Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Campus Security topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Perris Union trustees direct staff to gather community input on weapons‑detection options after high‑cost proposals
Summary
Trustees heard two weapons-detection proposals (a stationary Evolve system and a portable CHA/Open Gate system), asked about staffing and procurement, and voted to collect utilization data and community feedback rather than approving a purchase.
The Perris Union High School District board discussed two campus weapons-detection approaches Dec. 10 and directed staff to gather utilization data and community input before pursuing procurement.
John Hannah described two vendor options presented at a prior special meeting: a heavier infrastructure "Evolve" system with single-point entry and annual support fees, and a more portable CHA/Open Gate system comprised of multiple battery-powered units. Hannah outlined two staffing plans (Plan A: additional campus supervisors 8 hours/day; Plan B: 5 hours/day) and presented preliminary year‑one cost estimates that ranged into the mid six‑figures depending on system choice and staffing assumptions.
Trustee discussion focused on trade-offs. Board members asked about per-unit costs, power and retrofit needs for single-point entry, whether units could be battery-operated for events, and procurement rules (formal bid versus piggyback contracts). Carmen, the district's director of purchasing, advised that installation could trigger public works requirements and that purchases above statutory thresholds typically require a formal bid, though a valid piggyback contract could be used if compliant.
After deliberation the board moved to collect staff, parent and community feedback and gather utilization data rather than approve immediate purchase. The motion directing staff to "move forward with gathering data for the utilization without picking a detection system" was made, seconded and passed (item 15.13, 5-0). The board clarified that staff will survey parents and staff, complete a safety assessment with the district's risk vendor (Keenan), and explore procurement options including piggyback contracts and formal bidding timelines.
Why it matters: The decision keeps the process in an evaluative stage while producing the community input and fiscal detail needed before any expensive procurement. Trustees emphasized both the urgency of improving campus safety and the need to follow procurement law and ensure parent/staff acceptance.
Next steps: Staff will circulate a parent/staff survey (targeted for late January), complete the Keenan site assessments, investigate existing piggyback contracts, and return a procurement and implementation timeline and estimated total cost to the board for formal approval if warranted.
