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