HomeMy WebLinkAbout5D Telephone System Replacement Report
Phone 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245 / www.cityofpriorlake.com
4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: FEBRUARY 4, 2019
AGENDA #: 5D
PREPARED BY: FRANK BOYLES, CITY MANAGER
PRESENTED BY: FRANK BOYLES
AGENDA ITEM:
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION AWARDING PROPOSAL
FOR THE ACQUISTION OF A REPLACEMENT
TELECOMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM FOR ALL SEVEN CITY
BUILDINGS AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER
TO EXECUTE THE CITY’S STANDARDIZED LABOR AND
MATERIALS CONTRACT ASSOCIATED THEREWITH
GOAL AREA AND
OBJECTIVE:
High-Value City Services
6.Seek community engagement through a variety of communication
methods to reach all residents.
DISCUSSION:
Introduction
The purpose of this agenda item is to request the city council’s approval
of a resolution authorizing the execution the city’s standardized labor and
materials contract to supply, install, program, train users and maintain a
unified telecommunications system to replace the existing unsupported
system for all seven city buildings for seven years.
History
On November 16, 2018 the city council approved a phase one report
from Pat Daniels with Elert and Associates which recommended that the
city’s 10 to 15 year old Panasonic Telephone system be replaced
because of its: 1. lack of dependability, 2. Potential to be hacked, 3.
unavailability of replacement parts and software, 4.lack of basic
telecommunication features, and 5. difficulty in making even small
updates for system users.
The council approved this recommendation and authorized Elert and
Associates to complete the Phase 2 Study which culminated in the
preparation of a Request for Proposals, solicitation of proposals,
evaluation of proposals, interview of vendors and recommendation of a
vendor, equipment and price by written report to the staff and city
council.
Current Circumstances
Last week we received a written report from Elert which carefully
evaluated and scored the proposals offered by the four companies. A
copy of that report was provided to each councilmember. Elert then
arranged 1 ½ hour interviews with each company complete with
demonstrations. In addition to Mr. Daniels, four city staff members
representing police, administrative support, IT and Management
participated in the interviews. As a result of the new information received
during the interviews, Elert updated their report (copy attached).
Pat Daniels of Elert believes that any of the four companies which
proposed could meet the city’s needs. We are grateful that all four
companies took the time to prepare detailed proposals for our
consideration.
The Elert report explains the scoring for each proposal, but a few
comments are in order. Nuvera was the only company to offer a hosted
service wherein the city rents the service and the company continues to
own the software and hardware. Unfortunately, this proposal was
considerably more expensive than the rest both annually and over the
seven-year time period.
As is shown in the Elert report each of the other three company
proposals had their own advantages and disadvantages. After
considering all proposals the committee unanimously recommends
Marco for the following reasons:
1.Overall Marco received the top score in the 15 category Elert Analysis.
2. Mitel, the telephone system proposed has been in the industry for
decades.
3. Mitel and Marco serve Eden Prairie, Bloomington, Shakopee and
Chaska.
4.Marco proposed the greatest number of high-end feature phones.
5. Marco’s annual maintenance cost is least costly of the four.
6. Marco’s total seven-year cost (both capital and maintenance) is
second lowest.
6. Marco’s capital costs were initially lowest until they were adjusted for
the servers and softphone features.
6. Marco’s maintenance service is most comprehensive.
7. The controllers/servers for the Marco system provide capacity for long
term growth.
8. The controllers/servers provide for dependability through resiliency.
9. The breadth and diversity of the Mitel features meet city needs.
10. The features are easy to use.
11. For those who forget how to use features there is an on-line tutor.
12. A robust softphone application is contemplated for fifty phones.
13.The service center/warehouse is in St. Louis Park.
14. Elert rates the Marco project leader very highly.
Marco has also provided the attached reasons why they should be
chosen.
The city council and public should be aware that we will retain our
existing phone numbers so the public will NOT have to relearn them. For
this we pay a monthly cost to Nuvera of $805 which is already part of our
budget.
ISSUES:
Under previous Minnesota law the city would have had to bid for this
contract since its total value exceeds $100,000. However, after
numerous years the statutory limit for bidding was increased to
$175,000. As a result, proposals were solicited rather than bids. There is
no sales tax on either the capital or the services associated with this
work.
This is important in this case because while we have taken care to
consider the types of feature, telephone instruments and software for
each user, it is possible that during the installation process we learn that
fine tuning would better serve our customers and employees.
