December 13, 2006 Minutes
- Purchase Orders
- Office Supply Bid Award
- Remote Access Requests
- Cell Phone contracts
- December 8, 2006 transferred $4,969,142.24 to the Payables account and $1,987,214.52 to the Payroll account from the County's Concentration account for checks issued that week.
- Total Term Investments - N/A
- Balance today in INVEST account $132,362.62 rate 5.210%
- Balance today in Community Banks investment account $29,680,030.90 rate 5.480% (This rate equals today's Community Banks 91-day TBill rate of 5.080% plus 40 basis points)
- Balance today in Graystone Bank investment account $10,679,576.67 rate 5.620% (This rate equals last month's average 1-month LIBOR rate of 5.320% plus 30 basis points)
- Balance today in Commerce Bank investment account $17,024,332.72 rate 5.320% (This rate equals today's 91-day T-Bill rate of 4.870% plus 45 basis points)
- Balance today in Sovereign Bank investment account $116,222.63 rate 5.350% (This rate equals today's 1-month LIBOR rate of 5.350% plus 0 basis points)
- No T.R.A.N. Line of Credit required for 2006.
- Training Packet
- Ratify the December 1, 2006 Tornado Disaster Declaration - Halifax Area.
- Satisfaction Piece(s) with the following individuals:
- Diane Dillard for property located at 515 Stikle Street, Steelton, PA 17113
- Angela Gehman for property located at 804 Cherrington Drive, Harrisburg, PA
- Subordination Agreement for Hervie Shull and Jacqueline Shull on property located at 125 E. Broad Street, Williamstown, PA 17098
- Natural Gas Service Agreement between Dauphin County and Texon Disbributing L.P., d/b/a Texon L.P. Texon is selling its Pennsylvania assets to CenterPoint Energy Services, Inc. (CES). Whereas, Dauphin County consents to assignment of Agreement to CES.
- Amendment to ZA Accounting Contract to include CDBG and Home Program internal control and compliance testing including documentation of control narratives and selective testing compliance at the cost of $3,800.
- Spring Creek Application Permit to Operate Food Establishment in Swatara Township during calendar year 2007.
- Motorola Master Radio Service Software License Agreement with Emergency Management Agency.
- Service Agreement between Dauphin County and Verizon for telecommunications Customer Premises Equipment (CPE) for 911 Enhanced calls and CPE installation and maintenance services. (EMA)
- Subrecipient Agreement between Dauphin County and the Penbrook Borough for a Traffic Study for funding through the Community Development Block Grant Program. (Community & Economic Development /Community Development Block Grant)
- Notice of Assignment and Request for Consent wherein Dauphin County consents to the assignment of the Agreement to Harris and the assumption by Harris of Government e-Management Solutions, Inc., and assign the Contract Agreement between SCI and Dauphin County to Harris. (Information Technology)
- Notice of Fee Adjustment from Interstate Tax Service, Inc. Fee to increase by $40.00 per month (annual increase of 2.6%). The new adjusted monthly fee will increase from $250 to $290 per month, effective January 1, 2007
- Adopt Resolution #32-2006 authorizing the allocation of $30,000 of the FY2004 Unprogrammed Fund Community Development Block Grant Program Account for the YWCA YW-Works Program.
- Proposal for Health and Welfare Consulting Services between Dauphin County and Conrad Siegel Actuaries as amended.
- Receipt of a letter from Herbert, Rowland & Grubic, Inc., giving Notice of Intent to Award the bid of a roof replacement project to the low bidder, LR Four Roofing, Co., Inc.
- Notification from Herbert, Rowland & Grubic, Inc., indicating that Lower Swatara Township intends to apply to DEP for a general NPDES permit for stormwater discharges associated with construction activities at the Lower Swatara Township Community Park.
- Notification from Dauphin Engineering Co., on behalf of BW Partnership, indicating they intend to submit an application to DEP for a general permit for discharges of stormwater from construction activities at the east side of Lumber Street & Spring Garden Drive.
- Notification from CET Engineering Services, on behalf of Lower Paxton Township, indicating they intend to submit an application to DEP for a water quality management part II permit for an interceptor replacement on Earl Drive and a sanitary sewer replacement on Winfield Street, Lower Paxton Township.
