MICROFILM DIVIDER - North Dakota Legislative Branch |

MICROFILM DIVIDER OMO/RECORDS MANAGEMENT DIVISION

SFN 2053 (2/85) SM

rOLL NUMBER : DESCRIPTION

I

lit: :/.1.•,11

Ii/ 1·1!

' ' .~ ' ',, ,,

2001 SENATE APPROPRIATIONS

SB 2022

•.

1, I,',

,, ' .,::·. i/./i1,: ·.,. ·.• ''·•,/-'':': i:! . .. :· ::i,:\ ,', ' \1 ' . ' ' ! '

2001 SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE MINUTES

Statewide Information Technology-IT Department

Senate Appropriations Committee

□ Conference Committee

Hearing Date January 8, 200 l

Ta e Number SldeA Side B 5 Info Tech De t

Meter# I 5.1-54.0

..---------+---·-----+-___ In_fo_T_ec_h_D __ ep_t -+-o_.0_-3_1_,o ____ ,-----i

Minutes:

Curtis L. Wolfe. CIQ, presented an overview for the Information Technology Department for

statewide and agency information technology plans. Planning presentation handouts (attached).

He stated that they have 12 goals (slide presentation) and the importance for cost support for high

quality service and use, and for the value and economics, The goals are as follows: Goa) I,

Build ENOovernment: State Portal and completed applications, applications are in progress,

Phase 1 is in experiment, Phase II, integrate, and Phase III reinvent; Goal 2, Promote

0 Anytfm~ .. Anywhere" education: growth online training is currently at 8%, by 2002 should be

40% online; need to expand technology in the classroom-distance learning mainly in rural areas

for foreign languages, matht sciences. Exploring vendor programs for free edu(,/ation,

Administrative systems-web accesst virtual university. Distance learning and technical

workforce development with video services; Referenced that SB 2043 last session passed with no

moiiey which is needed now, Education Technology Council Chapter S4-S9. K-12 technology

Senate Appropriations Committee Statewide Information Technology-IT Department Hearing Date : January 8, 200 I

the powers and duties, video conferencing and LAN equipment. Need Workforce development

and distance education, Goal 3. Encourage enterprise solutions, encourage enterprise-wide

solutions. Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP). Replace systems-Geographic Info System (GIS)t

Electronic Doc Mgt System (EDMS), and Criminal Justice Integration; Gofil..4, Reinvent

Government Business process, business process; Goal 5, Strengthen State IT Professionals; Goal

!1, Advance Project Management; Goal 7, Coordinate Technology Research & Planning; Goal 8,

Fund Innovations; Goal 9, Integrate State Broad band Network; Goal JO, Modify Public Policy;

Goal 11, Develop workforce; and Goal 12, Enhance State Radio Network.

End Tape 5, Side A meter 54.0 ~•Begining Tape 5, Side B meter 0.0

Senator Bowmqn: When your plans are done, will they be outdated as you go along?

Curt Wolfe: Network roll out; one time cost routers~ contracts for 3 ycur length; sof\wurc

initiative is 20 year program to be keep up to date,

Senator Andrist: With computer technology struggle, payout with technology will there be

dollar and cents payback?

Curt Wolfe: On the economic workforce side or we wouldn't waste the time. Funds needed for

the distance teaming and workforce broad band access or we will not be accessible. Our work

and economics need technology.

~nator Robinson: I know the package is important but it is also overwhelming, the meaning of

figures and initiatives, as a whole and struggling with the issues.

Curtis Wolfe: The state did not fund in the past but now there is a need to be funded. The

subcommittees will be kept informed. The legislatures need to hear from more sources.

Senator J:loitump! With the mapping of towns, a lot of schools will be closing, The high speed

service to all towns wtll be the key to keeping these schools open, is this true?

I'• •.

\I.''

Page 3 Senate Appropriations Committee Statewide Information Technology-IT Department Hearing Date: January 8, 2001

Curtis Wot~: Right now we have narrowed it down to 194 cities and it depends on the stats of

these towns Main purpose is for public sector and there are cone ems from the private sector on

expenses for capacity. Any community needs to be creative on goals and fair prices.

Senator Schobin.:er: How about wireless referring to an advertisement on TV for Dell Systems'?

Curtis Wolfe: Depending on the distance for schools; right now short distant technology is not

there but long distant.

Senator Robinson: How many elementary are not able distance wise to high school for wireless

solutions'?

Curt Wolfe: An analysis to have to be <lone.

Senator Solberg: This is an important issue this session, more questions to come to know

knowledge of the system. Possible caucuses with both houses to hear and understand Curt's

overview to explain this process. There is a b_acklog and it is costing the state now.

Tape 5, Side B meter 14.1

Nancy Waltz. Associate Director. IT Department, presented information (handouts attached).

She introduced Phil Miller and Dennis Klipfel, agents with the IT Dept. She stated different

agents from the IT Dept. are assigned to state agencies,

Senator Robinso.n: What type of comparison do we have to other states; what is the nonn and

how do we compare?

Nancy .W,ltz: We have tried to compare-our numbers are high, no good comparison.

Senator Tallackson: Is the whole budget included here?

it I

,·rr Nancy Waltz: Everything is included for these fundfng sourt.:es, Tape S, Side B, meter 31.0

i\ ~· \,1~1 J

f;,,, ,,1'~ '

' ,t ' rr;,, -,,.,

:·

'{:(.·, '. :· 1

\ ;, ' ' ~ ·,•r', ,. ,·

; \

200) SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE MINUTES

BILL/RESOLUTION NO. 2022



Hearing Date January J 5, 200 J

Ta e Number

Minutes:

4 4

Side A IT De t

Side B Meter# 0.0-54.0 0.0-3 J. 7

Senator Nething opened the hearing for the Information Technology Department.

Curt Wolfe. Chief Information Officer. fnformation Technology Department, opened testimony

to identify the program, strategies and responsibilities. This is a nt,w finding approach in the

budget with pass through dolJars, to special fund from general fund with state agencies,

Schafer's budget $107,021,119 and Hoeven's budget at $96,903,519. Gave un overview of the

budget and contents.

Senator Orlndberg; Explain $20 million your asking back.

Curt Wol~: The $20 million asking back is to replace administrative systems, K .. 12: old system

nee'.ls to be web based; approximately $35 to $40 million when completed, Requested RFP from

vendor, had six respondents; now in the evaluation process and down to three finalists, there will

be a detailed evaluation to select vendor. The $20 million was in Schafer budget; all funding

i/\: <t>;, :: .•

\/, ',' .; Page 2, , Senate Appropriations Committee Bill/Resolution Number 2022 Hearing Date January ts, 2001

can't be funded over one biennium; over 5 to 6 years to be implemented will need more money

re applications to older sysL,1m to interface but in reality it is a structured fashion.

Senator Solberg: Are the computer systems pulling together? Are there any systems to

combine?

Curt Wolf~: The initiative is that all be related with new network, all the schools; support would

be an ongoing basis; all play role in the administration of the networks as they are deployQd,

Ivan group-higher education and all capitalize with investments made.

Senator Solberg: HIPA; How far advanced is the dialog with requirements to the private sector'?

Curt Wolfe: We are looking at an altemative with HIPA with less money without rewriting

Medicaid System.

~nator Tomac: Why the difference in FTE positions'? Because of certain programs and

agencies? Are they not in the agencies budgets?

Curt Wolf: These are special funded positions; agency budget with general funds and IT

Department budgets are specjaJ fundsMdepends 01:i specific agency.

Senator Tomag: OJS-why?

Curt Wo1f~: Study was done on the state.

Senator Tomac: Are K .. 12 schools concerned with wide area network? Are schools along 1-94

Included with costs due to new system? My concern is penalizing schools that are ahead than

other schools and now wUI cost these school districts again,

Curt Wolfe: No. For example with K-12, we are trying to be creative Hke not telling schools in

the Q~t Western Network to replace certain systems. All schools will be connected and we are ,,

· telling them what is needed for their own gain. We are not asking them to replace lnten\et

\'. . .,,,

', ,,/•' ' l;, 1·,. •'·Jf,~1i; :~ '\11:.

\l:{k 1 ', •• .. ,, i/;f \:'T .·' ·.: . · Page 3 · ' ' Senate Appropriations Committee

BilVResolution Number 2022 Hearing Date January J 5, 2001

Miki, Ressler. Director of Operations at lTD, (testimony attached), stating ITO is responsible for

providing technology solutions to state government agencies and this includes county

government for network connections and soon to include K-12 and libraries across the state. We

are responsible for creating information technology policies, standards and guidelines by

coordinating agency input and researching existing technology solutions with a section staff of

four. The administration section has 14 people and responsible for administrative support,

human resources, payrol1, bilHng and other accounting functions. The Software Development

group develops and maintains computer software applicaHons with a staff of 86 people and

contracts for another 22 programmers. ITD is requesting an increase of33 new FTE's. 30 from

special funded and contingent upon other state agencies receiving funding for their deve1opmcnt

projects. Computer Services staffed by 36 people to provide computer operations, printing

facilitiest database support, and technical service support for all the hardware and software

utilized, The Telecommunications staff of 27 is responsible state wide area network, all

telephone systems (40 plus) throughout the state along with a central help desk. New initiatives

for the next biennium inplude the following projects: Payment for Phase I of the wide area

network, Phase 2 deployment involves connection all the high schools and libraries across the

state, general funds $7,922,S49 less $3,700,000 from Universal Service Fund as part of the

£ .. Rate program, netting the cost to $4,222,549. ITD operates on a fee for service basis with

state agencies. Another initiative to save state government substantial dollars is a shared

electronic data management system (BDMS), Last year ITO launched DiscoverND which is the

state of North Dakota's web portal. ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning System) 3 FTE's;

Additional Security analysts 2 FTE's; 1 FTE Administratl-on; l FTE Info Tech Business Analyst;

I': ,1,,:,'; ,. ' • 11, ' '1, I l'f1'• '. •_, l/

1· ,··

1:'·. i/ l:;· '

'. • 1 '1' ,.. ,,' I 1• !1,' :'-'1

<'':: i' . ',, ,,, ·:·.' ':,' ''

"; ::.\i·-.:. ,, .. ·, P•ge4 ,· · · • ·. Senate Appropriations Committee

Bill/Resolution Number 2022 Hearing Date January ts. 2001

Summary 2001-2003 Budget $96,903,519 (Special Funds $71,185,087, General Funds

$25,718,432).

Senator Gdndberg: The $71 mill from Special Funds; are these the fees from state agencies?

Mike Ressler: Yes.

Tape #4, Side A, meter 44.0

Mary Anne Alhadeff. President & CEO. Prairie Public Broadcasting (PPB), (testimony

attached), stating Senator Bill 2022 includes their budget for operating grant of $1,407,S 13.

Each week, over a quarter million people use their seavice and about l /3 of their broadcast

schedule is a safe-haven for families. PPB provides more than 1700 ho_urs of original and local

productions. There is a federal mandate for public television stations to convert their operations

to digital by May of 2003, channel 22 in Bismarck, and this is our greatest challenge at this time.

Extension with PFC with be hard to get and our license depends on compliance. Charts and

graphs attached.

End Side A, meter 54.0

Tape #4, Side B, meter 0,0

Dan fullen. from Center for Innovation in Instruction (CII), explained the Phase II roll out with

reorganizing of K-12 technology to develop joint network with the IT Department, if approved.

Optional budget package (attached) will be submitted if this occurs for 200 l N2003.

Senator Nethinai Is your budget satisfactory as it?

Dan Pollen: Yes it ls.

Jody Fnmch. Project Coordinator for ND SBNDIT. testified giving history and providing current

service. w, now give Internet services for K-12 schools. We want to provide regional support

I:·,' :,11

:;ii' I ·'. ),:,,\:\'.'I ' •11 : t ~\ ; 1

;., .. \•,·' I I ~~, r'

i'r ~;,: I

,',

'') ' ) ''.

~, :

. . , I

Pages Senate Appropriations Committee Bill/Resolution Number 2022 Hearlng Date January 15, 2001

with technology, consultation, as a help desk support for distance education. (Pamphlet

attached).

Laura Glatt. Vice Chancellor AdministratLQn, North Dakota Unjversity System. testified on ERP

system for administration software system replacement; gave overview (see attached).

Senator Solberg: Is this replacing the computer program from 4 years ago; did that go down'!

Laura Q.Wt, It was a partnership with other colleges; it did not go forward and this is the new

option.

Tape 4, side B, meter J 2. J

Tona Kincaid, from Vocational Technician Education, spoke stating the importance of

fonnaHzing technology for alJ factors of education. Technology today hinges on all aspects of

our education with programming and nctworklng. Most occupations today require trouble

shooting skills and most positions are offered at a Jower level Jike middle schools. The Advisory

Committee need for what programs make sense and what ND needs for the future. In ND we

need incentives like many companies offer today. Research wilJ make the whole program work.

Teacher training is very f mportant to support the higher levels with information (echnology

skills,

Senator Holmb~rg: What is your background to get where you are today'!

Tana Kjnoaid: I have a Bachelors in communications but not fn learning the technology of today

that was mostly by on the job.

Darin King. Direcu,t.offi9hnoloaY for Orand Forks Public SchooJs. testified in support of this

bill with regard to the items that would impact K• t 1. schools throughout the! s~ate. Phase II of the

state network is an exciting project that has far reaching potential for K 12 students in ND bnng

affordable lnte?Mt access, Technology has the potential to transform the way teachers teach an, ..

, Page 6 Senate Appropriations Committee Bill/Resolution Number 2022 Hearing Date January 15, 2001

students learn in our state. Programs like ExploreNct, Cisco Networking Academics and

Infonnation Technology Essentials will be able to expand into additional school districts and

increase the number of technology workers available to our workforce.

Mark Johnson, NDACo Executive Director, (testimony attached), spoke in favor of the bill

stating that county government is the service delivery arm of the State and has become more and

more dependent on the data network that links all together. This will provide the lowest

possible cost for critical network access in ND and for cwcommerce of the future.

Christopher Bade. Information System Manager for the ND Water Commission, (testimony

attached), and also represents the State GIS Technical Committee, appeared support of this bill.

The Water Commission identified 01S as a major enhancement to our techno1ogy infrastructure.

With the increasing demands associated with ND water source coupled with changes in

technology, the data availability will dictate the implementation of GIS capabilities. This is

what prompted the Water Commission to approach ITD with the request to provide 01S data-hub

services at the state enterprise level. Tape 4, Side B, meter 31.0

Senator Nethinu~ What does 01S stand for? ;

Christcwher Baderi Geographic Information Systems.

With no opposition to this bill, the hearing was cJosed.

Tape 4, Side B, meter 3 J • 7

Senate Appropriations Committee BilVResolution Number 2022 Hearing Date January t 5, 2001

February 8, 200 I Full Committee (tape 1, side a, 0.0 -30.8)

Senator Nethiw:,, Chainnan, called the Senate Appropriations Committee to order.

Roll Call taken with 14 senators respondin&;,

Senator Nething reopened the hearing on S32022.

Senator Solberg, Chair of the Information Technology Subcommittee, distributed copies of

proposed amendments (18048.0101) and explained that a replacement of same was being

completed at this time to make a correction (notation that would allow the Information

Technology Department to transfer spending authority between line items). He explained the

amendments.

Senator Robinson: This whole technology program is a new concept u• something we have

needed for a long time .. -this would be a one system for all state agencies, institutions, high

schools, grade schools, libraries, etc. Some years ago higher education put in its system at

approximately 30 million ...... now the department can do the whole ~tate at a fraction more.

Believes there will be 194 locations total ---an example used: Bismarck being the hub: sending

things to Williston; one line to Job Service, one line to Higher Education, one line to Vocational

Education, one Une to the Courts, one line to the Law Enforcement ... and now there will be one

large line to handle an .... plus additional room for growth. The proposed system will have excess

capacity .... the price tag is high. but the potential is great.

Some schools already have more than the state h~ ..... and will have in the proposed system. If

they w!sh to contb1ue with all those programs •· they will have to pay for the additional.

/ i

/!,'

e Page 8 Senate Appropriations Committee BUI/Resolution Number 2022 Hearin1 Date January IS, 200 I

Scngtor Nethiwi: Are there concerns with tho costs or cuts'! Curtis Wolfe, Director of

lnfonnation Technology Department indicates the suvf ngs in tho higher cducutlon syHtcm area

alone will be tremendous ..... plus the speed, dutu storugc und retrieving ulong with voice video,

S,Qnwor Robla~on: Yes, to both the coNt and cuts .... but realize it is the best we cun do now,

Senator Gary Nelson: Believe higher education investigated a new program ..... 6 million to I 0

milliot, price tug--· Curtis Wolfe und hls ucpurtmcnt arc doing it for utmost hulf of the umount n

and it will be for tho cntiro state. Need to coordinate und encourage ull state government entities

to participate here,

S1;nator Nething: Need to amend for that reason?

Senator Gary Nelrmn: Not suro that we would not be setting a prcccdcncc -- there is u need for

flexibility and need to encourage the rest of state government to participate. This is a new

expanded mission --- can't see what will happ~n in tho future --- but we hnvc an outstanding

manager in Curtis Wolfe, think we should let him do his job,

Senator Nethina: lfwe were to start over with today's technology -- we would have to be more

flexible -- this is a two year bill --- not a blank check forever!

Senator Solberg: All Mr. Wolfe is asking for is two years.

Senator Ro~Jinson: Appreciate the discussion, Mii,ybe we can do both ..... the communication hus

be1Jn great with Mr. Wolfe and his staff--they advise all involved of the plans and keep people

informed throughout any project.

Senator Ncth,na: Proceed in that fashion-· reporting to an interim committee'?

Sem&or om NelAQn: Can do that .... there is a two year sunset ~- and the communication has

been great-.. •with Mr. Wolfe there is a comfort level •- would expect he will continue to report to

the Budget Committee.

I

Paae9 Senato Appropriations Committee But/Resolution Number 2022 He.-nnu Date January 15, 2001

s,oulgc NeU>im,: Peel a need for Pn Information Technology interim commhtcc1?

S~nutar Ono: Nelson: Think continue, has been 3 intcrlm's now, the inftiutivo brought U8 to this

level. Think Mr. Wolfe wHI keep us abreu8t. And the ERP program could hnve u severe <lollur

problem -== it hus gone down 8 million; reduction und flexibility is good,

Perhaps the question is what will be lose if we do not udopt the ERP progrnm this btcnnium1l We

could recoup investments in the future,

Senator N~thing: Further amend to include a study?

Senator Solber1i: We have no study rcsolution 1!

SenatQr Gary Nelson: Not aware of one --- stutcmcnt comes by direction from council.

Senator Bowman: Technology is in place -- right that we apply for federal dollars --

requirements of funding mechanism part of this? High Schools for example: will there be a

mandate that they should be part of this 1l

S,Bndy Paulson, 0MB Analysis: High schools go through the billing process -- become special

funds for lnfonnation Technology Department.

Senator Bowmam Federal dollars flow? Maximize same doJlars?

Senator Oar_y JSelson: IO million system/ do for 5 mil Hon. Get federal funds thP.rc --- then let

Mr. Wolfe manage the proj:ct.

Senator Solbcra: 44 new positions lo lnfonnation Technology Department (ITD) -0 out of this

federal program, If not funded •· 14 positions won't happen --· salaries/benefits, all costs

including equipment arc in the budget --- special funds -- 96 million, 71 miJlion income (lots of

federal dollars),

Seoator Anddat: Who would have access to this?

Senate Apprei priaUons Committee BUI/Resolution Number 2022 Hearing Date January I 5, 200 I

Senotsu SPl\wfi: State wide system ... will nfJcd to be uuthorizc<l to access ... but will huvc u

complete bookkeeping system ... undone con check the spimding of higher education, stutc

department, schools etc. When fully opcrationul. Audits could be done off this system,

Semuw· ?S~iliwi: Each campus could have reports regarding federal student louns.

SPUfttQr 01Jry Ne!3Qn: Higher Education is ult encompassing ... registration, t1nuncial nid -- this

system should replace ull the higher education technology programs .... bring to u level where

doing more,

Senator Solberg: Department of Public Instruction .... ull schools report there?

Senator Aodrist: Source of funds ... fee for service? 25. 7 general fund dollnrs'l

Senet2r NethioB: Fees added?

Senotor Solben:: Yes, telephone on up .

.Ssmator Robf nson: The 20 some year old higher education system has problems -- this should be

good timing; gives the needed flexibility.

Senator Solberg moved the amendments be adopted; Senator Robinson seconded; motion

earned.

Senator SG~beni moved a DO PASS AS AMENDED; seconded by Senator Schobi,nier. No

discl~ssion; roll call vote: t I yes, Ono, 3 absent and not voting. Senator Solbcn, accepted the

floor assignment.

•

I /

Office of Management and Budget January 15, 200 J

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO SENATE BILL NO. 2022

Page 1, line 14, replace 0 3,500,000° with "2,200,00011

Page 1, line 18, replace "20,488,873" with "J 1,971,373"

Page 1, line 20, replace "500,000" with "200,000"

Page 1, line 21, replace "$107,021,019" with "$96,903,519"

Page 1, line 23, replace "$35,835,932" with '·$25, 718,432"

Renumber accordingly

Statement of purpose of amendment: To decrease the education technology commission grants special line item by

$1,300,000 of general funds, to decrease the enterprise resource planning system special line item by $8,517,500 of general funds, and to decrease the IT innovation fund special line item by $300,000 of genaral funds.

,

Roll Call Voto#: __ /...._ ____ _

2001 SENATE STANDING COMMITfEE ROLL CA~ VOTES BILlJRESOLUTION NO, ~ ,.6 d tt) vZ .:t_ ..

Senate Approeriations Committee

0 Subcommittee on __________________ _ or

D Conference Commtttee

Legislative Council Amendment Number

Action Taken

Motion Made B f

I

Senaton Dave Nethin&X. Chainnan Ken Solbera. Vice-Chalnnan Randv A. Schoblnaer Elroy N. Lindaas Harvey Tallackaon Larrv J, Robjnaon Steven W. Tomac Joel C. Heitkamo Tonv Orindbera Runell T. Thane Ed Krinntad Ray Holmbera Bill Bowman John M, Andriat

Yes No

✓

✓

Senators Yem No

Total Vu __ ....,L_1/ ___ No ___ (! ______ _ ~ ~

Absent -._--:,

If the vote 11 on an amendment, briefly indicate Intent:

1--------------------------------,;,; ----------------------------------•:·-

REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE (410) February 8, 2001 3:51 p.m.

Module No: SR•23--279S C.rrltr: SollJtrg

lnMrt LC: 18048,0102 TIiie: ,0200

REPORT OP STANDING COMMlnEE SB 2022: A. pproprlatlon, CommlttH (Sen. Ntthlng, Chairman) recommends

AMENDMENTS AS FOLLOWS and when so amended, recommends DO PASS (11 YEAS, 0 NAYS, 3 ABSENT AND NOT VOTING), SB 2022 was placed on the Sixth order on the calendar.

Page 1, fine 14, replace "3,500,000" with "2,200,000"

Page 1, line 18, replace 1120,488,873" with "11,971,373"

Page 1, llne 20, replace 11§QO,OQO" with "200,000"

Page 1, Une 21, replace "107,021,019" with "96,903,519"

Page 1, line 23, replace "35,835,932" with "25,718,432"

Page 1, after llne 23, Insert:

"SECTION 2. TRANSFERS. Notwithstanding section 54-16~04, the director of the office of management and budget and the state treasurer shall make transfers of funds between line Items of appropriations In section 1 of this Act for the Information technology department as may be requested by the chief Information officer."


STATEMENT OF PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT:

Senate 8111 No. 2022 • Information Technology Department • Senate Action

Sallffltl and WIQ88 Operating tllpe(lMI E~t C'.entef fol' lnnovatlon and

lnlCtuotlon Educlllion recn::,r.

Commilliort J' an • SENOlTnttw IT ltohnlc6I education p,og,am

w~~ EllWpriM rtlOUICI planning

,,,rN>llo B«>adcllU!lg IT IMoYlllon tund

T OUII Ill tundl

L•NtimMldlncclmt

General fund

FTE

EXECUTIVE BUDGET

$~5,966,362 36,076,824 5,596,000

934,683

3,600,000

1,973,669 690,300

9,96e,905 20,488,873

1.407,513 ~

,107,021.019

Zl,!IMIZ S3&,83U32

212,00

SENATE CHANGES

{$1,300,000)

(8,617,500)

(300,000) (SI0,117.600)

($10,111,600)

0.00

SENATE VERSION

$25,985.352 36,076,624 6,596,000

93,4.683

2,20U,000

1,973,669 590,300

Y,968,906 11,971,373

1.'407,613 ~

S96,903,519

71J05,00Z '25,711U32

212.00

Dept. 112 • lnformatton Technology Department • Dltlll of Stnalt Chlngea

......... __. ~ ' .... ~lftiio.lllon

- DEik. (. COMM

ADJUST FlJNO'NQ REDUCE FUNOtHO FOA THE

fOA THE ENTEAPAISE EDOOATOW. ~90UACE

TELECOMMlNClATIONS Pt.ANH1HO -OOUHC(f. SVBTIMZ

AEDIJOE FUND+NG FOAIT

INNOVATtON FUND

PageNo. 1

TOTAL SENATE CHANGES

REPORT OP STANDING COMMITTEE (410) Flbru1ry 8, 2001 3:51 p.m.

andlnttruotlon Education Ttohnolopy (Sl,300.000)

Commltllon orant, BENOIT nt!Wofk IT technical tduo.atlon

PfOQr&m dtvtlopment Wlot Itta network Enltfp,ltt rtt00rce

planning IYllem Prairie Public e,oaocuuno ll Innovation fund

Total alllvndl

Le&& ,,omated Income

Goneral lund

FT£:

($1,300,000)

,-~-~-~ ($1,300,000)

0,00

($8,617,600)

-----·-- ... ~ .. -($8,617.600)

,_.._.,,,.. _______

($8,617.600)

0,00

Module No: 8R•23-2795 carrier: Solberg

fn1trt LC: 18048.0102 Tltlt: ,0200

($1,300.000)

(8.617,6()0)

"30010001 (~QMQQl

($300,000) ($10,117,500)

------·-------· ···----, .. ~·- --~· ·-

($300,000) ($10,117,600)

0.00 0.00

1 Thlo amendmonl reduces lundlnq for the etetewldo h1fo1rnatlon tochnolOQY network by oocreaslng tho lumJlng from tho gonoral fund for tho Eduoallo,iaf Telocommunlcutlons Councll lrom $3,500,000 to $?.,200,000,

2 This amendrnenl provides for Iha lollowing adjustments In lundlng ror lho onlerprlse rosourco planning (EHP) system which rosull lrt luricJlng lmln(I 1&duced lrom $20,499,873 to $11,971,373, ot which$ t 1,482,600 Is from tho general lund:

Decrease In tu11dlng tor op(l<atlng expenses Increase In funding due to tranafer of

rundlng lrom Iha Oepar1menl ol Public lnstruollon ,elated lo the Oualltr Schools Commission ($70,000 and student data base ($412,500)

Total

($9,000,000) 462,600

($6,617,600)

Senate BIii No, 2022 .. Other Changes • Senate Action

This amendment also adds a section allowing the Information Technology Department to transfer spending authority between line Items.

(I) DUI(. (a) COMM PageNo. 2

2001 HOUSE APPROPRIATIONS

SB 2022

2001 HOUSE STANDING COMMITTEE MINUTES

BJLL/RESOLUTION NO, S82022 · Overview

Houso Appropriations Committee


Heuring Dato March 2, 200 I

- -Tape Number Side A Side B -

I X -X

2 X

Committee Clerk Si~nuturc

Meter II I 04 - 6213 0 - 5176 -

60 - 1094

Minutes:HOUSE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE OVERVIEW MEETING OF

S82022.

--·

Rep. Timm: House Appropriations Committee wus culled to order and roll ~all wus taken. This

morning we have an overview by the ITD Department and its scheduled for two hours, and then

we huve an overview of the Dcpa11ment of Commerce, proposed Department of Commerce, I

think we should be able to get through all of that this morning and we will start off by hcuring

from the lnfonnation Technology Department.

Mr, Curt Wolfe, CIO Information Technology Department. {follo"•ed written testimony

with queatlons and answers rollowlng th~ testimony.)

Tape I• Side A (104 .. 2096)

Mr. Mike Butler. Director or Operations. Information Technology Department (followed

written tntlmony with qaaettfon1 and 1n1wer1 following the testimony.)

T1pe l • Side A (2100 .. 61.13)

Paao2 House Appropriadons Comm1.ttec BUI/Resoludon Number S82022 Hearing Date Maroh 2, 2001

Tape l • Side B ( 0 • 2190)

Ms, Mary Anne Alb1ul\!ff~ President and CEO, Prairie Public Broadcasting, (followed

written testimony with questions and antwcrs followJng the testimony)

Tape I -Side 8(2190 .. JJ90)

NDS.\l BcRt\'19DtHUYc.?, Administrative Software System Replacement • ERP (followed

written testimony with questions and answers followlng the testimony)

Tape 1 • Side B (32S0-5176)

Mr.t...Ul.rln.., Director of 'fcchnology, Grand Forks Public Schools. (followed written

testimony with questions and answers following the testimony)

Tape 2 Side A (60 .. 759)

Mr, Jeff Swank, President of the ITCND, (followed written testimony with questions and

answers following the testimony) Did not give a copy of his testimony to the clerk)

Tape 2 Side A (759 - 1094)

End of House Appropriations Commmltee overview meeting on S82022,

\

?.001 HOUSE STANDING COMMITTEE MINUTES

BILL/RESOLUTION NO, SB 2022

House Appropdntlons Committee Government Operutions Division


Heuring Date Murch 8, 200 ~

Side A Side B --+---- Meter# 03-08-0 I ta e # l 03-08-01 ta o #2

0 • 6220 0 - 6220 ·------ ----+-·---~-------0 - 6220 0 • 191

Committee Clerk Si ,nature

Minutes:

The committee was called to order. and opened the hearing on SB 2022.

Kurt Wolf: Said introductions, and explained thut the persons who will testify first arc

the· persons that did not get a chance to testify at the full committee overview.

llilJ Goetz, Chief of Staff in Governor's office: Is here to reaffirm the governor's

position to support the bill and how it came from the governor's recommendation.

Dan Pullen. Center for lnnovotion in Instrnction (CID: Had prepared written testimony.

He also had a handout regarding their optional budget package.

(#908 - 1800 : questions and answers)

Wayne Werma1ier. Scndh: Had a power point prcsentudon of what Scndit is. and how

they flt into the big picture. Sendit Is an e-mail product.

(# 2286: questions and answers)

;r; I \

C

I ,, Patio 2 Oovemment Oporattons Division BUI/Resolution Number SB 2022 Hearing Date March 8, 2001

l\'gync KutZ§c. Swts: lltrstctotfot lhP Statst.JlQnrd fur \i'.QQOUQmJI & T,,chohwl CfJu<eution};

Had prepnred written testimony,

( # 3797 .. 5080 : questions and answers)

RQxonn~: Explains that the Cll nnd Scndit employees arc not stutc employees,

ShgiJp Peterson: Explains further the employees situution.

Cbri§ Bador. Water Commjssion: Had u slide prescntution. Appears In support of the

ITD departmen~ and their putting together a GIS systom and dutll hub, thut would be housed in

ITD, but the agencies would use it,

(side 8, #490 .. 2250 : questions und answers - Chris Bader answers, Kurt Wolf answers)

Lisa Feldner. Bismarck Publl9 Schools. ERP (EntcrprlJJc Rosgurcc Planning} Evoluotion

Committee: Had prepared written testimony.

(#2682 - 3180 : questions and answers -

Rqp, ByerI.x: Why do you sa}' the project can be done for under $880,000, while the

budget it is stated as $11,971,000?

Li~a Feldner: K-12 is just a piece of it. ERP is for state government, higher education,

and K-12 .

.B.mt Byed~: If they apportioned the cost, to develop this system, the schools would

probably all run for cover, Is this a correct assumption?

Lisa Feldner: It may depend on the school. The ones listed on her list are all willing to

make some contribution. Dh,cussed a per pupil charge, if purchased out of state, would cost

about $7 per student, because they would not be purchasing the hardware.

Mark Joh 1 ic,qn. ND Asgiatioo of Counties: Had prepared written testimony.

Pa!Jc 3 Oovemment Operations Ctivifdon DUI/Re&t>lution Number SB 2022 Hearing Dato Mluch 8, 200 I

Mury Anno A l.ht.W.'2t't~ ecu5id1't1I. Ewirig fubJlQ..IY: l-lud some <locumcntntlon rcgurding

their trends and memberHhip, rcquostcd ut the overview from lust week ..

Kurt WQlf: Handed out some churts und graphs rcgnrdlng ttw ITD budget us 1, percent of'

tho total budget. The tclcphono service ls Included in thut number, so the closer number of their

budget Is 4.2%, He also handed out u couple other documents that rotfoct dutu processing

budgets of the vurfous ugenclcs, und ugoncy telephone budgets. There were a few more dlugrnms

on the historical funding sources for JTD revenue, compurc<l to spcclul flmds, und un ITD spcclul

fund comparison, Most of the fcderul funds come out of Hunmn Services, ond DOT, and Job

Service. Special funds would bo like Game and Fish,

Jerry : Hundcd out documentation regarding the costs of th" routers und equipment

put into each school. Every school is ND, no mutter what th1J size, this ls the minimal equipment

they will have installed. This was bid out, und these prices reflect a discount.

(tape 2, #0 - 2045 : questions and unswcrs - Kurt Wolf unswers, Mike Ressler answers,

regarding the school systems, pricing, and what they arc getting for these prices. They discuss

the DCN contract, and all the possibilities. They reference the 11grccn bar" sheet and explain

what that sheet will cover, funding sources, and requested FT E's if any, etc, There were

questions regarding grants, requirements, and decreasing student populations and factors. They

also discussed Phase I and Phase JI, and the number of schools, libraries, and state agencies

already set up.)

(tape 2, #2045 • 6220) : Kurt Wolf, Mike Ressler discuss the sheets handed out

previously, titled Information Technology Departm~nt Budget Initiatives. They begin discussing

Phase I, equipment costs, page 3 of their document. The "green bar,. sheet is also referenced.

Mike Ressler explains the finances of these programs, Curt Wolf gave some general history of

' . Paao4 Oovemment Operations Divf sfon BIIJ/RcsoJutlon Number SB 2022 Hcarlna Dato March 8, 200 J

the ERP program, They discuss tho shnr1Js of Higher Ed, K .. 12 und Stute Government, Curt

WoJf explained thnt the direction from the lust lcgh1lutivc i;cssion wuR not really clcnr, ,;o they

mude some conclusions, They ulso discussed tho lcusc/optlon-borrowlng Issue, A letter from the

Attorn1.,y General's oftlcc wus handed out along with the explunntlon they gave,

Qlds Kohmh, PPl: Expluim~d that the schools need this system. Hnd u handout.

Answered som" previously nsked questions.

Tho chulrman closed tho hcmlng on this bill.

'"


BILL/RESOLUTION NO. SB 2022

House Appropriations Committee Oovemment Operations Division

CJ Conference Committee

Hearing Date March 12, 2001

__ T_a_e Num_be_r ___ _S_id_e_A ______ s __ id_e_B ______ M_et_e_r # __ _ 03 .. t 2-01 tape #1 1 S95 .. 3528

Minutes:

The committee was called to order, and opened committee work on SB 2022.

Chainnan Byerly: The ITD department has provided us whh a Hst of expenses already

spent. phase I, and then a list or phase II. Questions the authority they had to do this spending.

(The committee read through the list of school~, locations, and discuss that they all are

getting a free Tl line at absolutely no cost to them. Roxanne, LC, explains that the counties,

courthouses and agencies will be charged differently, They discussed the e-rate credit grants

received from the federal government. They would like another report that shows the anticipated

monthly charges to the same entities in r,hase I and phase II. They also questioned why in some

small towns there is a need for more than one Tl line. Rep. Skarphol suggests there should be

sonte Umh on what is done here,)

11le chairman closed the committee work on this bill.

'· I' ·. •' \ ◄ ; ·' ·.":i,,'

'.'1, r· .' 1 I

I' I

'

~001 HOUS1B STANDING COMMITTEE MINUTES


House Appropriations Committee Government Operations Division

Cl Conference Committee.

Hearing Date March 14, 200 I

Ta Number Side A Side B Meter # -----------------------------------03-14-0l ta #1 5550 .. 5991

Committee Cle_r=k....;;.S..;.fiiigil.n~=at=u_re;..._.,..__...J~...a:;;...;---------~--------.........

Minutes:


Roxanne. LC: Handed out some infonnation regarding the statewide area network, and

the locations requested last week to be updated. It includes estimated income and estimated

expenses, either $800 or $900, Higher ed has some higher costs.

The chainnan closed the committee work on this bill.

;: : ' //' i/ t/,), \' 1<·,

Ii':)', Irr,:, (li :1;(

•:lj

' '

•,' ';

:'(,, '

200 l HOUSE ST ANDING COMMITTEE MINUTES


House Appropriations Committee Oovemment Operations Division


Hearing Date March 15, 200 I

SJdeA Side B 0 - 3120

Minutes:


Meter#

Chip Thomas. ND Health Care Association: Currently hospitals are making independent

arrang~ments with telecommunication carriers to link up various satellites and outreach efforts,

This is primarily a central/ western ND phenomenon, The different carriers result in a very

different pricing, The concerns are whether they are able to get the best price possible to cover

as much ofwestem ND as possible, There are some other programs that are available, but there

are noticeable geographical gaps, Dickinson and WilHston are most notable. Gave an example

of Bismarck hospitals reaching into the Dickinson and Bowman areas. One thought they have is

to allow the hospital association to access at the state rate the statewide network. Gave an I

example of the savings from local hospitals, They could then focus on one enterprise, and reach

out to everyone. Not commenting on the eastern part of the state, Chainnan Byerly asked me to

address why hospitals. He answers because they are one ot'the few. and most exclusive except

,, ; ;,

,'I -~l., ( ·, ,,,,

~,> I;•'

~{' ,, . . ,

:\ ! ! i'-, l'.r.'

