Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/15/1976 MINUTES CCBakersfield, California, June 15, 1976 Minutes of the Council of the City of Bakersfield, California, meeting in budget sessions at 7:00 P.M., June 15, 1976. The meeting was called to order by Mayor Hart. The City Clerk called the roll as follows: Present: Mayor Hart. Councilmen Rogers, Sceales, Strong, Barton, Bleecker, Christensen, Medders Absent: None Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 1976-77. Councilman Medders, Chairman of the Budget Review and Finance Committee, read Report No. 9-76 regarding Equipment Management, as follows: This report is being submitted in response to the Council's request of last evening regarding the proposed incease in internal equipment rental rates. The first concept that should be understood is the difference between the equipment replace- ment program and the equipment maintenance program. The equipment maintenance program represents a central pool for the maintenance of all Public Works and Police rolling equip- ment. These costs include the salaries and fringe benefits of mechanics and all other maintenance costs. Also included is an equip- ment replacement provision which represents an annual replacement charge that is based on the useful life of each piece of equipment. This charge includes a 4% inflation factor. The equipment replacement program represents the budget from which equipment, that is no longer deemed practical to keep, is replaced. Annually the equipment replacement provision in the equipment maintenance program is transferred into the replacement program in order to provide funds for the future replace- ment of equipment. The equipment maintenance program is operated as an equipment pool. The various departments throughout the City are charged a rental rate for each piece of equipment they use. The rental rates are based on maintenance costs and an equipment replacement amount. The total of all the rental charges are designed to recover the cost of the equipment maintenance budget and are reflected as a credit against the cost of this budget. An analogy would be a private business that sells its products at cost. The budgets of the using departments Bakers£ield, California, June 15, 1976 - Page 2 reflect these rental charges, object account 6200, Rental Internal Organizations. Attached to this report is a comparison of this operation between the actual results of the 1974-75 budget, the 1975-76 budget and the proposed 1976-77 budget including the 20% increase in rental rates. It also notes the effect of a 10% reduction in these rates on the operating deficit. I can agree with some of the councilmen that objected to the wording in this committee's report last night which inferred that a 20% increase in these rental rates was caused by a comparable increase in certain maintenance costs in the proposed budget. The statement was an oversimpli- fication of the actual situation. Actually, it represents more o£ a "catch up" for maintenance cost increases for a three-year period. This can be clearly seen by the attachment in that the 1974-75 actual results showed an operating deficit of 22.9%, the 1975-76 budget showed an operating deficit of almost 16%, and despite the 20% increase in rental rates in next year's budget, the program will still have a 5.7% operating deficit. It should also be pointed out that the number of vehicles being maintained are approximately the same. For your information, we have attached a listing of rental rates for City owned equipment com- pared to the cost of actually renting this same equipment from private industry and compared to the State of California's rental rates. It certainly would appear that if this program is to operate properly and the Council wants to re£1ect as true a cost of the various services it is providing the citizens of Bakersfield, the rental increase is not unreasonable. If a cut is made in the proposed rental rates, the reduction in the other operating budgets will simply be of£set by a corresponding increase in the equipment maintenance budget. Councilman Medders stated that the Budget Review and Finance Committee Report No. 9-76 regarding Equipment Management is for information purposes only. Councilman Bleecker stated that since the 20% increase in the Internal Equipment Rental Rates does not reflect an inflationary projection and it appears the City has been in the arrears for several years he will not object to the increase. Work Measurement Program. Deputy City Manager Sumbardo stated that there were several questions last night regarding the proposed Work Measurement 13° Bakersfield, California, June 15, 1976 - Page 3 Program and also a request for information on what other cities are doing in that area. Mr. Sumbardo reviewed the program, as follows: Work Measurement is in some respects synonymous with Work Management and what we are really talking about is, how can employee productivity be increased. Work Management or Work Measurement can be divided into three parts: 1. Planning and scheduling of the work to be involved. 