Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.c. Consider Approval of Resolutions of Intent to Participate in Dakota County 800 MHz Radio Network and Consolidated PSAPAGENDA ITEM: Consider Approval of Resolutions of Intent to Participate in Dakota County 800 MHz Radio Network and Consolidated PSAP AGENDA SECTION: PREPARED BY: Gary D. Kalstabakken, Chief of Police AGENDA NO. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution of intent to participate i the Dakota County 800 MHz radio network, Resolution of intent to participate in the Dakota County consolidated PSAP, Information on operational benefits, cost benefits and cost comparisons of various alternatives for PSAP operation are attached APPROVED BY: RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve resolutions indicating the City of Rosemount's intent to participate in the Dakota County 800 MHz public safety radio network and a consolidated (PSAP) center. ACTION: CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION City Council Meeting Date: May 24, 2005 SUMMARY The background for this item has previously been discussed with Council at Work Sessions in March and May of this year A review of the information is provided below. A study conducted by Dakota County and participating cities, including Rosemount, in 2004, recommended that Dakota County construct an 800 MHz public safety radio system to connect to the regional 800 MHz system already in service. Since that time an 800 MHz design group and policy group consisting of staff and elected officials from Dakota County and Dakota County cities have been working on technical and policy issues associated with the proposed county network. They have been assisted by PSC Alliance, a radio consulting firm under contract to Dakota County. During the same time, as part of the Dakota County High Performance Partnership (HiPP) process, the issues surrounding a consolidated PSAP have been studied by a technical committee and a policy committee, also assisted by PSC Alliance. 1 The City Council heard presentations on the status of these projects on March 15, and May 3, 2005. Since the last update, the preliminary network design has been completed and the HIPP committees have completed their work. On May 5, 2005 the HIPP Policy Committee met to consider joint PSAP issues. At this meeting the committee unanimously voted to pursue 1 PSAP to serve all Dakota County public safety agencies. The committee also approved a finance and governance plan that would create a joint powers entity to operate the PSAP. Based upon the benefits of improved radio interoperability with public safety agencies in Dakota County and throughout the region, as well as reduced capitol and operational costs for the City of Rosemount, staff concurs with the recommendations of the HiPP committee. Dakota County and its cities are requested to approve resolutions of intent to participate in the 800 MHz network and joint PSAP as part of the required plan approval process of the Metropolitan Radio Board. Approval of the technical plan in June would allow for expenditure of grant funds which expire in November 2005. If approval of the resolutions is granted, work will begin on a Joint Powers Agreement that would require City Council approval prior to Rosemount's participation in the joint PSAP. As of Thursday, May 19, 2005, the cities of Burnsville, Eagan, Farmington, Hastings, Lakeville, Mendota Heights, South Saint Paul and the Dakota County Board have passed resolutions in support of both items. The cities of Apple Valley, [river Grove Heights, Rosemount and West Saint Paul are scheduled to take action the week of May 23, 2005. 2 CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2005 A RESOLUTION STATING THE INTENT OF THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT TO PARTICIPATE IN A COUNTYWIDE 800 MHz PUBLIC SAFETY RADIO SUBSYSTEM WHEREAS, Minn Stat. 473.904 required that metropolitan counties prepare a communications system planning document on current and potential participation in the regional 800 MHz public safety radio communications system; and WHEREAS, the County and its cities currently operate independent VHF public safety radio systems not capable of interoperable communications; and WHEREAS, Dakota County in cooperation with the cities in the County studied this issue and issued reports in 1997 and 2000 concluding that the current independent VHF public safety radio systems were meeting the current needs of the agencies and that the County did not intend to participate in the regional 800 MHz system at that time; and WHEREAS, the terrorist events of September 11, 2001 have shown the necessity for an interoperable public safety radio system; and WHEREAS, the County and its cities again studied participation in the regional 800 MHz public safety radio system and in a report issued in 2004 unanimously recommended that the county participate in the regional 800 MHz public safety radio system; and WHEREAS, in 2004 the Dakota County Board of Commissioners authorized the County to join the Metropolitan Regional 800 MHz public safety radio system; and WHEREAS, significant federal grant funds have been made available through the U S Department of Homeland Security to implement interoperable radio communications systems; and WHEREAS, Dakota County has received approximately $6 million in grant funds to construct a countywide 800 MHz public safety radio subsystem; and WHEREAS, Dakota