Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout9.a. Dispatching Services - Consolidation StudyCITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: OCTOBER 15, 1991 AGENDA ITEM: DISPATCHING SERVICES - AGENDA SECTION: CONSOLIDATION STUDY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT PREPARED BY: STEPHAN JILK, CITY ADMINISTRATOR AGENDA U A ATTACH(ENTS: MEMO, DRAFT RFP, B PERSONNEL COMMITTEE REPORT r As the Dakota County Administrators continue to pursue the investigation into opportunities for cities and Dakota County to providecommunity services in a more cost effective manner we are currently in consideration of two specific areas: 1) Personnel Services 2) Public Safety Dispatching A committee chaired by Lyle Wray and represented by Sue Walsh on our staff is reviewing methods by which cities can utilize the County's and other cities personnel departments and programs to provide a more cost effective approach in hiring staff, providing benefit programs and personnel maintenance services to our staff. A copy of that committee's first report is attached. The second committee is co-chaired by Eagan Police Chief Pat Gegan and I. We are charged with looking into approaches to take in making our public safety dispatching more cost effective. The first step in that process was to develop a RFP to conduct a study into the possible alternative. A copy of the report to County Administrators group is attached along with the draft RFP and alternatives for funding. this is presented to you for discussion at this time. RECOMMENDED ACTION: NONE COUNCIL ACTION: 6-18 9 70; M E M O R A,N D U M Dakota County Employee Relations DepartmeCD �j Dakota County Administration Center, CO Hastings, Minnesota 55033 co Telephone: (612) 438-4435Q �tio� t'Z £Z Z2' DATE: September 13, 1991 TO: Lyle D. Wray, County Administrat r FROM: Will Volk, Employee Relations SUBJECT: Service Sharing/Consolidation—Personnel A meeting was held on September 9 to review ideas relating to the sharing or consolidation of certain personnel services within the City/County jurisdictions. The following were in attendance: Apple Valley Burnsville Eagan Hastings Inver Grove Heights Lakeville Mendota Heights Rosemount South St. Paul Dakota County Dakota County Dakota County Lynn Boland Mike,Crnobrna Holly Duffy Lori Webster Suzanne Klaas Dennis Feller Kevin Batchelder Sue Walsh Jim Cosgrove Nancy Hohbach Dave Kigin Will Volk Consistent with the attached meeting agenda, there was a thorough discussion of the listed Personnel functional areas. Several specific conclusions and recommendations emerged from the discussion: 1. The represented Cities proposed and recommended the establishment of a standing committee of City/County personnel staff for the purpose of information sharing and the discussion of various professional topics. Dakota County Employee Relations could establish such a committee and schedule meetings at appropriate intervals. Access to the County's Personnel Reference library (publications, surveys, subscriptions, etc.) was also discussed in this context. 2. It was proposed that County EDGE training program participation be expanded to include Cities. It was further proposed that Memorandum to Lyle D. Wray September 13, 1991 Page 2 Management Academy be expanded to currently non -participating Cities. Expanded Management Academy participation will be discussed at an upcoming meeting of the Management Academy governing body. Expanded EDGE participation can be accomplished following the development of necessary administrative/enrollment procedures and billing systems. 3. The risk management/ safety function was an area that generated significant discussion.. strong interest in County guidance and access to County expertise was expressed by all the Cities. 4. Limited interest was expressed in Cities' participating in the County's staffing systems. While it would be desirable to access test design expertise, the Cities mostly- have few vacancies and the cost effectiveness of a shared staffing function was questioned. The County expressed the need to insure that related liability questions are thoroughly examined if a joint staffing process is considered. 5. The employee benefits area generated broad discussion with the joint purchase of Life insurance and Long Term Disability insurance representing the most promising area for further analysis. Cities' participation in the County's Medical and Dental plans is more problematic due to the risk factors inherent in the modification of plan demographics. 