Is This Good Government?

A couple items seem to be brewing in the city, which make me wonder about the state of financial affairs in Highland Heights:

1. Significant cost overruns on city construction projects

Council was informed at the last council meeting that cost overruns on the "pedestrian pathway" project---i.e., the sidewalk along Highland Road-- will exceed $ 100,000.

I believe that project was originally bid out at under $ 700,000---so that is a huge increase in cost, percentage-wise. The $ 100,000 estimate did not include additional engineering fees charged by the city engineer, Andy Blackley and his firm, Stevenh Hovancsek & Associates--so the total cost for the overruns on the project is still unclear.

Another company designed the project, but all of the designs and plans were submitted to the city's engineer, Andy Blackley, for his approval. Blackley approved of the design, I was told that he recommended that it be constructed of concrete (rather than blacktop, as is typical for pathways) , and he was responsible for overseeing the construction work.

That the overruns exceeded $ 100,000 came as a complete surprise to council.

After viewing the original section that was constructed west of Bishop road (which was uneven and undulated signficantly as it traveled along Highland Road), Council had authorized an additional payment of $ 7,500 for hydrant work, so that the sidewalk could be made more level, but neither Blackley nor anyone from his firm warned council that other extra costs for the project had gotten out of control.

Steven Hovancsek, who retired and sold the Hovancsek & Associates firm to Blackley and his partners a number of years ago--but who has agreed (apparently on an independent contractor basis) to act as the public face for the firm when dealing with the city--discussed the situation with the Legislative & Finance Committee on June 16th.

I guess it's no surprise that Hovancsek worked extremely hard to point the finger at every one but Blackley and Hovancsek & Assoc. He blamed the original designer and council for all of the overruns---neatly sidestepping the fact that the city hired Blackley to take responsibility for, and to oversee, the project.

Hovancsek did not explain why, if the design was so poor, Blackley did not point out those shortcomings before the project was put out to bid.

When pressed, Hovancsek finally admitted that he and the city's service director, Tom Evans, unilaterally made the decision to have the contractor replace 81 driveway aprons---representing about 1/3 of the overrun costs--and that he did not inform council about that decision---even though he knew that the work had not been authorized, that it would cost alot of money beyond the bid amount, and that he lacked the legal authority to approve payment for that additional work.

For someone as experienced as Hovancsek to keep council in the dark, as he made decisions that significantly increased the cost of a Highland sidewalk construction project, is troubling indeed. A simple phone call to the council president, to give a heads up and to explain the situation, was all that was needed---but Hovancsek apparently chose not to make that call.

Typically, the city engineer receives a % of the contract cost as his fee for overseeing construction projects. I have no idea if such an arrangement was used with the Highland Road sidewalk project.

It should be very interesting to see, after council approves payment of the cost overruns for this project, how much of that amount (if any) Hovancsek & Associates receives.

To be continued....

2. Decisionmaking for construction projects

The city just spent a great deal of money redoing the Bishop & Highland Road intersection.

The project was not without its glitches, but it is wonderful to see that intersection thriving with local businesses and to have traffic move smoothly once again.

You can imagine my shock, then, when I heard Service Director Tom Evans announce at the Committee of the Whole Meeting on June 16th that the water main under Highland Road has been failing for a number of years and that it may need to be replaced----which means tearing up Highland Road.

Council President Scott Mills was similarly incredulous. He asked whether that didn't mean tearing up the newly reconstructed Bishop & Highland intersection.

Evans said yes.

Evans brought the issue up, he said, because there had been 27 breaks in the line since 1992, when the city relined the water main.

The fact that the issue was raised is not a problem. The problem is one of timing.

If the Highland Road water main has been of such concern to Evans in the past few years, why did he wait until after the Bishop/Highland Road project was finished to bring it up to council for the first time?

And, if that is such a concern, why is the city pursuing, as its next major construction project, redoing the Miner Road/Highland Road intersection?

Replacing the water main will entail opening up the entire length of Highland Road, so a new main can be constructed along side the old one (which would then be deactivated). Isnt replacing the water main---if it is as bad as Evans suggests--more of a priority, and thus more important for the city to do next?

Which brings into focus an important question: who benefits (financially) from all of these construction projects anyway.....? This is a particularly pertinent question to ask, as we read daily about the new scandals surrounding public contract in Cuyahoga County ...

# # #

Council Meeting Hodge-Podge

Some Quick Updates from the July 14 council meeting:

The city-ordered recycling bins are in. Interested residents will be able to buy the bins, at cost, through the service department. The city's trash collector will empty the bins as part of its contracted-for garbage collection service. Residents simply need to place filled bins at the curb on their regular trash day. Residents will also be able to continue to set out recylable items using blue bags (I just use plastic shopping bags, and that works fine).

Sidewalk audit. The city inspects sidewalks throughout the city on a rotating basis. The good news from the 2009 audit is that there are many fewer sidewalk issues than in the past. Residents are responsible for keeping the sidewalks in front of their homes in good repair. To be cost effective, given the relatively small amount of work needed at this point, the Acting Building Commissioner, Jim Austin, recommended holding off seeking a contractor to do sidewalk repairs until after next year's sidewalk audit is conducted.

Aberdeen Assisted Living Facility. The new facility on Bishop Road has received an occupancy permit and is awaiting final licensing by the state. It should be accepting its first residents soon.

