|
| | | | Meeting convened: 9:04 A.M. | | | |
|
Not available
|
|
| | 1. | | Roll call:
Members Present: 7 - Ald. Joseph Dudzik, Chair, Gerald Froh (Ald. Michael Murphy Alternate), Ald. Bauman, Jeffrey Mantes, Michael Daun (W. Martin Morics Alternate), Mark Nicolini, and Mariano Schifalacqua
Members Excused: 0 | | | |
|
Not available
|
|
| | | | Also present: Venu Gupta, Dept. of Public Works, Erik Shambarger and Dennis Yaccarino, Dept. of Admin., Budget & Management Div., Marianne Walsh, Barry Zalben and Michael Talarczyk, Legislative Reference Bureau | | | |
|
Not available
|
|
| | 2. | | Review and approval of the minutes of the February 10, 2010 meeting
Minutes note: Mr. Mantes moved approval of the minutes. There were no objections. | | | |
|
Video
|
|
| | 3. | | Discussion relating to what order City departments will appear before this Committee to give their proposed 2011 capital improvements budget request presentations
Minutes note: Ald. Dudzik said there are three large departments that will take a lot of time in giving their presentations and that needs to be taken in to consideration when scheduling them. He said the large departments are DPW, Fire and Police. He suggested that maybe one large department and several smaller departments could be scheduled at same meeting.
Mr. Nicolini said that many City departments did not have any capital improvement requests for 2010 and he doesn’t foresee those submitting requests for 2011. He suggested that one way to schedule the departments would be to put them in two categories, non DPW facility items and economic development items.
Mr. Schifalacqua said that DPW will have the most capital improvement budget requests and suggested they be scheduled by themselves. He said the scheduling of all other departments could be determined when the departments submit their 2011 capital improvement budget requests.
Ald. Dudzik said he recalls Mr. Mantes saying that DPW would be ready to give their 2011 proposed capital improvements budget presentation at the March 25th meeting.
Mr. Mantes replied in the affirmative.
Ald. Dudzik said that he would like to schedule one or two smaller departments to give their presentations at the March 25th meeting.
A motion was made by Mr. Schifalaqua to schedule one large department and one or more smaller departments at each of the next three meetings. There were no objections.
| | | |
|
Not available
|
|
| | 4. | | Presentations given by City departments on their condition data and proposed 2011 capital improvements budget request
Minutes note: Ald. Dudzik said the Department of Public Works (DPW) will give their condition data presentations today.
Mr. Mantes said he provided the committee members with the DPW condition data report prior to the last meeting. He said today each DPW section will give a presentation on how that section looks at the condition of the City’s capital facilities and infrastructure and how some decisions are made as to which improvements should be ordered (Exhibit 1).
Ms. Shirley Krug, Admin. Services Director and Ms. Cindy Angelos, Parking Financial Manager, appeared to give a presentation for the DPW, Administrative Services Division. She gave an overview on the parking fund and public safety communications sections. She said those two sections projected capital budget is $2,500,000. The assets in the parking fund section are the parking structures, meters and surface lots. She said the public safety communication's section projected capital cost is $500,000 and that covers the city wide paving projects general engineering, data network expansion and telephone system expansion.
Mr. Schifalacqua asked what are the condition and the replacement plan for the remaining 4,000 older meters?
Ms. Angelos replied that the older meters in the UWM, Marquette, Mt. Sinai area and some scattered sites in the downtown area will be replaced, and the remaining older meters don't get used as much and would not need to be replaced for about six-years.
Ald. Dudzik said the City has 45 surface lots and he is stunned that they only generate $100,000 a year.
Mr. Angelos replied that some of those lots have meters. She said most lots require a permit and that was established so that the City can receive some kind of revenue from them.
Dale Mejaki, Operations Manager, DPW-Infrastructure Services Division appeared to give the presentation on the DPW major bridge program. He said the City owns and maintains 176 bridges.
Mr. Nicolini asked how many of the 176 bridges are in the state/federal eligibility category?
Mr. Mejaki replied that he doesn’t know off hand but he would get that information for him.
Ald. Bauman asked how does the $20,000,000 in ARRA (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) funds factor into the budget for bridges?
Mr. Mejaki replied that the 2011 projected budget is currently being restructured to include those ARRA funds.
Ald. Bauman asked at what point does the City shut down or require weight control for a bridge?
Mr. Mejaki replied that the decision to close or put a weight limit control for a particular bridge is determined during its annual inspection.
Mr. Nicolini asked what is the schedule for bridge painting and repair?
Mr. Mejaki replied that painting and repair of a bridge is determined during its annual bridge inspection.
Mr. Schifalacqua said that for a bridge to be eligible for federal funding the bridge has to have a sufficiency rating of less than 50 and asked if the state uses the same criteria?
Mr. Mejaki replied in the affirmative.
