HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda CC 01.28.2020 WorkshopN otice of M eet ing of the
Governing B ody of the
C ity of Georgetown, Texas
J anuary 28 , 2 0 2 0
The G e orgetown City Council will meet on J anuary 2 8, 2020 at 3:00 P M at City Co uncil Chambers,
510 W 9th Street Georgetown, TX 786 26
The City o f Geo rgetown is committed to c ompliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (AD A).
If you re quire assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the
AD A, re asonable assistance, adaptations, o r acco mmodations will be provide d upon request. P lease
contac t the City Secretary's Office, at le ast three (3) days prior to the sche duled meeting date, at (512)
930-36 52 or City Hall at 808 M artin Luthe r King J r. Street, Georgetown, TX 78 62 6 for additional
informatio n; TTY users route through Re lay Texas at 711.
Policy De ve lopme nt/Re vie w Workshop -
A P re sentatio n and discussion regarding the 2 03 0 Update - Implementation and P ublic Engagement
-- So fia Nelson, P lanning Director
B P re sentatio n, review, and discussio n re garding the 2020 Citizen Survey -- Dr. Thomas Longoria,
P rofesso r and Director of Center for Research, P ublic P olicy, and Training at Texas State
University; and J ackson Daly, Community Services Director
C P re sentatio n and update regarding the Transfer Station Design and rate impacts -- Eric J ohnson,
Fac ilities Director and Ray Mille r, P ublic Wo rks Director.
D P re sentatio n and discussion regarding the Georgetown Fire Departme nt's Draft Strategic P lan
2 02 0 -- J o hn Sullivan, Fire Chief
Exe cutive Se ssion
In compliance with the Open Meetings Ac t, Chapter 5 51, Government Code, Verno n's Texas Codes,
Annotated, the items listed below will be disc ussed in closed session and are subject to action in the
regular se ssio n.
E Sec. 5 51 .07 1: Consul tati on wi th Attorney
Advice fro m attorney about pending or co ntemplated litigation and o ther matters on which the
attorney has a duty to advise the City Co uncil, including agenda items
- Litigation Update
Sec. 5 51 .08 6: Certai n P ubl i c P ow e r Uti l i ti es: Competi ti ve M atters
- P urchase P o wer Update
- De mand Response J oint Solutio n Agreement with Links E P LL C
Sec. 5 51 .08 7: Del i berati on Reg ar di ng Eco nomi c Devel opment Ne go ti ati ons
- P roject To rtilla
Sec. 5 51 .07 6: Del i berati ons Re gardi ng Securi ty Devi ses or Se c uri ty Audi ts: Cl ose
M e e ti ng
- Update on Cyber Security and Co ntinuity P lan -- J ames Davis, IT Ope ratio ns Manager
Sec. 5 51 :07 4: P ersonnel M atters
City Manager, City Attorney, City Se c retary and Municipal J udge: Co nsideratio n of the
Page 1 of 199
appointment, employment, evaluatio n, reassignment, duties, discipline, o r dismissal
Adjournme nt
Ce rtificate of Posting
I, R o b yn Dens mo re, C ity S ec retary fo r the C ity of G eorgetown, Texas , d o hereb y certify that
this No tic e of Meeting was posted at C ity Hall, 808 Martin Luther King Jr. S treet,
G eorgeto wn, T X 78626, a p lace readily ac ces sible to the general pub lic as required by law, on
the _____ day of _________________, 2020, at __________, and remained s o posted for
at leas t 72 c ontinuous ho urs p receding the s ched uled time o f said meeting.
__________________________________
R o byn Dens more, C ity S ecretary
Page 2 of 199
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Workshop
January 28, 2020
S UBJEC T:
P resentation and discussion regarding the 2030 U pdate - Implementation and P ublic Engagement -- Sofia Nelson,
P lanning Director
I T E M S UMMARY:
B ackground: W hile the City of Georgetown 20 30 Comprehensive P lan is fundamentally a “policy document,” the go als,
policies, and actions identified in it will only become a reality by co ncerted, co nsiste nt attention to implementation. This
requires that the City administratio n, departments, and present and future P lanning and Zo ning Co mmissions and City
Councils to actively and co ntinuously use the 20 30 Comprehensive P lan as a key re fe re nce for all decisions and actions.
P resentati on P ur po se:
P resent specific implementation action steps for implementing the City’s 20 30 P lan.
P resent public outreach plan for community re view o f the implementation plan and 20 30 plan as a whole.
F eedback Requeste d:
Do you suppo rt the implementation action ste ps o utlined in this presentatio n?
Is there additional informatio n needed in advance of ho lding public outreac h efforts on the action steps and the
2030 plan in its entirety?
F I NANC I AL IMPAC T:
n/a
S UBMI T T ED BY:
Sofia Nelson, P lanning Director
AT TAC HMENT S :
Description
Draft Imp lementatio n P lan v10.1
To p 3 Imp lementatio n S trategies
summary o f s teering committee s trategy review
C omp P lan I mp lementation P resentatio n
Page 3 of 199
01/16/20 City of Georgetown
2030 Plan Update Draft
“Term ” means the period, in years, during
which the initiative should begin.
0-2 Years = FY 2020-2022
3-4 Years = FY 2023-2024
5+ Years = FY 2025-2030
OG = On-Going
“Cost” means the approximated budget
required to accomplish the initiative.
$ = under $10,000
$$ = $10,000 to $50,000
$$$ = $50,000 to $100,000
$$$$ = $100,000+
“Leader” means the entity responsible for
championing each initiative, although the
support of additional entities is often
necessary.
HOW TO USE THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Page 4 of 199
2030 Implementation Plan
Goals, Policies, and Action Items Term Cost Leader
LU.1.a. Analyze and amend (if applicable) the UDC to ensure that proper transitions and buffering are required between
neighborhoods and adjacent commercial areas.
0-2 $$$Planning
LU.2.a. Analyze and amend (if applicable) the UDC to ensure standards are appropriate for new residential development to
allow a range and transition of density, accommodate smaller residential lots, prioritize open space, amenities and
heightened connectivity.
0-2 $$$Planning
LU.2.b. Analyze and amend (if applicable) to accommodate higher density residential developments (e.g., 24+ dwelling units
per acre).
0-2 $$$Planning
LU.2.c. Analyze and amend (if applicable) the UDC to support density bonuses and transfer of development rights as
incentives for desirable development types and forms.
0-2 $$$Planning
LU.3.a. Analyze and amend (if applicable) the UDC to promote compact, well-connected neighborhoods and commercial
areas pertaining to street connectivity, street design, open space, etc.
0-2 $$$Planning
GC.1.a. Actively partner with TxDOT, Central Texas Mobility Authority and Williamson County on roadway improvements on
the intersections with Williams Drive, University Ave, Leander Road and Westinghouse Road during design, construction and
maintenance. Ensure design includes pedestrian connectivity (specifically for the areas between Leander Road and
Lakeway Drive) and gateway features (signage, landscaping, etc.).
OG $Public Works
GC.1.b. Analyze and amend (if applicable) the UDC to ensure the Community’s vision for Highway Corridors, as described in
Gateway Overlay Exhibit in the adopted Land Use Element, are reflected.
0-2 $$$Planning
GC.1.c. Develop a plan (design, location, funding, coordination) to establish a gateway entry feature along southbound I-35. 0-2 $$$Facilities
GC.1.d. Identify additional highly visible locations along key corridors to emphasize branding elements (e.g., entryway
signage with enhanced landscaping, branding designs on overpasses and bridges, and unique streetscape and public art
features).
3-4 $Planning
GC.1.e. Prioritize, develop funding and install branding elements.5+$$$$Facilities
GC.1.f. Coordinate the use of tree mitigation funds at key, prioritized intersections (i.e. Williams Drive and SH29-University). 3-4 $Parks & Rec
Goal 1: Promote development patterns with balanced land uses that provide a variety of well-integrated housing and retail choices, transportation, public facilities, and
recreational options in all parts of Georgetown.
Policy LU.1 Encourage a balanced mix of residential, commercial, and employment uses at varying densities and intensities to reflect a gradual transition from urban to
suburban to rural development.
Policy LU.2 Promote more compact, higher density, well-connected development within appropriate infill locations.
Policy LU.3 Promote development of complete neighborhoods across Georgetown.
Policy GC.1 Leverage the Highway Corridors to promote economic development and an inviting, positive image of Georgetown.
1/16/2020 Page 1 of 10
DRAFT
Page 5 of 199
2030 Implementation Plan
Goals, Policies, and Action Items Term Cost Leader
LU.4.a. Utilize the Utility Master Plan and CIP process to weight/prioritize improvements in target areas.OG $$$Systems
Engineering
LU.4.b. Analyze and amend (if applicable) the UDC to develop a Williams Drive Gateway Overlay Zoning District (Austin Ave to
Jim Hogg Rd) that supports the vision established for the corridor in the 2017 Williams Drive Study.
3-4 $$$Planning
LU.4.c. Analyze and amend (if applicable) the UDC include an Urban Gateway Overlay Zoning District to support a more
intense urban design that reflects the development of established corridors such as Austin Avenue, SH29 (University).
3-4 $$$Planning
LU.4.d. Develop signage and landscaping standards for the Urban Gateway Overlay Zoning District.3-4 $$$Planning
LU.5.a. Develop a process to identify and develop small area plans for redevelopment in target areas. 3-4 $$Planning
H.2.a. Submit a budget request to complete a small area plan for the Track-Ridge-Grasshopper Neighborhood. 0-2 $$Planning
H.2.b. Develop a processs to identify target neighborhoods. 0-2 $Planning
H.2.c. Evaluate becoming a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) direct entitlement jurisdiction in FY21. 0-2 $Planning
H.2.d. Develop a dedicated funding source to support small area planning for target neighborhoods.3-4 $$Planning
H.2.e. Develop neighborhood plans for areas surrounding the downtown overlay district or transitional areas identified in the
Downtown Master Plan to address key preservation issues, such as encroachment of incompatible uses.
3-4 $$Planning
H.2.f. Review feasibility and applicability of Neighborhood Empowerment Zones for preservation and reinvestment
purposes.
3-4 $Planning
WD.2.a. Use tree mitigation funds for right-of-way planting materials within the Williams Drive Gateway. OG $$$ Parks & Rec
WD.2.b. Guide the desired development pattern for the Williams Drive Gateway through the adoption of a mixed use, special
area plan overlay, or other zoning district.
3-4 $Planning
WD.2.c. Enhance Williams Drive at I-35 intersections through landscaping and other similar improvements.3-4 $$ Public Works
WD.2.d. Create development standards to provide open spaces within the boundaries of the Williams Drive Gateway
Subarea Plan.
3-4 $$$Planning
WD.2.e. Create development standards to strengthen the Williams Drive Gateway unique identity through aesthetic
enhancements such as landscaping, street lighting, signage and building design.
3-4 $$$Planning
GC.2.a. Analyze and amend (if applicable) the UDC to ensure consistency between the Downtown/Old Town overlays and the
Downtown Corridor overlay.
0-2 $$$Planning
GC.2.b. Analyze and amend (if applicable) the UDC to ensure the Community’s vision for Downtown Corridors, as described
in Gateway Overlay Exhibit in the adopted Land Use Element, are reflected.
0-2 $$$Planning
Policy LU.4 Encourage redevelopment in target areas.
Policy LU.5 Identify potential opportunities and selectively target, plan, and promote development/reuse initiatives.
Policy H.2 Preserve existing neighborhoods in targeted areas.
Policy WD.2 Enhance the urban form and character of the Williams Drive Gateway.
Policy GC.2 Utilize the Downtown Corridors to retain and enhance Georgetown's historic, small-town charm.
Goal 2: Reinvest in Georgetown’s existing neighborhoods and commercial areas to build on previous City efforts.
1/16/2020 Page 2 of 10
DRAFT
Page 6 of 199
2030 Implementation Plan
Goals, Policies, and Action Items Term Cost Leader
LU.6.a. Analyze and amend (if applicable) the UDC to ensure consistency with the vision, goals and policies of the Downtown
Master Plan.
0-2 $$$Planning
LU.7.a. Analyze and amend (if applicable) the UDC to identify incentives (e.g., density bonus, reduced setbacks, and fee
waivers, grants) to encourage high-quality building materials at key corridors and nodes including Williams Drive at I –35
and SH29 (University) at I–35.
3-4 $$$Planning
LU.7.b. Update and renew the 1965 TxDOT right-of-way maintenance agreement to ensure improved beautification, ease
sidewalk improvement process and to support city standards for landscaping and gateway signs.
0-2 $Public Works
LU.7.c. Designate 5% of project costs of all city lead roadway improvements associated with the gateway corridors to be
applied to landscape and road frontage beautification. For projects lead by TxDOT, CTRMA or Williamson County, develop
funding sources to support heightened beautification that supports the vision of the Gateway Image corridors.
3-4 $$ Public Works
LU.8.a. Identify key capital improvements needed in Employment Centers and utilize economic development tools (e.g.,
Business Improvement Districts, 4A and 4B sales tax revenues) to encourage target industries within Employment Centers
identified on the Future Land Use map.
OG $Economic
Development
LU.8.b. Update the City’s Retail Recruitment study.3-4 $$Economic
Development
LU.9.a. Analyze and amend (if applicable) the UDC to identify opportunities to reduce the impact of development without
substantially increasing the cost (e.g., maximum impervious surface, natural drainage, building orientation, increased
density, and enhanced pedestrian/bike connectivity).
0-2 $$$Planning
LU.9.b. Update applicable City plans and standards in the Construction Standards and Specifics Manual.OG $Systems
Engineering
Policy LU.6 Continue to promote diversification of uses while strengthening the historic character and supporting the existing historic neighborhoods.
Policy LU.7 Strengthen Georgetown’s image and quality feel within enhanced gateways and commercial corridors.
Policy LU.8 Protect and promote land uses that support Georgetown’s target industries, support diversification of the City’s tax base, and enhance economic development
through intentional infrastructure planning, recruitment, and the land use entitlement process.
Policy LU.9 Adopt development practices that preserve and enhance the environment.
Goal 3: Provide a development framework that guides fiscally responsible growth, protects historic community character, demonstrates stewardship of the environment, and
provides for effective provision of public services and facilities.
1/16/2020 Page 3 of 10
DRAFT
Page 7 of 199
2030 Implementation Plan
Goals, Policies, and Action Items Term Cost Leader
LU.10.a. Develop a tool to assist in the evaluation of land use changes such as rezoning and comprehensive plan
amendments.
0-2 $$GIS
LU.10.b. Continue to use the Fiscal Impact Model to evaluate the net fiscal impact of potential developments, including
PUDs, annexations, development agreements and comprehensive plan amendments.
OG $Planning
LU.10.c. Analyze and amend (if applicable) the UDC criteria for voluntary annexation.3-4 $$$Planning
GC.3.a. Analyze and amend (if applicable) the UDC to ensure the Community’s vision for Scenic Corridors, as described in
Gateway Overlay Exhibit in the adopted Land Use Element, are reflected.
3-4 $$$Planning
Policy GC.3 Ensure that the Scenic Corridors preserve the natural, rural character as the City continues to grow.
Goal 3: Provide a development framework that guides fiscally responsible growth, protects historic community character, demonstrates stewardship of the environment, and
provides for effective provision of public services and facilities.
Policy LU.10 Support the City’s growth and development using a decisional framework that promotes fiscal health, safety, and quality of life for our current and future residents.
1/16/2020 Page 4 of 10
DRAFT
Page 8 of 199
2030 Implementation Plan
Goals, Policies, and Action Items Term Cost Leader
4.b. Adopt a Historic Preservation Element (in conjunction with a Downtown Master Plan Update) through partnerships with
businesses, nonprofits and State preservation organizations.
3-4 $$Planning
4.a. Analyze and amend (if applicable) the UDC for feasibility of incentivizing preservation of existing structures through
increased flexibility of development standards.
0-2 $$$Planning
5.a. Publish the Comp Plan Annual Report.OG $Planning
5.b. Estalish a timeframe for review and possible update to the City's 2010 Citizen Partricipation Element. 3-4 $$ City Manager’s
Office
Goal 4: Guide, promote, and assist the preservation and rehabilitation of the City’s historic resources.
Goal 5: Ensure effective communication, outreach, and opportunities for public participation and community partnerships to foster a strong sense of community.
1/16/2020 Page 5 of 10
DRAFT
Page 9 of 199
2030 Implementation Plan
Goals, Policies, and Action Items Term Cost Leader
LU.11.a. Analyze and amend (if applicable) the UDC to allow more compact residential development (e.g. lot size, street
width, setback, ranges in density).
0-2 $$$Planning
H.1.a. Evaluate potential funding sources, such as HOME, CDBG, sales tax revenue, housing bonds, future tax increments,
the Community Reinvestment Act, and/or philanthropic partners, to incentivize the rehabilitation of existing single-family,
duplex, quadplex, and multi-family homes.
OG $Planning
H.1.b. Maintain home repair program for low income homeowners. 0-2 $Planning
H.1.c. Evaluate and catalog small scale multi-family units for preservation and multi-family rehabilitation program. Study
opportunities for multi-family tax exemption programs.
3-4 $Planning
H.1.d. Expand homeowner home repair to workforce homeowners. 0-2 $$Planning
H.1.e. Coordinate with regional partners who might preserve units in Georgetown through Impact funds.OG $Planning
H.1.f. Create dedicated and stable funding sources for home maintenance and repair programs, such as Community
Reinvestment Act funds or a Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone (TIRZ).
3-4 $$$Planning
H.1.g. If need is present is H.1.c, develop a multi-family rehabilitation program to address need. 5+$$$Planning
H.3.a. Define metrics to classify “neighborhoods with rapid value increases” to consistently identify areas of focus (e.g.,
average annual increase of median home value).
0-2 $Planning
H.4.a. Coordinate with local organizations (e.g., faith-based, scouting, or other community service groups) to organize a
neighborhood clean-up day annual calendar.
OG $Planning
H.4.b. Encourage the neighborhood traffic management program to identify issues and alternatives to congestion and
maintenance based on community feedback.
OG $Public Works
H.4.c. Support the establishment of neighborhood associations.0-2 $Planning
H4.d. Build BEST (Beautiful, Engaged, Safe, & Thriving) Neighborhoods program to promote and support neighborhoods.3-4 $Planning
Policy H.3 Support owners’ ability to stay in homes in neighborhoods with rapid value increases without limiting the sale of the home.
Policy H.4 Maintain and promote neighborhood character and quality.
Goal 6: Ensure access to diverse housing options and preserve existing neighborhoods for residents of all ages, backgrounds and income levels.
Policy LU.11 Encourage innovative forms of compact, pedestrian friendly development and a wider array of affordable housing choices through provisions and incentives.
Policy H.1 Preserve existing housing stock that contributes to diversity and affordability.
1/16/2020 Page 6 of 10
DRAFT
Page 10 of 199
2030 Implementation Plan
Goals, Policies, and Action Items Term Cost Leader
H.5.a. Evaluate the needs of the Georgetown Housing Authority’s programs and identify potential support the City can
provide including, but not limited to, the use of CDBG funds, and energy efficiency upgrades.
OG $Planning
H.5.b. Support the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) developments that meet the City’s defined process.OG $Planning
H.5.c. Analyze and amend (if applicable) the UDC to identify opportunities to improve Workforce Housing Development
standards (e.g., lot size, setbacks, density, parking and coverage) to support low income and workforce renters.
0-2 $$$Planning
H.5.d. Evaluate city policies for inclusion of workforce housing incentives, including special districts (MUD, PID) and special
finance districts (TIRZ).
0-2 $Planning
H.5.e. Incentivize multi-bedroom rental housing options for families with children or seniors (multi-generational housing). 3-4 $$Planning
H.6.a. Evaluate the needs of the Georgetown Housing Authority’s programs and identify potential support the City can
provide including, but not limited to, the use of CDBG funds, and energy efficiency upgrades.
OG $Planning
H.7.a. Support non-profit developers to increase homeownership choices for workforce households.OG $Planning
H.7.b. Analyze and amend (if applicable) the UDC to identify opportunities to improve Workforce Housing Development
standards (e.g., lot size, setbacks, density, parking and coverage) to support workforce homeownership opportunities.
0-2 $$$Planning
H.7.c. Indentify potential revenue sources for creating a housing fund for use in development agreements and
programming.
0-2 $Planning
H.7.d. Establish down payment assistance program for workforce homebuyers. 5+$$$Planning
H.8.a. Develop a Health and Human Services Element for the comprehensive plan, as required by City Charter. 3-4 $$Fire
Policy H.8 Support the non-profit community to create housing opportunities for the most vulnerable residents (including but not limited to homeless, seniors, youth aging out of
the foster care system, and people with disabilities).
Goal 6: Ensure access to diverse housing options and preserve existing neighborhoods for residents of all ages, backgrounds and income levels.
Policy H.5 Support and increase rental choices for low-income and workforce households unless the housing is substandard.
Policy H.6 Support rental choices for senior households.
Policy H.7 Increase homeownership choices for workforce households.
