|
|
City Council |
|||
|
Agenda Request |
||||
|
Agenda Of: |
november 06, 2007 |
Agenda Request
No: |
III E |
|
|
Initiated By: |
Glenda
Gundermann, City Secretary |
Responsible
Department: |
City Secretary |
|
|
Presented By: |
Glenda
Gundermann, City Secretary |
Department
Head: |
Glenda
Gundermann, City Secretary |
|
|
|
|
Additional
Department. Head (s): |
N/A |
|
|
Subject /
Proceeding: |
Approve Minutes |
|||
|
Exhibits: |
Minutes october
16, 2007 |
|||
|
Clearances |
Approval |
|||
|
Legal: |
N/A |
Executive
Director: |
N/A |
|
|
Purchasing: |
N/A |
Asst. City
Manager: |
N/A |
|
|
Budget: |
N/A |
City Manager: |
Allen Bogard |
|
|
Budget |
||||
|
Expenditure
Required: $ |
N/A |
|||
|
Amount
Budgeted/Reallocation: $ |
N/A |
|||
|
Additional
Appropriation: $ |
N/A |
|||
|
Recommended
Action |
||||
|
Approve the minutes of the City Council meeting October 16, 2007. |
||||
|
Exhibits |
||||
|
STATE OF TEXAS |
§ |
|
COUNTY OF FORT BEND |
§ |
|
CITY OF SUGAR LAND |
§ |
CITY OF SUGAR LAND
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
tuesday, october 16, 2007
REGULAR MEETING
The City Council of the City of Sugar Land convened in a regular meeting open to the public and pursuant to notice thereof duly given in accordance with Chapter 551, Government Code, Vernon's Texas Codes, Annotated, as amended, in Sugar Land City Hall within said City on Tuesday, October 16, 2007 at 5:47 o'clock P.M. and the roll was called of the members; to wit:
David G. Wallace, Mayor
Thomas Abraham, Council Member at Large, Position One
Daniel O. Wong, Council Member at Large, Position Two
Dennis C. Parmer, Council Member District One
Donald G. Olson, Council Member District Two
Russell C. Jones, Council Member District Three
Michael S. Schiff, Council Member District Four
QUORUM PRESENT
All of said members were present.
Also present were:
Allen Bogard, City Manager
Glenda Gundermann, City Secretary
Joe Morris, City Attorney, and
A Number of Visitors
CONVENE MEETING
Mayor David Wallace convened the session, open to the public, to order at 5:48 o’clock P.M.
INVOCATION
Council Member Donald Olson delivered the invocation.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Council Member Donald Olson led the
pledge of allegiance to the Flag of the
RECOGNITIONS
Mayor Wallace recognized Albert Mo, a member of Boy Scout Troop Number 38, who was in attendance to earn the Communications merit badge.
CANS ACROSS
Mayor Wallace stated the United States Conference of Mayors,
Novelis Corporation, and Keep America Beautiful sponsor the Cans for Cash City
Recycling Challenge, a national contest that rewards cities for recycling
aluminum beverage cans. As a challenge
to residents, the City of Sugar Land and Keep Sugar Land Beautiful (KSLB) are
co-sponsoring the Cans Across Sugar Land City Recycling Challenge to collect
the 63,000 aluminum cans needed to span the width of
Ms. Vicki Gist, Executive Director of Keep Sugar Land Beautiful, stated
this is a community effort and recognized Raising Cane’s Restaurant, a drop-off
site, and Austin High School Honor Society students for their hard work and
support of the program. Ms. Gist invited
everyone to attend the Saturday, October 27 collection event at
Mayor Wallace presented the Cans Across Sugar Land City
Recycling Challenge proclamation recognizing the importance of environmental
awareness and recycling in
OATH OF OFFICE TO SUGAR LAND BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS MEMBERS
Mayor Wallace administered the Oath of Office to members of the
Animal Advisory Board, Building Standards Commission, Parks and Recreation
Policy Advisory Board, Planning and Zoning Commission,
The Mayor introduced the new slate of Board Members to the audience noting the annual Boards and Commissions dinner is October 22nd at the Sugar Land Marriott to express appreciation to these civic-minded volunteers for their invaluable contributions.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Mayor Wallace introduced Public Comment and entertained registered speakers. There were no public comments.
