Seal of the City and County of San Francisco

To view graphic version of this page, refresh this page (F5)

Skip to page body
          

January 17, 2013

MINUTES
PERFORMANCE & RESOURCES SUB-COMMITTEE MEETING
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
Thursday, January 17, 2013
One South Van Ness, 2nd Floor
CONFERENCE ROOM 2215
2:00PM – 4:00PM


Members

Brent Lewis – Chair, Director of Finance and I.T., Dept. of Human Resources
Phil Arnold - Chief Financial Officer, Department of Human Services
Dale Riley - Chief Information Officer, City Attorney
Thomas DiSanto - Chief Administrative Officer, Planning Department
Linda Yeung - Deputy City Administrator, City Administrator's Office
Tajel Shah - Director, Budget & Operations, Treasurer-Tax Collector
Jeana Pieralde - Chief Security Officer, Department of Technology
Jaci Fong - Director, Purchasing Department
Michelle Geddes - Program Manager, Department of Emergency Management
Julia Dawson - Budget Manager, San Francisco International Airport
Mary Fitzpatrick - Director of Systems, Controller

1. Call the meeting to order

The meeting was called to order by Chair Brent Lewis at 2:10 p.m.

2. Roll call:
Brent Lewis
Dale Riley
Linda Yeung
Tajel Shah
Eddie Gardner for Jeana Pieralde
Michelle Geddes
Mary Fitzpatrick

Absent
Phil Arnold
Jaci Fong
Thomas DiSanto
Jeana Pieralde

Mayor’s Office
Chanda Ikeda
Carol Lu

Guest
Andy Maimoni


3. Approval of minutes

The minutes of December 13, 2012 were approved.

4. Discussion: Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Plan Update

Chair Lewis announced that COIT is no longer under DT and has moved over to the Mayor’s Office. Chair Lewis introduced Ms. Chanda Ikeda from the Mayor’s Office who will talk about the ICT plan. Ms. Ikeda said that her role is solely to support COIT and under that role she is tasked with updating the ICT plan. Ms. Ikeda introduced Ms. Carol Lu, Fiscal and Policy Analyst from the Mayor’s Office who will also be helping her support COIT and the subcommittees.

Update on the ICT Plan by Ms. Ikeda:
- Goal is to get feedback from this committee as to where the Plan should go next. The purpose of the Plan is to create a strategic framework for citywide IT planning and budgeting for five years. Administrative Code requires that the Plan is updated every two years. COIT is tasked to present to the Mayor and the Board of the Supervisors the ICT plan.
- Would like this subcommittee to participate in the process and help develop this Plan.
- Discussed key dates for scheduled meetings -- March 1 is when the COIT approved ICT plan goes to the Board of Supervisors and Mayor for review.
- Presented the proposed format of the Plan.
- Discussed the six (6) IT goals representing the general categories that will be highlighted in the Plan. Ms. Geddes said that the current ICT plan is broken down by major service area (MSA) and there are goals within the MSA. Ms. Ikeda said that the other two (2) subcommittees didn’t feel that grouping departments by MSA was a good way of talking about IT. One of the proposed changes was to take out MSA completely and to talk about how projects fall into these major goals.
- Ms. Fitzpatrick asked if the new plan will be mapped from the current plan. Ms. Ikeda said they will definitely mention the work that was done on the first plan and talk about the six goals as built from the first plan. Ms. Fitzpatrick that the first plan should not be lost or dropped since this is a rolling five-year plan for projects and initiatives. Ms. Ikeda said that a lot of the projects that are highlighted in the first plan will still be included in the next plan.
- Ms. Shah commented on the first and fourth goals, suggesting that the two be combined. Ms. Ikeda said that there is a lot of synergy between the two but innovation is a major initiative of the Mayor so it was kept as a separate goal.
- Ms. Fitzpatrick said the fourth goal should be reworded as “utilize innovative technology.”
- Ms. Geddes said that one of their jobs here at COIT is to develop policies that work around IT.
- Ms. Shah suggested rewording the first goal to “make government efficient and effective by utilizing technology.” Mr. Maimoni suggested rewording the fifth goal to “focus on the city services that you maintain by keeping the infrastructure current.”
- Ms. Fitzpatrick suggested including collaboration and working together of departments.
- Ms. Ikeda showed the major initiatives that were presented by Mr. Jon Walton at COIT’s last meeting.
- Ms. Ikeda discussed the general fund and non-general fund requests of departments.
- Ms. Shah stated that the projects should align with the goals. Ms. Ikeda said they are trying to make sure that there are linkages and flow into the information.
- Ms. Ikeda stated some of the projects that have been suggested that might fit in the goals are FAMIS replacement, Financial systems replacement, Assessor replacement, Treasurer Tax, Gross receipt tax, Tech refresh, Security initiatives, Disaster recovery, Radio replacement, Broadband Wi-Fi, Fiber, Global strategies, Open Data SF, Innovation projects, Enterprise applications and Data Center consolidation.
- Discussed the challenges in developing the Plan. Ms. Ikeda asked the members on their thoughts about the inclusion of the performance measures and mentioned that she had already talked to Chair Lewis about this.
Ms. Ikeda asked if there is interest in having a working group to meet outside of the subcommittee to work on the ICT plan in the form of performance metrics. She said that Ms. Carol Lu will be working on the spreadsheet to get the updates/status of the projects. Ms. Ikeda will send the information to the members in between the meetings.
- Ms. Ikeda said that going forward is to have a work plan for each subcommittee and all the chairpersons to sit together. COIT would like to hear more about this committee. It will be good to have a large project or successful project highlighted and presented to COIT as recommended by this committee.
- For detailed information in the presentation, please refer to http://www.sfcoit.org/index.aspx?page=985.

Next Meeting is scheduled on either February 7 or 14, 2013.

5. Public Comment
There was no public comment.

6. Adjournment

The meeting was adjourned at 3:27 p.m.
 
Last updated: 2/19/2013 11:31:40 AM