|
COMMUNICATIONS CAPITAL PROJECTS COMMITTEE FEBRUARY 17, 2004 10:00 A.M. COURTHOUSE CONFERENCE ROOM Present: P. Penniman, Chair; R. Robertson; G. Totman; B. Blanchard; T. Todd, Legislature; L. Shurtleff, Emergency Response; K. Borgella, Planning Department; W. Skinner, Public Information; A. LeMaro, Facilities, S. Whicher, Administration; P. Meskill, Tompkins County Sheriff; M. Shakarjian, Administration Guests: D. Buck, Groton Police Department; K. Lansing, Cayuga Heights Police Department; S. Leonard, S. DiRaimo, NYSTEC Consulting Firm County
Called to Order The meeting was called to order at 2:00 p.m. Changes to the Agenda Mr. Penniman, Chair, indicated that unless an individual felt it necessary, the proposed agenda item of Executive Session: Contract Negotiations would be removed. Schedule of Meeting Due to a conflict with the originally scheduled date and time for this Committee meeting, it was changed to the Third Thursday at 10:00 a.m. Approval of Minutes It was MOVED by Ms. Robertson, seconded by Mr. Todd, and unanimously approved by voice vote, to accept the minutes of November 24, 2003, as amended. It was MOVED by Ms. Robertson, seconded by Mr. Todd, and unanimously approved by voice vote, to accept the minutes of February 3, 2003, as amended. Department of Transportation Relocation Project Status Update Ms. Borgella reported at this time we are awaiting a determination from the Town and Village of Dryden regarding the annexation of property. It is anticipated that a decision should be made within the month and are preparing to move ahead once this is completed. Ms. Blanchard said she believed at the March 11th Town Meeting a decision would be made. Ms. Robertson said that she had attended the February Town Meeting where it was discussed to have a working meeting for this topic. She has requested to be informed when the meeting would occur. Ms. Robertson said that the Town's considerations include buying a separate parcel for the Town Hall and is not certain if this additional issue may hold up the project. Ms. Blanchard said it is her understanding that the vote to take place will be on only the parcel for the proposed Department of Transportation site. Phase I Project Update Ms. Shakarjian reported that Motorola has been issued the building permit to locate the shelter at the interim site. Within the next twenty days the old generator should be removed, the new generator in place, and it is hoped to have the new system at this site operational in early March. As this work is being completed the work at the Emergency Response Center will continue; it is hoped to have the electrical work completed by February 23rd, followed by the installation of the consoles by the end of March. With the exception of some Legacy work and minor work by Midstate the only other piece to make the system operational is the telephone switch for which we recently received proposals. In addition, Ms. Shakarjian said discussions have begun with on the proposed South Hill tower rebuild and possible options. These discussions included modeling by a consulting firm to provide graphic illustrations of the possible structures. On February 23, 2004, a meeting with the Town of Ithaca will take place in order to provide the Town with information on this project and an opportunity to express any thoughts they may have. She reported that a Federal appropriation request form
has been received from Senator Schumer; this will be completed to request
additional funding for subscriber equipment associated with the project.
In 2003 a request was made for $4 million, with an award of $500,000 to
be used for public safety equipment. This year a similar request
will be made. In response to questions by the Committee, Ms. Shakarjian
noted that the application is made for general public safety equipment
so that there is flexibility, however the intent is subscriber equipment.
Last year's funds have not yet been received. While not confirmed
it is believed that the process will work as a reimbursement. Ms.
Robertson asked if there was any time restriction for use of these funds;
Mr. Whicher said it was through an omnibus bill and a notice was given
that $500,000 was granted and we are awaiting additional information on
the actual process. The focus of the first year was to reduce the
overall cost of subscriber equipment and that need still exists.
