HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-29-11 TC Agenda PacketThe Regular Meeting of the Town of Westlake Town Council will begin immediately following the conclusion
of the Town Council Workshop but not prior to the 7:00 p.m. posted start time.
Page 1 of 4
TOWN OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS
Mission Statement
On behalf of the citizens, the mission of the Town of Westlake is to be a one-of-a-kind community
that blends our rural atmosphere with our rich culture and urban location.
Westlake, Texas – A Premier Knowledge Based Community
TOWN COUNCIL MEETING
AGENDA
August 29, 2011
WESTLAKE TOWN HALL
3 VILLAGE CIRCLE, 2ND FLOOR
WESTLAKE, TX 76262
COUNCIL CHAMBERS / MUNICIPAL COURT ROOM
Photo Session 4:00 p.m.
Workshop Session: 5:00 p.m.
Regular Session 7:00 p.m.
Workshop Session
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Page 2 of 4
3. DISCUSS AND REVIEW OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS FROM AUGUST 29, 2011,
REGULAR MEETING. (25 min)
4. DISCUSSION ITEMS
a. Discussion and overview of SB 100 regarding elections (30 min)
b. Discussion and follow-up regarding the FY 2011-2012 budget. (15 min)
5. COUNCIL RECAP / STAFF DIRECTION
6. ADJOURNMENT
Regular Session
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. CITIZEN PRESENTATIONS AND RECOGNITIONS: This is an opportunity for
citizens to address the Council on any matter whether or not it is posted on the agenda.
The Council cannot by law take action nor have any discussion or deliberations on any
presentation made to the Council at this time concerning an item not listed on the
agenda. The Council will receive the information, ask staff to review the matter, or an
item may be noticed on a future agenda for deliberation or action.
Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for Fiscal Year beginning October 1, 2010 by
Lena Ellis, CFO, City of Fort Worth and Government Finance Officers Association
National Board Member.
3. CONSENT AGENDA: All items listed below are considered routine by the Town Council
and will be enacted with one motion. There will be no separate discussion of items
unless a Council Member or citizen so requests, in which event the item will be removed
from the general order of business and considered in its normal sequence.
a. Consider approval of the minutes from the meeting held on June 13, 2011.
b. Consider approval of the minutes from the meeting held on August 12, 2011.
c. Consider approval of Resolution 11-21, Appointing Michael Barrett to the
Planning and Zoning Commission.
d. Consider approval of Ordinance 660, Approving a negotiated resolution
between the Atmos Cities Steering Committee and Atmos Energy Corp., MID-TEX
DIVISION regarding the company’s Fourth Annual Rate Review Mechanism Filing
in all cities exercising original jurisdiction.
Page 3 of 4
e. Consider approval of Ordinance 661, Amending Chapter 2, Administration,
Article V Finance, Division 2 Fees and Use Schedule, adding Section 2-182 Credit
Card Processing fee.
f. Consider approval of Ordinance 662, Amending Chapter 2, Administration,
Article V, Finance, Division 1. Generally, Section 2-161, Signatures On Town
Checks.
g. Consider approval of Resolution 11-22, Authorizing the Town Manager to
execute Change Orders 18 and 19 with TxDOT for structural enhancements for
the FM1938 project.
h. Consider approval of Resolution 11-23, Adopting the Governmental Accounting
Standard Board (GASB) 54 Policy.
i. Consider approval of Resolution 11-24, Accepting the Certified Property Tax
Values.
j. Consider approval of Ordinance 663, Amending Chapter 46, Health and
Sanitation Adding Article V, Public Swimming Pool, Spa or Interactive Water
Feature Rules.
k. Consider approval of Ordinance 664, Amending Chapter 46, Health and
Sanitation, Article III, Food, Division 2, Food Service Sanitation and Good
Handling.
l. Consider approval of Resolution 11-25, Amending the Fee and Use Schedule.
4. EXECUTIVE SESSION
The Council will conduct a closed session pursuant to Texas Government Code,
annotated, Chapter 551, Subchapter D for the following:
a. Section 551.087: Deliberation Regarding Economic Development Negotiations –
to deliberate the offer of a financial or other incentive to a business prospect.
b. Section 551.071 Consultation with Attorney - to seek advice of counsel on legal
matters involving pending or contemplated litigation, settlement offers, or other
legal matters not related directly to litigation or settlement. Pending or
contemplated litigation and settlement offers include but are not limited to the
following: Rosevear and Simonetti
5. RECONVENE MEETING
6. TAKE ANY ACTION, IF NEEDED, FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEMS.
7. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: Any Council member may request at a workshop and / or
Council meeting, under “Future Agenda Item Requests”, an agenda item for a future
Council meeting. The Council Member making the request will contact the Town
Manager with the requested item and the Town Manager will list it on the agenda. At
the meeting, the requesting Council Member will explain the item, the need for Council
discussion of the item, the item’s relationship to the Council’s strategic priorities, and
the amount of estimated staff time necessary to prepare for Council discussion. If the
Page 4 of 4
requesting Council Member receives a second, the Town Manager will place the item on
the Council agenda calendar allowing for adequate time for staff preparation on the
agenda item.
8. COUNCIL RECAP / STAFF DIRECTION
9. COUNCIL CALENDAR
- Town Offices Closed
September 5, 2011
- Town Council Meeting
September 12, 2011
- Texas Municipal League
October 11-14, 2011, Houston
10. ADJOURNMENT
ANY ITEM ON THIS POSTED AGENDA COULD BE DISCUSSED IN EXECUTIVE
SESSION AS LONG AS IT IS WITHIN ONE OF THE PERMITTED CATEGORIES UNDER
SECTIONS 551.071 THROUGH 551.076 AND SECTION 551.087 OF THE TEXAS
GOVERNMENT CODE.
CERTIFICATION
I certify that the above notice was posted at the Town Hall of the Town of Westlake, 3 Village Circle,
August 24, 2011, by 5:00 p.m. under the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551 of the Texas Government
Code.
_____________________________________
Kelly Edwards, TRMC, Town Secretary
If you plan to attend this public meeting and have a disability that requires special needs, please advise
the Town Secretary 48 hours in advance at 817-490-5710 and reasonable accommodations will be made
to assist you.
Town of
Westlake
Item # 2 – Pledge of
Allegiance
Texas Pledge:
"Honor the Texas
flag; I pledge
allegiance to thee,
Texas, one state under
God, one and
indivisible."
CONSENT AGENDA: All items listed below are considered routine by the Town Council
and will be enacted with one motion. There will be no separate discussion of items
unless a Council Member or citizen so requests, in which event the item will be removed
from the general order of business and considered in its normal sequence.
a. Consider approval of the minutes from the meeting held on June 13, 2011.
b. Consider approval of the minutes from the meeting held on August 12, 2011.
c. Consider approval of Resolution 11-21, Appointing Michael Barrett to the
Planning and Zoning Commission.
d. Consider approval of Ordinance 660, Approving a negotiated resolution
between the Atmos Cities Steering Committee and Atmos Energy Corp., MID-TEX
DIVISION regarding the company’s Fourth Annual Rate Review Mechanism Filing
in all cities exercising original jurisdiction.
e. Consider approval of Ordinance 661, Amending Chapter 2, Administration,
Article V Finance, Division 2 Fees and Use Schedule, adding Section 2-182 Credit
Card Processing fee.
f. Consider approval of Ordinance 662, Amending Chapter 2, Administration,
Article V, Finance, Division 1. Generally, Section 2-161, Signatures On Town
Checks.
g. Consider approval of Resolution 11-22, Authorizing the Town Manager to
execute Change Orders 18 and 19 with TxDOT for structural enhancements for
the FM1938 project.
h. Consider approval of Resolution 11-23, Adopting the Governmental Accounting
Standard Board (GASB) 54 Policy.
i. Consider approval of Resolution 11-24, Accepting the Certified Property Tax
Values.
j. Consider approval of Ordinance 663, Amending Chapter 46, Health and
Sanitation Adding Article V, Public Swimming Pool, Spa or Interactive Water
Feature Rules.
k. Consider approval of Ordinance 664, Amending Chapter 46, Health and
Sanitation, Article III, Food, Division 2, Food Service Sanitation and Good
Handling
l. Consider approval of Resolution 11-25, Amending the Fee Schedule.
Town of
Westlake
Item # 3 –
Review of Consent
Agenda Items
DISCUSSION ITEMS
a. Discussion and overview of SB 100 regarding elections (30 min)
b. Discussion and follow-up regarding the FY 2011-2012 budget. (15 min)
Town of
Westlake
Item # 4 –
Discussion Items
Page 1 of 2
TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
Department: Town Secretary’s Office Meeting Date: August 29, 2011
Staff Contact: Kelly Edwards Discussion
Town Secretary
Subject: Discussion and overview of SB 100 regarding elections.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Gov. Rick Perry signed Senate Bill 100 on June 17, 2011. The legislation adjusted the dates of
the general primary election and primary runoff election in order to bring Texas into compliance
with the U.S. Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment (MOVE) Act, allowing more time for
overseas voters, particularly military personnel, to vote. Unfortunately, this bill negatively
impacts municipal elections. Due to the change in dates, there is a potential overlap between
dates for Primary runoff voting (May 22 in 2012) and May municipal elections (May 12 in
2012). With early voting, there will be an overlap in voting times. Because of this overlap, SB
100 removes the requirements that counties participate in joint elections on even numbered
years.
SB 100 allows cities to change their general election date from May to November. This bill also
provides that cities may change the terms for council members in order to continue conducting
elections on the May uniform date in odd numbered years only.
The law authorizes a general law city with a term of office of one or three years to adopt a
resolution by December 31, 2012 changing the length of the term of office to two years; and/or
authorizes a general law city with staggered terms of office for members of the city council to
cancel its staggered terms by adopting a resolution by December 31, 2012 providing for the
election of all members of the governing body at the same election.
The Council has until December 31, 2012, to decide whether to change Westlake’s election date
and/or term lengths.
Options
Change the election date for municipal elections to November
Continue with the two year terms so that elections could continue in May, but only occur
in odd numbered years
Hold municipal elections on our own, bearing all cost
At the time the law was passed, it was assumed that joint elections in May would not occur if the
counties were not required to engage in such elections. However, two of our surrounding
counties have agreed to hold joint elections even though they are not required to do so – Dallas
Page 2 of 2
and Denton counties. We find this development to be very encouraging but at this point, Tarrant
County has not agreed to hold joint elections.
Westlake is located in Denton and Tarrant County. Currently we have 5 registered voters in
Denton County. The Election Administrator in Denton County has agreed to continue
contracting with municipalities and ISDs which in turn continues to allow us to contract with
them for a May election. Currently the Election Administrator in Tarrant County has stated they
are unable to contract in May due to the overlapping dates with the Primary election.
Tarrant County held a meeting on August 10, 2011, to discuss the current issues. The Tarrant
County Commissioners met on Tuesday, August 30, 2011, to consider possible options as
presented during the August 10th meeting by municipalities and school districts to continue joint
elections on the May Uniform Election date.
APPLICABLE STRATEGIC PLAN VISION POINT
Inviting Residential and Corporate Neighborhoods
We are Leaders
Hospitality Finds its Home in Westlake
FISCAL IMPACT
Funded Not Funded N/A
RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUESTED/ OPTIONS
No action required, report presented for Council information and discussion.
ATTACHMENTS
None
Page 1 of 1
TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
Department: Town Manager Meeting Date: August 29, 2011
Staff Contact: Tom Brymer Discussion
Town Manager
Subject: Discussion of Proposed FY 2011-12 Municipal Budget
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Proposed FY 2011-12 Budget for the Town of Westlake was presented and reviewed with
the Town Council in a budget workshop retreat on August 12, 2011. The total budget proposed
for the Town for FY 2011-12 is $19.9 million, all funds (including Westlake Academy).
APPLICABLE STRATEGIC PLAN VISION POINT
Inviting Residential and Corporate Neighborhoods
We are Leaders
Hospitality Finds its Home in Westlake
FISCAL IMPACT
Funded Not Funded N/A
RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUESTED/ OPTIONS
Since the FY 11-12 Proposed Town Budget was reviewed in detail with the Town Council on
August 12th, staff recommends that at this meeting providing the Council with any additional
information requested on August 12th and answer any follow-up questions the Council may have.
ATTACHMENTS
None. The FY 2011-12 Proposed Budget was delivered last week to Council under separate
cover. It has been posted on the Town website as well for public review.
COUNCIL RECAP / STAFF DIRECTION
Town of
Westlake
Item # 5
Council Recap /
Staff Direction
Town of
Westlake
Item # 6 –
Workshop
Adjournment
Back up material has not
been provided for this item.
CITIZEN PRESENTATIONS AND RECOGNITIONS: This is an opportunity for citizens to
address the Council on any matter whether or not it is posted on the agenda. The Council
cannot by law take action nor have any discussion or deliberations on any presentation made to
the Council at this time concerning an item not listed on the agenda. The Council will receive
the information, ask staff to review the matter, or an item may be noticed on a future agenda
for deliberation or action.
Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for Fiscal Year beginning October 1, 2010 by Lena
Ellis, CFO, City of Fort Worth and Government Finance Officers Association National Board
Member.
Town of
Westlake
Item # 2 – Citizen’s
Presentations and
recognitions
CONSENT AGENDA: All items listed below are considered routine by the Town Council
and will be enacted with one motion. There will be no separate discussion of items
unless a Council Member or citizen so requests, in which event the item will be removed
from the general order of business and considered in its normal sequence.
a. Consider approval of the minutes from the meeting held on June 13, 2011.
b. Consider approval of the minutes from the meeting held on August 12,
2011.
c. Consider approval of Resolution 11-21, Appointing Michael Barrett to
the Planning and Zoning Commission.
d. Consider approval of Ordinance 660, Approving a negotiated resolution
between the Atmos Cities Steering Committee and Atmos Energy Corp.,
MID-TEX DIVISION regarding the company’s Fourth Annual Rate Review
Mechanism Filing in all cities exercising original jurisdiction.
e. Consider approval of Ordinance 661, Amending Chapter 2,
Administration, Article V Finance, Division 2 Fees and Use Schedule,
adding Section 2-182 Credit Card Processing fee.
f. Consider approval of Ordinance 662, Amending Chapter 2,
Administration, Article V, Finance, Division 1. Generally, Section 2-161,
Signatures On Town Checks.
g. Consider approval of Resolution 11-22, Authorizing the Town Manager
to execute Change Orders 18 and 19 with TxDOT for structural
enhancements for the FM1938 project.
h. Consider approval of Resolution 11-23, Adopting the Governmental
Accounting Standard Board (GASB) 54 Policy.
i. Consider approval of Resolution 11-24, Accepting the Certified Property
Tax Values.
j. Consider approval of Ordinance 663, Amending Chapter 46, Health and
Sanitation Adding Article V, Public Swimming Pool, Spa or Interactive
Water Feature Rules.
k. Consider approval of Ordinance 664, Amending Chapter 46, Health and
Sanitation, Article III, Food, Division 2, Food Service Sanitation and Good
Handling
l. Consider approval of Resolution 11-25, Amending the Fee Schedule.
Town of
Westlake
Item # 3 ‐ Consent
Agenda Items
Town Council Minutes
06/13/11
Page 1 of 6
MINUTES OF THE
TOWN OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS
TOWN COUNCIL MEETING
June 13, 2011
PRESENT: Mayor Laura Wheat and Council Members, Tim Brittan, Clif Cox, Carol Langdon,
David Levitan and Rick Rennhack.
