CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS COMMITTEE

200 E. Wells Street City of Milwaukee Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202 Meeting Minutes CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS COMMITTEE ALD. JOSEPH DUDZIK, CHAIR Ald. Robert Bauman, Ald. Michael Murphy, Ghassan Korban, Martin Matson, Mark Nicolini, and Mariano Schifalacqua Staff Assistant: Tobie Black, 286-2231; Fax: 286-3456, tblack@milwaukee.gov Fiscal Planning Specialist: Kathleen Brengosz, 286-3926, kbreng@milwaukee.gov Wednesday, February 29, 2012 9:00 AM Room 301-B, City Hall Meeting called to order at 9:06 a.m. Present: Dudzik, Froh, Schifalacqua, Korban, Bauman, Kammholz Excused: Nicolini Also in attendance: Kathy Brengosz, Fiscal Planning Specialist 1. Review and approval of the minutes from the February 8, 2012 meeting. Minutes were approved as written. 2. Presentation of the Underground Conduit Condition Report. Individuals appearing: Karen Rogney, DPW-Infrastructure Marcia Cornnell, DPW-Infrastructure Brian Pawlak, DPW-Infrastructure Regarding an earlier discussion about damage to conduits by drilling, Ms. Cornnell said that a contractor is responsible for getting a DPW permit. Each permit is reviewed, and if it crosses an underground circuit line, it is required that the drilled area be potholed. Ms. Cornnell and Ms. Rogney presented a PowerPoint on the condition of the underground conduits (please see the attachment "2012 Conduit Condition Report PowerPoint" to Council file 111338). Ms. Cornnell said that there are two distinct conduit systems, Communications and Electrical. The Communications line provides the line for telecommunications, traffic control and cable television and is used by various City agencies. The Electrical line provides a path for high voltage traffic control and street lighting cables. Besides the conduit system, the department also maintains electrical manholes and City of Milwaukee Page 1 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Meeting Minutes February 29, 2012 COMMITTEE communication manholes. Ms. Cornnell said that there are a number of reasons for conduit installations, including curb relocation, bridge reconstruction and significant grade changes. Conduit installations are also done at the request of Communications and Traffic Engineering, or in conjunction with paving projects. Ms. Cornnell explained a typical conduit package and said that there are 564 miles of conduit in the City. The conduits are currently made with Polyvinyl chloride, or PVC, pipe, as opposed to the previous materials of iron pipe, clay tile and fiber. She said that if the clay tile is broken, the conduit can then be fixed with PVC. More than half of the system is still made of fiber, which collapses when it gets wet and hugs whatever is in the pipe, which means that the cable cannot be taken out. Fiber is a difficult material to work with as it constrains what can be done on the conduit paths. Ms. Cornnell discussed manholes, which often have water in the bottom. Whenever work is done in a manhole, it has to be de-watered, which adds extra time and cost to the project. Ms. Cornnell said that there are 7453 active manholes in the City. These manholes have aged and the material of which they are made has changed over the years, ranging from brick to block to pre-cast concrete. Ms. Cornnell said that the block manholes fail at a greater rate and do not have a rebar system in them. When a manhole is repaired, the walls of the manhole need to be shored to prevent a collapse. 35:07The repair of a manhole requires experience and expertise to be done safely and at a reasonable cost. Ms. Cornnell said that an inspection database was created in 1988; however, manholes are not inspected on a regular schedule. She also added that over 50 percent of the manhole inspection reports are 20 years old. The true condition of manholes may not have been consistently reported in 1988. The department is standardizing inspections and training staff to make sure that every staff person will get the same result when inspecting a manhole. Ms. Cornnell said that in 2011 the section partnered with Sewer Engineering, which has a regular manhole inspection program with a five-year cycle. Last year, 300 manholes needed to be inspected prior to paving projects. If there was a conduit system at the paving project, the inspector from the private company could inspect both types of manholes at one time. The cost of the inspection contract was 24,058 dollars, or 80 dollars per manhole. The cost of the manhole inspections increased in 2012 to 115 dollars per manhole and includes the dewatering of 70 percent of the manholes. Ald. Dudzik asked if the manhole inspection was done by private contractors. Ms. Cornnell said yes and explained that Sewers now outsources the manhole inspections. Prior to the partnership, city staff do the inspection and make the repair. Ald. Dudzik asked if private entities, like We Energies, that have manholes do their own routine inspections and maintenance. Ms. Cornnell said that it would seem logical, but she can check on it. Ms. Cornnell said that there are various approaches to setting up a manhole rehab program. If a typical manhole lasts about 75 years, the City should be repairing or replacing the manholes every 100 years based on the number of existing manholes. Historically, manholes are replaced at a 4:1 ratio, so annually 80 would be repaired and 20 would be replaced. Last year, contractors charged 4700 dollars on