COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA2 COMMITTEE ON TECHNOLOGY AND3 INFORMATION SERVICES4 - - -5 Room 400, City Hall6 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Thursday, June 4, 20097 2:35 p.m. 8 - - - 9 10 PRESENT: COUNCILMAN BRIAN J. O'NEILL, CHAIR11 COUNCILMAN FRANK DiCICCO COUNCILMAN CURTIS JONES, JR.12 COUNCILMAN JACK KELLY COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN13 COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO 14 BILL 090097 - An ordinance authorizing the15 Department of Public Property of the City of Philadelphia to enter into an agreement with16 The School District of Philadelphia for: School District use of the City's 80017 megahertz public safety radio communications system...18 19 20 - - -21 22 V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Services23 Eleven Penn Center 1835 Market Street, Suite 60024 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.267025 2 1
Good2 afternoon. I'd like to call to order the3 hearing of the Committee on Technology4 and Information Services on Bill No.5 090097.6 Will the Clerk please read the7 bill.8
Authorizing the9 Department of Public Property of the City10 of Philadelphia to enter into an11 agreement with the School District of12 Philadelphia for: School District use of13 the City's 800 megahertz public safety14 radio communications system; provision of15 radios and equipment to the School16 District for the use of such system; and17 assignment and co-licensing by the School18 District to the City of certain federal19 licenses for use of the 800 megahertz20 spectrum; all under certain terms and21 conditions.22
I'd like23 to state for the record that there is a24 quorum of the Committee. 11 COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK:12 Good afternoon, Chairman O'Neill and13 members of the Committee on Technology14 and Information Services. My name is15 Joan Schlotterbeck. 19 090097, intergovernmental agreement with20 the School District of Philadelphia for21 use of the City's 800 megahertz public22 safety system. 10 This endeavor began with the11 Shared Services Task Force that was12 convened jointly by the City, City13 Council and the School District. 21 Once the four-year agreement is22 approved by both parties, the City will23 turn over to the School District radios24 and equipment to be used by their25 5 6/4/09 - TECHNOLOGY - BILL 0900971 security staff of approximately 100 and2 by the School District's operations staff3 in each school, 275. 21 The City will program radios with22 templates agreed upon by the City and the23 District. 20 We are asking for City21 Council's approval of this agreement. 18
What is19 the amount of the Homeland Security grant20 that this is part of; do you know?21 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO: The22 total amount is $8.3 million.23
8.3?24 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO:25 8 6/4/09 - TECHNOLOGY - BILL 0900971 Yes.2 Deputy Commissioner Frank3 Punzo.4
What is5 the length of warranty for the radios?6 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO:7 Three years.8
Is there9 any cost to the City for this agreement10 with the School District?11 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO: The12 cost to the City is for the procurement13 of some of the radios. The grant does14 not allow us to pay for every radio. But15 we have done the procurement of the16 radios over the last -- we've done a17 procurement of the radios over the last18 year and a half, so it has come not out19 of the General Fund, but out of the 9-1-120 fund. So no funds from the General Fund.21 The PSIC grant is a grant where we had to22 provide 20 percent match for the entire23 grant. This contributed towards that.24
Can you25 9 6/4/09 - TECHNOLOGY - BILL 0900971 describe how this agreement will enhance2 the safety of the school children, just3 in your own words?4 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO:5 Basically, we've piloted this. We have6 about 25 radios in the school police's7 hands today, but by allowing the School8 District police to have a direct9 communication to our Police and Fire10 Departments, we'll enhance that, as well11 as with the school safety offices that12 are in each school, it will allow direct13 communication and better communication to14 their police force as well as to our15 police force.16 And, finally, as it relates to17 the buses, security from the children18 being transported to and from school and19 then ultimately to look out at the20 Homeland Security aspect of if we had to21 do evacuations, having the ability to22 communicate with those buses and have23 them evacuate people would be another24 plus.25 10 6/4/09 - TECHNOLOGY - BILL 0900971
It sounds2 simple, but it really can be a big deal3 under certain circumstances.4 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO:5 Absolutely.6
Where7 public safety is really at risk.8 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO:9 Yes.10
What11 companies will be providing the radios12 and other equipment?13 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO:14 Motorola.15
And my16 last question, it's my understanding over17 the years the National League of18 Cities -- I hear about the spectrum and19 the limited number of channels and things20 that are out there. Are new channels,21 being able to procure new channels,22 almost invaluable or priceless? I mean,23 you can't pay a million dollars for one,24 right?25 11 6/4/09 - TECHNOLOGY - BILL 0900971 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO:2 Correct. You just can't go out and buy3 one.4
