GREENFIELD — City Councilors unanimously approved borrowing up to $250,000 to replace a generator that serves as back-up power for Greenfield police, fire, and ambulance dispatch during a special City Council meeting Tuesday night.
Mayor Virginia “Ginny” Desorgher told the council that the generator located at the police station failed on April 1. As the station serves as the 911 dispatch center for Greenfield and the Franklin Regional Council of Governments (FRCOG), the station is mandated by Code of Massachusetts Regulations 560 CMR 2.00 to have an emergency power generator that can keep the building operational for a minimum of 24 hours after an outage.
“It is absolutely necessary we have a generator,” Desorgher said. “It is the backup for all police, fire and ambulance calls.”
Joe Pugs, the city’s central maintenance and facilities director, said the city tests the generator approximately once a year, and testing earlier this month showed it was not producing as much power as is required. Further testing indicated the components of the generator were failing and would need to be repaired or replaced.
He said given the age of the generator, additional parts were likely to begin failing soon as well, and therefore it made more sense for the city to purchase a new generator rather than spending $100,000 fixing the current one.
“Testing showed a very critical component, the lining of the generator, was failing,” Pugs said. “The unit is over 15 years old, and it would ultimately see the failure of other components in the near future.”
He noted that a new generator would likely have a lifespan of 15-20 years.
Desorgher said that immediately after the generator failed, the city began looking into grant opportunities and contacted state and federal legislators. The Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency had a generator available, but it was too small to meet the city’s needs, and seeking a grant would require the city to continue renting a generator, which Pugs had been able to negotiate down from $20,000 to $14,000 a month.
She said borrowing funds would allow the city to find a permanent replacement more quickly.
“We hadn’t expected that to happen this year,” Desorgher said. “There really is not much of a choice here.”
Councilors asked whether any of the proposed capital expenses for this year could be pushed back and whether the new generator would require the city to reduce its capital purchases next year. Desorgher said she would like to continue with the capital purchase schedule outlined in the city’s capital plan, as equipment and projects on the list will only continue to increase in cost, and pushing projects back could ultimately cost the city more money.
She said while there is a capital plan, the city needs to be flexible and replace equipment, like the generator, that breaks down outside the expected timeframe.
“We have a capital plan for what we expect to need to be replaced,” Desorgher said. “But you don’t know when your refrigerator is going to die.”
