20150610 SM21915.2015
MIAMIBEACH
City Gommission Meeting
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL 2
City Hall, Commission Chambers, 3rd Floor, 1700 Convention Center Drive
June 10, 2015
Mayor Philip Levine
Vice-Mayor Jonah Wolfson
Commissioner Michael Grieco
Commissioner Joy Malakoff
Com m issioner Micky Steinberg
Commissioner Edward L. Tobin
Commissioner Deede Weithorn
City Manager Jimmy L. Morales
City Attorney Raul J. Aguila
City Clerk Rafael E. Granado
Visif us at www.miamibeachfl.gov for agendas and video "streaming" of City Commission Meetings.
ATTENTION ALL LOBBYISTS
Chapter 2, Article VIl, Division 3 of the City Code of Miami Beach entitled "Lobbyists" requires the
registration of all lobbyists with the Gity Clerk priorto engaging in any lobbying activitywith the City
Commission, any City Board or Committee, or any personnel as defined in the subject Code
sections. Copies of the City Gode sections on lobbyists laws are available in the City Clerk's office.
Questions regarding the provisions of the Ordinance should be directed to the Office of the City
Attorney.
SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA
R7 - Resolutions
R7M A Resolution Accepting The Recommendation Of The City Manager, Pursuant To lnvitation To
Negotiate (lTN) 2014-170-SW For A Gated Revenue Control System For The City's Parking
Garages;Approving The MaterialTerms Of An Agreement Between The CityAnd Skidata, lnc.,
As Set Forth ln The Term Sheet Attached As Exhibit "A" Hereto; Authorizing The City Manager
And The City Attorney's Office To Finalize The Agreement Based Upon The Material Terms
Approved Herein; Provided That They May Make Any Non-Substantive And Non-Material
Revisions And/Or Additions To The Agreement, As They Deem Necessary; Authorizing The
Mayor And City Clerk To Execute The Final Agreement; And, ln The Event That The City ls
Unable To Finalize Successful Negotiations With Skidata, lnc., Authorizing The City Manager
And The City Attorney's Office To Negotiate An Agreement With Amano McGann, lnc. Based
Upon The Material Terms Approved ln Exhibit "A" Herein (Provided That They May Make Any
Non-Substantive And Non-Material Revisions And/Or Additions To The Agreement).
(ProcuremenVParking)
(Memorandum & Resolution)
1
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
2
COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH FLORIDA,
ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY MANAGER PURSUANTTO INVITATION TO NEGOTIATE
2014.170.5W FOR A GATED REVENUE CONTROL SYSTEM FOR THE CITY'S PARKING GARAGES.
Advisory Board Recommendation :
Fi nancial !nformation :
Source of
Funds:
Amount Account
1 $ 303,000 142-61 76-000674
2 362,000 463-61 76-000674
3 471,000 467-6176-000674
4 2,696,000 480-61 76-000674
'fr.pD
OBPI
5 400,000 480-0463-000349
Total $4,232,000
Financial lmoact Summarv:
IB.F
AGENDA '"' R? M
Ensure trends are sustainable over the lono term.
Su Data Environmental Scan, etc: N/A
Item Summary/Recommendation :
The City's Parking Department is seeking a state of the art gated parking revenue control system, including
centralized processing of data for all of the City's parking garages, a central monitoring station for: intercoms, CCTV at
all entrance and exit lanes, and access controlfor all garage equipment. This will allowfor operational savings as well
as enhanced audit controls. ln order to achieve this service level, all garages must have compatible hardware,
software, firmware, and equipment, meaning that one system (vendor) must equip and service all garages.
The City's municipal parking garages are currently operated with on-site cashiers/parking attendants and a gated
revenue control system, provided by 3M (manufacturer). The equipment runs along several model lines ranging from
several years to over a decade old. Additionally, 3M notified its customers, including the City, of its intent to
discontinue its gated parking revenue control subdivision and related equipment and services.
At the September 10, 2014 City Commission meeting, the Mayor and City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2014-
28720 accepting the recommendation of the City Manager pertaining to the ranking of proposers pursuant to lnvitation
To Negotiate (lTN) 2014-170-SW for a Parking Garage Gated Revenue Control System. Further, the Resolution
authorized the Administration to enter into negotiations with all the proposers. The Administration was requested to
present the final contract for the Commission's review prior to entering into an agreement with the parking equipment
companies. The details of the contract negotiation phase and comparative analysis of final replies is attached.
The City Manager, after carefully considering the results of the negotiation process and staff recommendation,
recommends that the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, Florida, accept the recommendation of
the City Manager, pursuant to lnvitation To Negotiate (lTN) 2014-170-SW for a gated revenue control system for the
City's parking garages; approving the material terms of an agreement between the City and Skidata, lnc., as set forth
in the term sheet attached as Exhibit "A" hereto; authorizing the City Manager and the City Attorney's Office to finalize
the Agreement based upon the material terms approved herein; provided that they may make any non-substantive and
non-material revisions and/or additions to the Agreement, as they deem necessary; authorizing the Mayor and City
Clerk to execute the final Agreement; and, in the event that the City is unable to finalize successful negotiations with
Skidata, lnc., authorizing the City Manager and the City Attorney's Office to negotiate an Agreement with Amano
McGann, lnc. based upon the material terms approved in Exhibit "A" herein (provided that they may make any non-
substantive and non-material revisions and/or additions to the Agreement).
RECOMMENDATION
the Resolution.
Alex Denis, Extension 6641
Garage Gated Revenue Control System for the City of Miami Beach
MIAMIBEACH ome b'10- ls3
g MIAMIBEACH
City of Miomi Beoch, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miomi Beoch, Florido 33,l39, www.miomibeochfl.gov
COMMISS N MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Philip Levine and Members
FROM: Jimmy L. Morales, City Manager
DATE: June 10,2015
f the City mission
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MIAM! BEACH, FLORIDA, ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THEclw MANAGER, PURSUANT TO TNVITAT|ON TO NEGOTTATE (tTN) 2014-
17O.SW FOR A GATED REVENUE CONTROL SYSTEM FOR THE CITY'S
PARKING GARAGES; APPROVING THE MATERIAL TERMS OF AN
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND SKIDATA, INC., AS SET FORTH IN
THE TERM SHEET ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT "A" HERETO; AUTHORIZTNG
THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO FINALIZE
THE AGREEMENT BASED UPON THE MATERIAL TERMS APPROVED
HEREIN; PROVIDED THAT THEY MAY MAKE ANY NON-SUBSTANTIVE AND
NON.MATERIAL REVISIONS AND/OR ADDITIONS TO THE AGREEMENT,
AS THEY DEEM NECESSARY; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY
CLERK TO EXECUTE THE FINAL AGREEMENT; AND, IN THE EVENT THAT
THE CITY IS UNABLE TO FINALIZE SUCCESSFUL NEGOTIATIONS WITH
SKIDATA, INC., AUTHORIZTNG THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO NEGOTIATE AN AGREEMENT WITH AMANO
MCGANN, INC. BASED UPON THE MATERIAL TERMS APPROVED IN
EXHIBIT "A" HEREIN (PROVIDED THAT THEY MAy MAKE ANy NON-
SUBSTANTIVE AND NON.MATERIAL REVISIONS AND/OR ADDITIONS TO
THE AGREEMENT).
