County committee approves ClearGov budgeting software contract with 90-day opt-out; legal review and sole-source letter required
Loading...
Summary
After a presentation from ClearGov, the committee approved moving the ClearGov contract forward with a trial window and subject-to-legal review on sole-source justification. The contract includes a one-time implementation fee and an annual license fee; committee members discussed pricing, procurement options, and the risk of vendor lock-in.
The committee approved sending a contract recommendation for ClearGov’s budgeting and transparency software to the county commission, with conditions: the vendor must provide a sole-provider letter if the county pursues a sole-source procurement, and the county’s legal and purchasing staff will review whether the sole-source path is appropriate. The contract passed with an opt-out period that allows the county to cancel during an initial trial window.
Tom, a ClearGov representative, presented the software and showed sample public-facing budget documents and a transparency portal. He described a one-time implementation fee (presented in the meeting packet as about $33,075) and a first-year annual license fee quoted at $78,075 (the vendor also described a 3% annual increase if the county remains in the contract term). Tom said implementation and onboarding typically take 60–90 days and that the vendor offers self-guided training plus workshop sessions for staff.
Committee members asked procurement and timing questions. Commissioners pressed whether ClearGov needed a competitive process; staff and legal said they would review whether the product qualified as a sole-provider procurement or whether the county should pursue an RFQ. The committee agreed to require a written sole-provider justification from the vendor and to have purchasing/legal evaluate it; if sole-source justification is not available, staff said the county will proceed with an RFQ.
Commissioners asked about integration with the county’s ERP (Munis). ClearGov representatives said the software imports data from the ERP and can export budget versions back to the ERP; staff noted many implementation details would be worked out during onboarding.
The committee approved moving the contract forward with a contract start date to be adjusted so onboarding aligns with the county’s budget calendar (committee members sought a start closer to the November–January window so the software would be in place before key budget input work). The motion included the 90-day opt-out language discussed in the meeting packet and was subject to the vendor’s timely provision of sole-provider documentation and legal review.