Page2 Government Operations Division Bill/Resolution Number SB 2022 Hearing Date March 15, 2001

for nursing hontes, not-for-profit enterprises that serves all of ND. There wiJI probably others

who make a request, hut the benchmark should be the applicability of service to all North

Dakotans.

The state and providers will be required to meet certain federal requirements that go

under HIPAA. It has to do with medical standardized billing through extensive privacy

guarantees, particularJy in the area of electronic information transfers. We in the state dealing

with medicaid recipients will be needing a relevant information system. The state intends to use

this network, and it would be much easier for us to work with them and the entity responsible for

its operation Jn standardizing privacy policies if we were part of the network at the outset. That

would be another rationale for putting us on the system,

In terms of a Jong range plan, ND will be going through significant shifts, many of which

hospitals win not be able to do much about, dealing with demographics. We are attempting to

deal with this by going to a statewide emergency medical system. If in any event a hospital in no

longer able to justify its existence, those who reside there would be able to have emergency

medical medicine. It would be essential to haven two-way audio and video system that would be

provided by this network. We also could argue that teaching persons near their homes would

create a better chance of them staying in the area. We would like to use the network for teaching,

and retaining persons in the state.

Chairman Byed):: BasicaHy what you are saying is that the hospitals would be willing to

pay the fteightt but would like to pay the ~ttme freight as what the others would be charged. To

get the access?

. '''

' .,

t. ~'i h(;I ·c }1,1'1',

i: i1'. ' ' ~" ' :,\.~.·! ;_,i,r::

' I '

> .. <;,:.'

//

:·

n. , ;·, . ..:

l'age 3 Government Operations Division BilVRcsolution Number SB 2022 Hearing Date March 15, 2001

Chig Thomas: In my discussions with the department of human services we always have

difficulty in tenns of compensation, and as an alternative for a payment of treatment, this would

be a benefit to us as it reduces our overhead.

Rep. KQi1pelman: Do you envision the hospitals using the statewide network, regardless

of your request, is it the vehicle you think they will access for the needs you are talking about?

Would there be a way to dovetail as a fonn of alternative to another subsidy with human

services, or could it be in lieu of something?

,Chip Thomas: As the situation is right now, those who are using it arc those who are in

the capacity to afford it. The ones that are not on it that should be do not have a large enough

facility to subsidize it. Gave an example. Not sure of the second question, Our idea would be

that if a medicaid beneficiary or nny other person that would be able to go local rather than

having to ttnnsport them.

Rm>.,. J{mlpelman: Would accessing the state network at the same rate of state entities

co&t the state .money, or is it geared to be a pay as you go proposition?

Chairman Byerl~: The way he understands the contract that ITD has with DCN, it is for

0 x0 number of hookups at a certain rate.

~: He understands that the first Tl line is $800 per month, Subsequent lines

are $600. Thinks their contract is for up to ,600. If we were allowed on, we would just become

part of the bid package, and we would pay our share.

Bsm, Skamh~]: How many hospitals do you envision getting on here?

QhJp Thomu: When he includes the Jamestown hospital, it would be 4 7. They envision

eac:h hospital to be online. The better the technical communication. the less need for the patient

H ... t. ~1\): :, ,,~ ! : '.,

. '' ir,·1

jf:

.Page4 Government Operations Division Bill/Resolution Number SB 2022 Hearing Date March 15t 2001

to go to the physician. The Tl line has better quality that there is basically no fear of medical

compromise.

Rep. Skarphol: On the wireless aspect of a Tl line, say in a library, and the hospital

wants to access it by wireless, is the audio/video at the same level'?

Rep. Byerly: Probably not to the same level, can't say if it is acceptable. To Chip:

Having the hospital have the TI is only half of it, because you have the satellite clinics out there.

If the hospital has a T 1, you still need something at the clinic in the small towns. Gave an

example.

Chip Thomas: They have made that as one connection. They connect through a loop.

They thought that would be more efficient than running separate lines to each loc,ltion.

Rep. Skamhol: The ITD proposal has like 15 employees in the department of human

services to set up the requirements for HIPAA. If the OHS is successful in getting this done,

how applicable is that to your situadon, and how valuable would that be to you? Would that save

you from establishing similar software, similar communication equipment?

Chip Thomas: He is in subcommittee now regarding HIPAA. No one knows what

HIPAA is even going to entail, It is going to entail many changes. HIPAA changes are going to

be about double what Y2K changes entailed. Our expenses are on the software side and

operating side, not the hardware. Our expenses are going to be with the people. We are of the

opinion that we need to show good faith. With HIPAA, it is not ifwe do it, it is when and how

fast we do it,

Roll, Glauheim: The $800 per month is designed to pay for the Tl line to the libraries

and schools. I understand that private businesses could hook up. but they would have to pay to

brina the Hne to their business •

' '

Page S Government Operations Division Bill/Resolution Number SB 2022 Hearing Date· March 15t 2001

Chainnan Byerly: Not at the state rate, The state contracted for those "x" number of

hookups and if a private business wants to get onto the network, but it will be at a different rate,

not the state rate. You wouJrl have to contract with DCN.

(They discussed the DCN network, Joca) carriers, and the connection fee and monthly fee

in general, without specifics).

Chainnan Byerly: Comments that he still does not fee) comfortable with this just being

hospitals making this request. He sees aH sorts of others requesting to get onto the network.

Rep. Koppelman: Asks how much extra connections were built into the DCN/state

contract.

Chairman Byerly: Doesn't really know. They contracted for about 600, and have about

480 schools and libraries.

Rep. K211pelman: Questions if there is intended use for those extra connections?

Chainnru, Byerly: There may be some need for more than one T 1 litte. So the numbers

are not easy to follow. Hopes that they contracted for a number close to what they needed.

Rep. Skarphol: Requests Chip Thomas to get back to the committee as to how many

lines he was hoping for.

Chainnan Byerly: Also requestr, infonnat.ion on hospitals, clinics, and satellite and

outreach clinics are requesting. Are they doing away with leased lines?

Chip Thomas: Can follow up with Rep. Skarphol's question, and will follow up as soon '

as possible.

Rm,. Olassheim: Would they need live time patient rlght there clinic setting, or could

they go a couple blocks to a school to transmit information? If they have to be in the room with

~, patient, that would be different than just needing access hi , dose location.

!,

,:

., {' ,1;

~•,11 .'~~/ } 1·.'

~::1::> ,'~ \~

ik :11,i, ' .. '

', '

. ' . .

I•

Page6 Government Operations Division Bill/Resolution Number SB 2022 Hearing Date March 1 St 200 l

,ChiP. Ihomas: That should be able to be answered when he answers Rep. Skarphol

question,

Chainnan Byerly: We will need some more information, but will not need it until next

week when they start working on the ITO budget.

Rep. Huether: The capability at OCN is very great. It was built up to carry a lot, and

does not believe it had been used to close to its capacity.

Rep. Carlis(~: Asks a question about wireless, and its capability,

Chainnan Byerly: Explains that the wireless will not get from the hospital to a remote

clinic.

(Some discussion and examples on the wireless capability, and the number of schools and

libraries, and government agencies).


' '

2001 HOUSE ST ANDING COMMITTEE MINUTES





Committee Clerk Si nature

Minutes:

Side A 0 - 6210

Side B 0- 671


Meter#

Chairman Byerly: Handed out a document title Information Technology Costs for the

2001·3003 Biennium. These are the costs associated and coming out of the agency budgets.

Trying to get the various papers and handouts given organized so they could discuss the issues

somewhat more clearly.

(Discussion today began on #1 of Curt Wolf's memo - Infrastructure. They went on to

discuss r .. t lines, and the network. The committee began wondering about the directive from

last session, and what the bills from 1999 said. Legislative Council staff was requested to get

thf s infonnation ready to explain tot he committee at the next meeting).

The chairman closed the committee meeting on this bill,

J







Minutes:

Side A 0 - 5069 0 - 3600

Side B 0 - 6213

The committee was called to order, and opened committee work on SB 2022,

Meter#

John Bjornson. Legislatiye Council: Appeared and gave some historical infonnation

regarding last session bills SB 2044 and SB 2043. These were the bills that set up the IT

Department ,tr.a ga.v~ tb~m the powers and duties to set up the infrastructure.

(Questions and answers of John Bjornson from the committee and some general

committee discussion).

(•Ide BJ (ITO personnel come back for questions and answers)

(The committee asks questions regarding why libraries were chosen to receive the TI

lines. They also asked about the loans made and that whole issue of loans versus leases, A copy

of the contract between ITO and DCN was handed out. There was discussion as to whether there

are any federal grant& that can be used to help cover any of these costs.)

' i,

Page2 Government Op<,rations Division BilVResolution Number SB 2022 Hearing Date March 23, 200 J

(tape 21 (Cn.ntinuing discussion as to any federal grant money available, Jerry Fossum from

ITD helps answer this question. More questions regarding the equipment costs for the schools

and the wide area network. Some schools may not want or need this information. The

investment won't be made if the school doesn't want it. Further discussion as to the role of DPI

and education dotlars).

Joe Lennertz. DPI: Answers in response to a question of whether or not the schools can

or would make some contributio JS to this expense of the network installation~ he thinks they

could not use their federal technology dollars for this use. He said he would look into it for the

committee.

(Committee discussion as to the area network infonnation they had received today from

the department).

The chnirman closed the committee work on this bill.






Minutes:

S1deA 2426 • 6215

Side B 0 - 3019

The committee wa~ called to order, and opened committee work on SB 2022.

Meter#

Chairman Bye~: Thinks they beat the wide area network to death last Friday, They

probably need to move on.

Rep. Skan,hol: We did ask 0MB to get some infonnation fot· us.

!)aye. 0MB: Was told that most. of the requested information had been handed out

already. Did hand out some more infom1ation on connection costs received from Chris Kalesh,

DPI. Joe Lennertz has made a request of the federal government to find out if the federal funds

the schools get for technology can be applied to reimburse some of the state costs.

(The committee had some general discussion, They wanted the infonnation to find out

what costs the schools were running into. Rep. Skarphol explained why he wanted the

information. The questi"n whether it is good to just give the equipment and lines without the

schools making some contribution, and what kind of contribution could be made).

,,,

·~-I!: I .

,, ,,

, l

· ... ;: .. ,ji 1_T:\,·· ;,·r ,, '

',, :1 ,' t· I ·,

i,1 1,

'·:,/·

Page2 Government Operations Division Bill/Resolution Number SB 2022 Hearing Date March 26, 200 I

[side B]

(Further discussion as to finding a way to work out a contribution plan from the schools

to recoup costs for the routers and Tl lines. They discussed various options, including recouping

all ofth0 state general funds this biennium, or possibly taking smaJJer portions over a larger

_period of time.)


' I i'·'·•' 1 1 \

' '

200) HOUSE STANDING COMMITTEE MlNUTES





Ta e Number Side A 03-27-01 ta e # 1 0 - 6212

Side B Meter#

03M27-0l _ta ___ p_e t_l_2_· ____ 0_-_3_12 __ ..__ _____________ __

Commhtee Clerk Si mature

Minutes:


Chajnnan Byerly: Discusses where they l1~ft off yesterday. That there is $4 million in

DPI for grants for technology, We had just started on page 2 of the spread sheet, which talks

about training for K-12 teachersJ and CU and voc-ed.

(Discussion on these items. Rep. Skarphol has some comments and infonnation

regarding BxploreNet. The representative from ExploreNet felt that this money was set aside

speciflca11y for them, but would be wilting to have only a portion of the budget set aside

specifically for ExploreNet, Rep. Byerly remembers Wayne Kutzer speaking to the committee

about voe ed funds. The committee discussed this at great lengths and played with the idea of

moving thuse funds out or ITD and into the education or voe ed bill where they think they would

be more appropriate,)

Pqt2 Oovomment Oporattons Div,,ion BUI/Rnolutaon Number SB 2022 Hearina Date March 27 • 200 I

(The commfttec also discussed SB 2043, the companion bill that now allows ITD to

borrow/lease money not fn the budget, to do that which they did this current biennium without

leglslativo approval, The committee discussed this at some length,)

More discussion as to all the different costs that will be charged to the agencies, that

some of these agencies are going to have a most difficult time paying their IT bill. They have no

choice but to puy these charges, Rep. Skarphol commented on an even that happened to the tax

department some time ago, that they had ITD come help them with a computer problem, and

then their bill to have done this was so big, the tax department had to quit using the program

because the couldn't afford to run it any more, The committee discussed the possibility of this

happening to other agencies, and breaking their budgets over this too. They discuss policy, and

the needs for everyone having this system, the Tl line and router, etc.)

[side, BJ

Cb,dnnan Byerly: Explains that they have still been talking about the backbone, the wide

area network. They have been talking about getting this into the schools. There is a possibUity

to make a requirement that before the school gets the whole system, the school needs 0 x" number

of students, To make some protection for th,, small schools. Could explore this if they want.

Another option is to go ahead with charging a fee.

(Discussion continued on e-govemment, 01S, electronic document management system,

innovation fund, and Sendit. Discussion continued on Sendit and e-rate credits, and not charging

acceafees.)

The chairman closed the committee work on this bill.

. . . ,. ,• . {,,, ' ' ;

'i\/.;'-' ,;:, . . . ' .•·,·, il,\(i}.t~-=~\ /.:~~-t:\, :_,' ,_ ~~ ,,:•-L

. , '

;'i ;: ,··,., ,•:,,·,,. ·, .J ','• •. : ·,.I ,' 1

' i,,':\1·:;_', ,· ,, ,,

2001 HOUSB STANDING COMMITTEE MINUTES


House Appropriations Committee Oovcmment Operations Dfvisfon

CJ Conftrence Committee


Taoe Number_ Side A Side B 03-28-0J tape #1 0 • 6215 0- 806

Committee Clerk Shmature il&Zd_ Minutes:


Meter#

·-

(The committee had previously discussed the possibility of moving ExploreNet out of

the ITO budget and into the voe ed budget, The subcommittee requested the EE subcommittee to

come to the meeting and discuss this between the two committees. Rep. Monson, Rep. Wald and

Rep. Oullcson from the EE committee were present. They explained their views on ExploreNet

and heard the committee's thoughts on the reason for moving the program. Rebecca Ternes from

ExploreNet was present and gave some comments. The committees discussed thas together and

then decided to dunk about making the change),

(The committee also discussed the e-mail received from Joe Lennertz, and that the

question he posed was not what the committee had asked. They also discussed the letter that

Rep. Olassheim received.)

''' ,, '. •• '" <'

... \·1,:~!> ,,r.:: (,;:.;

L r A i ':,! J .•

/, r;

l ,\, ,, ·;· .... , Mi', •?,'.' L, j·':

,} ,-:

,\,,

-,<.1•,··.· ,,·

,;,

Pap2 Oovcmment Operations Division BUVRosolutlon Number SB 2022 Hearlna Date March 28, 2022

&cl1, Qlgsh;im: Some of the questJons have stressed that we don't know and there Is

uncertainty, and if the budget cuts are done for this, fine, He would like the committee however

to make lnfonned decisions, one way or the other. The questions are vuUd, but the committee

doesn't get the answers to make the decisJons.

Cbofrmao Byerb:: That's why we are asking Mr. Wolfe to provide the answers.

Re,p. Sk1u11lwl: He has constituents that he has to answer to, and they think we are

spending their money, and wo have to do that carefully,

Rep. Huether: Agrees, but doesn't agree, Discusses the referral on sales taxes.

J«p, Carlisle: Where will ITD find all these employees?

Chnirman Byerly: Hopefully the entry level persons wUI come from our colleges, The

senior level will probably be from <,ther companies,

Qav;. 0MB: Mike Ressler (ITD) has said they have a very good relationship whh the

State School of Science, The aggressive pay schedule wUI help hiring and keeping persons,

Chairman Byerly: We need to meet with the EE subsection again, and needs some

clarification from Dave on $1 million, $2 million, $3 million, That will help. He wants to find

this out before ITO comes in again, Does not wsnt another overview again. Does want to know

from the department ifwe cut so much, what are they not going to get. We also will need to

know if we cut some from the budget, how many less people are they going to need. Also upset

about this being spread out in all these budgets, There is no way to track this all down.

Rem, Sk,mhol: Would also like to have any current infonnation on the HIPAA program.


' ' 'I' I' .. 'i, ·, : ,. - ' ~Iii\"

l'

I; ',

,,.;-, .

I

"' 'I' '



House Appropriations Commf ttee Oovemment Operations Division


Hearing Date March 29. 2001

Side A Sido B 0 .. 6219 0 ~ 1759

Committee Clerk Si

Minutes:


Meter#

Cbaianao Byerly: Began discussing ERP, and explaining to Pam, from 0MB what they

had previously discussed with Dave, 0MB, We had talked about taking "x" number of dollars

out of ERP, would they be able to have identified end-point . If you had this amount of dollars,

you'd get this done, etc,

Pam, 0MB: That would actually delay the payment to who the vendor might be. Oracle

had proposed with their $11 million was to start with the University systems, because that was a

priority, They would do everything for the University and that $11 minion in the budget would

be in a payment stream.

Cha.jnpp Byerly: So ITO expects this to go on no matter how much it costs, and no

matter how long it takes?

> ,'., \ ,',:, r,: ~.•/,I, / , ·.',.•• •' :,. < •, :. : ' •. I , , ' ,1 ,' .

/, ',',' 'i

,i

•~!f•,/,';; I

.fi', ,'.( •. I

Pap2 Oovomment Opomlona Dlvl1lon BUVResoluttor, Number SB 2022 Hoarina Date March 29, 2001

Eam, QMD: This ls just tho flrst $1 J mBlion, Uke a down payment on a huge contract.

Riaht now the three flnaUsts are prepar,ng their flnal offers on some amount of money, The final

costs wUI be dctennined later. There is a concern that the costs will creep up over time. Hsgher

Ed has been detennined to be the priority need. Everyone hus agreed that that is the priority.

Oracle has said that the hf gher ed programs are integrated, and they should do them all at the

same time, It makes more sense and is more efficient, She has not heard of any talk of royalty

possibilities. Oetting tMs contract would be good for the vendor, becuuse this is the first state to

do this, The vendors have experience, but have not done one state in the same capacity that we

are requesting. The $11 million is just a guesstimate on the amount of higher ~d only. She has

no idea as to what the rest of the costs would be, Was just an arbitrary number,

(Rep. Olassheim questioned how Curt Wolf came up some specific dollar amounts as to

what the committee could cut. They dollar amount must reflect something, as the numbers are

not just whole round numbers, they are very, very specific. Pam answered that the vendors

might approach this in different ways, some may try to break down the costs differently than

others. The committee asked questions about some other programs, like the quality schools).

(In the afternoon the committee went back to discussion from the budget sheets, and went

line by line in the bill.

Rep. Skemhol: Moves to remove line 16, the IT technical education program

development funds. S~onded by Rep. Thoreson.

( committee discussion)

Voice vote adopted the amendment.

Rep. Carlisle: Moved to leavt ~ine 13, at $600,334, the CII money. Seconded by Rep.

Skarphol.

!•:\••;,. ,:•: l,~,' 0 I •

') :~t: ,:_.;',__ ' I -. ',

t I. • I~ • , ,

,' • • I •

Pqe3 Oovemment Operations Division BUJ/Retolutton Number SB 2022 Hoarina Date March 29, 200 l

(committee discussion)

Voice vote adopted the amendment,

Rep, SkalJ)bgl: Moves to remove $800,000 from line IS, Sendit. Seconded by Rep.

CarUsle,


&111, Olasabeim: Is not comfortable with the process. He would like to have someone in

person explaf n to the committee what would be being cut out of the programs when we cut the

funding,


Rc,p, Skwbol: Moves to adopt amendment to charge the schools $2500 per year with a

sunset clause of 2 years from no. This contribution as toward equipment, not connection charges,

Seconded by Rep. Olassheim.

(committee discuSBion)


RcP, Skarphol: Moved to remove line 20, IT innovation fund. Seconded by Rep.

Carlisle.




1 i '{i.'1' · ' ' ':,,::,•'

;ti

t

I

, ' I', a••',' ',.,

:,J

2001 HOUSE STANDINO COMMITTEE MINUTES


House Appropriations Committee Oovemmcnt Operations Djvfsion

Cl Conference Committee

Hearing Date April 2, 200 J

Ta Number Side A Side B 04-02·0 l ta[X' # l 0 w 6220 0 - 1949


Minutes:


Meter#

R.oxanne, LC: Handed out 2 documents, technology general funds grants for 1999 -

2001, and ITO telecommunications division.

(committee discuss,on as to what they did last meeting, They went on to discuss the

requested FTE •s within the organizational chart just handed out),

Rim, SkamhQJ: Moves to remove two requested FTE's. Seconded by Rep. Carlisle.

(committee discUMion .. at# 1064 Roxanne, LC, gave a summary of what changes the

· COll'mittce had already done).

Voice vote adopts the amendment.

Rep, Kgplmag: Moves to change salaries and wages $142,666 from general to sp«,ial

ftaddl. Seconded by Rep. Carliale.

( committee dilcu.uion) . ,,

I,;,';,:!

\'.;,;.::,, ·:::/.~\),'.~~\r,//[.; , .. ·. . . . . .

·, I ·._, •. • :,/

· .. • • •·· .•• , • .- ,. ,1: ·:: ::}nI\ , • '', ',: ' -•:,,: I 1 ,• ~>:• ,, '

, . :I' '

.',: ,' ,',,

' . .. , -;_·l•,. r

·, ' ' ' . ·,,'

Pap2 Oovemment Opontlon,. DlvJ1lon BUI/ROIOlutfon Numbor SB 2022 Houina Dato April 2, 200 I


(The discussion shifted onto e-govemment. Dave from 0MB explained some

lnfonnatlon to the committee,)

Jttp. Skaa,bpl: Moves to reduce e-govemment, which is line # 13 on the pJnk sheet by I

FTB, $167,088, Seconded by Rep, Thoreson.


(The discusfiion then went on to the O1S hub. Rep. Skarphol wanted to see some

reportins requirements, and thought maybe they would have to amend SB 2043, not the budget.

Rep, Olassheim favors the O1S hub, and there was discussion on this issue, They tried to come

to some sort of compromise.)

Rep, Skaa,bol: Moves to amend to put off for J year the 01S hub, contingent upon them

working out a plan, and goJng to the budget section for approval. Seconded by Rep, Olassheim.


(Discussion went on toe-document management system, security, and research and

planning,)

QblfDDM Byerly: There is a body and there is additional general funds and operating

expenses, etc. There is also additional funds for contracting and research. This is #14 on the

pink lheet.s. One FfE, operating and equipment expenses. They call it R&D money, grant

money. That is why he felt no pains in taking the Innovation fund.

Rem, O!eulumn: They intended the Innovation fund as a loan fund, to be paid back .

Didn •t qwte .understand that before.

Bop. !k•mhgl: Number 9 on the pink lheet.s, and number 1 O?

. . .

".:>{' , .. :,::.<,·; !

· · .... , .... i> •!.. . ;,. ttd./t : '' '' ,,, ', ~: . '

! ,> ','

-, ,·',' '

;•,'' ,_''

Pap3 Oovemment Operation, o,v,aton 8111/Rnolutlon Number SB 2022 Hearin1 Date April 2, 2001

Cblhman Bym:l):: Those are mf scellaneous, and he was trying to work through the

spread sheet first. and then tio back to the miscellaneous. He always t1gurcd tho department

heads were the research and planning people. It was their job to keep up with technology and the

competitors, It's basically a slush fund to deal with questions from the IT committee, and to pay

for research on various technology Issues.

RoXIM9• LC: One of the intended uses was to pay for consultants and grant writing,

Rsm, Olaasbc:dm: Moves to take $ I 00,000 out of the rescurch and planning line.

Seconded by Rep. Skarphol.


ChalrmDD Byerly: Has been ignoring rest of small things, Remember the DOT budget,

and a CARS and RIMS system. There are all these funds that authorize the projects, and these

bodies to do these projects are in the ITD budget.

Be.p, Olusbeim: You get some general fund savings but not JOO% out of taking some of

these projects out?

~bainnan Byerly: No. If you spend the mo11~y on CARS, you put down less asphalt.

Like HIP AA, the federal government requires us to do that, even though we don't have a '

definition of what HIPAA is yet. These are the kinds of positions that if they need them they

hire them, if they don't need them. they don't hire them. If you add all this money up, it is

basically apendina authority we are giving them. He can't say they need "x" less people for

HIP AA for example. They will end up hiring a pool of programers, and some will work on

projects, and then move on to another project. Those positions will then be there forever. You

could cut "x%" ofapending authority, but doesn•t know what that would accomplish, That's

wbeceweare,

'', ·, ., 1:• •1, ,,

·,,.' '~' ': ' ' ,'_

' ' ,•,•'.I,'! •

. 'l·,·,: .

Paao4 Oovemment Operations Division 8111/Reaolutlon Number SB 2022 Hearin& Date April 2, 2001

RGp,,S.k,u:phAl~ Expla,ns that he has talked to Workers Comp, About their ,magfng

process, and they wHI let him know how much thuy Kpont on this system. Oavo some

infonnation on their backup system und remote imaging. Workers Comp, the tax department,

and the DOT are established in imaging, and the Secretary of State is getting into this, There

may be some dupUcation of equipment,

Ch1tomm Byerly: The intention he thinks is to catch this where it gets to the point thut

there is lots of individual systems out there, That is the Intention of EDMS, he thinks,

Doesn't know how to go in and say im,tead of having 30 you can have 26 of these

programers. Basically it is spending authority to hire up to that many people, not to exceed that

many people.

R~p. Skaepho\: Am I correct in ussuming that they said they haven't even begun this

process because they don't know what they have to do?

Cbainn1n Byedy: In HIPAA they don't, All of the requirements haven't been defined.

Rep. SkamhoJ: If they don't get into this for a year from now, the unexpended dollars for

employees, they don't have the ability to utilize those dollars somewhere else?

Chairman Byerly: They just sit there, You heard Mr. Ressler say this morning in regard

to borrowing money. they have the ability to borrow up to their spending authority. So, any

amount of money in the budget under "total all fundsn, yes they could use up to that amount of

money for virtually anything they want.

Re,p. Glusheim: They have special fund income, not general fund authorimtion to

replace the HIP AA people with something else?

Chairman Byerly: There is nothing that says this money is HIPAA money. Its just

special funds. If the federal government decided not to do HIPAA, and there were other projects

• •

i 1,,

Page 5 Oovemment Operations Division BUI/Resolution Number SB 2022 Hearins Date AprU 2. 200 I

that other agenofes wanted and were willing to pay ITD for, they could do those, You would bo

giving them spending authority, anu if they have the money they cun do anything they wunt to.

There ts no differentiation to where the money comes from for tho spending authority,

Rem, Skarphgl: Ofvcs an example, Is there any way we cun put some restraints on thcfr

abHity to transfer money without being onerous?

Cbitirman Qye[ly: Asks Dave ofOMB if they cun do so. The number of employees has

always been limited by the salaries and wages line item, But since this is special funds, they

could exceed thss even couldn't they'/

l)ay~, OMQ: They can't exceed the traditional line item, but if you look at section 2 of

the bill, there was an amendment done by the Senate that deals with what you arc talking about.

The only place where the salaries are limited to a dollar amount certain is elected officials.

Otherwise, the departments have some room to figure out how much and how many to pay

within their budget authority.

Cha1anan Byerly: Section 2 bothers him, because everyone else who wants to transfer

has to come to the budget section. Here the CIO gets to decide and goes to the director ofOMB

who transfers the money, You might as well give him a single Une item.

Daye. 0MB: Explains that the Senate added this because of all of these initiatives that

are supposed to happen, and its hard to get the dollar amount done on these. This is where the

perfonnance measures you desire will fit together nicely.


•

2001 HOUSE STANDJNO COMMITTEE MINUTES


House Appropriations Committee Government Operations Dlvislon


Hearing Date April 3, 200)

,---------.---------r----------------.. Side A Sido B Meter# 0 - 6220 0- 490


Minutes:


Chairman Byerly: He had spent some time talking with people, partners in DCN. They

are very hesitant to opening this up to the hospitals. They said it was never ending with the other

groups that then wanted in. He did find out that hospitals are entitled to money under thee-rate

program, and there is also a federal rural program they arc entitled to money for. They can get

money to oftset costs of connecting. That is lnfonnation that I have gathered.

ReJ>, Huether: Can the hospitals as a group deaJ with DCN?

Chainnan Byerly: Anybody can deal with DCN, they can join a group and try to come

up with their own rate. They would have to deal with local providers.

Re», Glassheim: What would the disadvantage be to the hospitals in not going through

the state system and making their own arrang~ments?

', ~i-,

~i':':

Pqe2 Oovemment Oporattona Dlvj1ion Blll/Retoludon Number SB 2022 Hearlna Date April 3, 2001

CbabJll&D lb~'1[b:~: They would not have as good u rate deal, They could get some other

monoy to of'flot costs though,

&ml, Qlassheim: What would the disadvantage be to our system if others did get on h'l

Chialan10 llYOtb:: Other than our contract that say8 h c11n only be used for state and

educational purposes? He Is not positive that the contract could be gotten out of, and would

create a problem for the 3 years of the contract,

Rem, Huether: It would be revenue to the local providers.

~haianao ayor)y: There would be a hook up cost, and it wouldn't bo Uke the schools.

free, Even then, we probably would charge the hospitals a lot more that they would be willing to

pay for all the costs associated,

Rep, H}J~ther: Believes Chip Thomas said tho hospitals would pay like $8000 .. $9000

per month .

. R~p. Skaq,hol: Thfnks Chip Thomas is assuming the costs would be sfmilP.r to those on

the list. and the costs would be based on volume. The only real advantage he sees if the hospitals

got on the state Rj'dtem is that the contract with the state provides that they would get upgrades as

needed with the service.

Chairman Byerly: The schools, K• 12, believe that they are going to be paying something

on a monthly basis for these systems, exclusive of our amendment of $2500 per year for 2 years.

I am 99,90/4 !ure that Mr. Ressler and Mr. Wolf told us and said the schools have no montL ;y

costs. Asked Dave to make 1 OOo/4 sure that there are no costs to the schoola.

(Dave, 0MB said that it was his understanding was that ITO said the schools would have

no monthly costs. He will double check,)

ii-' • '!,,,, Ii fL. \i 1

Pap3 Oovemmont Operat~on, DJ vision BUVRotolution Number SB 2022 Hoarina Date April 3, 2001

f:bairmlD 8XGd)!: The schools think that they will have reaular monthly fee, exclusive of

the annuaJ fee we amended in, The schools I talked to understood the annual fee, but then

brou,iht up the monthly fee.

(some commjttee discussion as to the hospitals, number of nursing homes, group homcff,

and all other entities that would like to get included in the Tl Unes}

(committee back in tho afternoon)

(General discussion on schools K-12, quality schools, what actunlly is being requested for

software, short term and long term goals, spending now, or wafting and putting tMs on hold for

more years. Rep. Glassheim favors moving ahead with the ERP spending now, and not waiting

any longer. He belh.wcs the university is in real need for their computer systemt and why hold

off on the others, Further discussion on ERP).

R~p. Kruwelman: Moves to adopt amendment 18048.0201, un amendment regarding

ERP. Seconded by Rep, Carlisle,

Vote on Motion: 5 yes, 2 no, 0 absent and not voting,. Motion passes.

(More committee discussion on the funds requested, the breakdown of how much would

give what, Wgher ed needs for the computer programs and ERP Rep. Olassheim pleads to

restore some funding for at least the higher ed portion of the program.)

Rep, Olysheim: Moves to restore the amounts for higher ed financial aid programming.

Seconded by Rep. CarliRle,

Vote on Motion: 6 yes, 1 no, 0 absent and not voting, Motion passes,


Rep, Sk,a,hgl: Moves DO PASS AS AMENDED. Seconded by Rep. Koppelman.

t-. ~~''.:

W\.. i,:,·, i.~.:•./'. ~} i

f 'it.,' l~'·.

lf.:·•e·. :,,._

., , .. I> .,,' ;•;,,,,

t~>. 1'.i:' {£;: ~,'.·

••, ,, '.f', ~V.' ,

/{,!.,' t f i{

',:;.1. ·' ·;·,. ,1f1· 0

/

~i;,:.>

,', ,1

I '•;,•,'1',

'.f. ,_.: .,

t' ' ' , ~' I,

I'

't. ,' i:'

!· . ,,1,,., ,

Vote on Po Pass as Amended : 6 yes, 1 no, 0 absent and not voting.

Rep, Byerly will carry this bill to the fuU committee.

>' !}':(::(:.:,?•,,,,,, ,iy,, .. , ' ',.- ,, .. :: '.~ ,' '

,,,· 1

~t ' . .

,, ' ,', I

•it.','/,' •\JI<

',/:•,' t{i , .~;·.,ii~'

1;1,1. \1:-,

I'

i I, •,,

'

,:: '

\{,:i-?<, ' '

,/'

''

!

200 l HOUSE ST ANDINO COMMITTEE MINUTES




Hearing Date April 4, 2001

Side A Side B o .. 1167

Meter# ___ 4"-______ __,.,__ ______ _

Committee Clerk Si

Minutes:

The committee was called to orderJ and opened committee work on SB 2022.

(The committee had the prepared amendment to review. They went through the

amendment to make sure everything in there is what they wanted. They went through the

various portions of the amendment and found no substantive changes. There was one mistake in

the explanation where the numbers were in the wrong column).


\/ ,\·,.:. ,'



House Appropriations Committee

Cl Conference Committee

Hearing Date April S, 2001

Committee Clerk Si

Minutes:

Side A 0 .. 6220

Side B 0 ~ 180

- The committee was called to order, and opened committee work on SB 2022,

Meter#

Re,p. Byerly: Explain~ the amendment to the fuli committee as passed out of the

subcommittee, 18048.0203. He went through the amendment section by section and explained

where the changes were and why the subcommittee made them. Moved to adopt the amendment.

Seconded by Rep. Koppelman.

(committee discussion and questions),


am,. OlasshQim: Explained some of his thoughts on the process of having come up with i,11,

the amendments from subcommittee. Moved to restore $5 million into ERP. Seconded by Rep.

Warner.


Voice vote failed to adopt the amendment.

I ' .. I(.

k '" ?"' i.,1,/ . ' ,j;1'· ;._·:,' ',, I /

~1)() . ~'iii:' lj';,.:.,

4' 1, 1:,, ':'.'-,.··, ,

//.,_'r

}}' r

I

Page2 Appropriations BilVResolution Number SB 2022 Hcarinv, Date Aprils. 2001

Rem, Svedian: Moved to adopt an amendment regarding hospitals and the wide area

network. Seconded by Rep. Warner.



Rel>, Aarsvold: Moved to remove section 3 of the amendment, Seconded by Rep.

Gulleson.



Rep, Skarphol! Moved DO PASS AS AMENDED. Seconded by Rep. Monson.

Vote on Do Pass as Amended : 15 yes, 5 no, I absent and not voting.

Rep. Byerly is assigned to carry this bill to the floor,

Date: ·~ -c'.). °,-0 / Roll Call Vote#: ·1

2001 HOUSE STANDING COMMITTEE ROLL CALL VOTES BILIJRESOLUTION NO. 3B~d-~

House Appropriations - Government Operations Division

[3(bcommlttee on '5 1 1 Gx,.., +C?s , or

, D Conference Committee


Action Taken ~oJno,J iz> (1V1'WA,d

Committee

Motion Made By~,..._ r- t, J _ ! Seconded (/,,r.-, \ 1

~.>l'.JlbjW4~By ....,.., • '\--VtllAf ~ Representatives Vet No Representatives Yes No

Ren. Rex R. Bverly - Chainnan Ren. Eliot Olassheim Reo. Ron Carlisle - Vice Chainnan Ren. Robert Huether Ren. K.Jm Konnelman Ren. Bob Skamhol I

Ren, Blair Thoreson ,., -n } -

\ r.J t v- < ____-•· I ,· I )" - {} \ ·-'

A .. •· \ I I;"

i/ ' v-1 ...

\ [\.7

' _r

I•

Total (Yes) -----·--- No --------+--¥---4-++,._iiloC

Absent

Floor Aasignment

If the vote is on an amendment, briefly indicate intent:

J.

~,~~.\·,_':~_i.•l;:,\:,: :·.,,~·,,r, ,, .. ,,,/'/,,··,, '·,' "

,

.,.

\ ·,'

I •:1 . ! ,1

Date: ~ -::P,-0 I Roll Call Vote#: z_

2001 HOUSE STANDING COMMITTEE ROLL CALL VOTES BILURESOLUTION NO. 5~ ~6+-,~

House Awropriations - Government Op;rations Division Committee

~bcommlttec on Is p _____ Q_-;-_-q,J __ J_r_~___._S ____ . ________ _ or

. 0 Conference Committee

Legislative Council Amendme1umber

Action Taken fl0fi O ir2 (l l'l-'-..Q#.( J

Motion Made By

Renresentatlvet Yes Reo. Rex R. Byerly .. Chainnan Reo. Ron Carlisle .. Vice Chairman Reo. Kim Koooeltnan lei,. Bob Skamhol Rep. Blafr Thoreson

\

' \

" ,t,

Seconded By

No Reoresentatlves Reo. Eliot Olassheim Rep. Robert Huether

... • .... ' , J.-1 /'\ \ ~ _......,

L./ \ 'M J J

' )V '\ V

Yet No

Total (Yes) _________ No ---------~'r'#+M-Hvr Absent _______________________ ......,. __ _ Floor Assignment

If the vote is on an amendment. briefly indicate intent:

Date: S ·· :JC1-0 J

Roll Call Vote #: 3 2001 HOUSE STANDING COMMITTEE ROLL CALL VOTES

DILL/RESOLUTION NO. ~ fs ~~ House Appropriations - Government Operations Division

cr'ooommlttee on Je p t I I ~+~S , or



Action 'faken · i:11~ ()II'- .j:D 0, ~0 ' Motion Made By e9 ~-~ ~;onded

Representat,ves R~. Rex R. Bverlv .. Chainnan Reo, Ron Carlisle .. Vice Chairman Rea,. Kim Kopi,elman Ren. Bob Skan,hol Ren. Blair Thoreson

Total

Absent

Floor Assignment

I•

Yet No

I

\ ~ ' \ \ ,.