REVIEW OF CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Wallace introduced Review of the Consent Agenda and entertained questions and/or comments.
CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Wallace introduced III.A) SECOND
CONSIDERATION: CITY OF
routes rights-of-way mowing for the period October 1, 2007 through September 30, 2008; III.E) authorizing execution of a Contract in the amount of $75,000.00 with Andrews & Kurth, LLP for legal services relating to a proposed performing arts center; III.F) authorizing execution of an Agreement by and between the City of Sugar Land and Fort Bend County Levee Improvement District No. 14 for spoil excavation from White Lily Pond located in Brazos Park area; III.G) authorizing execution of an Agreement by and between the City of Sugar Land and Fort Bend County Levee Improvement District No. 2 for spoil excavation from White Lily Pond located in Brazos Park area; III.H) authorizing execution of an Agreement by and between the City of Sugar Land and First Colony Levee Improvement District No. 2 for spoil excavation from White Lily Pond located in Brazos Park area; III.I) authorizing execution of an Interlocal Agreement in an amount not to exceed $50,000.00 with Fort Bend Subsidence District for city sponsorship of WaterWise Water Conservation Education Program; III.J) authorizing execution of a one-year Contract extension in an amount not to exceed $91,000.00 with Lone Star Uniforms, Incorporated for police uniforms; III.K) authorizing an Electrical Distribution Easement for extension of power to 101 Gillingham Lane; III.L) approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of October 02, 2007.
Following a full and complete discussion, Council Member Wong, seconded by Council Member Olson, made a motion to approve the Consent Agenda. The motion carried unanimously.
CONTRACTS AND AGREEMENTS
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR TEXAS TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE
INTRA-CITY TRANSPORTATION PLANNING SERVICES
Mayor Wallace introduced consideration on an
Interlocal Agreement by and between the City of Sugar Land and
Mr. Dale Rudick, Director of Business and Intergovernmental Relations, stated that in accordance with the 2007-2008 Strategic Project identified as “Intra-City Transportation System”, the City has been working directly with the Texas Transportation Institute (TTI) and the Fort Bend County Public Transportation Department (FBC) to define a scope of services that will help determine a vision for an intra-city transportation system that includes a short, medium and long range plan. FBC has secured 80% federal funding to perform such a plan. The local 20% match will be split between City and County, and City’s share of the $100,000 study is $10,000.
The Texas Transportation Institute will perform a study to determine the need for an intra-city transit circulator service for Town Center along with a long term plan of action/vision as it relates to an Intra-City Transportation System utilizing modes of transportation other than the private automobile. TTI’s scope of services will be broken out into Task I: analyze short and mid-range opportunities for transit mobility in Town Center, the four quadrants of U.S. 59/S.H. 6 intersection; and Task II: analyze long-range opportunities for multi-modal connectivity throughout Sugar Land and into Fort Bend County, taking into account potential future commuter rail and major employment or activity centers. The city Comprehensive Plan, Visioning Task Force recommendations, Council directives and resolutions will be considered in the study. Recommendations from this study will allow the city to take advantage of potential funding sources for implementation; City is not required to follow recommendations that do not follow our vision.
Although the Fort Bend County Public Transportation Department is the primary on the contract with the Texas Transportation Institute, the city will have a strong presence on the steering committee during the course of the study which includes representation from Intergovernmental Relations, Public Works (traffic operations), Planning and Engineering. A large component of this study includes opportunities for community outreach and public review and comment by stakeholders and interested citizens.
Following a full and complete discussion, Council
Member Olson, seconded by Council Member Jones, made a
motion to approve execution of an Interlocal Agreement by and between the City
of Sugar Land and
ANIMAL CONTROL FACILITY
Mayor Wallace introduced consideration on authorizing Change Order No. 1 in the deductive amount of $237,067.00 with Zekkours Construction Company, Incorporated, and authorizing Purchase of a pre-engineered modular building in the amount of $211,248.00 from Houndquarters, Incorporated for animal control facility.
