HomeMy WebLinkAbout14.A. Physical Audit of Cable System
/~ ff,
City of Shakopee
Memorandum
TO: Mayor, City Council CONSENT
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: Tracy Schaefer, Bradley & Guzzetta, LLC
SUBJECT: Physical Audit of Cable System
MEETING DATE: July 5, 2005
Introduction
The City Council is asked to hire CBG Communications, Inc. to conduct a physical audit
Time Warner Cable ("TWC") cable system in Shakopee.
Background
The Shakopee Telecommunications Commission budgeted funds in its 2004 budget to
conduct a physical audit of Time Warner Cable's cable system, but due to staffing
changes, conducting a physical audit was delayed until 2005. (The funds from the 2004
Telecommunications Fund are still available.)
Due to the upcoming Comcast Communications, Inc. ("Comcast") cable franchise
transfer [Comcast has dropped off transfer application paperwork on June 15,2005 to
"purchase," operate and maintain Time Warner's Shakopee cable system], the City only
has 120 days to respond to any issues and/or violations. With that in mind, I developed a
Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) for a physical (technical) audit of the Time Warner
Cable system. Two (2) consulting firms submitted proposals, but based on the location,
services provided, ability to complete project before the transfer and experience, CBG
Communications, Inc. is being recommended to the City Council.
Although the proposal was developed for other communities to participate, most
communities have conducted a physical audit in the past couple years, so it is not
necessary for them to complete another physical audit. The City of Shakopee has
NEVER completed a physical "safety/technical" audit of the cable system.
If Council concurs, the physical audit conducted by CBG Communications, Inc. would
address at least the following:
. It would encompass both a paper review and physical evaluation, giving a
comprehensive assessment of the cable system's capabilities, physical
condition and technical performance. The paper review would include
reviewing Time Warner Cable and FCC documents and mandatory tests.
The physical audit would concentrate on driving throughout Shakopee to
identify safety and cable plant quality violations.
1
. Review the quality of the City's PEG (public, educational and
government) channels to determine if the "quality" issues with PEG audio
and video are internal city equipment/programming or TWC issues.
. Review of interactive systems and uses, including advanced high speed
data-over-cable (cable modem) services, video-on-demand and other two-
way technologies.
. Review of high definition TV (HDTV), including current activation in a
variety of systems.
. Review of universal service provision and lifeline service provision, to
ensure that basic cable services are available to all, and critical PEG and
broadcast services are available at no or low cost.
. Review of both compressed and uncompressed video, for a variety of
applications including residential cable services, video conferencing,
distance learning and access origination (including a variety of digital
transports such as 8-bit and lO-bit digital, MPEG, Serial Digital, IP and
others).
. Review of Shakopee's Emergency Alert Systems ("EAS"), including
those that interface with the Federal EAS system and those that provide
local inputs from Emergency Operations Centers, mobile command
centers, etc.
. Recommendations would be developed regarding future cable system
requirements to ensure that Shakopee has a state-of-the art cable system to
keep up with residential and business needs.
. Based on the findings of the review, CBG Communications, Inc. would
prepare a detailed report for the City setting forth the amount of any
findings and/or violations. The report would include support for the
engineer's findings and support and fully explain the basis therefore.
Physical Audit Benefits
. Review of potential cable franchise violations;
. Review of potential safety violations;
. The cable physical audit is planned to be completed before the 120 day transfer
application period expires. This will allow the City to determine if any cable
franchise violations exist before the transfer period expires. The City can only
deny the franchise on certain issues, evidence and findings. Such evidence and
findings must be properly documented or the transfer can't be denied.
Documented franchise or safety violations would allow the City to deny the cable
transfer, until the issues are resolved. Denying the transfer givesthe City more
leverage than issuing a normal franchise violation notice and is much cheaper
than a lengthy expensive legal battle;
. Ifviolations do exist, there is an opportunity for the City to get TWC to pay for
any additional work;
. It is prudent to conduct a physical audit every few years to "keep" the cable
operator honest.
