Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the 911 Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee backs forwarding 911 recorder upgrade request after budget discussion
Summary
Jackson County staff asked the Public Safety and Transportation Committee to recommend a recorder/server upgrade for the 911 center and a related budget adjustment; committee recommended approval to the full board after discussion about fund balance and payment timing.
Get email alerts on the 911 Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Jackson County staff asked the Public Safety and Transportation Committee on June 9 to forward a recommended purchase and budget adjustment for a 911 phone/voice recorder and server upgrade that county staff said is needed to remain compatible with a statewide upgrade.
A staff presentation said the state and Motorola plan an upgrade starting in August that affects phone-recording systems in 39 counties. Staff recommended an operating-system/server upgrade and a maintenance-extension agreement; staff estimated the server/OS cost at about $38,000 with an annual maintenance option from the shelter’s incumbent vendor Word Systems at about $11,000 per year. Motorola quoted a higher combination: roughly $44,000 for the OS/server and $24,000 per year for maintenance, according to staff comments.
Committee members asked how the County would pay for the purchase this year because the 911 budget had not included the expense for the current calendar year. County staff and County Administrator Michael Overton told the committee the purchase could be covered by the 911 fund balance and that the county’s fund balance was sufficient to pay the cost without a transfer from the general fund. Overton said the unbudgeted purchase would require a formal budget adjustment and that the motion should include the necessary budget action.
Commissioner Duckham moved and Commissioner Baer supported forwarding the request to the full board with the required budget adjustment; the committee voted to recommend approval. Committee members requested the vote be posted. No vendor contract was approved at the committee level; the presentation requested the recommendation be forwarded to the full board for final action.

