North Carolina Criminal Justice Information Network Governing Board Report
Submitted to the
Senior Chair, Chairs, Co-Chairs, and Vice Chairs of the
Senate and House Appropriations Committees
and the
Chairs, Co-Chairs, and Vice Chairs of the
Senate and House Appropriations Subcommittees on Justice and Public Safety
April 2011
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................ 1
Strategic Direction & Recommendations ......................................................................... 3
Background ..................................................................................................................... 5
Governing Board ............................................................................................................. 8
CJIN Governing Board Membership ........................................................................ 8
CJIN Governing Board Financials ............................................................................ 8
CJIN Governing Board ............................................................................................. 9
Updated Information Sharing Initiative .......................................................................... 10
Executive Summary ............................................................................................... 10
Background ............................................................................................................ 11
Criminal Justice Technology and Information Updates .......................................... 12
Local Law Enforcement Agencies/Record Management System Vendors ............ 14
Agency/RMS Vendor/County/Information Sharing Chart ....................................... 16
Analysis .................................................................................................................. 45
RMS Vendor Workshops ........................................................................................ 47
Financial Impact ..................................................................................................... 48
Alternatives, Benefits, & Adverse Consequences .................................................. 49
Summary ................................................................................................................ 51
Recommendations ................................................................................................. 51
Updated Pawn Broker Transaction Study ..................................................................... 52
Executive Summary ............................................................................................... 52
Background ............................................................................................................ 53
Study Bill HB 1282 ................................................................................................. 53
State Statute - Chapter 91A ................................................................................... 54
Property Crime ....................................................................................................... 59
Analysis .................................................................................................................. 62
Pawn Shop Statistics - Other States ...................................................................... 62
National Pawn Association ..................................................................................... 65
Letter - Pawn Broker Lobbyist ................................................................................ 66
Existing North Carolina Systems ............................................................................ 67
Other States and Large City Systems .................................................................... 78
Summary of Analysis ............................................................................................. 82
Recommendations ................................................................................................. 83
Activities ........................................................................................................................ 84
Cities and Towns .................................................................................................... 85
Counties ................................................................................................................. 88
State Systems ........................................................................................................ 90
Federal Agencies ................................................................................................... 92
Friends of CJIN ............................................................................................................. 94
Review of 2010 Future Activities & Recommendations ................................................. 98
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 1
Executive Summary
The Criminal Justice Information Network (CJIN) Governing Board created pursuant to Section
23.3 of Chapter 18 of the Session Laws of the 1996 Second Extra Session shall report by April
1st of each year, to the Chairs of the Senate and House Appropriations Committees, the Chairs
of the Senate and House Appropriations subcommittees on Justice and Public Safety, and the
Fiscal Research Division of the General Assembly on:
• The operating budget of the Board, the expenditures of the Board as of the date of the
report, and the amount of funds in reserve for the operation of the Board; and
• A long-term strategic plan and the cost analysis for statewide implementation of the
Criminal Justice Information Network. For each component of the Network, the initial
cost estimate of the component, the amount of funds spent to date on the component,
the source of funds for expenditures to date, and a timetable for completion of that
component, including additional resources needed at each point.
The 2011 CJIN Report was altered to highlight the Board’s recommendations during the year.
One of the main objectives was to evaluate and identify enterprise solutions that were
compatible with on-going projects but did not require substantial funding. One of the
approaches was to investigate the possibility of partnerships with existing vendors.
After extensive research coupled with partnerships with both the local law enforcement
agencies and their Record Management System (RMS) Vendors, the CJIN Board
recommended the adoption of data exchange standards within the State of North Carolina.
Adopting a specific standard between the agency’s RMS Vendor and a central repository will
not only potentially save law enforcement tens of millions of dollars in the future but more
importantly it will provide the criminal justice community with an abundance of actionable
information that is not currently available to most agencies today. Furthermore, to our
knowledge, North Carolina would be the first state to deploy such a strategy and this practice
could be extended to other applications both within and outside of criminal justice. A section of
this report is dedicated to the Board’s Information Sharing Initiative.
The Board was directed to study the feasibility of creating an automated pawn transaction
database system as part of the criminal justice information network. The Board submitted the
results of this study in April 2010. To facilitate this study, the CJIN Board conducted workshops
with county and municipal law enforcement agencies, information technology professionals,
pawnshop owners, pawnshop lobbyists, and vendors operating in North Carolina. A significant
portion of two CJIN Board meetings were dedicated to presentations and discussions regarding
the study. Additionally, the CJIN staff reviewed numerous other studies that were completed by
other states and participated in conversations with personnel from those states. What we did
not know and learned in the process of performing the study was that for an incremental
increase in technology coupled with legislative changes that would extend past the pawn
brokers to potentially include scrap metal, precious metals, secondhand dealers, etc. would
have a far greater impact on reducing property crime in the State of North Carolina. Included in
this report is an updated version of 2010 report.
All of the Board’s recommendations are contained in the Section entitled “Strategic Direction
and Recommendations.”
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 2
The report also contains background information regarding the Governing Board and the
membership, an update on criminal justice activities, a proposed strategic direction, research
derived from federal, state and local government initiatives that could be utilized within the state,
recognition of personnel providing assistance, and a review of our 2010 opportunities.
The General Appropriations Committee, the Appropriations Justice and Public Safety
Subcommittee, and the Joint Legislative Correction, Crime Control, and Juvenile Justice
Oversight Committee have historically relied upon the CJIN Board to undertake high profile
initiatives, requested cost allocation reports with recommendations, and allowed the Board to
provide technical demonstrations.
The CJIN Board has successfully installed a statewide criminal justice infrastructure that has
made information sharing a possibility – their implemented projects included mobile voice &
data, fingerprinting, court and juvenile justice applications, along with access to federal data
bases. The CJIN Board is by far the most knowledgeable cross-section of criminal justice
professionals assembled in North Carolina and possesses a proven track record of success.
Because most statewide projects cross over the jurisdictional boundaries between the Judicial
and the Executive branches, the membership of the CJIN Board is well represented by both
sides and has a history of success in working together.
In summary, the Board is comprised of 21 members appointed by the Governor, Chief Justice,
Speaker of the House, Senate President, Attorney General, and State Chief Information Officer.
It is the background of these members that has made all the aforementioned projects and the
ones highlighted in this report a success – Six Chief Information Officers/IT Directors, four from
law enforcement, five Officers of the Court, four general public, DMV Commissioner, and Chief
of Staff with Juvenile Justice.
.
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 3
Strategic Direction & Recommendations
In keeping with our objectives, the CJIN Board adopted a strategic direction that addressed
numerous initiatives over the last year. Two of these initiatives, Local Law Enforcement
Information Sharing and the Pawn Transaction Study, resulted in the following
recommendations:
At the October 14, 2010 Board meeting, the members approved the following Local Law
Enforcement Information Sharing recommendations:
• Adopt a specific data standard to be used for Record Management System Vendors to
exchange information with a designated repository;
• Allow the local law enforcement agencies and the regional systems to begin exchanging
information with a federal agency (to be determined – FBI or NCIS);
• Request that each RMS Vendor select one of their North Carolina Law Enforcement
Agencies and implement an operational data standard with a federal agency (to be
determined – FBI or NCIS) as a proof of concept; and
• Redirect the routing of information from the selected federal agency back to the SBI
when the state repository becomes fully operational.
The Pawn Transaction Study Report was approved by the Board on March 18, 2010 with the
following Study Recommendation:
• What we did not know and learned in the process of performing the study was that for an
incremental increase in technology coupled with legislative changes that would extend
past the pawn brokers to potentially include scrap metal, precious metals, secondhand
dealers, etc. would have a far greater impact on reducing property crime in the State of
North Carolina.
• For this reason, the CJIN Board respectfully requests the Oversight Committee consider
allowing the Board to broaden the original study.
Note: There are numerous other states that are either in the process of studying this or have
recently implemented similar legislation.
Introduced in the Legislative session this year, was SB-144 which requires Cash Converter
Businesses to keep records of purchases and to make those records available to local law
enforcement.
• The CJIN Board, based on the recommendations from the study report, fully supports
this legislation.
Based on all the presentations, workshops, and input from the criminal justice community, the
CJIN Board supports the following recommendations, initiatives, and projects:
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 4
• Deploy national standards for information sharing especially the ones that are already
being utilized and proven to be successful, which will result in a decrease in operating
costs and cost avoidance in the tens of millions, viable candidates include Local Law
Enforcement Record Management Systems, Jail Management Systems, Traffic Crash
Systems, etc.;
• Discontinue the expansion and creation of new systems that are being designed to
replace the business core systems that perform all the process work flow within any
given state agency, re-evaluate using these new systems as providers of information;
utilize web services or similar technology to enhanced these core systems;
• Utilize and enhance existing systems prior to spending millions of dollars on the
development of new systems, especially if the existing systems are very successful;
example, expand the use of NCIS’s Law Enforcement Information Exchange (LInX).
The LInX System has a proven track record within the NC Local Law Enforcement
community; therefore, this system should be expanded and interconnected with other
state and federal agencies;
• Continue the Board’s partnerships with NC businesses that assist law enforcement
agencies; Pawn Brokers, RMS/JMS Vendors, Crime Mapping Vendors, etc.;
• Pursue the potential for creating a pilot project that would address two-factor
authentication and possibly be certified as compliant with the US Department of Justice;
• Continue to support the Electronic Discovery Project; assist the District Attorneys, the
Administrative Office of the Courts, the State Bureau of Investigation, the local law
enforcement agencies, etc.;
• Investigate the possibility of securing federal funding for using North Carolina as a
candidate for a statewide broadband network similar to the San Francisco/Bay Area
which was the selected candidate for a regional solution;
• Continue to support the expansion of the CJLEADS Project; and
• Continue to support the expansion of the NCAWARE Project.
The CJIN Board is committed to exploring opportunities that will enhance the Criminal Justice
Community.
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 5
Background
The North Carolina Criminal Justice Information Network (CJIN) initiative is a project which will
allow the sharing of information between state and local criminal justice agencies.
During the 1994 Special Crime Session, the North Carolina General Assembly created the CJIN
Study Committee and appropriated monies to study and develop a plan for a statewide criminal
justice information network. The CJIN Study Final Report, dated April 7, 1995, outlined a
comprehensive strategic plan that provided the vision for the statewide Criminal Justice
Information Network in North Carolina. Based on recommendations and strategies identified in
the plan, the General Assembly established the Criminal Justice Information Network (CJIN)
Governing Board in Section 23.3 of Chapter 18 of the Session Laws of the 1996 Second Extra
Session.
North Carolina is recognized today in the nation as one of the leading states in developing a
statewide criminal justice infrastructure. Our success is due directly in part to the North Carolina
General Assembly recognizing the need for further coordination and cooperation between state
and local agencies in establishing standards for sharing of criminal justice information.
The CJIN Governing Board created the following vision:
To develop a statewide criminal justice information network in North Carolina that will
enable a properly authorized user to readily and effectively use information, regardless
of its location in national, state, or local databases.
The Governing Board has built an outstanding reputation for successfully implementing
statewide programs. This success can be directly attributable to the hard work and dedication
of the board members along with their experience and diversity. The composition of the board
is made up of professionals from the state, county, and municipal levels representing law
enforcement, the court system, corrections, juvenile justice, information technology, and the
public.
Study Final Report Findings
The North Carolina Legislature, during their 1994 Special Crime Session, created a ‘Blue
Ribbon’ Study Committee to identify alternative strategies for developing and implementing a
statewide criminal justice information network in North Carolina that would permit the sharing of
information between state and local agencies. An examination of the state’s current criminal
justice information systems revealed the following deficiencies:
• It takes too long to positively identify persons. From fingerprints to photographs,
information is scattered across different databases and filing systems.
• A single, comprehensive source for a person’s criminal history is not available in North
Carolina. Bits and pieces must be assembled on each individual, causing valuable time
to be wasted on information collection.
• There is no single source of outstanding warrants. A person wanted in one county could
be stopped in another while the officer has no knowledge of an outstanding warrant.
This situation compromises public and officer safety.
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 6
• Data is entered excessively and redundantly. There is no single, centralized location for
all information and records so data is entered and reentered over and over again into
separate databases using different coding systems.
• There is no statewide, interagency mobile voice and data communications system.
Officers cannot talk to their counterparts across their own county, much less to those
across the state.
Study Final Report Recommendations
The CJIN Study Committee outlined the following major recommendations for removing these
barriers that hindered the establishment and implementation of a comprehensive criminal justice
information network. These recommendations also took into account the major building blocks
for a statewide criminal justice information network that were already in place in 1995.
• Establish a CJIN Governing Board to create, promote, and enforce policies and
standards.
��� Adopt system architecture standards, end-user upgrades, and system security standards
to facilitate movement of data between systems.
• Establish data standards for sharing information, including common definitions, code
structures, and formats.
• Implement Live Scan digitized fingerprint systems and Statewide Automated Fingerprint
Identification System (SAFIS) technology to accomplish positive fingerprint identification
within two hours of arrest.
• Implement a statewide magistrate system to streamline the process of warrant and case
creation.
• Build a statewide warrant repository that contains all new and served warrant
information.
• Implement a statewide fingerprint-based criminal history that includes all arrests and
dispositions.
• Build a statewide identification index that includes information from all state and local
agencies, as well as necessary linkages to federal justice agencies.
• Establish standards for, and implement a mobile voice and data communication network
that allows state and local law enforcement and public safety agencies to communicate
with each other, regardless of location within the state.
Participants
CJIN is comprised of state, local, public and private representatives. The Department of
Justice, the Department of Correction, the Department of Crime Control and Public Safety, the
Administrative Office of the Courts, the Department of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention, the Division of Motor Vehicles, and the State Chief Information Officer are
participating CJIN state agencies. Local representation includes Police Chiefs, Sheriffs, County
Commissioners, County Information System Directors, North Carolina Chapter of Public
Communications Officials International, Court Clerks of Superior Court, Judges, District
Attorneys, general public appointments by the Speaker of the House of Representatives and
President Pro Tempore of the Senate, and the North Carolina Local Government Information
System Association (NCLGISA).
