The URL can be used to link to this page

20190130_ Council Strategic Planning SessionCouncil Strategic Planning Session January 30, 2019 1. Employee Survey (KS) Prosper, TX 2018 The NES is presented by NRC in collaboration with ICMA Survey Background Contracted with independent research firm, National Research Center, Inc. The National Employee Survey™ (The NES™) Offered in partnership with International City/County Management Association (ICMA) Measures 10 dimensions of the employee experience Web-based survey of City employees The NES™ Methods and Goals ObjectivesAssess organizational strengths Identify organizational challenges Articulate the specific needs of employees MethodsWeb survey of employees 215 employees eligible 173 completed surveys Response rate 80%GoalsIncreased job satisfaction Increased engagement Increased productivity and performance Improved quality of local services Improved community life Survey Topics Job Satisfaction Work Group Performance Employee Contribution and Fit Employee- Supervisor Relationship Employee Performance Evaluation Employee Development Wages and Benefits Communication and Decision- making Respect and Ethics Physical Work Environment 24 received similar ratings 2018 Benchmark Comparisons 99 received higher ratings 2 received lower ratings 70 received similar ratings 2018 Ratings Compared to 2016 54 received higher ratings 1 received lower ratings Most Important to Employee Satisfaction Respect and Ethics Physical Work Environment Employee Contribution and Fit Employee- Supervisor Relationship Employee Performance Evaluation Employee Development Higher than benchmark Similar to benchmark Lower than benchmark Most important Work Group Performance Wages and Benefits Communication and Decision- making The Town of Prosper is a great place to work. Key Finding #1 Job Satisfaction Strongly agree 55% Somewhat agree 33% Somewhat disagree 10% Strongly disagree 2% Aspects of Job Satisfaction 8 in 10 Satisfied with their job overall Feel positive about working for the Town Likely to recommend working for the Town 9 in 10 Plan on working for the Town in a year Gain satisfaction from job Rated positively (excellent or good/strongly or somewhat agree) Town employees give Executive Leadership and Supervisors high marks. Key Finding #2 Executive Leadership Process for making important decisions Confidence in Town leadership Modeling a high standard Strength of shared understanding of the Town’s mission Managing costs responsibly and logically At least 7 in 10 employees Rated positively (excellent or good/strongly or somewhat agree) Supervisor and Work Group More than4in 5 employees Rated positively (excellent or good/strongly or somewhat agree) Supervisor Creates an atmosphere of mutual trust and confidence Treats employees with respect Work Group Quality of work performed by their group Working relationships overall in their group Support Services remain strong with some notable improvements. Key Finding #3 Support Services Ratings Improved Ratings increased for both quality and timeliness Recruitment services Overall Town internal services Risk management Network services Human resources Training services Benefits administration Special Topics Very positive, 39% Somewhat positive, 24% A mix of negative and positive, 27% Somewhat negative, 5% Very negative, 2% What is your overall perception of the current workplace culture for employees at the Town of Prosper? Do you think it is… How would you describe the current workplace culture for employees at the Town of Prosper? 4% 23% 28% 46% Don't know Negative Mix of positive and negative Positive Strong customer service emphasis with respect for citizens and employees. I see respect, trust, teamwork and accountability in some departments, but a lack of those attributes in others. Unsure of the future. It's more of a hurry up and wait atmosphere. Conclusions The Town of Prosper is a great place to work. Town employees give Executive Leadership and Supervisors top marks. Support services remain strong with some notable improvements. Upcoming Management Efforts Overall ease of getting to the places you usually visit Railroad improvements State Hwy 289 improvements Additional traffic signals DNT intersection improvements Fishtrap and Teel intersection improvements Communication among all staff overall Town Intranet Site Continuous Process