Therefore, just as we do with larger construction projects, we have added
10% to the spending authorization so the changes can be made without
returning to the city council. Because the council does see the claims
listing, you will see and approve the final costs.
We are told that installation may require as much as two months for all
seven city facilities which will include line testing, system programming
and training. This is one of the reasons we wanted to be certain that the
Marco project leader is highly experienced.
FINANCIAL
IMPACT:
The costs associated with the new citywide telephone system are listed
in the Elert spreadsheet. Cost for the other proposals are included as
well.
The first-year cost is solely capital which for Marco is $75,368.00. (This
amount is less than the original Marco proposal of $76,288.48 because
the original proposal did not include the local government discount Marco
should have offered in its total capital costs.) Elert has examined the
spreadsheets provided by Marco and is satisfied that the discount is in
accordance with the standard practices for RFP’S.
Because of certain adjustments which could occur during installation
Elert recommends that ten percent or $7500 be added to the capital
proposal cost bringing the total purchase price to $82,868. This is $7000
more than the amount we anticipated would be drawn from the reserve
account. There are adequate funds in the reserve for this purpose.
First year maintenance costs are covered by the warrantee. Year two
through five maintenance costs are $$3350 a year or $13,400 for four
years. Maintenance costs for year six and seven are $ $3685 annually or
$7370. Total seven-year costs capital and maintenance would be
$103,638.00. Annual maintenance costs will be paid by becoming part of
the general fund budget for each respective year.
ALTERNATIVES: 1.Motion and second as part of the consent agenda to approve a
resolution authorizing the mayor and city manager to execute the city’s
standardized labor and materials contract agreement with Marco for a
total seven-year cost not to exceed $103.638.00.
2. Motion and second to remove this item from the consent agenda for
additional discussion.
RECOMMENDED
MOTION:
Alternative #1
4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RESOLUTION 19-___
A RESOLUTION AWARDING A PROPOSAL FOR THE ACQUISITION OF A REPLACEMENT
TELECOMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM FOR ALL SEVEN CITY BUILDINGS AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE CITYS
STANDARDIZED LABOR AND MATERIAL CONTRACT ASSOCIATED THEREWITH
Motion By: Second By:
WHEREAS, The City of Prior Lake has been operating with 10 to 15 year old Panasonic
telephone system in each of its city buildings; and,
WHEREAS, The telephone systems are no longer factory supported making parts and software
replacement time consuming and the systems undependable; and,
WHEREAS, The telephone system is an important tool for providing customer service and the
present system does not effectively support this objective; and,
WHEREAS, The city council has retained the services of Elert and Associates to assist the city
in determining its needs, preparing a request for proposal for coordinated
replacement telephone systems for all seven city buildings; and,
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
Proposals were received from Allstream, Marco, Matrix and Nuvera and each
proposal has been evaluated by Elert and Associates using fifteen criteria and
each firm was interviewed by a team of four city employees from various
departments; and,
Elert and Associates and the staff interviewing team recommend that the proposal
of Marco be accepted as contained in the Elert Report of January 31, 2019 and the
staff report dated February 4, 2019.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE,
MINNESOTA as follows:
1. The recitals set forth above are incorporated herein.
2. The proposal of Marco as set forth in both the Elert and Associates Report of January 31,
2019 and the staff report dated February 4, 2019 is hereby accepted in an amount not more
than $103,638.00 including first year capital expenses and maintenance cost for the
subsequent six years.
3. The mayor and city manager are hereby authorized to execute the city’s standardized labor
and materials contract to effectuate this objective.
Passed and adopted by the Prior Lake City Council this 4th day of February 2019.
2
VOTE Briggs Thompson Burkart Braid Erickson
Aye ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Nay ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Abstain ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Absent ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
______________________________
Frank Boyles, City Manager
Why Partnership with Marco/Mitel
• Experience
o Marco has more experience with technology than any other vendor. Not
only do we have 35 years’ experience with Mitel Voice Solutions, but we
have experience and certifications at the highest level with Microsoft,
HP Computing, and VMware Virtualization. All these technologies play a
role in the implementation of the phone system.
o We know City Government. We have installed 100’s of city and county
government solutions. Our team understands how to design and
implement a solution tailored around government entities.
• Financial Position
o Strong growth/profitable proven by our recent acquisitions and we are
backed by one of the largest private equity firms in Minnesota.
• Total Costs of Ownership
o Mitel customers on average keep a solution for over 10 years. With
Marco’s annual support costs the total costs of ownership will be very
low compared to similar solutions, both premise and hosted.
