Local Government Shared Services Directory Northeastern Illinois Metropolitan Mayors Caucus
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Local Government Shared Services Directory Northeastern Illinois Metropolitan Mayors Caucus Jennifer Kim Roosevelt Fellow July 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 3 RESEARCH METHODS, OVERALL FINDINGS, TYPES OF SERVICES SHARED, OVERALL BENEFITS OF SHARING SERVICES SPECIFIC SERVICES 5 BENEFITS, COST SAVINGS, PARTICIPATING MUNICIPALITIES, LENGTH OF AGREEMENTS, PRIMARY INITIAL REASONS FOR SHARING, HOW AGREEMENTS WERE FORMALIZED ASSETS 5 CABLE TELEVISION CONSORTIA 7 CODE ENFORCEMENT AND/OR PUBLIC HEALTH INSPECTIONS 8 DRINKING WATER TREATMENT & DELIVERY 10 FIRE PROTECTION 12 JOINT DISPATCHING 14 JOINT PROCUREMENT OF SUPPLIES AND/OR SERVICES 16 MANAGEMENT OR ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 18 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 20 POLICE 21 PUBLIC WORKS OPERATIONS 23 SEWAGE TREATMENT 25 STORM WATER MANAGEMENT 27 TECHNOLOGY 28 WASTE COLLECTION & DISPOSAL 30 OTHER SERVICES 31 CONCLUSION 32 BEST PRACTICES, ACTIONS FOR ILLINOIS STATE, POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS, OBSTACLES/NEGATIVE OUTCOMES, BENEFICIAL INFORMATION FOR STARTING SERVICE-SHARING, NEW AREAS OF INTEREST Page 2 of 35 Municipalities that Northeastern Illinois Shared Services Directory Share Services Not Sure Introduction 3% No Research Methods 2% • Survey: Out of 273 municipalities in the Northeastern Illinois Yes Region, we received responses from 117 municipalities 95% (approximately 42%) • Phone Interviews: We spoke with executive directors from 7 of the 9 Councils of Government: Lake County Municipal League, West Central Municipal Conference, West Cook Municipal League, McHenry County Council of Governments, DuPage Mayors and Managers Conference, Metro West Council of Government, and SSMMA; we also followed up with phone • Responses were extremely interviews with 5 municipalities: Berkeley, Lincolnwood, Mount positive overall, from both Prospect, Oak Brook, & Clarendon Hills municipalities and COGs • Meetings: We met with WRB LLC’s William Balling, who conducted the Mayors Caucus’ initial shared service case • On a scale of 1-5, municipalities study, and CMAP, who are currently conducting a shared on average rated their success service study with sharing services at around a 4, or “successful”; COGs rated • Further Research: We took information from websites, their success similarly. The most municipality bid documents, pilot and case studies, books, commonly chosen rating was 5, conference reports, presentations, articles, and documents of or “very successful” other regional models • Services Studied: After extensive deliberation & consultation • The most common initial reasons with regional experts, we selected the 15 most commonly for sharing services are cost shared services in the region to focus upon, with some further savings and operational research on other examples efficiency • The most common benefits of Did you find sharing services sharing services are also cost savings and operational ultimately beneficial & would you efficiency continue to do so? • The vast majority of shared service programs have been No ongoing for over 10 years, although a substantial number of 1% programs across all fields have been more recently implemented • By far, intergovernmental Yes agreements is the most common 99% method of formalization • Towns participate in programs indiscriminate of their sizes Page 3 of 35 WHAT SERVICES ARE BEING SHARED? 66 52 36 33 32 29 24 25 20 17 15 10 11 12 6 8 POLICE ASSETS PLANNING & SERVICES TECHNOLOGY OPERATIONS DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT STORM WATER PUBLIC WORKS WORKS PUBLIC CONSORTIUM DISPOSAL FIRE PROTECTION TRANSPORTATION CABLE TELEVISION JOINT DISPATCHING SEWAGE TREATMENT DRINKING WATER MANAGEMENT OR HEALTH INSPECTIONS SUPPLIES & SERVICES & SUPPLIES CODE ENFORCEMENT & WASTE COLLECTION COLLECTION ORWASTE JOINT PROCUREMENT OF TREATMENT AND DELIVERY ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES HOW IS SHARING SERVICES BENEFICIAL? 80 73 75 60 57 40 44 34 20 31 0 Regulatory Operational Cost Savings Addressed Better Reduce NortheasternCompliance Illinois SharedEfficiency Services Directory New Service Coordination Impact of Needs Capital Costs Page 4 of 35 Assets [Vehicles, equipment, storage facilities, etc…] Benefits • Lower maintenance costs • Less redundancy in equipment Photo: CDLApps.com • Relieves burden of capital purchase or rental fees for specialty equipment Participating Municipalities* • Larger Auctions (ex. Vehicle auctions) attract more buyers Addison & Other • More efficient response when picking up vehicles from a Algonquin, Algonquin/LITH Fire neighboring municipality as opposed to a more distant Protection District, & Huntley private facility Beecher (through WCGL, SSMMA) • Support in an emergency or when equipment