Legislature(2001 - 2002)
02/21/2001 09:18 AM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
MINUTES
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
February 21, 2001
9:18 AM
TAPES
SFC-01 # 21, Side A
SFC 01 # 21, Side B
CALL TO ORDER
Vice Chair Jerry Ward convened the meeting at approximately 9:18 AM
PRESENT
Senator Pete Kelly, Co-Chair
Senator Dave Donley, Co-Chair
Senator Jerry Ward, Vice Chair
Senator Lyda Green
Senator Gary Wilken
Senator Alan Austerman
Senator Lyman Hoffman
Also Attending: ANNALEE MCCONNELL, Director, Office of Management
and Budget, Office of the Governor; JIM DUNCAN, Commissioner,
Department of Administration; LARRY WALSH, Director/Chief
Technology Officer, Information Technology Group, Department of
Administration; DEL SMITH, Deputy Commissioner, Department of
Public Safety; KIM GARNERO, Director, Division of Finance,
Department of Administration; KAREN MORGAN, Deputy Director,
Communications Services, Information Technology Group, Department
of Administration; FRANKLIN TERRY ELDER, Director, Division of
Banking, Securities and Corporations, Department of Community and
Economic Development
Attending via Teleconference: STEVE SMITH, Director, Information
Technology, University of Alaska
SUMMARY INFORMATION
SB 29 - APPROP: GOVERNOR'S CAPITAL BUDGET
The Committee heard testimony from the Office of Management and
Budget, Department of Administration, the University of Alaska,
Department of Public Safety and the Department of Community and
Economic Development. After a brief overview the bill was held
in Committee.
SENATE BILL NO. 29
"An Act making capital appropriations and capitalizing
funds; making appropriations under art. IX, sec. 17(c),
Constitution of the State of Alaska, from the constitutional
budget reserve fund; and providing for an effective date."
ANNALEE MCCONNELL, Director, Office of Management and Budget,
Office of the Governor announced that the presentation would be
emphasizing special information groups, information technology and
emergency communications.
JIM DUNCAN, Commissioner, Department of Administration, explained
that the Telecommunications Information Council (TIC) was
established in 1987 by statute. He noted that it is a council that
meets quarterly, is chaired by the Lieutenant Governor and serving
on the committee are all the commissioners and deputy commissioners
of all state agencies, the director of Office of Management and
Budget, two members of the Alaska State Legislature, one member of
the University of Alaska and one public member. The council has
several duties: to establish guidelines, prepare a state short-
range and long-range information system plan to meet state needs,
to direct state agencies to prepare agency information plans and,
in accordance with statutes, establish guidelines for access by the
public. He informed that "off of the TIC there is a TIC policy
group" appointed by the Lieutenant Governor and its membership
includes the Lieutenant Governor, director of Office of Management
and Budget, the University of Alaska chief technology officer,
commissioners or deputy commissioners of the Department of Public
Safety, Department of Natural Resources, Department of
Environmental Conservation and Department of Administration.
Mr. Duncan said that in addition to the TIC and the TIC policy
group there is the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and the
membership of the TAC is made up of the chief technical
representatives from all state agencies. He pointed out that the
TIC initiatives have been adopted to continue to use the Internet
to service the state's external customers, to take steps towards a
digital democracy such as on-line public hearings and forums to
collect public opinions, to address the emergency communication
infrastructure needs, to work on digital signature systems to
continue to enable "e-government initiatives", and to address the
digital divide in the state. He shared that the TAC members believe
that access to the Internet in the urban areas is extremely high,
but the same statistic would probably show that it is "pretty
dismal in rural Alaska."
Mr. Duncan surmised that there are three levels of review: TAC,
TIC and the Information Technology Group (ITG).
Ms. McConnell explained the reason for the extensive review process
is because the information technology projects in one department
have significant impact on how the statewide system operates. She
stressed that consistent, quality statewide standards are an
important component of this project. She added that the projects
have been carefully selected based on the ability to move them
forward and with the knowledge that each project is a prototype for
future projects and would have applicability in other areas of
state government.