Representatives Ren, EHot OJassheim Rep. Robert Huether

,. ,... j u \..r.

' ~ l 1\\ i) V l \{ )'-'

~ \ \'--


Committee

Yes No

;/ IV '~ ~:( l·l1,·, \~l~·/ t,•/{/•:!,, ;',•' I ,'

s,':, ,. ' .

,-' ',

, ..

Date: 5.-;:}9-0 f Roll Call Vote#: 4

2001 HOUSE STANDING COMMITIEE ROLL CALL VOTES BJLURESOLUTJON NO. S-6 :>O.).....--:).._

House Appropriations .. Government QJ!rations Division Committee

s'bcommittee on lg ; I I ~+G9s , or

, 0 Conference Committee

Leglslatlvc Council Amendment N~~

Action Taken MtblN\ :tD. aM.QM. d' Motion Made By Pi s~ Seconded Poe'>. 0~

.

_llf2·· By l

Renretentatfva Yes No Rea>resentatives Yes No Reo. Rex R. Bverlv .. Chainnan Ren. Eliot OJassheim Reo. Ron Carlisle .. Vice Chairman Ren. Robert Huether Reo, Kim Kom,elman Rei,. Bob Skamhol Ren, Blair Thoreson

I

I\ ~ \L) 1-- t,.,,"'I\

' r\ A L/ \ fA JU -\ , t,... \. 1

~

'

' - \. -..

·I•

Total - (Yes) ________ No --------~~H-lt,j....., Absent

Floor Assignment .,

d.

Date: 's · .::A-9,/ Roll Call Vote#: ,.§

2001 HOUSE STANDING COMMITIEE ROLL CALL VOTES BILIJRESOLUTION NO. 5 f3 :_:)t);)-:)._

House Appropriations - Government Operations Division Committee

~bcomrnittee on -----~--x,v~J __ r_S9_1

_.,_S;;=.....;.... ______ _ or


Legislative Council Amendment Nllf1be~ ·----------------

Action Taken .M&{;o,J -ID {l,~ d ' _______________ , _______ _ Motion Made By f4>.

Reoresentatfves Yes No Representatives Yes No Ren. Rex R. Bverly .. Chahman Rep, Eliot Olassheim Ren. Ron CarUsle .. Vice Chairman Rep. Robert Huether Ren. Kim Koooelman Reo. Bob SkarohoJ Ren. Blair Thoreson .. "

" L/ /'

\ f\. lv _,,,, :/ft J

\ ' I

1

f'' ~ ,,

J

~ \- l V

\)

.,.

Total (Yes) No --------- ---Absent

Floor Assignment \


I'

{

Date:· 4- 2. -0/ Roll Call Vote #: /

2001 HOUSE STANDING COMMITTEE ROLL CALL VOTES BILURESOLUTION NO. S'(s ;\O<.+-d""


~bcoml!lltteeon be t ~+~s, or

. D Conference Committee


Action Taken Ma½VV' b O~~~~J Motion Made By

Repretentatlvn Yes No Renresentatlves Yes No Ren. Rex R. Bverlv - Chainnan Res,, Eliot Olassheim Reo, Ron Carlisle - Vice Chainnan Rer,. Robert Huether . Ren. Kim Konoetman Ren. Bob Skamhol Rer>, Blair Thoreson • L) ....

.. ...,..\\V ./

~ \ ~) - IV\ I

"1 ' hV

t,' \J ' I

-!•

TotaJ

Absent

(Yes) ________ No ---------~~

Floor Assignment

If the vote is on an amendment, briefly indicate intent:. (:

~ J ft-PF,iid ~f ~ ~~OAS 3~4

Date: / Z -6 / Rell cJ~ote #: z_.

2001 HOUSE STANDING COMMITTEE ROLL CALL VOTES BILURESOLUTION NO. S~ :)..C)~ ~

House Appropriations .. Government Operations Division Committee

~lx:ommittee on I z ____ (; __ ~-----J ___ , __ ~__.,__S __ . _______ _ or


Action Taken


~b~ il> (1 ~'--;J . Motion Made By ~ !: Sec011ded

~· ~~\By

Reoresentattves Yes No Representatives Yes No Rep. Rex R. Bverlv • Chainnan Rep, Eliot Glassheim Reo. Ron Carlisle • Vice Chainnan Rep, Robert Huether Rer,. Kim Kor,pelman Ren. Bob Skarnhol .. Ren. Blair Thoreson ,. I ~ !J

\ / ) \J V -\ V f---r-, . ~ ,~ \_/-' ,_

\. lV \

I•

Total (Yes) ________ No ----------4i-++-f-kt:Jr-¥-o

Absent

Floor As»fgnment ----------------------If the vote is on an amendment, briefly indicate intent:

11

.. : ... ·.'.;;._ ;_.:, . '

,":· ~ .

{;

Oat~: J_ Z--6 J RolJ Call Vote#: 3

2001 HOUSE STANDING COMMITTEE ROLL CALL VOTES BILURESOLUTION NO. s B ~~

House Appropriations .. Government Operations Division

r:r'bcommltteeon bi ; I I Qxzv+Q\?S !...

or . D Conference Committee

Legislative Council Amendmrt Number

Action Taken A\~6i-J ·-tD Q.,1M.1,1,\£t • Motion Made By (( S\<o.r~ Seconded k O (), "' By •

I

Representatives Yes No Representatives Ren. Rex R. Byerly - Chainnan Rep. Eliot Olassheim Reo. Ron Carlisle .. Vice Chainnan Reo, Robert Huether Rei,. Kim Koooelman Reo. Bob Skamhot ~

Reo. Blair Thoreson ' ~ i ~

' \ J 11.........-;-

\ V • f'. l A..,) V ' J...,

\.

\ -

I•

Committee

~{rt

Yes No

r ,:, Absent

Floor Assig11ment


'\1,,, Y~·~ -tr;~1.1~ Jl~1.,~ ~' \~ ,,. y· ¢T .

d

~

Date: ✓-"2..-0 / Roll Call Vote#: t/-

2001 HOUSE STANDING COMMITIEE ROLL CALL VOTES BILL/RESOLUTION NO. s B ;l0d--:)..


~bcommlttec on --"----Q._~ ... ;.....:.J--=r'--_~__.,_---'S ____ • ______ _ or

_ D Conference Committee

Legislative Council Amehdme~ber

Action Taken Mer O f',l Am Q~'\.a: • I

Motion Made By ~ 0 S~ ~~conded

Representatives Yes No Re2resentatf ves Yes No Rei,. Rex R. Byerly - Chainnan Rep. Eliot Olassheim Rei,, Ron Carlisle ~ Vice Chainnan Rep, Robert Huether Ren. Kim Koooelman Ren. Bob Skarnhol ...

A

Ren. Blair Thoreson " I r A. ) ---,. \ \.../ _.:)

~

'\ I I " l r -.\ l, \ ' """ \ I \ \ Jv " l \ \.._.I -

\) -

'

,.

Total (Yes) -------Absent

Floor Assignment

If the vote is on an amendment, briefly indicate intent:

~ -#) ~ ~ t' ( ~-ea,h.. \,tu_ C, I~ ~. o<P ~{)~~ .,. f_~(\~-eA"/t llf~ 1,,-\~~

0- 1"'f»'- --- ~7SO.CX:O. ~~

Date: iz-o/ Roll Call Vote#: S--

2001 HOUSE STANDING COMMITTEE ROLL CALL VOTES BILL/RESOLUTION NO. $ B ~

House Appropriations M Government Operations Division Committee

~bcommlttecon lo ii! I Qx,,,+~s, or

. D Conference Committee

Action Taken


Aoho~ --h o.,~ieud ·

Representatives Yes No Representatives Yes No Rep, Rex R. Byerly .. Chainnan

~ Rep, Eliot Olassheim

Ren, Ron Carlisle .. Vice Chairman I Rep, Robert Huether Ren. Kim Konnelman ,

Ren. Bob Skamhol ·-Ren. Blair TI1oreson ... n --'"\. ,,. '\ r,._. .J-"Y~

' l ) \ ~\ .1--> '-V'

l \\ )-...

' \ \' -

""

I•

Total (Yes) _______ _ No

Absent

Floor Assignment


i ,,I

,'; ',

Prepared by the Leglalatlve Councff staff for Representative t<OOl>tf man

April 3 I 2001

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO ENGROSSED SENATE BILL NO. 2022

Page 1, Hne 2, after 11department" Insert": and to provide leglstatlve Intent"

Page 1, remove Une 18

Page 1, Une 21, replace "06,903,619" wfth "84,932,146"

Page 1, Une 22, replace 1111,10~.gaz- with 1170,§9§,214"

Page 1, llne 23, replace "25,718,432" with "14,235,932"

Page 2, after line 4, Insert:

"SECTION 3. LEGISLATIVE INTENT • ENTERPRISE RESOURCE PLANNING• REPORT TO FIFTY-EIGHTH LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY. It Is the Intent of the fifty-seventh teglslatlve assembly that during the biennium beginning July 1, 2001, and endjng June 30, 2003, the Information technology department review the enterprise reaource planning concept and the request for proposal process anticipated to be used to soUclt bkJa for the project, If authorized: that the department prepare a report and Its recommendationl relating to the project; and that the report and recommendations be presented to the approprfatlons committees of the flfty~elghth legJslatlve assembly,"

Renumbet' ICCOf'dlngly


Dlpt, 112 • Information Technology Deparurent • Hou• Action

Th6I amendrnent removt1 $11,971,373 ($11,.t82,500 from the general fund and $488,873 from ott. f~) for the ente,prile rMOUrce planning (ERP) project and authority for three FTE poeltiof,a relating to the proj9ct, ms amendment alto adds a aectlon of leglslatlve Intent that durlr.g the 2001"°3 biennium. the Information Technology Department study the ERP concept and prtMnt recommendatk>nl to the Fifty-eighth Leglslatlve Auembfy.

,,, I I

Page No. 1 18().18.0201 • , .1 1"•.

,/ ] .. 1,i ,.

Date: L/- ·3 -q 1 Roll Call Vote#: /

2001 HOUSE STANDING COMMITIEE ROLi, CALL VOTES BILURESOLUTION NO, ":;){5 ,:)..O.).-:).._

Hau. I AeeropriatJons .. Government Opera dons Divf sion a ., Committee

~bcommittee on ~ 1 or

0 Conference Committee

Lesislative Council Amendment Number

Action Taken _ noo:fu ......... b\_-b....--...Q.~l'N/4-~----____ I ~......_,__'t ....... ~ ......... ,(J..__2('_._.) )..._._

MotlonMadeBy '2af)•~Q,vwJ ~~conded kip, o~ Repre1e11t1tlvet Yes No Representatives Yet No V

Reo. Rex R, Byerly .. Chairman ✓ Rep, Eliot Glassheim ✓ V

Reo, Ron Carlisle .. Vice Chairman ✓ Rep. Robert Huether v Reo. Kim Koooelman ✓ Rei>, Bob Skarohol ✓

Ren. Blair Thoreson ./

..

Total (Yea) _____ 5_ Abeent

Floor Aaipment

lftbe vote i1 on an amendment, briefly indicate intent:

Date: c/-·3-t>I Roll Call Vote #: 2..

1001 HOUSE STANDING COMMIITEE ROLL CALL VOTES BILL/RESOLUTION NO. s B :) D,~:)..

House ApproeriaJjons .. Government Operations Division Committee

~b<:ommlttee on ti a; ; '. I ~+..__..~-------~.......__.. ________ _ or D Conference Committee


ActlonTaken ,M~C½ =k a~'\r\._¼_\ ...... d ____ . _____ _ Motion Made By

~-~~conded

Representatives \'es No Repre.sen tatlves Yes No Reo. Rex R. Bverlv - Chairman ✓ Rep, Eliot Glassheim L,.,""

~-

Rep, Ron Carlisle - Vice Chainnan ._/' Rep, Robert Huether L,, v··

Rep, Kim Koorielman ✓--

Rep, Bob Skarohol \../

Ren, Bhlir Thoreson ,./

..

Total (Yes) ----------'(a_ ? Absent (_/:!..

Floor Aufgnment

If the vote is on an amendment. briefly indicate intent: ~

~ J,w- . }I.Jb~ (MV\t) . u·

''

!'.'• ,, ',' •' ,,••,

1•'\•

0a1o: ~~ s-o I Roll Call Vote #: .._3

ZNl HOUSE STANDING COMM11TEE ROLL CALL VOTES BJLURISOLUTION NO, S ~ :) 0 ,+"-:)_

Houae Al?2!2J?ri•tiona .. Oovemment QeeraOons Division Committee

~bc:ommlnee on bu ___...Q ... ~~d:-'-..... ~--§ ............ _____ _ or D Conforonce Committee

Legislative Council Amendment Number ,, ___ ___,,_ _______ .....,_ ___ _

~~ Action Taken

Motion Made By

Representatives \'es _No Representatives Yes No Ret>. Rex R. Byerly - Chainnan V" Rep, Eliot GJassheim

i-,

~

Ren. Ron Carlisle - Vice Chairman ✓ Rep, Robert Huether ✓ Reo. Kim Koo1>elman ~

Rea. Bob Skan,hol V"""" Reo. Blair Thoreson ✓ ...

.

Total (Yes) _ / ~ No I Absent ---~~,- ~~----------

Floor Auipment

If the vote is OD ID ameooment, briefly indicate '

◄', ' ', I

,(·~\ .. ~·; ,;, ' .'

,•:,,i'

'\• ;

f .. '.iff ..

' ',•· . ,. '•'

110it1.0IOI Tlt.0300 ,,__, No, 1

PNpnd bV the IAgl1IIIMt Cowd _, for .... ~. Oowmmer1I Opetattont

Ap'if&.2001

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO ENGROSSED SENA TE BILL NO. 2022

P191 1, h 2, .. "=menr' 1nNrt "; to PfOYkit •contingent~; to provk» • ltMlmtnl d ,.._,....M Intent: and to proykit an tKpWltlon dell

Page 1, Nne 10, ,._,. "25,915,352" with '75,578,531"

P1g11, Nne 11, ,._,. "31,071,82 .... wtth •35,181,772"

P191 1, Hne 12, ,._,. .. 5,&M,oocr with .. 5,080100Cr'

Page 1, Hnt 13, ,._,. -e~,583" with .. 800,3~"

P191 1, Hne 15, ,._,. .. 1,973,889" with "1,173,669"

Pege 1, remove Hne 16

Page 1, Hne 17, re,>tace-S,968,905" with "9,847, 12111

Page 1, line 18, roplace "11,971,373" with "1,603,666"

Page 1, line 19, replace "1,407,613" with "1.~07.513"

Page 1, remove line 20

Page 1, line 21, replace "96,903,519" with 1182,850,60611

Page 1, llne 221 replace "71.18§,0§7" with "71,883,QBO"

Page 1, Hne 23, replace "25,718,432" with "10,966,726"

Page 2, after line 4, Insert:

"SECTION 3, iitlTIMATED INCOME. The estimated Income llne Item Included In l8Ction 1 of thla Aot lncfudet $1,045,000, or 10 much of the line Item as may be neo11ea,y, d payments from school dfstrtcts that contain a high school. Each scooo, chtrict that containa a twgt, IChoot la to provide the Information technology department $2,500 per yw for co.ta NIOCiated with being connected to the atatewfde wide area networtc.

SECTION 4. CONTINGENT APPRt'PRIATION • GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION IYITEIII. If the fnformatio.1 technology department develops a ceotnlliud geographic Information ayatem lnibltive Pf'OPOl8I that identtfiea all geogr,ipNc Tnloimation 1yatem perticlparq, a proce11 for ,mp1ement1ng a centralized

====~~-:!"~r;u:,.~•=~-:.~ councl, thn II appRJpf'iated out of any moneya In the general fund In the state trlMe.ty, not othet'wiN appropriated, the aum d $750,000 to the Information technology dlpln11111t for Implementing • cenb'11ized geographk: Information eyatem for fiscal year ~ Jwy 1. 2002, and~ June 30, 2003.

Page No, 1 18048.0203

' 1,:·_:

~ ~·~. :·

' .

.'·/·

NCTION I, LICMIUTIVI INTINT • INTIIIPNII RIIOURCI PLANMNO • MPOlff TO ,1PTY""'"11f LIGIILATIYI AIII-LV, It ii the HMnt oftht flfty ... WN'#t ...,_. MNmbty thM dlling the ~ beglMng July 1, 2001, end tndlng June 30', 2003, the information technology depwtment revtew the ente,priN NJIOUtOI SMIMlng concept end thl NqUNt for propotll proct11 antidpud to bt UMd to loMc,t bidl for the PfQICt, if authorized; that the department prepare I report and itl recommendltionl relatii~ ~ the project; and that the report and r~tlont be pr....ud to the ~ commltteet of the fifty-eighth Jeglalltlv• ai~y.

IICTtoN I. l!XP1RATION DATI, Section 3 of thlt Act la effective through June 30, 2003, and after that date 11 Ineffective."

Renumber ICC«dtngly

ITATIMINT Of PURPOSE OP AMENDMENT:

..,,.._ IIM No, 2022 • Information Technology Dtpartm,nt • HouH Aodon

lxt!CUTIVE SENATE HOUSE HOUst! IUOOIT VERSION CHANGES VeRSION

SNtlHMd ...... Nt,N0,3~ f2U8Uli2 ($409,821! f21i,li7M31 ~...,.,,... 3e,07U24 3U7U24 r16.062 36,061,712 6,6",000 UV!l,000 616.000 &.080,000

C... for lnnovedon Ind 9:M,643 934,683 334,249) 000.3:M ~ I!~~ 3,IS00,000 2,200,000 2,200.000

81NOlT ,.,.:.,..,_ 1.973,"9 1,973,6&9 1eoo ,oool 1,173,669 IT technlttl ~ H0,300 &90,300 500,300

PfOl)tlffl de', llopmtne 9,908,905 (321.184l 9,647,121 Wklt .,.. nttw«k 11,HUOli

B...,,,..IM '"°"'°' 20,-'te,873 11,971,373 (10,487,707 1,&03,666 pltM!ng •~e&tm

1,407,&13 1,-407,613 1,407,613 Prtlrle Pub! ~ting IT lnnoYMlon fund 600,000 200,000 (200,000) ~nt 018 appr(lt)rltllon _________ .. , ___ .. ____ .,. ~ ~ T ot,I ,II f\lnd1 f107,021,019 190,903,519 ($13,302.913) $83,600,806

leN NtllNl'-d ll'lcomt Zl,JHgAZ ZlilH,g,Qt aw ,iuu11 Oln«tl fund f35,83&,932 $25,718,432 (S14',001,708) S11,710.72t

FTe 212.00 212.00 (8.00) ~-00

Dept. 112 .. Information Technology DepartnMnt .. Detall of HouH Changn

T••fwldl

t.•--•ttbdlnooffie

0.--Mld

m

REDUCE FUNOINO REDUCE FOR THE CENTER PUNDJNO FOR IHNOVATION FOR SENOIT

/tl«J IHSTRUOTION 1 NETWORK 2

ftsM.241)

0.00

(SI00,000)

----------(MCI0,000)

--------(M00,000)

o.oo

REMOVE R!MOVE FUNOINO FOR IT PROVIDE A POSITIONS AND

TEC ... llCAL REMOVE FUNOINO SOUACEi RELATED EDU(;A'TION FUNDING FOR THE CHANGE FOR FUNDING FOR PRCOAAM IT INNOVATION WIDE AREA WIDE AREA

DEVELC.IPM£NT 3 FUND ~ NETWORK & NelWOAK •

("80,300)

(1321,714)

('300,000)

---------- ...... -------· --------... - --·---·---(SN0,300) ('200.000) so ('321,714)

------.. -- -------- JQ6111Q ----(MI0,300) (U00,000) (11,041,000) (»21,714)

0,00 o.oo 0.00 (2,00)

~No. 2 18048.0203

.t > ) ,, • \ 1; I•

•/ ~ ~,\~~:t{i~ ~ /:,: , • ,.,i,(, ','I 111'1) 1' ,,, ,, I•,. t, • ';

' "

TNIIIII~

LfNMtlMNdlncionlt

Otnetelfllnd

l'Tf

LMN4ifflMMlnoorlle

Genefllfund

FTE

PROVIDe FOR A COHTINOl!NT

APflAOPAIATION (GIS) 11

ZAQ.ggg

t7D0,000

t7D0,000

o.oo

OICRIMI FUHOWOFOR

11-<JOIJIRNMINT INITIATIVl·t

(t140,~i (21,eM

(11.000

..... _ ...... _ ... .,._ ...

(f1t7,0N)

·•-» ........... -..... (f1(17,0N)

(1.00)

TOTAi.HOUSE CHANGe8

i141lU211 t6,0&2 515,00() 334,249

!eoo,ooo~ 590,300

(321,784? (10,467,707

(200,000) zaa

($13,302,1113)

111W (514,001,708)

(8.00)

RltMOV& FUHOIHOFOR

()181

(tatl.417f (HUM (510,000

,.._..., ... ..,, ... -, ....... ($1,071.7811)

.,. ... _ ..... _ ... _,. __

tho11,1e&> (2.00)

DICRIASe FUHOIHOFOR

RHIARCHAHO Pi.AHNINO POSITION

(100,000)

...................... __

($100,000)

...... -...... -.. , ........ ($100,000)

o.oo

(11,971,373)

.... -- .... , .. -......

,,11,m.373)

IHAOm ($11,482,600)

(3.00)

RHTORI FUNC>tHOFOR

HIGHER F~IOH

8V8TEM ffJ

1,603,606

_,..,.,,,. ... _ ...... .,._

ti.603,666

----....... --...

f1,tl03,666

0.00

1 Thlt lffllftdrMnl ~ fundlnQ from lht ~.i fund for !he Ctn.., IOf lnnovallon In lntltuctlon by $334,249, fTom $934,683 lo S&)0,334.

2 ThlHl'I,.,,._,. ,..,_ fundinehm»lt gen«1! fund tot the 8£N01T netw«k bv $800,000, from $1,973,6611 lo $1,173.669.

:, Thie ..,..n,nl NlfflOM funding from the~ fund« '680,300 for lnlctrMllon ~ edUCMlon p,og,am dMlopmenl,

4 1'ftll ........... rtmMe Uldlrtt from h ~ fund of '200,000 for en lnfotmlllQn ~ lnnoYation fund,

I .,,..,.._ • ...,_,~lnfl.M'dnt,--.lohooeta~wlth~lht~ wlde ... ~loldlool dlltriaa M--• hWt .._, Eld, lchc,ol Mid 1h11 conlalnt I hlgtl lChool will bt =~O'lldt lht lnb'mlllon TechrlO!ogy Dtpa,1mtnl $2.100 per •lwOOl'lflldk), lo 111 ....._.wide ... ~. Thll '#Ill l'IIIUlt In 11,045,000 In~ furdl r.....w and ...,.,-..,_.i Uld~•-- wldewnetworll le,__by$1, ,000.

t TN&-•• ttmOYtt ~ d 1»1,114 hM tie..,.,,.,.. fund end two nE poeltionl ... oc:4Mld wll'· !he~ .......... (.

7 Thie .. ...,,.,_,_ .187,0II ol ~ hm hi genlrll fund 111d ~ one FTE IIIOC'-lld wW1 lhl f-91,M!M1tllt lnlt~w~.

I TIIII ......... NfflOIIM ~ df1,011,1. hffl hi on,al flind tnd two FTE ~ fot Wlt"°"aphlc lnfofrnlliot'i •~ (GIS).

t .,._ ....... It...,_. ful'ldlnl d ,11,t7U7S, ol .tlldl S11,4'a,IOO II from 111 IIM'al fund tot lht .. _,,,.,.. MOUl'Ct l)lannlna (~RP) protlCC W~W._m....-,,...,..to._llftlltct, Thlt.,.,.,....llalto,_aNC6iotldlql11.il'tin.ritlhlt~.;lht20i01•03 i6elwM. ..-. lflMI,: den,.,_,. Dlplffllilnl ~ h IAP ooncepe and pNNnt ~• ~ lht 2003 L9iatlw ~ttmbly.

10-n.i..,._, ... ,.,.....~ot•1.IIOl,.t'ClfflhfWl'llfund,0,1"Wllf'lduoelionllnMtlllaldtYMM,

it lWa 11n.-•11•1t .... a .... lo 11e-. thet,,_...~5~111PNIGlllrilllarl all710,000hl'II h general fund 10 fll CNIPll1ment b' ht GIS ~, ........... ,.,..,......llft.----1Gllltllllllhieloh .... ldonlftd,._,..llldgll~~al. ,,.. ............... .,(f14,001,~"-- Ii~.

PageNo. 3 18048.0203

l~ilf ',·•/(t_~}:;;);;\:,:,,,i}\,c ;.,\\t ' -t ''

Date: ✓-~-o/ Roll Call Voto#: /

3001 HOUSE STANDING COMMITl'II ROLL CA.LL VOTES BILIJRISOLIJTION NO. 66 d-0d;L.

Homo APPROPRIATIONS Comm!ttco

D Subco?1nlitteo on ___________ .., ______ _

or D Confcronco Committee

IAaitladve Council Amendment Number /So¢ f, DZO s AotloaTIWll .. ~/;oJ 11.J ad¢ t21J:1YU1rlme-t,)f-Motion Mado By 4a. ~~

Reor..,ntadv11 Yet No Rmre1entadv• Yes No Thrun .. Chairman Wald - Vice Cba1nun '

\

Rm-Aanvold .. , 1.cJ Ra,.ll-lman -Im-Boehm \ \.~ I ~ v~ Rm-Mardnlon llD-Byerty \ ,\J ,... ft", "y Rm-Momon tm-CarUllo ' ' \ J '\ \ \ Rm .. Slau'Dbol bo-Dolzer " . ',~ Rm-Svedfan

ReD - Ol111bolm Rm-, lleD-Oubelca Rm-Warner 'llD-H__, lleo-Wentz LID- IC

I •

ta,.IC,

a.,.1tt' • J· Total (YN) ________ No --------~-#-W"" ·· A.bleat

Floor Autpment

lldle wee•••.,......, briefly mdiclte .-a:

oae: </£.-01 . Roll Call Voto#: 2.

· 2001 BOUSE STANDING COMMITl'EE ROLL CALL VOTES BILI.JRESOLV'l'ION NO. 51!, ~d-;}..

Houao APPROPRJATIONS ConunJttee

0 Subco~itteoon _________________ _

or D Conforonco Comm!tteo

Lea!1ladve Council Amendment Number

Acdon Taken .A1t2 lte:ri It> iu6.YJ@ a/J~d · (J

Motion Made By fir>, ,iflM4/~e«ioded lip, ~ Renre,eatatlva Yes No Reoresentatfva Ya No

Timm • Chahman Wald .. Vice Chahman

. '

Ren • Aanvold • J / Rep• Koooelman llm-Boobm I I " ~\ ) Reo .. Martinson ,, RJm .. Bverlv ... n\ i,f"\v Rep-Momon hn-CarUalo '' J .. ~ u Reo-Skan>bol llm-Dolzer \1 "4 Reo - Svedfan hn-Olaubebn Rer,-Tborelon Rm - Gulleaoa Reo-Wamor Ren-Huether Keo-Wentz Rm-It I •

Reo-Kimgan· ..,_ y::_ --

Total (Y•) No " . \ . ""

Ableat r ~(}I

Ploor Alljpment \)

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO ENGROSSED SENATE BILL NO,,,.

Paso I, line 4, after "department" insert 11; and to provide legislative intent"

Page 6, after line 15, insert:

"SECTION 7, l,EGISLATIVE INTENT, lt is the jntent of the legislative assembly

that any hospital licensed by the state may access and utilize this state's wide area network

services, provided the department determines that the access is not contrary to the state's carrier

contract and that capacity exists within the network. 11


o,i.1 /..s- c; 1 Roll Call Voto #: S

2001 HOUSE STANDING COMMl'JTII ROLL CALL VOTES BILURISOLVTJON NO. :5 f5 ~;,._

ffoUM APPROPRIATIONS Committee

D Subco~ttco on __________________ _

or 0 Conforenco Committoo

Logialativo Counoil Amendment Number __ ..,._ __________ _

Actloa TWII • /f/O h~ ~ ~ ;;.µ-uZ• ModooMadoBy Rep. ~c(J~ :~ Jp 1 ~

Reonaentatlva Yes No Reuraentatlvet Ya No Timm .. Cha1rman Wald· Vice Cbaitman

I

Ren - .Aarsvold ,. ,

Rea • Koppebrwl ,.. I,. ..

R.eo-Boehln .\ \,._,I ✓. 1lop - Martfnaon llen-BYerlY \1 '\\J ~, \\1 Rep-Momon Im - Carlisle \. 1~ " \- .Reo•Skamhol Reo- Delzer '\l' "- ~ .Reo - Svedfan Rm-Olusbefm ~ Reo • Thoreson Rm-Oullaon Rea- Warner Rel>· Huether ho-Wentz lleo - JCemoenfcb Ian- --ReD - ICllailb

Total (Y•) _________ No __________ _

Ableat

Ploor Allipmeat

If die ~- ja oa ID ameadlneat, briefly indicate bdeat:

Dato: 1/-5.-o I Roll Call Voto #: 4,

2001 HOUSE STANDING COMMl1TIE ROLL CALL VOTES BILI.JRESOLUTION NO, 5/3 3C>J~

HoUIO APPROPRIATIONS Committee

D Suboo?lJnitteo on __________________ _

or D Conference Committeo

Legj1ladvo Council Amendment Number

Action Taken A1o&r, f3 ~kPi "1:>UA-t c/. MollonMadeBy h,/J. ~~~;condcd f}_IJ. 4ffi,HJ0 ,v

Reoresentatlva Ya No Representatives Yes No Thmn • Chairman Wald .. Vice Chairman

I

Ren - Amvold ~ )

,/ Jtep - Koonelman Reo-Boohm C \' ,-~, \ Rei> - Martinson Ran • Bye;•.dy \ ~ \ \ - ... r"\. V" Rep-Momon Ren • Carlialo ' \ ) .J V .Ren .. Sbn>hol Reo- Dea.er "~ ....... ROI>· Svedfan Ren - Olaubelm Rep• Thoreson Rm - OullelOD Reo-Wamer ReD • Huether Reo-Wentz R.eo ---.. ~-1..

hn - Kenman ' ReD-KHnllko

Total (Yea) ________ No ----------+--.IL,I Ablent

FJoor AM*anment If the vote JI oa an ameada,ent, bdely mdicato intent:

lknuw ~~~ 3 B~~

Dato: ✓/ .,5~ !__ Roll Call Vote#: ~

2001 HOUSI STANDING COMMITTEE ROLL CALL VOTES BILIJRESOLIJTJON NO. 56 c~lJ~

HoUN APPROPRIATIONS Committee

D Subco~ltteoon __________________ _

or D Conference Committee

LeaJsJadvo Council Amondmont Number /f () V f 1 (J JO 3 Aolloo Takon )G;p mss ~ dn~ r:l.f2 cl MollooM«doBy lip,~:~ ·*• ~-_

Reor ... ntadvN YN No Represent1dve1 Ye, No Timm .. Chabman ""/

Wald· Vice Cbahman -

Reo .. Aanvold ✓ Reo - Koonelman ✓

Reo-Boehm v Reo • Martimon ~

Reo-BYerlY v Rm-Momon v", R.eo -Carllale v Ren .. Skamhol ✓

~ .. ✓ Reo - Svedian Rco .. Dolzer v

Rep .. Qlauboim • ✓ Rea • Thoreson ✓

R.eo-Oulleaon ' ✓ Rm-Wamor v"

Rm -Huether . l'la, • Wentz ~

Jlen - Komnemch -C,/

"

. ReD-.l:9----· v

Rm-lCllnllko v

Total (Y•) __________ _

Ablent

Floor Auipunent

Jf dae vote fl aa an ,....,.♦,,..._ briefty Indicate tnt,mt:

• 1n1r 1 • : . ,11111 . 1. : L :e ,1,1" ~j1h,1 ! · : · illR 1 • 11 • ,1110

, lh 111 H ! J 11 111111 ii II II II f ti It I I I I I ' 11111 I

t 11Prl' Ii .. 1 ,, 1111 11 :111 1 1 " , ,11111 1 , , , " ,~ 111

I '1fl! I l 11 i I 111,fllllllll II I ! j f M1ll1Jl1111 I It ' 111!11 '-

ID -··•·---·--...__..... ............................ ~......._.......~----

I ur I ilf1 i JiUI liillHf ! Ii ' I I I ' 1hf I ' I l111h

I J J I i'1 It !I.I I U f.~§.

11 .JI I I I I 11 11 ! I; i I I I; ! I I ~!•t1 ~I 1111 ;

' 11111 •• , '1 I ,1 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ; ! ! ! !1111 lllh1II ':··I I I I llllllllllllll V I . '

., ,,"( •,'

,,.,. • • -. '•, ·::,• • r

:·.. I ,'•'•

:} . ... , i~:I . .

,·

I I I

_ ......... •·--•·· .. •·-----------,-----···· -- ............. ___ _

11 I p Ii' ~11 rt11 Id i .1111 n l i I I 1 11 I ii 1 " : 11 I

I I

,hh1 Im 111111 di 11 111QII di 11 1 011 f , I I i I i I HI ~I ;) I I I I (1111 I i J ;

d I I I I HIii ;) I I I I 111 I I • I I ii I I I 01111 i II . I 11111

; i I I I i 111111 Ii I I I I 111111 I -c

(1ii 1''

(·,, '' .'·i/

. ',;,;I

•-•· ,..,,, ""• •· •---••-••~--.. ----H------·- - , ••--•••~•-•••• ------•

C' .. ,, '

i ~ u i '" I i'it' •: ; I ' m I ~ -' ~ .. I/ ff 1,• Ii sJ.( ;, ~ l\ g ~J( (B B

/ r I is~ ! i. J ~,a; l f s ~-, . ffi I t §lir •ii L a If' i a r !i!I [ · ·1 B r(ii j g J if~ ·i J

I l~J I I · 1a~ I · ;I . lii I

C ~ . '•' /

l l l l l ~1 t ;\ rt 'I;; •1iii1iWif"i .. ii I r, f i i ,: ~ i id ;u! II 11in 111111111·dl II 1 -j~ ~ 1 1·'° i !" f &

1 iPj 'i ' 11 iflf I ~IIIIJ ~ j!V I :1 ! ii . -~ d 99: 1' J, l1b 1111111n;u1 :i'_, I!! • I Pwi ~ ~J· 'I !· ')'! J;!,· ; ,'1·",'I

" ' I 'l ii' i i' ~ ' U! !l~ iLHI

i 'I J1~ ·11·· "In r1i1'1 1'1iliJ ' f I .t ' I I 1 I I I .1-1 . . i.r: , • I fa I ,4 Uqi

a. l i •1 • i• a11,1 -· I'

I ! ! I : ' f i ;iJI i 111 il);i I iW.1 - M.~ f I I I 'l ,.~ii I 1\f 11111, 1,,.1!

I i 11:J ti~ I I; 11.11 I I b 1. a· · , f ''I ,~ 1

1f 1111· • 1J! i i I J. Ii 11

' ri• ' I ' i i I I r I 8 f I s Ii f I I f I I ' ,''/

1./'

• : r •• :~, 1,.L~.i11a,f:l2tJ ... U ... u.......W....U.U ', d'cct ..,,:~.,•~·I~~-,/' :'i\l'/~ " . •,. ,l.;.,."'-...1.C..~i....Lu....i...~ \,

-- .. ___,;, ..... ,.

,'"~_·. ;_, : II s' .r '. ,I , ' , '"'", 1/ :·•,• ), ~ ,•; r' '

'

··3 f :, .·,;_ '. 'I '

' .,

ti ;; i! )Jf ... lH~ m H 11 1~d!l1~1! s t •!;! ,; I ·JJIJJ -~

~ & I 1, Si~~ Iii ~.JI

It • ~11 r JUd . -lili Ii •

I • i ! I

~, ,, -:.:·,I ,:.,1

11w1-\Ji: ~, ··· ·,., ,'!.",,.! '.·I. ,,,<;,•I• •·,_· ·,

,?···'''·,'.} ' ,, ,,,,1

'.: l ', ·: •,C'

. ,,·

2001 SENATE APPROPRIATIONS

CONFERENCE COMMITTEE

SB 2022

i. ,,

.. W. . • /.:" ,·

r,,

,t ~•,,

.,

2001 SENATE CONFERENCE COMMITTEE MINUTES


Senate Approprhtions Committee


Hearing Date April 13, 200 1

Ta Number Side A Side B 1 X

Minutes:

Meter# 6.6-42.4

Senaior Solberg opened the conference committee hearing on SB 2022. Present from the Senate

were Senator Solberg~ Senator Schobinger, and Senator Robinson, present from the House were

Representative Byerly, Representative Skarphol and Representative Huether,

Senator Solbeti! I would like the House to explain line by line the changes/amendents made by

the House and to explain each change.

Representative Byerly: Explained the changes to the bill starting on page 1, line by line and

reasons considered. Also stated that they use the spreadsheet provided to the committees by

lnfonnation Technology, stating there were no changes to Phase 1 & 2. All funding to ERP was

eliminated and taken off. There were priorities and this was the third priority, Wide area

network was the Jst priority and initiatives was the 2nd priority.

Senator SoJbera: ERP (enterprise resource planning project), eliminated why, bases of the letter?

Senate Appropriations Committee Bill/Resolution Number SB 2022 Hearing Date April 13, 200 I

Rcmresentative Byerly: The Director of IT sent a letter in response to the request of a House

committee member stating this was the third priority and savings to the general fund.

Senator Solberg: So the reason ERP was cut is because of priorities, the departments priorities.

Re,presentatjye 8)!9rly.· We asked the department for specifics and modules on costs. The

infonnation requested was not received on ERP. Consideration and testimony was presented

before the committee. We felt we are not ready to invest without the additional information

requested from the IT.

