Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-06-11 Commissioners Meeting WEDNESDAY, June 11, 2025 The Franklin County Commissioners met Wednesday, June 4, 2025, with the following members present: Dean A. Horst, John T. Flannery and Robert G. Ziobrowski. Commissioner Horst presided and after calling the meeting to order, a Moment of Silence, and the Pledge of Allegiance, proceeded with the business of the day. Commissioner Horst welcomed President Judge Meyers and Controller Harold Wissinger. The meeting was live streamed. On a motion by Robert G. Ziobrowski, Seconded by John T. Flannery; the Board unanimously approved to adopt the agenda. The minutes of the June 4, 2025 meetings were reviewed. On a motion by Robert G. Ziobrowski, Seconded by John T. Flannery; the Board unanimously approved the minutes. There was no public comment. On a motion by Robert G. Ziobrowski, Seconded by John T. Flannery; the Board unanimously approved all consent agenda items to include: Vouchers in the amount of $303,775.31. Agreement between the County of Franklin and 2025 Greencastle-Antrim Old Home Week for the Greencastle Senior Activity Center to use the window space at Real Estate Innovations for a display during the 2025 Old Home Week. There is no fee for this window display. Agreement renewal between the County of Franklin and Vector Media Holding Corp to advertise on the panels of the Rabbit Transit vehicles from June 16, 2025 to July 13, 2025. The advertisement will be to make the public aware of the 988 Lifeline. The 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline provides 24/7, free and confidential support for individuals in distress, prevention and crisis resources. Those experiencing suicidal thoughts, substance use, mental health crisis, or any other kind of emotional distress can call, chat or text with trained crisis staff at a cost of $3,800.00. This will be paid by the State. Agreement renewal between the County of Franklin and Eastern Time to provide annual and semi-annual alarm testing and inspections of the fire alarm systems for Franklin County at a cost of $3,549.00. This will be paid by the General Fund. Resolution 2025-09 for the donation of a Kenmore Cold Spot Refrigerator for the use of storing extra Military Share distribution food for homeless or in need veterans from The Sons of the American Legion. The Board reviewed regular agenda items. County Administrator Carrie Gray provided a high-level overview of each of the actions. Ms. Gray stated that this was identified as a need under former Warden Bill Becktold. In three or four of the recent capital requests, the Jail had included at budget time it was a deferred cost. It has since become a pressing need because of antiquated nature of the system which is proprietary and no longer in service. We have put this off as long as we could. They have been working over the past couple of years under former Warden Schell, there were specifications generated and we went out for proposals one other earlier time. because required to be a bid effort and there is more flexibility in the acquisition process. When we went through this at one other point we were not successful in getting any substantial responsive proposals so we took a step back and revised the specifications working with some subject matter experts to word things that would be understandable and appealing to security experts and that is how we have gotten to this point now. There were three proposals submitted that Warden Franzoni and her team reviewed. She then turned it over to Warden Franzoni to discuss the modern-day synopsis of where we are. Warden Franzoni stated that there were three proposals that were submittedto them. As the team worked through them they selected MTS (Montgomery Technology Systems, LLC.) What this means to the jail is this is a full retrofit of the original security controls and video systems. At the jail, they all say that the system, including the cameras are on hospice. day-by-day operation of being nervous if cameras are going to go down, if intercoms are going to go down, a lot of the much as they would like them too. The security system is the meat and potatoes or the ears and the eyes of the institution. The staff rely on the operations of those security controls for both the safety of the staff and the inmates. really a crucial piece of ensuring safety out at the jail. MTS would be putting in a new firefly control system or in layman terms the buttons or the eyes and the ears of what doors need opened, the central control, they will be able to see all the operations of the doors and the sallyports. All of the control stations will be replaced with modern touchscreen interfaces and intercoms with call up camera functionality which is great in an emergency situation. If there is an emergency on Charlie Unit they can easily call up that camera, that intercom and get a clear picture of what is going onin that housing unit and who is responding to the emergency. The intercom microphones are really important to the inmates. They all have the intercoms in their cells that they are able to hit the button in an emergency and it goes to the officer on the unit respond in a certain amount of time, then it goes to central control. That gives the inmate a chance if something would happen that they have that emergency button and access to the staff in any situation. They will also be installing the locking controls with all new termination boards and relays. They will be able to reuse some of the old locks and switches to make it most fiscally responsible but upgrading the technology that needs to go from analog to digital. 