LARRY WALSH, Director/Chief Technology Officer, Information
Technology Group, Department of Administration, explained the TIC
is interested in the agency's ability to solve technology needs in
the state. He said that when proposed projects are discussed,
there are consistent issues that come forward along with common
technical challenges even though the content and agencies might be
different. Therefore, he stated, ITG is interested in addressing
those common infrastructure needs and looking for ways to offer
those services to state agencies. He hoped the group could re-use
that technology for similar solutions. He noted the group is
trying to identify ways to improve this process, and he believed
the TAC review is a "great" way to start. He added that other
common issues discussed are network and bandwidth issues,
specifically with the delivery of information services into rural
Alaska. He explained that there are techniques that could be used
that perform either more efficiently or less efficiently. He said
that when these methods were reviewed, he witnessed some
"incredible brainstorming and information exchange" on how to solve
common problems. He shared that discussions also addressed how the
state of technology is changing in the marketplace and in the
state, and said that this is a "rapidly evolving arena." He stated
he was pleased with the effort of cooperation and collaboration
across agencies.
DEL SMITH, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Public Safety,
indicated that for the past couple of years, the department has met
with all of the groups that have proposed emergency communication
projects in an effort to narrow projects down to those most
critical for the state. He listed four components relative to
emergency communications: Department of Public Safety; Department
of Health and Social Services; Department of Military and Veterans
Affairs; and an entire governmental emergency response system. He
noted that meetings were held on several occasions and
recommendations were submitted to the Office of Management and
Budget. He believed the recommendations reflect what would be best
for the entire State of Alaska. He pointed out that the projects
are prioritized as a Southeast upgrade; a rescue coordination
replacement; an emergency communications land mobile radio
migration; and an emergency communications medical services.
Ms. McConnell indicated there is an additional overlay of
complexity for the emergency communication projects, because
there is a considerable amount of interaction with both federal
agencies and local agencies. She stressed that both of those
governmental levels must be taken into account.
Department of Administration
Payroll and Accounting System Replacement Analysis
$400,000 General Fund
Reference No.: 33862
AP/AL: Appropriation
Project Type: Planning
Category: Public Support Technology/Service
Location: Statewide
Election District: Statewide
Estimated Project Dates: 07/01/2001 - 06/30/2006
Funding will be used to hire a consultant to provide
replacement analysis and planning for the statewide accounting
and payroll systems (AKSAS & AKPAY) currently managed by the
Division of Finance.
One-time project
KIM GARNERO, Director, Division of Finance, Department of
Administration, explained that the Division of Finance maintains
and operates two large mainframe computer systems that serve all
state departments except the university. She indicated that AKSAS
provides statewide accounting services and AKPAY provides statewide
payroll services. She told that AKSAS is fifteen years old and
AKPAY is ten years old and both use ADABASE management software.
She noted the payroll software vendor has officially notified the
division that their product will no longer support ADABASE after
2002. She stated that both of the aging mainframe systems would
need to be replaced and stressed that planning should begin soon.
She added that stand-alone single function administrative systems
are numbered for large complex organizations.
University of Alaska
Telecommunications Equipment Improvements
$1,875,000
Reference No.: 34508
STEVE SMITH, Director, Information Technology, University of
Alaska, testified via teleconference from Fairbanks and explained
the university's objectives to upgrade to the next generation of
hardware to provide 24-hour access for the students and provide
full redundancy for the system.
Senator Hoffman asked why this project is listed as a phased
project.
Mr. Smith replied that the cost for replacing the primary
administration computer is split over two years with $1.5 million
for FY 02 and $1.5 million for FY 03 when redundancy for the new
system would be completed. He added that the remaining $375,000 in
the FY 02 request is for the convergence of the university network.
Senator Hoffman requested clarification that in FY O3 the project
would require another $1.5 million.
Mr. Smith responded that is correct. He explained that the $1.5
million in FY03 would provide full redundancy in the system to
ensure there would not be one single point of failure.
Senator Hoffman referred to the backup material indicating the
total project would cost $1.8 million.
