The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About4.07 LAN H/W & S/W Bids e e CITY OF DUBLIN AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 14, 1994 SUBJECT: Local Area Network Hardware/Software Project Bid Award '?JO (Prepared by: Bo Barker, Management Assistant) EXHIBITS ATIACHED: Ii. Hardware Bids - Comprehensive List of all Bids. /2. Consultants Letter Advocating Selection of the Hewlett Packard Solution /3. Hardware Bids - Comparison of Hewlett Packard Equipment '/ 4. Software Bids - Comprehensive List of all Bids ~5. Budget Change Form authorizing moving $2,000 to CIP #9315 RECOMMENDATION:/!.k' 1. '\()J' 2. 3. Award Hardware Bid: Whole Earth Business Systems for $109,933. Software: Reject all bids and authorize Staff to issue a purchase order through the State of California Master Contract for $10,852. Authorize the Mayor to execute the Budget Change Form. FINANOAL STATEMENT: The total cost of the hardware and software is $120,785. The Capital Improvement Program contains adequate funds for these purchases in the General Fund, the Criminal Activity Fund and the Internal Service Fund. See Report for further details. DESCRIPTION: At its meeting on October 3,1994, the City Council authorized Staff to circulate bids for the local area network (LAN) computer equipment. Due to the technical nature of the Data Processing System, the City Council granted a waiver to the competitive bid requirements. The bid was authorized as part of the 1994-95 Capital Improvement Program. Bids were due on October 21, 1994 at 10:00 a.m. and have been analyzed to determine how they best meet the City's needs. Local Area Network Project Specifications Bidders had the opportunity to bid on one or both of two Bid Alternatives. These "alternatives" separated the hardware (Alternative #1) and software (Alternative #2) required for the LAN. Within Bid Alternative #1 the vendors could submit proposals for up to four (4) hardware manufacturers limited to Compaq, Hewlett Packard (HP), IBM, and Dell. Hardware bids were received from the 6 vendors listed below. All vendors except for Advanced Micronet Solutions presented software bids. Entex Information Systems Whole Earth Business Systems Advanced Micronet Solutions Business World Products Johnson Controls Western Blue The final cost of the bid award was achieved by breaking down individual costs in the bids and applying them to the City's needs. These needs and the comprehensive lists of bidders proposals are shown in Exhibit 1. Bid Review The primary considerations in reviewing the bids was to determine which hardware maker would best meet the City's needs in terms of quality, cost and service. The two main contenders in this regard were Hewlett Packard and Dell. The bids consisting of Compaq equipment were considerably more expensive and no vendors made proposals on IBM. Although the Hewlett Packard and Dell computers have similar components (486D)(2 - 66m.hz), it was necessary to analyze the differences as they relate to the City's needs for quality, cost and service. Staff has worked with the City's computer consultant to weigh the cost/benefits between the Dell and Hewlett Packard options. While Dell had a slightly better price, it was determined that the solution which best meets the City's needs is the Hewlett Packard equipment. It is generally accepted that the Hewlett Packard equipment is of better quality than the Dell equipment. The quality differences are distinguishable by how the equipment is manufactured and is discussed in more detail in the following sections. File Server Comparison The Dell file server as proposed by Advanced Micronet Solutions is called the OmniPlex 5/90. The Omni Plex line is typically a high end personal computer although it is being proposed-with more capacity as a file server. There are some major differences between the Omni-Plex and the HP Net Server as proposed. These difference are highlighted in the architecture of the machines. The HP Net Server is