NEEDA - National Emergency Equipment Dealers Association

by Kenton Pattie, Executive Director
National Emergency Equipment Dealers Association
KentonP1@aol.com

James A. Williams, Commissioner of the Federal Acquisition Service, took over June 25, 06.

I met with Williams on Thursday afternoon, April 3, 2008 prior to the CFSI dinner. If you meet James Williams, General Services Administration,
it won’t take you long to discover he wants all Federal, state and local
procurement under his department.

He had been Director of the U.S. Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology, Department of Homeland Security. He was Internal Revenue Service’s Deputy Associate Commissioner for Program Management, Deputy Assistant Commissioner for procurement and Director of Procurement at the IRS, Director of the Local Telecommunications Procurement Division at GSA.

Williams, was nominated by President Bush to be the Administrator of GSA on June 24, 2008. He supports the Local Preparedness Acquisitions Act HR 3179, which is opposed by the National Emergency Equipment Dealers Association (NEEDA). NEEDA has been opposed to a Federal take-over of the local and state fire equipment procurement since NEEDA was founded. Congress had previously said a firm no to Williams idea. But 9-11 and Katrina have moved the GSA dream plan to change a lot of minds in the Congess . . . enough to give Williams what he wants.

He insists that the lowest cost for all goods and services is the “schedules program” which is also known as the GSA multiple-awards – a list of companies that give GSA low prices and promise to pay GSA a percent of all sales that GSA generates. Under this program, Federal, state and local buyers pick from a list of suppliers and buy direct. There are no bids, no advertised bids or bid openings, or bid challenges.

Williams maintains he gets the best prices because the government sector is the biggest buyer in the United States of most products. He points out that his agency buys all 65,000 cars each year for the Federal government and gets better prices from a couple of auto manufacturers that no one else can get.

He stated this week “all state and local grantees should buy from GSA. I hope we can push that issue. Our state and local customers want this service.”

He adds: “We’ve opened up GSA schedules to state and local buyers – they love the items we can get for them. We’re making a major push to market to state and local governments.”

Williams continues: “We need more corporate and state officials to respond to GSA offers. I feel good about where we’re going . . . to make ours the trusted brand, something they can count on.”

As an example, he pointed to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) that “fights wildfires.” Local governments that get help from FEMA to fight wildfires and other disasters can buy directly off the GSA schedules, he said. He also said under the 1122 program, local law enforcement agencies can buy off GSA schedules to get police equipment.

Williams: “Agencies like FEMA look at GSA for best value. We’re a business. We have to make a profit. That’s why we need more people to buy through GSA.”

With respect to small firms, he said: “GSA schedules are the best friend of small businesses. But when these small businesses don’t perform – when we don’t get enough business off of them, we kick them off. They write their Congressman to complain but we explain to Congress that these small firms don’t meet sales goals GSA sets.”

He said “We want for GSA to be a one-stop shop for all buyers.”

When he was asked about companies that don’t want to sell directly but rather go through dealers and distributors, he replied ‘That’s too bad. GSA gets the best price from the manufacturer on the schedule. We track discounts they offer to others so our customers get the best price from the manufacturer.”

The U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) received new authority to help state and local governments in purchasing homeland security equipment and services under the Local Preparedness Acquisitions Act (HB 3179) signed by President Bush on June 25, 2008. Fire and police equipment is included in the law: Public Law No: 110-248.

Acting GSA Administrator David Bibb “This is wonderful news for the American people and a big improvement to the status quo. State and local governments can now take advantage of GSA’s volume discounts for the supplies and services that will help keep our citizens secure.”

The new law authorizes the GSA Administrator to allow state, local, and tribal governments to buy homeland security goods and services through the cooperative purchasing program. Officials will be able to use GSA’s Schedule 84 to buy items such as: alarm systems, facility management systems, firefighting and rescue equipment, law enforcement and security equipment, and marine craft.

