in order to outline: –The basic terms and conditions –Payment or reimbursement of costs –PID improvements (planning, development, construction, management, and maintenance) –Terms and conditions for ongoing PID administration, operation, and management. Page 66 of 111 City Manager’s Office Part 3 Feedback and questions from City Council Page 67 of 111 1 DRAFT Policy and Guidelines for Reimbursement Public Improvement Districts I. OVERVIEW Public Improvement Districts (PIDs) provide a development tool that allocates costs according to the benefits received. A PID can provide a means to fund improvements to meet community needs which could not otherwise be constructed or provided and be paid by those who most benefit from them. Reimbursement PIDs are development financing tools authorized pursuant to Chapter 372 of the Texas Local Government Code, which the developer funds infrastructure and the issuer agreement to provide bond funding after key benchmarks are met. A Public Improvement District is a defined area of properties, whose owners have petitioned the City to form a PID. City Council establishes a PID by adoption of a resolution after a public hearing. The public hearing is publicized and written notification of the hearing is mailed to all property owners in the proposed PID. By petition, the owners pledge to pay an assessment in order to receive enhanced services and/or improvements within the District. The PID must demonstrate that it confers a benefit, not only to the properties within the District, but also to the “public” which includes the entire City. The purpose of the PID policy is to outline the issues to be addressed before the City Council can support the establishment and continuation of a PID. The policy outlines such things as petition requirements, information to property owners, and determination of annual plan of services, budget and assessments. It addresses City administration issues, which are in Page 68 of 111 Policy and Guidelines for Public Improvement Districts 2 addition to the requirements of state law. Before consenting to the creation of a district, the City Council will consider whether the creation of the district is feasible, practicable, and necessary for the provision of the proposed services and would be a benefit to the land by producing a development that exceeds minimum development standards, and therefore warrants the City’s consent, consistent with the other considerations in this policy. II. COMMUNITY BENEFITS Subject to the requirements of this policy, the City Council will prioritize approval of petitions for PIDs supporting real estate development projects that provide for the following public benefits to a degree that is superior to the level of community benefits typically generated by real estate development projects not involving PID financing. Such benefits include, but are not limited to, the following. 1. Quality Development. The development meets or exceeds the intent of the development, infrastructure, and design standards of City codes; 2. Extraordinary Benefits. The development provides extraordinary public benefits that advance the vision and goals of the Comprehensive Plan, such as, but not limited to, extension, financial contribution, and/or enhancement of master planned infrastructure, diversity of housing, and enhanced parks, trails, open space, and recreational amenities that are available to the public; 3. Enhance Public Service and Safety. The development enhances public services and optimizes service delivery through its design, dedication of sites, connectivity, and other features. 4. Fiscally Responsible. The development is financially feasible, doesn’t impair the City’s ability to provide municipal services, and would not impose a financial burden on the citizens of Georgetown in the event of annexation; 5. Finance Plan. The developer(s) contributes financially to cover a portion of infrastructure expenses without reimbursement by the PID or the City and as reflected in conditions placed on the issuance of bonds by the district; 6. Annexation. The development will not impair the City’s future annexation of the PID or adjacent property or impose costs not mutually agreed upon. It is not necessary that all community benefits be funded by PID assessments or PID Bonds. If a community benefit is not eligible for PID financing based on section 372.003, Local Government Code, the petitioner must ensure ongoing financing of the benefit from other sources. Page 69 of 111 Policy and Guidelines for Public Improvement Districts 3 If it is proposed that debt obligations secured by and payable from PID assessments are to be issued to reimburse for infrastructure that a developer would ordinarily fund at its own costs, the petition must demonstrate how creation of the PID and financing of the infrastructure provides an extraordinary benefit to the City as a whole and to the property in the PID, such as accelerated development or furtherance of a major City policy objective. The City will not create a PID to solely finance the costs of constructing infrastructure. III. GENERAL 1. PID Services and Improvements: a. PID assessments may only be used to serve or improve public property and may not be used to benefit or enhance private property. Listed below are services and