CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY

451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476

COUNCIL.SLCGOV.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651

LUKE GARROTT | DISTRICT 4 | COUNCIL CHAIR || JAMES ROGERS | DISTRICT 1 | COUNCIL VICE CHAIR || KYLE LAMALFA | DISTRICT 2 || STAN PENFOLD | DISTRICT 3 || ERIN MENDENHALL | DISTRICT 5 || CHARLIE LUKE | DISTRICT 6 | || LISA ADAMS | DISTRICT 7

COUNCIL BUDGET

STAFF REPORT

CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY

council.slcgov.com/budget

TO: City Council Members

FROM: Jennifer Bruno

Deputy Director

DATE: May 14, 2015 at 5:44 PM

RE: FY 2015-16 Budget – 911 Communications Bureau

*written briefing only – if Council Members identify questions for the Department, please let

staff know, and we will follow up*

VIEW MAYOR’S RECOMMENDED BUDGET HERE

ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE

The 911 Communications Bureau was created as a part of the FY 2013 budget process, and

consolidated Police and Fire Dispatch personnel into a single department. The Department consists

of 81 FTEs including 10 FTEs relating to the City’s partnership providing dispatch services for Sandy

City. The proposed budget for FY 2016 is $6.96 million, which is approximately $545,000 more than

the FY 2015 budget (9%). For a detailed breakdown of the FY 2015 911 Communications Bureau

budget proposal, as compared to FY 2014, see Attachment 2 (page 4).

There are only a few changes to the proposed budget as compared with FY 2015:

The proposed budget includes the standard personal services expense related changes (salary

adjustments, insurance, pension);

The proposed budget includes an adjustment to account for computer-aided-dispatch (CAD)

technology contracts as discussed in Budget Amendment #4;

The proposed budget also includes a funding pool ($219,000) to address compensation for

entry-level employees in the 911 Communications Bureau. The Department is having an

increasingly difficult time attracting qualified entry-level applicants. While compensation for

tenured dispatchers is well in line with market, compensation for these entry level dispatchers

is below other similar jobs. The Department has experienced that dispatchers tend to leave

City employment for higher paid dispatch jobs after the City invests significant time and

funding in training these employees. Note: Most of the employees in the 911 Communication Bureau are members of the American Federation of State County

and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Union, with the exception of those in supervisory positions. As such, specific

compensation changes will be addressed within those negotiations.

Project Timeline: Informational Briefing: May 19, 2013

Public Hearing: May 19 & June 2 Potential Budget adoption: June 9 or June 16

Page | 2

POLICY QUESTIONS 1. The Council may wish to inquire with the Administration as to how the partnership with Sandy

City for dispatch services is working in terms of logistics, efficiencies, etc, and whether or not it

is a model that can be expanded or replicated?

2. State legislation relating to dispatch technology – The Administration has provided an update

as to recent State legislation establishing a committee to investigate the possibility of the

County (VECC) and City migrating to a single system. The attached presentation

highlights the latest steps in the process, including a potential timeline for choosing vendors

(anticipated decision as of June) and potential costs. If this committee determines that the

City and County must migrate to a new system, it is possible that State and County funds that

have been set aside for this purpose will not be sufficient to cover all of the City’s costs to

changing our system over to whatever new system is selected. This decision has not yet been

made though, and an RFP still needs to be issued to make this final determination. The

Administration can provide more detail on this item at Council request.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 – Department Metrics/Measurements – page 3

Attachment 2 – Summary Comparison Budget Chart – page 4

Attachment 3 – PowerPoint Presentation – Salt Lake County Integrated Public Safety Technology

Initiative

Page | 3

ATTACHMENT 1 DEPARTMENT MEASUREMENTS

The following information was provided by the Department, for the Council’s information:

SLC911 is the second largest 911 center in Utah, answering more than 660,000 phone calls, which is about 1800 calls per day. Of those 660,000 phone calls, more than 140,000 resulted in actual police and fire incidents. SLC911 is a triple-accredited 911 center, one of only 6 worldwide. The accreditation is based upon the bureau's quality improvement processes, which reviews the dispatcher's compliance to call taking protocols. Each dispatcher has at least 9 calls reviewed each month. In 2013, the bureau conducted 7,560 case reviews. The overall compliance to the use of protocols, giving dispatch life support over the phone, and customer service was 98.31%. Thirty-two employees had an overall score of at least 99% for the entire year. The bureau's goal to answer emergency calls in less than 60 seconds is currently being met. For 2013, the average call processing time for life threatening calls was 45 seconds. The bureau continues to provide training to dispatchers to improve those times.

