The case made to City Council for the Real-Time Intelligence Center on May 12, 2026 rested in part on money: the federal government would pay for the center, and bundling the city’s Axon agreements would save money. This page sets that case beside the documents that carry the numbers: the two staff reports council voted on, the chief’s presentation and the minutes, the budget amendment, and the contract the city signed and posted in August (the contract, as signed). Every figure is quoted or computed from those, and each computation is shown. The hub for the center is The Real-Time Intelligence Center.
What was said
- Interim Chief Jackie Stepp, May 12, 2026, presenting the Axon contract (video, 5:06:30): “Projected savings of over 4 million over the term, immediate advancement of operational capabilities, locked-in pricing against inflation, and a stable long-term technology roadmap.” The minutes record the same claim: “This approach is projected to deliver more than $4 million in total contract value savings over time.” Earlier in the same presentation (4:43:48): “The future full access Fusus, the funding would cover 7 and 1/2 years, 89 months. Additional real-time intelligence center cost would be addressed through any standard procurement process. We don’t see any at this time.”
- Stepp, April 28, 2026, at the work session (video, 1:12:23): “467,602 would go directly to pay for Fusus for approximately 7 to 8 years. This is not a one-time one-year payment and we’re going to come back to you next year requesting additional funding.” And (1:14:00): “there’s no additional staff being requested to support the system today.”
- The staff report for the grant, May 12, 2026: “No local match is required for this grant.” “The award conditions, allowable uses, compliance requirements, and onboarding steps will be set at the Federal level. Once received, City staff will review the terms and determine the City’s ability and willingness to comply.”
- The staff report for the contract, May 12, 2026: “APD reached out to Axon in response to the City’s request for cost-saving ideas for the FY27 budget.” “Axon proposed a seven-and-a-half-year combined contract that offered the City of Asheville considerable savings for the first two years, while locking in current pricing for licensing, warranties, and cloud storage for an additional five and a half years through FY34.”
- Mayor Esther Manheimer, May 28, 2026, at the first mayoral debate: “we received a grant from the federal government to be able to pay for our own,” and, of Kim Roney’s vote, that she voted “against a grant that would help save the city money” (BPR).
- APD’s policy workgroup notes, June 11, 2026, the department’s own record: “This grant provides the department with a 7.5-year contract at current rates, prioritizing the use of federal funds over local resources.”
What the grant is
A Community Project Funding award of $1,141,256, secured by U.S. Rep. Chuck Edwards in the fiscal year 2026 appropriations act and administered by the Department of Justice under the Byrne Justice Assistance Grant program. APD answered a questionnaire from Edwards’ office in 2024; the city manager’s office authorized the request on May 22, 2024; the first request failed with the FY2025 continuing resolution and was resubmitted; APD learned in February 2026 that it had been funded. The award appears as $1,141,255.50 in APD’s March 2026 committee slides, $1,141,256.00 in the staff report and the budget ordinance as drafted, and $1,141,255.56 in the resolution and action agenda as adopted.
The budget amendment council adopted (Ordinance 5222) splits it in two: “Materials, $673,653.85” and “Contracted Services, $467,602.15.” Council accepted the award before its conditions were known; the staff report says staff would review them afterward. A separate Justice Assistance Grant, approved on the consent agenda on March 25, 2025, carried about $60,000 for the center’s first furnishings (Stepp, April 28, 2026; 2025-03-25 City Council).
