Loading...
20-R-55 - Semiannual Reports - Capital Improvements PlanRESOLUTION NO. 20 -R -55 A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS ACCEPTING THE SEMIANNUAL REPORTS WITH RESPECT TO THE PROGRESS OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN, AND OTHER MATTERS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH WHEREAS, the Capital Improvements Advisory Committee has reviewed the revenue and expenditures relating to the established Capital Recovery Fees in accordance with the Capital Improvements Plan for the City of Schertz; and WHEREAS, the City Council accepts the Semiannual Reports as fled by the Capital Improvements Advisory Committee in accordance with Texas Local Government Code Chapter 395; then BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS THAT: Section 1. The City Council hereby accepts the Capital Recovery Balance Report with respect to the progress of the Capital Improvements Plan for the City of Schertz, Texas for the periods of October 1, 2019 through March 31, 2020 as shown in the attached Exhibit A and the draft minutes of the May 20, 2020 City of Schertz Capital Improvements Advisory Committee as shown in the attached Exhibit B. Section 2. The recitals contained in the preamble hereof are hereby found to be true, and such recitals are hereby made a part of this Resolution for all purposes and are adopted as a part of the judgment and findings of the City Council. Section 3. All resolutions, or parts thereof, which are in conflict or inconsistent with any provision of this Resolution are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict, and the provisions of this Resolution shall be and remain controlling as to the matters resolved herein. Section 4. This Resolution shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas and the United States of America. Section 5. If any provision of this Resolution or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall be held to be invalid, the remainder of this Resolution and the application of such provision to other persons and circumstances shall nevertheless be valid, and the City Council hereby declares that this Resolution would have been enacted without such invalid provision. Section 6. It is officially found, determined, and declared that the meeting at which this Resolution is adopted was open to the public and public notice of the time, place, and subject matter of the public business to be considered at such meeting, including this Resolution, was given, all as required by Chapter 551, Texas Government Code, as amended. Section 7. This Resolution shall be in force and effect from and after its final passage, and it is so resolved. PASSED AND ADOPTED, this 2nd day of June, 2020. CITY OF SCHERTZ, TEXAS Rat el utier ez, Mayor ATTEST: Brenda Dennis, City Secretary FIGURE I CITY OF SCHERTZ Roadway Impact Fee �-- Service Areas ter' 1 3 2 4 SCCHHE]RZTL -.. FREESE son ;MICHC" COMMUNITY- SERVICE OPPORTUNRY 4, �Y. Est :. �•. `��•. yi '> it _. Q'. � P • g ,+ Y s t R— +o w ef�, A City of ScherM Texas Roadway Impact Fee Study Freese and Nichols, Inc. Page 5 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES May 13, 2020 The Schertz Capital Improvement Advisory Committee convened on May 13, 2020 at 6:00 p.m. at the Municipal Complex, Council Chambers, 1400 Schertz Parkway Building #4, Schertz, Texas. Present: Ernie Evans, Member; Richard Braud, Member; Ricky Haynes, Member; Ken Greenwald, Member; Gordon Rae, Member; Glen Outlaw, Member; Earl Platt, Member; Mark Penshorn, Member Absent: LaDonna Bacon, Member City Brian James, Assistant City Manager; Kathy Woodlee, City Engineer; James Walters, Staff: Finance Director; Emily Delgado, Senior Planner; Nick Koplyay, Planner; Daniel Santee, City Attorney 1. CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING Mr. Outlaw called the CIAC meeting to order at 6:OOP.M. 2. HEARING OF RESIDENTS Residents who choose to watch the meeting via live stream, but who would like to participate in Residents to be Heard, should email their comments to the Planning Division, at planning @schertz.com by 5 :00p.m. on