- Notification from Fischback Morgan & Associates, LLC, on behalf of Franklin and Elizabeth Kury, indicating they intend to submit an application to DEP for a general NPDES permit for a residential subdivision located on 420 Fishing Creek Valley Road, Harrisburg.
- Notification from Herbert, Rowland, & Grubic, Inc., on behalf of West Hanover Township, indicating they intend to submit an application to DEP for a general NPDES permit for construction activities that will discharge toward an unnamed tributary of Beaver Creek.
- Notification from Raudenbush Engineering, Inc., on behalf of Halifax Township, indicating they intend to submit an application to DEP for a general NPDES permit for stormwater discharges associated with construction activities on parcel #29-13-27 in Halifax Township.
- Notification from Rettew, on behalf of The Department of General Services, indicating they intend to submit an application to DEP for a general NPDES permit for stormwater discharges associated with construction of a new materials testing laboratory and parking lot at the intersection of Sycamore Road & Dogwood Drive.
DAUPHIN COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
COMMISSIONERS' WORKSHOP/LEGISLATIVE MEETING
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 13, 2006
MEMBERS PRESENT
Jeff Haste, Chairman
Dominic D. DiFrancesco, II, Vice Chairman
George P. Hartwick, III, Secretary
STAFF PRESENT
Chad Saylor, Chief Clerk/Chief of Staff; Bill Tully, Esq., Solicitor; Marie Rebuck, Controller; Bob Dick, Treasurer; Lowell Witmer, Clerk of Courts; Guy Beneventano, Esq., Assistant Solicitor; Mike Yohe, Budget Director; Randy Baratucci, Purchasing Director; Tom Guenther, Information Technology Director; Kay Sinner, Personnel; Gary Serhan, Deputy Controller; Carolyn Thompson, Court Administrator; Dave Schreiber, Personnel; Faye Fisher, Personnel Director; Elke Moyer, Human Services; Merle Foust, Personnel; Leila McAdoo, Solicitor's Office; Edgar Cohen, Facility Maintenance Director; Bob Hawley, Deputy Court Administrator; Sharon Chatman, Personnel; Diane McNaughton, Press Secretary; Richie Martz, Commissioners' Office; Kacey Truax, Commissioners' Office; Jena Wolgemuth, Commissioners' Office; and Julia E. Nace, Assistant Chief Clerk
GUESTS PRESENT
Daniel Victor, Patriot News; Linda Kreiser, Kiley Strohm, Darby Fischi, Peggy Barton, Lauren Alloway, Laura Johnson, Kelly Boland, Bryn Stevens, Whitney Wolfgang, Julie Barton, Ashley Tatangelo, Cara Tatahgelo, Taylor Weidensaul, Jenna Higgins, Lindsey Shaffer (all from Lower Dauphin Field Hockey Team)
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
Mr. Haste, Chairman of the Board, called the meeting to order at 10:00 a.m.
MOMENT OF SILENCE
Everyone observed a moment of silence.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Everyone stood for the Pledge of Allegiance.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mr. Haste: We have the November 22, 2006 Legislative Meeting Minutes and the November 29, 2006 Workshop Meeting Minutes. Is there a motion to approve them?
It was moved by Mr. Hartwick and seconded by Mr. DiFrancesco to approve the Minutes from the November 22, 2006 Legislative Meeting and the November 29, 2006 Workshop Meeting Minutes; motion carried.
Mr. Haste: We have the November 22, 2006 Salary Board Meeting Minutes. Is there a motion to approve?
It was moved by Mr. Hartwick and seconded by Mrs. Rebuck to approve the Minutes of the November 22, 2006 Salary Board Meeting Minutes; motion carried.
Mr. DiFrancesco: We also have the November 22, 2006 Election Board Meeting Minutes to approve. Is there a motion to approve?
It was moved by Mr. Hartwick and seconded by Mr. Haste to approve the November 22, 2006 Election Board Meeting Minutes; motion carried.
EXECUTIVE SESSIONS HELD BETWEEN MEETINGS
Mr. Saylor: Commissioners, as you know we met this morning in an Executive Session to discuss some personnel and litigation issues.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Mr. Haste: We are at the time in the meeting for public participation. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to address the Board at this time? (There was none.)
DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS/GUESTS
Mr. Haste: It is my honor to turn the microphone over to Mr. DiFrancesco.