Drug Mart liquor license. Although it does not yet possess a signed lease, Drug Mart has applied for a liquor license to sell wine and beer at a proposed location (the old Syms store) in the Shoppes at Alpha complex (the corner of Alpha Drive and Wilson Mills Road). The licensing is entirely a state issue. The city was merely notified that a license has been applied for.

The Catalano's property. Apparently title to the property has changed hands, but Council President, Scott Mills, reported that Giant Eagle, who previously owned the property, is actively working to prevent any business that would compete with its grocery stores from locating there. That puts in question whether Marc's will be able to rent the store, as one investment group had planned. For now, the property continues to remain empty.

Meanwhile, Bass Energy (who has sued the city and who owns the gas well involved in the recent Mayfield Heights emergency evacuation) is apparently claiming that the Catalano's property will be part of a drilling lease, which will purportedly also include the church next door and Millridge School. We can only hope that the parishioners and Mayfield School Board say no to Bass Energy.

Royalty Tax. At the repeated urging of Councilwoman Cathy Murphy, the Legislative & Finance Committee is exploring the issue of taxing energy companies, based on their sale of gas produced by Highland Heights gas wells, and taxing residents who receive royalties from those gas wells. Both Mayfield Village and Gates Mills have enacted similar legislation.
Right now, the drilling companies pay nothing when the local police and fire departments have to respond to emergencies at gas wells----such as the recent evacuation in Mayfield Heights due to the Bass Energy gas well leak.

The Old Pool House Renovation. Whoops. The City Service Director, Tom Evans, reported that the Park & Recreation Committee (P&R)--which is the group that decided that expanding the old pool house buidling was the park's most pressing need and that it would only cost $ 75,000---has apparently decided that rebanding the project will make the actual projected cost (of approximately $ 265,000) more palatable to council and the public.

Therefore, Mr. Evans declared on Tuesday that the project would now be referred to as the "park building alteration." Wonder why P&R is afraid to call the project what it really is?

Read my previous posts for more detailed information on the project, what it really entails, why it is going to be so expensive, and what P&R has said to justify the project.

More lawsuits against the city? Like the Highland Road "pedestrian path" project, the Bishop/Highland Road intersection project (which was overseen by then-City Engineer Andy Blackley), also experienced significant cost overruns.
Now the contractor is demanding an additional $ 38,000 to reimburse it for an increase in material costs. The contractor apparently claims that the city delayed the project and that the price of asphalt significantly increased by the time it was authorized to begin work. Law Director Tim Paluf acknowledged that the contractor has now threatened to sue the city over the issue.

# # #

Did they say $ 75,000? How about $ 265,000...and counting?

The continuing saga of the old pool house renovation project....again.

A little history refresher.

1 mil of our property taxes gets put in a fund that is used exclusively by the city's recreation dept. They are the only city department to have such guaranteed funding. It's a hefty sum.

In December the city's Parks & Recreation Committee (P&R) (an advisory group whose members get paid $ 75 per meeting) presented council with their new 5 year plan for the Community Park---a wish list of items and projects to be funded from the city's general fund---not using rec department funds.

Councilman Pilla specifically asked P&R to present a single wish list, with items listed in order of priority, to allow for a fruitful discussion about priorities and to allow for better financial planning for the park. P&R did not follow that direction.

Rather than working to reach consensus with council about park priorities and funding for the next five years, Councilman Anderson, the P&R rep, simply announced that P&R had decided that renovating the old pool house was their top priority and that the project should be done ASAP. The price tag, according to P&R? $ 75,000.

The reason this was a priority? According to Anderson, the old pool house should be renovated because the Highland Heights camp no longer wanted to use to Millridge School (which the camp has traditionally used at very little cost) when it rained. About 100 kids from inside and outside the city sign up for the 8 week camp each year.

I guess it is no surprise that in their ardor in pushing the old pool house renovation project, P&R grossly underestimated both the scope of the project and how much the proposed new camp shelter will cost city taxpayers.

Service Director Evans reported last night that as things stand now, the renovation project has expanded to include the following:

(1) An addition will have to be added to the pole barn in the park --and water, electricity, and sewer systems added there too---to accommodate the relocation of the service crew, the park maintenance workshop, and equipment storage area from the old pool house;

(2) New storage areas will have to be obtained for the huge amount of boy scout equipment, BB equipment, and the Home Days equipment that is currently stored in the old pool house.

(3) A new electrical system for powering home days will have to be developed and constructed, as the P&R renovation plan also includes removing the exterior electrical outlets that have traditionally been used for Home Days.

The current "guesstimate" pricetag for the project according to Evans? $ 265,000.

That's more than 3 1/2 times what P&R told council the project would cost.

But that might not be the end of it. As Evans (in his role as messenger) cautioned: " Don't throw a noose over a tree (if he's wrong)".

One person who definitely won't do that is Mayor Coleman.

The Mayor has been consistent in his verbal support of the project---all the while choosing not to include any money for it in his 2009 budget.

He announced at the Committee of the Whole meeting this week that he is anxious to get the project out to bid as soon as possible.

So what's the strategy here? Spend $$ first, and worry about paying for it later?

Or is the mayor simply leading P&R down the path, hoping to be able to point the blame elsewhere, once (fiscal) reality sets in?

I guess only time will tell....

# # #