Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the It Services topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Mount Pleasant council selects Bridal Technology for city IT services

Mount Pleasant City Council · December 17, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Council voted unanimously Dec. 17 to select Bridal Technology as the city's new IT services provider; staff will negotiate an agreement and the city attorney will review before execution. The selection follows a competitive evaluation after the city ended its prior contract with DataMax.

The Mount Pleasant City Council voted unanimously Dec. 17 to select Bridal Technology as the city's IT services provider and authorized the city manager to negotiate a service agreement subject to city‑attorney review.

City staff told the council they solicited proposals after the city ended its contract with DataMax in November and received two bids. A committee that included Mayor Pro Tem Hinton and Councilmember Hageman interviewed both vendors and recommended Bridal Technology as the city’s preferred provider. Staff said the contract will be negotiated and returned to the city attorney for review before execution.

Sean Bridal, who identified himself as CEO and owner of the company, said he founded the firm in 2008 and described ongoing work with neighboring counties and cities. Seth Bridal, introduced as Sean’s brother and an early hire, said the firm has served long‑term local government clients and is prepared to provide support.

Staff said the recommended scope is 24‑hour, seven‑day support that would cover public safety, water and utility systems. The council’s motion authorized the city manager to finalize terms and execute the contract after legal review.

The council took the action during its regular meeting after public comment, and the vote was recorded as unanimous. Staff and council did not provide final contract value or a copy of the negotiated agreement at the Dec. 17 meeting; those details were described as to be completed during negotiation.