While not stated explicitly, Pettit's letter suggested that the state wants to use the servers now running the pre-production environment and use them to run the production environment needed for what Deloitte is doing, Daley added. Oregon "evidently did not budget for the new servers it now requires," she wrote.
After Oracle made its objections to Oregon's requests, Cover Oregon made a number of alternative proposals, "none of which are acceptable," Daley said. Among these were suggestions that Oracle move the system off Exadata and onto commodity hardware, which isn't technically viable since the same configurations aren't possible, she wrote.
Cover Oregon also proposed running the pre-production environment "on hardware already leased and used by the state," which would be a violation of Oracle's privacy and data security policies, Daley added.
Oregon has some options, which include having Deloitte manage the production environment instead of Oracle, or buying new hardware for it from other vendors, Daley said. Oracle is also willing to discuss how to lower Oregon's costs for Oracle's management services, and even to terminate its services contract early so the state can find another provider, she added.
A Cover Oregon spokeswoman didn't respond to a request for comment on Daley's letter, which wasn't mentioned in the Oregonian's report.
"The State's apparent decision to now move off the system entirely is puzzling and will cost the state even more time and money, but that, too, is par for the course," Oracle spokeswoman Deborah Hellinger said via email. "It seems every decision the State makes is politically motivated as evidenced by the fact that the State's legal counsel is apparently briefing the press before briefing Oracle."
Sign up for CIO Asia eNewsletters.