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 7
Initiatives
The following CJIN initiatives evolved from the CJIN Study Final Report Recommendations:
• Voice Interoperability Plan for Emergency Responders (VIPER)
• Statewide Automated Fingerprint Identification System (SAFIS)
• CJIN-Mobile Data Network (CJIN-MDN)
• North Carolina Juvenile Online Information Network (NC-JOIN)
• Statewide Magistrate System
• End-User Technology
• CJIN Network Security
• CJIN Data Sharing Standards
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 8
Governing Board
Section 23.3 of Chapter 18 of the Session Laws of the 1996 Second Extra Session established
the Criminal Justice Information Network Governing Board within the Department of Justice
(DOJ) for administrative and budgetary purposes. Section 17.1.(a) of the Session Law 2003-
284 House Bill 397 transferred CJIN to the Department of Crime Control and Public Safety
(DCC&PS). The CJIN Governing Board is established within the DCC&PS for organizational
and budgetary purposes only and the Board exercises all of its statutory power independent of
control by the DCC&PS.
CJIN Governing Board Membership
There are twenty-one legislatively defined members on the Board. The CJIN Executive Director
serves as an advisory member to the Board and is supported by an Administrative Assistant.
There is also an ex-officio advisory member that represents the local city and county Information
System (IS) directors.
Mr. Robert Brinson, Department of Correction Chief Information Officer, was re-elected as the
CJIN Chair and Mr. Bill Stice, Technology Services Director, Town of Cary was re-elected as
the Vice-Chair.
The CJIN Web Site reflects almost all of the presentations provided at each meeting, all CJIN
reports, minutes of all the meetings, board membership, projects, and other relevant CJIN
activities. A CJIN email address is available for questions on CJIN operations. Based on all the
presentations and workshops over the last eighteen months an information sharing section was
added to the Web Site that reflects projects from the federal, state, and local levels – power
point presentations, handouts, contact information, etc.
CJIN Governing Board Financials
Until last year, the CJIN Board had operated on two, non-recurring appropriations of $100,000
each – the first funded Board operations from 1996 until 2004. The second $100,000
appropriation for the CJIN Board had a balance of $67,741.88 as of the March, 2009; the
Department of Crime Control and Public Safety, Administration Division, Fiscal Section did not
carry this balance forward. The Board’s operating fund for FY 2009/2010 was reduced to
$5,000.
The Department of Crime Control and Public Safety provided the CJIN Board with $2,500 in
temporary funding for FY 2010/2011. The temporary funding was used as follows:
DCCPS Computer Expenses (Maintenance, Managed LAN, etc.) $ 1,106.04
Travel for Board Members (Mileage, Meals, etc.) 626.00
Break Funds (Meetings) 152.00
Office Phone Service (CJIN Staff) 157.83
CJIN Staff Operating Expenses 0.00
Pending BDA for March 24th Meeting 350.00
Expenditures as of March 18, 2011 $ 91.87
Note: A special thanks to the Board members that expensed their travel to their agencies.
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 9
CJIN Governing Board
Governing Board Counsel – Lars Nance, Technical Advisor – Earl Bunting, Administrative Assistant – LaVonda Fowler, Executive Director – Eugene Vardaman
Appointed By Description Current Member
Governor Employee of Department of Crime Control & Public Safety Vacant
Governor Director or employee of State Correction Agency Robert Brinson, Chief Information Officer, Dept. of Correction
Governor Representative recommended by the Association of Chiefs of Police Glen Allen, Chief, Clayton P.D.
Governor Employee of Department of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention David Jones, Deputy Secretary
Governor Employee of Division of Motor Vehicles Commissioner Mike Robertson
General Assembly Representative of general public, recommended by the President Pro Tempore
of the Senate Robert Lee
General Assembly Representative of general public, recommended by the President Pro Tempore
of the Senate
Doug Logan, Emergency Management Coordinator, Granville
County
General Assembly Individual who is member of or working directly for the governing board of a
NC municipality and recommended by President Pro Tempore of the Senate Bill Stice, Technology Services Director, Town of Cary
General Assembly Representative of the general public, recommended by the Speaker of the
House of Representatives Barker French, Durham County
General Assembly Representative of the general public, recommended by the Speaker of the
House of Representatives Donnie Holt, Forsyth County
General Assembly
Individual who is a working member of or working directly for the governing
board of a NC county, recommended by the Speaker of the House of
Representatives
Todd Jones, Orange County, Chief Information Officer
Attorney General Employee of the Attorney General Vacant
Attorney General Representative recommended by the Sheriffs’ Association Tommy W. Allen, Sheriff, Anson County
Chief Justice, Supreme Court Director or employee of the Administrative Office of the Courts Basil McVey, Chief Information Officer, AOC Technology
Division
Chief Justice, Supreme Court Clerk of the Superior Court Mike McArthur, Chowan County
Chief Justice, Supreme Court Judge, trial court of the General Court of Justice Henry “Chip” Hight, Jr., Superior Court Judge, District 9
Chief Justice, Supreme Court Judge, trial court of the General Court of Justice H. Thomas Jarrell, Jr., District Court Judge, Judicial District 18
Chief Justice, Supreme Court District Attorney Al Williams, Sr. Assistant District Attorney, Judicial District 28
Chief Justice, Supreme Court Magistrate Eric Van Vleet, Durham County
State Chief Information Officer Appointment by the State Chief Information Officer George Bakolia, Deputy State Chief Information Officer
NC Chapter of Public Safety
Communications Officials
International, President
Active member of the NC Chapter of Public Safety Communications Officials
International
Steve Lingerfelt, Information Technology Director, City of High
Point
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 10
Updated Information Sharing Initiative
Executive Summary
The Criminal Justice Information Network (CJIN) Governing Board started studying local law
enforcement information sharing several years ago. After extensive research coupled with
partnerships with both the local law enforcement agencies and their Record Management
System (RMS) Vendors, the CJIN Board is in a unique position to recommend the adoption of
data exchange standards within the State of North Carolina. Adopting a specific standard
between the agency’s RMS Vendor and a central repository will not only potentially save law
enforcement tens of millions of dollars in the future but more importantly it will provide the
criminal justice community with an abundance of actionable information that is not currently
available to most agencies today. Furthermore, to our knowledge, North Carolina would be the
first state to deploy such a strategy and this practice could be extended to other applications
both within and outside of criminal justice.
This study began by inviting numerous police agencies and sheriffs to share with the Board their
methods for communicating with other jurisdictions. These law enforcement agencies provided
live demonstrations of their systems, power point presentations, handouts, and discussions
regarding the enhancing of their existing methods, procedures, and technology; overall, the
agencies are doing an outstanding job as evidenced by their postings on the CJIN Website.
Local law enforcement agencies across North Carolina are the custodians for a wealth of crime
fighting data. These agencies maintain a repository containing a comprehensive view of every
criminal incident that occurs within their jurisdiction. Over the last several decades this data has
been in transition in the majority of agencies from a manual to automated process, complete
with computers in the vehicles – millions of dollars are spent by local agencies to implement,
operate, and maintain these systems. While the functionality of these systems varies
significantly, they are each designed to satisfy the business needs of that agency.
In parallel with researching local information sharing, the CJIN Board contacted other states and
federal agencies to determine how the industry was addressing these issues. The Board
received presentations from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Naval Criminal
Investigative Service (NCIS) both of which have operational data repositories containing local
incident information and both are functional on a national level - an effort is currently underway
to connect these repositories.
The CJIN staff contacted all the RMS vendors that operate in North Carolina. Members of the
Board and law enforcement met with three of these vendors, that collectively serve in excess of
95% of our local agencies and have their corporate headquarters in North Carolina, to
determine how receptive they would be to providing a standard interface, and more importantly,
maintaining this interface as part of their future core suite of products. The vendors were not
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 11
only receptive to standardizing, they provided some significant insight into other areas such as
single sign-on, two factor authentication, warrants, etc. CJIN facilitated these meetings;
however, personnel from local law enforcement agencies and other state agencies were in
attendance including the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) and the State Bureau of
Investigation (SBI). The vendors also agreed to work closely with AOC on investigating an
electronic interface to the NCAWARE System.
The SBI has posted a Request for Proposal and is in the process of reviewing the submittals for
the purpose of obtaining the services of a vendor to assist with the creation of a state repository
for local incident and arrest data. The project is in its infancy and until completion, local law
enforcement agencies will continue to rely on various other systems for information outside their
jurisdiction.
Based on over two years of CJIN meetings, various workshops, conversations with agencies
both within and outside of North Carolina, the CJIN Board is making the following
recommendations:
• Adopt a specific data standard to be used for Record Management System Vendors to
exchange information with a designated repository;
• Allow the local law enforcement agencies and the regional systems to begin exchanging
information with a federal agency (to be determined – FBI or NCIS);
• Request that each RMS Vendor select one of their North Carolina Law Enforcement
Agencies and implement an operational data standard with a federal agency (to be
determined – FBI or NCIS) as a proof of concept; and
• Redirect the routing of information from the selected federal agency back to the SBI
when the state repository becomes fully operational.
Note: NCIS currently supports the interface to approximately 40 North Carolina local law
enforcement agencies.
Background
The CJIN Board started to investigate information sharing at the local level for a variety of
reasons; the CJIN Mobile Data Network was approaching obsolescence (the number of users
has significantly decreased), the number of wireless applications was continuing to increase
(eCITATION, DMV & Correction Photos, etc.), there were a variety of information sharing
systems being implemented and used across the state (COPLINK, Police to Police, Rambler,
Inform, etc.), there were systems under development or being discussed at the state level that
would impact the operations of local law enforcement (NCAWARE, CJLEADS, Electronic
Discovery, Crime Statistics, etc.), the Federal Bureau of Investigation was developing a national
repository for local law enforcement information that contained advanced analytical tools
(National Data Exchange – N-DEx), the Naval Criminal Investigative Services was developing a
repository for local law enforcement agencies in proximity to Naval Installations that contained a
database with applications (Law Enforcement Information Exchange – LInX), the wireless
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 12
industry was continuing to enhance their products and broadband was being addressed at the
federal level with stimulus funds, traditional 911 voice systems were on a fast track toward data
and video that may have a cascading effort on record systems and courts, advance
technologies were emerging in the criminal justice community such as digital signature, GIS,
and security with two-factor authentication, and other states were implementing and discussing
projects that would collect local incident information through the use of third-party vendors
deploying a turn-key approach.
The Board was concerned that the impact to the criminal justice community within the state, as
a result of all the various systems being developed, may be detrimental to the existing business
process of local law enforcement agencies. If properly planned, designed, and implemented all
the aforementioned items would significantly enhance the operation of local law enforcement.
The CJIN Board needed to update their original strategic plan and started the process by
addressing the place where the majority of criminal cases originate, with the local law
enforcement agencies. The Board was also working with the various state agencies on a
variety of upgrades, enhancements, and new systems, while staying in contact with other states
and federal agencies.
Criminal Justice Technology and Information Updates
To obtain a base line on information sharing and the technology being utilized, both at the local
and state level, the CJIN Board reached out to various agencies for assistance. The following
agencies provided the Board with presentations, live demonstrations, and handouts:
September 13, 2007
• Governor’s Crime Commission – Grants
• NC Fusion Center – ISAAC
• Administrative Office of the Courts – NCAWARE
• State Bureau of Investigation – SAFIS
• State Highway Patrol – VIPER
• State Highway Patrol – DMV Photos
• E911 Wireless Board
• Durham Sheriff’s Office – GangNet
November 8, 2007
• Administrative Office of the Courts – NCAWARE
• State Highway Patrol – VIPER
• State Bureau of Investigation – SAFIS
• Department of Juvenile and Delinquency Prevention – NC-JOIN
• North Carolina Local Government Information Systems Association
• Office of Information Technology Services – Second Major Data Center
• Department of Correction – OPUS
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 13
January 24, 2008
• Town of Cary IT
• City of Wilson IT
• City of High Point PD
• City of Jacksonville IT/PD
• State Bureau of Investigation – SAFIS
• City of Durham PD
• City of Raleigh PD
• Buncombe County IT/District Attorney
March 12, 2008
• Administrative Office of the Courts – NCAWARE
• State Highway Patrol – VIPER
• State Bureau of Investigation – SAFIS
• 2008 General Assembly Report
September 18, 2009
• Administrative Office of the Courts – NCAWARE
• State Highway Patrol – VIPER
• State Highway Patrol – DMV Photos
• Federal Bureau of Investigation – InfraGard
• Governor’s Crime Commission – SAVAN
• Office of State Controller – CJLEADS
• State Highway Patrol – CJIN Mobile Data Network
November 20, 2008
• Town of Coats PD
• Administrative Office of the Courts – NCAWARE
• State Highway Patrol – VIPER
• State Highway Patrol – DMV Photos
• Department of Corrections – DOC Photos
• Buncombe County/City of Asheville IT/District Attorney
• Department of Corrections – Probation System
• State of Pennsylvania – Justice Network
January 27, 2009
• Office of Information Technology Services – Digital Signatures & E-Forms
• Wake County Sheriff’s Office
• City of Raleigh PD
• City of Kinston PD
• Johnston County Sheriff’s Office
• State of Michigan – Justice Network
March 26, 2009
• Office of Information Technology Services – Digital Signatures & E-Forms
• Wake County Sheriff’s Office
• 2009 General Assembly Report
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 14
• State of Nebraska – Justice Network
October 29, 2009
• Administrative Office of the Courts – NCAWARE
• State Highway Patrol – VIPER
• Department of Corrections – DOC Photos
• Charlotte Mecklenburg PD – CRISS
• Office of State Controller – CJLEADS
• NC Department of Justice – Local Data Integration & Crime Statistics
• Naval Criminal Investigative Service – LInX
• Federal Bureau of Investigation – N-DEx
January 28, 2010
• Local Criminal Justice Information Sharing
• Town of Coats PD
• City of Dunn PD
• Harnett County Sheriff’s Office
• City of Benson PD
• City of Lillington PD
• Town of Angier PD
• HB 1282 – Automated Pawn Systems
• City of Raleigh PD
• Wake County Sheriff’s Office
• Charlotte Mecklenburg PD
• Guilford County Sheriff’s Office
• City of Fayetteville PD
• Cumberland County Sheriff’s Office
• City of Jacksonville IT/PD
Note: The details associated with the majority of the above presentations are posted on the
CJIN Board Website with contact information on the agency and links to the presentations.
