Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Emergency Communications topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

City outlines phased plan for 9‑1‑1/PSAP transition; CAD procurement and capital costs flagged

Public Safety and Community Health Committee · March 30, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

City project staff presented a four‑phase plan to stand up a local PSAP, starting with a June phone go‑live, an October rollout of crime‑call answering and a January 2027 CAD/dispatch phase; staff estimated a first‑year CAD implementation cost of about $2.9 million and sought council approval actions to proceed.

Spokane staff provided a multi‑phase update on plans to build a local public safety answering point (PSAP) and deploy a new computer‑aided dispatch (CAD) system.

Steven Williams walked the committee through four phases: a June 1 phone go‑live to preserve incoming call capability, an Oct. 1 start for crime call answering and incident reporting, a Jan. 1, 2027 phase to dispatch Spokane Fire, and subsequent work to fully assume 9‑1‑1 answering. He said the initial phone phase was accelerated because the county is decommissioning an existing phone system earlier than planned.

Williams said the project will deploy citizen online reporting, AI triage for nonemergency calls, and training for current SPD dispatchers; Phase 1 will require hiring 10–13 call takers and 3–6 public safety dispatchers for crime‑check work, while later phases will add additional FTE for fire dispatch and supervisors.

On costs, Williams said the first year of CAD implementation is estimated at $2.9 million (a late reduction of about $300,000 was negotiated), and council will see an amendment for approval. He and other staff also listed facility needs at the planned PSAP site — electrical grounding concerns, security camera upgrades, furniture replacement and gym/wellness equipment — and said quotes on those items are pending.

Council members pressed for comparative cost benchmarks, more conservative revenue assumptions and a side‑by‑side of expenses and potential offsets (current payments to the county vendor, efficiencies from moving off contracted dispatch) before committing major capital. Staff said they are continuing weekly work with project‑management and finance teams and expect to refine staffing and revenue models, flagging an estimated $400,000 gap in 2028 under current conservative assumptions but projecting the gap could be closed by reallocated dispatch funding and other efficiencies.

No final procurement vote was recorded in the committee; staff requested council consideration of the CAD implementation amendment in upcoming meetings.