It's pretty scary when one knows most of the people in the article. Two cents time: I don't think much of the 1500 radio, but I think even less of the APX. They simply don't need it, unless they were ditching their system and going to the County. Then they could have VHF and T-Band, for as long as T-Band will be around. More importantly, they could get a better value with a third party radio that has the improved vocoder. I'm also not sure I agree with the 1 Watt makes a difference statement, as it has to be framed in context. The APX spec sheet says it can go up to 6 W in VHF. That's +37.38 dBm. The XTS1500 says it can go up to 5 W. That's +36.99 dBm. All things considered, with antenna efficiency, free space attenuation, construction materials, and many uncontrolled variables, 0.39 dBm is imperceptible. A professionally designed system would have vastly greater margins considering covered area and common practices. I agree with Gottlieb, THAT wouldn't make a difference. Of course, one might have a different nifty factor, but ??? I also agree with Tony - planning is important. It also demonstrates to what depth various options were considered. In my experience with public sector procurement, lowest bid almost never means the best deal for the public. The best policy is discarding the highest and lowest bids and evaluating the merits of the middle solutions for identified needs. But then, the article only mentions subscriber units (and portables only, at that). Who knows what else went into this sausage. Maybe the most responsible thing they could have done is start the seed for a transition from T-Band to 700 and use the County's site controller for interconnection and interoperability between disparate band trunked and conventional. Sooner or later... at least right now.