COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA2 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND3 PUBLIC WORKS4 - - -5 Room 400, City Hall6 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Tuesday, May 26, 20097 1:20 p.m. 8 - - - 9 PRESENT:10 COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE, CHAIR COUNCILMAN FRANK DiCICCO11 COUNCILMAN BILL GREEN COUNCILMAN WILLIAM GREENLEE12 COUNCILMAN JAMES F. KENNEY COUNCILWOMAN JOAN L. KRAJEWSKI13 BILL 090289 - An ordinance authorizing the14 Commissioner of Public Property, on behalf of the City, to acquire fee simple title, or a15 lesser interest in real estate... 16 BILL 090361 - An ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property and the17 Procurement Commissioner, on behalf of the City, to enter into an agreement with18 Motorola, Inc... 19 BILL 090423 - Resolution approving the City of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Emergency 9-1-1...20 - - -21 22 V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Services23 Eleven Penn Center 1835 Market Street, Suite 60024 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.267025 2 1
Good2 afternoon. This is the Committee on3 Public Property and Public Works.4 We have established a quorum.5 On my right is Councilman DiCicco,6 Councilman Kenney, Councilwoman Krajewski7 and Councilman Greenlee.8 Mr. Carter, will you please9 read the title of the first bill.10
Bill No. 090289, an11 ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of12 Public Property, on behalf of the City,13 to acquire fee simple title, or a lesser14 interest in real estate, in parcels of15 land along the Delaware River and the K&T16 Trail, under certain terms and17 conditions.18
Good22 afternoon.23 COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK:24 Good afternoon, Chairman Clarke and25 3 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 members of the Committee on Public2 Property and Public Works. My name is3 Joan Schlotterbeck. I am the4 Commissioner of the Department of Public5 Property. I'm here today to testify in6 support of Bill No. 090289, an ordinance7 authorizing me as the Commissioner, on8 behalf of the City, to acquire fee simple9 title, or a lesser interest in real10 estate, in a parcel of land along the11 Delaware River and the K&T Trail, under12 certain terms and conditions.13 This bill will enable the City14 to acquire land for the development of15 the Delaware River Recreation Park and16 Path, which will be part of the East17 Coast Greenway.18 The Department of Public19 Property supports this measure and,20 accordingly, I respectfully ask that21 Council approve Bill No. 090289.22 I'm requesting a suspension of23 the rules so as to allow for the first24 reading at the next session of Council.25 4 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 Thank you. With me today is2 Jim Donaghy from the Commerce Department3 to answer any questions you may have.4
Thank you.5 Any questions by members of the6 Committee on this particular bill of this7 witness?8 (No response.)9
Anyone else10 to testify on this bill?11 (No response.)12
Thank you13 very much.14 Mr. Carter, please read the15 title of the next bill.16
Resolution No.17 090423, a resolution approving the City18 of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Emergency19 9-1-1 2008 Triennial Plan as an amendment20 to the City's 9-1-1 Plan, and authorizing21 the Commissioner of Public Property, on22 behalf of the City of Philadelphia, to23 submit such amended 9-1-1 Plan to the24 Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency25 5 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 for review and approval, as required by2 the Pennsylvania Public Safety Emergency3 Telephone Act.4
Thank you.5 Please proceed.6 COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK:7 Good afternoon, Chairman Clarke and8 members of the Committee on Public9 Property and Public Works. My name is10 Joan Schlotterbeck. I'm here today as11 the Commissioner of Public Property. I12 am appearing before this Committee today13 to recommend adoption of Resolution14 090423, which amends the City's current15 9-1-1 Plan, as required by the16 Pennsylvania Public Safety Emergency17 Telephone Act, Act 78. The Act requires18 the filing of a 9-1-1 plan every three19 years with the Pennsylvania Emergency20 Management Agency, or PEMA.21 The amended plan attached to22 Resolution 090423, the last amended plan23 was filed by the City with PEMA in April24 2005.25 6 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 The purpose of the amended plan2 is to document the costs associated with3 running of the City's 9-1-1 system, the4 technical capabilities of the existing5 system and future plans for improving the6 system. It provides information with7 respect to the revenues from the8 contribution rate of $1 per line per9 month on each