They've heard from Greg, Mike and Mark. They've told the Council ways that the city could save money (or make money) in the Fire Department. Councilperson Mary Verner, responding to the story about American Airlines, is asking for your individual suggestions. Please take a moment at home or work, to respond to her request. I've heard a lot of good ideas out there. Email CityCouncilMembers@SpokaneCity.org to let the entire Council hear your ideas and, hopefully, get us back on track.
Thanks, John
Tuesday, August 02, 2005
A letter that John sent to city officials. Click to see the article:
Bankrupt American Airlines' CEO started paying attention to what its workers (union members) had to say about doing their jobs more efficiently, instead of just listening to department heads. The result? Profitability.
From the article:
"Two years ago, American was dodging bankruptcy, and labor strife hit a peak after unions voted to accept steep pay cuts, only to find out that management had given itself big bonuses and protected their pension plans from creditors in the case of bankruptcy. Unions were livid and temporarily suspended approval of the givebacks.
Call that the nadir. The board reacted almost immediately, ousting CEO Donald Carty and eventually bringing in Gerard Arpey, who put into place the current employee-based turnaround plan."
The article:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0725/p01s03-usec.html
Thanks,
John Griffith
Local 29 E-Board
From the article:
"Two years ago, American was dodging bankruptcy, and labor strife hit a peak after unions voted to accept steep pay cuts, only to find out that management had given itself big bonuses and protected their pension plans from creditors in the case of bankruptcy. Unions were livid and temporarily suspended approval of the givebacks.
Call that the nadir. The board reacted almost immediately, ousting CEO Donald Carty and eventually bringing in Gerard Arpey, who put into place the current employee-based turnaround plan."
The article:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0725/p01s03-usec.html
Thanks,
John Griffith
Local 29 E-Board
Saturday, July 30, 2005
DES. Is it worth it? From Bill Jackman...
The Spokane County Department of Emergency Management (also called Department of Emergency Services DES) is the Spokane County version of FEMA. It also includes Dave Byrnes (the former SFD EMS officer) who is the Region 9 director of Homeland Security for the ten counties in Eastern Washington. The State of Washington is divided into nine regions, based upon population.
The only three significant events that DES was involved in from my memory were:
1.) Mt. St Helens 5/80
2.) Fire Storm 10/91
3.) Ice Storm 11/96
Mt St. Helens was an inconvenience, Ice Storm, was managed by Avista and the folks with chainsaws and as for Fire Storm – it never even came close to the city. If the City spent an average of $75,000 a year for DES for the past 25 years, that only averages out to $625,000 per emergency. Did Spokane get it’s $625,000 in value from County DES from any of these events? Add to this a $500,000 emergency situation room in the new SFD training center.
I didn’t realize the City of Spokane funds about half of DES. In reality, I think there are many of us on the SFD that could generate a pretty good report as to why DES could be significantly reduced in size. It’s not like we live in Florida where disasters are common. The real crisis here is how to best spend the limited financial resources of the city.
DES also helps distribute FEMA grant money for training and equipment. The City of Spokane Fire Department has received 2 – 3 grants for equipment, each grant was based on a 70/30 split (FEMA/local). This was after our twenty-plus million dollar, 1999 Fire Bond for new equipment and facilities.
DES is great for retired people working a second career. They have ties to local agencies, which in turn support their efforts but also don’t question their actual worth or value. The 2004 city share of $158,727.21 was no bargain for Spokane. The only true emergency management service in Spokane - is the Spokane Fire Department.
Bill Jackman
The only three significant events that DES was involved in from my memory were:
1.) Mt. St Helens 5/80
2.) Fire Storm 10/91
3.) Ice Storm 11/96
Mt St. Helens was an inconvenience, Ice Storm, was managed by Avista and the folks with chainsaws and as for Fire Storm – it never even came close to the city. If the City spent an average of $75,000 a year for DES for the past 25 years, that only averages out to $625,000 per emergency. Did Spokane get it’s $625,000 in value from County DES from any of these events? Add to this a $500,000 emergency situation room in the new SFD training center.