ABSENT:
OTHERS PRESENT: Town Manager Tom Brymer, Town Secretary Kelly Edwards,
Town Attorney Stan Lowry, Assistant to the Town Manager
Ginger Awtry, Special Projects and Municipal Court Administrator
Amanda DeGan, Public Works Director Jarrod Greenwood,
Finance Director Debbie Piper, Planning and Development
Director Eddie Edwards, and Facilities and Recreation Director
Troy Meyer.
Workshop Session
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Wheat called the workshop to order at 4:34 p.m.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Wheat led the pledge of allegiance to the United States and Texas flags.
3. DISCUSS AND REVIEW OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS FROM JUNE 13, 2011,
REGULAR MEETING.
Town Engineer Jeff Winkler provided an overview of the item g regarding the paving and
drainage bids.
Discussion ensued regarding Item g - the price, the project approved in the Capital
Improvements Plan, the difference of the cost of the 2” and 4” paving benefits, the
Town Council Minutes
06/13/11
Page 2 of 6
difference in pricing of materials, and previous construction standards and previous
maintenance of the roads.
Discussion ensued regarding Item e - Charter servicing the Deloitte campus, possible
service for the Academy and Municipal offices, and opportunities for additional service to
residents.
Discussion ensued regarding Item h – the methodology used to calculate the Frac water
usage fee, impact fees, fees charged by the surrounding communities, and increasing the
proposed Frac rate.
4. DISCUSSION ITEMS
a. Report and Presentation from the President of the Westlake Historical
Preservation Society Regarding FY 10/11 accomplishments and FY 11/12 Plans,
Including a Proposed Historical Marker Master Plan.
President Elect, Bert Schultz, provided a presentation and overview of the past
years activities which include the museum window exhibits, living history
presentations and annual events.
Mr. Shultz also provided an overview of the proposed Historical Mark Plan and
list of proposed sites that have been identified by the Board.
Discussion ensued regarding funding for the program and the cost of the
marker.
Council Member Brittan acknowledged and thanked Mrs. Sharon Sanden for all
her work and support with the Historical board.
b. Discussion regarding the Annual Affiliate Board Appointments.
Discussion ensued regarding the Council’s role in appointing members to affiliate
boards and the applications presented.
c. Discussion of a proposed Parkland Dedication and fee ordinance.
Facilities and Recreation Director Troy Meyer and Planning and Development
Director Eddie Edwards provided an overview of the proposed ordinance.
Discussion ensued regarding the parkland requirements of the surrounding
communities, implications of the proposed ordinance with the current Planned
Development zoning, the in-lieu fee, residential and commercial requirements
per dwelling or acre and the impact of the requirements on the property owner.
Town Council Minutes
06/13/11
Page 3 of 6
d. Discussion of Follow-up Items from May 20, 2011 Strategic Planning Retreat.
Special Projects and Municipal Court Administrator DeGan provided an overview
of the current and proposed statement as drafted from discussion during the
May Strategic Planning meeting.
Discussion ensued regarding rewording the current the mission / vision
statements, the current Comprehensive Plan Vision Statement and how the
statement should collaborate with both the Strategic Plan and Balanced
Scorecard.
The Council tabled this item for future discussion.
5. COUNCIL RECAP / STAFF DIRECTION
The Council asked for additional information on Parkland Dedication requirements such as a
review other cities, and the total number of acres located in the flood plain.
To increase the proposed Frac fee to a 2/3 probability.
Schedule an additional Strategic Planning workshop to review the proposed mission / vision
statement.
6. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Council, Mayor Wheat adjourned the
workshop at 7:03 p.m.
Regular Session
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Wheat called the meeting to order at 7:21 p.m. with all Council Members
present.
2. CITIZEN PRESENTATIONS AND RECOGNITIONS
Presentation by Bert Shultz from the Westlake Historical Preservation Society.
Mr. Bert Shultz, President Elect, thanked the former Historical Preservation Society
members for their service and traditions they set forth. Mr. Shultz presented the
Historical Preservation Society Roll of Honor plaque and read the names for the record.
Town Council Minutes
06/13/11
Page 4 of 6
3. CONSENT AGENDA
a. Consider approval of the minutes from the meeting held on April 25, 2011
b. Consider approval of the minutes from the meeting held on May 9, 2011.
c. Consider approval of the minutes from the meeting held on May 23, 2011.
d. Consider approval of Resolution 11-16, Authorizing the Town Manager to
execute Amendment No. 1 to the Local Transportation Project Advance Funding
Agreement with the Texas Department Of Transportation (Txdot), relating to the
review of a preliminary engineering study for the extension of FM 1938 from FM
1709 to SH 114.
e. Consider approval of Resolution 11-17, Authorizing the Town Manager to
negotiate and enter into an agreement with Charter Communications, for the use
of the Town’s telecommunication ductbank.
f. Consider approval of Resolution 11-18, Approving a Historical Marker Master
Plan.
g. Consider approval of Resolution 11-19, Authorizing the Town Manager to
execute a contract with Lane Construction for Mahotea Boone Trail and Aspen
Lane Paving and Drainage Construction related to the adopted Capital
Improvement Plan.
h. Consider approval of Ordnance 659, Amending the Water/Waste Water rates
and Tap Fee schedule by establishing a new Frac Water rate schedule.
MOTION: Council Member Langdon made a motion to approve the consent
agenda with revisions as discussed during the workshop. Council
Member Cox seconded the motion. The motion carried by a
vote of 5-0.
4. CONSIDERATION AND DISCUSSION TO ELECT A MAYOR PRO TEMPORE.
MOTION: Council Member Cox made a motion to nominate Council Member
Langdon to serve as Mayor Pro Tempore. Council Member Brittan
seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote 5-0.
5. CONSIDERATION AND DISCUSSION OF RESOLUTION 11-20, APPOINTING AND
REAPPOINTING MEMBERS TO THE HISTORICAL PRESERVATION SOCIETY,
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, PUBLIC ART SOCIETY, TEXAS
STUDENT HOUSING AUTHORITY AND ENTITIES, AND WESTLAKE ACADEMY
FOUNDATION.
MOTION: Council Member Brittan made a motion to approve Resolution 11-
20, with the revisions as discussed during the workshop. Council
Member Langdon seconded the motion. The motion carried by a
vote of 5-0.
Town Council Minutes
06/13/11
Page 5 of 6
6. EXECUTIVE SESSION
The Council convened into executive session at 7:32 p.m.
The Council will conduct a closed session pursuant to Texas Government Code,
annotated, Chapter 551, Subchapter D for the following:
a. Section 551.087: Deliberation Regarding Economic Development Negotiations –
to deliberate the offer of a financial or other incentive to a business prospect.
7. RECONVENE MEETING
Mayor Wheat reconvened the meeting at 7:46 p.m.
8. TAKE ANY ACTION, IF NEEDED, FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEMS.
‐ No action taken.
9. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
‐ None
10. COUNCIL RECAP / STAFF DIRECTION
‐ None
11. COUNCIL CALENDAR
- Town Offices Closed
July 4, 2011
- Fire Station Open House/BBQ
June 25, 2011 (5:30 - 7:30 pm)
- Municipal Budget Workshop
August 12, 2011 (9:00 - 4:00 p.m.)
- Town Council Meeting
August 29, 2011
Town Council Minutes
06/13/11
Page 6 of 6
12. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Council, Mayor Wheat asked for a motion to
adjourn the meeting.
MOTION: Council Member Rennhack made a motion to adjourn the
meeting. Council Member Langdon seconded the motion. The
motion carried by a vote of 5-0.
Mayor Wheat adjourned the meeting at 7:49 p.m.
APPROVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL AUGUST 28, 2011.
ATTEST: _____________________________
Laura Wheat, Mayor
_____________________________
Kelly Edwards, Town Secretary
MINUTES OF THE
TOWN OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS
TOWN COUNCIL MEETING
August 12, 2011
PRESENT: Mayor Laura Wheat and Council Members, Tim Brittan, Clif Cox, Carol Langdon
David Levitan and Rick Rennhack.
ABSENT:
OTHERS PRESENT: Town Manager Tom Brymer, Town Secretary Kelly Edwards,
Assistant to the Town Manager Amanda DeGan, Director of
Communications & Community Affairs Ginger Awtry, Fire Chief
Richard Whitten, Finance Director Debbie Piper, Planning and
Development Director Eddie Edwards, Human Resources and
Administrative Services Todd Wood, Facilities and Recreation
Director Troy Meyer, Director of Public Works Jarrod Greenwood
and Management Intern Scot Dixon.
Workshop Session
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Wheat called the meeting to order at 9:16 a.m.
2. DISCUSSION OF THE PROPOSED MUNICIPAL BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR
2011-2012, AND THE PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN.
Town Manager Brymer provided an overview of the proposed budget.
Reviewing the accomplishments
Budget theme “Investing in Our Future”
Discussion ensued regarding the investment in service delivery sustainability, sales tax
regression analysis and the timeframe of audit payments, water rates and how the
trends effect the cost for residents, funding from TSHA, various projects listed in the
Capital Improvement Plan, the five year forecast, establishing a sinking fund for the
replacement of rolling stock and technology.
3. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Wheat adjourned the meeting at 12:37 p.m.
APPROVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 12, 2011.
ATTEST: _____________________________
Laura Wheat, Mayor
_____________________________
Kelly Edwards, Town Secretary
Page 1 of 1
TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
Department: Town Secretary’s Office Meeting Date: August 29, 2011
Staff Contact: Kelly Edwards Consent
Town Secretary
Subject: Consider a Resolution appointing a new member to the Planning and Zoning
Commission.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Mrs. Sharon Sanden has decided to step down from the Planning and Zoning Commission after
many years of service. Mr. Barrett will file the position currently held by Mrs. Sanden.
APPLICABLE STRATEGIC PLAN VISION POINT
Inviting Residential and Corporate Neighborhoods
We are Leaders
Hospitality Finds its Home in Westlake
FISCAL IMPACT
Funded Not Funded N/A
RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUESTED/ OPTIONS
Approval of the applicant and resolution
ATTACHMENTS
Mr. Barrett’s application
Resolution
Resolution 11-21
Page 1 of 1
TOWN OF WESTLAKE
RESOLUTION NO. 11-21
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS,
APPOINTING A MEMBER TO THE WESTLAKE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
WHEREAS, the Town Council has received an application for consideration of appointment;
and
WHEREAS, the Town Council has determined to appoint Mr. Barrett to the Planning and
Zoning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the meeting at which this Resolution was considered was open to the public as
required by law, and public notice of the time, place, and subject of the meeting has been given in
accordance with Chapter 551, Government Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
WESTLAKE, TEXAS:
SECTION 1: That, all matters stated in the Recitals hereinabove are found to be true and correct
and are incorporated herein by reference as if copied in their entirety.
SECTION 2: That the Town Council of the Town of Westlake does hereby appoint the
following individual to serve as a member of the Westlake Planning and Zoning Commission for the term
noted below:
Michael Barrett- term expiring June 2013.
SECTION 3: If any portion of this Resolution shall, for any reason, be declared invalid by any
court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect the remaining provisions hereof and the
Council hereby determines that it would have adopted this Resolution without the invalid provision.
SECTION 4: That this resolution shall become effective from and after its date of passage.
PASSED AND APPROVED ON THIS 29th DAY OF AUGUST 2011.
___________________________________
ATTEST: Laura Wheat, Mayor
______________________________ ___________________________________
Kelly Edwards, Town Secretary Thomas E. Brymer, Town Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________
L. Stanton Lowry, Town Attorney
Page 1 of 2
TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
Department: Town Manager Meeting Date: August 29, 2011
Staff Contact: Tom Brymer Consent
Town Manager
Subject: Consideration and Discussion of an Ordinance Approving Rates and a Settlement
Agreement with Atmos Mid-Tex.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Most municipalities have retained original jurisdiction over gas utility rates and services within
their corporate limits. The Atmos Cities Steering Committee ("ACSC") is composed of
municipalities, including Westlake, in the service area of Atmos Energy Corporation, Mid-Tex
Division regardless of whether original jurisdiction has been retained. Atmos is a monopoly
public utility provider of natural gas. Because Atmos has no competitors, regulation of the rates
it charges its customers in the only way that cities can insure that natural gas rates are equitable
and competitive. Working as a coalition to review the rates charged by Atmos allows cities to
accomplish more collectively than each city could do acting alone. Cities have more than 100
years experience in regulating natural gas rates in Texas.
Rates cannot change and the Settlement Agreement with Atmos Mid-Tex cannot be implemented
without passage of rate ordinances by cities. No related matter is pending at the Railroad
Commission. The purpose of the Ordinance is to approve rate tariffs (“Attachment A”) that
reflect the negotiated rate change pursuant to the RRM process and to ratify a Settlement
Agreement recommended by the ACSC Settlement Committee and Executive Committee.
As a result of the negotiations, ACSC was able to reduce the Company’s requested $15.7 million
RRM increase to $6.6 million, allowing only incremental revenues necessary to cover direct
costs associated with the steel service line replacement program approved by ACSC Cities in
2010. Approval of the Ordinance will result in the implementation of new rates that increase
Atmos Mid-Tex’s revenues effective September 1, 2011.
Additional details regarding this rate case are found in the attached staff report.
APPLICABLE STRATEGIC PLAN VISION POINT
We are Leaders
o High quality services delivery coupled with financial stewardship
o Infrastructure maintenance and planning
FISCAL IMPACT
Funded Not Funded N/A
This RRM increase is for $6.6 million system wide, allowing only incremental revenues
necessary to cover direct costs associated with the steel service line replacement program
Page 2 of 2
approved by ACSC Cities in 2010. Approval of the Ordinance will result in the
implementation of new rates that increase Atmos Mid-Tex’s revenues effective September
1, 2011. The Settlement Agreement approved by the Town in 2010 contemplated those
incremental revenues to cover future steel service line replacement costs would be recovered
through customer charges. Consistent with that approach, the $6.6 million in additional revenues
to be recovered following passage of the Ordinance is accomplished by increasing customer
charges. The tariffs to be approved by the Ordinance set monthly customer charges at
$7.50 and $16.75 for residential and commercial customers, respectively. The commodity
portion of the commercial rate will decline slightly from existing rates.
RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUESTED/ OPTIONS
Town Staff and the ACSC Executive Committee, as well as ACSC lawyers and rate consultants,
recommend approval of this Ordinance.
ATTACHMENTS
1.) Staff report on the negotiated settlement of this Atmos rate case.
2.) Ordinance Approving Recommended Rate Increase for Atmos
3.) Frequently Asked Questions About the ACSC and RRM Rate Making Process
1327115/Atmos Mid-Tex RRM-4 Ordinance Staff Report 1
STAFF REPORT
The Town, along with approximately 154 other cities served by Atmos Energy Mid-Tex
Division (“Atmos Mid-Tex” or “Company”), is a member of the Atmos Cities Steering
Committee (“ACSC” or “Steering Committee”). On or about April 1, 2011, Atmos Mid-Tex
filed with the City an application to increase natural gas rates pursuant to the Rate Review
Mechanism (“RRM”) tariff approved by the City as part of the settlement of the Atmos Mid-Tex
2007 Statement of Intent to increase rates. This is the fourth annual RRM filing.
The Atmos Mid-Tex RRM filing sought a $15.7 million rate increase. The Town worked
with ACSC to analyze the schedules and evidence offered by Atmos Mid-Tex to support its
request to increase rates. The Ordinance and attached rate and RRM tariffs are the result of
negotiations between ACSC and the Company to resolve issues raised by ACSC during the
review and evaluation of ACSC’s RRM filing. The Ordinance resolves the Company’s RRM
filing by authorizing supplemental revenue of $6.6 million to be recovered through the customer
charge component of rates to cover direct incremental costs associated with a steel service line
replacement program approved as part of last year’s rate adjustment. All other relief requested
by Atmos Mid-Tex is denied.
