2018
Central Services & Purchasing Quick Facts Central Services & Purchasing Oneida County
Between Central Services and Purchasing over $6.3 M in savings were submitted to NYS last year. Central Services and Purchasing are two categories that transect a wide variety of services and functions. Purchasing had 17 counties submit savings proposals and Central Services had 11 with many more counties investigating savings strategies further including Oneida County .
Savings Ideas for Purchasing • •
•
•
Procurement and IT Plan Types Fuel Procurement/ Fueling Stations
Savings Ideas for Central Services
11 Total
Purchasing (Bulk Supply & Equipment)
24 Total Print/Document Recording
• •
12 Total
Web Development/IT Services
20 Total
• Plans that included School Districts
6 Total
Over 67 different strategies for Central Services and Purchasing were developed across the 34 plans submitted to NYS. Only 6 related to School Districts.
Savings and Benefits • • • • • •
Countywide purchasing Joint Purchasing Agreements between county, cities, towns, school districts (including BOCES). Joint Fueling Procurement for county, cities, towns, school districts (including BOCES). Purchasing agreements between police departments, fire departments and other special districts.
Maximizing services by pooling resources. Streamlining the interdepartmental communications. Facility square footage savings with document scanning. Reduction in back office administration expenses Increase in administrative efficiencies. Shared purchasing cost breaks.
• •
•
•
Countywide IT services. Centralized IT services with BOCES between cities, towns, school districts. Shared Printing/Copying services between county, cities, towns, school districts. County document Storage/ Scanning. Web development and database management between county, cities, towns, school districts. Shared mailroom services between county, cities, towns, school districts. Web based forms for purchasing, sharing and document viewing.
CODE ENFORCEMENT
2018
Quick Facts about Codes Oneida County
Oneida County identified 3 uncertified codes officer sharing scenarios that ranged from $100k-$730K. 2 out of the 3 plans proposed by Oneida County if certified would have exceeded the total Code Enforcement savings proposals from across New York State. Village to Town Code Sharing had the majority of cost savings last year, but more counties are looking at centralizing codes operations for next year.
Potential Concerns • •
• •
Possible Solutions
Total Savings Models from DOS Plans • Town to Town Sharing Village to Town Sharing
•
Village to Village Sharing Shared Codes Training Centralized Codes
Savings and Benefits • • • •
Shared back office functions reduce administrative costs. Shared Full-time Codes officers improves service, generates revenues through permitting and distributes cost. Shared Training costs and qualified available personnel Savings by coordination between code officers in contiguous municipalities where development density, type and code issues are similar.
Job Loss Codes Officers/Safety Inspectors addressing multiple areas of responsibility Different Zoning Laws Centralizing Codes making the process longer
Use personnel attrition to trigger shared service agreements. Areas with a variety of development types designate inspection personnel that specialize in: Commercial, Residential, and property maintenance.
•
Identify and share with municipalities that have similar codes and development densities.
•
Centralized Code Enforcement Personnel could improve service by allowing it to be financially feasible to hire a full-time staff person over a parttime person who is in the office once per week.
2018
Courts
Quick Facts about Courts out of 34 plans submitted by counties from across New York identified or are investigating cost savings measures related to courts. Oneida County observed savings through the abolishment of the Boonville Village Court by consolidating services into the Town of Boonville.
Oneida County
21:34
21
Consolidation Ideas • •
•
Considerations •
Savings from DOS Plans Over $3M was saved statewide. Oneida County was one of three saving less than $100K in shared services savings. Oneida County contributed the least ($14K) to the overall total while Ontario County observed roughly 60% of total. This was down by through the City of Canadaigua and the Town of Canadaigua sharing a court facility.
•
•
Savings and Benefits • • • •
Maximizing services by pooling resources. Streamlining the court system by centralizing services Providing more qualified judges through increased competition. Facility construction and maintenance cost reduction or elimination.
Village to Town Justice Court Consolidation. 2 or more Town Justice Court Consolidation with multiple Justices. Single Town Justice between 2 or more Towns.