335 intercom stations will get new cabling but will reuse the existing paging speaker system. The paging speaker system is used for all calls to get an emergency call or a basic head count they use it to get access to the entire jail quickly. The big piece is the video surveillance system of 243 new IP cameras that vary from fixed cameras to fisheye cameras, the 360s and PTZs. rotated and hit that point at the right time they could miss a lot of footage. With the new cameras they will have the 360 degrees at all times so for any instances or medical emergencies, staff assaults, inmate assaults, they will be able to view them now without hoping and praying that camera rotates on the incident. All new servers will be installed with the video retention and viewing stations. There will also be CAT6 and fiberoptic cabling to have the new cameras function. Additional card readers, which are also almost 20 years old, and viewing stations for the Operational Lieutenants to always be able to see what is going on in the housing units and have that extra layer of security. The upgrade is critical to have the video documentation and the enhanced ability to control across the facility for both the staff and inmates. It aligns with all the standards that they need for PREA accreditation and Title37 in an emergency situation in an institution and this upgrade is not just the technology refresh for the jail it's also a safety and liability investment for everyone. A statistic she found this morning was they would be going from a .3mg to a 4.8mg which is an almost 10 to 25 percent higher resolution capability in the cameras. The cameras now are very grainy and when you would zoom in you couldn't tell the facial features. wearing contacts. That is how much technology has grown since the jail was constructed in 2006 and 2007. They will have crystal clear facial documentation which is very helpful in an institutional setting. The new surveillance system brings clarity and real-time control in response and a proactive approval to avoid costly replacements later and potential security concerns in the future. Ms. Gray added that of the three options she believed one of the options was deemed nonresponsive. Warden Franzoni stated they were all deemed responsive. It was more budgetary and their references to doing detention. Ms. experience in detention facilities. Warden Franzoni stated that the lowest price was MTS. The next one up was not much more but their ability, and responsiveness to support plans and maintained plans was not what they were looking for and they had concerns. The third one was twice as much with very limited detention center experience when they called and did reference checks. Commissioner Ziobrowski asked what PREA certification is. Warden Franzoni stated that PREA certification is Prison Rape Elimination Act and is a federal statute that they are audited on every two to three years to ensure that inmates have a right to report any sexual assault, sexual harassment. Its a zero tolerance of any type of sexual assault in the facility and provides multiple ways to report and it an intensive investigation overall policy, plans and procedures to keep inmates safe while they are incarcerated. Commissioner Ziobrowski then asked that when we have a technology upgrade during his time in office, they always hope for and anticipate a reduction in full time labor just because of the efficiency of the technology. Does this new technology that we are going to have, is it going tobe less labor intensive and will you be able to reallocate your personnel in anyway that may be able to save some money in the long run. Warden Franzoni stated no, right now the way it works is there has to be a central control officer that has to be there to open the doors, be able to see what is going on, shut units ever be able to have a computer or someone else replace that human to be able to open those doors. That person will just have a better understanding of what is going on She does think that it will save man hours of her staff or especially for the Captain of Investigations going into the old DVRs. You almost need a Doctorate degree to figure them out and now he can sit at his computer and be able to figure it out. It will definitely save staff time just not positions. Commissioner Ziobrowski then asked Ms. Gray about her description of this as being $2,417,400.00 paid for by a combination of existing He asked for clarification on that. Ms. Gray stated this is a 50/50 split to set aside for projects that would decrease the risk to our employees and the other 50 percent is from bonds from capital projects that could be included in our eligible cost for the bonds that the Commissioners already issued for the rest of the Court facility improvement project. At the time of those bonds being issued, there were determined capital needs and this is one of them. Commissioner Ziobrowski stated there is no General funds being allocated other than the fact that we are paying for the bond already and that is coming out of General fund out of our budget. Ms. Gray agreed. Commissioner Flannery started with this is long over do and on his last tour he spent time in central control and he sees a challenge there. This is a long time coming and needed. Provided that the Commissioners approve this, what is the timeline for completion and is that going to disrupt running CAT6 cables and everything is down as that would be a concern at a jail. Warden Franzoni stated this will take 14 to 16 months but working with MTS andMr. Harman, Jail Maintenance, the way they have it planned out is they are going to run the wire and take each unit down one at a time with minimal disruption. MTS has a good history of doing detention and understanding the needs of detention. She is very confident in their ability to let the jail know their needs and to know the jail needs especially with having an open housing unit right now touse to shuffle inmates to do what needs to be done when units are down. Commissioner Horst stated spending roughly $2.4 million, does this company provide us with a year warranty, five-year warranty. Warden Franzoni stated it was a five-year warranty on parts and labor. Commissioner Horst continued that like most projects go, there is always