The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCAP 2011-10-24 Item 2C - Discussion - Permit Tracking System ReplacementCity of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Haggerton Community Affairs and Parks Committee FROM: Nora Gierloff, Deputy DCD Director DATE: October 14, 2011 SUBJECT: Permit Tracking System Replacement ISSUE The software program used to track City permits is being phased out by the vendor. An interdepartmental committee has been formed to research issues and options for its replacement. The change will require a significant investment of financial and personnel resources. BACKGROUND The City's current permit tracking system is Permits Plus by Accela. We have used this system since 1992 (when it started as a DOS -based system). It is used by the Building Division (building, plumbing, mechanical and electrical permits), Planning (land use applications, sign permits), Public Works (land altering, utility, paving, street use permits), Code Enforcement and Rental Housing. Over time we have made improvements to the system to improve service to the public. Applicants can call the City's automated inspection request line which then populates the daily inspection schedule in Permits Plus. Applicants can also send an e-mail and receive an automated response with the status of their permit, inspection results, and fees. Accela has developed a web based permit tracking system called Accela Automation and is focusing its efforts on enhancements to that program rather than on Permits Plus. We expect that support for Permits Plus will be phased out over the next few years. Another issue is that annual maintenance fees for Permits Plus have been steadily increasing by 10% a year for a current annual fee of $45,000. For these reasons developing a recommendation for replacement of Permits Plus is a 2011 program goal for the Department of Community Development (DCD). A 2008 report on permit software selection commissioned by the eCityGov Alliance cities had this to say: Recent changes in the permit management software marketplace, notably Accela's planned retirement of its earlier generation products, drove participating cities to re -think their approaches to permit automation. Accela's replacement product, Automation, will be expensive to implement and appears to have high operating and maintenance costs. In addition, Accela's preferred funding model for online permits through Automation would collect a percentage of permit fees. A number of Accela clients, including at least seven cities using myBuilding Permit. com, will have difficulty passing these costs on to their customers. As a result, many local governments are considering alternatives to WA2011 Info Memos- CounciRlDermitSystem.dou 10/19/2011 11 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 Automation, and some of them (e.g., the City and Borough of Juneau, AK) have decided to move off the product. Tukwila formed an interdepartmental committee in March of this year to identify City -wide permitting needs, hear vendor presentations, find out more about why other jurisdictions have chosen their vendors and reach consensus on a recommendation to Council. DCD invited participation by representatives from all City departments and a core group of representatives from DCD, IT, Public Works, Fire, Finance, and the City Clerk have regularly attended. ANALYSIS One of the Committee's first objectives was to learn what we could from the experiences of other cities as they made their permit system choices. Lynnwood issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) for permitting software in April 2008 and selected the EnerGov program. A group of six cities (Bothell, Issaquah, Kirkland, Redmond, Renton and Sammamish) joined together under the eCityGov Alliance framework to issue a joint RFP for permit software systems in November 2009. They did a very thorough selection process and required all of the information we would need to make our decision. They received fourteen responses which they narrowed down to a short list of seven. They then conducted in -depth demonstrations and due diligence research with each vendor. Ultimately five of the participating cities chose the EnerGov system while Issaquah chose to go with CRW. Short List Recommendation z= izr'aas.:� xus.u's ^s%tiasn�rst:�ic:. 111 ec tyGo-v t Hosttng w Red:.= AVg IM,. Wcost_ >.$550K. .Black Avg,1n ..yr..cost '$300.K ,fo tt resources t.:,.•-< r:,w.2.<:..ti,.,...Sv_.._s }a�a'r rta+;_. t._ a... sti_., �w. u...- .4�..�....��..�.:,....,<.�...�h ........�_M+nrr:mloresarcnmm t Infor CSDC Accela Best Match t t t t V CFi.w t. t <$400K Cost i G o Oirtnek t t EDEN They designed the RFP to allow other cities to join it later through an interlocal agreement per RCW 39.34and receive the same terms as they had negotiated with the vendors. Pricing, including the negotiated group discount, is guaranteed for three years from the first executed WA2011 Info Memos- CouncilTermitSystem.dou 2 10/19/2011 12 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 3 contract in 2010. Using the interlocal process to join the existing RFP would be faster and simpler than issuing our own RFP. Ranae of Costs Of the cities who participated in the eCityGov process Tukwila is most similar to Sammamish with 20 simultaneous system users and Bothell with 30. While Tukwila may choose different options than the ones specified in the vendor price estimates the bids are useful for getting a ballpark estimate of the purchase cost and in determining relative costs between vendors. Vendor Infor Hansen Accela EnerGov GovPartner CRW Systems Tyler Eden Sammamish 1 5i Year Costs 5 Year Costs 1,022,370 785,129 419,577 241,000 210,400 173,613 1,217,475 971,841 514,941 325,000 283,945 248,059 Bothell 1 Year Costs 1,135,120 724,075 490,258 238,200 230,450 217,103 5 Year Costs 1,409,635 934,662 619,806 315,000 320,803 325,242 Hansen is so much more expensive than the other vendors staff recommends removing them from consideration. Accela, our current vendor, has the second highest price quote and is three times the cost of the three lowest priced vendors. They also have high ongoing maintenance costs. EnerGov is the mid priced quote and five of the cities chose this vendor as the best match for their needs. GovPartner is the next lowest price though the consensus of the eCityGov group was that it did not have the full functionality they were looking for. CRW was chosen by Issaquah, the sixth member of the eCityGov group, whose Building Official said that it meets their needs well for half the cost of EnerGov. Staff made a site visit to Puyallup to see Tyler and spoke with staff from Bonney Lake who also use that system. While they were satisfied with the program it seemed to require a lot of work arounds to meet their needs. At first it appeared that choosing Tyler would make for an easier integration with our Eden financial system but after talking with other cities any of the permit systems can interface with Eden. Issaquah is a recent example of integration between CRW permitting and Eden financial programs. Benefit Many of the jurisdictions in our region already