Local Law Enforcement Agencies/Record Management System Vendors
After numerous discussions with sheriff deputies and police officers from all the aforementioned
agencies, it was obvious that one of the key sources of criminal justice and public safety
information is the Record Management System (RMS) used by the majority of law enforcement
agencies within the state. These record systems contain a wealth of information regarding each
incident that occurs within that jurisdiction. These databases contain the official record of an
incident; they are the source of information used for tracking crimes (trend analysis), mapping
crimes, searching for specific information (color of vehicle, description of property, personnel at
the scene, interviews, etc.), advanced crime analysis, etc. It is the repository of crime fighting
information.
Based on our research and the assistance of the SBI, we found the following RMS Vendors in
the State of North Carolina:
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 15
• HTE (OSSI Corporate)
• InterAct
• Keystone
• New World
• SunGard OSSI
• Southern Software
• Spillman
• USA
• VisonAIR
Two agencies have developed their own internal systems for records and close to 90 agencies
do not possess an electronic records system.
The vendors generally provide an integrated system comprised of Computer Aided Dispatch,
the Records Management System (both Police, Fire & Emergency Medical Services), Jail
Management, Mobile Data Systems, etc. The RMS vendors have also built information sharing
systems for their agencies and the following are currently available within the state:
• SunGard OSSI’s – Police to Police;
• Southern’s – Rambler; and
• VisionAIR’s – Inform.
The local law enforcement agencies are identified below along with their RMS vendor and if
they possess one of the information sharing systems it is denoted; the three major RMS
vendors within North Carolina provide their officers with the aforementioned information sharing
tools – Rambler, Police to Police, and Inform. Information regarding the law enforcement
agency is also provided; population of jurisdiction and number of sworn officers.
The chart displays the agencies that are participating in one of the two regional systems in the
state – COPLINK or NCIS’s LInX, in addition to, the agencies that are designated a Public
Safety Answering Point (receives 911 calls and dispatches police, fire, and emergency medical
services), and agencies that use Leads-On-Line (a data base of pawn broker records that is
being used by approximately 50 agencies and reflect over 180 pawn shops within North
Carolina, the system is connected to the NCIC’s Hot List and contains data from approximately
1400 law enforcement agencies in 35 other states.
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 16
Agency/RMS Vendor/County/Information Sharing Chart
AGENCY NAME
Sworn
Officers RMS Vendor County POP PSAP Coplink LInX P2P Rambler
Leads
On
Line
Aberdeen PD 28 Southern Software Moore 5,301 1 1
Alamance County SO 118 OSSI Alamance 60,211 1 1
Albemarle PD 49 OSSI Stanly 16,338 1
Albert J. Ellis PD Onslow Airport
Alexander County SO 32 OSSI Alexander 35,385 1 1
Alleghany County SO 13 Southern Software Alleghany 9,460 1 1
Andrews PD 6 Southern Software Cherokee 1,913
Angier PD 12 Southern Software Harnett 4,387
Anson County SO 29 Southern Software Anson 18,798 1 1
Apex PD 54 Southern Software Wake 32,269
Ashe County SO 23 Southern Software Ashe 23,837 1 1
Asheboro PD 77 Spillman Technology Randolph 25,321
Asheville PD 195 OSSI Buncombe 79,973 1 1
Asheville Regional Airport Authority Buncombe Airport
ASU 26 Southern Software Watauga Campus
Atlantic Beach PD 18 Southern Software Carteret 1,820 1 1
Aulander PD Southern Software Bertie 824
Aurora PD Beaufort 570
Avery County SO 24 Southern Software Avery 15,892 1 1
Ayden PD 18 VisionAir Pitt 4,987
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 17
AGENCY NAME
Sworn
Officers RMS Vendor County POP PSAP Coplink LInX P2P Rambler
Leads
On
Line
Badin PD 5 OSSI Stanly 1,946 1
Bailey PD 3 Southern Software Nash 735
Bakersville PD 1 Mitchell 354
Bald Head Island PD 10 Southern Software Brunswick 264
Banner Elk PD 9 Southern Software Avery 972
Beaufort County SO 48 Spillman Technology Beaufort 34,035 1
Beaufort PD 17 Southern Software Carteret 4,048 1
Beech Mountain PD 9 Southern Software Avery 50 1 1
Belhaven PD 8 Southern Software Beaufort 1,963 1
Belmont Abbey College Gaston Campus
Belmont PD 31 Southern Software Gaston 10,461 1 1
Benson PD 12 Southern Software Johnston 3,703 1
Bertie County SO 24 VisionAir Bertie 15,522 1 1
Bethel PD Southern Software Pitt 1,824 1
Beulaville PD 5 Southern Software Duplin 1,091
Biltmore Forest PD 12 Southern Software Buncombe 1,556 1 1
Biscoe PD 8 Southern Software Montgomery 1,774
Black Mountain PD 18 Southern Software Buncombe 8,526 1 1
Bladen County SO 44 OSSI Bladen 26,234 1 1
Bladenboro PD 6 OSSI Bladen 1,605
Blowing Rock PD 11 Southern Software Watauga 1,429 1
Boiling Spring Lakes PD 8 Southern Software Brunswick 4,372
Boiling Springs PD 8 Southern Software Cleveland 4,301
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 18
AGENCY NAME
Sworn
Officers RMS Vendor County POP PSAP Coplink LInX P2P Rambler
Leads
On
Line
Boone PD 11 Southern Software Watauga 14,813 1 1 1
Boonville PD 5 Yadkin 1,165 1
Bridgeton PD Craven 315
Broadway PD 4 Lee 1,116
Brookford PD 1 Catawba 439 1
Broughton Hospital Police Burke Hospital
Brunswick Community College 10 Brunswick Campus
Brunswick County SO 120 Southern Software Brunswick 67,064 1 1 1 1 1
Bryson City PD 7 VisionAir Swain 1,487
Buncombe County SO 230 OSSI Buncombe 130,326 1 1 1
Bunn PD 2 Franklin 406
Burgaw PD 10 Southern Software Pender 4,279 1
Burke County SO 102 OSSI Burke 64,734 1 1
Burlington PD 111 OSSI Alamance 51,662 1
Burnsville PD 8 Yancey 1,694
Butner Public Safety 43 Southern Software Granville 6,369 1
Cabarrus County SO 204 OSSI Cabarrus 57,412 1 1 1
Caldwell County SO 64 OSSI Caldwell 52,509 1 1
Camden County SO 15 OSSI Camden 9,732 1
Cameron PD 1 Southern Software Moore 280
Candor PD 5 Southern Software Montgomery 847
Canton PD 14 Southern Software Haywood 4,097 1 1
Cape Carteret PD 7 Southern Software Carteret 1,500 1
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 19
AGENCY NAME
Sworn
Officers RMS Vendor County POP PSAP Coplink LInX P2P Rambler
Leads
On
Line
Carolina Beach PD 28 VisionAir New Hanover 5,987 1
Carolina Beach State Park Southern Software New Hanover Park
Carrboro PD 38 OSSI Orange 19,891 1
Carteret County SO 48 Southern Software Carteret 38,596 1 1 1 1
Carthage PD 10 Southern Software Moore 2,334 1
Cary PD 163 OSSI Wake 146,536 1 1
Caswell Beach PD 4 Southern Software Brunswick 511
Caswell Center Hospital Police Lenoir Hospital
Caswell County SO 35 Southern Software Caswell 23,571 1 1
Catawba County SO 121 VisionAir Catawba 83,978 1 1
Catawba PD 3 Southern Software Catawba 755 1
Chadbourn PD 10 Southern Software Columbus 2,122
Chapel Hill PD 112 OSSI Orange 54,431 1
Charlotte/Douglas Airport Police Mecklenburg Airport 1
Charlotte-Mecklenburg PD 1,635 Mecklenburg 711,349 1 1
Chatham County SO 77 Southern Software Chatham 56,212 1 1
Cherokee County SO 26 Cherokee 23,550 1
Cherokee PD Swain 1 1 1
Cherry O'Berry Hospital Police Southern Software Watauga Hospital 1 1 1
Cherryville PD 18 Southern Software Gaston 5,795 1 1
Chimney Rock State Park Southern Software Rutherford Park
China Grove PD 13 Southern Software Rowan 4,396
Chocowinity PD 3 Southern Software Beaufort 711 1
Chowan County SO 14 Southern Software Chowan 9,652 1 1 1
Chowan University Campus Police 6 Hertford Campus
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 20
AGENCY NAME
Sworn
Officers RMS Vendor County POP PSAP Coplink LInX P2P Rambler
Leads
On
Line
Claremont PD 8 Southern Software Catawba 1,123
Clay County SO 14 Southern Software Clay 14,818 1
Clayton PD 41 OSSI Johnston 14,333
Cleveland County SO 86 OSSI Cleveland 68,368 1 1 1
Cleveland PD 5 Southern Software Rowan 840
Cliffs of the Neuse State Park Southern Software Wayne Park 1
Clinton PD 29 VisionAir Sampson 8,810
Clyde PD 4 Southern Software Haywood 1,401
Coats PD 7 Southern Software Harnett 2,180 1
Columbus County SO 63 Southern Software Columbus 42,593 1 1 1
Columbus PD 5 Southern Software Polk 1,066
Concord PD 154 OSSI Cabarrus 81,365 1 1 1
Conover PD 21 VisionAir Catawba 8,110 1
Conway PD 1 Northampton 696
Cooleemee PD 4 Davie 980
Cornelius PD 42 OSSI Mecklenburg 24,847 1 1 1
Cramerton PD 11 Southern Software Gaston 3,504 1
Craven County SO 66 HTE Craven 41,050 1 1
Creedmoor PD 13 Southern Software Granville 3,296 1
Cumberland County SO 309 OSSI Cumberland 85,558 1 1 1 1
Currituck County SO 64 OSSI Currituck 23,815 1 1 1
Dallas PD 12 Gaston 4,033
Dare County SO 67 OSSI Dare 16,704 1 1
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 21
AGENCY NAME
Sworn
Officers RMS Vendor County POP PSAP Coplink LInX P2P Rambler
Leads
On
Line
Davidson College Public Safety and Police 7 Mecklenburg Campus
Davidson County SO 121 OSSI Davidson 109,587 1 1
Davidson PD 18 Mecklenburg 10,541 1
Davie County SO 44 VisionAir Davie 36,132 1 1
Denton PD 6 Davidson 1,740
DHHS Police - Black Mountain Buncombe Hospital
Dismal Swamp State Natural Area Southern Software Camden Park
Dobson PD 5 VisionAir Surry 1,516
Dorothea Dix Hospital HTE Wake Hospital
Drexel PD 5 Southern Software Burke 1,920 1
Duck PD 7 Southern Software Dare 504
Duke University PD 28 OSSI Durham Campus 1
Dunn PD 35 Southern Software Harnett 10,377 1 1 1
Duplin County SO 66 Southern Software Duplin 42,108 1 1
Durham County SO 156 VisionAir Durham 32,044 1 1
Durham PD 494 OSSI Durham 234,088 1 1 1
East Bend PD 2 Yadkin 671
East Carolina University 26 InterAct Public Safety Pitt Campus
East Spencer PD 5 Southern Software Rowan 1,703
Eden PD 44 Southern Software Rockingham 15,696 1 1
Edenton PD 14 Southern Software Chowan 5,166 1 1
Edgecombe County SO 56 VisionAir Edgecombe 20,399 1
Elizabeth City PD 53 OSSI Pasquotank 20,355
Elizabeth City State University 17 Southern Software Pasquotank Campus
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 22
AGENCY NAME
Sworn
Officers RMS Vendor County POP PSAP Coplink LInX P2P Rambler
Leads
On
Line
Elizabethtown PD 14 OSSI Bladen 3,621 1
Elk Knob State Natural Area Southern Software Watauga Park 1
Elk Park PD Avery 447
Elkin PD 17 VisionAir Surry 4,150
Elon PD 15 OSSI Alamance 7,913 1
Elon University Campus PD 16 OSSI Alamance Campus
Emerald Isle PD 14 VisionAir Carteret 3,982 1 1
Enfield PD 10 Southern Software Halifax 2,221
Eno River State Park Southern Software Durham Park
Erwin PD 9 Southern Software Harnett 5,051 1
Fair Bluff PD 1 Columbus 1,226
Fairmont PD 10 Southern Software Robeson 2,763 1
Falls Lake State Recreation Area Wake Park
Farmville PD 10 Southern Software Pitt 4,715 1
Fayetteville PD 347 VisionAir Cumberland 207,779 1 1 1
Fayetteville State University 11 Southern Software Cumberland Campus 1
Fletcher PD 15 Southern Software Henderson 6,531 1 1
Forest City PD 32 Shield Technology Rutherford 7,133
Forsyth County SO 202 OSSI Forsyth 97,546 1 1
Fort Fisher State Recreation Area Southern Software New Hanover Park
Fort Macon State Park Southern Software Carteret Park
Four Oaks PD 5 Southern Software Johnston 1,995
Foxfire Village PD 2 Moore 582
Franklin County SO 62 Southern Software Franklin 51,306 1
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 23
AGENCY NAME
Sworn
Officers RMS Vendor County POP PSAP Coplink LInX P2P Rambler
Leads
On
Line
Franklin PD 18 Southern Software Macon 3,899 1
Franklinton PD 7 Southern Software Franklin 2,523
Fremont PD 3 Wayne 1,404 1
Fuquay-Varina PD 29 Southern Software Wake 16,961
Gardner-Webb University 4 Cleveland Campus
Garner PD 61 VisionAir Wake 27,013
Garysburg PD 2 Southern Software Northampton 1,203 1
Gaston County PD 2 New World Systems Gaston 1 1
Gaston County SO 121 New World Systems Gaston 78,685 1
Gaston PD 2 Northampton 945
Gastonia PD 172 Gaston 75,280 1
Gates County SO 10 Southern Software Gates 11,814 1 1
Gibsonville PD 14 OSSI Guilford 2,855
Glen Alpine PD 3 Burke 1,349
Goldsboro PD 103 OSSI Wayne 38,313 1
Goose Creek State Park Southern Software Beaufort Park
Gorges State Park Southern Software Transylvania Park 1
