HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-5-17Minutes for May 17, 2017, adopted June 14
Town of Nantucket
Capital Program Committee
v,ww•nantucket- ma.gov o
Members: Christy Kickham (Chair), Peter McEachern (vice chair), Richard Hussey (Secretary),*on
Bridges, Nat Lowell, Pete Kaizer, Stephen Welch
MINUTES v r
Wednesday, May 17, 2017
o
4 Fairgrounds Road, Training Room — 8:00 am t
N
Called to order at 8:05 a.m.
Staff: Libby Gibson, Town Manager; Gregg Tivnan, Assistant Town Manager; Brian Turbitt,
Director Finance; Rob McNeil, Director DPW; Julia Lindner, Financial Analyst; Terry
Norton, Town Minutes Taker
Attending Members: Kickham, McEachern, Hussey, Bridges, Lowell, Kaizer, Welch
Absent Members: None
Late arrival: Lowell, 8:09 a.m.
Documents used: Copy of minutes for November 23 and 30, 2016; December 7, 14, and 19, 2016; and
February 8, 2017.
1. November 23, 2016 — Held
2. November 30, 2016 — Held
3. December 7, 2016 — Held
4. December 14, 2016 — Held
5. December 19, 2016 — Held
6. February 8, 2017 — Held
11M /:VJ1Q1lJttCIMz.`4.
l >iscussion Kickham — This past season, suggestions were brought up for procedures and informati on the
committee would have liked to have on hand; this meeting is to review those procedures with
possible incorporation into next season's review.
Hussey — He found the trips to the various departments were enlightening and helpful.
Welch — Having liaisons to the various departments helped the committee to see the need and to
round out information for capital requests.
Turbitt — Having a clear set of what members are looking as we go through the process for is
helpful for the Finance Department.
Welch — In terms of expanded documents, those were helpful; he would like to see them made
programmatic so Finance only has to update them annually; for instance, debt service, a list of
anticipated facilities and existing facilities, and the past four years of capital costs.
McEachern — He feels prioritization of capital projects shouldn't be by department but for the
Town overall. One key thing we need when assessing purchase of equipment is the evaluation of
which is more economic, purchasing or repurpose existing; also we should know, from each
department head, a cost - effective analysis as to whether or not the new equipment requires a
new skilled employee and the accompanying labor costs. Four questions would be: does a new
purchase need a new employee; what type of asset is it, building, equipment, or service,
replacement or new, can you outsource.
Page 1 of 4
Minutes for May 17, 2017, adopted June 14
Gibson — We are talking internally about revision of "the form" and some of this overlaps long-
term staffing; the answer to outsourcing is almost always, "Yes, if..." collective bargaining was
done and has there been a bid for it.
Welch — Some suggestions brought up won't work. The idea is to bring up other ideas from
people with expertise on what is available, what and how easily it can be provided, and what the
members want to see. An end result would be a list of reports the committee wants to see, a
form containing information to be provided by department heads, and then refine it-
Lowell — We need to know whether or not an asset is a legacy we want to keep or a service we
want to provide, and can it be outsourced. Everything has to be looked at individually; it isn't a
one -size fits all. Town Administration is in the best position to answer some of those questions.
Gibson — At this committee's suggestion, we purchased Planet software which had request
forms that departments use to submit capital requests; that is "the form"; it might not have all
the information CapCom is talking about. Right now with Our Island Home (OIH), capital
project maintenance work is being done and a project form is being used to track the work_ The
CapCom form could be similar with additional information the committee wants to see.
Suggested modifying the older form for use to gather information. She doesn't want to reinvent
the form annually because new members want new information; she would like to come up with
a form that will work for several years.
Welch — Agrees the form should be good at least three years with "tweaks ".
McEachern — Several years ago, the CapCom got a construction project that showed no new
employees then the Finance Committee (FinCom) saw a request for a new employee associated
with that capital request. He thinks CapCom should have all that information up front.
• Operational versus Capital Items
Kickham — Some items should have remained in operational.
Gibson — Some of those were discussed during the Capital review projects. She doesn't know if
that happens often. Sometimes it is more helpful as a capital request because of the way it's
funded and because the money is always there; spending can be spread over several years.
Welch — His concern about operation items submitted as capital requests is that the Department
of Revenue (DOR) has stipulations and regulations we don't want to cross.
Turbitt — For ease of flexibility, there were several projects bundled together to total the
$50,000 capital- project cut off. DOR doesn't care how the Town manages that; it is all coming
out of the same pocket.
McEachern — He would like Ms Gibson and Mr. Turbitt to "stamp" those bundles so CapCom
knows they have reviewed it.
• Receive List of New Buildings a Month Prior to the First Meeting.
