Information Technology Priorities in Local Government

November 27, 2001

 

Present:
Craig Donnan, Center for Rural Studies
Chip Sawyer, Center for Rural Studies
Fred Schmidt, Center for Rural Studies
Christine O’Gorman, Center for Rural Studies/Town of Wallingford
David Deutl, Center for Rural Studies
Michael Gilbar, VLCT
Katherine Roe, VLCT
Dominic Cloud, VLCT
John Cushing, Town of Milton
Bill Dalton, Secretary of State’s Office
Barry Isaacs, Town of Mendon
Peter Brownell, VT Department of Education
Deb Beckett, Town of Williston
John Howland, Jr., VT Health Department
Tim Broadbent, UVM
Philip Hyjek, VISMT
Fred Skeels, City of Montpelier
Gregory Sanford, VT State Archives
Carolyn Gregson, Town of Underhill
Jessica Alexander, Town of Jericho

Introductions. Craig Donnan introduced himself and stated the purpose of the meeting, which is to identify local government information technology priorities that can and should be addressed statewide. Others in attendance introduced themselves.

Craig Donnan briefed participants on local government-related activities at the Center for Rural Studies. See attached presentation notes.

E-Government Survey Results. Craig Donnan reviewed the results of the e-government survey that was conducted at the 2001 VLCT Town Fair and at the Municipal Officers Management Seminars (MOMS). A total of 284 people responded to the survey. The survey was not representative and only reflects the opinions of those who chose to respond. Survey results indicated a strong interest among local government officials in learning about the Internet and online local government services and in attending a conference on the subject. A significant percentage of the respondents indicated that they are interested in learning how to put local government resources online. Specifically,

VLCT Activities. Michael Gilbar described how VLCT got involved in e-government. They looked at a Web site development tool created by the National League of Citites (NLC) and IBM. VLCT considered being a pilot League in the NLC/IBM project, but decided against it because of its focus on larger municipalities and its high cost. The League of Minnesota Cities helped develop a similar project, called GovOffice. VLCT decided to be a pilot league for their project, since it was more reasonably priced and more inclusive of smaller municipalities. Middlebury, Greensboro, and Dover participated in pilot. Middlebury has a Web site up and running, and the others are still working on theirs. GovOffice is a Web-based application that uses templates; towns just plug-in their own content and are able to maintain their own sites.

VLCT has noted several issues concerning town Web sites, including:

  1. Towns need money and staff to develop a Web site, or they rely on volunteers.
  2. Web site maintenance is an issue.
  3. Towns often find it difficult to decide on content.
  4. Towns are concerned about user-friendliness and about whether it is practical to have a Web site.
  5. Towns struggle with the public vs. published issue. They are reluctant to publish things that, although they’re public records, are not necessarily appropriate for publication on the Web.
  6. Some towns generate revenue for charging for access to certain records. Publishing them on the Web might reduce revenues.

VLCT has been looking at Web site development as first step toward getting people interested in e-government. At Town Fair, VLCT sponsored a session in which people from Burlington and Newport gave presentations on their Web sites and what went into developing and maintaining them.

Other topics that VLCT has been considering include:

Likes idea of e-government conference.

State Initiatives. Bill Dalton briefed participants on current State information technology initiatives. Pat Urban (Vermont’s CIO) is responsible for spearheading the e-government initiative. The first step is to provide online linkage capacity and the capacity for online payments. The State has contracted with Anexsys to develop charge engine capacity and to make sure that it can work with various agencies to link pre-existing Web sites. Anexsys also has a contract with the IRS, so they’re experienced. The plan is that within first year the State and Anexsys will add five services or functions and work to make them profitable within a 3-year period. The first function will be the Tax Department. The second function will be DMV (vehicle registration). They are currently searching for the other functions. People will eventually have the ability to pay for multiple functions with a single transaction. Participation by state agencies is voluntary.

Someone asked about developing standards so that municipalities and other states would be compatible. This project won’t address standards among states.

Other Projects/Goals/Priorities. John Cushing -- The Clerks & Treasurers Association is especially concerned about land records. Currently towns are not ready to deal with electronic land records. It’s a huge issue. One of the first priorities should be education -- both town officials and the public. Money is another issue in towns. Also legal issues that need to be explored. For example, some towns have contacted attorneys who told them that towns didn’t have the legal authority to collect taxes online. Also time considerations, since clerks and treasurers don’t have time to take on information technology initiatives.

Greg Sanford -- Legal issues are important. There are also issues pertaining to managing electronic records.