ADMINISTRATION RECOMM ENDATION
Adopt the resolution.
KEY TNTENDED OUTCOME SUPPORTED
Ensure expenditure trends are sustainable over the long term.
FUNDING
Funding for the onetime capital cost is available as follows:
Funding for the annual maintenance costs will be subject to appropriation in the annual budget
process.
Amount Account
1 $ 303,000 142-6176-000674
2 362,000 463-61 76-000674
3 47't,000 467-61 76-000674
4 2,696,000 480-61 76-000674
5 400,000 480-0463-000349
Total $4,232,000
4
City Commission Memorandum - Parking Garage Gated Revenue Control Sysfem
June 10,2015
Page 2 of 15
BACKGROUND
The City's Parking System currently has ten (10) municipal parking garages, totaling 6,106
parking spaces. An 't1th facility, Collins Avenue Garage is funded and currently in design with
an estimated 470 parking spaces, for a grand total of 6,576 parking spaces. The City's Parking
Department is seeking a state of the art gated parking revenue control system, including
centralized processing of data for all of the City's parking garages, a central monitoring station
for: intercoms, CCTV at all entrance and exit lanes, and access control for all garage
equipment. This would allow for operational savings as well as enhanced audit controls. ln
order to achieve this service level, all garages must have compatible hardware, software,
firmware, and equipment, meaning that one system (vendor) must equip and service all
garages.
The City's municipal parking garages are currently operated with on-site cashiers/parking
attendants and a gated revenue control system, provided by 3M (manufacturer). The
equipment runs along several model lines ranging from several years to over a decade old.
Additionally, 3M notified its customers, including the City, of its intent to discontinue its gated
parking revenue control subdivision and related equipment and services.
On May 21, 2014, the Mayor and City Commission approved the issuance of lnvitation to
Negotiate (lTN) No. 2014-170 for a Parking Garage Gated Revenue Control System. ln
response to the lTN, the City received proposals from the following five (5) firms:
o Amano McGann, lnc.. Consolidated Parking Equipmento Scheidt & Bachmann USA, lnc.o Skidata lnc.. WPS USA Corp.
At the September 10,2014 City Commission meeting, the Mayor and City Commission adopted
Resolution No. 2014-28720 accepting the recommendation of the City Manager pertaining to
the ranking of proposers pursuant to lnvitation To Negotiate (lTN) 2014-170-SW for a Parking
Garage Gated Revenue Control System. Further, the Resolution authorized the Administration
to enter into negotiations with all the proposers. The Administration was requested to present
the final contract for the Commission's review prior to entering into an agreement with the
parking equipment companies.
CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS
On December 10, 2014, the Parking and Procurement Departments convened negotiation
session No. 1 with all proposers and attended the meeting with Skidata, lnc., Amano MCGann,
lnc., LCN, lnc. D/B/A Consolidated Parking Equipment, WPS USA Corp., and Scheidt &
Bachmann USA, lnc. The intent of negotiation session No. 1 was to: 1) provide an overview of
the ITN negotiation process and clarify any questions proposers may have; 2) discuss and
review with proposers the Term Sheet and Cost Proposal Sheets which would form the basis of
negotiation discussions; and, 3) schedule site visits will all proposers for December 22 and 23,
2014, to evaluate equipment and inspect all parking garages.
On December 17,2014, the Citywas notified by Consolidated Parking Equipmentthat it had
withdrawn its proposal pursuant to the ITN because it had been informed by 3M, the
manufacturer of the equipment proposed, that 3M would no longer be producing the proposed
equipment. Following this notification from Consolidated, the City ceased further negotiations
with Consolidated.
5
City Commission Memorandum - Parking Garage Gated Revenue Control System
June 10,2015
Page3of15
On December 22, and December 23,2014, site visits were held and attended by the remaining
four (4) Proposers: Amano McGann, lnc., Scheidt & Bachmann USA, lnc., Skidata, lnc., and
WPS USA Corp. Proposers were given until December 30, 2014, to submit their questions
relating to the cost proposal. As a result of questions arising from evaluating the equipment, the
Procurement Department issued Response 1,2, and 3, on January 15, January 28, and
January 30,2015, respectively. On January 30, the City requested cost proposals, for which a
due date of February 6,2015, was established.
On February 6,2015, cost proposals from Amano McGann, lnc., Skidata, lnc., and WPS USA
Corp. were received. At this time, Scheidt & Bachmann USA, lnc., notified the City that, due to
schedule conflicts, it had withdrawn its proposal pursuant to the lTN. The following is a brief
summary, from the information provided in each firm' proposals, of the final three (3) proposers:
o Amano McGann, lnc. is headquartered in Roseville, Minnesota, with approximately 290
employees across the United States. With over 290 employees, 20 branch offices and
over 40 distribution partners throughout the U.S., according to Amano McGann, it has
performed over 6,000 installations worldwide along with its parent company Amano
Corporation. Amano provides parking, time and access solutions to universities, hotel
chains, airports, sports complex and municipalities. Recent clients include the City of
West Palm Beach, City of Portland Smart Park Garages, and the City of Detroit.
. SKIDATA, lnc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of SKIDATA, AG (founded in Austria in 1977),
was established in North America in January 2000 to serve the off-street parking and
revenue control system market segment. According to SKIDATA, it has built over 750
systems in Canada, USA and Mexico. Their products and services are found in airports,
municipalities, shopping centers, universities and medical centers across North America.
Recent clients include the City of Oklahoma City, City of Beverly Hills, City of St. Louis
and Downtown Salt Lake City. Their services include consulting, integration, direct
support, documentation and training.
