HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-01-21 - City Commission Workshop Meeting MinutesVZj. R..c V-Vvy ;.y. �,, ..i V '4vr:Nl_!F, TAVU!ARAC, F L 0 R 0F),k
January 8, 1981
NOTICE OF POSTPONED WORKSHOP
CITY COUNCIL
TAMARAC, FLORIDA
Please be advised that the Computer Workshop scheduled
for January 13, 1981 has been postponed.
The above workshop will be held at 1:30 P.M. Wednesday,
January 21, 1981, in the West Conference Room at City Hall..
The Council will meet with representatives of Alexander Grant
and Company for the purpose of questions and discussion con-
cerning a Computer Proposal.
The City Council may discuss such other business as may come
before it.
Carol A. Evans
Assistant City Clerk
/1c
1/8/81
CITY OF TAMARAC
CITY COUNCIL
COMPUTER WORKSHOP
January 21, 1981
CALL TO ORDER: The Workshop concerning computer proposals was called
to order at 1:45 P.M. on Wednesday, January 21st, 1981 by Mayor Falck.
The meeting was held in the West Conference Room at City Hall.
ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Mayor Walter W. Falck
C/M Irving Disraelly
V/M Helen Massaro
C/W Kelch - 2:20 P.M.
ABSENT AND EXCUSED:
ALSO PRESENT:
I.C/M Irving Zemel
Laura Stuurmans, Acting City Mgr.
Steve Wood, Finance Director
Mayor Falck indicated that this was a Workshop Session to discuss the
matter of the City's interest in computer programs and the existing situ-
ation relating to the billings with the possibility of continuing to use
the equipment on rental.
V/M Massaro mentioned that she liked the idea of the Mayor going through
all of the input and asked that he instruct Mr. Wood to give us various
information as what the costs will be and where the money is coming from.
Mr. Wood stated that originally he had discussions with Mr. Bob Hoyt
relating to the need for a computer system for the City; the current
Burroughs L 9000 was actually mechanically wearing out and parts are not
replaceable or take too long to get. He said we are probably over --using
the machine now and when he became Financial Director, he put in the
budget with the City Manager's approval, $200,000.00 for a computer
purchase that was subsequently reduced to $30,000.00 for a lease -purchase
agreement that is in the current budget as adopted. Later there were
discussions between himself, the City Manager and Alexander Grant Co. who
submitted an EDP feagi:bility study to the City; this never came before
the Council, so this alternative was not taken.
V/M Massaro asked what this study entailed and Mr. Gordon Kramer of
Alexander Grant replied that it was not a study; it was a proposal to do
a study, and Mr. W o od indicated that it was not routed to the City.
He indicated that at the same time he had been in contact with Coral
Springs and they had hired Mr. Larry Lustig who had developed a request
for a proposal that was submitted to various vendors for a computer system
for the City of Coral Springs. Mr. Wood said that the City of Tamarac and
the City of Coral Springs have basically the same kind of needs and pro-
vide basically the same kind of services; he took Mr. Lustig's proposal
and modified it and this was transmitted to Council and
sent out to the vendors. He then asked the Council to authorize a
$2000.00 expenditure to Alexander Grant and his evaluation was submitted.
The Council authorized that expenditure and Mr. Kramer reviewed the pro -
posalsy as he also did.,and his letter is attached to the latest memo that
Mr. Wood sent. His rating was based on the hardware itself; he did not
evaluate software.
Mr. Burt Emmer of Alexander Grant stated that this was not their failing;
there was a need for a system because of the problems the City was having
with the service for the utility billing and the impact of the TUI acquisi-
tion on the City's data processing needs.
Mr. Wood said when the City acquired the utility, it also acquired a con-
tract with then Coastal Data, now Quanex; we were not getting adequate
service and were concerned about that company going bankrupt and that we
would not be able to get billing, so other operations were explored so
that we would have some kind of back-up or contingency plan. Mr. Wood
further indicated that our contract with them expires on the 17th of
April and they are tentatively proposing another three year contract.
