Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Professional Services Contract topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves $210,000 contract with Edgewood Group LLC after public objections
Summary
The board approved a $210,000 professional-services contract with Edgewood Group LLC to work on strategic goals and decision-support tools; a member of the public criticized the contract as vague and alleged cronyism, while several board members defended the vendor’s experience and said system implementation requires time and data cleanup.
Get email alerts on the Professional Services Contract topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Committee of the Whole approved a professional-services contract with Edgewood Group LLC on Sept. 4, authorizing $210,000 from the general fund for the vendor to collaborate with district staff on strategic goals, dashboards and decision-support tools. An online commenter, identified as Amanda Hebert, urged the board to “Vote no on wasteful spending,” saying the deliverables were “fluff,” alleging a lack of curriculum materials in some schools and calling the contract a potential example of cronyism. The commenter asked that the district use an internal director or a single contractor instead of awarding an LLC a $200,000 contract. Board members responded with differing views. Board member Lanus praised the Edgewood CEO’s work and said some critical implementation work happens “behind the scenes” and requires expertise to clean up data and change business practices. Another board member recounted experience implementing complex district systems and said those projects take time and staff effort; the board member said she supported the contract and credited payroll and HR teams for recent improvements. Board member Martin said he would prefer a single, tightly focused hire but supported the proposal as presented. Board member Stewart noted Edgewood’s prior involvement with the district’s realignment plan and said the CEO has led national realignment work. A motion to approve the contract was made and seconded; the board voted and the motion carried.

