Present were (authorized to vote +):

Complete Meeting Agenda

MAJOR MEETING TOPICS

NOTICE OF MEETING. A public notice of the meeting, pursuant to Section 84-1411 R.R. S. 1943, was published in the Lincoln Journal-Star on December 28, 2000.

ROLL CALL. Chairperson Lash Chaffin called the meeting to order at approximately 1:00 p.m. and requested a call of the roll. Fourteen duly authorized representatives were present at the time of the roll call. Therefore, a quorum was present to conduct business.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES.  Chair Lash Chaffin requested a motion to approve the minutes of the November 30,2000 GIS Steering Committee meeting.  Dayle Williamson moved, and Larry Worrell seconded, that the minutes of the November 30, 2000 meeting be approved as circulated.
(see vote # 1 on Voting Record sheet).

NITC COMMUNITY TECHNOLOGY FUND GRANT APPLICATION. Larry Zink gave brief overview of the planned NITC Community Technology Fund grant application that he was working with John Miyoshi to develop and submit on behalf of the Lower Platte North NRD.  A preproposal grant summary had been available in advance of the meeting as a link to the agenda. Larry noted that the grant is intended to support a follow-up project form the original NHD pilot in the Logan Creek watershed in northeast Nebraska.  If funded, this proposal would develop an NHD database for the Salt Creek watershed (Lincoln and Wahoo).  Larry asked for Steering Committee support for this grant proposal.  Larry Worrell moved, Dick Genrich seconded, that the Steering Committee go on record as supporting this NHD grant proposal.   The motion passed. (see vote #2 on Voting Record sheet).

PRESENTATION TO THE NITC ON JANUARY 23. Steve Schafer explained that this presentation is designed to updated the NITC on Steering Committee projects relevant to them. The focus will be on standards development efforts and barriers to database development.

Lash said that this presentation was discussed at length during the Executive Committee meeting and the plan was to give a brief history of the committee and to talk some about the bigger projects that have already been completed, along with a short description of database development efforts. There will be some discussion about the agencies spearheading specific database development efforts along with mention of the databases that lack clear agency leadership at this point. Those databases will provide the opportunity for the NITC to become involved in this arena if they so choose.

Larry said he has already made a presentation to the NITC Technical Panel. He is on the agenda to speak to the NITC State Government and Community Councils, as well as the NITC itself. If there are any thoughts or specific concerns that need to be highlighted to the NITC those should be addressed at this meeting.

Larry said he told them the Steering Committee would probably be coming back to them for their endorsement of the local government guidelines that are in the process of being developed as well as potentially the technical assistance concept under consideration. They seemed very interested in both.

STRATEGIC PLAN FOLLOW-UP.
Executive Committee Report: Lash said that during the last Executive Committee meeting there was a lot of discussion about the level of frustration that seems to stems from attempting to reconcile differing visions of the Steering Committee's role and how it should work. Many of the Committee's priority projects are dependent on what the Committee is and what it means to agencies and local government which leads to a need for further discussion within the Committee about what direction to go and what purpose the Committee serves. There is considerable dissatisfaction about the fact that every time the Committee tries to do something, the initiative winds up getting squashed and that raises the question of whether or not that is appropriate and where the future of this body is. It may be that the Committee needs to seek further development and empowerment.

Larry added that this discussion was precipitated by the diagram he presented at the last meeting that attempted to illustrate the relationship of key spatial data infrastructure organizational/policy components to one another. The Committee charged the Executive Committee with the responsibility of framing relevant questions to be addressed with respect to those relationships. Larry drafted two papers as a result of that discussion. One addresses the status of priority database development. The other speaks to interrelationship issues about these organizational policy components.

Larry said because the questions related to the interrelationships between the policy components were so fundamental, the Executive Committee suggested that a  good starting point for the Steering Committee's discussion of these issues would be the question of whether this body is needed and if so what its structure should be.

Lash said that he entertained questions about the necessity of maintaining this body, if it is possible for some of the state organizational elements to be placed elsewhere. Eight years ago, there was no high level of coordination among the major agencies but that has changed. As for strategic initiatives, there has been little progress in that arena.