County has retained a consulting firm to design the countywide integrated 800 MHz subsystem to serve all areas of the County; and WHEREAS, the design of the countywide subsystem is being overseen by technical and policy committees made up of county and city participants; and WHEREAS, participation in the Countywide 800 MHz public safety radio subsystem will provide the City of Rosemount with full interoperable communications with all public safety agencies in the County as well as with all participants in the regional system; and WHEREAS, in order to meet federal grant deadlines, the final design of the Countywide subsystem must be completed and submitted to the Metropolitan Radio Board (or its successor) in June, 2005; and WHEREAS, to complete the design of the subsystem, it is necessary to determine the cities that will participate in the Countywide 800 MHz subsystem; and WHEREAS, the County and participating cities will need to enter into a cooperative agreement that will define the rights and obligations of the County and the City of Rosemount with respect to the cooperative and coordinated implementation, operation, and maintenance of the countywide subsystem. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the City of Rosemount hereby agrees to participate in a Countywide Integrated 800 MHz Public Safety Radio System; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the cooperative agreement be brought to the City Council for approval; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the city administrator communicate the city's intention to the County. ADOPTED this 24 day of May, 2005. ATTEST: RESOLUTION 2005— William H. Droste, Mayor Linda Jentink, City Clerk Motion by: Second by: Voted in favor: Voted against: Page 2 CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2005 A RESOLUTION STATING THE INTENT OF THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT TO PARTICIPATE IN A COUNTYWIDE JOINT DISPATCH CENTER GOVERNED BY A JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the High Performance Partnership (HiPP) effort of the County and the cities has identified joint dispatch as one activity to study; and WHEREAS, a HiPP Joint Dispatch Policy Committee co- chaired by Elizabeth Kautz, Mayor of Burnsville, and Steve Mielke, Lakeville City Manager, has been studying joint dispatch for the past four months; and WHEREAS, Dakota County and its cities are currently cooperating in the design of a Dakota County 800 MHz public safety radio communications subsystem; and WHEREAS, an important design consideration is the number and location of Public Safety Answering Points (dispatch centers); and WHEREAS, currently there are six dispatch centers in Dakota County serving a total population of 390,000; and WHEREAS, one dispatch center can provide more efficient, effective, and economic dispatch services for the county population (see Attachment 1 letter dated May 5, 2005 from Jeff Nelson, PSC Alliance, to Brandt Richardson, County Administrator); and WHEREAS, the Legislative Auditor's Report on PSAPs and 911 Service Delivery encourages PSAP consolidation; and WHEREAS, Dakota County has agreed to provide the capital cost of one Joint Dispatch Center to serve all public safety agencies in the county; and WHEREAS, the HiPP Joint Dispatch Policy Committee recommends that the County and its cities participate in a Joint Dispatch Center; and WHEREAS, Dakota County and participating cities will share the annual operating costs of one Joint dispatch center (see Attachment 2 Cost Model); and WHEREAS, the City of Rosemount will save significant funds by participating in a Joint Dispatch Center versus providing its own dispatch services (see Attachment 3 City/ County Specific Costs of Dispatch Services); and Page 1 WHEREAS, the management and operation of the Joint Dispatch Center will be governed by a Joint Powers Agreement that will give all participants a strong voice in the operations and management of the Center (see Attachment 4 Governance Summary and Organizational Structure). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the City of Rosemount hereby agrees to participate in a countywide Joint Dispatch Center to be governed by a Joint Powers Agreement; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the City Administrator is directed to bring the Joint Powers Agreement to the City council for approval, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the City Administrator inform the County of its decision to participate in the Joint Dispatch Center. ADOPTED this 24 day of May, 2005. ATTEST: RESOLUTION 2005- William H. Droste, Mayor Linda Jentink, City Clerk Motion by: Second by: Voted in favor: Voted against: Page 2 ATTACHMENT #1 PSC A L L I A N C E 4921 Fifth Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55409 Mr. Brandt Richardson County Administrator Dakota County Government Center 1590 Highway 55 Hastings, MN 55337 Dear Brandt: Re: Joint Dispatch Voice. 