HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolutions - 1991.11.07 - 18616Miscellaneous Resolution # 125 November 7, 1991
BY: FINANCE COMMITTEE - G. William Caddell, D. C., Chairperson
RE: BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS - POLICY ON VEHICLE FLEET
TO THE OAKLAND COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Mr. Chairperson, Ladies and Gentlemen:
WHEREAS the Finance Committee appointed a Leased Vehicle Policy
Subcommittee to review the County's Leased Vehicle Policy and the size and
nature of the vehicle fleet that has eventuated from the policy; and
WHEREAS the Leased Vehicle Policy Subcommittee completed its review and
submitted a final report to the Finance Committee ( Attachment A) ; and
WHEREAS the Finance Committee has reviewed the report of the
Subcommittee and concurs with the findings contained therein.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Oakland County Board of
Commissioners hereby amends the County Policy on Assignment of County Vehicles,
adopted December 18, 1975 by Miscellaneous Resolution #7393, as amended by
Miscellaneous Resolution #7924, as follows :
- #7, DEPARTMENT HEADS, be changed to: CHIEF ELECTED OFFICIALS -
Each Chief Elected Official ( County Executive, County Treasurer,
Clerk/Register of Deeds, Prosecuting Attorney, Drain Commissioner,
Chairperson of the Board of Commissioners) and his/her Deputy will
be permanently assigned a vehicle.
- Rules regarding the proper use of County vehicles need to be
strengthened and clarified along the lines suggested in Tab D.
- Add, "A 'hot line' number shall be established and publicized so that
any citizen can call in if he/she believes that a County vehicle is
being used improperly."
Change the first paragraph of (G. ) FLEET EXPANSION to read, "No
vehicles shall be added to the leased vehicle fleet without the
presentation of a specific resolution to the Board of Commissioners.
The fact that a vehicle addition had been planned for, as part of an
approved budget, should not, by itself, constitute authority to add a
vehicle to the fleet."
Add, "The automated gas system will be monitored by the Internal
Audit Division in accordance with the instruction manual and
procedures for operation of the system. As a general rule, the total
number of gas cards outstanding should equal the total number of
assigned vehicles, plus one more for the person responsible for a
given set of vehicles."
Change the County seal provision to read, "All cars, less those used
for undercover or investigative work or those permanently assigned to
an elected official, shall be marked with a minimum twelve-inch sized
County decal before a car is placed in service."
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS-POLICY ON 7EIIICLE ELE'ET Page 2
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County Executive be requested to
eliminate and reclassify vehicles in accordance with Tab C of the attached report.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that to lessen the effect of any adjustments or
dislocations the recommendations listed above would create, changes should be
phased in so that all of them will have taken effect by January 1, 1992. Budget
submissions now being prepared for the next two years should reflect these
changes.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that any savings realized from these
recommendations will be "in addition to" and "not a substitute for" reductions
that are now underway in the preparation of the 1992-93 budget.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County Executive present to the Finance
Committee, before the end of June, 1992, his recommendaitons regarding further
reductions in the size of the vehicle fleet once the effect of moving vehicles from
the Overnight (0) category to the Shift (S) category has been evaluated.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that any resolutions or policies of the County of
Oakland in conflict with the precepts of this resolution are hereby rescinded.
Mr. Chairperson, on behalf of the Finance Committee, I move the adoption
of the foregoing resolution.
FINANCE COMMITTEE
91235
The Chairperson referred the resolution to the Finance Committee. There
were no objections.
ATTACHMENT A
LEASED VEHICLE POLICY SUBCOMMITTEE
August 15, 1991
TO: Commissioner G. William Caddell
Chairman Finance Committee
Oakland County Board of Commissioners
This report to the Finance Committee is the result of a
series of meetings and hearings whose purpose was to re-
examine the County's Leased Vehicle Policy and the size and
nature of the vehicle fleet that has eventuated from that
policy. This examination was conducted by the Leased Vehicle
Subcommittee that was established for this purpose by the
Finance Committee. The signatures of the members of the
subcommittee appear at the end of this report.
In pursuit of the conclusions and recommendations
contained in this report, the subcommittee:
- reviewed the past history on this subject,
- reviewed the current leased vehicle policy in
detail. (The current policy is at Tab A. All
that follows in this report presumes that the
reader is familiar with this policy.)
- met with County elected officials to develop
guidelines that would be generally applicable to all
departments with regard to assignment of vehicles
and other related issues,
- met with appropriate department heads, managers, and
administrators to more fully understand the
rationale for various elements of the current
policy,
- determined that the charter of the subcommittee
included an examination of the adequacy of the
procedures used in fueling County vehicles,
- conducted a detailed examination of the
justification for each leased vehicle assigned to
each person or office in the County,
- offered each elected official, or his designated
representative, an opportunity to comment on the
conclusions and recommendations contained below
prior to this report being placed on the Finance
Committee's agenda. (Their comments are at Tab B.)
1
The subcommittee concludes and recommends that:
- the current leased vehicle policy is sound and does
not need any major revisions. However, applications
of this policy in certain instances may have, over
time, become too broadly interpreted and need to be
narrowed to insure that the County husbands scarce
resources that can be used for more pressing needs,
- a narrower interpretation of which person and which
offices would qualify for leased county vehicles
would cause a reduction of 13 vehicles in the
current fleet of 589 vehicles (See Tab C),
- a narrower interpretation would also reduce the
number of vehicles taken home by employees every
night by 58 -- from 246 to 188 (See Tab C),
- mileage claims would increase, of course, as the use
of personal vehicles increased. So, too, might
there be an increased use of the pool cars assigned
to individual departments. Nonetheless, there would
be a net saving in County transportation costs,
- all cars -- less those used for undercover or
investigative work, or which might routinely be
placed where defacement or other acts of violence
could occur -- should be marked with a minimum 12-
inch sized County decal.
- rules regarding the proper use of County vehicles
need to be strengthened and clarified as outlined at
Tab D,
- a "hot line" number should be established and
publicized so that any citizen can call-in if he/she
believes that a County vehicle is being used
improperly,
- no vehicles should be added to the leased vehicle
fleet without the presentation of a specific
resolution to the Board of Commissioners. The fact
that a vehicle addition had been planned for -- as
part of an approved budget -- should not, by itself,
constitute authority to add a vehicle to the fleet.
- to lessen the effect of any adjustments or
dislocations the recommendations listed above would
create, changes should be phased in so that all of
them will have taken effect by January 1, 1992.
This means that the budget submissions now being
prepared for the next two years should reflect these
changes.
2
t
' i/
Tommissioner John 6. 'Pa
Subcommittee Chairman
//
paggorge
Commissioner Marilynn E. Gosling
2 ,
•
- any savings realized from acting on the recommenda-
tions in this report should be "in addition to" and
"not a substitute for" reductions that are now
underway in the preparation of the 1992-93 budget.
- the gas control procedures now in effect appear to
be adequate enough to preclude the allocation of
further funds that might improve the accounting
process only marginally. There is, however, one
exception. There appear to be too many gas cards in
the hands of individuals. As a general rule, the
subcommittee believes that the total number of gas
cards outstanding should equal the total number of
assigned vehicles plus one more for the person
responsible for a given set of vehicles.
- Finally, we believe that further reductions should
be possible in the size of the vehicle fleet once
the effect of moving 58 vehicles from the "0" to the
"S" category has had a chance to be evaluated. Our
closing recommendation is that the administration
should present to the Finance Committee, before the
end of June 1992, its recommendations regarding
further cuts in the size of the vehicle fleet.
In closing the subcommittee would like to thank the
elected officials and other managers, supervisors, and
administrators who -- seeing and agreeing with the need to
make better use of tax dollars -- cooperated so fully and
effectively in the production of this report.