Mr. Mike Hobbs, Director of Public Works, stated on September 4, 2007, City Council authorized execution of a contract with Zekkours Construction Company, Incorporated in the amount of $751,580 for the turnkey construction of a 4,300 square foot animal control facility. Chapter 2155 of the Texas Government Code stipulates that all public works contracts in excess of $25,000 will include payment and performance bonds in the full amount of the contract value. On or about September 27, 2007, Zekkours Construction was notified by its insurance agency that the bond underwriter would not provide bonds in the full amount of the contract value of $751,580. Subsequent discussions with the underwriter revealed that the denial for bonding was based solely on the contractor’s limited experience with bonded public works projects.
Zekkours Construction has successfully completed over ten projects under contract with the city, of which two required bonding, and the largest was $180,000. The underwriter stated he would bond a project up to $600,000 in value until such time that the underwriter felt the firm deserved consideration for an increase in its bonding capacity. In an effort of good faith and in order to keep the project on-schedule, Zekkours Construction ordered the pre-engineered modular building and made a $23,472 down-payment.
In order to keep the project on-schedule, staff is proposing the following:
· Execute a deductive change order of $237,067 with the contractor per the following breakdown:
Building Cost $234,720
Contractor Markup (11%) $ 25,819
Less 10% Down-payment $ 23,472
Net Change Order $237,067
· Issue a purchase order to Houndquarters, Incorporated for the purchase of pre-engineered modular building in the amount of $211,248 per the following: Building cost: $234,720; Less 10% Down-payment: $23,472; Net Building Cost: $211,248.
Legal and Purchasing agreed that the provisions of Chapters 252 and 271 of the Texas Local Government Code permit both the above-specified actions. The net impact of this action to city is a savings of $25,819 and the ability to complete construction of the facility by the December 31, 2007contract completion date.
The main concern of Council related to warranty of the project. The building has a one-year warranty with a
50-year warranty on the Hardiplank siding.
The contractor must provide a one-year workmanship warranty; in this
case, the contractor will take ownership of the building for the one year,
parts and labor. City has a one-year
parts warranty from the building manufacturer and a one-year labor warranty
from the contractor, who agreed to merge the two as if it were a turnkey
project.
Following a full and complete discussion, Council Member Olson, seconded by Council Member Abraham, made a motion to approve Change Order No. 1 in the deductive amount of $237,067.00 with Zekkours Construction Company, Incorporated, and authorizing Purchase of a pre-engineered modular building in the amount of $211,248.00 from Houndquarters, Incorporated for animal control facility. The motion carried unanimously.
LETTER AGREEMENT – STREET
Mayor Wallace introduced consideration on a
Letter Agreement in the amount of $179,893.00 with CenterPoint Energy for
street lights on
Mr. Michael Leech, Assistant Public Works Director, stated per
contract with the City, Center Point is in the process of extending
electric capacity to the
The proposed lighting design includes University Boulevard
from U.S. 59 south to the Commonwealth Boulevard bridge. The proposal received from Center
Point is for $179,893.00 and includes (19) double-arm Houstonian style
luminaires and (34) single-arm Houstonian style luminaires. The mounts, poles, luminaires, and layout of
the street light system are consistent with the existing system along S.H. 6
and Eldridge and
Following a full and complete discussion, Council
Member Schiff, seconded by Council Member Parmer, made a
motion to approve execution of a Letter Agreement in the amount of $179,893.00
with CenterPoint Energy for street lights on
Mayor Wallace introduced consideration on
ratification of emergency purchase in the amount of $30,095.00 from Mark C.
Pope and Associates for
Mr. Philip Savko, Director of Aviation, stated the airport purchased a replacement Ground Power Unit (GPU) from Mark C. Pope and Associates on Thursday, October 04, 2007. Because the conservation of public resources was at risk, city policy for emergency purchases was followed. The policy allows for emergency purchases for amounts greater than $25,000 to be made without prior approval by Council as long as City Council is informed after the fact.
The purchase was necessary for the following reasons: The
unit replaced was over 15 years old and out of service for repairs for a total
of 2 ˝ to 3 months during FY 2006/07.
Since July 25, the unit was repaired 3 times at a cost of approximately
$3,500 and out of service for 6 weeks. After being returned to service
following the latest repair, the unit immediately bogged down while starting a
jet and was taken out of service again because voltage regulation problems in a
GPU can easily result in hundreds of thousands of dollars in damage to aircraft
electronics systems. In order to repair
the GPU again, it would have to be sent to
Council discussion ensued concerning the number of Ground Power Units that the airport owns, and Mr. Savko stated that the recent purchase is the second unit; and in the upcoming budget year, the airport has one that is scheduled to be replaced, which will give the airport a total of (3) Ground Power Units.
