Skip to content

Want government reform? Idea #3: A new public safety communication strategy

September 6, 2010

Have you ever noticed how police officers carry both a cellular phone and a hand-held radio? It might surprise you to learn that you are paying hundreds of times more for the radio than the cell phone. And you’re about to pay millions more unless we have the courage to change course. Even the New York Times is starting to agitate.

When I joined McCaw Cellular Communications in the early 1990s—one of the world’s most entrepreneurial companies—less than 10 million Americans had mobile phones. They were big, clunky and had no data capability. Today there are as many mobile phones as people, prices have fallen and consumers have benefitted from innovation that led to iPhones, Windows Mobile, Droid and other robust platforms. The change has been technically disruptive and positive. In that same time, the nation’s public safety community—law enforcement, fire, EMS—has also spent billions of public tax dollars on new infrastructure and yet the quality, cost and functionality of their expensive, proprietary, two-way radios has not materially improved since the 1970s.

Now, the taxpayers of Seattle, King County and Washington State are being asked to spend up to hundreds of millions more for a brand new radio system for police, fire, EMS and other emergency workers.

In Seattle and King County alone my gut check is that the cost will be in the $50 million to $250 million range. Since I’m not on the inside I don’t know if this is close or far from the truth, but my gut is that it’s uncomfortably in that range. And that says nothing of our friends in Pierce, Snohomish and other communities who are struggling through a similar journey. And Oregon is much further down the same pathway and is now politically panicking in the face of a $600 million bill.

It’s time for courageous honesty: In my personal view, the decision is the wrong direction technically, politically, and financially.

The uncomfortable truth is that for city, county and state governments public safety radio equipment costs between 10x and 100x more than it does in most other countries, despite the U.S. leadership position for wireless technologies such as smartphones, WiFi, WiMax and more. Even Seattle, in many ways the hometown of the consumer wireless industry, will pay tens of millions for a proprietary new police radio system.

The reason is that the nation’s public safety communications market does not enjoy healthy, vibrant, market-based competition in any way comparable to consumer mobile services

First of all, it is important to acknowledge that we must ensure our police, fire and EMS officials have access to high quality emergency communication systems. Unfortunately, we must upgrade the hardware-based system because the current vendor for the Seattle and King County system, Motorola, has made a business decision to end support for the current network.

In fairness, they told us long ago they would eventually turn off our system, and we needed to buy their next generation system (or conceptually their competitor’s system). Unlike in the consumer market, we may have purchased the equipment, but the company retains the right to determine how long our system is supported. It’s not much of an exaggeration to say that it’s sort of like Verizon asking consumers to directly fund new cell towers and network and then forcing everyone to buy new mobile phones because the company wants to upgrade their internal network capabilities.

Second, our nation’s first responders and 9-1-1 dispatchers aggressively moved to establish an industry standard for first responders called “P25” to get better radios at lower prices, to break the monopoly of the current structure. Unfortunately, more than 25 years later, P25 is still not available, still not implemented and even the Chairman of the FCC recently jolted Members of Congress by acknowledging “…[P25] has taken more than 20 years to develop and is still not complete” and “the protracted development of P25 has allowed vendors to take advantage of selling proprietary solutions.”

The industry knows that P25 isn’t, in fact, truly standards-based and has resulted in even more expensive radios, not the other way around. If our state’s march toward P25 continues, it will be more business as usual – and first responder radios will still cost $5,000 each. (Did you catch that? Just one P25 radio for one police officer costs $5,000 and yet it has less processing power and functionality than an iPhone, Windows Mobile or Droid phone).

Yet with few exceptions that is exactly where our current ‘group think’ in Seattle and King County is leading.

Third, some local Seattle and King County officials have recently applied for the Obama Administration’s plans for broadband across the nation utilizing “4G” or “LTE” technology on 700 MHz… for the Seattle area. Their position is inspired in part because the broadband system would help first responders. And yet The National Broadband Plan, as written, doesn’t help with voice communications—the most essential element for police, fire and EMS officials.