6. Specific discussion occurred on the subject of Retiree Health insurance. There was consensus that this area merits study and analysis to determine if there are cost effective plan options available. It was generally concluded that labor negotiations and payroll processing do not, at this time, represent suitable areas for service sharing/consolidation. WV/md Attachment cc: Meeting Attendees SERVICE SHARING/CONSOLIDATION Meeting Agenda September 9, 1991 1. Introduction & overview - Lyle D. Wray 2. Functional areas: • Training . Staffing • Benefits • Payroll • Labor Negotiations . Policy Professional Resources . Other 3. Recommendations & Conclusions 4. Adjourn September 16, 1991 Jilk DAKOTA COUNTY CITY / COUNTY MANAGERS JOINT / CONSOLIDATION OF DISPATCHING SERVICES Based upon past discussion and direction given by the administrators group a proposed RFP has been drafted in regards to consideration of joint/consolidated dispatch services for cities and Dakota County. The RFP was drafted and reviewed with assistance from the Police Chiefs Association and will provide for a two phase approach to defining existing services, cost, staffing and capital equipment and recommendations for future action. There was discussion as to whether or not there should be two RFP's and thus two studies. One would be done simply to "take inventory" of the Existing systems and to determine the capability of integrating or combining any or all of those systems. This step is necessary and it seemed an important step from the stand point of getting a good overview of what everyone is doing, what type, age, and level of investment there is in our system(s). There was concern raised as to whether we may want to take this first step and then decide whether or not to proceed. This first phase would probably be the least expensive since it would be more data/information collection/cataloging. The second phase, if decided to embark upon, would then be a analytical approach to determining the best approach to consolidation, non - consolidation and/or joint efforts where economically and politically feasible. As the RFP was written, it was decided to combine these two phases but distinguish between them in the process so as to create a "two stage" approach so that as we proceed we can make decisions along the way. To separate the two into separate RFP's would be extremely easy if that is the direction we would decide to take. One item of concern that has been raised is the management of the study if we do proceed. The recommended approach is to establish a joint powers agreement with all cities and the County. The "DCM" will provide leadership and administration of the RFP, selection of the consultant and leadership through the process. I would assume this would be handled through a committee selected by our group. The second item would be - who would pay for the study. The recommendation on this would be that the dollar amount of the study be spread to Dakota County and all cities proportionally by population and with Dakota County picking up a specified percentage. Options for this breakdown are shown on the attached sheets. I would suggest a review of the RFP and discussion for changes and direction. The following assumptions have been made in determining the basis for the funding of a dispatch consolidation study. 1. Study cost of $60,000 2. All cities over 1,000 in population within Dakota County will participate in funding the study. 3. The County allotment includes funding for the eight cities under 1,000 in population and the thirteen townships which are all provided dispatch services from County as part of the sheriff's statutory requirement. 4. Cities of higher population generate more calls and require more service than those lower in population., 5. Populations are based on 1990 information obtained from the Metropolitan Council. FUNDING OPTION #1 STUDY COST $60,000 COUNTY POPULATION 273,392 -Dakota County population for funding purposes is the population of the eight cities under 1,000 in population and the thirteen townships which the County provides dispatch services to at no cost. $60,000/273,392 population = $.219 per person ENTITY POPULATION ALLOTMENT ALLOCATION DAKOTA COUNTY 13,038 .219 $ 2,855 APPLE VALLEY 34,275 .219 $ 7,506 BURNSVILLE 51,093 .219 $11,189 EAGAN 47,291 .219 $10,357 FARMINGTON 5,919 .219 $ 1,296 HASTINGS 15,336 .219 $ 3,359 INVER GROVE HEIGHTS 22,454 .219 $ 4,917 LAKEVILLE 24,814 .219 $ 5,434 MENDOTA HEIGHTS 9,385 .219 $ 2,055 ROSEMOUNT 8,578 .219 $ 1,879 SOUTH ST. PAUL 20,168 .219 $ 4,417 WEST ST. PAUL 19,134 .219 $ 4,190 FUNDING OPTION #2 .STUDY COST $60,000 COUNTY POPULATION 273,392 -Dakota County funds 10% of study cost -remaining cost of the study is divided by