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 May 4, 2000.

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

MINUTES: Chairperson Lash Chaffin requested approval for the March 9, 2000 minutes. Jim Brown moved for the minutes of the April 3, 2000 Steering Committee meeting to be approved as submitted. Dayle Williamson seconded. No discussion was desired, so Larry Zink called roll and the motion passed. (see vote #1 on Voting Record sheet).

UPDATES FROM ADVISORY COMMITTEES

Because the GIS Steering Committee meeting was held in conjunction with the Annual Meeting of the Nebraska GIS/LIS Association, the first half the meeting agenda focused on update reports of the various database and other Steering Committee Advisory Committees.

Water Resources Database Advisory Committee: Josh Lear reported that the National Hydrograhy Dataset (NHD) working group has identified a pilot project area in Logan Creek watershed. There are three steps to this project; pre-conflation, conflation, and post-conflation. Conflation is moving attributes from one data set to another, post-conflation is fixing the errors created during conflation. The pre-conflation stage is nearly complete and they are about to the point where attribute data is needed. There are still some issues that need to be resolved, for example, to what degree the line work data should be edited.  However, the objective is to get this pilot project completed by September.

One of the objectives of the pilot project was to determine what resources would be required to develop a statewide NHD dataset. Larry Zink added that hopefully by demonstrating the potential of the NHD dataset and by determining a baseline for the resources that will be required to develop a statewide dataset, they will then be able to return to the agencies involved in the pilot project for their support for a statewide development effort. So far the pilot project has shown that there is a steep learning curve, which results in a large time investment. Consequently, for the purpose of making a time estimate for a statewide effort, it may be better to look at USGS efforts in this area.

The working group is requesting brief summaries of possible applications and uses for this dataset in illustrate the need and applications for the data.  The data will be 1:24,000 in terms of spatial accuracy, there will be unique ID's for every surface water segment, and there is a center line network to allow for downstream flow analysis. The first marketing job will have to be to the agency directors, then to the Governor's office and finally to the Legislature if a statewide effort is to proceed.

DOQ/DEM Database Advisory Committee: Dayle reported that they are working on the Lancaster County pilot project, with thanks to the County Assessor's office and the Lower Platte NRD for financial contributions. They have all the NAPP photography for the area and intend to complete the DOQ's for the Lancaster County Project by the end of May. They developed new 10m DEMs for the pilot project and are comparing DOQs based on the new 10m DEMs and the existing 30m DEMS.

Josh reported that it was his understanding that one of the purposes behind this project was to determine whether 10m DEMs would provide better and more accurate DOQ's. He has done some comparing and can definitely tell that there are some differences. One reason is that the 10m DEM's are a higher density of points and can therefore better capture small changes in relief. The other reason is that the vector contour line data has been edited since it was used to create the 30m DEM's. NRC has isolated some of the areas where there are apparent differences between the  DOQ's created from the 10 and the 30 meter DEM's. In most places there are visual differences. The next step is to determine a fair test to see if the differences are a result of increased accuracy in using the 10m DEM's. The differences tended to show up where there was the most relief.

Dayle said that they plan to include that information in the procedures as they are written. They hope to go on to complete the entire state. Josh estimated a year to complete the state while Dayle feels two years is more accurate.

Larry commented that the NRC is creating these in both UTM and State Plane Coordinate Systems. Dayle added that State Plane DOQs will not be signed off on by the USGS this time.

Transportation Database Advisory Committee: Ed Kelley reported that there has been one meeting of the Advisory Committee and some additional meetings and discussions and that initial priorities are to identify potential users of a transportation database and to determine what is available through local governments at the current time.

Larry Zink explained that several individuals have committed to using their local government contact networks to explore which local governments currently have digital road data. The Department of Roads is currently in the process of developing an agency GIS strategic plan and Larry has raised the need for local road data, as well as municipal boundaries in the context of that strategic planning effort.

Ed said that they had to acquire data for the census and that in order to do so, they contacted each individual county clerk and highway department and attached a survey asking for any GIS-related interest or inquiries from the county level. They have received a few responses from that.

