COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING AND PUBLIC MEETING BEFORE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Wednesday, May 26, 1999 1:15 p.m. - - - BILL No. 990284 - Authorizing the Procurement Commissioner, on behalf of the city of Philadelphia, to enter into a contract with Motorola Incorporated for the design and implementation of an 800-megahertz trunk municipal radio system for use by the City's public safety agencies and municipal operating departments, under certain terms and conditions PRESENT: COUNCILWOMAN AUGUSTA A. CLARK, Chair COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL COUNCILWOMAN JOAN KRAJEWSKI COUNCILMAN JAMES F. KENNEY COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN RICHARD T. MARIANO COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO - - - VINCENT VARALLO ASSOCIATES, INC. Registered Professional Reporters Eleven Penn Center, Suite 600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 561-2220 2 5/26/99 PUBLIC PROPERTY & PUBLIC WORKS I N D E X Louis Applebaum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Procurement Commissioner Vincent Costello. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Director of Communications 7 Harold Hairston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Philadelphia Fire Commissioner John Timoney. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Philadelphia Police Commissioner Joseph James, Deputy Commissioner . . . . . . 20 Department of Public Property James Roundtree, Director . . . . . . . . . . 30 Minority Business Enterprise Council Dean Kaplan, Budget Director. . . . . . . . . 34 City of Philadelphia Michael Athay, Esquire. . . . . . . . . . . . 101 Divisional Deputy, City Solicitor's Officer Melissa Hanlon, Motorola. . . . . . . . . . . 108 Alex Gross, Reporter and Photographer . . . . 122 Northeast News Gleaner - - - 3 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 P R O C E E D I N G S
Good afternoon. Ladies and gentlemen, we have a quorum present, and the Committee on Public Property and Public Works is now called to order. Would the clerk please read the bill 8 before us, Bill No. 990284.
Bill No. 990284, an ordinance authorizing the Procurement Commissioner, on behalf of the city of Philadelphia, to enter into a contract with Motorola Incorporated for the design and implementation of an 800-megahertz trunk municipal radio system for use by the City's public safety agencies and municipal operating departments, under certain terms and conditions.
Thank you. Are there persons present in the room 20 who wish been to be heard to speak on this bill? If so, please join us at the table. Thank you. (Commissioner Louis Applebaum comes forward.)
Good afternoon, 4 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 Commissioner. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Good afternoon, Chairperson Clark and other members of City Council. I am Louis Applebaum, the Procurement Commissioner for the city of Philadelphia, and we thank you for giving us the opportunity to testify today in support of Ordinance Number 990284, sponsored by Councilman Mike Nutter. I will provide a brief overview of the project with more specific testimony to be provided by Mr. Joe James, our Deputy Commissioner of Public Property; Vince Costello, Director of communications; Fire Commissioner Harold Hairston; and we expect Police Commissioner John Timoney to be here; and Mr. James Roundtree, the Director of the Minority Business Enterprise Council.
He is here. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Is he? COMMISSIONER TIMONEY: How ya doin'? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: I didn't see him.
Madam Chair, I'm sorry. Just for the record, I have a very good 5 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 working relationship with Councilwoman Clark, and I notice by way of your testimony, both written and verbal here today, that you identified me as the sponsoring member of the bill. Not that I would have any problem sponsoring the bill, but I am not the sponsor of the bill; the Chair is the sponsor of the bill. And you could have a relatively nice day or you could have some other kind of day, but I didn't want to have that confusion on the record so. . . COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: I apologize for the error, and I hope that is the only error that we make today.
Or that you don't make any that's more serious than that. (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Right, you're exactly right.
Please proceed. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Okay. The city of Philadelphia began more than five years ago to develop plans for a comprehensive modernization of our city's radio communications system. The current system, which was installed 6 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 in 1960, presents numerous problems for Philadelphia's radio communications capability. In 1994, the City advertised nationally for firms to submit qualifications for providing a system. The City received responses from Ericsson-GE Corporation, E.F. Johnson Company, and Motorola Corporation. A year later, in 1995, the City issued a request for proposal to all of those firms. Motorola and Ericsson responded with proposals, and E.F. Johnson declined to participate. The City appointed a blue-ribbon panel Selection Committee to evaluate the proposals with members representing City Council, Police, Fire, Water, Public Property, the Law Department, Procurement, and the Managing Director's Office. After lengthy evaluations of the proposals, the City Selection Committee and the City's consultant, RCC Communications, recommended unanimously that the City enter into negotiations with Motorola for the project. Motorola was selected primarily 'cause it proposed a system known as the 800-megahertz digital radio communication system that featured proven 7 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 technology already implemented in the marketplace. To help fund the acquisition and installation of the 800-megzhertz system, the State Legislature adopted an enabling legislation known as Act 78, and City Council enacted concurrent legislation that provided funding through a $1 surcharge on every telephone line in the city of Philadelphia. It is anticipated that this funding source, combined with contributions from the Water Fund and the Airport Fund, as well as revenues from the sale of 2-gigahertz bandwidth frequencies will fully fund the project. Further, the surcharge will continue to provide a continuing revenue stream to maintain the system. We are now going to go into the limitations of the current system, and Vince Costello, Joe James, Commissioner Hairston, and Commissioner Timoney will present to you their ideas, their concerns on the limitations of the current system.
Madam Chair, for the record, and members of the committee, my name is Vincent E. Costello, the City's Director of Communications. 8 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 I've had the opportunity over a period of years now to testify before Council on this project, it seems, and I'm glad that we're finally here with an almost-finished document. I'm glad we're approaching a point in time where we can look forward to some new technology and really an improved way of doing business in light of the City's radio system. As I've testified in the past. . .
. . . our existing radio system is from a 1960s generation. It was originally designed, as were all systems of that generation, for a mobile radio operation, mobile radios being high-powered 30-watt instruments which provide reasonable courage throughout the City. But even at that point in time, the City is a lot different today than it was back in the 1960s. Population patterns have changed and the City actually boundaries have extended to do the southwest, to the northeast and in areas where, even in the 1960s, there really wasn't a real heavy population. What has happened over the years is 9 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 that as technology has improved, as portable radio use or walkie-talkie usage has become in favor with the public safety agencies, and in particular with all the municipal agencies, our system was not able to accommodate the coverage requirements; because, once again, it was a system designed for a high-powered mobile radio. As the walkie-talkies came into vogue, we were forced into communications operation to find satellite receiver sites. We now maintain and service on a daily and weekly basis over 70 sites throughout the City to provide a reasonable level of portable radio coverage. Even at that level, it is frankly not acceptable. We have put whatever resources we've had into the public safety agencies for police and fire -- lesser for municipals because there's a limited amount of money and we knew a new technology and a better way off operating was on the horizon. Our system suffers from quite a few dead spots and lack of interoperability, and frankly, the most distressing things really is inadequate coverage in many areas throughout the 10 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 City. There is no predictable way to actually measure coverage, there's no predictable way to guarantee coverage. As a result, people who are using walkie-talkie radios in particular are often faced with the dead spots and just a lack of communication that they really depend on. It's particularly important and critical in the public safety agencies. We have asked the Police and Fire Departments to appear with us today to comment on the way the public safety agencies use the current radio system, the limitations that they see, and how they would like to see the future system operate. I'd like to ask Commissioner Hairston to first appear and provide his insight. COMMISSIONER HAIRSTON: Good afternoon Madam Chairwoman and --
Excuse me one moment. Just a minute, sir. COMMISSIONER HAIRSTON: Good afternoon, Madam Chair. .
Okay, Commissioner. How are you today. COMMISSIONER HAIRSTON: I'm actually 11 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 terrific now that I know that we are at least headed in the right direction to make sure that this system happens for us.
Well, a good deal of the enthusiasm for this project came as a result of -- COMMISSIONER HAIRSTON: I've had a lot of enthusiasm for this project. I don't know whether you know this or not, but when we go back in the history of this whole thing, there were 30 channels that we had to get from the State. The Fire Department was the one that really was responsible for getting those channels reserved.
Right. I started to talk to you before you put your name on the record, so if you don't mind putting your name on the record for the benefit of the stenographer, we'll finish up this conversation after that. COMMISSIONER HAIRSTON: Yeah. I'm Harold Hairston, the Fire Commissioner for the city of Philadelphia. And good afternoon to all of you. As I was saying, we really do have some enthusiasm for this because we've had some rather, 12 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 in my opinion, disastrous situations that never should have happened happen to us because of our present system. One of the comments earlier was that in the system we now have, we started out with what was scheduled to be a mobile situation. And for years and going back to when I first came in the Fire Department, we didn't have those portable radios. Now we have portable radios but originally, the system was designed for mobile radios. Now, you can't communicate very far with the portables. I don't know whether you remember this or not but you probably do. There was a lot of controversy about whether or not the lieutenant had called in when we had the two firefighters to die up in Oak Lane. We tested every frequency to see whether or not they were able to reach our headquarters with those portables, and we could not reach headquarters with those portables. Now, whether or not somebody's life would have been saved because of that, we'll never know. But I can tell you that that was a disastrous situation and so was Meridian. And if 13 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 you go into a high-rise building, you can pretty much count that is very, very unreliable. I don't care whether you're on the 3rd floor or whether or not you're on the 50th floor, you're not going to be able to communicate with any kind of reliability.