This isn’t a modest technical decision, it’s a major policy choice facing King County Executive Dow Constantine and the county council as well as Mayor Michael McGinn and the city council.

Here’s a picture of where Seattle and King County are headed if we don’t change direction: The first 4G or LTE system built in the U.S. for first responders is already underway, in the San Francisco Bay Area – a geography and population similar to our own. The federal government is fronting the $50 million it will cost, and the result is that 300 public safety vehicles will be equipped with 4G data modems. That is $167,000 per police car and fire truck, for video to and from the scene.

At the same time the consumer marketplace—AT&T, Verizon, Sprint and T-Mobile—provides virtually the same mobile service at a fraction of the cost at equal or higher service quality levels in many cases. Public safety is building their own mirror system to commercial services. A mirror system that is on track to be proprietary, closed, and expensive like our existing first responder radio systems.

Of course consumer cellular phones are not perfect nor always a technically viable alternative, and they are by no means a simple alternative, but philosophically they demonstrate the profound value of market-based competition.

I am willing to bet a private tour of the State Capitol building that if you ask 20 police, fire and EMS officials to choose between their cellular phones and their two way radios, the majority will choose to hold onto the former. Their mobile phones are easier, more flexible, equally as reliable in most cases and now support data.

Without question it’s important to acknowledge that technically cell phones do have limitations – in basements, rural and other “out of coverage” areas they won’t provide essential voice communications for first responders. But the very important and dirty little secret is that neither do the P25 radio systems, or the 4G/LTE systems. Our first responders need handsets that utilize the high feature / low cost advantages of open market cell phone systems, but also work in basements “peer to peer” when out of range of the system. And that solution still shouldn’t cost $5,000 for each and every single radio.

While it is true public safety radios need to be heavy duty, it doesn’t inherently mean they should cost 10 times as much as commercial systems that have more processing power, more technical flexibility and more application functionality.

Yes this is a bit technical and wonky but the financial implications are stunning in scale – as Oregon is experiencing, approaching $1 billion when the costs of all local agencies are included with the first $600 million buildout.

Is it too late? There is a way forward if we have the courageous honesty to tackle old assumptions and myths.

1. We should stop buying P25 radios at literally $5,000 per radio and start buying TETRA radios. TETRA is similar to P25, but it is truly open standard radio used by police and fire departments in Europe and Asia . They offer more features and are tested around the globe… and cost less than $500 each. They are essentially “Nextel-like” in their capability but are a fraction of the cost of the non-open standard P25.

2. We should absolutely back a national broadband plan – but not this one. Not until it is legally bound to an open, public standard that enables true, free market participation from any and all vendors. Not a penny of federal or state funding should go towards any proprietary 4G/LTE solutions, and Seattle and King County public safety leaders should insist on an open standard before launching any 4G/LTE 700 MHz construction in Washington.

3. Let’s ask line officers and regular firefighters what they need to do their jobs. They are the users and yet we rarely ask them firsthand what they need to succeed.

4. Investigate the real-deal of the $50 million pilot project in San Francisco, which puts the proprietary 4G/LTE technology in the lead for another 20-year monopoly. Let’s understand the implications before Seattle goes down the same expensive route—but likely without the pot of federal money provided to San Francisco.

5. We’re not the only ones with this issue. We should ask other regions and states to join us in asking for a market that gives our first responders what they really need, at a price that we can afford.

6. We should have the courage to explore a stronger partnership with commercial mobile operators in underserved areas. We could subsidize the expansion of their networks and provide cell tower sites, for example, in exchange for more sophisticated ‘priority access’ for public safety–and improved service level agreements–and pricing breaks.

Perhaps a stronger partnership with Oregon could save us both hundreds of millions of dollars or more. We can no longer afford a world where each state, each county, each city ‘goes it alone’ in the delivery of ‘utility’ services such as communications. Imagine our buying power united by a technical vision and strategy?

