Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda CC 12.13.2016 WorkshopNotice of M eeting of the Governing B ody of the City of Georgetown, Texas December 1 3, 2 01 6 The Ge orgetown City Council will meet on December 13, 2016 at 3:30 PM at the City Council Chambe rs, 1 01 E. 7th St., Georgetown, Texas The City o f Georgetown is committed to co mpliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you re quire assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reasonable assistance, adaptations, or ac c ommo datio ns will be provided upo n request. P lease contact the City Se c retary's Office, at least three (3 ) days prio r to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930- 3652 o r City Hall at 113 East 8th Street fo r additional information; TTY use rs ro ute through Relay Texas at 7 11. Policy De ve lopme nt/Re vie w Workshop - A Re vie w o f the City’s FY 2016 Fourth Quarter Financial Report, whic h includes the Investment Re ports fo r the City of Georgetown, Georgetown Transportation Enhanc ement Corporation (GTEC), and the Georgetown Econo mic Development Corporation (GEDCO); and review of preliminary year-end budget variances for the fiscal year ended Septe mber 3 0, 2 016. – Leigh Wallace, Finance Director. B Re vie w of the Fiscal and Budgetary Po licy to be used in preparing the fiscal ye ar 2018 annual budget and to guide financial operations during fiscal year 20 17 -- Leigh Wallace, Finance Dire c to r C Re vie w o f the City’s Investment P olicy and discussion of recommended changes for 2017 -- Leigh Wallace, Finance Director D Discussion and possible direction on Emergency Management planning pro cess, grant(s), and Offic e of Emergency Management (OEM) development -- Chad Be rg, Emergency Management Coo rdinato r E Prese ntation and discussion regarding the Georgetown Police Department’s CommUNITY Pro gram -- Wayne Nero, Chief of P olice Exe cutive Se ssion In compliance with the Open Meetings Ac t, Chapter 551, Government Co de , Verno n's Texas Codes, Annotate d, the items listed below will be discussed in closed session and are subject to action in the regular se ssio n. F Se c . 55 1.0 71 : Consul tati on wi th Atto rney - Advice from attorney about pending or contemplated litigatio n and other matte rs on which the attorney has a duty to advise the City Co uncil, including agenda items - TCS Industrial District Agreement - GTU-Jet Lease Agreement 5 51 .07 4: P ersonnel Matters - City Manager, City Attorney, City Secretary and Municipal Judge: Co nsideration of the appointment, employment, evaluatio n, reassignment, duties, discipline, o r dismissal Page 1 of 174 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 _________________, 2016, 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 174 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop December 13, 2016 SUBJECT: Review of the City’s FY 20 16 Fourth Quarter Financial Repo rt, which includes the Inve stment Reports for the City of Georgetown, Geo rge to wn Transportation Enhanceme nt Corpo ration (GTEC), and the Geo rgeto wn Economic Developme nt Corporation (GEDCO); and review of preliminary ye ar-end budget variances for the fisc al year ended September 30, 2 01 6. – Leigh Wallac e , Finance Director. ITEM SUMMARY: The Quarterly Financial Report to Council is attached. An executive summary is included to highlight variances with regards to the reve nues and an overview of the investment portfolio as o f September 30, 2016. The Financial Report sho ws a c omparison o f current YTD re venues compare d to the prior ye ar for the fo urth quarte r of the fiscal year on all majo r funds. Activity fo r the quarter primarily related to maturing of fo ur CDs, purchasing fo ur new CDs, paying principal and inte re st on o ur de bt servic e , and paying our annual water co ntracts with Brazos River Authority. Bond balances will be used in the coming months to fund related capital projects. SPECIAL CONSIDERATION: The investment activity and strategies described in the investment repo rt are in compliance with the City’s Investment P olicy and state law. This repo rt me e ts the quarterly repo rting re quirements mandated by the P ublic Funds Investment Act. COMMENTS: Valley Vie w, L.L.C., has prepared the attached investment reports. One compo ne nt of our new investment advisory services contract includes Valley View preparing the quarte rly investment reports on behalf of the City. FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A SUBMITTED BY: Leigh Wallace, Finance Director - SP ATTACHMENT S: Description Quarterly Financ ial R ep o rt F Y 2016 Year End P res entation Page 3 of 174 Red Poppy Capital of Texas Q4 2016 Financial Report and Investment Report For Quarter Ended September 30, 2016 Page 4 of 174 FINANCIAL REPORT AND INVESTMENT REPORT For the Quarter Ended September 30, 2016 Table of Contents Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................... 1-5 General Fund Schedule ................................................................................................................................. 6 Electric Fund Schedule .................................................................................................................................. 7 Water & Rural Water Fund Schedule ............................................................................................................ 8 Council Discretionary Fund Schedule ............................................................................................................ 9 Convention & Visitors Bureau Fund Schedule ............................................................................................. 10 Airport Fund Schedule ................................................................................................................................. 11 Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation Fund Schedule .................................................... 12 Georgetown Economic Development Corporation Fund Schedule ............................................................. 13 Quarterly Investment Report - City ........................................................................................................ 14-29 Quarterly Investment Report - GTEC ...................................................................................................... 30-36 Quarterly Investment Report - GEDCO ................................................................................................... 37-43 Grant Applications ....................................................................................................................................... 44 Capital Improvement Projects ................................................................................................................ 45-49 Long-term Commitments and Other Unfunded Liabilities ..................................................................... 50-53 Page 5 of 174 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR THE QUARTER ENDED September 30, 2016 I. Quarterly Financial Analysis General Fund Revenues: General Fund revenues collected for the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2016 are stronger than the prior year with a 4.6% increase. The total revenue collected year to date (YTD) for the General Fund is $52.6 million. Sales tax revenues continue to be higher than projected. General Fund sales tax revenues for the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2016 are 12.6% ahead of the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2015. The sales tax collections through August totaled $12.7 million, or 105% of budget. The growth in sales tax is primarily driven by increases in our core sectors of retail trade, food, and information, which are positively impacted by population growth. Property tax revenues are typically received during the first two quarters of the fiscal year, with the majority of the taxes being received in December and January. The amount of revenue is based on the assessed value and is estimated using the County Assessor’s data. Any deviations from estimates in this revenue stream are typically related to new construction and delinquency rates. Property tax revenues for the fourth quarter of 2016 are up 8.7%, or $0.9 million, from the fourth quarter of 2015. Our collection rate as of September 2016 is 100% compared to 97.1% last Sepember. The City collects a 4 – 5% franchise fee on electric, natural gas, cable, and non-cellular telephone revenues provided by entities other than the City. The City has collected $1.9 million through the fourth quarter of 2016, which is a 6.8% decrease from the fourth quarter of 2015. Franchise fees are typically collected on a quarterly basis and the timing of payments can vary. The City also collects a 3% franchise fee and a 7% return on investment (ROI) fee from City owned utilities, which totaled $2.9 million and $7.9 million respectively, through the fourth quarter of the fiscal year. Franchise fee and ROI collections are up 3.2% over this time last year. The electric ROI calculation now includes a base rate component. Environmental services revenues are up 4.3% from the fourth quarter of 2015. This increase is related to the growth in the customer base. Development related revenue is up 5.4% over the prior year. Year to date development applications are up 3.2% over last year. 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Oc t No v De c Ja n Fe b Ma r Ap r Ma y Ju n Ju l Au g Se p Number of Building Permits 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Source: MyPermitNow $400,000 $500,000 $600,000 $700,000 $800,000 $900,000 $1,000,000 $1,100,000 $1,200,000 Oc t No v De c Ja n Fe b Ma r Ap r Ma y Ju n Ju l Au g Se p Sales Tax Revenue 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Source: Texas Comptroller of Public 1Page 6 of 174 Court fine revenues are down by 10.1% from prior year due to a decrease in the number of court cases by 736 cases or 13.0% from prior year. Park and Recreation revenues are up 2.5% from the prior year due to increased Rec Center memberships sold (increased 11.5% from prior year). Other revenues are down 18.3% from the prior year due in part to a change in methodology for the administrative allocations. Overall, General Fund primary revenues were strong in 2016 and were higher than the prior year. General Fund Expenditures: General Fund operating expenditures for the third quarter of fiscal year 2016 are 4.7% higher than prior year, and within budget. The General Fund is budgeted to have higher expenditures than the prior year due to Public Safety operations, transportation budgets, new positions, and market and merit increases. Total salaries and benefit expenditures through the fourth quarter were $30.4 million or 96.8% of budget. An additional $20.6 million, or 98.1% of budget, was spent on operations. Overall, personnel costs are higher than fourth quarter 2015 due to the merit increases that went into effect February 2016, as well as increases in Fire overtime. Operating expenditures are up slightly compared to the prior year. Downtown and Community Services provides resources for developing downtown, as well as resources for Parks and Recreation, Convention and Visitors Bureau (CVB), Library, and Public Communications. Year to date expenditures are up 3.9% over fourth quarter 2015, due in part to increases in internal service fees and higher personnel costs. Finance and Administration in the General Fund consists of the Municipal Court. Expenditures for the fourth quarter are down 21.5% compared to last year. Personnel costs are up 2.5% due in part to higher wages and increased health insurance costs. Operating expenditures are down 63.1% due to the payment of a collection agency fee in 2015 that was not paid in 2016. Total expenditures for Public Safety through the fourth quarter are 98.3% of budget for a total of $25.4 million. Year to date operating expenditures increased 9.2% over the prior year due in part to increases in salaries, vacant positions in the prior year, and internal service fees relating to the new Public Safety Facility and technology. The Fire Division is projected to finish the year at budget due to a budget amendment to pay for personnel vacancies which were covered by overtime pay. The Georgetown Utility System Division includes Environmental Services and Inspections. Environmental Services manages the contract for solid waste collections. Total expenditures through the fourth quarter were 5.7% higher than the prior year due to customer growth. Management Services includes City Manager’s Office, City Council, City Secretary, Planning and social service funding. Total expenditures for the fourth quarter were $5.5 million and are 5.3% lower than the prior year. Transportation includes Transportation Administration and Streets. Year to date expenditures have remained relatively flat from September 2015 to September 2016, with a 3.5% or $106,761 decrease. Overall General Fund expenditures are within budget and projection. As planned in the budget, General Fund expenditures are slightly higher than revenue, leading to a minor decrease in fund balance. The fund balance is projected to be $10.6 million, covering the 90 day contingency reserve and the Economic Uncertainty Reserve. Utility Revenues: Electric revenue through the fourth quarter of 2016 is up 2.5% compared to the prior year’s fourth quarter. Tap fee revenues are down 46.2% from the prior year due to two large fees collected last year for Dispersol Technologies and Wesleyan 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Oc t No v De c Ja n Fe b Ma r Ap r Ma y Ju n Ju l Au g Se p Number of Court Cases 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Source: InCode Page 7 of 174 Independent Living. Other revenues are up from the prior year due to a payment received from the City of Round Rock for $157,500 due to an interlocal agreement for relocation of the utility on University Drive. Total water revenue is up from the prior year by 2.9%. Water sales are up 7.3% through the fourth quarter due an increase in billed customers (increased by 5.8% from September 2015 to September 2016). Tap revenues are driven by the type of development the City is experiencing. Other revenue is down 15.5% due to large payments received in the prior year from Newland Communities and Teravista. Total wastewater revenue is up 3.2% for fiscal year 2016 compared to last year. Wastewater revenues are up 5.1% due to an increase in billed customers (increased by 5.7% from September 2015 to September 2016). Tap fees are up 38.2% due to payments received for the Summit at Rivery Apartment buildings. Other revenues are down from the prior year due to large payments received in the prior year from Newland Communities and Teravista. Water revenues in the Western District are up 14.1%. Water revenues are up 11.9% due to an increase in billed customers. Tap revenues, which are driven primarily by development, saw a 98.7% increase from September 2015 to September 2016. This significant increase is partially due to an accounting change between the water and rural water funds in 2015. Utility revenues are significantly impacted by growth and weather conditions. The improved economic conditions and housing market continue to positively impact growth-related revenues. Staff will monitor these trends over the upcoming months. Utility Expenditures: The Electric Fund experienced higher purchased power costs than projected. Capital improvement projects are also over budget due to a substation project and increased development. The fund is projected to be $6 million over expenditures. Staff are developing a plan to bring the fund into balance and to cover the 75 day contingency reserve. The Water Fund is within budget for 2016. The capital improvement program expenditures of $12.5 million lags significantly behind budget of $41.3 million. Staff are preparing a FY 2017 budget amendment that will reappropriate these funds. Other Revenues: Hotel Occupancy Tax revenue is up 23.7%, or $168,565 from the prior year. Airport revenue is up 10.7% from the prior year, due in part to ramp grants received in December 2015 and February 2016. II. Investments The investment activity and strategies described in this report are in compliance with the Public Funds Investment Act (PFIA), City’s investment policy, and generally accepted accounting principles. Activity for the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2016 includes the maturing of eight financial institution deposits (CD’s) totaling $17.2M and the purchase of one new CD for $3.0M. The Investment Reports for the quarter ended September 30, 2016 and the supporting schedules are attached. Valley View Consulting, L.L.C., has prepared the attached investment reports. A component of our investment advisory services contract includes Valley View preparing the quarterly investment reports on behalf of the City. A summary of the investment balances at September 30, 2016 compared to the prior quarter is shown below for the City as well as Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation (GTEC) and Georgetown Economic Development Corporation (GEDCO). CITY GTEC GEDCO 6/30/16 9/30/16 6/30/16 9/30/16 6/30/16 9/30/16 Total cash and investments $145,542,025 $123,230,402 $26,716,518 $26,395,630 $9,212,429 $9,518,021 Average Yield 0.51% 0.51% 0.54% 0.60% 0.40% 0.46% 3Page 8 of 174 The City’s strategy continues to be matching maturities with cash flow needs, while focusing on the investment policy’s long range goals. The City’s investment strategy is to “ladder” or stagger maturities, thus minimizing erratic interest rate fluctuations. City portfolio balances have increased in the last few years in direct correlation to the increase in contingency reserves an d debt proceeds issued for future capital improvement projects. The City’s investment portfolio includes bank deposits, local government investment pool balances, money market accounts and financial institution deposits. All of these investments carry insurance or an implied backing from the Federal Government. The collateral on all City investments is monitored at least monthly to ensure the financial institutions carry minimum collateral of 102% of market value of the City’s investments. Currently the City does not own any securities due to the market conditions for these types of investments. Once the City begins purchasing securities, the investment officers will obtain from a reliable source the current credit rating for each held investment that has a PFIA-required minimum rating. All securities held by financial institutions as collateral on behalf of the City were reviewed and met PFIA-minimum rating criteria. The City maintains a $2 million Letter of Credit at the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) in lieu of maintaining an unsecured deposit with that agency to comply with fiscal suret y requirements. The City continues it’s banking fee reduction strategy by retaining higher daily balances at the City’s depository bank. These balances earn credit against the fees charged by the bank versus earning interest on these balances. An analysis has been performed verifying that this method is maximizing earnings by negating fees. The City's investment program is conducted to accomplish the objectives of safety, liquidity, public trust, and yield. 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. It is the intent of the City to invest its funds to maturity. III. Capital Projects The projects in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) consist of infrastructure and related construction and do not include small capital items such as furniture, equipment, and vehicle maintenance. Maintenance-type projects are not capitalized as a fixed asset and are usually cash funded. Therefore, they are considered operational in nature and are included in the departmental operating budget. A year-to-date budget status for each of the approved projects is included in the quarterly report, including the following: DOWNTOWN & COMMUNITY SERVICES Project 1DG Rivery Sheraton Garage: The Sheraton at Rivery is the City of Georgetown’s first Hotel/Conference Center. They received their final CO on June 27th and they have been in full operations since late July. The Parking Garage is one component of the project that will add approximately 340 public parking spaces. The City has entered into an agreement with the Developer of the Hotel/Conference Center to reimburse them for the construction of the Parking Garage with ownership transferring to the City upon its completion. To date the City has reimbursed 96% of the direct costs associated with the Garage. Grace Heritage Center Restoration: As the historic downtown continues to grow, Grace Heritage Center is emerging as a key landmark and component of the Downtown District. Since the circa 1881 building was donated to the City of Georgetown in 1995 and moved to its current site, the City has performed preventative maintenance, but has not undertaken a comprehensive approach to the restoration of the structure. City Council has approved contracting with G. Creek Construction, partnering with ARCHITEXAS for a Design/Build contract for the restoration of Grace Heritage Center. The City is currently negotiating the contract with G Creek and plans to kick off design as soon as the contract is finalized. PARKS Project 6CP San Gabriel Park Improvements: A master plan for improvements to San Gabriel Park was completed in 2015. The master plan proposed the improvements be completed in phases due to the high usage and the many events that take place 4Page 9 of 174 in the park. The schematic design for phase 1 and 2 was completed in April 2016. Funds for Phase 1 construction have been budgeted at $2.7 million. Construction plans for Phase 1 have been submitted for review to the Planning Department. Construction is expected to begin in early 2017. Phase 1 improvements include spring restoration, pavilions, road realignment, play areas, restroom and parking. Project 6DO Garey Park: In 2004, Mr. and Mrs. Jack Garey announced they would donate their 525 acre ranch and $5 million to the City of Georgetown for a public park. In 2008, the citizens passed a parks bond with $10 million dedicated for the construction of Garey Park. A master plan was completed in 2005 that set the stage for how the park would be developed. The project was bid in October 2016 and bids received were excessively over budget. Some amenities in the park will need to be deferred at this time due to available budget. The rebidding of the project will take place in early January with a projected ground breaking in March 2017. The construction project is estimated to be $13.5 million. ELECTRIC With increased growth in Georgetown, new development projects are thriving, causing expenses to exceed budget for the fiscal year. These expenses include new development projects totaling over $800K, as well as an unbudgeted LCRA Substation purchase of over $1M. WATER The Berry Creek Interceptor design is 50% complete and easement acquisition is in progress. Construction is estimated to start in summer 2017. The Stonehedge and Westinghouse lift station project bid will go to the Board and Council in November. Construction estimated to start around January 2017. The Pecan Branch wastewater treatment plant project should be ready to bid in April 2017. The Shell Road and CR 255 water main designs are 50% complete and easement acquisition is in progress. Construction estimated to start summer 2017. The Domel water treatment plant design is 90% complete. Construction is estimated to start April 2017. 5Page 10 of 174 YEAR-END YEAR-END APPROVED SEPTEMBER-16 YEAR TO DATE YEAR-END VARIANCE % VARIANCE BUDGET W/ENCUMB W/ENCUMB PROJECTION FAV(UNFAV)FAV(UNFAV) BEGINNING BALANCE 9,599,307 10,168,638 10,168,638 569,331 5.9% REVENUES Property Tax 11,636,698 551,582 11,636,698 11,673,060 (36,362)(0.3%) Sales Tax 12,113,449 3,330,299 12,679,188 12,357,361 321,827 2.7% Sanitation Revenue 6,534,000 860,141 6,815,778 6,827,000 (11,222)(0.2%) Transfer In - ROI & Other 8,548,263 1,955,239 8,909,975 8,612,503 297,472 3.5% Franchise Fees 5,129,030 989,732 4,926,316 4,960,206 (33,890)(0.7%) Development and Permit Fees 2,392,400 599,702 2,118,775 2,387,950 (269,175)(11.3%) Parks and Rec Fees 2,112,000 77,978 2,247,735 2,099,553 148,182 7.0% All Other Revenue 3,200,020 471,495 3,348,466 3,308,340 40,126 1.3% Administrative Charges 2,102,100 0 1,722,431 2,102,100 (379,669)(18.1%) Total Revenues 53,767,960 8,836,169 54,405,361 54,328,073 77,287 0.1% EXPENSES Administrative Services 896,542 92,916 892,961 896,542 3,581 0.4% Animal Services 913,111 77,244 863,080 913,111 50,031 5.5% Arts & Culture 74,771 12,034 86,706 74,771 (11,935)(16.0%) City Council 156,641 7,551 156,205 156,641 436 0.3% City Secretary 545,961 61,260 487,058 545,961 58,903 10.8% Code Enforcement 411,753 13,214 367,106 411,753 44,647 10.8% D&CS Admin 637,790 74,238 578,759 637,790 59,031 9.3% Environmental Services 5,624,432 994,381 5,924,615 5,624,432 (300,183)(5.3%) Fire Emergency Services 9,574,123 817,394 9,558,468 9,574,123 15,655 0.2% Fire Support Services 2,236,560 218,066 2,257,043 2,236,560 (20,483)(0.9%) General Gov't Contracts 3,414,415 266,445 3,053,284 3,414,415 361,131 10.6% Inspections 1,169,797 86,421 976,012 1,169,797 193,785 16.6% Library 2,172,357 178,152 2,132,044 2,172,357 40,313 1.9% Municipal Court 561,439 58,074 541,209 561,439 20,230 3.6% Parks 2,287,013 176,653 2,193,266 2,287,013 93,747 4.1% Parks Admin 392,812 33,870 395,264 392,812 (2,452)(0.6%) Planning 938,880 115,739 964,022 938,880 (25,142)(2.7%) Police Admin 2,823,180 98,858 2,750,481 2,823,180 72,699 2.6% Police Operations 9,852,456 978,650 9,572,430 9,852,456 280,026 2.8% Public Communications 427,117 46,085 385,529 427,117 41,588 9.7% Public Works 649,026 78,596 629,068 649,026 19,958 3.1% Rec Programs 1,390,554 89,191 1,279,445 1,390,554 111,109 8.0% Recreation 2,492,049 155,433 2,369,601 2,492,049 122,448 4.9% Streets 3,789,723 311,362 3,603,267 3,789,723 186,456 4.9% Tennis Center 396,954 28,990 380,258 396,954 16,696 4.2% Transfers 1,512,955 107,125 1,531,334 1,512,955 (18,379)(1.2%) Total Non-Operating Expenditures 55,342,411 5,177,942 53,928,514 55,342,411 1,413,897 2.6% EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF TOTAL REVENUE OVER TOTAL REQUIREMENTS (1,574,451)3,658,228 476,847 (1,014,338)1,491,185 (94.7%) ENDING BALANCE 8,024,856 10,645,485 9,154,300 1,491,185 16.3% CONTINGENCY 7,925,000 7,925,000 ECONOMIC STABILITY RESERVE 0 500,000 General Fund Preliminary Actual to Year End Projection as of September 2016 Page 11 of 174 AMENDED YEAR-END YEAR-END APPROVED SEPTEMBER-16 YEAR TO DATE YEAR-END VARIANCE % VARIANCE BUDGET W/ENCUMB W/ENCUMB PROJECTION FAV(UNFAV)FAV(UNFAV) BEGINNING BALANCE 13,415,841 13,415,841 13,415,841 0 0.0% OPERATING REVENUE Electric Revenue 63,400,000 9,835,659 61,570,923 64,110,890 (2,539,967)(4.0%) Other Revenue 1,782,350 1,558,916 3,777,713 1,782,350 1,995,363 112.0% Interest 17,425 4,449 25,079 17,425 7,654 43.9% Total Operating Revenue 65,199,775 11,399,024 65,373,714 65,910,665 (536,951)(0.8%) OPERATING EXPENDITURES Purchased Power 34,000,000 7,401,498 42,622,904 34,000,000 (8,622,904)(25.4%) Georgetown Utility Systems 20,002,180 846,391 14,714,825 15,803,180 1,088,355 5.4% Transfer Out - General Fund 4,945,813 1,096,949 5,004,097 4,945,813 (58,284)(1.2%) Other Transfers Out 353,008 17,277 129,108 353,008 223,900 63.4% Transfer Out - ISF 311,845 77,961 311,845 311,845 0 0.0% Transfer Out - GCP 225,000 56,250 225,000 225,000 0 0.0% CIS Implementation 134,000 2,954 63,632 134,000 70,368 52.5% CRR Credits 0 (89,373)(2,301,821)0 2,301,821 100.0% Total Operating Expenditures 59,971,846 9,409,906 60,769,589 55,772,846 (4,996,743)(9.0%) TOTAL NET OPERATIONS 5,227,929 1,989,118 4,604,125 10,137,819 4,459,792 85.3% NON-OPERATING REVENUE Bond Proceeds 1,500,000 0 1,761,132 1,500,000 261,132 17.4% Total Non-Operating Revenue 1,500,000 0 1,761,132 1,500,000 261,132 17.4% NON-OPERATING EXPENDITURES Operating Capital Improvements 11,058,000 3,167,350 8,596,647 8,883,000 286,353 2.6% Debt Issuance Costs 16,800 0 84,662 16,800 (67,862)(403.9%) Debt Payments 3,470,507 (8,413)3,406,348 3,470,507 64,159 1.8% Total Non-Operating Expenditures 14,545,307 3,158,936 12,087,657 12,370,307 282,650 1.9% TOTAL NET NON-OPERATIONS (13,045,307)(3,158,936)(10,326,525)(10,870,307)(21,518)0.2% EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF TOTAL REVENUE OVER TOTAL REQUIREMENTS (7,817,378)(1,169,819)(5,722,400)(732,488)(4,989,912)63.8% ENDING BALANCE 5,598,463 7,693,441 12,683,353 (4,989,912)(39.3%) RATE STABILIZATION/CREDIT RESERVE 5,000,000 4,775,000 CONTINGENCY 4,775,000 5,000,000 Electric Fund Preliminary Actual to Year End Projection as of September 2016 Page 12 of 174 AMENDED YEAR-END YEAR-END APPROVED SEPTEMBER-16 YEAR TO DATE YEAR-END VARIANCE % VARIANCE BUDGET W/ENCUMB W/ENCUMB PROJECTION FAV(UNFAV)FAV(UNFAV) BEGINNING BALANCE 49,698,815 49,698,815 49,698,815 0 0.0% OPERATING REVENUE Water Utility Revenue 22,500,000 3,280,602 24,942,260 22,500,000 2,442,260 10.9% Wastewater Utility Revenue 9,399,394 1,344,316 9,732,012 9,399,394 332,618 3.5% Capital Recovery Fee 5,945,574 1,272,868 6,313,555 5,945,574 367,981 6.2% Other Revenue 3,341,051 346,066 3,379,146 3,341,051 38,095 1.1% Irrigation Utility Revenue 204,428 63,074 259,810 204,428 55,382 27.1% Interest 119,232 25,074 225,704 119,232 106,472 89.3% Raw Water Revenue 140,000 30,689 186,853 140,000 46,853 33.5% Transfer In, Debt 100,000 0 106,695 100,000 6,695 6.7% Transfer