Loading...
Backup Documents 02/04/2014 W BCC Workshop Meeting BACK-UP DOCUMENTS February 4, 2014 Co *;r Count y Board of County Commissioners Workshop February 4, 2014 COLLIER COUNTY Board of County Commissioners WORKSHOP AGENDA Board of County Commission Chambers Collier County Government Center 3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor Naples FL 34112 February 4, 2014 1:00 P.M. Tom Henning - BCC Chairman; BCC Commissioner, District 3 Tim Nance - BCC Vice - Chairman; BCC Commissioner District 5 Donna Fiala - BCC Commissioner, District 1; CRAB Chairwoman Georgia Hiller - BCC Commissioner, District 2 Fred W. Coyle - BCC Commissioner, District 4; CRAB Vice - Chairman 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Review /Update the Collier County Strategic Plan 3. Overview of 800 MHz Radio System 4. Discussion of Stormwater Issues and Initiatives S. Public Comment 6. Adjourn Notice: All persons wishing to speak must turn in a speaker slip. Each speaker will receive no more than three (3) minutes. Collier County Ordinance No. 2003 -53 as amended by Ordinance 2004 -05 and 2007 -24, requires that all lobbyists shall, before engaging in any lobbying activities (including but not limited to, addressing the Board of County Commissioners), register with the Clerk to the Board at the Board Minutes and Records Department. Strategic Planning 2014 Board of County Commissioners Strategic Planning Workshop February 4, 2014 1:00 pm Strategic Focus Areas Quality of Place Growth Management III. Community Health, Wellness and Human Services IV. Infrastructure and Capital Asset Management Economic Development VI. Governance Strategic Planning Workshop Agenda • Collier County's Performance Management Planning Process • Review Vision, Mission, Motto, Guiding Principles and Strategic Focus Areas — Approve minor clarifications /re- wording in the Community Expectations section of the Strategic Plan • How Collier County is Performing towards Attainment of Strategic Goals • Continuing and New Priorities for FY 14 and FY 15 High Level View of Collier County's Performance Management Planning Process Strategic Planning i a "TI Outcomes of Practicing Performance Management • Provides a tool for comprehensive business and financial planning. • Employees are more focused on the outcomes of their actions and who benefits. Citizens are easily able to see how we are performing on the items they have expressed as important. • The Board can answer the question "How are we doing ?" and see progress toward the strategies you set. Motto, Vision and Mission Statements Vision: To be the best community in America to live, work, and play. Mission,., To deliver high quality, best - value, public services, programs, and facilities to our residents, businesses and visitors. Motto: Exceeding expectations, every day! Board of County Commissioners and County Employees' Guiding Principles ■Honesty &Integrity ■Service ■Accountability ■Quality • Respect ■Knowledge ■ Stewa rds h i p ■Collaboration ■Self - Initiating, Self- Correcting Strategic Focus Areas I. Quality of Place To preserve and enhance the safety, quality, value, character, and heritage of our neighborhoods, communities and region. IV: Infrastructure and Capital Asset Management To responsibly plan, construct and maintain the County's critical public infrastructure and capital assets to ensure sustainability for the future. II. Growth Management To responsibly plan and manage community growth, development, redevelopment and protect III: Community Health, Wellness and Human Services To improve the quality of life and prornote personal the natural environment. wellness, self- reliance and independence. V: Economic Development To support a business climate that promotes a sustainable, diversified and growing economy. VI: Governance To sustain public trust & confidence in County government through sound public policy, professional management and active citizen participation. Strategic Focus Area 1. 0 Quality of Place Community Expectations: A. Provide high quality, best value public facilities, services and amenities. B. Preserve and enhance neighborhood character and quality. C. Promote safe and secure neighborhoods. Strategic Focus Area II: Growth Management Community Expectations: A. Update and enhance the Growth Management Plan (GMP), Land Development Code (LDC) and other short and long -term plans as needed to reflect changing conditions in financial resources, community desires, contemporary data trends and best practices B. Implement the county's GMP and LDC consistent with community desires through efficient processes while maintaining a balance between public trust and public service C. Manage development and redevelopment in harmony with efficient mobility, habitat preservation, water resource management and a sustainable ecology Strategic Focus Area III: 0 Community Health, Wellness and Human Services Community Expectations: A. Improve access to health care and wellness services B. Address the needs of the community's senior, disabled, working poor and indigent populations C. Partner with community organizations that provide human services D. Address the health, recreational, educational and nutritional needs of the community's youth Strategic Focus Area IV: Infrastructure and Capital Asset Community Expectations: A. optimize the useful life of all capital assets and critical public infrastructure. B. Provide adequate, timely, cost - effective public facilities and infrastructure concurrently timed to meet both current and future demands. C. Mitigate the impacts of potential disasters on critical infrastructure. Strategic Focus Area V: Economic Development Community Expectations-, A. Develop a well - balanced, diversified tax base to sustain a health local economy B. Retain existing businesses and attract desirable new business and industry C. Partner to create additional jobs at or above the national average wage D. Serve the air transportation needs of county residents, businesses and visitors E. Promote our community as a year round destination of choice Strategic Focus Area VI: Governance Community Expectations: A. Provide effective leadership B. Operate an effective, professional, and fiscally responsible government C. Develop an engaged citizenry Strategy Map nc,nrd fr3f Courlty for ►rni siolt+�r Strat ,egy Map Viso ©rl T© be tho host community in Acrnorica to Iowa, work, anti plaay Mission_ Tv deliver high quality, Bast -value public services, programs, aKid facilities to our residents, businesses acid visitors_ inns Strategic Focus 1S.reas -- - ., r'1!l�.. �»O Hun{alt / / 1 Ovvvlu V••�v..1 I I Go Community Expectations- f3utconz+�s ancJ Strategic �bjactives x....v ., x �` G a . a wtfl. ,� a. d W 11 c �` — -' Etl:.•vtiY. nn. «...I.rr Mc,ttrr Exr_awcling Ex�lrlcta{fi {nr.x, Evsery C3xyl • - -.. .. .._• • .�.._, AtlaJrarrfr Nvamcfw vl 1 [hrvalvpn.v r,l Rtaalmrn Prnr.nrvn �Nn1A1t1ararhnc.Ara •. tN... i.r J"'• t.h�. � J NAII .,,l tar�.l,,.y �. •�- �yPnrwM .