In light of the recent Jim Lord revelation and the fact Linkmeister pointed this out to me and asked someone to convert it from pdf to a more readible, more available format - and in light of the fact that I typed this stuff out because it contained pages that had been scanned which made it impossible to cut and paste the information which meant that I typed my sorry little fingers off - I thought it might be good to let people get a look. Some may not have seen this yet.

Hidden, in plain sight?

Here is the link to the original document...

GAO Report - Y2k States of the 21 Largest U.S. Cities

You will need Adobe Acrobat to view the document in it's original form...

---------------------------------------------------------------------

GAO United States General Accounting Office Washington, D.C. 20548

Accounting and Information Management Division

B-283214

July 15, 1999

The Honorable Robert F. Bennett Chairman The Honorable Christopher Dodd Vice Chairman Special Committee on the Year 2000 Technology Problem United States Senate

Subject: Reported Y2k Status of the 21 Largest U.S. Cities

Key city services - including the provision of water and waste-water treatment, emergency services, transportation systems, city government services, and the operation public buildings - are critical to the safety and well being of city residents as we move into the next century. At your request, we identified the reported Year 2000 (Y2k) status of the nation's 21 largest cities (1). On July 12, 1999, we briefed your office on the results of our work. This letter provides a high-level summery of the information presented at that briefing, including background information and the reported readiness of those cities. The briefing slides are included in appendix 1.

Background

Most large cities provide their residents a variety of services, often including water and wastewater services, and emergency medical services. Cities also typically own and operate telecommunications systems, public buildings, and a variety of city government services, including city payroll, revenue collection and payment systems. Although a few cities also operate hospitals and electric power plants, these services are most often provided by state, county, or private entities.

It is important to note that some key services are provided by a mix of city and other entities. For example, within the transportation service area, most cities are responsible for traffic lights and controls, but not for subways and commuter rail systems. Throughout this letter and briefing, when discussing the Y2k status of key service areas, we only address the portion that is city owned and operated.

In providing key services to city residents, cities often use automated systems and equipment. These systems and equipment are subject to Y2k failures. Such failures could lead to a breakdown in a city's infrastructure, potentially seriously affecting city residents. [my emphasis]

Cities Reported Y2k Readiness Varies

Our survey of major cities identified significant variances in reported Y2k readiness. Two cities reported that they had completed their Y2k efforts. Nine cities expected to complete their Y2k preparations by September 30, and the remaining 10 cities expected to complete their preparations by December 31 (2). Completing Y2k activities in the last months of the year increases the risk that key services will not be Y2k ready in time for 2000, because there will not be enough time to deal with unanticipated complications.

On average, cities reported completing work for 45 percent of the key service areas in which they had some responsibility. They also stated that work is well underway on the remaining services. Cities were most likely to have reported completing work in their transportation systems and telecommunications equipment. Relatively few, however, reported completing their portions of water and wastewater treatment systems, public building systems, and emergency service systems.[my emphasis]

Given the amount of Y2k work remaining to be done in the last months of the year contingency plans are critical to ensure that cities will continue to provide key services through the Year 2000 date change.[my emphasis] Seven large cities reported completing contingency plans, while 14 cities reported that their plans are still being developed. Further, 20 of the 21 largest cities recognized the value of testing their contingency plans. 5 cities stated that they had completed this exercise; 7 cities reported that such testing was underway; and 8 reported that they planned to test their contingency plans. Only one city stated that it would not test contingency plans.

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

As requested, our objective was to identify the reported Y2k status of key services provided by the nation's 21 largest cities. To do so, we developed a structured set of questions, and interviewed city officials by telephone between June 28 and July 9, 1999. When appropriate we requested supporting documentation. We also reviewed city web sites to supplement city official's responses. We confirmed our understanding or their Y2k status by sending summaries of our interviews to city officials and asking them to confirm or modify their reported status, as appropriate. We conducted our work in Washington, D.C. and Atlanta, GA from June 28, 1999 through July 13, 1999.

[My note: at this point a large gap about the size of a large paragraph appears in the document, perhaps where redacted information was covered or a large break in the document...kind of strange]

As agreed with your office, we will send copies to the Honorable John Koskinen, Chairman of the President's Council on Year 2000 conversion; the Honorable Jacob J. Lew, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; and other interested parties. Copies will also be made available to others upon request.