Mr. Smith explained that the $1.8 million is the cost for FY 02.
Senator Hoffman noted the additional $1.5 million for FY 03 was not
shown in the backup.
Senator Wilken asked what Mr. Smith thought the voice-over Internet
Protocol (IP) would save in long-distance calls or operating costs
for the Anchorage and Fairbanks campuses.
Mr. Smith indicated the initial projection is a savings of
approximately $144,000. He explained that the second part of the
capital request, convergence of the university network, would
enable a single circuit for video, voice and data between all of
the campuses and also eventually include the Internet. He said
that currently there are separate circuits for voice, video and
data and the technology is available to handle all on one circuit.
He informed that the separate circuit for videoconferences is
available seven days a week 24 hours a day; therefore, it lays idle
much of the time. He indicated that with the new technology all
traffic could be run over one circuit, which would be more
efficient.
ARCS Video Automation and Control Project
$77,500 general funds
Reference No.: 33907
AP/AL: Appropriation
Project Type: Equipment
Category: Public Support Technology/Service
Location: Statewide
Election District: Statewide
Estimated Project Dates: 07/01/2001 - 06/30/2006
Funding will be used to purchase a computer based video/audio
automation system that will enable ARCS to receive video
programs from multiple sources including Federal agencies,
State of Alaska agencies, local Alaskan producers, and others,
and broadcast the programs over ARCS.
One-time project
KAREN MORGAN, Deputy Director, Communications Services, Information
Technology Group, Department of Administration informed that the
Alaska Rural Communication System (ARCS) has been through a variety
of changes over the past five to ten years. She noted that within
the past five years the signal had been digitized and the tape
delay center was disbanded, which left the programming up to
another provider. Originally, she said, the signal went to Bethel
and then it was brought back into the Anchorage area where the
joint venture office was established with the Public Broadcasting
Commission and the ARCS council. She said this is the first
request out of the joint venture office and the equipment being
requested would be used in the joint venture office to automate
some of the programs received by the ARCS signal. She explained it
would be timesaving for the department and would also be a
programming enhancement.
Senator Green asked if the operating budget would be affected.
Ms. Morgan responded that currently the ITG administers the grant
process to the public broadcasting joint venture office. She
clarified that the amount of that grant would not change.
Emergency Communications: Land Mobile Radio Migration
$16,248,100
$14,893,700 federal receipts
$1,354,400 general funds
Reference No.: 33845
AP/AL: Appropriation
Project Type: Equipment
Category: Public Support Technology/Service
Location: Statewide
Election District: Statewide
Estimated Project Dates: 07/01/2001 - 06/30/2006
Funding will be used to continue the process of converting
federal, state, and local emergency communications systems to
technology that will provide for interoperability (the ability
of different agencies with different communications systems to
communicate across jurisdictions and with each other).
Phased project
Ms. Morgan explained that the project was established in the middle
1990's as a joint venture between federal, state and local
governments to build an inter-operational two-way radio system
moving toward an analog communications system in the State of
Alaska. She said as cellular phones and other devices continue to
become more popular, the radio spectrum that allows communications
between these devices becomes more limited. The Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) is now selling that spectrum to the
federal government at "a great profit", she said, but as result of
the increased usage, they are now requiring that the federal, state
and local governments move to a new spectrum. She noted that the
FCC original deadline for this conversion has been delayed due to
the lack of a funding mechanism. She stated this project allows the
three entities to merge their resources and structures together.
She informed that the US Department of Defense has been
appropriated $14 million and has awarded a contract to begin the
conversion on their portion of the system. She noted Alaska would
receive approximately $7 million of this amount to allow the state
and local portions to be converted in conjunction with the overall
system.
Co-Chair Kelly inquired if there is communications between the
systems now.
Ms. Morgan stated there is currently no direct communication, which
causes problems. She detailed how two different radios must be used
in order for one entity to contact another.
Co-Chair Kelly asked if this is because some entities use analogue
while others use digital communications.