Unfortunately, at the end of the day, we acknowledge we have to buy a new radio system for our faithful and hard-working police, firefighters, and EMTs in the Seattle and King County area.

We as a city, county and state are more innovative, entrepreneurial and technically sophisticated than this. If we believe in government reform and want to display to the public that we have the courageous honesty to seize the opportunity of this crisis, we need to change course even in sacred areas like public safety. We have to question old assumptions, challenge monopolies inside and outside of government, and demand that when taxpayers are paying the bill, there is value for our dollar.

It’s the right thing for the public who are served by our courageous law enforcement, firefighters and EMS officials. And it’s right for taxpayers.

Your partner in service,

Reuven.

About these ads
18 Comments leave one →
  1. September 7, 2010 10:42 am

    Hello
    We are a small veteran owned business in the SF bay area, Est in 1969. We build communications shelters for the National Guard. CA, TX, MO, MT, GA, & SC use our shelters for Emergency responce. I don’t know if you have heard of Daryl Jones here in the Bay Area. I am forwarding you his blog as you will find it of interest if you have not seen it.

    http://www.tcomeng.com/daryljones

    His company installs and mantains 911 call centers in over 20 cities around the SF Bay Area. I have forwarded him your article. We believe in what you write. Let’s hope this same thing doesn’t happen to our neighbors to the north.

    Laura Phillips was a 15+year employee Of Motorola. She is now the General Manager of our of SUASI funding for the SF area. Many see how Motorola had a way IN.

    Best to you and your efforts, please keep me posted with the P-25 and such matters in your area.

  2. September 7, 2010 11:00 am

    Thanks for writing such an excellent article on the state of public safety communications in America. I agree with your analysis and urge you to take a leadership role at the state and Federal level to better inform citizens and elected officials of the failed effort of P25 digital trunked radio systems that are being purchased by many government entities. The systems are technically deficient, extraordinarily and unnecessarily expensive, and will be prematurely obsolete.

    -Daryl Jones (http://blog.tcomeng.com/)

  3. Greg Carttar permalink
    September 7, 2010 5:27 pm

    Representative Carlyle:
    We understand your frustration. P25 is a flawed and incomplete standard, and shows no promise of being anything else in the forseeable future. The format (P25) is not necessarily at fault….these systems require a very very high standard of engineering and deployment, arguably far in excess of what 90% of public safety practitioners NEED.
    What we NEED is simple, robust, foolproof, stressproof, gloveproof, foot pursuit proof RADIOS…not inflated toys that mimic cellphones.
    You cannot stand in the middle of a fire and take your gloves off to text or operate a cellphone.
    You cannot fiddle with a cellphone or text while chasing a suspect on foot.
    You cannot rely on a cheap radio that will shatter the first time you drop it.
    Sure, good ones are expensive, but expensive is relative. Good radios last 30 years. Manufacturers don’t like that, because they can’t get enough turnover.
    A good $800 radio will serve just as well as a $5000 radio, if it is a quality product. The TRICKS that the $5000 radio will do are of limited use to us in the field, and are possibly only of use to somebody who is in a command vehicle…not on the front line.
    Sure you can get $300 radios, but as above, the first time it gets dropped, it’s dead. That’s not good enough.
    We need to back up and look at what is NEEDED in the field, NOT what is the trickiest and trendiest.
    A $90 cellphone will NEVER be the tool that a quality piece of communications equipment is.
    Infrastructure that is provided by a public carrier (i.e., phone company) with “no skin in the game” cannot be trusted and relied upon in anything other than bright sunshine and fair weather.
    Please do not over-react to this, excercise reason.
    Ask any Firefighter what he wants and he will say that he needs simple and reliable, tough, dependable communications. The same is true for any Police Officer.
    Systems do not have to cost $600M….people who make decisions make them cost that much.

    Thanks for your consideration.

  4. Daniel permalink
    September 7, 2010 9:02 pm

    Mr. Carlyle,

    1. You’ll be happy to know that a consolidated, regional radio system is in the works. It will encompass King, Pierce, and Snohomish. Contact Marlin Blizinsky at marlin.blizinsky at kingcounty.gov.