the County Population without the cities and townships already being funded by the County STUDY COST $60,000 6,000 _ $54,000 $54,000/260,354 population = $.207 per person ENTITY POPULATION ALLOTMENT ALLOCATION DAKOTA COUNTY 273,392 APPLE VALLEY 34,275 BURNSVILLE 51,093 EAGAN 47,291 FARMINGTON 5,919 HASTINGS 15,336 INVER GROVE $ 3,175 HEIGHTS 22,454 LAKEVILLE 24,814 MENDOTA HEIGHTS 9,385 ROSEMOUNT 8,578 SOUTH ST. PAUL 20,168 WEST ST. PAUL 19,134 10% $ 6,000 .207 $ 7,095 •207 $10,576 .207 $ 9,789 .207 $ 1,225 .207 $ 3,175 .207 $ 4,648 .207 $ 5,136 .207 $ 1,943 .207 $ 1,776 .207 $ 4,175 .207 $ 3,961 FUNDING OPTION #3 STUDY COST $60,000 COUNTY POPULATION 273,392 -Dakota County funds 20% of study cost -remaining cost of the study is divided by the County population without the cities and townships already being funded by the County STUDY COST $60,000 12,000 $48,000 $48,000/260,354 population = $.184 per person w ENTITY POPULATION ALLOTMENT ALLOCATION DAKOTA COUNTY 273,392 20% $12,000 APPLE VALLEY 34,275 BURNSVILLE 51,093 EAGAN 47,291 FARMINGTON 5,919 HASTINGS 15,336 INVER GROVE .184 HEIGHTS 22,454 LAKEVILLE 24,814 MENDOTA HEIGHTS 9,385 ROSEMOUNT 8,578 SOUTH ST. PAUL 20,168 WEST ST. PAUL 19,134 .184 $ 6,307 .184 $ 9,401 .184 $ 8,701 .184 $ 1,089 .184 $ 2,822 .184 $ 4,132 .184 $ 4,566 .184 $ 1,727 .184 $ 1,578 .184 $ 3,711 .184 $ 3,521 FUNDING OPTION #4 STUDY COST $60,000 COUNTY POPULATION 273_,392 -Dakota County funds 30% of study cost -remaining cost of the study is divided by the County population without the cities and townships already being funded by the County STUDY COST $60,000 - 18,000 _ $42,000 $42,000/260,354 population = $.161 per person w ENTITY POPULATION ALLOTMENT ALLOCATION DAKOTA COUNTY 273,392 30% $18,000 APPLE VALLEY 34,275 .161 $ 5,518 BURNSVILLE 51,093 .161 $ 8,226 EAGAN 47,291 .161 $ 7,614 FARMINGTON 5,919 .161 $ 953 HASTINGS 15,336 .161 $ 2,469 INVER GROVE HEIGHTS 22,454 .161 $ 3,615 LAKEVILLE 24,814 .161 $ 3,995 MENDOTA HEIGHTS 9,385 .161 $ 1,793 ROSEMOUNT 8,578 .161 $ 1,381 SOUTH ST. PAUL 20,168 .161 $ 3,247 WEST ST. PAUL 19,134 .161 $ 3,081 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATION ANALYSIS FOR THE DAKOTA COUNTY CITY/COUNTY MANAGERS PROPOSALS DUE: LOCATION: CITY OF ROSEMOUNT 2875 - 145TH STREET WEST ROSEMOUNT, MN 55068 Request for Proposals Analysis of options and recommendations for the design and operation of Dakota County Consolidated Public Safety Centers. I. PURPOSE OF REQUEST The Dakota County Local and County Managers (hereafter referred.to as DCM) solicits proposals for entering into a contract for the performance of a study to define and recommend options for the functional capabilities, design and performance of a county -wide or county regional consolidated Public Safety Communications System. II. INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS A. Twelve copies of the proposal should be submitted and mailed or delivered to Rosemount City Hall, 2875 - 145th Street West, Rosemount, MN 55068, to the attention of Steve Jilk. B. The DCM, by this Request for Proposal, does not promise to accept the lowest or any other proposal and, specifically, reserves the right to reject any or all proposals, to waive any formal proposal requirements, to investigate the qualification and experience of any proposer, to reject any provisions in any proposal, to obtain new proposals, to negotiate the requested services and contract terms with any proposer, or to proceed to do the work otherwise. C. Proposals not sufficiently detailed or in acceptable form may be returned for completion or may be rejected by the DCM Association. All proposals received no later than 4:00 p.m. on , 19 will be considered by the DCM Association and in the event that a proposal is accepted, the appointed Committee Chair will contact the successful proposer in writing, within days following its consideration of the proposal. D. The DCM Association does not discriminate in the selection of contractors on the basis of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, affectional preference, age, political affiliation, marital status, status with regard to public assistance or disability. E. Proposals shall include representations signed by an authorized contracting officer, as follows: 1 This proposal constitutes an offer by the undersigned to enter into a contract to perform the described services of the compensations specified herein. The undersigned agrees not to discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment on the basis of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex affectional preference, age, political