HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 09242002 - C78 VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT REQUEST FORM
(Use a separate request for each vehicle request)
Department: lture - x Date June 19 2002
Authorized Signatory ..Gam _
1. Description of vehicle or piece of equipment raga Compact size pick W Uuck with
ra
diamond late a box. �� e. .
2. Reason for vehicle request: Expansion of the Califgrnia Doartment of A.gdculture funded Vest
Detection I'ra The car
Oact forhis pmgm include -the of two trucks with
storage box -- -
3. Funding Source:_Revenue reim ursement
Is an appropriation adjustment needed and attached? Yes X No
4. Is an alternative fueled vehicle acceptable? Yes No X
If answer is no, reason clean air vehicle will not work: Vehicle is to be used by field pef'sonnel
Electric hgqk-_Up hook-_Ustations and other alternative fuel fill stations are not available or are not
feasible.- -
5. If replacement vehicle, please show the following for vehicle to be replaced:
-vehicle number
-odometer reading
b. Reason purchase can not wait until next budget cycle: -Expansion of his vro=m is to be
irntlemented at the
finning of of FY 2002-03.
FOR FLEET MANAGEMENT COMPLETION:
1. Inspection/evaluation by Fleet Management as to condition of vehicle:
-Date of Inspection: '
-Make: Model:
-Year:
-Depreciation:
- Salvage:
-Estimated cost of request: 17ys� Zi CV
-Condition of vehicle/equipment�and life expectancy:
2. Fleet Management Signatory:
3. CAO Signatory: Approved Not Approved
4. Date for Board Order
tlfsirssrsiHomeivguislif�hicYesl Efll�lEAND EQUJPM1WTR&QUMTFORM1mckdoc
VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT REQUEST FORM
(Use a separate request for each vehicle request)
Department: A iculture 4 Z. Date June 19 2002
Authorized Signatory ._
1. Description of vehicle or piece of equipment reque :�_ Compact size pick-up truck with
diamond plate storage box. Z
2. Reason for vehicle request: .Expansion of the California Department of Agriculture funded Pest
Detection Program The contract for this program includes the purchase of two trucks with
storage box_
3. Funding Source: Revenue reimbursement
Is an appropriation adjustment needed and attached? Yes X No
4. Is an alternative fueled vehicle acceptable? Yes No X
If answer is no, reason clean air vehicle will not work: Vehicle is to be used by field personnel.
Electric hook.-up stations and other alternative fuel fill stations are not available or are not
feasible.
5. If replacement vehicle, please show the following for vehicle to be replaced:
-vehicle number
- odometer reading
6. Reason purchase can not wait until next budget cycle: Expansion ofthis program is to be
implemented at the beginning of FY 2002-03.
FOR FLEET MANAGEMENT COMPLETION:
1. Inspection/evaluation by Fleet Management as to condition of vehicle:
-Date of Inspection:
-Make: Model:-
- Year:
-Depreciation:
- Salvage:
-Estimated cost of request: 1 5 , �ye'-c
- Condition of vehicle/equipment life expectancy:
2. Fleet Management Signatory: .`�-�-----------------— v�� E
3. CAO Signatory- Approved Not Approved
4. Date for Board Order
lifsWsers'HomelvguislVehictesl VEWCLE AND EQUIPMENT REQUEST FURMtruck.doc
'2sC
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS w o n t ra
FROM: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Costa
DATE: SEPTEMBER 24, 2002 County
SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATION TO RETAIN COMMUNITY ALERT NETWORK AS THE COUNTY'S
EMERGENCY TELEPHONE NOTIFICATION (RINGDOWN) SYSTEM PROVIDER
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION:
1. RETAIN the Community Alert Network as the County's emergency telephone
notification (ringdown) system provider.
2. REFER to the Sheriff/Office of Emergency Services this matter and request that the
next contract for such services include performance level incentives and penalties.
BACKGROUND:
A request for information (RFI) was made in October 1999 to evaluate the status of the
County's system and to determine the state of the art for emergency telephone notification
systems. As a result of the RFI, the evaluation team ranked the CAN system first, and the
Board of Supervisors decided to continue the CAN contract. However, the Board also
approved the notion of reviewing the contract again in two to three years, after other system
providers gained experience in the industry.
On November 0, 2001, the Board of Supervisors referred to the Internal Operations
Committee (IOC) the development of a request for proposals (RFP)for a new emergency
telephone notification (ringdown) system similar to the current Community Alert Network
(CAN) system. Similarly, the Grand Jury, in a June 14, 2002 report, recommended that the
Board direct the appropriate county department to research, select, and implement a more
effective system of informing the county population of the occurrence of an emergency alert.