So you're saying that high-rise buildings will almost always be dead spots in the system as we're presently configured? COMMISSIONER HAIRSTON: Absolutely. So that means we had to refigure the way we deal with a lot of those kind of things. I mean, in some buildings, we actually require them to have a kind of telephone system and so forth. But as you could imagine, that's very limiting. The idea of it is for you to have instant information and to be able to pass it on because, in fact, no matter how I like to minimize in most cases, this is a dangerous job and things have to happen in a reasonable and quick way that is totally reliable. What happens is, you could be in some building, whether it's a dwelling or whether or not it's a high-rise building or in any of the 14 5/16/99 PUB. " And so if you don't get out of that dead spot, you're never assured that anybody is able to acknowledge what really happened. So consequently, you find yourself trying to make do all the time. Now, what's happened with us over the last several years is we've seen fewer and fewer fires, more and more medical calls. Now, if you were talking when we first started out taking people to the hospital and so forth, you probably have 20,000 people or something. Last year, we took 110,000 people. Our firefighters and paramedics go in buildings where they're unescorted by anybody, you run in to all kinds of situations. They can't communicate with headquarters that way. They have to get outside, get to a mobile radio before they can communicate. It's that kind of thing that has really kind of plagued us. The other thing is, because we have increased the number of responses so much over the 15 5/16/99 PUB. /WORKS - 990284 last few years, we've really taxed the system to the point where we don't have any available channels for any kind of expansion. So what we find ourselves doing is that in a major emergency where we like to assign a particular channel that everybody will be going, we have to go back and forth and then pick one and put all the things on another, which means that they're overtaxed. And because of all of this changing, what we find is, our system is really unreliable, it doesn't lend itself to any kind of expansion whatsoever. And one of the worse things for us -- and it's kind of ridiculous in today's atmosphere, I guess, and you probably remember this. One of the things that came out of the MOVE Commission when they had the report over it was that we ought to be able to talk to everybody. I still can't talk to the Police Commissioner unless I go get somebody and tell 'em to tap him on his shoulder. The fact of the matter is, we ought to be able to talk to anybody. I get people from the Water Department to come, they're on the fire ground and so forth. I have to call on one of our channels to somebody that may see the person in 16 5/16/99 PUB. /WORKS - 990284 the back or do it that way rather than deal directly with the person from the Water Department, or from the Police Department where I may want 'em to help us evacuate some area. The same thing with Licenses and Inspections. And probably the worse of all, I guess, is really dealing directly with the police from the fire marshal's standpoint. We ought to believe to have reasonably secure conversations. We ought to be able to contact the Police Department and not have somebody chase down where the detective is. The detective's in the right place, and we just want to be able to talk to him. So those are the kind of things that have really happened over the last few years. And if it sounds like I'm enthusiastic, it's because I really want to end this situation, it is because I am. I know that this system is worn out, it's absolutely worn out. It's like spitting chewing gum to put it together, and we need to change that. And the sooner we change it, the better off we're going to be.
It's better for firefighters' safety, it's better for the kind of operations we do on the fire ground, it's a much more secure 17 5/16/99 PUB. /WORKS - 990284 system. All of those are the kinds of things that I think would make all of us in the Fire Department feel a whole lot better about our ability to communicate. I don't know whether you have you have any specific questions for me, but I'd be happy to entertain 'em and I'll try to answer 'em for you.
Well, commissioner, what we would like to do is take the testimony -- let's take the testimony of all and let's get your whole case in chief before us, and then we'll do our questions. COMMISSIONER HAIRSTON: Okay, thanks for this opportunity then.
Thank you for your specific examples of why this system is necessary. (Commissioner John Timoney comes forward.)
Good afternoon, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER TIMONEY: Good afternoon, Madam Chair. And it's a pleasure to be here. There is a degree much more to add to what Commissioner Hairston said emphasizing the 18 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 importance of the interoperability, the ability for firefighters and police officers to communicate underground and especially in serious situations. From a police perspective, in addition, just like the firefighters, the whole issue of safety in dead spots, I had mentioned, I think, the last time I testified. Up in New York a few years back, the issue of these radios having severe dead spots in the subways wound up costing the life of a young female police officer who was transmitting as she was wrestling with a guy who was trying to take away her gun. That transmission never went over the air, she was killed, and it wasn't till a few hours later that we actually found her as a result of the portable radio not working. The other part is, as you're well aware, we're heavily involved in the fight against narcotics in a big way, and there's a clear issue of drug dealers being able to monitor police bands. We need the ability to have encrypted digital code so that the police officers doing high-level investigations into narcotics can 19 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 communicate as they're approaching buildings or homes, with the freedom and the ability not to be overheard so that the drug dealer can do one or two things -- either get rid of the drugs, flush 'em down the toilet or, God forbid, prepare to attack the police officers as they're coming through the door. So for all the reasons outlined by Commissioner Hairston and some additional concerns for the Police Department, we think this is a great opportunity going into the new millennium for the City of Philadelphia to have a top-notch radio system.
Thank you. And for the record that was Police Commissioner Timoney. COMMISSIONER TIMONEY: Who is, in fact, here.
Who is, in fact, here in the flesh and in living color and a bright yellow jacket too. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Thank you, Commissioner. We will now hear from Vince Costello 20 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 and Joe James, who will give us a briefing on the project itself.
My name is Joseph James, Deputy Commissioner for the Department of Public Property. The project, the 800-megahertz project, is a comprehensive modernization of the City's radio communications system. The proposal provides for the creation of a state-of-the-art citywide simulcast digital radio system. This simulcast broadcasting system divides the City into two parallel 15-channel subsystems. Under normal operating conditions, the radio users are divided between the two subsystems. Should one of the fifteen channel subsystems, however, all users on the failed system automatically would be relocated to the other system. As a result of this, "redundant" capability provides significantly enhanced coverage in operations' reliability throughout the City. The project includes 30 broadcast 21 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 channels that will provide coverage for 95 percent of the City above ground and inside buildings. The proposed system would also provide 90 percent coverage up to three miles outside the City's boundaries to improve communication capabilities for police, fire, municipal, and especially airport subscribers. Providing underground radio coverage is optional in the current proposal submitted by Motorola, although the City does intend to pursue underground installation unless it can partner with a private/public entity that would enable the City to minimize its costs. Should an appropriate partnership --
In following your testimony, you left the word out the word "not."
Did you read it the way you intended it to be? Shall I strike "not" from the testimony?
I would appreciate the opportunity to read it as it's intended. 22 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284
If I may go back to the -- providing the underground radio coverage is optional in the current proposal submitted by Motorola, although the City does not intend to pursue underground installation unless it can partner with a private/public entity that will enable the City to minimize its costs. Should an appropriate partnership be negotiated, the Administration anticipates returning to City Council for approval before it embarks on underground installation. Bill No. 990284 would be amended accordingly.
Is this the amendment that you have passed out to us? It is the proposed amendment to Bill No. 990284? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: That is an amendment to that bill which clarifies the situation that that when we do have prepared and under a situation a contract for the underground, that would be brought back to City Council for presentation and review. That's what that is.
So this clarifies the issue that you come back to Council before you 23 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 go further in developing an underground capability. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Absolutely.
All right. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: We will work on it. We have task forces working on it, and when we are fully prepared, we'll bring it back to City Council. As we are doing today.
Fine, thank you. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Mr. Costello or Joe James is going to do the advantages.
Yes, sir. In discussing the advantages of the new system, I think we really need to reflect once again on some of the shortcomings that exist.
Vince, don't forget to tell your name to the stenographer.
Vincent E. Costello, okay. Once again, in discussing the advantages of the proposed systems, we need to look at some of the disadvantages or the shortcomings of our existing way of operating. Our problems can be described threefold: 24 5/16/99 PUB. /WORKS - 990284 We have a capacity problem; we've had that for a number of years, as do most other major cities throughout the country. We have a coverage problem, a severe coverage problems because we cannot predict the type of coverage that we're going to receive, nor can we predict the type of coverage we'll receive in any specific geographic area. Finally, we have a flexibility problem, all of the issues raised by Commissioner Hairston and Commissioner Timoney. We fully expect, and based on the state-of-the-art nature and improvement technology of 800-megahertz frequencies, we fully expect the system to offer and to overcome all of these disadvantages. I'd like to read from the prepared testimony just to go into some detail on the advantages of the system. A major upgrade in broadcast coverage throughout the City, creating comprehensive citywide radio coverage for the first time. The new system would raise coverage to 95 percent citywide, primarily increasing coverage for 25 5/16/99 PUB. /WORKS - 990284 portable radios, and up to 95 percent inside City buildings. As a result, these changes will improve public safety and assist a variety of other municipal services by greatly enhancing the communications capability of police, fire, and other municipal radio personnel. Secondly, it will provide emergency access, priority access by radio, and Push-To-Talk identification capabilities, all of which permit faster and more reliable emergency communications. Emergency access permits certain users designated as critical or emergency callers to override other users on any channel. Priority radio access allows calls to be preprogrammed so that they will be automatically prioritized when they call. When a user engages the Push-To-Talk capability, the user's identity is immediately displayed and transmitted to the Dispatch Center, thereby saving critical seconds in emergencies because the users do not have to stop and identify himself or herself on the radio. Use of encryption technology, which provides state-of-the-art security for all radio communications, thereby inhibiting the ability of 5/16/99 PUB. /WORKS - 990284 unauthorized individuals from eavesdropping or using scanners to listen to public safety radio transmissions. Interoperability between all agencies, which will enable police, fire, probation, and parole, and other agencies to communicate on the same channel at the same time, which is a critically important advantage in an emergency that does not exist in the City today. Multiple levels of redundancy to ensure that critical communications are supported under the worse of circumstance. A state-of-the-art network management system that allows the operators to respond to changing communication requirements on a daily basis. Computerized diagnostics and alarms that will enable the City to maintain maximum system availability by flagging repair problems immediately as they arise. And, finally, considerable capacity for future expansion of the system. And in dealing with the capacity issue, I'd just like to add that because of the shortage 27 5/16/99 PUB. /WORKS - 990284 of radio frequencies and the general capacity in existing radio systems, a number of agencies, particularly the municipals, have had over the years to go out and actually rent and continue to rent radio coverage. That includes the Water Department, District Attorney's Office, Recreation Unit. I know that whenever we have a major special event in the City, we ourselves in Public Property need to go out and actually rent a special radio system just to provide channels because we cannot infringe on those that we already have. So capacity is and continues to be a major concern and problem for us.
COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: We'll now hear again from Joe James, who will discuss the scope of the contract.
Again, my name is Joe James, Deputy Commissioner for the Department of Public Property. The contract for this projects calls for the construction and installation of the entire infrastructure of this system as well as the purchase of the necessary equipment and training required to operate the system. 28 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 The contract includes erection of three new radio towers and three replacement towers to provide citywide coverage for the 800-megahertz system. The system will employ four existing towers, making a total of ten broadcast sites throughout the City. The City has worked diligently to situate new and replacement towers wherever possible in low-density, nonresidential areas. The new towers are listed at Police Academy, Highway Department at Whitaker, the Waste Treatment Plant at the Airport. The replacement towers are located at Bustleton and Hoffnagel, Ford and Belmont, and 31st and Grays Ferry. The City maintains public safety as a top priority of this project and has insisted in the contract that the broadcast or radio waves from the tower sites will be done safety and in accordance with the FCC safety guidelines so that they pose no threat to public health. In addition, it is important to note that the tower sites have been selected with sensitivity to the concerns of community residents. The City chose to limit the 29 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 construction of new towers for this project. And in those cases where new towers are needed, the proposal calls for them to be replacing existing towers wherever possible. Moreover, several existing towers, including one at 24th and Wolf Streets and one at Port Royal Avenue, are scheduled for demolition under the project. In addition, the City is working with community leaders and elected officials, including various District Council members to ensure that the location of new and replacement towers are situated away from residential areas. The project includes installation of communications equipment and facilities at each broadcast site, which includes fixed network equipment critical to the operation of the system. Operator consoles, broadcast equipment, signal repeaters to enhance the strength of the radio system signals being sent to run the system from a variety of locations, including City Hall, Police Headquarters, the Fire Administration Building, and the Airport. The installed equipment provides for full redundancy. In the event that broadcast capability is lost at any of the sites, the other 30 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 sites provide for full coverage of the City. The contract includes the purchase of 6,685 mobile and portable radios for police, fire, airport, and other personnel who will be users of the system. In addition, the proposal also includes optional installation of the system on mobile data systems such as the 800 MDTs (or mobile data terminals) recently outfitted in police cars. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Mr. James Roundtree, the Director of the Minority Business Enterprise Council, will now report on the minority participation.