In, Utilities 293,008 17,277 69,108 293,008 (223,900)(76.4%) Total Operating Revenue 42,042,687 6,379,965 45,215,145 42,042,687 3,172,458 7.5% OPERATING EXPENDITURES Water Administration 11,871,918 (1,371,771)11,795,779 12,582,808 787,029 6.6% Rural Water Admin 3,922,196 (582,163)3,026,448 3,922,196 895,748 22.8% Wastewater Plant Management 2,733,106 63,780 2,341,044 2,733,106 392,062 14.3% Water Plant Management 2,632,741 117,259 2,242,418 2,632,741 390,323 14.8% Transfer Out, ROI 2,420,817 677,628 2,704,418 2,420,817 (283,601)(11.7%) Water Distribution 2,267,236 322,344 3,013,380 2,267,236 (746,144)(32.9%) Wastewater Distribution 1,891,090 193,669 1,861,618 1,891,090 29,472 1.6% Rural Water Operations 1,336,848 101,912 1,150,530 1,336,848 186,318 13.9% Transfer Out, ISF 1,167,710 291,928 1,167,710 1,167,710 0 0.0% Transfer Out, General 425,000 106,250 425,000 425,000 0 0.0% Irrigation 308,386 22,223 216,889 308,386 91,497 29.7% Rural Water Systems Engineering 192,700 27,645 277,606 192,700 (84,906)(44.1%) Rural Water Technical Services 158,642 6,586 123,099 158,642 35,543 22.4% Rural Water Customer Care 113,850 162 94,852 113,850 18,998 16.7% Total Operating Expenditures 31,442,240 (22,546)30,440,792 32,153,130 1,712,338 5.4% TOTAL NET OPERATIONS 10,600,447 6,402,512 14,774,353 9,889,557 1,460,119 13.8% NON-OPERATING REVENUE Special Improvement Fees 642,373 79,860 639,248 642,373 (3,125)(0.5%) Bond Proceeds 6,000,000 0 7,858,868 6,000,000 1,858,868 31.0% Total Non-Operating Revenue 6,642,373 79,860 8,498,116 6,642,373 1,855,743 27.9% NON-OPERATING EXPENDITURES CIP 41,294,500 3,257,367 13,491,623 43,469,500 29,977,877 72.6% Debt Service 4,635,034 15,163 4,735,521 4,635,034 (100,487)(2.2%) Total Non-Operating Expenditures 45,929,534 3,272,531 18,227,144 48,104,534 29,877,390 (62.1%) TOTAL NET NON-OPERATIONS (39,287,161)(3,192,671)(9,729,028)(41,462,161)(28,021,648)71.3% EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF TOTAL REVENUE OVER TOTAL REQUIREMENTS (28,686,714)3,209,841 5,045,325 (31,572,604)36,617,929 (127.6%) ENDING BALANCE 21,012,101 54,744,140 18,126,211 36,617,929 202.0% CONTINGENCY 4,565,000 4,565,000 Water & Rural Water Funds Preliminary Actual to Year End Projection as of September 2016 Page 13 of 174 YEAR-END YEAR-END APPROVED SEPTEMBER-16 YEAR TO DATE YEAR-END VARIANCE % VARIANCE BUDGET W/ENCUMB W/ENCUMB PROJECTION FAV(UNFAV)FAV(UNFAV) BEGINNING BALANCE 0 0 0 0 0.0% REVENUE Interest 0 63 649 0 649 0.0% Total Revenue 0 63 649 0 649 0.0% TRANSFERS IN Transfer In, General Fund 1,085,045 0 1,085,045 1,085,045 0 0.0% Total Transfers In 1,085,045 0 1,085,045 1,085,045 0 0.0% TRANSFERS OUT Transfer Out, GCP 150,000 0 150,000 150,000 0 0.0% Transfer Out, Joint Services 250,000 0 250,000 250,000 0 0.0% Transfer Out, General Fund 500,000 0 500,000 500,000 0 0.0% Total Transfers Out 900,000 0 900,000 900,000 0 0.0% EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF TOTAL REVENUE OVER TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 185,045 63 185,694 185,045 649 0.4% ENDING BALANCE 185,045 185,694 185,045 0 0.0% Council Discretionary Fund Preliminary Actual to Year End Projection as of September 2016 9 Page 14 of 174 AMENDED YEAR-END YEAR-END APPROVED SEPTEMBER-16 YEAR TO DATE YEAR-END VARIANCE % VARIANCE BUDGET W/ENCUMB W/ENCUMB PROJECTION FAV(UNFAV)FAV(UNFAV) BEGINNING BALANCE 488,178 488,178 488,178 0 0.0% REVENUES Hotel/Motel Occupancy Tax Revenues 860,000 152,878 884,317 879,628 4,689 0.5% Poppy Festival 125,000 740 145,015 145,015 (0)(0.0%) Interest 1,500 148 1,541 1,500 41 2.7% Other 8,000 766 11,764 8,000 3,764 47.0% Total Revenues 994,500 154,532 1,042,636 1,034,143 8,493 0.9% EXPENDITURES Personnel 336,778 34,185 311,542 336,778 25,236 7.5% Operations 298,612 60,313 370,461 315,432 (55,029)(18.4%) Capital 100,000 0 25,000 100,000 75,000 75.0% Poppy Festival 85,000 452 122,575 122,575 (0)(0.0%) Transfer to General Capital Projects 100,000 25,000 100,000 100,000 0 0.0% Transfer to General Fund 10,000 2,500 10,000 10,000 0 0.0% Transfer to Fleet 29,620 0 26,800 26,800 0 0.0% Transfer to Information Technology 27,364 6,700 26,564 26,564 0 0.0% Transfer to Facilities 48,751 0 48,751 48,751 0 0.0% Total Expenditures 1,036,125 129,151 1,041,694 1,086,900 45,206 4.4% EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF TOTAL REVENUE OVER TOTAL REQUIREMENTS (41,625)25,381 943 (52,757)(53,700)(129.0%) ENDING BALANCE 446,553 489,121 435,421 53,700 12.0% CONTINGENCY 200,000 200,000 Convention & Visitors Bureau Fund Preliminary Actual to Year End Projection as of September 2016 Page 15 of 174 YEAR-END YEAR-END APPROVED SEP-16 YEAR TO DATE YEAR-END VARIANCE % VARIANCE BUDGET W/ENCUMB W/ENCUMB PROJECTION FAV(UNFAV)FAV(UNFAV) BEGINNING BALANCE 748,167$ 792,318$ 792,318$ 44,151$ 5.9% OPERATING REVENUE Fuel and Terminal Sales 2,876,150 192,275 2,040,675 1,988,444 52,231 2.6% Leases and Rentals 657,400 66,222 709,054 707,049 2,005 0.3% Interest and Other 67,400 92,265 117,054 63,738 53,316 83.6% Total Operating Revenue 3,600,950 350,762 2,866,783 2,759,231 107,552 3.9% OPERATING EXPENDITURES Personnel 321,471 30,072 302,418 317,632 15,214 4.8% Operations-Fuel 2,448,882 (1,014,454)1,533,284 1,549,525 16,241 1.0% Operations-Non Fuel 644,679 21,418 584,598 661,791 77,193 11.7% Transfers Out 15,080 3,770 15,080 15,080 0 0.0% Total Operating Expenditures 3,510,334 (959,194)2,435,379 2,544,028 108,649 4.3% TOTAL NET OPERATIONS 90,616 1,309,957 431,403 215,203 216,200 100.5% NON-OPERATING REVENUE Grants 25,000 0 50,000 50,000 0 0.0% TxDot Refunds 0 0 40,229 0 40,229 0.0% Total Non-Operating Revenue 25,000 0 90,229 50,000 40,229 80.5% NON-OPERATING EXPENDITURES One Time 0 0 6,080 6,080 0 0.0% Airport Master Plan 0 21,329 21,329 0 (21,329)#DIV/0! Runway Lights 757,935 0 750,000 757,935 7,935 1.0% Fuel Farm 100,000 0 87,705 100,000 12,295 12.3% Debt Service 80,222 0 139,101 139,657 556 0.4% Software 20,000 0 0 10,000 10,000 100.0% Total Non-Operating Expenditures 958,157 21,329 1,004,215 1,013,672 9,457 0.9% TOTAL NET NON-OPERATIONS (933,157)(21,329)(913,986)(963,672)49,686 5.2% EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF TOTAL REVENUE OVER TOTAL REQUIREMENTS (762,319)$ 1,288,628$ (482,582)$ (748,469)$ 265,887$ 35.5% ENDING BALANCE (14,152)309,736 43,849 265,887 606.4% Airport Operations Fund Preliminary Actual to Year-End Projection as of September 2016 11Page 16 of 174 YEAR-END YEAR-END APPROVED SEP-16 YEAR TO DATE YEAR-END VARIANCE % VARIANCE BUDGET W/ENCUMB W/ENCUMB PROJECTION FAV(UNFAV)FAV(UNFAV) BEGINNING BALANCE 8,592,116 8,528,267 8,528,267 (63,849)(0.7%) OPERATING REVENUE Sales Tax 5,381,250 983,924 5,317,862 5,625,000 (307,138)(5.5%) Public Improve. District Assessments 500,000 0 0 500,000 (500,000)NA Interest 15,000 9,535 85,388 63,307 22,081 34.9% Reimbursement from TXDOT 450,000 0 97,867 450,000 (352,133)(78.3%) Miscellaneous Revenue 0 2,143 2,143 0 2,143 NA Total Operating Revenue 6,346,250 995,602 5,503,260 6,638,307 (1,135,047)(17.1%) OPERATING EXPENDITURES Administrative Support 376,132 0 124,647 124,901 254 0.2% Debt Service 2,572,312 0 2,578,861 2,638,581 59,720 2.3% Total Operating Expenditures 2,948,444 0 2,703,509 2,763,482 59,973 2.2% TOTAL NET OPERATIONS 3,397,806 995,602 2,799,751 3,874,825 (1,075,074)(27.7%) NON-OPERATING REVENUE Debt Proceeds (FY16)17,500,000 0 11,217,429 11,659,167 (441,738)(3.8%) Total Non-Operating Revenue 17,500,000 0 11,217,429 11,659,167 (441,738)(3.8%) NON-OPERATING EXPENDITURES ROW 1460 (FY12)500,000 0 1,097,378 500,000 (597,378)(119.5%) FM 1460 Widening (FY15)61,000 0 3 61,000 60,997 100.0% SW Bypass-SH 29 to RM 2243 (FY14)1,332,579 2,799 1,796,042 1,332,579 (463,463)(34.8%) SW Bypass-SW Inner Loop 29 (FY15)0 0 8,585 8,585 0 0.0% SW Bypass-2243 to IH35 (FY06)1,121,000 2,272 12,192 1,121,000 1,108,808 98.9% Arterial SE 1-Inner Loop (FY04)0 0 2,183 2,036 (147)(7.2%) FM 971 Northwest-Washam IH35 (FY09)91,590 0 0 91,590 91,590 NA Wolf Ranch Pkwy Ext - DB Wood (FY10)283,350 0 0 0 0 NA Snead Dr (FY11)20,000 0 46 46 0 0.0% Williams Dr Gateway (FY13)794,000 0 215 794,000 793,785 100.0% Rivery-Ext Williams Dr to NW Blvd (FY16)1,500,000 282,619 2,584,092 1,590,966 (993,126)(62.4%) Rivery-TIA Improvements (FY16)1,400,000 0 239,800 239,800 0 0.0% Rivery 721,000 721,000 721,000 721,000 0 0.0% SH 29 Int.-IH35 to Haven Ln (FY14)650,000 0 0 0 0 NA Pecan Center Dr to Airport Rd (FY15)6,364,000 0 0 2,000,000 2,000,000 NA Mays St (FY15)10,150,000 426,013 6,878,735 6,375,089 (503,646)(7.9%) Available for Projects TBD 1,345,312 0 0 0 0 NA Total Non-Operating Expenditures 26,333,831 1,434,704 13,340,270 14,837,691 1,497,421 10.1% TOTAL NET NON-OPERATIONS (8,833,831)(1,434,704)(2,122,841)(3,178,524)1,055,683 (33.2%) EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF TOTAL REVENUE OVER TOTAL REQUIREMENTS (5,436,025)(439,102)676,910 696,301 (19,391)(2.8%) ENDING BALANCE 3,156,091 9,205,177 9,224,568 (19,391)(0.2%) RESERVED ENDING BALANCE 1,474,063 Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation Fund Preliminary Actual to Year-End Projection as of September 2016 Page 17 of 174 YEAR-END YEAR-END APPROVED SEP-16 YEAR TO DATE YEAR-END VARIANCE % VARIANCE BUDGET W/ENCUMB W/ENCUMB PROJECTION FAV(UNFAV)FAV(UNFAV) BEGINNING BALANCE 5,370,479 5,378,900 5,378,900 8,421 0.2% OPERATING REVENUES Sales Tax 1,345,313 374,511 1,464,844 1,406,750 58,094 4.1% Interest 7,500 3,638 27,882 24,244 3,638 15.0% Miscellaneous Revenue 0 10 59,968 59,958 10 0.0% Lease Revenue (Grape Creek)48,000 4,000 48,000 48,000 0 NA Total Operating Revenues 1,400,813 382,159 1,600,694 1,538,952 61,742 4.0% OPERATING EXPENDITURES Debt Service 106,694 0 106,695 106,695 0 NA Bond Issuance Costs 87,500 0 18,224 18,224 0 NA Interlocal Agreement 211,200 0 136,611 136,611 0 NA Supplies 300 0 2 2 0 NA Ads, Notices, Recording Fees 0 0 56 56 0 NA Special Services 7,500 0 0 0 0 NA Travel & Training 1,500 0 730 730 0 NA Promotional & Marketing Program 81,000 17,690 63,296 58,406 (4,890)(8.4%) Miscellaneous Expense 2,500 0 11,429 11,429 0 NA Total Operating Expenditures 498,194 17,690 337,043 332,153 (4,890)(1.5%) TOTAL NET OPERATIONS 902,619 364,469 1,263,651 1,206,799 66,632 5.5% NON-OPERATING REVENUES Bond Proceeds 3,100,000 0 2,977,185 2,977,185 0 NA Premium on Bond Issuance 0 0 141,562 141,562 0 NA Total Non-Operating Revenues 3,100,000 0 3,118,747 3,118,747 0 NA NON-OPERATING EXPENDITURES Catalyst 71,000 71,000 71,000 71,000 0 NA DisperSol 200,000 0 20,000 20,000 0 NA Economic Development Projects -Undetermined 3,988,774 0 0 0 0 NA Georgetown ISD 109,496 0 0 15,649 15,649 100.0% Rivery 4,500,000 4,500,000 4,500,000 4,500,000 0 NA Tasus 67,500 0 0 0 0 NA Texas Life Sciences 100,000 0 100,000 100,000 0 NA Total Non-Operating Expenditures 9,036,770 4,571,000 4,691,000 4,706,649 15,649 0.3% TOTAL NET NON-OPERATIONS (5,936,770)(4,571,000)(1,572,253)(1,587,902)(15,649)1.0% EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF TOTAL REVENUE OVER TOTAL REQUIREMENTS (5,034,151)(4,206,531)(308,602)(381,103)72,501 (19.0%) ENDING BALANCE 336,328 5,070,298 4,997,797 72,501 1.5% RESERVED ENDING BALANCE 336,328 351,688 Georgetown Economic Development Corporation Fund Preliminary Actual to Year-End Projection as of September 2016 Page 18 of 174 14Page 19 of 174 FYE Results by Investment Category: Asset Type Ave. Yield Book Value Market Value Ave. Yield Book Value Market Value Demand Accounts 0.29% 18,173,961$ 18,173,961$ 0.30% 17,380,505$ 17,380,505$ NOW/MMA 0.55% 5,349,353 5,349,353 0.19% 19,673,298 19,673,298 Pools 0.41% 69,025,556 69,025,556 0.10% 21,770,979 21,770,979 Certificates of Deposit 0.85% 30,681,533 30,681,533 0.65% 40,317,123 40,317,123 Totals 123,230,402$ 123,230,402$ 99,141,905$ 99,141,905$ 2016 2015 Change Total Portfolio 0.46%0.36%0.10% Rolling Three Mo. Treas. Yield 0.25%0.03%0.22% Rolling Six Mo. Treas. Yield 0.37%0.09%0.28% Quarterly TexPool Yield 0.31%0.06%0.26% (2) Fiscal Year-to-Date Average Yields calculated using quarter end report yields and adjusted book values and does not reflect a total return analysis or account for advisory fees. Annual Comparison of Portfolio Performance September 30, 2016 September 30, 2015 (1) Average Yield calculated using quarter end report yields and adjusted book values and does not reflect a total return analysis or account for advisory fees. Valley View Consulting, L.L.C.15Page 20 of 174 Summary Quarter End Results by Investment Category: Asset Type Ave. Yield Book Value Market Value Book Value Market Value Demand Accounts 0.29% 18,685,856$ 18,685,856 18,173,961$ 18,173,961$ NOW/MMA 0.55% 5,342,393 5,342,393 5,349,353 5,349,353 Pools 0.41% 76,766,844 76,766,844 69,025,556 69,025,556 CDs/Securities 0.85% 44,746,933 44,746,933 30,681,533 30,681,533 Totals 145,542,025$ 145,542,025$ 123,230,402$ 123,230,402$ Quarter End Average Yield (1)Fiscal Year-to-Date Average Yield (2) Total Portfolio 0.51%Total Portfolio 0.46% Rolling Three Mo. Treas. Yield 0.30%Rolling Three Mo. Treas. Yield 0.25% Rolling Six Mo. Treas. Yield 0.42%Rolling Six Mo. Treas. Yield 0.37% Quarterly TexPool Yield 0.31% 11,966$ Interest income provided in separate report.47,414$ June 30, 2016 September 30, 2016 (1) Average Yield calculated using quarter end report yields and adjusted book values and does not reflect a total return analysis or account for advisory fees. (2) Fiscal Year-to-Date Average Yields calculated using quarter end report yields and adjusted book values and does not reflect a total return analysis or account for advisory fees. Quarterly Bank Fees Offset Year-to-date Bank Fees Offset Valley View Consulting, L.L.C. 16Page 21 of 174 Economic Overview 9/30/2016 The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) maintained the Fed Funds target range of 0.25% - 0.50% (actual Fed Funds traded +/-40 bps). The September FOMC meeting recorded dissenting votes for maintaining rates. More hawkish members wanted to raise the range by 0.25%. The current probability of a December FOMC meeting vote to raise the Fed Funds target is +/-60%. Second Quarter US GDP revised to 1.4% (from 1.1%, no more revision is expected). Other economic data reflected modest, yet inconsistent, growth. The US Stock markets have maintained higher levels. Treasury yields drifted slightly higher on tightening rumors. Taxable municipal bonds or CDs offer the best interest earnings opportunity, if available. 0 250 500 750 1,000 1,250 1,500 1,750 2,000 2,250 2,500 S&P 500 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 Treasury Yield Curves September 30, 2015 June 30, 2016 September 30, 2016 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 US Treasury Historical Yields - Since 2006 Six Month T-Bill Two Year T-Note Ten Year T-Note 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50 7.00 7.50 US Treasury Historical Yields - Since 1998 Six Month T-Bill Two Year T-Note Ten Year T-Note Valley View Consulting, L.L.C.17Page 22 of 174 City - Investment Holdings Coupon/ Maturity Settlement Face Amount/ Book Market Market Life Description Ratings Discount Date Date Par Value Value Price Value (Day) Yield JPMorgan Chase Cash (3)0.29% 10/01/16 09/30/16 18,173,961$ 18,173,961$ 1.00 18,173,961$ 1 0.29% Southside Bank MMA 0.53% 10/01/16 09/30/16 921,588 921,588 1.00 921,588 1 0.53% Green Bank MMA 0.55% 10/01/16 09/30/16 4,427,765 4,427,765 1.00 4,427,765 1 0.55% TexPool AAAm 0.38% 10/01/16 09/30/16 4,341,802 4,341,802 1.00 4,341,802 1 0.38% TexSTAR AAAm 0.41% 10/01/16 09/30/16 64,683,754 64,683,754 1.00 64,683,754 1 0.41% BTH Bank CDARS 0.80% 11/03/16 02/05/15 1,519,989 1,519,989 100.00 1,519,989 34 0.80% BTH Bank CDARS 0.85% 11/17/16 11/20/14 3,047,956 3,047,956 100.00 3,047,956 48 0.85% LegacyTexas Bank CD 0.60% 12/07/16 12/07/15 5,022,592 5,022,592 100.00 5,022,592 68 0.60% BTH Bank CDARS 0.90% 02/02/17 02/05/15 1,522,507 1,522,507 100.00 1,522,507 125 0.90% LegacyTexas Bank CD 0.83% 04/13/17 05/23/16 2,005,600 2,005,600 100.00 2,005,600 195 0.83% LegacyTexas Bank CD 0.83% 04/13/17 05/23/16 4,011,200 4,011,200 100.00 4,011,200 195 0.83% Lubbock National Bank CD 0.95% 07/03/17 05/23/16 3,009,616 3,009,616 100.00 3,009,616 276 0.95% Lubbock National Bank CD 0.95% 07/03/17 05/23/16 2,508,013 2,508,013 100.00 2,508,013 276 0.95% Lubbock National Bank CD 0.95% 07/03/17 05/23/16 3,009,616 3,009,616 100.00 3,009,616 276 0.95% LegacyTexas Bank CD 0.95% 08/18/17 06/23/16 3,017,696 3,017,696 100.00 3,017,696 322 0.95% Lubbock National Bank CD 1.00% 10/02/17 05/23/16 2,006,748 2,006,748 100.00 2,006,748 367 1.00% 123,230,402$ 123,230,402$ 123,230,402$490.51% (1) (2) September 30, 2016 (2) Weighted average yield to maturity - The weighted average yield to maturity is based on adjusted book value, realized and unrealized gains/losses and investment ad visory fees are not considered. The yield for the reporting month is used for bank accounts, pools, and money market funds. (1) Weighted average life - For purposes of calculating weighted average life, bank accounts, pools and money market funds are assumed to have an one day maturity. (3) Earnings Credit - The City's depository accounts provide an earnings credit on balances which is used to offset bank fees. Valley View Consulting, L.L.C.18Page 23 of 174 City - Book and Market Value Comparison Coupon/ Maturity Face Amount/Purchases/ Sales/Adjust/ Face Amount/ Description Discount Date Par Value Book Value Adjustments Call/Maturity Par Value Book Value JPMorgan Chase Cash 0.29% 10/01/16 18,685,856$ 18,685,856$ –$ (511,895)$ 18,173,961$ 18,173,961$ Southside Bank MMA 0.53% 10/01/16 920,375 920,375 1,212 921,588 921,588 Green Bank MMA 0.55% 10/01/16 4,422,017 4,422,017 5,747 4,427,765 4,427,765 TexPool 0.38% 10/01/16 4,478,019 4,478,019 (136,218) 4,341,802 4,341,802 TexSTAR 0.41% 10/01/16 72,288,824 72,288,824 (7,605,070) 64,683,754 64,683,754 BTH Bank CDARS 0.75%08/04/16 1,515,864 1,515,864 (1,515,864)– – BTH Bank CDARS 0.75%08/18/16 2,530,440 2,530,440 (2,530,440)– – Southside Bank CD 0.51%09/02/16 2,007,667 2,007,667 (2,007,667)– – Southside Bank CD 0.51%09/02/16 2,007,667 2,007,667 (2,007,667)– – LegacyTexas Bank CD 0.55%09/07/16 1,002,754 1,002,754 (1,002,754)– – Independent Bank CD 0.65%09/24/16 3,029,370 3,029,370 (3,029,370)– – RBank CD 1.06%09/29/16 2,037,460 2,037,460 (2,037,460)– – BTH Bank CDARS 0.80%11/03/16 1,516,928 1,516,928 3,062 1,519,989 1,519,989 BTH Bank CDARS 0.85%11/17/16 3,041,433 3,041,433 6,523 3,047,956 3,047,956 LegacyTexas Bank CD 0.60%12/07/16 5,015,024 5,015,024 7,567 5,022,592 5,022,592 BTH Bank CDARS 0.90%02/02/17 1,519,057 1,519,057 3,450 1,522,507 1,522,507 LegacyTexas Bank CD 0.83%04/13/17 2,001,410 2,001,410 4,190 2,005,600 2,005,600 LegacyTexas Bank CD 0.83%04/13/17 4,002,820 4,002,820 8,380 4,011,200 4,011,200 Lubbock National Bank CD 0.95%07/03/17 3,002,421 3,002,421 7,195 3,009,616 3,009,616 Lubbock National Bank CD 0.95%07/03/17 2,502,017 2,502,017 5,996 2,508,013 2,508,013 Lubbock National Bank CD 0.95%07/03/17 3,002,421 3,002,421 7,195 3,009,616 3,009,616 LegacyTexas Bank CD 0.95%08/18/17 3,010,482 3,010,482 7,214 3,017,696 3,017,696 Lubbock National Bank CD 1.00%10/02/17 2,001,699 2,001,699 5,050 2,006,748 2,006,748 TOTAL 145,542,025$ 145,542,025$ 72,782$ (22,384,405)$ 123,230,402$ 123,230,402$ June 30, 2016 September 30, 2016 Valley View Consulting, L.L.C.19Page 24 of 174 0–6 Months 84% 6–12 Months 14% 12–18 Months 2% Current Quarter Maturities $0 $20,000,000 $40,000,000 $60,000,000 $80,000,000 $100,000,000 $120,000,000 $140,000,000 $160,000,000 12/31/2015 3/31/2016 6/30/2016 9/30/2016 Portfolio Balances Money Market Local Depository TexSTAR TexPool Certificate of Deposit 166 174166 102 69 90 73 75 109 104 123 156 163 97108 87 51 67 49 0 50 100 150 200 # o f D a y s Weighted Average to Maturity JPMorgan Chase 15% Southside Bank 1% Green Bank 4% TexPool 3% TexSTAR 52% LegacyTexas Bank 11% Lubbock National Bank 9% BTH Bank 5% Portfolio Holdings by Issuer Valley View Consulting, L.L.C.20Page 25 of 174 City - Allocation Investment Total Consolidated 2013 GO- Parks/Public Safety 2013 CO 2014 CO- Downtown Parks 2014 GO 2014 Revenue Electric 2014 Revenue Water WW JPMorgan Chase Cash 18,173,961$ 18,173,961$ –$ –$ –$ –$ –$ –$ Southside Bank MMA 921,588 921,588 Green Bank MMA 4,427,765 4,427,765 TexPool 4,341,802 4,341,802 TexSTAR 64,683,754 6,858,523 3,691,623 548,184 325,766 1,769,391 6,480,246 BTH Bank CDARS 11/03/16 1,519,989 1,519,989 BTH Bank CDARS 11/17/16 3,047,956 3,047,956 LegacyTexas Bank CD 12/07/16 5,022,592 BTH Bank CDARS 02/02/17 1,522,507 1,522,507 LegacyTexas Bank CD 04/13/17 2,005,600 LegacyTexas Bank CD 04/13/17 4,011,200 Lubbock National Bank CD 07/03/17 3,009,616 3,009,616 Lubbock National Bank CD 07/03/17 2,508,013 Lubbock National Bank CD 07/03/17 3,009,616 LegacyTexas Bank CD 08/18/17 3,017,696 3,017,696 Lubbock National Bank CD 10/02/17 2,006,748 Totals 123,230,402$ 46,841,403$ 3,691,623$ –$ 548,184$ 325,766$ 1,769,391$ 6,480,246$ Book and Market Value September 30, 2016 Valley View Consulting, L.L.C. 21Page 26 of 174 City - Allocation JPMorgan Chase Cash Southside Bank MMA Green Bank MMA TexPool TexSTAR BTH Bank CDARS 11/03/16 BTH Bank CDARS 11/17/16 LegacyTexas Bank CD 12/07/16 BTH Bank CDARS 02/02/17 LegacyTexas Bank CD 04/13/17 LegacyTexas Bank CD 04/13/17 Lubbock National Bank CD 07/03/17 Lubbock National Bank CD 07/03/17 Lubbock National Bank CD 07/03/17 LegacyTexas Bank CD 08/18/17 Lubbock National Bank CD 10/02/17 Totals Book and Market Value September 30, 2016 (Continued) Debt Service Police Restricted Seizure Utility Debt Service 2015 CO- Airport 2015 CO- Parks/Streets/ Vehicles 2015 CO- Stormwater 2015 CO-Tax Facilities 2015 CO- Water –$ –$ –$ –$ –$ –$ –$ –$ 2,882,913 1,391 67,785 29,668 1,402,167 1,421,837 3,009,702 13,787 2,882,913$ 1,391$ 67,785$ 29,668$ 1,402,167$ 1,421,837$ 3,009,702$ 13,787$ Valley View Consulting, L.L.C. 22Page 27 of 174 City - Allocation JPMorgan Chase Cash Southside Bank MMA Green Bank MMA TexPool TexSTAR BTH Bank CDARS 11/03/16 BTH Bank CDARS 11/17/16 LegacyTexas Bank CD 12/07/16 BTH Bank CDARS 02/02/17 LegacyTexas Bank CD 04/13/17 LegacyTexas Bank CD 04/13/17 Lubbock National Bank CD 07/03/17 Lubbock National Bank CD 07/03/17 Lubbock National Bank CD 07/03/17 LegacyTexas Bank CD 08/18/17 Lubbock National Bank CD 10/02/17 Totals Book and Market Value September 30, 2016 (Continued) 2015 GO- Roads 2015A GO- Roads 2015A GO- Parks 2015 Revenue Electric 2015 Revenue Water WW 2016 CO- Rivery TIRZ 2016 CO- Stormwater 2016 CO- Streets/ Facilities/ Equip –$ –$ –$ –$ –$ –$ –$ –$ 4,309,300 2,288,599 1,706,564 2,010,907 7,077,152 1,715,640 2,839,203 5,022,592 4,309,300$ 7,311,191$ 1,706,564$ 2,010,907$ 7,077,152$ 1,715,640$ – 2,839,203$ Valley View Consulting, L.L.C. 23Page 28 of 174 City - Allocation JPMorgan Chase Cash Southside Bank MMA Green Bank MMA TexPool TexSTAR BTH Bank CDARS 11/03/16 BTH Bank CDARS 11/17/16 LegacyTexas Bank CD 12/07/16 BTH Bank CDARS 02/02/17 LegacyTexas Bank CD 04/13/17 LegacyTexas Bank CD 04/13/17 Lubbock National Bank CD 07/03/17 Lubbock National Bank CD 07/03/17 Lubbock National Bank CD 07/03/17 LegacyTexas Bank CD 08/18/17 Lubbock National Bank CD 10/02/17 Totals Book and Market Value September 30, 2016 (Continued) 2016 GO Bonds 2016 GO- Parks 2016 GO- Roads 2016 Revenue Electric 2016 Revenue Water/WW Garey Park Donation –$ –$ –$ –$ –$ –$ 3,007,273 1,011,479 1,797,833 3,408,411 5,008,409 2,005,600 4,011,200 2,508,013 3,009,616 2,006,748 9,027,564$ 3,007,273$ 1,011,479$ 1,797,833$ 7,922,024$ 5,008,409$ Valley View Consulting, L.L.C. 24Page 29 of 174 City - Allocation Investment Total Consolidated 2013 GO- Parks/Public Safety 2013 CO 2014 CO- Downtown Parks 2014 GO 2014 Revenue Electric 2014 Revenue Water WW JPMorgan Chase Cash 18,685,856$ 18,685,856$ –$ –$ –$ –$ –$ –$ Southside Bank MMA 920,375 920,375 Green Bank MMA 4,422,017 4,422,017 TexPool 4,478,019 4,478,019 TexSTAR 72,288,824 4,124,476 4,750,311 1,263,130 596,334 402,612 1,767,613 5,026,050 BTH Bank CDARS 08/04/16 1,515,864 1,515,864 BTH Bank CDARS 08/18/16 2,530,440 2,530,440 Southside Bank CD 09/02/16 2,007,667 Southside Bank CD 09/02/16 2,007,667 LegacyTexas Bank CD 09/07/16 1,002,754 Independent Bank CD 09/24/16 3,029,370 3,029,370 RBank CD 09/29/16 2,037,460 2,037,460 BTH Bank CDARS 11/03/16 1,516,928 1,516,928 BTH Bank CDARS 11/17/16 3,041,433 3,041,433 LegacyTexas Bank CD 12/07/16 5,015,024 BTH Bank CDARS 02/02/17 1,519,057 1,519,057 LegacyTexas Bank CD 04/13/17 2,001,410 LegacyTexas Bank CD 04/13/17 4,002,820 Lubbock National Bank CD 07/03/17 3,002,421 3,002,421 Lubbock National Bank CD 07/03/17 2,502,017 Lubbock National Bank CD 07/03/17 3,002,421 LegacyTexas Bank CD 08/18/17 3,010,482 3,010,482 Lubbock National Bank CD 10/02/17 2,001,699 Totals 145,542,025$ 52,318,335$ 4,750,311$ 1,263,130$ 596,334$ 402,612$ 1,767,613$ 6,541,914$ June 30, 2016 Book and Market Value Valley View Consulting, L.L.C. 25Page 30 of 174 City - Allocation JPMorgan Chase Cash Southside Bank MMA Green Bank MMA TexPool TexSTAR BTH Bank CDARS 08/04/16 BTH Bank CDARS 08/18/16 Southside Bank CD 09/02/16 Southside Bank CD 09/02/16 LegacyTexas Bank CD 09/07/16 Independent Bank CD 09/24/16 RBank CD 09/29/16 BTH Bank CDARS 11/03/16 BTH Bank CDARS 11/17/16 LegacyTexas Bank CD 12/07/16 BTH Bank CDARS 02/02/17 LegacyTexas Bank CD 04/13/17 LegacyTexas Bank CD 04/13/17 Lubbock National Bank CD 07/03/17 Lubbock National Bank CD 07/03/17 Lubbock National Bank CD 07/03/17 LegacyTexas Bank CD 08/18/17 Lubbock National Bank CD 10/02/17 Totals June 30, 2016 Book and Market Value (Continued) Debt Service Police Restricted Seizure Utility Debt Service 2015 CO- Airport 2015 CO- Parks/Streets/ Vehicles 2015 CO- Stormwater 2015 CO-Tax Facilities 2015 CO- Water –$ –$ –$ –$ –$ –$ –$ –$ 11,555,064 1,390 67,717 29,638 2,134,355 1,420,408 3,450,350 758,624 11,555,064$ 1,390$ 67,717$ 29,638$ 2,134,355$ 1,420,408$ 3,450,350$ 758,624$ Valley View Consulting, L.L.C. 26Page 31 of 174 City - Allocation JPMorgan Chase Cash Southside Bank MMA Green Bank MMA TexPool TexSTAR BTH Bank CDARS 08/04/16 BTH Bank CDARS 08/18/16 Southside Bank CD 09/02/16 Southside Bank CD 09/02/16 LegacyTexas Bank CD 09/07/16 Independent Bank CD 09/24/16 RBank CD 09/29/16 BTH Bank CDARS 11/03/16 BTH Bank CDARS 11/17/16 LegacyTexas Bank CD 12/07/16 BTH Bank CDARS 02/02/17 LegacyTexas Bank CD 04/13/17 LegacyTexas Bank CD 04/13/17 Lubbock National Bank CD 07/03/17 Lubbock National Bank CD 07/03/17 Lubbock National Bank CD 07/03/17 LegacyTexas Bank CD 08/18/17 Lubbock National Bank CD 10/02/17 Totals June 30, 2016 Book and Market Value (Continued) 2015 GO- Roads 2015A GO- Roads 2015A GO- Parks 2015 Revenue Electric 2015 Revenue Water WW 2016 CO- Rivery TIRZ 2016 CO- Stormwater 2016 CO- Streets/ Facilities/ Equip –$ –$ –$ –$ –$ –$ –$ –$ 4,304,969 4,645,972 701,442 5,731,707 1,713,915 250,280 3,252,635 2,007,667 2,007,667 1,002,754 5,015,024 4,304,969$ 9,660,996$ 1,704,197$ 2,007,667$ 7,739,374$ 1,713,915$ 250,280$ 3,252,635$ Valley View Consulting, L.L.C. 27Page 32 of 174 City - Allocation JPMorgan Chase Cash Southside Bank MMA Green Bank MMA TexPool TexSTAR BTH Bank CDARS 08/04/16 BTH Bank CDARS 08/18/16 Southside Bank CD 09/02/16 Southside Bank CD 09/02/16 LegacyTexas Bank CD 09/07/16 Independent Bank CD 09/24/16 RBank CD 09/29/16 BTH Bank CDARS 11/03/16 BTH Bank CDARS 11/17/16 LegacyTexas Bank CD 12/07/16 BTH Bank CDARS 02/02/17 LegacyTexas Bank CD 04/13/17 LegacyTexas Bank CD 04/13/17 Lubbock National Bank CD 07/03/17 Lubbock National Bank CD 07/03/17 Lubbock National Bank CD 07/03/17 LegacyTexas Bank CD 08/18/17 Lubbock National Bank CD 10/02/17 Totals June 30, 2016 Book and Market Value (Continued) 2016 GO Bonds 2016 GO- Parks 2016 GO- Roads 2016 Revenue Electric 2016 Revenue Water/WW Garey Park Donation –$ –$ –$ –$ –$ –$ 3,004,251 1,010,462 1,796,026 3,525,716 5,003,375 2,001,410 4,002,820 2,502,017 3,002,421 2,001,699 9,006,939$ 3,004,251$ 1,010,462$ 1,796,026$ 8,029,143$ 5,003,375$ Valley View Consulting, L.L.C. 28Page 33 of 174 Valley View Consulting, L.L.C. 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 City of Georgetown Historical Yields Georgetown TexPool Rolling 3 mo T-Bill Rolling 6 mo T-Bill Rolling 12 mo T-Bill 29Page 34 of 174 30Page 35 of 174 FYE Results by Investment Category: Asset Type Ave. Yield Book Value Market Value Ave. Yield Book Value Market Value Pools 0.40% 15,794,940$ 15,794,940$ 0.09%4,699,650$ 4,699,650$ Certificates of Deposit 0.90% 10,600,691 10,600,691 0.62%8,039,961 8,039,961 Totals 26,395,630$ 26,395,630$ 12,739,611$ 12,739,611$ 2016 2015 Change Total Portfolio 0.53%0.41%0.13% Rolling Three Mo. Treas. Yield 0.25%0.03%0.22% Rolling Six Mo. Treas. Yield 0.37%0.09%0.28% Quarterly TexPool Yield 0.31%0.06%0.26% (2) Fiscal Year-to-Date Average Yields calculated using quarter end report yields and adjusted book values and does not reflect a total return analysis or account for advisory fees. Annual Comparison of Portfolio Performance September 30, 2016 September 30, 2015 (1) Average Yield calculated using quarter end report yields and adjusted book values and does not reflect a total return analysis or account for advisory fees. Valley View Consulting, L.L.C.31Page 36 of 174 Summary Quarter End Results by Investment Category: Asset Type Ave. Yield Book Value Market Value Book Value Market Value Pools 0.40% 16,140,952$ 16,140,952$ 15,794,940$ 15,794,940$ CDs/Securities 0.90% 10,575,566 10,575,566 10,600,691 10,600,691 Totals 26,716,518$ 26,716,518$ 26,395,630$ 26,395,630$ Quarter End Average Yield (1)Fiscal Year-to-Date Average Yield (2) Total Portfolio 0.60%Total Portfolio 0.53% Rolling Three Mo. Treas. Yield 0.30%Rolling Three Mo. Treas. Yield 0.25% Rolling Six Mo. Treas. Yield 0.42%Rolling Six Mo. Treas. Yield 0.37% Quarterly TexPool Yield 0.31% Interest data provided in separate report. June 30, 2016 September 30, 2016 (1) Average Yield calculated using quarter end report yields and adjusted book values and does not reflect a total return analysis or account for advisory fees. (2) Fiscal Year-to-Date Average Yields calculated using quarter end report yields and adjusted book values and does not reflect a total return analysis or account for advisory fees. Valley View Consulting, L.L.C. 32Page 37 of 174 Economic Overview 9/30/2016 The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) maintained the Fed Funds target range of 0.25% - 0.50% (actual Fed Funds traded +/-40 bps). The September FOMC meeting recorded dissenting votes for maintaining rates. More hawkish members wanted to raise the range by 0.25%. The current probability of a December FOMC meeting vote to raise the Fed Funds target is +/-60%. Second Quarter US GDP revised to 1.4% (from 1.1%, no more revision is expected). Other economic data reflected modest, yet inconsistent, growth. The US Stock markets have maintained higher levels. Treasury yields drifted slightly higher on tightening rumors. Taxable municipal bonds or CDs offer the best interest earnings opportunity, if available. 