Marysville Joint Unified School District trustees are scheduled to consider nearly $198,000 in technology and student-data items at their Oct. 13 meeting, including a three-year Google Workspace renewal, two AI-powered attendance and family-communication platforms and an updated privacy agreement for vendors handling student information.
The board agenda calls for approval of a $169,447.50 agreement with CDW Government LLC for Google Workspace for Education Plus licenses. The subscription would run from Nov. 8, 2026, through Nov. 7, 2029, with annual payments of $51,382.50 in the first year and $59,032.50 in each of the following two years. District staff say the renewal would continue access to security tools, anti-plagiarism detection and enhanced Google Classroom features.
Trustees are also scheduled to consider a $8,280 Apptegy agreement and ratify a $20,150 Edia Learning agreement, for a combined $28,430. The agenda says Apptegy’s text chatbot would serve Kynoch Elementary, McKenney Intermediate, Olivehurst Elementary, Yuba Feather Elementary and Dobbins Elementary. Edia’s platform would serve Yuba Gardens Intermediate, Lindhurst High, Linda Elementary and Cedar Lane Elementary. The district describes both platforms as tools for automating attendance tracking and family communication, with the goal of reducing chronic absenteeism.
The business-services portion of the agenda also asks trustees to approve the updated Student Data Privacy Agreement, CA-NDPA Standard Version 1.5, for future vendors and partners that receive student data from the district. According to the agenda, the agreement is intended to help address state and federal privacy requirements, including California Education Code Section 49073.1, SOPIPA, FERPA and COPPA, as well as emerging regulations and risks related to artificial intelligence in education.
The agenda lists the technology contracts and privacy agreement as proposed actions; it does not include vote results. The available meeting record associated with the BoardDocs material is for the Sept. 22 meeting, not the Oct. 13 meeting, so whether trustees approved, amended or rejected the items could not be confirmed from the materials reviewed.
