it may not be able to be first in, but as was noted, the city of oakland will be covered, so they will not really be out. there will be a matter of them when they get a chance to come in the of the infrastructure will be there, so the infrastructure is designed to hopefully have no gaps, so we will have of our regional infrastructure that everyone can use. i want to highlight again the commercial systems we are using, that while they work, they have lots of problems.

many of us have experienced large sporting events where deputies and police officers are there, but they are unable to communicate with their data because everybody else brings the system down. a large number of the size of the van with required -- of the bandwidth required, and one thing is they are pushing out video from the buses right into the police cars, so there will of some of the incidents that unfortunately occur on the buses. i want to talk a second about the timing of this. i had an opportunity to me with the ntia a month ago and i asked if there was any way that there would be an extension on the grant. so that we could have more time to get these negotiations

completed. the answer was unequivocal no. this was the last chance, do it now or do not do it at all. we see this as a great opportunity. supervisor campos: thank you -- supervisor kim:. thank you. >supervisor avalos: why was the answer no? >> the finding -- funding comes through the reinvestment act funding and congress -- >> another question for one of the other presenters. fcc guidelines say who could be the users of the bay web system. what do the guidelines say right now? who are the first responders who would use the system? >> thank you.

the definition of eligible user is in flux right now. the definition must be a public safety user and for public safety purpose. that does not rate -- mean to much. it is up to the fcc to interpret that and determine who it can and cannot be. the fcc issued an order on this specific question. supervisor avalos: if i can stop you, the language is not more specific than that? >> the language says it must be used by a governmental -- by governmental users for public safety uses and purposes. it is very broad. >> supervisor avalos: mta, puc.

>> perhaps. there are times when every public city employer is a public safety worker especially in large disasters and that type of thing. what the fcc has done is to interpret that. they have in their ruling they have consistently expanded or broaden that definition as they go. the most recently was in the fall of last year. they specifically cited transportation agencies, ports, airports, those types of public agencies as being in there -- this order, being eligible users for the 700 mhz system. i anticipate also that the fcc could probably also expand that to public-works workers. other workers who may not normally have a public safety function but certainly in an emergency or some event or

incident become public safety workers and their work becomes critical to the response for the first response and the follow-up response to address the incident. the definition is a little bit fluid right now, but it is expanding. so we expect in future years to expand the ability for our workers here in san francisco to use it. supervisor avalos: for it to be expanded and you say it is in flux, does it mean that the fcc or congress has to approve what the new definitions would be to make it more specific? how would that be settled? >> congress could change the definition. they're written in federal law. in the absence of congressional action, it is up to the fcc to define those definitions and interpret more clearly for us to can and cannot use the system. there really is the fcc at this

point making those decisions. >supervisor avalos: for our purposes, who are the people, city workers who are considered first responders? >> it is the public safety agencies. we have looked at this and find it for purposes of county, 875 devices as the agencies to sit in the eoc when it is activated in an emergency. there are 19 agencies that currently are called to be part of the eeoc -- eoc when it is activated. that is when we have drawn our line right now in terms of who can and cannot be an fallujah -- user on the system. that does include mta. it does include dpw, i believe and some of the other agencies that you would not think of as a strictly public safety agencies. supervisor avalos: for the

purposes of homeland security, what they want to see a more restrictive definition of what the public safety function would be, or more expensive? >> it is hard to speak for homeland security. i can briefly speak for the other early builders of these networks. obviously, we feel that it is important to have an expansive definition as possible of the network. we believe it will be -- bring value in and out -- in a number of ways. we are advocating and lobbying for an expansive definition. from 0-- anne can talk about home security. >> there is a conference call and the cities who are involved in that. it is universal across the country there is an -- a desire

to have the expanded definition. we have seen with the fed and other things attali different subject but similar experience. the definition of homelessness used to be very -- it was very limited. and after cities began to lobby congress and washington, it is now, you know, they have picked up san francisco's definition of homeless which is people living in cars, living on couches, count surfing, and so on. we feel the same kind of thing will happen here. the fcc has not narrowly defined it. it is broadly defined. it is our belief as we move forward to that as more and more communities get involved in this, we know who the first responders are in an emergency and it is all those that barry mentioned. supervisor avalos: it is about the 800 mhz system. one last question.