At its March 4, 2002 meeting, the IOC directed Lewis Pascalli, Hazardous Materials Program
Director, to develop an RFI along the lines of the 1999 RFI, but with the addition of incentives
and penalties based on expected performance. On April 15, the IOC approved the RFI
prepared by Mr. Pascalli and directed that it be sent out with a response deadline of May 31,
2002.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: NO SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR _ RECOMMEND +� N OF BOARD COMMITTEE
PPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S): 4,A&
MARK DeSAULNIER,CHAIR ;r GAYLE B.UIL MA'
.------_----...._—_—-----
-_ ____---�-__v------
ACTION OF BOARD ON September 2420 ------_____._—___--
s APPROVE AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER
CONTTI E) to October 1, 2002, consideration to retain the Cam-Laity Alert Network as the
County's emergency telephone notification (ringdown) system provider; and Dip= that this
item be moved from the Consent category of the Board Agenda to the Short Discussion
category for the October 1, 2002 meeting.
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
UNANIMOUS(ABSENT NONE__ } AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE
AYES: NOES: SHOWN.
ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
ATTESTED September 24., 2002
CONTACT: JULIE ENEA(925)335-1077 JOHN SWEETEN,CLERK OF THE BOARD
OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
CC: LEWIS PASCALLI,HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT
JULIE ENEA,STAFF TO IO COMMITTEE
SHERIFFIOFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR t
M
BY UTY
Recommendation on Emergency Telephone Ringdown System September 24, 2002
Page 2
On July 15, 2002, the IOC reviewed the IFI results. Of the five responses received, the
screening committee eliminated two and was unable to rank the top three based only on the
written proposals. On July 23, the IOC reported out to the Board of Supervisors and
recommended that the screening committee schedule presentations with the top three
vendors, and return to the IOC in September with a ranked list of vendors.
On September 16, 2002, the IOC received the attached follow-up report from Mr. Pascalli
recommending that the County retain the Community Alert Network as the County's
emergency telephone notification (ringdown) system. The report explains that the Evaluation
Panel was equally divided on two vendors that were seen to have comparable strengths. In
the absence of consensus, Mr. Pascalli recommended that the CAN system be retained for
reasons specified in the report. The IOC concurs with Mr. Pascalli's recommendation, and
also recommends that this matter be referred to the Sheriff:when he assumes responsibility
for the system under the Office of Emergency Services, and that the next contract for such
services include performance level incentives and penalties.
IOC Packet 9116/02
9:40 a.m. Item
2002 INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS/INFORMATION FOR A
NEW EMERGENCY TELEPHONE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM
On November f, 2001, the Board of Supervisors referred to the Internal Operations
Committee the development of a request for proposals (RFP) for a new emergency
telephone notification (ringdown) system similar to the current Community Alert Network
(CAN) system. A request for information (RFI) was Made in October 1993 to evaluate
the status of the County's system and to determine the state of the art for emergency
telephone notification systems. As a result of the RFI, the evaluation team ranked the
CAN system first, and the Board of Supervisors decided to continue the CAN contract.
However, the Board also approved the notion of reviewing the contract again in two to
three years, after other system providers gained experience in the industry.
At its March 4, 2002 meeting, the IOC directed Lewis Pascalli, Hazardous Materials
Program Director, to develop an RF1 along the lines of the 1999 RFI, but with the
addition of incentives and penalties based on expected performance. On April 15, the
IOC approved the RFI prepared by Mr. Pascalli and directed that it be sent out with a
response deadline of May 31, 2002.
Can July 15, 2002, the Committee reviewed the RFI results. Of the five responses
received, the screening committee eliminated two and was unable to rank the top three
based only on the written proposals. On July 23, the IOC reported out to the Board of
Supervisors and recommended that the screening committee schedule presentations
with the trip three venders, and return to the IOC in September with a ranked list of
vendors.