Good afternoon, Madam Chair and members of City Council. For the record, my name is James Roundtree. I'm Director of the Minority Business Enterprise Council. We have reviewed this proposal for the minority, women and disabled business participation for this project, and it fits all the meaningful and substantial participation for minority and women businesses. Approximately 37 percent of the outsourcing in the contracts will be performed by minority women and disabled 31 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 businesses. The MBE's review would recommend acceptance of this activity. That was a brief scenario, Council Chair. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Thank you. Project costs and funding. The 800-megahertz project is scheduled to take 36 months to complete, at a cost of $51.2 million. This price has been held firm by Motorola through June 30th of 1999. The City's negotiating team obtained substantial discounts on the fixed network equipment and the radios estimated at approximately $15 million off of list price. Additional discounts for future purchases were also negotiated and included in the contract. Motorola agreed to provide the City with a percent discount on future purchases of 19 fixed network equipment and subscriber equipment 20 for 10 years. The City believes this to be an 21 important clause to guarantee savings should the 22 system be expanded in the future. 23 Funding for the project has been 24 established through the telephone surcharge. A 25 total of $23 million currently exists, with 32 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 $21 million anticipated to be collected through the life of the project. In addition, funding from the Water and Airport Revenue Bonds projected at $11.5 million and the $5 million from the sale of two-gigahertz channels not compatible for radio system use is planned for the project. The need to avoid the delay will now be presented by Joe James.
First and foremost, public safety demands that the City act as quickly as possible to implement the 800-megahertz system. The current system often operates at 100 percent capacity on busy days. Given the previously-identified deficiencies of the system, system including port coverage, lack of interoperability, and lack of redundancy, it is imperative that the City act to modernize its communications capability. Further, the age and deteriorating condition of the current system, including the towers and other elements of the infrastructure, a major upgrade -- costing millions of dollars -- will be required even if 800-megahertz is not purchased. As indicated previously, the City has 33 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 negotiated several hard-fought concessions from Motorola that provide for over million in 4 discounts and the purchase and installation of the 5 new system, including discounts on fixed-network 6 equipment, site development costs, and the cost of 7 radio equipment. Motorola has made clear that 8 these discounts are premised on the approval of 9 the contract by the end of June 1999. 10 In 1990, the City reserve with the 11 Federal Communications Commission 30 channels for 12 the future operation of a modern radio system. 13 Since that time, the City has received two 14 extensions from the FCC, the last of which is set 15 to expire by August, year 2000. There is fierce competition for the channels, including competition from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the surrounding counties. To hold these channels, the City must demonstrate to the FCC by August 2000 that the channels are in use (usage on a test basis will suffice) and that 70 radio units per channel are in operation. To meet that schedule, the City must begin work in the summer of 1999. If the channels are lost, the prospect of future 34 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 modernization and needed expansion of the City's radio communications system will be severely limited. If I may speak on behalf of all of us present, this concludes our testimony, and we will be happy to answer any questions that you may have.
Thank you. I do have a few questions. With regard to the funding of this project, will any portion of the system be paid for out of General Funds?
Dean Kaplan, the City's Budget Director. No, we do not intend that any portion of the project would be supported by the General Fund.
Now or in the future, with one caveat. And that is that, as you know, in using City capital funds in certain other cases, there are always restrictions on how you may use them. For example, were we to choose to use a 35 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 capital funding process, there may be restrictions on the size and amount of the project. But as long as the 911 project -- should we intend -- we anticipate now that the 911 surcharge is going to be a continuing surcharge in the future. And should that be the case -- and we see no reason that it wouldn't -- there would be no expectation there would be use -- any need to use other source of funding.
May I conclude then that the $1 surcharge on telephones is anticipated to be sufficient?
All right, okay. Regarding most-favored customer pricing with respect to the project, I hear in your testimony that you were able to effect some savings. I guess my question was, did you leave any on the table? Could we have gotten any more? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: We do not believe that we left any money on the table. We 36 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 did not receive favored nation's customer or most favored customer in the contract because it would be very difficult in the future to monitor such an item. We do feel very, very confident that we were able to develop significant discounts in our negotiations with them. We, through our consultants and through investigations of other cities who have similar system, we are very assured that our pricing structure is as low or lower than all others. We received 35 percent discounts on what they called "fixed network equipment." We received percent discounts on the other type of 16 equipment. And we are the only city that we know 17 of that has an agreement with Motorola that will 18 take us ten years into the future, achieving the 19 same level of discounts on additional purchases. 20
My question is to 23 the Budget Director. You indicated that this 24 entire project will be funded from the 911 25 revenue, the surcharge? 37 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284
No, I said that in the future, I expected that most costs to the system would be borne by 911. And I also said that we don't expect to use General Funds to support it.
Now, how do you justify the Recreation Department special events to the 911 fund to subsidize those parts of the radio system -- mobile units in the Department of Recreation part, why should the 911 revenue pay for that?
Well, I think clearly, as Mr. Applebaum, Mr. Costello, and Mr. James have explained, as well as the two commissioners, we think we need the capacity of the system to do the City's normal day-to-day business and to have adequate reserve capacity for all sorts of I think normal, what I call "routine" emergencies. The fact that that capacity will also allow us to do special events or handle special visits, I don't think the marginal cost of that capacity is not additional to the system that we're buying.
You're going to purchase hundreds of radios for the Department of Rec. and other fleet management? That doesn't 38 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 seem like a 911 expenditure.
Well, I think that when the State, and perhaps I think Joe James had worked on this quite a bit with the State legislature. When the State approved the use the 911 revenues for this purpose, it did so because municipalities around the State were clamoring for upgrades like we're asking for public safety reasons. The fact that other departments can communicate on the system is in fact a tremendous advantage for all sorts of emergency situations. And the legislature, as I understand it, specifically amended the original legislation to allow this kind of interaction so that everyone could be on the same system. But perhaps that's a -- there might be a technical answer to that that's more helpful.
Thank you, thank you very much. I'm glad for finally the 911 surcharge issue is now being debunked, or the complaints 39 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 about it are being debunked. For years, people have complained that this money was being taken and not being used for any purpose that was clearly for communications or for public safety. It is clear now that waiting during the course of the consideration of this whole issue, that this issue money is now available and will be available into the future and should maybe stop some of the public complaints and private whisperings about this money being collected and not being used for the purpose it was intended so I had confidence that it was going to be used for that and I'm glad to see finally that it's coming to its fruition. The logistical problems of the installation, the actual installation of the equipment as it relates primarily to the PAB, not as much to the Fire Administration Building 'cause I think it's a more modern building with perhaps less activity in the radio room as opposed to the PAB. The actual physical installation of the equipment, we're not going to have a new building PAB building any time during the course of this project -- perhaps we should, but are we going to have any major disruptions in the use of the 40 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 current system as it transfers into the new system during the course of the installation period, if you're aware? If there's someone --
Councilman, I'd like to answer that question 'cause we were compelled to replace the existing radio consoles ten years ago. It is not an easy job but it is a job that takes an awful lot of coordination but it can and will be done. I mean, little by little, you know, one console comes on as another one goes off, and you're actually operating two systems at one time. It sounds logistically difficult, and it is. But, I mean, it's something that a professional operation like Motorola can and has done on many occasions. I mean, it would be ideal if we could say we're going to move into a brand new building so we'll operate the new system, and at 2 o'clock in the morning on a Sunday, everyone will move over and they'll be pre-trained. But, I mean, we don't have that luxury. It's a question of planning, it's a question of technical expertise, and it's something we've done before. So I'm confident 41 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 that it can be done very well here.
The issue of the installation of the equipment in the individual vehicles, the numbers of vehicles to be done at any particular time, the vehicles that far being taken out of service in order to do it, and also the issue of MDTs, how do they all relate to the difficulties in complications involving --
I think the Motorola, which was plan agreed to by the City, is to do our best to deliver to Motorola to the installation sites of vehicles a day. It does impose this 14 major problem for the non-public safety issue, of 15 course for the Police Department, where it will take 15 vehicles out of service, and to logistically move them from point A to point B or from point A to point C is difficult. Once again, I don't think there's a clear, irrefutable answer but I think it just takes planning and it just experience, and that's -- we've gone over and over and over that point with Motorola. They understand this, they've done it in other major cities, and they've accomplished it without, to my knowledge, any major wrinkles or 42 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 hurdles.
The issue of radio scanner eavesdropping, I guess, as the years go on and technology improves it's almost impossible to keep it from happening again, but is there a period of time industry standard-wise that this digital system would preclude that kind of eavesdropping from the point of drug dealers, to the point of tow-truck drives? I mean, there's a whole slew of people out there that are monitoring police radio transmission, I guess including myself at home. (Laughter.)
Which, I guess, will stop now. I'm just wondering, what period of time technology-wise does this window exist -- that this window is closed before it begins to open up again for this kind of activity.
Digital systems by their very nature are encryptic. We plan to put a second-level encryption on especially the police radios. As you suggest, however, Councilman, as we speak, there's probably someone making the 43 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 black box that will overcome this, even the dual levels of encryption, but it's really hard to predict when and if that might happen.
But we should have some period of time of relative privacy.
Councilman, the other thing I just want to add to that is because of the type of capability we have on the system, we will have the ability to mix talk groups. So in today's scanner environment, they usually scan for certain frequencies. In this type of system, they're using all of the channels. So for a lot of people to scan and fix in, we could have the talk groups spread amongst different channels using the channel as it becomes available. So I think in itself, the way the technology operates, it's going to make it very difficult for people, unless they spend a lot of time trying to understand our system for them to use it.
