Laserfiche WebLink
At this point, I think only thirty-three (33) addresses are correct but most don't have the right <br /> school name. I've been pushing them since January and it's not where it should be. <br /> Ms. Villa stated, There is a specific form on our site that we can send in for incorrect <br /> information. I will work with you and get that done. <br /> Committee Chair Broden asked, Can you translate what you were just saying? <br /> Ms. Villa replied, Every phone landline in the country has to be validated through this national <br /> 911 database, it's called the MSAG,the Master Street Address Guide. So when you get a <br /> landline in a new house,they would send it through to the community MSAG and register that <br /> address. They work with GIS and the Engineer's Office to make sure we aren't building in an <br /> address that isn't correct. Little things like mistaking a Drive for a Court could be a problem. The <br /> first ring the caller hears is what is going to that switch. The second ring makes sure it is routing <br /> to the correct 911 Center. The third ring the caller hears is the first ring the dispatcher hears. If <br /> there is an emergency at a school and they can't talk, and the address is wrong, we would send <br /> units to the wrong address. <br /> Committeemember Campau stated, We were advised by a County committee to change our <br /> dialing prefix from nine (9) to eight (8). We did that last week because of the number of misdials <br /> we were getting. <br /> Ms. Villa stated, Back in the day when everyone had the same phone company, there was no <br /> problem but now everyone has a different company. It's hard to get cooperation from them to <br /> change the addresses to the satellites. <br /> Mr. Croymans stated, This is one (1) of multiple examples of where the phone company and the <br /> business need to cooperate for the safety of us all. <br /> Bob Kruszynski, Offices at 227 W. Jefferson Blvd, stated, To clarify, I attended some Executive <br /> Board meetings last year and at the end of the budget process I recall hearing that they didn't <br /> want to address the personnel because the budget had already been set.Now I'm hearing <br /> fourteen(14)people are needed. Correct me if I'm wrong,but those additional people have to be <br /> approved by the Executive Board. Isn't there a shared cost with the personnel? The Executive <br /> Board has to make that decision and there is a formula to share that cost. I recall going through <br /> budget time last year when the discussion came up. That was quite a discussion. Is there another <br /> Executive Board meeting set? <br /> Mr. Croymans replied, I made a request today to have one (1) on the first available day in <br /> August. We needed to have the data to prove the efficiencies gained with the technology and we <br /> needed at least thirty (30) days of data to warrant those additional staff. <br /> Committeemember White thanked Mr. Croymans and Ms. Etter and all others involved in this <br /> process. <br /> 8 <br />