designed as a true file server with built in security and administration software, modular design for easy upgrade or hot swapping of hard disks, self synchronous architecture that eliminates data input/output bottlenecks, a 64 bit system bus width (speed) and 8 EISA expansion slots (expandability). The Dell Server doesn't have network software, nor as good of a modular server design as the HP server. Further, the Dell a 32 bit system bus width and 3 EISA slots for expandability. Speed and expandability are COPIES TO: All Bidders ITEMNO.A..L CITY CLERK FILE~ e e important considerations for a new network that will likely grow. There are also other technical features that make the HP Server stand apart from the Dell Server. Thus, although the Dell server is priced lower, it doesn't compare well with the technical capabilities, speed, networking features, and expandability of the HP File Server Workstation Comparison Dell computers use parts bought from the most affordable manufacturers. They seek out the most inexpensive parts and use them in their PCs. They manufacturer their machines in ways that achieve the quickest turn around time for their marketing strategy. The representatives from both Advance Micronet Solutions and Whole Earth Business systems agree that Hewlett Packard (HP) makes higher quality machines than Dell. They advocate Hewlett Packard if the price is not the only consideration and the product can be purchased within the client's budget. Some of the features that set HP apart from Dell include: Standardization of components that must pass HP's Quality assurance program, (Dell gets the cheapest components available)i HP's design of the PC requires no tools to open it and work oni they provide a shielded power supply that guards against EMF emissions. HP personal computers are designed with quality and reliability in mind through extensive research and development efforts. Additionally, there are other intangibles that make HP a better solution. These include direct HP support, (Dell uses third party support) and the stability of HP equipment in the knowledge that HP will be around for a long time to come and will continue to support their products. The City's consultant has also provided an opinion (Exhibit 2) recommending the Hewlett Packard solution even though Dell costs somewhat less. He states that for $170 per machine it is prudent in a significant investment for computer equipment to consider the long term quality attributes in addition to costs. Four vendors offered solutions on the recommended Hewlett Packard equipment. These bids offer the City an opportunity to review the Hewlett Packard equipment on a competitive basis. The comparison of these four identical solutions is presented in Exhibit 3. The chart in Exhibit 3 summarizes the items necessary to complete the installation of the LAN. The workstation line item represents 35 personal computers. As indicated, Whole Earth Business Systems submitted the lowest cost for the Hewlett Packard Solution. Bid Review - Software As stated above, five of the Vendors provided bids for Software. In order to determine that the bids were as competitive as possible, Staff compared the pricing to a master contract developed by the State of California. Master contracts such as this are developed by the State to competitively and consistently achieve the best price possible. As is shown in Exhibit 4, the State Contract price is over $2,000 lower than the lowest bidder. For this reason, Staff recommends that City Council reject all of the bids for software and authorize the purchase of the software through the State Contract. Bid Adjustment At the October 3,1994 City Council meeting the Bid Specifications included the following main components for the Fiscal Year 1994-95 LAN installation: 1. Purchase of one network file server. 2. Replacement of 24 personal computer workstations and printers which have been fully depreciated in the Internal Service Fund. 3. Purchase of 7 new personal computers; (4 for the police department, 2 for the Public Works Department, 1 for the Building Department). 