Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Website Selection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Trustees weigh website vendors, narrow field to two options
Summary
At a village board meeting trustees reviewed three website proposals, focused debate on setup costs versus annual maintenance and content transfer, and agreed to form a small review committee to test integration with the village's IT and recommend a vendor at the September meeting.
Trustees spent the longest part of their meeting comparing three website proposal packages and agreed to form a small review committee to recommend a vendor to the full board.
The board discussed quotes from TownWebb, Municipal Impact and Tyler Technologies. Chair said the village needs a site that communicates permits and meeting information to residents but acknowledged differing levels of technical experience among trustees, and said she wanted "the power user" to have input on the choice. "I don't use the website that much," the Chair said, "so I'd be down and dirty and go with the lowest plan" as long as it meets basic needs.
Trustees reviewed price structures: one speaker noted TownWebb’s higher initial setup fee and lower annual maintenance, Municipal Impact’s lower initial fee but limited transfer of existing content under some tiers, and Tyler’s higher cost and built-in fees. "None of these are over $3,500," one trustee said while another observed a nearby municipality’s $30,000 website purchase drew community criticism.
Concerns focused on content transfer, hosting and compatibility with the village’s current email and Office 365 setup. A trustee raised an implementation risk: "tier 2 setup fee does not include existing website content transfer or custom domain," and argued that a vendor who will transfer ordinances and other materials would reduce staff workload.
The board agreed to pare the list to two vendors and asked trustees and the village IT provider to test back-end integration. Chair proposed a small committee — including trustees Pfluger and the trustee who handles data entry (Kim) and staff Ben — meet before the next board meeting to examine vendor back ends and return a recommendation. The board expects to place a formal vendor recommendation on the September agenda and to consider budget implications during the 2026 budget process.
The board did not take a formal procurement vote at the meeting; it authorized the committee to gather information and report back.