affiliation, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, or disability and to take affirmative action to assure that all employees are treated equally with respect to training, hiring, rates of pay and other forms of compensation. The undersigned further agrees to take affirmative action to include the participation of socially or economically disadvantaged businesses, wherever possible, in the performance of this bid. III. PROPOSAL CONTENTS A. Title Page Show the proposal subject, the name of the proposer's firm, local address, telephone number, name of the contact person, and the date. In the event that a combination of firms is proposed, please indicate the lead firm. B. Table of Contents Include a clear identification of the material by section and by page number. C. Identification of Assigned Personnel 1. The name of the person that would be responsible for the management and administration of a contract with the DCM and a description of such person's experience and qualification. 2. The names of the professional staff that would be assigned to the project. 3. A statement committing the aforementioned staff to this project. 4. If joint ventures are proposed or consultants will be retained, a statement of such arrangements must be contained in the proposal including a brief description of each participant's role. 2 This `proposal constitutes an offer by the undersigned to enter into a contract to perform the described services of the compensations specified herein. The undersigned agrees not to discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment on the basis of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex affectional preference, age, political affiliation, marital status, status with regard to Public assistance, or disability and to take affirmative action to assure that all employees are treated equally with respect to training, hiring, rates of pay and other forms of compensation. The undersigned further agrees to take affirmative action to include the participation of socially or economically disadvantaged businesses, wherever possible, in the performance of this bid. III. PROPOSAL CONTENTS A. Title Page Show the proposal subject, the name of the proposer's firm, local address, telephone number, name of the contact person, and the date. In the event that a combination of firms is proposed, please indicate the lead firm. B. Table of Contents Include a clear identification of the material by section and by page number. C. Identification of Assigned Personnel 1. The name of the person that would be responsible for the management and administration of a contract with the DCM and a description of such person's experience and qualification. 2. The names of the professional staff that would be assigned to the project. 3. A statement committing the aforementioned staff to this project. 4. If joint ventures are proposed or consultants will be retained, a statement of such arrangements must be contained in the proposal including a brief description of each participant's role. 2 D. Proposer's Detailed Approach to the Analysis 1. The proposal shall address in detailed fashion the approach of the firm or combination of firms to the Scope of Work. 2. The proposal shall identify a specific time frame for the completion of each element of the Scope of Work as outlined above. E. Budget 1. Budget documentation for each task must include the following: a. Number.of and names of personnel, number of person days (8 hours equal one person day) and salary cost (identify each separately). b. Number of supporting personnel, number of person days, salary cost (list each separately). C. Other cost (eg. travel, telephone, printing, computer time, etc.). d. Total task cost. 2. Total Budget Documentation must include the following: a. Professional Personnel 1. Total number 2. Total person days 3. Total salary b. Support Personnel 1. Total number 2. Total person days 3. Total salary C. Total of Other Cost d. Total Cost of a, b, and c F. Disclosures and Assurances (Appendix A) 1. Applicant Authority Assurance that the signatory making representations in the proposal on behalf 3 of the proposer has the authority to do so and to bind the firm to a contract. 