• Information Services Director Jean Schultz: Fiscal Year 2002 Budget

Central Technology (40)

• Discussion: Fiscal Year 2002 Budget

Central Services (18)

• Board Of Supervisors: Fiscal Year 2002 Budget

Capital Expenditures (44)

Board Of Supervisors (05)

• Discussion: FY 2002 Budget

Chairperson Lehman called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Johnson County Administration Building at 9:07 a.m. Members present were: Pat Harney, Mike Lehman, Terrence Neuzil, and Carol Thompson; absent: Sally Stutsman.

Information Services Director Jean Schultz said she was going to begin by covering the requests from the Computer Committee, and then would go into the requests of the individual departments, submitted on their Technology worksheets. She handed out a packet to the Board, the top sheet of which was the Central Technology Account Budget Requests. She said that this sheet showed the requests from the Networking Committee and GIS money. She also showed the Board the 5-year Networking Plan, covering things like the 5-year replacement and upgrading of PCs, network servers, printers, hubs, and switches. Schultz said that switches and routers were used in interconnecting the buildings. She also noted that the handout included the cost of keeping the software and network up-to-date, as well as the cost of interconnecting the buildings and virus protection. Schultz said that those items came out to $243,398 for the Fiscal 02 budget request, and she said that this number was about $16,000 more than the current budget. She said that a lot of this was because every year they add more PCs, printers, and hubs, which is more to keep up-to-date. Schultz said $28,643 is the amount being used as part of the 3-year conversion for the Sheriff’s office, replacing 9- and 10-year-old terminals on their S400 computer system with PCs. Schultz said that they are in the 3rd year of converting their old terminals and old printers are also being replaced. She said that the $28,643 also included the cost for the exchange licenses, which will make it possible for each deputy to have email.

Lehman asked if the figure for the 18 PCs on Schultz’s handout, at $19,526, would be all the Sheriff Department would need in the near future. Schultz explained that this amount was for their terminals, printers, and gets them all Microsoft Word and Office. Schultz said that they had requested, under their Technology budget, savings to upgrade and replace their software and their AS400 system. Lehman asked if they should pencil in a figure for a further year out? Schultz said yes, and said that those requests were not on this handout because they were on the individual departments’ technology requests.

Schultz showed the Board that at the bottom, for GIS, they had put in $200,000. Lehman said that they had had $167,800 for this year, and noted that they probably would not expend that, since they were still hiring personnel. Schultz said they would spend most of it, because of the contract with Farragut to do the conversion, but said this was supposed to start the first of April and said she thought it would carry over some into the next fiscal year. Thompson asked Schultz to talk about the $200,000 figure, and asked if it had to be $200,000, and not some other number? Schultz said that it did not have to be $200,000. Thompson asked what would happen if they only had $100,000? Schultz replied that the project would move ahead slower. She said that the GIS Coordinator’s salary was approximately $45,000, and said she was unsure of the benefits. Schultz said that after 6 months, the salary would be up to around $48,000 or $49,000. Thompson asked if next year this would be in the Information Services budget, and she replied no, that next year it would be in GIS. Schultz said that she hadn’t put it in their budget request. Thompson said that Schultz hadn’t known when she made up her budget, but wondered about next year? Horne wondered where else it could go? Lehman said that when this had first gotten drawn up, they had thought it was going to be a separate department, and added that since then they had decided to put it under Information Services. Lehman said that it would probably show in her department, though the numbers would probably change. Thompson said they should do it like the Building Department and Planning and Zoning, when they identified them with the account number so that it could be sorted out to keep it separate from their budget. Thompson said that the salary should not show up on this fund. Schultz said, then, that the salary amount was to be moved to the Department 07 budget, and so that would reduce this $200,000. Thompson asked if the rest was going to buy equipment? Schultz replied that it went to buy equipment, training, software for various departments, and possibly some updated photos or other maps. Neuzil asked Schultz if she thought they would need $150,000 for that? Schultz said that she honestly didn’t know. Thompson said that she had noticed that there were quite a few departmental requests for things that she associated in her mind with GIS, such as ArcView. Thompson asked Schultz if any of those could be paid for out of this budget? Schultz said yes, that they could do that, take them out of the $200,000. Lehman asked if they needed to change those numbers, to reflect a more accurate number if there were duplications included in the $200,000. Schultz said that the ArcView requests from departments could be taken out of the $200,000. Lehman said that with the shortness of the project, if they were going to go ahead with GIS, the Board wondered if there any things that were duplicated, and asked for a more accurate number. Schultz said that she knew that Secondary Roads had $2,200 for ArcView. Thompson asked about IcoMap software, for Department 03? Deputy Auditor Mark Kistler replied said this was for mapping survey descriptions into AutoCAD software. He said it uses character recognition software to read text. Thompson asked if that counted? Schultz said that it could be considered GIS, also. Schultz said the Auditor’s Office request included software for the new Mapping/GIS Deputy, if approved, which would also be considered GIS software. Schultz said it would be AutoCAD. Harney asked if AutoCAD could also be considered GIS, and Schultz said yes. Thompson noted that Department 49 had 2 ArcView softwares.

Schultz said that the $200,000 was put in by the Computer Committee. She said that once a GIS Coordinator was in place, that person that knows a lot more about GIS-related costs, and could fine-tune it a little better. Thompson said that they probably would want more, and Schultz said quite possibly. Schultz said that they were doing well in the fact that with the contract with Farragut they will start to see some results by having them close the polygons. Thompson asked if these had all been approved by their Computer Committees? Schultz said yes, that this sheet was first approved by the subcommittee and then by the overall County Computer Committee. Thompson said that they had $58,000 more than they had before. Schultz said that they had about $16,000 out of the networking, about $9,000 from finishing the Sheriff’s, and then about $32,000 from GIS.

