Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Information Technology topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Washington County IT staff: timekeeping software near end-of-life; public safety CAD replacement underway
Summary
County IT reported a mandatory upgrade to its timekeeping software because the vendor has designated the current version end-of-life, and told supervisors a public-safety CAD/mobile replacement vendor has been selected with a target March go-live.
Washington County information-technology staff told supervisors on June 24 that the county must move to a new version of its timekeeping software by the end of the year and that a separate public-safety CAD/mobile replacement project is already underway.
The change to the timekeeping software is driven by the vendor’s decision to stop supporting the current version. “This current software that we use is end of life as of the end of this year. Thought we had till ’27, we didn’t. We have till the end of this year to move off of it to the new version,” an IT staff member said during the projects briefing. The county plans to upgrade to a new version from the same vendor; staff said most business rules built during an earlier migration can be transferred into the new system.
Why it matters: the county uses electronic timekeeping to track hours, required breaks and payroll accuracy. During the meeting a supervisor raised questions about recurring upgrade costs; the IT staff and others emphasized labor and compliance benefits. “By having those electronic timekeeping systems, it helps make sure that we’re giving the employees the breaks that they need,” a committee member said, pointing to potential liability avoidance under Department of Labor rules.
On public safety software, IT staff told the committee the county selected a vendor late last year, kicked off the project in November and expects to be live in March. “We chose the vendor at the end of last year. We kicked off the project November, and we will be live with a new product in March,” the IT staff member said. The sheriff and public-safety team were praised for working with a “demanding” vendor to keep the project on schedule.
Discussion-only items included a lay explanation of why software vendors sunset older versions and an exchange about the county’s reliance on cloud-hosted systems after a past migration. No formal action to purchase the timekeeping upgrade was recorded during the committee session; staff said the work is already in progress with the incumbent vendor.
Staff said physical time clocks will not be replaced and that the upgrade is limited to the back-end software the clocks communicate with. Budget consequences were raised by supervisors who asked how long the new version might remain supported and about recurring licensing costs; staff did not present a multi-year cost projection during the meeting.
Staff indicated they will return with standard implementation details as the vendor builds the county’s configuration, while continuing work on the public-safety replacement project.