Ms. Morgan replied very few systems are digital, and that most are
analogue. Furthermore, she said, communications are controlled by
the use of different frequencies, and as part of this upgrade, the
different entities would be using the same frequencies as well as
converting to digital technology.
Co-Chair Kelly summarized that this request would provide funding
to upgrade communications to digital and at the same time allows
communications between jurisdictions.
Ms. Morgan said that is correct.
Senator Wilken asked for clarification on what exactly the $16
million would be spent. He also wanted to know why the state would
not contract as a subscriber with a private company, such as
Globalstar, to perform the hardware work.
Ms. Morgan stated there is a land mobile council comprised of
representatives from a wide variety of local, state and federal
entities. She informed that several years ago the council reviewed
technology to determine what would best meet the overall needs to
enable joint communications. She stated the council determined that
satellite communication was fairly new technology that does not
work well in many areas and has inter-operability capabilities that
are not as "robust" as the land mobile radio communications. She
stated this project would still allow for some prescription type
services where needed.
Ms. Morgan said that the state is participating jointly on this
project because of infrastructure in place run by the State of
Alaska Telecommunications System. She explained this is a microwave
system that follows the highway system, and because this system is
already in place, the only expense would be upgrades. Without the
existing system, she noted, the cost of this project would be much
higher.
Senator Wilken inquired if the Alaska Land Mobile Radio Objective
Council (ALMR) had received a presentation from either Iridium or
Globalstar
Ms. Morgan replied that in 1997, the ALMR Council, issued a request
for information from the communications industry to determine the
best technology for communications. She said the council had
significant response from the industry, including satellite
communications companies.
Senator Wilken commented that he has noticed the changes in
technology over the past several years and ascertained that much
has happened in technology since 1997. He suggested further
communications with private industry before launching into a $40
million project that would have to be upgraded on an annual basis
as the industry moves ahead.
Ms. Morgan responded that she appreciated Senator Wilken's concern,
and qualified that although she was not a technologist, she could
guarantee that the council has been looking at the changes in
technology all along and this system has been determined to fit the
needs even in today's environment. The concern, she stressed, is
the unreliability of satellite systems for an emergency response
situation. She stressed communications are a problem and there is
concern over adequate emergency response to situations such as the
avalanches that occurred last year on the Seward Highway.
SFC 01 # 21, Side B 10:05 AM
Ms. Morgan stressed this was a "very good project" and assured the
Committee that the council wanted to proceed very cautiously,
making sure to take into account technology changes.
Senator Wilken inquired if this project could be part of the
telecommunication package the state is considering with major
communications providers AT&T/Alascom and GCI.
Co-Chair Kelly stated that Senator Wilken's questions have "sparked
questions" from other members.
Co-Chair Kelly asked how the satellite services do not provide
"robust enough coverage" and asked for general clarification on the
differences in coverage from satellite companies; specifically,
what was lacking.
Ms. Morgan replied the coverage from satellites is not always
reliable. Radio technology acts more like an intercom, she
explained, and allows multiple entities to communicate by tuning
into the same frequency, while satellites work more like a
telephone and do not allow multiple parties to communicate at this
point.
Senator Austerman asked if the council had considered Alaska owning
its own satellite for communications.
Mr. Smith indicated that he was a member of the ALMR council, and
that the council had received presentations from companies
representing almost every kind of communications equipment. He said
that the department is envisioning the land mobile radio migration
project as a trunk radio VHF system that functions like a telephone
system, but is wireless and would provide day-to-day reliable
emergency communications between fire departments, police cars and
other emergency response entities. He reiterated that satellite
phones do not allow parallel communication and in some emergency
situations, cell phone lines are tied up due to volume. Mr. Smith
voiced concern that getting satellite time, "twenty four hours a
day, seven days a week", when needed, would be difficult. He
stressed that a satellite would have to be consistently at the
right place on the horizon to effectively communicate.
Senator Wilken asked if this project is part of the
telecommunications package, and whether a privatized state network
would work.
