Arms Policy Board Regular Meeting

Area-wide Records Management System ARMS Policy Board Meeting Minutes DATE: August 20, 2015 3:30 PM PLACE: City of Urbana - Executive Conference Room 400 South Vine Street, Urbana, IL MEMBERS PRESENT: Chief Jeff Christensen, UIPD Chief Anthony Cobb, CPD Chief Paul Farber, RPD Deputy Chief Sylvia Morgan (proxy for Chief Pat Connolly), UPD Sheriff Dan Walsh, CCSO MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Lt. Keith Cunningham, CCSO Cassie Heldman, UPD Sanford Hess, Urbana IT Dave Wakefield, Urbana IT OTHERS PRESENT: None 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 3:00 p.m. 2. Additions to the Agenda There were none. 3. Election of Officers • Chair o Chief Christensen nominated Sheriff Walsh. DC Morgan seconded. Sheriff Walsh was unanimously elected. • Vice-Chair o Sheriff Walsh nominated DC Morgan. Chief Christensen seconded. DC Morgan was unanimously elected. • Treasurer Page 1 of 5  ARMS Policy Board Meeting Minutes – August 20, 2015 o There was a discussion to clarify if the Treasurer has to sign checks, and it was answered that they do not. The roles of the Treasurer are outlined in the ARMS Agreement. o Sheriff Walsh nominated Chief Cobb. DC Morgan seconded. Chief Cobb was unanimously elected. 3. Public Input There was none. 4. Staff Report Sanford Hess presented a staff report covering the following five major initiatives. • Documentation: An effort is underway to update ARMS documentation and move it to a web-based platform. This project started over summer with work by the Urbana IT Intern, and will continue with the effort of a former Urbana PSR who will be re -hired on a 12-week temporary basis. Payroll costs for documentation will require a budget amendment, but the expenses for ARMS will still be less than the revenue from the ARMS agencies. • Web-based Field Reporting: The major work by Dave Wakefield right now is moving Field Reporting to the “ARMS EZ” platform. This effort will allow for some improvements to the Field Reporting process, and will also remove the need to update the laptops when there is a Field Reporting change. A “Focus Group” of representatives from all ARMS jurisdictions met twice over the summer to give input on the changes. The goal for the rollout is October. o Sanford discussed that Sergeants and supervisors will need to train their staff on the new Field Reporting screens, in the same manner as the CCSO rollout. o Dave Wakefield explained that due to the technical changes, it will not be possible for some people to use old Field Reporting while others use the new version. o Chief Cobb asked about the testing efforts. Sanford noted that any testers would need to be entering reports in a fake environment that is not real-life. There was agreement that some light-duty officers would be ideal testers of the new software. o Sanford agreed to reach out around the end of September to gather some names for testing at the beginning of October. • Multi-Agency Reporting: After the Field Reporting re-write is complete, another change planned will allow an officer to write a Supplemental for a Report Number in another Jurisdiction. o Sanford said that the same change will also address a second request – securing reports to only a limited number of badge numbers within a jurisdiction. (For example, narcotics investigations.)  Chief Cobb asked when this would be available, and Sanford answered that it would be the end of the calendar year. Page 2 of 5 2  ARMS Policy Board Meeting Minutes – August 20, 2015 o A discussion occurred about a short-term approach for the cross-Jurisdiction Street Crimes Unit. DC Morgan presented the idea that user IDs could be created in another jurisdiction for Street Crimes members.  However, that person would have the ability to view ALL of the Field Reports in the other Jurisdiction with the short-term approach. • Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) Form: Another change that can follow the Field Reporting updates is including the CIT information in the Field Report. Sanford reported that he met with the CIT representatives, and designed an entry screen for CIT information that would be part of the Field Report. o Another change that would be related to the CIT form would be to introduce an “FI Card” to Field Reporting. This would be a streamlined version of the Face Sheet that captures information like the FI Card, but that officers would enter in Field Reporting, instead of handing in an FI card to records staff. o Chief Cobb asked about changes to the Case Management process.  Sanford responded that there is a Case Management discussion group, who will review the (new) documentation on Case Management.  Sanford expected that changes will then be coming out of the Case Management review process.  Chief Cobb noted that this is an urgent need for CPD. o Sheriff Walsh asked about recent changes in the State legislature for FIs.  Sheriff Walsh expressed concern that new changes should be included in FIs for January 1, 2016.  Chief Cobb explained that this information is going to be part of the same IDOT reporting process.  