HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-13-09 Information and Technology Committee!/1\
X111
INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE Anri113, 2009
Committee Members Present: David Varner, Chairperson; Henry Davis;
Tom LaFountain; Al "Buddy" Kirsits
Other Council Members Present: Oliver Davis; Karen White; Derek Dieter;
Timothy Rouse; Ann Puzzello
Other's Present: Mayor Luecke, Catherine Fanello, Gary Gilot,
Jeremy Toschlog, Bob Allen, Gary Horvath,
Kathy Cekanski-Farrand, Jamie Loo, Martha Lewis;
Rita Kopala;
UPDATE FROM BOB ALLEN. DIRECTOR, INFORMATION & TECHNOLOGY
This meeting was called by President Dieter and Chairman Varner to allow Bob Allen,
Director of the City's Information and Technology Department an opportunity to brief
the Council on the work progress of his department, especially in light of the city's recent
RFP for Information Technology Outsourcing.
Chairperson Varner began the meeting recounting the difficulty he experienced trying to
wade through the fifty-one page RFP issued by the City on March 9a'. He along with
President Dieter and an appazent majority of the Council felt it might be a good idea to
hear Bob Allen's take on the IT Dept. and the RFP.
Chairperson Varner called upon Bob Allen to give testimony. Bob began by stating his
IT Department had established a number of goals: 1. Building an IT network serving the
unique needs of the each city department. 2. Connecting the network. 3. Meeting with
Department Heads to discern their needs and wants. 4. Working with Department Heads
to prioritize department needs. 5. Establishment of a city-wide committee to prioritize
with available resources. 6. Discourse with Council and Administration to formulate a
1-3-5 year plan.
Chairperson Varner asked Bob Allen if having studied the RFP, did he feel the present IT
Department could handle the requirements? Allen felt they could. Varner also expressed
his opinion that the city was not receiving full and fair payback on its investment in
Metronet. As an aside he asked if the IT Department pulled permits when they install
low-voltage wire? Allen's answer was no, they just do it. Bob's final word was that he
felt each department softwaze needs were unique. The current IT staff helped develop,
implement, and now services these data processing tasks better and more cost-effectively
than anyone else. The IT Department currently has four people in the County-City
Building, three at the police department, two at Parks, one and half at the Water Works
and one at the Fire Department.
Chairperson Varner noting that responses to the RFP were due May 4~' asked Fanello
what she saw as a timeframe for reviewing the responses. Fanello asked if she could first
provide some background information so that everyone could understand the rationale
behind the issuance of the RFP. Because of the looming budget constraints she was
looking at each department for cost savings. This process involves identifying what
services are provided, how, by whom, and at what cost. With these benchmarks analysis
can help determine whether there may be ways to provide services more effectively and
efficiently. Are there better ways of doing things. We need to be able to compare other
ways and costs of providing necessary services. The RFP can provide a basis for
comparison and a way of determining "best practices." Shall we continue "as is" contract
for services, or develop some hybrid. Setting benchmarks, identifying alternatives, and
evaluating should be a necessary and worthwhile process. Catherine maintained. She
emphasized we needed to be "open-minded" when striving for "best practices", meaning
we may have to be open to change in how we do things and who does them. Decisions
cannot be made in a vacuum.
Oliver Davis and Derek Dieter expressed concerns about the RFP process, that is, the
objectivity of the need assessments. Fanello maintained the RFP process would serve as
away of finding out what was out there, what would best fit South Bend's needs.
Councilmember Oliver Davis wondered if this "best practices" information was available
by asking other communities what they are doing. Fanello stated each community's
needs and present practices were unique and not really comparable. Councilmember
Oliver Davis wondered whether we should be asking people who want to sell us
something what it is we need. Wouldn't they have a bias? Fanello maintained this
process was a valid way of finding out what is out there... a common practice in the
private sector... all a part of gathering information to give one the basis for making
informed decisions.
Councilmember Rouse suggested a better approach might be to hire a consultant who
would not have a vendor's bias. Fanello said the city had previously done this through
Crowe Horwath. Rouse questioned Crowe's capability and the fact that their study was
now dated being at least six (6) years old. His concern was for our own IT people being
overlooked and not getting a fair shake. Catherine defended the capability of Crowe in
assessing technology needs.
The Mayor came to Fanello's defense. He said we use a variety of ways and sources to
get appropriate information to then evaluate and decide what is best for South Bend.
Councilmember Henry Davis wondered if our own IT were asked their opinions of what,
who, how, and when things should be done. Catherine said she worked with our own
folks closely to find ways to do things better. Chairperson Varner cautioned a thorough
cost of service comparison was needed. Then for evaluating proposals a scoring matrix,
complete and understandable was necessary. Fanello said again this was only an
information gathering process which she fully expected the Council to be a part of
evaluating before any decisions are made. Gary Horvath of the SBPD described the
specific needs of the police department. He then spoke to the value of having a
centralized IT department capable of quickly responding to PD's needs.
Councilmember LaFountain observed this was an example of a possible hybrid situation
where some things we do best while other applications may best be contracted.
Chairperson Varner brought the meeting to a close reminding all the purpose was to
gather information and to keep involved so as to ultimately help make better decisions.
There being no further business to come before the committee at this time. Chairperson
Varner adjourned the meeting at 5:53 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
David Varner, Chairperson
Information and Technology Committee