Mr. Froh said that there are 176 bridges that the city is responsible for and asked how many bridges are located in the City?
Mr. Mejaki replied that he doesn’t have to exact number, but it is over 200.
Mr. Froh asked who is monitoring the safety of those bridges that the City is not responsible for?
Mr. Mejaki replied that he doesn’t know, but he will find out.
Mr. Clark Wantoch, Admin. & Transportation Design Manager, Infrastructure Services Division appeared to give the presentation on the street paving program and on the infrastructure surrounding the streets, such as traffic signals and signs, lighting, manholes and underground conduits.
Mr. Schifalacqua asked Mr. Wantoch to provide the committee members with a chart that shows the age of all the City streets.
Mr. Schifalacqua said the pavement management system includes the department going out every seven years and doing a whole new inventory and asked if the department uses that data to develop deterioration curves to be use as a predictive model?
Mr. Wantoch replied in the affirmative.
Mr. Wantoch said the federal government recently adopted a 2009 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices that all states are required to adopt. He said some of the required changes will have a financial impact to the City, such as the changes to the traffic controls, signs and pavement markings.
Ald. Dudzik asked how long does the City have to convert all those traffic control devices?
Mr. Wantoch replied that some of the devices need to be converted by 2015, but the state does give time extensions, if needed.
Mr. Schifalacqua asked what is the annual conduit lease amount?
Mr. Mantes replied that it is around a half a million per year.
Mr. Aquino replied that all the local sewer pipes are owned and maintained by the City, about 2,500 miles, and MMSD owns’ the Metropolitan Interception System (MIS), deep tunnel and water treatment plants.
Mr. Schifalacqua said that the City has 83 bypass pumps and asked if there is pressure by the State to replace those?
Mr. Aquino replied that the Dept. of Natural Resources has allowed the City to keep them.
Mr. Daun asked how long does it take for the engineers to assess system?
Mr. Aquino replied that it would take 10 years to assess the whole system.
Mr. Venu Gupta. Buildings and Fleet Superintendent, DPW, Operations Div. appeared to give the presentation on the strategic asset management of public buildings, recreational facilities and monuments. He said the DPW conducts data condition reports for about 80 City buildings. He said there are many other City buildings that could use a data condition report, but those are not under DPW authority. He said every year the DPW does a data condition report for 20-25 City buildings and the capital improvements budget is determine by those reports results.
Mr. Daun said that the facilities condition index show an index of 23% and asked what is the implication if the index of 23% extends well into the future?
Mr. Gupta said that whenever the index is that high the City would be subjected to higher replacement cost in the future. He also said the deferred maintenance costs would also be substantial.
Mr. David Sivyer, Forestry Services Manager, DPW, Operations Div., Environmental Services appeared to give the presentation for the Forestry Section. His presentation included tree planting and production, concealed irrigation and general landscaping and the emerald ash borer response.
Ms. Wanda Booker, Sanitation Services Manager, DPW, Operations Div. Environmental Services appeared to give the PowerPoint presentation for the Sanitation Services Section. She said sanitation capital use includes site, facility and service upgrades. She said their fleet equipment requests are handle by the Fleet Services Section.
Mr. Jeff Tews, Fleet Services Manager, appeared to give the presentation for DPW Operations Div. Fleet Services operation.
Mr. Schifalacqua asked Mr. Tews to provide this committee with charts or graphs that shows all the equipment by age and category and include the mileage for each.
Ald. Dudzik said that some departments rent or lease vehicles and asked if it would be beneficiall if those departments would better off owning their vehicles.
Mr. Daun replied in the negative. He said from an economically stand point it is an operational balance.
Ms. Carrie Lewis, Superintendent, appeared to give the presentation for the Water Works. She said the capital improvements budget for the water department consists of plant treatment improvements, plant building improvements, pumping and storage facilities, back-up power generation and water main replacements.
Mr. Schifalacqua said the ozone generators are about fifteen years old now and asked how are they holding up?
Ms. Lewis replied that they not using them as much as the thought they would so they are doing very well and should last a long time.
Mr. Nicolini asked Ms. Lewis if she has any comparative information regarding capacity utilization with other northeast Midwest great lakes major water utilities?
Ms. Lewis replied that she is most familiar with large cities on the eastern shore, which are Kenosha and Racine and they are in the same situation as Milwaukee is in that their facilities were built very large and costumer utilization has shrunk. She said Milwaukee is fortunate that it has two water plants.
| | | |
|
Not available
|
|
| | 5. | | Next meeting date and agenda
Minutes note: Next meeting: March 25, 2010 at 9:00 A.M.
Agenda item:
1. Dept. of Public Works will appear and to give a presentation on its proposed 2011 budget capital improvements plan requests. | | | |
|
Not available
|
|
| | | | Meeting adjourned: 11:12 P.M.
Terry J. MacDonald
Staff Assistant
| | | |
|
Not available
|