Federal Acquisition Service Commissioner Jim Williams: “GSA’s ability to leverage the federal government’s enormous buying power enables us to provide goods and services at best value and pass the savings on to our client agencies. Now we can pass these discounts on to state and local governments, while also allowing for enhanced security through greater interoperability possibilities across the federal, state and local environment. That’s a win-win for our customers and the American taxpayers.”

GSA provides a centralized delivery system of products and services to the federal government, leveraging its enormous buying power to get the best value for taxpayers. Founded in 1949, GSA manages more than one-fourth of the government’s total procurement dollars and influences the management of $500 billion in federal assets, including 8,600 government-owned or leased buildings and 208,000 vehicles.

Del. Eleanor Norton [D-DC], speaking for HR 3179 said the bill, sponsored by Chairman Ed Towns (Democrat 10th district New York will: “permit state and local governments to purchase homeland security and public safety equipment from the Federal supply schedules maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA).

“Opening the Federal supply schedules to State and local governments has bipartisan support. In past years, contract schedules have been opened up for information technology and goods and services needed to respond or prevent terrorism to State and local governments.

“State and local governments should be able to enjoy the price and convenience advantages that the schedules provide. I commend my colleague for his leadership and urge Members to support this bill.”

Rep. Darrell Issa [R-49th CA]
“Mr. Towns and the entire Committee on Oversight and Government Reform recognized that the GSA schedule is more than just a list of things that can be bought at a given price. It is, in fact, the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval.
“GSA goes to great lengths to ensure that products are appropriate for purchase and that they are a good value. Leveraging that capability and the Federal money already spent to allow States and local governments to participate in this acquisition serves two good purposes. It increases the value of seeking a GSA schedule, and in fact, it saves money and overhead for State and local agencies.”

Rep. George Butterfield [D-1s District, NC]:
“ I come to the floor today to offer my support for H.R. 3179, the matter that has been introduced by Mr. Towns of New York, which is entitled the Local Preparedness Acquisition Act. This is a fine piece of legislation, and I urge our colleagues to vote "yes" on this matter.”

Norton: “One word more on this resolution introduced by Mr. Towns. I am Chair of the subcommittee with jurisdiction over GSA and, of course, its schedule. Perhaps the average person would believe that States would be in the same position as the United States Government because they buy a great deal of goods and services and the same kinds of costs and scale and efficiency which comes with ordering large amounts at the same time would come to States as well. That's not always the case, and even if it is, there is no State as large or that orders as much as the United States of America. And it does seem to me altogether appropriate that States and localities have the same access to the GSA schedule as the United States and its agencies have.

This ability to use the schedule on which firms have precompeted so as to guarantee the best value hastens what can be an arduous period of competition. In my own district, I see that in an effort to make sure that a competition has properly occurred, there can often be many delays. We cannot, of course, in some respects get around those inherent delays, but with respect to many goods and services that are on the GSA schedule, if the efficiencies that we are able to provide for the government can also be provided to States and localities, the United States and the States together will be in better shape saving taxpayers money.

Rep. Edolphus Towns [D-10 District NY]:
This is a bipartisan, good government bill that will permit state apd local governments to purchase homeland security and public safety equipment using General Services Administration contract schedules.

H.R. 3179 has the support of many state and local governments and the National Association of Counties. It will make it easier for local officials to purchase the items they need to improve safety in their communities, while saving money at the same time.

The GSA Schedules are catalogues of more than 4 million commercial goods and services currently available to federal agencies at negotiated discount prices. Since 2002, Congress has enacted "cooperative purchasing" legislation that authorized state and local governments to purchase IT equipment and disaster recovery items from GSA schedules.

This bill further expands that authority to purchase items such as bomb detection equipment, perimeter security systems, and other homeland security goods and services from GSA Schedule 84.

It is important to note that this bill imposes no federal mandate and requires no new spending. Participation in the cooperative purchasing program is voluntary for both state and local governments and vendors. The analysis prepared by the Congressional Budget Office indicates that the bill has no net impact on federal spending and is the opposite of an unfunded mandate--in fact, it is a benefit to state and local governments.

This bill was developed jointly with the ranking member of the Government Management Subcommittee, Mr. Bilbray.