when was that established? how long have we had that? >>13 years? >> we're trying to search your memory. we are thinking 1997, 1996. >> 1996. we went into contract in 1996. it was after the 101 california incident. that is what motivated us to move forward. our first responders on scene could not communicate. supervisor avalos: how long do we expect a 700 mhz system to last? >> we believe the current hardware version of the technology is good for about 10 years. and i wanted to address quickly a question that came up earlier

about possible cost of replacing the system after 10 years. the jta has put a lot of thought into that and we are planning to develop what we call a sinking fund that we will establish probably beginning year three or so that will build up over time to be able to give us funding to make that upgrade at the end of the 10-year useful life. that will probably come as part of an administrative fee that will be taxed to the user -- that will be tapped to the user fee. we can keep a low and is part of the $5 we are charging for administrative fees for the jpa to begin building that fund. the other thing is this digital broadband technology will be evolving over time. it is not so much that we will

be possibly a forklift upgrade where everything is replaced at the end of 10 years. it could be that the technology is your place gradually over time where we're able to spread out as costs somewhat. we're not looking at a large amount at 10 years but we're able to spread those upgrade costs over time. supervisor kim: this is a follow-up question. the term of the subject agreement is 12 years. is it possible to reduce this to 10 years being that this is the projected estimates for how long the system will be useful? >> that is a little bit of a confusion, too. the 12 years is the total time of the agreement. we understand the system will not be operational for the first year or year and a half. motorola is under the master boom agreement for the jpa, committing to operate the system for 10 years from start of dates which is sometime in mid-2013

through 2023. supervisor kim: i understand that. the time -- 10 years starts today. while we are ready to install the system. >> that is true. i am getting your question. we need to upgrade this to four or the end of the current boom agreement? that is not our plan from the jpa. the useful life is 10 years but the 800 mhz system has been going for a 13 or 14 years. simply because -- it is difficult to predict what we're going to do. >> the answer was sufficient. it sounds like there are no more presentations from the department? why don't we go to the budget analyst? there were some revisions. >> i will briefly summarize the

additional information that we provided this week from last week. on page 8 of the report, we met the revised cost of this particular piece of legislation. just the least permit, utilities, and related costs. the total estimated cost to the city over the proposed 12-year site access and use agreement ranges from $3 million to $4 million. as you know last week, those costs were in the area of approximately $7 million. again, funding sources have not been specifically identified to pay for such costs. on page 9 of our report we point out that the inspector general of the united states department of commerce has raised various concerns regarding the application, the grant application. however, none of those concerns

caused the inspector general to seize the project. we just point that out on page 9 of our report. on page 10 of our report, again, we make reference to the $43 a month access fee was $38 being payable to motorola, $5 payable to the bay bridge authority, and again, funding sources have not yet been identified for those costs as well as the additional costs for their radios or computer devices which are estimated to range from $400 to $1,500. let me say that we thank very much ms. kronenberg for providing this information about the cost data and other elements of this plan. as of the riding of our report we have not had the opportunity to determine exactly what the

costs will be. in addition to the costs that are before you today and that is on the lease cost. based on the testimony i have heard today and what we have reviewed, it is clear that the total cost of this project are not known. our recommendations remain the same. we stayed out this matter -- we state that this is a policy matter for the board of supervisors. we pointed out if this proposed plan had not been included in that city's plan for five years technology, there has been a lot of communications as we understand it in this ensuing week between the departments regarding this matter and we appreciate that. we think that kind of communication should continue in order to make this the best plan possible.

