Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Software topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County to split cost of new ProPhoenix records/jail software; service contract added to agenda
Summary
Houston County commissioners placed on the agenda a $200,000 budget amendment for the county’s share of a ProPhoenix software replacement for the sheriff’s office and authorized consideration of the vendor’s service agreement, which carries an annual maintenance fee that begins in year two and includes a 5% escalator.
Major, a representative of the Houston County Sheriff’s Office, told the commission the agency’s current records and jail software is “not functioning” and that the county has chosen ProPhoenix as a replacement. Major said the county and the city of Dothan negotiated the project together and that Dothan has already started implementation on its side.
Major said the total county cost is approximately $400,000 before splitting with Dothan and that the sheriff’s office and city will split costs so the county’s immediate budget request is about $200,000. Major said the original price had been above $900,000 but that negotiations reduced it; the sheriff’s office will also add computer and server equipment at the communications center to host the system and integrate CAD and 911 functions.
The commission also placed on the agenda a ProPhoenix service agreement for the county to authorize the chairman to sign; staff described service fees of about $72,002.30 per year beginning in year two and noted the contract includes a 5% annual escalator. The chair read the contract item and the commission had no objection to placing it on the agenda.
Major said the ProPhoenix product covers report writing, jail management, inventory and training modules and will allow Houston County to communicate with Dothan and other agencies using the same software. Staff estimated a go‑live timeframe of six to eight months after approvals and implementation work begins.
No formal roll‑call vote was recorded in the transcript; the chair asked for objections to placing both the budget amendment and the service agreement on the agenda and none were voiced.