Rep. Brian Bilbray R- 50 District CA:
“H.R. 3179 will allow State and local governments to purchase homeland security products and services at more reasonable prices by providing them access to the General Services Administration schedules. Following the attacks on September 11, 2001 our local and State governments have taken on more responsibility for emergency preparedness and homeland security. With this added responsibility, these local governments need to purchase a wider array of goods and services.

Under this legislation, these localities will be able to purchase many products such as access control and perimeter security systems, fire detection and suppression equipment, firefighting clothing and marine craft from the GSA schedules. With this option, the cost of many of these products will be less than the cost of purchasing them from State-approved purchasing lists or the open marketplace, saving these local governments valuable tax dollars.

Importantly, this legislation does not impose any requirements on States and localities to utilize the GSA schedules, instead offering an additional voluntary purchasing method.

This legislation has strong bipartisan support and was passed out of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee by voice vote. Additionally, it has gained the endorsement of the National Association of Counties and many other outside organizations.

Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee D 18th District -TX:
“This important legislation amends title 40 of the United
States Code to authorize the use of Federal supply schedules for the acquisition of law enforcement, security, and certain other related items by State and local governments.

“In the post-September 11 era, with the advances in technology, communication and transportation, the likelihood of a situation escalating from an emergency to a disaster to a catastrophe has increased. This Nation is dependent upon the services of its first responders, and as such we cannot shirk responsibility for their well being when we put them in harm's way. Since the catastrophe of September 11, 2001, the need to anticipate and provide necessary resources to our emergency workers has been brought to Federal attention.

“The Federal Government has a responsibility to plan ahead and develop a strategy of what will occur should a catastrophic event ever take place. As can be seen with the World Trade Center Worker and Volunteer Medical Monitoring Program, which was established in 2004 by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, it has been insecure in its funding since its inception and is estimated to be out of outpatient awards by the end of FY 2007. This type of haphazard funding and insecurity about the program's future is not what our first responders risked their lives for.

“In order to enact any meaningful change, we must understand and identify the unique situations that face our first responders and then try to address any preventative pre-emptive actions that are possible. This includes Federal inquiry into the recognition and management of mental health defects, plans for short- and long-term health monitoring, quality of personal protective equipment, proposed research or lack thereof, and the national response plan. The necessity of inquiry into and improvement and solidification of these issues cannot be overstressed in looking to the future and how our Nation will deal with caring for the first responders during a disaster.

“Mr. Speaker, as we witnessed in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 and Hurricanes Rita and Katrina, our Nation's first responders were not prepared for the realities of the catastrophes they faced. We can ensure future safety and protection of our first responders by making sure their personal protective equipment is sufficient to handle any future risks. It is our obligation to make sure the funds for the proper equipment is being received through Federal grant programs so that in the case of a catastrophe, they will be able to safely respond to hazardous materials, biological agents, and other harmful materials.

“This legislation is important because it amends title 40 of the United States Code to provide necessary equipment to our Nation's first responders. In the wake of the tragedies of September 11 and Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the necessity for the provision of appropriate technologies, including interoperable communications and the availability of emergency equipment, became painfully apparent. This legislation calls for the availability and provision of alarm and signal systems, facility management systems, firefighting and rescue equipment, law enforcement and security equipment, marine craft and related equipment, special purpose clothing, and related services. By amending title 40 of the United States Code, this legislation is an important step towards ensuring that America's first responders are adequately prepared for any situation that may arise.”

Bill was introduced July 25, 2007
Scheduled for Debate November 8, 2007
Passed in House December 17, 2007
Passed in the Senate June 10, 2008
Signed into Law by President Bush: June 26, 2008
Became Public Law No: 110-248: Jun 26, 2008:
6/10/2008--Passed Senate without amendment.

This measure has not been amended since it was introduced.

