Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Digital Services Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Somerset delays vote on new city website after vendor, security and contract concerns
Summary
Commissioners discussed a proposed website redesign with a local vendor (Angela/Dot Marketing), raised security and contract questions about current GoDaddy hosting, and voted to table the procurement until contract details and budgetary obligations can be reviewed in or after executive session.
Somerset City Commission — Dec. 19, 2024 — Commissioners debated replacing the city's website and delayed a final vote to obtain contract and budget details.
Staff presented vendor options for a redesigned, more user-friendly city website and recommended a local vendor described in the record as Angela (Dot Marketing). Commissioners contrasted the proposed vendor's local support with prior problems on the city's GoDaddy-hosted site, including an apparent lack of a firewall, partial inaccessibility of archived minutes and a perceived slow response from that host. Staff said the city retains copies of files but noted restoration can be time-consuming.
Cost and scope were discussed. The transcript records multiple, imprecise figures: one quote was described as "close to 12,000" and another option discussed split-billing described in the record as $4,450 charged in 2024 and $4,450 charged in 2025; staff also noted a one-time photography/drone-fee of roughly $1,500 to capture local imagery for the site. Commissioners and staff emphasized features they want: fillable forms (utility service start/stop, building-permit intake, automated calendar), stronger security and analytics showing which pages/users visit the site.
Several commissioners asked about contract terms and whether any active contract with GoDaddy requires notice; staff said existing contracts were reviewed and a 30-day notice would likely be required to terminate, and advised that simultaneous hosting could be maintained during a transition. Commissioners asked that contractual obligations and any overlap in monthly payments be clarified, and some members requested an executive-session review of contract or legal issues before a final vote.
Outcome: The commission moved to table the vote and directed staff to provide contract details and to prepare for an executive-session discussion as needed. No final procurement action was taken at this meeting.
Context and next steps Staff said if the commission elects to proceed it could phase costs across fiscal years to ease budget impact; the recommended vendor indicated WordPress hosting and maintenance would be handled separately and that the city would pay for the site build at completion (per staff description). Commissioners requested a written summary of vendor proposals, precise cost breakdowns and the city's contractual commitments so the matter can be resolved in January following any required executive-session review.
