HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/01/2011 03C1 Citizen Service Request Response RE: AFSCME Budget Reduction Suggestions C I
MEMORANDUM
TO: Yvette Lewis, Union Representative
CC: Michael Morales, Acting City Manager
Department Heads
FROM: Rita DeBord, Finance Director
Cindy Epperson, Deputy Director Acct. & Budgeting
SUBJECT: AFSCME Budget Reductions Suggestions
DATE: February 11, 2011
This memo is in response to your letter of December 1, 2010, regarding cost saving
measures for the City of Yakima. The City appreciates AFSCME taking the time and
effort to provide the City with additional suggestions on how we could reduce costs
and /or improve efficiencies of providing services to our citizens. While it may not be
practical to implement some of your suggestions; the discussions and dialogue that
occurred as a result of your memo is valuable to both. the City and to the AFSCME
represented City Employees.
Below you'll find the City's response to each of your suggestions.
1) Fall Leaf Pick -up: 2009 Total = $61,376.54 (Does not include fuel (estimate
avail.), or brochures for the program (est. cost $2,000,000)): salaries $17,688.00:
Maintenance & Operating (M &O) for garbage trucks $6,858.00; Landfill fees $5,587;
biodegradable bags $31,244.54. In.2009, there was a $25,000 grant toward this
program. No grant money for the program for 2010, but total expenditures not in as of
11/30/2010.
o How about eliminating this program all together?
Response - The Fall Leaf Pick -up program is funded by Refuse rates, and serves to
accomplish several important preventative and environmental purposes —the program
helps to keep leaves out of the stormwater system and out of street gutters where they
inhibit efficient street - sweeping. Additionally, they are used to create useful mulch in
the "yard waste" portion of the landfill. Council has supported this program, and
reaffirmed it when the operation was moved from the Street budget to Refuse in the
2008 budget.
•
2) Utility Bills:
• Do not send a first reminder (not mandated): estimated savings $30,000 /yr. •
• Institute a fee for late payments. Currently there is only a shut -off fee of $44.00
• Institute a policy that any existing past due or late payments must be paid before
a new service is started. An "unified" lien on a property for a Water Utility can be
done, with no filing fees. For 2009, the City wrote off approximately $299,000 in
unpaid utility bills.
Response -
• Sending first reminder notices is not mandatory, it has been reviewed and
discussed in the past; general assessment is that it results in receiving payments
more timely. Utility Billing and Finance staff will review this practice again and
we'll look for more cost effective methods of providing this notice. (The schedule
of actions related to delinquent accounts is attached for your information).
• The issue of a late payment fee was vetted when the utility billing ordinance was
last reviewed and updated. The current process of collection results in an
ultimate collection rate of 99% (i.e. approx. 1% gets written off). The major issue
with late fees is the cost of administration —e.g. the statement adding the late fee
and the payment from the customer crosses in the mail —then there is a
reconciling item on that bill. It would take additional resources to
administer /reconcile late fees.
➢ State law does not allow City to require payment of a delinquent utility bill of the
previous tenant before we provide service to the new tenant at the same location;
➢ Stat law does not allow the City to withhold service from a customer at a new
location until that customer pays a delinquent utility bill from their previous
location;
➢ Liens allowed by state law differ based on the utility:
o Water: Only Lien allowed - Shut off service
o Irrigation: Only Lien allowed – Shut off service
o Refuse: May Shut off service and place Lien on property (1)
o Wastewater: Only Lien available – Place Lien on property (1)
(1) State law requires that if a Lien is placed on the property the City must pursue
Foreclosure within the prescribed timeframe (generally 3 yrs.); (City is not
allowed to maintain a lien until property is sold). The costs of pursuing a
property foreclosure and the public relations consequences of doing so are
simply too costly in most cases to make this approach a standard business
practice. (Any recommendation to foreclose on a property is discussed at the
City Manager level before any action is taken.)
• The City's write off of bad debts for Utilities is approximately 1% to 410
1.5 %; this is at the low end of industry standards.