SenatQr Solberg: Let's discuss more on the budget. The idea and rationale of your process on

the entire bill, are there any questions.

Senator Robinson: I do have concerns here mainly the relationship with KH 12 schools and the

state wide system/network., the amount assessed to the schools and costs of the system to them.

Representative Byerl}".: We didn't get through all our amendments, He went on to explain the

E-Oovemment initiative, OIS, ERP, EDMS, salaries and wages.

Senator Solbera: Lees discuss one area at a time. Wide area network and billing the school

$5,000 a biennium per school. Is this all schools thnt signed up, is this mandated?

Representative Byerly: In SB 2043 included the mandate for sign up for schools.

Remeunmtive Byerly: Why don't both sides explain their changes at this first meeting,

Shouldn't we go back now to the Senate amendments? Was the funding for ERP of $8.S million

from 0MB and the Governor's budget, I'm not sure.

Senator Solbera: We approved ERP with no additions ofS8.S million and this was the

Oovemor's budget.

Bau:csentative Byer(~: The reduction to ETC grants from the Senate, Executive budget was $3.S

million and the Senate reduced h to $1.3 million?

""'"_""""'_,~~~~~,.~,,,,.ffl'/~~'11"""'!'~,.' .~, ,~, -~~~""""""'"""ll'!"'ll'l'l!'l"!'!'ll'!!"""!",....,.,11'!1!!,,ltl!lll,', ,ll'P!'I.,,,,. ,"""',:""· ,,!!'1!11,""', ,,,'!'!1"11'!"!1~~~ ........ -"-""!'!~

, .....

• . Pqe3

',,,' •,:,;::. ,:, ''

" \· . '1::,'

:/;·\ '' 1

11 ·,

; ,,:_\ :' ', ,' ,'

$ePate APP,ropri~lions Committee Bill/Resolution Number SB 2022 H~g 0ate April l 3t 2001

Senator SQlberi:: The ETC grants, there was $1 million unfunded grants with connectivity

through the schools, this was the Governor's request. The transfer for spcndirtg authority was

unlimited. The change was to free up other areas of the department where it was needed.

Re,preseotatjye Byerly: Unlimited, $300,000 innovation?

1)3ye. 0MB, that was in the Govemor•s request.

RepresenwUve Byerly: To summarize, changes by Senate other than the unlimited transfot· of

funds, these were all changes in the Hoeven budget?

Senator Sol\ma: That's right.

Re,presentatiye Byerly: Went on to explain the amendments on page 2. There is no quality

school initiative anymore, out of Governor's office the transfer for student data base will wrap

into ERP eventually.

Senator Solb~rg: All reporting under one area.

Senator Robinson: The center piece proposed in the wide area network for K-12 schools,

Rsn,resentative Huether: The $2,500 per year to schools, $5,000 for two years. I have not heard

any concerns from the two schools I spoke with on this amount.

Senator Robinson: What will be next to these schools. We issue more and more costs to the

public schools, a struggling history.

Senator Solber1i: We will cover that area in our next meeting~ the wide area network Phase 1 &

2. We will provide the spreadsheet to the committee members and a detailed areas that were

reduced.

Sator Robinson: One more comment, the roll out of the wide area network and the FTE's

packaae is critical.

iatr,a:.SoU>eca: This meeting is a~ourned and recessed until our next meeting, Meter 42.4,

·1(. \'/-!- ,:,· '

' ' : •,_i -~! I

,·

-h.•\ f:{: I 1._

f,.:: ;~~,:-·r: ,, tr,, ,,,. 1'\1

~Jf \ t-_!·


BILL/RESOLUTION NO. S92022


x·conference Committee

Hearing Date April 16, 200 l

Side B Meter# 0.0 - 48.3

Minutes:

Senator Solbera. Chair of the S82022 (lnfom1ation Technology Department) Conference

Committee, caHcd the meeting to order at 3:30, Monday, April 16th in the Harvest Room.

Roll call: All members present: Senator Solberg; Senator Schobinger; Senator Robinson;

Representative Byerly; Representative Skarphol; and Representative Huether.

Senator Solbera. My intent committee members to basicaJly work off of this worksheet, and see

what progress we can make. A comment about the letter from Mr. Wolff. I do not see where

priorities are set, he was asked to draw out areas of the budget on certain levels of reduction. The

way I read the letter, he felt the entire appropriation and bHI was important to go forward. I did

not feel that thf s was an area that ITD felt could be cuti Would like to begin to work out the

differences and the process to work that out. The first one we have is a di ffere..r,ce of l million.

''/,'•"' •)r

Senate Appropriations Committee Bill/Resolution Number S82022 Hearing Date April 16. 2001

45 thousand dollars on Phase 2 of the network, and the l million, 45 thousand dollars proposed

by the House. Connectivity cost would be bore by the State, How many of the schools that we

would be missing if we mandated a $5,000 or $2500 per year on this hookup, and as we do that,

the money brought in by the universal service fund that we have an opportunity to recapture what

percent of that we may get back, and we may be in danger if we get a lot of the small schools that

do not want to sign up because of the cost. We may wind up losing , I believe a whole lot more

dollars on the universal service fund than we would gain.

Representative Byerly, Mr. Chairman, here is the report we have requested from DPI. There

were a couple of things that came up when we started dealing with this issue. The decision made

by ITO to expand the network to include the libraries, when there was no mandate in 2043 last

time for libraries. The schools presented a little bit different issue to us. We tied that together

into one package that included many of the grants that are in this budget, and also grants that arc

in the DPI budget. We asked schools to get back to us on what their current Internet access

charges are. Since then we have gotten a few odds and ends lower, where we found out what

they are being charged. Based on this information we felt it was appropriate for KM 12 to make a

contribution tn the area of purchasing of hardware. Each of the schools are now getting a bare

minimum service. When the state network is finally in place they witl be on the cutting edge of

teohnology, with no monthly access charget except for those that are going to require multiple

Ti's, We felt that $2500 for 2 years (Note: in our amendment, there as an expiration date on that),

was a very small price to pay for the capability that they are going to enjoy, especially in light of

what they are already spending.

Senate Appropriations Committee BilVResolution Number S82022 Hearing Date April 16. ?00 t

Senator Solbera, It looks like we have a small portion of the schools that we talked about. There

is no doubt that it is a wide area, They will be paying monthly fees once they are hooked up,

RQpre§~ntatiyc Byerly, We asked Mr. Wolff specifically that question, and he said on tape in our

committee, NO, they do not pay any monthly connection fees. We asked if they are going to

have any other costs from the State of North Dakota, and the answer to that was NO.

Senator Solbs,m, There is a postal rate charge, we have a postalized rate charge I believe is up to

$480 per month. This is the understanding that we worked off in the Senate all along.

R,a,resentative By...m:ly. Then we need to go back and review the minutes of our hearings. We

were told that once they were connected there were no recurring costs to a school district or a

library, We were told point blank that no school and no libraries are going to have any costs to

be on the state wide network ever.

Senator SolbS'ti, Never has been my understanding. This has been our understanding from

Day 1 when we were putting the statewide network together. The whole idea that there was a

postalized rate so there would be one charge ~)er month, per unit, on a T -l line, Am I correct

Senator Robinson?

Senator Robinson. Yes. that is correct, and the advantage of going with a state wide system is

that S l % of our system is in K through 12.

Senate Appropriations Committee· BUI/Resolution Number S82022 · Hearing Date April 16, 2001

/◄' ,.,

&presentatiye Byerly. We have heard that before. I would hope that we would be here to

gather new infonnation which we have right now. lfyou are under the impression that schools

have a recurring cost, that is new information to us. If there is a recurring cost, then we have

something to talk about.

Re.presentatiye Skarphol. What Representative Byerly has said is absolutely correct. We asked

them and were told that there would be no charge to schools and libraries. Our assumption was

that the $800 a month that the State agencies were paying was to subsidize that. All of our

committees were under the assumption that schools would pay absolutely nothing once they arc

hooked up.

Re.presentative Byerly. This is a new twist for us, and that changes our perspective if that is the

case. We would Jike to go back and review that.

~nator Solberg. We will hold that for the next meeting. On the standard $2 I, 784 on the school

employeos, this is what it would take to service the Phase 2 of the network. This is to take care

of the accounts, and make sure they are up and running, that all factions of the network, bumps in

the road, glitches in the network, that need to be taken care of. These are service personr,cl for

the hookup for all the K - 12 and the libraries,

Re,oresentatiye Byerly. We reviewed the status of the employees that they currently have in ICD.

There already are 11 employees ensaged in that task. We did give them 2 more employees. We

~~ined in going through the budget, we felt that two more would be sufficient. Over a

~I;:, /·., i',:' 1t · '

i: fi'•'

~;: .

, , ... ·:·•:1:: -~;l<-\~ ) ?··'_. '~

p' 's ...• •'

.. , . · · S-.te Appropriations Committee ·; QUI/Rci'olution Number 882022 , , ,ll~g bate April 16, 2001

·. period of time, we have given Mr. Wolff almost carto blanche to do whatevrr he wants in that

department.

Senator Solber". I don't think that we hav" given him anything. We put into place, what was

mandated, in the bill two years ago and I don't see any carte blanche, we will see what happens

when this committee is done, but it is not there yet.

Representative Byerly. I am a tittle confused by the current 2043. Coupled with the testimony

that we had upstairs that dealt with FTE, specifically in the area of software development for

different agencies. 2043 would allow Mr. Wolff that if he needs more bodies to go out and do it

w.Uhin his budget.

Senator Solbera, Show me where all these FTE's are run in the Phase 2 of the network, that has

not bee implemented yet.

Re_presentative pyerly. We ruquested an organizational ,,hart (attached),

Representative Skar_ghol. One detail that we did not cover the other day was, Section 2, this

transfer thing. Was this a Senate amendment or was that something requested by the Governor'!

, Seqator Solbera. That was th~ Senate.

, Re.presentaUve Skaa,hol. Without any oversight of any kind, do you think that is appropriate?

Senate Appropriatfons Committee Bill/Resolution Number S82022 Hearing Date April J 6, 200 J

Senaior Solber1, I think that is appropriate. The standing committee will continue to monitor

each area.

Represe~mhQI. It was not the Governors office that recommended this. The budget

section was not involved in that oversight at all? I see committee fine, but a lot of those

committee members are not budget cpmmittee members.

Senator Solber1L I would not have any problem with oversight on the budget s'.!ction reporting to

the budget c<)mmittee,

Representative Byerly. I don't remember last sessions version of 2043 and 2044. Docs it have

the sam~ kind of powers as the budget section to approve the expenditure of funds?

~lJt Solbers, I don•t remember if they have that or not.

~nator RobinsQn. To clear the air here. I have no problem whatsoever. Those committee

meetings are all open, everyone received the minutes. If there ever was an agency that wa.~: I

f.'orthrlght, upfront, this agency has been doing that. I think for the next meeting, we should puJI

the statute that refers to ITD. We need to keep in mind the rolling out of Phase 2 of the network

is no small issue, We are talking 300 circuits in 194 communities, We ho.d a history t .1 the state

of not living up to our commitments in the area of technology,

Senator SolbJ:r&e We have the FTE chart. I would guess that we are looking at 2 vacant

positions on K-12,

Paa,7' Senate, Appropriations Committee BUl/Resoluti<>n Number S82022 Hearing Date April 16. 200 l

Re,presentative Byerly. There is actually 4 positions. 2 are marked as vacant and 2 are marked

temporaries.

Senator Solbera, There is a temporary for Phase J •

Rm,resentatjye Byerly. Those are the 2 tcmporarfos that arc out of the budget right now. Those

are included as 2 of tho 4.

S;nator Solbera, Those are the 2 that you left intact'/ That is for Phase 1 of the network. By

taking care of the agencies, cause the university systems etc. Phase 2 is the othel' 194

communities and/or 390 hookups. Are we going to be able to offer and provide the proper

service,

Rgpresentatjye QyerJy. They would have a total of 13 people Jnvolved in the process, coupled

:: with the support they will get from SBNDIT. We felt it the additional employees might be nice

}'.: to have, We did not think based on the total package that they were entirely necessary. l•: f1 ..

f ii StnelOr SoJbet&e That is the difference we have, We felt they are entirely necessary for phase 2

or tho hookup, and be operational by January 2002, Any movement on that? I think it is

ablolutoly necet~""Y with the number ofunita we are putting on,

'/;,,' ,'

j,:,·,.·

' (,',,

Page8 Senate Appropriations Committee BilVResoludon N11mber SB2022 Hearing Date Aprii 16, 2001

Re,prespntadye Skarphol. It appears that we have 180 entities on line already in Phase I. There

is an initial need for help to do that, once you have 190 entities on line you should not need I I

people to sustain that. We felt some of the people that were in place already were going to be

able to pick up some of the load for Phase 2. We don't need to add as many employees.

Representative 8-.'i&dY.J We received testimony from the Association of Counties that the

$248,000 that is in here, was going to go toward to provide support to the counties. That is the

reason $248,000 is still in here, because the Association of Counties said that they were going to

be front lined to handle the questions the counties were going to have.

Senator Solberg. We are not getting a lot settled now.

Representadyc1 Byer!)!. We can probably agree that we are going to leave the Association of

Counties in there at $248,000.

Senator Solb,;m. Lets go to the Voe Ed program that was reduced from $422,300.

Rcpresentath1e Byerly. The way the V oc Ed budget sits at the moment, it docs still name

Explorer Net,

Senator Solbera, What was the reason for reducjng it to $422,3007

,\\,''._ ,:: . ,, .':·',,.·· :r .-,, . ,• ·:'1·

· l• . .1.'•i',•,;J: ·.•. ·:: 1

' ,'

~;}\,:(·:' ' ·,

Pago9

I I~

1;.:,: .

i,t:, \

J\( ,_ i,f,r ' I! ~1•,

Senate Appropriations Committee BUI/Resolution Number S82022 Heai:ing Date April 16, 2001

Reprcacntatiye Sk{UJ)hol. The V oc Ed subcommittee and the House Appropriations committee

thought it was appropriate. We transferred out $590,300 to them, and they reduced it over there.

I had a discussion with Governor Hoeven with regard to this issue, and we subsequently talked to

0MB. My conversation with the Governor and MS Peterson. The Governor told MS Peterson

that this money should go to Explore Net and if Mr. Wolff had a problem with that, he should

contact the Gov"mor. I think !t ~hould s:tay designated.

Senator Solbeti, If it is out of our hands, if it is transferred out, I personally don't think it should

go designated. I don•t see why, lfwe are going to transfer it over to Voe Ed, then 1 think we

should transfer it over for programs that they see flt. Let them make the decisions if we are

going to put it there.

Re_presc;ntative Skarphol, That $590,300 was requested by Explorer Net of Oovemor Schufcr, it

was never requested by ITD or V oc Ed, It was a request by Explorer Net. Had they not made

that request, those dollars would not be in the budget now. If it is not to be given to Explorer

Net, it should be taken out of the budget entirely,

Rei,resentative Byerb:, On this issue, I think we should put it on hold, It may come back again.

We transferred it out of this budget because it came under the heading of Voo Ed program. It

wu under the umbrella where it really belongs. It is a budget item like Prairie Public, that Mr.

Wolff' doesn't really have any control over it, and doesn't relate to his budget,

· ~:~T; ,', . hnator Sotbera, I don't agree that this was brought in strictly as Explorer Net. ,1,1',.:j ' " ~

" ' '

'.,1 .: .. ,

:,,, '' ,i

,,.,, ·\ t ~,

{(j,' I

- :-',,:. ,'.'·:·,: ,, J ,.1

'.'i,' 1 ..• ,I•

.· '

•' '•', P•S4t 10 Senaic, Appropriath>ns Committ~ BUI/Resolution Number S92022 Hearl,ig Date April 16. 200 I

Re,gre~nmtive SkamhQl. Explorer Net is the one that made the request for that exact dollar

amount of Governor Schafer•s and 0MB, and you can verify that with them. Voe Ed indicated

an interest in starting an IT program and they asked for an additional $500,000, That is a

separate appropriation and that was in the Voe Ed budget for an increase,

S@nator Sol®rg. On CII, it was cut by $334,000.

Re:presentative Byerly, Primarily, the reason was we were sitting with a budget of $340,000.

There arc very few budgets, that we would ever consider tripling under any circumstances.

When we took a look at programs they were offering, how it is going to be used, we felt this no

longer amounts to the ¼ million dollar. It certainly would be a sufficient amount of funding to

get thent started for the next 2 years.

Senator Solbera, I am looking for a printout of their report of where it would come under, and

how this money would be used. The present budget I think is $340,583. The additional dollars,

did you have the printout on that as where it would come and how it would be used.

R@resenmtive Dyed)!, The $594,000 they were asking for above the current budget. We took a

look at tt and kicked numbers around, we discussed it. We spent much Ume on the ITD budget,

ht~. ,

,~:::: ·. S.O.tor Solbora, You felt there was no need for anybody to stay and work with the people out in

':':\./:-'. .;.,· tM. 1eb()ol1? 1 >? ' ~';1ii' ·-i',,':'1 •.<(, ! .. ,,, •

I/ : , .. 1·,,

," 1'

"1J, ',,

,.i . •I.

I

·,

\I

Senate Appropriations Committee Bill/Resolution Number S82022 Hearlttg Date April 16. 2001

R~presentatiye Byerly. On the contrary. We deeded them over¼ million dollars in additional

funding to expand their training programs. There was not going to be any more FTE involved.

Most of it was going to be spent on the cost of presenting the programs, through the net and in

person. We felt the additional ¼ million doJlars was about 85% more than they had this time.

That is a pretty sizable increase in the budget.

Senator Solberg. Their proposal is to have 2, 4 day and 2, 8 day institutes at 2 different

locations around the State. Do you feel that this wiJJ do the job by cutting them by $335,000?

Representative Byerly. By increasing it by ¼ million dollars, we think that we will still affot'd

them enough staff and resources to put on their training.

Senutor Solber~. How did this happen'?

Representative Byerly. They will still continue to go on and provide training, We felt the ¼

mitHon dollars increase was sufficient to cover their costs,

Senator Robinson. I disagree with the change in the budget in a number of areas. CII is housed

out of Valley City State College, The fact we are bringing on an additional 194 locations

changes their work completely. They have the ability to it with not a whole 1ot of staff. This is a

service that the schoo1s value Mlrl i~ a very high priority. They are going to be changing their

operation in scope. This is due t1J the roll out of the network,

,:,

Page 12 Senate Appropriations Commhtee Bill/Resolution Number S82022 Hearing Date April 16, 200 l

.Rcwreaentatiye Skarphol. One of the other things that we considered with regard to the wide area

network and the training of the educators is the grants that are available to the school and the

amount of grant money that is out there. Last cycle there was $238,834.70 in grant awards that

were never asked for. They have been granted, but the schools never asked for them. There is

$240,000 doHars that could go to CII if it were asked for. They were grants that came out of

DPI. There was $3.9 million awarded, and $238,000 that was never picked up.

Senator Solberg. I think that was for equipment, and we arc talking training here with personnel

rather than equipment, whether it be video or whatever.

~presentatiy\) Skarphol. If we are going to provide the equipment. I would think it would be

legitimat,J to ask for the training.

Seng.tor Solbera, We have not come back to the idea that we are not going to charge them

$5,000 to hookup. I think that we better rethink this thing if we vrt. going to have an area

network. If we are going to destroy it, then lets destroy it.

L ·· ·11 Bo»resentatiye Skamhol. It is nC1t the intention of the House side to destroy the wide area

'j""

t··. network. We think it is just as important as you people do . . 1, ~/,.,i .'.\'' .'( y· 11.:'.•:. &corerentatb:e ByerJ~. I think we have a difference of opinion on certain things. We have the

•;,, same responsibiU1'111s as yonr committee, an~ that is to take a look at thh-1~ hear tesdmony, a~d .. f

:,~,'.~-,:it.':;,~''.(, ' ' ', :• '

---"""'~"""'""""!!!!ll'!'l'~"""""~~"""'Jl~~~"""1'11'111119!1"""'~""-· ,l'ffl!!II!, 111!111,, P,I!"!,, !II"' .. ,....,,,.,,~"""""""""""""'""""'11!1111!!1!'"""""''""""""""-"!!'l\'~,'l'I!, ,"'-",~,' '""'-""'~"""""_,.,.,,,~ tX- · .. , ·. ·.

/,\! ~1,:

'.!ii\' ,') ''°:!,' '' ,\f I

· 1,ir\ • .. J-'("

1·; I',,, '

; '{

Page 13 Senate Appropriations Committee Bill/Resolution Number sa2022 Hearing Date April 16, 2001

make decisions. If you think that we did not do that in all sincerity, then why arc we here

discussing it. One chamber or the other is more committed, I think is unacceptable. We do have

a difference of opinion.

Senator Solber~. I think w~ have a wide difference of opinion.

R~presentatiye Byerly. When we discussed the amendments that were done on the Senate, all

except 1 were just the recommendations of the Governors Office. In our judgment we came up

with some different conclusions. Now we can sort through those difference and come up with

what is best for the taxpayers of North Dakota.

Senator Solberg. To say this is strictly a Governors budget would be a misnomer. We have

worked to get some sensibility to ITD for North Dakota, There was considerable time put in

before this session to put together a network.

Senator Robinson. I don't know what procedum the House used. Our side throughout ~he

interim, and up through the crossover, when we dr.:alt with this budget, we dealt with all parties

involved. One thing we called for in this legislature was to bring this budget together. We could

have bur.ed these 1·equests in other budgets.

Senator Solbera. We have not made any he61dway in CII. Members of the House, do you want

ttt talk about anything on SENDJT?

"

',

' <1;-><.~ : ' '/ !, ':'·, ·•1,

P-'\ge 14. Sfflate Appropriations Committee Bill/Resolution Number 8B2022 Hearing Date April J 6, 2001

Re,prc;sentatiye ijyerly. Remember the work on Section 2 that was amended on the Senate side

allows Mr. Wolff, the way it is worded, to do anything he wants with this budget. We worked it

from a holistic approach to Section 2, allows Mr. Wolff to do anything he wants. We have some

differences that we need to iron out.

Senator Robinson. We have nothing to hide, We arc willing to attach language on Section 2 that

will have budget section approval. Does that change your philosophy on these issues or not'?

Repre§entativ~ Byerly. No, because he will still be able to transfer money from any line item on

his budget.

Senator Solberg,_ It seems to me if Section 2 bothers you so much, that the House would have

seen it before it came over.

Re.presentative Byerly. We ten it in because we treated this budget with a holistic approach. We

did not get a chance to discuss it in any detail. We told you in the last meeting that this was not

the House~s final position, We are waiting for some additional information, It is not a $13 ½

million difference.

Senator Solberi, It looks Uke we can go right back to the top. W'e havfl come down about,,

items and have made no progress, I think it is important that we P. ~t Phase 2 <>ut of the way

before we go ~ywhere else.

,•~,/,\·/:·, 1i1

I' { \\ ' ,'' .,•::

i(~, .l· I

I•'.

i" lt,(). ,, '

'. ;,

J:' ·,,. ,•/'{/\ 1r, ;' '·~I'. . · ' ., ,

,Page JS Senate Appropriations Committee Bill/Resolution Number S82022 Hearing Date April 16, 2001

Be,presentative Byerly. I will ragree to a certain point. We accept the fact that the state wide

network is vital to the State of North Dakota. The only thing we differ on is the amount of

money we feel ITO needs to do the implementation.

Senator Solberg. We will close this hearing.

). 1'.

2001 SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE MINUTES'



)( Conference Committee

Hearing Date April 18, 200 l

Tar,e Number Side A Side B

... ...... ,••

Meter# Tape# 3 X ().0 - 24.3 ...

./

·-

Committee Clerk Sign_ature a-~ ~ Minutes:

Senotor Solben,. Chair of the S82022 Conference Committee (Information Technology

Department), calJed the nie,.Jtihg to order at 2:30 pm on Wednesday, April t 8th in the Harvest

Room.

Roll Call answered by: S•:i, ·.-.tot Solberg, Chair; Senator Schobinger; Senator Robinson;

Representative &yi,rly; Representative Skarphol; and Representative Huether .

.Senator 5.!11.wml: All members present, believe we were discussing the handout prepared by the

Legislative Council --Interim Committee regarding statutory duties ..

B@resentatiye Skw:phol: S82043 ... JTD .... House amendments .... could we get copies for each

benchmark•· the 2001 version ( a copy of S92043, engrossed with house amendments

attached)?

Roxanne Hobza, Legislative Council Staff Analyst: Wm get them.

I

I / 'f:' <;,'}'I

I'•

' ' . ,

1· - '

1,, • : '

Pagel s~nate Appropriations Committee BilVResolutaon Number S92022 Hearing Date April 18~ 2001

Re.presentatiye Byerly~ We had a meeting with Mr. Wolff-· regarding this holistic budget --

package opposed line items -- we knew K-12 that the Senate had resistance for them to

contribute dollars -- leaves 2 options: nominal fee or grants item? I) 2500 for 2 years ; would

seem reasonable .... Mr. Wolfrs ITD grants could be used instead -- in difference to Senate,

change into mix of l million ETC grant H• replaces 1,445 --- looks like a WASH. 2) general fund

FTE's, again in interest of making progress -- line with it --- add to House dollars. Proposed 200

thousand in CII and 500 thousand in SENOIT. SENDIT H- we've lost 10 thousand students -

projection by DPI says it1s not any better now"- okay, tine. GIS needs firmer language, probable

to inevitable, l FTE and dollars. ERP ~ 7.5 million total, not addition. New information on bids

etc. Thaes where we sit.

Senator Solberg: Some areas of concern: 1 million out of grants? ERP amount; understand u

continue to build/not finn bids ..... how much this biennium, next, need of the state'? Total

addition needed to be put into the whole picture

E&.presentatiye Byerly: 7.7 million, give or take a few.

B,epresentatiye Skarphol: Not surf funding ...... it's a long way back ...... can manage on those

dollars. 7 million 500 thousand .... we need to seo success .... they should be able to show results

with these kh1d of dollars.

$tnator Solberu: We agree, disagree on levels ..... move House down some 10 million ..... thuf s

quite a reduction in the whole package. Degree roll out on. K-12 resolved.

Senator Robinson: New worksheet •· new figures ... we do appreciate what the House has done,

but ETC has I million out; SENDIT and CII amounts leave me with concerns ... given the

schedule and incitement workloads .... all for the benefit of schools .... public schools need

SENDIT and en.

1 ,, I •

1, l I

_:._'.;-!1,1•i/-' •. ,1',:; ii

Sefll~ Appropriations Committee Bill/Resolution Number S82022 Hearing Date April 18, 2001

1:t'>'

Re,presentatiye Byerly: No cuts to SENDIT, CH. SENDIT if adopted would be triple what it is

now; CU over 2 ½ the way it is now. Can't get carried away with wishes ---the t O thousand

reduction in students, IO thousand more -- means a decrease in number of schools, teachers etc ..

SenatQt Robinson: There is an increased workload -- connective increases -- close to IO when it

got to us,

Representative Byerly: No progress -- holistic proposal --- not line.

Representative Skawhol: Reduction in crease -- still 57% increase in budget, now 7.7 million.

Senator Solberg: General fund: rolling out; new l 00 million budget --- done in other budgets: all

going to special funds -- counted before?

Representative Byerly: Recommendation •M- not to degenerate.

Senator Solberg: Like from ITD ..... spreadsheet of House proposals, All transfers reported to

Budget section; new programs -- how they happen, when .... that's all part of the duties of IT

Interim Commi~.tee?

Bepresentatjye Sli,arphol: Need to find some common ground on word age -- comfortable that

Legislative Council draw of amendment.

Senator Robinson: Careful percent of increase brought some programs not here which weren't

here 2 years ago. Engrossed SB2043 (10179.0700) with the House amendments ... on pnge 2.

Senator Solbera: Where is the bill now?

Senator Robinson: House IBL Committee.

Rm,rescntative Skg·;.µhw.: 8 .. 9 -· 10 .:. ... worked here. creates better communication; not

· micro-management but giving direction. S82043 conference committee appointees have been

made; but no meeting scheduled yet,

Senator Robinsgn: Not in appropriations?

' ,,.

Pago4 Senate Appropriations Committee BUI/Resolution Number S82022 Hearing Date April 18. 2001

Rsmreaentatiye Skarphol: IBL ... would guess you could req1.1est being on the committee.

Ssmator Solberg: JTD booklet --- is close to benchmarks. S,ections 8 9 and JO sections; we• vc

had contact with ITO.

Repre;;entative Skarphol: Problem not with OMS/auditor-• this can be rcscurchcd:, ~an be

discussed.

Be.nresentatiye Byerly: Washington State used a model ...... had u history of doing everything

wrong -- but learned by mistakes.

Senator Solberg: Nv problem with performance?

Represent9tiv1< Byerly: IT Committee formed 4 years ago.

Senator Solberg: Yes, and still looking.

Senator Solberg: More on whafs here? Vv'e need to look over, Mike will get new spreadsheets •M

PH distribute them prior to the next meeting. Meeting adjourned until the cull of the schedulers.

·) ,~,,'., .. ~-,. , r ,'.,/:)lr;~1 -~·, .,/.(,• ., . ,..,, ''

,.. J,., J\t~·r :,:~}~~. \~~1t~

,, '

",•, ' ' 1·,,,,.,.1 ,

. ' J,



Senat<"• Appropriations Committee

~~· Conference Committee

Heuring Ont~ April 19, 2001

Side A Side B Meter# ~ ... --

X 52,2 - 54.4 -X 0,0- )9.) -

. -

Commjttec Cle1k Signature ~~.£~ Minutes:

Senator Solber", Chair of 882022 Conference Commitk~c (Jnformution Tcchnolr,gy

Department), opened the meeting at 4:00 pm on Thursday, April 19th in the Harvest Room.

Roll Call: Senator Solberg, Chair; Senator Sc~0bingcr; Senator Robinson; Rcprcscntutlvc

Byerly; Representative Skarphol; and Representative Huether responded.

SeDi~.>C Solbtcti: All members present, let's proceed with our discussions.

Senatw- Sghobinpr: Believe we have some prio1'1ties -- important that we continue to move

towards consensus; like to propose amendment # 18048.0205 ( copy attached). He went through

the amendments and led tho discussion.

Senator Schobjnpr: Rc.-:commends that the House recede from the House amendments and adopt

these amendments. S1::nator Robinson seconded recommendation. Discussion~ Cail for the vote:

Roll Call: 3 yes; 3 no, 0 absent and not voting. Dufeated.

Senator Schobinaer: Where do we start to begin the settlement now?

.

-

Pago 2 Senate Appropriations Committee BUI/R~solution Number S02022 Hearing Date April 19, 200 l

BQpre&smtatiyg 8YQtb'.: My feeling is thut the Hou~c version pumped in more thut might have

been desired .... more thun hulf way from our perspcctlvo •· it wus a significant movomcnt; no

reciprocation to yesterday's offer? The House feeling in the proposul Is thut there is tom; of

money there.

Representative Skomh21: Agree, House colleagues aro at time in trepidation of technology .. the

attempt hero - program is legit, funding adequate•· hopefully it will show success -- then 8CC

more enthusiasm in House. Need u track record of success to launch from.

Semuor Solbera: Understand politics-- part of the rcuson of fairness in the past was no

management -- vision ... everyone had own technology und went their own direction. We huvc

seen not direction until now 0 lT can do it. We need to be l'Cutist; I have the confidence that it

can be done. I'm not pleased thut IO million out by the Gov ~rnor ---umount by the House •

believe it is too drastic. Nerd to cooperate.

Senator Scbobin.ier recommends the House recf~dc from its umcndmcnts und udopt the House

amendments prc:posal of yesterday, That would drop t m!llion 45 thousund dollars: rcim;tatc

white area net pha~ ., 2; restore Cll 200; Scndlt 500; reduce I million TCC: 7 50 und I FTE und

restore 5 milUon, as I recall, Second by Rt.¢prcsentgtiye Byerly.

Rc,presentatiye Skarphol: 7 millio".l 813 thousand -- I J 8 over House'!

Roxanne Hob.za, Legislative Cour.cil Staff Analyst: Verified some portions of what wus

djscussed yesterday; fine points of the proposed amendment.

Senator Solbeai: Call for the vote?

Rcmresentatiye ByerJx: Like to table the recommendation unti1 tomorrow, at which time we can

physically see the amendments.

Senator Solbera: All in agreement -- okay by the Chair; Adjoumed until rtscheduled.

,1':,''

:i ~. '

• • I •

'~ l

' ' ' . '· ' ~




)( Confertnce Committee


e Number Slde A Side 13 Meter #


Minutes:

~enator Solbeni, Chair of the S82022 Conference Committee (Information Technology

Department), called the meeting to order at 2:30 pm, Friday. April 20th.

Roll Call: Senator Solberg, Chair; Senator Schobinger~ Senator Robinson; Representative

Byerly; Representative Skarphol; and Representative Huether present. All memb~rs present.

Senator Solbera: Amendmcmts # 18048.0206 should have covered what we have di8cusscd und

agreed upon durh1g our meetings. Questions'!

Senator Robinson: Concern about the grants line items ... there is strong feeling across the state

-- those that are in the kno 'N .... perhaps we 'II all know more in 18<24 months.

Senator Solberg: We have a motion on the floor: Senator Schobinger recommends the HOUSE

RECEDE from the House amendments, and adopt the amendments - 18048.0206.

Representative Byerly seconded the recommendation. Discussion.

Pa1c 2 Senate Appropriations Committee BHVResolutk,n Number S82022 Hearing Date April 20, 200 I

Call for the vot : Roll Call Vote S yes~ I no; 0 absent and not voting. Motion curried.

Conference Report on S82022 wm be sent forward,

18(),48,0205 ,., Flecal No. 3

Prepared by the Leglstallve Council staff for senator Schobtng,,r

Aprlf 19, 2001

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO ENGROSSED SENATF. BILL NO. 2022

That the House recede from Its amendments as printed on pages 1266· 1 ~58 of the S1enate Journal and pages 1350-1352 of the House Journal and that Engrossed Senate Bill N.o. 2022 be amended as follows:

Page 1, llne 10, replace "25,985,3J2" with "25,576,631 11

Page 1, llne 11, replace"· ,,076,824" with "35.761,772•

Page 1, Hne 12, replace ,i5,595,000" with "5,080,000"

Page 1, line 13, replace "934,58311 with "900,334"

Page 1, fine 14, replace "2,200,00011 with "1,700,000"


Page 1, remove llne 16

Page 1, line 18, replace "11,971,3'/3" with "8:,500,000"

Page 1, after fine 18, Insert:

"Geographic Information system

Page 1, tine 19, replace "1,407,513" with "1.407.513"


Page 1. nne 21, t'epface "96,903,519"' with "'91,318,72411

Page 1, Une 22, replace "71, 185,087"' with "Z0.838.880"

Page 1, llne 23, replace "25,718,43211 with 1120,479,844 11

Page 2, llne 1, after "TRANSFERS11 Insert"· r .. lMITATIONS"

750,000"

Page 2, line,., after the period Insert "Transfers that Increase line Items In excess of the amount Included In the executive recommendation presented on January 7, 2001, may only be made after emergency commission and budget section approval. The chief information officer shall Inform the budget sectl'>n of transfers made pursuant to this section."



s.nat• BIH No. 2022 - Information Technology Department • Conference Committee Action CONFERENCE CONFERENCE COMPARISON

SENATE COMMITTEE COMMfTT£E HOOSE TO VERSION ~S VERSION VERSION HOUSE

$25,98$,3~ ($408,821) $25,571,531 '25.& 71,5:11

PageNo. 1 18048.0205

,,..

