HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda CC 01.23.2018 WorkshopNotice of M eeting of the
Governing B ody of the
City of Georgetown, Texas
J anuary 23 , 20 18
The Ge orgetown City Council will meet on January 23, 2018 at 3:30 PM at Co uncil Chambers - 101
East 7th Street
The City o f Georgetown is committed to co mpliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If
you re quire assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA,
reasonable assistance, adaptations, or ac c ommo datio ns will be provided upo n request. P lease contact
the City Se c retary's Office, at least three (3 ) days prio r to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930-
3652 o r City Hall at 113 East 8th Street fo r additional information; TTY use rs ro ute through Relay
Texas at 7 11.
Policy De ve lopme nt/Re vie w Workshop -
A Ove rview and discussion regarding the creatio n of an In-City Municipal Utility District (MUD)
fo r the pro posed Berry Creek Highlands Development. -- Wayne Re e d, Assistant City Manager
B Ove rview presentation and discussion o f the City’s Debt Program – Laurie Brewer, Assistant City
Manager and Paul Diaz, Budget Manager
C Ove rview presentation of Water Resource Utilization for the 2017 fiscal year -- Leticia Zavala,
Customer Care Director
Exe cutive Se ssion
In compliance with the Open Meetings Ac t, Chapter 551, Government Co de , Verno n's Texas Codes,
Annotate d, the items listed below will be discussed in closed session and are subject to action in the
regular se ssio n.
D Se c . 55 1.0 71 : Consul tati on wi th Atto rney
Advic e from attorney about pending o r contemplated litigation and othe r matters on which the
attorney has a duty to advise the City Co uncil, including agenda items
- Update o n pending litigation styled Amanda P hilips v. City of Geo rge to wn
Se c . 55 1:0 74 : Personnel Matte r s
City Manager, City Attorney, City Se c retary and Municipal Judge: Consideration of the
appointment, employment, evaluatio n, reassignment, duties, discipline, o r dismissal
Se c . 55 1.0 86 : Certai n P ubl i c P ow e r Uti l i ti es: Competi ti ve Matte r s
- Purchase Po wer Update -- Jim Briggs, General Manager of Utilities
Se c . 55 1.0 87 : Del i berati on Regardi ng Eco nomi c Devel opment Ne go ti ati ons
- Pro ject Legacy
Adjournme nt
Ce rtificate of Posting
I, Shelley No wling, City S ecretary for the C ity of Geo rgeto wn, Texas , do hereby c ertify that
this Notic e o f Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a p lac e read ily acc es s ib le to
Page 1 of 79
the general pub lic at all times , o n the _____ day of _________________, 2018, at
__________, and remained so p o s ted for at leas t 72 c o ntinuo us ho urs p receding the
s cheduled time of s aid meeting.
__________________________________
Shelley No wling, City S ecretary
Page 2 of 79
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Workshop
January 23, 2018
SUBJECT:
Overview and disc ussio n regarding the creation of an In-City Municipal Utility District (MUD) for the proposed Be rry
Creek Highlands De velopment. -- Wayne Reed, Assistant City Manager
ITEM SUMMARY:
Staff is se e king Co unc il feedbac k and direction on a request to create a new In-City Munic ipal Utility Distric t (MUD).
We are seeking Council’s directio n o n whether the MUD as proposed is appropriate in its location, if the terms are
satisfactory, and/or if the re specific elements or fo cus are as you would like staff to negotiate. This co ver she et pro vide s
an analysis of ho w the propo sed MUD compares to the City’s Interim MUD Policy.
Background
Avanti Strategic Land Investo rs VIII, LLLC, (“Avanti”) is currently negotiating the purchase of appro ximately 31 4.5 ac re s
of land located on the south side of Highway 195 just west of the intersectio n of HWY 1 95 and Shell Road. The pro pe rty
is locate d within the City’s Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) and is contiguous with the city limits of Georgetown (see
Attachment 1). The property owner and developer are processing annexation and Planned Unit Development (PUD)
applications co nc urrently with its MUD request.
Avanti intends to develo p the property as a mixed-use development as shown on the attached Concept Plan (see
Attachment 2). The develo per proposes approximately 1,493 residential units along with 2 0 acres of
commercial/re tail/o ffice development, 20 acres of public parkland, a private amenity center, and additional open space. In
addition, Avanti has agreed to dedic ate to the City a 2.5 acre site for a fire station site and is working with the Jarrell ISD
on a site for an elementary school. The residential po rtion of the de velopment will include a mix o f ho using inc luding up
to 943 single-family home s, appro ximately 226 cluster homes (attached), and a maximum of 324 multi-family units. This
mix of uses is c onsistent with the City’s Future Land Use Plan (see Attachment 3).
Creation of Spe c ial District
The subject property is eligible for annexation and is expected to be served by water and wastewater infrastructure within
the next four and a half years. City Co uncil nee ds to evaluate the unique factors to determine if it justifies the creatio n of
a MUD based upon the applicant’s pro posal per Section 13.10 of the City’s Unified Development Code (UDC). An
evaluation of compliance with the City of Geo rgetown’s Interim MUD Po licy by City Staff is attached to this report (see
Attachment 5); staff has provided a summary evaluatio n o f the unique factors listed under Criteria #9 (Re quire
development in a MUD to exceed minimum UDC land use and development standards) fo r Co uncil’s consideration.