2
3) Cell phones - 2010 1 quarter spent $47,823.94.
0
o Can we reduce that? Do people who have desk jobs, and are not on call,
need a cell phone /Blackberry?
Response - During the 2010 budget development process, Wayne Wantland,
Communications Manager, sent an e-mail survey to all Divisions which asked the
managers to evaluate their need for cell phones vs. blackberries, and adjustments were
made to reduce that bill.
4) Temporary Employees – For 2010, there were 171 temporary Employees that
worked for the City of Yakima. As of 10/31/2010, the YTD total paid was $871,059.43.
o Can we evaluate the use of temporary Employees during times of layoff
and furlough of permanent employees?
Response - Temporary employees are used just as the title suggests —to do tasks that
are time limited, and thus not filled with a permanent employee. The statistics given
were 171 temporary employees in 2010, paid $871,000. This averages to just over
$5,000 per employee. The Parks and Recreation Division accounts for about'/ of the
temporary dollars spent in a year, with about %2 of that (i.e. 25% of the total paid
throughout the entire City) being in the aquatics program, primarily for lifeguards.
Transit "extra- board" accounts for another 20% of the City total.. That leaves 30% of
the total spread out over all of the rest of operating divisions. Most of the remaining use
of temporaries is to fill in for temporary vacancies of permanent positions during the
0 course of the Civil Service hiring process or extended absences, or to assist through
peak times when existing staffing resources are maximized. It would not be cost
effective to discontinue the use of temporary staff.
5) Eliminate all special pay not bargained for- Including "Acting" pay
Response - Municipal Code Section 2.20.088 addresses Special Assignment Pay, for
assignments beyond an employees classification. A listing of employees receiving
special assignment pay is produced out of the Payroll system and periodically for review
by the City Manager.
•
6) Rebate Visa cards – We can get rebate by using a participating Visa credit card
for purchases that we already make with our vendors. Purchasing has already done the
research, and there are 2 rebates available: Volume rebate and Prompt Payment
Rebate. For 2099, total expenses to vendors was $7,592.252.65. For the Volume
Rebate, we could have received $15,051.64, and for the Prompt Payment Rebate, we
could have received $2,900.00.
0 See Attached Documentation
Response - The City's purchasing and finance departments have been working
together on rebate programs for the Visa cards; rebate programs have been
implemented. The rebates are real and tangible and we are already receiving them. As
• we streamline the review, reporting and accounting process, this program will be
expanded.
3
7) Car washes for City vehicles: 3 vendors for a 2009 YTD total paid of $16,590.46.
Contract term is "until cancelled ". As of 11/29/2010 YTD paid = $12,957.02. Public
Works, YPD and the Wastewater Treatment Plant have car washing facilities.
Can we re- evaluate the contract and reduce this expense by finding a way
to utilize our own facilities?
Response - The Public Works drive - through vehicle wash facility is designed to be
used for Transit busses only. There is an area that vehicles can be "hand washed " —i.e.
high power hoses. Wastewater also has a facility to wash vehicles, but it is not a "drive -
through" either. The Police Department is the main user of the contracted services.
The price that the City pays for washes is much lower (at least $2 per wash) than what
the public is charged. The contracts are re- evaluated periodically by Purchasing and
Equipment Rental managers.
8) Vendor Contracts:
a. Senske Contract: Current contract expires 2/22/2015 ($33,365.00) for tree
trimming and 5/20/2015 ($9,412.30) for Public works (PW)/Transit landscape
maint. Police contract for landscape maint. Expires 3/23/2011. Contract award
amount $4,846.82. Contract totals = $47,624.12. YTD total paid as of
11/29/2010 is $48,161.62. 2009 YTD total paid was $63,010.45
b. Evergreen Services Contract: Current contract expires 3/1/2012 (27,619.13) for
PW/Transit Center landscape maint. YTD total paid to Evergreen Services as of
11/29/2010 is $18,730.50
c. Les Schwab Contract: contract expires 3/1/2012 ($110,192.08), but we
have spent $147,189/4 YTD as of 11/29/10. Last year total = $127,781.65.
d. Firestone Contract: Current contract expires 7/27/2011 ($80,000). The 2009
YTD amount paid was $136,538.75. As of 11/30/2010, the YTD amount paid is
$156,576.18.
