Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Technology Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board weighs $317,000 Neonet technology services contract amid questions about vendor costs
Summary
Trustees approved a one-year Neonet services agreement covering a technology coordinator and two desktop technicians; board members sought usage metrics and asked whether some outsourced services could be brought in‑house to cut costs.
Get email alerts on the Technology Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The board reviewed and approved a one‑year services contract with Neonet that packages technical support, student‑device oversight and safety‑monitoring tools and lists an approximate total cost of $317,000 for the contracted services. Administration said the price represents the aggregate costs of three contracted staff (a technology coordinator and two desktop support technicians) plus training, benefits, systems access and coordination with regional/state technology networks.
Board members questioned whether outsourcing still offered a cost advantage, noting the district’s existing in‑district tech liaison (Josh Kramer appears on the staff directory) and asking for ticket‑count and utilization metrics to justify the contracted headcount. Administration said the district operates a lean tech department across nine buildings and pointed to the contract’s inclusion of higher‑level systems‑engineering support and coordination with E‑Rate (federal connectivity subsidy) requirements.
The presentation explained that because Neonet is also a provider, it cannot serve as a consultant for E‑Rate procurement; the district instead uses a separate E‑Rate consultant for procurement work and may rely on Neonet only in vendor bids as permitted. Board members asked for detailed vendor‑contract volume reviews as the board considers other reductions and asked whether the district’s one‑to‑one Chromebook model affects long‑term tech staffing needs.
The district acknowledged the need to track tickets and utilization to evaluate if an internal staffing model could be less expensive and said such metrics would be provided to the board in follow‑up. The contract motion passed by roll call during the meeting.
Next steps: administration to supply ticket counts, utilization and contract‑volume data for board review as part of broader vendor‑spend analysis.