have a web based permit system or are implementing a system within the next 2 -5 years. These systems typically allow for electronic plan submittal, online status checks, greater automation of processes and public access to permit information. Another benefit is a more efficient link to the KC Assessor's Office resulting in faster property tax updates for new construction. The MyBuilding Permit. com application is used in conjunction with a permit tracking system by thirteen local jurisdictions allowing contractors to do "one stop shopping" for over the counter permits. Other jurisdictions use electronic permitting modules that are part of their permit tracking system. Some cities such as Seattle have developed proprietary systems. While there are capital costs associated with implementing an electronic permitting system it could have significant benefits for our customers and our staff. Mercer Island did a study when they implemented their ePlan review system and found that the benefits included: WA2011 Info Memos- CounciRPermitSystem.dou 3 10/19/2011 13 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 4 increased efficiency of staff review, faster permit review since there is no wait for plans to be stamped and routed, greater convenience for applicants as permits can be submitted at any time, significant cost savings for applicants due to elimination of paper, printing and transport costs, and streamlined emergency response and disaster recovery efforts. According to Marty Grisham this last item could be an important element of our disaster recovery strategy because it would allow us to help get our businesses open and operating more quickly after a disaster. Staff is working on developing a low cost pilot project to allow for electronic submittal of sign permits as we work through the larger permit software issue. Implementation Issues Listening to the experiences of other cities it seems that implementing a new permit system is time consuming and requires a significant investment of staff resources. Staff has been attending a working group of cities implementing the EnerGov program and several of them recommended the use of a consultant to negotiate the contract with the software vendor. Making sure that the City's needs for customization in permit processes, reports and permit documents are documented in the contract and included in the price can prevent costly overruns during implementation. Of the six cities in our region who have decided to switch to EnerGov in the past several years, only Lynnwood and Bothell have actually gone live with the system. Lynnwood spent three years in the migration and implementation phase. Issaquah went live with CRW almost a year ago and reported that implementation took about six months, much faster than the EnerGov cities. Financinq Options Given the significant investment required to upgrade to a new permit system many cities are imposing technology user fees. Fees are assessed as either a flat fee, fee per sheet or percentage that ranges from 1.3% to 5 see Attachment B. The Master Builders have written a letter in support of city technology fees if they are used to provide better service and in our informal discussions with applicants many think the efficiencies of electronic permit review would be worth a modest fee increase. The cost to use the online MyBuilding Permit. com electronic permitting site is 1.3% of the permit fee. The intent of a proposed technology fee would be service cost recovery. It would be applied to all permits that are processed through our tracking systems (except fire department licenses, rental housing). However, it would apply to the "Permit" fee only, excluding the plan review fee, mailing fees, state building code fee, impact fees, Cascade Water Alliance Fee and any other water or sewer assessments. For hourly land use permits it would be assessed once on the retainer and not added to any additional hours that may accrue during permit review. A chart of the amount Tukwila would have collected from different fee structures is included as Attachment C. It appears that we could cover the annual expenses associated with a permit tracking system that allowed for electronic plan review with a fee in line with that charged by other jurisdictions in our area. Over a longer term we could recover most or all of implementation costs, depending on future permit volumes. If we opted to proceed with this approach one question would be whether to start charging during the implementation phase when we were incurring costs or wait until the system was live. It would be most equitable to only charge the fee once the applicants were able to benefit from the upgrade. WA2011 Info Memos- CouncilTermitSystem.dou 4 10/19/2011 14 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 5 Timinq Staff suggests that a reasonable time frame for Tukwila to move forward with replacing our permit system would be: 2011 Review our permit processes to increase efficiency and prepare for electronic permitting Adopt an interlocal agreement to join the eCityGov Alliance RFP Select a permit software vendor Decide on an electronic permitting approach (MyBuilding Permit. corn or vendor system) 2012 Select and contract with a consultant to assist with negotiating the software contract Negotiate a contract for the permit software Start migration and customization which will extend into 2013. 2013 Go live with permit system and electronic permitting Adopt a financing mechanism This timeline will require a budget amendment for 2012 to cover expenditures for a contract consultant and initial permit software payments. The cost for these items would be approximately $175,000 with a possible offset of $50,000 if we opted to stop paying maintenance on Permits Plus. Additional costs for data migration, training, hardware and maintenance of approximately $150,000 would need to be included in the 2013 budget. Depending on the software configuration and technology fee level that we choose we anticipate a payback time of 4 -6 years. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Council consider a budget amendment for 2012 that would allow us to move forward with the permit software selection and implementation process. The Council is being asked to consider this item at the November 14 Committee of the Whole and November 21 Regular meeting to authorize acquisition of the Permit Tracking System and include the amount of $175,000 in the year -end 2011 -2012 budget amendment. ATTACHMENTS -Short List Vendor Information Comparison Technology Fee Survey Potential Technology Fee Revenue WA2011 Info Memos- CouncilTermitSystem.dou 5 10/19/2011 15 16 eCityGov Alliance Short List Vendor Information Comparison Vendor Information Tyler Technologies CRW Systems GovPartner EnerGov Solutions Accela Infor (Hansen) CSDC Systems 1. Contact Information • Company Name Tyler Technologies, Inc CRW Systems, Inc. GovPartner EnerGov. Solutions Accela, Inc. Infor (Hansen Inform. Technologies) CSDC Systems Inc. • Name and Title of Contact Person Mike Boots Account Manager Jennifer Lewis Regional Account Manager Kevin Vincent Business Dev. Manager Chuck Newberry