telephone landline or local10 exchange access line collected by11 telephone service providers and forwarded12 quarterly to the City. This plan also13 incorporates information on the City's14 use of revenue for mobile phones. Act15 56, effective March 29, 2004, amended the16 Public Safety Emergency Telephone Act to17 create the Wireless E-911 Emergency18 Service Fund and to require that each19 wireless service provider collect a20 monthly charge of $1 per account and21 quarterly forward such revenue to PEMA,22 which in turn makes grants to the local23 government for the 9-1-1 system expenses.24 Such wireless funds first became25 7 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 available to the City in Fiscal 2006.2 Once the City provides the3 information to PEMA in the form of the4 amended plan, a copy of the amended plan5 is forwarded by PEMA to the Pennsylvania6 Public Utility Commission, which reviews7 the costs associated with the 9-1-18 system and determines if continued9 collections of 9-1-1 surcharge rate on10 landline phones is permissible.11 The amended 9-1-1 plan provides12 information regarding technical aspects13 of the City's 9-1-1 system and provides14 descriptive information regarding the15 current and planned technical upgrades to16 be made to the system; updates17 information regarding the telephone18 costs, radio system costs, labor costs,19 operational costs, capital costs; and the20 City's policy and regulation for the21 management of the competitive local22 exchange carriers.23 The amended 9-1-1 plan contains24 monetary figures for justification of the25 8 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 continued collection of the City's $1 per2 month per line surcharge rate.3 Act 78 places a cap on the4 recovery of the costs to $1 of the cities5 of the first class, despite the fact that6 the City expends at least $3.30 per7 access line per month to provide 9-1-18 access to residents, business9 organizations and visitors seeking10 emergency services. The funds collected11 have been used to pay the salary and12 operation costs of the City's 9-1-113 center and capital costs to replace our14 E-911 equipment to become Phase I and15 Phase II compliant and build out the16 9-1-1 overflow center and will also be17 used for the proposed 800 megahertz18 upgrade.19 In conclusion, the amended20 9-1-1 plan, as submitted, is reflective21 of changes and modifications from the22 original plan and is in a form acceptable23 to the Department.24 We'd be happy to answer any25 9 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 questions, and we'd also be happy to walk2 you through the changes in the amendment3 if you would like that.4 And, Mr. Chair, we'd also like5 to submit for the record the amendments6 to the resolution.7
There is an8 amendment?9 COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK:10 Yes. Would you like the Deputy --11
If you12 could just briefly -- yeah. I think13 they've actually been circulated. If you14 could just briefly explain it. It seems15 to be technical in nature.16 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO: The17 amendments are actually and 9 of18 Exhibit A have been changed. The prime19 change, on it had referenced the20 fact that there was a problem in21 collecting the data by Verizon and by the22 Police Department. That was corrected,23 and it was changed in the second24 paragraph to indicate that. The PSAP,25 10 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 public safety answering point, handles2 8,216 calls per day. That was the change3 there.4 And on , there was a5 change to indicate that as the overflow6 public safety answering point for the7 Police Department primary public safety8 answering point in the Fire Department,9 which is the secondary public safety10 answering point, is now located in City11 Hall and has a number -- 47 positions to12 handle both Police and Fire should there13 be a need to go to that center in the14 future in the event of an emergency.15
Is that16 reflected -- you gave us an executive17 summary that's attached to the amendment.18 It says "2. Executive Summary." Do you19 have an attachment to --20 COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: I21 don't actually have it with me.22
We have23 three sheets.24 COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK:25 11 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 Yeah. The three sheets -- yes.2
And the two3 reflect the --4 COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK:5 Exactly. He was calling out the changes6 to the original submission.7 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO: I8 didn't read the entire page, yes, just9 the changes.10
I just11 wanted to make sure. Thank you.12 Any questions of these13 witnesses on this resolution?14 (No response.)15
Anyone else16 to testify on this resolution?17 (No response.)18
