text: an Open Data programming contest (that besides being inexpensive, it's much simpler to organize 
  
  and join than traditional tenders or grants) or*needs*to just pay somebody to write from scratch and 
  
  maintain some new program of this type, or customize existing ones. 
  
  The reason is that, just because this type of software development is so quick, even hiring a 
  
  professional to do it, or setting up a contest would be... too inexpensive to be handled with default 
  
  procurement procedures. Quoting from Day Two: Follow the Data, Iterating and the $1200 
  
  problem: 
  
  A big problem for cities is procuring products under $10,000. How does a city pay for 
  an awesome application like SeeClickFix when it doesn't fit the normal year-long 
  planning and two-year implementation in the millions of dollars? In Tuscon, Andrew 
  Greenhill tapped the Mayor's general budget for it, instead of trying to get the IT 
  department to shell out. In San Francisco, Ed Reiskin uses discretionary spending. But 
  every time, procurement gets messy. In reference to nepotism laws, Ed worries that he'll 
  appear "like I'm giving my buddies dollars." Building great products for cities has to 
  include finding great strategies to pay for them. In San Francisco, Jay Nath doesn't even 
  have a budget…which, he says is 'liberating' because he doesn't need to go through 