Meeting of 1998-5-28 Special & Budget Meeting

Schumpert said the Finance Director had submitted an initiative previously regarding vacancies in dwelling units and a request was received to discuss this again. The previous proposal was to reduce the rate 15% across the board instead of having the owners come in to fill out forms. This would save staff time, as well as the time of the owner. The correct percentage number was a concern in the past, as well as the various situations regarding a duplex versus a complex with many units, and the initiative was dropped before. This could be done through a percentage or on usage, and the 15%, based on the audit of the accounts, appears to be fair to the largest number of landlords.

Williams asked if landlords had been contacted. Steve Livingston, Finance Director, said the 15% was easy to understand and the minimum charge per customer includes 3,000 gallons, and that is one reason the vacancy is an important item to many landlords. Livingston said the direction he would like to investigate would be to see if a different quantity of water could be used and bill per thousand gallons, so that if there is a 50% vacancy rate, it would not be so closely tied to the 15% and therefore not as unfair.

Purcell asked if this would eliminate any spaces. Livingston said the current process requires an amount of work in the division, and said the City Manager had asked departments to identify a 4.5% reduction in the budgets, which would be to reduce people in the area of finance. Livingston said one item they reviewed today was taking the person out of the Welcome Center, although there would still be the same number of customers whether the employee were located at the Welcome Center or at City Hall, but it would be more efficient with that person back at City Hall. Livingston said if the vacancies are handled differently, along with that change, perhaps one position could be reduced. Purcell asked if the person at the Welcome Center at Fort Sill remained and only the vacancies were changed, could there be a reduction or half of a position. Livingston said they had tried to use part time personnel in the past but it takes so much to understand the City’s billing process; if a person handed a check and bill, that is not a problem, but customers have questions about paying part of the bill and items such as that. Livingston said based solely on changing vacancies he could not recommend eliminating a position, and pointed out that all the customers come in at certain times during the month.

Williams asked the number of customers served at the branch at Fort Sill. Livingston said he could get that number and explained that each soldier who out processes at Fort Sill goes through the Welcome Center and we sign off on the paper work. Williams asked if the City is the only utility located at the Welcome Center. Livingston said the City and ARKLA are currently the ones left as PSO and the telephone company have pulled out.

Shanklin asked the average water usage of an apartment. Livingston said an estimate would be 4,000 to 5,000 gallons and Shanklin agreed 4,000 would be reasonable. Shanklin asked how many apartment units there are. Livingston said approximately 10,000 units; there are 27,000 meters and about 37,000 units, so those are multi-unit. Shanklin said he could tell from the bill if there was a leak by the usage, and if over 4,000 gallons were used by a unit, something would be wrong. He said if there are three units, 12,000 gallons used and the owner states one is vacant, there would be a question and perhaps there should be a limit. Shanklin said some units have washers and dryers, and some units have families with children, so those factors cause a difference and there are many variations. He said a complex with 120 units may be 100% occupied but would pay 85% if the automatic 15% reduction were in place, and the usage should be compared to the suggested vacancy.

Powell agreed many factors would come into play and asked that he be able to appoint a committee to review the different scenarios and provide a recommendation. He asked the following persons to serve on the committee: John Purcell, Richard Williams, Robert Shanklin, Steve Livingston, Bill Burgess, Sr. and Orville Smith. Council voiced no objection. Cruz asked who would chair the group and Williams volunteered. Powell appointed Williams to chair.

Purcell said the Auditing Director did an outstanding job on this from last Friday to yesterday afternoon, with great difficulty getting information and it would normally take much longer. He said the request was for the Auditing Director to audit the City’s bid. The auditor’s opinion as stated and briefed yesterday was generally all those items under Section One on the spread sheet where the City bid were in the ball park, and even if the amounts were doubled, the price would still be less than the lowest bidder. However, in Section Three, there are still many concerns in those numbers and there was not as much information available. Purcell recommended considering awarding those in Sections One and Two, and not award those in Section Three to anyone until after the Parks & Recreation budget is considered, which should be next Tuesday. He said the Audit Director was unable to attend tonight and that was the reason some members had spoken with him previously.

