Brushy Creek Municipal Utility District Agenda Board of Directors Meeting Thursday, December 1, 6:00 PM

Transcription

1 Brushy Creek Municipal Utility District Agenda Board of Directors Meeting Thursday, December 1, 6:00 PM A special meeting of the Board of Directors of Brushy Creek Municipal Utility District will be held on Thursday, December 1, 2016 at 6:00 PM, in the District's office, Great Oaks Drive, Round Rock, Texas, to consider, act, and approve expenditures on the following matters: Page 1. CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL, ESTABLISH QUORUM, AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. 2. ANNOUNCEMENTS 3. CITIZEN'S COMMENTS (LIMITED TO 3 MINUTES) 4. DISCUSSION REGARDING ORDER OF CONSIDERATION OF AGENDA ITEMS 5. CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE MATTERS 6. CONSENT AGENDA (ALL OF THE FOLLOWING ITEMS MAY BE ACTED UPON BY ONE MOTION. NO SEPARATE DISCUSSION OR ACTION ON ANY OF THE ITEMS IS NECESSARY UNLESS DESIRED BY A BOARD MEMBER OR THE GENERAL MANAGER.) 6.1. Approve Request to Declare District Property as surplus property and authorizing staff to proceed with sale of such surplus property Request to Declare District Property as Surplus - Pdf 6.2. Approve change order with Beacon Construction for Creekside Pool building project Approve Change Order related to Creekside Pool renovation - Pdf 7. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ITEMS 7.1. Discussion possible action concerning proposals for sewer line filming Discussion possible action concerning proposals for sewer line filming - Pdf 7.2. Discussion and possible action concerning topics of interest in the 2017 Legislative Session 2017 Legislative Session - Pdf 7.3. Discussion and possible action concerning General Manager Performance Review and amendments to the General Manager employment agreement General Manager Performance Review - Pdf 8. REPORTS 8.1. Report concerning LCRA 138-kV Electric Transmission Line Project in Williamson County and related contested case hearing matters Page 1 of 33

2 Report concerning LCRA transmission line - Pdf Dated this 23rd day of November, 2016 Brushy Creek Municipal Utility District Mike Petter, General Manager The Board of Directors may go into Executive Session if necessary, pursuant to the applicable section of Subchapter D, Chapter 551, Texas Government Code, of the Texas Open Meetings Act, on any of the above matters. No final action, decision or vote will be taken on any subject or matter in Executive Session. Please note that this notice supplants the District's previous policy of specifically identifying those agenda items that would be discussed in Executive Session. The District is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to communications will be provided upon request. Please call Margie Anthes at for further information. I, the undersigned authority, do hereby certify that the above Notice of Meeting of the Board of Directors of Brushy Creek Municipal Utility District, is a true and correct copy of said Notice: that a true and correct copy of said notice was posted at a place convenient and readily accessible to the general public at all times, in its administrative office at Great Oaks Drive, that said Notice was posted on November 23, 2016 at,.m., and that a true and correct copy of said Notice was furnished to the County Clerk of Williamson County, the only County in which Brushy Creek Municipal Utility District is located. Margie Anthes, Executive Assistant Page 2 of 33

3 Agenda Item #6.1. Approve Request to Declare District Property as surplus property and authorizing staff to proceed with sale of such surplus property Agenda Date: 01 Dec 2016 Staff Responsible: Mike Petter PURPOSE OF ITEM Approve Request to Declare District Property as surplus property and authorizing staff to proceed with sale of such surplus property RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the identified property be declared as surplus property and sold at auction or other sale and if not sold, disposed of or donated as necessary. If approved, once sold or otherwise disposed of, staff will bring an order back to the Board to approve the disposition of such property. MOTION Motion to approve the Request to Declare District Property Surplus Forms for IT, Community Center, Aquatics, and Programs items. BACKGROUND The attached Request to Declare District Property Surplus forms are submitted to the Board for approval to declare various miscellaneous items from throughout the District as surplus property and allowing Staff to dispose of property accordingly. Staff is requesting that the Board declare these materials as surplus and allow Staff to dispose of the materials by sale or other disposal. FINANCIAL Any funds from the sale of surplus items are put into reserves, generally used for the purchase of related equipment or vehicles. LEGAL Legal has not been consulted for this item. COMMITTEE PARTICIPATION None ATTACHMENTS attach Surplus Items Page 3 of 33

