COMMISSIONERS OF PUBLIC WORKS
Minutes of June 11, 2009
A regular meeting of the Board of Commissioners of Public Works was held on Thursday, June 11, 2009, at 10:00 a.m., in the Boardroom at 121 West Court Avenue.
Meeting attendees are listed in the Print Friendly PDF version above.
- Vice Chairman Watts called the meeting to order. The invocation was given by Ken Barnett.
- Vice Chairman Watts gave the statement of compliance with the notification provision of the Freedom of Information Act.
- New Business:
- Mr. Brad Jeffares provided an update on GIS projects. He reported on a continued effort over several years to improve and maintain the GIS to make it better and more usable. He provided slides showing the work completed over the last fiscal year. Mr. Jeffares noted mapping of above and below ground wires for all primary and secondary electric lines in circuits 51, 52 and 53. GPS included pole positions, capturing things such as wire size, phasing, location of transformers, switches, fuses, and the secondary. He provided a snapshot showing red wires as primary as well as secondary added and mapped from each transformer and pole with detail information all the way out to the customer. Vice Chairman Watts asked how the information was used. Mr. Meredith responded that it is used as birthmark information to know how old poles are. They are in the process of inspecting pole line, and the information can be used to set up cycles for inspecting the system. He added that the information would be brought into the system modeling software to be purchased later in the year to help with coordination studies, fuse size, and things of that nature. Commissioner Monaghan asked if underground service line locations to houses were known. Mr. Meredith responded that they were having to do some guesswork but can find the information. With new installations such as Lodge Grounds, they go back and put everything into GPS upon completion while it is still fresh and they know where it was. Mr. Jeffares explained that GPS is ongoing and really consists of two projects happening simultaneously. There is the mapping of the existing data that has been put into the ground over the number of years you have been in the electric business, and then also trying to maintain and keep up with information about new things going in. He noted advancements in mobile GIS and GPS technology had made that much easier than in the past. He summarized the work for 2008 including: 1,555 poles; 19.7 miles of overhead electric primary; 18 miles of underground electric primary; and 26 miles of overhead electric secondary; 31.8 miles of underground electric secondary for approximately 2,134 customers. He continued that GPS collection was done in conjunction with electric collection when they went out and captured meters first. Mr. Jeffares stated that approximately 39% of meters had already been located for water, electric and gas in 2007 and 2008. He commented that users have the ability to look up a specific customer name, address, or number and know specifically where all meters are located. He stated that this helps with things such as a water model to tie customer demand to a specific point; it tells you where the demand is on your system so that when hydraulic modeling is done, you can tell where the pressure needs to be. Vice Chairman Watts asked if only electric lines had been done. Mr. Jeffares stated that GST had done the electric and CPW had mapped most of gas and water internally. Mr. Smith noted that the GPS system was used recently to map the location of existing lights and lines to meter gas lights. Mr. Jeffares noted the initial primary focus was on downtown areas since most electric is located there, adding that now the focus is on some more rural areas. He noted that Greenwood County has one of the best GIS in the state while other neighboring counties do not, so when address matching was done between customer data base and their GIS points, the matches were not as good, so the focus is now on GPS for customers where there was never a point. Mr. Jeffares referred to the 2009 plan to locate an additional 13,000 meters bringing the total to 64% of all meters on the system. Mr. Jeffares noted that the utility management system was primarily work done with gas and water departments and organized maintenance data, for example, rectifier readings are done and other readings captured for monthly reports. Mr. Jeffares added that in the past, information was captured through something like a spreadsheet so not a lot of analysis was done; now it is in a central repository and can be analyzed based on the location. He provided a snapshot of the utility management system currently used primarily by guys in the field with laptops. Mr. Jeffares noted an initiative to develop a mobile work order system that is integrated into the AS/400 work order system. He explained the process beginning with entering a work order into the AS/400, after which it is printed to various printers; the pieces of paper are organized and handed out to utility workers who go out and perform the work. The worker hand writes information on the sheet; it is then passed back up the chain to customer service and entered into the database. He noted a lot of effort going into the completion of a work order. Mr. Jeffares stated that the current work order system is part of the financial system because they are applied directly to customer accounts in order to have a smooth system. He noted that in the process of creating a mobile work order system, they had also determined a need for the GIS portal. Right now everyone in the organization has access to GIS in some form or fashion. Currently, there are seven websites between the different departments and two mobile applications. He stated that they wanted to get rid of so many different views or applications for GIS and have one centralized system. Mr. Jeffares noted a problem being that the electric department needs to see a particular view of their data, and so does the gas and water departments. He stated that in the past, a different website was created for each application; now they have created a GIS portal that is in essence the same application and allows for more control of how views are set up. Mr. Auman added that it should cost a lot less to maintain because they don’t have to go through seven websites and two mobile applications every time a change is needed. Mr. Jeffares pointed out that this is possible due to the advancements and better technology in the GIS software. He then provided a demonstration of the mobile work order system and explained the shortened means to complete the entire process. Mr. Auman noted that they started with the simplest type of work orders, that is move in/move out type work orders, to get the base system working properly before expanding to include more complicated types. Mr. Jeffares added that the plan is to put as many other work order types into place this year as possible. Mr. Auman noted that this would also allow customer service to pull up work orders and provide customers with a status report on their work order. Mr. Jeffares stated that in the future once internet access is available in the field, they would be able to see work orders closed instantly as done and know where they are in the system. Mr. Auman noted 18 tablets being used in the field at the present time. Mr. Jeffares continued that they plan to sit down with each person who has to respond to work orders to go through workloads to determine improvements that might be needed on the technical side. He demonstrated an inquiry showing work orders completed on or around specific dates, and the employee who completed the work order. Vice Chairman Watts noted that it could also be used as a management tool. Mr. Jeffares concluded that everything would now switch to one system so that as updates and changes are done it would affect everyone. His area would be to work on existing functionality of applications into the system and to provide training to users, particularly the mobile users to get them used to tablet pc’s and laptops in the truck, but also working with data.