improvements which Georgetown’s PIDs may provide or maintain. Other improvements allowed by statutes will be reviewed and considered individually by the City. i. Improved landscaping and irrigation; ii. Enhanced entry features; iii. Installation of fountains, distinctive lighting, and signs; iv. Installation of art or decorations; v. Construction or improvement of pedestrian trails and sidewalks; vi. Establishment or improvement of parks and recreational amenities; vii. Enhanced regional drainage improvements; and viii. Construction of off-street parking facilities b. Listed below are services and improvements which Georgetown PIDs may not provide or maintain: i. Swimming pools; ii. Travel expenses; iii. Perimeter fencing; iv. Acquisition; construction, improvement or maintenance of privately owned facilities or land; v. Any trails, parks, streets, or other public amenities that are located within a gated community or otherwise inaccessible location may not be funded or reimbursed by the PID; and c. Except for public improvements specifically listed in a voter-approved City bond proposition, the City will not expend or pledge a tax increment, general fund revenue, general obligation or certificate of obligation bond proceeds, etc. to support the costs of PID improvements, unless explicitly approved by City Council as advancing a City purpose. Page 70 of 111 Policy and Guidelines for Public Improvement Districts 4 2. PIDs must be established carefully and only when related to a public purpose to avoid a proliferation of special districts. 3. PIDs must be self-sufficient and not adversely impact the ordinary service delivery of the City, except where City Council elects to participate in the project's costs. 4. A PID's budget shall include sufficient funds to pay for all costs above and beyond the City’s ordinary costs, including additional administrative and/or operational costs as well as additional maintenance costs resulting from the PID. 5. Use of assessments for partial recovery of a developer's capital costs will be allowed only in special cases where extraordinary public benefit is shown. Only those capital costs associated with continuing district services will be considered for partial recovery. 6. Anyone selling land in a public improvement district must include a "title encumbrance" which notifies any prospective property owner of the existence or proposal of special assessments on the property. All closing statements must specify who is responsible for payment of the PID assessment on a pro rata share thereof. 7. A PID may not overlap the boundaries of another PID. 8. Development of property within the PID may not require variances from applicable development regulations that result in a significantly lower standard of development 9. The City will authorize PID bond proceeds only to pay the costs of PID improvements that have been designed and constructed to the City standards. 10. For a residential PID, the City Council will look more favorably on a petition where the developer of a new subdivision has put in place an active homeowner’s organization. 11. If multi-family rental units are included within the proposed assessments, all of the multi-family assessments must be prepaid by either the developer or builder. IV. PID APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS In accordance with Texas Local Government Code Section 372, a PID Petition must state: 1. The general nature of the proposed amendments; 2. The estimated cost of the improvements; 3. The boundaries of the proposed assessment district; 4. The proposed method of assessment, which may specify included or excluded classes of assessable property; 5. The proposed apportionment of cost between the public improvement district and the municipality or county as a whole; 6. How the district will be managed; 7. That the persons signing the petition request or concur with the establishment of the district; and that an advisory board may be established; Page 71 of 111 Policy and Guidelines for Public Improvement Districts 5 8. That an advisory body may be established to develop and recommend and improvement plan to the governing body; and 9. Evidence that the petition’s signatures meet the state law requirements or the petition will be accompanied by a reasonable fee to cover the city costs of signature verification. If the proposed district is an expansion of an existing district, a petition for the new portion of the district must identify each subdivision, or portion thereof, within the proposed boundaries of the new district, and each subdivision or portion thereof, that is not currently in an existing PID shall individually satisfy the requirements for a petition under Section 372.005 of the Texas Local Government Code. Subdivision has the meaning assigned by Section 232.021 of the Texas Local Government Code. Before the City will consider a PID, the petitioners must provide the following for evaluation: 1. Identification of the benefit of the PID to the affected property owners and to the city as a whole (i.e., public purpose). 2. Map of the area, description of the boundaries of the district for the legal notices and a "commonly known" description of the area to be included in the district. 