The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutA2-04AGREEMENT 0 THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into in the City of San Luis Obispo on January 7, 2004, by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as City, and Macro Corporation, hereinafter referred to as Contractor. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, on October 22, 2003, City requested proposals for wide area network improvements per Specification No. 90222A; and WHEREAS, pursuant to said request, Contractor submitted a proposal that was accepted by City for said improvements. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, obligations and covenants hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date this Agreement is made and entered, as first written above, until acceptance or completion of said improvements. 2. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE. City Specification No. 90222A, Contractor's proposal dated November 25, 2003, and Contractor's Summary of Proposal Modifications dated December 19, 2003 are hereby incorporated in and made a part of this Agreement. 3. CITY'S OBLIGATIONS. For as specified in this Agreement, City will pay and Contractor receive therefore compensation in a total sum not to exceed $79,361. 4. CONTRACTOR'S OBLIGATIONS. For and in consideration of the payments and agreements hereinbefore mentioned to be made and performed by City, Contractor agrees with City to do everything required by this Agreement and the said specification. 5. AMENDMENTS. Any amendment, modification or variation from the terms of this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be effective only upon approval by the City Administrative Officer. poi a� 6. COMPLETE AGREEMENT. This written Agreement, including all writings specifically incorporated herein by reference, shall constitute the complete agreement between the parties hereto. No oral agreement, understanding, or representation not reduced to writing and specifically incorporated herein shall be of any force or effect, nor shall any such oral agreement, understanding, or representation be binding upon the parties hereto. 7. NOTICE. All written notices to the parties hereto shall be sent by United States mail, postage prepaid by registered or certified mail addressed as follows: City City Clerk City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Contractor Macro Corporation 1777 Oakland Blvd. Suite 101 Walnut Creek, California 94596 8. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT. Both City and Contractor do covenant that each individual executing this agreement on behalf of each party is a person duly authorized and empowered to execute Agreements for such party. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be executed the day and year first above written. ATTEST City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO By: City Administrative Officer CONTRACTOR WE, ,111RO, • ' a I Summary of Proposal Modifications December 19, 2003 The following modifications to Macro's November 13, 2003 proposal were jointly agreed to. These are detailed in the following pages. Modification to proposal Page A -2: Deletes one of four changes to the City's Contract Performance terms requested by Macro. Deletions related to limits on liability. Modification to proposed Activity 2B (Develop Conceptual Design Alternatives): Adds a paragraph at end of this Activity that describes Macro's assumptions and basis for our labor estimates, and better delineates the limits of our efforts. If the City requires and requests that Macro include more than six mobile radio sites in its efforts (no more than four of which would be considered a new site development), such efforts would be quoted separately. Modification to proposal Page D -34 (Pricing): Rearranged when specific trips would be made under the existing Activities. Trip for Activity I would not be combined with Activity 1B but would be made a stand -alone trip. Trip planned for Activity 1B (Stakeholder Interviews) would no longer be a stand -alone trip but now would be included with the trip for Activity IA (Conduct project Kickoff Meeting). Also, some of the hours listed under Activity 2H (Attend Additional Meetings /Hearings) will be used to support additional interviews under Activity I B (no reallocation of hours was formally shown). These changes resulted in no change in total trips or cost to the City. • Modification to proposal Page C -31 (Schedule): Increased the time allotment scheduled for City staff review of Macro's deliverables under line item 17 and 26 to two weeks each. This pushed out Macro's final deliverable due -date, but had no effect on the first deliverable due date. • Proposed Milestone Payment Schedule: Macro's original proposal did not include a milestone payment schedule. This proposes payments to Macro based on specific dates, which corresponds to completion of specific milestones and work products. The above changes did not change the total number of trips or cost to the City. George Pete a President, Macro Corporation 0 11 The following supercedes Page A -2 in proposal dated November 13, 2003: "Requested Modifications to the City's Contract Performance Terms Macro Corporation respectfully requests the following modifications to the subject performance terms: i). <DELETED> ii). At the end of Section 30. Contract Assignment, please add, "which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld ". iii). In the first sentence of the second paragraph of Section 31. Termination, please change "or cured the deficiency" to read "cured the deficiency or provided evidence, reasonably acceptable to the City, that proper corrective action is being taken to cure the deficiency ". iv). Item 9 of Section C, Special Terms and Conditions, Attendance at Meetings and Hearings (RFP page 22) indicates "...Consultant shall attend as many `working' meeting will staff as necessary ... ". Macro agrees to attend as many working meetings as necessary, within our proposed labor estimates and scope. The City will find that we have proposed more than the minimum number of meetings to ensure a successful project. " 0 0 The following supercedes "Activity 213: Develop Conceptual Design Alternatives" In proposal dated November 13, 2003 "Activity 213: Develop Conceptual Design Alternatives Macro notes that while the City's RFP envisions a multi -band and multi -mode solution, it was expressed during the pre -bid conference that the final decision on frequency