Get email alerts on the Transportation Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee discusses Everdriven as backup transportation provider; asks solicitor to review contract terms
Summary
Staff presented Everdriven as a possible backup transportation contractor; trustees asked for usage data, clarification on camera costs, notice requirements, and asked the solicitor to review force‑majeure and payment clauses and the list of contract contacts before authorizing any commitment.
Colleen presented additional information about Everdriven as a possible alternate transportation provider or backup option. Trustees sought details on how often the vendor is used by other districts and whether on‑board camera systems and related data fees would be charged to the district or to the vendor. Colleen said camera systems are required and that camera fees appear as an additional charge under the vendor's attachment.
Trustees also raised concerns about how the agreement is structured — whether it allows scheduled or on‑demand usage, notice requirements and force‑majeure language — and requested that the district solicitor review the contractor draft to clarify financial obligations and operational triggers. The board asked staff to identify the district contacts the vendor would use for dispatch, notices and after‑hours issues before the district signs anything.
"So unless there's something different in here than what I had read... it doesn't look like it's written up that way," a trustee said about using the vendor as a fallback; the committee concluded solicitor review and additional operational detail were needed before moving forward.