Tuesday, May 12, 2020, so that the Planning Division may read the public comments into the record under the hearing of residents. In the body of the email please include your name, your address, phone number, agenda item number if applicable or subject of discussion, and your comments. This time is set aside for any person who wishes to address the Capital Improvement Advisory Committee. Each person should fill out the Speaker's register prior to the meeting. Presentations should be limited to no more than three (3) minutes. Discussion by the Commission of any item not on the agenda shall be limited to statements of specific factual information given in response to any inquiry, a recitation of existing policy in response to an inquiry, and /or a proposal to place the item on a future agenda. The presiding officer, during the Hearing of Residents portion of the agenda, will call on those persons who have signed up to speak in the order they have registered. There were no residents who spoke. 3. PUBLIC HEARING A. Hold a public hearing, consider and file the semi - annual report evaluating the progress of the city on achieving the capital improvements program and identifying any problems in implementing the plans or administering the capital recovery fees. Mr. Outlaw opened the public hearing at 6:05 P.M. No one spoke during the public hearing. Mr. Outlaw closed the public hearing at 6:06 P.M. There was a brief discussion. Motioned by Member Ken Greenwald to recommend to the City Council approval of the semi - annual report., seconded by Member Gordon Rae Vote: 8 - 0 Passed 4. ADJOURNMENT OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING Mr. Outlaw adjourned the CIAC meeting at 6:08 P.M. CITY OF SCHERTZ CAPITAL RECOVERY IMPACT FEE REPORT OCTOBER 1, 2019 TO MARCH 31, 2020 Oct 1, 2019 to Marc 31, 2020 Estimated Cost of Unfunded Projects Corbett Ground Storage Tank 5,000,000.00 NE Quad Distribution Mains 1,300,000.00 Impact Fee Study Update 250,000.00 Woman Hollering Trunk Line 7,860,000.00 Cibolo West Trunk Line 6,000,000.00 Impact Fee Study Update 250,000.00 Total Unfunded Project Costs Unfunded Projects to Ending Unallocated Impact Fee Balance 2 6,550,000.00 14,110,000.00 20,660,000.00 530,227.76 (6,984,287.19) (6,454,059.43) + Allocated Impact Fee Balances only include Capital Recovery funds and not funds from any other source. It also assumes Capital Recovery Funds are used first when allocated. z Negative Unfunded Projects to Ending Impact Fee Balance to be funded by future revenues or through other sources *** "******** IMPACTS FEES ***** * ******** Water Sewer Total Beginning Allocated Impact Fee Balance + 2,178,369.65 152,267.99 2,330,637.64 Net Change in Allocted Impact Fees 1,385,858.48 1,385,858.48 0.00 Ending Allocated Impact Fee Balance 792,511.17 152,267.99 944,779.16 Beginning Unallocated Impact Fee Balance 6,455,801.57 6,776,838.52 13,232,640.09 Revenues: Impact Fees 564,707.29 279,760.20 844,467.49 Transfer In 0.00 0.00 0.00 Interest Earned 2,610.33 1,536.40 4,146.73 Investments Income 58,108.57 70,835.41 128,943.98 Misc Income 0.00 0.00 0.00 Reimbursement 0.00 0.00 0.00 Expenses: Advertising 0.00 0.00 0.00 Engineering 0.00 0.00 0.00 Legal Svcs 0.00 0.00 0.00 Professional Services 0.00 0.00 0.00 CCMA- NorthCliffe Impact Fees 0.00 0.00 0.00 Auditor /Accounting Services 1,000.00 1,000.00 2,000.00 Investment Mgt Fee - Sewer 0.00 2,257.72 2,257.72 Transferred Out 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Revenue Over /(Under) Expense 624,426.19 348,874.29 973,300.48 Ending Unallocated Impact Fee Balance 7,080,227.76 7,125,712.81 14,205,940.57 Estimated Cost of Unfunded Projects Corbett Ground Storage Tank 5,000,000.00 NE Quad Distribution Mains 1,300,000.00 Impact Fee Study Update 250,000.00 Woman Hollering Trunk Line 7,860,000.00 Cibolo West Trunk Line 6,000,000.00 Impact Fee Study Update 250,000.00 Total Unfunded Project Costs Unfunded Projects to Ending Unallocated Impact Fee Balance 2 6,550,000.00 14,110,000.00 20,660,000.00 530,227.76 (6,984,287.19) (6,454,059.43) + Allocated Impact Fee Balances only include Capital