If you have any questions on matters discussed in this letter, please call me at (202) 512-6408, or Colleen Phillips, Assistant Director, at (202) 512-6326. We can also be reached by e-mail at willemssenj.aimd@gao.gov and phillipsc.aimd@gao.gov, respectively. Key contributors to this assignment were Glenda Wright, Barbarol James, and Sandra Fissel.

Joel C. Willemssen Director, Civil Agencies Information Services

GAO/AIMD-99-246R Y2k Status of 21 Largest Cities

(1)

Accourding to 1996 popluation estimates, the United States' 21 largest cities are (1) New York (2) Los Angeles (3) Chicago (4) Houston (5) Philidelphia (6) San Diego (7) Phoenix (8) San Antonia (9) Dallas (10) Detroit (11) San Jose (12) Indianapolis (13) San Francisco (14) Jacksonville, FL (15) Baltimore (16) Columbus, OH (17) El Paso (18) Memphis (19) Milwaukee (20) Boston (21) Washington D.C.

(2)

In most cities, the majority of city services are scheduled to be completed before this completion date. For example, Los Angeles plans to have all key city systems ready by Semptember 30, except for it's wastewater treatment systems, which are to be completed in November. Similarly, El Paso plans to be Year 2000 ready by September 1, except for its police department, which is scheduled for completion on December 1.

[snip/redundant powerpoint presentation info which uses bullets to convey points made in the letter above]

===================

Survey Results:

Slide "10"

Cities' Estimates for Completing Y2k Efforts of Key City Services

Currently Y2k Ready

Dallas

Boston

Fully Y2k Ready by September 30, 1999

New York Houston

Philidelphia

San Diego

San Jose

Indianapolis

Jacksonville, FL

Memphis

Milwaukee

Fully Y2k Ready between October 1, 1999 and December 31, 1999

Los Angeles

Chicago

Phoenix

San Antonio

Detroit

San Francisco

Baltimore

Columbus

El Paso

Washington D.C.

=====================

Slide "11"

Cities' Reported Y2k Status

Y=fully ready

N=not ready

N/A = Not Applicable - the city does not own or operate this service.

Note: Many cities operate some (but not all) systems within a key service. Only city-operated systems are addressed in this table)

I've had to reformat the table a bit because I'm HTML challenged.

