Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 04-12-2011 - 7ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: April 12, 2011 Action Agenda Item No. _~ SUBJECT: Follow-up on Electronic/Paperless A enda Plannin DEPARTMENT: Information Technologies/ County Manager/Clerk to the Board PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No ATTACHMENT(S): Staff Issues/Questions for Board Consideration INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Jones, Information Technologies, 245-2885 Frank Clifton, County Manager, 245- 2306 David Hunt, Clerk's Office, 245-2130 Greg Wilder, Manager's Office, 245- 2300 PURPOSE: To follow-up on the Board's use of an electronic/paperless agenda during tonight's work session and provide an opportunity for discussion, questions, and feedback from the Board to staff and vice versa in order to give staff additional baseline information upon which to proceed with electronic/paperless agenda efforts. BACKGROUND: At the Board's March 17, 2011 budget work session, discussion occurred regarding the Board moving toward an electronic agenda process and eliminating the use of paper. Staff from several departments have since met and initially discussed the multitude of variables involved with this effort. Based on that preliminary discussion, staff suggested to Board members that tonight's work session be conducted using the current electronic capabilities available. A work session was suggested since, in comparison to regular meetings, it is not televised, it is not as complex, and there is a smaller volume of associated materials. This initial introduction to electronic agendas and the elimination of paper will provide Board members with an opportunity to gain insight on the actual use of electronic agendas/laptops during a meeting. It will also hopefully allow Board members to identify benefits, concerns, needs, etc. related to electronic agendas including: • format • review of the agenda prior to the meeting • ability to make notes for agenda items • access to multiple documents/pages at the same time • legibility of maps, budget charts, and other similar documents • closed session materials a This introduction and discussion will also allow staff to confer with the Board about logistical issues with moving to an electronic agenda. Decision points on which staff would like feedback are addressed in Attachment 1. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact associated with discussion of electronic/paperless agendas. As the County moves forward with this effort, there will be costs related to software and its maintenance, equipment, training, personnel, and potentially other areas. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board follow-up on the tonight's use of an electronic/paperless agenda with discussion, questions and feedback to staff and responses to staff's questions in order to provide additional baseline information upon which to proceed with electronic/paperless agenda efforts. Items for Consideration in a Paperless Agenda Process 1) What goals does the Board have in mind for a paperless agenda process? There are many potential benefits, including: reduction of paper consumed, easier access to related information, reduction in resources required to manage the agenda creation process. To understand the Board's priorities will help ensure the right solution. 2) What is the anticipated usage rate for Board members and staff for paperless agendas? There are significant benefits to be gained with a wholesale use of paperless agendas by all meeting participants. However, partial adoption, in which staff supports both a paperless process and a legacy paper-based process can significantly erode or even eliminate those benefits with a net increase in staff time to support dual processes. 3) What screen size is deemed optimal for viewing on-line agenda materials? A large screen tends to be optimal for viewing detailed images (such as SAPFO charts, budget spreadsheets and complex GIS maps) and multiple agenda items, while smaller screens such as those on iPads and laptops may be inadequate for detailed images. However, larger screens limit the portability of devices and can create a visual barrier between elected officials and the public. 4) How would viewing hardware be handled? Would Board members use their existing laptops and bring them to each meeting? Would Board members prefer to use small screen touch pad devices, such as iPads? How would Board members envision meetings with other deliberative bodies (Boards of Health, Social Services, Planning; Quarterly Public Hearings; other local governing bodies, e.g., Towns of Chapel Hill, Mebane, Hillsborough)? Would they be compelled to bring laptops or would the County provide these? Providing access devices beyond what is currently available could potentially cost more than the system software and attendant servers. 5) What would the default media be? There are potentially different methods for creating and displaying agenda items, depending on whether paper or digital display is considered: For example, digital delivery allows for direct hyperlinking to historical minutes or video footage of background material. Paper does not. Due to the inherent inefficiencies of authoring two parallel versions of each abstract, it would be important to determine which medium would be considered the default for authoring and delivery. 4 6) What viewing and annotation features are needed? We assume the board values easy navigation, with a table of contents available at all times, to allow quick navigation to different agenda items. We assume the board requires the ability to scroll through items independently of one another. We assume the board desires a way to insert bookmarks on items to which they want to frequently refer. We assume the Board requires a mechanism for making annotations.. 7) How are annotations handled? Would individual Board members' annotations be considered part of the digital record of each meeting? Would a single annotations field for an entire agenda item suffice? Or would Board members prefer to annotate on the documents themselves, the digital equivalent of hard copy markup? Would those annotations only be viewable by the individual Commissioner who made them? Or would they become viewable among all Board members? 8) Can Board members' current Internet connections support paperless agendas? Given the need for Board members to access agenda items from home or on the road, will their current connectivity support access large agendas? IT can work with the individual Board members to assess this, but dial-up and AirCard connections will probably prove to be inadequate to support efficient download of these materials. In some Board members' homes, there is a verified lack of available broadband options. There may be other options, such as delivery of "flash" or USB drives. However, this would of course, eliminate cost savings of no longer delivering paper agendas. 9) Will Board members endorse the resources needed to support this technology? Information Technologies support will be needed before, during and after meetings in which this technology is used. Further, support will be necessary for the environment in which the public accesses data. Also, if the chosen solution is an end-to-end agenda creation through distribution and archiving solution, resources will be needed to support the authoring and workflow environment. This could approach a single FTE in required resources. Finally, the Board members themselves will need to arrive early if the chosen solution leverages their laptops, so those machines can be verfied as functional. A not to exceed cost limit may help in selecting the best solution. 10) Will hard copies still be available for the public, the Board and staff? This could potentially erode cost savings otherwise realized through print reduction 11) Will Board members need the ability to print entire agenda package on demand? Existing printer technology provided for Board members' home offices are generally not adequate for printing the large volumes associated with our agenda packages. This capability will require upgrades of County provided printers.