September 16_, 2002
Attached is a follow-up report from Mr. Pascalli recommending that the County retain
the Community Alert Network as the County's emergency telephone notification
(ringdown) system. The report explains that the Evaluation Panel was equally divide#
on two vendors that were seen to have comparable strengths. In the absence of
consensus, Mr. Pascalli is recommending CAN for reasons specified in the report.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
HEALTH SERVICEs DEPARTMENT
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
16 SEPJ02
TO : Contra Costa Board of Supervisors
Internal Operations Committee (IOC)
FROM : Lewis G. Pascalli, Jr.,Director, Hazardo Programs
SUBJ : FINAL REPORT TO THE INTERNAL IONS COMMITTEE 16 SEP
02-EMERGENCY TELEPHONE RING DOWN SYSTEM(ETRDS)—EVALUATION
RESULTS
Reference is made to the Board referral of 6 NOV 0l regarding the review of vendors providing
ETRDS services. On direction from the Internal Operations Committee(IOC), Health Services
developed a process to handle the development of a vendor list and protocol to receive, evaluate
and recommend back to the IOC a vendor that would provide ETRDS services that meet the
needs of the County. This report summarizes the evaluation.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Accept this Progress Report and direct the Health Services Department to inform the three (3)
finalists who made personal presentations to the Evaluation Panel (EP),that the final decision is
to retain the Community Alert Network as the County's ETRDS.
BACKGROUND-
On direction from your Committee, the Health Services Department developed a list of eight(8)
vendors comprised by referral and Internet search that could meet the requirements of our
Request for Information(RFI). A letter with the RFI was sent on 18 APR.02 to the eight(8)
vendors with a hard return date on close of work FRI , 31 MAY 02. We received five (5) RFI's.
A panel of five(5) (see Attach I)reviewed the RFI's and completed their evaluation of the RFis.
In a meeting, the EP discussed the RFA,the impressions the RFI's made on each member, and
after much deliberation ranked the RFI's. No consensus was reached but three(3)ranked closely
with each other.
The EP agreed to offer to the three (3) companies an opportunity to make a personal presentation
to the EP. Can the scheduled date, one member of the EP had a personal emergency and could not
attend the presentations. After the presentations on 14 AUG 02,the four(4)members of the EC
rated and ranked the presenters. There was a tie in the ranking of the EP between two (2)of the
presenters. The third presenter was clearly not in contention.
Page 1 of 2
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAMS
The EP discussed the rankings for a period of time and could not reach a consensus on one.No
evaluator was able to change his mind but all felt that the two(2)vendors had comparable
strengths. Each saw differences between the two(2)from their own prospective.
SUMMARY:
Since there was no clear,distinguishing aspects between the two (2)top presenters,=which the EP
could reach agreement on, I am:recommending that the Community Alert Network continue to
be the ETRDS vendor. I discussed my recommendation with the EP, including the member who
was not available, and there appeared to be no concern with this determination. The bases for this
recommendation are:
I. The Community Alert Network(CAN)has been the vendor for Contra
Costa County for over 10 Years,the other vendor has been in operation for
five (5)years;
2. CAN has been working closely with our Laotian language emergency
notification project,while the other vendor did not have a the multi-
language contract on call service available;
3. CAN is part of our CWS and has worked closely with us in aligning the
systems;
4. Both vendors have a GIS system capability to use computer mapping
activation;
5. Personal training is available from CAN at no cost; and
o. The Sheriff s Office will be assuming administration of the CWS and
would prefer that no significant changes be made before they can evaluate
the total CWS.
I have invited members of the EC to attend the IO Committee Meeting and be available for
discussion.
Page 2 of 2
CONTRA COSTA EMERGENCY TELEPHONE
RING DOWN SYSTEM RFI
REVIEW PANEL
BEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Lewis G. Pascalli, Jr.
4333 Pacheco Blvd,
Martinez, CA 94553
INDUSTRY
Ric Banner
Ultramar Diamond Shamrock
150 Solano Ave.
Martinez, CA 94553
ric—bonner@udscorp.com
COMMUNITY REPRESENTATIVE,
Ralph Sattler
1204 Ulfmian Way
Martinez, CA. 94553
rjsattler@aol.com
COUNTY OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES
Steven Rathbone, Sr.,Emergency Planner
50 Glacier Dr.
Martinez, CA 94553
stath@so.co.contra-costa,ca.us
ELECTED CITY OFFICIAL
Mark Ross, Vice Mayor City of Martinez
928 Main Street
Martinez, CA 94553
votefmdly@aol.com
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 2.
FROM: JOHN SWEETEN Contra
County Administrator '
� Costa
DATE: August 3,2002 County
SUBJECT: SHERIFF'S PROPOSED USE OF AB 3228 FRONT LINE LAW ENFORCEMENT FUNDS
(Chapter 134, Statutes of 1996)
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
1. RECOMMENDATION ACTION:
1. HOLD a scheduled public hearing as required by AB 3229 on Sheriff's request for Government Code
Section 30061(b)(3) Front Line Law Enforcement funds.