0 250 500 750 1,000 1,250 1,500 1,750 2,000 2,250 2,500 S&P 500 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 Treasury Yield Curves September 30, 2015 June 30, 2016 September 30, 2016 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 US Treasury Historical Yields - Since 2006 Six Month T-Bill Two Year T-Note Ten Year T-Note 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50 7.00 7.50 US Treasury Historical Yields - Since 1998 Six Month T-Bill Two Year T-Note Ten Year T-Note Valley View Consulting, L.L.C.33Page 38 of 174 Investment Holdings Coupon/Maturity Settlement Face Amount/Book Market Market Life Description Ratings Discount Date Date Par Value Value Price Value (Day)Yield TexPool AAAm 0.38% 10/01/16 09/30/16 7,461,126$ 7,461,126$ 1.00 7,461,126$ 1 0.38% TexSTAR AAAm 0.41% 10/01/16 09/30/16 8,333,813 8,333,813 1.00 8,333,813 1 0.41% LegacyTexas Bank CD 0.60% 12/07/16 12/07/15 1,506,778 1,506,778 100.00 1,506,778 68 0.60% RBank CD 0.80% 12/30/16 12/30/15 2,034,842 2,034,842 100.00 2,034,842 91 0.80% Lubbock National Bank CD 0.95% 07/03/17 05/23/16 4,012,821 4,012,821 100.00 4,012,821 276 0.95% Lubbock National Bank CD 1.05% 08/18/17 08/18/16 3,046,250 3,046,250 100.00 3,046,250 322 1.05% 26,395,630$ 26,395,630$ 26,395,630$ 91 0.60% (1) (2) September 30, 2016 (1) Weighted average life - For purposes of calculating weighted average life, bank accounts, pools and money market funds are assumed to have an one day maturity. (2) Weighted average yield to maturity - The weighted average yield to maturity is based on adjusted book value, realized and unrealized gains/losses and investment advisory fees are not considered. The yield for the reporting month is used for bank accounts, pools, and money market funds. Valley View Consulting, L.L.C.34Page 39 of 174 Pools 60% CDs/Securities 40% GTEC PORTFOLIO COMPOSITION $0 $5,000,000 $10,000,000 $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000,000 $30,000,000 12/31/2015 3/31/2016 6/30/2016 9/30/2016 GTEC PORTFOLIO BALANCES CD TexPool TexSTAR Valley View Consulting, L.L.C. 35Page 40 of 174 Book Value Comparison Coupon/Maturity Face Amount/Purchases/Sales/Adjust/Face Amount/ Description Discount Date Par Value Book Value Adjustments Call/Maturity Par Value Book Value TexPool 0.38% 10/01/16 5,913,701$ 5,913,701$ 1,547,425$ –$ 7,461,126$ 7,461,126$ TexSTAR 0.41% 10/01/16 10,227,251 10,227,251 (1,893,437) 8,333,813 8,333,813 Comerica Bank CD 0.67% 08/15/16 3,037,088 3,037,088 (3,037,088)– – LegacyTexas Bank CD 0.60% 12/07/16 1,504,507 1,504,507 2,270 1,506,778 1,506,778 RBank CD 0.80% 12/30/16 2,030,743 2,030,743 4,099 2,034,842 2,034,842 Lubbock National Bank CD 0.95% 07/03/17 4,003,227 4,003,227 9,593 4,012,821 4,012,821 Lubbock National Bank CD 1.05% 08/18/17 – – 3,046,250 3,046,250 3,046,250 TOTAL 26,716,518$ 26,716,518$ 4,609,638$ (4,930,526)$ 26,395,630$ 26,395,630$ Market Value Comparison Coupon/Maturity Face Amount/Qtr to Qtr Face Amount/ Description Discount Date Par Value Market Value Change Par Value Market Value TexPool 0.38% 10/01/16 5,913,701$ 5,913,701$ 1,547,425$ 7,461,126$ 7,461,126$ TexSTAR 0.41% 10/01/16 10,227,251 10,227,251 (1,893,437) 8,333,813 8,333,813 Comerica Bank CD 0.67% 08/15/16 3,037,088 3,037,088 (3,037,088)– – LegacyTexas Bank CD 0.60% 12/07/16 1,504,507 1,504,507 2,270 1,506,778 1,506,778 RBank CD 0.80% 12/30/16 2,030,743 2,030,743 4,099 2,034,842 2,034,842 Lubbock National Bank CD 0.95% 07/03/17 4,003,227 4,003,227 9,593 4,012,821 4,012,821 Lubbock National Bank CD 1.05% 08/18/17 – – 3,046,250 3,046,250 3,046,250 TOTAL 26,716,518$ 26,716,518$ (320,887)$ 26,395,630$ 26,395,630$ June 30, 2016 September 30, 2016 June 30, 2016 September 30, 2016 Valley View Consulting, L.L.C.36Page 41 of 174 37Page 42 of 174 FYE Results by Investment Category: Asset Type Ave. Yield Book Value Market Value Ave. Yield Book Value Market Value Demand Accounts 0.55% 2,002,599$ 2,002,599$ –$ –$ Pools 0.44% 7,515,422 7,515,422 0.11% 3,906,429 3,906,429 Certificates of Deposit – – 0.55% 1,506,179 1,506,179 Totals 9,518,021$ 9,518,021$ 5,412,608$ 5,412,608$ 2016 2015 Change Total Portfolio 0.38%0.24%0.14% Rolling Three Mo. Treas. Yield 0.25%0.03%0.22% Rolling Six Mo. Treas. Yield 0.37%0.09%0.28% Quarterly TexPool Yield 0.31%0.06%0.26% (2) Fiscal Year-to-Date Average Yields calculated using quarter end report yields and adjusted book values and does not reflect a total return analysis or account for advisory fees. Annual Comparison of Portfolio Performance September 30, 2016 September 30, 2015 (1) Average Yield calculated using quarter end report yields and adjusted book values and does not reflect a total return analysis or account for advisory fees. Valley View Consulting, L.L.C.38Page 43 of 174 Summary Quarter End Results by Investment Category: Asset Type Ave. Yield Book Value Market Value Book Value Market Value MMA 0.55%–$ –$ 2,002,599$ 2,002,599$ Pools 0.44% 9,212,429 9,212,429 7,515,422 7,515,422 9,212,429$ 9,212,429$ 9,518,021$ 9,518,021$ Quarter End Average Yield (1)Fiscal Year-to-Date Average Yield (2) Total Portfolio 0.46%Total Portfolio 0.38% Rolling Three Mo. Treas. Yield 0.30%Rolling Three Mo. Treas. Yield 0.25% Rolling Six Mo. Treas. Yield 0.42%Rolling Six Mo. Treas. Yield 0.37% Quarterly TexPool Yield 0.31% Interest income provided in separate report. June 30, 2016 September 30, 2016 (1) Average Yield calculated using quarter end report yields and adjusted book values and does not reflect a total return analysis or account for advisory fees. (2) Fiscal Year-to-Date Average Yields calculated using quarter end report yields and adjusted book values and does not reflect a total return analysis or account for advisory fees. Valley View Consulting, L.L.C. 39Page 44 of 174 Economic Overview 9/30/2016 The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) maintained the Fed Funds target range of 0.25% - 0.50% (actual Fed Funds traded +/-40 bps). The September FOMC meeting recorded dissenting votes for maintaining rates. More hawkish members wanted to raise the range by 0.25%. The current probability of a December FOMC meeting vote to raise the Fed Funds target is +/-60%. Second Quarter US GDP revised to 1.4% (from 1.1%, no more revision is expected). Other economic data reflected modest, yet inconsistent, growth. The US Stock markets have maintained higher levels. Treasury yields drifted slightly higher on tightening rumors. Taxable municipal bonds or CDs offer the best interest earnings opportunity, if available. 0 250 500 750 1,000 1,250 1,500 1,750 2,000 2,250 2,500 S&P 500 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 Treasury Yield Curves September 30, 2015 June 30, 2016 September 30, 2016 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 US Treasury Historical Yields - Since 2006 Six Month T-Bill Two Year T-Note Ten Year T-Note 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50 7.00 7.50 US Treasury Historical Yields - Since 1998 Six Month T-Bill Two Year T-Note Ten Year T-Note Valley View Consulting, L.L.C.40Page 45 of 174 Investment Holdings Coupon/Maturity Settlement Face Amount/Book Market Market Life Description Ratings Discount Date Date Par Value Value Price Value (Day)Yield Green Bank MMA 0.55% 10/01/16 09/30/16 2,002,599$ 2,002,599$ 1.00 2,002,599$ 1 0.55% TexasDAILY AAAm 0.50% 10/01/16 09/30/16 2,009,403 2,009,403 1.00 2,009,403 1 0.50% TexSTAR AAAm 0.41% 10/01/16 09/30/16 5,506,019 5,506,019 1.00 5,506,019 1 0.41% 9,518,021$ 9,518,021$ 9,518,021$ 1 0.46% (1) (2) September 30, 2016 (1) Weighted average life - For purposes of calculating weighted average life, bank accounts, pools and money market funds are assumed to have an one day maturity. (2) Weighted average yield to maturity - The weighted average yield to maturity is based on adjusted book value, realized and unrealized gains/losses and investment advisory fees are not considered. The yield for the reporting month is used for bank accounts, pools, and money market funds. Valley View Consulting, L.L.C.41Page 46 of 174 MMA 21% Pools 79% GEDCO PORTFOLIO COMPOSITION $0 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,000,000 $6,000,000 $7,000,000 $8,000,000 $9,000,000 $10,000,000 12/31/2015 3/31/2016 6/30/2016 9/30/2016 GEDCO PORTFOLIO BALANCES CD TexasDAILY TexSTAR Money Market Valley View Consulting, L.L.C. 42Page 47 of 174 Book Value Comparison Coupon/Maturity Face Amount/Purchases/Sales/Adjust/Face Amount/ Description Discount Date Par Value Book Value Adjustments Call/Maturity Par Value Book Value Green Bank MMA 0.55% 10/01/16 –$ –$ 2,002,599$ –$ 2,002,599$ 2,002,599$ TexasDAILY 0.50% 10/01/16 2,007,020 2,007,020 2,383 2,009,403 2,009,403 TexSTAR 0.41% 10/01/16 7,205,408 7,205,408 (1,699,389) 5,506,019 5,506,019 TOTAL 9,212,429$ 9,212,429$ 2,004,982$ (1,699,389)$ 9,518,021$ 9,518,021$ Market Value Comparison Qtr to Qtr Change Green Bank MMA 0.55% 10/01/16 –$ –$ 2,002,599$ 2,002,599$ 2,002,599$ TexasDAILY 0.50% 10/01/16 2,007,020 2,007,020 2,383 2,009,403 2,009,403 TexSTAR 0.41% 10/01/16 7,205,408 7,205,408 (1,699,389) 5,506,019 5,506,019 TOTAL 9,212,429$ 9,212,429$ 305,593$ 9,518,021$ 9,518,021$ June 30, 2016 September 30, 2016 June 30, 2016 September 30, 2016 Valley View Consulting, L.L.C.43Page 48 of 174 Grant Description Grantor Grant Amount Match Status Airport Airport Master Plan TxDOT Aviation 250,000$ 25,000$ Award Approved Police Bullet Proof Vests Office of Justice Program 16,560$ 8,280$ Award Approved Library Community Resources Coordinator Texas State Library and Archives 62,350$ -$ Award Approved Environmental Services Medication Collection Boxes Capital Area Council of Governments (CAPCOG)6,635$ -$ Award Approved Fire Fire Extinguisher Training System Firehouse Subs Public Safety Foundation 10,332$ -$ Award Denied Stormwater Drainage Flood Protection Planning Study Texas Water Development Board 332,500$ 215,000$ Application Approved CITY OF GEORGETOWN GRANT APPLICATIONS as of September 30, 2016 44 Page 49 of 174 Capital Improvement Projects Preliminary Year End September 30, 2016 2015/16 Year to Date Year to Date Project Budget Expenditures Encumbrances Balance General Government CIP Public Safety & Facilities 6CJ GMC Remodel 1,900,000$                     8,754$                              ‐$                                      1,891,246$                        6CR Public Safety Facility ‐                                         465,033                           73,916                             (538,949)                           [a] 6DP Fire Station ESD 550,000                           ‐                                         ‐                                        550,000                              6DQ EOC Siren System 1,000,000                        367,091                           205,379                           427,530                              6EW Transfer Station / Landfill 210,000                           26,600                             42,882                             140,519                              7AD Communications ‐                                         ‐                                         ‐                                        ‐                                           9BE Preventative Maintenance ‐                                        ‐                                       ‐                                       ‐                                          Public Safety & Facilities Subtotal 3,660,000                      867,478                         322,176                        2,470,346                        Parks CIP Bonds 1AU Street Rehab‐West ‐                                         3,170                                 ‐                                        (3,170)                                [a] 1BU Streets Rehabilitation ‐                                         32,796                             (140,856)                         108,060                              1DN Access to Rtw to Gov Srv ‐                                         ‐                                         9,118                               (9,118)                                [a] 1DP 8th St Church to Myrtle 41,382                             11,923                             29,459                             ‐                                           1DU 8th St Austin to MLK 11,923                             11,923                             ‐                                        ‐                                           1DV Church St 8th to 9th 11,923                             11,923                             ‐                                        ‐                                           1DX SH29 to Leander Rd SW 131,800                           17,848                             113,952                           ‐                                           6AR Westside Park ‐                                         18,249                             (15,966)                            (2,283)                                [a] 6CN River Trail Expansion 100,000                           ‐                                         ‐                                        100,000                              6CP San Gabriel Park Improvements 2,049,900                        406,938                           (406,938)                         2,049,900                          6DB McMaster Park 96,000                             12,790                             5,078                               78,132                                6DD New Village Parks ‐                                         6,925                                13,425                             (20,350)                              [a] 6DE SG Bank Stabilization 416,700                           387,422                           (1,075)                              30,353                                6DH Sidewalks 615,538                           ‐                                         ‐                                        615,538                              6DK Williams Dr. Pool 827,000                           849,631                           (12,742)                            (9,889)                                [a] 6DM VFW Park 1,314,800                        434,028                           881,294                           (522)                                   [a] 6DN Historic Park 257,700                           ‐                                         ‐                                        257,700                              6DO Garey Park 3,000,000                        807,249                           (787,667)                         2,980,418                          6DZ ADA Sidewalks Repairs 100,000                           ‐                                         ‐                                        100,000                              6EA General Repair / Maintenance 132,000                           2,715                                ‐                                        129,285                              6EB Red Poppy Canopy 77,500                             ‐                                         ‐                                        77,500                                6EC Tree Mitigation 44,000                             ‐                                         ‐                                        44,000                                6ED Grace Heritage Rehab 150,000                           13,238                             (10,000)                            146,762                              6EK Former PD Renovation ‐                                         375                                   ‐                                        (375)                                   [a] 6EP Electric Projects 185,000                           ‐                                         ‐                                        185,000                              6EQ Street Light Upgrades 40,000                             ‐                                         ‐                                        40,000                                6ER Parking Renovations 50,000                             ‐                                         ‐                                        50,000                                6ES ADA Facilities 242,049                           41,371                             ‐                                        200,678                              6ET ADA Parks 150,000                           ‐                                         ‐                                        150,000                              6EV Shotgun House Rehab 18,000                             18,000                             ‐                                        ‐                                           9AU University Sidewalks 81,800                             ‐                                         81,800                             ‐                                           9AW CDBG‐MLK/3rd St 10,534                             ‐                                         10,534                             ‐                                           Parks CIP Bonds Subtotal 10,155,549                   3,088,513                      (230,583)                       7,297,619                        Parks CIP   6DB McMaster Park ‐                                         2,500                                15,368                             (17,868)                              [a] 6DD New Village Parks ‐                                         912                                   (121)                                 (791)                                   [a] 6DX Emerald Springs Park 15,900                             52,594                             (36,294)                            (400)                                   [a] 6EH Village Park 71,100                             8,150                                ‐                                        62,950                                6EI Founder's Park 70,000                             ‐                                         2,989                               67,011                                6EU VFW Lighting ‐                                         190,375                           ‐                                        (190,375)                           [a] Parks CIP  Subtotal 157,000                         254,531                         (18,058)                         (79,473)                            Downtown & Community Service  1DG Rivery Sheraton Garage 4,008,000                        1,691,483                         ‐                                        2,316,517                          6BU Former Library Renovation 90,500                             ‐                                         ‐                                        90,500                                6EG Municipal Court / CVB Redesign 230,000                           ‐                                         ‐                                        230,000                              6EJ Parking Facility Study / Design 266,500                           10,058                             (10,058)                            266,500                              6EK Former PD Renovation 6,705,000                        169,579                           (33,675)                            6,569,096                          6EM Downtown West ‐                                         352,277                           (336,527)                         (15,750)                              [a] 6EO Downtown Festival Area 460,000                           ‐                                         ‐                                        460,000                              Downtown & Community Service Subtotal 11,760,000                   2,223,397                      (380,260)                       9,916,862                        Total General Government CIP 25,732,549$                 6,433,919$                   (306,724)$                     19,605,354$                    NOTES: [a] Individual projects may go over budget as long as total expenditures    for all CIP projects are within the department's total budget. 45Page 50 of 174 Capital Improvement Projects Preliminary Year End September 30, 2016 2015/16 Year to Date Year to Date Project Budget Expenditures Encumbrances Balance Transportation Services CIP Streets / Transportation 1BU Streets Rehabilitation 623,000$                      962,261$                      (782,663)$                     443,403$                        1BZ 971 @ Austin Ave.‐                                     59,437                         (59,437)                         ‐                                        1CA SW Bypass Leander to I35 ‐                                     66,051                         (5,235)                           (60,816)                          [a] 1CC FM 1460 ‐                                     111,043                       (57,530)                         (53,512)                          [a] 1CF Street Overlay/Microsurfacing 300,000                        277,685                       22,315                          (0)                                     1CN Sealant 326,000                        142,888                       (120,538)                      303,651                          1CP 2012 Street Rehab 236,000                        6,327                            (6,327)                           236,000                          1CQ SE I/L Schematic Design ‐                                     5,699                            (5,699)                           ‐                                        1CR SW Bypass‐29 to Leander ‐                                     4,480                            ‐                                     (4,480)                             [a] 1CS DB Wood Bridge ‐                                     24,949                         (24,949)                         ‐                                        1CU Cutler Process 1,000,000                     463,882                       408,672                        127,446                          1DE Williams Dr @ Jimm Hogg Rd ‐                                     218,765                       ‐                                     (218,765)                        [a] 1DG Sheraton Parking Garage ‐                                     4,186                            (4,186)                           ‐                                        1DH Cutler Process ‐                                     4,371                            ‐                                     (4,371)                             [a] 1DI SW Bypass / WR Parkway 20,000,000                   3,118,036                    14,557,034                 2,324,931                       1DK Southeast Inner Loop ‐                                     1,247,876                    (295)                              (1,247,581)                     [a] 1DL Austin Avenue Bridge 675,000                        514,916                       427,353                        (267,269)                        [a] 1DM Street Maintenance 2016 1,500,000                     1,482,568                    22,040                          (4,608)                             [a] 1DN Access RTW to GOV SRV ‐                                     ‐                                    40,690                          (40,690)                          [a] 1DO Austin Avenue at 5th St Light ‐                                     24,096                         16,672                          (40,768)                          [a] 1DR PH 1 Signal and Curb Ramps ‐                                     7,734                            53,170                          (60,903)                          [a] 5AL Curb and Gutter ‐                                     ‐                                    874,436                        (874,436)                        [a] 9AU University Sidewalks ‐                                     40                                 ‐                                     (40)                                  [a] Streets / Transportation Subtotal 24,660,000                 8,747,288                  15,355,522                557,190                         Stormwater 1BU Streets Rehabilitation ‐                                     282,825                       (282,825)                       ‐                                        5AL Curb & Gutter ‐                                     16,355                         212,535                        (228,890)                        [a] 5AM Curb & Sidewalks ‐                                     8,569                            (8,569)                            ‐                                        5AO Stormwater Infrastructure ‐                                      ‐                                     ‐                                      ‐                                        5AT Smith Branch Buy‐Outs ‐                                     1,110                             ‐                                     (1,110)                             [a] 5AW Regional Flood Study 950,000                        275,321                       409,679                        265,000                          6DE SG Bank Stabilization ‐                                     35,000                          ‐                                     (35,000)                          [a] Stormwater Subtotal 950,000                      619,180                     330,820                      0                                    Airport 6VA Airport Master Plan ‐                                     21,329                          ‐                                     (21,329)                          [a] 6VB Parallel Taxiway & Runway Lights ‐                                     3,958                            (3,958)                            ‐                                        6VE Fuel Farm 857,935                        837,705                        ‐                                     20,230                             6VF Software Specialized 20,000                          ‐                                    ‐                                     20,000                             Airport Subtotal 877,935                      862,992                     (3,958)                         18,901                           Total Transportation Services CIP 26,487,935$               10,229,460$               15,682,384$               576,091$                       NOTES: [a] Individual projects may go over budget as long as total expenditures    for all CIP projects are within the department's total budget. 