What the grant pays for, and what it does not
| Cost | Who pays | The source |
|---|---|---|
| The video wall | The grant | ”around $400,000” (Stepp, April 28); “Approximately $500,000” (Stepp, May 12, 4:42:52) |
| The Fusus subscription, Dec 1, 2026 to Dec 31, 2033 | The grant, $467,602.15 | Contract 92700065, clause 2, year 1b, “FUSUS; DOJ grant funded”; Stepp, April 28: “approximately 7 to 8 years”; May 12: “7 and 1/2 years, 89 months” |
| Construction, workspaces, computers | The grant, the remainder of the $673,653.85 materials line | ”about 250,000” (Stepp, April 28); “the remainder” (May 12) |
| Body cameras, tasers, drones, interview-room recording, Lightpost, warranties, licenses, cloud storage, Aug 1, 2026 to Dec 31, 2033 | The city, $6,955,559.00 plus sales tax | Contract 92700065, clause 2, the eight city-funded lines; clause 21, “The City is not tax exempt” |
| The people who staff the center | Not priced | Stepp, April 28: “there’s no additional staff being requested to support the system today.” No staffing cost has been published since; the July 23 workgroup notes say staff training follows the policy release |
| Fusus and everything else after Dec 31, 2033 | The city, at Axon’s price then | Axon’s Master Services and Purchasing Agreement, section 2: the subscription “will automatically renew for an additional 5 years,” with increases “by up to 3% at the beginning of each year of the Renewal Term” |
| Any other RTIC cost | The city, “through any standard procurement process” | Stepp, May 12, 4:43:53: “we don’t see any at this time” |
The grant pays for the room and the software subscription through 2033. The equipment contract, the staff, and the years after 2033 are the city’s.
The savings, as stated and as documented
The staff report for the contract gives three figures, and they are the only documented savings in the record:
| As the agreements stood | Under the bundle | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| FY27 | $837,155.82 | $740,000.00 | $97,155.82 |
| FY28 | $856,418.41 | $777,500.00 | $78,918.41 |
| Fusus, “over the life of the contract,” by bundling it rather than contracting separately | $46,948.25 | ||
| Documented total | $223,022.48 |
The minutes record the chief putting the first two together: “By combining this year, we save approximately 180k over the next two years.” The same presentation and the same minutes carry “more than $4 million in total contract value savings over time.” No document in the meeting packet, the released records, or the posted contract shows how the $4 million was computed. The chief’s stated basis was a model. The minutes: “Our current financial modeling shows technology costs rising to approximately $1.24 million annually by Fiscal Year (FY) 2027, followed by a significant coverage gap in FY 2029, when major agreements expire.” On the video (5:06:10): “there’s a potential 20 to 30% cost increase due to inflation.” The staff report’s own figure for FY27 as the agreements stood is $837,155.82.
Locked-in pricing, against the schedule the city signed
The staff report describes the bundle as “locking in current pricing for licensing, warranties, and cloud storage for an additional five and a half years through FY34,” and the chief described “locked-in pricing against inflation.” The contract the city signed on Aug 4, 2026 sets these payments:
| Year | Payment | Change from the year before | Against the FY28 unbundled figure, $856,418.41 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1a (FY27) | $740,000.00 | $116,418 below | |
| 2 (FY28) | $777,500.00 | +5.07% | $78,918 below |
| 3 (FY29) | $816,875.00 | +5.06% | $39,543 below |
| 4 (FY30) | $858,219.00 | +5.06% | $1,801 above |
| 5 (FY31) | $901,630.00 | +5.06% | $45,212 above |
| 6 (FY32) | $947,211.00 | +5.06% | $90,793 above |
| 7 (FY33) | $931,935.00 | −1.61% | $75,517 above |
| 7.5 (Aug to Dec 2033) | $982,189.00 | five months, above any full year |
The pricing the report calls locked rises about 5 percent a year from the first year. By year 4 the bundled payment passes the figure the report gave for the old agreements in FY28; years 5 to 7 run $45,000 to $91,000 a year above it, and the final five months alone exceed it by $125,771. The posted documents do not explain the final five-month payment. Axon’s pricebook page, posted with the contract, carries the note “Annual pricing for bundles, warranties and licenses may reflect a 4% YOY inflation escalator.”
The share the city carries
| Amount | |
|---|---|
| Contract total, Aug 1, 2026 to Dec 31, 2033, excluding taxes | $7,423,161.15 |
| Paid by the federal award (the Fusus line) | $467,602.15 |
| Paid by the city over 7.5 years | $6,955,559.00 |
| Paid by the city before the RTIC for Fusus access through the county | $30,000 a year (the January 24, 2023 interlocal agreement, the Asheville timeline) |
| Paid by the city before the bundle for the five Axon agreements, FY27 as they stood | $837,155.82 (the staff report) |
Most of the city’s $6.96 million buys what the department already had: the staff report says the contract bundles “five separate agreements” for body cameras, tasers, drones, Lightpost and interview-room recording. The RTIC’s own line in the contract is the grant-funded Fusus subscription. What the award does not reach is the schedule’s rise, the staff, and the years after 2033, when the Fusus subscription and every bundled item renew at Axon’s price under a five-year automatic renewal. The city’s share is a commitment of roughly $930,000 a year by the term’s end for equipment and licenses, before any RTIC staff and before the renewal.