•
Village to Town Consolidation. Villages would no longer be entitled to violations of the New York State Vehicle and Traffic Law that occur within the village or criminal offenses that occur within the village. When a single town court is established, each town will retain their respective fine revenues. When multiple towns are consolidating separate records must be kept for each of the participating municipalities. NYS Office of the State Comptroller will help all assessing court consolidation by providing revenue and expenditure data. See: http://www.osc.state.ny.us/ localgov/costsavings/ justicecourtbrochure.htm
2018
EMS (Includes Animal Control/Police/Fire)
Quick Facts about EMS of the 34 Counties have investigations or included savings programs throughout the state related to countywide Emergency Dispatch including Oneida County. However there are numerous other cost savings programs found in: Purchasing, Equipment Sharing, Training and Animal Control. Overall $26M of cost savings were found in EMS sharing.
Shared Training A major challenge as cited by the Chautauqua plan is the rising costs of recruitment and training of paid and volunteer emergency services personnel. Statewide shared service plans found $306K alone in training services. This amount includes new facilities and programs. The savings potential is why 11 plans have training as a potential savings mechanism.
Oneida County
911
20
ANIMAL CONTROL
4 Animal Control
was one of the least mentioned categories that outlined cost savings. Rensselaer County submitted two scenarios for cost savings. One of which helped realize a net savings of $38K through Centralizing Animal Control services within the County Sheriff ’s Department. Erie County found their greatest cost savings with 3 separate agreements where towns and villages consolidated services and developed service-based fee schedules with each other that netted over $121K.
Animal Control Officer Sharing Models •
Countywide Sharing through the County Sheriffs Department •
Savings and Benefits • • • • • •
Maximizing services by pooling resources. Streamlining the interdepartmental communications. Facility construction and maintenance cost reduction or elimination. Reduction in back office administration expenses Increase in administrative efficiencies. Shared Purchasing cost breaks.
•
•
•
•
Enhanced Enforcement of unregistered dogs, generating revenues. Elimination of safety concerns that often come with the civilian position. Deputies assigned to dog control duty would have the power of arrest.
Contracted services with a private entity like Humane Societies. Municipalities sharing through intermunicipal agreements
2018
Health & Personnel Quick Facts Health & Personnel s Per el
onn ce ran Insu lth/ Hea
came from Health/ Insurance and Personnel sharing. Neither of these categories were investigated by any municipality in Oneida County last year. The F.Y. 2019 plan would benefit from discussions in these areas because they made up 5% of the total savings in NYS.
Health and Personnel Savers
21
20
21 plans listed the creation of a healthcare consortium as a priority for investigation for the F.Y. 2019. Health/Insurance coverage is a major savings area especially in regards to retirees. The State Comptroller conducted an audit of 20 school districts where 10 collectively paid $239K in health insurance benefits for deceased or ineligible retirees. 20 plans listed personnel department savings. 12 were related to shared training.
Savings and Benefits • • • • • •
Maximizing services by pooling resources. Facility square footage savings with document scanning. Reduction in back office administration expenses Increase in administrative efficiencies. Shared purchasing cost breaks. Reduction in payment of ineligible insurance benefits.
Oneida County
$10.5M of the total $204M savings found statewide
Ideas for creating a Shared Healthcare Plan Albany County Healthcare Feasibility Study finalized in 2012 recommended three different options under the current law to formulate a health insurance consortium 1. Article 47 — Municipal Cooperative Health Benefits Plans: This article of the Insurance Law allows a municipality, school district, BOCES, or fire district to share in the costs of self-funding employee health benefit plans. Tompkins County created a plan under this law. 2. Article 44 Welfare Funds: This article of the Insurance Law allows medical benefits to be provided through an “employee welfare fund.” This is a trust fund maintained by one or more governmental employers with one or more labor unions, directly or indirectly through trustees. The benefits can be provided through the purchase of insurance or otherwise. 3. Establishing a County Trust Fund: This would allow municipalities, school districts, fire districts, and BOCES to obtain desired health care coverage, care management, risk and administrative arrangements through that trust approach used by area school districts to form a Health Insurance Consortium.