Electric Power

(1) New York - N/A (2) Los Angeles - Y

(3) Chicago - N/A

(4) Houston - N/A

(5) Philidelphia - N/A

(6) San Diego - N/A

(7) Phoenix - N/A

(8) San Antonia - N

(9) Dallas - N/A

(10) Detroit - N

(11) San Jose - N/A

(12) Indianapolis - N/A

(13) San Francisco - N/A

(14) Jacksonville, FL - N/A

(15) Baltimore - N/A

(16) Columbus, OH - N/A

(17) El Paso - N/A

(18) Memphis - Y

(19) Milwaukee - N/A

(20) Boston - N/A

(21) Washington D.C. - N/A

---------------

Water/Wastewater

(1) New York - Y (2) Los Angeles - N

(3) Chicago - N

(4) Houston - N

(5) Philidelphia - Y

(6) San Diego - N

(7) Phoenix - N

(8) San Antonia - N

(9) Dallas - Y

(10) Detroit - N

(11) San Jose - N

(12) Indianapolis - N/A

(13) San Francisco - N

(14) Jacksonville, FL - N/A

(15) Baltimore - N

(16) Columbus, OH - N

(17) El Paso - N/A

(18) Memphis - Y

(19) Milwaukee - N

(20) Boston - N/A

(21) Washington D.C. - Y

---------------

Telecommunications

(1) New York - Y (2) Los Angeles - N

(3) Chicago - Y

(4) Houston - Y

(5) Philidelphia - Y

(6) San Diego - Y

(7) Phoenix - N

(8) San Antonia - Y

(9) Dallas - Y

(10) Detroit - N

(11) San Jose - N

(12) Indianapolis - Y

(13) San Francisco - N

(14) Jacksonville, FL - N

(15) Baltimore - N

(16) Columbus, OH - N/A

(17) El Paso - N/A

(18) Memphis - Y

(19) Milwaukee - Y

(20) Boston - Y

(21) Washington D.C. - N

---------------

Emergency Services

(1) New York - N (2) Los Angeles - N

(3) Chicago - N

(4) Houston - N

(5) Philidelphia - Y

(6) San Diego - N

(7) Phoenix - N

(8) San Antonia - Y

(9) Dallas - Y

(10) Detroit - N

(11) San Jose - N

(12) Indianapolis - N

(13) San Francisco - N

(14) Jacksonville, FL - N

(15) Baltimore - N

(16) Columbus, OH - N

(17) El Paso - N

(18) Memphis - N

(19) Milwaukee - N

(20) Boston - Y

(21) Washington D.C. - Y

---------------

Hospitals/Healthcare Facilities

(1) New York - N (2) Los Angeles - N/A

(3) Chicago - N/A

(4) Houston - Y

(5) Philidelphia - N/A

(6) San Diego - N/A

(7) Phoenix - N/A

(8) San Antonia - N/A

(9) Dallas - N/A

(10) Detroit - N/A

(11) San Jose - N/A

(12) Indianapolis - N/A

(13) San Francisco - N

(14) Jacksonville, FL - N/A

(15) Baltimore - N

(16) Columbus, OH - N

(17) El Paso - N/A

(18) Memphis - N/A

(19) Milwaukee - N/A

(20) Boston - N/A

(21) Washington D.C. - Y

---------------

Transportation

(1) New York - Y (2) Los Angeles - Y

(3) Chicago - N

(4) Houston - Y

(5) Philidelphia - Y

(6) San Diego - Y

(7) Phoenix - Y

(8) San Antonia - Y

(9) Dallas - Y

(10) Detroit - N

(11) San Jose - N

(12) Indianapolis - Y

(13) San Francisco - N

(14) Jacksonville, FL - Y

(15) Baltimore - N

(16) Columbus, OH - N

(17) El Paso - Y

(18) Memphis - Y

(19) Milwaukee - Y

(20) Boston - Y

(21) Washington D.C. - Y

---------------

Public Buildings

(1) New York - Y (2) Los Angeles - N

(3) Chicago - N

(4) Houston - Y

(5) Philidelphia - Y

(6) San Diego - N

(7) Phoenix - N

(8) San Antonia - Y

(9) Dallas - Y

(10) Detroit - N

(11) San Jose - Y

(12) Indianapolis - Y

(13) San Francisco - N

(14) Jacksonville, FL - N

(15) Baltimore - N

(16) Columbus, OH - N

(17) El Paso - N

(18) Memphis - Y

(19) Milwaukee - N

(20) Boston - Y

(21) Washington D.C. - N

---------------

City Government Services

(1) New York - Y (2) Los Angeles - Y

(3) Chicago - N

(4) Houston - Y

(5) Philidelphia - N

(6) San Diego - Y

(7) Phoenix - Y

(8) San Antonia - N

(9) Dallas - Y

(10) Detroit - Y

(11) San Jose - N/A

(12) Indianapolis - N/A

(13) San Francisco - N

(14) Jacksonville, FL - N

(15) Baltimore - N

(16) Columbus, OH - N

(17) El Paso - N

(18) Memphis - Y

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), August 24, 1999

Answers

(19) Milwaukee - N

(20) Boston - Y

(21) Washington D.C. - N

========================

guess I exceeded memory limitations or something...

Mike

========================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), August 24, 1999.

Thanks Mike!!!!

printing, printing...

-- mabel (mabel_louise@yahoo.com), August 24, 1999.

Thank you so much. Curse that damn Adobe!!!

The scary stats for me are always the sewage/waste water ones.

This one combined with the Navy doc. would make for interesting comparisons.

-- R (riversoma@aol.com), August 24, 1999.

Dear Mike;

Wow.

Sincerely,

-- Lewis (thanks@lot.owork), August 24, 1999.

Damn. No good news here. Need to print it and discuss later.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), August 24, 1999.

Excellent, thanks Mike :-)

-- mar (derigueur2@aol.com), August 24, 1999.

check back...I have one more table to put into a more readible form...and it aint exactly good news either! I'll post it asap.

oh, the drama...the suspense...if this were a movie it would be rated XXX...

Mike

==================================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), August 24, 1999.

Mike, my nimble-fingered friend:

You're going to hate me for telling you this now. When in an Acrobat document, if you look on the menu bar, you'll see a little ABC icon. If you click on that, it allows you to select and copy text! You lose the formatting, but at least you don't have to type. I made the same mistake, and someone pointed this out to me.

Too many N' s on this damn list. And, one has to wonder about all the N/A 's. Even assuming that private companies may be a bit ahead of city-run utilities, it just don't look good!

BTW - has anyone seen the GAO report that said that only 3 states were tested and ready? It doesn't seem to be available yet.

Good work, Mike!