46Page 51 of 174 Capital Improvement Projects Preliminary Year End September 30, 2016 2015/16 Year to Date Year to Date Project Budget Expenditures Encumbrances Balance Water Services CIP Wastewater Line Upgrades: 2CH Cedar Breaks EST ‐$                                   1,400$                           1,100$                           (2,500)$                           [a] 3BZ Wastewater ‐ Street Rehab 200,000$                      ‐$                                   ‐$                                    200,000$                         3CJ Berry Creek Interceptor 8,333,900                     360,956                       (358,456)                       8,331,400                        5QZ Snead Drive 299,200                        625,862                       (625,836)                       299,174                           6CR Public Safety Facility 10,000                           205,770                       (166,528)                       (29,242)                           [a] Wastewater Line Upgrades Subtotal 8,843,100                   1,193,988                  (1,149,720)                 8,798,832                      WW Edwards Aquifer Compliance: 3B0 EARZ Ph. 8 755,825                        15,811                           ‐                                     740,014                           3CG EARZ 2013‐14 755,825                        144,214                       (144,145)                       755,756                           3CK EARZ 2014‐15 1,511,650                     782,405                       177,069                        552,176                           3CL EARZ 2015‐2016 ‐                                     318,445                       72,380                          (390,825)                         [a] WW Edwards Aquifer Compliance Subtotal 3,023,300                   1,260,875                  105,304                      1,657,121                      WW Lift stations & Force Mains 3CC Lift Station Upgrades 419,100                         ‐                                     ‐                                     419,100                           3CD Stonehedge LS & FM 27,600                           14,350                          (14,322)                         27,572                             3CE Westinghouse LS & FM 3,298,900                     13,974                          (11,332)                         3,296,258                        3CI Austin Custom Molds LS Decommission 152,000                        ‐                                    ‐                                     152,000                           WW Lift stations & Force Mains Subtotal 3,897,600                   28,324                        (25,654)                       3,894,930                      WW Treatment Plant 3CA Pecan Branch WWTP 1,957,000                     178,404                       (11,713)                         1,790,309                        WW Treatment Plant Subtotal 1,957,000                   178,404                     (11,713)                       1,790,309                      Water CIP 1BU Streets Rehab 143,700                        363,328                       (362,991)                       143,363                           1DE Williams Dr. @ Jim Hogg Rd ‐                                     519,738                       (11,695)                         (508,043)                         [a] 2BR LWTP Expansion Ph. III ‐                                     1,480                            ‐                                     (1,480)                             [a] 2BW Westside Facility 505,500                        4,859,768                    (4,564,350)                   210,081                           2BZ West Loop (H‐1B) Ph. 1 408,000                        ‐                                    ‐                                     408,000                           2CE Rabbit Hill EST 1,825,800                     1,850,508                    291,713                        (316,421)                         [a] 2CH Cedar Breaks EST 3,385,000                     555,008                       2,321,668                     508,324                           2CI Shell Road Water Line 6,292,500                     233,729                       (233,729)                       6,292,500                        2CJ Meter Issue ‐                                     457,072                       ‐                                     (457,072)                         [a] 2CK Daniels Mountain GST 2,200,000                     1,999,843                    8,578                            191,579                           2CL Park WTP Pump Station 335,000                        30,970                          1,630                            302,400                           2CM SW Bypass Waterline 1,106,000                     ‐                                    1,002,410                     103,590                           Water CIP Subtotal 16,201,500                 10,871,444                (1,546,765)                 6,876,821                      Rural Water CIP 2CN PRV Improv SH129 & CR245 183,881                        182,089                       1,792                            (0)                                      2CO Majestic Oaks Water Lines 289,607                        35,554                          254,053                        ‐                                        2JA Hwy 183 & 1869 Waterline 2,945                             2,945                            ‐                                     ‐                                        2JE CR 255 (WD 14‐2)4,817,567                     437,449                       471,931                        3,908,187                        2JF Domel Improvements 2,007,000                     115,037                       207,777                        1,684,186                        Rural Water CIP Subtotal 7,301,000                   773,074                     935,553                      5,592,373                      AMI/CIS‐Water 2CG Asset Management 71,000                           50,220                          (37,922)                         58,702                             Water/AMI/CIS Subtotal 71,000                         50,220                        (37,922)                       58,702                           Total Water Services CIP 41,294,500$               14,356,329$               (1,730,917)$                28,669,088$                 NOTES: [a] Individual projects may go over budget as long as total expenditures    for all CIP projects are within the department's total budget. 47Page 52 of 174 Capital Improvement Projects Preliminary Year End September 30, 2016 2015/16 Year to Date Year to Date Project Budget Expenditures Encumbrances Balance GTEC CIP 1CA SW Bypass Leander to I35 ‐$                         1,800$              ‐$                         (1,800)$                [a] 1CC FM 1460 Widening 61,000$               5,913$              (5,910)$                60,997$                51A Economic Development Projects 1,345,312$         ‐$                      ‐$                         1,345,312$          5QC Southwest Bypass 1,332,579$         1,804,446$      (7,204)$                (464,663)$           [a] 5QG SE1: Inner LP / SH130 ‐$                         2,065$              118$                    (2,183)$                [a] 5QW Wolf Ranch Pkwy Extension 283,350$            ‐$                      ‐$                         283,350$             5QY NB Frontage Rd 2338 to Lakeway ‐$                         5,365$              (5,365)$                ‐$                          5QX Northwest Boulevard Bridge 91,590$               91,303$            (91,303)$             91,590$                5QZ Snead Drive 20,000$               992,930$         (992,884)$           19,954$                5RB ROW ‐ FM 1460 500,000$            1,099,413$      (2,035)$                (597,378)$           [a] 5RC Williams Dr. Gateway 794,000$            215$                 ‐$                         793,785$             5RF Rivery Road (Convention Center Prj..)721,000$            ‐$                      ‐$                         721,000$             5RI Mays Street (S. Georgetown TIRZ)10,150,000$       314,605$         6,138,400$        3,696,995$          5RJ IH 35 / Hwy 29 Intersection Improvements 650,000$            ‐$                      ‐$                         650,000$             5RM Rivery Ext (Williams Dr. ‐ Nwest Blvd.)1,500,000$         2,871,839$      (247,599)$           (1,124,240)$        [a] 5RN Pecan Center Dr. / Airport Rd.6,364,000$         53,171$            (53,171)$             6,364,000$          5RO Southwest Bypass ‐ Laubach 1,121,000$         19,340$            261$                    1,101,399$          5RP Rivery TIA Improvements 1,400,000$         ‐$                      239,800$            1,160,200$          5RQ Rabbit Hill ‐$                         29$                   425,700$            (425,729)$           [a] Total GTEC CIP 26,333,831$       7,262,434$      5,398,808$        13,672,589$        Notes: [a] Individual projects may go over budget as long as total expenditures    for all CIP projects are within the department's total budget. 48Page 53 of 174 Capital Improvement Projects Preliminary Year End September 30, 2016 2015/16 Year to Date Year to Date Project Budget Expenditures Encumbrances Balance Electric CIP Electric CIP 9‐0580‐90‐129 Downtown URD Projects ‐                          3,082                  (3,795)                 713                      9‐0580‐90‐300 Electrical System Improvements 4,375,000          5,344,273          (104,754)             (864,519)            [a] 9‐0580‐90‐310 Power Quality Improvements 80,000                21,133                 ‐                           58,867                 9‐0580‐90‐320 Sectionalization Improvements 50,000                ‐                          ‐                           50,000                 9‐0580‐90‐330 Pole Improvements 50,000                14,025                ‐                           35,975                 9‐0580‐90‐340 Major Device Replacement ‐                          37,596                ‐                           (37,596)              [a] 9‐0580‐90‐350 Relocation Projects Reimbursements ‐                          57,530                (39,865)               (17,665)              [a] 9‐0580‐90‐400 Electrical System Expansion ‐                          189,292              (124,066)             (65,226)              [a] 9‐0580‐90‐410 New Development Projects 1,200,000          2,003,841          35,115                (838,956)            [a] 9‐0580‐90‐420 Reimbursements New Developments (540,000)            29,946                ‐                           (569,946)            [a] 9‐0580‐90‐430 Street Lighting  88,000                24,738                9,931                   53,331                 9‐0580‐90‐500 Consultant Engineering 150,000              202,913              17,531                (70,444)              [a] 9‐0580‐90‐510 System Mapping Support 50,000                71,514                102,972              (124,486)            [a] Electric CIP Subtotal 5,503,000          7,999,882          (106,931)             (2,389,951)          T&D 9‐0585‐90‐003 Electric Substations 698,000              1,044,736          22,446                (369,182)            [a] 9‐0585‐90‐021 Communication Equipment 507,000              399,551              (225,600)             333,050               T&D Subtotal 1,205,000          1,444,287          (203,155)             (36,132)               CIS 9‐0580‐91‐105 CIS System 4,350,000          935,773              2,384,611           1,029,616           CIS Subtotal 4,350,000          935,773             2,384,611           1,029,616           Total Electric CIP 11,058,000$       10,379,942$       2,074,525$          (1,396,467)$        NOTES: [a] Individual projects may go over budget as long as total expenditures    for all CIP projects are within the department's total budget. 49Page 54 of 174 CITY OF GEORGETOWN Long-term Commitments, Reservations and Other Unfunded Liabilities September 30, 2016 Unfunded Liability & Commitments Description Status Financial Impact/Notes Cemetery Special Revenue Fund City owns several cemeteries including Independent Order of Odd Fellows (IOOF) and is obligated to maintain facilities, primarily mowing. Currently no perpetual fees to plot owners. Current plot sales are used to offset maintenance costs. As of 9/30/15, the Cemetery SRF had an ending fund balance of $314k. Projected FY2016 ending balance of $400K, with $250K in perpetual reserve. Approved FY2017 expenditure of $150K to add Columbarium service. Currently cemetery operations are self- funded through plot sales of approximately $50K per year. The cemetery is managed through Parks Administration. In 2015, Council elected to reserve $75,000 annually for future costs associated with maintaining the property. The General Fund will make this transfer in 2016 and 2017. Self-Insurance Internal Service Fund Established in 2014 to provide and manage employee health insurance. Includes both employee contributions (premiums) and City contributions through the annual budget. Initial plan was to build reserve fund over 3 to 5 year period and draw from other City sources if necessary. FY2016 projected fund balance is $2.6M. This fund balance is significantly higher than originally forecasted, and is due partially to lower medical claims as well as returning all unused budget allocations for health insurance into the fund. In FY2017 the IBNR reserve is fully funded at 10% of expenses, and the Rate Stabilization reserve is fully funded at 20% of expenses. Costs are allocated through the budget to the ISF based on employees within each fund. The ISF is overseen by HR and Finance, with annual plan elements determined by the Employee Benefit Committee. City Council approved two levels of reserve in the Fiscal and Budgetary Policies on April 26, 2016. Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability (UAAL) Recognizes the outstanding liability for the City’s employee retirement plan through TMRS. The City contributes monthly to fund the UAAL, based on an annual percentage of payroll. As of 12/30/14, the UAAL was $17.4M and is considered 83.3% funded. The UAAL is decreased by $300K from PY and funded % has increased by 2% since previous report. The City will amortize any UAAL over a period not to exceed the amortization period used by the TMRS actuary. The City may amortize its UAAL more quickly by making contributions to TMRS in excess of the rate specified by TMRS. The 2017 TMRS contribution rate is 12.56%. Actual % of payroll costs is recognized within each fund. 50Page 55 of 174 Unfunded Liability & Commitments Description Status Financial Impact/Notes Other Post Employee Benefits (OPEB) While the City has no obligation to offer additional retiree benefits, retirees are eligible to participate in the City’s health insurance program. That ability represents a subsidy that impacts health insurance costs to the City. This is an actuarial calculation based on current and future employees on future City health insurance costs, and has numerous and complex factors in its calculation. Retirees pay their own premiums, and thus the liability is considered “pay as you go”. With additional employees being added, potential future retiree impacts increase. Thus, the 2015 current net OPEB liability is $786,700, which is an increase of $159,670 over the prior year. The 2016 OPEB valuation is currently under review. Retirees pay their monthly premiums to the ISF who in turn processes their health insurance claims. Compensated Absence Future costs associated with benefits such as vacation, and sick leave for City employees. Compensated Absence is accrued annually to each proprietary fund type on a GAAP basis and accounted for on the balance sheet of each fund. For governmental funds (and for budgetary basis), the expense is recognized when due and payable. Total citywide Comp Absence is $5.8M, of that $4.9M is considered unfunded in the Gen Fund. Employee payouts are on a “pay as you go” basis. $30K is budgeted annually to offset the costs of employee benefit payout. Power Contract Credit Reserve Financial assurance for wholesale power contracts. Established to provide assurance to wholesale power contract providers as fiscal surety against any potential risk. These funds were held as collateral at JPMorgan and vary depending on the volatility of market conditions in regards to the future value of power contracts. The contract with JPM was replaced in 2016 and the requirement to carry the reserve was eliminated. Rate Stabilization Reserve Intended to mitigate potential rate impacts due to increased fuel costs or other external factors. Used to defer or minimize the future cost increases or other impacts related to power costs. Monitored and adjusted monthly as needed through the Power Cost Adjustment (PCA). The RSR is maintained within the Electric Fund and is projected to be $4.5M in FY2017. Potentially, a similar reserve could be developed for the Water Fund. 51Page 56 of 174 Unfunded Liability & Commitments Description Status Financial Impact/Notes Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Compliance Needs Federally mandated standards for accessibility to public buildings, parks, sidewalks. The City completed facilities, sidewalks and parks assessments. A three year funding plan has been prepared and year one was funded in the 2016 Budget. Training for ADA Board liaisons is funded in the FY 2017 budget. As facilities are built or repurposed, meeting ADA compliance will be included in Project Costs. Funding for program expansion will be needed (General Fund sources). Park Equipment Maintenance & Replacement Addresses useful life of equipment type assets in parks, ensuring maintenance and public safety. Includes equipment not directly in a Facility, such as benches, trail lighting, playground equipment, restrooms, and signage. Over the past 5 years, funding for Park Maintenance and Replacement has increased. $200K transfer from General Fund included in FY2017 budget. Staff has listed all assets & developed replacement schedule funded by the General Fund, soon to be on EAM. Emergency Medical Service Special Revenue Fund 2014/15 Annual Budget assumed EMS Program to be operationally active by June 2015 with revenues to offset operating and capital costs. Operating deficit would be funded internally until capital costs were recovered in 5 years. Due to delays in program implementation and negotiations with Williamson County, operation for the program was delayed until at 10/1/15. Operations have begun and staff is monitoring call volume, revenues and collections. Capital has been expended, including TRV and equipment, 9 new paramedics hired. Additional resource requirements are currently being evaluated to ensure response times are met and revenue is recovered. FY2017 budget includes 3 FF/Paramedics to mitigate overtime for the 4th TRV, and half of a position to monitor the revenue collection contract. Sidewalk Maintenance Funding plan for repairing and maintaining existing City sidewalks. Currently, new sidewalks are built as development occurs. Repairs are funded as needed or if funding is available, when major roads are repaired. Useful life of a sidewalk is estimated at 40 to 50 years. FY2017 budget includes spending of $2.6M from approved 2015 Bond Proposition for new sidewalk construction. Major Technology Replacement City uses ISF for capital replacement of equipment. Major software (and related implementation) is funded as needed through the annual budget. Current system replacements are funded when actually purchased, with costs allocated if applicable. Revised cost allocation model that captures replacement costs approved for the FY2017 budget, with a three year phase in approach to true cost. CIS billing to be replaced in 2016, funded by utility funds. Financial System and Human Resource System selection consultant funding included in the FY2017 budget. Funding for acquisition of the new Finance/HR system(s) will be considered in the FY 2018 budget process. Radio Equipment Replacement Communication system consisting of 500 on-body and in-vehicle radios for Police, Fire, and GUS. Current model no longer supported in 2018. Staff proposed 3 year replacement schedule for FY2017-2019, $500K per year. Phase I approved in FY2017 and led by new Emergency Management Coordinator. Replacement radios are compatible with newer technology. 52Page 57 of 174 Unfunded Liability & Commitments Description Status Financial Impact/Notes Airport Maintenance Fund on-going maintenance of the Airport grounds, runways and taxi ways. Terminal and Tower included in Facilities ISF. A plan was developed to increase revenues towards a self-supporting fund status within 3- 5 years. Early assessments indicated the self-supporting status may occur within 3 years. FY 2017 approved budget shows fund breaking even. An Airport Master Plan will be developed over the next year to address long term capital maintenance project prioritization. 53Page 58 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ FY 2016 PRELIMINARY YEAR -END VARIANCE ANALYSIS Council Workshop December 13, 2016 Page 59 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ PURPOSE •4th Quarter Report and Preliminary Year-End provide a picture of financial condition of the City •Numbers are not yet audited or final •Compare projections to actuals Page 60 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ General Fund Revenue General Fund Revenues: Revenue Type Projected YE per Budget as of July 26, 2016 Preliminary Actual as of Sept. 30, 2016 $ Variance % Variance Property Tax $11,673,060 $11,636,698 ($36,362)(0.3%) Sales Tax $12,357,361 $12,679,188 $321,827 2.6% All Other Revenues $30,297,652 $30,089,475 ($208,177)(0.7%) Total Revenue $54,328,073 $54,405,361 $77,288 0.1% Page 61 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ General Fund Expenses General Fund Expenses Expense Type Projected YE per Budget as of July 26, 2016 Preliminary Actual as of Sept. 30, 2016 $ Variance % Variance Downtown & Community Services $9,844,300 $9,800,872 $43,428 (0.4%) Finance & Admin $561,439 $541,209 $20,230 (3.6%) Fire (Amended 10-24-2016)$11,810,683 $11,815,511 ($4,428)0.1% GUS $7,443,255 $6,900,627 $542,628 (7.3%) Management Services $6,379,556 $6,182,599 $196,957 (3.1%) Police $14,000,500 $13,553,097 $447,403 (3.2%) Transportation $3,789,723 $3,603,267 $186,456 (4.9%) Transfers $1,512,955 $1,531,334 ($18,379)1.2% Total Expenses $55,342,411 $53,928,514 $1,413,897 (1.5%) Page 62 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ General Fund Balance •Including transfer to Council SRF General Fund –Fund Balance Projected YE per Budget as of July 26, 2016 Preliminary Actual as of Sept. 30, 2016 $ Variance % Variance Fund Balance $9,154,300 $10,645,485 $1,491,185 16.3% Page 63 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ Debt Service Fund General Debt Service –Fund Balance Projected YE per Budget as of July 26, 2016 Preliminary Actual as of Sept. 30, 2016 $ Variance % Variance Fund Balance $1,530,625*$1,870,004 $339,379 22.2% *Reflects Council’s Anticipated Approval of Budget Amendment 12-13-2016. Page 64 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ Joint Services Fund Joint Services Fund–Fund Balance Projected YE per Budget as of July 26, 2016 Preliminary Actual as of Sept. 30, 2016 $ Variance % Variance Fund Balance $749,366 $280,454 ($468,912)(62.6%) Page 65 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ Internal Service Funds Internal Service Funds –Fund Balance Projected YE per Budget as of July 26, 2016 Preliminary Actual as of Sept. 30, 2016 $ Variance % Variance Facilities Maintenance Fund Balance $364,386 $762,242 $397,856 109.2% Fleet Management $1,337,221 $1,762,672 $425,451 31.8% Information Services $394,592 $778,187 $383,595 97.2% Self Insurance*$1,040,984*$1,041,019 $35 0.0% *Reflects Council’s Anticipated Approval of Budget Amendment 12-13-2016. Page 66 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ Special Revenue -EMS Paramedic EMS SRF–Fund Balance Projected YE per Budget as of July 26, 2016 Preliminary Actual as of Sept. 30, 2016 $ Variance % Variance Fund Balance ($853,003)($826,180)$26,823 (3.1%) Page 67 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ Special Revenue -Tourism Tourism SRF–Fund Balance Projected YE per Budget as of July 26, 2016 Preliminary Actual as of Sept. 30, 2016 $ Variance % Variance Fund Balance $435,421*$489,121 $53,700 (12.3%) *Reflects Council’s Anticipated Approval of Budget Amendment 12-13-2016. Page 68 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ Other Special Revenue Funds Special Revenue Funds –Fund Balance Projected YE per Budget as of July 26, 2016 Preliminary Actual as of Sept. 30, 2016 $ Variance % Variance Street Maintenance Tax $1,657,580 $2,028,946 $371,366 22.4% Permitting $59,052 $75,308 $16,256 27.5% CDBG (Sidewalks)-($3,894)($3,894)0.0% Animal Services $169,738 $191,929 $22,191 13.1% Library Restricted*$52,754 $52,731 ($23)(0.1%) Main Street Facade $117,879 $114,333 ($3,546)(3.0%) Parks Restricted (Tree Fund, Parkland & Parks)$634,444 $987,778 $353,334 55.7% *Reflects Council’s Anticipated Approval of Budget Amendment 12-13-2016. Page 69 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ Other Special Revenue Funds Special Revenue Funds –Fund Balance Projected YE per Budget as of July 26, 2016 Preliminary Actual as of Sept. 30, 2016 $ Variance % Variance Police Restricted $121,648 $133,703 $12,055 9.9% Fire Billing $58,262 $36,873 ($21,389)(36.7%) Conservation $390,534 $452,907 $62,373 16.0% Council Discretionary $185,045 $185,694 $649 0.4% Cemetery $399,673 $401,659 $1,986 0.5% Court Fees $56,593 $43,167 ($13,426)(23.7%) TIRZ’s $287,148 $309,735 $22,587 7.9% Wolf Ranch PID $439 $440 $1 0.2% PEG Fee $175,589 $176,090 $501 0.3% Page 70 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ Water Funds Water Services Fund Projected YE per Budget as of July 26, 2016 Preliminary Actual as of Sept. 30, 2016 $ Variance % Variance Revenues: Operating $42,042,687 $45,215,145 $3,172,458 7.6% Non-Operating $6,642,373 $8,498,116 $1,855,743 27.9% Expenses: Operating $32,153,130*$30,440,792 $1,712,338 6.3% Non-Operating $48,104,534 $18,227,144 $29,877,390 (62.1%) Fund Balance $18,126,211*$54,744,140 $36,617,929 206.5% *Reflects Council’s Anticipated Approval of Budget Amendment 12-13-2016. Page 71 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ Stormwater Drainage Fund Stormwater Drainage Fund Projected YE per Budget as of July 26, 2016 Preliminary Actual as of Sept. 30, 2016 $ Variance % Variance Revenues: Operating $3,213,564 $3,288,759 $75,195 2.3% Non-Operating $720,000 $363,400 ($356,600)(49.5%) Expenses: Operating $2,281,565 $2,297,829 ($16,624)0.7% Non-Operating $1,809,794 $1,544,820 $264,974 (14.6%) Fund Balance $1,554,508 $1,521,813 ($32,695)(2.1%) Page 72 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ Airport Fund Airport Fund Projected YE per Budget as of July 26, 2016 Preliminary Actual as of Sept. 30, 2016 $ Variance % Variance Revenues: Operating $2,759,231 $2,866,783 $107,552 3.9% Non-Operating $50,000 $90,229 $40,229 80.5% Expenses: Operating $2,544,028 $2,435,379 $108,469 (4.3%) Non-Operating $1,013,672 $1,004,214 $9,458 (0.9%) Fund Balance $43,849 $309,736 $265,887 606.4% Page 73 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ Electric Fund Airport Fund Projected YE per Budget as of July 26, 2016 Preliminary Actual as of Sept. 30, 2016 $ Variance % Variance Revenues: Operating $65,910,665*$65,373,714 ($536,951)(0.8%) Non-Operating $1,500,000 $1,761,132 $261,132 17.4% Expenses: Operating $55,772,846*$60,769,589 ($4,996,743)9.0% Non-Operating $12,370,307 $12,087,657 $282,650 1.9% Fund Balance $12,683,353*$7,693,441 ($4,989,912)(39.3%) *Reflects Council’s Anticipated Approval of Budget Amendment 12-13-2016. Page 74 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ Electric Fund •Reasons for Operating Revenue/Expense Variances: –Mild summer temperatures –August/September significant weather impacts –Increase in Capital Improvement Program •Requirements due to growth Page 75 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ FY2016 –Cause and Effect -Weather •Mild, Wet Late-Summer (standard weather fluctuation) –Lower retail customer demand •→ Lower revenue •→ But also Excess supply –Entire Wholesale Market has excess supply •→ Market price depressed •→ Wholesale Clearing Price below Purchase Price –→ Power Purchase loss from clearing excess supply •→ Used Cash Reserves Page 76 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ 2016 May-Aug averaged 5°below budget FY2016 was 19.1” above normal rainfall 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Avg Temp Normal Temp Rain (In)Normal Rain +4.4 -5.3 -1.7 -0.4 +3.7 +2.0 -0.8 -6.7 -7.7 -1.3 -4.8 +2.2 Page 77 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ Average KWh Sales per day by temp (2011-2012 data) Percentage Impact of 5°Temp Variance & FY16 Actual Monthly Variance 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 Mi l l i o n s o f k W h s 5 degree bands Avg Kwh at temp FY16 May-Aug 50°-45° +10.7% -9.6% 55°-50° +2.4% -2.3% 60°-55° +2.1% -2.0% 65°-60° -5.9% +6.3% 70°-65° -2.5% +2.6% 75°-70° -15.8% +18.8% 80°-75° -13.8% +16.0% 85°-80° -16.1% +19.2% 90°-85° -12.8% +14.7% May –6.7° -12.3% KWh Jul -1.3° -8.3% KWh Aug -4.8 -13.9% KWh Jun -7.7° -19.3% KWh Page 78 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ Electric Fund •FY 2016 Solutions –Adjust allocations between the Electric and Water Funds to appropriately recognize shared costs •CIS Project •Infrastructure Control Operations –Debt fund the CIS project in the Electric Fund –Recognize Payment from NRG purchase of Buckthorn Project •FY 2017 Solutions –Reduce cash funding and increase debt funding for planned capital projects Page 79 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ Electric Fund -Moving Forward •Monitor purchased power costs closely •Improve cash position of the fund to improve buffering weather fluctuations Page 80 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ Summary •General Fund: –Revenue: •Additional sales revenue review was recognized due to nearly 25% increase in collections in August. •This one-time in nature payment was used to offset the overage in Fire due to OT costs stemming from staff vacancies. •Total sales tax projection moved from 22.9 M to 23.4 M. •Year -end actuals finished around 22,437,000. –Expenses: •Overage in Fire OT costs was adjusted through Budget amendment. Page 81 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ Summary •Internal Service Funds: –Fleet : •Increase in fund balance is the result of less expenses in capital repair. –Facilities: •Increased fund balance because GMC parking lot delayed. Savings in janitorial services due the timing of the West Side Service Center. •Savings in landscape services while negotiating new contract. –IT: •Increase in fund balance because of underspending. •General Capital Projects: –Working on roll forward of all CIP and will bring for Council review in January Page 82 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ Summary •Special Revenue Funds: –Paramedic: •Preliminary actuals close to year-end projections, despite the increase in overtime. –Street Maintenance Fund: •Increase in fund balance