City of Canyon Commission Meetings

AGENDA NOTICE OF MEETING Notice is hereby given that the governing body of the City of Canyon will meet at 5:30 p.m. on the 15th day of December, 2014, in the Commission Chambers of City Hall at 301 16th Street in the City of Canyon to discuss the following agenda items: 1. Call to Order. 2. Invocation. 3. Pledge of Allegiance. 4. Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of November 17, 2014. 5. Public Forum – Comments from Interested Citizens. 6. Conduct Public Hearing, and Consider and Take Appropriate Action on Abatement of Substandard Structures at 1410 9th Ave in Accordance with City Ordinance No. 675, Section 150.55 of the Code of Ordinances. 7. Conduct Public Hearing, and Consider and Take Appropriate Action on Abatement of Substandard Structures at 1615 4th Ave in Accordance with City Ordinance No. 675, Section 150.55 of the Code of Ordinances. 8. Consider and Take Appropriate Action on a Livestock Permit Renewal Request by Alberta Evans at 510 US Highway 60. 9. Conduct Public Hearing and Consider and Take Appropriate Action on a Request to Rezone Lots 69 through 76, Block 9 of Canyon East Unit No. 3 to PD (Planned Development District) from SF-S (Single-Family Suburban Residential District). 10. Conduct a Public Hearing, and Consider and Take Appropriate Action on a Plat of Canyon East Unit No. 4, a Re-plat of a Portion of Canyon East Unit No. 3. 11. Consider and Take Appropriate Action on Ordinance No. 1018, Amending Table N1102.1.1 of the 2012 IRC and Table R402.1.1 of the 2012 IECC. 12. Consider and Take Appropriate Action on Selection of Consultant for a Family Aquatic Facility Feasibility Study. 13. Consider and Take Appropriate Action on City of Canyon’s Investment Policy 14. Consider and Take Appropriate Action on Selection of Auditor for FY 2014. 15. Executive Session Pursuant to Texas Government Code §551.072 Real Property, §551.071 for Consultation with Attorney, §551.087 Economic Development Negotiations, and §551.074 Personnel: Appointments to Boards and Commissions (Planning and Zoning Commission, Zoning Board of Adjustment, Board of City Development, Canyon Area Library Board, Main Street Advisory Board, Canyon Housing Authority Board, Construction and Advisory Appeals Board, and Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Advisory Committee). 16. Consider and Take Appropriate Action on Items Discussed in Executive Session. 17. Adjournment. Randy Criswell, City Manager City of Canyon I certify that the above Notice of Meeting was posted on the bulletin board of the Civic Complex of the City of Canyon, Texas on the 12th day of December, 2014. Gretchen Mercer, City Clerk City of Canyon City Commission Meeting November 17, 2014 The City Commission of the City of Canyon met in regular session at 5:30 p.m. in the City Commission Chambers of the Civic Complex. Commissioner Gary Hinders presided over the meeting with the following Commissioners in attendance: Justin Richardson and David Logan. Mayor Alexander and Mayor Pro-Tem Jed Welch were unable to attend. Also present were the following City Staff: City Manager Randy Criswell, Assistant City Manager Chris Sharp, City Secretary Gretchen Mercer, Assistant City Manager for Special Projects Jon Behrens, Code Enforcement Director Danny Cornelius, Palo Duro Creek Golf Course General Manager John Haun, Palo Duro Creek Golf Course Director Casey Renner, Public Works Director Dan Reese, Police Chief Dale Davis, Fire Chief Mike Webb, Parks and Recreation Director Brian Noel, and City Attorney Chuck Hester. Item 1. Call to Order. Commissioner Hinders called the meeting to order at 5:36 p.m. Item 2. Invocation. Commissioner Richardson gave the invocation. Item 3. Pledge of Allegiance. Gabrielle Sexton led the Pledge of Allegiance. Mr. Sexton is a student from Reeves-Hinger Elementary School and good citizen. Item 4. Approval of Minutes of the Meeting of November 3, 2014. Commissioner Logan moved, duly seconded by Commissioner Richardson, to approve the minutes of November 3, 2014. Motion carried unanimously. Item 5. Public Forum – Comments from Interested Citizens. No comments were made. Item 6. Update from City Staff (Regarding Sewer Study). City Manager Randy Criswell informed the Commissioners that the requested information on the expansion of the sewer system and water needs for Canyon was being prepared. Mr. Criswell stated Public Works Director Dan Reese and himself had met with City Engineer Dwight Brandt and that Mr. Brandt was making progress on the report, but needed some more time to gather the information. Item 7. Consider and Take Appropriate Action on Request from Jim Christopher to Rename Southeast Park after Ex-Commissioner/Mayor/County Commissioner Paul Lindsey. Jim Christopher approached the Commission in regard to a request he had submitted to rename Southeast Park after long time citizen Paul Lindsey. Mr. Christopher stated Mr. Lindsey had City Commission Meeting November 17, 2014 Page 2 of 5 dedicated more than 65 years of his life to the betterment of Canyon as a Board Member, Commissioner both for the City of Canyon and Randall County, as Mayor of Canyon, and many other boards and Committees. Mr. Christopher said Southeast Park was Mr. Lindsey’s vision and was instrumental in the purchase of the property where the park sits today. Commissioner Richardson asked about the history of naming properties around Canyon after citizens. City Manager Randy Criswell gave the history of the Lois Rice Pavilion, named after former Mayor Lois Rice who served 16 years as Mayor of Canyon. Mr. Criswell said land was purchased for an RV Park and Lois was passionate about that RV Park. When the opportunity presented itself to sell that property for a hefty profit for development, Lois reluctantly agreed to the sale for the betterment of Canyon. Mr. Criswell said when the pavilion was built at Conner Park, it was agreed by the City Commission to name it after Lois since the money from the sale of the RV Park, approximately $400,000 was used to help fund the project. Mr. Criswell said the Kent Johnson Memorial Baseball Complex was named after a former Parks Department employee of the City of Canyon that was passionate about baseball. Mr. Johnson had dedicated himself to Canyon having the best baseball fields within 300 miles, and he accomplished this. Mr. Criswell stated with the sudden passing of Mr. Johnson, the Commission and staff felt it was appropriate to name the complex after Kent Johnson. Mr. Criswell said Hunsley Park’s naming wasn’t really traceable in our records, but was probably named after the developer of the subdivision. Commissioner Logan said he thought that the Hunsley Park property was originally intended as a school site, but never used, so it became a park. Mr. Criswell said Conner Park was named after the founder of Canyon, L.G. Conner. According to history, Mr. Conner donated a lot of land including the land Conner Park is on. Mr. Criswell said there is a plaque set in concrete in front of the clock tower at the Canyon Area Library in honor of Ex-Mayor Phil Langen at the request of his family. After discussion, Commissioner Logan moved, duly seconded by Commissioner Hinders to rename Southeast Park to Paul Lindsey Park. Commissioner Richardson stated renaming a park after someone was a big decision, and requested to table the issue so the Mayor and Mayor Pro- Tem could be active on the decision. Commissioner Hinders acted on the motion on the table with a vote. Motion carried 2-1 with Commissioner Richardson voting nay. James Lindsey, the son of Paul Lindsey expressed appreciation of bestowing the honor on his late father, Paul Lindsey. Item 8. Consider and Take Appropriate Action on Abatement of Substandard Structure at 1410 9th Ave in Accordance with City Ordinance No. 675, Section 150.55 of the Code of Ordinances. Code Enforcement Director Danny Cornelius presented a request to schedule required public hearings for the abatement of substandard structures at 1410 9th Ave. Mr. Cornelius stated he had received numerous complaints about kids getting into the house and breaking out windows. City Commission Meeting November 17, 2014 Page 3 of 5 Mr. Cornelius said the roof deck, ceiling, and second floor all were sagging, and the house as a whole was structurally unsound and unsafe. Commissioner Hinders confirmed that no one was currently living in the home. After discussion, Commissioner Logan moved, duly seconded by Commissioner Hinders to schedule the required public hearings for the abatement of all substandard structures located on the property at 1410 9th Ave. Motion carried unanimously. Item 9. Consider and Take Appropriate Abatement of Substandard Structure at 1615 4th Ave in Accordance with City Ordinance No. 675, Section 150.55 of the Code of Ordinances. Code Enforcement Director Danny Cornelius presented a request to schedule public hearings for the abatement of substandard structures on property located at 1615 4th Ave. Mr. Cornelius said the windows are broken, doors are in poor condition and the garage door in the back doesn’t stay shut, allowing moisture to get inside causing more structural problems. Mr. Cornelius stated the building is full of lumber and junk, all creating a danger to the health and safety of the general public. After discussion, Commissioner Logan moved, duly seconded by Commissioner Richardson to schedule the required public hearings for the abatement of all substandard structures located on the property at 1615 4th Ave. Motion carried unanimously. Item 10. Consider and Take Appropriate Action on Resolution No. 22-2014 Canvassing the Returns and Declaring