I didn’t realize the City of Spokane funds about half of DES. In reality, I think there are many of us on the SFD that could generate a pretty good report as to why DES could be significantly reduced in size. It’s not like we live in Florida where disasters are common. The real crisis here is how to best spend the limited financial resources of the city.
DES also helps distribute FEMA grant money for training and equipment. The City of Spokane Fire Department has received 2 – 3 grants for equipment, each grant was based on a 70/30 split (FEMA/local). This was after our twenty-plus million dollar, 1999 Fire Bond for new equipment and facilities.
DES is great for retired people working a second career. They have ties to local agencies, which in turn support their efforts but also don’t question their actual worth or value. The 2004 city share of $158,727.21 was no bargain for Spokane. The only true emergency management service in Spokane - is the Spokane Fire Department.
Bill Jackman
Thursday, July 28, 2005
Saturday, July 23, 2005
Coeur d'Alene Golf Tournament
The Coeur d’Alene firefighters are hosting a second annual charity golf tournament. Last year we had a great time and would love to see some support from Spokane Fire people. The tournament is a scramble and starts at 1300 on August 19th at Twin Lakes Village in North Idaho. The money raised will go to the American Cancer Society.
I have attached an entry form. Please contact me if you require any further information.
John G. Morrison
Fire Captain
Coeur d'Alene Fire Department
(208) 769-2340
jmorrison@cdaid.org
I have attached an entry form. Please contact me if you require any further information.
John G. Morrison
Fire Captain
Coeur d'Alene Fire Department
(208) 769-2340
jmorrison@cdaid.org
Thursday, June 30, 2005
Tuesday, June 28, 2005
Pacific Northwest Firefighters Golf Tournament
The Spokane Firefighter's Golf Club will be hosting the 53rd annual Pacific Northwest Firefighter's Golf Tournament this year. The SFD is one of five host cities with the other four being Portland, Seattle, Everett, and Tacoma. The Tournament will be held at the Deer Park Golf Club on August 3rd and 4th. There will be a hospitality room on the 2nd and 3rd at the Ramada Inn at North Pointe. The Tournament is open to all active and retired firefighters of all golfing abilities. We are hoping for a large turn out from the members of our department. So far Portland has 20 members traveling over for the Tournament. The entry form and more information are attached.
Any questions call me at Station 8-C or home
Thanks, Jamie
Any questions call me at Station 8-C or home
Thanks, Jamie
From Chief Williams regarding the phones...
Greg:
I talked to Garv this morning after the Cabinet meeting about your email. He assures me that they continue to dedicate City IMS resources to try to figure out what is going on that is causing this problem. They have involved Cisco (the phone manufacturer) as well as the providers of the phone lines. They are having daily conference calls among all of the players to try to solve this issue.
As a reminder, the red phone in the station is available if folks need to make calls rather than using their cell phones. These phone should be working since they are outside of the network (no one has reported that they have had problems with the red phones).
This situation is frustrating for everyone but I can assure you that it is a priority for our IMS folks who are in regular contact with the City IMS personnel. Garv has promised that this is the top priority for his department and it will remain that way until it is resolved.
Thanks!
Bobby Williams
I talked to Garv this morning after the Cabinet meeting about your email. He assures me that they continue to dedicate City IMS resources to try to figure out what is going on that is causing this problem. They have involved Cisco (the phone manufacturer) as well as the providers of the phone lines. They are having daily conference calls among all of the players to try to solve this issue.
As a reminder, the red phone in the station is available if folks need to make calls rather than using their cell phones. These phone should be working since they are outside of the network (no one has reported that they have had problems with the red phones).
This situation is frustrating for everyone but I can assure you that it is a priority for our IMS folks who are in regular contact with the City IMS personnel. Garv has promised that this is the top priority for his department and it will remain that way until it is resolved.
Thanks!
Bobby Williams
Monday, June 27, 2005
Looks like I spoke too soon on phones (in more ways than one).
From Local 29 President Greg Borg
Mayor West,
I returned to work today, Sunday 26th to find that our phone were out on the 23rd and the computers would not let us log on today. One of the people on my shift was able to get the secondary computer to work so I could read and answer my e-mails. While I appreciate Garv's answer it does not answer my questions. Can we get a telephone line in the station that works until this is fixed? I know Qwest can have a phone installed by Wednesday, on a phone line that works all the time. Can our computers be taken off line until you fix them so we can have access?