Improvement Program Involve mid-level leaders in the budget process as related to equipment and material needs Employee Focus Groups (PD) Internal Communications –Newsletter (PD) Employee Survey Recommendation Discussion/Direction from Town Council 2. Downtown Road Reconstruction (HW) Downtown Road Projects: 1.Broadway (McKinley –Coleman) 2.Fifth Street (BNSF RR –Coleman) 3.McKinley (First Street –Fifth Street) Where Are We Now? 1. Broadway •All underground complete •Paving Complete by End of March •Remaining Sidewalk, Landscaping, and Lighting to be installed prior to Summer 2. Fifth Street •All underground complete •Subgrade stabilization this week •Anticipate paving complete by End of February 3. McKinley •All underground complete •Paving finished Friday •Driveways and inlet tops next week What Contributed to Delays? •Antiquated water system –inability to isolate old water lines •Overlap of project scopes with two different contractors •Multiple water lines •Broadway drainage connects to McKinley drainage system •Access and traffic control •Broadway Design Engineer utilized incorrect benchmark (0.4’) •National Weather Service (1899 -2018) •2nd Highest Annual Rainfall of 55.97”. Highest 62.61’ in 2015. Average = 33.60” •Largest Rainfall for September of 12.69”. Next was 10.80” in 1932. Average = 2.85” •Largest Rainfall for October of 15.66”. Next was 14.18” in 1981. Average = 3.36” What Are We Doing To Improve Communication? •Flyer January 11th to update Downtown Businesses •Bi-monthly E-mail update sent January 25th •Now Weekly E-mail updates to Downtown •Will provide same in Weekly Update to Town Council 3. Infrastructure and Transportation Study (JC) Infrastructure and Transportation Study Recommendations Jim Cline, P.E. Cline Advisors and Consultants PLLC 30 January 2019 Study Focus Areas: 1.Project Delivery –Improve process for implementing CIP (predictable and minimize impact to public) 2.Minimizing Railroad Impacts –Limit impacts (Noise and Delays) of BNSF line 3.Traffic Signal Improvements –address improving and maintaining traffic signals 4.Project Funding Opportunities –Seek opportunities to stretch the capital program funds Project Delivery (Task 1) •Establish a sustainable process •Fill vacancies •Add two construction superintendents (FY 19) •Add one CIP Engineer (FY 20) •Utilize contracted support to fill gaps and transition the team Minimize RR Impacts (Task 2) •Quiet Zone the entire BNSF Corridor •Pursue grade separations •Focus area for outside funding partnerships Traffic Signal Improvements (Task 3) •Establish On-Call/ILA agreements to provide complete signal maintenance •Identify known problem locations (crash/congestion) and implement short-term improvements •Masterplan future traffic signal locations for consideration in future development •Hire the planned signals/signs technician •Consider all users in design Project Funding Opportunities (Task 4) •Fight above your “Weight Class” in the pursuit of funding •Quiet Zone/Grade Separations •Trails •Traffic Control Improvements •Transportation Development Credits •Consider lifeline service (elderly/disabled) through McKinney Urban Transit District Infrastructure and Transportation Study •Recommendation •Discussion/Direction from Town Council 4. Downtown Beautification Update (JW) Downtown Beautification Update Role and Efforts of Code Compliance in the Old Town Area Downtown Focus Area Downtown Beautification Update Issues: •Older Properties •Higher Concentration of Renter vs. Owner-Occupied Homes •Less Paved, Off-Street Parking •High Grass and Weeds/Junked Vehicles Downtown Beautification Update Code Compliance Efforts •Consistent Enforcement •Weekend Patrols •Renewed Pre-Trial Meetings with Prosecutor •Dependent on Court Action Permitted Use Morgan Moving 103 East Fifth at Coleman •Planned Development zoning approved for this use in 2007. Areas Obtaining Compliance Areas of Compliance 218 West Second •Homes demolished by new property owner 304 South Main •Junk motor vehicles were removed and the structure was demolished per Town Staff. Areas of Compliance 199 McKinley-Designer Roofing Screening fence installed by owner with staff approval Non-Conforming Uses Apartments Downtown Apartments •Subject to Increased Inspections and Improvements Upon Enforcement of Multi-Family Rental Program Non-Conforming Uses 408 West Broadway K & H auto