• Documented Customer Satisfaction
o We do not just say it, we measure it every day.
• Mitel is a Market Leader
o Mitel is considered one of the top market leaders. They are aggressively
acquiring other companies putting them and Cisco as the two top VoIP
manufactures in the world.
Telephone System RFP
Recommendotion
January 3t,2Ot9
Prepared for:
City of Prior Lake, Minnesota
Prepared by:
Pat Daniels
elert & associates
tech nology consu lta nts
o truelQORTH compony
t\
P
elert & associates
technology consultants
o trueNORTH compony
Executive Overview
Elert & Associates I A True North Company (E&A) was retained to assist the City of Prior Lake (the City)
with the procurement of a new telephone system infrastructure. After thorough review of the City's
requirements, E&A developed an RFP, which was advertised on the City's website and emailed to all
vendors that requested a copy.
The base RFP allowed for premise and hosted/cloud-based solutions and included the telephone system,
unified messaging, and unified communications. lt also included alternates or options including
softphone/mobility applications, emergency notification system, and music-on-hold. We also requested
pricing for public switched telephone network (PSTN) services.
The City received proposals from the following vendors:
Company Telephone System
All Stream Communications MitelMi-Voice
Marco MitelMi-Voice
Matrix Communications NEC U3C
Nuvera Hosted Cisco Broadworks
The preliminary evaluation, seven-year cost, and scores are based on the following configurations:
1. Telephone System
2. Unified Communications
3. Unified Messaging
4. Music on Hold
5. PSTN Cost (Using current Nuvera monthly PRI cost of 5805)
H
N
OJ
bo((,
o_
Minnesota r South Carolina r Tennessee r TexasConnecticut r Florida a lllinois r lowa
elert & associates
technology consultants
o truel{ORTH compony
Recommendation
Although Marco and Matrix scored the highest in the initial evaluation, the City invited all vendors to
meet with the City to present their solutions. A committee of City employees and a representative from
Elert & Associates attended allfour presentations.
Based on a thorough review and evaluation of the proposals, products, and presentations, the
Committee and Elert & Associates concluded that Marco's proposed Mitel solution is the best-valued
solution. The products that Marco proposed and demonstrated meet or exceed the City's design,
flexibility, and end-user experience expectations. Marco demonstrated that they fully understand the
overall project scope and expectations of the City. ln addition, Marco demonstrated that they have
skilled project management and technical resources to meet the City's installation and long-term
maintenance requirements.
Elert & Associates recommends that the City enter into a contract with the best-valued respondent,
Marco, for the purchases of its proposed solution including the telephone system, voice mail with email
integration, unified communication, mobility applications, and first-year warranty for the contract price
of S75,358. (This cost includes the requested modification to upgrade from CX to MX controllers to
support growth to 350 users plus the addition of the 50 mobile user licenses and the replacement of
conference room phones with standard phones and 3 satellite speakers. Even with these additions the
total cost is lower than the original price because Marco had mistakenly failed to apply the mandatory
Sourcewell Public Sector d iscount in their origina I proposal pricing). E&Aalso recommends thatthe City
include a ten percent contingency fund of approximately 57,500 in the budget for this project.
Matrix was the only vendor to provide a proposal for PSTN services. The SIP PSTN service that Matrix
proposed appeared to meet expectations initially; however, upon further investigation, E&A
recommends that the City retain the existing PRI service with Nuvera at the existing monthly cost of
S8os.
cn
OJ
l!o-
TexasConnecticutFloridalllinoislowa Minnesota South Carolina Tennessee
elert & associates
technology consultants
o truefORTH compony
System Summary
All Stream Communications - Mitel Mi-Voice
All Stream proposed Mitel's Mi-Voice platform. They proposed hardware and servers required to support
call control and all applications including a Mitel 3300 MXelll as the primary controller and a CX controller
to support resilience and the PRI services. The MXelll controller supports a total of 350 telephones which
would be sufficient to support any foreseeable growth. All Stream also included an HP ProLiant
applications server to support the voice mail and unified communications applications. This solution
meets the exceeds specifications and will allow the phones at all facilities to re-register with a secondary
controller should the primary controller become unavailable for any reason. All Stream proposed Mitel's
6920 series telephones which generally meet specifications but are not as flexible as the 6930 telephones
proposed by Marco. The Mitel platform can support the majority of the telephony options as specified.