In consi derati on o f the cr e ati on of the Di stri ct, Avanti i s supporti ve of fol l o w i ng publ i c i mpro ve me nts and/or
contri buti ons:
1. Contribute $2,0 00 ,00 0 to ward the exte nsion and constructio n o f the Berry Creek wastewate r interceptor
identified in the City’s Wastewater Master Plan (see Attachment 4) that will serve this site and the service area (the
“Major WW Improvement”) along with granting of permane nt and temporary easements for this interceptor at no
cost to the City and c ontribute $54 9,3 92 toward a future wastewater interceptor to conne c t to the Majo r WW
Improveme nt. The Developer estimate s its total costs for o ff-site wastewater infrastructure will exceed
$4,000,00 0;
2. Contribute $500,000 to ward project’s pro rata share of a future elevated water storage tank to better serve this
site;
3. Dedicatio n of approximately 8 .5 acres for the future right-of-way (9 4 fe e t in width) for the future Shell Spur Ro ad
consiste nt with the City’s Overall Transportatio n P lan (OTP);
4. Fund the design and co nstruction of an appro ximately 1.0 mile of the Shell Spur Road four-lane major collector
road bisecting the pro ject, including an intersection at HWY 195, with the City providing reimbursement for the
construc tion o f the 3 rd and 4th lanes using deve lo per contributions it receive s fro m o ther developers.
5. Fully fund the design and construc tion o f a signalized intersectio n at HWY 195 and She ll Spur Road along with
other transportatio n improvements at HWY 19 5 identified in its Traffic Impact Analysis (“TIA”);
6. Dedicate 2.5 acres for a future fire station site lo cated on Shell Spur Road near HWY 19 5;
Page 3 of 79
7. Dedicate 2 0 acres for public parkland adjacent to the City’s future Westside P ark and develop the site using
$425,000 for trails, recreational, and playgro und features; andFund the design and construction o f a public parking
trailhead lo c ated on the public parkland, including a minimum of 15 public parking spaces.
In addition, Avanti has agreed to the following enhanc e d development standards and fe atures:
1. Per the proposed P UD, residential development shall be subject to e nhanced architectural features ove r and abo ve
City requirements, including exterior finishes having 85% masonry finishes of brick, stone, and/or stuc c o
(exclusive of roofs, eaves, dormers so ffits, windo ws, doors, gables, garage doo rs, decorative trim and trim work).
All walls must include materials and design characteristics c onsistent with tho se on the front. Lesser quality
materials or details for side or rear walls are prohibited;
2. Per the proposed PUD, nonre side ntial develo pment, excluding public sites, shall be subject to enhanced
architec tural features over and abo ve City requirements and shall have exterio rs finishes constructed of 10 0%
brick, stone, stucco (exclusive of roofs, eaves, so ffits, windows, doors, gable s and framework);
3. Design and construct a minimum o f one private amenity center that will contain a clubho use and po ol for Distric t
residents use only. The private amenity cente r will be owned and maintained by the Community homeowner ’s
associatio n;
4. Design and construct private trails throughout the develo pment and provide pedestrian connectivity to the public
park; and
5. Fund the co st of all City legal fees incurred by the City in the creation of the District.
Requested Feedbac k from the Council:
Is the use o f an In-City MUD suitable in the propo sed location?
If there is a desire to proceed with the MUD pro c e ss, are there specific eleme nts or fo cus areas you would like
staff to ne gotiate?
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Proposed Fi nanc i al Terms (based on esti mate d assessed val ues)
Bonds to be Issued (Maximum Amount) – $30 ,15 0,0 00
Bond Maturity (Maximum) – 25 years fro m date o f issuance
Bond Issuance Period (from first to last bo nds issued) – 10 years
District Only Tax Rate (Maximum) – $0.55 /$10 0 assessed valuation
City Tax Rate (FY18 ) – $0.4200
Total Maximum Tax Rate, City and District (based upon FY18) – $0.97
Facilities Bonds may be issued to finance: Water, Wastewate r, Storm Drainage, Roads, Recreational Facilities, and
Refunding Bonds
SUBMITTED BY:
Wayne Reed, Assistant City Manager
ATTACHMENT S:
Description
Att 1 - Loc atio n Map - Berry Creek Highland s MUD
Att 2 - PUD C o nc ep t Plan Revised 2018-01-23
Att 3 - Future Land Us e P lan - Berry Creek Highlands MUD
Att 4 - Map Berry Creek Interc ep tor - Berry Creek Highlands MUD
Att 5 - Evaluation Matrix - Interim MUD Polic y - Berry Creek Highland s MUD
Att 6 - Interim MUD P o licy RES 092314-W
Att 7 - PowerP o int - Berry Creek Highlands MUD 2018-01-23
Page 4 of 79
Berry Creek Highlands MUD Location Map
Page 5 of 79
* Open space includes greenbelts, easements and landscape
buffers
314.5 AC.TOTAL
Amenity Center 3.0 AC.
Major Row
Open Space*
15.7 AC.
17.1 AC.
Notes:
RESIDENTIAL (MF-1)
UNITSLOT TYPE ACRES
20.1 AC.
213.7 AC.RESIDENTIAL TOTAL Total Units
Stream Buffers 5.8 AC.
Floodplain Included in Public Park
RESIDENTIAL (MF-2)16.2 AC.
RESIDENTIAL (SF)177.4 AC.
Commercial (C3)19.9 AC.
1,500
201
324
975
Public Park (includes floodplain)20.0 AC.
Fire Station 2.5 AC.
10' Trails
Public Facility (PF)14.2 AC.
(2,174 LF)
Major Row By Others 2.6 AC.
RESIDENTIAL LAND USE SUMMARY
SHEET FILE: H:\170013-AVAC\Cadfiles\PLANNING\Submittals\PUD March 2017\Exhibit C3 Update.dwg
GEORGETOWN, TEXAS
AVANTI ACQUISITION COMPANY, LLC
BERRY CREEK HIGHLANDS Date: January 11, 2018
Scale: 1" = 1000'
North
EXHIBIT C
Base mapping compiled from best available information. All map data should be
considered as preliminary, in need of verification, and subject to change.This land plan
is conceptual in nature and does not represent any regulatory approval.Plan is subject
to change.