Mr. DiFrancesco: It is my honor to make this presentation. There is probably not a greater privilege in this office than the times that we can spend sitting back and acknowledging the good works of a very impressive group of young people. All too often we sit here and we do our business. So it is particularly pleasing when we get the opportunity to highlight the best and brightest in Dauphin County. This morning we have the honor of bringing appropriate attention and praise to the Lower Dauphin Girls Field Hockey Team that had achieved the incredible goal of a state championship again this year. This team has..how many is it for this team?
Individual from the team: This is the first for this team.
Mr. DiFrancesco: I can tell you coming from a school that doesn't get very many state championships; I know how significant that it is to get a state championship and what that means not only for all of you individually, but for the school and the community. It is a great pleasure to have you here. I'm very happy that you were able to come in this morning. I would like to read this proclamation on behalf of the Board.
(Mr. DiFrancesco read the following Proclamation, introduced the attendees, applause and pictures taken.)
Office of County Commissioner
Dauphin County, Pennsylvani
Proclamation
We, the Dauphin County Board of Commissioners, are honored to acknowledge and applaud the outstanding athletic achievements of Lower Dauphin High School and its extremely talented 2006 women's field hockey team;
Whereas, the Falcons field hockey team, coached by Linda Kreiser, Kiley Strohm, Darby Fischl, Peggy Barton, Diane Angstadt and Mandi Mease, had an outstanding season, culminating in Lower Dauphin's 29th straight win and its 3rd state championship victory;
Whereas, these young competitors have brought richly deserved honor and recognition to themselves, their school, their community and this very grateful county of Dauphin;
Whereas, the achievements and evident character of these talented young women have carried on Lower Dauphin's proud tradition of athletic prowess, ending the season as the Mid-Penn Keystone Division champs, Mid-Penn tournament winners and District 3-AAA titlists;
Whereas, these exceptional young women earned victory with the essence of good sportsmanship, team unity and personal character, demonstrating them to be true "winners," in every sense of the word;
Therefore, we join the 253,300 residents of Dauphin County in hailing Lower Dauphin's much-admired 2006 field hockey team and wishing them continued success in their athletic endeavors and in all aspects of life; we thank them for providing fans with not only the thrill of competition and the glimmer of trophies, but, more importantly, with enhanced school pride, regional unity and enduring hope; and, in honor of their accomplishments and their coveted state championship, we do hereby proudly declare December 13, 2006 to be "Lower Dauphin Falcons Day" in Dauphin County.
Ms. Barton: I'm Julie Barton. Lauren Alloway and I are captains of the team. On behalf of the team, we want to thank you for the proclamation and helping us celebrate our state championship.
Commissioners: Congratulations.
Mr. DiFrancesco: It is an honor to have you all here. I'm sure some of you will be going onto post-high school collegiate play and we wish you well in your careers as you move forward.
SALARY BOARD
The Minutes of the Salary Board Meeting are on file in the Commissioners' Office.
PERSONNEL
Ms. Sinner: Number 27, I would like to add the hourly rate and step. It is $15.61.
Mr. Hartwick: Did we work anything out related to #13? I thought I saw something that we were going to try to create another temporary position.
Ms. Sinner: There are some upcoming vacancies.
Mr. Hartwick: Okay. We are going to try to resolve this situation?
Ms. Sinner: Yes.
Mr. Hartwick: With an adequate solution before we vote on this person.
Ms. Sinner: I don't know if Faye has talked to the other Commissioners.
Mr. Hartwick: Okay.
Ms. Sinner: The department director is comfortable with it. There are vacancies coming up.
Mr. Haste: Are there any other questions?
Mr. Hartwick: One other question, have we looked at our vacancy adjustment since this is not in the hiring window?
Mr. Haste: There was an email.
Mr. Hartwick: I'm sorry I didn't see the email.
Mr. Yohe: Per my email, the vacancy adjustment will fall from $984,000 to about $811,000.
Mr. Hartwick: So we are still above the $600,000?
Mr. Yohe: Yes.
Mr. Hartwick: That was my only concern.
Mr. Haste: Is there a motion to approve the personnel packet as amended?
It was moved by Mr. DiFrancesco and seconded by Mr. Hartwick to approve the personnel packet as amended; motion carried.
Ms. Sinner: I want to point out that there were some requests for payout for vacation for two employees in the packet.