2. The standardization and improvement of work methods. A measurement of the actual work that is being done to see how its being done and whether its coming up to some standard that is generally accepted. The proposal that has been made by the firm of Kapner, Dull, & Wolfberg, who specialize only in this type of program, would be the following: Develop work standards, including crew sizes and a time to accomplish specific tasks that are assigned to the Street Division (resurfacing streets, patching holes, doing alley repairs, etc.). To install a work scheduling program so that the work can be carried out in the most efficient manner. To install a reporting system so that supervisors and foremen can have a system to evaluate work that is actually being done and determine where it can be changed for improvement and therefore increase productivity. The question was asked, last night, why this can't be done with existing City staff. The reason for that is: First of all the Work Measurement concept is a very specialized, highly technical sub- ject and there is no one on most staffs, except in larger cities like Los Angeles, Chicago, etc., that have the expertise and background to install this system. The other reason is that, installation of a complete system such as this in the Street Division would require a minimum of six months to install, with the people doing the installing working 8 hours a day. So it is a full-time not a part-time job. Bakersfield, California, June 15, 1976 - Page 4 Mr. Sumbardo briefly reviewed letters on Work Measure- ment Programs from: Kern County Parks Department with a savings of $187,000.00 per year; City of Los Angeles Street Maintenance and Parks with a savings of $3,000,000.00 a year; and City of Phoenix, Arizona,with a savings of $2,000,000.00 a year. Mr. Sumbardo then read the paragraph from the letter of Kapner, Dull, & Wolfberg, Inc., Oaks, California, as follows: Management Consultants of Sherman "If the current annual rate of productivity improvement savings that you are realizing within one year after the completion of our program does not exceed your work manage- ment program fee we will return to you the difference between the fee and your annual rate of savings." Councilman Christensen questioned the paragraph, just read, from Kapner, Dull, & Wolfberg, Inc. Mr. Sylvan Kapner, President of Kapner, Dull, & Wolfberg, Inc., stated it is a flat contractural fee and they have not proposed any contingency or sharing of savings. Councilman Rogers asked, if, other than the their consulting firm, for this study, would there be other to the City, such as, staff time so that there are indirect to the City. fee paid to costs costs Mr. Kapner stated that there are some additional costs which should be drawn from existing personnel. After discussion, Councilman Bleecker stated that it would appear to him, since all the employees in the City now have full-time jobs, that additional positions would have to be authorized to persue this study. City Manager Bergen stated that if the Council determines that the City should proceed with this study any assistance will have to come from within that department and there will not be any additional personnel hired. At the present time the City has not filled some positions because the staff is not satisfied that 134 Bakersfield, California, June 15, 1976 - Page 5 the City is getting the kind of operation, in that Division, that they could. The personnel in that Division are not necessarily to be blamed, it is a matter of coordination, planning, etc., that needs to be done. Councilman Barton stated that if an organization, such as Mr. Kapner's, can come into the City of Bakersfield and give an iron clad guarantee that they will save $32,000.00 if a contract is granted, then there is something basically wrong with the system of controls within the City from the standpoint of productivity. It indicates that the City may have a problem in productivity and this lies within the spectrum of management and supervisory controls. If the Governmental Efficiency and Personnel Committee can review this situation and find the need for improve- ment in the span of control, work levels and productivity, then he would be willing to go along with an outside study. Councilman Bleecker asked if the City Manager felt it is possible to arrive at a savings using the expertise of City employees. City Manager Bergen stated, yes, the staff intends to make a study in the Street Division. The City does not need an outside firm to improve efficiencies in that department, although it would have been easier and faster to have consultants do the Work Measurement Program. Councilman Barton made a motion to delete the $32,000.00 for the Work Measurement Program from the Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 1976-77 and refer to the Governmental Efficiency and Personnel Committee for study and recommendation. Councilman Strong stated that he finds it a little difficult to reconcile the fact that the Council, on many occasions, has allocated monies for studies and programs without any guaranteed savings. The City of Bakersfield has had a number of studies which have been embarrassing in that they did not save anything Bakersfield, California, June 15, 1976 - Page 6 135 and now there appears to be a certain amount of scepticism on the part of certain Councilmen when someone can flatly make a guarantee that they can save an amount equal to the cost of the study. He hoped that the Council would consider keeping the amount in question in the budget with the idea it would be referred, at some later date, to the Governmental Efficiency and Personnel Committee for further study and review with a recommendation to the Council. Councilman Strong further stated that he had talked, at length, with Mr. Kapner and on the basis