SEC Planning, LLC
t 512.246.7003
www.secplanning.com info@secplanning.com
Land Planning Landscape Architecture Community Branding
AUSTIN, TEXAS
150010000500
++
+
Page 6 of 79
Future Land Use Plan - Berry Creek Highlands MUD Location
Berry Creek
Highlands
Page 7 of 79
Berry Creek Interceptor Line and Berry Creek Highlands MUD Location Map
West
Side Park
Berry Creek Highlands
Berry Creek
Interceptor Line
Page 8 of 79
Evaluation of Compliance with Interim MUD Policy – Berry Creek Highlands MUD
Revised: January 17, 2018 Page 1 of 4
The City’s Interim MUD Policy is intended to clarify how staff and City Council fulfill the purpose of
Section 13.10 of the UDC in a consistent and fair manner. The purpose of a Georgetown MUD is to assist
in closing the financial gap when a unique development is seeking to exceed minimum City standards.
Generally
Meets
Policy
Does Not
Appear to
Meet
Policy
Policy
No.
Policy
X
1 Threshold questions under Section 13.10.030. Property is
eligible for annexation and can be served by City water
and wastewater utilities within the next 4 ½ years. The
applicant has submitted an annexation petition and PUD
application which have been reviewed by the City.
X
2 “Unique factors” justifying MUD creation: a) open space,
regional trail, and public parkland along Berry Creek and
adjacent to City’s Westside Park site; b) Developer is
contributing toward transportation and utility facilities
beneficial to the implementation of the City’s master
plans. See responses to Policy 9 and 10 below.
X
3 Submit information with the MUD creation petition that
would allow the staff to perform the level of review City
Council has directed during consideration of several recent
MUD petitions.
X
4 Agree to cross-departmental “MUD Review Team.”
X 5 Address provision of public services and address public
safety: Developer has consented to dedication of a fire
station site in a location that will enhance public services
and optimize service delivery.
X 6 Address utility service issues: a) Developer has agreed to
contribute to, fund, and/or construct water and
wastewater infrastructure consistent with City’s utility
master plans; b) City will be the provider of water, sewer,
and solid waste services; and c) City will impose water and
wastewater impact fees through standard procedure.
Page 9 of 79
Evaluation of Compliance with Interim MUD Policy – Berry Creek Highlands MUD
Revised: January 17, 2018 Page 2 of 4
Generally
Meets
Policy
Does Not
Appear to
Meet
Policy
Policy
No.
Policy
X 7 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: Developer has agreed to a maximum bond
issuance amount and period as shown under the
“Financial Impacts” section of the Council cover sheet.
N/A 8 Address future annexation of the MUD, when located in
the ETJ. This will be an In-city MUD.
9 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.
X 9 a. Restrict age-restricted development <10% of overall
residential units: Developer is not requesting age-
restricted development.
X 9 b. Prohibit correctional facilities, etc…
X 9 c. Require 20% be identified for nonresidential land
uses, unless located in Low Density Residential in the
City’s Future Land Use Plan…: The Concept Plan
identifies roughly 36.7 acres for nonresidential land
uses, of which 20 acres is to be commercial, or about
12%. The land uses are consistent with the Future
Land Use Plan which identifies this property as
predominantly as a Mixed Use Community with a
Mixed Use Neighborhood Center at the future
intersection of HWY 195 and Shell Spur Road.
X 9 d. Require at least 30% of proposed commercial/retail
land uses be developed within first 5 years of first
building permit.
X 9 e. Require workforce housing.
Page 10 of 79
Evaluation of Compliance with Interim MUD Policy – Berry Creek Highlands MUD
Revised: January 17, 2018 Page 3 of 4
Generally
Meets
Policy
Does Not
Appear to
Meet
Policy
Policy
No.
Policy
X 9 f. Require public school site and public facility sites, if
desired: Developer is working with the Jarrell ISD on a
potential site for a future elementary school and has
agreed to dedicate a 2.5 acre site for a fire station.
X 9 g. Require a land use plan to be attached to the consent
agreement
X 9 h. Require gross impervious coverage to be kept below
the maximums allowed by the UDC
X 9 i. Require tree preservation to exceed minimum UDC
standards
X 9 j. Require compliance with all water quality and water
conservation/drought restriction ordinances….
X 9 k. Require protection and conservation or features
unique to site such as clusters of trees, springs,
natural floodplain, etc…: The Concept Plan reflects
the stream corridor and floodplain to be left as open
space and a 20 acre public park site to be provided.
X 9 l. Require higher standards for architectural design:
Developer has agreed to higher standards.
X 9 m. Require submittal of a pattern book with visual
representations of architectural styles…: Developer
has agreed to submit a pattern book, which will be
provided with future site specific submittals.
X 9 n. Require landscaping along OTP roadways.
X 9 o. Require signage consistent with UDC provisions.
X 9 p. Require innovative or non-conventional subdivision
design: The Developer is proposing a mix of housing
products within the roughly 1,500 residential units
with a trail network and sidewalks to connect homes
to future the school and public park.
Page 11 of 79
Evaluation of Compliance with Interim MUD Policy – Berry Creek Highlands MUD
Revised: January 17, 2018 Page 4 of 4
Generally
Meets
Policy
Does Not
Appear to
Meet
Policy
Policy
No.