Mr. DiFrancesco: One comment, Chad, I'm assuming as we go through these that in fact the Committee is meeting to review the requests to fill these positions outside of the window. Is that still in place and happening?
Mr. Saylor: It is still in place. We have not had occasion to meet. Usually what happens is the ones that come up outside of the window are usually ones that are tough to get my hands on. They are the court positions, the 24-hour operations where overtime is an issue and there have been a lot of part-timers which generally is considered not a major impact on the budget. In this packet, I did talk with Steve Shaver and he was trying to hire telecommunicators to reduce his overtime that he is incurring out there. I did ask for him to give me an idea of what kind of savings he would hope to achieve. I have not checked my email to see if he was able to respond.
Mr. DiFrancesco: We know that there are 24-hour operations where that has to happen and we save money by filling them. I just want to make sure that process and procedure is still in place forcing the Directors to come to that group if they want to hire outside of the hiring window.
Mr. Saylor: Some of these others, Children & Youth, if we don't fill the position the Department of Health finds us in violation. I do keep an eye on it. Usually the ones that crop up in between are the ones that traditionally have not had a chance to do something about.
Mr. Hartwick: This one was just overwhelming. If we are going to try to be consistent with managing vacancies, we need to reconstitute that group and make sure that they are active starting January 1 of the new year.
Mr. Saylor: When the occasion arises, we do get together.
Mr. Hartwick: The occasion should arise every time there is a personnel submission every week in the Workshop session, you should be doing a review with that group.
Mr. Saylor: Okay. I did follow up with Steve Shaver at the Emergency Management Agency, he was trying to fill some telecommunicator spots because of the overtime budget. I've asked him for specific numbers. I was not able to check my email yet this morning.
Mr. Hartwick: How about the District Attorney's Office?
Mr. Saylor: I have not received an email back from Ed yet on that particular one. I did have a conversation with Lowell for his. The District Justices, they do their thing.
Mr. Hartwick: We're just going to have to start to manage and play hardball again next year and send a message that we are serious about the hiring window. We're starting to get a little lax.
PURCHASE ORDERS
Mr. Baratucci: In the purchase order packet on page 2, there is a change. I received a call this morning from Voter Registration regarding the one requisition for a mailing of people who haven't voted in five years. They had an estimate of 2,500 and that was the price on page 2. I received an email this morning saying it is not 2,500, it is 16,000 people. So obviously the price is different. The email says that the cost of the printing is now $2,344 instead of $734 and the postage will be approximately $2,880. So lines three and four would change to $2,344 and $2,880 respectively.
Mr. Haste: Does that fit into his budget?
Mr. Baratucci: The budget amount is at the top which is $7,000. So he is still within the budget. I'm not sure why the last minute changes. MaryAnn called this morning and said that she just got this information. I'm passing it so when you approve the P.O. at least you know what the amount is. Other than that all the remainder of the purchase orders are all within budget. We fixed those since this is a combo meeting. If you have any questions on any of the other items, I'll address them; otherwise, it is there for your approval.
Mr. Haste: Is there a motion to approve the purchase orders?
It was moved by Mr. Hartwick and seconded by Mr. DiFrancesco to approve the purchase orders as presented; motion carried.
Mr. Baratucci: We have our yearly office supply bid. You should have a list of the bidders. We only had four bidders this year. The low bid is from the company that we are currently using for our office supplies. In fact, they ended up being the low bidder for both parts. We have the office supplies and what I call the computer supplies which are mostly printer supplies. They ended up being low on both this year. They have done a good job. We've been happy with them. Their prices are consistently a lot less than some of the others. I would recommend that we award both parts A & B as noted to Office Basics.
Mr. Haste: Is there a motion to award the office supplies bid to Office Basics?
It was moved by Mr. DiFrancesco and seconded by Mr. Hartwick to award the office supplies bid to the low bidder of both Parts A & B to Office Basics.
Mr. Hartwick: May I ask a question? They are considerably lower. What do you attribute that to?
Mr. Baratucci: According to the other bidders, they're losing money. But I doubt that is the case. I've asked that same question and the other bidders are always flabbergasted at the prices that they've come in with. That has been their comment. We've double and triple checked the items that they send us. We have equals listed. They don't have to give the exact item. All of them have checked out. Once in a great while we'll get something that doesn't meet our specs. We return it and they replace it. That is with anybody. For the most part, the products have been acceptable. I think they are very aggressive and they want to keep our business. That is good for us.