the Results of a Local Option Election Held on November 4, 2014. City Manager Randy Criswell presented Resolution No. 22-2014 for consideration. Mr. Criswell said Resolution No. 22-2014 simply verifies the results and that the election was held in accordance with the law. After discussion, Commissioner Richardson moved, duly seconded by Commissioner Logan to adopt Resolution No. 22-2014 as presented. Motion carried unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 22-2014 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CANYON, TEXAS CANVASSING THE RETURNS AND DECLARING THE RESULTS OF A LOCAL OPTION ELECTION HELD NOVEMBER 4, 2014 FOR THE PURPOSE OF SUBMITTING LOCAL OPTION 1, VOTING FOR OR AGAINST THE LEGAL SALE OF BEER AND WINE FOR OFF-PREMISE CONSUMPTION ONLY, AND LOCAL OPTION 2, VOTING FOR OR AGAINST THE LEGAL SALE OF MIXED BEVERAGES IN RESTAURANTS BY FOOD AND BEVERAGE CERTIFICATE HOLDERS ONLY, WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF CANYON, TEXAS, RANDALL COUNTY. City Commission Meeting November 17, 2014 Page 4 of 5 Item 11. Consider and Take Appropriate Action on Randall County Fire Contract. City Manager Randy Criswell presented an updated Agreement between the County and the City for fire protection services. He stated the current contract for fire services with Randall County had not been updated since 1975, and there have been dramatic changes in the County since then. Mr. Criswell said the contract had been reviewed by staff and City Attorney Chuck Hester. After discussion, Commissioner Richardson moved, duly seconded by Commissioner Logan to approve the contract as presented. Motion carried unanimously. Item 12. Consider and Take Appropriate Action on Bids Received for Golf Cars for Palo Duro Creek Golf Course. PDC Golf Pro Casey Renner presented bids for a new golf car fleet. He stated this was a State Contract bid from E-Z-Go, and that he had made several attempts to get a bid from Club Car, but they never submitted a formal bid. The informal bid they submitted was higher than the E-Z-Go bid. Mr. Renner said we really need to get this order placed before the end of the year, to take advantage of the trade-in being a 2014 trade value. He also stated that over the four years we’ve owned the current cars, we’ve been putting money back to help pay for the new fleet. That total is in the neighborhood of $150,000. He also asked for permission to purchase a new Range Cart for $8,900 and a new 3 Gang Picker for $2,195. After discussion Commissioner Logan moved, duly seconded by Commissioner Richardson, to approve the purchase of 72 new E-Z-Go golf cars for $184,899.52, a new Range Cart for $8,900, and a new 3 Gang Picker for $2,195. Motion carried unanimously. Item 13. Consider and Take Appropriate Action on Ordinance No. 1014, Adopting an Updated Water Conservation Plan. Director of Public Works Dan Reese presented the recently updated Water Conservation Plan. He stated that the previously established conservation goals had not been met, so the goals in this plan had been raised, with regard to water usage per person per day. He stated he felt it was more realistic this way. City Manager Criswell stated that we are going the wrong way with this plan. If we’re having to raise our daily water usage goals, we aren’t doing it right. The drought has been a problem, but he stated he felt that we need to be looking at getting more serious about conservation. Commissioner Logan pointed out that we’ve done about everything in the plan except “#6, Landscape water management and control”, so he would suggest that we begin to focus our efforts in that area. There was discussion about irrigation rules, use of “gray” water, water rates, and several other things. Staff was directed to begin studying and investigating methods that can be used to success with regard to landscape water use for discussion at a later date. After discussion, Commissioner Logan moved, duly seconded by Commissioner Richardson to adopt Ordinance No. 1014 as presented. Motion carried unanimously City Commission Meeting November 17, 2014 Page 5 of 5 ORDINANCE NO. 1014 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CANYON, TEXAS, ADOPTING A WATER CONSERVATION PLAN; ESTABLISHING GOALS FOR THE REDUCTION OF WATER CONSUMPTION; REDUCING THE LOSS AND WASTE OF WATER; IMPROVING EFFICIENCY IN THE USE OF WATER; AND EXTENDING THE LIFE OF CURRENT WATER SUPPLIES; IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE TEXAS WATER CODE AND THE TCEQ AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Item 14. Executive Session Pursuant to Texas Government Code §551.072 Real Property. Commissioner Hinders indicated the Commission would adjourn into executive session at 7:08pm. Item 15. Consider and Take Appropriate Action on Items Discussed in Executive Session. Upon returning from executive session at 7:50 p.m., no action was taken. Item 16. Consider and Take Appropriate Action on Meeting Dates for December 2014 and January 2015. After discussion, it was decided that there would be one meeting in December, on December 15, and one in January on January 5. Item 17. Adjournment There being no further business, Commissioner Logan moved this meeting be adjourned. ______________________________ Gary Hinders, Commissioner Place 4 ATTEST: ________________________________ Gretchen Mercer, City Secretary  AGENDA To: Mayor and City Commission From: Danny Cornelius, Director of Code Enforcement Date: December 4, 2014 Re: Conduct Public Hearing and Take Appropriate Action on Abatement of Substandard Structures at 1410 9th Ave in Accordance with City Ordinance No. 675, Section 150.55 of the Code of Ordinances. The City Commission voted to hold this public hearing at the November 17, 2014 meeting to consider abatement of the following substandard structures. Property: Lot: East 130 feet of north 140 feet of block; Block: 28 Addition: Victoria Addition Address: 1410 9th Ave Owners: Deutsche Bank National Trust Company Description: The house and accessory buildings are dilapidated and unsafe. According to Section 150.55 of the Code of Ordinances, Abatement of Substandard Structures, if the owner fails to repair, rehabilitate, demolish, or remove the buildings, the City Commission may order such work to be done. The decision shall be made at a public hearing. Notification of the hearing has been made by certified mail to the owners of record and has been published in the Canyon News. I will present photographs of the buildings recommended for abatement. If the Commission agrees with my assessment, I recommend the lot be cleared and the substandard buildings demolished. City of Canyon July 29, 2014 Deutsche Bank National Trust Company Trustee, Attn. Bankruptcy Department 1100 Virginia Dr. Ste. 175 Fort Washington, PA 19034-3204 It is our understanding that you are the owner, agent, lessee, or occupant of the property known and described as follows: Property: E 130 of N 140’ of Block Blk: 28 Addition: Victoria Addition Property File #: R086-0520-1010 Address: 1410 9th Ave Description: The house and accessory buildings are dilapidated and unsafe. They must be repaired or demolished. You are hereby notified that the undersigned Building Official for the City of Canyon has inspected the building on said above described property, and has by reason of the defects hereinafter set forth, found the same to be a dangerous building, and subject to the provisions of City Ordinance No. 675 providing for the repair, rehabilitation, demolition or removal of any building or structure which is, or threatens to be (a) structurally unsafe, or (b) not provided with adequate egress, or (c) which constitute a fire hazard, or (d) are otherwise dangerous to human life, or which by way of existing use constitute a hazard to safety or health or public welfare by reason of inadequate maintenance or dilapidation, or obsolescence, or fire hazard, or abandonment. Conditions constituting dangerous buildings All buildings or structures which have any or all of the following defects shall be deemed "dangerous buildings": (1) Those whose interior walls or other vertical structural members list, lean or buckle to such an extent that a plumb line passing through the center of gravity falls outside of the middle third of its base. (2) Those which, exclusive of the foundation, show 33 percent or more of damage or deterioration of the supporting member or members, or 50 percent of damage or deterioration of the non-supporting enclosing or outside walls or covering. (3) Those which have improperly distributed loads upon the floors or roofs or in which the floors or roofs are over-loaded, or which have insufficient strength to be reasonably safe for the purpose use. (4) Those which have become or are so dilapidated, decayed, unsafe, unsanitary or which so utterly fail to provide the amenities essential to decent living that they are unfit for human habitation, or are likely to cause sickness or disease, so as to work injury to the health, morals, safety or general welfare of those living therein. (5) Those having light, air and sanitation facilities which are inadequate to protect the health, morals, safety or general welfare of human beings who live or may live therein. (6) Those having inadequate facilities for egress in case of fire or panic or those having insufficient stairways, elevators, fire escapes, or other means of communication. (7) Those which have parts thereof which are so attached that they may fall and injure members of the public or property. (8) Those which because of their condition are unsafe, unsanitary, or dangerous to the health, morals, safety or general welfare of the people of