8.3 Development Services Software Purchase
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION DATE TIME
01/06/12 4:00 P.M.
AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: APPROVED FOR
NO: 8 AGENDA:
City Manager’s Office
BY: Mike Schrage, Deputy City Mgr.
ITEM
Gary Hobbie, Dir Community &
NO. 3
BY:
Development Services
Page 1
ITEM:
Authorize the Mayor to execute contract for the purchase and implementation of Development
Services software.
BACKGROUND:
The Building Services division of the Development Services Department began using a database built
by an inspector on staff approximately 14 years ago, and transitioned to the database that is currently
in use approximately 10 years. The access software has been modified and continually supported in-
house by a Computer Technologies staff person. Additionally, the Neighborhood Services Division
has been using a separate internal database that was built by NS & CT staff approximately 10 years
ago. Over time, modifications have been made to the databases, but it has become apparent that the
usefulness of those databases has been very nearly maximized, and we are unable to gain additional
system and staffing efficiencies that could be pr ovided by features co mmonly available from
commercial development services software products. In short, Departmental needs as well as
customer service expectations have progressed beyond the capabilities of the two databases.
The Development Services Department’s ability to perform effectively as well as provide customer
service at the level desired both internally and exte rnally is hindered by se veral limitations of the
current systems. Some of the highlights of those limitations include the following:
Both systems are primarily limited to data storage and basic reporting.
o
The Building Services & Neighborhood Services systems are separate and distinct.
o
There is no software or database for other divisions or processes such as
o
The Planning & Zoning Division
o
Development Review Team
o
Other Departments involved in the Development Services process.
o
Contractor Licensing Software does not Integrate with DS Software
o
Despite our emphasis on concurrent processi ng of development applic ations (annexation,
o
zoning, platting, building permit, thru final certificate of occupancy, etc.) there is no integration
of information or processes in the current system.
Access to the database is primarily available in the office with very limited use in the field.
o
Data such as property information, plans, in spection records, correction notices, etc.
o
cannot be reasonably accessed in the field.
Data entry in the field is also limited such that reports, inspection logs, correction
o
notices, etc. are generated off-line in the field and must be entered in to the system
back at the office.
Inspectors remain dependent on paperwork gathered before they leave the office or from their
o
memory about the circumstances of a particular project.
There is no capability for inspectors that ar e already in the field for the day to access
o
information related to recently scheduled inspections.
There is no incorporation of Geographic Information System capabilities.
o
Both systems are highly dependent on off-line m anual scheduling and initiation of processes,
o
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION DATE TIME
01/06/12 4:00 P.M.
AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: APPROVED FOR
NO: 8 AGENDA:
City Manager’s Office
BY: Mike Schrage, Deputy City Mgr.
ITEM
Gary Hobbie, Dir Community &
NO. 3
BY:
Development Services
Page 2
reporting and correspondence.
Many documents are generated out side the database with manual incorporation of the data
o
from the database in to those documents.
Plan review letters and many other forms of correspondence are completed and electronically
o
stored outside the current software so documentation related to an address or project is not
centralized.
Performance tracking must be conducted manually outside of the current software.
o
There is no automated communication or follo w-up with owners, designe rs or contractors
o
regarding things such as inspection reports, co rrection notices, status reports, etc. which
results in delayed communications and reliance on paper forms.
There is no centralized up-to-the-minute repor ting of unresolved project requirements or
o
inspection items that can be relied upon by staff or outside pa rties. Rather, the current
inspection process requires on-going compilation of information from various sources.
There is no ability of outside parties to access the database to monitor the progress of their
o
project.
There are no other online capabili ties for outside parties such as application submission or fee
o
payment.
No billing or payment feat ures – in-house or online.
o
Customer service improvements as well as online capabilities have been a recurring priority identified
in the 2000 City/Chamber Building/Code Inspection Improvements Task Force as well as the New
Chamber Strategic Plan as well as follow-up reviews. Staff believes that significant progress has
been made regarding customer service as well as most of t he concerns and priorities identified in
those documents. However, further progress regarding process improvements, staff efficiencies and
customer service are highly dependent upon many of the functi onalities that a comprehensive
software solution can provide.
Considerable effort has been invested in investigating acceptable cost effective solutions. Staff first
considered improvements that might be able to be made to the existing systems with existing staff. In
the end, it was concluded that the current database could not be modified or upgraded to the extent
that would be needed to provide significant process and customer service improvements, and that the
amount of staff time that would have to committed is not available at current staffing levels.
We also met with local programmers to discuss t he possibility of creating another custom built
program that included more of the functionality found in commercially available software. It quickly
became apparent that contracting to have a system custom built wo uld require City staff to fully
design the system desired and coordinate closel y with the programmers regarding not only the
software features desired but to provide the programmers a fu ll understanding of the building
permitting, plan review, building inspections, planning & zoning and code enforcement processes in
order to develop software that met our needs. The programmers also noted that some preliminary
experimentation and programming on their part would be necessary before they would be able to
determine if the project was feasib le and what it might cost. Ult imately, they expressed concern
about providing a fixed price cost estimate and suggested that the software would need to be
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION DATE TIME
01/06/12 4:00 P.M.
AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: APPROVED FOR
NO: 8 AGENDA:
City Manager’s Office
BY: Mike Schrage, Deputy City Mgr.
ITEM
Gary Hobbie, Dir Community &
NO. 3
BY:
Development Services
Page 3
developed at an hourly rate with an undetermined number of hours required.
Neither option compared favorably with utilizing commercial software that is already fully developed
and implemented. It did not seem practical to expect that performance similar to commercially
available software could be attained in a timely manner, if at all. A nd, it was also difficult to assess
whether any overall cost savings could be realized.
Staff made a Study Session pres entation to the City Commission in August of 2010 detailing the
process and service improvements that could be expected thru conversion to a new software product.
At that time, there was general support for proceeding with soliciting proposals from vendors and
conducting a selection process.
The process has been conducted over the past eighteen months with six responses being received.
Four respondents were extensively interviewed by a panel of six staff members. The review process
included interviews, online demonstrations, test driving selected softw ares by City staff, reference
checks, and additional online research regarding customer sati sfaction, pending litigation and
copyright disputes.
Ultimately, the respondents were ranked using a detailed rating system that contained approximately
130 criteria. Anticipated cost was a consideration as staff worked through the proposals, but cost
was variable depending on modules, licensing structure, length of time it would be utilized and final
contract negotiations. Cost was a significant consideration, but not the only factor when ranking and
selecting the software.
The selection process was conducted as a Qualifications Based Selection process in that the
respondents were ranked regarding their responsiveness to the scope of services that was distributed
and contract negotiations were entered in to with the top ranked firm(s). Ultimately, it was concluded
that the initial implement ation cost as well as the on-going a nnual maintenance costs of the top
ranked respondent were not acceptable compared to the anticipated costs and features offered by
the next ranked vendor. Negotiations were entered in to with the second ranked vendor and resulted
in reduced pricing on their part and the agreement with GovPartner that has been attached for your
consideration.
Based upon our interviews, testing of the softw are and reference checks, we believe that the
recommended software addresses all of the capability related concerns noted above. Additionally,
we believe that it will allow the Development Services Depar tment to continue to develop staff
efficiencies such that building permitting & inspection as well as code enforcement productivity gains
and expansion into the adoption and enf orcement of the International Property Maintenance Code
can be realized despite recent staffing reduction of approximately 22%. Those productivity gains are
expected to be realized by allowing staff to spend more time in the field focused on conducting
inspections thru field entry of information and automation of processes and paperwork and eliminating
back-office manual processes. We are also excited about the customer service improvements that
will be able to be offered to applicants, owners, designed and contractors.
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION DATE TIME
01/06/12 4:00 P.M.
AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: APPROVED FOR
NO: 8 AGENDA:
City Manager’s Office
BY: Mike Schrage, Deputy City Mgr.
ITEM
Gary Hobbie, Dir Community &
NO. 3
BY:
Development Services
Page 4
The attached agreement is with GovPartner. The firm chosen includes staff that have experience in
municipal operations and processes that was relied upon in the development of the software. They
will be working closely with City staff to implement the software.
The negotiated fee that they have agreed to is:
Annual Hosting Fee - $30,000
Initial Implementation Services - $30,000
CONFORMANCE WITH STRATEGIC PLAN:
The proposed action is consistent with the following components of the City’s shared vision statement:
The city will be clean, attractive and inviting.
The city of Salina will be attractive and well maintained. It will be evident that good
housekeeping and high community standards are valued.
The City Commission of Salina will have commi tted to providing the highest quality City
services possible within available resources. The City Commission recognizes their role and
responsibility to provide the needed policy direction and resources to its administration. At the
same time, the City’s administrative personnel are committed daily to transforming this direction
and resources into the highest possible quality of municipal services, consistent with the
expectations of both the City Commission and the citizens of Salina.
The proposed action is also consistent with the following goals contained in the City’s strategic plan:
Goal #3: The city will provide the highest quality of services, consistent with governing body direction,
available resources and staff commitment to quality.
Goal #4: The city will maintain growth and development policies that are updated to reflect current
conditions and desired growth direction.
FISCAL NOTE:
Development Services related fee increases we re implemented with the intention of generating
additional funds to be applied to the annual hosting fees for licensing of the software product. The
recent economic downturn has decreased development activity and related fees. However, $60,000
of funds was budget in the 2011 Computer Technologies budget in anticipation of implementation of
this software and those funds remain available in 2010.
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION DATE TIME
01/06/12 4:00 P.M.
AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: APPROVED FOR
NO: 8 AGENDA:
City Manager’s Office
BY: Mike Schrage, Deputy City Mgr.
ITEM
Gary Hobbie, Dir Community &
NO. 3
BY:
Development Services
Page 5
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The following options have been identified for consideration by the City Commission:
1.) Authorize the Mayor to execute the attached agreement with GovPartner for software
implementation and annual software licensing at a cost not to exceed $60,000 for the first year
and $30,000 per year for the following four years.
2.) Request city staff to seek other Development Software products.
3.) Take no action resulting in continued use of the current Building Services and Neighborhood
Services databases.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Commission authorize the Mayor to execute the attached agreement with
GovPartner for software implem entation and annual software licensing at a cost not to exceed
$60,000 for the first year and $30,000 per year for the following four years.
Enclosures: GovPartner Agreement