HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda CC 08.25.2020 WorkshopN otice of M eeting of the
Governing B ody of the
C ity of Georgetown, Texas
August 2 5, 2 02 0
The Georgetown City Council will meet on August 25, 2020 at 3:00 P M at Teleconference
The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (AD A).
If you require assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the
AD A, reasonable assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. P lease
contact the City Secretary's Office, at least three (3) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512)
930-3652 or City Hall at 808 Martin Luther King J r. Street, Georgetown, TX 78626 for additional
information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711.
R E V I S E D A G E N D A
J oin fr om a P C, M ac , i P ad, i P hone or A ndroid devic e: P lease click this U R L to
jo in:
https://geor getowntx.zoom.us/s/91739908685?
pwd=e Wtsb W Q y Tmgr Q mN x Z01 Ganp3 M 0 Y2dz09
Webinar I D: 917 3990 8685
P assword: 668390
O r join by phone toll fre e:
(888)475-4499, (833)548-0276, (833)548-0282, (877)853-5257
Webinar I D: 917 3990 8685
P assword: 668390
Citizen comme nts are acc epted in thr ee differ ent for mats:
Submit the following form by 12:00 p.m. on the date of the mee ting and the
City S ec re tary will r ead your comme nts into the re cor ding dur ing the ite m
that is be ing disc usse d –
https://re cor ds.geor getown.or g/F or ms/Addr essCounc il
You may log onto the me eting, at the link above , and “raise your hand”
dur ing the ite m. If you ar e unsur e if your devic e has a mic rophone ple ase
use your home or mobile phone to dial the toll fr ee number. To J oin a
Zoom M ee ting, clic k on the link and join as an attende e. You will be asked
to e nte r your name and email addre ss – this is so we can identify you whe n
you are calle d upon. At the bottom of the we bpage of the Zoom M e eting,
Page 1 of 156
ther e is an option to Raise your H and. To speak on an ite m, simply clic k on
that R aise Your H and option onc e the item you wish to spe ak on has
opened. Whe n you are calle d upon by the M ayor, your de vice will be
r emotely un-muted by the A dministrator and you may speak for thr ee
minute s. P lease state your name clear ly upon be ing allowe d to spe ak.
When your time is over, your de vice will be muted again.
As another option, we ar e opening a city confe re nc e r oom to allow public
to “watch” the virtual mee ting on a bigge r scr ee n, and to “r aise your
hand” to speak fr om that public de vice . This Vie wing Room is loc ated at
City H all, 808 M artin L uther K ing J r. S tre et, Community R oom. Soc ial
Distancing will be strictly enfor ce d. F ac e masks ar e r equire d and will be
provided onsite . U se of profanity, thre atening language , slander ous
r emarks or thr eats of harm are not allowed and will re sult in you be ing
immediate ly r emove d from the me eting.
If you have questions or ne ed assistanc e, ple ase contact the City
Se cr etar y’s offic e at c s@ge orge town.org or at 512-930-3651.
Policy De ve lopme nt/Re vie w Workshop -
A P resentation and discussion regarding cost of service water rate study and related policy -- Glenn
Dishong, Water Utilities Director and Matthew Garrett, NewGen Strategies and Solutions
B P resentation, update, and discussion regarding amendments to the P arkside o n the River
Development Agreement and the Wate r Oak Second Amended and Restated Co nsent Agre e ment -
- Wayne Reed, Assistant City Manager
C P resentation and disc ussio n regarding an R F I fo r the Sanitation Contract -- Teresa Chapman,
Environmental Conservation P rogram Coordinator and Ray Miller, Director of P ublic Works
D P resentation and discussion regarding Charter Review P rocess -- Skye Masson, City Attorney
and David Morgan, City Manager
Exe cutive Se ssion
In compliance with the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551, Government Code, Vernon's Texas Codes,
Annotated, the items listed below will be discussed in closed session and are subject to action in the
regular session.
E Sec. 551.071: Consul tati on w i th Attorney
Advice from attorney about pending or contemplated litigation and other matters on which the
attorney has a duty to advise the City Council, including agenda items
- Litigation Update
Sec. 551.072: Del i berati ons about Real P roperty
- Riverhaven -- Travis Baird, Real Estate Services Manager
- P arkside Waterline Easement Acquisition -- Travis Baird Real Estate Services Manager
Adjournme nt
Ce rtificate of Posting
I, R obyn Densmore, C ity S ecretary for the C ity of G eorgetown, Texas, do hereby c ertify that
Page 2 of 156
this Notice of Meeting was pos ted at C ity Hall, 808 Martin Luther King Jr. S treet,
G eorgetown, T X 78626, a plac e readily ac cessible to the general public as required by law, on
the _____ day of _________________, 2020, at __________, and remained so pos ted for
at leas t 72 c ontinuous hours prec eding the s cheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
R obyn Dens more, C ity S ec retary
Page 3 of 156
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Workshop
August 25, 2020
S UBJEC T:
P resentation and discussion regarding cost o f service water rate study and related policy -- Glenn Dishong, Water
Utilities Director and Matthew Garrett, NewGen Strategies and Solutions
I T EM S UMMARY:
The City contracted Ne wGe n Strategies and Solutions in the Summer to conduct a cost of service water rate study. The
purpose o f the cost-of-service analysis is to e quitably distribute the reve nue requirements between the various customer
classes of service served by the utility. The cost-of-service analysis determines what cost differences, if any, exist
between serving the various customer classes.
Staff will review the Fiscal and Budgetary P olicy as it applies to the Water Utility and rates, as well as briefly review the
2018 rate study recommendations and implementations.
NewGen will be pre senting their results fro m the study and se e k policy feedback to guide the creation of proposed rates
for Co uncil and the Water U tility Advisory Board to review. The last study was in 20 18 , and pe r our Fisc al and Budgetary
P olicy we are required to conduct a rate study at least every three years.
F I NANC I AL I MPAC T:
N A
S UBMI T T ED BY:
Mayra Cantu, Management Analyst on bahelf of Glenn Dishong
AT TAC HMENT S :
Description
2018 R ate S tudy
F isc al and Budgetary P olic y
C ity P res entation
NewG en P resentation
Page 4 of 156
Georgetown City Council Workshop
June 26, 2018
Georgetown Water, Wastewater and Reuse
Rate Study Update
Page 5 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
Agenda
•Key Issues
•Fund Performance Under Current and Proposed Rates
•Draft Rate Adjustments
•Discussion and Next Steps
2
Page 6 of 156
Current Fund Performance
Page 7 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
Key Issues
•Descending Financial Performance
–Rates will not keep up with costs without adjustments
•Wholesale Supplier Cost Increases
•Rapid Growth, Capital Projects and New Debt Service
–$195M in Capital Project needs between FY 2019 and FY 2023
4
Page 8 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
CIP Funding Forecast
Water & Wastewater Combined
5
$195M funded*:
46.7% Cash & Impact Fees
53.3% Debt
*Avg funding % over 5 years
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Debt $36.35 $26.39 $29.99 $13.26 $42.03
Impact Fees $14.25 $13.55 $16.54 $15.82 $16.36
Cash $1.935 $0.070 $0.46 $0.47 $0.31
Total CIP $52.53 $40.02 $47.00 $29.55 $58.70
$52.53
$40.02
$47.00
$29.55
$58.70
$-
$10.00
$20.00
$30.00
$40.00
$50.00
$60.00
$70.00
Co
s
t
(
M
i
l
l
i
o
n
$
)
CIP Funding
Page 9 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
Combined Revenue Performance –
Current Rates
6
$35
$40
$45
$50
$55
$60
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Co
s
t
(
M
i
l
l
i
o
n
$
)
Fiscal Year
Over/Under Recovery ($)Revenues Under Current Rates Revenue Requirement
Page 10 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
Combined Revenue Performance –
Proposed Rates
7
$35
$40
$45
$50
$55
$60
$65
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Co
s
t
(
M
i
l
l
i
o
n
$
)
Fiscal Year
Combined Utility Revenue Performance Under Proposed Rates
Over/Under Recovery ($)Revenues Under Proposed Rates Revenue Requirement
Page 11 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
Combined Fund Performance (Ending Balance) –
Current Rates
8
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Available Fund Balance $24.66 $20.19 $9.08 $1.81 $(5.52)
Contingency $6.00 $6.00 $6.00 $6.00 $-
90 Day Reserve Target $8.18 $8.47 $8.76 $8.99 $9.33
$(10.00)
$(5.00)
$-
$5.00
$10.00
$15.00
$20.00
$25.00
$30.00
$35.00
Ba
l
a
n
c
e
(
M
i
l
l
i
o
n
s
$
)
Page 12 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
Combined Fund Performance (Ending Balance) –
Proposed Rates
9
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Available Fund Balance $23.68 $18.37 $14.38 $11.46 $11.30
Contingency $6.00 $6.00 $6.00 $6.00 $6.00
Reserve Target (90 days)$8.19 $8.48 $8.80 $9.05 $9.42
$-
$5.00
$10.00
$15.00
$20.00
$25.00
$30.00
$35.00
Ba
l
a
n
c
e
(
M
i
l
l
i
o
n
s
$
)
Fund Performance Under Proposed Rates
Page 13 of 156
Overview of Recommendations
Page 14 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
Revenue and Rate-Setting Objectives
1.Revenue sufficiency
2.Minimize rate shock to customers by phasing in rates
and utilizing combined fund performance
3.Potential rate design alternatives
11
Page 15 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
Proposed Rate Increases
•Water
–Rate increases adjust both minimum and volumetric rates across all
customer classes by the % above
–Proposed Rate Design changes effective FY 2019 yields an
estimated 17% increase in rate revenues
•Irrigation Block