Marco - Mitel Mi-Voice
Marco proposed Mitel's Mi-Voice platform. They proposed hardware and servers required to support
call control and all applications including a Mitel 3300 CX ll as the primary controller and a CX controller
to support resilience and the PRI services. Since the CX ll controller supports a total of 150 telephones
which barely met specifications to support 127 telephones, the City had Marco provide the cost to
upgrade it to a MXe controller. The MXe controller provides long-term growth up to 350 telephones.
The cost of the upgrade controller is included in the final contract cost presented in the
recommendation above. Marco also included the Mi Collab virtual appliance to support the voice mail
and unified communications applications. This solution meets the specifications and will allow the
phones at all facilities to re-register with a secondary controller should the primary controller become
unavailable for any reason. The Mitel platform can support the majority ofthe telephony options as
specified.
Matrix Communications - NEC U3C
Matrix proposed NEC's U3C solution with three NEC Express 5800 servers. Two of the servers are used
to provide redundant active/active call control and unified communications applications, and the third is
provided to support audio conferencing. Matrix also included standard off-the-shelf Adtran gateways to
support PSTN connections and analog ports. The solution as proposed will utilize the City's hosted
Office 365 platform for all voice message storage. lf the City decides additional redundancy is needed in
the future, additional instances of the software can be loaded on any City server at no additional cost.
Their solution provides a very high level of redundancy. The U3C platform is capable of supporting the
majority of the features specified.
Nuvera - Hosted Flexvoice
Nuvera proposed their Flexvoice hosted solution which utilizes a Cisco Broadworks platform. The system
consists of georedundant servers located in Nuvera's data centers located in Hutchinson and New Ulm.
The service would be provided over existing fiber connections to City Hall and the Police Station. Nuvera
included a high availability Edgemark router which will provide survivability should there be a loss of
connectivity to their two data centers. The system supports the basic features requested; however, the
integrated messaging is not as robust as the NEC or Mitel solutions. The solution also has the advantage
of no upfront out-of-pocket expense or hardware to maintain over the life of the system.
sto
o_
TexasConnecticutFloridalllinois lowa Minnesota South Carolina Tennessee
elert & associates
! e 9! r' !19sy J9!!! !I! r'l!
o truelQORTH compony
Cost
Points
H
Gompany
CapitalCost
Annual
Maintenance
Years 2-5
Annual
Maintenance
Year5&7
Monthly
PRI/LD or
Hosted Cost
Seven Year
Cost
Matrix S55,018.24 S6,016.26 S6,016.16 s80s.00 S158,735.60
lvlarco S76,288.48 s3,3s0.00 s3,685.00 s80s.00 S164,678.48
AllStream 571,2G2.s3 S5,512.80 S5,850.50 ssos.00 5t72,634.73
Nuvera so.oo so.oo So.oo 52,683.47 5225,41L.48
Company Total Points
Marco 237
Matrix 230
AllStream 225
Nuvera 208
Connecticut o Florida r lllinois o lowa o Minnesota o SouthCarolina o Tennessee r Texas
rno
bo(I,
o-
E4
elert & associates
technology consultants
o trueibRTl{ compony
Evaluation Scoring
Pdlts afe a$rrded h the tullolving mamer. E4h v€n(br is ossiJl€d a value b€tu/e$ 0 gld 3
Fails to me6t spocificalbrrs or cxpoctolims 0
M66ts tle spocilicalions or 6rpe{ialidr3 wih sdne hnitatiJaB 1
tl€e6 h6 soacifcalins or exp.dslions 2
Acseds Ule speofcdbns or ere€ctalixls in cdnpnison with dt6 g.opo6ab 3
Connecticut o Florida o lllinois o lowa Minnesota South Carolina . Tennessee . Texas
ro
c,
oo
@d
P6sible Al Stream Marco Matrix Nuwra
Factor W€ight Score Points Score Points Score Points Sc016 Points Score
Redundancy/Resiliency/Suni\ability
Total Se\en Year System Cost
(lncluding Maintenance)25 75
15 3
69
15 J 15
72
3 15
75
J
53
15
E91 1 15 2 10 10 2 10 2 10
Acti\e Directory lntegration 15 2 10 10 2 10 2 10
UC and UM Functionalily 15 2 10 2 10 2 10 1 5
Telephones I
10
15Wffi
30
2w
2
'10I
20
3
2
15I
20
2I
2
10
20
2w{w
t;1tr!&id
2
10
20
Product Life cycle Status 5 15 10 2 10 2 10 2 10
lndustry Ranking 5 15 2 '10 2 10 2 10 10
Oistribution Network 5
5
15
15
2
2
10
10
2
2
10
10
10
10
2
2
10
'10
2
2
Project Understanding &
lmplementation Process 5 2 10 2 10 2 '10 2 10
Owner Responsibilities 5 2 10 2 10 2 '10 2 10
References 5 t5 10 2 10 2 10 10
Se^,ice and SupporUTeams tc 2.5 12.5 3 15 2 10 15
Technology
Manufacturer
Organization
Vendor la
Orqanization
TOTALS 100 300 30 226 31 237 29 230 29 208
H elert & associates
tech nology consu lta nts
o truel$ORTH compony
Evaluation Criteria Points
AllStream 3 Controller supports up to 350 users.
