REPORT TO SHASTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

BOARD MEETING DATE:  May  2, 2017
CATEGORY:  Regular - Law and Justice-4.

SUBJECT:

Sheriff's Office Replacement of Records Management System: Spillman Agreement and IPS Transitional MOU

Supervisorial District No. :  All

DEPARTMENT CONTACT:  Tom Bosenko, Sheriff, (530) 245-6167

STAFF REPORT APPROVED BY:  Tom Bosenko, Sheriff

RECOMMENDATION

Approve and authorize the Chairman to sign: (1)  A five-year Memorandum of Understanding, effective upon the date of final signature,  with the City of Redding, City of Anderson, and the Shasta Area Safety Communications Agency (SHASCOM) to guide the implementation process of an integrated and jointly shared public safety electronic hardware and software system, at an estimated Sheriff’s cost of $1,508,160 ($251,422 is the Sheriff’s remaining balance) for its share of the replacement Integrated Public Safety System (IPSS) project; and (2) Exhibit L “Shasta County Shared Agency Agreement” of the Professional Services, Purchase and Software License Agreement with Spillman Technologies, Inc.

SUMMARY

The Chief of Police for the City of Redding, Chief of Police for the City of Anderson, and the Sheriff of Shasta County, who together are the Integrated Public Safety (IPS) Directors, have recommended an agreement (“Transitional MOU”)  to guide the activities of IPS through the process of implementation of a replacement integrated and jointly shared electronic Records Management system (RMS), which will include Jail Management system (JMS), Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD), Mobile Data, In-field reporting,  County-wide message switch, and necessary hardware. SHASCOM has also expressed an interest in contributing to the ongoing maintenance expenses for a new IPS system.

There are two separate documents referred to throughout this report; the “Transitional MOU” and the “Spillman Agreement.”  The Transitional MOU is a Memorandum of Understanding among the three local Law Enforcement Agencies and SHASCOM created to govern the financial obligations and transition process off the old software and to the Spillman product. The “Spillman Agreement” is the Professional Services, Purchase, and Software License Agreement between the City of Redding (IPS Purchasing Agent) and Spillman Technologies, Inc. One of the Exhibits within the Spillman Agreement is a “Shasta County Shared Agency Agreement” (Exhibit L to the Spillman Agreement), which grants Shasta County rights to use the Spillman software, and acknowledges the City of Redding as the host agency.

DISCUSSION

Since its inception in 1991, the County of Shasta, City of Redding, and City of Anderson have, and continue to, operate IPS under a collective agreement through their law enforcement departments. IPS was formed to consolidate the various records systems and other automated programs which each of the public safety agencies were using to maximize usefulness and sharing of information, reduce redundancy, and make the best use of available personnel resources. Besides the three primary agencies, many other public safety agencies and departments (referred to as subscribing users) rely upon the data within the IPS System.  Those subscribing users have been advised of the pending RMS/JMS project.  The current IPS agreement between the County and the Cities of Redding and Anderson is scheduled to expire in June of 2018.

The IPS Directors have agreed that the current IPS system and associated hardware have reached end-of-life and can no longer effectively serve the needs of the Law Enforcement Agencies, nor is it equipped to receive, track, and export some information required by law. The current software must be replaced or overhauled.  Due to continued difficulties in recruitment for Report Program Generator (RPG) language programmers (the primary language that IPS System programs have been written in) and other technical hurdles, the IPS Directors agree that the best option is to migrate to a commercial off-the-shelf (OTS) solution for IPS.  The City of Redding, as the purchasing agent for IPS, processed a Request For Proposals (RFP) in 2015.

The City of Redding, acting as the agent for the County and the Cities of Redding and Anderson, has procured a replacement IPS system through the Spillman Agreement. The Spillman Agreement is anticipated to go to the Redding City Council on May 2, 2017.

The County is an express third party beneficiary of the Spillman Agreement.  Under the Spillman Agreement, Spillman will grant the County a license to use the IPS system subject to the terms and conditions of the Spillman Agreement and Exhibit L.

