|
1.
2011 DRAFT BUDGET -
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SUB-COMMITTEE BUDGET PROVISOIRE 2011 – SOUS-COMITÉ DE LA
TECHNOLOGIE DE L’INFORMATION |
That Council, sitting as Committee of the Whole, approve the Information Technology Sub-committee portion of the 2011 Operating and Capital Budgets.
Recommandation du SOUS-ComitÉ
Que le Conseil, siégeant à titre de Comité
plénier, approuve la partie des budgets de fonctionnement et d’immobilisations
de 2011 relative au Sous-comité de la technologie de
l’information.
DOCUMENTATION
1.
Committee
Coordinator’s report dated 4 February 2011 (ACS2011-CMR-ITS-0001)
2.
Extract
of Draft Minutes of the Information Technology Sub-committee meeting of 28
February 2011 immediately follows the IT Sub-committee Coordinator’s report
3.
Deputy
City Manager, City Operations, report entitled City of Ottawa –
Technology Roadmap – Supplemental Information to the 2011 City Budget dated 18 February 2011 (ACS2011-COS-ITS-0002) is attached as Annex 1
Information Technology Sub-committee
Sous-comité de la technologie de
l’information
and Council / et au
Conseil
4 February 2011 / le 4 février 2011
Submitted by/Soumis par : Committee Coordinator / Coordonnateur du comité
Contact
Person/Personne ressource: Melody Duffenais, Committee
Coordinator
City Clerk and Solicitor/Greffier et Chef du contentieux
(613)
580-2424 x 20113, melody.duffenais@ottawa.ca
|
Ref N°: ACS2011-CMR-ITS-0001 |
SUBJECT:
|
|
|
|
|
OBJET
:
|
BUDGET PROVISOIRE 2011 – SOUS-COMITÉ DE LA
TECHNOLOGIE DE L’INFORMATION |
That the Information Technology Sub-committee consider the relevant portions of the 2011 Operating and Capital Budgets and forward its recommendations to Council, sitting as Committee of the Whole, for consideration at the meeting to be held March 8 to 10, 2011, as required.
Que le Sous-comité de
la technologie de l’information examine les sections pertinentes des Budgets
d’immobilisations et de fonctionnement de 2011 et qu’il présente ses recommandations
au Conseil, siégeant à titre de Comité plénier, aux fins d’examen lors de sa
réunion prévue du 8 au 10 mars 2011, au besoin.
City Council, on December 8, 2010, while considering the 2010-2014 Council Governance Review report, approved the 2011 Budget process which indicated that the individual Committees, Board and Commission would hold meetings to listen to public delegations, review their respective budgets and make recommendations to Council. At that meeting, Council also approved a motion directing the City Treasurer to report back to Council on 15 December 2010 with a more detailed timetable, including suggested Standing Committee review dates, and budget development guidelines.
On December 15, 2010 Council considered and approved the City Treasurer’s report entitled “2011 Budget Timetable and Process”, together with the following motion:
MOTION NO. 2/9
Moved by Mayor J. Watson
Seconded by Councillor S. Desroches
WHEREAS this Council is committed to promoting a culture of fiscal responsibility at City Hall; and
WHEREAS this Council wishes to proceed with the development of its 2011 Budget as soon as possible; and
WHEREAS budget directions with respect to any taxation target have not yet been provided to either staff or Standing Committees responsible for preparing and reviewing budget submissions; and
WHEREAS City Council’s first budget will set the pace and tone for all four budgets we will fashion together; and
WHEREAS Council is mindful of the tough choices many of its citizens must make every day in this economy and is prepared to make the same tough choices when deciding how to spend taxpayers’ dollars in 2011 and beyond; and
WHEREAS the Long Range Financial Plan that is to be developed after the adoption of the 2011 budget provides a term of Council forecast of the City’s financial situation;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the 2011 Draft Budget for all of the City’s tax-supported programs be prepared on the basis of a maximum 2.5% total tax increase; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and the City Manager present a budget overview report to Council that details how that tax target objective can be achieved at a Special Meeting on January 19, 2011; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that City Council direct each Standing Committee to work within the funding envelope for the budgets in their mandates, and that any additions to the budget will require offsetting reductions; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that City Council request the Ottawa Police Services Board and the Ottawa Public Library Board deliver budgets that would have no more than 2.5% increase on their tax requirement; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Long Range Financial Plan be developed with a maximum tax increase of 2.5% for the years 2012 to 2014.