Turbitt —That is doable.
Gibson — We have a Facilities Maintenance Plan done in 2015. The link to that can be sent to
the CapCom members. The Facilities Manager is working on a maintenance plan for all the
Town buildings; pointed out that Facilities Maintenance is currently understaffed.
• Accurate Numbers from Departments for Their 10 -Year Capital Plan.
Gibson — The numbers need to have some basis; though it doesn't have to be accurate. For
example: it was very hard to come up with numbers the dredging plan due to the location and
the conditions in each location. If the numbers are vague, the department head needs to explain
why to CapCom. The further out you go, the harder it is to get good numbers. Substantial
capital projects should be part of the 10 -year plan and not suddenly appear one or two years out
Kickham — We should have accurate numbers for two to three years out.
Lowell — When this building (4 Fairgrounds Road) was built, the police chief said it was a good
time to build because the national economy was low; we got lots of bids. Suggested the Town
consider building projects when there is a down turn in the economy; that is the reason for place
holders.
Page 2 of 4
Minutes for May 17, 2017, adopted June 14
• Departmental Preventive Maintenance.
Kickham — This is so the committee knows that departments are taking care of their assets.
• Investing in Buildings Being Kept as opposed to Buildings Being Phased Out.
Welch — OIH comes to mind; a list of potential projects could help the committee to process
how the level of maintenance on a building fits into the grander scheme.
• Prioritizing Requests
Kickham —The committee used to prioritize.
Kaizer — Suggested that departments prioritize their requests.
Welch — He would want Town Administration to have an over - ruling prioritization in regards to
all the requests when they come to CapCom, then CapCom further prioritizes.
Gibson — We do a tiered prioritization: Tier One should be done within one to three year, Tier
Two is for project can wait two or more years, and Tier Three is for projects that would be "nice
to have ". She'll send it to Mr. Kickham. This year a project came in that was given a high priority
but the committee did not agree; it made Town Administration reassess it.
• Guidance on How Best to Spend the Money.
Kickham — We deliberated that very well this past year.
Welch — In retrospect, the sewer and OIH didn't come before CapCom; they went to
committees. He would like to see more involvement of CapCom for its recommendation
especially when large dollar amounts are involved.
• Getting a Dollar Amount on What the Town Can Afford.
Hussey — The first question from FinCom is where did we start, what was our budget. This is
important to know.
Gibson — The only number that can be provided at the beginning of the process is the
minimum Capital Funding Requirement, which is a function of Town Code; it is based upon
prior -year projects and prior -year revenue and has most recently been funded through the
General Fund Budget. A lot has to happen before free cash is certified; it's hard to get by the
end of October. Particularly large projects could be funded by a debt exclusion or capital
override, but that is up to the voter.
McEachern — Wonders if there is a negative to starting in November.
Welch — He thinks the meetings should start earlier in terms of preliminary review.
Gibson — She prefers CapCom start meeting earlier in the year; November is tight due to
holidays and the operating budget. She and Mr. Turbitt need to talk about what it takes to start
the meetings in September or even August; she needs to get the list of proposed capital projects
to the Board of Selectmen (BOS) earlier so they can approve what goes to CapCom and what
does not. Suggested a joint meeting with CapCom, FinCom, and BOS at some point in the
process to review the funding sources.
Kickham — We've been fortunate to have healthy free cash recently; but we don't want to take
all the free cash but do want to know what we have to work with. Based on the committee
having new members, at the beginning of the meeting season, we should review the funding
options.
• Getting a Timeline for each Project.
Kickham — Such as when will the project start
Gibson — She can add that to the form along with: can it be outsourced, does it require
additional staff, and what sort of project.
Kickham — It's also important, with on -going funding, to know the status of a project.
• Establish Criteria for Department Heads.
Gibson — Review of the criteria should be done before it comes to CapCom. There are projects
that don't make it to CapCom.
Kickham — This goes back to there being due diligence by Dept Heads seriously assessing the
need and cost of a project.
Page 3 of 4
Minutes for May 17, 2017, adopted June 14
Update on Status of Previous- Years' Requests.
Hussey — That is very important.
Kickham — Can tie this into review of funding sources.
Welch — This could be tied into the liaison process.
Gibson — Need to get the liaison list pretty early in the process. It might be helpful for her to
work with the chairs of CapCom, FinCom, and BOS to set up the joint meeting.
Discussion about the next meeting date and topics to be discussed.
CAPCOM BUSINESS
1. Committee Reports - None
V. DATE OF
Wednesday, June 7, 2017, 8:00 a.m., 4 Fairgrounds Road
Adjourned at 9:40 a.m.
Submitted by:
Terry L. Norton
Page 4of4