One of the other issues that was raised in more of or briefings was 44 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 the issue of the unauthorized use of radio frequency, I think, for the most part in the Police Department, there is some ongoing problems from time to time with the unauthorized use of the radio by particular officers or people who aren't police officers. My understanding of this system I'm talking -- do you recognize the problem that I'm raising? Okay. My understanding is, this system will enable us to perhaps cut down on that activity because of the ability to I.D. the person that's keying in on the particular radio. Is that in fact true?
That is true exactly true. We will be able to know exactly from the I.D. who's using the radio. And in fact, from the base station, turn it off and disable it. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Disable it and turn it off, yes.
And in everyday parlance, is that comparable to caller I.D.? A user's use of the system would immediately identify them? 45 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284
Okay. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: And the user cannot change so that he can block caller I.D.
It leaves a fingerprint, just the very touching of the system puts a fingerprint on it, and he's unable to control or erase. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Correct.
How close are we in this system to cellular phone I.D. for 911 calls? For example, when an individual calls from the house, obviously, the number is recorded where the call is coming from, even if it's a phone booth outside, land-line phone booth. How close are we or are we anywhere near being able to I.D. 911 calls from the cell phone?
To try to answer that question, it's a very complicated issue. And there's two pieces that drive that. One is the industry itself and the technological hurdles of 46 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 trying to provide the number identification, the location, and information of a cellular caller. And there's probably a multitude of providers out there today who trying to design systems and then convince the cellular companies that this is the right technology for them to deploy. On the government side, our issue, of course, is twofold. The FCC mandate for providing that type of information requires that we provide a funding mechanism for the cellular providers to be reimbursed for providing this information, which is completely devoid of how we do today with land lines, so there's a funding issue that's causing a problem. And second, there is a contention between, if there is going to be funding, who should be providing the funding, whether the funding should be housed at the State level or at the local government level. And the service-providers are more inclined to have the Commonwealth control those funds.
And just finally, one other technical issue. The issue of security companies that have alarm systems that as I -- in 47 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 my view are, basically the alarm goes off and the person monitoring that system simply calls 911. To me, they're not providing all that much of a service, frankly, considering what it is they're paying for. Do we have an ability at some point in time in the future to consider somehow obtaining some level of the recovering of our cost from the company itself? I know we've done a lot of work on giving people so many free -- two or three false alarms, and then on the third or fourth, they wind up getting charged $25 or whatever it is. I'm wondering if there's some way, and maybe in another forum, we could perhaps investigate or look into the ability of dealing with these alarm companies, that basically are simply people who just dial 911 and send our police officers out. They get a paid a fee, we incur the cost, and I'm just wondering if you could just make a note to try to look and see whether or not --
-- that makes any sense in incorporation of this new system. 48 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 And just finally -- I know I've taken some time -- I just want to compliment this entire crew, from the Administration's people to the individual department people. This is one of the better and more coherent presentations about this very important system. I think you guys have done a -- I know it's taken a long time, and it's obvious why it's taken a long time, because you've done your homework. So I'd just like to compliment you all on your ability to explain it to us in layman's terms and for the good job you've all done. I want to thank you on behalf myself and the citizens. Thank you. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: We thank you very much for that comment. As you realize, this has been a team effort from a lot of people and a lot of departments, and we appreciate your kind words.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Commissioner or Mr. James, in the 49 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 testimony, on , in the Push-To-Talk identification capability, as Councilwoman Clark commented, that allows the dispatch area or the radio room personnel to automatically know, based on what's been keyed in, who the person is that's operating that particular radio. All this equipment is given to people on a permanent basis, or is there ever any interchangeability of these units between and among either police officers, firefighters, or general public employees who have access to this equipment?
Generally, the municipal departments, Councilman, the radios are assigned by call number. But as you've suggested --
Radios are assigned in municipal departments assigned by call number. For instance, the Public Property range is in the 500s. On the public safety side -- fire, police -- they are usually group radios, which are taken out individually. They would still be, however, assigned to talk groups so that the dispatchers would 50 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 understand and would know from which talk group those radios are emanating from. It may not be the individual but it would be a specific individual within the Police Department.
That it's the 8-to-4 guys and not the 4-to-12 people or something like that?
So it's not necessarily telling you that it's Officer Jones, badge number whatever, who's driving, you know, 1913 car, or something like that.
That is correct, but it would identify it down to the squad level and by district and by division.
It would, okay. Is it my understanding that there is an additional capability to also determine location 51 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 of the radio once the Push-To-Talk button has been activated?
There's an automatic vehicle locator -- they refer to it as "AVL" in the technical circles, an automatic vehicle location device. We have not pursued that option as part of this basic system, but it's a possible add-on in the future.
And when you use that term, are you talking about something that goes into the car or van or truck or something like that?
It nothing to do with radios; it has to do with the actual --
It's like a transceiver unit, a typical locator device. 52 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284
Like a reverse Lojack kind of thing or something like that?
All right. On 5, in the scope of the contract issue, Mr. James, I think you may have covered this particular area. What monitoring, if any, do we plan to do with regard to the FCC safety guidelines and the issue of public health concerns? Do we currently monitor our towers, or do we plan to do any monitoring in the future on the public health issue?
To answer the question, as part of the overall project, I believe there's probably going to be two aspects that's going to deal with that. One, from a construction standpoint, the City's contract manager and project managers would be responsible as well to be a part of the inspection of the site to make sure that the site is being done according to the guidelines and consistent with the standards. And additionally, as part of our exercise to prove the coverage, there's going to 53 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 be a certain amount of monitoring to ensure that we have the coverage patterns that are being done. Currently today, because of the City's resources, we do not go out and do the normal what you would call the FCC guidelines for radio emissions. Similar to this project, based on the type of equipment, I don't perceive that we would have that initially, but if in fact, we want to ensure the health, there would be a certain amount of this study done just to ensure that the transmitters are not transmitting anything greater than what should be and they're falling within the acceptable FCC coverage.
Well, I heard what you said we're not necessarily going to do. Are you essentially saying that we're not going to have regular monitoring of our own particular towers as it relates to radio frequency emissions and what the levels may be around our towers all over the City?
Currently, we do not do that, and I don't perceive that at the end of this project that we would be continuing to do that. In particular, for this type of the new tower 54 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 sites, if we wanted to ensure that there was no 3 public safety health risks, we would do those types of studies just to prove to ourselves that the radios are transmitting in the optimal range.
You just lost me, you just lost me on that, Mr. James.
Well, he said we're not going to do it but we might do it as part of the --
I don't believe it was originally as part of the project. But making a very good point, I think it's something that we can certainly include into the project and it won't add any more to the project, to ensure ourselves that there are no more public safety risks.
If you could just restate what you said. Are we or are we not going to protect the public health?
We are going to protect the 55 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 public health.
Under the proposed plan, through what monitoring? How will we know?
We intend, if I can speak out of school for a moment, but I think I can speak --
Mm-mm, I'm not interested in out of school; I want you to be bound by what you put on this record. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Can we put on the record that our committee will review with Motorola the comments that you're making now, and we will do the best that we can to add that to the proposal, and we will report back to you directly.
I'm sorry, I just have one question in that area. 56 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 I recognize that there's been pretty extensive medical research on the issue of high-voltage electric wires and those kinds of things. Is there clear medical evidence that radio transmissions do the same thing? I know people in the community, anytime there's a cell phone tower or another tower, get very upset about the potentiality of that kind of emission, and I'm not discounting that it exists. I'm just saying, I'm wondering if there's any medical evidence that would indicate that it does exist and if it's something that we should be severely concerned about. I mean, I understand the high electric issue. I guess that's still disputed but it's -- there's still some more evidence there for that than there is for radio transmission. I'm just wondering whether or not this is something that is perceived or it's actual?
I don't think we've ever seen any conclusive evidence that there was any public health threat caused by radio transmissions. Councilman Nutter's question was somewhat of a curve ball. I am used to FCC 57 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 oversight of the communication system. I mean, generally, the federal government assumes that responsibility. And we have FCC officials locally, and their job is to deal with those types of issues, their job is to deal with interference issues. And we work on a pretty consist basis with the FCC local representatives. However, most of our work is done in the terms of interference. I mean, we will have occasions when we will be advised that perhaps our transmitters are tuned too high or too low. Or groups that come into the city -- we have a constant problem in South Philadelphia from Veterans Stadium with outdoor concerts, where there will be consistent bleed-over and almost an incapacity of some of our existing frequencies brought in by these hybrid systems that come from out of nowhere, often accompanying large rock groups and things like that who have their own entourage with local radio systems with no real designation from the City and really no 23 pre-knowledge of the City.
I think in Roxborough too, there's complaints by people of 58 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 bleed-over into TV sets and that kind of stuff.
I was just wondering from a medical standpoint, is there any evidence that there's a medical problem with radio transmissions?
But we're only responding to your comment, your printed testimony, your last paragraph on that says that the City maintains public safety as a top priority in this project and has insisted in the contract that the broadcast or radio waves from the tower sites be done safely, in accordance with FCC safety guidelines so that they pose no threat to public health. Now, I give you an opportunity now to say what that means in plain language. And if you have covered all of the eventualities, fine; but if you have not, here is the opportunity to preserve the space to come back and fix it. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: We -- we will 59 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 review with Motorola the public health situation as it relates to the towers and as it relates to the last paragraph of , and we will report back to you.
If I can be clear, I mean, one, as Councilman Kenney raised the issue, I mean I'm certainly not making any particular comment or certainly any allegation about what the public health issues are or whether people are affected or not affected. What I do know is that there are concerns, and to the extent that there are concerns and to the extent that the FCC thinks enough of it to have guidelines, and even if we think we're within those guidelines, what I am asking is that during construction, we monitor it and for some reasonable period after the system is up and running, that we do our own tests for our own sites to ensure that they are within the FCC guidelines. And that's all I'm really asking for. Mr. James says it was not intended to do and we don't do, that's fine, but I'd like to get beyond that and ask that we actually take specific actions because I believe that it inures 60 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 to our benefit going forward to do that on our own for at least our own sites. We may not be able to control what other people do on their sites -- whether it's TV stations, radio stations, or anyone else, but we certainly have not only the capacity, but I believe, an obligation to do something about our own sites.
So that's what I'm asking for. I don't know what the cost issues are that are involved in that, and I don't, you know, throw it out flippantly that, you know, just do it, and we don't care and all that. I would like to know the details of it, but I think it's serious enough and important enough that it needed to be raised today. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Right, we agree with you, and it is in the contract; so, therefore, Motorola is aware of it. The question is, how are they going to report back to us on these particular issues during construction and also on an ongoing basis? 61 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284
Well, my only suggestion to you on that is that as you go through discussions with Motorola and reach some agreement about that, more than likely what they should do is agree to hire someone at our direction to provide independent test data information to go out to those locations and do whatever the normal testing is according to FCC guidelines, write a report back to us, and tell us what they found.