Following a full and complete discussion, Council
Member Abraham, seconded by Council Member Olson, made a
motion to approve ratification of emergency purchase in the amount of
$30,095.00 from Mark C. Pope and Associates for
PUBLIC HEARING
STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT – FORT BEND MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT
NO. 67, 68, 69, 111 AND 112 (NEW TERRITORY COMMUNITY)
Mayor Wallace convened the Public Hearing to receive and hear all persons desiring to be heard on a Strategic Partnership Agreement with Fort Bend Municipal Utility District No. 67, 68, 69, 111 and 112 (New Territory Community) for municipal services and future annexation of the districts.
Mr. Jim Callaway, Executive Director Community
Development, stated the Agreement was reviewed at the first Public Hearing and
Council workshop and placed on the city web site. The utility districts must hold two hearings,
and in the case of the
Mayor Wallace entertained comments from the public; hearing none the Public Hearing was closed.
PUBLIC HEARING
STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT – FORT BEND MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT
NO. 106, 108, 109 and 117 (GREATWOOD COMMUNITY)
Mayor Wallace convened the Public Hearing to receive and hear all persons desiring to be heard on a Strategic Partnership Agreement with Fort Bend Municipal Utility District No. 106, 108, 109 and 117 (Greatwood Community) for municipal services and future annexation of the districts.
Mr. Jim Callaway,
Executive Director Community Development, stated that Staff has not met recently with the Districts to discuss
any outstanding issues. The Districts must act prior to Council consideration;
the districts, like Council, must hold two Public Hearings, and the process is
ongoing at this time. The goal is to be in a position for Council to act on the
Strategic Partnership Agreement with these districts the same time that Council
approves the Groundwater Reduction Plan, which is scheduled for November
6, subject to action by the districts.
Mayor Wallace entertained comments from the public; hearing none the Public Hearing was closed.
ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
RESOLUTION NO. 07-36 –
CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION
Mayor Wallace introduced consideration on CITY OF
Ms. Jennifer Brown, Assistant Fiscal Services Director, stated with approval of this resolution, Staff will have authorization to publish Notice of Intent to issue Certificates of Obligation (CO). Public notice is required by State law when a city issues the Certificates of Obligation to finance capital improvements. The project funded by these certificates involves the construction of 100 T-Hangars, to be located in the new General Aviation Complex on east side of the airport. The project was first included in the 2007 Capital Improvement Plan with a budget of $3,035,000 and the supplemental funding request was included in the 2008 CIP for an additional $1.29 million, for a total budget of $4,325,000 to construction. Issuance costs are estimated at $100,000, with the total for Certificates of Obligation at $4,425,000.
Design of the
T-Hangars is complete, bids due on November 1, 2007, with award of contract in
November and construction commencing at year-end, which is contingent upon
completion of the east General Aviation Complex in October.
Staff is recommending the issuance of Certificates of Obligation for this project under the guidelines established by the Financial Management Policy Statements most recently adopted by City Council on August 21, 2007. The policy statements provide that the city shall issue Certificates of Obligation for public improvements in certain circumstances, including when it is more economical to issue COs rather than issuing revenue bonds. The city has issued Certificates of Obligation for airport projects with an underlying pledge of airport revenues for the certificates. Although the Certificates are taxed back, they are repaid from the airport revenues and are treated as if the airport were issuing revenue bonds, including calculating bond coverage requirements which are reported in the Financials, and they are presented to the bond rating agencies as well.
City has not issued any debt this calendar year, which is a unique position; and because the issue is less than $10 million, City finds itself in a bank qualified situation. As a result, banks may deduct 80 percent of the carrying costs associated with these obligations, and this makes the obligations more marketable to banks, thereby giving the city a larger market for the Certificates. This translates to lower interest costs for the city.
