January 9, 2002
Mr. Bill Bush, Arkansas Geological Commission
Mr. Chris Boudreaux, Conway Corporation
Mr. Randy Jones, First Electric Cooperative Corporation
Mr. Mike McGibbony, Department of Information Systems
Mr. Earl Smith, Arkansas Soil & Water Conservation Commission
Ms. Phyllis Smith, U of A at Little Rock
Ms. Suzanne Wiley, U of A Cooperative Extension Service
Mr. Jack Cothren, Attending for Jim Wells, Wellsco
Mr. Jubal Smith, Entergy
Attending By Video Conference
Ms. Susan Cromwell, Fayetteville Public School District115
Dr. Fred Limp, CAST
Ms. Shirley Sandlin, Benton County Assessor
LIB Advisory Panel
Arkansas Geographic Information Office
Mr. Shelby Johnson, State Geographic Information Coordinator
Mr. Learon Dalby, GIS Program Manager
Mr. Ken Cotter, Arkansas Society of Professional Surveyors
The meeting was called to order. The minutes of the last meeting of November 28, 2001, were approved unanimously.
Report of the State Geographic Information Coordinator
Shelby Johnson reported the NAPP flying is just about to resume. He stated that he did not get a report by meeting time but there may have been some flights taken place on Monday or Tuesday depending on weather conditions. The USGS NAPP office was able to QC all the film from all previous years and we now have a hardwired list of reflights that need to be taken as well as new flights that have not been flown.
He sated his concern about the very large rain in December, which could potentially cause problems because of standing water. If the field boundaries cannot be delineated from the air, the NAPP office will reject those flights. He stated hopefully we will have good weather so all flights that have not been flown to date will get flown first and if there are any reflights. we can get all of them QCd by the end of the flying season so that the flying portion of the project will be wrapped up this year.
Shelby reported the Cadastral I-Team had a meeting on December 13, 2001 to present the results of a survey conducted of every county assessor office in the state. This survey was done to determine their mapping practices so the information could be plugged into the Cadastral I-Team draft. The committee looked at the results and unfortunately there are a significant number of counties in Arkansas where the assessor does not map parcels on paper. They record all of the paperwork that is filed and when it comes time to do the annual assessment and evaluation process, they use just the existing records and no mapping whatsoever. There are 21 counties in Arkansas that fit this characteristic. This is a signal to the Cadastral I-Team that there will be significant challenges ahead. The group will continue meeting.
School District Boundary Dataset
Susan Cromwell reported that some school districts are being heavily marketed by companies that want to sell school district boundary planning software. Shelby recommended Susan refer the vendors to his office for consultation on GeoStor development.
Arkansas Centerline Team
Learon reported that it had been decided from the last meeting to do a pilot project on two DOQQs, one in the Delta and one in the Ouachita area. The project has begun. It was decided to digitize the two DOQQs, GPS the roads on those two specific DOQQs, and then run a comparison between AHTD centerline data, Tiger centerline data, the GPS data and the digitized data. An accuracy assessment is scheduled for the last week in January against all of those and the DOQQs to determine the best methodology for trying to get the state centerline file done. It is assumed it will be a combination of these, but at this point an assessment is needed to get a good grasp on the data. After the assessment is done, aggressive contact will be made with any and everyone that has centerline data. Some municipalities have data and they will be contacted to see if they will be willing to work with the Geographic Information Office on the project. All files will then be assembled, filling in with best available and go from there.
Arkansas Digital Orthophotography Project
Learon reported that not all files have been QC'd at this point. All of the ones in the south have been QCd and have been delivered to CAST for input into GeoStor. The ones in the north are continuing to be QCd and that should be wrapped up by the middle of next week. He reported that all the data in-house has been delivered to the cooperators with the exception of Shirley, and Learon will be getting that to her. Status of the USGS format has not changed in some time.
Committee chairs and members were praised for getting out a lot of good information in a short period of time. It was reported that as of meeting time there is now something for all framework data layers. It was reported there is still a long way to go but that much progress has been made. Reports have been received from all the subcommittees.
Fred Limp reported that everyone should have received electronic copies of materials that were sent out the first part of the week. Included was a list of things that will be accomplished in the next six months.
Fred reported that they were having some difficulty reading the tapes provided by Learon but that they would get it figured out.. He projected that in the next two weeks they should have all of the ADOP 2000 CIR information on GeoStor available to download.
