Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda CC 12.12.2017 WorkshopNotice of M eeting of the Governing B ody of the City of Georgetown, Texas December 1 2, 2 01 7 The Ge orgetown City Council will meet on December 12, 2017 at 3:00 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. REVISE D AGENDA Policy De ve lopme nt/Re vie w Workshop - A Re vie w o f the City’s Investment P olicy and discussion of recommended changes for 2018 -- Elaine Wilson, Controller B Prese ntation and discussion regarding po licy for placement of small c e ll nodes by wireless netwo rk providers within public rights-of-way -- Glenn W. Dishong, Utilities Director C Update and discussion regarding po ssible termination of, or amendment to , the Development Agre ement Regarding Annexation and Develo pment of Cowan Springs and possible new utility agre e ment between P ulte and the City -- Wayne Reed, Assistant City Manager and Wesley Wright, Syste ms Engineering Director D Prese ntation on annexation requireme nts and discussion on establishing an annexation strategy -- Sofia Nelso n, P lanning Director, Charlie McNabb, City Attorney and Wesley Wright, Systems Engineering Director E Discussion o f possible projects to be c onsidered for application submission in response to CAMP O Call For P rojects related to TxDOT funding sources available for funding years FY19 to FY2 2 -- Edward G. Polasek, Transportatio n P lanning Coordinator F Update and direction regarding the City Council's Vision and Strategie s -- David Morgan, City Manager and Jack Daly, Assistant to the City Manager 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. G 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 - We stern District Water Agreeme nt with Orchard Ridge -- Wesley Wright, P.E. Systems Engineering Director Page 1 of 104 - Texas Crushed Stone Industrial Agreement Se c . 55 1.0 72 : Del i berati ons about Real Pro perty - Cowen Creek Interceptor Easement Acquisitions -- Travis Baird, Re al Estate Services Coo rdinato r 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 86 : Certai n P ubl i c P ow e r Uti l i ti es: Competi ti ve Matte r s - Quarterly P urchase Power Update 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 _________________, 2017, 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 104 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop December 12, 2017 SUBJECT: Review of the City’s Investment Policy and discussio n of reco mmended changes fo r 20 18 -- Elaine Wilson, Controller ITEM SUMMARY: The purpose of the Investment P olicy (Po licy) is to provide the framework fo r managing the City’s investments in a way that mitigates risk while optimizing returns. The po licy is modeled after P ublic Funds Investment Act (P FIA) recommendatio ns. According to the Act, Council must approve the po licies on an annual basis. The City’s Investment Advisors, Valley Vie w Consulting, have recomme nded updates to the policy that are outline d in the presentation. The full version of the policie s with tracked changes is also provided. The General Government and Financ e (GGAF) Bo ard reco mmended the policies to Council at the meeting Decembe r 11, 2017. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None SUBMITTED BY: Elaine Wilson, Controller - SP ATTACHMENT S: Description Investment Polic y FY 2017 Tracked Changes S ummary of C hanges Memo Investment Polic y Pres entatio n Page 3 of 104 City of Georgetown Investment Policy Page 1 CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS INVESTMENT POLICY As amended December 12December 13, 2016, 2017 SECTION 1: SCOPE & OBJECTIVES 1.1 SCOPE This Investment Policy applies to all financial assets of the City of Georgetown, Texas, which includes the City of Georgetown Economic Development Corporation and the Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation, held in all funds. 1.2 STATEMENT OF CASH MANAGEMENT PHILOSOPHY The City will maintain a comprehensive cash management program to include the effective collection of all accounts receivable, the prompt deposit of receipts to the City's bank accounts, the payment of obligations to comply with State law and in accord with vendor invoices, and the prudent investment of idle funds in accord with this Policy. 1.3 OBJECTIVES The City's investment program will be conducted to comply with Texas Government Code Chapter 2256 (the Public Funds Investment Act) and accomplish the following objectives, listed in priority order: 1. Safety. The City will give priority to the preservation and safety of the principal invested. Investments will be made in a manner that will mitigate credit risk and interest rate risk. 2. Liquidity. The City will maintain the availability of sufficient cash to pay obligations of the City when they are due. 3. Public Trust. Investment Officers shall seek to act responsibly as custodians of the public trust. Investment Officers shall avoid transactions that might impair public confidence in the City’s ability to govern effectively. 4. Yield. The City will invest idle cash in a manner that will maximize earnings to the greatest extent possible, consistent with State and local laws and the objectives of safety and liquidity listed above. It is also the objective of the City to diversify its investments to eliminate the risk of loss resulting from over concentration of assets in a specific maturity, a specific issuer or a specific class of investments, when appropriate. It is the intent of the City to hold investments to maturity. SECTION 2: STANDARD OF CARE 2.1 PRUDENCE Investments will be made with judgment and care, under circumstances then prevailing, that persons of prudence, discretion, and intelligence exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation, but for investment, considering the probable safety of their capital and the probable income to be derived. The City Council recognizes that in maintaining a diversified portfolio, occasional measured losses due to market volatility are inevitable and must be Page 4 of 104 City of Georgetown Investment Policy Page 2 considered within the context of the overall portfolio's investment return, provided that adequate diversification has been implemented. In determining whether an Investment Officer has exercised prudence with respect to an investment decision, the determination shall be made taking into consideration: A. The investment of all funds, or funds under the City’s control, over which the Officer had responsibility rather than a consideration as to the prudence of a single investment. B. Whether the investment decision was consistent with the written Investment Policy of the City. The Investment Officer, acting in accordance with written procedures and exercising due diligence, shall not be held personally responsible for a specific investment's adverse credit risk or market price changes, provided that these deviations are reported immediately to the City Manager and/or the City Council and that appropriate action is taken to control adverse developments. 2.2 ETHICS & CONFLICT OF INTEREST Investment Officers and employees involved in the investment process will refrain from personal business activity that could conflict with the proper execution of the investment program, or which could impair their ability to make impartial investment decisions. Investment Officers and employees will comply with all disclosure and reporting requirements of Section 2256.005 (i) of the Texas Government Code. 2.3 DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY The Finance Director, Treasurer, and Controller are the City's Investment Officers. The Finance Director is responsible for overall management of the City's investment program and may direct the other Investment Officers in his/her duties. Accordingly, the Investment Officers are responsible for day-to-day administration of the investment program and for the duties listed below: 1. Maintain current information as to available cash balances in City accounts, and as to the amount of idle cash available for investment; 2. Make investments and maintain written procedures for the operation and internal control of the investment program consistent with this Policy; 3. Ensure that all investments are adequately secured; and 4. Attend training relating to investment responsibilities under this Policy as required by Section 2256.008 of the Texas Government Code. Ten (10) hours of investment training must be completed within twelve (12) months of attaining the position of Investment Officer, and thereafter, eight (8) hours of training must be completed within a two-year period that begins on the first day of the City’s fiscal year and consists of the two consecutive fiscal years after that date. To ensure quality and capability of investment management, all Investment Officers shall receive training from an independent source that addresses investment controls, security risks, strategy risks, market risks, diversification of investment portfolios, and compliance with the Public Funds Investment Act. The Training sponsored by any of the following organizations is approved: Texas Municipal League Page 5 of 104 City of Georgetown Investment Policy Page 3 Government Finance Officers Association of Texas (GFOAT) Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada Government Treasurers’ Organization of Texas (GTOT) University of North Texas Texas Tech University Center for Professional Development Unless authorized by law, no person may deposit, withdraw, transfer or manage in any other manner the funds of the City. SECTION 3: INVESTMENT STRATEGIES 3.1 OPERATING FUNDS Operating Funds are defined as cash and investments used for day-to-day operations that do not fall into one of the other categories. Operating Funds will be invested in a manner suitable to provide adequate liquidity for the anticipated operating needs of the City. Investments of Operating Funds shall be limited to a weighted average maturity no greater than one year and any one investment may not exceed 36 months without authorization by the City Manager. All investment instruments must meet credit and safety criteria as required by the Public Funds Investment Act and this Policy. All investments shall be of high quality with no perceived default risk. Operating Funds will remain sufficiently liquid to enable the City to meet operating requirements that may be reasonably anticipated. If utilized, securities with active and efficient secondary markets are necessary in the event of unanticipated cash requirements. Operating Funds’ maturities will be staggered based on the City’s anticipated operating needs, and the investments may include financial institution deposits, U.S. treasuries and agencies, state and municipal debt instruments, investment pools, and money market mutual funds. Investment of Operating Funds will be structured to attain the highest possible yield given the liquidity and safety requirements. 