Seal of the City and County of San Francisco

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

Skip to page body
          

February 1, 2013

MINUTES
COMMITTEE ON INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
PLANNING & BUDGETING SUB-COMMITTEE MEETING
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
Friday, February 1, 2013
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
City Hall, Room 288
11:00 am – 12:30 pm

Members
Greg Wagner - CFO, Department of Public Health
Monique Zmuda - Deputy Controller, Controller’s Office
Kenneth Bukowski - Acting COIT Director
Travis Fox - Deputy Director Technology & Performance/CIO, MTA
Michael Liang – CIO, SF Public Library
Bella Fudym - IT Manager, Adult Probation
Vakil Kuner - CIO, Department of Human Services
Theresa Lee - Deputy Airport Director, San Francisco Airport
Ken Salmon - CIO, Public Utilities Commission
Brian Strong - Director, Capital Planning
Chanda Ikeda - Mayor’s Office

1. Call the meeting to order

Chair Greg Wagner called the meeting to order at 11:20 a.m.

2. Roll call

Greg Wagner
Monique Zmuda
Kenneth Bukowski (arrived late)
Art Wong for Travis Fox
Vakil Kuner
Theresa Lee
Ken Salmon
Brian Benson for Brian Strong
Chanda Ikeda

Absent

Michael Liang
Bella Fudym
Brian Strong
Travis Fox

Guest

Carol Lu – Mayor’s Office
Keith DeMartini – Planning Department, Finance Manager
Micheal Sanders – Planning Department, IT Supervisor
Rachel Cukierman – Controller’s Office

3. Approval of Minutes

The minutes of January 11, 2013 were approved.

4. Presentation by the Planning Department on their Supplemental Appropriation

Tom DiSanto, the Chief Administrative Officer of the Planning Department, gave a presentation on the Planning Department’s Supplemental Appropriation, seeking approval on the IT related project/expenditures from this subcommittee. Mr. DiSanto explained that the Planning Department is experiencing permit volume and revenue beyond what was assumed in the budget for the current fiscal year. Mr. DiSanto explained that the department is working with the Mayor’s Budget Office and the Controller’s Office to put together a Supplemental Appropriation that will address the permit volume and allow the department to clear the backlog. Mr. DiSanto explained that the majority of the funds sought through the Supplemental Appropriation would go towards funding new staff; the remainder of the money would fund one-time IT expenditures related to the backlog to free up staff time.

With respect to the one-time IT expenditures, Mr. DiSanto explained that the Planning Department proposes to take a file room that holds the case dockets on site (since 2009) and digitize all of those files. There is, on average, one public request for a file per day. Making files digitally available to the public will not only improve the time it takes for the department to respond to public requests for records, but also will free up planners’ time to address permit requests; therefore, addressing the permit processing backlog. The Supplemental, thus, has both business objectives (improving the efficiency of operations and improving customer service) and environmental objectives (utilizing green technology to reduce the department’s carbon footprint).

Mr. DiSanto said the project is budgeted at $325,000. Mr. DiSanto explained that the money would be used to cover one-time expenses -- there will be no costs in the out-years; all maintenance costs have been assumed in the department’s baseline. Additionally, the supplemental includes funds to outsource the digitalization of all of these files.

With respect to the digital indexing of these files, Mr. DiSanto explained that every file is assigned a unique case number (docket number), and these numbers will be the basis for the new digital indexing system.

For more information on the presentation, please refer to: sfcoit.org

Motion made to approve the Supplemental Appropriation to move forward to the Committee on Information Technology. The motion was approved.


5. ICT Plan Update

Ms. Ikeda stated that she wants to give a brief update on the ICT Plan, including a discussion of:
-Citywide IT budget;
-General Fund project requests that have be submitted;
-Funding scenarios; and
-Financial strategies.

Ms. Ikeda asked the subcommittee to look at the chart displaying citywide IT spending. Ms. Ikeda asked the subcommittee to note that over half of the City’s IT Budget goes towards funding salaries and fringe benefits for staff. Ms. Zmuda added that much of IT work order funding also goes towards salaries and fringe benefits. Ms. Zmuda noted that the percentage of dollars spent citywide on IT professional services is very low.

