1. International City/County Management Association, 2001 September 23, 2001 Develop new models of how things work. Reinvent service delivery from the customer perspective.

2. What is the E-Gov Alliance? A partnership between King County cities to: Improve service delivery Enhance relationships between government and constituents Learn and grow together The Vision

3. What are our objectives? Convenient service delivery Expansion of available resources Stronger influence over vendors Internal efficiencies The Vision

4. Why do we care? Because they’re asking for it!!

5. Bellevue Survey Results

6. Permitting Clients

7. Bellevue Survey Results

8. Kirkland Survey Results

9. How was the Alliance formed? King Co. City Manager’s Group Joint Strategic Planning Process Joint Sessions/Individual Planning Community/Technology Self-Assessments Press Release & URL Getting Started

10. 6 month timeline Structure for Strategic Planning Innovation Groups E-Gov Forum 20 Participating Cities w/MRSC E-Gov Alliance Coordinating Committee 13 Managers and IT Directors IG Staff & Local Consultant E-Gov Alliance Co-Chairs CM & IT Director Getting Started

11. Accomplishments to Date City E-Gov Strategic Plans Partnerships - Microsoft, Washington State DIS Increased vendor purchasing power Inter-agency collaboration Getting Started

12. Service Portal for King County Cities Citizen Centric ingle Single gateway services On-line services Links Links to City sites and applications Service Portal for King County Cities The Next Step in our Evolution: Getting Started

13. The Portal – Regional Pilot Projects Shell Portal Design – City of Bellevue ePermits Transactions – 4 cities Parks & Recreation Class Registrations – 8 cities The Technology

14. Alliance Guiding Principles Cost sharing is equitable Risk is shared Mission is not diluted Roles & responsibilities are clearly defined Clear & direct benefit to participants Intellectual property is protected Cities retain control and flexibility Getting Started

15. Technology Guiding Principles Don’t reinvent the wheel Build on existing infrastructure investments Leverage economies of scale The Technology

16. ASP Interface Regional Portal Strategy Permit Application Each City Backend Middle Layer Transaction Interface Vendor Proprietary, User name, Password, Banking Vendor Proprietary, User name, Password, Banking Vendor Proprietary, User name, Password, Banking Parks/Rec. Application Utilities Application User Interface One “middleware”, one password, one user-name, one banking agreement The Technology

17. What does it look like……? Even though it’s a work in progress, How are we organized……? How will it work……?

18. The Technology

20. Customer Access Options Access Avenues The Technology

21. Web Transaction Process - E-Permits E-Gov Infrastructure The Technology

22. ePermits Project Team The Organization

23. Governance Structure Interlocal Agreement 3 Tiers of Participation Cost Allocation Maximum flexibility The Governance

24. City Participation The Governance

25. City Participation The Governance

26. Governing Bodies Executive Board CEO’s, CAO’s Accept new Principals Policies & budget Negotiate partnerships Operations Forum Operational staff Technical advice Operational forums Opportunity to join new projects The Governance

27. Initial Portal Cost - 5 years $1.7 million 700,000 population = $2.50/person $.50/person/year Individual City Costs Future initiative costs Add The Financing

28. Cost Administrative support Insurance Legal Basic overhead Back-end integration Merchant account fees Credit Card Fees Business process - staff time E-Gov Alliance CostCity Cost The Financing

29. What’s next? Portal goes “live” First Executive Board meeting Adopt & sign agreement Hire Alliance Director The Outcomes

30. Implications for Participating Cities Centralized transaction infrastructure Negotiate open access to proprietary databases Shared funding, risks and decision Best practices linked to regional consistency Flexibility and creativity will ensure success The Outcomes

31. Longer Term Implications Increased expectations and participation Further exploration of hosting and sharing applications Blurring of jurisdictional boundaries Pressure to bring consistency and convenience to more complex services The Outcomes

32. Questions?