Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Technology And Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
School board rejects purchase of iPad charging lockers after debate over cost and alternatives
Summary
Great Valley School District board declined to approve an $5,300 order of two charging carts (48 lockers) for student iPads after members questioned whether the expense should fall to taxpayers and asked administration to explore lower‑cost or repurposed options.
The Great Valley School District board voted down a motion to purchase two iPad charging lockers (item 8.22 on the consent agenda) after a lengthy discussion about need, cost and alternatives.
Board members raised three central points: whether charging carts are the most cost‑effective approach, whether students should arrive at school with charged devices, and whether existing classroom charging infrastructure or previously purchased “charging bricks” could be repurposed. "Why as a taxpayer, why am I paying for them not coming prepared? I'm done," board member Pete Barrett said during debate.
The administration described how technology staff and building‑level staff had recommended a small number of charging lockers for student use during lunch and other midday downtime, saying many students use devices heavily during the day and sometimes need a mid‑day boost. The administration also said the tech department receives requests at the tech window for chargers and device loans.
Despite that, several board members said the quoted purchase — roughly $5,300 for two units that hold 24 devices each — did not scale to meet true demand if device drain were widespread. One board member said if the problem were district‑wide, the district would need many more units; another called the board approval, as presented, fiscally imprudent.
The motion to approve item 8.22 failed by a 6–1 vote; one board member voted yes and six voted no. The board asked the administration to return with additional options, including repurposing existing equipment or proposing a smaller trial, before bringing a procurement request back to the board.
Ending: The administration was directed to evaluate alternatives, clarify use cases and operational placement (cafeteria vs. classrooms vs. library), and return with cost‑effective options for board consideration. No purchase was authorized at this meeting.