repair shop 205 West Broadway Lawn Tech On-going Efforts 215 West Broadway Michael Luna •Certificate of occupancy issued for Office use only •Tenant stores vehicles, auto parts, and trailers on-site •14 notice of violations issues •11 citations issued and dismissed On-going Efforts Mobile Homes •313 North Coleman was cited on two occasions, both dismissed, prior to installing under pinning on the trailer in 2017 •Mobile Homes are closely monitored for deteriorating exterior •Currently have seven (7) homes with on-going non-compliance violations for outdoor storage, junk motor vehicles, building code violations and bulk trash. •Each location has received multiple notices as well as citations. •Staff currently working with homeowners regarding property maintenance violations. 313 North Coleman Street Downtown Beautification Update •Recommendation •Discussion/Direction from Town Council 5. Public Hearings on Consent Agenda (JW) Public Hearings on Consent Agenda •Expedited Approval of Non-Controversial, Uncomplicated Zoning Cases •Utilized by the Cities of Grand Prairie and Dallas, formerly by Carrollton Public Hearings on Consent Agenda •Recommendation for Approval by Staff •Unanimous Approval by P&Z •No Written Opposition •Can be Pulled from Consent Agenda upon Request by Councilmember or Receipt of Public Appearance Card Public Hearings on Consent Agenda •Recommendation •Discussion/Direction from Town Council 6. Field Utilization and Fees (DR) Youth Sports Participating and Field Needs Issue: Providing adequate number of sports fields for Town participants Background Information •Revised Field User Fee for Spring 2019 registration. •Higher than average registration numbers. •Celina to construct: •(2)synthetic softball, •(2)synthetic baseball, •(2)natural turf rectangle fields •Install lights on existing rectangle fields, •Anticipated opening 2020 25% reduction in out of Town participants starting 2020 due to Old Celina Parks expansion. 25% reduction in out of Town participants starting 2020 due to Old Celina Parks expansion. 25% reduction in out of Town participants starting 2020 due to Old Celina Parks expansion. 25% reduction in out of Town participants starting 2020 due to Old Celina Parks expansion. Options: •Leagues to ensure that Town of Prosper kids are accepted first ;then allow registration of others, •Frisco and Celina have agreed to discuss the use of their baseball /softball fields if they have excess capacity. •Allocate funding for the preparation of Construction Documents in the 2019/20 budget. Field Utilization •Recommendation •Discussion/Direction from Town Council Park Fee Discussion Issue: Ensure the Town’s park development fees cover the construction of our park facilities. Council Direction: Whether or Not to increase the park improvement or dedication fees. Last Update: January 12, 2010 Todays Requirement: Two Different Fees: Park Dedication Fee: 5% of the total Tract or 1 acre per 35 dwelling units, whichever is greater. Park Improvement Fee: Single Family Dwelling Unit: $1500 Multi-Family Dwelling Unit: $2000 Park Improvement and Dedication Fee Update Park Dedication Fee Update Dedication Fee based on the following: •Level of service standard for parkland and recreational areas •Persons Per Household •Cost of Land Parkland Areas (Park Master Plan) Blue Circles: Neighborhood Parks (1/2 mile radius) Green Circle: Future Needed Neighborhood Parks Parkland Areas (Park Master Plan) Blue Circles: Neighborhood Parks (1/2 mile radius) Green Circle: Future Needed Neighborhood Parks 69.5 acre park 45.6 acres active 23.9 acres passive 65.6% active 34.4 % passive Community Park Utilization Example Parkland Dedication Analysis At a population build-out of approximately 70,000 people, we will need: •An additional +/-37.5 acres of neighborhood parks •An additional +/-108.27 acres of community parks •And additional +/-103 acres of special use/linear parks Note: This is based on 11.25 acres/1000 population. Per the approved 2015 Parks Master Plan, which indicates a range between 11.25-20.5 acres/1000 population. Parkland Dedication Requirement Comparison Type Dwelling Units Dedication Requirement Amount of Parkland to Dedicate (acres)Acres/DU SF 100 1 acre per 35 units 2.857 1 to 35 MF 100 1 acre per 35 units 2.857 1 to 35 Type Dwelling Units Dedication Requirement Amount of Parkland to Dedicate (acres)Acres/DU