•Base Rate multipliers
•Possibly offset with behavior changes
•Wastewater
–Rate increases adjust both minimum and volumetric rates across all
customer classes by the % above
12
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Water --13.00%-15.38%
Wastewater 4.40%-12.50%-16.67%
Page 16 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
Water Proposed Fixed Rate Design
Meter Equivalencies
13
Meter Size Current Proposed Charge Turbine Factors
5/8”$15.50 $15.50 0.674
3/4”$23.00 $23.00 1.000
1”$38.50 $38.50 1.674
1 ½”$76.50 $76.50 3.326
2”$122.50 $153.34 6.667
3”$245.50 $368.00 16.000
4”$383.50 $644.00 28.000
6”$766.50 $1,410.00 61.304
8”$1226.50 $2,450.00 106.522
*Residential Volumetric Rates remain unchanged*
Page 17 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
Water Proposed Volumetric Rate Design
Commercial (less than 3”)
14
Small Commercial (<2” Meter)Current Proposed (FY 2019)
0 –300,000 gallons $2.40 $2.40
300,001 + gallons $2.40 $6.50
Large Commercial (2” Meter)Current Proposed (FY 2019)
0 –600,000 gallons $2.40 $2.40
600,001 + gallons $2.40 $6.50
Large Commercial (3” Meter)Current Proposed (FY 2019)
0 –900,000 gallons $2.40 $2.40
900,001 + gallons $2.40 $6.50
Page 18 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
Water Proposed Volumetric Rate Design
Commercial (4”, 6”, 8”)
15
Commercial (4” Meter)Current Proposed (FY 2019)
0 –4,000,000 gallons $2.40 $2.40
4,000,001 + gallons $2.40 $6.50
Commercial (6” Meter)Current Proposed (FY 2019)
0 –6,000,000 gallons $2.40 $2.40
6,000,001 + gallons $2.40 $6.50
**Potential Industrial class for one customer
Commercial (8” Meter)Current Proposed (FY 2019)
0 –8,000,000 gallons $2.40 $2.40
8,000,001 + gallons $2.40 $6.50
Industrial**Current Proposed (FY 2019)
0+ gallons $2.40 $2.40
Page 19 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
Water Proposed Volumetric Rate Design
Commercial Irrigation Meters
16
Commercial Irrigation Current Proposed (FY 2019)
0 –500,000 gallons $4.00 $4.00
500,001 + gallons $4.00 $8.50
Reuse Irrigation Current Proposed (FY 2019)
0+1.05 1.25
Page 20 of 156
17
17
Page 21 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
Water Proposed Volumetric Rate Design
Parks/Restaurants/Fire Hydrants
18
Municipal Interruptible (Parks)Current Proposed (FY 2019)
0+ gallons $2.40 $2.40
*Parks department has multiple agreements with commercial customers to subsidize
their water use. Expected impact to Parks from commercial rate changes is $7K -$8K
per year
Restaurants Current Proposed (FY 2019)
0+ gallons $2.40 $2.40
Fire Hydrants Current Proposed (FY 2019)
0+ gallons $2.40 $8.50
Page 22 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
Wastewater Proposed Fixed Rates
19
Current 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Residential $30.65 $32.00 $32.00 $36.00 $36.00 $42.00
Small
Commercial $30.65 $32.00 $32.00 $36.00 $36.00 $42.00
*No Volumetric rates on these customers
Page 23 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
Wastewater Proposed Fixed and Volumetric
Rates
20
Current 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Commercial
Fixed $46.35 $48.39 $48.39 $54.44 $54.44 $63.51
Volumetric $2.35 $2.75 $2.75 $3.10 $3.10 $3.61
Large
Commercial
Fixed $82.30 $85.92 $85.92 $96.67 $96.67 $112.78
Volumetric $2.35 $2.75 $2.75 $3.10 $3.10 $3.61
High
Strength
Commercial
Fixed $46.35 $48.39 $48.39 $54.44 $54.44 $63.51
Volumetric $3.70 $4.46 $4.46 $5.02 $5.02 $5.86
Multi-
Family
Fixed $110.10 $114.95 $114.95 $129.32 $129.32 $150.87
Volumetric $2.35 $2.75 $2.75 $3.10 $3.10 $3.61
Evaporation
Cooler
Fixed $46.35 $48.39 $48.39 $54.44 $54.44 $63.51
Volumetric $2.35 $2.75 $2.75 $3.10 $3.10 $3.61
Page 24 of 156
Next Steps, Bill and Rate Design
Impact, and Rate Comparisons
Page 25 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
Customer Bill Impact -Residential
22
Residential Current 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Water (3/4”)$40.50 $40.50 $40.50 $45.77 $45.77 $52.81
Wastewater $30.65 $32.00 $32.00 $36.00 $36.00 $42.00
Total $71.15 $72.50 $72.50 $81.77 $81.77 $94.81
Variance($)$1.35 -$9.27 -$13.04
Variance (%)1.90%-12.78%-15.95%
Residential Current 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Water (3/4”)$64.50 $64.50 $64.50 $72.89 $72.89 $84.10
Wastewater $30.65 $32.00 $32.00 $36.00 $36.00 $42.00
Total $95.15 $96.50 $96.50 $108.89 $108.89 $126.10
Variance($)$1.35 -$12.39 -$17.21
Variance (%)1.42%-12.83%-15.81%
*10,000 Gallons
*20,000 Gallons Page 26 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
Total Residential Monthly Bill Comparison
(10,000 gallons)
* Source: Bill calculated based on lowest meter size obtained from each entity’s website as of 05/07/2018
23
$71.15
$72.50
$88.11
$93.80
$100.43
$101.32
$122.59
$134.47
$162.96
$177.90
$177.93
40.50
40.50
40.94
55.80
46.81
52.32
78.24
91.49
67.86
76.88
107.08
30.65
32.00
47.17
38.00
53.62
49.00
44.35
42.98
95.10
101.02
70.85
Georgetown (Current)
Georgetown (Proposed)
Round Rock
Pflugerville
Cedar Park
Temple
Liberty Hill
Leander
Taylor
Austin
Hutto
Water Wastewater
Page 27 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
Total Residential Monthly Bill Comparison
(20,000 gallons)
24
$95.15
$96.50
$150.01
$163.30
$178.32
$188.28
$190.89
$212.01
$274.56
$316.73
$423.94
64.50
64.50
68.94
109.80
84.32
94.76
146.54
140.63
112.36
195.28
222.02
30.65
32.00
81.07
53.50
94.00
93.52
44.35
71.38
162.20
121.45
201.92
Georgetown…
Georgetown…
Round Rock
Pflugerville
Temple
Cedar Park
Liberty Hill
Leander
Taylor
Hutto
Austin
Water Wastewater
* Source: Bill calculated based on lowest meter size obtained from each entity’s website as of 05/07/2018
Page 28 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
Next Steps
•Need to Increase Revenues
–Seeking Council direction on rate changes to be
effective January 1, 2019
•Council will review proposed rate changes as part
of the proposed budget, and during ordinance
readings
•Rates Studies continued every 3 years
25
Page 29 of 156
Questions and Discussion
Page 30 of 156
1
FY2018 Annual Budget
Fiscal and Budgetary Policy
Adopted: September 12, 2017
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 ........................................................................................................................ 29
Page 31 of 156
2
FY2018 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, 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 32 of 156
3
FY2018 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 33 of 156
4
FY2018 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 34 of 156
5
FY2018 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 35 of 156
6
FY2018 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 36 of 156
7
FY2018 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 37 of 156
8
FY2018 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 on a mathematical calculation using 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 38 of 156
9
FY2018 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 – Funds with Personnel Budgets greater than $4 million will include a vacancy factor
of at least 1% of total 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. 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 FY2018 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.
Compliance Status – Benefit payout reserve FY2018 in compliance.
Page 39 of 156
10
FY2018 Annual Budget
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
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 – FY2018 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 40 of 156
11
FY2018 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 41 of 156
12
FY2018 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 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 42 of 156
13
FY2018 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 43 of 156
14
FY2018 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 FY2018 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 44 of 156
15
FY2018 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 45 of 156
16
FY2018 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 46 of 156
17
FY2018 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 47 of 156
18
FY2018 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. 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. 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 FY2018 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
additional unscheduled repair reserve equal to 10% value of annual internal service funding is also
budgeted.
PCI Rating
100 – 85 Good
85 – 45 Fair
45 – 0 Poor
Page 48 of 156
19
FY2018 Annual Budget
Compliance Status – Facilities repair reserve FY2018 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
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.
Page 49 of 156
20
FY2018 Annual Budget
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
U.S. Treasury and Agency securities
Investment Pools that meet the requirements of the PFIA
Page 50 of 156
21
FY2018 Annual Budget
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 51 of 156
22
FY2018 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 52 of 156
23
FY2018 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 53 of 156
24
FY2018 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 54 of 156
25
FY2018 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 FY2018 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 55 of 156
26
FY2018 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 FY2018 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 FY2018 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.
Compliance Status – General Fund Reserve FY2018 at 2%.
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
Page 56 of 156
27
FY2018 Annual Budget
shortfall that occurs during the fiscal year and should be replenished in the following fiscal year’s
budget.