612 720 -5843 Fax 612 825 -8972 Toll Free: 888 384 -9171 May 05, 2005 info@pscalliance.com www pscalhance.com I have had the privilege of providing consulting services to Dakota County from time -to -time since 1997. I have also provided certain services directly to some of the individual communities within the county during a comparable window of time. Our professional efforts have all focused on the issue of public safety service delivery and communications technology during that period. During each prior engagement the issue of dispatch consolidation has consistently surfaced at one time or another in every venue. It is my observation that at no time since 1997 has the interest, commitment, and enthusiasm of all of the local government stake holders to consider actual methods of Implementing joint dispatch been higher than it is right now. I also suggest that the opportunityto actually implement joint dispatch has never been better than it is now. Recommendations At an April meeting of the HiPP policy group, I committed to offer some specific recommendations concerning joint dispatch for consideration by the members. We recommend that: 1. Dakota County and its partnering communities establish a single, jointly operated public safety dispatch center to serve all of the citizens of the County. 2. The single joint PSAP be governed and operated as a Joint Powers Agency pursuant to the principles and governance considerations as established in the documented record of meetings of the HiPP Joint Dispatch study group. Mr. Brandt Richardson May 05, 2005 3. Appropriate provisions for redundancy be incorporated into the design and that back -up strategies be planned and executed in the event of outage at the single joint PSAP. 4. Every community within Dakota County participate in the single joint dispatch facility and that all public safety agencies migrate their two -way radio communications to the 800 MHz radio backbone. 5. A single set of appropriate central electronics dispatch center infrastructure be acquired and built to service the needs of the County and the individual jurisdictions through the joint dispatch center. Benefits Benefits of implementing these recommendations include: 1. Significant avoided capital cost for every community operating a PSAP today. 2. Significant recurring operating cost savings realized Countywide by leveraging and aggregating dispatch center staff to serve the entire user community across the county. 3. Enhanced communications interoperability. 4. Improved command, control, and deployment coordination of public safety personnel equipment and staff during both routine and crisis situations. The joint dispatch model provides a template which can be applied to other public safety, shared service initiatives within the County. 5. Service levels which are equal to or better than that possible today. 6. Greater process discipline through a shared governance and operational structure. 7. The opportunity to collect meaningful performance metrics leading to best -in -class management of the service delivery process. 8. Increased opportunities for continued professional development and advancement of specialized dispatch center staff serving a countywide community base. 9. Greater dispatch center staff depth deployment flexibility Page 2 Mr. Brandt Richardson May 05, 2005 10. Improved opportunities to leverage industry Best Practices in the delivery of public safety communications services. The achievements of the HiPP Joint Dispatch planning process are significant and the work process has been fascinating. It has been our observation that every stake holder has approached the challenges of the joint dispatch study with a highly focused emphasis on what is best for the whole Dakota County community while also recognizing that the whole community is made up of unique individuals and cities each with a set of common needs. We think this represents a textbook case of developing best -in -class public policy. This joint dispatch process holds great potential and we encourage resolutions of support from every affected political body. Page 3 Sincerely yours, PSC Alliance Inc. J. J. Nelson Jeff Nelson 514106 L— 0000 %00 001 sstersi %00007 L60'fi00'9f °Evros's 519101 I includes personnel a operating expense Tnr/nmt Owen. PSAPnnerations only not BOO M& expenses joint dispatch costs ace based or midpoint. al nlwnnnal,rv.anges alga %inM1d by the 5% Inflation team: apple[ annually fore k mectfected asides,. of at lent 1 42 al In ISAI eporeting expenses fey year one 1 ocsY9c'sf wep •^minaod anus/ up puma OHL 606.911..176 6u 1M pled 46 ••46 t °he0 9 EZ05 %E2L 54✓eE45 642'169 16.6 as 1o M 0130 d2,11 5125/a% 0 S •%A6 5 12'691$ 9956 2 I I' ILL LEIS ®I unewwe ue0 %60 e 276 E8$ %9p (1 996 (SS ves au! e I sea %OIL °hOL rea'E170 %66 1 I 646 (IV 995 .Iepu.M elllaNel 1 %9L LL %8e 19 912'6559 9644 6 029'9999 .111 691'099$ v °462 9 LEE LOIS 999 'se 15 690'5969 %809 C6 'as 259'[955 995'9515 %L9 9 L .59'9919 959'5696 065'5915 9906 u %CD III 456'7669 %ES 97 995'1069 696'6695 .nnuel ov...rms meta new 0v ma.a 55,732,85] total COUNTY C6ntrIb4t10n 6 psas• l zooal 05)0 %ELe 99(69 oseog($ %99 51 569 0905 uno] .199.0 a 655(92$ E yunq 41 000'054 9609 %60 L 9 900'986e %09 21 ass'E60'9 wl6a6ans 2'68659/ 960'.00 .6 L.s I.6 Avuev noun 9955 Cl 90921 /65'5169 Let 666 9506 9 941295 1 19 6A9 6 6114 9 -15 2 920.000 2e9n5094 vrotaatae savings -2419 m.p+mb(r4 A 1 2 91 0 ease 1 or Total Population 1 nl Tnlal lthwey Elements (969,6 poa9 .Iwn 94 ,9 )0 11 u VaIM Vn(A9 aaauad 4131001 Futwe EcOelees- 6 95np Model (Vea• L) C017 SHARING JOIN! DISPAUCH 99 9/ 42,46 54 tent Inclockrg overhead no 16%) 166•21 uan3 A9 a)uela :1.06/9 6490 Alums) tIR tz gy 8 Expense Items Joint Dispatch 1 PSAP City Share Of Expenses Independent PSAP Local CYty Expenses Comments Operating Expenses SOO MHz PSAP(s) PSAP Annual Operating Expenses (year 1 shown) $187,596 $87,956 Includes 16 %overhead for utilities, rent, facility security and