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 Thursday, July 8, 1999.

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

MINUTES. Chairperson Jim Brown asked for a motion to approve the April minutes. Lauren Hill moved to approve the April minutes as distributed. Dayle Williamson seconded. Larry Zink called roll and the motion passed (see vote #1 on the attached Voting Record sheet).

REVIEW OF PROCEDURES AND POLICIES. Jim Brown explained that because a vote was scheduled for this meeting, the Executive Committee was charged with reviewing the Steering Committee's meeting and voting procedures. Larry Zink noted that the Steering Committee had briefly discussed the existing voting procedures at its last meeting and proposed two changes for consideration at the next meeting. The proposed changes were listed in the minutes of the last meeting and have been available as links for this meeting's agenda. The two changes were recommended due to the addition of members to the Committee since the previous voting procedures had been adopted. The first would change the number of an official quorum from "eight duly authorized members" to "at least fifty percent of the duly authorized members". The second recommendation would change the number of committee members required to take action and make determinations from "eight duly authorized members" to "a majority of the committee members present". Lash moved to adopt the amended procedures and policies as drafted. Dick seconded. Larry Zink called the roll and the motion passed (see vote #2 on the attached Voting Record sheet).

Dennis Burling suggested that at some point, the section requiring a copy of the agenda to be made available prior to the meeting be clarified to allow that copy to be in digital format.

ELECTION OF OFFICERS. Jim Brown noted that it had been discussed at the last meeting that it was time for the annual election of officers and he then opened the floor for nominations for chair and vice chair. John Miyoshi nominated Lash Chaffin for chairperson. Lash accepted the nomination.

Dayle Williamson nominated Mark Kuzila for Vice Chair.

There were no further nominations. Jim Brown closed the nominations. Because there was only one person nominated for each office, Jim asked for a motion to suspend the rules and cast a unanimous ballot for the nominated candidates.

Dayle Williamson moved to suspend the rules and cast a unanimous ballot for Lash Chaffin as Chair and Mark Kuzila as Vice Chair. John Miyoshi seconded. Larry Zink called the roll and the motion passed (see vote #3 on the attached Voting Record sheet).

ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON STANDARDS FOR MULTI-PURPOSE LAND INFORMATION SYSTEMS. Erik Hubl reported that the are still looking for commentary on the draft cadastral section which is available on the Internet. They are working to complete this portion although graphics are still to be inserted to help explain some of the key concepts. They have set a deadline of fall for completion for the cadastral section.

Larry noted that this advisory committee's annual term has expired and requires a motion to reauthorize the Committee for another year.

John Miyoshi moved to reauthorize the Advisory Committee for an additional year. Mark Kuzila seconded. Larry Zink called roll and the motion passed (see vote #4 on the attached Voting Record sheet).

Governmental Units – Val reported that he and Larry met to determine their focus for this project as they restart after the Symposium. They plan to go through the first tier of coverages, which include legislative coverages, NRD's, and municipal boundaries and focus on getting these databases documented with standard metadata. They will then attempt to determine what sort of flow process there is with the Census Bureau, if there is one, document that, and put together some metadata on those coverages. Working to determine a method to capture and maintain municipal boundary coverages will be the next step.

Transportation – Dick reported that he, Ed Kelley, and Larry met and put together the beginning of a white paper. He plans to get approval from his supervisor before proceeding any further.

DOQ/DEM – Mahendra reported that the NRC celebrated the completion of the DOQ's and DEM's with an open house at the NRC. The response was encouraging. The NRC is currently working on an agreement with the NGS to complete second generation DOQ's. NAPP 1999 will be available by September. The first generation DOQ's and DEM's are available via the Internet.

Registered Wells – Paul Yamamoto provided a brief overview of the efforts of Groundwater Working Group of the Water Resources Database Advisory Committee. Paul said that of the number of concerns raised during initial discussions, the group decided to concentrate initially on trying to improve the location data of the Department of Water Resources registered wells database.

