Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the It Procurement topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commissioners approve five-year lease for 120 Getac tablets and vehicle docking stations; transcript shows inconsistent dollar amounts

Mesa County Board of Commissioners · January 27, 2026
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

The board authorized a five-year lease (vendor listed as SAITEC/SATEC in the transcript) for 120 Getac Gen5 tablets, docks and installation for county fleets; Troy Flick said devices will support Windows 11 and 5G, but the transcript contains inconsistent dollar figures that were not reconciled on the record; vote 3-0.

Mesa County commissioners authorized a five-year lease contract for Getac Gen5 tablets, docking stations and installations for county fleet vehicles at their Jan. 27 meeting.

Troy Flick, Mesa County IT operations manager, told the board the recommended contract is the product of a formal RFP process and covers 120 units with docks, antennas and vehicle mounts. "This new equipment will be under a support and replacement warranty for the length of the lease. It will have improved specifications to operate Windows 11. They will also support 5G connectivity for better performance, and they will provide more storage to accommodate larger offline GIS maps," Flick said.

On the record, the agenda text and Flick's spoken numbers are inconsistent: the agenda language lists a contract figure read as $764,001.34 (and related per-year figures), while Flick's presentation included a different large dollar figure (read as $76,064,134.45 in the transcript). Commissioners asked clarifying questions (including confirming the quantity of 120 units and that installation is included); staff explained the per-unit cost reflects docking and vehicle-mounted equipment as well as installation. The county did not reconcile the conflicting amounts on the record.

Commissioner (Speaker 4) moved to approve the item as published; Commissioner (Speaker 6) seconded. The motion carried 3 to 0. Staff said vendor buildout and installation would take approximately two months plus several weeks of vehicle installation.