Graham County SO 15 Graham 8,327 1
Graham PD 33 VisionAir Alamance 15,042 1
Granite Falls PD 14 Southern Software Caldwell 4,999 1
Granite Quarry PD 7 Southern Software Rowan 2,479 1
Granville County SO 51 Southern Software Granville 40,839 1 1
Greene County SO 20 Southern Software Greene 21,384 1
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 24
AGENCY NAME
Sworn
Officers RMS Vendor County POP PSAP Coplink LInX P2P Rambler
Leads
On
Line
Greensboro PD 602 OSSI Guilford 268,917 1
Greenville PD 182 New World Systems Pitt 82,569 1
Grifton PD 6 Southern Software Pitt 2,174 1
Grover PD Cleveland 699
Guilford County SO 250 Spillman Technology Guilford 170,820 1 1
Halifax County SO 60 VisionAir Halifax 31,439 1
Hamlet PD 19 Southern Software Richmond 5,820
Hammocks Beach State Park Southern Software Onslow Park
Hanging Rock State Park Southern Software Stokes Park
Harnett County SO 110 VisionAir Harnett 87,549 1 1 1 1
Havelock PD 28 InterAct Public Safety Craven 23,739 1 1
Haw River PD 8 Southern Software Alamance 2,068
Haw River State Park Southern Software Rockingham Park
Haywood County SO 50 Southern Software Haywood 40,784 1 1 1
Henderson County SO 129 VisionAir Henderson 83,265 1 1
Henderson PD 52 OSSI Vance 16,236 1
Hendersonville PD 38 VisionAir Henderson 13,135
Hertford County SO 21 Southern Software Hertford 20,431 1 1
Hertford PD 7 Southern Software Perquimans 2,203 1
Hickory PD 114 OSSI Catawba 41,039 1 1
High Point PD 219 OSSI Guilford 99,961 1 1
Highlands PD 12 Southern Software Macon 985
Hillsborough PD 28 Southern Software Orange 6,751 1
Hobgood PD Halifax 381
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 25
AGENCY NAME
Sworn
Officers RMS Vendor County POP PSAP Coplink LInX P2P Rambler
Leads
On
Line
Hoke County SO 52 Southern Software Hoke 41,722 1 1
Holden Beach PD 9 Southern Software Brunswick 964
Holly Ridge PD 8 Southern Software Onslow 1,469
Holly Springs PD 36 HTE Wake 21,599 1 1 1
Hope Mills PD 30 VisionAir Cumberland 14,559 1
Hot Springs PD 1 Madison 677
Hudson PD 11 Southern Software Caldwell 3,144
Huntersville PD 82 OSSI Mecklenburg 41,216 1 1
Hyde County SO 15 Southern Software Hyde 5,391 1
Indian Beach PD 4 Southern Software Carteret 88
Iredell County SO 133 VisionAir Iredell 96,384 1 1
Jackson County SO 44 Southern Software Jackson 35,389 1 1
Jackson PD 1 Northampton 675
Jacksonville PD 112 HTE Onslow 81,612 1 1 1 1 1
Jefferson PD 3 Southern Software Ashe 1,442
Johnson C. Smith University Campus PD 4 Mecklenburg Campus
Johnston County SO 104 OSSI Johnston 119,239 1
Jones County SO 10 Southern Software Jones 9,170 1
Jones Lake State Park Southern Software Bladen Park
Jonesville PD 10 Southern Software Yadkin 2,246
Jordan Lake State Recreation Area HTE Wake Park
Kannapolis PD 75 VisionAir Cabarrus 35,308 1 1
Kenansville PD 4 Southern Software Duplin 1,256 1
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 26
AGENCY NAME
Sworn
Officers RMS Vendor County POP PSAP Coplink LInX P2P Rambler
Leads
On
Line
Kenly PD 8 Southern Software Johnston 1,810
Kernersville PD 67 OSSI Forsyth 22,956
Kerr Lake State Recreation Area HTE Vance Park
Kill Devil Hills PD 25 VisionAir Dare 6,875
King PD 19 Southern Software Stokes 5,859 1 1
Kings Mountain PD 29 OSSI Cleveland 9,720 1
Kingstown PD Cleveland 819
Kinston PD 84 OSSI Lenoir 22,478
Kitty Hawk PD 15 OSSI Dare 3,491 1
Knightdale PD 23 Southern Software Wake 12,393 1
Kure Beach PD 10 New Hanover Park
La Grange PD Southern Software Lenoir 2,774
Lake James State Park Southern Software McDowell Park
Lake Lure PD 10 Southern Software Rutherford 1,105
Lake Norman State Park Southern Software Iredell Park
Lake Royal PD 6 Southern Software Franklin 1
Lake Waccamaw PD 5 Southern Software Columbus 1,287
Landis PD 8 Southern Software Rowan 3,127
Laurel Park PD 7 Southern Software Henderson 2,290 1 1
Laurinburg PD 36 VisionAir Scotland 15,925
Lee County SO 48 Southern Software Lee 29,198 1 1
Lees-McRae College Avery Campus
Leland PD 30 Southern Software Brunswick 13,408 1
Lenoir County SO 62 VisionAir Lenoir 26,768 1
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 27
AGENCY NAME
Sworn
Officers RMS Vendor County POP PSAP Coplink LInX P2P Rambler
Leads
On
Line
Lenoir PD 54 VisionAir Caldwell 19,071 1
Lewiston Woodville PD Bertie 554
Lexington PD 67 OSSI Davidson 21,420 1
Liberty PD 10 Spillman Technology Randolph 2,898
Lilesville PD 1 Anson 436
Lillington PD 12 Southern Software Harnett 3,300 1
Lincoln County SO 104 OSSI Lincoln 64,159 1 1 1 1
Lincolnton PD 31 Southern Software Lincoln 11,543 1 1
Littleton PD 5 Halifax 666
Locust PD 11 VisionAir Stanly 2,984 1
Longview PD 14 Southern Software Catawba 4,273 1
Louisburg PD 13 Southern Software Franklin 3,711
Lowell PD 9 Gaston 2,779
Lumber River State Park Southern Software Robeson Park
Lumberton PD 78 VisionAir Robeson 23,039 1
Macon County SO 42 Southern Software Macon 29,610 1
Madison County SO 17 Southern Software Madison 17,390 1 1
Madison PD 13 OSSI Rockingham 2,210 1 1
Maggie Valley PD 8 Southern Software Haywood 1,602 1 1
Magnolia PD Southern Software Duplin 1,014
Maiden PD 13 Southern Software Catawba 3,466 1 1
Manteo PD 7 Southern Software Dare 1,044
Marion PD 22 Southern Software McDowell 7,481 1
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 28
AGENCY NAME
Sworn
Officers RMS Vendor County POP PSAP Coplink LInX P2P Rambler
Leads
On
Line
Mars Hill PD 5 Southern Software Madison 1,938
Marshall PD 3 Madison 841
Marshville PD 8 Southern Software Union 3,156 1
Martin County SO 34 Southern Software Martin 16,628 1 1
Matthews PD 57 OSSI Mecklenburg 29,209 1 1
Maxton PD 9 Southern Software Robeson 2,341
Mayo River State Park Southern Software Rockingham Park
Mayodan PD 13 OSSI Rockingham 2,470 1
Maysville PD 3 Southern Software Jones 980
McAdenville PD 2 Southern Software Gaston 606 1
McDowell County SO 43 Southern Software McDowell 36,278 1 1
Mebane PD 20 OSSI Alamance 8,316 1
Mecklenburg County SO 304 Mecklenburg 48,333 1
Medoc Mountain State Park Southern Software Halifax Park
Merchants Millpond Park Southern Software Gates Park
Meredith College Campus Police 7 HTE Wake Campus
Methodist University PD 5 Southern Software Cumberland Campus
Micro PD Johnston 557
Middlesex PD 4 Southern Software Nash 890
Mint Hill PD 28 Southern Software Mecklenburg 21,048 1 1
Mitchell County SO 15 Mitchell 13,602 1
Mocksville PD 22 Southern Software Davie 4,640 1
Monroe PD 85 Southern Software Union 38,120
Montgomery County SO 24 Southern Software Montgomery 18,846 1
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 29
AGENCY NAME
Sworn
Officers RMS Vendor County POP PSAP Coplink LInX P2P Rambler
Leads
On
Line
Montreat College Campus Police 3 Buncombe Campus
Montreat PD 5 Buncombe 701
Moore County SO 73 Southern Software Moore 46,576 1 1 1
Mooresville PD 58 OSSI Iredell 30,737 1 1
Morehead City PD 36 VisionAir Carteret 8,830 1
Morganton PS 63 OSSI Burke 17,058
Morrisville PD 32 Wake 15,996
Morrow Mountain State Park Southern Software Stanly Park
Morven PD Anson 552
Mount Airy PD 38 VisionAir Surry 10,820
Mount Gilead PD 7 Southern Software Montgomery 1,411
Mount Holly PD 29 Southern Software Gaston 11,787 1 1 1
Mount Mitchell State Park Southern Software Yancey Park
Mount Olive PD 16 OSSI Wayne 4,626 1
Murfreesboro PD 9 Southern Software Hertford 2,622 1 1
Murphy PD 8 Southern Software Cherokee 1,627
Nags Head PD 19 OSSI Dare 3,131 1
Nash County SO 70 VisionAir Nash 86,119 1
Nashville PD 12 Southern Software Nash 4,947
Navassa PD 4 Brunswick 1,973
New Bern PD 87 New World Systems Craven 26,611 1 1
New Hanover County SO 286 OSSI New Hanover 83,164 1 1 1
New River State Park / Mount Jefferson Southern Software Ashe Park
Newland PD 5 Southern Software Avery 695 1
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 30
AGENCY NAME
Sworn
Officers RMS Vendor County POP PSAP Coplink LInX P2P Rambler
Leads
On
Line
Newport PD 10 Southern Software Carteret 4,214 1
Newton Grove PD 3 Sampson 630
Newton PD 34 HTE Catawba 13,819 1 1 1
North Carolina A & T State University 12 Southern Software Guilford Campus 1
North Carolina Alcohol Law Enforcement Statewide State
North Carolina Arboretum Campus Police Buncombe Campus
North Carolina Central University 16 OSSI Durham Campus 1
North Carolina Division of Forestry Johnston State
NC Division of Parks & Recreation
Headquarters HTE Wake State
North Carolina Fairgrounds Police Wake
North Carolina State Highway Patrol Internal Statewide State 1
North Carolina State University 42 USA Software Wake Campus
North Carolina Wildlife Commission Statewide State
North Topsail Beach PD 11 Southern Software Onslow 930
Northampton County SO 21 VisionAir Northampton 14,970 1
Northwest PD Brunswick 882
Norwood PD 6 OSSI Stanly 2,815 1
Oak Island PD 25 Southern Software Brunswick 8,594 1 1
Oakboro PD 5 Stanly 1,139 1
Ocean Isle Beach PD 13 Southern Software Brunswick 520 1
Old Fort PD 4 Southern Software McDowell 983
Onslow County SO 108 OSSI Onslow 91,990 1 1 1 1
Orange County SO 85 OSSI Orange 51,199 1 1
Oriental PD Pamlico 857
Oxford PD 32 VisionAir Granville 9,447 1
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 31
AGENCY NAME
Sworn
Officers RMS Vendor County POP PSAP Coplink LInX P2P Rambler
Leads
On
Line
Pamlico County SO 17 InterAct Public Safety Pamlico 11,981 1
Parkton PD Robeson 551
Pasquotank County SO 40 OSSI Pasquotank 21,490 1 1
Pembroke PD 14 Southern Software Robeson 2,837
Pender County SO 54 OSSI Pender 46,688 1 1 1 1
Perquimans County SO 9 Southern Software Perquimans 10,167 1
Person County SO 42 Southern Software Person 29,339 1 1
Pettigrew State Park Warren Park
Piedmont Triad International Airport Southern Software Guilford Airport 1
Pikeville PD 3 OSSI Wayne 703 1
Pilot Mountain PD 8 VisionAir Surry 1,299
Pilot Mountain State Park Southern Software Stokes Park
Pine Knoll Shores PD 8 Southern Software Carteret 1,634 1
Pine Level PD 5 Southern Software Johnston 1,978 1
Pinebluff PD 4 Southern Software Moore 1,403
Pinehurst PD 25 Southern Software Moore 12,119 1
Pinetops PD 7 Southern Software Edgecombe 1,259
Pineville PD 36 USA Software Mecklenburg 7,747 1 1
Pink Hill PD 2 Lenoir 520 1
Pitt County SO 142 OSSI Pitt 52,621 1 1
Pittsboro PD 13 Southern Software Chatham 2,443 1
Plymouth PD 10 Southern Software Washington 3,846 1
Polk County SO 24 Southern Software Polk 15,950 1 1
Princeton PD 4 Southern Software Johnston 1,443
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 32
AGENCY NAME
Sworn
Officers RMS Vendor County POP PSAP Coplink LInX P2P Rambler
Leads
On
Line
Princeville PD Edgecombe 2,412
Queens University of Charlotte Campus Police Mecklenburg Campus
Raeford PD 15 Southern Software Hoke 4,412 1
Raleigh PD 704 Keystone Wake 383,331 1
Raleigh-Durham Int'l Airport OSSI Wake Airport
Ramseur PD 6 Spillman Technology Randolph 1,755
Randleman PD 14 Randolph 4,487 1
Randolph County SO 162 Randolph 107,748 1
Ranlo PD 7 Gaston 3,369
Raven Rock State Park Southern Software Harnett Park
Red Springs PD 15 Southern Software Robeson 3,497
Reidsville PD 49 OSSI Rockingham 14,637 1 1
Rhodhiss PD Caldwell 407
Rich Square PD 2 Southern Software Northampton 840
Richlands PD 6 Southern Software Onslow 1,148 1 1
Richmond County SO 48 OSSI Richmond 31,543 1
River Bend PD 5 InterAct Public Safety Craven 3,162
Roanoke Rapids PD 37 VisionAir Halifax 16,572
Robbins PD 5 Southern Software Moore 1,332 1
Robersonville PD 7 Southern Software Martin 1,578 1
Robeson County SO 130 OSSI Robeson 95,273 1 1
Rockingham County SO 89 HTE Rockingham 55,900 1 1
Rockingham PD 32 Southern Software Richmond 9,484 1
Rockwell PD 5 Southern Software Rowan 2,082 1
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 33
AGENCY NAME
Sworn
Officers RMS Vendor County POP PSAP Coplink LInX P2P Rambler
Leads
On
Line
Rocky Mount PD 150 OSSI Edgecombe 16,965 1
Rolesville PD 10 Southern Software Wake 2,952 1
Roper PD Washington 609 1
Rose Hill PD 4 Duplin 1,396
Rowan County SO 124 OSSI Rowan 90,124 1 1
Rowland PD 6 Southern Software Robeson 1,174
Roxboro PD 30 Southern Software Person 8,933 1
Rutherford County SO 77 VisionAir Rutherford 47,565 1 1
Rutherfordton PD 15 Southern Software Rutherford 4,166
Saint Pauls PD 13 OSSI Robeson 2,368
Salemburg PD Sampson 482
Salisbury PD 87 OSSI Rowan 32,263 1 1