• Question for all contracts: Can we re- evaluate the contract and reduce? Can
we monitor the spending more closely?
Response All contracts go through a bid process, to ensure the City is getting the best
price for the services. In 2009 the Yard and Lawn care contract was reviewed and sent
out to bid.- A. lower cost contract was awarded to Evergreen Tree and Lawn Care, in
part as a cost reduction matter. The contract includes tree - trimming, as needed, along
with landscape maintenance for Public Works, Transit Transfer Center, the Convention
Center, the Yakima Valley Visitors Center, and spraying at Wastewater. These
contracts are reviewed in the annual budget process. Because of the specialized
equipment and "as needed" aspect of tree - trimming, contracting is cost effective. The
geographic diversity and scope (i.e. small areas of grass /vegetation) are the factors that
make landscape contracting cost effective. •
4
The Les Schwab contract supplies /maintains most of the tires for the fleet. Since the
City has to purchase tires, this contract includes the servicing /warranty with the
® purchase. Firestone is contracted to maintain the Police Fleet. The competitive bid and
convenient location are factors. The reason for the increase from 2009 to 2010 is
primarily because budget concerns reduced the number of police cars replaced, so that
the maintenance was slightly higher, because it was for an older fleet. The Police Dept
has an employee dedicated to managing the contract —i.e. tracking, documenting,
coordinating fleet repair.
9) Take home vehicles: Several City vehicles are taken home. This practice costs
the city in both fuel and maintenance on the vehicles.
o Can we re- evaluate this practice?
Response - Administrative Code Police ADM 300 addresses the "Use and Assignment
of City Vehicles ". The City Manager directed a review of all take home vehicles during
the cost reduction review in 2010; thus this recommendation has already been done.
10) Retirement incentives for those close to retiring— The City Manager
monitors all vacancies prior to authorizing the rehire of a vacant position. This method
has worked to keep a vast majority of the City's reduction in FTEs to vacancies, rather
than lay -offs. Human Resources did some preliminary investigation to determine how
some agencies addressed this. Since retirement incentives would involve an additional
cost to the City, and may not affect the work groups targeted for reduction in the
of Government model, this was not further pursued.
® Priorities
11) Restrict/cut
back all travel — Travel restrictions have been in place for many
years; and travel was further restricted in 2010 and 2011 budgets. The actual travel
expense for 2010 was $165,000, compared to $225,000 spent in 2008, a drop of
$60,000 or 36 %. Travel budgets are needed and used to acquire required continuing
education /training to maintain a well trained and qualified work force and to maintain
required certifications for employees.
III
5
Delinquent Account Follow -Up Schedule
Water Accounts
✓ Day 1 Bill mailed to customer
✓ Day 15 1 Reminder Notice sent — Approximately 33% of
our accounts are receiving this notice.
✓ Day 29 2nd Reminder sent — Approximately 20% of our
customers receive this notice. This notice has
language required by federal Law.
✓ Day 43 Deliver written notice 7 days prior to suspension.
Door Hanger. Approximately 10% of the City's
water customers are receiving this notice. This
notice is required under State Law.
✓ Day 50 Water is shut off. Approximately 5% have this
occur.
✓ Day 57 Meter checked for tampering.
✓ Day 64 Meter checked / account closed / final bill mailed.
✓ Day 72 Account processed for pre - collection.
✓ Day 79 Account sent to collection.
Accounts Without Water
✓ Day 1 Bill mailed to customer.
✓ Day 15 Reminder Notice sent.
✓ Day 29 Suspension Notice sent.
✓ Day 72 Account processed for pre - collection.
✓ Day 79 Account sent to collection.
