Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Equipment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
RSU 60 staff seek snowblower replacement and several vans; board asks for options
Summary
District transportation staff requested replacement of a 1997 snowblower and proposed purchasing four vans to maintain routes and program transport; board members asked for additional price comparisons and route‑use scenarios before approving purchases.
District fleet staff presented two near‑term equipment requests at the RSU 60/MSAD 60 budget workshop: a replacement snowblower for the transportation shop and multiple replacement vans to address aging program vehicles and inspection failures.
Jeremiah Seir, identified in the meeting as the administrator in charge of the fleet, told the board the district’s current snowblower is a 1997 John Deere that has become increasingly unreliable and difficult to service. He provided multiple price points: a straight replacement two‑wheel model priced "just under $14,000," a four‑wheel‑drive John Deere for about $15,278 (with a cab adding roughly $6,000–$7,000), and a Mahindra option near $26,000 that includes an enclosed cab and loader. Seir said the Mahindra’s loader option would provide important scraping capability and that the older machine had forced staff into significant manual shoveling during recent storms.
Leanne Camt, identified as the district’s director of transportation, explained that the vans proposed in the budget perform dual roles: scheduled program use and ad‑hoc student pickups when bus drivers are unavailable. She reported that several vans passed inspection this year but that “one or possibly two” will reach end‑of‑life by next March due to rust and parts scarcity. The budget currently includes four vans (one replacement plus three additional units); administrators said the vans could be used for daily, non‑CDL routes to shorten long rural rides and reduce contractors.
Board members asked for additional alternatives — such as snow pushers, UTVs, or lower‑cost four‑wheel replacements — and requested written price quotes and a route‑use analysis showing whether two vans would be an acceptable compromise. Several members signaled willingness to fund a safety‑motivated equipment purchase from fund balance rather than increase the operating budget, but none approved a final purchase order during the workshop.
Next steps: administration will provide written quotes, cost comparisons (including cab/loader options), and a deployment plan showing the operational tradeoffs between purchasing two, three, or four vans.
