LA dreams or LA nightmare?

In 2009, the City of Los Angeles awarded Google a $7.2-million contract to provide email for its 30,000 employees, infuriating Microsoft in the process and chalking up a significant win for Google in the public sector. But that victory is turning into something of a headache for both Google and its partner CSC.

An internal memo obtained by advocacy group Consumer Watchdog reveals that the two firms missed deadlines to solve security concerns that had caused the LA Police Department (LAPD) to halt its move onto the Cloud-based system. The LAPD has moved around 1,900 users who had migrated to Google's new email system back to the old GroupWise platform and put a planned migration of 4,000 more users to the new system on hold.

One senior LA official has gone as far as to accuse the suppliers of misrepresentation. On 10th December 2010, a strongly worded Notice of Deficiencies was sent to to David Beach, senior principal contract administrator at CSC, by LA city technology chief Randi Levin. Levin claimed:

“CSC and Google's behavior goes beyond a mere failure to communicate in a timely manner and instead, on several occasions, has risen to the level of misrepresentation. These failures are wholly unacceptable to the city of Los Angeles.”

Levin's memo said that Google and CSC had "repeatedly committed" to meeting certain deadlines for implementing both the LAPD's security requirements and the FBI's requirement that the Google Apps for Government system be compliant with its Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) standards. She added that CSC indicated that it might be necessary to ask "the DOJ and FBI to amend or reinterpret the current CJIS policy”, noting:

“CSC has indicated that it expects the 'LAPD to make policy and operational changes' and to 'sponsor' CSC and Google in conversations with the FBI. These new demands made by CSC and Google are unacceptable.”

The memo also raised concerns about the prospect that “the failure to meet all security requirements also negatively impacted the productivity of several other City Department”, citing the Fire department's Arson Investigation outfit and part of the Office of Public Safety. Levin noted:

“As these City departments were migrated by CSC to Google Apps for Government prior to CSC/Google's admission that all security requirements were not met, the City also reserves the right to require CSC/Google to assist in the migration back to Novell Groupwise of those City departments affected by these security failures. ”

Other LA City voices are joining the babble around the contract. City Controller Wendy Greuel sent the city technology agency a letter asking it to explain the circumstances leading to the failed deliverables, while City Councilman Bernard Parks commented:

“The fundamental issue is the security element for the police, the city attorney and general services, which have not been completed...I think we've given them more than enough time.”

LA City Council now appears to be at least contemplating the prospect of legal action with the revelation that the City's Budget Committee held a closed doors session earlier this month to discuss the contract and consult with city attorneys.

For its part CSC told US media:

“So far, LAPD employees have not migrated to Google Apps because of necessary, additional security requirements that the department requires to work within the larger U.S. law enforcement community. These new requirements were not included in CSC's contract with the City and were not specified in the City's RFP for this project. As the LAPD and the City have brought new requirements to CSC, we have developed a process with the City to identify new requirements, prioritize them, and develop a schedule to deliver them to the City. Many of these new features have been incorporated at no additional cost to the City. In accordance with our process, CSC and Google will provide the City with a timeline for developing and incorporating these new security requirements. We recognize the importance of the security requirements, and CSC is working with the City to reach a solution to completing them. In the case of these and other new requirements, CSC will proactively work with the City to follow the change control process and find the right solutions to support our contract obligations. CSC, however, cannot be held accountable for requirements that were not established by the City in its RFP or by contract, or for additional requirements not introduced through the City’s change-control processes established in the contract between CSC and the City.”

Some 36 out of 40 LA City departments have so far been successfully migrated to Google Apps and 16,000 City employees are using the new Cloud-based system. But in the wake of last week's Google security certification dispute, Consumer Watchdog has called on the US federal government to suspend any contracts with Google. John M. Simpson, director of the nonpartisan, nonprofit public interest group's Privacy Project, said:

“Apparently Google makes whatever statements are necessary to win a contract and then worries about living up to its promises later. This sort of hype is all too common with advertising companies and Google is one -- but it cannot be allowed for a company responsible for the security of government information. ”

LA dreams or LA nightmare?

tags for LA dreams or LA nightmare?

Tags

Now on techcloud 9

Commenting on the cloud

Twitter feed

Tag cloud