11-Fiscal management; RFP's for landfill and residential sanitationCITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM BRIEFING SHEET
Submittal Date:
Originating Department:
Presented By:
Agenda Item No.:
12/l0/10
Council Date:
City Council
Steve McFadden; Edwayne Samis
11.
12/23/ 10
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Not an action item.
POLICY ISSUE(S):
Fiscal management; Service level definition
BACKGROUND:
City Council needs to deliberate and decide on several critical questions as part of its review of the RFPs
for landfill services and residential sanitation collection. The primary question is whether or not to
privatize the collection of residential sanitation. Discussions about privatization should include:
l. The operational cost difference of changing to the Blossom Prairie landfill, including vehicle O
& M and labor (a moot question if privatization is approved)
2. Any difference in quality of service to sanitation customers if privatization is approved
3. The impact on other Public Works Divisions if labor from the Sanitation Division is lost to
privatization (Sanitation employees backup other Public Works divisions form time to time)
4. Whether or not to continue providing certain services the Sanitation Department provides and
how to pay for them if they are to continue
5. Whether to continue to provide free bulk item drop off at a customer convenience center
The accompanying PowerPoint presentation lists additional concerns.
Staff will present responses to questions and provide additional analysis at Monday's meeting.
BOARD/ COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
EXHIBITS:
12/07/'0 McFadden Memo; PowerPoint presentation; Traffic Division operations descriptions
ACTION:
BUDGET INFO:
❑ Financial Report ❑ Minute Order
Expense
$
❑ Department Report ❑ Resolution
Budgeted Amt.
$
E Presentation ❑ Ordinance
yTD Actual
$
❑ Public Hearing ❑ Other
Acct. Name
Acct. Number
FISCAL NOTES:
REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY:
Z Administration E City Clerk ❑ EMS/IT ❑ Engineering, Planning, & Community Development
❑ Finance ❑ Fire ❑ Municipal Court ❑ Legal ❑ Library ❑ Police Z Public Works ❑ Utilities
City of Paris
Revised 2/04/08
68
12/10/2010
70
12/10/2010
71
12/10/2010
Sanitation Concerns
In the Event of Privatization
• Who will be removing debris due to illegal dumping such as, tires, brush,
construction waste, large deceased animals, etc.?
•Who will be responsible for recycling of items that are not allowed in the
landfill such as e-waste and tires?
• Who will be collecting large brush stops from residential curbside?
• Who will be collecting large bulk stops from residential curbside?
• Who will be picking up large deceased animals on city right-of-way and state
right-of-way within city limits?
• Will the sweeper contractor: Be on-call 24/7? Per residential request? Per
emergency request? Per city departments? Police department? TXDOT
Assistance?
• Will brush truck provide free brush pick up after storms? Random collection
throughout the week?
• Will there be an after hours call center to receive calls for trash being missed
and debris cleanup? Who will respond to these after hours calls?
72
4
12/10/2010
Traffic Questions
Concerning Privatization
•How would the traffic division function with the absence of a Traffic
Supervisor/Technician if position does not remain in the Public Works?
• How will the traffic division function with the reduction in workforce with
the absence of two (2) sanitation employees who have assisted in this
division for many years?
This personnel reduction would create safety issues when work is performed
on streets/roa d ways without the additional staff. Using employees from
other divisions (Streets, Parks) would reduce service level in those areas.
TRAFFIC/SANITATION SUPERVISOR'S RESPONSIBILITIES
Traffic Division Supervision 85%
Sanitation Supervision 15%
73 5
12/10/2010
PROPOSALS
Proposal #1:
Restructure Traffic Supervisor position with additional
duties in the event of privatization.
(Supervisor currently has 17.5 years traffic experience with the City of Paris)
Traffic Supervision 85%
Additional Duties 15%
•Public Works Department Safety Manager/Trainer
•Contract Monitor
•Municipal Airport Maintenance Supervisor
•Manage all safety devices and work zone operations for Public Works
divisions.
•Manage any sanitation services not privatized.
74 6
12/10/2010
Proposal #2:
Retain two (2) non-collector sanitation employees.