4 Agenda Item #6.1. 1:39..m_ F? Page 4 of 33

5 Agenda Item #6.1. Page 5 of 33

6 5 ~00? _S:.=_n_ 5. U_.;=~ n~ Agenda Item # Page 6 of 33 (IN

7 Agenda Item #6.1. m<<_<m_ 2:8 25: Page 7 of 33

8 3..0OW z.::.n_ E. :55. CE:.n. Agenda Item #6.1. 3:3 J apo unn m.» Page 8 of 33 )(35

9 m<<_<m_ Q5... Agenda Item #6.1.._.m_u_mm Hmxum Page 9 of 33

10 Agenda Item #6.1. Page 10 of 33

11 wmm?9. w:..m..=:_< U_.mum_._mm #9.: 3m _<_mu_m. m_3 mom... zoo:,_ Agenda Item #6.1. Page 11 of 33

12 7:: :.2... :=.< CF.-2. «Q05 Agenda Item #6.1. ~m_ 23. m M<mw zo I_ <8?zo EIZ on o um? El: cm.» Page 12 of 33

13 Agenda Item #6.1. Page 13 of 33

14 L 3 Onmudf 5:2: :5. ::.=v. C? «F. Agenda Item #6.1. m u::q 8 9%: mw Page 14 of 33 ()

15 ni-_um_,_a<<mnm_. 3:333 E\aomm_mcos: Agenda Item #6.1. o::8_:m <<\no3u..m$og:3 <<o_.::m. H+33 n3m_aem voo.m:o<m:o: mi N..ȯzm :63 9; _._o oe Page 15 of 33

16 . T. «G0? 2.5: C_..::. Agenda Item #6.1. am E3. ZIIZ w: _..m m? unn» Page 16 of 33 :l I sq ( /

17 ._._.o<c:_= u_.mmm:_.m <<mm:m_. :9 <<o_._a_: Agenda Item #6.1. Page 17 of 33

18 mzmmm wwqm?oa mmso " Agenda Item #6.1. Page 18 of 33

19 Agenda Item #6.1. Page 19 of 33

20 3 wm::.oo3 u_:_g.n_.mm_aem Agenda Item # um:.03 mrm?saqm.qmm_gem Page 20 of 33 E manx 3.38 m.8m_mmnm1n_.mm_ae

21 Agenda Item #6.2. Approve change order with Beacon Construction for Creekside Pool building project Agenda Date: 01 Dec 2016 Staff Responsible: Mike Petter PURPOSE OF ITEM Approve change order with Beacon Construction RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of change order with Beacon MOTION Approve change order #7 with Beacon for additional improvements to the pool site for a total of $5, BACKGROUND The expansion of the Creekside Pool office building and the renovation of the pool restrooms is part of the Parks Master Plan. The Board previously approved the project concept for funding in the FY2016 Budget. This project was originally bid in December 2015 but staff was not confident the project would be finished by the time the pool opened. The project was re-bid in May and four proposals were received. The plan is to expand the office building to allow for more space and more importantly, provide an office window that looks out onto the pool deck and pool. The current windows are angled so it s not easy to see the pool. The plan does not call for expansion of the restrooms but a refresher of the space. Improvements need to be made to the plumbing and electrical services. The restroom roof would also be expanded to extend over the pool pumps. The pumps are currently covered by a lean-to roof, constructed by staff. The plumbing in the restroom is tied into the plumbing for the pool filters which causes backflows in the wastewater system. The proposal included two options: (1) replace the cracking pool deck and (2) replace the shingled roof with a metal roof. The current change order is related to additional improvements to the pool decking. The original contract included $36,873 to re-surface the deck. After the project started, staff requested that all the depth markers and other deck tiles be replaced. This totaled 38 tiles. After the contractor removed the existing deck coating, significant damage was found to the concrete deck material. this will require the sub-contractor to float material in order to create a smooth surface. FINANCIAL The Change Order is for $5,680 for the tiles and floating. Attached is the total project budget. Page 21 of 33

22 LEGAL Legal has not reviewed the change order. Agenda Item #6.2. COMMITTEE PARTICIPATION Parks Committee supported this project plan ATTACHMENTS CO #7 - depth markers blending Creekside Pool Costs Pool Markers Page 22 of 33