Policy
X 10 Require development in a MUD to exceed UDC parkland
requirements and address parkland provisions in the
consent agreement: Developer has agreed to dedicate and
develop a 20 acre public park site adjacent to the future
Westside Park with direct access onto Shell Spur Road, to
construct more than 2,000 linear feet of a 10 foot wide
regional trail on the public parkland, to construct a public
parking lot on the park site with 15 spaces for a trailhead,
and provide pedestrian connectivity between future
school site and the public parkland.
X 11 Address transportation issues and include transportation
provisions in the consent agreement: Developer has
conducted a TIA, agreed to dedicate right-of-way
consistent with OTP, consents to connectivity, and to
comply with water quality and stormwater best
management practices.
Page 12 of 79
Page 13 of 79
Page 14 of 79
Page 15 of 79
Page 16 of 79
Page 17 of 79
Page 18 of 79
Page 19 of 79
Page 20 of 79
Page 21 of 79
Page 22 of 79
Page 23 of 79
Page 24 of 79
Page 25 of 79
Page 26 of 79
Page 27 of 79
Page 28 of 79
Page 29 of 79
Page 30 of 79
Page 31 of 79
Page 32 of 79
1/17/2018
1
Evaluation of Proposed Berry
Creek Highlands In-City MUD
City Council Workshop
January 23, 2018
Purpose
Staff is seeking Council feedback and
direction on a request to create a new In-City
Municipal Utility District (MUD)
• Is the use of an In-City MUD suitable in the proposed
location?
• If there is a desire to proceed with the proposed In-city
MUD, are there specific elements or focus areas you
would like staff to negotiate?
2
Page 33 of 79
1/17/2018
2
Presentation Overview
•Context
•Interim MUD Policy Evaluation
•Proposed Financial Terms
•Council Feedback and Direction
4
Berry Creek Highlands Location
6
Page 34 of 79
1/17/2018
3
Berry Creek Highlands Concept Plan
6
Future Land Use Plan
6
Page 35 of 79
1/17/2018
4
Berry Creek Wastewater Interceptor
6
Georgetown MUDs 2004 - 2017
8
20042006200720122014201520162017
Berry Creek Highlands
Page 36 of 79
1/17/2018
5
Interim MUD Policy Evaluation
7
Generally
Meets Policy
Does Not
Appear to Meet
Policy
Policy
No.
Policy
X 1 Threshold questions under Section 13.10.030. Property is eligible for
annexation and can be served by City water and wastewater utilities within
the next 4 ½ years. The applicant has submitted an annexation petition and
PUD application which have been reviewed by the City.
X 2 “Unique factors” justifying MUD creation: a) open space, regional trail, and
public parkland along Berry Creek and adjacent to City’s Westside Park
site; b) Developer is contributing toward transportation and utility facilities
beneficial to the implementation of the City’s master plans. See responses
to Policy 9 and 10 below.
X 3 Submit information with the MUD creation petition that would allow the staff
to perform the level of review City Council has directed during consideration
of several recent MUD petitions.
X 4 Agree to cross-departmental “MUD Review Team.”
X 5 Address provision of public services and address public safety: Developer
has consented to dedication of a fire station site in a location that will
enhance public services and optimize service delivery.
X 6 Address utility service issues: a) Developer has agreed to contribute to,
fund, and/or construct water and wastewater infrastructure consistent with
City’s utility master plans; b) City will be the provider of water, sewer, and
solid waste services; and c) City will impose water and wastewater impact
fees through standard procedure.
Interim MUD Policy Evaluation
7
Generally
Meets Policy
Does Not
Appear to
Meet Policy
Policy
No.
Policy
X 7 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: Developer has agreed to a
maximum bond issuance amount and period as shown under the
“Financial Impacts” section of the Council cover sheet.
N/A 8 Address future annexation of the MUD, when located in the ETJ.
This will be an In-city MUD.
9 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.
X 9 a. Restrict age-restricted development <10% of overall residential
units: Developer is not requesting age-restricted development.
X 9 b. Prohibit correctional facilities, etc…
Page 37 of 79
1/17/2018
6
Interim MUD Policy Evaluation
7
Generally
Meets Policy
Does Not
Appear to
Meet Policy
Policy
No.
Policy
X 9 c. Require 20% be identified for nonresidential land uses, unless
located in Low Density Residential in the City’s Future Land Use
Plan…: The Concept Plan identifies roughly 36.7 acres for
nonresidential land uses, of which 20 acres is to be commercial,
or about 12%. The land uses are consistent with the Future Land
Use Plan which identifies this property as predominantly as a
Mixed Use Community with a Mixed Use Neighborhood Center at
the future intersection of HWY 195 and Shell Spur Road.
X 9 d. Require at least 30% of proposed commercial/retail land uses
be developed within first 5 years of first building permit.
X 9 e. Require workforce housing.
Interim MUD Policy Evaluation
7
Generally
Meets Policy
Does Not
Appear to
Meet Policy
Policy
No.
Policy
X 9 f. Require public school site and public facility sites, if desired:
Developer is working with the Jarrell ISD on a potential site for a
future elementary school and has agreed to dedicate a 2.5 acre site
for a fire station.
X 9 g. Require a land use plan to be attached to the consent agreement
X 9 h. Require gross impervious coverage to be kept below the
maximums allowed by the UDC
X 9 i. Require tree preservation to exceed minimum UDC standards
X 9 j. Require compliance with all water quality and water
conservation/drought restriction ordinances….
Page 38 of 79
1/17/2018
7
Interim MUD Policy Evaluation
7
Generally
Meets Policy
Does Not
Appear to
Meet Policy
Policy
No.