Mr. Hartwick: Nothing wrong with that.
Mr. Haste: All those in favor, say, aye.
All: Aye; motion carried.
Mr. Baratucci: The next item. If you recall a couple of weeks ago, you approved the remote access usage policy. We have the first two requests. Both requests are for the Personnel Department. They are the people listed on the form. I want to mention that this is something that we are going to attack like the BlackBerry situation and make sure that it is something that we want to do because it is an ongoing expense. I do think that as the information gets out that this is available, you may be seeing more of these requests. I don't know if you want to take action on these today or whether you want to get more information. It is entirely up to you. There are these two requests that came through Mr. Guenther's Office. He is here if you have any questions of him. I want to get this in front of the Board and you can either vote on it yes or no today or you can wait. These would be for 2007. There is time if you want to review them.
Mr. Hartwick: I didn't realize there is a $780 monthly service charge for this.
Mr. Baratucci: That's not monthly that is a year.
Mr. Hartwick: That makes a difference.
Mr. Baratucci: The BlackBerry charges are like $42-43. This is $65. I'm just pointing it out because I know that you were very cognizant about approving those BlackBerry items. This is an enhancement above that. The BlackBerry is an email but this is something that you can do much more than email.
Mr. Hartwick: Is there cost savings in doing this? Will you be taking away their desktop? What is the lease for a year for the desktop?
Mr. Guenther: The lease per desktop is approximately $400 a year. The lease cost of a laptop rental would be probably in the $500 range. So the lease cost for equipment is slightly more. We have that factored in to our strategy from a budget standpoint to assume that and roll that out in the next lease.
Mr. Haste: We worked out that the program they want to get into, it can be accessed by way of this?
Mr. Guenther: Right.
Mr. Haste: GEMS?
Mr. Guenther: GEMS, the financial software system would be available, as well as email, file access to all the other words documents and other information. This is the way to get to it.
Mr. Hartwick: Could we wait to approve this?
Mr. Haste: Yes.
Mr. Baratucci: As I said it is for 2007, if you want to take a week or two to discuss it, okay.
Mr. Haste: Yes.
Mr. DiFrancesco: Faye or Dave, can you give us a sense on why this is important. What ability will this give you to do the job better?
Ms. Fisher: The original request was made because we spend quite a bit of time out of the office. So we put in a request for two laptops. That information was shared with all three of you. I started with Commissioner Hartwick.
Mr. Hartwick: Right.
Ms. Fisher: The air card allows us to access all of our files because currently when we have to work out of the office, we're taking discs back and forth to our home.
Mr. DiFrancesco: Actually what I want to know, when you work out of your office, can you tell us exactly what type of assignments take you out of the office?
Ms. Fisher: Right now, contract negotiations is a very big thing. We are negotiating four contracts.
Mr. DiFrancesco: So you need access to the records when you are in contract negotiations?
Ms. Fisher: Right.
Mr. Haste: It is my understanding when you are in negotiations, you get a lot of what if's and this and that. This would be a way to access that.
Mr. DiFrancesco: That is what I was assuming.
Mr. Haste: You can use a disc.
Ms. Fisher: We can't right now because we don't have access to computers where we are.
Mr. Hartwick: To make this easier for me, are you two usually together in contract negotiations?
Ms. Fisher: During contract negotiations, yes.
Mr. Hartwick: So could we make a request for one?
Ms. Fisher: I don't know how that works with Information Technology. Outside of contract negotiations, Dave has to do work at home and he would need his laptop. I may be using mine for something different at work.
Mr. Hartwick: The ideas of taking it home to use, I'm sure there are a lot of people who would like to have laptop computers to be able to use from wherever. There are a lot of people who work late nights. The idea to have access on the information during contract negotiations to work on out of the office; but for you to just have a laptop to take home everybody who wants to work late and take all the information with them. I'm sure we'll have similar requests. We have a challenge with the BlackBerrys. I can see the same challenge occurring with the request for laptop computers the exact same way.
Ms. Fisher: It is up to you. My request is for two laptops and two air cards. If you only give me one, that is fine. I don't have a BlackBerry. I don't have a cell phone. I don't have anything else so I'm requesting two.
Mr. Hartwick: Okay.
