Leveraging Partners, Resources & Technology for Delinquent Collections

a City of Houston Case StudyPresented by

Don Pagel, City of Houston Parking Management Division

Joe R. Martin, Municipal Intelligence Group

The Houston Mobile Enforcement Fleet

Overview

• Abstract

• Statement of Problem

Since 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

• 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

Houston Metrics

The TeamCity of Houston

Parking Management

Division

CoH PMDEnforcementDepartment

Duncan SolutionsCollections

Municipal Intelligence Group

Booting & Support Services

T2 SolutionsT2 Flex &

Handhelds

CoH PMDMeter

Department

Enforcement Background

Booted Vehicle Information by YearFiscal Year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Budgeted Boots Installed 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400

Actual Boots Installed 1,300 1,300 1,400 1,400 1,300

Shortfall 1,100 1,100 1,000 1,000 1,100

Method of Locating Boot Eligible Vehicles

Busted Thumbs

The Challenge

In 650 Square Miles of Houston,Boot Eligible Vehicles are“Few and Far Between”

Booting Density Metrics

Market Comparison

Houston Pittsburgh Detroit Chicago

Square Miles 650 55 143 227

Population 2.1 mm 305,000 713,000 2.7 mm

Population per Sq. Mile 3,200 5,600 5,000 12,000

Boot List Vehicles 32,000 6,000 86,000 500,000

Vehicles per Sq. Mile 49 100 600 2,200

vs. Houston 2 x 12 x 45 x

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

Pace of Enforcement Daily Coverage in Houston

#

Walking Beat PEO Miles per Shift 5

Number of Walking Beat PEO’s 30

Total Walking Beat Miles per Day 150

Mobile PEO Miles per Shift 20

Number of Mobile PEO’s 15

Total Mobile PEO Miles per Day 300

Total PEO Miles per Day 450

Lane Miles of City Streets - Houston 16,000

Percent of Lane Coverage Daily 3%

The Conclusion

Boot 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 metrics

But…

• 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

Leverage Existing Resources

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

Year February March

2010 149 139

2011 233 224

Improvement 84 85

% Increase 56% 60%

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 - StreetOPSHistorically, 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 fromthe field came too late to take action. Now that booting activity had significantly increased, a new solution was needed.

Phase III - StreetOPSAt 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 – StreetOPSDaily Activity Report

Phase III – StreetOPSBoots Installed Report

Phase III – StreetOPSBootable Areas Map

Phase III – StreetOPS

Daily & Monthly Totals

Phase II-III Results

Phase II-III Results

Fiscal Year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012*

Budgeted 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400

Actual Boots 1,300 1,300 1,400 1,400 1,300 1,300 2,000 2,400

Shortfall 1,100 1,100 1,000 1,000 1,100 1,100 400 0

* Actual calendar year 2011 & projected 2012 fiscal year

Phase II-III Results

* Actual calendar year 2011 & projected 2012 fiscal year

2005 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '120

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Fiscal Year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012*

Budgeted 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400

Actual Boots 1,300 1,300 1,400 1,400 1,300 1,300 2,000 2,400

Shortfall 1,100 1,100 1,000 1,000 1,100 1,100 400 0

2,400

Phase I-II-III Costs

Provided by Municipal Intelligence Group & Duncan Solutions to Parking Management:

Cost to Parking Management:

4 License Plate Recognition Systems Maintenance & RepairInstallation/Support StreetOPSTM

2 Enforcement Vehicles (1 seasonal) 2 Enforcement Crews (1 seasonal)

$0.00(included in collections contract)

Summary & ConclusionDue 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.

The Houston Mobile Enforcement Fleet

Questions and Answers