FY 2016-2017 C OMMUNITY I MPROVEMENT P ROGRAM T ASK F ORCE J ANUARY - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

FY 2016-2017 COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM TASK FORCE

JANUARY 23, 2017

NAOMI NARVAIZ, COMMITTEE CHAIR ARTHUR TAYLOR, COMMITTEE CO-CHAIR

Topics of Discussion

 History of Facility Needs Timeline  Update on the Community Improvement Program Task Force

(CIPTF) Meetings and Analysis

 Update on Specific Facility Issues  CIPTF Recommendation to City Council  Seek Direction from City Council on how to proceed

Community Improvement Program Task Force



City Council identified facilities needs in December 2013 and began a series of facility needs assessments



Further discussion was had by City Council during a Facilities workshop in November 2014



During City Council Visioning in May 2015, facilities were listed as Council’s #1 goal



Facilities Need Assessment Study was presented to City Council in May 2016



Consultants provided data on existing and future space needs



Report noted that existing City facilities, not including fire and police facilities, were undersized for the current staffing level by 21,000 square feet



Community Improvement Program Task Force was appointed by City Council in October 2016 following a thorough and extensive facility needs analysis process

Background

 Committee is composed of 30 citizens from various

neighborhoods, professions, city involvement, and background

 26 voting members  4 ex-officio, non-voting members  Geographically and demographically representative of San Marcos

 Committee met nine times beginning on October 20, 2016

through January 5, 2017

 Reviewed potential projects  Reviewed needs and cost of projects  Toured facilities  Educated on City’s finances, bond issuance process, and possible

effect on the City’s tax rate

Initial Potential Projects List

Project Name Capital Costs Ongoing Operating Costs Projected Project Years

Police Facility Renovations $ 5M Possible savings 2017 Public/Community Services Facility Total Cost-$18M , GF portion-$6M TBD-minimal 2017-2018 City Hall Reconstruction Or City Hall Annex Total Cost-$30M, GF portion-$15M Total Cost-$16M, GF portion-$8M Possible savings 2018-2019 Fire Department #2 Relocation from Holland $4.75M TBD-minimal 2018 Fire Training Field $ 2M $50,000 annually 2018 Fire Department Station #8 New Highpointe Trace Subdivision $ 4.5M

Partially funded by developer

$1.4M annually 2021-2022 Fire Department Station #11 New HWY 80 &21 $ 7.1M $1.4M annually TBD Library Expansion $14.5M $500,000 annually 2019-2020 River Ridge Extension to Post Road Total Cost-$10.5M, GF portion-$9.5M None 2020-2022 Victory Gardens Neighborhood Improvement Phase II Total Cost-$10.8M, GF portion-$3.4M None 2020-2022

Projects Selected by Task Force for Analysis

Project Estimated Total Project Cost Current Estimated General Fund Cost Estimated Annual Operating Expense

Police Facility Renovation $ 5.5M $ 5.5M Public/Community Services Facility $18.0M $ 6.0M City Hall Reconstruction $30.0M $15.0M Fire Station #2 $ 5.2M $ 5.2M Fire Training Field $ 2.0M $ 2.0M $50,000 Fire Station #8 $ 4.5M $ 4.5M $1.4M Library $14.5M $14.5M $500,000

Facility Issues Identified

Police Department



Built as a manufacturing facility in 1973



City bought building in 1992



Currently offices 152 total employees



Renovations proposed include:



Addition of SWAT storage facility separate from main building



911 Dispatch Center remodel



Perimeter security fencing



New public access point to increase security

Facility Issues Identified

Police Department



Renovations proposed include:



Parking lot improvements including drainage improvements and expansion of current lot



HVAC replacement



Additional office and meeting rooms including a larger briefing room and consolidation of functional areas



SWAT vehicles with ballistic resistant glass should not be stored in sunlight

Facility Issues Identified

Fire Station #2



Originally built in 1954



A consulting firm in 2009 graded the facility as one of the worst facilities they had ever reviewed



Structurally unable to accommodate a normal sized engine



Engine must be special ordered as a low profile vehicle



Engine must have a full water tank to park in station due to clearance limitations



70% of Station #2’s service area falls within Station #1’s service area which creates a low call volume for this station

Facility Issues Identified

Fire Station #2



No buffer area between the bay and living areas creating health concerns for firefighters



ISO consultant recommends that the

• ptimal location would be in the

vicinity at Wonder World Dr. and Ranch Road 12 creating better access to existing parts of the City

Facility Issues Identified

Fire Station #8



Two additional stations have been recommended on the East side of IH35 for many years



Council negotiated an agreement with the Highpointe/Trace development to fund $2.5M of the cost of a new fire station which includes $500,000 in land



City is required to build the new station within 4 years of the first certificate of

• ccupancy which is expected to be

issued by the end of 2017



Station costs include the purchase of an apparatus



Cost also includes annual operating expenses of $1.4M

Facility Issues Identified

Fire Training Field



City currently does not have a designated training facility



City Council designated land at the San Marcos Regional Airport for such a facility



Firefighters currently do not receive live fire training and use city streets and parking lots to simulate firefighting activities



Limited daily staffing resources prohibits crews from leaving the city to utilize regional training facilities

Facility Issues Identified

Fire Training Field



Approximate cost for all firefighters to attend an 8 hour training session at a regional facility is $40,000



Training field may include:



Residential/high rise live fire training



Rope & trench rescue



Propane props



Vehicle extrication/fire training



Confined space rescue



Apparatus Driver/Operator Course



Fire prevention & education programs



Fire, Police, & EMS integrated response

Facility Issues Identified

City Hall Reconstruction



Current City Hall built in 1975



Building has significant structural issues



Facilities have been remodeled numerous times to accommodate changing needs and staffing levels



