HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-12-7Minutes for December 7, 2017, adopted Jan. 4, 2018
Town of Nantucket
Capital Program Committee
www.nantucket-ma.gov
A €., IU + y
2019 JAN -4 AM 10: 59
Members: Stephen Welch (Chair), Pete Kaizer (vice chair), Richard Hussey (Secretary), Christ,, Kickham,
Peter McEachern, Jason Bridges, Nat Lowell
MINUTES
Thursday, December 7, 2017
4 Fairgrounds Road, Community Room — 8:00 am
Called to order at 8:03 a.m. and Announcements made.
Staff. Brian Turbitt, Director Finance; Terry Norton, Town Minutes Taker
Attending Members: Welch, Kaizer, Hussey, Kickham, McEachern, Bridges, Lowell
Absent Members: None
Late arrival: Lowell, 8:05 a.m.; Bridges, 8:07 a.m.
Documents used: Copy of November 15, 2017; CapCom Summary of FY2019 Requests
COMMENTSI. PUBLIC
1. None
11. APPROVEMINUTES
1. November 15, 2017: Approved by unanimous consent
2. November 29, 2017: Held
OUTSTANDINGIII. UPDATE
Welch — Yesterday we discussed several items; he forwarded that revised list to Finance. Reviewed additional
the outstanding issues and items: perimeter fence, airport ground service equipment, DPW aerial lift
questions. He broke those down as urgent or pressing.
REVIEW OF WORKSHEETS
Welch — This is the worksheet that will be used to evaluate and write the CapCom recommendations. He has
a couple of house -keeping items: there is no third column for FY2019 requests, actual out -year requests
will be included, the three "Rec" columns will have dollar amounts, explained the RORI column
abbreviations, funding sources will be populated by Finance.
Hussey — Asked about the repayments of the loan by the Airport to the Town.
Turbitt — They have been making payments; reviewed the terms of repayment of the loan including credit for
use of material by the Town.
McEachern — Asked if the Wilkes Square redevelopment is a totally private -sector funded project and if any
of the infrastructure would be paid for by the Town.
Turbitt — He's not entirely sure; possibly the intermodal transportation center.
McEachern — CapCom should consider that could be a number coming up in five or 10 rears. If any board
feels a project is to maintain an existing asset, we could request it be put into the operating budget.
Welch -- That might take the form of a lack of a recommendation.
Turbitt — He would be hesitant to do that due to the unpopularity of such actions in the past. Noted that if
there is a lack of recommendation as a capital project, there probably isn't money in the operating budget.
Kickham — Last year there were a few projects that fell into that category and we flipped them back into the
operating budget; asked if there was something different about them that made that possible.
Turbitt — We had bundled several projects into a single request in the case of building maintenance.
Explained the difficulty of doing that. Explained they went through all requests with the department heads
to ascertain where that might be possible.
Page 1 of 4
Minutes for December 7, 2017, adopted Jan. 4, 2018
Welch — Anything that's more than $50,000, over the next ten years, needs to be included on all the sheets.
We need to know what projects are coming up to ascertain fiscal capacity. We have about S2.%1 shortfall
between the requests and Town Administration recommendations. Once we go through these and
ascertain the rankings, we'll be able to sort and filter the requests against legal requirements.
WWCO: Tank Maintenance (`Sconset, Washing Pond, North Pasture)
McEachern — If there is a project that is showing signs of failure, he'd go back to the contractor or engineer
to quantify why the project isn't meeting expectations. Noted that Town Administration didn't weigh in
because it doesn't have the jurisdiction to do so. Feels this problem should be fixed within the
departmental enterprise fund.
Lowell — The tanks are brand new and should have been built with stainless steel bolts and studs.
Welch — The uncertainty about the durability of the particular epoxy is in question. Our question is two-part:
what is our recommendation and what does it include. He's concerned about the comment, during the
discussion, that if the epoxy doesn't work, the tanks will have to be rebuilt in ten Vears.
Lowell — Painting the tanks should be a part of operational maintenance.
Welch — We either replace them earlier than anticipated or we waste money- maintaining them for the next 20
years. For him, the question becomes what is the plan to address the cause; he doesn't think the long-term
solution is patching and painting, it's stainless-steel studs and bolts and making it work the right way. That
goes back to digging into the RFP to ascertain what was requested, was the request sufficient, and was it
built to that specification; if not, then we need the capital request to bring it up to that standard. He
doesn't know how to put that into a clear recommendation.
Turbitt — Pointed out that the Town has limited authority over the Water Company- and its board.
Kickham — He's wondering if what they said in the discussion is a scare tactic; he can't imagine the tanks will
need to be replaced in ten years.
McEachern — The tanks should be maintained on a daily, weekly, monthly basis. Suggested
recommendation to have an out -side engineer evaluate the situation and ascertain whether or not the
tanks were built to specifications.
Welch — If it's a maintenance thing, they need to do a maintenance plan. There's still what was meant by the
comment that the tanks would need to be replaced in ten years if the epoxy doesn't work. We need to get
clarity on that. If it's a maintenance issue, okay; but if it's deficient, that's another matter.
Kickham — He doesn't understand how long after a tank is built the maintenance should have to start; he's
not mechanical in that nature.
Lowell — When you have outside exposure, just dealing with primer and paint, they start rusting if not painted
correctly. He felt the way it was presented, they were talking about the life cycle of the tank. They have to
have an internal maintenance plan for these tanks.