COMmrssioner G. William Caddell
( ,
,COmmissione:i Larry Crake
---7O6mmissioner James D. Ferrens
3
December 18, 1975
COUNTY POLICY ON ASSIGNMENT OF COUNTY VEHICLES
CENTRAL POOL
The Central Pool consists of vehicles housed at the Central Garage,
which are used for the following purposes:
A. To be used by those departments who are in need of unscheduled or
interAttent transportation. Generally, these vehicles are
checked out for short periods of time, but occasionally are used
for full days or several days when necessary.
B. To be used as replacement vehicles, when necessary, when assigned
vehicles are brought into the Garage for normal preventative
maintenance or due to necessary repair service.
BASIC ASSIGNMENT PRINCIPLES
It is the policy of the County of Oakland, to provide the most
economic and feasible types of transportation, for those departments
requiring methods of transportation to accomplish their prime mission. It
is recognized that vehicles are management tools and are necessary for the
transportation of persons, equipment, supplies and specialized activity.
In this respect the County Executive is responsible for the assignment of
vehicles, based upon the following principles:
A. The basic principle in the assignment of a County vehicle to a
department, an employee or group of employees for the conduct of
County business shall be in the best interest of the County in
terms of economy, improvement or necessity of operations.
B. Recognizing the management role of the department or institution
head, no assignment other than those made by the County Executive
on the basis of overall mileage to be driven, will be considered
except on the request and approval of the department or
institution head. Where in the judgment of the County Executive,
a County employee should be placed in a County vehicle because of
the mileage to be driven, the department or institution head will
be consulted prior to such assignment.
C. Recognizing the assignment of a County vehicle is in effect a
trust and often results in an indirect fringe benefit to the
employee, the County Executive reserves the right to forthwith
revoke such assignment, or invoke such other penalties as shall
be appropriate under the circumstances, whenever said employee
shall be guilty of improper care or use of such vehicle. Prior
disciplinary action on the part of the department or institution
head will be considered by the County Executive prior to any
action taken by them.
D. !Recognizing the conditions under which an assignment has been
granted may vary from time to time, each department or
institution head In whose department assignments have been made
shall immediately notify the County Executive via the County
Executive-Central Services Division of any changes of
circumstances calling for a change of previously approved
assignment within that department. To this end the County
Executive will require annual re-justification of all regular
assignments.
E. Recognizing the complex and multiple factors involved in the
assignment of County vehicles under Item A above the County
Executives, in determining such assignments, will give
consideration to the following factors or combinations thereof:
Tab A
1. MILEAGE DRIVEN
Where it is determined that the average monthly mileage, driven
by an employee or group of employees, falls within a range where it wbuld
be more costly to the County to reimburse the employee(s) for using their
personal vehicles.
This is the primary consideration for assignment of County
vehicles.
• The mileage of those vehicles, assigned to specific departments,
on the basis of mileage driven, shall be inspected quarterly to determine
if sufficient miles are being driven in County-related business trips to
necessitate continued assignment to the department.
2. SPECIALIZED VEHICLE EQUIPMENT
Where it is determined that the vehicle must have specialized
equipment built into it, as an integral part of the vehicle, to properly
perform the functions of the job. The impracticability of drawing a
vehicle specially equipped, from the Central Pool, shall be shown,
Examples of such equipment are as follows:
a. Emergency lights and sirens.
b. Two-way radios.
c. Specialized truck bodies.
d. Snow removal and earth moving equipment.
3. SPECIALIZED VEHICLES
Where it is determined that a specialized type of vehicle is
required to efficiently carry out the functions of the department, for the
purpose of transporting materials, equipment, supplies and personnel to
job sites. The impracticability of drawing such a specialized vehicle,
from the Central Pool, shall be shown. Examples of items to be
transported include:
a. Construction tools.
b. Surveying instruments.
c. Radiological equipment
d. Parts inventories.
e. Testing equipment.
f. Pumps and compressors.
g. Laboratory equipment.
h. Chemicals.
i. Grounds personnel.
j. Maintenance personnel.
4. TERRAIN CONDITIONS
Where it is determined that the travel conditions are not
conducive to the use of personally owned vehicles. The impracticability
of drawing an adequate vehicle, from the' Central Pool, shall be shown.
5. EMERGENCY NEED ;
Where it is determined that is is necessary to have a vehicle
available to respond immediately to a work situation or for public service
emergencies which require immediate response. The likelihood of an
emergency occurring, which requires the immediate attention of the
assignee, shall be clearly shown. Examples include the following:
a. Response to natural disasters.
b. Enforcement emergencies.
c. Health and safety emergencies.
d. Emergencies related to the safety of County-owned facilities
and personnel.
e. Situations where it is important to respond immediately to
fulfill the services expected by the taxpaying public.
6. TRANSPORTING NON-COUNTY PERSONNEL
Where it is a regular function of the department to provide
transportation for persons, other than County employees. The
impracticability of drawing an adequate vehicle, from the Central Pool,
shall be clearly shown. Examples are as follows:
a. Prisoner transportation.
b. Transporting children who are wards of the court.
c. Making arrests.
ca. Transporting hospital patients.
7. DEPARTMENT HEADS
Each major department head whose duties entail the use of a
vehicle in carrying out his normal assigned responsibilities will be
permanently assigned a vehicle for departmental use. Such vehicles,
though assigned to the department head, are to be made available to other
departmental personnel for necessary travel and the likelihood of such
travel will be considered in making the assignment.
This is a natural extension of the Central Pool concept, as the
County operations have continued to grow and decentralize. The
impracticability of drawing a vehicle, from the Central Pool, shall be
clearly shown.
The above is in recognition of the increased cost to the County
because of the following factors:
a. The use of the department head's available time in securing
and returning vehicles to the Central Pool or providing, in lieu thereof,
the necessary "delivery services".
b. The necessity for immediate and often home to destination
travel.
c. Hidden costs due to delay when vehicles are not available, or
in the converse, the increased number of Central Pool cars needed to
eliminate this problem.
F. Under no circumstances will a vehicle be assigned as a fringe
benefit, only. Automobiles shall be assigned on the basis of the printed
guidelines. County employees, regardless of position, shall be assigned
cars, only as outlined in this policy.
G. FLEET EXPANSION
Effective 1/1776 request for additional new vehicles (Other than
replacements) shall require the affirmative recommendation of the County
Executive and the approval of the Finance Committee.
Further, the Finance Committee shall recommend to the Board of
Commissioners appropriation sufficient to cover the acquisition cost plus
monthly leave charges for the balance of the current year.
HOME-WORK ASSIGNMENTS
In all cases, where it is determined that it is to the County's
advantage to have the employee take the assigned vehicle home at the end
of the notmal work day, it is understood that the vehicle is not to be
used for personal activities.
A. REPORTING TO JOB SITES RATHER THAN THE HOME OFFICE
Where it is determined that it is to the County's advantage to
have the employee report directly to the job site, rather than to his home
office and later travel to the job site. In such cases, the dollar
savings in efficiency of operation must be shown, or the need to provide
an expected public service apparent. Examples are as follows:
1. If the employee normally started work at 8:30 a.m. and had to
report to the office first, he would not actually start work on the job
until after 9:00 a.m.
2. Where the employee must report immediately to a job situation
during normal off-duty hours; such as a medical examiner investigator's
call to a death scene, a police official called to an emergency, a key
maintenance employee called to a water line break, etc.
3. Where it is necessary, for the using employee, to provide
spot supervision on a 24-hour per day basis.
4. Where there are a sufficient number of regular night,
weekend, and early morning meetings or contacts made, which would make it
less feasible for the user to drive first to the Central Garage. Examples
are:
a. Servings of warrants
b. Obtaining easements
c. Meetings with other public agencies
.d. Investigative work
B. ECONOMIC DETERMINATION
Where it is determined that it would be more costly to the
County, in terms of non-productive time spent in obtaining transportation,
than it would be to have the vehicle driven home.
cmli policyvehicle
Comments from Elected Officials Concerning this Report
To be added after the subcommittee report
is signed and before the Chairman of the
Finance Committee puts this item on the
Finance Committee's agenda.