There being19 none, thank you very much.20 Mr. Carter, please read the21 title of the next bill.22
Bill No. 090361, an23 ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of24 Public Property and the Procurement25 12 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 Commissioner, on behalf of the City, to2 enter into an agreement with Motorola,3 Incorporated, for Motorola to design,4 build, install, optimize and maintain5 facilities and equipment for the upgrade6 of the City's 800 megahertz trunked7 municipal radio communications system;8 and authorizing the Commissioner of9 Public Property, on behalf of the City,10 to enter into an agreement for the11 purpose of financing the lease of12 equipment, software and related services13 for the upgrade of the radio14 communications system with an option to15 purchase such equipment and software and16 to enter into an escrow agreement17 pursuant to the terms of the lease18 agreement; all under certain terms and19 conditions.20
1 Property and Public Works. My name is2 Joan Schlotterbeck. I am the3 Commissioner of Public Property. I am4 here today to offer testimony in support5 of Bill No. 090361, 800 megahertz6 municipal radio system upgrade with7 Motorola, Inc. that will implement the8 needed upgrades of the City's existing9 800 megahertz radio system. 15 Our request for Council's16 support for this bill is based on three17 closely related factors: Timing,18 technology and economics. 2 The need for a prompt approval3 of the bill is a critical component of4 our recommendation. Our current5 maintenance agreement with Motorola6 expires June 2010. Contractually,7 Motorola is not required to continue8 maintenance support for our system,9 existing system, beyond that date. Due10 to advances in technology and component11 design, Motorola will have limited12 ability to support the outdated13 components and technology of our current14 system beyond the expiration of our15 current contract. 20 This is a critical feature since it is21 anticipated that the completion of the22 upgrade will require somewhere in the23 range of 18 to 24 months. 3 Replacing the entire system is4 another option that was considered, but5 this option was rejected since current6 estimates are that the complexities7 associated with such a replacement could8 take a minimum of five years to9 accomplish. 18 Next I would like to address19 the technical enhancements of the20 upgraded system. 1 system to comply with the federal2 government requirements. These3 requirements dictate that rebanding must4 be completed by 2012. 9 The existing network will be10 replaced with all new components and11 technology. We will upgrade from a12 digital trunked system to an IP-based13 system. The newer high-speed controllers14 in the ASTRO P25 IP system have been15 tested in conditions that are 170 percent16 of our highest traffic conditions, and17 the controllers did not roll. We will18 continue to maintain our A and B system19 configuration and have the ability to20 expand channels and tower sites. 1 at no charge to the City. 7 It is important to note that8 the upgraded system will be P259 compatible, which is the standard for10 interoperability with other systems. The11 systems will also be compatible with 70012 megahertz operation when that technology13 is available. 17 The pending contract provides18 that the required rebanding will be19 conducted concurrently with the upgrade20 of the system. 1 65 sites identified by police officers2 and firefighters where coverage was lost3 due to interference. Rebanding during4 upgrade is a highly desirable feature5 since it is conducted on an existing6 operational system. Difficulties can7 occur, creating the possibility of8 reduced operational capacity during the9 rebanding process. Performing the10 rebanding while the system is being11 updated eliminates this problem. 16 We have attempted to find the17 most economical way to provide an18 improved communication system that will19 serve the needs of the City, and finance20 the cost of that system in a way that21 minimizes the economic burden on the22 current budget and succeeding years. 5 for radio cost after3 trade-in and discounts. 12 The City has elected to enter13 into a financing agreement with a14 third-party source with terms that are15 agreeable to three parties involved. The16 agreed-upon interest rate and terms17 reflect what are judged to be appropriate18 for the tax-exempt Lease Purchase19 Agreement. 1 completed, the system will be completely2 paid off in four years, and the City will3 then pay maintenance on an annual basis4 for upkeep of the system. 5 million projected cost of the13 contract. 17 Reliable communications are the18 cornerstone of the City's ability to19 respond to emergency situations. 3 The upgrade will allow the City to4 protect the already existing large5 investment in the system.