Blaine said he believes there is still a role for the Committee to discuss some of the larger scope projects. Perhaps it should no longer be a stand-alone entity, but a subcommittee beneath a more formal, finance committee. As far as identifying specific projects to be done, it seems that various departments are going to do whatever they want to without any direction from the Steering Committee.

Duane said that implementation of GIS on a statewide basis is a huge issue. Unless steps are taken, GIS will continue to develop in the more populated areas but will not have any impact anywhere else.

Dayle said that he strongly supports the development of the regional center concept as a step that needs to be taken if rural counties in Nebraska are going to be involved in GIS and offer cost effective products to the taxpayers. No one is going to help them do it unless regional centers are developed.

Lash said he also likes that project but sometimes feels that the Steering Committee gets in the way of someone championing that project because of its political nature and the nature of the agencies involved. With it current structure and resources, he feels that there just appears to be no way for the GIS Steering Committee to be the launching pad for this effort.

Steve Schafer said that the development of standards and guidelines are an important part of the function the Steering Committee serves and is a piece not being done on a coordinated level. The second major task for the Committee is coordinating the development of databases. Continued focus on those framework databases, identifying and communicating specific barriers to their development can only aid in bringing those efforts to completion in a reasonable, timely fashion. The third, more nebulous area is to identify opportunities to obtain greater value out of the efforts already in process.

Larry Worrell said that this committee began ten years ago as an ad hoc committee with four members. It came together because there were so many proprietary systems that no one was ever going to be able to communicate. That is no longer an issue. The goal at the time was to provide guidance, advice, and help to smaller communities to people who couldn't afford it because the state had the money, the expertise, and the ability to go ahead with whatever projects they wanted to. That hasn't changed. Smaller counties do not have the capacity to develop GIS, particularly operating under the tax lids. If the Committee chooses to no longer provide guidance, assistance, communication, and help in the legislature to acquire funding, then the efforts of this body are a waste of time.

Lash asked Larry Worrell to discuss some of the early meetings. Larry said that the first meetings were comprised of himself, Jim Brown, and two University professors. The only concern at that time was building a GIS and how that could be accomplished. Larry was able to convince his county to build a GIS from the ground up, only because of outside contacts the county commissioners had. Lash asked when Terry, Mahendra and the Legislative Research people became involved. Larry indicated that it was happening all along, that they just kept pulling various people into their circle. The NRC, with their broad use of information, was a key player.

Larry said that a major issue facing counties on a two to three year basis is maintaining a current cadastral subscription. Counties pay ten to thirty thousand dollars a year to maintain an updated subscription and it is already outdated by the time it is paid for. A regional service center, whether it is divided by Department of Roads districts or four or five centers throughout the state, the money that the counties are wasting now could provide one part of a shared concept.

Blaine said that Lash makes a good point, that the Steering Committee doesn't do any of those things. If someone else took the initiative and took on the project, the Steering Committee would back them but typically it does not take the lead. The purpose of the Committee is good and needs to exist but its present structure, capabilities and how it operates hasn't accomplished very much toward meeting its own goals. There are no educational centers out there, there have been few outreach efforts, there are not many GIS created, published standards in use right now. There is no funding and no ability to accomplish much of what the Committee has expressed the desire to do.

Scott McIntyre said that they experienced some of the same frustrations in Omaha. They have city and county departments that have developed applications and a tremendous amount of institutional knowledge and information. However, when a department tries to implement GIS for the first time, they find that almost everything they need to build the application is there but not located in a central repository or easily accessible. A regional GIS service bureau sponsored and supported by the government would provide a place for agencies to obtain the necessary expertise and advice that is now too widespread to be usable and would prevent the necessity of paying for a consultant to become versed in agency specific applications.

Larry Zink said that what has been expressed to this point is a lot of frustration but there has been no mention of the organizational policy issues that were brought up in the strategic plan, such as a regional mapping center, a service bureau, improving the clearinghouse etc. The question is whether these are the elements that need to be attached to this group in some way to improve the weaknesses inherent in the organizational structure. Does the Committee want to pursue regional mapping centers? Are additional technical GIS services in state government attractive to the Committee? Does the Committee want to enhance the clearinghouse so that people can more easily reference and find that data? The federal government is beginning to call for increased coordination with the state and local level and is beginning to look to the state to spearhead those efforts. Where does the growing role of the federal government fit into the structure of GIS in Nebraska?

