HomeMy WebLinkAboutS2- Facilities Management CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTIOE
From: James Sharer Subject: UPGRADE AND INSTALLATION
OF NEAX TELEPHONE SYSTEM
Dept: Facilities Management
Date: November 7 , 1996 0 C
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
NONE
Recommended motion:
Adopt Resolution .
i
.r�
Signature
Contact person: James Sharer Phone: (909 ) 384-5244
Supporting data attached: Ward:
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: $293 ,015 ! 07
Source: (Acct. No.) 630-262-5703
Acct. Description) Communications Equipment
Finance: C
Council Notes:
Continued to
75-0262 Agenda Item No.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
F-97-08
BACKGROUND
The current City Hall telephone system is an NEC NEAX 2400 MMG. This system acts as
the main switching location for all City telephone traffic. Through this system, City
facilities connect to local and long distance carriers for telecommunications services.
The NEAX 2400 was originally installed in 1986. There has been one software upgrade in
1991. As technology advances, so do the capabilities of telephone systems. Currently, the
City has equipment designed with 1983 technology and software with 1990 programming.
Due to the age of this system, malfunctions have become commonplace. Telephone Support
has maintained the system to the best of its ability and budget, yet interruptions of service
have risen dramatically over the past year.
The climbing cost of maintaining this system is forcing the City to prepare for an increase
in maintenance from $3000 per month to approximately $5000 per month. This anticipated
increase is based upon discussions with maintenance vendors concerning time and materials
needed to maintain the older system, and the fact that the maintenance contract expires this
fiscal year.
The new system will provide voicemail, automatic call routing (automated attendant), peak
period call distribution, digital integration of voice and data, and the new instruments will
be ADA compatible; thus increasing employee productivity while eliminating the answering
service, an annual cost of $6,000.
PURCHASING PROCESS
The proposed purchase is for the upgrade and installation of a NEAX telephone system and
voice processing system, to be utilized in daily operations by City employees.
At the request of the Facilities Management Division, appropriate technical specifications
were prepared, published and furnished to area suppliers.
Bid proposals were received on October 31, 1996 and reviewed by a committee comprised
of John Murphy, Purchasing Manager, Jim Sharer, Facilities Manager and Bruce Hill,
Telephone Systems Coordinator.
Five (5) vendors supplying these services were solicited. The City received four (4)
responses. One solicitation was returned by the vendor unopened and the remaining four
were reviewed, with the following results.
75-0264
ri
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
Company Points Total Bid Proposal
(100 possible) (Including Tax)
Vision Communications 98 $293,015.07
COM-AID 95 $292,865.80
CMS 86 $362,248.41
GTE 74 $428,606.10
The Telephone Support Coordinator developed a proposal evaluation criteria utilizing a
point system, based upon examples supplied by the Purchasing Manager. The point system
broke down as follows;
Total Bid Proposal Price 55 points
Compliance to Specifications 20 points
Acceptance of Contractor Exceptions 15 points
Verification of References 10 points
Specifications and evaluation criteria have been reviewed with Facilities Management and
the Purchasing Manager who concur that the bid proposal of Vision Communications best
meets the specifications and requirements of the City. It is therefore recommended that the
bid proposal be accepted for contract.
FUNDING
The funding for this proposal is included within the F/Y 96/97 Telephone Support budget.
A budget transfer of $35,000 from Account 630-262-5172 Equipment Maintenance into
Account 630-262-5703 Communications Equipment will be required. With the purchase of
the upgraded telephone system, maintenance costs will be reduced. Therefore, the $35,000
portion of the cost savings in equipment maintenance can be transferred into the upgraded
system purchase.
In addition to reduced maintenance costs, the debt service for the existing system has been
paid off. $265,000, formerly applied to the debt service, has been allocated for the purchase
of the upgraded system. Since the telephone system will be purchased, as opposed to lease
purchased, there will be no debt service applied to this purchase and no additional costs
passed onto Departments.