Schultz pointed out to the Board that they were looking at the T-1 frame relay, the $30,000, the cost of interconnecting all the buildings. She said that the Health Department had some employees who moved to the ICARE Building. Schultz said that instead of using phone lines, they had provided them with wireless communication which, so far, seems to be working very well. Schultz said that they wanted to run that for a few months and, if it continued to work well, then they would work toward doing that from, perhaps, the County Administration Building to the Courthouse, or from the Administration Building to the Sheriff’s Office. Schultz said that this would save considerable money if this worked out. Thompson noted that this was a good way to try the system out. Lehman said that she had said it would cost $30,000, but said that if they could make some exceptions, they could drop that number down. Schultz said yes, and said that they hadn’t used it long enough to say if it would work for sure, but said it was a good way to test the system out. She said that if it didn’t work, it would not affect a lot of people.

Schultz said that the next sheet in her handout covered document management. She said that originally, the Document Management Committee had requested $60,000 for the next year. She said that they have had a couple of requests that they haven’t gotten in on time when they submitted the requests to the Board. Schultz said that the top part was what was initially requested, $34,000 for Ambulance, $23,000 for Health, $1,000 for Planning and Zoning, and $2,000 for County Attorney and the Board of Supervisors. Since then, Schultz said, they had gotten some requests in for the Treasurer, Auditor, and Elections. Schultz said that she assumed those 2 departments had talked to the Board when they had talked about their individual budgets. Schultz said that for Ambulance, the $34,000 would scan all their patient care records, and their correspondence, and personnel records. She explained that Health wanted first to convert several file cabinets of things having to do with water quality, and those kinds of things. Schultz said Planning and Zoning has already gotten their documents scanned, and their $1,000 was to scan a few new items. Schultz said that the $2,000 for the County Attorney and the Board of Supervisors was not the same type of document management, that it was not what they call the Paper Clip software. She said that the Board and the County Attorney have a need for software like Carol Peters has on her PC, that allows them to do very quick retrieval from Word documents. It creates an index. Schultz said that the Treasurer had an Electriever, a circular file which is old, and they cannot get maintenance on it or parts for it anymore, so they would like to scan their documents. She explained to the Board that Treasurer Tom Kriz feels that this $18,000 should not be new money, as he feels that if he has those documents scanned, he can save on personnel money. Lehman asked if he was reducing his personnel by $18,000, and Horne said yes, that he thought this adjustment had already been made. Schultz said that the Auditor had a request for scanning of parcel cards, and microfilming their road books, minute books, transfer books, and scanning the voter ID cards. Schultz said that they had a Document Management Committee meeting after they had gotten the requests from the Auditor’s Office. She told the Board that the Auditor’s Office had prioritized, saying that if they could not do all 3 projects, they would first want to microfilm the road books, the minute books, and the transfer books. Schultz went on to say that the Auditor’s Office’s 2nd priority would be the voter registration cards, and their 3rd priority would be to scan the parcel cards.

Thompson asked if the microfilming was still a viable technology? Schultz replied that the Auditor’s Office had said that they were in very old books. Kistler said it was a lot easier on the documents to set them up for microfilming than to throw them on a flatbed scanner. Kistler said that the microfilm could be put into the document management system using the COLD storage system. Schultz said that there would probably be additional costs, because they would probably have to enter the index when it went from microfilm to the Paperclip document management system. Schultz said that was what they had done with the birth and death records they got from the Clerk of Court, which had been on microfilm. She said that they had converted them to images, and then indexed them. Lehman asked Schultz to review what departments had gotten document management money last year. Schultz replied that some had gone to the Treasurer and also the Auditor. Lehman said that they had put a lot of Zoning’s paper files on optical disk for retrieval on Paperclip, and that this had freed up a lot of space. Schultz said that the Auditor’s Office and the Treasurer’s Office had not started their part yet, but said she thought that they wanted to get started pretty soon. Schultz reported that last year they requested $75,000 and the Board had approved $60,000 as a lump sum and had the Document Management Committee meet and come back to the Board with a plan as to how the money should be spent. Schultz said she recommended the Board do the same this year. Schultz said that in the numbers given by Health, Ambulance, and probably the Auditor, the numbers are rough estimates that Schultz said she thought could be fine-tuned and reduced.