With respect to the ICT Plan, Ms. Ikeda stated that she is assuming $8+ million in General Fund allocation in FY 2013-14 that increases by 10% annually for the next five years. This totals approximately $49 million dollars to allocate. The requests from departments total approximately $200 million. Ms. Ikeda then stated that the objective of this subcommittee is to determine how to first reduce the number of requests, and second how to address the identified need.

Ms. Ikeda showed the subcommittee four different funding scenarios, each including a different combination of projects and funding levels. In order to create these scenarios, Ms. Ikeda grouped projects into the following categories:

1) Possible Collaboration or Consolidation
2) Emerging need
3) Review for Funding
4) Not projects (equipment, materials, and supplies)

Ms. Ikeda clarified that these categories and scenarios are just initial thoughts and need to be revised.

Ms. Ikeda noted that the cost of the four largest projects alone equals $165 million.

Ms. Ikeda presented four possible funding options. Projects were categorized and evaluated as part of various options with discussion focusing on the large IT capital project requests.

The subcommittee discussed the issue of how to determine the true costs of a project. Relatedly, the subcommittee discussed the idea of funding critical planning for the largest and most expensive projects before committing to funding the project at the level requested. Ms. Zmuda agreed, though stated that there is not enough time for departments to go through a comprehensive planning analysis before March 1st, when the Plan is due. The subcommittee also discussed only committing funding for the coming 2 years, rather than committing to funding for the full 5 years.

Ms. Ikeda suggested discussing the largest projects individually and treating them differently in the Plan.

Mr. Salmon mentioned that it may be useful to look into collaborative partnerships between Enterprise departments and General Fund department – the Enterprise departments could be provided a General Fund Subsidy for expansion of their projects to include General Fund departments. The subsidy would cover the cost for the General Fund portion.

Ms. Ikeda stated this was a good time to transition to the Financing Strategies part of her presentation.

Ms. Zmuda stated that the ICT Plan may be a place to be focused about using one-time savings or sources to fund IT.

Mr. Wagner agreed. Mr. Wagner mentioned that departments are often urged to move away from spending one-time money on ongoing expenses. He said it may be a good policy for the Mayor’s Office and the Board to promote IT as a priority for these one-time funds.

Mr. Benson asked the group how they could encourage more collaboration between departments. He also suggested that some projects have business impacts and it might make sense to call that out in the plan more explicitly, though they may be hard to quantify.

Mr. Wagner suggested coordinating the funding of IT projects with capital investments – timing investments that are physically co-located so that we can gain economies of scale.

Ms. Ikeda mentioned that there is much work to be done, but that a draft of the ICT Plan will be presented to COIT on February 7th.

Ms. Ikeda then began to review the Ratings & Criteria portion of her presentation.

The subcommittee reviewed the criteria and ratings scale.

Mr. Bukowski suggested adding back into the criteria whether the project was the department’s highest priority. All agreed.

The subcommittee discussed whether to treat Enterprise departments differently than General Fund departments in terms of the approval process. All agreed that all departments should go through the vetting process with the subcommittee and with COIT.

Ms. Ikeda mentioned there were 66 Non-General Fund projects and 77 General Fund projects to review.

The subcommittee discussed the format and timing of all of the department presentations.

Mr. Bukowski suggested sending departments instructions on the presentation format – imploring them to be as concise as possible.

Mr. Salmon suggested that it would be helpful if someone reviewed the presentations before they even get to the subcommittee.

Ms. Ikeda said she would ask Kate Howard, the Mayor’s Budget Director, about using the Budget Office staff to stress the early submission of departments’ presentations.

Ms. Ikeda concluded her presentation.


6. Public Comment

Mr. Wagner opened it up for public comment. There was no public comment.

7. Adjournment


The meeting was adjourned at 12:48 p.m.


Last updated: 2/19/2013 1:31:14 PM