HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 06231992 - 1.84 HOARD 01" SUPERVISORS Goi
Barton J. Gilbert t
C o S[a
Mom: Director of General Services
County
June 10, 1992
VASE,
Approval of Contracts with Denalect Alarm Company
SUBJEct, (6-23-92)
spEciric nEouEst(s)on nEcommE"DA11ONIS)A BACK011OUND AM)JUSTWICAtIO"
I. RECOMMENDATION
AUTHORIZE the Director of General Services to execute separate
two year contracts with Denalect Alarm Company for a total
amount not to exceed $72,000-00 to provide monitoring services
for fire and security alarms located in various locations
occupied or to be occupied by the County.
II. FINANCIAL IMPACT
Funds for this contract are budgeted by the General Services
Department as part of the occupancy costs for each department.
III. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION/BACKGROUND
Denalect has provided monitoring services for buildings ,
alarmed with County owned equipment for over seventeen years.
During this period the number of alarm systems has grown to
the point where the total cost now exceeds the limit for
approval delegated to the Director of General Services.
It is the County' s policy to install fire and security alarms
for the safety and protection of the -, general public, staff,
and County property in all new locations as they become
occupied by County departments. It has, proved to be more
cost effective for the County to provide and install its own
equipment rather than to lease it from an alarm company. By
standardizing the equipment, efficiencies were realized in
installation, repair and servicing the systems, stocking
parts, and training County employees in user departments on
CONTINUED ON ATTA WFAENt. X YES SIGNATU"E'
"ECOMMENt)AIlOtIOFCOUNTY A13MItilgIllAtOn —nECOL4MEt4t)ATlOt4Or-I)OA"DCOMMITIEE
APPROVE _0111E"
SICANAIUMSI:
ACTION OF HOARD ON
—g&-----APPnOVEt)Agnr:commr:NiDev --A _otimn
vote OF SUPPRVISOns
I IfEnEny CERTIFY 711AT 1111518 A TRUE
UNANIMOUS(ASSENT AND COMECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: HOES: AND MIMD ON 111E MINUTES Or 111E IMAM
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON WE DATE SjjoVVN.
CC, • Auditor-Controller ATTESTED 3 / 9 q
Risk Management PHIL HATOFLOn,CLEnK OF T111E BOAnD OF
County Counsel SUPEnVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISMATon
Orig: General Services Department-F/M
Communications Division (via. F/M)
MM (10/88) Purchasing Division (via F/M) By DEPUTY
III. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION/BACKGROUND - (CONTD)
use of the system. In addition, false alarms were reduced
when employees who moved to other locations did not have to
learn different systems.
standardizing meant that it was not practical for more than
one monitoring company to provide monitoring service. Each
alarm monitoring company uses different data language and has
its own radio frequency. The County must purchase radios with
that frequency in order to transmit the alarm signal. If the
monitoring contract were put out to bid, the County would be
subject to increased costs to purchase new radios for each
location. Additional costs would be incurred for alarm
panels, for training time for communications staff to learn
new equipment, for retraining employees using the systems, and
for establishing new emergency call lists and procedures.
The County' s equipment is compatible with that of Denalect.
Denalect has provided quality service -and has worked closely
with the County' on technical matters 'to make the systems
function effectively. It is strongly recommended that
Denalect be the sole-source vendor for monitoring County owned
alarm equipment.
PLD:almbdodr.692