This will permit the Finance Committee
in particular and all Commissioners in general
to have the benefit of all relevent views
before acting on this report.
1 Tab B
COUN I Y MICHIGAN Daniel T. Murphy. Oakland County Executive
Executive Office Building 1200 North Telegraph Poad Pontiac. Michigan 48053 (313) 858 0484
arOAKILAND
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
Commissioner John G. Pappageorge
Chairman
Vehicle Policy Subcommittee
Daniel T. Murphy
COUNTY EXECUTIVE pi 4/1 1 /- i;
DATE: September 30, 1991
SUBJECT: AUGUST 15, 1991 REPORT
LEASED VEHICLE POLICY
I have reviewed your August 15, 1991 report to the Finance Committee regarding the
County's Leased Vehicle Policy.
I agree with the conclusion of the Subcommittee that, "the current leased vehicle
policy is sound and does not need any major revision." I think we can say that it has
served the County well for the past 16 years.
I recognize your concerns regarding the effective administration of the Leased Vehicle
Policy and am looking forward to receiving a copy of your complete study.
Since the Policy (Miscellaneous Resolution #7393, December 18, 1975) specifically
designates the County Executive responsible for the assignment of vehicles, I
request that the Board of Commissioners refer the Subcommittee's report to me for my
consideration.
I will consider your recommendations as I review the current administrative rules and
procedures and the 1975 policy for possible revisions necessitated by program
changes which may have taken place over the past 16 years.
I will advise you of any changes I make to the leased vehicle administrative rules and
procedures and any recommendations to amend the 1975 policy resolution.
JAKLAND .
(nnnn•nnnnn•(11n108t
COUNTY MICHIGAN Daniel T. Murphy, Oakland County Executive
MEMORANDUM
TO: Dr. G. William Caddell, Chairperson
FinEince Committee
7,k/
D FROM: tiel Murphy, County Executive
DATE: October 17, 1991
RE: Leased Vehicle Policy Subcommittee Report
Finance Committee Referral
In response to your referral of the Leased Vehicle Policy Subcommittee
report, I offer the following comments and recommendations.
Vehicle Elimination
I have reviewed the Subcommittee's list of vehicles recommended for
elimination from the County's fleet as well as those included in my 1992-1993
budget recommendations. (Analysis is contained on Attachment "A" and
Schedules 1 and 2.)
I recommend that the eleven (11) vehicles listed on attachment "A" be
removed from the county fleet at an estimated average cost savings of $12,630 per
car and total savings over a five year period of $138,930. $27,360 of this savings
is already incorporated into the Executive budget recommendation for 1992-1993.
Vehicle Reclassification.
I have likewise reviewed the Subcommittee's recommendations for restricting
over-night and weekend use of selected county vehicles.
Analysis (see Attachment B) does not include the vehicles assigned to the
Narcotics Enforcement Team (NET) since I understand that the Finance Committee
has asked Sheriff John Nichols for further comments regarding their assignment.
Also, I have not included in the analysis those vehicles assigned to the Parks and
Recreation Division. It is my position that the Parks and Recreation Division,
while leasing county owned vehicles, is responsible for their assignment and
usage.
The analysis, therefore, is limited to the 24 remaining vehicles identified by
the Subcommittee. Based upon this analysis, the average net savings is $199.67
per vehicle per year. This is an annual savints of $4 792 for the 24 vehicles or
$23,960 over a five (5) year period.
Executive Office Building • 1200 North Telegraph Road Pontiac, Michigan 48341 • (313) 858-0484
The Subcommittee's recommendations raise issues and questions that have
not been fully addressed. Solutions to the following issues could certainly reduce
these savings.
1. What are the legal consequences of the proposed changes of
current policy and/or administrative rules?
Withdrawal of over-night or weekend use of county vehicles may
be interpreted as a selective reduction of compensation for one
or more of the following reasons:
a. Since 1985, the Internal Revenue Service has classified the
over-night use of county vehicles as frincre
benefit/compensation. Such compensation is reported on
the employee's W-2 federal income tax report form as part
of the employee's gross taxable wages.
h The over-night and weekend cz of vehicles since
1975, appears to be a condition of employment.
c. The Subcommittee has not applied the Vehicle Policy's
"Basic Assignment Principles" equally to all of the vehicles
of all elected officials and their operational staffs. This
creates inequity.
2. What is the cost to construct, maintain, operate and secure a
parking facility for county vehicles (or personal vehicles) left
over-night and on weekends and provide for day-long and after
hours vehicle check-out and check-in services?
3. What is the County's potential liability if personal vehicles,
which are stored on county property over-night, suffer loss or
damage?
In addition, the mere loss of ten (10) minutes of productive time per
employee per day to check-out and check-in a vehicle (or pick-up a vehicle)
results in a loss time value of $2,154 per employee annually or $247,710 for 24
people over five years. This amount is far in excess of the estimated $23,960
savings for that same five year period.
In view of the cost and legal implications of the issues noted above, I do not
plan to change the current assignments of vehicles, however, I will continue to
monitor that their assignment provides the most efficient and effective use of the
County's resources.
Furthermore, I do plan to delegate the responsibility to determine necessity
of over-night and weekend use of county vehicles to the respective elected
officials for the vehicles I have assigned to their departments. This provides for
closer supervision of vehicle use and will ensure full compliance and
accountability to the policy.
mma
attachments
2
0/S
***
5 Year Savings
$11,084
(2,174)
8,085
3,460
(7,825)
$12,630
11
Vehicle Purchase Price
Less Resale Value (60,000 miles)
Vehicle Operating Cost
(Fuel & Maintenance)
Vehicle Fixed Cost
(Insurance, Etc.)
Cost for Mileage Reimbursement
NET SAVINGS Per Car
Cars Eliminated
ATTACHMENT A •
Leased Vehicle Analysis
County Executive Recommendation
Vehicle Elimination
Vehicle
Number
88-516
87-002
88-504
90-512
87-512 **
86-402**
86-403**
89-917**
86-806**
86-807**
88-813**
90°511**
Division
Assignment
Airport
CMH
Solid Waste
Solid Waste
Children's Village
Sheriff
Sheriff
Sheriff*
FM&O
FM&O
FM&O
FM&O
TOTAL: 11 Vehicles
* Misc. Res. #90130 authorized confiscated vehicle as Department owned.
** Vehicles deleted in 1992-1993 County Executive Budget recommendation.
Note: Vehicles recommended by Subcommittee for elimination, but not
recommended above are:
89-509 Central Services - This vehicle will be used by the new Director of
Central Services.
88-523 Community & Economic Development - This is a pool vehicle shared
by three staff members of the Economic Development Division who travel
26,309 business miles per year (1990). 13,272 miles in county vehicle,
13,037 in personal vehicle. No cost saving possible.
85-412 Community & Economic Development - This is a confiscated 1985
Buick used to transport ladder and equipment used in the field inspection
of housing rehabilitation projects.
Elimination Savings:
TOTAL SAVINGS **** $138,930
See Schedule 4 I.
Includes savings of $27,360 incorporated in to the 1992°93 Executive
Recommendation.