The questions everywhere seem to revolve around getting and maintaining data and what the organizational structures that need to be put in place to do that are. It is no longer a technology issue, it has become a data issue with the question of how to put new structures in place to support it on an ongoing basis.

Jim Brown commented that perhaps the questions being asked were the wrong ones. While asking how many centers should be created, who should staff them, and what type of services they should provide are all excellent questions, there is still one overriding question. That is how does the Steering Committee promote this concept and move it forward.

John Craig, NDOR, said that land use planning is an issue that comes up over and over for the Department of Roads because of the scope of their work. It was the main impetus behind propelling Roads into developing an internal GIS strategic plan.

Recently, he placed one of his former deputy state directors in Omaha to do long-range collaborative planning, which provides a resource for directing development in the counties. Sarpy County wants to grow in an intelligent way and it is clear that the metropolitan area planning association who is supposed to be doing a lot of that planning is not all it can be. They are working on a 20-25 year plan that is due to be released soon. That brings the question back to what is the organizational structure to actually move something forward and advocate it to make it happen. The feeling is that the Steering Committee possesses valuable experience that should be leverageable assisting with the implementation of GIS planning.

As Roads begins to work its GIS plan and integrate it as part of its longer range planning efforts, the idea is to develop a model in Sarpy County and then execute it in the remaining districts. This is a new way of looking at things, a cultural shift that does not come easily but is being forced upon agencies.

Another piece of the puzzle beyond long-range collaborative planning and land use is how can the data be used. GIS is the answer. Having data is useless without a way to manipulate it.

Roads is also partnering with the University this spring to have a 'how to do long-range collaborative planning' conference. Without a doubt it will come back to land use planning, the necessary data sets, and a GIS.

Another aspect in the transportation business is a vested interest in transportation management centers. A better way to respond to accidents and to clearing hazards needs to be developed, which means using GIS and GPS. Consequently, they are looking at setting such a center up in Omaha within the next two or three years. There may be a way to set up a GIS model in this county along with the Transportation Management Center.

Lash said that one thing that the GIS Steering Committee lacks is a tie in with a heavily motivated, heavily funded agency. Some of the early successful projects stemmed from the NRC's motivation and coordination. If Roads is beginning to move into a position to get to a level of coordination, that might be a good avenue to develop advocacy. John Craig commented that the real message here is that there is a legitimate requirement that drives GIS.

Dayle said that counties are beginning to accept the concept of land use planning much better these days than they used to. That is the only way to get things done in a quality fashion, to bring GIS in and overlay them. John Craig said that was a good way to articulate the problems with GIS. A lot of nay-sayers believe that implementing GIS use is pouring money down a black hole.

Larry said that one question that came out of the Executive Committee meeting in terms of how to promote GIS is that perhaps the Steering Committee needs to step back as a group and take a look at using the statutory definition of the body. It is designed with the directors of several very powerful state agencies and/or their designees. Due to the technical nature of GIS, the membership has evolved to include many middle level, technology people. One option toward making progress on Steering Committee goals is to return to the statutory make-up of the Committee and use those positions as leverage. For example, the surface water database is one with many interested parties but no agency who claims ownership. If the Steering Committee brought the heads of these agencies together as members of the Committee along with policy makers, practical solutions could potentially be reached.

Dick Nelson said that the Steering Committee was set up as a steering body, not as an implementation body, consequently, a certain amount of frustration is going to result. The strategic plan that has been put together serves a very valuable purpose. It has a lot of people interested in these issues around the table to discuss pertinent points. He was most interested in the comment about the state agencies being well served and the local entities being left out because that is a perspective he lacks. HHS is in a position to move forward in large part due to the information that has come available through the work done by the Steering Committee through the ability to collaborate with other agencies and that is a very significant accomplishment.

The Steering Committee does not have regulatory authority HHS has, but most people are intelligent enough to know that it won't do any good for them to build a system that does not use standards. By providing standards, the Steering Committee is giving people the opportunity to buy into the system.