Recovery funds and not funds from any other source. It also assumes Capital Recovery Funds are used first when allocated. z Negative Unfunded Projects to Ending Impact Fee Balance to be funded by future revenues or through other sources C O 0 a d C r C 7 LL O U GJ K 7. Q N U N C d O X W IC 3 C C Q V d O N N M O N O O N VO1 N O O h M O ~ Op O O O M M a OD n O m e-1 e1 h lC N N VT VT N N N N N Vl t0 C N N a 00 p N N M V'N m lL h 00 Ol O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N 0 N N N N N N N 0 N C d O X W IC 3 C C Q V d O N N N V h M O N Op V1 O O M M a OD n e-1 e1 h lC N N O C M M N e+1 h N O OC N Vl t0 C N N a 00 p m oo ao m w �o o o v ao .-� Vl h CO N h a N N CO N V �O/1 m W N M N Vl N +A N V! V! V! V N V) N u V N N N N N N N m m V R Ln Ln l0 w h h 00 00 01 Ol O O N N O N O N O N O N O N O N O c-1 O H O N O N O N O N O N O H O H O N O N O N O N O N C N N N N N N N w N N N N N N N N N N N N N !0 2= f6 IO 2 A 2 tO 2 10 2 N 2 m 2 m 2 N 2 N Z m 2 t0 5 l0 2 f0 2 A 2 fO 2 lO 2 2 2 W C i C T C t C T C C C C C C LL V LL OV LL V LL O LL V _ LL V _ LL V LL O LL u LL V U U r Vn1 V) N V) N to to In N N V d 3 d h w 5 c °o J O C O Yj O L R 2 W r � r y v c O L O d 0 CJ O N O O C O G 7 O Y C Lp0 r � W ` O m LD Cr O @ C ti r N N cl N � x U a c m Ln c Lo L 10 E ]�j O O 00 W O C W C = u v a m a o a - x N n EO o w 7� U - n N W m Lo L L d d Y d Y d W i U U c c O Q r r N N � p0 d p L vl N c i 3 1O y a N L Y Ln C LL �. m E W O V m � Ln w n LD MUM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N 1 -1 1 m 0 9 m n ai n n N a 0 to m0 � a •o c a a K � w � R r c C Q d C a` v LL Oc0 LD C O C V' O d 3 3 LL N d E U I, C LO m ry m La m m V a 'a W N O 4 M On M N N cri LW ul O ei W w Lq V 1!1 N t0 N - w W N� M O w m Vl n n N w m .� YIl w M 't M W a O N N W O n W't m n O w W L6 O c-I n M n 01 M n N m r, N� Ln W H M w V n N LO Ln W IN co C N w M m IN co N N m N m M N N M V O m O ul Oi ui n O W D (1 M N co N Ln R M N M V! 1? VT 4h N N °O °O °O n v° n W N w V m LQ m M N W cn N rV N N m m a V1 Ln t0 w n n W W m m O O ✓� 8 0 0 8 0 o a 0 0 o 0 o o 0 0 o ci 0 c, 0 a 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 0 o o 0 o 0 o 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N a I0 A R A A A A A A A A N R A A R A A A A M x x x x x x S x S x x x x x S x x x S S W - LL o ii u 'u O i� O iL o LL O ii u LL u u O i� u N V1 W V1 N LA N N W ul W V1 N v1 W N W 0 N LA v LL Oc0 LD C O C V' O d 3 3 LL N d E U I, C LO m ry m La m m V a 'a W N O 4 CITY OF SCHERTZ ROADWAY IMPACT FEE REPORT OCTOBER 1, 2019 TO MARCH 31, 2020 Oct 1, 2019 to Marc 31, 2020 "*"""*'"*"*" "' ROADWAY IMPACTS FEES ""'*"**""** Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Total Beginning Allocated Impact Fee Balance 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Net Change in Allocted Impact Fees 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Ending Allocated Impact Fee Balance 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Beginning Unallocated Impact Fee Balance 31,757.94 14,981.09 35,168.60 3,544.70 85,452.33 Revenues: Impact Fees 137,322.10 80,421.56 159,737.37 0.00 377,481.03 Transfer In 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Interest Earned 551.59 287.90 598.30 25.92 1,463.71 Investments Income 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Misc Income 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Reimbursement 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Expenses: Advertising 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Engineering 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Legal Svcs 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Professional Services 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Auditor /Accounting Services 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Transferred Out 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Revenue Over /(Under) Expense 25.92 378,944.74 137,873.69 80,709.46 160,335.67 Ending Unallocated Impact Fee Balance 169,631.63 95,690.55 195,504.27 3,570.62 464,397.07 SCHIERTZ I OCOMMUNITY PPORTUNITY Classification & Compensation Study Executive Summary The City contracted