CARRIED
Of particular note to Committees is the second resolution of this motion, namely:
“BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that City Council direct each Standing Committee to work within the funding envelope for the budgets in their mandates, and that any additions to the budget will require offsetting reductions;"
City Council, at its meeting of 19 January 2011, tabled the 2011 Draft Operating and Capital Budgets and referred the budgets within each Standing Committee's mandate, to that Committee for consideration and recommendation to Council.
Furthermore, when considering its budget envelope at its meeting on 1 February 2011, the Finance and Economic Development Committee passed the following motion:
That the IT Sub-Committee be delegated the authority to review its portion of the Draft Operating Budget Estimates (Capital and Operating) and report its recommendations directly to City Council at the 8 March 2011 Special Council meeting.
The 2011 Information Technology Sub-committee Draft Operating and Capital Budget is now before the Sub-committee for the purpose of hearing from public delegations and to consider and make recommendations to Council.
The Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee will review and make recommendations on those portions of the budget with Rural Implications.
This meeting was advertised in the three daily newspapers and public delegations will be received by the Committee. As well, there will be five multi-ward bilingual budget consultation meetings held in late February and early March, 2011 (i.e. in advance of Council's consideration of the Budget to be held March 8 to 10, 2011).
There are no legal/risk management impediments to implementing the recommendations in this report.
Financial Implications are identified in the 2011 Draft Operating and Capital Budgets, as well as in the City Treasurer's Transmittal Report dated 17 January 2011 and entitled "2011 Draft Operating and Capital Budgets - Tax Support Programs", tabled with Council on 19 January 2011.
Document 1 - City Treasurer's report dated 17 January 2011, entitled 2011 Draft Operating and Capital Budgets - Tax Support Programs (issued previously to all Members of Council and held on file with the City Clerk)
Document 2 - 2011 Information Technology Sub-committee Draft Operating and Capital Budgets (issued previously to all Members of Council and held on file with the City Clerk).
The Committee Coordinator will forward the Committee's recommendations to Council for consideration, at the meeting of March 8 to 10, 2011. Budgets will be amended as per Council deliberation and adoption.
2011 DRAFT BUDGET - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SUB-COMMITTEE
BUDGET
PROVISOIRE 2011 – SOUS-COMITÉ DE LA TECHNOLOGIE DE L’INFORMATION
ACS2011-CMR-ITS-0001 City Wide/à l'échelle de la Ville
Guy Michaud, Director, Information Technology Services & Chief Information Officer, provided a PowerPoint presentation with respect to the 2011 Draft Tax Supported Budget, highlighting the main budget changes in terms of the IT department. A copy of Mr. Michaud’s presentation is held on file with the City Clerk and Solicitor’s branch pursuant to the City’s Records Retention and Disposition Bylaw.
Councillor Blais noted that under Citizen Centric Services there is 2011 request for $9.2 million and a spending plan of $9.2 million but there is also an unspent authority of $10.8 M. He questioned whether that unspent authority has been reallocated somewhere else in the corporation or is sitting in a bank account, and if the latter is the case, why it is not being spent on IT projects this year. Mr. Michaud explained the money is sitting in an account waiting to be spent on software licenses that are required to implement the CRM solution. He clarified it is last year’s instalment plus this year’s because although the procurement began in 2010 it took a bit longer than expected and is not yet completed.
Councillor Blais suggested that type of detail should be articulated more clearly in the budget documentation in future, noting a similar situation occurs this year in terms of the budget for the community based mobile workforce. He questioned whether an update from staff would be forthcoming to indicate when these monies are spent in terms of the rollout of the programs. Mr. Michaud advised that, as per the IT Sub-committee’s mandate, updates on major projects would occur on a quarterly basis.
Councillor Blais asked for assurance that the $15 M in unspent authority, or at least the majority of it, would be spent this year and not carried over again. Steve Kanellakos, Deputy City Manager, City Operations, pointed out that some of the confusion with the figures stems from the fact that the Service Ottawa budget is actually allocated among various committees and departments, so the Sub-committee was not seeing the entire picture. He noted that in 2010 the main issue was the complexity of the procurement effort, which took longer than expected and was delayed by the municipal election process in the fall. He said the process is back on track now and there is a spending plan that will take into account the carryover from the previous authority in 2010 plus the additional funds requested. He advised that staff will report on a quarterly basis with the Treasurer on the financial position of the operating and capital expenditures related to this project and the information will be distributed to the Sub-committee. He said he was confident that the major contracts would get underway this year in terms of the spending plan.