Because5 they're not available.6 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO: To7 quote Visa or American Express, they are8 priceless. You can't go out and secure9 them and go to the FCC and say, I want10 five or I want ten of these. They just11 aren't for sale, which made them, of12 course, valuable to us in that we worked13 hand in hand with the School District,14 but that their value -- you can't put a15 dollar value on them, a direct16 correlation of the dollar value. But if17 you could go out and buy them, I'm sure18 that they would be in a million plus19 range for each one of the channels.20
Councilman25 12 6/4/09 - TECHNOLOGY - BILL 0900971 Kelly. Okay.2
Then I'll3 follow up.4 COUNCILMAN KELLY:5 Mr. Chairman, I just want to say that due6 to the late start of this Committee7 hearing, unfortunately, I had made8 previous commitments and it would require9 me to leave this Committee, but I would10 like to go on the record as supporting11 and voting for Bill No. 090097.12
Thank you.13 COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK:14 Thank you.15
For the20 record, I just for the record want it to21 be known that the seed on this idea, this22 opportunity, developed right here in this23 Council Chamber. I'm not naming names,24 but I want this Committee that you25 13 6/4/09 - TECHNOLOGY - BILL 0900971 describe for making these relationships,2 it all started right here during the3 budget process. So let's not forget4 that.5 The question that I want to ask6 is, what do you mean by "co-license"?7 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO:8 Co-license means that the licenses with9 the FCC will be in the name of the School10 District as well as the City of11 Philadelphia.12
That leads13 me to one problem I'm having, and I think14 I told you that during the briefing.15 There are ten channels there.16 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO:17 Correct.18
And I19 understand that there's some hesitation20 by the School District to release the21 additional five channels. Is this a22 trust? I just don't understand what the23 hesitation of the School District would24 be to give us all five. Do they think25 14 6/4/09 - TECHNOLOGY - BILL 0900971 we're going out of business or we're2 going to not let them use the system?3 Because I understand that moving all ten4 channels into the system immediately5 would be a savings to the City and have6 to install five at one time, five later.7 It just doesn't make any sense that --8 we're not in a situation here where all9 ten channels can come over at the same10 time.11 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO:12 Councilman, the reality is, we could13 install all ten channels at the same14 time. The co-licensing I believe was15 done because as we had discussions and16 the length of the agreement that we were17 able to put in place, which is four18 years, our School District would have19 loved to have this or 10- or 20-year20 agreement going forward, at which point21 they would have released all ten channels22 and not co-licensed them. But technology23 changes, Administrations change, City24 Council members change. Everything25 15 6/4/09 - TECHNOLOGY - BILL 0900971 changes in a span of time, and I don't2 want to say it was an idea of lack of3 trust, but there was concern that after a4 four-year period could the City decide to5 walk away from the radio system and then6 not leave the School District with any7 opportunity to have channels available if8 they had to go back onto the system on9 their own. The likelihood of that, you10 know, is not high, but it is something11 that's there.12
Would you13 agree that the lawyers that work both for14 the School District and the City of15 Philadelphia could not come up with a16 document that makes this a relationship17 that's by ordinance?18 I just don't like the fact the19 way we're doing this deal. I'd like to20 see all the ten channels come at once,21 and assure the School District by law, if22 we have to do it by ordinance, that23 giving us the ten channels, they're on24 the system as long as it's called the25 16 6/4/09 - TECHNOLOGY - BILL 0900971 School District of Philadelphia and this2 is called the City of Philadelphia. It3 makes no sense to do this the way we're4 doing it.5 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO:6 Councilman, I can't speak from a law7 perspective, but I believe that as both8 counsels discussed this, it was not based9 on, I believe, our Charter. Unless this10 were to go through an authority, we11 cannot enter into an agreement that is12 longer than four years as the City of13 Philadelphia.14
So why can't15 we -- and I don't want to belabor this.16 Why can't we get all ten channels, enter17 into a four-year agreement and then have18 another agreement? Again, it just -- and19 I'll let my colleague maybe help me with20 this, the lawyer here, explain why we21 can't do this in a different way.22 COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK:23 Would it be helpful if we invite the24 folks from the School District to the25 17 6/4/09 - TECHNOLOGY - BILL 0900971 table?2 COUNCILMAN RIZZO:3 Mr. Chairman?4
