The URL can be used to link to this page

2012-06-26 RetreatIm [A CITY OF SOUTHLAKE June 26, 2012 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members From: Shana K. Yelverton, City Manager Subject: 2012 June Retreat The June Retreat has been a tradition in Southlake for many years, giving the City Council and staff an opportunity to come together to review organizational performance, and items that have potential to influence the upcoming budget. In addition to the information sharing aspect of the Retreat, it is also a wonderful opportunity for collaborative problem -solving and teambuilding. We look forward to it and sincerely appreciate the time you commit for this purpose. This year the Retreat is scheduled as follows: City Council June Retreat Day 1 Tuesday, June 26, 2012 5:30 p.m. — 9:00 p.m. Hilton Hotel (Working agenda attached) City Council June Retreat Day 2 Wednesday, June 27, 2012 9:00 a.m. — 4:30 p.m. Hilton Hotel (Working agenda attached) Again this year, the Retreat will be held over two days. On Day 1, we will begin the evening with an overview and welcome presentation. Once this session is completed, we will move into a working dinner that will allow for an open discussion of issues related to the City's key focus areas. This highly interactive session will be defined and led by you, giving Council an opportunity to discuss projects of major importance, key issues or concerns, expectations, etc. as they relate to the priorities that you have set for the City of Southlake. Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council 2012 June Retreat Page Two Following dinner, staff will provide a financial overview to include an update on the FY 2012 budget performance as well as projections and preliminary issues for the upcoming FY 2013 budget. At the request of Councilmember Morris we have invited Bill McLeRoy with The Whitestone Group to make a presentation on private foundation funding. We will conclude the evening with a review of the City's Statement of Financial Principles with a focus on the Debt Management provisions. We will begin Day 2 with an overview of the agenda items for that day with the first discussion and presentation led by Bob Price who will provide a transportation update, highlighting both local and regional projects. Following the transportation update, we will provide a presentation designed to facilitate discussion regarding moving forward with the multipurpose facility. This presentation will be followed by a break for lunch which is designed much like the dinner on Day 1, with the intent of providing Council the opportunity to define and lead their own discussion. The final presentation of the day will center around the evolution of SPIN. Staff will provide Council with a presentation that highlights common themes for consideration followed by some draft framework options. The conversation will then be turned over to Council to develop options for the program going forward. We hope that you find the Retreat topics relevant and interesting, and we look forward to seeing you on June 26th. Please let me know if you have questions. SKY SOUCM OF Meeting: City Council June Retreat—Day 1 Date: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 Time: 5:30 p.m.— 9:00 p.m. 2 5";ValuesJ� Place: Southlake Hilton No. Item Supporting Documents Welcome 5:30 pm Define success (motivation, outcomes, overview) Working Dinner: Strategic Focus Discussion Mobility Infrastructure 5:45 pm Quality Development Open discussion Volunteerism • Partnerships • High Performance Management • Safety & Security • City Values Financial Overview FY 2012 Performance 7:00 pm • FY 2013 • Projections • Preliminary Budget Issues 7:30 pm Private Foundation Funding • Bill McLeRoy, The Whitestone Group Review Statement of Financial Statement of Financial 8:00 pm Principles Principles Document 9:00 pm Conclude r SOUCM OF E Meeting: City Council June Retreat—Day 2 Date: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 Time: 9:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. 2 UJK "�Values Place: Southlake Hilton No. Item Supporting Documents 9:00 am Welcome • Overview Transportation Update Regional 9:15 am ' Local Current Future 10:15 am Multipurpose Facility Project Briefing Finalize Location and Uses Lunch: Strategic Focus Discussion Mobility Infrastructure • Quality Development 12:00 pm • Volunteerism Partnerships High Performance Management • Safety & Security • City Values 1:30 pm SPIN Evolution Discussion Project Briefing 2:45 pm Break 3:00 pm SPIN Discussion, continued 3:45 pm Executive Session (if needed) 4:30 pm Adjourn V O u L 1 L� ■ L O L CL 0 ■ i 0 CL CL 0 ►� U) W W L v L 3 0 L U) 4-1 QJ QJ QJ >1 N -+ N CL s rn U) 0 CL U) iTL 4060 U) r 0 ._ U) a� LWC 0 4. ialk."im a � / � � LW \ MOWN uv) � . Vl 1101- _p •C 41 L 3 f0 O 41 O > C n C O p . > 0 3 s C Y a C.� O O.LOA 1' O '' C m r'' C y. y •— N O. C1 O y m Qf E N M �0 4— - p ui 3' p ++ ui J .0 Y Z a c rV m C E }, 41 L m y c� E ELn > �° a> j m y p o ++ ap °1 F' N m Q C Q v G1 O > •C N L in QA bn i y -O O L N'D oo L -1 O N O 3Qj 00 O E S n Y a+ of c .0 0 N 'mO u C YO G1 N -p in -a 41 �O m C (D m m i C p C 0+ vn u '..N to 3 y , s 3 m N m=• > v v a +� p 4' d u > L d -, i 4 9 c C CL m Q 'i ++ Q o LL ar C � tW 3 N i .i > a+ C = u 0! A^ O N 9 O O C R tL0 O O. m Y QJ N > CJ C > 3 � .i a`+ Q u O 3 L C p i Q1 C Qw C n pQ m Q co > N y 0J L }' v0i 00 ) > . Q1 • 2 O C C m 0! i . _ :a •> .a v LU 3 r > fC CL O C E M cr 'f • U Sa 7 >, m L Q H. N fn 4' °4 m 0) H L ±+ N > c u ° u,75 m c .Y v N .i L..4J C ._ A '> LL m W mm> M� C 01 of E N w O_ ' C H C Q u L a Q 0J 3 C a ra ,�,, E o O v cu u v `1 N V G. d 01 .E i G1 U p U m > N N c o v .� C y L O a Y w CL you 0- 4, o U us QJ > H cu 'AOA U m w Q � +, 0 W (✓ Op O e•i U V iy J ate+ 0 O r.L '0 ■�0 O ■� r O O 0 � V > v � O E am E � O � .Lm � � O ui Ei V LM N LM r n L CD c� aD O sm CL c� s L c� CL 44 At l CL a 0 ■_ �r CD x CD n LM 4-6 4 r 0 Lm c� m CL a) LM CL a� s a� 0 CL 13 c� CL 0 C a cc Ma a) cc s 0 U) LM 0 C6 CD a� 0 m M r V Lm Cn — O .� � O � to O O O 76 cr V t� N �L Iq 0 Lq d v E 0L om O .3 N E LM O s H v O c� � •v .v ��o•i CL c LM E ._ At E O CD t� E0 ,> O0.0 m ♦„� ,� v O O cn N L N 13 %m O _ O CL F.0 m li C ME L (D O — ow -_O�•+ ._ N >C � =.2 O �•+ � L - G> > O L MOMME ._ _LM .. ca ._ REMEM Q � o = N C.)*00i Q O > ttf �= .>LMM � � .� L. � O CM.� � MMMMM'o ME �-' ME +� ,0 CL L O = 4-0 v N O r.L N ~ CD a .. CL _ � }= •- m = • • =O c so Q O L O Q O� O v MW 0 r.= r— v m = m Q .� ,_ 11 L O r. . IMMEME CD _ O N CDi .0 m a O W O E E O 0 0 0 *M0 MENEMN A � L Ja v ■ - Low O L 3 A ■ENEM CL ME MPMOO V L N W- O i O d 1 L _ •O m E L WE - r. . 0 oj N � U ' U BE � E N J v a E }'0)U) 70 Ur= d C t4 . . , 3 O N C E �O = aN Ea) W Q O K c E Qchi O N N N Z s N > �o O E CM cQ i N O c N Y N cm O G%E E N a.E'N Nd m aC'C-L O� a>cu ;i ca = +r Q1 Nm d "0 my N � U ' U BE � E N J v a CC m }'0)U) 70 Ur= /O V cz C t4 . . , G O N C �O = aN Ea) N � U ' U > R - LL a J v a CC m m E 70 c oC /O V cz . . . . , K c E cc Ctm O Z s N C dcc C d C V as0 R N iQ d G%E E N d N Nd C O� E O� a>cu ;i ca = +r Q1 Nm d "0 my N � U ' U > R - LL a J v a CC m m E 70 c oC /O V cz . . . . , U � � U ' U Cll VJ 70 cz /O V cz a .0 0 V A O i Q O X > W p 0 3 �E MAI D H a .O E L 0 x w H N O V m m UL O E >m OMa LM CL MO va 0 LMa _M O N U. C N r O N LL Mol 0 CD O� ma CO 0) Ln O _ O N CJ V X O � v � ax LL Lm E o acnes LL 0 4- O u 0 i LL Lom c� E 0 cn . m LL XC Z-7:73 W 0 cl N co 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 C C� C! 0 0 0 C C 0 0 C C CD 0 0C C 0 0 C 0 C 0 0 0 0 C� C� 0 0 0 0 0 00 06 cc 4 ci N � ss � COS VD- SQ N T 0 N LL E _ � v O C � i = um d i :F+ 76) LL 0 E cLMa v � as � E a as 0 � CL o 0 z in ■ o N T 0 N LL v d L LlJ t. Q w O 00 a C'I d z 1!1 F. O 0 U LO O C Cd i Go U U O w w ,all N ■� O O � N V � L 400 cn 1!1 F. O 0 U LO O C Cd i Go U U O w w ,all olm CD m.a{ IM I■■+ N O i Y 0 CL cm d _ M UL MENEM m O CLm ME V 4" ME z V O L a a� cn 0 ME am mO ME CD ■6 z 0 o: LM O O ■ENEM cn ma 0-1 as J 0 T UL a ■ O L U. cn a 0 i O r - II N N •— O Los a ,ca as � � r MOMOM cn z U. V O L a a� cn 0 ME am mO ME CD ■6 z 0 o: LM O O ■ENEM cn ma 0-1 as J 0 T UL a ■ O L U. cn a 0 i O r - II CL ca V N r O N >M LL d CL a D C (1) Lm am M T 0 N >m LL Li U) 0 CM) ■ - MENEM 0 > • - .— >, LL LowImmi .0 SOMME .�..� •— IMMEME .— 0 0 c� 00,N%N r O N o p o o C _ Lc; ■ a L um O c O 0 O O Xm Q 0 I LL 0 000000000 0 o O o o O o 0 0 co 1l- (0 to (*) N r O N L O 4w cc N O N t i cn cu L ACV iii C'4 O O u '� C VJ A V U tea/ Q � N V) E J N ,i 0) Z U) c 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 T 0 e 0 e 0 e f0 o w U � � N r 0 00 W CV R* � Mo M � fV C ■ ■ LO Lf)•, E n � OOMM% o r Lo a) r- n 00 n Lf)m W W n N 60- n N n + W i %ft.. O O Ma 4) N C O cum $ o O o W g N o CL 7 0 0 E Im C O i N N r*, � Q Q r co • • • 0 cn cn cu L ACV iii C'4 O O u '� C VJ A V U tea/ Q � N V) E J N ,i 0) Z U) c 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 o 0 e 0 e 0 e f0 o w U � � O � r )o N u1 N W CV 00 � � Mo M � fV C m c rn o m R N Y R O n n � ao co N n co co r- n 00 n O n W W n O W N0 w n N n >� ao� cum $ o O o W g N o N U 0- N N m y co r co N W w n� W N 8 N N N r 1A N M O N �W p b coo N O m a.n ti M Q y W EA EA N) 10 w N m to to M fA b w b w 01 b (a W to P;5 0 m >o ry N 7 M M a W w tD n N Cy M N C O M M N is h co 001 1Mo N M G�1 r )moo o m Eo o 3 u p N �Cq CV .2 N v a 000 W 2 v g 2 d "LLLLLL U w ri (cc S Y Z D: 3 m c v zi • CL L IL C9 m cq ss cq L Co c� 0 cq 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 4 C cli SJUIloQ jo suogpa i 0 0 LM 0 C) 0 0 0 O T � O � N O O O 0 O 0 ME 0 •- V r LM 0 d 0 0 0 O V ui uopunjun 0 � T cq :. 0 c m 00 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 clim 0 0 cq c 0 0 c 0 0 cq 0 0 0 cq 00 z L 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 itJ O O O 0 Lo m GID - ss Cos ui uopunjun 0 � T cq :. 0 c m 00 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 clim 0 0 cq c 0 0 c 0 0 cq 0 0 0 cq 00 z L 0 0 0 0 m 40 O O LL 2 r r O N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cli 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o -m-bs ui uaxv 0 0 0 rn 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 c.� 0 0 0 0 0 0 cq m 0 0 cli0 0 cq 0 0 cq 0 0 0 a� a� 00 m Ln 13 L a U r O o LM N co r a O a CN a� ■— m a� Im p oo U:) Oo O oo Lo O O (umPnalsuoo maN) s4tuzaadu. pgng 1 mc N r - N A I L E E v ii O L- a. a� E E u CV) M V N . L c c N O CO r N r [t r O O O ti O r O 00 r O O CU O 00 N R:T N r N r CO M r O N LL - > ° oC O O � 0 — 0 0d (� 4- -U) N U) O a 16MLM L- -� O to 0 Q 0 LM 0L L. *0z cn ' O a + oO w 2 Is I w N N C j, O N w � f 1 � O uv) O • V Lm a a� c� � V Lim 9l. :c CL O ' L am r LM o CV Q � v O — •- O • N v - v LL c O ;r. LL > C V i i A ;06 pi " F # m a U C1A m a-J V — V to = J W i ru LL v a-J 0 Q � LL — C: LL- _0 E +� — ca — V E � ca ca L N 4A U ate-+ ate-+ . O Q ca O U U LL iz Y .v a-J •O p O •C: O � a _ 4- J *+ ca L 4A i O •— CU E v _� coif a) a) p � O ■�� = can in � N •_ = f > 0 QJ .� DC Yr µ4� TM r t O • O IAN x a, v a Fm; � a o v a v v v i � 0 Qj a a o v4-1 •� m �., � O aj O � a � •� � a v O ' Lr N 3 Ln N f6 4-1N •Q cn a) V � CAA C6 �O 4-J N _0 x p can - •� � � � E C Lo U Q . , •C6 U � •� E ru p u -0 Ln (D Ln C: a) Q) ru � N o E m I'D Ln U LL a) a--j _0 a) � c6 U U C: -0 -0 — LL •— .E Ln o �► +-1 Li O V �� _ , n ,_ �: ,. ;.i� �,, ...e�, ,� ��.. a. , g � i pFcq a �■r W L f� W Lm Q GV O cq w o cc � a � • 1 1 1 w O cn E Li cn O O Ln x m FE; c CJ Ln w �+ O C/) o co Ln 16M ..Y . ,.,,, � ...r� _ .. � � ,, . ,r '� r' _` e �; ., �` ', O 0 _� � � :. e R { r - .... .�.., .,.� r z ro CL +-+ Q O v E C • (D U O 0 0L U +_+ ■� U N O O � .p O am OOMW*4 (3) 4-J — 1 1 O 06 °' Ln f6 _ L � a.., Qu • � Ov bn O O 4-J c L- 4E _0 c - - :E L 4) u E (LADM a � •V i pz N •� Cc `� a) V � � � •C � •-J +-+ cn O v Q V) >ro O (U O- OV � 4= Ln a--+ a--+ ca c6 : Q O O _0 p Q 4, v 4 _ a- •cn L +-+ i > o 0 a) -0 c _ DOLLARS a 0 C 0 o O O 0 0 0 o O o 0 C o O o O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 oo c I cq o z o �■■� Q c w L o 0 cq cq CD cq pq cq cc A I o . w � q I 0 • a I C) O i 0 o cq m O • � O GV 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O 10 O 10 O tfj O d� cyJ CV CV NOL Vfl'IVA dO HDVLLNHDHH(i e. A M � 1 h C x Q Fl; X Lr) O > m L ....ex N 0 N . LL N 00 7 rj CU _0 C N v a X C :3 7 LL (9 L N C O O O O O O O V} O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Ln O In O ui O Iri M M fV N `--I .