Mr. Smith indicated there are sections of the telecommunications
RFP that would affect certain portions of the existing
infrastructure of the current telecommunications system. He said
there is an option to hire a private communications provider whose
responsibility would be to install the system and do the upgrades;
however, it needed to be a VHS trunk radio system regardless of who
is in charge. He commented that the State of Florida is working
with a private vendor to do just that, so it is a possibility.
Senator Wilken expressed concern over spending $40 million now and
in five years, considering rapid technology advancements; another
$40 million request might be before the committee. He asked why the
state does not subscribe to a system and let the privatized entity
do all the necessary upgrades.
Mr. Smith responded that the Department of Public Safety contracted
with Western Identification Networks, a private firm, for use of
their fingerprint identification program and that program is
working "just fine." He commented that he did not feel this
appropriation approach precluded the state from issuing RFPs to
look at other options; however, without an appropriation, the state
would not "attract much attention from vendors."
Ms. Morgan clarified that the privatization component is included
in the RFP and during the time the capital request was submitted,
two things were happening simultaneously: one was that the federal
government was moving ahead with the contract, and two, the "RFP
was on the street". She stated the ALMR was included in both.
Senator Leman inquired how this project related to the Alaska mini-
radio service that provides emergency broadcasts on radio channels.
He asked if there might be an inter-relationship with those
technologies.
Mr. Smith said there is an emergency radio broadcast notification
system to the public in the case of an earthquake or a tsunami;
however, it is a one-way radio system not a two-way system. He said
the council is aware of the system, but he did not see it as part
of a two-way radio system.
Senator Leman remarked that if the state was going to invest this
much money, an effort should be made to make sure that all the
systems work together.
Mr. Smith stated that partnerships with the ARMY, Coast Guard, and
other entities are being established to take advantage of the
infrastructure that exists right now.
Senator Hoffman inquired if any of the systems could be used at the
local level for search and rescue.
Mr. Smith said yes, he could see that occurring.
Senator Hoffman commented that in rural Alaska, assistance in
search and rescue is needed, especially in the winter when those on
the ground with snow machines need to communicate with the National
Guard and other rescue coordinators.
Mr. Smith stated that the radios would be available for search and
rescue. He added that the 25 Megahertz (MHZ) radios that are
currently in use are not manufactured anymore and would need to be
replaced with 12.5 MHZ narrow-band radios. All radios must be the
same megahertz for communication, he said.
Mr. Smith communicated that this proposal includes an airmobile
trunk-able system that can be set up in remote areas to coordinate
search and rescue for major disasters outside of the major
population areas of the state.
Senator Ward said there might be satellite technology developing
that provides cell phones with more than just two-way operations.
He asked if the council was informed of any developing technologies
that might be available in the next few years.
Mr. Smith did not recall any presenter talking about new technology
that would be suitable, nor, was he provided any information about
a more cost effective satellite service program. He commented that
this was mainly due to Alaska's position on the planet. He said
satellite communications might be good in the interim, but are cost
prohibitive and sufficient bandwidth might be a problem.
Co-Chair Kelly, referring to the backup information sheet, inquired
if the wording on the zero-percent state match was a misprint. He
also questioned the general fund involvement.
Ms. Morgan indicated that at the time the request was submitted
there were approximately eight federal government grants being
applied for, each with different match requirements. The request is
denoted zero because a specific grant has not yet been obtained,
she stated.
Senator Hoffman questioned a portion of the backup information
sheet that indicated an additional $4.7 million might be required
due to various funding options between the local, state, and
federal agencies.
Ms. Morgan replied it would depend on the grant awards whether
additional state funds would be necessary.
Electronic Signature Project
$100,000 general funds
Reference No.: 33936
AP/AL: Appropriation
Project Type: Information Systems
Category: Public Support Technology/Service
Location: Statewide
Election District: Statewide
Estimated Project Dates: 07/01/2001 - 06/30/2006
Funding will be used to purchase hardware, software, and
provide staff to evaluate and pilot electronic signature
technology.