this city. (9) Those buildings existing in violation of any provision of the building code of this city, or any provision of the fire prevention code, or other ordinances of this city. Standards for repair, vacation or demolition; continued occupancy The following standards shall be followed in substance by the Building Official in ordering repair, vacation or demolition. (1) If the dangerous building can reasonably be repaired so that it will no longer exist in violation of the terms of this article it shall be ordered repaired. (2) If the dangerous building is in such condition as to make it dangerous to the health, morals, safety or general welfare of its occupants it shall be ordered to be vacated. (3) In any case where a dangerous building is 50 percent damaged, decayed or deteriorated from its original value or structure, it shall be demolished, and in all cases where a building cannot be repaired so that it will no longer exist in violation of the terms of this article it shall be demolished. In all cases where a dangerous building is a fire hazard existing or erected in violation of the terms of this article or any ordinance of the city or statute of the state it shall be demolished. You are hereby given a reasonable time, not to exceed fifteen (15) days from receipt of this notice, to commence the demolition and removal of the building. Your failure to comply with the terms of this notice, and to place the building in compliance by demolishing the same will subject the building to be demolished by the City, at the expense of the City and assess the expense as a lien against the property, as a personal obligation of the owner thereof, or for any other remedy authorized by law, or for a combination of such remedies, whether named herein or not, under the terms of State Laws. Sincerely, Danny Cornelius Director of Code Enforcement DC/th  AGENDA To: Mayor and City Commission From: Danny Cornelius, Director of Code Enforcement Date: December 4, 2014 Re: Conduct Public Hearing and Take Appropriate Action on Abatement of Substandard Structures at 1615 4th Ave in Accordance with City Ordinance No. 675, Section 150.55 of the Code of Ordinances. The City Commission voted to hold this public hearing at the November 17, 2014 meeting to consider abatement of the following substandard structure. Property: Lot: 18; Block: 33 Addition: Original Town of Canyon Address: 1615 4th Ave Owners: Sarah Kay Brent Description: The building is unsafe, unsanitary, and dangerous to the health, morals, safety, and general welfare of the people of the city. Windows are broken, the garage door in back is open, the front and back of the building are dilapidated, and the interior is full of accumulated materials. According to Section 150.55 of the Code of Ordinances, Abatement of Substandard Structures, if the owner fails to repair, rehabilitate, demolish, or remove the buildings, the City Commission may order such work to be done. The decision shall be made at a public hearing. Notification of the hearing has been made by certified mail to the owners of record and has been published in the Canyon News. I will present photographs of the building recommended for abatement. If the Commission agrees with my assessment, I recommend that the legal action be taken to abate the substandard structure. City of Canyon September 23, 2014 Sarah Kay Brent 3606 Patterson Dr. Amarillo, TX 79109-4606 It is our understanding that you are the owner, agent, lessee, or occupant of the property known and described as follows: Property: Lot: 18 Blk: 33 Addition: Original Town of Canyon Property File #: R005-7800-2350 Address: 1615 4th Ave Description: The building is unsafe, unsanitary, and dangerous to the health, morals, safety, and general welfare of the people of the city. Windows are broken, the garage door in back is open, the front and back of the building are dilapidated, and the interior is full of accumulations of materials. The building must be repaired or demolished. You are hereby notified that the undersigned Building Official for the City of Canyon has inspected the building on said above described property, and has by reason of the defects hereinafter set forth, found the same to be a dangerous building, and subject to the provisions of City Ordinance No. 675 providing for the repair, rehabilitation, demolition or removal of any building or structure which is, or threatens to be (a) structurally unsafe, or (b) not provided with adequate egress, or (c) which constitute a fire hazard, or (d) are otherwise dangerous to human life, or which by way of existing use constitute a hazard to safety or health or public welfare by reason of inadequate maintenance or dilapidation, or obsolescence, or fire hazard, or abandonment. Conditions constituting dangerous buildings All buildings or structures which have any or all of the following defects shall be deemed "dangerous buildings": (1) Those whose interior walls or other vertical structural members list, lean or buckle to such an extent that a plumb line passing through the center of gravity falls outside of the middle third of its base. (2) Those which, exclusive of the foundation, show 33 percent or more of damage or deterioration of the supporting member or members, or 50 percent of damage or deterioration of the non-supporting enclosing or outside walls or covering. (3) Those which have improperly distributed loads upon the floors or roofs or in which the floors or roofs are over-loaded, or which have insufficient strength to be reasonably safe for the purpose use. (4) Those which have become or are so dilapidated, decayed, unsafe, unsanitary or which so utterly fail to provide the amenities essential to decent living that they are unfit for human habitation, or are likely to cause sickness or disease, so as to work injury to the health, morals, safety or general welfare of those living therein. (5) Those having light, air and sanitation facilities which are inadequate to protect the health, morals, safety or general welfare of human beings who live or may live therein. (6) Those having inadequate facilities for egress in case of fire or panic or those having insufficient stairways, elevators, fire escapes, or other means of communication. (7) Those which have parts thereof which are so attached that they may fall and injure members of the public or property. (8) Those which because of their condition are unsafe, unsanitary, or dangerous to the health, morals, safety or general welfare of the people of this city. (9) Those buildings existing in violation of any provision of the building code of this city, or any provision of the fire prevention code, or other ordinances of this city. Standards for repair, vacation or demolition; continued occupancy The following standards shall be followed in substance by the Building Official in ordering repair, vacation or demolition. (1) If the dangerous building can reasonably be repaired so that it will no longer exist in violation of the terms of this article it shall be ordered repaired. (2) If the dangerous building is in such condition as to make it dangerous to the health, morals, safety or general welfare of its occupants it shall be ordered to be vacated. (3) In any case where a dangerous building is 50 percent damaged, decayed or deteriorated from its original value or structure, it shall be demolished, and in all cases where a building cannot be repaired so that it will no longer exist in violation of the terms of this article it shall be demolished. In all cases where a dangerous building is a fire hazard  existing or erected in violation of the terms of this article or any ordinance of the city or statute of the state it shall be demolished. You are hereby given a reasonable time, not to exceed fifteen (15) days from receipt of this notice, to commence the demolition and removal of the building. Your failure to comply with the terms of this notice, and to place the building in compliance by demolishing the same will subject the building to be demolished by the City, at the expense of the City and assess the expense as a lien against the property, as a personal obligation of the owner thereof, or for any other remedy authorized by law, or for a combination of such remedies, whether named herein or not, under the terms of State Laws. Sincerely, Danny Cornelius Director of Code Enforcement DC/th  AGENDA To: Mayor and City Commission From: Danny Cornelius, Director of Code Enforcement Date: December 5, 2014 Re: Consider and Take Appropriate Action on a Livestock Permit Renewal Request by Alberta Evans at 510 US Highway 60. Alberta Evans has submitted a request to renew her livestock permit at 510 US Highway 60. According to the request, the maximum number of boarding livestock (horses and donkeys) would be 5 animals. The previous permit requests were for a maximum of 4 animals. The permit was renewed at the June 17, 2013 meeting. At that time, the commission renewed the permit until December, 2014. The minutes of the meeting are attached. According to Section 91.21 of the Code of Ordinances, any person desiring to keep livestock in the city shall make an application to the City Commission. The permit, if granted, would expire annually on December 31 and must be renewed in the same manner as the original application. The City Commission has the right to revoke any livestock permit if it finds the premises to be a public nuisance. Five notices were sent to property owners within 200 feet. We received no responses. The letter of application from Alberta Evans is attached. An itemized list of buildings within 500 feet of the property is required by the ordinance. The