maintenance, bath amounts were adjusted 5% from 2009 actual! This is beyond the PSAP operating expenses noted above o aomimsFer County Subsystem's re lationship wiff external partners, S9 /radio per yr in joint dispatch $15 /radio per yr for independent (81 Radios Fire/EMS Alerting Operating Expenses $1,968 Locally Determined 800 MHz Subsystem Administration Fees (Concept) $729 $1,215 800 MHz Regional System User Fees $7,371 $7,371 $91 /radio per year (81 Radios for RoseFnount) Operatin Ex nses Sub- totals g pe ;197,164 ;9fi,542 Year 1 operating casts (joint dispatch vs local independent PSAP) Also see Note 7 800 MHz Subsystem Users' Fees See Note 4 Bebw see Note 4 Below See Note 4 Below Transition Funding TBD TBD Pkceholtlei for additional start -up /transition expenses, a 9, training, overtime, severance, etc Capital Expenses 600 MHz Subsystem 800 MHz subsystem Buih1 -Out $97 M -$U $450,000 M TBD, Local Paid forby Dal_mta Cain_ laceholder 800 MHz Local In- Budding Enhancements Not Su bsb¢ed by County 800 MHz Radio Plan Development Paid by County TBD, Local 800 MHz Capital Replacemen4Expanson Funtl TBD TBD No grant funding should be assumed at r rMarromPi Capital Expenses 800 MHz PSAP Equipment 800 MHz CEB Equipment (console controller) $19,090 $150,000 hardware expense per PSAP 800 MHz Radio Controls Workstations $44,543 $225,000 Hardware expense per PSAP Supports 14 posiboos Supports 3 Pavlrons City share of joint dispatch hardware capital is 4 89% of total, oty cost For capital in independent dispatch mode is at least $3751( Fire /EMS Alerting Network Equipment $23,250 TBD, Local Capital Expenses Sob -total $86,883 $375,000 Cost for hardware capital in independent dispatch mode r; at leaet $3]51( per PSAP BOO MHz Subs Subsystem Connection Fees y Included in Joint Dispatch Costs 3 $300,000 515 Per capita (Population 20,000) 800 MHz CEB Connection Transport Expense Included $50K to $7SOK Fiber connections or microwave Dispatch Center Construction /Expansion Paid by County TBD, Local Notes. 1 Non- Dispatch Functions Local jurisdictions will choose anc fund what, if any, non dispatch functions to preserve in those PSAP communities that elect to participate in pint dispatch 2 CAD /Mobile/Records Management Software Fees Local portions of these software license fees are not known ar included in the joint dispatch budget Final determinaton of these expenses will occur in the implementabon planning phase for pint dispatch 3 800 MHz Subscriber Radios Costs far subscriber radios will remain the resonsibility of the respective user agencies The Dakota County 800 MHz subsystem's methodology for procuring, dispensing, programming, maintaining, and repairing subsmber radios has yet to be finalized At the present time the purchase pnce for each radio is presumed to be $2,800 for portable radios 4 800 MHz Subsystem Users' Fee Includes site maintenance, local leases, for etc This fee TBD tower utilities radio sites, 5 The above capital expenses reflect 800 MHz implementabon and do not include CAD, logging equipment, 911 telephone, furniture, PSAP construction, etc 6 PSC recommends that the ^SAP(s) fund a PSAP equipment replacement fund in the future 7 The cost of independent dispatch for Rosemount is dependent upon Rosemount remaining with Eagan at the same split of capital operating expense If Eagan chooses to participate in joint dispatch and Rosemount does not, Rosemount will either have to initiate its own dispatch operation or find another PSAP to service ils needs Overview of Expenses for 800 MHz Dispatch Expense Breakdown By Scenario ATTACHMENT 3: City of Rosemount PSC Affiance Inc, Copyright 2005 FILE Name Cost Breakdowns By Entity- 051105 xIs TAB Name Rosemount as Oierwew PAGE 1 5/12/05 Governance for Countywide Joint Dispatch Executive Summary Prepared on behalf of the HiPP Joint Dispatch Policy Committee By: PSC Alliance Inc. May 11, 2005 Purpose The purpose of this document is to document the elements of govemance that are being recommended by the participants of the HiPP Joint Dispatch Policy Committee. These elements are intended to serve as the foundation for a joint powers agreement that participating cities and the County will finalize for final approval. The timeline to advance the question of participation in the countywide 8D0 MHz public safety radio system and joint dispatch requires each jurisdiction to indicate its intentions before the end of May 2005. As a result, the County Board and city councils are being asked to consider resolutions declaring their intentions at this time with review and approval of the requisite joint powers agreement for joint dispatch and cooperative agreements for participation in the 800 MHz radio system to follow in the weeks ahead. This document serves as Attachment 4a to the request for County Board /City Council action in these matters. Governance Model EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. Governance of a Countywide Joint Dispatch Operation The Policy Committee recommends governance of countywide joint dispatch and 800 MHz radio system management and administration by a joint powers agreement. The joint powers agreement presumes the creation of a new service entity that is owned and controlled by all jurisdictions subject to the terms and conditions of the agreement. While the joint powers entity would be authorized to hire, manage, train, develop, and terminate its employees, the JPA will not require or include a separate personnel