Download
1 / 40
400 likes | 544 Views
Leveraging Partners, Resources & Technology for Delinquent Collections a City of Houston Case Study Presented by Don Pagel, City of Houston Parking Management Division Joe R. Martin, Municipal Intelligence Group. The Houston Mobile Enforcement Fleet. Overview. Abstract
E N D
Leveraging Partners, Resources & Technology for Delinquent Collectionsa City of Houston Case StudyPresented byDon Pagel, City of Houston Parking Management DivisionJoe R. Martin, Municipal Intelligence Group
Overview • Abstract • Statement of ProblemSince the beginning of booting operations in 2005, the annual budget of 2,400 boots installed per year had never been achieved
Agenda • Houston Metrics • The Team • Background • The Challenge • The Solution: Phase I, II & III • The Results • The Cost • Summary & Conclusion
Houston Metrics • Square Miles 650 • Population 2,100,000 • On Street Parking Spaces 4,700 • Off Street Parking Spaces 1,300 • Meters 2,000 • Staff 70 • Annual Citations 238,000 * • Annual Meter Revenue $4,700,000 * • Annual Citation Revenue $7,600,000 * * 2011 budget
Enforcement Background Method of Locating Boot Eligible Vehicles Busted Thumbs Booted Vehicle Information by Year
The ChallengeIn 650 Square Miles of Houston,Boot Eligible Vehicles are“Few and Far Between”
Pace of Enforcement: Walking Beat PEO • Walking Beat PEO: • Typical Walking Speed 3 MPH • Walking Speed when Manually Typing Plates <1 MPH • Miles Covered in 8 Hour Shift <5 Miles
Pace of Enforcement: Mobile PEO • Mobile PEO: • Typical Driving Speed 15 MPH • Driving Speed when Manually Typing Plates < 2 MPH • Miles Covered in 8 Hour Shift <20 Miles Mobile PEO pace reduced to NEAR WALKING SPEED
The ConclusionBoot Eligible Vehicles are too Spread Out and PEO Coverage Barely Touches 650 Square Miles
The Solution Bring Technology to Bear
Phase IImplement License Plate Recognition Systems In March 2010, Municipal Intelligence Group (MIG) is engaged by Duncan Solutions and Parking Management to provide vehicle immobilization services using MIG enforcement vehicles equipped with License Plate Recognition (LPR)
Phase I Details • Launch March 2010 • One LPR equipped enforcement vehicle • Operating all eligible booting hours • 8 am – 6 pm M-F • Areas of coverage outside focus areas covered by PEO’s • Spot eligible vehicles, install and release boots
Phase I Results • Significant improvement in booting activity • Better understanding of metricsBut… • Still not on track to meet budget • LPR enforcement vehicle operating at a loss
Phase I Assessment While LPR made great strides in improving booting results, due to the low density of boot eligible vehicles, one enforcement vehicle could not makeup the difference to meet budget. Additionally, the low density produced a negative ROI on enforcement vehicle operations and therefore not sustainable by MIG & Duncan.
Phase I Challenge While LPR proved a useful resource in locating scofflaw vehicles and created a significant net gain in booting activity, a new program needed to be devised to expand booting activities while creating a positive ROI to the contractors.
Phase II – Pilot Program MIG was retained to operate in areas not already covered by walking beat and mobile PEO’s. These PEO areas are typically high in traffic and rich in booting opportunities. Due to the slow pace of manual plate entry by PEO’s, it was expected that many vehicles were being missed.
Phase II – Pilot Program As Mobile PEO’s were already patrolling in areas of high traffic but at a very slow pace, a pilot program was conceived for MIG to provide, maintain and support LPR equipment on two mobile PEO vehicles. Hence… “Leverage Existing Resources”
Phase II Details • Launch February 2011 • LPR systems, installation, maintenance, and support all provided by MIG • Installed on: • Boot Van patrolling CBD • Prius patrolling suburbs
Phase II - Pilot Results Boot Installed
Phase III – Expansion & Enhancements Due to success of the Phase II Pilot Program, during the balance of 2010 the program was expanded and enhanced: • LPR systems installed on two (2) additional PEO Prius’ operating in the suburbs, expanding the Parking Management PEO LPR fleet to four (4). • Implementation of StreetOPSTM, the proprietary MIG boot log management system.
Phase III - StreetOPS Historically, Parking Management recorded boot activities using an Excel spreadsheet maintained by Dispatch. This allowed only one user at a time and only at the location of the file. Additionally, management reporting was, at best, difficult and slow. Feedback of results from the field came too late to take action. Now that booting activity had significantly increased, a new solution was needed.
Phase III - StreetOPS At no cost to Parking Management, MIG provided StreetOPSTM, a boot activity log, management and reporting system designed by MIG. Features include: • Web interface SQL database application • Unlimited simultaneous users • Real-time access to data and reporting • Boot, notice, release and tow tracking • Android, iPhone & Windows Mobile compatibility
Phase III – StreetOPS Landing Page
Phase III – StreetOPS Enter New Boot
Phase III – StreetOPS Daily Activity Report
Phase III – StreetOPS Boots Installed Report
Phase III – StreetOPS Bootable Areas Map
Phase III – StreetOPS Daily & Monthly Totals
Phase II-III Results * Actual calendar year 2011 & projected 2012 fiscal year
Phase II-III Results 2,400 * Actual calendar year 2011 & projected 2012 fiscal year
Phase I-II-III Costs Provided by Municipal Intelligence Group & Duncan Solutions to Parking Management: Cost to Parking Management:
Summary & Conclusion Due to the low number and wide dispersion of boot eligible vehicles in the City of Houston and Houston’s large land mass, the traditional methods of enforcement and outsourcing were not viable and did not achieve desired results. By leveraging existing assets and resources of Municipal Intelligence Group, Duncan Solutions and Parking Management, a solution was reached that finally met Parking Management booting budgetary goals.
