Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fleet Security topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Klamath County commissioners discuss temporary fleet-security plan, draft take-home vehicle policy
Summary
County officials discussed buying a $6,997 security system (plus $125/month service), a temporary “hybrid” plan to store county vehicles at the road shop on weekends, and drafting formal guidelines for take‑home vehicles with a time-limited review.
Get email alerts on the Fleet Security topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Klamath County commissioners discussed on-record options to secure county vehicles and to formalize take-home vehicle rules, including a temporary hybrid of weekend storage at the county road shop and staff take-home during the week.
The conversation began with a staff cost estimate for a commercial monitoring system “right now [at] $6,997,” which the speaker said would include purchase, installation and training, and a monthly monitoring fee of $125. Commissioners present and staff discussed an interim approach that would have public-works staff park county fleet vehicles at the road shop over weekends while permitting staff to take them home during the workweek.
The hybrid plan would avoid storing vehicles at employees’ homes on weekends while minimizing daily vehicle transfers: vehicles would be driven from the road shop to staff on Mondays and returned each Friday. Commissioners asked staff to draft a short written policy with clear guidelines for take-home use, and to include limits such as “straight to work, straight home” and restrictions on non‑work passengers to avoid insurance problems.
Supervisors and other staff told the board they are already stretched: there are more vehicles in service than supervisors, and some employees rely on the assigned county vehicle for errands such as doctor appointments or lunch when they lack a personal car. Commissioners said the policy should allow limited, reasonable latitude (for example, quick stops for fuel, a child pickup or a medical appointment) but should guard against routine personal use that would effectively make the vehicle a personal benefit.
Several commissioners asked for a clear timeline. One commissioner proposed a 60‑day limit for the temporary policy, with a firm update to the board sooner. Staff agreed to return with an update and a plan; one commissioner asked to have an interim update in about 30 days so the board could review road-shop access, landlord options for storage, and bids for security systems. Staff also said they would check with the road‑shop leadership about the operational burden of moving a dozen county vehicles to and from the shop daily.
Insurance and precedent concerns arose in the discussion. A commissioner reminded the board to confirm existing county policy on non‑employed passengers; staff said that currently no employee was carrying non‑employees and that the county should set that as a precedent for this temporary arrangement to avoid creating cross‑departmental expectations or an insurance exposure.
Next steps the board directed staff to pursue included: obtaining bids for security-system options, drafting a written take‑home-vehicle policy that defines allowable incidental stops and addresses non‑employee passengers and insurance, checking road‑shop logistics with Department Head Morris, and returning with a status update within 30 days and a plan within 60 days. No formal vote was taken during the discussion.