Councillor Wilkinson requested clarification about the ITS Capital envelope number. Mr. Michaud advised that the ITS Capital envelope request is $11,500 per year (2011-2014) for renewal.
With respect to Capital Works in Progress (WIPs) Councillor Wilkinson pointed out the budget documentation shows approximately $60 million in authority for WIPs but the expenditures and commitments are only half of that. She inquired why the remaining $30 million has not been committed. Mr. Michaud advised those figures were based on third quarter commitments and that the updated totals are significantly different.
The Councillor pointed out that part of the reason Council decided to do the budgets at a later point than in previous years is so they could review the actuals. She suggested the WIPs documentation could have been updated by the beginning of March. Brian Flynn, Manager, Financial Services, advised that the draft budget documents were compiled between September and November 2010 and used the third quarter WIPs. He noted that a quarterly report would come forward in April with respect to the year-end, and likely a Works in Progress close report early in 2011, both of which would provide context on these projects. He added that most of the money for these projects has been spent, although there could be delays with some projects.
Councillor Wilkinson accepted that explanation but reiterated that an updated page could have been provided to the Sub-committee with respect to the status of the $30 M that was remaining at the time the budget documents were prepared. She said this information would be useful to Councillors when responding to questions from the public.
Councillor Taylor noted that the Auditor General (AG) has indicated that his Office no longer requires the support from the ITS department to conduct Fraud and Waste investigations and specific audits. He questioned whether the AG has hired his own IT staff with access to the system or how he now plans to service that request. Fraser Hirsch, Manager, Information, Security & Project Services, advised that he is not aware of the plans of the Office of the AG in that regard. Mr. Kanellakos suggested that question would be best raised to the AG through the City’s Audit Sub-committee.
Councillor Taylor inquired whether the City is now in compliance with Payment Card Industry (PCI) standards. Mr. Michaud indicated the City is heading in that direction but must upgrade the CLASS system in order to be fully PCI compliant. He said the new version of the software is expected in the July-August timeframe. He further clarified for the Councillor that there is a cost to that upgrade and that it is included in this budget.
The Councillor inquired about the line item with respect to unachieved payphone revenue. Alain Rochefort, Manager, Technology Infrastructure, advised that it refers to revenue from payphones in City facilities, of which the City gets 16%.
Chair Tierney inquired whether desktop virtualization in 2013 would see a decrease in the number of FTEs in the IT department because fewer staff would be required to physically go station-to-station, re-inflating software and so on. Mr. Michaud replied that while the virtualization project would help in that regard, the City is making a significant investment in technology that may require new skill sets to implement and maintain so even as staff efficiencies are realized it is hoped they could be reassigned to assist with new demands. He said the department is aware of the City’s current fiscal reality and would aim to keep the FTE requirement as flat as possible going forward, but given the City’s increasing use of technology it is difficult to estimate any sort of decrease in FTEs.
Chair Tierney inquired what percentage of IT staff are currently supporting software upgrades and going desktop to desktop to maintain the current environment. Mr. Michaud advised that is in the neighbourhood of about 240, or 80-85% of the current 339 FTEs. The Chair speculated that the desktop virtualization project will see a shift in the way IT staff operate, bringing the numbers more in line with the industry standard of 60 per cent to maintain operations 40 per cent for new development.
With respect to the budget line item 906010 – IT desktop, laptop and peripherals – Chair Tierney questioned why the authority and spending plan are almost double the others. Mr. Michaud clarified it is simply due to unspent authority from the previous year.
The Sub-committee then considered the portions of the 2011 draft budget as presented.
Moved by Councillor S. Blais:
That the Information Technology Sub-committee consider the relevant portions of the 2011 Operating and Capital Budgets and forward its recommendations to Council, sitting as Committee of the Whole, for consideration at the meeting to be held March 8 to 10, 2011, as required.