SF 100 ((11.25 x 100 DU = 1125) x 3.26 = 3667.5/ 1000) =3.6675 1 to 27.26 MF 100 ((11.25 x 100 DU = 1125) x 1.918 = 2157.75 / 1000) =2.15775 1 to 46.34 Existing Parkland Dedication Requirement Proposed Parkland Dedication (Dr. John Crompton Model) Staff recommendation: No modification needed Parkland Dedication if implemented Units with no pre- existing agreements Amount of Parkland Dedicated (based on new rate) # of SF Left 4753 174 # of MF Left 4950 107 Total Parkland 281 Parkland Delta (positive = excess)39 Town Standard Density Number of SF Units left multiplied by updated rate. Proposed Dwelling Units Town Standard x People per household rate Parkland needed per 1000x= Parkland Dedication via John Crompton Formula Average: 1 to 36.8 Park Improvement Fee Improvement Fee based on the following: •The cost to develop our neighborhood parks and linear parks. •Hike and bike trail system broken down into a unit price (i.e. cost per acre or per mile). •Number of units left undeveloped. •It is anticipated community parks will be funded by Bonds, General Fund, etc. •The future needs take into consideration the existing Development Agreements and Planned Developments (PD’s) COSTS PER DU Park Facilities Dwelling Unit Cost Per Neighborhood Park $1,202.75 Cost per Community Park $6,625.20 Cost per Hike and bike trail $1,265.20 Cost of Park Improvements per unit (captures all parks)$8,792.19 Improvements per DU minus community parks $2,166.99 Acres of undeveloped neighborhood parks: Park Improvements Costs per acre / mile Notes Cost Per Neighborhood Park $147,144.81 Cost based on $1,103,586.10 Neighborhood Park (7.5 acre park) Cost Per Community park $320,442.34 Cost based on Frontier Park in its entirety. Includes 3% inflation per year and design costs. 79.7 acre park. Cost Per Linear Mile of Hike and Bike Trail $650,000.00 Average past construction costs Park Improvement Breakdown Per Parkland Needs Note: •This is a blended method of SF and MF. •This treats all Community Parks like a sports complex •Density was used to calculate the number of lots left to develop. Acres of parkland undeveloped Cost per acre / mile x Number of future units Fee per Dwelling Unit÷= Total # of Lots left to Develop (owe park improvement fee)18192 Multi-Family 4950 Single-Family 13242 Total Cost (developing undeveloped and future parks) 148.70 Neighborhood Parks $21,880,433.25 Community Parks $120,525,625.05 Hike and Bike Trail $23,016,500.00 Grants -$5,475,000.00 TOTAL COST OF PARK IMPROVEMENTS AT BUILD OUT $159,947,558.30 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 $0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 Single Family Multi-Family Parkland Dedication Average: $1,303 Park Improvement Fee Rate Parkland Dedication Rate (Dwelling Units per Acre) Average: $1,252 Average: 50 DU/Acre Comparison Cities Note: each City ordinance is calculated differently. They are not always “apples to apples” Note: •Some cities have 4B funds to pay for development. •Cities with only a green column do not have a separate park improvement fee rate. •Two cities have hike and bike trail development as separate requirement to the fee. $2,000 $2,062 $2,116 $2,170 $2,229 $2,281 $2,350 $2,441 $2,538 $2,614 $1,500 $1,546 $1,587 $1,627 $1,672 $1,711 $1,762 $1,830 $1,904 $1,961 $0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000 2.67%3.08%2.62%2.57%2.71%2.34%3.02%3.86%4.01%2.99% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Multi-family Single Family Year Percent Increase Construction Escalation •Current Fee adjusted based on escalation of construction costs over the last 10 years •Information provided by Engineering News Record Alternatives Park Dedication Fee •No change to parkland dedication fee. Park Improvement Fee •No change to park improvement fee and use other available funds. •Increase the park improvement fees single family from $1,500/unit to $2,200/unit. •Incrementally increase fees until the fee meets the estimated needed fee by year 2025. To incrementally increase the park fees to meet today’s construction escalation factor by 2025, the fee would increase 50% the first year and 6.37% each year after. Or every 2 years at 12.74%. Or every 3 years at 19.11%. $1,500 $1,552 $1,605 $1,661 $1,718 $1,777 $1,839 $2,166 $2,241 $2,318 $2,398 $2,481 $2,566 $2,655 $1,833 $1,950 $2,074 $2,206 $2,346 $2,496 $2,655 $1,000 $1,200 $1,400 $1,600 $1,800 $2,000 $2,200 $2,400 $2,600 $2,800 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Current Parks Fee with Construction Escalation Parks Fee Update with Construction Escalation Parks Fee Update Overtime (50% increase) Year 3.45% 3.45% 6.37% Park Fee Discussion •Recommendation •Discussion/Direction from Town Council 7. McKinney Urban Transit District (HW) Three Programs Are Currently Available 1. Older Adult Program 2. Individuals with Disabilities Program 2. Low Income Pilot Program Current Participating Cities: Celina, Lowry Crossing, McKinney, Melissa, Princeton 1. Older Adult Program •Must be 65 years of age or older. 