going to be a change order here or there. Are we expecting any? Do you feel that we have done our best in this proposal process to cover most of the meat and potatoes besides, well we took this apart and the wire is broken and we need to replace it. Warden Franzoniconfirmed that working with the team they looked at drawings more than they have looked at their own homes. She feels very confident in the team as with the last scope they found some cameras not on the plans and did the best they couldbefore the actual project started doing their due diligence making sure they had all the accurate numbers by manually counting intercoms and manually counting cameras. She does think there will be change orders for a few missed little things but they did the best they could for the scope for County Administration and for the Boards approval. Commissioner Horst continued, along with the warranty thought process, there is probably a maintenance plan that comes after the 5 years? Warden Franzoni stated that talking with other jails, they have maintenance contracts that they go back into and renegotiated at that time. Commissioner Horst asked if this is something that CJL could take care of. Ms. Gray stated yes. One of the specifications was that this system not be proprietary which is some of the challenges with the antiquated nature of the current equipment, so whether it would be CGL or someone else to be determined or this have a lot more options to who maintains the system with then we had this first time. Commissioner Horst stated that he did some research on this company and wished that we could have found someone a little bit closer but Agreement between the County of Franklin and Montgomery Technology Systems, LLC. (MTS) for original installation and is now outdated. The upgraded system will enhance surveillance capabilities, provide broader coverage, and improve overall facility monitoring. These improvements are critical for addressing liability concerns and ensuring greater oversight of daily operations within the jail. This investment represents a necessary and timely upgrade to maintain safety, security, and accountability at a cost of $2,417,400.00. This will be paid by a combination of existing On a motion by Robert G. Ziobrowski, Seconded by John T. Flannery; the Board unanimously approved the agreement. The Board conducted a bid awarding for Jail Kitchen Equipment. Ms. Gray introduced Jail Business Manager Tammy Zook and Frank Patron from Procurement to present the recommendation for the award. Ms. Zook stated that the Jail is requesting approval to proceed with the replacement of three essential kitchen components that are critical to daily operations and meal preparation. The items to be replaced are Tilt Skillet which is utilized for preparing vegetables, rice, soup, and other items, Double Oven used extensively for baking a wide variety of food, and a Dishwasher which is essential for maintaining cleanliness and sanitation standards in the kitchen. To procure these replacements, the County solicited bids and received responses from four vendors. Upon opening, three were initially considered suitable. However, a detailed post-opening review determined that two of those bids were unresponsive due to the inclusion of additional terms and conditions that conflicted with the County's requirements. As a result, MS Johnson is being recommended as the sole responsive and compliant bidder, with a total proposal amount of $133,100.00. Given the necessity of these kitchen components for uninterrupted operations and compliance with food safety regulations, the Jail is requesting approval to proceed with MS Johnson for the full replacement at the quoted price. On a motion by Robert G. Ziobrowski, seconded by Dean A. Horst; the Board unanimously approved to award to MS Johnson and for staff to move forward with awarding the bid contract. The Board held hearings for cumulation of write-invotes.Ms. Gray introduced Election Directorand Deputy Chief Clerk Susan Christophel to review the process. Ms. Christophel stated that there were two petitions to cumulate votes for the various spellings of their names written in on the primary ballot this year. On a motion by Robert G. Ziobrowski, seconded by John T. Flannery; the Board unanimously approved that after consideration of the petition to cumulate votes for Stacey A. Brady for the office of Metal Township Tax Collector, the Board finds that Stacy Brady, Stacy A. Brady, Stacey Brady, and Stacey A. Brady on the Democrat ballot is the same person and that the votes cast under these names at the Municipal Primary held on May 20, 2025 in Franklin County, PA are therefore cumulated giving Ms. Brady a total of 13 write-in votes and the nomination on the Democratic ticket. The Board held hearings for cumulation of write-in votes. Mr. Donald L. Ambrose brought in proof of notification to his opponent, Derek Hine by way of certified letter card and a certificate of mailing proving that he sent the letter. Commissioner Horst asked if just a last name would be okay. Ms. Christophel stated that they could go name by name to determine if it was acceptable or they should be struck and how the Board feels the voters' intent was. Commissioner Horst stated that there is probably more than one Ambrose in Washington Township. Ms. Christophel explained that there are three in Washington Township. Commissioner Ziobrowski stated that whatever they do, he thinks they are setting They could say the ones that just say Ambrose conceivably could be somebody else. In some situations that might make a difference. He remembers years ago when one of the Fleagles ran in Waynesboro. There are a couple Fleagles that are in elected office and so that could have been someone else. The fact that neither of these other individuals are in all likelihood interested in the job, we may or may not choose to include them. He asked for advice from Solicitor Sulcove. Commissioner Flannery would