Lehman asked about the total money for this year, and Schultz replied that there was $104,000 of new money, not counting the $18,000 the Treasurer thinks it can save on the personnel. If you include the $18,000, then the total goes to $122,000. Lehman asked Schultz to explain what she meant by new money, whether this was above the $60,000? Schultz said that the $122,000 was if everyone got what they’re asking for: the $60,000 they initially submitted, the $18,000 for the Treasurer, plus the $43,000 for the Auditor and Elections. This, Schultz said, totaled $122,364. She told the Board that she subtracted out the Treasurer’s $18,000 because it is saved someplace else. Lehman said he was trying to make sure they weren’t asking for this amount plus the $60,000 they had this year. Schultz said this was not the case. Thompson said that in the Board’s terms it was $44,000 of new money. Neuzil summarized that last year they had asked for $75,000 and they were given $60,000, and this year they were requesting $104,000. Schultz confirmed this. Thompson said that the Computer Committee planned their budget to get the $60,000, and asked why the committee did not have a chance to consider the additional requests? Schultz said that they just weren’t together in time to do so. Thompson asked if everyone had known, and Schultz said yes, a memo had been sent out. Schultz said that Kriz had thought that since he was putting it under his budget, that he didn’t need to put it under document management, since it was related to his personnel. She said this was what had happened to the Treasurer and the Auditor may not have had time. Neuzil asked if the request from the Auditor was in the Auditor’s budget, and Schultz said that yes, it was. Thompson asked Schultz if the committee had had a chance to meet, whether they would have been able to include some of the requests in the $60,000? Schultz replied no, not with everything the departments had asked for. Thompson said that was what she was wondering, whether the committee would have put a lower priority on some of the other things in order to get some of these things in there. Schultz repeated that some of the estimates could be reduced and suggested asking the offices to prioritize portions of their requests. The Auditor’s Office had indicated that the microfilming was their top priority, before voter registration and parcel cards. Schultz wondered if Health could also divide the processing of their records into 2 fiscal years. Schultz said that whatever amount the Board approved could be fine-tuned and prioritized by the committee. She also said that the Board’s decision could impact the number of licenses purchased, the amount of software purchased, and the type/complexity of software purchased for the departments.

Thompson asked Schultz if there were some other requests from the departments in their technology that were not included in Schultz’s plan. Thompson said that she had higher totals than on Schultz’s sheet, for technology altogether. Thompson said that number she had for technology was $760,021, which was the number that came from the Auditor’s Office. Schultz said that there were some things on the technology requests, which was a compilation of the technology worksheets from individual departments, which are included in the document management money. Thompson asked if there other things beside what Schultz had been talking about that had been requested? Schultz said yes, that there had been for individual departmental things. Thompson asked Schultz if she was going to talk about those, and she yes.

Schultz showed the Board a sheet titled FY 02 Technology Requests. She said that the Auditor’s Office had compiled the individual technology worksheet requests submitted by departments with their budgets. Schultz said that she had gone through those and made some notations and recommendations on a couple of them. She noted a $740 carryover on a maintenance line item. She said that the top of the sheet were hardware/software maintenance-type issues, where on the bottom were more new requests. Schultz said that the cost of all items that say "Document Management" are included in the spreadsheet they had just talked about. Schultz pointed out that the Ambulance (Dept. 01) had requested a newer version of their billing software, and also said that the County Attorney (Dept. 02) had asked for 2 laptops, one for a new part-time attorney position, and the other to correct the fact that 2 people are currently sharing one computer. She said the one laptop request would be dropped if the new position is not approved. She also said that the next software requests for the Auditor (Dept. 03) listed had to do with the new Mapping/GIS deputy. Thompson asked if this, then, came out of the $200,000? Schultz said the computer with Microsoft Office and the Reflections Software would not normally come out of the GIS budget, because these were things given to new employees. She did say that the AutoCAD Software and the ArcView could be taken out of the $200,000 for the GIS. She added these would only be in if the new position is approved. The next request was the Auditor/Accounting portion of the document management request discussed earlier.

Schultz said that the IcoMap software was what Kistler had explained; this software helps read legal descriptions. Schultz said this was not really GIS. Kistler said that it could be used on the front end of the GIS system, and Schultz said that this item could go either way. Schultz said that the 2 additional copies of the Reflections Software were for the Minutes Deputy and the General Ledger Deputy. Schultz said this was software that helped them access files on the HP 3000 for the real estate software or general ledger software. Thompson asked why this request had not gone to the committee? Schultz said that new hardware and software have in the past always come through in the technology worksheet for the department. She said that she then goes through them and does an analysis similar to the one she was doing now. Schultz said that the Networking Committee’s budget was mainly to maintain PCs and printers to be sure they are no more than 5 years old, and also to look at server and interconnection types of things. Schultz said that if it’s software regarding document management, the Document Management Committee reviews it, but if it’s additional software or new software for new employees, it comes through on the technology worksheets from the individual departments. Schultz said that the Health Department (Dept. 04) had asked for a computer and a color printer, and noted that these had been on a Decision Package. She explained the PC takes care of a situation where a computer must be shared and the color printer replaces one moved to the ICARE building.

Schultz pointed out a number of additional items for Dept. 4 she had identified as document management, and thus they had been included in the document management spreadsheet. She said that Department 07, Information Services, had asked for new software for programming. Schultz pointed out that payroll software had been funded $45,000 in last fiscal year’s budget and said they were asking for $55,000 in the current fiscal year’s budget, and said that they were requesting $100,000 in the coming fiscal year’s budget. She said this would give them a total of $200,000 to work with. Thompson asked what the whole thing would cost, and Schultz said she didn’t know the answer to that.

