Authorize Request for Quotes for Software Services for Permitting, Licensing, and Code Enforcement

The purpose of this case is to authorize staff to issue a Request for Quotes for Permitting, Licensing, and Code Enforcement to aide in the preparation of the 2016 Budget. The intent of the RFQ is to review the current levels of service provided to ensure that the City is getting the maximum value for the services it purchases. This process will allow for a consistent, baseline review of options in a transparent manner. Without taking this step, Staff has found it difficult to provide a fair, equal, and transparent comparison of prices and offerings. Taking this step does not obligate the City to change from its current vendor. This is an exploratory phase, with alternative ranging from remaining with our current vendor to changing to a new vendor in 2016.

The City has been with its current provider PIMS (Permit & Inspection Management System) provided by LOGIS (Local Government Information Systems) since circa 2004. LOGIS is a joint-powers, inter-governmental provider of a number of IT services. Staff has been generally pleased with PIMS in terms of excellent customer service, basic functionality needs, and cost-competitive pricing.  This case is on the agenda due to the fact that the RFQ process takes a significant amount of staff time/effort and may lead to a significant capital expenditure.

The City's current and proposed Strategic Action Plan identify this improvement as being part of the City's mission to provide more efficient, cost-effective service.  It further addresses the goal of increasing staff effectiveness, and is part of the tactic of improving our business process.

Notification is not required to authorize the RFQ. If approved, Staff will distribute the RFQ to a list of compiled vendors and advertise in appropriate media outlets.

Recently, an inter-departmental Staff team collaborated on a document of desired services and functionality. All departments of the organization were represented in this meeting. Broadly speaking, Staff desires to enhance the services currently provided for City Staff as well as external customers and residents as is relates to permitting, licensing, and code enforcement. There are components that address some of Staff's desired improvements within the existing PIMS system. There is some desired functionality that is not currently provided by PIMS.   The overall intent is to reduce the amount of duplicate data entry and increase self-service opportunities.

As a general observation, it was discovered that are multiple instances of duplication in our process that should be explored to streamline. Some can be accomplished with software improvements. Some can be done with internal process improvements. As one Staff Member of the team noted:

"It's like going to the grocery store and checking out each item twice. First, you enter the items into the system to get a total amount. Then again, you have to check each of the items out a second time into a separate system if you want to utilize a credit card."

Examples of duplicate data entry include the following:
 

1. Permit Data Entry
   1. Customer completes paper application by hand
   2. Staff re-enters this data into the system
2. New Home Construction
   1. New Utility Account Set Up started by paper file in Building Inspections
   2. New Utility Account Set Up into separate Excel workbook, not integrated with current system
   3. New Utility Account activated with third-party billing vendor
3. Business Registration Certificate
   1. License Entered into existing software system
   2. Separate Access Database is duplicated for reporting and tracking purposes
4. Credit Card Payments for Building Permits
   1. Payment information entered into existing software system
   2. Same information re-entered into third-party software system
   3. Verification of payment entered separated into existing software system
5. Code Enforcement
   1. Data entered into existing software system
   2. Data also entered into Central Records System (public safety data system)

Attached to the case is a list of desired enhancements to our existing software system. Staff acknowledges that it is likely that the City will not be able to accomplish all of these goals, but does desire to enhance the customer experience to focus on self-service when desired by the customer. In addition, a better self-service will result in a measurable amount of time spent by Staff entering data and scheduling inspections via phone. It is possible that many of the goals may be able to be accomplished with our existing system. It is also possible that the City might discover that there is another system that better meets our needs that is cost-competitive that results in a quick return on investment. Broadly speaking, the desired enhancements are summarized by the following:

Permit Administration/Customer Experience
 

1. Online Submittal for All Permits
2. Online Issuance for Some Permits
3. Customer Status Tracking
4. Electronic Plan Review (concurrent rather than sequential plan review)

Inspections
 

1. Online scheduling (no phone call needed)
2. Stable mobile field presence

General Improvements
 

1. Limit number of layers/modules for single entry
2. Consolidate number of log-ins
3. Control and more regular update of property database (upload County data monthly)

Staff has generally been pleased with the level of customer service provided by PIMS Staff. Having local technical Staff has proven to provide qualitative value. Staff actively participates in regular User Group Meetings intended to improve the functionality of PIMS. Changes to the Work Flow of PIMS requires approval of the User Group and are applied across the consortium. City Staff recently met with LOGIS Staff to discuss this proposed process. The discussion was very positive, and LOGIS Staff is understanding of the City's desire to ensure that it is provided a cost effective solution that meets the core needs of the organization. The City allocates approximately $25,000 annually for PIMS.
 
Alternatives

Alternative #1. Authorize the Request for Quotes. This is a helpful budget planning tool that does not obligate the City to switch vendors or obligate the City to future costs. With the price gap consistently reducing between our existing system and newer, web-based systems, it seems an appropriate time to review available systems and costs.

Alternative #2. Do not authorize Request for Quotes. Under this alternative, Staff would simply assume remaining with our current system for purposes of 2016 Budget planning.

There is no additional cost to the City to issue a request for quotes. If the process selects a new vendor, annual costs would remain similar to the existing system. However, there would be an up front set-up cost of approximately $25,000 to $75,000+. It is this wide range of options that makes it important to do a structured request for quotes that ensures a consistent comparison and ensure that all implementation costs are captured.

Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the request for quotes for permitting, licensing, and code enforcement software.

Looking forward, it would be Staff's recommendation that a new vendor would need to significantly increase the functionality of the current system at a similar annual price. Staff would not recommend switching vendors if it were to be too similar to our existing system, as there is a significant start-up and transition cost.

Motion to authorize the request for quotes for permitting, licensing, and code enforcement software.