LC Facilities Ad HocCommittee
Meeting: Tuesday, August, 25, 2009. 8:15 AM in the Lower Meeting Room of Town
Hall South
Present: LC Members – Dan Amaral, Jan Brookes, Pat Llodra, Paul Lundquist
BoF Member – Jim Gaston
Invited Guests – LeReine Frampton. Bob Merola
Directors of Town Departments: Janet Robinson, Superintendent of Schools,
Gino Faiella, Director of BoE Maintenance, Amy Mangold, Director of
Park and Rec, Carl Samuelson, Director of P & R Maintenance, Fred
Hurley, Public Works director, Scott Sharlow, Director of the GIS and IT
Department
One member of the press
Two members of the public
Paul Lundquist stated that the Facilities Committee’s goals were to boost efficiency, cost effectiveness, and inter-department planning and sharing in the maintenance of BoE and Town facilities. He said that the committee had been impressed by the high degree of meaningful collaboration. He added that the end point was to create an organizational framework that would have flexibility, a timely and efficient responses to emergencies, a system of tracking work and inventory, and a program of preventative maintenance.
Pat Llodra said that the Facilities Committee saw the need of for a conversation with all department heads responsible for town maintenance around five general areas:
· Cooperation/collaboration among around town and BoE departments
· The use of technology to assist/record work flow, inventory, costs, etc.
· Grant writing
· A purchasing agent
· Fairfield Hills – Who decides what work is to be done and by whom? How is the cost of that work tracked?
She stressed that the committee wanted to learn how town departments worked together. She asked department heads to explain exactly how the initiation of work begins.
Collaboration and Cooperation
Fred Hurley replied that there is an on-going dialogue among maintenance supervisors. One of them would call another. For example, because each department head is aware of the projects in which the others are involved, one of them might call to borrow equipment purchased through another department’s budget. Emergencies, such as a burst pipe, might initiate a call for equipment and manpower from another department.
Carl Samuelson noted that a lot happens at lower levels. The people working on the project have the power to make some decisions at the site that don’t go through the department head.
Pat Llodra asked whether the system is too people-dependent. “Will this embedded culture of cooperation disappear if the department heads change?”
Fred Hurley responded that he didn’t think it would because “the people who work for Newtown are encouraged to and supported in making decisions on their own.” Department heads have established a pragmatic, get-the-job-done attitude among their employees. “We try to anticipate equipment needs to make workers efficient.”
Jim Gaston asked if there was a method to ensure that equipment isn’t duplicated.
Carl Samuelson replied that because departments need to get the work done, there is some duplication. However, during the budget process, department heads talk to each other about equipment specifications, and whether other departments might be able to use equipment purchased through its budget.
Dan Amaral asked about what the PWD was doing with the fill removed from the high school construction site.
Mr. Hurley said that the gravel was taken to the town garage, and that another pile may be used for winter sand.
Use of Technology to Track Work, Inventory, etc.
Mr. Gaston asked, “How are small projects tracked?”
Mr. Hurley replied, “We could track it with a great deal of effort and time. We recognize that it’s a problem because people question us. The PWD is piloting tracking software. The day will come when the crew leader will track work from an IPod, and we’ll be able to inventory work easily.”
Mr. Hurley noted that work funded through grants must be documented for grant reporting requirements. He added the GIS system creates greater efficiencies and removes most errors. It will also allow town departments to track the history of how much work has been done in a particular area.
Mr. Samuelson said that P & R and the PWD are working with Scott Sharlow to figure out which software would serve the needs of both departments.
Gino Faiella said that using software is a great idea, but he would like to see a program in operation before he commits to using it.
Mr. Gaston asked, “Will a work order system will be up and running in six months?”
Mr. Sharlow replied that an internet work order system will be working by then for use by the PWD and P & R. BoE maintenance can be easily added, although the BoE may not feel that the system is right for its department’s use. Mr. Sharlow added that the technology is there, but it has to be used. “The Achilles heal is the end user.” It takes support, training, and a lot of work to update the inventory and track work.
Mr. Hurley said that six months isn’t enough time to get everyone trained. He added that the town needs to hire more people in the IT department, and noted that Mr. Sharlow “just lost a man.”
Jim Gaston asked if additional personnel would be required to input information.
Mr. Samuelson said that additional personnel would be needed.
Mr. Samuelson noted that the reason the BoE wasn’t included in the search to identify software to track work and inventory was that the PWD and P & R interface more frequently than either department does with the BoE.
Pat Llodra noted that the job of elected officials and town employees is to make sure that the use of public money is clear and transparent. She said that we’ve discovered an ample but anecdotal record, rather than specific dollar amounts that account for work. Work must be accounted for in a fair and clear procedure.
Jim Gaston added that tracking work will become especially important as budgets get more difficult.
Bob Merola stated that departments need to demonstrate to taxpayers that they’re doing a good job, and that “for your department’s and the town’s benefit.” There needs to be a way to track “the good stuff.”
Carl Samuelson noted that even though the public has access to the information, individuals might not interpret it positively.
Fred Hurley said that no data system can tell people how to interpret. Mr. Hurley added that departments must get a clear message from town administrators about the end goal so that each department knows how to justify its budget.