Sadler said he was told the City was not going to be required the same as the other bidders regarding the height, number of times of mowing, etc. and asked if that was correct. Purcell said he was not sure but that was why he mentioned doubling the numbers. Purcell said it appeared the City’s bid was based on historical data showing a property is mowed every two weeks, or every three weeks; the contract was written so the grass would be kept within certain height limits, so during the discussion with the Auditor, even if the bid was not exactly correct, and the amounts doubled, it would more than cover mowing it more often. Purcell said even if the City’s bid was doubled it would still be lower than the other lowest bid.

Purcell said he planned to propose an agenda item in the next few weeks that whenever the City bids, the cost that the department estimates should go to the Auditor to make sure the prices are correct and have plenty of time for that review and have interaction with the department, and what the Auditor certifies as the City’s bid would go in the sealed envelope.

Beller said Page 2 of the agenda item shows a recommendation for bid awards and asked if there were exceptions shown by asterisks. Schumpert said it indicates no award to the low bidder on Section 1, Areas A and F, because of medical problems indicated in the letter of withdrawal, so it would be more accurate to award Sections 1 and 2 based on the recommendation in the agenda commentary rather than the bid sheet. Beller said the firm met specifications but withdrew and Schumpert agreed. Purcell said that was why he indicated awarding to the firms shown in yellow because those were the ones being recommended.

Warren said it was his understanding the City would be held to the same specifications and asked if that was correct. Schumpert said absolutely and they bid the specifications as written. Sadler said the bid was formulated based on historical data of how many times it is usually mowed. Purcell said that was the statement by the auditor. Sadler said mowing frequency would certainly be determined by the amount of rainfall received.

Shanklin asked if the RFP’s were put out by Warren, Purcell, and Williams. Response was it was done by the Specifications Committee, and those are some of the members. Shanklin said he saw the RFP a week ago and chose not to look at it but to wait to learn from the group what they had in mind. Shanklin asked if any money was saved or if this is what is usually advertised. Williams said it may identify how many labor hours are apportioned by certain departments for mowing, and you can see then how many man hours versus the staff positions available, and there are other sheets on other duties provided by those individuals when they are not mowing. Shanklin asked if the mowing is taken away, are there many other duties for them to do and are they being overworked. Williams said he would not go that far, but there is a justification sheet of other duties some employees do in addition to mowing.

Purcell said if there were three employees mowing and the contract were to be given to an outside bidder, then three spaces should be eliminated, because the money paid to the employees would be applied to the contract. Shanklin asked if we know where these are. Purcell said yes, and if you look on the sheet again, when we get to Tuesday, by awarding all these contracts, we just saved $10,189 in Parks & Recreation’s budget that is now available to use elsewhere. Shanklin said $10,000 is a very fine line. Purcell agreed but said it is still $10,000 and more could be found later on, but based on this, $10,000 should be saved. Shanklin asked if all this exercise will save $10,000 and Purcell said in Sections One and Two. Shanklin said he did not understand going through all of this for $10,000, and discussion was held.

Huck said the last column on the right shows the difference between the proposed budget and the recommended award. He said some areas are more and others have savings; there is a savings on the Cache Road median which is recommended to be done in-house as opposed to being done by a contractor. Huck said A-O have been contracted out in the past, and the City has only been maintaining P-S, which are the public parks, buildings and some median areas, and the rest has been contracted out for several years. He said in the past it was contracted out on a frequency basis as opposed to a per height basis, and the Specifications Committee recommended going with a height criteria versus frequency when the staff told the contractors when to mow.

Shanklin said there was $35,000 in the budget but now it shows $52,000, which is $17,500 more, on Item G. Huck said these are all the section line road right of ways throughout the City, which was done by a private contractor last year, and it was done six times at a cost of $6,000 per time. Huck said with the height factor, the bid was $52,000 instead of the past practice. Shanklin said one figure shows $67,000 last, then $35,000 in the budget, and now it is being let for $52,000. It was pointed out that one bid was $67,983 but that was not recommended.

