Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Detention Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Montgomery County awards inmate phone and video-visitation contract to ICSolutions at 50% commission
Summary
The Montgomery County Commission unanimously awarded a three‑year contract to Inmate Calling Solutions, LLC (ICSolutions) for inmate telephone and video visitation services. The county will receive a 50% commission for the inmate messaging system; the domestic call rate is listed at $0.04 per minute.
The Montgomery County Commission on May 27 approved a contract with Inmate Calling Solutions, LLC (dba ICSolutions) to provide installation, service and operation of inmate telephone and video visitation services at the Montgomery County Detention Facility.
According to the executed contract, the term is three years, beginning May 28, 2025 and ending May 27, 2028. The contract specifies a 50% commission rate for Part II — the inmate messaging system — to be paid to Montgomery County. The county memo accompanying the bid tabulation records a domestic call rate of $0.04 per minute.
Purchasing Manager Khristie Davis’s memo recommended ICSolutions as the best overall solution for inmate messaging and telephone services; the procurement documents include bid tabulation summaries and the final contract language. The contract includes standard provisions on compliance with applicable laws and an indemnity clause in which ICSolutions agrees to defend and hold the county harmless for liabilities arising from the contractor’s operations to the extent caused by the contractor’s negligence.
The motion to award the bid was moved by Commissioner Harris and seconded by Vice Chairman Carmen Moore‑Zeigler and carried unanimously. The contract’s dispute-resolution clause describes mediation in Montgomery, Alabama as a condition precedent to litigation; unresolved disputes are to be decided in the Circuit Court of Montgomery County under Alabama law.
No public commenters or commissioners were recorded objecting to the award during the meeting; the procurement records show multiple bidders and a tabulation of proposals.