due to the decision to hold off on spending on Fog Seal. Page 83 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ Summary •Special Revenue Funds: –Parks: •Additional revenue of $101K recognized for the Pipeline Easement revenue. •Expenses are under due to a roll forward on Founders’ Park, which will be done in a January budget amendment. –Council Discretionary Fund: –Increase in fund balance due to interest earned on beginning fund balance of $650. –Airport: •Operating revenues exceeded the projections increasing the health of the fund. Page 84 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ Summary •Debt Service: –The Debt Service Fund reflects the refunding (refinancing) of $7.9M Contractual Obligations for 2006 and 2007 for vehicles and equipment from various City departments. –The refunding was approved by Council in spring of 2016 and resulted in $861,000 savings on interest rates. •Tourism Fund: –The Tourism Fund reflects an increases in both revenue ($40K) and expenditures ($50K) for Poppy Festival activities and CVB operations activities. Page 85 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ Summary •Self-Insurance Fund: –The Self-Insurance Fund is amended by ($500K) in revenue and ($34K) in expenditures to reflect plan contributions and medical claims that were higher than budgeted. •Library Restricted: –The Library Special Revenue Fund is amended to recognize additional donation revenue ($16K) and appropriate additional Library related expenditures ($15K). Page 86 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ Summary •Electric and Water Funds: –The Electric and Water Funds are adjusted so that the Water Fund contributes toward half of the costs of the Customer Information System (CIS) project, and contributes toward Control Center, Meter Services and SCADA department costs based on meter allocation. –This amendment is needed to improve cash flow in the Electric Fund as a result of a current year loss on Purchased Power costs. •This budget amendment decreases the CIS budget in the Electric Fund by $2.2M and increases it in the Water Fund by the same amount. •This amendment also transfers $711K out of the Water Fund to the Electric Fund for shared Control Center Costs. –Since Electric and Water services benefit from both the Customer Information System and the Control Center, the funds will share costs in future fiscal years. Page 87 of 174 FY2016 Annual Budget ‘ Next Steps •Budget Amendments –2016…. –Capital Improvement Program “Roll Forward” •Bond Reimbursement Resolution •External Audit •Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Page 88 of 174 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop December 13, 2016 SUBJECT: Review of the Fiscal and Budge tary Po lic y to be used in preparing the fiscal year 20 18 annual budget and to guide financial operations during fiscal year 2017 -- Leigh Wallace, Finance Director ITEM SUMMARY: The purpo se of this item is to ado pt the propose d changes to the Fiscal and Budgetary Policy for the upcoming budge t. The propo sed changes were discussed and recommended by the General Government and Finance Adviso ry Board on November 30, 20 16 . The purpose of the Fiscal and Budgetary Policy (P olicy) is to pro vide the framewo rk for financial operations of the City and to ensure prudent stewardship, financial planning and acco untability. Each year the Policy is administrative ly amended to reco gnize date and amount c hanges within the text; and to address any new financial or regulato ry requirement that may need to be added. Other amendments may be recommended in o rder to clarify wording o r to further define a particular Po lic y Area. P otential changes for c onsideration and disc ussio n by Council are noted in the overview prese ntation provided during workshop. The full versio n of the policies with tracked changes is also provided. FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A SUBMITTED BY: Leigh Wallace, Finance Director - SP ATTACHMENT S: Description F is cal Polic y Overview P res entation F is cal and Bud getary Polic ies F Y 2017 Trac ked C hanges F is cal Polic y R es o lutio n Page 89 of 174 FY2017 Annual Budget GGAF November 30, 2016 City Council December 13, 2016 Investment Policies 2017 1Page 90 of 174 FY2017 Annual Budget Purpose •Fiscal and Budgetary Policies guide: •Budget development and monitoring process •Debt sale •Accounting and audit procedures •Reviewed annually by GGAF and City Council •Last updated April 2016 •Significant overhaul in structure of document •Added Economic Uncertainty Reserve •Added Self-Insurance Reserves •Changed Employee Compensation program •Enhanced requirements for quarterly financial reporting 2Page 91 of 174 FY2017 Annual Budget Administrative Changes •Clarified wording and formatting •Removed old language that no longer applies •Updated and consolidated notations of compliance and amount for FY 2017 adopted budget 3Page 92 of 174 FY2017 Annual Budget Substantive Changes •Expenditure Management, Personnel Costs (page 9) •Vacancy Factor –expanded policy to apply to all major funds with personnel costs greater than $4 million •General Fund, Joint Services, Water, Electric •Benefit Payout Reserve –specifically applies to General Fund and Joint Services Fund •Staffing & Compensation, Self-Insurance (page 14) •Stabilize fund revenue and department expenditures by adding policy to return any budgeted and unused health insurance contributions to the fund at the end of the fiscal year 4Page 93 of 174 FY2017 Annual Budget Substantive Changes •Expenditure Management, Retirement Benefits (page 12) •Provide more flexibility in option to fund the unfunded pension liability •Current language: One-time payment approved no later than December •Proposed language: Higher contribution rate approved during budget process 5Page 94 of 174 1 FY2017 Annual Budget Fiscal and Budgetary Policy Adopted: December 13, 2016 Contents I. PURPOSE ......................................................................................................................................... 2 II. FUND STRUCTURE AND BASIS OF BUDGETING ...................................................................................... 2 III. OPERATING BUDGET ......................................................................................................................... 3 IV. REVENUE MANAGEMENT ................................................................................................................... 6 V. EXPENDITURE MANAGEMENT ............................................................................................................ 9 VI. STAFFING AND COMPENSATION ....................................................................................................... 13 VII. FUND BALANCE POLICIES ................................................................................................................. 14 VIII. LONG-TERM LIABILITY RESERVES ....................................................................................................... 15 IX. BUDGET CONTINGENCY PLAN ........................................................................................................... 15 X. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) BUDGET .............................................................................. 16 XI. CAPITAL MAINTENANCE AND REPLACEMENT ..................................................................................... 17 XII. ACCOUNTING, AUDITING AND FINANCIAL REPORTING ......................................................................... 19 XIII. ASSET MANAGEMENT ..................................................................................................................... 20 XIV. DEBT MANAGEMENT ....................................................................................................................... 22 XV. OTHER FUNDING ALTERNATIVES ....................................................................................................... 25 XVI. FINANCIAL CONDITIONS, RESERVES, AND STABILITY RATIOS ................................................................. 26 XVII. INTERNAL CONTROLS ...................................................................................................................... 28 Page 95 of 174 2 FY2017 Annual Budget I. PURPOSE The City of Georgetown is committed to financial management through integrity, prudent stewardship, planning, accountability, full disclosure and communication. The broad purpose of the Fiscal and Budgetary Policies is to enable the City and its related component units, including the Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation (GTEC) and the Georgetown Economic Development Corporation (GEDCO), to achieve and maintain a long-term stable and positive financial condition, and provide guidelines for the day-to-day planning and operations of the City’s financial affairs. Policy scope generally spans areas of accounting, operational and capital budgeting, revenue and expenditure management, financial reporting, internal controls, investment and asset management, debt management and forecasting. This is done in order to: A. Demonstrate to the citizens of Georgetown, the investment community, and the bond rating agencies that the City is committed to a strong fiscal operation; B. Provide precedents for future policy-makers and financial managers on common financial goals and strategies; C. Fairly present and fully disclose the financial position of the City in conformity to generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP); and D. Demonstrate compliance with finance-related legal and contractual issues in accordance with the Texas Local Government Code and other legal mandates. These policies will be reviewed and updated annually as part of the budget preparation process. II. FUND STRUCTURE AND BASIS OF BUDGETING The budgeted funds for the City of Georgetown include: Governmental Funds: General Fund which accounts for all financial resources except those required to be accounted for in another fund, and include basic governmental services, such as Street Maintenance, Planning and Development, Police, Fire and Parks, as well as solid waste management. Special Revenue Funds (SRF) account for specific revenues that are legally restricted for specified purposes. The City currently budgets 26 SRF Funds and includes Tourism, Parkland Dedication, Library Donations, Animal Services Donations, and Street Maintenance Sales Tax. Debt Service Fund is used to account for the payment of general long-term debt principal and interest. Capital Project Funds are used to account for the acquisition or construction of major capital facilities other than those financed by enterprise activities. Page 96 of 174 3 FY2017 Annual Budget Proprietary Funds: Internal Service Funds account for goods or services provided by one internal department to another. The City uses this system to recognize cost for fleet replacement and maintenance, facility maintenance, computer replacement and maintenance and employee health insurance costs. Enterprise Funds include the City’s “business like” activities including all the utility funds and the airport. Basis of Accounting and Basis of Budgeting The City accounts and budgets for all Governmental Funds using the modified accrual basis of accounting. This basis means that revenue is recognized in the accounting period in which it becomes available and measurable, while expenditures are recognized in the accounting period in which they are incurred. Because the appropriated budget is used as the basis for control and comparison of budgeted and actual amounts, the basis for preparing the budget is the same as the basis of accounting. Exceptions to the modified accrual basis of accounting include: • Encumbrances, which are treated as expenditures in the year they are encumbered, not when expended • Grants, which are considered revenue when awarded, not received • Principal and interest on long-term debt, which are recognized when paid. General government funds include the General Fund, special revenue funds, debt service fund and general capital project funds. Proprietary Funds, which include the enterprise and internal service funds are accounted and budgeted using the full-accrual basis of accounting. Under this method, revenues are recognized when they are earned and measurable, while expenses are recognized when they are incurred regardless of timing or related cash flows. The basis for preparing the budget is the same as the basis of accounting except for principal payments on long-term debt and capital outlay which are treated as budgeted expenses. Exceptions include: • Depreciation which is not budgeted • Non-budgeted accruals such as compensated absences. III. OPERATING BUDGET Budgeting is an essential element of the financial planning, control and evaluation process of municipal government. The operating budget is the City’s annual financial operating plan. The annual budget includes all of the operating departments of the General Fund, proprietary funds, debt service funds, special revenue funds, and capital improvement funds of the City. A. Form of Government – The Charter (Section 1.03) established a “Council-Manager Government” wherein the City vests power in the City Council to “enact legislation, adopt budgets, determine policies, and appoint the City Manager who shall execute the laws and administer the government of the City.” B. Comprehensive Plan – The Charter (Section 1.08) requires that the City Council “establish comprehensive planning as a continuous and ongoing governmental function in order to promote and strengthen the existing Page 97 of 174 4 FY2017 Annual Budget role, processes and powers of the City of Georgetown.” The current comprehensive plan is the 2030 Plan adopted in 2006. C. Preparation – The Charter (Section 6.02) requires “a proposed budget prepared by the City Manager and submitted to the City Council at least thirty days prior to the end of the fiscal year. The budget shall be adopted not later than the twenty-seventh day of the last month of the fiscal year. No budget will be adopted or appropriations made unless the total estimated revenues, income and funds available shall be equal to or in excess of such budget or appropriations, except otherwise provided.” 1. Proposed Budget – A proposed budget shall be prepared by the City Manager with participation of all of the City’s Directors within the provision of the Charter and the 2030 Plan. a. The budget shall include four basic segments for review and evaluation: • Revenue • Personnel Costs • Operations and Maintenance Costs • Capital and other non-project Costs b. The budget review process will include City Council participation in the development of each segment and allow for resident participation in the process, and will allow for sufficient time to address policy and fiscal issues by the City Council. c. A copy of the proposed and approved budgets will be filed with the City Secretary when it is submitted to the City Council and will be available on the City’s website. 2. Adoption – Upon finalization of the budget appropriations, the City Council will hold a public hearing, and subsequently adopt by Ordinance the final budget as amended. The budget will be effective for the fiscal year beginning October 1st. The Annual Budget document will be submitted annually to the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) for evaluation and consideration for the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award. D. Balanced Budget – The goal of the City is to adopt and maintain a balanced operating budget using sustainable funding sources that are expected to continue to be available in subsequent fiscal years. Excess balances in operating funds from previous fiscal years shall remain in the fund in which they were appropriated until either such excess balances are proposed and adopted pursuant to Section III. C. Preparation of this policy; until they are used to reduce outstanding debt obligations of the City; or both. The Charter (Section 6.04) requires that an operating deficit created in any fiscal year shall be paid off and discharged during the following year. In practice, deficit has been interpreted to mean City funds as a whole. The City Council may choose from time to time to allow individual funds to have a negative balance as long as Operating Reserve requirements for the City as a whole are maintained. E. Planning – The budget process will be coordinated so that major policy issues are identified prior to the budget approval date. This will allow City Council adequate time for consideration of appropriate decisions and analysis of financial impacts. Page 98 of 174 5 FY2017 Annual Budget F. Reporting – Summary financial reports will be presented to the City Council quarterly. These reports will be in a format appropriate to enable the City Council to understand the overall budget and financial status. G. Control and Accountability – Each Director, appointed by the City Manager, will be responsible for the administration of his/her departmental budget. This includes accomplishing the Goals and Objectives adopted as part of the budget and monitoring each department budget for compliance with spending limitations. Directors may transfer funds up to $20,000 within the operations and maintenance or capital line items within a departmental budget category without additional approval. All transfers from or to the Personnel line items require approval of the Finance Director and City Manager. All other transfers of appropriation or budget amendments require either City Council or City Manager approval as outlined in Section III.H Budget Amendments and Section V.C.4 Use of Excess Salary Savings. H. Budget Amendments – The Charter (Section 6.04) provides a method to amend for budget amendments and emergency appropriations. The City Council may authorize with a majority plus one vote, an emergency expenditure as an amendment to the original budget. This may be done in cases of grave public necessity to meet an unusual and unforeseen condition that was not known at the time the budget was adopted. In practice, this has been interpreted to include revenue-related expenses within the enterprise funds and timing differences on capital improvement projects. The following criteria will be used in evaluation of budget amendments: • Is the request necessary? • Why was the item not budgeted in the normal budget process? • Why can't a transfer be done within the Division to remedy the condition? The Finance Director must certify availability of revenues or funding sources prior to adoption. The City will amend the budget at year end, if needed, for revenue based expenditures that exceeded budgeted amounts due to increased revenue and recognize any grant funded expenditures for grants received after the budget was adopted or last amended. The City will also amend the budget if necessary for any capital project timing adjustments from prior year, as well as, any other known adjustments needed and approved at that time. I. Contingency Appropriations – The budget may include contingency appropriations within designated operating department budgets. These funds are used to offset expenditures for unexpected maintenance or other unanticipated expenses that might occur during the year. Currently, the City maintains contingency appropriations for insurance deductibles, unexpected legal expenses and equipment repairs. J. Use of Unanticipated and Unappropriated General Fund Balances – Within 90 days after fiscal year end, staff will report the projected General Fund balance to Council. In the event that unexpected, unbudgeted amounts are determined to be available in the General Fund after year end, these funds may be used for any of the following purposes, as approved by the City Council: 1. to fund capital projects; 2. to fund equipment purchases in lieu of issuing debt; Page 99 of 174 6 FY2017 Annual Budget 3. to reduce outstanding City debt, including bonded indebtedness and unfunded pension liabilities; 4. to fund contingent liabilities such as the benefit payout reserve, cemetery trust fund, and similar obligations of the City; 5. to take other steps to reduce property tax rates or mitigate any future increases; 6. to hold those funds in reserve for future commitments or contingencies that may be pending, and/or; 7. to fund an Economic Uncertainty Reserve of annual General Fund operating expenditures according to Section XVI, A, 2, b, Economic Uncertainty Reserve. IV. REVENUE MANAGEMENT A. Characteristics – The City will strive for the following optimum characteristics in its revenue system: 1. Simplicity – The City, where possible and without sacrificing accuracy, will strive to keep the revenue system simple in order to reduce compliance costs for the taxpayer or service recipient. 2. Certainty – A knowledge and understanding of revenue sources increases the reliability of the revenue system. The City will understand its revenue sources and enact consistent collection policies to provide assurances that the revenue base will materialize according to budget. 3. Equity – The City shall make every effort to maintain equity in its revenue system; i.e., the City should seek to minimize or eliminate all forms of subsidization between entities, funds, services, utilities, and customer classes, and ensure an on-going return on investment for the City. a. The City will make every effort to recognize the benefit that City tax payers contribute to City programs and services. b. The annual Parks and Recreation residential membership rates are established at 75% of non- residential rates plus or minus 10% at the discretion of the Parks and Recreation Director in keeping with the targeted market cost recovery. 4. Revenue Adequacy – The City should require there be a balance in the revenue system; i.e., the revenue base will have the characteristics of fairness and neutrality as it applies to cost of service, willingness to pay, and ability to pay. Overall Operational Cost Recovery for Parks and Recreation for the Recreation and Tennis Centers is targeted to be between 50 – 60%, with some variance in individual programs. 5. Realistic and Conservative Estimates – Revenues will be estimated realistically, and conservatively, taking into account the volatile nature of various revenue streams. 6. Administration – The benefits of a revenue source should exceed the cost of levying and collecting that revenue. Page 100 of 174 7 FY2017 Annual Budget 7. Diversification and Stability – A diversified revenue system with a stable source of income shall be maintained. This will help avoid instabilities in two particular revenue sources due to factors such as fluctuations in the economy and variations in the weather. B. Other Considerations – The following considerations and issues will guide the City in its revenue policies concerning specific sources of funds: 1. Cost/Benefit of Incentives for Economic Development – The City will use due caution in the analysis of any incentives that are used to encourage development. A cost/benefit (fiscal impact) analysis will be performed as part of the evaluation. 2. Non-Recurring Revenues – One-time or non-recurring revenues should not be used to finance current ongoing operations. 3. Sustainable Revenues – “Sustainable" means revenue that is consistently available year after year, and includes revenues realized subsequent to adopted projections. 4. Property Tax Revenues – All real and business personal property located within the City will be valued at 100% of the fair market value for any given year based on the current appraisal supplied by the Williamson Central Appraisal District. Conservative budgeted revenue estimates result in a projected ninety-eight percent (98%) budgeted collection rate for current ad valorem taxes. Two percent (2%) of the current ad valorem taxes will be projected as the budget for delinquent ad valorem tax collection. For budgeting purposes, the City will forecast the proposed property tax rate using the effective maintenance & operations (M&O) rate plus the interest & sinking (I&S) rate needed to fund tax supported debt service. Increases to the M&O rate will be deliberated and determined by the City Council. 5. Interest Income – Interest earned from investments will be distributed to the funds in accordance with the equity balance of the fund from which the monies were provided to be invested. 6. User-Based Fees and Service Charges – For services associated with a user fee or charge, the direct or indirect costs of that service will be offset by a fee where possible. The City will review fees and charges no less than once every two years to ensure that fees provide adequate coverage for the cost of services. The City Council will determine how much of the cost of a service should be recovered by fees and charges. 7. Enterprise Fund Rates – The City will review and adopt utility rates as needed to generate revenues required to fully cover operating expenses, meet the legal requirements of all applicable bond covenants, and provide for an adequate level of working capital. Utility rates will be reviewed annually as part of the budget process. A rate study will be conducted every 3 years to review rate methodology and ensure revenues will meet future needs. All utility rates will be based on standardized “cost of service” methodologies. • Water Rates will recognize at least 75% of the “fixed” cost of service, including debt payments and ROI costs, within the monthly “base charge” determined by meter size. “Volumetric charge” will recognize the balance of fixed costs not included in the base rate, plus all variable costs associated with procuring and treating water. . Page 101 of 174 8 FY2017 Annual Budget • Wastewater Rates are “flat and equal” for all residential customers based on the cost of providing services. Commercial customer rates are varied depending on size and specifications of each commercial customer. • Electric Rates include 100% of fixed costs within the base rate, with all variable costs included in the kWh rate. • Stormwater Drainage Fees are based a mathematical calculation based on impervious cover and applied in compliance with State Law. A restricted Power Contract Credit Reserve has been established to provide financial assurances to the City’s wholesale power contract providers as fiscal surety against any potential risk on the City’s behalf and will be maintained as “restricted” fund balance on the City’s financial statements. A Rate Stabilization Reserve (RSR) Account has been established in the Electric Fund to offset and mitigate potential impacts to customer rates due to increased fuel costs or other external factors that may negatively impact Electric Rates. The Rate Stabilization Reserve (RSR) may provide funding for: • Deferring or minimizing the rate impact of future cost increases • Costs associated with providing additional power supply • Filling contractual obligations • Balancing of annual power costs RSR funds will be monitored monthly to ensure the electric rate is being managed per the Policy. Increases to RSR are made through the Power Cost Adjustment rate as determined by the fund, at the recommendation of the General Manager for Utilities. 8. Internal Cost Recovery Fees – Additionally, enterprise activity rates will include transfers to and receive credits from other funds as follows: a. General and Administrative Charges – Administrative costs should be charged to all funds for services of general overhead, such as administration, finance, customer billing, legal and other costs as appropriate. These charges will be determined through an indirect cost allocation following accepted practices and procedures and reviewed annually by the City’s external auditors. b. Payment for Return on Investment – The intent of this transfer is to provide a benefit to the citizens for the ownership of the various utility operations they own. For all utilities except for Electric: • In-Lieu-of-Franchise-Fee. This transfer, currently 3% of operating revenues generated inside the City, is consistent with the franchise rates charged to investor owned utilities franchised to operate within the City. • Return on Investment. The return on investment (ROI) transfer for In-City utility customers is currently calculated at 7% of operating revenues for all utilities. ROI for water and sewer Page 102 of 174 9 FY2017 Annual Budget customers outside the City is 10% of operating revenues. There is no ROI calculated on solid waste revenues. The Franchise and Return on Investment for the Electric Utility is derived from the base rate and kWh sold. The base rate revenue is multiplied by 7% for all customers. For customers inside the City, a $0.0102 charge per kWh, equivalent to the 3% and 7% paid by other utility customers, will be included in the cost per kWh. For customers outside the City, a $0.007253 charge per kWh, equivalent to the 7% ROI paid by utilities, will be included in the cost. 9. Intergovernmental Revenues – All potential grants will be examined for matching requirements and must be approved by the City Council prior to making application of the grant. It must be clearly understood that operational requirements (on-going costs) set up as a result of a grant program could be discontinued once the term and conditions of the program have been completed. 