2018
Public Works & Youth Services Quick Facts Public Health & Youth Services
Public Works Shared Agreement Areas
$2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $500,000
Youth/Recreation
$2,500,000
Equipment Facility/Vehicle Maint. Fueling General Aid Agreement Lighting/Energy Maintenance Mowing/Ditching Other Salt Storage Snow Removal Summer Workprogram
$3,000,000
0
Savings and Benefits • • • • • • •
Maximizing services by pooling resources. Facility build-out and maintenance cost reduction. Reduction in back office administration expenses. Increase in administrative efficiencies. Shared purchasing cost breaks. Reduction in utility costs and repair with LED lights. Improved logistics and service.
Oneida County
28
Public Works was the most talked about savings initiatives across the state. 28 plans mentioned it while 20 submitted a cost savings plan to NYS DOS. Categorically Public Works initiatives totaled $17M with Oneida County contributing $150K. Oneida County also is looking to investigate Youth Services savings. Statewide there were only 6 proposals but they totaled to $338K.
Sharing Concerns with Public Works and Youth Services Youth Services and Public Works are closely tied together because many Youth programs require public facilities. Equipment management and procurement costs are rising. Below are a few concerns and solutions to help municipalities: • Rising Energy Costs Possible Solution: Install LED lighting to reduce energy bills. The City of Albany has a 27 point energy plan that will save $110K annually. Other municipalities mitigate the costs of this program by joining in bulk purchasing of bulbs and lifts. • Rising Equipment Costs Solution: Equipment is a high cost to municipalities between procurement, rentals and maintenance. Municipalities have observed cost savings by establishing MOU’s between cities, towns, villages and school districts. Often they create a specialty equipment program for items like Cherry Pickers, Pavers, Vacuum Trucks, Guardrail Equipment, Rollers, etc. • Coordinating Sharing Possible Solution: Coordinating can be difficult with a high demand item or personnel. This can be mitigated by GIS software that Oneida County Planning Department utilizes. Oneida County Central Services utilizes the Laserfiche system which is effective at web form creation and record keeping.
2018
School Districts & BOCES Quick Facts School Districts & BOCES
$3,000,000
Savings Ideas for School Districts & BOCES •
•
• • •
Savings Areas $4,000,000
Oneida County
50
Oneida County was one of many Counties that did not include School Districts & BOCES in the Shared Services Panel. School Districts and BOCES offer great savings potential to tax payers. The plans submitted to DOS showed 50 or more areas where savings could occur. The main savings categories were:Purchasing,Public Works, Health Insurance, Tax Assessment and Personnel. Most submissions required further investigation, but opportunities are available.
Central Services/IT Energy
•
Health $2,000,000
Personnel
•
Public Works/Youth & Recreation $1,000,000
0
Purchasing Tax Assessment/Collection
Public works was the biggest area where savings were realized through joint salt storage, LED lighting retrofits, shared fuel dispensing and equipment.
Savings and Benefits • • • • • •
•
Maximizing services by pooling resources. Streamlining the interdepartmental communications. Facility square footage savings with document scanning. Reduction in back office administration expenses Increase in administrative efficiencies. Shared purchasing cost breaks.
•
•
• • • • •
Joint Purchasing Agreements between county, cities, towns, school districts (including BOCES). Joint Fueling Procurement for county, cities, towns, school districts (including BOCES). Healthcare and Pharmacy Consortium Countywide IT services. Centralized IT services with BOCES between cities, towns, school districts. Shared Printing/Copying services between county, cities, towns, school districts. County document Storage/ Scanning. Web development and database management between county, cities, towns, school districts (including BOCES). Shared mailroom services between county, cities, towns, school districts. Web based forms for purchasing, sharing and document viewing. Shared Salt Storage. Joint Youth Programs. Joint Recreation facilities. Shared Equipment Agreements. Centralized Tax Collection & Assessment.
2018
Shared Services
Plans from NYS DOS Total Savings for F.Y. 2018
Savings Categories
Purchasing g EMS
34 of the 62 Counties in Central Services New York State submitted Shared Services Plans to Waste Water take into affect within F.Y. Consolidation C lid ti 2018. Water/Waste Water ServicesRefu Refuse CodesYouth Code Projects amounted to Planning Animal Control Social Services Soc $130MM of the $204MM Public Works had the highest total number in total savings. 98% of mentions across all the submitted plan at of the $130MM water/ 20 out of 34 plans. Social Services received waste water savings the fewest submitted shared service initiatives. came from Nassau Most of the agreements found savings through County alone. joint programs found with health insurance, central services, purchasing and shared training initiatives.
