Last summer the state broke ground on the new Department of Information Services data center. The project will cost upwards of $255 million and consolidate the state government's I.T. infrastructure and its 32 current data centers. But some legislators are concerned that such a large project isn't necessarily the best way to go. Why? Because of the emergence of cloud computing. While not the answer to every computing or data center need, the proliferation of data centers run by companies such as Google, Microsoft and Amazon (among many others) are providing more computing power bang for your buck.

Essentially, for those of us old enough to remember (or who like to read history books on this sort of thing), this is a return to some of the original computing models from the pre-internet days -- e.g. "dummy terminals." A mainframe computer would supply the bulk of computing pow! er and remote terminals spread around the office (or in this case, the state) could allow the user to tap into the mainframe's computing power. Chances are you're currently relying on cloud computing and don't even know it (examples include Hotmail, Gmail, Facebook, Office Live, Google docs, Flickr, etc.).

So, what do these two issues have to do with each other? Several legislators believe that, especially given the state's budget deficit, outsourcing computing power via the cloud computing platform would help save the state money. The Department of Information Services could offload some of the staff and computing power to one of the ma! ny cloud computing partners.

HB 3080, introduced last week, would help implement a plan to

"...consolidat[e] the operational functions of information technology, including servers and networks, for state government within the department of information services and to consider outsourcing to the private sector a significant portion of information technology services where feasible and cost-effective."

Section 10 contains similar language that the state may 

"...contract with one or more authorized preferred providers to provide certain information technology functions and services for state government that are currently provided by the department of information services or state agencies for a period of up to ten years...[and] determine which information technology functions and services would be the most feasible and cost-effective to contract for with the private ! sector."

This proposal isn't a huge surprise, given one of the co-sponsor's reservations over the DIS project. But the bottom line is a good one. If the private sector can provide the same result or better for a smaller price tag (and there are security provisions written in the bill), then why not engage in competitive contracting? This angle is being used elsewhere in talks about lessening the budget deficit.