2. APPROVE the Sheriff's request to continue funding the Air Support Unit with Government code
30061(b)(3)funds.
3. APPROVE the Sheriff's request to continue funding the Rodeo area Resident Deputy, Community
Policing program with Government code 30061(b)(3)funds.
I1. FINANCIAL IMPACT:
NONE. The recommended Board Action will have no impact on the County General Fund. The funds
from the State of California under AB 3229 are restricted funds that may only be used as prescribed by
Government Code Section 30061(b)(3), requested by the Sheriff and approved by the Board.
Ill. BACKGROUND/REASON(S) FOR RECOMMENDED ACTION(%
The State's fiscal year 2002/03 Budget continues the program authorized by the Local Law Enforcement
Supplemental Funding Act (AB 3229) by appropriating restricted funds for three separate programs: 1) an
estimated$334,457 to the Sheriff's Office for jail construction and operations; 2)an estimated$334,457 to the
District Attorney's Office for criminal prosecution; and 3) an estimated $2,682,364 to be allocated to County
unincorporated law enforcement and city police departments on the basis of population (of this amount, an
estimated$294,195 will be available for front line enforcement services in the County's unincorporated areas).
The above estimates are based upon FY 2001/02 receipts because information from the State for 2002/03
has not been received. The three County programs referred to above will be included in the adopted final
County budget for FY 2002/03 in Budget Units 0262, 0241 and 0263, respectively.
Regarding the Sheriffs use of front line law enforcement funds, Government Code Section 30061(c)(1),
requires that the Board of Supervisors hold a public hearing on the Sheriff's requested use of these funds in
each year in which the State provides such funds. Fiscal year 1996197 was the first year of this program and
your Board approved the Sheriff's request to use these funds to initiate a law enforcement Air Support Unit.
The Sheriff has since implemented a Resident Deputy, Community Policing program in the Rodeo area with
these funds. As indicated in the attached,the Sheriff requests that funds available for the current fiscal year
continue to be used for the Resident Deputy, Community Policing program in Rodeo and the Air Support Unit.
IV. CONSEQUENCES OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Failure to approve the Sheriff's requested use of these funds would be detrimental to both of the important
programs supported by them. Furthermore,failure to use these funds could result in forfeiting the funds to the
State.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUN ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD 775MMITTEE
4_,,::--APPROVE OTHER
SIGNAT URE `:- ;. -. -
ACTION OF BOARD N APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
P
`z.
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT-------) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Contact Person:George Roemer,3351055 ATTESTED
CC: CAO,Justice System Programs JOHN SWEETEN,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
Sheriff SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
County Auditor-Controller
Supplemental Law Enforcement Oversight Committee
BY ;DEPUTY
OFFICE OF THE SHERIFF
Contra Costa County
Executive Office , " tN`
335-15011 ''
Date: September 4, 2002
To: Board of Supervisors
Via: John Sweeten, County Administrator
From: Warren E. Rupf, Sheriff
By: Kathryn J. Holmes, Undersheriff.
Subject: Report on Use of Front-ling Law Enforcement Funds
The Front-line Law Enforcement Funds provided by AB 3220 are used by the Sheriffs
Office for two very important programs. With these funds, we implemented and
maintain a Resident Deputy, Community Policing Program in the Rodeo area. The
program has provided significant benefit to the Rodeo area residents by providing a
liaison between law enforcement and the community, and assisting with crime
prevention and crime awareness. Specifically, the funds are used to pay the full cost of
the Deputy Sheriff position, including salary, benefits and necessary equipment. These
costs totaled $129,652 in fiscal year 2001102. For fiscal year 2002103, we estimate that
the costs will be approximately $135,000.
The other program supported by theses funds is the Sheriff's Office Air Support Unit.
This program began in 1907 with the support of the Board of Supervisors by using
these funds and through a partnership with the Alameda County Sheriffs Office. The
amount of State funds used for our Air Support Unit during fiscal year 2001/02 was
$370,620; we estimate that $30+6,000 will be used for this program during fiscal year
2002/03.
Both the Resident Deputy, Community Policing Program in the Rodeo area and the Air
Support Unit have proven to be extremely valuable and are deserving of continued
funding. The Sheriffs Office intends to continue using these Front-line Law
Enforcement funds for the Resident Deputy, Community Policing program in Rodeo and
the Air Support Unit.
cc: Commander Obie Anderson