Page | 4

ATTACHMENT 2

SUMMARY OF BUDGET CHANGES

Actual Adopted Proposed Percent

2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 Difference Change

Personal Services $ 5,273,458 $ 5,473,022 $ 5,955,766 $ 482,744 9%

Operations and Maintenance Supply 59,744 90,234 87,844 (2,390) -3%

Charges for Services 955,773 850,062 915,052 64,990 8%

Capital Outlay - - - -

Total $ 6,288,975 $ 6,413,318 $ 6,958,662 $ 545,344 9%

911 Communications Bureau

PROPOSED BUDGET FY 2015-16

SALT LAKE COUNTY INTEGRATED PUBLIC SAFETY TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

SLC911 & VECC – Report to COG 07 May 2015

TIME LINE

• 06 March 2015 – CAD RFP Released

• Vendor Inquiries Due – 13 March 2015

• Pre-Proposal Conference – 18 March 2015

• Proposal Submission Deadline –

• Initial Deadline – 21 April 2015

• Extended Deadline – 01 May 2015

• Identification of Semi-Finalist – 15 May 2015

• Demonstrations – 26-29 May 2015

• Anticipated Contract Award – 12 June 2015

VENDOR RESPONSE

Six Qualified Responded with Qualifying Proposals:

• FatPot

• Intergraph

• Motorola

• Spillman

• TriTech

• Versaterm

PRLIMINARY EVALUATION

Garphical Representation of Common CAD Platform Specifications only

(A) Dispatch (B) Dispatch (C) DISpatch (G) Mobile Bus SysAdmin Interfaces

Functions (H) Global (I) AVL (l)APCO

Unifted CAD

ReQ

Maximum Possible

Versatenn

TnTech

Spillman

Motorola

lntereraph

RFP Section INTERGRAPH MOTOROLA SPILLMAN TRITECH VERSATERM Maximum Possible

Score

(A) DISPATCH BUS FUNC 1,659 1,687 1,638 1,667 1,632 1,730

(B) DISPATCH SYS ADMIN 262 255 263 266 274 275

(C) DISPATCH INTERFACES 95 128 91 123 125 140

(D) PD RMS BUS FUNC 1,713 1,888 1,760 1,549 1,816 1,925

(E) PD RMS SYS ADMIN 150 155 134 134 155 155

(F) PD RMS INTERFACES 60 85 93 65 84 100

(G) MOBILE 405 412 405 356 411 440

(H) GLOBAL 1,145 1,175 1,103 817 1,155 1,180

(I) AVL 130 135 121 120 117 135

(J) JAIL MANAGEMENT 440 0 997 977 978 1,100

(K) FIRE RMS 2,854 0 2,854 3,215 0 3,785

(L) APCO UNIFIED CAD 1,670 1,656 1,627 1,594 1,684 2,060

Vendor's Total Point Score 10,583 7,576 11,086 10,883 8,431 13,025

Adjusted Score Value 28.44 8.72 12.77 12.53 9.71 35

Adjusted Percentage Value 81.25% 58.17% 85.11% 83.55% 64.73% 100

Common CAD Platform (A, B, C, G, H, I, L) 5,366 5,448 5,248 4,943 5,398 5,960

Final Scored Common CAD Platform 32 32 31 29 32 35

% of Maximum Common CAD Features 90.03% 91.41% 88.05% 82.94% 90.57% 100.00%

PD RMS Score (D, E and F) 1,923 2,128 1,987 1,748 2,055 2,180

% of Maximum Global RMS 88.21% 97.61% 91.15% 80.18% 94.27% 100.00%

FD RMS Score (K) 2,854 0 2,854 3,215 0 3,785

% of Maximum Global 75.40% 0.00% 75.40% 84.94% 0.00% 100.00%

PRELIMINARY EVALUATION

Range of pricing for CAD platform is as follows:

• CAD platform: $1.4 million to $3.4 million

• Hardware: $313,000 to $567,000

• Auxiliary products: $1.8 million to $3 million

RFP asked for financing options

NEXT STEPS

• Finalize quantitative scores.

• Schedule oral interviews and demonstrations.

• Refine quantitative scores to include demonstrations and oral presentations.

NEXT STEPS

• Semifinalists invited to provide best and final offer.

• Best and final offer will begin the negotiation process leading to the optimal solution that best fits the public safety jurisdiction within the Salt Lake Valley.

EVALUATION CRITERIA Evaluation of Proposals -- Criteria Weight

1 - 3 Adherence to RFP requirements, completeness and quality of references 6

4 Level of service and responsiveness to Consortium 10

5 Financial stability and resources of the vendor 2

6 Experience and technical expertise of staff 10

7 Design, capability, and functionality of system application software 35

8 Current availability and ability to demonstrate installation 2

9 Level of integration between applications and demonstrated interfaces 2

10 Capability, design, reliability, warranty and expandability of proposed

technical solutions

2

11 Economic feasibility and justification of all costs 20

12 Vendor willingness to negotiate a contract, including ability to offer project

financing and competitive finance terms

6

13 - 16 Feasibility, timeliness and quality of software implementation. Level of

assistance provided to Consortium by vendor during implementation. Number

of hours and extent of user training. Quality and extent of the documentation

to be provided.

5

TIME LINE – NEXT

• Identification of Semi-Finalist – 15 May 2015

• Demonstrations – 26-29 May 2015

• Anticipated Contract Award – 12 June 2015