Annual maintenance cost is high due to age and deferred maintenance of facilities



Lacking adequate meeting and training space



Lacks adequate parking spaces

Facility Issues Identified

City Hall Reconstruction



City Council chambers only accommodates 38 seats



Unable to provide working space for new staff which limits the amount of staff that can be added



Limited privacy in the HR offices when dealing with personnel issues



Lack of building security to protect citizens and staff. Unable to limit public access to many areas of the building



Efficiencies limited by having staff located in multiple building across the City

Facility Issues Identified

Public/Community Services Facility



Public Services building built in 1985 and SMEU building built in 1976



Facilities have been remodeled numerous times to accommodate changing needs and staffing levels



Annual maintenance cost is high due to age and deferred maintenance of facilities



Lacking adequate meeting/debrief and training space



Lacks adequate parking spaces



Inadequate covered/climate controlled storage for equipment and inventories

Facility Issues Identified

Public/Community Services Facility



Fleet maintenance area cannot accommodate large equipment and fire trucks for repair



Unable to provide working space for new staff which limits the amount of staff that can be added



Lack of building security to protect citizens and staff. Unable to limit public access to many areas of the building



Efficiencies limited by having staff located in multiple building across the City



Crowded equipment/fleet yards provides greater potential for damage to equipment

Facility Issues Identified

Library Expansion



Library building built in 1994



Built to hold 150,000 items but currently houses 163,500 items. Must discard items to add to the collection



By State guidelines, the library is undersized for the current use



Carpet and furniture is original to the building



Maintenance issues include restrooms, water leaks, peeling wallpaper and the need for new paint



Lack designated area for large programs, they must be held in the main part of the library

Facility Issues Identified

Library Expansion



Learning Center is heavily used and

• ften has multiple classes held

simultaneously



Lack an area to devote to teen programs and activities



Meeting rooms are heavily used and not sufficient to accommodate library programs or requests from other community, non-profit organizations



The San Marcos/Hays County Local History collection has used all available secure space and cannot accommodate additions to the collection



Lack of Security identified

Cost of Debt Service for Projects

Project Estimated Total Project Cost Current Estimated General Fund Cost Annual General Fund Debt Service

Police Facility Renovation $ 5.5M $ 5.5M $412,500 Public/Community Services Facility $18.0M $ 6.0M $450,000 City Hall Reconstruction $30.0M $15.0M $1,125,000 Fire Station #2 $ 5.2M $ 5.2M $393,750 Fire Training Field $ 2.0M $ 2.0M $150,000 Fire Station #8 $ 4.5M $ 4.5M $337,500 Library $14.5M $14.5M $1,087,500

Tax Rate Effect-Full Rate vs Use of Capacity

 Full rate-tax rate increase fully supports the costs of the proposed

projects

 Use of Capacity-cost of the debt service and operational cost of the

project is funded through the current tax rate and does not result in a taxes increase. Revenue shifted from operations to debt service

Project Debt Service- Cents on the Tax Rate FY2018 Operations- Cents on the Tax Rate FY2018 Full Tax Rate Impact Public/Community Services Facility 1.02 1.02 City Hall Reconstruction 2.55 2.55 Police Facility Renovation 0.94 0.94 Fire Station #2 0.90 0.90 Fire Training Field 0.34 0.11 0.45 Fire Station #8 0.77 3.18 3.95 Library 2.47 1.14 3.61

City Hall and Public/Community Service Facility Recommendation



Public/Community Services Facility



Facility would be relocated to a new site outside of downtown



Facility would be funded via existing GF bonding capacity along with funding from the Electric and Water Utilities



Facility would not be part of the May 6, 2017 Bond Election



Existing facility needs are too desperate to risk the failure of a bond election



New City Hall Facility



Facility would be relocated within the existing City Hall site



Facility would be funded via existing GF bonding capacity along with funding from the Electric and Water Utilities



Facility would not be part of the May 6, 2017 Bond Election



Existing facility needs are too desperate to risk the failure of a bond election

Bond Election Recommendation

 Propose Two Bond Propositions for

May 6, 2017 Election



One with Public Safety Projects with a tax rate impact of 5.30 cents



One with Library Expansion with a tax rate impact of 3.07 cents

 City Hall Reconstruction and

Public/Community Services Facility

 Pay debt service with existing general

fund capacity

 Public Safety Projects and Library  15% of debt service and operating

expenses will come from existing general fund capacity

Project Tax Rate Impact (cents) Proposal Public/Community Services Facility Pay debt service with existing capacity Not Included In Bond Election City Hall Reconstruction Pay debt service with existing capacity Not included in Bond Election Police Facility Renovation 0.80 Proposition #1 Fire Station #2 0.77 Proposition #1 Fire Training Field 0.38 Proposition #1 Fire Station #8 3.35 Proposition #1 Library 3.07 Proposition #2

Additional Recommendations

 Property from Fire Station #2 be restricted to public use or

single family development

 If City Council decides not to place the Library expansion on

the 2017 ballet, that they place the project on a ballot within 3 years or fund the project through existing capacity

Direction needed from City Council

 Does City Council desire to call an election?

 Election ordinance would be brought back to City Council on

February 7, 2017



Historically, the City has adopted election ordinances on emergency



If not adopted on emergency, second reading would be at the February 17th Packet Meeting

 Take Committee recommendation as is, or propose a different

scenario?