Mr. Wood said the City has experienced many problems with the service
bureau which directly affect the customers of that utility. He had
vC
l
January 21, 1981
/pe
requested an evaluation of the hardware from the City Manager and Mr.
Wood said he then wrote a memo to put something on the agenda for
analysis of software that the vendors were proposing, because he felt
the City could make a $30,000 or $40,000 mistake and wanted to make
sure what the needs of the City were; he also felt Mr. Kramer would be
more qualified to make this evaluation.
C/M Disraelly asked if h e_ received any information from the Chamber
in Washington? Mr. Wood replied that there has not been any information
on municipalities and he has not received any information on software as
yet.
Mr. Wood indicated that the City Manager did not put his request on the
Agenda, but brought it up at a meeting when he was in Clearwater with
Mr. Kramer looking at that city's utility billing system, which is one
of the items that is proposed in Public Domain by Burroughs Corp. on
one of their proposals.
V/M Massaro asked about the $4000.00 figure and what it would do for us?
Mr. Wood replied that it would allow someone to advise the City other
than himself whether the equipment that is being considered is what is
needed.
V/M Massaro felt that $4000.00 or $8000.00 was high to make that deter-
mination and wanted to know how many hours they will put in, as it
didn't seem reasonable to her.
Mr. Burt Emmer said that rather than going to the market place in such
broad terms, they develop a set of specifications as to what is needed
by the City; each city will have different requirements and one of the
main efforts is working with the city in developing what they need
specifically.
V/M Massaro indicated that they should know what is required by the
City.
Mr. Emmer said one of the biggest efforts they make is defining what
the City needs; they establish a guideline and they will find a vendor
closest to satisfy a city's requirements. They evaluate the vendor's
software which is not static; it is constantly changing and they look
for the one that is going to be best for the City. They negotiate the
contract to make sure the vendor performs and satisfies the requirements.
C/M Disraelly asked if the software has to be changed to make it compat-
ible as to what the City itself is going to need, that is software that
is in the Public Domain?
Mr. Kramer indicated that any software package that is bought, whether it
is private or public, will have to be changed to fit the City's needs.
They look for a package that they will not have to change too much; when
you buy something that is public domain, what you get for $78.00 is a
computer tape and maybe a manual on how it works. A private source gives
you some implementation assistance and some of the support to make the
changes. There is a major question about support from public domain on
software and he also indicated that software has to be matched to the
hardware to a limited extent.
C/M Disraelly asked how long it will, be before a report.. _on Margate will
be available and further asked, "If we_hired you today, would it be the
lst of May before your evaluation would come back?"
Mr. Kramer said it would probably be the middle of March before the actual
report would be done; they are finding out what Margate's user require-
ments are. Mr. Kramer felt that they could give Tamarac an evaluation by
the first week in March, as a lot of the work has already been done and
Margate is hiring them to do the whole study, whereas Tamarac had just
looked into the hardware. Mr. Kramer stated that the software is sig-
nificantly more important than the hardware.
-2- January 21, 1981
/Pe
r
C/M Disraelly mentioned that in looking at their hardware proposal,
he noticed that the statements about each did not follow the same
format.
Mx. Kramer explained that they did establish a weightingfactor; the
higher the weight factor, the better for the City. They worked with
members of the City Staff and asked them what they considered the most
important thing; Alexander Grant evaluated and the City evaluated and estEblished
a scale of from 1-10, one being the lowest and ten being the bestyand
then they multiplied the objective criteria based on reading each pro-
posal multiplied by the weighting factor, which gave them a number to
enable them to come up with what is their highest numerical rating.
Mr. Kramer reviewed all the criteria and read ratings and explained
what this all meant.
C/W Kelch was in attendance at 2:20 P.M.
V/M Massaro asked about Advance T ec h no l o g y and Mr. Kramer
explained that since they did not submit a bid bond with their pro-
posal, they were disqualified.
