Monday, February 1, 2010
Computer conundrum
Looks like the city has decided on a course of action — much cheaper than the $250,000 proposal for a new computer system that staff advocated. This makes sense in a tough financial times. If you can fix it and stave off a big expenditure, at least for a while, that's the way to go.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
So, this computer system has been in place for HOW LONG, and the city employees did not know how to use it? No wonder things were screwed up.
I'm for that. I think that the commission did a great thing by taking it careful and getting the facts themselves. I am glad that they are really watching things instead of telling us they are and letting big spending go on and on.
City Staff didn't care how to use it they only cared about getting NEW! Didn't the last commission tell them NO as well.
The answer is still NO! Thanks Goodness
Much cheaper than... ???
That's a lot like someone saying, the two of us really need a new apartment so let's go buy 400 acres loaded 5000 sq ft main home, a 2000 sq ft Mother in law's quarters 1400sq ft for servants quarters and throw in a few storage buildings and a livery stable. Then let's talk about what we will need to park the vehicles out of the weather for just the two of us.
No worry, we can just send the bill to the tax payers. Surely they will find this a more practical approach than an apartment with a spare bedroom.
Because we need enough room to invite family and friends and even their neighbors over to stay for a few months at a time.
More than saying the City chose a course of action much cheaper than $250K when the result was less than $10K is more more accurately defined as the the governing body calling BS on some reckless conduct and frivolous spending by the professional staff.
I mean you could do ten multi-year upgrades at $10K per fix and still not have spent the quarter million dollars that the Director of Admin and the City Manager was proposing.
I think that the City Manager and the Dir of Admin should have to live within our means. We are a community of 11,000 20% are under the age of 18 and not employed. Over 70% of our children qualify in school for free or reduced lunches, another 20+% are disabled, retired, or living in some way on a fixed income.
We don't have that kinda of money and if we do then give it back to the tax payers bc we need it more that you need a fancy computer.
It seems the last commission didn't think it was worth training new employees on the present computer system. Not only that, but commissioners recommended scrapping the old computer system and having employees design a new one using Microsoft Office.
Now that there is a mess, they are hoping that throwing a few thousand dollars at it will resolve the problem. I'm sure it will get employees trained, but will it provide a working system? How much will they have to spend before they decide to either fix what they have completely, or start all over with a new system.
A few thousand dollars to find out seems to be the real waste. The problem should have never got this far! How much is it going to cost us to find out what is really needed? What if the city auditors have as much problem with the latest goings on as they did last year? Who pays the penalties? US the taxpayers!!
Fix it or replace it. DO IT RIGHT! Then get on with it.
Get your facts right. The last commission nor the current commission knew before this that employees were not being trained. All the commission was told, by city staff, was that a NEW system was needed. The last commssion and the current commission have said loud and clear NO! Staff has been told to learn to use what we've got!
thanks for commissions that can say NO to the city manager and city administrator.
And speaking of city administrator; just what has he gotten right. Other than constantly trying to find ways to spend and/or undermine the commission, I just can't find anything he has accomplished.
"It seems the last commission didn't think it was worth training new employees on the present computer system. Not only that, but commissioners recommended scrapping the old computer system and having employees design a new one using Microsoft Office."
Gotta call bs on this one. There is no way the last commission (or ANY said 'no' to training). Have you looked at the training budget. Staff is here and there and everywhere all the time out getting training. Every dept. especially cops and fire are getting training all the time. They don't need commission approval to get it. Training is an ongoing cost that would be associated with a contract to provide services for a large installation like the city computer system. Since all departments depend on it all would share the load in the expenditures and it would look like an expense of $166 per month per department and we'd get all the training we need. What I'm saying is, if we needed training (which is obvious) staff has and had the full power and authority to arrange that without coming to the commission for approval because that amount of expense is fully within the authority of any department head to make without the cost being considered a budget line item. Same thing as paying for voicemail or cable or internet which are also shared and split out by department. So, whomever put in the above quote and the rest of their post is either totally ill informed, full of conjecture without basis, completely ignorant, or a flat out liar.
Some people insist that more time could be spent training - even self-training - if the Admin department wouldn't spend so much time on the blogs sniping at the commissioners and citizens in general.
It's important to recognize that most of these strong advocacy positions FOR the City staff and against the City Commission comes from just a very few (3) employees in the Administrative department.
Some times you have to learn to read between the lines. When you do, Anonymous = Administrator
That's very funny....and a great point. I keep forgetting about that. I've heard that before and for some reason keep forgetting that 3 key staff people are using the blogs as their own mini-pr persuasive tool. They aren't content with openly opposing the commission when they make a direct request or expect accurate and truthful information in their decision-making. They feel the need to snipe at them from behind the veil of anonymous on here also. Cowards.
Post a Comment