My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1982-07-26
Public Access
>
City Council Minutes
>
1982
>
1982-07-26
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/1/2010 7:52:04 AM
Creation date
10/1/2010 7:52:01 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Council Meeting
Supplemental fields
Minutes - Date
7/26/1982
SESSIONNUM
1312
TYPE
REGULAR
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Session 1312, Minutes Page 5 <br /> July 26, 1982 <br /> <br /> <br /> about this matter. Responding to his questions, Mr. McPhail reported that the orig- <br /> inal computer equipment was purchased in August, 1980. Mr. 011endorff said that An- <br /> dy Arizala was an independent- consultant and that his firm had expertise in munici- <br /> pal finance data processing. Mr. Arizala reviewed the recommendations the City re- <br /> ceived from others and also oversaw the softwear that was being done for the City <br /> by contract. Mr. Levy said he found it difficult to understand that the City should <br /> be confined to the limitations of the present DX10 system and that a completely new <br /> system had to be purchased at substantial cost after such a short time. He asked if <br /> any vendor other than TI had been called in to see if the present system could be <br /> adapted with more expansion capabilities. Ms Stepanek said no other vendor had been <br /> called in and she did not think that satisfaction would be obtained from another <br /> vendor for anything less than a much larger price. She said the softwear investment <br /> which the City had was not limited to that of the operating system which was re- <br /> ferred to in the report but also to the applications which have been developed. The <br /> number of applications was larger and more comprehensive than was envisioned in 1980, <br /> when the system was purchased. Mr. Levy said that was irrelevant to the limitations <br /> found in the system. He asked if consideration had been given to adopting an en- <br /> tirely new system, since the City had already outgrown one less than two years old. <br /> Ms Stepanek said a new system from TI, called N S, had been considered, and al- <br /> though the system looked very promising in that it would do away with many of the <br /> operating restrictions contained in the DXiO, it had only recently been tested, and <br /> she felt the system was too new to adopt and would not recommend it. Mr. Levy asked <br /> why the City must be limited to systems from TI. Ms. Stepanek said that once an or- <br /> ganization had committed itself to applications softwear, it was very difficult to <br /> move that softwear from one system to another. She said another problem was that <br /> finance applications were developed using a data base management system, which was <br /> not easily transferable, and that it was not just a question of finding a computer <br /> which will run the programs. Ms Stepanek said she was not involved in the original <br /> recommendation that the City use the present system, and that she had joined REJIS <br /> after the process was under way. <br /> Mr. Ollendorff said the Cizy originally got: i moo the system through receiving a fed- <br /> eral grant three years ago to buy a mini-computer for use by the Police Department. <br /> Applications were added, which were found to be very useful, and the system was ex- <br /> panded quite a lot; however, it cannot be expanded further. Mr. Levy felt a seri- <br /> ous error in judgment was made at the time of purchase and that there was something <br /> wrong when a system lasted less than two years. Ms Stepanek reminded him that the <br /> original system was planned to be used only by the Police Department, and that the <br /> applications installed and currently in development considerably exceeded the orig- <br /> inal planned usage of the computer. There was extended discussion concerning the <br /> computer system and she possible alternatives which might be available instead of <br /> purchasing another system like the present one. Mr. Levy pointed out that the new <br /> system would have essentially the same limitations as the old, and might also have <br /> to be upgraded within a short time. He thought other vendors should have been con- <br /> sulted; however, Ms Stepanek said going to a different vendor would lose the backup <br /> capabilities of a new system like the old system. The old system could not be used <br /> as backup without changing the applications code to have two separate versions, and <br /> each change made on one system would have to be made on the other, if they are to <br /> back each other up. <br /> Mr. Levy said he felt very uncomfortable with the recommendation, and asked that <br /> the Council delay the decision for a week or two in order to research the matter <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.