23 Distribution: X CHANGE ORDER l HE.5EcT CONTRACTOR X Project: Creekside Pool Improvements Change order number: Brushy Creek Road Date: 11/21/15 Round Rock, TX _ Architect's project no.: To owner: Contract date: Brushy Creek MUD ;; Great oaks Dr Round Rock, TX Contractors Jobld. "t'a '=. General Construction Agenda Item #6.2. SEER The contract is changed as follows: Add installation of depth markers/no diving tiles to get pool to state code along with all additional blending needed to float areas after removal process was complete = $l, Blending cost : $3, Total amount of CO #7 = $5, The original Contract Sum was... $ 362, Net changes by previously authorized Change Orders... $ 13, The Contract Sum prior to this Change Order was... $ 375, The Contract Sum will be increased by this Change Order in the amount of... $ The new Contract Sum including this Change Order will be... $ 381, The Contract Time will be unchanged by 0 days. The date of Substantial Completion as of the date of this Change Order therefore is unchanged Not valid until signed by the Architect, Contractor and Owner. Architect Contractor Owner BeaconConstructionCompany,Inc. BrushyCreekMUD 1623RiveryBlvd GreatOaksDr Georgetown,TX78628 RoundRock, TX (512) (512) By: By: By: 2V " Date: Date: \ I1-J \ 9 Date: Page 23 of 33

24 Brushy CreekCreekside Pool Renovation Original Construciton Project Cost Approval $ 380,000 Funds Encumbered Funds Expended Remaining Vendor Budget or Contractual Costs Through October, 2016 Through October, 2016 Funds Unspent Construction $ 374,206 $ 374,516 $ 137,184 $ 237,021 Beacon Bid Agreement 362, , ,184 Beacon CO #1 Additional Metal Roofs 6,180 6,180 Beacon CO #2 Extend Deck 5,800 5,800 Beacon CO #3 Remove Floor Drain (3,687) (3,687) Beacon CO #4 Restroom Equipment 1,347 1,347 CO #5 Remove ceiling panels (3,650) (3,650) CO #7 Deck Improvements 5,680 Engineering $ 27,050 $ 27,050 $ 26,035 $ 1,015 Arch Edge Initial Design 27,050 27,050 26,035 Other $ 9,700 $ 2,700 $ 465 $ 9,235 Oncor Replace Transformer 5,000 Wallace Floodplain Application 2,200 2,200 Kanetsky Electrical Inspection 2, Total Project Cost $ 410,956 $ 404,266 $ 163,684 $ 247,271 % of Orignal Projection 108% 106% 43% 65% Project started in Project plans at $140,000. When scope increased and initial bids received, the budget was increased to $340,000 Budget was increased to $380,000 to include expanded deck and metal roofs Agenda Item #6.2. Page 24 of 33

25 Agenda Item #6.2. Page 25 of 33

26 Agenda Item #7.1. Discussion possible action concerning proposals for sewer line filming Agenda Date: 01 Dec 2016 Staff Responsible: Mike Petter PURPOSE OF ITEM Discussion possible action concerning proposals for sewer line filming BACKGROUND This item has been tabled to December 8, 2016 Page 26 of 33

27 Agenda Item #7.2. Discussion and possible action concerning topics of interest in the 2017 Legislative Session Agenda Date: 01 Dec 2016 Staff Responsible: Mike Petter PURPOSE OF ITEM 2017 Legislative Session RECOMMENDATION Staff is seeking feedback from the Board MOTION Staff will implement the direction of the Board BACKGROUND In January 2017, the Texas legislature will meet for the 85th session to discuss new or revised laws. Staff placed this item on the agenda to determine if the Board has any interest in reaching out to the local representatives for any issues of interest to the District and its residents. FINANCIAL There is no financial impact LEGAL Legal has not reviewed this summary. COMMITTEE PARTICIPATION None ATTACHMENTS None. Page 27 of 33

28 Agenda Item #7.3. Discussion and possible action concerning General Manager Performance Review and amendments to the General Manager employment agreement Agenda Date: 01 Dec 2016 Staff Responsible: Mike Petter PURPOSE OF ITEM Discussion and possible action concerning General Manager Performance Review RECOMMENDATION Staff will implement the decision of the Board. MOTION Motion to approve performance review of General Manager for Fiscal Year BACKGROUND This item has been placed on the agenda at the request of the Board regarding the performance review of the General Manager for the fiscal year ended FINANCIAL None. LEGAL Not consulted. COMMITTEE PARTICIPATION None. ATTACHMENTS None. attach Performance Mgmnt Cycle Review GM Page 28 of 33