I am having people use my personal e-mail so I can get city notices. I am using my cell phone to do city business. I thought the system might be fixed when we returned. It has been a week.
Respectfully, Greg
Mayor West,
I returned to work today, Sunday 26th to find that our phone were out on the 23rd and the computers would not let us log on today. One of the people on my shift was able to get the secondary computer to work so I could read and answer my e-mails. While I appreciate Garv's answer it does not answer my questions. Can we get a telephone line in the station that works until this is fixed? I know Qwest can have a phone installed by Wednesday, on a phone line that works all the time. Can our computers be taken off line until you fix them so we can have access?
I am having people use my personal e-mail so I can get city notices. I am using my cell phone to do city business. I thought the system might be fixed when we returned. It has been a week.
Respectfully, Greg
Tuesday, June 21, 2005
More on the phones...
I was forwarded this from Councilman Joe Shogan. It is a response to our questions about the phones from Garv Brakel, head of the city's IMS Division. A public thanks to the mayor, to our city councilmembers and especially to Mr. Brakel for answering Local 29's questions regarding the history behind the new phone system. It sounds like they've discovered the problems and the phones should now be working - good news for all!
The memo:
I was first notified of the problems with telephones at the fire stations on Monday, the 6th of June 2005, and focused the appropriate resources of my department for a quick resolution. Clearly, there has been a problem out there for several months. One of the issues has been that the problem was intermittent, and as a consequence has not been reported and escalated to management in affected departments and MIS. During this time, however, the 911 system was not impacted, nor, because of redundant systems, was there ever a situation when a fire station was without emergency communications capability. We isolated the main problem this week, however, we will continue to monitor performance. The fundamental problem was a programming error in some network components at remote sites.
Let me address the specific questions posed my Mr. Griffith:
1. The total cost of the new telephone system was $1,597,591.00. With tax, the total increased to $1,726,995.87. Included in this number is hardware, software, and installation services. It is true that each telephone instrument costs around $500, however, these telephones are actually computers on our citywide network that have many features not available on the old system. An example of this is the directory capability or unified messaging which makes voicemail available through the email system. Over time, we will be fielding additional enterprise applications to our customers via the telephone system. This number compares favorably with the $300 to $400 we were paying for rebuilt telephones for the old system. After inflation, the new telephones were actually cheaper than the old ones in 1989.
2. While the old system was not broken, it was 15 years old. To keep it operating following the year 2000 we bought parts from organizations that had already replaced their systems. We have been totally in the used parts arena for five years. At any time, a hardware failure could have caused an outage that would have lasted until we found the appropriate part. We have been on borrowed time for years.
3. The City began its search for a new system in 2000 with initial planning based upon our difficult experience in making the old system Y2K compliant. In 2001, we engaged the services of a telecommunications consultant to assist MIS staff in identifying each department’s requirements for a new system. We extended an invitation to all interested vendors to install demonstration systems for our evaluation. Five vendors accepted our offer and actually installed their systems in City Hall for use by selected users. City staff visited three other vendor sites for demonstrations. These requirements and experiences were reduced to a 120 page RFP that was released in early September 2003. On the due date of October 6, 2003, the City received 12 proposals for evaluation. The evaluation team consisted of City Council President Rob Higgins, Administrative Services Director Dorothy Webster, Mike Charter from the fire department, Dave Ingle from the police department, George Bailey from the solid waste department, and Ron Nicodemus the director of the utility billing department. I sat as a non-voting member of this committee. The final selection was based upon functionality and lowest cost over a 5 year period. The decision was approved by both City Council and Mayor West before the contract was signed.
4. The Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) technology is a mature product at this point. In fact, I delayed the whole process to the point that the technology was not only mature, but also at the point where prices dropped as they do with all new electronics. The exact same system selected is in use by several other cities and counties in Washington, Microsoft, Boeing, and over 60% of Fortune 500 companies. Mr. Griffith is probably confusing our system with some commercial offerings of VoIP where the Internet is the means of transport instead of normal public switched telephone system circuits. There are quality of service issues with these services. Ironically, the programming errors that we found cause our system to have these same problems at remote sites.