3. Description of all city-owned land within the district. Property in the PID owned by the City shall not be subject to PID assessments. Property in the PID owned by another governmental entity may be assessed only pursuant to an interlocal agreement between the entity and the City 4. “Market Feasibility Study” - The petitioner must provide evidence of the feasibility of the real estate development project and the PID, taking into account both the market for the proposed product types and the petitioner’s capacity to deliver the project. The feasibility study should also include a comparison of the combined PID assessment and ad valorem tax burden on owners in nearby developments. 5. The preliminary Service and Assessment Plan, which includes the method of assessment and the five year plan that defines the annual installments on the total PID assessment and the detailed projected cost for PID improvements (including maps). 6. Assurance of long-term backing and support, which will include the financial plan and build out/phasing forecasts. If proposing bond funding, the value to lien ratio should be a minimum of 4:1. 7. Contingency Plan to address the maintenance or disposition of PID improvements and or property that has not been dedicated to the public if a PID is dissolved. 8. Sunset clause or procedures outlined for public review of the success of the PID and a determination of property owners whether to continue with the district or dissolve it. Page 72 of 111 Policy and Guidelines for Public Improvement Districts 6 9. Specified procedure for eventual termination of the district. 10. Types of activities the District organization will undertake and who will determine those activities. 11. Specified assurances to the City that the construction of improvements in the public right-of-way will be maintained by the PID and in no way obligates the City to future maintenance or operational costs, unless otherwise stated in a subsequent agreement. In addition, the following must be addressed before the City Council will take action on a petition: 1. An "application fee" will be paid by the applicant to reimburse the city for the cost of evaluating the petition. An escrow for the estimated amount for the first year of contracted administrative cost will also be deposited with the City. 2. The petitioner must agree to reimburse the City or directly pay for the City’s administrative costs for reviewing the PID petition, publishing related notices, reviewing the Market Feasibility Study and Service Assessment Plan, including the cost of services provided by the City’s third party PID Administrator, consultants, bond counsel, and financial advisors. *Note: PID Administration is addressed in a separate policy V. BOND SIZE LIMITATIONS AND FINANCING CRITERIA The following limitations and performance standards shall apply to a PID debt issue approved by the City: 1. Minimum appraised value to lien ratio at date of each bond issue: 4:1 2. Maximum annual permitted increase in annual assessment installment: 2% 3. Maximum maturity for each series of bonds (to extent allowed by law): 25 years 4. The last Bond issuance shall be not later than the date that is ten (10) years after the date of the first Bond issuance. 5. The aggregate principal amount of bonds required to be issued shall not exceed an amount sufficient to fund: a. the actual costs of the qualified PID improvements; b. required reserves and capitalized interest during the period of construction and not more than 12 months after the completion of construction and in no event for a period greater than 3 years from the date of the initial delivery of the bonds; and Page 73 of 111 Policy and Guidelines for Public Improvement Districts 7 c. any costs of issuance, arbitrage, administrative fees, third party fees, or other costs related to issuance. 6. Any PID Bond issued will include a Reserve Fund in an amount equal to the lesser of: a. The maximum annual debt service on the bonds; b. 10 percent of the Bond Par Amount; or c. 125 percent of the average annual debt service and that such Reserve Fund will be funded from bond proceeds at the time bonds are issued. 7. The City will apply to PID bonds the same post-issuance compliance requirements the City applies to its general obligation and certificate of obligation debt. 8. Before the City will levy a PID assessment or authorize issuance of PID bonds, the petitioners and the City must enter into a PID Development Agreement that establishes: a. the basic terms and conditions for creation of the PID, including the provision of community benefits and compliance with the requirements of this policy; b. payment or reimbursement to the City of both the City’s one-time and ongoing administrative and operational costs; c. the financing of the PID improvements and the payment of assessment revenue or PID bond proceeds to pay the costs of the PID improvements; d. the planning, development, construction, management, and maintenance of the PID improvements; e. terms and conditions for ongoing PID administration, operation, and management, including collection of PID assessments; and f. any services to be funded by the PID. In agreeing to form a PID for which debt will be issued to fund the costs of constructing qualified public improvements, the City will require the following: 1. The property owner/developer must demonstrate to the City that it has the expertise to complete the new development that the PID will support. 