F',cpen'" 31,07',124 :»e.o·,ua• (316.0&il 3~.701,772 3U&t.77i SIOl>,000 UtO,CIOO &.691,000 (&16,000 6.0to,000 &.oeo.ooo 300,o'oo ,.~_,,- t3,UN 934,6'3 (34,249 900,334 600.334

IMINctloft E~teftr~ 3.500,000 :uoo,ooo (600,00Q) 1,700,I.IOO Ul00,000 (600,000)

O,liilnll SEM:>IT~ 1,973.eet 1,973.&H 1300,0001 1,873,869 t,173.649 500,000 ( ITltCMICaltduclllon &eo,300 090,300 600,300 ~.,,, .... ~

321.71M ., .. ftlMIOi'k t,Ni,905 9,c:,ee,90~ ueuois 8,IM7,121 Entlf9f1M rNCMct :M>,4M,t73 11,971,373 (3,471,373) U00,000 t,603,666 U9U:M

Pr~~ 1.407,113 1,407.&13 1.407,&13 t.407,613 IT WI0'1alion I &oo,000 200,000 1200,000) ~ 018-opridon 760,000 (760,000)

IPhlo lnfo,fflltlon 750,000 760,000 760,000

• ·-- ---TQWl .. lundt $107.021,0tt $96,903,619 (55.684,795) $91.318,7~4 $83,600,606 $7,719.111

Lffl fflimllld inco,nt ZL.LH.QIZ l.Ll~ t~1U9Zl ZQ,I~.~ Z!.H:M~ tl.~~.~l Glnef II lund $35.836,932 $25,718,432 (fU3&,688) $20,479,&44 $11,716,726 $8,763,118

FTE 212.00 212,00 (5.00) 207.00 20400 300

o-tpt, 112 .. Information Technology Dopartment • Detail of Conference CommlttH Changes DECREASE

DECREASE REDUCE FUNDING ADJUST FUNDING FOR DECREASE FUNOINO FOR FOR THE

FUNOINO FOR DECREASE GEOOAAPHIO FUNDING FOR EDUCAT~N ENTERPRISE RECOMMENOEO FUNOINOFOR INFOAMA1"ION RESEARCH ANO TECHNOLOOV RESOURCE

SALAAV E•GOVEANMENT SYSTEM (GIS) PLANNING COMMISSION Pl.ANNINO INCREASES INITIATIVE I INITIATIVE 2 POSITION 3 GRANTS 4 SYSTEM &

Salarltl and Wlgtl ($140,4°'4) ($268,4171 Opefaling e,cpenHI 78,318 1293,388 ($100,0001 Equipment (6,000) 610,000) Ctnitf IOf Innovation

Ind ln1lructlol', Edueltlon Ttchnolocw ($500,000) Comml11lon gran10

SENOITnetwoik IT ledlnlcll education p,og,11111dewlopmen1 f.· Wide .,,. ~

Enlerp,IM ftlOI.Kce ($3,471,373) plan~atem

Prairie P &Oldcalllnu IT lnn0'11tlon fund QontlnQtnt 01S appropriation =lo lnfo,matlon 750,000

--- --·-T owl all funds so ($67,086) ($321,7851 ($100,000) ($500,000) ($3,471,,173)

Ltu tllir'naeed Income llialH (4§§,073)

Oenet'II fund ($142,MI) ($67,088) ($321.785) ($100,000) ($500,000) ($2,912.600)

FTE 0.00 (100) (1.00) 0.00 0,00 (3,00)

RE!OUCE REMOVE FUNDING FUNDING FOR REMOVE FOA THE REDUCE IT TECHNICAL FUNDING TOTAL

CENTER FOR FUNDING EDUCATION f!ORIT CONFERENCE INNoVA l'IOH ANO FOR Sf.NOif PROGRAM INNOVATION COMMITTEl: INSTRUCTION t NeTWORt<7 DEVELOPMENT I FUNO CHANGES

Slii,ieilndwages 1$40l.t211 Operltlng ..... (315,052 Equipment

($34.249) (51&,000

C.,.lof!MowMIOc'I (34,249 end'"-ldon

EducaMon TtchrlO!ogy (500,000) Cornmill4oft orants

SENOtTMIWOfte ($300,000) (300,0001 ITlldWCflltdocatlon (1590,3001 (590,300 iwoc,tm dMlopmenl

Wide.,.. nttwo,11 e,_,,..,eaource (3,471,373)

~~~ ($200,000)t IT IMOWlllon fund (200,000) Col•- OtS ~

- ~~ 750,000

(~. T_,tlbldl ($34,241) ($300,000) ($590,300) ($200,000) (15,5&4,79!,)

L ... Mllffllledineofflt 131§.297)

f ..... ' Page No. 2 18048.0205

W1~i '' I.' !,·• ... '/ r·( /'

On,lllulwJ

FTI l~,Ht)

o.oo 1'300,000)

o.oo (1&90,300)

0,00

($200,000)

o.oo (SU3UM)

(&.001

I ™t amendment fffflOllfl one FTB ~ Md ,NNd potltlOn I~ of $)67,088 from ltlt Qlflll., fund Ind P,OYiclel lddlti0nll lundin9 of f 100,000 ftom lhe Otl'lfll fund lo, !ht~• e,goyt,nl'flltnl lnltllliYt,

I Thie amtndmlm ttffl()Yff ~ flom lht ~II fund 111 l'#O IMOOlf.ttd FTE l>OIAA>nl fOf Int dtpl,tmtnt'e oeog,apNo k'1fo<fflltlon 1y1ttm lnklllHt ol It ,07t, 765 and rtttoftt ~ of $7!!0,000 ffom the oer,erll fund Ind one Fl& Polfflon In 1 '9fciil QolOO'IPhlO mtomi,tiOO •v11tm lint Item kif• "'1 dlcflMt In Nf'dno from lht QtlWII lund ot f321,7&&.

J Thlt ~I decl'NNt Jundlng lr()'YI ltlt gene,• fund to, opttallng tlCPtflM1 rtllltd 10 tht rNMtch ~ r,llnnlng politlOn by $100,000,

4 TI1lt amandrnlnl rtduott lundlna lot E~lonll T~l6on• Council~.,, .. by $500,000, from $2,200,000 wNch Y,11 lht ltvtl propos.td by boltt tht 8'nalt and the Houle, to $f ,700,000,

f Thlt ~I CNCtMtM lundlf,a fol lhe tntlfPtlet rHQUfct J)llnl'llnO !ERP) pr()jtol ~ $3,471,373, of~ $2,962,!IOO 11 from lht Qtotral fund, from•• 1,,11,313 ,o suoo.~ tnd rtmMt dlorltv fof thrM rre. polltionl , ... IO lhf PfoitOt, Thlt propoMd 1evt1 of funding,, N,tM,334 matt thin the IMI of fundinQ P,OYldtd by ltlt ~ of $1,503,eet,

I Thie .-nendrntnt rtductt fu~,J from lht o,Mf'II f\lfld IOI' lht Ctnftf fl)( lnnoYlllon and IMlructlon bV $3-U4~. ,,om $&~.58310 $900,334, Thl1 p,opottd ltwl ol lundlng It '300,000 m«t thin tht 1M1 o4 funding p,ovldtd b~ lht Houle of $600,3~4.

7 Thlumtn<tntnt rtductt fu~ from lhe ~II fund IOI' lht BENDIT ntl'N<Htl bv ~.QOO, froin $1,973,66!;\ to $1,613,669, Thill p,opoHd level of tundlng II ~.000 mort thin tht IMI of tundinQ PfO\lldtd by Int Hou1t of $1, 17U69,

• Thlf llffltfldnMnt rtmOY,,. fundlnq trom Int"""'" tufld of $&~0.300 fo, lnfofn"Mtllon ltehnlcll tducallon p,og,am deve!Opment.

• Thia 1menctmen1 removt1 lundlnQ from tht general fund ol $200,000 for an lntormatlon lt<:hnology Innovation tund,

Page No. 3 18<M8.0205

Dale:_ 1,-{./f/. cl/ RoU Cull Votu II: / ...

2001 CONFERENCE COMMITTEE ROLL CAl~L VOTES BILL/RESOLUTION NO. SB 2022

CONFERENCE COMMITTEE .. Jnformation Technology Department

Legislative Council Amendment Number _L Jc:i'?(f'j) .,,? t1 5_. -----·····-·---···--·· .. -·---

0 recommends that the (SENA1'~ (ACCEDE to) ~from)

lho (Sona116i~ncndmcnts on (SJ/HJ) pugc(s) __ _

D having been unublo to agree, recommends thnt the committee be dischurgcd und u

new committee be appointed.

Action Taken

ll.Aff.,_ nde By rcscntat

~By --(' S~lcprcscntativc · _.

Senators Yes No Re resentatlve

Senator Solber Re

Senator Schobin er v Re resentative Ska hol

Senator Robinson Re resentative Huether

Total Yes ___.j,____ Absent ---

Yes No ,

Datc: _ ___d-Lf' -.::? /

Roll Cull Vote#:. ~ . -·-~--

2001 CONFERENCE COMMITTEE ROLL CALL VOTES BILL/RESOLUTH)N NO. SB 2022

CONFERENCE COMMITTEE-Information Technology Department

Legislative Council Amendment Number / f::Z, 1(',.f.e.,£,.td_, ______ ~------···--··

0 recommends that the (SENAT~ (ACCEDE to)

the (Senatc8mendmcnts on (SJ/HJ) pugc( s) ./.2 ~-6. J.l!!i.:/?

D having been unnble to ngrce, recommends that the coi,1:.~,nco be discharged und a

new commit ee be a pointed.

'JfJ"l'I J Y-// ction Taken ~~~ ' (/~~o/_=: ___ _

Motion Made By . Seconded By , d L Senator/Representative - . ~ Scnator/Rcprescntutive ~/ - .. -

I

Senators Yes No Representative Yes No

Senator Solbenz ✓ Representative Byerly ✓ -

Senator Schobinger ✓- Representative Skarphol ✓

Senator Robinson ✓ Represent~tive Huether /

' -

No -L--- Absent ___ _

I

AIPOAT OP CON'8AINCE COMMITTEE (420) Aprll 21, 2001 7:03 1.m.

REPORT OF CONFERENCE COMMITTEE

Module No: Sff .. 71•9014

Insert LC: 18048.0208

SB 2022, 11 engro1Hd: Your conferenca committee (Sens. Solberg, Schoblnger, Robinson and Reps. Byerly, Skarphol, Huether) recommends that the 'iOUSE R&CEDE from the House amendments on SJ pages 1256-1258, adopt amenc' ,ts as follows, and place SB 2022 on the Seventh order:

That the House recede from Its amendments as printed on pages 1256-1258 of the Senate Journal and pages 1350-1352 of the House Journal and that Engrossed Senate BIii No. 2022 be amended as follows:

Page 1, llne 10, replace "25,985,35211 with "25,576,531"

Page 1, tine 11, replace "36,076,824" with "35,661,772"

Page 1, llne 12, replace "5,595,000 11 with 115,080,000"


Page 1, 1/ne 14, replace "2,200,000" with "t ,200,000"


Page 1 , remove llne 16

Page 1, llne 18, replace 11 11,97'1 ,373" with 117,500,000 11

Page 1, after line 18, Insert: "Geographic Information system

Page 1, llne 19, replace"1,407,513"wlth 11 1A07,513"

Page 1 , remove line 20


Page 1, llne 22, replace '71,185,087" with "70,838,880"

Page ·1, llne 23, replace "25,718,432" with "18.779,844"

Page 2, llne 11 after "TRANSFERS" Insert 11• LIMITATIONS"

750,000''

Page 2, line 4, after the period Insert "Transfers that Increase line Items In excess of the amount Included In the executive recommendation presented on January 7, 2001 , may only be made after eme1 ~enc , commission and budget section approval. The chief Information officer shall Inform u :a budget section of transfers made pursuant to this section."

Renumber accordlngfy


Stnat• BIii No. 2022 • Information Technology Department • Conference Committee Action

CONFERENCE CONFERENCE COMPARISON E)(EOUTIVE SENATE COMMITTEE COMMITTEE HOUSE TO

BUDGET VERSION CHANGES VERSION VERSION HOUSE

SallriN and wages $25,985.352 $25,985,352 ('40l,821) S25,576.531 $25,5713,631

(2) tlESK. (2) COMM P.1ge No. 1 SA,71•9014

MPOR't 0, CON,,IRINOI COMMITTEE (420) Module No: SR•71•9014 Aftrll 21, 2001 1:03 1.m.

lnHrt LC: 18048,0200

&- 3e,079,IR4 3&,076,~,t (416,oeaf 36,$61,772 36,681,772 UOS,000 5,695,000 !616,000 6,080,000 6,080,000

IMOYNMd 9:M,683 934,~ t:M,i49 800,334 900,334 200,000 lr411'

E~tOhnok,gy (J.600,000 2,200,000 ( I , 00(), 000' 1,200, 00-0 ~.200,000 (1,000,000) i,entt

1,173,609 600,000 SENOIT nttwonc t,9l3,~9 1,973,669 laoo,oool 1,673,069 IT lleh~ lduoltlun &90,300 590,300 680,300 ,~,,,, tk>pmtnt

9,008,905 9,6-47,1:ll 321.184 11tt nttwQ;k 8,8tl8,006 11.968.906 Enlefp,lse rNOUroe 20,486,673 H,971,373 (,4,471.373) 7,ti(J0,000 t,603,666 6,006,334 plan~ttm

PrMle P SrOldoullng 1,407,513 l,-+07,513 1,407,613 1,407,613 IT lnncw1Uoo fund l>00,000 200,.)00 (200,000) ~I QIS awrop,laUon 'f50,000 (/60,000) °:aphlo lnlormtUon 760,0QO 760,()00 760,000

Y m -·- ·----··, ...... ---------•"~~·- -•---•----~•••-••r

Total all fundt $107,02',019 $96,903.619 ($7,264J95) $69,618,724 $83,000,000 $0,Ql8,I18

LeH eBllmaled (ncome 21,16§,0§l Zl.l§M§·t ru§J.2.ZJ. ZQ,§~tt.!!§Q l.1&§.a..~ (t,Q4~,QQQl

Gene<al fund $35,835,932 $25,718,432 ($6,038,E'38} $18,7'/0,844 $11,716,726 $1,003,118

FTE 212.00 212.00 (6.0(1' 207.00 204.00 300

Dept. 112 .. fntormatlon Technology Department• Detail of Conference Committee Changes

OECflEASE DECREASE REDUCE FUNDINO

ADJUST FUNDING FOR OECREME FUNDING FOR FOF1 THI:: FUNOINOFOfl DECAF.ASE GEOORAPHIO FUNDING FOR EDUCATION ENrrnrmsr:

RECOMMENDED FUNDINGfOA INFORMATION RESEARCH ANO TECHNOLOGY llESOUllCE SAi.ARY €·GOVERNMENT svs·reM (GI~) PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNINg

INCREASES INITIATIVE 1 INITIATIVE POSITION 3 GRANTS 4 SYSrEM

Balarles and wages ($140,404[ ($268,417; Operallnu e11pensa11 (21,684 !293,368 ($100,000) EQOlpmenl (5,000 610,000 C8/'lter IOI' Innovation and Instruction

Education Technology ($1,000,000) C-OmmlHfon grants

SENDIT network IT technical education program development

Wide Ql'aa netw oni. Ente<p,lse ,eaource ($4,471,373) plannlng s~lem

flrfllrle Publ Bmadcastlng IT Innovation fund COOUnoenl GIS appfop,lallon °=aphlo lnfOfmltion 760,000

yaem ----·- ----• ---- ----·---T 0111 aN ftJn<1s $0 ($'8i',088) ($321,765) ($100,000) ($1,000,000) ($4,471,373)

Leu ntlmlMed Income ~ --- --··- (◄88,&731

General fund ($1-42,688) ($167,088) ($321,785) ($100,000) ($1,000,000) ($3,98:.!,600)

FTE 0,00 (1.00) (1.00) 0.00 0.00 (3.00)

REDUCE REMOVE FUNDING FUND)NOFOR REMOVE FOR THE ,1EDUOF. IT TECHNICAL FUNDING TOTAL

CENTER FOR FlJ1 .. t-li'IG EDUCATION FORIT CONrERENCI: INNOVATION Arfl FOR BENOIT PROGRAM INNOVATION COMMITTEE INSTRUCTION NETWORK 7 DEVELOPMENT 8 FUND CHANGES

SllairittandW.- ($,408,821) Qpt,ating txpen ... r6.052) (IJJlpmenl

($1:M,249) 515,000)

C....lcwlnnol/ltion 134,249) Ind lnlltuc:tlon

ECM:ltlOn TICihnolocW (1,000,000) Commlulon r,.-

($300,000) SENOITnttwork f300,000! ITttchnlcllldllOltlon ($590,300) 590,300 rtOQFIWnlM'l.,_.I

Wrdeartlnetwocic E~priNrelOC.IIC8 f4,471,373}

•' Pl'~••~no ,i~ ITll~tund ($200,000)'"' (200,000) f ,I., ==~.,,::1a11cn 750,000 ~·

(2' OESI<, (2t COMM Page No. 2 SA-71-9014

REPORT OP CONl'IRINCI COMMITTEE (420) AprH 21, 2001 7:03 1,m.

Module No: 8A•71•9014

lnHrt LC: 18048,0206

•~tttm

T oCII Ill lundt ($13•U◄9)

ltlt HlJmated Income •- ... -- .... ---Gene,al lund ($134,249)

HE 0.00

_,,..,.. ... ____ ($300,000)

_____ ......... ($300,000)

o.oo

----($690,300)

_ .. _._+....,. .. .--.....

($590,300)

0.00

f$200,000)

($200,000)

o.oo

(S7,21M,i'96)

tiio&Qll ($6,038,6881

(6.001

1 Thl1 amendment r'1'10Y811 ono FTE po,ltlon and relatll(.I po&ltlon fund!ng ol $167,088 from the general funu assoclalod with lhe dopa11men1'11 e•oove,~11n111,11v,.

2 Thl1 arnendmoot removos funding from the general lund and tv J HIIOClalod FTE poslllons IQf the oopartmenl's QOOv1JPhlo h1lo1ma1.un systom lnlllal!vtt 04 $1,()11, 786 and re,1ore1 lundlrtQ ol $76-0,000 from loo gftnmal lund and one F Tl: position 111 a special goO{,lraphlc lnlormallon sy~lom lil1e 1111m fo, a net decrease In ruuding lrom the general lund ol $321,765,

3,t Thlt amffldment tleorea&H funding from !he general fund lo, operallng ex~nsoa rolafe(I to the roaowch «f1<1 planning poslllon 1,y $100,000. Thia llll'llfldrnenl reduce• lundlnQ IOf' Educallonal TelecomffilJnlcatlons Council gr1111ts by $1.000,000, lrom $2,200,000 which wua tho lovol

p,opoaed b~ both the Senato and tile Houae, to $1,200,000. 5 Thf1 amendmenl decreaae• funding tor the enlerp,lse ro&ource planning (ERP) projecl by $4,471,:>73, ol which $3,082,600 Is lrom lho oonornl

lund, lrom $11,971,373 lo $7,5001000 and removea authority for three FTE positions rolalrx.l lo tho p,ojeot, Thia proposod lovol or funding 111 $6,996,33,t more lhan the level ol nmdinQ p,ovkJed by the ►louap ol $1,503,660,

6 Thl1 "'1WOdnlttnl roduooa lunc.llng lrom the o-meral lund lor the ConlGf' lor l11novatlon and !ustructlon bY $134,249, lrom $934,083 lo $800,334. _ Thia p<opote(I level ol lundlng Is $200,000 more than the lovol ol fwl(llng p,ovlood by the Hww of $000,3:14. '/ This arnendmenl reduces funding from the gene1c.l lund for the SENOIT network by $300,000, from $1,973,669 to $ t ,613,069. This p1opo1>od

level of funulng js $5()0,000 more lhan tho lovel of lundlng provided by th(, Hcx.,so ol $r, I 73,669. 8 This amendment removoa londlng lrom tho genefal lunu of $690,300 for Information t1JChnical odocallan program dovolopmont. 8 Thia amandment removoa lundlng from the general fund of $200,000 Irr an Information technology Innovation fund.

This amendment also amends Sootlon 2 of the engrossed b!!I to provide that transfers In excess of the amount Included In Governor Hoeven's executive budget recommendation may only be made after Emergency Commission and Budget Section approval and the Chief Information Officer shall Inform the Budget Section of all transfers made during the biennium.

Engrossed SB 2022 was placed on the Seventh order of business on the calendar.

PageNo. 3 SR-71-90I4

2001 TESTIMONY

SB 20?.2

Plrtmtnt 111 , lnformatJon Ttohnol\)9y Department nett BIii No, 2022

Prepared by the North Oekota Lugl&IRllve Countll staff for Senate Appropriations

Revised January HI, 2001

f'TI! Poeltlon, General Fund Other Fund, Total 2001-03 Schafer E>eeoutlve Budg,tt 212,00 $35,836,03~ $71,186,067 $107,021,019

1999-2001 Legislative Appropriations 168,00 250.&QQ --•¥~..i9.409,5f!r ·-- 49,t°'69,657'

lnr.:reaae (Decrease) 44,00 $35,505,032 $21 J 77Fi ,530 $57,301.462

2001·03 Hoeven e)(ecutlve Budget 212,QQ ___ _!2~_71 ~ ,432 $71,185,081 _ $96,903.!..5-.t~

Hoevon Increase (Decrease) to Schafer 0.00 ($1~, 117,50.Ql $0 ~lt2J 11 ,0022 -'The 1999-2001 appropriation amounts Include $262 of other funds for the agency's share ol the $1.4 mllllon funding pool

appropriated to the Office of Management and Budget for assisting agoncles In providing the $36 per month minimum salary Increases In July 1999 and July 2000.

Major Schafer Recommendations Affecting Information Technology Oepartmftnt 2001-03 Budget

1, Reduces general fund one•Ume funding for Implementation of the slalewiclo Information technology network,

2, Restores ,011trac.t programming funding to the level provided In the 1999-2001 biennium,

3. Restores funding In the operating Un~ Item to allow technology-relateo bl!llngs to pass through the agency,

4. Adds 1 now FTE position and related funding for addition al network planning responslbllltles:

1 FTE Information technology business analyst Operating and equipment Equipment

Total• Network planning

5. Provides the following 4 new FTE positions and related funding for the statewide Information technology network:

2 FTE telecommunlcatlons analyst II 2 FTE lelecommunlcatlons analyst Ill Operating and equipment Center for Innovation and Instruction l:duca\lonal Telecommunications Council (ETC) SENOIT network Information technology technlcal education program development

Total• Statewide Information technology network

6. Provides the followlng 15 new FTE positions and related funding to support the development effort associated with tht! Health Insurance Portability and Ac;countablllty Act (HIPAA):

1 FTE administrative aecretary Ill 2 FTE programmer analyst I 2 FTE programmer anatytt II 4 FTE programmer ,natytt Ill 5 FTE senior programmer analyst 1 FTE aystem11 development manager Operating Eqwpment

Total• HIPAA

Gonoral Fund ($250,000)

$128,0'13 140,404

4,652,408 594,000

3,500,000 1,427,000

590,300

$11,032,125

Other Funds

$2,789,837

$3,798,000

$125,973 21,684

5,000

$152,657

$128,013 140,404

4,779,663

----· $5,048,080

$70,580 193,987 ~133,287 512,053 702,019 140,404

1,526,260 75,000

$3,452,590

Total ($250,000)

$2,789,837

$3,798,000

$126,973 21,684

5,000

$152,657

$256,026 280,808

9,432,071 594,000

3,500,000 1,427,000

590,300

$16,080,205

$70,580 193,987 233,287 512,053 702,019 140,404

1,525,260 75,0~ ----

$3,452,590

iit?'::,,, (:": r. ~·' ! .'. _:·:.~: ,·••. ·,

1, Provkfes the following 4 new FTe positions and refated funding to support the Depa,tment of Human Services FACSE$ project:

1 FTE programmer analyst II 1 Ftl: programmer analyat Ill 2 FTE Hnk>r programmer analyst Operating Equipment

Total· FACSES project

8. Provide• the following 3 new FTE positions and related funding to support the Department of Human Services foster care project:

1 FTE programmer analyst 111 2 FTE semor program analy8t Operating Equipment

Total .. ~oster care project

9. Provides the follUNlng 2 new FTE positions and related funding to support Tax Department projects:

1 FTE programmer analyst II 1 FTI: programmer analyst Ill Operating Equipment

Total• Tax Department projects

10. Provides the following 2 new FTE positions and ralated funding to support Department of Transportation projects:

2 FTE programmer analyst Ill Operating Equipment

Total • Department of Transportation projects

11. Provides 1 FTE and related funding for a security position: 1 FTE Information system security analyst Operating Equipment

Total - Security

12. Provides 1 FTE position and related funding to assist the Attomey General In lnv89tlgatlng cyberc:rime:

1 FTE Information system security analyst Operating Equipment

Totaf • Cybercrfme

13. Provldeo 2 FTE positions and related funding to develop and support en e..govemment Initiative:

2 FTE senior programmer analyst Operating Equipment

Total~ E-govemmont

14. Provide$ 1 FTE and related fundl"g for a research and planning position:

1 FTE information technology business analyst Operating Equipment

Total - ~esearch and plannlng

~ I I \ 1 ,.

, i) I

. \ ·' '

:, ' ·.,.,'

$116,643 21,684

5,000 $143,327

$280,808 43,368

-~ 10,000 $334,176

$140,404 ti'1,684

5000 -•--•- I

$317,088

other Fundt

$116,643 128,013 280,808 902,736

20,000

$1,448,200

$128,013 260,808

1,153,052 15,000

$1,576,873

$116,643 128,013 43,368 10,000

$298,024

$256,027 43,368 10,000

$309,395

$116,643 21,684 ~000

$143,327

Total

$116,643 128.r 280, 902, 7.x1

20,000

$1,448,200

$128,013 280,808

1,153,052 15,000

$1,576,873

$116,643 128,013 43,368 10,000

$298,024

$256,027 43,368

---· 10,000

$309,3(

$116,643 21,684 5,000

$143,327

$116,043 21,684

5,000 ----$143,327

$280,608 43,368

. ·-~-·----10.,ooq $334,176

$140,404 171,684

5,000 ..... __ ~ ... -.-.... ... --$317,08(

15. Pt'OVkMs ttl9 foltowfng 2 FTE potltlont and IOftware and equipment funding to devetop and support a centraNted g.eographlc Information svstem (GIS):

1 FTE data base design analyst tu 1 FTE programmer analytt Ill Operating eQl'lpment

Tot1t1 • GIS

16, Provides the following 3 FTE positions gnd related funding for an enterprise resource planntng (ERP) system:

1 FTE programmer analyst Ill 2 FTE senior programmer analyst Operating Equipment

Total- ERP

17, P,ovldes the following 2 FTE positions and software and equipment funding to develop and support a centrallz&d eler.tronlc document management system (EDMS ):

1 FTE data base design analyst Ill 1 FTE programmer analyst Ill Operating Equipment

Total- EOMS

18. Provides 1 FTE position and related funding for administrative responslbllltles:

1 f=TE senior personnel officer Operating Equipment

Total .. Administrative

19. Provtdes funding to establish an Innovation fund.

20, Provides passthrough funding for the Center for Innovation In Instruction.

21. Provides funding for support of the SENDIT networi<.

2?.. Provides funding for support of Prairie Public televlslon.

General Fund

$140,404 128,013 293,368

__ __c;.510,000

,1,071,785

$20,000,000

$20,000,000

$500,000

$340,583

$546,669

$1,407,513

OtMr Funds

$128,013 280,808 65,052 15,00Q

$488,873

$140,404 128,013 293,368

•~ 760,000 $1,321,785

$116,643 21,68-4

5,000

$143,327

Tot.I

$140,404 128,013 ?.93,368 510,000

$1,071,785

$128,013 280,808

20,065,052 15,000

$20,488,873

$140,404 128,013 293,368

-~--- ·---- 760,000 $1,321,785

$116,643 21,684 5,000

$143,327

$500,000

$340,583

$546,669

$1.40'1,513

\

Major Hoeven Rec:ommendatlona Affecting Information Technology Department 2001-03 Eludget Compared to the sm •• Introduced (Schafer Budget)

r 1. Reduces funding for the statewide lnfonnatlon technology network by

decreasing the funding for the Educatlonat Telecommunications Councll from $3,500,000 to $2,200,000.

1;

i;· 2. Provides the following adjustments In funding for the ERP system which result In funding being reduced from C.,d),488,873 to $11,971,373, of

t which $11,482,600 Is from the general fund,

,,,,,• ~ I ' \

·::•l i··/

. ' ., :-, ',':

i:,'.'

r

' '

a. Decrease In funding for operating e)(pensee. b. Increase In funding due to the tninsfer of funding related to the

Quality Schoots Commission ($70,000) and student data base ($412,500) from IM Department of Pubtlc Instruction to the tnfotmatton Technok)gy Department.

Subtotal

, Reduces funding provided to establish •n lnMYatton fund from $500,000 to $2001000,

1' ·,,, 'I,

General Fund Other Funds ($1,300,000)

($9,000,000)

$482,600

($8,517,500)

($300,000)

Total ($1,300,000)

(5i9,000,000)

$482,500

($8,517,600)

($300,000)

_•j ' ',, ;,

~:-1\/-' ;:· ;' I• "/'-,'

,,i', . ', i"··' ,1,·, .' ii:\ ..

Major Les,fslatlot\ Affecting the lnfOnnatlon Techno4ogy Deptrtment

Senate Bin No, 2026 requires Information technology plans prepared by state agencies to address the feaslbHlty of telecommuting by em~et1. . ' ' (

te Bfl No. 2043 requJret the Information Technology Committee to review the cost-benefit anttlyalw of any major project of . S~ l'oatd of Higher Education or any lnstltutfon under the control of the board If the protect algnlftcantty Impact& the state's wide area network. lmpacta the statewide llbnlry tyatem. or Is an admlnlslra\ive projeci. The bill alto authorizes the lnfr,rmatlon Technology OepMrtment to purchase equipment llnd software through financing arrangement&, specifies addttional requlremento that must be Included In the department•• business pfan, and changes the deadline for age·ncles submitting lnfonnatlon technology plans from January 15 t~ March 15 of each even-numbered year.

1,,,, 'i'',

'i,i

Prepared by the North 0akota Leglalatlve Council staff for House Appropriations

February 26, 2001

A,artment 112 -tnform1t1on Ttehnotogy Department ---•mNo.2022

',

FTE Pot1ltliMI• General Fund Othtr Funda Total 2001..03 Schafer Executive Budget 212.00 $35,835,932 $71,185,087 $107,021,019

1999-·2001 L-OIIJative Appropriations 168,00 250,000 49,4~,557 49,659,5571

lncreaae (Decrease) .... 00 $35,585,932 $21,775,530 $57,361,462

2001..03 Hoeven Executive Budget 212.00 $25.718,432 $J1 t 185,087 $96,903,519

Hoeven lncreaae (Decrease) to Schafer 0.00 ~$10,117,~1 -= $0 ,s10, 111,sooi

1 The 1999-2001 appropriation amounts Include $262 of other funds for the agency's share of the $1.4 million funding pool appropriated to the Oft'lce of Management and B1Jdget tor aulatlng agencies In providing the $35 per month minimum salary lncreatet In July 1999 and July 2000,

Major Sch•ftr Rtcommtndatlont Affecting lnfonn1tlon Technology Department 2U01.03 Budget

1. Reduces general fund one-time funding ror Implementation of the statewide Information technology ~

2. RNlbrla contract programming funding to the leYef pro~ In the 1999-2001 blennklm.

3, Re,tOtH funding In the operating Hne Item to allow technolog)•..,.,ated bfftlnga to pase through the agency .

.ii, Adde 1 new FTE potltion and .-tld funding for additional network planning ratp0nalbHffl1t:

1 r re Information technology butlneu analytt Operating and equipment Equfpment

Total .. Network pfannlng

5, Provides the followfng 4 new FTE positions and related funding for the atatewkf e Information technology netwoftc:

2 FTE tetecommunlcQtlona analyst II 2 FTE teleec:N1imunfcatJont anatyat Ill Operating and equipment Center for !nnovetfon ind lnetructton Educattonal T~ttonl Counctf (ETC) SENM network lntormatkwt technology~ education program development

Total • s~ Information ttchiology netwot'k (The Senate reduced funding for the ltlttWkM lnformltion technology network to the levet recommended In the Hoewn oecuttve budget by l'lducJng funding for ETC grantt by $1,3 mllon ffom 13,5 mHlton to $2.2 mffHon,)

e. Provtdtl the tdowtng 15 new FTE poeftionl and related funding to euppon the dewlopnttnt lffort 1110dettd wtth the Helfth Insurance Portlbtllty end Accountdlty NA (HIPM):

. •' .

. ~;, ,- ·~' ,",

1 PTE edmlNet,lttve Metltaty ltl 2FT!PfOO(afflfMrwtyttl 2m~~,, 4 m PfOOl'lfflMlr lnlli/tt lU & Fri .... Pf'OOf'lfflfflt." .... 1 m t)ellme dMfopffllnt mwoe,Opln1lttta

GtnerafFund other Fund• Total ($250,000) ($250,000)

$2,789,837

$3.798,000

$2,789,837

S3.798,000

$125,973 $125,973 21,684 21,884

____ 5._000 _____ 5....,,.,QQQ

$152,657 $152,657

$128,013 $128,013 $256,026 140,404 140,404 280,808

4,652,408 4,779,663 9,432,071 594,000 594,000

3,500,000 3,500,000 1,427,000 1,427,000

__ ...;;.;;59();.;..ti..-300 ..... _____ _ ___ 590 ____ ,300_

$11,032,125 $5,048,080 $18,080,205

l:qulpmtnt

Totaw-HIPM

:, A. PnMMt ht toffO'l,mg 4 new FTE poeltk>ni and related funding to r - •~ the Depar.ment of Human Services FACSES project:

..

· 1 FTE programmer ,nafytt II 1 Pre programrn« analyst llt 2 FYE aenfof' programmer anafytt Operating Equipment

Total - r'.-\CSES project

8. P~ the following 3 new FTE posltlOtia and related funding to support the Department ot Human Servk:es foster care project:

1 FTE programmer analyst Ill 2 FTE senior program analyst Operating Equipment

Total• Foster care project

9. Providn the foflowlng 2 new FTE positions and related funding to support Ta,c Department projects:

1 FTE programmer analyst II 1 FTE programmer analyst Ill Operating Equipment

Totat • Tax Department projects

10, Providel the following 2 new FTE poeltlona and related funding to 1uppori Depa,tment of TrantportatJon projects:

2 FTE programmer analyst Ill Operdng Equlpmtnt

Total .. Department of Trant:oortatlon projects

11. Provldtl 1 FTe and related funding for a security position: 1 FTE lnfomv.-tlon tyttem security analyst Operating Equipment

Totat .. securtr,

12. Provldel 1 FTE potltion end related funding to a11let the Attorney Oenn In lnvettigating cybercrime:

1 FTE lnfotmetion •Y•.tem aeclH'fty analyst Operating Equipment

Total .. Cyblrcttme

13. ~ 2 FTE potltk>nl and rellt6d funding to devttt1:>p and support an e,oowmment lnltfatfvt:

2 m Nn10r programmer ana1yat ()pttating Equipment

Total• I:~ 1•. Pl"O'lldN 1 FTe and ,..._. funding for a l'IHlf'Ch and planning

poeMlon: 1 FTE ~ technok>gy bullnlll anatytt ~ Equipment

Toltll -ANllhlh and pllr.-,tng

\:i:: . . ' ~ ' ','

OentratFund

$116,643 21,684 5,000

$143,327

$3171081

OtMrFu~ Total 75,000 75,000 ---~;..;;;.

$3,452,590 $3,452,590

$116,643 128,013 280,808 902,736 20,000

$1,448,200

$116,643 128,013 280,808 902,736

20,000

$1,448,200

$128,013 $128,013 280,808 280,808

1,153,052 1,153,052 15,000 15,000 --------

$1,576,873 $1,576,873

$116,643 128,013 43,368 10,000

$298,024

$116,643 128,013 43,368 10,000

$298,024

$256,027 $256,027 43,368 43,368 10,000 10,000 ___ ...;...:..... ......

$309,395 $309,395

$116,643 $116,643 21,684 21,684

5,000 5,000 ___ .....,___ ___

$143,327 $143,327

$118,643 21,684

5,000 $143,327

$280,808 43,368 10,000

$334,116

S140,~ 171,884

5,000 $317,088

General Fund Other Fund• Total 1!5 •. ProvkMI the tonowlng 2 FTE poeltlot1• and softwate and equipment

tundlng to develop and auppo,t a centralized geographic lnform"Uon 1yatem (GIS):

1 FTE data bale de1lgn analyat Ill $140,404 $140,4\14 1 FTE p,ogrammer anafytt Ill 128,013 128,013 Operating 293,368 293,368 Eq~prnent 5101000 510,000

Total· 01S $1,01'1, 785 $1,071,785

16. Provldei the foflowlng 3 FTE positions and related funding for an enterprise resource planning (ERP) system:

1 FTE programmer analy1t Ill $128.(J13 $128,013 2 FTE aenlor programmer analyst 280,808 280,808 Operating $20,000,000 65,052 20,065,052 Equipment 15,000 15,000

Total· ERP (The Senate reduced funding for ERP by $8,517,500 to $20,000,000 $468,873 $20,488,873 $11,971,373 of which $11,482,500 la from the general fund to the funding level recommended In the Hoeven executive budget.)

17, ProtJldea the following 2 FTE positions and software and equipment fundfng to develop and eupport a centralized electronlo document management system (EOMS):

1 FTE data base design analyst Ill $140,404 $140,404 1 FTE programmer analyst Ill 128,013 128,013 Operating 293,368 293,368 Equipment 760,000 760,000

Total .. EDMS $1,321,785 $1,321,785

18. Ptovktea 1 FTE position and related funding for administrative responsfbilltJet:

1 FTE aenlot personnel oMcer S116,643 $116,643 Operating 21i(l84 21,684 Equipment 5,000 5,000

Total .. Admlnlatrative $143,327 $143,327

19. Provldea funding to Ntabflth an Innovation fund, (The Senate reduced $500,000 $500,000 funding by $300,000 to $200,000 which la the level of funding recommended In the Hoeven ekecutfve budget,)

20, Provldee pa11through funding for the center for Innovation In $340,583 $340,583 lnstructton,

21, Provfdea funding for 1upport of the SENOIT network, $546,669 $546,669

22, Provldee funding for support of Prairie PubJlc televlalon. $1.407,513 $1,407,513

Major Hotwn ReoommendatlOM Affecting lnfonn1tJon Technology Department 2001.03 Budget Compartd to the BIii •• Introduced (Schafer Budget)

O.nertl Fund OtherFund• Total 1. Aeducel funding for lhe ltltewtde Information technok>gy networlt by ($1,300,000) ($1,300,000)

dectllllng the fll,dlng for the !ducallonal Telecommunlcatlonl ~ tn,nt $3,500,000 to $2.20(),000. (The S.... ~ fundtng for h ttltewtde lr1f'olmllon tect~ netwof'k a ~ In thl HoeYtrt exttMrw budget.)

2, Pf'OYkttl the folkMlng ~ In fundtng for the ERP 1y1tem which ....utt In fundtng being Nduced tom S20 • .cae,173 to $11,971,373, ot ~ s11 ,412,500 te ttont the gene,11 i\m, (Thi Stnate ldJUtted fundtng for the ERP IYtNffl II r'ltlOfflffllnd In the HOMn ex-acutiw budget)

•• DlcN111 fn fll,dlng for CJplfllting expenMt, ($9,000,000) ($9,000,000)

b, lncflMI In fll,dlng M to tM trww of funding related to the $482,000 ~.500 QtMMy ICMole Cofnmlllkwl (S70,000) .nd ttudent datl bMe

($412,500) from the [)apartment of Public Instruction to the Information T echnotogy Department.

Subtotal

. Reduces funding pro\Jlded to ntabflth an Innovation fund from $500,000 to $200.000. (The Senate decreased funding for an Innovation fund as recommended In the Hoeven executive budget.)

($8,517,500)

($300,000)

M1Jor Legl1f1tlon Affecting the fnform1tton Technology Department

($8,517,500)

($300,000)

Senate BIii No. 2026 requires Information technology plans prepared b:1 state agencies to address the feasibility of ielecommutlng by sefected employeea. (ThJI ~II haa been passed by the Senate.)

Senatt BIii No. 2043 requires the Information Technology Committee to re-view the cost-benefit analysl" of any major project of th,e State Board of Higher EducaHon or any Institution 1Jnder the control of the board If the project significantly Impacts the state's wide area networl<. Impacts the atatew,.:le library system, or Is an administrative project. The bill also authorizes the Information Technology Oep,trl.ment to purchase equipment and software through financing arrangements, $peclfles addltlonal requirements that must be lnciuded In the department's business plan, and changM the deadllne for agencies submitting Information technology plans from January 15 to March 15 of each even-numbered year. (This bill has been passed by the Senate.)

Senate BIii No. 2251 creates a new Educatlonrtl Jechnology Council to replace the Educational Telecommunlcallons Council and provkJes that funding appropriated by the 2ooi'Leglslatlve Assembly for the Division of Independent Study, SENOIT technology sefvlcea, and the Center for Innovation In Instruction be transferred to the Information Technology Department for use by the Educational Technology Council. (This bill has been passed by the Senate,)

Summ1ry of L1gl1l1tlve ChangM Reaultlng From First HouH Action

See Statement of Purpose of Amendment (attached).

02122/01

(,-,

'' 1EtID. /.

~-'' 11ft Btn No. 2022 • F11ndln1 Sumnt•ry /:. Euull~t StHfe Se114te ,j-, , Budsel; Ch111rs Version '\ ~

( lnfom\allon TcchnoloJy Dq,,rtment

Stlariclandwa,es S25,985,352 $25,985,352 Opfflth11 ticpenses 36,076,824 36,076.824 Equipment S,!!95,000 5,595,000 Ccncer tot innovation and '934,583 934,58)

Instruction EducatiOfl lcchnolog~ 3,500.000 ( l.J00.000) 2,200,000

commission grants SENDIT network 1.973,669 1,973,669 IT ~hnleal educatlort ,rog. 590,300 590,300

ck\lelopmc:nt Wide area network ~.968,905 9,968,905 Enterprise resource pl..,nlng 20,488,873 (8,S I ?,SOO) l l.971,373

system Ptalrlt public bro1dcasllna 1,407,SIJ 1,407,513 IT lnnov1tl0fl tbnd S00,000 (300,000) 200,000

, I

Total all f\lnds SJ0?.021,019 ($10,117,500) $96,903,519 (' Lffl estimated Income 71,1851087 0 11,185,087

Oeneralf'und $35,835,932 ($ I 0, 117,500) $25,718,432

FTB 212.00 0.00 212.00

t':\ Bill Total f:· Total •H funds $107.021,019 (SI0,I 17,500) $96,~3,$19 I'" I Less estimated Income __Jl,185,087 0 7l,l8S,081 I· i Oeneral t'und $35,83$,932 ($10,117,500) S2S, 718,432 i,'

fTE 212,00 0.00 212.00

fl Senate 8111 No, 2022 .. lnform•tlon Technology Department - Senate Action

Entutl\'t Stnttt SfHtt audaet Chanau Vtrtlon

Salaries and w .. es $25,985,352 $2S,98S,H2 Opertltn1 e,cpenses 36,076,824 36,076,824 Equipment 5,595,000 S,S9MOO Cei,ter ror Innovation and 934,.,u 934,583

lMb'UCtiffl Education technofoay 3,500,000 ( 1,300,000) 2,200,000

ccxnmlulon arants SBNOIT Mtwork 1,973,669 1,973,~9 tr teclmlct! edlk:aclon pro,. 590,JOO 590,300

development Wlcte.,..networlc 9,961,905 9,968,905 EMeqWite ~ ptannln1 20,488,813 (8,St?,500) I 1,971,373

l)'liem PdftM ,-t,Ho blotdclltht1 1,407,513 1,401,513 IT ~llk>tl f\and S00,000 (300,000) 200,000

TocallllftMtds S107,021.019 $96;903,519 Lett esllmlied Income 71,1851081 11 11u1011 o.twalftlfld iJUlM32 '' " $2S,718,d2

m 212.00 212.00

SB2022

·\, ., ' ' •• ·. I ,'

I.:

i'

I I•,

/,,,;·~ ,., '.

,,.

02/22/01

partmtnt No, 112 - Information Technology Dep•rtment - Deta,, of Senate Chan1es

AdJwst F111tdln1 Rtd1tct Fundln1 ror the

for tht Enltrprlst Red11cc Fundln& £dlkatlonal Ruou. rt for IT

Telecom mu nit• Pl ■ nnlnr lnnov•Oo11 tton1 Council' Sysltnl Fund

Tot•I Srnatt Ch•nl(H

S1l1tits ,nd w11ges Oper.iln1 e,cpenses Equl~nt Centa (ot lnoovatlon and

lnstruct6on Education technology (1,300,000) (1,300,000)

commission pts SENOIT network IT technical education proa.

development Wide area network EnterprlSt resource plmnlng (8,517,500) (8,S 17,SOO)

syitern Pr•lrle public bwtdctStlns IT Innovation fund poo,0001 (300 000)

Total all ft.Inds ($1,300,000) ($8,511,500) ($300,000) (SI o, 111.~:oo) lMs estlrnated Income 0 0 0 0

Otneral tund (S 1,300,0001 (S8,SIU00\ ($300,000) ($10, 11 U00)

FTS 0 00 0 00 0.00 0.00

· It amendment reduces funding for the statewide lnfonnatlon technology network by decreasing the funding from the general fund tor the Bducatlonal Teltcommunlcatlons Council from $3,500,000 to $2,200,000.

2 This amendment provides for the following adjustments In funding for the enterprise resource planning (ERP) system which result In f\mdlna being reduced from $20,499,873 to S 11,9711373, of which S 11,482,500 Is from the general fund:

Decttate In t\lndtn1 ft>r ($9.000,000) o,enttna e,cpenses

lnctttse ltt f\indlna due to 482,500 ttwter or funding !\-om the Depir:menl or Public IMttuotlon related to the Quality School• Commission (S10,000) end ltUdent dill base(~ 12,500)

Tota ---· ($_8 ..... ,'1 .... 7,-SOO ..... )

-----------This amendment al10 adds a section allowing the lnfonnatlon Technology Department to transfer spending authority between llne Items.

'' ,1 \, ]

. • ~I '

' 2 S92022

,(,')