average to repair a manhole and 23,500 dollars to replace a manhole. If a manhole rehab program is based on condition reports, 400 manholes would be due for repair and 200 would be due for replacement. If a program is based on useful life of 75 years, City of Milwaukee Page 2 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Meeting Minutes February 29, 2012 COMMITTEE 2000 manholes would be replaced at 23,500 dollars each. The City needs to choose an approach or two that will move the maintenance of the infrastructure forward. Ms. Cornnell said that last year the committee asked if grant money was available for manhole rehabilitation. According to the research by the Department of Administration, typically grant money is available for initial installation of a system, but not maintenance of a system. She added that grants were not even available for system installation at this point. With regard to the budget, Ms. Cornnell said that the key issues are major projects that are in addition to the regular paving projects, including the Streetcar Project; developing a manhole inspection program on a five- to ten-year cycle; and developing a regular replacement and repair program based on condition reports. Ald. Dudzik asked, given that over 50 percent of the duct packages are from the 1930's to the 1980's, how quickly the fiber duct will need to be replaced. Ms. Rogney said that the fiber duct is located all throughout the City. Mr. Pawlak said that the department works with the fiber duct that is swollen and constricted and uses Roto-Rooter to jet through the fiber duct getting the paper blasted out. He added that a large percentage of the conduit system has water accumulated in it, but in some areas without a lot of moisture, the duct is in the same shape as the day it was installed. Ald. Dudzik asked if it is possible to put PVC pipe in the conduit after it is Roto-Rootered. Mr. Pawlak said that there is technology called pipe bursting that splits the grout apart and a high density polyethylene is put in, but relining a small (3") diameter pipe is not something that he has seen done. Mr. Korban said that the pipe bursting gives the desired results and it increases the capacity. Ald. Dudzik asked about the need to separate the Communication and Electrical conduit systems. Mr. Pawlak said that high voltage systems should not be mixed with low voltage systems. He said that fiber, because it is not conductive, is put alongside some high voltage systems, but for the most part they are kept separate. Mr. Froh asked if Time Warner Cable is paying an adequate amount of money to occupy the conduit system. Mr. Henke answered that in general there is a lot of utilization of the Downtown conduits and the rate structure is a flat rate per conduit. Occupancy rates are based on whether one-third, two-thirds or a whole conduit is being occupied. In practice, it is difficult to estimate whether Time Warner is using one-third, two-thirds or a full conduit. Also, there are higher rates for bridge crossings. There is much less conduit utilization in the rest of the city. If a new pricing structure is established, rates could be adjusted for development areas (lower rates) or for the Downtown area (higher rates). Mr. Henke added that a survey was done back in 1996 on conduit rates, but it might be worthwhile to have a study done on alternate providers, like AT&T and We Energies, to determine whether the City is being competitive with its occupancy rates. Mr. Froh said that the concern is that the true costs of maintaining the conduit system were not really available at the time that the rate structure was developed. Mr. Schifalacqua asked how soon there will be a firmer proposal of what funding level the City should be at for manhole repair. Ms. Cornnell said that the City needs to have a manhole inspection contract and needs to identify what condition the 75 manholes are in. The cost of the contract will be put together and will be put it into the 2013 budget request. She added that there will eventually be 100 percent inspection but it will begin with the aged manholes. 3. Presentation of the Communications Condition Report. City of Milwaukee Page 3 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Meeting Minutes February 29, 2012 COMMITTEE Individuals appearing: David Henke, DPW-Administration Brian Pawlak, DPW-Communications Mr. Henke and Mr. Pawlak presented a PowerPoint on the Public Safety Communications Program of the Department of Public Works (please see the attachment "2012 Communications Condition Report PowerPoint" to Council file 111338). Mr. Henke explained the fiber optic cable installations for some of the water booster facilities. Being an Enterprise Fund, Water Works pays for the connections directly to the facilities. However, the fiber is used for multiple agencies, so when a system is installed, the combined fiber optic backbone is paid for by the Capital program and the laterals to individual water facilities are paid for by Water Works. Ald. Dudzik asked why the arrangement with Water Works is not made with all departments. Mr. Henke said that it is done with other Enterprise Funds, like parking garages and the Housing Authority. However, the majority of departments are funded under the main City budget. Mr. Henke addressed some of the questions that the committee posed last year, including questions about the copper migration strategy, Department of Transportation resource sharing, and outsourcing. He said that the fiber optic cable is the