Franklin County commissioners approve $2.42 million jail security-system retrofit with MTS

Franklin County commissioners voted to approve a contract with Montgomery Technology Solutions (MTS) to replace and modernize the county jail’s security-control, intercom and video systems, county staff said during the meeting.

County administration staff described the project as a full retrofit of the jail’s original security-control and video systems, replacing control stations with modern touchscreen interfaces, installing a digital intercom system to replace roughly 335 existing intercom stations, and adding about 243 IP surveillance cameras and new servers for video retention. County staff and the warden said the upgrade is intended to improve daily operations, emergency response and compliance with federal PREA requirements and Title 37 standards.

Warden Franzone told commissioners the existing systems are obsolete and frequently fail, leaving staff concerned that cameras or intercoms could go down. She said the new system will allow central control to call up cameras and intercoms for specific housing units quickly, enable improved emergency calls from cells, and provide improved video resolution and continuous 360-degree coverage in many housing areas.

Why it matters: Commissioners and jail leadership framed the project as a safety and liability investment for staff and inmates. County administration said the $2,417,400 cost will be paid roughly half from workers’ compensation reserves and half from capital bond proceeds previously issued for court facility improvements; no new general‑fund appropriation was identified. County staff estimated a 14-to-16‑month construction timeline and said installers will sequence work unit‑by‑unit to minimize operational disruption.

Details presented at the meeting: the vendor selected from three proposals was Montgomery Technology Solutions (MTS); staff said all three proposals were responsive and that MTS submitted the lowest price. Warden Franzone described technology upgrades that include replacement of control termination boards and relays where needed, new Cat‑6 and fiber cabling, prox card readers, modern viewing stations for lieutenants, and a mix of fixed, fisheye and PTZ cameras. Staff said some existing locks, switches and wiring will be reused where feasible to limit cost. The warden said the cameras will have much higher resolution than the current system — she quoted numbers “from about 0.3 to 4.8” but noted she was not a camera expert; the transcript did not specify the units used for those figures.

Funding and procurement: Carrie Gray (county administration staff) said the funding is a roughly 50/50 split between workers’ compensation reserves — funds set aside for initiatives that reduce employee risk — and capital projects funded by bonds the commissioners previously issued. Gray said the bond proceeds were issued for court facility improvement projects and that this jail work falls under eligible capital needs. Gray stated there would be no direct general‑fund appropriation outside the previously issued bonds; she added that taxpayers effectively pay for the bond service, but the county is not reallocating operating general‑fund dollars specifically for the purchase.

Operations and warranty: Commissioners asked whether the new system would reduce staff or posts; the warden said central control remains a single, required officer post and that the upgrade is not expected to eliminate positions, though it should save staff time on investigative tasks such as extracting footage from old DVRs. County staff said MTS will provide a five‑year parts-and‑labor warranty; county maintenance staff and the warden said longer maintenance contracts can be negotiated after the warranty period.

Procurement process and risks: County staff said the first solicitation did not yield responsive proposals, the specifications were revised, and three proposals were then submitted and reviewed. Staff said they adjusted the specifications to avoid a proprietary system requirement so the county would have more options for future maintenance and support. Commissioners pressed staff on the risk of change orders; jail staff said they had manually counted cameras and intercoms and felt they had done due diligence but acknowledged the possibility of limited change orders for unexpected conditions.

Timeline and disruption: The warden said a realistic construction timeline is 14–16 months, with cabling and equipment installed in phases and individual housing units taken offline one at a time to limit disruption; staff said they expect to use open housing units to rehouse inmates temporarily when necessary.

Ending: Commissioners voted in favor of the contract. County administration and jail leadership thanked the board and said they will work with procurement and maintenance staff during the installation and commissioning phases.