Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cybersecurity topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hancock County approves three-year cybersecurity contract, directs camera replacements after closed session
Summary
The Hancock County Board of Commissioners approved a three-year cybersecurity services contract with ThinkGard and, after a closed executive session on security, directed the prosecutor’s office to prepare a resolution for replacement cameras in county buildings.
Get email alerts on the Cybersecurity topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Hancock County Board of Commissioners on March 31 approved Resolution #214-26, a three-year contract with VC#, Inc., d/b/a ThinkGard, to provide equipment and services to protect the county’s internet and communications systems. The agreement carries a not-to-exceed cost of $45,120 for the first year and includes a 4% annual increase in subsequent years.
Commissioner William Bateson moved to approve the contract; Commissioner Timothy Bechtol seconded, and the motion passed 3-0. Phil Johnson presented the contract and described its multi-year pricing structure.
Earlier in the day the board held an executive session “regarding security.” Commissioner Jeffrey Hunker moved the session at 10:17 a.m.; roll-call votes were recorded as yes from Commissioners William Bateson, Timothy Bechtol and Jeffrey Hunker. The board reconvened at 10:48 a.m. with no action taken during the closed session.
Following the executive session, Commissioner Hunker said he would like the prosecutor’s office to prepare a resolution for Vaughn Industries to purchase and install replacement cameras to replace broken cameras in various county buildings. The transcript records the direction but does not include contract terms or a procurement timeline.
The ThinkGard contract is intended to strengthen county defenses against outside attempts to access internal operations; the transcript notes the agreement’s initial-year cap and the 4% annual increase but does not supply further technical details or scope-of-service language in the meeting record.
Next steps recorded in the meeting: the commissioners approved the contract and requested the prosecutor draft the cameras resolution; no procurement contract for cameras was presented or approved during the session.
