Washington DC December 2009

 Quasi State Agency  Self Governed—by the Users  Chartered/Established by the Legislature  Service Driven—Users pay for what they use  We support Police, Fire, EMS, Corrections, Transportation, Public Works, Natural Resources, Hospitals and Ambulances  We have agreements with Cities who do not participate  Cover 12 of the 29 Utah Counties  Looking at expansion into and additional five this year  Statewide in next 3-5 years

We identified the common pain which brought the stakeholders together: we need to communicate

We identified a person of stature…a Governor…who support and endorse the project..at the highest political level

Secure a committed leader…who will broker the project and move it along….Someone has to lead the effort Realize—sometimes it is Going to be tough sledding!! Politics, Politics, Politics

Develop a formal Charter that Includes: --Board of Directors --Governance Structure --Defined levels of Participation --Funding Levels --User input and feedback --The ability to make a deal --Recognizes the users contributions

Pick representatives who can make and support decisions: organizationally, politically and financially

Meet openly, encourage participation, recognize your partners contributions

Unify the group—agree on a common vision, have clearly defined goals, purpose, meet the schedule, make the suppliers your partner

Every project has a drop dead date: at some point performance is expected, and results are needed. OUR CASE: 2002 OLYMPICS

Focus on: Predictable Management w/user input -Financing -Budget -Expansion -Levels of Service -Staffing -Service Contracts

Establish predictable maintenance to guarantee long term success and service delivery. Establish a replacement fund.

Remember Who you Serve— The Users. They are the core reason you are doing this

 Agencies projected: 40 Actual: 125  Calls for service 150,000 every 24 hours  Rates consistent for five years  Expansion of our initial coverage area by 40%  Users projected: 6500 Actual: 17,250  Projected growth from Regional to Statewide  Customers are still looking for new service  Groundwork in place for future endeavors

 Economics of technology requires agencies to work together  The change out of technology has accelerated rapidly over the last 10 years  Emergencies require multiple agencies to respond, those agencies have to communicate  “I may not be able to own it all but I can own a piece of something”  “It will be the latest technology”  Grants are requiring demonstrated interoperability and cooperation in order to get the funding  Multi agency responses requires defined interoperability between services

 Difficult to know where all this technology is heading  Future market offerings may change this approach  Fact: Governance and Partnerships are in place  Fact: Interoperability is being practiced, Channels are being shared, spectrum is being shared  Fact: The next system implementation will be easier  Fact: People now realize that: we can share a common vision, we can implement together, its cheaper to own a piece of something rather than nothing…………  Fact: User rates are unpopular, but self government is not

 It will be worth it:  “in times of emergencies, the public looks to government, particularly their Public Safety Officials, to act swiftly and correctly to do the things which must be done to save lives, help the injured, and restore order. Most disasters occur without warning, but people expect a rapid and flawless response…” One of the KEY components to that response is a wireless communications system……………….”