We do not wish to see our costs creep up. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: We understand, and we will do that and we will report back to you with a written document as to how do we resolve this problem.
I think, Commissioner James, it might be helpful, and this 62 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 is just a technical comment that antenna locations, tower locations, the FCC and all the regulators have never blocked the installation of an antenna or a tower based on health; it's never been a factor, it can't be a factor. So I think that might be interesting that you comment on that.
Thank you, Councilman. Yes, to comment on that, it has been clearly articulated in just about every FCC ruling that the radio emissions from broadcasting radios, or even in the case of television and particularly in the cellular, that that cannot used by a community as a reason not to have it because it doesn't pose a health threat to the community. To Councilman Nutter's concern, I think it raises an issue that can be easily accomplished and will not add a lot to this project. But that is certainly something that we can accommodate.
Commissioner Applebaum, can we have your report prior to final passage? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Yes. 63 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284
Thank you. Now I need to ask some questions to fill out my record. Did you have another comment?
Yes, thank you. On with regard to the minority participation, just so the record is clear about what we're talking about in terms of the numbers, from this Exhibit L, which may now be an additional exhibit that flushes out the section on minority participation, it's my understanding from this that 37 percent of the total contract hours to be outsourced will go to minority, female, and disabled/disadvantaged businesses, but that the total amount of contract dollars to be outsourced is $12 million out of 51.2? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Correct.
All right. So that represents 23.5 percent of the contract. And then 37 percent of the 12 million is what will go to the minority women, disadvantaged business entities, which is $4.5 million. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Correct.
And so what -- I mean, just so we're clear on the record, it's 64 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 $4.5 million out of the 51.2. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Roughly 4 percent of the total contract, realizing the total 5 contact is composed of the large percentage, which 6 is equipment and hardware that is supplied to us 7 via Motorola. 8
Right. So when you 9 go back to the $12 million, which represents 23.5 percent, are we to take from that the reason it's $12 million out of the 51.2 is because the other 76 percent or so primarily represents what Motorola is doing itself. Either in the way of providing equipment or personnel to fill out the rest of the contract? Is that why that number is what that number is? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Right, that is correct.
Okay, so you've got Motorola providing three quarters of what's happening themselves. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Correct.
And the 12 million that's left over, 37 percent of that is what is going out to this particular community that we're 65 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 dealing with. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Correct.
Okay. And in the second part of this Exhibit L, you talk about how Motorola agrees to employment goals utilizing labor, and therefore, the creation of local jobs with employment goals of 30 percent minority and 5 percent women. How many jobs are we talking about? What kind of jobs are we talking about? And what's the nature of the work?
I'm James Roundtree, Director of the Minority Business Enterprise Council. Councilman Nutter, we don't have the specific number of jobs, but there are construction-related jobs, and it is meant that the 30 percent participation in employment goals is by trade and 5 percent for females is by trade.
That's the primary construction in this? 66 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284
Everything else is primarily equipment and installation into, I guess, City Hall and a number of other places.
All right. I think, Madam Chair, I have two last questions that relate to the contract or the proposed -- I'm sorry, the proposed agreement. Section 3.7, which is , Technological Improvements, which carries over into of that same section. Early on this in agreement, there is a long list of definitions but I do not see a definition for the term "system staging." What is the system staging? In the context of it, it reads in the sentence: "City shall be entitled to receive and contractor install all software upgrades that are 67 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 available at the time of system staging." Does that mean at the time the system is essentially being turned on or being made operable?
Councilman, system staging -- the terminology "system staging" refers to an event that will take place at the Motorola factory in Schaumberg, Illinois, at world headquarters. Our entire system, everything that we buy, exclusive of all the portable and mobile radios, of course, is actually set on the floor of the Motorola factory. The system is operated, City employees, and contractor personnel will be there. We'll see how the system operates, we'll actually test the system at the staging area, and I think --
Exactly, Councilwoman. I mean, there will be many, many dress rehearsals before the system is really turned over to our public safety personnel, but this is the dress rehearsal at the Motorola factory in Schaumberg, Illinois. 68 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284
To provide an opportunity for a last systems debugging and before it's sent out to be installed?
Before it's boxed and created and shipped to Philadelphia, yes, ma'am.
All right. And so this section is providing that on the day or days over which that happens, if Motorola comes up with a new idea or a new technology, that we at least get notification that that exists. And then they have to tell us what the pluses and minuses of that are, and we then get opportunity to decide whether we want that particular software item or other upgrade item installed in our system.
So that provision at least allows us at the time of system staging to have whatever access to whatever is the latest things out of the box to have in our system.
And, further, if we decide to take that new item, that goes into the change order category of Article 8 on ? 69 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 And can you quickly tell us how you deal with change orders and what's the impact on the cost of the system?
Well, depending on the type of modification, I mean, like any change order, Motorola will submit a cost estimate to us. We will evaluate the merit of the improvement, we will evaluate the logic of installing that improvement, determining that it will not in effect be a detriment to the initial operation of the system, but rather an enhancement, and either accept or reject that price differential.
Okay. In section 16 3.12 -- COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Let me interrupt with one thing. If they do have an upgrade or change that we buy, we have already developed the discount level on those items, so we'll get preferential pricing at that particular time.
That's the 25 percent? 70 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Excuse me?
That's the 4 percent discount that you speak of? 5 COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Right, 25 6 percent or possibly more, yes. 7
That's at anytime 8 during the first ten years. 9 COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Ten years, 10 yes. 11
So any other 12 technology that comes along, even after the 13 system's been up and running here in Philadelphia, 14 we have access to upgraded technology at a 25 or 15 possibly more percent discount. 16 COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: That's 17 correct, yes. 18
Except new 19 technology? 20 COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: On brand-new 21 technology, I've just been advised that it was 15 22 percent on brand-new, out-of-the-box. When they 23 sell things, they don't like to share any 24 discounts but we have negotiated on new technology 25 15 percent. 71 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284
And otherwise 25 and up? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: If it's not brand-new technology, it's and up. 6
A variation on 7 something that already exists. 8 COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: That's right. 9
Okay, in Section 10 3.12 on , in the section that talks about 11 approval of subcontractors, and in the larger 12 books, there's a list of these approved 13 subcontractors. Can you just tell me how people 14 got on that list? 15 It's in Tab G. 16
Okay, I've been advised 17 to explain the minority women and disabled 18 businesses that apply to that listing, and they 19 were sent to -- 20
Right. I'd be 24 interested in that but I was not only asking about 25 minority, female and other disabled businesses, 72 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 I'm asking, how did anyone get on the list, what was the process? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: These were all presented to us by Motorola as the subcontractors that they would be using, and we reserve the right to approve them or not approve them. And the one, two, three, four -- the first four -- kind of the fifth company were presented by Motorola.
I'm sorry, say that again? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: The vendors listed are --
Are you talking about Hankels, Andrews, Center Cord, D.O.E., and Keating? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: They were vendors that were supplied and indicated by the Motorola Corporation of who they would use in our project.
Okay. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: We reserve the right to accept that, or for whatever reason, reject it. I believe that we have accepted them.
Right. 73 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: The other companies are the minority companies that also were listed by Motorola on their minority participation forms as the firms that they would use for minority participation. And MBEC, I believe, has reviewed those companies and have approved them.
So you could only get on this list if you came via Motorola, this list of approved contractors? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Well, that's the -- yes, I mean, they --
I'm just asking a simple question 'cause I don't know -- COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Sure. In any given time, a vendor that we deal with can use who they so desire. It's generally always subject to our approval. If there was a name on here that we recognized that had done poor work for us in the past or has a bad performance record, we would reject that. But I believe our technical people were satisfied with these particular companies, and they have approved them.
No, I understand. 74 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 I guess I'm also just wondering, suppose a company came along who had a stellar performance with the city of Philadelphia, didn't happen to know anybody at Motorola and said, "I'd like to do some of this work," what happens to them? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: When Motorola submitted the pricing to us -- and remember, it was a competitive RFP -- they went out in the marketplace and selected the vendors that gave and yielded to them the competitive pricing that they needed. If they didn't receive the competitive pricing from the vendors that they (unintelligible), they would have gone to other ones. But generally speaking, we do not have the control of who those subcontractors might be. Only we have the control that if we're not happy with them, we can reject them.
Okay, so I mean the overall package is, the number was $51,200,000. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Correct.
And the components of that are, Motorola's going to do certain things, and based on these group of companies that 75 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 we deal with, we can guarantee you the $51.2 million price. If other people somehow come along or want to get involved in the process, one, quite honestly, that could affect what's going on; two, they might not have any experience in dealing with them; and three, they may not have any idea of what their price would be as a competitor to anybody else on this particular list. Is that the way it works? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: That's correct, yes. Our contract and our agreement is with Motorola and we will be forwarding payment directly to Motorola. They will then pay their various contractors.
Okay. My last question actually goes either to Mr. James or Mr. Costello. It has to do with actually one of our own facilities. And I noticed in some document that a couple of rooms I think were mentioned in one of these particular materials as to where certain equipment is going here in City Hall. I think there's a reference made to certain locations like Room 714 or something like that. 76 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 Just a minor observation. My last trip up to -- I think it's municipal radio up on the seventh floor. Do we have any planned upgrades for the work environment and conditions up in that space? It seems to be rather tight and not particularly conducive to a positive work environment.
Councilman, you're absolutely right, and I think you're actually being kind in describing the current space up there.
One of the key ingredients for me in this project is not just the improved radio capability but the ability to provide a more professional and certainly a more aesthetic environment for employees -- those who do municipal dispatch as well as all Communications Division employees. 77 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 As part of this project, we will be relocated our entire operation to the seventh floor of City Hall. Our existing operations will move up there, our new Dispatch Center will move up there, the system manager and manager offices will move up to the seventh floor. Plans are underway now, and an architect was just hired to completely renovate that space. As you know, the seventh floor is not exactly pristine at this point in time either, but the spaces will be completely redone and, really, we can thank this project for the impetus to get that thing moving.
Thank you, Madam Chair. This is just a continuation along the lines that Councilman Nutter, in regards to MBEC. I'm just a little bit confused. I didn't read the book yet, I haven't been here actually. However, with the list of contractors, does that mean that 78 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 there are no opportunities for other contractors to submit a bid or be a part of this package that's in the binder that was passed out?