What council was told about leaving, and what it signed
City Attorney Brad Branham, May 12, 2026, answering the mayor (5:14:13): “In any contract that the city executes at this point, we include certain clauses that allow council, specifically council, to pull the funding from those contracts. We call them non-appropriation clauses. You hold the ability to appropriate money, and without the money the contract essentially is voided.”
The signed contract’s non-appropriation clause (clause 19) ends the contract “on the last day of the then-current fiscal year,” and “Upon termination for non-appropriation, the City shall return all Devices to Contractor within 30 days of termination, and if returned, Contractor will not invoice the City for the remaining MSRP value of the Devices.” Axon’s master agreement (section 16.3) provides that on early termination “Axon will invoice Agency the difference between the MSRP for Axon Devices received … and amounts paid towards those Axon Devices,” with return allowed “only if terminating for non-appropriation.” Clause 19.1 lets the city drop the Fusus portion alone if the grant fails; “all other products, services, and amounts listed herein will remain active.” A budget vote can end the contract; ending it means handing back the body cameras, tasers and drones or paying list price for them (the clauses, quoted).
What was asked, and what has not been answered
- Patrick Conant, April 14, 2026, at public comment (2:28:28): “What is the ongoing operational cost after the grant runs out?” No answer has been published as of Sept 23, 2026.
- A resident, May 12, 2026 (5:20:37), with Axon’s February 2026 investor presentation: “We were just told that the Department of Justice grant will cover Axon and Fusus costs for the RTIC for 7 and 1/2 years. But Axon has a history of ratcheting up the price on its customers throughout the life of a contract.” On the deck’s 125 percent net revenue retention: “At 125, you’re paying 25% more than last year.” The deck is in the city’s meeting folder (Documents); Axon’s investor materials report net revenue retention of 124 to 126 percent for more than 20 consecutive quarters (Axon).
- Kim Roney, May 12, 2026, before the contract vote (6:24:24): “The concerns I’ve heard over the past few weeks include cost, of facilities, of staffing, of budget amendments, of post-grant funding, of what we could be funding instead.” And (6:30:00): “We’re here tonight because former city manager and the former police chief made this request for funding in 2024 … We have 225 million. You heard us fight about it tonight. We’re trying to cover a $1.1 billion gap with 225 million, but this funding came somewhat easily.”
- Sheriff Quentin Miller, June 11, 2026, to the policy workgroup, per APD’s notes: “While seized drug money initially funded this expensive system within the Sheriff’s Office, current grants provide temporary relief. Ensuring long-term sustainability requires the community to embrace the program through open dialogue and active support” (The RTIC Policy).
The questions this leaves
Each has an owner and a document; the full list by addressee is on Asking About the RTIC.
- To the city manager: the model behind “more than $4 million in total contract value savings,” as a document. Anchor: the May 12 minutes.
- To the city manager: the RTIC’s annual operating budget line, staff included, for FY27 and FY28. Anchor: the Aug 4, 2026 contract; Stepp’s April 28 statement that no staff were requested “today.”
- To the city manager: the plan for Dec 31, 2033, when the grant-funded subscription ends. Anchor: the master agreement’s renewal clause.
- To the city manager: the year 7.5 payment of $982,189. Anchor: Contract 92700065, clause 2.
- To council: the schedule above, read into the FY28 budget discussion beside “save the city money.” Anchor: the contract; BPR, May 28, 2026.
- To council: whether “considerable savings for the first two years” and a 5 percent annual rise for the five after were the terms it understood on May 12. Anchor: the staff report; the contract.
Related: The Real-Time Intelligence Center · The Axon contract, as signed · Asheville’s RTIC claims and the record · What Axon Contracts Do · Follow the Money · Esther Manheimer · Jackie Stepp · 2026-05-12 City Council
Region: Asheville · Last verified: September 23, 2026