9 These changes will be made with minimal10 interruption to operations, something11 that cannot be guaranteed if a new system12 were to be installed. 18 We have worked hard with19 Motorola over the past year to arrive at20 a cost-effective contract that is21 responsive to the critical operational22 needs of our city. 3 Chairman Clarke and members of4 the Committee on Public Property and5 Public Works, thank you for the6 opportunity to testify on this vitally7 important initiative. 15
Thank you,16 Commissioner, for your summarized17 testimony.18 Just kidding.19 COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: I20 know.21 COUNCILMAN CLARKE:22 Commissioner, in the past --23 COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: I24 can read it again if you'd like.25 23 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1
No more.2 In the past, there have been3 significant issues raised with respect to4 this whole 9-1-1 system and Motorola. In5 particular, my colleague, Councilman6 Frank Rizzo, has raised significant7 concerns about the operations,8 intermittent failures in its operations,9 and initially on the face of it when you10 look at the fact that we're entering into11 a long-term agreement with this12 particular company, the natural response13 is, Well, why would we do that.14 What has happened now that puts15 that at a comfort level that we will no16 longer receive any problems associated17 with the operations as we enter into a18 longer-term arrangement? Has there been19 something done within the company or20 within the systems or within the21 technology that will ensure -- and22 understand nothing is perfect -- ensure23 that we will no longer have any24 interruptions?25 24 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO:2 Councilman, Frank Punzo, Deputy3 Commissioner of Public Property,4 Communications.5 To answer the question, several6 things we've attempted to put into the7 new system that have caused those8 problems in the past. One was touched on9 by the Commissioner as it deals with the10 speed of the controller, which was one of11 the areas that has caused numerous12 problems. When police go into13 large-scale triple assists and others,14 our system would have a tendency as built15 to roll the controller, but in doing so,16 there was a loss of communications, hence17 we upgraded the controller speed and18 insisted that Motorola upgraded with the19 new system so that we don't have that20 problem. That's where we tested at 17021 percent of the highest volume that the22 City has.23
So in24 layperson's terms, it's somewhat of an25 25 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 overload?2 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO:3 Correct. Yes.4 The second part of it was,5 obviously there have been changes that6 are necessary to the underlying network.7 Now, while Motorola does not provide that8 network, Verizon does currently today, we9 will be soliciting information from other10 carriers to find out what is the best11 solution to solve that network piece,12 meaning is it microwave, is it T1's, is13 it some other form of data connectivity,14 if you will, connect the tower sites15 together, in a layman's terms.16 The radios themselves are being17 upgraded for Police as well as Fire.18 We've made significant changes. We've19 also looked at the -- in 1999 when the20 system was built, I was not involved at21 that time, not to say that it was done22 right or wrong, but many of the channels23 that were put into the radios are what24 are called talk groups, are being looked25 26 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 at and in concert with Police and Fire,2 as well as Prisons and others, we're3 looking at those talk groups and saying4 how can we best provide the same services5 we provide today with less numbers of6 talk groups in their radios, which has a7 tendency as you're changing these8 channels and changing talk groups to have9 people all over the place, especially if10 it's in a dark vehicle, you're not able11 to look at the screen, et cetera.12 We've looked at the digital13 vehicle repeaters, which their name says14 vehicle but they are actually portable as15 well as vehicle mounted, to increase our16 coverage in what is really problem areas17 for firefighters mostly, but in some18 cases police officers as well. In19 below-grade fires or in high-rise fires,20 these will increase our coverage without21 the cost of adding a brand new tower22 site, which you can't necessarily put a23 tower site next to every large building24 anyway, but just that idea.25 27 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 As we looked out there at the2 varying -- the players that had bid back3 in 1999 and those that are still in the4 industry today, it was determined that5 the best course would be to stay the6 course with our current vendor. We knew7 the problems that they had. One of the8 challenges and one of the items that I9 think that they, as well as even Verizon,10 has stepped up to the plate, when11 something breaks, they fix it and they12 fix it quickly and it is fixed on an13 almost permanent basis. We can't prevent14 lightning strikes, which have been some15 of the problems that we've had with the16 radio system. We can't --17