One-time project
Mr. Walsh told the committee that one of the common interest topics
found in a recent review of agency technical requests was a common
interest across the agencies in technology that could be used to
identity and authenticate electronic users of the various state
systems. He stated this request would fund a pilot project to
identify and fund the technologies that are available, and identify
the standards and enterprise issues. He said these could then be
leveraged into a variety of state solutions in order to avoid
having stove-piped solutions in different agencies and to
provide a common infrastructure to benefit all agencies doing
electronic commerce within the IT enterprise.
Senator Leman inquired if other departments would need additional
funding to implement these programs.
Mr. Walsh replied that when other states, such as Washington,
acquired the certificating authority contract from one of the
service providers, the state viewed it as an "enabling, building
block that every agency needed to buy into." He said that one of
the hopes of the Alaska TIC project request is that the state would
be able to adopt a standard that agencies would be able to build
into their system rather than reinvent. He said the Department
could present the bid as one enterprise instead of individual
agencies requesting funds. He commented it was too soon to say how
that should be addressed, but he favors the enterprise approach. He
stated he would be able to provide the cost at a later date.
Mainframe Improvements, Equipment Replacement, Virus Scanning
and Metadirectory Development
$2,181,000 information services funds
Reference No.: 33836
AP/AL: Appropriation
Project Type: Equipment
Category: Public Support Technology/Service
Location: Statewide
Election District: Statewide
Estimated Project Dates: 07/01/2001 - 06/30/2006
Funding will be used to purchase the highest priority
equipment, including hardware and software, to meet
anticipated customer demand.
On-going project
Upgrade Internet and Intranet, and Implement New Network
Technology
$539,900 information services
Reference No.: 33852
AP/AL: Appropriation
Project Type: Information Systems
Category: Public Support Technology/Service
Location: Statewide
Election District: Statewide
Estimated Project Dates: 07/01/2001 - 06/30/2006
This project will combine circuits for voice and data traffic
by making use of Voice over Internet Protocol (VolP)
technology. This will significantly increase the efficiency
of the state's voice and data transmission systems.
Phased project
Mr. Walsh explained that these two requests could be identified as
one since both are seeking authority to be funded by available
internal service funds (ISF) for equipment. He said the ISF is
generated from the charges by ITG to the agencies for use of its
systems. He said that these funds are considered depreciation funds
and are used to replace technology as needed. The department
separated these requests into two components, he said, because of
the telecommunications partnering of proposals which evaluates
identified elements that are "in scope" of the telecommunications
partnering, (Project Reference Number 33852) and equipment
replacements that are "out-of-scope", (Project Reference Number
33836). He mentioned that in prior years, before these breakout
designations, these proposals would have been presented together.
Co-Chair Kelly asked for clarification of "in-scope" and "out of
scope."
Mr. Walsh replied that ITG has asked vendors in the
telecommunications area for specific "bundles" of technology uses.
He said that Project Number 33852, comprised of Internet, intranet,
and network technologies, consists of components of the partnering
plan bundles for which proposals were requested. He said it is very
likely that if a contract were awarded, these technologies would be
provided by the awarded vendor partner and not through ITG. He
explained that mainframe improvements, virus scanning, and
equipment replacement are not part of the proposals being sought
from the vendors and are therefore "out of scope".
Co-Chair Kelly asked for further clarification.
Mr. Walsh explained that ITG operates a large technology enterprise
and the partnering proposals ITG is seeking and evaluating now are
focused on "just a subsection" of what ITG does. He said if there
is something that ITG does today that they are asking a vendor to
propose on, that is considered "in-scope."
Senator Wilken inquired about the lack of an operating impact for
Project number 33852 and about there not being a payback. He
questioned the lack of an operating impact, while noting an
increase of $57,600 in annual operations and maintenance. He asked
why the state should invest $539,000 with no payback, and why this
project is not part of the telecommunications RFP bundle.
Mr. Walsh clarified that this project is part of the
telecommunications RFP and one of the reasons the Department
segregated these requests into separate projects is because if a
contract is awarded, the partner may be providing equipment as part
of the contract.
Senator Wilken asked, if a contract was awarded, would there still
be need for capital.
