Laithtab, identified in the meeting as the district’s director of instructional technology, briefed the Hardin County Board of Education on Dec. 20 about staffing changes, technology projects and funding sources.

Laithtab said the technology department has handled about 4,300 work orders so far this year and manages roughly 1,200 security cameras across the district. He described a 1-to-1 Chromebook initiative for students in grades 3–12 begun during the pandemic and said the district’s goal is to get five years of service from each device.

"Chromebooks ... they're $300 devices. They're cheap," Laithtab said, describing durability challenges in middle school. To manage lifecycle costs, he proposed replacing one-fifth of the Chromebook inventory each year.

Laithtab noted the district used ESSER funds and Emergency Connectivity Fund (a federal FCC program) to buy devices and interactive classroom panels, and that some phone-system replacements and network upgrades used e-rate discounts. He explained the state’s CETS funding is dispersed to districts by enrollment and said the district has received roughly $21 per student per year in recent cycles; with the local match, that produces about $42 per pupil in Katz funds used for technology.

He told the board the current e-rate cycle covers an approximately $3,000,000 five-year program of networking gear, with the district paying the 20% non-discount share over the cycle. Upcoming priorities include upgrading wireless access points over the next three years and maintaining an annual Chromebook refresh schedule.

Laithtab also described staffing transitions: two long-tenured technicians (one with 29 years of service and another with 25 years) are leaving this month, and two technician positions remain open. He said the district employs part-time student technicians from the EC3 IT pathway who are paid $10 an hour and have repaired more than $10,000 in devices this year.

Board members asked whether the state provides additional technology funds for new school construction; Laithtab replied it does not, and that the district must budget technology costs for any new building.

The update was presented as part of the meeting’s departmental reports; no board action was taken on the items at the session.