City Hall Diary
Several months ago I wrote a blog “Try It Before You Buy It,” where I spoke about the importance of making sure that the city has the option of using technology before actually purchasing it. I shared how large organizations struggle with information technology (IT) implementations when dealing with vendors who often make promises that differ from the actual results received. I also pointed out how the VTA and City of San Jose have spent millions on unwise technology decisions to purchase software.
Since my first council meeting, I have asked “perspicacious” questions regarding software expenditures. Questions that I asked included: What is the return on investment (ROI)? Have references been checked? Was piloting the software allowed? If so, did city staff use the software? Was web-based software available?
Sometimes I think I might come off as “prickly.” However, it is important to me to ask these questions—to dig deep. In my opinion, if a company wants city money, then staff needs to make sure they drill the company hard so that at the council meeting, staff is ready to make the case. From my private sector experience, a private company will not shell out dollars without making completely sure they are getting exactly what is promised, because if they don’t, they could go out of business or people would get fired.
Let me share an example of what I am talking about. In May 2007, the San Jose Parks Department proposed spending a one time, drop-in-the-bucket amount of $1.6 million on software to manage the scheduling of parks, reserving facilities and family camp. The scheduling and reservations were previously done by hand on paper.
I challenged the expenditure and asked the questions I mentioned above to staff. I wasn’t completely satisfied with their answers, and it appears when it came down to it, they were not satisfied with their answers either. They took on the challenge to investigate my questions further; they went looking to see if money could be saved and if there was a better, more efficient alternative out there.
I am happy to say that staff exceeded my expectations (and I think their own) and brought back a much better proposal in December 2007, which the council accepted.
Staff began by doing a very thorough ROI, justifying the expense by the amount of hours it would save city workers at the community centers. Then, staff chose a web-based solution which is hosted and reduces our upfront and ongoing costs. The amount for this new alternative: $125,000. Yes, indeed. So, we might have—could have—spent $1.6 million in one-time money for the same solution that we are spending $125,000 on instead.
The $1.6 million proposal is the typical software sale of massive upfront license fees and servers. However, the $125,000 proposal does not require servers or massive upfront dollars. Instead, we spent $125,000 on implementation and training and received a better model.
The city would have owned the software with the $1.6 million dollar option. However, we do not want to own it. Ownership equals expensive and timely upgrades, bug fixes and daily maintenance. Plus, in five years the software and servers would be outdated and we would have to spend more money to update them. Thus the process of spending to keep up would be never ending.
Also important to mention is that the city does not pay any future fees for this purchase. The costs are covered by fees the users pay when they book a room or recreation area. So residents can make reservations from home on the internet vs. driving down to the community center. The vendor of the software company makes money over time based on a portion of individual user fees instead of $1.6 million up front.
My value-add is that I can do my part in trying to save the city money when I can. Every bit of money saved is a good thing in my book. With money saved—especially on technology—we can help pay off the deficit, hire public safety officers and fund traffic calming.
Pierluigi,
Congratulations on your money saving analysis. Public entities are all too quick to purchase database software, thinking all of their problems will be solved and that they can then just sit back and relax.
Given that the task was formerly done with pencil and paper, and given the realities of the SJ budget crisis, I would have recommended that they simply create an Excel spreadsheet and post it on the City website with appropriate read/write access. Cost… about an hour of work; perhaps $150 of labor including benefits, overhead and G&A burdens.
#1 Napper,
We need more City and County people that think like Pierluigi thinks, ” I believe it`s called common sence”!
Those of us that live in District Six that attend his many Town Meetings know the value we have in our Council person.
If more City Council people would use his methods or researching, the City wouldn`t be in the serious trouble it is in today.
Napper,
One more plus with Pierluigi is:” everything is out in the open with him”. That is refreshing !
Wow. Good job.
Please don’t give the “savings” to MHP.
$1.6 Million? And I thought Creative Suite was expensive…
Good job, not only did you save the taxpayers’ money, but you didn’t have to hire a consultant to make the decision.
Give Pier a break. He saved us almost $1.5 million by making a simple and valid request. This should be a routine practice, not an exception.
Pierluigi gets my “vote” for very best SJ City Council member, using actual work experience to save the taxpayers from yet another bad and expensive decision. Most of the others are “pols” with no actural work experience. Can’t imagine where Napper is coming from except somewhere in the bowels of SEIU. Have not been aware of any other City Council pol sharing the details of their work for the citizenry. How about Campos detailing “her” decision to build a Taj Mahal fire station to garner more votes for election, or always reliable murky spender, Forrest W. and his multi-million dollar bridge over the tracks. I would still like to know the result of Pierluigi’s uncovering of the 2 million dollar golfswing net, or why the money-losing city owned golf courses haven’t been sold, etc.
