RICHMOND
Two of the state's top technology officials are being called to testify before a government panel on open record laws about why aspects of Virginia's plan to privatize its computer systems were discussed behind closed doors.
The state's 10-year, $2 billion contract with Northrop Grumman Corp. has come under increased scrutiny of late.
Key deadlines have been missed, and state agencies have complained about billing problems and poor services. A recent survey shows that state employees grade the computer assistance provided as average, at best.
In April, a hacker breached a state prescription-monitoring Web site, putting at risk a database that contained millions of patient records. Two months later, the database is not fully restored, and health care providers must call the state to check the records.
Information security is one of Northrop Grumman's duties under the contract.
Earlier this month, Lemuel Stewart Jr., the state's chief information officer, was removed from his job after he suggested withholding payment of a $14 million invoice from Northrop Grumman.
Stewart's replacement is new state Technology Secretary Len Pomata, who was grilled Monday by legislators about the closed-door meetings in April and June and delayed progress on a statewide computer system upgrade.
Pomata and James McGuirk II, chairman of the Information Technology Investment Board that held the private meetings, have been asked to appear at an upcoming meeting of the Freedom of Information Advisory Council.
The request is a bit of a departure for the council, which usually responds to requests for opinions rather than conducting its own investigations.
"I thought there was going to be smoke. I didn't know there was going to be a forest fire," House Majority Leader Morgan Griffith, a Salem Republican who chairs the council, said after listening to Pomata testify Monday.
During a House of Delegates committee hearing, Del. Sam Nixon, R-Chesterfield, raised questions about the legality of holding portions of the recent IT investment board meetings away from the public's view.
Nixon carried the 2003 bill creating the IT investment board and the chief information officer position.
He also chided Pomata for jointly serving as the interim chief information officer, technology secretary and a board member, noting that the original intent was to keep those positions separate.
Others raised concerns about the cost to taxpayers.
"We have the responsibility to see if this is the best value for the commonwealth," said Del. Bob Marshall, R-Prince William.
Inked in 2005, the deal was billed as one that would provide significant savings to the state by capping technology spending at $236 million annually.
While spending has been within the cap, to date some of the savings originally promised have not been realized.
Among the deadlines Northrop Grumman has missed: Transformation of the state's infrastructure was supposed to be completed by Wednesday but is running six months behind schedule.
Pomata acknowledged that "service levels in general are below expectations."
Yet the most outspoken critics stopped short of calling for the contract to be voided.
In an e-mail, Northrop Grumman spokeswoman Christy Whitman said there have been challenges in the "complex and unprecedented undertaking" of "modernizing outdated and inefficient technology " but predicted ultimate success.
Also investigating the technology pact is a state Senate subcommittee chaired by Sen. Yvonne Miller, D-Norfolk. That panel met Monday at the same time as the House of Delegates committee.
Julian Walker, (804) 697-1564, julian.walker@pilotonline.com
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Can't afford to void the contract
While many of the outspoken critics would love to get rid of NG and this contract they realize that it is not financially feasible to. NG owns almost all the IT equipment that state agencies are using, this means desktops, laptops, servers and all the other equipment connecting them and anything else defined as ‘in scope’. We, the taxpayers, would need to buy new equipment or buy back all the equipment. This would be an enormous cost that the state cannot afford, especially now in this financial climate.
The Commonwealth a Junkie to Northrup Grumman?
If these "secret deals" did indeed result in NG spending state taxpayer money to create an infrastructure using thier own equipment, then NG has tried to create a situation that forces the Commonwealth to be a technology junkie to NG. Becuase they have installed things like complex and difficult to maintain Cisco equipment and created a complex network hierarchy in which they control access, they have effectively done this. This is why the state agencies are angry.
It is catigorically unacceptable to continue this contract. If NG owns the equipment, the state can replace it with better equipment from other manufacturers and tell NG to get the hell out of Virginia.
In principle, Warner's basic idea to unify the state technology infrastructure is good, but the implementation was very badly done. This is likely because it became political. NG saw that EDS had made the Navy Marine Corps Infrastructure a cash cow, and NG decided to do the same thing with the Commonwealth of Virginia.
Too expensive to just
Too expensive to just replace it all. FWIW, this is the same thing the Navy did with its IT assets (to EDS, which is now part of HP). But big businesses do this sort of thing sometimes, especially those working on contracts. Why pay full purchase price on equipment when you can essentially rent it for its useful life for less money?
That's what these sorts of deals are supposed to let a company (in this case, the company is the Commonwealth) do. Whether it actually works or not is a question for the accountants.
I thought privatization of services was "bad"
yet here is an example of just that happening.
Wonder why it is ok for the Govt to look to private sector for certain services, like IT, but govt wants to take control of things way outside their responsibility, like the auto industry?
Yea, I know, this is a story about the COMMONWEALTH of VA and I am paralleling the Feds, but there are other state level things as well. Would seem that if a state cannot properly perform the function, the Feds would jump in and take control of that as well. Why wont they for this? National health has electronic health records as one of its synergistic main ideas. This state level security would fall right in line with that. Kind of a building block, wouldn't anyone agree? Really, why not table this until after the Congress rams universal health down our throats and use this money for something else. Let Congress foot this bill as they are soon going to absorb it anyways.
This is not about "privatization,"
this is about politics and money and letting out profitable contracts to cronies and big shots. There is certainly a big political element in this, and we should remember that this was done when the General Assembly was under the dominance of state Republicans in both the General Assembly and the State Senate. It is not likely that the Virginia Dept. of Information Technology back then could create a situation where their responsibilities, authorities, and control are taken over by a massive company that makes decisions to suite their own bottom line. It is much more likely that there was political pressure involved, either from the General Assembly or from powerful decisionmakers within the executive branch who were responsding to pressure from others.
Actually, it's more than that
This is the centerpiece of Mark Warner's governorship. His other major proposal, an overhaul of Virginia's arcane tax code, ended in the same arcane code with higher rates.
But it was good enough for him to get elected with 2/3rds of the vote for Senate, and get Tim Kaine elected governor. And Creigh Deeds is running on continuing the "great work" they've done. The Commonwealth is running on a FY2010 budget balanced only on the wildest revenue projections -- it makes Gilmore's car tax repeal plan look like chump change. And we were repeatedly reminded that Warner's "hard choices" put the Commonwealth on sound financial footing for the future.
The media is doing a disservice to the public by not more fully investigating the fruits the last two administrations have brought the Commonwealth.