system. Successful ventures have relied upon the personnel administration capabilities of a member jurisdiction for such services and this model would be no different. The agreement would include language directing the joint powers entity to contract with one member entity for various operational support functions, such as personnel services (as noted above), legal services, accounting, procurement, and payroll administration. The purpose of this language is to maximize the cost effectiveness and efficiency of the joint dispatch operation by leveraging the existing resources of a participating jurisdiction. The agreement will provide a means for the entity to exercise ownership and /or lessee rights, for PSAP /dispatch equipment and the 800 MHz radio system infrastructure, while protecting the County's ultimate responsibility and associated interests as the owner of the countywide 800 MHz radio subsystem that provides the local connectivity to and use of the Metro 800 MHz Radio System. In addition, the agreement will enable a formal process to allow for the transition of resources and equipment, if any, to the new entity. The HiPP Joint Dispatch Policy Committee reviewed examples of joint dispatch operations and their associated agreements and by -laws to help craft a joint powers agreement ()PA) that meets the needs and requirements of the prospective participant jurisdictions within Dakota County. PSCAlliance Inc, Copynght, 2005 2 5/12/05 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Governance of a Countywide Joint Dispatch Operation Elements of Joint Governance The following elements have been reviewed, considered, and agreed to at the HiPP Joint Dispatch Policy Committee level: Accountability, Authority, and Responsibility Three distinct governance functions have been identified within the context of accountability, authority and responsibility. These are, and will be addressed structurally by: Board of Directors Ultimate financial, legal, and fiduciary controls, including overriding policy leadership regarding levels of service Executive Committee Acts as the executive review function, on behalf of the elected officials on the Board of Directors, for financial, legal, and fiduciary controls, including policy recommendations regarding levels of service Operations Committee Operational input, feedback, and procedural leadership regarding levels of service Emergency Communications management Day to day management of the dispatch entity and the 800 MHz radio subsystem These three functional areas within the construct of govemance form the basis of an agreement to be deployed for joint dispatch governance. Control The governance agreement will address the levels and limits to control. Shared control and decision making among participants and the need to have meaningful, timely influence on service delivery standards and protocols are the driving parameters for agreement on governance among participants. The HIPP Joint Dispatch Policy Committee recommends levels of membership, control and influence for each functional area of governance as noted above. These levels of membership, control, and influence are described in Attachments 4b and 4c. Finance The HIPP Joint Dispatch Policy Committee acknowledges the importance of service improvement, added value, cost effectiveness, and accountability for aggregate spending for public safety communications in the county. In addition, the committee also confirmed the key role that costs, budget control, and cost sharing play in the governance process and crafted a cost sharing process and formula that is practical, relevant, pragmatic, and perceived as fair and equitable The JPA will also support the principle that the cost sharing process/ formula must also be reliable over time, capable of transcending any short -term fluctuations or unusual conditions. The cost sharing formula recommended by the HIPP Joint Dispatch Policy Committee is based upon a flat $750,000 subsidy by the County with the balance of operating expenses shared across the member cities and the County based upon the percentage of system use as measured by a combined event factor of 911 calls and computer -aided dispatch (CAD) events for each jurisdiction. The County's share of the system use /event -based factor will be based upon the 911 calls and CAD events processed on behalf of the County Sheriff's Department. An overview of this cost sharing formula with projected cost shares for year 1 is enclosed in this packet as Attachment 2. Credits and /or direct revenue will also be attributed to member junsdictions for services rendered to the joint powers entity (e.g., the County will build and maintain the Joint dispatch PSAP facility with rent and operating expenses payable to the County by the Joint powers entity). The members of the Policy Committee concur that a governance agreement must address the formulae for cost sharing that accounts for the varying types of costs and credits. PSC Alliance Inc., Copyright, 2005 3 5/12/05 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. Governance of a Countywide Joint Dispatch Operation Timing It is assumed that the "anchor Jurisdictions" or participants would agree to and approve the joint powers agreement as soon as practical to allow for meaningful implementation planning. Further, it is assumed here that while all participants would begin using the new joint dispatch service and the 800 MHz subsystem at approximately