Barry Isaacs (Selectboard, Mendon) -- Agreed that time is an issue. He reported that there will be a line item for an information manager in next-year’s budget for the Town of Mendon, so they can have a person to deal with information technology issues for the Town.

Carolyn Gregson -- Agreed that tme is an issue, and added that there is no hope of having a dedicated IT person in most small towns.

Fred Schmidt -- Noted that it seems that UVM has taken the lead on these issues. Still need to find a home.

Dave Deutl -- Re-affirmed all concerns voiced thus far: security, privacy issues, published vs. public, etc. Advanced planning is necessary to prepare for the day when electronic transactions will be the norm.

Chris O’Gorman -- Also re-affirmed all concerns voiced thus far, especially issues involving electronic records management and training. Would like to see the State do more to make their services available online. Local officials could benefit from being able to transmit data (reports, etc.) to the state electronically, obtaining grant information online, applying for grants online, etc. Would also like to see VLCT offer more on its Web site.

Bill Dalton -- Online transactions (even non-financial) will become more common. The Anexys project will help this along.

John Howland -- What happens in cases when there’s hybrid ownership of a Web site (Chamber of Commerce, etc.) in terms of ownership and public records? Foresees a day when public records law will differentiate between public records and publishable information. Is a Web page a public record? Should towns keep a record of changes made? General records retention issues for electronic records? Are instant messages records? When does e-mail rise to the level of a meeting? Would like to see a uniform naming convention for town Web sites.

Brainstorming Projects: Nominal Group Technique

Training

  • Coordinate training among VLCT, the State, and other professional organizations
  • Training & certification standards
  • Accreditation
  • Develop a curriculum?
  • Publicize training opportunities in one place

Score = 65
(n=14)
5,5,5,5,5,5,5,5,5,4,4,4,4,4

Create Issues-based Working Groups to Research Information Technology Issues

Score = 31
(n=10)
5,4,4,3,3,3,3,3,2,1

Create Infrastructure standards

  • Software (to aid with volume purchasing)
  • Data (so municipalities/state can share information better)
  • Conduct a survey to determine what software town officials are currently using.
  • What are standards for other institutions?

Score = 29
(n=7)
5,5,4,4,4,4,3

Pursue Funding for Projects

  • Grants
  • Collaborate

Score = 23
(n=6)
5,5,5,4,2,2

Form strategic alliances with groups that can both support and benefit from enhanced information technology capability in local government

Score = 19
(n=8)
4,3,3,2,2,2,2,1

Create a meta-database for agendas/minutes of local boards

  • Easy to search
  • Tool for local gov’t officials to see what other towns are doing so they don’t re-invent the wheel

Score = 18
(n=5)
5,4,3,3,3

Identify shared resources

Score = 12
(n=5)
4,3,3,1,1

Create templates

  • Databases, spreadsheets, word processing documents

Score = 11
(n=5)
3,2,2,2,2

Establish/encourage links between local governments and the State

  • Application development

Score = 9
(n=6)
3,2,1,1,1,1

Identify centers of technical competencies

  • Find out who does what particularly well and use them as a resource

Score = 7
(n=6)
2,1,1,1,1,1

Develop best practices for e-government

  • Based on what’s already being done
  • Publish

Score = 6
(n=3)
3,2,1

Explore changes to state laws & regulations

  • Electronic records
  • Public vs. Published

Score = 6
(n=2)
4,2

Technical assistance for town reports (or other prototype project)

  • Software provision & literacy
  • Strategic alliances
  • Collaboration
  • Online resources
  • Standardization issues
  • Seeking grants & other funding

Score = 4
(n=2)
2,2

Coordinating with other agencies/organizations for purchasing

  • Volume discounts
  • Standardization

Score = 0
(n=0)

Explore common access to databases (e.g. mailings)

  • Currently numerous databases with same or similar information
  • Easier to maintain accurately

Score = 0
(n=0)

Discussion of Results of Nominal Group Technique

Training – important to coordinate training among the various organizations that offer training to town officials – try to eliminate duplication or try to make sure content is the same. Need to provide hands-on training.

Survey – assess what software is currently being used in town offices.

Standards – data standards, training, certification, software

Barry Isaacs – wants to work on infrastructure standards. Will write a mission & scope statement for that task.

Craig Donnan – will write a mission & scope statement for the training item.

Fred Schmidt – Wants to put together a list of training that’s available and ask for positive comments from people who have used the training. John Cushing will work with him on it.

Bill Dalton – offered to work with Greg Sanford on the issues-based working groups topic. Mike Gilbar said that VLCT could help with that.

Back to Municipal Technology Group Page