Mr. Wood mentioned that Arthur Birken, City Attorney had advised that
since they had not submitted a bid bond, they should not be considered.
V/M Massaro asked why this company couldn't re -submit and was advised
by Mr. Kramer that the City Staff in their evaluation had totally dis-
qualified this company due to Mr. Birken's recommendations.
V/M Massaro asked if Advance Technology was a responsible company and
Mr. Kramer said that in his opinion, they were responsible.
Mr. Emmer said he didn't want to mislead Council, this is not complete
because the software was not adequately evaluated,due to the fact that
they did not have specifications for the software. He then indicated
that the evaluations can change significantly when specifications for
software are included.
V/M Massaro asked if Advance Technology was the best in reference to
what was submitted? Mr. Emmer then stated that they also got the best
ranking in regard to software too.
V/M Massaro asked Mr. Emmer if they were going to do this evaluation all
over again if they are given the contract? Mr. Emmer said, "Yes,"
but they must add the software and then come up with a conclusive evalua-
tion.
C/M Disraelly mentioned that they were not identical evaluations and
Mr. Kramer said the criteria was identical, but they wanted to show the
differences.
C/M Disraelly also mentioned that they did not indicate any others in
Florida and they didn't go into a broad discrepancy in the monthly lease
rentals.
Mr. Kramer stated that this was pretty hard to do because there were all
kinds of plans available and then Microdata didn't have a plan.
Mr. Emmer stated that from a cost standpoint, we can make them all
equivalent.
Mr. Kramer said the initial configuration purely is a CPU, 13 CRT type
terminals, a printer, and discs for storage; it has nothing to do with
software.
C/M Disraelly indicated that Burroughs should be subtracted to make
this equivalent.
Mr. Emmer explained that there are a few things Council must be cognizant
of before deciding on a system--1) The monthly cost that we pay a service
bureau will be eliminated.
-3- January 21, 1981
/pe
Mr. Wood stated that the City is paying approximately $2500 per month
or $30,000per year to produce utility bills and that would more than
likely increase; a computer system will replace that cost.
(Tape- Mr. Emmer went on to say, 2) If the City buys a computer system, it
side can be done a variety of ways-- you can go out and buy a computer for
#2) $200,000.00, or go into certain types of installment purchase agree-
ments -- you must look at what is the annual equivalent amount
to be paid out over a period of time. The fixed number of $200,000.00
would not be subject to renegotiation or inflationary increases if the
City buys a computer system.
Mr. Kramer said in the total that is being discussed in regards to
monthly charges, etc., that is for any and all systems up and running
versus $30,000 just for utilities plus whatever the expenses are of
processing the payroll on the L9000.
V/M Massaro asked what our expense was on the payroll? Mr. Wood replied
that the City owns the L9000, but we have a service contract on the
machine which is about $1300.00 per year plus an operator.
Mr. Kramer said the $30,000 only includes one function; it doesn't
include all the other operations and off -sets, and they can do all of
those things for that price per month.
Mr. Emmer said he would not anticipate saving money; it has been his
experience that when a city gets a computer, it gives them smoother
processing and it will furnish services a little better and it may
stabilize costs as the city grows.
C/M Disraelly said that if the City owned their own software for the
utility, there will not be that $30,000.00 cost.
Mr. Kramer said it is hard to determine just what is the value of good
information when it is needed; personnel will be saving time and a value
cannot be put on that.
Mr. Emmer mentioned that the City must look at our situation in pro-
ducing utility bills. If a computer system is obtained, the City will
not have to worry about an outside contract; service bureaus are very
unreliable and change hands and disappear overnight and then a crisis
situation can exist. If the City goes into their own system, there will
be complete control and a service company will not have to be depended
upon.
C/W Kelch noticed a figure of a projection on the proposals of five to
seven years --why was this restriction placed? Is it because they con-
sider this period of time in which the useful material will be available
and at the point we get into an expansion or a refinement situation,
will this all be obsolete?
