HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 06021998 - C123 C.123
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA
Adapted this Order on Tune 2s, 1928- by the following votes
AYES: Supervisors Uilkema, Gerber, DeSaulnier, Canciamilla, Rogers
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
SUBJECT: GRAND JURY REPORT NO. 9804
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the 1997--98 Contra Crista
Grand Jury Report No. 9804, "The Year 2000," is REFERRED to the County
Administrator.
I hereby certify that this is a true
and correct copy of an action taken and
entered on the minutes of the Board of
Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: June 2,_3998__
PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk of the Board
of supervisors and County Administrator
By ,Deputy
cc: CAO
Grand Jury
A REPORT BY
THE 1997-98 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY GRAND JURY
1020 Ward Street
Martinez, California 94553
Report No. 9804
THE YEAR 2000
Ready or Not-Here It Comes!
APPROVED BY THE GRAND JURY:
JOHN M. HUNT
GRAND JURY FOREMAN
ACCEPTED FOR FILING:
Dater
JOHN VAN DE POEL
OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
Section 933.(Cl & 933.05 California Government Code
Section 933. Comments !2nd Reports on Section 933.05 Response to Grand Jury
Grond Jury Recommendations Recol7 mend.ations- Content
(C) No later than 90 days after the Rego -enb: Persongj.6122earance by
grand jury submits a final report on the R l2onding Pgdrty• Grand Jury ftnort to
operation of any public agency subject to Affectqd A92ncy.
its reviewing authority,the governing (a) For purposes of subdivision (c) of
body of the public agency shall comment Section 933,as to each grand jury finding,
to the presiding judge of the superior court the responding person or entity shall
on the findings and recommendations indicate one of the following,
pertaining to matters under the control of (1)The respondent agrees with the finding,
the governing body, and every elective (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or
county officer or agency head for which partially with the finding, in which case the
the grand jury has responsibility pursuant response shall specify the portion of the
to Section 914.1 shall comment within 60 finding that is disputed and shall include
days to the presiding judge of the superior an explanation of the reasons therefor.
court,with can information copy sent to the -(B) For purposes of subdivision (c) of
board of supervisors,on the findings and section 933,as to each grand jury
recommendations pertaining to matters recommendation,the responding person
under the control of that county officer or or entity shall report on of the following
agency head and any agency or actions;
agencies which that officer or agency (1) The recommendation has been
head supervises or controls, in the findings implemented,with a summary regarding
and recommendations,All such comments the implemented action.
and reports shall forthwith be submitted to (2)The recommendation has not yet been
the presiding judge of the superior court implemented, but will be Implemented In
who impaneled the grand jury. A copy of the future,with a timeframe for
all responses to grand jury reports shall be Implementation.
placed on file with the clerk of the public (3)The recommendation requires further
agency and the office of the county clerk, analysis,with and explanation of the
or the mayor when applicable, and shall scope and parameters of an analysis or
remain on file in those offices,one copy study,and a timeframe for the matter to
shall be placed on file with the applicable be prepared for discussion by the officer
grand jury final report by,and in the or director of the agency or department
control of the currently Impaneled grand being investigated or reviewed,including
jury,where It shall be maintained for a the governing body of the public agency
minimum of five years. Leg.H.1961 ch. when applicable.This timeframe shall not
1284, 1963 ch. 674, 1974 chs.393,1396, 1977 exceed six months from the date of
chs. 107, 187, 1980 ch.543, 1981 ch.203, publication of the grand jury report.
1982 ch. 1408 sec. 5, 1985 ch. 221 sec.1, eff. (4) The recommendation will not be
7/12/85 ch 690 sec. 1, 1988 ch. 1297,1997 implemented because It is not warranted
ch.443 or is not reasonable,with an explanation
therefor.
The foregoing are portions of Section 933, the responding party is responsible for
compliance with all of the requirements.
Grand Jury Report No.9804
THE YEAR 2000
Ready or Not- Rere It Comes !