of some of the things that were discussed he was very impressed and asked the City staff to check into the company's qualifications and obtain letters of recommendation so the Governmental Efficiency and Personnel Committee would have the opportunity to evaluate the program along with recommendations from other cities. The full Council has not had that opportunity and it is understandable why they are taking this position. In view of the fact that there has not been ample opportunity to review, in detail, the letters of recommendation from Mr. Coop and the cities of Los Angeles, Phoenix, etc., Councilman Strong offered a substitute motion that the amount of $32,000.00 be left in the Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 1976-77 with the idea that the entire Work Measurement Program question be referred to the Governmental Efficiency and Personnel Committee for further study and recommendation. Councilman Sceales stated that he cannot support either motion as he does not like to vote against people who are winners. These people have saved the County of Kern $187,000.00 and they are not talking about something that may be done, it has been done. Councilmen are going to have to be cutting the budget wherever possible and it is his intention to support every cut possible. City Attorney Hoagland, in answer to a question regarding deleting items from the budget, stated the Council adopts an Operating Budget at this time, primarily for the function of the Bakersfield, California, June 15, 1976 - Page 7 City in its ordinary course of business, not for any special projects. What the Council is determining at this time, is whether or not the Work Measurement Program funds should be in the budget along with the other operating costs to the City. Specific items can be deleted but the Council should not delete the daily operations from the budget. The Council has the legal right up until the time the tax rate is set, which is the £irst Monday in August or at least prior to the last Monday in August, to delete or add items to the budget. Councilman Strong's substitute motion that the amount of $32,000.00 be left in the Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 1976-77 with the idea that the entire Work Measurement Program question be referred to the Governmental Efficiency and Personnel Con~ittee for further study and recon~endation, was approved by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Councilmen Rogers, Strong, Barton, Bleecker, Christensen, Medders Noes: Councilman Sceales Absent: None Professional and Consulting Services. Councilman Christensen recapped the breakdown of the Professional and Consulting Services account for the Council. Councilman Barton stated by serving on the Water and City Growth Committee, he could see the $120,000.00 for the Professional and Consulting Services account and would hope, based on the reports that the Council gets, that this will be an over extended amount in the budget. Based on the severity of it, he would support this amount City will have a surplus sure of the dollar amount being continued and would hope that the in this particular account. He is not but does not want to be categorized as being super critical of these services per se. Some of the Professional and Consulting services fall within the category of the last subject discussed and he would like to have them thoroughly Bakersfield, California, June 15, 1976 - Page 8 137 reviewed. An example is $30,000.00 for Planning. The City has to be involved in Environmental Impact Reports, make analysis and continually get expert opinions on zonings and things of that nature. Utilizing a lot of professional and consulting services means one thing; the City is over extending their management capabilities or they are lacking personnel within that particular department. If you recall,not too many weeks ago, the City expended $17,500.00, that was in my personal opinion not absolutely necessary, and now there is talk about spending another $30,000.00 for pro- fessional services within the Planning Commission to develop Environmental Impact Reports. Don't get me wrong I firmly believe that the City will have to make expenditures where absolutely necessary, but participation on a user pay basis should be encouraged. That particular subject (in the Preliminary Budget, page 51 - Planning Commission $30,000.00), should also be referred to the Governmental Efficiency and Personnel Committee for recommendation. Councilman Barton stated he would like a recommendation from the Governmental Efficiency and Personnel Committee as to the validity of the expenditure, based upon manpower and also that which falls within the user pay concept. Mayor Hart asked if Councilman Barton wanted this referred to the Governmental Efficiency and Personnel Committee and retain the monies in the budget as Councilman Strong recon~nended in his substitute motion. Councilman Barton stated that was correct. Upon a motion by Councilman Barton, Professional and Consulting Services - Planning Account No. 4100 in the amount of $30,000.00 was retained in the Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 1976-77 until the Governmental Efficiency and Personnel Committee makes vote: Ayes: Noes: Absent: a recommendation to the Council, by the following roll call Councilmen Rogers, Strong, Barton, Bleecker, Christensen Councilmen Sceales, Medders None 138 Bakersfield, California, June 15, 1976 - Page 9 Councilman