with Management Advisory Group International, Inc. (MAG) to conduct a salary and compensation study for City classifications. MAG's findings and recommendations are based on: • salary survey results; • job information from employees and their supervisors; • a job profile analysis based on input from employees and supervisors; and, • assisting Schertz in options to increase external competitiveness. The goal of this project was to provide the foundation for an appropriate classification and compensation system and pay plan based on current compensation levels for peer and competitor public employers as well as private sector wage information. The objectives of the study were to: 1) conduct job analysis of included City classifications; 2) gather salary and compensation data from similar /competitor organizations; 3) develop a revised classification plan; 4) provide a Benefits Analysis and, 5) develop a revised compensation and pay plan. In response, MAG has developed a proposed pay plan and salary adjustment recommendations for current City employees. Study Methodology The study methodology included: • collection of current City budget, personnel, and organizational background information; • development, distribution, collection, and analysis of Job Profile Questionnaires©; • identification and selection of comparable agencies for the market salary survey; • identification of classification benchmarks; • analysis with recommendations concerning the relative ranking of City positions to develop a classification plan that will ensure internal equity; and • a salary/wage survey and analysis. Job Profile Questionnaires MAG evaluated the included City classifications in order to assign positions to an appropriate pay range. Information about employee jobs was collected through a Job Profile Questionnaire© (JPQ). The questionnaire was available online, through MAG's website, and was made available to all incumbents in included City classifications. MAG collected responses from 297 of the 342 potential respondents for a response rate of 86.8 %. The JPQ asked employees to rank their job in each of the above areas and provide written comments about their tasks in each area. Based on this information, each job class was evaluated by MAG's unique Job Evaluation System. The evaluation from this system resulted in an evaluation of each job and established the relative ranking of positions within the compensation system. Market Salary Survey The Market Salary Survey reflected the variety of duties and responsibilities in which City employees engage. In a collaborative effort with City management, MAG developed a list of target organizations to be surveyed. Upon City approval of the target list, the survey instrument, and the benchmark classifications, MAG conducted the survey and performed the technical analysis and evaluation. COMMUNITY OPPORTUNITY Organizations typically included as targets in a salary survey are those that are: • competing with the City for employees, for either lower level or higher level positions; • geographically situated in such a fashion as to almost automatically be considered a competitor; • structured similarly to the City, or providing similar types of services; • attractive to highly valued City employees for one reason or another; and, • within a reasonable commuting distance. The proposed salary ranges for the pay plan are the result of both job analysis and a market salary survey of target organizations. There were 50 job classes included as benchmarks in the survey, identified in collaboration with and confirmation by the City. Classes were chosen to reflect a cross section of the types, levels and organizational areas within the City. The titles were considered to be representative of the various functional areas within the various work areas /units. The data from the survey was used to assist with the classification of the various jobs within the pay structure. It is important to note, however, that the market study simply serves as an indicator of market trends and, consequently, the internal job analysis is the most critical