4. Purchase of Software including: the network operating system, word processing, spreadsheet, database, and desktop publishing programs. These applications will be available to all workstations on the network. After a further review of the equipment necessary to successfully implement the Local Area Network, it was determined that it would be beneficial to proceed with the purchase of three (3) additional computers. The three computers would be for the Economic Development Manager, Associate Planner, and the Recreation Department. Two of these represent new workstations and one is a replacement machine. The Economic Development Manager and Associate Planner positions were adopted as part of the Fiscal Year 1994-95 higher service level. Since it was unclear if these positions would be approved, computer equipment was not included in the initial CIP estimates. Included in the Higher Service Level for the Economic Development Manager was $2,000 in operating budget funds allocated for computer equipment. No funds were allocated in the Operating Budget for the Associate Planner. In order to make the budgeted Economic Development appropriation available for the purchase in this program, the City Council must authorize a budget transfer from the operating budget to the CIP #9315 (Exhibit 5). Staff considers the unit price of the bids received on the workstations to be very competitive. The Recreation Department currently has a stand alone terminal located at Shannon Center. Use of this workstation is limited to access to the IBM System 36 located at the Civic Center, since the terminal does not have a micro processor. It is limited to a monitor and a keyboard. Given the significant price reductions in the cost of micro computers, there are adequate replacement reserves available to replace the workstation with a fully functioning personal computer. In addition to accessing the IBM System 36, PC applications can be used by the Shannon Center Staff. This will result in two fully operable PC's being available for three full-time Staff positions. Staff recommends increasing the number of replacement machines by one. The costs of these three additional computers are included in the costs projecti~ns provided in this report and fall within the budget limitations. e e The Police Evidence System is budgeted as part of a separate CIP project #9317. A total of $2,500 was estimated for computer equipment in this project. Given that Staff has fixed pricing available under this bid, the personal computer for the Evidence System will also be purchased as part of the proposed bid award to Whole Earth Business Systems. Thus a total of 35 new computers are included in the cost estimates and recommended for purchase. Other Adjustments There may be unforeseen circumstances that will necessitate further purchased of software or equipment for the network An example of this situation is in the number of word processing licenses bought by the City. Staff has estimated that 26 word processing licenses are necessary even though there are 35 users. In a network environment, one does not typically license 100% of the users on all software applications. This feature is designed to save money because one doesn't need to purchase one license for each user. Thus, once the network is installed the actual usage will be attainable and may need to be adjusted. Another example would be cabling. Certain workstations may need a longer cable which would have to purchased.. Any additional items required would be purchased at the same unit prices as presented in this report and will not exceed the budget. Budget Review The following table is provided to give the City Council an overall view of the project costs and budget. The purchase of file server, the personal computers and most of the network devices are listed under the "Whole Earth Purchase" section. The software and