1/16/2020 Page 7 of 10
DRAFT
Page 11 of 199
2030 Implementation Plan
Goals, Policies, and Action Items Term Cost Leader
H.9.a. Update MUD/PID and residential PUD policies with definition of housing diversity. 0-2 $Planning
H.9.b. Analyze and amend (if applicable) the UDC Housing Diversity Development standards to strengthen incentives.0-2 $$$Planning
H.9.c. Analyze and amend (if applicable) the UDC requirements and development standards for accessory dwelling units
(ADUs).
0-2 $$$Planning
H.10.a. Analyze and amend (if applicable) the UDC Special District Policy to build on the existing requirement for diversity in
housing stock to include a portion of the development that addresses affordability for the 60-120% Area Median Income
(AMI) segment.
3-4 $$$Planning
H.11.a. Pursue Strategic Partnership grants focused on agencies that promote aging in place/community.OG $Planning
H.12.a. Continue regular coordination with local nonprofit organizations, Williamson County, Georgetown ISD, Texas
Department of Housing and Community Affairs, and local major employers.
OG $Planning
H.13.a. Conduct a review of City policies and plans to identify potential conflicts and opportunities to support
implementation of the 2030 Plan Update’s Housing Element policies.
3-4 $Planning
H.14.a. Expand community education and outreach programs to inform residents of available support, such as homebuyer
education services, home rehabilitation grants, utility billing assistance, homestead exemptions, nonprofit partnerships for
home maintenance and City Georgetown Housing programs.
0-2 $Planning
Policy H.13 Align housing goals with other city policies and strategic plans.
Policy H.14 Provide opportunity for community engagement through outreach and communication.
Goal 6: Ensure access to diverse housing options and preserve existing neighborhoods for residents of all ages, backgrounds and income levels.
Policy H.9 Encourage and incentivize new housing and reinventions or additions to existing housing to provide a mixture of housing types, sizes, and price points .
Policy H.10 Ensure land use designations and other policies allow for and encourage a mixture housing types and densities across the community.
Policy H.11 Promote aging in place opportunities by aligning land use policies and transportation policies that promote a housing market capable of accommodating residents
throughout all stages of life.
Policy H.12 Actively seek and build public and private partnerships to leverage resources and promote innovation.
1/16/2020 Page 8 of 10
DRAFT
Page 12 of 199
2030 Implementation Plan
Goals, Policies, and Action Items Term Cost Leader
LU.12.a. Establish a time frame for review and possible update to the Public Safety Element. 3-4 $$ City Manager’s
Office
GC.1.g. Develop a budget to support increased landscape maintanence along the Gateway Image Corridors.3-4 $$Facilities
LU.13.a. Annually present the Future Land Use map to GISD and Williamson County for feedback and corrdination on future
development planning.
OG $Planning
LU.13.b. Seek opportunities for shared recreation facilites when new schools are planned. OG $Parks & Rec
LU.13.c. Coordinate with the school district demographer to partner on housing projections. OG $Planning
WD.3.a. Draft and adopt a grant program to incentivize or assist in signage, street frontage landscaping and other
streetscape improvements.
3-4 $$$Planning
WD.3.b. Evaluate the adjustment of the Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone (TIRZ) boundary to include the entirety of the
Subarea and develop a TIRZ spending plan.
0-2 $Finance
WD.3.c. Work with Georgetown Independent School District (GISD) on the potential redevelopment of a catalytic site.0-2 $Planning
LU.14.a. Update the City’s 2009 Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan.0-2 $$$$ Parks & Rec
Policy LU.13 Promote development decisions that serve the needs of our interlocal government partners.
Policy WD.3 Use strategic public/private partnerships to promote a new form of development.
Goal 9: Maintain and add to the existing quality parks and recreation.
Policy LU.14 Ensure that the subdivision and development process includes consideration of the way in which residential lots relate to parks and open space, emphasizing
adjacency and accessibility to parks and open space.
Goal 7: Maintain high quality infrastructure, public safety services, and community facilities.
Policy LU.12 Support public safety services and infrastructure to ensure that Georgetown continues to be a safe, welcoming community that serves all residents.
Policy GC.1 Leverage the Highway Corridors to promote economic development and an inviting, positive image of Georgetown.
Goal 8: Actively partner with GISD, Williamson County, other governmental agencies, and local organizations to leverage resources and promote innovation.
1/16/2020 Page 9 of 10
DRAFT
Page 13 of 199
2030 Implementation Plan
Goals, Policies, and Action Items Term Cost Leader
WD.1.a. Create transit stops to improve access to GoGeo and evaluate feasibility of a bus pull-in lane within the Williams
Drive Gateway.
3-4 $$ Public Works
WD.1.b. Fill in the sidewalk gaps to increase pedestrian connectivity, including the improvements in the Implementation
Plan of the Williams Drive Study for the Centers Area.
3-4 $$$$ Public Works
WD.1.c. Ensure traffic calming on parallel connections to reduce cut-through traffic and promote public education efforts
regarding alternate routes.
5+$$$ Public Works
WD.1.d. Improve connections between parcels and create a network of street, including the connections and system
improvements as described in the Implementation Plan of the Williams Drive Study for the Centers Area.
5+$$$$ Public Works
WD.1.e. Improve traffic flow and access management through improvements in the Implementation Plan of the Williams
Drive Study for the Centers Area.
5+$$$$ Public Works
WD.1.f. Evaluate (model) proposed roadways in the Subarea during the next update of the Overall Transportation Plan
(OTP).
3-4 $Public Works
WD.1.g. Undertake speed study on Williams Drive.3-4 $$ Public Works
LU.15.a. Adopt a new Overall Transportation Plan.3-4 $$$ Public Works
LU.15.b. Support transportation infrastructure improvements using 4A and 4B type funds that support economic
development in key locations.
OG $ City Manager’s
Office
LU.15.c. Re-evaluate and confirm priority of segments identified in the Sidewalk Master Plan through an Update to the Plan
and secure potential funding for out years.
3-4 $Public Works
Policy LU.15 Proactively plan investments in transportation and other infrastructure to leverage partnerships with the business community and interested neighborhood
organizations and maintain the level of service as the City continues to grow.
Goal 10: Improve and diversify the transportation network.
Policy WD.1 Make connections through and within the Williams Drive Gateway.
1/16/2020 Page 10 of 10
DRAFT
Page 14 of 199
2030 PLAN IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES SUMMARY
Strategic Initiatives Implementation Approach and Tools
Regulatory Framework
Goals:
1. Balanced land use
2. Reinvestment
3. Development framework
4. Historic Preservation
6. Housing &
neighborhoods
8. Land use that enables
partnerships
Diversity and Density
• Update development standards to ensure compatibility of diverse uses including buffers, setbacks to reduce barriers to higher density
development in Community Commercial Centers and support the updated residential future land use categories
• Use tailored development standards for key areas: Employment Centers, Regional Centers, Gateways, Southeast Georgetown, Williams Drive
and Downtown
• Preserve and incentivize the City’s historic resources and reuse existing structures through tailored, flexible development standards
• Allow a variety of housing types, lot sizes, and a balance of amenities
• Develop incentives for inclusion of moderate density, moderately priced housing types, affordable/workforce housing creation
Land Uses
• Perform UDC diagnostic review of allowed uses, density and subdivision requirements to implement Comp Plan
• Review and update rezoning approval criteria
Gateways
• Update boundaries of overlay districts to reflect development changes within an area (for example, once identified scenic areas have now
become urbanized areas)
• Identify specific locations for major gateway sign locations (I-35 northbound, SH-130) and minor gateway signs (S. Austin and SH29 entrances
into historic Georgetown)
• Create an Urban Corridor type
• Update Scenic Corridor standards for larger setbacks, lower building heights, native landscaping and limited lighting
• Update Downtown Corridor standards for building and street front design
• Prioritize building and site design (placement of buildings, materials, landscaping) when negotiating development agreements and potential
incentives for I-35, SH130, SH29, SH195 that support Employment Centers and Regional Centers
Williams Drive Subarea
• Establish a Williams Drive special zoning district area that implements proposed mix of uses, density, and building form (setbacks, height, and
design)
• Develop an incentive program for enhancing site and buildings in compliance with the goals and policies of the Williams Drive Subarea
Decision Framework
Goals:
1. Balanced land use
3. Development framework
6. Housing &
neighborhoods
Development Agreements, Annexation, Special Purpose Districts and Intentional Infrastructure
• Review utility connection policies to ensure support of land use goals (#1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8) of the Comprehensive Plan
• Ready infrastructure for development in key, prioritized Employment Centers, Southeast Georgetown and mixed-use developments
• Update approval criteria for voluntary annexation
• Review approval criteria for special purpose districts (MUD, PID, TIRZ, PUD) to distinguish between types of development and identify
specific criteria for meeting diversity and density goals
• Evaluate annexation requests and special purpose districts using the City’s Fiscal Impact Model
• Develop a Comprehensive Plan checklist for use in evaluating development proposals and zoning applications for consistency with the plan's
principles and direction
Page 15 of 199
Strategic Initiatives Implementation Approach and Tools
Financial assistance/incentives to housing developers and builders meeting housing policies
• Development and other incentive agreements – tailored development standards and/or contribution in infrastructure costs (including a udit of
existing workforce housing standard incentive to ensure its usability)
• Utilize special purpose financing districts (MUDs, PIDs, TIRZs) policy (for example, to incorporate a minimum amount of workforce housing as
part of the consent to utilize a special purpose financing district)
• Consider utilizing fee waivers (for example parkland, development application, and building permit fees)
• Create a dedicated funding source for housing development incentives and agreements
Plans, Programs, and
Partnerships
Goals:
7. High quality
infrastructure
8. Land use that enables
partnerships
9. Integrate greenspace &
recreation
10. Maintain levels of service
as we grow
Small Area Planning & Neighborhoods
• Create small area plans to guide development in key locations
• Explore the applicability of Neighborhood Empowerment Zones, Neighborhood Conservation Districts or Overlays
• Develop Neighborhood Association Program (assist neighborhoods with education/tools for establishment)
Comprehensive Plan Elements
• Adopt a Historic Preservation Element as part of the next update to the Downtown Master Plan
• Update the Parks Plan and the Overall Transportation Plan (OTP)
• Revisit charter required 2030 plan elements for applicability and identify specific timeframes for update when necessary (Citizen’s Participation
Plan, Urban Design Element, Public Safety Element)
• Coordinate Utility Master Plan with 2030 Comprehensive Plan
Capital Improvement Planning (CIP)
• Identify key capital improvements needed in Employment Centers to support economic development objectives
• Use 4A/4B funds to support Employment Centers, Regional Centers
• Dedicate 5% of project costs of all new roadway improvements within Gateway corridors for beautification
Annual Reporting (2030 Plan)
• Convene the 2030 Steering Committee annually to review and approve the annual report
• Prepare an annual community report card on comprehensive plan progress
• Develop a comprehensive plan checklist for use in evaluating development proposals and zoning applications for consistency with the plan’s
principles and direction
Partnerships
• Partner with GISD for planning of future school sites and infrastructure
• Adopt a Health and Human Services Element
• Support Georgetown Housing Authority (GHA) preservation of units
• Support housing non-profits, banks with Community Revitalization Act initiatives, and other community organizations
Home Repair
• Expand home repair programs to reach moderate income workforce owner-occupied households and small-scale rental properties
• Create a dedicated funding source eligible to be used for both workforce and lower income housing rehabilitation
Page 16 of 199
Steering Committee meeting December 5, 2019
2030 Plan Steering Committee Discussion Summary
December 5, 2019
What changes are needed to the 2030 Plan Implementation Strategies?
What is your first
impression?
What are the benefits of the
strategies? What are concerns?
What are the options to address the
concerns?
What changes are needed, if any?
• I like it
• Digestible, organized
• Real, implementable things
• Measurable goals & tools to
track
• No goal 5
• A lot to do, a lot of effort
• Some easy, others really big
• Ambitious, but achievable
• Nothing new, reflects Steering
Committee conversations,
consistent with what’s been
talking about
• Detailed, specific
• Good synopsis
• A lot of stuff, questions
• Generic overview of what long
range planning should be
• Suggestions for updating, a lot
of updating
• Hit the nail on the head on all
implementation priorities
• Good balance of achieving
goals…. Not telling people no and
not giving away everything
• Succinct
• Partnership with GISD is written
down
• Provides a measuring stick for
success
• Can draw direct connections to
goal and policy work
• Creating something everyone can
use
• Everyone has the same sheet to
work with
• Start from common spot
• Plan, vision of what we want city
to look like in 2030
• Specific enough to have teeth
• Strategic initiatives narrow it
down
• Corridors well defined earlier in
process
• Good variety of tools and
timeline
• Future Georgetown needs these
procedures
• Defines what our culture and
future is, what we’ve known in,
character
• Using the plan
- What process will this be applied to,
when someone wants to build
something?
- Common interpretation?
- Residential vs. nonresidential % for
future land use districts can possibly be
too hard to balance and enforce
- Do we have enough criteria to make
discretional decisions? Is there enough
detail for staff analysis?
• Keeping the plan off the shelf and alive
- Bandwidth of City staff to keep plan alive
with current staffing levels.
- Is this a plan that will be on the shelf?
- Hate to do the work and it go unused
- Commitment to annual meeting
• Incentives
- Incentives for single family residential
historic properties need to be listed.
- Who is developing the
standards/incentives
- Development incentives – clarify,
political
• Home Repair
- Minimal dedicated funds limit its
effectiveness
- Use of a Multi-family rehab strategy
could lead to landlords abusing money
for improvements and lead to raising
rents.
• Misc.
- Balancing the vision of the plan with
property owner rights and the City
making decisions
- There appears to be a lot of plans in the
implementation strategies and not many
partnerships or programs
- County should be a identified partner
• Using the Plan
- Pay attention to detailed implementation,
keep the big picture in mind
• Keeping the Plan Alive
- Annual reviews and reports to evaluate
progress – “so that’s what you did with
that idea”
- Invest in resources to get the work done
- Checklist when developers come in pre-
application, possible scoring
- Creating checklist is a way of keeping plan
alive (keeps it in the forefront)
- Quarterly evaluations of 2030 Plan
• Incentives
- Dedicated funding resource for incentives
to encourage housing goals.
- Define what an incentive is.
- Utilize cheapest incentives, such as
funding others are providing (example
grants, LIHTC.)
- Specifically initiate (tax abatement for
historic downtown, residential incentives)
• Home Repair
- Rent control, other tools to not take
advantage of renters
- Education, ensuring that people know
about homestead exemptions to stay in
homes
• Misc.
- Start working with County early
- Stay connected to national innovation
• Key areas should be identified for targeted development
and the use intentional infrastructure.
• Dedicated funding source for implementation of housing
goals should be identified.
• Keep the plan alive through identified solutions and
additional staff resources to prioritize the implementation
of the plan.
• Define incentives to include financial and development
standard incentives including historic preservation (ex.
density bonuses, height increase, impervious bonuses,
etc.)
Participants: Mayor Dale Ross, Ercel Brashear, Suzy Pukys, Hugh Brown, Josh
Schroeder, Scott Stribling, Linda McCalla, Wendy Cash, Doug Noble, Danelle
Houck
Page 17 of 199
City Council Workshop | January 14, 2020Page 18 of 199
PURPOSE OF PRESENTATION
Goals
2/26/2019
Policies
7/2019
Implementation
Strategy
12/2019
Action
Plan
1/2020
Page 19 of 199
FEEDBACK REQUESTED
Will this action plan achieve the 2030 Goals?
Is there additional information you need before
finalizing the actions and beginning public engagement
on the Implementation Plan?
Page 20 of 199
WORKSHOP PRESENTATION OUTLINE
I.Implementation Action Plan
II.Public Engagement and Next Steps
III.Council Feedback
Page 21 of 199
Part I.
Implementation Action PlanPage 22 of 199
STEERING COMMITTEE TAKEAWAYS
•Identify key areas, partner in development
through intentional infrastructure.
•Dedicated funding source for implementation of
housing goals should be identified.
•Keep the plan alive through identified solutions
and additional staff resources to prioritize the
implementation of the plan
•Incentives should be defined to include financial
and development standard incentives (ex.
density bonuses, height increase, impervious
bonuses, etc. )
Page 23 of 199
PRIORITIES
•Update development standards
•Review utility connection policies
•Adopt a Historic Preservation Element
•UDC diagnostic review
•Employment Center capital
improvements
•Incentives for moderate density and
moderate priced housing types
Page 24 of 199
HERE’S HOW TO USE THE FULL PLAN
“Term ” means the period, in years, during
which the initiative should begin.
0-2 Years = FY 2020-2022
3-4 Years = FY 2023-2024
5+ Years = FY 2025-2030
OG = On-Going
“Cost” means the approximated budget
required to accomplish the initiative.
$ = under $10,000
$$ = $10,000 to $50,000
$$$ = $50,000 to $100,000
$$$$ = $100,000+
“Leader ” means the entity responsible for
championing each initiative, although the
support of additional entities is often
necessary.
Page 25 of 199
3 MAJOR STRATEGIES
Regulatory Framework:
Regulations and standards (“rules”) for the development of land primarily
zoning and subdivision
Decision Framework
Criteria and processes used in the decision-making process related to land
development by City Council (“why”)
Plans, Programs, Partnerships
Plans require additional work to further 2030
Programs are routine activities of the City
Partnerships allow us to maximize resources and concentrate effortsPage 26 of 199
SUMMARY –REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
2020-2022
(0-2)
2023-2024
(3-4)
2025+
(5+)
•UDC:
•Overall UDC review to ensure
the UDC is implementing the
vision established for 2030.
o Yr. 0 -1: Complete review of
UDC
o Yr. 1 -2: Code rewrite
•Housing:
•Update existing Workforce
Development standards to
identify specific opportunities
to improve usability of existing
program.
•UDC:
•Establish development
standards that support the
implementation of the
Williams Drive Gateway
Subarea Plan.
•None
Page 27 of 199
SUMMARY –PLANS, PROGRAMS, PARTNERSHIPS
2020-2022
(0-2)
2023-2024
(3-4)
2025+
(5+)
•Gateways:
•Develop a plan for a
gateway feature at City
entrance on southbound
I-35.
•Comprehensive Plan Element:
•Parks Plan Update
•Gateways:
•Identify and program minor
gateway improvements
•Establish an incentive program
for use of high quality building
material.
•Designate % of project costs to
beautification.
•Comp Plan Elements
•Historic Preservation Element
and update to the Downtown
Master Plan
•Health and Human Services Plan
•Overall Transportation Plan
•Gateways:
•Prioritize, develop funding
and install branding
elements.
Page 28 of 199
2020-2022
(0-2)
2023-2024
(3-4)
2025+
(5+)
•Housing:
•Identify potential
public/private/non-profit
partnership opportunities to
create a dedicated housing
fund.
•Expand home repair program
to workforce homeowners
•Small Area Planning:
•Submit a budget request to
complete a small area plan for
the neighborhood Track-
Ridge-Grasshopper
Neighborhood.
•Housing
•Home Repair –Evaluate Multi-
family opportunities
•Neighborhood program to
promote and support the city’s
great neighborhoods.
•Small Area Planning:
•Establish small area plan
program to support potential
redevelopment opportunities
and neighborhood driven
requests to review land use
concerns.
•Housing
•Establish down payment
assistance program.
•Should evaluation show a
need, evaluate the
opportunity to establish a
Multi-family rehabilitation
program.
SUMMARY –PLANS, PROGRAMS, PARTNERSHIPS (cont.)
Page 29 of 199
SUMMARY –DECISION FRAMEWORK
2020-2022
(0-2)
2023-2024
(3-4)
2025+
(5+)
•Evaluate special district policy for
workforce housing opportunities.
•Evaluate the opportunity of
density bonuses and transfer of
development rights as incentives
for desirable development.
•Define metrics to classify
“neighborhoods with rapid value
increases” to consistently evaluate
neighborhoods over time.
•Update MUD/PID and residential
PUD policies with definition of
housing diversity.
•Analyze and amend (if applicable)
the UDC criteria for voluntary
annexation.
•Create dedicated and stable
funding sources for home
maintenance and repair
programs.
•Guide the desired development
pattern for the Williams Drive
Gateway through the adoption of
a mixed use, special area plan
overlay, or other zoning district.
•None
Page 30 of 199
SUMMARY -ON-GOING ACTION STEPS
Regulatory Framework Plans, Programs, Partnerships Decision Framework
•None •Actively partner with TxDOT, Central Texas
Mobility Authority and Williamson County
on roadway improvements.
•Publish the Comp Plan Annual Report.
•Evaluate the needs of the Georgetown
Housing Authority’s programs and identify
potential support the City can provide
including, but not limited to, the use of
CDBG funds, and energy efficiency
upgrades.
•Pursue Strategic Partnership grants focused
on agencies that promote aging in
place/community.
•Partnership with GISD on school site
identification, annual future land use map
review, use of district property, and shared
recreation facilities.
•Utilize the Utility Master Plan and CIP
process to weight/prioritize
improvements in target areas.