The ACSC Settlement Committee and ACSC legal counsel recommend that all ACSC
Cities adopt the Ordinance implementing the rate change.
RRM Background:
The RRM tariff was approved by ACSC Cities as part of the settlement agreement to
resolve the Atmos Mid-Tex 2007 system-wide rate filing at the Railroad Commission. Atmos
Mid-Tex’s current action represents an extension to the three-year trial project known as the Rate
Review Mechanism (“RRM”) process. The RRM process was created collaboratively by ACSC
and Atmos Mid-Tex as an alternative to the legislatively authorized GRIP surcharge process.
ACSC opposed GRIP because it constituted piecemeal ratemaking, did not allow any
reasonableness review, and did not allow participation by cities or recovery of cities’ rate case
expenses. The RRM process has allowed for a more comprehensive rate review and annual
adjustment as a substitute for GRIP filings during the three-year trial period specified by the
tariff.
Purpose of the Ordinance:
Rates cannot change and the Settlement Agreement with Atmos Mid-Tex cannot be
implemented without passage of rate ordinances by cities. No related matter is pending at the
Railroad Commission. The purpose of the Ordinance is to approve rate tariffs (“Attachment A”)
that reflect the negotiated rate change pursuant to the RRM process and to ratify a Settlement
Agreement recommended by the ACSC Settlement Committee and Executive Committee.
As a result of the negotiations, ACSC was able to reduce the Company’s requested $15.7
million RRM increase to $6.6 million, allowing only incremental revenues necessary to cover
direct costs associated with the steel service line replacement program approved by ACSC Cities
1327115/Atmos Mid-Tex RRM-4 Ordinance Staff Report 2
in 2010. Approval of the Ordinance will result in the implementation of new rates that increase
Atmos Mid-Tex’s revenues effective September 1, 2011.
Reasons Justifying Approval of the Negotiated Resolution:
During the time that the Town has retained original jurisdiction in this case, consultants
working on behalf of ACSC cities have investigated the support for the Company’s requested
rate increase. While the evidence does not support the $15.7 million increase requested by the
Company, ACSC consultants agree that the Company can justify an increase in revenues of $6.6
million, a result consistent with Cities’ approval of a steel service line replacement program last
year. The agreement on $6.6 million is a compromise between the positions of the parties.
The Settlement Agreement of 2010 which included an extension of the RRM process,
included an allowance for recovery of direct costs, excluding overheads, of the steel service line
replacement program. Current year recovery factors of $00.15 for residential customers and
$00.41 for commercial customers per month were authorized last year. The 2010 Settlement
Agreement contemplated that the steel service line replacement program would be adjusted
annually, but shall be capped at $00.44 cents for residential customers and $1.22 for commercial
customers. The increase in this case is consistent with the caps contemplated last year for the
steel service line replacement program, and nothing more.
The alternative to a settlement of the RRM filing would be a contested case proceeding
before the Railroad Commission on the Company’s current application, would take several
months and cost ratepayers millions of dollars in rate case expenses, and would not likely
produce a result more favorable than that to be produced by the settlement. The ACSC
Settlement Committee recommends that ACSC members take action to approve the Ordinance
authorizing new rate tariffs.
Steel Service Line Replacement:
Under pressure from the Railroad Commission to establish a comprehensive program to
replace service lines that contain steel which is subject to corrosion and leaks, ACSC worked
with Atmos Mid-Tex in 2010 to establish a risk based approach to steel service line replacement
that accomplishes the following goals:
1. Replace all service lines throughout the Mid-Tex Region with the highest degree
of risk within two years;
2. Coordination between ACSC city members and Atmos Mid-Tex to minimize
disruption of rights of way without compromising safety;
3. To minimize and spread the rate impact on customers of the replacement
program, the service lines with little relative risk of leaks should be replaced over a 10-year
period; and
4. Current recovery of incremental (above and beyond normal maintenance and
repair addressed in RRM proceedings) direct (excluding Atmos Mid-Tex overheads) cost of
service line replacement should be permitted as an adder to customer charges.
1327115/Atmos Mid-Tex RRM-4 Ordinance Staff Report 3
Fulfillment of these goals in the 2010 case led to $00.15 and $00.41 added to residential
and commercial customer charges, respectively. The annual customer charge adder to cover the
steel service line replacement program may not exceed $00.44 and $1.22 for residential and
commercial customers, respectively, prior to the entry of a Final Order in the next system-wide
Statement of Intent rate proceeding.
Changes to Customer Charges:
The Settlement Agreement approved in 2010 contemplated that incremental revenues to
cover future steel service line replacement costs would be recovered through customer charges.
Consistent with that approach, the $6.6 million in additional revenues to be recovered following
passage of the Ordinance is accomplished by increasing customer charges.
The tariffs to be approved by the Ordinance set monthly customer charges at $7.50 and
$16.75 for residential and commercial customers, respectively.
The commodity portion of the commercial rate will decline slightly from existing rates.
Explanation of “Be It Ordained” Paragraphs:
1. This paragraph approves all findings in the Ordinance.
2. This section adopts the attached tariffs (“Attachment A”) in all respects and finds
the rates set pursuant to the attached tariffs to be just, reasonable and in the public interest. Note
that only new tariffs or existing tariffs being revised are attached to the Ordinance. Existing
tariffs not being changed in any way are not attached to the Ordinance.
3. This section requires the Company to reimburse ACSC for reasonable rate
making costs associated with reviewing and processing the RRM application.
4. This section repeals any resolution or ordinance that is inconsistent with this
Ordinance.
5. This section finds that the meeting was conducted in compliance with the Texas
Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code, Chapter 551.
6. This section is a savings clause, which provides that if any section(s) is later
found to be unconstitutional or invalid, that finding shall not affect, impair or invalidate the
remaining provisions of this Ordinance. This section further directs that the remaining
provisions of the Ordinance are to be interpreted as if the offending section or clause never
existed.
7. This section provides for an effective date upon passage.
8. This paragraph directs that a copy of the signed Ordinance be sent to a
representative of the Company and legal counsel for ACSC.
Ordinance 660
Page 1 of 3
ORDINANCE NO. 660
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF WESTLAKE,
TEXAS, (“TOWN”) APPROVING A NEGOTIATED RESOLUTION BETWEEN THE
ATMOS CITIES STEERING COMMITTEE (“ACSC” OR “STEERING COMMITTEE”)
AND ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIVISION (“ATMOS MID-TEX” OR
“COMPANY”) REGARDING THE COMPANY’S FOURTH ANNUAL RATE REVIEW
MECHANISM (“RRM”) FILING IN ALL CITIES EXERCISING ORIGINAL
JURISDICTION; DECLARING EXISTING RATES TO BE UNREASONABLE;
ADOPTING TARIFFS THAT REFLECT RATE ADJUSTMENTS CONSISTENT WITH
THE NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENT AND FINDING THE RATES TO BE SET BY THE
ATTACHED TARIFFS TO BE JUST AND REASONABLE; REQUIRING THE
COMPANY TO REIMBURSE CITIES’ REASONABLE RATEMAKING EXPENSES;
REPEALING CONFLICTING RESOLUTIONS OR ORDINANCES; DETERMINING
THAT THIS ORDINANCE WAS PASSED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT; ADOPTING A SAVINGS
CLAUSE; DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND REQUIRING DELIVERY OF
THIS ORDINANCE TO THE COMPANY AND THE STEERING COMMITTEE’S
LEGAL COUNSEL.
WHEREAS, the Town of Westlake, Texas (“Town”) is a gas utility customer of Atmos
Energy Corp., Mid-Tex Division (“Atmos Mid-Tex” or “ Company”), and a regulatory authority
with an interest in the rates and charges of Atmos Mid-Tex; and
WHEREAS, the Town is a member of the Atmos Cities Steering Committee (“ACSC”
or “Steering Committee”), a coalition of approximately 154 similarly situated cities served by
Atmos Mid-Tex that have joined together to facilitate the review of and response to natural gas
issues affecting rates charged in the Atmos Mid-Tex service area (such participating cities are
referred to herein as “ACSC Cities”); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of the agreement settling the Company’s 2007
Statement of Intent to increase rates, ACSC Cities and the Company worked collaboratively to
develop a Rate Review Mechanism (“RRM”) tariff that allows for an expedited rate review
process controlled in a three-year experiment by ACSC Cities as a substitute to the current GRIP
process instituted by the Legislature; and
WHEREAS, the Town took action in 2008 to approve a Settlement Agreement with
Atmos Mid-Tex resolving the Company’s 2007 rate case and authorizing the RRM Tariff; and
WHEREAS, the 2008 Settlement Agreement contemplates reimbursement of ACSC
Cities’ reasonable expenses associated with RRM applications; and
WHEREAS, the Steering Committee and Atmos Mid-Tex agreed to extend the RRM
process in reaching a settlement in 2010 on the third RRM filing; and
Ordinance 660
Page 2 of 3
WHEREAS, on or about April 1, 2011, the Company filed with the town its fourth
annual RRM filing, requesting to increase natural gas base rates by $15.7 million; and
WHEREAS, ACSC coordinated its review of Atmos Mid-Tex’s RRM filing by
designating a Settlement Committee made up of ACSC representatives, assisted by ACSC
attorneys and consultants, to resolve issues identified by ACSC in the Company’s RRM filing;
and
WHEREAS, independent analysis by ACSC’s rate expert concluded that Atmos Mid-
Tex is unable to justify an increase over current rates except for undisputed costs of $6.6 million
to cover the steel service line replacement program initiated in 2010; and
WHEREAS, the ACSC Settlement Committee, as well as ACSC lawyers and
consultants, recommend that ACSC Cities approve the attached rate tariffs (“Attachment A” to
this Ordinance), which will increase the Company’s revenue requirement by $6.6 million to
extend current recovery of incremental direct costs of the steel service line replacement program
authorized by ACSC Cities in ordinances passed in 2010; and
WHEREAS, the attached tariffs implementing new rates are consistent with the
negotiated resolution reached by ACSC Cities and are just, reasonable, and in the public interest.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN
OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS:
Section 1: That the findings set forth in this Ordinance are hereby in all things approved.
Section 2: That the Town Council finds the existing rates for natural gas service provided
by Atmos Mid-Tex are unreasonable and new tariffs which are attached hereto and incorporated
herein as Attachment A, are just and reasonable and are hereby adopted.
Section 3: That Atmos Mid-Tex shall reimburse the reasonable ratemaking expenses of
the ACSC Cities in processing the Company’s rate application.
Section 4: That to the extent any resolution or ordinance previously adopted by the
Council is inconsistent with this Ordinance, it is hereby repealed.
Section 5: That the meeting at which this Ordinance was approved was in all things
conducted in strict compliance with the Texas Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code,
Chapter 551.
Section 6: That if any one or more sections or clauses of this Ordinance is adjudged to be
unconstitutional or invalid, such judgment shall not affect, impair or invalidate the remaining
provisions of this Ordinance and the remaining provisions of the Ordinance shall be interpreted
as if the offending section or clause never existed.
Ordinance 660
Page 3 of 3
Section 7: That this Ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage with
rates authorized by attached Tariffs to be effective for bills rendered on or after September 1,
2011.
Section 8: That a copy of this Ordinance shall be sent to Atmos Mid-Tex, care of David
Park, Vice President Rates and Regulatory Affairs, at Atmos Energy Corporation, 5420 LBJ
Freeway, Suite 1862, Dallas, Texas 75240, and to Geoffrey Gay, General Counsel to ACSC, at
Lloyd Gosselink Rochelle & Townsend, P.C., P.O. Box 1725, Austin, Texas 78767-1725.
PASSED AND APPROVED ON THIS 29th DAY OF AUGUST 2011.
_____________________________
ATTEST: Laura Wheat, Mayor
____________________________ ______________________________
Kelly Edwards, Town Secretary Thomas E. Brymer, Town Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
____________________________
L. Stanton Lowry, Town Attorney
August 1, 2011
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS REGARDING
ACSC AND THE RRM RATEMAKING PROCESS
What is the Role of Cities in Ratemaking?
Cities have historically exercised original jurisdiction over the level of gas rates charged
within their boundaries. Generally, gas distribution utilities have filed rate cases at the city level
and only gone to the Railroad Commission of Texas (“RRC”) with an appeal of city action or if
they cannot reach a settlement with cities. If a utility and cities reach an agreement, the utility
may then file a case at the RRC to implement the same rates approved by cities in areas outside
municipal boundaries.
Once a case is at the RRC, the Commission Staff generally expects cities to intervene and
do most of the discovery, sponsor opposing witnesses, and do most of the cross-examination and
briefing. There is no consumer advocate at the RRC. If cities do not participate in hearings at
the RRC, the request of a regulated utility is likely to be rubber-stamped.
What is the background to the creation of the Atmos Cities’ Steering Committee?
The Atmos pipeline and distribution systems were built, owned and operated by Lone
Star Gas (“LSG”) which maintained over 200 rate jurisdictions until it sold its assets to Texas
Utilities (“TXU”) in the late 1990’s. That meant that many cities had their own unique
distribution rates and that individual cities had to process rate cases at the local level. LSG-
Pipeline served all 200-plus distribution systems and pipeline rates were set by the RRC.
From the early 1980’s through the late 1990’s, LSG filed no pipeline or system-wide rate
case at the RRC. When LSG was finally brought before the RRC to show cause why its rates
should not be reduced, approximately 80 cities intervened and created an ad hoc group known as
the Steering Committee of Cities Served by Lone Star.
TXU purchased the LSG assets in the late 1990’s and immediately commenced
consolidating 200-plus ratemaking jurisdictions into regions. As regional cases were filed, cities
within each region created an ad hoc committee to form a common strategy and negotiating
position. Once TXU had aggregated the cities into five or six jurisdictions, each with a different
rate, Texas Utilities Gas Company filed a system-wide case to bring all of the old LSG territory
under one common rate. The different city regional committees then united and formed the
Allied Coalition of Cities (“ACC”). While the gas utility assets were owned and controlled by
TXU, the Steering Committee transformed itself from an ad hoc group that came together only in
response to rate filings by the utility into a permanent standing committee.
In Gas Utilities Docket (“GUD”) No. 9400 in 2004, TXU’s request for a $61.6 million
system-wide increase was aggressively opposed by ACC. The Company received only a $2.01
million increase. Unhappy with that result, TXU decided that owning a gas system was neither
as fun nor as profitable as the deregulated electric system, and they sold the system to Atmos
Energy Corporation (“Atmos” or “Company”). ACC was then transformed into the Steering
2
2557/15/1348026
Committee of Cities Served by Atmos and then renamed Atmos Cities Steering Committee to
obtain an easy to remember acronym, “ACSC”.
What is the Atmos Cities Steering Committee?
ACSC is a coalition of 154 cities that unite in common purpose to address gas utility rate
and franchise issues related to Atmos Energy Corporation. Its objectives are to: (1) ensure that
gas utility rates charged to cities and their residents are fair and reasonable; (2) maintain
reasonable franchise fee revenues for cities; (3) protect cities’ original jurisdiction over rates and
services; (4) be a voice for consumers where no state agency assumes such a role; and (5)
promote sound ratemaking policy in the public interest.
Cities join the permanent standing committee by passing a resolution and agreeing to
support the work of ACSC through modest occasional per capita assessments which support
ongoing administrative and legislative advocacy and all expenses where cities are not entitled to
reimbursement. Each member city designates a representative to ACSC. Member
representatives may volunteer to serve on the ACSC Executive Committee or Settlement
Committee. The Executive Committee sets policy, hires legal counsel and consultants, directs
litigation, establishes a legislative agenda, sets assessments on members as needed and meets
quarterly with Atmos executives. The Settlement Committee is directly involved in negotiating
resolution of contested matters with Atmos executives.