Business Dev. Manager Julian D. Munoz, A.I.A. VP of Procurement Randall Scheideman Account Executive Jaime Peschiera VP of Contracts Administration • Company Address 370 1.15 Route One Falmouth, ME 04105 16980 Vie Tazon, Ste 320 San Diego, CA 92127 8710 Earl art Lane SW Cedar Rapids, IA 52404 2160 Satellite Blvd, Ste 300 Duluth, GA 30097 2633 Camino Ramon, Ste 120 Bishop Ranch 3 - San Ramon, CA 94583 11092 Sun Center Drive Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 3031 Viking Way, Ste 108 Richmond, BC CA V6V 1W1 • Phone 425-254-2867 858-451-3030 888 -256-5777 888-355-1093 x 3102 925-659-3247 800 -821 -9316 x 3519 888-270 -7228 x 401 • Email Address mlke.boots@tylertech.mm jenntfer@crw.mm kvincent@govpartner.com cnewberry@energov.com jmunoz @accela.com randall.scheideman @inror.com j.pesddera @csdcsystems.com • Company Webslte www.tylertech.com www.aw.com www.govpartner.com www.energov.com www.accela.com www.infor.com /Industries/ publicsector www.csdcsystems.com 2. Regional Offices and Staff • Describe whether your organization is • kcal, regional, national or International. National Regional office in Renton, WA. National Regional offices in San Diego, CA and St. Petersburg, FL National / International Regional offices in Munteta, CA; San Diego, CA; Orlando, FL; St. Paul, MN and In Abu Dhabi, UAE National / International Regional offices in Kansas City, MO; Destin, FL and Redlands, CA. National / International Regional offices in Visalia, CA; Sandy, UT; Abu Dhabi, UAE; Melbourne, Australia and Beijing, China National / International National / International Regional offices in Mississauga, ON; Richmond BC; Fort Worth TX and Ottawa ONL • Regional office performing this engagement. ' Renton; WA San Diego, CA Cedar Rapids, IA Redlands, CA San Ramon, CA Rancho Cordova, CA Richmond, BC Canada • Describe the range of services provided by the office performing the engagement. Implementation, Installation, data conversion, consulting, training, au0omization, support, disaster recovery, and applcation and data hosting. Research and development, various implementation and dient support services including project management, data conversion, training, and technical support. Development and implementation, marketing, sales, accounting and product support. Sales, marketing, research and development, implementation, data services and customer support Implementation . Implementation and support. Project management, analysis and design, data setup and configuration, testing, training and documentation. 3. Company information • Briefly describe your company and the characteristics that set your company „,cpart. J Tyler Technologies is a leading provider of integrated software systems and Infonnat on technology services for local governments. Tyler partners with cities, counties, schools and other government entities to enable them to become more efficient, more accessible and more responsive to dtizens. Tyler has an installed base of systems in more than 8,000 local govemunent agencies throughout the United States, Canada, Puerto Rico and the United . Kingdom. CRW Systems, Inc has been dedicated to providing Community Development Management Resource to kcal Munidpalities for over 18 years. Our flagstaff product, TRAKff Is our only system. We makntaln 100% dient retention. We attribute our client loyalty to the fact that all of our resources are dedicated to the support and enhancement of our product. GovPartner is a leading provider of e- Government software and services that provide eGovemment Solutions that are built on a 100% Microsoft .NET platform. We focus on our clients' needs and have veteran project managers who have the skills and experience to capture and streamline processes and procedures white introducing best practices. We then configure the solution to enforce the efficent operating model. From Inception, EnerGov's mission statement is to provide the most innovative technology coupled with the best customer service in the Industry. This mission has been the driver in developing, implementing; and servicing the premier Land Management system In the market over the last 5 years, EnerGov .NET. Moreover, EnerGov's GIS integration has "set the bar" for how Land Management systems and ESRI GIS databases communicate through one cohesive Interface. For 30 years Accela products have been the choice of government agencies looking to Improve effiden y, service delivery, and customer service by using advanced activity tracking and management systems. Our flagship product, . Accela Automation, is the most mature and most advanced permitting solution available Pe nil today. Accela stands out from its pe just competition tltion not st in Its experience, ete but �� Hansen is a leading provider of automated Permit, Licensing, Code Enforcement, and Customer Service applications in the United States —our clients process over 6,000,000 permit applications, licenses, and Inspection requests every year. Our software is being used by the governments of four (4) of the five, Los s Angeles, Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Philadelphia. Our proven industry experience pro gives us the insight to Since 1989, CSDC Systems Inc., a private company based in Mississauga, Ontario, has been developing and implementing systems that are used for automating major business processes in government such as the permitting, inspections, planning and land development, licensing, tax billing, case and complaint management and code enforcement processes. CSDC provides the AMANDA business process management software suite and a complete Confidential eCitvGov Vendor Information Comparison eCityGov Alliance Short List Vendor Information Comparison Vendor Information Tyler Technologies CRW Systems GovPartner EnerGov Solutions Accela Infor (Hansen) CSDC Systems ..._ .. _ ._. _ - —._._. .- ____ ._ . __ _ ... range of services for the -implementation of AMANDA projects. The AMANDA suite. of software modules will handle all requirements specified by the ECityGov Alliance In the RFP. CSDC is committed to providing software applications that are easy to configure, easy to use and provide low cost of ownership. CSDC minimizes support costs by maintaining a single version of the AMANDA software and incorporates all new technologies as they are developed. Due to thls commitment, CSDC has never lost a customer and has an Impeccable track record in the successful implementation of local govemment solutions. CSDC has over 60 products in the AMANDA software suite. CsDC provides a range of Professional Services designed to successfully implement AMANDA. These services delivered under Inc AIM project management methodology have resulted in an unbeatable track record achieved with successful AMANDA implementations at over 140 different sites. Providing information systems to the public seder is our exdusive focus. We have over 2,000 professional people dedicated to developing, implementing, supporting, and enhancing Tyler's systems. Our success is a direct result of this focus. We serve certain dients —and we serve them better than anyone else. The result: Tyler provides superior product