Mr. Walsh stated capital might still be needed to fund the delivery
of the technology, and that is part of the evaluation process
underway on the proposals already received. He said the payback
anticipated might depend on the proposal, and is also part of the
cost analysis ITG is performing.
Ms. Morgan clarified this request is for an appropriation
authority. ITG currently provides telecommunications through
several methods, she said, one of which is rates-for-services.
Rates-for-services, she explained, is made up of two components,
the operating budget and the capital or depreciation component. She
said this request would provide ITG the appropriation authority
that assumes that the partner will charge the agency for new
technology. She continued that ITG is hoping to have a RFP awarded
so ITG could have a budget amendment to signify the changes
required as part of the RFP. She stressed it is a complex issue,
but being awarded the appropriation authority would show that ITG
is moving forward.
Senator Wilken addressed a portion of the request that asks the
state to spend $539,000 to invest in new equipment that would lower
long distance costs. He inquired about lowering the cost of long
distance by using the new voice-over IP.
Ms. Morgan said she anticipated some savings in long distance
costs. She said that Internet and bandwidth, even without voice-
over IP, has a "very steep growth curve", and that as more
residents take advantage of state online services, the bandwidth
usage has grown in "astronomical proportions". She said projections
are that bandwidth would increase approximately forty percent
annually, and that this new technology would enable ITG to save
money. She warned, however, that this is yet to be seen, and she
could not give an overall savings estimate, as the savings would be
at the agency level because this is a charge-back situation.
Co-Chair Kelly asked Senator Wilken if that answered his question.
Senator Wilken replied no, and stated that since the benefits of
this request were not clearly defined, the committee would need to
wait for the results of the RFP before deciding whether to invest
in the hardware.
Co-Chair Kelly stated that no cost savings have been identified in
the request, but that the upgrading of equipment was to keep up
with increased demands on service.
Ms. Morgan agreed that the request was to keep up with increasing
demands and that the request, if granted, would give the department
the appropriation authority to adjust the overall rates charged to
the successful telecommunications provider.
Co-Chair Kelly asked for further clarification.
Ms. Morgan explained this request would give the department the
appropriation authority for the partner provider to provide these
services if the department successfully awarded the contract to a
partner. Whether the department used a private sector or did the
work internally, she emphasized, the services would not be free,
and without the expenditure authority the department could not
proceed with one of these alternatives, depending on the outcome of
the RFP.
Department of Community and Economic Development
Securities Database
$300,000 receipt services
Reference No.: 33846
AP/AL: Appropriation
Project Type: Information Systems
Category: Public Support Technology/Service
Location: Statewide
Election District: Statewide
Estimated Project Dates: 07/01/2001 - 06/30/2006
This project creates a new securities database in the Division
of Banking, Securities and Corporations. The database will
provide for enforcement tracking, create public access to
information via the Internet, increase division productivity
and consistency of staff, and establish database integrity.
One-time project
FRANKLIN TERRY ELDER, Director, Division of Banking, Securities and
Corporations, Department of Community and Economic Development,
testified the security database is roughly twenty years old and
does not have the ability to track enforcement activity or put
information on the Internet for public use. He stated that this
request would allow the department to expand the system without
increasing clerical staff. He said that with the demand for this
information growing, the fee-for-services would be the funding
source for this request.
Senator Austerman asked whether this project would replace the old
system or upgrade it.
Mr. Elder replied that request is for replacement of the existing
system and the old non-relational database.
Senator Austerman asked whether another operator or staff person
would be necessary to input the data.
Mr. Elder replied yes, the operating budget request asks for
another analyst programmer who would be working part-time on this
database and part-time working on other databases in the
department.
Co-Chair Kelly asked if the Department anticipated increasing fees
to cover this expense.
Mr. Elder replied no, that the fee for services already generates
approximately six times the cost of the division.
Co-Chair Kelly commented that he wanted to make sure that the
Department did not raise fees unnecessarily. He was concerned that
as a result of legislation passed last year that put "a picket
fence around agencies budgets," departments might try to raise
money by increasing fees.
ADJOURNMENT
Co-Chair Pete Kelly adjourned the meeting at 10:42 AM
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|