3.2 CONTINGENCY RESERVES (or operating reserves) Contingency Reserves are the minimum fund balance/working capital requirements as defined by City Council in the Annual Operating Plan. Contingency Reserves’ balances may be used to cover any cash operating shortfalls due to the timing of bond issues, revenue receipts, etc. The funds will be invested in a manner suitable to cover operating shortfalls that may be reasonably anticipated. All investment instruments must meet credit and safety criteria as required by the Public Funds Investment Act and this Policy. All investments shall be of high quality with no perceived default risk. Investments of these funds may exceed 24 months with prior approval of the City Manager if short term cash flow needs are not evident. Any one investment may not exceed 36 months in maturity length. The weighted average maturity for these funds may not exceed 24 months. Contingency Reserves investments will remain sufficiently liquid to meet City needs in the event of an operating shortfall, and if utilized, securities with active and efficient secondary markets will provide marketability necessary should the need arise to liquidate the investment prior to maturity. Contingency Reserves’ maturities will be diverse to cover possible operating shortfalls, and the investments may include financial institution deposits, U.S. treasuries and agencies, state and municipal debt instruments, investment pools, and money market mutual funds. Investment of Contingency Reserves will be structured to attain the highest possible yield given the liquidity and safety requirements. 3.3 DEBT 3.3.1 Reserves. Debt Reserves are defined as bond reserve funds required to be set aside in accordance with bond covenants. The City’s bond covenants do not require the City to maintain any reserve funds. Therefore, the City’s investments are not adversely affected by any reserve requirement conditions. Page 6 of 104 City of Georgetown Investment Policy Page 4 3.3.2 Interest & Sinking (or debt service funds). Interest and Sinking funds are defined as those funds accumulated to meet periodic payments required by bond and note maturity schedules. The investment maturities are limited by pertinent debt service requirements and tax laws limiting accumulation and earnings for such funds, and investments should be made in a manner suitable to comply with applicable requirements and payment schedules. The investments must meet credit and safety criteria as required by the Public Funds Investment Act and this Policy. All investments shall be of high quality with no perceived default risk. The funds shall be invested to ensure adequate funding for each consecutive debt service payment, but shall not exceed the debt service schedule. Involuntary liquidation of investments is highly unlikely due to the nature of these funds. Interest and Sinking fund maturities will be diversified by matching them to the debt service payments of the City, and the investments may include financial institution deposits, U.S. treasuries and agencies, state and municipal debt instruments, investment pools, and money market mutual funds. Investment of Interest and Sinking funds will be structured to attain the highest possible yield given the liquidity and safety requirements. 3.4 BOND PROCEEDS (capital improvement funds) Bond proceed funds are defined as those funds received from the sales of City bonds or notes and not otherwise set aside for debt service or reserve purposes. These funds typically include money to fund infrastructure, construction, or other large projects. The investment maturities are limited by pertinent project draw requirements, applicable bond covenants, and tax laws governing earnings for such funds, but may not have a single security greater than 36 months, unless a flexible repurchase agreement is used in accordance with Section 4.1.5 of this Policy. Investments must meet credit and safety criteria as required by the Public Funds Investment Act and this Policy, and should be made in a manner suitable to meet project requirements. All investments shall be of high quality with no perceived default risk. The funds shall be invested to match projected cash flow requirements with sufficient liquidity to meet unanticipated project outlays, and maturities shall not exceed the expected project completion dates. Bond proceed maturities will be diverse to provide necessary liquidity based on project needs, and investments may include financial institution deposits, flexible repurchase agreements, U.S. treasuries and agencies, state and municipal debt instruments, investment pools, and money market mutual funds. Investment of Bond Proceeds will be structured to attain the highest possible yield given the liquidity and safety requirements. SECTION 4: AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS 4.1 AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS City funds may be invested in the following authorized investments: 4.1.1 Financial Institution Deposits. Certificates of Deposit and other evidences of deposit at a financial institution that, a) has its main office or a branch office in Texas and is guaranteed or insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or its successor, b) is secured by obligations or in any other manner and amount provided by law for deposits of the City, or c) is executed through a depository institution or approved broker that has its main office or a branch office in Texas that meets the requirements of the Public Funds Investment Act. All financial institution deposits in excess of the FDIC insured amount must be collateralized as described by Section 5.5 COLLATERALIZATION. 4.1.2 U.S. Treasuries and Agencies. Obligations of the United States of America, its agencies and instrumentalities, including other obligations, the principal and interest of which are unconditionally guaranteed or insured by, or backed by the full faith and credit of the United States or its agencies and instrumentalities, including obligations that are fully guaranteed or insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or by the explicit Page 7 of 104 City of Georgetown Investment Policy Page 5 full faith and credit of the United States. Such obligations include letters of credit of the United States or its agencies and instrumentalities, including the Federal Home Loan Banks. 4.1.3 Investment Pools. Investment pools that meet all requirements of the Public Funds Investment Act, including the following criteria: a. An investment pool must provide an offering circular or other similar disclosure instruments and provide monthly and transaction reporting as required by Section 2256.016 of the Texas Government Code. b. Investment in a new pool will require the approval of the City Council. c. A public funds investment pool created to function as a money market mutual fund must (1) mark its portfolio to market daily, (2) include in its investment objectives the maintenance of a stable net asset value of $1 for each share and (3) be continuously rated no lower than AAAm or at an equivalent rating by at least one nationally recognized rating service. 4.1.4. Money Market Mutual Funds. No-load government money market mutual funds if the fund: a. Is compliant with the Public Funds Investment Act; a.b. Is regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission; b.c. Marks its portfolio to market daily; c.d. Includes in its investment objectives the maintenance of a stable net asset value of $1.0000 for each share; d. Is continuously rated no lower than AAA or at an equivalent rating by at least one nationally recognized rating service. 4.1.5. Repurchase Agreements. Fully collateralized repurchase agreements that: a. Have a defined termination date; b. Are secured by cash or obligations as allowed by the Public Funds Investment Act and this Policy; c. Require independent third party safekeeping of all securities prior to the release of any funds; d. Are placed through a primary dealer or financial institution doing business in Texas; and e. Do not create a reverse repurchase agreement by the City. Construction, capital improvement and bond proceed funds may utilize a flexible repurchase agreement, or similar agreement, that allows expenditure-related withdrawal of funds, without penalty, with an average life and termination date limitation based on the anticipated draw schedule. Any repurchase agreement shall require the execution of a mutually acceptable Repurchase Agreement. 4.1.6. Municipal Issuers. Obligations of: a. The State of Texas or its agencies and instrumentalities; and b. Counties, cities, and other political subdivisions of the State of Texas rated as to investment quality by a nationally recognized investment rating firm not less than A or its equivalent. Investments securities purchased prior to this Policy’s revision, that do not meet the revised requirements of this Policy, are not required to be liquidated. The City shall monitor each security’s investment’s status to determine whether it is in the best interest Commented [RL1]: SKA - why delete the the other obligation and FDIC language, and exclude MBSs? Page 8 of 104 City of Georgetown Investment Policy Page 6 of the City to hold or liquidate the investmentsecurity. 4.2 CREDIT RATING REVIEW AND EFFECT OF LOSS OF REQUIRED RATING Not less than quarterly, the Investment Officers will obtain from a reliable source the current credit rating for each held investment that has a Public Funds Investment Act-required minimum rating. Any Authorized Investment that requires a minimum rating and does not qualify at any time during the period, is considered to not have the minimum rating. The City shall take all prudent measures that are consistent with this Policy to liquidate an investment that does not have the minimum rating. 4.3 COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW All authorized investments outlined above must meet the requirements of the Public Funds Investment Act. No investment may be made in any instrument except as provided above. 4.4 CASH ON HAND Cash resources required for the immediate needs of the City, and not otherwise available for longer term investment, will be placed in account(s) at the City's Depository/ Depositories, in local government investment pools and/or money market mutual funds. Such account(s) will earn interest at the highest rate(s) provided in the respective depository contract(s). SECTION 5: SAFEKEEPING AND CUSTODY 5.1 AUTHORIZED BROKER/DEALERS and INVESTMENT POLICY CERTIFICATION Authorized investment securities may be purchased only through brokers/dealers who are licensed and in good standing with the Texas Department of Securities, the Securities Exchange Commission, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, or other applicable self-regulatory organization. The City Council will, at least annually, review, revise, and adopt a list of broker/dealers who are authorized to engage in investment transactions with the City. The list is approved and included in Attachment “A” of this Policy. Before engaging in investment transactions with an financial institution, broker/dealer, Investment Pool, or Money Market Mutual Fund,a discretionary investment management firm, the Investment Officers will have received from said pool/firm a signed Certification Form. This form will attest that the individual responsible for the City’s account with that pool/firm has received and reviewed the City’s Investment Policy and that the pool/firm has implemented reasonable procedures and controls in an effort to preclude imprudent activities arising out of investment transactions conducted between the City and the firmtransactions conducted between the City and the pool/firm that are not authorized by the City’s Investment Policy, except to the extent that this authorization is