Thank god for you! One person brave enough to ask for real answers. I’ve read your blog and followed the NPR reports…, then checked out the State Auditors review and detailed appendices (which were not easy to find by the way)…; the detail starting on pg. 74 of the final report put’s an interesting twist the whole discussion….

https://www.sao.wa.gov/EN/Audits/SGPR/Documents/Final_TPI_report_Web.pdf

These pages seem to indicate that of the agencies studied, nearly all are fairly competitive when compared to the private sector…, according to TPI’s Mark to Market comparison. And some are extremely competitive. Where it get’s interesting is when the Department of Information Systems (DIS) gets involved…, the prices are rediculously high.

And as I understand it; it is DIS that is sponsoring the need for the new data center to consolidate services and save mountains of money. From the looks of the Auditor’s study, DIS is the last agency you would want to lead this effort. Unless they think that the DIS costs are representative cost to provision IT services within state govt. (swing and a miss). Do the other agencies think this is a good thing?

Back to consolidation and a new data center for the state. I know that the technologies to enable consolidation are there and Cloud computing offers cost efficiencies, scalability, business continuity and disaster recovery. This is a technology area which has really taken off over the last few years and technology advisors (Gartner / Forrester) are predicting big changes in the near future. These technology advisors say that cloud computing, to include just about every aspect of technology provisioning services, will be an extremely competitive service offering within the next 2-5 years. In fact, recent studies from both indicate that the private sector and public sector will move aggressively to Cloud Services over then next 2-5 years. Many big players are working feverishly to compete for this market space… (Amazon, Microsoft, Google, IBM, SalesForce.com, etc, etc.)

So, why would the state invest in a single, stand alone data center now? It seems that it will be out dated before it is complete. How can the state compete with the private sector for commodity services? And the ‘real cloud’ offers scalability and disaster recovery that a single state “private cloud” can’t offer. The ‘real cloud’ provides instances of customer data and services in multiple geographic locations throughout the country which provides real disaster recovery at a price cheaper than the state can ever offer. I’d bet $300 Million on it! (or is it $392 Million now…)

The NPR Reports:
DIS stating that they hadn’t really done a cost comparison with private sector offerings. What? And, this was funded?
DIS (Tony?) stated that the current building might not withstand another earthquake. Really? If the building is unsafe then why would the state let hundreds of people go to work in it every day? I assume there are no plans to demolish the building after the new data center is complete?

DIS (Jim?) stated that they are out of floor space and power in the existing space. What about server virtualization? All the data centers I’m aware of are gaining floor space and reducing power utilization simply by deploying virtualization technologies to consolidate servers and services as the hardware is due for life-cycle replacement.

I simply don’t get it. As a taxpayer, I’m embarrassed by this decision and can’t understand how something so poorly vetted could move through our legislative process so easily; especially now.

Thank you and good luck with your Bill.

-Hayden

Hopefully, there will be some vetting of this in the legislature and that the Department of Information Services will provide some insight into their plans because as of right now, they seem to be building a large toilet with which to flush the taxpayers dollars.

Wow, some sharp feelings there? Sorry I may not be technically competent (true indeed) and sorry you feel the people of the 36th Legislative District are poorly represented. Given that I won 66%-34% and 94% of the precincts in my district I respectfully suggest the people of my community might disagree with you.

It would be extremely helpful to my learning curve if you as a DIS employee would say something of substance technically, and explain where/why/how my analysis is inaccurate.

If you will provide specific examples of statements that I made that are factually inaccurate I’ll gladly clarify and apologize if necessary. The obligation of public officials is to raise tough issues in a Democracy, not to put our heads in the sand and bend to the technical (or military, etc.) experts who try and intimidate elected officials into writing blank checks.

I think highly of the DIS folks. You seem pretty offended that I’ve taken these issues to task, but I believe most DIS employees are passionate believers in their work and in their role in building quality of life in our state. I challenge you Teddy as a DIS employee to engage with me to help improve the quality and efficiency of how we spend our technology money in Washington. I believe it’s time that DIS and technology in our state was more transparent, open with vigorous and healthy debate. Should we outsource email? Should we consolidate purchasing? Should we use the cloud? Should we change the cost recovery model for DIS so you are able to provide higher levels of service and not just cost driven? I’m raising issues that I believe your colleagues are raising around the water cooler because they care about high quality services.

Challenging assumptions, business models and processes, contracts and decisions is not anti state employee–it’s pro government!

We’re in this together.

Your partner in service, Reuven.

You appear to be what has been traditionally known as a muckraker (for those not familiar with the term – To search for and expose misconduct in public life.). Yet you do not know much about the technology industry. If you read thru the link that you presented for the RFP, you will see that the old adage of “it is in the details” applies here. I am a 30 year veteran of the computer industry and have worked both in the public and private sector throughout my career and for the most part people in this industry are painfully careful about these kinds of requests.

In respect to “your buddy” that knows Cisco, I suspect you try asking a real professional who actually works in this business about what the needs are and about looking at what the department actually owns BEFORE you suggest that they need additional items. Let me point out a few things to you from an actual professional (ME).

First the term cloud computing is a brand new term, what it means and how it will applied is highly depended on more than a very few pieces of hardware and software, you have no idea what is currently in the network of this department and you have no idea what is in the pipeline of this department I again I take offence to you making such a blatant statement without actually asking someone about it. Moreover, your constituent’s now have a reason to question whether or not they made a proper choice in you as a person to represent them.

You are fortunate in the fact I do not live in your district because I would be out not just campaigning for your opponents but actively attempting to have someone like yourself removed from office for speaking out without actually looking into the facts (we know what they are but you apparently do not understand how to find them without checking first). As a citizen I am appalled at your behavior.