Ms. Fisher: It is in the budget. I've discussed it with Mike Yohe.
Mr. Hartwick: And you discussed it with me. This is the first time that I have actually seen the dollars and had to answer the question, I thought we were saving money with a desktop versus a laptop. This is going to be additional expenses. I didn't realize the actual expense is going to go up for a lease arrangement plus you have the yearly arrangement which is going to be significantly higher if there are a lot of other folks who want to be doing some of their things at home. We need to be cognizant.
Ms. Fisher: Okay, it is up to you.
Mr. Hartwick: I guess I'm the bad guy again.
Mr. DiFrancesco: I agree with Commissioner Hartwick. I'm looking at it this way. The two of you when you are in the heart of negotiations, negotiations never happen here, they always happen on the road. You need to have access to your working tools when you are there. But I agree with Commissioner Hartwick, in turns of we love the idea of with the initiative that people want to take work home and they want to do it at home; but that is really the policy that we have to be careful of because it is every single person would come in and say, hey, I need one too. Just like we have gotten tons of requests for the BlackBerry and we basically said no. You're at your desk everyday and you don't need to take your email home with you because the additional cost is incredible. It doesn't take a lot of requests before we start spending a lot of unnecessary money. My position on these two is simply this, that I realize that you are in a unique position where you work, you are basically moving your office to contract negotiations to some place else for an extended period of time. When negotiations aren't going on you duck back into whatever area designated and you're punching numbers trying to figure out what the next step is going to be. I can see very well why it works for you and I support that. We have to be cautious of this. When the next person comes through the door and they simply want one because they want to have more accessibility to their work and take it home which again I don't want to put that down because I think it is a great thing. It is a significant cost to have that service.
Mr. Haste: We will bring it up next week.
Mr. Baratucci: My last item kind of related to this and related to things that cost a lot of money, is the cell phones. You should have all received an email from me. I attached some items. The RFPs came in and the costs were a lot higher than what we are currently paying. One company stood out basically because they seem to want to work with us. They came up with various different proposals. They came up with an alternate proposal where we could actually get our costs down close to what we are paying now. It is a company that we never used before. I do understand that a lot of police departments use them. In fact some of our departments that pay for their own phones out of different funding sources like Drug Forfeiture Money, Supervision Fees, etc. They all use Nextel. One of the advantages is the phones are all equipped with the push to talk feature. That is the way they come. So that is something that you do pay extra with the others. Right now we only have one department that has that feature. That is Facility Maintenance. This would be something that all people would have and if they use it properly could help reduce the number of minutes that we have. The alternate bid would limit the use of the walkie-talkie feature to a local area. It's a pretty big local area. It is Central Pennsylvania, Eastern Pennsylvania, South Jersey, and Delaware. It will pretty much cover the majority of where our people are. If they are out of that area, they would just use the regular phone and use the block of minutes. All the companies have shied away from the plan that we currently have which is a true bucket of minutes where you pay a flat fee for a bucket. These are a build your own basically among the plans that they have. Nextel gives much more flexibility. Cingular for instance makes you take one minute and combine it with one zero minute plan. That is one reason their costs are higher. Verizon, who I personally have and like, has a great network but they are so far out of the ballpark cost wise and seem to have taken the attitude in my opinion, we're like IBM used to be, we're the big guys, we don't have to make any movement. If we don't get your business, that's okay with us. We'll move onto bigger and better things.
As you know lately the last six months, things haven't been as great with Cingular as they were prior to that. They have made some efforts to fix it. I'd be okay with staying with them if their costs were similar. I went back to them and asked them if they could grandfather us in on the contract which we currently have which would keep the cost down. They tried but said they couldn't go with that. So in my mind, the least costly way to go, I think taking a chance with Nextel would be a good move. Again, I don't think any of the people are perfect coverage wise. They all have issues, different issues, but overall I hear mostly from police departments and some of the people that currently use Nextel that they are happy with it.
The sales representative seems real, real anxious to work with us. He wants to go out of his way to go to the departments and teach them how to use the phones since they will have a feature that most of our people haven't had before. Overall, I think especially if we take the alternate choice we'll at least be able to keep the costs somewhere in line. They are still kind of high. We tried to reduce the number of phones but we didn't get very far. That's the proposal.
Mr. Haste: Can we roll the current numbers over?
