Buildings & Grounds Committee

April 5, 2005 – 8:30 a.m.

Draft Minutes

Members present: John Steger, Chairman; Paul Allen; Danny Ross; Dan Tagliente; Tom Hartnett; Mike McKee; Scott Steve, Chairman of the Legislature

Others present: Ann Homer; Scott Schrader, County Administrator; Brian Parker, Buildings and Grounds Supervisor ; Eric Mulvihill

Absent: Steve Dafoe

Chairman John Steger called the meeting to order 8:42 a.m.

Mr. Allen moved adoption of the minutes of the March 1, 2005, meetings; seconded by Mr. Ross. Mr. McKee asked that he be reflected as "Excused" for the March meeting, as he was in Albany with Soil and Water. Consensus was that was fine. All members voting in favor; none opposed; minutes approved as .

 

1. Abolish/ Create, Buildings and Grounds Department (Building Maintenance Foreperson/ Assistant Buildings & Grounds Supervisor) – Mr. Allen moved adoption; seconded by Mr. Ross. Mr. Schrader indicated that there has been some restructuring in the Buildings and Grounds Department to better utilize the positions. This is evidenced with the change from Cleaner to Custodian. The desire is to improve the abilities and knowledge of the individuals in B & G. We have advertised the Foreperson position twice; the candidates who have applied do not have the qualifications and attributes we are looking for. They have some attributes but are not the ideal candidates. Settling for someone less than ideal is not the best idea for this department. There are increased responsibilities being assigned to the department which are broadening the scope of the departments. We need an individual with significant supervisory experience as well as experience in the trade so that the individual can assist Brian in managing the department. This conversation was originally held with committees in 1991 and Brian indicated that he received no support at that time. Mr. Schrader indicated that the real issue now with this position is the salary. The $32,000 salary is now going to get us the supervisory experience that we need. This position would be non-union; the Foreperson is currently union. This would be competitive. His recommendation is that the position be established with a starting salary (low end) of $36,000. Mr. Parker is a Grade F, with a salary of $25,000 to $36,700. Mr. Parker is making more than that. Mr. Schrader indicated that the Management Compensation Plan needs to be overhauled completely, but he believes that a salary of $36,00 would be appropriate, with the Grade and Salary range to be ironed out through Management Compensation. Mr. Allen asked if there is any possibility of getting a licensed electrician for this position. Mr. Schrader indicated that it would be nice, but he is not certain that we want to restrict the position description/specification that much, as you will eliminate qualified candidates who may not have licensure in a particular practice. Upon approval, this position will be advertised, and hopefully we will get a candidate who has the experience that we are looking for. Mr. Steger asked if the Recycling Program will come under this department as well. Mr. Schrader indicated that it would under the current configuration. All members voting in favor; none opposed; resolution adopted.

 

2. Accept Proposal/ Authorize Agreement, Buildings and Grounds (Water Treatment Boilers) – Mr. Tagliente moved adoption; seconded by Mr. McKee. All members voting in favor; none opposed; resolution adopted.

 

1. Review Potential Goals and Objectives – Mr. Parker reviewed the list of potential goals and objectives that was attached to the agenda. The NYSERDA Energy Audit is a "cost plus" so he does not know where the committee wishes to go. Mr. Parker indicated that the Court Security may be encompassed in the possible combination of the Court Systems. Mr. Parker feels that the other issues may be addressed in the variety of programs that are going on both in front and behind the scenes. Chairman Steve indicated that Mr. Schrader will be discussing the Court consolidation plan with the Common Council at a workshop tonight at 5:30 p.m. All members are invited to attend. Chairman Steve indicated that his feeling is the City does not want to make a commitment unless they know the County will commit the space. The County may not want to commit the space until the City makes a commitment to move. Mr. Schrader suggests that this committee endorse the project to combine the Court Systems. This would give the City a good feeling that this is not something that will fall on its face if they move forward. Mr. Allen moved that we support the project and that the B & G committee pass it on as a general resolution that the Legislature as a whole would vote on. Chairman Steve indicated that the next issue would then be where is DMV is going to go. A good dialogue needs to happen about where is DMV going to go. If a resolution goes to the floor, the members will want to see the whole plan and know the cost factor. Mr. Parker indicated adopting a resolution on the floor at this time will have a domino affect and each move will affect the entire project. Mr. Allen said he feels in order to have the City feel comfortable to buy in to the project, we should show them that we are serious about the project. Chairman Steve indicated that if this committee approves the concept, that will give the City the indication that project is supported. The committee could endorse the concept that if the City takes the space, it makes sense to move DMV out of the building. If the City doesn’t take the space, it make not make sense to move DMV out of there. Mr. Allen withdrew his original motion. Mr. Allen moved that the B & G Committee endorses the proposal that City Court be relocated in the County Court House; seconded by Mr. Ross. All members voting in favor; none opposed; committee motion adopted.

Mr. Schrader indicated that the goals and objectives mentions security in the COB. We are in the process of identifying a better way to provide security in the COB, particularly given a situation that occurred in the last month that have made staff feel uncomfortable. We are in the process of getting proposals for providing better security; this may mean relocation of certain departments and certainly security for the building.

Mr. Allen feels that the goals and objectives should be broken down better. For example, expanding on the "review space requirements" to itemize all the benefits we are looking to get -–e.g. better flow for DMV, better service for the Court system, etc. He feels this is what we are doing to accomplish the goals. Mr. Parker explained that that is what he means by the domino affect. Mr. Allen indicated that this will be used to develop a larger document to set goals and objectives for the County so he feels it should be broken down. Mr. Parker indicated that we have 1990, 2000, and 2001 space studies. Mr. Allen feels that is fine but it is not a goal and objectives. He wants a breakdown of specific goals (e.g. moving of prisoners). Mr. Tagliente feels this is a general concept – if you want specifics do a) locate all courts in Court House; b) move DMV, etc. Mr. Allen feels we should have specifics – he feels moving DMV is a means to an end – the end is making DMV more profitable and efficient. Chairman Steve indicated that this detailed conversation needs to be held. He does not feel that it should be outlined at this time. Mr. Allen wants more specific and thorough listings of what we want to do. This list is not acceptable to him in its current format. Chairman Steve asked Mr. Parker to compile a further detailed list with the understanding that this is an ever-changing list. Mr. Allen feels Mr. Steger should review and approve Mr. Parker’s list. Mr. Steger will meet with Mr. Parker to review the list. Members should e-mail ideas to Brian and then he and Mr. Steger will review the list.

2. Proposal Bell and Spina – Mr. Parker explained that this is to resolve the 301 lighting problem. A new set of bulbs have been ordered and we will try those before we go further.

 

3. Departmental Report – Mr. Parker reviewed the Departmental Report which was attached to the agenda packet. Mr. Schrader indicated that our facilities, except the landfill, withstood the weekend storm/water rather well. At the landfill, the leachate tanks/pumps had to be shut down because there was no way that we could haul. This means that the landfill itself is holding the leachate. This is acceptable under DEC regs but this can break out the sides of the landfill and erode the containment. Also, less likely, if there were a rupture, it could rupture the liner and put the leachate in the groundwater. This is highly unlikely. I’m guessing we are hauling the leachate today. There was a lengthy discussion on the direct leachate line – and options – through McGraw or directly to the Wastewater Treatment Plant.

The meeting adjourned at 9:30 a.m.

BACK