The Committee has accomplished a great deal in its time and the best thing to do at this point is to continue working through the collaborative process because this type of thing evolves over time. John may be offering significant opportunity but his advances have been made through a collaborative process. The Steering Committee's relationship with the NITC is less clear. The NITC may be able to accomplish a lot more than the Steering Committee but the Committee has valuable experience to offer.

Scott McIntyre said one of the real benefits of this body is coordination and cooperation that results out of having people brought together and information shared. The frustration expressed seems to center around an inability to help those agencies that are not in this group. Most of the people on the Steering Committee have taken the initiative and been assertive enough to develop GIS within their department, which means that most departments are doing what they want to do. It may be appropriate for the Steering Committee to go to the Governor with recommendations, a proposed cost and some idea of where a regional center should be housed.

Jim Brown said that this is an important enough issue to set it as the Committee's highest priority. He moved for the GIS Steering Committee to set as its first priority the advocacy of the development of regional service centers for county and local government assistance. Duane Stott seconded. Scott asked if this motion entails a state sponsored and funded initiative. Jim said it did though funding the initiative is less important than getting the issue out there.

Cliff said that a state initiative may be required to get things going with consortiums forming once it has been created. Once the centers are in place, there will undoubtedly be many people interested in pitching in on the funding. The problem is getting started. Jim said the Steering Committee has a track record of beginning projects with little or no money and bringing on partners after the fact. Nebraska needs these centers to attain all its important goals in addition to providing cost benefits, saving money property taxes, and making assessment more equal.

Steve asked if property tax savings is documentable. At this point, he is uncertain whether to support the motion or to begin posing arguments. From his perspective, what would be more useful would be to assign a group of people to build the business case for this concept. The other issue here is that this concept promotes a solution rather than bringing forth the problem. The problem is not how to establish GIS service centers, it is how to accomplish land records modernization statewide.

Jim pointed out that his motion simply states that the Steering Committee develop a method of advocacy to facilitate county and local government assistance. That may be the best means to advocate it.

Part of the business case is that people across Nebraska keep designing the same business case over and over. A service center would eliminate that redundancy. Jim said that the questions that keep rising are how many service centers should there be, who should be in charge of it, and how should it be funded. Those questions are never answered and this issue never gets addressed.

Steve said that the bottom line is that this is not the group that has the political power to make these things happen. If these local technical assistance centers to be developed, the real question is how much political capital the League of Municipalities and NACO are willing to spend to accomplish it. That is where the impetus for these centers has to come from. It cannot come from state government.

Cliff said that the state stands to gain as much benefit from these centers as local government does. Steve said that his understanding was that this was a local issue and the question is more what information can this body do to support NACO and the League in their efforts to advocate an appropriate solution.

Cliff said that one of the prime examples of cost benefits from GIS is economic development. Once that is online, it can be expensed at any time. Most of the data contained in the priority databases will be utilized via service centers. That would provide a service not only to the constituency but also provide a return service back to the state by improving the quality of the data available through the priority databases.

Duane added that cadastral mapping has been the key focus of GIS development across the state but for the most part, cadastral maps are out of date. That process is one that could be presented as a need across the state.

Larry Zink said that the biggest argument for state involvement and ownership is that state and federal agencies will benefit from having that cadastral data developed and moved into geospatial format. They need and use the data and it is only going to happen statewide if there is some kind of partnership.

Money is being spent on property tax assessment so it is not a new budget allocation. Ultimately, the case will be based on economic development issues related to the Department of Roads. When they do work, they need to know who owns what and where.

Blaine said that the discussion has come back to what a great idea this all is and that if Jim's motion passes, the Committee will feel like something important has been accomplished. Unfortunately, next year nothing will have changed and there will still be no educational outreach programs. A different approach needs exploration. The concept of lending Steering Committee support to an agency that is going to move forward with it is a good one. If this motion is passed today, then the real issues will be swept away and not be discussed.

Jim said that the purpose of his motion has been misunderstood. The purpose of the motion is to set this issue up as being of primary importance so that it is the focus of all other meetings. This is a concept whose time has come. The GIS Steering Committee is not a state agency group, it is composed of power districts, local governments, municipalities, etc. and was set up as a steering body. Setting this issue as most important for the Committee to address is a critical act of steering.