--I V? V} V} VT V} V? in tka ._ V 67 I C 4! a cn L L C16. O �n •0 > 4 +-J •— .- c6 cn U > 0 •— i V � � Q � o o � O LZ (1) + ) J �7 V O \ . . . � / & \ o k � ( r k � # .� # n10 t � ccq o k � � Q Fl; _ ¥ N LL \ $ k �+ m § � � � § � o / o � o �% C ■ 2 . c k �J � D ¥ � k � � � § u� a� J r o� m nr O m � r X o� O °1-Ir b �a h0 �o ate+ L R co Q� OR m ca *r m o cv t° ■ C1141 4A Ci N m arr 0CD � arloJ x SJ o a� O Qr l O C cOC c0 O O Sir- ,fa 0. C ■� � V O y 4� a� LM CL •— O IM y ._ rM U) cc Cc E LM ) iLM O ■ � +�•+ N O WM Q = N = C� LM N 4� i Z M o � > > > > +� U > C) A A A c� C) N � a � c � u o 0 El Cl N .Rpp CL CL E�- cnm €g � cn N r • II� `'• 3NY� i • • r • r Lm Lm CA • CL • • a e� • 4. t�! �f G c� • r fig Aw M �e s { r J i .... . • s n 9 J' r � P� x s r f — r � f r i a - L VJ � � I f+ 1 • 0 uv) CL O j m i O cc Q 04 3 L8 L 1 N 1 o .2 u I CL q: - ■ 1 ■ 1 O - �� E .- 0 0q 6 O • a. a c n co a 1 9, Qua O O 0 if W m L I ►�. • � � C �,��i s f c R 1 r_ 1 1 • • N i4-4 tw bo W W tw w ._ cu i m i a. j� m N r. x rt �-+ A _ r.4 r"AAW or 1 Ea rw. is � 3 cny dY i � i n� 0 Y } r AL ►_ i 18 ■ef'"�` �.� .,' pit. ,_ T1� — � Fit•. N e (AP .r{►H A: at llf!I+� I .r, Q' M CV 00 a 4 l� Lm 4� Cc LL J D t000 > Garland Avt�+ OShilaA Road /u er Road ii Plow Road ID Y M � 0 tc '® m HNkrett vtnu iref0on Road n rn nnmweyRo.a _o Cc s fp WebbChe el� 35 CO N o � z O $^ Lune Road rn A } 1 I ' •.1 �� II`111Ii1iC 11 = a L ut1) � �y1-��;L\ •fib(�� , y � i E— t Illtl�� cn rk cn • �11'��rllC `IfC •tir�� 0 lot n , • • a ........... s a� o V H uo51¢8d•N = t a 00 �� P2I`anS�\ Y w o a ti Yo 1 x C3 N z u cL a` = z3 c� z PLI joueod _ o (a v c O L Z �c?- a' i ! PA elslA fed v N 7co 'RJMl1W1d F c� 'Pd uowao Plo Lj- O � Pa uolV¢H t o l 1 Lmeuogewalul 1 I 1 N N kEwM21 N9 1 um !n ¢ co � ) R zt o 11 c y m or 1 a Pa Seuudsmo rIro ©Z r" �( ► ca 0 FM = h m tL y c _f O A V y e a _ E a g r. c — A r OG V �N •I.'may ,I� N E g 6l a. �f•' e H A Q C I 0 r N Imo• v1 p F- � V j C V � H p S 2 W ti J V� Q \ ,,tthurB/rq -a Q )�p0t"' 4 k LF711!N Jnu//oM E E ' JOWnH c 25 J J d �Q m 4 ■000 LL■ 1i i Hs nvv vMq ri.,s e � yy . � Y C Q-- Q _ • ,y 3 _ �•� ' �) a� '�+ir ,yea., �i �.�I /' „�.� 1 ,� _ lk • N JrttirEil■ „y Al ; IF _ • 1 g ��- .f tT y h � ' dv 8 i1, L d: 4 L 1 _L_ oll" f, vW.1� it AMC i If 1 v , J • a 17 IL .! 4� ..: � .�•. S+gym -f 11 �q� t � I { q Rpm r blo _CL O ' - 46 i M cn fAl cn F x . _. ri 1 r Tv kill if Ej �r • •uj cli ► `!' Of7= �1 • Ate. Mill LL .. +: 114 'e u i. gN _ � r 000 ,t Y. � 7 .V N O N O N CO . J n O b d eIVA C e J s •... � -� ; • +!Sli t:7• O OF • � # O • t .. 6. ,. A City of Southlake Project Briefing g 1400 Main St Southlake, TX 76092 www.cityofsouthiake.com Multipurpose Facility January 25, 2011 Alison Ortowski, Assistant to the City Manager Kyle Taylor, Management Intern PI r` a Contents Project Briefing Purpose 5 History 5 Funding Considerations 10 Public/Private Partnership 11 Next Steps 12 Summary 12 Attachment A — BRS Survey Results 14 Attachment B — Public / Private Partnerships Matrix 30 Project Briefing Purpose Gateway Church and how much would that cost? The purpose of this briefing is to 2. Would new construction be a review the history of the actions better option? behind bringing the multipurpose 3. If the City chose to construct a facility project to fruition, the facility, where would it be or current considerations associated where could it be located? with the facility, and the next steps 4. What types of uses would the involved with the project. facility include? 5. Would those uses change based on whether or not the facility is in History a renovated building or in a newly-constructed building? City Council established a 6. How much would it cost to Multipurpose Facility as a priority operate such a facility? during a discussion of facility 7. Could we partner with a private needs at the June Retreat on June entity on the operations? 23, 2008. This prioritization was reflected in the Capital In order to answer some of these Improvements Program (CIP) for questions, efforts commenced in FY 2009, where $2,000,000 was October 2008 to examine the used to establish a project feasibility of buying and renovating account for the construction of a the Gateway Church facility, located recreational center, library, and at 2121 E. Southlake Boulevard. senior center. Per the CIP Gateway had outgrown the space, description, the facility was to was constructing a new location include "significant areas of elsewhere and the facility would training, recreational class soon be available for purchase. At offerings, gymnasium space, and that time, the City commissioned other amenities associated with a Integra Realty Resources to Recreation Center. [The] project conduct a market value appraisal of was listed as the highest priority in the Gateway facility who reported FY 2009 per Parks System Master an appraised value of $10,500,000. Plan, and [utilizes] a potential A follow-up market value appraisal campus style setting with Library was also conducted by Integra in and Senior Center allowing March 2009, which listed the opportunities for shared space appraised value of the facility at and infrastructure." $9,800,000. Following the priority designation Examination of the Gateway facility of this project, several questions continued in May 2009, when the arose: City hired Telios Corporation to perform a Mechanical, Electrical, 1. Should the City renovate an and Plumbing (MEP) Survey, which existing facility such as the revealed approximately $1.75 million in recommended 5 improvements to the building's Following the receipt of the March heating and cooling systems. 2009 Integra appraisal, discussions Additionally, the Apex Arts League centered around additional 7 conducted an analysis of the considerations with the property. building in June 2009 to determine There were concerns that the the extent of the Audio, Video and appraisals should be reconsidered Lighting (AVL) equipment in the given a number of market factors, facility. This assessment placed including the potential for future use the estimated dollar value of the of the facility, as its current use AVL equipment in the range of limited its marketability. $1.6 million to $2.4 million, with the installation value of the Given this new consideration, in equipment priced at $500,000. June 2009, the City engaged This means that if the City were to Goodrich, Schechter and purchase the equipment for a new Associates, Inc. to perform a third facility, it would cost an estimated market value appraisal which valued half a million dollars to install that the facility at $8,400,000. equipment. The assessment also noted that additional trained staff Based on new considerations, would be necessary to operate the including significant changes in the AVL equipment. Figure 1 below commercial real estate market presents a table of appraisals and between October 2008 and June assessments conducted on the 2009, at a minimum, the purchase Gateway Facility. (assuming the facility could be purchased at the appraised value) including the MEP improvements for this facility would cost the City 10/27/2008 Appraisal $10,500,000 $10,150,000, using the latest appraised value. However, these numbers do not include costs 3/5/2009 Appraisal $9,800,000 associated with renovating to - accommodate the change in use. 5/28/2009 Improvements MEP $1,750,000 In addition to the option of purchasing and renovating an 06/02/2009 Appraisal $8,400,000 existing facility, questions remained j about the feasibility of constructing a new facility. One site that was 6/17/2009 AVL $1,600,000 to considered at the outset was the Valuation $2,400,000 city-owned property located off of Byron Nelson, adjacent to the Senior Center. Some Figure 1: Gateway Church considerations that were discussed Facility Appraisals and with this site: Assessments 6 • No costs associated with and scored by staff, with the top purchase of the land three selected for interviews in • Adjacent to current city-use January 2010. A committee of staff • Drainage issues with the (Ken Baker, Jim Blagg, Alison site Ortowski, Bob Price, Chris Tribble) • Location possibly not and City Council (Mayor John feasible due to Terrell, Councilmember Virginia neighborhood setting Muzyka and Councilmember Laura Hill) recommended Barker Rinker In tandem with these construction Seacat (BRS) from the field of and design-related inquiries, interviewees and that firm was discussions were also held selected to conduct a study to regarding the feasibility of analyze the feasibility, associated public/private partnerships for this costs and potential uses for both the type of facility. Possibilities for Gateway site and a to-be- this type of partnership are determined greenfield site. The explored later in this briefing. scope of services included: By late 2009, the City had some • Identification of site opportunities information related to costs and constraints associated with the Gateway facility. However, as discussions Identification of building about the project continued, it opportunities and constraints became clear that there were still • An inventory of existing facility many lingering questions. assets such as mechanical equipment, furniture, stage On August 3, 2009, the equipment, HVAC, parking lot multipurpose facility was listed as condition, fountain condition, the number one CIP priority during lighting, etc, and a a joint City Council, Parks and recommendation on whether Recreation Board, and Southlake these assets should continue in Parks and Development use, be repaired or replaced Corporation meeting. Following A structural analysis, this designation, discussions geotechnical investigation and centered around the best way to answer some of those lingering report, environmental assessment, and traffic questions and move the project analysis forward. The decision was made Recommendation of possible in late 2009 to utilize a portion of use scenarios for the facility and the project funding to commission site, including expansion and the a feasibility study for the project. pros and cons of each scenario developed In October 2009, the City issued a Preparation of a cost benefit request for qualifications to solicit analysis for each scenario, firms to conduct the study. including all costs associated Thirteen proposals were received (building improvements, new 7 construction, site Each of these populations were improvements, operational, analyzed in terms of age distribution maintenance, ADA and median household income. requirements, parking The analysis also quantified the requirements, etc.) number of private and non-profit • A recommendation on the best providers in the service area who use or uses for the building offer similar services. The summary and site and preparation of a in the analysis notes, "The generalized floor plan showing Population of the City of the location of uses Southlake...is adequate to support a comprehensive indoor recreation • Preparation of a project cost facility." estimate for recommended building uses, including Along with the market analysis, a building costs, construction, citizen survey was conducted in FF&E, indirect costs and April / May 2010. This survey was project contingency designed to both inform the City • A comparison of new about multipurpose facility construction to renovation of preferences and serve as the existing facility/site recreation survey that would later be used for the 2030 update of the • A recommendation on whether Parks and Recreation Master Plan. the City should construct a new facility or purchase and Surveys were randomly mailed to renovate the existing 1500 households and 499 surveys facility/site were completed and returned. See • Preparation of a project time Attachment A for results. line for both options To highlight, Question 12 in the In addition to the scope of survey asked residents to identify services listed above, BRS was also asked to conduct both a the two most important facilities for inclusion in a multipurpose facility, market analysis and a citizen with 68% identifying a recreation survey so that the scope of the center, 52% identifying an project could be tailored to what expanded library, 42% identifying a the market could support as well cultural arts center, and 16% as what the City's residents would identifying a senior center as the want in such a facility. most important or second most important choice. These results are The market analysis looked at a reflected in Figure 2 (see next number of local indicators including Southlake's population page). (27,000) and the population of the secondary service area (87,500). 