Linux Access in State and Local Government, Part V

Open-source government advocates across the golden plains.

Linux and open-source advocates have a passion for contributing. In this article, we explore the topic of Linux and open-source software serving government through the efforts of some interesting, geographically dispersed individuals. These individuals may not realize the profundity of their contributions, but then visionaries rarely do.

The effect of open-source software on theories of economics has emerged again. In the most recent edition of Linux Journal, Doc Searls further illuminated the economic shift in the most profound distinction I have seen since I began the study of economics 25 years ago. In a quote from the article, "Practical Penguin Progress" (Linux Journal, August 2003), Doc states:

Free software and open source are ways that the demand side supplies itself. Call this DIY-IT, or Do It Yourself Information Technology. In some cases, DIY-IT is so well developed that customers hardly need vendors at all.

DIY-IT is causing a shift in market power from supply to demand...Here the demand side--the customer--is in a position to supply itself.

In the traditional economic model of production-distribution-consumption, Linux and open source break the mold of the old paradigm. In the purest sense, Doc describes a perpetual motion machine that, in economics, would crack the existing model and end the need for producers and distributors of energy. Free and open-source software does the same thing.

Three Who Do

If Do It Yourself Information Technology continues breaking the extant paradigm, people such as Kevin Pate, Jeff Self and Richard Brice will have made a difference. I recently interviewed these gentlemen, and they put an exclamation point on what open-source software is doing in local and state governments.

Linux Journal: You chose to build an application or applications with Linux and or other open-source software. Tell us what you're doing.

Jeff: We (the City of Newport News, Virginia) have developed several applications built with open-source tools. Most of these applications have been Web-based. We have a JSP application that our city inspectors connect to with cell phones. We have really jumped into PHP development as well. We are using both PostgreSQL and MySQL for our databases. We are now looking at Python for some things we previously were planning on using Java for. Python just seems to be much easier to develop in. And we are taking a serious look at Zope. We are trying to find an open-source project manager application for our development team. We are promoting the use of wherever possible to city employees.

Kevin: The City of Houston plans on exploring the use of Linux in [its] infrastructure as much as possible. Once the city realizes the cost saving potential, I believe Linux will take a stronghold in [the] server environment. In the near future, the City of Houston will explore the benefits of moving its Oracle databases to the Linux platform, as well as some file and print services. My firm, Pate Consulting, is working diligently with the City of Houston to produce a solid Linux strategy that will help the city and its taxpayers save hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars.

Rick: I work for the Bridge and Structures Office of the Washington State Department of Transportation, and I develop applications for designing highway bridge structures. The people that use these kinds of applications presently work with Windows. However, I have latched onto and am modeling all of my work after something more important than a single software platform: the culture of the Open Source community, the bazaar style of development and the willingness to cooperate and collaborate openly with others. Open source offers advantages that I just can't pass up.

LJ: Do you think Linux is making progress in government?

Jeff: Yes. A combination of things is helping. Linux is acceptable now, unlike three or four years ago. When IBM pumped $1 billion into Linux, a lot of manager's eyes were opened. The economy also is helping Linux and open source. City governments are struggling to meet budgets. Because of this, Linux looks better and better.

Kevin: Linux is gaining momentum in government. Not only for the US, but it's also [doing so in] foreign governments as well. In addition, I heard that the City of Austin currently is performing a large Linux rollout. The more government entities are willing to adopt Linux, the easier it will be to make a push for Linux in one's own city. Governments worldwide are realizing the cost savings can be phenomenal. Moreover, they realize Linux is a tool they can utilize and customize fully due to its open-source licensing.

Rick: My interface with our IT department tells the story. There are those that see the technology budgets and know we can get equivalent or superior functionality from Linux-based solutions. Progress is being made in the sense that the level of awareness has been raised, and some are willing to start investigating Linux solutions. I've shared Linux distros with some of these people, and they are very excited about what they've seen.

LJ: Kevin, being in the Houston area, the city government reached out for your help with Linux; is that correct?

Kevin: Actually, I heard [the city] needed some help upgrading [its] Linux-based Web servers, participated in the bidding process and got the job.

LJ: Tell us more about [Houston's] process of finding you.

Kevin: The City of Houston releases RFPs when a particular project generates a need for services. Vendors (who have obtained a vendor number from the city) participate in the bidding process for an RFP. At that time, the city chooses the best proposal for the job including price, experience, etc.