Larry Zink pointed out that there are two core databases that need extra work and those must be kept in mind when working on priorities. Those are the PLSS/Property Parcel database and the surface water database. Jim said his motion was prefaced with the idea that none of the other issues were less important or should be left out.

Dick Nelson said that funding issues are not going to disappear until a business plan is drafted. The Governor is besieged with requests for money every day, all with the promise of saving him money. A business case would provide necessary legitimacy.

Lash asked if any of the Committee members want to add any amendments to Jim's motion that would include some of the issues brought up by Dick Nelson and Steve Schafer.

Greg Fetterman, coordinator for the Lower Platte River Corridor Alliance, said that prior to working for the Alliance he worked for local government as a clerk and an assistant city administrator. Coming from that end, it is fairly clear what is needed. Cities and counties are required to report a number of things to the state and a Regional Center could provide the means to facilitate the transfer of that information as well as making it more accessible. A template to use when reporting would allow all the information to be the same statewide and to be entered into a statewide GIS system. If a regional center is established just to promote a GIS system, local government will very likely say they do not have the money or the time to deal with it. A template that includes demographic and zoning information would allow specific requirements to be fed into the system to locate matching geographic areas. Such a system would be invaluable in bringing new business to Nebraska.

Jim proposed an amendment to his motion that the GIS Steering Committee to set as its first priority 'designing and advocating a system' for county and local government assistance'. That would include developing avenues of funding and the methodology.

Steve said that his major concern with the motion stems from not being certain that this avenue actually addresses the core need as well as the sense that the cost for these centers will not be shared proportionally with local government. Also, the Committee has repeatedly discussed a desire to avoid prioritizing because of the difficulty of placing one initiative above another. Instead, the approach has been to identify opportunities for steps that can be taken to move each initiative forward. His idea of a replacement motion would be to support that approach and ask the Steering Committee to spend its time identifying those steps and opportunities toward advancing each of the initiatives in the GIS Strategic Plan.

Scott McIntyre commented that service centers implies a number of small offices across the state and that may not be the best approach. Jim said that his motion did not address the number of centers, simply that service centers be developed. Scott asked if the centers were intended to support state and local government or just local government. Jim explained this was directed specifically for local government because the state is well situated with respect to GIS. Scott suggested adding some terminology into the motion about the GIS Steering Committee working with local government to advocate the service centers.

Larry Zink pointed out that a resolution was passed at the last meeting addressing the importance of land records modernization and the need for state/local partnership. This resolution was a solidification of what has already been included in the strategic plan. Duane said Jim's motion does not eliminate the priorities that have already been established, it simply emphasizes the fact that those goals are unlikely to be realized without a strong effort to develop regional service centers.

Jim said that his intent was for this to be a collaborative work with local government and any addition to the motion to clarify that would be welcome. He does not want to get involved in the details of determining how many centers there should be and who should be in control of it. Larry Zink stated that it was his understanding that the motion Jim was proposing was mainly intended to be an internal Str. Cmte. statement of priority as opposed to an external expression of priorities relative to the multiple initiatives proposed in the GIS Strategic Plan.  Jim agreed that this was his intent.

Editor's Note:  Tape of meeting discussion unavailable at this point and minutes drafted from rough notes of Str. Cmte. Coordinator.

Following further discussion, a vote was called on Jim Brown's motion, as amended by Jim, "The GIS Steering Committee sets as its first priority the designing and advocating of a system of regional service centers for county and local government assistance."  The motion passed. (see vote # 2 on Voting Record sheet).

REVISION OF RESOLUTION ON IMPORTANCE OF LAND RECORD MODERNIZATION AND THE NEED FOR A STATE/LOCAL PARTNERSHIP.  Larry Zink noted that in the process of amending and passing a draft resolution at the last meeting on land record modernization the Str. Cmte.  made what he feels is probably an unintended grammatical misstatement.  He suggested that he thinks the resolution would probably be more consistent with the Str. Cmte.'s intent if the words "will cooperate" were changed to "should cooperate" in Section 2. of the resolution.  Larry asked if it okay to make this change.  Str. Cmte. members indicated their support for Larry's suggested editorial change and did not feel that a revote was necessary.

Editor's Note:  Taping of meeting discussion resumed at this point.