•Identify key capital improvements
needed in Employment Centers and
utilize economic development tools
(e.g., Business Improvement Districts,
4A and 4B sales tax revenues) to
encourage target industries within
Employment Centers identified on
the Future Land Use map.
•Support the Low-Income Housing Tax
Credit (LIHTC) developments that
meet the City’s defined process.
Page 31 of 199
Part II. PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
Page 32 of 199
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
•1/14 –Implementation workshop
•After 1/28 City Council Workshop
•Full Plan posted online, email
•Traditional Public Meeting
•Office Hours and community partner events
•Boards and Commissions
Page 33 of 199
NEXT STEPS
1/21 P&Z
Overview of Implementation
1/28 Council Workshop
Overview of Full Plan
2/4 P&Z
Overview of Full Plan
2/18 P&Z
Public Hearing and Recommendation
2/25 City Council
Public Hearing and 1st Reading
3/10 City Council
Public Hearing and 2nd ReadingPage 34 of 199
Part III. Feedback
Page 35 of 199
Feedback Requested
•Will this action plan achieve the 2030 Goals?
•Is there additional information you need before
finalizing the actions and beginning public engagement
on the Implementation Plan?
Page 36 of 199
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Workshop
January 28, 2020
S UBJEC T:
P resentation, re vie w, and discussion regarding the 2 02 0 Citizen Survey -- Dr. Tho mas Longo ria, P rofessor and Director
of Center for Re search, P ublic P olicy, and Training at Texas State University; and J ac kso n Daly, Community Servic e s
Director
I T E M S UMMARY:
P resentation and discussion regarding biennial Citize n Survey done in partnership with Texas State University
F I NANC I AL IMPAC T:
Total cost not to e xc eed $7 ,500.
S UBMI T T ED BY:
J ackson Daly
AT TAC HMENT S :
Description
DR AF T P res entatio n
2018 R ep o rt
2018 O nline S urvey
Page 37 of 199
2020 Resident Survey
Council Workshop
Date TBA
Page 38 of 199
Agenda
•Survey overview
•Project timeline
•Efforts to improve response
•Focus group feedback on results
Page 39 of 199
Survey Overview
•Likert Scale Survey Instrument
•Demographic and Geographic Section
–Key in keeping the survey accurate.
•12 Focus Areas
–Typically 4 to 8 questions per Focus Areas
•Refined instrument
–Reduced repeated questions
–More opportunities for open-ended feedback
Page 40 of 199
Focus Areas
•12 Base Focus Areas
Quality of life Service utilization
Mobility Media usage
Development Perception of government
Public safety Employee interaction
Service Quality (Utilities)Perception of safety
Service Quality (Parks/Library)Value for taxes
Page 41 of 199
Project Timeline
•January: Council direction on survey
•March: TXST finalizes survey instrument
•April: TXST mails survey (early April) and
makes open survey link available (late April)
•May: Analyze the results
•June: Focus groups
•Summer: Submission of full report and
presentation of findings made to Council
Page 42 of 199
Efforts to Improve Response
•Continue direct mail survey
•Promote survey online to entire community
•Analyze results to ensure data reflects
household data
•More robust efforts to improve renter
response (e.g., customized message on
mailing envelope and focus group with
renters)
Page 43 of 199
Discussion/Direction
•Confirm survey questions
•Confirm timeline
•Confirm efforts to improve results
Page 44 of 199
i
Georgetown Community Survey 2018
Final Report
Thomas Longoria, Ph.D.
Professor and Director
Center for Public Policy, Research, and Training
Texas State University
Page 45 of 199
ii
Executive Summary
About the Survey
The questionnaire was mailed to a random sample of 2,300 households in May of 2018. There were 469
completed surveys. The response rate for the random sample survey was 20 percent. Based on the
response rate we can be 95% certain that the results for the questions reflect the views of Georgetown
households with a margin of error of +/- 4. In addition, a link to an open survey was also made available
to the public and 873 residents completed the survey.
The survey is generally representative of households in Georgetown when the demographics of the
survey respondents are compared to 2018 American Community Survey Data from the US Census. For
example, in 2018, and estimated 16% of occupied housing units in Georgetown have a non-white head
household according to the US Census and 17 % of the survey respondents indicated that they were
non-white. The estimated percent of residents who have lived in Georgetown 5 years or less is 47%
according to census estimates. Fifty-three percent of survey respondents indicated that they moved to
Georgetown 5 years or less. There are two notable exceptions. The estimated percentage of renter-
occupied housing in Georgetown is 27% compared to 10% of the respondents indicated that they rent.
According to the US Census, 56% of Georgetown residents are 65 years old or younger compared to 25%
of the respondents (see Figures 20 to 24). The survey results were statistically weighted to determine if
these differences influenced the findings, they did not. In addition, when survey responses were
examined by age and home ownership, few differences were found.
It is important to note that the responses reflect respondent perceptions. These perceptions should not
be mistaken for objective “reality.” Perceptions are formed in the context of expectations that people
have for the quality of public services in Georgetown. For example, waiting three minutes to get
through an intersection may be perceived to be an excessive amount of time by people expecting small
town traffic. The same three minutes may not be noticed by people expecting rush hour traffic for a
growing community in a booming metro area.
Three contrasts are presented in the report below to provide additional insights including:
• Contrast #1: Comparison to a benchmarks
• Contrast #2: Comparison to the prior survey
• Contrast #3: Comparison across demographic categories
The major findings from these contracts are included in this executive summary.
Contrast #1: Comparison to Benchmarks
Greater than 75 percent of respondents who indicate that the service is good or excellent can be said to
meet or exceed benchmark for quality provision. With a 4 percent margin of error, 76 percent is
potentially 80 percent. Based on this criterion, Georgetown met or exceeded benchmark for quality
provision in 32 of 39 service indicators (82%). Areas for improvement identified in the survey included:
(1) traffic and parking; (2) employment opportunities; (3) housing opportunities; (4) retail options. The
top three priorities volunteered by respondents in an open-ended question are: (1) traffic; (2)
infrastructure and roads; (3) manage growth.
Page 46 of 199
iii
Contrast #2: Changes Over Time
There have been some changes in the percentage of respondents who say that the city is doing a good
or excellent job. Given the margin of error, only changes greater than 4% are considered.
In 8 of 25 cases common questions in the 2016 and 2018 surveys there were improvements of more
than four percent (32%). Improvements were observed in street repair, city beautification, the city as a
place to work, and emergency preparedness.
In 1 of 25 cases, there was a decrease in the percent who rated the service area good or excellent (4%).
The percent of respondents who rated traffic flow as good or excellent decreased by 16%.
Contrast #3: Comparisons Across Demographic Characteristics
Differences in responses were examined for seven different demographic characteristics including:
income, age, race, gender, home ownership, children in the home, number of years living in
Georgetown. In general, there are few statistically significant differences in the views of Georgetown
residents when they are examined in terms of their demographic characteristics. Thirty statistically
significant differences were found out of 231 statistical tests (33 indicators * 7 demographic
characteristics). In other words, statistically significant differences were found in 13% of the possible
cases.
The full results are presented in the report below. Highlights include:
• Lower income residents were less satisfied with employment and housing
• Residents under 65 were less satisfied with the city as place to work and walking for leisure
• Non-white residents were less satisfied with housing opportunities, animal control, and water
services
• Women were less satisfied with the city as a place to work and biking for leisure
• Owners were less satisfied with traffic and parking. Renters are less satisfied with housing
opportunities
• Households that include children were less satisfied with walking for leisure
• Residents for more than 10 years were less satisfied with housing opportunities, animal control,
street repair and traffic signal timing
Results for Specific Items
The remainder of the report presents the frequencies for each of the indicators in the survey. The
information is presented using bar charts to illustrate the range of responses. In each bar chart, the
number of respondents in found in parenthesis next to the indicator. The percent for each response
category is placed above the bars in the bar chart. Notable findings are presented with each bar chart.
Page 47 of 199
iv
List of Figures and Tables
Page
Figure 1: Value of City Services for City Taxes Paid 1
Figure 2: Quality of Government by Level of Government 2
Figure 3: Perceptions of Overall Quality of Life in Georgetown 3
Figure 4: Perceptions of Development 4
Figure 5: Traffic and Parking 5
Figure 6: Walking and Biking 6
Figure 7: Emergency Services 7
Figure 8: Code Enforcement and Permitting 8
Figure 9: Municipal Courts and Traffic Enforcement 9
Figure 10: Streets and Sidewalks 10
Figure 11: Utility Services 11
Figure 12: Waste Services 12
Figure 13: Services and City Beautification 13
Figure 14: Neighborhood Safety 14
Figure 15 Safety in Recreation and Shopping Areas 15
Figure 16: Service Utilization 16
Figure 17: Sources for News about Georgetown 17
Figure 18: Contact with City Employee 18
Figure 19: Rating of City Employee Contact 18
Figure 20: Years Lived in Georgetown 28
Figure 21: Racial Background 29
Figure 22: Age of Householder 30
Figure 23: Home Ownership 31
Table 1: Quality of Life and Quality of Service Perceptions 2016-2018 19
Table 2: Quality of Life and Quality of Service Perceptions 2016-2018, Cont. 20
Table 3: Perceptions about the Quality of Different Levels of Government 21
Table 4: Statistically Significant Differences by Income Groups 22
Table 5: Statistically Significant Differences by Age Groups 22
Table 6 Statistically Significant Differences by Racial Groups 22
Table 7: Statistically Significant Differences by Gender 23
Table 8: Statistically Significant Differences by Home Ownership 23
Table 9: Statistically Significant Differences by Children in the Home 23
Table 10: Statistically Significant Differences by Years in Georgetown 24
Table 11: Resident Perception by Survey Method 25
Table 12: Resident Perceptions by Survey Method, Cont. 26
Table 13: Survey Responses by Survey Method 27
Page 48 of 199
1
Responses to Key Indicators
Value of City Services
In 2018, 81% of respondents indicated that the value of city services for city taxes paid was excellent or
good. This represents a 3% increase compared to 78% in 2016.
26.1
54.8
16.6
2.5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
Figure 1: Value of City Services for City Taxes Paid (n=440)
Page 49 of 199
2
Quality of Government by Level of Government
83% of respondents rated the quality of local government as good or excellent in 2018 compared to 82%
in 2016. 80% rate county government as good or excellent, 62% rate state government as good or
excellent, and 55% rate the federal government as good or excellent.
9.4 10.1
15.5
20.8
45.3
51.5
64.2 61.8
33.3
30.1
17.2 14.8
12
8.3
3.1 2.6
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Federal Government
(n=393)
State Government (n=396)County Government
(n=413)
City Government (n=427)
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
Figure 2: Quality of Government by Level of Government
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Page 50 of 199
3
Quality of Life
98% of respondents rated the overall quality of life in Georgetown as good or excellent in 2018. The
same percentage (98%) indicated that overall quality of life was good or excellent in 2016. The quality
of life indicator rated the lowest was the city as a place to work. 81% of respondents indicated that the
city was an excellent or good place to work. However, this is a 7% increase in the percentage who
indicated that the city was a good or excellent place to work in 2016.
64.5
60.6
38.4
68.4
60.3
32.7 34.3
42.1
25.7
37.2
2.4 3.5
14.8
4.4 2.10.4 1.6
4.8
1.5 0.4
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
The City as a Place to
Live (n=468)
A Place to Raise
Children (n=315)
A Place to Work
(n=271)
A Place to Retire
(n=452)
Overall Quality of Life
(468)
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
Figure 3: Perceptions of Quality of Life in Georgetown
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Page 51 of 199
4
Perceptions of Development
84% rate the quality of businesses and services as good or excellent. 69% rate housing opportunities as
good or excellent, and 68% rate retail options as good or excellent. For these three, there were no
changes from 2016. In 2018, 56% of residents rate employment opportunities as good or excellent, a
3% increase compared to 2016 results.
19.7
10.8
15.9 18
64.4
45
52.6 50
13.9
32.3
24.4
27.2
2
12
7.1 4.8
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Quality of Businesses and
Service Establishments
(n=461)
Employment Opportunities
(n=346)
Housing Opportunities
(n=397)
Retail Options (n=434)
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
Figure 4: Perceptions of Development
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Page 52 of 199
5
Traffic and Parking
25% of respondents rate traffic flow as good or excellent. In 2016, 41% rated traffic flow as good or
excellent. The percentage who rated traffic flow as poor increased from 18% to 28%
2.1
6.6
23.2
40.7
46.3
36.5
28.4
16.2
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Traffic Flow on Major Streets (n=404)Amount of Public Parking (N=457)
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
Figure 5: Traffic and Parking
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Page 53 of 199
6
Alternative Transportation Modes
45% rate the availability of walking paths and trails as good or excellent. 30% of respondents rated the
ease of biking to work as good or excellent. 22% rated the ease of walking to work as good or excellent.
Note that the number of respondents for these cases is low, likely meaning that for most people walking
or biking to work is not applicable or relevant. In other words, of those who might be able or interested
in walking to work, only 22% rated the ability as good or excellent.
In 2016, 77% rated the availability of paths and walking trails as good or excellent. The decrease of
32% is likely a function of priming. After being asked about all the different walks that paths and
walking trails might be used (for recreation and to get to work), people were primed to think about
walking paths and trails and if they meet their perceived needs.
10.9
17.8
4.5
38.7
6.3
34.5
41.9
25.5
40.2
16.1
34.2
28.5 30.6
17.4
28.7
20.5
11.9
39.5
3.7
48.9
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Availability of Paths
and Walking Trails
(n=386)
Ease of Biking for
Leisure (n=270)
Ease of Biking for
Work (n=157)
Ease of Walking for
Leisure (n=455)
Ease of Walking for
Work (n=174)
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
Figure 6: Walking and Biking
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Page 54 of 199
7
Emergency Services
96% of respondents rated police services as good or excellent and 97% rated fire services as good or
excellent. 93% of respondents rated emergency preparedness as good or excellent, an increase of 6%
compared to 2016.
55
68.9
41.341
28.1
51.7
3.4 2.5
5.6
0.7 0.5 1.3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Police Services (n=444)Fire sevices (n=441)Emergency Preparedness (n=375)
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
Figure 7: Emergency Services
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Page 55 of 199
8
Code Enforcement and Permitting
78% of respondents rated permitting and inspections as good or excellent. 87% rated animal control as
good or excellent. 78% rated code enforcement as good or excellent.
22.2
32.7
17.7
55.3 54
60.2
18.1
10.2
15
4.4 3.1
7.1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Code Enforcement (n=320)Animal Control (n=352)Permitting and Inspection (n=254)
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
Figure 8: Code Enforcement and Permitting
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Page 56 of 199
9
Municipal Courts and Traffic Enforcement
80% of respondents rated traffic enforcement as good or excellent. 92% rated municipal courts as good
or excellent.
30.8
25.1
60.7
55.1
7.3
15.1
1.2
4.6
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Municipal Courts (n=247)Traffic Enforcement(n=414)
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
Figure 9: Municipal Courts and Traffic Enforcement
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Page 57 of 199
10
Streets and Sidewalks
73% rated street repair as good or excellent, a 12% increase since 2016. 72% rated street lighting as
good or excellent. 53% rated traffic signal timing as good or excellent
15.9 17.8
9.9
57.4
52.4
43.2
20.7 22.8
31
6.1 7
15.9
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Street Repair (n=460)Street Lighting (n=460)Traffic Signal Timing (n=465)
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
Figure 10: Streets and Sidewalks
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Page 58 of 199
11
Utility Services
94% of respondents rated sewer services as good or excellent. 92% of respondents rated electric
services as good or excellent. 90% rated city water services as good or excellent.
38 38.8
44.3
51.2
54.8
47.8
8.9
6.2 7.4
2 0.2 0.5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
City Water Services (n=461)City Sewer Services (n=436)City Electric Services (n=431)
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
Figure 11: Utility Services
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Page 59 of 199
12
Waste Services
94% of respondents rated the quality of the garbage collection as good or excellent. 91% rated recycling
as good or excellent. 76% rated yard waste pickup as good or excellent.
52.6 51.8
32.8
40.9 39
43.4
5.8 5.9
14.9
0.6
3.2
8.9
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Garbage Collection (n=462)Recycling (n=438)Yard Waste Pickup (n=403)
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
Figure 12: Waste Services
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Page 60 of 199
13
Services and City Beautification
89% of respondents rated services to youth as good or excellent. 88% of respondents rated services to
seniors as good or excellent. 92% rated city beautification as good or excellent.
37.8
33.7
41.2
49.7
55.6
50.4
11.7
9.1 8
0.8 1.6 0.4
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Services to Seniors (n=368)Services to Youth (n=252)City Beautification (n=452)
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
Figure 13: Services and City Beautification
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Page 61 of 199
14
Neighborhood Safety
90% of respondents rated neighborhood safety at night as good or excellent. 89% feel safe in their
neighborhood at night. 95% of respondents feel safe in the downtown square. Note how the
percentage who rate safety as good is different across these three indicators. Respondents are less
likely to rate safety in the downtown square and in their neighborhood at night as excellent.
64
47 47.4
30
41.5
47.9
5.1
9.6
4.5
0.9 2 0.3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Neighborhood (Day) (n=470)Neighborhood (Night) (n=460)Downtown Square (n=397)
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
Figure 14: Neighborhood Safety
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Page 62 of 199
15
Safety in Recreation and Shopping Areas
88% of respondents rated safety in city parks as good or excellent. 79% rated safety in recreational
waters as good or excellent. 95% rated safety in shopping centers as good or excellent. 81% rated the
safety of city drinking water as good or excellent.
32.5
27.8
40.9
36.9
55.1
50.9
53.9
44.3
12.1
17.5
4.9
10.3
0.3
3.8
0.2
8.5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
City Parks (n=314)Recreational Waters
(n=234)
Shopping Centers
(n=445)
Drinking Water (n=447)
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
Figure 15: Safety in Recreation and Shopping Areas
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Page 63 of 199
16
Service Utilization
57% of respondents visited the downtown square often or very often. 32% of respondents visited a city
park often or very often. 32% visited the city library often or very often. 19% utilized a recreation
program often or very often. 17% visited the city website often or very often.
15
9.4
12.4
21.7
5.1
16.5
9.9
19.1
35
11.9
30.4
19.5
36.2
32.4
26
19.1
25.8
21.2
7.7
24.2
19.2
35.4
11.1
3.2
32.8
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
City Library (n=467)Recreation Programs
(n=466)
Visted a City Park
(n=382)
Visited the
Downtown Square
(n=466)
Visted City Website
(n=454)
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
Figure 16: Service Utilization
Very Often Often Sometimes Rarely Never
Page 64 of 199
17
Sources of News about Georgetown
20% of respondents used the city social media as a source for news. 63% of respondents used
Community Impact as source for news often or very often. In 2018, top three sources for news based on
the percentage who said they used the source very often, often, or sometimes: (1) Community Impact
(80%); (2) City Newsletter (75%); (3) Williamson County Sun (62%). In 2016, top three sources for news
based on the percentage who said they used the source more than 12 times in the past year: (1)
Williamson County Sun (42%), (2) Community Impact (30%); Local TV Stations (20%). These different
response categories may have influenced the results.
13.9
5.5
22.1
27.6
2
6.8
36.4
14.3
22.6
34.9
3.7
13
24.3
19.4 16.9 17.5
5.5
22.9
8.9
17.4 16
9.9
14.3
18.716.5
43.4
22.4
10.1
74.5
38.7
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
City Newsletter
(n=461)
City Social Media
(n=454)
Williamson
County Sun
(n=456)
Community
Impact (n=456)
GTV Ch. 10
(n=455)
Local TV Stations
(n=455)
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
Figure 17: Sources for News about Georgetown
Very Often Often Sometimes Rarely Never
Page 65 of 199
18
Resident-Initiated Contacting
54% percent of residents had contact with a city employee in the last year. 91% rated the service the
employee provided as good or excellent overall.