10. Revenue Monitoring – Received revenues will be regularly compared to budgeted revenues and variances will be investigated, and any abnormalities will be included in the quarterly report to the City Council. V. EXPENDITURE MANAGEMENT A. Appropriations – The point of budget control is at the department level budget for all funds. The Charter (Section 6.03) provides that any transfer of appropriation between funds must be approved by the City Council and that the City Manager, without City Council approval, is authorized to transfer appropriations among departments, within the same operational division and fund. The City Manager may also authorize transfer of salary adjustment monies between funds that are budgeted in a citywide account. B. Expenditure Monitoring – Expenditures and encumbrances will be regularly compared to budget, variances will be investigated, and any abnormalities will be included in the quarterly report to the City Council. Projected year-end expenditures will be reported in the annual budget. C. Personnel Costs – Costs related to salaries and benefits are budgeted at 100% total costs, assuming open positions are filled throughout the fiscal year. New positions that are added during the budget process may have staggered hire dates with appropriate costs reflected in the budget. 1. Vacancy Factor – General Fund appropriations Funds with Personnel Budgets greater than $4 million will include a vacancy factor equal to 1% of total General Fund fund salaries and related benefits (retirement, FICA, Medicare) to offset salary savings within the budget. The vacancy factor will be budgeted as a negative expense within the fund General Government Department of the General Fund. This factor will be reduced throughout the year as vacant positions are recognized within the department budget. Compliance Status – General Fund and Joint Services Fund FY2017 in compliance. 2. Benefit Payout Reserve – The City will establish a benefit payout reserve equal to 15% of the accrued benefit liability for employees in the General and Joint Services Funds who are currently eligible to retire. Only terminating employee benefit expenses may be paid from this reserve. This reserve shall be funded as an offset to the vacancy factor. Page 103 of 174 10 FY2017 Annual Budget Compliance Status – Benefit payout reserve FY 2017 partial compliance. 3. Position Control – The annual budget includes a set number of positions within departments when approved and adopted by City Council. Additional positions cannot be added without approval of the City Council. The City Manager may approve the transfer of authorized positions between departments if funds are available within the department. 4. Use of Excess Salary Savings – Departmental savings generated due to open positions or other salary line item savings cannot be spent by the department unless previously approved by the City Manager and validated by Finance as “excess funds.” D. Special Purpose Funding – In order to support community assistance programs, the City designates specific funding for special purposes, including Social Services, Children’s Programs, and Public Art. The City reserves the ability to cap this special purpose funding when necessitated by budget contingency or compliance issues, such as revenue shortfalls, or other reasons as determined by City Council. 1. Strategic Partnerships for Community Services – The City of Georgetown values partnerships with organizations that are committed to addressing our communities’ greatest public challenges and has identified key priorities in the following areas: • Public Safety • Transportation • Housing • Parks & Recreation • Veteran Services, and • Safety Net The City has targeted funding for these programs to be $5.00 per capita, which may be adjusted to offset the effects of general inflation based upon Consumer Price Index. If previous funding levels are higher than the targeted amount, and to avoid significant reductions in levels of funding, the City Council shall seek to attain this target chiefly through population growth. These funds will be allocated and paid according to the City Council’s guidelines for such programs. Compliance Status – FY2017 in compliance. 2. Public Art Funding – The City will annually allocate funding for Public Art on a year to year basis depending on the availability of funds in an amount to be determined at the discretion of the City Manager. Funding priority will be given to projects that include a matching donation, including contributions from local organizations and sponsors. Any unspent funds will accumulate and be reallocated in the following budget year. Disbursement of these funds will be determined by the City Council at the recommendation of the City’s Arts & Culture Advisory Board. Every effort will be made to include public art funding in future City facilities whose primary purpose is for public use. These projects will include a reasonable allowance for public art that fits the scope and purpose of the building so long that it does not negatively impact the project cost beyond the original budget. In the event there is cost savings in the construction of City Facilities, the City Council may consider utilizing that savings on the purchase of public art for the facility. Page 104 of 174 11 FY2017 Annual Budget E. Purchasing – The City will maintain and regularly review a written Purchasing Policy. All City purchases of goods or services will be made in accordance with the City’s Charter, current Purchasing Policy and with State law. The following table shows a summary of requirements for purchases of goods and services. Dollar Limits: Procurements: Requirements: Under $3,000 Under the small purchase limit No competitive bids and City credit cards may be used. $3,000 up to $49,999 Within informal bid limit A minimum of three informal competitive bids required unless exempted; Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) requirements apply in accordance with state law. $50,000 and above In excess of the informal bid limit Formal solicitations, which includes public notices, required unless exempted. Advisory board review and recommendation may be required. Council approval required. Common exemptions to the formal solicitation process include the procurement of professional services, the purchase of goods or services from a sole source provider, and purchases for public health emergencies. In addition to the above, all purchases must be approved according to preapproved limits within each department as directed and approved by the City Manager. F. Contracts and Change Orders – Contracts and related change orders must follow the City Purchasing Policies and State Law. In accordance with State Law, change orders are limited to 25% of the total contract amount. Change orders greater than $50,000 require the same advisory board review and Council approvals as the original contracts. G. Prompt Payment – All invoices approved for payment by the proper City authorities shall be paid within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of goods or services or invoice date, whichever is later in accordance with State law. The City will take advantage of all purchase discounts, when possible. H. Risk Management – The City will pursue every opportunity to provide for the Public’s and City employees’ safety and to manage its risks. The goal shall be to minimize the risk of loss of resources through liability claims with an emphasis on safety programs. I. Retirement Benefits – Proposals to revise benefits administered and provided by the Texas Municipal Retirement System shall include a written description, and, detailed and summary numerical assessments of the changes that would result from the proposed benefit revision. 1. The numerical assessments shall include the following: Page 105 of 174 12 FY2017 Annual Budget a. The estimated change to the TMRS contribution rate that would result from the proposed change in benefits, expressed as a percentage of employee pay and as an annual dollar amount to the General Fund and to each City fund. b. The estimated change to the City’s unfunded pension liability, expressed as a dollar amount. c. The estimated change to the City’s actuarial funding ratio. 2. The description and numerical assessments must be provided to the City Council at least 72 hours prior to consideration and approval, and must be read aloud to the Council prior to Council consideration. 3. The estimated changes to the City’s contribution rate and the unfunded pension liability presented pursuant to the section must be based on information provided by the TMRS actuary or by a professional actuary authorized by the TMRS to provide such information. 4. Proposals to revise TMRS benefits must be voted on individually as part of the City Council’s legislative agenda. 5. The City will amortize any unfunded actuarial liability (UAAL) over a period not to exceed the amortization period used by the TMRS actuary. The City may amortize its UAAL more quickly by making contributions to TMRS in excess of the rate specified by TMRS. 6. The City may elect to make an annual 1-time payment prior to further fund the City’s unfunded pension liability. Such payment will be approved and authorized by the City Council prior to December 31 in order to be recognized in the following year’s TMRS employer contribution rate calculation. 6. The City may elect to pay a higher contribution rate than required by the TMRS, to reduce the City’s unfunded pension liability. Such payment will be approved and authorized by the City Council as part of the City's annual budget process. J. Retirement Cost-of-Living Adjustment 1. Within 60 days of when the TMRS annual funding update becomes available each year, staff will review and prepare a summary of costs and options for potential cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) for City of Georgetown retirees. 2. Consistent with state statutes governing the Texas Municipal Retirement System, the City may provide an automatic COLA for members of the TMRS who are retired from the City of Georgetown and receiving a monthly retirement benefit from the TMRS. 3. The City Council may adjust the COLA provided to city retirees based upon the funding level of the City’s pension plan, as calculated by the TMRS, as follows: Page 106 of 174 13 FY2017 Annual Budget When the funding level of the City’s pension plan is The COLA should be Less than 70.0% Zero 70.0% to 79.9% 0.3% of CPI 80.0% to 89.9% 0.5% of CPI 90.0% and greater 0.7% of CPI 4. Adjustments made pursuant to subsection b. should reflect the effect of the prospective change in the COLA on the funding level of the City’s pension plan. K. Deferred Compensation Benefits – In addition to the retirement benefit administered by the TMRS, the City will sponsor a Deferred Compensation 457 plan, which is a supplementary individual retirement savings plan. The City will encourage employee participation in this plan. VI. STAFFING AND COMPENSATION City Council and Management recognize the importance of attracting, hiring, developing, and retaining the best people, and compensating them for the value they create. 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. The following programs are subject to available funding in the annual operating budget. A. Adequate Staffing – Staffing levels will be adequate for the fiscal functions of the City to operate effectively. Workload allocation alternatives will be explored before adding additional staff. B. Competitive Compensation – In order to maintain a competitive pay scale, the City has implemented a Competitive Employee Compensation Maintenance Program to address competitive market factors and other issues impacting compensation. The program consists of: 1. Annual Pay Plan Review – To ensure the City’s pay system is accurate and competitive within the market, the City will review its pay plans annually for any potential market adjustments necessary to maintain the City’s competitive pay plans. 2. Pay for Performance – Each year the City will fund performance based pay adjustments for regular non-public safety personnel. This merit-based program aids in retaining quality employees by rewarding their performance. Pay for Performance adjustments are based on the employee’s most recently completed performance evaluation. 3. Public Safety Steps – Each year the City will fund anniversary step increases for public safety sworn personnel consistent with public safety pay scale design. Page 107 of 174 14 FY2017 Annual Budget C. Self-Insurance Program – The City is committed to providing quality healthcare insurance that offers the most flexibility in health benefits and options to its employees. In order to provide the most cost effective solution, the City has determined that establishing a self-funded health insurance plan offers the greatest opportunity to mitigate future cost increases while offering quality health care services to its employees. The City has established a mechanism to manage the accounts and payments associated with this program. Per GASB Statement No. 66, such funding should be accounted for as an Internal Service Fund (ISF). 1. Employee Health Insurance ISF – This fund contains premium contributions from employees and budgeted health insurance contributions included in the City’s annual budget process. To maintain stable revenue to this fund, and to clearly set expenditure expectations for departments, any budgeted appropriations for employee health insurance that are unused at the end of each fiscal year will be transferred back to the self-insurance fund. 2. Self-Insurance Reserves – Annually through the budget process, staff and the City’s Health Benefit Consultant firm will evaluate and recommend to Council the appropriate funding levels for both a rate stabilization reserve as well as an incurred but not reported (IBNR) reserve. Compliance Status – Both reserves FY2017 in compliance. 3. Employee Premiums – Annual premiums will be recommended to City Council through a collaborative process between the City’s Employee Benefit Committee and external Health Benefits consulting firm using historical data and other analytic analysis. VII. FUND BALANCE POLICIES The City’s Fund Balance is the accumulated difference between assets and liabilities within governmental funds, and it allows the City to meet its contractual obligations, fund disaster or emergency costs, provide cash flow for timing purposes and fund non-recurring expenses appropriated by City Council. This policy establishes limitations on the purposes for which Fund Balances can be used in accordance with Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement Number 54. The City’s Fund Balance will report up to five components: A. Non-spendable Fund Balance – includes inherently non-spendable assets that will never convert to cash, as well as assets that will not convert to cash soon enough to affect the current financial period. Assets included in this category are prepaid items, inventory and non-financial assets held for resale. B. Restricted Fund Balance – represents the portion of fund balance that is subject to legal restrictions, such as grants or hotel/motel tax and bond proceeds. C. Committed Fund Balance – describes the portion of fund balance that is constrained by limitations that the City Council has imposed upon itself, and remains binding unless the City Council removes the limitation. D. Assigned Fund Balance – is that portion of fund balance that reflects the City’s intended use of the resource and is established in a less formal method by the City for that designated purpose. E. Unassigned Fund Balance – represents funds that cannot be properly classified in one of the other four categories. Page 108 of 174 15 FY2017 Annual Budget VIII. LONG-TERM LIABILITY RESERVES The City of Georgetown recognizes certain long-term unfunded commitments and contingencies that will require substantial funding at some point in the future. The City is committed to addressing these commitments in a fiscally prudent method by acknowledging their future financial impacts and developing strategies and designated reserve funds to mitigate those future impacts. A. The Finance Director will maintain a list of unfunded liabilities. The list will be included in the quarterly financial report to Council. IX. BUDGET CONTINGENCY PLAN This policy is designed to establish general guidelines for managing revenue shortfalls resulting from local and national economic downturns that adversely affect the City's revenue streams. A. Immediate Action – Once a budgetary shortfall is projected, the City Manager will take the necessary actions to offset any revenue shortfall with a reduction in current expenses. The City Manager may: • Freeze all new hire and vacant positions except those deemed to be a necessity. • Review all planned capital expenditures. • Delay all "non-essential" spending or equipment replacement purchases. The City Manager shall report in a timely manner to the City Council the projected shortfall and the actions taken to resolve it. B. Further Action – If the actions identified in subsection A are insufficient to offset the projected revenue deficit for the current fiscal year, the City Council may approve the following actions, in the order listed: 1. Apply unspent, unobligated surplus funds from prior fiscal years to fund one-time costs in the current fiscal year budget. 2. Authorize the use of the General Fund Economic Uncertainty Reserve pursuant to Section XVI.A.2.b. Economic Uncertainty Reserve. 3. Notwithstanding Section XVI.A.2.a. Base Level Reserve of this policy, authorize a reduction in the unobligated fund balance in the General Fund, pursuant to Section XVI.A.2.a. Base Level Reserve of this policy, from 90 to 75 days. 4. Direct other reductions in services, including workforce reductions. C. Replenish Fund Balance – As soon as practical, without placing undue strain on City services, the City Council shall increase the unobligated fund balance in the General Fund, up to the 90-day amount required in Section XVI.A.2.a. Base Level Reserve of this policy and shall restore the General Fund Economic Uncertainty Reserve as required in Section XVI.A.2.b of this policy. Page 109 of 174 16 FY2017 Annual Budget X. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) BUDGET The City’s goal is to maintain City facilities and infrastructure in order to provide excellent services to the customers within the community, meet growth related needs, and comply with all state and federal regulations. A. Preparation – The City annually updates and adopts a five-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) schedule as part of the operating budget adoption process. The plan is reviewed and adjusted annually as needed, and year one is adopted as the current year capital budget. The capital budget will include all capital projects, capital resources, and estimated operational impacts. • Needed capital improvements are identified through system models, repair and maintenance records and growth demands. • Economic development projects that have capital infrastructure needs must be reviewed and approved for funding by the City no later than March 1 to be included in the annual CIP process. Any economic development project approved for funding after March 1 will be included in the following year CIP process unless otherwise authorized by City Council. • A team approach will be used to prioritize CIP projects, whereby City staff from all operational areas provide input and ideas relating to each project and its effect on operations. • Citizen involvement and participation will be solicited in formulating the capital budget through neighborhood meetings, public hearings and other forums. • Capital infrastructure necessary to meet the requirements of the City’s Annexation Plan will be identified separately within the CIP plan, so that funding alternatives can be developed if needed. Prior to Council adoption, the following Advisory Boards will review the Capital Projects budget: Georgetown Utility Systems Advisory Board (GUS) Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board (GTAB) General Government and Finance Advisory Board (GGAF) Parks Advisory Board Electric Water Wastewater Streets Stormwater Drainage Airport Facilities Other General Government Capital Parks and Recreation B. Control – All capital project expenditures must be appropriated in the capital budget. Availability of resources must be identified and then reviewed by the Finance Division before any CIP contract is presented to the City Council for approval. Page 110 of 174 17 FY2017 Annual Budget Prior to presentation to Council, the following Advisory Boards will review: Georgetown Utility Systems Advisory Board (GUS) Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board (GTAB) General Government and Finance Advisory Board (GGAF) All utility contracts and other utility expenses greater than $50,000 All Transportation, Stormwater Drainage and Airport expenditures and contracts greater than $50,000 All General Government non-routine contracts and expenditures greater than $50,000 C. Financing Programs – Where applicable, assessments, impact fees, pro rata charges, or other fees should be used to fund capital projects which have a primary benefit to specific identifiable property owners. Recognizing that long-term debt is usually a more expensive financing method, alternative-financing sources will be explored before debt is issued. When debt is issued, it will be used to acquire major assets with expected lives equal or exceeding the average life of the debt issue. Short-term financing including Capital Leasing and other tax-supported obligations can be used to fund vehicles, computers and other operating equipment provided the impact to the tax rate is minimal. Caution should be used in replacing assets with short-term, tax-supported obligations due to the repetitive nature of the replacements. The total amount of I & S (interest and sinking) portion of the tax rate dedicated to fund short-term debt for equipment replacement will not exceed $0.04. XI. CAPITAL MAINTENANCE AND REPLACEMENT The City recognizes that deferred maintenance increases future capital costs. Therefore, a portion of all individual funds with infrastructure should be budgeted each year to maintain the quality within each system. A. Infrastructure Maintenance — On-going maintenance and major repair costs are included as capital expense within the departmental operating budgets. These costs are generally considered system repairs and are not capitalized for accounting purposes. They include such items as park and recreation facility repairs, street seal coat, water line repairs and other general system maintenance. B. Modified Approach — Pavement Condition Index (PCI) — Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement # 34 provides for an alternative approach to depreciation for measuring the value of infrastructure assets and the related costs incurred to maintain their service life at a locally established minimum standard. The City has elected to implement this modified approach in maintaining its non-enterprise fund infrastructure assets. In order to adopt this alternative method, the City has implemented an asset management system that determines if the minimum standards are being maintained. This measurement system will be updated at least every 3 years. The City has elected to use this alternative method for reporting its street infrastructure assets. Page 111 of 174 18 FY2017 Annual Budget The City uses the CarteGraph PavementView Pavement Management Information System to track the condition levels of each of the street sections. The condition of the pavement is based on the following factors: • Type of Distress • Amount of Distress • Severity of Distress • Deduct Values (function of first three) The Pavement Condition Index (PCI) is a measurement scale is based upon a condition index ranging from zero for a failed pavement to 100 for pavement with perfect condition. The condition index is used to classify pavement in the following conditions: The City’s administrative policy is to achieve an average PCI level of 85. An 85 PCI is considered maintaining the streets in a “good” condition. Staff will prepare a street maintenance budget that meets this target for Council’s consideration during the budget process. The PCI level as of 2014 was 87.30. C. Internal Service Funds Capital Maintenance & Replacement – The City currently utilizes internal service funds to maintain and replace existing assets. Assessments are made to the using funds for the use of equipment currently in use and to be purchased during the year. In this way, suitable funds are available for the purchase of operational assets without the issuance of debt. 1. Fleet Maintenance and Replacement – The City has a major investment in its fleet of cars, trucks, tractors, and other equipment. The City will anticipate replacing existing equipment, as necessary and will establish charges that are assigned to the using departments to account for the cost of that replacement. Vehicle maintenance is also allocated in this manner. 2. Technology – It is the policy of the City to plan and fund the maintenance and replacement of its computer network and other technology systems. The City currently uses a four-year replacement cycle for all desktop computers. A reserve will be established within the ISF for replacement of major systems and will be funded over time through excess revenues within the Fund. Funding for major systems assumes that 50% of the replacement cost will be debt funded.While cash funding is preferred, major IT systems and projects may require debt that is amortized over a shorter useful life appropriate for the software or hardware. Compliance Status – IT replacement reserve FY2017 in compliance. 3. Facilities Maintenance – The City has established an on-going maintenance program, which includes major repairs, equipment, as well as contracts for maintaining City facilities. The City has anticipated a useful life of such equipment and established a means of charging those costs to the various departments in order to recognize the City’s continuing costs of maintaining its facilities. Determination for facility repairs is based on useful life of the various elements of each facility. A proportional cost for each element is expensed within the budget for capital replacement. An PCI Rating 100 – 85 Good 85 – 45 Fair 45 – 0 Poor Page 112 of 174 19 FY2017 Annual Budget additional unscheduled repair reserve equal to 10% value of annual internal service funding is also budgeted. Compliance Status – Facilities repair reserve FY2017 in compliance. D. Departmental Capital Maintenance & Replacement – The City also utilizes department capital maintenance and replacement schedules for specialized assets and equipment necessary to provide services. 1. Parks and Recreation – As part of the City’s on-going maintenance program, the City also recognizes the need to regularly maintain and replace grounds, equipment and facilities that are part of the City’s Parks and Recreation system. Separate replacement and maintenance schedules will be maintained for these items including, but not limited to, playground equipment, buildings, sport courts, trees and grounds, and restroom facilities. The City’s goal is to provide level on-going funding to ensure safe, well-maintained facilities for its citizens. 2. Public Safety Equipment – As part of the City’s on-going maintenance program, the City also recognizes the need to regularly maintain and replace specialized equipment in Police and Fire. Separate replacement and maintenance schedules will be maintained for these items including but not limited to for Fire: SCBA’s and other firefighting equipment and protective gear; and for Police: bullet proof vests, armaments and other tactical equipment. The City’s goal is to provide level on- going funding to ensure proper protection for employees and citizens. E. Surplus Property 1. From time to time it is necessary to dispose of certain vehicles or equipment that have been procured with City funds and used in City services. Individual surplus property items with expected sales value in excess of $50,000 must be approved by the City Council prior to disposition. 2. City staff will maintain reports and records of all surplus property dispositions in accordance with good internal controls. XII. ACCOUNTING, AUDITING AND FINANCIAL REPORTING A. Accounting – The City is solely responsible for the recording and reporting of its financial affairs, both internally and externally. The Finance Director is responsible for establishing the structure for the City’s Chart of Accounts and for assuring that procedures are in place to properly record financial transactions and report the City’s financial position. B. General Government and Finance Advisory Board (GGAF) – The City may establish a subcommittee consisting of at least 2 City Council members and not more than 3 citizens that may meet monthly to provide additional oversight to the City’s Finance operations. This subcommittee will also review general government items that are not reviewed by another City advisory board before being presented to City Council. The City’s Finance Director will be the liaison for this subcommittee. C. Audit of Accounts – In accordance with the Charter, an independent audit of the City accounts will be performed every year. The auditor is retained by and is accountable directly to the City Council. The auditing Page 113 of 174 20 FY2017 Annual Budget firm will serve for up to 5 years, at which time, the City will re-bid these services and changing firms if deemed necessary by GGAF and City Council. D. External Reporting – Upon completion and acceptance of the annual audit by the City’s auditors, the City shall prepare a written Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) which shall be presented to the City Council within 180 calendar days of the City’s fiscal year end. The CAFR shall be prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and shall be presented annually to the Government Finance Officer Association (GFOA) for evaluation and consideration for the Certificate of Achievement in Financial Reporting. E. Internal Reporting – The Finance Department will prepare internal financial reports, sufficient to plan, monitor and control the City’s financial affairs. XIII. ASSET MANAGEMENT A. Cash Management and Investments – The City Council has formally approved a separate Investment Policy for the City of Georgetown that meets the requirements of the Public Funds Investment Act (PFIA), Section 2256 of the Texas Local Government Code. This policy is reviewed annually by the City Council and applies to all financial assets held by the City and applies to all entities (component units) included in the City’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and/or managed by the City. 1. Statement of Cash Management Philosophy – The City shall maintain a comprehensive cash management program to include the effective collection of all accounts receivable, the prompt deposit of receipts to the City’s depository, the payment of obligations, and the prudent investment of idle funds in accordance with this policy. 