Low Graphics Version Home | Contact Us | FAQs | Service Request | eLists | Site Map
City of Fullerton
Administrative Services
Home ... > 2007 > February 22, 2007
State College & Raymond Grade Separation Updates
Water Bill Payment
City Employment
Agendas & Minutes
City Services
Emergency Preparedness
Online Services
Public Notices
TWG Minutes - February 22, 2007




Special Meeting Held February 22, 2007

9:15 A.M.




Chair Burtner called the meeting to order at 9:17 a.m.


ROLL CALL                     Members Present

                                                Tony Anderson                      Larry Iboshi

                                                Roger Burtner, Chair            Cameron McCune

                                                Steve Giano                           Paul Stover


                                                Mike Carter and Carl Samantello arrived after roll call.


                                                Members Absent

                                                Fred Canfield, Helen Hall, Robert Port



                                                Joe Felz, Assistant to the City Manager, Fullerton           




Chair Burtner had not had time to review the draft minutes for the three previous meetings, therefore, approval was postponed to the next meeting.




Item 1.      Creation of an educational/municipal (institutional) fiber/wireless network, FullertonNet


Showcase Event at CSUF

Everyone agreed that the showcase event was successful, and that everyone who participated had done a good job with their presentations and providing information regarding the benefits of an I-Net. 


George Giokaris, FJUHSD Superintendent, had related to Chair Burtner that he was very supportive of the proposed I-Net project and indicated that they could come up with the money for the capital improvements, but he was concerned about ongoing/recurring costs.  Chair Burtner noted that Dr. Giokaris had left the event before seeing Ted Malos’ presentation which emphasized that an I-Net tends to drive costs down, and revolutionizes IT. 


Mr. Anderson stated that he could see how an I-Net could enable you to do things differently and possibly more efficiently, and might forestall having to add additional staff, but he did not necessarily see the potential for "squeezing a whole bunch of current costs out of the equation."  Mr. Giano noted that it is definitely an arguable point.


Vice Chair Stover pointed out that he had been very impressed with Ted Malos’ presentation.  Mr. Malos had indicated that everything about their fiber system had been great, but the reality still exists that school districts do not have money for computers, that there are costs that the schools have to worry about beyond just getting the fiber installed.   Mr. Stover stated that he strongly believes that there is nothing else, with a price tag of under $2 million, that would have this kind of impact, noting that in totality $2 million was not that much, and that the TWG needed to figure out whatever creative financing exists and get to the point where people are actually having formative discussions about how the I-Net gets funded. 


Mr. Samantello pointed out that if the TWG wants to be taken seriously, it needs to get the costs documented and under control.  He indicated that he did not believe the capital outlay would be a problem, but that the project could not be presented to the decision makers in the school districts without documenting the ongoing/recurring costs. 


Chair Burtner suggested that perhaps an amount of money within a specific range could be established and presented to the school district boards that would allow them to commit to the project, and the actual "how to pay for it" could be determined later because there are a number of potential options to pay for it over time.


Mr. Samantello noted there was a small delta ($90,000) between putting in the 216 as opposed to the 144, and that perhaps the cost could be justified by not doing the high-end, dense wave division multiplexing now, but instead using the standard single-mode kind of transmission, noting that once the fiber is installed, the issue becomes connectivity.  That would allow the schools to buy in right away, and give them the next three or four years to find the funding to upgrade that hardware.  In other words, the school districts could justify the cost difference by the cost savings in the hardware.


Chair Burtner noted that the school districts appear to want to be part of this I-Net and commit to it, and asked Assistant to the City Manager Joe Felz about the next step – working out the details of a memorandum of understanding, developing a business model, and outlining the financing.  Chair Burtner suggested that rather than having the TWG work on the next steps, perhaps it could be handed off to a subcommittee which included representatives of the city and school districts who have authorization to speak on behalf of the agencies.


Mr. Felz agreed that would be a good approach, but noted that the next formal step would be for the TWG to make a recommendation to City Council.  He further noted that he had included the project in the City's five-year capital improvement program which is part of the budget process that is currently under way.


Mr. Samantello indicated that the school districts' CalNet contract expires in 2008, and that would give them an 18-month to two-year transition period.


Mr. Stover asked Mr. Felz if getting the Redevelopment Agency engaged in this conversation could possibly speed up the process, and whether or not the Homeland Security grant, if that came in next week, would possibly change anything.