. Shakopee has NEVER conducted a physical audit. With changing technologies
and rapid growth in Shakopee, an audit is critical. Shakopee residents have issued
2
complaints to the City on issues ranging from the audio quality of the PEO
(public, government, access) channels to wires hanging too low in their
backyards;
. Shakopee has been operating under new franchise terms and conditions for one
year, but is unsure ifTWC has followed the new provisions; and
. Written report findings will be useful to other city departments and SPUC from
issues ranging from ROW to public safety.
Budget
Funds were budgeted in 2004 to conduct a physical audit and have remained in the
Telecommunications Fund. The cost to complete the physical audit is $17,500
(including all expenses).
Action Requested
Direct the appropriate staffto enter into an agreement with CBO Communications, Inc. to
conduct a Time Warner Cable cable physical audit not to exceed $17,500 for the City of
Shakopee.
3
City of Shakopee
Memorandum
TO: Telecommunications Commission
Mayor, City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: Tracy Schaefer, Bradley & Guzzetta, LLC
SUBJECT: Physical Audit - SOQ
MEETING DATE: June 15,2005
Introduction
Statements of Qualifications (SOQ) were sent out to three (3) technical firms to audit the
City of Shako pee's Time Warner cable system.
Background
At its May meeting, the Commission directed Bradley & Guzzetta, LLC to try to work
with other cities to perform a physical cable audit. After calling several cities, many
showed a desire to participate in the physical audit. Some cities wished to wait to
commit funding until after costs and qualifications were submitted. With that in mind,
the SOQ were sent with the number of cities, rather than the specific cities. Currently,
the cities of Chaska, Fridley and Bloomington are all "interested" in participating in
Shakopee's review.
By contacting other cities to participate in the review, the City of Shakopee and the other
cities will save money conducting the physical audit. Once the SOQ are returned, the
cities will work together to determine the "cost savings" formula. I would recommend a
formula along the lines of number of subscribers and/or miles of cable plant.
Time Warner Cable has indicated that the cable franchise documents (from TWC to
Comcast) will be dropped off on Tuesday June 14,2005. With that in mind, the SOQ
deadline was set for Tuesday June 14,2005. A recommended consultant will be on the
table for the Commission to review at the meeting.
Attached is a copy ofthe SOQ that was sent to:
Columbia Telecommunications Corporation
Kramer Firm
CBG Communications, Inc.
All firms provide cable technical audit services for municipalities. Companies such as
EP A (local audio visual firm) do not perform this type of work. The SOQ was not sent to
firms that did not provide such services, due to the time sensitive nature of the project
and expert review that is desired.
Action Requested
No action needed.
1
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
REQUEST FOR STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS (SOQ)
TO PROVIDE CONSULTING SERVICES TO CONDUCT CABLE SYSTEM
PHYSICAL AUDIT
SUMMARY
This document is a request for statement of qualifications (SOQ) to provide consulting services
to the City of Shakopee, Minnesota and potentially other Time Wamer Cable operator
communities located within the Twin Cities to conduct a physical audit of the TWC cable
system. Based on the findings of this audit, the consultant will prepare a detailed report for each
participating City setting forth the findings, violations and recommendations, if any, for each
city. Each report must support and fully explain the basis for any violations that are identified.
RFO Issue Date: Tuesday, June 7, 2005
Statement ofOualifications (SOO) Due Date: Tuesday, June 14,2005,10:00 A.M. Central
Daylight Time
BACKGROUND
The City of Shakopee, Minnesota (a Minneapolis suburb) (the "City") wishes to perform a
physical audit of the Time Warner cable system. The City will engage an outside consultant to
perform this review and the results of this review will be presented to Time Warner Cable for
comment.
The City has contacted other Twin Cities communities served by Time Warner Cable to
determine if they would be interested in an audit to review Time Warner Cable's system in
conjunction with the City's review. Many of these communities have expressed a desire to
participate in the review of the physical audit made by Time Warner Cable pursuant to their
respective franchises. Depending on the nature of responses received from technical consultants,
as few as one community or as many as five other communities may wish to participate with the
City of Shakopee.