2. The property owner/developer must provide the City with the sources of funding for the public improvements not being funded by the PID. 3. The proposed development must be consistent with the entitlements on the property. All required zoning, other required land use approvals or other required permits must be in place for the development prior to issues of any PID bonds. 4. All reasonable estimate costs must be identified before a decision is reached on a request to issue bonds for a PID. Costs to be identified include costs related to establishing the district; costs for construction and/or acquisition of improvements, and PID administrative costs. Page 74 of 111 Policy and Guidelines for Public Improvement Districts 8 5. If the City elects to hire a qualified third party PID administrator to administer the PID, the costs for such administration shall be paid for with PID funds. The PID administrator will be required to review and comment on the budget and to attend the annual public hearing regarding the Service and Assessment Plan. 6. The PID Financing Agreement (or other application PID documentation) shall contain a section, which clearly identifies the benefit of the PID to the affected property owners and to the City as a whole (i.e. public purpose) and also evidence of insurance. Page 75 of 111 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop October 9, 2018 SUBJECT: P resentation and discussio n regarding a review and future adoption of a legislative age nda fo r the City of Georgetown during the 86th Le gislative Session -- Jack Daly, Assistant to the City Manager and David Morgan, City Manager ITEM SUMMARY: Staff will discuss a pro posed legislative program and pro pose a draft Legislative Agenda for the City Council to adopt fo r the 86th Legislative Session at a future meeting. Typic ally, the state legislature considers appro ximately 1,500 bills that directly affect Te xas cities. Staff hopes to track c e rtain bills during the upcoming le gislative session, as well as communicate regularly with state elected officials and staff. To help ensure City staff is acting in accordance with Council direction, the propo sed legislative agenda will serve as a guide when engaging with state officials. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None at this time . SUBMITTED BY: Jackson Daly ATTACHMENT S: Description DRAFT Pres entation Page 76 of 111 86th Texas Legislative Session City Agenda October 9, 2018 Page 77 of 111 Overview •Guide for Council and staff to promote City interests •Establishes policy direction for general topics that could affect the City •Work to establish and maintain active, positive partnerships with our elected officials Page 78 of 111 Elected Officials •Charles Schwertner, Senate District 5 •Terry Wilson, House District 20 •Larry Gonzales, House District 52 –Not seeking re-election Georgetown Page 79 of 111 House Districts Georgetown Page 80 of 111 85th Legislative Session Review Status House Senate TOTAL Introduced 4,333 2,707 6,631 Passed 700 511 1,211 Vetoed 36 15 51 %Passed 15.3%18.3%17.5% Page 81 of 111 86th Legislative Session •Adopt Legislative agenda •Legislature Convened –Jan 8 –May 27 •Williamson County Day •Texas Municipal League •Focused Advocacy Page 82 of 111 Legislative Agenda Topics •Preserve local home-rule control •Oppose unfunded mandates •Oppose revenue caps •Support local parks funding •Protect utility interest Page 83 of 111 Topic: Local Control •Support local control, where elected officials are tasked with raising funds and providing services to respond to the individual needs of the community they serve •Oppose legislation that would erode authority of Texas cities –Annexation –Local option ordinances (tree preservation) Page 84 of 111 Topic: Unfunded Mandates •Unfunded or underfunded mandates from state and federal governments ultimately end up costing local tax payers. •Mandates from the state should include funding to implement the mandate Page 85 of 111 Topic: Taxation •Oppose legislation that reduces the appraisal growth cap established in current law and legislation that imposes revenue caps in the form of adjusting provisions for the current property tax rollback rate. Page 86 of 111 Topic: Parks •Support of legislation that provides a fair and equitable distribution of the sporting goods sales tax revenue for Local and State parks •Support pass-thru federal dollars for parks •Support constitutional dedication of sporting goods sales tax revenues for parks Page 87 of 111 Topic: Utilities •Support dissolution of CTSUD Board •Support local control regarding Municipally Owned Utility (MOU) decision making related to electric market participation •Oppose expansion of PUC jurisdiction or loss of MOU control related to rates or regulations •Support continued MOU general fund transfers and ROI •Oppose changes to current law regarding disclosure of competitively sensitive information •Oppose required discount mandates Page 88 of 111 Our Home, Our Decisions Page 89 of 111 Next Steps •Discussion and direction •Review and possibly adopt proposed agenda on October 23 •Provide updates throughout the session •Anticipate specific topics and initiatives that will