5. Once the installation has been completed, acceptance testing shall be performed upon the system following its cutover. This test and verification period, if successful, shall consist of thirty consecutive days of normal traffic load with no major component failures and no major alarms, defined as: 1) CPU failure; 2) main power supply failure; 3) a failure of the remote electronics at one of the City’s sites; 4) 25% of incoming/outgoing trunks inoperable; 5) 10% or more stations inoperable; or 6) 10% of the voice mail system inoperable. The City of Spokane shall accept the installed system after a signed letter of official system certification with successful acceptance test results, accompanied by two sets of as-built documentation provided by the Vendor, is received, reviewed with the Vendor, and accepted in writing by the City of Spokane. Because installation is not complete for this system, final acceptance testing has not begun.
6. It would be very difficult and prohibitively expensive to either go back to the old system or select a different technology at this point. One of the decision points for this system is that it rides the same network that we use for computers. With the old system, we had to maintain a separate physical network just for telephones. The savings over time will be significant. Telephonic customer service will improve this week. Funding for this system was via the City Capital Improvement Program and MIS equipment replacement reserves which are both one time funding resources for capital programs only and are not viable sources for continuing operations.
The memo:
I was first notified of the problems with telephones at the fire stations on Monday, the 6th of June 2005, and focused the appropriate resources of my department for a quick resolution. Clearly, there has been a problem out there for several months. One of the issues has been that the problem was intermittent, and as a consequence has not been reported and escalated to management in affected departments and MIS. During this time, however, the 911 system was not impacted, nor, because of redundant systems, was there ever a situation when a fire station was without emergency communications capability. We isolated the main problem this week, however, we will continue to monitor performance. The fundamental problem was a programming error in some network components at remote sites.
Let me address the specific questions posed my Mr. Griffith:
1. The total cost of the new telephone system was $1,597,591.00. With tax, the total increased to $1,726,995.87. Included in this number is hardware, software, and installation services. It is true that each telephone instrument costs around $500, however, these telephones are actually computers on our citywide network that have many features not available on the old system. An example of this is the directory capability or unified messaging which makes voicemail available through the email system. Over time, we will be fielding additional enterprise applications to our customers via the telephone system. This number compares favorably with the $300 to $400 we were paying for rebuilt telephones for the old system. After inflation, the new telephones were actually cheaper than the old ones in 1989.
2. While the old system was not broken, it was 15 years old. To keep it operating following the year 2000 we bought parts from organizations that had already replaced their systems. We have been totally in the used parts arena for five years. At any time, a hardware failure could have caused an outage that would have lasted until we found the appropriate part. We have been on borrowed time for years.
3. The City began its search for a new system in 2000 with initial planning based upon our difficult experience in making the old system Y2K compliant. In 2001, we engaged the services of a telecommunications consultant to assist MIS staff in identifying each department’s requirements for a new system. We extended an invitation to all interested vendors to install demonstration systems for our evaluation. Five vendors accepted our offer and actually installed their systems in City Hall for use by selected users. City staff visited three other vendor sites for demonstrations. These requirements and experiences were reduced to a 120 page RFP that was released in early September 2003. On the due date of October 6, 2003, the City received 12 proposals for evaluation. The evaluation team consisted of City Council President Rob Higgins, Administrative Services Director Dorothy Webster, Mike Charter from the fire department, Dave Ingle from the police department, George Bailey from the solid waste department, and Ron Nicodemus the director of the utility billing department. I sat as a non-voting member of this committee. The final selection was based upon functionality and lowest cost over a 5 year period. The decision was approved by both City Council and Mayor West before the contract was signed.
4. The Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) technology is a mature product at this point. In fact, I delayed the whole process to the point that the technology was not only mature, but also at the point where prices dropped as they do with all new electronics. The exact same system selected is in use by several other cities and counties in Washington, Microsoft, Boeing, and over 60% of Fortune 500 companies. Mr. Griffith is probably confusing our system with some commercial offerings of VoIP where the Internet is the means of transport instead of normal public switched telephone system circuits. There are quality of service issues with these services. Ironically, the programming errors that we found cause our system to have these same problems at remote sites.
