Diocese of Newark Diocesan Council Technology Committee Meeting Minutes Saturday, February 14, 1998 Present: John Rollins (chairing for Steve), Jan Paxton, Johanna Young, Ken Boccino, Dave Jones, Chris Neglia, Scott Bennett Regrets from: Louie Crew, Steve Boston, Ray Anderson, Dale Gruner, Wayne Juneau Introduction of new members - Chris Neglia ( Yes, he is related to Fr. Dwight Neglia, Rector, St. Agnes, Little Falls) Schedule of next meetings: March 14 workshop, Christ Church, Pompton May 9, St. Peter's, Morristown, 10 AM - Ken will schedule us in June 6, Special Convention - Tech Committee Presence has been requested, help needed because some of this Committee will be occupied as deputies. Convention Revisited - Our presence - we got lots of praises from Bishops and other folks - Steve has already shared his letter. We need to plan to do the presentation equipment work again - full time next year. Ann Wrede wants us to project a seating chart! The resolutions committee needs to have a liaison to the Tech folks putting the changes up - we need some extra preparation and coordination. It would be really great if we could be sited up in the front row of tables with the assistant secretaries! The display might be easier in a wysiwyg program instead of Netscape, so we could edit on screen. The projectors were fine - Dave could see them from the back Scott is to be commended! Steve leaned on the Convention manager because we had trouble with the hotel's AV person, who was less than cooperative. The total cost was $700 - money well spent! We can suggest that to come out of the convention budget next year. Results of hearing - Dave was at the hearing and reported The hearing started with Ray, Dave, Steve, and Scott and had about 20 folks - most stayed the whole time - They started by saying that we were on a fact gathering mission - there was some fear the Diocese would be forcing some sort of compliance. Steve explained that we were looking for a standard package we could support. Many churches are not using any financial package - some are using Computreasurer II, which does not do pledges. There is some concern about this package because it is a DOS program, and no one is exactly sure about the development of a Windows version. It was built by Albany To (a priest who is not Canonically resident here. ) They're happy with it if they use it. It might be a package to look at if it is updated. A few other packages were mentioned - Quickbooks and another unfamiliar package that Steve will follow up on. The question asked was will the diocese fund the purchase? The committee answered That we view our role as being to recommend and support, with the hope that we can persuade the budget committee to fund our recommendations. We got some forms back at that point and recruited some folks for this committee. For information gathering it was very successful. We all wish the package would spit out the parochial reports. Someone suggested to John a workshop that would share work-arounds for how folks get the packages to give what they ask for. Dave suggests that we have enough on our plate now. Dave would like to get the follow-up from Steve. Perhaps then after the web workshop we could have packages to investigate, by September be able to review for the committee, and by November make a choice/purchase. None of the packages will meet the needs of the churches or the needs of the diocese. Just producing a financial package will not get the Diocesan figures that John Zinn wants. It would be counterproductive to be pushed into choosing a finance package immediately, despite the request from the diocese. What we really need to have along with a financial package is a funnel program that will interface Between a package-excel-parochial report. The consensus is that we should work in that direction. Final preparation for March 14 see the revised registration page. Software purchase planning - The consensus is that we will work to get the "most bang for our buck" We will not buy the whole package. We'll work on setting up congregations who have no computer equipment and no software at all. We'll try to work a plan where we can do a 50% funding to get folks up and running. Ken will put the Parish Package recommendation out to Johanna to put into the Voice. We need to put out some sort of a system for congregations to apply to us for a license and perhaps offer to give $50 toward purchase price of hardware if it comes with the packages already loaded and licensed. What can the technology committee do to help the diocese use our new network to it's fullest potential. For example,. we are not using internal e-mail to communicate and our still doing so by handwritten method or phone. Johanna still has no connection to the server's modem after one year of complaining. Chris and Ken both know Novell networks - Chris has a weird schedule and can probably come in and work on some of the stuff. Johanna needs to talk with Larry and let Chris know what is needed and get this under control. Ken says that he will be happy to take some time off and help Chris. From Louie and the Special Convention Committee: 2 laser printers (preferably HPLJ 4 or HPLJ 5) will be needed at the electing convention on June 6th, the site yet to be announced by Bishop Spong. Chris has an HP4+ and will be able to bring it to convention. We may need to rent one. We will need to insure toner availability - Ken can procure a spare cartridge. The company with whom we have contracted to do the ballot tallies will provide a spreadsheet printout on a transparency of all results by order, with a running tally for the latest ballot and all earlier ones. We would like for the technology committee to be the ones to handle the projection. Voters will have a blank tally sheet of their own for recording the projections. Need overheads? Christ Church, Pompton has one and Ken will get one. We also want to support the Technology Committee by using pencils with the diocesan website like those you used at diocesan convention. Michael says there are enough - the original order was made to include both conventions. Done! More from Louie: Also, the Committee is open to exploring possible ways to use cyberspace in the presentation. As I have indicated earlier, I am already planning to provide cyber copy of the booklet, including the photographs in *.jpg formats. Assuming that all 5 nominees are cyberliterate or willing to work through someone who is, we might want to schedule a portion of the period when they are all in town (May 15-18) for a live interactive time online, though I don't know what form that might take. It would need to be friendly to the nominees. We don't have to do it, but I encourage you to consider ways that might do credit to the candidates, the diocese, and the technology committee. Louie's request is a scheduling nightmare. Isn't it unfair to expose the candidates to open questions from anyone who wants to take potshots? It would require a great investment of time and talent to service a very small population with a questionable outcome. No one on the committee has the expertise to do this as a real-time chat room or anything else. Our best bet is to suggest to the committee that they find someone, perhaps Allison Davis from St. Mark's, Teaneck, to videotape the first meeting. Ask the committee to devise one generic question that all of the candidates could prepare a written answer for ahead and then use as an opening statement - like what is the greatest challenge you feel that you would face as Bishop of Newark - something really broad, but not the things they've answered in their profiles. Then, after the weekend, we could take the tape and pull a series of shots from it to make a "photo Journal" page, with each candidate's thumbnail photo linked to a page of shots of him/her and the text of that opening prepared question/answer. That could go up on the web and then anyone could view it, but the text would have been prepared with the knowledge that it would be used in that way. This we have the expertise to do. Review of goals and objectives - for time reasons we did not review the whole list, but it was noted that we are working on the specific goals of the software packages, the workshop, and the convention presence. We added to one goal - the financial recommendation -refocus and put more energies to getting hooked up with licensed products than to getting everyone software, since we have only $9,000 to work with - the "bang for the buck" thought. We seem to have achieved our convention presence goal - we've been asked for continued presence and it would appear that what we have introduced this year is likely to become the norm for the future. If you have any questions about the Diocesan Technology Committee or its minutes, contact Jan Paxton. Return to Technology Committee Home Page