2. Individuals with Disabilities Program •Must meet at least one of the seven criteria below: •Deaf or profoundly hard of hearing •Non-ambulatory without assistance or mechanical aid •Qualify for at least 50% disability allowance through the VA •Qualify for Social Security Disability Income (SSDI) •Intellectually disabled •Have a seizure disorder •Be legally blind 3. Low Income Pilot Program •Have an annual household income at or below the low-income program requirements. Initial Period: (April 2, 2018 -March 31, 2019)* *January 16, 2019 MUTD Board Meeting: voted to make permanent. Times You Can Get a Ride Monday -Friday, 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. Saturday -8 a. m. to 6 p.m. Trips must be within Collin County* *However if live in Denton County, you can travel in Denton County only within your city and all of Collin County. Objective of the Council’s Involvement Whether or Not to Participate in the Program? Important Background From June 2017 –November 2018 •# of Participants = 372 •# of Trips = 6,719 •Trips by City: •Celina = 88 •Lowry Crossing = 0 •McKinney = 6,543 •Melissa = 16 •Princeton = 72 How Funded •Participants will receive a reloadable debit card. •For every $1 that the participant spends on taxi service out-of-pocket, the program matches three -to -one. For example, if you load $5 onto the card, the match is an additional $15 for a total of $20. Capped at $600/individual/month. FY2018 City Subsidy Match Allocation (based on % of population) •Celina = $3,013 •Lowry Crossing = $589 •McKinney = $62,113 •Melissa = $2,751 •Princeton = $2,947 •TxDOT Grant Funding in FY2018 = $459,079 Unused funding rolls over. FY2019 Budget Match Allocation (based on % of population) •Celina = $2,000 •Lowry Crossing = $0 •McKinney = $100,000 •Melissa = $2,500 •Princeton = $3,500 Prosper participation unknown: possibly around $5k -$10k. Again any unused funding rolls over. January 16, 2019 Board Meeting •Mobility Service RFQ •To address customer service issues with current taxi provider •Timeline –Bring back to board for consideration in April •Potential cost increase for service Next Steps •Send a letter requesting participation •Execute ILA •Budget Amendment for funding •Membership includes a Board seat of elected official or staff member McKinney Urban Transit District •Recommendation •Discussion/Direction from Town Council 8. Water Conservation Plan (FJ) Water Conservation Plan and Water Resource and Emergency Management Plan Update The Town of Prosper is required by the Texas Commission of Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to submit a revised Water Conservation Plan and Water Resource and Emergency Management Plan every five years. The Plan is due by May 1, 2019, and will be presented the April 9th council meeting. Updates Alteration Current Proposed Stage 1 Initiation Storage in Lavon Lake is less than 55% of NTMWD’s total conservation pool capacity Storage in Lavon Lake is less than 70% of NTMWD’s total conservation pool capacity April – October or less then 60% during November – March Stage 2 Initiation Storage in Lavon Lake is less than 45% of NTMWD’s total conservation pool capacity Storage in Lavon Lake is less than 55% of NTMWD’s total conservation pool capacity April – October or less then 45% during November – March Stage 3 Initiation Storage in Lavon Lake is less than 35% of NTMWD’s total conservation pool capacity Storage in Lavon Lake is less than 30% of NTMWD’s total conservation pool capacity April – October or less then 20% during November – March ET/Smart Controllers Not Allowed to operate in Smart Mode NTMWD has remained silent on the issue *Note: Staff does not wish to grant ET/Smart controller variances from the watering schedule. 