supervisor chu: are there others who wish to speak? ♪ at the phone copa, copa motorola ♪ ♪the kind of phone you pay a toll on ♪ ♪ and i hope it works out on the whole-a ♪ ♪ at the copa, we thank you guv ♪ ♪ radio waves all above ♪ ♪ good to hear your voice all today ♪ karl rove thank you. are there other members who wish

to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed. this item is before us. any thoughts? i will share my. i want to thank the department and all the department heads for coming today to share with us the fuller picture of the plans for the 807 hundred mhz system and to share with us what your budget projections look like. i think those numbers are not going to be perfect at this moment and hearing what john walton mentioned, there is going to be opportunities to revisit that through our process and make sure if there are opportunities to have better efficiencies that we do do that. i do not think that conversation is done with. i want to thank the budget analysts for york -- your observations. overall, i think what we're asking is whether it is valuable for the city to be investing in additional amounts to join in to a system that is a data system. it is something we do not have

at this moment and i but -- do believe that is the future. the question for us is do we want to take that step now? we know that is the future and gain $13 million worth of grant funding to accomplish that, or do we want to hold off and hope maybe there is some grant money to do it later? probably not if it is coming from the stimulus funding. for me, it is pretty clear that we need to be part of a regional system. it is important from a public safety point of view and from a big disaster point of view, when we have earthquakes or other big disasters, they do not stop at the borders. they continue on and there is going to be absolute reason for us to communicate and work together and share our resources when those times come. i think it is important for us to do it. it will enhance our local public safety efforts as well. i am supportive of this. i think there are more questions to come to kuwait and departments about them moving

forward for the 800 mhz system as well as this one. those questions i am willing to ask is that process comes forward. i would be supportive of this and i would be interested to hear what my colleagues think. supervisor kim: i want to thank the department and the department of emergency management for the incredible work i know you have put into this. this is not a time line that you would have wanted to see the city go through. that was a time when you have to work under and we asked a lot of questions and i appreciate your patience and working through all those and researching the background information. i still have concerns not about entering into regional systems, i think that is important and i know this disaster will happen and it is important to be prepared. i do appreciate the intent and the final outcome of what we're trying to move forward into. i feel comfortable moving this

out of committee with no recommendation. i am sure my colleagues will have questions out well -- as well but i do not want to stop the process from being -- moving forward and my colleagues need to weigh in. a lot of good work has happened. last week i was uncertain as to how much could be done with that in the time frame of two weeks but you really have surpassed even my expectations and i appreciate there was funding found not within the general fund at least for this upcoming year. thank you so much. your budget is taking some of our unexpected expenditures this year. i do really appreciate that. i think one of my wishes in terms of how this process could have been different, that we had a longer time to plan for with coit. i look forward to the reintegration of the planning process and it is great to have

mr. walton here to speak to that and i appreciate your feedback on this issue. this is not anything that has to do with our process but it would be great if we could have had our own rfp process where we could look at the technology that was out there and pick our own carrier. there is a part of me that feels uncomfortable with the fact we're getting a system because it is free. not because it is the best system out there and this could be the best system out there, i am not saying it is not. that is not my area of expertise but ideal -- do feel uncomfortable moving it out of committee. i request we do with no recommendation. i do appreciate the immense amount of work that went into this. thank you, supervisor kim. supervisor avalos. supervisor avalos: i am uncomfortable with this item. i appreciate the work that has been done going back to committee and giving us a greater perspective on financing. i know this is a real huge priority for dem and the bay

area. i see the value, certainly, as i mentioned last week. i see the value of being able to process digital data among our public safety departments and especially knowing that as each year goes by, the risks of -- the big one or other disasters are imminent. i just feel it is a bit of the tail wagging the dog in a way. this has not necessarily been as strongly planned for within all our different city departments and it has come from that way up to us. it has come from the federal government. there has been concerns about motorola's proposal but they did get funded. and that is who we have to work with. it is a bit of a full source

type of contract we're working with in terms of choosing to work with motorola and build out of the antennas for site access and usage. it makes me feel very uncomfortable. i can see moving it out of committee. i feel that if we move it out of committee without a recommendation, it is likely to pass. and so our concerns about here expressed with the costs are going to be, the budget analysts still say the costs are somewhat unknown. they're real and we're making a leap of faith in approving a project like this. i wanted to express my discomfort which still is strong. i am willing to move it out without recommendation. mostly because that is what my colleagues want to do here. i have reservations.