. WPS USA Corp. has over twenty (20) years of experience using bar code technology in
their parking access systems. According to WPS, it introduced the first "Credit Car
ln/Credit Card Out" solution back in the early 1990's. Recent clients have been the City
of Norfolk, the Los Angeles Department of Transportation, Rockville Town Square and
the Union Station Parking Garage in Washington, D.C.
Several negotiation sessions with all three (3) proposers were scheduled, as well as a request
for best and final cost proposals offers. The Administration received final replies to the
referenced negotiations on May 19,2015.
ANALYSIS
Parking gated revenue control system is necessary for the operation of the City's parking
facility, as well as the management of over $16 million in annual revenue at these facilities. A
system with robust functionality and reporting/audit capabilities, as well as a partnership with a
qualified service provider is critical for the effective management of a system that serves over
3.3M customers annually and through which significant revenue is yielded. For these reasons,
the Administration believes that, in the best interest of the City, functionality, prior performance
record and cost of the system are critically important considerations. With that in mind, a
comparative analysis follows with the purpose of illustrating major differences among the three
finalist with whom the City has negotiated.
6
City Commission Memorandum - Parking Garage Gated Revenue Control System
June 10,2015
Page4of15
1. System Functionality. The three (3) proposed systems offer basic access and revenue
control functionality. The major differences among the three (3) firms are in the areas of
ticket technology (barcode vs. magnetic stripe), and validation of disabled permits.
a. Ticket Technology. The major difference in the area of functionality is the
technology utilized for ticket transactions (vs card access), which is typically
either a barcode ticket or magnetic stripe ticket. Historically, each type has been
lauded by the industry as the preferred methodology over years. Currently,
barcode tickets are the most widely accepted and enjoys a substantial portion of
the market share. While all indications seem to point towards continued use and
growth of barcode tickets, there is no clear indication of either taking the full
market share. The following are the options available for each of the three (3)
proposers in the barcode vs. magnetic stripe technologies:
o Amano McGann, lnc. offers both barcode and magnetic stripe ticket sysfems;
however, both systems cannot be deployed simultaneously in each garage.. Skidata offers both barcode and magnetic stripe ticket sysfems which may be
d eployed si m ultaneou sly.c WPS offers bar code system only.
While staff believes that either barcode or magnetic stripe methodologies are
acceptable, it is important to note that once a decision on bar code or magnetic
stripe is made, future changes in technology will require major system upgrades.
b. EMV (Europay Mastercard & Visa) - Chip embedded credit card technology,
which provides users added protection against fraud, is quickly approaching, if
not already here.
o Both Skidata and Amano have solutions for EMV and committed to providing
their solution at no additionalcosf fo the City. WPS has advised the City that
they are developing an EMV solution; however, its availability and cosf is
contingent upon various facfors. The following is an excerpt from an email
sent by Mr. Garrett Coleman, Manufacturer's Representative, on March 17,
201 5.
"Please understand that there are a number of requirements that companies
like WPS are not responsible for completing. These need to be resolved by
the credit card industry. Untilfhese are resolved, it is not possible to state for
sure there will not be any added cosfs when the regulations are released and
enforced."
c. Validation of Disabled Permits. The process to confirm legitimate disabled
parking transactions, typically processed as exception validations, requires
human interaction. Disabled parking permits are issued and directly linked to an
individual. A disabled parking permit with matching user information on a
government issued identification, such as a driver's license or state identification
card must be presented to an attendant (at a remote location) for confirmation.
Once confirmed, a validation may be processed for a parking fee waiver (the
exception), as required by Code. The following are the exception validation
solution provided by each proposer:
7
City Commission Memorandum - Parking Garage Gated Revenue Control Sysfem
June 10,2015
Page 5 of 15
Amano's solution provides individual components; however, the solution is
not currently integrated resulting in a very labor intensiye process to audit and
reconcile validations. Amano offered to further develop their solution, if
requested to do so at no additional cost to the City.
Skidata provides an automated audit feature to specifically confirm, track, and
retrieve at any point in the future, all validations through a single source, the
transient ticket transaction number. The following is a brief description of the
S ki d ata auto m ated so I utio n for v a I i d ati o n s (e xc e pti o n s).
A customer provides their credentials (disabled parking permit and
identification) for viewing by an attendant at a remote centralized monitoring
location. The attendant can view the credentials and an image of the
credentials is sfored as an attachment (electronic file) to the specific
transaction number for that customer. At a later date, any or all validations,
including disabled parking validations, may be easily retrieved by referencing
a single source (ticket transaction number) for auditing purposes. The images
of the disabled parking permit and identification are easily retrieved, viewed,
and confirmed.
. WPS proffered to develop (and preliminarily tested) a similar functionality
through their license plate recognition (LPR) sysfem. However, their
proposed solution is in the developmental stage.
ln FY 2013114, there were a total of 26,968 disabled parking permit exception
validation transactions, at all ten municipal parking garages, with a value of
$254,766. Without an effective exception validation system, the validation
process for these transactions is vulnerable to manipulation/fraud. The Skidata
solution closes this loophole with a proven, efficient, and user-friendly auditable
feature for validated exception transactions. Amano and WPS proposed to
enhance their current functionality; however, the proposed solutions are, to date,
either unbuilt or untested.
It is important to note gated revenue control systems may also be used in
municipal parking lots with high demand providing greater audit controls and
preserving the integrity of disabled parking.
2. References. The City contacted references provided by each proposer and conducted a
survey/questionnaire. All references for Skidata were deemed satisfactory; however,
there were issues brought to the City's attention with regard to the past performance of
Amano and WPS. The following are excerpts from responses received to the
survey/q uestion nai re:
Amano Reference - Citv of West Palm Beach:o System does not work off-line. Monthly access cards do not work off-line due to
different facility codes at garages. Previous equipment from Federal APD would
batch credit card. This equipment does not batch. Unable to process credit card
transactions when there is a power outage, as evidenced in a recent lightning
strike.
8
City Commission Memorandum - Parking Garage Gated Revenue Control Sysfem
June 10, 201 5
Page6of15
Credit card jams on insertion. Recommends swipe.
No capability to send information to spitter or exit gates. Example: when a ticket
jams and the machine is turned off, the device does not reset itself and requires
on-site reprogramming (cannot be reprogrammed remotely from central station).
lntercoms go on and off-line. Currently, four are off-line (system is only two
years old). Amano is quick to respond but intercoms are still down.
WPS Reference - Citv of Norfolk
Q. Are you satisfied with the audiUaccounting capabilities of the software? Please
explain system capabilities.