The list of current members is attached.
What is the benefit of membership in ACSC?
One hundred fifty-four cities speaking as one voice is much more effective in advocacy
before the Railroad Commission and legislature than any one city or multiple small groups of
cities.
The legislature has given gas utilities a right to an annual increase in rates. Resources
(both financial and human) of individual cities are conserved by membership in ACSC.
Additionally, membership enhances institutional memory of ratemaking issues, public policy
debates, and right-of-way and franchise fee battles.
What has ACSC accomplished?
Going into the legislative session, ACSC in December 2010 released a 48-page report,
“Natural Gas Consumers and the Texas Railroad Commission.” More than 200 television,
newspaper and radio news sites posted information on and a link to the report which may be
found on ACSC’s website, TexasGasConsumers.org.
Earlier in 2010, ACSC representatives visited on several occasions with the Sunset
Commission Staff, and several ACSC recommendations for reform were included in the Sunset
Commission Report on the Railroad Commission, delivered to the legislature’s Sunset
Committee prior to public hearings on the agency. Several ACSC member representatives
testified before the legislature regarding reforms needed at the Railroad Commission.
3
2557/15/1348026
During the most recent legislative session, lobbying efforts by ACSC were critical in
killing two gas utility bills that would have undermined traditional regulation, deprived cities of
certain rights, and led to even greater rate increases.
In the last 12 months, ACSC has resolved a major issue involving franchise fees. Atmos
unilaterally, with notice, ceased inclusion of franchise fees in the calculations of gross receipts
regardless of whether specific franchises included such payments. Several cities were willing to
pursue the matter through litigation. However, counsel for ACSC was able to negotiate a
resolution that allowed each member city to determine whether it desired an increase in franchise
fee payments based on inclusion of franchise fees in the calculation of gross receipts. If a city
opted for inclusion of fee-on-fee revenues, it had the further option of retroactive payments back
to the point in time that Atmos decided to curtail fee-on-fee payments. Each member had these
options regardless of the wording of the then valid franchise agreement. This resolution spared
significant litigation costs and anxiety and was only possible because of the clout of the ACSC
membership.
One of the most significant accomplishments of ACSC occurred in 2007 via a settlement
of the then pending system-wide rate case. Approximately 50 ACSC city representatives showed
up in Arlington for a meeting with Atmos executives who were shocked at the vocal opposition
to Atmos practices, the unfairness of annual Gas Reliability Infrastructure Program (“GRIP”)
rate filings that precluded city and citizen review, and the Company’s lack of coordination with
cities. That meeting led to the creation of the Rate Review Mechanism (“RRM”) process and
greater ongoing communication between the Company and ACSC.
Last year, ongoing communications between ACSC and the Company led to a workable
solution to the need to replace steel service lines in a manner that accommodated city needs to
control their rights-of-way, while moderating the rate impact and focusing first on the riskiest
service lines based on leak repair histories. This compromise precluded a more onerous (from a
city and consumer perspective) program threatened by the RRC.
What is a RRM case?
The concept of a RRM proceeding emerged as a three-year experimental substitute for
GRIP cases as part of the settlement of Atmos Mid-Tex’s 2007 system-wide rate case. In 2003,
the Texas Legislature added Section 104.301, Interim Adjustment for Changes in Investment, to
the Gas Utility Regulatory Act. While not identified as such in the law, § 104.301 was referred
to as the Gas Reliability Infrastructure Program or GRIP. The GRIP adjustments allowed gas
companies to recover changes to invested capital without a review of whether increased revenues
or declining expenses offset the invested capital costs. Both Atmos Pipeline and Atmos Mid-Tex
filed GRIP cases as soon as the RRC adopted rules to implement the interim adjustments. As
explained below, it quickly became apparent that the GRIP adjustments were terrible public
policy.
As an alternative to GRIP, ACSC entered into a negotiated agreement with Atmos in
2007 to establish the RRM process. Unlike GRIP, the RRM provided for an annual review of all
portions of Mid-Tex’s cost of service. It fixed an authorized rate of return on equity for the
three-year period at 9.6% (which was less than what the RRC would have authorized) and set
4
2557/15/1348026
caps on the extent to which expenses or investments could increase from one year to the next.
More importantly, it allowed cities to make a comprehensive evaluation of all aspects of the
utility business—investment, operation and maintenance expenses and revenues—unlike GRIP
which only allows consideration of changes to invested capital.
Why is RRM superior to GRIP?
The GRIP cases are one-sided guarantees of a rubber-stamp of the utility’s rate request.
ACSC attempted to participate in the first two GRIP proceedings filed by both Atmos Pipeline
and Atmos Mid-Tex at the RRC. Not only were cities’ motions to intervene denied, but also,
ACSC’s comments were ignored. At the city level, ACSC consultants determined that Atmos
was not only including items such as artwork, chairs, computers and meals in interim rate
adjustments that were allegedly intended to promote pipeline safety, but also the Company was
over-earning its previously authorized rate of return. ACSC attacked the Commission’s rule in
court because it denied city participation, denied a hearing on a contested matter, and denied
cities’ recovery of any expenses associated with resisting GRIP rate increases. The courts have
not been helpful to cities, although the matter has now been set for hearing before the Texas
Supreme Court on September 15, 2011.
Cities have contended that GRIP is terrible public policy since it authorizes what would
from a history of public interest regulation be regarded as unlawful—piecemeal ratemaking.
GRIP allows rates to increase if the utility’s invested capital net of depreciation increases year-
over-year. An increase in rates is mandated under GRIP if investment increases, even if
increasing revenues and declining expenses more than offset the costs associated with increased
investment.
The RRM process negotiated by ACSC solves the piecemeal ratemaking problem by
providing for a comprehensive review of Atmos’ expenses and revenues. Furthermore, RRM
benefits ACSC by: (1) allowing cities participation that would be denied under GRIP; (2)
allowing cities to recover, at utility shareholder expense, all their ratemaking costs; and (3)
avoiding both litigation and RRC jurisdiction.
The legislature has functionally authorized annual increases in gas utility rates through
the GRIP process. Since consumers are otherwise stuck with annual rate increases, it is better to
have cities participating in the comprehensive RRM process than unable to participate in a
piecemeal process.
What has been the history of the RRM efforts?
In 2010, ACSC, in settling the third RRM proceeding, agreed to a slight modification and
extension of the process. A settlement of the fourth annual RRM is now pending before ACSC
members. The results of the four RRM proceedings are as follows:
RRM Filing Year Atmos Request ACSC Settlement
#1 2008 $33.5 million $20 million
#2 2009 $20.2 million $2.6 million
#3 2010 $70.2 million $27 million
#4 2011 $15.7 million $6.6 million (pending)
5
2557/15/1348026
These results are better for cities and consumers than would have been authorized by the
RRC under the GRIP process.
What is the future of the RRM process?
The settlement of the fourth RRM filing anticipates ACSC and Atmos working between
August and December to refine the RRM process. If agreement on a new process is reached,
Atmos will file another RRM case next April. If no agreement can be reached on the RRM
process by the end of this year, Atmos Mid-Tex will file a system-wide traditional rate case in
January 2012.
If you have other questions please contact me at (512) 322-5875 and/or
ggay@lglawfirm.com.
Geoffrey Gay
ACSC, General Counsel
Page 1 of 2
TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
Department: Finance Department Meeting Date: August 29, 2011
Staff Contact: Debbie Piper Consent
Finance Director
Subject: An Ordinance of the Town of Westlake, Texas amending Chapter 2,
Administration, Article V, Finance, Division 1. Generally, establishing Section
2-162, a Credit Card Processing or Handling Fee. Providing for repealing,
savings and severability clauses; and providing for an effective date of this
Ordinance.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In an effort to achieve one of the outcome strategies noted in the Town’s Strategic Plan related to
our Vision Point – Hospitality Finds its Home in Westlake, we have reviewed several ways to
use technology to enhance service delivery and citizen engagement.
To accommodate our citizens with various payments to the Town, we are implementing an
online UB “Customer Information System” and internet credit card payment processing system.
With this enhancement to our existing finance software from Stw, Inc., citizens will have the
capability to access utility information (on-line) and the ability to make payments on line, via
credit card or bank draft. Below is a list of the new services we will be able to provide to our
citizens related to their utility bills:
Ability to receive their bill via email in a PDF file
Customer ability to enroll for ACH payment
Customer ability to store a credit card, and setup recurring automatic payments.
o Information is stored on a separate secured server maintained by Authorize.net
o Credit card and bank information is masked after initial entry (employees do not
have access to this information)
Customer ability to setup and receive email notifications for payment reminder and cut
off list notice.
Customer ability to send information to the Utility Billing office which can be converted
to a work order.
We anticipate a large response to this service and hope to alleviate a large portion of the
approximate 450 payments we are currently receiving which are manually opened, deposited and
processed through our accounting system.
A terminal will be positioned at the Town offices for citizens who want to come in to make these
payments with a credit card. In addition to utility payments, we will be able to take credit card
payments for any other municipal fee, fine or other charge at the front window. We are in the
Page 2 of 2
process of working towards on-line payments for all other fees, fines or charges and will bring
information to the Council in the fall of this year regarding implementation of that service. The
municipal court is already set up with these capabilities and is charging a 5% processing/
handling fee.
Along with these credit card services, we have determined that providing these services is not
feasible without the imposition of a charge designed to recover the costs directly and reasonably
incurred in providing this service. Our research has shown that the additional expenses incurred
by the Town for offering this service for utility billing is significantly less than for other
municipal fees and charges. We are proposing a 3% processing or handling fee for utility billing
and 5% on all other municipal fees, fines and charges that are processed.
APPLICABLE STRATEGIC PLAN VISION POINT
Inviting Residential and Corporate Neighborhoods
We are Leaders
Hospitality Finds its Home in Westlake
FISCAL IMPACT
Funded Not Funded N/A
Funds are available for the module, software and terminals and will be allocated between the
Utility Fund and General Fund.
RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUESTED/ OPTIONS
Adopt an Ordinance of the Town of Westlake, Texas amending Chapter 2, Administration,
Article V, Finance, Division 1. Generally, establishing Section 2-162, a Credit Card
Processing or Handling Fee. Providing for repealing, savings and severability clauses;
and providing for an effective date of this Ordinance.
ATTACHMENTS
Ordinance
Ordinance 661
Page 1 of 3
TOWN OF WESTLAKE
ORDINANCE NO. 661
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS AMENDING CHAPTER 2,
ADMINISTRATION, ARTICLE V, FINANCE, DIVISION 1. GENERALLY, ESTABLISHING
SECTION 2-162, A CREDIT CARD PROCESSING OR HANDLING FEE. PROVIDING
FOR REPEALING, SAVINGS AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSES; AND PROVIDING
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE.
WHEREAS, Chapter 132 of the Local Government Code authorizes municipalities to
collect a fee for processing or handling at the point of sale for the use of a credit card to pay a
municipal fee, fine or other charge, said amount being reasonably related to the expense incurred
in processing or handling the credit card payment, not to exceed five percent (5%) of the amount
of the fee, fine, court cost or other charge (“Fee”); and
WHEREAS, Chapter 132 of the Local Government Code further authorizes
municipalities to collect a service charge if, for any reason, a payment by credit card is not
honored by the credit card company on which the funds are drawn, said amount being equivalent
to that charged for the collection of a check drawn on an account with insufficient funds
(“Service Charge”); and
WHEREAS, Chapter 132 of the Local Government Code also authorizes municipalities
to charge a reasonable fee designed to recover the costs incurred in providing through the
internet: access to information, collection of payments for taxes, fines, fees or other charges; or
other services authorized by law; and
WHEREAS, Chapter 132 of the Local Government Code also allows municipalities to
contract with a vendor to provide access, collect payments or provide authorized services; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council of Westlake (“Town Council”) has determined that the
Town of Westlake, Texas (“Town”) receives many requests to pay for municipal fees, fines and
other charges through the use of a credit card; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the Town
and its citizens to allow individuals to pay for municipal fees, fines and other charges through the
use of a credit card; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council has determined that allowing the payment of municipal
fees, fines and other charges through the use of a credit card requires the Town to incur
additional expenses for offering this service; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council has determined that it would be beneficial to the citizens
of the Town to provide access to information, collect payments of taxes, fines, fees or other
charges, or other municipal services authorized by law through the internet; and
Ordinance 661
Page 2 of 3
WHEREAS, the Town Council has determined that providing the access to information,
collect payments of taxes, fines, fees or other charges, or other municipal services authorized by
law through the internet is not feasible without the imposition of a charge designed to recover the
costs directly and reasonably incurred in providing the access or service; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council has determined that the additional expenses incurred by
the Town for offering this service will be significantly less for payment of charges commonly
found on utility bills by credit card, as opposed to the payment of all other municipal fees, fines
or other charges by credit card; and
WHEREAS, as a result of this discrepancy between utility bills and all other municipal
fees, fines and other charges, the Town Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the
Town to collect one processing and handling fee for the payment of utility bills, by credit card,
and another processing and handling fee for payment of all other municipal fees, fines and other
charges, by credit card; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the Town
and its citizens to charge the Fee and Service Charge, if necessary, to offset the cost of providing
this service of convenience as set forth below.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS:
SECTION 1: That all matters stated in the preamble are found to be true and correct and
are incorporated herein as if copied in their entirety.
SECTION 2: That Chapter 2, Administration, Article V, Finance, Division 1. Generally,
Section 2-162, Credit Card Processing and Handling Fee. The Town of Westlake Code of
Ordinances is hereby amended as follows.
Sec 2-162: Findings Incorporated. The findings set forth above are incorporated into
the body of this Ordinance as if fully set forth herein.
Sec 2-163: Establishment of Processing or Handling Fee. A processing or handling
fee of three percent (3%) is hereby established to be charged by the Town at the point of sale for
processing or handling each time a credit card is used to pay a utility bill. For the purposes of
this Ordinance, a utility bill includes those charges commonly found on a Town utility bill,
including but not limited to charges associated with water, sewer, trash, storm drainage and
optional donations. A processing or handling fee of five percent (5%) is hereby established to be
charged by the Town at the point of sale for processing or handling each time a credit card is
used to pay all other municipal fees, fines or other charges. The Town Council finds that said
amounts are reasonably related to the expense incurred by the Town in processing or handling
the credit card payment.
Sec 2-164: Establishment of Service Charge. A service charge in an amount
equivalent to that charged for the collection of a check drawn on an account with insufficient
Ordinance 661
Page 3 of 3
funds is hereby established to be charged by the Town if, for any reason, a payment by credit
card is not honored by the credit card company on which the funds are drawn.
Sec. 2-165 – 2-180 reserved.
SECTION 3: Savings/Repealing Clause. All provisions of any ordinance in conflict
with this Ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent they are in conflict; but such repeal shall
not abate any pending prosecution for violation of the repealed ordinance, nor shall the repeal
prevent a prosecution from being commenced for any violation if occurring prior to the repeal of
the ordinance. Any remaining portions of said ordinances shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION 4: Severability. Should any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of
this Ordinance be declared unconstitutional or invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, it is
expressly provided that any and all remaining portions of this Ordinance shall remain in full
force and effect. The Town hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance, and each
section, subsection, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more
sections, subsections, sentences, clauses and phrases be declared unconstitutional or invalid.
SECTION 5: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon
its passage.
PASSED AND APPROVED ON THIS 29th DAY OF AUGUST 2011.