Larry commented that the Working Group discovered that several NRD's, HHS, DWR, USGS and DEQ are already collecting GPS information on registered wells locations. The problem was that there was no standard process or methodology for getting this enhanced locational data to DWR and for incorporating it into the Registered Wells Database. The Working Group developed a standardized format designed to document how the enhanced locational data was collected and to assist agencies in passing their information on well locations to the Department of Water Resources to be incorporated into their database. Larry noted that he had developed a draft resolution designed to add the Steering Committee's support to the efforts of this Advisory Committee and asked for a vote to adopt it.

John Miyoshi noted that NRDs would like the well drillers to report this information when the well is drilled. The well drillers would be willing to invest in GPS units and report this information if they did not have to report the legal description but the DWR is not willing to forego that. Paul said that the current locational information is based on converted legal descriptions and if that is wrong, then the location will be wrong.

Dayle asked where this document will be distributed. Larry said that the DWR will probably send this out with the form to the involved agencies. Dennis asked if anyone other than government agencies, such as well drillers, will be receiving this document, as it seems directed solely at those government entities.

Larry said that the well drillers are probably not involved in this, at this time. Mark said that the well drillers want to help and it would be useful to have a representative from this group on the Working Group. Paul pointed out that the Working Group had disbanded and that the focus of the Working Group was on improving the locational information of existing wells. Well drillers are involved with new wells. Lash suggested that someone from the Working Group arrange to talk to the well drillers. Mark agreed to arrange it.

Lash asked for the vote to be called. Larry Zink called roll and the motion passed (see vote #5 on the attached Voting Record sheet).

Surface Water - Larry noted, that as was reported at the last meeting, the Surface Water Working Group had reached a consensus around a goal to develop a statewide 1:24,000 National Hydrography Dataset. Their objective now is to get a pilot project organized and underway as a means of determining optimum methodologies and costs. Current efforts focus on developing a draft pilot proposal as a means to seek specific support for and commitment to implementing a pilot project. One possibility is submitting a pilot project proposal for consideration for funding from the state collaborative funds this fall.

Land Cover/Land Use – Larry said that Jim Merchant said he was swamped, but would try to get this Advisory Committee going this summer.

EXECUTIVE SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT.

GIS Steering Committee Participation in NITC Planning Process - Lash reported the Executive Committee met with Steve Schafer to discuss the GIS Steering Committee's role with the NITC statewide technology planning process. The basic conclusion was that the Steering Committee needs to draw attention to its successful projects and to take the initiative in finding the best place to fit in with and influence the NITC's State Technology Plan. Due to speed with which things are happening, Steve had encouraged the Steering Committee to authorize the Executive Committee to act on its behalf

Larry added that the NITC has formed several coordinating councils (State Government, Education, Community, and a Technology Panel). These groups are still in a formative, evolutionary stage. There is an interest in having input from existing coordinating groups, like the GIS Steering Committee, but no blueprint for how they will fit into the process. In the meantime, the timeline for developing the first State Technology Plan is running, with a goal of having a completed plan by the end of January 2000. If the Steering Committee is to influence the NITC Statewide Technology Plan, it will need to be alert to opportunities to raise its issues and concerns within the context of this evolving planning process and it will need to have the ability to move relatively fast. Larry noted, that to facilitate this process, he had drafted an outline of what he felt where issues upon which there was a high degree of consensus within the Steering Committee, based on past discussions and actions of the Steering Committee. He indicated that unless there were objections by the Steering Committee, these were the issues, which he and the Executive Committee would seek to incorporate into the State Technology Plan.

Lauren Hill indicated that she agreed that the technology planning process was moving pretty quickly and that the Steering Committee needed to be alert to opportunities to raise its issues of concern.

John Miyoshi indicated that he was supportive of Larry taking a leading role in this effort. He asked if there was anything new in the outline points that Larry had drafted.

Larry indicated that he felt the points in his draft outline had been affirmed by the Steering Committee in its past actions and discussions. Larry said that the outline point "Formatting Locational Data" had not received a lot of specific Steering Committee discussion, but the Executive Committee, at its last meeting, had discussed it. Larry noted that there was one other item that he hadn't include in his draft outline listing, but that he felt perhaps should be included. That was the need for some mechanism to help local governments fund the development and maintenance of geospatial databases. Larry noted that the Steering Committee had discussed the Wisconsin model, with its dedicated land transaction fees, quite a bit, but he wasn't sure if it had ever been specifically voted on. Larry wanted to know if there were any concerns about also bringing this issue to the NITC's attention. The question was raised about the need to seek administrative approval before this issue was raised. Larry indicated that Lauren was in the meeting, so maybe she could address that issue. Lauren Hill indicated that she felt would be appropriate to raise the issue within the context of technology planning. General support was expressed for adding this issue/concern to Larry's draft outline of issues/concerns.

