This section of the report provides an overview of the Department"s Facilities Maintenance and Capital Improvement Program activities conducted by the Support Services Division.

The Fire Department has 39 active stations, 3 inactive stations, 2 pump stations and 10 other miscellaneous properties on nearly 37 acres within the City and County of San Francisco. The Support Services Division is responsible for managing these properties.¹

Included in the approved budget for FY 2001-02 are $400,000 for facilities maintenance projects, such as asbestos removal, roof repair, and maintenance on HVAC and exhaust extractor systems. However, $1.8 million is also included for structures and equipment related to maintenance of the auxiliary water supply system. This represents a substantial increase over the amount expended in the preceding year and, among other projects, this will fund the repair of five expected major water main breaks in the current fiscal year.²

The Department spends almost $250,000 annually on a work order with the Department of Public Works for janitorial services, routine facility repairs, minor carpentry and electrical work, street coordination and management of the bid process for contracts for repairs to water main breaks. The Support Services Division is not completely satisfied with the manner of the Public Works work order implementation. The concerns are:

Imbedded in the Support Service Division mission statement and identification of activities is the "development of a Capital Improvement Plan for facilities." Additionally, listings and projected spending through 2006-07 for capital improvement and facilities maintenance projects are contained in the Department"s Capital Budget and Facilities Maintenance budget requests. Thus, the Department has some documentation of selected projects and estimated costs. However, there are no specific procedures to formalize and memorialize the overall process, or a plan that sets priorities for projects or reflects direction from the Fire Commission.

Operationally, the motorized auxiliary water supply system control valves project is an example of a large-scale capital project for which funding has been available for more than five years, but remains unspent.⁴ Among the reported reasons for this are an insufficient amount of funding and the inability to utilize the available funds for any other project. Currently, the project is being re-packaged for another bid solicitation in November 2001.

The only other documentation available at the Fire Department relative to the Capital Improvement Program was a proposal, requesting that a $48.3 million bond measure be submitted to the electorate to improve and rehabilitate the AWSS, increase system efficiency and reliability, decrease maintenance costs and prevent future problems.⁵ This proposal describes the problems of aging cast iron pipe, differential soil settlement, and corrosion as principal contributors to potential system failure. This proposal has not advanced within the Department.

While the Department"s clear intent and stated mission are to have a formal capital improvement plan, and there is some limited documentation of various projects and costs, there is no overall plan document encompassing the full range of capital projects, schedules, costs, priorities and funding sources for the Department. And some approved funds for capital projects remain unspent after more than five years.

Importance of a Formal Program

The Department can continue with a disjointed, non-prioritized program for facilities maintenance and capital improvements or the program can be formalized. Benefits of a formal, documented program accrue to both the Public Works and Fire departments in important but different ways, as shown below.

Benefits to Department of Public Works

· The ability to allocate resources within DPW to meet the engineering and project management needs of the SFFD over an extended period;

· The ability to conduct location planning and schedule work for different City departments in a common area at the same time;

· The opportunity to coordinate different types of projects in a rational and orderly fashion;

· The ability to minimize mobilization costs for all projects; and,

· The ability to be more efficient in the delivery of design and project management services.

Benefits to Fire Department

· Detailed descriptions of projects in two clearly delineated categories: one for on-going, day-to-day maintenance and emergency repairs of all of the Department"s operating facilities; and, one for large-scale capital expenditures that support the Department"s primary mission and ensures long-term infrastructure viability;

· The ability to coordinate the planning and construction of different projects in geographic areas where responsibility is shared between Fire and Public Works;

· The ability to provide advance notification to affected stations for call responses and for identifying alternative routes and water supplies where necessary;

· The ability to identify resources needed for various projects, determine the method of procurement for each, and work in advance with the Purchaser"s Office to ensure that appropriate procedures are followed and in a timely manner for project completion, as scheduled;

· A mechanism and process through which projects can be prioritized by the Fire Commission; and,

· For budgeting as well as tracking and reporting purposes, clear and more accurate identification of project costs as well as funding sources.

Conclusions

The Department"s capital improvement and facilities maintenance program are disjointed, without sufficient advance planning or coordination of projects with other key City departments.

Available capital funds are not expended in a timely manner, and needed improvements are not completed as required to ensure safe and functioning infrastructure that supports service delivery.

Coordination and cooperation with other City departments in procurement and construction could be improved with a formal plan that is comprehensive, that prioritizes projects, and that identifies funding sources.

The Department should develop a written policy and procedures to ensure formal, continuing documentation, and review the City"s procurement procedures to determine whether or not rules governing vendor selection should be modified.

Recommendations

The Fire Department should:

1.10.1 Develop a formal policy and set of procedures to provide for a rolling Comprehensive (Five-Year) Capital Improvement Plan, that includes a section detailing the major facilities maintenance activities scheduled for the next fiscal year.

1.10.2 Review the City"s procurement procedures with the Purchaser"s Office to determine the possibility of modifying the limitations on vendor selection by departments.

Costs and Benefits

This is a low-cost activity that will facilitate Department prioritization of projects and improve interdepartmental cooperation.

The benefits include a more rational capital improvements program, more Departmental control and flexibility in the area of facilities maintenance, and improved interdepartmental coordination and cooperation for project priorities.

¹ It is unclear how this responsibility is actually carried out in light of the different designations we found for the same unit: Facilities Renovation Program and Bureau of Property Management and Capital Improvements.

² Main-break repairs are projected at an estimated cost of $125,000 each.

³ The Fire Department purports that the DPW markup is 85%.

⁴ Ordinance No. 127-96 appropriated $3,900,223 of 1986 Fire Protection Bond Interest Earnings for Various Capital Improvement Projects at the Fire Department for Fiscal Year 1995-96 and placed $3,269,850 on reserve. Specific projects designated for funding from this source included repairs to the Fireboat Phoenix, AWSS Storage Tank and other AWSS facilities -all of which are completed. However, the motorized AWSS Control Valve project remains undone to date.

⁵ Document entitled "2000 Fire Protection Bond, San Francisco Fire Department," dated August 23, 1999.