Laserfiche WebLink
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of Council <br />Tuesday, February 22, 2011 <br />Page 6 <br />cuckoo clocks to go home. We discussed the possibility of using the old police annex for the <br />Recreation Department. That is ongoing. The next meeting is March 16tn <br />SPECIAL COMMITTEE REPORTS: <br />Information & Technolozy - There was no meeting. There is no report. <br />Records Commission - Mrs. Mills reminded everyone that Community Shred Day is May 14tn <br />at the Civic Center from 9:00-12:00. Mrs. Betsa and Mr. Esborn are looking at a grant that <br />would possibly help us financially for off-site storage. <br />OLD `BUSINESS <br />OPEN PORTION - 3 minute limit imposed by Chair. Those who wish to speak must first state <br />their name and address. <br />There were no comments. <br />NEW .BUSINESS , <br />. Motion to authorize going out to bid for audio and videorecording system for Police <br />Department. <br />Mr. Saponaro, seconded by Mrs. Mills, made a motion to authorize going out to bid for audio <br />and videorecording system for Police Department. <br />Council President Buckholtz stated this was briefly discussed at Caucus. <br />Chief Dearden provided an update. As I mentioned to the Finance Committee, since Caucus I <br />had the Detective Bureau review their 2010 records to see how many times this type of <br />equipment would have been utilized by them in their investigative criminal offenses. Not as it is <br />mandated by the State law but just in general how many times they would have used it. They <br />said it approximated 60 times for 2010. After meeting with SPAN, I have a response to Dr. <br />Parker relative to your question, all of the other SPAN community's municipalities made the <br />necessary changes in their equipment either adding to or modifying what they have or buying <br />new, there is no benefit for us to try and collectively purchase something. In talking with <br />Highland Heights and Lyndhurst, they both used a company that was able to come in and <br />provide a system at a much lower price than what the original cost of the Zenith system would <br />be. They were talking somewhere in the area of $4,000. I have contacted that vendor and asked <br />him to come out and look at our system and see what his recommendations would be. The reason <br />for leaving this motion on is just simply so that at any given time we feel that the pricing isn't <br />conducive, it allows us to move forward with at least going out for bidding at that time without <br />starting from square one again.