***
****
OAKLAND COUNTY, MICHIGAN
LEASED VEHICLES ANALYSIS
BUSINESS MILEAGE REIMBURSFMENT
Schedule 1
Vehicle
Number
Division
Assignment --------------
1990
0/5 miles
* 88-516 Airport 0 1,990
* 87-002 CMH 0 17,381
* 88-504 Solid Waste 0 12,181
* 90-512 Solid Waste 0 10,488 **
87-512 Childrens' Village S 9,103
86-402 Sheriff 0 5,181
86-403 Sheriff 0 13,007
89-917 Sheriff ***
86-806 FM&O c .., 4,694
86-807 FM&O S 3,576
88-813 FM&O S 3,484
90-511 FM&O S 2,635 **
Total Miles Driven 83,920
Miles driven by Overnight Vehicles 60,228
Miles driven by Shift Vehicles 23,692
Mileage Reimbursement (One Year) **** $1,565
Mileage Reimbursement (Five Year) $7,825
Notes:
* Vehicles on both lists
Estimated miles based on actual miles partial experience for 1990
Misc Res. 90130 authorized confiscated vehicle as Department owned
75% for 0 designation: 100% for S designation, at rate of $0.25/mile
**
***
****
Prepared By: Budget Division 15-Oct-91
Number of Vehicles Sold:
Total Revenues from Auction:
27
$58,700
OAKLAND COUNTY, MICHIGAN Schedule
LEASED VEHICLES ANALYSIS
RESALE VALUE OF COUNTY VEHICLES
Vehicle Sale
Number Price
85-008 $1,800 Figures based on Spring '91 Auction for Full Size,
85-012 2,200 Intermediate, and Compact vehicles
2
85-020 2,800
85-407 1,700
85-411 2,200
85-501 1,600
85-502 2,300
85-503 2,600
85-504 1,700
85-506 1,600
85-507 1,700
85-509 2,100
85-510 1,500
85-511 1,500
86-002 1,900
86-005 1,800
86-405 2,500
86-502 2,100
86-504 1,800
86-505 1,700
86-514 1,900
87-004 2,500
87-010 3,400
87-407 3,250
87-412 3,600
87-507 2,250
87-510 2,500
Total 27 $58,700
Average Sale Price per Vehicle: $2,174
r /. ./
Prepared By: ,Budget Division 11-Oct-91
VEHICLE
NUMBER DIVISION
TOTAL
REIMB.
NET **
RETMD.
RATE
NET
ANNUAL
SAVINCS/
(COST)
PERSONAL
MILEAGE
(MILES)
20
12
20
10
10
40
40
4
36
20
34
16
22
20
26
50
34
34
16
10
32
0
46
60
220
220
220
220
220
220
220
220
220
220
220
220
220
220
220
220
220
220
220
220
220
220
220
220
2,400
2,400
2,400
2,400
2,400
2,400
2,400
2,400
2,400
2,400
2,400
2,400
2,400
2,400
2,400
2,400
2,400
2,400
2,400
2,400
2,400
0
2,400
2,400
$0.15
$0.15
$0.15
$0.15
$0.15
$0.15
$0.15
$0.15
$0.15
$0.15
$0.15
$0.15
$0.15
$0.15
$0.15
$0.15
$0.15
$0.15
$0.15
$0.15
$0.15
$0.15
$0.15
$0.15
($360)
($360)
($360)
($360)
($360)
($360)
($360)
($360)
($360)
($360)
($360)
($360)
($360)
($360)
($360)
($360)
($360)
($360)
($360)
($360)
($360)
$0
($360)
(1160)
$36
($122)
$230
($131)
($162)
$432
$555
($281)
$353
$36
$418
$6
$143
$230
$155
$630
$313
$313
$6
($162)
$274
$0
$692
$828
AVERAGE $0,10
$446,895
$195,009
Net Reimbursement Rate = $0.25/mile reimbursement rate for use of personal vehicle less credit for
OAKLAND COUNTY, MICHIGAN
LEASED VEHICLE ANALYSIS
ANNUAL SAVINGS FROM CAR RECLASSIFICATION
'COMMUTING WORK
.VARIABLE DISTANCE STATION
ASSIGNED TO SIZE COST/MILE (MILES) DAYS* COST/YEAR
91-504
91-502
85-412
91-012
91-503
90-506
91-014
88-508
88-513
91-501
91-005
91-009
91-004
89-404
88-526
88-524
91-505
90-509
91-010
87-518
88-527
88-410
91-011
88-518
BOARD OF COMM
CIRCUIT COURT
COM/ECON DEV
COMPUTER SVCS
CORP. COUNSEL
FRIEND OF CRT.
INST/HUMAN SVCS
COMM. MENTAL HLTH
HEALTH DIV.
HEALTH DIV.
MGT & BUDGET
PERSONNEL
PROBATE COURT
PROSECUTOR
PROSECUTOR
PROSECUTOR
PUBLIC SVCS
ANIMAL CONTROL
PUBLIC WORKS
FACILITIES ENG.
FACILITIES MAINT.
GARAGE POOL
RISK MGT.
SOLID WASTE
J.BRENNAN
J.CUNNINCHAM
J.DRIKER
S.TOPIWAILA
J.HAYS
J.SALAMONE
R.LOCEY
R.COOPER
T.CORDON
N. LONG
R.MARTIN
V.LUZI
B.CONSILIO
L.KOZMA
M.MODELSKI
J.SLEVIN
R.CHISVOLM
C.ANDERSON
J.MINJOE
F.DOORNWEERD
G.WALKER
S.FAYNE
R.SMITH
COMPACT
COMPACT
FULL
INTR
COMPACT
COMPACT
INTR
COMPACT
COMPACT
COMPACT
INTR
INTR
INTR
FULL
COMPACT
COMPACT
COMPACT
COMPACT
INTR
COMPACT
COMPACT
FULL
INTR
COMPACT
$0.090
$0.090
$0.134
$0.104
$0.090
$0.090
$0.104
$0.090
$0.090
$0.000
$0.104
$0.104
$0.104
$0.134
$0.090
$0.090
$0.090
$0.090
$0.104
$0.090
$0.090
$0.134
$0.104
$0.090
$396
$238
$590
$229
$198
$792
$915
$79
$713
$396
$778
$366
$503
$590
$515
$990
$673
$673
$366
$198
$634
$0
$1,052
$1,188
"WORK STATION DAYS 260 WORKING DAYS PER YEAR
12 COUNTY HOLIDAYS
15 VACATION DAYS
5 SICK LEAVE DAYS
8 CONFERENCE/MISC. DAYS
220 WORK STATION DAYS
ROM estimates for 55 cars
ROM estimates for 24 cars
variable cost of $0.10/mile for County Vehicle not used = $0.15/mile
Prepared By: Budget Division . 15-Oct-91
0A7LAND COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
1201 North Telegraph Road Pontiac, Michigan 48341
313/858-5000
JOHN F. MCHOLS
SHERIFF
BILLY J. NOUN
Undersheriff
September 18, 1991
Commissioner John G. Pappageorge
Board of Commissioners
County of Oakland
Dear Commissioner Pappageorge:
LEASED VEHICLE POLICY SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT DATED AUGUST 15, 1991
Pursuant to Tab "B" entitled Comments as to vehicles selected for removal
from the Sheriff's fleet; three vehicles, one assigned to the Business
Manager - Dale Cunningham, one assigned to the Corrections Staff Assistant
- Ann Russell, and one assigned to Detective/Sergeant Berry Zeeman (who,
apparently, is an exception granted to other Detectives who are permitted
to take their cars home), were removed from the fleet.
I have been cooperative and submitted the full vehicle plan together with
implementation dates in which I ordered the immediate removal of three
vehicles from the fleet which had previously been assigned to the Jail
Lieutenants for which there was no justification other than transportation
to and from work.
With the removal of the aforementioned three vehicles, I was immediately
served with the notice of a labor grievance which, ultimately, will go to
labor arbitration. I do not have a problem in defending the Department's
position in this.- However, to recant at this point and have to return
their vehicles would be an indication of vacillation which I do not want to
project to the Union at this time.
I noted in the draft copy, however, that the aforementioned other three
vehicles are, apparently, in addition to these which makes the bulk of the
fleet removal at County level come from the Sheriff's Department. By way
of explanation of the two vehicles which concern me most of all (since I
assume that Detective Zeeman will continue being exempted by the overall
exemption of Detectives) I refer to Mr. Cunningham's and Mrs. Russell's.