A. Not satisfied. Cash does not match shift report. Cash received via Pay-ln-Lane
(PlL) devices are not tallying correctly.. PIL cash refunds are inaccurate due to issuance of same amount of change due
a
to customer in both bills and coins resulting in a duplicate refund.
WPS was not aware of this issue until advised by Reference.
Reference has been thorough in providing WPS documentation regarding these
malfunctions.
This is particularly of concern in remote centralized motoring, since there is no
cashier present to witness this occurrence. Reference personally witnessed this
malfunction.
This was discovered at their third busiest garage.
Reference attempted unsuccessfully to have WPS provide replacement
equipment; consulted with their legal department; and was advised to allow WPS
to address the issue.
New software update is required. Update was scheduled last year. There have
been issues resulting in delays. Update is now scheduled for Spring/Summer
2015.
Reference stated that it is prepared to pursue legal action.
3. COST PROPOSALS. The final cost proposals are itemized into three major areas: (1)
cost of installed equipment; (2) rebate and removal of existing equipment; and (3) ten
( 1 0) year maintenance/support.
*These figures represent the final costs negotiated with and confirmed by each Proposer. As
noted in Exhibit C, the City and the Proposers engaged in several rounds of cost negotiations to
assure best pricing, address certain errors and omissions in Proposer's cost proposals and
create a functional system baseline so that all proposals could be compared equitably. For
example, Amano's original cost proposals inadvertently omitted the required dedicated
employees (at a cost of $821 ,197.52 over the ten year term) and Skidata's omitted the required
training (at a cost of $12,000.00 as an initial cost). Additionally, all proposers offered extra
goods and services (above and beyond what is required for a fully functional system) that could
enhance system operation and is available to the City for future consideration.
a
a
Amano Skidata WPS
Eouioment and lnstallation $3,418,950.00 $3.667,412.00 $2.769,205.00
Rebate on Existino Eouioment s(273.100.00)$(32,500.00)$11,470.00
Maintenance and Suoport (10 Year)$3.823.237.52 $3,158,266.60 $2,478,461.00
Total 10 Year Costs $6.969.087.52.$6.793.178.60 $5.259.136.00-
9
City Commission Memorandum - Parking Garage Gated Revenue Control Sysfem
June 10, 201 5
Page 7 of 15
CITY MANAGER'S DUE DILIGENCE
The City's ten parking garages are currently operated with on-site cashiers/parking attendants
and a gated revenue control system, provided by 3M (manufacturer). Collectively, all garages
generate over $16M in revenues with a labor expense for cashiers/attendants of $3M, annually.
As you know, a Request for Proposals (RFP) for Parking Attendants was issued and an award
is anticipated by the July 2015 City Commission meeting. A critical component required to
manage and operate our municipal garages is a state-of-the-art revenue control system with
remote monitoring. Remote monitoring will automate cashier operations at all parking garages
reducing cashier labor expenses from $3M to $1.8M, a savings of $1.2M (40o/o), annually.
Therefore, a robust and reliable gated revenue control system is essential to process, collect,
and audit transactions and their related revenues. While the City has considered a metered
operations approach (see Exhibit B) to a gated system, the Administration has concluded that
such approach is not cost effective.
Skidata's PARCS solution is composed of gated entrance and exit control systems with the
ability to accept credit card payment in-lane and access credentials such as access cards, pay
by mobile phone applications, or validations; automated pay stations with the ability of accepting
credit card and cash payments; garage offices and central monitoring work stations composed
of desktop computers, monitors and audioivideo (intercoms); and software system that
integrates with all revenue control devices at all garages and interfaces with the City's permit
and financial management systems. More importantly, the system allows for Remote Monitoring
reducing the need for cashier (labor) functions. This is anticipated to reduce parking
attendanUcashier labor cost by 40o/o. ln addition, remote monitoring allows for a variety of
technology enhancements, including real time utilization, ability to change rates based on
utilization, grant gate access, diagnose, troubleshoot, and potentially resolve a variety of alarms
related to in-lane or peripheral equipment.
The City Manager, after carefully considering the results of the negotiation process and staff
recommendations, recommends that the Mayor and City Commission authorize the
Administration to finalize negotiations on final contract terms with Skidata, lnc.; and, upon
successful conclusion of the negotiation terms by the Administration, authorize the Mayor and
City Clerk to execute an Agreement for a gated revenue control system for the City's parking
garages with Skidata. ln support of this recommendation, the City Manager finds as follows:
Functionality
While Amano, Skidata, and WPS are very competitively matched in terms of general system
functionality, the review and analysis conducted by staff indicate some significant differences in
a few areas. Of greatest concern is the need to efficiently and effectively process transactions
through remote monitoring while maintaining a user-friendly and reliable auditable trail, of
validated transactions, most notable are disabled parking permit exemptions with an annual
value exceeding $250,000.
10
City Commission Memorandum - Parking Garage Gated Revenue Control Sysfem
June 10,2015
Page I of 15
References
Section 2-369 of the City Code requires that, in the award of contracts, the following be
considered:
(1) The ability, capacity and skill of the bidder to perform the contract.
(2) Whether the bidder can perform the contract within the time specified, without delay or
interference.
(3) The character, integrity, reputation, judgment, experience and efficiency of the bidder.
(4) The quality of performance of previous contracts.
(5) The previous and existing compliance by the bidder with laws and ordinances relating to
the contract.
Skidata client references indicate that it has a satisfactory history of past performance. Past
clients of both Amano and WPS expressed some concerns of each firm's respective systems
and response to system issues. Especially concerning is the experience shared by a past client
of WPS in which it stated that the system was unable to accurately record and reconcile cash
balances. This is a very dangerous scenario when one considers the amount of revenue ($1Ottl
annually) flowing through the City's gated revenue control system.
Cost
While system costs for all proposed systems are significant, the current estimated annual
revenue yielded through the parking operations at which the reference equipment will be utilized
is approximately $16M. The following tables indicate costs as a percentage of revenue over the
contract term for the new proposed systems, both in terms of overall project cost as well as
yearly maintenance costs.
While cost is clearly an important consideration, the gated parking revenue control system is a
major system for the City through which nearly $16M is processed each year. System
functionality and prior performance of the contractor is as critical as is the cost of the system.
Remote Monitoring Savings and Resulting Net Cost
The following is a comparison of current staffing cost versus proposed (reduced) staffing levels;
new equipmenUremote monitoring, including maintenance costs, over a ten year period.