Legal requirements
include the following: (1) Council
authorizes publication of Notice of Intent to issue Certificates of Obligation,
(2) Notice is published once a week for two consecutive weeks, and (3) First
notice published at least 31 days prior to sale date. The Notice must contain the time and place
set for the ordinance authorizing the sale, maximum amount and purpose, and the
manner in which the Certificates will be paid.
For this particular issue, the Notice will contain the following
information: principal amount not to
exceed $4,425,000; project to be funded is Sugar Land Regional Airport
T-Hangars; the debt service funded from airport revenues; and the sale date
will be December 4, 2007 at the 5:30 p.m. City Council meeting.
To summarize the time line for this process, on October 24 and 31 the Notice of Intent will be published in the City’s newspaper of record; November 20, the preliminary official statement to Council for consideration and approval; December 4, certificates will be bid in a competitive sale with Council approval of the bond ordinance; and anticipated delivery of funds around December 20-27. The transaction must be completed by the end of the year to benefit from bank qualified designation.
Following a full and complete discussion, Council
Member Schiff, seconded by Council Member Parmer, made a
motion to approve CITY OF
workshop
BOND REFERENDUM NOVEMBER 2007
Mayor Wallace introduced discussion on Fort Bend Independent School District Bond Referendum November 2007.
Dr. Timothy Jenney, Superintendent of Schools,
The bond planning
objectives included considering
District as a whole in establishing and ranking facility and maintenance
priorities, ensure equity of facilities, address overcrowding, reflect
timeliness of project and life cycle issues, maintain educational program
quality, and focus on safety and security.
Dr. Jenney gave a brief overview of Fort Bend ISD bond history. In 1991, $89,550,000 was raised that included eight new schools and two new facilities plus renovations; in 1995, $139 million for five new schools plus renovations; in 1999, $264 million for eight new schools and renovations; and in 2003, $300 million for six new schools and three existing campuses. These amounts reflect the inflationary factor in construction costs.
This year FBISD is
projected to serve approximately 69,000 students; enrollment is expected to
climb to 75,000 over the next three years and 88,000 by 2015. Fifteen years
ago, the District had 40 campuses, FBISD was the 29th largest school
district in the state, and the enrollment was 41,981. Today there are 67
campuses, FBISD is the 7th largest school district in the state, and
the projected enrollment for 2007-2008 is 69,247. There are more than 1,000
public school districts in
Over-crowded
conditions exist at campuses in fast growth areas of the district. According to
a comprehensive study conducted by an independent demographer, to keep up with
growth the district will need 8 additional campuses by 2010 and 13 additional
campuses by 2015. In FBISD, 8,000
students attend most or all of their classes in portable buildings/classrooms,
and there are 320 portable classrooms currently in use.
Bond Referendum 2007 Projects include the following:
(8) new campuses (total): $252,700,000
· Elementary School #43 – Sienna 15,862,500
· Elementary School #44 17,212,500
· Elementary School #45 17,212,500
· Middle School #14 44,212,500
· Elementary School #46 18,472,500
· High School #11 71,752,500
· Middle School #15 47,362,500
· Alternative Learning Center II 13,891,500
· Land Purchase/Fees for Future Schools 6,721,000
Renovations and Support Facilities $139,000,000
Renovations to existing campuses and new support facilities including a Natatorium Practice Pool, Head Start Community Center at Ridgemont Elementary and electrical and air conditioning upgrades as part of an Early Childhood Center at the original Missouri City Middle School gymnasium. The renovations to existing campuses include enclosing the interior classroom walls of 14 elementary campuses.
Technology $ 23,600,000
New equipment,
upgrades, replacements.
Transportation $ 11,200,000
Buses to address
growth, replace aging vehicles.
Legislature enacted
a law that will commence post
2010 requiring
seatbelts in buses.
Safety and
Security $ 1,500,000
New equipment,
upgrades to address campus security.
TOTAL $428,000,000
The total Bond Package breakdown by spending category is as follows: Eight new campuses and land purchases 59.04 percent; refurbish or modify existing facilities 32.48 percent; major technology improvements 5.51 percent; purchase new school buses 2.62 percent; and enhance campus security equipment .35 percent.