�.� � 1...1:.I•`r.r F..1 i ri....•. r_••••• I. . f..- C!lxa.trw, � hufc�.IVr,ul P..rtnnr wt!!t � �— 1•a•lr.a[r Ir1 f':ran.1 »a.rt /ty 1 t Jaabv rt cr ut.aay.: t7rparn is Mlasatw to �VIY.r I. a.•.. a•1 Av.. r..Ui� 1 •rqY d� t la.m n J W J ty �l � 1 ryva. a. sl {I.lr t�vurrtY f IYI Y r.•e..•y I • r.i. 1 M..r.• a... • -�. li. ..... t. ..•..... •.I..1 . ..!•...• y !1. ..yr. . i h...e.. l• Iy,... .-... u. ...a.. .I. r.�..i... ae .., •..r +. �. i. r......... •i. . .. . .� Mc,ttrr Exr_awcling Ex�lrlcta{fi {nr.x, Evsery C3xyl A Sampling of Operational Trends Across the County Manager's Agency Domestic Animal Services Animals Adopted & Animals Euthanized (2010 -2013) Year Animals Adopted Animals Euthanized 2010 1,769 4,196 2011 1,730 3,566 2012 1,879 3,116 2013 1,943 2,881 Animals Adopted & Animals Euthanized (2010 -2013) 4,400 —*— Animals Adopted 4,200 -4,196 �� -*—Animals Euthanized 4,000 3,800 3,600 3,400 3,566 3,200 3,000 3,1-16 2,881 2,800 __._ __ _ ___ _ _ _ _ y 2,600 2,400 2,200 1,943 2,000 1,879 1,769 1,800 _. _ 17300„ 1,600 - - -- - - 2010 2011 2012 2013 Tourism Occupancy Rates Naples, Marco Island and Everglades City January to April (2009 -2013) Year Occupancy Rate 2009 76.4% 2010 80.2% 2011 83.0% 2012 85.6% 2013 88.1% Source: Research Data Services, Inc. uses a worldng inventory of approximately 8,600 hotel /motel /resort units and 1,400 condo /single- family units. Occupancy Rates Naples, Marco Island and Everglades City January to April (2009 -2013) 88% 86% 85.1% 84% 82.90 82% e 80% 78.9% 78% 77.2% 76% 74% 72.6% 72% 70% 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Solid & Hazardous Waste FDEP Recycling Rates for Collier County (2010 -2013) In 2008, the Florida Legislature enacted House Bill 7135 which established a new statewide recycling goal of 75% to be achieved by 2020. Annual certified recycling rates are determined by the FDEP. The CY13 recycling rate for Collier County is an estimate. The FDEP is scheduled to release CY13 recycling rates in April 2014. Solid Waste Managemel Florida (2012) 56% 55% 54% s� 52% 51% do 50% ido 48% i 46% 44% 42% 41% OP 40% �� 40% i 38% - _ __ _________ ___ ____ _.. __ 36% 2010 2011 2012 2013 In 2008, the Florida Legislature enacted House Bill 7135 which established a new statewide recycling goal of 75% to be achieved by 2020. Annual certified recycling rates are determined by the FDEP. The CY13 recycling rate for Collier County is an estimate. The FDEP is scheduled to release CY13 recycling rates in April 2014. Solid Waste Managemel Florida (2012) Risk Management Outstanding Liability in Dollars 4,2 50,000 —*—Property Casualty Fund Liability 3,972,000 —*—Workers' Comp. Fund Liability 3,750,000 3,250,000 2,750,000 2,937, 0 2,850,000 2,250,000 2,230,000 2,024,000 2,031,0 1,829,000 1,750,000 1,250,000 1,379,000 1,434,418 1,173,998 798,424 750,000 576,647 739,862 528,778 250,000 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Traffic Management Traffic Fatalities Per 100,000 (2009 - 2012) Source: NHTSA (U.S. DOT). Fatalities for 2013 from the NHTSA are not yet available. Fatalities Rates in 2012 for Mid -Size Counties (FL) Rank (fewest fatalities) 15.0 —*—Collier Co. 2012 Fatalities per 100,000 —0— Florida Collier 14.0 13.7 2 13.0 11.5 13.0 Sarasota 12.6 12.6 4 13.0 12.9 12.0 12.3 12.2 Manatee 11.0 6 10.0 19.4 9.9 9.0 2009 2010 2011 2012 Source: NHTSA (U.S. DOT). Fatalities for 2013 from the NHTSA are not yet available. Fatalities Rates in 2012 for Mid -Size Counties (FL) Rank (fewest fatalities) County (population range: 300K to 400K) 2012 Fatalities per 100,000 1 Collier 9.9 2 Lake 11.5 3 Sarasota 12.2 4 Escambia 12.9 5 Manatee 14.4 6 Marion 19.4 Source: NHTSA (U.S. DOT) Purchasing Percent of Purchase Orders Issued to Local Vendors 70% / / 64% / 64% / 62% / / / 58% / / / I I� 52% 50% ,/ 51% / / / /� / / / / / 43% 42% 40% - - 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Wastewater Self- Service Electronic Payments for Customers (2010 -2013) 39% r r r J* 38% r♦ r ♦ r r 35% -.._ _..__ - - -_ --- ____._ __.__ _- 35% r ♦ ♦ r r r r 33% 33% ♦♦ r r r r ♦ r r ♦ 31% rr r ♦ ♦ r r r 29% r♦ ♦ r r r ♦ r 27% 26% 25% 2010 2011 2012 2013 Human Resources Improvements in Processing Personnel Action Reports (PARS)' The error The error The goal is rate using a rate was to ultimately paper , , greatly ' implement a process was reduced fully - extraordi- through automated Warily high.2 training.3 process.4 32.6% Monthly Error Rate 2.0% Monthly Error Rate (June 2009) (April 2010) 1 PAR activity includes promotions, demotions, transfers, separations and certifications. 2 Material omissions and incorrect entries by staff were common place using an all -paper system. This, in turn, necessitated time- consuming corrective measures. The monthly error rate reached a high of 32.6% in June 2009. s The monthly error rate by April 2010 had dropped to 2.0 %. 4 Moving to full automation has been an ongoing and evolving process. One significant advancement was the introduction of PDF forms that incorporate information directly from SAP, which greatly reduced omissions and errors. Growth Management Division Business Center Intake Customer Satisfaction Snapshot (03/26/13- 05/31/13) 16 14 12 R e 10 s p 0 n 8 v Outstanding d e n t 6 Good s j fair 4 Needs Improvement 2 (ry 2 o Unsat. J 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Over 30 Wait Time (minutes) Twenty -seven (27) out of the thirty -one (31) participants or 87.1% rated their experience as "outstanding." The average wait time for those who participated in this grouping of surveys was 10 -15 minutes. Full -Time Board Employees FTBEs Per 1,000 Unincorporated Pop. (FY 2013) Brevard 11.16 Sarasota 8,22 Lee Manatee 6.42 Seminole 6.33 Marion 5.47 Collier 5.46 Escambia 104.43 4 5 6 7 6.96 8 9 10 11 12 I FTBEs Rank County Unincorporated Pop. (200K to 300K) FTBEs (Total) FTBEs (Per 1,000) 1 Escambia 245,796 1,088 4.43 2 Collier 293,343 1,602 5.46 3 Marion 268,686 1,471 5.47 4 Seminole 209,974 1,330 6.33 5 Manatee 258,211 1,658 6.42 6 Lee* 353,196 2,457 6.96 7 Sarasota 247,070 2,031 8.22 8 Brevard 205,690 2,295 11.16 .,1,,,,1- , t,U, dicU PUPUlduurr rigures are rrom me urnce or hconomic and Demographic Research. Board FTE numbers come from the respective budget documents from each county for FY 2013. The ranking or ordering of the counties is from the fewest FTBEs per 1,000 to the greatest. Lee Co., as a neighboring county, was included despite an unincorporated population exceeding 300,000. Full -Time Board Employees FTBEs Per 1,000 Unincorporated Pop. (FY 2013) Brevard 11.16 Sarasota 8,22 Lee 6.96 Manatee 6.42 Seminole 6.33 Marion 11 5.47 Collier 5.46 Escambia 714.43 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 FTBEs Rank Place Median Household Income % of Households with Median Income >_ $100K 1 Collier Co. 56,104 25.4% 2 Seminole Co. 58,577 24.8% 3 Sarasota Co. 48,900 18.8% 4 Brevard Co. 49,099 18.5% 5 Lee Co. 48,453 17.9% 6 Manatee Co. 47,910 17.9% Florida 47,309 17.9% 7 Escambia Co. 43,806 14.1% 