5. Once the installation has been completed, acceptance testing shall be performed upon the system following its cutover. This test and verification period, if successful, shall consist of thirty consecutive days of normal traffic load with no major component failures and no major alarms, defined as: 1) CPU failure; 2) main power supply failure; 3) a failure of the remote electronics at one of the City’s sites; 4) 25% of incoming/outgoing trunks inoperable; 5) 10% or more stations inoperable; or 6) 10% of the voice mail system inoperable. The City of Spokane shall accept the installed system after a signed letter of official system certification with successful acceptance test results, accompanied by two sets of as-built documentation provided by the Vendor, is received, reviewed with the Vendor, and accepted in writing by the City of Spokane. Because installation is not complete for this system, final acceptance testing has not begun.
6. It would be very difficult and prohibitively expensive to either go back to the old system or select a different technology at this point. One of the decision points for this system is that it rides the same network that we use for computers. With the old system, we had to maintain a separate physical network just for telephones. The savings over time will be significant. Telephonic customer service will improve this week. Funding for this system was via the City Capital Improvement Program and MIS equipment replacement reserves which are both one time funding resources for capital programs only and are not viable sources for continuing operations.
Tacoma Fire is hiring. Application deadline - June 30th
Click on title to go to webpage with downloadable application.
Tuesday, June 14, 2005
Friday, June 10, 2005
The mayor responds...
John,
I received a copy of your email to the City Council and will be providing you with a more detailed reply shortly to your inquiry.
Always feel free to contact the City Council members about things but also please also feel free to contact me or Deputy Mayor Jack Lynch at any time if you have questions, suggestions or simply comments, especially when issues come up in the area of administration. By Charter the City Council is responsible for policy and the Mayor is responsible for administration.
While the City Council approved the contract for the new phone system, it was on the advice of my office that they did so. The City Council should be concerned if something isn’t working properly or if they feel they are not provided adequate information so we will be answering your questions to them also.
In the last 17 months I’ve strived to open the administration up to the Council, employees and the public and believe we have made significant progress there. For example, I’m told the previous administration forbade administrative staff from communicating with the Council without the knowledge and/or permission of the Mayor or City Administrator. I immediately changed that policy when I took office because of my belief that the Council should be fully informed and should be able to ask staff any question without restriction. It made no sense to me to deny the policy making body of the City access to important information. If a Governor had done that to me when I was a Legislator I would have been rightfully outraged. Even in this time when the Council has asked me to resign the administration is fully maintaining the Council’s right to unrestricted access to staff and information so they can do their jobs.
Now regarding your questions; they are good questions that deserve answers. We will get those answers to you as soon as possible. Rest assured that the new phone system was reviewed for several years before a decision was made to buy it. The money was programmed into the budget as a one time expense to purchase the system and had no relation to layoffs anywhere in City government. One time monies should never be used for ongoing expenses like salaries or benefits. Primarily they should be used to improve systems and/or lower ongoing costs.
I’ll see that you soon get the answers to all your questions and again please feel free to contact me at anytime regarding anything.
James E. West
Mayor
City of Spokane
W. 808 Spokane Falls Blvd
Spokane, WA 99201-3335
(509) 625-6250
I received a copy of your email to the City Council and will be providing you with a more detailed reply shortly to your inquiry.
Always feel free to contact the City Council members about things but also please also feel free to contact me or Deputy Mayor Jack Lynch at any time if you have questions, suggestions or simply comments, especially when issues come up in the area of administration. By Charter the City Council is responsible for policy and the Mayor is responsible for administration.
While the City Council approved the contract for the new phone system, it was on the advice of my office that they did so. The City Council should be concerned if something isn’t working properly or if they feel they are not provided adequate information so we will be answering your questions to them also.