Regarding the impact
of FBISD bond sales on debt service tax rate, if the bond is approved, the tax
rate would increase by no more than 11 cents over the next three years. For the average home price of $180,000, the
tax bill would increase by a maximum of $180 per year, or $15 per month with a
homestead exemption. The rate increase
would be more than offset by a 46 cent reduction in the district’s Maintenance
and Operations tax rate adopted by the district over the past two years. FBISD debt service tax rate compares very
favorably with other fast growing
Homeowners who are
65 years of age or older, and who have been granted an “over 65 tax freeze,”
will not experience an increase in their tax rate as a result of the bond.
2007 Bond
Election Calendar
Early Voting (October 22 – November 2)
October 9 Last
day to register to vote for the Tuesday, November 6, election
October 22 First
day to vote early in person
November 2 Last day to vote early in person
November 6 Polls open (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.)
7:00 p.m. – Deadline for receiving early voting ballots by mail
Mayor Wallace proposed that in the next meeting, City Council come forward with a resolution of support on behalf of the City of Sugar Land for passage of the bond referendum. Mayor Wallace expressed appreciation to Dr. Jenney for his leadership at FBISD, and to his staff members for their hard work and diligence in working on the process.
FORT BEND COUNTY LEVEE IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 2
BOND REFERENDUM NOVEMBER 2007
Mayor Wallace introduced discussion on Fort Bend County Levee Improvement District No. 2 Bond Referendum November 2007.
Mr. Glen Gill, Director, Fort Bend County Levee Improvement District
No. 2, stated that LID No. 2 is responsible for flood control for the
original portion of First Colony. LID 2
protects a major portion of First Colony and
The levee around LID 2 is designed to keep the Brazos River & Oyster Creek out of the neighborhoods during high river events. Rainfall within LID 2 flows into one of the City’s storm sewers. The storm water then flows into the nearest Ditch. This water then flows, by gravity, through the flap gates into Ditch H. If needed, huge pumps help move a larger volume of water. Ditch H is the primary outflow channel for LID 2.
When LID 2 was originally designed 35 plus years ago at
approximately 80 feet above sea level, the levee height was designed with the
best information at the time. In January of this year, the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) released a study including a new model for the
The negative impact on residents of LID 2 if remapped into the flood plain because levee does not meet accreditation requirements of new FEMA model is significant for the following reasons: flood insurance in LID 2 is currently optional; current flood insurance costs from $112 to $317 annually per household and insures up to $350,000 of home and contents; flood insurance would become mandatory if homes are designated as in the flood plain and flood insurance could cost up to $2,233 annually for every household; mortgage companies would not finance homes in the flood plain without flood insurance and existing mortgages would also be required to insure; and values of property could drop if homes are in the flood plain.
To address the issue, LID 2 plans to participate in a regional perimeter levee with several other districts to reduce the overall cost to all LIDs of addressing FEMA requirements. District’s attorney and engineers have contacted FEMA to request allowing the District to do the ring levee and take the outer perimeter of the six and keep that intact and maintained; do the outer levee, not the entire system. This would save the District about one-fourth of the entire cost. District’s part of just the west levee is approximately $1.5 million. All modifications to levee should be within the existing right-of-way; dirt will be moved all along the levee and residents who back up to the levee will see work right outside their fence line.
If required modifications are not completed prior to the April 1 deadline, the levee will not be accredited by FEMA. The first phase of levee improvements will begin construction in October 2007 and finish in February of 2008 to meet new FEMA standards before final remapping. Estimated costs are as follows:
LID 2 levee protects approximately $3.3 billion in property valuation; LID 2 capital improvement projects, approximately $9 million – projects to meet FEMA standards, rehabilitation of pump stations, and levee repairs and modifications; engineering studies indicate that future projects for erosion control may be required; and the LID 2 board is proposing a $15 million bond authorization to fund current and future projects. An example of a LID 2 future project involves erosion; erosion can weaken the levee and potentially cause a failure in protection. The levees are inspected and maintained on a regular basis.
Mr. Mike Stone, a consultant for the District, presented a financial overview of the bond issue. The last LID 2 bond issue was authorized in 1975. A bond issue allows the financing of infrastructure over an extended period of time and reduces the necessity for paying for infrastructure costs from current property taxes and allows a lower current tax rate.