8 citizen survey and the market Figure 2: Multipurpose analysis, took comments from the Community Facility Citizen individuals present, and then Survey Results engaged in a card exercise where the groups chose the different components of their ideal Senior Facility 16% community center. A SPIN meeting on July 21, 2010 Cultural Arts Most concluded these meetings, where Facility 42% Important BRS gave a presentation, took comments, and then had the Ind Most Important citizens in attendance play a "dotocracgame, where each Expanded Library 52% Y person placed seven dots (representing votes) on the seven of 22 possible components to the Recreation Center 68% center which they most desired. The top selections were community 0 100 rooms (14 votes), indoor track (13 votes), an Indoor leisure pool (13 Number Chosen votes), a gymnasium (12 votes), a Public input was another large Figure 3: July 21, 2010 SPIN component of the commissioned Meeting feasibility study. BRS conducted Citizen Participation Results many meetings with Council, staff, community stakeholders, and Library 11 citizens. The first of these meetings took place on March 2, 2010, where BRS and City staff Theater ii met with seven groups representing youth, arts, senior, Gym 12 and recreation interests. This meeting allowed these groups to specify their desires in a Indoor Pool _- 13 multipurpose facility. Meetings continued on July 20, Indoor Track 13 2010 and July 21, 2010, where BRS held a number of meetings and workshops with various City Community Rooms i officials and public I representatives. At these 0 5 10 15 meetings, the BRS team presented the findings from the 9 theater (11 votes), and a medium In addition to $4,500,000 already library (11 votes). The results of set aside, the FY 2011 CIP 5-year this exercise are reflected in the plan shows that $10,700,000 should chart in Figure 3. be available by 2015 after contributions from the General Fund Based on the feedback received (GF) and Southlake Parks at the various public meetings, Development Corporation (SPDC) BRS prepared possible plans for a Fund. A breakdown of total funding multipurpose center and is available in Figure 4. presented them to City Council at a workshop in August. These plans included proposals for both Fiscal Source Amount the purchase and renovation of the Gateway Church building and FY 2009 GF $2,000,000 the construction of a new campus FY 2011 GF $2,500,000 entirely. City Council asked BRS FY 2012 GF $3,000,000 to make some changes to the FY 2013* SPDC $1,000,000 plans presented and return with a FY 2014* SPDC $1,000,000 revised plan. FY 2015* SPDC $1,000,000 Following the August 2010 Total:* $10,500,000 meeting and additional *Planned Funding discussions in October, BRS is scheduled to present their draft Figure 4: Multipurpose Facility report on the feasibility study at Capital Improvements Program the January 25, 2011 City Council Funding Meeting. Though there is CIP funding City Council will be asked to allocated toward the project, many consider the report as presented surveys have taken place to gauge and discuss options to proceed. the willingness of citizens to pay additional taxes to support the multipurpose facility. As part of the Funding Considerations survey conducted by BRS, 71% of respondents replied that they would Once the feasibility study is be willing to pay more in property completed, City Council will have taxes to construct o Multipurpose a good indication of the amount of Facility, whereas 29/o would prefer funding that will be needed for the not to pay more in property taxes to project. To date, City Council has construct the facility. A graphical approved $4,500,000 in funding representation of these numbers is for the project. This funding was seen in Figure 5 (next page). allocated in the FY 2009 CIP ($2,000,000) and the FY 2011 CIP ($2,500,000). 10 In addition to construction funding, Figure 5: Maximum operational funding will also be monthly amount needed. In the BRS Citizen Survey, households would pay in 51% of respondents felt that the property taxes to build a operations cost of the new facility Multipurpose Facility should be borne by user fees, whereas 28% believed that operations should be financed using tax dollars. Figure 7 shows a Nothing graphical representation of the 19% 29% $1-$2 results of that survey. 8% $3-$4 $5-$6 Figure 7: How respondents 21% 12°i°11% $7-$8 feel Multipurpose Facility operating costs should be $9-$10 funded Mostly User fees 16% Mostly These results are supported by 5% Taxes the conclusions found in the 2009 51% city-wide citizen survey, where 28% 100% Taxes 61.3% of responses favored increased property taxes in trade don't Know for a multipurpose facility. This question, along with the response percentages is available in Figure 6. Public/Private Partnership wouldFigure 6: Q61: What city services - • As mentioned earlier, discussions public facilities or new programshave been ongoing regarding the "added, in trade for increasedpossibility of entering into a property taxes? (choose all that public/private partnership to apply) manage the operations of this type of facility. The City could choose to Multipurpose Facility 61.3% pursue this type of partnership in (Performing arts center, order to offset some of the costs of library, recreation center, operation. In this scenario, the City senior center) enters into a partnership with Recreation Center 51.3% another entity to construct and/or Larger library 34.9% operate the facility. Research Performing arts center 34.2% suggests that most partnerships see Other 20.4% the City picking up most or the entire tab for constructing the New Senior Center 19% facility, and the private entity taking 11 responsibility for operating the The draft report should provide facility. This is not a steadfast rule, information so that Council can however, and the specifics of each begin to answer some of those key partnership vary greatly questions that have surrounded the depending on the type of facility, project from its inception: and the arrangement in place. Such agreements typically dictate 1. Should the City renovate an the benefits that the City is entitled existing facility such as the to, when the City can reserve the Gateway Church and how much facility, and discounts for would that cost? residents, though this is 2. Would new construction be a negotiable in each instance. better option? 3. If the City chose to construct a Examples of these types of facility, where would it be or arrangements could include a where could it be located? partnership with an entity such as 4. What types of uses would the the YMCA to operate a facility include? recreational facility, or a 5. Would those uses change based partnership with an arts-related on whether or not the facility is in group to operate a performing arts a renovated building or in a type facility. These partnerships newly-constructed building? do not need to be mutually 6. How much would it cost to exclusive, however, as the City operate such a facility? could partner with an organization 7. Could we partner with a private to operate a recreationally-based entity on the operations? facility while partnering with an entity such as the Carroll Independent School district to Summary utilize their theater to provide arts- based events for the community Council identified the Multipurpose as well. See Attachment B for a Facility as a priority in June 2008. matrix outlining other Many studies have taken place to public/private partnerships across determine the best direction for the the state and the nation. Multipurpose Facility, and a draft of the BRS Feasibility Study will be Next Steps presented to Council on January 25, 2011. To date, $4,500,000 in A draft of the BRS Feasibility funding has been approved for this Study will be presented on project, and $10,700,000 in total January 25, 2011 at the City funding is planned in the CIP Council Work Session. The through FY 2015. purpose of this briefing will be to aid Council in their decision as to how to move forward with the facility. 12 Project Updates Space and Community Facilities Committee finalized its • January 25, 2011: BRS recommendation for the presented a final report to City Bicentennial Park Concept Council for their consideration. Master Plan. The plan included City Council gave no direction a recommendation to locate a at this time. multipurpose facility with a • June 28, 2011: The senior center component in the Multipurpose Facility was southwest portion of the discussed at City Council's park. The committee also 2011 June Retreat and a recommended that the concept determination was made at master plan be forwarded to City that time to evaluate it as part Council to consider adoption to of the Southlake 2030 Parks, ensure that Bicentennial Park is Recreation, Open Space and the desired location for the Community Facility Master multipurpose facility. Plan which is currently being conducted. • May 14, 2012: The Southlake 2030 Parks, Recreation, Open 13 Attachment A BRS Survey Results r 14 Community Survey for the City of Southlake Q1. Demographics: Ages of People in Household by percentage of household occupants 10-14 years 12% 15-19 years 10% 5-9 years 20-24 years 11% 4% 25-34 years Under 5 years 4% 7% I i 65+years j 4% 35-44 years 20% 55-64 years 11% 45-54 years 18% Source: Q2. Are You or Other Members of Your Household Currently Using Any Indoor Recreation, Sports, Fitness, Aquatic, Cultural Arts or Library Facilities? by percentage of respondents Yes 84% No 16% Source:Leisure Vision/ETC Institute(May 2010) I Leisure Vision/ETC Institute 1 Community Survey for the City of Southlake Q2. Are You or Other Members of Your Household Currently Using Any Indoor Recreation, Sports, Fitness, Aquatic, Cultural Arts or Library Facilities? by percentage of respondents No 16% Q2a.Indoor Facilities That Households Currently Use multiple choices could be made Yes Southlake Public Library 72% 84% Private fitness clubs 66 i Churches 44% Recreation facilities in schools 39% i i Homeowners association 34% Other public recreation centers12%1. 23% i i t Indoor facilities in neighboring cities22% College or university facilities � Southlake Senior CenterOther % 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Source: I. irc Vision/ETC Institute(May 2010) Q2. Are You or Other Members of Your Household Currently Using Any Indoor Recreation, Sports, Fitness, Aquatic, Cultural Arts or Library Facilities? by percentage of respondents Q2b. How Well Indoor Recreation,Sports, Fitness,Aquatic,Cultural Arts and Library Facilities That Household Are Currently Using Meets Their Needs Meets all needs 39% No Yes 16% 84% Doesn't meet any needs 2% Meets some needs 59% Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute(May 2010) — Leisure Vision/ETC Institute 2 Community Survey for the City of Southlake Q3. Level of Need for Various Cultural Arts Features by percentage of respondents I I Theater(music,plays,etc.) % I Exhibitions of art,history,etc. 7 I Black Box(small performance space) 9% I Studios for an instruction 13% Studios for music/dance institution 10 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% mStrongly Needed r3Somewhat Needed ®Not Needed 01D Know Source: Leisure Vision,E'rcinstitutelMay2Uto) Air Q4. Cultural Arts Features That Households Would Use the Most by percentage of respondents who selected the item as one of their top two choices Theater(music,plays,etc.) 59% i Exhibitions of art,history,etc. 34%I Black Box(small performance space) #% Studios for music/dance institution 1 % Studios for an instruction Other 5% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Use Most[Z]Use 2nd Most Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute(May 2010) Leisure Vision/ETC Institute 3 Community Survey for the City of Southlake Q5. Level of Need for Various Features That Could Be Included in a Senior Facility by percentage of respondents Fitness and exercise