Mr. LeMaro reported that the majority of the work on the building should be done by February 27, 2004. The indoor air-quality tests have been completed with the preliminary tests being good. The Certificate of Occupancy inspection is complete and the certificate is expected within the week to allow the moving of staff. The fiber/phone lines between the Crash Fire Rescue (CFR) building and the Emergency Response Center (ERC) were run for phone, and Information Technology Services is working on local computer hookups. The electrical contractor will be done shortly, with the lead employee of the original contractor now under the employ of Burns, the replacement electrical company. An exhaust for the generator for the building needs to be installed and it is expected to be completed within the next two weeks. Phase I Historical Overview In order to provide a clear understanding of Phase I of the Communications project, Ms. Shakarjian gave a PowerPoint presentation of the historical background from its inception to the present time. Hard copies of the slides are available with the original minutes on file at the Legislative office. Mr. Penniman stated he understands that not all designs could have been laid out in the RFP, but all steps should have been included and were not. This was confirmed by Ms. Shakarjian who said that not all factors were known at the time. She explained that the intent was for a county-wide system, not an interim link as it became. The presentation then addressed the phone switch. Mr. Whicher stated that the original discussions included the feasibility of leasing the system, followed by a review of the potential for purchasing the switch from Motorola under a sole-source contract. Further investigation indicated that under our purchasing rules the switch would have to be bid out since multiple vendors could provide the service and equipment. There were five proposals for the 911 phone system and it was then narrowed down to three; and after a lengthy final meeting the consensus was the choice should be Positron. . Ms. Robertson then inquired about the expenses related to the change in site location for the interim link and was informed that although the location changed, the cost was not substantially more. Mr. Whicher wished to express his thanks to Mr. McEwen who assisted in reviewing the proposals received. Resolution: Authorizing the County Administrator to Enter Into An Agreement for a 911 Phone System at the Emergency Response Center It was MOVED by Ms. Blanchard, seconded by Ms. Robertson. A discussion followed during which Ms. Blanchard inquired about the operability of the system with the loss of the integration of the equipment included in the Motorola proposal. Mr. Shurtleff explained that the integration would have allowed the sharing of equipment platforms, which would have eliminated some steps in the process of dispatching. He also indicated it would have provided only one vendor to service the equipment rather than two. Mr. Shurtleff said he originally thought that the total cost would have been less, however with the figures and specifications having been reviewed by the consultants it was felt that to have the integration would have ultimately cost more, Motorola's specified equipment may become obsolete in the near future and replacement cost increased their price. Mr. Penniman said he had attended a portion of the meeting and was impressed with the depth of the review. He said the executive session was not necessary as possible concerns about vendors had been resolved. Mr. Shurtleff said in discussions with his staff it was felt that the suggested system would work. Mr. McEwen said that the consultants felt the equipment proposed by Motorola would become obsolete within a few years; although Motorola could have offered other equipment they did not. Of the other two remaining vendors it was determined that Positron offer was the best choice. Ms. Blanchard inquired if Motorola was asked if they would offer an alternative proposal. Mr. DiRaimo said that the integrated piece was proprietary equipment developed by Plant Pallas for Motorola, and there were questions regarding Plant's approval to support the equipment; with this in mind it was determined that there would be problems in the future to receive support, as well as the level of the technology being in question. He indicated that this particular issue was brought up several times during the Phase I project. Mr. McEwen said that Motorola only made the one offer, that to get another offer would require going to an outside vendor; and the integration piece would not be guaranteed by Motorola. He indicated if Motorola were chosen it would possibly mean a large expense in the next several years to replace this equipment. Mr. Whicher said that every attempt had been made to keep the Motorola phone switch in place, however it was clearly shown that it was not in the County's best interest to do so and the decision was made for the Positron equipment. Ms. Robertson then inquired what the additional position noted in the RFP was for and was informed by Mr. Whicher that it was a request for the cost of adding additional equipment in the future if the County determined it necessary. Mr. Shurtleff also clarified that maintenance would be covered under the standard budget and that the current year's maintenance budget is needed to maintain the present equipment. Mr. Shurtleff felt the phone system would still be eligible for State funding reimbursement as it will allow 911 calls to be made from cellular systems. A voice vote by members resulted unanimously approving to submit the following resolution to the full Legislature for its approval: RESOLUTION NO. 30 - AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT FOR A 911 PHONE SYSTEM AT THE NEW EMERGENCY RESPONSE CENTER WHEREAS, the county is constructing a new Emergency Response Center,
and