LJ: You're Cisco certified, an MCSE and a Red Hat Certified Engineer; how do you use those credentials to attract business?

Kevin: The Cisco and Microsoft certification are not really used anymore to attract new clients, because we are strictly a Linux shop now. However, I do use them on our web site and in my signature to reveal the technological experience and diversity I have obtained during my career. The Red Hat certification helps tremendously in obtaining new Linux work. This certification shows potential clients that I have done more than just play around with Linux. When the very company that has the #1 Linux distribution certifies you, it erases many doubts [for] potential clients.

LJ: Jeff, in Newport News, did you find any resistance within the unit to using Linux?

Jeff: There hasn't been too much resistance at all. In fact, when I started working here, they were already running Linux for the city's intranet. I happened to work outside of the IT department initially. Many departments in the city have an information technology analyst. I was the first of the ITA's to run Linux. Now, many of the ITA's are running Linux servers for file sharing. The IT department finally got serious about Linux once they realized [how] many of the ITA's were already using it.

LJ: You have your own ideas about creating an outreach initiative. What are you trying to accomplish?

Jeff: Our director of information technology started working here last Fall. We started exchanging ideas [over] email soon after he arrived. I let him know my opinions of open-source software. We both believe that city governments are a perfect fit for the open-source model of development. Every city has the same functions. We have seven cities in the metropolitan area of Hampton Roads. Why not get the seven cities to work together on software development? We're not competing with one another, so there is no reason we shouldn't work together. Of course, each city has its own way of functioning in day-to-day operations. But I think the software could be written to be flexible enough to allow for each city's unique way of doing business.

I'm of the belief that city governments should be looking at ways to save taxpayers money. I think too many people working for city governments forget that the money they spend belongs to the citizens. That's why I believe Linux and other open-source software can and should play a vital role in city government.

LJ: Without breaching any confidentiality, what's next for Newport News?

Jeff: Our director is really pushing for an ERP system to replace many of our applications on the mainframe. It's possible that we may run it on Linux. We also will be looking at a groupware system down the road. We are keeping our eyes on potential open-source groupware applications. We are also looking for an open-source job description system, possibly utilizing XML to replace our current system, which keeps all job descriptions in Word Perfect.

LJ: What's your vision for the future of your department?

Jeff: I think open source will play a key role in shaping the look of our department in the future.

LJ: What should governments look for in Linux applications?

Jeff: They should look for projects that have an active development cycle and a strong user base. A large user base means others [are] out there [who] can provide their experiences and help out with problems. An active development cycle means new features will be coming and the chances of the project being abandoned are slim.

LJ: Rick, without breaching any confidentiality, what's next for your government?

Rick: I can only speak for the little microcosm in which I work. We will continue to develop bridge engineering solutions to make our design functions more efficient and consistent. We will continue to build an infrastructure of software components that other engineers can use to jump-start their development projects. We will continue to seek out others with similar needs and interest to form cooperative relationships. And most importantly, we will continue to promote the open source concept.

LJ: What's your vision for the future of your department?

Rick: My vision is to have the developers in the agency be thinking about and seeking out opportunities to collaborate with others in government doing similar work. It isn't something that can be mandated or enforced. It is something that will require a slow and gradual cultural change. I hope to lead by example and show success.

LJ: What should governments look for in Linux applications?

Rick: Best value. It is the same old story that has been told countless times. Assess your needs, and pick the solution that offers you the best value. Governments should be open-minded about Linux applications. Use them where they make sense.

LJ: Kevin, what do you think the future will look like?

Kevin: The future of Linux is very bright for several reasons. For one, the hardware support and features in the Linux kernel keep advancing at a rapid pace. For example, the Linux 2.6 kernel, which is due out sometime this year, contains support for asynchronous I/O, USB 2.0, IPSec and cryptography, as well as support for a multitude of new hardware. Linux has a future because it is a community more than it is a product. Communities with one common interest tend to survive for many years. In conjunction with the growing technological needs of our society and the thriving community of Linux, the future is very solid.

In the article mentioned above, Doc pointed out that "Linux is a project, not a product". Because the community creates the project, the thinking appears to be growing on a sub-conscious level. That growth doesn't appear to have geographic boundaries.

I wish to thank the people who contributed to this article.

Tom Adelstein works as a Linux consultant in Dallas, Texas. His current interest lies in the field of web services, security and supporting Linux deployments.



Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Re: Linux Access in State and Local Government, Part V

tadelstein's picture

>That said, I agree with those who say there should not be a mandate
>for ONLY OSS - it must compete on its merits, but from what I've
>been reading (and I'e been reading a lot about this lately), there are
>a lot of lobbying efforts to prevent just that.

While this thinking sounds logical, its ground of being comes out of a model of FTC style free trade. Mandating OSS in government is not in restraint of trade.

The notion of competitive bidding in government procurement confuses people even more.

Those who feel that OSS should not be be mandated could use the logic to say that the election process shouldn't be mandated, and that we shouldn't mandate rule of law.

Government exists to serve and protect the people. To treat it as part of a market is to to suggest that regulators of the market (such as the stock market) should be allowed to freely trade on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange.

Follow the logic and you will see that it leads to impossible scenarios where peole with information not available to everyone can gain market advantage.

Consider that we have software for nuclear weapons where the code no longer exists. The government never mandated that it be provided as part of the procurement process.

OSS does not have to compete on merit when the government is the buyer. It should provide open standards, open source and the taxpayer should not have to pay a second time for procuring it.

Almost every piece of software that makes up the Internet resulted from government grants. Foundations organized to continue development usually inherit the grant-paid development.

Even indirectly, taxpayers money keeps the IT industry alive, especially at the University and K12 level.

Who do you think pays for government?

Read Plato's "The Republic". Review your notes from Economics 101 or take Economics and stay awake.

Government should use OSS software unless it cannot find what it needs. Then, it can acquire software on the market, but the vendor should be compelled by law to hand over the source. If Oracle and Microsoft don't like it, other vendors will emerge.

Thinking such as that which prompted this reply is the result of media based television, people on autopilot, learning. Turn off your television and read text books. You know not of what you speak.

Wake up.

Re: Linux Access in State and Local Government, Part V

Anonymous's picture

My goodness! Did we not have a good night?

If this is the way you respond to an endorsement, I'm looking forward to seeing your response to a rebuttal.

I've already addressed a lot of your directives and questions in some text that is part of an effort to encourage the US government to require the release of SW developed under federal grant as Open Source. You can read the proposal at: - see and the supporting FAQ at:
and also follow much of the follow-on at Slashdot:

However, to address the original point of my comment: that an Open Source proposal should complete on its merits, are you defending the position that an inferior proposal and implementation using Open Source should be accepted over a superior proposal (that uses proprietary software but otherwise implements standards and provides its source code under escrow) simply because it is Open Source?

Or are you saying that the RFP be closed to any proposal that isn't Open Source? Either way, you're excluding proprietary solutions that might be superior to the Open Source solution in many ways.

Especially for Enterprise IT situations (>10,000 users, >10,000 cpus), Open Source has not (yet) provided a number of very important implementations (see Robert Lefkowitz (r0ml)'s very good presentation reported by Tim O'Reilly at: His slides are supposed to be made available as well via O'

Perhaps as a result, these kinds of implementations WILL spawn a viable OSS solution, but I'm not holding my breath.

I agree that Open Source is preferable when possible, but sometimes it's not (possible).
Here's my little list of where Open Source has failed and will probably continue to fail:

- where the SW hasn't been defined well enough to be cloned.
- where the OSS version lacks the user feedback that allows developers to polish it sufficiently to appeal to to a wide enough audience.
- where the user base is too small, specialized, and/or lacks monetary impact to make it of interest to OSS developers.
- where there is a requirement for obsessive attention to detail in a timely manner with oversight from highly paid professionals (tax preparation software, contract software, banking software, and see below)
- where there is an inherent requirement for direct product liability (medical device control). This can be OSS, but it requires a company willing to certify it for use.
- and of course, combinations of the above.

And of course, using your own example, do you expect that source code used for nuclear weapon design & testing or the Patriot missile guidance system be made Open Source? (Actually, I'd support that, but I don't see it happening).

So to reiterate my position, until OSS penetrates wider and deeper (about which I'm optimistic), evaluating proposals on their merits seems to be a better approach than blind faith that the OSS development paradigm is better all the time.

Listen to me - it sounds like I'm a paid shill for Microsoft - look what you've done to me...

Harry (not a paid shill for MS) Mangalam

Re: Linux Access in State and Local Government, Part V

tadelstein's picture

Harry, it just occured to me that we're having two conversations. Also, it might help readers understand that while your points live in a separate context than mine, neither set of points invalidate the other.