Marco
3
Original CX controller meet specifications. With
recommended upgrade to MXE controller which
added 52,900 to the contract price shown in the
recommendation above system exceeds
specifications.
Matrix 3 Fully redundant active/active configuration
Nuvera
3
Georedundant solution with two diverse fiber
connections to the city
AllStream 2 Meets Expectations
Marco 2 Meets Expectations
Matrix 2 Meets Expectations
Nuvera 2 Meets Expectations
AllStream 2 Meets Expectations
Marco 2 Meets Expectations
Matrix 2 Meets Expectations
Nuvera
2
Meets Expectations as Host solution does not
typically support single user authentication with
AD.
AllStream 2 Meets Expectations
Marco 2 Meets Expectations
Matrix 2 Meets Expectations
Nuvera
1.
Does not provide synchronized messaging
r\o
oo(!
o-
Minnesota . South Carolina o Tennessee r TexasConnecticut r Florida e lllinois o lowa .
Redundancy/Resiliency/Survivability Points
Awarded
Explanation
E911 Points
Awarded
Explanation
Active Directory lntegration Points
Awarded
Explanation
UC and UM Functionality Points
Awarded
Explanation
elert & associates
tech nology consultants
o truelSORTH componyH
AllStream 2 Meets Expectations
Marco
3
Standard telephones exceed expectations/These
are the committees preferred telephones
Matrix 2 Meets Expectations
Nuvera 2 Meets Expectations
AllStream 2 Meets Expectations
Marco 2 Meets Expectations
Matrix 2 Meets Expectations
Nuvera 2 Meets Expectations
AllStream 2 Meets Expectations
Marco 2 Meets Expectations
Matrix 2 Meets Expectations
N uve ra 2 Meets Expectations
AllStream 2 Meets Expectations
Marco 2 Meets Expectations
Matrix 2 Meets Expectations
Nuvera 2 Meets Expectations
AllStream 2 Meets Expectations
Marco 2 Meets Expectations
Matrix 2 Meets Expectations
Nuvera 2 Meets Expectations
Connecticut r Florida o lllinois o lowa . Minnesota r SouthCarolina r Tennessee r Texas
oo
OJ
oo(!
o-
Telephones Points
Awarded
Explanation
Organization Points
Awarded
Explanation
Product Life cycle Status Points
Awarded
Explanation
lndustry Ranking Points
Awarded
Explanation
Distribution Network Points
Awarded
Explanation
H elert & associates
technology consultants
o truel$ORTH compony
AllStream 2 Meets Expectations
Marco 2 Meets Expectations
Matrix 2 Meets Expectations
Nuvera 2 Meets Expectations
AllStream 2 Meets Expectations
Marco 2 Meets Expectations
Matrix 2 Meets Expectations
Nuvera 2 Meets Expectations
AllStream 2 Meets Expectations
Marco 2 Meets Expectations
Matrix 2 Meets Expectations
Nuvera 2 Meets Expectations
AllStream 2 Meets Expectations
Marco 2 Meets Expectations
Matrix 2 Meets Expectations
Nuvera 2 Meets Expectations
AllStream 2.s Seven-year support from manufacturer
Marco
3
Seven-year support from manufacturer/ Remote
Software changes included with maintenance
Matrix 2 Meets Expectations with five years of support
Nuvera 3 Ten-year support from manufacturer
O)
@
b0oo-
o Tennessee o Texasconnecticut r Florida o lllinois r lowa r Minnesota o South carolina
Organization Points
Awarded
Explanation
Proiect Understanding &
lmplementation Process
Points
Awarded
Explanation
Owner Responsibilities Points
Awarded
Explanation
References Points
Awarded
Explanation
Service and Support/Teams Points
Awarded
Explanation