cabling have firm unit pricing and are labeled with their vendor. In the "Other Items and Equipment Section" only the portable computer has been purchased to date while all other costs remain as estimates. General Criminal Internal Total Network Item Fund Activity Service All Fund Fund Funds Whole Earth Purchase Personal Computers 13,467 8,088 52,332 73,887 File Server 2,843 4,931 2,843 10,617 Network Printers 10,233 5,000 15,233 Network Upgrade Cards 2,360 2,360 Power Supply 343 343 RAM Upgrades 1,576 1,576 Track Mice 790 790 Network Installation 1,500 3,500 5,000 Shipping from Whole Earth 125 125 Software ~ State Contract 10,852 10,852 CablinK - Johnson Controls 6,875 4,250 6,875 18,000 n.hpr _. . Portable 2,705 2,705 Gateway 2,500 2,500 Phone Line Installation 400 400 Deskjets 1,000 1,000 External Modem 400 400 R MS Adapters 900 900 16 Channel MUX 3,000 3,000 Procurement Consultant 3,800 3,800 Totals 52,317 17,269 83,902 153,488 ~ Internal Service Fund General Fund Criminal Activity Fund Transfer from Econ. Dev. Bud. Funds from CIP #9317 Total Budget 83,922 49,515 17,269 2,000 2,500 54,015 17,269 83,922 155,206 Amount under Bud et 1,698 o 20 1,718 Staff recommends the City Council award the bid to Whole Earth Business Systems for hardware totaling $109,933 and authorize the purchase of software through the State's Master Purchasing Contract. for $10,852. Additionally, authorize staff to make adjustments within the project budget, which are required to successfully implement the LAN. oo oo Cll"Oti a "C ;::l '<;; 0 "0 ;::l ~ e o:l Q., Q) I-t ~ >< ~ i! "'0 ~ I-t J.U ~ :r: I ...... U Q) '0 I-t ~ ~ ~ I-t e 0 u ~ ~ ...... 11 Q) Z 2! ~ ~ "0 OJ ..( I-t < - ~ u 0 .....J .s .... o:l J.U ~ ..2 ~ e III ] ~ o U g g- 0\ .... ~ co N 0 M ~ ~ 0 0 ~ ~ ~ "'" "'" 0\ .... N .... 0\, 0\, ""', M 0, 0\ M ""', ..". I./') co co- I./') N ~' co 00 0 0 .... 0\ .... "'" ..,. u u .... .... ~ M .... ~, co N 0 M ~ ~ 0 0 0 .... "'" 0\ .... N .... ~ Q., C"\. 0\ "'" M 0 0\ M :r: N co- co 1./')- N- ~- ~ ~- Q., .... 0\ .... :r: .... .... :"..'.:.:":::.::: 'i' " ""if' ", ",,' ii ??" "",, ,.,i " .? ," "i9?n ~ I:-.. I./') .... I:-.. ~, 0 ~ I:-.. 0 8 ~ l@ :::l M .... 4 M I./') co I:-.. ~ C"\. I:-.. co, ..". 00 .... .... <'l. Cll R' M' ..; 0\' ..,.' Cl D 0 ~ .... .... ...... ...... ...... ...... N .... ... i,I C,i' It "'i'"" ~ Ii "',"." . ',';:"""i', '".-.''' .'Vyi x',. g g ~ I./') ~ 0 "'" 0 0 0 I:-.. ~ 0 N ~, M co co N I./') 00 "'" .... ~ ~ 0\, ...... '-'l.. M 0\, 00 00 .... ~ 00 M ..- '-0' ..,. .... N' ~' 0' N' 8 0 ...... 0\ ...... .... ..,. u ...... .... iil" ".,',. s ."'i."', """. " ".'"'."i""",,, , ..IiI' '.'............ )-.;I'i. '''''.,... ",..,.',.', ".'.";;"',', .'.. "..,"'." .... g- I./') 0 [::: I:-.. g ~, R 8 I:-.. ~ ~ ~ ~ ..". ...... ..., c; Q., 0\ "<. 00 '-0 M I./') co, ...... ...... ..., :r: 0\- N M- ..".' .... M ~- 0' 1:-..' 0 0\ .... .... M U ... ...... ~ ~ ...... [::: I:-.. g 8 R 8 0\ I:-.. I./') .... ~ M co 00 N 0 Q., 0\, co, ~ ..., ""'- I./') 00 ~ I./') ...... ~ :r: Q., 0\ M M "",- ...... M- oo- ~- I:-.. .... .... :r: .... ...... ...ii ii. ," ;... i" , 77'0i: "'. l5IG ..", ',. 8:':".i. ::2 00 \0 0 N c; R 8 ~ N 8, co :::l ..... N ..., .... co R, ..". M Qj "<. M I./') N, N 1:-.., M 00 M ..-:. 0 D I:-.. N 1./')- .... .... M' N c-..: ...... .... '-0 ...... 0\ 0 .... t-.. 00 ~ 0 N R, 0 8 t-.. @, 0 N ~ ~ N M ...... 00 I:-.. 00 C 0\ Q., "'l "'- C"\. N M co, 0\ 0_ "<. ::r: 0' ~ I./') ...... ...... M 1./')- I:-.. ...... c; ...... ...... 0\ .... ~ I:-.. M '-0 0 N R, R 8 ~ "'" C \0 ~ 0\ M .... co co ~ ::g, Q., .... "'- C"\. N M 00, "<. :r: 5: 0 ~' I./') .... ...... M 8' 00 ~ .... .... ...... ...... ...... I" ii. ,',' ;;."". .."..;C .'",/...' II.... i'.ii. ii..".' .',. .ii; ...:....... ,IX?:;: .,.....';;..",., 'ii..".' ',i'.,,' ~ 18 t-.. ~ 0 I:-.. ~ c 8, g 0\ I./') c; ~ 00 ...... ~, ..., ~- N Q., co, 0\, 0, ...... M t-.. "<. ...... .... :r: 0\ I./') "'" N' .... I./') 0\ 0\ 0\' Q., 00 .... ...... N ::r: .... .... tr 00 0 ~ 0 t-.. \0 0 8, M ...... I./') 3 a 0 ~, co ...... ~, ~ ;$ "'" N Q.., co 0 ...... M "<. ...... ..., :r: S 0\- "",- N' .... I./') 0- 0\ 0' 0 00 ...... N M U ...... .... ~ ~ I:-.. ~ 0 t-.. \0 0 ~, 0 00 I./') ..., ~ co .... ~, ~ N co N ..., 0.. co ...... M 00_ ~, .... 