Health Insurance PUBLIC WORKS Personnel Tax Services Courts C Co rts t
Top Savings Areas for F.Y. 2018 *Excludes Water/Waste Water
EMS/Police/Fire services ranked in as the second most savings area next to Water/ Waste Water. 6 of the 16 plans putting forth shared services initiatives cited consolidated emergency management dispatching. Public Work/DOT was one of the most popular shared service initiatives. It was mentioned in 27 of the 34 plans as either currently or planning to share services. Out of the 27 plans 20 of them listed savings observed in 2018. The creation of healthcare consortium was a hot button topic with 20 plans listing it as a conversation during the initiative, though 10 put forward Health/ Healthcare savings. It will see more activity/proposals for F.Y. 2019 Plans.
Oneida County Shared Services Plan A plan to abolish its Village Court and consolidate court functions with the Boonville Town Court.
Department of Public Works: $150,000 The sharing Oneida County DPW equipment with all municipalities within Oneida County for all related public works projects.
Rome and Verona Mowing and Snowplowing Shared Service Agreement: TBD The City of Rome and the Town of Verona have come to terms on a shared service agreement in regards to mowing Brown Rd. The agreement also includes the snowplowing of Brown Rd, Heelpath Rd. and Zingerline Rd.
Real Property Tax Groupings were developed by creating groupings based on statistical breaks. This allowed to determine if there were any correlations between Real Property Taxes and the types of initiatives that were introduced. 5 grouping were identified. Oneida County fell within the lower 2/5 Grouping joined by Broome, Columbia, Saratoga and Schenectady Counties. 4 out of 5 of the Counties have a population between 150,000 to 250,000 people. Oneida has the largest land area to account for as well as the most municipalities or 46 (The next is Saratoga with 30). Public Works/ DOT, Purchasing and Health/Health Insurance were the most common initiatives proposed.
RP Tax Total 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Saratoga: $530K Broome: $423K Columbia: $336K Oneida: $327K Schenectady: $322K
Total Tax Savings 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Broome: $20.3M* Columbia: $1.8M Saratoga: $364K Schenectady: $272K Oneida: $164K
*18MM is from a large scale Emergency Communications Project.
Uncertified Savings
Comparative Real Property Tax Groupings
Certified Savings
Boonville Courts: $14,000
2017
Central Services: TBD This initiative would involve the sharing of records management services hosted by Oneida County’s Central Services department. Code Enforcement: $100k-$730K Municipalities enter into an agreement that involves the sharing of a Code Enforcement Officer under a variety of possible scenarios. Courts: $250K This initiative would involve the sharing or consolidating of court services among two or more contiguous Towns across the County. DPW Salt Storage: TBD The Shared Services Panel recommends that the creation of an agreement for a centralized large volume salt-brine production and storage operation. It could become the first step in better coordination of highway functions. This effort will be the result of collaborative efforts between all interested municipalities for the potential of real property tax savings. Shared Purchasing: TBD Oneida County Purchasing Department offers a Shared Purchasing Agreement to all municipalities in relation to supplies, equipment and any other item that is of real cost savings benefit. Lighting Districts: TBD The Shared Services Panel recommends a study be initiated that reviews existing lighting districts to determine whether costs savings could be obtained. Youth Services: TBD The creation of a shared services agreement amongst the 7 largest municipalities within Oneida County and their Youth and Recreation Programs.
Oneida County Shared Services Meeting Proposed Work Groups
The following work groups were developed utilizing a comprehensive review of all the state plans submitted during 2017 and the discussions from the Oneida County Shared Services meetings in 2017. These groups may be further subdivided after initial conversations occur. Many of the plans proposed to New York State observed the greatest amount of savings and efficiencies by collaborating with multiple departments, agencies and municipalities.