the same time, there would be some staggering of agencies for actual cutover. A complete transition within a 6 -month window is anticipated, provided detailed cutover planning occurred. To protect the interests of all participants, the committee recommends that all initiating parties (the anchor jurisdictions) must agree to an initial period of membership of no less than five (5) years. Expandability The Committee also recommends that the JPA accommodate expansion in the future and, thus, the governance agreement will provide such a process. The Policy Committee also recommends that jurisdictions that join the joint powers entity at a later date will be responsible for an appropriate one -time contribution to offset the original capital investment, the in- process capital replenishment funding, and the equity already earned by managing the development and start-up of the joint dispatch operation. Ease The Policy Committee has chosen this governance model, in part, because it will be easy to use, cost sensitive, and non bureaucratic. Problem Resolution and Commendation Procedures —The JPA will provide a defined method of identifying, surfacing, discussing, and resolving problems between a participant(s) and the joint dispatch entity, as well as between and /or among participating jurisdictions. It also must provide for an agreed upon vehicle for processing complaints and commendations from the public and field personnel, whether they be made to elected officials, jurisdictional management, public safety agencies, or the dispatching entity. Conclusion and Recommendation The Policy Committee has reviewed various factors associated with levels of service, cost efficiencies, and a desire for best practices. The Committee was also provided detailed requirements and other relevant input from the HIPP Joint Dispatch Technical Committee made up of public safety representatives from fire, EMS and law enforcement agencies across the County. The Technical Committee with assistance from the consultants, PSC Alliance Inc., provided feedback and input in the following areas: O Weighted attributes for a quality joint dispatch PSAP O Back up for dispatch operations and system redundancy O Fire and medical dispatch issues, challenges and opportunities O Tasks that are deemed non dispatch in nature that would not transition to a joint dispatch operation In addition, both the Policy and Technical Committees received feedback, guidance, and input in from the consultants, PSC Alliance Inc. on various subjects, including relevant questions regarding the experiences that other joint dispatch/ PSAP operations have had with various subjects, such as, but not limited to: O Overall governance and cost sharing practices O Managing personnel concerns and performance through transition and change O Periodic review of the cost sharing formula for relevance O Critical success factors PSC Alliance Inc, Copynght, 2005 4 5/12/05 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Governance of a Countywide Joint Dispatch Operation The Policy Committee concludes that emergency communications can be effectively and reliably delivered by purposefully pursuing the joint powers agreement option including specific safeguards and processes It acknowledges that other opportunities for synergy and resource sharing may well exist within the pubic safety arena and that the joint powers governance structure and process will enable synergy and broader cooperation as appropriate and desired. Finally, the HiPP Joint Dispatch Policy Committee recommends a single joint dispatch operation governed by a joint powers agreement based upon the elements and parameters identified in this executive summary and requests the conceptual approval of a JPA based upon the same elements and parameters by each respective city council and the County Board. This conceptual approval is desired no later than May 27, 2005 to allow the County and participating communities to file and obtain approval for its 800 MHz Radio Subsystem Plan from the Metro Radio Board at the Metro Radio Board's last regular meeting on June 3 This request to move ahead directly also protects the County, future joint dispatch participants, and their respective interests relative to the use of state and federal funding that has been awarded to the County for this work to be done. The first component of grant funding expires if not used by November, 2005. PSC Alliance Inc., Copynght, 2005 5 5/12/05 0 Table A Summary of Governance Structure AccountabiU y,, Authority, and Responsibility Functional Level of Governance Board of Directors Executive Committee Operations Committee Includes Fire/EMS and Law Enforcement Subcommittees Emergency Communications Management Membership u The Mayor (or a Gty ry C ounolpernalper wn acting as the mayor's designee) from each community of at least 10,000 residents with its own local law enforcement agency In Dakota County, and the County Board Chairperson (or another County Board member acting as the chair's designee) The chief adminibabve officer of each member Junsdicbon, City Administrators Managers and the County Administrator The Operations Committee will be compnsed of a designated respresentabve from each law enforcement and fire service agency from the member Junsd¢ bons, a representative from the CountyJoint EMS Council, and the Executive Director of Emergency Communications, also known as the chief operating official of the Joint powers entity