~~~-_.~'.~i~-t~r:-~~~·~;.::-:--~---:_ --=~~<-::-~~·a~-

,ti""< .. •>· •. • --~-Z-~ -~ -d~~~---:•-== -------------------. --------------------- , ,_ --, -ESrlllECOIIIIENDATIONCOIIPARISONDETAIL Page: 1of3 · .,.-

413. DEP.l'~OF.,. &FINMCIALINST 8111~882008 Data: 1MI01

• aliar 2IIIOl-410S Time: 9:56:31

I I ... lffll

W./_I IS MD WAGES SN.ARIES TEUPORARY. OVERTIME & SHI BENEFIIS

10TAL

ULARIES AND WAGES GENERAL FUND FEDERAL FUNDS SPEaAL.FUNDS

TorAL

aa,MllNGEXPENSES ~-DATA PROCESSING

vA.,!-lELEPHONE TRAVB..

~u:AReSUPPLIES POSTAGE LEASEIRENT -EQUIPMENT LEASEIRENT - BLDG4.AND DUES & PROFESSIONAL DEV. OPERATING FEES & SERVICES REPAIRS PROFESSIONALSERVICES INSURANCE OFFICE SUPPLIES PRINTING PR0FESSIONAL SUPPUES & M FOOD & Q.OTHING MEDlCALJ)ENTAL & OPTICAL SLDG.GRNDS.~ MTCE S

Ml:SCEU.ANEOUS SUPPLIES

Ollcaof .. ......-tmd Budget

,~1 1,614.192

2.190 420.825

2.037,,207

0 0

2.037$17

2,03T.;l07

6.500 17,175

220,920 0

1,175

~2.898 0

94,811

25.926 10,444 4,154

15.891 89

11.724 6.171

12..042 56

0

6 3,812

Pnia■nt I .saCftal BQClgat ,.....,, 1.837.344 (20.389} -1.1%

0 0 0.0% 487,266 (7,303) -1.5%

2.324,,a10 (27.892) -1..2%

0 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0%

2.324.610 (27.692) -1.2%

2.324,810 (27.892) ·1..2%

27.5o7 7.983 29.0% 18,108 0 0.0%

221.033 18.006 8.1% 8,000 8,931 1 t 1.6%

0 0 0.0%

12,823 2,526 19.7% 0 0 0.0%

101.519 10.sn 10.5% 65,836 0 0.0%

~0.812 0 0.0% 5,139 2,130 41.4%

20.448 20.321 99.4% 290 0 0.0%

8,625 0 0.0% 8.806 0 0.()%

15,275 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0%

0 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0%

4,991 0 0.0%

RllquNf8d r~~Cba~i Buclglt

2001-2003

1,816.955 281,748 15.3% 2.119.092 0 0 0.0% 0

47S,963 102.520 21.0% 58tl.78S

~11 ,~~ 11.5% 2.TOU78 -0 0 OJ)% 0 0 0 0.0% 0

2,296,918 384,268 16.5% 2.?08.878

2.296.918 384,288 11..5% 2,7GIMI,

35.550 15,483 56.2% 43,050 18,108 0 0.0% 18,108

239.039 18,005 8.1% 239,039 16,931 8,931 111.6% 16.931

0 0 0.0% C 15,349 2.526 19.7% 15.349

0 0 0.0% 0 112,196 10.sn 10.5% 112.196 65,836 0 0.0% 65.,838 10,812 0 0.0% 10.812 7,269 2,130 41.4% 7~

40,769 20,321 99.4% 40,769 290 0 0.0% 290

8.625 0 0.0% 8,825 8,806 0 0.0% a.sos

15,275 0 OJ)% 15,275 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0 Q.()04 0 0 0 0.0% 0

4,991 0 0.0% (,991

R307A

.·.-::!: ~?:~c~~=if· ~• c~=:,?c.'i~~~-'<~'::t-~,c.c-··=<:,:•c--=· • ;:'°-:,':,:' ·c""<""", c'- ,- ~-. ,•

i. msa:t~TIONCOMPARISON DETAIL ffl WI OEUIIBIIIG&FINANCIALINST • ~

. -,.c __ ·- _: ..--•,-_< ..

Page:2of3 • ~

. ■1111111: 21111-aa

OIEIIAllllaDPEIIIEI OPERA BUDGET ADJUSTMENT

1UT'AL

OPERAl'ING EXPENSES GENERAL FUND FEDERAL FUNDS SPECIAL FUNDS

TGrAL

EQmlllENT OFFICE E0UIPIENT & FURNIT

v"'-EQUIPMENT TOTAL

EQUIPMENT GE!-ERAL FUND FEDERAL FUNDS SPECIAL RJNDS

'IOTAL

IPECIAL LINES CONTINGENCY

lOiAL

IPECMLLINES SPEOALRJNOS

TOTAL

FUNDINQ

GENERAL FL.=>m FEDERALFUtC>S

OlllmflfX tPIMltMIIIBI ....

BUI t;: SB2008 Data: 1/4/01 Time: 9:56:31

Isl ,:a I .. E4%Cbal ::s: I futt~ai ... --..... -1 0 0 0 0.(rl;. 0 94.472 0.0% 94.472

443.79' 529,272 70.574 13.3% 599,146 172,SCb 32.8% 701.111

0 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0.0% 0 O 0.0% 0

443.794 529.272 70.574 13.3% 599,846 172.546 32.6% 701,818

443,794 529,272 70,574 13.3% 599.148 172.546 32.6% 701,111

44.196 23.041 (3.341) -14.5% 19.700 (3,341) -14.5% 19.700 0 41.041 {39,541) -96.3% 1,500 (12.041) -29.3% 29,000

44.196 6',082 {42,882) -66.9% 21,200 {15,312) -24.0% 41.700

0 0 0 0.0% O O 0.0% 0 0 O O 0.0% O O 0.0% 0

44.196 64,082 (42.882) -66.9% 21.200 (15,382) -24.0% 48.700

U.196 84.082 (42.882) -66.9% 21,200 (15.312) •24.0% 41.700

0

0

0

0

0

0

20.000

20,000

20,000

20,000

0 0

0 0.0%

0 0.0%

0 0.0%

0 0.0%

0 0.0% 0 0.0%

20,000

20,000

20.000

20,000

0 0

0 0.0%

0 0.0%

0 0.0%

0 0.0%

0 0.0% 0 0.0%

20,000

20,000

20,000

20.000

R3G7A

0 0

I

'' i_ ,,

I :>- z

f/:' 1,: :W', ~ 1'

,,

,, f t·

I

ii(,'' :; ~1 i. ~ "t ( .· . ,· ..... 1- ...

':\· i~ I I I ~t;-' - 11 ,~·~ ;.,t· , I ,

-•\'\.,tt,i · .. ·• , . ....._.......... I ' I '\,, : .. 'I I{

i

I 1

'I

I .,_ ',1. :,,

•

Pl-aop-in_g .Cycle ~

Janua,.y 15, 2000 11- Pl:in,; duP

July 15, 2000 - B.11d9etc; duc

Novf''mtH:>,., 2000 St;1t.-. IT pl;-111

puhlishr(f

Continuouc; pl;lnninq throu~Jhout th" hi,~nni1Hu

IT P1anning AnaJysts

----------------,...,,..~,,...,.._.., .. Nancy Walz

Dennis Klipfel

· Rob Gair ,.

- Phil (Bods} Miller·

Oversight Responsibilities

)

,- Approve tr.cfuir.itions ovr>r $1,000 ~

"Ar1provc contractual ;ir11ui•.itio11c;.

over $25,000

Monitor JHOjPcJ,:, ovPr $2t;O,OOO

1

.,

IT Planning Supplemental Information

r IT l\rchitPcturr - Hardw:ue

,... IT l\r,:hitccturr. -T rlrr on1 n1u nic a ti on s

'T l\rchitecturf' - S&ftwarr ' l\ppliratiqn-. Developmen-r·

ll <;t;1ffin!1 1 Training Pl;rn

C 0"' pli:111r r with c;t a rHbnfc;

..

" IT .Planni_ng Information Requirements

.. . .

Agency tnissio,:a & descrip.tion

" Alignment with statewide IT plan - . " . ' ~ ~

- Goals, objectives, ant;f · accomplis.bments

· ·Activities (work/budget p'ackages) · Oro;criptive information , ,{_

. Estim;itP.d costs - 3 bicnnla ., \ .

Budget f~r fhc 01-03 bicnnla

SpQf:ial IT Object Codes (Budget Detail)

3002 I_T Oat;w Procec;sing

3003 n Telf"phonr-

1oor; IT Software t Supplir~

100n - IT Contr:1ctu:1I SPrvic<>~ . '1001 IT fquipnH'nt

2

... ,,..,.___,,...,ftfl .. 1111bcW,lf rro,_..,~>

101-0l ........... 101-0, ..... ~~ 001.0,~ ...

3

:5/;., ')(i) ).

.::;,- k () I

,,!--

~-~-

-:.".

IT Budget a a Percent of the Total Budget

Higher Eel. Ext. & Research Total

Health and Human Services Total 1.22%

All Tefephort.e for State Gov"t Total

0.42%

Total Non-IT Budget 95.38%

1.02% K-12 School Technology Total 0.30%

Other State Agencies Total 1.41%

---Statewide Projects Total 0.29%

■ All Telephone for State Gov"t Total

■ Health and Human Services Total

□ Higher Ed .• Exl & R Total

□ K-12 School Technology TotaJ

■ Other State Agencies Total

■ Statewide Projects Total

■Total Non-IT Budget

1'' f." I

"

;;;t! !.,·::,,;·' ' -

Hoeven•, Budget Recommendation IT Budget 111 Percent of the Total Budget (Excluding tTD Speclal Funds)

CMlgo.y Al Tel1p.'lone for ltate Govt Total HNNtt end Human hrYloN Total IN1w 1c1,. lxt. I......,.,,. Total K•12 lohool Ttohnology Total Olhtrttlte111MINTotll ltatewklt Gtntral l'und ProJtote Total

ToClf IT Budget Total Non•IT Budget

Alan of Countle• Innovation Fund ERP E-gov GIS

% of Total Budget Recommendation

$11,271,490 0,42% Ml,317,143 1.22% '47,241,MO 1.02% $13,710,I01 0.30% M1,0l2,M7 1.41% $13,331.411 0.29%

$248,000 $200,000

$11,482,500 $334,177

$1,071,784 $211,044,102 ,4,84%

M,411,370,408 96.38%

- ·---... ·:.· -- -·y- - .-. - .. - .;-

Historical Funding Sources for ITD Revenue ITD Special Funds Budget - $71,327,753

Special Funds 23%

Federal Funds 32%

Non-Appropriated Funds 1%

General Funds 44%

-~-.. ~

1-.......

j,

X.XXii _&D~'j!Jl!!!!1.~•~'P->-,.... __ _ -~~it. !:,.1#-ffi_i'·'"S~-t'1"' -;,_~;-- - - - -. ... .>- ,AAl?ec~_,.J;?F,¥,<}.Q!Siti!L -~ . . .... ~m:::::e..,.. ,:_" '. - .. · -~'"""'-o,~?"1-¾k-O·•"""'""' • C . ~ • • .. A,""+-"' .._.,...,,.._ I . IL u;a;;e:. 4% _Uh24DU ¾ . .. & , • ~ ~--~~"V~

..

State of North Dakota Information Technology Department

.. -craw..,~ _. .. ..,

Sod.~

3-~-0\

ITD 2001- 2003 Budget Request

Presentation to the House Appropriations Committee

March 2, 2001

By Curt Wolfe, CIO

-.~..,·.-,~ ·-~.

ITD Total Budget $96,903,519

General Funds 26.5%

Special Funds 73_5%

2

- ~?:" / ,?9,-:;:::~"'-..,-;'.~""'•"" , - ~--·~:--"'----:-~~-· -:-... _~""'!_~ :-· -·

tF , , . , - ,;

ITD SPECIAL FUNDS

State Agency

~

Services Rendered

Approves Request

Request Funding

Request Services

I'ID

Request Authority

Legislature

Approves Authori~J

3

::.-:;;..~i_:;:"_•?~\:·~~~:::·~~- ~ -:-'.~ . - ~ -<:-•:-; -- --~--~ :.~;~---:.-----:~• --:-,:..---;:-:-;~-: ---- --:':\'=""~ -~~-~~---· ~·-,.:: -~-:: -~---::-:---~_-_

ITD SPECIAL FUNDS

State Agency

C

Services Rendered

Approves Request

Request Funding

Request Services

rro

Request Authority

Legislature

.1'

Approves Authority

:~

4

f:t,I '. :·

,i:> l:·,.'., ~!.'.,}.

. •.

.. I i

J

I I i

J g

! .. ..

j

I -I !

I

-; I. .. .. .. .. ........ -! :1 -~ .. I • j i

I I

?~?f.if![_~~~-~"'--:"'7·=~-..::•c'""i~~,·~c ,._;;,,., -ccc.,7

~'"F''""C.

~·

General Fund Details

• Non-traditional funds.

- Prairie Public Broadcasting

- Base budget for Sendit - NDSU

- Base budget for CII - VCSU

...-"!,':_

$1~407,513

$ 546,669

$ 340,583

Total: $2,294,765

6

{l[ffi~~ -~---,=-s~~., ""~~ • . . .. -· ,, .

::.~: General Fund Details

• Completion of Network Rollout:

- Phase II - K-12 high schools and

public libraries

- Router and recurring Tl circuit

cost

- Equipment cost for Phase I

~ ;----.:

$4,22~9

$ 450~75

Total: $4,672,824

7

r:7·~:.:~;~:f!-- -.'" · :_ .;_ .. - :-~~~~~._:~-~~ .~~~--~·~~~:_:::~r:.---:--c.--,,;;.-~-i_:-~•:..-::·~~!~- ....._ r


• Support and Training:

- Association of Counties - local

political subdivisions

- Sendit - expanded role - K-12

s 248,

$1,427,-

- Two RE coD1ponents ($4,595,474)

* Statewide IVN Support.

* Workforce Education.

Total: $ 1,675,QOO

8

...-;-~;,~~--~ .. ~~~~~~~rP~@\?,:,~-r:~.t-~?-~~~-~~;~•. --~~--

-'~-~+1,- ~:••' -

General Fund De ·

• Utilization of Network:

- CII - Teacher training

- ETC Grants

- Vocational Education

K-12 technology training

_"._-"7""-- -::-.;::. ->:·•--·,;...-

S 594,0C)O

$2,200,000

$~590,300

Totals: $3,384,300

9

~~t#~-~~"';"~c~c'::~---S.C~ :''::- .. -~~-·;•:;-c'-._~ -; • - _;--~,:- C'-c • --~- •--~-- ;.,-_-c-'. '"';"' -. -,::"C::•""7:,Z-7~ C::., - C.-:c~;~, :'c• '•"'->' ~;~~~~-.,"; C ·C•-


• Improved productivity and reduce cost of government:

-ERP - E-government -GIS - Security/Cyber Crime - Research & Planning

• Innovation Fund:

$11,482,500 S 334,177 $ 1,071,784 $ 143,328 $ 3172088

Total: $13,348,877

Total: $ 200,000

Grand Totals: $25,575,766 10

j

SB 2022 TESTIMONY SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE

BY: MIKE J. RESSLER, DIRECTOR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT (/TD)

JANUARY 15, 2001

Mr. Chainnan, and members of the committee, my name is Mike Ressler and I am the Director of Operations at ITO.

ITO is responsible for providing technology solutions to state government agencies and our customer base includes county government for network connections and soon to include K-12 and libraries across the state. Today we have a staff of 169 FTE's and 22 contract programmers. We are primarily special funded except for the $250,000 of general fund money we received this biennium for a plaru1ing position and for consulting assistance in developing the RFP for the wide area network.

ITO is organized into five sections as follows: IT Planning, Administration, Software Development, Computer Services, and Telecommunications.

IT Planning is responsible for creating IT policies, standards, and guidelines by coordinating agency input and researching existing technology solutions, This section has a staff of four. They review agency IT plans to ensure they are complete and also monitor agency IT efforts and expenditures to detennine compliance with IT plans, the state standards and policies. A statewide IT plan is crafted every two years after state agencies submit their IT plans, Research of new technologies is critical for state government to be efficient when automating processes and the need to coordinate this knowledge. Grant writing is a new avenue ITO is starting to explore. These are two reasons for tequesting a new position in this section.

The Administration section has 14 people and is responsible for administrative support, human resources, payroll, billing and other accounting functions. Records management provides consulting to state agencies, develops records retention schedules and audits for compliance of these records management programs. Security staff also reports in this section as they are responsible for physical, network and application security. This is an area that is growing quickly as the internet has revolutionized the way we access information. The protection of datti is being scrutinized by the federal government as well as citizens who want to be sure the data stored with the state is only accessed by those who are authorized to access it. Another growing problem is the increase in criminal activity using the internet, These crimes can be committed in one state by an individual in a different state. The challenge is twofold. what criminal investigation team is going to prosecute (federal. state .city) and where is the law enforcement staff going to get the expertise needed to use the tools (computers, networks, etc,) needed for investigating these crimes. This requires technical knowledge along with law enforcement expertise. As a result ITD and the Attorney General's office have agreed to work together when these oases arise. To date the Bureau of Criminal Investigation (BCI) has prosecuted 10 cases in which computers were used in committing a crime. When the jndividual is not working on these projects, he (she) can work on security issues at the state, This will allow for cross training and a better use or a very expensive, highly skilled individual. Another

\\ISDSRVN1\lcot .. "cel\MIKB\Ual1lature\TBST.l022Jan I 5•200 I . DOC

function of the administration section involves backup procedures and disaster recovery practices which are critical for the continuation of business in the event ofa catastrophe.

The Software Development group develops and maintains computer software applications. This section has a current staff of 86 people and contracts for another 22 programmers. ITD is requesting an increase of 33 new FTBts. 30 of these positions are special funded and contingent upon other state agencies receiving funding for their development projects. ITO has experienced a real difficulty in finding contract programmers who have experience in the latest web and client server skills. These people when found have billing rates from $75 to $250 per hour. The projected hourly rates ITD will charge for the next biennium are $49 for a programmer and $53 for a systems analyst, It is our belief that the only way we are going to succeed in the future is to grow our own staff with these skills. Agencies have voiced their concerns over the high consulting rates and in many cases have had to abandon their development project and/or drastically reduce their scope. When we use contract programmers we pass on the hourly rate we pay for the contractor to the agency.

Computer Services is responsible for operating the mainframe computer, AS/400 computer, and the many servers used to operate e-mail systems, file servers, and agency applications. This section of 36 people provides computer operations, printing facilities, database support, and technical service support for alt the hardware and software utilized. E .. mail administration is also supported here and has become a mission critical application for many people today. ITO is requesting two new database support positions. Both the geographic information systems (GIS) and electronic data management systems (EDMS) wiU require additional support in this area.

Telecommunications has a staff of 27 and is responsible for the state wide area network, all telephone systems (4o+) throughout the state along with a central help desk. ITD has just completed phase 1 of the wide area network, deploying A TM T-1 circuits to 177 locations in 64 communities. The second phase will ~onnect every high school and library in the state (additional 30o+ locations in 130 communities) with this same technology and pave the way for web based applications, such as geographic infonnation systems (01S), and video applications to be utilized. An additional two positions are being requested for this increase in workload, The addition of the K .. 12 institutions and libraries will more than double the end points on the current state network. The education community is dependent upon this broadband network if they are going to offer such programs as: distance learning classes, degrees over the internet, and the ability to share teachers, with hard to find skills.

New initiatives for the next biennium include the following projects:

Payment for Phase 1 of the wide area network. State agencies did not receive any additional funding for converting to the new A TM 1'-1 network which was completed November 30, 2000. ITO borrowed s2.ooo.ooo for the equipment (routers, switches, etc,) and is obligated to pay this note over a 36 month period. This amount is being billed back to the appropriate state agency on a monthly · basis. Agencies will pay 9 months of this note during this bi.ennium. but will need to obtain the remaining $1.476,S70 in the next biennium. Agencies also have had to find the increase in circuit cost, for the current biennium in their existing budget. The increases for next biennium were provided in ITD'• budget instructions and the agencies will be requesting these dollars in the budgets you will review over the next four months. ITO is requesting two FrE •a to support the increased

\\ISDSlt~of1<cel\MlKIN..tsi•lature\TBST2022Jan I !•2001,DOC

workload as a result of this new network at a cost of $321,784. The above costs will be recovered through ITD's special fund.

Phase 2 of the wide area network deployment involves connecting all the high schools and libraries across the state. We are requesting the state provide an ATM T-1 circuit to each of these locations. the one-time cost for the router, and the internet connection. If the institution needs additional bandwidth. they will be required to come up with the needed funds. General fund dollars are being requested for this initiative and will amount to $7,922,549. ITO is expecting to receive roughly $3,700,000 of these dollars in a refund from the Universal Sen'ice Fund as part of the E-Rate program, netting the cost at $4,222,549. Because this phase will more than double our existing customer base:

1

ITD is requesting two additional FTE's to install and support this mission critical infrastructure on an ongoing besis.

The Governor. in partnership with the Legislative IT Committee, have detennined the need for coordination of the many facets of this technology deplo)1llent. As a result, the following programs have been located in the ITO budget and the requests are as follows:

• Association of Counties will receive $248,000 to provide network support for county government throughout the state.

• IT Technology Program will receive $590,300 to work with the Board for Vocational & Technical Education to deploy technology curriculum in K-12.

• Center for Innovation in Instruction wilt receive $934,583 to provide additional instructional technology resources to K-12 educators and administrators.

• SENDIT Technology Services will receive $1,973,669 to provide internet support center and deliver core IT services, support and training to the K-12 users.

• Education Telecommunications Council will receive $2,200,000 (this biennium $6,000,000 was funded) to foster the development and use of technology for education, These dollars can assist the schools with the purchase of video equipment and will be awarded by the ETC.

• Prairie Public Broadcasting will receive $1,407,513 for the operational expense of networks used to broadcast programs.

These initiatives total $7,354.065 of general funding and are importar~ · .. o the state can obtain the maximum potential from our investment in this high speed network.

State agencies are appearing before the te'"(is)ature to acquire funding for major appJication development projects. ITO works clos~ly with agencies in estimating the amount of software development resources they will need. ITO bills agencies on an hourly basis for development work and all monies for this initiative are special funded in our budget. If the legislature approves the following projects in the agencies budgets, ITO.is requesting 26 new FTE•s (systems analysts/ programmers) and funding for 12 additional contract programmers:

• Human Services: Health Insurance Portability & Accounting Act (HIP AA) • Human Services: Fully Automated Child Support Enhancement System • Human Services: Foster Care • Tax Department: Tax Collections / Accounts Receivable • Department of Transportation: Construction Automated Reporting System (CARS) • Department of Transportation: Roadway Information Management System (RIMS)

\\JSOSRVN-r.:ot..xceMf lKS\LtaftlatuN\TSST2022Jan t 5•2001.DOC

ITD operates on a fee for service basi• and win not fill any position. should the agency redirect their priorities and as a result does not spend their money with ITO.

Today we have various state agencies operating geographic infonnation systems (01S). This past year, we hired Convergent Groui,, a GIS consultant, to review how North Dakota was utilizing this technology. They recomm~-nded ITO establish and support a centralized hosting infrastructure, This hub, consisting or computer proc,,ssors and disk storage, would provide a means for sharing all the infonnation government has stor~d on various machines throughout the state. Today, agencies are duplicating investments on equipment and even worse are not able to share the data as readily as we could if a central hub was installed. ITO is requesting two FTE's to operate the equipment, provide data base support and coordinate GIS activities around the state. Software and equipment dollars are also being requested and the total general fund request is $1,071,784. State agencies will not pay nn for this service and will no longer need to request in their budget this type of equipment/service.

Another initiative which has the i1otential to save state government substantial dollars is a shared electronic data management system (EDMS). Agencies are generating a large amount of electronic records, for example imaging tax returns, and the need for these records to be managed and easily accessed by those who have the authority is essential. This technology will have a noticeable l'etum on the time it takes to access records, the accuracy of accessing the records. and the space savings from storing documents electronii,ally vs. on paper. ITO would manage the central data base and provide the needed software, licenses and hardware to do so. Our role would also be to provide the expertise on how this should be ai:complished so agencies do not have to reinvent the wheel. The ITO request is $1,32 t, 784 of spedal funds (we would bill back our costs to the agencies using the service) and includes two FTE's.

Last year ITO launched DiscoverND which is the state of North Dakota•s web portal. We have seen an aggressive attempt by some agencies to develop their service applications to be web enabled and thus offer thom to the citizens of l\fD over the internet. One very successful application is the Grune & Fish hunting and fishing licens1, system. Citizens are becoming ,,.xposed to the convenience of dealing with online systems and will be demanding this from government in the very near future. Agencies pay lTD for the develor,ment of these applications, but the central infrastructure like the ND portal and the interfacing behveen agency systems is not charged out. Also, we see the potential of this technology to re .. engineer the way government agencies deal with the citizens, The major draw back to this reinvention is that agencies are not looking at the big picture and will not pay to develop systems that cross department lines. ITO is requesting general funds for two FTE's, a systems analyst and a programmerr, to concentrate on the developrtlent and maintenance of these central systems. The amount is $334,177.

ITD, in partnership with Higher Uduoation, 0MB, and the K-12 environment have released a RFP for acquiring an enterprise resource J>lanning system (ERP). This system integrates financial, human resource, administrative, procure:ment, student registration, and other systems into a common schema so all parties can share and use the data. Today our systems are old, some obsolete, and require ~or maintenance efrorta. In m.any cases the systems do not provide the data in the context needed so apncies, univenity staff', and 10hool administrators have created shadow systems. This is time consuming. coatly and increases tl,.e chances for data to be inaccurate because it is stored in various databue1. The federal govemmrent bu released some new requirements for the education systems

\'11SDU.VN'r-Met.....rMIKB\l.taWlbft\TUl10WenlS•2001,DOC

i

and to be compliant they will need to invest some major dollars in the old systems. The four largest school districts are in need of acquiring a financial system over the next two years because the company providing them this service is no longer going to do so. The timing is right for this acquisition and the coordination amongst the above parties will allow the state to maximize its investment. We are in the process of conducting oral interviews from three companies who are capable of providing these systems. The general fund amount requested for this bieMium is $11,971,373 and includes three FI'E's (systems analysts/programmers which wilt be special funded) to assist in the implementation. This amount will not pay for the whole system, but should give the state a start at implementing certain modules over the next two years. The intent is to complete the remaining modules in the following bieMium. The total cost is expected to be in the $35,000,000 to $40,000,000 range. These numbers include the cost of the computer infrastructure needed and the additional state staff needed to augment the transition. We will know more as we continue the evaluation process and wiH have a better total cost before the legislature completes the session.

As we expand the network and move more services to the e-government model along with federal mandates such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIP AA), information technology security is becoming more critical and more complex. Central leadership and expertise is necessary to identify solutions the state can implement on a proactive basis. Monitoring of intrusion attempts is also critical to maintain the integrity of the network. ITO is requesting special funds for one FfE to assist in the security area and the amount is $143,328.

As crscussed earlier in my testimony ITO is working with the Bureau of Criminal Investigation and will assist them from a technical standpoint with prosecuting individuals who use computers and networks to commit crimes. ITD is requesting general funds of$143,328 to hire one security analyst.

There is a need for the state to work with the educational system in an effort to ensure the proper infonnation technologies are being taught so we have a pool of resources to hire. We are requesting $143,328 of special funds to hire an administrative position who will work with the schools and coordinate with agencies who have a need for hiring technology expertise.

Greater emphasis needs to be placed on research and planning so that North Dakota can identify trends and new technologies instead of reacting as technologies change. By getting out in front of technology change, the state will prevent wasteful spending and make better decisions when choosing technologies to be implemented. ITO needs to coordinate with agencies and develop assignments to accomplish this. We are requesting $317,088 of general funds and one FTE. This amount also includes $150,000 for consulting service and computer tools needed to fulfill this mission.

And last, but not least, ITO is requesting $200,000 of general fund money to be put into an innovation fund. This fund will provide some flexibility for implementing IT projects that come about during the interim. Two years is a long time for technology and the ability to access some funds would have a positive i~~dCt. These funds could only be acquired if the agency submits a cost effective project and approval is granted by some body (maybe the Legislative IT Committee). The agency would pay back the funds in the next biennium. This model has not been completely worked out yet - agencies could pay back with interest or they could pay back a portion of the cost savings thoy obtained by implementing the program,

\\ISDSltVN'lwct-ueef\MIKB\1..tlltlabn\TBST20W1nl !•2001,00C

:.,-

Ov....U, · JTD'a total budpt iequeat i, $96,903,519 of which $25,718,432 is general funds, This iocludcl fbndin, for +4 new Fri!'• and 12 new contract programming staff. Of the 44 new FrE ••• 8 will be·pneraJ ftmded. .

nu. concludel my testimony and I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you for your support.

. ·;)'(\/?" \\JIDA~~Tl!ST2022JtnlS-200l,OOC f·(>. . ltt' '

,,t:ii.:-, ~: .. ~·-~,:t:' . ' (t~[,):. ,'. ' ,,

,· •,, ~) ' ;~

~jl li .: · f!: f. ►:'' •

• ~ ·.1

.J

State of North Dakota lnfonnation Technology Department

/TD


Presentation to the Senate Appropriations Committee January 15, 2001

By Mike J. Ressler

Infonnation Technology Department

' ·:,,::,:,.· "'··. . . l . . . ..

, ... ' -· 11 ,...--- •! l

j. • •

'> ·. '

1

Special Funded

Wide Area Network (State/Higher Ed/Political Subs)

2 New FTE 's = Telecommunications Analysts $321,784

Network Equipment $ 1,476,570

( General Fund=$ 450,275)

General Funded

Wide Area Network (K-12/Libraries)

$ 7,922,549

2 New FTE's = Telecommunications Analysts

ITO will receive$ 3,700,000 E-Rate Refund ( Special Fund Authority)

2

General Funded

Contingency Line Items

$7,354,065

A!tsociation of Counties IT Technology Program Center for Innovation in Instruction SEND! r Technology Services Education Telecommunications Council Prairie Public Broadcasting

S 248,000 S S90,300 S 934.S83 S 1,973,669 $2,200,000 $ ·~407,513

Special Funded Software Development Services

$7,085,081

Health Insurance Portability & Accounting Act (HJPAA) Fully Automated ChUd Support Enhancement System

Foster care Tax Collectiom I Accounts Receivable

Construction Automated Reportiq Syatem (CARS) Roadway Information Manaaement System (RIMS)

26 New PTB 11 • Syatema Analyatl / Prognmmen

12 New Contract Prop'ammen

3

< /;f/1ft;!"' ,/ 'ii t '. / ··.·' .·.· .·· , .. . . · . ,';'' ('·

•, ', .

i .. :··\,-·,.::;,."'· ,•, .,,11 ,· :t

GenLeral Funded

Geographic Infonnation Systems (GIS)

$1,071,784

2 New FTE's = Systems Analyst/ Data Base Analyst $ 250,000 Software/Consulting $ 500,000 Computer Hardware

Special Funded

Electronic Data Management System (EDMS)

$ 1,321,784

2 New FTE's = Systems Analyst/ Data Base Analyst $ 250,000 Software/Consulting $ 750.000 Computer Hardware

i \

< ,,,

;/:(, . . . , . ' . ' ',i',◄

:·,· ,· ' . . .

General Funded

E-Govemment (Enterprise Applications)

2 New FTE's ·- Systems Analyst/ Programmer

General Funded

Enterprise Resource Planning System (ERP)

$11,971,373

3 New FTB's = Systems Analysts/ Programmers ( FTB•s are Special Funded)

5

Special Funded

Additional Security Analyst

$ 143,328

1 New FTE = Info Systems Security Analyst

General Funded

Additional Security Analyst for Cybercrime

$143,328

1 New FTB = Info Systems Security Analyst

6

: I, '

' '

. •: .. ;,,' ,, ',·.