It has taken more than 32 years and several levee expansions to use previously authorized bonds. The method of funding and impact on the tax rate follows: (1) There are no current authorized LID 2 bonds; (2) Without a bond issue would require using a large portion of existing cash reserves for modifications; (3) Tax rates for levee maintenance have been reduced for last 15 years; and (4) If bond authorization is approved, current annual tax rate could be decreased by as much as 5 cents because modifications would be paid with bond revenues extended over several years.
Bond revenues can be used for modifications to meet FEMA requirements and can also be used for other purposes including: (1) fund emergency repairs, (2) fund facility enhancements, and (3) fund pump station repairs and replacement of pump equipment.
Regarding the Bond Issue on the November 6 ballot, LID 2 voters will be asked to authorize the issuance of bonds. If bonds are not authorized, both current and future improvements will have to be funded from annual tax revenues.
The LID 2 Board of Directors has proposed a bond authorization issue that will protect residents of LID 2 from flooding, allow residents to avoid expensive and mandatory flood insurance, and allow LID 2 to reduce annual taxes. The LID 2 Board consists of Andre McDonald, Gil Saenz, and Glen Gill, who are appointed and have the responsibility of managing the assets and infrastructure associated with LID 2.
Mayor Wallace expressed his gratitude to the Levee Districts for
creating the efficient perimeter levee plan for the residents of
Council questioned the plan for internal levees since they do not go through a certification process. Mr. Stone commented that each district is its own government body, but currently there is no intent to remove any of the internal levees. However, should there be a breach in the exterior levee the District could still rely on the interior levees.
Mayor Wallace proposed that in the next meeting, City Council come forward with a resolution of support on behalf of the City of Sugar Land for the passage of this bond referendum.
Council Member Olson left the meeting at 7:20 o’clock P.M.
WATER MASTER PLAN UPDATE AND GROUNDWATER REDUCTION PLAN
Mayor Wallace introduced discussion on Water Master Plan update and Groundwater Reduction Plan.
Ms. SuEllen Staggs, Director of Utilities, stated that the
Water Master Plan includes the current water system requirements, new
development water demands, the water Capital Improvement Program, and the
Groundwater Reduction Plan. The Water
Master Plan serves as a guide for orderly and timely developmentof water
production, treatment and distribution facilities for the City and extra-territorial
jurisdiction (ETJ). The plan anticipates infrastructure needs to support new
development, not rehabilitation. The
plan was last updated in 2000.
The 2007 Water Master Plan update includes the Capital Improvements Program
schedule for five and ten years and the ultimate city/extra-territorial
jurisdiction build-out. This will be the first comprehensive Water Master Plan
that incorporates the entire extra-territorial jurisdiction in a regional
approach, including the Groundwater Reduction Plan; and this is the first
Master Plan completed through a 2030 timeframe. Ms. Staggs stated that Claunch
& Miller, Incorporated had been retained to update the current plan.
The Water Master Plan process included updating demand projections for
connections and turning that into gallons per day. Claunch & Miller created
a comprehensive hydraulic model which helped determine what infrastructure
needs staff had, reviewed TCEQ requirements, and developed five year, ten year,
and ultimate Capital Improvements Program.
Mr. David Kasper, Claunch & Miller, Incorporated, stated in
developing the Master Plan, Claunch & Miller predicted how the city
population would change through the year 2030 based on the number of people
moving into the city, where the people will locate, and when this will occur,
which will be converted into a water demand. The firm worked with Public Works
and Planning Departments, who worked with developers and other water districts
to produce the estimates. Water usage records were researched for Greatwood,
Mr. Kasper stated water use demand is expected to increase in the city
over the next thirty years. New development is expected to occur between now
and the year 2013, and after 2013 most of the remaining development is expected
to take place south of the Brazos River in some of the large undeveloped
tracts. Water demand will fluctuate and
more water is used in the summer months, which is an important component in
sizing pipes, pumps, and tankage. Flow
and pressure must be provided throughout the year regardless of the peak demand
situation.
Claunch and Miller proceeded with development of the computerized
hydraulic model. The city has a complex water system due to the multiple
interconnected water plants, pumps, tanks, wells, and future water plants.
State of the art water modeling software for the city was necessary to properly
analyze the system. The city purchased the computerized water system modeling
software and temporarily transferred the license to Claunch & Miller to
develop the model; the license will be transferred back to City. The goal is for city staff to operate and
update the model.