primary backbone of the system and should be utilized for all of the City's major facilities. If a facility's needs change, it may be converted from copper to fiber optic. However, copper cabling exists in areas in which there are not high bandwidth needs or in smaller locations in which providing fiber would not be economical. For example, water booster stations are currently served by copper, but Water Works wants to add security cameras and additional items that will increase the bandwidth needs, so these stations will be wired with fiber optic. Mr. Henke said that optical fiber will be used for new systems for primary sites. Copper will be utilized for small runs to the nearest City facility. He added that existing systems will be migrated to the fiber optic systems when they are upgraded or replaced. Mr. Schifalacqua asked if the copper migration strategy is something new that has been developed over the last year. Mr. Henke said that the policy is a formalization of existing informal policies and practices. In response to questions regarding the department's maintenance costs, he added that 310,000 dollars were spent in 2011 as opposed to the 380,000 dollars that were spent in 2010. He said that this does not mean that the department was getting more for its money but that there was less reliance on the copper system and some deferred maintenance as well. Mr. Henke discussed the need for diverse facilities. He gave an example in which a gas line was drilled straight through an existing communications duct. There were three such incidents in the past year, including two incidents that impacted fire houses in which fiber optic cables were lost. In the two cases, there were other copper facilities available for use until the fiber optic line was repaired. Mr. Henke discussed resource sharing, specifically with the Department of Transportation. He said that the agreement with the DOT will be updated this year to reflect some new sharing for the upcoming Zoo Interchange Project. The City provides fiber cables to the DOT at several locations around the city, including the Port of Milwaukee. In exchange, the City can utilize the DOT's fiber and systems to connect to Miller Park. The City also utilizes the DOT's traffic cameras and road City of Milwaukee Page 4 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Meeting Minutes February 29, 2012 COMMITTEE sensors to monitor road conditions. Mr. Henke also addressed the committee's previous questions regarding outsourcing. He said that there is a question of whether the maintenance of the City's existing facilities, should they be outsourced, would be managed by another telecommunications company or if the City would do its own service and provide service to other businesses and cities. There have been a couple of studies in the past; one recommended that the City maintain a private network and fiber optic backbone, which has resulted in what the City has today. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 led to telecommunications deregulation, which resulted in another study that determined that the City should lease its conduit space and share resources with other local organizations. Where there is fiber in place, a cable is installed that may have 72 or 144 individual fibers, and any unused fibers may be shared with other organizations around the City, including educational organizations and non-profits. With regard to outside organizations maintaining the City's network, the flexibility, responsiveness and seamless design that maintenance with City staff provides makes it preferable for the City to maintain its own network. Ald. Dudzik added that the City maintaining its own facilities is also a benefit security-wise. Ald. Dudzik asked for clarification on providing fiber optics to other cities. Mr. Henke said that it is not provided to other cities but other organizations, mostly educational institutions within the City of Milwaukee. Mr. Schifalacqua said that the committee is interested in condition ratings. He would like to see some type of condition rating report for the communication facilities, including the age and the amount of miles of fiber optics. Ms. Brengosz said that there is inventory information, but there is not a formal policy for how the condition is rated. Mr. Henke added that an updated condition report for 2011 was submitted, and is similar to that of last year. Mr. Schifalacqua said that fiber connections being provided to universities in exchange for high speed internet access is a good arrangement. He mentioned another city that provides broadband for its citizens and asked what it would take for the City of Milwaukee to do something similar. Mr. Henke said that it would take a great deal of infrastructure and development to do so, particularly to service citizens and businesses. He said that the other city's program was deployed as part of an electrical utility upgrade. This means that the other city must run its own electrical, which is a different circumstance from that of Milwaukee. Also, in 2004, there was a Wisconsin state law passed barring municipalities from serving citizens or businesses directly. A legislative change would most likely be necessary to allow the City to provide internet access. Mr. Froh said that it would be valuable have a regular program for testing existing unused fiber. Mr. Henke agreed that this would add value and knowledge to the inventory assessment and condition report. Mr. Froh also said that a cooperative venture with an outside