Loading...
01-18-89 Public Works Comm MinutesJanuary 18, 1989 PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MINUTES 8:00 A.M. Attendance: Chairman Hopkins, Vice Chairman Gunnerson, Councilwoman Hafferman, and Councilman Schindler. Others Present: Mayor Kennedy, .DP.W Hammer, Acting Water Supt. Van Dyke, Surveyor Zavodny, and Street Supt. Brady. SHOP FOREMAN C. Hopkins stated the request for a Shop Foreman was placed on the Finance Committee agenda by Mayor Kennedy as a result of misinterpretation of a request made by C. Nystul. The recommendation was referred by City Council to the Public Works Committee. DPW Hammer stated the history of the request for a Shop Foreman. This request has been in all budget requests from 1986 to 1989. There is a current employee who could successfully fill this position and would eliminate hiring new personnel. C. Gunnerson questioned the number of employees currently working in the shop. Street Supt. Brady responded three. DPW Hammer stated the Public Works Department will not have four mechanics under any circumstances. C. Gunnerson stressed his concern the number of employees does not increase. DPW Hammer justified the funding of the additional $3,100 needed stating the money is available in the budget but was not budgeted. The money for retirement of one current employee is budgeted. If this employee does not retire during this budget year the money would be used for the Working Foreman. If this employee does retire the unused portion of the remaining salary would be used. An approved budget resolution would be required to relcoate money within the budget. C. Schindler raised the question raised by C. Gunnerson at the City Council meeting regarding why City ambulances are being noticed at Tunex. After some discussion, . Street Supt. Brady assured the Committee they were Evergreen ambulances. C. Schindler moved the Committee recommend to City Council the Public Works Director be given permission to advertise within house for a Shoo Foreman but at no time shal the statt increase over the existing level of three. C. Gunnerson seconded. With all motion carried. NOTE: C. Schindler stated, for the record, due to where the salary is coming, if Mr. Gibbs retires, no one will be hired in his place until the new budget year. In addition, this may have been approved by Council at their meeting of January 16, 1989 if the Street Supt. had recommended to DPW for recommendation to Council. The impression given was DPW did not have knowledge of the issue. Street Supt. Brady stated he attended the Finance Committee meeting to answer questions regarding vouchers he signed, as vouchers have been questioned in the past. The Shop Foreman happened to be on the agenda without his knowledge. A memo was written to Mayor Kennedy requesting a Shop Foreman including additional recommendations. C. Schindler stressed his memo should have been addressed to DPW Hammer, not to the Mayor, and for DPW Hammer to make the presentation. DPW Hammer stated four months ago a memo was written to him, but, he was surprised to see this on the Council agenda without his knowledge. DPW Hammer then read the following portion of the Personnel and Policy Handbook as adopted by the City Council in regard to policy relating to importance of Chain of Command: "The Council is a policy setting body. These policies are implemented through the Mayor and administrative officers of each department. It is important that the chain of command be recognized and maintained." January 18, 1989 PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MINUTES Page 2 This is an on -going problem in Public Works. He can only control the employees for which he is responsible. However, there were problems with W/S Supt. Hyde concerning the chain of command. The Council and Mayor must control the chain of command at their Ift level. One particular Councilman talks to union employees at the Shop, in the Garbage Division, etc. For example, traffic signal & sign personnel were assigned to a job which was not completed due to one Councilmember giving priority directions. This created problems and must be stopped. If the City has an Administrative Assistant and the chain of command is not followed that person will not be able to due his job because he cannot control it. This issue has to be resolved within the Council. C. Schindler questioned the number of councilmembers involved. DPW Hammer responded one. C. Gunnerson stated it is not required of personnel to take direction from this individual. He suggested writing a memo which states the personnel under DPW take direction from DPW Hammer,.department heads take direction from City Council. Surveyor Zavodny stated it is intimidating for a Councilmember to give direction. C. Hafferman responded she believes the problem could be helped if employees inform the Councilman that they receive their directions from their boss. C. Schindler stated a memo would be in order but, in addition, should be followed up with a meeting between DPW, Mayor Kennedy, the Councilman, and President of City Council. DPW Hammer stated this has been requested by him on several occasions. It is causing problems for staff members, for the Public Works Department, and in his personal life. Control of W/S Supt. Hyde was lost due to interferring from this Councilman. C. Hopkins suggested this go before a Council Workshop with Mayor Kennedy present. • C. Schindler stated there is nothing wrong with a Councilman asking a city employee what they are doing but he draws the line when a Councilman gives direction. The staff members present agreed they welcome involvement by Councilmembers. Surveyor Zavodny noted C. Ruiz was on Public Works job sites continually. As chairman he knew what was going on, who was doing it, and when he spoke on the Council floor he could talk at length about public works. This was a real asset. C. Hopkins stated the Council needs to observe and workonthe chain of command. STREET RECONSTRUCTION/MAINTENANCE C. Hopkins opened discussion by requesting different philosophies in order for the staff to begin planning. He recommends working with the staff on priorities. This requires an agreement on goals and priorities, such as Private vs Public, Maintenance vs Reconstruction, and Total Maintenance. He questioned if decision needs to go before Coucnil. C. Schindler repponded yes. C. Gunnerson responded the decision should be made in the Public Works Committee, brought to Council for informational purposes, and agreed upon by Council. His philosophy remains the City have a continual maintenance program in which our Street Dept. should be focusing. Any total reconstruction program should be contracted. One primary reason is for control over time lines and enforcement and