He stated that even over the Christmas holidays they were still running at about the 2000-downloads-per-month rate. The 2000 reflects the equivalent of somewhere around 20,000 additional digital files. He also stated that they have had 107 DOQQ downloads since the black and white DOQQs came on line, and while that was fewer than he thought, it was actually a pretty substantial number for a relatively small period of time.
A meeting is planned with the USGS National Map Center. The main objective is to get changes updated on-line within seven days. This will involve figuring out how to connect state data sources, agency data sources, and local data sources with USGS. There are two pilots underway: one in Utah and one in Delaware. The one in Arkansas will be the third national pilot. The Digital Government Magazine ranked Arkansas number 9 out of 50 states in terms of GIS activities. That is a tremendous compliment for Shelby and Learon and everyone involved. Investments made two or three years ago are beginning to pay off.
Suzanne Wiley asked if there would be any funding to help support the pilot. Fred said he was hopeful. Shelby stated he did not have any information about funding but that he did know that the coordinator for the State of Kentucky is now working on the National Map Project. She still remains a Kentucky employee but is on assignment to USGS. He reported that they are now requesting a new director to fill the State GIS Coordinator role in Kentucky. Shelby explained that some states have a coordination and requirements liaison who resides at the state level at the state office. If there was an opportunity like that, it might be a real advantage to the state. Fred commented if the USGS would fund an additional person for the Arkansas GIS office, it would be an ideal win for both sides. More will be known at the end of February. The date of the meeting has not yet been confirmed.
Suzanne Wiley distributed some copies of the National Map. She commented on how it fits into the GeoStor concept.
Suzanne asked if any committees had met, and she commented that most everybody is serving on at least two committees, some more than two. She solicited members to sign on and participate on a committee and commented that it is important that the committees get some action going, especially the Arkansas Special Data Infrastructure Policies Committee. She suggested the members look at some policies and get some things in line before a catastrophe happens.
Arkansas AmericaView Consortium
Suzanne reported that it has been unusually quiet on the list serve; however, Shelby did have some limited response to report back to the board. He explained that Plum Creek Timber is interested in statewide coverage at least one time a year with no season preference. The Geological Commission is interested in statewide coverage, preferably the winter season. The Health Department is interested in statewide coverage and is trying to determine the best season for them. The Audubon Society is interested in statewide coverage and is deliberating the best season for them. Shelby also reported he had received responses back from Soil and Water, the Cooperative Extension Service, and the Little Rock District Corps of Engineers, each trying to determine if they need statewide coverage and a season preference. Fred mentioned that the Game and Fish Commission may be interested. Suzanne stated that with the inclusion of CAST, it would bring the total to nine and with one more it would get down to the $380.00 mark. Shirley commented that Benton County would be interested, and Randy Jones from First Electric and Phyllis Smith from UALR stated that they would also join. Discussion followed on what the advantages would be to join. Suzanne suggested it might be worth the effort to put out an email to the forum that we now have 11 cooperators, which would bring the initial individual investment down even further. It was suggested that Shelby author the email.
Fred Limp reported that USGS and AmericaView cannot support the purchase of data, but they can support the development of enhanced products. The community can determine if there are other things they want, and USGS is prepared to support the development techniques that would provide that to the community at no cost. There is a national meeting of the consortium in Cleveland on January 25 -26, 2002, and it is their intent to talk about the level of interest. USGS is trying to point out to Congress that there are a lot of people interested in these things so Congress will support the background activities that USGS needs to do to get the data moving.
Data Standards for County Assessors Offices
Shirley Sandlin will be meeting with the Assessment Coordination Department January 23, 2002, and will put together a statement of need. She will get back with Shelby and Learon regarding this.
GeoStor and SLIB Promotion
Suzanne Wiley reminded the members that the Board applied for the SmartMoves Awards last June. Due to Kelly Boyds input, Suzanne immediately got a response from INA. They are interested and waiting for direction from the CIO as to what they should do next. Kelly Boyd mentioned in the last meeting that perhaps the Governors Office could help us with a promotional rollout of GeoStor. She emailed Mr. Boyd but he is out of town and has not responded.
Fred Limp reported they are working on a draft of a promotional or informational piece with the U of A Press Office. They have agreed to work with the LIB on this and hopefully have something put together by the middle of February.
Jubal Smith has agreed to outline some times and dates, put some action items together, and come up with a media plan.
Learon reported there have been several changes to the draft document. He indicated he took what was submitted and added continuity to the entire document. Suzanne Wiley suggested moving all of the members of the committees to an appendix. She also suggested that we needed to focus on developing pages devoted to our burning issues, as was done in the Indiana plan. Susan Cromwell suggested keeping up with Arkansas Code.