Saluda PD 3 Polk 562 1 1
Sampson County SO 90 VisionAir Sampson 55,484 1
Sanford PD 83 OSSI Lee 28,249 1 1 1
Scotland County SO 41 Southern Software Scotland 13,284 1
Scotland Neck PD 8 Southern Software Halifax 2,182
Seaboard PD Northampton 640
Seagrove PD Randolph 258
Selma PD 23 Southern Software Johnston 7,671
Seven Devils PD 5 Watauga 129
Severn PD Northampton 252
Shallotte PD 13 Southern Software Brunswick 1,998 1
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 34
AGENCY NAME
Sworn
Officers RMS Vendor County POP PSAP Coplink LInX P2P Rambler
Leads
On
Line
Sharpsburg PD 9 Southern Software Nash 1,418
Shaw University PD 10 Wake Campus
Shelby PD 71 OSSI Cleveland 20,793 1
Siler City PD 21 Southern Software Chatham 8,713 1
Singletary Lake State Park Southern Software Bladen Park
Smithfield PD 38 InterAct Public Safety Johnston 13,410
South Mountains State Park Southern Software Burke Park
Southern Pines PD 28 OSSI Moore 12,657 1
Southern Shores PD 9 OSSI Dare 2,616
Southport PD 11 Southern Software Brunswick 3,143 1
Sparta PD 6 Southern Software Alleghany 1,798
Spencer PD 12 Southern Software Rowan 3,481
Spindale PD 11 Southern Software Rutherford 3,850
Spring Hope PD 5 Southern Software Nash 1,328
Spring Lake PD 10 OSSI Cumberland 13,175 1
Spruce Pine PD 12 Southern Software Mitchell 2,020 1
St. Augustine's College Wake Campus
Stallings PD 21 HTE Union 12,152 1
Stanfield PD 4 Stanly 1,337 1
Stanley PD 8 Southern Software Gaston 3,272 1
Stanly County SO 49 OSSI Stanly 32,819 1 1
Stantonsburg PD 3 Wilson 749
Star PD 4 Southern Software Montgomery 808
State Capitol Police OSSI Wake
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 35
AGENCY NAME
Sworn
Officers RMS Vendor County POP PSAP Coplink LInX P2P Rambler
Leads
On
Line
Statesville PD 75 HTE Iredell 27,322 1
Stedman PD Cumberland 970
Stem PD Granville 382
Stokes County SO 39 Spillman Technology Stokes 39,305 1
Stone Mountain State Park Southern Software Alleghany Park
Stoneville PD 4 Rockingham 965
Stovall PD Granville 397
Sugar Mountain PD 5 Southern Software Avery 247 1
Sunset Beach PD 12 Southern Software Brunswick 3,434 1 1
Surf City PD 17 Southern Software Pender 1,532
Surry County SO 57 VisionAir Surry 56,096 1
Swain County SO 18 Southern Software Swain 12,364 1
Swansboro PD 9 Southern Software Onslow 2,306 1
Sylva PD 13 Southern Software Jackson 2,601 1
Tabor City PD 9 Southern Software Columbus 3,958 1
Tarboro PD 28 VisionAir Edgecombe 10,292 1
Taylorsville PD 11 Southern Software Alexander 1,931 1
Taylortown PD 2 Moore 994
Thomasville PD 65 OSSI Davidson 27,200 1
Topsail Beach PD 6 Pender 596
Transylvania County SO 55 Southern Software Transylvania 31,091 1 1
Trent Woods PD 5 Southern Software Craven 4,465 1
Troutman PD 13 Southern Software Iredell 2,289 1 1
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 36
AGENCY NAME
Sworn
Officers RMS Vendor County POP PSAP Coplink LInX P2P Rambler
Leads
On
Line
Troy PD 11 Southern Software Montgomery 4,297 1
Tryon PD 8 Southern Software Polk 1,777 1
Tyrrell County SO 9 DaPro Systems Tyrrell 4,251 1 1 1
UNC Asheville University Police 12 Southern Software Buncombe Campus
UNC Chapel Hill University Police 31 OSSI Orange Campus 1
UNC Charlotte University Police 28 Southern Software Mecklenburg Campus 1
UNC Greensboro University Police 18 Southern Software Guilford Campus 1 1
UNC Hospitals Special Police Orange Hospital
UNC Pembroke University Police 8 Southern Software Robeson Campus
UNC School of Arts Southern Software Forsyth Campus 1
UNC Wilmington University Police 25 VisionAir New Hanover Campus
Union County SO 181 Southern Software Union 172,498 1 1 1
Valdese PD 12 OSSI Burke 4,592
Vance County SO 43 Southern Software Vance 27,378 1
Vanceboro PD 1 Southern Software Craven 919
Vass PD 3 Southern Software Moore 825
Village of Misenheimer PD 5 OSSI Stanly 701
Village of Simpson PD Pitt 497
Wadesboro PD 25 Southern Software Anson 5,489 1 1
Wagram PD 2 Southern Software Scotland 771
Wake County SO 350 OSSI Wake 577,254 1 1
Wake Forest PD 54 HTE Wake 27,890 1
Wake Forest University 24 OSSI Forsyth Campus 1
Wake Medical Campus Police Southern Software Wake Hospital 1
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 37
AGENCY NAME
Sworn
Officers RMS Vendor County POP PSAP Coplink LInX P2P Rambler
Leads
On
Line
Wallace PD 13 Southern Software Duplin 3,570
Walnut Cove PD 7 Southern Software Stokes 1,589
Walnut Creek PD 2 Wayne 920 1
Warren County SO 36 Southern Software Warren 19,018 1
Warrenton PD 5 Southern Software Warren 914
Warsaw PD 11 Southern Software Duplin 3,224
Washington County SO 21 Southern Software Washington 8,545 1
Washington PD 38 Southern Software Beaufort 10,114 1
Watauga County SO 51 Watauga 29,006 1
Waxhaw PD 16 Union 4,241 1 1
Wayne County SO 82 Southern Software Wayne 70,588 1 1
Waynesville PD 34 Southern Software Haywood 10,144 1 1
Weaverville PD 13 Southern Software Buncombe 3,319 1
Weldon PD 9 Southern Software Halifax 1,712
Wendell PD 15 HTE Wake 6,001 1
West Jefferson PD 7 Southern Software Ashe 1,212
Western Carolina University Police 13 Southern Software Jackson Campus 1
Weymouth Woods-Sandhill Nature Preserve Southern Software Moore Park
Whispering Pines PD 7 Southern Software Moore 2,542 1
Whitakers PD 2 Southern software Nash 367
White Lake PD 6 OSSI Bladen 583 1
Whiteville PD 25 Southern Software Columbus 5,125 1
Wilkes County SO 67 OSSI Wilkes 64,340 1 1
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 38
AGENCY NAME
Sworn
Officers RMS Vendor County POP PSAP Coplink LInX P2P Rambler
Leads
On
Line
Wilkesboro PD 19 OSSI Wilkes 3,179 1
William B. Umstead State Park Southern Software Wake Park
Williamston PD 19 Southern Software Martin 5,649 1
Wilmington International Airport PD Southern Software New Hanover Airport
Wilmington PD 255 OSSI New Hanover 102,207 1 1
Wilson County SO 81 OSSI Wilson 27,992 1
Wilson PD 115 Southern Software Wilson 51,264 1
Wilson's Mills PD 3 Southern Software Johnston 2,078
Windsor PD 9 Southern Software Bertie 3,214
Winfall PD Perquimans 610
Wingate PD 7 Southern Software Union 4,275
Winston-Salem PD 519 OSSI Forsyth 235,073 1 1
Winston-Salem State University 11 Southern Software Forsyth Campus 1
Winterville PD 18 Southern Software Pitt 9,154 1
Winton PD Hertford 957
Woodfin PD 15 Southern Software Buncombe 6,020 1 1
Woodland PD 1 Southern Software Northampton 797 1
Wrightsville Beach PD 25 Southern Software New Hanover 2,696 1
Yadkin County SO 34 Southern Software Yadkin 31,112 1 1
Yadkinville PD 12 Southern Software Yadkin 2,800 1
Yancey County SO 13 Yancey 16,857 1
Youngsville PD 8 Southern Software Franklin 1,245
Zebulon PD 22 Wake 5,545 1
TOTALS 19,613 9 ,870,111 122 47 6 4 123 48
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 39
The Analysis Section of this report utilizes the information contained in this chart along with the
results from the RMS vendor meetings to draw some financial conclusions.
Federal Bureau of Investigation – National Data Exchange (N-DEx)
Note: The following information was derived from a power point presentation given to the CJIN
Board along with information downloaded from the FBI’s website regarding N-DEx. The
complete power point is available at the CJIN Website.
Scattered across the country are more than 18,000 law enforcement agencies—local, state,
tribal, and federal—each going about their business of gathering clues, conducting interviews,
solving crimes, and generating reports and information.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation began a national information sharing initiative by creating a
data repository within their Criminal Justice Information Services facility in West Virginia.
This facility currently is the home to the National Crime Information Center (NCIC), the
International Automated Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS), Law Enforcement Online, etc.
The FBI’s new initiative, that is in production and has some states connected, is called the
National Data Exchange (N-DEx). This repository is designed to store all the local law
enforcement incident data contained in every record management system throughout the United
States. The system will also be storing case reports, booking and incarceration data, and
parole/probation information. N-DEx detects relationships between people, vehicle/property,
location, and/or crime characteristics. It “connects the dots” between data that is seemingly
unrelated. It also supports multi-jurisdictional task forces ��� by enhancing national information
sharing, identifying links between regional and state systems, and illustrating virtual regional
information sharing.
Vision: The vision of N-DEx is to enable the sharing of complete, accurate, timely, and useful
information across jurisdictional boundaries and to provide new investigative tools that enhance
the nation’s ability to fight crime and terrorism.
Mission: N-DEx provides law enforcement agencies with a powerful new investigative tool to
search, link, analyze, and share criminal justice information such as incident/case reports,
incarceration data, and parole/probation data on a national basis to a degree never before
possible.
What is N-DEx and What Are Its Benefits: N-DEx is a criminal justice information sharing
system that provides nationwide connectivity to disparate local, state, tribal, and federal systems
for the exchange of information. N-DEx provides law enforcement agencies with a powerful new
investigative tool to search, link, analyze, and share information (for example, incident and case
reports) on a national basis to a degree never before possible. N-DEx benefits local law
enforcement in their role as the first line of defense against crime and terrorism.
Through N-DEx’s services and capabilities, N-DEx allows participating agencies to detect
relationships between people, places, things, and crime characteristics; to link information
across jurisdictions; and to “connect the dots” between apparently unrelated data without
causing information overload. This capability occurs primarily in the realm of structured data but
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 40
can also include unstructured data. In addition, N-DEx provides contact information and
collaboration tools for law enforcement agencies that are working on cases of mutual interest.
Ownership of data shared through N-DEx remains with the law enforcement agency that
provided it. N-DEx supplies controls to allow law enforcement agencies to decide what data to
share, who can access it, and under what circumstances. It allows agencies to participate in
accordance with applicable laws and policies governing dissemination and privacy.
Although law enforcement is the primary focus of N-DEx, future iterations will incorporate the full
criminal justice community. The ultimate goal is to transform all criminal justice data into
knowledge for the entire justice community.
N-DEx offers a range of options to allow broad participation, ranging the spectrum from law
enforcement agencies with automated records management systems to those with paper-based
systems.
To mitigate law enforcement agencies’ costs and impacts, N-DEx uses nationally-developed
standards and existing systems and networks. N-DEx also helps agencies get started by
providing implementation support, tools, and training.
The N-DEx concept was
developed in close collaboration
with the local, state, tribal, and
federal law enforcement
agencies critical to the success
of the project. Ensuring that N-DEx
meets the real-world needs
of law enforcement has been
identified as the key success of
the factor from the very
beginning and will continue to
guide the program throughout
implementation and operation.
This is the timeline for the N-DEx
development:
Operational March 19, 2008,
Increment 1 – Initial Deployment: sharing of incident/case report information, correlation (basic),
visualization (basic), search, initial support 50,000, reports.
Operational July 18, 2009, Increment 2 – Second Deployment: Sharing of arrest, booking, and
incarceration data, correlation (advanced), visualization (advanced), subscription/notification,
analytical reporting 100,000 users, collaboration, One DOJ integration, Increment 1 operation
and maintenance.
