Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Contract topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves CSO consulting contract to implement EasyRouting software for district transportation
Summary
The board approved a one‑year CSO (CECL/CSO) transportation consulting agreement that embeds EasyRouting software implementation, training and routing support — a fixed‑fee implementation with a possible hourly overage; directors requested mid-implementation reviews and vendor participation in early summer routing trials.
The board voted 6–1 to approve a transportation consulting contract with CSO to implement the EasyRouting platform, support summer‑school routing, and assist district and vendor staff through full school‑year setup.
Administration described how the district’s existing routing system (EduLog) has limited interoperability with special‑education routing needs and that EasyRouting should allow the district and vendor to manage gen‑ed and special‑ed routes in a single platform. The recommended contract combines implementation, configuration and training hours with a fixed monthly fee across the initial implementation period; the packet showed an estimated 800 hours of support and a fixed fee structure with a stated hourly overage rate for work beyond the scope.
Lindsay Harrigan and representatives from the Prior Lake School Bus Association told the board they supported a managed migration and would continue negotiating contract details with the district. Harrigan said the association is “committed to finding a transportation solution that works best for the district” and that CSO’s involvement and training would help the vendor manage routes on the new platform.
Directors asked several clarifying questions about whether software license fees were embedded in the CSO agreement, whether the contract was fixed‑fee versus time‑and‑materials, what automatic renewal language meant, and whether the board would see scope changes before additional invoices. Administration explained that the contract included platform implementation and training and that the district would assume a direct software agreement if it elected not to renew with the vendor; the board requested a written checkpoint after summer‑school routing and that bus‑company representatives return with the district to report on implementation progress.
The motion to approve the CSO transportation consulting contract carried on a roll call vote, 6 in favor and 1 opposed. Directors who supported the contract emphasized long‑term efficiencies and improved routing for special‑education students; the sole dissent raised concerns about contract language, auto‑renewal and the fixed‑fee structure without stronger change‑authorization language. The board directed administration and CSO to conduct a proof‑of‑concept over summer routing and to report back to the board after that trial.
