HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council-Agenda Packets-5/19/2004
Ie
l'exas
PUBLIC NOTICE
COLLEYVILLE CITY COUNCIL
WORKSESSION AGENDA
MAY 19, 2004
5:30 P.M.
CITY HALL
100 MAIN STREET
EXECUTIVE CONFERENCE ROOM
I. Call to Order
II. Discussion of Capital Improvement Projects and Funding Options
a. Utility system projects
b. Funding opportunities for utility capital projects
c. SH26 landscaping and overhead utility relocation
d. General Fund related projects
e. Funding opportunities for General Fund related capital projects
III. Discussion of Bond Election
a. Date of election
b. Structure and format of ballot language
IV. Selection of Future CIP Worksession Date(s)
VI. Adjournment
I certify that the above notice was posted on the Bulletin Board at City Hall on Monday,
May 10, 2004, at 5:00
n~ ~
Cynthia Singleton, TRMC
City Secretary
100 MAIN STREETCOLLEYVILLE, TEXAS 76034 (817) 503-1000
~
MEMORANDUM
Office of City Manager
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
Mayor and City Council
Bill Lindley
CIP worksession
May 19, 2004
As a follow up to your CIP planning discussions, the City Council scheduled a
meeting for May 19, at 5:30 p.m., in the City Hall, Executive Conference Room,
for further review of possible capital projects and financing options. This memo
and accompanying information is provided to assist in your discussion. In
reviewing the various projects, among other things, you will want to give
consideration to selecting projects, anticipated public support of projects, funding
options, tax/utility rate impacts, and public input-education for project selection.
Utilitv -
At the last worksession, there was general support in the $12,792,611 for capital
projects. The Council reviewed possible project funding based on consideration
of utilizing $6,392,611 in available cash, allocating $2,229,446 from development
fees and issuance of $6,400,000 in debt. As mentioned at previous meetings,
the use of available cash and debt related rate adjustments are important policy
decisions still to be made by the Council.
The Financial Advisor and Finance Director have projected that a debt issuance
would not require any additional rate increase above the planned 2005 rate
increase (augmenting the program with available cash). The planned rate
increase has previously been identified at $0.14 per thousand gallons for water
and $0.06 for sewer (per thousand gallons). The following is a quick summary of
funding and possible sources of payment:
System Improvements
$12,792,611
Working Capital
Development Fees
Debt Issuance
Funding:
4,163,165 Cash available above 180 Working Capital
2,229,446 Associated development fees
6.400,000 Proposed Revenue Bond sale
$12,792,611
If the City Council were to opt not to utilize available cash and/or development
fees, the corresponding additional utility rate increases, by category, would
generally be:
Source Funds
Working Capital $4,163,165
Development Fees $2,229,446
Water
$0.20
$0.10
Sewer
$0.04
$0.02
Remember though that based on the Utility Development Impact Fee Program,
funds not spent within a ten year period of collection are eligible for refund to the
developer. You will certainly want to consider then allocating the just over $2.2
million in developer fees to offset system improvements to minimize utility rate
adjustments.
SH26 -
During a previous joint meeting with the SH26 Advisory Committee, Council
identified $2,200,000 in funding for hardscape and softscape for the corridor. At
the last meeting, the Council discussed breaking down possible overhead utility
relocation options into several components. These included:
Option 1
Option 2
$18,950,000
10,950,000
8,650,000
13,465,150
5,700,000
2,250,000
Option 3
Option 4
Option 5
Option 6
Bury full corridor .
Bury Business District & acquire full
easement
Bury Business District
Bury from creek to creek
Bury intersections & acquire full easement
Bury intersections
One of the main decisions remaining by the City Council is to determine, at what
level if any, are the overhead utility lines to be buried. While the Council can
structure the ballot to have multiple options related to this utility question, policy
consideration will need to be given to the perceived overall ballot cost (tax rate)
by the voter. A criteria will be required to be established by the Council in how it
will select the winning ballot initiative under a multiple ballot choice scenario for
this category of a possible project.
Tax Supported Project Fundinq -
During the last worksession, the Financial Advisor presented, as a follow up to a
previous Council question, a discussion on current debt obligations and related
bond ratings. It was noted that, based on the earlier question, a 3.5% debt tax
rate would fund $16,865,000 in capital projects. A 7% debt tax rate would realize
$40,865,000 in capital project funding. Both scenarios were based on an
average annual 3% TAV growth with no increase in the maintenance tax rate.
Other financing sources were noted to include $2,831,537 in excess Fund
Balance (above the 90 day threshold). There are various miscellaneous
development fees that can be associated with some street improvements. It is
important for the Council to make a fiscal policy decision in considering allocation
of available cash and tax rate implications as you select projects.
The Council has discussed that any property tax based capital program be voted
by the public. This philosophy is particularly important when viewed against the
Charter limitations for tax rate adjustments. You will recall that the Charter limit
in an ad valorem tax revenue increase greater than 7% of the total collected
without specific voter approval is prohibited. Along with tax based projects being
voter approved, the Council will want to provide clear language for the voter to
understand those projects that would be funded above a 7% threshold (staff
estimate is that virtually any combination of tax supported projects will do this).