area Community room for classes,events,etc. 23% 9% 14% Games/activity room 28% 10% 13% Arts and crafts room 35% 12% 14% Computer room 16% 16% Indoor swimming:therapy/wellness 19% 14% Indoor swimming:lap % 18% Indoor swimming:leisure 18% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Strongly Needed Momewhat Needed ONot Needed ODon't Know Sourer: Leisure Vision,ETC Institute(Mu}'alit) Q6. Features That Households Would Use the Most at a Senior Facility by percentage of respondents who selected the item as one of their top two choices Fitness and exercise area 27% Community room for classes,events,etc. i g°/ Indoor swimming:leisure 13% Indoor swimming:therapy/wellness % i Games/activity room 8% i ndoor swimming:lap 7% Computer room 5% Arts and crafts room 4°/ Other 1 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Use Most DUse 2nd Most Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute(May 2010) Leisure Vision/ETC Institute 4 Community Survey for the City of Southlake Q7. Level of Need for Various Recreation Features That Could Be Included in a Recreation Center by percentage of respondents Aerobics/group exercise space �'• 35% Gymnasiums for basketball,volleyball,etc 25% Indoor running/walking track Cardiovascular equipment area Weight machines area t' Free weights area 32% Childcare area for children of parents using 8% Multipurpose recreational programming space 10% Racquetball/handball courts 7% Arts and crafts rooms ° Children's indoor playground 8% Indoor swimming:lap Indoor swimming:therapy/wellness(warmer water) Indoor swimming:leisure Cafe/juice bar / 70% Preschool program space(0-5 years) 34% 11% Rock climbing wall 30% 8% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Strongly Needed MlSomewhat Needed ONot Needed E3Don'l Know Sources Leisure Vision/ETC Institute(May 201 u Q8. Recreation Features That Households Would Use the Most at a Recreation Center by percentage of respondents who selected the item as one of their top five choices Indoor running/walking track " 47 Cardiovascular equipment area }1 yea+-]45 Weight machines area 39 Gymnasiums for basketball,volleyball,etc 36 j Aerobics/group exercise space I 1 34 Indoor swimming:leisure 33 Free weights area 20 Children's indoor playground 19 Indoor swimming lap 18% Arts and crafts rooms " 18 Racquetball/handball courts 11, Childcare area for children of parents using 15% Multipurpose recreational programming space 13% Indoor swimming:therapy/wellness(warmer water) 13% Rock climbing wall 12% Caf6/juice bar 10% Preschool program space(0-5 years) 6% Other 1% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Use Most OUse 2nd Most 12Use 3rd Most OUse 4th Most ®Use 5th Most Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute(May 2010) Leisure Vision/ETC Institute 5 Community Survey for the City of Southlake Q9. Level of Need for Various Features That Could Be Included in an Expanded Library by percentage of respondents Reading lounge 39% Children story time area 31% 11 q1. 9% Drive-up book retu 19% 15% 6% Quiet study room 36% 14% 10% Public access to computers 34% 20% 7 Preschool area 38% 16% 12% Conference room(20-30 persons) 38% 28% 14% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Strongly Needed OSomewhat Needed MNot Needed E3Don't Know Source: Leisure Vision ETC Instihne(Nla, i Q10. Features That Households Would Use the Most in an Expanded Library by percentage of respondents who selected the item as one of their top three choices Drive-up book return IN 62% Reading lounge 4'% Quiet study room '39% Children story time area 25% I I i i Public access to computers 17% I I I I Conference room(20-30 persons) 14%I I I Preschool area 14% I I I I Other I I I I 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Use Most EMUse 2nd Most DUse 3rd Most Source:Leisure Vision/ETC lnstitute(May 2010) Leisure Vision/ETC Institute 6 Community Survey for the City of Southlake Q11. Facilities That Respondents Would Use if They Included the Types of Features That Are Most Important to Their Household by percentage of respondents(multiple choices could be made) Recreation center 81% � I Expanded library 73% i I i Cultural arts facility 64% i I � i i Senior facility 20% i 1 i I I I I None 6% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Source: Leisure Vision,ETC Institute(May 2010) Q12. Facilities That Are Most Important for the City of Southlake to Develop by percentage of respondents who selected the item as one of their top two choices Recreation center 68% Expanded library 52 Cultural arts facility 42 i Senior facility 1 y% 0% 20% 40% 60% Most Important 02nd Most Important Source:Leisure Vision/ETC Institute(May 2010) Leisure Vision/ETC Institute 7 Community Survey for the City of Southlake Q13. Directions Respondents Would Most Prefer the City Take in Planning Future Library Services by percentage of respondents Develop a new free standing library in its own building Keep the library at Town Hall 28% -the library does not need to 22% be expanded 17% Keep the library at Town Hall 33% as a satellite location and develop a new library building Develop a new library space incorporated into a multipurpose community facilities complex Source: Leisure Vision ETC Institute(May 2010 Q14. How Often Households Would Visit a New Recreation Center if it Had the Features They Most Prefer by percentage of respondents Several times per week 48% Never 8% Once per week 20% Less than once a month Monthly 7% Few times per month 5% 12% Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute(May 2010) Leisure Vision/ETC Institute 8 Community Survey for the City of Southlake Q15. Maximum Amount Households Would Pay Per Month for a Family Membership to Use a New Recreation Center if it Had the Features They Most Prefers by percentage of respondents I $55-$64 per month $65-$74 per month 24% 12% $75 or more per month 11% Less than$55 a month 53% Source: Leisure Vision,ETC Instnurc Oday 2010) Q16. Maximum Amount Households Would Pay Per Month for an Individual Membership to Use a New Recreation Center if it Had the Features They Most Prefers by percentage of respondents $30-$34 per month 14% $25-$29 per month $35 or more per month ! 33% 13% i ! 1 I Less than$25 a month 40% Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute(May 2010) Leisure Vision/ETC Institute 9 Community Survey for the City of Southlake Q17. How Respondents Feel the Costs for Operating a New Recreation Center Should Be Funded by percentage of respondents Mostly from taxes 28% ° 100%through 5�0 property taxes Mostly from user fees Don't Know 51% 16% Source:Leisure Vision/ETC Institute(May 2010) Q18. Maximum Amount Households Would Pay Per Month in Additional Property Taxes to Build and Operate a New Multipurpose Community Facilities Complex if it Had the Features Most Preferred by percentage of respondents $7-$8 per month 8% $5-$6 per month 21% $9-$10 per month 19% $3-$4 per month 12% $1 -$2 per month Nothing 11% 29/° Some: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute(May 2010) • Leisure Vision/ETC Institute 10 Community Survey for the City of Southlake Q19. Types of Activities That Households Participate in When They Go to a Park by percentage of respondents(multiple choices could be made) Walking/hiking 62% t Take kids to play 54% i Ride bikes 41,% i Picnic 464. Running or jogging 43% i I Organized sports 42% t I Walking animals 41% i t Non-organized sports 40% Other 3% None 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Source: Leisure Vision ETC Institute Way 210) Q20. Level of Satisfaction with Various Aspects of Parks and Other Recreational Facilities in the City of Southlake by percentage of respondents(excluding"don't know"responses) Maintenance of parks II 62% 1 9% ° Safety of parks 60% 1 14%1 0 Overall quality of parks 63% 1 10% 7% Parks conveniently located for people in all areas 49% 18% 8 Safety of athletic fields 0% 23 Maintenance of athletic fields 5 % 18° ° id Quality of athletic fields 8 0 81.10 Amount of passive parkland or open space 4 0 1 ° o Availability of athletic fields 46% 1 ° Quality of recreational programs offered 45% 32°11 Quality of special events offered 43% 33°0 7°r' Amount of athletic fields 41° 25° ° r' Number of soccer fields 41° 30% 9° Number of baseball fields 40% 2 ° B° Variety of special events offered 43° 11° ' Variety of recreational programs offered 3° 30° Number of softball fields 39% 34% I Number of football fields 35% 32% Safety of hike and bike trails 37% 38% Maintenance of hike and bike trails 35% 37% Number of lacrosse fields 28% 1 42% Quality of hike and bike trails 31% 32°0 Availability of hike and bike trails 25% 1 24% 1 3 %' 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Extremely Satisfied OSatisfied El Neither Satisfied or Dissatisfied ODissatisfed NExtremely Dissatisfied Source:Leisure Visiom'ETC Irntino. - Leisure Vision/ETC Institute 11 Community Survey for the City of Southlake Q21. Number of Times Per Year Household Members Use the City of Southlake Parks and Recreation Facilities Listed in Question #20 by percentage of respondents 1-9 times 23% 10-19 times 16% Haven't used 10% 20-29 times 12% 100+times 17% 30-49 times 8% 50-99 times 14% Source: Leisure Vision,ETC Institute(May 2010) Q22. Types of Parks and Recreation Facilities That the City of Southlake Needs by percentage of respondents(multiple choices could be made) Pathways 61% i Natural areas 56° i i � I I I Active park space 42% I � � I � � Passive park space 40% Athletic fields 34% Other 14% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Source: Leisure Vision/ETC lnstitute(May 2010) Leisure Vision/ETC Institute 12 Community Survey for the City of Southlake Q23. Level of Satisfaction with the Quality of Existing Parks and Recreation Facilities in the City of Southlake by percentage of respondents Satisfied 52% Extremely Satisfied 13% Don't Know 3% Very Disatisfied 2% Dissatisfied 21% 9% Neither Satisfied or Dissatisfied Source: Leisure Vision!ETC Instiune(May 2010) Q24. Demographics: Ages of Respondents by percentage of respondents 35-44 years 38% Under 35 E 6% 65+years 6% 45-54 years 33% 55-64 years 17% Source: Leisure VisioWETC Inblitute(May 20101 Leisure Vision/ETC Institute 13 Community Survey for the City of Southlake Q25. Demographics: Gender by percentage of respondents Male 40% Female 60% Source: Leisure Vision:ETC Institute(May 21)10) Q26. Demographics: Number of Years Lived in the City of Southlake by percentage of respondents Under 3 years 37% 3 to 5 years 28% 16+years 6% 11 to 15 years 10% 6 to 10 years 19% Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute(May 2010) Leisure Vision/ETC Institute 14 Community Survey for the City of Southlake Q27. Demographics: Total Annual Household Income by percentage of respondents $150,000 to$199,999 21% $200,000 to$249,999 15% $100,000 to$149,999 14% $50,000 to$99,999 4% 'X Under$50,000 2% Not provided $250,000 or more 3% 41% Source: Leisure Vision/ETC I:. Leisure Vision/ETC Institute 15 Attachment B Public / Private Partnerships Matrix 30 • y N m Nc �� 9 cr c n E L C o N (UD U lLA m U Q7 ° N m m p m C L m O O C ¢ L y p L d C N U a) n o Ern O U o m o m a) m m m m cn U m m E m m m O E m c c C T m C .(D T L > T c E NL- O N a) m m fA > m m L'O p J d C >1 N T O O C Y U O c m U apoN d m o ° O c co E � a'� ace n D o m o of x m o a_i mwcop �� c Eo m e N U o N °) '- 0 o co m mm o� U m C9 c a J c = o n U N c U m ! n n .2:.L D TL C N C = N N m C ¢ ¢ N U C o C L } } U U U Q d U U U U U o_ a D N O m^ ` U U U U U.LLB Q d O U U U U m 2)U -04 o d D ° J c O :V _ T L y '� C � a) m E m Y m v ° p , m n o o m m cp c o a) m d Y = c O U 2 a) io m cam c O U m m J c U a m 0 <na c c a 3 v�� > o m 0nw c c Z 3 0 N % O m ¢ N p d LL m L (p ¢ ¢ LL o °) L m ¢ U ma U U U c U w n) L U a U . N O W J U ¢ m J ¢ a w^ t 0 L N o • C m N o_ d U o 0 o U ^ d U o 0 c o p r o o o v o E i o e coo m U Cl) ro o 5 U _ : n m - E -_ _ °� d 2 a E E -_ m E - D E E c - m (o o E o m rn E m o' o m N o N a U a M c» c * U a U a n 69 (14 1 <n U C O a O _ � o - o - U a E E - ° c v - E cp co of E U o E v r o U p 0 cli N U cp v o m U N v N ss e> e» csi ss t» e> e» e» c) 3 m 3 c d m d a Z � Z m N N N m a) N In N a) �@ m a) U � N LL m m LL O m D E m m D LL m a .L. N U a) C ¢ .L... LL m C ¢ m C o m O) — c a) O) C am am r n m ,c m m o O U c o a) _m o o cn E > > J E a E Y a _m E m a a) o E o o- E a y a a)N `m T d m o d r p om 'r.. jt 0 - n U J t m U y o 3 v o E o J a) m m r a) 0- a) a) a) ° a Jxm a ¢ a. 0 N c c a p c a m ¢} ¢} aLL JU o T -O m M CO)- OC Cra) ¢N w U> aO o U E m a o ¢wU ¢ a ¢LL n cc p ai 0 0 V c s v c c U mL? N m Dc o o a m N o m o= o m ID > o ¢ as w J !iQd i m J> z ¢ L � DO — C N ZE E r `o E c a `-T' 2 U aci c a) m m ° i o o r U E m ¢ CU u U m E c N o LL• ¢ .E a m D a) ¢ c o m LL m a) m `O r > c - .x U N J t N °' o m E @ a) L o a) m m o 2i 0 0- E a r E n Q } ¢ az a JU � Uaxa � } m ¢ U)Via ¢ ¢cn 0 / n2 / EE k}O /\ \ j ` 9 uaos;a 2 10 2 ME / / \ § 69 21 \ \{ KZ\ƒ \\\\ K I M \ /\ a ; \ / o 60 e z 5),2 } \ � b c E G ` _ _j) / \ k , ± § 0o \ } 7 ° f 3 \\ \ « ok ° b ± )/ \ `— _ _ (ID L �� 11 \\ > }/ z + I w \\ \/ co 2)< } L) CD m {\ j o w \ \ J/ co � 61> / c3 � -a : Jt 4� / \\ / / / @ ( § � \ & & \ g 2 » !