320 likes | 473 Vues
Develop new models of how things work. Reinvent service delivery from the customer perspective. International City/County Management Association, 2001 September 23, 2001. What is the E-Gov Alliance?. A partnership between King County cities to: Improve service delivery
E N D
Develop new models of how things work. Reinvent service delivery from the customer perspective. International City/County Management Association, 2001 September 23, 2001
What is the E-Gov Alliance? A partnership between King County cities to: • Improve service delivery • Enhance relationships between government and constituents • Learn and grow together The Vision
What are our objectives? • Convenient service delivery • Expansion of available resources • Stronger influence over vendors • Internal efficiencies The Vision
Why do we care? Because they’re asking for it!!
Bellevue Survey Results Permitting Clients
How was the Alliance formed? • King Co. City Manager’s Group • Joint Strategic Planning Process • Joint Sessions/Individual Planning • Community/Technology Self-Assessments • Press Release & URL Getting Started
Structure for Strategic Planning 20 Participating Cities w/MRSC Innovation Groups E-Gov Forum E-Gov Alliance Coordinating Committee 13 Managers and IT Directors IG Staff & Local Consultant 6 month timeline E-Gov Alliance Co-Chairs CM & IT Director Getting Started
Accomplishments to Date • City E-Gov Strategic Plans • Partnerships - Microsoft, Washington State DIS • Increased vendor purchasing power • Inter-agency collaboration Getting Started
Service Portal for King County Cities The Next Step in our Evolution: Service Portal for King County Cities • Citizen Centric • Single gateway • On-line services • Links to City sites and applications Getting Started
The Portal – Regional Pilot Projects • Shell Portal Design – City of Bellevue • ePermits Transactions – 4 cities • Parks & Recreation Class Registrations – 8 cities The Technology
Alliance Guiding Principles • Cost sharing is equitable • Risk is shared • Mission is not diluted • Roles & responsibilities are clearly defined • Clear & direct benefit to participants • Intellectual property is protected • Cities retain control and flexibility Getting Started
Technology Guiding Principles • Don’t reinvent the wheel • Build on existing infrastructure investments • Leverage economies of scale The Technology
Regional Portal Strategy User Interface Transaction Interface ASP Interface ASP Interface ASP Interface One “middleware”, one password, one user-name, one banking agreement Middle Layer Vendor Proprietary, User name, Password, Banking Vendor Proprietary, User name, Password, Banking Vendor Proprietary, User name, Password, Banking Permit Application Parks/Rec. Application Utilities Application Each City Backend The Technology
Even though it’s a work in progress, What does it look like……? How will it work……? How are we organized……?
Customer Access Options Access Avenues The Technology
Web Transaction Process - E-Permits E-GovInfrastructure The Technology
ePermits Project Team The Organization
Governance Structure • Interlocal Agreement • 3 Tiers of Participation • Cost Allocation • Maximum flexibility The Governance
City Participation The Governance
City Participation The Governance
Executive Board CEO’s, CAO’s Accept new Principals Policies & budget Negotiate partnerships Operations Forum Operational staff Technical advice Operational forums Opportunity to join new projects Governing Bodies The Governance
Initial Portal Cost - 5 years • $1.7 million • 700,000 population = $2.50/person • $.50/person/year Add • Individual City Costs • Future initiative costs The Financing
Administrative support Insurance Legal Basic overhead Back-end integration Merchant account fees Credit Card Fees Business process - staff time Cost E-Gov Alliance Cost City Cost The Financing
What’s next? • Portal goes “live” • First Executive Board meeting • Adopt & sign agreement • Hire Alliance Director The Outcomes
Implications for Participating Cities • Centralized transaction infrastructure • Negotiate open access to proprietary databases • Shared funding, risks and decision • Best practices linked to regional consistency • Flexibility and creativity will ensure success The Outcomes
Longer Term Implications • Increased expectations and participation • Further exploration of hosting and sharing applications • Blurring of jurisdictional boundaries • Pressure to bring consistency and convenience to more complex services The Outcomes