Dennis Burling suggested that the need for additional education and outreach related to GIS and geospatial data should also be added to the draft outline. He noted that this is something for which the Steering Committee has been seeking additional support over the last couple years. General support was also expressed for adding this concern to Larry's draft outline of issues to be raised in the NITC technology planning process.

Larry Zink called roll and the motion passed (see vote #6 on the attached Voting Record sheet).  See this link for revised outline, based on Steering Committee discussion, of issues and concerns for NITC Statewide Technology Plan consideration.

Geospatial Data Sharing Cooperative - Larry Zink noted that the Steering Committee had originally discussed this idea about a 1-1/2 years ago and it was again briefly discussed at the last Steering Committee meeting. Larry wanted to know if the Steering Committee was interested in pursuing the concept further. He explained that the data sharing cooperative, which is designed to allow participating government and non-profit agencies to share data among themselves while allowing it to be sold outside the cooperative, has been working very well in New York State. Each agency maintains ownership of its data and any errors located in the data are reported to the owner. Larry noted that he had developed a background page that outlines the principals upon which a data sharing cooperative is based.

Dayle indicated that he thought something along this idea has merit and should be pursued.

Lash indicated that he has some concerns about including non-profit groups. Jim Brown indicated that he initially also had concerns about non-profit groups, but now as he has thought more about it, he does have a problem as long as they share their data. Lash added that he also had concerns about the equitability of the size of databases involved, that some participants would just be users and not collectors. Jim Brown indicated that he did not necessarily think that these were problems, just issues to be discussed. The groups represented on the Steering Committee comprise a good cross section of those who would be involved in a cooperative agreement of some sort.

Lash said that developing an agreement like this has a great deal of value. A debate of how to handle data as public record is inevitable and if this issue has already been addressed internally, it removes potential conflict. Jim commented that the issue of receiving a return for the collection of data was more and more being brought up in budget hearings.

Larry Worrell expressed a strong concern about including non-profit agencies. He felt they will redraft the data and turn around and sell it. He indicated he didn't want to share his data with them.

John Miyoshi asked what the next step was. Larry Zink said, assuming that the Steering Committee was generally supportive of the concept and of the principals outlined in the background paper, then he felt that attorneys need to look into this and develop a rough draft of a cooperative agreement. Lash suggested forming a working group to discuss and develop a draft agreement. Dayle Williamson volunteered Jim Cook, and Lauren Hill and Lash also agreed to serve on this working group.

Multiple GIS Listservs - Larry explained that six list servers dedicated to GIS discussion have evolved over the last couple of years. Jim Lacey who is responsible for maintaining the GIS list servers asked if it was necessary to keep all six separate or if it made more sense to combine some of them. The issue was discussed briefly and no strong feeling were expressed and no action taken.

Josh Lear reported that the Council is a body created to coordinate regional database development and standards. They have had two teleconferences. The first was to develop a draft charter, which was sent out to the members. Between the first and second conferences, he had sent out email to the GIS Steering Committee and to the GIS/LIS Association to solicit additional ideas for areas of focus for this group. During the second meeting, they refined the charter a bit and it was unanimously endorsed.

The Strategic Plan elements are basically the objectives from the charter. Under item seven, 'to participate in the creation of standards necessary to create and distribute accurate and credible data' is a subclass calling for the convening of 'a workshop for public land states to investigate what is being done and by who to develop statewide data sets for the Public Land Survey System'. This issue was a major impetus in the creation of this Council. There will be a workshop scheduled for sometime this fall.