8 Marion Co. 39,770 10.1% 3uume: Hmerican Lommumty purvey (uNU3), U.S. Census Bureau. Financial & Management Services - Debt Reduction Year Collier County Outstanding Debt $804 (millions) $765 2010 $726 2011 $677 2012 $627 2013 $594 Outstanding Debt in Millions $804 2008 $ 765 2009 $726 2010 $677 2011 $627 2012 $594 2013 2008 $804 2009 $765 2010 $726 2011 $677 2012 $627 2013 $594 800 MHz Radio System co �r County public Safety Radio System Migration e System Use e History of system e System Configuration e Proposed migration plan c°*erC-°''`nty public Safety Radio System 2013 Activity 1994059644 transmissions in 2013 • Sheriffs Office 892669598 = 47% • Fire* and EMS 494719845 = 25% • County Government 299439209 = 17% • City of Naples 195519858 = 9% • City of Marco 4329088 = 2% * 5 independent, 2 County, and 2 municipal fire departments • 38 Agencies and government departments • System supports 4200 mobile and portable radios sio �erCounty Public Safety Radio System History &Cost 1994 - System RFP & contract $8.3 mil 1995 - 1996 Construction & loading 1999 - City of Naples added to $100k system 2002 - Simulcast expansion rural $1.375 mil fringe 2007 - Simulcast technology Upgrade $4.5 mil 2008 - ESC including CCSO 9 -1 -1 $2.9 mil Included site technology upgrades TYPE Multi -Site Cover County Simulcast 800 MHz Public Safety Radio Network IMMOKALEE CORKSCREW • NORTH NAPLES WAW • MILES CITY •175 EAST COUNTY BARN ESC KREHLING MARCO ISLAND CARNESTOWN LOOP ROAD 0 cO*eY c�ounty g00 MHz System Configuration W • 12 Sites utilizing 41 channels • Redundant site at the ESC • System Command and Control at County Barn Site and the ESC • All Sites are linked with a digital microwave network • 2 911 centers with 16 dispatch consoles - CCSO and NPD c;°*ercounty public Safety Radio System Technology • Trunked Radio System • Channels are shared among all users = efficient use of available frequency spectrum • Users are divided into talk groups not assigned to specific channels • System assigns groups to available channels 10 System establishes communication privacy 10 Improves cross agency communications • Provides group /user priority for access during busy times CD er County What is Trunkin g ? - Computerized Channel Assignment Conventional Approach Trunked Approach System channels are shared not dedicated to a user Bank Tellers SALES COUNTER SALES COUNTER Being Served J. l` System channels are shared not dedicated to a user Co�er County Rt Y 1 �R Obstacles to Signal Propagation x mum7m,:,m 3 watt 35 watt col er County Public Safety Radio System Technology • Current system has been use for 18 years, approaching end of life in 2017 • Technology protocols are changing • What's Next? - P25 Phase 2 • P25 is a suite of standards for digital radio systems • Released in 1995 and the standards continue to evolve • P 25 standards offer improved interoperability between systems and different vendors equipment • P25 Phase 2 standards improve system performance and capabilities • Strong federal support of P25 technology through grants and federal purchasing requirements Co er County Public Safety Radio System Technology Migration • Gradual migration - immediate improvement for public safety and maximizing existing investment • FY 14 upgrades • Two equipment shelters • Replacement of three battery back up systems • Replacement of three site generators • Radio system command and control hardware that will integrate current and future technology • FY 14 efforts will include an interim solution to improve portable radio coverage in North Naples that will transition to a P25 site in FY 15 �°�Yc�nty public Safety Radio System Technology Migration • FY 15 site component replacement and migration of public safety users • FY 16 to FY 18 complete installation of site components and migration of system users • Anticipated five year cost is $15 million • The system vendor is offering pricing concessions for existing customers keeping us on budget • The State of Florida Contract pricing remains in effect until 2021 Colter County Future Considerations • System users have identified the following topics as areas for future action: • Establish standards for in building coverage by ordinance or inclusion in the LDC • Identify areas where additional system resources will be needed due to growth • Utilization of impact fees for funding radio system expansion and improvements cor county 800 MHz Maintenance -00000%---% • Radio repair services are available 24 hours a day for any system issue • System infrastructure is regularly checked according to established maintenance schedules • Mobile and portable radios require annual maintenance checks • Radio software is periodically updated to resolve issues /improve performance Collier County Public Safety Radio System Questions ? ?? John Daly Telecommunications Manager 239 - 252 -2531 hndaly@collierqov.net Backup Materials Background: The FCC's release of 800 MHz frequencies in the 1970s provided for the development of public safety communications systems with significantly improved capabilities over existing systems of that era. The Law Enforcement Assistance Administration initiated a project to develop the capabilities and standards needed in a trunked radio system. This project was a joint effort with Association of Public Safety Communications Officials (APCO) and became known as APCO Project 16. The Project 16 standards released in 1979 included: • Channel access time • Unit and group addressing • Unit and group priority • Data systems interface • Individuality of system users • Command and control flexibility • System growth capability • Frequency use • Reliability APCO Project 16 addressed operational and functional requirements not technical requirements. As a result manufacturers developed proprietary systems to meet the standards. Collier County's EDACS system is compliant with Project 16 standards. The system was implemented in 1995 with users transitioning to the system in 1996. With periodic upgrades to expand system coverage, improve technology, and replace obsolete components, the system will serve Collier for at least twenty years. The user base has expanded from 1600 radios in 1996 to 4,200 today generating 1.7 million radio transmissions monthly. In 1989 in response to Congressional and FCC direction; APCO formed a working group known as APCO Project 25 (P25) to establish standards for digital two way radio communications for public safety. Unlike Project 16, Project 25 was tasked with developing technical requirements not just performance standards with the primary goals of improving interoperability among public safety agencies and efficient use of radio frequency spectrum. The Project 25 committee includes; local, state, and federal public safety representatives, representatives from Federal technical agencies and telecommunications industry representatives. The standards released in the 1995 continue to evolve and Project 25 is an ANSI (American National Standards