Land Cover: Larry reported that there has been little activity on this committee. Jim Merchant is hoping to reconvene that committee this summer. Their earlier meetings consisted of discussing current database development efforts and began a discussion about the feasibility of creating some sort of nested classification scheme. There is difficulty, particularly with this data set, in terms of scale between the municipalities and other users.

Governmental Units (Boundaries): Larry reported that he and Val Goodman have identified a number of data sets that are needed. Val already has a number of these data sets, which will be updated due to Census 2000. There are a number of other boundary datasets that are also already available in some form, but few are documented with metadata. One of the most needed and most difficult boundary dataset to acquire will be the municipal boundaries. There is no mandated responsibility to notify anyone in state government about municipal boundary changes. Cities do frequently notify the Department of Roads because they get reimbursed according to the miles of streets and gas tanks within their boundaries. This committee will be looking to Roads for help in acquiring this type of data.

Update on PLSS Efforts: Jim Brown reported that they have been working with the Forest Service. The Bessey unit is nearly complete and they are beginning to work on the McKelvey unit, moving into the Northwest unit. They are also finishing off the tracts in Dodge County. Those two projects will be done by the end of the year.

A student intern from Northwest Missouri will be working for the State Surveyor's officer for the next two months.

Larry asked if there had been any further efforts between the State Surveyor's office and Rich Kearns in terms of creating a single, official PLSS database. Jim said there has not. There was more GPS work done by the Forest Service in the Sandhills, which allowed them to do some further digital comparisons. The results of the Sandhills were as expected. The accuracy of the positional corners got much worse due to the lack of points of reference, moving from an accuracy of 30 meters to well over 60.

Soils: Nathan McCaleb introduced Steve Peaslee, the NRCS' new GIS specialist and reported that 43 counties are SURRGO certified. The project is going well. They have had to adjust priorities for Western Nebraska because some DOQ's were unavailable but that issue may be resolved by the end of the month.

Advisory Committee on Standards for Local Government Multipurpose Land Information Systems: The Advisory Committee met yesterday. Brian Dunnigan is back on the committee. The Cadastral Data section is ready for adoption by the Steering Committee. The Advisory Committee is currently in the process of working on the "Other Data" section. It is coming together very quickly and they hope to have something in draft form by the next Steering Committee meeting. Now that the foundation has been laid, they can begin to get into some of the applications and layers.

They are also beginning sections 3 and 4 but will not be ready by the next meeting in spite of an aggressive timeline associated with it.

This is the beginning of the third year this committee has been working on this document and they are beginning to see the possibility of completion. By necessity, the base sections were kept purposely general with respect to types of technology since that is the most fluid aspect of it. After the document is written, then incentives needed to be created to encourage people to use this document. Perhaps some funding could be attached to it. After that, the Steering Committee needs to begin thinking about how to address the issue of upkeep on this document.

Several members of the Advisory Committee attended the Western Governor's Conference and learned that Nebraska is among the leading states in terms of GIS/cadastral initiatives. Nebraska is well advanced with its state-wide databases and state-wide organizational structure which is helping us lead the way in cadastral development and gis use in general.

Land Records Modernization:  Jim Brown reported that this committee met in Ogalalla. They came up with some bare bones recommendations, including the need for regional professional centers.  These regional centers could be more than just mapping centers though they should encompass a regional mapping center and should have a county surveyor function attached. This may be an opportunity to attach other needed regional support elements, such as computer technical support for the counties, and to house a number of other professional functions. A regional center could take care of tasks that require very technical expertise to do that most counties lack the funding and personnel to support.

Each regional center will have a different appearance due to the differing technological needs of the counties in that area. There were no specific boundaries discussed with respect to where the regional boundaries would fall, but it was envisioned that there would be specific population and area guidelines.

The next item of discussion was funding. There was agreement that some funding mechanism needs to be found that would finance the mapping and surveying elements. Some state government funding needs to be located because the counties cannot create something like this without assistance.

There is the sense that this is an idea whose time has come and that something needs to either be done to move forward on this or a new concept developed. They are soliciting input from NACO and a number of different entities to determine how best to get this process moving. Ideas and suggestions regarding this concept are welcome and should be directed to committee members:  Larry Worrell, Jim Brown, Duane Stott, Cliff Welsh or Larry Zink.