In the last 17 months I’ve strived to open the administration up to the Council, employees and the public and believe we have made significant progress there. For example, I’m told the previous administration forbade administrative staff from communicating with the Council without the knowledge and/or permission of the Mayor or City Administrator. I immediately changed that policy when I took office because of my belief that the Council should be fully informed and should be able to ask staff any question without restriction. It made no sense to me to deny the policy making body of the City access to important information. If a Governor had done that to me when I was a Legislator I would have been rightfully outraged. Even in this time when the Council has asked me to resign the administration is fully maintaining the Council’s right to unrestricted access to staff and information so they can do their jobs.
Now regarding your questions; they are good questions that deserve answers. We will get those answers to you as soon as possible. Rest assured that the new phone system was reviewed for several years before a decision was made to buy it. The money was programmed into the budget as a one time expense to purchase the system and had no relation to layoffs anywhere in City government. One time monies should never be used for ongoing expenses like salaries or benefits. Primarily they should be used to improve systems and/or lower ongoing costs.
I’ll see that you soon get the answers to all your questions and again please feel free to contact me at anytime regarding anything.
James E. West
Mayor
City of Spokane
W. 808 Spokane Falls Blvd
Spokane, WA 99201-3335
(509) 625-6250
Regarding phones - Brad Stark's response from Garv Brakel - the City's IMS Director
I have just heard recently (on Monday) of these problems. I’ll get back to you with a resolution. I’m guessing that the problem is related to simultaneous use of the computer. The phones and computers share the same network but settings in the switches and routers give priority to the voice application. If you can imagine all of the little packets of information floating around in our network but some of them are holding up red flags, and the red flags are waved through ahead of everybody else. Dropping words in a conversation tells me that the red flags are not being recognized.
To answer the other questions I’m talking somewhat off the top of my head as I am on vacation and just checking in at night from home. The new phone system cost about 1.8 million. Each phone is essentially a computer with additional capabilities that we will be adding over time and does cost around $500. This is compared to the old phones which cost around $300 in 1989 when they were purchased. The old system was functioning well, however, it was 15 years old and no new parts were available. We have been a heartbeat away from having nothing for several years. Maintenance on the old system was very expensive and going up. We had to get a new system. There was a huge effort to identify requirements, build an RFP, and select a new system. In addition to MIS, fire, police, utility billing, and other departments were members of the selection team. MIS did not hold a voting position on the team, so the system was actually selected by the user departments. Mayor West approved the process and final selection. This technology is not in its infancy. These people are confusing Internet based phone systems with our Voice over IP system. Our system runs over our own network, not the Internet. One of the many advantages to this is that our phones and computers are on the same physical network so we are maintaining only one network instead of the two we had before. The cost savings over the long run are considerable. This is the phone system that most organizations are buying now. The system is guaranteed to work correctly and the vendor will assist us in fixing this problem. We really cannot economically go back at this point. The money for this program is not related to a loss of firefighter positions for several reasons, not the least of which is the fact that a good portion of it is from the utilities. The systems was paid for with CIP and MIS equipment replacement funds which are capital programs outside of the general fund problems associated with the loss of firefighters
Fire stations are somewhat different than other locations in that we do not have city owned highspeed network connections to all of them yet. We have a joint plan with the fire department to run fiber optic cable to all stations. As each station comes on to that network, overall service will improve. I’ll get you the schedule. In the meantime, we are leasing data grade circuits and if we are having problems, it could well be related to the quality of these circuits. We will address the performance issue with the vendor.
As a service provider, I would prefer that our customers talk to us about problems and use the normal chain of command to report problems. If that is not working for them, I respect their right to call on the council for help. Monday of this week was the first time I was aware that the stations were complaining. Give me a chance and we will get this fixed.