entity would allow for providing internet access, even if it could not be done directly. Ald. Dudzik suggested that the City might be able to create an Enterprise Fund, like Water Works, for this purpose. Mr. Kammholz asked if there had been any work done towards using fiber optics to make internet access available to commercial development and enterprises for economic development purposes. Mr. Henke said that there had not. However, as part of the City's conduit leasing agreement, he said that there has been a recent request from Time Warner Cable to use the City's conduit to install fiber to serve a facility at 32nd and Center Streets. So there is some development occurring as a result of opening up the conduit system for leasing. City of Milwaukee Page 5 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Meeting Minutes February 29, 2012 COMMITTEE Ms. Brengosz asked about the damage that occurs to conduits and asked if all the instances of damage have been related to directional drilling. Mr. Henke said that this was the cause in two of the cases in the last twelve months. Mr. Pawlak said that in a third case, it occurred as a bridge deck was being removed. The bridge deck is relatively shallow, and the pvc that houses the fiber optic cable was sheared through. Ms. Brengosz said that there has been some discussion of locating underground facilities with GIS since there is a greater instance of utilities being hit due to directional drilling becoming more prevalent. Ms. Brengosz asked how the fiber optic system is located and if the department has considered using this method. Mr. Henke said that he is not directly familiar with the locating operations, but said that the City's records are used to mark the conduits and cabling. He added that if directional boring is done, potholing is supposed to be done before the work is started to avoid disrupting the City's facilities. Mr. Korban said that it goes beyond the marking of the conduits. He said that when directional boring is done, direction is lost and depth is not being controlled. In some instances, the damage to conduits will continue to occur. 4. Presentation of the Department of Public Works Buildings Condition Report. Individuals appearing: Venu Gupta, Department of Public Works Paul Fredrich, DPW-Facilities Sean Schutten, DPW-Facilities Mr. Gupta presented a PowerPoint giving an overview of the program (please see the attachment "2012 DPW Buildings Condition Report PowerPoint" to Council file 111338). The assessment provides detail on the condition of assets and what it will take to preserve and maintain them. Condition assessment reports also play a key role in developing a long term capital improvements program. Mr. Gupta said that any good strategic asset management program includes a seven-step approach. The first step is to determine what the City owns. An inventory is done of all the building assets; not only the buildings but the details of each system, the furnishings and anything else that is part of the buildings. Mr. Gupta said that it is a very meticulous, detailed process. The second step involves determining what all the assets are worth. For the buildings, the City uses the insured current replacement value. Mr. Gupta said that the third step is to determine the status of the assets with regard to deferred maintenance. The fourth step involves assessing the condition of the building, including all components. The process for determining the condition of the buildings is a detailed, intricate process because it involves looking at each building system and its components a well as roofs, and the exterior of the buildings. He added that in-house expertise is used to do the assessment of conditions. The fifth step is to look at functional shortcomings, including changes in building codes that require system upgrades. For example, using a new technology like compressed natural gas vehicles requires modification to repair facilities to comply with the codes. How much funding is needed for the functional shortcomings must be determined. The sixth step involves determining the remaining service life of certain building City of Milwaukee Page 6 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Meeting Minutes February 29, 2012 COMMITTEE components. This leads to the seventh step, which is to determine what the department needs funding for, what will be fixed first and what will be delayed if funding is not available. Mr. Gupta said that the department will present to the committee very comprehensive reports on the buildings that have been inspected this year. Mr. Froh said that an eighth component to the asset management program should be determining how important a facility is and its criticality to City functions. He said that this involves other entities that are supported by the Department of Public Works. Mr. Gupta said that this will add more value to the reports. Mr. Gupta said that a lot of important work is going into the City's facilities and that well-maintained buildings have a great impact on the vitality of a city. Well-maintained buildings facilitate important fiscal and public policy processes and provide cost effective services to the public. He added that funds used to maintain facilities should be regarded as an investment in asset protection. Ald. Dudzik said that the City Hall complex buildings seem to have gotten considerably less clean over the years. He said that with regard to janitorial services, the number of employees has been reduced by