Compliance Status – Tourism Fund Reserve FY2018 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 FY2018 in compliance.
5. Stormwater Drainage Fund – $250,000 for unforeseen emergencies or other potential revenue
shortfalls.
Compliance Status – Stormwater Fund Reserve FY2018 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 FY2018 in compliance.
7. Airport Fund – A contingency reserve of 75 days of operating expenses will be maintained in the
fund. The 75 day reserve will represent all operating expenses minus fuel costs and any transfers.
Compliance Status – Airport Fund Reserve FY2018 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.
Page 57 of 156
28
FY2018 Annual Budget
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.
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.
Compliance Status – Debt Fund Reserve FY2018 in compliance.
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
Page 58 of 156
29
FY2018 Annual Budget
The City will 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.
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 59 of 156
Water Rates
Policy and Brief History
Page 60 of 156
OVERVIEW
CURRENT POLICY 2018 RATE STUDY
Page 61 of 156
FISCAL AND BUDGETARY POLICY
•A rate study will be conducted every 3 years to review rate methodology and
ensure revenues will meet future needs. All enterprise rates will be based on
standardized cost of service methodologies and conservation goals.
•Last rate study was in 2018
•Working capital reserves should be 25% or ninety (90) days of operating
expenses, net debt service and long‐term water contract costs.
•Bond Coverage Ratio –1.5x coverage of self-supported debt
Page 62 of 156
FISCAL AND
BUDGETARY
POLICY
•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.
Page 63 of 156
FISCAL AND BUDGETARY POLICY
•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.
Water Rates
•fixed for all residential customers based on the cost of providing services.
Commercial customer rates are fixed and volumetric depending on size and
specifications of each commercial customer.
Wastewater Rates
Page 64 of 156
2018 WATER RATE STUDY
Page 65 of 156
2018 RATE STUDY
•Key Issues Identified
•Descending Financial Performance
–Rates will not keep up with costs without adjustments
•Wholesale Supplier Cost Increases
•Rapid Growth, Capital Projects and New Debt Service
–$195M in Capital Project needs between FY 2019 and FY 2023
Page 66 of 156
2018 COMBINED REVENUE PERFORMANCE –
CURRENT RATES
Page 67 of 156
2018 RECOMMENDATIONS
REVENUE SUFFICIENCY MINIMIZE RATE SHOCK TO
CUSTOMERS BY PHASING IN RATES
POTENTIAL RATE DESIGN
ALTERNATIVES
Page 68 of 156
2018 Implementations
No change in water rates to residential Residential water rates have not changed since
2013
Increased some base rates for larger meters
Established rate tiers for non-residential
Increased wastewater rates
Page 69 of 156
THANK YOU
Page 70 of 156
DRAFT RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
WATER AND WASTEWATER
COST OF SERVICE AND RATE DESIGN STUDY
August 25th, 2020
Page 71 of 156
2NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
AGENDA
PROJECT TEAM & RESOURCES
METHODOLOGY
DRAFT STUDY RESULTS
QUESTIONS
2
Page 72 of 156
Project Team & Resources
Page 73 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS (NEWGEN)
Management and economic consulting company specializing in
municipalities and municipal utilities.
Page 74 of 156
Project Team
Project Manager
Matthew Garrett
Assistant Project Manager
Michael Sommerdorf
Lead Analyst
Megan Kirkland
Analyst
Tianna Carnes
Quality Control/Assurance
Chris Ekrut
Assistant City Manager
Laurie Brewer
Management Analyst
Mayra Cantu
Water Utilities Director
Glenn Dishong
Customer Care Director
Leticia Zavala
Finance Director
Leigh Wallace
Control Center Manager
Chelsea Solomon
Marketing and Conservation Manager
James Foutz
Marketing Data Analyst
Randy McKenzie
Customer Care Operations Manager
Cindy Pospisil
CIP Manager
Michael Hallmark
Systems Engineering Director
Wes Wright
Treasurer
Karrie Pursley
Page 75 of 156
Study Methodology
Page 76 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
INTRODUCTION
•In April 2020, the Project Team was tasked by the City of Georgetown to conduct
a comprehensive water and wastewater utility cost of service rate study.
•In simplest terms, determine cost projections and evaluate rate sufficiency to
generate necessary revenues.
•FY 2020 Study Goals and Objectives:
•Fiscal Policy Compliance
•Revenue Sufficiency
•Conservation
•Equitable Cost of Service
7
Page 77 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
WHAT IS A COST OF
SERVICE STUDY?
8
•An analysis to equitably
allocate the revenue
requirements to the various
customer classes of service to
the utility
•Do cost differences exist
between the types of
customers served?
•Facility requirements
•Usage characteristics
•Test Year (FY 2021)
Page 78 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS
•Postponements to FY 2021 due to timing and data limitations
•Cash-Needs/Utility Basis Hybrid Revenue Requirement approach to
determine Outside City rate differential
•Wastewater Cost of Service rates specific to Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD)
and Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
9
Page 79 of 156
Draft Study Results
KEY DRIVERS
FY 2021 COST OF SERVICE
FY 2021 –FY 2025 SCENARIOS
Page 80 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
KEY DRIVERS FOR FY 2021 AND BEYOND
•Residential Customer Growth
•2,800 Annual Water Accounts
•1,300 Annual Wastewater Accounts
•Long-Term Capital Needs
•Approximately $192.24M in Water/Wastewater Capital Needs (FY 2021 –FY 2025)
•$97.01M Debt Funded
•$16.78M Cash Funded
•$78.45M Impact Fee Funded
•New Program Operations & Maintenance
•Future costs associated with growth
11
Page 81 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
LONG-TERM CAPITAL FUNDING FORECAST
12
Page 82 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
REVENUE REQUIREMENT FORECAST
13
Page 83 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
COST OF SERVICE –WATER
14
$17.4M
$1.6M
$14.2M
$1.2M
-Under Recovery
-Over Recovery
Page 84 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
FY 2021 COST OF SERVICE
•Peaking Ratios represent how consistently
customer classes use water
•Peak Month Demand/Average Month Demand
•A higher peaking ratio reflects greater variability
•General guidelines listed below:
•Peaking Ratio > 2.0 less consistent system users
•Ex: Residential, Irrigation customers
•Peaking Ratio < 2.0 more consistent users
•Ex: Commercial, Industrial customers
15
Per Utility Billing Data Extract
(Oct 2018 –Sep 2019)
Customer Class Peaking Ratio Customers
Inside and Outside City
Residential (incl Builder)2.08 41,450
Small Commercial 1.39 1,013
Large Commercial 1.26 274
Government 2.06 158
Irrigation 2.11 634
Total System 1.98 43,529
Page 85 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
FY 2021 COST OF SERVICE
REVENUE REQUIREMENT ALLOCATION
•Residential and Government customer classes currently paying less than class cost of service
•Residential:Estimated $2.34M or 8.3% increase in Residential revenues to meet revenue requirement
in FY 2021
•Government:Estimated $0.06M or 8.2% increase in Government revenues to meet revenue
requirement in FY 2021
16
Customer Class Peaking Ratio Revenue Requirement
($M)
Current Revenues
($M)Variance ($M)Variance (%)
Inside/Outside City
Residential (incl Builder)2.08 $ 28.22 $ 25.88 $ (2.34)(8.3%)
Small Commercial 1.39 0.89 0.98 0.09 10.1%
Large Commercial 1.26 2.10 2.37 0.27 12.9%
Government 2.06 0.74 0.68 (0.06)(8.2%)
Irrigation 2.11 2.49 2.80 0.31 12.6%
Total System 1.98 $ 34.44 $ 32.71 $ (1.73)(5.0%)
Page 86 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
CURRENT RATES
WATER –BASE RATES
Base Rates Inside City Outside City
5/8” Meter*$ 15.50 $ 18.50
3/4” Meter*23.00 27.50
1” Meter*38.50 46.00
1 1/2” Meter*76.50 91.50
2” Meter 153.50 183.50
3” Meter 368.00 440.00
4” Meter 644.00 770.00
6” Meter 1,140.00 1,686.00
8” Meter 2,450.00 2,929.50
17
Source: City of Georgetown (https://gus.georgetown.org/customercare/rates/)
*No rate adjustments since 2014
Page 87 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
CURRENT RATES
WATER –RESIDENTIAL VOLUMETRIC RATES
Volumetric Rates Inside/Outside City
0 –10,000 gallons $ 1.75
10,001 –20,000 gallons 2.40
20,001 –40,000 gallons 4.00
40,001 –60,000 gallons 6.50
60,001+ gallons 8.50
18
Source: City of Georgetown (https://gus.georgetown.org/customercare/rates/)
No adjustments to Residential Volumetric Water rates have been made since 2014
Page 88 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
CURRENT RATES
WATER –NON-RESIDENTIAL VOLUMETRIC RATES
Customer Class Meter Size Tier 1 Rate Tier 2 Rate Tier 2 Threshold
Small Commercial <2”$2.40 $6.50 300,001 gallons
Large Commercial 2”$2.40 $6.50 600,001 gallons
Large Commercial 3”$2.40 $6.50 900,001 gallons
Large Commercial 4”$2.40 $6.50 4M gallons
Large Commercial 6”$2.40 $6.50 6M gallons
Large Commercial 8”$2.40 $6.50 8M gallons
Manufacturing <8”$2.40
Municipal Interruptible $2.40
Restaurant $2.40
Evaporative Cooling $2.40
Fire Flow $2.40
Irrigation Only $4.00 $8.50 500,001 gallons
19
Source: City of Georgetown (https://gus.georgetown.org/customercare/rates/)
Page 89 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
CURRENT RATES
WASTEWATER
Customer Class Base Charge
(Inside)
Volume Charge
(Inside)
Base Charge
(Outside)
Volume Charge
(Outside)
Residential
(Single Family/Domestic)
$ 32.00 N/A $ 36.75 N/A
Small Commercial
(4” Sewer Line/ 3/4” Water Meter)
$ 32.00 N/A $ 36.75 N/A
Commercial
(<6” Sewer Line)
$48.40 $2.75 $55.65 $3.15
Commercial
(>8” Sewer Line)
$85.95 $2.75 $98.85 $3.15
High Strength Commercial
(>250 BOD/Food Processing)
$48.40 $4.50 $55.65 $5.20
Multi-Family Service
(>3 Residential Units per Water Meter)
$114.95 $2.75 $132.20 $3.15
20
Source: City of Georgetown (https://gus.georgetown.org/customercare/rates/)
Page 90 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
FINANCIAL OBJECTIVES
•Goals for Combined Utility (Water/Wastewater):
•Overall Revenue Sufficient
•Meet Target Financial Policies
•Current Fiscal Policies:
•Debt Service Coverage: 1.50x
•Days Cash on Hand: 90 Days
•Water Monthly Base Charge Fixed Cost of Service Recovery: 75%
•“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.”