list is attached. City of Canyon  List of Buildings within 500’ of the Permit Request 5 Deer Crossing ‐ House 7 Deer Crossing ‐ House 9 Deer Crossing ‐ House 11 Deer Crossing ‐ House 13 Deer Crossing ‐ House 15 Deer Crossing ‐ House 17 Deer Crossing ‐ House 608 N 2nd Ave ‐ House 409 1st Ave ‐ House 501 1st Ave ‐ House 509 1st Ave ‐ Empty House used as storage, partially built storage building and a partially built office 100 N 5th St ‐ Empty House used as storage 400 Hwy 60 ‐ Inland Fisheries – 2 buildings – warehouse and office 406 Hwy 60 ‐ Paul Blake Construction – commercial building 500 Hwy 60 ‐ Economy Storage – office and 3 storage unit buildings 601 1st Ave ‐ Lanky Pitman – commercial storage containers and carports 609 1st Ave ‐ Howard Morris ‐ Storage building City Commission Meeting June 17, 2013 The City Commission of the City of Canyon met in regular session at 5:30 p.m. in the City Commission Chambers of the Civic Complex. Mayor Alexander presided over the meeting with the following Commissioners in attendance: Mayor Pro-Tem Jed Welch, Gary Hinders and David Logan. Commissioner Jon Behrens was unable to attend. Also present were the following City Staff: City Manager Randy Criswell, Assistant City Manager Chris Sharp, City Secretary Gretchen Mercer, Public Works Director Dan Reese, Code Enforcement Director Danny Cornelius, Business and Community Development Director Evelyn Ecker, and City Attorney Chuck Hester. Item 1. Call to Order. Mayor Alexander called the meeting to order at 5:33 p.m. Item 2. Invocation. Mayor Pro-Tem Welch gave the invocation. Item 3. Approval of Minutes of the Meeting of June 3, 2013. Commissioner Logan moved, duly seconded by Mayor Pro-Tem Welch to approve the minutes of June 3, 2013. Motion carried unanimously. Item 4. Public Forum – Comments from Interested Citizens. No Comment was made. Item 5. Update from City Staff. (Kent Johnson Memorial Baseball Complex – Construction Update, City Hall Study Update, Entryway Project). City Manager Randy Criswell stated the Kent Johnson Memorial Baseball Complex hosted a State Baseball Tournament the weekend of June 7, 2013 with around 60 teams participating. Mr. Criswell said this had a good impact on Canyon and declared the complex officially open for business. Mr. Criswell said a few items remained to be completed from the punch list before the city took over maintenance. Mr. Criswell expressed appreciation to the Commissioners for their support of the project. Mr. Criswell stated Lavin Architects had their analysis complete from meeting with each department and hoped to present it to the commission at the July 1, 2013 meeting. Mr. Criswell stated the Entryway was complete, with the 90 day contract maintenance period beginning sometime last week. Mr. Criswell said during this time if any plants, trees or shrubs did not survive, they would be replaced. Mr. Criswell stated the contract only allowed for so many mowings so the city may have to help, but it was felt this would be better than paying a contractor. Mr. Criswell said the lighting would be installed the first part of September when the city takes control. City Commission Meeting June 17, 2013 Page 2 of 5 Mayor Pro-Tem Welch asked if a timeline had been given to receive the reports from the Strategic Planning Session conducted Monday June 10, 2013. Mr. Criswell said those reports should be received very soon. Mayor Pro-Tem Welch asked if the revisions to the employee handbook had been completed and ready for the Commission to review. Assistant City Manager Chris Sharp stated the final revisions were being completed. Mayor Pro-Tem Welch asked where the Planning and Zoning Commission was with the revised landscaping ordinance. Director of Code Enforcement Danny Cornelius said a draft ordinance was in the works requiring more landscaping inspections making sure conservation is considered and water efficient systems were used. Item 6. Consider and Take Appropriate Action on Second and Final Reading of Resolution No. 09-2013, A Resolution Approving Project Funding Agreement Between the Canyon Economic Development Corporation and the Rack Boutique to Expand the Current Business at 1609 4th Ave. Business and Community Development Director Evelyn Ecker presented Resolution No. 09-2013 for the final reading and adoption. Ms. Ecker stated The Rack Boutique had been in business in Canyon for 10 years and ready to expand their business. Ms. Ecker said they were expanding their business to include an online store that would operate out of the back of the store. Ms. Ecker said the online store would carry a separate inventory from the front of the store. After brief discussion, Commissioner Hinders moved, duly seconded by Commissioner Logan to adopt Resolution No. 09-2013 as presented. Motion carried 3-0 with Mayor Alexander abstaining. RESOLUTION NO. 09-2013 APPROVING PROJECT FUNDING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CANYON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND THE RACK BOUTIQUE FOR DIRECT FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO EXPAND THE CURRENT BUSINESS AT 1609 4TH AVENUE. THE EXPANSION WOULD ENCOURAGE RETAIL SALES, GENERATE STATE AND LOCAL TAX REVENUE. Item 7. Consider and Take Appropriate Action on a Livestock Permit Renewal Request by Alberta Evans at 510 Highway 60. Code Enforcement Director Danny Cornelius presented a request for the annual renewal of a livestock permit at 510 Highway 60 by property owner Alberta Evans. Mr. Cornelius referenced the minutes from June 18, 2012 where the Commission stipulated that a general cleanup of the property is completed and a privacy fence is in place before requesting renewal of the permit for 2013. Mr. Cornelius said the fence is almost complete and he monitored the property for accumulation violations. Mr. Cornelius stated even though not required, 5 letters notifying property owners within 200’ of the request to renew the livestock permit were sent out with only one reply received back, from Economy Storage, opposed to the Permit. Mr. Cornelius said as stated in Section 91.21 of the Code of Ordinances, “any person desiring to keep livestock in the city shall make an application to the City Commission. The permit, if granted would expire City Commission Meeting June 17, 2013 Page 3 of 5 annually on December 31 and must be renewed in the same manner as original application. The City Commission has the right to revoke any livestock permit if it finds the premises to be a public nuisance”. Mayor Alexander asked if it was possible to get on the renewal schedule as stated in the ordinance. Mr. Cornelius said a permit could be granted for 1 ½ years if desired by the commission. Mayor Alexander asked Ms. Evans if the fence was complete, to which Ms. Evans said it would be totally complete by September or October this year. Commissioner Logan asked about the junk vehicles. Ms. Evans said one had been removed; one was running when it was parked, which she hopes to have running again this Fall, and the other is a project of her son’s. Mr. Cornelius said if they were not tagged and inspected, they were still considered junk vehicles. City Attorney Chuck Hester stated if the junk vehicles were on private property and not visible, they were ok. After discussion, Mayor Pro-Tem Welch moved, duly seconded by Commissioner Hinders to grant the permit for 1 ½ years with renewal December 2014. After discussion, Mayor Pro-Tem Welch amended his motion to include the completion of the fence. Motion carried 3-1 with Commissioner Logan voting against. Item 8. Conduct First Public Hearing on Ordinance No. 978, for Annexation of Property Owned by Gillispie Palmer Development, LLC. City Manager Randy Criswell presented Ordinance No. 978 for its first Public Hearing. Mayor Alexander opened the Public Hearing. There being no Comment, Mayor Alexander closed the Public Hearing. ORDINANCE NO. 978 ANNEXING TERRITORY TO THE CITY OF CANYON Gillispie Palmer Development, LLC AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CANYON, TEXAS, ANNEXING THE TERRITORY HEREIN DESCRIBED TO THE CITY OF CANYON IN RANDALL COUNTY, TEXAS, EXTENDING THE BOUNDARY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF CANYON TO INCLUDE THE PROPERTY HEREIN DESCRIBED WITHIN THE SAID CITY LIMITS, AND GRANTING TO ALL THE INHABITANTS OF SAID PROPERTY ALL THE RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES OF OTHER CITIZENS AND BINDING SAID INHABITANTS BY ALL OF THE ACTS, ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS, AND REGULATIONS OF SAID CITY. Item 9. Consider and Take Appropriate Action on Recommendation From Audit Committee for Approval of 2012 Audit. Mayor Alexander presented the Audit with a brief description of the audit process and the role of the Audit Committee. Mayor Alexander stated the audit had become much more complicated due to various new regulations, and the need City Commission Meeting June 17, 2013 Page 4 of 5 for additional auditing as a result of the City receiving more than $500,000 in Federal money. Commissioner Hinders stated the City of Canyon received a clean Audit and highlighted the audit and recommendations of the auditors. After discussion, Commissioner Logan moved, duly seconded by Mayor Pro-Tem Welch to approve the audit for the City of Canyon as presented. Motion carried unanimously. At this time, Mayor Alexander had to leave the meeting. Mayor Pro-Tem Welch took over. Item 10. Consider and Take Appropriate Action on Bids Received for Potential Street Paving Project. City Manager Randy Criswell presented bids opened May 30, 2013. Mr. Criswell stated the 2011 Fiscal year ended with a surplus of about $1.7 million