-- pshannon (pshannon@inch.com), August 24, 1999.

ps...buddy!

I know! Guess what? It's a scanned image!!!!!

Can you believe it? If it were text I could simply copy and paste but the darn thing, every page, is an image scan.

interesting, eh?

Mike

(who believes that power should always be in the hands of the many, not the few, or the one)

====================================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), August 24, 1999.

Never mind, Mike, I just reread your opening and looked at the pdf.

Yea, it's scanned...

-- pshannon (pshannon@inch.com), August 24, 1999.

Never mind, Mike, I just reread your opening and looked at the pdf.

Yeah, it's scanned...

-- pshannon (pshannon@inch.com), August 24, 1999.

Mike,

Thank you very, very much for getting this into a format that most of us will be able to read. Thanks also needs to go to Brian in Canada for pointing out to us last month that we should have been reading the GAO report:

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=0017kE

One of the key paragraphs from the July GAO report:

On average, cities reported completing work for 45 percent of the key service areas in which they had some responsibility. They also stated that work is well underway on the remaining services. Cities were most likely to have reported completing work in their transportation systems and telecommunications equipment. Relatively few, however, reported completing their portions of water and wastewater treatment systems, public building systems, and emergency service systems.

Cities reported completing work for only 45 percent of the key service areas as of late June/early July? That's a lot of work that still needs to be done between now and December.

Also of interest is the July 15th Senate hearing on state and local government preparedness: http://www.senate.gov/~y2k/hearings/990715/

A chart on the readiness of key services in the 21 largest cities:

http://www.senate.gov/~y2k/hearings/990715/chart4_tbl.gif

Mike and Brian...thanks.

-- Linkmeister (link@librarian.edu), August 24, 1999.

Thanks also needs to go to Brian in Canada for pointing out to us last month that we should have been reading the GAO report

Absolutely Linkmeister! I remember how frantic Brian was that we weren't paying proper attention to it.

Brian, thank you.

The fact that this document is in a pdf format still has me thinking, "hidden in plain sight". I wonder how many people actually downloaded the pdf but never got around to looking at it.

Thanks again, Brian!!!

Mike

=================================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), August 24, 1999.

last part...

==================

Survey Results:

Cities' Reported Y2k Status

Slide "12"

Reported Status of Cities' Y2k Efforts

Fully Y2k Ready by the end of:

(1) New York - August

(2) Los Angeles - November

(3) Chicago - October

(4) Houston - August

(5) Philidelphia - September

(6) San Diego - September

(7) Phoenix - November

(8) San Antonia - October

(9) Dallas - July

(10) Detroit - November

(11) San Jose - September*

(12) Indianapolis - September

(13) San Francisco - November

(14) Jacksonville, FL - September

(15) Baltimore - December

(16) Columbus, OH - November

(17) El Paso - December

(18) Memphis - August

(19) Milwaukee - September

(20) Boston - July

(21) Washington D.C. - November

* This estimate excludes San Jose's city-owned telecommunications equipment, which is currently being assessed

In most cities, the majority of city functions are scheduled to be completed well before this date. For example, Los Angeles plans to have all key city systems ready by September 30, except for its wastewater treatment systems, which are to be completed in November. Similarly, El Paso plans to be Year 2000 ready by September 1, except for its police department, which is scheduled for completion on December 1.

Independent Verification is Completed, Ongoing, or Planned?

1) New York - Ongoing

(2) Los Angeles - Ongoing

(3) Chicago - Ongoing

(4) Houston - Ongoing

(5) Philidelphia - Completed

(6) San Diego - Completed

(7) Phoenix - Ongoing

(8) San Antonia - Planned

(9) Dallas - Completed

(10) Detroit - Completed

(11) San Jose - Ongoing

(12) Indianapolis - Ongoing

(13) San Francisco - Ongoing

(14) Jacksonville, FL - Ongoing

(15) Baltimore - Ongoing

(16) Columbus, OH - Ongoing

(17) El Paso - Ongoing

(18) Memphis - Completed

(19) Milwaukee - Ongoing

(20) Boston - Completed

(21) Washington D.C. - Planned

Has Completed Contingency Plans?