Institute) standard. The attached white paper from LR Kimball written for a county in Pennsylvania provides detailed background on P25. Project 25 Phase 2 standards improve performance in several areas including more efficient use of frequency spectrum and a migration to a Project 25 Phase 2 system is the recommended migration path for Collier County. What do we do next? As a result of a variety of actions including federal procurement requirements for communication equipment, federal grant guidance, regulatory actions and technology innovations, the Project 25 standard has emerged as the as the choice for public safety radio system technology. SAFECOM, which is an emergency communications program in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), provides communications grant guidance for federal agencies awarding grants and grant applicants. SAFECOM guidance specifically states that "grantees should target funding toward standards —based equipment that enables the entity to support implementation of Project 25 equipment for mission critical voice ". This link will take you to the SAFECOM grant guidance document: httP: // 216.81.81. 251 /SiteCoIlectionDocuments /2013 SAFECOM Guidance Feb 22 FINAL.PDF Several agencies in Collier have been successful applying for federal communication equipment grants and purchased multi -mode portable and mobile radios compatible with the County's current technology and P25 to prepare for system migration and interoperability with P25 systems as they are implemented. Agencies purchasing new or replacement radios are also purchasing multi -mode radios to achieve the same goal. There is an expectation that future grant guidance from SAFECOM may require that the radio system the radios operate on be P25 compliant also. Without a migration plan in place the agencies in using the Collier system may be denied grants if the SAFECOM guidance is changed. P25 radio systems are replacing legacy radio systems not just as a response to the P25 standard but also due to technology evolution. Just as we see in data networks and telephone systems the technology protocols that drive these systems are changing to provide additional capabilities and reliability. In radio we see the same situation and with the development of the P25 standard manufactures are dedicating research and design resources to the standards process. With commercial systems and the developing national broad band network unable to support mission critical public safety voice communications for the immediate future, it is necessary to plan for and fund upgrades for the public safety radio system. The backbone of the next system must be able to fully support and operate the legacy voice radio system Collier currently utilizes until it is no longer needed, a P25 phase 2 voice radio system as users are migrate to it, LTE data, and interface with other external legacy or standards based systems as needed using the core P25 capabilities. The interface between the current legacy system and P25 must support all current features of the legacy system; unit ID, radio priority, emergency, patching of groups; and seamless integration of the talk groups resident on each system. With funding in place the considerations that will be evaluated are as we plan implementation are: • How soon will Collier Public Safety responders need P25 capability to improve interoperability? Numerous counties in Florida including Miami -Dade, Volusia County, Hillsborough, and Lee have all begun P25 migration while maintaining the legacy system. Mobile County Alabama is proceeding with a migration plan very similar to what is being proposed for Collier. Mobile is transitioning public safety users to P25 and keeping government users on the legacy system for several more years. • The estimated replacement value for all radios operating on the Collier System exceeds $12,000,000. A phased migration allows users to replace radios not compatible with P25 over several years and continue use of the legacy system. • A phased migration will allow project scope to be evaluated prior to initiating each phase to meet any changes in technology or operational requirements. • Once P25 technology is available to system users, there will be additional vendor choices available for mobile and portable radio purchases. This is where the savings in a standards based system will be realized. It is important to understand that the open aspect of a P25 primarily applies to the over the air segment of the system, talking to the radios in the user's hands. Command and control protocols and network switching between sites are not as tightly specified at this time. • With changing operational requirements for public safety responders it is important to have a plan in place. With rapidly changing events a secure, interoperable digital network will become critical especially for law enforcement. • Collier County must provide reliable communications for public safety responders. Aging system components need to be upgraded before there is degradation in service or a critical equipment failure. Conclusion: Clearly a combination forces have resulted in the emergence of the P25 digital standard as the platform for future radio systems. Collier County's desired path for radio system migration provides the improved communication capabilities and resources vital for public safety responders while maximizing the investment in the current system. A onetime replacement of the current system would have a significantly higher cost. In addition, the next generation radio system switch offers the ability to integrate multiple technologies and other products into the system. This will allow an evaluation of required capabilities and available technologies prior to implementing each phase of the project which may afford some cost savings. Many of the core components in the current system have been in use since day one nearly twenty years and a P25 system will be no different. This is a long term investment with a strong technology foundation. Submitted by: John Daly, Telecommunications Manager Information Technology Department FY 14 800 MHz Radio System Capital Improvement Plan Dispatch Consle Replacement 1,303,666.80 17 dispatch consoles Engineering, Installation, Project Management Training and cutover assistance VIDA High Availability Network Switching Center 2,215,258.28 24 port EDACS gateway 48 Port Interoperability Gareway Logging Recorder interface Logging Recorder upgrade P25 Licenses Engineering, Installation, Project Management Replacement of UPS Units 75,000.00 North Naples WAW Marco Island Replacement of Generators 120,000.00 North Naples WAW Corkscrew Replacement of Equipment Shelters 225,000.00 North Naples Immokalee FY 14 Total 1/15/2014 3,938,925.08 RADIO SYSTEM FIVE YEAR UPGRADE PLAN Components FY 14 FY 15 FY 16 FY 17 FY 18 Totals Dispatch Consoles 1,304,000.00 1,304,000.00 Network Switch 2,220,000.00 2,220,000.00 UPS Units 75,000.00 75,000.00 150,000.00 Generators 120,000.00 120,000.00 240,000.00 Equipment shelters 225,000.00 - - 225,000.00 P25 Site Upgrades Simulcast - 3,900,000.00 500,000.00 4,400,000.00 P25 Site Upgrades Multisites - 2,500,000.00 1,500,000.00 - 4,0000000.00 Microwave /Site Connectivity 1,400,000.00 750,000.00 2,150,000.00 3,944,000.00 3,900,000.00 4,400,000.00 1,500,000.00 945,000.00 14,689,000.00 1/16/2014 National Public Safety Telecommunications Council Why Can't Public Safety Just Use Cell Phones and Smart Phones for Their Mission Critical Voice Communications? It's not that simple. Commercial Cellular Voice is Different Why Can't Public Safety Just Use the Planned Nationwide Public Safety Broadband Network for Their Mission Critical Voice Communications? Again, it's not that simple. NPSTC Information for Local, Tribal, State, and Federal Officials, April 15, 2013 National Public Safety Telecommunications Council INFUKMA I IUN FUK LULAL. I KIBAL. S I AIL. AND FLDLKAL UFFICIALS Why can't public safety just use cell phones and smart phones for their mission critical voice communications? Unfortunately it's not that simple. Although public safety regularly use cell phones, smart phones, and other commercial wireless devices and services as a secondary form of communications, these devices and systems are currently not sufficiently suited for public safety mission critical voice communications during critical incidents. Public safety officials cannot depend upon commercial systems that can be overloaded and unavailable. Experience has shown such systems are often the most unreliable during critical incidents when public demand overwhelms the systems. Public safety officials have unique and demanding communications requirements. Optimal public safety radio communications require: • Dedicated channels and priority access that is available at all times to handle unexpected emergencies. • Mission - critical one -to -many group capability, a feature not available in today's commercial cellular systems. • Highly reliable, secure, and redundant networks under local control that are engineered and maintained to withstand natural disasters and other emergencies. • The best possible coverage within a jurisdictional area, with a minimum of dead zones — even in areas where commercial cellular services are not economically viable. • And, unique, ruggedized equipment designed for quick response in emergency situations. First responders must not be forced to dial, wait for call connections, or get busy signals when seconds mean the difference between life and death! Why can't public safety just use the planned nationwide public safety broadband network (NPSBN) for their mission critical voice communications? Again, it's not that simple. Although the nationwide public safety broadband network (NPSBN) will have voice capabilities that will be valuable to public safety, the network will not be able to initially provide (for many years and maybe never) the mission critical level of voice service and dependability needed by public safety. The NPSBN is intended to provide urgently needed broadband data capabilities for public safety and is not initially being designed to replace current land mobile radio (LMR) mission critical public safety voice systems. One key element lacking for the NPSBN to replace LMR is that the NPSBN will use LTE commercial technology, a network technology that does not currently provide the "OFF NETWORK" capability that is critical to public safety. This means that when the broadband network is not available or not reachable there will be no communications, a critical requirement for public safety. Other key elements required for mission critical voice include but are not limited to: • Nationwide broadband build out: It will take 10 years or more to build out the nationwide public safety broadband network to provide mission critical coverage equal to current public safety land mobile networks. • Direct Mode or Talk Around: The capability to communicate unit -to -unit when out of range of a wireless network OR when working in a confined area where direct unit -to -unit communications is required. • Push -to -Talk (PTT): The standard form of public safety voice communications today. The speaker pushes a button on the radio and immediately transmits the voice message to one or many other units. When they are done talking they release the PTT switch and return to the listen mode of operation. • Group Call: This method of voice communications provides communications from one -to -many members of a group and is of vital importance to the public safety community. There is much debate relative to whether broadband will eventually have the capabilities to replace current mission- critical public safety LMR systems, however the facts are clear that if this capability becomes reality it is not likely to happen in less than 10 years. Local, tribal, state, and federal public officials are urged to not abandon or stop funding their public safety voice LMR systems until such time as it can be demonstrated that broadband can safely and adequately provide public safety with the mission critical requirements currently provided by LMR. NNS I C Intormation for Local, Tribal, State, and Federal Officials, April 15, 2013 The National Public Safety Telecommunications Council ( NPTTC) is a federation of organizations whose mission is to improve public safety communications and interoperability through collaborative leadership. Voting Members 1. AASHTO ..........American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials 2. ARRL ...............American Radio Relay League 3. AFWA ..............Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies 4. APCO ...............Association of Public -Safety Communications Officials — International 5. FCCA ...............Forestry Conservation Communications Association 6. IACP ................International Association of Chiefs of Police 7. IAEM ...............International Association of Emergency Managers 8. IAFC ................International Association of Fire Chiefs 9. IMSA ...............International Municipal Signal Association 10. NASCIO ...........National Association of State Chief Information Officers 11. NASEMSO ........ National Association of State Emergency Medical Services Officials 12. NASF ...............National Association of State Foresters 13. NASTD .............National Association of State Technology Directors 14. NENA ...............National Emergency Number Association 15. NSA .................National Sheriffs' Association Associate Members (Non- Voting) 1. ATIS ................Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions 2. CITIG ..............Canadian Interoperability Technology Interest Group 3. NCSWIC ........... National Council of Statewide Interoperability Coordinators 4. TIA ..... .............Telecommunications Industry Association 5. UTC .................Utilities Telecom Council Liaison Organizations (Non- Voting) 1. FCC .................Federal Communications Commission 2. FEMA ...............Federal Emergency Management Agency 3. FPIC ................Federal Partnership for Interoperable Communications 4. NTIA ...............National Telecommunications and Information Association 5. OEC .................Offiice of Emergency Communications 6. OIC .................Office for Interoperability and Compatibility 7. PSCE ...............Public Safety Communication Europe 8. US DOI ............ US Department of the Interior 9. US DO] ............ US Department of Justice Resources: NPSTC Mission Critical Voice Definition http: / /www. pscr.gov /projects/ broadband /regs_ stds /Functional_Description_MCV_v5. pdf Voice over Broadband Articles: Voice and Public Safety Broadband http: / /andrewseybold.com/ 3038 - voice - over - public - safety- broadband Mission - Critical Voice over LTE: What, When and How? http: / /andrewseybold.com/ 2772 - mission - critical- voice - over -ite- what -when- and -how Mission - Critical Voice and LTE: Be Careful http: / /andrewseybold. com/ 2772 - mission - critical - voice - over -Ite- what - when - and -how NPSTC Information for Local, Tribal, State, and Federal Officials, April 15, 2013 White Paper Project 25: Background, History, Objective and Phases Adams County, Pennsylvania February 2010 www.kimballcorp.com aKimball TECHNOLOGY Project 25: Background, History, Objectives and Phases History of P25 Before the advent of digital radio technologies, most frequency modulated (FM) land mobile radio (LMR) systems had the ability to communicate with each other, whether from vendor A or vendor B, as long as the correct frequencies were used, and any "control tones" were used by all. As the digital era of communications emerged, this became more difficult with the advent of differing technologies from multiple vendors. It became apparent that a digital radio from vendor A might not, and in most cases could not due to differing protocols, talk to a digital radio from vendor B. In October of 1989, The Association of Public- Safety Communications Officials (APCO) assigned and created Project 25, the next sequential number assigned for that year within APCO. This project was assigned the task of researching the differing technologies in digital communications. Project 25 truly came to fruition in a meeting jointly sponsored by APCO, the National Association of Telecommunications Directors (NASTD), the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), the National Communications System (NCS), and the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD). All agencies present decided that a standard was needed, not only to evaluate basic digital technologies, but to develop a set way to use specific ones emerging in FM land mobile radio systems markets. These standards were viewed as a way to ensure that radios purchased, especially by public safety entities, whether from vendor A or B, could once again talk to one another. Objectives of P25 Provide enhanced functionality with equipment and capabilities focused on public safety needs Improve spectrum efficiency Ensure competition among multiple vendors through open systems' architecture Allow effective, efficient, and reliable intra- agency and inter- agency communications Kimball TECHNOLOGY www.irkimball.com Since then, P25 has transformed into an industry-wide effort to set the recommended voluntary standards of uniform digital FM two -way radio technology for public safety organizations, as well as a common platform that could be used throughout the U.S. APCO's objective was to find solutions that would best serve the needs of public safety. In addition, the P25 Committee encouraged and welcomed the participation of numerous international public safety organizations and equipment suppliers, hoping to make this a truly worldwide recommended standard- setting initiative. Standards of P25 In January of 1993, APCO Project 25 moved forward by adopting a proposed open system architecture through six interface standards that would determine the future of digital technology, for use in the United States public safety markets. These interface standards would allow vendors to compete in the market, as long as the standards were met. Since then, data interface has been rewritten to include two separate interfaces — subscriber data Interface and data networks Interface. Also, fixed station interface was added, since the fixed base station must interface the voice as well as data of the subscriber units and mobile data terminal. Common Air Interface (UM) Peripheral (Subscriber) Data Interfaces (A) Data Host or Networks Interface (Ed) Fixed Station Interface (Ef) Telephone Interconnect Interface (Et) Inter -RF Subsystem Interface (G) Network Management Interface (En) Console Subsystem Interface (Ec) All interfaces are bound together in what is commonly referred to as the radio frequency subsystem (RFSS). The RFSS can be technically made up of any RF site equipment, as long as that equipment supports the common air interface, and has the process to interface with the open architecture of all other interfaces. Common Air Interface (CAO The objective of the CAI is to ensure that P25 - compliant subscriber equipment from one vendor will be interoperable with subscriber equipment from another. Ximball TECHNOLOGY www.Irkimball.com This means that all vendors must use the same type of equipment configurations for coding and decoding the digital signal, and must produce the same digital results. P25 technology uses an improved multi -band excitation (IMBE) vocoder to convert the voice signal to a digital bit stream. This vocoder has an additional advantage in that it is designed to only digitize the voice signals, and ignores unwanted outside noises. On the transmit side, the CAI of a radio uses a specific voice encoder /decoder (vocoder) device and process to convert the analog voice signals from the subscriber /user into a digital bit stream. This digital bit stream, or digitized voice, is then applied to the RF section of the radio for transmission. Subsequently, on the receive side of the radio, the RF section receives the RF signal, converts it back to a digital bit stream, and forwards it to the vocoder. The vocoder uses this bit stream to create a synthetic version of the original voice signal. Subscriber Data Interfaces (A) The purpose of the peripheral (subscriber) data interface is to allow bursts of digital data (data packets) to be transferred between computers, such as a laptop, whether they are interconnected through a portable or mobile radio, to a fixed - facility computer or server. It also allows for the use of a mobile data terminal (MDT) in lieu of another subscriber unit computer. The mobile data interface standard provides the ability of passing data packets by using transmission control protocol /Internet protocol (TCP /IP) standards version 4 and 6 (IPv4, IPv6). These protocols are used for the following: Between MDTs Between mobile or portable subscriber units and a MDT From a MDT to a to a fixed host From a subscriber unit to a fixed host Data Network (Host) Interface (Ed) The fixed data network interface standard provides for the ability of a "fixed" network computer or server to pass the same data to an MDT, subscriber unit, or Kimball _� ..... ......... ._ .,.