54.4
45.6
Figure 18: Percent of Residents Who Had
Contact with a City Employee
Yes No
54.336.4
3.9
4.7
Figure 19: Rating City Employee Contact
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Page 66 of 199
19
Table 1: Resident Quality of Life and Quality of Service Perceptions 2016-2018
Indicators 2016 2018 Change
Value of City Services for
Taxes Paid
78 81 +3
Perceptions of Overall
Quality of Life
Overall Quality of Life 98 98 0
The City as a Place to Live 98 97 -1
Life Choices and Quality
of Life
A Place to Raise Children 95 95 0
A Place to Work 74 81 +7
A Place to Retire 95 94 -1
Perceptions of
Development
Quality of New
Development
Overall Quality of
Businesses
84 84 0
Employment
Opportunities
53 56 +3
Housing Opportunities 70 69 -1
Retail Options 68
Traffic and Parking
Traffic Flow on Major
Streets
41 25 -16
Amount of Public Parking 46 47 +1
Walking and Biking
Ease of Walking for
Leisure [Availability of
walking paths in 2016]
77 79
Emergency Services
Police Services 95 96 +1
Fire/EMS Services 98 97 -1
Emergency Preparedness 87 93 +6
Municipal Courts and
Traffic Enforcement
Municipal Courts 90 92 +2
Traffic Enforcement 77 80 +3
Page 67 of 199
20
Table 2: Resident Quality of Life and Quality of Services Perceptions 2016-2018
Indicators 2016 2018 Change
Code Enforcement and
Permitting
Code Enforcement 77 78 -1
Animal Control 83 87 +5
Streets and Sidewalks
Street Repair 61 73 +12
Street Lighting 69 70 +1
Traffic Signal Timing 52 53 +1
Garbage and Sewer
Garbage Collection 92 94 +2
Recycling 91 91 0
Yard Waste Pickup 77 76 -1
Sewer Services 89 94 +5
Parks and Recreation
and Public Library
City Parks 95 95 0
Recreation Programs 91 93 +2
Public Library 96 98 +2
Services
Services to Seniors 88 88 0
Services to Youth 84 89 +5
City Beautification 84 92 +8
Page 68 of 199
21
Table 3: Perceptions of Quality of Government by Level of Government 2016-
2018
2016 2018 Change
City Government 82 83 +1
County
Government
75 80 +5
State Government 62 62 0
Federal
Government
48 55 +7
Page 69 of 199
22
Statistically Significant Differences
Income
Table 4: Statistically Significant Differences by Income
Percent Good or Excellent
Less than 75K More than 75K N Chi-Square Sig.
Traffic 33 22 406 6.18 .01
Employment
Opportunities
46 63 221 5.98 .01
Housing
Opportunities
60 77 350 11.84 .001
Traffic
Enforcement
75 86 362 7.40 .007
Yard Waste
Pickup
82 72 349 4.49 .03
Age
Table 5: Statistically Significant Differences by Age
Percent Good or Excellent
Less than 65 More than 65 N Chi-Square Sig.
Place to Work 69 83 216 5.54 .02
Walking for
Leisure
68 81 331 6.57 .01
City Drinking
Water
81 90 335 4.60 .03
Race
Table 6: Statistically Significant Differences by Race
Percent Good or Excellent
Non-White White N Chi-Square Sig.
Housing
Opportunities
58 70 397 3.81 .05
Animal Control 77 89 352 5.88 .02
City Water
Services
78 91 461 10.80 .001
Page 70 of 199
23
Gender
Table 7: Statistically Significant Differences by Gender
Percent Good or Excellent
Male Female N Chi-Square Sig.
A Place to
Work
86 75 263 5.47 .02
Traffic 19 32 454 10.7 .001
Biking for
Leisure
67 52 261 6.34 .01
Traffic Signal
Timing
48 57 451 3.91 .05
Home Ownership
Table 8: Statistically Significant Differences by Home Ownership
Percent Good or Excellent
Owner Renter N Chi-Square Sig.
Traffic 24 38 458 4.10 .04
Parking 45 66 447 6.85 .009
Housing
Opportunities
70 54 388 4.54 .03
Recycling 82 76 427 10.7 .001
Children in Home
Table 9: Statistically Significant Differences by Children in Home
Percent Good or Excellent
No Children Children N Chi-Square Sig.
Walking for
Leisure
82 65 455 10.7 .001
Street Lighting 68 80 460 3.86 .05
Page 71 of 199
24
Years in Georgetown
Table 10: Statistically Significant Differences by Years in Georgetown
Percent Good or Excellent
Less than 10
Years
More than 10
Years
N Chi-Square Sig.
Place to Retire 96 91 443 4.81 .03
Housing
Opportunities
75 61 390 9.02 .003
Police 98 94 435 5.11 .02
Traffic
Enforcement
84 76 406 4.05 .04
Code
Enforcement
84 70 313 7.96 .005
Animal Control 92 81 345 9.81 .002
Street Repair 80 65 451 11.75 .001
Traffic Signal
Timing
57 48 456 3.96 .05
Permits 85 70 247 8.29 .004
Page 72 of 199
25
Table 11: Comparison of Resident Quality of Life and Quality of Service Perceptions for
Open Survey and Random Sample Surveys 2018
Indicators Open Survey Random Sample Difference
Value of City Services for
Taxes Paid
71 81 +10
Perceptions of Overall
Quality of Life
Overall Quality of Life 94 98 +4
The City as a Place to Live 95 97 +2
Life Choices and Quality
of Life
A Place to Raise Children 92 95 +3
A Place to Work 74 81 +7
A Place to Retire 91 94 +3
Perceptions of
Development
Quality of New
Development
58 76 +18
Overall Quality of
Businesses
75 84 +9
Employment
Opportunities
52 56 +4
Housing Opportunities 61 69 +8
Retail Options 63 68 +5
Traffic and Parking
Traffic Flow on Major
Streets
20 25 +5
Amount of Public Parking 42 47 +5
Walking and Biking
Ease of Walking for
Leisure
69 79 +10
Walking to Work 17 22 +5
Ease of Biking for Leisure 48 60 +12
Biking to Work 24 30 +8
Emergency Services
Police Services 94 96 +2
Fire Services 98 97 -1
Ambulance/EMS
Emergency Preparedness 87 93 +6
Municipal Courts and
Traffic Enforcement
Municipal Courts 87 92 +5
Traffic Enforcement 77 80 +3
Page 73 of 199
26
Table 12: Comparison of Resident Quality of Life and Quality of Services Perceptions for
Open Survey and Random Sample 2018
Indicators Open Survey Random Sample Difference
Code Enforcement and
Permitting
Code Enforcement 71 78 +7
Animal Control 84 87 +3
Permitting and Inspection 64 78 +14
Streets and Sidewalks
Street Repair 68 73 +5
Street Lighting 68 70 +2
Traffic Signal Timing 44 53 +9
Waste Services
Garbage Collection 89 94 +5
Recycling 84 91 +7
Yard Waste Pickup 70 76 +6
Utilities
Electric Services 86 92 +6
Water Services 83 89 +6
Sewer Services 89 94 +5
Parks and Recreation
and Public Library
City Parks 92 95 +3
Recreation Programs 90 93 +3
Public Library 96 98 +2
Services
Services to Seniors 85 88 +3
Services to Youth 80 89 +9
City Beautification 86 92 +6
Page 74 of 199
27
Table 13: Comparison of Respondents by Survey Method
Random Sample
Mail
Random Sample
Online
Open Survey Chi Square Sig.
Income
Less than 75K 47 23 37 15.07 .001
More than 75K 53 77 63
Children in Home
No 83 57 66 45.93 .0001
Yes 17 43 34
Years in Georgetown
Less than 10 53 57 55 .62 .75
10 or more 47 43 45
Age
Less than 65 23 52 41 31.67 .0001
65 or more 77 48 59
Gender
Male 48 56 41 7.59 .02
Female 52 44 59
Home Ownership
Owner 90 92 90 .279 .87
Renter 10 8 10
Race
Non-White 16 18 23 8.80 .01
White 84 82 77
Page 75 of 199
28
Years Lived in Georgetown
53
47
55
4547
53
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Less than 5 years More than 5 years
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
Figure 20: Years Lived in Georgetown
Random Sample (n=466)Open Survey (n=852)US Census
Page 76 of 199
29
Racial Background
16
84
23
77
17
83
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Non-White White
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
Figure 21: Racial Background
Random Sample (n=483)Open Survey (n=922)Census
Page 77 of 199
30
Age of Householder
25
75
41
5956
44
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Under 65 Over 65
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
Figure 22: Age of Householder
Random Sample (n=343)Open Survey (n=724)Census
Page 78 of 199
31
Home Ownership
90
10
90
10
73
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Own Rent
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
Figure 23: Home Ownership
Random Sample (n=464)Open Survey (n=847)Census
Page 79 of 199
City of Georgetown 2018 Resident Open Survey
This survey is being conducted by Texas State University on behalf of the City of Georgetown. Your address has
been randomly selected to receive this survey. The survey will take approximately 20 minutes to complete. Your
responses are completely confidential and there are no risks associated with completing the survey. The data will be
stored electronically for three years. While participation is optional, your feedback is extremely important to the City
for planning and decision-making purposes.
Please contact Dr. Thomas Longoria at tl28@txstate.edu 512-245-6899 if you have any questions. If you have any
concerns about this survey, contact Dr. Denise Gobert Texas State Institutional Review Board (IRB) Chair at 512-
245-3256 or dgobert@txstate.edu or Monica Gonzales at meg201@txstate.edu
Please only complete this survey one time per household. Do NOT complete this survey if your household
received a survey in the mail.
Please click the response that best represents your opinion for each of the items below. Feel free to select
N/A if you don’t know, have no opinion or if the question does not apply.
1. In your opinion, what are your top three priorities for the City of Georgetown?
Priority #1
Priority #2
Priority #3
2. Please rate the following elements of quality of life in Georgetown.
Poor Fair Good Excellent N/A
The city as a place to live
A place to raise children
A place to work
A place to retire
Overall quality of life
3. Please rate the following aspects of mobility in Georgetown.
Poor Fair Good Excellent N/A
Ease of walking for leisure
Ease of walking to work
Traffic flow on major streets
Amount of public parking
Ease of biking for leisure
Ease of biking to work
Page 80 of 199
4. Please rate the following characteristics of development in Georgetown.
Poor Fair Good Excellent N/A
Quality of new development
Overall quality of businesses
Employment opportunities
Housing Availability
Retail Options
5. Please rate the quality of each of the following protective services in Georgetown.
Poor Fair Good Excellent N/A
Police services
Fire services and EMS services
Municipal courts
Traffic enforcement
Code enforcement
Animal control
Emergency preparedness
6. Please rate the quality of each of the following city services in Georgetown.
Poor Fair Good Excellent N/A
Street repair
Street lighting
Garbage collection
Recycling
Yard waste pickup
Traffic signal timing
City water service
City sewer service
City electric service
Permitting & inspection services
Other comments about city services:
Page 81 of 199
7. Please rate the quality of each of the following community services in Georgetown.
Poor Fair Good Excellent N/A
City parks
Recreation programs
Services to seniors
Services to youth
Public library
City beautification
8. In the previous 12 months, how many times have you or members of your family used the following
services?
Never 1-2 times 3- 12 times 13 - 26 times
More than 26
times
City library
Recreation centers
Visited a city park
Downtown Square
9. In the previous 12 months, how often did you receive news about the City of Georgetown from the following
sources?
Never 1-2 times 3-12 times 13 - 26 times
More than 26
times
Georgetown.org (city website)
Reporter (Utility bill newsletter)
City Social Media
Williamson Co. Sun
Community Impact
GTV Ch. 10
Local TV Sta.
Other media sources:
Back Next
Page 82 of 199
10. Overall, how would you rate the quality of services provided by each of the following levels of
government?
Poor Fair Good Excellent N/A
The Federal Government
The State Government
County Government
City Government
Now we would like to ask you some questions about your satisfaction with
contact with city employees.
11. Have you had any in-person, phone, email or social media contact with any employee of the City of
Georgetown within the last 12 months?
Yes No
12. If you answered yes to #12, what was your impression of the employee(s) of the City in your most recent
contact? (Please write name of the department and rate each of the characteristics below).
Department Contacted
Back Next
Page 83 of 199
12. (continued) Rate the department contacted and noted earlier using each of the following
characteristics.
Poor Fair Good Excellent N/A
Overall impression
16. Please rate safety in the following areas throughout the City.
Poor Fair Good Excellent N/A
In your neighborhood (day)
In your neighborhood (after
dark)
In downtown/square
In city parks
In recreational waters (Blue
Hole, Lake Georgetown)
In shopping centers
Drinking city water
18. In Georgetown, residents pay property taxes to the City, the County, and the School District. The School
District rate accounts for 60% of total property taxes paid, the County rate accounts for 20% of total property tax
paid, while the City’s rate accounts for 20% of property taxes paid. Based on this information, do you think the
value of services you receive from the City is:
Poor Fair Good Excellent N/A
The City of Georgetown is seeking feedback from a sample of residents on the use of solar panels to
generate power for city utility customers. If you would like to be considered for a 1-2 hour long focus
group, please provide your email address in the space below.
Back Next
Page 84 of 199
Single-family home (detached)
Duplex or townhome
Apartment or condo building
Mobile home
Other
Now we would like to ask you some questions about you and your
household. Remember that your responses are completely confidential and
anonymous.
19. How many years have you lived in Georgetown?
Less than 2 years 2-5 years 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years
20. Which of the following best describes the building you live in?
21. Do you own or rent?
Own Rent Other Arrangement
Back Next
Page 85 of 199
Male
Female
Other
22. What is the nearest neighborhood intersection near your home? (e.g., 1st and Main)
23. What is your gender?
24. Which of the following options best describes your age category?
18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75 years or older
25. Please select all that apply:
Full-tme Employee Unemployed Retired Student Part-time Employee
Back Next
Page 86 of 199
White
Black or African American
Asian, Asian Indian, Pacific Islander
American Indian or Alaskan Native
Other
Less than $25,000 $25,000 to $50,000 $50,001 to $75,000 $75,001 to $100,000
$100,001 to $150,000 Over $150,0001
26. Are you of Hispanic or Latino origin?
Yes No
27. What is your race or ethnicity?
28. What is your household income?
How do you normally get to work?
Drive alone Car pool
Public
Transportation Bicycle Walk Taxi Motorcycle
Work at
home Retired Other
Back Next
Page 87 of 199
29. How many adults (18 or older) live in your household?
30. How many children (younger than 18) live in your household?
32. Anything else you want us to know?
Thank you for participating in our survey! The City of Georgetown
values your opinions.
Back Next
Page 88 of 199
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Workshop
January 28, 2020
S UBJEC T:
P resentation and update regarding the Transfer Station Design and rate impacts -- Eric J ohnson, Facilities Director and
Ray Miller, P ublic Works Director.
I T E M S UMMARY:
This is an update regarding the Transfer Station design. Specifically, Council will be given an update on the progre ss of
the Design for the Transfer Station, and given an oppo rtunity for input on scope options, based on lo ng te rm ne e ds. A
discussion on the rate impact will also be provided by Ray M iller.
F I NANC I AL IMPAC T:
T he S chematic D esign of the T ransfer S tation will brought to C ity C ouncil for input and approval, prior to moving
forward with final design.
S UBMI T T ED BY:
Eric J ohnson, Facilities Director and Ray Miller, P ublic Works Director
AT TAC HMENT S :
Description
Trans fer S tatio n Up d ate P res entation
Page 89 of 199
City Council Workshop
January 28, 2020
Transfer Station Design
Update
Page 90 of 199
Purpose:
•Provide an overview of previous discussions
regarding the transfer station
•Update on the progression of constructing a new
transfer station
Guidance:
•Consideration of construction options
•Consideration of funding options
Page 91 of 199
Why do we have a Transfer Station
•Materials must be direct-hauled in the
collection vehicle or long-hauled using
transfer trailers
•Factors that affect financial feasibility
include:
–Collection cost
–Disposal cost
–Distance/travel time to landfill
–Fuel costs
–Annual tonnage hauled
–Payload of transfer trailers vs. collection vehicles
Page 92 of 199
Background
•The City committed to the Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to make certain
improvements at the transfer station
–Improvements include covering areas where waste is
exposed and better storm water management
–The existing facility was originally opened in 1984 and
improvements made in 2006-2009
–Prior to investing in improvements to the existing
facility, City Council provided guidance to compare
that option to building a new facility at the same
location
Page 93 of 199
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
To
n
s
p
e
r
H
o
u
r
Current vs 2028 Projection
Estimated Hourly
Capacity
= Current
= 2028 Projection
Page 94 of 199
•Since the transfer station cannot operate over its
capacity, the operations would be impacted in
several ways:
–Collections vehicles must wait longer to unload, impacting collection
routes
–Collection operations would have to shift to earlier in the day or later
in the day
–Recycling trucks could not be unloaded during peak hours since only
one material stream can be managed at a time
–Site becomes more congested, with less space for self-haulers
Impact of Operating At or Near Capacity
Page 95 of 199
Council Direction on April 24, 2018
New Facility
1.Better separation of customer drop off and collection
vehicles
2.Increase operational efficiency
3.Reduce wait time to unload vehicle
4.Less downtime to process multiple streams
5.Provide for 3 waste streams (trash, recycle, and
compost)
6.Require new TCEQ permit
Page 96 of 199
Option A
Design Element Estimated Cost Estimated Cost w/ 20%
Contingency
Transfer Station Building $ 3,400,000 $ 4,080,000
Scale House $ 100,000 $ 120,000
Covered Drop-Off Area $ 350,000 $ 420,000
Scales $ 270,000 $ 324,000
Site Work $ 2,760,000 $ 3,312,000
Road Alignment $ 500,000 $ 600,000
Water Line $ 300,000 $ 360,000
Compost Area Regrade $ 300,000 $ 360,000
Truck Wash $ 40,000 $ 48,000
TOTAL $ 8,020,000 $ 9,624,000
Page 97 of 199
City of GeorgetownPage 98 of 199
City of GeorgetownPage 99 of 199
City of GeorgetownPage 100 of 199
City of GeorgetownPage 101 of 199
City of GeorgetownPage 102 of 199
City of GeorgetownPage 103 of 199
City of GeorgetownPage 104 of 199
City of GeorgetownPage 105 of 199
Option B (Option A + Operator Building)
Design Element Estimated Cost Estimated Cost w/ 20%
Contingency
Transfer Station Building $ 3,400,000 $ 4,080,000
Operators Building $ 200,000 $ 240,000
Scale House $ 100,000 $ 120,000
Covered Drop-Off Area $ 350,000 $ 420,000
Scales $ 270,000 $ 324,000
Site Work $ 2,760,000 $ 3,312,000
Road Alignment $ 500,000 $ 600,000
Water Line $ 300,000 $ 360,000
Compost Area Regrade $ 300,000 $ 360,000
Truck Wash $ 40,000 $ 48,000
TOTAL $ 8,220,000 $ 9,864,000
Page 106 of 199
City of GeorgetownPage 107 of 199
Pros vs Cons
•Pros
–Full Package for operator
–Meet City Standards
–City would maintain building
–Uniform appearance throughout Facility
•Cons
–May not meet future operator needs
–City would have to maintain building
–Binds operator contract to building
–Increased project cost
Page 108 of 199
Option C (Option A + Option B + Office
Building + Outdoor Education Area)
Design Element Estimated Cost Estimated Cost w/ 20%
Contingency
Transfer Station Building $ 3,400,000 $ 4,080,000
Office Building $ 340,000 $ 408,000
Outdoor Education Area $ 30,000 $ 36,000
Operators Building $ 200,000 $ 240,000
Scale House $ 100,000 $ 120,000
Covered Drop-Off Area $ 350,000 $ 420,000
Scales $ 270,000 $ 324,000
Site Work $ 2,760,000 $ 3,312,000
Road Alignment $ 500,000 $ 600,000
Water Line $ 300,000 $ 360,000
Compost Area Regrade $ 300,000 $ 360,000
Truck Wash $ 40,000 $ 48,000
TOTAL $ 8,590,000 $ 10,308,000Page 109 of 199
Pros vs Cons
•Pros
–Allows City Staff to operate at Facility
–Allows Education Programming
–Uniform appearance throughout Facility
•Cons
–May not meet future operator needs
–City would have to maintain building/pavilion
–Ties down future flexibility of the site
–Increased project cost
Page 110 of 199
Budget and Rates
Purpose of this section:
•Overview of current contract status
•Outline potential funding options
Guidance:
Request guidance on future actions
Page 111 of 199
Transfer Station Contract
Transfer Station Current Contract:
•Extended November 1, 2017
•Renew date by November 1, 2022
•TDS has administered the Georgetown solid waste
contract for more than 20 years
•The current transfer station was constructed in 1989
and has lasted more than 30 years
Page 112 of 199
Budget and Rates
•Transfer Station construction costs are up to 10
million dollars
•Debt is sold and repaid over a 20 year period
•Payments are approximately $700,000 per year
•A new transfer station is expected to increase
capacity and efficiency to last to 2050 or longer
Page 113 of 199
Combined External Commercial, Internal
Commercial, & Residential
CUSTOMER CY PER YEAR COST PER MONTH ANNUAL
REVENUE
MONTHLY
REVENUE
External
Commercial
1,051,200
(Compactor,
Roll -Off)
$0.30 per cy per
year
$315,360.00 $26,280.00
Internal
Commercial
503,061
(dumpsters &
carts)
$0.27 per cy per
month
$135,826.47 $11,318.87
COG
Residential
Misc.