1) New York - No

(2) Los Angeles - Yes

(3) Chicago - No

(4) Houston - Yes

(5) Philidelphia - Yes

(6) San Diego - No

(7) Phoenix - No

(8) San Antonia - No

(9) Dallas - Yes

(10) Detroit - Yes

(11) San Jose - No

(12) Indianapolis - No

(13) San Francisco - Yes

(14) Jacksonville, FL - No

(15) Baltimore - No

(16) Columbus, OH - No

(17) El Paso - No

(18) Memphis - No

(19) Milwaukee - No

(20) Boston - No

(21) Washington D.C. - Yes

Testing of Contingency Plans is Completed, Ongoing, Planned or Not Planned

1) New York - Planned

(2) Los Angeles - Completed

(3) Chicago - Planned

(4) Houston - Planned

(5) Philidelphia - Completed

(6) San Diego - Ongoing

(7) Phoenix - Ongoing

(8) San Antonia - Completed

(9) Dallas - Completed

(10) Detroit - Completed

(11) San Jose - Ongoing

(12) Indianapolis - Planned

(13) San Francisco - Ongoing

(14) Jacksonville, FL - Ongoing

(15) Baltimore - Planned

(16) Columbus, OH - Ongoing

(17) El Paso - Planned

(18) Memphis - Not Planned

(19) Milwaukee - Planned

(20) Boston - Ongoing

(21) Washington D.C. - Planned

==========================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), August 24, 1999.

Interestingly, Boston is listed as a city which is ready yet it has not completed it's contigency plans...

Mike

===================================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), August 24, 1999.

Mike, many thanks, your efforts are much appreciated !! print ...print ..print

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), August 24, 1999.

A news article about the GAO's late June/early July survey:

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=0017kE

[Fair Use: For Educational/Research Purposes Only]

Friday July 16 1:31 AM ET

Big U.S. Cities Slow On Y2K Readiness

By Jim Wolf

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Many big U.S. cities -- including Los Angeles, Chicago and Washington -- are leaving themselves scant time to complete preparations for possible year 2000-related computer glitches, the audit arm of Congress said Thursday.

In addition, nine states are ``behind'' in efforts to ensure their most critical systems do not fail when the year 2000 dawns, said the head of a Senate panel monitoring the issue.

The nine -- which reported having completed work on less than 70 percent of their most important systems -- are New Hampshire, Ohio, Alabama, Louisiana, Colorado, Wyoming, New Mexico, California and Hawaii.

On a local level, only 55 percent of the smallest counties surveyed -- those with a population below 10,000 -- say they have countywide emergency plans to cope with possible 2000-related disruptions to vital services, the National Association of Counties reported.

At issue are fears that some computers may crash or scramble data by misreading 2000 as 1900, the result of old space constraints that pared the date field to two digits.

Any such glitches, known as Y2K problems, could disrupt the provision of water and waste treatment, emergency services, transportation systems, city government services and the operation of public buildings among other services.

The problem could also boggle systems that hinge on date-sensitive microchips, such as traffic signals, radio communications and 911 emergency services that rely on global positioning systems.

Dallas and Boston were alone among the 21 biggest U.S. cities to report completion of efforts to deal with the so-called Y2K problem, the General Accounting Office said. The GAO is the audit and investigative arm of Congress.

Nine cities -- New York; Houston; Philadelphia; San Diego; San Jose, California; Indianapolis, Indiana; Jacksonville, Florida; Memphis, Tennessee; and Milwaukee -- said they expected to complete preparations by Sept. 30.

The remaining 10 -- Los Angeles; Chicago; Phoenix; San Antonio, Texas; Detroit; San Francisco; Baltimore; Columbus, Ohio; El Paso, Texas; and Washington -- said they expected to be ready by Dec. 31.

Joel Willemssen, head of a GAO arm that tracks information systems, voiced concern about the laggards. He made his comments in a letter released at a hearing of the Special Committee on Y2K issues.

``Completing Y2K activities in the last months of the year increases the risk that key services will not be Y2K-ready in time for 2000 because there will not be enough time to deal with unanticipated complications,'' Willemssen said.

``Given the amount of Y2K work remaining to be done in the last months of the year, contingency plans are critical to ensure that cities will continue to provide key services through the year 2000 date change,'' he added.

The Senate panel displayed a chart showing that only 43 percent of the 21 cities' key systems were said by the cities themselves to be ready as of July for the date change.

The GAO carried out the study by interviewing city officials by telephone from June 28 to July 9.

Sen. Robert Bennett, a Utah Republican who heads the special Y2K committee, said he feared that many state and local governments were ``leaving little room for testing, contingency planning and unexpected problems.''

``I hope these statistics aren't as bad as they appear,'' he said in a written statement.