After speaking with Ron Matzner, Federal I-Team Coordinator, Suzanne related that he suggested the plan be built based on input from stakeholders and constituents in the state in order to please them and to get them on board. He also suggested to use it as a public relations campaign to show how developing these datasets can benefit local communities, county governments, city governments, and state agencies.
Ron mentioned that Utah is going back and looking at their plan and approaching it differently. He suggested that Arkansas do the same.
He suggested building it through decision makers, city managers and planners, judges, legislators and venture capitalists, department heads and agency directors. These are the people needed on board as part of the constituency, not just the GIS users. Ron explained that building a document that justifies costs and needs is what the Feds are looking for so they can point to that and say that these areas need to be supported, as well as the state. This would be a good step in the eight-month countdown to the next Legislative Session and the LIB would be building justification for needs there.
Suzanne Wiley suggested that the subcommittees meet at least once or twice and bring some funding numbers that are invested in each of these layers. Some kind of projection is needed of what it would take to do what is needed. Learon suggested setting a priority within each framework layer of what the most important need is. He commented that there are very few number estimates of costs and that too many of the plans that came in did not have an estimate of the funding needed to complete a particular layer.
Suzanne suggested going back through survey results and looking at the questions asked to see how they can apply to developing some kind of a matrix that shows that these framework layers are supporting mandates for city, county, local levels, forestry and any other groups. She thinks that would help the document a lot and that it would also be something to point to when it comes time to approach the Legislature for their support. Shelby expressed his concern about going through the exercise of building a matrix. He said he thought the existing body of work that has been pulled together needs to have some numbers filled in, but to step back through the process of completing a matrix and all the other activity which is above and beyond what the FGDC and the original template called for would be additional busy work. He suggested looking at the balance of what needs to get done as well as the goals and other things the board needs to achieve.
Bill Bush suggested Shelbys office take the I-Team Document, review it, decide what else is needed, and send it out to each committee, letting them know what information is important. This would ensure the conformity of the document and supply pertinent and consistent information. He recommended the document go before the Legislature for review. This would also be an opportunity to keep them updated.
Summary of Initiatives for I-Team Document
Go back to the LIB committees with specific suggestions on how and what they need to complete their particular part of the document
Ask them to come up with some specific numbers - what is invested and what needs to be invested
Prioritize needs within that particular layer and develop a matrix to help justify activities on various layers
Work on the first few pages to outline burning issues
Suzanne also related that Ron said it is not critical to get the document in as soon as possible. Arkansas is part of the Federal I-Team Initiative. He indicated that he would like a report after this meeting to see where the LIB is. He could then put on the website that the survey had been done and this would promote Arkansas as speeding ahead.
Earl Smith commented that there may be more opportunities to take advantage of a funding source for county or multiple counties rather than statewide. His question was how to take advantage of a funding source that is not a pure data layer delivery but is necessary for a project. There was continued discussion involving funding sources.
Mike McGibbony commented that he has spoken with a number of his business colleagues over the last 30 days about this product and what its potentials are. He related that he sees planning and some conceptual ideas about marketing and promotion but not an overall layer of business economic modeling. He suggested organizing an Economic Development Committee. He believes there is venture capital funding available. He challenged the group to focus on what its future financial obligations are. He suggested talking to local financial markets that might be able to help.
Discussion followed on the ways that venture capitalists investments could relate to Economic Development in the State of Arkansas. Mike will make some inquiries in the public sector concerning the legal aspects of what is involved with public funding.
Nominations were opened for Chair of the State Land Information Board. Jubal Smith nominated Susan Cromwell and Randy Jones Seconded the nomination. Nominations were closed, a vote was called, and Susan Cromwell was unanimously accepted as the new Chair for the State Land Information Board.
Nominations were opened for Vice Chair of the State Land Information Board. Shirley Sandlin nominated Suzanne Wiley and Bill Bush moved that nominations cease, a vote was called. Suzanne Wiley was unanimously accepted as Vice Chair of the Board.
Future Meeting Dates
There was discussion to schedule the next meeting in conjunction with the Joint Committee on Advanced Communications and Information Technology. The Surveyors meeting was also considered, but since it is scheduled very late in March, it might be too long to wait. It was decided to postpone the date of the next meeting until calendars are checked for other meetings. A priority is to get on the Joint Technology Committee Agenda. Updates will continue online.
Meeting Adjourned 11:56 a.m.