Along with the ballot language, detailed and informative educational material
would need to be prepared to assist the voter in understanding the ballot and
corresponding increase in the tax rates.
During the last meeting, Council discussed caution regarding using Fund
Balance to "buy-down" financing costs of possible capital needs. This is an
important policy point that will need to be decided as you finalize a capital
program. While you are considering current capital needs, there too will
undoubtedly be future capital projects that could be funded as well by Fund
Balance by a future Council. Thus, a decision today in the use of Fund Balance
precludes future opportunities.
The following table is provided to give the City Council a quick glance of the
corresponding debt rate needed to fund various incremental debt issuances.
Debt
Issuance
$ 1,000,000
3,000,000
5,000,000
10,000,000
20,000,000
30,000,000
Annual Debt
Payment
$ 100,000
300,000
500,000
1,000,000
2,000,000
3,000,000
Needed
T ax Rate
$0.0040
0.0120
0.0201
0.0401
0.0802
O. 1203
Summary -
The City Council discussed a possible bond election as early as the September
11, 2004 uniform election date. Allowing for a sixty-two (62) day notice to call an
election, a resolution would need to be approved at the July 6, 2004 City Council
meeting. If the Council were to consider hosting a Special City Council meeting
to consider the resolution, a meeting would need to be held by July 9, 2004. To
meet either schedule, the City Council will need to finalize the list of projects and
identify funding sources over the next several weeks. The next uniform election
date of November 2, 2004 provides the Council more opportunity to discuss
components of a CIP program.
During the May 19, 2004 worksession, items that need to be focused on include:
o Selection of projects
o Determination on funding options
o Tax-utility rate increases (voter acceptance)
o Public input on possible projects
o Date of election
o Direction on general ballot structure
I look forward to your continued discussion in considering developing a CIP
program. As you have seen over the last several months, the mechanics of
building such a program are complex and mingled with multiple policy issues.
Please give me, Dianne or Terry a call should you have any questions about the
meeting topics or information provided.
Attachments:
- Possible CIP Tax Supported Projects
- Possible CIP Utility Supported Projects
CITY OF COLLEVILLE
Possible CIP Tax Supported Projects
~
",,~l.
Streets
Tara Subdivision
Street Rehabilitiation
Church Street'
Glade Road ..
Saddlebrook Subdivision
$ 3,576,872
$ 7,923,669
$ 1,980,000
$ 4,501,018
$ 4,799,940
Subtotal: $ 22,781,499
One
One
Two
Two
Three
Sidewalks
Pleasant Run
Assorted locations
Thompson Terrace (Sect. I & II)
Bransford Elementry
Colleyville Elementry
$
$
174,500
230,000
One
One
$
$
Subtotal: $
117,500
58,600
580,600
One
One
SH26 ....
Landscaping $ 2,200,000 Not Reviewed
Overhead Utility Relocation
Option 1 (full corridor) $18,950,000 Not Reviewed
Option 2 (business and full easement) $ 10,950,000 Not Reviewed
Option 3 (business only) $ 8,650,000 Not Reviewed
Option 4 (creek to creek) $ 13,465,150 Not Reviewed
Option 5 (intersections and full eastement) $ 5,700,000 Not Reviewed
Option 6 (intersections) $ 2,250,000 Not Reviewed
Subtotal: TBD
Facilities
Central Fire Station $ 4,183,000 One
Subtotal: $ 4,183,000
Equipment
Mobile AED Units $ 12,500 One
Portable radios (Fire) $ 66,500 One
Outdoor Warning System $ 300,000 One
Mobile Display Terminals (Police) $ 50,000 One
Portable radios (Police) $ 128,170 One
Subtotal: $ 557,170
Parks
Senior Center $ 1,200,000 One
Sneed ... $ 420,000 One
Football Facility $ 1,571,646 One
Tennis Courts $ 70,000 One
ADA park enhancements $ 90,000 One
McPherson Park $ 3,148,569 Two
Cottonbelt Trail (Phase III) $ 1,158,110 Three
Subtotal: $ 7,658,325
TOT AL:****' $ 35,760,594
NOTE: . T1F debt program has partial funding for Church Street
Glade Road has development fees available
Sneed Park improvements revised based on sports group contractor quote
Overhead option To Be Determined (TBD)
..... The $35,760,594 does not include any associated cost for SH26 Overhead Utility Relocation
CITY OF COLLEVILLE
Possible CIP Utility Projects
~..-.
~,.
Ground Storage Tank (5 MG)
High/Low Pressure Main
TRA Feeder Main
Felps, Acuff, Greenbriar, West waterlines
SH26 Utility Relocation
John McCain & Oak Knoll Water Lines
Warwick & John McCain Water Lines
Westcoat Transmission Line
TOTAL:
$ 4,905,000
$ 693,480
$ 919,948
$ 392,357
$ 4,855,500
$ 271,123
$ 301,603
$ 453,600
$ 12,792,611
One
One
One
One
One
One
One
One