Board asks staff for options to relocate IT and veteran services amid building-condition concerns
Loading...
Summary
Commissioners directed staff to present conceptual options to relocate the county IT department and assess whether veteran services should be co-located, citing workplace leaks, equipment-move hazards, and cybersecurity concerns.
The board directed county staff to develop conceptual options for relocating the Information Technology department, and to include veteran services in planning discussions, after commissioners raised concerns about workspace conditions, equipment handling and cybersecurity at the IT office located above the Tax Collector's office.
Commissioner Wilkinson said staff had not previously received clear direction to relocate IT and explained safety and operational concerns: stains on carpet, evidence of prior leaks, a room with a softened floor, narrow stairways complicating movement of heavy equipment and an entry that opens through a public area. IT leadership (Ritchie) confirmed that the department is already moving some servers to a backup facility and that a phased migration of equipment and staff is technically possible.
Commissioners asked staff to evaluate multiple options, including: moving into existing suite space on the government complex (suite 550/600 were discussed because of loading-dock access), building a stand-alone facility on county-controlled land, or renovating existing space. Staff and public-works representatives warned the board about a regulatory/cost implication: if renovations surpass a substantial-improvement threshold (commonly a cumulative 50% of building value), the county may be required to bring the entire structure up to current code, increasing total project cost.
The board sought conceptual cost comparisons and an analysis of code-trigger risks, loading and access needs (for large crates and servers), cybersecurity and phased migration schedules. Commissioners asked staff to return with options (conceptual layouts and order-of-magnitude costs) for board review rather than detailed engineering designs.
Ending: Staff will convene IT, Public Works and administration to produce conceptual options and cost implications for on-campus renovation versus stand-alone construction and return to the board for decisions on scope and funding priorities.