0\, :r: 0.. 0\- 00 "",- N' .... I./') .... 0\ ~ ...... 0 0 ::r: ...... ...... -~ oo ~ -~ ;::l ,...., Cll Vl .... ,~ .... ID 8 r- oo oo "'" > Cll ] C f-o ~ I:: , Cll ~ .... ,9 ... .B ::!- D d: Cll 6 ~ :g ~ ..I<: u ;;; ~ 1! ~ '6 '.0 ~ .... $ o:l -0 ~ -E Jj oo 0 .~ 1: ~ ~ ~ :::l 1 ..... ~ Cll ] Cll 1! >< o:l 0 0 Cll "t:l ~ f '" 1: -0 u: ~ :;:l S: z .s .s ~ \>;., Q., f-o en en f-o I:: o ] o ........ e E ~ IDS S: e ~ -1-1 . .-I ..n . .-I ~ X ~ .~ e e Bo Barker City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza P.O. Box 2340 Dublin, CA 94568 October 31, 1994 Dear Bo Barker: As I understand your request for infonnation, you require a sununary analysis that compares the Hewlett Packard (lIP) VL2 4/66 versus the De1l4/66LE workstation. Technically, both workstations offer very similar performance. Specifically, both the HP and Dell workstations rely on an 80486 CPU operating at 66!'vIHz. In addition, both PCs provide fast local bus video and reliable disk storage space. The Dell workstation, however, offers approximately 60 MB more disk space than the HP. Otherwise, both brands should offer the same theoretically pelformance on the City's LAN. From a business perspective, the difference between the two bids is approximately $5,530. Divided by 26 workstations, this difference amounts to a $210 "insurance policy" per workstation. The most recent J.D. Power & Associates survey ranks reliability as the top concern among PC buyers. Within this survey, users picked Hewlett Packard as the maker of the most reliable pes; Dell was ranked fOUlth, behind Compaq and Digital Equipment.1 To put this $210 premium in perspective, consider what happens a workstation fails. In addition to the inconvenience and temporary loss of use of the PC, you should also take into account the: . User's time in encountering then repOlting the problem . System administrator's time required to diagnose the problem as a hardware failure . In the case of Dell, the additionalloss-of-use time required to box then mail the PC. . System administrator's time required to reinstall the PC and verify that the problem has been con'ected. Perhaps the most damaging consequence is a hasty and, often times, negative impression of the City's technological investment. Regardless of the pelformance ofthe tile server, backups and networking software, the workstation remains the main interface tool that your staff uses. That said, it is not surprising that the workstation plays such a critical role in determining the perceived success of an office automation plan. As always, if you have any questions or require further clarification, please call me at (916) 487-7050 or (916) 531-6409. Sincerely, Andrew Toyota 1 Investor's Business Daily, October 27,1994 pg A4 col1 EXHiBiT :2 e e LOCAL AREA NETWORK PROJECT ~ HARDWARE COMPARISON OF HEWLETT PACKARD EQUIPMENT Whole Advanced Micro Johnson Earth Net Solutions Entex Controls File Server T e HP HP HP HP Workstation T e HP VL2 HP VL2 HP VL2 HP VL2 File Server 9,808 10,757 9,945 ... 12,213 Workstations (36 PCs) 68,257 74,193 73,351 98,941 Printers 14,072 15,536 13,877 18,468 Network Devices 2,180 1,210 4,637 ........ 5,498 UPS 317 282 309 . 312 RAMu ades 1,456 1,704 1,400 .. 2,020 Track mice 730 370 570 913 Installation 5,000 3,800 3,800 6,375 Sub-Total 101,820 107,852 107,889 . 144,740 Tax 7,988 8,584 8,587 0 Shi in 125 250 ..... 125 0 Total 109,933 116,686 116,601 144,740 Exhibit 3 e e <:"'~~~8~$~i;g ~,g~oU"}~"':o......r--: ]: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~8 '-' ~ N ~ ...... ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ $ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "''''; 3!2N~"'~~ .--'-- ;! .-- ~ '<1' ~ :B :.2 x ~ E :!i El ~ ~ El ~ El El :q ~ ~ 5\ 8 ~ 8 ~ .... ~ R ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 8 ; ci B ~ ..