    2. As a first responder, I can tell you that your assertion that the public safety community would choose cell phones over PTT radios is incorrect. PTT radios offer a wide area, one-to-many broadcast capability that is fragile to non-existent in cellular systems.

  5. Mark permalink
    September 8, 2010 5:51 am

    Representative Reuven Carlyle says:

    A. “if you ask 20 police, fire and EMS officials to choose…”
    B. “Let’s ask line officers and regular firefighters what they need…”
    C. “We should ask other regions and states…”
    D. “We should have the courage to explore a stronger partnership with commercial …”
    E. “We have to question old assumptions, challenge monopolies…”

    There is a state level guidance and coordination group that has done exactly these items. It represents state government and nearly every city and county in the state. Each state (or region) has a nearly identical coordination committee. Meetings are open to public opinion and input. To my knowledge, Reuven has never visited any meetings, never asked the relevant questions, never provided any of his time.

    http://www.region43.org/

    It is always very easy to say “We should, We should”..
    It is more difficult to say “We do”, and “We have”.

    I am not saying that Mr. Carlyle is either right or wrong in his analysis. He may have some salient points. However, as a State Representative, perhaps he should avail himself with a little more accurate information, prior to engaging in comparisons of private enterprise and public safety needs.

    The private enterprise will always be driven by profits, and and the public safety needs will be driven by actual requirements. These are often in direct opposition.

  6. David permalink
    September 8, 2010 9:45 am

    With all due respect Mark, I’ve been to countless meetings at the local, regional and state level to discuss these very issues… and you must be attending different meetings than I did. I couldn’t disagree with you more. I’ve noticed the following:

    a) very few, if any, actual first responders with current “line level” experience attend… and those that do are not provided options, but instead overwhelmed with technical detail and bludgeoned with geek speak.

    b) I do not think first responders are empowered with a voice, let alone a decision, in radio system planning. management and technicians dominate the process and the decision-making. Yes, retired chiefs and others in management are invited, but are they given equal influence in technical decisions? And are they “line level”, i.e. do they have recent experience inside burning buildings or conducting a traffic stop?

    c) It is highly inaccurate to suggest that Region43 (and other standing committees) are questioning old assumptions. And they certainy aren’t doing anything to reduce monopolies. Region6 obviously must have endorsed the plan to award the bay area 700 MHz build out of proprietary, non-standard technology. To state the existing committes have “done exactly these items” is really over-reaching.

    I can only assume your point-of-view is the one typical of government staffers and long-time industry players who stand to suffer if a new approach is taken to public safety radio… and so you must fear elected officials like Carlyle, who among their many responsibilities, takes the time to “pick up the pen” for the purpose of reducing cost to taxpayers and increasing safety for first responders.

    Along with the Chairman of the FCC, he dares to question a 75 year status quo and then goes further, suggesting “reform” of government in this matter.

    Me thinks that if you truly wanted to help cops and firefighters you’d embrace his challenge to reform (as I do). That you’d embrace his questions rather than berating him for not going to your meetings and not seeking your input first. I mean no disrespect, but I definitely suspect your motives.

  7. Greg permalink
    September 9, 2010 12:11 pm

    Mr. Carlyle…

    While many of us share your frustrations with public safety radio systems of today, especially P25 systems, TETRA is not a better choice. The EU and other regions of the world may have chosen TETRA, but it’s just as infrastructure dependent (and expensive) as any cellular network deployed today. Not to mention, there are _no_ options for off-network use of TETRA devices. This makes use of any TETRA devices impossible should coverage be impaired by a major disaster or other partial / full network failure. From my research, I have yet to see any major regional disasters take place that could impair TETRA networks, so they are as yet still untested in any worst-case scenario.

    I’m not looking forward to reading any postmortem reports after such a disaster strikes either. It will undoubtedly be ugly, at best.

