HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.a. 800 MHz adio System and PSAP ConsolidationAGENDA ITEM: 800 MHz Radio System and PSAP
Consolidation
AGENDA SECTION:
PREPARED BY: Gary Kalstabakken, Chief of P. e t
AGE B
ATTACHMENTS: Dispatch Decision Tree, Dispatch 5 -Year
Selected Cost Models, Dispatch
Governance Organization Charts
APPROVED BY:
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discussion
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION
City Council Work Session Date: May 3, 2005
ISSUE
There are two purposes in bringing this item back to the Council at this Work Session:
1. Provide an update on the 800 MHz and Joint Dispatch discussion.
2. Seek Council direction on Rosemount's position on both items.
Committees have continued to work on the design and governance policy of the 800 MHz
radio system since the formation of the Design Group in September of 2004 and the Policy
Group in January of 2005. Additional committees have also been meeting to discuss the
operational and policy considerations of moving to a joint public safety dispatch center within
Dakota County.
An update on this issue was provided to Council at the March 15, 2005 Work Session. The
governance, finance and operational issues related to 800 MHz and joint dispatch have been
further developed and refined; however, they are still at a conceptual level for continued
discussion and decision- making as the final design is completed and the number of
communities committing to the joint dispatch center becomes known. Because of timelines
involved, each elected body of the municipalities within the county with public safety agencies
and the Dakota County Board will be required to make decisions on participation on the 800
MHz backbone and the related building and operation of a joint dispatch center by May 31,
2005. A meeting is scheduled for Thursday, May 5, 2005, for the Policy Group HiPP Joint
Dispatch Committee to continue discussing the governance and funding options of a joint
dispatch center.
SUMMARY
A final radio plan on 800 MHz must be provided to the Metropolitan Radio Board by June 30,
2005. In order for the consultant, PSC Alliance, to prepare this plan there must be a
determination of which municipalities will be utilizing the system and how many dispatch
centers will be operating within the county.
The attached decision tree lays out the decision making process. There are two basic
questions that need to be answered by Council:
1. Will Rosemount transition to 800 MHz for public safety communication?
800 MHz is being planned as the radio system for statewide implementation.
Its build out has been quickened as a result of the terrorist attack of 9/11.
i. Need for interoperability of radio systems to address major incidents
ii. Federal and state dollars directed to build out direct and through grants
Option of remaining on VHF system would result in isolation from all other
agencies moving to 800 MHz.
It appears that no agency currently operating a VI-IF dispatch center intends to
remain on VHF To choose this option, Rosemount would need to build,
operate and maintain our own VHF system, which utilizes "old" technology.
2. Will Rosemount participate in a joint dispatch center?
General Considerations
Dakota County is building the 800 MHz system and will own the infrastructure of
the system. As such, Dakota County will be a partner in a joint dispatch center.
Every municipality, whether currently operating a dispatch center or contracting
for dispatch services, must make a decision regarding participation in a joint
dispatch center.
The Councils of each city will be making commitments by May 31, 2005
Each city has been represented at the discussions, but it is unknown what each
Council will ultimately decide. Costs are dependent on number of participants
in a joint center.
Operation of a joint dispatch center is intended to be based on best practices,
with the result intended to be that each agency participating will receive
dispatch services that are equal to or better than services currently being
provided.
Financial Impact
The Policy Group of the HiPP Joint Dispatch Committee has reviewed several
models and will have recommendations prepared for Councils when official
action is taken at a future Council Meeting.
Rosemount will experience an increase in our dispatch costs under all models
that are being considered.
Rosemount's costs under the scenarios most seriously being considered range
from $100,191 to $249,380. (2005 cost is $79,572 includes administrative
overhead).
Several models transition over a three -year period to allow cities facing an
increase to better prepare for the increase.
Cities that currently contract services will ultimately see an increase in dispatch
costs while the current dispatch provider cities see a decrease.
2
Governance
A Joint Powers Agreement in some form is the most likely governance model to
operate a joint dispatch center.
Discussion at this point has focused on two versions of a JPA with a Board of
Directors and Operations Committee as the primary governing bodies.
The difference between the two versions is at the Board of Directors level. In
one model the BOD is given weighted voting based upon financial contribution
and in the other model the BOD voting is non weighted
In both models, the Operations Committee is non weighted, i.e. one seat one
vote.