HR 3179 Local Preparedness Acquisition Act:

Authorizes the Administrator of General Services to provide for the use by state or local governments of federal supply schedules of the General Services Administration (GSA) for alarm and signal systems, facility management systems, firefighting and rescue equipment, law enforcement and security equipment, marine craft and related equipment, special purpose clothing, and related services (as contained in federal supply classification code group 84

BIRTH OF THE AMERICAN FIRE SERVICE: 1736 BY BEN FRANKLIN
Originally Posted: July 3, 2008 9:44 AM
Last Updated: July 3, 2008 9:44 AM

In 1736, Franklin, with a group of like-minded individuals, formed the Union Fire Company in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, the first organized fire company in the colonies. Describing the establishment of this organization, Franklin wrote in his autobiography:

"About this time I wrote a paper on the different accidents and carelessness by which houses were set on fire, with cautions against them, and means purposed of avoiding them. This was much spoken of as a useful piece, and gave rise to a project, which soon followed it, of forming a company for the more ready extinguishing of fires, and mutual assistance in removing and securing of goods when in danger. Associates in this scheme were presently found, amounting to thirty. Our articles of agreement obliged every member to keep always in good order, and fit for use, a certain number of leather buckets, with strong bags and baskets (for packing and transporting of goods), which were to be brought to every fire; and we agreed to meet once a month and spend a social evening together, in discoursing and communicating such ideas as occurred to us upon the subject of fires as might be useful in our conduct on such occasions."

From these humble begins, America's fire service was born. It was not long before Franklin's vision spread throughout Philadelphia, and eventually the Colonies.

US GOVERNORS: PLAN TO WITHHOLD 3% OF PAYMENTS OWED TO DEALERS IS "IMPRACTICAL, IF NOT IMPOSSIBLE, TO ACHIEVE"
Originally Posted: July 3, 2008 5:44 AM
Last Updated: July 3, 2008 5:44 AM

In previous NEEDA Newletter articles, for the past two years we have warned that the 3% withholding law is very bad for emergency equipment dealers. The National Governors Association sent a June 13, 2008 letter to IRS saying that "states cannot rationally plan for or begin to implement changes necessary to meet the statutory deadline of January 1, 2011."

The National Governors Association(NGA) has told the Internal Revenue Service that in its present form the 3% withholding law is currently not workable for the states.

In a letter from Raymond C. Scheppach, Executive Director, the Governors say "The Complexities and c osts associated with Section 3402(t) raise significant concerns for governors and other state and local government stakeholders. . . The provision was never the subject of a hearing or debate in the US House of Representatives or the US Senate . . . the section will operate as an unworkable, unfunded mandate and its compliance costs will far exceed any increase in collections realized at the federal, state or local levels. In addition, the impending deadline and the complexities of the state systems that must be altered or developed to comply with Section 3402(t) make implementation impractical, if not impossible, to achieve."

The 3% withholding law was included in the Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005 (Public Lw 109-22) during House-Senate Conference. There was never any debate on the provision in the US Senate or US House.

Already, the Defense Department states that implementation of Section 511 will cost DOD $17 billion over five years compared to the $7 billion in receipts DOD would receive from dealers and other companies which sell to local, state and Federal agencies.

SENATOR VOINOVICH CALLS FOR REPEAL OF LAW THAT TAKES 3% OF ALL SALES INCOME AWAY FROM EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT DEALERS
Originally Posted: July 2, 2008 9:25 PM
Last Updated: July 2, 2008 9:25 PM

US Senator Voinovich recently introduced the “MADE in the USA Tax Act.” The bill includes a large number of tax-related provisions, and one of the provisions is repeal of the 3% withholding law.

MADE in the USA Tax Act (Introduced in US Senate)

SEC. 104. REPEAL OF IMPOSITION OF WITHHOLDING ON CERTAIN PAYMENTS MADE TO VENDORS BY GOVERNMENT ENTITIES.
Section 511 of the Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005, and the amendment made by such section, are repealed, and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall be applied and administered as if such amendment had never been enacted.

As you know by reading NEEDA Newsletter, NEEDA is strongly against the 3% withholding of all payments owed to emergency equipment dealers by local, state and federal buyers.