�...,,.- _ -,W ___�.a- u:...._..�.._.���.._,� _..�..._.... TECHNOLOGY www.IrkimbaIi com any fixed computer in the network. It has the ability to transfer that data by TCP /IP, X.25, or system network architecture (SNA), Fixed Station Interface (FS) The FS is used to provide communications between a fixed station and the RFSS, or to the console subsystem. This could be in the form of data, or messaging, to support analog as well as digital voice. The FS has two main schemes, conventional (CFSI) and digital (DFSI). The CFSI can provide for interfacing a conventional analog or digital signal to the RFSS or CS; however, the DFSI can ONLY be used to interface digital voice or data to the RFSS and CS. Te lephone Interconnect Interface The telephone interconnect interface allows an interconnection between the RF subsystem of a private P25 system, and a public switched telephone network (PSTN). This would provide the ability of "dialing in" to a P25 system through a local telephone switchboard. Inter -RF Subsystem Interface (ISSI) The inter -RF subsystem interface (G Interface) standard was written to allow any P25 subscriber unit RF subsystem to connect to and communicate with the RF subsystem of any other P25 subscriber unit, or fixed base, regardless of the settings of the CAI, or the manufacturer. It also currently has the ability in Phase 1 to interface to analog signals. The requirements of any vendors Inter -RF Subsystem will be the following: It shall support the following modes of operation • Conventional • Trunked • Mixed mode It shall support the following network configurations in any of the three modes of operation • Point -to -point • Multipoint It shall support bearer media Interconnection • T1, E1, and fractionals • Aggregation of these into higher bandwidths, such as SONET `Ximball TECHNOLOGY www.irkimball.com Network Management Interface (NMI) The NMI is the brains and single point control behind a P25 system. It maintains the database listings of all equipment, settings, and functionality of the system. The NMI uses these database listings and settings to control how the subsystems, as well as subscriber units, function during operation. Is also includes all fixed encryption equipment in order to control the operation of any secure link. These listings fall under one of the five following categories: 1. Configuration Management— stores and allows access for changes to the system 2. Fault Management— tracks faults within the whole system 3. Security Management — controls security issues, such as encryption, as well as updating encryption of subscriber units on a recurring basis. This includes the key management facility (KMF). 4. Performance Management— tracks performance of all subsystems 5. Accounting Management— accounts for all equipment, including tracking of subscriber unit locations, if applicable. Console Subsystem Interface (CSSI) The CSSI is a multiple channel digital interface. It allows for the simultaneous connection to multiple subscriber units through the RFSS, as well as connection to multiple fixed stations. The CSSI is an Ethernet 100 BaseT interconnection. It is used to interface users /subscribers and fixed station traffic with the dispatcher. Phases of P25 APCO P25 was written to provide for a timely migration to an advanced, digital, narrowband radio system. This narrowband principle was to fulfill the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) mandated reduction of channel assignments from 25 KHz to 12.5 KHz to 6.25 KHz channel assignments. This would allow for four times the number of assigned users within an allowable band, otherwise known as spectrum efficiency. Phase 1 P25 Phase 1 is the first step in the process. It allows for a migration to a 12.5 KHz digital channel, and is backward compatible and allowed to converse with analog radio systems. [imball TECHNOLOGY www.Irkimball.com The equipment used for the digital traffic is continuous four -level frequency modulation (WIVI). In digital mode, it produces a baud rate of 9600 baud, or bits per second. Phase 2 Phase 2 has a different modulation process, called finalized quadrature phase -shift keying (CQPSK). This is a technique in which the digitized signal is created at a rate of 4800 baud. This allows for two voice or data signals to be super- imposed into the 12.5 KHz channel, or, technically, 6.25 KHz per channel. The final planned migration of Phase 2 is to convert to a time division multiple access (TDMA) technology. This technique "samples" each of two voice users alternately, and creates a composite signal of both. Two -slot TDMA allows for two voice users to be on the same radio, technically reducing the equipment needed per channel. The advantage of this TDMA process is that one base station can now accept and process two voice or data users, thereby reducing infrastructure costs. Conclusion In the ever changing world of communications, it has, in the past, been the vendors that have controlled the technology of innovation. That control has created a quagmire of differing technologies, as well as incompatible systems. P25 has been designed and created to eliminate those incompatibilities. The catchword of today and tomorrow is "interoperability," and P25 has been deemed the standard through which that interoperable breakthrough has been accomplished. Kimball TECHNOLOGY www.irkimball.com Stormwater Issues &Initiatives After Actions Report 2013 Rainy Season February 4, 2014 Board of County Commissioners Workshop Presented by the Growth Management Division Natural Resources Department it Presentation Overview • Season Characteristics/Forecasting, &Data • Stormwater "Hot Spots" • Lessons learned /New Issues • System Performance &Awareness • Fundi &Current Needs • Future Project Prioritization 2 Forecasting Data 3 " ° "R [Wednesday Heavy Rain Possible through Total Rainfall Accumulation Forecast— through Saturday Most of the rainfall should fall by Wednesday MY tar- n.w u �w kM tIt Figure - for updates, visit httG vww hpc ncep noaa.govkqpf /dayl -5 shtmi %# f Potential Impacts 1. Total rainfall accumulations reaching 1 — 3 inches across the area. 2. Isolated areas could receive much higher amounts where the heavy rain becomes focused for any period of time. 3. Floodingdue to already saturated grounds will be the main concern. RAINFALL TOTALS: 24- or 48 -hour readings, as indicated Palm River 3.9 E (co[oRaHS) 9.45" 24 -hour ending 7 am Saturday, 917 North Naples 4.8 NNE (cocoRaHS) 8.02" 24 -hour ending 730 am Saturday, 917 North Naples (SFWMO) 6.53" 48 -hour ending 8 am Sunday, 9/8 North Naples (SFWMD) 5.83" 48-hour ending Sam Sunday, 918 Naples Park 3.7 ENE (tocoRaHS) 5.70" 48 -hour etxding lam 5unday, 918 Naples 1.4 NNW (coCoRaHS) 4.80" 14 -hour ending 7 am Saturday, 917 Naples 6.7 ENE (tocoRaHS) 4.19" 14 -hour ending 74S am Saturday, 917 Gla des Naples Municipal Airport (ASfls) 2.90" 48 -hour ending Sam Sunday, 918 Naples East (coop) 1.65" 48 -hour ending Tarn Sunday, 918 v Palm 8eactt , r \CA Fly oro �t #oa �ti.. o at Gla des .. • : _ _ �� .