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017GallonsTotal vs Residential Gallons Per Capita Per Day (GPCD) Total Residential 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 PopulationGallons of Water (in millions)Deliveries vs Usage Population Received Billed Flushing Construction Strategies •Reduce the total and residential per capita usage. •Maintain water loss percentage below 12 percent. •Total Losses were 4.51% for 2017. •Maintain meter replacement and repair program. Description 2017 Actual 5-Year Goal 10-Year Goal Total gpcd 209 200 190 Residential gpcd 140 135 130 •Raise public awareness by public education. •Provide a customer portal for customer live water usage data for approximately $6-$8 per meter. •Ordinances & Enforcement •When complaints/notifications arise, public works staff will continue to send letters to personally educate offenders. Recommendation Enforcement Guidelines First Offense Courtesy Warning Second Offense Certified Letter with Notification of Violation Third Offense $100 Fee Fourth and Subsequent Offense $300 Fee •Increase Water Conservation Education •Texas A&M AgriLife classes •Update website •Increase social media outreach •Continue to monitor water use and gpcd •Total water usage, gpcd, and unaccountable water losses •Landscape water management measures •Increase Drought Tolerant/Native Landscaping Education Recommendation Water Conservation Plan •Recommendation •Discussion/Direction from Town Council 9. 2019 Holiday Meeting Schedule (RB) Proposed for 2019: •Establish annual meeting calendar each January •Identify potential conflicts early •Adjust schedule to accommodate Public Hearing notices, developer timelines 2019 Holiday Meeting Schedule •Recommendation •Discussion/Direction from Town Council 10. Legislative Strategy (KN/HJ) Local Decisions have created Texas cities where people want to…. LIVE WORK DO BUSINESS •The ability of Texans to create vibrant, livable cities is being challenged by state officials who want to dictate that every community and neighborhood conform to their agenda. •State officials want to put ONE SIZE FITS ALL RESTRICTIONS on the annual budgets of all cities and counties. •Town of Prosper will assess $20.2 million in property taxes in FY 2018-2019 •Prosper paid the State $370,971 in Fees last year (Annual Reoccurring) Administrative Fees for Sales Tax Collection $150,660 Court Fees $220,311 Minimal Tax Savings for citizens, high impact to Town Services For Prosper’s current budget, a 2.5% cap would have resulted in a savings of $5.60 a month for the average homeowner but would impact the Town revenues by over $500,000. Based on FY 2018-2019 Adopted Budget Adjusted for 2.5% Property Tax Cap Homeowner Savings Revenue Loss Represents What in Town Budget? $5.60 per month $527,942 Any one of the following: •5 Police Officers •Full operations of the Library •Elimination of half of the Street Maintenance Program •Elimination of contracted services for athletic field and median maintenance Town cost drivers exceed 2.5% Costs driving Prosper’s budget are increasing at percentages much greater than the 2.5% increase in revenue that would be allowed under the proposed cap. Cost Driver Annual Increase Market Salary Increases –Fire and Police 3.0% Employee Health Insurance 3.0% Town’s Contribution Construction Cost 2.99% Base line budget increase for inflation 3.0% A 2.5% cap extends and intensifies the impacts of recession •** 2019 –No funding for 5 new patrol officers •2018 –Windsong road repairs requested by Citizens during budget hearing •2017 –No funding for 11 positions including 5 public safety positions and improvements to Whispering Farms park and Frontier soccer fields. •** 2019 One-time adjustment –less lost revenue than in previous years due to the elimination of the sales tax adjustment for property tax relief. 