Schultz said that the Sheriff’s Department (Dept. 08) AS400 upgrade was a 3-year plan, and said they had already saved $6,000 each from the current and past fiscal years. She said that they’re asking for the remaining third, another $6,000, so they would have the $18,000. Schultz said this would extend the life on their AS400. Schultz said that the next item was a system upgrade, and told the Board that IBM had told them they were no longer going to support the language their system is written in, and they also had been told by CIS that they would not be supporting the current version. Therefore, Schultz said, they will need to do something different with their law enforcement software. She said that they found out about this not too long before budget time, and said before they would spend the money, there would be a full evaluation, budget estimates, and start saving for this, probably on a 3-year plan. Schultz said that they had gotten estimates on the upgrade from IBM and CIS, and this was where they got the figure of $300,600. They put in 1/3 of that for this year, to begin saving towards that. Schultz said that last time, Iowa City, Coralville, and Johnson County had all gone together and developed specs, sent out RFPs to many companies, had demos, and a full evaluation. Neuzil asked how many years they had left, and Schultz said she thought it was 3. Neuzil asked if Iowa City was in the same boat, and Schultz said she didn’t think they used the same software anymore. Thompson said she thought they have newer stuff. Schultz said that they change more often than the County does, historically. Neuzil asked if Carpenter had this in his budget? Schultz said yes, that it was Decision Package 2. Thompson asked if this had to interface with the federal system? Schultz said that it interfaced with the State system, and so probably with the federal system through that. Thompson said this would explain why it was so expensive. Neuzil asked how old this system was, and Schultz said it was almost 10 years old. Thompson said that the current system does everything they want it to, but said it wasn’t going to be supported anymore. Schultz said yes, the software company has a new version, and they want users to switch over to. Schultz said it had been about 10 years, and said that was why they had been converting their terminals over, as they had been 7 years old. Schultz said the final cost might end up varying up quite a bit, depending on the kind of system they got. She said that they were trying to get the Board some figures, so that they could start saving.

Neuzil asked if there was nothing they could do about IBM doing that to them, and asked if it was pretty common? Schultz said it was not unusual, because software companies don’t want to have to have people continually up on different versions of software. Neuzil said they wanted people to buy the new. Schultz said yes, so then they support the old version for a certain period of time, and then they say you have to do something different. She said that this was the same thing that had happened to the County with the payroll system, general ledger, and accounts payable. She noted that it was happening to Ambulance as well, on a much smaller scale, with the new version of their billing software. Thompson said that if you kept upgrading each time, you spend smaller amounts each time, but overall you probably spend more. Schultz said that when a company comes out with a new version, they require customers to purchase the new version. She said that lots of times they’ll give credit to preferred customers, but that’s not part of the maintenance agreement. She said that on some standard software, you’ll get some enhancements as part of the maintenance costs, but then when they release a new system, customers have to buy the new version.

Stutsman joined the meeting via speaker phone at 9:50 a.m.

Schultz said that she had taken out of SEATS (Dept. 12) part of their Decision Package #1, $600 for connecting their building with the Administration Building. Schultz said that basically, she recommended taking that out because it’s already covered in the central technology budget. Schultz said that they were also asking for odometer sensors, $1,100. She said that currently the drivers have to radio back their odometer readings when they make a stop, and these sensors will provide this automatically and with greater accuracy. Schultz noted where she removed the requested $18,000 amount by the Treasurer (Dept. 14) for document management which was offset by decreased personnel costs.

Schultz said part of Planning and Zoning’s (Dept. 19) request was already included in the document management sheet, and explained that Department 19 also had a request for computer equipment, initially $9,100 on a Decision Package. She said that $1,000 of it was the ongoing document management, and $8,100 for some hardware and software. Schultz said that this amount can be reduced by $3,900. She said that they had initially budgeted $1,400 for 4 new 19-inch monitors. Schultz said that instead, they would order 19-inch monitors in the next series of 5-year replacements, and then trade them for the 17-inch monitors, eliminating the need for that $1,400. Also, Schultz said, they had budgeted $1,700 for a new laser jet printer and $800 for a digital camera, both of which they instead got from this year’s Building Inspector money. Schultz said this reduced their initially requested $8,100 to $4,200. Schultz said she had talked to Rick Dvorak this morning, and he said he thought he had taken the monitors, printer, and digital camera out in this latest update to the Board.

Schultz then explained the requests for Department 24, Conservation. She said that Conservation had had $2,200 budgeted in the last fiscal year that they did not spend. Schultz said that they had wanted a PC for Harry Graves, and she had mentioned that to him. She thought that he was in the process of requesting a budget amendment so that he can get a new PC. She said that Conservation has 2 PCs now for 2 other staff members. Schultz said that one will soon be upgraded through the 5-year replacement program. Schultz recommended that they reduce this to $1,050 rather than $2,800 because if they get the budget amendment the department will have already gotten a PC and some software. Thompson asked where that number should go, as she had 0 on hers, and Schultz said this was a mistake, that it should say $1,050. Thompson asked if the new computer would be covered by the 5-year plan, and Schultz said no, the new computer would be covered by the budget amendment for the current fiscal year, but after that it would be covered by the 5-year program. Schultz pointed out that she had broken down the costs: the current PC is $1,300, the Office software was about $170, $100 for Graves to be able to dial out and use email, $100 for the hub to connect their 3 computers, some money for the Photoshop and PageMaker software for their newsletters and Web page, and some money for an additional DeskJet printer if they need it. Schultz said Graves had told her it was all right to reduce the $2,800, because he was working on the budget amendment for the current year. Horne said he wanted to qualify that they had budgeted for a computer that was approved last year, and was never purchased. Horne said that was why they were amending, and said that they were not requesting a new expenditure. Lehman said that this money would not affect the levy; this money should be in what they were approved for last year. Lehman said it was a line item that they are trying to approve, basically, and not new money. Schultz said it was carryover money, basically. Thompson said that the $2,200 was going to buy the equipment for him and the $2,800 is new money for next year. Schultz said they didn’t need the whole $2,800, that this could be reduced to the $1,050. Lehman asked if the $1,050 could be out of their regular budget, the levied amount they were required to give them? He said they were asking basically for $1,050 above what the Board is mandated to give them. Thompson said it seems like a small amount. Lehman asked if they were coming in the back door, at $1,050 more than what the Board is required by law to levy to them. Schultz said no, that they were not coming in the back door, that the $1,050 was being submitted with their technology worksheet like every other department. Lehman said OK, this would still count against their levied amount, and that they were just trying to clarify the line item. Schultz said yes, that they had been told that all the technology requests were to come through the technology worksheets, so they have been following the guidelines in doing that.

