My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7.3. SR 03-15-2010
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2000 - 2010
>
2010
>
03-15-2010
>
7.3. SR 03-15-2010
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/26/2010 9:50:32 AM
Creation date
3/12/2010 10:58:25 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
3/15/2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Although our current system is just three years old, and a significant investment, it would be <br />iu advised forme to not recommend to the Council, that we join this county-wide system <br />and take full advantage of the Sheriffs offer to fund this project. <br />Having said that, there are st.~, two hurdles to full implementation that must be ~rnentioned. <br />First, l~rol'hoe~rx has not yet done an install or implementation in Minnesota. Their <br />experience is in eastern coastal cities and'~Iisconsin. Having said that, I have assured our <br />staff and have told the Sheriff, that I will not abandon our current RMS provider and <br />change, until 1'rol'hoe~rx is both functional, and fully integrated with all of our requiL•ed <br />interfaces. ~E-citations to the courts. Motor vehicle queries, National Crirnlnal History <br />integration and so on.} <br />In addition to those interfaces, we need an established communication linl~ between our <br />facility and the government center. Our IT staff prefers a fiber connection one that we <br />own, but the County is proposing either leasing fiber or a point-to-point wireless <br />connection. The costs associated with this are still unl~nown, but it appears that if the <br />County chooses leased or wireless, that they will absorb this cost <br />I don't want to jump ship unless we l~now the new provider has shaken out the bugs and <br />worl~ed out all the fixes. <br />The second hurdle is on the fire side, and although this system is fully capable of handling all <br />of theif.• needs, no one had budgeted or was prepared for this generous offer by the Sheriff. <br />As a result, they lacl~ the computers, doclti.ng stations, and air cards to have the system work <br />in their ~.•ucks. ~Iithout that hardwa~.•e, they have no real connection to anything except from <br />desl~tops back at the station. Chief Cunningham will be at the meeting tonight, to discuss not <br />the immediate funding, but what the needs are going to be in the near future for fire <br />integration to CAD and records. He has some concerns migrating from his current RMS <br />provider, Firehouse, to the new system, unless he too is assured that the full functionality <br />and integration are accomplished. There is a yearly maintenance fee for fire, which is roughly <br />X1,000, which the department currently budgets for the existing Firehouse software. <br />Our IT Department lead by Bob Pearson has reviewed this system, and they have given their <br />full support to moving forward with this integration. <br />I am not certain that any formal Council. action is needed for this project, other than a <br />consensus from the Council that they concur that this is an appropriate move for all <br />involved. <br />Chief Cunningham, Bob Pearson, and I will be happy to answer any questions that you may <br />have. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.