� use v Palm 8eactt , r DM H*t,dry �';; 00 �ry � zca 0.t9 if +3.its Rainfall (inches) ,t Cotner BaoY:.�;,7 .ac'D o -}e 0 00 a T or 001 .025 D.�i orr 6026-050 d si J n� "'if ��/ Guff ),!t *,v f /1iredcv 051 • 100 ��;ru �IiN vi:�• r�BfrE' DIY 9Y P 17n 101-200 ara� Mainland Monroe ; r' 'T tj 201 300 16 301-400 M401-6,00 E601 -800 0 10 20 40 eo a0 Miles 48 -hour rainfall map, through 8 am Sunday, September 811, CoCoRaHS sites that dad not report on both Saturday (917) and Sunday (918) are not reflected in this map. S 60 70 60 i0 40 30 Ia 10 00 COLGON- MR•9LA- Cuinre CuunitCuurlhuU)C [m] At c wnvla od P 2 nfz11 (+n] County Courthouse Received S" 0000 0000 00 00 0130 ? -OS 07-0' 07-M fnLDC2.MR•9LA • ,:cgdan Gat# tiro Sto s 2 pnl /trc.umWatrdRain /an Unl - - -- -0 3� 30 15 1a os ao 0000 '013-07.05 0000 00 CO 07 -11 0713 GG Estates Fire Station Received %2" 0000 0000 00 0U 07.07 070] 07.11 O'r Cr7 Concentrated Areas of Intense, Rainfall July 14, 2013 Real Time (telemetric) Rain Gauge Information BCB /SIFWMD http: / /my.sfwmd.goy /floodwatch 0000 0000 07.13 07 -15 6 w L c m c Rainfall Data by Month 16 15 14 13 12 11 - -. -___ __..._- 10 9 - g 7 _...._._ __.. 6 5 4 3 - 2 _ 1 0 Apr 2.93 1.87 May Jan Feb Mar Monthly Total 0.28 2.81 1.21 Monthly Average 1.58 1.84 2.39 Apr 2.93 1.87 May Jun Jul Aug Sep 5.22 13.88 15.06 8.99 13.31 2.35 8.04 7.16 7.72 7.36 SOURCE: Big Cypress Basin South Florida Water Management District t r..... Planned Station at = reedom Park •• • I • • i •; Suggested • • • Locations: r. • I -75 Weir #2 I('� GG Main #3..,- • Faka Union #5+ ` *� GG Main #6 • w , Mw 1mo cMESS sill" SFWMD u•o "...O.. D<. K Telernetric Rainfall " °d•.•,7615o• 279�Qt1.7.15 Monitoring ites g iExisting Rainfall Stations i* Telemetry Sites W/O Rain http:// wwwsfwmd .govlfloodwatchlindex.htm wo. BCB/ F SFWMD Rain Gauge Stations • 17 Telemetric locations • Real Time Data available • Possible 4 Additional StorM)Nater "Hot Spots" • Source& Event Layers • Annual Updates 9 IMMOKALEE AREA w�eiir,ato �` 0 r f k?�f fl I I A +�IFs reeMrfr �r � I ( MAOCALE +p,O b a„ '-. —�— —T � T - r — — A p 1, VA� GERBIL 7 8WCH RD } a e�NEE —� GOLDEN A 7E BLVD - NI (� - O NOW L _ m ``&VV J + di EV£RGLAOES CITY (43 AND CHOKOLOSKEE C M� rt \mar y ary LCQ@tW gaming a Reg own Gepw"mt Faalibes & Govemmem Pane - A"Onf Flooded Area Into lion 7eclnob9y 6 WS SwpoR SKWn EMS m Hospital ShemT High S Fl000eO Rai06 G'om 4pnapemwtDAf1,%W �i- FIM 0 Library 0 VOW Pppr DrAMp Ali StorM)Nater "Hot Spots" • Source& Event Layers • Annual Updates 9 !iJ , -1 Lessons Learned Improve coordination of and documentation of Flooding Response Activities Increase promotion of pre - season system awareness and routine maintenance • Continue to educate residents about issues of Privately Maintained Systems 11 Collier County Stormwater Management - NPDES Program 3y stem 9a9 ° - °� •" Performance & Awareness Canal System Operated & Maintained by County & State Manages surface water levels throughout the county Maintained by the HOA as part of the PUD's stormwater management system Drains to the canal system 0. .ate �a 6 C Zd� 6t - -° � YJ .� 4 �.. - Y fO O iL ° Ui � •a� v e fl e a + O �� • WQ11t A �� f��l� 1 � 6 .�� � �, � ��� �' flop � °j°°� • it �• �Bo,�i C ^ , • ,Rye + 6 � ' i A �� P4e .d s t7 O 12 Stormwater System- Care &Maintenance Preventive steps for reduced flooding • Watch for debris on inlets and debris in water's pathway • Check for buildup of sod that blocks runoff • Check for blockages in the control structure in the pond e ac r z yU . Collier County Stormwater Management - NPDES Program 13 Operation, Maintenance, and Management of Stormwater Systems Operation and Maintenance Inspection Report for Stormwater Management Ponds (Adapted from Anne Arundel County. Maryland) Inspector Name Community Inspection Date Address Stormwater Pond Normal Pool Normally Dry Watershed Items inspected Checked Maintenance Needed Inspectioi Remarks I Yes No Yes No requency I. Pond components A Embankment and Emergency syiillwaw 1. Vegetation and ground — -- - -- Cover adequate 2 Embankment erosion 3 Animal burrows 4 nau onze pan in s 5. Cracking, bulging, or sliding of dam a. Upstream face b. Downstream face c At or beyond toe Upstream Downstream d Emer ency spillway 6. Pond, toe chimney drains clear and functioning 7 Seeps /leaks on • Annual System Maintenance Checklists • Privately Owned and Operated Pond Maintenance Guides 14 15 System- Care &Maintenance Action Plan for Calendar Year 2014 • Spring -Home Owners Association Notifications February, March, April — Code Compliance `weeps • April &May —Road Maintenance Dept. Sweeps • May — Pre - Season Readiness Meeting BCB /District &County 16 Stor water Program Funding Total (001/111 funding) Millage Rate Equivalent 0.18 0.16 0.14 + a 0.12 m 0.10 0.08 - - 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.00 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 Fiscal year 17 Stor water Program Funding Transfer Dollars from Funds 001 & 111 $25 $20 IA $15 0 $10 $5 $0 Budget - Expenditures z �G o g e. FY 14 6.03 i u Current Stormwater Funding Does Not Allow For Sufficient Levels of: • Dedicated Regular System Maintenance • System Upkeep & Rehabilitation • System Capital Improvement Projects 19 Future Capital Project Prioritization • Comprehensive Needs List • Ranked potential Projects • Feasibility Analysis Completed • AUIR - 1 and 5 Year Plan 20 saw Aft a . �� r Questions 21 BCB Capital Plan FY13 Budget FY14 Tentative FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 a s ; 021 FY22 FY23 Total (FY34- FY23)_ BCB Capital Projects Structure Inspection Program $225,000 $200,000 $225,000 $225,000 $225,000 $875,000 28th Street Culvert Replacement $225,000 $350,000 $350,000 Miller Weir #3 Rehabilitation $40,000 $1,000,000 $1,600,000 $2,600,000 Henderson Creek Weir #2 Retrofit $60,000 $2,000,000 $2,060,000 Fall Protection (BCB -14, C &SF -15, B- 16/17, internal design) $237,900 $237,900 Radio Frequency Conversion Project (CIFER) $250,000 $250,000 Golden Gate Canal Weir #4 Retrofit $50,000 $1,500,000 $2,000,000 $3,550,000 Cypress Canal Weir #4A1 Retrofit $50,000 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,050,000 Faka Union Canal Weir No. 6 and 7 Retrofit $50,000 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,050,000 Golden Gate Canal Weir #5 $50,000 $1,000,000 $1,050,000 C -1 Connector Canal Control Gate Barron River Control Structure Other Capital Projects Henderson Creek Diversion $140,584 $1,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,800,000 $4,300,000 BCB Field Station Design & Construction $2,000 0001 $4,000,000 1 $2,000,000 1 $8,000,000 ..Y a✓. ti