\ c _ � \ � �( e = \{ k cl \ko2 {!&r i = 3 \) k ) j o ) ) E o ) }\ \ D I \ i / }\ \ ` o § :so } \32\ \}/ ) / c ( c } \ k) \ \2\ \§ \ { oE / � � E/ ~ /2 ) /\ O O N O T N N a A cn t i� ,� 3hyev i 9n Z_ C!) � O tl O c� a -� a� U) .__ LM O a o C/) LL CL .� 0. * i .� cn E *0 x E E �.. > = a) O o _ Z c) cn E O E • C E 00 +' O N N � • C I • = V S C N O 'O +N+ C • 'a cm ■ • >,C 0cn L �... � C • O O d L • • L CL 'N �.L • G> f+ N E 1 • N = C O O -3 L O • a%- O 'D N d ; CM C 0 Q • L C O Q C Q O i � N � V 'o GW C O .O N • L N • Q C o am d E +�+ N O O d a: Q'U m II N d V� O ui � > U) +� CLo v oLM ,� �n LM rr = ca N E 0 � i O 0 v � N Z 'Aul V 1 FL � `n � O � N_ C CL > v Z Z t__ • vv L N fD U N v s- Ln L N • v 3 �; a� o C M1. O N L o U 3 a N = O N O = �� 4- O z N O 1 E _� N • O 0- 0 Ow. L 4-, o 0 4- a) V) -C ° � V • = 0 3 N N ao ao Q) :+ v 1 • C 4.1 _ c C L `° ao (U N 'p o o CL O o Q o • c .N _ � L 42 1 v � a� L N N E Q w O 4-1 n v 4� -C t �►- � 0 4) 4)LM O 4) O E CIA O Z E .� a O tn13 — cn im .� C"A' _ •= N MEME y O o o *0 Mai r CL a y O E N c� O y � O C� EEmmom v o •�"-, y cMc 0 CL o ,U : o MMMIMM 4-1 a, 00 a� � o y C Lon O = = d �, i A Lon ■� i d N N ; ._ � ._ _ O E CV � � CD > � =r � _ CD ,° m c>v w '_ O � c c - Mr c a) " c _ CV) oE O .OE > cn � a � O - M EEMMEM c •cam AMMMMM' 0 c s � ON ■� E C > O d d MENEM '� a _ c C a O n � m as C C 0 0 o M = � C� %IMEMEM O • • �I C*4■ M L C16■ M U) (D .0 N 4� U) }+ >; O CL 0 .- pCL O CL CD M p OWm N •� :E i L i 0 4*d 4*d 4) O m 0 m L H 4*6 Z t� • 0 4- _ I In • .. � 0 . O 4-0 a 1 O a� O � ._ ♦..� • ._ � _ .O 0 0 E Now. E o 0 Oow O i IW v i � '� > m � cam a� i a �: z m 0 a m �: > M •- m O O U. O N O v U. N LL r 00 m o 012 20 0 cn *a m 0 N ° " O i m a 0 0 0 Cl) a m . . . IML LL i Q CO) Q � O O r O 4) 'oOo Q ., ca m CL C'*m •— •— C� O 0 Z C� '_ z a 0 v cnJa 0.� •- C� v i = i =1 M E +� o O O O w � _ E v O O = cn cn ._ . . . i i� N 0 Cl) CL N '_ as N > > o 0 U M . . N •� � � � . . CL O 0 0. v }' _ L z . I C .0 a *� O ._ a G � � c� y c o > O - � AA,, r C� cc N O o v a Co . , w • • • • Ln • OE , ■� C E NO }' O •y C U • d y O_. • . W E V c • 3 SIN ._ _ 0 :5 � � • Cf) > NE Cr cp N • ' ,�..� a y L — - •� � L • l c. •c c ch E • �:. Z p � E � V 'o o � L c� • eC N d N L _N o • CML c L Q IM i �O • c O la . c L ao Q N v 'C E C� c O CL • ' 3: '++ .ay ' N L .4) O d C'U X Aal ' O � U � v p .— O � V) O U M pLn U � v 4-+ CB E 4J OA w � -Q �, � v O 'er 1 a .c p E 1 Q N p O Z b4D v oA r-I r ++ _ V 06 �.+ E 41 QA j Q C V � V 1 E L v o > • CL Q! cu +j Q i p p � w ++ >- >' Q z co to O W J G • • • • M C. _ •Q v 75 Q � L O E m 1 r � 1 4 ' 4 R 0 r a M�1 • UDC 71 Desired Outcomes • We will know citizens are engaged when... • In five years, when asked about SPIN, residents will say.... • SPIN Neighborhoods will be well-informed by ... • SPIN Representatives will... • The City will... What is the :.L 7L- - demand I • What information are residents and businesses interested in? • What types of communication do they want? • How can SPIN meet those needs? missionWhat is the of - program.? L L- Current Mission: To provide a forum which fosters open and timely communication between the citizens and city government regarding programs, activities, and issues affecting the quality of life in the community in order to provide positive relations and a stronger sense of community. • In thinking about the desired outcomes, does the current mission still apply? • If not, what changes should be incorporated?? What are the • • • , i • In thinking about the desired outcomes, list 3 - 5 specific program goals. • Consider variables necessary for citizen engagement: — Citizen efficacy: I feel I understand government. I think I can influence government. — Citizen trust in government: The government is responsive to me. They look out for my interests. — Citizen competence: Do residents understand how the government functions and have skills to contribute to the community? — Government responsiveness: Did the government do what it said it was going to do in a timely manner? meetingIn the mission • goals of the program,, what are the responsibilities • pp • Thinking broadly, what is the role of appointees? • Now thinking specifically, if a iob description were created for this position, what would be listed under responsibilities? How • • we improve Forum participation • Are SPIN Forums an effective way to provide information to residents and businesses? • Should forums be reformatted to improve participation? • If an online or virtual option is considered, what information should be included? • In thinking about the desired outcomes, what communication needs should Forums meet? • How can connections be made between Forums and City Council strategic priorities? i How do we connect • Should the City engage HOAs through SPIN? If so, how? • Should the City manage HOA contact information and communication? • What role should appointees play in connecting with HORS? measureHow do we specificsuccess.? What are some performance • What should we measure as indicators of success related to citizen communication and involvement? • What citizen engagement variables are we trying to influence with SPIN? • Program-specific options: — Forum participation — Citizen Survey (current): • Utilization of SPIN — Measures based on program goals as established by City Council • Outcome-based options: — Level of engagement in community (new Citizen Survey measure) — Citizens feel informed (current Citizen Survey) — Ability to fill 100% of open resident board and commission vacancies within 3 months — # volunteer hours for the city (monthly, annually) A City of Southlake Proj*ect Briefing 1400 Main Street Southlake, TX 76092 www.cityofsouthiake.com Southlake Program for the Involvement of Neighborhoods Sy: Alison Ortowski, Assistant to the City Manager May 16, 2012 JIM t I 4. W W W.CITYOF S OUTHLAKE.COM c CONTENTS (w ProjectBriefing Purpose................................................................................................................ 5 History ........................................................................................................................................... 5 CurrentConsiderations.................................................................................................................. 8 FutureConsiderations................................................................................................................... 11 Options.......................................................................................................................................... 13 Summary....................................................................................................................................... 13 Attachment A- SPIN Forum Guidelines ........................................................................................ 15 WWW.CITYOFSOUTHLAKE.COM 35,000 30,000 -- -- 25,000 - 0 20,000 a 15,000 - 10,000 -- SPIN created I 5,000 1 1 1 1 O eM cD 00 O N d' cD 00 O N CD 00 O N rN cD 00 O N O a0 Figure 1: Historical and Future Southlake Population Sources: US Census and NCTCOG Population Estimates ■RESIDENTIAL PERMITS ■COMMERCIAL PERMITS 800 700 600 z 500 F 0 U 400 C7 � O U w 300 � z 200 100 - 0 - 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Figure 2: Southlake PermitActivity WWW.CITYOFSOUTHLAKE.COM Project Briefing Purpose and establish a public forum that will ensure a The purpose of this briefing is to review the history permanent, ongoing, community-wide dialogue. -)f the Southlake Program for the Involvement of Jeighborhoods (SPIN), the current considerations d) To include citizens in governmental problem- associated with the program, and to review options for solving procedures." evolving the program. The Articles also provided for the creation of Neighborhood Councils and empowered History SPIN Delegates to appoint a minimum of three SPIN was created by the AL members to such council. Councils were Southlake City Council in 1993 expected to meet monthly, with the meeting via adoption of Ordinance No. ®®� date, place and agenda set by the SPIN 598. At that time, Southlake ®SPIN®� Delegate. had a population of 8,900 and was starting to see a number of Finally, the Articles outlined that all SPIN neighborhood groups coalesce, *M# Delegates and members of Neighborhood requesting interaction with Councils would meet annually with the City and information from the City. SPIN was created to Council and staff. meet this need for more formalized neighborhood-City communication. 1993-1995: From 1993 to 1994, Southlake's population The following timeline highlights major changes to surged 22%, going from 8,900 to 10,850. This SPIN as well as changes in Southlake resulting from strong growth rate was repeated from 1994 the growth in the community. to 1995, with a 23% increase in population with the 1995 population totaling 13,350. This • November 16, 1993: represented a 50% increase in population in just City Council approved Ordinance No. 598 on 2nd two years. (See Figure 1 - opposite) Reading which created SPIN. This ordinance defined SPIN as a "citizen advisory committee" In response to the population growth, that "would be of assistance to the City Council Southlake began to see a significant increase and City staff by providing a more available form in development activity during this time in both of citizen participation in the affairs of the City residential and commercial categories. (See and to create a forum for neighbor to neighbor Figure 2 - opposite) communication." The original SPIN Standing Committee was composed of 17 Delegates who During this high growth period, the SPIN were appointed for terms of two years with "no program was in its infancy with the first two member to serve more than two consecutive years of operation dedicated to establishing terms." operational procedures and program expectations and goals. The Standing Articles of Organization (Articles) were also Committee also began discussions on the adopted in conjunction with the original creation of a Code of Conduct. SPIN also ordinance that outlined the following program hosted the first city-wide forums during this time objectives: period. "a) To direct and channel citizen involvement Additionally, City documents show that and participation in the City and its government. communication was primarily achieved through City mailings, fliers and word of mouth. The b) To provide a common meeting ground City had not yet launched a website or cable for neighbors to come together for the free channel. exchange of ideas on a wide variety of subjects. August 20. 1996: c) To act as a mechanism to leverage City Council approved Ordinance No. 59" Southlake's wide array of human resources on 2nd Reading, revising the following major WWW.CITYOFSOUTHLAKE.COM program aspects: increased almost 70% from just under 15,000 to over 25,000. Development activity hit its peak, 1. SPIN Delegates: SPIN Delegates were with the addition of almost 4,000 homes and redefined as SPIN Standing Committee nearly 8,000,000 sq. ft. of commercial property Representatives. representing an added valuation of more than $207 million. SPIN also experienced peak 2. Annual Map Review: Responsibility activity, hosting 50 forums in 2005. assigned to the SPIN Standing Committee for annually reviewing and making necessary Also during this time, the City's communication recommendations for changes to the SPIN program expanded with the launch of the Neighborhood Map. first website and the cable channel. SPIN communication continued to rely upon printed 3. Terms of Office: Changed terms of office mailers, postcards, information in the Southlake from June through May to January through In Review newsletter, and word of mouth with December and removed term limits. some appointees utilizing neighborhood email lists. 