Mr. Baratucci: Yes. The current contract ends January 1. Unless you have any major questions, it would be great if you could act today to give me some time to work on it. If not, we could still probably do it next week if you need more time.
Mr. Haste: Is there a motion to approve the low bid and award the contract to Nextel?
It was moved by Mr. DiFrancesco and seconded by Mr. Hartwick to approve the cell phone contract to Nextel. Are we looking at 30,000 minutes?
Mr. Baratucci: We will probably start at 40,000 because of the fact that we want to make sure that we don't go over our minutes but according to the gentleman every quarter we can change. So at the very beginning we definitely don't want to go over the minutes because it gets very costly. So we will probably start with 40,000 with the goal to go down to 30,000 assuming the walkie-talkie thing works as we think it will. That would be my recommendation. We start at with the higher amount.
Mr. DiFrancesco: So the motion would read 40,000 minutes costs estimate.
Mr. Haste: Motion carried.
Mr. Baratucci: We'll get a contract to the Solicitor's Office and that will be in front of you in the next week or two to sign, probably the 27th.
Mr. Hartwick: So we'll have the process done when we change over with all the phones? How does that work out?
Mr. Baratucci: Those of you that have your own are not part of this deal. You have your own deal. The people that have BlackBerrys for...
Mr. Haste: Those of us who are using others...George's question was, will we lose access to the internet on our own? Evidently the answer is no, right?
Mr. Baratucci: If you currently have a phone under the County plan, you'll be switched over to Nextel and if you have a BlackBerry, you will need to get another BlackBerry.
Mr. Hartwick: We don't have it through the County but we still have access.
Mr. DiFrancesco: If we have our own outside of the County system, it won't change?
Mr. Baratucci: It is just the phones that we are paying for out of County money.
REPORT FROM BUDGET & FINANCE - MIKE YOHE, BUDGET DIRECTOR
Mr. Yohe gave the following report:
Report from the Office of Budget & Finance
December 13, 2006
Mr. Haste: Any questions for Mike?
Commissioners: No.
REPORT FROM CHIEF CLERK/CHIEF OF STAFF - CHAD SAYLOR
Mr. Saylor: Commissioners, I want to mention that we attended a very important event this morning. The Chamber had its annual celebration of Excellence Awards Banquet. I'm very pleased to add to the record and announce to those assembled here that our own Dauphin County Commissioners were the recipients of the Annual Excellence in Public Service Award. The award was given to all three of them. The past recipients include Senator Piccola and Congressman Holden and various others. They had a very large crowd assembled. There was a very nice introduction piece which I think very accurately portrayed the job of County Commissioner in general and in particular the job the three of you are doing. It was a very nice ceremony. I just wanted to make mention of it in my report this morning.
Mr. Haste: You have the title wrong, Government Leader of the Year Award for 2006.
SOLICITOR'S REPORT
Mr. Tully: Item F, is a modification of the Z&A contract. There is no general fund money that will be spent.
I have no other changes to the Solicitor's Report and would be happy to answer any questions that you might have.
Mr. Hartwick: The Spring Creek application for permit to operate a food establishment, what is that about?
Mr. Tully: We are basically renewing the ongoing contract. We need that in place for all systems go when it is actually taken over. At the time of renewal, we're still the owner of record. That is why we have to fill that out. It will be an additional $50 to the general fund; but I think we can handle that.
Mr. Haste: This is for the township.
Mr. Tully: Yes, that is what we need for Swatara.
Mr. Haste: Are there any other questions? (There were none.)
MATTERS REQUIRING BOARD ACTION
Mr. Haste: We have Items A thru N. Are there any items that need to be pulled out separately?
Commissioner DiFrancesco and Commissioner Hartwick: No.
Mr. Haste: Is there a motion to approve Items A thru N?
It was moved by Mr. DiFrancesco and seconded by Mr. Hartwick to approve the following items A thru N; motion carried.
FORMER BUSINESS
Mr. Haste: Are there any other items to be brought before the Board at this time? (There were none.)
CORRESPONDENCE
Mr. Haste: The following was received by the Commissioners and will be handled by the staff appropriately.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Mr. Haste: We are again at the point in time for public participation. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to address the Board? (There was none.)
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Mr. Hartwick and seconded by Mr. DiFrancesco to adjourn the meeting; motion carried.