•
Rd Del Utility Accts 2 -8 -11
i
i
0
. ,
4 - PURCHASING PROCESSES
Purchasing Cards I.
Purchasing cards were developed in the late 1980's as a way to help federal government employees .
acquire small dollar goods in an efficient and effective manner. The concept quickly migrated to the
private sector in the early 1990's.' The fundamental goals of a purchasing card program are:
• Reduce process cost;
• Increase process efficiency;
• Increase convenience for employees;
• Reduce time need to obtain goods/services; and
• • Reduce number of paperwork errors.
As purchasing card programs mature, the organizational goals expand to include;
• Obtain better data about spending;
• Increase control over spending;
• Leverage spending 6 to reduce prices; and
• Generate rebates.'
Between the 1990's and 2003, purchasing cards evolved from "best practice" to "common practice" for
both public and private sector organizations. Since 2003, the focus has been on "controlled growth" of
existing purchasing card spending programs.'
ill Current Purchasing Card Programs �
Both the City and the County have limited purchasing card programs; the City has five car the
County has one in Purchasing. Both the City and the County utilize the State of Washington Charge Card
Services Contract with JPMorgan Chase. Table 4.1 compares the City and County purchasing card 1
programs with the results from the NIGP benchmark survey.
Table 4.1 Crna grin' P Curl U a'e at Yakima with Other Public i •encie
{�, , p:9 i,� 1y/ y 7j���.�{;1[�'!''�pj�,r��'yfj�1 It + I r' l `!' t I di •. � 7 T � 1 ! a ���
�?t � } t o t ' ° , i 1°W 9'�I 1.I "E Etuor .LLm1Ltiod .ill lai �1 it rai � � v� I f ',1 1 {C� '1''. J jp ,'
S , ! 1 5 P 1 1 4I ! 1'Q 1 L ItJ V v 1? 1 3 0 ?: �� Mir"' A V P , -
:M'!!1�� ,11, a�, a0 . l 3AL3 1 1B l. lll id /If�'�+ � 11 k
Dollar Limit per Transaction $2,319 $2.000 $3,772 $2,500 $2,500 N/A
Total Annual Number of Transactions 8,618 5,521 23,030 11,136 220 400
Total Annual Dollar Value $1,199,659 $1,000,000 $7,558,426 $3,050,135 $69,488 $96.500
Average Transaction Value $237 $217 $535 $305 $316 $241
Number of Cardholders 165 162 412 300 5 1
Avg. Monthly Spend per Cardholder $829 $884 52.314 $973 $1,158 $8,042
Percent Purchase Spend via P -Card 3.01% 2.35% 5.02% 3.22% _ 0.55% _ 1.02%
I
is Palmer Richard J. and Gupta, Mahendra. 2003 Purchasing Card Benchmark Survey Results. RPIs/IG Research
Corporation, 2003. Pg. 18.
16 Palmer and Gupta. 2003. Pg. 38.
17 Palmer, Richard J. and Gupta, Mahendra. 2005 Purchasing Card Benchmark Survey Results. RPMG Research
Corporation, 2005. Pg. 22.
' 18 Data Source: National Institute of Governmental Purchasing, Inc. 2007 Benchmarking Study (Unpublished).
Data Analysis: Procurement Consulting Services, Inc. Small Cities = Municipalities with population < 100,000.
• Response Count: 58.
19 Counties Response Count: 63.
City and County of Yakima Joint Administrative Purchasing Assessment 1 t�
Final Report 1 �1
Page 18 of 32 •-.. •.. •.. ..... ,
•
•
•
•
t ii �, ixllat�d'�;County's��p�oarti. programs: are.. significaiitlk,lundefjiehfortiiiiiwi*}iet cbnh�at'ed�to:: }heiti'
d i 0.tigel•t ericliidark,averages.
it&titlie.i cyi 01N.41011 ,tiearlyy.7'7% /o all puraliase. drilbrs; are° less :than. $11;000 and i88% ai a =less khan!'