4. Executive Committee: Defined roles of the SPIN Executive Committee and outlined February 15, 2005: process for elections of Chair, Vice Chair City Council approved Ordinance No. 598- and Secretary. B on 2nd Reading, removing the provision for establishment of neighborhood councils. 5. Meetings: Required monthly Standing Committee meetings as opposed to the April 2008: annual meeting previously required and City staff implemented the Connect-CTY stipulated that joint meetings with City system and began utilizing it to communicate Council should be held at least four times with residents and businesses about SPIN per year. Forums, replacing the mailing of paper fliers and postcards. 6. Removal of Members: Established that SPIN had responsibility for policing April 21, 2009: its membership, with the addition of a City Council approved Ordinance No. 598-C on provision to the Articles of Organization that 2nd Reading, revising the following aspects of the authorized the Standing Committee to make program: recommendations for removal of members to the City Council. 1. SPIN Neighborhood Map: Boundaries of the map were redrawn to reduce the number 7. Neighborhood Councils: Removed the of neighborhoods from 17 to 11. This was requirement that SPIN Standing Committee based on the recommendation from the Representatives appoint delegates and that Standing Committee that due to advances monthly meetings be held and stating that in email communication, larger SPIN they "shall meet as often as they determine neighborhoods were more manageable. In but at least twice during any six month addition, some SPIN Neighborhoods with period." smaller populations were combined. 8. Code of Conduct: Adopted the first Code of 2. Terms of Office: Terms of office were Conduct that provided guidance on member changed from a calendar year schedule to behavior, emphasizing neutrality and the a June to May schedule so that the SPIN importance of not using one's position as a appointments mirrored the schedule of other means of influence. Boards and Commissions. • 1996—2005: 3. Attendance Policy: An attendance policy During this time period, Southlake underwent was created and attached to the Articles of a complete transformation. The population Organization. '" WWW.CITYOFSOUTHLAKE.COM Q1.In your capacity as a SPIN Representative,whom(in your SPIN Neighborhood)do you communicate with on a regular basis? • September 15, 2009: All of the above City Council approved Ordinance No. 598-D BUSIfe66e6 13% on 2nd Reading, allowing the appointment of 13% \ _ Alternate members. �\ • Late 2009 — Early 2010: '\ The processing of a controversial development case highlighted the need for establishing Neighbors written guidelines governing the scheduling 98% and communication procedures related to Neighborhood HOAs SPIN Forums. To address this need, staff so% first surveyed the SPIN Standing Committee utilizing questions designed to assess how, with whom and how often SPIN Representatives Figure 3: Who SPIN Representatives Communicate With communicate. Q3.In your capacity as a SPIN Representative,how do you Eight SPIN Standing Committee members communicate?Response Percent responded to the survey. Responses show that when SPIN Representatives communicate, they ONeghbor(Meh000d. most often communicate with neighbors and/ Ne 5s01 enerl \ or Home Owners Associations (HOA)via email Emi% or word of mouth (see Figures 3 and 4). In addition, frequency of communication was split between weekly and less often than monthly (see Figure 5). These results were presented to the SPIN Standing Committee and the City Council at the March 9, 2010 Joint Meeting. A discussion was also held regarding the roles and Word of Mouth responsibilities of staff and Standing Committee 75% Representatives (see Figure 6 - page 12). Figure 4: How SPIN Representatives Communicate Feedback from this meeting was utilized to prepare a draft guidelines document. •All of the above Businesses Churches •Neighborhood HOAe •Neighboro . August 10, 2010: lase often than—thly Following a joint meeting discussion with City Council in June 2010 regarding SPIN forums and the scheduling / communication process, Monthly SPIN adopted the SPIN Forum Guidelines (Attachment A). These guidelines serve as Two to three hme6 per month a Standard Operating Procedure for both scheduling and issuing communications about Two to three ti—per—k SPIN Forums. They also document roles and responsibilities of staff and SPIN Standing Committee Representatives and provide guidance to appointees on development aspects to consider when making a meeting °'1" recommendation. These guidelines are 10% � -- 30% Q% - ;; provided to new members upon appointment Figure 5: and also provided by staff to developers when SPIN Representatives Communication Frequency meeting inquiries are made. WWW.CITYOFSOUTHLAKE.COM such responsibility with the City Council. The • October 19, 2010: ordinance utilizes enforcement language that City Council approved Ordinance No. 598-E on mirrors the City's Code of Ethics. 1st Reading, revising the following aspects of the program: Current Considerations 1. Code of Conduct Complaint Review Since its inception in 1993, the landscape in which Process: Revisions were proposed to the SPIN program operates has changed significantly. outline the process for handling allegations Population has increased more than 200%. More of SPIN Code of Conduct violations. These than 5,300 homes have been permitted and almost changes included appointing the Executive 10 million commercial square feet have been added, Committee as the initial reviewing body. resulting in a corresponding $424 million in added valuation. City Council began a discussion at this meeting regarding the need for a city-wide Board and In addition, when the program was created, the City Commission Code of Conduct. As such, 2nd had fewer communication options, relying mainly on Reading and final adoption of the revisions in mailers and word of mouth. Ordinance No. 598-E was tabled indefinitely at a subsequent meeting to allow staff time to Today, the City utilizes a number of communication develop a comprehensive city-wide document. tools, including numerous websites, Connect-CTY, email blasts, and social media. • Late 2011 —2012: In late 2011, written complaints were provided Some additional considerations include: to the SPIN Standing Committee Chair regarding the conduct of a SPIN Standing Program True Cost: Committee member. The Executive Committee City staff has calculated FY 2011 SPIN true conducted a review of the complaint material program cost as $71,986. Figures 7 (below) and subsequently referred the item to the and 8 (next page) illustrate the true cost SPIN Standing Committee for consideration. breakdown. On April 10, 2012, the SPIN Standing Committee reviewed the complaint and made a recommendation to the City Council to consider ntlmlmstrative Fee removal of the Standing Committee member. 4% Hourly Expenses -.,_......: 16% This is relevant to this briefing because through processing the review of this complaint, several questions were raised amongst the staff, City Council and Standing Committee as to the mission, goals, and purpose of SPIN. It also highlighted the need to remove the responsibility for the processing of such complaints from the SPIN Standing Committee, recognizing that this type of public, peer-review is less desirable than Operational Expenses City Council management of board member 13% Personnel Services performance. 67% • May 15, 2012: Figure 7: SPIN True Cost Illustration City Council approved Ordinance No. 598- E on 2nd Reading, revising the process for receipt, review and response to Code of Conduct complaints. The revisions remove the SPIN Standing Committee from the Code of Conduct complaint review process and place WWW.CITYOFSOUTHLAKE.COM Item Item Description C• Personnel services account for the costs incurred solely through the necessary personnel required to operate the program. In the case of the SPIN program, a portion of several employees' time is dedicated to SPIN-related activities. $48,483 These expenses include salary numbers and the costs associated with Personnel employee benefits. Services 67% Operational expenses account for the costs associated with operating a program that are not personnel related. These direct charges include contract services, office supplies, maintenance, and other expenses. Direct . expenses account for the costs associated with operating a program that are not personnel related. These direct charges include contract services, office $9,311 supplies, maintenance, and other expenses. SPIN related expenses include Operational office supplies for SPIN Standing Committee meetings, including food, as well 13% as office supplies and roadway signs for SPIN Forums. Costs related to use of the Connect-CTY system are also included here. Hourly expenses account for charges incurred by a program on an hourly basis. These charges include the cost of using City facilities and the cost of having $11,423 executive level personnel present at program functions. Hourly 16% The administrative fee is a flat 4% charge on the sum of personnel services, direct expenses, and hourly expenses. This fee accounts for the administrative $2,769 expense incurred through the normal operation of a City program or function. Administrative 4% • . •:. Figure 8: SPIN True Cost Details WWW.CITYOFSOUTHLAKE.COM Average and Averapeper ypeofAtMndeeaatSPINForume SPIN Forum Totals, Attendance History and eZW•201e•2011 Attendee Information: In 2011, SPIN Forums had an average total attendance of 11 per meeting, with seven of ZO _._.-_.__.—____..____ .__..._........._...._._.__.__-.____......-_ those attending as citizens. Figure 9 (top left) 6 shows averages since 2009. ,5 Total attendance in 2011 was 400 with 256 of 10 ------`----------- ------- - those identified as citizens. Figure 10 (middle left) compares total attendance since 2009. s 3 2 z 2 2 2 In addition, since the beginning of 2011, staff has asked those attending forums to indicate Average Attendance Average#Staff in Average#Applicant/ Average#SPIN Average#Citizen In per Meeting Attendance per Applicant Reps in Representaaveain Attendance par on the sign-in sheet how they heard about the Meeting Attendance per Attendance par Meeting Meeting Meeting meeting. The options are: City Email, City Figure 9: SPIN Forum Attendance-Averages Website, Phone Call, Road Sign, Neighbor and SPIN Representative. Figure 11 (bottom left) shows that of those who Total and Type of Attendees at SPIN Forums responded, 43% indicated that they learned of 1200 u2009.2d,0.2011the meeting through City Email, 20% through the 1,2a City Website, 18% through the Road Signs, 13% lddd -- ------------------ -............-------------------------- through a Phone Call and 3% indicated they Big learned about the meeting through a neighbor or a SPIN Representative. eoo • Current SPIN Representative Communication _._.