_____________________________
ATTEST: Laura Wheat, Mayor
____________________________ ______________________________
Kelly Edwards, Town Secretary Thomas E. Brymer, Town Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
____________________________
L. Stanton Lowry, Town Attorney
Page 1 of 1
TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
Department: Finance Department Meeting Date: August 29, 2011
Staff Contact: Debbie Piper Consent
Finance Director
Subject: An Ordinance of the Town of Westlake amending Chapter 2, Administration,
Article V, Finance, Division 1. Generally, Section 2-161, signatures on town
checks providing a cumulative clause; providing a severability clause; providing
a savings clause; and establishing an effective date.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In an effort to bring our Code of Ordinances up to date with our current practices, we are
requesting the amendment of this ordinance to change the amount of the required two (2)
signatures on checks to all checks greater than $10,000 (as is currently the practice) from the
$1,000 noted in our Code.
APPLICABLE STRATEGIC PLAN VISION POINT
Inviting Residential and Corporate Neighborhoods
We are Leaders
Hospitality Finds its Home in Westlake
FISCAL IMPACT
Funded Not Funded N/A
RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUESTED/ OPTIONS
Amendment of the Ordinance changing the amount of the required two signatures from $1,000 to
$10,000.
ATTACHMENTS
Ordinance
Ordinance 662
Page 1 of 2
TOWN OF WESTLAKE
ORDINANCE NO. 662
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF WESTLAKE AMENDING CHAPTER 2,
ADMINISTRATION, ARTICLE V, FINANCE, DIVISION 1. GENERALLY, SECTION 2-161,
SIGNATURES ON TOWN CHECKS PROVIDING A CUMULATIVE CLAUSE; PROVIDING
A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND ESTABLISHING
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Town of Westlake, Texas is a general law Town; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Westlake finds it necessary to amended
the amount of a check drawn on any town account and
WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the passage of this Ordinance is in the best
interest of the citizens of Westlake should be approved and adopted.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
WESTLAKE, TEXAS:
SECTION 1: That all matters stated in the preamble are found to be true and correct
and are incorporated herein as if copied in their entirety.
SECTION 2: That Chapter 2, Administration, Article V, Finance, Division 1.
Generally, Section 2-161. Signatures on Town checks of the Town of Westlake Code of
Ordinances, as amended, are hereby amended as follows.
Sec. 2-162. Signature on town checks
All checks of more than $10,000.00 that are drawn on any of the town’s accounts require two
signatures.
Secs. 2-1622-108. Reserved.
SECTION 3: That this Ordinance shall be cumulative of all other Town Ordinances
and all other provisions of other Ordinances adopted by the Town which are inconsistent with
the terms or provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed.
SECTION 4: It is hereby declared to be the intention of the Town Council of the
Town of Westlake, Texas, that sections, paragraphs, clauses and phrases of this Ordinance
are severable, and if any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section of this Ordinance
shall be declared legally invalid or unconstitutional by the valid judgment or decree of any
court of competent jurisdiction, such legal invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect any
of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs or sections of this Ordinance
since the same would have been enacted by the Town Council of the Town of Westlake
Ordinance 662
Page 2 of 2
without the incorporation in this Ordinance of any such legally invalid or unconstitutional,
phrase, sentence, paragraph or section.
SECTION 5: This ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after its passage
as the law in such case provides.
PASSED AND APPROVED ON THIS 29th DAY OF AUGUST 2011.
_____________________________
ATTEST: Laura Wheat, Mayor
____________________________ ______________________________
Kelly Edwards, Town Secretary Thomas E. Brymer, Town Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
____________________________
L. Stanton Lowry, Town Attorney
Page 1 of 2
TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
Department: Public Works Meeting Date: August 29, 2011
Staff Contact: Jarrod Greenwood
Public Works Director Consent
Subject: Consider a resolution authorizing the Town Manager to execute Advanced
Funding Agreements for Change Order numbers 18 and 19 with the Texas
Department of Transportation for enhancements related to FM 1938 construction.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
FM 1938 is a major TxDOT project supported by Westlake, Keller, Southlake, and Tarrant
County as a regional effort to facilitate the growing traffic congestion on residential streets. The
current phase of the project began in June 2010 and extends south from the existing Precinct
Line Road Bridge at Hwy 114 in Westlake to Randol Mill intersection at the Westlake Town
limits.
Town Council previously approved TxDOT Change Order No. 1, at the March 28th regular
council meeting, for pavement enhancement work. Change Order No. 19 provides for an anti-
graffiti/UV inhibitor coating to be applied to all headwalls, retaining walls, and pedestrian
tunnel. Change Order No. 18 provides for powder coating of all metal handrails and adds
decorative railing similar to existing metal rails on the Dove Road, Westlake Parkway, and
Precinct Line Road bridges (see attached photos).
The proposed Advance Funding Agreements, totaling $170,063.82, are necessary for TxDOT to
proceed with the change orders and incorporate the anti-graffiti coating and rail enhancements
with the existing contract with Ed Bell Construction Company.
APPLICABLE STRATEGIC PLAN VISION POINT
Inviting Residential and Corporate Neighborhoods
We are Leaders
Hospitality Finds its Home in Westlake
FISCAL IMPACT
Funded Not Funded N/A
The current CIP includes funding of $4,225,155 for paving, landscape, and hardscape
enhancements to FM 1938. Staff will make the appropriate funding adjustments to include
Change Order Nos. 18 and 19 without increasing the total project costs.
Page 2 of 2
RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUESTED/ OPTIONS
Staff recommends approval.
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution
Exhibit “A” - Proposed Advanced Funding Agreement Amendment No. 18
Exhibit “B” - Proposed Advanced Funding Agreement Amendment No. 19
Drawings/photos
Resolution 11-22
Page 1 of 2
TOWN OF WESTLAKE
RESOLUTION NO. 11-22
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF WESTLAKE,
TEXAS, AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER TO EXECUTE ADVANCED
FUNDING AGREEMENTS FOR CHANGE ORDER NUMBERS 18 AND 19 WITH THE
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR ENAHANCEMENTS
RELATED TO FM 1938 CONSTRUCTION.
WHEREAS, the Town of Westlake worked in partnership with the Cities of Southlake
and Keller for the construction of FM 1938; and
WHEREAS, Westlake desires to provide residents and commuters safe and aesthetically
pleasing streets to travel; and,
WHEREAS, Westlake desires to provide a attractive road enhancement project; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that funding for the Advanced Funding
Agreements are necessary for the enhancement of the FM 1938 corridor; and
WHEREAS, the cost for the construction of the FM 1938 pavement enhancements will
be allocated from the existing FM 1938 streetscape capital project budget.
WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the passage of this Resolution is in the best
interest of the public.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN
OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS:
SECTION 1. All matters stated in the Recitals above are found to be true and correct
and are incorporated herein by reference as if copied in their entirety.
SECTION 2. The Town Council of the Town of Westlake hereby approves the
agreements with the Texas Department of Transportation, for the construction of enhancements
totaling $170,063.82 related to the FM 1938 streetscape master plan, attached as Exhibits “A”
and “B”, and further authorizes the Town Manager to execute the agreements on behalf of the
Town of Westlake, Texas.
SECTION 3: If any portion of this Resolution shall, for any reason, be declared invalid
by any court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect the remaining provisions
hereof and the Council hereby determines that it would have adopted this Resolution without the
invalid provision.
Resolution 11-22
Page 2 of 2
SECTION 4: That this resolution shall become effective from and after its date of
passage.
PASSED AND APPROVED ON THIS 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2011.
__________________________________
Laura Wheat, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________ __________________________________
Kelly Edwards, Town Secretary Tom Brymer, Town Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________
L. Stanton Lowry, Town Attorney
Page 1 of 3
TOWN OF WESTLAKE AGENDA ITEM
Department: Finance Meeting Date: August 29, 2011
Staff Contact: Debbie Piper Consent
Finance Director
Subject: Approval and Adoption of the Governmental Accounting Standard Board
(GASB) 54 Policy, delegating the responsibility to assign funds to the Town
Manager or his/her designee, and amending the existing Fiscal and Budgetary
Policies to incorporate the new policy and approved delegation.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Previously, state and local governments were required to report fund balance in two categories:
Reserved Fund Balance – reports dollar amounts that have been appropriated and for
which resources have already been committed, such as inventories, prepaid expenditures,
etc.
Unreserved Fund Balance – the residual amount that is still available for future
expenditures
o Designated – Used to communicate to the reader of the financial statements that
certain projects had been identified that might require future spending
o Undesignated – Remaining balance of Unreserved Fund Balance
Over time, inconsistencies were seen in the reporting of fund balance and some users perceived a
lack of transparency in the way fund balances were reported. They were concerned with the
restrictions that had been placed on the use of current governmental resources. Frequently, it
was not apparent at what decision-making level the restrictions had been imposed and by what
authority.
GASB 54 is effective for financial statements for periods beginning after June 15, 2010 (which
will include our September 30, 2011 audit) and applies to the five governmental funds used by
state and local governments. The Town does not currently have any Permanent Funds.
General Fund
Special Revenue Funds
Capital Projects Funds
Debt Service Funds
Permanent Funds
As a result of the new standard, fund balance financial reporting will become more detailed and
the increased disclosures will help the user of the financial statements in understanding the
availability of resources. The new standard creates fund balance classifications that establish a
hierarchy based on the extent to which a government must observe constraints imposed upon the
use of the resources that are reported by the governmental fund.
Page 2 of 3
Based on the requirements of GASB 54, the fund balance will now be composed of three
primary categories:
Non-spendable Fund Balance – includes amounts that cannot be spent and are, therefore,
not included in the current year appropriation.
There are two components to this fund balance category:
1) Not in spendable form – previously recorded disbursements and include items that are
not expected to be converted into cash, i.e. inventories, pre-paid items, etc.
2) Legally or contractually required to be maintained intact – refers to an amount that
has been received that must be invested indefinitely, i.e. a donation received by the
government from a citizen, the principal of which is to be invested in a permanent
fund and the earnings used for general governmental purposes
Restricted Fund Balance – reports on resources that have spending constraints that are
either:
1) Externally imposed by creditors, grantors, contributors or laws and regulations of
other governments, i.e. grants, etc.
2) Imposed by law through constitutional provision or enabling legislation.
The amounts represented by this fund balance category have very stringent conditions
imposed by external parties or by law. Therefore, the amounts are restricted to very
specific purposes and cannot be redeployed for other purposes. The government can
be compelled by an external party to undertake the spending requirements represented
by the Restricted Fund Balance.
Unrestricted Fund Balance
1) Committed Fund Balance – represents amounts that have internally imposed
restrictions mandated by formal action of the government’s highest level of decision-
making authority. The committed amounts cannot be redeployed for other purposes
unless the same type of formal action is taken by the highest level of decision-making
authority to reserve or modify the previously imposed restriction.
2) Assigned Fund Balance – reports amounts that are constrained by the government’s
intent that they will be used for specific purposes. Decision making with regard to
these amounts may be made by a committee or other governmental official. The
resources represented by the Assigned Fund Balance can be more easily redeployed
and the constraints are not as stringent.
Except for the General Fund, fund balance amounts that are not labeled as non-
spendable, restricted or committed would be reported in the Assigned Fund Balance
category. Therefore, the Assigned Fund Balance becomes the residual amount for the
Special Revenue Fund, Capital Project Fund and Debt Service Funds.
3) Unassigned Fund Balance – the residual fund balance for the General Fund. It
represents the amount of fund balance remaining after allocation to the Non-
Page 3 of 3
spendable, restricted, committed and assigned fund balances. This amount reflects
the resources that are available for further appropriation and expenditure for general
governmental purposes.
GASB 54 calls for a change in familiar fund accounting terminology and concepts. However,
the improved transparency and disclosure that is created by this new accounting standard will
greatly benefit users of the governmental financial statements.
APPLICABLE STRATEGIC PLAN VISION POINT
Inviting Residential and Corporate Neighborhoods
We are Leaders
Hospitality Finds its Home in Westlake
FISCAL IMPACT
Funded Not Funded N/A
RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUESTED/ OPTIONS
Approval and Adoption of the Governmental Accounting Standard Board (GASB) 54 Policy,
delegate the responsibility to assign funds to the Town Manager or his/her designee, and amend
the existing Fiscal and Budgetary Policies to incorporate the new policy and approved
delegation.
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution
Resolution 11-23
Page 1 of 2
TOWN OF WESTLAKE
RESOLUTION 11-23
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF WESTLAKE,
TEXAS, APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING
STANDARDS BOARD (GASB) 54 POLICY, DELEGATING THE RESPONSIBILITY
TO ASSIGN FUNDS TO THE TOWN MANAGER OR HIS/HER DESIGNEE, AND
AMENDING THE EXISTING FISCAL AND BUDGETARY POLICIES TO
INCORPORATE THE NEW POLICY AND APPROVED DELEGATION.
WHEREAS, The Town Council being convened in Regular Session on the 29th day of
August, 2011, with a quorum present; and,
WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the passage of this Resolution is in the best
interest of the citizens of Westlake.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN
OF WESTLAKE:
SECTION 1: That, all matters stated in the recitals hereinabove are found to be true and
correct and are incorporated herein by reference as if copied in their entirety.
SECTION 2: That, the Town Council of the Town of Westlake, Texas, hereby adopts
Governmental Accounting Standard Board Statement (GASB) 54 effective August 29, 2011. To
comply with GASB 54, the following policies will be adopted:
The Town shall report governmental fund balances per GASB 54 definitions in the balance sheet
as follows:
Nonspendable
Restricted
Committed
Assigned
Unassigned
The Town Council shall approve all commitments by formal action. The action to commit funds
must occur prior to fiscal year-end, to report such commitments in the balance sheet of the
respective period, even though the amount may be determined subsequent to fiscal year-end. A
commitment can only be modified or removed by the same formal action.
The Town Council delegates the responsibility to assign funds to the Town Manager or his/her
designee. The Town Council shall have the authority to assign any amount of funds.
Assignments may occur subsequent to fiscal year-end.
Resolution 11-23
Page 2 of 2
The Town Council will utilize funds in the following spending order:
Restricted
Committed
Assigned
Unassigned
SECTION 3: If any portion of this resolution shall, for any reason, be declared invalid
by any court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect the remaining provisions
hereof and the Council hereby determines that it would have adopted this Resolution without the
invalid provision.
SECTION 4: That this resolution shall become effective from and after its date of
passage.
PASSED AND APPROVED ON THIS 29th DAY OF AUGUST, 2011.
___________________________________
Laura Wheat, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________ ___________________________________
Kelly Edwards, Town Secretary Thomas E. Brymer, Town Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________________
L. Stanton Lowry, Town Attorney
Page 1 of 2
TOWN OF WESTLAKE AGENDA ITEM
Department: Finance Meeting Date: August 29, 2011
Staff Contact: Debbie Piper Consent
Finance Director
Subject: Approval of Resolution to accept the Certified Tax Rolls having a total appraised
value of $936,334,098 less exemptions of $138,586,552 for a net taxable value of
$797,747,546.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This resolution is provided pursuant to Section 26.04 of the Texas Property Tax Code which
requires the assessor for a taxing unit to submit the total appraised value, the total assessed value
and the total taxable value of the property within the unit’s boundaries to the unit’s governing
body by August 1st or as soon thereafter as is practicable. These are the same values that were
used to calculate the effective and roll back rates for the proposed budget given to the Council at
the August 12th budget workshop.