The water system modeling efforts include developing an existing and
future system model. Regarding the
existing model, Claunch & Miller started with the GIS system,
partial maps, and ran under peak demand plus fire flow to determine
shortfalls. The city system as it stands
today is able to provide adequate pressure and fire flow to over 99 percent of
the city, which indicates a well-planned water system. The future system model
was started by inputting the future water demands. The firm tested the need for
improvements in the model. The Capital Improvements projects were tested in the
model to optimize the improvements and avoid future building issues. Every
project in the CIP, both water and surface water, was included in the model and
tested.
The city presently meets or exceeds the State of
Ms. Staggs stated that in addressing infrastructure needs, the water
system plan follows a regional approach. Utility agreements will set the
guidelines. Any new developments install
most of the needed distribution system.
Line sizing for the trunk system is determined by the Water Master
Plan. The City installs new production
and treatment capacity. The 5 year
Capital Improvement Plan includes eight major projects being funded at
$12,300,000. The 10 year Capital
Improvement Plan includes an increase in booster pump capacity and the
Greatwood/Riverpark Interconnect at a cost of $2,200,000. In the ultimate CIP, the Phase II and Phase
III booster pump increase will cost $350,000.
Ms. Staggs stated that the Developer funded 5
year Capital Improvement Plan includes five major projects at $6,800,000 which
are Riverstone West Distribution Main, Riverstone East Distribution Main, West
Belfort tie-in, University Distribution Phase II, and Tract Three Distribution
Main. The Developer funded ultimate
Capital Improvement Plan includes New Territory Out-Tract Water Main, Water
Loop Northeast Boundary and Brazos South - Regional Utilities at $20,100,000.
The Groundwater Reduction Plan is a component of the Water Master Plan,
and the draft plan is included in the Water Master Plan. Staff will insert
additional details and copies of water supply contracts, Ground Reduction Plan
contracts, and the Water Conservation Plan prior to submittal.
The Fort Bend Subsidence District regulations require 30%
non-groundwater sources by 2013 and 60% non-groundwater sources by 2025. The Groundwater Reduction Plan is due in
January 2008 and is the planning roadmap through 2030. The roadmap for meeting
the requirement includes surface water conversion, conservation, water reuse,
and non-potable surface water use. Council
policy was adopted in 2002 which stated the city was planning for the
extra-territorial jurisdiction (ETJ). City and ETJ are working together to
complete and submit the Ground Reduction Plan, and the plan includes 3 ETJ
MUDs, 2 private utility systems, 4 businesses, 8 homeowner associations, with a
total of 63 private wells.
Staff anticipates the majority of the city growth and water needs will occur before 2013. The current water demands of 22 million are expected to jump to 29 million in 2013. In a conversion factor, by 2013, 8.9 million gallons of what we need in total demand should not be groundwater. In 2025, it is anticipated there will still be some groundwater to be used. City cannot find alternative sources to meet the 8.9 MGD (million gallons per day). Regarding what the surface water plant size needs are, the conservative approach to non-potable projects would be 2 MGD of non-potable projects and education kits. If additional projects are implemented in the future, city could sell the credits, postpone expansion, or save credits for a rainy day.
Basically if this 2 MGD in non-potable projects occurs, city will have approximately 4 billion gallons of credits banked by the time of the conversion in 2013.
If city has a 10 percent overage in the size of our surface water plant, city could meet the long term demands by overproducing in the summer months and slightly under-producing in the winter. In 2024 city would need a 9 MGD plant and an ultimate capacity at 21 MGD. Since we do not have a good timeframe on when the Brazos South area would develop, the projections for growth are not included in the water plant itself. There is additional capacity that would be needed for the water plant somewhere in the future at 2025-2030.Staff is recommending that a 9 MGD surface water plant would be operational in 2013 and expanded to 22 MGD by 2025. This takes up the slack for the Brazos South area. Potential treatment types are conventional, mf/uf membrane filtration, and reverse osmosis. Ms. Staggs stated that citizens have high expectations regarding water quality, therefore there will be taste tests and focus groups to determine water quality standard. The city will begin testing and a pilot study next year to determine treatment type for TCEQ permitting requirements.
Our source water, which is the