•First adopted in 2013
21
Page 91 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
PROJECTED COMBINED UTILITY PERFORMANCE
UNDER CURRENT REVENUES
•Combined utility estimated to not
recover revenue required as early as
FY 2021
•Days Cash on Hand reserves drop
below 90 Days as early as FY 2023
•Water Monthly Base Charge revenues
estimated to not recognize Water
Fixed Cost of Service as early as FY
2021
22
FY (Targets)2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
DSC (1.50x)3.82 3.07 2.44 2.27 2.07
Days Cash (90 Days)*187 127 40 -24 -75
Fixed COS (75%)71%68%69%69%68%
*Excludes $10M Annual Non-Operating Contingency
Page 92 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
RESIDENTIAL VOLUMETRIC RATE DESIGN
CURRENT STRUCTURE
23
Page 93 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
RESIDENTIAL VOLUMETRIC RATE DESIGN
CURRENT STRUCTURE
24
Conservation signals
occur at lower gallonage in
comparator group
Page 94 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
RESIDENTIAL VOLUMETRIC RATE DESIGN
CUSTOMER FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION
25
75%
Under
15,000
90%
Under
25,000
96%
Under
40,000
Page 95 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
RESIDENTIAL VOLUMETRIC RATE DESIGN
•Based on historical customer usage characteristics and feedback from the City, the following
Residential alternatives were determined:
26
Scenario 1:
Current Volumetric Tiers
Scenarios 2 and 3:
25,000+ Gallons
0 –10,000 gallons 0 –5,000 gallons
10,001 –20,000 gallons 5,001 –15,000 gallons
20,001 –40,000 gallons 15,001 –25,000 gallons
40,001 –60,000 gallons 25,001+ gallons
60,001+ gallons
Page 96 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
SCENARIO #1:
ADJUSTING REVENUES UNDER CURRENT RATE DESIGN
•Revenue adjustments driven by first debt payment for
San Gabriel Interceptor ($32.5M) in FY 2023
•Water rate adjustments applied evenly across all
customer classes
•Targeting Fixed COS metric
•Mitigate significant Wastewater rate increases
•Wastewater rate adjustments applied evenly across all
customer classes
27
FY (Targets)2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
DSC (1.50x)4.20 3.91 3.47 3.25 3.01
Days Cash (90 Days)*211 205 197 210 231
Fixed COS (75%)75%76%81%80%79%
Rate Adjustments 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Water (All %)6.45%4.50%4.50%--
Wastewater (All %)7.85%7.85%7.85%--
*Excludes $10M Annual Non-Operating Contingency
Page 97 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
SCENARIO #2:
REVISED RESIDENTIAL TIER DESIGN (25,000+ GALLONS)
28
FY (Targets)2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
DSC (1.50x)4.25 3.95 3.47 3.25 3.01
Days Cash (90 Days)*214 211 203 216 237
Fixed COS (75%)75%77%83%82%81%
Rate Adjustments 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Water (Base $ Only)$1.50 $1.50 $1.50 --
Water (Volumetric)Varies ----
Wastewater (All %)8.89%8.89%8.89%--
•Revenue adjustments driven by first debt payment
for San Gabriel Interceptor ($32.5M) in FY 2023
•Water Base rate adjustments targeting Fixed COS
metric and to mitigate significant Wastewater rate
increases
•No rate adjustments to Non-Residential Water
Volumetric Rates
*Excludes $10M Annual Non-Operating Contingency
Page 98 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
SCENARIO #3:
REVISED RESIDENTIAL TIER DESIGN (25,000+ GALLONS)
AND NON-RESIDENTIAL VOLUMETRIC WATER RATE ADJUSTMENTS
29
FY (Targets)2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
DSC (1.50x)4.27 3.97 3.47 3.25 3.01
Days Cash (90 Days)*216 212 205 217 239
Fixed COS (75%)75%77%83%82%81%
Rate Adjustments 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Water (Base $ Only)$1.50 $1.50 $1.50 --
Water (Volumetric)Varies ----
Wastewater (All %)8.46%8.46%8.46%
•Revenue adjustments driven by first debt payment for
San Gabriel Interceptor ($32.5M) in FY 2023
•Water Base rate adjustments targeting Fixed COS metric
and to mitigate significant Wastewater rate increases
•Other Water Rate Adjustments applied evenly across
Non-Residential Water volumetric rates
•Targeting revised Residential second tier rate in Non-Residential first
tier rate adjustment (see attached rate schedule)
*Excludes $10M Annual Non-Operating Contingency
Page 99 of 156
30NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
COMMUNITY
RATE
COMPARISONS
•Comparisons between communities are very
common, but may not tell the whole story.
•Each system is unique in geography, age of
infrastructure, capital maintenance efforts, and
typical usage patterns.
30
Page 100 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
REGIONAL BILL COMPARISON
RESIDENTIAL USER BILL (5,000 GALLONS –WATER; FLAT SEWER*)
31
*Georgetown currently does not charge a variable rate based on billed Sewer flows. 5,000 gallons in Sewer flows assumed for s urrounding cities
Georgetown scenarios 1, 2 and 3 are examples
of possible rate designs for discussion only
and are not proposed rates.
Page 101 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
REGIONAL BILL COMPARISON
RESIDENTIAL USER BILL (15,000 GALLONS –WATER; FLAT SEWER*)
32
*Georgetown currently does not charge a variable rate based on billed Sewer flows. 10,000 gallons in Sewer flows assumed for surrounding cities
Georgetown scenarios 1, 2 and 3 are examples
of possible rate designs for discussion only
and are not proposed rates.
Page 102 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
REGIONAL BILL COMPARISON
RESIDENTIAL USER BILL (25,000 GALLONS –WATER; FLAT SEWER*)
33
*Georgetown currently does not charge a variable rate based on billed Sewer flows. 10,000 gallons in Sewer flows assumed for surrounding cities
Georgetown scenarios 1, 2 and 3 are examples
of possible rate designs for discussion only
and are not proposed rates.
Page 103 of 156
34NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
SCENARIO
MATRIX
Policy Objectives
34
Objectives Supported Scenario
#1
Scenario
#2
Scenario
#3
Revenue Sufficiency ✓✓✓
Fiscal Policies ✓✓✓
Conservation ✓✓
Equitable Cost of Service ✓
Page 104 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
CONCLUSIONS
•Summary
•Current Rates Insufficient -Rate Increases are Needed
•Current Residential Volumetric Tiered Structure Not Achieving Conservation Plan
•Some Customer Classes Not Covering Cost of Service
•Guidance for Staff and Board is needed
1.Which of the policy objectives below should guide rate recommendations?
•Financial Policy
•Rate Equity
•Conservation Plan
2.What (if any) additional analysis is needed to better inform or address Council objectives?
35
Page 105 of 156
NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC
NEXT STEPS
•Tuesday, August 25th, 2020 –Receive Council Feedback
•Thursday, September 10th, 2020 –Next Water Utility Advisory Board meeting
•Tuesday, September 22nd, 2020 –City Council Workshop
•Tuesday, October 13th, 2020 –City Council Regular Agenda
•Friday, January 1st, 2021 –Water and Wastewater Rates Effective
36
Page 106 of 156
THANK YOU! ANY QUESTIONS?
MICHAEL SOMMERDORF, SENIOR CONSULTANT
(972) 704 -1655
MSOMMERDORF@NEWGENSTRATEGIES.NET
MATTHEW GARRETT, DIRECTOR
(972) 675 -7699
MGARRETT@NEWGENSTRATEGIES.NET
Page 107 of 156
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Workshop
August 25, 2020
S UBJEC T:
P resentation, update, and discussion regarding amendments to the P arkside on the River Development Agreement and the
Water Oak Second Amended and Restated Consent Agreement -- Wayne Reed, Assistant City Manager
I T EM S UMMARY:
Council is being asked to provide direction and feedback o n modifications to certain terms of the agreements that control
the P arkside on the River master planned development including provisions on landscape and tree preservation, increase
in the partne rship between the City and the M U Ds re garding imposing the City’s sales tax and use tax, consent to
annexation o f 47 acres into W C M UD #25, and modify the financ ial terms by allo wing up to 4 M U Ds. The attached
P owerP oint provides an analysis of the proposal to the City’s M U D policy.