and as stated in the last audit, 2012 ended with a surplus of approximately $2 million. Mr. Criswell said in the past the Commission had discussed using some of the surplus on needed projects that had no source of funding, including street paving. Mr. Criswell stated based on those discussions, staff selected some problem drainage areas that could only be corrected with the construction of curb and gutter, had the City Engineer design the necessary improvements, and then bid the projects out so we would know exactly what those costs would be. Mr. Criswell stated these are areas that have been proposed for paving for many years, but the projects have not been funded due to a lack of available resources. He advised the Commission that they have the option of electing to do any or all of this paving. BID TABULATION SHEET Paving Improvements 2013 City of Canyon Base Bid – 4th Avenue from 4th Street to 8th Street Alternate #1 – 4th Avenue from 2nd Street to 4th Street Alternate #2 – 5th Avenue from 2nd Street to 3rd Street Alternate #3 – 5th Avenue from 38th Street to Palo Duro Dr. Dimple Dr. from 5th Avenue to Tierra Blanca Dr. Dimple / Palo Duro alley from 5th Ave. to Tierra Blanca Thursday, May 30, 2013 – 2:00 p.m. Bidder Base Bid Alternate #1 Alternate #2 Alternate #3 Total __ Holmes Construction Amarillo, TX $ 336,807.00 $ 180,409.50 $ 57,411.00 $ 212,045.00 $ 786,672.50 ______ Lee Milligan, Inc. Amarillo, TX $ 514,183.50 $ 265,680.00 $ 96,460.50 $ 337,854.50 $ 1,214,178.50 _ L. A. Fuller & Sons Amarillo, TX $ 355,200.00 $ 179,900.00 $ 60,200.00 $ 189,950.00 $ 785,250.00 _ Lipham Asphalt & Paving Aspermont, TX $ 391,649.20 $ 192,940.20 $ 59,839.80 $ 211,626.10 $ 856,055.30 _ City Commission Meeting June 17, 2013 Page 5 of 5 After discussion on the recommended areas needing repair, Commissioner Logan moved, duly seconded by Commissioner Hinders to award the bid to low bidder, Holmes Construction, for the Base Bid of $336,807.00, and Alternate #1 for $180,409.50 for a total bid of $517,215.50. This would pave 4th Avenue from 8th Street to 2nd Street. Motion carried unanimously. Item 11. Adjournment There being no further business, Commissioner Hinders moved this meeting be adjourned. __________________________ Jed Welch, Mayor Pro-Tem ATTEST: ________________________________ Gretchen Mercer, City Secretary  AGENDA To: City Commission From: Danny Cornelius, Director of Code Enforcement Date: December 9, 2014 Re: Conduct a Public Hearing and Consider and Take Appropriate Action on a Request to Rezone Lots 69 through 76, Block 9 of Canyon East Unit No. 3, to PD (Planned Development District) from SF-S (Single-Family Suburban Residential District). Kuhlman and Sons LP and Canyon East Development, LLC have submitted a zoning change request for Canyon East Unit No. 3. According to the attached zoning application, the requested zoning for lots 69 through 76 is PD (Planned Development District). The intent is to build zero lot line homes. Lots 67 and 68 would remain SF –S (Single-Family Suburban Residential District). According to the Zoning Ordinance, PD District is the appropriate zoning for zero lot line homes, where the zero side yard setbacks can be established by an approved site plan. The site plans for the zero lot line properties are shown on the plat of Canyon East Unit No 4. The Planning and Zoning Commission voted to recommend approval of the plat. City of Canyon  ORDINANCE NO. 1017 Rezoning Canyon East Unit No. 3 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CANYON, TEXAS, REZONING LOTS 69 THROUGH 76, BLOCK 9, CANYON EAST UNIT NO. 3, AN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF CANYON, RANDALL COUNTY, TEXAS, PROVIDING THAT THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION BE POSTED UPON THE ZONING DISTRICT MAPS OF THE CITY OF CANYON, PROVIDING THAT ALL ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH ARE EXPRESSLY REPEALED, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing on December 8, 2014 for the purpose of considering rezoning certain properties situated in the City of Canyon. All owners of property within 200 feet, as indicated by the most recently approved municipal tax roll of real estate property, were given written notification, and opportunity to be heard, and proper notice by publication was given through the local newspaper in accordance with City Charter provisions, the Code of Ordinances and the Texas Local Government Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended rezoning the properties from SF-S (Single-Family Suburban Residential District) to PD (Planned Development District); and WHEREAS, the City Commission conducted a public hearing at its regular meeting and considered the recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission for rezoning; and WHEREAS, the passage, promulgation, and enforcement of the provisions herein contained are deemed necessary and advisable for the promotion of the general welfare of the community to carry out the governmental powers delegated to and possessed by the City of Canyon; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CANYON, TEXAS: SECTION 1. The City Commission finds that PD (Planned Development District) would be more appropriate than SF-S (Single-Family Suburban Residential District) zoning for the properties in question. SECTION 2. That Lots 69 through 76 of Block 9, Canyon East Unit No. 3 are hereby zoned PD (Planned Development District). SECTION 3. That this Zoning classification be posted upon the Zoning District maps of the City of Canyon and filed with the City Secretary and Building Inspector of the City of Canyon. SECTION 4. Severability. If any provision, section, subsection, sentence, clause, or the application of the same to any person or set of circumstances for any reason is held to be unconstitutional, void or invalid or for any reason unenforceable, the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance or the application thereby shall remain in effect, it being the intent of the City Commission of the City of Canyon, Texas in adopting this ordinance, that no portion thereof or provision contained herein shall become inoperative or fail by any reasons of unconstitutionality of any other portion or provision. SECTION 5. Repealer. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of conflict with this ordinance. SECTION 6. This ordinance shall become effective immediately. INTRODUCED AND PASSED at the regular meeting of the City Commission on the 15th day of December, 2014. _______________________ Quinn Alexander, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________ Gretchen Mercer, City Clerk  AGENDA To: Mayor and City Commission From: Danny Cornelius, Director of Code Enforcement Date: December 9, 2014 Re: Conduct a Public Hearing and Consider and Take Appropriate Action on a Plat of Canyon East Unit No 4, a Replat of a Portion of Canyon East Unit No. 3. Kuhlman and Sons LP and Canyon East Development, LLC have submitted a plat for Canyon East Unit No. 4, a replat of a portion of Canyon East Unit No. 3. The plat would establish site plans for zero lot line homes on lots 69A through 76A and relocate the SPS transformer easements from Unit No. 3. The zoning ordinance allows side yard setbacks to be established in PD (Planned Development District) with an approved site plan. The plat would also establish a front yard setback of 15 feet on lots 69A through 76A. The zoning ordinance requires a minimum front yard setback of 25 feet in the PD; however, a lesser setback may be approved with the plat. The Planning and Zoning Commission voted to recommend approval of the plat. City of Canyon R ev ie w C op y  AGENDA To: Mayor and City Commission From: Danny Cornelius, Director of Code Enforcement Date: December 5, 2014 Re: Consider and Take Appropriate Action on Ordinance 1018, Amending Table N1102.1.1 of the 2012 IRC and Table R402.1.1 of the 2012 IECC. According to our amendments of Table N1102.1.1 of the 2012 IRC (International Residential Code) and Table R402.1.1 of the 2012 IECC (International Energy Conservation Code), the required insulation and fenestration requirements for homes will increase on January 1, 2015. For example, ceiling R-Values will increase from R-38 to R-49 and walls will increase from R- 13 to R-20 or R-13 cavity plus R-5 continuous insulation. The City of Amarillo is in the process of drafting amendments to the 2015 ICC Codes. According to my conversations with Scott McDonald, it is possible they will amend the codes to require a lower R-Value, possibly R-40 in the ceiling and R-13 in the walls. They will not be enforcing the higher standards January 1, 2015 as stated in the current ordinance. I have proposed to the Construction Advisory and Appeals Board that we amend the tables to stay with our current requirements after January 1, 2015 until we adopt the 2015 codes. Table N1102.1.1 from the 2012 IRC and the proposed amendment are attached. The Construction Advisory and Appeals Board voted unanimously to recommend adoption of Ordinance 1018. City of Canyon  ORDINANCE NO. 1018 Amending the 2012 IRC, Table N1102.1.1, and the 2012 IECC, Table R402.1.1 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CANYON, TEXAS: AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF CANYON, CHAPTER 150, SECTIONS 150.24 AND 150.30 TO AMEND TABLE N1102.1.1 OF THE 2012 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE AND TABLE R402.1.1 OF THE INTERNATIONAL ENERGY CONSERVATION CODE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR REPEALER; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, upon the recommendation of the Construction Advisory and