Be wonderful to hear from Blanca on the mural commission for relatives, or Ken Yeager’s push to hire hundreds more “fire inspectors” for the Firefighters union to “make safe” the citizens NOT in his area. Zoe’s decisions, and their reasons, would be most enlightening. Anyway, Pierluigi sets a great—and rare—example for how democracies should be run. George Green
PierLuigi’s urging to seek alternatives to way the City normally does business is refreshing.
Me thinks web-based outsourcing is not a panacea to lower taxes however.
The recent outsourcing of the City’s Bidline to RFP Depot (rfpdepot.com) has some collateral issues. City vendors “must” contract with RFP Depot in the future in order to obtain bid information. In order to contract with RFP Depot, vendors must “agree” that RFP Depot has the right to 5% of all contracts the vendor engages in from any other agency or company that RFP Depot has arrangements with, whether or not the vendor got the contract through RFP Depot or through some other source.
To the agencies, it seems like a win-win situation, as they get on-board free. To the vendors…..it’s another intermediary getting a cut. To the taxpayer, expect to see higher costs due to a new form of overhead.
Go to his D6 web site…
http://www.sanjoseca.gov/district6/
Drill around, read what he’s been up to; how he’s spent his first 10 months; what he’s doing now.
Check his schedule and attend one of the DC neighborhood meetings where he updates residents on everything from a cross walk to city wide, county and state issues that impact their neiborhood and quality of life. Email his office.
No matter where you live in San Jose, you have to come see this guy. He not only hit the deck running; he landed with track shoes laced up tight. He goes through a 15 min Power Point show-n-tell with details and candor that most would be lucky to finish in an hour or two. All good stuff; no fluff.
Talk about Return on Investment; and it only cost us the effort to vote. D6 got lucky.
Yeah, and the mayor, a few councilmembers, and a few chiefs of staff can’t even post their calendars on the web, as required by a law THEY pased.
Notwithstanding the happy ending, the councilman’s little saga is quite disturbing. A few questions:
1. Has the City of San Jose purchased software previously, or did its entire staff just arrive from Dogpatch?
2. If the staff is experienced in purchasing software, why weren’t every single one of the councilman’s perspicacious questions asked by them early on in the vendor selection process?
3. Are these employees driven to city hall each morning in short buses?
4. Will we voters have to start electing council representatives based on their ability to see through the staff’s incompetence? If so, we’re going to need a lot more councilmembers.
Now, let’s examine the councilman’s questions to determine if they were truly shrewd, perceptive, and insightful, or whether they were simply the kind of basic questions the average homeowner would ask when selecting a roofing contractor.
Oliverio: “What is the return on investment (ROI)?”
Roof shopper: “This is a rental that I intend to sell, but still, I may go with a tear-off if the product life and warranty justify it. Give me the numbers.”
Oliverio: “Have references been checked?”
Roof shopper: “Do you have any references in this part of town?”
Oliverio: “Was piloting the software allowed?”
Roof shopper: “Now this product that you’re recommending, it’s proven itself in this climate?”
Oliverio: “If so, did city staff use the software?”
Roof shopper: “And your crew has installed this material before?”
Oliverio: “Was web-based software available?”
Roof shopper: “I’ve been reading about fire-proof, fake shakes. Do you have any experience with them?”
Gee, I wonder how many of you average home owners out there ever considered yourself perspicacious?
I commend Pierluigi for taking the time to try to save the city money, and using his knowledge to help the city.
Keep up the good work.
Have not seen Victor Ajlouny recently.
The truck seen on the Egyptian border selling 12 day old bread with new FRESH BREAD wrappers did look like his, though.
THANKS,
I’m sure not many of us were aware of what a
“wonderful” councilperson you were until you told us.
Pierluigi,
I didn’t mean to steal your fire on this issue in my earlier comment. I agree with the other posters that you are, far and away, the most enthusiastic and effective council member we’ve had in decades.
You do set the standard for your peers. How do I know? I can speak from personal experience when your office recently intervened on my behalf to recover an excess payment to the denizens of the City Billing Department. I was pushed to the limit with their infinite and mindless demands of me. The final straw was when they asked me to prove that I had paid the bill. My gosh, it was an electronic payment and they maintain the billing database! Following your office’s intervention, I was contacted by the Billing Department and promised an immediate credit to my account.
I had to laugh at Finfan’s contribution when he asked, “Are these employees driven to City Hall each morning in short buses?” I’m thinking Finfan may be on the mark here.
Keep up the good work and continue to ask the questions. Your actions may serve as testament to others that City protocol remains out of touch with what it must be – fiscally responsible.