The City Council approved its M U D P olicy on J uly 2 4, 2018. In the P olicy, Council affirmed the purpo se of a M UD is
“to assist in closing the financial gap when a deve lo pment is seeking to exceed minimum City standards, pro vide a robust
program o f amenities, and/o r where substantial o ff-site infrastructure impro vements are re quired that would serve the
M U D and surrounding properties.” The P olicy identifies the basic requirements for the creatio n and amendme nt to a
M U D are as follows:
1 . Quality Development. The development meets or exceeds the intent of the development,
infrastructure, and design standards of City codes;
2 . Extraordinary Benefits. The development provides extraordinary public benefits that advance the
vision and goals of the Co mprehensive P lan, such as, but not limited to, extension, financial contribution,
and/or enhancement of master planned infrastructure, diversity of housing, and enhanced parks, trails, open
space, and recreational amenities that are available to the public;
3 . Enhance Public S ervice and S afety. The development enhances public services and o ptimizes service
delivery through its design, dedication of sites, connectivity, and other features.
4 . City Exclusive Provider. The development further promotes the City as the exclusive provider of
water, sewer, solid waste, and electric utilities;
5 . Fiscally Responsible. The development is financially feasible, doesn’t impair the City’s ability to
provide municipal services, and would not impose a financial burden on the citizens of Georgetown in the
event of annexation;
6 . Finance Plan. The developer(s) contributes financially to cover a portio n of infrastructure expenses
without reimbursement by the M UD or the City and as reflected in conditions placed on the issuanc e of
bonds by the district;
7 . Annexation. The development will not impair the City’s future annexation of the M UD or adjacent
property or impose costs not mutually agreed upon.
City staff finds the proposed amendments to the related agreements as described in the presentation will achieve the
intent of the City’s M U D P olicy (see attachment 3).
F I NANC I AL I MPAC T:
The overall fiscal impact of the pro posed amendments is revenue positive. The request to extend the water and wastewater
impact fees to the additio nal property, which wo uld be for ro ughly 500 SUEs, wo uld mean a loss in o ne-time revenue.
However, the master developer ’s support for a Strategic P artnership Agreement (S PA) will resulting in a recurring
revenue stream that is projected to produce more than $2,000,000 annually upon full build-out.
S UBMI T T ED BY:
Danella Elliott
AT TAC HMENT S :
Description
P arks ide on the R iver Land Us e P lan (P roposed)
Page 108 of 156
MUD P olic y (approved July 24, 2018)
P arks ide on the R iver P res entation
Page 109 of 156
Page 110 of 156
City of Georgetown Municipal Utility District Policy
(Approved by City Council July 24, 2018)
Page 1 of 7
The City of Georgetown finds that the purpose of a Municipal Utility District (MUD) is to assist in
closing the financial gap when a development is seeking to exceed minimum City standards,
provide a robust program of amenities, and/or where substantial off-site infrastructure
improvements are required that would serve the MUD and surr ounding properties.
The following policies are to be used in guiding the consideration and action on requests for
creation and operation of all proposed special districts, including amendments. These policies
are reinforced in Section 13.10 of the UDC.
POLICY 1: Basic Requirements for Creation of MUDs
MUDs are an appropriate tool to allow urban level density neighborhoods in locations supported
by the 2030 Comprehensive Plan within the city limits. The City may alternatively consider
Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) MUDs where the City may annex the property in the future.
Before consenting to the creation of a district, the City Council should consider whether the
creation of the district is feasible, practicable, and necessary for the provision of the proposed
services and would be a benefit to the land, and therefore warrants the City’s consent, consistent
with the other considerations in this policy.
A. The City’s basic requirements for creation of a MUD shall be that:
1. Quality Development. The development meets or exceeds the intent of the
development, infrastructure, and design standards of City codes;
2. Extraordinary Benefits. The development provides extraordinary public benefits that
advance the vision and goals of the Comprehensive Plan, such as, but not limited to,
extension, financial contribution, and/or enhancement of master planned
infrastructure, diversity of housing, and enhanced parks, trails, open space, and
recreational amenities that are available to the public;
3. Enhance Public Service and Safety. The development enhances public services and
optimizes service delivery through its design, dedication of sites, connectivity, and
other features.
4. City Exclusive Provider. The development further promotes the City as the exclusive
provider of water, sewer, solid waste, and electric utilities;
5. Fiscally Responsible. The development is financially feasible, doesn’t impair the City’s
ability to provide municipal services, and would not impose a financial burden on the
citizens of Georgetown in the event of annexation;
6. Finance Plan. The developer(s) contributes financially to cover a portion of
infrastructure expenses without reimbursement by the MUD or the City and as
reflected in conditions placed on the issuance of bonds by the district;
7. Annexation. The development will not impair the City’s future annexation of the MUD
or adjacent property or impose costs not mutually agreed upon.
Page 111 of 156
City of Georgetown Municipal Utility District Policy
(Approved by City Council July 24, 2018)
Page 2 of 7
POLICY 2: Provide examples of “unique factors justifying [MUD] creation or amendments" to
guide determinations made in the UDC
Consistent with past Council actions, require the construction of specific regional infrastructure
improvements consistent with the City's comprehensive plan and master plans and that are
beneficial to the City. Examples include:
a. The acceleration of master planned public infrastructure improvements, including but not
limited to, wastewater interceptors, treatment plants, and major transportation
improvements, that not only provide a benefit to the developed property, but also to
other surrounding properties.
b. Conservation subdivision design that clusters development in low impact areas and
maintains existing topography, scenic views, natural drainage flows and wildlife habitat.
c. Regional trail connections located across the development, as well as off-site, to fill in
gaps in the City and County trail system.
POLICY 3: Address provision of public services, and address public safety m atters in the
Consent Agreement
a. Require MUD to provide facilities to enhance public services and optimize locations for
service delivery.
b. Require donation of land to City or ESD (as applicable) for new fire station or other public
safety facility as determined by the City.
c. If the City provides fire protection services within the MUD, require payment of Fire SIP
fee (or similar fee) to fund fire station construction and operations.
d. Require roadway design to enhance access and reduce response times to properties
located outside of the MUD.
e. If located outside of the City Limits, then the MUD consent agreement may, at the City's
discretion, include an interlocal agreement ("ILA") to contract with the City of
Georgetown for fire, police, and solid waste services on terms acceptable to the City.
f. An ETJ MUD may provide a maintenance program approved by the City's Transportation
Department that is consistent with City standards and should include appropriate
consultation with the County Engineer.
Page 112 of 156
City of Georgetown Municipal Utility District Policy
(Approved by City Council July 24, 2018)
Page 3 of 7
POLICY 4: Address utility service issues, and include those utility service provisions in the
Consent Agreement
a. Require all utility facilities that service the MUD to be consistent with the Utilities Master
Plan.
b. Require of the MUD that the City be the water, sewer and electric service provider where
it is located within the city’s single or multiple certificated service area.
c. Require the cost to relocate any existing utility infrastructure to be borne by the
developer and/or MUD, not the City.
d. Limit cost-sharing on MUD off-site improvements to only those circumstances where the
necessity for the improvement is so great that limited CIP funds are appropriate for
overall system wide improvements that benefit multiple properties (i.e., regional
improvements that the City can afford to participate in).
e. Address water and wastewater rates. Generally, rates for in-City MUD customers should
be the same as the rates for other in-City customers, and the rates for ETJ MUDs
customers should be the same as for other out of City customers.
f. Require specific water conservation techniques that will be used to minimize demand
levels including xeriscaping, low impact development ("LID"), rainwater harvesting, grey
water reuse and other strategies in consultation with GUS.
g. Require all MUDs and their residents, whether in the City or in the ETJ, to comply with
City of Georgetown water conservation and drought contingency plan-related
ordinances.
h. For all MUDS, require impact fees to be assessed at the time of final plat approval [note:
Impact fee payments are eligible for reimbursement by the MUD]. For ETJ MUDS, require
payment of impact fees at the time the final plat is approved. For in -City MUDS, require
payment of impact fees no later than the time of building permit issuance. However,
utility capacity reservation shall not occur until impact fees are paid.
i. Address rates, treatment capacity, utility and other easements necessary for City services,
capacity for dwelling units, gallons per day usage for water and wastewater, water,
wastewater and electric infrastructure, permitting and design, and fiscal surety.
Page 113 of 156
City of Georgetown Municipal Utility District Policy
(Approved by City Council July 24, 2018)
Page 4 of 7
POLICY 5: Specify the amount of debt intended to be issued, the purpose of the debt, and the
debt service schedule, and include those financial provisions in the Consent Agreement
a. Require a maximum bond issuance amount and schedule, including refunding bonds
issued by the district, unless otherwise agreed to by the City, to comply with the following
requirements, provided such requirements do not generally render the bonds
unmarketable:
1. Maximum maturity of 25 years for any one series of bonds; and
2. The last Bond issuance shall be not later than the date that is ten (10) years after
the date of the first Bond issuance.
b. Require all City property and land to be exempted from all MUD taxes, assessments,
charge, fees and fines of any kind.
c. Establish a maximum tax rate of $0.55/$100 of assessed valuation for in-city MUDs and a
maximum tax rate of $0.95/$100 of assessed valuation for ETJ MUDs.
d. Limit debt issuance to capital infrastructure and related costs, for in-city and ETJ MUDs;
on and off-site water and wastewater infrastructure; stormwater infrastructure; roads,
bridges, and related transportation infrastructure; and parks, trails, and recreational
facilities.
e. To the extent possible, debt should be structured to retire nonresidential lands first so
they can be annexed, if an ETJ MUD. Where multiple MUDs are established for a large
project, nonresidential lands should be included in the first MUD created.
f. A table summarizing the overlapping tax rate of all existing taxing entities (city, county,
school district, MUD, ESD, etc.) and the proposed MUD tax, demonstrating the total
anticipated tax rate over the life of the MUD.
