Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMarch 16Technology Committee Special Meeting Minutes Meeting Location: City Council Chambers 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, California Date & Time: March 16, 2022 at 5:00 p.m. Agenda 1.Call to Order a.Roll Call – All Present 2.Approval of Minutes from March 9, 2022 Regular Meeting 3.Appointment of Associate Members (John Swan and Andreas Bibl) 4.Review of proposals for the IT Master Plan & LAH IT Software and Hardware (List) 5.LAHCF Overview Discussion Review and discussion of the JVSV Proposal Related to Broadband (Comments from LAHCF) Minutes: 1.Call to Order (roll call) Members Present: (i)Rajiv Bhateja (ii)Scott Vanderlip (iii)Bill Coughran (arrived at 5:06 p.m.) (iv)Annie Ju (online) (v)George Lee (vi)Sasha Zborek (vii)Ameesh Divatia (online) Town Staff: (i)Peter Pirnejad (ii)Cody Einfalt (online) (iii)Sarina Revillar (online) (iv)Deborah Padovan 2.Approval of Minutes a.Move: Sasha Zbrozek b.Second: Bill Coughran c.Vote Yes: Bhateja, Vanderlip, Coughran, Ju, Lee, Divatia, Zbrozek No: None 3.Appointment of Associate Members (John Swan) a.Move: Sasha Zbrozek b.Second: Bill Coughran c.Vote Yes: Bhateja, Vanderlip, Coughran, Ju, Lee, Divatia, Zbrozek No: None 4.Appointment of Associate Members (Andreas Bibl) a.Move: Bill Coughran b.Second: Sasha Zbrozek c.Vote Yes: Bhateja, Vanderlip, Coughran, Ju, Lee, Divatia, Zbrozek No: None 5.IT Master plan a.Peter provided background on why this is needed. i.What is needed now? ii.3 yr plan 1.Remote work 2.Cloud transition 3.Desktop to Laptop transition 4.DFA b.Town staff contacted Redwood City for a transition plan for contract expires June 30, 2022 i.Proposals received: 1.IT Svcs (Stepford & Eaton & Associates) 2.Standalone IT Strategic Plan (Stepford, Eaton & Associates, Reichental & Associates) c.Dicar Networks may be an option because they service Monte Sereno - Ameesh d.Eaton Associates – Sasha feels that it is more complete and the recommendations are valid e.Bill is asking if the JVSV plan is related – it is not f.Suggest to split the two initiatives – short term and strategic – Ameesh g.George feels that the two proposals are not the same h.Eaton has another SoW that they have submitted for IT Svcs – Rajiv i.Discussion around whether both should come from the same provider j.Jonathan Reichental Associates proposal for strategic plan – Peter i.Much more comprehensive ii.3 aspects of IT iii.This committee needs to see the proposal k.Need to get references for Eaton from other city govts l.Q for Peter: Do we have references for Reichental? – Rajiv i.Have professionally worked with Jonathan and would recommend him ii.For short term would want someone with local experience – Stepford m.Have we interviewed the IT Svcs vendors – Rajiv for Sarina i.Yes ii.One more vendor – Zag iii.Eaton did not have a quick reference of city govt available iv.Stepford did have a list of references including Redwood City v.Like the fact that you have redundancy with a vendor rather than an in-house individual n.Should have a short-term contract for IT svcs - Sasha o.Recommendations: Rajiv i.Press Eaton for references ii.Tech depth assessment for each vendor iii.Town staff to make the decision iv.For the strategic plan, need to evaluate the best way to find a resource 1.Is this a less urgent need? Not quite, coming to the end of the FY, we should get a sense of budget for next year – Peter v.Do we have an urgent need for anything now – Stan 1.Yes, we need an IT Svcs plan - Peter 2.Cybersecurity - Stan 3.Offsite backup – Rajiv 4.Need to budget for hw/sw needed for strategic plan - Peter 6.Question from public – Allan Epstein a.Cybersecurity review – insurance broker, Sedgwick b.John Paulson from Sedgwick offered that option c.Sarina will follow up with him 7.JVSV proposal a.Committee Members Vanderlip and Zbrozek recused themselves from the discussion on LAHCF and left the meeting. b.Town being asked to participate and partner with LAHCF c.ARPA(American Rescue Plan Act) funds to LAHCF i.$2M received ($800K to support broadband and LAHCF) ii.Very strict in how they allocate the funds (25Mbps/5Mbps speeds for underserved areas). Question raised about whether we will be eligible d.Peter has talked with Cruz.io(similar to Next Level Fiber), City of San Bruno e.Cody has contacted 5 vendors – JVSV, Magellan advisors (do not have the bandwidth), Entrypoint (consulting firm pushing municipal fiber only), Cruz.io(did they send a proposal?), Ting Internet (has not responded) f.The Town needs the expertise to answer questions like(Peter) i.Can the Town take over the LAHCF facilities if they were to offer it? g.George i.Happy that the Town is interested in providing broadband ii.Comcast and AT&T providing services but do not guarantee service h.Bill i.What is the value of the rights of way? i.Stan i.3 pronged attack 1.AT&T, Comcast 2.Community fiber 3.Point to point radio links ii.Light a fire under AT&T j.George i.Fiber the only choice if latency is a concern 1.15 ms with cable 2.Sub 10 ms with fiber k.Allan Epstein i.Committee should look at the needs of the entire community and not just those served by LAHCF. Reach out to the providers as to what their plans are to provide services in the Town 8.Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted by Ameesh Divatia The minutes were approved as presented at the April 4, 2022 Technology Committee Meeting.