AGENDA #12c

 

BUDGET WORKING PAPER

 

TO:                  Mayor and Town Council

 

FROM:            W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager

 

SUBJECT:       Public Works Department Reorganization

                       

DATE:             April 27, 2005

 

 

This report describes the proposed reorganization of the Public Works Department. We propose the following divisions in the reorganization:

 

 

We recommend reassignment of key personnel and regrouping of departmental functions to improve performance, increase efficiency and give greater attention to environmental and sustainability programs including:  Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), Green Fleet Program, Alternative Fuels Program, and Energy Management Program.  The changes proposed are consistent with the recommended budget and are proposed to take effect July 1, 2005. Another key objective has been to provide appropriate focus and necessary resources to the management of the significant capital improvement program in which the Town is engaged.

 

BACKGROUND

 

We have been working on comprehensive reorganization of the Public Works Department since shortly after the appointment of the new Director, Bill Letteri.  Our primary objective has been to begin the establishment of the flexible and dynamic organization needed to respond to the Council’s greater focus on environmental and sustainability issues while improving service capacity and responsiveness.

 

Consolidation of Recommendations by Maximus and Budget Review Citizens Subcommittee:

 

The Council’s budget review consultant, Maximus, recommends in their report that fleet management responsibilities of the Public Works Department be combined under the supervisory management of the Transportation Department.  They go on to recommend that division superintendent positions be eliminated, in great part because of their earlier recommendation to transfer the fleet management responsibilities to another position.  The sub-committee of citizens on the Budget Review Committee endorsed the consultant’s recommendations with little comment.

 

Manager’s Comment:

 

As we were planning for the development of the new Town Operations Center we recommended that the Housing Maintenance Division be placed under the supervisory management of the Public Works Department.  The consultant’s preliminary report argued against this organization change, but their final report endorsed the change.  The sub-committee of citizens on the Budget Review Committee endorsed this proposal, also.

 

The consultant was engaged to provide objective and independent advice to the Council.  I and the staff have cooperated fully in providing information.  We understand the value of an outside review by a knowledgeable group of professionals.  Much of what the consultant has reported is a confirmation of the excellent work done by Town employees.  We agree with many of the points made by the consultant about areas of good performance and areas where performance could be improved; indeed, some of the latter have been the subject of previous discussion by the Council as well as the staff.

 

We have considered the recommendations and reasoning of the consultant and agree in part and disagree in part regarding how the Public Works Department should be organized.

 

Supervisory Management of Housing Maintenance Function

 

We have carefully considered the costs and benefits of consolidating supervisory management of the public works buildings maintenance function and the public housing maintenance function.  The new Town Operations Center design is based on such a consolidation and will facilitate such a consolidation.  We believe that these functions can be accounted for separately while managed as a unit.  We think that training, development and promotion opportunities will be enhanced for all the employees affected by this future organization change.  We recognize that there also will be challenges associated with this change: new communications patterns, changes in organization culture, re-engineering of work methods, coordination of resources, more detailed cost accounting, etc.  On the whole, our conclusion about two years ago when we first considered this issue was that the challenges were worth the probable advantages to be gained.  The two units are small and the challenges are manageable.  We still believe consolidation of supervisory management is reasonable.

 

We believe this organization change can be put into place after we occupy the new Town Operations Center.  In the time leading up to this change and in the months thereafter we will look for opportunities to make better use of staffing; but, we do not recommend staffing reduction now.

 

Supervisory Management of Fleet Maintenance Function

 

We do not share the consultant’s view that the vehicle maintenance operations of the Public Works Department and the Transportation Department should be consolidated under a single supervisory manager.  The scale of operations and the nature of the work involved argue against such an organization change, in our opinion.