Schultz said the next item for Auditor/Elections (Dept. 33) was on the voting equipment, and said that she couldn’t really comment on the voting machines, as she wasn’t involved with them. Schultz said that this was the Department 33 document management line item, and said it was included in the document management spreadsheet, $27,900.

Schultz said that in Secondary Roads (Dept. 49), the hardware and the software in their decision package was for their new Assistant County Engineer. She said that their monitors would be upgraded to 19 inches just like they were going to do with Zoning, through the 5-year program. She said that 19-inch monitors were almost the same price as 17-inch monitors right now. Neuzil said that this was assuming the Board approved a new Assistant Engineer. Thompson asked what the amended figure would be, then, if they don’t need to upgrade the monitors. Schultz said that the number could be reduced from $2,000 to $1,600 for a PC and software. She also said that the $6,700 for computer software was for Eagle Point software, their engineering software. Schultz said that the ArcView could come out of GIS money, for Department 49.

Lehman asked Schultz to do the math for the Board and take off the document management and GIS items, to find out the totals for technology, for GIS, and for document management. Lehman said that the Board was going to have to decide itself what was going to happen if the new Assistant County Attorney and Assistant County Engineers are granted. Thompson Schultz about the whole technology request, asking if it was $250,000 above last year, what the Board calls new money? Schultz said she was looking at the colored sheet, which had the budget total. Schultz said that over $600,000 of that is for voting machines. Thompson corrected her earlier total, saying that it was $912,277 above last year. Lehman said that this included $696,500 for voting machines. Schultz said that it also includes $100,000 for payroll, which is $45,000 in addition, and includes the extra $40,000 for document management. Thompson said there was still $300,000 in there over last year, and said part of it was the Sheriff’s request. Thompson said this gets it down to $200,000 extra, which she supposed was the cost of the new things. Lehman said there were some tradeoffs, like the $18,000 for document management in the Treasurer’s Office, which would be saved in personnel. Schultz explained that the colored sheet had items in blue that were designated Information Services only, IS-type expenses. She said that the items in fuchsia were costs that came through the Document Management Committee or the Networking Committee, and the green items were those that came through individual department technology requests. She said that they have changed a few things, as a few things from the department technology requests can now be covered under GIS.

Thompson asked what the agreements were from last year? Schultz said she wasn’t sure what the agreements from last year were. Thompson said she couldn’t see from this sheet either. Schultz said that if the Board would tell her what totals they wanted, she could get those for them and bring them back. Thompson said the problem was that it was really unlikely that they would have $912,000 worth of new money for this. Thompson said what they needed to know was what could they cut back on. She said that they probably would do some savings for the voting equipment, and not the whole amount. Lehman asked if they should get some feedback at this time, to start shoring this thing up a little bit. Thompson said that the ones she had marked were not going to add up to $300,000. Lehman said that when the Board got to personnel, that would tell if some of that technology would be needed or not. He said that they needed to look at personnel first, and then technology. Schultz said this was right, because a number of the technology requests were dependent upon personnel decisions, such as the part-time Attorney, the Mapping/GIS Deputy in the Auditor’s Office, and the Assistant County Engineer.

