5.4. SR 11-06-2006
City of Elk River
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Agenda Section Meeting Date
Administration November 6, 2006
Item Description
Mobile Software Implementation
Item Number
5.4.
Prepared by
effre A. Beahen, Chief of Police
Reviewed by
Introduction
On August 14, 2006, I presented to the Council a budget request for 2007 that included the
purchase and implementation of new mobile software and hardware in the 2006 budget year.
Adequate funding is available for that purchase now.
Discussion
Council will recall the discussion from August and the desire to upgrade to the new LETG
records and mobile systems. This will afford the department the chance to automate the data
entry process and free up considerable staff time; not only here at the police department but in
court services as well.
I met with state court staff in September and discovered that although grant money was available,
it was for conversion of systems that are not compatible with the new court services system
(MNCIS). Our new proposed system is not only compatible; it is the only system working direcrly
with court services to implement the automated reporting. Other systems will be brought on
board during the next 1-2 years.
MNCIS in Sherburne County will be brought online December 1, 2006, and will be ready for our
input at that time. The State and County are very enthused about Elk River being the first system
online, as we write the largest share of citations in Sherburne County.
The merits of the system have already been discussed and my belief is that the Council is behind
the new system. This request is more a formality to have the specific purchases approved for
2006.
Financial Impact
As stated in my previous memo, we had budgeted $25,000 for bar coding software and
equipment. The new system has that built in, so those funds are available. We also have budgeted
$18,978 for our annual Visionaire maintenance fee. That will not need to be paid as we will be
changing over to LETG as our new software provider and will not pay any maintenance fees in
2006 or 2007. (Additional savings next year of over $19,000.)
Our IT department has $15,000 available for hardware upgrades and $6,000 in consultation costs
that were set aside and available for this project as well.
With $64,978 available in existing 2006 budget funds, we are well within our budget to implement
the LETG Mobile Software or EMERTS with a price of $46,480. Because this price is under
$50,000 there is no requirement to put this purchase out for bid. In addition, LETG is currently
the only vendor authorized by the State of Minnesota for the direct mobile reporting to MNCIS
starting in December.
Last, as stated in the attached detailed memo from August, we will save full time equivalent hours
with this implementation as this is time estimated to be between .5 and .75 full time equivalent.
This equates to employees being reassigned to other details with a full time equivalent wage of
approximately $31,200 a year.
Attachments
· August 14 memo to the Council
· Current LETG pricing
Action Requested
Request approval of the 2006 mobile purchase as proposed.
Council Action
Motion by
Second by
Vote
Follow Up
Elk River Police Department
2007 Budget Addendum
Public Safety Records
Management Soft\Nare
Proposal
Submitted by:
Jeffrey A. Beahen
Chief of Police
Project Manager
August 14, 2006
2
Introduction:
In 1999, the police department requested an upgrade to their
computer system, which had been purchased in 1984, and a new
records management system and mobile computer system were
installed. A records management system (RMS) was purchased after
bids were let, and the RMS system installed was called "Vision"
Vision RMS is a records system based on a Microsoft Sequel, version 7,
data storage system, a common and reliable platform for data storage.
The RMS system is basically proprietary however in that the agency
can not make changes to the system, but can advocate changes as
part of a user group. This group however is nationally based, and
changes are often difficult to obtain.
Since 1999, software and hardware changes have been constant, and
unforeseen. The platform on which we built our RMS system alone has
changed from Windows NT, to Windows 2000 to Windows 2003.
Additional platform changes are right around the corner. Although our
RMS system operates efficiently and is unhampered by these changes,
it is but one small illustration of the vast infrastructure and system
enhancements that have taken place over the past seven years.
We are proposing replacing our system with a new RMS platform, that
addresses the needs of this agency for many years, and unlike the
Vision system, it is browser based or accessed through the world wide
web, so not only is access easier, but the department is not
responsible for maintaining as much of the operating platform,
insuring us that as future technological changes occur, we will not be
left behind.
Problem Identification:
We were inspired to look at a new system while pursuing an upgrade
to our current processes. We had approval from the Council to
implement a bar coding system for evidence tracking purposes. We
found that this integration was cumbersome and the end result would
be a bar coding system that albeit would code and track the evidence,
it would not be fully system integrated and thus the value was
minimal. One of the software systems offered however was a complete
integrated platform, which not only offered us the chance to see what
full integration does, it allowed us to see how little system integration
we actually had.