2. Compliance with Affirmative Action - DCM will not discriminate in employment practices on the basis of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, public assistance status, veteran status, handicap or disability; that it has agreed to take affirmative action to recruit minorities, women and handicapped persons into its employment; and that it will transact business only with firms who have adopted similar non-discriminatory and affirmative action policies. In cases where a contract with the DCM will exceed $50,000 and the number of full-time employees exceeds twenty (20) in the company making a Proposal, in its Proposal the company must furnish the DCM with documentation that shows the company has adopted a written affirmative action policy. Contracts which exceed $50,000 will not be awarded to companies of more than twenty full-time employees which fail to provide verification of an affirmative action policy. 3. Firm Not Debarred - A certification that the firm/firms or employees thereof are not on the "List of Persons or Firms Currently Debarred for Violations of Various Public Contracts Incorporating Labor Standards Provisions." IV. SCOPE OF WORK The DCM Association has appointed a special task force of local government officials to determine the feasibility of public safety communication consolidation within Dakota County. The services requested herein will develop, in a two phase project, an analysis of existing public safety communication systems and operations and recommendations as to alternatives for consideration of these services for cost saving and efficiency gaining. To accomplish this, it is determined that the scope of this study should include in: Phase I: A• Description of participating government's radio systems to include E911, MDT's, CAD, Fire, Police and other divisions, ie. Public Works. 4 B. Description of participating government. Public Safety Computer -Systems (to include Fire Department). C. An evaluation of existing communication centers. D. Determine true cost of existing Communications Centers. Phase II: A. Assess impacts of "on the horizon" technologies on present and recommended consolidation options. B. Determine what would be necessary to interface existing systems to make them compatible. C. Evaluate the ability to integrate centralized dispatching to Police Departments' existing record keeping. D. Determine future growth of a consolidated system or systems. E. Determine impact on community service. T�2 oe- 'f Co+�Sd��bAT1�� F. Recommendations €sem G. An action plan to accomplish any consolidation recommendations. 1. Cost factors/short and long term. 2. Recommend staff levels for operation. H. Prepare and present, to the Task Force, DCM Association and Dakota Police Chiefs a report containing findings and conclusions in Task areas. Consultant proposals submitted for consideration must contain a definition of the methods to be used in completion of report. V. CONSULTANT SELECTION CRITERIA Contractors will be selected on the basis of the following criteria: 1. Demonstration of a thorough understanding of the nature and scope of the work to be accomplished. 2. Completeness of the proposal, in response to the tasks outlined. 5 3. Appropriateness of the consultant proposal for accomplishing the objective of the research. 4. Previous experience and professional competence of the proposer in the planning design of Public Safety Communications for multiple jurisdictional user groups. 5. Capacity of the proposer to perform the required work within the time period specified. 6. Demonstrated knowledge of police computers and data banks. 7. Past performance and working relationships with governmental agencies. 8. Adequacy of the budget submitted for accomplishing the required tasks. 9. Avoidance of conflict of interest prohibited under state and local law. Consultants submitting proposals will be evaluated on these criteria by a team made up of members selected by the DCM Association. The committee will review all submittals, rank them according to responsiveness to the Request for Proposals and interview the highest ranked proposers. Selection of a consultant will be subject to the approval of the DCM Association. VI. REQUIRED PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE The DCM desires that the consultant work on the tasks required in this contract be completed with 90 days of the execution of the contract. n Radio communications task force recommends �„11'rboyu drowning sre the Musustii ver'bluerwluo'tiie aaer:a:th mss nequen j' IX..XjFlFj,rr>a7�[i:aLi�e friGrsiiig tludraumirt��brst_canseorrnn:mre:hT ate with a ery-htgh fra�i�uuy 0.rHM ito on a Msrmsafiolssn del6mbittrcLc` �.'�Iamiwhrly�aTe o�uerin a `Bl om:ngton`_` ice tar sgtupped w�lh anDDanigaheriz_ Tt�iary rad zaiii the.;uccidntt,°abut can't- rsmunw4k with either u_, f n oT_ polsa uai4 Tile -Gorbachev vuxt to tliewiri ' �;�;,.'7iu.motoreadi intend 1fu-fTaueay. 