You can't18 prevent what?19 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO:20 Lightning strikes. That has been areas21 where towers have been struck by22 lightning. There's no way that we can23 actually prevent that. We put all of the24 grounding possible --25 28 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1
It's above2 our pay grade?3 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO:4 It's above our pay grade, yes.5 -- (continued) just in an6 attempt to solidify what has gone on.7 The reason we're upgrading the8 radios is, obviously the Prison System9 today is on an old 450 megahertz analog10 system. They need to be brought on this11 system as well, and providing them with12 the 600 radios gets all of their13 personnel onto the radio system, and14 they're also prepared to procure on their15 own the consoles that are necessary.16 Probably the biggest thing is,17 we don't have to change out the system18 wholesale and take the chance that we did19 in 1999 of putting something brand new in20 and not necessarily knowing what we would21 face in the problems. Again, getting22 back to we know what we have today and we23 know how well it has worked for the most24 part.25 29 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 We've covered with your2 colleague, Councilman Rizzo, a lot of3 these items, and he had asked that we4 include them in there. So that's another5 reason why we have gone to Motorola and6 asked them to be put in.7
Okay. One8 quick question. We're hoping that all of9 the corrections have been made in a way10 that we don't experience any problems,11 but in the event that we start to12 experience any intermittent interruptions13 in our new system, upgraded system, are14 there any provisions that call for15 penalties or clawback provisions in the16 contract to ensure that as we move ahead,17 if something happens with this new18 upgraded system, there's a price to pay19 by the vendor?20 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO:21 Throughout the build-out of the system22 within the first two years, there are23 penalties for missing thresholds with24 Motorola. I think that the highest is25 30 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 $6,000 per day if they miss certain dates2 within the proposed timeframe, those 243 months, and that reduces, I believe, to4 the lowest, which is 4,000 or 2,400 per5 day as we get further and further into6 the implementation. I mean, there is7 always the desire not to pay the vendor8 obviously if that occurs.9
Okay.10 Commissioner, I know you have a couple of11 Administration witnesses. Would you12 prefer that they testify before we enter13 into questions?14 COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: I15 think that would be a good idea.16
I know we17 have the Prisons Commissioner. You want18 to testify also? You just want to be in19 response to any issues?20 (Witnesses approached witness21 table.)22
I see we23 are well represented. I feel safer24 already.25 31 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 All right, gentlemen. I know2 we had actually asked for you all to be3 available today because I know during the4 course of the briefing, there were some5 concerns raised about the individuals and6 the agencies that actually utilize these7 systems to make sure that they were at a8 comfort level in what's being proposed,9 given the history of some of the issues10 relating to Motorola. We wanted to make11 sure that you all were on board. So I12 understand that I know you all may have13 some written testimony or not, but please14 proceed.15 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER ROSS: Good16 afternoon, Chairman Clarke and members of17 the Committee on Public Property and18 Public Works. My name is Deputy Police19 Commissioner Richard Ross. I'm here with20 Chief Inspector Mike Feeney.21 Police radio is the public22 safety answering point for the City of23 Philadelphia. The safety of all those24 who live, work and visit our city is25 32 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 dependent on this operation working2 reliably and effectively.3 Police radio actually consists4 of three separate but interdependent5 systems: 9-1-1, where incoming emergency6 calls are received; computer-aided7 dispatch, or CAD, which then prioritizes8 these calls according to severity; and,9 most critically, the 800 megahertz radio10 system, which enables the emergency to be11 transmitted to police officers in the12 field and which also enables officers to13 communicate with each other.14 Approximately 60 calls for15 service to the 800 megahertz radio system16 are required each year. These calls are17 for problems of varying degrees of18 severity, but all require and receive a19 timely response from the vendor,20 Motorola. The maintenance agreement21 covering the 800 megahertz radio system22 is scheduled to expire in June of 2010.23 The radio system is the24 backbone of public safety and officer25 33 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 safety. Allowing a lapse of a2 maintenance contract on such an essential3 public safety system for any duration4 significantly increases the risk and5 liability to the City. It puts our6 citizens and officers at peril and is7 unnecessary.8 We support the purchase and9 implementation of the needed upgrade to10 the municipal radio system. It is our11 belief that this upgrade, in addition to12 continuing Motorola's support, will13 correct the deficiencies in the current14 system. The upgrade will allow for15 improved radio coverage throughout the16 City and increase the system's capacity17 to manage radio traffic during times of18 emergency. This will ensure that the19 Police Department can continue to provide20 the highest level of service and21 protection to our citizens. And that22 will conclude my testimony.23