3
The desire to implement a new RMS system is not so much problem
solving or resolving what does not work, but rather being proactive in
finding ways to better handle our daily workload and improve the
utilization of our staff. We are seeking a cost effective way to vastly
improve our reporting process, greatly increasing our efficiency and
effectiveness. I am confident that the Council will see an approved
RMS system that has the proven ability to outperform our current
system in almost immeasurable terms.
Why not utilize our current platform? Vision Software was sold to
another vendor in 2003, and it became "Visionaire Public Safety". At
that time, they removed all their Minnesota support and sale staff, and
implemented a national call center for departments to access, either
for software glitches or system questions.
This loss of a Minnesota support network hampered our relationship
with our RMS provider, and although the system operates very well, it
is basically the same system that we purchased in 1999, with small
improvements and changes being made along the way. The software
world in general has passed Visionaire by, leaving us wishing that
there was far more efficient ways to process the vast amount of
information we input each and every day.
We became aware of this product, that upon viewing a demonstration
of same, made us realize that there is a system out there that is
revolutionary in terms of what it can do, has immeasurable time
savings contained within, and has the long term ability to be
adaptable, upgradeable and is marketed and devised by a totally
Minnesota based company, with invaluable operational links to the
State of Minnesota-specifically the Department of Motor Vehicles.
The other, likely most important feature, is that the product we are
looking at is CIBERS compliant. CIBERS is the new format that all
police departments must utilize for crime reporting to the State and
Federal agencies that track crime data. All agencies must be CIBERS
complaint by 2008. At this time, only LETG is CIBERS compliant, and
CIBERS operational as well.
The value of this proposed program is in the changes in efficiency
rather than utilizing things that are broken or outdated. As this project
is laid out for the reader, it should become obvious how much change
is possible and the value of this proposed system for the City of Elk
River.
. 4
I Exec\JliVe Sponsor I
Chief Jeffrey A. Beahan
..
Stee~rl~COrnmittee I
Rolfe, Kll.lntz, Masica. Vita
T
Project Manager
Chief Jeffrey A. Beahan
, ~
User Committee .,
Patrol Sergeants Technical Support Team
1 "Investigator Pearson Nicka
1~1erica1
1-Patrol
, .
~ 1
Ad Hoc Committee
Patrol Clerical Data Transfer N~.
Mordal Masica Pearson
Patrol officer MorriS
State InterfaceJMlNClSlDVS
LETG
5
BENEFITS AND GOALS OF NEW SYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION
· More accurate and complete data retrieved and archived.
. Data and information is available in a more timely fashion.
o Increased search capability.
o Higher case clearance rate results.
· Enhanced information in the squad, which can lead to:
o Higher overall arrest rates.
o Higher warrant arrests.
o Reduction of radio traffic.
o Reduction in errors.
o Higher data accuracy.
o Reduction is dispatch times.
o Reduced response times.
o Increased patrol times.
o More time for citizen contact.
· A greater reduction in redundant data leading to:
o Greater efficiency
o Greater accuracy
· Tremendous reduction in paper documents.
. Better decision making by officers in the field, detectives
investigating a crime and management, in allocating resources.
. More complete, accurate and accessible information will improve
reporting and trend analysis, streamline data processing and
workflow, and will ultimately enhance officer and public safety.
o Allows better information analysis.
o Geographically based.
o Real time.
o Allows for more efficient resource assignments.
6
BUSINESS PROCESS BASELINE
. Current practices
1. Current technology implemented in 1999
2. Actual software was developed in 1996 (Ten years old)
· Technology is rapidly evolving, leaving us far behind.
1. No Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) link
2. No direct field interface with records management system.
(RMS)
3. No automated mobile field reporting. (AFR)
4. No automated field accident reporting. (MAR)
5. No automated citation system. (MNCIS)
6. All basic reports are handwritten and later have to be
reentered. (Dual entry)
7. No bar coding feature.
8. No ability to track evidence.
9. No ability to audit evidence.
· No interface to courts for case dispositions or cases disposals.
· Implementation as proposed would allow department to
reallocate staff as follows:
1. Redeploy or reassign two data entry staff (2-FTE)
2. Reduce amount of staff time to .5 full time equivalents.
(FTE)
3. Reduce supervisory time by 1-FTE.
7
Case Study for Change to New System
Issues pertaining to direct users:
1. Browser based
a. Much faster access to data than current system.
b. Easy to interface from a variety of locations.
c. Able to interface direct with web site to allow community
access to crime data.
2. Easier system for our IT staff to maintain. Maintenance of
backbone is done by software provider.
a. Upgrades are pushed out to the user via the browser, no
need for IT to go around and update each PC.
b. Upgrades are real time.
3. Not proprietary based. Same technology that is used on the web,
every
day by almost everyone. Simple, easy to use. Allows access and
ease of interface with not just Microsoft products, but almost any
other commercial software available.