3systan—"`"_w`. fiatTolled and -cordoned off lry' VliFsiate _. troopers:mho carried UHF walk e--talkus w Cite streets were patrolled and bl=kod by county deputies witl1'VHF radws,taty . with UHF radios, and public works and, - ambulance units with incompatibk VHF and _ = UHF. radios.:;=While the visit:wene off. with - out big problems, it alas a aonnnunic Ems _.. incompatibili y nightmare:• ast year a number of local officials approached the Metropolitan Council and asked us to analyze the _ overall feasibility of a �- - - region -wide communica- tions network that all communities could use. This spring, Council Chair Mary Anderson asked me to chair a task force made up of local government officials and radio users from police, fire, emergency medical, and public works services. Our 30 -member task force concluded in August that most public safety and other government radio communica- tions systems in the region will have to be upgraded over the next few years if they are to remain dependable in emer regional system DIRK DEVRIES gency situations. Members unani- mously recommended that the region explore building a regionwide radio communications system. The Twin Cities area is made up of seven counties, nearly 300 cities, town- ships, and special districts, and extends over 3,000 square miles. Most jurisdic- tions have their own communications systems. There are about thirty 911 dispatch centers serving police, fire, ambulance, and local government com- munications. And there are numerous other county and municipal radio sys- tems in operation. Our task force has identified five major radio communication problems: lack of channel capacity, limited com- munication across jurisdictions, limited geographic reach, potential for chaos in a major disaster, and potential duplica- tion of equipment and costs as commu- nities upgrade their systems. Capacity Lack of channel capacity is the most critical radio communication problem jurisdictions will face in vears to come. First, there are no more VHF or UHF radio frequencies available in the metro area today. The more than 200 fre- quencies in the VHF and UHF bands allotted by the Federal Communica- tions Commission to public safety and local government have all been spoken for. Second, there is no way to coordi- nate or reallocate local government UHF or VHF channels that are not fully used. Third, as needs grow in years to come, the scarcin• of available channels Will become more acute. Finally, indi- vidual jurisdictions that seek to address pressing needs by purchasing new equipment today are increasing the likelihood of regional incompatibility and duplication tomorrow. Lack of capacity is a problem. Hen- nepin County Medical Center told us that emergency medical services units in the eastern and western portions of the metro area cannot communicate directly with one another. The Metro- politan Area Fire Chiefs Association told us that jammed frequencies, diffi- culty getting access to channels, and interference from private radio users are common. Communication across jurisdictions Metro counties and suburbs gener- ally operate on a VHF frequency, and therefore can communicate with one another. On the other hand, Minneap- olis and St. Paul agencies generally operate on UHF. This means that while the two central cities can gener- ally communicate with one another, they cannot communicate with the counties and suburbs. In 1990, the newest radio technology arrived in the metro area—the higher frequency 800 megahertz radio system. Eden Prairie has it, Minnetonka has installed it, and Bloomington is in the process of buying it. Because its users cannot communicate with users of the other two frequency bands, incompati- bility in radio communications is spreading. Range Local systems have limited transmis- sion range. For example, a Minneapo- lis fire truck that helps in a St. Paul fire may travel beyond the Minneapolis sys- tem's transmission reach. Limited range also could be a problem during a high-speed police chase that passes through several jurisdictions. A major disaster Given the region's current radio communications, a local major disaster could be chaotic. Assistance from many agencies would need to be coordinated in a major plane crash, a chemical spill upstream in the Mississippi River, or tornado touchdown. Cost duplication Other local governments will want to upgrade their radio systems. This may result in duplicating equipment, ser- vices, and costs that could be shared regionwide. After studying the problem, the task force believes that a regionwide net- work can assure equitable service, com- patible systems, economic efficiencies, and beiter quality communications. The system we are talking about is called an 800 megahertz regional trunked radio system. The