``Only very efficient executive-level management and contingency planning can sustain us through the upcoming historic date change,'' added panel Vice Chairman Sen. Christopher Dodd, a Connecticut Democrat.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Linkmeister (link@librarian.edu), August 24, 1999.

{...] Bennett [...] said he feared that many state and local governments were ``leaving little room for testing, contingency planning and unexpected problems.''

``Only very efficient executive-level management and contingency planning can sustain us through the upcoming historic date change,'' added [...] Dodd.

Has Completed Contingency Plans?

New York - No

Chicago - No

San Diego - No Phoenix - No

San Antonia - No San Jose - No Indianapolis - No

Jacksonville, FL - No

Baltimore - No

Columbus, OH - No

El Paso - No Memphis - No

Milwaukee - No

Boston - No (who is listed as one of the two cities "Y2k ready")

=====================================

of course...we're left to "trust" the other cities who are self-reporting this data

Mike

=================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), August 24, 1999.

italics off

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), August 24, 1999.

Thanks, Mike.

-- Old Git (anon@spamproblems.com), August 24, 1999.

WOW! Thanks, Mike, for all of your time and effort! :-)

-- Gayla (privacy@please.com), August 24, 1999.

Under the heading 'Telecommunications' Chicago should have a N/A, instead they show a Y.

The city of Chicago doesn't own telecommunication utilities in the Metro area.

I find this to be a bit confusing. Is this catagory reflecting internal telecommunications systems? (I know this survey excludes 911)

Has anyone else noticed an inconsistency such as that in this report?

BTW Michael, thanks for taking the time to do this!

-- Deborah (infowars@yahoo.com), August 25, 1999.

Michael, I forwarded this to a friend who has relatives in the Baltimore area. (Baltimore seems to be in VERY bad shape according to this report.) I thought his response was interesting:

Thanks for the report. It's incredibly incompetent to think that these cities, who are responsible for so many people, have allowed their project deadlines to extend to year-end. I also think it's inexcusable to list any category as N/A as if it's not their problem because the utility is owned by someone else. Every major city ought to be on top of EVERYthing that could impact them. It is my general contention that if the cities stay calm and can be provided for, this nation will avoid the worst case scenarios, but if riots break out, no one is safe and a thousand times more damage will be done than what would occur just due to Y2K.

So far, everyone has discussed the two major threats of Y2K -- technical glitches and public panic. Both have been fought tooth and nail for a while now. But we know that not every technical problem will be resolved, so contingency plans MUST be in place everywhere. I'm beginning to think the greatest threat at this stage is actually incompetent leadership. If the leadership of New York City doesn't have plans for getting water to their people for a week or two in case the distribution systems get hosed-up, the rioting will be on their hands. If Houston has major health problems because their sewers all backed-up into people's houses causing disease and death and they didn't have contingency plans for preventing it, then shame on them!

-- Gayla (privacy@please.com), August 25, 1999.

Deborah, thanks for the catch!!! I'll revise my copy : )

Gayla, your friend states very well exactly how I feel. Especially since LA seems to be among the worst off. How cities can place an N/A in any of these categories is beyond me. I hope they haven't simply followed their past patterns and simply passed on the responsibility to the contracted entity. How many times do projects handled by city and county governments as well as state governments go over-budget and fall far behind in their schedules?

That is the biggest thorn in my side regarding the more optimistic points of view.

This experience is NOT happening in a new world where suddenly perfection in all areas is possible, graft and corruption have ceased, where productivity is soaring, and where personal problems don't affect the real people who must do the work.

It's the same world where Y2k was born. If anything, the fact is most people simply don't take it seriously. If someone is working on a project and cannot see how important their effort is and what consequence might occur if the deadlines are missed then can it not be assumed that their effort would may be hampered by their lack of vision?

Spin, spin, spin.

The realistic view is that the problem should never have been assumed even fixable by the deadline. Contingencies and warnings should have been created and we should be working within them NOW. It's too late now.

BTW, I still don't know how Boston made it to Y2k Ready status without completing contingecy plans.

Mike

==================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), August 25, 1999.

Hi Mike,

FWIW: Boston's Electric Co's and Hospitals are privately owned and were NOT included in this report...

Who is it that says Bawhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! (?)

hrumph...

-- mar (derigueur2@aol.com), August 25, 1999.

Michael

Better late than never,,,, I am totally impressed with the time and effort it took to convert that document.

By the man a drink!

-- Brian (imager@home.com), September 05, 1999.