Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Police topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
San Angelo police request $250,000 portable building, evidence consolidation and operational investments
Summary
Chief Griffith asked council to fund a $250,000 portable building to consolidate evidence storage and relieve fragmented facilities; staff also proposed third‑party evidence audits, district remapping and phased investments in ammunition and body armor to address staffing and operational shortfalls.
Chief Griffith told the council the San Angelo Police Department is operating across multiple fragmented locations and asked for a finished portable building (quoted price $250,000) to temporarily house staff and consolidate evidence storage while the city plans a long‑term facility.
Griffith described the portable building as a movable, finished structure that could serve police functions now and be repurposed later: “This would be the ability to put a portable building next to us to limp by to get to where we're about 4 or 5 years down the road looking for an actual new police department,” he said. He said the model under consideration is finished out and available and that the department has identified space on department property to place it.
The chief also asked for funding to hire a vendor to re‑map police districts using geodata and calls‑for‑service to improve deployment and response times, and proposed a third‑party audit of evidence holdings to consolidate physical evidence into three storage sites. He said some physical evidence and records could be digitized over time but that much physical evidence must remain in secure storage.
On recurring operational items, Griffith proposed phasing in ammunition purchases toward an eventual annual target closer to $100,000 and highlighted a body‑armor purchase offset by grant funds. He said training and perishable skills require steady ammunition availability and emphasized the department is below many peer cities in per‑capita budgets and staffing.
Council members asked questions about building size (presentations referenced both ~2,900 and “just under 4,000” square feet), finish‑out costs and whether the quoted price includes completion; the chief confirmed the unit being discussed is finished out.
No formal vote occurred at the workshop; council and staff said requests would be returned in the budget amendment process for subsequent action.