dependent on an analysis of the makeup of the City’s entire portfolio, requires an interpretation of subjective investment standards, or relates to investment transactions of the City that are not made through accounts or other contractual arrangements over which the pool/firm has accepted discretionary investment authority. The letter must be signed by a Qualified Representative as defined by the Public Funds Investment Act. “Qualified Representative” means a person who holds a position with a business organization who is authorized to act on behalf of the business organization and who is one of the following: Page 9 of 104 City of Georgetown Investment Policy Page 7 (1) for a business organization doing business that is regulated by or registered with a securities commission, a person who is registered under the rules of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority; (2) for a state or federal bank, a savings bank or state or federal credit union, a member of the loan committee for the bank or branch of the bank or a person authorized by corporate resolution to act on behalf of and bind the banking institution; (31) for an investment pool, the person authorized by the elected official or board with authority to administer the activities of the investment pool to sign the written instrument on behalf of the investment pool, or (42) for an discretionary investment management firm registered under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 or, if not subject of registration under the Act, registered with the State Securities Board, a person who is an officer or principal of the investment management firm. 5.2 AUTHORIZED FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS Financial institution deposits and other evidences of deposit may be purchased at qualified City Depositories and other financial institutions. Qualifications will be determined by the Investment Officers. The City must have a written agreement with the Depository and other financial institutions, and that depository and other financial institutions must meet all State Laws for deposit of public funds. The City's main operating Depository/Depositories will be selected as provided by law and the City’s purchasing procedure. 5.3 INTERNAL CONTROLS The Finance Director will establish and maintain procedures for the execution of the investment program and these procedures will address internal controls to mitigate risks of intentional or inadvertent mismanagement or misappropriation of funds. All investment transactions will be documented by the Investment Officers. The Investment Officers, or through the City’s Investment Advisor, may make investments orally, but will follow promptly with a written confirmation to the financial institution or broker/ dealer, with a copy of such confirmation retained in the City's files. All trades, purchases, and sales, excluding cash equivalent transactions, will be completed through a competitive process. Where appropriate, at least three (3) quotations will be solicited for each such investment made. Market value of the portfolio and each investment will be monitored at least quarterly through industry standard publications/sources for market data such as, but not limited to, The Wall Street Journal or Bloomberg. 5.4 SAFEKEEPING All securities purchased by the City under this Policy must be designated as assets of the City, must be settled on a delivery-versus-payment (DVP) basis, and must be protected through the use of a third-party custody/safekeeping agent. The City will enter into a formal agreement with an institution of such size and expertise as is necessary to provide the services needed to protect and secure the investment assets of the City. 5.5 COLLATERALIZATION To the extent not insured by federal agencies that secure deposits, City funds (including financial institution deposits and CDs) must be collateralized in compliance with the Texas Public Funds Page 10 of 104 City of Georgetown Investment Policy Page 8 Collateral Act and pertinent federal banking regulations. With the exception of deposits secured with irrevocable letters of credit at 100% of deposit plus accrued interest, the aggregate market value of pledged securities shall be equal to at least one hundred two percent (102%) of the deposit plus accrued interest less an amount insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Should the depository fail to adequately maintain the required collateral level, the City may increase the minimum to 110%. The City reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to accept or reject any form of insurance or collateralization pledged towards its deposits. Institutions serving as a depository will be required to sign a Depository/Collateral Agreement with the City. The collateralized deposit portion of the Agreement shall define the City’s rights to the collateral in case of default, bankruptcy, or closing and shall establish a perfected security interest in compliance with Federal and State regulations, including: • The agreement must be in writing; • The agreement has tomust be executed by the Depository and the City contemporaneously with the acquisition of the asset; • The agreement must be approved by the Board of Directors or designated committee of the Depository and a copy of the meeting minutes must be delivered to the City; and • The agreement must be part of the Depository’s “official record” continuously since its execution. Securities pledged as collateral must be retained by an independent, third party custodian and marked as pledged to the City. The City will be provided the original safekeeping receipt from the custodian on each pledged security. With the exception of the Federal Reserve Bank, the City, financial institution, and the custodian will operate in accordance with an acceptable custodial agreement. The City's Investment Officers must approve in writing the release of collateral prior to its removal from the safekeeping account in accordance with the terms of the depository and/or custodial agreement. The financial institution(s) with which the City invests and/or maintains deposits will require the custodian to provide monthly a listing of the collateral pledged to the City marked to current market prices. The listing will include total pledged securities itemized by name, CUSIP, type and description of the security; safekeeping receipt number; par value; current market value; maturity date; and Moody's or Standard & Poor's rating, if available. SECTION 6: REPORTING 6.1 QUARTERLY REPORTING The Investment Officers shall prepare, sign and submit to the City Council a quarterly report on investment transactions for all funds covered by this Policy. The report will be prepared in compliance with the Public Funds Investment Act. The report will cover the investment position of the City at the end of each fiscal quarter. The contents will include at a minimum: 1. Beginning and ending market value and accrued interest of the portfolio; 2. Beginning and ending market value and book value, maturity date, type of funds, interest coupon, and yield for each separate security; and 3. A statement as to the compliance with this Policy and State law. 6.2 ANNUAL REPORTING Within 90 days following the end of the fiscal year, the Investment Officers will present to the City Council or the General Government and Finance Advisory Board a comprehensive annual report on the investment program and investment activity. In addition to the information required for Page 11 of 104 City of Georgetown Investment Policy Page 9 quarterly reporting, the annual report will include a review of the activities and return for the twelve months, suggest Policy revisions and improvements that might enhance the investment program, and include an investment plan for the ensuing fiscal year. The annual report may be a component of the quarterly report. 6.3 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS In order to To evaluate portfolio performance of funds subject to this Policy, the City establishes “weighted average yield to maturity” as the standard portfolio performance measurement. The portfolio’s performance will be compared against appropriately competitive and reasonable benchmarks, including money market mutual funds or investment pools of similar make-up and maturities. 6.4 COMPLIANCE The quarterly reports shall be formally reviewed and a compliance audit of management controls and adherence to this Policy as it relates to the City’s investments and investing activity will be performed on an annual basis in conjunction with the City’s annual financial audit. The results shall be reported to the City Council. SECTION 7: POLICY REVIEW AND AMENDMENTS This Investment Policy will be reviewed by the City Council on at least an annual basis as required by the Public Funds Investment Act. The City Council shall adopt a written instrument by rule, order, ordinance, or resolution stating that it has reviewed the investment policy and investment strategies and the written instrument so adopted shall record any changes made to either the investment policy or investment strategy. Page 12 of 104 City of Georgetown Investment Policy Page 10 CITY OF GEORGETOWN INVESTMENT POLICY Attachment “A” Approved Broker/Dealer List Coastal SecuritiesFTN Financial Duncan Williams Hilltop Securities Multi-Bank Securities Raymond James Rice Financial Wells Fargo Securities These broker/dealers meet the City’s Investment Policy requirements. Page 13 of 104 Page 1 of 3 M E M O R A N D U M DATE: December 6, 2017 TO: Mayor & Council David Morgan, City Manager Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager FROM: Elaine Wilson, Controller/Karrie Pursley, Treasurer SUBJECT: Proposed Updates to City of Georgetown Investment Policy ATTACHMENTS: Redline version of the City of Georgetown Investment Policy The City’s investments are guided by the City’s investment policy, which was created pursuant to Chapter 2256 of the Texas Government Code, known as the Public Funds Investment Act (PFIA). The law requires the governing body of local governments to review the policy annually. City staff and its investment advisory firm, Valley View Consulting, L.L.C., have reviewed the current policy and made recommended changes to enhance the policy and make minor language clarifications. There has been no state legislative changes since last year’s review. These proposed changes will be reviewed by GGAF on December 6, 2017. The policy and proposed changes will be reviewed at the December 12, 2017 Georgetown City Council Meeting. A summary of the changes proposed is outlined below. Section 2.3 Delegation of Authority Addition of the Treasurer position. Section 3.1 Investment Strategies Addition of State and Municipal debt instruments Section 3.2 Contingency Reserves Addition of State and Municipal debt instruments Section 3.3 Debt Addition of State and Municipal debt instruments Section 3.4 Debt Addition of State and Municipal debt instruments Page 14 of 104 Page 2 of 3 Section 4.1.2 Treasuries and Agencies Clarification on letters of credit. Section 4.1.4 Money Market Mutual Funds Minor wording clarification. Section 4.1.6 Municipal Issuers Minor wording clarification. Section 4.4 Cash on Hand Minor wording clarification. Section 5.1 Authorized Broker/Dealers and Investment Policy Certification Updated with the 2017 Legislative changes in