POLICY 6: Address future municipal annexation of the MUD, when located in the ETJ
a. Allow the City to set rates for water and/or sewer services for land that is in the MUD at
the time of annexation that are different from rates charged to other areas of the City
consistent with the provisions of Section 54.016(h) of the Water Code to compensate city
for assumption of MUD debt.
b. This section shall apply to a District created as an ETJ MUD that is annexed into the city
limits. At the City's option, a "limited district" may be continued in existence after
annexation to maintain amenities or services beyond what the City typically provides for
neighborhoods similarly situated. In such cases an ETJ MUD shall enter into a SPA stating
conditions on which MUD will be converted to a limited district that will continue to exist
following full purpose annexation. Concurrently with the MUD’s confirmation election,
the MUD shall hold election on proposition to levy an O&M tax per Section 49.107 of the
Water Code to provide funds to operate the limited district following full purpose
annexation by the city; the MUD shall have no right to issue bonds until proposition to
levy an O&M tax is approved.
Page 114 of 156
City of Georgetown Municipal Utility District Policy
(Approved by City Council July 24, 2018)
Page 5 of 7
POLICY 7: Require development in a MUD to exceed minimum UDC land use and
development standards, and address the land use provisions in the Consent Agreement or
related agreement
a. Require higher development and design standards for residential and nonresidential land
uses to promote a superior development. Examples include, but are not limited to:
1. Enhanced architectural standards; such as higher percentages of masonry on
exterior walls and variations in floor plans; and
2. Improved materials for signage, such as masonry bases.
b. Age restricted developments shall not exceed 10% of the net developable land area and
10% of the total housing units within the MUD.
c. Prohibit certain other land uses such as Correctional Facility; Personal Services
Restricted as defined the Unified Development Code, Chapter 16, of Title 17 of the
Georgetown City Code of Ordinances, and others as determined by City Council.
d. Ensure the City will benefit financially from commercial/retail land uses in developments
with ETJ MUDs.
i. All efforts should be made to exclude commercial/retail land area from an ETJ
MUD in favor of full-purpose annexation, or a SPA should be required allowing the
City to collect sales taxes from the area.
ii. The Strategic Partnership Agreement should provide that the City is entitled to
receive up to 100% of the sales taxes collected, and that none of those taxes
should be shared with the MUD unless special circumstances exist.
iii. City should retain site plan review to current City standards for uses other than
one- and two-family residential uses.
e. Require a diversity of housing offered within the district that is consistent with the Future
Land Use Plan.
f. Require public school location(s) to be provided, if desired by the applicable School
District. Location(s) of school sites should be in a central, walkable location within a
residential neighborhood away from a collector or arterial roadway identified in the
Overall Transportation Plan (OTP).
g. Require a land use plan to be attached to the Consent Agreement, and require major
amendments to a MUD land use plan be reviewed by the Planning & Zoning Commission
and approved by the City Council.
h. Require all in-City MUDs to submit a Planned Unit Development Application and all ETJ
MUDs to submit a Development Agreement Application, concurrent with the
development of a consent agreement, to memorialize development stan dards.
Page 115 of 156
City of Georgetown Municipal Utility District Policy
(Approved by City Council July 24, 2018)
Page 6 of 7
POLICY 8: Require development in a MUD to exceed UDC parkland requirements (not just
meet UDC standards or less than UDC standards), and address parkland prov isions in the
Consent Agreement
a. Require a park or series of parks open to the general public within the MUD in the size
and location approved by the Parks and Recreation Board.
b. Require installation and maintenance of park facilities improvements.
c. Require maintenance access to be provided, when needed.
d. Require connections to regional trail network and adjacent uses such as schools.
e. Require regional trail network to be a minimum of 10 feet in width.
f. Require usable trailheads with off-street parking and ADA compliant trails.
g. Require financial contributions to regional park facilities such as We stside Park or Garey
Park (depending on the location of the MUD).
h. Prohibit roads through parkland in a manner that subtracts from net usable park land.
i. Require provision of security and maintenance program.
j. Require protection and perpetuation of unique features on a particular site that should
be maintained as open space whether for environmental, conservation or scenic views.
POLICY 9: Address transportation issues and include transportation provisions in the Consent
Agreement
a. May require completion of a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) and construction and/or funding
of both on- and off-site improvements identified in the TIA, including roadways identified
in the City's Overall Transportation Plan (OTP), pursuant to Section 12.09 of the UDC
b. Require dedication of right-of-way, inclusion of bike lanes, sidewalks, and aesthetically-
pleasing streetscapes consistent with the OTP and City street design standards.
c. Require residential subdivisions to be designed with increased connectivity, reduced cul -
de-sacs, short block lengths, additional stub outs to adjacent properties, except where
developed as a conservation subdivision pursuant to Chapter 11 of the UDC.
d. Require creative stormwater management and water quality solutions to be provided
such as low impact development ("LID") to minimize any downstream impacts.
Page 116 of 156
City of Georgetown Municipal Utility District Policy
(Approved by City Council July 24, 2018)
Page 7 of 7
POLICY 10: City Operations Compensation Fee
A fee shall be assessed for each residential unit within a district, located within the City’s ETJ,
equal to the proportion of City operations attributed to serving residents of the district. The fee
shall be calculated as follows:
B = Total General Fund budget for the fiscal year in which the consent application is filed.
P = The estimated population of the City at the time the consent application is filed.
H= The estimated average household size within the City at the time the consent application is
filed.
D = The percentage of City services used by district residents. This percentage shall be adopte d
by the City annually as a part of the City's budget adoption process.
Y = Number of years of duration of the district.
R = Discount rate. This rate shall be adopted by the City annually as a part of the city's budget
adoption process.
PV = Present Value.
City Operations Compensation Fee = PV(R,Y,-((B /(P /H)) * D))
Example: B = $24,000,000
P = 41,000 H = 2.8 D = 15%
Y = 20
R = 6%
Fee = 2,819
Miscellaneous Provisions
Where not otherwise specifically addressed in this Policy, the procedures in Unified Development
Chapter 13 shall prevail.
Page 117 of 156
City Manager’s Office
Parkside on the River MUD
Proposed Amendments to the Existing Water Oak
2nd Amended and Restated Consent Agreement and
Parkside on the River Development Agreement
Presented by
Wayne Reed, Assistant City Manager
August 25, 2020
Page 118 of 156
City Manager’s Office
Overview
•Purpose of Presentation
•Update on Development Progress
•Parkside on the River Land Plan –Additional Land
•Consent Agreement Scope of Amendments
•Development Agreement Scope of Amendments
–Impact Fees and Strategic Partnership Agreement
–Landscape and Tree Preservation Standards
•Next Steps
•Feedback and DirectionPage 119 of 156
City Manager’s Office
Purpose
Staff is seeking Council’s feedback and direction on a proposal to the Parkside on
the River development that will involve an amendment to the Water Oak
Municipal Utility District (MUD) 2nd Amended and Restated Consent Agreement
and an amendment to the Parkside on the River Development Agreement.
1.Does Council support the addition of the 361 acres to the master planned development
with the proposed land use plan?
2.Does Council support amending the existing Consent Agreement to a) add 47 acres into
WCMUD #25 district boundary and b) increase max. number of MUDs from 3 to 4?
3.Does Council support allowing the fixed impact fees to apply to the additional property
with execution of a Strategic Partnership Agreement?
4.Does Council support considering modifications to Landscape and Tree Preservation Std.s?
Page 120 of 156
City Manager’s Office
Update on Development Progress
•24” Water Transmission Line Project
–Project 70% completed as of August 2020. Under budget of $3,500,000
•Barton Tributary Sewer
–Project began construction Dec. 2019 and completed August 2020
•Single-Family
–Phase 1A with 151 lots. Construction on Parkside Pkwy (1/3 mile)
began July 2020 and home construction to begin Feb. 2021
–Phase 2-1 with 122 lots. Engineering design complete and estimated
start of construction October 2020
–Phase 2-2 with 61 lots. Engineering design complete and estimated
start of construction December 2020
Page 121 of 156
City Manager’s Office
Update on Development Progress
•Overhead Electric Along RM 2243
–Working with PEC, ATT and Frontier to convert overhead to underground
•Gas Service
–Working with Atmos to extend a main gas line from Parkside at Mayfield Ranch
•RM 2243 Road Improvements, Phase I
–Under design from Parkside Pkwy. to Springtime Drive in Phase 1A
–Estimate construction to begin Oct. 2020 and completed by April 2021
Ultimate Cross section
Page 122 of 156
City Manager’s Office
Approved in Oct. 2019
•1,208 acres
•300 acres of open space (min.)
