It’s hard to think about things like snow removal when it’s been in the 90s and humid outside lately. But this is the best time to be talking about it — well in advance of the next snow storm.
On the city council agenda tomorrow is a plan to add staff and upgrade the city’s truck fleet in order to improve what they call “snow response.” Recommendations for change include:
- Due to growth, the number of snow routes needs to be increased to add one additional route;
- A slight reconfiguration of the routes on the north side of the City to address the many new areas;
- The new plan also eliminates what are currently called “secondary” snow routes. (This will allow
staff to more quickly complete efforts on the major streets during a snow storm, and move into the
residential streets faster.)
- Based on the additional route and a review of current staffing levels, the Administration is
requesting a change in staffing for the Streets & Sewers Division to reduce our reliance on
“Temporary” workers and move back to using a full complement of full-time staff. This change will
add 22 full-time employees.
- A fourth PW [Public Works] Supervisor is also requested, to help monitor the snow response program. In the summer months, this new Supervisor will be able to relieve the Manager from direct oversight of the Seal Coat program.
- The annual cost for the staff changes is estimated at about $226,000 based on the current
pay levels. There are several reasons cited for this recommendation in the attached presentation.
- Staff developed a schedule for accelerating the purchase of trucks to meet their expected useful life (attached) and is recommending an increase in the annual level for truck replacement from about $250,000 in our Capital Fund to about $642,000 (and this amount needs to increase annually for inflation). Since we are behind in our upgrades to the truck fleet, we will need to buy ten (10) trucks in 2009, nine (9) trucks in 2010, and six (6) trucks in 2011 . The schedule shows a need to find additional funds or borrow on a short term basis for these three years in addition to the increased Capital Fund support. The attached spreadsheet provides a summary of this analysis for consideration.
- The equipment used for snow removal was also evaluated as a part of the program review. There are forty-three (43) trucks used for fighting snow and ice storms. It is estimated that the larger trucks last only about nine years before they become unreliable, and costs for maintenance start to increase to the point where their replacement is more cost-efficient. The smaller trucks only last about seven years. Based on these estimates the City needs to be buying about 5 to 6 trucks annually to keep up with this rate of deterioration. We have only been buying two or three, as funds are made available.
The financial impact is estimated to be $226,000 per year for the additional staffing, $392,000 for fleet upgrades in the current budget, plus a lot of borrowing in future years for more vehicle replacement ($510,000 in 2009, $696,000 in 2010, and $412,000 in 2011).
Why hire so many permanent full-time workers? According to the study that was done, it was determined that the current process of hiring temporary workers is not effective. The presentation attached to the council request states that temporary workers “lack experience,” “don’t know routes as well,” “need more supervision,” and “are paid more than full time staff.” In addition, the “current staffing level provides no back-up.”
It should come as no surprise that more staff is necessary to handle public works needs in a city that continues to increase in size (and continues to add miles of inefficient curvilinear streets). There’s an annexation request on the city council agenda nearly every week, and I have yet to see one defeated. As the city continues to grow, expect other departments to request an increase in staff and equipment as well.
Perhaps the next Six Sigma project could be a process for evaluating annexation requests on a cost-revenue basis. The city currently does no such evaluation, choosing to look only at the potential revenues (increased tax base) and ignore the additional public works and public safety costs.