term "megahertz" means one million radio - wave cycles per second. The term "trunked" means calls would come to a central computer that routes them to the first open channel, with priority for emergency calls. Routing calls is similar to the way telephone calls are switched. Under computer control, there is no longer a police radio or a fire radio. Instead, all government radio systems would have access to other systems across the region. A central computer would receive the calls and open the needed channels. When a call is fin- ished, the channel shuts down and is ready for the next user. A trunked system would have more than enough capacity to handle current and anticipated routine communica- tions demands of participant agencies, while being capable of responding to a larger, regionwide crisis. The biggest barrier to a region -side system is not technical—it's political. Local officials are naturally skeptical of a bigger entity that may appear to compromise local control_ However, we have found that local autonomy would be preserved under a regional trunked system. Homeowners would perceive no change in the service they receive now. Furthermore. radio users would have greater flexibility than they do today. For example, the fire department in Eden Prairie could reach the state patrol—or the local police—on a trunked system. Some people fear that if the region were to go to a large system, it would be controlled by jurisdictions with the most financial resources. However. the task force believes that Governance must be regionwide and include local input to be accepted. A large system would have both regional and local components. The regional component would comprise the "backbone" network, including a cen- tral computer with its software and strategically located towers. Only this component would be governed by a regional body. The local component— dispatch centers and portable and mobile equipment—would continue to be governed, and financed by local jurisdictions. If local governments don't reach agreement on a regionwide system, we expect that over the next 20 years, they could spend much more money on new radio systems—many incompatible with one another. However, a coordinated effort under one planning and funding umbrella could reduce expenditures and improve capabilities and transmission range. No other trunked radio system of such size and complexity—politically or techni- cally—has ever been implemented. Despite these challenges, I believe the Twin Cities area can cooperate to build a common system. One reason for optimism is the success the region achieved in building an emergency 911 phone system. The task force is also exploring the idea of including 911 into this region - wide system. This could free 911 from the costly and high -maintenance leased and dedicated phone lines it uses today. The task force has recommended that planning for a regionwide system go forward. If the decision is to go forward, the task force will review options for the design, functions, man- agement, and performance of the system. The Council would report the find- ings of the task force study to the Legislature in December 1992. Author- ity to build and fund a regionwide trunked radio system would have to come from the Legislature.: Dirk deVries chairs the 800 Megahertz Regional Trunked Radio System Task Force. He is a member of the Metropoli- tan Council. Region -wide "trunked" radio --network PW !. { w C s. Pia. s. Ogen P�o•rJi Co Gwen P.... FJ ZZ P_ s. 5. Ronald VegenncO Enpineednp. Inc. County, cities; may examine consoliclafed dispatching .service Seen aspossible cost-saving measure By EVELYN HOOVER _ might also allow each city to have The fast portion of the two -pa . " "" ' ' " ' ' access -to -the most: up-to-date study would involve an inventorA '__ The feasibility of consolidating dispatching technology.. - of the services -now provided by` the dispatching services for "There is a lot of money being the various dispatching services .police, fire and ambulance spent to provide, (dispatching) • within the county and an moven-. throughout the county into one services and those services vary tory of equipment and costs asso- 1 location may studied by Dako- widely from ' city to ` city," said ciated with dispatching. - - - -- ta Countyand its cities in the near . Steve JUk, Rosemount City Ad- .In the second. phase, . alter- future. mini strator -and co -chair -of the native cost-saving methods will ; Consolidation of dispatching consolidation study committee. be examined. - Consolidation is'' service is just one of many poten- However, before making a de- expected to be one -of the alter - tial cost-saving. measures being :- termination on wheter or not con- natives examined during the re- examined by city .and. county soiidation..can :work is Dakota cond phase. "We feel it is managers, who have been looking County as it does in Anoka Coun- necessary to go out and get a non - at ways to save money during the ty, cities and the county are pro- biased technical approach to I ever -tightening budget crunch.ceeding carefully. this," said Jilk. 1 Several Dakota County cities, "We're not looking for an over- . He added that a recommenda-' including Burnsville, Eagan, Ap- night decision," said Jilk.. tion to consolidate dispatching ple Valley and Lakeville, have.....