<Q...."'~~C!S~oO..........~5. ~~.... !;?....i'l\ ~ ~~~............ ~ .-- ~~~ > .... ..... ~.,." 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 ~ ~ ~>= ~ ~ ~ ~ ~;t;t ~ R ~ ~ o;:g si R ~ 15 G f.! ";;.: ~ ...... Ct>. \D 0 0 U(, l11. ,..... ~ ('"/') \0 r".l..::c...... l"""'" --- 0 Q'I ~ ,...;-~............,.... ~ ~ ~......"::i' 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 ~ 8 8 8 8 8 ~ rn ~ ~..c: N ~ ~ 8"...0 ~ cO"; 0 N co 0 ~ N'-O N 0 '1""1 N ~]~~~~~g~5~~5 i~~~~~5 ..... >< .. <: [J.j ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 8 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ g ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ $ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~N\tJ5::..~~5-~M~ M ~ ~ i:!l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~r- ~ ;; ~ [2 ~ '" '" N ..... u ~ ~ i'l <: <J'J c U ~ iil 8 ;;:: rt ~ ~ ~ N '-0 '" ;;:: ~ ~ ~ !;? ~ ~ ...: g; 5 '" N ~ ~ ~~,=~~"':' 8 [2 o ~ '" ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ g; :;: ~ 2; g ~ l2 g g ]f-- :;l t3 b i-' CI ~ =: (J c "" f2 .......... \XI ....0 "'Iti' ...:r "11:I'I ~ N ...... ...... r-' ...... ~ !Xl ...... ,.... " QI e ~ ~ "t ~ ~ g .0: ] --- l:: rJJ co W ('t") 5: p "l ": ~ <:.1:: ~ ~ ~ -a 5 '""" ...... __u ~ ~ ::B ::{ m '" ~ S ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ 8 8 ~ ~ ~ ;2 f<i f<i f<i ,-----. M N ..., ~ U") E 8 R ~ Q.l M 0 -I-' :I ~ ~ ~ as ...... f-~. ~",8888888888 .~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~> .... ]~~~~~~~~~~~~ ::~l"""I""""f""'!?iNU")MLt')~M5 ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~I ~I~' 01 ~ ~ ~ ~i ~l ~\ ~ ~ ~ '" .... .... .n >< c.R ~ 5\18 "'10 ~'I 8\8 '" 0 :ii, ~ ~ ~ t'-.. M M 0\ ~ ?:l 8 888 !li '" '" ..0 ~ ::: ~ 8 8 8 8 8 ci ~ gi ~ &:i '" .... .,~- lj <: [J.j ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 8 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 !2 ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ '" M ~ ~ ! ,......... ~ : 0 0 '" '-0 '" ~ '" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~; '0 '" ~ ~;;:: ~ .., ..;;:5\~~~~~~ ~~~~~!il~~~ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ ;; ~ ~ ~ c ~ ; lI') tf) ('t") ::.. ,----. 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ J ~ ~ g 8 ;:; .. l'J 1:" l'J 1:" U u ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 8 8 6 ~ ;:; ~ M ~ ~ ti u ~ V = ~ ~ & ~ g ;:; ;:; ;:; ;:; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 dON N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 2 ~ ;:"t"to~~~~~o~'" ~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~ '" <: Q ~ ~ ] ] ] .5 S .~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3: ~ ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ~ ] ~ ~ ~ o 0 .. .. i i ~ ~ ~ y ~ J J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 0 o ...,. "- 3; '" ,.; .... ~ ~ o '" ~ ~ '3; ~ o .,." i .0: ~ ~ .2 ~ 11 ~ ..... <: ~ ~ ~ g ~ Cl ~~i':" ... o-l <: 000 ~ ...0 .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .g .g 8 ~ ~ ~ .2 "0.<:0_ .... .... .... ~ ..9 u-i ~ "1 ] ] l .2 ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ --I e Cl'l'Y U~. IJUBLIlI JltJlK.JE'I' CJlANGE f'OHM CIlIUIGE FORM newappropriallonL-!. budget transfer' decrease budget accollnt ~ account II 1 COt _'\OYO_ ISO _ 070:li 3,\00 -.ill!![!g account II 2 :t ~ account II 3 :Ii mil lie account " 1 $ ---1.!.!:!!!!2 aCGount II I" :Ii ;) name acc:ount II 6 $ name Account 1/ 7 :Ii ~ ac::r:ount II 8 :Ii 1UTAL nUDGET INCREASES $ REASONS, JUSTIFICATION, AND ITEMIZED COSTS: L- L-l budget change increase budget account I nalne laccount II "1 SO 1100( - <B31_5 , _'-' I~ \account II 12 I name laccount II 13 I nalne I account II 11 I namB laccount II 15 I name \account II 16 1 name laccount II 17 I name laccount II 18 TOTAL nUDGET DECREASES L-l e - 0"10 eJ-.. 000 - t.....I '-"-......... $ $ $ $ 3: $ :Ii $ $ CITY MANAGER signature Cl'l'Y COUNCIL signature \ \ date \ \ date jT7,i~ijIB~1 ,.1t: \ 1 ~: \~ ~, . ~ i ~ ,-;11 , {,. I, lkJ ur~ 'if' _5