two-thirds. Maintenance of the buildings, even the inside, should be kept up because it affects the impression made on people who visit the building. Mr. Gupta said that Recreational Facilities provide green spaces and active recreational opportunities. There is a greater emphasis today on having places which support social and community development. He added that the department is challenged, with limited funding, to create a wider spectrum of designs to meet more diverse needs, including more sustainable spaces and more active spaces. Mr. Fredrich gave presentations on the Facilities Condition Assessment Program and the Recreational Facilities Program (please see the attachments "FCAP 2011 Buildings PowerPoint" and "2012 Recreational Facilities PowerPoint" to Council file 111338). Mr. Fredrich said that DPW-Facilities controls, operates and pays for the electric and heat in 70 buildings around the City. This number does not include libraries, Water Works buildings, Fire Department or Police Department buildings, Port of Milwaukee facilities or any of the surplus buildings that the City owns. Mr. Fredrich said that the Facilities Development and Management Section has two branches. Operations and Maintenance is responsible for the day to day oversight of the facilities and utilizes various trade personnel. The Design and Construction branch is responsible for things like major building improvement, strategic asset management and managing and designing capital projects. The professionals on staff, such as engineers, work for this branch of the section. Mr. Fredrich said that he and other staff members are pleased with the oversight provided by the Capital Improvements Committee. He said that it helps to have a body to which the Facilities section can be accountable. Mr. Fredrich said that the (Facilities Condition Assessment Program (FCAP) system has been refined over the years and it is an extremely comprehensive analysis. Every component of a building, from the roof and the exterior of the building to the interior components, is detailed in a very thorough inventory in the FCAP program. The FCAP is then used to develop a capital budget. Mr. Fredrich discussed the various organizations that have developed recommendations and best practices for managing facilities, including the Association of Higher Education Facilities Officers (APPA), the International Facilities City of Milwaukee Page 7 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Meeting Minutes February 29, 2012 COMMITTEE Management Association (IFMA), the National Research Council, the American Public Works Association (APWA) and the U.S. Department of the Interior. He said that the best of the organizations' recommendations have been integrated into the FCAP program. Mr. Fredrich explained that the revised FCAP has two phases, Phase A and Phase B. During Phase A in 2011, eleven of the twenty building complexes, including the Central Repair Garage and the Industrial Road Complex, were evaluated. During Phase B, the remaining nine complexes, including City Hall and the Zeidler Municipal Building, will be evaluated this year. In 2013, Phase A and Phase B will be combined into one major portfolio of all of the facilities. This will result in a very thorough understanding of the condition of all the buildings and the cost to maintain acceptable levels of repair. Ald. Dudzik asked why funds are being spent on the Forestry South Headquarters when there has been a discussion about getting rid of it. Mr. Gupta said that since the building is still being used, funds still have to be spent to maintain it. He also said that the department will determine what the long term plans are for the building before a capital request is made. Mr. Fredrich added that if the department sees that a facility has deferred maintenance that exceeds its value, it helps to decide if there should be a reorganization. Mr. Schutten explained the process of how the department develops each individual report in the Facilities Condition Assessment Program and how it will be used as a tool in the future. A physical analysis comprised of a physical inspection, component inventory, condition assessment and photographic documentation is performed. Next, a financial analysis, including cost estimation with the help of third-party software and project scheduling based on the twenty-year plan, is performed. The third step involves using outside sources. Consultants are used to evaluate building components such as roofs and electrical systems. Reviewing building occupants and usage also provides valuable information on building conditions. The fourth step is the development of a report that contains all of the compiled information. Mr. Schutten discussed the capital budgeting spreadsheet that details the predictable and expected twenty-year capital projects. Mr. Fredrich added that this type of report not only details the buildings condition but serves as a reminder that the building needs to be inspected at a certain point in the future. Mr. Schutten used the Lincoln Avenue Complex as an example when displaying the detailed analysis in a program report. The report gives details on every building in the complex itself. Mr. Fredrich used building control components at the Lincoln Garage as an example. He said that there are number of mechanical deficiencies associated with the building, which is based on the useful life of the building components and the remaining useful life of components. One of the deficiencies involves the installation