Exhibit M to the Spillman Agreement, which is the City of Anderson Shared Agency Agreement, granting the City of Anderson rights to use the Spillman software and acknowledging the City of Redding as the host agency, has already been approved by the Anderson City Council on April 4, 2017. The IPS Transitional MOU was also approved by the Anderson City Council on April 4, 2017.

The purpose of the Transitional MOU, is to provide a transitional agreement among the County, the Cities of Redding and Anderson, and SHASCOM to control the implementation process of the replacement IPS system through the initial operational period of the system.  Following the successful installation of the replacement IPS system, the County, the Cities of Redding and Anderson, and SHASCOM will draft and execute a revised IPS agreement for the purpose of governing future operations and sharing of operational costs.

The total project cost is $3,294,639, plus applicable taxes up to $200,000, as noted in the Transitional MOU. The total figure does not include taxes since some of the price quotes did not include taxes, and the County of Shasta has an obligation to pay State sales tax regardless of vendor location.  This total project cost includes the previously paid cost of the project consultant Innovative Technologies, Ltd. (ITL); the contingency costs as outlined in the Transitional MOU; necessary support components; a one-year warranty; and reflects miscellaneous tax and vendor credits.

The contingency amount of $122,530 is 5% of the Spillman Agreement maximum of $2,503,423 (excluding taxes).  Pursuant to the Transitional MOU, the Board is authorizing the Sheriff to sign amendments, including retroactive, up to $122,530.

To best mitigate the impact felt by each governing body involved, the Law Enforcement Agencies have planned for and allocated grant funds towards this project.

Grant funds from Item 5227-102-0001 of the Budget Act of 2014” (AKA “City Realignment State Funding” or “AB109”) have been allocated to this project at an allocation rate of; Redding PD (68%), Anderson PD (16%), Sheriff’s Office, City of Shasta Lake (16%).  Those funds were put in an interest-bearing account while this project has been in the works and all interest accrued has also been applied. The total benefit contribution of AB109 to the project cost is $910,477, of which $145,676 was applied to the Sheriff’s portion of project costs.

Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) 2015 front line law enforcement activities funds were also placed in an interest bearing account. The total benefit contribution to the project cost is $199,146, of which $31,863 was applied to the Sheriff’s portion of project costs.

Grant funds from the Homeland Security Grant for 2015 and 2016 have been allocated to qualifying costs for the project. The total benefit contribution to the project cost is $307,063, of which $138,178 was applied to the Sheriff’s portion of project costs.

Additionally, reserve funds (Sheriff’s contribution is $315,000) from IPS have been applied to the project, as well as IPS equipment funds (Sheriff’s contribution is $123,355).  Any financial contribution towards the project by an IPS Agency (Sheriff’s Office contributed $500,000 in 2016) has been put into an interest-bearing account and to date total interest earning benefit contribution to the project cost is $2,820, of which $2,687 was applied to the Sheriff’s portion of project costs.  In summary, the Sheriff’s one-time financial responsibility is approximately $1,508,160 (including estimated taxes for all components), less the contributions previously discussed, leaving a contribution obligation amount of $251,422.  This remaining balance must be paid in full within the next 18 months.  There will be ongoing maintenance costs, similar to the current system, as well as ancillary costs associated with project implementation.  Some of the ancillary costs are unknown until the project implementation occurs, and are typical with a project of this magnitude.

ALTERNATIVES

The Board may choose not to approve the Transitional MOU or the Spillman Agreement Exhibit L; however, that is not recommended as the IPS current shared system is end-of-life and needs to be replaced. The current system is not capable of tracking and exporting data required to maintain compliance with newly enacted Federal and State reporting requirements.

OTHER AGENCY INVOLVEMENT

Integrated Public Safety (IPS) is representative of the County of Shasta Sheriff’s Office, City of Redding Police Department, and City of Anderson Police Department. The Spillman Agreement has been reviewed and approved as to form by Shasta County Counsel, the City of Redding’s City Attorney, and the City of Anderson’s City Attorney. The Spillman Agreement has also been reviewed as to the technical aspects and approved by County Information Technology. County Risk Management has reviewed and approved the Spillman Agreement Exhibit L. 