Winter 2010, Increment 3 – Full Operational Capacity: add data sets (probation/parole data),
enhancements and modifications previously deployed, analytical reporting (advanced), rolled
out nationally data contributors, 200,000 users, Increment 2 operations and maintenance.
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 41
Participation: There are two types of N-DEx participants; N-DEx Data Submission and N-DEx
System Users.
Requirements for an N-DEx Data Submission:
• Any Law Enforcement agency can participate
• Agencies must adhere to national standards for efficient sharing of data
• National Information Exchange Model (NIEM)
• Law Enforcement Information Sharing Program (LEISP)
• Logical Entity Exchange Specification (LEXS)
Agencies will be required to:
• Sign an operational Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
• Identify and map data to the N-DEx Information Exchange Package Documentation
(IEPD);
• Obtain Network Connectivity through an existing CJIS Wide-Area Network (WAN) or
connect over the Law Enforcement Online (LEO).
Naval Criminal Investigative Services – Law Enforcement Information Exchange (LInX)
Note: The following information was derived from a power point presentation given to the CJIN
Board along with information downloaded from the NCIS’s website regarding LInX. The
complete power point is available at the CJIN Website.
NCIS launched the Law Enforcement
Information Exchange (LInX) initiative in
2003. The project was designed to enhance
information sharing between local, state, and
federal law enforcement in areas of strategic
importance to the Department of the Navy.
LInX provides participating law enforcement
partner agencies with secure access to
regional crime and incident data and the
tools needed to process it, enabling
investigators to search across jurisdictional
boundaries to help solve crimes and resolve
suspicious events.
LInX sites are currently operated by NCIS
and its partners in nine regions throughout
the U.S. There are over 760 NCIS LInX partner agencies with approximately 30,000 trained
users.
The nine regions are:
• Northwest, which encompasses 217 agencies within the State of Washington, as well as
parts of Oregon and agencies within the State of Alaska;
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 42
• Hampton Roads, encompassing 106 agencies in the Norfolk and Richmond areas
of Virginia;
• Southeast, with 69 agencies in the northern area of the State of Florida, as well as
agencies in the southeastern area of the State of Georgia;
• Gulf Coast, with 32 agencies in the southeastern coastal area of Texas;
�� Hawaii, with 6 agencies;
• Rio Grande, with 39 agencies in the central area of New Mexico;
• National Capital Region, with 126 agencies in southern Maryland, northern Virginia and
the District of Columbia;
• North Carolina, with 47 agencies’ data in the eastern portion of the state; and
• Southern California, with 34 agencies.
A Northeast region is presently in development and includes 20 agencies in the southeastern
section of Connecticut.
Types of Data in LInX
• Records Management Data (Incident structured data, incident narratives and
supplemental reports)
• Investigative reports
• Field interviews / Suspicious incidents
• Arrests
• Mugshots
• Computer-Aided Dispatch (CAD) data (traffic stops)
• Pawn shop records
• Jail booking records
• Traffic Crash Reports
• Traffic Summons data
• Sex Offender Registry
• Warrants
LInX provides increased efficiencies and cooperation between agencies:
• Local-state-federal sharing of law enforcement (LE) data inadequate, informal, non-automated
• In 2004 LInX was piloted in 2 locations to support NCIS mission in the protection of
Naval assets and equities (Puget Sound, Washington State and Norfolk, VA)
• Collaborative approach to electronically capture the cumulative knowledge of federal,
state, county and municipal law enforcement agencies
• A single regional database of law enforcement records from multiple disparate police
records systems with strong local governance
Charlotte Regional Information Sharing System
The Charlotte Mecklenburg Police Department provided the CJIN Board with an overview of the
Charlotte Regional Information Sharing System; the Power Point was presented by Crystal
Cody and is available on the CJIN Website.
Goals:
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 43
• Prevent or disrupt
criminal activity in the
Charlotte region
• Facilitate the timely
sharing of information
between agencies
• Create a common
platform to share and
analyze data
• Implement a data
warehouse of RMS
information from all
law enforcement
agencies in the 11
county Charlotte
region
• Provide access for all
participants to all the
data sources
• Provide advanced
analytical tools
2007 COPS Grant:
• Purpose - Enhanced data sharing
• Strategy - Capacity to link people, places, and events within and across multiple
jurisdictions, criminal activities and networks, detection, response and prevention, data
linkages for CRISS agencies (NC/SC), develop actionable intelligence
• Key Features - Consolidated search tool, expanded link analysis capabilities, local,
regional, national data sources, regional governance, representation for all participants,
cost sharing
CRISS encompasses an 11 County Region
Counties Agencies
Anson 2
Cabarrus 3
Catawba 6
Gaston 10
Iredell 4
Lancaster 2
Lincoln 2
Mecklenburg 11
Stanley 8
Union 4
York 5
Total 57
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 44
COPLINK contains some excellent analytical tools. The following screen shots are an example
of the advanced criminal justice applications that are available:
State Bureau of Investigation – CAPTURES Project
The NC Department of Justice (DOJ) has issued a Request for Proposal for creating a
statewide sharing solution that will be program managed by both the DOJ and the SBI. The
project has the following objectives:
• Coordinate the development and operation of a statewide data sharing solution
(CAPTURES) that contains local law enforcement incident-based crime data;
CJIN Ge
• In
st
is
N
• Et
o
• In
• Ea
• T
Members
discuss t
Analysi
After ana
the repor
• T
Sns
t
in
ut
h
sy
aa
• 8
ae
• Tl
a
ee
x
• 1
o
• T
Nr
e
• As
u
eneral Asse
ncrease col
tatewide dat
s accurate, s
North Carolin
Ensure NIBR
the FBI’s U
ncrease the
Ensure data
nalysis tools
Through educ
s of the CJI
the scope of
s
alyzing the
rt, the follow
The overall
System was
umber of 5
tudy was
nformation fr
pdated with
he RMS Ve
ystem admi
nd numerou
gencies;
5% of the
gencies in
lectronic rec
The populati
aw enforcem
lectronic rec
xcess of 99%
5% of the la
ne percent o
The top three
North Carolin
ecord system
Approximatel
ubscribe to
embly Repo
laboration a
ta sharing ca
secure and t
na jurisdiction
RS (National
Uniform Crim
amount of lo
sharing with
s; and
cation and tr
N Board ha
f the project
Agency/RM
wing informat
number of
482 – out o
69 agencies
started usi
rom 2008 a
h the assista
ndors, the r
nistrators, t
us law enfor
law enfor
the state
cord systems
ion served
ment agenci
cord system
%;
aw enforcem
of the popula
e RMS Vend
na and they
ms, not coun
y 53% of
information
ort – April 2
among loca
apabilities fo
timely. Incre
ns;
Incident-Ba
me Reporting
ocal crime da
h the FBI’s N
raining, incre
ave held sev
and the time
S/County/In
tion was disc
agencies t
of a total
s. The
ing the
and was
ance of
regional
he SBI,
rcement
rcement
e have
s;
by the
ies with
ms is in
ment agencie
ation;
dors (Southe
provide reco
nting the in-h
the law en
sharing tool
2011
al law enfo
or local crime
ease the am
ased Reporti
g (UCR) Prog
ata shared b
N-DEx progr
ease and im
veral meetin
etable.
formation S
cussed:
that posses
es without el
ern, OSSI-Su
ord systems
house system
nforcement
ls being prov
orcement ag
e data in a s
ount of loca
ing System)
gram;
between Nor
ram which a
mprove local
ngs with the
Sharing Char
s an electr
lectronic rec
unGard, and
s to over 95%
ms); and
agencies th
vided by the
gencies by
simple and u
al crime data
) compliant d
rth Carolina
lso provides
crime report
e DOJ and S
rt in the pre
ronic Recor
cord systems
d VisionAIR
% of the age
hat possess
eir RMS ven
Pag
providing u
useful forma
a shared betw
data is subm
jurisdictions
s access to c
ting.
SBI personn
evious sectio
rds Manage
s serve less
are all locat
encies (that
s an RMS
ndor or they
ge 45
users
at that
ween
mitted
s;
crime
nel to
on of
ement
s than
ted in
have
also
have
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 46
joined regional information sharing initiatives, and in a small number of cases they use
both.
During the CJIN Board meetings and workshops with local law enforcement agencies it was
determined that interfaces (sometimes referred to as adapters or replicators) being provided by
third party vendors are not always sustainable. These adapters are generally being installed to
send local incident data (all the data or a portion thereof) to another system for a variety of
beneficial reasons. The funding for the implementation is generally grants and when the
interface becomes operational it becomes incumbent upon the local law enforcement agency to
maintain the software. Since record systems are dynamic; changes, upgrades, or new releases
to these systems may result in a malfunction to the interface.
Specific Data Exchange Standards
In lieu of pointing to specific examples of these non-sustainable interfaces, it was more
productive to search for a potential long-term solution to the issue. The 2010 CJIN Report
discussed a potential solution which would require the cooperation, along with entering into a
partnership, with not only the RMS vendors but also other state and federal agencies. In our
case it would involve the NC Department of Justice, the State Bureau of Investigation, the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Naval Criminal Investigative Service.
While all the government agencies that we contacted are receptive to a standard, the next step
was to reach out to the RMS vendors and invite them to participate in a workshop. To ensure
that these meetings would be beneficial to both parties, a standard agenda was developed that
contained the following items:
• Brief overview of the vendor’s products;
• Overview of their Records Management System;
• Overview of Integration of various System Components;
• Discussion of their information sharing system (Police to Police, Rambler, Inform, etc.)
and the potential expansion of this product;
• Sharing of Technical Roadmap (where possible);
• Plans (if any) to extract a file for the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s National Data
Exchange System (within NC) and overview of agencies in other states;
• Interim solutions and strategic goals (CJIN);
• Analytical Tools;
• Administrative Office of the Courts, NCAWARE and interfaces to the vendor that would
support the agencies;
• Single Sign-On;
• Two factor authentication; and
• General discussion regarding if the vendors would be receptive to developing a standard
interface to a specified repository and then maintain this interface as their core suite of
products. This was critical to resolving the sustainability issue moving forward.
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 47
RMS Vendor Workshops
All the vendors that have record systems in the state were contacted along with key law
enforcement agencies that use their products. It was imperative that the local agencies take a
lead role in this effort. Therefore, the workshops consisted of personnel from local law
enforcement agencies, state agencies, the CJIN Board, and key leaders from the vendor; these
workshops are summarized below:
City of High Point – OSSI: A workshop was held with OSSI-SunGard in the City of High Point
on May 13, 2010. The meeting consisted of conversations relating to all the aforementioned
agenda items in addition to an update on their N-DEx pilot project in Marietta, GA.
The workshop was attended by Bob Brinson, Steve Lingerfelt, Jerry Welch, High Point PD
(Linda Hodgson & Major Jim Tate), Madison PD (Chief Perry Webster), Greensboro PD,
LaVonda Fowler, and Eugene Vardaman.
OSSI-SunGard had the following personnel in attendance: Alan Biddle, Mike Garner, Mike
Martin, Chad Wilson, Neil Campbell, Ryan Kirby, and Eric Smith.
CJIN Board member Steve Lingerfelt facilitated the meeting.
City of Southern Pines – Southern: A workshop was held with Southern Software in Software
on June 10, 2010. The meeting consisted of conversations regarding the standard agenda
items in addition to an update on their N-DEx pilot project in North Little Rock, AK.
The workshop was attended by Bob Brinson, Sheriff Tommy Allen (Anson County), Chief
Deputy Neil Godfrey and Sergeant David Bishop (Moore County Sheriff’s Office), Janet Green
and Stephanie Taborn (Administrative Office of the Courts), Adam Caviness (Chief Technology
Officer – Southern Software), John Roscoe (Chief Financial Officer – Southern Software),
LaVonda Fowler, and Eugene Vardaman.
Harnett County – VisionAIR: A workshop was held in the Harnett County Sheriff’s Department
in the City of Lillington on June 29, 2010. The meeting addressed all the items discussed in the
previous meetings along with an extended presentation on VisionAIR’s products and technical
roadmap.
The workshop was attended by Bob Brinson, Bob Lee, Chief Tim Ledford (City of Mint Hill,
President of the NC Association of Chiefs of Police), Major Gary McNeil, Dianne Raynor, Eric
McKinney (Harnett County Sheriff’s Department), Captain Allen Moseley, Linda Powell,
Jeanette Adkins, Sergeant Gene Harrell (Edgecombe County Sheriff’s Office), Detective Ron
Christie, Detective Tom Mellown, Paula Gullie, Pablo Rodriquez, Rebecca Crawford, Sergeant
Brendan Hartigan, Sergeant Kim Lane (Durham County Sheriff’s Office), Janet Green and
Stephanie Taborn (Administrative Office of the Courts), Special Agent Chris Battista and Tim
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 48
Parker (State Bureau of Investigation) Trent Lowe, Jeff Beard, Denise Sheffield, Wendy Gilbert,
Gary Bunyard, and Shelly Newsome (VisionAIR), LaVonda Fowler, and Eugene Vardaman.
Spillman Technologies is located in Salt Lake City, UT and they specialize in integrated CAD,
RMS, Mobile Data & Field Reporting, Mapping & GIS, Crime Analysis & CompStat, JMS, Fire,
Data Sharing, etc. There contact person is Billy Duncan, Senior Account Executive, at 800-748-
4610, ext. 7-1757.
InterAct Public Safety is located in Winston Salem, NC and provides public safety solutions to
Public Safety Answering Points, Law, Fire, and EMS. They are currently undergoing a change
to their Records Management System; therefore, we will contact them again in the second
quarter of 2011.
New World Systems – AEGIS Public Safety is located in Troy, MI and provides an integrated
solution to public safety. Their contact person is Al Bennett, Vice President, at 248-269-1000.
All the RMS vendors were very receptive to working with their local law enforcement agencies,
state agencies and the CJIN Board to resolve many of the issues that were discussed during
these workshops. The majority of RMS vendors openly discussed the various issues that occur
with assisting third party vendors with interfaces both with implementation and maintenance.
