HomeMy WebLinkAboutM120678December 6, 1978
RECONVENED: The Board. reconvened at 8:00 p,m. pursuant to recesso
Present: Supervisors Lemke, Madigan, Richter and Chairman
Winston. Clif Miok'el~on, administrative officer; and
Clark A, Nelson, county clerk, by Cathy Pitts, assistant
clerk to the Board. ABSENT: Supervisor Moseley
78-2283 DATA PROCESSING FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PRESENTATIONS CONTTNIIED
Ed Carlson, Computer Sciences Corporation, made a statement
at this time, The corporation has three major divisions. One is
,dealing with the federal government, one with the state and local and
commercial sectors, and one with intertime sharing network. The press
has released another report on the business practices with the GSA,
The current press release deals with CSC. Sources say a few members
of GSA received money prior to awarding to Tnvinese in 1972, The
Grand Jury is investigating this. No one has contacted us whatever.
This year as these types of reports have been received we have received
a significant amount of business from the state and local governments.
This has not been based on how many good or bad news articles there were.
The corporation denies these allegations.
Chairman Winston stated that he has thought about the format
for the meeting and has decided that he would ask the interim Data Processing
Director to come to the podium and tell us why he did not think
it would work. Then he will ask the vendors to come forward and answer
any questions that may have been raised.
Ed Brown, interim data processing director, stated that he
had planned to ask the Board if they would allow the Data Processing Department,
to make a presentation next week so the skey people in the department
can discuss this with the Board. Mr. Brown presented his personal opinion
at this time. He has made an analysis of the proposalso He talked to
the people involed in facilities management and has talked with people
considering facilities management. He lied been unable to find anyone
favorable in that it would be a$.vantageous to enter into such a contract.
Specifically, whenever he looks at the budget and the base expenditures,
There is no way we can come out fiscally. The over all cost is going
to be $100,000 or more than the current budget allows. Mr. Brown set
out what has happened the last two years in data processing with the
voter registration by mail, outreach program and proposition 13. There
were not only problems with the law but were problems with the people.
The immediate requirements were met. As he has talked to people involved
in facilities management they have no assurances that it would be such
a good way on proposition 13 ifoday. It is his opinion to readjust the
assessment roll. Tt is his intent to adjust many assessments back to
1975-76valueso This will result in a decrease of assessment and revenue
for the county. He felt that the Spirit of 13 will pass and ~rohihit
the state in aiding the county:, like this year. He felt that if this
county buys into a contract for a great deal of expenditure of money
that we will be in trouble.
Chairman Winston stated that if staff comes up with figures
different from his that Mr. Brown would sit down and give=. them any
information he might have.
Mr. Brown felt that he would make every effort to cooperate
and understand.
78-2284 STATEMENT BY CHAIRMAN WINSTON
Chairman Winston stated that the local newspaper had contacted
him at home about this matter. There was a confusion in the story.
He was speaking about Governor Brown and it was printed Ed Brown.
Page 486.
December 6, 1978
December 6, 1978
78T2285 DATA PRCESSING FACTLTTTES MANAGEMENT PRESENTATIONS CONTINUED
Mr. Brown stated that it was his understanding that Orange
County is the only one in the state with the processing as is being
', presented to the county. He did not feel there has been work done
to take over the entire county operation. Butte County does a good
job except for management. He felt that the county could find a
', good director. This is one thing that would solve the problems.
CSC's basic cost is $800,000 about $25,000 of our total budget for
equipment, personnel and supplies. In addition, they will provide
management services for that and the county will have to pay for the
', computer and immediate enhancement. The county will still pay for
janitor services and everything else. Also, the Board should look
at the rates on special services, The top rate for one person is
', $400 per day and less expensive charges down the line. He did not
feel that if immediate programs and. systems were required that the
outside vendor could provide them as fast as the in-house personnel could.
The county would have to go through-the contract manager and go through
the procedure of getting priorities and it would cost more money.
As it was this county just barely made it. A two week or ten day delay
would not have allowed meeting the deadline.
Mr. Brown felt that there would be a great difference between
', $160,000 and $800,000 plus $160,000. This would still be cost of the
hardware.
Supervisor Richter stated that he would hope that a contract
if written would be such that the county would no longer be paying the
bill for processing. The county should not have to pay $800,000 if they
were not getting $800,000 warth of work, If the state said that there
was no need for the county to have welfare or a number of other things
then there would not be the business for that and he hoped that the
contract would be drafted to include reduced fees.
' Chairman Winston stated that the county has had data processing
'; for 22 years. There has been trouble with data processing for those
', 22 years. He has talked to customers who have gone through two or three
managers and as far as they are concerned they are not going to go
through another one. He wondered if it was possible to get someone
who could fill the job.
Mr. Brown stated that facilities managment has come up with
a great individual. He suggested that the Board contact LA county and
find out about the assignment. He did not feel that he had all the
information.
Discussion of the poor management in the Data Processing
Department over the years held at this time. The Board was aware of
the problems. They were told about the problem by the Administrative
Officer. The Board has made many studies regarding this matter.