75.0264
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
TELEPHONE SYSTEM COSTS
EXISTING SYSTEM
FISCAL YEAR 1995/1996
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE $ 98,600
ANSWERING SERVICES $ 6,000
DEBT RETIREMENT $187,000 TOTAL $291,600
EXISTING/NEW SYSTEM
FISCAL YEAR 199611997
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE $ 64,500
ANSWERING SERVICES $ 6,000
NEW SYSTEM $293,000 TOTAL $363,500
NEW SYSTEM
(FOR ONE YEAR AFTER PURCHASE)
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE $ 50,000
ANSWERING SERVICES $ 0
DEBT RETIREMENT $ 0 TOTAL $ 50,000
75-0264
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
This resolution is being submitted for the Supplemental Agenda of November 18, 1996, due
to system installation time constraints. It has been planned that the system will be installed
during the City Christmas Holiday break due to interruption of service -during the
installation process. To meet the planned installation deadline of January 2, 1997, the
equipment has to be ordered by November 22, 1996.
James Sharer John urphy
Facilities Manager asing Manager
75-0264
Entered into Record at
C i t y O f S a n B e rCQynqI11jn@e1C%S%tg:
Interoffice Memora*#,,-
re Agenda Item S
To: MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL �yd
From: JAMES SHARER, FACILITIES MANAGE City ClerkICDC Secy
subject: TELEPHONE BID City of San Bernardino
Date: November 18, 1996
Copies: SHAUNA CLARK, CITY ADMINISTRATOR; FRED WILSON, ASSISTANT
CITY ADMINISTRATOR; JOHN MURPHY, PURCHASING MANAGER.
Item S2 on the supplemental agenda is an action to approve a new
telephone system for City Hall . Our recommendation is to go with
VISION COMMUNICATIONS, based upon meeting the selection criteria in
the RFP. COM-AID, the apparent low bidder, has notified me that
they plan to come in and protest the award (see attached fax) . This
information is supplied to you so that you may better understand
the criteria used to select VISION COMMUNICATIONS.
The proposal review committee consisted of James Sharer, John
Murphy and Bruce Hill . Each exception resulted in a 1 point
deduction on a 100 point scale .
The discrepancies listed below reference the specific sections of
the COM-AID proposal that are in exception.
EXCEPTIONS WITH COM-AID
1 . DID NOT ACKNOWLEDGE GENERAL TERMS (Section 8) .
In Section 1 of the City' s General Specifications, it is requested
that the bidder shall attach a itemization of the specifications .
2 . DISCREPANCIES IN "SERVICE GUIDELINES" (SECTION 4) .
The SERVICE GUIDELINES in COM-AID' S proposal lists pricing for
services requested as part of the one year warranty in the RFP.
3 . DISCREPANCY IN "PREVAILING LABOR RATES" (SECTION 6) .
Pricing for labor is detailed that should have been included in the
one year warranty,
4 . DISCREPANCY IN COST OF ADMINISTRATIVE TRAINING (SECTION 4) .
Administrative training was requested as part of the RFP. COM-AID
indicates training provided by the manufacturers at a cost .
5 . NO IVR PORTS IN BID (SECTION 5) .
Interactive Voice Response (IVR) capabilities were required in the
RFP.
Listed below is a comparison of the major components of the
proposed system upgrade. The items in bold indicate an item given
more weight in comparison.
COMPARISONS
VISION COM-AID
TELEPHONE SYSTEM
SYSTEM TYPE MDX MMG ICS IMGxh
SOFTWARE LEVEL 6100 6100
PROCESSOR TYPE PENTIUM 486
PORT CAPACITY 6, 144 3 , 072
VOICEMIAL SYSTEM
SYSTEM TYPE CENTIGRAM 120I CENTIGRAM 120I
PORTS/STORAGE 16/55 HOURS 16/55 HOURS
FAX PORTS 4 4
(FaxMemo)
IVR PORTS 4 0
(Voice Gateway)
The three items of the comparison that are in VISIONS favor will
become vital to the City in the coming years as the City advances
into data and voice integration. First, the Pentium processor is
faster than the compared 486 processor in COM-AID' s proposal .
Second, the 6, 144 port capacity becomes critical as data users
access the City computer system through telecommunication lines . As
data and telephones combine, the demand for more telephone system
port capacity will increase dramatically. Third, the four
Interactive Voice Response (IVR) ports were requested in the RFP.
These ports are the connection of the two systems for the voice and
data integration.
