Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Technology topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Duchesne County Library Board reviews 2026–2028 technology plan, flags wireless, computers and security gaps
Summary
Board reviewed a three-year technology plan that prioritizes replacing an underperforming wireless access point, phasing out aging staff computers, evaluating maker-space training requirements and restoring missing security cameras; funding timing tied to expected E-rate eligibility in 2028.
The Duchesne County Library Board on Jan. 20 reviewed a draft 2026–2028 technology plan that lays out priorities for wireless infrastructure, staff and patron devices, maker-space operations and security-camera coverage.
Board members were told the wireless access point near the circulation desk at the Roosevelt branch is delivering markedly slower speeds than newer equipment elsewhere in the system, prompting a recommendation to replace it so patron devices do not struggle choosing between networks. The presenter said staff computers ‘‘are both of them are 8 years old’’ and are starting to have compatibility and performance problems; she noted Windows 10 support has ended and some machines cannot be upgraded to Windows 11.
The plan flags several practical steps across the three-year timeframe, including targeted hardware replacements, software evaluations for patron computers, and a plan to qualify for E-rate discounts in 2028 to help pay for wiring or internal-connection upgrades. On maker-space equipment such as the Cricut machine, staff proposed a required training-and-certification model used by a neighboring library so patrons may use the machines independently after completing online instruction.
Security also factored into the discussion. The board was told a camera removed during remodeling left a ‘‘blind corner’’ in the juvenile area at Duchesne Branch and that the Roosevelt branch lacks a parking-lot camera; staff described incidents that make restoring those cameras a priority but noted access to footage is restricted and requires attorney approval for specific requests. The presenter said camera footage is not routinely reviewed and that legal counsel must authorize access for a stated purpose and time period.
No formal vote was taken; the board reviewed the draft and asked staff to continue refining priorities and cost estimates for future budget requests. The presenter said she will return with any attorney feedback and further details at the next meeting.