 

The Town’s transit system is among the best in the country and is the most successful in the state.  One of the reasons for its success is that it is a separate enterprise devoted to the single purpose of providing public transit services.  There is no question about priorities in the bus maintenance shop:  the buses are the priority.  We have two keenly interested local partners in operating the transit system, but there are no questions about whether their contributions to the transit enterprise are being properly used, because there is no co-mingling of funds, there are no concerns about accounting for costs generated by other enterprises, and there is no competition for management attention.  We believe that our transit partners, the University and the Town of Carrboro, would want to participate in any consideration that the Council may make of consolidating maintenance management.

 

We believe that there is a substantial difference between the nature of work involved in operating a bus maintenance shop and a shop that maintains garbage trucks, fire trucks, earth moving equipment, police cars, passenger vehicles, and small motorized machines.  We know that priority setting is more of a challenge when there are multiple departments dependent on a single shop.  We also know that different skill sets and operating procedures are required.  Just as we considered consolidation of supervisory management for buildings maintenance functions, we also considered consolidation of vehicle maintenance functions and concluded that it would not be as effective as continued separation.

 

The consultant states: “It is not common to find local governments with combined transit and non-transit fleets.  This is because of three primary factors: state and federal regulations relating to transit operations and subsidies, the frequent use of separate transit authorities, and the maintenance characteristics of large buses.”  We agree.

 

The Town Operations Center has been intentionally designed to maintain the separation of the transit and public works vehicle and equipment maintenance operations.  Federal regulations regarding use of transit grant funds require such separation in building construction.  We think that differences in function and priorities also require such separation to facilitate effective operations.

 

DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED ORGANIZATION

 

The proposed restructuring of the Public Works Department is based on a number of fundamental principles. 

 

§         Reporting and communications within the department must be at once direct and clear, yet fluid.  We believe that rigid protocols can stifle communications and prevent spontaneous and responsive working relationships between divisions.  The functional model purposely avoids building boundaries between functional areas.  Employees are assigned to a “home base,” but are encouraged to work across divisional lines whenever necessary to gain the greatest benefit.

 

§         Organizational change is both transitional and dynamic.  We expect incremental change among personnel and assignments over the next few years, with periodic changes in organization arrangements.  Transfer of the Housing Maintenance function in fiscal year 2006-07 is an example.

 

§         The revised model brings emphasis and focus to environmental and sustainability programs that have been initiated by Council.

 

§         The organization allows for flexibility and responsiveness to the demands of the Town’s capital improvements program.

 

The recommended Functional Organization Chart for the Public Works Department is attached as Exhibit I.  Key features of the recommended organization are described below.  No new positions are recommended.  Several positions are reassigned to new functions.

 

Public Works Administration Division:  This division consolidates all general management functions in one organization under the leadership of the Public Works Director and the Public Works Operations Manager.  Functions include:

 

 

Solid Waste and Fleet Services Division:  This division provides solid waste services throughout town and fleet maintenance services for all Town vehicles except transit vehicles under the leadership of a Public Works Division Superintendent.  Functions include:

 

 

Street , Traffic and construction Services:   This division maintains streets and traffic control devices, constructs and maintains public works and drainage facilities under the leadership  of  a Public Works Division Superintendent.  Functions include:

 

 

Sustainability Programs and Facilities Management:  this Division has three major functional elements and manages Sustainability Programs, Building Services, and Landscape and Grounds Services under the leadership of a Public Works Division Superintendent.  Functions are listed separately under each major area.

 

o       Town buildings maintenance

o       Custodial services management

o       Public housing maintenance (effective in 2006-07)

 

We believe that the new functional arrangement will: promote consistency of work rules and practices among all divisions; simplify the organization by reducing the number of divisions from four to three; consolidate buildings and grounds functions in one division; and give greater attention to environmental and sustainability programs and provide additional capital project management capacity.

 

CONCLUSION

 

We believe that the proposed organization will make the best use of existing resources, improve efficiency and increase responsiveness of public services provided by the Public Works Department.  We recommend that the Council authorize the proposed organization effective July 1, 2005.

 

ATTACHMENT

 

  1. Chart (p. 6).