29 Performance Management Cycle Overview May July April August November November Page 29 of 33 Board Goals Prior to the end of the third quarter of the fiscal year, the Board will adopt its goals for the upcoming fiscal year. These goals serve as the basis for establishing the fiscal year budget and for developing the General Manager s goals, as well as departmental, team and individual goals for the entire organization. GM Goals After adopting its goals, the Board meets with the GM to establish the GM s specific goals for the upcoming fiscal year. Mid-Year Review At the conclusion of the second quarter of the fiscal year, the GM will submit a self evaluation to the Board using the Performance Review Form and a status update based upon the Development Plan activities that have been completed to date. The Board will conduct a formal mid-year review meeting with the GM and make any necessary modifications to the Performance Review Form including the addition or deletion of GM goals. The Board will vote to authorize the Board president to sign the mid-year Performance Review Form and updated Development Plan. 360 Feedback At the conclusion of the third quarter of the fiscal year and at the GM s discretion, feedback may be solicited from the GM s direct reports on the GM s performance as it relates to assisting them in achieving their individual and departmental goals for the fiscal year. The 360 feedback process, if requested by the GM, shall be facilitated by an outside, third party. The results of the 360 feedback shall be compiled and delivered to the GM and the GM shall determine whether to share the feedback with the Board. The primary purpose of the 360 feedback is to assist the GM in completing the annual self evaluation and determining areas for development to be included in the Development Plan. Annual Review During October the GM shall submit to the Board a self evaluation of performance for the year using the Performance Review Form. The GM shall complete the form including a rating for each Primary Job Duty, Goal and bonusable Goal. Each Board member will review the GM s self evaluation and will complete an individual Performance Review Form including a rating for each Primary Job Duty, Goal and bonusable Goal. The Board may choose to have the District s human resources staff compile the Board s individual evaluations or choose an outside, third party to compile them. Regardless of how the individual Board member evaluations are compiled, the compiled results will be reviewed with the Board in a facilitated meeting during which the Board will prepare a single, collective Performance Review Form for the GM. Once the collective Performance Review Form is completed, the Board may either select one or more representatives from the Board to meet with the GM to present the evaluation or the entire Board may present the evaluation. After the evaluation is presented to the GM, the Board will vote to authorize the Board president to sign the evaluation and the Board will vote on whether to authorize any salary adjustment or one-time bonus based upon the GM s performance for the year. Following the Annual Review, a new Performance Review Form for the upcoming fiscal year review cycle is filled in with the Key Responsibilities including the GM s goals as established during the annual budget process. All bonusable goals are also documented on the Performance Review Form at this time. Development Plan Based upon the GM s annual self evaluation, and 360 feedback, the GM shall prepare and submit a draft Development Plan to the Board at the time of submittal of the annual self evaluation. The Board will review the draft Development Plan and make any necessary revisions and approve a final Development Plan and review it with the GM at the time the annual evaluation is presented to the GM. Agenda Item #7.3.

30 Agenda Item #8.1. Report concerning LCRA 138-kV Electric Transmission Line Project in Williamson County and related contested case hearing matters Agenda Date: 01 Dec 2016 Staff Responsible: Mike Petter PURPOSE OF ITEM Report concerning LCRA 138-kV Electric Transmission Line Project RECOMMENDATION Staff is presenting an update MOTION This is being presented as an update. BACKGROUND In the fall of 2015, the District received notice that the LCRA was considering multiple routes for new transmission lines that would run from their substation in Round Rock to new sub stations in Leander and Cedar Park. The LCRA held several town hall type meetings and provided an online survey for residents in the area to complete. The District provided information on the open house and survey to residents via the website and s. Several of the routes either pass through or along the District boundaries. Attached is a FAQ document produced by LCRA. On January 14th, representatives from the LCRA presented the project to the Board of Directors. The Board indicated an interest in providing feedback to the LCRA on the location of the Williamson County Transmission line routes. The District signed up as an intervenor for the hearing related to the selection of routes for the transmission line along with several hundred individuals, companies, communities, and groups. On July 7th, the State Office of Administrative Hearings held a preliminary hearing to discuss the process and timeline. The process is very similar to a legal case. Intervenors, or their legal representatives will testify before the SOAH administrative law judges and must be available to be questioned by LCRA, PUC, and the judges. The process requires the intervenor to be available during the course of the hearing which could be very long. Nearly every community was represented by a lawyer at the pre-hearing. Page 30 of 33

