Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Research Texas Integration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Counties pass 50% integration mark; Tyler portal migration and November integration deadline discussed
Summary
JCIT presenters said more than half of clerk offices are integrated with Research Texas; Tyler/Ed Mendoza reported phased county integrations and announced an EFSP portal migration that will redirect users to a new portal starting Monday, May 15.
JCIT heard detailed operational updates about Research Texas integrations and the e‑filing front end supplied by Tyler Technologies.
Ed Mendoza, director of professional services for the E‑File Texas program, presented transaction and integration metrics. The meeting record shows the statewide integration effort is past the halfway mark: attendees were told "we're over 50%" of counties integrated, with 222 clerk offices live and another 15 scheduled to join the system the following Monday, Casey said. The group set a target for broader integration work to continue through a November 1 deadline for total integration in the current rollout phase.
Mendoza described vendor and county coordination: several case management system (CMS) vendors are turning on integrations in blocks, and larger waves of counties are expected as vendors finish API testing. "We're getting blocks and blocks of counties coming online," he said. Committee members flagged a subset of small counties that had not previously published electronic records and will need clerk‑level assistance to mark sensitive/confidential documents so public posting does not expose protected material.
Mendoza also announced a platform change: the older HTML5 Tyler portal will be retired and users redirected to the newer EFSP portal. "This portal will be closed down starting Monday, May 15," he said; staff said they would keep the old site live briefly in the background to handle unexpected issues and support calls during the switchover.
Committee members discussed implementation risk, noting some counties undergoing CMS transitions may need extra time. Staff said they had received extension requests from small counties and would coordinate with CMS vendors to stage integrations. No formal policy vote was recorded; the committee asked standards and implementation teams to continue vendor coordination and to assist smaller clerks that lack prior web publication practices.