Thank you.24 Commissioner.25 34 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 COMMISSIONER AYERS: Chairman2 Clarke, other members of the Committee,3 good afternoon.4 The radio system, the Motorola5 radio system that we are currently using,6 we went into service, as you know, back7 in 2002. Since that time, there have8 been various issues with the radio system9 that was corrected over a period of time.10 We stopped and we looked at how the11 firefighters utilize the radio system and12 the complaints that we received over that13 period of time to date. Back in 2002 to14 June of 2005, we received 73 complaints15 from my field operations, and this is16 from the officers and the firefighters17 that utilize the radios. From June of18 2005 to January 2006, there have been no19 memos submitted. In 2006, there were no20 memos. 2007, no memos. In 2008, we21 received four memos depicting areas where22 there were deficiencies in the field. To23 date, 2009, we have two memos.24 There has been cooperation25 35 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 between Public Property and also the2 vendor for the City that will work with3 usually the cellular interference, make4 sure that that was taken care of, and5 most of those issues were resolved.6 To date, we are looking forward7 to the replacement of the radios that we8 currently use in the field, again, some9 800 radios for firefighters, 200 mobile10 units. We're looking forward to the11 technical changes and the upgrades that12 relate to our operations in high rises,13 our operations in basements and in14 certain areas where we have some15 interference with our reception.16 We look forward to and support17 an upgrade to our radio system so that we18 can continue to protect not only the19 citizens but ourselves as we go about our20 day-to-day operations in the field.21 COMMISSIONER GIORLA: Good22 afternoon, Councilman Clarke, members of23 the Committee. I'm Commissioner Louis24 Giorla of the Prisons.25 36 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 The current state of the2 Prisons' radio system is that we have two3 operable radio frequencies they're using.4 One is 800 megahertz. The other one is5 the 450 megahertz series that Mr. Punzo6 described. The expectation some years7 ago was that we would be upgraded upon8 the construction of CFCF, and that was 139 years ago when Curran-Fromhold was opened10 and we still haven't been able to upgrade11 our radio system.12 Throughout our system,13 correctional officers today are using14 second- and third-generation radios that15 were upgraded and restored after use by16 the Police and Fire Departments. This17 contract will give us the ability to18 provide operable radios throughout our19 facilities, which extends citywide both20 to our satellites and our State Road21 complex. It will also allow us to equip22 every correctional officer on duty and it23 is our intent to equip all supervisors on24 duty 24 hours a day with a working radio,25 37 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 something we don't have the ability to do2 now.3 The Prison System, like the4 Police and Fire Departments, supports5 this measure and would ask that you give6 it your support as well.7
I'm going8 to ask Ms. Schlotterbeck and Mr. Punzo to9 come back up, and, gentlemen, if you just10 stay on the side. There may be questions11 for you in particular.12 (Witnesses approached witness13 table.)14
Thank you.15 Are there any questions by16 members of the Committee for these17 witnesses?18 (No response.)19
There being20 none, Councilman Green, you have21 questions of these witnesses?22
Thank you,23 Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the24 opportunity to ask a few questions here.25 38 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 I want to thank Commissioner2 Schlotterbeck and Mr. Punzo for taking a3 meeting with me last week -- also in4 attendance was Allan Frank -- to discuss5 some of the concerns that I raised in the6 briefing session they gave Council in the7 Caucus Room.8 I want to just go through the9 testimony and make sure I understand how10 we got where we are today.11 In the testimony it says, "Our12 current maintenance agreement with13 Motorola expires in June 2010." How long14 have we known that this is going to15 expire in June of 2010?16 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO:17 Well, actually, Councilman, this has been18 known since we implemented the system.19 It was part of the contract at that time.20