- If city and county -leaders can services will not necessarily be their own dispatching services.. .agree on whether to proceed with the outcome of the study, if it is Other_. cities like. Rosemount,..-. a study_ of. possible ways�.to.cut. conducted. The study could rec- •Hastings and Inver Grove _. costs in the dispatching.area, a ommend a completely different Heights are served by the Dakota... •-request forproposals will be -sent cost-saving method_ Or, it could County•Sheriff's Department, as out and a consultant wM.be hired also recommend using a middle- are the -smaller cities and to conduct the three-month study. ground approach, grouping cer- townships._ Farmington, on :the Yet to be determined is how the : __ twin cities' dispatching services other haad,_is ;served by. Lake-- -: estimated i60,000 study wBI be together. -on -a regional or sub. Until the late:1960s Dakota = " funded. The draft proposal . calls ° : . _: county basis, JUk said. ` County handled the duties for all " for the study costs to be spread to', "We don't want to consolidate cities in the county - ' _ the county. and all cities propor-= :- :: simply to save a dollar "-be said. Consolidation *-might save tionally by population or- with" -."We want to make sure services money by avoiding duplication of -.:-Dakota County. picking: up :a - :—Smprotected."_=� equipment and. cutting down the :. specified. portion and-- the re-- ,-.;This 'sentiment is shared by number of personnel needed to mainder being spread among -the - :-`Di perform-the-:same_aervice__It -- -,.. - atehin .10A 7. Dispatching .........................::....:::..,....:..: (Continued from front Paye) that the city's dispatchers have If consolidation were to occur, many of the area's police chiefs, now.. - He that Lakeville is very Knutson said, officers would be...; able to access. records from ail . who have also been discussing the added on _ satisfied a1th its dispatchers and _ departments involved in the con- possibility. "We need to go about this very -is-not looking for changes solidation . - Idvers, Apple Valley -� -carefully before anyone jumps to any conclusions," said Burnsville _ - because o£; any dissatisfaction - •=.. Lloyd with the services being provided ` police -chief -said, he thinks con- -:: policeChief Mike DuMoulin. - _ :But in order, to keep up with the, solidat.ionscould be: very_. _ DuMoulin _ and „other: police : ^. new technology and its associated beneficial if it's handled correct see that there r may be ly cajsomet chiefs expressed concerns about- how eonsolidation=-might -affect costs;-- consolidation.: co necessary to make the technology.;�-.may:.,.be some _cost savings if cibzenF.m their.Fities;Cities pro- -viding . affordable, he said .; =enough a(iesare:involved in it," =.he•said "We:havesto make sure 24-hour dispatching offer -access for the community- This Rosemount Police -Chief Elhel that the services Provided are not access provides -residents with �= `service Knutson said he thinksconsolida- tion could be helpfui� for --_his reduced." -=*_ '_ -` Eagan Police -Chief Pat Geagan .:more personalized and the feeling• that the police department and its Officers - department is close by. _ . __ During the day;- when staff tbe-Rosemount and conn of consolidated dispat- chug, saying itis too early to tell Lakeville Police Chief Don Gudmundson also worried about secretaries office, Officers can call in and get one way oranother_ _ the personal touch but has addi- background information from of- tional concerns about.how a con- fice files. However, after the of- solidated dispatching service fice closes '.at night, that might affect the handling of messages and how dispatchers background information is - unavailable. ers ff f'access 1 shared by all cities could possibly Departm tdoesn't haveSheriff's have the same level of knowledge to Rosemount's files and can only ahnw investieations and cases Drovide basic information.