At the onset, Mr. Cunningham's position in Administrative Services was
filled by a Captain until I, in an effort to avail the County of the talent
of a non-sworn, civilian expert in such matters replaced the Captain with
him. The job description, the duties, have all remained the same or
increased under Mr. Cunningham's tenure. The Captain was allowed a car
without question. Mr. Cunningham was assigned the same vehicle without
question, and I see no reason to change.
Mr. Cunningham attends meetings at night; does Administrative checks of our
installation; has reponded to emergencies on request; and has not misused
the vehicle. It would not seem fair or just to penalize a good employee
who had dedicated many, many hours of unpaid work and run the risk of
losing these services at the level at which they are currently provided.
Secondly, Mrs. Ann Russell was hired by this Department December 5, 1988,
as a replacement for an individual whose position had been reassigned (the
Jail Administrator position was deleted and for a temporary period of time
Lieutenant Reeves was Compliance Officer for the Consent Judgment
requirement). In an effort to maximize the possibility of removing the
odious Jail Consent Judgment from the County's
available in the Department nor in the County.
neck, we sought talent not
Mrs. Russell was a distinguished member of the Department of Corrections,
had a wealth of knowledge in
Administrative Assistant to the
When I interviewed her, the question of a vehicle came up.
this issue with Deputy County Executive Kenneth Burchill.
that we could furnish a car without adding to the fleet.
in essence, "Go ahead -- more power to you." I did just
her a vehicle without increasing the size of our fleet.
is fair or reasonable at this time to deprive her of a
part of the discussion to lure her into the County. She has
County (as most of you know) very ably, very creditably,
cooperatively. It should, also, be noted in passing, that Mrs.
the only female Executive in the Department and, thus, the only one to lose
a car!
I should, also, like to point out that a careful review of the draft
proposal seems to penalize the Sheriff's Office unduly, especially in that
other people of similar rank or grade were permitted the use of their cars
during the day and ordered to park them at the work station in the evening
where the ones attached to the Sheriff's Department were ordered deleted
from the fleet.
I would strongly urge that the Committee review its position concerning the
removal of Mr. Cunningham's and Mrs. Russell's vehicle since it'has the
effect of drawing a line between civilian and non-civilian members of the
Department. It has been my belief that a unified Command group is far
better able to deal with the complexities of 'the Sheriff's. Office
administration than one through which an arbitrary dividing line of
civilian and sworn personnel is created. I would be happy to appear before
the Committee should you desire, and I would respectfully request the
Committee's reaction to this letter before the policy is made firm.
John F. Nichols,
Sheriff
JFN/ba
Jail administration, and had served as
Jail Administrator of Washtenaw County.
I discussed
informed him
His response was,
that and assigned
I do not think it
vehicle which was
served the
and very
Russell is
gjp-r-,1 ,17
eb-1 OAKLAND COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
1201 North Telegraph Road Pontiac, Michigan 48341
313/858-5000
JOHN F. NICHOLS
SHERIFF
BILLY J. NOLIN
Undersheriff
October 7, 1991
Dr. C. William Caddell
Chairperson
Finance Committee
Board of Commissioners
County of Oakland
Dear Doctor Caddell:
LEASED VEHICLE POLICY SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT/FINANCE COMMITTEE REFERRAL
Concerning your memorandum of October 4, 1991, regarding your feelings that
I may want to reexamine the issue as to whether or not NET cars should be
reclassified from "0" to "S", please consider the following as my response.
To me, the issue is a relatively simple one. When the Committee to examine
the Leased Car Policy held its first meeting, I understood its mission to
be as follows:
1. To effect control of vehicle usage on non-duty hours; i.e., cars to be
taken home.
2. To effect a cost saving to the County in examining cars that could be
removed from the fleet and cars of which the usage for driving back and
forth to work was creating an unnecessary expense.
I submitted my recommendation which included the removal of three cars from
our fleet which I did not feel necessary except for home/work
transportation. Included also were marking of other vehicles and the
requirement of parking many vehicles on termination of duty to avoid the
take-home usage. ,
Dealing with the °Detective Division, in our original concept we had
recommended that only on-call Detectives drive their cars to and from .work
and those who were not on call park at the nearest installation or their
Detachment Headquarters. This was modified by the Committee which excluded
the Detectives from consideration and resolved that issue.
During the course of the evaluation, an incongruity was an iteration of
policy by the State Police which prohibited their officers from driving
vehicles home unless it fell within very narrowly defined terms where the
use is "essential for effective operations or provides substantial cost
benefit to the department (en route scheduling)."* Thus created were two
- Dr. G. William Caddell 2 October 7, 1991
sets of rules under which NET officers operated. Those from the State
Police were not allowed to drive their, cars home; those who were assigned
to the Sheriff's Department were allowed to drive their cars home; and
those non-Sheriff's Department employees; i.e., policeman from the other
jurisdictions, were allowed to drive Sheriff's Department cars home as
well.
At the time of its enunciation, the State policy created no particular
problem for this Department, and we did not raise the issue of two sets of
rules for vehicle usage. However, when the Sheriff's Department officers
were to be prohibited from driving their cars home it did become an issue.
Since we were restricting our own Detectives' usage of cars and at the same
time, apparently, committing the use of other Sheriff's cars by
non-Departmental employees; i.e., officers from outside departments, it put
our management into a rather precarious position in teLms of employee
relationships. With that thought in mind, I made the suggestion that our
policy match that of the State Police. So much for the rationale that
created the issue which you wish me to review.
Nothing has changed from my original evaluation. The issue as I see it
should be resolved in one of two frames of reference. If you consider that
the operation is more convenient, smoother, safer, and more efficient as
the result of allowing the officers to take their vehicles home at night,
then I, certainly, do not feel offended by that decision. I have never
been one to unnecessarily penalize police officers and if that is your only
concern, we would certainly applaud the decision to allow them to take the
cars home.
If, however, the economics of it are as important as we have been led to
believe, then it does represent a great many miles traveled at 35 cents a
mile, and that is a problem that should have been resolved within the
province of those skilled and trained in the practice of finance which I,
admittedly, am not and for which I am eternally grateful.
• I have no personal interest in the issue no matter which way it is
resolved. I can understand both sides of the story. I find it difficult
for me to make a decision that, I believe, properly belongs with those
responsible for allocation of funding. I did not create the problem nor
raise the issue! I responded to a problem in the best fashion I knew how
and in what I thought, at the time, was in the best interest of both law
enforcement and the County.
Sincerely,
(m?
John F. Nichols
Sheriff
JFN/ba
Enclosures
*Department of State Police memo issued from Colonel Michael D. Robinson,
Director, entitled "Home/Work Use of Departmental Vehicle-- Exceptions"
STATE OF.MIC.411V,N
-
1 1 1 1 11 1.k1t)
JOHNENGLER:Govvnor
EIEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT & BUDGET
P.O. BOX 30025, LANSING. WCHIGAN 15909
PATRICIA A. WOOOWCFM-1. Ctt
„7anuAry 10, 1991.
ALL IDEPAP.TX.Z1t7 DIRICTCF5
EaCM: Patricia A. Woodworth, Director. (
Dtpart F.=nt of V.Anagement ; Budget
' SUB.:Tr:CT: Use of State of Nichigan Vehicles -- Horst, to.0f 4i
v !A cy! tat vthiclem )setwoen ta employes's ho- 4 and place of work shall occur
only in cases where such use is essential for effective operations or provideN
substantial coot benefit to the deportment, tctivft im:acdiately, zt:Ict
adhsrenco tp tho following policy iz r e iuiree:
1. APPAOVAL-REGULAa DA515
Pp e
Aoproval to utiliee a ottes vehicle on a regclar beeil betwiten place C.1.
wc7k And hanzt may only be approved when one of the foIlcwiny condit.tens
eniet:
a, ,,Eter-worAing hours pxrking dots r.et ez:ist in the •ofEice viciaity.
b. Technical ecuipment on or la a vshiclt resuiece special security. ,
c. The vehicle ,1..3 ±eçlzired at home by Law r_nferce_n_ent perlIonnel with
11 arrest power
Il
1, The .requcncy and length 0! time worked la a4.1eInLztratLve1y
unpreactablc because tht nattire of an assignment (t.g-
narcotics Lnvestigatlon.; survtiIlanos; crime scene ez-mminxtion)
is dependent oa crLsintl zctivity and, •
2.