functionality developed over decades of experience with its clients. This Is evidenced by EnerGov being selected as the 2009 Business Partner of the Year and as a Tier 1 recommended solution for Land Management applications. Building upon this superior technology offering, second to none are the dynamic individuals that make up EnerGov Solutions. EnerGov invest extensive amounts of time and resources to employ, train, and develop the most qualified and highly skilled team members throughout each respective department Sales, Marketing, Client Services, Support, Researdr and Development, Data Services, Testing, etc Overall, Inc dynamic "people" of EnerGov are the true drivers of Automation offers a solution that Is Independent of fast-changing workstation tedmology, providing a dean and efficient method of presenting pertinent data through any Internet connection. Unlike first - generation web enabled software of our competitors, the three tiered architecture of Aocela's solution does not require client -side application Installation and maintenance. Instead, Accela interfaces through a single web application layer that organizes .and brings data to the web, wherein customers need only IT staff to manage the system from the web application layer. understand your need for a system that will not only automate your permitting business processes but will also be easily configured to fit your unique business rules. the company's success from both a technological and customer service perspective. • Briefly describe how you will meet our requirements and maximize our retum on investment. Based on Inc RFP functional requirements our responses will show our ability to meet and/or exceed the needs of each agency Involved. Agencies that are already utilizing the EDEN • application will benefit from a completely Integrated system while the other agencies will benefit from our open architecture allowing Inc Integration between their current software. Al agencies -wIll benefit from our willingness to work with Inc current eCltyGov application to provide a long term solution that will Integrate/interface with all applications at all locations. Our "Evergreen Philosophy" will allow all agencies Inc ability take advantage of future upgrades or CRW will wait dosely with each agency Individually to fully understand your business process and configure TRAKIT to meet your needs and optimize use of the system. Additionally, CRW has previous experience working with Mybuildingpermlts.mm and various Washington clients which provides us with additional knowledge and experience on how to ensure TRAIQT is Inc best solution for each agency. After careful evaluation of the RFP requirements, we at GovPartner have proposed the best solution that will fit those needs. By Implementing our software, member Cities will leverage a mature and robust solution that incorporates cutting edge technologies. These technologies coupled with process improvements significantly reduce overall effort by both staff and customers. • This will allow staff to focus energy on moving projects forward Instead of routine mundane tasks. Not only is ROI measured Improved internal productivity, but In the speed at which projects move through Inc process, particularly with Improved accessibility by EnerGov will meet the RFP requirements by leveraging our Innovative, mature Enterprise Land Management Application, dynamic personnel, and the experience of over 150 Implementations throughout the United States over the last decade. As with all previous Implementations, EnerGov's primary focus will be to assess and analyze the current processes of each respective implementation (each agency) and utilize Inc EnerGov .NET system to maximize efficiency, revenue retention, and user experience. EnerGov's project teams do not focus on emulating current processes but to enhance, develop, and implement Inc most efficient and The company's unique experience In upgrading fts dassic products, Tidemark Advantage and Permit Plus, to Accela Automation assures those participating cities that have Ada products In place, will experience an of dent and cost effective moVe to the Accela Automation platform, In proposal In to iud expertise, our Dro,000 license includes more o than ��'� in eia le discounts to S Acme . This customers. This rs complemented cis additional 40% that discounts of a to age that are being offered to agendas that are not curtest Accela sites. In addftion to the initial hard Our solution Is uniquely suited to meet the Alliance's needs. Between Inc .Net Web -based software application and our flexible pridng structure we are confident we will be able to provide Inc Alliance with the solution that you are seeking. CSDC is proposing the AMANDA system solution environment, for all functions defined by the Alliance and the participating dtles. The AMANDA system will meet Inc Alliance's and cities' current needs and has been designed to meet future needs as a result of departmental growth or the involvement of new participants. CSDC has the experience product breadth and track record to provide the Alliance and partidpating cities with a solution that has given our customers real, tangible benefits from Inc finandal, service, and functional points of view. If selected, CSDC Is prepared to provide the Alliance and the Confidential eCityGov Vendor Information Comparison Page 2 of 9 eCityGov Alliance Short List Vendor Information Comparison Vendor Information Tyler Technologies CRW Systems GovPartner EnerGov Solutions Accela Infor (Hansen) CSDC Systems Confidential eCityGov Vendor Information Comparison Page 3 of 9 enhancements with no financial burden thus giving all agendes Involved long term return on investment We have agendes that have been utilizing our applications for 20+ years and have never had to relicense during the life of our applications which Is the goal of our "Evergreen Philosophy" customers online. productive processes to fully leverage the power of EnerGov .NET. dollar savings, Accela Finally, In recognition of the eCityGov Alliance's desire to understand all options available to maximize functionality while minimizing costs, Accela's proposal includes a number of options designed to provide cost effective alternatives to the Alliance and Its participating Cities. This includes various hosting options as well as alternative web portal interfaces, giving the Alliance. and partidpating cities the fleodbllity to select a cost effective option that best meets the needs of all participants. cities with local support for the duration of the project. We are committed to working hard with the Alliance and the cities to deliver an AMANDA solution that not only meets, but exceeds the Alliance's and dties' expectations. Above all, the Alliance and the cities will receive a system that will empower their staff to introduce future levels of automation and address the periodic re- engineering of business processes, without vendor Involvement or lengthy and expensive customizations. • Year Founded 1981 1991 2000 2002 1981 1983 1998 • Private vs. Public (listing Exchange and Listing Code) Public (NYSE: TYL) Private Private Private Private Private Private • Fiscal year end December 31 December 31 March 31 December 31 June 30 June 30 September 30 • Revenue: Current Year $ 141.7 M $ 3.2 M Not Available Will be provided If finalist vendor. Not Available Will be provided if finalist vendor. Not Available Wilt be provided If finalist vendor. $ 2 8 $ 14.1 M • Revenue: Prior Year . $ 265.1 M $ 5.4 M $ 40.2 M Not Provided Not Provided $ 2.2 B $ 12.7 M • Net Income/Loss: Current Year $ 12.8 M Not Provided Not Provided Not Provided Not Provided Not Provided $ 1.4 M • Net Income/Loss: Prior Year $ 14.8 M Not Provided Not Provided Not Provided Not Provided • Not Provided $ 0.6 M • % of gross revenue generated by proposed software & related maintenance and services. 