The second subcategory deals with the development of a 1/24,000 scale hydrographic database. There are not a lot of activities listed in the Strategic Plan. This is one of the issues specifically listed and it was done so specifically for the state of Nebraska as requested by Josh, in response to the feedback he had gotten from the Steering Committee. This is an incentive for Nebraska to move as quickly as possible toward setting up a pilot project to have something to take back to the Council.

Larry asked if Josh has any sense of where this group is going. Josh said that there are two tracks. One is going to be the development of framework databases. All the states are interested in that. Second, is the development of a public outreach program to promote regional policy discussion.

Larry said that in coordination with National Geography week, there has been a major push from the National Geographic Society and ESRI to celebrate a GIS Day on November 19th. Larry indicated that he wanted to bring this event to the attention of the Steering Committee and see if there was a desire to organize anything in response. He indicated that the goal of the day, was to increase the awareness of GIS technology.

Mark Kuzila asked if the Steering Committee wanted that visibility.

Dayle said that the NRC will put up displays if there is a place to do so.

Lash encouraged individual agencies to explore ways of celebrating GIS Day.

Larry indicated that he didn't sense a desire for an organized Steering Committee response to the occasion, but added that if GIS/LIS Association chooses to do something, he assumes that the Steering Committee would be comfortable in cosponsoring it.

Scott Richert reported that they are drafting a membership letter to be sent to all members.

The next meeting may be a satellite conference in Omaha or at Mahoney State Park.

For GIS Day, they are discussing sending a map to all the legislators and creating a GIS/LIS brochure.

Larry said that this year, Senator Wehrbein introduced a bill to coordinate rural technology purchases. There was strong objection from local governments about the creation of a rural technology coordinator, as proposed all technology purchases would have to be approved by the coordinator. However, there was some interest in identifying and responding to the rural local government technology needs and a commitment to look further at the bill, even though it did not pass.

In response to Sen. Wehrbein and this concern, at its last meeting NIDCAC passed a motion supporting the development of a study proposal related to local government information technology requirements. Larry reported that an outline study proposal has been drafted and was included in the agenda packet. This proposal outlines three general areas of study related to local government IT: 1) connectivity and infrastructure, 2) local government requirements, and 3) citizen access to local government services. Larry noted that the study proposal suggests that the first and third areas be studied by the NITC Community Council and that NIDCAC focus on the second area. Larry noted that under this second study area (local government requirements), one of the issues is data sharing opportunities.

Larry asked if the Steering Committee wants to become involved in this study of local information technology issues. He felt that this might be another way of raising the issue of how rural local governments can be encouraged and assisted in their efforts to develop needed geospatial databases, such as property parcels. Lash commented that several people from the Steering Committee will be involved with this committee anyway. Larry pointed out that if the Steering Committee were not involved, geospatial database issues would probably not come up. Dayle suggested that Larry draft a letter to NIDCAC, on behalf of the Steering Committee, expressing the Steering Committee's interest in the local government study, relative to spatial database needs, and offering our assistance when spatial database issues arise.

Larry said that he will be attending the NSGIC Annual Meeting at the end of August and explained that within this group, organizational votes are taken by states. Larry noted that he has voted for Nebraska in the past, but wanted to confirm that he is authorized to vote for Nebraska and if there are any issues he should to bring up. The Steering Committee agreed Larry is authorized to vote for Nebraska.

Larry said that there is a revised meeting schedule in the meeting packet. He noted that in response to the discussion at the last meeting the location of some of the meetings has changed and the January meeting date was moved one week later.

Jim Brown reported that the State Surveyors office will be doing a joint PLSS project with the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management to map all forest lands in Nebraska.

The Missouri/Nebraska boundary compact maps are available at the State Surveyor's office. They have not been ratified yet.

They are also working in Dodge County attaching their electronic tax assessment maps to the State Surveyor's parcel maps.

Larry Zink said that he has been trying to research the state's GIS purchase agreement and has discovered that it is GSA based, but is unsure exactly what that means. He has been trying to get this information from the DAS Material Division and will continue to follow up.

OTHER BUSINESS

There was no other business. The next meeting will be September 9, 1999 at the East Campus Union.

Dennis Burling moved to adjourn. Mark seconded.

The meeting was adjourned. The next meeting will be Thursday, September 9, 1999 at 1:00 PM.

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