- Manager Reeves noted that bids were received for renovations to the main office to relocate some staff. Bids were opened and a copy of the bid tabulation sent in their bid package. He noted that a letter of understanding was requested from the low bidder stating that it was a complete job. That letter had not been provided, and in fact, the low bidder is asking to increase his bid. Manager Reeves recommended that all bids be rejected and that engineering become involved with bid specifications before going out for rebid.
A motion to reject all bids as recommended was made by Commissioner Monaghan, seconded by Vice Chairman Watts, and unanimously approved.
- Manager Reeves noted a request from Mr. Pat Patterson with the County for permission to place a communication tower on the Hodges water tank. He stated that as far as he had been able to discern, there is no objection from any staff members and space is available. He continued that the question would be whether to charge any fees. Commissioner Monaghan asked if an opportunity to lease to someone else would be lost in doing so. Manager Reeves responded that obviously anything such as this would take space away and inhibit an opportunity to lease to another vendor. Commissioner Monaghan asked the General Manager to contact the County Manager to find out about some kind of arrangement such as swapping. Vice Chairman Watts asked about other similar towers. Manager Reeves noted a couple of existing contracts for lease agreements. He concluded that he would contact the County Manager and report back to the Board.
IV. Other Business:
- Manager Reeves requested a date for a pre-bid meeting for water tank inspections. He stated that the date would need to be sometime in early July. The Commissioners were in agreement to hold the meeting prior to the July 9 regular meeting at 9:00 a.m.
- Manager Reeves presented a request from the engineers who had designed the recreational contracts for Lander University. He noted that a letter was sent some time ago indicating that the Board was agreeable to provide in-kind services and they are asking for a definition of in-kind services in order to prepare their documents. He expressed that we could at least provide a water meter pit, but was not sure what could be done beyond that. Manager Reeves stated that he would work out some more specifics of what could be done to assist them.
- Commissioner Monaghan referred to an article on the front page of The Index Journal on closing the County swimming pool. He expressed concern with kids not being able to swim all summer. He noted that one thing mentioned was the water loss. Commissioner Monaghan asked the General Manager to contact the County Manager about CPW furnishing the water. Vice Chairman Watts expressed an understanding that the amount needed would only amount to a few dollars per day. Manager Reeves agreed to find out if the problem is from lack of maintenance, adding that we would want to be careful there. He noted that it seemed to be a bit much for evaporation. Both Commissioners agreed that they did not want lower to moderate income kids who may not have the ability to join the YMCA to miss out because of not having water. Commissioner Monaghan stated that Councilwoman Childs mentioned that Lander would have limited usage times and transportation would be an issue. Commissioner Monaghan expressed a desire to do everything possible to help keep the pool open. Manager Reeves stated that he would contact the County. Commissioner Monaghan referred to “water projects approved” in the COC Planning Report noting that Berkshire Subdivision and Barrington Subdivision were shown as “possible”. He asked that the details relating to annexation be provided. Mr. Cometto noted no update on annexation for either. Mr. Meredith added that annexation would go across all three departments; the project on Milford Springs Road was canceled, and backs up to Allison Drive which is contiguous to the city and would not be a problem to annex, but the developer lost his funding and had pulled out of Greenwood. Commissioner Monaghan commented that if that is the case, it should be deleted from the report. Mr. Meredith stated that discussion was ongoing through Charlie Barrineau on annexation for Barrington Subdivision (beside Avalon). Commissioner Monaghan asked about highlighted areas; Mr. Auman stated that typically highlighted areas denote something that had changed since the previous month. Commissioner Monaghan asked if Bethany Park Subdivision, A. P. Neal, shown on the report under “gas projects” was in the city. Mr. Meredith responded that it was. Commissioner Monaghan asked about asset bar coding noting that it was shown as “being evaluated”. Mr. Auman responded that they had again started back on the system and were looking at using it and if any changes needed to be made. Ms. Ogletree stated that it was a matter of integrating information off the hand-held units back into the AS/400 to work back and forth for fixed assets. She added that Brian was working on the programming. Mr. Auman noted that Brian was writing code now and should be done by the end of the month. Ms. Ogletree noted that he is also working on writing the code for bar coding at the warehouse.
- Mr. Gentry reported that the CDBG project on Taggart is proceeding, with no decision made with the other grant recently submitted. He noted that they are keeping close tabs on an energy grant. Commissioner Monaghan asked about “shovel ready” projects that could be submitted for federal funds. Manager Reeves noted that a number had been submitted and other avenues of funding were still being pursued. He noted that the final list came from the state this week, and CPW was not on it. Manager Reeves stated that they hear regularly from the man in Washington who is still opening doors for us, just had not gotten any money from him yet.
V. Executive Session
A motion to go into Executive Session to discuss contractual matters was made by Commissioner Monaghan, seconded by Vice Chairman Watts, and unanimously approved.
VI. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
Return To Top
|
|
