Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1993 0217 CC REG ITEM 11C - liTEMELW • DORPARK, CALGCH:::'-. AGENDA REPORT Gil)?Cour/)c,IIMeeting 1 TO: The Honorable City .Council ACTION: FROM: Donald P. Reynolds Jr. , Administrative Services ager DATE: February 12, 1993 SUBJECT: Consider Upgrade to City Phone System The following report will present for the Council's consideration, a proposal to upgrade the City's phone system to include voice mail and automated attendant. This report presents new information in response to a report previously presented by staff on June 17, 1992. Background In 1988, the City leased/purchased its first phone system serving 23 employees. This is the system in place today and is considered to be a "PBX Hybrid" designed for small businesses which uses a combination of analog and electronic telephone devices. The City entered into a 60 month installment sale (government lease with a $1 buy out at the end of the term) at a cost of $423.61 per month, (9.74% interest rate) , for an annual cost of $5,083. 32, (total purchase price at the time was $20,057.28) . With the move to the new phone system, the City expanded its capability to receive calls by 100% from 4 incoming lines to 8 when the system was originally purchased, but now this capacity does not fulfill the needs of staff and the public. Over the past 5 years, the City has grown from 23 to 37 full-time employees, (30 of these employees work at the City Hall offices) . During that same time frame, City responsibilities grew to include new programs that demand a high volume of customer service responses such as solid waste/recycling, transportation, cable television and public works. The phone system needs to be expanded in order to meet the City's expansion of services. On June 17, 1992, staff presented its response to the need for phone system improvements. In this report, staff summarized the proposed features of an upgraded phone system, (Attachment "A") , which include: automated attendant; voice mail; 50% expansion of incoming phone lines, (from 8 to 12) , and; an off premise extension for Building and Safety/City Engineer. It was explained that the City's current phone system is capable of meeting all of these needs, and is also capable of expanding far beyond the current expansion proposal. A second issue discussed in staff's June 17 report was public perception. Staff has continued to explore systems that will work towards improving customer service by making staff more easily accessible. This is can be accomplished through careful design and planning for the implementation of new features. • • Discussion The City Council expressed several concerns in response to staff's June 17, 1992, report. The following information will address these concerns, discuss two new aspects of the proposal as well as clarify some issues related to the features and technology being proposed at this time. The final section addresses the proposed fiscal impacts. General Applications Attachment "D" is staff's rough sketch of how calls will be distributed with the upgraded system. This sketch illustrates that most calls will enter via the main number at City Hall. There would be essentially no change to the way a caller reaches a staff person, except that the staff person could be reached more quickly without first talking to the receptionist, and messages could left electronically instead of manually. An application for future phone system designs are also presented in this diagram to include the direct in-ward line ("DIL") capability. The history of the initial upgrades will help to determine the need to have DIL. These applications are discussed in more detail under the heading of "Future Considerations. " Staff prefers to implement the other upgrade features first, before exploring the need for this feature. Automated Attendant The primary concern from the Council was the decision whether or not to have a person answer the phone, or have a machine. Currently, it may take several rings for the receptionist to answer the phone. This is one aspect of customer service that staff is attempting to address. Staff recently conducted a random survey of 100 cities across the state, as presented in Attachment "B. " This survey identified that 11% of the cities surveyed use an "automated attendant" to answer the phone. No cities in Ventura County use this system, but the County of Ventura does. Staff continues to recommend an automated attendant, because of the role of the receptionist, and feedback from cities which use the feature effectively. Both the League of California Cities' Western Cities Magazine ("How to Avoid Voice Mail Hell", September 1990) , and successful cities which use automated attendant report that if short messages are used to answer the phone when a call is answered, the system can be very effective in improving customer service and freeing staff to address other concerns. Currently, the receptionist handles clerical work at the counter regarding business registration, receipts/petty cash and parking citations, as well as greeting the public and answering phones. 