regards to the PFIA, including removal of specific references to banks, financial institutions, and broker/dealers. Section 5.5 Collateralization Minor wording clarification. Section 6.1 Quarterly Reporting Minor wording clarification. Section 6.3 Performance Standards Minor wording clarification. Attachment “A” Change in approved brokers from Coastal Securities to FTN Financial Upcoming Legislative Changes These changes incorporate all changes made in the 85th Texas Legislative session. We do not expect any further changes to the PFIA or the Public Funds Collateral Act until 2019 during the next biennial session. Page 15 of 104 Page 3 of 3 Page 16 of 104 FY2017 Annual Budget GGAF December 11, 2017 City Council December 12,2017 Investment Policy 2018 1Page 17 of 104 FY2017 Annual Budget Purpose •The Investment Policy sets the objectives and strategies for investing the City’s available cash and reserves •The Policy follows all of the rules in the Public Funds Investment Act (PFIA)and is recommended by the Investment Advisors •Council required to review and adopt the policy annually •Last reviewed and adopted December 2016 2Page 18 of 104 FY2017 Annual Budget Administrative Changes •Adding the Treasurer as an authorized Investment Officer •Stating which funds can invest in State and Municipal bonds •Operating Funds •Contingency Reserve Funds •Debt Service Funds •Capital Improvement Funds (Bond Proceeds) •Verbiage changes to more closely match the PFIA wording 3Page 19 of 104 FY2017 Annual Budget Substantive Changes •Changes to PFIA •Section 4.1.4 Money Market Mutual Funds •PFIA removed requirement of Net Asset Value of 1.0000 to correspond to SEC removal of this requirement for Prime funds last October •City choosing to keep this requirement which will be found in Government Funds •PFIA changed wording to comply with SEC Rule 2a-7 from a stated weighted average maturity –City policy will be to comply with this change •Section 5 –Broker/Dealers Certifications •PFIA removed requirement for broker/dealer certifications except for local government investment pools and discretionary investment advisors •City is removing portions of Section 5 that no longer apply 4Page 20 of 104 FY2017 Annual Budget •Broker/Dealer List Changes •Remove Coastal Securities •Add FTN Financial 5Page 21 of 104 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop December 12, 2017 SUBJECT: P resentation and discussio n regarding policy for placement o f small cell nodes by wire less network providers within public rights-of-way -- Glenn W. Dishong, Utilitie s Directo r ITEM SUMMARY: FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A SUBMITTED BY: Glenn W. Dishong - Utilities Director ATTACHMENT S: Description S mall Cell Deployments and S B 1004 Presentation Page 22 of 104 PRESENTED BY: GLENN DISHONG, UTILITY DIRECTOR Small Cell Deployments and SB 1004 Requirements Page 23 of 104 Communications Scenario Pre-SB 1004 Applied to “wired” communications companies Franchise requirement Customers known Franchise fee to GF City electric utility required to allow attachment Pole attachment agreement Pole attachment fee to electric utility Page 24 of 104 Small Cell World Wireless technology Need density No franchise needed Unable to determine what customers are “connected” Texas Local Govt Code Ch 284 applies Requires expanded installation Expanded use of utility poles More than just utility poles Required processing times Fee limitations Page 25 of 104 SB 1004 Requirements City still controls ROW ROW use goes beyond utility poles Street lights Traffic lights Free standing poles Fees for use Utility Poles –Electric Fund Other Poles –General Fund Design Manual Required Appropriate standards Where What How Page 26 of 104 SB 1004 Continued Expanded use of utility poles Design requirements must be set Traditional pole attachment for wire connections to nodes Use of poles for devices Non-discriminatory rates Pole attachment rates apply Page 27 of 104 Policy Enactment Ordinance Sets out legal requirements including Permitting Processing times Fees Pole Attachment agreement (if needed) Reference to Design Manual Readings in January Design Manual Referenced by Ordinance Amended and approved by staff Page 28 of 104 Design Manual Locations for Node Support Poles or attachment Restricted ROW Parks Residential Areas Historic Districts Preferred ROW Industrial Areas Highways Retail and Commercial Reasonable design or concealment Installation <300 from historic site or structure is discouraged Must comply with underground requirements Page 29 of 104 Design Manual Installation Preference Micro Network Node lashed to communication line between utility poles Utility poles Service poles Street Lights Traffic Signals Street Signage New Node Support Pole Ground equipment Page 30 of 104 Design Manual Other Requirements Cannot obstruct, impede, or hinder travel or public safety Obstruct or hinder ability to ascend or do maintenance Cannot violate NESC for utility service poles Size limitations Load analysis Interference analysis Relocation or removal for maintenance Relocation or removal for safety Removal for obsolescence Page 31 of 104 Review Design Manual In progress Ready upon 2nd reading of ordinance Ordinance Readings in January Pole Attachment Agreements Already exist for some “wired” companies May need to amend to address equipment Permitting process Need to amend to include equipment, Service Poles and Node Support Poles Page 32 of 104 The End Questions? Page 33 of 104 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop December 12, 2017 SUBJECT: Update and disc ussio n regarding possible termination o f, or amendment to, the Deve lo pment Agreement Regarding Annexation and Deve lo pment of Cowan Springs and possible new utility agreement between Pulte and the City -- Wayne Reed, Assistant City Manager and Wesley Wright, Systems Engineering Director ITEM SUMMARY: Staff is reco mmending amending or te rminating the existing Developme nt Agreement regarding the Anne xatio n and Development of Co wan Springs (referred to as the “Development Agreement”) and seeking Council's co ncurrence to proceed. The multiple owners have consented to the termination with the deal po ints pro vided in this c ove r sheet. This item is being c oo rdinated with Council’s recent approval to annex roughly 500 acres represented by Highland Village and Somerset Hills (portio ns o f Co wan Springs) o n November 2 8th and c onsideration of PUD zoning on the majority of property on January 9th: Sun City Te xas Somerset PUD (Amendment 1) for 7 68 .9 acres; Somerse t Hills PUD for 3 79 .6 acres; and Highland Village P UD with 120 .5 acres, a combined total of 1,269 acres. If the P UDs are appro ved by Council, it will effectively bring the entire Co wan Springs property into the City and pro vide fo r PUD zo ning that will make the property subject to the City’s regulatio ns, which is the major intent of the e xisting Development Agreement. The following provides a histo ry of the Development Agreement, inc luding amendments, and a summary o f the propo sed terms and conditio ns o f terminating it. Background The City entered into the Develo pment Agreement with Somerset Hills, Ltd., (referred to as the “Developer” and “Owne r” in the Agreement) in 2006 concerning the po tential annexation and development of some 1,202 ac re s o f land to encourage orderl y and effi ci ent l and deve l opment o f roughl y 1,202 ac r es l o cated w i thi n the Ci ty’s Extraterri tori al Juri sdi cti on (see Attachment 1 ). The Development Agreement was amended twice over the next six years incorporating additio nal land as well as removing some to o. At present, the Development Agreeme nt applies to approximately 1,269 acres of private property. Of this total, some 769 acres o f the Cowan Springs property have been or are in the process of being developed as part of Sun City; at the time o f the approval of the Development Agree ment in 2006, the City did not anticipate this property wo uld include age-restricted residential dwelling units. Original Develo pment Agreement (May 2006) The City Co uncil appro ved the original Develo pment Agreement in May 2006. The Development Agreement set fo rth authorized uses of the pro perty (some existing uses and agricultural uses) and defined events c onstituting consent to annexation of the property. Consent to a vo luntary annexation was triggered by an application for annexation or any one of three other actions: a) the owner submitting an applic atio n fo r a site plan, preliminary plat, or any other developme nt- related application applying to all or any portion of the pro perty; b) change in existing use s o n all or any portion of the property from the existing agricultural and/or vehicle storage uses; o r c) receipt o f an application by the City for wate r, wastewater, or electrical service(s) for all or any portio n of the property. In exchange for this arrangement and as lo ng as the o wner remained in full compliance with the Develo pment Agreement, the City agreed to not pursue involuntary annexation thro ugh its term, which is May 23, 20 21 , unless sooner terminated thro ugh mutual consent. The City has benefited from entering into the Development Agre e ment by gaining the Owne r/Develo per ’s consent to the following terms and co nditio ns: City Regulations Imposed on Land Develo pment. Owner consented to impose all of the City’s laws, o rdinances (including UDC), regulatio ns, technical manuals, policie s and requirements to any future land development even if such develo pment occurs outside o f the city limits, e xc luding City taxation. Upon annexation of any po rtion of the property, all City regulations, including taxation, would apply like any other property. Impe rvious Coverage. Gro ss lot coverage or impervious coverage was established fo r each re sidential lo t and overall. P roperty Owners’ Association . Deve lo per agreed to establish a Property Owners Association(s) Page 34 of 104 to own, operate or maintain common areas within the property that are not owne d by a special district o r political subdivision. No New Spe c ial Districts. Exce pt fo r existing Road Districts with Williamson County, the De veloper c anno t apply for, support, sponsor, o r seek third party sponsorship for any special districts or municipalities of any kind witho ut the prior consent of the City Council. P arks and Recreational Facilities. The developer must comply with the City’s UDC with regard to parkland, trails, and open space. Scho ols. The developer must negotiate in go od faith with the Geo rgeto wn ISD concerning the lo c atio n of a school site within the property (to serve sc hoo l age children living in the de velopment). Fire Services. The Developer agreed to pay $630 per residential unit at the time of building pe rmit as a contribution in aid of a fire statio n to serve the property. If requested by the City, the de veloper must dedicate a two acre site to the City for a fire station. Electric Services. Deve lo pe r agreed that the City would be the electric utility se rvice provider for the property within the City’s c e rtified electric service area. Retail Solid Waste Dispo sal Services. Developer agreed the City will provide solid waste disposal to customers within the pro pe rty. Retail Water Utility Services. Developer agreed that the City would be the retail