LAND MODERNIZATION COMMITTEE REPORT. Larry reported that there is discussion within NACO about land record modernization in local government and a possible fee to support such an effort. The Steering Committee's subcommittee is entering into this dialogue with them in order to share with them the thinking of the committee on land record modernization efforts.

In addition, it was note that Jim is exploring the possibility of obtaining federal funding for this effort with the Bureau of Land Management.

BECOMING AN IMPLEMENTATION TEAM IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE OMB INITIATIVE. Larry explained that the Office of Management and the Budget (OMB) is becoming increasingly interested in GIS. Previously, only the FGDC has expressed interest. The OMB seems to be indicating that they will be attaching strings to federal agency expenditures to do more and more coordination among federal agencies as well as state and local entities. They will be asking for reports from coordinating bodies about what is being done with respect to framework or priority issues. These reports will include what has been developed, what hasn't been developed, what the plans are, how much money is being spent on these initiatives and who the individual contacts are.

Larry requested information about the amount of money spent on GIS as he does not have access to budget information.

The OMB is also wanting a federal champion. Larry is not sure what that entails, if it is someone from a federal agency or if it is someone to interface with their federal coordinating efforts. They are also planning to set up a financial team liaison where they will pull together budget people to determine where the resources are and how they can be moved around. It is very conceptual but seems to be some new, serious interest.

Larry asked if the Steering Committee is comfortable with Nathan acting as the federal representative if they are seeking someone from the federal government or Larry if they are seeking an interface from the state/local level.

Dayle commented that Nathan has been promoted and is now stationed in Texas. Larry said that means the Steering Committee is without a formal federal representative. Nathan was elected by federal agencies then appointed by the governor so that process will have to be explored again before a new federal representative can be appointed to the Committee.

Larry observed that this may be a good time to attempt to leverage any initiatives that the Steering Committee might be interested in obtaining federal funds for, such as the surface water database, the property parcel/cadastral database, and possibly the street address database. The Census Bureau called recently to ask if the Steering Committee was working in this area because they are interested in partnering.  Larry indicated that to the extent he has the time, he will attempt to follow-up on and develop something for the Str. Cmte. to consider in this regard.

REPORTS ON GIS ACTIVITIES FROM MEMBER AGENCIES. Dick Nelson introduced Steve Fredrick. He is the administrator of the data management section within HHS's Regulations and Licensure. John Erickson used to be the GIS data management expert but he moved over to the Policy Research Office. Steve is heading up a team within the HHS system that is looking at their applications for GIS.

HHS has installed a server and is working with a contractor/consultant. They have trained a number of people in both the financial support agency and the services agency. Now they are beginning to do some rudimentary mapping of health data. It is being used for various kinds of services and programs. Other than at a very high level of aggregate, that sort of mapping will be confidential. They intend to be producing some materials fairly soon.

One of the programs Steve is working on is the agencies vital records: marriage, divorce, death, etc. They anticipate coming out with some GIS data on their web site this year.

John Miyoshi reported that they are working on two GIS projects in the Lower Platte North. Last fall, through a grant with the DEQ they put a well head protection coordinator online. The Coordinator goes out and works with towns to define their well head protection area. They do a contaminant source inventory of potential contaminants within the twenty year time of travel of the municipal well. All the data and all the potential contaminant source in town are put on a GIS system and then onto a CD for easy access. Two cities are now complete.

They have also been attempting to do some regional GIS work. The three NRDs that are in the Lower Platte Corridor alliance include Papio Missouri River NRD, Lower Platte South in Lincoln, and Lower Platte North in Wahoo are putting GIS information on a server housed in the Lower Platte North area. The server should arrive this week and they will be running the Internet Map Server software, similar to what Game and Parks has purchased.   Currently there is no data up but they plan to have a great deal of information for the farmers to access, such as DOQs and soil information where available. It has been expanded to include any counties or cities that want to either contribute or access the data. All GIS processing will take place on the server at the NRD's Wahoo shop. It is a much simpler program and the users will not have to purchase licenses to use it.