Public safety agencies of smaller communities served by the system may parbapate as ad- hoc, non voting members in committee and subcommittee business There will be law enforcement and fire/EMS subcommittees fir disopline- speaflc business as needed The Executive Director of Emergency Communications, also known as the chief operating official of the Joint powers entity, will be appointed by the Boarc o` Directors Control The Board of Directors will vote on financial, legal, and fiduciary matters using a weighted vote method equal to the weight of that Jurisdiction's funding percentage for the current year The Board may vote on other matters, including the employment of the person responsible for the day -to-day management of the countywide 800 MHz radio system and joint dispatch operation, using a one member one vote method The Exectrtrve Committee will reviewand recommend financial, legal, and fiduciary actions, as well as public policy aftecbng the level of service to the Board of Directors The Executive Committee will assist the Board of Directors in the recruitment and recommendation of the person to be enployed no lead and direct the day-to- day management of the countywide 800 MHz radio system and joint dispatch operation, and willvore on all matters using a one member one vote method The Dpeation Committee and both subcommittees that exist within the Operations Committee will be chaired by the Emergency Communications Executive Director Each regular member will review matters of operational pohoes and procedures and when possible, will decide issues by consensus When voting is used, the committee will use a one member one vote method Ad -hoc, non-voting members may participate in discussion and bring matters of interest to the committee its subcommittees for review and disposition, but may not participate n the process of voting In the event of a vote that e tied, the chair retains the ability to break the be The Operations Committee may seek redress and relief from problems that are not being handled to their satisfaction by requesting review of the matter by the Executive Committee The Executive Director of Emergency Communications will be responsible for the day -to -day management of the countywide B00 MHz radio system and Joint dispatch operation including its performance and personnel management, as well as its relationship with the user agencies Meetings The Board of Directors will meet at least two times each year yet as often as required to perform its legal, financial, and fiduciary responsibilities as Defined in the JPA The Executive Committee will meet at least quarterly, yet as often as necessary to perform its dunes and responsibilities as defined in the JPA The Operations Committee will meet at least 6 braes each year yet often enough to perform its duties and responsibilities as defined in the JPA The Executive Director and his /her team will meet and communicate with the user agencies on a frequent basis to promote a solid working relationship The Executive Director will act as chair of the Operations Committee and its subcommittees and will meet and participate with the Executive Committee and Board of Directors as needed PSC AWanc Inc, 2005 FILE Name. Governance Matrix 050905-xis TAB Name Sheetl PAGE 1- 5/9/05 _i(ki�_a {,431 J4,�Twn +ie Functional Level of Governance Membership Control Meetings The Board of Directors will meet at least two times each year, yet as often as required to perform its legal, financial, and fiduciary responsibilities as defined in the JPA. Board of Directors The Mayor (or a Oty Councilperson acting as the mayor's designee) from each community of at least 10,000 residents with It own local law enforcement agency In Dakota County, and the County Board Chairperson (or another County Board member acting as the chair's designee) The Board of Directors will vote on financial, legal, anc fiduciary matters using a weighted vote method equal to the weight of that Jurisdiction's funding percentage for the current year The Board may vote on other matters, Including the employment o` the person responsible for the day to-day management of the countywide 800 MHz radio system and Join, dispatch operabon, using a one member one vote method Executive Committee The chief administrative officer of each member Junsdicbon, Oty Administrators 1 Managers and the County Administrator The ExecuMe Committee will reviewand recommend financial, legal, and fiduciary actions, as well as public policy affecting the level of service, to the Board of Directors The Executive Committee will assist the Board of Directors in the recruitment and recommendation of the person to be employed to lead and direct the day-to- day management of the countywide 800 MHz radio system and Joint dispatch operation, and willvote on all matters using a one member one vote method The Executive Committee will meet at least quarterly, yet as often as necessary to perform its duties and responsib rbes as defined in the JPA Operations Committee Includes Fre/EMS and Law Enforcement Subrommtttees The Operations Committee will be compnsed of a designated respresentative from each law enforcement and fire service agency from the member Junsdichons, a representative from the Countyioint EMS Council, and the Executive Director of Emergency Communications, also known as the chief operating official of the Joint powers entity Public safety agencies of smaller communities served by the system may