The bridge simply reads that mandating open source doesn't stop procurement from operating as situation normal.

Also, open source doesn't mean hand the code over to the Chinese.

I can maintain the same security clearance requirements on any product. I just want the code.

Re: Linux Access in State and Local Government, Part V

Anonymous's picture

The relevance of the dharmic references escapes me but I follow (but don't completely buy) the rest.

In fact, here's a reference that came out recently that touches on my point about OSS and proprietary SW competing on merits, but for competely different (and completely wrong) reasons:∂=rss&tag=feed&subj...

The author, James DeLong, is from the Department of Unintentionally Hilarity at the Orwellianly named Progress and Freedom Foundation.


Re: Linux Access in State and Local Government, Part V

tadelstein's picture

I think that sometimes the smiles and winks don't get translated across the text of message posts. 'ey?

The main point, and this comes from having consulted elective and appointed officials and committees; Government is not an enterprize commercially. Their procurement does not fall under the paradigm as those governed.

The "ground of being" has nothing to do with you specifically and I didn't point my pen at you personally, specifically or assumptively. Rather, I wished to make a point about the listening: The already listened listening of those among us who haven't had a ride on the cluetrain manifesto.

Now, wink ;-)

Re: Linux Access in State and Local Government, Part V

Anonymous's picture

Microsoft DOS and windows
Sprung up and thrived while IBM
and other mainframe manufacturers
had strangle holds on their markets.

Eventually IBM and others had to giveway
to the super mini super computers of the new age.

The same will happen at the Operating System Level.
I had a chance to try out linux. I have always
been extreemly impressed with the type of
application power it has with a less than 300kbyte
software program.

Re: Linux Access in State and Local Government, Part V

Anonymous's picture

Microsoft DOS and windows
Sprung up and thrived while IBM
and other mainframe manufacturers
had strangle holds on their markets.

Eventually IBM and others had to giveway
to the super mini super computers of the new age.

The same will happen at the Operating System Level.
I had a chance to try out linux. I have always
been extreemly impressed with the type of
application power it has with a less than 300kbyte
software program.

Re: Linux Access in State and Local Government, Part V

Anonymous's picture

and one more URL that may have been missed:


Re: Linux Access in State and Local Government, Part V

Anonymous's picture

Great series of articles, if a little uneven - LJ should post the series of links in order.


I've been looking at use cases and propagation of linux in various scenarios and gov't is by far the largest and most significant block. As goes gov't, so goes all the subcontractors, suppliers, vendors, etc who want/need to deal with gov't. Tip gov't and there will be precious little resistance except from proprietary SW vendors.

That said, I agree with those who say there should not be a mandate for ONLY OSS - it must compete on its merits, but from what I've been reading (and I'e been reading a lot about this lately), there are a lot of lobbying efforts to prevent just that.

As Tom reiterates, it's also extremely well-suited to benefit from the use of Open Source (gov't offices generally don't compete (they need functionality, they dont try to sell software competetively), their needs are strongly parallel, they generally have excellent connectivity, they tend to have their own development teams (or recruit local consultants), many departments are well suited to deployment of thin clients, with restricted needs for a huge stew of applications), they generally don't require 3D applications and multimedia) and the fact that it hasn't embraced OSS more strongly is bewildering. Even with MS's 'Don't Lose to Linux' fund, its lobbying efforts, and its good cop/bad cop handling of licensing deals, it's strange to see that it's taken so long for Linux to gain a toehold. On the other hand, since gov't is MS's largest (and perhaps least troublesome) customer, there is a certain reluctance to give up that particularly sustaining teat.

However, it looks like that toehold has been gained (especially fast overseas) and I expect to see US gov'ts embrace Linux as so many other domains have recently.

One thing that I don't think was explicitly mentioned as a strong benefit of OSS for gov't is the process of procurement. As Lisa Nyman-Wolfisch mentioned at the recent O'Reilly OSCON in Portland, one of the biggest wins for them in using OSS was that they didn't have to go thru the procurement process before starting, saving them months of lead time in developing their Census Web site.

I also heard Doc Searls give his DIYIT talk at OSCON and I agree that it's a good way to view the changing face of IT - from a "bit-vendor to consumer" one-way street to a consultancy to consumer in a 2 way interaction.

Again, excellent series of articles.

Best, Harry