No, it does not, Councilwoman. My name is James Roundtree, and I'm the Director of the Minority Business Enterprise Council. But we left the little caveat that should Motorola find some additional opportunities or areas that they were going to purchase goods or services from, that they would utilize some minority and women businesses.
Does that mean that the 37 percent goals have already been reached?
No. That means they have committed to 37 percent, but it has not been reached. A major portion of the activity will be done through the construction area, and so they are still negotiating with a number of firms for that participation.
Will this project create any permanent jobs? And if so, what types? 79 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: There will not be any permanent jobs created going in the future; it will be the same workforce that we have today using the equipment. We are entering into a maintenance contract with Motorola for the three years after final completion, so they will be on site for at least that many years to make sure that the system works and operates correctly.
During the construction phase, will people be paid prevailing wage? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Yes, absolutely. There's a comment in the contract that requires Motorola to pay prevailing wages, yes.
Okay. Can you describe what good-faith effort, what it actually is? Since I've been here, it's always described as "good faith," and then get calls from our constituents to say that good faith is not working. I mean, can you tell me what evaluating and monitoring and all those kind of things are? Do you have a checklist that you use? How often 80 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 do you monitor? What are the things you're looking for in your evaluation?
Jim Roundtree, again. Councilwoman, we have a standard sheet identifying what specifically good faith is, and I can get that for you, but it's more like a ten-item checklist. But in this particular contract, we're going to be -- MBEC will be very involved in actually monitoring and working with Motorola to assure that the firms that they have identified previously are given an opportunity to participate and then monitor that entire process all the way through, receive and certify payrolls, following up by purchase orders, along with, if we need Council's checks to assure that the minority and women and disabled business vendors have been paid. To that degree, we'll be involved to that degree.
And what is the 81 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 sanctions for failing to comply? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: If they're not in compliance, just as any other company doing business with the city of Philadelphia, they risk being defaulted and a call against their performance bond.
Is that a part of the agreement written into the agreement, the noncompliance? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Oh, yeah. All standard -- all contracts that are entered into by the city of Philadelphia, our terms and conditions, require compliance with the contract; and upon a failure, they can be disqualified and the City of Philadelphia can go against their performance bond, which in this particular contract, is a 100 percent performance bonds or $51.2 million. So they will perform.
Well, some of the other companies haven't performed, so do you use that enforcement mechanism in the contracts? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Yes, we do.
Well, if it sounds to us like they don't perform, I mean, they 82 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 could but some -- we haven't received documented information on 'cause we get too many calls from constituents that are in the contracting business that want to participate in lots of these projects, and it seems that there are many barriers. And one question I would have is, does Motorola, do they have a track record in terms of meeting these types of requirements on other projects that they have been involved in?
Let him answer. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Absolutely. I mean, Motorola is the leader in the industry of the 800-megahertz system. I believe they're the only ones right now who have that. But I believe your question is directed specifically to minority participation.
Right. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: We have no 21 information that would indicate that they don't comply, and they have made commitments that they will comply. And our Director of Minority Business Enterprises Council is satisfied with that commitment, and they will do what they say 83 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 they are going to do, absolutely.
Well, Mr. Roundtree, do you feel assured? We go through this every time we do a big deal or a TIF, and then a month later, people are calling us up, and we have to do additional public hearings, and we feel like we have to enforce or bring people back to the table to continue to talk about minority participation? And for myself on these kind of projects, I just need to know these answers beforehand so that when people start to call, we know exactly who to call, and that's --
I am very confident that the members of the Motorola team and the members of the City team have a direct understanding that they will comply with everything that they have agreed to and committed to thus far.
I don't know whether this goes to communications or procurement. How much money have we spent on this project from its 84 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 conception to today? How much money has actually been spent in consulting fees, engineering, all kinds of expenses associated with this project? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: I believe this particular question was posed earlier, and the only cost that I know of that the City has expended to date has been our independent consultants. The City team has worked very long, hard, and strenuous, a lot of hours, so I can't evaluate those costs 'cause there's a lot of our own city of Philadelphia manpower. As far as consultants, I believe the number was 2 to $400,000.
Councilman, as you know, this project has gone back quite a while, and we've had consultants on board since the early 1990s, so I guess the number would certainly reach about a half a million dollars to date in consulting fees. There really have been no other expenses associated with the project other than, as Commissioner Applebaum mentioned, the City personnel costs.
Do you think it would be to our advantage to start keeping track 85 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 of what City employees involve themselves in this project so we'd know in the end -- (Chairwoman Clark taps gavel.)
Excuse me, Madam Chair, don't you think it's appropriate to know what time and effort is expended in -- would you excuse --
I hear you and I have no desire to step on your right to ask questions but if I had you in a court of law, I'd have to ask you where you're going with this line of questioning.
At the end of the project, it would be nice to know how much money we've spent.
We've got to pay those guys what we pay those guys whether they do anything good, bad or otherwise. That doesn't help me. Expenditures such as we might have incurred for a consultant, hardware or any other of the soft costs that go with the project, fine, but I don't think you can start allocating what part of Dean's time he's spent on this versus something else. 86 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284
No, I'm not talking about the Budget Director; I'm talking about the people in the Communications Division to support the installation.
How is he different from anybody else? He's a City employee who's on a salary.
Well, if you would like to include Dean into that, I have no problem with that.
No, what I want you to do is ask a question that is relevant to this proceeding. I do not wish to be disrespectful to you, but I do not wish to have this hearing go off on tangents --
-- not likely to get me to a point where I have a record that will sustain this purchase or not. And irrelevant questions -- I don't mean to characterize your question as irrelevant, but I need an offer of proof of where you're going with this 'cause this doesn't take me anywhere. 87 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284
Well, we've -- there's been other members of this committee that have asked questions that are not relevant to the purchase of this system that there was no 6 objection to.
That's my interpretation. Now, could I continue with my question?
Yes, if you're going to ask a question that's relevant to these proceedings.
My question is, when we finish this project, will we really know how much it cost? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: We will absolutely know how much we have paid to our contractor for this contract, just as in every other project in the City of Philadelphia, whether we're building a building or buying police cars or buying salt for the roads, we know exactly what paid through a purchase order, through checks that are issued. 88 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 The other costs, such as our overhead, our own payroll, those costs are not captured. In order for the city of Philadelphia to be able to capture those costs, we would have to install a very sophisticated complicated cost system such as major law firms have to capture costs, and we, every employee, would have to fill out time reports by the tenth of an hour of what we're doing and charge to jobs, and I don't know whether that would be relevant and important or necessary.
The -- once the system's in and operating, the operational costs of the system that we have determined what the support for the system, the telephone lines, and all the associated equipment, what we're going to be spending to annually to maintain and operate the system. I'm not talking about just the maintenance; I'm talking about all of the expenses associated with maintaining a system of this ten-tower -- the telephone lines, has that all been put together on exactly how much we're going to spend in the operational ends?
Councilman, to answer that question, I would say to date, we have not defined 89 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 the total operational costs. I believe you're speaking about the operational costs for the networking end of it. We do have a cost that's in the budget that's a part of the project for the construction of the infrastructure, which includes all of the circuits necessary to the various tower sites for the operational costs. But at this particular moment, I couldn't tell you per se what that actual cost would be, but that's something that I could certainly respond to you in writing.
Electricity -- in other words, there's going to be a cost to operate this system, and I'd be interested to know what that would be annually.
I think we can probably give you the networking costs. I don't know if I could give you the utility costs for operating the tower and so forth.
There's more than network. Obviously, there's going to be a lot of expenses associated with keeping this system up and running. Going back to the guarantee that the 90 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 system has, you've identified the fact that the current system has lots of holes and that there's coverage-related problems. When this system is installed, after it's staged at the factory and it's delivered to Philadelphia and it's turned on, and I know that it's in this detail, if there are coverage problems, who's responsible? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Motorola is responsible for the performance of the system in accordance with the specifications. There are in addition to the normal specifications, we have a through-put -- what was that?
There is a through-put requirement that's in the study that ensures the performance of the system as well as part of the first phase of the project, involves a coverage study where there's an actual feet on the street that go out to sites and test that radio to ensure that they have the coverage before we accept the system. So there is -- part of the phasing of the project involves a detailed coverage analysis to ensure, before we agree to it, that we have the coverage as we predicted in the proposal within 91 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 the building and outside the building.
The only last concern that I have is, and I see a representative that spoke with me from -- a photo journalist. There is presently an ordinance in our government that permits certain organizations to monitor fire, police, radio. And that ordinance also identifies who is not allowed to monitor. How are we going to accommodate the news media, photo journalists, the ability -- and Councilman Kenney mentioned the fact that the concern about eavesdropping, but there are organizations that are permitted to monitor our frequencies. So how are we going to give that access to our TV, radio, and other media to be able to know what's going on if this is such a solid, secure digitized system? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: We have reviewed that in our meetings, and if media, authorized media are interested, they will buy from the City of Philadelphia an appropriate radio that they can use to listen to certain areas that we want them to listen to. They must be approved and they must buy the equipment. 92 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284
Are we -- by law, are we allowed to prohibit total access to our system? Are we allowed to do that by law? Can you do what you just said legally, prohibit the media from listening in on all of the frequencies? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: We're not prohibiting them; we're allowing them to participate. We are going to control it and we are going to sell them the equipment.
Well, that's not what you really said. You said you would let them listen to what you -- COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: We're going to sell them equipment. If they so desire, if the legitimate media wants to listen to what is going on and they apply to us, we will sell them the equipment, and they will be able to listen in.
No. Are there some channels that you would hold confidential? 93 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Right.
Yes? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: There will be a limit. I mean, the very, very secure areas -- undercover agents and whatever -- they will not have the authority to listen into those particular channels.
I asked the question and I understand, and I don't want to be argumentative. Are you legally allowed to deny them? Right now, our U band and our H band are all high confidential bands, but still, the media can listen in to them because the technology permits it? If they wanted to listen to all 30 channels that you have available, or anyone that's permanent permitted by law to listen, is there anything you could do to prevent them from listening if they chose to? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: I believe this is a question that would go to the City Solicitor's Office to make that determination.
Do you have a lawyer from the City Solicitor's Office present? Do we have a legal opinion on that that's brief? 94 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: The Law Department prefers that we submit the question to the City Solicitor's Office, and we will do that. But I imagine, using good judgment, that in the world of public safety, if it's necessary to protect the interests and we have the technology to do that, we certainly would do that.
Let's not speculate on the record. If we're going to get an opinion on it -- COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: We will speak to the City Solicitor and get an opinion on that question.