Policy
X 9 k. Require protection and conservation or features unique to site
such as clusters of trees, springs, natural floodplain, etc…: The
Concept Plan reflects the stream corridor and floodplain to be left as
open space and a 20 acre public park site to be provided.
X 9 l. Require higher standards for architectural design: Developer has
agreed to higher standards.
X 9 m. Require submittal of a pattern book with visual representations of
architectural styles…: Developer has agreed to submit a pattern
book, which will be provided with future site specific submittals.
X 9 n. Require landscaping along OTP roadways.
X 9 o. Require signage consistent with UDC provisions.
X 9 p. Require innovative or non-conventional subdivision design: The
Developer is proposing a mix of housing products within the roughly
1,500 residential units with a trail network and sidewalks to connect
homes to future the school and public park.
Interim MUD Policy Evaluation
7
Generally
Meets Policy
Does Not
Appear to
Meet Policy
Policy
No.
Policy
X 10 Require development in a MUD to exceed UDC parkland
requirements and address parkland provisions in the consent
agreement: Developer has agreed to dedicate and develop a 20 acre
public park site adjacent to the future Westside Park with direct
access onto Shell Spur Road, to construct more than 2,000 linear
feet of a 10 foot wide regional trail on the public parkland, to
construct a public parking lot on the park site with 15 spaces for a
trailhead, and provide pedestrian connectivity between future school
site and the public parkland.
X 11 Address transportation issues and include transportation provisions
in the consent agreement: Developer has conducted a TIA, agreed
to dedicate right-of-way consistent with OTP, consents to
connectivity, and to comply with water quality and stormwater best
management practices.
Page 39 of 79
1/17/2018
8
Proposed Financial Terms
15
• Bonds to be Issued (Maximum Amount) – $30,150,000
• Bond Maturity (Maximum) – 25 years from date of issue
• Bond Issuance Period (from first to last) – 10 years
• District Only Tax Rate (Maximum) – $0.55/$100 AV
• City Tax Rate (FY18) – $0.4200
• Total Maximum Tax Rate, City and District (based upon
FY18) – $0.97
Council Feedback and Direction
• Is the use of an In-City MUD suitable in the
proposed location?
• If there is a desire to proceed with the proposed
In-city MUD, are there specific elements or focus
areas you would like staff to negotiate?
16
Page 40 of 79
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Workshop
January 23, 2018
SUBJECT:
Overview prese ntation and discussion of the City’s Debt P rogram – Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager and Paul Diaz,
Budget Manage r
ITEM SUMMARY:
This overview o f current and proposed debt o bligations is a requirement of the City’s Fiscal and Budgetary P olicy. The
purpose is to review the debt management program, outstanding debt, and a pre vie w of the 2018 debt sale. The re vie w
includes Revenue bonds, General Obligation bonds, CO bonds, and Self-Supporting obligations.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUBMITTED BY:
Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager and Paul Diaz, Budget Manager
ATTACHMENT S:
Description
Deb t Overview P res entation - 2018-01-23
Page 41 of 79
1/17/2018
City Manager's Proposed Budget 1
FY2018 Annual Budget
FY 2018 Debt Overview
FY2018 Annual Budget
Debt Planning
•Budget development includes capital plan and
debt plan
•2018 Budget included proposed debt with tax
estimated tax impacts (for following year)
–Refine the 2018 debt plan as project timing and
costs are updated
Page 42 of 79
1/17/2018
City Manager's Proposed Budget 2
FY2018 Annual Budget
Debt Policies
•Provide debt update annually
•Balance needs of the City between pay as you
go and debt financing
–Stability of tax rate
•Explore all funding options for a capital item
•Finance a capital item over its useful life
•Method of sale – competitive
FY2018 Annual Budget
Types of Debt
•General Obligation Bonds
–Used for large projects
–Approved by the voters
–Repaid with property taxes over long terms
•Certificates of Obligation
–Used for required or routine items
–Public notice required
–Repaid with property taxes or other revenue
–Term over the life of the asset
Page 43 of 79
1/17/2018
City Manager's Proposed Budget 3
FY2018 Annual Budget
Types of Debt
•Revenue Bonds
–Used for large electric and water projects
–Repaid with utility revenue over life of asset
FY2018 Annual Budget
Current Bond Ratings
•Independent review of city’s management and
financial condition to determine
creditworthiness
•Impacts the interest rate
•Standard & Poor’s 2017 Rating
–General obligation AA+
–Revenue bonds AA
Page 44 of 79
1/17/2018
City Manager's Proposed Budget 4
FY2018 Annual Budget
Current Tax Rate
•Total 42 cents per $100 assessed valuation
–Interest & Sinking 22.7 cents
–Operations & Maintenance 19.3 cents
•Contract with the voters
–2015 Transportation Bond
•No increase more than 10 cents total
•No increase more than 2 cents in one year
•City has decreased tax rates
–FY18/0.42 ‐‐FY17/0.424 ‐‐FY16/0.434
FY2018 Annual Budget
Debt Coverage Ratio
•For revenue bonds
•Combined water and electric
•Number of times net operating revenue can
cover debt service