13% Eden Note: Tyler has several other software products. 100% Not Provided 100% Not Provided 10% Note: Infor has several other software products. 80% • Parent Company (If separate) N/A - N/A N/A N/A N/A Infor Global Solutions N/A • Describe parent company's relationship with the ProPosing Party. N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Owner N/A • Genealogy of Organization (Changing business, name changes, acquisitions/mergers, etc.) Tyler Technology acquired the EDEN application approximately 5 years ago. The EDEN application continues to be a leader In the government marketplace backed by Tyler Technologies government experience fundamental sound CRW Systems, Inc. DBA CRW Associates None None Accela, Inc was formed in October 1981, as a California corporation. The company's history Includes the following mergers/acquisitions: • December 2002: Acquisition of Sussex Business Systems Infor Global Solutions (Infor) acquired Hansen Information Technologies in June of 2007 . None Confidential eCityGov Vendor Information Comparison Page 3 of 9 eCityGov Alliance Short List Vendor Information Comparison Vendor Information Tyler Technologies CRW Systems GovPartner EnerGov Solutions Accela Infor (Hansen) CSDC Systems onfidential eCityGov Vendor Information Comparison Page 4 of 9 ' philosophies. • 2001: Merger with Kfva and Tidemark Solutions • 2000: Mergers with Sierra Computer Systems and Open Data Systems — — — -- -- • Describe how the company has grown. "OrganimPy, "thru acquisition, thru mergers, etc.? Grown organically and through acquisition. Organically Organically Organically Grown organically and through 9a N acquisition. Grown organically and through acquisition. Grown organically and through r9 N 9 acquisition. • Are there any planned acquisitions or mergers in the future? Tyler Technologies continue to evaluate the marketplace and if there is a merger or acquisition that can benefit our clients, the company would evaluate any such opportunity. No No No No No No • Disdose any recent litigation (and outcomes) and litigation currently underway. N/A N/A N/A N/A In July 2009, Accela was the 2003CA prevailing 1713NC' brought by Accela as Plaintiff against Defendants Sarasota County, Florida and CSDC Systems, Inc. for procurement irregularities. The trial court found in favor of Accela and ordered the contract between Sarasota County and CSDS Systems Inc. to be null and void. N/A N/A 4. # of Vendor Employees • Total Worldwide 2,025 30 17 90 157 9,200 115 • Total in U.S. 2,025 30 16 90 146 3,400 20 • # dedicated to the proposed software 93 30 17 90 157 300 95 • U.S. 4 dedicated to the proposed software 93 30 16 90 146 250 20 • Location of office that will be supporting us & 4 of employees Renton, WA 174 San Diego, CA 28 Cedar Rapids, IA 10 Atlanta, GA & Redlands, CA 80 San Ramon, CA 45 Rancho Cordova, CA 180 Richmond BC & Mississauga ON 75 5. Number of Customers Using the Proposed Software • Total Worldwide 55 121 90 154 —515 500 61 • Total in U,S. 55 120 89 154 -500 290 21 • 4 cities using the proposed software 55 98 18 -120 78 80 44 onfidential eCityGov Vendor Information Comparison Page 4 of 9 eCityGov Alliance Short List Vendor Information Comparison Vendor Information Tyler Technologies CRW Systems GovPartner EnerGov Solutions Accela Infor (Hansen) CSDC Systems • # cities using the proposed version 55 32 17 117 0* * Based on the implementation date for this contract, anticipate that version 7.0, due for release In 2010, will be Installed. 50 15 • #of cities In Washington using the proposed software 12 6 0 2 2 17 2 6. List City customers with similar requirements • Anacortes, WA, Walla Walla, WA, Puyallup, WA, Bonney Lake, WA Mercer Island, WA We have several customers that have similar requirements to eCityGov. However, we do not provide customer lists In a public forum. We can discuss this information privately, or with a non disclosure agreement. Goldsboro, NC, Laguna Hill, CA, Agoura HITS, CA, Miami, Shores, Ft, Orange Oty, Ft, Tayk rsvilie, UT, Fairbanks, AL, Victoria, TX Grass Valley CA, Larkspur, CA, Southlake, TX, Paradise, CA, Benicia, CA, Los Gatos, CA, Pleasant Hill, CA, Martinez, CA, Avondale, AZ, New Braunfels, TX, Lenexa, KS, Tigard, OR, Springfield, OR, Petaluma, CA, Galveston, TX, Palo Alto, CA, Hesperia, CA, Pleasanton, CA, Alameda, CA, Evanston, IL, Community Associations of The Woodlands, TX, Rochester, MN, Vacaville, CA, Westminster, CO, McAllen, TX, Peoria, AZ, Fort Collins, CO Anchorage, AK, Chicago, IL, Las Vegas, NV, Sherwood, OR Not Provided 7. Vendors Target User Profile for This Software What is your "sweet spot" customer size (where the majority of your customers using the proposed software are)? E.g. # of citizens and operating budget 40,000 Population 60,000 Population 75,000 Population 125,000 Population 50,000 — 150,000 Population 100,000 Population 90,000 — 350,000 Population 8. Vendor's Implementation Model — Direct, VAR, Implementation Partner, etc. Direct Direct Direct and Implementation Partner Direct Direct Direct and Implementation Partner Direct 9. Version Schedule • Current version and general availability release v5.2.1 December 2009 v11.01 December 2009 CDP 2.0 October 2009 Version 8 Spring 2009 Accela Automation 6.7 January 2009 v8.20 Sumer 2009 m AMANDA 5 June 2009 • Proposed version & general availability release date v5.2.1 December 2009 v11.01 December 2009 CDP 2.0 October 2009 Version 9 January 2010 Accela Automation 6.7 January 2010 vB.20 Summer 2009 AMANDA 5 June 2009 • Estimated release date for next version December 2009 December 2009 January 2010 Q1 2010 January 2010 Summer 2010 AMANDA 5.n June 2010 • Typical release schedule & tlme to Install 1 Major, 2 Minor / 12 hours Monthly / 30 Min. Quarterly / 1 Day 1 Major, 4 Minor / 1 -2 Hours 2 Major + Point / 2-4 Days 1 Major / 1 Day 1 Major, 6 Misr / 12 hours Confidential eCityGov Vendor Information Comparison Page 5 of 9 eCityGov Alliance Short List Vendor Information Comparison Vendor Information Tyler Technologies CRW Systems GovPartner EnerGov Solutions Accela Infor (Hansen) CSDC Systems • Number of prior versions supported All 24 All . All 2 2 2 10. User protection plans Briefly describe what user protection plans you have. For example: • Source code held In Escrow • No charge to migrate to a similar new software (e.g. new g technology) • Other options Tyler maintains an escrow agreement with an escrow services company