CARRIED
City of Ottawa – technology roadmap – Supplemental infOrmation to the 2011 city budget
VILLE
D’OTTAWA – FEUILLE DE ROUTE TECHNOLOGIQUE – RENSEIGNEMENTS SUPpLÉMENTAIRES POUR
LE BUDGET 2011 DE LA VILLE
ACS2011-COS-ITS-0002
Guy Michaud, Director, Information Technology Services & Chief
Information Officer, noted that the
presentation associated this item occurred as Item 3 of the regular agenda
immediately preceding this meeting (refer to Extract of Minutes 2 below). The committee received the staff report for
information supplemental to the draft 2011 budget.
That the
Information Technology Sub-Committee receive this report as supplemental
information to the 2011 Draft Budget.
RECEIVED
FIVE-YEAR TECHNOLOGY ROADMAP - OVERVIEW
FEUILLE DE ROUTE TECHNOLOGIQUE
QUINQUENNALE – APERÇU
Guy Michaud, Director, IT Services & Chief Information Officer, provided a PowerPoint overview of the Technology Roadmap, which he noted is based on the following four building blocks:
·
Specific
technology required to enable key Service
Ottawa initiatives
·
Foundational technology required to support service excellence initiatives and
reduce the risk of service interruption by modernizing an aging infrastructure
·
Initiatives
designed to optimize opportunities to achieve internal efficiencies
·
Ongoing technology to streamline and support daily operations (lifecycle renewal &
sustainment).
He noted the Roadmap is also flexible and is updated on an annual basis in order to meet Council’s strategic planning and fiscal constraints.
David Johnston, Manager, Business Technology Architecture, assisted with the presentation, delivering detailed information about the Roadmap and the technology that enables Service Ottawa. A copy of the PowerPoint is held on file with the City Clerk and Solicitor’s branch pursuant to the City’s Records Retention and Disposition By-law.
Chair Tierney referenced the virtualization project, noting that City departments and groups associated with the City, such as the Ottawa Public Library (OPL), are all looking for efficiencies and cost savings. He inquired whether the 2013 project is the virtualization of the desktop or the server. Mr. Johnston replied that the server virtualization project started last year and 2013 is the target for completion. It will reduce approximately 260 servers to 17 or so.
Alain Rochefort, Manager, Technology Infrastructure, confirmed that it is a three-year program and the target is mid-2013.
With respect to desktop virtualization, Deirdre Stirling, Manager, Client Services, indicated staff have just closed a Request For Information and are working closely with the OPL on the project, as they have been identified as a pilot site to go forward. She said with the amount of response that was received from the vendor community, staff are now proceeding to a Request For Proposals (RFP) and hope to have a solution in place by the end of 2013.
Chair Tierney remarked that often users at a library require only the ability to surf the web and do not actually need a full suite of tools. He questioned whether the final solution would be in place before the pilot begins at the OPL. Ms. Stirling indicated that through the RFP process staff will ask for a six-month pilot process to run before a vendor is actually selected, meaning there will be the opportunity to test out one or two different solution sets.
In terms of benchmarking, Chair Tierney suggested Sub-committee members need some clarity about projects already completed, underway or still to come this year. Mr. Johnston assured that ITS staff are committed to providing the IT Sub-committee regular progress reports. He noted the major focus of 2010 was on Service Ottawa and planning and preparing for it, so many of the initiatives have been slow getting off the mark, but staff are expecting that with the budget approval many projects will move forward.
Councillor Taylor referenced the ‘no wrong door’ access policy that the City has adopted with respect to Citizen Centric Services, agreeing with the approach that there is no wrong way for a citizen to access the City. With respect to pushing greater communication with residents he questioned whether IT staff will be working with Corporate Communications and/or reviewing external best practices to ensure the appropriate methods for external communication are used in each case so that the audience is reached but citizens are not overloaded with unnecessary data. Mr. Michaud assured that the IT department works closely with the Service Ottawa team and will work according to Corporate Communications’ strategy to determine the best medium to communicate as required.
Vice-Chair Blais referenced the building blocks of Service Ottawa and inquired as to the nature of the mobile enabled service delivery. He questioned whether, for example, it would enable a resident to use a Smartphone (or similar technology) to send a photo of a problem area, such as graffiti, to 311, which would in turn generate a service request. Mr. Michaud replied that is one of the intentions of the mobile platform, confirming that the CRM software used by 311 would be able to send a work request to staff in the field so they could respond to the situation. The other purpose of the platform would be to encourage people to work at home or alternate work locations in order to reduce the cost of office space and so on.