–Bond covenants 1.35x
–Fiscal and Budgetary Policy 1.5x
–2018 coverage is 1.95x
Page 45 of 79
1/17/2018
City Manager's Proposed Budget 5
FY2018 Annual Budget
Current Tax Obligations
Other City
Facilities
44%
Parks/Rec & Facilities
12%
Public Safety
28%
Streets and
Transportation
16%
General Government
Tax Supported Debt $132.6M
FY2018 Annual Budget
5 Year Tax Supported Debt
$0
$20,000,000
$40,000,000
$60,000,000
$80,000,000
$100,000,000
$120,000,000
$140,000,000
2012‐2013 2013‐2014 2014‐2015 2015‐2016 2016‐2017
Tax Supported Debt
Tax Supported Debt
Page 46 of 79
1/17/2018
City Manager's Proposed Budget 6
FY2018 Annual Budget
Current Enterprise Obligations
Electric
32%
Irrigation
1%
Stormwater Drainage
4%
Water
30%Airport
1%
Wastewater
32%
Enterprise Debt $106.6M
FY2018 Annual Budget
5 Year Enterprise Debt,
Including Self Supported Debt
$0
$20,000,000
$40,000,000
$60,000,000
$80,000,000
$100,000,000
$120,000,000
2012‐2013 2013‐2014 2014‐2015 2015‐2016 2016‐2017
Enterprise Debt
Enterprise Debt
Page 47 of 79
1/17/2018
City Manager's Proposed Budget 7
FY2018 Annual Budget
Debt per Capita
$1,988
$1,932
$1,859
$2,124
$2,187
$1,600 $1,700 $1,800 $1,900 $2,000 $2,100 $2,200 $2,300
2012/1
3
2013/1
4
2014/1
5
2015/1
6
2016/1
7
Total Tax Supported Debt per Capita
FY2018 Annual Budget
Debt Per Customer
$898
$1,063
$961
$983
$1,185
$0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200 $1,400
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
Outstanding Debt per Utility Customer
Page 48 of 79
1/17/2018
City Manager's Proposed Budget 8
FY2018 Annual Budget
Historical Assets Net of Debt
$‐ $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600 $700
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Millions
City Assets Net of Related Debt
General Utility
FY2018 Annual Budget
FY 2018 Proposed Debt
General Obligation Bonds
Katy Crossing Trail 500,000
San Gabriel Park 3,500,000
FM 1460 1,950,000
FM 971 3,900,000
Leander Road to SW Bypass 1,550,000
Northwest Blvd Bridge 10,500,000
Rivery Blvd Extension 4,500,000
General Obligation Bonds 26,400,000
Page 49 of 79
1/17/2018
City Manager's Proposed Budget 9
FY2018 Annual Budget
FY 2018 Proposed Debt
Certificate of Obligation FY 18 Budget Amendments Total Debt
Public Safety Vehicles 1,799,000 300,000 2,099,000
Public Safety Radio Replacement 500,000 500,000
ADA Facilities 150,000 150,000
ADA Transition Plan Parks 150,000 150,000
Animal Services Relocation 100,000 100,000
Downtown Parking Expansion 250,000 250,000
Downtown West Signage 125,000 125,000
GMC Remodel 100,000 100,000
Fire Station 7 2,000,000 300,000 2,300,000
Fire Station 6 300,000 300,000
Enterprise Resource Planning System 2,700,000 2,000,000 4,700,000
Sidewalks 576,000 576,000
Certificate of Obligation Total 8,750,000 2,600,000 11,350,000
FY2018 Annual Budget
FY 2018 Proposed Debt
*Note: electric may adjust for new growth
Enterprise Debt Self Supporting Revenue Total
Electric CIP 6,537,000 6,537,000
Airport CIP 150,000 150,000
Stormwater CIP 900,000 900,000
Enterprise Total 1,050,000 6,537,000 7,587,000
Page 50 of 79
1/17/2018
City Manager's Proposed Budget 10
FY2018 Annual Budget
Five Year CIP
Row Labels FY2018 FY2019 FY2020 FY2021 FY2022
2008 Road Bond 5,850,000 ‐ 900,000 4,300,000 ‐
2015 Road Bond 16,550,000 4,100,000 2,250,000 6,370,000 13,000,000
Facilities 3,325,000 6,250,000 300,000 1,650,000 4,400,000
FD 300,000 250,000 250,000 300,000 ‐
Finance 6,999,000 1,895,500 2,912,500 1,473,000 745,500
Parks 4,150,000 6,300,000 2,400,000 1,150,000 1,250,000
Sidewalk 576,000 1,031,000 1,087,000 3,768,000 ‐
Grand Total 37,750,000 19,826,500 10,099,500 19,011,000 19,395,500
FY2018 Annual Budget
Tax Impact Analysis
•Developed in FY2016, the Five Year Debt
Model is a tool to better understand the
impacts of issuing debt.
•Allows for scenario testing and the adjustment
of multiple variables including assessed value,
sales tax, tax rate distribution, and debt service
requirements.
Page 51 of 79
1/17/2018
City Manager's Proposed Budget 11
FY2018 Annual Budget
How the Model Works
Projected Tax Increase
FY2018 Annual Budget
Forecast
Scenario #1
•Assessed Value in FY2019 will
total near $7.8 billion and will
exceed $9.1 billion around
FY2022.
•Property tax revenue is
projected to total $28.8
million, of which approximately
$14.6 million will be needed to
cover debt service.
•Strong growth in AV will allow
the City to issue more debt
with little to no impact on the
tax rate in FY2019.
Scenario #2
•Assessed Value in FY2019
will total near $7.8 billion
and will exceed $8.9 billion
around FY2022.
•Property tax revenue is
projected to total
approximately 1.6 M less by
2020 than in Scenario #1.
Page 52 of 79
1/17/2018
City Manager's Proposed Budget 12
FY2018 Annual Budget
Tax Rate Projected Impacts –In cents
Scenario #1
Scenario #2
Base Rate Yearly Impact Total Rate
FY2019 42.00 0.23 42.23
FY2020 42.23 1.23 43.46
FY2021 43.46 0.69 44.15
FY2022 44.15 1.30 45.45
Base Rate Yearly Impact Total Rate
FY2019 42.00 1.00 43.00
FY2020 43.00 1.93 44.93
FY2021 44.93 1.34 46.27
FY2022 46.27 1.98 48.25
FY2018 Annual Budget
2017 Refunding/Early
Defeasance‐December 2017
We would like to note that the following
details do not include the numbers from the
refunding that happened in December. The
refunding and defeasance saved the City
$1.3 million dollars.