of a compressed natural gas facility. Mr. Fredrich said that the code will require a specialized working environment in order to do repairs on compressed natural gas vehicles. This is a need, but it is shown as a deficiency. Mr. Fredrich said that the report is a snapshot in time of a facility that illustrates the deficiencies that exist in the facility and how they affect the overall condition of the facility. Mr. Froh mentioned that the committee requested that DPW work to integrate the buildings that are maintained by other City agencies into the same system DPW uses for building evaluation. Mr. Fredrich said that the department is working with the Police Department to evaluate their seven districts, a total of eleven buildings. He also said that DPW is working with the Port of Milwaukee, which has twenty buildings. City of Milwaukee Page 8 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Meeting Minutes February 29, 2012 COMMITTEE Mr. Gupta said that the challenge is that resources are limited and the process for collecting data is still very intensive. He said that there is a substantial cost associated with the process as well. Mr. Gupta added that the work must be done by in-house staff as well as outside consultants and other third parties. The department is hoping to have a standardized approach to the process that is adaptable and can be used for all City facilities. Mr. Korban said that it is important for the committee to recognize that different tools are being used by various departments and should decidel, for the purpose of consistency and standards, which tool to use. Mr. Friedrich agreed and emphasized the industry standards that the department tried to adapt and bring into the FCAP. He also said that consistency and continuity with inspection team are important. Mr. Fredrich said that the FCAP is in compliance with the national standards that have been established by many well-known entities. He added that the FCAP is the central location for all of the facility information and it documents the condition assessment of each component of the buildings. The FCAP is also a tool to strategize the capital budgeting program. Mr. Fredrich said that there is an attempt to get the economies of scale combining similar building projects into the bid packages. He also said that the FCAP is a living document. Mr. Fredrich said that the FCAP needs to be maintained, so there are plans to assess twenty percent of buildings every year so that each building will be thoroughly reviewed on a five-year cycle. Mr. Kammholz said that some of the information that DPW-Facilities has provided is a little bit subjective as it depends on what the department is counting as deferred maintenance. He added that the committee was initially established to be focused on infrastructure. Mr. Kammholz said that for a long period of time the City focused on buildings and facilities and less on infrastructure like Streets. When one looks at the Debt Outstanding and the principal requirements, it is clear where the money is being spent and not necessarily where is should be going. If one looks at the outstanding principal requirements, there are 176 million dollars over a fifteen year life for buildings alone. This number excludes the buildings maintained by the Police Department and Fire Department. Looking at the figures for Sewers, there are only 53 million dollars outstanding. For Sewers, it is 36 million dollars, and for Streets it is 114 million dollars. Mr. Kammholz said that the department can come up with data, but it is still the department investigating the facilities and coming up with a huge deferred maintenance number that will end up crowding out what can be reasonably spent on Streets, Sewers and other infrastructure that the public uses more directly. Mr. Kammholz said that it may be useful for a set dollar amount to be given to DPW every year for facilities and the department can handle maintenance. This approach means that the department can prioritize deferred maintenance. The entire capital budget could be spent on buildings based on the department's data, and there would be nothing left for other infrastructure. Mr. Kammholz asked the department about setting allocations within a certain dollar amount instead of data driving budget requests. Mr. Gupta said that it would be more of a policy decision. As to the allocation of available dollars, the department is trying to show the needs for the buildings. He added that once the actual conditions of the buildings are shown, it provides the tools to the department to prioritize. The department can decide, based on conditions, what should be fixed first, so the value of the FCAP is there. How many dollars would be needed to support a certain level of conditions for the buildings would be a policy decision. Mr. Kammholz explained that the DPW-Facilities is far ahead of other sections when City of Milwaukee Page 9 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Meeting Minutes February 29, 2012 COMMITTEE it comes to defining its needs, which means that its improvements can be scheduled out into the Capital Budget. Condition information is still being obtained from Streets and other infrastructure classes that the public uses. Because of the level and amount of data that Facilities has obtained, Facilities can define its needs more easily, which could result in other infrastructure being left behind with regard to distribution of funds for maintenance. Mr. Kammholz added that he is not suggesting