___ _ Data: 26 Each Friday, staff prepares and sends a 2'd-- 1 ,g, _-104 „ weekly email newsletter to the SPIN Standing d 51 �11 'g Committee. It includes a list of upcoming City ToM Attendance #Ste#In Attendance#Applicanttendace NSPIti «Ceridan a meetings as well as links to and summaries of Repair Attendance Representative in C.U.ce Attendance news items. The email is intended to inform the Figure 10: SPIN Forum Attendance- Totals SPIN Standing Committee members as well as provide them a simple way to spread information throughout their neighborhoods by forwarding the email to their contact lists. SPIN Neighbor —Representative 3% 3% Recently, staff began utilizing the City's email blast system to send the emails, as it allows Road Sign data to be gathered about how the email is 18% Cy";Email used. Figure 12 (opposite) shows, on average, 57.69% of Standing Committee members open the email, 16.62% click links within the email and none forward the email. It should be noted Phone call that if portions of the original email were copied "" and pasted into a new email, that type of usage data is not gathered by the system. City Webahe Citizen Survey Information: 20% In the 2011 Citizen Survey, respondents were Figure 11: asked to indicate how often the utilized various How SPIN Forum Attendees Learned of the Meeting y communication outlets to obtain information WWW.CITYOFSOUTHLAKE.COM ,aA • Ongoing Training and Orientation Considerations: �A Upon appointment, SPIN Members are provided with a notebook that includes: �% 5789 o Current SPIN Standing Committee meeting schedule, o SPIN Ordinance and Code of Conduct, o SPIN Forum meeting schedule and submittal 20% 16.62 deadlines, aA 0.00% _ o SPIN Forum Guidelines, Average%Standing ConmMM Avwape%Standing Commmee Avwage%Standing Commltbe Members M.Open Email MenEen Who ClIck a Link WSlhin Ne Membere Who Forward Email Email o SPIN Neighborhood maps and subdivision Figure 12: SPIN Weekly Email Newsletter Statistics information and additional maps (zoning, parks, mobility plan, etc.), about City news, information and programming. o City department information (mission, Respondents indicated that local newspapers responsibilities, contact information); and, are the most often utilized communication tool with more than two-thirds of respondents o City Frequently Asked Questions document. indicating that they use the tool at least once per week, followed by MySouthlakeNews.com, the They are also provided with a "Communication City email blast system and Connect-CTY with Tips" document that outlines both where 26% indicating use of at least once per week for information can be found as well as expectations each of these tools. and tips on how to develop and utilize a neighborhood communication network. Staff On the other end of the spectrum, over two- also meets will all new appointees to cover any thirds of respondents indicated that they never questions they may have about their role. use or were unaware of the City Facebook and Twitter accounts, the City's cable channel and Additionally, in 2011, all SPIN Standing SPIN Neighborhood Representative services. Committee members (current and new) were See Figure 13 for results related to SPIN invited to serve as a pilot group for the online Neighborhood Representative contact. Board and Commission Training Site. All of the newly-appointed members completed the online training and also attended an on-site orientation Three tames per month in December 2011. 2% Once per week t% TNAa Der month 2% Future Considerations Given the City's advances in its communication program and the significant changes that Southlake has seen in the last 20 years, it is appropriate for the Monthly or lees often 27% City Council to assess this program, its goals and structure to determine if it is still relevant. Naves llsa,Not awns al The following are a few questions that can be§sed a,% determine what changes, if any, should be ma SPIN: Figure 13: Citizen Survey Results What is the current function of the SPIN How often,if ever have you or other household members utilized your SPIN Neighbhorhood Representative to find out about City of Standing Committee? Southlakenews,information and programming?(Q46A) WWW.CITYOFSOUTHLAKE.COM Staff SPIN Representative • Work with applicant to schedule meeting If hosting: / obtain project information Speak with applicant; provide meeting • Ensure case file requirements (per recommendation SPIN Meeting Guidelines)are met and Notify neighborhood archived in Laserfiche • Open / manage / close meeting • Create / post agenda and meeting materials (program, sign-in sheet) Provide neighborhood with post-meeting report • Post to website calendar TOWN HALL Include in Weekly SPIN Email If meeting in another neighborhood or City- MEETINGS newsletter wide: • Create/order/ place signage Monitor information and distribute to • Send Connect-CTY neighborhood as appropriate • Post to social media sites • Include in weekly email blast to residents and media • Attend meeting • Create meeting report and post to website • Create / post agenda Attend meeting & provide neighborhood • Create and email packet to members report • Post to website calendar Notify neighborhood of any news/ STANDING Include in Weekly SPIN Email issues brought up at meeting COMMITTEE newsletter MEETINGS • Order food and set up room • Gather and distribute information related to request made at the meeting; maintain follow-up items tracking list • Include in Weekly SPIN Email Stay informed newsletter Distribute information to neighborhood CITY NEWS - Include in weekly email blast to as appropriate / ITEMS OF residents and media INTEREST • Post to social media sites • Additional communication as needed • Manage attendance records Maintain contact information for HOAs, • Manage contact information key neighborhood contacts and other OTHER Manage SPIN budget residents in SPIN neighborhood • PROGRAM Stay informed and familiar with City ACTIVITIES Respond to member requests news, events and issues Figure 6: Current Division of Duties WWW.CITYOFSOUTHLAKE.COM • What measurable impact does the program Southlake community a way to interact with their local have on the community? government. The program has allowed the City to • Is the work done by the Standing Committee communicate on important development and policy matters for nearly two decades. beneficial and useful to the City and to the residents? A number of changes have occurred in the city since • Is the cost of the program justifiable when the program's inception and in order for the SPIN to compared to its value? remain relevant in today's Southlake, assessing the program and making needed changes is necessary to • Are forums in their current format beneficial? Is ensure continued success. there an alternate format to consider that would increase participation? • If SPIN was created today, what would the program look like? o What role would appointees play and what responsibilities would members have? o What format would forums utilize, i.e. meeting at town hall, online forum, etc.? Options The answers to the questions posed in the previous section should assist the City Council in determining the future of SPIN. Staff has identified four scenarios that serve as options for consideration: 1. Continue with SPIN without alteration of duties or composition. 2. Continue SPIN with amendment to SPIN Standing Committee duties and /or composition. 3. Evaluate the need for the SPIN Standing Committee and: o Reformat and incorporate SPIN Forums into the development process as a requirement for developments that meet identified criteria, assigning staff to work with developers on scheduling and advertising. o Utilize the SPIN brand to invite all interested parties to get involved, enlisting tools available on the new City website to customize communications to neighborhood news. 4. Eliminate the SPIN program all together. 40 )ummary SPIN has played a unique role in offering the A WWW.CITYOFSOUTHLAKF.COM WWW.CITYOFSOUTHLAKE.COM Attachment A - SPIN Forum Guidelines 40 WWW.CITYOFSOUTHLAKE.COM WWW.CIl-YOFSOUTHLAKE.COM Procedures: SPIN Forum Guidelines Source: City Council / SPIN Standing Committee / Administrative Category: SPIN Town Hall Forum Procedures Effective Date: October 1, 2003 Revised Date: 08/10/2010 i 1. Purpose The purpose of these procedures includes the following objectives: ■ To effectively communicate the role that the SPIN Program plays in the public process and how it works; ■ To efficiently and effectively process participation requests; ■ To efficiently and effectively notify residents of upcoming events in order to maximize participation and increase value to all stakeholders; ■ To provide follow-up communication that is useful for City Council, City Boards and Commissions, Program Participants, and City Residents. 2. Definitions 2.1. SPIN Staff Liaison: City-appointed staff member who is designated as the SPIN Standing Committee's liaison and schedules all SPIN Town Hall Forums. 2.2. SPIN City-wide Forum: Meetings held for developments located on SH 114 or Southlake Boulevard that impact the city as a whole. 3. SPIN Town Hall Forum Scheduling Process 3.1. Step 1: First Contact with Applicant — Typically, the initial contact with an applicant occurs with a member of the Planning and Development Services Department. During these meetings, staff: 3.1.1. Highlights SPIN meeting criteria which is included in the development application 3.1.2. Advises the applicant that, depending on meeting availability, at least a three-week timeframe is required to schedule a meeting (see Section 4 for more information), and 3.1.3. Directs the applicant to contact the SPIN Staff Liaison to discuss scheduling a meeting 3.1.4. Notify SPIN Staff Liaison via email of meeting and potential SPIN Meeting request SPIN Forum Guidelines 3.2. Step 2: Applicant Contacts SPIN Staff Liaison — The applicant contacts the SPIN Staff Liaison, or designee, who: 3.2.1. Provides the applicant with the SPIN Information Packet which includes: 3.2.1.1. SPIN Meeting Procedures Document 3.2.1.2. SPIN Neighborhood Map 3.2.1.3. SPIN Neighborhood Representative Contact Sheet 3.2.1.4. SPIN Town Hall Forum Schedule with Submittal Deadlines 3.2.1.5. SPIN Meeting Form: 3.2.1.5.1. Applicant Contact Information 3.2.1.5.2. Proposal Description 3.2.1.5.3. Project Location (Address or nearest cross- streets and existing landmarks and SPIN Neighborhood) 3.2.1.5.4. SPIN Neighborhood Representative Recommendation 3.2.1.5.5. Applicant's SPIN Meeting Request (Yes/No) 3.2.1.5.6. Desired SPIN Meeting Date 3.2.2. Instructs the applicant to contact the applicable SPIN Representative(s) within three business days in relation to the proposed development or community issue. 3.2.2.1. If contacting the SPIN representative is problematic, or a vacancy is present in the appropriate SPIN Neighborhood(s), the applicant may be directed by staff to contact a member of the SPIN Executive Committee, of which a copy of the individuals that comprise this body will be included in the packet materials provided to the petitioner. 3.2.3. Notifies, via email, the appropriate SPIN Neighborhood Representative as well as the SPIN Executive Committee following the meeting with the applicant that a SPIN Meeting Request is pending and provides contact information for the applicant. 3.2.3.1. If SPIN Neighborhood Representative is not contacted by applicant within three business days, the SPIN Neighborhood Representative shall notify SPIN Staff Liaison via email. 3.2.4. Creates an electronic file for the request that may be referenced as the request moves through the process, as well as by those needing information at some future date. SPIN Forum Guidelines 3.3. Step 3: Applicant Contacts SPIN Representative — The applicant contacts the appropriate SPIN Neighborhood Representative and discusses the proposed project with him/her. 3.3.1. The purpose of this contact is to familiarize the SPIN Neighborhood Representative with the proposed project so that he/she may make a recommendation as to whether or not a SPIN Meeting is necessary. 3.3.2. If SPIN Neighborhood Representative has not responded to applicant's request within three business days of meeting with SPIN Staff Liaison, the applicant shall notify the SPIN Staff Liaison who will: 3.3.2.1. Direct applicant to contact a member of the SPIN Executive Committee, and 3.3.2.2. Notify, via email, SPIN Executive Committee member of pending SPIN Meeting request 3.4. Step 4: Review of Meeting Requests — The decision to recommend a SPIN meeting to discuss and review a particular issue is at the discretion of the SPIN Neighborhood Representative who shall consider these Project Consideration Guidelines: 3.4.1 Circumstances where a meeting may be recommended is generally measured by the amount of visual impact or change in use it will have on the existing character of a property and would include the following: 3.4.1.1 Zoning changes and major site, concept or development plans 3.4.1.2 Where new development is proposed (i.e. new building construction, new residential homes, new streets/infrastructure, etc.); or 3.4.1.3 Where the character of existing development is dramatically changed, either visually or by use (i.e. major fagade changes to an existing building or a zoning change to add a use to an existing development); or 3.4.1.4 Where the property is residentially adjacent and/or located along a major corridor such as Southlake Blvd or SH 114. 