Low Graphics Version Home | Contact Us | FAQs | Service Request | eLists | Site Map
City of Fullerton
Administrative Services
Home ... > 2008 > December 4, 2008
State College & Raymond Grade Separation Updates
Water Bill Payment
City Employment
Agendas & Minutes
City Services
Emergency Preparedness
Online Services
Public Notices
TWG Minutes - December 4, 2008




December 4, 2008

9:00 A.M.



CALL TO ORDER       Vice Chair Stover called the meeting to order at 9:02 a.m.


ROLL CALL                 Members Present

                                                Roger Burtner, Chair            Carl Samantello

                                                Fred Canfield                        Thad Sandford

                                                Mike Carter                            Paul Stover, Vice Chair

                                                Larry Iboshi                           


                                                Members Absent

                                                Helen Hall                               Madusha Palliyage

                                                Harry Lamberth                     Ed Smith



Because Chair Burtner had missed the last couple of meetings and was not up to speed on TWG issues, he asked Vice Chair Stover to chair this meeting.




Vice Chair Stover noted an error in the October 30 minutes.  Reference to the "v network" on page 2 under Anaheim Earthlink Radios Update, paragraph 2, should be corrected to "b network".  With that correction, Mike Carter moved approval of the minutes.  The motion was seconded by Thad Sandford, and the minutes were unanimously approved.




1.         ISMS Evaluation Update


Vice Chair Stover noted that a roundtable discussion had been held with ISMS.  Mr. Ferrier had asked via email if the school districts had been able to provide all of the information that ISMS had requested.  Mr. Samantello indicated that ISMS had requested a lot of information about the district's E-rate status and filings, and he (Samantello) had been responding to the requests for information as quickly as possible.  Mr. Samantello noted that ISMS seemed to be unclear on the difference between Priority One and Priority Two funding in E-Rate.  He pointed out that the district to date had not qualified for Priority Two (internal wiring funding), but that had changed this year, and the district would be filing another 470 on December 8 for the Priority Two funding, which would provide for replacing all of the equipment and upgrading to a fiber connection.  This 470 for Priority Two funding was being filed in addition to the 470 filed by the district for their standard Priority One funding.


With that updated information, Mr. Stover questioned whether ISMS should be contacted and apprised of this latest info.  Mr. Sandford pointed out that ISMS was nearing completion of their report, and any additional information or guidance at this point would be disruptive. 


Mr. Stover asked Mr. Samantello if the high school district was working in concert with the elementary school district.  Mr. Samantello pointed out that the elementary school district's primary concern is financial – their programs and technical programs are being cut.  They are also concerned about their 470 filing, and whether it would be adequate to allow them to participate in the I-Net if that develops next year. 


2.         Wireless Network Update


Mr. Stover noted that Ms. Hall was absent today, therefore, no update on the wireless network was available. 


Mr. Samantello noted that the school district was starting to look at wireless as a possibility campuswide, but there is a concern.  And that is the fact that they receive uncensored wireless access into the campuses.  As a result, the district is looking at technology to cancel out wireless signals that come in from outside the area, such as Fullerton's Downtown Network.  Mr. Samantello noted that the district is legally required to ensure that students do not see inappropriate material while on campus, and unfortunately that was one of the side effects of the downtown network.


3.         Anaheim DHS Update


Mr. Stover noted that the TWG had received a considerable amount of information on the Anaheim DHS grant project during the last two meetings.  It was agreed there was no need for further discussion, except Mr. Stover commented that he was surprised that the fiber would be run overhead, considering the amount of the grant.  Chair Burtner pointed out that Anaheim had requested twice the amount of money they actually received because they were originally planning to lay fiber underground, but when the funding was scaled back, it became necessary to go overhead.


Mr. Samantello questioned why the City of Fullerton is not applying for this type of funding (DHS).  Mr. Stover indicated that his impression from Mr. Ferrier was that Fullerton did not need to apply since Anaheim had already done so.  Mr. Canfield pointed out that Anaheim contracts out for IT services to EDS, and EDS is the one who applied for and received the grant money.  He further noted that Fullerton does not have anyone to apply for grants.


Mr. Samantello suggested that this committee might recommend to the City that they hire a consultant for grant writing, noting that it does not require a full-time staff member.  Mr. Stover suggested that the only reason the grant writing is not being done by Fullerton is because they have no one hired specifically for that purpose.


Chair Burtner pointed out that the ISMS report will probably include information about funding sources, and he would not be surprised if ISMS's report includes direction to the City as to where they might go for grant money.  Mr. Burtner suggested that the TWG wait until the ISMS report is received, and then prepare a response and recommendations to Council.


Mr. Canfield suggested that since the City's emergency response center is set up at Fire Station 6, which is the farthest from the downtown area, obtaining Homeland Security money would allow connection from City Hall to Fire Station 6 and would cover a significant portion of the I-Net.