With respect to efficiencies resulting from the planned phasing out of certain technology or software suites and reduction in the number of programs that would require service, Vice-Chair Blais questioned how the department would respond to requests for costly annual software upgrades. Mr. Michaud responded that the department inquires whether there is a business requirement for each upgrade request it receives and attempts to determine if it is required immediately or could be postponed to a later date. He noted one of the challenges they face is that since amalgamation the City has a very diverse software environment, at the desktop level especially, and there are often delays to roll out each new piece of technology because of the tremendous amount of testing required prior to implementation, meaning upgrade requests cannot always be delayed. He said staff hope to bring everybody to a common platform for people using similar software so that upgrades would only be done when there is a real business requirement for it. In response to further questions from the Vice-Chair he confirmed that some business units do have the delegated authority to buy software as deemed necessary to meet their business requirements.
Vice-Chair Blais noted that, in terms of renewal and sustainment, Windows 7 Desktop and Office 2010 would be introduced in 2012. He questioned whether a newer version of Office is expected to come out by then and whether it wouldn’t be appropriate before rolling out Office 10 to review whether or not all City employees need a full business package or could do with some of the free services offered by Google and others that provide fairly adequate word processing and so on. Mr. Michaud clarified that the planning for Windows 7 would be done in 2012 and the implementation would occur in 2013-14. He said that no upgrade is expected to Windows until 2014. With respect to Microsoft Office he noted the rollout of the upgrade at the desktop level just occurred and since the City is currently using Exchange 2000 an upgrade to Exchange 2010 is considered appropriate and long overdue.
The Vice-Chair inquired whether it is staff or Microsoft that is set the 2014 date, which Mr. Michaud confirmed to be Microsoft.
Mr. Johnston added that the timeline indicated for Office 2010 is a placeholder for staff to start thinking about planning for it. At that time staff would also look at whether it is required for all users or whether Windows cloud services would be appropriate for certain users.
Vice-Chair Blais asked how active Microsoft is in the process of the City’s upgrading. Ms. Stirling indicated that Microsoft provides services through a vendor-client relationship, providing assistance and guidance as needed.
Councillor Wilkinson questioned whether the key performance indicators in Appendix 3 of the roadmap are part of the Ontario benchmarking system or simply internal. Mr. Johnston indicated they are a combination of internal and comparison to OMBI municipalities where possible.
The Councillor noted the success of the recent Apps for Ottawa contest and questioned where Apps would figure into the Service Excellence initiative. Specifically, she wondered whether staff are encouraging or supporting the community to develop Apps that could provide instant information and enable the City to provide service faster and at a lower cost. Fraser Hirsch, Manager, Information, Security & Project Services said staff are looking at the sustainment of the Apps world as it pertains to municipal government. He said they are referencing information from larger municipalities to determine how Apps can be leveraged furthered for City purposes, not just citizen purposes. Through the establishment of a sustainment program staff will be looking for ways to engage developers, determine what data sets they want and what they could do for the City. He assured that details would be provided to the Sub-committee as the sustainment program is further developed.
Councillor Wilkinson asked when the use of cloud technology would be implemented. Mr. Johnston stated that staff undertook some investigative work about six months ago to determine whether the public cloud environment is suitable for the City and they ascertained there are some opportunities. He noted staff have had some experience with elements of cloud, such as software as a service, and they believe there may be opportunities to use cloud computing in terms of platform as a service, and infrastructure as a service. There are a number of unresolved issues at the moment but staff will be investigating it all further towards the end of this year and will likely include some further details in the budget for 2012.
With respect to the City’s use of social media such as Facebook and Twitter, Councillor Wilkinson noted the City has been able to use those forums to communicate messages to residents but is presently unable to use them for internal communications. She suggested this could be a useful internal tool and questioned whether that will be made possible anytime soon. Mr. Hirsch indicated there are some security issues related to social networking, noting that 10 percent of most websites in the worldwide web are or have been infected and could potentially inflict damage on the corporate network if more wide open access is permitted. To that end the department will be upgrading the City’s internet filtering service to provide real time protection. That upgrade is scheduled for completion in Q3, at which time ITS will start working with Corporate Communications on the possible rollout of a social media policy.
Chair Tierney noted the Sub-committee had not discussed the open data movement recently and he wanted to ensure the initiative will continue to move forward. He asked that staff provide an update at the next Sub-committee meeting. Likewise, with respect to Councillor Wilkinson’s point about communications, he asked that the appropriate staff be at the next meeting to speak to where the City is headed in terms of use of social media.