There was discussion about the needs to give the person a written notice for Terry Stops. • Quicket (e-Citations): Sanford attended a meeting between Urbana police and Quicket, a local company based in Research Park that has developed an e -Citation solution. o Sanford described how their solution includes a tablet and printer, so that it’s able to immediately produce a receipt (as discussed with FI cards). o Sanford said that the solution lacks a records management process on the back - end. In a best-case scenario, it could be the front-end for officers to record information and print a receipt. o He also said that he directed Quicket to speak with Katie Blakeman, the Circuit Clerk. o Chief Cobb asked about replacement cycles for citation printing equipment in the cars. A discussion occurred about the timing of purchasing equipment that might be needed for e-Citations. • A discussion occurred about the relationship of the (new) Policy Board to decisions made in the (existing) ARMS User Group. Page 3 of 5 3  ARMS Policy Board Meeting Minutes – August 20, 2015 o Sanford agreed to copy the Policy Board on minutes from the User Group. o There was concern that all Policy-level decisions should go through the Policy Board. o Sanford said that the User Group will be prioritizing changes at their October meeting, and that he will bring the list of prioritized items to the Policy Board at the November meeting. 5. New business • Action Item - Establish Policy on Electronic Attendance o The Policy Board expressed a preference for sending a replacement instead of electronically attending. o The board decided that Proxy notification by e-mail to Sanford (and copying the board) would be sufficient. • Action Item - Establish Policy on counting Abstentions (with Yes, with No, or not at all) o The Policy Board expressed a preference to not count abstentions. A motion was made by Chief Cobb, seconded by Chief Christensen to adopt the policies on Proxy Notification and Counting abstentions described above. The vote was unanimous to approve. • Action Item - Identify “Official” record keeper of the ARMS Policy Board o Chief Christensen made a motion, seconded by Chief Cobb, that Urbana is the “Official” record keeper for ARMS. Unanimously approved. • Action Item - Approve ARMS Operating Budget o Sanford provided the budgeted amounts for ARMS in the Urbana City budget. o He noted that the expense budget is lower in FY 16 than FY 15. o He also noted that the balance from FY 15 was retained in the ARMS Fund, and not transferred to the VERF.  Sheriff Walsh identified a topic for future discussion – a long-term strategy for replacing ARMS, and saving for such a replacement. o Sanford proposed postponing the budget approval to November to provide a more accurate picture. • Action Item - Approve removing two fields from ARMS Field Reporting Face Sheet: “Shift” and “Computers” o Sanford presented a topic from the Field Reporting development – removing two fields that seem unused.  “Shift” is used inconsistently – sometimes the shift of the crime and sometimes the officer’s work shift. Since ARMS has other information (the time of the event, the time of the officer’s arrival), the proposal is to remove it. Page 4 of 5 4  ARMS Policy Board Meeting Minutes – August 20, 2015 “Computer” was supposed to mean that “Computers were used in committing this crime”. Sanford checked with Teri Hickman at ISP and they don’t need it. It is not presented to the state with UCR data.  Sheriff Walsh asked about statistics on the use of computers. Chief Christensen noted that Crime Codes could be used to create a query like that. o Deputy Chief Morgan motioned to approve the removal of the “Shift” and “Computer” fields from the Field Report. Chief Christensen seconded. Motion was approved unanimously. • Discussion – Proposed ARMS Security Policy o Sanford presented the proposed guidelines:  Any person seeking ARMS access must be fingerprinted on a “Criminal Justice Applicant Card” and it should be to a standard (… defined by the ARMS Policy board).  The person seeking ARMS access must sign a request for access that stipulates basic security assumptions (... defined by the ARMS Policy Board).  The person must have a secure workspace, defined as one where the computer station is in a locked area and the public does not have access to the computer workstation (… or as defined by the ARMS Policy Board). o Chief Cobb asked which people have access to ARMS now.  Lt. Cunningham said that several groups have access, but that County users are only granted access if they are LEADS certified.  Sanford said that he would disseminate lists of who has users to ARMS now, along with the date of their last access. o The group discussed the process for getting access. The Policy Board clarified that it would like to be part of the process for approving new agencies/locations.  There was discussion that Agencies who are ARMS users will continue to set up their own users.  Users from new Agencies will then need to go through a review process by the ARMS Policy Board.  Sanford took the action item of reaching out to the agencies with ARMS access to find out how they are using ARMS, and how many people have access. 6. Adjournment – the meeting adjourned at 4:10 PM. Page 5 of 5 5