It ic necessary to uti15i'e the aenigned state vehicle to
•ccmpleto thes anaignment dIza to the need for police equipment.
Use of. state vehicles tinder the above ciroutanass require prior
deparLment'al and 2.1".7.D approvAl .on an teaual basis. Complete inetructLese
for subctittal of the MTD-.2 are conea:;ned In Har,D Letter i8O dated
3/15/86,
C-.-- Laboratory pertonaal
a n icrusents have both of tht following characteriatico:
12 ' S1 11:32 FROM IIRR.4 --LA3 STRL3 -1-ITS F'HGE.t)k.)
P:.gs 2
January 10, 1991
2. A227,0v,XLS-OCCASIOI-TX/. Ust
Dtpaz.tntn rlAy alno approve use o!!' vehicles on an pccasicnal batis
undtr thn following circumttzneet: .
a. A-L-notor pool assiymment is ntedcd p=iox to 7:3d a.m. alccmsitating
• pick-up the•preceding day.
b.Tht...e.epartment cieterm4nel that it i3 in the etate's best inte'rsat
to have an occanionAl travel me/sign:tent begln andjor or end at a
fs home (out e ecizeduling). THI3 IS ONLY TO BM U7ILIZED IN r
RARE CIF(CU1-JZTANCES 1-11-4,1= SUCH USt IS COST IstNEFIcxAL.
Depa=tment aipp=oval it requirtd for each occurrence of ite= 2.x. ral-1.
2.b.
Strict adherence to thls policy L. emmential for a coat effective
tzsnsportktien ssr-rict. A review of all current home to office U3Z9t by yolv:
Dtpartment .elcployees is to be conducted irmediately to envurt'such
o-curring only in compliar.ce $.(5•th policy at:a only whore essential to .
D n ?a=t7.4ent operations. trrECTIVL I2:IATtLY, AIL HOX2 TO OFFICF, R. .V I.PnV.,..S
T:Ln F7.7M TXr.
-TOR TZ.MS7CMZ DIv:s/ou Rzscinn. NA2 TO
swax.= ANY P..EQUBSTS ro:4. Cim..1.1:NT FISCAL *XtAR TO TSZ XCTOX TP.AgSPOn
DIV;SIOI4 BY FEBALLIAY 15, 19$1.
STEVEN N. ANDREWS
CIRCUIT JUDGE
Ebt Tirruti Tu urt
fur OE (!.--uurt
if
COURTHOUSE TOWER
PONTIAC, MICHIGAN 48053
TELEPHONE 858-0360
August 22, 1991 OAKLAND COUNTY
Mr. John G. Pappageorge
Oakland County Board of Commissioners
1200 North Telegraph Road
Pontiac, MI 48341-0404
Dear Mr. Pappageorge and Members
of the Leased Vehicle Policy Subcommittee:
We were asked by you to review the report of the Sub-
committee, dated August 15, 1991, and respond with the
following questions and concerns:
1. The elected officials and some of their
chief assistants are being permitted to
keep their assigned vehicles; the judiciary,
however, has not been afforded this same
opportunity. Mrs. Cunningham, Ms. Consilio,
and Mr. Salamone are our chief assistants.
None of the judges - all of whom are County-
wide elected officials - have County cars;
instead of us, our chief assistants have
been assigned cars. If the other elected
officials and their chief assistants are
being permitted to continue this practice,
why should the judiciary be singled out for
different treatment?
2. The report includes no rationale for its
recommendation that certain vehicles be put
back in the pool and no longer assigned to
individuals.
3. The report states that "The current leased
vehicle policy is sound ... however, applications
of this policy ... may have ... become too
broadly interpreted." The Board of Commissioners
Mr. John G. Pappageorge Page -
August 22, 1991
appropriately should concern itself with
policy; however, it may be within the
province of the executive to implement
and apply policy.
4. Specifically, what abuses are attempting
to be remedied by this recommendation?
What, if any, abuses have our judicial
employees committed? What do you hope to
accomplish by way of savings from this
proposal? What cost/benefit analysis has
been done?
5. What safeguards do you intend to put in
place regarding the pool system? If a
department head wanted to, what would
prevent him or her from continually
authorizing the taking home of an "S" car
for him or herself?
6. Not all assigned vehicles are included in
the report. Are you confident that all
were given due consideration? For example,
the Circuit Court would be more willing to
relinquish its Pretrial Services car than
its Court Administrator's car; nevertheless,
the Pretrial vehicle isn't even listed in
the report.
7.. The Subcommittee made recommendations based
. on meetings with County department heads;
however, we note that one of the Subcommittee
members left the room when our staff came in
to discuss our vehicle usage.
8. The establishment of a hot line so that
citizens can report improper vehicle use
flies in the face of trusting, morale-building
working relationships. We believe that to
include this provision is insulting to the
hundreds of County and Court employees who
work tirelessly and diligently to provide
services to the Oakland County citizenry.
Mr. John G. Pappageorge
August 22, 1991
Page -3-
ircuit Judge
the Finance Committee will s ,riously co4sidkr the issues
and questions we've raised .his lett
We appreciate the oppirwAtiluo:u:o respond and hope that
4/111 , !
1.91116f ,
/1
E7f i
Buge,0 A. Moore
ChW Probate Judge
Steven
Chief ,
. ANuirews
SNA/EAM:ml
cc: Daniel T. Murphy
Dr. G. William Caddell
Judith K. Cunningham
Barbara A. Consilio
Joseph G. Salamone
(Commission Meeting, September 4, 1991) PARK.s.i-RE-c„ ou-re- s
ENTRANCE TERRACE HANDRAILS - ADDISON OAKS CONFERENCE CENTER:
Moved by Mrs. Fox, supported by Mr. Olsen to award the bid for the pur-
chase of handrails for the entrance terrace at the Addison Oaks Con-
ference Center from the low bidder, ACI Steel Fabricators, in the amount
of $3,042.85.
AYES: Fox, R. Kuhn, Lewis, Olsen, Vogt, Wint (6)
NAYS: (0)
Motion carried on a voice vote.
CONFERENCE CENTER EXTERIOR UPDATE - ADDISON OAKS:
Chief of Design J. Figa updated the Commission on the status of the exterior
repairs at the Addison Oaks Conference Center. Mr. Figa expressed his concern
over the exposed chimneys and requested Commission approval to use whatever funds
are necessary to close up the exposed chimneys before winter weather causes any
further damage.
Commission directed staff to have Kirkarchitecture review the site as soon as
possible for suggestions and recommendations for repairs before completing any
additional work on the chimneys.
NEW BUSINESS:
Tax Refund:
Staff was informed that, in accordance with a court settlement between General
Motors and the City of Pontiac, the Parks Commission owes $100,755 as a refund
for a tax overpayment for the years 1985 through 1990. The amount noted is a
reduction of 5% from the actual amount due, plus no interest has been charged.
Commission directed staff to check with Equalization on other possible assessment
changes that could result from lawsuits.
Moved by Mr. Lewis, supported by Mr. R. Kuhn to authorize a refund of
parks and recreation millage funds in the amount of $100,755 for the
years 1985 through 1990 to General Motors in accordance with a court
settlement. This refund will be made subject to repayment of the funds
if the property is sold at higher than existing market value.
