Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Technology Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Framingham technology services presents $2.94 million FY26 budget; council seeks detail on OpenGov, email standards and vendor price hikes
Summary
Technology Services presented a $2,938,640 FY26 budget on May 8, citing maintenance costs, a move to the OpenGov permitting platform and a sharp vendor price increase for VMware licensing; councilors requested a formal presentation on the OpenGov procurement add‑on, asked about email/addressing standards and noted the ongoing technology audit.
The City of Framingham’s Technology Services department told the finance subcommittee on May 8, 2025, that its FY26 budget request totals $2,938,640, with personnel, operating and small capital lines intended to support citywide systems, public wifi and cybersecurity initiatives.
Director Carly Mello presented a breakdown that listed $897,780 for personnel, $1,980,860 for operating costs and $60,000 for small capital to fund a laptop replacement cycle. Mello said Technology Services supports more than 700 municipal users and 125 school users, roughly 700 computers, more than 100 servers and over 70 network locations across police, fire, libraries and other city facilities. She also said the department has used state and federal grants to offset roughly $37,000 in cyber‑security improvements.
Mello told the committee that a new cloud‑based permitting platform, OpenGov, will raise annual costs compared with the prior vendor. The presentation and subsequent discussion referenced a series of related increases: an annual OpenGov permitting charge that replaces a smaller previous contract, and a proposed procurement module that would add an annual maintenance cost and a first‑year implementation fee. The committee asked for a separate demonstration and formal presentation on the procurement module before approving that add‑on.
Mello also described an unexpected price increase from VMware, the city’s virtualization vendor, that had to be included in the FY26 budget. The department said it had not completed a full alternatives analysis before the budget deadline and that staff will continue to pursue options to manage licensing costs.
Councilors pressed Technology Services on several customer‑service and workflow issues that councilors said recur year after year. Questions included: whether email‑address naming conventions could be standardized to make officials easier to reach; consistent, user‑friendly naming and OCR preparation of posted public documents; and the roles and responsibilities for the city website (the city uses the CivicPlus platform, and the mayor’s office/Web team was described as the site owner). Mello said Technology Services can support standardization and file preparation but that some web responsibilities sit with the mayor’s office and the PIO; she also said the department performs ad hoc assistance when asked and will continue to work with departments on document and phone‑system workflows.
Committee members asked about the status of a tech audit; Mello said the audit is in process but she did not provide a final delivery date and pledged to share the RFP timing and final timeline when available. Councilors urged that the audit findings be available before any large, multi‑year investments are finalized.
No formal decisions were made at the May 8 hearing. Councilors requested a future, detailed presentation on OpenGov’s procurement module and asked Technology Services to return with additional information on vendor alternatives, contract terms and customer‑facing workflows.