J 2'5.0:0: At the County 55% of all purchase orders, including those issued by Public Works, are less than
s e coons cold >r
$1,000 and 89% are less than $2,500. �:�yQiE.�! .. e ..::...:...�,;.� trans a ,� �:� ..,:. ,.:.:!�, aM,Pi �;een �PT4P9§s�:kb!rPu�
�_effective.::purchasing card program:'' An August-2002 study by the National .Association of Purchasing
-Card: Professionals,..found that.. the average cost = of: the;. traditional' purchase :.order process; ;including
receiving,and •payweot,' was $79.75.1* transaction:' The average: colt, Of .4i pt}irchasing +card. transabtibii.
was;$16:28,. a S avings :of $63,45,per transaction.. The ;:20Q5 .Palmer and' Pori: study 2 0 .; �whielii includes..:'
both;pubkig ;and, prt ate sector erg /1121%1ot% shpws: sin}ilar result, with tl}e, tmd tion$1 prgcess: Cost
; $82 21; a, p -cant ' of $21.83, and a -net:difference.of $67.38..' Recommendations in this report for
staffing levels in Purchasing are predicated on the productivity gains 'resulting from instituting effective p-
card programs.
Impediments to P -Cards •
• The risk of fraud or misuse is one of the greatest impediments to p-card implementation. However, the
perception of misuse has been proven to be far greater than the reality. Purchasing card misuse accounts
on average for 0.034% (3.4 "basis points ") or $340 for every $1 million of p -card spending. Improper
purchases account for only one out of every 14,925 transactions. Further, the Palmer and Gupta study
also showed that 80% of the misuse spending occurred in 12% of the organizations, indicating poor
controls in those select few companies.
•
Effective internal controls will prevent fraud and misuse and quickly identify any potential improper
411
purchases so that they can be rectified. The Consultant recommends the City and County review
"Auditing and Investigating the Internal Control of Government Purchasing Card Programs," published
by the United State General Accounting Office (May 2003), to determine how effective controls can be
established. Periodic internal audits and an annual external audit will also reduce the incidence of
improper purchases. The external audit should be conducted following the guidelines set forth in the.
GAO Audit Guide referenced above.
Improving the P -Card Program
•
There appears to be a high correlation between p -card technoloKt and program success, confirmed by the
2005 Palmer and Gupta report. Virtually all of the high performing p -card organizations. NIGP has
reviewed utilize card management software that enables real -time self - management, built -in controls, and
robust reporting capabilities. The current contract includes PaymentNet. The Consultant has not
reviewed the functionality of this system. Implementation of PaymentNet is precluded by the fact that the
state contract with JPMorgan Chase expires October 31, 2009. .However, the City and County may have
the option of implementing the new p -card program with U.S. Bank, including their card management
software, AccessOnline, as early as. July 2008.
There may be a perceived conflict between purchasing via a contract and purchasing via a p -card.
However, the best public procurement practice is to actually combine the two, purchasing items on
contract via p -card, preferably using e- procurement. Under this model, centralized purchasing establishes
and administers the contractual relationship with the supplier, while routine transactions are fully
delegated to end users. P -cards facilitate the ability of using departments to order from established
20 Palmer and Gupta . 2005. Pg. 44.
21 Palmer and Gupta. 2005. Pg. 119. •
City and County of Yakima Joint Administrative Purchasing Assessment
�
Final Report
Page 19 of 32
O
contracts by use of electronic catalog ordering for such commodities as office, janitorial and computer
supplies. Processes that add time and cost, but no value, such as requisitions and purchase orders, can be
eliminated.
e- Pavables
While primarily an accounts payable and not a purchasing function, the City and County should consider
leveraging the p -card program to facilitate e- payables. Several banks are now offering e- payable
solutions that integrate with the organization's financial system. The benefits include improved cash
management, reduction in paper checks and increased rebates.
Recommendations:
4.1 City and County - Develop strategy and plan to optimize utilization of p- cards. [Short term;
internal/external] -
4.2 City and County - Select and implement card management software. [Medium term; internal]
4.3 County - Develop p -card policy and manual; City - Revise p -card policy and manual as necessary to
include card management software; City and County - Re- engineer business processes as applicable.