Special Funded

Extra Administration Position

$ 143,328

1 New FTE = Sr. Personnel Officer

General Funded

Research & Planning

$317,088

1 New FTE = Info Tech Business Analyst $ 150,000 Software/Consulting

,, 7

I' ,,

:t ,: ., ...... , ' ' ' • , • •I••

',,' '

General Funded

Innovation Fund

$200,000

No FTE's

SUMMARY

Total 2001 • 2003 Budget Request = $ 96,903,519

Total Special Fund Dollars • S 71,185,087 Total General Fund Dollars • S 25,718,432

44 New ITD FTE's ( 8 General Funded ) 12 New Contract Programmers

«,r:,c, i. ' \;,,,: •• :.;if• •.... · > < ,, .. 8

3--T• .-

..... , ... ..,. __ _

--,::~~:<• - .~:~~.- ···-•_c"c,_;c:::j_· ~=·':_;~-:r~,).,

':-~;~- -~~

POSITTON SUMMARY . :--:-;

HIPPA 15 Positions Special Funded

FASCES 4Positions Special Funded

Foster Care 3 Positions Special Funded

Tax Application 2Positions Special Funded

Dept of Transportation 2 Positions Special Funded

Wide Area Network 2 Positions Special Funded

EDMS. 2Positions Special Funded

Security 1 Position Special Funded

Existing Planning 1 Position Special Funded

ERP 3 Positions Special Funded

Training/ Admn 1 Position Special Funded

K-12/Libraries WAN 2 Positions General Funded .,--- ~ - .

GIS 2 Positions General Funded

E-Govemment 2 Positions General Funded

Research & Planning I Position General Funded

Security I Cybercrime I Position General Funded

TOTAL POSmONS 44 Positions 27

', r

QUESTIONS?

Mike J. Ressler Information Technology Department

(701) 328-1001 http://www.state.nd.us/itd/

[email protected]

. '

, ·';-;.~"';'J-._r..:_h· .\l:.-1:t; :

9

·~~-:..-:· ;~-· > ~r,

.:.-::.

r·

---':'~~~ ,_·,.._0. \~L >

a

CONTACT ITO Fila COPY OR LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL LIBRARY

North Dakota Statewide Information Technology -Plan

2000

Agency Plan Summaries

Curtis L. Wolfe. CB•F.F INFORMATION OFFICER

Nouember2000

•

•

•

SB 1022 TESTIMONY HOl'JSB APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE

JIY: MIKE J. RESSLER, DIRECTOR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT(ITD)

MARCH 2, 2001

Mr, Chainnan, and membel's of the committee, my name is Mike Ressler and I am the Director of Operations at ITD,

JTD is responsible for providing technology solutions to state government agencies and our customer base includes county govenunent for network connections and soon to include K-12 and libraries across the state. Today w,, have a staff of 169 FTE's and 22 contract programmers. Our l 999.2fJOI budget is $56,222,095 with the, majority of it being special funded, $250,000 of genera) fund money was appropriated for a pleinning position and for consulting assistance in developing the RFP for the wide area network,

ITO is organized into (Ive sections as follows: IT Planning, Administration, Software Development, Computer Services, and Telecommunications.

IT Planning is responstbile for creating IT policies, standards, and guidelines by coordiuating agency input and researching cmisting technology solutions. This section has a staff of four. They review agency IT pl1111 to cnsu,rc they are complete and also monitor a31,ncy IT efforts and expenditures to dotermine compliance with IT plans, the state standards and policies, A statewide IT plan is crafted every two yean after a·tate agencies submit their IT plans. Research of new technologies is critical for 1tate government to be- efficient when automating processes and the need to coordinate this knowledge, Grant writing is a new avenue ITD is starting to explore. These are two reasons for requesting a new poaltion in this section.

The Administration section has 14 people and is responsible for administrative support, human resources, payroll, bUling and other accounting functions, Records management provides consulting to atate aaencies, develop• record,, retention schedules and audits for compliance of these records manaaement programs. Security staff also reports in this section as they are responsible for physical, network and applic&ition security. This is an area that is growing quickly as the internet has revolutionized the way we access infonnation, The protection of data is being scrutinizt.-d by the federal government as well as citizens who want to be sure the data stored with the state is only acceucd by those who arc authorized to access it. Another growing problem is the increase in criminal activity uuing the internet, These crimes can be committed in one state by an individual in a different state. The challenge is twofold, what criminal investigation team is going to prosecute (federal, 1tate ,city) and where is the law enforcement staff going to get the expertise needed to use the tools (computers, networks, etc.) needed for inve3tigating these crimes. This requires technical knowledge along with law enforcement expertise. As a result ITO and the Attorney General's office have agreed to work together when those cases arise, To date the Bureau of Criminal Investigation (BCI) bu prosecuted 10 cues in which computers were used in committing a crime. When the individual ii not working on these projects, he (she) can work on security issues at the state, This

C:\My Documena\lJ Staft\Mlb Reuler\200l\TSST2022Mw2-200l ,OOC

•

•

•

will allow for cron training and a better uso of a very expensive. highly skilled individual. Another function of the admj niatration section involves backup procedures and disaster recovery practices which aro critical for the continuation of business in the event of a catastrophe.

The Software Devolopmont group develops and maintains computer software applications. This section bu a current staff of 86 people and contracts for another 22 programmers, ITO is requesting an increase of 33 new FTE's. 30 of these positions are special funded and conHngent upon other state agem,ies receiving funding for their development projects. ITD has experienced a real difficulty in finding contract programmers who have experience in the latest web and client server skills. These people when found have billing rates from $75 to $250 per hour, The projected hourly rates ITO will charse for the next biennium are $49 for a programmer and $53 for a systems analyst, It is our belief that the only way we are going to succeed in the future is to grow our own staff with these skills. Agencies have voiced their concerns over the high consulting rates and in many cases have had to abandon their development project and/or drastically reduce their scope. When we use contract programmers we pass on the hourly rate we pay for the contractor to the agency.

Computer Services is responsible for operating the mainframe computer, AS/400 computer, and the many servers used to operate e-mail systems, file servers, and agency applications. This section of 36 people provides computer operations. printing facilities, database support, and technical service support for all the hardware and software utilized. E-mail administration is also supported here and has become a mission critical application for many people today. ITO is requesting two new database support positions. Both the geographic infonnation systems (GIS) and electronic data management systems (EDMS) will require additional support in this area .

Telecommunications has a staff of 27 and is responsible for the state wide area network, all telephone syatems (40+) throughout the state along with a central help desk. ITD has just completed p}ulse J of the wide area network, deploying A TM T -1 circuits to 177 locations in 64 communities, The second phase will connect every high school and library in the state (additional Joo+ locations in 130 communitiea) with thi• same technology and pave tho way for web based applications, such as geographic infonnation systems (O1S), and video appUcations to be utilized. An additional two po1itions arc being requested for this increase in workload. The aJdition ofthe K-12 institutions and libraries will more than double the end points on the current state network. The education community ia dependent upon this broadband network if they are going to offer such programs as: distance learning olaues, degrees over the internet, and the ability to share teachers. with h~rd to find akUls,

New initiatives for the next bieMium include the following projects:

Payment for Phase l of the wide area network. State agencies did not receive any additional funding for converting to the new A TM T-1 network which was completed November 30, 2000. ITO botTOwed $2,000,000 for the equipment (routers, switches, etc,) and is obligated to pay this note over a 36 month period. This amount is being billed back to the appropriate state agency on a monthly basis. Agencies will pay 9 months of this note during this biennium, but will need to obtain the remaining $1,476,570 in the next biennium, Agencies also have had to find the increase in circuit costs for the current biennium in their existing budget, The increases for next biennium were provided in ITD'a budget instructions and the agencies will be requesting th ;,se dollars in the budgets

C:\My Dooumenta\U Staff\Mlke lwller\2001\TBST20l2Mar2-2001,00C

•

•

•

you will review over the next four months. ITD is requesting two FI'Bts to support the increased workload as a result of thts new network at a cost of $321, 784. The above costs wlll l,., recovered through ITD's special fund.

Phase 2 of the wide area network deployment involveis connecting all the high schools and libraries across the state, We arc requesting the state provide an ATM T•l circuit to each of these locations, the one-time cost for the router, and tho Internet connoctlon, Jf the., institution needs additional bandwidth, they will be required to come up with the needed funds, General fund dollars are being requested for this initiative and will amount to $7,922,549, ITO is expecting to receive roughly $3,700,000 of these dollars in a refund from the Universal Service fund as part of the E•Rate program, netting the cost at $4,222,549. Because this 1>hase wUI more than double our existing customer base, ITO is requesting two additional FTE's to install and support this mission critical infrastructure on an ongoing basis.

The Governor, in partnership with the Legislative IT Committee, have detennined the need for coordination of the many facets of this technology deployment. As a result, the foJlowing programs have been located in the ITO budget and the requests are as follows:

• Association of Counties wiJl receive $248,000 to provide ntJtwork support for county government throughout the state.

• IT Technology Program wiU receive $590,300 to work with the Board for Vocational & Technical Education to deploy technology curriculum in K-12.

• Center for Innovation in Instruction wiJI receive $934,583 to provide additional instructional technology resources to K-12 educators and administrators .


• Education Telecommunications Council will receive $2,200,000 (this biennium $6,000,000 wu funded) to foster the development and use of technology for education, These dolJars can assist the schools with the purchase of video equipment and will be awarded by the ETC,

• PraJrie PubUc troadcasting will receive S 1,407,S 13 for the operadonal expense of networks uaed to broadcast programs,

These initiatives total $7,354,065 of general funding and are important so the state can obtain th" maximum potential from our investment in this hjgh speed network.

State aaoncin are appearing before the legislature to acquire funding for major application devolopmcmt projects, ITD works closely with agencies in estimating the amount of software development resources they will need. ITD bills agencies on an hourly basis for development work and all monies for this initiative are special t\tnded in our budget. If the legislature approves the followins projects in the agencies budgets, ITD is requesting 26 new FTE's (systems amllysts / programmers) Md fundins for 12 additional contract programmers:

• Human Services: Health Insurance Portability & Accounting Act (HIP AA) • Human Services: Fully Automated Child Support Enhancement System • Human Services: Foster Care • Tax J)epartment: Tax Collections / Accounts Receivable • Department of Transportation: Construction Automated Reporting System (CARS) • Department of Transportation: Roadway lnfonnation Management System (RIMS)

C:\My Documento\U StaMMlke ReNler\2001\TESno.2lMwl•2001,DOC

•

•

•

ITD operates on a fee for service basis and will not 1111 any position, should the agency redirect thoir priorities and aa a result does not spend their money with ITD.

Today we have various state agencies operating geographic information systems (GIS), This pust year, we hired Convergent Group, a GIS consultant, to review how North Dakota was utilizing this technoJosy, They recommended ITO es\ablish and support a centralized hosting infrastructure, This hub, consisting of computer processors and disk storage, would provide a means for sharing all tho information government has stored on various machines throughout the state, Today, agencies aro dupJioatlng investments on equipment and even worse are not able to share the data as readily as we could if a central hub was instalJed, ITO is requesting two FTE's to operate the equipment, provide data baao support and coordinate GIS activities around the state. Software and equipment dollars urc also being requested and the total general fund request Is $1,071,784. State agencies will not pay ITD for this service and wiU no longer need to request in their budget this type of equipment/service,

Another initiative which has the potential to save state government substantial dollars is a shared electronic dala management system (EDMS). Agencies are generating a large amount of electronic records, for example imaging tax returns, and the need for these records to be managed and easily accessed by those who have the authority is essential. This technology will have a noticeable retum on the time it takes to access records, the accuracy of accessing the records, and the space savings from storing documents electronically vs. on paper, ITD would manage the central data base and provide the needed software, licenses and hardware to do so. Our role would also be to provide the expertise on how this should be accomplished so agencies do not have to reinvent the wheel. The ITO request is $1,321,784 of special funds (we would bill back our costs to the agencies using the service) and includes two FTE's,

Last year ITO launched DiscoverND which is the state of North Dakota's web portal, We have seen an aggressive attempt by some agencies to develop their service applications to be web enabled and thus offer them to the citizens of ND over the internet. One very successful appUcation is the Game & Fash hunting and flshing license system. Citizens are becoming exposed to the convenience of dealing whh onUne systems and will be demanding this from government in the very near future. Agencies pay ITD for the development of these applications, but the central infrastructure like the ND portal and the interfacing between agency systems is not charged out. Also, we see the potential of this technology to re-engineer the way government agencies deal with the citizens. The major draw back to this reinvention is that agencies are not looking at the big picture and wilJ not pay to develop systems that cross department lines, ITO is requesting general funds for two FTE's, a systems analyst and a programmer, to concentrate on the development and maintenan, ~ of these central systems. The amount is $334,177.

ITD, in partnership with Higher Education, 0MB, and the K-12 environment have released a RFP for acquiring an enterprise resource planning system (ERP), This system integrates financial, human resource, administrative, procurement, student registration, and other systems into a common schema so an parties can share and use the data. Today our systems are old, some obsolete, and require major maintenance efforts. In many cases the systems do not provide the data in the context needed so agencies, univorsity staff, and school administrators have created shadow systems. This is time consuming. costly and increases the chances for data to be inaccurate because it is stored in various databues. The federal government has released some new requirements for the education systems

C:!My Documet1ta\85 Staft\Mlb R.euler\2001\TEST2022Mar2-2001,DOC'

•

•

11 I I ,, '

and to bo compliant they will need to invott somo major dollars in tho old 1y1tems. Tho four larsest achool df ttri<'tl are in need of acqufrins a f1nancial system ovor tho next two ycan because the company provldlns them this service is n(, longer aolng to do so, Tho tlmlns la right for this acquisition and the coordination amongst lhe above parties wUI allow the state to maximize its invoatmont. We are in the procoes of c-,riductins oral interviews from three companies who are capable of providing thcso systl,ms. The general fund amount requested for this biennium is SJ J,971,373 and tncludes three FfB's (systems analysts/programmers which wUI be special funded) to wist in the implementation. This amount will not pay for the whole system, but should givo the state a start at implemendng certain modules over the next two yoars. The intent ls to complete the remaining modules in the following biennium, The total cost is <ixpected to be in the $35,000,000 to $40,000,000 range. These numbers include the cost of the computer infrastructure needed and the additional stato staff needed to augment the transition. We will know more as we continue the evaluation process and wilJ have a better total cost before the legislature completes the session,

As we expand the network and move more services to the e-govemment model along with federal mandates such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountnbithy Act (HIPAA), infonnation technolo3y security is becoming more, critical and more complex. Central leadership and expertise is necessary to identify solutions the state can implement on a proactive basis. Monitoring of intrusion attempts is also critical to maintain the integrity of the network. ITO is requesting special funds for one FTE to assist in the security area and the amount is $143,328.

As discussed earlier in my testimony ITO is working with the Bureau of Criminal Investigation and wJII assist them from a technical standpoint with prosecuting individuals who use computers and networks to commit crimes. ITO is requesting general funds of $143,328 to hire one security analyst.

There is a need for the state to work with the educational system in an effort to ensure the proper lnfonnation technologies are being taught so we have a pool of resources to hire. We are requesting S143,328 of special funds to hire an administrative position who will work with the schools and coordinate with agencies who have a need for hiring technology expertise,

Greater omphuia needs to be, placed on research and planning so that North Dakota can identify trend, and new technologies instead of reacting as technologies change. By getting out in front of technoloay change, the state will prevent wasteful spending and make better decisions when choosing technologjes to be implemented. ITO needs to coordinate with agencies and develop assignments to accomplilh thi1, We are requcstins $317,088 of general funds and one FTE. This amount also includea S150,000 for consulting service and computer tools needed to fulfill this mission.

And lut, but not leaat, ITD is requesting $200,000 of general fund money to be, put into an innovation fund. This fund will provide some flexibility for implementing IT projects that come about dwin1 the interim. Two years ia a long time for technology and the ability to access some fwtda would have a positive impact. These funds could only be acquired if the agency submits a cost effective project and approval is granted by some body (maybe tht Legislative IT Committee). The aaency would pay back the f\mda in the next biennium. This mc,del has not been completely worked out yet - agencies could pay back with interest or they could pay back a por1ion of the cost savings they obtained by implementing the program .

C:'My ~\1$ Statru.4ike R.ealer\2001\TEST2022Mar2-200l ,DOC

•

•

•

'

Overall, ITD'• total budget rcqucat i• $96,903,519 of which S25,57S,76611 general funda, This inoludes f\andlna for 44 ncw.FTE's and 12 new contract programming staff. Of the 44 new FTB's. 8 will be 1onml funded. ·

Thia conclude, my testimony and I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you for your support .

C:\My ~ Sttff\Mlb RMJer'200J\TEST2022Mar2•200I.DOC

I ,'I<, •, ,' •,

11 11 1: d 11 ~ . i .__.. ._____. ........___.. .___,

__._____i

'•. . • r'·, l ; ' I ' \ ~ .: ,. I· ,' ~ ', : l' I I

{·: i1 ' ~ '

/:. ;.·. .,. It'.' ,,

t ,I:·

POfffl'OLIO AIIIGNMINTI• Wide Area Networking

Tlmo.Graff • W~Cor•

Rod Erickson • All Clrcuttl • Internet Acctt•

Duane Hartze • H.323 Video - State Government

Jim Swenson • Higher Education .. PoUtlcll Sub Dlvlelons

Adding K•12 and Llbrarl•• wm lnor1111 network conntotlon1 by 300+

Vacant (K-12 / Libraries)

Vacant (K-12 / Ubraries)

23 March 200 I

I,

i

PORTFOLIO AIIIGNMINTI• State Government Networking

• Campue/Mttro Baokbone • .H323 • Core Beokbont (1wttohtl/router1) • Computer Room

Switch Room • Tower • Metro /Vea (Sank Core)

RtMaroh · VLAN • VPN • H,323 • VoIP • Eto,

John Alvarez Department of Tran1portatlon ID&F lfeotrto loard fulHty M1n191ment Highway Patrol lndu1tr111 c-,mml•1lon

• State Bank

- NO Geologlcaf Survey ·OH and GM • MNI and Eltvator .. State W•tlf' commlllion .. AtmOlpheric R....rch

tneurance Commllllon OMI

• Central Strvicet • Surplu1 Propeny • Central DupHcatJng

Publlo lerYloe CommlNlon leoUrltlN Commlaelon ... HlttcM1oll ..... lladfo ..... ,.,

John Sheldon Huffllnl1MGM He■Nh0epar1fflent m, lndlan ...... J..wlnl LaborO.,.tment HoUlffll and finance

23 March 200 I

'·'· ' ',,,'

;~'.,\~·\ ;,:: :> !:, .',\ ...... ~ ..

CoHeen Bergenheler

Agr!outtur• • Soll ConwvatJon • Wheat Comml11lon

Glmt and ,tth Oovemor'• Offlc. Job ltrvloe Leablatlve Couaael North Dakota Untvntty IY9ttm

• School of Mtdk»ne • UNO Graduate Center • NOSU Extension Offices

P1rk1 and Rtortltlon Rt1l l1tatt Comml11lon Rttlrtment lnv11tm1nt Office Secretary of ltatt State Trt11urtr Wortctrt Comp

John Gla1er I Temp Attorney o,n,ral 801 Bond Bank Com UtHlntlon CounoU Corrtctton lRthabllltatfon

• Parole and Probation • Rough Rider Industries • State Penitentiary

Courtl Dtpart. Of PubHo ln,truotfon

Board of Vooatlonal and Teohnloal Education Emergency Management National Ou.rd Statt larloard State Ubrary SUprtmt Court Tax Department Tourltm

23 March 2001

j

t

Broadband 1tate wide •re• network Implementation Goll 9: lmepated Broadband Network

Bud et Initiatives

TIUI butiative creates die physical network infrutructure to 1upport diaital opportunities for economic development, life Jona learnina ud ,ovemment aervlcet tbroupout North Dakota. The broadband network will expand the capacity and coveraac of the information super hipway, bl the CWTtnt bJenmum, tho 60 locations on the existina state wide area network will be converted to newer tecbnoloaY, When coq,lete. 552 pby.acal locations in 194 North Dakota towns and cities will be connected. The state role u an anchor tenant will mean that new services provided to education and government will be available to private industry u well. ITD is requesting general Amdl &o support the K-12 connections to the wide area network as mandated by NDCC 54,59,

Bdy Item Planned Budget Buqct No&ea (•Executive Request ..

Recommendation) Source All State The estimated increase in ongoing $1,461,000 Aaency budaets Agencies were insb'Uoted to Apncies / ITD circuit costs bllttd by ITD for ag,encic,s (estimated by ITD) hue their budaeu OD ITD

to connect to tho new network. and ITD (112) Base projected rata. ITO Budget Jncluded this amount u

revenue to project their rates for next biennium. It i~ included ln ITD'a base budget.

County The estimated increase in ongoing $126,000 Agency 112 Counties were informed or Government/ circuit costs billed by ITO for counties Base Budget the upcomina rate increase, ITD to connect to the new network. JTD included the wne

amount u revenue in their base bud.aet.

US/ITD The increue in 01111olng circuit costs $542,000 Agency 215 NOUS wu instructed to for uparading NOUS clrculta to the Optional Priority 30 include t1ut amount u part new network. and ITD (t 12) Bue of the ITD rate. ITD

Budget included the wne amount u revenue in their bale budaet.

State.Apnciel EquJpment costs billed by ITD for the $1,476,570 Thia ls the one time cost blchldma imtial installation, for Phase l of the netWOrk. Hjpe,Ed/ Agencies were not aware or rm this amount when

cozq,letina their bqeta, It WU included ln tbt-executive rec:onnendldon.

ITDIK.·12 State circuit costs to connect 111 hJah Agency 112 Tbe total amount WU schools to the network. $7.910,082 Optional Priority 5 requetted with tbe total

Estimated B•nte credit (SJ. 700.000) mhwl tbe e .. rat, credit reauested 11 1eneral f\mdl,

2. ltate network 1upport Ootl 9t Jmqratecl Broadbud Network

0mllldy four orpaiudou work toaetber to support the customer bue or the state network. ITD providea tho overall coordmadoa Md ...,art 1w •• apacln. tbe Hl&btr Education Compudq Network (HBCN) provides aupport for the North Dakota UDivenlty

......, tbe Auoclation otCoundet provides support tor couuty aovernment offices. and SBNDrr provWN aupport for K• .... Wida tbe expu1ion of the network, IUN)Ort clemlDcb on tbele orpnizadonl ¥will increale. To take ftall ldvamqe otcbt MW . . It will be lq,e,adve that tbote orpn1Zldom pow tbefr lffllcet Into re,ional marlteta .t uailt aaenolel, scbooll and

. . pw&'I- oftlcel fa acc...!q tbe MW network,

l

(.', ,, r

' Item

Stateaaetklia/ Additional FTEs for network support. ITD

rrD/ Expand 1upport provided by the Auooiadon or Auociation ofCountfet Coumiel

ITD/SENDIT Expand support to 8 rqions for K• l 2 acbools

NOUSIIVN Expand 1upport for vidto c:onf'erenclna for K-12 schools

Video conference and LAN equJ.pment Goll 9: lntearated Broadband Network Ooll 2: Promote "Anytime• Anywhere Edu<:ation

Plamaedllldpt (•Bxocutive

Recomneadatioa S309.317

$248,000

$1,427,000

$2,739,194

·auctpt..,.._ N-. .,,, . ',~>•;, .·

' :Source ·r, ;4.,+, · ' L ' •"~

,•·,I' I l\'•r •:._!of

Aaeocy Budaota Apaclet were imtnacted IO ( estimated by ITD) buo their budaeta oa ITD

and ITD 112 projected rates. 11D Optional Priority 4 included the ame amount

u revenue m their bae et.

Aaency 112 Th1a unount ii included ln Optional Priority 5 ITD'• budaet to paa

tbrouah tu the Association of Counties.

Aaoncy201 Thia ii tbe amount or the Optional Priority 16 incrtlMI m SBNDfra

budaet. In the executive recommendadoa the entire SENDIT budaet was moved to ITD'• budaet 112.

Agency 215 This us tbe mcreue Optional Priority I l 0 requested to 1upport K-12

and state a enciea ..

The broadbend aetwork initiative wUl create access at the buUding level. To connect ptople in otlicea and meeting rooms, additional eqwpment will M 1eeeuary so that video conferencing, and local are1a networks can take the applications to the delivery point. To aceoq,Uah dm, the Education TelecomnunicaUon C,ouncU will be responsible for taraeting grant dollars to those scbooll that provide the bett opportwlity tor aakina 1dv111ta1e of the network. The BTC wHI take a leadershJp role in the plannlna and evaluation of the iq,lementation of'te<lbnoloaY throughout K-12, State agencies and hJ:lher education have htcl~d theH equipment costs in their intonnadon tecbnoloaY plans and budaeta where appropriate,

ITD/Bducatbl Telecomnuuca ·doetCoulcll (BTC)

Item

Included are put ftulda plm the cost ot ataff to provide leadmhip and admlni1vadon.

lnldedvet are mcluded bl indJvidual l&tllO)' IT p&UI,

Plldilled Budaet (•Exec.wive

Recominendation :13,500,000

2

Agency 201 BueBudaet

Ed, Tecbnolo&Y

'f'be execudw recoamendadola reduced tbe request and moved tbe U'DOUad to ITD'• budtot (112).Lepaladoe lnvolvma die pWl'IIIIICt atruotun ottbe BTC llto\ald be coord!Mlecl wbb

WU..

blttwlde Information T1echnology Budget lnltlatlv~~ __ J-,4,2001

Workfare. Development and Distance Education Ooil l 1: Workforce Development Ooal 2: Promote •Anytime .. Anywhere Education

For North Dakota to become a player in the digital economy. the state needs a hiahly trained workforce to attract new busineslel and provide tec:bnJcal support to exlstin, businesses, Distance education, fast becoming a very con-.,etitive market world•wide, will play a vital role in providing training to under served areas of the state and attracting students to North Dakota colleges and unJvmities. It is cuential that our teacben have the necessary skills and tools to integrate technology into the cuniculum and we new methods of delivery,

Entity Item Planned Budaet Budaet Request Notes (•Bxecutive Source

Recommendation · .. •

ITDNCSU/CII Provide trainina to administrators and $594,000 Agency242 Tb.is ui the amount of tbe teacben who will integrate technology Optional Priority ? increase in ar. budaei. In into K-12 classrooms. the executive

reeommendation the entire CU budaet was moved to lTD'a bud et 112 •

NOUS Provide centralized online course Sl.856,280 Agency 21S management s;istems and support Optional Priority 110 necessary to deliver workforce training over the Internet ($935.100). coordination of djstance education 1ctivJties ($498,200) and ODIN ~22980,

Expand technology curriculum $590,300 Agency 112 oft'orina• to additional aobooJs, Use Optional Priority 21 programs like ExplorN'et and Cisco Academies to provide ready .. to--use currlculwn and teacher trainJng to achools.

a. Enterprlae Reaource Planning (ERP) System Ooa1 3: Enterprise-wide Solutioru

AU of North Dakota State Oovemment will boneftt from this project to replace agina administrative systemt, This project items from Univenity Systems effort, over the put several years to replace its financial and student systemt, K-12 dlatrlcta will benefit from the increued buyina power oftbe state and compatibility in reporting requirements, The new administrative system.twill bo based on tecbnolops dlat allow for areater acceu to data to Improve management decision makJna Ind will eliminate the arowina trend toward .. lbldowl' 1ystem1, OnUne acceu for post secondary students to apply. realater and do tranaactions online ii cridcal to attracdq ...._ to North Dakota coUeaes and wuvenltfet.

3

· statewide Information Technology Budget Initiative, ,.....,.,200,

ITD

Item

Replace eJdstin& financial, human moun:e and student lnfonnation systems for state aovemment, hJgher education. and K-12. The estimated coat ls used for budget purposes and will be rermed when vendor proposals are received,

8. Geographic Information System Hub Goal 3: Enterprise-wide Solutions

Planned Budaet (•Executive

Recommelldation $20,000,000

Budaet Rcqueat Noea Source 'I .

The project was Thi• reprnenls partial included only u an funding of the total project.

executive Univenlty Systems and Krtcommendation. 12 will be tho first priority.

Agency 112 An RFP process bas begun. Optional Paiority 18 $488,873 in spe(lial funds

included agency tor agency enhancements enhancements wu added to the

re uested oflTD. $20 000 000 eneral fund,,

A study by Converaent Technologies recommends the development and support a centralized Geographic Information System hosting infrastructure (01S bub) for North Dakota state agencies and their partners. The 01S hub would provide a means of sbarlna: the 01S intOffllltion now beina stored locally at each aaency, ITO would also provide centralizcd 01S development and support services to aaencfes who cannot Justify full-time O1S staff. This initiative will also create the infrastructure for web-enabling O1S information reportin,.

Varioua aaenciet

Implement a centralized 01S hub to enable sbarln& ofOIS among users within state aovemment, political subdivisions and the federal ovemmont.

Initiatives are included in individual agency IT plans, These ln.ltiatlves are neceuary for the individual agency to collect and analyze 01S infonnation for s cHlc ses.

7. Innovation Fund Goat 8: Fundina lntormation Technology

Planned Budget Budget Request Notes (•Executive Sow-co

Recommendation S l .059,317 Agency 112 General funds.

Optional Priority 17

An innovation ftmd ahould be established to provide flexible funding for IT projects that arise durina tho next biennium. This fund would aerve II meebamlm to provide dollars for coat effective project, beyond what was oriatnally appropriated to individual qenoMtt. Apncfoa utilizina the resources o(thll fund would pay back tho fund wjth interest to maintain au on-aolna mourco,

rro

leent

Bt1ablish Ill "lnnovadou Fund" u a mecbamtm tor funding key technology mida vet,

Plumed Budaet (•Executive

tion $500,000

4

Aaency I 12 The request wu reduced la Opdonal Priority 22 the executive

•. t I 'I • t t ,,.t t I

{ .·__ .... S ..... Y ..... te._· w~l~d-=--e ___ ln __ fo .... rm--=-:.;::;;:a~tl.:...:on:..::....T...;....;e:..;:;c:;..;;..:;h:;.;..;:,n..;;;;:;;..;ol~o.-.gy--==-B:::..::ud::::..ag~•;..:...t .::.:..:ln:.:.::lt::.:la:.:.::tl..:...;ve:..=s=----_ ,.....,,.., 200a

Shared Electronlc Document Management System ao.J 3: Emerprise•wide Solutfooa

This Initiative include, the fimdina to develop and support a centralized Electronic Document Manaaement System inftutructure (BDMS) for North Dakota state aaencies. This in.ftastructure would be centrally mana1ed by ITD with the cost billed back to the ptrticipatina aamcies versu5 fn1,lcmenting similar technologies locally in each agency,

Entity Item Planned Budget Budget Request Notes (•Executive Source

Recommendation) State Aaeocie1 Implement centralized EDMS $1,309,317 Agency 112 Agencies will be billed for /ITD services, Ootional Priority 19 services used. Varioua lnJtiatives are included in individual aaencies qeacy IT plans. Funds requested in

the agency initiatives may be used to purchase the centralized services from ITD and for other J)roject coats. --

9. E-govemment Goal 1: E-aovenunent

Oovemment service delivery will move from the "brick and mortar" approach to delivery over the Internet, Citizens will receive ,ervicea onU.ne instead or in Une, Extensive programming and development will be needed to produce these online applications, ITO will be a key provider or development and hosting services for e-government applications. To create a seamless approach to

emment. a single lnterf11ce to multiple applicadom across agency lines is needed, State funding is necessary to develop these rile wide applications.

Entity Item Planned Budget Budaet Request Notes (•Bxccutive Sour<:e

Recommendarion) ITD Direct general tbnds to the $321.228 Agency 112 Qeneral ftanda. The request

development of the state portal and Optional Priority t S was reduced fn the entm,rise wide aooUcations. executive recommendation.

Various E-govemment initiatives to move aaencjea 1pecif1c services online are included in

ur~vidual aaenc}' IT a,lans,

1 o. leourlty and privacy Goal l: B-aovernment

Al we expand the network and move more servlces to the e•govcmment model along with fed~ral mandates aucb u tbe Health Insurance POftlMHty and Accountability Act (HIPAA), information technology security is becoming more critical and more coiq,lex. Central leadenblp IDd expertise ta neceuary to ldendty aolutions the state can implement on I proa,;dve bula, Mon.ltoriq or intrusion atteq,ta Ji alto critical to mtlntain the lntc,arity or the network,

s

ltdtwldt Information Technology Budget Initiatives

rm

Various ..-:•

Item

ITO is requestina general funds for l FrB to wilt the Attorney General's office alona with other law eo/orcoment agencies in investigating cybcrcrlme An additional FI'E at ITO wilt provide expertbe and leadership in helping the 1tate to adequately secwe its information technolo resources. ~a.lives to iq,rove security at the qency lev~l are included in individual

enc IT tans.

11. Re1e1rch and planning Goal 5: Technology R.esear_ch & Plannin&

PlaanedBucfaet (•Executive

Recomrnendation

Budpt Request Notes Source

Aaency 112 Optional Priorities

U&l4

Greater oq,buis needs to be placed on research and planning so that North Dakota can identify trends and new technologies instead ofreactlna u technologies change. By getting out in front of technology change. the state will prevent wasteful spendina and make beuer declaiona when cboosm, tecbnoloales to be implemented.

Item

Enhance the research and Plannina capabilities of state aovernment by addina positions to identify te<:lillology trend, and hq,Ucations for North Dakota. Additional funds would be used for contracting for studies and mearcb.

12. Moblle Data rennlnat Expansion Ooll 12: State Radio Network Enhancements


Recommendation $310,614

Budaet Request Notea Source

Agency 112 The request wu reduced in Opdonal Priority 16 the executive

recommendation.

Tbe pilot project to uq,leanent mobile data tmnina1t in Highway Patrol veluclea bu ~ extremely positive. Offlcen f1nd that they spend an addidonal one hour per pmon per llill\ in the car rather than in the office doin& paper work. ThJJ project will expand the coven,c, to other area, or the state, Provldina the tecbnoloJY through atate radio also mabt it available to local law enforcement aaeac• wbeN the &owen are located.

S.bUo

Item

Add MDT CJPll,Wtiet to an additional 5 ncllo towers.

Purcbue mobllt data tetminab tor 20 lddidoall can.

PlauedBucfaet '(•Sxecudve

Reccm•,•ndldon S2d0,892

S220,000

6

Budaet Request Nota 'ct .......... ~ 1 I

' '/) ' 'I ,,

,,,

Aaency 506 The request WU Nell~ la Optional Priority $ tbe executive

Aaeacy 504 TIie,.. WU Nclucecl in 8aM Budpt 1bit execudve

F Id

Statewide Information Technology Budget Initiatives

3, State Radio Communication• Ooal 12: Stato RadJo Network Enhancmenf.s

Radio commmications technology is moving from analog to digital and at some point wiU be required by the FCC. This massive project will need to be accoq,liahed over a number of years. Continuous planning will be an iq,ortant part or this endeavor so that local, atato aJKI federal public safety entities can participate in and migrate to newer mobile radio technologies with minimal impact on exJstina services.

Entity Item Planned Budget Budact Request Notes (•Executive Sow-ce

Recommend8tion) State Radio Develop a plan, including an $400,000 Agency506 The request was reduced in

enameerlng study and request Optional Priority 6 the executive for proposal for ~lementation recommcndatiol\. or a public safety communication system to support mobile voice, data, and imaidna reauirements for users.

14.Crlmlnal JuItlce Integration Goal 3: Enterprise-wide Solutions

A ttratcafc plan will be developed by March 2001 outlining specific steps to integrate criminal justice systems in North Dakota. Small aration projects between agencies are currently underway and will be incorporated fnto the overalJ plan. The planning process olvea all the state entitiei involved in public safety including the JudJclal Branch. the Attorney General's Office, the Department of

dona and Rehabilitation. Highway Patrol, State Radio, and the Department of Transportation. The process also includes local and reafonal law enforcement entities.

Entity Item Planned Budget Budaet Request Notes (•Executive Source .

Recommendation) Various agencies Initiatives are iucluded ht Planning is currently

individual agency IT plans, underway. Small data Orant dollars wm be sought to •barin& projecta will be fund the majority of' new costs. ftmded &om indJvidual

agencies. Grant dollan will be sought (or wae h1Jtfativet.

Note: •Executive Recommendation refers to Governor Schafer's November 2000 Budget Message.

7

~¥~;:~::~~~~~~:~';~~~~ .. ~-~~~~~~~~-:-,

ltlfollliation~ Technology Department Budget Initiatives J I 11:;' 12.2001

1. Stahl Network· Phase 2 Rollout- Primarily K-12 and Libraries

Pwpoac Item Planned Budget Funding Source JustirlCation {~ve

Recommendation} laflastl.t•e Sbccciraait a,sls and c:quipment costs General Ftmds = This initiative creates the physical network inf~"IUre to support forlC-12 foe IOUlcls to coa,ncct all high schools $4.222.549 digital opportunities for economic development. life long learning

and libcarics to lhc nctwodt as and government services tbrougbout North Duola.. TIie broadbmd mandaced in NDCC 54-59_ Includes 2 $7,.9~9 network wtll expand the capacity and coverage of the imonnatiaft fTE f« WAN managcmenL {SJ.100.000) super highway. In the current biennium (Plmc I). 1hc M locations

Estimlrcd E-r.ate credit on the existing state wide area nctwodc were converted to newer technology_ When Phase 2 is complete. SS2 physical locations in 194 North :>alcota towns and cities will be conncc:1ed.. rm is requesting general funds to support the K-12 connections to the wide area network as mandated by NDCC 54.59.

