Approved:       March 23, 2007          

Date

MINUTES OF THE HOUSE GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY AND TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE

The meeting was called to order by Chairman Jim Morrison at 3:40 P.M. on March 12, 2007, in Room 526-S of the Capitol.

All members were present except Representatives Holland, Siegfreid, and Frownfelter, all of whom were excused.

Committee staff present:

Mary Galligan, Kansas Legislative Research

Tatiana Lin, Kansas Legislative Research

Renae Jefferies, Office of Revisor of Statutes

Gary Deeter, Committee Assistant

Conferees appearing before the committee:

Hal Gardner, Executive Director, KAN-Ed Network

Scott Shoemaker, Senior Architect, Calence Consultants

            John Casebeer, Senior Architect, Calence Consultants (by telephone conference) 

Others attending:

See attached list.

The Chair introduced Hal Gardner, Executive Director, KAN-Ed Network, who gave brief comments on issues currently under consideration by the legislature, noted variance among legislators regarding the mission of KAN-Ed, and introduced the Calence network design team who worked with KANWIN (Kansas Wide-Area Network), KANREN (Kansas Research and Education Network), and KAN-Ed to provide a feasibility study for a proposal to consolidate the three networks (Attachment 1). Responding to the Chairman’s question, Mr. Gardner said KAN-Ed’s current excess capacity was a result of initial negotiations with carriers, who provided a package of excess bandwidth for nearly the same price as a smaller package.

Scott Shoemaker and John Casebeer (the latter by conference bridge connection), both Senior Architects, Network Strategy and Infrastructure, Calence, reviewed the executive summary of the network consolidation feasibility study (Attachment 2). Mr. Shoemaker summarized the findings by saying that the three networks cannot effectively be joined into a single network, although some areas of collaboration and consolidation could provide benefits and reduce costs. He noted that funding models were not included in the study.

Giving more details, Mr. Shoemaker said the three networks have distinguishing intra-network characteristics, different governance structures, variant business models, separate funding patterns, and multiple backbone configurations, all of which preclude comprehensive consolidation, although each provides valuable service to constituents in an efficient manner. He identified areas of similarity, but commented that issues of security, availability, adaptability, and standardization create daunting problems for consolidation. He traced several recommendations regarding backbone migration, QoS (Quality of Service) design standards, and realignment, outlining phases for accomplishing the recommendations, including cost estimates.

Mr. Shoemaker and Mr. Casebeer, with assistance from audience members, responded to numerous questions from members:

•          KANREN has peering points with KAN-Ed.

•          From an engineering standpoint, KAN-Ed has many open-ended bandwidth requirements, in part through negotiating with multiple carriers.

•          Interactive video was originally envisioned for classroom use; however, other applications are now using it–hospitals and libraries--with the future possibility of town-hall meetings.

•          The study did not include capacity evaluations; the present networks have no impediments for adapting to future requirements.

•          The variation in standards used by KAN-Ed is necessary to accommodate various user groups. Calence recommends developing tighter standards and more uniformity. However, further analysis is needed to quantify standardization.

•          The 2006 KAN-Ed Oversight Committee report (Attachment 3) was the launching point for the Calence study.

•          KANREN is not mentioned as often in the study because the network is more tightly structured and the study identified fewer cost savings.

•          Doug Haecock, KANREN Board Member, replied that most KANREN members are also KAN-Ed members. (Committee members were later provided with Attachment 4, which lists 2006 KAN-Ed members.)

•          The study at a high level recommended possible staff realignment at the operations center.

•          Mr. Gardner responded to a question that 32 libraries are connected to KAN-Ed and that presently KAN-Ed is responding to school districts and hospitals as they express a need for further services.

•          Jerry Huff, Business Director, KAN-Ed, said connectivity will not solve QoS; additional bandwidth will, especially for video.

A member commented that KAN-Ed appears to be wasting resources, being over-engineered with minimal results, and seems to be operating parallel to KANREN; he recommended merging KAN-Ed and KANREN networks. Another member responded that QoS is key for classroom use, and merging video and data on the same network would destroy effective interactive learning. Members requested the map provided by the 2006 report (Attachment 5).

Staff also provided for members a study of private data networks (Attachment 6) and an overview of KAN-Ed (Attachment 7).

The meeting was adjourned at 5:14 p.m. The next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, March 13, 2007.