4. Will be able to have complete paperless reporting;
a. Motor vehicle accidents
b. Traffic citations
c. Incidents reports
i. Clerical staff take on task of validating
ii. Reassess assignment, redeploy workforce
iii. Creates a proactive vs. reactive agency
5. Integrates new technology.
a. Printers in cars, eliminates needs to purchase traffic
citations
b. Drivers license swipes in each car.
c. Ability to utilize inexpensive PDA's (Palm pilots) in place of
expensive laptops for investigators and command staff.
d. Eliminates some recurring monthly expenses.
e. Full bar coding system.
f. Ability to locate and track evidence.
6. Times savings.
a. Be able to complete accident reports in the car, no need
for the officers to return to the station later and reenter
the form.
8
b. Evidence audit-currently not done, almost impossible to do
by hand. Will be able to do so in the future within minutes,
and at any time.
c. Evidence disposal. Current practice is to get dispositions in
writing, go through files by hand and then dispose of item.
Takes hours to get through just a few items. New system
will link court database with evidence tracking-disposal will
occur real time.
d. Ability to associate and import any data file to the case file
electronically. Video, photos, either BIT/JPG/HTML.
e. Ability to input or even create our own forms. Not just
generating a form, but easily creating one that when used,
the data inputs directly to the RMS system.
f. No ticket printing costs. We currently pay over $5,000 a
year. That cost would be greatly reduced, perhaps less
than half.
7. Ease of access.
a. Ability to customize the search engine.
b. Data is very easy to find.
c. No need for cumbersome Crystal reports or links.
8. Ability to link or interface with CAD. Buffalo PD did this with
Wright County who has the same software that Sherburne
Cou nty has:
1. Ability to access current call screen, all data surrounding
the call.
2. Ability to access prior call history.
3. Ability to access prior call history date. (Phone numbers,
names, vehicle information, etc.)
In-Direct Users
· MNCIS (State and District court systems)
· Department of Motor Vehicles (DVS) accident reporting system.
. Community via the web interface.
. Local paper (Automated weekly news reports)
9
FUNDING
. Currently have $50,000 available this year to start the project.
$25,000 from bar coding, $13,337 in a maintenance contract
that would have been paid to Visionaire and approximately
$15,000 in IT management funding that is available. The IT
costs were going to be used to upgrade our current RMS server-
which is running low on space.
· We have the ability to lease. With $50,000 down, we can spread
the system costs out over 5-7 years, making the system not only
affordable, but also less impact on a single year's budget.
· The department has paid over $77,000 in annual maintenance
costs thus far to Visionaire. We don't feel that are return on that
investment has been very rewarding.
· The fixed costs for the new system are much lower than what we
paid to start our current RMS system in 1999. There is still a
150/0 annual maintenance cost for this new project. (The industry
standard)
. The 10th District Court announced on Thursday August 10, 2006,
that they have been awarded funding from the State to
implement the MNCIS/Police Department citation interface. That
interface is a pilot program utilizing LETG, the software firm that
we wish to purchase our new software from. Details of the
funding will be made available on Sept. 8th, 2006. It is
anticipated that as much as 250/0 of the project costs might be
absorbed through this grant.
WHAT WE WANT OUR SYSTEM TO DO:
(Specifics as identified by the Ad Hoc Committee)
GENERAL:
· -Integration between all modules (w/ CAD interface)
. -Single entry point (not duplicating data entry)
. -RMS will automatically submit data to external sources (i.e.
CIBRS, etc.)
. -Single data base
· -RMS should provide capability to generate inquires from
external and internal data sources
. -Interface with state and federal agencies
. -System will allow settings for specific security access
MOBILE:
. Access to full RMS and evidence modules
· Automated ticket writing (D.L. swipe, ticket printer)
· Use of D.L. swipe will automatically populate the offender
information to the citation
. Also written warnings and repair orders
. Audit ability to track where citations are issued by area as well
as missing numbers
. Field reporting (integrated to RMS)
. Imports data from CAD (if interfaced)
. Has the ability to create and alter forms (i.e. tow sheets,
property report, etc.)
. Mapping software
. Automated accident investigation/reporting, must allow for the
state accident reports to be written and drawn using the DVS
site and download the report to RMS. System will also
automatically populate the information off a driver's license or
license plate to the form.
. CAD (with proper interface in place)
. Mobile messaging
· Ability to communicate with external entities and access DVS
photo files
10
11
. Prior call history and alerts, as well as being able to place a
safety notice on an address
. Ability to use GPS
. Mobile equipment check-out (officers can type in what PBT,
radar, camera, etc they have)
· Ability to do activity log from the car
· Ability to access RMS files for permits, animal licensing, handgun
permits, etc.