Page 53 of 79
1/17/2018
City Manager's Proposed Budget 13
FY2018 Annual Budget
Takeaways
•City’s debt has increased over the past decade
•Correlates to population growth and voter approved
projects to improve services and quality of life
•Excellent credit ratings
•Economic conditions and fiscal management ensure
ability to pay debt
•Current debt estimated to impact FY19 rate at .23 cents
•Current economic forecast and CIP plan shows drives
need for increased rate of 3.4 Cents to 6.2 Cents over
next four years with continued growth
FY2018 Annual Budget
Next Steps
•February 27 Council Agenda
–Authorize Financial Advisors to proceed with bond
sale schedule and documents
–Approve Notice of Intent to issue Certificates of
Obligation
•March
–Offering Statements reviewed by staff
–Staff meet with bond rating agency
Page 54 of 79
1/17/2018
City Manager's Proposed Budget 14
FY2018 Annual Budget
Next Steps
•April 24 Council Meeting
–Approve results of competitive sale
•May 17– Closing and receive proceeds
Page 55 of 79
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Workshop
January 23, 2018
SUBJECT:
Overview prese ntation o f Water Resource Utilizatio n for the 2017 fiscal year -- Le tic ia Zavala, Customer Care Dire c to r
ITEM SUMMARY:
An overview of water resource utilization will be presented and discussed. Focus will be on water resources, productio n,
and conservation effo rts.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUBMITTED BY:
Leticia Zavala, Custo mer Care Director? (skm)
ATTACHMENT S:
Description
P res entation
Page 56 of 79
Water Resource Utilization
Fiscal Year 2017
Council Workshop
January 23, 2018
Page 57 of 79
Agenda
•Water Resources & Production
•Conservation Goals
•Annual Conservation Efforts
•Rebate Program
•Drought Survivability (Agrilife) Project with Texas A&M
•Brazos River Authority –Stage 1 Watch
•2014 Conservation Plan Update
•Questions
Page 58 of 79
Water Resources
•Water Supply -55,670 acre feet of raw water
–Surface Supply -49,179 acre feet (BRA & LCRA)
•Lake Georgetown -6,720 acre-feet
•Lake Stillhouse Hollow -38,987 acre-feet
•Lake Travis -3,472 acre-feet (under acquisition)
–Groundwater Supply -6,491 acre feet (Edwards Aquifer)
•Water Treatment/Production -TTL Capacity 47.13 mgd
–Lake WTP -28.6 mgd
–Southside WTP -3.23 mgd
–Park WTP -6.3 mgd
–Domel WTP -3 mgd
–Round Rock Treated Water -6 mgd
Page 59 of 79
Water Resources
•Water Storage Capacity -30mg
–23 mg in storage tanks (elevated & ground)
–7 mg in clear wells
Page 60 of 79
Water Production -3 Year Comparison
•2016
–Total production -6.3B gallons
–Average daily -17.2M
–Peak -36M
•2017
–Total -7.2B gallons
–Ave Daily -19.9M
–Peak -38M
Page 61 of 79
Water Conservation Goals
•Be “Good Stewards” of our Natural Resources
1.To supply water for total buildout of the Georgetown water
service area utilizing existing water resources
•Goal set forth in 2014 Conservation Plan -Reduce total
consumption (GCPD)Year GPCD Water Loss %
2014 Water Conservation Plan Goals:
Year End 2018 180 15%
Year End 2023 160 12%
Actual Annual Totals:
Year End 2014 217 17%
Year End 2015 188 15%
Year End 2016 179*12%
*Ahead of schedule based on
Year end report totals
Page 62 of 79
Water Conservation Goals
2014
2015
2016
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
2018 2023
GP
C
D
2014 Conservation Plan
Gallons Per Capita/Day (GCPD)
GCPD Goal GCPD (Actual)
2014
2015
2016
10.00%
11.00%
12.00%
13.00%
14.00%
15.00%
16.00%
17.00%
18.00%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
2018 2023
WA
T
E
R
L
O
S
S
%
2014 Conservation Plan
Water Loss Percentage
Water Loss % Goal Water Loss % (Actual)Page 63 of 79
Overall Conservation Goals
•Be “Good Stewards” of our Natural Resources -cont’d
2.Spread consumption throughout the day to ensure efficient use of
water resources
•Balance the % of customers irrigating each day
•Flatten peak -moving some of the demand to the shoulders.
•Customer Service
–Educate customers on usage patterns to help identify potential
savings for both GUS and customer
–Help customers reduce their usage and reduce bills
•Achieve Operational Efficiencies
–Manage demand at lowest cost possible
Page 64 of 79
Water Conservation –Year-Round Efforts
•Aqua Alerts -since 2009
•Internal conservation resource -2012
–residential irrigation audits & education
•Mandatory 3 day watering schedule -2014
•Initiated a marketing ad campaign –Don’t
Water Down Georgetown” –summer 2016
–Choose 2 days/week watering
–Eliminate watering on Mondays
–Turn off irrigation controllers during winter months
–Reduce sprinkler system zone times
•Irrigation Rebate Program
Page 65 of 79
Water Conservation –Year-Round Efforts
•Outreach Events
–Red Poppy Festival
–Market Days on the Square
–Georgetown Christmas Stroll
–Sun City Water Matters Town Hall
–Sun City Landscape Maintained Homes
•Mass Marketing
–#Pick2 Postcard mailer
–½ page ads –seasonal
•Community Impact
•Williamson County Sun
Page 66 of 79
Irrigation Rebate Program
•Implemented program April 2017
–Outlined in the 2014 Conservation Plan
–Rebate covered cost of annual inspection
and programing controller to 2 day/week
schedule.