band and technology has not been arrived at. Therefore, we see that the objective of this Task will be to arrive at a decision on frequency band(s) and technology, to the extent that the Technical Specification can be developed and a vendor contract awarded, with minimal risk (and maximum flexibility) to the City.3 Through our work on the previous Task, we will have established a clear and complete understanding of the City's existing radio systems and operations, basic coverage requirements, and the current and future needs of the various City departments. In this Task, Macro will develop options for the City's future radio system expansion and improvement. We will present the advantages and disadvantages of each option, and make recommendations, with rationale. In particular, we will explore these possible technology variations as required: • Conventional versus trunked technology • Analog versus digital transmission (i.e., Project 25, TDMA, etc.) • Narrowband versus wideband channels • Multi -site and simulcast transmission; satellite receivers Based on our considerable experience in similar projects, we expect that there may be one or more other options, or hybrid designs, which could meet the City's requirements. It is also possible that short -term solutions may be possible that will mitigate immediate problems, such as coverage in a specific area, without compromising long -term plans. We will search for such opportunities, and include them in our recommendations. Regulatory issues will be important to this Project. In this task, we will address the following: - The likely availability of licensable channels in the 150 MHz, 450 MHz and 800 MHz bands within the City The effect of the FCC's narrowbanding of channels below 512 MHz, and the vulnerability to adjacent- channel interference. Regulatory protections available and their relationship to the type of technology deployed The likely availability of licensable channels in other bands, such as 700 and 800 MHz We note that the new 700 MHz allocations are not yet licensable as details of the frequency coordination process are now being developed. However, channels in this band are likely to be available. Our development of options will include an analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of each option, and broad -based cost estimates. A "Pro /Con" analysis will be provided that will consider the following important aspects that affect option selection: • Impact of frequency band and technology selection on interoperability • Availability of particular technologies within the various frequency bands • Long -term equipment and parts availability • Ongoing manufacturer support • Adherence to applicable technology standards and conventions • Staffing and training requirements (with costs) 9 11 Finally, Macro will recommend a particular system design and technology, as well as identify and discuss any known significant political and subjective considerations associated with the recommendations. It is unclear at this stage how many transmitter and receiver sites will be necessary in the conceptual or final designs. Macro's cost estimate has anticipated the same total number of mobile radio sites will be implemented as exist today (a total of six; RFP page 1, Current System Overview). However, we understand that the actual site locations will likely change to improve coverage in certain areas. Additionally, as noted in our proposal for Activity 2A: Radio Coverage Analysis, we have assumed that four of the six anticipated sites could be new (not currently used by the City for mobile network equipment). Consideration and development of more than six sites, or more than four new sites would be quoted separately ". 3 Such risks include hidden costs and vendor change orders that could increase the costs of the future system. END 0 The following supercedes Page D -34 in proposal dated November 13, 2003 Required Tasks Hour Person - Description Estimate Labor Trips Expenses Total TASK 1- NEEDS ASSESSMENT Activity IA: Conduct Project Kickoff Meeting 12 $2,059 1 $320 $2,379 Activity 113: Stakeholder Interviews 20 $3,431 (w /IA) $150 $3,581 Activity IC: Establish Interopembility Matrix 2 $344 $344 Activity 1D: Establish Radio Coverage Baseline 6 $1,030 $300 $1,330 Activity IE: Survey Communications Sites 12 $2,059 1 $470 $2,529 Activity IF: Review Existing System Documentation 2 $344 $344 Activity IG: Review Existing FCC Authorizations 1 $172 $172 Activity IH: Evaluation of Existing Network and Facilities 12 $2,059 $2,059 Task Total $12,738 TASK 2: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN ALTERNATIVES AND COSTS Activity 2A: Radio Coverage Analysis 16 $2,745 $2,745 Activity 213: Develop Conceptual Design Alternatives 106 $18,184 $18,184 Activity 2C: Develop Site Interconnection Plan 12 $2,059 $2,059 Activity 2D: Prepare Draft Report 16 $2,745 $2,745 Activity 2E: Prepare Presentation and Workshop Material t0 $1,716 $1,716 Activity 2F: Conduct Presentation and Workshop 14 $2,402 1 $320 $2,722 Activity 20: Prepare Final Report 8 $1,373 $1,373 Activity 2H: Attend Additional Meetings/Hearings 28 $4,804 2 $640 $5,444 Activity 21: FCC Applications 8 $1,373 $1,373 Task Total $38,361 TASK 3: PLANS AND TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS Activity 3A: Develop Technical Specifications 80 $13,724 $13,724 Activity 313: Prepare Draft Technical Specification 32 $5,490 $5,490 Activity 3C: Prepare Final Technical Specification 9 $1,544 $1,544 Activity 31): Provide Vendor List 2 $344 $344 Activity 3E: Attend Pre - Proposal Conference 12 $2,059 l $320 $2,379 Activity 317: Assistance in Response to Vendor Questions 10 $1,716 $1,716 Task Total $25,197 TASK 4: PROPOSAL REVIEW /CONTRACTOR NEGOTIATIONS Activity 4A: Review and Evaluate Technical Proposals 16 $2,745 1 $320 $3,065 Task Total $3,065 Project Total $79,361 Ll N A _ +m R - Cl) D 3m P,±,P11 le g�� qqp sso w r p p -] iS . m o � WN �j g Eia �' iZ xy YY4 wu o.. _ n n♦ m m � m m o � n .+ � m m � A R F R R a A R A A A R F� A R a R .R �� $ 3 0 0 Milestone Payment Schedule Payment Amount Due Date Completion of Activity., 1 $12,738 Fri 2/6/04 Activity 1 H: Evaluation of Existing Network and Facilities 2 $31,544 Wed 4/7/04 Activity 2G: Prepare Final Report 3 $27,575 Fri 5/28/04 Activity 3C: Prepare Final Technical Specification 4 $7,504 Mon 10/25/04 No later than dates shown at left. Associated with Activity 4A: Review and Evaluate Technical Proposals Total: $79,361 SLO_Costs_FINAL..r2.xls 12117/2003