Paul Lundquist stated that the best news is that a web-based technology system will be in place that will facilitate the management and tracking of work and inventory.
Pat Llodra observed that we “still need to tease out the real cost of work.”
Possible Use of Common CIP Tools
Jan Brookes explained that as a member of the BoE Strategic Planning Committee she had the opportunity to read the CIP Action Team’s report, and was impressed with several of the tools/forms created by that committee. She noted that Bob Tait had developed a different form for use by town department heads to justify their CIP requests. She asked if it would be possible for representatives of the BoE and town departments to standardize CIP tools. She said that this would give members of the BoF and LC information to understand CIP requests and compare them.
Janet Robinson replied that the CIP team did an exceptional job. She said that being able to look at all town and BoE projects through the same lens will reduce the unintended competition among departments.
Mr. Gaston noted that by the 2010 -11 budget year, the town will reach the 10 percent bond cap, and may not be able to do any new projects. He also advocated for common CIP tools.
Pat Llodra said that we need to develop common standards and apply them to all town and school projects. The adversarial attitude of winners and losers doesn’t help advance the town.
Fred Hurley pointed out that “that attitude casts its own shadow in trying to get work done. My budgets have taken major hits in recent years. With the goal of moving the town forward, we’ve made do. Eventually, we’ll have needs that can’t be ignored. (I’m in favor of) anything that will help us create common standards to determine need over want.”
Amy Mangold agreed with Mr. Hurley. (We need something) “to help us avoid what happened last night.” Mrs. Mangold was referring to the BoS meeting in which architects for the Recreation-Senior Center proposed two different buildings with markedly different costs per square foot.
Mrs. Llodra summarized the discussion by saying, “There is a willingness and interest to create improved tools and common standards to better identify needs.”
Purchasing Agent
Pat Llodra stated that a purchasing agent may be a benefit to the town, especiallyfor items that are common to several departments. This may also be a better use of staff.
Scott Sharlow said that he is the purchasing agent for his department. He knows what he needs and has vetted the vendors. A town purchasing agent would probably reduce his department’s flexibility and its timeliness of response. He reminded the committee that when he worked in New York City, there was an eight month lag between writing purchase orders and getting what he’d ordered.
Mr. Hurley said that adding a purchasing agent would take the burden of paper work away from his office. He said that all jobs between $2,000 and $10,000 had a two bid minimum. Three bids were required for jobs over $10,000. A purchasing agent would oversee and track the bids, and this would show better financial controls.
Gino Faiella agreed that a purchasing agent would help him. “If I write the specs, the purchasing agent could field the phone calls and follow up with the vendors,”
Grant Writer
Paul Lundquist stated that he saw a need for the town to identify grant opportunities.
Carl Samuelson said that a grant writer and administrator would help him with deadlines and reporting.
Amy Mangold added that grant writing was very time-consuming.
LeReine Frampton said that as a member of the Commission on Aging she has been told by directors of senior centers in other towns that a lot of grant money is available to help towns build senior centers. However, it’s confusing and time-consuming for commission members to identify those grant opportunities.
Fred Hurley commented that some grants require the expertise of specialists. In terms of work, his department has “reached overload, but I don’t want to hire more people.”
Janet Robinson said that because the district was in 100% compliance in Special Education, Newtown received a large ARRA grant. She stated that although Newtown isn’t a poverty district, “we can get grants if we hook up with a poverty school system. “ She believes that a grant writer would be helpful to research grant opportunities especially in the fine arts and world languages.
Fairfield Hills
Pat Llodra said that when work is done at FFHs by town departments, the cost is born by the department that supplies the labor.
Fred Hurley said that material costs are billed to the Fairfield Hills Authority. Contractor expenses for the streetscape and paving were paid for by grants. PWD daily worksheets would provide documentation of the labor cost done at FFHs. However, because it would be extremely time consuming, he wouldn’t be able to calculate it.
Mr. Hurley added, “All roadwork is done by contractors. (That means) “No road work was not done because the PWD was working at FFHs. Labor and equipment used to complete work at FFHs was not funded from road accounts.”
Pat Llodra concluded the discussion of common issues with department heads by saying, “We value the collaborative culture that all of you have established and maintained. This committee wants to re-enforce that culture by helping to create common tools.”
Amy Mangold added that to keep this cooperative culture going it’s important to create a system that will provide data for others.
Division of Committee Responsibilities
Pat Llodra has created a chart entitled Town of Newtown & Board of Education Facilities Maintenance Overview. She will research the information needed to complete the chart.
LeReine Frampton will call Greenwich, and ask why that city decided to combine the maintenance of town and school facilities under one department.
Bob Merola will contact Scott Sharlow and ask him to comment on the IT challenges that prevent town offices from moving to or staying at Edmond Town Hall.
Jan Brookes will ask Gino Faiella, Carl Samuelson and Fred Hurley for one or two examples of inter-department collaboration and cooperation. Jan will also email Bob Tait with a list of questions the committee developed for him.
Pat and Paul will interview Gino and Fred about questions the committee developed for those department heads.
The committee will meet with borough officials about the borough’s role relative to the town.
Jan Brookes for the Committee
| 
