TO: Mayor Collins and Town Council Members
FROM: Kevin Burke, Town Manager
Peter Wingert, Chief of Police
DATE: December 1, 2016
DEPARTMENT: Police Department
Staff Contact Peter Wingert 480-948-7418
End
AGENDA TITLE:
Title
Consideration of Paradise Valley Alarm Monitoring Program and Resolution Number 2016-22
Body
Agenda Item Relates to Mission/Vision:
• Provide high quality public services to a community which values limited government
Strategic Initiative:
• Continuously provide high quality public safety services for Town residents and visitors.
• Regularly invest in public facility and infrastructure projects.
Council Goals or Other Policies / Statutory Requirements:
• Improve Public Safety Services including prevention, enforcement, communication and community/victim outreach.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation
Consider Resolution Number 2016-22 and/or give direction on one of the three business models for the Paradise Valley Alarm Monitoring Program.
Background
SUMMARY STATEMENT:
The Town of Paradise Valley has been providing police alarm monitoring since 1984. The equipment purchased at inception has reached the end of its serviceable life.
In October 2015, the Town Council directed staff to seek a “Hybrid” solution. The hybrid solution would seek to use a vendor’s infrastructure to pass alarm signals to the police department.
In late December 2015, the alarm monitoring equipment failed, causing an outage for five days for all subscribers to our alarm monitoring service. Staff was able to revive the system and continue to offer this service and sought to implement the Town Council’s direction of a hybrid system. Staff also began to seek a private partner to assist with alarm monitoring for a short term, in order to guarantee alarm monitoring service to subscribers.
In late February, staff reached an agreement with a vendor to provide short term monitoring of alarm subscribers. Executing this proved too difficult due to our non-standard data formats. Also in February 2016, staff advertised for an alarm consultant via an RFQ process. At the close of the RFQ process, in late March, no bids were received to provide consulting services.
Staff found 13 municipalities nationwide that provide alarm monitoring service directly to subscribing customers. Five of those 13 are located in the Dallas and Houston, Texas area. In late May 2016, staff conducted site visits with those five municipalities in Texas in order to gather research on municipality alarm monitoring. During those site visits, staff found no success stories with the hybrid system of alarm monitoring for various reasons from lack of customer service, to continued technical issues, to concern about data transfer between the partner agency and the vendor. Upon return to Paradise Valley, staff could no longer recommend the hybrid model to the Town Council.
In June 2016, Town Council gave direction to staff to seek a business model that was cost positive or cost neutral and would not need subsidization from the general fund.
In July 2016, staff requested a vendor to assist with creating business models for the monitoring service.
On November 3, 2016, staff presented business models to the Town Council. Council gave direction and asked clarifying questions on two of those models. Those clarifying questions were answered in the Town Council Study Session on November 17, 2016. During that study session Town Councilmembers asked for an “All-In” business model.
A four year “All-In” business model that offers full redundancy, some expanded services including water, temperature, carbon monoxide monitoring and positions the Town to offer video analytics in the future is included in this presentation. The All-In model is itemized for four years, due to the speed with which technology changes.
Three business models are included. Those models include:
• Best of variables model (Business model #1)
• Gradual Termination Strategy model (Business model #4)
• Competitive All-In model (Business model #5)
BUDGETARY IMPACT:
The budgetary impact of this decision varies, depending on the business model chosen by the Town Council.
• “Best of All Variables” business model #1 would cost the Town approximately $900,000 over ten years.
• “Gradual Termination” business model #4 would have a positive effect of approximately $400,000.
• “Competitive All-In” business model #5 would cost the town approximately $1.9M over four years.
ATTACHMENT(S):
Resolution 2016-22 Alarm Monitoring Service Termination
Pdf of presentation slides titled “12 01 16 Alarm Monitoring” Action
Answers to Questions posed by Town Council members in 11/17/16 study session