Powell asked why the bid from Beaver Creek increased from $35,000 to $52,000. Huck said the concept was changed on bidding; in the past it was bid on frequency as opposed to height. Powell said if it rains once, the grass could grow four inches in one day and asked if the height requirement caused a financial problem. Purcell said it would be mowed better by specifying the height and will save $10,000 so far, even though that particular item was more. Shanklin asked if the three Council members agreed on the height and Purcell said yes, along with the rest of the Specifications Committee. Purcell said the old specifications were, in effect, you mow it every two weeks except if we decide we do not want you to mow it, you may mow it after four weeks, or we may decide to mow it ourselves, and a firm could not bid on something like that. Purcell said that was one reason the height requirement was included.

Powell asked if thought was given to mowing the section lines on a per frequency basis. Purcell said no and they put a risk on the bidders, but it could have doubled from last year if it was done per frequency if there was rain. Huck said the low bid on section lines is $52,000 for Beaver Creek for a twelve month contract to keep the grass at that level, whether he mows two times or fifty times, and historically it has been done six times. Huck said if there is a wet season, the contractor will lose money but if there is no rain, he would still receive that amount. Huck said it is a twelve month contract for a fixed price to keep the grass that height.

Shanklin asked who would go measure the grass to see if it was the right height. Warren said it would be the same person who goes around right now and tells the contractor to go mow the grass. Shanklin asked who this person is and if that is all he does. Huck said Danny Tate, the field foreman, does that and supervises crews and checks on contractors. Shanklin said there had been much argument on this subject. Powell asked Danny Nottingham to come forward.

Danny Nottingham, Building and Grounds Superintendent, said this is the first time we have ever gone out with a contract like this and agreed with Shanklin that it could be a hassle at first. He said it might work out as it goes on, but before, it was done on a per frequency mowing and there are contractors present who have been mowing for the past few years and everything seemed to be all right. Nottingham said the way the contract is written, the firms will be paid for twelve months and that includes November, December, and so forth, when there is no mowing done.

Shanklin asked if a firm would be docked if they do not mow until the grass is far above the specified limit. Williams asked if he was speaking of the City or of an outside contractor. Shanklin said an outside contractor. Williams said just as is done with other contracts, if they do not live up to the performance you either cancel the contract or do something differently. Williams said the City would get a much better job of mowing.

Shanklin asked Cruz if anything would be done to the contractors if they do not mow correctly. Purcell said they signed the contract to keep grass between certain heights and asked why the statement would be made that they will not mow it. Huck said it is shown that grass cannot be mowed less than a certain height to prevent crews from scalping the turf, and once it gets to 12 inches, it must be mowed and if they want to mow when it is at eight inches that is their prerogative, but it is mandatory that when it gets to 12 inches that they have to mow it. It was pointed out that 12 inches was used as an example and areas had different height requirements.

Powell asked if the City had the equipment in place to fulfill its bid without the purchase of more or new equipment. Huck said yes, and the City has been contracting certain areas for eight or nine years with the exception of two area the City elected to bid because the contractor had not done a good job and they could be absorbed within the current operating budget. Huck said he did not have the manpower or equipment to mow all the areas listed. Powell asked if the equipment and manpower are in place to mow the areas shown for the City and Huck said yes.

Jerry Ihler, Public Works/Engineering Director, reviewed the departmental budget handout giving clarification of budget requests, as well as division organizational charts. There are 14 divisions in the department and comparisons were shown to last year’s budget. Sewer System Technical Division is set aside from others because it is a new division approved in February 1998, and the last person was just hired for that division. Drainage Maintenance Division is funded by the $1 charge on the utility bill; Sewer System Technical Division is funded by the 1995 Capital Improvement Program. Total departmental budget shows an increase of $33,270, excluding the Sewer System Technical Division. Water Treatment Plant budget includes the Waurika assessment, and that increased by $85,000 in comparison to last year, and the City has no control over that. Financial assurance for landfill closure, post closure, costs increased by $31,000. If those two items are excluded, the department budget is showing an overall decrease of $83,000 in comparison to last year.

100 Accounts were summarized as follows: Water Treatment Plant shows a $20,000 increase in personnel and last year Council approved a chemist at the Water Treatment Plant, and that person was hired in January so the person was not in place for a full year; it will be a full year’s cost this year. Duties the chemist performs include lab testing required by DEQ and the lab is about to be certified so it can do the majority of testing required, which would be a significant savings from having to contract that out. There is a decrease of $42,000 at the Wastewater Plant; there have been several long term employees retire, and replacing them with new employees at lower steps caused the decrease in the 100 accounts. Wastewater Maintenance Division shows a decrease of $46,792 which comes with a $12,700 decrease in overtime; there have been arrangements with the crews which hopefully will decrease the overtime. Last year was the first full year of budget for the Wastewater Maintenance Division, and it was created as part of the EPA mandate to address the sewer system rehabilitation with regard to maintenance.