2. Objectives – The City’s investment program will be conducted as to accomplish the following listed in priority order: • Safety of the principal invested • Liquidity and availability of cash to pay obligations when due • Ensure public trust through responsible actions as custodians of public funds • Maximize earnings (yield) to the greatest extent possible consistent with the City’s investment policy. 3. Safekeeping and Custody – Investments may only be purchased through brokers/dealers who meet the criteria detailed in the investment policy, which also addresses internal controls related to investments. 4. Standard of Care and Reporting – Investment will be made with judgment and care, always considering the safety of principal to be invested and the probable income to be derived. The Finance Director is responsible for the overall management of the City’s investment program and ensures all investments are made in compliance with the investment policy. An investment report, providing both summary and detailed information, will be presented to the City Council quarterly. 5. Authorized Investments – The City can currently invest in the following: • Certificates of Deposit Page 114 of 174 21 FY2017 Annual Budget • U.S. Treasury and Agency securities • Investment Pools that meet the requirements of the PFIA • No-load Money Market Mutual Funds • Fully collateralized Repurchase Agreements • Obligations of Municipal Issuers in Texas rated not less than A or its equivalent • Other investments as approved by City Council and not prohibited by law. B. Fixed Assets – These assets will be reasonably safeguarded and properly accounted for, and prudently insured. 1. Capitalization Criteria – For purposes of budgeting and accounting classification, the following criteria must be met in order to be capitalized: • The asset owned by the City • The expected useful life of the asset must be longer than one year, or extend the life of an identifiable existing asset by more than one year • The original cost of the asset must be at least $5,000 • The asset must be tangible • On-going repairs and general maintenance are not capitalized. 2. New Purchases – All costs associated with bringing the asset into working order will be capitalized as part of the asset cost. This will include startup costs, engineering or consultant type fees as part of the asset cost once the decision or commitment to purchase the asset is made. The cost of land acquired should include all related costs associated with its purchase. 3. Improvements and Replacement – Improvements will be capitalized when they extend the original life of an asset or when they make the asset more valuable than it was originally. The replacement of assets components will normally be expensed unless they are a significant nature and meet all the capitalization criteria. 4. Contributed Capital – Infrastructure assets received from developers or as a result of annexation will be recorded as equity contributions when they are received. 5. Distributions Systems – All costs associated with public domain assets, such as streets and utility distribution lines will be capitalized in accordance with the capitalization policy. Costs should include engineering, construction and other related costs including right of way acquisition. 6. Reporting and Inventory – The Finance Division will maintain the permanent records of the City’s fixed assets, including description, cost, department of responsibility, date of acquisition, depreciation and expected useful life. Periodically, random sampling at the department level will be performed to inventory fixed assets assigned to that department. Responsibility for safeguarding the City’s fixed assets lies with the department supervisor or manager whose department has been assigned the asset. Page 115 of 174 22 FY2017 Annual Budget XIV. DEBT MANAGEMENT The City of Georgetown recognizes the primary purpose of capital facilities is to provide services to the community. Using debt financing to meet the capital needs of the community must be evaluated according to efficiency and equity. Efficiency must be evaluated to determine the highest rate of return for a given investment of resources. Equity is resolved by determining who should pay for the cost of capital improvements. In meeting demand for additional services, the City will strive to balance the needs between debt financing and “pay as you go” methods. The City realizes that failure to meet the demands of growth may inhibit its continued economic viability, but also realizes that too much debt may have detrimental effects on the City’s long-range financial condition. The City will issue debt only for the purpose of acquiring or constructing capital assets for the general benefit of its citizens and to allow it to fulfill its various purposes as a city. A Debt Condition Update report will be provided annually. A. Usage of Debt – Long-term debt financing will be considered for non-continuous capital improvements of which future citizens will be benefited. Alternatives for financing will be explored prior to debt issuance and include, but not limited to: • Grants • Use of Reserve Funds • Use of Current Revenues • Contributions from developers and others • Leases • Impact Fees. When the City utilizes long-term financing, it will ensure that the debt is soundly financed by conservatively projecting revenue sources that will be used to pay the debt. It will not finance the improvement over a period greater than the useful life of the improvement and it will determine that the cost benefit of the improvement, including interest costs, is positive to the community. The City may utilize the benefits of short-term debt financing to purchase operating equipment provided the debt doesn’t extend past the useful life of the asset and the potential impact to the tax rate is within policy guidelines. The I & S (interest and sinking) portion of the tax rate cannot exceed $0.04 for short- term debt (3-10 years). B. Types of Debt 1. General Obligation Bonds (GO’s) – General obligation bonds must be authorized by a vote of the citizens of Georgetown. They are used only to fund capital assets of the general government and are not to be used to fund operating needs of the City. The City’s ad valorem taxing authority backs general obligation bonds. Conditions for issuance of general obligation debt include: • When the project will have a significant impact on the tax rate; • When the project may be controversial even though it is routine in nature; or Page 116 of 174 23 FY2017 Annual Budget • When the project falls outside the normal bounds of projects the City has typically done. For debt programs that include multiple projects that will be issued over multiple years at the discretion of the City Council, the City may approve a Contract with the Voters to manage future property tax rate impacts. The Contract with the Voters will be included in educational information for all applicable GO Bond elections, and will include a maximum annual tax rate increase and a cumulative total per bond authorization maximum tax rate increase. The City will include these impacts in its annual Debt Condition report. The City Council will carefully manage the unissued GO Bond authorization through annual review of related projects to ensure full disclosure on future timing of projects included in the bond package. Timing of authorized projects and related bond issuance will be included in the Annual Budget and published on the City’s website. Any changes to this schedule require specific Council authorization. 2. Revenue Bonds – Revenue bonds will be issued to provide for the capital needs of any activities where the capital requirements are necessary for the continuation or expansion of a service. The improved activity shall produce a revenue stream to fund the debt service requirements of the necessary improvement to provide service expansion. The average life of the obligation should not exceed the useful life of the asset(s) to be funded by the bond issue, and will generally be limited to no more than twenty (20) years. An exception can be made for plant expansions or related system expansions whose useful life is in excess of 30 years. A cost benefit analysis will be done to fully disclose the impacts of extending debt beyond 20 years. 3. Certificates of Obligation, Contract Obligations (CO’s) – Certificates of obligation or contract obligations may be used to fund capital requirements that are not otherwise funded by general obligation or revenue bonds. Debt service for CO’s may be either from general revenues (tax- supported) or supported by a specific revenue stream(s) or a combination of both. Typically, the City may issue CO’s when the following conditions are met: • When the proposed debt will have minimal impact on future effective property tax rates; • When the projects to be funded are within the normal bounds of City capital requirements, such as for roads, parks, various infrastructure and City facilities and equipment; and • When the average life of the obligation does not exceed the useful life of the asset(s) to be funded by the issue. Certificates of obligation will be the least preferred method of financing and will be used with prudent care and judgment by the City Council. Every effort will be made to ensure public participation in decisions relating to debt financing. 4. Self-supporting General Obligation Debt – Refers to certificates of obligation issued for a specific purpose and repaid through dedicated revenues other than ad valorem taxes. The annual debt requirements are not included in the property tax calculation. Both the Airport and Stormwater Drainage funds will issue this type of debt. In addition, the Electric and Water Services Funds can utilize this method of funding non-system capital assets. The City also issues debt on behalf of the Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation (GTEC) and the Georgetown Economic Page 117 of 174 24 FY2017 Annual Budget Development Corporation (GEDCO) whom then pledge 4A and 4B sales tax revenue for the repayment of that debt. 5. Internal borrowing between City Funds – The City can authorize use of existing long-term reserves as “loans” between funds. The borrowing fund will repay the loan at a rate consistent with current market conditions. The loan will be repaid within ten (10) years. The loan will be considered an investment of working capital reserves by the lending fund. 6. Other Short-term Borrowing – The City may authorize the issuance of Public Property Finance Contractual Obligations (PPFCO) which is short-term obligations for the acquisition of personal public property, such as equipment. PPFCOs are payable from either ad valorem taxes or another dedicated revenue stream. Each issuance will be assessed to ensure cost effectiveness and the repayment schedule will not exceed the useful life of the asset. Multiple equipment acquisitions can be grouped in a single PPFCO issue in order to develop economies of scale. C. Method of Sale – The City will use a competitive bidding process in the sale of bonds unless conditions in the bond market or the nature of the issue warrant a negotiated bid. In such situations, the City will publicly present the reasons for the negotiated sale. The City will rely on the recommendation of the financial advisor in the selection of the underwriter or direct purchaser. The financial advisor must meet all licensing requirements and comply with all Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB) regulations. The City’s financial advisor will not act as the underwriter on any City bond issue. D. Disclosure – Full disclosure of operating costs along with capital costs will be made to the bond rating agencies and other users of financial information. The City staff, with assistance of the financial advisor and bond counsel, will prepare the necessary materials for presentation to the rating agencies and will aid in the production of the Preliminary Official Statements. The City will take responsibility for the accuracy of all financial information released. E. Federal Requirements – The City will maintain written procedures to follow post issuance compliance rules, arbitrage rebate and other Federal requirements. • Post issuance tax compliance rules will include records retention, arbitrage rebate, use of proceeds, and • Continuing disclosure requirements under SEC Rule 15c2-12, MSRB standards, or as may be required by bond covenants or related agreements. F. Debt Structuring – The City will issue bonds with an average life of twenty (20) years or less, not to exceed the useful life of the asset acquired. The structure should approximate level debt service unless operational matters dictate otherwise. Market factors, such as the effects of tax-exempt designations, the cost of early redemption options and the like, will be given consideration during the structuring of long term debt instruments. Exceptions to the 20 year average life include debt issues for major system expansions, such as water, sewer or electric plants, in which case the City may issue debt greater than 20 years since the average life of the asset exceeds 30 years. A cost benefit analysis indicating the impacts of extending debt beyond 20 years will be completed. G. Debt Coverage Ratio – Refers to the number of times the current combined debt service requirements or payments would be covered by the current operating revenues net of on-going operating expenses of the City’s combined utilities (Electric, Water, and Wastewater). The City will maintain a minimum debt service Page 118 of 174 25 FY2017 Annual Budget coverage ratio of 1.5 times for these utilities as a whole. The bond ordinances allow the City to forego a debt reserve fund for its utility debt if the coverage is maintained at 1.35 times or better. A coverage ratio of 1.5 times will also be required for all funds issuing self-supporting debt. Compliance Status – Debt coverage ratio FY2017 in compliance. H. Bond Reimbursement Resolutions – The City may utilize bond reimbursements as a tool to manage its debt issues, due to arbitrage requirements and project timing. In so doing, the City uses its capital reserve "cash" to delay bond issues until such time when issuance is favorable and beneficial to the City. The City Council may authorize a bond reimbursement resolution for General Capital projects that have a direct impact on the City's ad valorem tax rate when the bonds will be issued within the term of the existing City Council. In the event of unexpected circumstances that delay the timing of projects, or market conditions that prohibit financially sound debt issuance, the approved project can be postponed and considered by a future council until circumstantial issues can be resolved. The City Council may also authorize revenue bond reimbursements for approved utility and other self- supporting capital projects within legislative limits. Currently revenue bonds must be issued within 18 months after an eligible bond funded project is begun. The total outstanding bond reimbursements may not exceed the total amount of the City’s reserve funds. XV. OTHER FUNDING ALTERNATIVES When at all possible, the City will research alternative funding opportunities prior to issuing debt or increasing user-related fees. A. Grants – All potential grants will be examined for any matching requirements and the source of those requirements identified. A grant funding worksheet, reviewed by Finance, that clearly identifies funding sources, outcomes and other relevant information will be presented and approved by the City Council prior to any grant application being submitted. It must be clearly understood that any resulting operation requirements of the grant could be discontinued once the term and conditions of the project have been terminated. The City Council must authorize acceptance of any grant funding. B. Use of Reserve Funds – The City may authorize the use of reserve funds to potentially delay or eliminate a proposed bond issue. This may occur due to higher than anticipated fund balances in prior years, thus eliminating or reducing the need for debt proceeds, or postpone a bond issue until market conditions are more beneficial or timing of the related capital improvements does not correspond with the planned bond issue. Reserve funds used in this manner are replenished upon issuance of the proposed debt. C. Developer Contributions – The City will require developers who negatively impact the City's utility capital plans offset those impacts. These policies are further defined within the City's utility line extension policy and other development regulations. D. Leases – The City may authorize the use of lease financing for certain operating equipment when it is determined that the cost benefit of such an arrangement is advantageous to the City. Page 119 of 174 26 FY2017 Annual Budget E. Impact Fees – The City will impose impact fees as allowable under state law for both water and wastewater services. These fees will be calculated in accordance with statute and reviewed at least every three years. All fees collected will fund projects identified within the Fee study and as required by state laws. XVI. FINANCIAL CONDITIONS, RESERVES, AND STABILITY RATIOS The City of Georgetown will maintain budgeted minimum reserves in the ending working capital/fund balances to provide a secure, healthy financial base for the City in the event of a natural disaster or other emergency, allow stability of City operations should revenues fall short of budgeted projections and provide available resources to implement budgeted expenditures without regard to actual timing of cash flows into the City. A. Operational Coverage – The City’s goal is to maintain operations coverage of 1.0 (one), such that operating revenues will at least equal or exceed current operating expenditures. Deferrals, short-term loans, or one- time sources will be avoided as budget balancing techniques. Reserves will be used only for emergencies or non-recurring expenditures, except when balances can be reduced because their levels exceed guideline minimums as stated below. 1. Operating Reserves – The City will maintain reserves at a minimum of seventy-five (75) days (20.83%) of net budgeted operating expenditures. Net budgeted operating expenditure is defined as total budgeted expenditures less interfund transfers and charges, general debt service (tax supported), direct cost for purchased power and payments from third party grant monies. The amount of these funds are allocated within the following operating funds and using the following guidelines to maintain the fund balance, working capital and retained earnings (reserves) of the various operating funds at levels sufficient to protect the City’s creditworthiness, as well as, its financial position from unforeseeable emergencies. Compliance Status – Total reserves FY2017 in compliance. 2. General Fund – The fund balance reserve in the General Fund should equal ninety (90) days or 25% of annual budgeted General Fund operating expenditures. Reserves are allocated as follows: a. Base Level Reserve – will equal ninety (90) days of current year budgeted operating expenditures which will be designated for emergency use only. If the Base Level Reserve is used during the fiscal year, the balance must return to the ninety (90) day requirement within the following fiscal year’s adopted budget. Compliance Status – General Fund Reserve FY2017 in compliance. b. Economic Uncertainty Reserve – will equal up to 6% of current year budgeted operating expenditures. The reserve will be designated to temporarily offset a decline in any General Fund revenue source during the current fiscal year or in planning the future budget year. The reserve may be used when growth in any General Fund revenue source from one fiscal year to the next is below zero. The reserve will be available to support only existing programs approved in a prior fiscal year. Used funds shall be restored up to the 6% reserve as soon as practical. 3. Tourism Fund – A minimum sixty days (60) or 16.67% of operating expenditures will be reserved within the fund balance. These funds are designated to be used to offset any potential revenue shortfall that occurs during the fiscal year and should be replenished in the following fiscal year’s budget. Page 120 of 174 27 FY2017 Annual Budget Compliance Status – Tourism Fund Reserve FY2017 in compliance. 4. Water Services Fund – Working capital reserves should be 25% or ninety (90) days of operating expenses, net debt service and long-term water contract costs. These reserves are designated to be used to offset potential revenue shortfalls or fund unexpected or emergency expenses that occur during the fiscal year. These reserves should be replenished in the following budget cycle. Compliance Status – Water Fund Reserve FY2017 in compliance. 5. Stormwater Drainage Fund – $250,000 for unforeseen emergencies or other potential revenue shortfalls. Compliance Status – Stormwater Fund Reserve FY2017 in compliance. 6. Electric Fund – The remaining balance to meet the citywide requirement of seventy-five (75) days of reserve funds will be maintained within this fund. It can be used for unforeseen emergencies and expenditures. The Rate Stabilization Account and the Power Contract Credit Reserve are not included in this Contingency Reserve. Compliance Status – Electric Fund Reserve FY2017 in compliance. For all other non-enterprise funds, the fund balance is an indication of the balance of each particular fund at a specific time. The ultimate goal of each such fund is to have expended the fund balance at the conclusion of the activity for which the fund was established. Reserve requirements will be calculated as part of the annual budget process and any additional required funds to be added to the reserve balances will be appropriated within the budget. Funds in excess of the minimum reserves within each fund may be expended for City purposes at the will of the City Council once it has been determined that use of the excess will not endanger reserve requirements in future years. This action requires an amendment to the City’s Annual Budget and is outlined in Section III. J. Use of Unanticipated and Unappropriated General Fund Balances. B. Liabilities and Receivables – Procedures will be followed to maximize discounts and reduce penalties offered by creditors. Current liabilities will be paid within 30 days of receiving the invoice. Accounts Receivable procedures will target collection for a maximum of 30 days of service. The Finance Director is authorized to write-off non-collectible, non-utility accounts that are delinquent for more than 180 days, and utility accounts delinquent more than 180 days, provided proper delinquency procedures have been followed, and include this information in the annual report to the City Council. C. Capital Project Funds – Every effort will be made for all monies within the Capital Project Funds to be expended in a timely manner preferably within thirty-six (36) months of receipt. The fund balance will be invested and income generated will offset increases in construction costs or other costs associated with the project. Capital project funds are intended to be expended totally, with any unexpected excess to be transferred to the Debt Service fund to service project-related debt service. Page 121 of 174 28 FY2017 Annual Budget D. General Debt Service Funds – Revenues within this fund are stable, based on property tax revenues. Balances are maintained to meet contingencies and to make certain that the next year’s debt service payments may be met in a timely manner. Fund balance should not fall below 45 days annual debt service requirements, in accordance with IRS guidelines. E. Investment of Reserve Funds – The reserve funds will be invested in accordance with the City’s investment policy. Existing non-cash investment would be exempt through retirement of the investment. F. Ratios/Trend Analysis – Ratios and significant balances will be incorporated into both the mid-year and annual reports to the City Council. This information will provide users with meaningful data to identify major trends of the City's financial condition through analytical procedures. The following ratios/balances will be used as key financial indicators: • Fund Balance/Equity: Assets - liabilities FB/E AL (Acceptable level) minimum reserve requirement • Working Capital: Current assets less current liabilities CA - CL AL minimum reserve requirement • Current Ratio: Current assets divided by current liabilities CA/CL AL > 1.00 • Quick Ratio: "Liquid" current assets divided by current liabilities Liquid CA/CL AL > 1.00 • Debt/Assessed AV Taxes : Debt divided by assessed Ad Valorem value D/AV AL < 5 • Debt Ratio: Current liabilities plus long-term liabilities divided by total assets CL +LTL/TA AL < 1 • Enterprise Operating Coverage: Operating revenue divided by operating expense OR/OE AL > 1.25 • Times Coverage Ratio: Operating revenue less operating expense divided by annual debt service (OR-OE)/DSV AL > 1.5 The City will be to develop minimum/maximum levels for the above ratios/balances through analyzing of City historical trends and future projections. These ratios will also be compared to other similar or regional municipalities for further analysis. XVII. INTERNAL CONTROLS A. Written Procedures – Wherever possible, written procedures will be established and maintained by the Finance Director for all functions involving cash handling and/or accounting throughout the City. These procedures will embrace the general concepts of fiscal responsibility set forth in this policy statement. Page 122 of 174 29 FY2017 Annual Budget B. Internal Audit Program – An internal audit program will be maintained by the Finance Director to ensure compliance with City policies and procedures and to prevent the potential for fraud. 1. Departmental Audits – departmental processes will be reviewed to ensure dual control of City assets and identify the opportunity for fraud potential, as well as, to ensure that departmental internal procedures are documented and updated as needed. 2. Employees or Transaction Review – Programs to be audited include Petty Cash, City Credit Card accounts, time entry, and travel. All discrepancies will be identified, and the employee’s Director will be notified. The City Manager will also be notified depending on the seriousness of the infraction. 3. The Finance Director and City Manager will present an annual audit plan to the General Government and Finance board. Results of all internal audits will be provided to the GGAF and City Council at year-end. C. Directors Responsibility – Each Director is responsible for ensuring that good internal controls are followed throughout their department, that all Finance Division directives are implemented and that all independent auditor internal control recommendations are addressed. Departments will develop and periodically update written internal control procedures. Page 123 of 174 Resolution Number: ___________________ Page 1 of 2 Fiscal and Budgetary Policy Amendment Date Approved: ______________________ RESOLUTION NO. _______________________ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, FORMALLY ADOPTING THE FISCAL AND BUDGETARY POLICY EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 13, 2016. WHEREAS, the City Council developed a Fiscal and Budgetary Policy and was adopted by City Council action in 2001; and WHEREAS, the Fiscal and Budgetary Policy has been reviewed and adopted each year since 2001 by such Council action; and WHEREAS, this Policy is used to guide the City’s financial operations; and WHEREAS, the City’s Annual Budget is prepared in accordance with this policy; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and approved the amended Fiscal and Budgetary Policy for Fiscal Year 2016-2017; and WHEREAS, the City Council has deemed this Policy to be in effect. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1. The facts and recitations contained in the preamble of this resolution are hereby found and declared to be true and correct, and are incorporated by reference herein and expressly made a part hereof, as if copied verbatim. The City Council hereby finds that this ordinance complies with the Vision Statement of the City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 2. The City Council approves the Fiscal and Budgetary Policy as illustrated in Exhibit A. SECTION 3. In the event any section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase, provision sentence or part of this resolution or the application of same to any person or circumstance shall for any reason be adjudged invalid or held unconstitutional, by a court of competent jurisdiction, it shall not affect, impair, or invalidate the remainder of this ordinance which shall be given full force and effect. SECTION 4: This resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption. Page 124 of 174 Resolution Number: ___________________ Page 2 of 2 Fiscal and Budgetary Policy Amendment Date Approved: ______________________ RESOLVED this 13th day of December 2016. ATTEST: THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: Shelley Nowling, City Secretary By: Dale Ross, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________ Charles McNabb, City Attorney Page 125 of 174 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop December 13, 2016 SUBJECT: Review of the City’s Investment Policy and discussio n of reco mmended changes fo r 20 17 -- Leigh Wallace, Finance Director ITEM SUMMARY: The purpo se of the Investment Policy (Po lic y) is to pro vide the framewo rk for 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 Go vernment and Finance (GGAF) Bo ard reco mmended the policies to Council at the meeting November 3 0, 2016. FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A SUBMITTED BY: Leigh Wallace, Finance Director - SP ATTACHMENT S: Description Overview Inves tment Polic y FY 2017 Investment Polic y FY 2017 Tracked Changes Investment Polic y Res olution Page 126 of 174 FY2017 Annual Budget GGAF November 30, 2016 City Council December 13, 2016 Investment Policies 2017 1Page 127 of 174 FY2017 Annual Budget Purpose •The Investment Policy sets the objectives and rules for investing the City’s available cash and reserves •The Policy follows all of the rules in the Public Funds Investment Act and is recommended by the Investment Advisors •Council required to review the policy annually •Last reviewed April 2016 •Updated training requirements of investment officers •Updated list of approved broker/dealers 2Page 128 of 174 FY2017 Annual Budget Administrative Changes (Document what we’re already doing in practice) •Officially document investment procedures and internal controls •Explicitly state all transactions will be through a competitive process with minimum 3 bids •Align policy language more closely with Public Funds Investment Act •Training requirement for Investment Officers •All investments must be of highest quality •City Council approves list of brokers/dealers 3Page 129 of 174 FY2017 Annual Budget Substantive Changes •Resolve conflicting language on maximum length of investments •operating funds, contingency reserves, bond proceeds •Single maturity may not exceed 3 years •Changes to approved list of Broker/Dealers •Add Hilltop Securities •Add MultiBank Securities •Add Wells Fargo Securities •Add FTN Financial Capital Markets •Remove Coastal Securities •Remove JPMorganChase Securities •Remove UBS Paine Webber 4Page 130 of 174 City of Georgetown Investment Policy Page 1 CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS INVESTMENT POLICY As amended April 26, 2016December 13, 2016 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 131 of 174 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 (Ii) of the Texas Government Code. 2.3 DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY The Finance Director 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 their 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 (a) of the Texas Government Code. and ensure that any staff executing transactions covered by this Policy attend the required training. The investment training shall be attended within twelve (12) months of attaining the position and receive not less than ten (10) hours, and thereafter, not less than once in 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 and receive not less than 8 hours of instruction 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, Page 132 of 174 City of Georgetown Investment Policy Page 3 diversification of investment portfolios, and compliance with the Public Funds Investment Act. The Ttraining must be sponsored by any of the following organizations is approved: Texas Municipal League 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 by State or local laws as provided above, 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 fFunds will be invested in a manner suitable for funds requiring a high degree of liquidityto 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., and aAll 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. Involuntary liquidation of Operating Fund investments is unlikely due to their short term natureOperating Funds will remain sufficiently liquid to enable the City to meet operating requirements that may be reasonably anticipated. If utilized, However, should a liquidation of investments prior to maturity be necessary, their short term nature will make material losses unlikelysecurities with active and efficient secondary markets are necessary in the event of unanticipated cash requirements. Operating Funds’ investments maturities will be diverse staggered based on the City’s anticipated operating needs, and the investments may include financial institution deposits, U.S. treasuries and agencies, 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 maturityInvoluntary liquidation of Contingency Reserve investments is unlikely due to their nature. However, should a liquidation of investments prior to maturity be necessary, the comparatively longer term nature of some of the investments could result in material losses depending on financial and economic conditions. Contingency Reserves’ investments maturities will be diverse to cover possible operating shortfalls, and the investments may include financial institution deposits, U.S. treasuries and agencies, investment pools, and money market mutual Page 133 of 174 City of Georgetown Investment Policy Page 4 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 rReserves 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. 3.3.2 Interest & Sinking (or debt service funds). Interest and sSinking 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 sSinking fund investments maturities will be diverse 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, 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 weighted average maturity in excess of one year, with no single security greater than 24 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. Involuntary liquidation of investment is highly unlikely due to the project- specific nature of these funds. 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 investments 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, 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 ALLOW ABLE AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS City funds may be invested in the following instrumentsauthorized 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 in aor in any other manner and amount provided by law for Page 134 of 174 City of Georgetown Investment Policy Page 5 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 full faith and credit of the United States. 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 money market mutual funds if the fund: a. Is regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission; b. Marks its portfolio to market daily; c. Includes in its investment objectives the maintenance of a stable net asset value of $1 for each share; d. 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 this StateTexas; 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 This StateTexas and or its agencies or and instrumentalities; and Page 135 of 174 City of Georgetown Investment Policy Page 6 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. 4.1.7. Other Investments. Other investments as approved by the City Council and not prohibited by law. Investment 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 status to determine whether it is in the best interest of the City to hold or liquidate the security. 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 PFIAPublic 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. Such account(s) will earn interest at the highest rate(s) provided in the respective depository contract(s). 4.5 LENGTH OF INVESTMENTS The following general constraints will apply unless further restricted by the strategies in Section 3 of this Policy. Maturities exceeding 36 months will require authorization by the City Manager, with no single maturity greater than 60 months. Maturities will be staggered to avoid undue concentration of assets in a specific maturity sector and maturities selected will provide for stability of income and reasonable liquidity. 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 Investment OfficersCity Council will, maintain at least annually, review, revise, and adopt a list of broker/dealers who are authorized to provide investment servicesengage in investment transactions with the City. The list is approved and included in Attachment “A” of this Policy. Page 136 of 174 City of Georgetown Investment Policy Page 7 Before engaging in investment transactions with a financial institution, broker/dealer, Investment Pool, or Money Market Mutual Fund, the Investment Officers will have received from said firm a signed Certification Form. This form will attest that the individual responsible for the City’s account with that firm has received and reviewed the City’s Investment Policy and that the 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 firm. The letter must be signed by a qQualified rRepresentative as defined by the Public Funds Investment ActSection 2256.002, of the Texas Government Code. “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: (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; (3) 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 (4) for an 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. On investments, the Investment Officers will solicit competitive quotes. Where appropriate, at least two three (23) 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 Page 137 of 174 City of Georgetown Investment Policy Page 8 Journal or Bloomberg. Market value may also be determined through the City’s investment software application, which uses industry standard publications/sources for its market data. 5.4 SAFEKEEPING All securities purchased by the City under this Policy must be designated as assets of the City, must be conducted 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 C.D.’s) must be collateralized or enhanced in compliance with the Texas Public Funds 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 of the deposit (includingplus 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 depository 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 to 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 in by an independent, third party bank 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 safekeeping bankcustodian(s) will operate in accordance with an acceptable master safekeepingcustodial 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 Page 138 of 174 City of Georgetown Investment Policy Page 9 6.1 QUARTERLY REPORTING The Investment Officers shall prepare 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 the 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, accrued interest 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 quarterly reporting, the annual report will include a review of the activities and return for the twelve months, suggest Policy revisions and improvements that might enhance the investment program, and include an investment plan for the ensuing fiscal year. 6.3 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS In order to evaluate portfolio performance of funds subject to this Policy, the City 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 and make amendments as necessary. The Council will review the Policy as part of the annual investment report presented by staff.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 139 of 174 City of Georgetown Investment Policy Page 10 CITY OF GEORGETOWN INVESTMENT POLICY Attachment “A” Approved Broker/Dealer List Bonwick CapitalCantor Fitzgerald Coastal Securities FTN Financial Capital Markets Duncan Williams JPMorgan Chase Securities Hilltop Securities Multi-Bank Securities Raymond James Rice Financial UBS Paine Webber, Inc.Wells Fargo Securities These broker/dealers meet the City’s Investment Policy requirements. Page 140 of 174 Resolution Number: ___________________________ Page 1 of 1 Description: Investment Policy Date Approved: December 13, 2016 RESOLUTION NO. ____________ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, AMENDING THE EXISTING CITY OF GEORGETOWN INVESTMENT POLICY EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 13, 2016. WHEREAS, the goal of the City of Georgetown is to implement an investment policy that utilizes all current municipal investment practices, while ensuring the safety and availability of all funds entrusted to the City in compliance with state federal, state and local laws; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Georgetown has reviewed the investment policy; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Georgetown wishes to amend its Investment Policy (as last amended April 26, 2016); and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1. The facts and recitations contained in the preamble of this resolution are hereby found and declared to be true and correct, and are incorporated by reference herein and expressly made a part hereof, as if copied verbatim. The enactment of this resolution is not inconsistent or in conflict with any 2030 Plan Policies. SECTION 2. The Investment Policy attached as Exhibit “A” is hereby adopted by the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas. SECTION 3. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption. RESOLVED this 13th day of December 2016. ATTEST: THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: Shelley Nowling By: Dale Ross City Secretary Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Charles McNabb City Attorney Page 141 of 174 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop December 13, 2016 SUBJECT: Discussion and possible direction on Emergency Management planning process, grant(s), and Office of Emergency Management (OEM) develo pment -- Chad Berg, Emergency Management Coordinato r ITEM SUMMARY: The purpose of this workshop item is to review recent changes to the Office of Emergency Management and discuss upcoming proje c ts that require Council direction/appro val. These items include: 1. Review roles and respo nsibilities in Emergency Management 2. Update and approve the City's Emergency Ope ratio ns Plan 3. Update and approve COG Ordinance Chapter 2 .76 on Emergency Management 4. Submit a grant fo r Emergency Management Prepare dness Grant (EMPG) funds 5. Expand City of Geo rgeto wn's role with the Emergency Medical Task Force (EMTF) FINANCIAL IMPACT: Discussion only SUBMITTED BY: Chad Berg, Emergency Managment Coordinator ATTACHMENT S: Description E/M Presentation Page 142 of 174 Office of Emergency Management / Homeland Security Page 143 of 174 What is Emergency Management? Page 144 of 174 Vision Building a safer future through effective partnerships of local government, emergency services, private sector, and volunteer agencies and the citizens of Georgetown to save lives, protect property and reduce the effects of disasters through preparedness, prevention, planning, response, and recovery activities . Mission The Office of Emergency Management (OEM) coordinates the Georgetown emergency management program to prepare, prevent, plan, respond and recover from all-hazard events. The OEM develops, maintains and implements the ability to direct, control, manage and coordinate emergency operations in cooperation with local, State and Federal governmental and private sector agencies. Page 145 of 174 Terminology •Hazard-A dangerous event or circumstance that has the potential to lead to an emergency or disaster. •Emergency-A dangerous event that normally can be managed at the local level. •Disaster-A dangerous event that causes significant human and economic loss and demands a crisis response beyond the scope of local and state resources. •Emergency Management-Organized analysis, planning, decision- making, and assignment of available resources to mitigate, prepare for, respond to, and recover from the effects of all hazards. Page 146 of 174 The Emergency Management Cycle Page 147 of 174 Government Code 418 This Government Code assigns responsibility for dealing with disasters to the Mayor for the local jurisdiction •The Mayor of a local government has the responsibility for directing emergency management programs in their jurisdictions through coordination with subject matter experts. •Mayor can declare a local state of emergency or disaster •Expected to utilize jurisdictional resources first, but then once local resources are exhausted can request state assistance •May order the evacuation of all or part of the population from an area under their authority •May limit egress back to the disaster area Page 148 of 174 Local Government Responsibilities Local governments are responsible for their emergency management programs, to include: •Conduct comprehensive emergency planning •Training emergency responders , city staff and city officials •Conducting drills & exercises •Providing emergency facilities & equipment, with good communications & power; establishing EOC facilities •Developing mutual aid agreements •Responding to emergencies •Providing emergency public education Page 149 of 174 Current Emergency Management Work Plan •Collaboration Among Entities •Partner with State, Regional, County, Local Governments •Create Public / Private Partnerships •Chamber of Commerce •Work with Civic Groups, Churches, Non-Profits •Collaboration with the Sun City Emergency Management Committee •Hazard Vulnerability Analysis for the City of Georgetown •Review and Revise the Approved Hazard Mitigation Action Plan •Local Emergency Operations Plan •Review and Revise Existing Emergency Operations Plan •Check Federal and State Compliance •Develop Regional and County Coordination •Ensure Local Validity •Develop Standard Operations for Emergency Operations Center •Adopted Throughout Williamson CountyPage 150 of 174 Current Emergency Management Work Plan •Emergency Public Education Program •Coordinate with National Ready.gov Program •Develop Community Specific Program •Implement Throughout Community •Community Preparedness Programs •WarnCentralTexas.org •Outdoor Emergency Warning Siren System •Smart911 •PulsePoint •Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) •Hazard Mitigation Programs •Develop 5 year Plan •Emergency Planning •Employee Training •Simulated Exercises Page 151 of 174 Next Steps / January 2017 •City Ordinance for Emergency Management •Ratify the ordinance to reflect the desired progressions for Georgetown Emergency Management •Georgetown Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) •Approval of the updated Emergency Operations Plan that meets current standards •Emergency Management Performance Grant (EMPG) •Application to the Texas Division of Emergency Management for the EMPG •The purpose of the Emergency Management Performance Grant (EMPG) Program is to provide Federal funds to states to assist state, local, territorial, and tribal governments in preparing for all hazards. •The EMPG will reimburse Emergency Management expenses up to 50% of the total cost on projects, salaries and expenses Page 152 of 174 Texas EMTF •Requesting involvement in the Emergency Medical Task Force (EMTF) Program through a Memorandum of Understanding with the State of Texas •The Texas Emergency Medical Task Force (TXEMTF) is a State and Federally (TXDSHS, ASPR) funded program with the mission of creating State-deployable medical teams, regionalized for rapid mobilization and readiness. •Provides a network of support for the greater Georgetown area •Provides an advanced level of training to staff concerning disaster operations •Equips the City of Georgetown with emergency response assets Page 153 of 174 Summary •The Mayor of a local government has the responsibility for directing emergency management programs in their jurisdictions. •An effective local emergency management program addresses mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery •Preparedness is vital to a successful emergency management program •Georgetown OEM actions for FY17 include: •Collaboration among the public sector, private sector and civic organizations •Emergency Planning •Training / educating the employees and citizens •Conducting emergency exercises •Development of a Comprehensive ProgramPage 154 of 174 Are you Ready? Chad Berg Emergency Management Coordinator Georgetown Office of Emergency Management / Homeland Security Office –512-930-3621 Chad.Berg@Georgetown.org Page 155 of 174 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop December 13, 2016 SUBJECT: P resentation and disc ussio n regarding the Georgetown P olice Department’s CommUNITY Pro gram -- Wayne Nero, Chief of P olice ITEM SUMMARY: In light of ongoing national conversations regarding public trust and policing, the Ge orgetown Police Department has been fo c used on opportunities for community engagement. Through internal dialo gue the department has created CommUNITY. CommUNITY is a strategic framework for the Ge orgetown Po lic e Departme nt’s Community Engageme nt P lan. The co nc ept is a creative play on the wo rd “c ommunity”, plac ing particular emphasis on the wo rd “unity” contained within. The po lice department has identified seven major stakeho lder gro ups in which the department will work strategically and intentionally with in o rde r to forge stronger re lationships, meet and exceed stakeholder policing needs and expectatio ns, and strengthen public trust and legitimacy. The seven stakeho lder gro ups the police department will be focused on include: 1. Neighbo rhoo ds (micro-communities) 2. Youth 3. Business Community 4. Elderly 5. Churches 6. Non-go vernmental Organizations (Social Se rvices) 7. Media The pro gram will further po sition the po lice department to take a leadership role in bringing the community together as one through collaboration o n various programs and partnerships across stakeholde r groups when and where appropriate. FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A SUBMITTED BY: Wayne Nero ATTACHMENT S: Description Co mmUNITY Program Outline Co mmUNITY Program P res entation Page 156 of 174 PURPOSE: In light of ongoing national conversations regarding public trust and policing, the Georgetown Police Department has been focused on opportunities for community engagement. Through internal dialogue the department has created CommUNITY. CommUNITY is a strategic framework for the Georgetown Police Department’s Community Engagement Plan. The concept is a creative play on the word “community”, placing particular emphasis on the word “unity” contained within. The police department has identified seven major stakeholder groups in which the department will work strategically and intentionally with in order to forge stronger relationships, meet and exceed stakeholder policing needs and expectations, and strengthen public trust and legitimacy. The seven CommUNITY stakeholder groups the police department will be focused on include: 1. Neighborhoods (micro-communities) 2. Youth 3. Business Community 4. Elderly 5. Churches 6. Non-governmental Organizations (Social Services) 7. Media The program will further position the police department to take a leadership role in bringing the community together through collaboration on various programs and partnerships across stakeholder groups when and where appropriate. Page 157 of 174 VISION STATEMENT: ONE EXTRAORDINARY COMMUNITY One…meaning all members of the community. EXTRAordinary…meaning unusually engaged CommUNITY… an adored and admired group of diverse people sharing life through mutual trust, respect, and understanding MISSION: (FOCUS) Forge strong relationships across various stakeholder groups that provide Opportunities for Constructive dialogue (problem solving), which through mutual trust and understanding enables Unity that is Sustainable. GUIDING PRINIPLES: ACCOUNTABILITY RESPECT JUSTICE KNOWLEDGE COMPASSION PATIENCE KINDNESS UNITY Page 158 of 174 CommUNITY Neighborhoods Youth Businesses ElderlyMedia Churches Social Services Page 159 of 174 ENGAGEMENT STRATEGY: PHASE ONE: Assess and inventory the strength of relationships between law enforcement and the various stakeholder groups. PHASE TWO: Establish beneficial contacts within stakeholder groups where meaningful relationships can be built and maintained. PHASE THREE: Seek out, develop, and participate in community engagement opportunities within stakeholder groups with the focus on strengthen personal relationships. PHASE FOUR: Develop programmatic opportunities to exchange information, educate, actively listen, and problem solve across stakeholder groups. PHASE FIVE: Develop a comprehensive network of relationships across stakeholder groups that can collectively through partnership add value to the community and engage in collaborative problem solving. Relationships Meaningful Dialogue Problem Solving Page 160 of 174 COMMITTEES CommUNITY Advisory Group A group comprised of selected leaders from across stakeholder groups that will serve as an advisory committee to the Chief of Police on a variety of matters related to Project CommUNITY and other issues as deemed appropriate by the Chief of Police. CommUNITY Stakeholder Sub Committee A group comprised of selected community leaders within specific stakeholder groups that will work with law enforcement staff in developing opportunities for community engagement within their stakeholder group. Page 161 of 174 Programmatic Examples: 1. Neighborhoods (micro-communities) a. CommUNITY Events b. Neighborhood Patrols c. Directed Patrols d. Community Discussion e. Public Education f. Problem Solving g. Crime Bulletins/Analysis h. Participate in local projects 2. Youth a. Campus Patrols b. Youth Police Academy c. Youth Summer Camp d. Youth Leadership Program (GISD) e. School Safety/Security f. CommUNITY Values Booklet (Elementary/Middle/HS-joint project with students) g. Value Posters in Schools/Parks/Athletic Complexes 3. Elderly a. Take Me Home b. Are You Ok? c. Silver Shields Program 4. Business Community a. Business Patrols b. Crime Bulletins/Analysis c. Problem Solving d. Public Education e. Crime Prevention Programs 5. Churches a. Community Discussion b. Problem Solving c. Public Education 6. Non-governmental Organizations (Social Services) a. Sharing Resource Information b. Participation/partnership in appropriate social clubs 7. Media a. Proactive/Positive Stories b. Social media storytelling for CommUNITY projects/programs 8. Misc Page 162 of 174 a. Proclamation (when program is initiated/Council Support) b. Project video c. PSAs (LE Related/educational) d. CommUNITY Pay It Forward Project e. CommUNITY Wristbands/Decals/Pins f. CommUNITY Ribbon Project (in support of public safety) g. CommUNITY Themed Talks (TED) h. CommUNITY Clean Ups i. CommUNITY Grant Program Page 163 of 174 Council Workshop December 13, 2016 To Be the Standard...Refuse MediocrityPage 164 of 174 Purpose •Issue of Police & Public Trust To Be the Standard...Refuse MediocrityPage 165 of 174 Purpose •Issue of Police & Public Trust To Be the Standard...Refuse MediocrityPage 166 of 174 Purpose •Issue of Police & Public Trust To Be the Standard...Refuse MediocrityPage 167 of 174 Purpose •Community Engagement To Be the Standard...Refuse MediocrityPage 168 of 174 Seven CommUNITY Stakeholder Groups To Be the Standard...Refuse MediocrityPage 169 of 174 Vision & Mission •One Extraordinary CommUNITY •(FOCUS) Forge strong relationships across various stakeholder groups that provide Opportunities for Constructive dialogue (problem solving), which through mutual trust and understanding enables UNITY that is Sustainable. To Be the Standard...Refuse MediocrityPage 170 of 174 Engagement Strategy To Be the Standard...Refuse MediocrityPage 171 of 174 Programmatic Phases •1. Assess & Inventory Relationships •2.Establish New Relationships •3.Seek Engagement Opportunities •4.Develop Programmatic Opportunities •5.Develop Relational Network for Collaborative Problem Solving & Interaction To Be the Standard...Refuse MediocrityPage 172 of 174 Questions? To Be the Standard...Refuse MediocrityPage 173 of 174 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop December 13, 2016 SUBJECT: Sec. 551.071: Consul tati on w i th Attorney - Advice from attorney about pending o r co ntemplated litigation and other matters o n which the attorney has a duty to advise the City Council, including agenda items - TCS Industrial District Agreement - GTU-Jet Lease Agreement 551.074: Perso nne l Matters - City Manager, City Attorney, City Sec re tary and Municipal Judge: Consideratio n of the appointment, employme nt, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal ITEM SUMMARY: FINANCIAL IMPACT: NA SUBMITTED BY: Page 174 of 174