527,942 991,297 997,763 - 1,000,000 2,000,000 3,000,000 4,000,000 5,000,000 6,000,000 7,000,000 8,000,000 9,000,000 2019 2018 2017 General Fund Supplement Requests Supplemental Requests Lost Revenue from Rev Cap A 2.5% cap rate encourages use of debt •M&O tax revenue is used by Prosper and other municipalities to cash-fund portions of capital expenditures. •If the M&O rate is capped at 2.5%, capital purchases normally cash funded would be increasingly moved to bond programs. •Cash would be needed to cover operational costs that cannot be debt funded such as Town salaries. •This will evidently put debt burden on future Town Council and future generations of the Town. Compounding Effect on Loss Revenue •The Town would absorb over a five-year period a loss of $5 million in the General Fund. •Force the Town to reduce the budget by 16% or the elimination of an entire department. •Such as Administration which includes the Town Manager, HR, IT, Court and Finance. We Need to Tell the Story…. Local Decision-Making gives Texans and Prosper a Voice… in the level of service they want and how to pay for them. We Need to Tell the Story…. Aug –Town Manager presents Budget to Council. Notice of Proposed Tax Rate and Budget Public Hearings. Sept –Budget Public Hearings held. Council Adopts Tax Rate and Budget. July -Open Forum Budget Work Session with Council and Town Staff. Jan -Open Forum Council Strategic Planning SessionOct –Budget fiscal year begins and taxes are billed by Tax Assessor/Collector. Legislative Strategy •Fiscal Management •Transportation •Economic Vibrancy •Public Safety Legislative Strategy •Recommendation •Discussion/Direction from Town Council 11. Town Council Succession Planning (HJ/RB) Town Council Succession Planning The current Town Council will experience the effects of term limits beginning in 2020. The current Council holds over 50 years of combined local government experience,benefitting the Town in several ways: •Personal Investment in the community •Relationships with residents, stakeholders •Institutional knowledge •Regional leadership positions, influence By 2022, most of the current Council positions will have turned over, creating a sharp drop in overall Council experience levels. Council Members’ Years of Experience 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Mayor Ray Smith 11 12 13 14 15 Michael Korbuly 6 7 8 9 10 Kenneth Dugger 11 Craig Andres 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Curry Vogelsang 7 8 9 Meigs Miller 10 11 12 13 14 Jeff Hodges 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Jason Dixon 8 9 10 11 54 50 57 54 48 11 13 15 Why is succession planning important? Potential threats: •Loss of institutional knowledge •Political instability •Loss of regional influence •What can we do now to prepare future Councils for success? Benefits of Succession Planning: •Smooth Transition / Stability of Council •Continuation of Policy Direction •High-functioning government •Well -prepared Council that is ready to lead Three Tactics: I.Council Engagement II.Citizen Engagement III.Leadership Development I.Council Engagement -Engagement by Councilmembers in Town events and activities builds trust by building relationships with the community. Current Council Engagement Activities: •Community Picnic •National Night Out •Christmas Parade & Festival •Homecoming Parade New in 2018/2019: •Leadership Speaker Series –concludes in February 2019 •Open House / State of the Town -August 2018 •Prosper Chamber State of the Town –January 2019 Proposed for 2019: •Downtown Party –May 2019 What other opportunities for Council engagement are available? II. Citizen Engagement –Citizen engagement activities prepare future leaders by creating a strong “civic infrastructure.” Current Citizen Engagement Activities: •Boards, Commissions, and Committees •Citizens Fire Academy •Citizens Police Academy •Citizens on Patrol •CERT Team New in 2019: •Town Talks •HOA Presidents Meeting Proposed for 2019: •Citizen Academy •Board Recognition Event What other opportunities for citizen engagement are available? III.Leadership Development –proactive Council training & development prepares new leaders for service. Current Leadership Development Activities: •Council Orientation •Held immediately after election •Introduction to Executive Staff •Communication and staff support •Review of governing documents, Town resources •Financial and Legal briefings •TML Conferences (Annual Conference, Elected Officials Conference) Proposed for 2019-2020: •Candidate Orientation •Held after filing period closes •Organization/Departmental Overviews •Introduction to Executive Staff •Review of governing documents, Town resources •TML Institute -Certified Municipal Official Designation •Town Council Rules of the Road / Code of Conduct Town Council Succession Planning •Recommendation •Discussion/Direction from Town Council