Schultz asked the Board what figures they wanted from her, and how she could better organize the information to help them. Lehman asked Horne if he had any suggestions. Horne said that it would be easier to take GIS and Document Management out of it. Thompson asked her to pull items duplicated on one sheet into a separate section. Neuzil noted that the GIS Coordinator was right now in the Technology requests, so this total would then be less than what was on the page. Schultz said that this was going to go up in the Information Services budget. Lehman asked if the Board wanted to send an amount of money back to the Document Management Committee and let them decide how that money is spent, which departments get what, and the timetable that will be used, and do the same thing with GIS. Neuzil said that he had a concern that because some of the Auditor’s requests were not a part of the committee, it’s hard to know what the priorities are of the committee when you don’t have everything together because things were late. Neuzil said that it was hard for the Board to prioritize when they don’t know what the committee has prioritized. Thompson said that if Schultz altered the budgets for Ambulance and Health like they had discussed, that they could get the Auditor’s $4,500 for microfilming into the $60,000 budget fairly easily. Schultz said that the Auditor, in this fiscal year budget, has been allocated some money for a scanner and for some part-time labor. She said that they have gotten $11,700 from the committee and Board, for software and scanner of $6,975 and a part-time position of $4,758. Thompson said that Schultz should work with that and, next year, if they gave them $60,000 again, they could squeeze in the microfilming, with $3,600 off of Ambulance and $3,600 off Health, that’s $7,000. Schultz said yes, probably. Thompson suggested that they fund the $60,000 plus the $18,000 for the Treasurer, which is really just a one-time budget neutral thing, moving money from personnel to this. She said this would be taking the $122,000 and reducing it to $78,000 for document management. She asked if they could agree on that? Neuzil asked if part of the Auditor’s request would be included. Thompson said just the microfilming would be included. Schultz said that through this year’s budget they are getting software and scanner and some part-time labor. She said that she didn’t know if any of their Elections people would have time to do some of this scanning in next fiscal year’s budget, since it’s an off-year. Schultz said that they would have the scanner and the software, if they had time to do that. Thompson said that if they still needed money they could come in the regular process next year and come to the committee and talk about getting it into the budget. Stutsman asked why they weren’t in the regular process this year? Schultz said she didn’t know, except that when the document management committee met to finalize their request from the Board, they didn’t have any figures from the Auditor’s or Treasurer’s Offices. Stutsman said that it sounds to her like they have a process put in place, through the Document Management Committee, and it sounds like it’s working well. Stutsman said it sounds like they have a department who has chosen not to be a part of that process, and she said the Board needed to be supportive of that process. Schultz said that the Auditor’s Office did come to the Document Management Committee, but it was a meeting after they had submitted the original amounts due the first part of November. She said that they had come to the committee and discussed their requests with their committee, but it was later. Schultz said that the Document Management Committee didn’t cut anyone’s requests, but instead passed them all forward to the Board for them to decide how much money they had for document management, then the Document Management Committee would come together and decide how to prioritize it. Schultz said that although the figures were late, the Auditor’s Office did submit their figures to the Committee, and discuss their figures with them. Thompson said that last year the Board had a long discussion about this, and they had sort of agreed that $60,000 a year was what they could afford for this. She said that this year it seemed reasonable to put the $18,000 in, because the Treasurer is deleting the staff person, but she still thinks that $60,000 a year should be an adequate amount to do this over a period of time. She qualified that maybe it wasn’t adequate, but it was more or less what they could afford. Thompson recommended that they increase it for this year only to the $78,000 to accommodate the Treasurer, then next year do another $60,000. She said it was not the best plan, but over time they would get it done. Neuzil said that if they approved the $78,000, realistically the $60,000, then would the Document Management Committee look into the 3 requests from the Auditor’s Office? Schultz said they would try to do as much as they could with the $60,000. She said that with the fine-tuning of some of the estimates, they might be able to save some money and maybe do some of the Auditor’s requests. Schultz said that for sure she thought they could do the microfilming, through the savings of training and installation, and even part of the second item. Neuzil said this sounded good.

Schultz said that in the past, after the Board had approved money to use for document management, the Document Management Committee came back with a plan to the Board for approval. Neuzil said he would feel uncomfortable if they were itemizing the $60,000 that didn’t include the Auditor’s first priority. He asked if the Document Management Committee would still understand that the Board would like to see those issues addressed. Schultz said that she recommended they do the same thing as in the past, with the Document Management Committee coming back to the Board for final approval of their plan. Thompson said that the Treasurer might not need the whole $18,000, either, that it might include a similar amount for training and installation that Schultz’s department could do. Schultz said that Kriz was talking about having a person from Imagetech come on-site and do the scanning that way. Neuzil said that they wanted to get the records out of that machine. Schultz said yes, that this would be easier from a retrieval basis because it will be online, and also at some point the machine will not work. Thompson said that by the end of the year they could see daylight down there, where that thing used to be. Schultz said she didn’t know how fast they were going to get it all scanned. She said that they did get some money out of this year’s budget. Schultz said that the initial estimate to scan all of those for the Treasurer was $67,000. She reported that they got an allocation of $31,000 from the current fiscal year budget, which they have not yet started to use. Then with the $18,000, that brings the total allocated to $49,000. Thompson asked Schultz if the Board gave the Document Management Committee $78,000 with the understanding that next year it would go back to $60,000, then they could get a budget together including the Auditor and Treasurer. Schultz said they would include as much as then can and prioritize it for the Board, and then come back and make a recommendation to the Board for their final approval. Schultz said that she didn’t understand or realize that the $60,000 from last year was the target for each year. Knowing that up front, she said, they could now prioritize better in the future. Lehman said that the Document Management Committee must have known the amount was going to be $60,000, unless the requests from Ambulance, Health, Planning and Zoning, County Attorney, and Board of Supervisors just happened to come out to $60,000? Schultz said that this was the case, and explained how the various estimates coincidentally came out to $60,000.

Lehman asked if the Board was comfortable penciling in $78,000 for document management? Neuzil said he was as long as they look at the Auditor’s requests, too. Thompson said those books were raggedy; the Board saw them and they need some new ones. Schultz said to Neuzil that they should for sure be able to do the microfilming, by saving $4,500 from other places. Neuzil said this was a start. Lehman asked if they need to lock that in with line items, or just send the message with the dollar amount and what the Board would like to see. Neuzil said this was what he was worried about. Thompson said that they should do what they did last year, give the Document Management Committee the $78,000 and they will come back with a plan. Lehman said that Schultz could relay the message of what the Board would like to see the money used for. Schultz made one correction, saying that the amount allocated by the Board last year was $65,000, explaining that they had initially requested $75,000, and had received $65,000. The Board was in agreement on $78,000 for document management.