under which Tyler places the source code of each major release of the Tyler Software Products. Provided Alliance is under a then- current Maintenance Agreement and paying the maintenance fees, the Alliance is entitled to receive releases to the Tyler software products in the contract that Tyler makes generals available without additional charge to customers under the Tyler annual Maintenance Agreement, however, implementation, installation, consultation and training services related to the new releases would be provided to Alliance at Tyler's then current rates. CRW maintains a source copy of the software In an escrow account, as described in Exhibit F of the Sample Contract in Section #11. A copy of the latest source code for the software being Installed by CRW pursuant to this Agreement shall be deposited in this escrow account CRW does not separately charge or updates and enhancements to dients who are current on their maintenance agreement. Custorners can subscribe to an Escrow account where the software Is held. Our escrow agent is Iron Mountain. We have NEVER charged an upgrade fee to any customer, including those customers who migrated from our client/server system to the .NET version. EnerGov's standard Software and Support Plan provides all partners the ability upgrade to the latest version of EnerGov .NET without incurring additional charges. In addition, EnerGov provides a general warranty that software will be free of material defects. Escrow agreements can be provided at the expense of each agencies requirement. For customers with a Software Support Agreements, new versions and software updates are inducted in the oust EnerGov's policy if for agencies Pilate a[ least once a year. to update All user protection plans offered, such as warranty and maintenance terms, are detailed in Accela's Sample license and Maintenance agreements inducted In the Additional Information section of this proposal. Accela will escrow its source codes In an account established and maintained by the Alliance and/or ti with st participating City any established and nationally- Y Y provided tred escrow agency, Provided that the a Alliance and/or Para °Patin9 Ch' pays directly to Its selected d with agent all fees associated with Its account and the e conditions ow arrangement ement a e with the escrow arrangement are limited to those defined by Accela In its standard escrow agreement. A source code escrow account is available for purchase. Currently Infor has a program in place that to give active service and maintenance customers credit for software that they have purchased if they desire to upgrade to a newer version and /or want to change solutions. However, service charges may still apply• The AMANDA source code can be placed in escrow with an Alliance - assigned escrow agent. At regular intervals, when an AMANDA release or a new version Is installed, the source code tapes will be updated and replaced at the escrow agent. There are no CSDC licensing ng charges should the Alliance upgrade the tw re versions lion or to r new software versions a anent technology. Any CSDC charges for services requested by and rdirate will be based e on standard rates at roe dime the services are provided. 11. We require having development, back -up, training, testing and archival copies of the software in addition to the production copy. Is this provided as standard with your Software? During implementation, will set up a back -up and training database. These can be used for testing and software backup for the duration of the product. Deliver backup copies of the system to clients for testing and training purposes. Each customer allowed In deploy a Development, Testing, and Production version of the software. Will provide additional concurrent license to manage pre- productions / testing environments, training environments, archival copies, etc. Once software licenses are purchased, the Alliance and /or rticl ap pa p ng Gty may Install it on an unlimited number of environments as needed. This Is allowed as per standard software licensing agreement Additional environments such as development, training, testing, archival can be used. 12. Briefly describe your customer service and support. • What options and the cost • What is covered and what Isn't For as long as a current Maintenance Agreement is in place, Tyler shall, In a professional, good and workmanlike manner, perform its obligations set forth in this Maintenance Agreement In order to conform the Tyler Software Products to the applicable warranty under the Agreement Maintenance fees do not include installation or implementation of the Tyler Software Products, onsite support (unless Tyler cannot remotely unreel a defect in a Tyler Software Product), application design, other Ppl 9 consulting services, support of an operating system or hardware, and support outside Tyler's normal business hours. CRW provides customer service and support including enhancements and upgrades to all clients who are current on the maintenance agreement. For a full Ilst of coverage please refer to our 'Sample Maintenance Agreement' induded In Section #11. Service: Annual Software Maintenance (ASM) 1s a program designed to provide maximum value to the City for your technology Investment This annual fee is 20% of the software license purdrase price and provides for ongoing unlimited technical and user support You will be able to contact a support representative whatever the Issue or roblem. ASM also insures that your system is always current by providing updates, providl software enhancements and upgrades at no additional charge. Software upgrades even Include platform upgrades, which happen every few years so the City will not outgrow your technology Gold Package (standardl Maintenance Is billed as a rate of 20% of the purchased license list cost. Pursuant to Accela's standard Maintenance Agreement, the following Items are considered Maintenance Services, and lnduded to the Accela's Annual Maintenance. • Telephone Support • E-Mail Support • Online Support • Remote Support • On -Site Su Peat Software Updates Maintenance does not include system configuration, enhancement, or training. Support costs are 20% of the total software purchased. Software support is provided by the software.vendor. Infor offers 24x7 online support through www,infor365.com. Phone The AMANDA Annual Maintenance and Support Agreement are designed to provide to the Alliance ongoing maintenance and support services, lndudlng the distribution of new versions of the AMANDA products. Section 9. Pridng Proposal Indudes the cost annual maintenance. please refer to section 13.20 Software Support a coin Maintenance and Support for S complete description services. is CSDCa software support services. Please refer to section 11. Contacts, Temps and Conditions for a copy of CSDCs Maintenance and Technical Support Agreement. Standard Support / 8-8 EST Phone, Email, Desktop Streaming 18% of software cost platinum Package support is offered during standard business hours as we as remote access for complex riv fur qualified are received try our qualified Product Support Analyst's o ucto and ranked to from 