Financial Impact
Developing a financial analysis regarding the impact of adopting a specific data exchange
standard requires making some informed assumptions. During the process of researching data
for this section, the following items and expenditures were used:
• The size of the agency (generally the number of sworn officers and/or number of users)
translates into licenses either for the site in the case of large agencies or the number of
concurrent users with small agencies;
• The extent of integration between different components in the system; Computer Aided
Dispatch, Records Management, Jail Management, Field Based Reporting, Mobile Data,
etc.
• Record Management Systems can range in value from $50,000 to an excess of
$1,000,000 depending upon the size of the agency and whether or not they are bundled
into a purchase with a suite of products;
• Each one of the components in the system also has an option to procure a maintenance
agreement – these contracts generally cost between 10 to 15 percent of the purchase
price, once again depending upon agency size;
• Third party vendors that provide adapters charge between $10,000 and $40,000, once
again based on variables – example, do all the interfaces involve only one RMS vendor
(the range of costs were based on a specific interface to a single repository for a specific
application);
• Once an interface is installed, how long will it continue to function without any changes;
modification to the interface are generally the result of changes to the Record
Management System, with some exceptions;
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 49
• The complexity of the telecommunication network (with security) used by each of the
agencies is also challenging, not only during the implementation of the interface but also
during the life of the interface; and
• The interface standard being used by the third party vendor is not compliant with either
the FBI or NCIS standard.
All of the above items contribute to the ability to perform an exact financial impact on the 482
agencies that possess a records system. Having stated that, we are positive that creating a
standard would be financially beneficial and the following assumptions were made to arrive at a
realistic mid-point:
• The number of participating agencies would be 362; this is 75% of the total agencies;
• The number of changes for the life of the interface would be 2; and
• The cost of each one of these changes would be $20,000.
Alternatives
Number
of
Agencies
Number
of
Changes
Cost
per
Change
Savings or
Cost
Avoidance Comments
Minimum 241 1 $10,000 $2,410,000 50% Participation
Midpoint 362 2 $20,000 $14,480,000 75% Participation
Maximum 482 3 $40,000 $57,840,000 100% Participation
Conclusion: Therefore, we are confident that a specific standard for data exchange between
agencies and the federal repositories, either N-DEx or LInX, would save the local law
enforcement community tens of millions of dollars over the life of the interface.
Alternatives, Benefits, & Adverse Consequences
The CJIN Board spent a lot time discussing various alternatives with local law enforcement
agencies, state and federal agencies, other states, and the existing RMS Vendors. These
discussions resulted in our being able to formulate the following alternatives:
• Connect the local law enforcement agencies directly to the NC Department of Justice
and the State Bureau of Investigation; including the regional systems;
• Connect the local law enforcement agencies directly to the NCIS’s LInX System;
including the regional systems;
• Connect the local law enforcement agencies directly to the FBI’s N-DEx System;
including the regional systems; and
• There are a variety of combinations to the above alternatives; example, connect the local
law enforcement to LInX and then allow LInX through a Memorandum of Understanding
to forward the local incident data to N-DEx.
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 50
The following chart illustrates some of these alternatives with some benefits and adverse
consequences:
Alternative Benefit Adverse
Consequences
CAPTURES NIBRS data would be obtained for the
SBI’s crime statistics
The DOJ/SBI issued an RFP to
change the Uniform Crime
Reporting data of all the law
enforcement agencies in NC;
only 2% of the agencies use
NIBRS.
LInX It is a fully functional and operating
repository that approximately 50 NC
agencies are already using - system
contains applications
LInX is available today
This alternative would also provide the
SBI with the time required to develop
their system
Other states have taken this approach
Not sure of the involvement of
Northrop Grumman (if any), this
should be determined.
N-DEx It is a fully functional and operating
repository that possesses a variety of
advanced applications
The FBI has resources available to
help the vendors with the interface
No North Carolina agencies are
currently connected to N-DEx,
although thousands throughout
the US are.
LInX/N-DEx Would receive all the benefits
associated with both LInX and N-DEx
and would become a phased
approach, NC repository would be
LINX
This is fully operational in Virginia
in the area of Hampton Roads.
Combinations To Be Discussed To Be Discussed
CJIN General Assembly Report ��� April 2011 Page 51
Summary
The local law enforcement agencies have done an excellent job in acquiring automation that
has enhanced their business needs. The regional systems in the state are doing an outstanding
job of sharing information. It was very obvious after all the research, workshops, phone calls,
etc. that the state did lack a standard for information exchange among RMS Vendors and
various repositories.
It was also obvious that this would be a tremendous savings to the law enforcement agencies
and more importantly, having additional local incident data would increase their ability to fight
crime.
The report reflects a lot of detailed information regarding law enforcement agencies and serves
to document all the workshops, meetings, and discussions that led up to this report.
Special thanks to all the agencies and their personnel that participated in this report; including
the CJIN Board members, Local Law Enforcement Agencies (Sheriff and Police), DOJ, SBI,
AOC, DOC, FBI, NCIS, and the RMS Vendors both within and outside the state.
Recommendations
The CJIN Board, while making some specific recommendations regarding a specific standard, is
also recommending that other areas of criminal justice be addressed for the possibility of
incorporating standards:
• Adopt a specific data standard to be used for Record Management System Vendors to
exchange information with a designated repository;
• Allow the local law enforcement agencies and the regional systems to begin exchanging
information with a federal agency (to be determined – FBI or NCIS);
• Request that each RMS Vendor select one of their North Carolina Law Enforcement
Agencies and implement an operational data standard with a federal agency (to be
determined – FBI or NCIS) as a proof of concept; and
• Redirect the routing of information from the selected federal agency back to the SBI
when the state repository becomes fully operational.
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 52
Updated Pawn Broker Transaction Study
Executive Summary
The Criminal Justice Information Network (CJIN) Governing Board was directed to study the
feasibility of creating an automated pawn transaction database system as part of the criminal
justice information network.
To facilitate this study, the CJIN Board conducted workshops with county and municipal law
enforcement agencies, information technology professionals, pawnshop owners, pawnshop
lobbyists, and vendors operating in North Carolina. A significant portion of two CJIN Board
meetings were dedicated to presentations and discussions regarding the study. Additionally,
the CJIN staff reviewed numerous other studies that were completed by other states and
participated in conversations with personnel from those states.
The majority of the January 28, 2010 CJIN meeting was devoted to briefing the Board on the
existing pawn shop automation within North Carolina; personnel from the counties of Wake,
Mecklenburg, Cumberland, Guilford, and Onslow, cities of Raleigh, Fayetteville, Charlotte,
Jacksonville, and Dunn, along with pawnshop owner Bob Moulton, Director of the National
Association of Pawn Brokers participated in the discussions.
At the March 18, 2010 Board meeting, the CJIN staff reported the findings to date and
requested some direction from the Board regarding expanding the scope of the project to
include secondhand dealers, scrap yards, precious metals, and other outlets for stolen property.
After a lengthy discussion, the Board was in agreement that the staff findings should be
reflected in the study report; however, the recommendation should be responsive to the request
of the legislature.
Part of the staff’s report to the Board reflected property crime and the statistics associated with
pawnshops. Currently, statistics reflect one pawn item out of every 1,000 is determined stolen.
Discussions on these statistics ranged from - law enforcement and the pawnbrokers are doing
an outstanding job; to the statistics do not reflect all the stolen property because the state does
not have a statewide pawn transaction database. Comments were made that the number of
recovered items would increase with a statewide system. The study reflects the definition of
property crime, national and state statistics, historical trending, etc.
The State Statute defines the reporting responsibilities of a pawnshop. The CJIN Board, with all
of the aforementioned assistance, determined that the reporting included manual processing of
records, automation of received records within county and city agencies, fully automated
process of reporting, and Internet processing being done by a national vendor. It was found that
the records being handled within each process were not being shared with other systems;
although in some cases the ability was there to share the information. The systems developed
in several counties have the potential to be expanded to a state level. Furthermore, the
information available through the Internet provider was feature rich and comprehensive.
Determining the costs of each of these potential solutions was difficult.
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 53
The Study Bill specifically addressed the feasibility of developing and maintaining pawnshop
transactions within an automated system for law enforcement agencies. While conducting the
various meetings and workshops, along with research and conversations with other states, it
was expressed by all the participants that targeting the records of pawnshops were only a
partial solution to solving property crime. It was the speculation of the majority of the
participants that only a small portion of stolen property flows through pawnshops. There are
numerous unregulated outlets within the state that could handle stolen property that are
currently not required to maintain records.
The advantages and challenges of developing a statewide system are detailed in this report.
The simple answer to the study request is yes it is feasible to develop a system to track pawn
transactions and share this information with all the law enforcement agencies in the state.
Based on the systems developed in North Carolina counties, the national company that uses
the Internet, modules contained in some of our record management systems, expanding some
of the information sharing initiatives that are currently being developed, or starting a new
system, we have the experience, system knowledge, and a receptive community of regulated
businesses to ensure success.
Undertaking this study resulted in a number of feasible technology solutions; however, the Joint
Legislative Corrections, Crime Control, and Juvenile Justice Oversight Committee should
consider expanding the businesses required to keep and maintain transaction records. Prior to
making a technical recommendation and based on all the information contained in the report
regarding property crime, the CJIN Board respectively requests that the Committee consider
allowing the Board to broaden the original study to include other businesses operating in
secondhand merchandise.
Background
In performing the study outlined in House Bill 1282 the CJIN Board addressed the following
areas in order to gain an understanding of pawnshops and property crime, not only in North
Carolina but in the United States:
• Study Bill 1282
• State Statute – Pawn Brokers
• Property Crime - Definition
• NC SBI Statistics
• US FBI Statistics
Study Bill HB 1282
The CJIN Board undertook the Pawn Shop Transaction Study based on the General Assembly,
during the 2009-2010 session, enacted the following:
1.
A bill to be entitled an act to direct the criminal justice information network governing
board to study the feasibility of creating an automated pawn transaction database
system as part of the criminal justice information network.
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 54
SECTION 1. The Criminal Justice Information Network Governing Board shall study the
feasibility of developing and maintaining an automated system that would receive pawn
transaction data electronically from pawn shops and provide access to law enforcement
agencies for retrieving information about pawn shop transactions statewide as part of the
Criminal Justice Information Network. The study shall consider issues related to the State's role
in regulating pawn shops in order to identify and minimize illegal activities, recover stolen
property, verify compliance with applicable laws, and ensure a legitimate environment for
consumers by decreasing the cost of regulation, improving law enforcement services and
effectiveness, enabling information sharing among law enforcement and regulatory authorities,
and impacting related crimes. The Board shall report its findings and recommendations,
including any legislative proposals, to the Joint Legislative Corrections, Crime Control, and
Juvenile Justice Oversight Committee on or before March 31, 2010.
SECTION 2. This act is effective when it becomes law.
Prior to researching property crime at the state and federal level, the Board reviewed the
existing State Statute. The following State Statute covering Pawn Brokers is provided as a
review:
State Statute - Chapter 91A
Pawnbrokers Modernization Act of 1989
§ 91A-1. Short title
This Chapter shall be known and may be cited as the Pawnbrokers Modernization Act of
1989. (1989, c. 638, s. 2.)
§ 91A-2. Purpose
The making of pawn loans and the acquisition and disposition of tangible personal property
by and through pawnshops vitally affects the general economy of this State and the public
interest and welfare of its citizens. In recognition of these facts, it is the policy of this State and
the purpose of the Pawnbrokers Modernization Act of 1989 to:
(1) Ensure a sound system of making loans and acquiring and disposing of tangible
personal property by and through pawnshops, and to prevent unlawful
property transactions, particularly in stolen property, through licensing and
regulating pawnbrokers;
(2) Provide for licensing fees and investigation fees of licensees;
(3) Ensure financial responsibility to the State and the general public;
(4) Ensure compliance with federal and State laws; and
(5) Assist local governments in the exercise of their police authority. (1989, c. 638, s.
2.)
§ 91A-3. Definitions
As used in this Article, the following definitions shall apply:
(1) "Pawn" or "Pawn transaction" means a written bailment of personal property as
security for a debt, redeemable on certain terms within 180 days, unless
renewed, and with an implied power of sale on default.
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 55
(2) "Pawnbroker" means any person engaged in the business of lending money on
the security of pledged goods and who may also purchase merchandise for
resale from dealers and traders.
(3) "Pawnshop" means the location at which, or premises in which, a pawnbroker
regularly conducts business.
(4) "Person" means any individual, corporation, joint venture, association, or any
other legal entity, however organized.
(5) "Pledged goods" means tangible personal property which is deposited with, or
otherwise actually delivered into, the possession of a pawnbroker in the
course of his business in connection with a pawn transaction.
(6) "Purchase" means any item purchased from an individual for the purpose of
resale whereby the seller no longer has a vested interest in the item. (1989,
c. 638, s. 2.)
§ 91A-4. Pawnbroker authority
A pawnbroker licensee is authorized to: (i) make loans on pledges of tangible personal
property, (ii) deal in bullion stocks, (iii) purchase merchandise for resale from dealers, traders,
and wholesale suppliers and (iv) use its capital and funds in any lawful manner within the
general scope and purpose of its creation. Notwithstanding the provisions of this section, no
pawnbroker has the authority enumerated in this section unless he has fully complied with the
laws regulating the particular transactions involved. (1989, c. 638, s. 2.)
§ 91A-5. License required
It is unlawful for any person, firm, or corporation to establish or conduct a business of
pawnbroker unless such person, firm, or corporation has procured a license to conduct business
in compliance with the requirements of this Chapter. (1989, c. 638, s. 2.)
§ 91A-6. Requirements for licensure
(a) To be eligible for a pawnbroker's license, an applicant must:
(1) Be of good moral character; and
(2) Not have been convicted of a felony within the last 10 years.