Schultz also said in working with the Auditor’s Office she found out there is some money that has carried over from technology that could be allocated and used. She said that she didn’t know the specifics of it, but said there was from last fiscal year $2,200 for Conservation, being spent out of this budget. There was $15,000 left in Physical Plant, so that is under Technology and it is a carryover. Schultz said that they are not requesting any computers or anything, and said that she didn’t know what would happen once the new person was hired. She did say that Mike Scheer’s PC is covered by the 5-year replacement program. Schultz said that Pat Langenberg had gotten an estimate from Johnson Controls regarding Y2K issues. Initially, Schultz reported that the estimate had been around $20,000, but then it turned out that Pat had found they didn’t have to replace as much as they initially had told them, so the $15,500 was left. Thompson asked if this was going to be available to spend this year, and Schultz said yes, that it could be reallocated. Thompson said that there was probably going to be a recommendation from Johnson Controls to update the really old computer that monitors the heating systems in the 3 buildings. Thompson said that the newer systems allow a person to be at home and change the thermostats, instead of having to go to the site to do it. She said that they will need to do a cost-benefit analysis, whether they would spend $100,000 in order to change the temperature from home. Thompson said that they tell them about all the great new features that it has, but said she didn’t know if it was that much better than the one that they have, especially since no one seems to know how the one they have now works. Lehman said they may need the basic piece updated even without the at-home technology. Thompson said that they probably need a whole new thing, because she’s sure they were going to tell them that the one they have is too outmoded to upgrade. Lehman asked whether that could be under Technology rather than Capital Expenditures. Thompson said it would probably be in the budget for next year, and noted that nothing was going to happen because they don’t have it. Schultz said that she was trying to say that there was some money that had carried over, that could then be allocated and somehow used. Lehman asked her to come up with a more accurate figure on this, and Schultz said that she has been trying to work on getting it. She said that she can’t produce it because she doesn’t have all the numbers, and said that she knew the Auditor’s Office was trying to get those together. Lehman noted that they didn’t know what was going to be expended before the end of the year. He said the money may be there now, but maybe it’s scheduled to be spent before July 1. Schultz said that she just wanted to bring this money to the Board’s attention. Thompson said that if they could find out how much that was, they’d know how much they could decrease here. Schultz said that it might help them as far as having some money, too.

Thompson suggested that they should talk about the big items that they had to save for, like the voting machines and the Sheriff’s upgrades. She said that the Auditor’s Office was asking for $596,000 of new money, to add to the $100,000 that they already saved. Thompson said that last year they saved $50,000 and they told the Board that wasn’t really enough. She wondered if they should pencil in $100,000 for this year; would that do anything? Lehman said the question was whether there was going to be grant money, if the federal government was going to help in light of the national problems they’ve had? Thompson said that if they had money saved up, they certainly weren’t going to lose anything. Harney said that at the training this week, he learned that there is an upgrade to the present machines that can be purchased at a minimal cost, that would increase the scanning ability and really update them so they could be very useful for many years. Neuzil confirmed this, saying that’s what Secretary of State Chet Culver had said. Thompson said she thought their machines were so outmoded that they couldn’t get that. Lehman wondered if he was aware of the kind of machines they had. Neuzil said Culver was aware of their situation and in Linn County and Polk County. Thompson said her understanding was that the law said that counties that can, have to do it. She said that if they can’t, she would not feel bad about not doing it, because it should be so few ballots. Thompson said that the Auditor’s Office does a really nice job face-to-face with people, helping them correct mistakes, if they realize they made one. Lehman said he would hate to get into a panic situation because of problems other people have had. He said he was pretty confident in our people. Thompson said it was not breaking a law, because the law said they did not have to do it if they didn’t have the technology. Neuzil said the question was if they had the machines that had the ability to be upgraded, that would scan better, and spit the ballot out if someone overvoted. He said the question was whether they needed brand new machines or not. Horne said that might be true for some, but some are older, like pull the curtain over it. Neuzil asked if we had some of the pull the curtain kinds? Thompson said no, they didn’t have any of those. Horne said he thought he had said there were a couple of them at some of the precincts. Kistler said they were all the same, and Horne said he stood corrected. Kistler said that the machines could be programmed to spit out the ballot or not spit out the ballot, but you cannot put in the requirement that the Secretary of State’s office put in, that it kick it out, and if the voter chooses not to remark it, that you override it so that it can be counted. Kistler said this was the problem, that it was one or the other and the override couldn’t be added. Lehman asked if that was the update. Harney said that was the way he had described the update. Harney said there was an optical lens or something you could purchase to put on those and upgrade them. Kistler said he didn’t know anything about that. Lehman said they needed to check with Julie on that. Thompson agreed with Lehman. Neuzil said on the idea of federal funding, he had talked briefly with Lu Barron, from Linn County, who also is going to be attending that D.C. trip. Neuzil said that he and Barron were going to get together and talk a little bit about it, what they were going to at the federal level, and if there’s any kind of funding that is going to be available to have more states be in compliance. Neuzil asked if they had the voting machine set up so that it spit them back out, then that ballot would be spoiled and a person would get a new ballot. Thompson said yes, unless they had already left, or wouldn’t wait. Neuzil continued that if they still wanted to vote for 2 people, and it did spoil that section of the ballot, then the question is you would not be able to put it back into the machine. Lehman said that this would have to be a hand count. Thompson said that it counts all the other places except for the one with the problem.

Stutsman said she thought the Board should focus more on what they could afford to put into these machines, rather than what the machine can or cannot do. She said in such a tight budget year, she thought they should put the barest amount in, with the idea that they were going to be saving for these for a future time. Stutsman said they could look at the national level as far as grants or upgrades. Thompson asked Stutsman if she could go for the $100,000 instead of the $50,000? Stutsman replied that as a preliminary figure she could go with $100,000, and then see where they were at when they get done with the process. Lehman asked if there was consensus there? Thompson said that now they were only $400,000 over, instead of $900,000, and she said this helps them a lot. Lehman added that this was new money, and Thompson confirmed that. The Board had a consensus that they would use that figure of $100,000 for the voting machines for the time being.