200 Accounts: There is $73,000 increase overall. Administration shows a relatively small increase and last year it was still in the transition period due to the reorganization and an increase in training. Drainage Maintenance shows a decrease of $14,000 because rip rap will not be done in the same amount this year. Solid Waste Disposal shows a $74,000 increase due to a $50,000 increase to repair the roads as use of the Silk property will commence; also DEQ will require as we use the topsoil that terracing and erosion control be provided. The fence on the west boundary is also in need of attention as it faces the highway, and that is included in the $50,000. The other part of that increase is due to $37,000 more for financial assurance. Wastewater Maintenance shows a decrease and that was based on last year’s experience. There was an $85,000 increase due to the Waurika assessment and landfill financial assurance, but those aside, there would be a $42,000 decrease in the 200 accounts in comparison to last year’s budget.

300 Accounts: There are 14 divisions and the needs are shown by priority throughout the department as a whole, causing great variances in divisions. There is a decrease of $25,000 overall in the capital outlay, and last year’s decrease was $600,000, but the year before the department received a good portion of the initial rolling stock funding.

Personnel authorizations for divisions were reviewed, and there is no change in the number of personnel. Sewer System Technical group will be made up of five individuals and will address the SSES, for a total of 261 employees in the department. Solid Waste Disposal Division requests Council ratify an action at the landfill; this year’s budget has seven heavy equipment operators and there was an opening. In an attempt to improve the operation, permission was received to advertise for a landfill foreman instead of a heavy equipment operator. This will allow the superintendent to spend more time on planning instead of running the daily operations. The foreman will be a working foreman and will also be expected to operate heavy equipment at least 50% of the time, but he does have the authorization to manage the other people. Landfill Superintendent needs time to focus on planning because the landfill has become complicated with regard to Subtitle D regulations. Budget will show six heavy equipment operators and one landfill foreman.

Wastewater Collection Division initiative last year was to do away with the hand type rodders requiring two or three people to operate and go with easement rodders that pull along with the vac truck. This has allowed rearranging of crews; previously there were three, three-man crews and since the purchase of the mechanical easement rodders, there will be two-man crews with regard to performing the maintenance on the sewer lines. The three laborers have been placed with a senior equipment operator, which will be used as a full construction crew. Each of the three-man crews had a senior equipment operator and two laborers; now there will be a senior equipment operator and an equipment operator because the mechanical easements rodders fall into that job category. The other option would be to pay the employees working out of classification, which would be more expensive. Three laborer positions were converted to equipment operators and it allows for another construction crew and provides better coverage.

Shanklin asked about the maintenance work required by the EPA order. Ihler said the maintenance crews who must clean the sewer system have been hired and that is the Wastewater Maintenance Division with 11 employees. This fiscal year will be its first full fiscal year of operation and it is working very well. Two vac trucks have been purchased and those are working well. Shanklin asked if the vac trucks had caused problems for construction and Ihler said no, and depending on the condition of the line, there would be problems with flushing lines. Shanklin asked if badly deteriorated lines can be flushed and Ihler said it would be better to make point repairs on them.

Purcell complimented Ihler on the presentation. He said the department has 256 people and the budget came in, despite the step increases, of $88,000 less than last year. Purcell said that may be due to management moving people around and those efforts should be commended. Shanklin said it is the best department in the City and asked what would be done if they had to cut 3% from the budget. Ihler said he received a directive from the City Manager to cut 4.5%. Ihler commended Shaw, Graves and Johnson, and the superintendents of the 14 divisions, for making the budgets and operations work. Ihler said 4.5% of a $15 million budget is $670,000, and he would ask to take out the Waurika assessment, which they have no control over, as well as the $138,000 financial assurance, to lower the amount they would have to come up with to meet the 4.5%. He said they are $200,000 short of finding the 4.5% and had found one vacant position that could possibly be suggested to eliminate. Ihler said they are just now making progress on the equipment replacement and are suggesting two packer trucks this year, although three were requested in previous years because none had been bought for several years. Ihler said his reduction would be from capital outlay, which would increase maintenance costs. Schumpert pointed out the original capital outlay request was much larger than is shown in the budget at this time.