Appeals Board, the City Commission now finds it is in the best interest of the public health, safety, and welfare to amend Table N1102.1.1 of the 2012 International Residential Code and Table 402.1.1 of the International Energy Conservation Code, published by the International Code Council; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CANYON, TEXAS: SECTION 1. That Chapter 150, Section 150.24 and Section 150.30 are hereby amended as follows: N1102.1 (R402.1) General (Prescriptive). The building thermal envelope shall meet the requirements of N1102.1.1through N1102.1.4 as amended until December 31, 2014. Effective January 1, 2015 Table N1102.1.1 and Table N1102.1.3 will be in effect as printed in 2012 IRC. The required slab R-Value for climate zone 4 except marine will remain 0. TABLE N1102.1.1 (R402.1.1) INSULATION AND FENESTRATION REQUIREMENTS BY COMPONENTa CRAWL GLAZED WOOD MASS BASEMENTc SLABd FENESTRATION SKYLIGHTb CEILING FLOOR SPACEc CLIMATE FENESTRATION FRAME WALL WALL WALL R-VALUE U-FACTORb U-FACTOR R-VALUE R-VALUE WALL ZONE SHGCb, e R-VALUE R-VALUEi R-VALUE & DEPTH R-VALUE 1 NR 0.75 0.25 30 13 3/4 13 0 0 0 2 0.40 0.65 0.25 38 13 4/6 13 0 0 0 3 0.35 0.55 0.25 38 20 or 13 + 5h 8/13 19 5/13f 0 5/13 4 0.35 0.60 N/R 38 13 5/10 19 10/13 0 10/13 except Marine 5 and 0.32 0.55 NR 49 20 or 13 + 5h 13/17 30g 15/19 10, 2 ft 15/19 Marine 4 h g 6 0.32 0.55 NR 49 20 + 5 or 13 + 10 15/20 30 15/19 10, 4 ft 15/19 7 and 8 0.32 0.55 NR 49 20 + 5 or 13 + 10h 19/21 38g 15/19 10, 4 ft 15/19 Footnotes shall remain unchanged. SECTION 3. Severability. If any provision, section, subsection, sentence, clause, or the application of the same to any person or set of circumstances for any reason is held to beunconstitutional, void or invalid or for any reason unenforceable, the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance or the application thereby shall remain in effect, it being the intent of the City Commission of the City of Canyon, Texas in adopting this ordinance, that no portion 1 thereof or provision contained herein shall become inoperative or fail by any reasons of unconstitutionality of any other portion or provision. SECTION 4. Repealer. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of conflict with this ordinance. SECTION 5. Penalty. It is an offense to violate any part of this ordinance, punishable upon conviction in accordance with Section 150.99 of the City of Canyon Code of Ordnances. SECTION 6. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately. INTRODUCED AND PASSED at the regular meeting of the City Commission on the 15th day of December, 2014. _______________________ Quinn Alexander, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________ Gretchen Mercer, City Clerk 2  AGENDA To: Mayor and City Commission From: Jon Behrens, Assistant City Manager for Special Projects Date: December 2, 2014 Re: Consider and Take Appropriate Action on Selection of Consultant for a Family Aquatic Facility Feasibility Study. In November the Aquatic Facility Committee interviewed the following finalist to perform the family aquatic facility feasibility study: 1. Kimley-Horn & Counsilman-Hunsaker 2. Parkhill, Smith, and Cooper & Water Technology Inc. A third firm, Aquatic Design Consultants, removed themselves from the interview process due to a sudden increase in their workload. After interviewing the two finalist, the team of Kimley-Horn & Counsilman-Hunsaker was selected as the most qualified team to perform the feasibility study. The committee was impressed with the Kimley-Horn presentation, the amount of work the team has performed together in the past, and the level of expertise they bring to the project. A request for a Project Scope of Work was sent to this team. The Kimley-Horn team has provided a Scope of Work and Work Agreement for their professional services. The Scope of Work contains all of the aspects of the study that we have discussed as a committee and that I have shared with you in previous City Commission meetings. The current project schedule, which I am very comfortable with, has a final presentation being made in April. The total cost for the Feasibility Study will be $38,000. It is the committee’s recommendation that the City enter into a contractual relationship with the team of Kimley-Horn & Counsilman-Hunsaker to perform a family aquatic center feasibility study. City of Canyon  AGENDA To: Mayor and City Commission From: Chris Sharp, Assistant City Manager Date: December 8, 2014 Re: Consider and Take Appropriate Action on City of Canyon’s Investment Policy Pursuant to Chapter 2256 of the Local Government Code, we are presenting you with an Investment Policy for the City. For the most part, this is the same policy that you approved last time. At this time, no major changes have come from the Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) that would require changing our policy. It is staff’s recommendation that the Commission approve the Investment Policy.  INVESTMENT POLICY I. POLICY It is the policy of the City of Canyon that after allowing for the anticipated cash flow requirements of the Entity and giving due consideration to the safety and risk of investment, all available funds shall be invested in conformance with these legal and administrative guidelines, seeking to optimize interest earnings to the maximum extent possible. Effective cash management is recognized as essential to good fiscal management. Investment interest is a source of revenue to the City of Canyon’s funds. The City’s investment portfolio shall be designed and managed in a manner designed to maximize this revenue source, to be responsive to public trust, and to be in compliance with legal requirements and limitations. Investments shall be made with the primary objectives of:  Safety and preservation of principal  Maintenance of sufficient liquidity to meet operating needs  Public trust from prudent investment activities  Optimization of interest earnings on the portfolio II. PURPOSE The purpose of this investment policy is to comply with Chapter 2256 of the Government Code (“Public Funds Investment Act”), which requires each Entity to adopt a written investment policy regarding the investment of its funds and funds under its control. The Investment Policy addresses the methods, procedures and practices that must be exercised to ensure effective and judicious fiscal management of the City of Canyon’s funds. III. SCOPE This Investment Policy shall govern the investment of all financial assets of the City of Canyon. These funds are accounted for in the Entity’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and include:  General Fund  Water Works & Sewer System Fund  Golf Course Fund  C.E.D.C. Funds  W/S Bond Funds  Emergency Management Fund  Library Gift and Memorial Fund 1  Board of City Development Fund  LEOSE Fund  D-Fi-It Program  Employee Flower Fund  Vol. Firemen’s Funds  All subsidiary funds and Any new fund created unless specifically exempted The City of Canyon may consolidate cash balances from all funds to maximize investment earnings. Investment income will be allocated to the various funds based on their respective participation and in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. This Investment Policy shall apply to all transactions involving the financial assets and related activity for all the foregoing funds. IV. INVESTMENT OBJECTIVES The Entity shall manage and invest its cash with four primary objectives, listed in order of priority: safety, liquidity, public trust, and yield, expressed as optimization of interest earnings. The safety of the principal invested always remains the primary objective. All investments shall be designed and managed in a manner responsive to the public trust and consistent with state and local law. The Entity shall maintain a comprehensive cash management program, which includes collection of account receivables, vendor payments in accordance with invoice terms, and prudent investment of available cash. Cash management is defined as the process of managing monies in order to insure maximum cash availability and maximum earnings on short-term investment of idle cash. Safety [PFIA 2256.005(b)(2)] Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the investment program. Investments shall be undertaken in a manner that seeks to ensure the preservation of capital in the overall portfolio. The objective will be to mitigate credit and interest rate risk.  Credit Risk – The City of Canyon will minimize credit risk, the risk of loss due to the failure of the issuer or backer of the investment, by:  Limiting investments to the safest types of investments  Pre-qualifying the financial institutions and broker/dealers with which the City will do business  Diversifying the investment portfolio when possible, so that potential losses on individual issuers will be minimized. If, in the opinion of the Investment Officer, it is most advantageous to maintain all funds in a single Financial Institution, then the City Commission shall have the authority to waive this diversification requirement. 2   Interest Rate Risk – the City will minimize the risk that the interest earnings and the market value of investments in the portfolio will fall due to changes in general interest rates, by:  Structuring the investment portfolio so that investments mature to meet cash requirements for ongoing operations, thereby avoiding the need to liquidate investments prior to maturity.  Investing operating funds primarily in certificates of deposit, shorter- term securities, money market mutual funds, or local government investment pools functioning as money market mutual funds.  