Jim Brown said that it is critical to recognize that this is proposed as a technical support center, not just a GIS mapping center. That will mean different things for different counties. In some counties, the database will be maintained at the county, while in the more rural counties, the database may need to be maintained from the central office. The intent is not to take over GIS at the county level, it is to provide technical support.

Jim Brown explained that their vision of this center could include some basic types of computer training, such as Windows 2000 training and how to use the Internet. Lash commented that a system that helps counties do assessment mapping rather than taking over that responsibility is superior.

Western Cadastral Data and Policy Forum: Larry Zink reported that there were many recommendations related to the development and maintenance of cadastral data that came out of this meeting of folks from 18 western states. One of those was a recommendation for increased funding for the Bureau of Land Management's GCDB program, the program that is focused on developing the Public Land Survey System. The other critical recommendation was recognition of the need for regional technical support centers. These recommendations will be sent to the Western governors for their consideration.

STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBERS UPDATES AND AGENCY GIS ACTIVITIES: Jim Brown reported that the GPS base station in Lincoln is still down and will be down until after height modernization. The Department of Roads has the funding for a new base station, but it is not up yet.  The previous Lincoln GPS base station was developed in partnership with a private firm, and that firm was recently purchased by another firm and they came and took their hardware.

Dayle reported that a month ago, he received a note from Jim Merchant that indicated the NRC will receive an award at the upcoming Mid-America GIS Symposium for their efforts in completing the DOQ's. Also, early this week, Dayle received notification of receipt of a Special Achievement in GIS award. It is to be presented to the NRC in a special ESRI ceremony in San Diego in June. Awards are presented to several user sites throughout the world in recognition for outstanding work in the GIS field.

ELECTION OF OFFICERS: Lash explained that pursuant to the guidelines adopted by the Steering Committee, officers are elected once a year. Nominations for chair were opened. John Miyoshi nominated Lash Chaffin. Larry Worrell seconded. There were no other nominations. Larry Zink asked for a motion to elect Lash Steering Committee chair by unanimous ballot. Larry Worrell so moved. Dayle Williamson seconded. Larry Zink called the roll and the motion passed. (see vote #2 on Voting Record sheet).

Lash opened nominations for vice chair. Nathan McCaleb nominated Mark Kuzila as vice chair. Dayle Williamson seconded. Dayle moved to cast a unanimous ballot to elect Mark Kuzila as vice chair. Dick Genrich seconded. Larry Zink called the roll and the motion passed. (see vote #3 on Voting Record sheet).

CADASTRAL SECTION OF GUIDEBOOK: Lash explained that the cadastral section has undergone extensive peer review and the Advisory Committee is prepared for the Steering Committee to consider endorsement of the cadastral section. Dick Genrich moved to endorse this section. Mele Koneya seconded. Larry Zink called the roll and the motion passed. (see vote #4 on Voting Record sheet).

AFFIRMATION OF CO-SPONSORSHIP OF THE MID-AMERICA GIS SYMPOSIUM: Formal action on this item was overlooked at that last meeting. Dayle moved to affirm Benefactor Co-sponsorship of the Mid-American GIS Symposium. John seconded. Larry Zink called the roll and the motion passed. (see vote #5 on Voting Record sheet).

DEVELOPMENT OF A COMPREHENSIVE GIS STRATEGIC/BUSINESS PLAN: Lash explained that over the years, Steve Schafer and others have suggested that in order to get state funding for a variety of activities including educational efforts the GIS Steering Committee needs to demonstrate the cost benefits of GIS.

Larry Zink said that there are a number of GIS action items currently in process and Steve Schafer indicated he concern that the Steering Committee has not built a case to justify funding. He suggested the Steering Committee develop a statewide GIS strategic plan. Such a Strategic Plan would pull all of these various initiatives together in a coherent package for policy makers and outline the benefits of GIS in general and these specific initiatives.  There was general agreement that if such a project was undertaken it should be available before the legislature is in session which will be in September.

The decision to be made at this point is whether the Steering Committee is willing to dedicate itself and Larry's time to pulling together a comprehensive document designed to make the case for what the Committee wants to do, including timelines, specific costs, and needs and benefits.