The committee then received the staff presentation for information.
ANNEX 1
Report to/Rapport au:
Information Technology Sub-committee
Sous-comité de la technologie de l’information
18 February 2011 / le 18 février 2011
Submitted by/Soumis
par:
Steve Kanellakos, Deputy City Manager/Directeur
municipal adjoint, City Operations/Opérations municipales
Contact
Person/Personne-ressource: Guy Michaud, Director/directeur
Information Technology Services Department/ Services de technologie de l’information Information Technology
Services / Services de technologie de l’information
613‑580‑2424,
ext./poste 12880
|
Ref N°: ACS2011-COS-ITS-0002 |
SUBJECT:
|
City of Ottawa – technology roadmap –
Supplemental infOrmation to the 2011 city budget |
|
|
|
OBJET
:
|
VILLE D’OTTAWA – FEUILLE DE ROUTE
TECHNOLOGIQUE – RENSEIGNEMENTS SUPpLÉMENTAIRES POUR LE BUDGET 2011 DE LA
VILLE |
That the Information Technology Sub-Committee
receive this report as
supplemental information to the 2011 Draft Budget.
Que le Sous-comité de
la technologie de l’information prenne connaissance de ce rapport à titre
d’information supplémentaire au budget préliminaire de 2011.
BACKGROUND
Technology
is one of the critical enablers to create a client-centric organization, or
“eGovernment”.
eGovernment
is characterized by:
·
Balancing cost
containment with innovation;
·
Doing more but
differently in terms of productivity through a more effective workforce
·
Greater
interaction with citizens and access to services via broadening channel
options;
·
IT-enabling more
services; and
·
Demonstrating
“best value” for the tax dollar.
The
City of Ottawa 5-Year Technology Roadmap (Document 1) responds to the challenge
of transforming the way municipal government operates by exploiting technology and
the Internet to help the organization deliver on Council’s commitment to
eGovernment and Service Excellence.
The
initiatives that comprise the Technology Roadmap are organized into four
themes:
·
eGovernment:
specific new technologies enabling key Service Excellence initiatives,
including Service Ottawa;
·
Foundation
Technology: building blocks on which Service Ottawa and future eGovernment
initiatives are dependent and that need to be in place in order for Information
TechnologyService (ITS) to effectively and rapidly deploy and support the new
technologies;
·
Efficiency &
Effectiveness: investments in new technology or leading practices that result
in improved operational performance, annualized savings or deferral of capital
expenditures; and
·
Operations and
Lifecycle Renewal: ongoing capital spending to maintain/upgrade/replace
existing technology to ensure the City’s technology infrastructure and assets
continue to support day-to-day operations.
The
Roadmap also addresses two key strategic goal for ITS, which are a) to achieve
a fast, flexible, secure, cost effective and sustainable computing environment
that meets client needs, and b) to reduce risk of disruptions to City services
and impacts on citizens.
These
goals will be accomplished by reducing the complexity of the IT environment,
standardizing and consolidating where feasible, assessing and planning for
emerging technologies, and by applying leading industry practices to improves
operations and performance.
DISCUSSION
Service
delivery continues to be a priority for the City, and through the Service
Ottawa program Council is making a strong commitment to Service Excellence and
the citizens of Ottawa to improve the delivery of City services.
Truly
citizen-centric business models have information technology embedded in their
operations to facilitate scalable, flexible service delivery, and advanced
communication and interaction with citizens.
Furthermore leading organizations around the world know that information
technology is the key to maximizing efficiencies and service delivery.
Information technology lies at the heart of most successful efforts to deliver
more services and products while simultaneously lowering costs.
Service Ottawa
The
Service Ottawa program applies a range of technology and process improvements
to how the City engages, interacts with, and provides services and information
to citizens, by:
·
Simplifying
current access points and increasing self-serve capabilities;
·
Organizing information
and services from the citizen’s perspective;
·
Allowing citizens
to find the information they need about City services, register for programs,
submit forms, make payments and report and track service requests;
·
Tracking service
requests from the time of report through to resolution;
·
Standardizing
processes and service standards across the City providing consistent,
predictable, high quality services and information to Citizens; and
·
Providing a
common technology platform for citizens & staff will make them more
knowledgeable, engaged, and responsive to client inquiries in a contemporary
collaborative environment.