(Employees have 22.5 and 16.5 years of service with the City of Paris)
Duties:
•Continue to enhance Traffic Management Operation and assist other
departments.
•Continue Illegal Dumping Removal.
• Continue Brush Pickup w/in the city if not assumed by privatization
(would require retaining boom truck).
•Continue removal of large deceased animals on city and state
right-of-way.
•Continue maintenance at Municipal Airport.
•Continue to remove bulk debris from residential curbside.
•Continue to provide after hours right-of-way and street debris
cleanup.
75 7
TO: KEVIN CARRUTH, CITY MANAGER
FROM: STEVE MCFADDEN
DATE: DECEMBER 7, 2010
SUBJECT: PUBLIC WORKS TRAFFIC AND SANITATION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
INTRODUCTION
The pending sanitation service RFP process creates serious questions related to the future of
the current traffic management program. Also it is unclear if all sanitation services have been
fully considered in the privatization process to date. The potential loss of three positions,
included in the sanitation budget that provide considerable assistance to the traffic division
have not been discussed to any degree. This loss would reduce the department's ability to
provide a safe and adequate service level. The current traffic staff consists of two maintenance
employees who provide a traffic services program that is vital to the City's overall operation.
The two traffic employees are trained to perform the basic duties of their positions at the daily
direction of the supervisor, as are the two sanitation employees who have become capable of
providing adequate assistance when their work schedule permits them to work with the traffic
unit. However, the training level of these four employees requires that they have daily
direction from a well trained supervisory with technical expertise and experience in the field of
traffic management for them to provide services that meet all governmental requirement for a
safe traffic operation.
PROPOSAL 1
RESTRUCTURE TRAFFIC/SANITATION SUPERVISOR POSITION
Should the City Council determine that the best approach for the city is to privatize the
sanitation service, it is proposed that the current supervisor position be expanded to include a
number of services that should improve the overall operation as well as continue to provide any
sanitation related services not included in the privatization process. These duties that could be
considered include:
• Public Works Department Safety Manager/Trainer.
• Contract Monitor - In the event of privatizing the Sanitation Division.
• Municipal Airport Maintenance Supervisor - Assist in providing paved surface and curb
markings, parking lots, driveway, taxiway strip, runway marking applications, etc., as
needed.
7s
• Manage all safety devices and work zone operations for Public Works divisions. By
centralizing the operations it will reduce damage to signs, base supports, barricades,
and reduce annual to bi-annual cost for replacement, liability for neglected or damaged
devices with improper retro-reflectivity or incorrect set up.
• Manage any sanitation services not privatized.
The current traffic supervisor has 17.5 years of traffic experience, with five years being in a
supervisory capacity. He has received extensive training in order to receive the proper
certifications needed to provide a professional traffic operation that is in compliance with all
federal, state and city traffic requirements. This background not only provides a more
complete and professional operation, but places city in a better position in any litigation
involving the traffic operation.
The major concern is that without a qualified traffic supervisor, the operation will suffer and
not be able to provide an adequate program.
PROPOSAL 2
EXPAND TRAFFIC OPERATION AND CONTINUE NON PRIVATIZED SERVICES
It is proposed that the City retain the services of the two non-collector sanitation employees to
permit the department to continue the traffic operation at an enhanced level. These
employees would also provide any sanitation related services that are not assumed by a private
contractor. This could include:
• Continue to enhance Traffic Management Operation and assist other departments.
• Continue to remove items that are abandoned on city right of way due to illegal
dumping.
• Continue brush pick up within the city. It would be necessary to retain the current
brush truck to be able to perform with function.
• Continue removal of deceased animals on city property and right of ways. (Animal
control does not remove large animals due to their not having the proper equipment.)
• Continue maintenance at Municipal Airport.
• Continue to remove bulk debris from residential curbside.
• Continue to provide after hours right-of-way and street debris cleanup.
The retention of the two employees would not only improve the traffic management operation,
but would permit the Public Works Department to continue to provide services that make our
city a better and safer environment for our community.