water utility service provider for the pro perty. In addition, the developer agreed to commenc e co nstruction of a ce rtain sixteen inch (16 ”) water line (“Offsite Water Line”) on or before the final platting of the 1 ,70 0th single-family residential unit on the property and complete c onstruction on or before the final platting of the 2,000th single -family residential unit. Retail Wastewater Utility Services. De veloper agreed that the City wo uld be the retail wastewater utility service provider for the property. The City co mmitted to pro vide 0.87 Million Gallons per Day (“MGD”) peak c apacity, which was e stimated to serve 1,6 00 residential units, non-age re stricted. The parties agreed to inc re ase capacity as follows: o City agreed to cover the co sts associated with designing and constructing a new wastewater treatment plant (“WWTP”) when actual wastewater flows warrant the inve stment by the City to build suc h plant; o Developer agreed to cover the co sts asso ciated with designing and constructing a new lift station and force main sufficient to serve the pro perty to the ne w wastewater treatment plant fro m the property. o Agreement expressly states “City agrees to diligently pursue commencement and c ompletio n of the new wastewater treatment plant when warranted and when nec e ssary to meet wastewater service require ments” (Section 13.0). o Developer agreed to convey at no cost to the City a twenty acre (20 ac.) site located on the pro perty at a mutually agreeable location for the new wastewate r treatment plant. Impac t Fees. Developer agreed to pay the City’s water and wastewater impac t fees in place at time o f approval of final approval o f the plat for the portion of the pro perty that includes that se rvic e connection. The agreement has been and is binding on successors and runs with the property. This has allo wed the City to enforce the terms and conditions of the agreeme nt on purchasers o f portions of the property, like P ulte the present master developer of Sun City. Co nversely, it has provided predictability to developers, like Pulte, who have sought to develop po rtions of Cowan Springs. First Amendment to Development Agreement (Marc h 20 08 ) In March of 20 08 , City Council approve d the first amendment to the Development Agreement. This amendment added roughly 361 acres to the 1,2 02 acre property. These pro perties are highlighted on Attachment 1. They are referred to as the Myra Young Trac t and the Boot Tract. Substantive pro visions in this amendment modified the following provisions: P arks and Recreational Facilities. This amendme nt clarified that the Develope r ’s obligation to c omply with the City’s UDC with re gard to parkland, trails, and open space included the construction Page 35 of 104 of a trail and low water crossing along the so uth side of Ronald Reagan Bo ulevard as shown in Exhibit C. Electric Services. In c onsideration of the City cove ring the capital investment to underground distribution level service to the property, the Developer agreed to the City imposing a supplemental e lectric c onnect fee for e lectrical c onnectio ns lo cated within the property until and up to $375,000. Fo r a single-family residential unit, the fee is roughly $150. Retail Water Utility Services. In additio n to the original te rms, the Developer agreed that the City wo uld be the re tail water utility service provider for the Myra Young Tract, if the Chisholm Trail Special Utility District (CTSUD) agreed to allow the City to dually certify the portion of the Myra Yo ung tract that was in this special distric t’s service area. In addition, the City agreed to provide water service for up to 2,000 single-family residential units (or nonresidential equivalent) upon the City’s final acceptance of the Offsite Water Line as described in the original Development Agreement. Retail Wastewater Utility Services. The amendment clarified and adde d c onditions as follows: o Developer agreed to convey to the City within thirty (30) days o f the effective date of the ame ndment property for the new WWTP, access and utility easeme nts, and a one hundred and fifty foo t (150’) buffe r between the WWTP and future re sidential development, all at no cost to the City. o Once the City took po sse ssio n of the WWTP site, it agreed to pursue all necessary regulatory appro vals required for a new WWTP. “Design and Constructio n Review Trigger” and a “Co nstruction Trigger” were e stablished for the timing of the City’s constructio n of the new WWTP. o Develo per maintained obligation to design and construct a new lift station and force main at its so le cost and would have a capacity interest in the city’s wastewater collection system for up to 0.8 7 MGD peak flow. o City recommitted to provide 0.87 MGD peak capacity, which was estimated to serve 1,600 re sidential unit equivalents or nonresidential equivalents. This was the extent of substantive amendments to the terms and conditions contained in the Development Agreement. Second Amendment to Development Agreement (February 20 12) In February of 2012 , City Co unc il approved the second amendment to the Deve lo pment Agreement. This amendme nt removed 33.54 acres from the Cowan Springs property to release it from the terms and conditions of the Developme nt Agreement. Attachment 1 reflects the current extent of private property covered by the Development Agreement. No other changes. Termination or Amendment o f Development Agre e ment (for January 9, 2018) Termination of the Develo pment Agreement as amended simultane ously with the entitlement of the Sun City Somerse t, and Somerset Hills, and Highland Village P UDs, which are currently scheduled to be approved by City Council on January 9th could occur unde r the fo llowing terms: Utility Agre e ment . P ulte , the Sun City master deve lo per, will need to agree to execute a utility agreement that obligate s it to repay the City for its capital investment for undergro und e lectric and to construct and/or provide easements to construct the water and wastewater infrastructure as shown on Sun City PP-2 01 7-0 17 Utility Master Plan (se e Attachment 2), specifically: o Each single-family residential unit shall be accessed a $150 supplemental electric connect fee for ele c trical c onnectio ns located within Sun City (within extent of the Cowan Springs property) up to $375,000 in co nsideration of the City covering the capital investment to underground distribution level service in Sun City; o Pay applicable City impact fees as is customary with each building permit; o Extend existing wastewater interceptor with a 21" wastewater line (CC-1 2015 MASTERPLAN) from Pedernales Fall Drive to CR 245 at time of deve lo pment of the subdivision; o Off of the 21” waste water interceptor, extend an 8” waste water line (CC-1 2015 MASTERPLAN) at time o f development of the subdivision along the western edge of Page 36 of 104 Ne ighbo rhood 68 to the so uthern boundary of the existing Ro nald Reagan Boule vard ROW, c re ating a 8” wastewater stub for o thers to extend to their developme nt; o Off of the 21” wastewater intercepto r in a location between Neighbo rhoo ds 6 2 and 72, extend an 8” wastewater line (P ER COG WW0 1A 5' CL OFFSET) at time o f development of the subdivision through Neighborho ods 69 and 70 to the cul-de-sac lo cated in Neighborho od 6 9 to the southe rn boundary of the existing Ronald Re agan Bo ulevard ROW, c re ating a 8” wastewater stub for o thers to extend to their de velopment; o Fro m the lift station site , extend an 8” waste water line (8” WASTEWATER (TYP.) PER COG WW01 A 5' CL OFFSET) at time of deve lo pment of the subdivision generally loc ate d in Ne ighbo rhoods 76 and 7 8 up through an easement between lots as shown to the southern boundary of the existing Ronald Reagan Boulevard ROW, c re ating a 8 ” wastewate r stub fo r others to e xtend to their development; o Co nstruct a forced main starting at the Future Lift Station Site, generally through Ne ighbo rhoods 77, 79, and 80, up to Ronald Reagan Blvd. ROW to City standards and design; o If other entities desire to develop and connect to City’s wastewater system in advance of Pulte final platting any o f the aforementioned Neighborhoo ds, Pulte shall convey to the City all ne c essary e ase ments for such infrastructure along with tempo rary easements for access and c onstructio n ne c essary to perform the work at no co st to the City and free and clear of any liens and encumbrances that would harm the City o r others from installing said utilities; and o A term o f ten (10) years. Outstanding item to address/resolve: o Pedestrian Walkways. Cowan Springs Agreeme nt shows the developer (P ulte at this time) has an outstanding obligation to construct pedestrian walkway and a low water cro ssing alo ng Reagan Bo ulevard per Section 7 (Park and Re creatio nal Facilities) as amended in 20 08 . In exchange for agreeing to the above, the City will co ntinue to represent it will pro vide so lid waste, retail water, retail wastewater, and e lectric utilities consistent with c urre nt co nditions in the Developme nt Agreement, specifically: Commit to a) provide retail wastewater service to the entire Cowan Springs pro pe rty, b) uninterrupted wastewater se rvic e as the three PUDs deve lo p that make up the Co wan Springs property, c) co vering the cost to design and construct the lift station when needed. Sun City Texas Some rset P UD, Somerset Hills P UD, and Highland Village PUD With the approval of these three (3) PUDs, the City will have entitled a total of 4,65 0 residential dwelling units (DUs) along with 75 ac re s fo r commercial development. The residential components are broken o ut below: Sun City Somerset PUD (768 .9 ac.) … 2 ,220 max units (1,85 0 single-family detached and 37 0 low density MF). Somerset P UD (377.6 ac.) … 1 ,63 0 max units (830 SF detache d and 8 00 lo w density MF) Highland Village PUD (120.5 ac.) … 800 max units (approx. 