• octaxpayer

    Interesting how the IT Management, which really means CEO/IT, Project management office, IT director and the CIO Christina K. who at the time was responsible to ensure the contract met the County requirements is the same people now blaming the vendors. A RFP went out all the design requirements
    were submitted. Other agencies including CEO/IT lower management warned the IT director and PMO office that the details were not thought out properly and as usual the facts distorted and BOS relying on these County officials to do the right thing have failed again. Why do you let these same management team keep lying and making bad decisions on tax payer dollars? Make them accountable.

  • talkinghead

    Also the contract is actually for 3 years. Years 4 and 5 are at the discretion of the BoS to extend the contract with Xerox/Atos.

  • Philmore

    Am I the only one STUNNED that an Employee Union Rep has to be the one (and THANK YOU for doing so!) to expose contract DEFECTS that apparently ESCAPED the notice of those NEGOTIATING the contract, and those VOTING on it? Dare I even ASK if PENALTIES or REMEDIES for performance shortfall that now “must be negotiated” exist in the ORIGINAL CONTRACT? If NOT, WHAT was the “performance ” rating given to the 2 oblivious groups above? Are they still employed? Is a working sense of SMELL an impediment to living in OC?

  • talkinghead

    Man if you only knew how bad it is. And don’t forget, Atos owns the contract now.

  • Paul Lucas

    Secrecy is not transparency