2006-10-17
JOINT CONSOLIDATION COMMITTEE
OF THE
CITY COUNCIL AND THE SCHOOL COMMITTEE
Meeting Minutes
October 17,2006, 8:30 a.m.
Beverly City Hall
PRESENT: Timothy Flaherty, Miranda Gooding, Paul Manzo, Maria Decker
Kathleen Griffin was also present. Chris Rand, Director of Buildings and Grounds for
the School Department, and Joan Liporto, Director of Finance and Operations for the
School Department, both joined the committee.
Mr. Flaherty explained that the Committee is exploring the possibility of consolidating
school and city maintenance functions, and asked Mr. Rand to share his thoughts on this
issue. The following is a summary of the discussion:
1. Mr. Rand described his previous experience as Assistant Director of Facilities in
Lynnfield. He explained that the Lynnfield model consolidated building and
ground maintenance functions for all town facilities, including schools, within the
DPW. Under that model, the division of responsibility/function was between the
"indoor" maintenance department and "outdoor" maintenance department. Each
function had its own assistant director who reported directly to the DPW director.
Mr. Rand felt that this model worked very well as long as the DPW Director
placed equal importance on both departments.
2. Mr. Rand currently manages 1 million sq. ft. of school space in Beverly, and all
school grounds.
3. Currently, there is some limited collaboration between the school and city
maintenance departments. However, the school department is typically charged
back for personnel from public services at overtime rates. He also stated that
vendor services are duplicated by the same vendors serving the city and the
school side. There are opportunities for greater efficiencies and cost-savings if
maintenance personnel and outside vendors were to be managed together.
4. Mr. Rand favors a consolidation plan that would separate building and facilities
functions from grounds, i.e. along the lines of the Lynnfield model. He pointed
out that this was suggested by Superintendent Hayes in his memo to the Beverly
School Committee dated June 21,2006.
5. Dr. Hayes' recommendation as set forth on page 2 of that memo is as follows:
"The City and School Committee should create a central municipal maintenance
department... for maintenance of all School and City buildings. This department
should come under the supervision of the Director of Buildings and Grounds. The
School Department has over 1 million square feet of facilities and will have one
maintenance position (strength in plumbing) while the City has far less square
footage of facilities and two maintenance employees whose strengths are in other
trades... The City and School Committee should likewise create a central
municipal maintenance department... for maintenance of all School and City
grounds. The department should come under the supervision of the Director of
Public Works. The Department of Public Works possesses the resources to
perform this function, resources that the schools are hard pressed to provide.
When [the foregoing changes are implemented], the role of Director of Buildings
and Grounds should be revised to be a Director of Facilities, again reporting to the
Director of Finance and Operations and ultimately to the Superintendent of
Schools."
6. An alternative model would consolidate both functions (facilities and grounds)
within the Department of Public Services. However, under that model, there are
concerns about accountability for conditions within school buildings. For
example, it is foreseeable that parents will continue to contact the school
administration about concerns/problems with school facilities; but, if building
maintenance comes under the supervision of Public Services, then there would be
no direct accountability to the school department for the condition of the schools.
7. Mr. Rand maintained that the grounds and snow removal functions could easily
be transferred to Public Services without triggering the same accountability
issues, because these functions would be performed much better by Public
Services, which has the manpower and expertise to do the work.
8. There was discussion about various ways of handling the school custodian
functions and the possibility of contracting for cleaning services separately.
9. Kathy Griffin acknowledged that there are many different variations of
consolidation, and that separate "pots of money" can be budgeted for different
buildings/departments to accommodate the consolidation of facility maintenance
within the school department for example.
At the conclusion of the discussion with Mr. Rand, there was discussion with Joan
Liporto regarding Kathy Griffin's thoughts about the potential consolidation of city and
school business/finance functions. Those thoughts were summarized in writing, in draft
form, by Ms. Griffin and had been previously circulated to members of the Consolidation
Committee. In summary, Ms. Griffin recommended that several steps be taken to
improve controls and efficiencies in the budget process on both the city and school sides
of operations. These steps can and should be taken regardless of whether consolidation
takes place. There was discussion and agreement about the need to update MUNIS
functions on the school side to streamline the preparation of year-end DOE reporting,
which currently requires an inordinate amount of staff time to prepare and which has in
the past been filed after the reporting deadline. She also recommended that the city
finance department provide written rules and guidance as to the policies and procedures
of carrying year-end encumbrances. As for the issue of a potential consolidation, Ms.
Griffin noted that there is virtually no potential for the city's finance department to
absorb school functions because the city finance department is so thinly staffed right
now.
The consensus of the committee was to table discussion of consolidating business/finance
functions at this time and to concentrate going forward on making recommendations
regarding the consolidation of technology and buildings and grounds.