Garv
To answer the other questions I’m talking somewhat off the top of my head as I am on vacation and just checking in at night from home. The new phone system cost about 1.8 million. Each phone is essentially a computer with additional capabilities that we will be adding over time and does cost around $500. This is compared to the old phones which cost around $300 in 1989 when they were purchased. The old system was functioning well, however, it was 15 years old and no new parts were available. We have been a heartbeat away from having nothing for several years. Maintenance on the old system was very expensive and going up. We had to get a new system. There was a huge effort to identify requirements, build an RFP, and select a new system. In addition to MIS, fire, police, utility billing, and other departments were members of the selection team. MIS did not hold a voting position on the team, so the system was actually selected by the user departments. Mayor West approved the process and final selection. This technology is not in its infancy. These people are confusing Internet based phone systems with our Voice over IP system. Our system runs over our own network, not the Internet. One of the many advantages to this is that our phones and computers are on the same physical network so we are maintaining only one network instead of the two we had before. The cost savings over the long run are considerable. This is the phone system that most organizations are buying now. The system is guaranteed to work correctly and the vendor will assist us in fixing this problem. We really cannot economically go back at this point. The money for this program is not related to a loss of firefighter positions for several reasons, not the least of which is the fact that a good portion of it is from the utilities. The systems was paid for with CIP and MIS equipment replacement funds which are capital programs outside of the general fund problems associated with the loss of firefighters
Fire stations are somewhat different than other locations in that we do not have city owned highspeed network connections to all of them yet. We have a joint plan with the fire department to run fiber optic cable to all stations. As each station comes on to that network, overall service will improve. I’ll get you the schedule. In the meantime, we are leasing data grade circuits and if we are having problems, it could well be related to the quality of these circuits. We will address the performance issue with the vendor.
As a service provider, I would prefer that our customers talk to us about problems and use the normal chain of command to report problems. If that is not working for them, I respect their right to call on the council for help. Monday of this week was the first time I was aware that the stations were complaining. Give me a chance and we will get this fixed.
Garv
Thursday, June 09, 2005
Response from Councilman Bob Apple...
John Griffith, Local #29 Executive Board:
Thank you, for your comments on the new, phone system. I completely agree and have been becoming more vocal, with my displeasure since it went into effect last September, simply it is not compatible with almost everything existing and requires a wealth of patches and persistent problems. Your City approved approximately $3 million early last year and none of the promises made, have been forthcoming further, the system provider gave notice shortly after installation, that they would no longer provide maintenance and that we would need a sub-provider.
Last week we approved nearly $ .5 million, of transferred around money we do not have because, somebody apparently convinced someone they could "patch" our way out of this financial disaster. Unfortunately, I've witnessed with such city contracts, a complete lack of any performance standards and unwillingness to hold vendors accountable and in my opinion, this system is a fraud that has and will cost city employee jobs. There is a great deal more wrong with this system and at this time, I do not believe those management of our city who are responsible and if nothing else, they should be held accountable.
At least three members of your city council, asked for a review of this system by a specific well known company and were lead to believe it was in the works, only to be told months later it was not needed and an old study by an unknown vendor, should suffice our concerns. Certainly, we do not have the money to go back and our City should have never endeavored into the apparent attempt, at forming our own distinct system and instead of proven one's. I'am so mad, about this system and the lies told because, yours is only one of a growing stack of serious complains.
Bob Apple, Spokane City Council
Thank you, for your comments on the new, phone system. I completely agree and have been becoming more vocal, with my displeasure since it went into effect last September, simply it is not compatible with almost everything existing and requires a wealth of patches and persistent problems. Your City approved approximately $3 million early last year and none of the promises made, have been forthcoming further, the system provider gave notice shortly after installation, that they would no longer provide maintenance and that we would need a sub-provider.
Last week we approved nearly $ .5 million, of transferred around money we do not have because, somebody apparently convinced someone they could "patch" our way out of this financial disaster. Unfortunately, I've witnessed with such city contracts, a complete lack of any performance standards and unwillingness to hold vendors accountable and in my opinion, this system is a fraud that has and will cost city employee jobs. There is a great deal more wrong with this system and at this time, I do not believe those management of our city who are responsible and if nothing else, they should be held accountable.
At least three members of your city council, asked for a review of this system by a specific well known company and were lead to believe it was in the works, only to be told months later it was not needed and an old study by an unknown vendor, should suffice our concerns. Certainly, we do not have the money to go back and our City should have never endeavored into the apparent attempt, at forming our own distinct system and instead of proven one's. I'am so mad, about this system and the lies told because, yours is only one of a growing stack of serious complains.
Bob Apple, Spokane City Council
Letter to City Council regarding city phone system...