Mr. Felz indicated that the project is part of the City's capital improvement program (an Engineering project) and not a Redevelopment project, but that Redevelopment would be a possible funding source.   He explained that the Homeland Security project would have its own timeline.   He further explained that the City of Anaheim is the lead agency on Homeland Security funds for the county.  Anaheim needs to get fiber to the Fullerton Airport for their new helicopter operations there.  As part of our Homeland Security, Anaheim would like our Police Department to have direct contact with Anaheim's police substation at Fullerton Airport.  Since Fullerton does not currently have fiber running to the Airport, Anaheim has put in for a Homeland Security grant to run that fiber.  Anaheim will install the fiber (which will be underground) as part of the Homeland Security grant which will be administered by Anaheim.  Mr. Felz indicated that he has been designated as the City's grant administrator and will be required to present this Homeland Security grant project to City Council for approval.  Once the grant application is approved by Homeland Security, the installation would be expected to take place fairly quickly, and at that time the City would negotiate with Anaheim to lay fiber for the I-Net at the same time as the P.D.-to-Airport fiber.


Mr. Samantello expressed concern that any Homeland Security grant will most likely come with significant stipulations about safety, security, access, etc., and that the City should identify what restrictions will be associated with the grant.


Mr. Stover expressed disbelief that the I-Net is possibly two years away from happening, and stated that that kind of timeline was unacceptable.  Mr. Felz clarified that the two years was an outer limit, and that the project is on track, and once financing is secured, the project can be accelerated.


Chair Burtner asked Mr. Felz what sort of commitment the City needed from the school districts to move forward in terms of forming a committee to analyze details.  Mr. Felz suggested that once the City has a preliminary budget, a letter of agreement or memorandum of understanding be submitted to the two districts for approval before going to Council. 


Dr. McCune suggested a letter of intent as opposed to a letter of agreement.   Chair Burtner indicated he would work with Mr. Felz and perhaps Dr. McCune on the letter of intent and hopefully have a draft for review in the next week or two. 


Mr. Stover cautioned against slipping into a "San Francisco bridge project" where the longer this goes, the costs keep changing and the TWG has to keep coming back and basically redoing everything that's been done – which, he noted, has already happened a few times. 


Mr. Anderson pointed out that the TWG still doesn't have a handle on the ongoing costs, and it would not be possible to go to the school district boards without having answers to their questions, e.g., who's going to operate the I-Net, is the City going to pass costs onto the school district, will they have a telecommunications service provider/operator to get e-rate discounts, who will handle maintenance issues, what will the service level be, etc.


Mr. Stover noted that the TWG has been trying to study the issue of ongoing costs and maintenance, and everything they have learned is that costs are lower with an I-Net, and he questioned whether anyone could rationalize that the installation of fiber would actually drive maintenance costs up.


Mr. Samantello suggested that Chair Burtner talk to perhaps CENIC for more information pertaining to that issue, noting that people are going to want to know what the maintenance cost is going to be, and the TWG needs to have answers.  He further noted that the decision makers will want to know that the TWG has been very detailed and comprehensive and has done due diligence to make sure all the bases have been covered, and without that thoroughness and completeness up front, the project would not get the support the TWG is looking for.


Mr. Felz concluded the discussion by indicating that once the draft letter of intent has been completed, it would be submitted to the school districts with a request for two action items:  agree to move forward and assign someone to work on a temporary ad hoc committee to finalize the details.  He noted that someone on the committee would need to be a "number cruncher" to make sure nothing was overlooked.


Item 2.      Citywide wireless network


W2i Conference Report

Chair Burtner indicated he had considerable information on the conference report, but due to time constraints, he would hold that information for another meeting time.






Mr. Iboshi indicated that he was volunteering again this year to man the booth at the annual Railroad Days in May, and requested that the TWG have an information packet or some type of material that could be presented to visitors to the booth. 


Chair Burtner announced that two people needed to be recognized for their service to the TWG in helping put together the Showcase Event at CSUF.  On behalf of the TWG, Mr. Burtner thanked Mr. Felz for being instrumental in getting the City's support for the event (including funding), and Mr. Giano for all of his work in coordinating the event, including site venue, speaker coordination, catering arrangements, parking,  etc.


The next regularly scheduled meeting of the TWG would be March 15; however, due to schedule conflicts for some members, it was agreed that the meeting would be moved to March 8.




With no further business, Chair Burtner asked for a motion to adjourn.  The motion to adjourn was made by Paul Stover and seconded by Larry Iboshi. The meeting was adjourned at 10:13 a.m. with unanimous approval. 




RSS for Fullerton NewsFullerton eLists
Home | Contact Us | FAQs | Service Request | eLists | Site Map | Disclaimer & Privacy PolicyCopyright © 2000 - 2015 City of Fullerton. Administrative Services, 303 W. Commonwealth, Fullerton, CA 92832. (714) 738-6520