Eouioment & !nstallation Amano Skidata WPS
Eouioment and lnstallation $3.418.950.00 $3,667,412.00 $2,769,205.00
Rebate for Existing Equipment and/or
Cost of Removino Existino Eouioment ($273,100.00)($32,s00.00)$11,470.00
Total !nitialCosts $3.14s.8s0.00 $3,634,912.00 $2,780,675.00
Annual Maintenance Amano Skidata WPS
Total Maintenance Costs Over 10
Years $3.823.237.52 $3.158.266.60 $2.478.461.00
Estimated Revenue (10 Years)$160,000,000.00 $160.000.000.00 $160,000,000.00
Maintenance Only Cost as a
Percentaqe of Revenue 2.39Yo 1.97Yo 1.55o/"
11
City Commission Memorandum - Parking Garage Gated Revenue Control Sysfem
June 10, 201 5
Page9of15
The proposed reduction in attendant labor hours may be achieved as follows:. Elimination of the second and third Parking Attendant I (cashier), if applicable, from all
locations, Monday through Friday, dayshifts; and. Elimination of all Parking Attendant I during off-peak (overnight) hours.o Reduction of Parking Attendant ll during off-peak hours.
Remote monitoring is anticipated to reduce cashier labor hours by 4Qo/o. This is attributed to a
centralized remote monitoring consolidating cashier functions and tasks at one centralized
location. Each workstation is equipped with data access control to process parking
transactions; intercoms and video monitors for audio/video interactions with the customers;
and will interface with the security camera system to be deployed in all garages under a
separate formal competitive procurement process for security system. Additionally, annual
maintenance costs over the next ten (10) years are less than current annual maintenance costs.
YEAR 1 CURRENT PROPOSED DIFFERENCE
Staffing
Equipment Cost
Equipment Maintenance
TOTAL
$2,943,000.
$225,000.
$3.168.000
$1,800,000.
$3,63s,000
$132,000
ss.567.000
$ (1,143,000)
$3,635,000
$(e3,000)
$2,399,000
YEAR 2
Staffing
Equipment Maintenance
TOTAL
$2,943,000"
$22s,000-
$3,168,000
$1,800,000"
$173,000
$1,973,000
$ (1,143,000)
$ (52,000)
$ (1,195,000)
YEAR 3
Staffing
Equipment Maintenance
TOTAL
$2,943,000"
$225,000-
$3,168,000
$1,800,000"
$331,000
$2,131,000
$ (1,143,000)
$106,000
$ (1,037,000)
YEAR 4
Staffing
Equipment Maintenance
TOTAL
$2,943,000*
$225,000.
$3,168,000
$1,800,000*
$342,000
$2,142,000
$(1 ,1 43,ooo)
$1 17,000
$(1,026,000)
YEAR 5
Staffing
Equipment Maintenance
TOTAL
$2,943,000.
$225,000"
$3,168,000
$1,800,000.
$353,000
$2,153,000
$(1,143,000)
$128,000
$(1.015.000)
YEAR 6
Staffing
Equipment Maintenance
TOTAL
$2,943,000*
$22s,000.
$3,168,000
$1,800,000.
$364,000
$2,164.000
$ (1,143,000)
$139,000
$ (1.004.000)
YEAR 7
Staffing
Equipment Maintenance
TOTAL
$2,943,000-
$22s,000.
$3,168,000
$1,800,000.
$376,000
$2.176.000
$(1,143,000)
$151,000
$(992,000)
YEAR 8
Staffing
Equipment Maintenance
TOTAL
$2,943,000"
$225,000*
$3.r68.000
$1,800,000.
$388,000
$2.188.000
$(1,143,000)
$163,000
$(980.000)
YEAR 9
12
City Commission Memorandum - Pa*ing Garage Gated Revenue Control Sysfem
June 10,2015
Page 10 of 15
Staffing
Equipment Maintenance
TOTAL
$2,943,000.
$225,000.
$3.168.000
$1,800,000.
$400,000
$(1,143,000)
$175,000
YEAR 1O
Staffing
Equipment Maintenance
TOTAL
$2,943,000.
$225,000.
$3.168.000
$1,800,000"
$413,000
$2,2r3,000
$(1,143,000)
$188,000
$(95s,000)
TOTAL 1O YRS $3r.680.000 $24.907.000 $(6,773,000)
* Assumes No lncrease
The proposed solution results in an estimated total cost savings of $6,773,000, over a ten year
period.
Therefore, based on a combination of factors that includes equipment and comparable
installations, past performance on previous public sector contracts and cost savings (especially
when compared to the current system), the City Manager recommends that the Mayor and City
Commission authorize the Administration to finalize negotiations on final contract terms with
Skidata, lnc.
The City Manager further recommends that in the event that the City is unable to finalize
successful negotiations with Skidata, Inc., to finalize negotiations on final contract terms with
Amano McGann, lnc.
As a side note, the City Manager notes that during phase 1 evaluation of proposals, Skidata
was recommended as the first-ranked Proposer by every Evaluation Committee member.
Amano McGann followed Skidata with one second-place rank, one third-place rank and one
fourth-place rank as scored by the Evaluation Committee.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami
Beach, Florida, accept the recommendation of the Gity Manager, pursuant to lnvitation To
Negotiate (lTN) 2014-170-SW for a gated revenue control system for the City's parking garages;
approving the material terms of an agreement between the City and Skidata, lnc., as set forth in
the term sheet attached as Exhibit "A" hereto; authorizing the City Manager and the City
Attorney's Office to finalize the Agreement based upon the material terms approved herein;
provided that they may make any non-substantive and non-material revisions and/or additions
to the Agreement, as they deem necessary; authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the
final Agreement; and, in the event that the City is unable to finalize successful negotiations with
Skidata, lnc., authorizing the City Manager and the City Attorney's Office to negotiate an
Agreement with Amano McGann, lnc. based upon the material terms approved in Exhibit "A"
herein (provided that they may make any non-substantive and non-material revisions and/or
additionq to the Agreement).
ttr,rin$ntusrio
T:\AGENDA\201SUune\PROCUREMENnTN 2014-170-SW Parking Garage Gated Revenue Control System for the City of Miami
Beach MEMO (20150526 KGB).doc
13
TERM SHEET (EXI {IB!T
BRIEF SCOPE OF WORK AMANO SKIDATA WPS
Removal/buy back of existing equipment, new equipment at allgarages, installation, hardware/software, 10 years
maintenance/suooort.