· Ability to record and save in RMS verbal andjwritten warnings
reference traffic, curfew, etc.
. Internet access
· Future integration with B&Z for the ability to bring up blueprints
in the field
· Ability to access aerial photos of an area
RMS:
. User friendly
. Browser based
. Master name, vehicle, and location index
. Incident and field reporting
· Case management (user friendly)
. Ability to assign cases
· Ability to audit open cases assigned to a particular officer
. Case aging report
. Activity follow- up
· Crime analysis (ability to see where the problems are occurring
and when)
. Activity type
. Time of day
. Day of week
. Combination
. Date range
. Address range
. Method of operation comparison
. Training records (ability to maintain and audit staff training
records)
. Equipment inventory
· Permit files (animal licenses, hunting permits, gun purchase
permits, city licensing-alcohol, tobacco, etc.)
· Ability to access juvenile data separately from adult data
· Ability to tie a juvenile entry to the parent or guardian
12
· Ability to import digital information (dictation files, digital
photos, etc.)
EVIDENCE:
· Fully integrated bar-coding system
· Ability to read up-to-date evidence reports from any authorized
workstation
· Holds chain of custody
. Ability to import files (jpeg photo files, etc.)
. Electronic signature ability
· Integrated ability to construct form letters to notify property
owners of disposition
. Property audit trail ability
. Ability to track evidence through case file number
. Notification system when case is outside statute of limitation
· System will provide a means to match stolen property with
recovered property
· System will provide a means to easily replicate data
13
PROJECT COSTS:
To place this project out for bids would require the use of a consultant.
The Edina Police Department had the cheapest rate for a consultant we
could find, and that was $30,000. Other related projects in Mille Lacs
County, Crow Wing County, Buffalo, Isanti County and others, have
incurred consultant fees as high as $145,000.
One way to avoid these costs is to start small and then add on to the
system as the funding becomes available through our lease program.
We can start the process and avoid bids by purchasing the first section
of this new RMS project, the mobile piece, for under $50,000. No
formal bid process would be required, thus eliminating the need to hire
a consultant and pay the cost to develop a request for proposal and
bids. We have the IT staff in-house that could assist with that process,
but a consultant would still be needed to draft the required documents
for the requests. Edina's RFP was almost 175 pages in length.
We have examined the other vendors who are available, as well as
looking at our current software provider as potential options instead of
LETG. None of these are viable solutions, and our IT staff strongly
advocated the LETG solution for ease in long term maintenance, ability
to implement future change, and the browser based solution provided
as the primary means on interface. In addition, LETG is the only
solution that is working with the State to accomplish the DVS and
MNCIS interfaces. Our IT manager Bob Pearson has thrown his total
support into the LETG project, and has been a strong advocate for
migration to a solution that offers this much efficiency and enhanced
performance.
If approved, we would work the vendor on lease options, and would
structure a payment program that would be cost effective for the next
5-7 years. See the attached spread sheet for exact details.
14
CONCLUSION
I respectfully request that the Council review this overview of
the proposed project and ask approval to move forward with the
software implementation.
The implementation would begin with the mobile transition,
followed by full records change out to the LETG software
package in late 2006 or early 2007, with lease payments
structured to begin in 2007.
Ol
c::
'u
it
11l
Ol
~
Qj
>
i:r:
-'"
jjJ
C
'm
::2:
Iii
:>
c::
c::
<C
MOOOO M
-c-OOOO ~
MaiNMN ai
MCOr-O)O co
NMM~CO r-
NtOM"":tO ai
C'\IE;R-~-c--c- LO
ffl ffl ffl ffl
in
o
<.:>
Iii
(5
I-
OLOOLOO 0 LO
MCOCO-.rM r- CO
6aiaiaiai CO 6
coC")~............ C") co
o N LO -.r M co -.r_
Mai"":aiN ..0 co
r--.rMO)-.r 0) 0)
..... "C"'"" V ('t')
ffl ffl ffl ffl ffl ffl ffl
en
::2:
~
00000
00000
66666
00000
CONCOOCO
to..oNo:itO
NM~-.rr-
ffl ffl ffl ffl ffl
-0
11l
:>
0-
en
Qj
Co
Iii
(5
I-
LOLOLOLOLO
0)0)0)0)0)
aiaiaiaiai
r-r-r-r-r-
CO CO coco CO
..f..f..f..f..f
ffl ffl ffl ffl ffl
~
:0
o
::2:
Iii
(5
I-
OLOOLOO
MCOCO-.rM
6aiaiaiai
COM"C"'""......-c-
-.rOr--.rLO
c.D~a:i~..o
V "C"'""T"'" Lt)(O
ffl ffl ffl ffl ffl
~
11l
~
o
en
~
:0
o
::2:
LOOOOO
cooooo
66666
NCOCONCO
CONCOCOCO
....:r-:aitOM
N NM
ffl ffl ffl ffl ffl
~
11l
::
"E
11l
::c
~
:0
o
::2:
LOLOOLOO
-.rCOCO-.rM
aiaiaiaiai
LO r- M LO M
cor-ococo
..ftOai..f"":
N NM
ffl ffl ffl ffl ffl
0..