BACKG OOD
"The Year 2000 issue is global, affecting businesses as well as
governments--including Contra Costa County. The basic problem is that
software running on many computers uses only the last two digits to
designate the year. When computers were a new technology and disk
storage space was expensive, programmers designed systems to assume the
century was 1900. If not reprogrammed to read all four digits of the year,
systems may either shut down in confusion or,perhaps worse, may
calculate and produce erroneous outcomes."
This quotation was in the report by KPMG Peat Marwick, LLP, made to the Contra
Costa County Board of Supervisors on January 31, 1997.
FINDINGS
1. Computers make millions of calculations that rely upon dates stored in software
programs. Failure may occur as these systems attempt to read dates after December 31,
1994. Dates used to calculate eligibility and expiration dates,installments, entitlements,
interest, penalties, schedules, court sentences, debt management, pension benefits, may be
vulnerable to the Year 2000 conversion.problem.
2. In addition to Year 2000 date issues within computer systems, embedded chip
controllers must be Year 2000 compliant. Embedded chip technology controls such
functions as building security, lighting, heating, air conditioning, and traffic signals.
3. The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors directed the Department of
Information Technology to develop and implement a plan to ensure Contra Costa
County's main computer system be Year 2000 compliant.
4. In response,the Department of Information Technology developed"The Information
Technology Strategy"plan presented to the Board of Supervisors on August 6, 1996. As
of April 1998, all of the County's central computer systems are in the testing and
implementation phase and will be Year 2000 ready by December 1998,
5. The County also has computer applications and Local Area Network(LAN)based
systems that may not integrate with the County's main system.
"04-- 1
6. In addition to the County's main system, there are at least 66 independent systems
exchanging information with the main system. There is no tracking method to beep the
County advised as to the status of these independent systems and their compliance with
the Year 2000 challenge.
7. Some special districts and cities have computer applications that exchange
information with the County's main computer system.
8. Federal, state and local governments, as well as private entities such as banks and
vendors, exchange data with the County's main computer system.
9. Date information is embedded in the lines of code,and programmers must perform
line-by-line modifications to add four-digit capabilities.
10. Industry estimates the actual programming to become Year 2000 compliant will
represent only 10 to 20 percent of the total effort. After modification of codes,testing of
each system ensures that it is Year 2000 ready. The testing component will consume 60
to 70 percent of available resources.
11. Entities that interface with the County computer system state that they are aware of
the Year 2000 problem and are working to be in compliance. Some completion dates are
as late as July 1999.
12. Some agencies indicate they are dependent on their vendors to provide solutions
for the Year 2000 problem.
CONCLUSIONS
1. The County has made extensive efforts to resolve the Year 2000 date challenge.
2. External interfaces must be constructed to protect the main computer programs
from receiving tainted information to ensure a smooth transition into the 21st century.
3. Outside computer systems may create problems for the County's main system.
4. County experts anticipate but cannot identify specific problems created by non-
compliant
oncompliant individual computer applications.
5. No County office has the responsibility to coordinate the Year 2000 conversion with
outside entities interfacing with County systems.
6. General Services Department has the responsibility to accomplish the Year 2000
conversion with embedded chip technology.
9904- 2
RECOMMENDATIONS
The 1997-98 Contra Costa County Grand ,fury recommends that:
A. The County verify completion of the main computer system conversion.
B. The County ensure that all County individual and LAN--based applications
are compatible with the main system at Year 2000.
C. The County initiate a tracking system to inform the Board of Supervisors of
the status of outside entities'compatibility with the County's system.
D. The County implement a certification process that allows outside user units to
confirm compatibility with the County's main system.
E. The County ensure that hardware operated by embedded chip technology is
capable of operating in the Year 2000.
F. The County ensure that all contracts for the purchase of computer related
and electronic date sensitive devices utilize contract language requiring Year 2000
compliance.
9904- 3