31 District staff testified at the November 16th hearing. At that hearing, it was apparent that the cities of Cedar Park, Leander, and Round Rock believed that the Y2 route on 1431 was a viable route. This route runs on the north side of The attached memo from Gardere addresses the remaining schedule. FINANCIAL The Board approved funding of up to $25,000 for the Gardere law firm to represent the District's interest in this case. LEGAL Gardere provided the attached memo on the status of the process COMMITTEE PARTICIPATION The Parks Committee has shown an interest in the project and updates have been provided to them, ATTACHMENTS Agenda Item #8.1. Gardere memo Page 31 of 33

32 Agenda Item #8.1. Andres Medrano A U S T I N D A L L A S D E N V E R H O U S T O N M E X I C O C I T Y The hearing on the merits in PUC Docket No was conducted from Nov The hearing was attended by approximately twenty attorneys representing several hundred individual intervenors and a number of pro se landowner intervenors as well. With the exception of Friday, November 18, the hearing went long every day. All parties were afforded the opportunity to cross examine the witnesses for LCRA TSC and the intervenor witnesses designated by one or more parties for cross examination. Much of the focus of the hearing was on the northwestern side of the study area for the proposed transmission line. Specifically, a number of parties advocate paralleling the line along County Road 175 north of 1431 and another group of parties advocate paralleling Ronald Reagan boulevard instead. This distinction does not directly impact Brushy Creek MUD, though routes utilizing Ronald Reagan are somewhat more likely to utilize 1431 going east due to the location of the terminus of those segments. The segments of most interest to Brushy Creek MUD N3 (which parallels the trail and crosses Brushy Creek s park area), O3 (paralleling Sam Bass Road south of 1431), and Y2 (paralleling 1431 east of CR 175) all received some attention. No party is advocating use of N3 and no route under serious consideration at the hearing utilizes O3. I cross examined LCRA TSC s engineering witness on the impacts O3 would have on the neighborhoods adjoining Sam Bass road and she was forthright that the structures for the line would be beyond the shoulder of the road and in the yards of many residents which would require significant clear-cutting of trees in the area. The SOAH ALJs (State Office of Administrative Hearings Administrative Law Judges) were attentive to this testimony. A number of other parties including Williamson County and the Cities of Cedar Park and Round Rock also strongly oppose routes using segments N3 and O3. Segment Y2 received more attention as it is part of LCRA TSC s best meets needs Route 31 and the alternate routes that got the most attention at the hearing LHO-1 (advocated by the CR 175 landowners as well as Commission Staff) and COL-1, which is a slightly modified version of Route 31. Evidence was emphasized in the hearing that 1431 is a larger road than Sam Bass or CR 175 and that it is more like Ronald Reagan Boulevard than the other options. Brushy Creek MUD expressed its opposition to Y2 through direct testimony and cross examination. Page 32 of 33

33 Agenda Item #8.1. Initial Briefs are due on December 19, Reply Briefs are due January 17, I will circulate a draft brief not later than December 9 so that Brushy Creek MUD has time to review thoroughly. Consistent with our position at hearing, Brushy Creek MUD will not advocate a route but will advocate avoidance of N3, O3, Y2, and the other smaller links that impact its properties and interests. The route advocated by Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) (Route 29) avoids the three segments as does Route 25 which was advocated as an alternative by Williamson County. The ALJs did seem to focus primarily on the choice between LOH-1 and COL-1, however, both of which utilize Link Y2. The ALJ s proposal for decision in the case will be expected approximately 60 days after Reply Briefs are filed (mid-march) and the PUC is expected to take up the case at an Open Meeting in April. We will mostly likely want to plan for a representative of Brushy Creek MUD to attend the Open Meeting and speak directly to the Commissioners as to the MUD s interests. In my experience, this late phase of the proceeding is equally or even more important than the hearing and briefing phases. Page 33 of 33