And we will get the opinion on an expedited basis so as to have it in advance of our final passage? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Absolutely. (City Solicitor's opinion later submitted and attached hereto.)
Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Thank you.
Okay, I need to 95 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 ask questions just so that my record is complete. Does the proposed contract include a warranty or a maintenance agreement for the subscribers? And if so how, long is the City committed to the agreement? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: We are offered with the program a one-year warranty on all equipment. We have negotiated with Motorola a three-year, full-warranty, full-maintenance contract that we have the option to take in the future. So we today have, from the beginning of the program till approximately five years out, full warranty, full maintenance on the system.
How much does it cost? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: The annual maintenance cost is approximately $1 million. That's full maintenance, full parts, everything, 100 percent.
Would it be cheaper to maintain the system with City employees or to contract with another contractor? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: In our study of other cities and in our investigations when we 96 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 visited other cities who had the 800-megahertz system that is similar to what we are getting, we feel very confident that it's very important to have the professionals who have sold us the equipment maintain that equipment. In the long run, we feel very strongly that the costs will not be excessive and we will have the outside contractor fully responsible. And the city of Cleveland was very successful in doing that way, and we studied them when we made our visits to Cleveland.
What happens to the City employees who currently maintain the radio system?
Councilwoman, I think the City employees that currently maintain, our base station technicians, they will become in effect the system managers because of the technology that we're buying. And because we'll be able to manage, they will in turn become the managers. They will be --
So they will take advantage of the training aspect of it and go into the new system as the operators. 97 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284
Exactly. We have about $900,000 to $1 million set aside for training of our people. I'd just like to add that the people who work in the Department of Public Property communications and the radio system area are among the most dedicated and loyal in the City and have done a truly magnificent job over the years under conditions that were not always financially favorable in maintaining what we have right now. They're not the type of people that we would put on the side, but instead, incorporate into the new system.
Thank you. Please define for this committee what is meant by "through-put performance standard" and "grade of service" as it relates to the proposed system's performance.
Yes, briefest, if could I make it. The through-put standard is just a 98 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 benchmark that we're setting today that gives us a record of how the system should operate and the type of reliability that our users can anticipate once the system is deployed. And the grade --
Below which we shall not fall, and the details -- those parameters and details if, in fact, we do not meet our benchmark. The grade of service, again, is an indicator to us of the time that will elapse from the time a user pushes the Push-To-Talk button until the time they have a channel available for them to speak. Again, it provides us a measurement tool to go back and measure against once the system is installed.
What remedial actions have been made -- what remedial actions is Motorola required to perform under the proposed contract if the system does not meet the grade of service?
The first remedial action that will occur is a joint analysis between the 99 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 City and the Motorola team to go over the performance measures to define where, in fact, there is a defect in our performance. And then set a set of circumstances of remedial action for Motorola to reconfigure or re-optimize our system to --
Are you getting near the end of the answer? I told you I like short answers.
Goodness gracious. Goodness gracious. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: That would have been my answer.
Okay, now, are we clear? If I ask you a long question, I want a short answer. No, seriously, I do have a lot of questions. Commissioner Applebaum? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Yes?
Do you mind if we bring back Commissioners Timoney and Hairston to 100 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 permit the committee to ask them questions. They're sitting in their chairs as if they need to spring. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Absolutely.
Are there questions from the committee specifically addressed to Commissioners Timoney and Hairston? We're beginning to feel a little bit worried about the City's safety if we keep them here poised on the end of a chair. You just told us that you have no way to talk to them. Are there questions for the commissioners? Are there any questions? (No questions.)
In that case, Commissioners, please accept our thanks for your patience and for your presentations, and we will consider that you've made your contribution, and you may go. COMMISSIONER TIMONEY: Thank you, Madam Chair. COMMISSIONER HAIRSTON: Thank you for the opportunity to speak before you.
Thank you. 101 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Thank you for allowing them to leave. We're on the clock now, and we don't want them charged to this project.
Don't provoke the committee, sir. Don't provoke the committee. (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Okay.
All right. My next question is, is all of the software provided in this system Y2K-compliant? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Our City Solicitor's Office will answer that question. (Michael Athay comes forward.)
Michael Athay. That's A-T-H-A-Y for the reporter. I'm a Divisional Deputy City Solicitor Officer, and I've represented the City in the negotiation of this contract. Motorola has agreed to a warranty of the year 2000 compliance of the software, of all software, including code that is embedded in microchips for this project. All software that is 102 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 part of the project will be subject to this warranty. The standards of warranty are the City's standards, essentially the City's standards. And the warranty has been negotiated with the advice and consent of the City's Chief Information Officer, Brian Anderson, every step of the way.
The warranty does not have a term. The warranty will extend into --
Is there a specific cost connected to it, an identifiable cost connected to the warranty as to Y2K?
There is no additional cost in the contract for the year 2000 warranty specifically, no. 20
Thank you. Since the operation of the proposed system is dependent on software, under the proposed contract, does Motorola warrant that the software will be uninterrupted and error-free? And if so, for how long? 103 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284
I can address that question as well. Councilwoman Clark, no software is completely uninterrupted and error-free; it's simply not the case. There are always errors in software; it's the nature of the business. Motorola has --
If not, what corrective action does Motorola have to make under the proposed agreement?
This contract contains strong warranties for software, including again, code that's embedded in microchips, very strong warranties. And under those warranties, Motorola is required to correct any defect that goes to the primary functionality or any critical feature of the system that's critical to the primary functionality. The City's team, the technical team has carefully negotiated the definition of primary functionality, and there's no short way to describe it here. But I can assure you that the issue was thoroughly reviewed, and the definition of "primary functionality," in our judgment, will sustain the system, the operability of the 104 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 system. If there's a defect --
Let me think for a moment. There is no additional cost, to my knowledge, that goes specifically to the software warranty.
It's incorporated in the general project warranty that Commissioner Applebaum described.
To sustain the overall warranty for system compliance?
Yes, I believe that's correct. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: That is correct. In our discussions, there has not been any place where software warranties have been shown as a separate item. They're included in the 105 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 totals.
Right. Will the City be obligated to purchase Motorola software? And if so, for how long and at what costs?
Motorola software is included in the base purchase. It's a major part of the project.
The City will be purchasing enhancements and updates -- these are the terms in the industry -- to the base software. I mean, it's desirable to do that and we would want to do that. And we will be doing that going forward. The City is not, under this contract, committed to purchase what the industry calls "eversion upgrades." That will be at our option. If and when a major upgrade of the software becomes available, it would be negotiated at the time. We are not committed to do that under this contract.
Will the City have to pay extra for any software enhancements or new software products? And if so, will we receive discounts on those purchases? 106 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Could you repeat the questions, please?
Sure. Will the City have to pay extra for any software enhancements and new software products? And if so, will the City receive any discounts on those purchases? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: I -- I would assume that if there are additional software, as they come out, and enhancements, that would be chargeable, we would be obligated to pay for that. And I, again, would assume that the discounts that we have negotiated will be continued on. Again, we have not had specific pricing on software. So it's -- I would -- I'm making an assumption that they will be priced at the same discount level.
Please identify the proposed project managers for the City and Motorola on this project. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Okay. The interim project manager has been Vince Costello, from Communications. 107 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 We have received a proposal from the two consultants who have worked very closely with us on this project, and we will be very shortly signing the agreements for their services. These gentlemen have been with the City for sometime as independent consultants, and one has been the project manager or the owner's representative for the Criminal Justice Center and also for the construction of a prison. So they have extensive experience in project management and also in radio systems as they related to the prisons. Our group has full confidence that these men have the ability and dedication and loyalty to take us from here forward. And we again have heard from other cities of the importance of having a full-time project manager working on the project from the day that we sign the contract.
What about the project managers from Motorola, did you address that? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: I did not address that. I do not know whether we have the name yet or not. They have not presented to us 108 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 the name of the product manager, but we do reserve the right. . . I'm sorry, I'm being corrected. There is a project manager. Melissa? (Melissa Hanlon comes forward.)
L-O-N, okay. Does each one have adequate, relevant management and oversight experience to qualify for the development and installation of an emergency radio system of the size, magnitude, and scope of this project? That's a yes- or no-question. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Yes.
Okay. Do you have anything you want to put on? I have, "If not, why so? If yes, why so?" COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Well, let's say the committee has worked very diligently and very hard to do a very good job of --
Are you persuaded that their experience is sufficient? 109 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Yeah. And we feel comfortable with the City's management and also with Motorola's. And our goal is to install a perfect system, and we feel very satisfied that that will happen with the group that we have retained.
Okay. I want to talk just a little bit about underground. How far underground can a police officer or a fireman go before system coverage will be cut off? What proposals for an underground system were made? What are the costs associated for each proposal? Is there sufficient funding in place? And why aren't we considering the underground system now? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Well, let me start with first question as far as how far an officer can go. We understand that it varies in the various locations of the city, the various sections of the underground. It is somewhat limited. The officer will have some coverage underground, but again, it is very limited. We have had a proposal presented to us by Motorola for a full underground system at a cost of approximately $22 million. We have 110 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 elected to defer that for the time being, and we are meeting with SEPTA in the hopes of developing a program where we will be able to share the cost with the SEPTA system for developing the full underground system. We are also going to look to the private sector for the possibility of the cellular systems adjoining us and deferring some of costs. So we will-- in fact, we do have a task force dealing with SEPTA, and we will also try to deal with the cellular system people and with Motorola to come up with a program that will be advantageous to the City on a basis that we can share the cost. And as we mentioned before and in the amendment that you have, when that is developed, it will be presented to City Council.
So you see that as Phase II? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Well, actually, this program is Phase I and Phase II. This is be Phase III.
Phase III. I'm reminded to ask to you to submit written answers to all the questions that are 111 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 unanswered today so as to permit our record to be full enough to justify our decision. Okay, yes, sir?
This is a technical question. The present system, the 450 and the Fire Department operates, you have backup generators to keep that system up in the event of an interruption of PECO Energy service. What are you planning to do to keep this system an up system during the potential of a major interruption of power? And now that you're adding additional antenna locations, will they all be up all the time?
Absolutely, absolutely. They'll be redundant backup power at each of the ten major cites, including the sites of City Hall where we're feeding off of existing generators. But each system have an up system, a series of generators. There should be clear, unless a catastrophic situation occurs, a power outage that would last for a long time, I mean we should have a reliable source of power at all of the sites.
So you're telling me that the installation of this system will also 112 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 include the installation of additional generation equipment. Is that a separate deal here? 'Cause that's a substantial investment.
The 51 million includes the generators and all that to keep the system up?