Welch — Suggested we ask for the Maintenance Plan, come to understand clearly the extent the issue of this
request relates to a deficiency of design or construction, and recommend how to proceed.
McEachern — The question of deficiency needs to be answered by an outside engineer; it is a question of
credibility.
Hussey — In the back up information, there is a memo from Haley Ward which states the recommendations
are based on inspections of the tanks by three different companies.
Welch — We need clarification on if this is a maintenance issue, a design issue, or a construction issue. We are
questioning how it fits into the useful life of the asset. If it's salt air on paint, that's one thing; if it's design,
that's something different.
Lowell — We need more clarification on what the $1.1M means.
Kickham — Anything that's deemed a maintenance plan, he wonders at what point it falls under capital.
Welch — Under Policies and Procedures, it is within our purview to look at the maintenance plan to ascertain
whether or not it addresses the issue.
McEachern — In the request to Mark Willett, he'd like to know who were the engineers who designed the
tanks.
Welch — Asked Mr. Turbitt to forward the request to Mr. Willett asking him to clarify the questions the
committee still has.
Page 2 of 4
Minutes for December 7, 2017, adopted Jan. 4, 2018
Sewer: Building Foundation and Utilities
Welch — This request has no data and no out -year information; asked Mr. Turbitt for clarity. This didn't even
have a CIF request form.
Turbitt — This was actually presented last fiscal year and pushed to this year; it was put on hold for more
information.
Welch — We'll continue to hold this; he'll add it to open -items list.
Sewer: Perimeter Fencing,
Welch — This is on the out -standing matter list whether the fence is for security or liability.
Lowell — His opinion on this is that liability was overstated; however he wants the perimeter fencing for just
the property and to separate the request for electric gates. If they put in an electric gate, something will go
wrong. He believes it should be a padlock gate. Cited an incident with an electric gate that broke down
due to the mechanisms not holding up in this environment.
Kickham — He's flexible on this; we should decide whether or not to do it at all.
Discussion about whether or not the need for the fence is safety and/or liability.
Bridges — We should be discussing if it will stay in.
Welch — We need more information; he doesn't know if it's worthwhile discussing this; if we do put in a
fence and gate, an electric gate doesn't always work. A chain with a padlock would create the visual
barrier and that no parking is permitted.
Kaizer — It seems a number of the group rankings are skewed by very low individual ranks.
Welch — When we have all the information, the personal rankings will change and so too will the group
rankings.
Sewer: Sparks Avenue Rehab,
Welch — His question was the lack of a map showing the area of work to ensure there is no overlap with
other work.
Hussey — The CIF request form for this asks for $250,000 not $500,000 and explains it is for replacement of
aging sewer infrastructure and is part of the National Grid L8 Feeder program.
Lowell — He remember this has something to do with the eventual hook up of the Shimmo Sewer program.
McEachern — As a resident of the area, that section of Sparks Avenue has had numerous backups of the
sewer lines into peoples' yards and houses resulting in a lot of insurance claims for damage to private
properties. That has cost the Town a lot of money; the system wasn't designed for the businesses that are
up -stream of the line. The L8 Feeder program is moving this to the forefront.
Welch — Noted that currently unblocking is being done manually on an almost weekly basis. We wants to see
how it relates to other projects to ensure it is a discrete project. We have a request in for a map.
Lowell — Noted that $500,000 is not really a lot of money in relation to the overall total of requests and the
work is necessary; they are making an effort to coordinate work with other projects and doesn't want to
make this harder for David Gray. To him this is housekeeping work.
Welch — He wants to ensure all paperwork for requests is in order and answer the question whether or not
the request is for $500,000 or $250,000.
Kaizer — Mr. Gray did provide a National Grid L8 Feeder map of a portion of the project request with the
original request.
Discussion about the ranking process and changing personal rankings.
Welch -- We have to fill in other columns: phased funding, imminent threat, and legal requirement. He'll fill in
which projects fall under imminent threat and legal requirement. Funding sources will defaul7 to the values
provided by Town Administration; we will have discussions about them. In regards to the columns on
Risk, he provided the members with a supplemental sheet with column keys; explained how to fill that out
and how the columns work together. Suggested doing them as agroup with values being plus or minus to
indicate confidence or an error or a dash to indicate neutral; there will be added discussion at a later date.
Hussey — He has questions about whether or not some of the projects can be completed w1thin the time
noted.
Mckham — To him it's relative to capital funding. We have the opportunity to ask the dept heads if they can
finish. Especially with phased funding, this is a factor.
Page 3 of 4
Minutes for December 7, 2017, adopted Jan. 4, 2018
McEachern — Negative applicability of the Risk column would be de minimij-' we do have good material.
Welch — Suggested it not be applied to every project; suggested it be deployed when it comes to making cuts
from the list to help discern the final recommendation. The next step is to review and process the other
requests; then we'll develop a sheet sorted by our group ranking. Final rankings should be to :els Lindner
by 1:00 p.m. on December 18 so we can have a final print out of the rankings of all requests at the
December 19 meeting; the final recommendations would go to Ms Gibson January 4, 2018.
V. CAPCOM BUSINESS & COMMITTEEREPORTS
1. None
DISCUSSIONOF OF
Wednesday, December 13, 2017, 8:00 a.m., 4 Fairgrounds Road, Community Room
Adjourned at 9:45 a.m.
Submitted by:
Terry L. Norton
Page 4 of 4