AYES: Fox, R. Kuhn, Lewis, Olsen, Vogt, Wint (6)
NAYS: (0)
Motion carried on a voice vote.
Vehicle Use Policy:
Manager Richard noted that, as part of the Oakland County Board of Commissioners'
study on the use of county-owned vehicles ., Parks and Recreation has been included
with recommendations for cutbacks and overnight use.
LI;Le-ceZ
Karen Smith
Recording Secretary
Pecky D. Lewis, Jr.
Secretary
. cl;OMM1S510D. Meeting, a epcemer .1.4.)
-
- The fleet policy recommendations will be presented at the September 5 Finance
Committee Meeting. The Parks Commission suggested a resolution be adopted and
presented at that meeting stating the Parks Commission reserves the right to
establish a policy for the assignment and use of county-owned vehicles to Parks
and Recreation staff.
Moved by Mr. R. Kuhn, supported .by Mrs. Fox to adopt the following
resolution:
WHEREAS, the Oakland County Parks and Recreation Commission is
a separately funded county department established under Public Act 261;
and
WHEREAS, the Parks Commission operates on a millage approved by
the Oakland County electorate; and
WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Commission establishes, approves
and oversees a separate annual operating budget; and
WHEREAS, vehicle use is reviewed as part of the annual budget plan-
ning process; and
WHEREAS, some Parks and Recreation staff are on 24-hour emergency
call; and
WHEREAS, the Parks Commission -appreciates the convenience of a
vehicle pool and service.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Oakland County Parks and
Recreation Commission reserves the right to establish a policy for the
assignment and use of county-owned vehicles to Parks and Recreation
staff. _
AYES: Fox, R. Kuhn, Lewis, Olsen, Vogt, Wint (6)
NAYS: (0)
Motion carried on a voice vote.
MANAGER'S REPORT:
The Manager's Report is as filed in the agenda.
The next Commission meeting will be 9 a.m. on Wednesday, September 18, at Haas
Lake in New Hudson. The meeting will be. followed by a tour of Haas Lake and the
rookery. .
The meeting was adjourned at 11:15 a.m.
3-4
Courthouse Tower
Pontiac, Michigan 48053
Phone: (313) S58-0656
FAX:. (313) 858-0660
Gerald D. Poisson
Chief Assistant Prosecutor
Office of the Prosecuting Attorney
RICHARD THOMPSON
Prosecuting Attorney
County of Oakland
October 1, 1991
John G. Pappageorge, Chairperson
Lease Vehicle Policy Subcommittee
Oakland County Board of Commissioners
1200 North Telegraph Road
Pontiac, Michigan 48341
RE: Policy on Assignment of County Vehicles
Dear Commissioner Pappageorge:
Pursuant to your request we have reviewed your
subcommittee's report concerning the county policy on the
assignment of county vehicles and forward the following comments.
First, we agree with the subcommittee's finding that the
County Executive's current leased vehicle policy is sound. The
Prosecutor's Office has always utilized its leased vehicles in a
manner consistent with the policy established by the County
Executive. We will continue to utilize those vehicles in a
manner consistent with the policy promulgated by the County
Executive.
Next, we note that several of the subcommittee's findings
deal with the interpretation of the County Executive's policy.
We believe that the County Executive's interpretation of the
existing policy has been sound and that under the law it is his
role to interpret and implement the policy.
We also note that we were unable to speculate as to possible
savings to the county by utilizing the subcommittee's proposed
interpretation of the existing policy. The subcommittee's report
does not contain empirical data which would allow us to make cost
saving estimates or projections.
COMMISSIONER PAPPAGEORGE
OCTOBER 1, 1991
PAGE TWO
In closing, I wish to emphasize the Prosecutor's Office will
continue to utilize vehicles in a manner consistent with the
policy promulgated by the County Executive. We know of no
instances where vehicles were used contrary to said policy. We
believe the existing policy is sound and that its interpretation
and implementation are matters properly within the scope of the
County Executive's exercise of his functions.
Very truly yours,
RICHARD THOMPSON
PROSECUTING ATTORNEY
Gerald D. Poisson
Chief Assistant Prosecutor
GDP/drs
85-501 Board of
Comm.
Brennan 0 I S I 1
89-509 Central
Services
Vacant 1 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1 0 89-001 Inst. &
Human Svcs.
Locey
1 None
1 0
87-002 Community
Ment. Health I
Bickelman
86-806 Facilities
Maint. & Ops.
1 0
1
Amendment to Tab C
Recommended Changes to the County's Vehicle Fleet
The major differences between what is listed below and the
original Tab C recommendation are as follows:
Parks and Recreation vehicles have been eliminated from
consideration.
The Sheriff's NET vehicles have been removed from the list of
those vehicles that should be reclassified from "0" to "S". They would
instead remain as "0" vehicles.
The eleven vehicles to be eliminated were agreed at a Finance
Committee meeting in the course of discussions with representatives from
the Executive's Office.
The majority of of those vehicles still on the list to 's.e
reclassified the "0" to "S" category are associated with Director-level
positions.
As amended, the Vehicle Policy Subcommittee's recommended changes
to the vehicle fleet would eliminate eleven vehicles and reclassify 27
vehicles from the "0" to the "S" category.
Vehicle Division
or Unit
Assigned
to
Current I Proposed Net
0 to S
Change
Eliminate
1 88-516
87-512
On
Order
89-502
89-903
90-506
Aviation &
Trans.
Circuit
Court
Comm. &
Econ. Dev:
Computer
Services
Corporation
Counsel
Friend of the
Court
Vacant
Cunningham
Driker
Topiwalla
Hays
Salamone
None
S 1
S I 1
85-503
88-508
Children's
Village
Community
Ment. Health
(Pool)
Cooper
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
27 I 11
1
1
1
1
1
None
None
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
Health
Health
Management
& Budget
Personnel
Department
Probate
Court
Prosecuting
Attorney
Prosecuting
Attorney
Prosecuting
Attorney
Public
Services
Animal
Control
Public
Works
Public
Works
Public Works
Maintenance
Public Works
Maintenance
Risk
Management
Sheriffs
Department
Sheriff's
Department I
Sheriff's
Department
Sheriff's
Department
Solid
Waste
Solid
Waste
Solid
Waste
Gordon I 0
Long 0
Martin I 0
Luzi I 0
Consilio I 0
Kozma I 0
Mode!ski
Slevin I 0
Chisholm I 0
Anderson
Minjoe I 0
Doornweerd I 0
Walker I 0
Tessier I 0
Fayne 0
Cunningham 0
Smith I 0
1-1 Russell
Miley 0
Hobart I 0
86-807
88-813
90-511
88-513
85-008
89-501
89-505
On
Order
89-404
88-526
88-524
89-504
88-527
89-503
87-518
87-003
88-410
89-510
90-410
90-821
86-402
86-403
88-518
88-504
90-512
Totals
Facilities
Maint. & Ops.
Facilities
Maint. & Ops.
Facilities
Maint. & Ops.
I
Assigned I Current I Proposed I Net Change
I 0 to S I Eliminate
I
to
Vehicle Division
or Unit
85-501 I Board of
I Comm.
Brennan
89-509 Central
Services
88-516 Aviation &
Trans.
87-512 Circuit
Court
On
Order
88-523
85-412
89-502
89-903
90-506
Comm. &
Econ. Dev..
Comm. &
Econ. Dev.
Comm. &
Econ. Dev.
Computer
Services
Corporation
Counsel
Friend of the
Court
Salamone
(Pool)
(Pool)
Topiwalla
Hays
Driker
Tab C 1
Recommended Changes to the Ccnifity's Vehicle Fleet
The first three columns of the table below are self-explanatory.
The next four columns depend on understanding the following symbols:
"0" means the vehicle is taken home every night and on weekends
by the same person.
"S" means the vehicle is for comMon use by a given department and
is not habitually taken home. It remains instead on County
property or property approved for County use. This does not
preclude the taking home of an "S" vehicle for a specific
task that is authorized on each occasion by the responsible
department head.