2 As presented in Attachment "A", the proposed system answers seven calls at one time on the first ring or with no ring. The proposed message answering incoming calls is as follows: "Hello, you have reached the City of Moorpark. If this an emergency, please hang up and dial 911. If you know the extension of the party you wish to reach, you can enter this number at any time during this message. If not, please hold and the City's receptionist will receive your call." As soon as a selection is made or the receptionist answers the phone, the automated attendant is free to answer new calls. A person can select "0" or the extension number as soon as the call is initially answered. The City of Redondo Beach has a very simple application of the message system presented in Attachment "A". It is a short method of applying this technology, but has reduced the calls to the receptionist by 50%, (before, the Redondo Beach receptionist was answering up to 200 calls per hour) . Many other cities surveyed use a long message of selection "ques" for the caller, which are cumbersome and confusing to use. Staff is not proposing to implement a system that is this complex for the caller to use. The automated attendant proposed by G-Tel only has the capacity to hold a 56 second message because long introductions are not "user 1 friendly". A 50% reduction in phone traffic, would allow the receptionist to respond more quickly to public needs at the counter and address other responsibilities. Voice Mail In response to the Council's concerns regarding the voice mail system and its tested applications, the system proposed by G-Tel is being used currently throughout the state, and is supported exclusively by Fujitsu (manufacturer of the City's G-Tel system) . The Voice Mail program proposed is a "Calstar" system, which is recommended by Fujitsu for exclusive use on the G-Tel system, because it has been tested and approved in their Anaheim office. It is the only system that can be fully integrated into the City's current system. Integration allows for quick responses to caller ques, and better coordination between call telephones and the voice mail system, (i.e. , call waiting turns off and on as messages are left and retrieved, each user can custom design their voice mail box application, recording their own voice) . Other systems are available which can provide some of these features, but only the Calstar system is approved by G-Tel and Fujitsu for the integrated applications. Typically, the systems proposed by other vendors are limited in their applications because they "interface" but do not fully "integrate" with the G-Tel system. The capabilities and the 3 service of these systems can be limited as a result. The price of the G-Tel system is approximately $3,000 to $4,000 dollars more than the interfacing systems proposed by four other vendors analyzed by staff. On January 26, 1993, staff and a representative of the Council's Public Works, Facilities and Solid Waste Committee (Councilmember Wozniak) met at G-Tel to see a demonstration of the system. The demonstration met staff's expectations, and appeared to satisfy the expectations of the Committee's representative. Clarification of Proposed Applications Staff would like to clarify some of the proposed applications for the Council, and elaborate on how the system is proposed to work. Two levels of recorded voice announcements can be delivered by this system; the first being addressed above as an "automated attendant" , and the second being the Voice Mail Box application which is part of the Automatic Call Distribution, ("ACD") , feature. The automated attendant is a very useful tool for disbursing and receiving public information after hours. The work day use has already been addressed. When the night line is activated, callers, if they know the extension, can continue to reach staff at work. The after hours answer system can also provide a lengthier menu that allows a person to activate certain mail box messages that may address community calendars, recreation programs and registration, or be used as a "suggestion box" for citizen input. The success of similar programs used in other cities (as reported by The Guide/ICMA, November 4, 1991) indicates that the off hours information can be very helpful to the citizens who cannot reach City Hall during the week days, "the City's, (City of Mason, Ohio) , campaign has been well received by callers; some have even called back and requested to be placed on hold to finish listening. " ACD is one of the most useful features presented in this proposal which is perhaps understated in Attachment "A." This feature places all of the phones of a single department into a "group" and when the a call is referred to this department, the caller is sent to the group and does not return to the receptionist, (for example, a person who wishes to talk to a planner, will talk to someone in the department, and not be shuffled from the receptionist to the department and back again) . While waiting, the caller may be placed on hold with music, or listen to a customized recorded message of department activities. The caller may also select "0" during this time and receive the extension number from the receptionist of the party they wish to contact, leaving a voice mail message for them rather than waiting. The message light on each phone will indicate that a caller is waiting, which flashes more quickly the longer the person waits. 4 Contract Service Offices The County Sheriff's Department will have a unique application of the voice mail feature which will enhance citizen communications. Because of the complex nature of the County's phone system, the City will not be interfacing with it, but we will be able to communicate with East Valley Sheriff station via "call forwarding" and voice mail. Currently, when no Moorpark Sheriff staff are available, all phones are forwarded to the City's line. Attachment "C" is a study of phone messages which shows that the Police Department currently equals approximately 5% of the receptionist's messages. What is proposed is that these calls be forwarded to a separate line which is connected to the central City phone system via voice mail. The voice mail box proposed for non-emergency police department calls would allow a caller dialing the Police Department to leave a message, and/or still be able to reach the City receptionist if they choose. There will always be a way for a person to reach staff, (true with all voice mail box applications) , even when they dial East Valley Sheriff Station number. The Building and Safety/City Engineering offices are proposed to be linked as "off-premise" stations. They will work exactly like City phone extensions, allowing the caller to call City Hall and be transferred, and allowing Building and Safety/Engineering staff to reach City Hall by dialing a 3 digit extension. In the event that the City moves these offices on site, the adjustment is a very simple adjustment to include them as a regular extension. The off- premise extension is purchased through the dial tone provider, (Pac-Bell) , and charged by distance per month. These offices will then be tied to the City's phone system and be capable of using the City's long distance lines, (unless the system is programmed to block this use) . The cost of an off premise extension from Pac Bell is $200 for installation, and $30 per month. A regular/standard line costs approximately $15 per month. There is no additional cost from G- Tel except minor labor to program the feature. Additional Proposed Features Two new features are being proposed to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the system: an uninterrupted power supply, or "UPS, " and; the "Call Accounting Manager. " The Call Accounting Manager adds approximately $7,250 to the original price for the proposed system, but is promised to pay for itself by closely monitoring phone use and charging the department directly instead of applying general cost distributions. For example, if the Building and Safety Office/Engineering office finds that it needs to make long distance calls when connected to the City phone lines, (and these extensions are not blocked or 5 prohibited from doing so) , then the cost of these calls can be charged to them directly, (as can each department) . The proposed system identifies each phone extension, and each call placed from each extension. Therefore, the City could move towards a precise billing system for each department, rather than applying the percentages used currently. Reports from AT&T on long distance use allows some control over City long distance use, but this system would allow for more control which assures efficiency and minimizes abuse. The UPS system being proposed allows the phone system to operate for approximately 60 minutes when a power failure occurs. This is ample time for the staff to attach a portable emergency generator to the phone system and keep it up during such an occurrence. This is another crucial feature for customer service, as the power at City Hall fails during regular business hours approximately once per year, and the failure may not be City-wide. Currently, when this occurs, the City operates on one emergency line. The cost of the UPS system is approximately $11,000. Future Considerations/DIL In the future, the system can be re-programmed to include DIL. A simple application of this ability (common to approximately 30% of the cities in. the County and the County) , would list a direct line to specific department locations in addition to the general City Hall number for the public to use. This could serve as a second option for callers who wish to by-pass the receptionist and contact the department directly, (if no one in the department is available, they could still reach the receptionist) . Common to cities such as Port Hueneme and Camarillo is a similar system referred to as "Direct In-Ward Dialing" or "DID" where there are separate numbers listed for city staff and departments. This application is not being recommended by staff because "DID" is an expensive item from Pac-Bell (per month) and requires that a minimum of 100 numbers be set aside for this purpose (three times the amount of current staff at City Hall) . Using existing lines into City Hall, the same feature can be applied to a few departments, avoiding the monthly cost of DID. As presented in Attachment "C" , two City departments combined receive half of all messages taken by the receptionist, (Community Development and community services) . Building and Safety/Engineering reports that approximately 20 calls per day are cycled through their office, when added to the Public Works office, equals another large portion of City calls received. There would be no automated attendant for the DIL lines, but the voice mail system could be programmed by staff to first receive these calls, allowing the caller to choose a specific aspect of service common to each department, (for example, "thank you for 6 calling the City's Department of Community Development, if you wish to speak to Code Enforcement, press "1" now, if you wish to speak to a planner, press "2" now, or hold until the next person is available") . This is staff's description of the "sub-directory" presented in the sketch of phone call distribution (Attachment "D") . Fiscal Implications Staff is recommending that the proposed system be acquired using the same installment sale application as the current system. As previously mentioned, the City is paying $423.61 per month on a 60 month lease that ends in October, 1993. To meet this obligation, the City has allocated $6,720 split between four City departments, (35% Community Development, 20% Public Works, 25% Administrative Services and 20% Recreation) . The City's phone lease allocation is $1,638.68 more than 12 months of installments, (12 X 423.61 = $5,083.32 subtracted from $6,720) , leaving this portion to absorb some of the cost to upgrade. Staff expects that it can complete a contract with G-Tel by mid-March, leaving roughly 3 to 4 months of upgraded costs applicable to this fiscal year. Two prices have been quoted for the City by G-Tel for the upgrade; one with the account call manager and one without (Attachment "E") . Without the account call manager, the 60 month lease would be $642.35 per month, (at 9.26% interest, base price of $30,713.68) . With the account call manager, the cost is $793.82 (at 9.26% interest, base price of $37,968.30) . Staff recommends the purchase of the account call manager, therefore, the cost of the upgrade in the current fiscal year can be summarized as follows: 4 months of Upgrade installments $ 3 ,175.28 Less the balance remaining from the Current lease ($ 1,636.68) Needed Funds for FY 1992/93 $ 1,538.60 For fiscal year 1993/94 , the City would have to appropriate the following amount: July to September of Original Lease $ 1,270.83 Upgrade Lease at 12 months $ 9,525.84 Annual Total FY 1993/94 $10,796. 67 The cost of the off-premise extension would also have to be 7 budgeted for FY 1992/93 and FY 1993/94. At $200 for installation and $30 per month, the City would be looking at an additional $290 for FY 1992/93 and $360 for FY 1993/94. Whether or not this cost is passed to the contractor is another issue to be addressed, and currently there exists no telephone expense line item for these two departments. Staff proposes to absorb these costs into the existing distribution of phone costs, and add the new phone cost line items to Building and Safety/Engineering during the next fiscal year. The current budget can absorb the additional costs of adding four new trunks to the City's system, (estimated to be $220) . Conclusions Staff has proposed a phone system upgrade which is comprehensive in its attempt to respond to growing citizen requests and growing needs of City staff. In many ways, the public's contact with the City will be improved, and in no way is the proposed design of the system intended to create barriers between staff and callers. The cost is 30% higher than in previous years, however, the benefits in terms of freeing staff to accommodate other work and better customer service warrants this expense. Adopting this type of system, reduces the need to have additional staff at the public counter for carrying out clerical responsibilities such as the parking citation and business registration programs. The lease is fixed, where personnel costs are not, therefore, in these times of growing needs and fewer dollars, a fixed cost may be a more sound investment than investing in additional staff to serve the same purpose. 8 Recommendation (Roll Call Vote) That the City Council authorize the Mayor to execute an installment sale agreement for the purpose of upgrading the City's phone system, with GTE Leasing Corporation at a price of $793.82 per month for 60 months, and appropriate funds from the general fund reserve account for the balance of fiscal year 1992/93 as follows: A total of $1,538.60 split between U.-"Administrative Services, 25% $364 .65,, (001 '4.117.653) ; Community Development, 35% $538.51, (041.4.131.653) ;- vRecreation, 20% $307.72, (001.4.148.653) ; 1 &*,T4x rn - Public Works/Streets, 20% $307.72, (003:4.141.653) : Y /rr and create new expenditure line items for fiscal year 1993/94 for v Building and Safety and Engineering, appropriating a total of $360 split between accounts 041.4.133.653 and 001.4.134.653. Attachments: A) June 17, 1992 Summary of Phone Features B) Automated Attendant Study C) Receptionist Message Recording Study D) Sketch of Proposed Phone Call Distribution E) Phone Upgrade Cost Proposal 3 » . 9