Lash asked if the intent was for the Steering Committee to adopt a resolution and form a Subcommittee. Larry explained that there had been some discussion about the Executive Committee forming the core of this group but concern was expressed about a lack of local government representation there. Dayle commented that it would be extremely helpful to have a coordinating committee to help organize the project and keep it moving on track.

Lash said that the Steering Committee should create this strategic plan on Steve Schafer's recommendation. Dayle agreed. Dick Genrich added that he has seen some positive results at the DOR already from their efforts at drafting a strategic plan.

Jim Brown clarified that the proposal is to create a comprehensive GIS strategic business plan for the state government agencies. Larry said that it can be shaped however the Committee wants but that as he understood Steve's suggestion it was cast boarder, to include recommendations and justifications for the things like the regional centers concept. Lash added that justification would encompass demonstrating local government cost savings for state agencies.

Jim Brown expressed reservations about this project. The Steering Committee has undertaken a lot of tasks already and to add this would require a huge commitment of resources. He is not convinced it is worth the effort.

Dan Hoffman said that he presented the draft resolution regarding the document stamp tax to Lauren after the last meeting. There was some concern expressed about the addition of a fee and they determined that a strategic plan including cost justification would be in order to increase the chances of obtaining funding. Legislators do not understand GIS and are wary of providing funding for it. However, redistricting this year will help increase their knowledge and experience and the Steering Committee should already have a plan in place detailing what needs to be done.

Jim Brown said that he doesn't have any trouble passing the motion, but that the Committee needs to have some idea of what direction this is going before beginning work. There is a big difference in GIS for the entire state of Nebraska, GIS for state government, GIS for local and county government, and GIS for private industry. The price could run anywhere from $2,000 to $500,000, depending on the scope of the plan. Developing a general strategic plan is not a simple process; it is something that has been in process for the past five years and is still incomplete. Jim said that he does not know enough about this yet. He moved to bestow the authority to create a comprehensive GIS business plan on the Executive Committee. Duane Stott seconded.

John asked if that was an aggressive enough move. Larry said that it would be fine but there is still the issue of local government representation because that is a weakness of the Executive Committee. Jim explained that his motion was designed to allow the Executive Committee to act before the next meeting if necessary.

Larry said that there is not clear vision of what this plan will look like, only that something needs to be produced to package and justify expenditure for GIS. In light of that, more discussion with the body at large is needed in order to give the Executive Committee a direction.

John indicated that it is very difficult to make progress without a plan. Jim pointed out that it is nearly impossible to identify all the potential uses of GIS let alone make a cost benefit analysis for them. John agreed but added that some framework of a plan is better than what exists now. Larry said that he felt that there is a fair consensus among Steering Committee members that certain databases need to be developed and what entities need to be involved in that development. There is also a fair consensus regarding the proposed regional centers and while the Steering Committee members are cognizant of the value of these initiatives, legislators are not.

Dayle commented that the business plan part of this should show how the databases will be utilized, the importance of the databases, and what will be lost if they are not developed. Dick added that any plan needs to be dynamic and flex with the times and advances in technology. Mark pointed out that one element that needs to be addressed in any strategic plan is a central node for all data.

Lash said that he definitely thinks Steve needs to be a part of this discussion. Any interested party is encouraged to attend the next Executive Committee meeting on June 5, 1-4 in the Executive Building. Lash reiterated the motion was to empower the Executive Committee to deal with this issue later this month. Larry Zink called the roll and the motion passed.(see vote #6 on Voting Record sheet).

REVIEW OF GIS-RELATED PROJECT PROPOSALS BEFORE THE STATE RECORDS BOARD: Larry Zink explained that there were three proposals that went before the State Records Board for grant funding which were deferred because of the State Record Board's concern about possible GIS considerations  The proposals were from: the State Surveyor's office, the Game and Parks Commission and a joint one from Department of Water Resources and Conservation Survey Division.  The State Records Board deferred any action on all three proposals because the projects were perceived as GIS-related and the Board members were not familiar with GIS and related standards.

Jim Brown explained that he submitted a proposal to help fund an effort to put survey information on the web, which includes original surveys, notes, maps, plats, all application surveys, and all subsequent government surveys. The Surveyor's office is already in the process of moving this information online, the additional funds will simply move the project along faster. This project is not directly GIS-related.