1A (production down) to )E (and are re for enhancement) and are responded to In the order Suppott issues that may fall ode scope Include system setup, application performance t software), ftw modified objects (custom sare), hardware/operating Standard Support + BOOmb of offsite backup 13 passes to annual Users Group /year *does not Include all travel (plane ticket etc) Q0 custom developed reports/ year I3-day onsite wellness visits Dc/year * includes all travel expenses 23% of software cost ($15,000 k/yr minimum upgrade from Gold Package) .nfidential eCityGov Vendor Information Comparison Page 6 of 9 eCityGov Alliance Short List Vendor Information Comparison Vendor Information Tyler Technologies ' CRW Systems GovPartner EnerGov Solutions �Accela Infor (Hansen) ' CSDC Systems investment. Our policy Is to maintain the ASM cost as a fixed price indefinitely. Support: Support for this project will be provided both onsite and remotely during the Implementation / training phase and remotely during the support phase. There are two tiers of . support for the GovPartner solution. Tier 1 support will be provided to the Oty by the City's e- govemment consultant assigned by GovPartner. This consultant will be the primary interface with the City and will coorginate with tier 2 support as necessary. Tier 2 support will be provided by the GovPartner technical team. In addition the City will have access to an online dient support system to submit requests and check request . status in real -time 24/7 via the GovPartner website. Your support consultant will employ use of Web Conferencing for remote support as necessary. system, data correction and training issues. Package Add-ons 24 hour support 8% additional of software cost to either support package Additional Su000rt Services Custom Reporting On- Demand Custom Reporting Services (not included in Standard Support) • Report Enhancement - $349 Custom Report - $499 Non- Standard Development - $99 /hr Custom Development Services Oustom Software Development CData Conversion Services $150 - $199 /hr Onsite Training Professional Onsite Training Services $ 899 /Day + travel i 13. Briefly describe your training: . • Approach and philosophy • Options nt��e center, fnteraoiNe Web courses, CD /DVD, onsite, train- the - trainer, etc • Prices /rates On -site training is preferred and training sessions are a . combination of lecture and hands-on education using live data from the customer site. Full details In RFP response. Po Training programs for both System Administrators and End Users. Offer Basses In report writing to assist agency in cleating and customizing Provide onsite training, rePo�• ng, online context sensitive, online tutorials and additional training re4 as required. Able to customize a train- the - trainer program If required. Cost of training is approximatey $2, 500 /onsite day The City's training plan will be tailored to meet specific demands and the tedmical capabilities of staff. The training budget is.based on preliminary estimates of approximately 10 students that will require 2 — 5 days of training. 9 trains Initial training wit be provided for the s Subject oN lest Matter Experts (SME). SMEs will be exposed to more technical concepts and system administration capabilities and are sometimes responsible for system administration at a departmental level. Training is onsite at $1,000. per day plus �� mess. Offer adaptable on -site training solutions to meet each agency's needs dependent on a varying range of factors and restrictions from facilities and budgetary constraints to staff size and geographical location. Throe basic philosophies will apply: pretrensive Method, Train - Com Tral the - Trainer, or a combination of both. In addition there is a learning center (Atlanta, GA), aining, and full web training, documentation (customizable training materials) with each and every training program selected. "Train the trainer" approach Will train power users in all aspects of the application - both from a typical user perspective and from that s the technical or administrative personnel. Available of support any combination of training classes required. Comprehensive product training Proves via WebSc. Custom style training specific to your Agency may also be provided' Regional educational seminars throughout the year and during • its annual User Conference. Training can be provided by either the Implementation vendor, Sierra Systems, or by the software vendor. Cost for training is for on-site per my plus expenses for on -site training (12 student max). Training will be on site for groups of ten or fewer where every trainee will have direct access to a workstation and all software delivered. Train- the - Trainer sessions to ensure that those s attendance skids to acquire the necessary skills E succUsers.ly train the Client's Ens Users. Alternatively, and depending on the Clients requirements, will provide the End User training sessions Instead of or in addition to Train the-Trainer training is delivered The kin user training is delivered Burins with phase us provide the users with tlhe'yust in time" training they need for the transition to the production environment. AI training logistics induding fadlit setup, notifications to attendees and technical support will be finalized before training begins. Full details In RFP Response Section 13.19 Training Overview Confidential eCltyGov Vendor Information Comparison Page 7 of 9 eCityGov Alliance Short List Vendor Information Comparison Vendor Information Tyler Technologies CRW Systems GovPartner EnerGov Solutions Accela Infor (Hansen) CSDC Systems 14. Company Qualifications • Three or more years of related permitting system experience. Briefly describe. Application was rewritten from the ground up in 1998 at which time the permitting application was introduced. Installing and implementing permitting systems for 10+ years. Developed of solutions for Community Development Management for over 18 years. Such solutions Include software applications for Permit Management, Project Application Traddng, Code Enforcement, License Management, nagemenG Citizen Response Management, Interactive Voice Response, Mobile/Field Access and GIS Integration. Delivered and supported permitting systems since 2000. Over five years, implementing over 121 governmental agencies similar to size and scope as the agency's represented within this RFP response. These implementations and experiences have driven the application to be diversified and flexible while at the same time providing a core. system designed around Land Management "best practices ". Moreover, a majority of these agencies are or were becoming GIS "Centric' organizations and overwhelming selected EnerGov and its GIS centridty. provided automated permitting solutions 28 years. Released In 1996. 13+ years designing and implementing permitting systems to govemment agencies. The latest Web-based version Includes best practice templates based upon feedback from clients and staff. 