77
CONCLUSION
The RFP process presents the opportunity for the City council to evaluate the sanitation service
the City provides its citizens, as well as how the service can be best provided in the most
effective manner without a reduction in service level. However, serious consideration should
be given to the needs of all members of the community, especially these citizens who due to
age, disabilities and other life issues, that effect their quality of life.
The current services provided by the Public Works Sanitation crews do take these issues in
consideration on a daily basis as they strive to provide the best service possible for all citizens.
This is accomplished due to the dedication of our employees as a result of special service
requests and their awareness of residents of the community who have special needs. For
example, citizens who are not able to place the trash in the designated location for pick up.
Often it is necessary for the collectors to go beyond the stated policy to provide the best service
for these individuals.
We believe that the following two proposals will permit the department to continue the best
traffic services possible in a cost effective manner, as well as continue to provide quality
sanitation services in any area that is not included in the privatization process.
The cost of these proposals will depend on what the council chooses to approve.
The supervisor position is currently budgeted at $49,253 including benefits, and the full cost for
the two sanitation employees is $86,945.
Please let me know if you have any questions or need additional information.
78
Traffic Division
Project Operations
The Traffic Division consists of five major areas of operations:
• Pavement and curb marking operations - SAMPLE
• Sign design and fabrication - Design and Fabricate signs per request
• Field installation and maintenance- General maintenance of sign installments and
replacements
• Fleet graphics and lettering- Application of decals to truck , cars, and equipment
• Traffic volume data collection- Annual traffic counts for high volume city streets
(Collegiate street , 24th S.E., Pine Bluff...)
Pavement and Curb Markings Operations
This type of operations entails the use of thermo plastic material or engineered traffic paint for
stop bars, pedestrian crosswalks, center line stripe (double and single), turn arrows, symbols
and text. Section Intersection/Location Description/type ; Footage of ? Hrs required '
` Material
i
~ S.E.
and Clarksville
Stop bars and cross ~
100 ft
i 3 hrs. ~
Intersection
i walks- Thermo
~
i
;
f
;
! plastic
4
E
f
;
! S.E.
' 6hand Clarksville
Stop bars and Cross i
60 ft
~ 2.5 hrs ~
j Intersection
j walks- Thermo
~
plastic ;
; S.E.
j
12th and Clarksville
~ Stop bars and Cross
40 ft
~ 3.0 hrs
s
i Intersection
~ walks-Thermo
~
plastic
S.E.
~ 13 and Clarksville
( Stop bar
; 15 ft
~ 1.5 hrs =
~
Intersection
(
~ S.E.
~ 17th and Clarksville
~ Stop bars/Cross
~
160 ft
8.0 hrs ~
~ 79
lntersection I walks/centerline.
! Section ~ Intersection/Location
i. Description/type ~
Footage of
Hrs required
~
~
Material
S.E.
S. Coliegiate and Clarksville ! Stop bars/Cross
4,000 ft-
40 hrs
; Intersection
; walks/centerline/turn ;
4"lines and
lanes ~
thermo
'
i
markings
~
g ;
' S.E.
~ lohnson Woods Dr. an
d ~ Reflectors '
200 ft
2.5 hrs '
Clarksville Intersection
~ (RPMs)
;
' S.E.
33rd and Clarksville
~ Stop bar
15 ft
1.5 hrs
Intersection
~
s
S.E
S. Church and Washington
; Stop bars and Cross
~
60 ft
2.5 hrs
walks- Thermo plastic
~ S.E
Ard and Austin
Stop bar
15 ft
~ 1.5 hrs ~
S.E.
~ -
6"' and Austin
= Stop bar
~
30 ft
' 2.0 hrs '
S.E
~ 6i and Washington
Stop bar
30 ft~
~ 2.0 hrs ;
S.E.
; g`n _12`n on Austin street
~ Stop bars/centerline/
i
1450 ft
` 40 hrs ,
~
-
' crosswalks/ RPMs i
~
i
S.E.
6T
~ " and Rail Road tr
acks
~ R/R MARKINGS ~
~
-x2 ~
8.0 hrs
S.E
; 8T" and Rai{ Road tracks
i R/R MARKINGS ;
-x2 i
8.0 hrs ~
S.E
12" STREET /1200 BLK
~ Pedestrian Crossing
30 ft~ =
3.0 hrs ;
S.E.
