Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Gage County supervisors debate keeping paid JDS eCitation system versus cheaper alternatives
Loading...
Summary
Supervisors and law enforcement discussed delays and costs in rolling out Justice Data Solutions (JDS) eCitation software, weighing an already‑purchased five‑year JDS module (estimated $37,250) against lower‑cost options such as Trax/Mach. The board agreed to convene a small working group to evaluate options and contact JDS about contract flexibility.
Gage County supervisors spent a substantial portion of their Nov. 26 meeting discussing the county's rollout of electronic citation (eCitation) software and whether to stay with a Justice Data Solutions (JDS) module the county has already purchased or switch to a lower‑cost alternative.
Sheriff’s office and records staff told the board that the eCitation system’s hardware (handheld license scanners and armrest printers) is already in the patrol cars and that the county has paid for a JDS module that was presented as a five‑year investment. "That software estimate, I think that was $37,250 that was for a total of a five‑year term investment," said the county representative outlining the purchase. He added that subsequent annual maintenance was estimated at about $2,150. The same staff noted a vendor staffing turnover and other delays have slowed the rollout of the module.
Several supervisors asked whether the county could instead use Trax (within the MACH suite) or other vendors such as Brazos, which some local agencies use, at a much lower annual per‑user cost. One board member summarized the contrast: the current JDS module represents tens of thousands of dollars up front while Trax/Mach could cost a few dozen dollars per user per year. The county technical presenter cautioned that JDS includes broader records‑management, incident and evidence modules that the county uses for jail booking and civil processing and that switching systems could affect other integrated functions.
Supervisors and staff agreed the rollout needs more hands‑on attention after the county lost key points of contact at JDS and at the crime commission during implementation. The sheriff’s office described setting up a beta vehicle and completing initial training, but said additional training was required before wider deployment.
The board did not change the contract during the meeting. Instead, supervisors agreed to convene a smaller working group — including sheriff’s office staff, county IT, and select supervisors — to quickly evaluate options, make phone calls to vendors and to JDS about potential contract accommodations, and return recommendations to the full board. One supervisor urged caution about abandoning an already‑paid contract "if we're already this far down the line," while others stressed potential long‑term savings from a different vendor.
Next steps: a small group will analyze the county’s integration needs, vendor offerings, and possible contract remedies; staff said they would contact JDS about whether the county could extend or otherwise amend the implementation timeline without additional charges.