penalties. In- house delays occur for various reasons without penalty. Enough work on the west side of Kalispell is available for the Street Dept. to conduct maintenance. Street Supt. Brady stated potholes are filled on the west side, but filling them does not solve problems if the remainder of the street is bad. C. Schindler stated the First Alley West project was totally contracted. The contractor was delayed and requested extension. City Council granted an extension. January 18, 1989 PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MINUTES Page 3 C. Gunnerson stated granting the extension was the decision of the Council. C. Schindler responded decision is also the Council's to authorize extension for the Public Works Department. The Council, in addition, can delegate a deadline for Public Works. • DPW Hammer stated a deadline was placed on Meridian Road completion. C. Gunnerson and C. Schindler both agreed the Meridian Road project was a smooth, fantastic job. C. Schindler stated people were upset with Oregon Street East not being finished. DPW Hammer stated water main installation is time consuming. Surveyor Zavodny stated water mains were contracted to Doyle Enterprises, who was within their lengthy time schedule. Acting Water Supt. Van Dyke added Oregon Street was late starting due to delay of approval of the Public Works Reconstruction Program. Without approval of the recon- struction program, bids could not be obtained for lack of determination of quantities. C. Hafferman stated she.was under the impression the reasons were City Street Dept. delays for being called off the job site for another job. Street Supt. Brady stated the opposite, other jobs were contracted in order for the Street Dept. to continue to work on Oregon. The project will be completed this season. C. Schindler stated he has participated in this discussion for five years and suggested a round -house discussion take place with private local contractors, Public Works Department, and City Council. Street Supt. Brady suggested the City contract a project and compare figures this way. C. Hafferman suggested the City choose two streets, contract one, and have the City complete one and compare. Surveyor Zavodny responded if the contractor knows the reason, he will do the job for nothing. C. Gunnerson stated the two things to address are time and materials, not labor. C. Hafferman responded in disagreement, labor costs have to be included. The Public Works Director should know these costs. DPW Hammer stated Public Works does this at present with a breakdown of costs per block for reconstruction done by city crews. The Public Works Dept. contracts 95% of reconstruction. If the City chooses to create one major contract, the ability to use the County Road Department is lost. Third Ave. E. was a cooperative effort of the City and County, who provided trucks, labor, and materials, as was North Meridian. DPW Hammer referred to an article in American Public Works Association regarding a so-called "new concept" in California called multiple bidding in which they praise the Public Works Director for doing this and eliminating high cost of profit and overhead by not allowing one major contract. They sub -contract to keep the overhead cost down. The City of Kalispell has been doing this for five years. The consequence of a major contract is, for example, in 1986 the City curb and sidewalk contractor bid $5.20/ft. The same contractor bid with Pack and Co. on the 5th Ave. W. project and it cost the City $9.00/ft. This was a result of a package bid. • C. Gunnerson suggested going out for a unit bid per square foot. Mayor Kennedy stated the City is not positive of funding resources until the budget process begins. C. Schindler stated the Street Reconstruction Program would have to be adopted by ' '*t January 18, 1989 PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MINUTES Page 4 • 0 Council and adhered in order to maintain budget for projects. Money could not be taken from the Public Works Budget. C. Gunnerson agreed. DPW Hammer noted when Public Works reconstructs a street, boulevards are filled, raked, approaches are done in asphalt, etc. This is City personnel concern for the City and the City taxpayer. A contractor cannot do all of this for less than $30,000 per block and the City could not afford to pay him. Surveyor Zavodny stated contractors have one advantage the City does not. Private sector contractors, if they receive poor quality work, have the choice to not consider these contractors for future projects. The City is obligated to consider all proposals and cannot eliminate competition. In addition, he believes the City has been accepting poor quality material for the past five years without recourse. Mayor Kennedy stated if projects were contracted it would eliminate replacement of or purchase of equipment. DPW Hammer responded the only equipment the City has is equipment which is used 2080 hours per year. There is nothing the City owns which is strictly used for street reconstruction. C. Hopkins will take the two possible scenerios before the Council at the workshop scheduled for this day. C. Schindler reiterated the comment made by Surveyor Zavodny regarding the contractor bidding lower in order to obtain future jobs. DPW Hammer offered the figures compiled regarding cost comparisons as well as a Pavement Management System print out of rated streets as to maintainable streets and streets requiring reconstruction. He noted within the past five years 14%, equaling 9.25 miles out of 66 miles of city streets have been reconstructed. C. Schindler stated maintenance is not being performed as soon as it should. DPW Hammer stated asphalt is not available until May 15, which creates a problem. Street Supt. Brady informed of a mix this year called Unique Paving Materials which can be used year round. Cold mix in potholes lasts approximately one week. C. Hopkins requested DWP Hammer prepare two pages of history of the number of streets reconstructed, costs, etc., and a short synopsis of where the staff thinks the City should set goals this year. DPW Hammer stated this year may already be decided with the Southwest project and budget remaining only in the Tax Increment funds, limiting work to the Tax Increment District. C. Hopkins then requested the staff inform the Committee of agenda issues needing resolution. DPW Hammer stated the Banner Policy issue went through committee without resolution last year regarding an ordinance for setting fees. DPW Hammer will provide actual costs and report back to Committee. Surveyor Zavondy stated Garbage Assessments/New Annexations is another issue. He provided the Councilmembers present with background information to be discussed in the near future. Adjourned: 9:10 A.M. ss