Diversifying maturities and staggering purchase dates to minimize the impact of market movements over time.  Utilizing any other method of investment management allowable by the Public Funds Investment Act deemed most advantageous based on current market conditions. Liquidity [PFIA 2256.005(b)(2)] The investment portfolio shall remain sufficiently liquid to meet all operating requirements that may be reasonably anticipated. This is accomplished by structuring the portfolio so that investments mature concurrent with cash needs to meet anticipated demands. Public Trust All participants in the City’s investment process shall seek to act responsibly as custodians of the public trust. Investment officers shall avoid any transaction that might impair public confidence in the City’s ability to govern effectively. Yield (Optimization of Interest Earnings) [PFIA 2256.005(b)(3)] The investment portfolio shall be designed with the objective of attaining a market rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles, taking into account the investment risk constraints and liquidity needs. Return on investment is of secondary importance compared to the safety and liquidity objectives described above. V. RESPONSIBILITY AND CONTROL Delegation of Authority [PFIA 2256.005(f)] In accordance with The City of Canyon and the Public Funds Investment Act, the City Commission designates the City Manager as the Chief Financial Officer and he/she and the Director of Finance as the City’s Investment Officers. An Investment Officer is authorized to execute investment transactions on behalf of the City. No person may engage in an investment transaction or the management of City funds except as provided under the terms of this Investment Policy as approved by the City Commission. The investment authority granted to the investing officers is effective until rescinded by the City Commission. 3 Quality and Capability of Investment Management [PFIA 2256.005(b)(3)] The City shall provide periodic training in investments for the designated investment officers and other investment personnel through courses and seminars offered by professional organizations, associations, and other independent sources in order to insure the quality and capability of investment management in compliance with the Public Funds Investment Act. Training Requirement (PFIA 2256.008) In accordance with the City of Canyon and the Public Funds Investment Act, designated Investment Officers shall attend an investment training session no less often than once every two years commencing September 1, 1997 and shall receive not less than 10 hours of instruction relating to investment responsibilities. A newly appointed Investment Officer must attend a training session of at least 10 hours of instruction within twelve months of the date the officer took office or assumed the officer’s duties. The investment training session shall be provided by an independent source approved by the State of Texas and compliant with the requirements of the Public Funds Investment Act. For purposes of this policy, an “independent source” from which investment training shall be obtained shall include a professional organization, an institution of higher education or any other sponsor other than a business organization with whom the City may engage in an investment transaction. Internal Controls (Best Practice) The Chief Financial Officer is responsible for establishing and maintaining an internal control structure designed to ensure that the assets of the City are protected from loss, theft, or misuse. The internal control structure shall be designed to provide reasonable assurance that these objectives are met. The concept of reasonable assurance recognizes that (1) the cost of a control should not exceed the benefits likely to be derived; and (2) the valuation of costs and benefits requires estimates and judgments by management. Accordingly, the Chief Financial Officer shall establish a process for annual independent review by an external auditor to assure compliance with policies and procedures. The internal controls shall address the following points.  Control of collusion.  Separation of transactions authority from accounting and record keeping.  Custodial safekeeping.  Clear delegation of authority to subordinate staff members.  Written confirmation for telephone (voice) transactions for investments and wire transfers, and  Development of a wire transfer agreement with the depository band or third party custodian Prudence (PFIA 2256.006) 4 The standard of prudence to be applied by the Investment Officer shall be the “prudent investor rule.” This rule states that “Investments shall be made with judgment and care, under circumstances then prevailing, which persons of prudence, discretion and intelligence exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation, but for investment, considering the probable safety of their capital as well as the probable income to be derived.” In determining whether an Investment Officer has exercised prudence with respect to an investment decision, the determination shall be made taking into consideration:  The investment of all funds, or funds under the City’s control, over which the officer had responsibility rather than a consideration as to the prudence of a single investment.  Whether the investment decision was consistent with the written approved investment policy of the City. Indemnification (Best Practice) The Investment Officer, acting in accordance with written procedures and exercising due diligence, shall not be held personally responsible for a specific investment’s credit risk or market price changes, provided that these deviations are reported immediately and the appropriate action is taken to control adverse developments. Ethics and Conflicts of Interest [PFIA 2256.005(i)] Officers and employees involved in the investment process shall refrain from personal business activity that would conflict with the proper execution and management of the investment program, or that would impair their ability to make impartial decisions. Employees and Investment Officers shall disclose any material interests in financial institutions with which they conduct business. They shall further disclose any personal financial/investment positions that could be related to the performance of the investment portfolio. Employees and officers shall refrain from undertaking personal investment transactions with the same individual with which business is conducted on behalf of the City. An Investment Officer of the City who has a personal business relationship with an organization seeking to sell an investment to the City shall file a statement disclosing that personal business interest. An Investment Officer who is related within the second degree by affinity or consanguinity to an individual seeking to sell an investment to the City shall file a statement disclosing that relationship. A statement required under this subsection must be filed with the Texas Ethics Commission and the City Commission. 5  VI. SUITABLE AND AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS Portfolio Management The Entity currently has a “buy and hold” portfolio strategy. Maturity dates are matched with cash flow requirements and investments are purchased with the intent to be held until maturity. However, investments may be liquidated prior to maturity for the following reasons:  An investment with declining credit may be liquidated early to minimize loss of principal.  Cash flow needs of the Entity require that the investment be liquidated. Investments [PFIA 2256.005(b)(4)(A)] City funds governed by this policy may be invested in the instruments described below, all of which are authorized by Chapter 2256 of the Government Code (Public Funds Investment Act). Investment of City funds in any instrument or security not authorized for investment under the Act is prohibited. The City will not be required to liquidate an investment that becomes unauthorized subsequent to its purchase. I. Authorized 1. Obligations of the United States of America, its agencies and instrumentalities. 2. Certificates of Deposit issued by a bank or other approved financial institution organized under Texas law, the laws of another state, or federal law, that has its main office or a branch office in Texas, organized under Texas law, the laws of another state, or federal law, that has its main office or a branch office in Texas and that is guaranteed or insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or its successor or secured by obligations in a manner and amount provided by law for deposits of the Entity. 3. Money Market Mutual funds that are 1) registered and regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission, 2) have a dollar weighted average stated maturity of 90 days or less, 3) rated AAA by at least one nationally recognized rating service, and 4) seek to maintain a net asset value of $1.00 per share. 4. Local government investment pools, which 1) meet the requirements of Chapter 2256.016 of the Public Funds Investment Act, 2) are rated no lower than AAA or an equivalent rating by at least one nationally recognized rating service, 3) seek to maintain a $1.00 net asset value, and 4) are authorized by resolution or ordinance by the City Commission. 6  5. Certificates of Deposit through cooperative programs such as CDARS (Certificates of Deposit Account Registry Service) which provides $250,000 FDIC Insurance Coverage per Financial Institution. 6. Other securities as permitted by Public Funds Investment Act Sec. 2256.009. Obligations of states, agencies, counties, cities, and other political subdivisions of any state rated as to investment quality by a nationally recognized equivalent. 