Members of Local 29 are on the frontline of Spokane's new era of "customer service." But, for quite some time, we've had an unnecessary impediment placed in front of us.
The Internet-based phone system went into effect, coincidentally, as we announced the loss of over 50 positions from the fire department.
This system is a degradation from our previous conventional phone system. Sound quality is poor. And often the phone cuts in and out. It is very frustrating. More importantly, it is frustrating to our citizens (or in the current lingo - "customers"). When they call the stations to schedule CPR, report an emergency or ask a home safety question, frequently a firefighter has to apologize that he is unable to understand what the caller is saying, as the phone cuts in and out. Some of the more resourceful members might direct citizens to call them on their personal cell phones, before terminating the conversation on the city phone.
I know our IMS folks have been working hard to solve the many shortcomings of this new system. And I'm sure they will eventually fix the problems.
But members of Local 29 are wondering about the whys and the wherefores of this phone system. Recently there have been news articles claiming that an Internet-based phone system is not yet a viable alternative to a conventional phone system. To clarify these issues with our members, we respectfully request answers to these questions:
1. How much did the new system cost? We've heard every phone cost $500 - with an overall cost of two-million dollars.
2. From our end, the old conventional system was never broken. Is this true?
3. What was the process the city employed which resulted in buying into this program? Who were the "players" in this process?
4. Was there ever concern that this technology was still in its infancy, and that financially and operationally it would be prudent to delay implementation?
5. What, if any, performance standards were guaranteed by the vendor?
6. Can the citizens' money be refunded? Can we go back to a conventional phone system, improve telephonic customer service and hire back some of our firefighters?
Thank you very much,
John Griffith
Local 29 Executive Board Member
Spokane Citizen
The Internet-based phone system went into effect, coincidentally, as we announced the loss of over 50 positions from the fire department.
This system is a degradation from our previous conventional phone system. Sound quality is poor. And often the phone cuts in and out. It is very frustrating. More importantly, it is frustrating to our citizens (or in the current lingo - "customers"). When they call the stations to schedule CPR, report an emergency or ask a home safety question, frequently a firefighter has to apologize that he is unable to understand what the caller is saying, as the phone cuts in and out. Some of the more resourceful members might direct citizens to call them on their personal cell phones, before terminating the conversation on the city phone.
I know our IMS folks have been working hard to solve the many shortcomings of this new system. And I'm sure they will eventually fix the problems.
But members of Local 29 are wondering about the whys and the wherefores of this phone system. Recently there have been news articles claiming that an Internet-based phone system is not yet a viable alternative to a conventional phone system. To clarify these issues with our members, we respectfully request answers to these questions:
1. How much did the new system cost? We've heard every phone cost $500 - with an overall cost of two-million dollars.
2. From our end, the old conventional system was never broken. Is this true?
3. What was the process the city employed which resulted in buying into this program? Who were the "players" in this process?
4. Was there ever concern that this technology was still in its infancy, and that financially and operationally it would be prudent to delay implementation?
5. What, if any, performance standards were guaranteed by the vendor?
6. Can the citizens' money be refunded? Can we go back to a conventional phone system, improve telephonic customer service and hire back some of our firefighters?
Thank you very much,
John Griffith
Local 29 Executive Board Member
Spokane Citizen
Thursday, May 26, 2005
San Juan Hiring....
This link takes you to Orcas Fire. On their website is a link to download the application. Jenny also has an application at the office.
Sunday, May 22, 2005
Interesting fire suppression article from June 2005 WIRED Magazine
If you get a chance to pick up this magazine, there's usually something worth reading. And this month is no exception.
Thursday, May 12, 2005
SEATTLE PI EDITORIAL REGARDING INITIATIVE 336
The other night at the union meeting, many of you wanted some information regarding the initiative the WSCFF endorsed. Besides the link above, here are a couple of websites - one pro, one anti.
PRO I-336
http://www.bettersafercare.org/
ANTI I-336, PRO I-330
http://www.yesoni330.org/
PRO I-336
http://www.bettersafercare.org/
ANTI I-336, PRO I-330
http://www.yesoni330.org/
Thursday, April 21, 2005
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)