Ted Cleveland ,,spoke to the Board regarding Ed Brown's qualifications
as the Data Processing Director. He has heard rumors that Mr. Brown
would like to have a dual title of Data Processing Director and Assessor.
', He felt that Mr. Brown would be able tc do both jobs efficiently. Data
Processing is very responsible now. They were responsive at the time
of Proposition 13. He did not feel that the county could get that type
of response from facilities management, The complaints that the Board
received relative to the assessments were a result of State Board of
Equalization mandates and not the T3ata Processing Department.
Bill Lawrence, auditor, felt that there is going to be a
continued need for systems development. A11 of the price quotes make
the presumption the county will go on for ever requiring a high system support.
Page 4870
December 6, 1978
December 6, 1978
He supported facilities management. They have the advantage of bringingT
in outside people. The Board should use care in negotiating the contract
so it would have a reduction clauseo
Supervisor Lemke asked the vendors if assuming all of these
items are exactly what they are reported to be that depending on the
Board's decision to decide to go with facilities managffe nt and negotiation
of the contract could there be an ironing out of buybacks and systems
available etc? The Board is operating on the premise that these are
only proposals.
Mr. Eastman, SCT, felt that the statements were correct. He
felt that if the Board looked at a contract there would be flexibility
of reduction.
Supervisor Lemke stated that he would like to be able to go
to the other bidders if in the contract nego€iations an agreement could
not be reached.
Mr. Carlson,. CSC, felt that was a good way to do business.
If the county for ~-.any reason. decides not to go with a system this
would result in a reduction of cost. The county is going to have to sit
down and negotiate and this does not mean a committment.
Mr. Wadsworth, Sierra National, stated that he was in agreement
with the other vendors on this matter.
Mr. Staszak, SCT, stated that he would like to comment on
Mr. Browny remarks concerning costs.,Tfiey_ proposed not only personnel
but assumption of equipment costs as well as supplies. This proposal
shows a reduction over a period of time. The cost will be higher the
first year because of the influx of additional people. They would
be assuming total responsibility. If the county wanted to go back to
in-house processing the county would reassume the costs and would be
building up the credits on the equipment.. They will deal as a buffer
for the Board with the vendor and the equipment will revert to the
county at no cost to the county except for the continued cost of the
payments.
Mr. Carlson felt that their presentation was not a reflection
on Mr. Brown's performance since he has been director but before he was
appointed, He felt that Orange County was in favor of facilities management.
Up until last year's election LA County could not contract for full
managment facilities management. They did not increase the cost when
they took the different counties and cities through a conversion system.
If you look at the different proposals it is difficult to evaluate
relative to money.
Supervisor Lemke stated that he would like to add to what
the Data Processing Committee felt regarding money. They agreed that
money was not the criteria that was going to be the deciding factor.
Mr. Carlson stated ghat it is important that they do not
take over the equipment and the supplies, It is not economically
advantageous to take over the hardware and the supplies. Anything under
one umbrella would have to relate to an increased amount. In some cases
they do take the hardware. They have to analyzezto see who is in the
best place. In this care the county should keep the hardware. The
biggest part of the supply cost is people. Of about $62,000, $54000 is
people. Orange County had the same problem as Butte County regarding
Proposition 13. The tax bills had to get aut. There was an increased
effort and the job was done. There were probably .sixteen people working
Page 488.
December 6, 1978
December 6, 1978
on the item at no increase in costo There is no way to anticipate certain
changes and priorities that come up. They-sit down and evaluate these
things as they come up and talk about the cost benefits and change
priorities. There were some other subtasks that had to get along without
work being done during this time, If the county decides not to implement
a program they do not have to pay for it. He felt that if the program
is going to work it will be a working relationship between the facil£es
management director and the administrative officer. The tax bills
were mailed out on October 20, 1978 in Orange County which is five
days mare than in the previous years.
' Mr. Fastmem~, stated that his company was the locbest bidder.
', Cost along should not be the determination of who to contract with.
They have bid full responsibility. The Board should consider the
cheapest cost to get the job done. The one thing he has heard is the
need for systems. He agreed to look for a single man might not be the
answer. They have praposed a three man team.
Supervisor Zemke statedii that he and Supervisor Madigan
', would be having a meeting on Monday morning. They would like to meet
with the individual vendors and Mr. Brown or one of his representatives.
Clif Nickelson, administrative officer, stated that the
analysis of the bids would be ready for the committee members on Friday.
The analysis is to be sent to the other Board members<
The discussion with the Data Processing personnel will be
held December 12, 1978 at 1:30 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT ,
', There being nothing furthe before the Boar at this time,
the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p . to reconvene on Tuesday, eeember 12,
1978 at 9:00 a.m.
i.
ATTEST: CLARK A. NII~SON, COUNTY CLE ~
and ex-officio Clerk of the
Board of Supervisors
By ~ _ __ Chas n, Board Supervis
.Page 489.
December 6, 1978