paroapate as ad- hoc, non voting members in committee and subcommittee business There will be law enforcement and fire/EMS subcommittee for discipline- spedfic business as needed The Operation Committee and both subcommittees that exist within the Operations Committee will be chaired by the Emergency Communications Executive Director Each regular member will review matters of operational policies and procedures and when possible, will decide Issues by The Operations Committee will meet at least 6 toles each year, yet often enough to perform its duties and responsbhbe as defined In the JPA consensus When voting is used, the committee will use a one member one vote method Ad -hoc, non -voting members may participate in discussion and bring matters of Interest to the committee its subcommittees for review anc disposition, but may not parbapate in the process of voting In the event of a vote that 15 t led, the chair retains the ability to break the be The Operations Committee may seek redress and relief from problems that are not being handled to their satisfaction by requesting review of the matter by the Executive Committee Emergency Communications Management The Executive Director of Emergency Communications, also known as the chief operating official of the Joint powers entity, will be appointed by the Board of De c-w The Executive Director and his /her team will meet and communicate with the user agencies on a frequent basis to promote a solid working relationship The Executive Director will act as chair of the Operations Committee and its subcommittees and will meet and paroapate with the Executive Committee and Board of Directors as needed The Executive Director of Emergency Communications will be responsible for the day -to-day management of the countywide 800 MHz radio system and joint dispatch operation Including Its performance and personnel management, as well as its relabonship with the user agencies Table A PSC Alliance Inc, 2005 Summary of Governance Structure Accountability, Authority, and Responstbdrty FILE Name Governance Matrix 050905 xis TAB Name. Sheetl PAGE' 1 5/9/05 Expense Items Joint Dispatdr 1 PSAP IPA and for County Expense Independent PSAPs Local Expenses Comments Operating Expenses -800 MHz PSAP(s) PSAP Annual Operating Expenses Year l shown P 9 P 582530 $9, $6,D09,097 Includes 16% overhead for Wdttres, rent, fatality security and maintenance Fnr Fire/EMS Alerting Operating Expenses 9 p 9 P $30,000 Locally Determined This is beyond the PSAP operahng expenses noted above 800 MHz Subsystem Administration Fees (Concept) $17,181 $28,635 To administer Conry Subsystem's relationship with external partners, $9 /radio per yr m pint dispatch $15 /radio per yr for.ndep'-ndent 800 MHz Regional System User Fees $173,719 $173,719 $91 /radio per year Operating Expenses Sub totals $4,803,430 $6,211,451 ff�� BOD MHz Subsystem Users Fees See Note 4 Below See Note 4 Below See Note 4 Below id for by Dakatatnntlyy. 800 MHZ Subsystem Build-out q;�59,r7 1Dd 800 MHz Local In-Building Enhancements $950,000 TBD, Local Placeholder Cbw,fr Not Subsidized by County 800 MHz Radio Plan Development TBD, Local 800 MHz Capital Replaeemen VExpanston Fund s TBD No grant fund rag should be assumed at replacement Capital Expenses 800 MHz PSAP Equipment 800 MHz CEB Equipment (console controller) 5390,000 $150,000 Hardware expense per PSAP 800 MHz kadro Controls Workstations $910,000 $225,000 Hardware expense per PSAP Supports 14 postOors Supports 3 PoSrfpns (Example eir Dry share of Joint dispatch hardware app G their of total expense, city cost for aptalm independent dispatch mode is at least $375K Fre/EMS Alerbng Network Equipment $975,000 TBD, Local Capital Expenses Sub -total $1,775,000 $375,000 Cost for hardware capital in independent tlispafth made is at east 1375K per PSAP BOD MHz Subsystem Connection Fees =ndudS in $15 per Capita p Examples $3'SK for 20KpopulaMw, $675K for 45K population 3antlbspaKh Cats 800 MHz CEB Connection Transport Expanse Fiber connections or microwave Dispatch Center Construction /Expansion iaaW Notes. 1 Non Dispatch Functions Local Jurisdictions wdl cnoose and fund what, if am; non-dispatch fundmns to preserve in those PSAP communities that elect to participate in pint dispatch 2 CAt Management Software of these software license fees are not .mown or included in the pint dispatch budget Final determination O for Joint dispatch JMOb,leIReruds Fees Local po-bons the expenses wJI occur m the unplernentation planning phase 3 800 MHz Sdbscrmer Radios Costs for subscriber radios will remain the resons,brlry of the respective user agenoes. The Dakota County 800 MHz subsystem's methodology for patunng, dispensing, programming, maintaining, and repairing subscriber radios has yet to be finalized At the present time the purchase price for each radio is presumed to be $2,800 for portable radios 9 800 MHz Subsystem Users' Fee Includes site maintenance, local tower lease, utilities for radio sites, etc This fee TBD 5 The above aptal expenses reflect SOO MHz implementation and do not include CAD, logging equipment, 911 telephone, furniture, PSAP construction, etc 6 PSC recommends that the PSAP(s) fund a PSAP equipment replacement fund in the future Overview of Expenses for 800 MHz Dispatch Expense Breakdown By Scenario System View Dakota County 800 MHz Joint Dispatch PSC AEance Ine Copyright 2005 FILE Name Cost Breakdowns By Entity 051005.xS TAB Name System Costs Overview PAGE•1 5/22/05