26,268 accounts
$0.90 per
account
$283,694.40 $23,461.20
Totals $734,880.87 $61,060.07
Page 114 of 199
Internal Commercial
CUSTOMER CY DUMPSTER
1X PER WEEK
WEEKLY COST MONTHLY
REVENUE
ANNUAL
REVENUE
Individual
Commercial
8 $2.16 $9.36 $112.32
74 Total 592 $1278.72 $5,538.95 $66,493.44
Individual
Commercial
6 $1.62 $7.02 $84.24
84 Total 504 $816.48 $3,538.08 $42,456.96
Commercial
Cart 1x per
week
0.5 $0.14 $0.60 $7.28
354
Total
177 $24.78 $106.20 $1288.56
TOTAL
ANNUAL
135,826.47
Page 115 of 199
Residential
$15.90 $16.01 $18.80 $19.55 $19.97 $20.45 $20.97
$28.74 $29.14
$51.80
96 gal cart, Standard Residential Service
Page 116 of 199
Next Steps
•Council input on design element options
•Determine Rate Structure
•Proceed with Schematic Design
•Complete Design October 2020
•Permits and Bidding
•Construction –12 -14 months (Phased to keep
existing site open)
Page 117 of 199
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Workshop
January 28, 2020
S UBJEC T:
P resentation and discussion regarding the Georgetown Fire Department's Draft Strategic P lan 2 020 -- J ohn Sullivan,
Fire Chief
I T E M S UMMARY:
F I NANC I AL IMPAC T:
.
S UBMI T T ED BY:
M onica Heyward
AT TAC HMENT S :
Description
G F D S P 2025 Draft
S P O verview 2020
Page 118 of 199
Page 119 of 199
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 120 of 199
Message from the Fire Chief
I am deeply proud to be part of this great organization and community. I can confidently say that
our organization and members are committed to excellence internally and externally. We avoid
doing “just good enough” and remain committed to doing our best each day. Our pride in the
organization and positive commitment to quality have made us what we are today and, through
constant assessment and change, will sustain us into the future.
The City of Georgetown is not a place where we work – it is a community where we commit to
serve others before ourselves. It is a community where we value feedback and respect diverse
views and relationships.
At Georgetown Fire Department, you are not just an employee - you are a member, part of a
family and a team. You become a member the day you join the organization, in any capacity, and
put on the GFD uniform.
We are a family in the sense that we spend a considerable amount of time together and “getting
along” is not an option – it’s a requirement. Much like family members care for one another, we
must equally show caring concern for one another and the community we serve.
The following pages reflect our relationship as a team in the sense that we must always pull
together to get the job done. It is intended to communicate to existing and new members the
expectations of the way members are treated in the system, expectations for individual behavior
and performance, clarification of our mission and guidelines for leadership to work
collaboratively with others inside and outside of our organization.
I am thankful that our 2020 Strategic Plan reflects community and member driven feedback. It is
aligned with the City of Georgetown’s values and it is based upon the fundamental principle that
our members are the foundation of this organization; therefore, the organization can be no
better or stronger than its membership.
Being a member of the Georgetown Fire Department is more than an occupation; it includes a
commitment and responsibility to our community and to the other members of our family and
team. This commitment is backed with individual responsibility and accountability, and a
commitment to this organizational plan through our mission, vision, goals and values.
E pluribus unum.
John M. Sullivan
Fire Chief
Page 121 of 199
Introduction
The Georgetown Fire Department (GFD) provides an all-hazards approach in the protection of the
lives and property of the residents, businesses, and visitors of Georgetown, Texas. GFD is
consistently working to achieve and/or maintain the highest level of professionalism and
efficiency on behalf of those it serves, and thus, contracted with the Center for Public Safety
Excellence (CPSE) to facilitate a method to document the department’s path into the future via a
“Community-Driven Strategic Plan.” The following strategic plan was written in accordance with
the guidelines set forth in the Commission on Fire Accreditation (CFAI) Fire & Emergency Service
Self-Assessment Manual 9th Ed. and is intended to guide the organization within established
parameters set forth by the authority having jurisdiction.
The CPSE utilized the community-driven strategic planning process to go beyond just the
development of a document. It challenged the department’s members to critically examine
paradigms, values, philosophies, beliefs and desires, and challenged individuals to work in the best
interest of the “team.” It further provided the department with an opportunity to participate in the
development of their organization’s long-term direction and focus. Members of the organization’s
community and department stakeholders’ groups demonstrated commitment to this important
project and remain committed to the document’s completion and future plan execution.
Page 122 of 199
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT | 2020 – 2025 STRATEGIC
PLAN
Table of Contents
Organizational Background ........................................................................................................................ 1
Organizational Structure ............................................................................................................................. 2
Community-Driven Strategic Planning ................................................................................................... 2
Process and Acknowledgements .............................................................................................................. 4
Community Group Findings ....................................................................................................................... 5
Community Priorities .............................................................................................................................. 6
Department Stakeholder Group Findings ............................................................................................. 7
Mission ............................................................................................................................................................... 7
Values ................................................................................................................................................................. 8
Programs and Services ................................................................................................................................. 9
SWOT Analysis ............................................................................................................................................... 9
Critical Issues and Service Gaps ............................................................................................................. 10
Strategic Initiatives ..................................................................................................................................... 10
Goals and Objectives ................................................................................................................................. 10
Vision ............................................................................................................................................................... 29
Performance Measurement ..................................................................................................................... 30
The Success of the Strategic Plan.......................................................................................................... 31
Glossary of Terms, Acronyms, and Initialisms ................................................................................... 32
Works Cited ................................................................................................................................................... 34
Appendix 1..................................................................................................................................................... 35
Community Expectations ..................................................................................................................... 35
Areas of Community Concern ............................................................................................................ 36
Positive Community Feedback .......................................................................................................... 38
Other Thoughts and Comments ....................................................................................................... 42
Appendix 2..................................................................................................................................................... 44
Strengths ................................................................................................................................................... 44
Weaknesses .............................................................................................................................................. 44
Opportunities ........................................................................................................................................... 46
Threats ........................................................................................................................................................ 47
Appendix 3..................................................................................................................................................... 48
Page 123 of 199
Page 1
Organizational Background
Established in 1881, the Georgetown Fire Department was created to mitigate emergencies within
its jurisdiction as a volunteer organization. The original composition of the department was
comprised of a hook and ladder company and a rescue hose company. The department has
continued to be an ever-evolving organization
focused on providing professional and caring
emergency services. The evolution of the
organization is indicative as it has changed
from its original all-volunteer status to its
current all-career status. The department’s
evolution continued with the addition of non-
emergency services that include pre-fire
planning, arson investigation, community
education, and disaster preparation.
The Georgetown Fire Department serves an
approximate population of more than 100,000 residents within the City and its extra territorial
jurisdiction (ETJ). The City of Georgetown has grown
exponentially over the last decade. That growth and
increase in population has and will provide for specific risks
for which the department considers, prepares, and deploys
its resources.
Today, GFD reflects on its history and remains committed
to providing all-hazards emergency services and education
to its community with honesty, integrity, teamwork, and
respect. The Georgetown Fire Department continues to
honor its community with the provision of quality services
through its proactive focus on risks and deployment from
five stations that are located strategically throughout the
139 square miles of coverage area. Two additional stations
are under construction with an anticipated opening
timeframe of the spring of 2020. Staffed to support the
community, GFD embraces its future vision and excellence
in service delivery.
Page 124 of 199
Page 2
Organizational Structure
Community-Driven Strategic Planning
For many successful organizations, the voice of the community drives their operations and charts
the course for their future. A community-driven emergency service organization is one that seeks
to gather and utilize the needs and expectations of its community in the development and/or
improvement of the services provided. To ensure that the community remains a focus of an
organization’s direction, a community-driven strategic planning process was used to develop this
strategic plan.
A strategic plan is a living management tool that provides short-term direction, builds a shared
vision, documents goals and objectives, and optimizes the use of resources. The process of
strategic planning can be defined as “a deliberative, disciplined approach to producing
fundamental decisions and actions that shape and guide what an organization (or other entity) is,
what it does, and why.”1
1 See Definition, Purpose, and Benefits of Strategic Planning (Bryson 8)
Of
f
i
c
e
o
f
F
i
r
e
C
h
i
e
f
(1
)
F
i
r
e
/
M
e
d
i
c
a
l
C
h
i
e
f
Fire & Life Safety
(1) Fire Marshal
Inspection & Investigation
(1) DFM
(3) Fire Prevention Specialists
Respond Quickly
Solve Problems
Be Nice (Care)
FP System & Plan Review
(1) FPE
Respond Quickly
Solve Problems
Be Nice (Care)Medical Services
(1) Medical Director
Planning & Support
(1) Assistant Chief
Community Risk Reduction
(1) DFM Outreach
Respond Quickly
Solve Problems
Be Nice (Care)
Logistic Services
(1) CPT
(1) Purchaser
Respond Quickly
Solve Problems
Be Nice (Caring)Administration Services
(1) Assistant Chief
(1) Executive Assistant
(1) Administrative Assistant
Operations
(1) Division Chief
(1) QA/QI Coordinator
A-Shift Commander
(1) Battalion Chief
Station(s) 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
(3) CPT, (5) LT,
(8) DE, (1) CEP II,
(25) FF/P and FF/E
Respond Quickly
Solve Problems
Be Nice (Care)
B-Shift Commander
(1) Battalion Chief
Station(s) 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
(3) CPT, (5) LT
(8) DE, (1) CEP II
(25) FF/P, FF/E
Respond Quickly
Solve Problems
Be Nice (Care)
C-Shift Commander
(1) Battalion Chief
Station(s) 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
(3) CPT, (5) LT
(8) DE, (1) CEP II
(25) FF/P, FF/E
Respond Quickly
Solve Problems
Be Nice (Caring)
Professional Standards
(1) Battalion Chief
(2) CEP II
Page 125 of 199
Page 3
Effective strategic planning benefits from a consistent and cohesively structured process employed
across all levels of the organization. Planning is a continuous process, one with no clear beginning and
no defined end. While plans can be developed on a regular basis, it is the process of planning that is
important, not the publication of the plan itself. Most importantly, strategic planning can be an
opportunity to unify the management, employees, and stakeholders through a common understanding
of where the organization is going, how everyone involved can work to that common purpose, and how
progression and success will be measured.
The Community–Driven Strategic Planning Process Outline
1. Define the programs provided to the community.
2. Establish the community’s service program priorities and expectations of the organization.
3. Identify any concerns the community may have about the organization, along with aspects
of the organization that the community views positively.
4. Revisit the mission statement, giving careful attention to the services and programs
currently provided, and which logically can be provided in the future.
5. Revisit the values of the organization’s membership.
6. Identify the internal strengths and weaknesses of the organization.
7. Identify areas of opportunity or potential threats to the organization.
8. Identify the organization’s critical issues and service gaps.
9. Determine strategic initiatives for organizational improvement.
10. Establish a realistic goal and objectives for each initiative.
11. Identify implementation tasks for the accomplishment of each objective.
12. Determine the vision of the future.
13. Develop organizational and community commitment to accomplishing the plan.
Page 126 of 199
Page 4
Process and Acknowledgements
The Center for Public Safety Excellence (CPSE) acknowledges and thanks the community and
department stakeholders for their participation and input into this community-driven strategic
planning process. The CPSE also recognizes Fire Chief John Sullivan and the team of professionals
that participated for their leadership and commitment to this process.
Development of this strategic plan took place in June and November 2019, beginning with a June
meeting hosted by a representative from the CPSE for members of the community (as named in
the following table). To ensure broad representation, the department identified community
stakeholders comprised of some who reside or work within the Georgetown Fire Department’s
coverage area and some who were recipients of GFD’s service(s).
Community Stakeholders Work Session
Georgetown Fire Department Community Stakeholders
Thomas Arthur Brock Bonheim Melinda Brasher Fred Brent
Barbara Brightwell George Brightwell Wendy Cash Robert Chody
James Coffman-Romick Chuck Collins Melody Copeland Karen Crosby
Janna Fincher Ron Garland Kelly Goetz Rita Healy
Jim Johnson Mark Lenhard Patrick Lloyd George Lourigan
James Mallinger Monica Ochoa Vickie Orcutt Mark Ramsey
Linda Scarbrough TJ Sheehan Tom Sourbeer Steven Taylor
Jose Velez Roland Waits
Page 127 of 199
Page 5
Community Group Findings
A key element of the Georgetown Fire Department’s organizational philosophy is having a high
level of commitment to the community, as well as recognizing the importance of community
satisfaction. Thus, the department invited community representatives to provide feedback on
services provided by the department. Respondents were asked to provide a prioritized
perspective of the programs and services provided by the department. Additionally, input was
gathered during the meeting that revolved around community expectations and concerns
(prioritized), as well as positive and other comments about the organization. Specific findings of
the community stakeholders are provided in the appendix of this document . The department
stakeholders utilized the full feedback from the community stakeholders in understanding the
current challenges encountered within the organization. Additionally, the community
stakeholders’ feedback provided a process to ensure alignment with the work completed on the
organizational mission, values, vision, and goals for improvement.
Community Stakeholders Work Session
Page 128 of 199
Page 6
Community Priorities
To best dedicate time, energy, and resources to services most desired by its community, the
Georgetown Fire Department needs to understand what the customers consider to be their
priorities. With that, the community stakeholders were asked to prioritize the programs offered
by the department through a process of direct comparison. The results were as follows:
Programs Ranking Score
Emergency Medical Services 1 178
Fire Suppression 2 162
Technical Rescue 3 122
Domestic Preparedness Planning and Response 4 94
Hazardous Materials Mitigation 5 93
Community Risk Reduction 6 65
Fire Investigation 7 58
Public Fire and Life Safety Education 8 40
See Appendix 1 for a complete list of the community findings including expectations, areas of
concern, positive feedback, and other thoughts and comments.
Community Stakeholders Work Session
Page 129 of 199
Page 7
Department Stakeholder Group Findings
The department stakeholder work sessions were conducted over the course of three days. These
sessions served to discuss the organization’s approach to community-driven strategic planning,
focusing on the department’s mission, values, core programs, and support services. Additionally,
focus was given to the organization’s perceived strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats.
The work sessions involved participation by a stakeholder group that represented a broad cross-
section of the department, as named and pictured below.
Georgetown Fire Department Stakeholders
Roland Azua Gary Beyers Daniel Bilbrey T.J. Blair
Carl Boatright Priscilla Coffman Jeff Davis Monica Heyward
Brad Hill Jason Jeffery Craig Krienke Russell Lawhorn
Colby Lyons Jenna McGurk Kenny Merrell Ryan Ramsey
Clay Shell Craig Sossner John Sullivan Joe Toomgam
Department Stakeholders
Mission
The mission provides an internal aspect of the existence of an organization and to a degree, an
empowering consideration for all department members. The purpose of the mission is to answer
the questions:
Page 130 of 199
Page 8
• Who are we?
• Why do we exist?
• What do we do?
• Why do we do it?
• For whom?
A workgroup met to revisit the existing mission and, after ensuring it answered the questions, the
following mission statement was created, discussed, and accepted by the entire group:
Our mission is to protect our community and surrounding region by
providing prompt, professional, and caring services through continuous
education, preparation, and community engagement.
Department Stakeholders Work Session
Values
Values embraced by all members of an organization are extremely important, as they recognize
the features that make up the personality and culture of the organization. A workgroup met to
revisit the existing values and proposed a revision that was discussed, enhanced further, and
agreed upon by the entire group:
Page 131 of 199
Page 9
We, the members of GFD, are committed to honoring these values true to our core,
as defined in our professional standards.
Pride
Passion
Respect
The mission and values are the foundation of this organization. Thus, every effort will be made to
keep these current and meaningful so that the individuals who make up the Georgetown Fire
Department are guided by them to accomplish the goals, objectives, and day-to-day tasks.
Programs and Services
In order to ensure a deeper focus exists in determining issues and gaps within an organization,
there must be a delineation between core programs and supporting services. Core programs are
those core deliverables provided by the department. Supporting services are all of the internal and
external programs and services that help the GFD deliver its core programs.
The importance of understanding the difference is that issues and gaps may exist in core programs
or supporting services, and the department’s strategic approach may bring forth different
considerations for improvement. Additionally, supporting services may be internal or external to
the organization and requires understanding how the difference impacts their location within the
analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats if identified. Finally, it is important
that the department stakeholders understand that in order to deliver the identified core programs,
many local, state, and national supporting services support its delivery.
Through a facilitated brainstorming session, the department stakeholders agreed upon the core
programs provided to the community, as well as many of the supporting services that support the
programs. This session provided the sought understanding of the differences and the important
key elements of the delineation.
SWOT Analysis
Through a SWOT analysis (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats), an organization
candidly identifies its positive and negative attributes. The SWOT analysis also provides an
opportunity for an organization to evaluate its operating environment for areas in which it can
capitalize, as well as those that pose a danger. Department stakeholders participated in this
activity to record GFD’s strengths and weaknesses, as well as the possible opportunities and
potential threats. Information gathered through this analysis provides guidance toward the larger
issues and gaps that exist within the agency. The information gleaned will assist the agency in
finding its broader critical issues and service gaps.
Page 132 of 199
Page 10
Appendix 2 consists of the SWOT data and analysis collected by the department stakeholders.
Department Stakeholders Work Session
Critical Issues and Service Gaps
Following the identification and review of the department’s SWOT, two separate groups of
department stakeholders met to identify themes as primary critical issues and service gaps (found
in Appendix 3). The critical issues and services gaps identified by the stakeholders provide further
guidance toward identification of the strategic initiatives, which will ultimate ly lend direction for
the development of goals, objectives, critical tasks, and timelines.
Strategic Initiatives
Based upon all previously captured information and the determination of critical issues and
service gaps, the following strategic initiatives were identified as the foundation for the
development of goals and objectives.
Georgetown Fire Department’s Strategic Initiatives
Health and Wellness Internal Communications Recruitment and Retention
Staffing Technology Training
Succession Plan and Future Leader Development Performance Management (Accreditation)
Goals and Objectives
To continuously achieve the mission of the Georgetown Fire Department, realistic goals and
Page 133 of 199
Page 11
objectives with timelines for completion must be established. These will serve to enhance
strengths, address identified weaknesses, provide a clear direction, and address the concerns of
the community. These should become a focus of the department’s efforts, as they will direct the
organization to its desired future while reducing the obstacles and distractions along the way.
Leadership-established workgroups should meet and manage progress toward accomplishing
these goals and objectives and adjust timelines as needs and the environment change. Regular
reports of progress and changes should be shared with the GFD’s leadership.
Goal 1 Recruit and retain qualified personnel to continuously meet the needs of
the department and community.
Objective 1A Evaluate the current recruitment process.
Timeframe 60 days and Ongoing Assigned to: Operations
Critical Tasks
i. Establish a recruitment team.
ii. Identify the effectiveness of the current methods to identify shortfalls.
iii. Identify new recruitment methods.
iv. Develop a new recruitment process.
v. Implement the new recruitment processes.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Page 134 of 199
Page 12
Objective 1B Establish a selection criterion for qualified candidates.
Timeframe 90 days / Annual Review Assigned to: Administration Services
Critical Tasks
i. Review all current job descriptions for validity.
ii. Identify the selection criteria for each position.
iii. Revise job descriptions, as needed.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 1C Evaluate the current pay and benefits for GFD.
Timeframe 1 year Assigned to: Meet & Confer (LMT)/HR
Critical Tasks
i. Establish a pay and benefits team and select a leader.
ii. Conduct a market analysis to ensure a competitive pay plan.
iii. Evaluate the current assignment pay.
iv. Evaluate certification, incentive, and education pay.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 1D Create a career development program for all ranks.
Timeframe 1-2 years Assigned to: Professional Standards
Critical Tasks
i. Establish a career roadmap for all ranks and positions.
ii. Create task books for all ranks.
iii. Provide college level coursework to promote attainment of degree
iv. Evaluate and revise as needed.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 1E Evaluate the processes and identify their effectiveness.
Timeframe 2-3 years Assigned to: Operations
Critical Tasks
Assign the recruitment team to evaluate the process for effectiveness and
validity.
Work with HR to determine data points for the process.
Create a report of findings for department leadership.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Page 135 of 199
Page 13
Goal 2
Enhance and expand the health and wellness program for our members to
address the increased risks associated with the physical and mental
demands of our profession.
Objective 2A Evaluate and analyze current health and wellness programs to determine
their effectiveness.
Timeframe 90 days / Annual Review Assigned to: Health & Wellness Committee
Critical Tasks
i. Determine what health and wellness programs are in place for GFD.
ii. Inventory current equipment.
iii. Collect all data pertaining to health and wellness.
iv. Conduct a department-wide survey for input on the current program.
v. Conduct a financial analysis for the programs.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 2B Conduct a needs analysis for all aspects of health and wellness; to include
annual physicals, PTSI, equipment, and peer support.
Timeframe 18 months/Annual Review Assigned to: Professional Standards and Medical
Critical Tasks
i. Perform annual screening for cancer and perform a physical with full-body scan.
ii. Research nation standards for injury prevention and infection control programs
available to firefighters.
iii. Establish peer fitness personnel and a nutritionist. Research training needs and
equipment.
iv. Research industry best practices for all aspects of health and wellness.
v. Review NFPA standards for PPE and equipment that pertains to health and
wellness.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 2C From the determination of the analysis, build a health and wellness plan
for GFD.