[Medium term; internal]
4.4 City and County - Integrate the use of p -cards with term contracts. [Medium term; internal]
4.5 City and County - Explore the use of e- payables. [Medium term; internal]
4.6 City and County - Conduct periodic external audits of p -card program. [Long term; external]
Spend Analysis
Currently neither the City nor County conducts any form of spend analysis — the process of aggregating,
cleansing, and analyzing organizational purchasing data to identify opportunities for reducing costs. This
is both a business process issue and an information technology issue. To effectively perform spend
analysis, a commodity coding system such as the NIGP Commodity /Service Code needs to be integrated
• into the purchasing module. More information on commodity codes is provided in the Information
Technology section of this report. In a recent study, the Aberdeen Group reports that public sector
organizations can reduce total spending by 2% to 15% through spend analysis. Without conducting a
comprehensive spend management analysis, the Consultant is unable to develop accurate estimates of the
potential savings. It would be reasonable to assume that the City would probably be on the low end of the
estimated range, and the County on the high end. Any savings accrued via spend analysis would be
"hard," directly attributable to various expense line items. It should be noted that absent a comprehensive
spend management analysis, it will take several years to internally collect the data to fully achieve the
projected savings.
Recommendation: •
4.7 City and County - Implement spend analysis to reduce costs and improve operational performance.
[Long term; internal]
22 Minahan, Tim A. et al. Supply Management in the Public Sector. Aberdeen Group and Government Procurement
• News: May 2004.
City and County of Yakima Joint Administrative Purchasing Assessment
���
Final Report
Page 20 of 32 ... ,..,......... •.
•
Vendor
•
Number Company Paid in 2009 2010 YTD
Vendors Over $200,000
11809 Layne Christensen Company $ 1,382,847,39 $
3299 Yakima Visitors & Cony Bureau $ 984,011.50 $ 894,37 83
1,316,307.18 884 1,1
11 Al Tri City Taxi 588,425.90
11266 Granite Northwest $ 758,124.85 $
3021 Western Peterbilt $ 582,373.78 $ 576,534.90
2601 Wells Fargo Insur (ACORDIA) $ 423,715.14 $ 443,701.02
11042 Dixon & Lee Attorneys at Law $ 494,895 97 $ 167,540 0 360,083.34 $
4863 Columbia Ford
Total $ 6,302,359.15 $ 4,359,242.82
Vendors Under $200,000 79,799 02
8273 Columbia Asphalt and Gravel $ 123,495.51 $
4470 Owen Equipment (BEN- KO- MATIC) $ 29,223.68 $ 30,395.21
2189 Lyon Law Offices $ 378,994.32 $ 7,828.20
4026 Special Asphalt Products $ 132,321.37 $ 94,706.62
10403 CXT Incorporated $ $ 109,024.48
9401 KAR -GOR Inc $ 40,064.30 $ 34,151.17 III
1763 Central Pre -Mix Concrete $ 4,083.25 $ 16,368.09
4252 Office Solutions NW
$ 207,690.75 $ 151,276.54
2087 Janitors Closet $ 95,556.36
11790 Waxie $ - $ 160,000.00
10587 WCP Solutions $ 85,885.68 $ 65,591.69
7495 Meyer, Fluegge & Tenney $ 51,630.34 $ 89,928.57 5,56
11802 Yakima Collision Repair $ 13,166.29 $ 11,111,26265.56
5260 Schwab Trires Les $ 127,781.65 $
Total $ 1,289,893.50 $ 997,524.89
Total $ 7,592,252.65 $ 5,356,767.71
Volume Rebate $ 15,051.64 $ 10,619.79
quarterly spent (total /4) * .00793
Prompt Payment Rebate
(604 days to pay) /(60 * .006 * ave inv amt) 2,900.00 $ 2,900.00
scenerio - 2 days, $500,000 inv $
* ** based on top 100 vendors, by number of invoices (15,325), there is a potential III
p
transaction savings of $972,371.25 based on a NAPCP study (please see attachment)
0111■ REVISED
ADM 300
CITY OF YAKIMA
October 24, 2005
City Manager Bulletin # 116
October 24, 2005
TO: All City Employees
FROM: Dick Zais, City Manager
SUBJECT: Use and Assignment of City Vehicles
The purpose of this memo is to update the City's Administrative Policy from
June 1997 regarding the use and assignment of City vehicles. Vehicles
authorized to be taken overnight on a regular basis are vehicles for law
enforcement (marked or unmarked) or vehicles equipped with permanently -
affixed special gear such as emergency communications, flares, first aid supplies,
tool boxes, tanks, etc. A supervisor must approve use of a City vehicle for any
purpose.
