INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES
October 3, 2001
I. Welcome and Introductions
§ Members Present: Scotty Brookie, Mark Cianca, Pat LeCuyer, Larry Merkley, Bob White, Kathleen Dettman, Terry Schalk, Bill Hyder, Bruce Cooperstein, Charlie McDowell.
§ Staff Present: Max Ritchie, Fana O’Halloran
II. Chair Announcements
§ An undergraduate student representative is needed for the committee. Larry has asked for suggestions or recommendations from committee members.
§
UC is looking
for a new Human Resources system. An
outside consulting firm has advised that this project may cost $80 million
dollars. The HR system at UCSC is not a
priority at this point, but if the state were to fund the project the group
would support it.
§
Over the summer
the UC was audited with short notice to report all IT spending dating back to
1987. Though it was difficult to report
all IT expenses, a response was provided in that time frame.
III. Status Report
§
AIS Project-
The AIS Executive Committee has not formally met yet. During the end of July and the beginning of August, consultants
were brought in to work on a comprehensive draft implementation plan for the
project. This should be finished by mid
October, at which point Francisco Hernandez will solicit feedback. Ideally, a working test module will be
online in June 2002, with full implementation by Fall 2003. Examples of working AIS programs can be
found at Johns Hopkins University and University of Arizona.
§
The state is
currently having budget problems, and UC has had many initiatives cut back this
year. At this point, no one is sure of
the implications.
IV. ITC’s agenda for 2001-2002 -
Chair Merkley circulated an email asking
committee members to prioritize various issues that the group will discuss this
year. High priority items were deemed
to be ‘essential to achieve campus goals’.
Medium priority: ‘important to the campus, but could be dealt with
later’. Low priority: ‘Interesting
idea, we'll get to it if we have time’.
High priority items included:
§
Policies
§
Security
§
Email
§
Oversight
§
Instructional
Support
Medium priority items included:
§
Web presence
§
ECP
§
Network rates
§
Data warehouse
§
FIS
Medium priority items will be discussed at
the next meeting. There were no low priority items.
High priority items discussed were:
VI. Next Meeting: Thursday, October 25, 2001, 10:00-12:00, McHenry Library, Room 481