483 SF detached/lo w density MF and 2 96 high density MF) To tal Max DUs = 4,650 FINANCIAL IMPACT: If the City amends or terminate s the Development Agreement as desc ribed abo ve, there would be financial costs to the City related to the lift station, which is included in our c urre nt impact fees. More importantly, te rminating the Development Agreement removes the current c ondition for the City to construct the new WWTP based upon a "Construction Trigger," whic h is not necessarily based on actual wastewater flows. Maintaining the Developme nt Agreement through its term (May 23, 2021) would likely trigger the requirement to construct the new WWTP years in advance of the actual need. Therefore an amendment or terminatio n to the Development Agre e ment will allow the City to control when it de c ides to make capital investments in wastewater infrastructure to se rve the Co wan Springs property. Termination The Agreeme nt has a special provision that speaks to the termination of the agre e ment that is worth c alling out. Se c tion 27 states, "In the eve nt this Agreement is terminated by mutual consent o f the parties as provided for herein, the partie s shall promptly execute and file of record in the offic ial Records of Williamson County, Texas, a document confirming the termination of this Agreement, and other such do c umentatio n as may be appropriate to reflect the termination." Page 37 of 104 SUBMITTED BY: Wayne Reed, Assistant City Manager and Wesley Wright, Systems Engineering Dire c to r ATTACHMENT S: Description S un City PP-2017-017 Utility MasterPlan Co wan Sp rings Map (1,269 ac res ) Page 38 of 104 Page 39 of 104 Page 40 of 104 Attachment 1. Cowan Springs Property (Approximately 1,269 acres of private property) Somerset Hills ~ 379 acres Sun City Somerset ~ 769 acres Highland Villages ~ 120.5 acres Page 41 of 104 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop December 12, 2017 SUBJECT: P resentation on annexation requirements and discussion o n establishing an annexatio n strategy -- Sofia Nelson, Planning Director, Charlie Mc Nabb, City Attorney and We sle y Wright, Systems Engineering Dire cto r ITEM SUMMARY: Change i n State Law On December 1, 20 17 , Senate Bill 6 becomes effective. The bill requires landowner or voter approval o f annexatio ns in the state ’s largest counties (those with 500,0 00 population o r more) and in c ounties that opt-in to the bill through a petition and ele c tion process. Cities not subject to S.B. 6 (i.e., those in counties with a population of less than 500 ,00 0 that are no t annexing into such a county and those in a county that has not held an election to be c ome subject to the bill) may continue to annex under laws not affected by S.B. 6. Based on the 20 10 census and for the purposes of SB6 Williamson County has a po pulation of less than 5 00 ,00 0. However it is expected that at the time of the 20 20 census Williamson Co unty will exceed a populatio n of 50 0,000 and therefore require landowner or vote r approval of annexations. Counci l strateg y In 2016 and 201 7 the Co uncil identified a goal o f e stablishing an annexation strate gy. Purpose of P rese ntati o n On No vember 14th and Nove mber 28th the City Council received a presentation on SB6 and the new state require ments regarding invo luntary annexation.The purpo se of this workshop item is to follo w up on the discussion that took place on November 14 th and 28th and present to City Council state law requirements for extending utilities to areas identified for consideration. Additionally, staff will review the are as initially presented o n Novembe r 14th and pre sent findings on e ach area. FINANCIAL IMPACT: n/a SUBMITTED BY: Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, P lanning Director ATTACHMENT S: Description Annexatio n P res entation 12.12.17 Page 42 of 104 Annexation City Council Workshop December 12, 2017 Page 43 of 104 Presentation Team •David Morgan, Wayne Reed, Laurie Brewer, Jim Briggs City Manager’s Office •Skye Masson and Charlie McNabb Legal Department •Wesley Wright Systems Engineering Department •Nat Waggoner Planning Department •Joe Sepuldeva GIS •Jess Henderson Public Safety IT Operations Manager Page 44 of 104 Purpose of Presentation Seek Direction from City Council on the following: Are there areas that the City Council would like staff to advance with annexation proceedings. Page 45 of 104 Areas of consideration Page 46 of 104 Shell Road 1Annexation Area at a Glance Utilities •Electric : PEC ( 3 properties in GUS service area) •Water: GUS (planned 16”) •Wastewater: GUS (planned BCI) Streets Minimal/Undeveloped Properties 128 # in the floodplain 11 # of dwelling units 27 Assessed Value $144,326,054 Est. Tax Revenue $611,942 Page 47 of 104 I-35 North of Westinghouse 2 Annexation Area at a Glance Utilities •Electric : GUS and Oncor •Water: GUS •Wastewater: GUS Streets None/undeveloped Properties 11 # in the floodplain 0 # of dwelling units 1 Assessed Value $924,340 Est. Tax Revenue $3,919 Page 48 of 104 Inner Loop E. of I-35 and W. of 1460 3 Annexation Area at a Glance Utilities •Electric: GUS and Oncor •Water: GUS •Wastewater: GUS Streets None/undeveloped Properties 11 # of dwelling units 3 # in the floodplain 0 Assessed Value $6,926,984 Est. Tax Revenue $29,370 Page 49 of 104 FM 1460 S. of Inner Loop and N. of Westinghouse 4 Annexation Area at a Glance Utilities •GUS Electric •GUS Water •Primarily Septic, but GUS Wastewater available in the area Streets Recently chip sealed/good overall condition/very narrow/substandard/ no curb and gutter/undefined drainage Properties 42 # of dwelling units 30 # in the floodplain 6 Assessed Value $15,419,100 Est. Tax Revenue $64,760 Page 50 of 104 Logan Ranch 5Annexation Area at a Glance Utilities •Electric : PEC ( 10 properties in GUS service area) •Water: GUS •Wastewater: Septic Streets Recently chip sealed/good overall condition/very narrow/no curb and gutter/undefined drainage Properties 78 # in the floodplain 0 # dwelling units 78 Assessed Value $49,299,331 Est. Tax Revenue $209,029 Page 51 of 104 Barton Tract 6 Annexation Area at a Glance Utilities •Electric: GUS/Oncor •Water: GUS •Wastewater: GUS Streets None/undeveloped Properties 1 # of dwelling units 0 # in the floodplain 0 Assessed Value $177,297 Est. Tax Revenue $751 Page 52 of 104 Crystal Knoll 7 Annexation Area at a Glance Utilities •Electric: GUS/PEC •Water: GUS •Wastewater: GUS Streets Recently chip sealed/ overall good condition/curb and gutter Properties 428 #of dwelling units 424 # in the floodplain 6 Assessed Value $72,972,697 Est. Tax Revenue $309,404 Page 53 of 104 Golden Oak 8 Annexation Area at a Glance Utilities •Electric: GUS •Water: GUS •Wastewater: Septic Streets Recently chip sealed/good overall condition/very narrow/no curb and gutter/undefined drainage Properties 49 # of dwelling units 49 # in the floodplain 30 Assessed Value $17,201,517 Est. Tax Revenue $72,934 Page 54 of 104 Haverland Drive 9Annexation Area at a Glance Utilities •Electric:GUS/PEC •Water: GUS •Wastewater: Septic Streets Some recently chip sealed,some unimproved/narrow, substandard/undefined drainage Properties 18 # of dwelling units 14 # in the floodplain 6 Assessed Value $3,778,688 Est. Tax Revenue $16,021 Page 55 of 104 Indian Creek 10Annexation Area at a Glance Utilities •Electric: Oncor •Water: Jonah •Wastewater: septic Streets Recent chip seal/overall excellent condition/curb and gutter Properties 160 # of dwelling units 156 # in the floodplain 0 Assessed Value $29,713,184 Est. Tax Revenue $125,983 Page 56 of 104 Oakcrest Estates 11 Annexation Area at a Glance Utilities •Electric: GUS •Water: GUS •Wastewater: Primarily Septic Streets Recently chip sealed/excellent overall condition/very narrow/no curb and gutter/undefined drainage Properties 226 # of dwelling units 213 # in the floodplain 24 Assessed Value $87,363,958 Est. Tax Revenue $370,423 Page 57 of 104 Wood Ranch 12Annexation Area at a Glance Utilities •Electric: GUS & PEC •Water: GUS •Wastewater: Septic Streets Recently chip sealed/good overall condition/very narrow/no curb and gutter/undefined drainage Properties 117 # of dwelling units 115 # in the floodplain 0 Assessed Value $51,142,808 Est. Tax Revenue $216,845 Page 58 of 104 Legend Oaks 13Annexation Area at a Glance Utilities •Electric: PEC •Water: GUS •Wastewater: Septic Streets Recently chip sealed/overall excellent condition/ curb and gutter Properties 45 # of dwelling units 45 # in the floodplain 0 Assessed Value $15,423,431 Est. Tax Revenue $65,395 Page 59 of 104 Olde Oak 14Annexation Area at a Glance Utilities Electric: PEC Water: GUS Wastewater: septic Streets Recently chip sealed/good overall condition/very narrow/no curb and gutter/undefined drainage Properties 32 # of dwelling units 31 # in the floodplain 0 Assessed Value $8,834,716 Est. Tax Revenue $37,459 Page 60 of 104 Rabbit Hollow 15Annexation Area at a Glance Utilities Electric: GUS and Oncor Water: GUS Wastewater: Septic Streets Recently chip sealed/good overall condition/very narrow/no curb and gutter/undefined drainage Properties 76 # of dwelling units 60 # in the floodplain 26 Assessed Value $13,202,580 Est. Tax Revenue $55,978 Page 61 of 104 Sedro Trail Drive/ Chaparro Estates 16 Annexation Area at a Glance Utilities Electric: GUS Water: GUS Wastewater: Streets Some recently chip sealed, some unimproved/sub- standard/no defined drainage Properties 47 #of Dwelling Units 42 # in the floodplain 0 Assessed Value $14,210,849 Est. Tax Revenue $60,253 Page 62 of 104 Texas Traditions and County West 17 Annexation Area at a Glance Utilities Electric: GUS & PEC Water: GUS Wastewater: Streets Recently chip sealed/excellent overall condition/normal street width/curb and gutter Properties 404 # of dwelling units 400 # in the floodplain 7 Assessed Value $106,508,172 Est. Tax Revenue $451,594 Page 63 of 104 Serenada 18 Annexation Area at a Glance Utilities Electric: GUS & PEC Water: GUS Wastewater: septic Streets Recently chip sealed/good overall condition/very narrow/no curb and gutter/undefined drainage Properties 911 # of dwelling units 900 # in the floodplain 85 Assessed Value $284,980,575 Est. Tax Revenue $1,208,317 Page 64 of 104 Current Areas of Focus 1.Shell Road ( city limits to I-35) 2.I-35 North of Westinghouse 3.Inner Loop East of I-35 and West of 1460 4.FM 1460 S. of Inner Loop and N. of Westinghouse Page 65 of 104 Requested Direction from City Council Are there areas that the City Council would like staff to advance with annexation proceedings. Page 66 of 104 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop December 12, 2017 SUBJECT: Discussion of po ssible projects to be considere d for application submissio n in response to CAMP O Call For Pro jects related to TxDOT funding so urces available for funding years FY19 to FY22 -- Edward G. P olasek, Transportation P lanning Coordinator ITEM SUMMARY: CAMPO has a combined project call for all TxDOT funding sourc e s and categories. Jurisdic tions are being asked to complete applications fo r any transportation: planning studies; preliminary engineering and design; and construc tion projects. CAMPO Staff will assign pro jects to the appro priate funding catego ry based on the type of application. There is an estimated $1 35 Million in traditional STP-MM (roadway, transit and bike/sidewalk, and $10 million in Transportation Alternatives Set-Aside (bicycle and pedestrian). The Project Call will be issued in December with a submissio n deadline in early January and the application process is a data driven technic al process. CAMP O will be o ffe ring workshops throughout No vember and December to aid in proje c t data preparation. FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A SUBMITTED BY: Edward G. Polasek, AICP ATTACHMENT S: Description P res entation Page 67 of 104 CAMPO Project Call 2019-2022 City Council Workshop December 12, 2017 Page 68 of 104 Project Call Expectations Estimated $400 Million in three TxDOT categories $135 Million in traditional STP-MM (roadway, transit, bike/ped) CAMPO places project applications in appropriate funding category Eligible Projects include: Planning Studies Preliminary Engineering and Design Construction City of GeorgetownPage 69 of 104 Project Call Timeline Date Item 12/8/2017 Sponsor Webinar (Application Form Review) 12/11/2017 Application Period Opens 1/18/2018 Application Period Closes (5:00 p.m. Central Time) 1/19/2018 Scoring and Portfolio Development 3/26/2018 Technical Advisory Committee -Information 4/1/2018 Public Comment Period Opens 4/9/2018 Transportation Policy Board -Information 4/9/2018 Public Hearing 4/23/2018 Technical Advisory Committee -Recommendation 4/30/2018 Public Comment Period Closes 5/7/2018 Transportation Policy Board -Approval 6/5/2018 Project Call Sponsor Workshop (Awarded