(b) Every person, firm or corporation desiring to engage in the business of pawnbroker shall
petition the appropriate city or county agency in the area in which the pawnshop is to be
operated for a license to conduct such business. Such petitions shall provide:
(1) The name and address of the person, and, in case of a firm or corporation, the
names and addresses of the persons composing such firm or of the officers,
directors, and stockholders of such corporation, excluding shareholders of
publicly traded companies;
(2) The name of the business and the street and mailing address where the business
is to be operated;
(3) A statement indicating the amount of net assets or capital proposed to be used by
the petitioner in operation of the business; this statement shall be
accompanied by an unaudited statement from an accountant or certified
public accountant verifying the information contained in the accompanying
statement;
(4) An affidavit by the petitioner that he has not been convicted of a felony; and
(5) A certificate from the chief of police, or sheriff of the county, or the State Bureau
of Investigation that the petitioner has not been convicted of a felony.
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 56
(c) Licenses shall be granted under this Chapter by the city if the pawnshop is to be
operated within the corporate limits of a city as defined by G.S. 160A-1, and by a county if it is to
be operated outside the corporate limits of any city as defined by G.S. 160A-1.
(d) Any license granted under this Chapter may be revoked by the county or city issuing it,
after a hearing, for substantial abuses of this Chapter by the licensee. (1989, c. 638, s. 2.)
§ 91A-7. Record keeping requirements
(a) Every pawnbroker shall keep consecutively numbered records of each and every pawn
transaction, which shall correspond in all essential particulars to a detachable pawn ticket or
copy thereof attached to the record.
(b) The pawnbroker shall, at the time of making the pawn or purchase transaction, enter
upon the pawn ticket a record of the following information which shall be typed or written in ink
and in the English language:
(1) A clear and accurate description of the property, including model and serial
number if indicated on the property;
(2) The name, residence address, phone number, and date of birth of pledgor;
(3) Date of the pawn transaction;
(4) Type of identification and the identification number accepted from pledgor;
(5) Description of the pledgor including approximate height, weight, sex, and race;
(6) Amount of money advanced;
(7) The date due and the amount due;
(8) All monthly pawn charges, including interest, annual percentage rate on interest,
and total recovery fee; and
(9) Agreed upon "stated value" between pledgor and pawnbroker in case of loss or
destruction of pledged item; unless otherwise noted, "stated value" is the
same as the loan value.
(c) The following shall be printed on all pawn tickets:
(1) The statement that "ANY PERSONAL PROPERTY PLEDGED TO A
PAWNBROKER WITHIN THIS STATE IS SUBJECT TO SALE OR
DISPOSAL WHEN THERE HAS BEEN NO PAYMENT MADE ON THE
ACCOUNT FOR A PERIOD OF 60 DAYS PAST MATURITY DATE OF THE
ORIGINAL CONTRACT. NO FURTHER NOTICE IS NECESSARY.";
(2) The statement that "THE PLEDGOR OF THIS ITEM ATTESTS THAT IT IS NOT
STOLEN, HAS NO LIENS OR ENCUMBRANCES, AND IS THE PLEDGOR'S
TO SELL OR PAWN.";
(3) The statement that "THE ITEM PAWNED IS REDEEMABLE ONLY BY THE
BEARER OF THIS TICKET OR BY IDENTIFICATION OF THE PERSON
MAKING THE PAWN."; and
(4) A blank line for the pledgor's signature and the pawnbroker's signature or initials.
(d) The pledgor shall sign the pawn ticket and shall receive an exact copy of the pawn ticket
which shall be signed or initialed by the pawnbroker or any employee of the pawnbroker. These
records shall be available for inspection and pickup each regular workday by the sheriff of the
county, or the sheriff's designee or the chief of police, or the chief's designee of the municipality
in which the pawnshop is located. These records may be electronically reported to the sheriff of
the county or the chief of police of the municipality in which the pawnshop is located by
transmission over the Internet or by facsimile transmission in a manner authorized by the
applicable sheriff or chief of police. These records shall be a correct copy of the entries made of
the pawn or purchase transaction and shall be carefully preserved without alteration, and shall
be available during regular business hours.
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 57
(e) Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter, any person presenting a pawn ticket to a
pawnbroker is presumed to be entitled to redeem the pledged goods described on the ticket.
(1989, c. 638, s. 2; 2007-415, s. 2.)
§ 91A-8. Pawnbroker fees; interest rates
No pawnbroker shall demand or receive an effective rate of interest greater than two percent
(2%) per month, and no other charge of any description or for any purpose shall be made by the
pawnbroker, except that the pawnbroker may charge, contract for, and recover an additional
monthly fee for the following services, including but not limited to:
(1) Title investigation;
(2) Handling, appraisal, and storage;
(3) Insuring a security;
(4) Application fee;
(5) Making daily reports to local law enforcement officers; and
(6) For other expenses, including losses of every nature, and all other services.
In no event may the total of the above listed monthly fees on a pawn transaction exceed
twenty percent (20%) of the principal up to a maximum of the following:
First month.................................................................................. $100.00
Second month................................................................................. 75.00
Third month..................................................................................... 75.00
Fourth month and thereafter............................................................ 50.00
In addition, pawnbrokers may charge fees for returned checks as allowed by G.S. 25-3-506.
(1989, c. 638, s. 2; 1995 (Reg. Sess., 1996), c. 742, s. 37.)
2.
§ 91A-9. Pawnbroker transactions
In every pawn transaction:
(1) The original pawn contract shall have a maturity date of not less than 30 days,
provided that nothing herein shall prevent the pledgor from redeeming the
property before the maturity date;
(2) Any personal property pledged to a pawnbroker in this State is subject to sale or
disposal when there has been no payment made on the account for a period
of 60 days past maturity date of the original contract; provided that the
contract between the pledgor and the pawnbroker is renewable if renewal is
agreed upon by both the parties;
(3) Every pawn ticket or receipt for such pawn shall have printed thereon the
provisions of subdivision (1) of this section which shall constitute: (i) notice of
such sale or disposal, (ii) notice of intention to sell or dispose of the property
without further notice, and (iii) consent to such sale or disposal. The pledgor
thereby forfeits all right, title and interest of, in, and to such pawned property
to the pawnbroker who thereby acquires absolute title to the same,
whereupon the debt is satisfied and the pawnbroker may sell or dispose of
the unredeemed pledges as his own property. Any sale or disposal of
property under this section terminates all liability of the pawnbroker and vests
in the purchaser the right, title, and interest of the borrower and the
pawnbroker;
(4) If the borrower loses his pawn ticket he shall not thereby forfeit his right to
redeem, but may, before the lapse of the redemption period, make an
affidavit with indemnification for such loss. The affidavit shall describe the
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 58
property pawned and shall take the place of the lost pawn ticket unless the
pawned property has already been redeemed with the original pawn ticket;
and
(5) A pledgor is not obligated to redeem pledged goods or make any payment on a
pawn transaction. (1989, c. 638, s. 2.)
§ 91A-10. Prohibitions
3.
A pawnbroker shall not:
(1) Accept a pledge from a person under the age of 18 years;
(2) Make any agreement requiring the personal liability of a pledgor in connection
with a pawn transaction;
(3) Accept any waiver, in writing or otherwise, of any right or protection accorded a
pledgor under this Chapter;
(4) Fail to exercise reasonable care to protect pledged goods from loss or damage;
(5) Fail to return pledged goods to a pledgor upon payment of the full amount due
the pawnbroker on the pawn transaction. In the event such pledged goods
are lost or damaged while in the possession of the pawnbroker, it shall be the
responsibility of the pawnbroker to replace the lost or damaged goods with
merchandise of like kind and equivalent value. In the event the pledgor and
pawnbroker cannot agree as to replacement, the pawnbroker shall reimburse
the pledgor in the amount of the value agreed upon pursuant to G.S.
91A-7(b);
(6) Take any article in pawn, pledge, or as security from any person, which is known
to such pawnbroker to be stolen, unless there is a written agreement with
local or State police;
(7) Sell, exchange, barter, or remove from the pawnshop any goods pledged,
pawned, or purchased before the earlier of seven days after the date the
pawn ticket record is electronically reported in accordance with G.S. 91A-7(d)
or 30 days after the transaction, except in case of redemption by pledgor or
items purchased for resale from wholesalers;
(8) Operate more than one pawnshop under one license, and such shop must be at
a permanent place of business; or
(9) Take as pledged goods any manufactured mobile home, recreational vehicle, or
motor vehicle other than a motorcycle. (1989, c. 638, s. 2; 2007-415, s. 1.)
§ 91A-11. Penalties
(a) Every person, firm, or corporation, their guests or employees, who shall knowingly violate
any of the provisions of this Chapter, shall, on conviction thereof, be deemed guilty of a Class 2
misdemeanor. If the violation is by an owner or major stockholder or managing partner of the
pawnshop and the violation is knowingly committed by the owner, major stockholder, or
managing partner of the pawnshop, then the license of the pawnshop may be suspended at the
discretion of the court.
(b) The provision of subsection (a) shall not apply to violations of G.S. 91A-10(6) which shall
be prosecuted under the North Carolina criminal statutes.
(c) Any contract of pawn the making or collecting of which violates any provision of this
Chapter, except as a result of accidental or bona fide error of computation, shall be void, and
the licensee shall have no right to collect, receive or retain any interest or fee whatsoever with
respect to such pawn. (1989, c. 638, s. 2; 1993, c. 539, s. 655; 1994, Ex. Sess., c. 24, s. 14(c).)
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 59
§ 91A-12. Municipal or county authority
All of the counties and cities as defined by G.S. 160A-1 may by ordinance adopt the
provisions of this Chapter and may adopt such further rules and regulations as the governing
bodies of the counties and cities deem appropriate; provided, however, no county or city may
regulate:
(1) Interest, fees, or recovery charges;
(2) Hours of operation, unless such regulation applies to businesses generally;
(3) The nature of the business or type of pawn transaction; or
(4) License fees in excess of rates set by the State. (1989, c. 638, s. 2.)
§ 91A-13. License renewal
Notwithstanding any provision of this Chapter to the contrary, any person, firm, or
corporation licensed as a pawnbroker on or before October 1, 1989, shall continue in force until
the natural expiration thereof and all other provisions of this Chapter shall apply to such license.
Such pawnbroker shall be eligible for renewal of his license upon its expiration or subsequent
renewals, provided such license complies with the requirements for renewal that were in effect
immediately prior to October 1, 1989. (1989, c. 638, s. 2.)
§ 91A-14. Bond
Every person, firm, or corporation licensed under this Chapter shall, at the time of receiving
the license, file with the city or county issuing the license a bond payable to such city or county
in the sum of five thousand dollars ($5,000), to be executed by the licensee, and by two
responsible sureties or a surety company licensed to do such business in this State, to be
approved by the city or county, which shall be for the faithful performance of the requirements
and obligations pertaining to the business so licensed. The city or county may sue for forfeiture
of the bond upon a breach thereof. Any person who obtains a judgment against a pawnbroker
and upon which judgment execution is returned unsatisfied may maintain an action in his own
name upon the bond, to satisfy the judgment. (1989, c. 638, s. 2.)
Property Crime
In the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, property crime includes the offenses of
burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson. The object of the theft-type offenses is
the taking of money or property, but there is no force or threat of force against the victims. The
property crime category includes arson because the offense involves the destruction of
property; however, arson victims may be subjected to force. Because of limited participation and
varying collection procedures by local agencies, only limited data are available for arson. Arson
statistics are included in trend, clearance, and arrest tables throughout crime in the United
States, but they are not included in any estimated volume data.
Burglary: The UCR Program defines burglary as the unlawful entry of a structure to commit a
felony or theft. To classify an offense as a burglary, the use of force to gain entry need not have
occurred. The Program has three sub-classifications for burglary: forcible entry, unlawful entry
(where no force is used), and attempted forcible entry.
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 60
Motor Vehicle Theft: The UCR Program defines motor vehicle theft as the theft or attempted
theft of a motor vehicle. The offense includes the stealing of automobiles, trucks, buses,
motorcycles, snowmobiles, etc.
Larceny-Theft: The UCR Program defines larceny-theft as the unlawful taking, carrying,
leading, or riding away of property from the possession of another. Examples are thefts of
bicycles, motor vehicle parts and accessories, shoplifting, pocket-picking, or the stealing of any
property or article that is not taken by force or by fraud. Attempted larcenies are included.
Embezzlement, confidence games, forgery, check fraud, etc., are excluded.
Arson: The UCR Program defines arson as any willful or malicious burning or attempting to
burn, a dwelling house, public building, motor vehicle or aircraft, or personal property of another.
NC Attorney General, NC State Bureau of Investigation, Uniform Crime Reporting
Property Crime Offenses, Eight -Year Trends
Offense 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Burglary 98,233 97,267 98,264 102,780 105,346 106,849 109,128 104,723
Larceny –
Theft
225,562 225,687 220,058 217,963 222,189 228,707 228,259 208,326
Motor
Vehicle
Theft
24,556 26,344 27,012 28,251 29,670 27,486 26,211 19,409
Property
Crime Total
348,351 349,298 345,334 348,994 357,205 363,041 363,598 332,458
NC Property Crimes, Years: 2008 - 2009
CJIN General Assembly Report – April 2011 Page 61
Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2008 Crimes in the United States
Overview of U.S. Property Crimes
• In 2009, there were an estimated 6,327,230 larceny-thefts nationwide.
• The estimated number of larceny-thefts dropped 4.0 percent in 2009 when compared
with the 2008 estimate. The 2009 figure was a 9.2 percent decline from the 2000
estimate.
• The rate of estimated larceny-thefts in 2009 was 2,060.9 per 100,000 inhabitants.
• From 2008 to 2009, the rate of larceny-thefts declined 4.8 percent, and from 2000 to
2009, the rate decreased 16.8 percent.
• Larceny-thefts accounted for an estimated 67.9 percent of property crimes in 2009.
• The average value of property taken during larceny-thefts was $864 per offense. When
the average value was applied to the estimated number of larceny-thefts, the loss to
victims nationally was nearly $5.5 billion.
• The largest portion of reported larcenies (36.3 percent) were thefts of motor vehicle
parts, accessories, and contents.
$0
$10,000,000
$20,000,000
$30,000,000
$40,000,000
$50,000,000
$60,000,000
$70,000,000
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Stolen and Recovered Property 2009
Total Recovered by
Type
8,600,00