that maintenance on buildings be deferred; however, there needs to be a broader perspective in which there is a focus on infrastructure classes first and there is an alternate way of approaching some of the building deferred maintenance. Mr. Schifalacqua said that for the last twenty years, there has been a cash conversion policy and there was a lot larger cash component to Streets and Sewers than there was to Buildings. He said that the numbers quoted by Mr. Kammholz does not accurately show the amount of money that was actually spent on capital. Also, with regard to giving the department a lump sum of funds to maintain the buildings, Mr. Schifalacqua said that the budget for Facilities is maintained through Program Accounts, which means that the City budgets a certain amount of money in a program and the department prioritizes its needs. Mr. Kammholz said that funding Sewers and Sewer Maintenance have been borrowed since 1999 when the Sewer Maintenance Fund was created. He said that one can see that there is a significant difference. With regard to the Infrastructure Cash Conversion policy, borrowing was deferred, but oftentimes the focus on cash within the capital program itself reduced the amount of capital because there was a focus on the tax dollar levy and not necessarily on deferred maintenance. Mr. Schifalacqua said that the amount of capital spent on the restoration of City Hall may have lead to the large amount of money that has been spent on Buildings as opposed to Streets. Mr. Kammholz reiterated that infrastructure is what the committee should be focusing on and that every million dollars that is spent on deferred maintenance of buildings is not being spent on other classes of infrastructure. Ald. Dudzik added that there will always be one building that requires a large amount of capital. Mr. Schutten said that the annual amount of capital that Facilities receives is reported in the FCAP, which is one of the benefits of the system. All of the projects can be prioritized so there will be level and predictable budget requests in the future once the portfolio is combined. 5. Presentation of the Recreational Facilities Condition Report. Individuals appearing: Venu Gupta, Department of Public Works Paul Fredrich, DPW-Facilities Sean Schutten, DPW-Facilities Mr. Friedrich presented a PowerPoint on the Recreational Facilities (please see the attachment "2012 Recreational Facilities PowerPoint" to Council file 111338). He explained that DPW maintains and operates 61 play areas while Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS) maintains 34 play fields. He added that MPS has a very comprehensive maintenance program. However, by ordinance, DPW is required to reconstruct all 95 play areas and fields if needed. The Condition Report being presented to the committee includes the assessment of half of the play areas for which DPW is responsible with the other half being assessed this year. Mr. Fredrich explained that there are three steps in the condition City of Milwaukee Page 10 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Meeting Minutes February 29, 2012 COMMITTEE assessment process. The first step involves a field inspection to evaluate each site and an evaluation form is completed. Industry Best Practices are then applied to the data to identify each of the various components of the recreational facilities, and the FCI is calculated. The third step involves using the condition assessment to develop the Six-Year Plan. Ald. Dudzik asked about the 30th and Fardale site. Mr. Fredrich said that the site, which was donated to the City to be developed into a recreational site, needs a great deal of work, including clearing, cleaning and development. Ald. Dudzik said that given the fact that Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements must be taken into consideration at all of the recreational facility locations, he would be interested to see what is done with the location as the area has changed somewhat since its inception. He said that he is not sure that a passive recreational facility in that location would be able to follow the ADA requirements. Mr. Fredrich said that the department will work with the Budget Office to determine if the 30th and Fardale site is a priority that can be afforded. Overall, Mr. Fredrich said that the recreation sites that were assessed are in good to fair condition. Ms. Brengosz asked if the department is using the same FCI scale for recreational facilities that is uses for the buildings. Mr. Fredrich said yes. Ms. Brengosz then said that if the value of a recreational facility is somewhat lower than a building, is seems as though doing routine maintenance on it or doing smaller things would result in a higher FCI when the facility might not actually be in poor condition. She asked if it is appropriate to use the same scale for two different types of infrastructure. Mr. Fredrich said that the same FCI is used to maintain consistency when communicating with the committee. The FCI is just a relative indicator of a building's overall condition. But he said that it is a good point because much of the value of the recreational sites is in its land as opposed to in the building. 6. Set next agenda. The next meeting is March 21st. There will be a discussion of the debt targets. Meeting adjourned at 11:12 a.m. Staff Assistant Tobie Black This meeting can be viewed in its entirety through the City's Legislative Research Center at http://milwaukee.legistar.com/calendar. City of Milwaukee Page 11