Sponsors) City of GeorgetownPage 70 of 104 Previous City of Georgetown STP-MM Projects Williams Drive Corridor Study STP-MM Planning Study FM 1460 Construction STP-MM Partial funding for ETJ/RR portion SE Inner Loop Corridor Study STP-MM Planning Study Williams Drive Widening STP-MM Construction Lakeway Bridge Reconstruction STP-MM Construction City of GeorgetownPage 71 of 104 Possible Project Submittals Focus on 2008 and 2015 Voter Approved Bond programmed improvements, on state system with federal environmental requirements Focus on 2017 Williams Drive Corridor Study Implementation Focus on Partnerships with Williamson County and TxDOT to advance projects City of GeorgetownPage 72 of 104 Voter Approved Bond Projects On State System and programmed Funding in FY 2019-2022 Leander Road Widening (Norwood Drive to SW Bypass) 2 lane to 4 lane segment TxDOT anticipated schematic FY 2018 No environmental approvals or ROW maps City would pick up project with TxDOT as co- sponsor City of GeorgetownPage 73 of 104 Williams Drive Study Implementation CAMPO Sponsored Platinum Planning Study 2015 Road Bond Intersection/Capital Pool as possible match Traffic Operations: Corridor Wide Driveway/post box Consolidation Study Traffic Operations: Intersection Engineering and Construction at Lakeway/Booty’s, Wildwood, and/or Woodlake Traffic Operations: Upgrades signals and operations in preparation for Traffic Management Center Page 74 of 104 Partnerships with Williamson County and TxDOT SW Bypass/SE Inner Loop intersection with IH 35 Implements SE Inner Loop Corridor Study Advance Mobility 35 project Bridge and Intersection Improvements currently unfunded in Mobility 35 Williamson County would complete application for joint submittal by City and County Equal participation by City/County with possible funding sources for City being: GTEC 2015 Road Bond Intersection Pool 2008 Road Bond SW Bypass Corridor Study City of GeorgetownPage 75 of 104 In Summary Feedback and Direction from City Council Staff to Complete application(s) prior to January 9, 2018 CC Meeting Request submittal by January 18, 2018 deadline Request letters of support as needed City of GeorgetownPage 76 of 104 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop December 12, 2017 SUBJECT: Update and directio n regarding the City Council's Vision and Strategies -- David Mo rgan, City Manager and Jack Daly, Assistant to the City Manager ITEM SUMMARY: In November, City Council participate d in two 3-hour strategy sessions. The purpo se of these se ssio ns was to revisit and confirm or refre sh the Council’s ro le, their rules o f engagement, their go als, and the City’s vision statement. Ultimately, City Council developed nine strategies that, if e xecuted, will ac hieve their goals. City Co unc il also confirmed the vision statement for the City. Staff has developed a series of narratives assoc iated with eac h strategy and is hoping to confirm that the narratives refle c t Council’s intent. Attached is a draft prese ntation, as well as a list of proposed narratives for each strate gy. Staff is asking for Council to re vie w each narrative and provide fe e dback o r confirmation for each one. P ending Co uncil direction, staff plans to de velop a list o f tactics to be executed over the c ourse of c ale ndar year 2 01 8. These tactics will wo rk to wards achieving each strategy, and ultimately work to achieve Co uncil’s goals for the City. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None at this time . SUBMITTED BY: Jackson Daly ATTACHMENT S: Description Co uncil Strategies Pres entatio n Co uncil Strategy Narratives Page 77 of 104 Council Strategy Update December 12, 2017 Page 78 of 104 Agenda •Background on Council Goal Setting Process •Review Role, Rules, Goals, Vision, Strategies •Direction and Next Steps Page 79 of 104 Background •Council goals help ensure clear direction to staff regarding the vision and priorities of the Council. •Four Council Visioning Sessions in November 2015 –14 strategies (42 tactics) •Updates to Council on: –March 22 & June 28, 2016 –Memo October 18, 2016 –January 10 & August 8, 2017 –Memo October 30, 2017 Page 80 of 104 Background •Revisited Council goals on November 1 & 2 •Confirmed – –Role of Council –Rules of Engagement –Vision statement –Council Goals •Refined Council Strategies (9) Page 81 of 104 Role of Council As a representative democracy,we provide a voice for,and communication to, each district so that the Council can make decisions that serve the best interests of the City of Georgetown as a whole. •Set policy,and exercise sound financial responsibility,and hold staff accountable for results •Ensure alignment between vision, goals, and strategies •Identify and define key challenges and opportunities •Establish the organizational culture of the City by leading with integrity and upholding legal and ethical standards •Ensure that City services emphasize public health, safety, and opportunity Page 82 of 104 Rules of Engagement •To treat everyone with respect, courtesy,and civility •To act collaboratively and promote and solicit an open, honest, transparent,respectful,and professional dialogue with each other,our citizens, city staff,and other interested parties •To honor our commitments •To actively advocate for our point of view,but also to recognize and respect the decisions of Council,even though we might not agree with that decision (we will not undermine the decisions of Council) •To recognize any preconceptions that we may have about certain individuals,groups,or organizations Page 83 of 104 Goals Culture Georgetown is a truly diverse, vibrant, inclusive, and socially dynamic city where everyone has the opportunity to participate in, and benefit from, our economic, political, and social activities Employee Our outstanding and innovative City Employees work diligently to bring the Vision of Council to life and deliver exceptional services to our customers while exemplifying our Core Values Internal Process Our policies and procedures are easy to understand, and consistently and professionally applied. Our internal processes are effective, efficient, fair, inventive, and transparent, and make us a desired destination for residents and businesses Customer Anyone interacting with the City will have such a positive experience that they will tell everyone about it Financial To maintain a fiscal environment conducive to attaining the goals of the CityPage 84 of 104 Vision Statement Process •One-on-one meetings with Council •Two surveys –551 responses and 616 responses •Community Workshop •Council Workshops on September 12 and October 10 •Confirmed vision at Council goal setting meetings on November 1 & 2 Page 85 of 104 New Vision Statement Georgetown: A caring community honoring our past and innovating for the future Page 86 of 104 Use of Vision Statement •Helps with alignment across the City •Serves as a building block for updating the City’s comprehensive plan •Drives future branding initiatives Page 87 of 104 Strategies 1.Become a destination for unique experiences 2.Create a strategy to increase mobility 3.Promote greater diversity in our population and our businesses 4.Create and maintain outstanding aesthetics and a welcoming appearance and spirit 5.Annexation and MUD strategy 6.Monitor,promote,and communicate a long-term water and utilities plan and strategy 7.Expand on our reputation as a City of Innovation 8.Increase our influence with State Government 9.Expand our role to develop collaborative strategies with GISD, Southwestern,and other entities Page 88 of 104 Strategy Narratives •Identified nine (9) strategies that should be pursued to achieve the goals of the Council •Staff developed narratives around each goal to confirm meaning •Reviewing and confirm each narrative •Gives clear direction as staff develops tactics Page 89 of 104 1.Become a destination for unique experiences City Council recognizes the shifting trends related to how people spend their time and money. People are increasingly interested in “experiential entertainment”. Changes in retail growth and sales tax collections reflect these trends. People want authentic and memorable experiences. Georgetown is well-positioned to promote itself as a destination city, distinct and unique from other cities in the state. Page 90 of 104 2.Create a strategy to increase mobility The most recent Citizen Survey highlights mobility as a key challenge for Georgetown. In 2015, Georgetown voters approved the largest transportation bond in the City’s history. The Council has been strategic in its debt program to ensure adequate investment in infrastructure, while managing the impact of debt on taxpayers. The City’s road network is its most valuable asset. It is important that City Council continues to have discussions regarding innovative approaches to street maintenance and to adequately fund the maintenance program. Furthermore, City Council recognizes the importance of capitalizing on partnerships within the region to make transportation infrastructure more feasible. Collaboration on master planning efforts and sharing costs will help Georgetown prepare for increased demand on the transportation network. Although a majority of the investment will be on roadway infrastructure, this also includes collaborating on multi-modal projects such as sidewalk and bicycle infrastructure.Page 91 of 104 3.Promote greater diversity in our population and our businesses City Council recognizes that diversity across all aspects of society helps ensure better decision making. Diversity in thought leads to better outcomes. Diversity helps the City hedge against changes in the environment and economy. A broad range of businesses and employers should be recruited to Georgetown. Generally, growing the commercial tax base in the City will help alleviate over reliance on residential property taxes. A diverse business sector necessitates a diverse housing stock. A variety of services, resources, and amenities should be made available to residents, including seniors, families, and young professionals. Page 92 of 104 4.Create and maintain outstanding aesthetics and a welcoming appearance and spirit Georgetown has several key gateways leading into the City. Moreover, Georgetown serves as the northern gateway to the Austin region. As such, particular attention and resources need to be directed towards ensuring gateways are well-maintained and adhere to a high development standard. As the City progresses through the comprehensive plan update, specific focus needs to be placed on developing a more refined vision and master plan for the City’s gateways. Costs associated with maintaining publically owned rights-of-way (including state- owned property) need to be appropriated and expended at a level consistent with Council’s vision. Page 93 of 104 5.Annexation and MUD strategy Changes in state law and significant population growth have accelerated the need for City Council to adopt new annexation strategies. The continued influx of Municipal Utility District (MUD) requests is triggering the need for the Council to revisit its policies and procedures related to these types of developments. These two challenges in tandem exacerbate the need for the City to address its strategies, policies, and procedures related to MUDs and annexation. The City has worked extensively with developers to assist them in delivering creatively financed