So since21 2002?22 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO:23 Yes, since its implementation.24
Okay. There25 39 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 is also testimony that basically because2 it's expiring in 2010, we have no choice.3 Timing is one of the issues that forces4 us to go to Motorola. I'd just like an5 explanation of how we, knowing for eight6 years a contract was going to expire, how7 we are now in a situation where we have8 no alternative but to choose one vendor.9 Why is this bill before us now, with no10 choice?11 COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: As12 Commissioner in the past Administration13 for four years and extended into this14 one, we tried to move this thing out over15 three years ago into an open-dialogue16 discussion, position, new system, renewal17 options, whatever, and we're here today18 because it never happened.19
What about20 the last 18 months?21 COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK:22 We've been working on it for the last 1823 months.24
Okay. Was25 40 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 there a plan at the end of the Street2 Administration for this?3 COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK:4 Not really.5
No? Okay.6 So this began in earnest with the7 beginning of the Nutter Administration?8 COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK:9 Correct.10
What is the11 problem today with issuing an RFP for12 this system?13 COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK:14 There's no time.15
There's no16 time.17 COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK:18 And we made a decision that given the two19 people that were capable of dealing with20 the issue, the two major firms, that this21 was the road we were going to go.22
The23 testimony indicates --24 COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK:25 41 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 For the reasons stated in my testimony.2
Well, the3 testimony indicates that Motorola will4 have limited ability to support the5 outdated components and technology of our6 current system, and during his response7 to Councilman Clarke's questions,8 Mr. Punzo referred to this as a new9 system. Can you explain how we can10 purchase a system without issuing an RFP11 under the Charter? I mean, I want to --12 I have an oath to uphold the law, like13 everybody else that's part of the14 Administration. I just want to15 understand how we can do this legally.16 COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK:17 Well, maybe we should get one of the18 attorneys here.19 Michael?20 (Witness approached witness21 table.)22
Michael Athay,23 Chief Deputy City Solicitor in the Law24 Department.25 42 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1
Oh, I'm7 sorry. I guess my question is, from the8 testimony it sounds like we're basically9 getting a new system that we're calling10 an upgrade, and I'm wondering how we can11 legally do that without going out to RFP.12
Well, Councilman,13 we don't view it as a new system. It is14 an upgrade to an existing system. It's15 an upgrade to the same platform.16
We don't view it as19 a new system. And this was part of the20 Law Department's analysis. We view it as21 an upgrade to an existing system. It is22 the same technology, basically the same23 technology. It will be enhanced. It24 will have some new functionality, but it25 43 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 is basically the same platform within the2 scope of work of the base contract.3
We're going4 from a digital trunked system to an5 IP-based system. We're using new6 software. We're buying new hardware.7 We're getting digital repeaters. I8 don't -- I mean, there's a lot that is9 part of this contract that was not part10 of the base contract, and I've asked you11 to send a copy of that over to my office12 and we'll take a look at it, but rather13 than get into a debate about the legal14 merits, if the Solicitor's Office could15 just submit a written memorandum to the16 Chair that explains to us why this is17 legal, I'll be satisfied with that.18
Okay.20 So how long would it take to21 issue an RFP?22 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO:23 Councilman, we would estimate to do an24 appropriate RFP would take between two25 44 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 and three months to capture everything2 that's in our system today and make sure3 all the questions that are answered.4 This is, again, not just experience on5 the radio system, but in many of the RFPs6 that we put out into the field today.7 The other factor is that even8 when we arrive at a solution, which we9 have here, our negotiations of a10 contract, even one that was amended, have11 taken over six months to actually bring12 to fruition a contract that it is deemed13 acceptable by both the Department of14 Public Property and the Law Department.15 So we believe that it would take far16 longer than what it would appear on the17 surface, and any delay places us into a18 situation where we would be, at a19 minimum, 24 to 36 months out from the20 date that that would be arrived at to put21 in a new system, probably closer to the22 36 months. So these were factors that23 were considered.24