2018 Statewide Savings Related to Proposed Work Groups
Code Enforcement $155K 2018 Savings from: Erie, Monroe, Onondaga, Schuyler and Steuben Courts$3.3M 2018 Savings from: Broome, Cattaraugus, Dutchess, Monroe, Montgomery, Oneida, Ontario and Steuben EMS $26.1M 2018 Savings from: Broome, Cattaraugus, Dutchess, Monroe, Montgomery, Onondaga, Ontario, Rensselaer, Schuyler, Steuben, Sullivan and Tompkins
2018
Groups 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
CENTRAL SERVICES & PURCHASING CODE ENFORCEMENT COURTS EMS (ANIMAL CONTROL, POLICE, FIRE) HEALTH & PERSONNEL PUBLIC WORKS & YOUTH SERVICES SCHOOL DISTRICTS (INCLUDES BOCES) TAX ASSESSMENT/COLLECTION
Health & Personnel $10.5M 2018 Savings from: Albany, Broome, Cattaraugus, Dutchess, Erie, Franklin, Jefferson, Monroe, Montgomery, Onondaga, Ontario, Saratoga and Tompkins Public Works$18.1M 2018 Savings from: Albany, Broome, Cattaraugus, Chautauqua, Chenango, Clinton, Dutchess, Erie, Franklin, Livingston, Madison, Monroe, Montgomery, Nassau, Oneida, Onondaga, Ontario, Rensselaer Schenectady, Schuyler, Seneca, Steuben, Suffolk, Sullivan, Tompkins, Wayne and Yates Tax Assessment/Collection $1.8M 2018 Savings from: Cattaraugus, Clinton, Erie, Franklin, Montgomery, Onondaga, Ontario and Steuben
Links
Resources
Oneida County www.ocgov.net
Contact Info Oneida County Executive Phone: 315-798-5800 e-mail:ce@ocgov.net Contact Person: James Genovese
2017 Oneida County Shared Services Plan at bottom of home page
Oneida County Planning Phone: 315-798-5710 e-mail:planning@oc.gov.net Contact Person: Chris Henry
NYS DOS Local Government Services
Oneida County Attorney Phone: 315-798-5910 e-mail: countyattorney@ocgov.net Contact Person: Bob Pronteau
https://www.dos.ny.gov/lg/SubmittedPlans2017.html
Link shows 2017 Plans from counties across of the state. NYS DOS Local Government Services Phone:1-800-367-8488 e-mail: LFGEprograms@dos.ny.gov
2018
Tax Assessment & Collection Quick Facts Tax Assessment & Collection Oneida County
30
In 2017 Oneida County identified only 30 tax assessors for the 40+ municipalities within the county. There was no savings strategies were reviewed or realized by Oneida County last year, but throughout the state 9 counties submitted plans for cost savings. An additional consideration for investigating tax assessment and collection is that it was investigated in over 20 or more plans throughout the state
Tax Assessment Savings Considerations •
•
•
•
•
Tax Assessment Savings x Ta t
en
m
ss
se
As
Tax Collection
Throughout New York State 65% of the cost savings were found in Tax Collection services. Mostly they were found with the utilization of Shared Tax Collection Software. Total savings between collection and assessment is over $1.8M with an average savings per plan of $205K.
•
•
Tax Collection Savings Considerations •
Savings and Benefits • • • • • • •
Maximizing services by pooling resources. Facility build-out and maintenance cost reduction. Reduction in back office administration expenses. Increase in administrative efficiencies. Shared purchasing cost breaks. Reduction in reporting times. Bring all municipalities to a 100% equalization rate
Attrition rates will be increasing due to average age of assessors in Oneida County. Real Property data collection can become more professional, streamlined and more consistent. Training costs can be reduced by sharing assessors across multiple municipalities. Towns must legislatively prepare by making their assessment position appointed rather than elected. Since 1989, the statewide turnover rate for elected assessors is 40% greater than for appointed assessors. Montgomery County proposed a countywide assessment department that could realize $270,000/yr in savings. Onondaga, Erie and Madison Counties proposed Coordinated Assessing Programs (CAP ) which allows for 1 assessor across two or more current assessing units.
•
•
Software and equipment cost savings can be realized by using each on multiple municipalities. Franklin County estimated 30%-60% cost savings in staff time by utilizing Tax Collection Software. Onondaga County also installed a similar software where they realized 50% savings in tax collection savings. Decrease the data transfer logistics from tax collection staff to Oneida County Department of Finance. Potentially combine this position with Town Clerk position.