The table below indicates that, in the opinion of the members of
the Leased Vehicle Policy Subcommittee, 58 County "0" vehicles should
instead be designated as "S" vehicles. Moreover, the subcommittee
believes that the fleet should be reduced by 13 vehicles.
A close look at the proposed changes shows that the lion's share
of the shift from the "0" to "S" category comes from two considerations.
One is the subcommittees determination that the "0" vehicles
assigned to director-level employees represents a convenience more than
it does a necessity. In almost all situations, the tasks required
during normal duty hours or during off hours can be accomplished by
either using an "S" vehicle or by using a personal vehicle and charging
mileage.
The other consideration that created a large shift from the "0" to
"S" category was the determination that the 24 vehicles assigned to the
Narcotics Enforcement Team (NET) should parallel the recent decision by
the State to move its NET vehicles from the "0" to "S" category.
89-001 Inst. &
Human Svc
85-503 I Children's
I Village
87-002 Community
Ment. Health
88-513 Health
88-508 Community
Ment. Health
Cooper
Bickelman
Gordon
None
85-008 Health I Long
/
Frfe_K
7eigide.T7 /A-)
or..) 0-A LL
,
ILI f1.1.1...
f-)
• .
Recreation
88-505 Parks &
Recreation
87-511 Parks &
Recreation
90-508 Parks &
Recreation
89-508 Parks &
Recreation
Kipke,
Wells ,
87-515
88-520
88-506 Parks &
Recreation
Parks &
Recreation
Parks &
Recreation
I Thibodeau
Stencil
I--P-arks-& —
I Recreation
-M anseJdzI. 71)?t.3 t--(3
e,
1n.A.
0,0 LL
ss,
/hi-FuCat CLOT-6i
Ictr=1:12a4.14)
89-501-
89-505
Management -- - Martin
& Budget°
Personnel Luzi
Department
On Probate
Order Court
Consilio
89-404 Prosecuting Kozma
Attorney
88-526 Prosecuting Modelski
Attorney
88-524 Prosecuting
Attorne
89-504 Public
Services
Chisholm
89-503
88-527 Animal
Control
Public
Works
Anderson
Minjoe
87-518 Public
Works
Doornweerd
2 Tab
Public Works
Maintenance
Public Works
Maintenance
Risk
Management
Sheriff's
Department
88-010 1
88-011
8 8-0 12
88-001
88-003
88-004
88-005
88-711
88-714
0 1
0 I
1
1
S
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
None
None
None
1
1
1
1111111111
1
1
1
S
1
Sheriff's
Department
Sheriff's
Department
Sheriff's
Department
Sheriff's
Department
Sheriff's
Department
Sheriff's
Department
Sheriff's
Department
Sheriff's
Department
She
Department
NET
NET
NET
NET
NET
NET
NET
NET
Walker 87-003
88-410
89-510
90-410
90-821 I Sheriff's
Department
87-008 I Sheriff
Departmen
87-004 1 Sheriff's
Department
87-013 'Sheriff's
1, Department
89-403 Sheriff's
, Department
88-015 !Sheriff's
Department
89-408
88-016
87-417
89-407 1
87-418
R9-003
87-702
87-416
88-405
Sheriff's
Department
Sheriff's
Department
Sheriff's
Department
Sheriff's
Department
Sheriff's
Department
Sheriff's
Department
Sheriff's
Department
Sheriff's
Department
Sheriff's
Department
Cunningham
Russell
Zeeman
Tessier
Fayne
NET
NET
NET
NET
NET
NET
NET -
NET
NET
NET
NET
NET
Tab C
Vehicle Use Guidelines
What follows on this page are guidelines published last month by
the County Sheriff concerning the proper and ethical use of County
vehicles. On the following pages are the guidelines that were put in
effect by the County Drain Commissioner.
While the Vehicle Policy Committee has not done an extensive
search of each of the entities presided over by an elected official, the
committee recommends that guidelines similar to those in this section
of the report should be incorporated into the County's vehicle policy.
Proposal for Vehicle Usage - To be issued July 1, 1991
OAKLAND COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT ASSIGNED-VEHICLE POLICY
It is the policy of the Oakland County Sheriff's Department to provide
County-assigned vehicles to those employees who need assigned vehicles to
carry out their job assignments in the most economical and feasible manner.
It is understood that assigned vehicles are not to be used for personal
activities.
Approved use -
1. Driving to and from work. .
2. On Department business regardless of the time of day. .
3. Responding to any emergency, "police, or Corrections Divisions
problem that needs supervision, investigation, or assistance.
4. For field supervision at any time.
Violation of this Policy
Any violation of this policy will result in disciplinary action and may
result in revocation of the assigned vehicle.
Tab 0
DEPARTMENT OF THE DRAIN COMMISSIONER
COUNTY VEHICLE POLICY
RULES OF CONDUCT
ROBERT H. FREDERICKS
D pily
55313970
GEORGE W. KUHN
OAKLAND COUNTY DRAIN COMMISSIONER
ONE PUBLIC WORKS ID rtivi
WATERFORD, MICHIGAN 4E332819 07
858°0958
FAX # (313) 85B-1066
GLEN YRJANATNEN
DvplIty & Cf Ensinerr
Drain .51 L), .s E.nerler;ng
858..09S
WILLIAM E. EILOCKOW
Chief Eneer
Water &Sewer EngIr.eering
8.59•109-1
The Drain Commissioner hereby adopts the following Rules of Conduct
applicable to the use of County vehicles assigned with overnight
privileges to Drain Commissioner employees, thereby establishing a
clear and consistent procedure and policy for the use of said
vehicles.
1. Vehicles in general shall only be used for official
County business during the normal work day. After hours
or weekend use of a vehicle is pe/wissible if the
employee assigned the vehicle is required to perfoLi,1
County work assignments during these off hour time
periods.
2. At the end of the work day an employee assigned a vehicle
with take home privileges may drive the vehicle home, and
shall then park and not use the vehicle until the next
scheduled work day.
3. Employees with take home privileges of County vehicles
shall not permit non County employees to drive the
vehicle. .
4. Employees with the take home privilege of a County
vehicle shall limit their use of the vehicle to
occasional stops for errands, etc., mad e along the normal
route of and as part of the normal evening drive home
from the work place. The vehicle shall not be used to run
errands, or to make other stops, etc., that are not
located along the route of the normal drive home.
5. Employees with assigned County vehicles shall make their
vehicle available as "pool cars", for use by other County
employees in need of a County vehicle during the work
- day, when they themselves are not using the vehicle.
6. Employees with assigned County vehicles shall make
arrangements to leave their County vehicle at the work
place, for use by other County employees, when they are
on leave from their job for more than 3 days.
7. Any altercation, or accident, etc., involving a County
vehicle shall be promptly reported to Drain Office
management, and appropriate accident and police reports
shall be completed in accordance with general County car
use policy.
- '
OAKLAND COUNTY DRAIN COMMISSIONER
DEPARTMENT OF THE DRAIN COMMISSIONER
COUNTY VEHICLE POLICY
RULES OF CONDUCT
(Page Two)
8. Any use of a County assigned vehicle that may appear
questionable, or give the appearance of an impropriety,
shall be brought to the attention of Drain Office
management for disposition. .
All employees of the Drain Commissioner's Office assigned the use
of a County vehicle with take hone privileges, by their receipt of
this notice, are hereby informed and made aware of the Drain
Commissioner's "Rules of Conduct" for the use of said vehicles, and
understand that violation of these guidelines may result in the
suspended or permanent loss of the vehicle assignment and/or take
home privilege, including possible change in duty assignments to
tasks not requiring the need for a County vehicle, and/or other
disciplinary action in accordance with the provisions of the
Oakland County Merit System.
June 4, 1991
- -
3 Tab D