14th andClarksville~
, ~Stop bar
15 ft
1.5 ~hrs
~
! Intersection
~
~
S.E
17' " and Washingt
o
n
Stop bar~
30 ft
~ 2.0 hrs ~
S.E.
w_
i 24n and Sycamore
i~ Stop bar ~
15 ft
1.5 hrs
~ S.E.
~~24T" street/1200-1600 blk
Center line and RPM
2],00 FT
40 hrs
S.E.
; 24th and Clarksville
~ Stop bar I
15 ft ~
~
1.5 hrs ;
j Intersection
' S.E.
i Crockett Circle and~
i-°°-
i Stop bars/Cross
150
6.0 hrs 3
s Clarksville Intersection
~ walks/centerline.
8~
intersection 1 walks/centerline.
Section
~ Intersection/Location '
Description/type r
Footage of
Hrs required
€
'
~
Material
j
S.E.
~ S. Collegiate and Clarksville j
Stop bars/Cross
4,000 ft-
40 hrs '
j Intersection ~
walks/centerline/turn '
4"lines and
lanes
thermo
markings
~
~ S.E.
lohnson Woods Dr. and ~
Reflectors ~
200 ft
~ 2.5 hrs ~
'
Clarksville Intersection ~
(RPMs) i
!
S.E.
33rd and Clarksville ¢
Stop bar
15 ft
1.5 hrs
Intersection
S.E
; S. Church and Washington ;
Stop bars and Cross `
60 ft
2.5 hrs ,
`
~
`d
walks- Thermo plastic
S.E '
~
and Austin
3
Stop bar
~
15 ft
1.5 hrs ~
S.E.
6"' and Austin
~
Stop bar ,
30 ft ~
2.0 hrs `
S.E
6~" and Washington i
Stop bar
30 ft
2.0 hrs
~cn .,cn ,
, _ -:---z
.~.u. v-.a.a v.. ~ua~n. auccL .atvN ual 41 %~cnwinnc/ ~tlrjv iL •FV IIfJ
' crosswalks/ RPMs
~ S.E 67" and Raii Road tracks AR/R MARKINGS -x2 ~ 0 rs ~
~ C R . QTH onr! Qnil Qnn.J+-Lc ' D/D KAADViAIr'C
~ S.E
- -
m.~._._.~.. ._.~....w.„. ....s
12T" STREET /1200 BLK
.
.a_..,_..._
Pedestrian Crossing
30 ft
.
~ 3.0 hrs
S.E.
14'h and Clarksville
Stop bar ~
15 ft ~
1.5 hrs
Intersection
~ S.E.
` 17t' and Washington
Stop bar ~
30 ft
2.0 hrs ~
S.E.
24t' and Sycamore
Stop bar
15 ft
1.5 hrs
M~~V~~~
S.E
TH
24 street/1200-1600 blk
` Center (ine and RPM
2
100 FT
40 hrs
S.E.
24th and Clarksville
; Stop bar ~
15 ft
~ f
1.5 hrs
Intersection
j S.E.
~ Crockett Circle and
E Stop bars/Cross
150
6.0 hrs
~ Clarksville Intersection
f
I walks/centerline.
°
~
~
;
€
81
Section ~ Intersection/Location ; Description/type ; Footage of I Hrs required `
Material '
R.~: Pine-B[ufif-.From Nvrth Center.~rmf~urrt
Main to,20h ~ ta~es/t.r4sswalVtrrows/st0p ; tt ~
~ N.E. ; 20T" and Martin Luther : Stop bar 30 ft 2.0 hrs ~King
` ;
77
,..__..Ne~• ..1~TH 8t1~~MLK~N~.........