The Spillman Agreement has also been shared with all affected agencies (Shasta County Probation, Shasta County District Attorney, Shasta County Superior Court, Shasta County Child Support Services and Shasta County Fire).  It has also been discussed with the Shasta County Public Defender.

Of the ancillary agencies, County Fire, Child Support Services, and Public Defender have not noted any concerns.  Sheriff’s staff are working with the Chief Probation Officer and District Attorney to mitigate the concerns for increased data entry and the impact that it might have on their departments. There may be an interface that would push much of the data and thus alleviate that impact. Associated costs of the interface are unknown until project implementation can begin.

The IPS team has met with the Court IT team to address all other automated links that the two systems currently have. Some concerns were addressed with “possible workarounds” but the final solution will remain undecided until the Spillman product is purchased and implementation can begin

The Court, Probation, and District Attorney are currently using an antiquated system so if or when they replace it, the IPS team may have to address interfacing with the future software vendor’s product.  It should be noted, however, that many software companies have existing interfaces with Spillman and this may be of minimal impact.

The Transitional MOU has been reviewed and approved by the SHASCOM  Director, as well as County Risk Management. County Counsel has reviewed and approved the Transitional MOU as to form. The County Administrative Office has reviewed the recommendation.

FINANCING

With the execution of the Transitional MOU, the County will agree to share in all of the expenses to replace the existing IPS system as specified in the Transitional MOU, with the costs shared jointly by Shasta County, the City of Redding, and the City of Anderson on a 45-45-10 percent basis respectively for those services and items which benefit these three agencies. There is a small recoupment of costs through user fees imposed on subscribing agencies which is reconciled to the annual budgets for IPS. SHASCOM has agreed to reallocate their existing maintenance expenses to the ongoing maintenance expenses for the replacement IPS system.

The amount of scheduled contributions required from the County and the Cities of Redding and Anderson shall be based upon the Spillman Agreement cost of $2,450,592 (as listed on the Spillman Exhibit G pricing sheet) for the system replacement, $575,940 previously paid for consulting services from ITL, Ltd., $75,963 for necessary support components, a one-year warranty $278,212, an additional $122,530 contingency, and vendor and tax credits of $208,598. The total anticipated project expense is $3,294,639, plus applicable taxes up to $200,000.  Amendments to the project (change orders) may be approved by the Sheriff, the Redding Police Chief, and the Anderson Police Chief in an amount not to exceed $122,530, as delineated above.  SHASCOM will not contribute to this amount.

The Spillman Agreement for the replacement IPS system also includes an initial warranty period of one year as part of the initial purchase price.  A maintenance agreement, negotiated with Spillman, is included in the Spillman Agreement. The County is obligated to share in the expense of the maintenance agreement and all future maintenance agreements so long as it continues to participate in IPS and in use of the system.  The maintenance costs will be factored into future IPS budgets and paid by and through each agency’s annual contributions to the IPS Fund. SHASCOM will contribute funds, no less than $130,000 per year to the system maintenance costs, subject to adjustment and increase approved by the IPS Board according to cost increases incurred for the system and ancillary components, not to exceed 10%.  After deducting the payment from SHASCOM, the balance of the maintenance costs are divided among the County and the Cities of Redding and Anderson on a 45-45-10 percent basis respectively. The maintenance costs are agreed and outlined in the Spillman Agreement at an annual increase of 3%, the first year’s maintenance cost for the Spillman software is $286,599.

A party may opt-out of all future maintenance expenses.  This would require the party to stop using the system as a primary user and require a separate subscriber agreement for any necessary access to system functions, such as the California Law Enforcement Telecommunication System (CLETS).

The Sheriff’s remaining one-time contribution obligation amount of $251,422 will be included in the FY 2017-18 Requested Budget.  There is no additional General Fund impact with approval of this recommendation.