Sappanfoc Expand support provided by the $248,000 General funds Currently four organizations work togcthct to support the customer Ox1111ics Association of Counties base of the stale network.. ITO provides lhc overall coordination and

Sllpport for IC- Expand support to 8 regions for K-12 Sl.427,000 General funds support for state agencies. the Higher Education Computing , 12 schools Network (IlECN) provides support for the North Dakota University

System campuses. the Association of Counties provides support for county government offic~ and SENDIT provides support for K•l2 users_ With the expansion of the network. support demands on dlCSC organizations will increase. To take full advantage of the new

. capabilities, it will be imperative that these organizations grow their services into regional markets and assist agencies. schools and local government offices in accessing the new networL

,_ £1 ipal•tfor Included arc EfC gr.mt funds plus the s2.200.ooo General funds. The broadband network initiative will create access at the buiklin& K.tlmcrs cost of staff to provide leadership and Note: 99-01 ETC lcvcL To connect people in offices and meeting roo~ additional

administration.. grants funded at equipment wiil be necessary so that video conferencing. and local $6,000,000 area networks can take the applications to the delivery point. To

accomplish this. the Education Telecommunications Counal will be rcsponsiolc for targeting grant dollars to those schools that provide the best opportunity for taking advantage of the network. The ETC will take a leadership role in the planning and evaluation of lbc implementation of technology throughout K-12. State agencies and

,_ higher education have included these equipment costs in their

'" infonnation technolol!v plans and budgets where annror,riarc. '.

1

;~~,..- =?J!~~..p!':-"'~.-~7-...~-~~~.;;--~--'.-•,." ---~_ :~~r-~:i<-_:""'"".:'- ::~--~ ••--~~- ., ',.--~~.-~'"":-~r. ~j. ---. -=·--:: • .~- ,~---J .- -• • ~ - -~ -~_;<•-"~.~--'~ _-' --• -_·V. -2

-< -;..._: ,,, _ _...

_Information Technology Depa, t1nent Budget Initiatives

Tr F 11 c ~ .. u ( Plovilk mini• to adxuiois11arurs and SS94.000 GcneiaI Funds Foe North Dakola to become a player in the di&ifal ccaaamy. Ille IQcWfl 1lfllo will inlegrate tedmology state needs a highly trained woMCKCC to attract new businesses aad illlO IC-12dassrooms.. provide tcdmical support to existing businesses DiSlaaa':

Tni•iac JC.20 Expm»rcdmology curricuium $590,,300 General Funds education. fast becoming a very compctitnie market world-wide,:

TOlal

to. additional schools- Use will play a vital role in providing training to uodc£ serwd areas of programs lik · -· ·-: _ _. • Cisco the state and atttacting students to North Dakora colleges and

1cadc111ics to provide ready-to-me universities- It is essential that our teachers have the ncccssaiy skiDs alum and teachct training to and tools to integrate technology into the curriculum and use new

scbonls methods of deli S 13,,303,.644 General Funds= I Compared to S6.ooo.ooo spent in ETC granls in 99-0l. Spendinc

$9 .281.849 will be more focused with s,catcr accountability.

Related ~ in other agency budgets

Purpose 11cm Planned Budget Funding Justification (•Executive Source

Recommendation)

Sawoit NDUSIIVN will expand support for $2.739,194 General funds This is the increase requested to support the video conferencing video conferencing for K-12 schools. requested needs of K-12 and state agencies_ The support would be provided

by lVN staff. Training/ NDUSIIIECN will provide centializcd $1»856.280 General funds This provides the necessary distance education applications 10 nm DistanceEd onli.nc course management systems requested over the network..

and support nccess:uy tG deliver workforce training over the Internet {S93S.Ul0i coordination of distance education activities ($it98.200) and ODIN {$422.98())_

2

.:-~~

-.-~~~-~-~~~?'-:~~~~:~~---~~~ -~~~-:£~~~?~~:-~~~~~-~~--~,~~--~"'.~~~=:.c~~-:-·_;~~~:~~~~~-~ ~:; ~:<~--'~--::~~~~:~~:~~~~\'::;~~~~j;;~;_:_

~__,_,,>,-,-

-'.,._,

-· . lnfonmdion Technology Department Budget Initiatives --~ -,._ -,

. -i - Y:12. lGOJ

.2.. - · M>1k Phase 1 Equipment COS$S

... NC 11cm Planocd Budget Budget Request Justuacation (*Executive Source

RCC01111nendation) s,;r1a1forsaa1e F.qwpmeat cosas billed by ITO $1,476,570 General Funds= This is 75% of lhc one time cost for Phase I of the actwork. .... for the initial ins1allation. S4S0.275 Agencies were not aware of this amount when comptctiac tllcir

bud~cts.. It was included in the executive recommendation. S.,pastforSrate Addilioml FTEs for nctworlc $321,.784 Special Funds This is the increase in support costs bwlt into the ITO rates.

.. -

... -. -

3

~~~~~.,;.., ·~~f?~,-~1~-.:¥~~~~~~\.:":-.: :?"'".'.'~_-:, .. ~~-'c".-:-..:-;: ~ :·:.-~~ - --~ :- --~ ~ ,aa.:- . •'-·-- , ·':'--"'~, .

:Information Technology Department Budget Initiatives

3. Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP} System

Papose Item Pfanoc:d Budget ( Funding Source Justification (*Executive ·•~J

Rccommcndation) TGfal Sys1a11 Replace cxisling imancial. human S l 1.000.000 Gcncral Funds. This represents partial funding of the total project. University f«the~ iesowce md smdcnr information Systems and K-12 will be the first priority. An RFP process has lfi&herEd-aad systems r«srarc govcmmcnt. higher begun. IC-12. educa1ioa. and K-12. The esrimated

cost is used foe budget purposes and All of North Dalcob State Government will benefit from this project will be rcfmed when vendor proposals to replace aging administrative systems. This project stems &om arcn:ccivcd. University Systems efforts over the past sevcm years to replace its

rmancial and student systems. K-12 districts will benefit from the increased buying power of the state and compatibility in rqxxting requirements. The new administrative systam will be based on technologies that allow for i;reatcr access to data to improve management decision making and will eliminate the growing trend toward "shadow'" systems. Online access for post secondary students to apply. register and do ttansactions onlinc is critical to

~

attracting students to Nonh Dakota coll~cs and univemtics. Quality Schools $70.000 General funds Create ~"terns to collect infonmtion for quality schools initiative. K-12 Student l»tabasc $412,500 General funds Create a data warehouse of student infonmtion to evaluate lhc

cffedivcness of K-12 prol!r.lms. rm strff"mg for agency cnhanccments $488.873 Special funds Spending authority for ITO to complete requests by agencies for

specific enhancements. Tobi $11.971.373

,I

4

,~?~s;~~p?~~s"'~--~"."""?~~~--- .•,"-".i=:'.'.?c'•-:C~"',:°'~ :--· .·~~?f:~;,'o-?. ~-- .-,.J~ ~ ....,_ .,.:- .__, __ ,_,,,._-,.:.--:-: --~.:.- - -- -:~;:-.::~ -~.-r:..•,:--·~;,7-~~-:, -~

,~.,.,; -.._-

... lllfoln'lation Technology Department Budget Initiatives - Jc: J )ZlOOI

'-E~

,.,.. Item Planned Budget Funding Source Justirtcation (•Executive

Rcconunendation) Coa11li11a1ion/ Directgaaal funds to the $334.177 General Funds Govemmcnt service delivery will move from the "brick ad.....-~- devclopmmt of the state portal and approach to delivery over the Intcmct. Citizens will R:CCi¥C m-rica

Cllleiptise wide applications. onlinc instead of in line. Extensive progtamming and development

I will be needed to produce tllesc onlinc applications. lTD will be a key provider of development and hosting services for c.gcwanmeat

I applications. To create a seamless approach to govcmmcna. a sincJc interface to multiple applications across agency lines is ncedcd... State funding is necessary to develop these enterprise wide applications.

s

•::~ 5~~~~~~1~~~•·""~~:.,.~:--"'--,- --".1,-~~;;.-;-:~<--~::--·--·~J--'- <----:-=._ - - ~•:>~G:<~"'--,. ~~?-.:_~~~ ~-:-:::: .. -,-:-._:-""7'•-~7"-•:--:~, .•;~::••~-,._~~.--::•.--:-c:k::..:,.:::;'j •-:• ~--• ~ ~•,-:-~.

-- :~---

lnf01~1nation Technology Depa,tment Budget Initiatives lair ry 12. 2801

5. Geographic lnfutrnation System Hub

Pue,-c lrmi P1aoocd lludget Funding Source Justification (~tive

Rccommcndation) Haduuatcud lmpk arnr a c:enmatizcd GIS bub to Sl,.071,.784 Gcncral Funds- A study by Convergent TcdmologiC$ ~commends the dcvelopne• Support caab1c sharing oCGIS information and support a centralized Geographic Information Syslcm hosting -

a~uscrswilhin Slate goveuunent,. infrastructute {GIS bub} for North Dakota stat~ agencies and their polilical subdivisions and the federal partners.. The GIS hub would provide a means of s..'1aring thc-GIS · go.tamnatt. information now bcin& stored locally at each agency. ITO would

also provide cc:ntralizcd GIS development and support SCfVices ro agencies who cannot justify full-time GIS staff. This initiative will also create the infrastructure foe web-enabling GIS information reporting.

6

' :".':'i?,~;--- - .~ -~-~-!'"~-~~r~~ -~~:---~~ ~ ::_,,,., __ ,_

"' ".'-• ... t,.;-i_~-..; ,.~: ~::~ -~,~ . ~

lnlwnaation Technology Departn,ent Budget Initiatives ·~-·~

t::, _ J y 12. 2111 -;:--.

._ a and S.:bonicOocument Management System ...... ban Planned Budget Funding Soun:c Justification -- -- - -

(•Executive Recommendation} -

Hui !M& Iq,lcmu• cmt«afn:cd 1:DMS Sl,321,784 Special Funds. This initiative includes the funding to develop and~ a ·- .. -

SaA,mt saviccs. centralized Electronic Document Management System infrastructure (EDMS) for Nonh Dakou.- state agencies. This - ·: . infrastnldUie would be centrally managed by lTD with 1hc COIi

billed back to the participating agencies versus implcn~ntiP& si1111lar tcchnol01?ies locally in each al!cncv.

7

~~-:~;,-..... ~"-7

- .-,-~~

lft~:f~:~,fl , =: __:_· ,

._ll(illmation Tectmology i~'@.artment ,Budget Initiatives .·1 ,y·~210l

; .. :- -c. Ra111rchald_plaulil19

:._,.,a -- Planned Budget Budget Request Justifiation (•Executive Source

lt~nnicndation) C..li lim& E - "'e II& research and $317.088 Gcncra1 Funds_ Greater emphasis needs to be placed on rescuch and planning so

·••di plna■w c:apahiliries or st11e that North Dakota can identify ttcnds and new technologies insl=d pk1¥1N nl byadtfmgpositions of reacting as technologies change. By getting out in front of

-ID idtalif1 ~p.ogy trends

l technology change. the state will prevent wasteful spending md

and implicatioE. & North make better decisions when choosing technologies to be DMofL Addilioaal funds would implemented.

I bemat r« CODlaC"mg r« stlldies and~

9

·-:.••'i-;--

.-;;-, - ·:~~p_:~ .-:~_--.- -~~~ ·,,..._-e-

1_~111·. Dfi:: • ·• · a. 1, 1...ic:0•N1· · Technology Department Budget Initiatives f yl2.lGOJ

........ Fund ,.._ 11cm Plaaned Budget Funding Source Justification c•Exeamve

i Recotmnendation) SpccialP<lojcds F.soHidt•.....,.._F....rasa $200.000 GcncwFunds- An innovation 6md showd be es1ahlishcd to provide flexible

wtdrmisra &x timcfinc key technology funding for 1T projects that arise during dlC next biennium. 1ms iiailialifts.. fund would sene as mechanism to provide dollars for cost e1TcctiYe

projects beyond what was originally appn,priated to individual agencies. Agcncio utilizing the rcsomces of this fimd would pay back the fund with interest to maintain an on-going ttSOUrCC.

Nore: *Ex.ecutive Rccommcndation refers to Governor HoevenFs BudgeL

10

~'

$250.~.ooo

i21XUJOIU]()(J .'/.

[) CJO(UJIXJ

00 (](](l_()(l(]

[J_CJll(UJOll

Total State IT Budget Compared to ITC Special Funds

99-0

01-03

.~ -·~---

■ Total State IT Budget

■ ITO Special Funds

'!,'

r h: /,' '

;.0. ,·,

1•,, :::·_,. .... ·-,,,;i,-: ' ':.:· '

',

·,: ·:·:· , ·. ~: "; .'- ·:

; '_ ' I•:~• •

•,',' ,, -,,

1,; '·,' I ~' i 1,

1 , ,

1

'• ,',, r

ITP SpeQial Fund Comparison

Total .. lT~ ITP~Fundl ITO 8pec6II Funda • a % of the TotaJ IT Budget

99-01 199,813,693 $ 49,486.000 $

26%

01-03 226,850,◄76 70,166,372

31%

Change $ 28,038,782 $ 20,880,37~

~~~~~~~t;:._?-~,- -~y~~~~~- --~-:~_ ~-=--f· --~--.

.·:-- :a- :,o. -~

~~\->~ ,_. ;. ... ::::,

WOl'IIIATION"IECltNOLOGY ~ APPROPRIATIONS FORTIE WIDE

FOR 2D01 -2003 BUDGET DEPLOYMENT

Estlnaatad Estlunated Loe- at- II la lttljherEd I County C!!I

--(1IO) 1 Slope CounlyCourthouse Amidon 2 Mclnblb CounlyCourthaule & SS Ashley 3 Golden ValeyCaunly Courthouse Beach • Golden ValleyCounly ss Beach 5 BelccutJabs.vice & SS Belcourt 6 Ballan Jab Service Badah 7 BeulallMalor"Vehide Beulah 8 Bisman:k Padeand Probation Bismarck 9 ~'8Jm:ralties Commiaian Bisi 10 Game & F'ISh Depadlnent Bismarck 11 lnsunlnce Deparl11•d: Bismarck 12 SWpluscProperty Bismarck 13 MallChestm"Houlie BiSI 14 Miwui Rivw"Corndanal Centea-- Bismarck 15 Bisnack Job SeMce at US Bank Bismarck 16 Bisman:k Job Selvice Bismack 17 Bismadc SlafeColage Bismarck 18 Association d Counties Bismarck. 19 Burleigh County Courthouse Bismarck. 20 Counci on the Arts Bismarck 21 PERS Bismarck 22 Bankilag & Finmace Bismarck 23 lawEllbcenl8lllTraimlgAcademy Bismarck 24 Retiranent& llwesbaNH Office Bismarck 25 Ol&GasDnision Bismarck. 26 Worbrs Comp at f11teriors by France Bismarck. ZT BCI - Bismarck. Bismarck 28 Elr•g. Uamgemmlt (Mani.alfan) Bismarck. 29 Boll::11 au Cnly Coul1houle, SS. DC Bottineau 30 Minot SIBie Uniwnity- Bultill08C. Bottineau 31 Buike County Courthouse & SS Bowbells 32 Bowma, CntyCourthouse. SS. & DC Bowman 33 TCMner Calmly Courthouse & SS Cando 3' Fa.tar Co Courthouse. SS. & DL Carrington 35 Giant CnlyCourthouse. SS. & DL Carson 36 Pembilaa Ccxny Courthouse Cavafter 37 Pembina Colny SS Cavar&er 38 OwerCounlyCourthouse & SS Center

350 1.050

350 900

800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800

2.390 800

1.400 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800

1,400 2.328 1.050 1.050 1.re-~ 1.~,

7()()

1.050 900 700

&en!!

900 Equipment 1.476.570 900 ITO Staff ( 2 FTE's ) 321.784 900 900 Total Cost ... Phase I 1.798.354 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800

2,390 Circuit cost only- see other HECN cos~ below. 800 900 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 900

2.328 Circuit cost only - see other HECN costs below. 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 900

: ~;~.f ~~·f~it:~.;~::

~-

~~··

z~ l~ ,t-J

~~ci~~-:K'Y'"::1~.:::.--'",-~----· · .·::.---- -■ - RJIISFORTIEWIDE ~~.-.'t'.. . • .U111W.a.N I ilCIIPIIIC -2111B BUDGET

~~"'"r-- •-::"' .. '• ·.. - FOR2I01 ~

-LMlll■n.

38 'GlfggsC'oQuhmae&SS 4 1lwide CounlJCoudhaule. SSr & DL 41 Dellsl.alllJDJS 42 ·o.1a Lal■ DL&: MV 43 U..LllkeDOT 44 O.. .. LalreJabService 45 Dellilsulle·"--&PHMIMJR 41..aka~CSE e LllkeRagialtffSC 48 laa Allgian.Slllla Ca11ge 49 Ran-,·~CuwliOUle.SSrDC SO Didri ... F&P.BCl,Fn-ifl shal.&CSE 51 DitullGll'V&Rllhab 52 Dk:kir.-.nJob s.w:e 53 DicldlSIII lair Ellfaff.ement Center St DickiiiiDt OOT / DL / UV I HP 55 Didcinaan 01 & Gas 56 DicknsollSllllalJnNersily 57 Stark CounlyCculhouse ·sa S1lltt CounlJSS 59 Baclaltds HSC 80 DictreyCo SS 81 DicuyCoCaurlalle 82 Ellnl■'e MalorVehicle 63 FargoMaf.or'Vehide 64 FagoP&P 65 FargoTax 66 FargoWCB of FargoJob SeMce 68 Sl:aleAutfl« 69 FargoDOT 70 Nor1h Dalmla Stale Uniwni.y 71 SEHSC 72 Cass Co Ccuthause Annex & SS 73 FargoBCI 74 ·Fargo.DJS 75 l.aatChlllw::e 76 WelaCGlnyCourthouse 77 w• CmlnlySS 78 ••• CoCourthouse& SS

2!l Coope,stown Crosby Devisl.ake Devis Lake Derislake DerisLake Devils lake Devis lake DevilsLake Devils lake Devis lake DickillSOn Dickinson Dickinson Dickinson Dickinson OickinsOn Dickinson Dickinson DickillSOn Dickinson Ellendale Ellendale Blendale Fargo Fargo Fargo Fargo Fargo Fargo Fargo Fargo Fargo Fargo Fargo Fargo Fargo Fessenden Fessenden Finley

..... 700 700 800 800 800 800 800 900 800

2.328 1.400

800 800 800 800 800 800

2,328 1.050

900 800 900

1.050 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800

2.796 800

1.400 800 800 800 350 900 700

DEPLOYIIENT

&61•facl expense

900 900 800 800 800 800 800 900 800

--, -r -_;::--'"':'• .. ·--:-' ::'j---,. •• ~ -- -,:-·3s~~;J?~~~~. -

2.328 Circuit cost only- see other HECN costs below. 900 800 800 800 800 800 800

2.328 Circuit cost only- see other HECN costs below. 900 900 800 900 900 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800

2.796 Circuit cost only- see other HECN costs below. 800 900 800 800 800 900

- 900

900

-._~•':.'.'~

.,,., -'...,.!;

'~ ...;:.·'

, s~

1tf:trJ"c~?'r?~---""'':<c..C -·c.cc-~:~:,-,,_,_ - - --

.---·- -- -9FOIIIIA'RONlECHf.lOLOGY -.&IIESll/l:C #PROPIMTIONS FOR THE WIDE

l.Gcl&JI 79 SlllgldCoColdaae&SS 80 Fort Yal9$Job SeMce 81 SiouJt.CounlyCcubJuse& SS 112 ·Fort Tallln Jab SeAice 83 Dei;al~Cenlel-84 GlaftonJab &nice 85 Walsh Co Cour1house & P&P 86 Gtaft1Jl1 MolarVehicle & D L 87 Gland Forks Malor Vehicle -as School aiha Blind 89 GrandForks CoCrlls & SS 90 NEHSC 91 Gcand FodtsDOCR 92 Grand Forks 8CI 93 Grand Forks DJS 94 Gant Forks DOT 95 Gland Forks HP 96 Grand Fens Job &nice f1T UnMnilyd Norlh Dakola 98 Havey Job Service 99 AdamsColn.yCcuthouse 100 AdanlS County SS 101 Trail Co Ccuthouse & SS 102 Jauestuwn Maiar"Vehicle & DL 103 S1ulsman Co SS 104 JameskMn Job SeMce 105 SCHSC 106 Slulsman Co CSE 107 Jamesl£>M1 DJS 108Slaletespital 109 Slulsman Co Cour1house & HP 110 Dunn CountySS 111 Nelson CoCcuthouse & SS 112 Latbn Co Cc:u1house & SS 113 Cavalier CounlyCcuthouse & DL 11.t C8valilr Colny SS 115 En1111ons Cnly Coudhouse. SS.& DC 116 RallSCm Co Cour1house & SS 117 ND Veterans Home 118 Morion Cnly Ccuthouse. SS. & DC

FOR 2001 • 2003 BUDGET

!:!l Forman Fart Yates FortYates -Ft Totten Grafton Grafton Grafton Grafton Grand Forks GrandForks GrandForks GrandForks Grand Forks Grand Forks Grand Forks GrandR'ns Grand Forks Grand Forks Grand Forks Harvey Hettinger Hettinger Hillsboro Jamestown Jamestown Jamestown Jamestown Jamestown Jamestown Jamestown Jamestown Killdeer Lakota LaMoure Langdon Langdon Linton Lisbon Lisbon Mandan

Estinl&IMJ Revenue

1.050 800 700 800 800 800

1.050 800 -~

800 1.400

800 800 800 800 800 !00 800

3.924 800 35C 900

1,050 800 900 800 800 800 800 800

1,050 1.050 1.050 1,050 1,050

900 1,050 1.050

800 1,400

DEPLOYMENT

Eslimatad expense

900 800 900 800 800 800 900 800 800 800 900 800 800 800 800 800 800 800

3,924 Circuit cost only- see other HECN costs below. 800 '.900 900 900 800 900 800 800 800 800 800 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 800 900

-.::'

_·. ~~- -- -

--D>NTECHNOLOGY 1EQuESJED AIIIIIIII DJNS FORTIE WIDE

LocaGre 119 Youlh Cal19clianal Cenllr" 120 Dunn CounlyCGullmuse& DC 121 Mll}wle Stale Un1-nly 122 Sbelidal CCUllyCourthouse & SS 123 Billings ColPlllyCourthouse !24 S..ISOR CounlyCaurthoule 125 lkwllon. ColnySS 126 ·Minot [lL/MV /Ta Dept 127 MinotJob &nice 128 NCHSC 129 Minot BCl 130 Minot Oulraach (DHS) 131 Ward CountyCourthouse & DC 132 MinotCSE 133 Minot DOT 134 Minot Oi & Gas 135 Minot DJS 136 Minot Parole & Probation 137 Minot Smile lJnMnily 138 Renville County Ccu1house & SS 139 Hetti...ger CounlyCom1house 140 l leltinger County SS M-1 LoganCOldyCourthouse&SS 142 EddyColmtyCourthouse & DC 143 Eddy County SS 144 New Town Job Service 145 Oakes Job Senlice 146 Rolla Job Service 147 RolefteCounlyCourthouSe 148 Rolette Coooty Social Service 1G RollaDJS 150 Piesce County CourthouSe & DC 151 Piesce County SS 152 Rugby Motor Vehicle 153 Mountrail County Courthouse & DC 154 Mountrail County SS ~55 Merca CntyCourthouse. BCI, & DC 156 Uefi:erCounfy SS 157 Kidder Cotr.tyCourthouse & SS 158 Mc:HenryCounty Cour1hOuSe & SS

FOR 2001 -2003 BUDGET Estimatad

~ Mandan Manmlg Mayvile McClusky Medora Minnewaukan Minnewaukan M"mot Minot Minot M"mot Minot Minot M'inot

Mmot Minot ~mot M'mot

Minot Mohall Mott Mott Napoleon New Rockford New Rockford NewTown Oakes Rolla Rolla Rolla Rolla Rugby Rugby Rugby Stanley Stanley Stanton Stanton Steele Towner

Rw9llta 800

1.050 2.328 1.050

350 700 900 800 800 800 800 800

1.050 800 800 800 800 800

2.328 1.050

700 900 350 700 900 800 800 800 700 900 800

1.050 900 800 700 900

1.050 900 700 700

,--:;- -~ ~-

'ORK DEPLOYMENT

Estimated

(.. -Expense

800 900

2.328 Circuit cost only- see othu HECN costs bekJW_ 900 900 900 900 800 800 800 800 800 900 800 800 800 800 800

2.328 Circuit cost only- see o1her HECN costs below. 900 900 900 900 900 900 800 800 800 900 900 800 900 900 800 900 900 900 900 900 900

•

WORIIATION TECHNOLOGY~ REQUESIEDAPPROPRIATIONS FOR THE WIDE

FOR 2001 -2003 BUDGET

Locllfiall 2!t ValleyCity

Eatknated Estimatad Revenue Expense

159 V,.,.,CilyDOT 160 Vlilll:tCiy Job Service 161 V,.,,, Slllle UnAersity 162 Barnes Co Courthouse & SS 163 Rid1land Co Courthouse 164 Richland Co SS & P&P 165 Wahpeton Slallt tnasit)' 166 WabpelonJobService 167 Wahpelalt W 168 Mclean CalyCourthouse. SS.& DC 169 Mckenzie Ccu,tyCour1house & SS 170 WestF-argoP&P 171 WiliamsCntyCcu1hous&.. CSE. DC 172 WiliidDn Oi & Gas 173 NWHSC 174 Wlliston Slate Colege 175 WllistDn Job Service 176 Wilision DJS 177 WilislDn MolDr" Vehicle 178 Wilisfon HicjN,ay Palrol 179 Williston Parole & PRJbation 180 WilistDn DOT I DL

HECN lniaslruclure

Phase ■ Deplofment-Sc:bools I Libraries Schools ( 200)

1 Adams Public (119) 2 Nsxa.tder Public (109} 3 P,jl8l11005e Public (102) 4 Ast-,Ptmlic(214) 5 Beach Hir#I {247) 6 Ttde Mt Comm High (619) 7 Belfield Public (318) 8 Bedhold Public (218) 9 Bec"8h High (375} 10 Bisbee Egeland tigh (81) 11 Bismack High {'M89) 12 CenuyHigh Sdlool 13 Sou1h Central Alt High School 14 Bismarck Voe Center

VaDeyCily ValfeyCity ValleyCily Wahpeton Wahpeton Wahpeton Wahpeton Wahpeton Washburn Watford City WestFargo WilflSton

Williston WilrlSton WilflSton Wilfiston Williston Williston Williston Williston WilflSton

Adams A(e)Cander

Anamoose

Ashley

Beach Belcourt Belfield Berthold Beulah Bisbee Bismarck Bismarck Bismarck Bismarck

800 800 800 800

2.328 2.328 Circuit cost only- see other HECN costs below. 1.400 900 1,050 000

900 900 2.328 2.328 Circuit cost only- see other HECN costs below.

800 800 800 800 700 900

1~050 900 800 800

1.050 900 800 800 800 800

2.328 2.328 Circuit cost only - see other HECN costs below. 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800

800 800 800 800

49.545 49.545 Includes all hardware. internet access and ITO technical support for the 11 Universities.

Circuits 3.759.624 { 303 circuits X $517)

Equipment 2.609.133 ( $8.611 per location )

ITD Core Equipment 135,000 ( 2 Routers & Monitoring Equipment )

Site Prep / Install 590.850 ( $1.950 per Faolity)

lntemetAa;ess 481.021 ( DS/3 Bandwidth )

-•1

- ~,::~::--~-:-:---_~ -~=-· . .:~.!,":" :·- -y_; ...... ~ - -- .

aFOIIIIIATION'TECHNOLOGY -.:.:;. ~ ~: 1=, DEPLOYMENT FORTIEWIDE #PROPRUJIONS

. FOR aG1 .. 2803 Estimatad

Lee■■• 15 8clllr J■ I JI".$- High (372) 16 ..... 1'1Mc(122} 17 -•Alblc(486) 18 ~W,,,,,Nllc(323) 19 BalderC....PIMc(31) 20 Cando Pubic (302) 21 Cadi.glcllR HiF·(297) 22 Roen¥• Pmlc(151) 23 Cenllalea■s Pubic (818) 24 ·eau111r Pubic (980} 25 Canl■r Pubic (320) 26 Aicllllnl'.k.S.-Higb(150) .z, GdggsCcullyCenllalHigh(202) 28 DMdeCcullyffWI (194) 29 · Oas ua-eu•-· High School 30 Devis Lake High (713) 31 Sd.oallorlleDeaf 32 Lalce 1'lea Voe Tech Cenler 33 Dickiiw High (1028) 34 DnlkePIJblic(164} 35 0:&JIOI, Public (237) 36 Drilled~ (29) 37 Dwlaelll~(285} 38 ~Public (259) 39 Edinburg Public (170) 40 Edmont Public (136) 41 Elgin Public (268) 42 Elendale Hvt (172) 43 Endedin Pc.tiic {373)

" Fairmount Public (147) 45 North High (881) .. Soult Hvt School 47 Woodrow Wilen Alt High School 4l Evalualion & Tninilag Center 49 Division d Independent Study 50 Fesser.den Public (198) 51 Rnley-SlanJn Public (184) 52 Flalher Public (263) 53 ~ Pubic (86} 54 Sargent Central Public (347)

E!l BcAIIINU Bowbells 8cMman BuxlDn C8Mrl C8&ldG Caningioo canon

Colfax 03opecslown Crosby Des lacs Dewslake Devils lake Devils lake Dickinson Drake Drayton DriscoD Dunseith Edgeley Edinburg

Edmore Elgin

Ellendale Enderlin Fairmount Fargo Fargo Fargo Fargo Fargo Fessenden Fmfey

Flasher Fordvillet

Forman

R8v9nue Expense

fTDStaff (2F1Es)

Less E-Rate Reimbursement ( Estimated )

Estimated Total Cost-PhaN I

321.784

(3.700.000)

4.197~412

-,J-

'..' ,. ;•, '.,'>. ,: ,, ', ,>I;•,,! I ·, ,, ' '•'. '.t~_:,: \;

'A :: , ' ' ' '. ., •. , '. ◄- • '

' . .

' ;{;

,•, • I

" '

~/ . . ~::' : ,, .. ,. . .

' .

\!' s'(

~-;~ .. ~ . ,r'.

•,

~

I·

. I

t h . ! f .

~ . [ J I i - I I - - I i i I I ii~- I j ~- i I - j Iii) -111ill11l11Jtlll1l1111Jll18l!11,ill,il

11111111l11l1J111l11II l111l11llf1l11fi1 --~·••1~1111~1•2~~~~~~~~~1;~1111~•••;-11 ·

' ".

I~' ( < •• • '._ I ~ • ; ' •' •,

> ,·,t--;-.~"-· .. ···-c· - - ,:;·~-~~ -±-Eq-:::r-2~ :c. - •~WIDE• . ~-~=~~--., . 'N'CWA1IDN IONS FOR TtE

ffe.!!#t,,,.,,. "IM1I ---- - r-6~,aatacf -·.-:-__ ,:,:_-:-~_c_ ........ - -211113 - ~• ·,c,-,c .. ,_ WSI FOR-, ~ ex,-.. 40RK DEPLOYMENT

IAGIIDP

15 laWb• tlgll.(324) •• ladllD8Hfd\(349) 'J7 LIi di- Pulllc (219) 98 .Udgllwood~<272) • Budce-CanlrllJPublic (125) 100 -Unlan Puble.(372) 101 Lilbontflpl2S)} 102 se, ddock Publi:{237) 1o:J Narll Shan, High School 104 u.dlnl-lgtl(1282) 'HE llaa:11GlSchoals 106 Ila m• PublcSchool 107 tldNile ••mn Hvi (113) 1GB .._ Pullie School 109 llayJille Parland CG High {256) 110 llcClulkyff91 (140} 111 ll11dinaPlmic(192) 112 Minar"Publc{286) 113 Uilan-OlnabnJck Hi;t'- {31) 1-U MinnaailtenPtMct34) 115 Central Campus Schaul 116 Dakota 118ffl01ial High School 117 Magic Cly Campus High (1127) 118 &Dis Rivel" C&mpusM High School 119 Minto Plmlc (263) 120 Mahal PltiicSchool 121 MontpeiwPlmlic{140} 122 Mott School 123 Munich Public (160) 124 Napoleon Public (267} 125 Neche Pubic (129) 126 New England Public (246} 127 New Rockford Public (395) 128 New Salem High School 129 New Town High School 130 Newburg-Uniled Public School 131 Northwood Public 132 Oakes High (173} 133 SEArea Voe Tech Center 134 Oriska Public (95)

Cllf langfl"'.;t

t..arinlOle Leeds l.idgelwood lignite Lnon Lisbon Maddocfo". Makoti Mandan Mandan Mandaree Marion

Max Mayville

Mcausky Mecfma

Milnor MiHDn t4nnewauken Minot Minot Minot fKlllOt Minto Mohall Montpelier Mott Munich Napoleon

Neche NewEngland

NfftNRDclcford NewSalem NewTown Newburg Northwood Oak~ Oakes Oriska

--~:i~7 ~ ,:•~_-7:7-/,~ ~~{,:~ ~c•~~:~;

--.--·_•_·_.·· ' ' - -

' - ' -

Pago 2 Senate Appropriations Committee BUI/R~solution Number S02022 Hearing Date April 19, 200 l

BQpre&smtatiyg 8YQtb'.: My feeling is thut the Hou~c version pumped in more thut might have

been desired .... more thun hulf way from our perspcctlvo •· it wus a significant movomcnt; no

reciprocation to yesterday's offer? The House feeling in the proposul Is thut there is tom; of

money there.

Representative Skomh21: Agree, House colleagues aro at time in trepidation of technology .. the

attempt hero - program is legit, funding adequate•· hopefully it will show success -- then 8CC

more enthusiasm in House. Need u track record of success to launch from.

Semuor Solbera: Understand politics-- part of the rcuson of fairness in the past was no

management -- vision ... everyone had own technology und went their own direction. We huvc

seen not direction until now 0 lT can do it. We need to be l'Cutist; I have the confidence that it

can be done. I'm not pleased thut IO million out by the Gov ~rnor ---umount by the House •

believe it is too drastic. Nerd to cooperate.

Senator Scbobin.ier recommends the House recf~dc from its umcndmcnts und udopt the House

amendments prc:posal of yesterday, That would drop t m!llion 45 thousund dollars: rcim;tatc

white area net pha~ ., 2; restore Cll 200; Scndlt 500; reduce I million TCC: 7 50 und I FTE und

restore 5 milUon, as I recall, Second by Rt.¢prcsentgtiye Byerly.

Rc,presentatiye Skarphol: 7 millio".l 813 thousand -- I J 8 over House'!

Roxanne Hob.za, Legislative Cour.cil Staff Analyst: Verified some portions of what wus

djscussed yesterday; fine points of the proposed amendment.

Senator Solbeai: Call for the vote?

Rcmresentatiye ByerJx: Like to table the recommendation unti1 tomorrow, at which time we can

physically see the amendments.

Senator Solbera: All in agreement -- okay by the Chair; Adjoumed until rtscheduled.

,1':,''

:i ~. '

• • I •

'~ l

' ' ' . '· ' ~




)( Confertnce Committee


e Number Slde A Side 13 Meter #


Minutes:

~enator Solbeni, Chair of the S82022 Conference Committee (Information Technology

Department), called the meeting to order at 2:30 pm, Friday. April 20th.

Roll Call: Senator Solberg, Chair; Senator Schobinger~ Senator Robinson; Representative

Byerly; Representative Skarphol; and Representative Huether present. All memb~rs present.

Senator Solbera: Amendmcmts # 18048.0206 should have covered what we have di8cusscd und

agreed upon durh1g our meetings. Questions'!

Senator Robinson: Concern about the grants line items ... there is strong feeling across the state

-- those that are in the kno 'N .... perhaps we 'II all know more in 18<24 months.

Senator Solberg: We have a motion on the floor: Senator Schobinger recommends the HOUSE

RECEDE from the House amendments, and adopt the amendments - 18048.0206.

Representative Byerly seconded the recommendation. Discussion.

Pa1c 2 Senate Appropriations Committee BHVResolutk,n Number S82022 Hearing Date April 20, 200 I

Call for the vot : Roll Call Vote S yes~ I no; 0 absent and not voting. Motion curried.

Conference Report on S82022 wm be sent forward,

18(),48,0205 ,., Flecal No. 3

Prepared by the Leglstallve Council staff for senator Schobtng,,r

Aprlf 19, 2001

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO ENGROSSED SENATF. BILL NO. 2022

That the House recede from Its amendments as printed on pages 1266· 1 ~58 of the S1enate Journal and pages 1350-1352 of the House Journal and that Engrossed Senate Bill N.o. 2022 be amended as follows:

Page 1, llne 10, replace "25,985,3J2" with "25,576,631 11

Page 1, llne 11, replace"· ,,076,824" with "35.761,772•

Page 1, Hne 12, replace ,i5,595,000" with "5,080,000"

Page 1, line 13, replace "934,58311 with "900,334"




Page 1, line 18, replace "11,971,3'/3" with "8:,500,000"

Page 1, after fine 18, Insert:

"Geographic Information system

Page 1, tine 19, replace "1,407,513" with "1.407.513"


Page 1. nne 21, t'epface "96,903,519"' with "'91,318,72411

Page 1, Une 22, replace "71, 185,087"' with "Z0.838.880"

Page 1, llne 23, replace "25,718,43211 with 1120,479,844 11

Page 2, llne 1, after "TRANSFERS11 Insert"· r .. lMITATIONS"

750,000"

Page 2, line,., after the period Insert "Transfers that Increase line Items In excess of the amount Included In the executive recommendation presented on January 7, 2001, may only be made after emergency commission and budget section approval. The chief information officer shall Inform the budget sectl'>n of transfers made pursuant to this section."



s.nat• BIH No. 2022 - Information Technology Department • Conference Committee Action CONFERENCE CONFERENCE COMPARISON

SENATE COMMITTEE COMMfTT£E HOOSE TO VERSION ~S VERSION VERSION HOUSE

$25,98$,3~ ($408,821) $25,571,531 '25.& 71,5:11

PageNo. 1 18048.0205