Timeframe 6 months/Annual Review Assigned to: Professional Standards and Medical
Critical Tasks
i. Create a priority list from the analysis.
ii. Prepare a budget for health and wellness priorities.
iii. Create deadlines and timeframes for program implementation.
iv. Prioritize a list of equipment needed.
v. Create a process for selection of personnel to oversee the program.
vi. Identify vendors and resources needed for establishing and implementing the
program.
vii. Develop guidelines and policies for the program.
viii. Secure funding for the program.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Page 136 of 199
Page 14
Objective 2D Select and assign personnel to selected program development and
provide needed training.
Timeframe 90 days/Annual Review Assigned to: Professional Standards
Critical Tasks
i. Assign personnel to programs chosen from the selection process.
ii. Provide appropriate training to the program coordinators.
iii. Provide training on all equipment assigned to the programs.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 2E Initiate and implement changes or additions to the health and wellness
program.
Timeframe 90 days/Annual Review Assigned to: Health & Wellness Committee
Critical Tasks
i. Train all department members on the program.
ii. Provide demonstration on any equipment used for health and wellness by the
peer fitness selectees.
iii. Implement the health and wellness programs.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 2F Perform an annual review of all health and wellness programs to track
and document their effectiveness and identify any needed changes.
Timeframe 4-12 months/Ongoing Assigned to: Medical & Operations
Critical Tasks
i. Conduct an annual evaluation of the programs.
ii. Recommend any needed changes.
iii. Implement identified changes.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Page 137 of 199
Page 15
Goal 3 Develop and maintain a high-quality training program for the members
of GFD to best serve the City of Georgetown and the surrounding area.
Objective 3A Analyze current training programs against national standards.
Timeframe 90 days/Annual Review Assigned to: Professional Standards
Critical Tasks
i. Determine what department training programs are currently valid.
ii. Use an outside agency to audit and identify changes in current protocols.
iii. Compare protocols against national standards of NFPA, National Registry, and
other governing agencies.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 3B Create benchmarks for GFD based on other high performing systems.
Timeframe 120 days/Annual Review Assigned to: COR Leadership
Critical Tasks
i. Identify GFD metrics for EMS and fire responses.
ii. Utilize baseline GFD response time elements to create future benchmarks.
iii. Compare GFD baselines to similar sizer agencies.
iv. Identify types of training requirements to better meet and exceed GFD
benchmarks.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 3C Standardize training policies to reflect new benchmarks.
Timeframe 4 months/Annual Review Assigned to: Professional Standards
Critical Tasks
i. Determine what should be standard for all GFD divisions.
ii. Evaluate current policies for relevance.
iii. Update or create new policies to reflect training needs and gaps.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 3D Analyze current training division staffing levels.
Timeframe 1 year/Annual Review Assigned to: Professional Standards
Critical Tasks
i. Request additional staffing to assist in meeting GFD training needs.
ii. Identify personnel in operations with subject-matter expertise to assist in
training.
iii. Identify agencies/departments who may have subject-matter expertise to fill
gaps.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Page 138 of 199
Page 16
Objective 3E Perform a needs assessment of current and future training.
Timeframe 1 year/Annual Review Assigned to: Operations & Professional Standards
Critical Tasks
i. Identify future training requirements associated with community expansion.
ii. Engage the local community to determine desired services.
iii. Keep the training to employee ratio at a manageable level and budget for
additional staffing.
iv. Designate a dedicated training apparatus and budget for future replacement.
v. Define an annual process for obtaining personnel feedback and input.
vi. Hold an annual meeting to identify current and new threats.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 3F Complete acquisition of training resources and staff to meet noted needs.
Timeframe 2 years/Annual Review Assigned to: COR Leadership
Critical Tasks
i. Determine and assign an individual for grant writing purposes.
ii. Apply for all grants that may address the department’s needs.
iii. Prioritize all training needs considering budget constraints.
iv. Complete the budget process.
v. Re-assess as the budget changes.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 3G Determine regional training opportunities with surrounding agencies.
Timeframe 1-2 years/Ongoing Assigned to: Professional Standards
Critical Tasks
i. Determine if there is any cost-sharing with neighboring agencies for large-scale
training events.
ii. Partner with other cities that have specific training props and facilities.
iii. Ensure that the rules of engagement have no overlap on similar training props.
iv. Hold an annual mass casualty incident training event with all stakeholders to
ensure interoperability.
v. Designate a regional training liaison.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Page 139 of 199
Page 17
Objective 3H Create a department-wide culture that emphasizes training as a priority.
Timeframe 90 Days/Ongoing Assigned to: Operations
Critical Tasks
i. Hold officers accountable for subordinates’ training hours.
ii. Budget for addition staffing the ensure that on-duty personnel are able to
complete scheduled training.
iii. Require a specific number of hours for training.
iv. Establish required make-up training for employees that miss scheduled training.
v. Create self-appraisals for areas of underperformance.
vi. Identify a timeline for underperforming individuals to improve.
vii. Use a peer assessor process to determine KSA’s for all positions in the
department.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 3I Evaluate and revise the new training programs to ensure they meet
established quality standards.
Timeframe 4 -12 months/Ongoing Assigned to: Operations/QA
Critical Tasks
• Create an evaluative approach that includes appropriate data points.
• Complete a program analysis to identify any shortfalls.
• Revise the programs as needed.
• Develop and disseminate a report of findings to all personnel
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Page 140 of 199
Page 18
Goal 4
Succession Planning and Develop. Implement a standardized
professional development plan that monitors, trains and ensures that
employees have the knowledge, skills, and abilities to perform in future
leadership roles by providing clear expectations and requirements.
Objective 4A Review existing positions and required knowledge, skills, and abilities.
Timeframe 60 Days/Annual Review Assigned to: COR Leadership
Critical Tasks
i. Review and update job descriptions for all positions.
ii. Determine the needed KSA’s for each position.
iii. Create and disseminate a report of findings to department leadership.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 4B Identify and train mentors for program implementation.
Timeframe 60 Days Assigned to: COR Leadership
Critical Tasks
i. Create a selection process for mentors.
ii. Assign and train selected members.
iii. Determine and develop a curriculum.
iv. Deliver the curriculum to the selected members for review.
v. Match mentors with department personnel.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 4C Create a plan for the standardized development of personnel in each
position with a formal mentoring plan.
Timeframe 90 Days/Annual Review Assigned to: COR Leadership
Critical Tasks
i. Create a training plan using finding from the review process for each position
with a formal mentoring plan.
ii. Develop a curriculum for dissemination and delivery.
iii. Set milestones and timelines within the plan.
iv. Review and revise as needed.
v. Establish general orders based upon the plan.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 4D Communicate expectations and requirements to all personnel.
Timeframe 90 Days/Ongoing Assigned to: COR Leadership
Critical Tasks
i. Determine the needs for clearly defining the plan and its development.
ii. Develop general orders outlining the formal mentoring process.
iii. Distribute the general order to all personnel.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Page 141 of 199
Page 19
Objective 4E Create an evaluation process for mentors and employees to ensure
alignment with GFD expectations and goals.
Timeframe 2 months/Ongoing Assigned to: COR Leadership
Critical Tasks
i. Create an evaluation process based on expectations.
ii. Implement the evaluation plan.
iii. Review the evaluation with the employees.
iv. Obtain the employees' feedback.
v. Review and revise as needed.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 4F Evaluate the program to ensure its productivity and effectiveness.
Timeframe 6 – 12 Months/Ongoing Assigned to: Professional Standards
Critical Tasks
i. Review the program to determine its validity and effectiveness.
ii. Provide a report of findings for department leadership.
iii. Make needed changes to both components of the program to ensure the success
of the mentor and employee.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Page 142 of 199
Page 20
Goal 5 Invest in technology to improve our overall service delivery.
Objective 5A Identify all current technology utilized by GFD.
Timeframe 2 months/Annual Review Assigned to: Planning & Support/IT
Critical Tasks
i. Appoint a technology team consisting of five members representing the different
divisions in the department in addition to an IT representative.
ii. Select a team leader.
iii. Identify all current versions of software and associated tech equipment.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 5B Perform a gap analysis evaluation to identify shortfalls and new
technology needed for GFD.
Timeframe 1 year/Annual Review Assigned to: Planning & Support/IT
Critical Tasks
i. Perform a gap analysis to identify current shortfalls in department technology.
ii. Determine what technology is not working or valid as a tool.
iii. Identify new technology to overcome the shortfalls found.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 5C Conduct research for new technology.
Timeframe 1-2 years/Ongoing Assigned to: Planning & Support/IT
Critical Tasks
i. Determine the research method.
ii. Identify and contact vendors.
iii. Schedule product demonstrations for evaluation purposes.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 5D Perform testing and determine a selection process.
Timeframe 6-12 months/Ongoing Assigned to: Planning & Support/IT
Critical Tasks
i. Develop a train-the-trainer program and train the department from that group.
ii. Perform field testing on GFD technology and new equipment.
iii. Complete an evaluation process on the tested technology.
iv. Select the products that best meet the department’s needs.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Page 143 of 199
Page 21
Objective 5E Establish training and deployment of new technology that was selected
and approved.
Timeframe 3-6 months/Ongoing Assigned to: Professional Standards/IT
Critical Tasks
i. Develop and implement department-wide training.
ii. Develop and implement a deployment plan for all new technology.
iii. Complete the rollout of all new technology.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 5F Perform an evaluation of the technology that was implemented based on
department needs.
Timeframe 6-12 months/Ongoing Assigned to: Planning & Support/IT
Critical Tasks
i. Evaluate the program and processes on the technology used.
ii. Evaluate all technology used by GFD to determine its effectiveness.
iii. Identify possible additional capabilities for all products.
iv. Provide additional training, as needed.
v. Evaluate the process and equipment on an annual basis.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Page 144 of 199
Page 22
Goal 6 Ensure adequate staffing that provides for the safety of our community
and our members while maintaining fiscal responsibility.
Objective 6A Analyze the effectiveness of current staffing levels based on community
needs and professional standards.
Timeframe 90 days/Annual Review Assigned to: Administrative Services
Critical Tasks
i. Survey community leaders on current needs and garner support.
ii. Review CRA/SOC results and deployment objectives.
iii. Analyze data for response times, call volume, public education, and threats to
current staffing levels.
iv. Analyze increased stress of support staff due to growth and service delivery.
v. Assess and analyze response times when units out of service for training,
maintenance, administrative reasons, and deployment.
vi. Examine national standards to determine professional staffing levels across the
department.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 6B Identify staff needs, clarifying roles and responsibilities throughout the
organization, current and future.
Timeframe 90 days/Annual Review Assigned to: Administrative Services
Critical Tasks
• Create, modify, or adjust the organization chart, as needed.
• Create current job descriptions, defining roles and responsibilities.
• Revise and rewrite as new jobs are created.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 6C Access the current staffing budget.
Timeframe 60 days/Ongoing Assigned to: Administrative Services
Critical Tasks
i. Identify the cost associated with personnel, equipment, and facilities.
ii. Identify revenue sources.
iii. Identify the cost of needs through budget requests.
iv. Create a comprehensive staffing plan.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 6D Develop a plan to address identified staffing needs.
Timeframe 4 months/Ongoing Assigned to: COR Leadership
Critical Tasks
i. Based on information gathered through analysis, develop the desired staffing
model.
ii. Create associated policies bases on that model.
iii. Obtain approval from the chain of command to move forward with the plan.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Page 145 of 199
Page 23
Objective 6E Communicate the need for increased staffing
Timeframe 6-12 months/Ongoing Assigned to: COR Leadership
Critical Tasks
i. Educate and inform stakeholders on community needs, budget, preferred staffing
model, and implementation plan.
ii. Determine funding options.
iii. Perform a cost/benefit analysis for all funding options.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 6F Prioritize and implement staffing levels and department reorganization
as the budget allows.
Timeframe Annually Assigned to: COR Leadership
Critical Tasks
i. Prioritize staffing based on the approved budget.
ii. Present the plan to department leadership for approval.
iii. Implement the staffing matrix, as approved.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 6H Review staffing changes as budget and community needs change.
Timeframe Ongoing Assigned to: COR Leadership
Critical Tasks
i. Perform an annual evaluation of the staffing results using the review committee.
ii. Determine if the prioritization was valid and revise as needed.
iii. Create a report of record to provide to department and city leaders.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Page 146 of 199
Page 24
Goal 7 Create clear, consistent, and transparent communication throughout the
organization.
Objective 7A Identify and evaluate current communication practices.
Timeframe 3 months Assigned to: COR Leadership/Communications
Critical Tasks
i. Establish a focus group representing all ranks.
ii. Examine and evaluate current practices.
iii. Determine the effectiveness, or ineffectiveness, of all modes and methods.
iv. Feedback (surveys, etc.)
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 7B Identify and evaluate roadblocks in current communication practices.
Timeframe 3 months/Annual Review Assigned to: COR Leadership/Communications
Critical Tasks
i. Establish a focus group representing all ranks.
ii. Set communication expectations.
iii. Conduct a department-wide survey to identify roadblocks.
iv. Document the results for review.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 7C Identify and evaluate alternative methods to ensure improvement and
efficiency of communications.
Timeframe 3 months/Ongoing Assigned to: COR Leadership/Communications
Critical Tasks
i. Research various modes of communication used by other organizations.
ii. Determine the effectiveness of identified modes of communication against
identified challenges.
iii. Prioritize new modes of communication relative to the completed needs
assessment.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 7D Develop a communication plan that includes a feedback loop throughout
the department.
Timeframe 6 months/Ongoing Assigned to: COR Leadership
Critical Tasks
i. Create a communications plan from identified modes.
ii. Develop communication channels throughout the organization.
iii. Ensure that channels of feedback are being utilized properly.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Page 147 of 199
Page 25
Objective 7E Create and deliver process-specific training to the appropriate personnel
for goal realization.
Timeframe 1 year/Ongoing Assigned to: COR Leadership
Critical Tasks
i. Inventory any current or new technology that will be utilized in the developed
plan.
ii. Analyze newly developed plan processes to determine training needs.
iii. Develop a training curriculum to meet the application needs of identified
technology and processes outlined in the plan.
iv. Determine sequencing and dissemination groups for the delivery of training.
v. Complete the training for all personnel.
vi. Evaluate the training as needed, at least annually.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 7F Implement procedures to ensure department transparency and
accountability.
Timeframe 6 months/Ongoing Assigned to: Administrative Services/COR
Critical Tasks
i. Develop policies for the new communications plan.
ii. Send policies to the applicable committees for approval.
iii. Develop and codify directives in accordance with the current processes,
iv. Test new systems to identify significant challenges.
v. Complete the department-wide implementation of the communications plan and
equipment.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 7G Review and revise the process, as needed.
Timeframe Ongoing Assigned to: COR Leadership
Critical Tasks
i. Determine the data points needed for review purposes.
ii. Identify the hardware and software needed for data collection.
iii. Collect all pertinent data for review.
iv. Revisit and distribute the survey.
v. Make any needed revisions based on the data analysis.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Page 148 of 199
Page 26
Goal 8 Prepare for, pursue, achieve and maintain international accreditation to
better serve our community and embrace excellence.
Objective 8A Form team or committee structures with management components as
needed to pursue and maintain accreditation.
Timeframe Ongoing Assigned to: COR Leadership
Critical
Tasks
i. Identify the needed team or committee structure(s) for the various components of
the accreditation process.
ii. Create management oversight positions to lead the teams or committees, as well
as the process overall.
iii. Establish team or committee member criteria.
iv. Determine the composition of the teams or committees.
v. Solicit participation to meet the composition of the teams or committees.
vi. Develop and complete the selection process.
vii. Provide for the needed educational components provided through the
Commission on Fire Accreditation International to ensure the relevant members
have the needed training.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 8B Develop a community-driven strategic plan.
Timeframe 3 months and Ongoing Assigned to: COR Leadership
Critical
Tasks
i. Hold an external stakeholder meeting where community members provide
feedback on program priorities, service expectations, concerns and strengths
perceived about GFD.
ii. Provide internal stakeholder work sessions to evaluate (and update if necessary)
the mission, vision, and values; determine internal strengths and weaknesses,
external opportunities and threats.
iii. Establish critical issues and service gaps. Determine specific strategic initiatives.
iv. Develop goals, objectives, critical tasks and appropriate timelines, to include
levels of measurability, to achieve over five years.
v. Create a vision for the developed strategic plan.
vi. Publish and distribute the formal strategic plan to stakeholders as determined by
the organization.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Page 149 of 199
Page 27
Objective 8C Implement the community-driven strategic plan.
Timeframe 3 months, Ongoing Assigned to: COR Leadership
Critical
Tasks
i. Create a strategic planning subcommittee to review the draft strategic plan.
ii. Provide internal stakeholder work sessions to evaluate (and update if necessary)
the draft mission, vision, and values; determine internal strengths and
weaknesses, external opportunities and threats; establish critical issues and
service gaps.
iii. Evaluate goals and objectives within the draft plan, and further define critical
tasks as needed to ensure clarity with each goal.
iv. Determine a work plan for the accomplishment of each goal and implement the
plan.
v. Annually evaluate objectives accomplished with the plan.
vi. Report annual plan progress to internal and external stakeholders.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 8D Conduct a community hazards and risk assessment and publish a
Community Risk Assessment - Standards of Cover document.
Timeframe 6 – 12 months/Annual Assigned to: COR Leadership
Critical
Tasks
i. Obtain instruction on hazard and risk assessment, and standards of cover
preparation.
ii. Perform community hazards and risk assessment.
iii. Evaluate historical community emergency response performance and coverage.
iv. Establish benchmark and baseline emergency response performance objectives.
v. Establish and publish the Community Risk Assessment - Standards of Cover.
vi. Maintain, and annually update the Standards of Cover document.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 8E Conduct and document a self-assessment of the department utilizing the
CPSE/CFAI Fire and Emergency Services Self-Assessment Manual criteria.
Timeframe 6 months/Annual Assigned to: COR Leadership
Critical
Tasks
i. Obtain instruction on writing a CFAI self-assessment manual.
ii. Assign self-assessment manual category and criterion writing to the department
accreditation committee/team members as appropriate.
iii. Review self-assessment and ensure all reference items are in order.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Page 150 of 199
Page 28
Objective 8F Achieve agency accreditation by the CFAI and CAAS
Timeframe April 2021 Assigned
to: COR Leadership
Critical Tasks
i. Apply for “Candidate Agency” status with the CFAI and CAAS.
ii. Prepare for CFAI and CAAS Peer Assessor Team visit.
iii. Upload Strategic Plan, Standards of Cover, and Self-Assessment Categories and
Criterion for review and comment by CFAI Peer Team.
iv. Host CFAI and CAAS Peer Team site visit for accreditation review.
v. Receive CFAI and CAAS Peer Team recommendation to CFAI and CAAS for
Accredited status.
vi. Receive vote during the CFAI and CAAS hearings in favor of Accredited status.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Objective 8G Maintain accreditation with the CFAI and CAAS.
Timeframe Ongoing Assigned
to: COR Leadership
Critical Tasks
i. Submit the required Annual Compliance Reports.
ii. Attend CFAI “Dayroom Discussion” web-meetings for continued education.
iii. Participate in the accreditation process by providing “peer assessors” for external
department review and identification of possible best practices.
iv. Participate in the annual CPSE Excellence Conference for continued education and
networking with other accreditation teams and accredited agencies.
v. Submit Annual Compliance Reports as required by CFAI and CAAS policies.
vi. Establish succession development of the internal accreditation team in
preparation for next accreditation cycle.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Page 151 of 199
Page 29
Vision
On the final day of the process, the CPSE presented a strategic
plan vision of where the organization will be in the future if the
strategic plan is accomplished. This is not to override the
department’s global vision but rather, to confirm the futurity of
the work that was designed by the department stakeholders.
This vision is intended as a target of excellence to strive toward
and provides a basis for its goals and objectives.
Georgetown Fire Department’s 2025 Vision
is to be widely known as an internationally accredited organization that always focuses on those
we serve. We remain dedicated to life safety by providing emergency operations and community
risk reduction in service to our community. This vision, our true futurity, will only become
reality by striving to accomplish our goals. We will become this future by…
Gaining full buy-in and acceptance of the department’s core values which personify pride,
passion, and respect. This will be realized by ensuring a well -trained workforce is in place that
remains always ready to meet our mission of providing caring services to our community. This
will be further illustrated by our emphasis on enhanced workforce development safeguarding
quality performance while providing on-going relationships.
Favoring our community first, the relationships we have with the citizens of Georgetown will be
further enhanced. Our bolstered approach to internal communications will ensure a well -
informed public, while also supporting a transparent and cohesive department. This will be
supported by our management of technological resources for effectiveness while preparing us
for the future with an improved focus on our vision.
Determined to pursue the goal of improvement, while honoring our storied history and
embracing the future. Our department-wide teamwork will be strengthened through a balanced
staffing initiative, helping us highlight greater efficiencies and outcomes. To maintain a cohesive
and caring department, we commit to delivering both quality health and wellness options to our
members while providing caring services, pursuing excellence, and being the best of the best in
all that we do. Together, we commit to fulfilling our mission, living our values and making this
vision a reality.