is out of service Berkley & Stone Park • Lower operating costs Buffalo Grove, Glenview, Kenilworth, Lake Bluff, & Lincolnshire Cost Savings Crete, Crete Park District & Crete Examples: School District • Crete saves $25,000 in capital investment by borrowing crack Crete & Monee sealing equipment from Monee rather than buying it DuPage County, Woodridge, & themselves Woodridge Park District • School District 68, the Lisle-Woodridge Fire District, and Ela Township, Hawthorn Woods, Woodridge Park District all use the Village of Woodridge’s fuel Kildeer & Lake Zurich station, providing fuel at a reduced cost for the localities and Geneva, Naperville & St Charles providing a source of revenue for the Village Glenview & Northfield • The Village of Woodridge saves $2,200 a year on fuel delivery costs by purchasing through DuPage County & has determined Glenwood, Hazelcrest, Homewood through research savings of approximately $2,500 by & Flossmoor purchasing squad cars through the Suburban Purchasing Hoffman Estates & South Barrington Cooperative instead of the State of Illinois Joint Purchasing Johnsburg, Richmond & Spring Agreement Grove La Grange & Others Page 5 of 35 Northeastern Illinois Shared Services Directory Participating Municipalities (Continued)* Length of Agreements Lisle-Woodridge Fire District, School Distrct 68, Village of 10% Less than 1 Year Woodridge, & Woodridge Park District 1-2 Years 15% Long Grove & Cuba Township 50% 3-4 Years Northfield & 2 Others 5-6 Years Tinley Park & Others 15% 7-10 Years Warrenville & Warrenville FPD 10% 10+ Years Examples of Assets Shared Fuel Vehicles Primary Initial Reasons for Sharing Pick-Up Truck Regulatory Compliance 5% Employees 20% Operational Efficiency 20% Equipment Sharing Cost Savings Fuel 5% Address New Service Factor Waste Needs Better Coordination Crack Sealing Equipment 50% Reduce Impact of Lift Truck Capital Costs Sweeper/Vacuum Truck How Agreements Were Formalized Bucket Truck Intergovernmental Agreement Purchase of 39% Services Contract New Government 50% Agency Informal Agreement *Reflects responses from approximately 30% of the region 11% Other Page 6 of 35 Northeastern Illinois Shared Services Directory Cable Television Consortia Length of Agreements 12% Less than 1 Year 1-2 Years 13% Photo: AbleManTV.com 3-4 Years 5-6 Years Benefits 75% 7-10 Years Consortium can oversee customer 10+ Years care and maintain public access programming Cost Savings Primary Initial Reasons for Sharing Regulatory Compliance Bargaining Power 13% Operational Efficiency 25% Participating Municipalities* Cost Savings 13% Beecher, Monee & Peotone Address New Service 12% Needs Burr Ridge, Clarendon Hills, Hinsdale 37% Better Coordination & Willowbrook Reduce Impact of Indian Head Park, La Grange, La Grange Park, Riverside, Western Capital Costs Springs Mount Prospect & Others How Agreements Were Formalized Intergovernmental New Lenox & 13 Others 22% Agreement Winnetka & Others Purchase of Services Contract New Government 56% Agency Informal Agreement 22% *Reflects responses from Other approximately 30% of the region Page 7 of 35 Northeastern Illinois Shared Services Directory Code Enforcement and/or Public Health Inspections Benefits Photo: I-ACE.org • Better service in expertise & number of inspections executed • Higher quality service, particularly for municipalities too Participating Municipalities* small to afford the quality of service on their own Algonquin, Cary & Huntley • Ability to attract larger firms, including national firms, through the size of the bid Bannockburn, Lake Bluff, Lake Forest & Mettawa • Cost Savings through economies of scale Bannockburn, Buffalo Grove, • Standardization/Consistency across neighboring Deerfield, Highland Park, Lake Bluff, Lake County, Lake Forest, & municipalities Lincolnshire • Ability to use other employees (ex. Fire District personnel) Barrington & Cook County when unoccupied Berkeley & Hillside • Shared policies & problem solving regarding property maintenance Buffalo Grove & Long Grove Chicago Heights, Park Forest, Richton park, & South Chicago Heights Clarendon Hills & DuPage County Cost Savings Countryside & Cook County Examples: Deerfield & Lake County Health Inspection • Deerfield saved $4,275 for elevator inspections through the Lake County Health Inspections Frankfort, Mokena, New Lenox, Orland Park & Tinley Park • Itasca has saved $175,000 in telecommunications Glenview, Lincolnwood, & 4 Others • Winnetka saves approximately $225,000 annually in inspectional services Golf, Glenview, Kenilworth, Wilmette & Winnetka • The Southeast Lake County Shared Services Working Group saved $22,059 in elevator inspections Page 8 of 35 Northeastern Illinois Shared Services Directory Participating Municipalities (Continued)* Length of Agreements Grayslake & Grayslake Fire Protection District Less than 1 Year 22% 18% Hawthorn Woods & Others 1-2 Years Lindenhurst & Lake County 3-4 Years 15% McHenry