20+ years of experience implementing Permitting systems and more than 10 years delivering on-line Permitting solutions. • Experience working with cities of our slze. Briefly describe. Public sector dient focus, 100% of efforts here. Various sized cities utilizing applications including several of the cities involved In this RFP process. Agencies ranging in stze from 4,000 residents up to a state agency with 5,000,000 residents but the majority of our dients range in population she of 30,000 to 70,000. Developed to help dties of this size fully meet their permitting management needs. Previous experience working with MBP.com and various Washington clients. Serve cities with populations ranging from 2,500 to 2,150,000. Solution Is highly configurable and can scale and cater to small or large populations. Most customers have populations of 100,000 or less. Implemented over 120 agencies with its Enterprise Land Management system over the last 5 years. Each of which were similar in size or larger than the agencies represented in this RFP. Breadth a experience minors the regional and local options considered in this proposal. Client base ranges from large statewide and regional deployments with hundreds users to small agendes with less than ten users. Solution is fully scalable to be udllzed In agencies as small as Issaquah, yet as large as the dies of Chicago or Las Vegas. Each of the partidpating jurisdictions fall within comfort zone. Customers by Population and functional scope similar. • Briefly describe your experience Integrating your permitting system with a 3 party • financial system, in ' particular: EDEN Springbrook SunGard IFAS Open architecture allows 3'" party product interfacing. The cities currently utilizing EDEN applications will have a completely Integrated system. Created a.batch script that exports the needed financial Information to the Financial System on a nightly basis. This has been created for agencies utilizing the three financial vendors listed here. Automated processes to capture and create a batch file for import Into systems such as IFAS, Springbrook and EDEN. Can • directly integrate depending on transactional needs. The open architecture of the .NET platform ensures a stable and secure environment within which to operate while greatly enhancing data mobility, data sharing, and data integration. • Data Services departments have experience In providing flat file export utilities, API's, Web Services, etc. to fadlitate the required finandal and other integration points. Integrated the proposed system with Eden Finandal in charlotte County NC; experience in 3'" party Integrations, Interfaces to an agency's 3r1 party financial system have been created for many projects. Developed and Installed many Interfaces. All system integration requirements will be handled by the AMANDA Integrated adaptors and by the Enterprise Application Interface (EAI) module; configured for real -time data transfers. • Briefly describe your experience integrating with ESRI GIS. Embedded Into application; product is designed to work with GIS systems and utilize ESRI mapping tools. 12 year ESRI business partner. 3 plug -Ins to incorporate ESRI GIS data. Member of the ESRI Developer Network (EDN) for over 5 years. Interfadng with ESRI using ArcGIS Server 9.3.1. REST API from their Microsoft Sllverlight 3.0 to olset. GIS "Centric" application based on the latest ArcGIS piatforrn. Leverage each agency's GIS infrastructure for 'Viewing" but also leverages the geodatabase as central repository for property data thus allowing sophisticated business intelligence functions from spatial attributes to be incorporated into the system. (2009 ESRI Business Partner of the Year) Accela GIS out of the box interface between the ESRI GIS System and Accela Automation. Two l ferent GIs components: Map Drawer Is an interactive map display and query tool that provides users with access to the from within toe workflow n process and GeoAdministrator is designed for the GIS editors or analysts who create and manage addresses, assets and parcels on the map. GIS Adaptor module has been designed for data transfers between AMANDA and ArcGIS databases. Both Permit and Inspection records will be integrated with the GIS database. :onfldential eCityGov Vendor Information Comparison Page 8 of 9 eCityGov Alliance Short List Vendor Information Comparison Vendor Information Tyler Technologies CRW Systems GovPartner EnerGov Solutions Accela Infor (Hansen) CSDC Systems • Briefly describe your experience Integrating your permitting system with a customer, developed or 3'" party Web front- end /portal. None City of Mercer Island, WA to MBP.com None Open architecture of the .NET. platform ensures a stable and secure environment within which to operate while greatly enhandng data mobility, data sharing, and data integration. This coupled with having already developed a seamlessly integrated front end web portal provides necessary API level integration to facilitate a central front end interface with multiple agency backend processing. one None Gty of Bellevue, WA & Snohomish County, WA to MBP.com 01 Confidential ecitvGov Vendor Information Cmmnarison Page 9 of 9 26 Technology Fee Usage Email sent out April 2010 Updated: July 27, 2011 27 Bufldinq ... 1L rtl-U.s F lictWbiliC :Notes City of Federal Way $ 6.00 yes yes yes also charged against mech, plumb, elect City of Covington $ 38.00 yes yes yes also charged against mech, plumb, fire sprinkler /alarm City of Bellingham $ - City of Des Moines $ 25.00 yes no no City of Black Diamond $ - City of Auburn $ - City of Ocean Shores $ - City of Kent 3% considering adoption of technology City of Burien $ - City of SeaTac $ - City of Newcastle $ - City of Lynnwood $ - City of Sammamish $ - City of Renton 3% effective 11/2010 - applies to all permits City of Mercer Island see notes The cost to submit via the EPlan process is based on the number of original plan sheets (at $2 per sheet; there are not additional fees for subsequent submittals, supplemental documents, calculations, letters, forms, etc.). City of Maple Valley $ - City of Redmond 3% applies to all permits, land use applications, public works, fire City of Tacoma 5% every permit City of Bothell 5% added to all fees listed other than state, impact, mitigation or facility City of Issaquah 1.3% yes yes yes also charged against mech, plumb, fire sprinkler /alarm City of Kirkland 1.3% yes yes yes also charged against mech, plumb, fire sprinkler /alarm Email sent out April 2010 Updated: July 27, 2011 27 $140,000.00 $120,000.00 $100,000.00 ..� $80,000.00 $60,000.00 $40,000.00 $20,000.00 Technology Fee Comparison $- 2011 thru Ju y .................... ............................... $13,326.08 $30,752.49 $51,254.15 $9,588.00 $39,950.00 ►g 1.3% of fee collected Li 3.0% of fee collected 1415.0% of fee collected $6.00 per issued permit x$25.00 per issued permit; $58,057.52 $96,762.53 $12,564.00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $52,350.00 L.. $13,242.67 $30,560.00 $50,933.33 $10,182.00 ...._... .__..._ ........................ $42,425.00 $33,801.99 $78,004.59 $130,007.66 $19,296.00 . ............................... _............. $80,400.00 $68,333.07 $113,888.45 $13,284.00 ......... . ........ ............................... $55,350.00 $18,714.59 $43,187.52 $71,979.20