Evaluation of Recommendations made by the Consolidation of Services Study Commission

1. Evaluation of Recommendations made by the Consolidation of Services Study Commission Presentation to the Orange County Board of County Commissioners December 19, 2006

2. Consolidation of Services Study Commission • Timeline: • November 2004 Charter Amendment • January 2005 Implementing Ordinance • Jan. – Feb. 2005 Committee members appointed 11 Members – County, Orlando and Legislative Delegation • April ’05-May ‘06 Meetings held • May 2006 Final Report • June 27, 2006 Presentation to BCC • August 14, 2006 Presentation to Orlando City Council

3. CSSC Recommendations • Implementing Ordinance: • Conduct a comprehensive study of consolidation of City/County government services • Provide a report with specific findings and recommendations regarding: • Efficiencies in service delivery • Economies of scale • Opportunities for enhanced intergovernmental cooperation • Other related issues • Hold at least 4 public hearings

4. CSSC Recommendations • Implementing Ordinance: “Within 180 days of the date the report is presented to the County, the Board of County Commissioners shall evaluate the impacts of the Commission Recommendations to County operations, hold appropriate public hearings to obtain citizen input and initiate discussions with the City of Orlando regarding implementation.”

5. CSSC Recommendations • Six Areas of Study: • Parks & Recreation • Transportation • Purchasing • Planning • Fire & Emergency Services • Water Utilities

6. CSSC Recommendations • Recommendations: • Parks & Recreation

7. CSSC Recommendations • Parks & Recreation 1.The Parks & Recreation Department services should not be consolidated. Response: No Action Needed

8. CSSC Recommendations • Parks & Recreation 2. County, City, OCPS and other partners should continue efforts to create common parks and recreation areas. Response: Variety of continuous and ongoing efforts including • Field of Dreams • The Club • Ivey Lane • Pinewood Elementary • Barber Park • Tangelo Park

9. CSSC Recommendations • Parks & Recreation 3. Establish and/or maintain dedicated funding sources for development and maintenance of recreation areas. Response: • Portion of countywide ad valorem is dedicated to parks • Impact fee implemented in March 2006

10. CSSC Recommendations • Parks & Recreation 4. Explore opportunities to coordinate efforts in planning for parks and recreation facilities and services. Response: Work through multidisciplinary staff group to meet on a semi-annual basis to discuss Capital Improvement Projects

11. CSSC Recommendations • Parks & Recreation 5. County and City parks advisory boards should meet together at least semi-annually to discuss long-term community needs. Response: Annual meeting of Parks and Recreation Advisory Boards has been conducted since 2005. Next meeting will explore the value of more frequent meetings

12. CSSC Recommendations • Parks & Recreation 6.Continue to expand linkage between existing and proposed trails. Response: • Cady Way Trail and Baldwin Park Trail Systems • Currently working on Shingle Creek Trail • City’s plans for future trails has been incorporated in Orange County Trails Master Plan

13. CSSC Recommendations • Parks & Recreation 7. Implement a Joint Parks and Recreation Website as a user-friendly “One-Stop” information center. Response: Staff is looking at the potential of creating a consolidated website that includes all Orange County municipalities

14. CSSC Recommendations • Recommendations: • Parks & Recreation • Transportation • Purchasing • Planning • Fire & Emergency Services • Water Utilities

15. CSSC Recommendations • Transportation 1. It is not appropriate to consolidate transportation services at this time. Response: No Action Needed

16. CSSC Recommendations • Transportation 2. Continue close coordination in planning roadways and traffic signalization programs. Response: • The city and county traffic management systems communicate on a daily basis • Through MetroPlan, the City and County jointly plan and seek funding on a variety of projects that have regional impact

17. CSSC Recommendations • Transportation 3. City should join in the County’s 3-1-1 Government Information/Services System and identify a stable funding source for the system. Response: • Multiple issues and challenges in combining the two government’s information systems. • City presently has an existing system that combines a number of services

18. CSSC Recommendations • Transportation 4. Continue cooperation in expanding the provision of emergency power for signalized intersections. Response: • Continue to retrofit traffic signals in a practical, feasible fashion • City and County to pursue an interlocal agreement to share emergency generators

19. CSSC Recommendations • Transportation 5. Jointly explore traffic signal standards and the acquisition of hardware and software to ensure interoperability. Response: • Majority of signals at state roads and intersections are DOT • DOT specs to be standardized within 2-3 years • Presently two different computer systems control traffic signals – potential for a universal controller

20. CSSC Recommendations • Transportation 6. Consolidate City and County traffic management centers after the implementation of the other recommendations. Response: There are a variety of challenges inherent in combining different traffic management systems. If desired, these challenges can be discussed in-depth at a future worksession

21. CSSC Recommendations • Transportation 7. Work with the Sheriff’s Office to develop alternatives to the FHP for clearing traffic accidents in a timely manner. Response: Pursue further discussion with the Sheriff’s Office

22. CSSC Recommendations • Transportation 8. Remove freight trains from downtown Orlando during regular workday business hours. Response: Relocation of freight trains is one of the issues being addressed with Commuter Rail

23. CSSC Recommendations • Transportation 9. Develop a stable dedicated funding stream for LYNX. Response: Mass transit funding is scheduled to come back to the BCC in early 2007

24. CSSC Recommendations • Transportation 10. Develop funding sources for transportation infrastructure demands. Response: • Legacy Funding • Impact fees have been raised and are indexed • State Transportation Trust Fund • Rental Car surcharge

25. CSSC Recommendations • Transportation 11. Utilize the additional capacity of the local option gasoline tax. Response: If desired, this issue can be brought for discussion at a future BCC meeting