Okay. Let's talk about the MBEC involvement just a little bit more, Mr. Roundtree. Please describe the agreement that has been reached with respect to MBEC contractors in this project. Specifically, why haven't the MBEC certified subcontractors been selected for the project? Why will the selection occur after the project is approved by Council?
The first answer, there has been no commitments to the specific firms. Second, our response is, because of the nature of the construction activity, they have -- Motorola or their general contractor has not 113 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 completed negotiations. And at that point, once the negotiations are completed, then ten days prior to award of a contract to the general contractor, they will submit a solicitation commitment form committing to the specific subcontractors for minority, women, and disabled business.
You will have the list by contract, name, size of the contract, in terms of dollars, and the amount of work involved?
Okay. Has the scope of the construction been determined yet?
I don't feel qualified to respond to that particular version of it.
Well, does anybody know how you price it without knowing the size and 114 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 scope of the work? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: We know the story on the towers that's going to be constructed, we know where they are. There's been some adjustments made with one tower replacing another tower. So the definitive numbers per tower have not been determined. But in general, on the overall price, the price of 51.2 will cover it. In fact, there are some documents that show that that price might come down to be a lower number for some of the changes that were made.
So you have some appreciation for the size of the construction as a percentage of the total cost of the project. But today, if you had to give a parts list and a who-does-what list, you're not prepared to be that specific and that detailed?
Okay. Now, is it your intention then to provide this Council with an itemized list of the work to be done and the contractors?
Yes, ma'am. Yes, 115 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 Council Chair, yes.
Of contractors and the work that they have been offered or assigned or contracted for?
Okay, we will give you a list of the committed firms, the solicitation. We will give you a copy of the actual solicitation and commitment form that would identify who, how much, and what they're supposed to be doing.
No, that they will be contracting with -- not -- at the point that we submit you the list, it will be commitments versus what they would like to do. It will be specifics.
Yes. The list that we will submit to you will be the firms that Motorola or their general contractor will be using on those 116 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 particular items.
All right, okay. Excuse me one minute, I just want to be certain. . . What are the maximum coverage limits on the million for the professional liability and 8 umbrella insurance when the contract is over 9 52 million? 10 COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: This total 11 program has been reviewed by Risk Management, and 12 they have accepted it. And in reality, the value 13 of the contract, the 52 million, doesn't relate to 14 the potential liability. And the 25 million 15 umbrella liability and professional liability are 16 for incidents that could occur and do not relate 17 to the 52 million contract price. 18 We're looking at the potential 19 liability. I think they're under the -- the 20 insurance that they have is payable for $1 million 21 dollars per occurrence. The $25 million umbrella 22 picks up after that occurs. But there's no 23 relevance between the dollar value of the contract 24 and the amount of insurance that they're 25 providing, and the -- 117 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284
And the risk manager's only interested in paying a premium liability to which this contract exposes us. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: That's correct.
I understand that. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: And Risk Management was satisfied with that coverage, as we are.
Thank you. Are there any further questions for any people who are present in this room to speak? (No response.)
Gentlemen, thank you for your presentation. It was clear and concise. And when you have provided me with the answers to the questions that we've asked I will consider this record complete. (Above answers later submitted and attached hereto.) COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Thank you very much.
Thank you very much. Okay. 118 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284
I'd like to ask Mr. Applebaum or Mr. Costello or Joe James one quick thing.
Wait a minute, come back to the table for the purpose of -- we have an amendment, gentlemen, to this bill which we must do. Sir, if you're next, would you just hold on. We'll finish this business and then we'll hear from you, too. Mr. Nutter, will you read the proposed amendment?
Yes, Madam Chair. The first amendment amends Section 1 of the bill 16 to add the following sentences at the end of the section: "The Procurement Commissioner is further authorized to investigate costs, feasibility, and appropriate contractual mechanism for extending the implementation of the municipal radio system to the tunnels, stations concourses, and trains used by the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transit Authority (SEPTA) within the boundaries of the City. The results of such investigations 119 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 shall be presented to Council for its review and consideration, and Council's further authorization shall be required as a condition of the City entering into any agreement for the implementation of an underground phase of the municipal radio system." The second amendment, Madam Chair, amends the bill by substituting the attached Exhibit A for the Exhibit A now attached to the bill. For any of the three of you, is it our understanding that the new attachment A is this? This being the book that says "Exhibit A to Agreement for Design and Implementation of 800-Megahertz Trunk Municipal Radio System." COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: That is correct. I believe you have two binders.
Well, I was going to ask about that because there was no mention made of that. The other says, "Exhibits B Through N." Do you need those amended into the bill as well? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Yes, that should be in the bill. 120 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284
The exhibit is the two binders together, the Exhibit A to the amendment and the Exhibit A to the bill. The Exhibit A to the amendment is the two binders together. It's the contract and the set of exhibits to the contract. One very large exhibit, Exhibit A, to the contract and a number of other exhibit. The original bill was set up the same way. Exhibit A to the bill was the contract plus the exhibits to the contract. We are replacing the one Exhibit A with the other Exhibit A. In both cases, the exhibit is the contract and the exhibits to the contract.
All right. So your testimony is that even though we have two binders, the two binders represent the entirety of Exhibit A, and that is now what's being substituted for the original Exhibit A, and you want those amended 121 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 into this particular bill.
Thank you. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Madam Chair, we would request that you suspend the rules of the reading --
So as to permit first reading at next stated meeting. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Thank you very much. You took the words right out of my mouth.
Okay, thank you very much. All right. Please, sir, would you joint us at the table. State your name for purposes of the record. Are you alone, or do you have someone testifying with you?
Mr. Gross, we thank you for your patience. Please identify yourself for the record, spell your name as I have just done, and proceed. Now, you have submitted your testimony, and I need to tell you that it will be set forth in full as though you gave it to us word for word. Can you briefly summarize what you would have said if you had done the whole statement, or do you need to do the statement?
Well, I would like to touch on the statement if I could very briefly. But basically, the gentleman was kind enough to raise and Councilman Rizzo raised a lot of questions that I had on this. I'd just like to speak on it -- expound briefly on some of the facts that you had asked.
Sure. My name is Alex Gross. A-L-E-X. Gross, G-R-O-S-S. I am a reporter and a photographer with the Northeast News Gleaner, which is a newspaper that's been in publication for quite a long time, about 117 years. 123 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 Prior to coming here, I was concerned that the 800-megahertz radio system would prohibit people in the news media from basically being able to impart information to the public, putting us out of business, letting people know about accidents, fires, traffic alerts, shootings, stabbings well after it happened. Now I can see now that that's not going to happen. However, in doing research for this, I came across some -- how should I say? -- information that I would -- that City Council possibly might not be totally familiar with or aware of, and I'd like to bring those concerns to you with the security of the 800-megahertz system. The system -- let me see here. The general public can no longer listen. This might be what you want to achieve but, however, you're going to be doing this at the expense of the following. You do have a lot of private security companies, for example, in Jefferson Hospital Temple Hospital, that they routinely monitor police radio transmissions. When they hear a wanted person in the area who had just committed a crime, they are now able to be on the lookout for 124 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 that person and either detain him for the police or let the police know, Hey, the person that you were looking for just rather than ran around the corner is hiding in a Dumpster somewhere. Without knowing that somebody is wanted, a wanted person could walk into a hospital past the security officer and hide in a bathroom. Nobody's going to know that. The second is, casual people who monitor police and fire frequencies will not be able to -- even though you might not like them to listen, they are not going to be able to also tip off the police as to wanted people. And, again, it was brought to my attention that sometimes when people call the police or call the Fire Department or EMS for a crime in progress, for a fire, or for some other emergency-type situation, sometimes, believe it or not, the dispatchers put erroneously. It's not done intentionally; they're human. It happens seldom, but it does happen. The people then can call back up and say, Wait a minute, that's not what I said. What I said was the following. . . The information could then be redispatched quickly 125 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 and more efficiently. And most importantly, neighborhood police departments are now no longer going to be able to know what the city of Philadelphia Police Department is doing. A lot of them --
When you say "neighborhoods," you mean in contiguous communities outside Philadelphia.
That is correct. For example, Bucks County, Delaware County, bordering towns in Chester County and the like. If they hear that the police are looking for somebody that has just done something wrong and is fleeing, let's say, northbound, up Bustleton Avenue, they're not going to know that because they can't listen and find out that the person who had just done what they had done is going north on Bustleton Avenue. They can be sitting right there and the person who just did a crime drove right past 'em, and they would not know, and they don't have any access to know.
Well, I would ask that you, 126 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 you know, you take that into consideration when you -- if this bill gets passed, that certain people do have an absolute right, aside from the media -- not a right, but it's important for them to be able to know what's going on also. In addition to that, Town Watch people routinely listen in to police scanners while they're doing their patrols. If the police are looking for somebody, the Town Watch people are in direct communications with the police through the radios or through their telephones. Now they know, Hey, the person that, you know, I just passed is wanted.
Okay, thank you, Mr. Gross. Are. There questions of this witness? (No questions.)
You're welcome. There's one other thing I wanted to say if I could. It's not intention of the media -- I thank you for allowing us to -- and especially for Councilman Rizzo for bringing this up. The media 127 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 does not want total, 100 percent access to this system. A lot of transmissions are sensitive. We know right now of drug operations, surveillance operations that are going on inside the city. We're responsible members of the media, we don't publish that information, we don't broadcast it. We're not asking for, you know, presidential protection details. That's none of our business.
Okay, Mr. Gross, I thank you very much. I think we got the gist of your comments.
Are there any other persons in the room who wish to be heard to speak in favor of or against the bill before us? (No response.)
Madam Chair, I move that we adjourn the public hearing and convene the public meeting. 128 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - 990284 (Duly seconded.)
All in favor? Opposed? This meeting is now adjourned. - - -
We are now constituted in public session. Before us is a bill, take a motion.
Madam Chair, I move that the proposed amendments, as read into the record earlier to Bill 990284, be adopted. (Duly seconded.)
Madam Chair, I move that Bill 990284, as amended be, reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation and a further recommendation that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next session. (Duly seconded.)
All in favor? Opposes? 129 5/16/99 PUB. PROP./WORKS - Pub. Meeting This bill is now passed. Let me express my appreciation to you for your testimony and for your patience. This meeting is adjourned. (Adjourned at 3:25 p.m.) - - - 130 C E R T I F I C A T E I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of Wednesday, May 26, 1999, were reported fully and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of same. RE: COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS BILL NO. 990284 __________________________________, JOSEPHINE CARDILLO, Registered Professional Reporter