3.4.1.5 Specific use permits where the use may have considerable impact on adjacent properties 3.4.1.6 Comprehensive Plan Amendments SPIN Forum Guidelines 3.4.1.7 Ordinances 3.4.2 Circumstances where a meeting may not be necessary include: 3.4.2.1 Plats, for their legal limitations on timing and fact that zoning and/or development plan will reflect the same design as the plat 3.4.2.2 Minor site plans where changes are being made to existing structures 3.4.3 Other Meeting Review Considerations 3.4.3.1 The SPIN Staff Liaison will not call a SPIN meeting without the consent of the SPIN Representative and/or a member of the Executive Committee unless directed by the City Manager, the full City Council, or a meeting request is remanded back to SPIN from the Planning and Zoning Commission. 3.4.3.2 In instances where a City Department is seeking input on an ordinance, comprehensive plan element or other non- development case, meetings may be called without the consent of a SPIN Neighborhood Representative. However, staff shall ensure that the Executive Committee as well as any representatives in neighborhoods affected by the proposal is notified about potential impact to the neighborhood. 3.4.3.3 The SPIN Executive Committee is solely responsible for the orderly management of the SPIN meeting agenda. 3.4.3.4 In instances where the issue has citywide implications, the SPIN Standing Committee (in conjunction with the SPIN area representative) is responsible for coordinating the neighborhood communication efforts to host a citywide meeting. 3.5. Step 5: SPIN Neighborhood Representative Meeting Recommendation — The SPIN Neighborhood Representative reviewing the meeting request makes a recommendation as to whether or not a SPIN Meeting is necessary. This recommendation is communicated by the SPIN Neighborhood Representative to: 3.5.1. The SPIN Staff Liaison, via email, who will enter the recommendation into the request's record, and 3.5.2. The applicant 3.5.2.1. If the SPIN Neighborhood Representative does not recommend a meeting and the applicant feels that a SPIN Forum Guidelines meeting is necessary, the applicant may be directed by staff to contact a member of the SPIN Executive Committee for a second review and recommendation of the proposal. The communication procedure for this recommendation will be the same as with the initial recommendation as described above. 3.5.2.2. If the SPIN Neighborhood Representative does recommend a meeting, the applicant is not bound by that recommendation, as SPIN Meetings are not a requirement, and the applicant may choose not to move forward with such recommendation. 3.6. Step 6: Applicant Decision — The applicant, having received the SPIN Neighborhood Representative's recommendation, returns the completed SPIN Meeting Form to the SPIN Staff Liaison. On this form, the applicant will indicate whether or not a meeting is requested and the desired SPIN meeting date. The SPIN Staff Liaison will also record the SPIN Neighborhood Representative's recommendation on this form, referencing any applicable email communication on the topic. 3.7. Step 7: Meeting Coordination — If the applicant requests a SPIN Meeting be scheduled, 3.7.1. The SPIN Staff Liaison will: 3.7.1.1. Post meeting information on City Website (SPIN Meetings page and Events Calendar) 3.7.1.2. Send meeting information to SPIN Standing Committee via Weekly Email Update 3.7.1.3. Order signage 3.7.1.4. Record/send Connect-CTY phone call 3.7.1.5. Prepare posted agenda and send to City Secretary for posting 3.7.1.6. Prepare meeting materials (program, sign-in sheet) 3.7.2. The SPIN Neighborhood Representative will: 3.7.2.1. Notify SPIN Neighborhood of upcoming meeting utilizing additional communication tools that may be available to each SPIN Neighborhood Representative such as email communication with neighborhood homeowner associations. 3.7.2.2. Comply with the SPIN Code of Conduct 3.7.2.2.1. SPIN Representatives are held accountable to a Code of Conduct. In situations where a SPIN Representative does not wish to host a meeting in accordance with the Code, the SPIN Forum Guidelines SPIN Representative may ask his/her Alternate Representative to host the meeting. The Executive Committee also reserves the right to host or coordinate with another SPIN Representative to substitute host a meeting for the applicable SPIN area(s) in the event that an Alternate Representative is not appointed or if the Alternate Representative does not wish to host a meeting in accordance with the Code. 3.7.3. SPIN Standing Committee Members will: 3.7.3.1. Notify SPIN Neighborhood of upcoming meeting utilizing additional communication tools that may be available to each SPIN Neighborhood Representative such as email communication with neighborhood homeowner associations. See Section 5 for more information about Meeting Agendas and Format. 3.8. Step 8: Meeting Follow-Up 3.8.1. Documentation of SPIN Meetings — The City of Southlake staff member who attended the forum will generate a report following each meeting. Reports are general observations of SPIN Meetings by City staff and SPIN Representatives. The report is neither verbatim nor official meeting minutes; rather it serves to inform elected and appointed officials, City staff, and the public of the issues and questions raised by residents and the general responses made. Responses as summarized in this report should not be taken as guarantees by the applicant. Interested parties are strongly encouraged to follow the case through the Planning and Zoning Commission and final action by City Council. 3.8.2. Distribution and Posting of Reports on City Website - 3.8.2.1. The SPIN Staff Liaison will: 3.8.2.1.1. Post report on the SPIN website under "SPIN Meeting Reports" for access 3.8.2.1.2. Include report in electronic meeting file 3.8.2.1.3. Distribute report to SPIN Standing Committee members via Weekly Email Updates 3.8.2.1.4. Include in Planning and Zoning Commission meeting packets 3.8.2.1.5. Include in City Council Meeting Packets 3.8.2.2. SPIN Standing Committee Members will: • SPIN Forum Guidelines J 3.8.2.2.1. Distribute report to SPIN Neighborhood utilizing additional communication tools that may be available to each SPIN Neighborhood Representative such as email communication with neighborhood homeowner associations. 3.8.2.2.2. Follow project through development process by monitoring Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council meeting agendas and communicate to SPIN Neighborhood as necessary 4. SPIN Town Hall Forum Meeting Schedule 4.1. Regular Meeting Timeline — SPIN holds two (2) Citywide / Neighborhood forum nights on a monthly basis, the second and fourth Mondays of the month. If a meeting is requested, the meeting request must be submitted through the proper channels, as described in Section ll, by the required deadline of three weeks in advance of the requested meeting agenda (please refer to the SPIN Meetings and Submittal Deadline Schedule included in this packet for meeting dates) in order to allow for adequate advertisement and notification of residents. All SPIN Meeting Forms must be submitted to the SPIN Staff Liaison in the City Manager's Office (CMO) by 5:00 p.m. on the required meeting submittal date. 4.2. Designated Overflow Meeting Date — If both the second and fourth Monday meeting schedules are full and/or if there are extenuating circumstances to consider when scheduling a project, a SPIN Town Hall Forum may be scheduled on the last Thursday of the month provided the following conditions are met: 4.2.1. The request is made no less than ten days from the meeting date; 4.2.2. The SPIN Neighborhood Representative and a majority of the SPIN Executive Committee recommend the meeting or the meeting is requested by the Planning and Zoning Commission or the City Council; and, 4.2.3. A City-wide Connect-CTY phone call is made in order to account for the inability to post signage throughout the city advertising the meeting. 4.2.3.1. If the meeting is requested due to a full schedule on the second and fourth Monday meeting nights, and the three- week notification timeframe can still be met, normal notification procedures will be followed as outlined in Section 5 of this document. SPIN Forum Guidelines 5. Meeting Notification Procedures — The SPIN Representative(s) and the Executive Committee will work with the SPIN Staff Liaison to publicize the meeting. Notification for upcoming SPIN meetings occur via a variety of communication mechanisms (see list below), coordinated through the CMO. SPIN Neighborhood Representatives are also expected to communicate meeting information to their SPIN Neighborhoods. Applicants may choose to communicate meeting information as well; however, use of the SPIN name or logo on an applicant-initiated mailing is prohibited unless the mailer is reviewed and approved through the CMO. Staff Communication City-wide Meeting* Neighborhood Meeting Means Agenda Posting X X Cable Channel X X Connect-CTY X X Facebook X X Media Tips X X Signage X (14 placed City-wide) X (4 placed at key locations near proposed development SPIN Weekly Email Update X X Twitter X X Website X X *Developments located on SH 114 or Southlake Boulevard that impact the city as a whole shall be deemed city-wide meetings. 6. SPIN Meeting Agenda / Format 6.1. Arrival Time — Applicants are requested to meet the SPIN Neighborhood Representative at the meeting location thirty (30) minutes prior to the scheduled start time (typically SPIN meetings start at 6:00 p.m., 7:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m.). This allows for discussion about the meeting, to review handouts and/or presentation materials to be provided during the meeting, and to provide an opportunity to review the ground rules and address questions. 6.2. Useful Information — Petitioners should present the following information during their meeting presentations: 6.2.1. Concept / Site Plan (copies for handouts, if development related); 6.2.2. Possible tenants for development; 6.2.3. Vision of development / issue; 6.2.4. Time frame for completion of development / issue; 6.2.5. Elevations of buildings; and SPIN Forum Guidelines 6.2.6. Estimated date(s) for placement on City Boards and Commissions and/or City Council meeting agendas so participants may continue participating in the public review process. 6.3. Meeting Protocol — The SPIN Representative / Host will open the meeting with a review of the SPIN Program, the meeting format and the SPIN meeting ground rules. The host will then introduce the applicant and/or presenters. A question and answer session will follow the presentation. Applicants are asked to provide information on the merits of their proposal, and are asked to avoid any comments or references to other developments or proposals pending with the City. 6.4. Policy on Follow-Up Meetings — SPIN will agree to host ONE meeting with a petitioner. Should a petitioner wish to hold a follow-up meeting with specific neighborhoods or Homeowner Associations, they will do so only at their own expense and initiative. Developer-initiated meetings should be communicated to the SPIN Representative so that information may be made available and advertised through appropriate channels. Meetings should not be offered under the guise of the SPIN program, and use of the logo or SPIN name is prohibited unless expressly permitted by the Executive Committee. • SPIN Forum Guidelines C ƒ to \ \ \ U k E -C \ E ( 0 U 9 � � � u ƒ : 0 \ \ ƒ \ 3 ƒ / > \ § [ E \ m E \ bn } \ / - oi � » = g \ C:/ E / 0 \ $ 2 / S m E a 2 z \ / \ E \ : \ § ƒ E\ \\ \ \ E c , e e / \ \ \ ® \ : / Ln \ / / \ / u _ - \ ( / : « 2 E ) � z \ j y [ Ln ( 9 w ° 2 \ \ 5 0 - ƒ U u « \ /_ \ § _ \ / c § /_ y \ \ \ u / C _ E c E 2 2 ( C ® © . E .g 2 » a i { ƒ \ § 2 E y _ \ z Z % / \ O n bD \ u � ® \ _ / o e @ z \ / < M /CL $ \Z n . \ � \ \ \ E � \ CL u = \ .a u § C < fu 9 - 0 \ � \ 4- f \ = n z a u 3 \ \ > ƒ 2 \ CL 2 '° ƒ < $ m 0 y 3 _ / = u Ln / , m -0\ / \ / 2 f \ a) _0 # \ Q ol \ $ \ ® { % \ \ E > y R \ / » k { $ } E u 0 c 2 7 u $ § { " k \ L \ u � \ \ ƒ / \ E \ < } 0 E L) 3 ° ec O \ \ \ /.E/ 9 � 'a E 3