–75 acres of public open space along the river
•700 acres for SF (max. = 2,500 DU)
•89 acres of MF (along Leander Rd)
•50 acres commercial (min.)
•16 acre elementary school site
•Fire station site
Parkside on the River Land Use Plan
Page 123 of 156
City Manager’s Office
Parkside on the River Land Use Plan
Proposed August 2020
•Master developer has 361 acres under contract
•1,570 ac. vs. 1,208 ac. total land area
•422 ac. vs. 300 ac. of open space
–115 vs. 75 acres of public open space along the river
•925 ac. vs. 700 ac. for SF
–Increase in DU from 2,500 to 3,000
•No change in MF
–Remains 89 acres (along Leander Rd)
•64 ac. vs. 50 ac. commercial (min.)
•16 acre elementary school site
•Fire station site
314 acres
47 acres –to be added
to WCMUD #25
Page 124 of 156
City Manager’s Office
South San Gabriel River Corridor
Traveling the South San Gabriel River
•The distance from I-35 to the east edge
of Garey Park following the river corridor
is approximately 39,510 ft. or 7.5 miles.
•Garey Park itself has 6,925 ft. of river
frontage. More than a mile.
•Parkside on the River has 5,000 ft. of river
corridor frontage. With the additional
property’s 5,700 ft. of river corridor
frontage, Parkside on the River will add
approximately 2 miles of trail to this
regional trail corridor.
Page 125 of 156
City Manager’s Office
South San Gabriel River Corridor
Parkside on the River Stretch of River Corridor
Page 126 of 156
City Manager’s Office
Consent Agreement Amendment
Request
•Consent to addition of 47 acres to the WCMUD #25
•Increase maximum number of MUDs from 3 to 4
Financial Terms
•Maximum Amount of Bonds to be Issued for Future Districts: [No Change (“NC ”)]
•Maximum Bond Maturity: 30 years [NC]
•Bond Issuance Period: 15 years from the date of the first issuance of Bonds issued by each district [NC]
•Refunding Bonds: Not later than 10th anniversary of date of issuance [NC]
•Reimbursement Agmt.: 15 years after First Bond Issuance Date by each district [NC]
•District Only Tax Rate (Maximum):$0.92/$100 in Assessed Value [NC]
Page 127 of 156
City Manager’s Office
Development Agreement Amendment
Request: Impact Fees
•Extend impact fees (water and wastewater) rates to additional property
•Not requesting an increase in City’s commitment to the maximum SUEs; this would remain at 4,600
•Parkside on the River Land Use Plan (approved) will likely use around 4,100 SUEs out of 4,600 SUEs
upon full build out; this means roughly 500 SUEs would be used on the additional property
•Water and Wastewater Impact Fees (Section 9.01). In consideration of the Former Owner’s
construction of the SSGI and Primary Owner’s payment of the Off-site Capacity Payment, the Impact
Fees payable by Owners and End Buyers are (i) for water, the Water Impact Fee per SUE is $3,324, and
(ii) for wastewater, the Wastewater Impact Fee per SUE is $2,683;
Parkside DA
(Sec 9.01)
City's Current
Impact Fees Difference
Water Impact Fee $3,324 $6,921 -$3,597
Wastewater Impact Fee $2,683 $4,348 -$1,665
Maximum Number (500)$3,003,500 $5,634,500 -$2,631,000Page 128 of 156
City Manager’s Office
Request: Impact Fees (City’s condition if impact fee rates are extended to additional property)
•In exchange for the Parkside on the River SUEs and fixed Wastewater Impact Fee and Water Impact Fee
being extended to the additional 361 acres, the City has requested the master developer support a
Strategic Partnership Agreement (SPA) between the City and Williamson County MUD No. 25 (WCMUD
No. 25) and Parkside on the River MUD No. 1 (PORMUD No. 1).
•Each MUD will be required to approve the SPA in advance of the City approving the SPA in accordance
with State law. This would have to be accomplished before an amendment to the DA is effective.
•Consent to limited purpose annexation of the commercial land within the district to be effective when
the SPA is executed by the City.
•City annexes commercial land in the MUD for the limited purpose of collecting sales and use taxes on
sales consummated within the district. Annexation would occur in future upon development.
•The SPA will detail that MUDs will get 20% of the City’s 1% general sales tax but none of the other types
of sales and use taxes. The City will get 80% of the City’s 1% general sales and use tax, and 100% of all
other sales and use taxes.
Development Agreement Amendment
Page 129 of 156
City Manager’s Office
Request: Impact Fees (City’s condition if impact fee rates are extended to additional property)
The City staff supports the application of the Wastewater Impact and Water Impact Fee up to the water and
wastewater utility commitment of 4,600 SUEs after satisfaction of the following:
•A minimum of 10 acres of commercial land is developed with a unified design and a minimum of 50,000
square feet of retail development before the Parkside on the River requests to use above 4,100 SUEs and
the remaining commercial land remains (no request to change to residential).
Neighborhood Retail Shopping Center
Sales Tax Revenue Cumulative Sales
Tax at 20 years
Annual Sales Tax at
Full Buildout
20 Acre Commercial
Annual Sales Tax
General $13,003,200 $1,238,400 $387,000
Street Maintenance $2,889,600 $275,200 $86,000
GTEC $5,779,200 $550,400 $172,000
GEDCO $1,444,800 $137,600 $43,000
Total $23,116,800 $2,201,600 $688,000
Development Agreement Amendment
Page 130 of 156
City Manager’s Office
Request: Landscape and Tree Preservation
Development Requirement Application Current
MUD
Req.
Proposed
Req.
Tree
Survey
•Survey of existing heritage and
protected trees
•Identification of trees removed
A tree plan will be submitted with each
preliminary plat. This will allow tree credits to be
utilized throughout multiple sections of a plat.
X X
Tree
Removal
•20% of heritage trees can be
removed within a tree plan without
approval from City
•Up to 20% of trees within a preliminary plat
can be removed without approval from City.
•Additional trees require assessment from City
Arborist prior to approval.
X X
Development Agreement Amendment
Page 131 of 156
City Manager’s Office
Request: Landscape and Tree Preservation
Development Requirement Application Current MUD
Req.
Proposed
Req.
Tree
Credit
Credit trees Definition
•Size : Single trunk trees 18” and
greater but less than 26”
•Location:
•Residential streetyard
•Medians and Parkways
•Pocket parks/amenities
•Trees meeting the size and location
requirements identified within a tree plan
may be utilized to mitigate for trees
removed.
•Trees planted to meet the minimum
landscaping requirements of the UDC
cannot be utilized for credit
X
Credit trees may apply up to 50% of
required mitigation for tree removal
within a tree plan
Example=
•100 inches of mitigation are required for
heritage trees removed within a tree plan.
•Within a tree plan there are 200 inches of
credit trees
•50 inches may be used to mitigate for
heritage tree removes.
X
Development Agreement Amendment
Page 132 of 156
City Manager’s Office
Purpose
Staff is seeking Council’s feedback and direction on a proposal to the Parkside on
the River development that will involve an amendment to the Water Oak
Municipal Utility District (MUD) 2nd Amended and Restated Consent Agreement
and an amendment to the Parkside on the River Development Agreement.
1.Does Council support the addition of the 361 acres to the master planned development
with the proposed land use plan?
2.Does Council support amending the existing Consent Agreement to a) add 47 acres into
WCMUD #25 district boundary and b) increase max. number of MUDs from 3 to 4?
3.Does Council support allowing the fixed impact fees to apply to the additional property
with execution of a Strategic Partnership Agreement?
4.Does Council support considering modifications to Landscape and Tree Preservation Std.s?
Page 133 of 156
City Manager’s Office
Next Steps
(The following are high level)
•Should Council support the proposed amendments:
•Begin drafting amendments to the current Consent and Development
Agreements as described in presentation consistent with Council direction
•Return to Council on landscape and tree preservation standards
•Initiate discussions with WCMUD #25 and PRMUD #1 concerning SPA
•Return to Council with agreements for final consideration
Page 134 of 156
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Workshop
August 25, 2020
S UBJEC T:
P resentation and discussion regarding an R F I for the Sanitatio n Contract -- Teresa Chapman, Environmental
Conservation P rogram Coordinator and Ray Miller, Director of P ublic Works
I T EM S UMMARY:
The process for developing and acquiring a new solid waste contract is complex and lengthy. Although, the current solid
waste contract does not expire until October 31, 2 02 2, it is time to discuss and review o ptions to ensure a smo oth and
timely transition to a new contract.
Options include utilizing another 5 year extension, direct ne gotiations with current ve ndor Texas Disposal Systems, issue
a Request for Information (R F I) or issue a Request for P roposals (RFP ).
F I NANC I AL I MPAC T:
No current impact
S UBMI T T ED BY:
Teresa Chapman
AT TAC HMENT S :
Description
F uture S olid Waste C ontrac t - P resentation
Page 135 of 156
Solid Waste Services
Georgetown City Council
August 25, 2020
Page 136 of 156
Purpose: Request direction on preparing for a new
solid waste contract that would take effect October 31,
2022 at the conclusion of the current contract.