element in determining pay grade assignment. Proposed Pay Plan and Structure MAG has developed a revised pay plan for all positions included in the study. The proposed pay plan is an open range plan. The City currently uses a grade and step compensation plan. However, the open range approach is less structured and allows for the recognition of variable employee performance. It is also much less costly to implement an open range pay structure. This approach has the benefit of flexibility and does not obligate the employer to increases based only on tenure. Market Position Current Market Position Overall, the survey data indicates that the City generally lags the market about 16% at the midpoint. This is to say that the City currently pays at about the 34th percentile. Proposed Market Position MAG first prepared implementation reports to bring the City to 100% of the market, orthe 50th percentile. However, due to the City's financial constraints, MAG prepared an alternative option to bring the City to 97% of the market, or the 47th percentile. Staff recommends implementation at the 47th percentile. Position & Cost Summary Cost Summary Current Payroll $18,721,085 Proposed Payroll plus FICA $19,957,310 Change in Total Payroll 6.60% Adjustment To Minimum* $427,816 Adjustment to Market ** $808,409 Total Applied Adjustments $1,236,225 SCHIERTZ I COMMUNITY Position Summary # of Positions reviewed: 368 # Adjusted To Minimum: 140 # Adjusted Toward Market: 241 # Not Adjusted : 86 *Adjustment to Minimum — adjustment to salary to bring a person /position up to the new proposed minimum salary range. * *Adjustment to Market — adjustment to salary to maintain an incumbent's depth penetration in their current range. This is an effort to maintain the merit system. Budget Summary FY 19 -20 - $275,000 (YEAR 0) FY 20 -21- $250,000 (YEAR 1) FY 21 -22 - $250,000 (YEAR 2) FY 22 -23 - $250,000 (YEAR 3) FY 23 -24 - $250,000 (YEAR 4) We have a total of $1.275M budgeted over the next five years for implementation of Class & Comp. Implementation Timeframe MAG recommends implementation beginning October 1, 2020. Staff recommends an accelerated implementation beginning July 1, 2020 (budgeted funds available). City staff is working on implementation strategies and options that will facilitate a fair, equitable and "characteristic neutral" approach to transitioning to the new pay plan within the budgetary constraints of the City. MAG's implementation recommendations would accomplish the following: • Bring about internal salary equity for employees; • Greatly simplify the salary plan for internal administration; • Provide a simple, easy to understand plan for employees; • Freeze any salary that exceeds the range maximum; • Simplify future adjustments to the structure to accommodate market changes. Benefit Analysis MAG completed a comparative benefit analysis, and the results are included with the report; though, they did not provide recommendations for changes to benefits. Looking at the City's comprehensive benefit offerings, the City appears to be competitive overall. Based upon a recent news release from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, total benefits account for 37.7% of compensation of local government employees (national average). Finance has confirmed that the City is right about 37.76% (though individual positions may vary due to overtime, certification pay & Worker's Comp). Table 3. Employer Costs for Employee Compensation for state and local government workers by occupational and industry group ec. 2019 Total wages and I Taal berti fda Paid haw Supplaneaal pay Imuranoe Retksmant and Lsp W requkad Ssds$ empenseum "Wigs sa" benefits Cant (5), Pommy _ 0ou (S) - Parcenl Cost (4) Parcem Cast (S) I Paivera Cost (S) I Percent Cost IS) Peraem Coat (S) I'_ Pereert._ C_ ust (S) .., Permni Slats aM lord govemrmYU andwre..... 52.14 100A 32.50 629 10.63 37.7 3.89 7.5 0.51 I 1.0 fi.06 11.7 6.30 12.1 2.66 5.5 Given the City's financial constraints, staff recommends that all budgeted and available funds for Class & Comp implementation be allocated to adjusting wages.