•Processed 1,539 rebates (thru Nov
2017)
•54 local irrigation companies
participated –5 completed over 83% of
the rebates
Water -Irrigation Rebates
Month # Received Total Rebate Amount
May 289 $21,675.00
June 358 $26,850.00
July 256 $19,200.00
August 243 $18,225.00
Sept 181 $13,575.00
Oct 160 $12,000.00
Nov 52 $3,900.00
Total 1539 $115,425.00
Page 67 of 79
Drought Survivability Study –“Agrilife” Project
•Texas Water Foundation, Texas A&M, & San
Antonio Water System (SAWS)
•Identify, monitor and document watering needs for
100 native landscape plants to this area -2 sites
–SAWS
–Georgetown
•Timeline:
–2014 -2015: Conducted research study
–2016: Released study findings -SAWS site
–2017: Released addendum -Georgetown site
•specific plant survivability performance indexes.
Page 68 of 79
•BRA issued Watch for Lake Georgetown –late Nov
•Why did BRA do this?
–Lake Georgetown had lower inflows & the Williamson County
Regional Raw Water Line (WCRRWL) operated for more
than 1 month.
–This triggered the plan as a potential early indicator that
drought conditions could be developing in the coming year.
–BRA’s goal was to raise public awareness while asking for a
voluntary 5% reduction in water use
Brazos River Authority -Stage 1 Drought Watch
Page 69 of 79
•What did Georgetown do as a result of the
watch?
–Continued our normal winter ad campaign
•Turn off irrigation systems during winter months
•Williamson County Sun & Community Impact
–Sent letters to MUD’s, HOA’s, and top users
requesting their help in reducing water use by
turning off their irrigation systems
–Updated Website to highlight drought information
Brazos River Authority –Stage 1 Drought Watch
Page 70 of 79
2014 Water Conservation Plan
•Purpose:
–Document strategies to utilize existing water resources to
supply water for the total buildout of the Georgetown service
area
–Ensure most efficient use of Georgetown’s water resources
•Mandated:
–Texas Administrative Code -Title 30/Chapter 288
•Plans are updated every 5 years
–To coincide with regional water planning efforts
–Plan update scheduled for 2019
Page 71 of 79
2014 Water Conservation Plan
•2014
–Added provision for landscape & irrigation standards for new
construction to water ordinance
•2015
–Drought Survivability Study (DSS) participation began
•2016
–Initiated marketing ad campaign -“Don’t Water Down
Georgetown”
–Expanded role of conservation dept to include utility marketing
functions & moved dept into Customer Care
Page 72 of 79
2014 Water Conservation Plan
•2016 -cont’d
–Increased participation in regional planning efforts
•BRA Region G Board -election of Jim Briggs to Board
•TCEQ Irrigation Auditor’s Commission -selection of Mark Warden
•2017
–Increased presence at Community & HOA events
–Implemented water rebate program
•2018
–Review commercial irrigation requirements
•Evaluate tiered rate structure for commercial outdoor water use
–By meter size, lot size, or commercial activity (NAISC code), or combination of all
–Dependent on a CIS system that can incorporate above variables for billing
Page 73 of 79
2019 Conservation Plan Update
•Schedule & Timeline:
–January/April 2018:
•Internal review of the existing 2014 Conservation Plan
•Identify revisions to existing plan for the next 5 -year update (2019)
–May 2018
•Present Council with final update of 2014 Conservation Plan
–June/October 2018:
•Obtain feedback via focus groups on proposed plan revisions
–November/December 2018:
•Provide Council with a draft 2019 Conservation Plan
–January/March 2019:
•Adopt 2019 Conservation Plan
Page 74 of 79
Water Rate & Fee Review
•2018/19 Budget Review:
–Water Connect (tap) Fee
•Outdated Fee -based on metering costs from 1997
•Changes to connection & commissioning process (i.e.QA/QC,GPS) outside ETJ
necessitate a review
–Water Rate
•Reviewed every 3 -5 years
•Tiered rate structure -based on achieving certain per capita usage goals
•Upper rate tiers support conservation programs (i.e. rebates)
–Impact Fee
•Reviewed every 3 -5 years
•Fees are impacted by per capita usage -when and how many connections affect
infrastructure improvements and timing.
Page 75 of 79
Questions?
Page 76 of 79
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Workshop
January 23, 2018
SUBJECT:
Sec. 551.071: Consul tati on w i th Attorney
Advice from attorney abo ut pending or co ntemplated litigation and o ther matters on which the attorney has a duty to
advise the City Council, including agenda items
- Update on pending litigation styled Amanda Philips v. City o f Georgetown
Sec. 551:074: Personnel Matters
City Manager, City Attorney, City Secretary and Municipal Judge: Consideration of the appointment, employme nt,
evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal
Sec. 551.086: Ce r tai n P ubl i c Power Uti l i ti es: Co mpeti ti ve Matters
- P urchase Power Update -- Jim Briggs, General Manager o f Utilities
Sec. 551.087: De l i berati o n Regardi ng Economi c Devel opment Negoti ati ons
- P roject Legacy
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
NA
SUBMITTED BY:
Shelley Nowling, City Secretary
ATTACHMENT S:
Description
Current Volume & Rate S heet
2014 Permit Volume & Rates
Page 77 of 79
Page 78 of 79
Page 79 of 79