I surprised that apparently you haven't indicated what system you're trying to monitor, nor has anyone asked. Isn't that part of Troubleshooting 101?
Should it be? I asked/mentioned multiple times to verify the frequencies to the best of the OP's ability, he/she stated they're accurate as far as he/she knows, that there's an online audio stream of the system that apparently labels it with the same frequency or frequencies also, and that it's a digital-based system as well. I thought to ask which specific system the OP is trying to monitor directly but didn't figure it mattered overall - it's just another radio transmission, after all, and if it isn't showing up on the spectrum as it should then either a) the antenna is so bad it can't tolerate or receive said frequency or frequencies with any sensitivity at all, b) it's overloading the front end severely to such a degree that system just doesn't appear as it should, or c) they're not broadcasting on the assigned frequencies like they should (which again could
potentially be an issue with ppm).
I use NOAA weather at 162.550 - that's in the VHF-Hi band, you know - to set my ppm on my two RTL sticks and I don't have to change it again 99.9% of the time; every so often I'll need to adjust it 1 single digit positive or negative to get a particular NXDN system to decode properly. Aside from that when I discovered the ppm for each stick, that was that: it's the same from 110 to 940 MHz on my hardware. I can't speak for anyone else but I don't find myself adjusting the ppm at all, and if I do it's like once a week at most.
As far as the RF Gain is concerned, even if it was set for 0, and no RTL AGC or Tuner AGC is enabled, with a proper antenna attached (which that little 5" thing certainly doesn't qualify for to any degree at all), a 110 watt transmitter on a tower broadcasting from ~1 mile away is most certainly going to show up on the spectrum "loud and clear" - the one I mentioned above and posted a picture of will still give me peaks of -15 to -10 dB (as per the second pic below) - and that's only 30 watts from 0.6 miles away, 110 watts would be
booming by comparison from a similar distance.
Regardless, the OP will figure it out at some point... or go buy a real scanner I suppose.