4.         CERT Training


Mr. Stover noted that as a result of the recent Southern California Shakeout, the TWG learned of the CERT (Community Emergency Response Teams) program.  After a brief discussion at the last TWG meeting, it was decided that those members of the TWG who might be interested should become certified.  He noted that the training appeared to consist of two Saturday sessions.


Mr. Canfield pointed out that there was an article in this week's newspaper regarding the next CERT training classes that would be starting in January.


Mr. Stover asked Mr. Canfield to coordinate the effort on behalf of the TWG, i.e., send out invitations to the TWG members to determine who is interested in participating; and based on that response, contact the training center to see if training for an entire group could take place in one day, rather than two.  Mr. Canfield agreed.


5.         Technology Park Designation (status of CSUF/City partnership)


Mr. Stover pointed out that he had previously brought up the idea of a "technology corridor" or "technology park," but the idea had basically been shut down by Mr. Ferrier.  But Mr. Stover noted that he sees it as an educational opportunity where students could come together to discuss and incubate ideas, using technology with the ability to bring in data, and provide the opportunity to look at things or pursue ideas in a way that students might not necessarily get the chance to in the classroom environment.  He suggested that the "technology park" could be championed by Cal State Fullerton, for example, in conjunction with the City, or by the school districts.  He stated that the idea might be a wild one, but the idea is to get the technology park idea started so that the City and the TWG could be viewed again with some credibility for moving on the idea of attracting people to Fullerton with the idea that we do embrace technology.


Mr. Sandford pointed out that at a meeting with Council and the City Manager, the City Manager had pointed out the challenges faced by the City of how to deal with the property that Beckman-Coulter is leaving.  Mr. Sandford's suggestion is that the City could declare that property to be a technology park, and specifically direct some of the City's infrastructure there to improve it, including communications, but also things such as tax abatement to encourage high-tech companies that are small or start-ups to locate there.  If you were able to accomplish that, then you would create the need for mutual support, i.e, a central services environment, that would allow these companies, as well as the support service companies, to grow and flourish.  He noted that the City would need a full marketing package to promote such a project.  He further noted that it is not the TWG's job to develop such a project, but would be more a project for the Planning Commission.


Mr. Stover asked if the TWG should present this concept to the Planning Commission, but Mr. Canfield suggested that it should be presented to the Economic Development Team.


Note:  Chair Burtner requested that the tape recording of the meeting be stopped.  Approximately four minutes lapsed before the tape recorder was started again.


Mr. Stover stated that the TWG should try to champion ideas such as these (the technology corridor or park), because not doing so reflects that the TWG is not reaching as far as they need to regarding business development.  He suggested that the TWG present the idea to the Economic Development Team.


Mr. Samantello pointed out that the City of Downey had created something similar with the Rockwell property that had been vacated.  They created Downey Studios and an education center.  He noted, however, that creating such a center would require someone with the experience or knowledge of how other cities have accomplished such a project.


Mr. Sandford commented that in Downey's case the land had been owned by the government, NASA in particular was the caretaker, and they were interested in getting out from under the maintenance of it.  And at one point in time there was even talk of creating a Smithsonian West on the site.  In Fullerton's case, there may be an issue regarding acquisition of the Beckman-Coulter land. 






To be determined







Southern California Shakeout


Mr. Sandford asked if there was going to be an outbrief of the emergency training exercise.  Mr. Stover indicated he was not sure, but suggested that it would be beneficial to the TWG to have someone provide such a report.  Mr. Sandford noted that it would be informative to have an understanding of how the exercise went overall, but also to learn of any issues with the communication infrastructure.  He suggested that City staff be contacted to see if such a briefing to the TWG would be appropriate.


Mr. Samantello pointed out that the information obtained might be useful in obtaining Homeland Security funding.


Communications Master Plan


Mr. Sandford pointed out that during the summer session with the City councilmembers, they had discussed the TWG's charter being one of providing a communications master plan.  He noted that the TWG has not produced that yet.  Mr. Sandford suggested that the City would be well served if they had one – one that deals with fundamental objectives and philosophical approaches, as opposed to details of what wires go up what street. 


Mr. Burtner indicated that he has a copy of the plan for the City of Santa Monica which Santa Monica put together when they did their I-Net, which is analogous to what Fullerton is doing.


Mr. Sandford suggested that the TWG take such a plan or build a basic framework for one, begin discussing its development, and let it evolve into the City's master plan for communications – providing direction that the Council could get behind and support. 


Mr. Stover asked Chair Burtner if perhaps it would be appropriate at the TWG's meeting in January to bring back the 2002 report for review for possible update and/or to shift over into actually delivering a master plan.  Chair Burtner agreed.



With no further business, Vice Chair Stover adjourned the meeting at 10:02.


 Next meeting scheduled for January 8.

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