New Contract Components:
-10-year contract (standard in the industry)
-Enhanced services (coming in future slide)
New Solid Waste Contract Options:
1.Utilize another 5-year extension
2.Direct negotiations with TDS
3.Competitive RFP
4.Two -step Process: RFI then based on responses
move to an RFP or direct negotiations with
preferred vendor(s)
Purpose: Request Direction
Existing Contract Term
•Ends on Oct. 31, 2022 (existing 5-year
contract started in 2017)
•Two additional 5-year extensions
available (otherwise goes to a month
to month contract)
•Approximately 27,000 households
•Approximately 2,500 non-residential
carts
Page 137 of 156
2012 RFP/Contract Development:
•The City hired a consultant to assist with developing an RFP and solid waste contract that was awarded and
started on October 1, 2012. Cost was estimated to be $250,000 including staff time; approximately $80,000
went to the consultant.
•The 2012 contract provides a solid foundation for a new contract via direct negotiations, RFI or RFP
Three service packets were included in the 2012 RFP:
1.Residential Service and Non-residential Cart Service
2.Non-residential Service (commercial dumpsters)
3.Management of City-Owned Site located at 250 W.L. Walden Drive known as the “Georgetown Transfer
Station” including maintenance of the old landfill
Bidders:
•Companies could bid on individual Packets or any combination of the three
•Six companies bid on the RFP: Central Texas Refuse, Al Clawson, Waste Management, Allied Waste, IESI, and
Texas Disposal Systems
2012 RFP for Solid Waste Contract: Background
Page 138 of 156
2012 Bid Comparison
Bid Company Residential Price
Non-residential
cart
Non-Residential
(Dumpsters)
Transfer
Station
Maintain
Old
Landfill
Central Texas Refuse $29.50 Price varies No Yes
Al Clawson N/A N/A N/A N/A
Waste Management $25.67 Price varies No Yes
Allied Waste $17.19 Price varies No No
IESI $24.95 Price varies No Yes
Texas Disposal Systems $13.81 Price varies Yes Yes
2012 RFP for Solid Waste Contract: Bid Comparison
TDS was the only company to bid on all 3 packets
Page 139 of 156
Solid Waste Scope of Services for New Contract
City Costs 2018 & 2019
Street Sweeping& Drainage/Streets: $79,172.10
2020 Call Out Crew: $879.11
(29 illegal dumps, 195 animals, & nearly 1,500 litter
sites)
Service Packet Service Description 2012 Contract 2022 Contract
Residential Services Landfill, Recycling, Brushy, Bulky, Other
Commercial Services Landfill, Recycling Dumpsters
Other Services City reduced rate, Transfer Station, &
Maintenance of old landfill
Downtown Services Specialized services of a City approved program
which includes landfill, recycling, & future compost
Household Hazardous Waste City approved HHW program for Tier I and II residents
Compactor Services Provide pricing for compactors
Enhanced City Services No additional charges for mulched brushy, Public
Works bulky, & street sweeping
Page 140 of 156
Solid Waste: Transfer Station Functions
COG Transfer Station Current Services
•Staging area to sort landfill trash, recycling, and some compost for residents and commercial businesses
•Landfill trash disposal brings in approximately $150,000 to the City now; improved efficiencies and
disposal streams provides opportunity to increase revenue
•Approximately 2,000 people and businesses use the Transfer Station each month
•Yellow bag-the-bag program (unique to Georgetown). City hands out about 3,000 bags per year; the
yellow bags are provided to City residents for them to place any plastic bags into and when full they place
the yellow bags in their recycling bin to be picked up curbside.
•Primary method for multifamily residents to recycle (our second most asked question, “how do I get my
apartment recycle or do it on my own?”
•Free recycling drop-off for anyone
•Free mulch
•Free Christmas Light Recycling
•Free Christmas Tree Recycling (real trees)
•Recycle/Reuse Store
•For a drop-off/management fee: Brushy/Yard trimmings, Appliances, Landfill trash, Used oil, Car
batteries, Tires, Mattresses, sofas and other bulky items
Page 141 of 156
Sanitation Contract Options
1.Utilize another 5-year extension with TDS
2.Direct negotiations with TDS to enhance contract
3.Competitive Request For Proposal (RFP) Process
4.Request For Information (RFI) process
•Then determine whether to move forward with options 1, 2, or 3
Page 142 of 156
Utilize another 5-year extension
Pro
-Good foundational contract from 2012
-Provides consistent and reliable services with our current vendor, Texas Disposal Systems
-Saves costs and workload of RFI or RFP
Con
-Items in the contract are not addressed such as the host fee, compactor and City services
-10 Years since the services were competitively bid
Direct negotiations with TDS
Pro
-Good foundational contract from 2012
-Provides consistent and reliable services with our current vendor, Texas Disposal Systems
•Saves costs and workload of RFI or RFP
•Would update current contract items such as the host fee, compactor and City services
Con
•10 Years since the services were competitively bid
Options Overview
Page 143 of 156
Competitive RFP
Pro
•Provides multiple companies opportunity to bid on public contract
Con
•Cost(s) in staff time and hiring a consultant to review and administer
•Based on 2012 data,there may be limited companies that can provide the full range of sanitation
services requested
RFI Process
Pro
•Enables the City to explore service provider capabilities and options
•Explores and reviews trends and evolving opportunities in the solid waste industry
•Keeps all contracting options open
Con
•Cost of city staff time to complete the process
Options Overview
Page 144 of 156
RFI versus RFP
Character Name Included in RFI Included in RFP
Company History
Financial Condition No
Qualifications for Services
Team Qualifications
Priced Packets No
Trucks and Equipment No
Lead Time to Start No
Interest in complete packet
Interest in individual packets
Consultant Needed No Yes
Page 145 of 156
Purpose: Request direction on preparing for a new contract that would take
effect October 31, 2022 at the conclusion of the current contract.
New Contract Process Options:
1.Utilize another 5-year extension
2.Direct negotiations with TDS
3.Competitive RFP
4.Two -step RFI then based on responses move forward with the RFP or
negotiations with preferred contractor(s)
Purpose: Request Direction
Page 146 of 156
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Workshop
August 25, 2020
S UBJEC T:
P resentation and discussion regarding Charter Review P rocess -- Skye Masson, City Attorney and David Morgan, City
Manager
I T EM S UMMARY:
Working with the City Manager ’s office, the City Attorney’s office has prepared an overview of the legal requirements
for amending the charter, background on previous charter review process, and recommended timeline for moving forward
including steps for public input and Council review as requested by City Council at the J une 23, 2020 Council meeting.
F I NANC I AL I MPAC T:
TB D
S UBMI T T ED BY:
Rachel Saucier
AT TAC HMENT S :
Description
C harter R eview - P res entation
Page 147 of 156
Charter Review
Process
Presented by City Attorney Skye Masson
August 25, 2020
Page 148 of 156
Amending
the Charter
An election to amend the Charter can be
held no more than every two (2) years.
The City Council approves the submittal of
charter amendments to the voters.
Voters approve or reject each proposed
amendment on a uniform election date.
In Georgetown, the usual practice has
included a charter review committee to
review the charter and proposed
amendments and make recommendation to
the City Council.
CITY OF GEORGETOWN
Page 149 of 156
Recent Georgetown Charter
Review Processes
CITY OF GEORGETOWN
May of 2003 -13 charter
amendments were approved by
voters. In 2001, the City Council
appointed a Charter Review
Committee that worked with the
Council and Staff to review the
Charter and make
recommendations on amendments.
2012 -the City's Legal Department
led a review committee. After a
thorough review, the Council
decided not to have a Charter
Election and the work was put on
hold.
Page 150 of 156
2012 Charter
Review
Process
CITY OF GEORGETOWN
Council directive and Staff input
11 Charter Review Committee
Meetings
Approx. 11 hours spent at Committee
meeting (11 1-hour meetings)
Approx. 7 City Council Meetings
regarding Charter Review Process
Approx. 2-year process in total
Page 151 of 156
Establishing a Charter Review
Committee
Council is responsible for creating the Charter Review
Committee. Historically each Councilmember and the
Mayor appointed a committee member.
Other considerations when establishing a Charter
Review Committee:
Identifying issues for review by Charter Committee
City Staff assistance and coordination of committee
City Attorney role in drafting amendment language
Deadline for receiving recommendations from
Committee
CITY OF GEORGETOWN
Page 152 of 156
Identifying
Charter
Amendments
CITY OF GEORGETOWN
Council-directed:
•Term Limits
•Vacancies
•Correcting
inconsistencies with
state law.
Citizen-directed
Staff-directed
Consider
amendments
recommended in
2012
Page 153 of 156
Timeline
Options
Must order the charter amendment election
at least 78 days prior to the uniform election
date
May 1, 2021—Uniform election date would
require completed process and first reading
of an ordinance by January 19, 2021
November 2, 2021 Uniform election date
would require completed process and first
reading of an ordinance by July 27, 2021.
CITY OF GEORGETOWN
Page 154 of 156
Recommended Schedule—
November 2021 Election
CITY OF GEORGETOWN
Legal Dept and City Staff
conduct technical review
of Charter and
presentation of result of
review to Council
Fall 2020
Council appointment of
Charter Review
Commission and
submission of
amendments for
commission consideration
Late Fall 2020
Charter Review
Commission
meetings/review of
Charter
Spring 2021
City Council holds public
hearings on proposed
amendments.
June–July 2021
First Reading of
Ordinance Calling
Charter Amendment
Election
27 July 2021
Publish required notices
of election
Aug.–Sep.
Charter Election
1 Nov. 2021
Page 155 of 156
Council Direction
1.Does the Council wish to proceed with the timeline for November
2021 Charter Amendment Election?
2.How would the Council like to identify potential amendments/issues
for review?
CITY OF GEORGETOWN
Page 156 of 156