26. CSSC Recommendations • Transportation 12. Continually review funding mechanisms for equity and adequacy to ensure funding keeps with the true cost of providing transportation infrastructure. Response: • Road building costs are updated annually based on market escalation • Impact fees are indexed

27. CSSC Recommendations • Recommendations: • Parks & Recreation • Transportation • Purchasing • Planning • Fire & Emergency Services • Water Utilities

28. CSSC Recommendations • Purchasing 1. The Purchasing Department services should not be consolidated. Response: No Action Needed

29. CSSC Recommendations • Purchasing • Develop a “One-Stop” application process for M/WBE businesses. Response: Software package is being developed for data sharing application that allows information sharing and contractor reports. ISS will complete assessment within the next several months

30. CSSC Recommendations • Purchasing 3. County should adopt a procedure similar to the City’s for advertising RFP’s. Response: Vendor self-service is part of the Advantage System e-procurement initiative. Presently working on in-house development of software that would enable vendor notification of solicitations

31. CSSC Recommendations • Purchasing 4. Target new opportunities for the Shared Interest Cooperative Purchasing Group. Response: Both organizations are maximizing opportunities. Elaine Walker and Kevin Walsh have been appointed co-chairs of SICOP

32. CSSC Recommendations • Purchasing 5. Increase the dollar level authority of the Purchasing Departments to speed and simplify the purchasing process. Response: The Purchasing Code is updated routinely. During the next update, staff will evaluate the usefulness of this recommendation and advise the Board

33. CSSC Recommendations • Recommendations: • Parks & Recreation • Transportation • Purchasing • Planning • Fire & Emergency Services • Water Utilities

34. CSSC Recommendations • Planning • Planning Department services should not be consolidated. Response: No Action Needed

35. CSSC Recommendations • Planning 2. Explore creating common elements and terminology in land use codes. 3. Increase joint planning for parks, roads, schools, and other critical infrastructure needs. • Formalize quarterly meetings of planning staffs to evaluate issues and opportunities; study areas with shared boundaries. • Coordinate methodology for impact fees.

36. CSSC Recommendations • Planning Response: • Planning Directors to develop an MOU addressing a number of these issues • Memorialize quarterly meetings of planning staff • Conduct semi-annual joint CIP meetings for discussion on master plans for parks, fire, infrastructure • Coordinate impact fee updates • Allow comment to code updates relating to land use changes in adjacent areas and overlay districts

37. CSSC Recommendations • Recommendations: • Parks & Recreation • Transportation • Purchasing • Planning • Fire & Emergency Services • Water Utilities

38. CSSC Recommendations • Fire & Emergency Services 1. Neither the fire departments nor their services should be consolidated. Response: No Action Needed

39. CSSC Recommendations • Fire & Emergency Services 2. Develop a fire service boundary agreement to round off jurisdictional boundaries and establish service delivery areas. Response: • Discussions in progress regarding feasibility and benefits of rounding off jurisdictional boundaries • Anticipate a discussion of this concept with both boards in Spring ’07

40. CSSC Recommendations • Fire & Emergency Services 3. Future technology improvements should allow interoperability between the two fire department communication centers. Response: • The current OCFRD Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) system is an older technology that was purchased in 1998 • Orange County is actively pursuing an upgrade to it’s system, which will allow an electronic interface to the City of Orlando CAD system

41. CSSC Recommendations • Fire & Emergency Services 3. (cont’d) • City and County are working on a disaster recovery solution and backup computers are currently being installed in the OFD 911 Center • OFD and OCFRD have both installed CAD system monitors at each other’s 911 centers to monitor status of each other’s unit

42. CSSC Recommendations • Fire & Emergency Services 4. Involve fire and emergency services representatives in land use/development planning. Response: • A Fire Service Agreement could help address many of these issues • Participation in semi-annual CIP meetings will assist in more proactive planning

43. CSSC Recommendations • Fire & Emergency Services 5a. Explore the potential of joint purchasing of vehicles and equipment. Response: Each agency has the potential to piggy-back on the other’s purchasing contracts

44. CSSC Recommendations • Fire & Emergency Services 5b. Establish common radio terminology and improve accountability practices. Response: Central Florida Fire Chiefs meet monthly and discuss policy and procedure issues. To the extent possible, these issues are standardized

45. CSSC Recommendations • Fire & Emergency Services 5c. Coordinate emergency response resources & command procedures. Response: County resources and command procedures are based on National Standards and we continue to coordinate with the city on joint response

46. CSSC Recommendations • Recommendations: • Parks & Recreation • Transportation • Purchasing • Planning • Fire & Emergency Services • Water Utilities

47. CSSC Recommendations • Water Utilities • County, City and OUC should immediately establish a joint committee of high level staff and policy makers to evaluate consolidating their respective water systems. Response: • Ongoing and extensive cooperation between organizations • Extensive consolidation study between OUC and City recently completed and determined consolidation was not warranted • Water related issues are rapidly developing and changing

48. CSSC Recommendations • Water Utilities (cont’d) 2. County should implement its Stormwater Utility Fee. • County should evaluate the adoption of a countywide Stormwater Utility Fee. Response: A worksession outlining the issues can come back to the Board during 2007

49. CSSC Recommendations • Water Utilities (cont’d) • The water utility divisions of the County, the City, and OUC should meet regularly to explore opportunities for collaboration. Response: Staff for all three organizations meet frequently

50. CSSC Recommendations • Water Utilities (cont’d) 5. Explore development of a joint bio-solids processing facility. Response: Presently partnering on a bio-solids compost project and will assess further upon completion of the project