Dick Genrich reported that they are finishing up their GIS Strategic Plan. Twenty-nine projects were identified and spread across a five-year timeline. The total estimated budget for these projects was approximately 3.2 million dollars over the five year span. As soon as that is finalized January 24, they will be back with the final presentation. Work that is being done includes a process of taking the patterning off to develop graphics for the local roads that the department has committed to completing by 2002. Doug Laney has been working on putting E911 road names on county maps. They will be available on the server. Ed has been working the past couple of years on SIDs and that effort is coming along well.  They have not done as well as they promised in terms of corporate limits.

Mele reported that Game and Parks has acquired Internet Mapping Server Software with a grant from the State Records Board. It hasn't been set up yet but it will be within the next month or two. They plan to serve up Game and Parks land records and hunting information to allow users to do interactive mapping and access data.

Dayle said that with respect to the groundwater database wells, DNR has a large backlog of work to be done and has been unable to make any progress in this arena. The tagging issue might be a good place to start until DNR has a better opportunity to move on that. For the next meeting, Dayle suggested that John bring in a presentation on the progress they've made in Abbey.

Mahendra reported that DNR is the lead agency for returning population estimates in between census' and also to review the census count itself. The final review of census data will be complete next month and the information will be released to the states.   The second generation of DEMs is complete for an initial block and has been sent to Rolla, Missouri for their evaluation. USGS has changed their standards since the last time DEMs were done. They discovered that different states used different units of measurement, feet, meters, decimeters etc. so they standardized that element into decimeters. The maps were returned in decimeters, which Nebraska cannot use. Dayle Williamson is looking into this issue.

Steve Schafer said that he has heard reports from several agencies and local entities talking about developing databases and asked what assurances there are that all of these databases will interconnect easily and allow for exchange of data. John said that vendors have more or less solved those issues. Steve asked if entities are all using the same software. John said the software will read the data however the databases are set up. Larry said that no one has invested the time and energy into making sure that all the data is accessible from different areas. Steve asked if that would be a useful discussion to have. Larry agreed it would.

Lash commented that at one point, the Committee had a small group of people who were looking into standardizing some of the processes. Then it was more software issues, but by the time the document was published, it was already obsolete. There probably should be a renewed effort at coordinating these things. Jim said that there is no problem unless a local government comes in with a coordinate system that is not standard or if the same entity is given two different names. Lash asked for this issue to be put on the agenda to discuss a possible new strategy.

Paul reported that they have had an ongoing cooperative agreement with CSD to go out and obtain GPS coordinates for all of their facilities. The current term for these areas is 'environmental interests', which means any facility or area DNR has an interest in.

DEQ has also opened up regional offices throughout the state within the last year. There are five offices in Nebraska now and Paul has been charged with the task of getting regional offices access to GIS. He will be getting them access to Arcview starting next week and getting them started on training. Lash asked where the regional offices are located. Paul said Chadron, North Platte, Holdredge, Norfolk and Omaha.

Blaine explained that all the electrical facilities digitized and have implemented an application that allows them to graphically track outages across the system and customer reports of problems. They are working on web enabling that application so that customers can take a look where the outages are. They are also creating a real time network so that they know the exact configuration of the electrical network at any given time.

Scott McIntyre said that they are doing a couple of things to update the base maps. The planning department recently cleaned up the street center line coverage by correcting the spelling of street names and inserting missing address ranges. They hope to fly the city this spring to update the orthos. This would be the third version. It was originally flown in 1993 and again in 1998. They wanted to do it last year but the weather was not good enough until after the trees had leafed out. They will get 1/4 meter imagery for the developed area and 1/2 meter for the rural areas.

Erik Hubl reported that Lancaster County voted on the merger of the Assessors office with the Registrar of Deeds and that will take place in two years time. They are working to get models in place to help facilitate a smooth transition in that regard. On the GIS front, they are using a spatial analyst to model areas of the city to show hot spots to obtain a more homogenous flow. They have begun to map mobile homes, because these are also considered real property. A different parcel id structure for it because mobile homes can move to another part of the county.

Scott Richert reported that most of the Association's energies have been focused on the organization of the Symposium. Membership renewal letters were sent out last month.

The meeting was adjourned.

NEXT MEETING.  The next meeting is scheduled for March 1, 2001, 1:00 PM at the Nebraska Dept. of Roads.