require Council feedback Page 90 of 111 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop October 9, 2018 SUBJECT: P resentation and discussion o n a request for a deve lo pment agreement for a develo pment to be known as Chapel Hill located at 551 Westinghouse Road -- Sofia Nelson, Planning Director ITEM SUMMARY: B ackground Subject Prope r ty The subject pro perty is approximately 5 4 acres in size and located at 55 1 Westinghouse Road. Generally, the property is located north of Westinghouse, east o f I-35 and we st of Rabbit Hill Road.The property is generally located outside the city limits fo r the e xc eption of a small portio n located inside the city limits with a zoning of Reside ntial Single Family (RS). Reason for De ve l opment Agreement The applicant is propo sing a development agreeme nt to address annexation, land use s, develo pment standards, and c ost- sharing on regional water improvements. Proposed Devel o pment The proposed development would allow for local commercial/busine ss park use s along the frontage of Westingho use Road and multifamily develo pment for the remainde r of the property. Requested Fee dbac k Staff is seeking your feedback regarding the propo sed use, development standards,and propo sed provisions for utilitie s. FINANCIAL IMPACT: n/a SUBMITTED BY: Sofia Nelson, P lanning Director ATTACHMENT S: Description P res entation Page 91 of 111 1 Chapel Hill Development Agreement City Council Workshop October 9, 2018 Page 92 of 111 Purpose of Presentation •Present the request for a development agreement to the City Council for discussion on the following: –Land use –Development Standards •Architectural Standards •Parkland Standards –Annexation –Provision for regional water improvements 2Page 93 of 111 Presentation Agenda •Location of Property •Comprehensive Plan Guidance •Westinghouse Corridor: –current development –development under review •Development Agreement Request •Direction from City Council 3Page 94 of 111 Location of Property 4Page 95 of 111 Location of Property 5Page 96 of 111 Zoning 6Page 97 of 111 Comprehensive Plan Guidance 7Page 98 of 111 Future Land Use 8Page 99 of 111 Development along Westinghouse Corridor 9Page 100 of 111 Development Agreement Request 10Page 101 of 111 Development Agreement Request •Land use •Annexation •Provision for regional water improvements 11Page 102 of 111 Land Use •Local Commercial with incorporation of some business park uses along Westinghouse •Multi-family development on the remainder of the property 12Page 103 of 111 Aesthetics •Commitment to increased masonry standard for multi-family and commercial development. •Request for a sign area and height increase to allow a consolidated sign proposal. •Preservation/Incorporation of significant heritage tree stand into development. 13Page 104 of 111 Transportation •Request to submit a traffic impact analysis later in the development process. •Access management- location and type of driveways will be solidified. •Requested reduction in the connectivity standards due to site constraints. 14Page 105 of 111 Utilities •Construction of a CIP regional 16” water line. –Delivery date to be included in the development agreement. –Reimbursement and timing to be included in the development agreement. 15Page 106 of 111 Parkland •Applicant requesting to meet parkland dedication requirements by paying $200 per residential unit. •Staff requesting compliance with proposed parkland ordinance that is currently under review by the UDC advisory committee. This includes: park improvement fee and additional details regarding proposed open space and multi-family amenities 16Page 107 of 111 Annexation Process •Approval of the development agreement. •Upon the purchase of the property annexation will be requested and PUD zoning with the terms of the Development agreement will be requested for the property inside the city limits and property being annexed. •Platting and Site Plan will not be submitted or reviewed until the property is fully within the city. 17Page 108 of 111 Direction from City Council 18Page 109 of 111 Direction from City Council Staff seeks concurrence, direction on requested updates, or additional information needed prior to bringing this request to City Council for action. –Land use –Development Standards •Architectural Standards •Parkland Standards –Annexation –Provision for regional water improvements 19Page 110 of 111 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop October 9, 2018 SUBJECT: Sec. 551.071: Consul tati on w i th Attorney Advice from attorney abo ut pending or co ntemplated litigation and o ther matters on which the attorney has a duty to advise the City Council, including agenda items Sec. 551:072: De l i berati o ns about Real P roperty - P arcel 7 & 8, Northwest Blvd. -- Travis Baird, Real Estate Services Coordinator - South Lake Wate r Treatment P lant -- Travis Baird, Re al Estate Services Coordinato r Sec. 551:074: Personnel Matters City Manager, City Attorney, City Secretary and Municipal Judge: Consideration of the appointment, employme nt, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal Sec. 551.087: De l i berati o n Regardi ng Economi c Devel opment Negoti ati ons - Wolf Lakes Update - P roject Deliver Update ITEM SUMMARY: FINANCIAL IMPACT: NA SUBMITTED BY: Page 111 of 111