6~`~
~ N.E MLK and Fitzhugh Stop bar ` 60 ft ' 2.5hrs ~g
~ 1 8,4br,%a~
N:E Mcirkin LutherlZin4.~ ~.Crass w4ltcs 5tc~ 'b~rs curbs~~ W 20Q0
,
; :frarn 8th tcs: 6"'
mA-
~ N E and MLK Stop bars/crosswalks 60 ft 2.5 hrs
a
N.E E~ 6and HiekOry Stop bar 15'.ft ; 1'15 hrs
N.E 17`h and Tudor ~µN H~~~ Stop bar~M~^T~~~~_~~. u~u~30 ft µ~N,~ 2.5 hrs
N £ ~0'T" ~nd 7udor Stup 4ar 1'5 hts
N.E. Fitzhugh and Tudor~ Stop bar 2.5 ~hrs
N E 5T" ar~d Tudor , S#ctgbX Y4F 60 ,v#t 2~`hrs~
.~F.N.E MLK and North Main 1~ Stop Bar 35 ft 1.5 hrs~
,a, N E Rine Bfu#and.Frtzhugh Stop Oarfcrosswalk, 90 ft 2 $ hts
' N.E. 8T" and Pine Bluff Cross walks 30 ft ' 2.5 hrs
N E 17T" and Price ~.M Cr~rss watks a 151t, ~ I* hrs ,
N.E. 17T" and Lamar Center line 200 ft 4.0 hrs '
~
N._E._ gxh;and Houston.,.. :._$togbar~,.__ 60(`ft f
N.E. 2"d and Houston Stop bar and cross walk 60 ft~ 2.5 hrs
N.E. 1" and Houstors Stop bar artid, ctoss wa~Ik 45'ft hrs
_~h.a ........,w.~.~.m_. e__ ~.p.~.~~,.~~~,..~~.__~_
N.E 2"d and Pine Bluff Sto bar 30 ft 2.5 hrs
N.E 3R° and Pme Bluff Stop bar ; ],5:ft ' 15,:hrs
N E Fitzhugh and Clement ~ Stop bars 60 ft ~ 2.5 hrs
r._
Y N E Frtzhugh to N E taop Center Irne/rpms.` 4QOf? ft~~ hrs
N.E. Pine Mili road and Center line/turn 670 ft 8.Ohrs
Collegiate lanes/crosswalk/arrows/stop ;
,
~ bars ;
N E 32 ~street 400 61k t SchQOC crc~s ~ralk
~ W ¢ _ 4 ~~~'s
N.E. Collegiate and Price Stop bars 30~ft 2.5 hrs
N E Col{egiate and Cherry Stop bars 30ft 2 5 h~5
~N.E ~ Castlegate and Pine Mill Stop bars 15 ft ~ 1.5 hrs ~
IttE ~ 42"d and Plns Mttl Rd Stop bar , iS ~ft
~ N.E. 34from N.E. LOOP to ~ Center line w/rpm 5200 ft ` 16 hrs West of Brownwood ,
R9
Section
Intersection/Location
Descrfption/type
Footage of '
Hrs
Material
re uired '
N.W.
Graham Street
~ Center line/turn 6000 ft
40hrs
1'`-3'
lanes/crosswalk/arrows/stop
bars
N.W.
7th and Graham
Stop bar/turn lane/center lane
1000 ft '
40 hrs
N.W.
Graham street/ 3rd to
Center line w/rpms
12000
40 hrs
19`h
N.W.
3`d from Graham to
Center line/rpms parking stalis/~
~
700 ft
8 hrs '
Bonham
stop bars/crosswalks
N W.
2"d and Houston
Stop bars /cross watks
45 ft
2.5 hrs ;
N W.
19th and Center
Stop bar
15 ft
1.5 hrs
N.W.
192h and Graham
Stop bar
30 ft
2.5 hrs
N.W.
lnandProvine
_.Stop bar.~~~__~~_..
_30.._
ft
2.5 hrs
J Section
~'-Intersection/Location
Description/type
Footage of
Hrs required !
Material
! S.W.
4T" and Kaufman
Stop bars /cross
300 ft
4.0 hrs
i
walks
; S.W.
; 7T" and Kaufman
3
Stop bars /cross
~ 300 ft
~ 4.0 hrs
walks
~ S.W.
7T" and Grand Ave.
Stop bar
15 ft
1.5 hrs
~ S.W.
~ 7T" from Bonham to
~ Center line
200 ft
4.0 hrs
~
Grand Ave.
