Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the It Gis Contract topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners approve Dewberry contract and $29,000 GIS budget amendment over one dissent
Summary
Board approved a new master services agreement with Dewberry for GIS support and a $29,000 amendment to the FY2025 GIS budget. The motion carried 4–1; Commissioner Carlin opposed.
Teton County commissioners voted 4–1 on May 6 to approve a new master agreement with Dewberry for professional GIS services and to amend the FY2025 GIS budget by $29,000 to cover shortfall and immediate needs.
Why it matters: The county has been transitioning GIS operations in‑house; the Dewberry contract buys short‑term professional services the county says it lacks internally, including web development and support for the treasurer’s property tax application. County IT said the contract also bridges skill gaps while staff evaluates long‑term licensing and hosting costs.
Alisa Dunn, the county’s enterprise IT manager, told the board the county’s fiscal‑year 2025 professional‑services budget for GIS had originally been $75,000 but an August invoice of about $56,000 had consumed most of that allocation, leaving less than $20,000 to finish the fiscal year. She said the FY2026 line items include $60,000 for professional services and $53,000 for licenses and AWS storage (combined, $113,000), covering on‑going hosting and licensing for ArcGIS and other components.
Dunn said the proposed Dewberry agreement focuses on skills not resident in the county staff, particularly web development and support for the treasurer’s property‑tax application. “Janssen Lyon is able to complete 99% of requests,” she said, “but this particular skill set is web development.”
Public comment included a call from a long‑time user of the previous Greenwood Mapping service urging the county to evaluate private alternatives; a speaker named Noah Ganz was suggested as a potential private option.
The motion to approve the master agreement and the $29,000 amendment passed 4–1; the meeting record shows Commissioner Carlin opposed. The minutes and the staff report indicate the amendment is intended to cover FY2025 shortfalls and enable continued treasurer‑application support while the county assesses longer‑term licensing and support options.
Ending: County IT and the treasurer were directed to continue a cost‑benefit analysis of hosting, licensing and contract versus off‑the‑shelf products and to return to the board with recommendations during FY2026 budget planning.