The third option, which has not been viewed as a desirable option at this point,
is having the joint dispatch center run as a County entity and the JPA would
provide an Operations Committee as the formal forum for users.
The JPA and other issues will not be finalized before Councils are asked to
commit to either or both 800 MHz and joint dispatch.
Other Issues
A Technical Group, comprised of police and fire officials, and dispatch
supervisors, has been working to provide recommendations and input on the
best practices for the operation of a joint dispatch center.
Two areas have developed within the group that has somewhat split the group;
System Redundancy and Emergency Medical Dispatching.
Redundancy needs to be address in the system design and, therefore, must be
decided now. Emergency medical dispatching is an operational issue that can
be decided anytime between now and the start of operations.
System redundancy choices may have a significant financial impact on system
design.
Very simplistically, the system redundancy discussion centers on one dispatch
site or two dispatch sites.
0 Can one dispatch center be constructed with internal redundancy and
hardening of the physical structure that is adequate and then rely on
another entity's center (e g. Ramsey and/or Scott County), or
o Is a second dispatch center required to provide redundancy and to
provide a backup site in the event of system failure at one site?
3
co
c
O
co
U
5 a)
O 0
ca 0 2
O U
CO O
O co O
CO
U
m
CL
U
d)
O
U
co
a
0
C
o
0-
c
0
co
o
co
0
0
CD cz
0 03 a)
0 0 o E o
a- E o
in O 2 U N
-1--' N ct
CO a_ o o Q
to cti
U a'
0
0
0
O
0
0
co
0
m
w
C
0
0
U
r
c a)
O
E
E
c
E
0
U
Q m
c
g
m oo
m ti
W -0
C.)
m
c V
a o E
m E
L
0
a o
LL O
CO
y m m E
w m am
E C r+ 0 E
y r E U U
c 0 O m
w 0.2 am
O m m
m 0
J
01 0 3
c
a EWE
0
0 m U
N
c
0
0_
0
0
0
0
0
4
2 k
o
co
11 ties
a.
0
c c
77 {f
c k 0
0 CO
0 In ad
2 E /k\
i 5 f$
Q
CO
En
E tee
0
2 jd
oa co to
ƒ
al
.2.9
0 O; cc
0 0\_/
c
a=
o
co
6
0
O.
co N
co
L. r.
=7=a
c1
1.01
4?a
rn
u
op
"f-7
I
Ln
cr+"
c0
Lo
0
CO y1
lf) 0
ID GO
N o 00
L. 00 00
11) 1.14.
4A-
7- 7
77 Thal rott .7,
r":-.7„ 7■1
1-1
n ,n1 7., ch
co co =7 1•7:::
y•I ta 01 7'
PI
Oa
Q.) -Ffr
Ci
N
CO
CA-
fivr
2\
i mam
1 "or
i 1 el a m
1
sr
0
eg 11111
u 1 u om
E
x
0
m 0Wa
Ev
v 0 0 r
a
c c c Z
0 o 0 0
a
G
e
a
qt
P
B
8
E
a
e
s
8
6
a
0
0
6
0
E
0
V
N
1 o m o a
E
rti
m
c
n
e
r.
3
in
fi
a
LI
fQ
0
R
Y
2
N
O
E•a
pa yN
Opp
d C
iqF
Ju E
a
a
E
s
a
a
a
2
d
8 0
2 et n
y
2 2
1
r.
9
n
m
0
0
0
0
r3
0
0
0
0)
m
0
3
0
m
UT
It.
0
-I
N.)
.0
l z
ON) 1
0
01 a
&:O M
C a
cn 2
-EA
.....4 0 Iv a
0
0 0
CO 0
a iso CD CO
isO
(a o
$in_ c 7;
3 1) CO CM
J
c b E cci. E
i-o- 0
4,1
5
o
(D 1/4,‹ cn
m
0 a) a) cD CD
(xi 0) 0.)
■1 ■is
CM
CO
Ca
li 0 0 I.< 0
CC) D
23 CD
2 CD U) CD
(7) Cl.)
,i.
tt TS ----iit
0
Of
0
0
3
Q
7
to
cn
0
0_
(7)
SI)
0
tay
01
4
0
u
c
ET