I have no5 problem with that. I mean, I know one6 thing, we have a four-year limit by7 Charter. We make a decision to go8 outside through an authority to get9 around the Charter, and that decision was10 made not to do that in this case.11 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO:12 Correct.13 (Witness approached witness14 table.)15
Maybe the16 Charter, it's one of those areas that 50,17 60 years ago it made sense. It might not18 make sense anymore when you get issues19 like this.20 But identify yourself, please.21
John Lombardi,22 I'm Senior Vice-President, Transportation23 Services.24 With regard to the agreement,25 18 6/4/09 - TECHNOLOGY - BILL 0900971 it's a four-year agreement. We were2 prepared to do a 99-year agreement with3 the City. We don't have any reservations4 about the system being turned over to the5 City. I mean, we've been buying fuel6 with the City for over 30 years. We view7 that as a similar arrangement. I don't8 think we would ever stop buying fuel with9 the City. I don't think we would ever10 stop using the radio systems together.11 So we were prepared to do a12 99-year lease or some type of an13 agreement that would result in permanent14 transfer of the system.15
So,16 Mr. Lombardi, is it too late in the game17 to get all the ten frequencies over now?18
I don't believe19 so. I mean, I have to get approval from20 the School Reform Commission, but --21
We can't25 19 6/4/09 - TECHNOLOGY - BILL 0900971 do it by the Charter.2
Why can't3 you -- if you have this trust that -- you4 just explained about the fuel. In the5 four-year agreement, why can't you give6 us all ten frequencies then?7
Well, if things8 change in four years, we lose our9 frequencies, we have no ability to10 communicate.11
We have21 another witness. Could you identify22 yourself.23
I'm Robert Sutton.24 I'm the Divisional Deputy City Solicitor25 20 6/4/09 - TECHNOLOGY - BILL 0900971 in the Law Department dealing with2 technology issues, Intellectual Property3 Division. And this is a subject that we4 had discussed at length with the School5 District over a period of time. There6 was a good deal of concern about exactly7 what the circumstances would be that8 these channels would be turned over to9 the City. Initially we were talking10 about having all ten channels turned over11 to the City. As a part of compromise12 over time and given the number of years13 that we felt that we could enter into14 this agreement without going into the15 additional complication of doing it16 through an authority, the parties that17 were involved with the negotiation18 decided that it would be best to set up19 this agreement now, get it started, it20 goes for a period of time, it can be21 renewed following these years if both22 parties give notice to the other that23 they're interested in continuing it, and,24 of course, there could be a subsequent25 21 6/4/09 - TECHNOLOGY - BILL 0900971 agreement.2 Once the working arrangements3 are established, it's more likely that4 there will be that kind of trust, comfort5 level with continuing the program. But6 the way that it is set up right now is7 that initially five channels would be8 provided to the City, and they would be9 relicensed not -- it's not immediate,10 because it also requires FCC approval for11 transfer of these licenses. And there is12 a further complication because of a13 rebanding procedure that's going on with14 respect to all users of the 800 megahertz15 spectrum throughout the country. And so16 exactly what the timing would be for the17 transfer of these licenses depends in18 part on the FCC approvals.19 But the plan is that we would20 arrange -- we would apply to the FCC for21 transfer of the five to the City and for22 co-licensing of the other five. That23 gives the School District the ability to24 continue using these other frequencies to25 22 6/4/09 - TECHNOLOGY - BILL 0900971 the extent that they're needed, and2 they're needed right now with respect to3 the school transportation system, the4 school buses. This agreement does5 provide that over a period of time the6 City would match School District spending7 to provide 800 megahertz radios for the8 school bus drivers, but the current9 school radio system could continue for a10 period of time also. They would continue11 to use that on these co-licensed12 frequencies, but this also allows the13 City to start using them as well in ways14 that wouldn't interfere with the School15 District use.16 Then if the agreement does17 terminate for some unanticipated reason18 or at the end of the four-year period19 there's a different policy and people20 decide not to go forward with it, then21 those co-licensed channels could, of22 course, continue to be used by the School23 District, and the School District has the24 option to request that they be relicensed25 23 6/4/09 - TECHNOLOGY - BILL 0900971 solely in the name of the School2 District, and because they would have3 continued making use of those, that would4 be easier to provide for.5
Counselor,6 my follow-up to that, and I appreciate7 that, but just so I have it right, the8 first five are coming over, are they9 co-licensed?10
The first five11 that are coming over would be licensed12 entirely by the City.13
Then the17 rest of my question is, the next five18 that you're going to keep, the19 co-licensed, are they still going to come20 to our new system with the first five but21 co-licensed? Are we going to be able to22 use them, the whole ten --23
