Council eliminates city engineer?s position

The Washington City Council voted 5-1 Tuesday to eliminate the position of city engineer. Councilors Merlin Hagie, Mike Roth, Karen Wilson-Johnson, Fred Stark and Russ Zieglowsky voted in favor of eliminating the position and Bob Shepherd voted against it. The council later voted to make the date of elimination Dec. 31. The current city engineer is Rob McDonald. His salary is about $74,000 a year. The city has had a city engineer since 1985.

Hagie made the motion to eliminate the city engineer?s position. Mayor Sandra Johnson did not accept Hagie?s motion on the grounds that there was no evidence that eliminating the position would save money. Roth said the finance and personnel committee had already discussed eliminating the position and that two of its members, Zieglowsky and Roth, supported it.

?What else do you want?? Roth asked.

Johnson said she wanted a report that defines the cost-savings.

Stark said that if Roth wished, he could challenge the mayor?s refusal to allow the motion. He made that motion and Hagie seconded it. There was then a discussion about how the council should proceed. City Attorney Craig Arbuckle was not at the meeting but the council was able to speak with him via phone.

Johnson found Robert?s Rules of Order on the Internet. After reading through the pertinent section and consulting with Arbuckle, the council decided to take a vote on whether to sustain Johnson?s objection to the motion. That vote failed with only two councilors, Stark and Shepherd, voting for it and the other four voting against it. Then the council voted 5-1 to pass Hagie?s original motion.

Johnson asked the finance committee members if they had a study to show that the city would save money by getting rid of the city engineer. Johnson referred to engineering expenses from 2007.

?My rough numbers are $2.1 million in projects with 15 percent going to engineering,? she said. ?If you outsource that it will cost $375,000 just for engineering, if we can go through with all those projects. I don?t see the savings there, but I bet you?ve got a study which you?ve all put together.?

Roth said he thought it would be a cost-saving measure because the city?s major projects have been completed such as the paving on South Ninth and Polk Street and the city?s portion of the engineering for the sewer plant.

Zieglowsky said he hadn?t ?done the numbers? but that he had discussed the idea with other people, and the consensus he heard was that the city would save money in the long run by eliminating the position.

Stark said few towns Washington?s size employ full-time city engineers. However, he said that most of the towns its size have public works directors. Stark said the incoming city administrator, Brent Hinson, recommended waiting for the cash flow analysis to be performed before the city make a decision about the engineer?s position. Johnson said she did not want to tie the administrator?s hands by making a decision about the position before he arrived.

The council reviewed a list of upcoming city projects to be done later this fall and next spring. Roth said the list of projects buttressed his argument for eliminating the position. He said in-house engineering is needed in three of the 20 projects listed.

?Can anyone tell me how much money we?ve saved by having this position?? Roth asked.

Shepherd responded, ?When we had our sewer separation job for the downtown, [former city engineer Liz Finarty] came in and came up with a thing that saved us $1.5 million in one project. That, in itself, paid for every year she was here. She came in and told the engineering firm that was supposed to be doing the study how to save that money because they did not think of it. That was in 2000.?

?So there was one instance in 10 years?? Roth asked.

?No sir, I can give you many instances,? Shepherd said. ?The engineering position has saved us when they did the design for the downtown, which was done in-house. An engineer always saves us if you use them and direct them. And if we?re not directing them, shame on us.?