  8. Robert permalink
    September 9, 2010 3:00 pm

    A lot of public safety’s radio issues could be remedied if everyone stopped trying to turn what traditionally have been rugged & reliable hand-held two-way radios into a cellphone/gameboy.

    P25 is not the devil here. P25 works just fine as a basic common air interface.
    At this point, basic P25 works as well as anyone else’s air interface.

    It’s when you start adding those “cute lil’ options” that makes it get pricey. Costs & complexity also balloons when you ignore the propagational nature of electromagnetic waves & try to make use of frequency bands that common knowledge says won’t work well in certain geographic areas.

    In many cases, it would certainly help if consultants & system designers would stop trying to unecessarily “one-up” Mother Nature when it comes to signal propagation.

    As others point out, rarely can a busy responder take the time to remove gloves & think about which buttons to push without becoming dangerously distracted.

    If I were stuck in the middle of a blazing building or in a foot pursuit, the last thing I need to concentrate on is my radio knobs & switches. I would want, no, demand that my radio “reached out & touched someone” when i needed it; Without having to consider all the logisitcs that a full optioned radio will present.

    If you want a cellphone/gameboy, go to a dept store. If your intent is to provide reliable, simple & robust radio communications devices, stop adding all those rarely (if ever) used features that raise the complexity & cost of both the radio & the infrastructure it’s tied to.

    Just a little common sense will save millions of dollars & more importantly, someone’s life.

    How did anyone ever get along with a simple two-way radio in the past?

  9. Erik permalink
    September 10, 2010 12:43 pm

    Seriously? That would not work at all unless public safety entities were given primary use of the cellular phone frequencies, automatically bumping civilian users. In a major emergency or disaster (be it an earthquake or a shooting in crowded public event), everybody and their dog is going to be on their cell phones. Our police need to be able to communicate even when the public cell network is clogged with parents trying to get in touch with their kids. It would be incredibly foolish and short-sighted for our first responders to *not* have their own dedicated system, independent of the public cell network. Penny wise, pound foolish.

  10. Bad Link? permalink
    September 13, 2010 2:21 pm

    Reuven – great article!

    Please note, however, that Google tells me one of your links – http://vx820.wordpress.com/2009/02/22/voip-roip-for-two-way-radio-systems-site-connect-soft-radio-dispacth-from-pc-iwalkie-sitecast-homeland-security/contains potentially nasty malware.

  11. Randy permalink
    September 15, 2010 6:52 am

    “I am willing to bet a private tour of the State Capitol building that if you ask 20 police, fire and EMS officials to choose between their cellular phones and their two way radios, the majority will choose to hold onto the former. Their mobile phones are easier, more flexible, equally as reliable in most cases and now support data.”

    I’ll take that bet. I’ll bet you that if you handed a fireman a cellular phone as his emergency communications device and told him to walk into a burning building, he’d throw it in your face and take the radio.

    The same is true for a police officer in a high stress event environment.

    Plan my tour. Let’s do this…. I’m calling your bet.

  12. March 24, 2012 8:25 pm

    This is s very nice site with a lot of information. Please see my website for other information.

  13. May 12, 2014 5:20 am

    Mix of RPG and strategy and also angry bird is exactly what you’ll discover on this newest franchise.
    Unfortunately, unlike last year when a vast majority of the Cydia
    apps on the store were free, MCleaner too is not free.
    This software application has access to Siri as well.

  14. May 31, 2014 9:38 pm

    I take pleasure in, lead to I found just what I was
    having a look for. You’ve ended my 4 day lengthy hunt!
    God Bless you man. Have a nice day. Bye

Trackbacks

  1. POLICY & POLITICS TODAY | WashBucket.net: Washington State Government & Politics
  2. – Why Don’t Cops just use Cell Phones? « the Chief Seattle Geek blog
  3. Washington, DC - 9 Years After 9/11, Public Safety Radio Not Ready - The RadioReference.com Forums
  4. Como não fazer: Outro exemplo de má implantação… « Mundo TETRA

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 5,259 other followers

%d bloggers like this: