VIRGINIA INFORMATION PROVIDERS NETWORK AUTHORITY - Minutes
Board of Directors
Washington Building
1100 Bank Street, Richmond, Virginia

Ms. Woodward called the meeting to order at 1:10 p.m.

Approval of Minutes of January 28, 1999 Meeting
Mr. Holcomb moved to adopt the minutes from the January 28th meeting. Mr. Houlihan moved to make changes before adopting the minutes. In the second paragraph under Discussion of Token Based Authentication, he said the total price of the tokens should be $97,150. He suggested that in the second paragraph of the Network Manager's Report, we amend the first sentence to read "Mr. Houlihan reported on recent major purchases or pending purchases." He also asked that we remove the word "the" in the email address in the second paragraph after the Executive Session, to read "board@vipnet.org."

Ms. Woodward asked that we change the Executive Session entry to read, "There was no public comment" Mr. Westrick asked that in the second paragraph of the Report on Litigation section, we should change the first sentence to read, "Mr. Westrick said he was unable to confirm the filing of the nonsuit." Mr. Holcomb amended his motion to adopt the minutes with the suggested changes. The motion was seconded and approved by the Authority.

Personnel Committee Report
There was some discussion of the status of the Personnel Committee. Ms. Woodward reminded the Authority that the Committee has a proposal and estimated cost structure to create two full time staff members, an Executive Director and an Administrative Director. She said the Committee will be examining regulations that might be applicable to this decision, and that prior to the beginning of the fiscal year she expects to have a concrete proposal before the Authority on the hiring of staff.

Report on Technology's Secretary's Customer Summit
Mr. Simonoff reported that agency heads have been in the midst of strategic planning sessions looking at opportunities and how to pursue them. Representatives from all state agencies and institutions were invited to a Customer Summit, where a list of five opportunity areas were distributed. Participants were asked to indicate what their priorities were in terms of what topics they wanted to participate in workshops on. This revealed that by a large margin the Internet and Use of the Web were top priorities. Mr. Simonoff said when the results of this questionnaire came in, we will have early indication of interests and will help us hone our planned survey.

Consideration of the Proposed Business Plan
Ms. Woodward said the rationale for the Business Plan is as a guide for where we are going each year, what the plan for VIPNet is in the coming year, and what the financial picture is. She said that we are required to show that we are governing the development of this network and to show our financial footing. There was some discussion of the need to incorporate the work from the Planning Sessions into the Business Plan, which is a living document that can be reviewed and adjusted.

The Authority agreed that they would suggest policy changes to the Business Plan. Mr. Thomas moved that on page nine, last paragraph, first sentence, we strike everything from the first comma to the end of the sentence, joining the first and second sentences. This changes the sentence to read: "For those agencies that already have a Web presence, the Network also can partner with those agencies to develop more sophisticated interactive and electronic commerce applications that may be beyond the capabilities of an agency's resources." The motion was seconded and approved.

Mr. Holcomb moved that on page nine, second full paragraph, under point one, to add the words "Governor's and" before "the General Assembly's." This now reads: "(1) develop additional Web-based Virginia government information resources and services by continuing to form partnerships with Commonwealth agencies and pursuing the Governor's and the General Assembly's technology initiatives." The motion was seconded and approved. He also moved that on page eleven, under "Relationship with the General Assembly" in the second sentence, to substitute the words "the Authority" for "the Network Manager." This now reads: "The Authority will need to work closely with the Joint Commission on Technology and Science..." The motion was seconded and approved. He next moved to add the phrase "For promoting the viability of the Network" to page twelve, fourth paragraph, at the beginning of the sentence. This changes the sentence to read: "For promoting the viability of the Network, and to develop those association alliances, the marketing staff plans the following activities:" The motion was seconded and approved.

Mr. Holcomb next moved to include on page thirteen, in the fourth bullet, a reference to Virginia Independent Automotive Dealers Association and Washington Area New Car Dealers Association, and in the seventh bullet to add the Commissioners of Revenue, Sheriff's, and Chiefs of Police Associations. The motion was seconded and approved.

Mr. Thomas moved to strike on page twenty-two, under "Projected Expenses", the second to last paragraph and the next paragraph, except for the last sentence. The last two sentences of the Projected Expenses section now read: "Based on the current salary structure and benefit packages for technology personnel in the Richmond area, we are projecting that our personnel expenses for the next 16 months will be approximately $2,100,000. By approaching the partnership from a win-win perspective in which the Network Manager prospers..."The motion was seconded and approved.

Ms. Woodward moved to include in the Business Plan a statement making clear that the document is modifiable at any time under action by the Authority. The motion was seconded and approved.

Mr. Holcomb moved to ask the Authority to forward any editorial changes to Mr. Marcus, and that any conflicts are to be resolved by the Chair, and further moved to approve the Business Plan with editorial changes to be incorporated and re-approved at the next meeting. The motion was seconded and approved.

Consideration of the Annual Report
The Authority had some discussion of the Annual Report. Mr. Moseley suggested that, for the benefit of the public, where the Annual Report covers the Authority it should list the names of the members, much like it lists the staff of the Network.

Mr. Holcomb suggested that on page three, last paragraph, we should note that the Authority is appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the General Assembly, and he also urged the inclusion of financial spreadsheets in the Annual Report.

Mr. Holcomb moved to approve the Report with the edits, and to transmit the Report to the Governor and the General Assembly. The motion was seconded and approved.

Mr. Holcomb moved to approve the Electoral Board Agreement. The motion was seconded. Mr. Simonoff suggested approving the Electoral Board Agreement subject to changes in standard wording as a modification of Mr. Holcomb's motion. The motion was seconded and approved.

The Authority agreed to delay discussion of the Privacy Statement until a later date.

Discussion of Proposed Survey
Dr. Tom Guterbock, of the University of Virginia's Center for Strategic Research spoke on the proposed survey for the Authority. He presented his preliminary specifications for his two proposed surveys, a Producer Scan survey, and a Consumer Survey. He said he was hoping to get a sense of the design the Authority is looking for before he developed a budget, and was looking for feedback from the Authority.

He said from the results of the Producer Scan, he hoped to give the Authority profiles of individual agency needs and issues. There was some discussion of setting priority levels and of focusing on the business needs of agencies versus technology needs. Discussion also focused on finding the best way to identify customers.

He said the Consumer Scan will focus on Virginia residents who have access to the Internet. This survey should reveal information regarding where the citizen accesses the Web, how they use the Web in general, how they use government Web sites, and their awareness of VIPNet. Open ended questions should reveal any desired transactions or information citizens would like to access from state agencies on the Web.

Dr. Guterbock said he expected to have the Provider Scan underway by late spring or early summer, and that the ownership of the survey questions would not be an issue associated with any contract between the Center for Survey Research and the Authority.

Public Comment Period
There was no public comment.

The meeting ended at 4:15 p.m.

Affiliation