“Vision is knowing who you
are, where you’re going,
and what will guide your
journey”
Ken Blanchard
Page 152 of 199
Page 30
Performance Measurement
To assess and ensure that an organization is
delivering on the promises made in its
strategic plan, the organization’s leaders must
determine performance measures for which
they are fully accountable. As output
measurement can be challenging, the
organization must focus on the assessment of
progress toward achieving improved output.
Organizations must further be prepared to
revisit and revise their goals, objectives, and
performance measures to keep up with
accomplishments and environmental changes.
To establish that the department’s strategic
plan is achieving results, performance
measurement data will be implemented and integrated as part of the plan. An integrated process,
known as “Managing for Results,” will be utilized, which is based upon:
• The identification of strategic goals and objectives;
• The determination of resources necessary to achieve them;
• The analyzing and evaluation of performance data; and
• The use of that data to drive continuous improvement in the organization.
A “family of measures” typically utilized to indicate and measure performance includes:
• Inputs - Value of resource used to produce an output.
• Outputs – Quantifiable units produced which are activity-oriented and measurable.
• Efficiency - Inputs used per output (or outputs per input).
• Service Quality - The degree to which customers are satisfied with a program, or how
accurately or timely a service is provided.
• Outcome - Qualitative consequences associated with a program/service; i.e., the ultimate
benefit to the customer. Focused on the “why” of providing a service.
• If you don’t measure the results of your plan,
you can’t tell success from failure.
• If you can’t see success, you can’t reward it.
• If you can’t reward success, you’re probably
rewarding failure.
• If you can’t see success, you can’t learn from
it.
• If you can’t recognize failure, you can’t
correct it.
• If you can demonstrate results, you can win
public support.
Reinventing Government
David Osborn and Ted Gaebler
Page 153 of 199
Page 31
The Success of the Strategic Plan
The department has approached its desire to develop and implement a strategic plan by asking for
and receiving input from the community and members of the organization during the development
stage of the planning process. To assist in the development of this plan, the department used
professional guidance to conduct a community-driven strategic planning process. The success of
this strategic plan will not depend upon the implementation of goals and related objectives, but
from support received from the authority having jurisdiction, the members of the organization,
and the community-at-large.
Provided the community-driven strategic planning process is kept dynamic and supported by
effective leadership and active participation, it will be a considerable opportunity to unify
department and community stakeholders. This can be accomplished through a jointly developed
understanding of organizational direction, focusing on all vested parties working to achieve the
mission, goals, and vision. Further consideration must be made on how the organization will
measure and be accountable for its progress and successes.2
2 Matthews (2005). Strategic Planning and Management for Library Managers
Page 154 of 199
Page 32
Glossary of Terms, Acronyms, and Initialisms
Accreditation A process by which an association or agency evaluates and recognizes a program
of study or an institution as meeting certain predetermined standards or
qualifications. It applies only to institutions or agencies and their programs of
study or their services. Accreditation ensures a basic level of quality in the
services received from an agency.
CFAI Commission on Fire Accreditation International
CPSE Center for Public Safety Excellence
Customer(s) The person or group who establishes the requirement of a process and receives
or uses the outputs of that process; or the person or entity directly served by the
department or agency.
Efficiency A performance indication where inputs are measured per unit of output (or vice
versa).
EMR Emergency Medical Responder
EMS Emergency Medical Services
Environment Circumstances and conditions that interact with and affect an organization.
These can include economic, political, cultural, and physical conditions inside or
outside the boundaries of the organization.
Input A performance indication where the value of resources is used to produce an
output.
Mission An enduring statement of purpose; the organization's reason for existence.
Describes what the organization does, for whom it does it, and how it does it.
MOT Mobile Outreach Team
NFPA National Fire Protection Association
Outcome A performance indication where qualitative consequences are associated with a
program/service; i.e., the ultimate benefit to the customer.
Output A performance indication where a quality or number of units produced is
identified.
PTSI Peer Team Support Intervention
Stakeholder Any person, group, or organization that can place a claim on, or influence the
organization's resources or outputs, is affected by those outputs, or has an
interest in or expectation of the organization.
Strategic Goal A broad target that defines how the agency will carry out its mission over a
specific period of time. An aim. The final result of an action. Something to
accomplish in assisting the agency to move forward.
Strategic A specific, measurable accomplishment required to realize the successful
Objective completion of a strategic goal.
Page 155 of 199
Page 33
Strategic Plan A long-range planning document that defines the mission of the agency and
broadly identifies how it will be accomplished, and that provides the framework
for more detailed annual and operational plans.
Strategic
Planning
The continuous and systematic process whereby guiding members of an
organization make decisions about its future, develop procedures and operations
to achieve that future, and determine how success is to be measured.
Strategy A description of how a strategic objective will be achieved. A possibility. A plan
or methodology for achieving a goal.
SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats.
Vision An idealized view of a desirable and potentially achievable future state - where
or what an organization would like to be in the future.
Page 156 of 199
Page 34
Works Cited
Bryson, John M. Strategic Planning for Public and Nonprofit Organizations: A Guide to Strengthening
and Sustaining Organizational Achievement. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2018.
Commission on Fire Accreditation International. (2015). Fire & Emergency Service Self-Assessment
Manual. (9th Ed.)
Matthews, Joseph (2005). Strategic Planning and Management for Library Managers. Libraries
Unlimited.
Page 157 of 199
Page 35
Appendix 1
Community Expectations
Understanding what the community expects of its fire service organization is critically important
to developing a long-range perspective. With this knowledge, internal emphasis may need to be
changed or bolstered to fulfill the community's needs.
Respondents were asked to list, in priority order, up to five subjects relative to the expectations
they have for the Georgetown Fire Department. Responses were then analyzed for themes and
weighted. The weighting of the prioritized responses was as follows: if it was the respondent’s first
entry, then it received five weighted points. Weighting gradually decreased so that if it was the
respondent’s fifth entry, then it received one weighted point. The weighted themes were then
sorted from the highest cumulative weight to the lowest cumulative weight and listed below. The
numbers in the parentheses are the cumulative weighted value that correlated with the theme
identified. While the themes are listed in prioritized, weighted order, all responses were important
in the planning process. The following are the expectation responses of the community
stakeholders:
Community Expectations of the Georgetown Fire Department
(in priority order)
1. Fast response. Prompt response times. Response times that are continuously reviewed. I expect
prompt response to emergency calls for service. Provide emergency care with sufficient
response times. Good response time. Short response times. I expect rapid response times for
emergencies. Quick response times. Responsiveness to calls. Rapid response time. Safe quick
response to all emergencies that meets the customer’s needs. (105)
2. Continued and advanced training for all firefighters. Appropriate training in medical
emergencies. Professional competency. All staff is trained on a daily basis. Stable, competent,
continuously trained professionals and administrative staff. Competency an d skills necessary
to do the job. Well trained and professional. Skilled employees. Deliver services with
compassion and care. Qualified training for personnel. Training and professional development.
Well trained staff. To have enough resources for proper training. (77)
3. Community outreach. Relationship building. Offer proactive advice to community members.
Answer any questions we might have. Partner with the community. Community engagement.
Engagement with the community. Need to be more visible in the community by having articles
in newspapers/magazines about services. Need to be more visible in the community. Fire chief
should visit neighborhoods on a monthly basis. Continuous transparency to the Georgetown
community. I expect community outreach, especially to children on safety issues. Collaboration
with local health care providers. Community partner. Regional partner to fulfill specialized
needs. Be a good community partner. Communicate with stakeholders. Engaged with the
community. (43)
Page 158 of 199
Page 36
4. That GFD keeps pace with the growth of Georgetown. Availability. Proper staffing for needed
coverage. That new fire stations are built before they are needed, not the year after. Have
enough apparatus to cover the fire area and get on it quickly. Adequate materials, equipme nt,
and infrastructure (hydrants, facilities, etc.). Addressing the needs of the entire community.
Viewing public safety beyond traditional fire/EMS norms. Strategic preventative work. Equal
services for the community. That we get the same level of service and support as those in the
city. Well planned growth. Properly resourced. (43)
5. Customer service. Professionalism. Patient/client-centered. Professional attitude. Caring staff.
Empathy. Professional and quality care services. Courteous to clients/victims. Best practice
care. (32)
6. Ability to take control of situations. Ability to assess the problem and act on it quickly. Quality
care for medical emergencies. Prepared staff. Effective management of crisis. Good leadership.
(29)
7. Continuing education of the public on policies, procedures, and practices of GFD. Provide on-
going education to community that includes all ages. Engagement with community education.
Have members on the department in the schools, including Southern University, to give
instruction. Need to have information provided to small community groups. Provide training to
all ages on preventing emergencies. Educating school children and the public at large.
Community education. (25)
8. Available to consult with business operators on safety/compliance. Communicate findings.
Knowledgeable about fire codes. Support pro-business policies for businesses when it comes to
design. (13)
9. Adequate pay for our fire department members that will help prevent turnover. All staff is
compensated well for their skill sets. Recruitment of top tier personnel. (9)
10. Professionalism. Professional department that supports its members. (8)
11. State of the art equipment and technology. All equipment necessary to service all businesses
and residences in Georgetown. (7)
12. Cost-efficient operating model. Efficient. (5)
13. Keep us safe. (5)
14. Partner with other first responders. Close relationship with police. (4)
15. Transparent budgeting process. (3)
16. GFD reflects the diversity of the Georgetown community. (2)
Areas of Community Concern
The planning process would be incomplete without an expression from the community
stakeholders regarding concerns about the organization. Some areas of concern may, in fact, be a
weakness within the delivery system, while some weaknesses may also be misperceptions based
upon a lack of information, understanding, or incorrect information.
Page 159 of 199
Page 37
Respondents were asked to list, in priority order, up to five concerns they have about or for the
department. Responses were then analyzed for themes and weighted. The weighting of the
prioritized concerns was as follows: if it was the respondent’s first entry, then it received five
weighted points. Weighting gradually decreased so that if it was the respondent’s fifth entry, then
it received one weighted point. The weighted themes were then sorted from the highest
cumulative weight to the lowest cumulative weight and listed below. The numbers in the
parentheses are the cumulative weighted value that correlated with the theme identified. While
the themes are listed in prioritized, weighted order, all responses were important in the planning
process. The following are the concerns of the community stakeholders prioritized and weighted
accordingly:
Areas of Community Concern about the Georgetown Fire Department
(verbatim, in priority order)
1. Keeping facilities, training, equipment, and personnel ahead of the Georgetown population
curve. Properly resourced. Concerned with how the GFD plans on meeting the needs of the
community with such rapid growth. No fire station to address growth along FM 2243. Rapid
growth of Georgetown. Focus on Sun City at the expense of other residents. Growing population.
Enough staff available for the growth. Be proactive rather than reactive to city growth. How
much input does the fire department have in city planning and development? Scaling to meet
the community growth. Handle increased load and growth. Are resources available to make
things happen? Ability to sustain personnel and facilities in rapidly growing population. Staffing
for growth - recruitment. Ability to staff a growing community. Do we have enough staffing to
address the population growth? (82)
2. Responders don't communicate with businesses about their observations following a call. Little
to no outreach/relationship building. Responders sometimes comment to customers about
frequency of calls to the business. Sometimes not letting us know when the situation is all clear.
Communication with local healthcare providers. Communication with healthcare providers
when arrive on site. Communication can be improved with community partners. Follow-up
services for fire victims. Many in my neighborhood do not speak English as a primary language
- is the department prepared to deal with that? Outreach to under-represented communities.
Participation in regional organizations. (34)
3. Sufficient tax base and budget to support operations. Growing population - impact on taxpayers
and businesses. Cost for taxpayers to keep up with the growth. Ability to fund critical programs.
On-going cost of sustainability. Is budget allowing growth in staffing to meet community growth
demands happening today? (24)
4. Are calls being responded to in a timely manner? What are the response times? Can we do better
with response times? Response time delays related to growth. Medical response time in a
rapidly growing population. (20)
5. Respecting wishes when patients voice where they want to be transferred to. Lack of
consideration of client request. Not person-centered. Rumors that some employees do not
Page 160 of 199
Page 38
consider themselves to be public servants. Continued focus on serving senior adults. Does staff
understand their role in the community? (18)
6. Are they hiring most qualified applicants? Will they be able to continue to recruit at a high level?
Livable wage and affordable housing - can our firefighters and EMS staff afford to live in
Georgetown? Self-care for first responders. Attracting the right personnel. (18)
7. Top tier training and training time for GFD personnel. On-going training with new technologies.
Training budget and resources. Are they engaging all staff in continuous training and education?
(15)
8. Cost of fines to businesses where patients pull fire alarms/set off some detectors. Cost of fines
for facilities when alarms are pulled. Costs of EMS service. Does the community provide
adequate funding? (12)
9. The fire station that serves us is greater than 5 miles away, so we have high home insurance
rates. In my rural area there are no fire hydrants. (10)
10. Relationships with surrounding departments. Build relationships with community members.
Current leadership partners well, but how does this look if leadership was to change?
Departmental relationships. (9)
11. Keeping up with top tier equipment. Appropriate vehicles for emergency response. (7)
12. Preventing grass fires. Controlling grass fires. (7)
13. Building layouts. (5)
14. More free education/CPR classes. (5)
15. Increased liability on providers of medical care. (4)
16. Addressing pre-existing/past issues of concern and bringing to resolution. (3)
17. Increased regulations. (3)
18. Automobile traffic. (3)
19. Diversity in GFD. (2)
20. Emergency preparedness. (2)
21. Limited water supply with increasing consumption. (2)
22. Sirens sounding at night as they approach the neighborhoods. (1)
Positive Community Feedback
The CPSE promotes the belief that, for a strategic plan to be valid, the community’s view on the
organization’s strengths must be established. Needless efforts are often put forth in over-
developing areas that are already successful. However, proper utilization and promotion of the
strengths may often help the organization overcome or offset some of the identified weaknesses.
Positive Community Comments about the Georgetown Fire Department
(verbatim, in no particular order)
Page 161 of 199
Page 39
• Great attitudes from all I have encountered.
• Seems like a great relationship with the local community.
• Great reputation in Georgetown.
• Firefighter/medical people are positive, motivated, and friendly.
• GFD is always looking ahead.
• Chief Sullivan – great spokesperson/leader for the department.
• Great headquarters facility on D B Wood.
• GFD community engagement is great.
• Leadership of GFD is outstanding!
• Professional organization at every level.
• Always striving to be better.
• Proactive approach to problem-solving.
• Professional relationships.
• Community education.
• Knowledgeable.
• Caring.
• Communicative.
• Open to improvement/change.
• Prompt response to situations in our neighborhood even though we are outside city limits.
• Coordination with other fire departments such as Leander.
• Had one experience with Fire/EMS. Great response time to our house in the Whitetail
neighborhood. All fire/EMS personnel were very professional.
• Leadership of the department beginning with the fire chief.
• Openness to have customers visit the fire department to learn about the department mission and
vision.
• Openness to have the chief and others write articles about services.
• Openness to have the chief go to schools in Georgetown to inform children/staff/administrators
about fire safety.
• Community involvement.
• Strong leadership.
• They listen to concerns and act.
• I don’t recall any times where ethics were questioned.
• Excellent leadership.
• Public visibility.
Page 162 of 199
Page 40
• Cooperation between GFD and GPD.
• Encourages volunteers.
• Work on continuous improvement.
• In my experience, they have been very willing to reach out to the community.
• The willingness to question themselves as part of the strategic planning process.
• Leadership that considers addressing needs of community beyond traditional fire/EMS roles.
• Pipe and drums.
• Community engagement generally.
• Follow process/protocols on calls.
• Great response time to calls.
• Customer service EMTs offer medical providers.
• Responsiveness of administrative staff to inquiries/emails.
• Great response time.
• Always helpful.
• Always courteous.
• Very knowledgeable.
• Good reputation.
• Community involvement.
• Quality of equipment, apparatus, stations.
• Helpful staff.
• So far, I have little interaction with fire/medical, but what I have seen is quick response and
situations handled professionally.
• Chief Sullivan’s leadership.
• Addresses senior adult needs.
• Growth vision.
• Leadership is strong.
• Implementation of EMS in recent years appears to be a success.
• People in Georgetown are receiving quality timely care.
• Strong collaboration with other city entities.
• Professional.
• Engaged with kids and community.
• The reduction of response time since adding EMS.
• Strong leadership and community presence.
Page 163 of 199
Page 41
• Outstanding facilities and equipment.
• Regional collaborator.
• Organizational leadership.
• Dedicated professional members – “Service Above Self.”
• Community focus and engagement.
• Forward-thinking – vision.
• I think this meeting/process is very positive.
• As a longtime resident, there have not been very many negatives regarding the department as a
whole.
• Seem to work with the community when asked.
• Take the safety of the community seriously.
• Good to sponsor various community events. Positive image.
• As an event coordinator, I have found the fire department to be excellent in communication as
well as supplying representatives and staff when called upon for meetings and events.
• Their friendliness and cooperation in their service is both attractive and much appreciated.
• Focused leadership.
• Involved in community.
• Proactive interactions, not just reactive when community is in need.
• Understand the unique place we live with growth and demographics (i.e. this external
stakeholder meeting).
• Very professional to the general public.
• Very informative to businesses on procedure.
• Recently started a review of every business in Georgetown and hopefully Williamson County.
• Proactive – seeking input and implementing procedures to resolve issues.
• Professionalism.
• Visibility.
• Friendliness.
• Open communication.
• Share local small-town values.
• They have a great reputation in the community.
• They have great leadership.
• Very community-oriented.
• Respond quickly.
• Very strong “customer interactions” – EMTs show empathy for patients.
Page 164 of 199
Page 42
• Will answer questions when contacted.
• Showed commitment to having all stations know our building when it opened.
Other Thoughts and Comments
The community was asked to share any other comments they had about the department or its
services. The following written comments were received:
Other Community Comments about the Georgetown Fire Department
(verbatim, in no particular order)
• Improvise-Adapt-Overcome!
• I am in a neighborhood in Williamson County that is outside of the city limits, but I am served by
the Georgetown Fire Department. Fire department planning should also consider support for
areas like us.
• We want to be sure this chief and his staff are funded properly for the department.
• We want the chief to be paid a wage (compensated) fairly, and a wage that compensates him for
his skill set.
• I am pleased with Georgetown Fire Medical.
• Thankfully, I have had limited interaction with the GFD.
• Great service provided by Georgetown Fire & Medical. One area for improvement is working
closer and collaborating with local hospitals to provide better medical care to patients.
• Our facility has had great experiences with the fire department. Thank you for your service.
• My biggest concern for the future is keeping up with growth. For example, Shell Road
development. Concurrent assets handle 1,500 more housing units with new school, etc. Does the
infrastructure enable fast response? I don’t hear that at planning meetings.
• GFD is on the right track. Keep up the good work.
• I love the partnership we have with Georgetown Fire & Medical. They help us tremendously, and
I am thankful for the leadership.
• The fire department is doing a great job for the citizens!
• My personal experiences with Georgetown Fire or EMS over 30 years has been very positive.
• Implementing a new “head of homeland security” (department) is very wise, and it is imperative
everyone get on-board with what this department can provide for our present and future safety
and security.
• Thankful for our fire department with respect to what I do for a living. Being needed to respond
24-7, it is comforting knowing how well our fire department responds and is there when needed.
Eternally thankful!
• I own a funeral home in Georgetown. The fire department is always very helpful in what
sometimes are difficult situations.
Page 165 of 199
Page 43
Page 166 of 199
Page 44
Appendix 2
Strengths
It is important for any organization to identify its strengths to ensure that it can provide the
services requested by the community, and that strengths are consistent with the issues facing the
organization. Often, identification of organizational strengths leads to the channeling of efforts
toward primary community needs that match those strengths. Programs that do not match
organizational strengths, or the primary function of the organization, should be seriously
reviewed to evaluate the rate of return on staff time and allocated funds.
Through a consensus process, the department stakeholders identified the department’s strengths
as follows:
Strengths of the Georgetown Fire Department
Wide range of capabilities and service delivery. Compassionate personnel.
Cultural diversity of the staff. Modern state of art equipment and
facilities.
Responsiveness to our community. (programs) Dedicated and committed personnel.
Growing department–more staff and promotions. Customer service.
Good perception with the public and other agencies. Knowledge and abilities of personnel.
CQI/QM. Continuous improvement for EMS/fire. Training opportunities provided.
PDMP – participated problem-solving process. Creativity – thoughts/problem-solving.
Cancer development and paths. Inter/intra department relationships.
Meet and confer. Council support.
Prevention Bureau. The “We got your six”
document. Apparatus commit times for run types.
Good hospital turn-around. Responsiveness of the EMS Coordinator.
Youthful age of department personnel. Department adaptability.
