010913 by chrstphr

VIEWS: 26 PAGES: 2

									                                                         MINUTES
                                                      Tax Committee
                                               September 13, 2001 @ 5:00 P.M.

MEMBERS PRESENT:                    Jeff Lickiss; Cheryl Budzinski; Junior Watkins; Lynn Pearson

MEMBERS ABSENT:                     Roger Monroe

OTHERS PRESENT:                     Patrick Urich-County Administrator; David Williams-County Board Chairman; Bob Baietto,
                                    Carol Trumpe-County Board; Steven Kossman-Probation; Nancy Mills, Nancy Neel-Health
                                    Department; Donna Schwab-Budget Director;Don Toohill-Assistant State’s Attorney; Tom
                                    Seckler, John Rosa, Stan Knobloch-DP/IT Services, Ila Gile, County Clerk’s Office; Tripp
                                    O’Connor, Nicole Demetreas-Treasurer’s Office; Paul Chamberlain-Supervisor of
                                    Assessments Office; Brad Horton-Recorder of Deeds; Nancy Honings-State’s Attorney’s
                                    Office; John Carlson, Denise Patton-Personnel; Carol Van Winkle, Sheriff’s Department;
                                    Bob Egan, Shauna Gollnitz -Budget Analysts; Rich Loesch, Steven Denny-Cleveland
                                    Dovington Partners, Inc.

The meeting was called to order at 5:00 p.m. by Vice Chairman Budzinski.       Minutes of August 22, 2001 were approved on a
motion by Ms. Pearson and a second by Mr. Watkins. The motion carried.

Presentation: Cleveland Dovington Partners, Inc. Evaluation Report on County’s DP/IT Services
Mr. Loesch gave a presentation on CDPI’s Evaluation of the County’s DP/IT Services. The firm’s findings included:
Dissatisfaction with and lack of confidence in DP, departments expressing lack of representation, (Mr. Lickiss entered the
meeting), application and integration problems, obsolescence, duplication of files, inadequate training and software for help
desk, third-party software issues, larger projects not well planned and utilized, security problems, no County control over
services, data integrity problems, outsourcing not providing value of shared resources, etc. (Jim Thomas entered the meeting).
Also discussed: Need to evaluate cost benefits of migrating off mainframe and changing to client server, problems of multiple
platforms, potential savings in telephone calls, productivity tools, etc. The report also indicated that DP should be a core
competency of the County and that qualified staff are available in the Peoria area and can be hired cheaper than outsourcing.

Regarding outsourcing, it was stressed that proper management and sharing of technical experts would be necessary, that
using the City as an outsourcer would be difficult, and that using a combination of in-house and outsourcing would be the worst
scenario. The cons of outsourcing included higher direct costs, no direct control of staff, problems with management
relationship, quality and communication problems in current environment, contract and terms problems, scope of control,
partnership in DP environment, etc. Pros of outsourcing included access to new technologies, no recruiting problems,
experienced staff, good skills inventory, purchasing leverage, etc.

CDPI’s recommendations were to hire an IT leader that would provide leadership to the DP staff and be responsible to the
County Administrator, institute a contract administrator/coordinator, establish project methodology, assign responsibilities, make
changes to current contract with clear, unambiguous language, make outsourcer responsible for third party relationships, get
Internet strategy in place, get business analysts to help, etc. It was further recognized that goals and objectives of DP and the
County should be the same, and that the course of action should be to plan for the immediate future by extending the contract
with ACS for at least another 6 months. Other recommendations were to stabilize the current environment within a month,
acquire problem solving tools, organize IT groups, analyze benefits of the mainframe, use common off the shelf software and
middleware for integration, create business analysts, and, after 6 months, put the contract out for bids.

In response to a request for his recommendation, the County Administrator explained that the issue encompassed more than
just his recommendation. It was noted that the DP Technology Subcommittee’s recommendations were that IT services should
be a core competency of the County, and that the first responsibility was to recommend bringing IT services in-house.

Mr. Seckler read a letter from Mr. Jack Bonaccci of ACS, in which concern was expressed about the CDPI report and the
possibility of the County bringing IT services in-house. Mr. Bonacci requested an opportunity to meet with the Tax Committee,
the County Administrator, and the County Board before a decision was made. Mr. Seckler noted that several of the
recommendations made by CDPI were proposed by SCT over the years, that many statements in the summary report were
inaccurate, and asked that information be verified before a decision was made.

Resolution: To Hire an Information Services Director and Establish an In-House DP Staff
Mr. Lickiss asked if the Committee would agree to amend the resolution with the goal of reviewing an in-house DP. In response
to a question about the subcommittee’s consensus regarding in-house DP, it was noted that virtually all members were in
agreement. Mr. Lickiss requested that the resolution be passed on to the County Board floor for further discussion. Ms.
Budzinski moved for approval of the resolution based on the subcommittee’s consensus. Ms. Pearson seconded the motion,
and it carried with the Tax Committee Chairman voting Nay.

The meeting adjourned at 6:06 p.m. on a motion by Ms. Budzinski and a second by Ms. Pearson.

Recording Secretary: Susan McIntyre-Steiner

								
To top