I'm sorry.25 45 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 How long would an RFP delay the process?2 A year?3 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUNZO: It4 could delay the process a year. It could5 delay the process longer than that. It's6 hard to say at this juncture. But what7 we know is that past experience with what8 occurred in 1999, what has occurred with9 other systems, what has occurred with the10 prime competitor to Motorola, it would11 take upwards of approximately five years12 to get this full system implemented if we13 were to go somewhere other than with14 Motorola, and that would put us into a15 position where even if we made that16 decision today, meaning we had a contract17 in place, we would be well beyond the18 expiration date of our current19 maintenance agreement.20
Well, one of21 the things that was talked about a great22 deal in 2007 during the race that I was23 in for City Council and other people were24 in for Mayor was the need to do RFPs. In25 46 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 fact, in the last session of Council2 under the Street Administration, people3 sitting very close to the seat I'm4 sitting in basically insisted on RFPs.5 And it seems to me that we're spending an6 awful lot of the public's money without7 knowing that we have the cheapest or best8 solution because we didn't do an RFP.9 And I understand that your staff did a10 lot of work evaluating it, but under the11 Charter, there's only one way to know,12 and rather than -- if we need to change13 the Charter for circumstances like this,14 then let's have that discussion, but15 until we do, I'm not sure I understand16 how we can be in a position where a17 vendor can have a gun to our head.18 So at this point, I see people19 from Motorola in the room. I'd like to20 see if they can come up and answer a few21 questions of mine.22 Mr. Chairman, I see people from23 Motorola in the room. I'm hoping they24 can answer a few questions of mine.25 47 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 (Witnesses approached witness2 table.)3
Before we4 do that, are there any other questions by5 members of the Committee, any other6 questions of the Administration7 witnesses?8 (No response.)9
Thank you12 for coming up. I couldn't agree with13 Deputy Commissioner Ross more and with14 the other people who testified,15 Commissioner Ayers and Commissioner16 Giorla, that the safety of our emergency17 responders, our prison guards need to be18 paramount in every single thing that we19 do. And so Commissioner Schlotterbeck20 testified that you, if we execute the21 currently proposed contract, will22 continue maintenance support until an23 upgrade is completed. Are you saying24 that if we don't execute this contract25 48 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 and we go out to an RFP, that you will2 not support the system until such time as3 we complete an RFP, and put all our4 safety officers in the City at risk?5
Thank you,6 Councilman. My name is Jim Schneider7 with Motorola. I'm the Service Director8 for the Midatlantic and the Northeast.9
Excuse me.10 Before we get into these questions, were11 you all prepared to offer testimony12 today, or you were just here in a13 supportive role?14 UNIDENTIFIED WITNESS: We were15 here in a supportive role to address16 questions.17
Okay. I18 just wanted to make sure, because I19 didn't know you were coming up. We were20 still talking to the Administration21 witness, but that's fine.22 Please proceed.23
Councilman24 Green, the many major components of the25 49 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 system today, frankly, are coming to an2 end of life in June 2009. Motorola has3 committed to support the system through4 June 2010 in support of the contract.5 Beyond that, the supportability is on a6 best effort with the availability of7 parts and allowing us to maintain the8 system.9
So it's your10 testimony today that if we don't issue11 this contract and we issue an RFP in12 order to determine whether or not we've13 gotten the best deal we can for the14 taxpayers of Philadelphia, that you're15 going to put at risk our public safety16 officers in the City of Philadelphia,17 that Motorola is willing to do that? You18 wouldn't give us the time to go do an19 RFP? You'll let our police radio system20 fail; is that your testimony?21
No, sir, that's22 not my testimony. My testimony is that23 we've gone beyond a one year of24 commitment of 2009.25 50 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1
No, sir, we8 will not abandon the City. We will9 continue to maintain the City as best we10 can with the parts availability to keep11 the system operational.12
Well, can13 you do that through the length of time14 that an RFP would be required?15
Okay. Does18 the contract require that you pay your19 subs prevailing wage? Will you have any20 subcontractors on this project, assuming21 you get it?22
Will they25 51 5/26/09 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 090289, etc.1 all be receiving prevailing wage?2