October 13, 2008
Dale Sandstrom, Chair
Pat Forster, Information and Technology Department
Jim Gienger, Project Manager for UCIS Replacement Project
Dorothy Howard, Member of the Operations Oversight Group
Mark Molesworth, Information and Technology Department
Rod Olson, Member of the Operations Oversight Group
Allan Schmalenberger, Chair of the Operations Oversight Group
Jerrold Arneson, Interim Director of Technology
The meeting was called to order by Chair Sandstrom.
Recommendation on Contract with Tyler Technologies, Inc.
Chair Sandstrom opened the discussion by reviewing the past actions of the committee and outlining the major changes in the proposed contract. He explained that the contract attempts to fix price the project to the extent possible, but Tyler is unwilling to enter into a pure fixed price contract due to the risks inherent in the product. While the Odyssey system is a finished product with all three of the major components we require (case management, e-filing, document management) and the vendor has a history of successful implementations, the court is not in a position to state with any certainty either the extent or the types of modifications we may be requesting. Neither side is in a position to predict the extent of issues which may arise during data conversion, and that is another risk that Tyler is unwilling to assume alone.
Chair Sandstrom explained that the Operations Oversight Group has changed its approach to the pilot project to include all three major components of the project.
Sally Holewa explained that Tyler is unwilling to assume 100% of the risk in this project. They did propose a fixed price contract after the last meeting, but it was not acceptable for two reasons: it took away the state's right to have any input into modifications, customizations, and implementation schedule, and it allowed Tyler to renegotiate the scope of the work following Phase 0. She and Jim Gienger have been in contact with Tyler's other clients throughout the negotiating process and have been using their successes and lessons learned as the basis for much of the negotiations. Additional risk mitigation factors have been worked into the contract.
Chair Sandstrom explained that we recognize the risk inherent in the contract but part of risk management is controlling our own expectations and processes.
Mark Molesworth commented on the need for visibility into the process as the project. Pat Forster noted the increased risk of mitigation through retainage and the ability to opt out after Phase 0. He noted the lack of a termination for convenience clause and suggested that the court pursue adding that clause. Sally Holewa explained that Tyler has rejected termination for convenience as an exclusive right of the state, nor is the court willing to enter into a mutual termination for convenience clause that would allow Tyler to walk away from the contract without cause.
Judge Medd moved/Donna Wunderlich seconded that the committee recommend the Supreme Court proceed with the project under the contract that has been negotiated, subject to any minor changes that may be necessary to finalize the contract. Motion carried with Judge Herauf and Judge Narum voting "no" to the recommendation.
Approval of Minutes
Minutes from September 26, 2008 were reviewed. Becky Absey moved/Rita Fischer seconded that the minutes be approved. Motion carried.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
The next meeting will be on December 12, 2008, at 9:30 a.m. in the Supreme Court Front Conference Room.