Thompson brought up the $100,000 for the Sheriff. Stutsman inquired what this was for, and Thompson said it was to upgrade their computer system, saving for three years to pay for the estimate of $300,600. Schultz said that they didn’t know that that was what the total cost was going to be. She said the Sheriff had tried to get figures for the Board to give them something to work with. Schultz said the Sheriff’s Department was going to do a full evaluation, looking at software from other companies, so the estimate can change. Lehman said that they did know it would be a large price tag. He explained to Stutsman that right now they have nothing saved, and they’re currently using a 10-year old system that IBM no longer supports. He said that they were requesting $100,000 to set aside this year toward the new purchase. The Board agreed to set aside $75,000 for this purchase.

Thompson said that with the saving up for the payroll software, there was $45,000 in one year, they put $55,000 in for the current fiscal year, and they’re asking for $100,000 for next year, an increase of $45,000. Schultz said that if there was enough money to do more than payroll/human resources, to do accounts payable and general ledger, which they are also losing their support for. Appropriating enough to do a full financial system, that’s what the recommendation to the Board would be. Schultz said that was the priority they had gotten from the Board, that the priority would be payroll and HR, but if it turned out they could get it for a good price, then they should do the full financial system. Thompson asked if they had the manpower to change 3 big systems in one year. Schultz said they certainly wouldn’t do it all at once; it would have to be staged. Thompson asked Schultz if they could get along if they had another $55,000 for next year. Schultz said she couldn’t say that for sure. Stutsman said that they had talked about this for a number of years, and said that this is probably one of those that has come to the top of the list, and they just should put in the full amount and get it rolling. Schultz said that if they found a package that did what they needed for less, certainly they wouldn’t just spend it because they had the money. The Board agreed to allocate $100,000 for this year, giving them $200,000 to spend on replacing the system.

Thompson said that the GIS had $167,800 this current year, and they’re asking for $200,000, about a $32,000 increase, which can include some of the things that are already approved, but leave money open to purchase additional items. Thompson told Stutsman that the $200,000 includes the salary for the GIS Coordinator. Stutsman asked if the salary and benefits shouldn’t be taken out of there and put into the Information Services budget. Stutsman said that it was just too confusing to look at that and think it’s all central. Thompson said eventually it would be, but it’s still $32,000 of new money that’s being requested. Lehman said that he thought they got to the $167,800 for the past year because they knew they weren’t going to start the program for the full year. He said he thought they definitely need more than that. Thompson said they had pretty much talked about $200,000 a year for a long time. Lehman said that he would be content to leave it there, although they would readjust and line-item the salary into Information Services budget. Stutsman agreed, saying this would be a true reflection of what that money is actually going for. Lehman suggested that they show the $200,000 minus the salary for the future. Neuzil said that it would be about $150,000.

Thompson asked if they had agreed to reduce the document management by $44,000, to give them the $78,000? The Board said yes, they had. Schultz confirmed that this was the $18,000 for the Treasurer and the other $60,000. Lehman said that the Document Management Committee needed to get back together and prioritize that a little further. Neuzil said that this should include the Auditor’s requests. Schultz said they could look at their first priority plus as much as they can get done.

Harney asked Schultz about the Central Technology, when she had talked about hardware: switches, hubs, and routers. He said that later she had also talked about the T-1 frame, which was also for tying the buildings together. He asked Schultz if this were a duplication? Schultz said that the T1 frame relay and Internet connection were to another vendor, a phone company, for their high speed wires between the buildings and the high speed wire to the Internet. Schultz said the hubs and switches are equipment they purchase that is in the buildings that make things talk across the wires. She explained the hubs are used to connect PCs to different buildings and to each other. As hubs are replaced, Schultz said they are in the process of increasing the speed of the hubs from a 10-based T to 100-based T, which is important once they get GIS and use document management more. Schultz also said that there are a lot more intelligent hubs and switches, resulting in better performance.

Thompson asked Schultz about a $100,000 software estimate for Fiscal Year 02 and suggested not including the current budget amount in the plus/minus column of the spreadsheet. Thompson said making this change might indicate they are in their target range. Neuzil asked Thompson what the target was, the number she was trying to come up with. Thompson replied that they were $912,000 above this year’s budget, and said that they just took out enough to bring it down $343,000 above last year’s budget. Neuzil asked if, in last year’s budget, they had spent $755,000, and Thompson confirmed this, saying that this year’s request was almost 1.7 million dollars. Schultz said that there was $12,000 too much listed for hardware purchase for the Sheriff, again dealing with the plus/minus column problem in the spreadsheet. Schultz said she had been looking at this as how much they were going to spend. Thompson said it should be how much they’re going to budget out of next year’s budget. Schultz said she could go back and fix the spreadsheet and bring the corrected copy back to the Board. Schultz said that the problem items were where there was savings, and said she thought the other lines should be right. Thompson asked Schultz to fix the incorrect numbers and then they would see what it did for them. Thompson confirmed to Neuzil that they had taken the voting machines from $696,000 to $100,000, and Thompson said that they had saved almost $600,000. Schultz noted the reduction of $200,000 to $100,000 for another request. Schultz said she would get an updated copy to the Board. Thompson said they were still talking about a $300,000 to $400,000 increase. She noted they still had some things in there attached to positions they had not discussed yet. Lehman said they could revisit those when they look at personnel.

Recessed at 10:50 a.m.; reconvened at 11:00 a.m.

(Continued in Part 2)