en
...;
:>
<.:>
c:: 0000000
o
::
en
~
Ol
Ul
::::>
CO~-.rLO-.r
C")..... T"'" C'\I
T"'"('t)v.....v
~ ~ ~
Ul
-0
11l
:>
0-
en
~
c::
Ol
Ol
<C
>.
Olc
....0 .g5
~ a. E 'C <.:>
i:r:'E~E'E
~coe?com
jjJUlca<.:>Ul
o
o
6
o
-.r_
0)
0)
N
ffl
o
I'-:
co
M
N
to
0)
ffl
LO
co
6
co
o
ai
0)
ffl
LO
~
r-
r-
~
r-:
0)
ffl
N
0)
M
-.r
Iii
(5
I-
~
11l
~
o
en
Iii
(5
I-
"<F-
o
o
Lri
~
C
'm
::2:
c::
c::
<C
o
o
6
o
N
M
ffl
en
::2:
~
Qj
Ul
::::>
Qj
a.
OOLO
000)
6 6 ai
OOLO
M co ~
;; ~ fA-
Ol
c::
'u
it
~
:0
o
::2:
.... Qj
~c
I:: it Q)
ct--a.
::J'~
1U '- (j)
U E...J
i= <C 0
....
c::
'm
::2:
c::
c::
<C
Ul
in
o
<.:>
c::
o
:a;
C
Ol
E
Ol
Ci.
.s
-0
Ol
X
u::
00
00
66
LOLO
LOLO
NN
ffl ffl
0000 0
0000 0
6666 6
0000 0
OOOLO LO
r-:r-:..or-: to
"C"'"".....C\J <0
ffl ffl ffl ffl ffl
Q) "- en
2:Ol....c::
Ol 2: c:: 'c:
en Ol Ol .-
OlenE~
~enOlI-
o-g>~
::2:ulij:O
enen::2:o
I-I-u~
ffi ffi .5!!, en
::2:::2:e::2:
OlOla.~
o
o
o
o
~
ffl
-0
c::
11l
o
o
o
M
ffl
c::
~~
.!u
Ol c::
ca~
c::
:>
-0
~
Ol
....c::
:g:o
<.:>~
Qi .=
~(5
ene
LO
~
0)
LO
N_
N
ffl
0000
0000
6666
OOON
OLOCOM
- ffl
6;tA-tA-
Ol
Iii
::
"E
11l
::c
Iii
(5
I-
~ Ol
11l Ol=
~:2.g~
o 0::2: c::
en Coen 2
c::OlI-C::
.Q~~~
1il:2wen
6~~&
o
o
o
..0
ffl
~
:0
o
E
:;::.
Ul
o
u
Iii
in
c::
o
o
0_
~
ffl
~
:>
1il
.l!!
Z.
'C
:>
U
Ol
Ul
c::
Ol
'00
~
~
-
o
~
o
N
-.r_
N
ffl
~
:0
o
::2:
Iii
(5
.!;;.
o
o
o
o
~
ffl
cb
ffl
o
o
LO
r-:
ffl
11l
1il
-0
-
o
c::
o
'00
Qj
>
c::
o
<.:>
Ul
in
o
u
u
Ol
'0
D:
u
.!!1
::2:
Qi'
1il
E
~
!:!:!-
goooo
0_88 8 ~
~..fr-:OtO
N;;~~;%
ffl
OlC
Ul c:: 11l
1i) :g(5
8 .2~
&x ~~
~~ ~::2:
D:
Iii
(5
I-
00
NO
LO 0
OM
co M
~ ffl
ffl
"E"E
:> :>
00
E E
<C 11l
Ol2!:-
Ul ....
11l 11l
Ol Ol
...J>-
~
>.
~
Ol
1il
E
~
!:!:!-
~
Ol
>.
....
~
""
2
Ul
o
u
C
'm
E
o
z