Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/06/2010 TECH December 6, 2010 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE TECHNOLOGIES BOARD HELD ON December 6, 2010 The Regular Session of the TECHNOLOGIES BOARD of The Colony, Texas was called to order at 6:30 pm on the 6th of December, 2010 at CITY HALL, in the City Managers Conference Room, City Hall, 6800 MAIN STREET, THE COLONY, TEXAS, with the following roll call: Bill Swink present Steven Steele absent Andrew Turner present Stephen Hoffman present Lyle Snider absent Tim Tomlinson present With four out of six members present a quorum was established and the following items were discussed. 1.0 Call Meeting to Order: 6:30 P.M. Meeting called to order at 6:42. 2.0 DISPOSITION OF MINUTES Acceptance of Technologies Board Minutes for a meeting held on November 8, 2010. 3.0 CITIZEN INPUT None 4.0 AGENDA ITEMS 4.1 Introduce new Technologies Board Members. New Board Member Jeff Montgomery introduced himself. 4.2 Discuss, nominate, and vote on board appointments. Chairman Turner tabled this item until the new Board Member terms begin in January. 4.3 Discuss, recommend, and approve an enterprise video security solution. Bruce Maker, IT Manager for the City of The Colony, said that three vendors have submitted quotes for the Video Security Solution throughout the City. The system will involve Wastewater, One Harris Plaza, City Hall, Kids Colony Park, Skate Park, 1 - 1 December 6, 2010 Recreation Center, Community Center and inside the Police Department. Stephen Hoffinan asked if this system will replace current equipment. Mr. Maker said it will depend on which vendor is chosen. Some of the vendors have chosen to use existing equipment and others are replacing all of the equipment. Mr. Hoffman asked if the current equipment is obsolete. Mr. Maker said the equipment was replaced two to three years ago and it is obsolete. Mr. Maker said the quotes range from 68 to 109 cameras depending on the vendor and storage will be located at City Hall, the Police Department, and the Five Star Maintenance building. Mr. Swink asked if each entity will be storing their own data. Mr. Maker said each one will be storing data for several locations depending on where the cameras are in relation to the storage unit. Mr. Swink asked if everyone would be able to retrieve the video. Mr. Maker said they would. Depending on their level of security on the network they would be able to retrieve the video or view the cameras live. Mr. Turner asked what the disparity was in the camera count. Mr. Maker said it depends on coverage area. One vendor may have bid more cameras for a coverage area than the other. Mr. Swink asked if all of the cameras pan and zoom. Mr. Maker said the quote includes pan and zoom cameras as well as stationary cameras. Mr. Tomlinson asked what the data retention requirement for storing video is. Mr. Maker said it is 30 days. Mr. Tomlinson asked if that was a city requirement. Mr. Maker said it is a city requirement. Mr. Swink asked if they would retain the data for longer if need due to an investigation. Mr. Maker said they would be able to archive the video onto a DVD for evidence purposes. Mr. Swink asked if there would be an operator at a console monitoring the cameras. Mr. Maker said there will be a console located at dispatch with cameras rotating to be monitored. Mr. Swink asked if the data server had enough HVAC and power to handle the new equipment. Mr. Maker said we do. Mr. Swink asked if all of the servers will be on UPS. Mr. Maker said they will and we have plenty of power on the UPS. Mr. Tomlinson asked if the quotes incorporate the disaster recovery function or if that would be an enhancement. Mr. Maker said it would be an enhancement but all of the software is capable of doing disaster recovery. Mr. Turner asked what the storage space is and how long before it would need to be upgraded. Mr. Maker said the systems range from 10 Terabyte per server to 24 Terabyte per server. They are all upgradable by adding drives. Mr. Swink asked how many days or hours does 24 Terabyte represent. Mr. Maker said it is a minimum of 30 days. Mr. Swink asked about the maintenance agreement because he noticed one did not include nights and weekends. Mr. Maker said that was correct and they would talk to the vendor about that agreement if chosen. Mr. Tomlinson asked how the maintenance compared to the other two quotes received. Mr. Maker said it was comparable with most of the support being remote support. Mr. Hoffman asked if extended support could be negotiated. Mr. Maker said it could be. Allen Harris, City Council Liaison, asked if the resolution differed between the quotes. Mr. Maker said there are different cameras with different resolutions. Mr. Harris asked if those requirements were put in the RFP or if they vary by vendor. Mr. Maker said they vary by vendor. Mr. Tomlinson asked if all vendors met the requirements or if some went over and above what was requested. Mr. Maker said all of the quotes go above and beyond what was requested. Mr. Turner asked if any of the cameras will ever be considered for traffic cameras. Mr. Maker said that is not something that we ever see doing as far as red light cameras. Cameras may be installed at some point at intersections for viewing traffic. 