Page 167 of 199
Page 45
Weaknesses
For any organization to either begin or to continue to move progressively forward, it must not only
be able to identify its strengths, but also those areas where it functions poorly or not at all. These
areas of needed enhancements are not the same as threats to be identified later in this document,
but rather those day-to-day issues and concerns that may slow or inhibit progress. The following
items were identified by the department stakeholders as weaknesses:
Weaknesses of the Georgetown Fire Department
Administrative staffing as compared to other
departments.
Communication – top/down disconnect and
down/up feedback.
Policies – outdated, undeveloped, not
enforced Trust. Station to station/shift to shift/all ranks.
Training. Medics running calls during
training. Future officers not getting
experience.
Experience gap. 40+ new hires. Succession plan
and lack of depth.
Station 4 location and access to roadways. Apparatus – maintenance shop problems.
Quality management and QM medical
personnel buy-in.
Lack of support staff for exponential
growth/services.
Shift standards - three different shifts Single company stations with staffing of three.
That’s the way we have always done it.
Ops/Gear
Lost art of seniority. Membership growth and
the age of the department.
Budgetary limits, i.e. additional training staff,
equipment, PPE
Apparatus are not designed properly to meet
our needs and more reserve units are needed.
Cancer initiative – need to purchase
additional sets of gear.
Communication. Pass-on between
shifts/stations.
Minimal officer development. Not taking advantage of outside training.
Commitment and passion for the job. Resistance to change.
Lack of documentation - Firehouse training. Too sensitive to criticism.
Accountability Entitlement of personnel.
Lack of ARFF capabilities. Stations without ambulances.
Recruitment – low turnout or not qualified. Lack of use for available local resources, i.e.
drones.
Mass retirement within the department. Splitting stations.
Tier 2 CAD vendor support. Outdated software within the department.
Page 168 of 199
Page 46
Opportunities
The opportunities for an organization depend on the identification of strengths and weaknesses
and how they can be enhanced. The focus of opportunities is not solely on existing service, but on
expanding and developing new possibilities both inside and beyond the traditional service area.
The department stakeholders identified the following potential opportunities:
Opportunities for the Georgetown Fire Department
Alternate treatment and transport. Community and organizational growth.
Training with outside organizations. Grants for equipment and training staff.
Internship with hospital department
organization.
Diversity of colleges and number of available
options.
Technical diversity in area. (Silicon Hills) Colleges and continued education opportunities.
Development of tactical medical training
and use in operations.
MOT/community paramedicine resource
booklet for higher utilizer.
Strong community relationships. Chamber
of commerce, hospital, Fort Hood.
Transition from a bedroom community to
suburbia/commercial and industrial growth.
Increased support from local government. Community outreach and education
Recruitment – Colleges, high schools,
military. Enhancement of resource availability in the CAD.
Business and housing diversity in the
community.
Train with GPD on scenarios, such as mass
casualty.
Have GPD trained to the E.M.R. level. Develop a city employee health clinic to reduce
costs.
High school fire academy. One regional CAD system.
More regional policies. Dedicated impact fee for GFD.
Expanding firewise program city-wide. Use of drones for firefighting Ops.
Enhanced wildland program. TIFMAS Station 6.
Page 169 of 199
Page 47
Threats
By recognizing possible threats, an organization can reduce the potential for loss. Fundamental to
the success of any strategic plan is the understanding that threats are not completely and/or
directly controlled by the organization. Some of the current and potential threats identified by the
department stakeholders were as follows:
Potential Threats to the Georgetown Fire Department
Privatization of EMS. Social media and camera phones.
Downturn in the economy. Exposure to litigation.
Increased risk due to zero lot line for housing. Reduced income due to possible tax
reductions.
Change in the political environment. Reduction in recruitment demographics.
Mass casualty event that overwhelms
resources. Natural disasters.
Shortage of firefighters and medics. Unable to keep up with city growth.
Water infrastructure and growth. Burn-out.
Call volume, department growth, and
promotional opportunities relative to Auto-Aid
received.
Mutual -aid received.
Violence against EMS workers. Carcinogens and environmental factors.
Department turnover from multiple factors. Politics. Unfavorable election results.
New construction materials. Technology. Solar panels/EV’s. (Tesla)
Page 170 of 199
Page 48
Appendix 3
The following information is the raw data comprised from the deliberation of the two workgroups.
The information in each table is linked to a strategic initiative that the overall group, by consensus,
determined was something that the department should pursue for change and continuous
improvement.
Critical and Service Gap Issues Identified by the Department Stakeholders
Initiative
Link Group 1 Group 2
He
a
l
t
h
a
n
d
We
l
l
n
e
s
s
Health and Wellness
o Cancer initiative
o Requirements
o Fitness Standards
o Firefighter safety
o Two sets of turnout gear
Health and Wellness
o Frontline cancer check
o PTSI/peer support
o Fitness program
o Cardiac tones
o Work/life balance
o Substance abuse
o Wellness education
o Policy development
o Injury prevention
Initiative
Link Group 1 Group 2
In
t
e
r
n
a
l
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
Internal Communications
o Technology
o Dissemination
o Transparency
o Division
Internal Communications
o Expectations-top down and bottom-up
o Feedback
o Chain of command
o Shift/station communications
o Front line and F.L.S
o Communication and channels efficiency
o Taking self-responsibility
o Selective engagement
o Embrace technology options
o Better QM technology
o Relationships
Initiative
Link Group 1 Group 2
Page 171 of 199
Page 49
Pr
o
f
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
l
Dev
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
Su
c
c
e
s
s
i
o
n
Pla
n
n
i
n
g
Professional Development
o Firefighter development
o Officer development
o Commitment
o Pride and ownership
o Standards
o Clear expectations
o Policy updates
o Leadership
N/A
Initiative
Link Group 1 Group 2
Re
c
r
u
i
t
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
Re
t
e
n
t
i
o
n
Recruitment
o Pay and benefits
o Lack of marketing
o Word of mouth
o Morale
o Lack of recruitment team
Recruitment/Retention
o Standards/requirements
o Qualifications
o Outreach
o Compensation/benefits
o Messaging
o Brands
o Work balance
o Schedule
o Relationships
o Health and wellness
o Mobility
Initiative
Link Group 1 Group 2
St
a
f
f
i
n
g
Staffing
o Firefighter safety
o Benefits
o Retention
o Sick leave usage
o Four-person staffing
o Lack of support services
• Fleet, admin, FLS, training
Support Staff and Systems
o Overworked due to workload
o QM failure
o Legal technology
o Too many additional roles
o Undefined FTO roles
o Pressure to certify new-hires
o No established on-boarding
o Too focused on EMS
o Document and validate training
Initiative
Link Group 1 Group 2
Te
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y
Technology
o CAD
o Web site
o Inter-department communication
o RMS database
o Medical personal information
security
N/A
Page 172 of 199
Page 50
Page 173 of 199
Page 51
Initiative
Link Group 1 Group 2
Tr
a
i
n
i
n
g
Training
o Lack of training staff
o Mentorship program
o Lack of motivation
o Time availability-ambulances
Training
o Time restrictions
o Resources
o New technology
o Lower priority
o Staffing
o Limited support staff
o Sharing experiences
o Compensation
o Unit reliability
The following information is the raw data comprised from the deliberation of the two workgroups.
The information in each table is not linked directly to a strategic initiative, but remains important.
The department is best served to understand and embrace this other information as it moves
forward for deliberative purposes and consideration of support of the strategic initiatives.
Critical and Service Gap Issues Identified by the Department Stakeholders
Topic Group 1 Group 2
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
Gr
o
w
t
h
Community Growth
o Response times
o Additional apparatus
o Specialized apparatus
o Station locations
o Training/personnel
o Regional CAD system
N/A
Topic Group 1 Group 2
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
Gr
o
w
t
h
N/A
Department Growth
o Community growth
o Sharing experience
o New hires-little/no experience
o EMS focused
o Proactive vs. reactive needs
o Support staff needs
o Training
o Prioritizing needs with resources on-
hand
Page 174 of 199
Strategic Plan Overview
Council Workshop January 28, 2020
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPASSIONATE -PROFESSIONAL -RESPONSIVE
Page 175 of 199
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPASSIONATE -PROFESSIONAL -RESPONSIVE
brief history…
2019
Page 176 of 199
Office of Fire Chief
CMO
ESD8
GAPFF
Accreditation
Best Practices
Fire & Life
Safety
Plan Review
Inspections
Investigations
Medical
Services
Standard of Care
Medical Review
Planning &
Support
Risk Reduction (CRR)
Purchasing/DEA
Facilities & Fleet
Communications
Administration
Services
Fiscal Services
Civil Service
Policy
Records
Operations
QA
Fire
Medical
Rescue
Haz-Mat
Pre-plans
Professional
Standards
Safety
Wellness
Member Training
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPASSIONATE -PROFESSIONAL -RESPONSIVE
what we do…
Page 177 of 199
Of
f
i
c
e
o
f
F
i
r
e
C
h
i
e
f
(1
)
F
i
r
e
/
M
e
d
i
c
a
l
C
h
i
e
f
Fire & Life Safety
(1) Fire Marshal
Inspection & Investigation
(1) DFM
(3) Fire Prevention Specialists
(1) Permit Tech TBD
Respond Quickly
Solve Problems
Be Nice (Care)
FP System & Plan Review
(1) FPE
Respond Quickly
Solve Problems
Be Nice (Care)Medical Services
(1) Medical Director
Planning & Support
(1) Assistant Chief
Community Risk Reduction
(1) DFM Outreach
Respond Quickly
Solve Problems
Be Nice (Care)
Logistic Services
(1) CPT
(1) Purchaser
Respond Quickly
Solve Problems
Be Nice (Caring)Administration Services
(1) Assistant Chief
(1) Executive Assistant
(1) Administrative Assistant
Operations
(1) Division Chief
(1) QA/QI Coordinator
A-Shift Commander
(1) Battalion Chief
Station(s) 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
(3) CPT, (5) LT,
(8) DE, (1) CEP II,
(25) FF/P and FF/E
Respond Quickly
Solve Problems
Be Nice (Care)
B-Shift Commander
(1) Battalion Chief
Station(s) 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
(3) CPT, (5) LT
(8) DE, (1) CEP II
(25) FF/P, FF/E
Respond Quickly
Solve Problems
Be Nice (Care)
C-Shift Commander
(1) Battalion Chief
Station(s) 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
(3) CPT, (5) LT
(8) DE, (1) CEP II
(25) FF/P, FF/E
Respond Quickly
Solve Problems
Be Nice (Caring)
Professional Development
(1) Battalion Chief
(1) CEP II
RANK SOF
AC 2
DC 1
BC 4
FM 1
DFM 2
CPT 12
LT 14
FLS 3
DE 24
FF 75
how we do it…
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPASSIONATE -PROFESSIONAL -RESPONSIVE
Page 178 of 199
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPASSIONATE -PROFESSIONAL -RESPONSIVE
our growth trends…
63
25
7
9
16
6
5
15
9
7
60
2
11
2
7
41
30
5
1
18
5
0
16
7
5
58
9
13
3
7
63
34
3
3
19
0
2
17
6
5
69
3
16
9
3
86
37
1
7
19
3
3
19
3
6
68
8
19
5
5
13
0
37
3
7
20
2
2
20
6
2
71
0
20
5
2
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
OOD FD1 FD2 FD3 FD4 FD5
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
44%
82%29%21%
An
n
u
a
l
I
n
c
i
d
e
n
t
s
Station/Planning Zones
18%
Page 179 of 199
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPASSIONATE -PROFESSIONAL -RESPONSIVE
our planning zones…
Page 180 of 199
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPASSIONATE -PROFESSIONAL -RESPONSIVE
community input…
Arthur, Thomas
Brock, Bonheim
Brasher, Melinda
Brent, Fred
Brightwell, Barbara
Brightwell, George
Cash, Wendy
Chody, Robert
Coffman-Romick, James
Collins, Chuck
Copeland, Melody
Crosby, Karen
Fincher, Janna
Garland, Ron
Goetz, Kelly
Healy, Rita
Johnson, Jim
Lenhard, Mark
Lloyd, Patrick
Lourigan, George
Mallinger, James
Ochoa, Monica
Orcutt, Vickie
Ramsey, Mark
Scarbrough, Linda
Sheehan, TJ
Sourbeer, Tom
Taylor, Steven
Velz, Jose
Waits, Roland
Page 181 of 199
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPASSIONATE -PROFESSIONAL -RESPONSIVE
service ranking…
Rank Score
Medical Services 1 178
Fire Suppression 2 162
Technical Rescue 3 122
Domestic Preparedness 4 94
Hazardous Material
Mitigation
5 93
Community Risk Reduction 6 65
Fire Investigation 7 58
Fire & Life Safety Education 8 40
Page 182 of 199
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPASSIONATE -PROFESSIONAL -RESPONSIVE
community expectations…
Ranking Score
Fast Response 1 105
Competent, trained workforce 2 77
Community outreach 3 43
Keep pace with growth 4 43
Customer service 5 32
Page 183 of 199
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPASSIONATE -PROFESSIONAL -RESPONSIVE
community concerns…
Ranking Score
Growth and demand on services 1 82
Communication 2 34
Sufficient tax base to support costs 3 24
Timely response 4 20
Page 184 of 199
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPASSIONATE -PROFESSIONAL -RESPONSIVE
strategic initiatives…
Health &
Wellness
Recruit &
Retain
Succession
Planning
Tech/IT
Training
Staffing
Internal
Commo
Best
Practice
Page 185 of 199
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPASSIONATE -PROFESSIONAL -RESPONSIVE
strategic initiatives…
Goal 1 Recruit and retain qualified personnel to continuously
meet the needs of the department and community.
Objective
1A Evaluate the current recruitment process.
Timeframe 60 days and Ongoing Assigned to:Operations
Critical
Tasks
i.Establish a recruitment team.
ii.Identify the effectiveness of the current methods to
identify shortfalls.
iii.Identify new recruitment methods.
iv.Develop a new recruitment process.
v.Implement the new recruitment processes.
Funding
Estimate
Capital Costs:
Personnel Costs:
Consumable Costs:
Contract Services Costs:
Page 186 of 199
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPASSIONATE -PROFESSIONAL -RESPONSIVE
strategic initiatives…
Goal 1 Recruit and retain qualified personnel to continuously
meet the needs of the department and community.
Objective 1A Evaluate the current recruitment process.
Objective 1B Establish selection criterion for qualified candidates.
Objective 1C Evaluate pay and benefits for GFD.
Objective 1D Create Career development program for all ranks.
Objective 1E Evaluate the processes and ID their effectiveness.
Page 187 of 199
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPASSIONATE -PROFESSIONAL -RESPONSIVE
strategic initiatives…
Goal 2
Enhance and expand the health and wellness program
for our members to address the increased risks
associated with the physical and mental demands of
our profession.
Objective 2A Evaluate and analyze current health and wellness
programs to determine their effectiveness.
Objective 2B Conduct a needs analysis for all aspects of health and
wellness; to include annual physicals, PTSI, peer support.
Objective 2C Build a health and wellness plan based upon
aforementioned analysis.
Objective 2D Select and assign personnel to wellness programs.
Objective 2E Initiate and implement changes or additions to the
health and wellness program
Objective 2F Perform and annual review of program to track and
document their effectiveness and ID needed changes.
Page 188 of 199
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPASSIONATE -PROFESSIONAL -RESPONSIVE
strategic initiatives…
Goal 3
Develop and maintain a high quality training program for
the members of GFD to best serve the City of Georgetown
and surrounding area.
Objective 3A Analyze training programs to national standards.
Objective 3B Create benchmarks based upon high performing systems.
Objective 3C Standardize training policies to reflect new benchmarks.
Objective 3D Analyze current training division staffing levels.
Objective 3E Perform a needs assessment of current/future training.
Objective 3F Complete acquisition of training resources and staff.
Objective 3G Determine regional training opportunities.
Objective 3H Create department-wide culture w/ training as priority.
Page 189 of 199
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPASSIONATE -PROFESSIONAL -RESPONSIVE
strategic initiatives…
Goal 4
Succession planning. Implement a standard
professional development plan that monitors, trains,
and ensures that employees have the KSA’s to perform
in future leadership roles.
Objective 4A Review existing positions and required KSA’s.
Objective 4B ID and train mentors for program implementation.
Objective 4C Create a plan for standardized development or
personnel in each rank with formal mentoring plan.
Objective 4D Communicate expectations and requirements.
Objective 4E Create an evaluation process for mentors and
employees to ensure alignment with goals.
Objective 4F Evaluate the program to ensure its productivity and
effectiveness.
Page 190 of 199
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPASSIONATE -PROFESSIONAL -RESPONSIVE
strategic initiatives…
Goal 5 Invest in technology to improve our overall service
delivery.
Objective 5A ID all current technology used by GFD.
Objective 5B Perform a gap analysis to ID shortfalls and new
technology needed for service delivery.
Objective 5C Conduct research for new technology.
Objective 5D Perform testing and determine a selection process.
Objective 5E Establish training and deployment of new technology
that was selected and approved.
Objective 5F Perform an evaluation of the technology that was
implemented based upon department needs.
Page 191 of 199
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPASSIONATE -PROFESSIONAL -RESPONSIVE
strategic initiatives…
Goal 6
Ensure adequate staffing that provides for the safety of
our community and our members while maintaining
fiscal responsibility.
Objective 6A
Analyze the effectiveness of current staffing levels
based upon community needs and professional
standards.
Objective 6B ID staff needs, clarify roles and responsibility throughout
all ranks.
Objective 6C Assess current budget allocations for staffing.
Objective 6D Develop a plan to address staffing deficits or needs.
Objective 6E Prioritize an implement staffing levels and department
reorganization as budget allows.
Objective 6F Review staffing changes as budget and community
needs change.
Page 192 of 199
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPASSIONATE -PROFESSIONAL -RESPONSIVE
strategic initiatives…
Goal 7 Create clear, consistent, and transparent
communication throughout the organization.
Objective 7A ID and evaluate current communication practices.
Objective 7B ID and evaluate roadblocks in current commo process.
Objective 7C ID and evaluate alternative methods to ensure
improvement and efficiency of communication.
Objective 7D Develop a communication plan that includes a
feedback loop throughout the department.
Objective 7E Create and deliver process-specific training to the
appropriate personnel for goal realization.
Objective 7F Implement procedures to ensure department
transparency and accountability.
Objective 7G Review and revise the process, as needed.
Page 193 of 199
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPASSIONATE -PROFESSIONAL -RESPONSIVE
strategic initiatives…
Goal 8
Prepare for, pursue, achieve and maintain international
accreditation to better serve our community and
embrace excellence.
Objective 8A Form team or committee structures with management
components as needed to pursue accreditation.
Objective 8B Develop a community-driven strategic plan.
Objective 8C Implement the community-driven strategic plan.
Objective 8D Conduct a community hazards / risk assessment and
publish a CRA-SOC document.
Objective 8E Conduct and document a self-assessment of the
department utilizing the CPSE-CFAI Manual.
Objective 8F Achieve agency accreditation by CFAI and CAAS.
Objective 8G Maintain accreditation with CFAI and CAAS.
Page 194 of 199
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPASSIONATE -PROFESSIONAL -RESPONSIVE
Our mission is to protect our community and surrounding region by
providing prompt, professional , and caring services through
continuous education, preparedness, and community engagement.
Page 195 of 199
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPASSIONATE -PROFESSIONAL -RESPONSIVE
Our vision is to be a premier emergency service provider
that is best known as a caring service provider.
Page 196 of 199
Our Vision is to be widely known as an internationally accredited organization that always
focuses on those we serve. We remain dedicated to life safety by providing emergency
operations and community risk reduction in service to our community. This vision, our true
futurity, will only become reality by striving to accomplish our goals. We will become this
future by…
Gaining full buy-in and acceptance of the department’s core values which personify
pride, passion, and respect. This will be realized by ensuring a well -trained workforce is in
place that remains always ready to meet our mission of providing caring services to our
community. This will be further illustrated by our emphasis on enhanced workforce
development safeguarding quality performance while providing on-going relationships.
Favoring our community first, the relationships we have with the citizens of Georgetown
will be further enhanced. Our bolstered approach to internal communications will ensure
a well-informed public, while also supporting a transparent and cohesive department. This
will be supported by our management of technological resources for effectiveness while
preparing us for the future with an improved focus on our vision.
Determined to pursue the goal of improvement, while honoring our storied history and
embracing the future. Our department-wide teamwork will be strengthened through a
balanced staffing initiative, helping us highlight greater efficiencies and outcomes. To
maintain a cohesive and caring department, we commit to delivering both quality health
and wellness options to our members while providing caring services, pursuing excellence,
and being the best of the best in all that we do. Together, we commit to fulfilling our
mission, living our values and making this vision a reality
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPASSIONATE -PROFESSIONAL -RESPONSIVE
Page 197 of 199
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPASSIONATE -PROFESSIONAL -RESPONSIVE
We, the members of Georgetown Fire Department, are committed to honoring
these values true to our core, as defined in our professional standard:
Pride
Passion
Respect
Page 198 of 199
Questions/Comments
GEORGETOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPASSIONATE -PROFESSIONAL -RESPONSIVE
Page 199 of 199