Bleecker asked, on the last motion, if the Governmental Efficiency and Personnel Co~nmittee is to consider whether or not this expenditure is necessary in relationship to the number of people there are in Planning, in other words, whether or not Planning can handle it themselves with the number of the people they have. It is proper to refer to the Govern- mental Efficiency and Personnel Committee because their function is primarily in that area and asked Councilman Barton if that was the main gest of his motion. Councilman Barton stated, no, the other part of the motion was whether this expenditure for Professional and Consulting Services falls within the realm of the user pay basis. Councilman Bleecker requested that the Clerk give that motion verbatim, on those areas of concern, to Assistant City ~4anager Russell so it could be placed on the agenda for the Governmental Efficiency and Personnel Committee. Councilman Bleecker requested that large amounts in the budget, especially in the Other Outside Services and Charges Accounts, be explained specifically what they are for rather than be placed in a miscellaneous account under one lump sum. After further discussion, upon a motion by Councilman Medders, Report No. 8-76 of the Budget Review and Finance Committee, was accepted, and the Operating Budget of the 1976-77 Preliminary Budget, with the Work Measurement Program and Professional and Consulting Services being referred to the Governmental Efficiency and Personnel Committee for study and recommendation, was approved by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Councilmen Rogers, Sceales, Strong, Barton, Bleecker, Christensen, Medders Noes: None Absent: None Mayor Hart declared a brief recess at this time. Bakersfield, California, June 15, 1976 - Page 10 139 Capital Improvement Program 1976-77. Deputy City Manager Sumbardo stated that the Council has been given the five year Capital Improvement Program for 1976-81 and the first year of that five year program, as in the past, is also included in the Operating Budget. Mr. Sumbardo read a letter from the Planning Commission, dated May 27, 1976, as follows: Honorable Mayor and City Council City Hall Bakersfield, California Honorable Gentlemen: The Planning Commission herewith submits the Capital Improvement Program for the years 1976-1981, inclusive, pursuant to the State Conservation and Planning Act. The Commission recommends approval of the five- year Capital Improvement Program, as submitted and reviewed, with the following modifications: RECREATION AND PARK SERVICES 1976-77 1977-78 CALIFORNIA AVENUE PARK Playground area 10,000 Park lighting 3,500 4,000 Group picnic facilities 14,000 Total 17,500 14,000 Modifications in the specific projects for California Avenue Park do not change the total amounts proposed for the 1976-77 and 1977-78 fiscal years. Respectfully submitted PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD JILL HADDAD, CHAIRMAN Councilman Medders asked if there are any reserve funds in Revenue Sharing for Fiscal Year 1976-77. Deputy City Manager Sumbardo stated, no, there is only six months of the usual one-year Revenue Sharing because the present program has not been approved for extension; and even if it is approved within the next few months, it is the staff's 140 Bakersfield, California, June 15, 1976 - Page understanding that there will not be sufficient time for them to fund Revenue Sharing for the remaining six months of the 1976-77 Fiscal Year so that the City would get the second half of the money in this next year. Councilman Medders made a motion to use the funds allocated for the Beach Park Site, if they are not used for that development, for lighted tennis courts in Lowell Park. This motion was approved by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Councilmen Rogers, Sceales, Strong, Barton, Bleecker, Christensen, Medders Noes: None Absent: None Councilman Strong requested that if certain monies are available that consideration be given for additional Basketball Courts at Lowell Park. Upon a motion by Councilman Bleecker, the Capital Improve- ment Program for Fiscal Year 1976-77, as changed, was approved by the £ollowing roll call vote: Councilmen Rogers, Sceales, Strong, Barton, Bleecker, Christensen, Medders None None Ayes Noes Absent: Public Hearing Federal Revenue Sharing Funds. Mayor Hart declared the meeting open for public hearing on Revenue Sharing Funds. No protests or objections being received the public hearing was closed. Adoption o£ Resolution No. 40-76 of the Council of the City of Bakers- field approving and adopting the Operating Budget and the Capital Improvement Budget for the Fiscal Year 1976-1977. Upon a motion by Councilman Medders, Resolution No. 40-76 of the Council of the City of Bakersfield approving and adopting the Operating Budget and the Capital Improvement Budget for the Bakersfield, California, June 15, 1976 - Page 12 141 Fiscal Year 1976-1977, was adopted by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Councilmen Rogers, Sceales, Strong, Barton, Bleecker, Christensen, Medders Noes: None Absent: None Recess. The Council recessed the budget sessions at 9:36 P.M., until a report from the Governmental Efficiency and Personnel Committee regarding Meet and Confer Sessions with Employee Units and Additional Position Requests is available. MA/~y of~ld, Calif. ATTEST: CITY CLERK and Ex-Offf±eio Clerk of the Council of the C±ty of Baker-sf±eld, Californ±a