Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Digital Government topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County reviews bids to modernize website; staff recommends user‑friendly platform and year‑one support
Summary
Staff presented three finalists to redevelop Cheshire County’s website (two local/one out‑of‑state) with project costs ranging from about $12,700 to $24,500; commissioners asked for one more week to review and a decision will return to the board next meeting within the $25,000 budget line.
Cheshire County staff briefed commissioners April 23 on competitive proposals to redevelop the county website, presenting three finalists after screening roughly 10 bids. The county sought a modern, easy‑to‑manage site that departmental staff can update without vendor support,
Davis (project lead) summarized the three finalists: Snowberry (out of Pennsylvania) proposed a lower‑cost option at approximately $12,700 with a 14–16 week timeline; Planeteria (California) quoted about $24,440 with a 4–6 month timeline; and Communicators Group (a regional firm) bid approximately $24,500 and included an option (about $33,000) for additional AI features. Staff said each vendor proposed WordPress‑based builds with modern integrations and offered training for departmental users; one vendor offered a 12‑month startup period of technical and content support at no additional cost.
Commissioners emphasized three priorities: 1) ease of daily updates by nontechnical staff, 2) strong local support and references, and 3) predictable ongoing maintenance costs. Several commissioners said they favored a vendor that provided an extended post‑launch support window to avoid hourly charges for routine questions during the first year.
Staff reported a $25,000 budget line for the website redesign and recommended returning with a final award next meeting; commissioners asked staff to supply additional reference checks and cost clarifications. Davis said department heads would be included in design conversations and that the vendor would train site editors. The board did not award the contract at the meeting and will revisit the item next week.
Why it matters: The county’s website is a primary public access point for agendas, job applications, department contacts and emergency information; staff emphasized updating user experience and removing manual workarounds that currently require staff time.
Next steps: Staff will collect follow‑up vendor references, clarify ongoing monthly support fees and present a contract recommendation at the next commissioners meeting.