Jeff Law, Chief Appraiser of Tarrant Appraisal District and Joe Rogers, Chief Appraiser of
Denton Central Appraisal District have submitted this information to the Town and Tarrant
County Tax Assessor-Collector has certified that the estimated tax collection rate for the tax year
2011 is 100%. The appraised value from the certified rolls is $936,334,098 less $138,586,552 in
exemptions, produced a net taxable value of $797,747,546. The new construction value included
in the net taxable value amount is $78,170,788.
The effective tax rate calculations were prepared by Town staff with review from outside parties
since this was the first year for these calculations. The legal notice regarding the effective tax
rate for the Town of Westlake, Texas for tax year 2011, FYE 9-30-12 was published on Sunday,
the 14th of August.
APPLICABLE STRATEGIC PLAN VISION POINT
Inviting Residential and Corporate Neighborhoods
We are Leaders
Hospitality Finds its Home in Westlake
FISCAL IMPACT
Funded Not Funded N/A
RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUESTED/ OPTIONS
Staff recommends approval of the resolution accepting the Certified Tax Rolls.
Page 2 of 2
ATTACHMENTS
Certification letter by Debbie Piper of values used for publication and budget purposes
Certification letter and roll values from Tarrant County Appraisal District
Certification letter and roll values from Denton Central Appraisal District
Resolution 11-24
Page 1 of 2
TOWN OF WESTLAKE
RESOLUTION NO. 11-24
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS
APPROVING THE TAX ROLLS FOR 2011 ON PROPERTY WITHIN THE TOWN;
AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS, on July 26, 2011, the Chief Appraisers of the Tarrant and Denton
Appraisal Districts approved and certified to the Westlake Town Council the Tax Rolls for 2011
with a total appraised value $936,334,098 and having a net taxable value of $797,747,546
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN
OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS:
SECTION 1: That all matters stated in the preamble are true and correct and are
incorporated herein as if copied in their entirety.
SECTION 2: That the Certified Tax Rolls value for the tax year 2011 for the Town of
Westlake, Texas be and hereby approved in the amount of $936,334,098 for total appraised
value.
SECTION 3: That the certified net taxable value (total appraised value less exemptions)
of $797,747,546 is approved.
SECTION 4: That in addition to the value shown in Section 3 above, the Chief
Appraisers have prepared a list of all properties pending disposition before the Appraisal
Review Board. A projected minimum value of $30,218,721 has been assigned to this
property, $38,135,329 in properties not on the rolls, and $29,930,860 represents total ceilings
for over 65 and disabled persons for a total of $836,170,736 used for budget purposes.
Resolution 11-24
Page 2 of 2
SECTION 5: That this resolution shall become effective from and after its date of
passage.
PASSED AND APPROVED ON THIS 29thTH DAY OF AUGUST, 2011.
_____________________________
Laura L. Wheat, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________ ______________________________
Kelly Edwards, Town Secretary Thomas E. Brymer, Town Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________________
L. Stanton Lowry, Town Attorney
Page 1 of 1
TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
Department: Planning and Development Meeting Date: August 29, 2011
Staff Contact: Eddie Edwards Consent
Director of Planning & Development
Subject: Consider approval of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 46, Health and
Sanitation, by adding Article V, Public Swimming Pool, Spa or Interactive
Water Feature Rules.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Tarrant County Health Department provides permitting and inspection services for Food
Establishments and Public Swimming Pools in the Town of Westlake. The State Board of Health adopts
rules and regulations relative to these types of inspections and they are the model rules used by the
Tarrant County Health Department for all of the municipalities that they contract with. In order to avoid
confusion for the citizens we serve, it is recommended that the Town of Westlake adopt the latest rules
adopted by the state.
APPLICABLE STRATEGIC PLAN VISION POINT
We are Leaders
FISCAL IMPACT
Funded Not Funded N/A
RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUESTED/ OPTIONS
Approve the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 46 of the Code of Ordinances.
ATTACHMENTS
Ordinance
Ordinance 663
Page 1 of 7
TOWN OF WESTLAKE
ORDINANCE NO. 663
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF WESTLAKE AMENDING CHAPTER 46,
HEALTH AND SANITATION ADDING ARTICLE V, PUBLIC SWIMMING POOL,
SPA OR INTERACTIVE WATER FEATURE RULES , SECTIONS 46-150 THROUGH
46-160, RESERVING SECTIONS 46-161 THROUGH 46-179 PROVIDING A
PENALTY; PROVIDING A CUMULATIVE CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION; AND
ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Town of Westlake, Texas is a general law Town; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the regulation of public swimming
pools, spas and interactive water features are for the health, safety and welfare of the
general public and the residents of the Town of Westlake; and
WHEREAS, upon the recommendation of the Tarrant County Health
Department, the Town Council of the Town of Westlake, Texas, is of the opinion that it
is in the best interests of the town and its citizens that the amendments should be
approved and adopted.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN
OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS:
SECTION 1: That all matters stated in the preamble are found to be true and
correct and are incorporated herein as if copied in their entirety.
SECTION 2: That Chapter 46 of the Town of Westlake Code of Ordinances is
hereby amended by adding as follows:
Article IV
Secs. 46-125-46-149 Reserved
ARTICLE V. PUBLIC SWIMMING POOL, SPA OR INTERACTIVE WATER
FEATURE RULES
Sec 46-150 State regulations and guidelines adopted.
There is hereby adopted by reference of the V.T.C.A., Health and Safety Code §
341.064; Tex. Admin. Code §§ 265.181—265.208, "Standards for Public Pools and
Spas," and Tex. Admin. Code §§ 265.301—265.308 “Public Interactive Water Features
and Fountains”, as amended from time to time.
Ordinance 663
Page 2 of 7
Sec 46-151 Definitions.
All definitions in the V.T.C.A., Health and Safety Code Ch. 341 and Title 25, Chapter 265,
Subchapter L of the Texas Department of State Health Services regulations, "standards
for public pools and spas," are hereby adopted. In addition, the following definitions
shall apply in this article:
Certified pool operator. A person who possesses a valid pool operator's certificate from a
course approved by the city.
Town. Authorized representatives of the Town of Westlake which shall include the
director and representatives of the Tarrant County Public Health Department.
Director. Director of the Tarrant County Public Health Department, who shall be an
authorized representative of the city with respect to public pool and spa inspections and
permitting.
Pool. Any manmade permanently installed or non-portable structure, basin, chamber, or
tank containing an artificial body of water that is used for swimming, diving, aquatic
sports, or other aquatic activity other than a residential pool and that is operated by an
owner, lessee, operator, licensee or concessionaire, regardless of whether a fee is
charged for use. The pool may be either publicly or privately owned. The term does not
include a spa or a decorative fountain that is not used as a pool.
Private residential pool. A pool that is located on private property that is intended for
use by one single-family and their invited guests, located on property used for the
placement of a single-family residence.
Private residential spa. A spa that is located on private property that is intended for use
by one single-family and their invited guests, located on property used for the
placement of a single-family residence.
Public interactive water feature and fountain (PIWF)--Any indoor or outdoor installation
maintained for public recreation that includes water sprays, dancing water jets,
waterfalls, dumping buckets, or shooting water cannons in various arrays for the
purpose of wetting the persons playing in the spray streams.
Regulatory authority. The director and representatives of the Tarrant County Public
Health Department.
Spa. A constructed permanent or portable structure that is two feet or more in depth
and that has a surface area of 250 square feet or less or a volume of 3,250 gallons or
less and that is intended to be used for bathing or other recreational uses and is not
drained and refilled after each use. It may include, but is not limited to, hydrojet
circulation, hot water, cold water, mineral baths, air induction bubbles, or any
combination thereof. A spa does not refer to a business establishment, such as a day
spa or a health spa. Industry terminology for a spa includes, but is not limited to,
"hydrotherapy pool," "whirlpool," "hot spa," "hot tub," etc. A spa does not include a
private residential spa.
Ordinance 663
Page 3 of 7
Sec 46-152 Pool and spa permits.
(a)Required. It shall be unlawful for any person to operate a public pool, spa or
interactive water feature in the Town without a current and valid pool, spa or
interactive water feature permit.
(b)Posting. A valid permit shall be posted in public view in a conspicuous place at the
public swimming pool for which it is issued or on file in a secure area of the permitted
facility's premises.
(c)Nontransference (change of ownership). Permits issued under the provisions of
this article are not transferable. Upon change of ownership of a business, the new
business owner will be required to meet current standards as defined in Town
ordinances and state law before a permit will be issued. The new owner shall notify
the Town within ten (10) days after assuming ownership of the pool, spa or
interactive water feature.
(d)Multiple permits. A separate permit shall be required for every public pool, spa or
interactive water feature except that public pools or spas or interactive water features
on a single water filtration system require one permit.
(e)Denial of permit. A permit may be denied if the Town, upon inspection, determines
that the requestor has failed to comply with approved plans and specifications
adopted in accordance with these rules.
(f)Inspections for permits. An inspection shall be required annually to qualify for a
permit. A permit is valid for one year from the date of issuance.
Secs. 46-153 Review of plans and specifications.
(a)Submission of plans. Before a public pool's and/or spa's and/or interactive
water feature’s construction or extensive remodeling begins, the person
proposing to construct or remodel shall submit an application to the regulatory
authority for review and approval. The application shall include:
(1) The construction or remodeling plans, under an engineer's seal,
and specifications stating that the proposed construction or remodeling
complies with these rules and indicating that the proposed layout,
mechanical plans, construction materials of work areas, and the type and
model of proposed fixed equipment and facilities;
(2) The date on or after which proposed construction is to begin;
(3) The phone number and address of the entity primarily responsible
for constructing the pool, spa or interactive water feature and the phone
number and address of the entity primarily responsible for operating the
pool, spa or interactive water feature;
(4) A check or money order in the amount of $150.00 payable to
Tarrant County, Texas; and
Ordinance 663
Page 4 of 7
(5) And any necessary additional information necessary to verify
compliance.
(b)Approval. The Town shall approve plans and specifications that meet the
requirements of these rules. No public pool, spa or interactive water feature shall
be constructed or extensively remodeled except in accordance with plans and
specifications approved by the Town.
Secs. 46-154 Inspections.
(a) Preoperational inspections. The Town shall inspect a newly constructed or
remodeled public pool, spa or interactive water feature prior to operation to
determine compliance with approved plans and specifications, and with the
requirements of these regulations. Requested inspections must be made a
minimum of three working days prior to the desired opening date.
(b) Inspections. The Town shall inspect all public pools, spas and interactive
water features at least once per year. The owner or operator shall request an
inspection by permit application providing the pool, spa or interactive water
feature owner's name and address and, if different, the pool, spa or interactive
water feature operator's name and address.
(c) Inspection fees. A fee, as set forth in the Town's fee ordinances, shall be
required to be paid for preoperational inspections and, thereafter, on an annual
basis. Fees shall be paid to Tarrant County Public Health Department at 1101
South Main, Fort Worth, Texas 76104. Only one permit will be required for a
public pool, spa or interactive water feature connected to a single filtration
system. Inspection fees shall be based on the number of filtration systems
located at a single address. Inspection fees for single filtration systems shall be
$250.00 each.
Secs. 46-155 Pool, spa or interactive water feature closures.
(a) A public pool, spa or interactive water feature shall be closed if any of the
following conditions occur:
(1) Disinfectant level below the minimums set by the Texas
Department of State Health Services;
(2) pH below 7.0;
(3) Inability to see bottom drain (poor visibility);
(4) Chlorine levels above eight ppm; or
(5) Any other imminent health hazards.
(b) A closed sign shall immediately be posted and the pool, spa or interactive
water feature access gate shall be locked until all violations have been corrected.
Ordinance 663
Page 5 of 7
Secs. 46-156 Pool and spa records.
Daily records for each permitted public pool, spa or interactive water feature
shall be kept on premises and shall include information pertaining to:
(1) Disinfectant—Three times per day;
(2) pH—Three times per day;
(3) Alkalinity—One time per week;
(4) Chemicals added—As noted by name, amount and date; and
(5) Other information needed to ensure the facility's proper operation.
Secs. 46-157 Suspension and revocation of permit.
(a)Notice of suspension. The Town may temporarily suspend the permit of a
public pool, spa or interactive water feature for noncompliance with state pool,
spa or interactive water feature standards, by issuing a written notice for
suspension. When a permit is suspended, pool, spa or interactive water feature
operations shall immediately cease. A closed sign shall be immediately posted
and the pool, spa or interactive water feature access gate shall be locked until
any and all violations have been corrected.
(b)Reinstatement of permit after suspension. Whenever a notice of suspension is
issued by the Town, the holder of the permit or the person in charge will be
given an opportunity to correct the violation(s) prior to final revocation of the
permit. The Town may end the suspension any time if the reasons for
suspension no longer exist.
(c)Revocation of permit. The Town may, after providing notice of pending
revocation and an opportunity for a hearing, revoke a permit for serious or
repeated violations of any of the requirements of these rules or for interference
with the Town in the performance of its duties. Prior to revocation, the city shall
notify the holder of the permit or the person in charge, in writing, of the reason
for which the permit is subject to revocation and that the permit shall be revoked
at the end of the ten (10) days following service of such notice. Unless a written
request for a hearing is filed with the Town by the holder of the permit within
such ten (10) day period, the revocation of the permit becomes final.
(d)Service of notices. A notice provided for in these rules is properly served when
it is delivered to the holder of the permit or the person in charge of pool, spa or
interactive water feature operations, or when it is sent by registered or certified
mail, return receipt requested, to the address listed on the permit application. A
copy of the notice shall be filed in the records of the regulatory authority.
(e)Hearings. The hearings provided for in these rules shall be conducted by the
regulatory authority at a time and place designated by it. Based upon the
recorded evidence of such hearings, the regulatory authority shall make a final
finding, and shall sustain, modify or rescind any notice or order considered in the
hearing. A written report of the hearing decision shall be furnished to the holder
of the permit by the regulatory authority.
Ordinance 663
Page 6 of 7
(f)Right of appeal. Any permit holder who wishes to dispute the decision of a
hearing may appeal the decision to the Director of the Tarrant County Health
Department.
(g)Application after revocation. Final revocation of a pool and/or spa permit shall
not prevent the holder of the revoked permit from making written application for
a new permit to the regulatory authority.
(h)Closed pool, spa or interactive water feature. Prior to reopening, the owner or
operator shall provide the application and fee required by subsection 46-74(a) if
a pool, spa or interactive water feature:
(1)closes voluntarily at the request of the regulatory authority on more
than two occasions in one calendar year; or
(2)closes on court order on more than two occasions in one calendar
year.
Secs. 46-158 Public pool, spa or interactive water feature operator
certification.
(a)Requirement. The person in charge of pool, spa or interactive water feature
operations at a Class C pool as defined by the adopted regulations, shall have at
least one certified pool, spa or interactive water feature operator employed to
maintain the pool, spa or interactive water feature for each apartment complex
or municipal location. The certificate must be kept on premises to facilitate
inspections.
(b)Termination of certified pool, spa or interactive water feature operator. In the
event that a certified pool, spa or interactive water feature operator is
terminated or transferred, the business shall have sixty (60) days from the
operator's termination or transfer date to designate a new certificate holder. This
requirement is applicable even if pool, spa or interactive water feature
maintenance operations are contracted to an outside company.
Secs. 46-159 Penalty for violation.
Any person, firm or corporation who violates, disobeys, omits, neglects or
refuses to comply with or who resists the enforcement of any of the provisions of
this article shall be fined not more than $2,000.00 for each offense. Each day
that a violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense.
Secs. 46-160 Designation of health authority.
The city designates the Medical Director of the Tarrant County Public Health
Department as its health authority for the purpose of insuring minimum
standards of environmental health and sanitation within the scope of that
department's function.