This policy is subject to change at any time, and the use of a city vehicle by any
city employee may be revoked at any time for any reason.
A. City employees may be assigned a vehicle with the authority to take it
home in accordance with the following conditions:
1. To respond to 24 -hour emergency calls in which an immediate
response is required to save life and / or prevent damage to
property;
2. To respond to 24 -hour emergency calls in which an immediate
response is required to investigate criminal activity and/ or fires or
to serve as an incident safety officer; or
3. To exercise supervisory responsibility in an emergency;
4. To perform on -duty inspections for night construction activity from
April 1 through September 30 as needed; or
5. To participate in an out -of -town training seminar or business
meeting the following day; or
6. To transport K -9 equipment, including dogs; or •
7. To allow in -door, safe and secure storage of police motorcycles.
No assignments are allowed as a privilege or condition of employment. It is
understood that anyone taking home a City vehicle for emergency response
should be available when called. If not, supervisors should arrange for
alternatives.
B. City employees assigned a vehicle for day or night use will observe the
following rules:
1. Vehicles will be used only for the conduct of official municipal
business.
2. Transporting passengers in a City vehicle is restricted to City
employees, others traveling on City business, to assist the public in
an emergency, or after approval by a supervisor and execution of a
waiver of liability.
3. Employees may drive to a lunch location only while on duty, for
meeting purposes, or while en route between workstations.
4. Employees attending meetings during the day or evening will, if
possible, use a City vehicle and pool transportation with other
employees planning to attend.
5. All vehicles not specifically assigned for overnight use or
continuous use during the day will be available to other employees
requiring transportation to conduct municipal business.
6. Personal use of.a City vehicle is strictly prohibited at all times.
7. In the event a City vehicle is unavailable for City business,
employees are eligible to request mileage reimbursement in
accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code.
The use of City vehicles to attend a training seminar or conference for occasional
incidence of overnight travel is permitted. Employees must have supervisory
approval. The contentsrof Section B of this administrative policy are applicable
to the incidence of occasional overnight use.
Henceforth, subject to the above guidelines, overnight use of a City vehicle is
restricted to the employees listed below. A deviation from this policy subjects
the employee to possible disciplinary action for unauthorized use of a City
vehicle and Internal Revenue Service income tax consequences.
. j
All vehicles shall be marked except unmarked, undercover law enforcement
vehicles used by undercover law enforcement officers listed below.
•
•
10 ) AUTHORIZED PERSONNEL .
ASSIGNED CITY VEHICLES FOR OVERNIGHT USE
•
Fire Department
Fire Chief
Deputy Fire Chief(s)
Assistant Fire Marshall
Deputy Fire Marshall
Training Supervisor
Training Assistant
K -9 Accelerant Detection Handler
Police Department
• Police Chief
Division Commander(s) •
Detectives
SWAT Commander
K -9 officer(s)
j Motorcycle Patrol Officers
School Resource Officers
Community Service Officers
Department of Public Works
Street Maintenance Supervisor
Department of Community and Economic Development
Animal Control (for emergency call out duty only)
City Management Department
Sewer Maintenance Crew Leader (Only for the crew leader on -call that night or weekend)
I I '
1 i i