lean is a write-in. Ms. Christophel stated that Mr. Ambrose was on the Republican ballot and is the current Tax Collector. Commissioner Ziobrowski stated that logic says these are all his. Solicitor Sulcove stated that he thinks that the case law and to a lesser degree the election code is not at all clear about this, would support Commissioner Ziobrowski here. That it is your determination of the voter intent and there are other people with this name. You have to make that to someone filing a petition of review of your decision. There is no set answer in the election code. Commissioner Ziobrowski continued that in this particular situation, he was guessing difference. Commissioner Horst stated that in his opinion, the intent ofthe last name speaks volumes for him. He knows precedent probably in the future. Commissioner Flannery stated if it was the exact same situation, which is probably not going to present itself. In this situation with someone already currently holding the position and being on the ballot on the other side, he thinks the voter intent is there. On a motion by John T. Flannery, seconded by Robert G. Ziobrowski; the Board unanimously approvedthat after consideration of the petition to cumulate votes for Donald L. Ambrose for the office of Washington Township Tax Collector, the Board finds that Donail Ambrose, Donald Ambrose, D Ambrose, Don Ambros, Don Ambrose, Ambrose, Ambros, D.L. Ambrose, Ambrose Donald, and Donal L. Ambros on the Democrat ballot is the same person and that the votes cast under these names at the Municipal Primary held on May 20, 2025 in Franklin County, PA are therefore cumulated giving Mr. Ambrose a total of 43 write-in votes and the nomination on the Democratic ticket. Ms. Gray introduced President Judge Meyers to present the Court of Common Pleas program to keep everyone well acquainted with the different programs with their emerging trends, topics of interest and any concerns they may have. His presentation was made a part of these minutes. Commissioner Horst first thanked the President Judge for his presentation and stated that he learned a lot today enough for that. President Judge Meyers stated that the Courts are always open, and they are always welcome. Commissioner Flannery asked generally, you talked a little about sentencing is there a standard set of sentencing guidelines or are you able to make your own judgment on the bench can do whatever they want. So, going to throw him in jail for three years, and Commissioner Horst maybe only six months. Are there strict guidelines and do you guys adhere to them routinely? President Judge Meyers criminology has always been studied and there was always a concept that bias discrimination things factored in way too much into judicial decisions so they wanted to make it more uniform by creating sentencing commissions which are to be bilaterally supported organizations that will then create parameters for what should be an appropriate sentence for a crime. The sentencing commission of Pennsylvania just reissued its eighth edition it is online publicly for everyone to read and see the charts and the grids and you can see all the little nuance details,and it makes a great deal as to the nature of prior crime criminal. They do have guidelines. The rule that the appellate courts have said is if a trial judge sentences within the range of a standard sentence, it is presumed lawful. The thing is that could be no jail time to say one month. It could then be ten days to three months. It could be one month to six months or six months to 24, they have levels of discretion. They can sentence that way within that level and move on to the next case and the appeal presumably will likely be, should be, denied absent some other error. If they want to go below the standard or above, we can do it, they just have to put all the reasons on the record and there needs to be support for it. makes up a trouble if appeal. The discretionary aspects of sentencing are almost always upheldby the appellatecourts historically through the case law. If there is a clear violation of law though as a matter of law, then the appellate courts are going to look that over very carefully. For someone to say the judge can always throw the book or can absolutely let Flannery then asked about plea deals. The District Attorney and the Public Defender, does the judge always have to buy into that plea deal? Do you see it? What generally are the percentages of accepting that or . comment on existing cases or to him or a plea but he did state that if you came to the summary appeal court there are times that he will tell the parties think it is justice, and he will ask the parties to go back out and either formulate a new plea or bring it in for a hearing or trial just becausehe knows based upon what is presented to him he just doesn't believe that it is just and he does have to state his reasons but the big thing is that unfortunately sometimes theres a concern. The district attorneys where there are victims of crime are required to state on the record that the matter has been reviewed and discussed with the victim, Sometimes the DAs will report to the Court that particular victim does not agree with this disposition, butthese are the reasons interesting and part of what they do. Commissioner Flannery stated that he has been watching too much Court TV late at night and you see things and you have to wonder Commissioner Horst thanked President Judge Meyers for his time and asked that he pass along their appreciation to the other judges for letting him come and present. The meeting was adjourned at 11:12a.m. on a motion by Robert G. Ziobrowski, seconded by John T. Flannery. Carrie E. Gray County Administrator/Chief Clerk FRANKLIN COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ____________________________________ Dean A. Horst, Chairman ____________________________________ John T. Flannery ____________________________________ Robert G. Ziobrowski