-- in our25 24 6/4/09 - TECHNOLOGY - BILL 0900971 new system? That's what I'm concerned2 about, because I would like to see all of3 that coming over --4
The City has the5 option of making use of all ten, yes.6 Exactly how that would happen I think is7 still to be determined, because the plans8 for particular frequencies are still up9 in the air in part because of the10 rebanding procedure. So that we have not11 been issued the new frequencies that the12 City will be using for the 800 megahertz13 system. We will have to move over to new14 frequencies. And also Motorola will be15 working -- I'm presuming that the upgrade16 bill that's also on your discussion in17 City Council is approved -- Motorola will18 be working on the engineering for the19 upgraded system.20 I don't think that it is21 specifically determined yet exactly what22 use at what time will be made of any of23 these ten frequencies to be24 transferred -- or the five frequencies to25 25 6/4/09 - TECHNOLOGY - BILL 0900971 be transferred and the five frequencies2 to be co-licensed.3
Okay. So4 what I'm hearing is that even though5 there's going to be this co-licensing,6 those five, the second five, will come7 over but be co-licensed in our system?8
We should think of9 co-licensing as joint use. Both the10 School District and the City can make use11 of those.12
I got it.13 My last question to Public Property --14 thank you both.15 My last question is, in your16 testimony, Commissioner Schlotterbeck17 mentions installation of radios in the18 bus fleet will be performed by City19 technicians. Are we being reimbursed for20 that?21 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO: No,22 Councilman. That is part of the overall23 deal.24
What's the25 26 6/4/09 - TECHNOLOGY - BILL 0900971 value of that?2 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO: I3 would say that's probably, over the span4 of four years -- what is occurring is,5 the School District is buying some buses6 with the radios already installed. We're7 just doing programming. So that would8 have a value of probably in the area of9 $35 to $50. A real installation,10 probably in the $100 to $150 range as our11 technicians. We're not very expensive,12 trust me.13
Just to16 recap, there's nothing that prevents us17 during the period of this agreement from18 entering into a long-term agreement19 without waiting for this to end if both20 sides agree that it's going well?21 COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK:22 That's correct.23
And goes24 through an authority and --25 27 6/4/09 - TECHNOLOGY - BILL 0900971 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO:2 Yes.3
Maybe even4 the Charter will change by then, who5 knows.6 I want to thank both of you and7 our other witnesses.8 Any other questions from the9 Committee?10 (No response.)11
Let me add one12 clarification. We have spoken here about13 this being a four-year agreement. It was14 conceived of as a four-year agreement15 when it was under negotiation. There was16 a good deal of time that passed as it was17 negotiated and even between the18 introduction of this bill and now. It19 was always considered that it would be20 most convenient if the term actually21 ended sometime during the summer recess22 of the schools, and so the agreement is23 actually set up under Section 2 to24 provide for a period ending July 31st,25 28 6/4/09 - TECHNOLOGY - BILL 0900971 2012. Actually, now, considering that2 it's already June of 2009, this would be3 just over a three-year agreement as it's4 written now. However, the City5 Solicitor's Office has the option of6 making minor changes in this that are7 still within the spirit of the bill, and8 so it is possible that actually when we9 work on this and finalize the agreement,10 that we will choose an end date that11 would be in the summer of 2013 rather12 than 2012.13
We don't14 need to do anything today to amend the15 bill to permit that?16
That's correct,17 because this is -- we have been talking18 about a four-year agreement and this is a19 minor change that I think is within the20 discretion of the City Solicitor's Office21 when we finalize the agreement.22
Okay.23 Thank you.24 The hearing, if there are no25 29 6/4/09 - TECHNOLOGY - BILL 0900971 other witnesses, is adjourned. We'll go2 into our public meeting.3 Councilman Rizzo, can I have a4 motion on Bill 090097 with a rules5 suspension.6
Bill No.7 090097 reported out of this Committee8 with a favorable recommendation, with the9 rules of Council suspended so the first10 reading can be at our next session of11 City Council.12 (Duly seconded.)13
Moved and14 seconded.15 All in favor indicate by saying16 aye.17 (Aye.)18
The ayes19 have it, and Councilman Kelly also is20 voting aye before he left.21 Thank you.22 (Committee on Technology and23 Information Services concluded at 3:0024 p.m.)25 30 1 CERTIFICATE2 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the3 proceedings, evidence and objections are4 contained fully and accurately in the5 stenographic notes taken by me upon the6 foregoing matter on June 4, 2009, and that7 this is a true and correct transcript of same.8 9 10 11 12 13 ______________________________14 MICHELE L. MURPHY15 RPR-Notary Public16 17 18 (The foregoing certification of this19 transcript does not apply to any reproduction20 of the same by any means, unless under the21 direct control and/or supervision of the22 certifying reporter.)23 24 25