The governor’s spending plan calls for big information technology upgrades for some state departments — upgrades that many agree are overdue. But the $30 million price tag proposed to come out of the capital bill is ruffling some feathers over the source of money.
At a meeting of the House Corrections and Institutions Committee on Tuesday, James Reardon, commissioner of the Department of Finance and Management, defended the request while calling for a new system for funding the state’s IT investments.
The governor’s Capital Construction Proposal for FY 2016 and 2017 includes $30.9 million toward improvements in the state’s IT systems.
This year, Reardon is asking legislators for $14.7 million to cover costs of a variety of tasks, including updating the state’s financial application to “provide framework for accounting and reporting for capital projects,” and implementing an electronic system to manage bid solicitations and contracts.
In some parts of state government, technology is decades old, unwieldy, and difficult to manage. As Reardon pointed out, the danger with such outdated programs is not only that they might fail — if they do, there are not a lot of people trained to help fix them.
The Agency of Human Services, Reardon relayed, utilizes an access system that is more than 30 years old.
Reardon cautioned legislators that, although he would not say that any of the projects “can’t be deferred,” the investments are worthwhile and require attention soon.
“My frustrating thing over the years is that everything is about providing programs and services, and infrastructure is not something that gets a lot of attention because it’s not politically appealing,” Reardon said. “Our infrastructure doesn’t get the attention until it falls apart.”
Reardon conceded that his asking price seemed steep at a time when the state is tightening its belt across the system.
In fact, he would rather not be making a case to the House Corrections and Institutions Committee for funds through the capital budget at all, he said. He believes IT projects should move away from being funded by one-off investments to a long-standing appropriation through the operating budget.
In an effort to move away from being funded through the capital fund, Reardon has steered his department away from relying on one-time money.
Reardon’s sentiments were largely echoed by committee members, who were up front about their concern for where they will be able to find the money for the suggested IT improvements.
“When I was on the other side of state government, one of the reasons I decided to run is because of the unfunded mandates,” said Rep. Susan Davis, P-West Topsham, a former state employee. “We would like to see a line item dedicated to information technology.”
“The only thing I want to do is in the end, as dire as our fiscal situation may be, not lose sight of making at least some investment that will allow us to move forward.”