As described in the proposal and the staff report, the point system
for exceptions was developed by John Murphy and Bruce Hill . The
system is based upon each exception costing one point to the
overall score of 100 points . As demonstrated in the staff report,
COM-AID has 95 points due to the above listed exceptions .
Therefore, VISION COMMUNICATIONS is the recommended bidder with 98
points .
Nov- 14-9b U4 - Lj�
C&
November 14, 1996
The City of San Bernardino
Attn: Mr. Jim Sharer, Facilities Manager
Dear Mr. Jim Sharer:
or and Common C .�mcil Meeting,
d to approve a Resolution which wil ward Telephone
It has lust c°n1e to our attention t)baetaastke Xt.Monday's May
(Supplemental item # S2) for upgrade of your current E
the Members
contract 111
$293,015-07
System to Vision Communications Services, Inc. , historical r. .:)rd, and comes
to the City': has very
This recommendation and intended.award s contrary bidder. That i vhy we are so
as a great surprise and disappointment to us at COMLAIT7, listorically, the C. � � in
COM-Al not Vision, is the lowest qi tified bidder
consistently awarded contracts on the basis o lowest qualified
surprised by this current instance;
Tesponse to this RFp (Bid Proposal Specification F-97-08).
occasions over the past eight years CUM-AID has lost.competit + �bid awards
On numerous occa
's bids in
cause we were not low bid. In all cases,we s°�tantial expenditure o : me and money
solely be put our
good faith. We-took our losses in stride an p
toward our learning process for future projects. r at $292,529
stance, for the first time, COM-AID is the low qua`i�e e bal , 'disconcerting
In this current in lirtin
and is now being denied this award exceptions o re RFP and indicated ll comp
since COM-A1D took absolutely
with, and responsibilty for, all aspects of this "turn key" implementation, 4 ractly as
we ,
requested.
the, i
Council to continue to honor the intc E,, ty of the
We are respectfully appealing to our long standing precedent of lowest q ualified bid
competitive bid process, as well as y g
awards, and deny the recommended award as placed before the Council s i this time.
We are absolutely confident of our ability to implement and service the City 0' ;an Bernardino
with excellence. Please give us that earned opportunity.
Sincerely,
"6t' i
Gary Sa aha
vice President of Sales
GS/dt/bo4754o
Nov- 14-96 04 : 46P P . 02
C,�'ML
vl-AI C)
November 14, 1996
'Che Cite of San Bernardino
Attention: Ms. Rachel Clark, City Clerk
Dear Inks. Rachel Clark:
It has just come to our attention that at next Mondays Mayor and Common C ncil Meeting,
the Members of the Council will be asked to approve a Resolution which wil; ward a
$293,015.07 contract (Supplemental item ft S2) for upgrade of your current EAX Telephone
System to Vision Communications Services. Inc.
This recommendation and intended award is contrary to the City's historical r, .)rd, and comes
as a great surprise and disappointment to us at COO-Aih. Historically, the C has very
consistently awarded contracts on the basis of lowest qualified bidder. That i Ay we are so
surprised by this current instance; CONM-AID, not Vision, is the lowest qi Lified bidder in
response to this RFP (Bid Proposal Specification F-97-08),
On numerous occasions over the past eight years CONI-AID has lost competit : bid awards
solely because we were not low bid. In all cases, we continued to respond to tl City's bids in
good faith. We took our losses in stride and put our substantial expenditure of me and money
toward our learning process for future projects,
in this current instance, for the first time, COINI-AID is the low qualified bid r at S292,528
and is now being denied this award for unknown reasons. This is especial ; disconcerting
since CO NI-AID took absolutely no exceptions to this RFP and indicated Il compliance
with, and responsibilty for, all aspects of this "turn key" implementation, cactly as
requested.
We are respectfully appealing to the Council to continue to honor the intf ,, -ity of the
competitive bid process, as well as your long standing precedent of lowest ualified bid
awards, and deny the recommended award as placed before the Council , i ithis time.
We are absolutely confident ofour ability to implement and service the City o ;an Bernardino
with excellence. Please give us that earned opportunity.
Sincere'.-,
Siha
Vice President of Sales
CiSldtJbo 4754o