2 December 6, 20 10 Mr. Turner asked if the system had a limit to the number of cameras it could handle. Mr. Maker said one vendor recommended not going over 160 cameras per server but the number of servers is unlimited. The other two vendors did not list a maximum. Mr. Tuner asked if the servers are standard servers. Mr. Maker said they are. Mr. Swink asked if the City specified the areas we would like covered or did the vendors recommend them. Mr. Maker said the Directors came up with areas they felt needed to be covered at this time. Mr. Turner asked if coverage for the schools is a consideration. Mr. Maker said they are not because the schools are a completely different entity run by LISD. Mr. Tomlinson asked if there was a big delta in the prices on the quotes. Mr. Maker said all of the quotes are within reason. Mr. Montgomery asked if the server storage is a server appliance or if it is all contained on one server. Mr. Maker said it is a server with storage in the server. Mr. Montgomery asked if the server was upgradeable. Mr. Aaron Varenhorst with Lensec said the servers are upgradeable by adding hard drives to them or using SCSI drives. Mr. Swink asked if there would be offsite storage. Mr. Maker said that would be the reason they are looking at disaster recovery so the data would be stored in both locations. Mr. Tomlinson asked what recommendation Mr. Maker was looking for from the board. Mr. Maker said he would like to know if the board thinks they are heading in the right direction for the technology. He is not looking to approve a vendor but the technology. Mr. Turner asked what quality of vendors quotes were received from. Mr. Maker said vendors that were on state contract were looked at. They received three quotes. Mr. Hoffman asked if Mr. Maker would be checking references on similar projects. Mr. Maker said the quotes contained references. Mr. Swink asked if Mr. Maker has seen the software yet. Mr. Maker said he has not seen it yet but he is making arrangements to visit other cities to view them. Mr. Swink asked if training is included in the quoted price. Mr. Maker said training is included for the IT staff as well as end user training from all three vendors. Mr. Tomlinson asked if the local storage is on a hardware based raid. Mr. Maker said yes based on the models of computers. Mr. Swink asked if the license plate cameras are the same price for the different systems. Mr. Maker said it is roughly the same price for each system. Mr. Swink asked if the license fee is based on the type of camera. Mr. Maker said it was based per camera and the type did not matter. Mr. Tomlinson asked if there were any other City facilities that will need monitoring in the future. Mr. Maker said there will be others added eventually. Mr. Tomlinson asked if any of the systems would have a problem with expansion. Mr. Maker said we may have to purchase another server but it would not be a problem. Mr. Montgomery asked if the servers were calculated based on every camera being full frame rate. Mr. Maker said he would calculate it that way. Mr. Turner asked if there would be any problems adding this to the network. Mr. Maker said there would not be a problem. Mr. Tomlinson asked what the timeframe is for making a decision. Mr. Maker said he would like to have the decision made by the beginning of the year. Mr. Turner asked if the system needed to be installed before the jail construction is completed. Mr. Maker said no. Mr. Tomlinson asked how long it will take to implement the system. Mr. Maker said it will take 90 to 120 days and it will depend on weather and running power to the outdoor cameras. Mr. Turner asked if running power is part of the quote. Mr. Maker said it is not included. Mr. Tomlinson asked if a quote with fewer cameras would be beneficial to the City by having to run less power. Mr. Maker said the number of outdoor cameras was about the same from all three vendors. Mr. Swink asked if Five Star is the only location where new poles would have to 3 December 6, 20 10 be installed. Mr. Maker said they will also be installing some at the Wastewater treatment plant. Mr. Montgomery asked about encryption compliance efforts for transmitting video. Mr. Maker said the VPN's are encrypted and we do meet state requirements for encryption. Mr. Tomlinson asked if any vendors have been eliminated. Mr. Maker said none have been eliminated. Stephen Hoffman made a motion to approve the technology for the video security solution. Tim Tomlinson seconded the motion. Motion carries. 4.4 Discuss holding work sessions for the Technologies Board Mr. Maker said he would like to hold work sessions of the Technologies Board so the Board can recommend items for the City to look at. Mr. Harris said the City Council sees the board as another set of eyes and ears to use their expertise to bring information to the City. Mr. Hoffman asked if these would be separate meetings or if they would be part of regular meetings. Mr. Maker said they could be either. Mr. Hoffman asked why members could not be included in a meeting by phone. Mr. Harris said it has to do with the Public Information Act and Open Meetings Act. Mr. Harris said members could remote in and give input but would not be able to vote. Mr. Tomlinson asked how many board members we now have. Mr. Maker said we have seven. Mr. Hoffman asked if a vote was needed on this item. Mr. Maker said no. 5.0 ADJOURNMENT With no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:35 p.m. APPROVED: Andrew_Tfurner, Chairman Betty P plin, Rec rding Secretary r s` 4