While
Service Ottawa encompasses a number of process and technology enabled
initiatives, the core technology investments include:
1.
Citizen Service
Management (CSM) system to support 3.1.1. and citizen service requests,
integrated with the City’s major financial, administrative, and work management
systems;
2.
Conversion of
eleven (11) call centers required for the CSM solution to include Computerized
Telephony Integration (CTI), leveraging the Telecommunications Renewal
initiative Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP);
3.
Enhanced
Ottawa.ca – new Information Architecture and hardware/software upgrades;
4.
Providing the
City’s community-based mobile workforce with mobile devices and tools so that
they can deliver a broad range of services on-site, report on the progress of
these services as they are being delivered, and to connect and collaborate
regardless of physical location;
5.
On-line and
real-time search, viewing and booking of city recreational facilities,
including ice rinks.
Although
there are investments required to implement these initiatives, all are based on
sound business cases that show a positive return on investment.
The
total investment required to implement the Service Ottawa initiatives is $79.3M
over 5 years, with $14.25M required in 2011.
Other eGovernment Initiatives
Service
Ottawa is the flagship program of Service Excellence, and consequently is a
major focus for IT Services and consumes the majority of available capacity and
resources.
Council
has identified other eGovernment opportunities, including the potential for a
single, multi-purpose “O-Card” that could be used to access and pay for
municipal services. At this time, the level of investment is unknown, and no
funding has been provided in 2011 to initiate an investigation of technology
options and establish an investment plan for consideration.
Foundation & Modernization Initiatives
The
success of eGovernment, including Service Ottawa, will be dependent on a robust
and modern infrastructure. The
Technology Roadmap includes a number of specific initiatives and investments
that directly support both the short and long-term objectives of Service Ottawa
and are building blocks for the future that will enable ITS to effectively and
rapidly deploy and support new and emerging technologies.
The
investment required to implement these initiatives is $6.035M over 5 years,
with $625K required in 2011.
The
initiatives are described in more detail in the Technology Roadmap, and
include:
·
Virtual Desktop
Infrastructure (VDI);
·
Server
Virtualization;
·
Modernization of
Telecommunications System (including VoIP);
·
Data Storage
Modernization; and
·
Access Control
and Identity Management
Efficiency & Effectiveness Initiatives
Specific
investments have been identified in the Roadmap that enhance the performance
and effectiveness of City and IT operations.
The
investment required to implement these initiatives is $2.94M over 5 years, and
include:
·
Consolidating
Data Centres;
·
Consolidating
Printing Devices; and
·
Consolidating
Desktop Software Solutions;
·
IT Service
Management
·
Enterprise
Portfolio Management
·
Solution Testing
and Quality Assurance
IT Lifecycle & Renewal
IT
Services supports and maintains the computing infrastructure on behalf of the
City and its more than 9,300 users. This includes both hardware and software
for desktop and enterprise systems, over 59 business suites, and 235 independent
business applications. A significant proportion of the City’s current
technology was acquired during amalgamation, and is either at, or near, “end of
life” and should be replaced/upgraded to maintain current service levels and
incremental organic growth. Deferral of technology infrastructure replacement
results in an increased probability of failure of systems, increased costs to
repair/fix, and impacts on the internal and external services that depend on
technology.
The
investment required to maintain/sustain the City’s technology infrastructure,
enterprise systems and business applications is $11.78M in 2011.
RURAL IMPLICATIONS
There are no specific rural implications associated with this report.
CONSULTATION
During 2009/2010, staff worked closely with Rob Collins, former Chief
Technology Advisor, in the development of the Technology Roadmap.
LEGAL/RISK MANAGEMENT
IMPLICATIONS
There
are no legal/risk management impediments associated with this information
report.
CITY STRATEGIC PLAN
This report corresponds directly to the implementation of a Technology Roadmap within the Service Delivery Priority - New Objective #2: Improve Operational Performance: improve the effectiveness and efficiency of service delivery processes to achieve service levels that are endorsed by Council and clearly communicated to citizens and staff.
TECHNICAL IMPLICATIONS
This Information report is supplemental to the Budget Estimates report and the technical implications are described within the report.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
This
Information report is supplemental to the Budget Estimates report and has no
financial implications.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
Document 1 - City of Ottawa Technology Roadmap
(issued previously to all Members
of Council and held on file with the City Clerk.)
DISPOSITION
The City Operations Department will action any direction received as part of consideration of this report.