Mr. Kramer said it is a normal :range of time they deal with. Technolo-
gical changes make the changes at times, but this may not happen. If
the City has an operating system that works, why change it?
Mr. Emmer said if a computer is purchased, a computer company will
furnish a maintenance agreement; if a computer is used for 50 years,
if it does the job, don't change it. From his experience, he finds that
after 5 to 7 years, the service starts to decay.
C/M Disraelly asked if the City will have to hire a programmer?
Mr. Kramer indicated that the City will need an EDP manager who is
involved with setting up controls, access controls as well as controls
over logging out reports, setting up some schedules, and he will have
to have some light programming capability.
Mr. Wood indicated that there is an individual in the budget to hire.
Mr. Kramer said a query language has to be established to interrogate
the data on hand and get responses on either hard copy or on a CRT.
-4- January 21, 1981
/pe
i
Mayor Falck asked what we have to do now?
Mr. Wood recommended that the City authorize Alexander Grant to continue
as the consultant to reseach the software and come back with a conclusive
report on both the hardware and the software.
Ms. Stuurmans asked how long their bid prices are good for? Mr. Emmer
said we could probably write them and get a 60 day extension and Ms.
Stuurmans said this letter should be sent now.
V/M Massaro asked, "What does the City need right now?" She knows we
need to make a determination about the utility billing. Do we do the
payroll over here and is there a problem with it?
Mr. Wood replied that there is a big problem with it. The system is
inefficient and it is taking too long. It takes 4 days to bill the
utility in the east. There is a labor crunch because of the L9000.
V/M Massaro asked what else Mr. Wood wanted to do on the computer?
Mr. Wood indicated that the City needs to be able to do: 1) both
utility billings, 2) Payroll, 3) financial accounting system, 4) a
fixed asset accounting system for insurance purposes and replacement
cost figures, 5) personnel reporting --a way to keep track of sick leave,
vacation days, etc. ........... ....
V/M Massaro indicated that if reported, it could be written down as
relates to payroll; she further said that she wants to know what the
City's real needs are.
Mr. Wood stated that one of our real needs is to have geographic data
which will allow some reporting on engineering tracts, how much money
has been collected on certain projects as opposed to others, Developers'
Agreements, the amount of monies collected from drainage improvements;
to be able to call up that information on a screen so that we will know
what the developer owes. It has gotten out of hand at the utility plant
manually trying to keep track of all the Developer Agreements. Mr. Wood
also believes we need an occupational license program to be done by
computer.
C/M Disraelly said that we are not sure of expiration dates on temporary
signs and bonds and other temporary items and that we do not have a bank
of information.
Mr. Emmer stated that this will centralize the information.
Mr. Wood said the City also needs to keep track of how much is being
spent on vehicle maintenance or when to replace vehicles.
V/M Massaro asked how much would this system cost the City if this was
broken down monthly?
Mr. Kramer replied that it would cost $50,000.00 per year and Mayor
Falck indicated this would be $5,000.00 per month.
Mr. Barry Magnes, Utilities West Accountant, indicated that the system
being used for Utility West is a batch mode system that is twelve years
old and he would not recommend it to any other city because it is
inefficient both laborwise and turn -around.
Mr. Wood also mentioned that the City probably needs to do some crime
incident reporting for both Police and Fire Departments.
C/M Disraelly discussed Quanex and keeping the Burroughs for an extra
couple of months, maybe an additional six months, until such time as
we put a new computer aboard. He asked if we can continue to rent for
$1600.00 and get rid of Quanex, because we would be saving money after
the fourth month?
Mr. Wood stated that the City will be forced to do something in April,
as Quanex's contract expires.
-5- January 21, 1981
/pe
C/M Disraelly said, at worst, we will be paying $1600.00 to Burroughs
for this rental instead of paying $2500.00 for this one function to
Quanex.
