Barron County Board of Supervisors members on Oct. 20 heard a detailed presentation from Motorola and partners proposing a radio replacement and integrated mobile-video, body-camera and evidence‑management system. Motorola representatives said the package would replace aging single‑band radios, add rugged multi‑band radios capable of VHF/800/UHF and LTE/Wi‑Fi fallbacks, provide in‑car video, and introduce a combined remote speaker microphone with camera (SVX) and a new body camera (V700).

The proposal’s presenters — Chad Olszewski, Motorola account executive; Bill Pritchard, Motorola mobile‑video manager; and Sid Sanaki of Ancom Communications — described equipment features, cloud evidence storage and artificial‑intelligence tools for redaction and transcription. “Most people will be like, oh, the gun, obviously. No. Your radio. It's your lifeline,” said Chad Olszewski, who said the radios are designed to be “ultra rugged” and interoperable with today’s WISCOM system, local Tait infrastructure and the planned WISCOM 2 system.

Why it matters: county officials and presenters said the package is intended to modernize aging communications hardware that county law enforcement still uses, improve officer safety and evidence capture, and provide a unified evidence‑management system intended to speed redaction and transcription work. Presenters said the proposal would also provide tools for dispatch to locate officers and view live camera streams.

Key finance and contract points presented

- Proposed financed amount (presenter figure): about $1,582,622.40; Motorola staff said the total cost after financing would be “about $1,700,000.”
- Motorola reported it negotiated a reduced buy‑down interest rate for the county of 2.49 percent, contingent on county acceptance by a date stated in the presentation (Dec. 12, 2025).
- The presenter described a 5‑year finance structure with payments in arrears, meaning the first payment would not be due until 2026; the year‑one payment shown on slides was $340,556.45. Presenters said estimated ongoing smart‑service costs would be about $400–$450 per radio per year and estimated evidence‑library/central‑services renewal at approximately $85,855 per year (presenter estimate).
- The presenter said Motorola would include three years of CommandCentral Aware (dispatch situational awareness) at no charge as part of the package and described an unlimited‑storage cloud option for in‑car and body camera evidence with evidence transfer if the county later chooses a different vendor.

Installation and additional costs

Presenters said Ancom Communications would handle vehicle installs; the presentation included an installation cost estimate that the presenter gave as an additional line item. Presenters noted some “smart” features (LTE/Wi‑Fi fallback, smart mapping, remote firmware updates) could require further local configuration or optional infrastructure to address indoor “dead spots.”

County action and next steps

Following questions from supervisors about redaction time savings, radio dead zones, translation features and hardware refresh schedules, the board voted to appropriate $3,000 to obtain a legal opinion from the law firm Quarles & Brady to construct a general‑obligation note corresponding to the proposed Motorola lease payments. The motion (made by Marv Thompson, seconded by Randy Cook) passed with 27 yes, 2 absent; the presenters said the 2.49 percent interest buy‑down required acceptance by a specified date in December 2025, and that a county decision would need to be finalized before that deadline.

Quotes and context

Chad Olszewski, Motorola account executive: “Most people will be like, oh, the gun, obviously. No. Your radio. It's your lifeline.”

Deputy (presenter) on redaction workload: “I just did one that had probably 25 hours of video, and it took me a week and a half,” describing how faster redaction would free staff time for other duties.

What the board said about timing

County staff said a legal opinion and drafting of a general‑obligation note would be needed before a final county decision on the lease/financing; the board was asked to reserve Monday, Dec. 8, 2025, for a possible special meeting to act before the presenter’s acceptance deadline. No final contract or lease adoption occurred at the Oct. 20 meeting.

Ending

The presentation elicited detailed technical and cost questions and led to a narrow procedural vote to fund legal review of the financing structure; the larger procurement decision remains pending, with staff and committee follow‑up and a possible Dec. 8 board meeting if staff returns materials in time.