Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the School Safety Communications topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

North Clackamas staff recommend up to $1.84M Vocera wireless communication system; board questions remain

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

District staff recommended awarding a wireless staff communication contract for up to $1,840,000 to procure Vocera smartbadge devices and related licenses, proposing a six‑school pilot and a districtwide rollout pending further clarification and board approval.

District staff presented a proposal at the May 22 North Clackamas School District board meeting to procure a wireless staff communication system using the Vocera smartbadge product and recommended awarding a contract “to the Sarah Communications for a sum not to exceed $1,840,000,” according to staff remarks recorded on the public record.

Teresa Neff Webster, the district’s chief of operations, said the system is intended to improve staff communication both day‑to‑day and in emergencies and cited ongoing consideration of HB 3083 (called “Alyssa’s Law” during the presentation) as part of the district’s rationale. David Cruz, the district’s director of safety, security and risk management, described the product as a secure, encrypted wearable “smart badge” system that supports secure messaging, group broadcasts and a panic‑button function. Staff said Vocera met the district’s RFP specifications and HB 3083 compliance; two other proposals were characterized as more aligned with traditional radios and phones and not compliant with HB 3083 as described by staff.

Staff proposed a pilot across six schools (four elementary and two middle schools) to test operations, training and standard operating procedures. The presentation described two badge types: a larger smart badge with a screen intended for administrators and other designated personnel, and a smaller “sync” badge for other staff that includes a panic button and voice communication features. Staff said the devices are intended primarily for indoor building coverage on the district wireless network and that outdoor coverage would require additional network investments or temporary “patches.” Staff said the $1,840,000 recommendation would include full licenses and device purchases and that procurement is in active contract negotiation; staff told the board they had included replacement devices for the first three years in the cost estimate.

Board members asked detailed questions about outdoor coverage, a timeline and how this system compares with current radios/walkie‑talkies. Director Dobson noted that HB 3083 had just passed the state senate and is awaiting the governor’s signature; she emphasized that the law “asks school districts to consider” such devices but does not mandate them. Staff acknowledged that the presentation contained differing timeline references during discussion (staff initially described a pilot start in fall 2026 with districtwide rollout by summer 2027, while other remarks in the record referenced a pilot and partial roll‑out starting fall 2025 and completion of pilot sites by January 2026); staff told the board they would provide a clarified, written timeline and a gap analysis that compares current communications capability, costs and the additional value of the proposed system.

No board vote to approve the contract was recorded at the May 22 meeting. Staff reported they are in contract negotiations and requested authority to execute procurement consistent with the RFP evaluation; board members requested additional written materials including a comparison of current systems and a clearer funding and timeline proposal before taking final action.