Mr. Wood explained that to take the B800 that is over there now for
the PSC refund and to make it capable of also doing the utility
billing, would require an expenditure of about $680.00 per month.
V/M Massaro asked if the Burroughs could do the two things? Mr.
Wood replied that it would do the PSC and the utility billing, but
the memory space would probably not be sufficient to do payroll.
Mr. Kramer indicated that the one they rejected from Burroughs is
the one being used at the utility now.
Mr. Wood mentioned that payroll probably could be done on it for an
additional cost. He indicated that this would be an interim measure
just to get them through.
Mr. Wood said they want us to rent or buy from them a Data .1500,
which is an intelligent terminal, not a computer, for a three year
period and we would have to re-enter into another agreement; they
came out the other day with this contract. He asked them if they
would come back and submit a year or a month -to -month rate and they
have not replied.
C/M Disraelly said it should be decided today if we can also get
Burroughs to extend it on a 3 month extension each time.
Mr. Wood explained that they have most of the equipment they need
right now on a six months rental from Burroughs; they are going to
need most of that equipment longer than six months because they will
not finish the PSC billings completely by then and probably
will need to go to another six months rental. That would likely
give us enough time to go out and get another computer system and
the additional cost would be only $600.00 per month.
There was a discussion by Council on the PSC refunds and the problems
encountered.
C/W Kelch said she is interested in figuring the cost of the errors
that the City has been handling and feels there has been an increase
in these errors. In the ten years she has been here, Ms. Kelch
indicated there are more errors in the billing procedure than ever
before. She felt that if we had an in-house system, we would have
a push-button system to check on this.
Mr. Wood indicated that when Quanex took over, they fired all the
people that worked for Coastal and installed their own people who
were unfamiliar with the operation of our utility; they were not up-
dating the data when they should have been. They would process the
bills with incorrect information, they would lose them or not give
them to the Pony Express who delivers them to us and there were just
a whole raft of problems that the City couldn't control, as they
were out of our jurisdiction.
Mr. Magnes reported that the General Manager of Quanex in a general
meeting, apologized twice in the last two months and said he would
personally see that these things never occur, but they continue to
happen.
Mr. Wood mentioned that there was a problem with the Post Office as
well.
C/M Disraelly asked about checks that never were delivered to the
people out of state and wondered why the post office never returned
them.
QZ
January 21, 1981
/Pe
I
Mr. Wood explained that while the post office should return them to
the City, sometimes they just put them in their dead letter box.
Mr. Emmer stated that when a certain time goes by, the checks should
be stopped and re -issued, and Mr. Wood indicated that they are doing
that.
Mr. Magnes reported that everyone who did not receive checks that
they know about will get replacement checks; they have stopped 48
checks. The majority of checks which have gone outside of Tamarac
and returned by the post office have been mailed back to the service
addresses and just a few have been returned by the post office;
they are waiting to see the bank statement as to who signed them and
if they went through. If checks went out to the wrong address, and
we don't get the checks back, we will re -issue the checks.
Mr. Wood indicated that they have received cancelled checks; they
recently convinced Summit Bank that they should sort those checks
for us in numerical order so bank reconciliations can be compared.
Mr. Magnes indicated that Summit Bank told them their equipment wasn't
in yet to put code numbers on and that they had sent them to another
bank to do this.
Mr. Wood said we can agendize for discussion and possible action the
use of the Burroughs Equipmentfor a period of time.
Ms. Stuurmans indicated that this was the item tabled from the last
Agenda and we can just carry it over.
Mr. Emmer suggested that the audit report be put on the agenda and
they will be present.
MAYOR FALCK ADJOURNED THE WORKSHOP MEETING AT 3:15 P.M.
ASSISTANT CITY CLERK
This public document was promulgated at a cost ofAm.4 ,or
i�. per copy, to inform the general public and public
officers and employees about recent opinions and considerations
by the City Council of the City of Tamarac.
-7- January 21, 1981
/pe
J