Ordinance 663
Page 7 of 7
Secs. 46-161 through 46-179 Reserved
SECTION 4: That this Ordinance shall be cumulative of all other Town
Ordinances and all other provisions of other Ordinances adopted by the Town which are
inconsistent with the terms or provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed.
SECTION 5: It is hereby declared to be the intention of the Town Council of
the Town of Westlake, Texas, that sections, paragraphs, clauses and phrases of this
Ordinance are severable, and if any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section of
this Ordinance shall be declared legally invalid or unconstitutional by the valid judgment
or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, such legal invalidity or
unconstitutionality shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, clauses, sentences,
paragraphs or sections of this Ordinance since the same would have been enacted by
the Town Council of the Town of Westlake without the incorporation in this Ordinance of
any such legally invalid or unconstitutional, phrase, sentence, paragraph or section.
SECTION 6: This ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after its
passage as the law in such case provides.
PASSED AND APPROVED ON THIS _____ DAY OF ____________ 2011.
_____________________________
ATTEST: Laura Wheat, Mayor
____________________________ _____________________________
Kelly Edwards, Town Secretary Thomas E. Brymer, Town Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
____________________________
L. Stanton Lowry, Town Attorney
Page 1 of 1
TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
Department: Planning and Development Meeting Date: August 29, 2011
Staff Contact: Eddie Edwards Consent
Director of Planning & Development
Subject: Consider approval of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 46, Health and
Sanitation Adding Article III. Food, Division 2. Food Service Sanitation and
Food Handling.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Tarrant County Health Department provides permitting and inspection services for Food
Establishments and Public Swimming Pools in the Town of Westlake. The State Board of Health adopts
rules and regulations relative to these types of inspections and they are the model rules used by the
Tarrant County Health Department for all of the municipalities that they contract with. In order to avoid
confusion for the citizens we serve, it is recommended that the Town of Westlake adopt the latest rules
adopted by the state.
APPLICABLE STRATEGIC PLAN VISION POINT
We are Leaders
FISCAL IMPACT
Funded Not Funded N/A
RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUESTED/ OPTIONS
Approve the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 46 of the Code of Ordinances.
ATTACHMENTS
Ordinance
Ordinance 664
Page 1 of 5
TOWN OF WESTLAKE
ORDINANCE NO. 664
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF WESTLAKE AMENDING CHAPTER 46, HEALTH
AND SANITATION, ARTICLE III FOOD, DIVISION 2, FOOD SERVICE SANITATION
AND GOOD HANDLING, SECTIONS 46-77 THROUGH 46-82, RESERVING SECTIONS
46-87 THROUGH 46-110 PROVIDING A PENALTY; PROVIDING A CUMULATIVE
CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE;
AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Town of Westlake, Texas is a general law Town; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the regulation of food establishments including
food service establishments, retail food stores, temporary food establishments, mobile food
units, and roadside food vendors are for the health, safety and welfare of the general public
and the residents of the Town of Westlake; and
WHEREAS, upon the recommendation of the Tarrant County Health Department, the
Town Council of the Town of Westlake, Texas, is of the opinion that it is in the best interests of
the town and its citizens that the amendments should be approved and adopted.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
WESTLAKE, TEXAS:
SECTION 1: That all matters stated in the preamble are found to be true and correct
and are incorporated herein as if copied in their entirety.
SECTION 2: That Chapter 46 of the Town of Westlake Code of Ordinances is hereby
amended by adding as follows:
Sect. 46-77 Delete existing and replace with the following:
Sec. 46-77 Adoption of Texas Food Establishment Rules
The Town of Westlake adopts by reference the provisions of the current rules or rules as
amended by The Executive Commissioner of the Health and Human Services Commission found
in 25 Texas Administrative Code, Chapter 229, Sections 161 through 171 and 173 through 175
regarding the regulation of food establishments in this jurisdiction.
Sec. 46-78 is here by amended add the following definitions
Sec. 46-78 Definitions Amend by adding the following definitions:
Ordinance 664
Page 2 of 5
Authorized agent or employee means the employees of the regulatory authority.
Food establishment means a food service establishment, a retail food store, a temporary food
establishment, a mobile food unit, and/or a roadside food vendor.
Municipality means shall be understood to refer to the Town of Westlake.
State Rules mean the state rules found at 25 Texas Administrative Code, Chapter 229, Sections
161 through 171 and Sections 173 through 175. These rules are also known as the Texas Food
Establishment Rules.
Regulatory Authority mean the Tarrant County Public Health Department
Sec. 46-79 thru 46-83 delete and replace with the following:
Sec. 46-79 Food Permits
A person may not operate a food establishment without a permit issued by the regulatory
authority. Permits are not transferrable from one person or entity to another or from one
location to another location, except as otherwise permitted by this ordinance. A valid permit
must be visibly posted in or on every food establishment regulated by this ordinance.
(a) Any person desiring to operate a food establishment must make a written application for
a permit on forms provided by the regulatory authority. The application must contain the
name and address of each applicant, the location and type of the proposed food
establishment and the applicable fee. An incomplete application will not be accepted.
Failure to provide all required information, or falsifying information required may result in
denial or revocation of the permit. Renewals of permits are required on an annual basis
and the same information is required for a renewal permit as for an initial permit.
(b) Prior to the approval of an initial permit or the renewal of an existing permit, the
regulatory authority shall inspect the proposed food establishment to determine
compliance with state laws and rules. A food establishment that does not comply with
state laws and rules will be denied a permit or the renewal of a permit.
(c) Fees for permits issued under this ordinance shall be as listed in the fee schedule
Sec. 46-80 Review of Plans
(a) Whenever a food establishment is constructed or extensively remodeled and whenever
an existing structure is converted to use as a food establishment, properly prepared
plans and specifications for such construction, remodeling or conversion shall be
submitted to the regulatory authority for review before work is begun. Extensive
remodeling means that 20% or greater of the area of the food establishment is to be
remodeled or when equipment required by the rules is to be relocated or removed. The
plans and specifications shall indicate the proposed layout, equipment arrangement,
mechanical plans and construction of materials of work areas, and the type and model
of proposed fixed equipment and facilities. The plans and specifications will be approved
Ordinance 664
Page 3 of 5
by the regulatory authority if they meet the requirements of the rules adopted by this
ordinance. The approved plans and specifications must be followed in construction,
remodeling or conversion.
(b) Failure to follow the approved plans and specifications will result in a permit denial,
suspension, or revocation.
(c) Fees for the review of plans shall be as listed in the fee schedule
Sec 46-81 Inspections
(a) Before a permit is issued, the Town or its authorized representative shall inspect and
approve the food establishment. An inspection of a food establishment shall be
performed at least once annually and shall be prioritized based upon assessment of a
food establishment's compliance and potential of causing foodborne illness according to
25 TAC 229.171(h).
(b) The regulatory authority shall classify food establishments as special priority, high
priority, medium priority or low priority, according to the type of operations; particular
foods that are prepared; number of people served; susceptibility of the population
served; history of violations and any other risk factor deemed relevant to the operation.
(c) Refusal of an owner, manager or employee to allow the authorized representative of the
regulatory authority, upon presentation of credentials, to inspect any permitted business
or operation therein during normal business hours will result in an immediate suspension
of the permit, requiring all permitted activities to abate until after such time as a hearing
may be held per the Administrative process.
Sec. 46-82 Food Manager / Food Handler Education
Requirement:
(1) Each food service establishment shall have at least one person employed in a
managerial capacity possessing a current food manager certificate approved by the
regulatory authority.
(2) Each food service establishment with six (6) or more employees that is required to
have
certified food managers must have at least one certified manager on site during all
operations.
(3) Every employee of a food service establishment other than a certified Food Manager
must maintain a valid food handler certification registered with the regulatory
authority.
(4) Food Handler certification shall be valid for a period of up to three (3) years as
determined by the regulatory authority
(5) Food Manager and Food Handler certification documentation must be maintained in
the food service establishment and presented upon request by the regulatory
authority
Ordinance 664
Page 4 of 5
Sec. 46-83 Suspension of Permit
The regulatory authority may, without warning, notice, or hearing suspend any permit to
operate a food establishment if the operation of the food establishment constitutes an imminent
hazard to public health. When a permit is suspended, food operations shall immediately cease.
Whenever a permit is suspended, the holder of the permit shall be afforded an opportunity for a
hearing within ten (10) days of receipt of a request for a hearing.
Whenever a permit is suspended, the holder of the permit or the person in charge shall
be notified in writing that the permit is, upon service of the notice, immediately suspended and
that an opportunity for a hearing will be provided if a written request for a hearing is filed with
the regulatory authority by the holder of the permit within ten (10) days. If no written request
for hearing is filed within ten days, the suspension is sustained. The regulatory authority may
end the suspension at any time if reasons for suspension no longer exist.
Sec. 46-84 Revocation of Permit
The regulatory authority may, after providing opportunity for a hearing, revoke a permit
for serious or repeated violations of any of the requirements of these rules or for interference
with the regulatory authority in the performance of its duties. Prior to revocation, the regulatory
authority shall notify the holder of the permit or the person in charge, in writing, of the reason
for which the permit is subject to revocation and that the permit shall be revoked at the end of
the ten days following service of such notice unless a written request for a hearing is filed with
the regulatory authority by the holder of the permit within such ten day period.
If no request for hearing is filed within the ten (10) day period, the revocation of the permit
becomes final.
Sec.46-85 Administrative Process
(a) A notice as required in these rules is properly served when it is delivered to the holder of
the permit or the person in charge, or when it is sent by registered or certified mail,
return receipt requested, to the last known address of the holder of the permit as shown
on their permit application. A copy of the notice shall be filed in the records of the
regulatory authority.
(b) The hearings provided for in these rules shall be conducted by the regulatory authority at
a time and place designated by it. Based upon the recorded evidence of such hearing,
the regulatory authority shall make final findings, and shall sustain, modify or rescind any
notice or order considered in the hearing. A written report of the hearing decision shall
be furnished to the holder of the permit by the regulatory authority.
SECTION 3: That this Ordinance shall be cumulative of all other Town Ordinances and
all other provisions of other Ordinances adopted by the Town which are inconsistent with the
terms or provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed.
Ordinance 664
Page 5 of 5
SECTION 4: That any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions or
terms of this ordinance shall be subject to the same penalty as provided for in the Code of
Ordinances of the Town of Westlake, and upon conviction shall be punishable by a fine not to
exceed the sum of Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) for each offense. Each day that a
violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense.
SECTION 5: It is hereby declared to be the intention of the Town Council of the Town
of Westlake, Texas, that sections, paragraphs, clauses and phrases of this Ordinance are
severable, and if any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or section of this Ordinance shall be
declared legally invalid or unconstitutional by the valid judgment or decree of any court of
competent jurisdiction, such legal invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect any of the
remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs or sections of this Ordinance since the same
would have been enacted by the Town Council of the Town of Westlake without the
incorporation in this Ordinance of any such legally invalid or unconstitutional, phrase, sentence,
paragraph or section.
SECTION 6: This ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after its passage as
the law in such case provides.
PASSED AND APPROVED ON THIS 29 DAY OF AUGUST, 2011.
_____________________________
ATTEST: Laura Wheat, Mayor
____________________________ ______________________________
Kelly Edwards, Town Secretary Thomas E. Brymer, Town Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
____________________________
L. Stanton Lowry, Town Attorney
Page 1 of 1
TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
Department: Planning and Development Meeting Date: August 29, 2011
Staff Contact: Eddie Edwards Consent
Director of Planning and Development
Subject: Consider approval of a Resolution Amending the Fee and Use Schedule.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The proposed Fee and Use Schedule amendment will revise the fees that Tarrant County charges for
permitting and inspection services for Food Establishments and Public Swimming Pools. It also is
establishing a fee for plat or easement amendment or abandonment and it is clarifying that grading or
excavation permits will include any costs incurred by the town from the use of contractors or consultants.
APPLICABLE STRATEGIC PLAN VISION POINT
Development paying for development
FISCAL IMPACT
Funded Not Funded N/A
RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUESTED/ OPTIONS
Approval of the proposed Fee and Use Schedule dated August 29, 2011.
ATTACHMENTS
Fee and Use Schedule dated August 29, 2011.
Letter from Tarrant County Public Health Department.
Resolution 11-25
Page 1 of 11
TOWN OF WESTLAKE
RESOLUTION NO. 11-25
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF WESTLAKE,
TEXAS, AMENDING THE CURRENT “FEE AND USE SCHEDULE” BY APPROVING
A NEW “FEE AND USE SCHEDULE” DATED AUGUST 29, 2011.
WHEREAS, The Tarrant County Health Department provides permitting and inspection
services for food establishments and commercial swimming pools in The Town of Westlake;
and,
WHEREAS, The Tarrant County Health Department charges fees to the users directly
and does not charge the Town of Westlake for their services; and,
WHEREAS, The Tarrant County Health Department has not changed the fees charged to
Town of Westlake establishments over the past fourteen years and have recently developed a
new fee schedule designed to be more equitable for various size food establishments; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the passage of this Resolution is in the best
interest of the citizens of Westlake.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN
OF WESTLAKE, TEXAS:
SECTION 1: That, all matters stated in the Recitals hereinabove are found to be true
and correct and are incorporated herein by reference as if copied in their entirety.
SECTION 2: That the Town of Westlake Town Council does hereby approves the
proposed Fee and Use Schedule, attached as Exhibit “A”,
SECTION 3: If any portion of this Resolution shall, for any reason, be declared invalid
by any court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect the remaining provisions
hereof and the Council hereby determines that it would have adopted this Resolution without the
invalid provision.
Resolution 11-25
Page 2 of 11
SECTION 4: That this resolution shall become effective from and after its date of
passage.
PASSED AND APPROVED ON THIS 29TH DAY OF AUGUST 2011.
ATTEST: ________________________________
Laura L. Wheat, Mayor
_______________________________ _________________________________
Kelly Edwards, Town Secretary Thomas E. Brymer, Town Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________
L. Stanton Lowry, Town Attorney
Resolution 11-25
Page 3 of 11
EXHIBIT A
FEES AND USE SCHEDULE
Revised
August 29, 2011
1) The fees and use charges listed in this section are in addition to any other fees and use
charges which may exist in ordinances of the town, including, but not limited to the Uniform
Fire Code, Uniform Building Code, National Electrical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code and
Uniform Mechanical Code. To the extent there is a conflict in the fees and use charges
contained in this section with other stated fees and uses, the fees and use charges in this
section shall prevail. Fees calculations based on the number of acres involved shall be
calculated by rounding up to the next whole acre.
2) ZONING CHANGE APPLICATIONS
Pre-application/pre-design conference: This is intended to provide the applicant with a
verbal interpretation of ordinances and processes, and to respond to any questions they may
have. Such meetings may involve the town consultants at the request of the town manager.
Fee: $400.00 This conference is only required, and the fee charged, at the discretion of the
Town Manager.
Straight zoning change: This includes review of the application, site visits, meetings with
the applicant and recommendations to the planning and zoning commission as well as
published notifications and public hearings.
Fee: $1,800.00 plus $90.00 per acre; $40,000.00 maximum (less fee paid for pre-application
conference).
Planned development district: This includes review of the application, site visits, meetings
with the applicant and recommendations to the planning and zoning commission as well as
published notifications and public hearings.
Fee: $1,800.00 plus $90.00 per acre (less fee paid for pre-application conference).
Specific use permit: This includes review of the application, site visits, meeting with the
applicant and recommendations to the planning and zoning commission and all public
notifications.
Fee: $1,800.00.