~
~
~ S.W.
7T" Washington
Stop bar
15 ft
1.5 hrs
! S.W.
2"a and Kaufman €
Stop bars /cross
300 ft
4.0 hrs
F
walks
; S.W.
1St and Austin
Stop bars
30 ft
2.5 hrs
S.W.
11T" and Bonham
stop
15 ft
1.5 hrs I
! S.W.
3`d and Kaufman
Stop bars /cross
300 ft
4.0 hrs
1
walks
S.W. ~
3RD and Grand Ave
Stop bars/cross
45 ft
2.5 hrs
walks
~
S.W.
i
Hearne from 1n- 41h
Center line/stop
900 ft
8 hrs
bar/rpms
R_Q
TRAFFIC DIVISION ATTACHMENTS
The "General Operations Requirement" describes a routine operation regarding:
• Brief description operations
• Hours required for certain operations
• Employee requirements for certain operations
• Monthly productivity average
• Yearly productivity average
• Yearly hours performed per operation
The "Pavement and Curb operations" describes:
• Locations for deteriorating pavement markings
• Marking requirements
• Footage of markings and material
• Hours required for maintenance
The small sample of pictures are of deteriorating pavement markings are for:
• Pedestrian crossing at Major and Minor Intersections (cross walks)
• Vehicle "stop bar" guides
• Turn lanes ( faded arrows)
• Intersection turn lanes ( faded arrows and text)
• Approaching turn lanes
• Two samples picture are of a proper intersection and turn lane in accordance to MUTCD (Manual on
Uniform Traffic Control Devices)
84
~
~
~
O
~
~
~
O
D"
C
~
^
O
.
A
~
o
C~C
~
~
~
a
N
O
~
i...~
CC
CCS
~
~
C
^p
~
a
~
tb
z ~ O
jm~
Cl Q.,
cn
Q.' N
~ O~
O
~
~r a
N II
c`~ ~ ~o
~
~ y
X
00
~
~
~
o
p
N ~
C
'
~
✓
~
M
~
Sr
N
bA
~
~
cd
,
•
~
~
~
~
~
oA
•
~c
N
~
N
.
~
O
N
~y
~
G
^r
04
bA
~
s.ct.
;
21~3
~
w
4
~ x J.-
U c~
~
~
IRi
C
0
~
~
~
;
~
~
C
~
^C
C
G~
C
~
O
~
,
^r
Or
~
r
i
d
~
I~I
~
~
w
~
i~
~
.
^~s
U
C
CC
~
~
O
~
Ci
C
~
o
A
~
a~
C
.
C
y
~
~
~
O
~
~
~
~
W
to ° o
7$
~
~
N
N N ~
A
~
~ bA
~
O
~••f
~
A
~
~
O
~
~
~
n
.
~
'
~
N
~
C~
o
0
~
N
W
~
x ~
~
^
~
~
~
-
4=
v
' ~
'
Q
O
~
'L
~o
=
J
~
'I.
M
W
Q
=
i,
s
o
N
~
-C
~
~
t.,
~
~
0
x
~
~
0.
N
~
bA
~
~
o
~
~
a~
~
O
~
N
N
'C
a~
.
~
~
~
~
U
•
'C
~
th
'
V--I
~ i.cC+
~
~ s4
~ .-4 4.-
I--1
R9
Q
~
C/1
z
~
~
a
'
z
=
Q"
w
U
W
~
v~
W
a~
u
Q
~J0
~
8
;
~
o
a
a
~
z
~
s
~
~
Q
~
Z
O
W
~
W
~
Q
h
a
U
~
U
~
~
~
Z
Z
O
U
~
z
z
~
o
o
,
~
~
o
~
o
a~
vv,
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
y
~
H
~
~ ~
N
N
o
~
a~
o
~
r~
w
~
~
O
o
~
~
~
o
~
~
~
~
o
~
~
;
o
~
~
~
. ~
~
o
~
~
~
.
~
~
n.,
~
~
~
P"
~ • ~
a;
Q"
Q"
y
4~--~
~
cc3
=
~ a
9
89
91