whatever i can do to help in the process in the future as we move forward, i'm at your disposal. croats think you and i want to thank my colleagues for their perspective. the discomfort with having a vendor that was chosen for us is something i grappled with in the beginning. that is nothing we can change and that is how the federal government money did come down. what i am comforted by is the fact that after a tenure -- 10- year period, the assets convert to the assets of the jpa. the long-term asset would become hours and i am comforted by the fact that the design of it does not make it such we have to purchase motorola equipment in order to use it and that is very important. we can go to any vendor we choose in the purchase of our radios going forward.

though it is motorola that was chosen because of that federal process, i am comforted by those facts. we have a motion to send the item forward without recommendation. do we need a roll call? we will do that without objection. thank you. would you call item 5 and 6? >> item 5. resolution establishing the monthly contribution amount to the health service trust fund. item six. ordinance amending the san francisco administrative code regarding board approval of health service system plan and contribution rates. supervisor kim: thank you for calling these items. these are items i sponsored as a member of the board of supervisors and the appointee to

the health service board. i wanted to bring these items forward. in my comments i did mention how i was thankful for kathrine dodd and her staff and the work they did to bring down the costs. by way of background we have rate packages before us which would do a number of things. one of the things we were taking a look at what we started to look at real numbers and what that would mean for costs for the city, they were significant. we as you know have a number of different plans for our health services for our employees. we spend about 500 + million dollars on a to moll products -- hmo products and we were seeing rates that were higher than any of us had hoped for. for kaiser we started off with rates that looked like 6.9% increase. that is significant if you look at how much we spend in those products. not only for the employee but for the employers, city and

county of san francisco. blue shield we started off with rates that were as high as 15.44% increase for active and non-medicare retirees and some of our medicare plans increase of 19.62%. and so, we started from a place where we saw rates that were very high. that would be multiplied by what we spend now which is over $500 million and we knew that was not something that we could move forward without some serious damage to our budget process with the city. and so, the health service board in addition to the staff worked very hard to think about different ways we could help to drive the cost down. some of the big changes that i know the department will talk about, we went from a fiscal year calendared to a calendar year calendar. this is something that was enabled by proposition c. the department will speak more about it. it helps to the things we qualify for

including our federal programs. also helps with administration of costs. also helps to bring down some of the cost for us at the city. we will have to in -- open enrollment periods and that is something the health service staff has agreed to do even though that is more work for them. i want to thank them for that. we did make some plan amendments that drive the costs down and there is also an application of a slight subsidy for blue shield in order to make sure that we are keeping the risk pool such that we're able to collect the accountable care organization to drive down the cost. to recap, for kaiser, i will not speak of some of the other plans for benefits that have stayed static. for non medicare retirees we saw rates go to 4.9%. that is significant when you take a look at how much we spend for this senior medicare world.

it went from -2.79 to -- on kaiser. blue shield went from 15.4% to 7% increase which is a significant savings and for the medicare component from 19.60% increase to 11.2% increase. these are significant changes and i will speak to those hmo issues. the department has more to say but i want to thank you for the work your folks have put into it and the work you will do going forward. katherine dodd. >> thank you very much. i could not ask for better member of the health service board because she pretty much said everything i needed to say. she summarized the changes we made. we were fortunate the board acted swiftly after proposition c passed, which allowed us to go from changing