Amendments to approved site plans: This includes review and approval of the town manager
and/or his designee(s). If the request exceeds the legal authority of the town manager and/or
his designee(s) to grant the site plan revision, the application may be converted to a full
zoning application with payment of the balance of a full application fee.
Fee: $900.00 plus $20.00 per acre (less fee paid for pre-application conference).
Resolution 11-XX
Page 4 of 11
Variance of UDC Regulations: This includes review of the application, site visits, meetings
with the applicant and associated town staff and recommendations to the board of
adjustment, and all public notifications and public hearings.
Fee: $900.00.
3) SUBDIVISION PLAT, ENGINEERING PLAN AND SITE PLAN APPLICATIONS
Pre-application or pre-design conference: Ten percent of the projected total fee for the
activity being applied for. This fee shall be credited toward the next ongoing fee, if any,
when due.
(Minimum $1,800.00)
Any subdivision plat or re-subdivision plat:
Preliminary plats: $1,800.00 plus $90.00 per acre, maximum of $36,000.00.
Final plats: $900.00 plus $90.00 per acre, maximum of $18,000.00.
Minor Plats: $900.00 plus $90.00 per acre, maximum of $18,000.00.
Engineering plans: $1,800.00 plus $90.00 per acre.
Replat: $1,800.00 plus $90.00 per acre, maximum of $36,000.00.
Site plans:
Comprehensive (final) site plans: $1,800.00 plus $90.00 per acre.
Vacation of plat: $720.00.
Amendment or abandonment of an easement: $300.00 plus any costs incurred from use of
contractors or consultants.
4) CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION FEE FOR SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS
Construction inspections: The inspection fee will be six percent (6%) of certified
construction costs of the land development (including, but not limited to, public and private
improvements such as streets and roads, drainage, parking lots, fire water systems, walls,
fences, site grading, water features, parks, open space corridors, required landscaping,
irrigation, sidewalks, trails, etc., but not including building construction) for subdivisions or
re-subdivision. Estimated Inspection fees are to be paid prior to permitting and or
commencement of work on the proposed improvements and the balance based upon certified
construction costs prior to acceptance of improvements or issuance of building permits. The
construction inspection fee is in addition to any other fees listed herein.
5) COMMERCIAL AND REMODEL - BUILDING PERMIT FEES
Total Valuation Fee
$1.00 to $500.00 $50.00
$501.00 to $2000.00 $50.00 for the first $500.00 plus $6.60 for each additional $100.00
or fraction thereof, up to and including $2,000.00.
Resolution 11-XX
Page 5 of 11
$2,001.00 to
$25,000.00
$150.00 for the first $2,000.00 plus $30.00 for each additional
$1,000.00 or fraction thereof, up to and including $25,000.00.
$25,001.00 to
$50,000.00
$840.00 for the first $25,000.00 plus $21.60 for each additional
$1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $50,000.00.
$50,001.00 to
$100,000.00
$1,380.00 for the first $50,000.00 plus $15.00 for each additional
$1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $100,000.00.
$100,001.00 to
$500,000.00
$2,130.00 for the first $100,000.00 plus $12.00 for each additional
$1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $500,000.00.
$500,001.00 to
$1,000,000.00
$6,930.00 for the first $500,000.00 plus $10.20 for each additional
$1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $1,000,000.00.
1,000,001.00 and up $12,030.75 for the first $1,000,000.00 Plus $6.60 for each
additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof.
Plan review fee: Add 65 percent to permit fee.
Other inspections and fees:
TABLE INSET:
(1)
Inspections outside of normal business hours
(Minimum charge--two hours)
$75.00 per hour*
(2 hour minimum)
(2)
Reinspection fees assessed under provisions of the adopted
codes.
$75.00 per hour*
(1 hour minimum)
(3)
Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated.
(Minimum charge--one-half hour)
$75.00 per hour*
(1 hour minimum)
(4)
Electrical, Plumbing, and Mechanical inspections. $75.00 per hour*
(1 hour minimum)
(5)
Consultants for inspections or plan review utilized for specific
specialized projects.
Actual cost
incurred.
*Or the total hourly cost to the town, whichever is the greater. This cost includes
supervision, overhead, equipment, hourly wages and benefits, and mileage.
**Actual cost includes administrative and overhead costs.
6) RESIDENTIAL NEW CONSTRUCTION AND ADDITIONS PERMIT FEES:
Residential building permit fees shall be the amounts calculated in accordance with the
addendum attached to Ordinance No. 470 titled Residential Building Permit Fee Formula.
Resolution 11-XX
Page 6 of 11
7) SPECIAL BUILDING PERMIT FEES
1. Swimming pools $500.00
2. Fence if not included in building permit application $165.00
3. Fence repair and barbed wire fencing excluded No fee, no
permit
4. Demolition $250.00
5. Sprinkler system for yards $300.00
6. Any antenna $400.00
7. Sidewalk, curb cuts, driveways, concrete work in Right-of-way $200.00
8. Moving permit for buildings moved on any town street: Permanent
house relocation (plus all direct and indirect costs incurred by the
Town of Westlake due to such relocation)
$450.00
9. Construction in the public-right-of-way (other than a certificated
telecommunications provider) $600.00
10. Trenching, excavating or grading that is not within the public right-
of-way (other than a certificated telecommunications provider) $600.00 *
11. Water well – for private use. $1,000.00
8) SIGN PERMITS AND OTHER INSPECTIONS
Sign Permits
Construction signs $150.00
Temporary signs $80.00
Signs or display cases within the commercial district $200.00
Home occupation signs $75.00
Political signs No Permit
Signs within residential district (Except for home occupation signs) No Permit
9) RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FEE
All newly-constructed residential structures shall pay a $3,100.00 residential lot development
fee per lot where the town's duct bank is or is planned to be located, in addition to the
building permit fees. The residential lot development fee shall be payable in conjunction with
the building permit fee.
Resolution 11-XX
Page 7 of 11
10) MISCELLANEOUS FEES AND USES
Special event permit – includes all tents, fireworks, and
temporary electrical poles. $250.00
Temporary electrical poles. For other than construction
projects. $35.00
Subdivision name change. $250.00
Street name change. $250.00 + cost of new street
name blades
Zoning verification letter $500.00
11) FIRE DIVISION PERMIT FEES:
1. Aboveground Storage Tanks (AGST) $150.00
2. After hour inspections $ 75.00**
3. Asbestos removal $100.00
4. Battery Systems $250.00
5. Burn Permit – Non-resident $ 50.00
6. Burn Permit – Resident No Charge
7. Candles and open flame in assembly areas $ 50.00
8. Carnivals and Fairs $ 50.00*
9. Changing UST or AGST contents $100.00
10. Compressed Gas $100.00
11. Cryogens $250.00
12. Dry Cleaning Operations – flammable/combustible liquids $ 75.00
13. Dry Cleaning Operations – non-flammable liquids $ 50.00
14. Emergency Medical Services – services and expendables #
15. Explosives or Blasting Agents – Use $150.00*
16. Fire Alarm System Review #
17. Fire Sprinkler System Review #
18. Fireworks (certified events only) $150.00*
19. Fumigation or thermal insecticidal fogging $250.00
20. Hazardous Materials – Storage, dispense, use of $ 50.00
21. Hazardous Materials Mitigation ^#
22. Highly Toxic Pesticides – Storage, use of $ 50.00
23. High-Piled Combustible Storage $ 50.00
24. Hot works operations $ 50.00
25. LPG 25-199 WGC $ 25.00
26. LPG 200-1,999 WGC $ 75.00
27. LPG 2,000 < WGC $100.00
28. LPG fueled vehicles or equipment in assembly buildings $ 50.00
Resolution 11-XX
Page 8 of 11
29. Malls – covered $ 75.00*
30. Motor vehicle fueling dispensing station $ 50.00
31. Personnel stand-by – Fire Watch $ 35.00^
32. Personnel stand-by – Special Event $ 35.00^
33. Private Agency License Inspection/Certification $ 50.00
34. Pyrotechnic – Special events material $500.00*
35. Radioactive Materials $500.00
36. Re-inspection for fire alarm systems $ 75.00*
37. Re-inspection for new construction $ 75.00*
38. Re-inspection for sprinkler systems $ 75.00*
39. Trench Burning – Clearing Land or Rubbish $150.00
40. Underground Storage Tanks (UST) $150.00
41. UST and AGST removal or temporary out of service $ 50.00
42. Water System Analysis/Test for Fire Suppression Systems $ 25.00
*If required, addition cost for personnel may be charged. Additional cost for expendable
equipment and necessary apparatus may be incurred.
**Two (2) hour minimum. If required, addition cost for personnel may be charged.
Additional cost for expendable equipment and necessary apparatus may be incurred.
^Cost is per hour per personnel utilized. Additional cost for expendable equipment and
necessary apparatus may be incurred.
#Cost based on third party or contracted services provider fees. Based on agreement with the
Town, fees may be paid directly to the third party or contracted services provider.
12) FIRE PLAN CHECK FEE
0--100,000 square feet $0.015/square foot
100,001--300,000 square feet $1,500.00 for the first 100,000 square feet plus $0.014 for
each additional square foot of area.
300,001 + square feet $4,200.00 for the first 300,000 square feet plus $0.009 for
each additional square foot of area or fraction thereof.
13) AMBULANCE AND EMS FEES
BLS Emergency $400.00
ALS I $500.00
ALS II $700.00
Mileage $.10 per mile
Resolution 11-XX
Page 9 of 11
14) GAS DRILLING AND PRODUCTION RELATED FEES:
Gas Well Pad Site Related Permits & Fees
Gas Well Pad Site Permit Application Fee (initial permit per pad site) $30,000
Approved Gas Well Pad Site Permit Annual Review & Renewal Fee 5,000
Fire Fighter Training & Equipment Fee (initial fee per approved pad site) 10,000
Setback Reduction Request/Property Owner Title Verification Fee 5,000*
*this is a minimum fee; actually cost may increase based on actual title company fees
Gas Well Related Permits & Fees
Gas Well Permit Application Fee (initial permit per well) $10,000
Gas Well Permit Amendment Application & Review Fee 2,500
Gas Well Certificate of Completion & Completion Inspection Fee 1,500
Tank Battery Completion & Annual Permit/Inspection Fee 1,000
Annual Approved Gas Well Permit Review, Inspection, & Permit Renewal Fee 1,500
Initial/Annual Insurance & Surety Review Fee (per approved gas well permit) 1,000
Annual Fire Fighter Training & Equipment Fee (per approved gas well permit) 2,000
Annual Safety/Hazardous Materials Plans & Reports Compliance Review Fee 1,000**
Well Re-working Permit Fee 5,000**
Gas Well Permit Transference Processing Fee 5,000**
Gas Well Permit Extension Processing Fee 5,000**
Well Abandonment Permit Application & Inspection Fee 2,500 **
Road Maintenance Agreement Review & Inspection Fee 5,000**
**this is per approved gas well permit
Pipeline Related Permits & Fees***
Resolution 11-XX
Page 10 of 11
New Pipeline Construction Permit & Inspection Fee $5,000
New Pipeline Certificate of Completion & Inspection Fee 1,500
New Pipeline ROW/Street/Road/Easement Crossing License (license is per
crossing)
2,000
Initial/Annual Insurance & Surety Review Fee (per approved pipeline permit) 1,000
Annual Safety Report Compliance Review Fee (per approved pipeline permit) 1,000
Annual Pipeline Permit & License Renewal Fee (per new pipeline permit) 2,000
Inactive Pipeline Permit Application & Inspection Fee 2,500
Idled Pipeline Permit Application & Inspection Fee 2,500
Idled Pipeline Permit Reactivation Inspection Fee 2,500
Miscellaneous Gas & Oil Related Fees
Seismic Testing Permit Fee $ 500
Technical Advisor Fees ****
**** Based on Actual Cost plus 10% Administrative Fee
TARRANT COUNTY
15) FOOD PROGRAM FEE SCHEDULE
Food Store
< 5000 sq. ft. $200
> 5000 sq. ft. $300
Food Service
< 500 sq. ft. $100
> 500<1500 sq. ft. $150
Resolution 11-XX
Page 11 of 11
> 1500< 3000 sq. ft. $200
> 3000<6000 sq. ft. $250
> 6000 sq. ft. $300
Child Care Food Service $150
Catering Operation $250
Food Court $200 per establishment
Adjunct Operation
Food Service $150 per independent operation
Food Store <5000 sq. ft. $150 per independent operation
Food Store >5000 sq. ft. $200 per independent operation
Commissary
No food prep $100
With food prep $200
Mobile Units
Prepackaged food only $100
Open and/or food prep $200
Push Carts $200
Plan Review
< 500 sq. ft. $0
> 500<3000 sq. ft. $50
> 3000 sq. ft. $100
Late Fee
From 1-30 days 10% of fee owed
From 31-60 days 20% of fee owed
The late fee increases 10% for each 30 day block until permit fee and late fee is paid.
Permits that are more than 90 days overdue will be void and required to reapply.
Reinspection Fee
Required reinspection $75
16) SWIMMING POOL SPA & INTERACTIVE WATER FEATURE FEE SCHEDULE
Plan Review and opening inspection $150
Annual Permit $250
Required reinspection $75
EXECUTIVE SESSION
The Council will conduct a closed session pursuant to Texas Government Code, annotated,
Chapter 551, Subchapter D for the following:
a. Section 551.087: Deliberation Regarding Economic Development Negotiations –
to deliberate the offer of a financial or other incentive to a business prospect.
b. Section 551.071 Consultation with Attorney - to seek advice of counsel on legal
matters involving pending or contemplated litigation, settlement offers, or other
legal matters not related directly to litigation or settlement. Pending or
contemplated litigation and settlement offers include but are not limited to the
following: Rosevear and Simonetti
Town of
Westlake
Item # 4 –
Executive Session
Town of
Westlake
Item # 5 – Reconvene
Meeting
TAKE ANY ACTION FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION, IF NECESSARY
EXECUTIVE SESSION
The Council will conduct a closed session pursuant to Texas Government Code, annotated,
Chapter 551, Subchapter D for the following:
a. Section 551.087: Deliberation Regarding Economic Development Negotiations –
to deliberate the offer of a financial or other incentive to a business prospect.
b. Section 551.071 Consultation with Attorney - to seek advice of counsel on legal
matters involving pending or contemplated litigation, settlement offers, or other
legal matters not related directly to litigation or settlement. Pending or
contemplated litigation and settlement offers include but are not limited to the
following: Rosevear and Simonetti
Town of
Westlake
Item # 6 – Take any
Necessary Action, if
necessary
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: Any Council member may request at a workshop and / or
Council meeting, under “Future Agenda Item Requests”, an agenda item for a future
Council meeting. The Council Member making the request will contact the Town Manager
with the requested item and the Town Manager will list it on the agenda. At the meeting,
the requesting Council Member will explain the item, the need for Council discussion of
the item, the item’s relationship to the Council’s strategic priorities, and the amount of
estimated staff time necessary to prepare for Council discussion. If the requesting Council
Member receives a second, the Town Manager will place the item on the Council agenda
calendar allowing for adequate time for staff preparation on the agenda item.
- None
Town of
Westlake
Item #7 ‐ Future
Agenda Items
COUNCIL RECAP / STAFF DIRECTION
Town of
Westlake
Item # 8
Council Recap /
Staff Direction
COUNCIL CALENDAR
- Town Offices Closed
September 5, 2011
- Town Council Meeting
September 12, 2011
- Texas Municipal League
October 11-14, 2011, Houston
Town of
Westlake
Item # 9 –
Council Calendar
Town of
Westlake
Item # 10 –
Adjournment
Back up material has not
been provided for this item.