Mr. Whicher indicated Phase I is almost complete and asked the Committee for direction on how to proceed with Phase II of the Public Safety Communications System. He reported that at this time a resolution exists that allows the County to enter into negotiations with Motorola; however, a review of the finances and technological advances have provided additional insight. With regard to financial obligations it is theoretically possible to save funding if the County were to do a Request for Proposal or Request for Information to see if other vendors are interested. A review of existing projects around the nation indicated that in several instances Ma/Comm had come in as lower bidder, but as the projects are ongoing it is difficult to know what the final cost will be. Mr. Whicher explained that these projects are done over a long period of time and that the cost of the technology changes throughout the project as it progresses. Mr. Whicher recalled that we had asked in the RFP for an integrated voice data system and that Motorola did not provide that. Therefore, it is possible that our final cost could be higher than the original Motorola bid. Mr. Whicher reported that at this time the State-Wide Network (SWN) has once again requested an extension on bids until April 2, 2004. The SEQR Review process has begun but it is unknown what is next. Mr. Whicher expressed his loss of faith in the State's decision making ability process and noted that while the County had hoped to have knowledge of the State decision prior to proceeding it has become apparent that we must continue in order to meet County needs. Mr. Whicher said calls were made to Ma/Comm inquiring informally what they might suggest differently if they were to bid. He was told about some suggestions that provide more narrow-banding capability; however, in discussions with Mr. Shurtleff it was not thought it would be a significant enough advance to delay the project. Mr. DiRaimo from NYSTEC said that all of the technology will change with time and explained several differences in technology. Mr. Meskill noted that it was required by New York State to have APCO 25 standards. Mr. DiRaimo said that the link between two systems must be APCO 25 compatible and that both Motorola and Ma/Comm offer this. Following this a lengthy discussion took place regarding the pros and cons of rebidding or preparing a request for information (RFI). Members of the Committee and the NYSTEC representatives as well as Mr. Meskill, Sheriff, Mr. Shurtleff, Emergency Response Director, and former police Chief McEwen provided their insight into the matter, expressing concerns that delays of more than a year may take place if the project were rebid, others felt the delay would only be three to four months. Another suggestion was to seek consultants to guarantee that the figures and plans received by Motorola are accurate. Ms. Blanchard suggested working as a partner with Motorola and feels it would improve the working relationship. Ms. Robertson stated she feels that the County needs to be sure to receive the best price for the equipment needed. The majority of those present expressed a great deal of concern regarding a delay in moving forward, noting the present equipment may not continue to provide necessary functionality and cause a public safety hazard. Mr. Penniman expressed a desire to move forward if the project could stay within the budget amount. Ms. Kiefer recalled this committee declined to extend its original deadline, which is why we only got one bid response. She thinks that decision was in large part because of pressure from the public-safety community. She says after hearing today about how Motorola handled the phone switch equipment, it is clear that Motorola, as any corporation, acts in its own interests. Similarly, Tompkins County should be businesslike and look out for its own interests, so it is important to go out for bids or information again. She believes this would take a matter of months, not years. It was MOVED by Ms. Blanchard, seconded by Mr. Totman to charge Mr. Whicher to move forward with the Public Safety Communication System as it presently exists with Motorola. Mr. Joseph said time matters, but so does the performance of the system and the cost. He said Motorola's bid did not respond to all we asked for. We have a chance of getting there by bid or by negotiations, and he asked specifically how much time a rebid will take and how long negotiations for what we wanted will take. Additional discussions ensued during which Mr. Whicher stated the staff has worked long and hard on the project and with good faith, worked for the good of the County; he had hoped to have information related to the SWN project to be able to advance in the most advantageous manner. Mr. Whicher said it is time to make a determination of what way to proceed and he needs the Committee's direction. It was noted that the County could either rebid or negotiate to get the type of system they desire, with the rebid process it was thought it could take up to two years. Ms. Blanchard was excused at 3:15 p.m. Mr. Penniman suggested and received consensus to amend the motion to include that the project stay within the budget of the Capital Program. Ms. Robertson expressed concern that it could not be guaranteed to stay within the budget and said she cannot support the motion. A voice vote on the motion to move forward with the Communications Capital Project with Motorola, setting a cap on the contracted amount resulted as follows: Ayes - 3 Legislators Penniman, Totman, and Todd); Noes - 1 (Legislator Robertson); Excused - 1 (Legislator Blanchard). MOTION CARRIED. Mr. Whicher expressed his disappointment regarding statements made during the meeting related to staff. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 3:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted by Karen Fuller, Deputy Clerk.
Questions or Comments
|