Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Information Technology Gis topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Monroe County tables $25,000 GIS services contract after users request joint review
Summary
The Monroe County Commissioners voted Nov. 5 to table a $25,000 professional-services proposal with Michael Baker International for GIS support after county GIS users and staff asked for a joint meeting to review scope, vendor roles and upgrade needs.
The Monroe County Commissioners on Nov. 5 voted to table a $25,000 professional-services proposal with Michael Baker International after GIS users and county staff requested a joint meeting to review the contract and the county’s upgrade plan.
Miss Storman, speaking for "various members of the GIS key," asked commissioners to "table to vote on the contract of Michael Baker International for $25,000 until all members of the committee have had an opportunity to review the contract and determine how it relates to each individual user and determine if it is actually necessary to pay for these services," noting some services are already provided by county employees.
A county GIS analyst told commissioners the county is "very overdue for having an upgrade to ArcGIS Pro" and described the upgrade as necessary to keep the county on par with peer jurisdictions. An IT staff member said the Michael Baker proposal is a "cafeteria-style" contract that would provide professional services as needed — for example, server upgrades, role-based system administration and training — and would allow the GIS governance committee to choose which services to use.
Several commissioners and staff described operational urgency. One commissioner said the county is "behind the 8 ball" and noted multiple functions must be completed to prepare for the upgrade. IT staff and a county employee identified as Deb said the county is currently using a legacy version (identified in the meeting as "10/2006") and that the 9‑1‑1 center already operates on a newer version; staff said the county’s data is not fully usable by the 9‑1‑1 center until upgrades and server work are completed.
Commissioner David moved to table the contract and the motion received a second; after discussion the board voted to table the item and asked staff to convene a meeting of GIS users, vendor representatives and relevant departments before the next regular meeting.
The IT staff said funds for professional services were included in the current year’s budget and that, if the $25,000 contract is used as proposed, the governance committee would determine which services to deploy and the county would only pay for services actually used.
The item will return to a future agenda after the requested user/staff/vendor meeting and any follow-up clarifications.
