Alpine tech leaders lay out plan to split IT systems, data centers and staff for three‑district reconfiguration
Loading...
Summary
District technology leaders told the board they are preparing 300+ core systems, three data centers and staffing overlaps ahead of the planned split into three districts, and flagged firm deadlines and key costs — including a FY26 capital request of about $867,000 for a core data center.
Alpine School District technology leaders presented the board with a detailed plan to prepare IT systems, data centers and staffing for the district’s upcoming reconfiguration into three separate districts. The presentation described steps to create separate instances of core systems, split or archive existing data, and preserve institutional knowledge through planned staff overlap and knowledge transfer.
The presentation matters because student records, payroll, learning platforms and network services must remain available and secure while Alpine builds three independent technology footprints. Dr. Blaine Edmond, the district’s administrator of technology, said the objective is “for 3 districts to be successful when we start,” and emphasized that the district’s work now should reduce the technical and financial burden on the new districts after the split.
Technology leaders described the scale and sequence of the work in a house‑building metaphor. Paul Lewis, director of data services, told the board: “Our technology infrastructure is a lot like a house. It has a foundation — you pour the cement — and then you start building the walls.” Leaders said the “foundation” decisions include which student information system (SIS) and finance/Human Resources (HR) systems each new district will use; those choices determine many downstream integrations and timelines.
The team identified roughly 300 core systems that must be reviewed, divided, or re‑instantiated for the new districts. Two foundational systems were highlighted by name: the student information system currently known as Skyward (SMS2), which the district plans to upgrade to the vendor’s new version often called Q (cumulative), and the finance system currently called Alio that Alpine is migrating to Link ERP. Paul Lewis and others said Alpine intends to begin the Skyward/Q transition in fall 2026 and expects the Link ERP migration to be completed sooner; they recommended new districts decide on their foundational systems by July 1, 2026, if possible.
Leaders urged a staffing approach that preserves Alpine staff who hold institutional knowledge while allowing overlap so those staff can help stand up new district systems. “If all of our staff were hired by new districts and they immediately started working only exclusively for the new district, there would be no one left to run Alpine for that last part of Alpine’s existence,” the presentation said.
On infrastructure, the technology team said the district is pursuing three data centers and must identify a central site before May 1, 2025, to meet Utah Education Network (UEN) circuit bid timelines. Matt Johnson, director of technology and infrastructure, told the board the district has a FY26 capital outlay request of about $867,000 for the core data‑center room (power, fire suppression, backup power) — a figure that does not include room modifications or the racks and servers, which staff said they would budget for in FY27.
Staff explained how some vendor contracts allow Alpine to provision temporary instances now — “free instance” sandboxes — so new districts could be set up and then decide whether to purchase. The team described a plan to build empty “shells” of systems (directories, accounts, configurations) and populate them once districts make final choices and student/employee assignments are settled.
On data splitting and archival responsibilities, leaders said student records will require record‑by‑record decisions (for example, a student who later attends a different new district) and recommended one district accept long‑term archival responsibilities (old transcripts, employment records). They also noted staff, teachers and employees will need tools and time to move Google Drive and other personal data, and that migrations will likely combine automated and manual steps.
Leaders repeatedly framed the project as urgent but manageable. “The sky’s not falling,” the presentation said; “Skies are blue and sunny. We can make this work,” reflecting confidence in staff and the plan while acknowledging there is no single handbook for a split of this magnitude. The group recommended quick action on deadlines, early hiring or consultation with incoming district leaders, and a timeline that preserves overlap for knowledge transfer.
Next steps the team proposed include: finalizing decisions on SIS and finance platform choices by summer 2026; selecting a primary data‑center site before May 1, 2025, to align with UEN circuit procurement; completing Link ERP and Skyward/Q transitions on the timelines shared; and continuing system‑by‑system reviews to identify which core services can be divided early and which require longer planning. No formal board vote was taken during the presentation.
The team closed by inviting questions and said it would return with updates on data‑center location, vendor responses and a growing systems road map available to current and future district leaders.