Purcell said when the City Manager requested the 4.5% decrease, the result is cutting a budget which had already been submitted at a lower cost, and that is what happens with across the board cuts. Shanklin said he never voted on a 4.5% cut. Purcell said some departments did not come in lower and could possibly withstand a 4.5% cut, so it is worthwhile for Council to review those.

Purcell asked if anything in the Public Works/Engineering budget has to do with grass mowing. Ihler said the Drainage Maintenance program, funded by the $1 surcharge, includes some mowing, and other than that, the only mowing is ground keeping around the water plant and wastewater plant, and that is done mainly with contract labor. The budget includes funding for contract labor, but no divisions have personnel who are assigned to mow grass other than the Drainage Maintenance crews.

Powell said some budgets may be written anticipating a requested decrease. He said on S 11th Street, there is a lot of trash and he was at the landfill yesterday afternoon. Powell asked who enforces the requirement that trash be tied down or contained and the fine. Ihler said if a load arrives at the landfill that is not secured, the fee is double and any fines would not be with Public Works.

Powell said this is Lawton’s landfill and asked why we were not checking on those bringing refuse and charging them. Schumpert and Ihler said they are checking. Powell said his question was when that would start and that no one had asked him for identification. Ihler said he would bring that to the attention of the attendant. Shanklin pointed out the volume of traffic at the landfill and stated it was impossible for one person to keep up with.

Powell asked who cleans up the area on S 11th. Schumpert said crews from the Pre-Release Center are used at times. Mike Shaw, Assistant Director, said once a week, usually on Thursday or Friday because those are the slowest days for residential refuse, crews stop to pick up litter. Shaw said someone could be there eight hours a day and not keep up. Powell asked if it would be possible to assign a non-paid crew there. Shaw said they would look into that if more personnel could be obtained from DOC. Green said the Street Division is to run the street sweeper in that area on Mondays to take care of the weekend debris, and that wood chips are lined along the median.

Powell asked if a scraper overturned last week at the landfill and Ihler said yes. Powell asked if anyone was injured and Ihler said no. Powell asked if there was equipment damaged and Ihler said it was minor and the equipment is operational again. Shaw said a new scraper was delivered today. Powell asked about the areas in use and Ihler said the area in use is almost at its maximum height. Powell asked who assigns maximum height and Ihler said DEQ. Ihler said they plan to submit a report to DEQ requesting a modification to the permit to allow it to go higher at that location as we could gain three to four years if it is approved; request is to go 40-50 feet higher although a base would be retained at the top.

Green said she appreciated Ihler’s presentation and that it was easy to understand. She said she obtained information in Philadelphia regarding clean and well-marked streets, and it is important to a person’s first impression of a city. Green said an effort is needed in Lawton to improve in that area and she passed around a book of information.

Smith said there had been previous discussion about the number of employees who go out on water leak calls. He asked Ihler to review his process. Ihler distributed a memorandum explaining how leaks are addressed and corrected statements made at a previous meeting. Ihler said when a call is received regarding a water line leak, either the field foremen or superintendent, only one of those persons, goes out to check the leak. Ihler said it was reported that three men go to check on the leak and there are no more three-man crews in Water Distribution, and the maintenance or construction crews do not go out to check for leaks. Ihler said if the leak is on a meter or on something they can correct, the foreman or supervisor will make the correction and notify the resident; if it is a minor leak that needs to be scheduled, they will call for utility locates which require 48 hours. If it is an emergency, a crew will be pulled from a scheduled leak repair to handle the leak.

Purcell said he passed out a sheet tonight and had included items to consider; adding the $100,000 for removal of the tanks at Public Works, if we did all the initiatives, we have saved about $955,000 of the $2.2 million needed. He said if this is the case after verifying, it may be a need of $1.2 million. Schumpert noted the museum asbestos abatement is not included and Purcell said that had to be considered.