John asked what action needed to be taken. Larry suggested passing a motion stating that this is proposal is not directly related to GIS and that the Steering Committee has no concerns about it. Mark Kuzila explained that the concern on the Records Board was about duplication of resources. If the Steering Committee plays a coordinating role, then the possibility for more efficient use of the equipment purchased becomes available.

Mele Koneya added that Game and Parks encountered concern that their proposed project would be taking them in a direction independent of other agencies. Without a coordinating entity, there is no way to ensure that is not happening.

Mark explained that Conservation and Survey Division's project was a request for funding to continue an existing project with DWR to hire students to input well registration data into a database. They have revised their proposal to include an explanation about how this relates to GIS and resubmitted it. Larry said that it may be that the Records Board would like any proposal that looks like GIS to be evaluated by the Steering Committee to ensure appropriate coordination efforts. In general, it is a positive sign that the Steering Committee is being consulted.

Larry Zink asked if there was any possibility of sharing the Internet map server software or if it is cumbersome for the data to be off site. Mele said that was a question that came up with the Board as well. The Records Board wanted Game and Parks' project to be a one stop shop. The problem is that this is not going to be a static data set and there is no way of knowing how much collaboration will be possible.

Dayle moved to send a formal letter to the State Records Board stating that the GIS Steering Committee has reviewed and highly recommends that the Nebraska State Records Board approve funding for the following three e-government/GIS-related proposals: the State Surveyor's proposal, and the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission proposal, and the Department of Water Resources/Conservation and Survey Division-UNL proposal. John seconded. Larry Zink called the roll and the motion passed. (see vote #7 on Voting Record sheet).

LB628 DATA SHARING COOPERATIVE: Dan Hoffman explained that there was a bill introduced by Senator Kermit Basheer and supported by the World Herald and the media of Nebraska. The opponents were the League, NACO and DAS. They bill went through and was passed in the first part of April. It goes into effect July 3.

It applies to all public records and allows citizens to make their own copies of public records, either by bringing their own duplicating device or by agreeing on an off site location. It also states that a citizen can obtain copies of public records in any form it is maintained in, including print outs, electronic data, photocopies etc. A fee can be charged for copies but cannot exceed the actual cost of making the copies available. There was intent language entered on the floor to allow labor costs to be recovered. Data can only be requested in the format it is maintained in. If the estimated cost is over $50, a deposit can be required. This data must be made available within four business days or draft a written estimate of when the data will be available.

A public record is defined as all records or documents belonging to the government, unless specifically excluded.

Concern was expressed about privacy issues and about businesses acquiring, packaging and reselling data. There was also some concern about the inability to recover development costs.

Larry asked if this law makes the Steering Committee's efforts to form a Geospatial Data Cooperative obsolete. Jim Brown indicated that he intended to continue require every county he deals with to sign a data sharing agreement to eliminate any questions or concerns about sharing database information. Lash commented that there are reasons to have a cooperative agreement that have nothing to do with public records or selling data. Also, this law could change if a major dataset gets sold. Larry added that a cooperative agreement on a larger scale would allow agencies to eliminate individual contracts and institute a large scale blanket agreement. There was a general concensus in the Steering Committee to proceed with the Data Sharing Cooperative concept.

MEETING SCHEDULE: Jim Brown moved to adopt the new meeting schedule that Larry proposed. Mele seconded. Larry explained that the meeting will be moving to the first Thursday of the month to eliminate conflicts with the NITC's Government Council meeting. Currently, all the meetings are scheduled to be held at UNL's East Campus. Larry Zink read the roll. The motion passed. (see vote #8 on Voting Record sheet).

Larry said that he has been receiving contacts from local government expressing interest in GIS. Washington County has approved funding for a GIS needs assessment. Otoe County is planning on moving a head with some sort of GIS. Franklin County is interested in GIS and the Plainview phone company in the Norfolk area is interested in doing GIS service for themselves and possibly others. This stirring interest speaks to the continuing need for education and outreach.

The next meeting will be July 6, 2000 at the University of Nebraska's East Campus Union. The meeting was adjourned.

"P"=present, "A"=absent, "+"=voting for, "-"=voting against, "NV"=not voting