Therefore, we support the repeal of Section 511. Repeal of Sectoin 511 is urgently needed. Without repeal, every emergency equipment dealer will lose 3 percent of earned income, which will be kept by the US Treasury.

The Bush Administration has already moved to put Section 511 into practice through regulations being written by the US Treasury Department. The regulations would require all buyers to send money owed to dealers to the US Treasury.

So, if you are a dealer and want 100% of your earnings to come to you rather than to the Treasury, you are for repeal of Section 511 (the 3% withholding law). Note, I called this a "law" because Section 511 has been passed by Congress and signed into law by the President.

What Voinovich and other Senators are trying to do is to repeal this law. Without repeal, the Bush Administration or the next Administration will begin taking 3% of all sales income away from dealers like you.

Whatever you think of the 3% withholding law, you should make your views know to your legislators.

DIESEL ENGINE CONFERENCE IN DEARBORN, MICHIGAN AUG 4-7, 2008
Originally Posted: July 2, 2008 12:09 PM
Last Updated: July 2, 2008 12:10 PM

NEEDA Executive Director Kenton Pattie: "NEEDA is very concerned about the future of the diesel engine. The high cost of diesel fuel and the focus of the US government on research for passenger cars using hybrid or battery power indicates little attention is being given to the diesel engine. We expect the next Administration to focus more on the importance and wide use of the diesel engine, particularly in the fire and emergency service.

CLICK ON THE HEADLINE OF THIS NEEDA STORY FOR MORE INFO.

US CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ISSUES RECOMMENDATIONS ON LONG TERM RECOVERY FROM MAJOR DISASTERS
Originally Posted: July 2, 2008 11:45 AM
Last Updated: July 2, 2008 11:45 AM

NEEDA is represented in the US Chamber of Commerce by Kenton Pattie, Executive Director.

George Haddow, deputy chief of staff under former FEMA Director?James Lee Witt:"Historically, long-term recovery planning starts the day after the event?occurs. It should be?pre-disaster."

Haddow and Jane Bullock, Witt's former chief of staff, co-wrote one of the?numerous essays in the report released July 1, 2008 titled “Re-Engineering?the Nation's Disaster Response Process," published by the US?Chamber's Business Civic Leadership Center (BCLC).

Haddow and Bullock: "Building a long-term recovery plan identifies what impact a major disaster?will have on a community's residents, homes, infrastructure, economy, and?environment and develops processes and procedures to ensure that the community?is rebuilt safer and stronger."

They warn no community "has developed a?long-term recovery plan prior to disaster."

Haddow: The "nation's emergency management system is broken," and with a?new administration in 2009 "there's a great opportunity to start?incorporating" new ideas.

On the local, state and federal levels, Haddow said, hazard mitigation and?long-term recovery planning responsibilities should be taken away from emergency?management organizations.

Haddow: "Build a new entity that's focused on this kind of long-term recovery?planning and hazard mitigation. Therefore, they're not going to be?consumed -- as every emergency management organization is when the event occurs?-- by the response."

Kitty Taylor, the BCLC's senior manger of communications and?research: "We picked these diverse authors for the report because it is a?multi-stakeholder problem to improve the disaster response and recovery?process.”

"Nonprofits have learned a lot through their many years of being on the?ground after disasters; businesses have gotten ever more involved in disaster?response now; and, of course, government agencies have learned a lot and have?room for improvement as do all sectors."

In the report, the BCLC also makes its own recommendations for improving the?emergency response system.

The writers advise:
Finding the right balance between preparedness and mitigation, relief and?long-term recovery.
Ensuring that government, nonprofits and businesses work together before?and after a disaster.
Being more intelligent in recovery efforts.

Stephen C. Jordan, the BCLC's senior vice?president and executive director: "Historically, disasters have come and gone and people have thought, 'oh that?disaster was unique to itself.”

But what the organization "realized is that there are lessons learned that?can be useful for future disasters and what we've decided to do is try and?aggregate, from some of the leading experts in the country, lessons learned from?previous disasters so that we can apply [them] to future disaster response?processes," he said.