PROPOSED EQUIPMENT AMANO SKIDATA WPS
Submitted
Electronicallv
Submitted
Electronicallv
Submitted
Electronicallv
NEW EQUIPMENT COST.
INSTALLED AMANO SKIDATA WPS
Equipment
lnstallation
Software lnstallation
Other
2,885,500.00
227,975.00
305,475.00
2,830,004.00
143,750.00
331,579.00
362.079.00
2,332,315.00
76,630.00
29,800.00
330,460.00
TOTAL $3,418,950.00 $3,667,412.00 $2,769,205.00
Skidata is $248,462 (7%) higher than Amano and $898,207 (32Yo) higher than WPS.
REBATE/BUYBACK OF EXISTING EQUIPMENT
Skidata is $664,970 .92 (17Yo) lower than Amano and $679,805.60 (27%) higher than WPS.
SUMMARY/GRANDTOTAL OF ALL COSTS
Over a ten (10) year period, including all maintenance and support, the grand total cost of
Skidata is $175,908 .92 (3o/o) lower than Amano and $1 ,534,042 .60 (29o/o) higher than WPS.
EXISTING EQUIPMENT AMANO SKIDATA WPS
Rebate/Buy back for existing
equipment
Cost to remove existing
eouioment
(288,100.00)
15,000.00
(s0,000.00)
17,500.00 11.470.00
TOTAL $(273.100.00)$(32,500.00)$11,470.00
MAINTENANCE/SUPPORT TEN (1 O} YEARS
1O YEAR MAINTENANCE AMANO SKIDATA WPS
Maintenance - Year 1
Maintenance -Year 2
Maintenance - Year 3
Maintenance - Year 4
Maintenance - Year 5
Maintenance - Year 6
Maintenance - Year 7
Maintenance - Year 8
Maintenance - Year 9
Maintenance - Year 10
206,462.00
299,881.00
325,159.75
350,527.25
375,986.61
401,543.04
427,142.87
452,948.55
478,808.63
504.777.81
122,192.10
163,241.70
320,446.30
330,844.20
34't,553.70
352,583.40
363,944.50
375,646.40
387,699.70
400,1 14.60
138,420.00
205,900.00
218,254.00
229,985.00
248,384.00
270,698.00
276,107.00
284,391.00
295,767.00
310,555.00
TOTAL $3.823.237.52 $3.158.266.60 $2.478.461.00
AL OF ALL COSTS - TEN YEARS:
AMANO SKIDATA WPS
Equipment Cost
Additional lnstallation Cost
Software Cost
Existing Equipment
Maintenance Cost - 10 YEARS
Other
2,885,500.00
227,975.00
(273,100.00)
3,823,237.52
305,475.00
2,830,004.00
143,750.00
331,579.00
(32,500.00)
3,158,266.60
362,079.00
2,332,315.00
76,630.00
29,800.00
11,470.00
2,478,461.00
330,460.00
TOTAL $6.969.087.52 $6,793,178.60 $5,259,136.00
14
City Commission Memorandum - Parking Garage Gated Revenue Control Sysfem
June 10,2015
Page 12 of 1 5
GATED REVENUE CONTROL SYSTEMS v. METERED OPERATIONS
ALTERNATIVE OPTION ANALYSIS
(EXHTBTT B)
Recently, the concept of operating municipal garages as metered operations in lieu of
gated revenue control systems was suggested. The Parking Department evaluated
these two alternative methods of operating the City's parking garages and the following
are the results.
Metered (pay station) parking is the standard in the industry for operating on-street
parking and surface parking lots. This is predominantly due to parking spaces being
dispersed over large geographic areas in these settings. Based on the concept
presented, staff evaluated the potential impacts of converting garage operations in the
City to metered operations. The following are high level impacts of operating garages
with meters:o Parking gated revenue control systems garners 100% of parking revenues as users
must pay for their parking session prior to exit. Metered operations are based on
enforcement levels and would require more intensive staffing levels.o The City's metered system has a compliance ratio of 85%, meaning 8.5 of 10
users pay for their parking. Therefore, 15% ($2.+ltl of $16M) in garage revenues
would stand to be lost, if operated with meters.o ln order to achieve the 85% compliance level 2417 for all 10 garages, an
estimated 50 additional enforcement officers would be needed, at an estimated
cost of $2,818,400, including salaries, health and pension benefits.o For the remaining 15% who do not pay, the City's citation capture rate is 10o/o,
which could generate approximately $972,000 in citation revenue (assuming a
90% collection rate), but the County retains $611,820 of this, which represents
the County's portion of 113 of citation revenue, as well as contributions to school
crossing guards and technology (Autocite) fund.
. Citations and related fines derived from parking enforcement often have negative
implications with the public. The City's portion of revenue generated from an $18
overtime parking citation equates to $6.67 per citation, after the County's fees are
assessed.
. Diminished revenues related to potential disabled placard abuse. ldentity of placard
owner is not verified in metered facilities but is verified in staffed/gated garages.
ln closing, the current cost of operating the gated revenue control systems in the City's
10 garages is $2,985,500. With technology enhancements and remote monitoring, labor
hoursicosts are estimated to decrease by 4Oo/o to $1,800,000. Even taking the capital
costs of new equipment for all garages into account, the gated revenue control system
would appear more cosUrevenue effective.
Additional detail is provided in the analysis below, including increased capital expenses
and other recurring operational expenses incurred with metered operations as
compared to gated revenue control systems.
15
City Commission Memorandum - Parking Garage Gated Revenue Control Sysfem
June 10,2015
Page13of15
GATED REVENUE CONTROL SYSTEMS . METER COMPARISON
Equipment
Staffing
Maintenance
$3,635,000
$1,800,000
$123,000
$o
$1,800,000
$164,000
$0
$1,800,000
$321,000
$3,635,000
$s,400,000
$608,000
TOTAL:$5,558,000 $1,964,000 $2,121 ,000 $9,643,000
137 METERS
Staffing
License Plate Recognition
Vehicles
Maintenance
Meter Collections
$1,027,s00
$2,818,400
$767,3s0
$43,200
$220,000
$2,874,768
$o
$43,200
$220,000
$ 0 $1,027,500
$2,932,263 $8,625,431
$o $767,350
$4s,200 $129,600
$220,000 $660,000
TOTAL:$4,876,450 $3,137,968 $3,195,463 $11,209,881
CONCLUSION:
Even taking the capital costs of new equipment for all garages into account, the gated revenue control
system would appear more cosUrevenue effective. Technology enhancements and remote monitoring
available with the new gated revenue control system result in a reduction of labor hours/costs of
approximately 4Oo/o to $1,800,000 (currently at $2,985,500). Furthermore, the cost of contracted labor at
living wage rates is significantly lower than City employee labor expense (salary/benefiUpension).
16
City Commission Memorandum - Parking Garage Gated Revenue Contrcl Sysfem
June 10,2015
Page 14 of 15
EXHIBIT C
SUMMARY OF COST NEGOTIATIONS
Below please find original cost proposal submittal from each proposer due by February 6, 2015.
The chart below provides a chronology of negotiations and their respective results. Please note
the FINAL offer for each firm was confirmed as follows: Amano: April 23, 2015; Skidata. May 19,
2015; and WPS: March 19,2015.
* After negotiation discussions with each Proposer to understand the cost proposals, staff requested
revised Cost Proposals which were received on March 12,2015.
* Staff determined that the revised cost proposals contained errors and omissions or additional equipment
not requested by the City as follows.
Origina! Cost Proposal After Site
Visits - Received February 6. 2015 AMANO SKIDATA wPs
Equipment Cost
Additional lnstallation Cost
Software Cost
Equipment Removal and Rebate
Maintenance Cost
Other
$2,883,500.00
$0.00
$227,975.00
-$213,100.00
$3,252,260.00
$655,500 00
$2,906,329.00
$143,750.00
$331,579.00
$17,500.00
$3,518,161 .00
$257,102.00
$2,370,745.00
$76,630.00
$29,800.00
$1 1,470.00
$2,390,041.00
$476,704.00
PRELIMINARY TOTAL $6,806.135.00.$7,174,421.00*$5,355,390.00.
Revised Cost Proposal- Received
March 12.2015 AMANO SKIDATA WPS
Equipment Cost
Additional lnstallation Cost
Software Cost
Equipment Removal and Rebate
Maintenance Cost
Other
$2,883,500.00
$0.00
$227,975.00
-$273,100.00
$3,002,040.00
$699,900.00
$2,906,329.00
$143,750.00
$331,579.00
-$32,500.00
$3,280,512.00
$217,102.00
$2,332,315.00
$76,630.00
$29,800.00
$11,470.00
$2,478,461.00
$444,070.00
TOTAL $6.540.315.00 $6.846.772.00 s5.372.746.00
Errors and Omissions AMANO SKIDATA WPS
Corrections for Mathematical Errors
on Cost Prooosal -$346,975.00
Reduction for Supplemental ltems
(Table 1)-$45.450.00
Add Cost of Dedicated Employee
Omitted from Amano's Cost Proposal $821.197.52
Corrections for Mathematical Errors
on Cost Prooosal $72.743.56
Reduction for Supplemental ltems
(Table 1)-$126,337.00
Corrections for Mathematical Errors
on Cost Proposal $28.200.00
Reduction for Supplemental ltems
(Table 1)-$141,810.00
TOTAL $428,772.52 -$53.590./t4 -$113.610.00
17
City Commission Memorandum - Patuing Garage Gated Revenue Control Sysfem
June 10,2015
Page15of15
TABLE 1: SUPPLEMENTAL ITEMS
Items not necessary for implementation/operation of system but available to the City in the future on
an as needed basis.
Final Adjustments Confirmed by
Prooosers AMANO SKIDATA WPS
Date Confirmed by Proposer
Equipment Cost
Additional lnstallation Cost
Software Cost
Equipment Removal and Rebate
Maintenance Cost
*Other
4t23t2015
$2,885,500.00
$0.00
$227,975.00
-$273,100.00
$3,823,237.52
$305,475.00
5t19t2015
$2,830,004.00
$143,750.00
$331,579.00
-$32,500.00
$3,158,266.60
$362,079.00
3t1912015
$2,332,315.00
$76,630.00
$29,800.00
$11,470.00
$2,478,461.00
$330,460.00
FINAL TOTAL $6.969.087.52 $6.793.178.60 s5.259.136.00
AMANO
G7 Bollards ($150 x 8 = $'t ,200)
G8 Bollards ($150 x 1 - $150)
G10 Bollards ($1SO x 2 = $300)
Booth Removal (per booth)
Online Validation Software (eParcVal)
Daily pass online software (eFlexPass)
Bu lk Validation Software (eFlexPrint)
Pedestrian Warning System (per systemX$sOO x 10 garages)
laneX$400 x 42 lanes
$1,200.00
$150.00
$300.00
$2,000.00
$4,000.00
$10,000.00
$6,000.00
$5,000.00
TOTAL .00
SKIDATA
WEBKey Managed System (annual fee year 1)
WEBKey Managed System (annualfee maintenance years 2-10)
Pedestrian Alert signage (Per Garage)($1,349 x 10 garages)
$473ea x 10
$9,500.00
$98,617.00
$13,490.00
TOTAL s126,337.00
WPS
Pedestrian warning light & buzzer at each exit
Printed graphic static signage: Budget
Additional protective bollard if required: (Each)
Electronic locks for accessing equipment housings (Lump sum)
Booth Removal: Not to exceed $3,000.00 per booth Budget
Level Counting, Exterior Monument Sign: (Budget Each)
Floor Space Available Sign: (Budget Each)
Ramp counter for level counting using camera detection: (Each)
LPR Cameras, housing, and installation: (Each)
LPR site infrastructure where
$8,160.00
$20,000.00
$450.00
$85,000.00
$3,000.00
$9,500.00
$2,800.00
$4,500.00
$3,400.00
TOTAL $141,810.00
18
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
IUIIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THEclry MANAGER, PURSUANT TO INV|TAT|ON TO NEGOTTATE (tTN) 2014-
{7O.SW FOR A GATED REVENUE CONTROL SYSTEM FOR THE CITY'S
PARKING GARAGES; APPROVING THE MATERIAL TERMS OF AN
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND SKIDATA, INC., AS SET FORTH IN
THE TERM SHEET ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT ',A" HERETO; AUTHORTZTNG
THE CIry MANAGER AND THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO FINALTZE
THE AGREEMENT BASED UPON THE MATERIAL TERMS APPROVED
HEREIN; PROVIDED THAT THEY MAY MAKE ANY NON-SUBSTANTIVE AND
NON.MATERIAL REVISIONS AND'OR ADDITIONS TO THE AGREEMENT,
AS THEY DEEM NECESSARY; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY
CLERK TO EXECUTE THE FINAL AGREEMENT; AND, IN THE EVENT THAT
THE CITY IS UNABLE TO FINALIZE SUCCESSFUL NEGOTIATIONS WTH
SKIDATA, INC., AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CIry
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO NEGOTIATE AN AGREEIUIENT WITH AMANO
MCGANN, INC. BASED UPON THE MATERIAL TERMS APPROVED IN
EXHIB|T ,,A" HERETN (PROVIDED THAT THEY [,lAy MAKE ANy NON-
SUBSTANTIVE AND NON.MATERIAL REVISIONS AND/OR ADDITTONS TO
THE AGREEMENT).