7. Any other investment allowable under the Public Funds Investment Act meeting the goals of this policy that results in a maximization of yield, based on market conditions. All prudent measures will be taken to liquidate an investment that is downgraded to less than the required minimum rating. (PFIA 2256.021) II. Not Authorized [PFIA 2256.009(b)(1-4)] Investments including interest-only or principal-only strips of obligations with underlying mortgage-backed security collateral, collateralized mortgage obligations with an inverse floating interest rate or a maturity date of over 10 years are strictly prohibited. VII. INVESTMENT PARAMETERS Maximum Maturities [PFIA 2256.005(b)(4)(B)] The longer the maturity of investments, the greater their price volatility. Therefore, it is the City’s policy to concentrate its investment portfolio in shorter-term securities in order to limit principal risk caused by changes in interest rates. The City attempts to match its investments with anticipated cash flow requirements. The City will not directly invest in securities maturing more than two (2) years from the date of purchase; however, the above described obligations, certificates, or agreements may be collateralized using longer dated investments. Diversification [PFIA 2256.005(b)(3)] The City recognizes that investment risks can result from issuer defaults, market price changes or various technical complications leading to temporary illiquidity. Risk is controlled through portfolio diversification that shall be achieved by the following general guidelines:  Limiting investments to avoid overconcentration in investments from a specific issuer or business sector (excluding those deposit that are fully insured and collateralized in accordance with state and federal law), 7   Limiting investment in investments that have higher credit risks (example: commercial paper),  Investing in investments with varying maturities, and  Continuously investing a portion of the portfolio in readily available funds such as local government investment pools (LGIPs), money market funds, interest bearing depository accounts, or overnight repurchase agreements to ensure that appropriate liquidity is maintained in order to meet ongoing obligations. The following maximum limits, by instrument, are established for the Entity’s total portfolio: 1. U.S. Treasury Securities ......................................... 100% 2. Agencies and Instrumentalities ................................. 85% 3. Certificates of Deposit .............................................. 100% 4. Money Market Mutual Funds ................................... 50% 5. Authorized Pools ...................................................... 50% 6. Interest-Bearing Depository Accounts………………. 100% VIII. REPORTING (PFIA 2256.023) Methods The Investment Officer shall prepare an investment report on a quarterly basis that summarizes investment strategies employed in the most recent quarter and describes the portfolio in terms of investment securities and maturities, and shall explain the total investment return for the quarter. The quarterly investment report shall include a summary statement of investment activity prepared in compliance with generally accepted accounting principals. This summary will be prepared in a manner that will allow the Entity to ascertain whether investment activities during the reporting period have conformed to the Investment Policy. The report will be provided to the City Commission. The report will include the following:  A listing of individual securities held at the end of the reporting period.  Unrealized gains or losses resulting from appreciation or depreciation by listing the beginning and ending book and market value of securities for the period.  Additions and changes to the market value during the period.  Average weighted yield to maturity of portfolio as compared to applicable benchmark.  Listing of investments by maturity date.  Fully accrued interest for the reporting period  The percentage of the total portfolio that each type of investment represents.  Statement of compliance of the Entity’s investment portfolio with state law and the investment strategy and policy approved by the City Commission. 8  IX. INVESTMENT POLICY ADOPTION [PFIA 2256.005(e)] The Entity’s investment policy shall be adopted by resolution of the City Commission. It is the Entity’s intent to comply with state laws and regulations. The Entity’s investment policy shall be subject to revisions consistent with changing laws, regulations, and needs of the Entity. The City Commission of Canyon shall adopt a resolution stating that it has reviewed the policy and investment strategies annually, approving any changes or modifications. X. FUND BALANCE A. Definitions - In compliance with the Government Accounting Standard Board (GASB) Statement No. 54, the City has adopted the following definitions: 1. Non-spendable fund balance – (inherently not spendable) Includes amounts that will never convert to cash or will not convert to cash in the current period, such as inventory, supplies, long-term portion of loans and non-financial assets held for resale or principal of an endowment. 2. Restricted fund balance – (externally enforceable limitations on use) Includes amounts that can be spent only for the specific purposes stipulated by external resource providers either constitutionally or through enabling legislation. Examples include grants, court receipt restrictions (municipal technology fund) or charter restrictions. 3. Committed fund balance – (self-imposed limitations) Includes amounts that can be used for the specific purposes determined by a formal action of the City Commission in form of a resolution. Commitments may be changed or lifted only by taking the same formal action that imposed the constraints originally. 4. Assigned fund balance – (limitation resulting from management’s intended use) Comprises amounts intended to be used for a specific purpose, as expressed by City Commission, by a designated official or committee. By adopting this policy the City Commission has hereby authorized the City Manager as the official to assign fund balance to a specific purpose. In governmental funds other than the general fund, assigned fund balance represents the amount that is not restricted or committed, as it is intended to be used for the purpose of that fund. 5. Unassigned fund balance – (residual net resources) This is the excess of total fund balance over non-spendable, restricted, committed, and assigned fund balance. Unassigned amounts are technically available for any purpose. B. Order of Expenditure of Funds – When multiple categories of fund balances are available for expenditure (for example, a construction project is funded partly by grant money, funds set aside by the City Commission, and unassigned fund balance) the City will start with the most restricted category first until depleted before moving to the next category with available funds. Spendable fund categories in 9  order of most restricted to least restricted are: Restricted, Committed, Assigned, and Unassigned. C. Minimum Unassigned Fund Balance – It is the goal of the City of Canyon to achieve and maintain a minimum unassigned fund balance in the general fund to ensure that there will be adequate liquid resources in the event of unanticipated circumstances and events. The desired unassigned fund balance of 50% is optimal. The minimum unassigned fund balance is set at 25% of budgeted expenditures for the fiscal year, providing for approximately 90 days of estimated expenditures. D. Designated Circumstances – the minimum unassigned fund balance may be spent under these extreme circumstances: 1. Natural disasters, including but not limited to tornados, fire or flood. 2. Opportunities for a grant in which the matching portion may require a portion of the minimum unassigned fund balance. 3. Shortfall in the budgeted revenue in excess of 20%. 4. Unforeseeable expenditures in excess of 20% over budget. 5. When unforeseen circumstances or emergencies in another fund require a fund transfer from the general fund. E. Replenishment of Minimum Unassigned Fund Balance 1. When designated circumstances have reduced the unassigned fund balance below the targeted minimum level, the replenishment is to occur within 12 months. 2. Depending on the severity of the reduction of the minimum unassigned fund balance the following measures will be taken to replenish the minimum unassigned fund balance: a) Should calculations reveal that the minimum unassigned fund balance will be replenished through normal activity within the next 12 months no action is necessary b) Reduction of expenditures c) Delay of capital purchases d) Increase in fees and/or taxes e) Salary freeze f) Hiring freeze 10  AGENDA To: Mayor and City Commission From: Chris Sharp, Assistant City Manager Date: February 6, 2012 Re: Consider and Take Appropriate Action on Appointment of Auditor for City of Canyon’s Budget Fiscal Year 2013-2014 . Last month you authorized staff to issue a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for auditing services for the City’s annual audit. Two CPA firms submitted qualifications. They are Brown Graham, and Doshier, Pickens & Francis. After ranking both proposals and interviewing both firms, city staff is recommending Doshier, Pickens & Francis. We believe they have the experience and capacity to perform the city audit in a reasonable amount of time. It is staff’s recommendation that Doshier, Pickens & Francis be appointed as the City of Canyon’s auditor for FY 2013-2014.