The Cities want the technical consultant to evaluate the following areas:
. Headend (same headend for all communities);
. Hubs;
. System Technical Performance Testing;
. Audio and Video Signal Quality of all channels with an emphasis on the PEG channels;
. Review of Technical Documentation;
. Physical Plant Inspection; and
. Report of Findings.
1
The participating cities will each require a separate report identifying the potential violations and
findings by the technical consultant.
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS
At this time, the City of Shakopee wishes to identify qualified businesses that have the technical
capacity and expertise to conduct this physical audit within guidelines set by the City.
Qualified businesses wishing to be considered for this review should submit a Letter of Interest
and Statement of Qualifications (SOQ's) in accordance with the requirements set forth in this
solicitation.
The consultant's response to the Scope of Services must include:
. A general description of the methodology the consultant will use in performing this
Physical Audit;
. The estimated cost of the review for each City. Please break out the estimated cost for
service based on the City of Shakopee participating and then the cost to add one (1)
additional city, two (2) additional cities, three (3) additional cities, four (4) additional
cities and five (5) additional cities. The size of the communities may vary, but all are
located in the Twin Cities region, share the same headend and all are served by Time
Wamer Cable.
. The consultant's hourly rate for all persons involved with conducting the physical audit;
. Consultant's qualifications & firm history; and
. Three (3) references (that have used the consultant in the past two years to perform
physical audits).
The participating cities are not desirous of long and complicated responses including excessive
graphics, but rather a specific on-point description of the proposed methodology for conducting
the physical audit and the expected outcomes from this audit. The participating cities wish to
begin the physical audit immediately and to have it completed as soon as possible, but no later
than two months from the date a consultant is selected.
Responses to this SOQ are therefore due no later than Tuesday, June 14,2005 10:00 A.M.
Central Daylight Time.
EVALUATION
The City of Shakopee and any participating cities will evaluate responses to the SOQ to:
1. Determine whether there are qualified businesses that are actively interested in providing
the services described in the SUMMARY and BACKGROUND above; and
2. Determine whether there are qualified businesses that can provide the specific
deliverables requested in the timeframe required.
.
2
FORMAT AND CONTENT OF SUBMITTALS
Respondents must submit one (1) hard copy and one (1) electronic copy of a Transmittal Letter
of Interest and provide the SOQ information requested. Submittals may be as long as you wish,
but must be submitted on 8 ~ "x II" sized paper and be written in 12-point font text. Submittals
may include resumes or other pertinent information.
E-mail proposals will also be accepted as the electronic copy, but the hard copy must follow in
the mail. No fax proposals will be accepted. Submittals must be received bv Tuesdav June 14.
2005.10:00 AM Central Davli2ht Time at the following address, on behalf of the City of
Shakopee as its consultant:
Tracy J. Schaefer
Senior Project Manager
Bradley & Guzzetta, LLC
444 Cedar Street, Suite 950
St. Paul, MN 55101
schaefer@bradlevguzzetta.com
A proposal which is in any way incomplete or irregular is subject to rejection. Timely delivery
of proposals at the designated location is the responsibility of the consultant. Proposals shall be
deposited at the designated location prior to the time and date for receipt of proposals. If you
have any questions related to the Statement of Qualifications, please email or FAX them to the
attention of Tracy J. Schaefer, schaefer@bradleyguzzetta.com or 651-379-0999 ext. 4, no later
than Friday June 10,2005 at 3:00 P.M. Central Daylight Time.
The City of Shakopee reserves the right to ask additional questions, request additional
information, or otherwise conduct follow-up investigations to the information provided in the
initial SOQ.
CITY OF SHAKOPEE. MN RIGHTS
This SOQ and/or the selection process do not obligate the City of Shakopee or other interested
Twin Cities communities to enter into any agreements. The City reserves the following rights, in
addition to those accorded by law:
1. The right to reject any and all submittals, to waive irregularities, and to re-solicit
proposals.
2. The right to use and disclose information included in all submittals as the City deems
necessary .
3. Please note that this SOQ is being issued outside the Minnesota competitive bidding
statute and is not subject to that statute, except as provided by law.
3