WHEREAS, on May 21, 2014, the Mayor and City Commission authorized the issuance
of lnvitation to Negotiate (lTN) 2014-170-SW for a Gated Revenue Control System for the City's
parking garages, including centralized processing of data for all of the City's parking garages; a
central monitoring station for intercoms and CCTV at all entrance and exit lanes; and
centralized access control for all garage equipment; and
WHEREAS, on May 22,2A14, ITN 2014-170-SW was issued with an opening date of
July 10, 2014; and
WHEREAS, on September 10, 2014, the Mayor and City Commission approved
Resolution 2014-28720, accepting the recommendation of the City Manager and authorizing the
Administration to enter into negotiations with all the proposers; to wit: Skidata lnc.; Amano
McGann, lnc.; LCN, lnc. d/b/a Consolidated Parking Equipment; WPS USA Corp.; and Scheidt
& Bachmann USA, lnc.; and
WHEREAS, on December 17,2014, the City was notified by Consolidated Parking
Equipment that it had withdrawn its proposal pursuant to the ITN; and
WHEREAS, on February 6,2015, Scheidt & Bachmann USA, lnc. notified the City that it
had withdrawn its proposal pursuant to the ITN; and
WHEREAS, staff held several negotiation sessions with all three (3) proposers, as well
as a request for best and final cost proposals offers; and the Administration received final
replies to the referenced negotiations on May 19,2015.
19
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COIUMISSION OF THE Clry OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, accept the recommendation of the
City Manager, pursuant to lnvitation To Negotiate (lTN) 2014-170-SW for a gated revenue
control system for the City's parking garages; approving the material terms of an agreement
between the City and Skidata, lnc., as set forth in the term sheet attached as Exhibit "A" hereto;
authorizing the City Manager and the City Attorney's Office to finalize the Agreement based
upon the material terms approved herein; provided that they may make any non-substantive
and non-material revisions and/or additions to the Agreement, as they deem necessary;
authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the finalAgreement; and, in the event that the
City is unable to finalize successful negotiations with Skidata, lnc., authorizing the City Manager
and the City Attorney's Office to negotiate an Agreement with Amano McGann, lnc. based upon
the material terms approved in Exhibit "A" herein (provided that they may make any non-
substantive and non-material revisions and/or additions to the Agreement).
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of 2015.
ATTEST:
Rafael E. Granado, City Clerk Philip Levine, Mayor
T:\AGENDAU0l5Uune\PROCUREMENflITN 2014-'170-SW Parking Garage cated Revenue Control System for the City of Miama Beach RESO.doc
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
& FOR EXECUTION
20
TERM SHEET (EXHIBI
BRIEF SCOPE OF WORK AMANO SKIDATA WPS
Removal/buy back of existing equipment, new equipment at allgarages, installation, hardware/software, 10 years
maintenance/suooort.
PROPOSED EQUIPMENT AMANO SKIDATA WPS
Submitted
Electronicallv
Submitted
Electronicallv
Submitted
Electronicallv
NEW EQUIPMENT COST.
INSTALLED AMANO SKIDATA WPS
Equipment
lnstallation
Software lnstallation
Other
2,885,500.00
227,975.00
305,475.00
2,830,004.00
143,750.00
331,579.00
362,079.00
2,332,315.00
76,630.00
29,800.00
330,460.00
TOTAL $3,418,950.00 $3.667.412.00 $2.769.205.00
Skidata is $248,462 (77o) higher than Amano and $898,2Q7 (32o/o\ hiqher than WPS.(7%) his (32o/o) higher
Skidata is $664,970 .92 (17o/o) lower than Amano and $679,805.6 0 (27o/o) higher than WPS.
SU
Over a ten (10) year period, including all maintenance and support, the grand total cost of
Skidata is $1 75,908 .92 (3o/o) lower than Amano and $1 ,534,042.60 (29o/o) higher than WPS.
T:\AGENDAV015\June\PROCUREMENT\|TN 2014-170-SW Parking Garage Gated Revenue Control System for the City of Miami Beach MEMO
(20150526 KGB).doc
REBATE/BUYBACK OF EXISTING EQUIPMENT
EXISTING EQUIPMENT AMANO SKIDATA WPS
Rebate/Buy back for existing
equipment
Cost to remove existing
eouioment
(288,100.00)
15,000.00
(50,000.00)
17,500.00 1 1.470.00
TOTAL $(273.100.00)$(32.500.00)$11,470.00
MAINTENANCE/SUPPORT TEN (10) YEARS
1O YEAR MAINTENANCE AMANO SKIDATA wPs
Maintenance - Year 1
Maintenance -Year 2
Maintenance - Year 3
Maintenance - Year 4
Maintenance - Year 5
Maintenance - Year 6
Maintenance -Year 7
Maintenance - Year 8
Maintenance - Year 9
Maintenance - Year 10
206,462.00
299,881.00
325,159.75
350,527.25
375,986.61
401,543.04
427,142.87
452,948.55
478,808.63
504.777.81
122,192.10
163,241.70
320,446.30
330,844.20
341,553.70
352,583.40
363,944.50
375,646.40
387,699.70
400.1 14.60
138,420.00
205,900.00
218,254.00
229,985.00
248,384.00
270,698.00
276,107.00
284,391.00
295,767.00
310.555.00
TOTAL $3,823,237.52 $3,158,266.60 s2.478.461.00
MMARY/GRANDTOTAL OF ALL COSTS - TEN 1O) YEARS
AMANO SKIDATA WPS
Equipment Cost
Additional lnstallation Cost
Software Cost
Existing Equipment
Maintenance Cost - 10 YEARS
Other
2,885,500.00
227,975.00
(273,100.00)
3,823,237.52
305.475.00
2,830,004.00
143,750.00
331,579.00
(32,500.00)
3,158,266.60
362,079.00
2,332,315.00
76,630.00
29,800.00
11,470.00
2,478,461.00
330.460.00
TOTAL $6,969,087.52 $6.793,178.60 $5,259.136.00
21