residential products to Georgetown. As laws related to annexation change, the City must be thoughtful in its approach to permitting development in the extraterritorial jurisdiction that may negatively impact the City in the future. Promoting high- quality growth and equitable taxation and services is a priority for the City. Page 94 of 104 6.Monitor, promote, and communicate a long-term water and utilities plan and strategy City Council recognizes the importance of thoughtful utility management. As a purveyor of water, electricity, and wastewater services, it is imperative that the City both effectively manage and communicate plans associated with all city-owned and operated utilities. Acknowledging that the Texas electric and water markets are continually in flux and will always experience changes, solutions need to be presented to ensure the City’s financial position remains strong, rates remain competitive, high-quality customer service is emphasized, and ample resources are available to serve the continually growing population in the City’s service area. Page 95 of 104 7.Expand on our reputation as a City of Innovation The City executed purchased power agreements to cover Georgetown’s energy usage with 100% renewable energy, making Georgetown one of the largest city-owned utilities to do so. This alone has helped Georgetown brand itself as an innovative city and garnered international acclaim. City Council recognizes that in an environment where taxation is limited and there is increasing regional competition for taxable value and natural resources, the City must find effective solutions and inventive methods of service delivery. Being a forward-thinking organization will allow Georgetown to elevate its profile in the region and recruit like-minded businesses and residents.Page 96 of 104 8.Increase our influence with State Government The City of Georgetown and the State of Texas are partners. Increasingly, the Texas Legislature has raised concerns about city decision making, and State pre- emption of local authority continues to be a topic of interest at the State Capitol. As Georgetown continues to elevate its presence in the region and in the state, the City Council recognizes the importance of dedicating time and resources to ensure the City’s interests are protected. The City must work with State officials to find common ground and shared goals. That said, there will be disagreements. However, it is important that the City work to build and maintain positive relationship with state agencies and elected officials. Page 97 of 104 9.Expand our role to develop collaborative strategies with GISD, Southwestern, and other entities To remain competitive in the region, City Council recognizes the importance of investing in opportunities for young people. A healthy educational systems is critical to ensuring a successful community. Georgetown I.S.D. and Southwestern University are integral pillars in the community and key city partners with the City. All three entities must work in concert to maximize the impact of limited resources. The City is well-positioned to provide services and opportunities for youth to further their education or career in Georgetown. The City is also fortunate to be able to partner with Southwestern University to capitalize on their thought-leadership and resources to further opportunities for college students and graduates. Page 98 of 104 Next Steps •Feedback from Council –Modifications and adjustments to goals or strategies –Staff to take input and incorporate tactics into the work plan, and will report back to Council •Post on website •Update in early-2018 –Staff teams will develop tactics to achieve strategies –Some tactics will work to achieve several strategies Page 99 of 104 Council Strategy Update December 12, 2017 Page 100 of 104 Council Strategy Narratives 1. Become a destination for unique experiences City Council recognizes the shifting trends related to how people spend their time and money. People are increasingly interested in “experiential entertainment”. Changes in retail growth and sales tax collections reflect these trends. People want authentic and memorable experiences. Georgetown is well-positioned to promote itself as a destination city, distinct and unique from other cities in the state. 2. Create a strategy to increase mobility The most recent Citizen Survey highlights mobility as a key challenge for Georgetown. In 2015, Georgetown voters approved the largest transportation bond in the City’s history. The Council has been strategic in its debt program to ensure adequate investment in infrastructure, while managing the impact of debt on taxpayers. The City’s road network is its most valuable asset. It is important that City Council continues to have discussions regarding innovative approaches to street maintenance and to adequately fund the maintenance program. Furthermore, City Council recognizes the importance of capitalizing on partnerships within the region to make transportation infrastructure more feasible. Collaboration on master planning efforts and sharing costs will help Georgetown prepare for increased demand on the transportation network. Although a majority of the investment will be on roadway infrastructure, this also includes collaborating on multi-modal projects such as sidewalk and bicycle infrastructure. 3. Promote greater diversity in our population and our businesses City Council recognizes that diversity across all aspects of society helps ensure better decision making. Diversity in thought leads to better outcomes. Diversity helps the City hedge against changes in the environment and economy. A broad range of businesses and employers should be recruited to Georgetown. Generally, growing the commercial tax base in the City will help alleviate reliance on residential property taxes. A diverse business sector necessitates a diverse housing stock. A variety of housing options should be made available to residents, including seniors, families, and young professionals. 4. Create and maintain outstanding aesthetics and a welcoming appearance and spirit Georgetown has several key gateways leading into the City. Moreover, Georgetown serves as the northern gateway to the Austin region. As such, particular attention and resources need to be directed towards ensuring gateways are well-maintained and adhere to a high development standard. As the City progresses through the comprehensive plan update, specific focus needs to be placed on developing a more refined vision and master plan for the City’s gateways. Costs associated with maintaining publically owned rights-of-way (including state-owned property) need to be appropriated and expended at a level consistent with Council’s vision. Page 101 of 104 5. Annexation and MUD strategy Changes in state law and significant population growth have accelerated the need for City Council to adopt new annexation strategies. The continued influx of Municipal Utility District (MUD) requests is triggering the need for the Council to revisit its policies and procedures related to these types of developments. These two challenges in tandem (changing state law and the increase in MUDs) exacerbate the challenge. The City has worked extensively with developers to assist them in delivering creatively financed residential products to Georgetown. As laws related to annexation change, the City must be thoughtful in its approach to permitting development in the extraterritorial jurisdiction that may negatively impact the City in the future. Promoting high-quality growth and equitable taxation and services is a priority for the City. 6. Monitor, promote, and communicate a long-term water and utilities plan and strategy City Council recognizes the importance of thoughtful utility management. As a purveyor of water, electricity, and wastewater services, it is imperative that the City both effectively manage and communicate plans associated with all city-owned and operated utilities. Acknowledging that the Texas electric and water markets are continually in flux and will always experience changes, solutions need to be presented to ensure the City’s financial position remains strong, rates remain competitive, high-quality customer service is emphasized, and ample resources are available to serve the continually growing population in the City’s service area. 7. Expand on our reputation as a City of Innovation The City executed purchased power agreements to cover Georgetown’s energy usage with 100% renewable energy, making Georgetown one of the largest city-owned utilities to do so. This alone has helped Georgetown brand itself as an innovative city and garnered international acclaim. City Council recognizes that in an environment where taxation is limited and there is increasing regional competition for taxable value and natural resources, the City must find effective solutions and inventive methods of service delivery. Being a forward-thinking organization will allow Georgetown to elevate its profile in the region and recruit like-minded businesses and residents. 8. Increase our influence with State Government The City of Georgetown and the State of Texas are partners. Increasingly, the Texas Legislature has raised concerns about city decision making. State pre-emption of local authority continues to be a topic of interest at the State Capitol. As Georgetown continues to elevate its presence in the region and in the state, the City Council recognizes the importance of dedicating time and resources to ensure the City’s interests are protected. The City must work with the State to find common ground and shared goals. That said, there will be disagreements. However, it is important that the City work to build and maintain positive relationship with state agencies and elected officials. Page 102 of 104 9. Expand our role to develop collaborative strategies with GISD, Southwestern, and other entities To remain competitive in the region, City Council recognizes the importance of investing in opportunities for young people. A healthy educational systems is critical to ensuring a successful community. Georgetown I.S.D. and Southwestern University are integral pillars in the community and key city partners with the City. All three entities must work in concert to maximize the impact of limited resources. As funding for education continues to be constrained, the City is well-positioned to provide services and opportunities for youth to further their education or career in Georgetown. The City is also fortunate to be able to partner with Southwestern University to capitalize on their thought-leadership and resources to further opportunities for college students and graduates. Page 103 of 104 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop December 12, 2017 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 - Western Distric t Water Agreement with Orchard Ridge -- Wesley Wright, P.E. Systems Engineering Director - Texas Crushed Sto ne Industrial Agreement Sec. 551.072: De l i berati o ns about Real P roperty - Cowen Creek Interceptor Easement Acquisitions -- Travis Baird, Real Estate Services Co ordinator 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. 551.086: Ce r tai n P ubl i c Power Uti l i ti es: Co mpeti ti ve Matters - Quarterly Purc hase P ower Update ITEM SUMMARY: FINANCIAL IMPACT: NA SUBMITTED BY: Shelley Nowling, City Secretary Page 104 of 104