|
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Erdahl at 8:30 a.m. It was held at the Roseville City Hall.
Members Present: David Arbeit, David Claypool, Virginia Erdahl, Richard Johnson, Paul Leegard, and Dennis
Welsch.
Members Absent: Cliff Aichinger, Brad Henry and Patrick O'Connor Visitor: Mark Beauchamp and Trudy Richter of
the Fair-Share Financial Model consultant team and Gary Stevenson
Support Staff: Randall Johnson and Theresa Foster
2. ACCEPT AGENDA
The proposed agenda was accepted as submitted.
3. ACCEPT MEETING SUMMARY
Richard Johnson moved and Claypool seconded to approve the July 7, 1999 meeting summary as submitted. Motion
carried, ayes all.
4. DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS
4a. MetroGIS Fair-Share Financial Model
Beauchamp summarized for Team comment:
- Revisions to the benefits rating scheme requested by the Team at the previous meeting,
- The general cost classifications and amounts provided by John Lunde of the consultant team,
- The assumption that regional solutions for "socioeconomic characteristics of areas", as piloted by the
I-35W Corridor Coalition, and "where people live" are too expensive to consider until MetroGIS has addressed the other
eleven priority information needs and has established a stable revenue stream,
- The assumption of a four-year timeframe to implement regional solutions for the other eleven priority
information needs,
- The effect on subscription fees of various budget amounts,
- Conservative penetration rates assumed for cities, school districts, and watershed districts,
- The assumption that past expenditures for GIS data and program development by participants are ignored in
the model, that is, the model is based upon "marginal costs" and,
- His recommendation that MetroGIS should develop a business plan, including a marketing component, to
define a phase-in strategy to achieve a mature MetroGIS (provision of 22 core functions and implementation of 11
priority information need solutions) and to sustain a mature MetroGIS as assumed by the fair-share financial model.
It was agreed phasing-in of subscription rates would be the most prudent way to proceed and, consequently, the
group agreed on a need to obtain grants and other supplemental sources of funding (bridge financing). Chairperson
Erdahl mentioned that special projects with the private sector might be another means of expanding revenue sources to
achieve priority data development. Team members concurred few stakeholder organizations would pay for products not yet
available which would be the effect of the charging a fee that annualizes the cost of data development and annual
operations over a four-year period. It was agreed that at the September 16th Peer Review Forum, perspective subscribers
should be informed that a phase in of subscription rates will be proposed and that estimated interim fees and fees once
the eleven regional data solutions should be shared for comment.
Claypool commented, and the Team concurred, that the business plan should include a marketing element. The
Team concurred MetroGIS’ proposal to provide regional data solutions to priority information needs is valuable
information to the stakeholders’ GIS program development plans. If they know something is pending they can
concentrate on another aspect(s) of their program and are potential contributors to the MetroGIS project. Everyone also
concurred that the interim data and cost sharing agreements are providing significant benefit and will continue to do
so regardless of the prospect of integrated regional data solutions. Stevenson noted that the status quo might be a
cost-effective alternative to the notion of developing regional solutions for each of the priority information needs.
It was agreed to reduce the initial penetration rate for cities from 30 to 25 percent. Members concurred that
the mostly likely cities to join would be those that adjoin the boundary of another metro-area county (38 percent of
the cities in the region) and those located within counties that do not maintain GIS data that would be provided by the
11 MetroGIS data solutions.
Arbeit commented that any federal participation, other than grants, is unlikely because federal acceptance of
an ongoing contribution to MetroGIS would set a precedent. He also noted that a contribution from the State at the rate
of 15% of MetroGIS’ costs is also questionable. The Team concurred that a fair-share contribution from federal and
state levels of government should be shown in the model even though these funds may have to come from other sources to
help justify grants, in particular from the state and federal government. The Team also agreed it is appropriate to
propose a recommended federal contribution to regional collaboratives for discussion with the FGDC (Federal Geographic
Data Committee) since they paid for our study and are looking to MetroGIS to provide suggestions for how to equitably
finance collaborative GIS initiatives.
It was agreed to share the projected subscription fees for a $500,000 phase-in budget and for a mature
MetroGIS with the Policy Board for comment on July 28th. Members offered additions and modifications to the draft
report prepared by staff to the Policy Board. It was agreed the costs should also include contingency funds. Staff
agreed to revise the draft report and forward it to Chairperson Erdahl for approval.
4b(1). MetroGIS Legal Organizational Structure
Richard Johnson suggested, and the others agreed, that a final recommendation regarding a legal organizational
structure for MetroGIS should be postponed until the recommended Business Plan is completed. An objective of the
Business Plan would be to determine whether a separate (formal) legal structure for MetroGIS is desirable and, if so,
when it should be pursued. The initial conclusion that a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) organization is the most
appropriate structure would then be reevaluated to insure it would be consistent with both short and long term needs of
MetroGIS. The group conceded that the current informal structure might be a viable option during the interim period
until a mature level of services and the eleven regional data solutions have been provided. The group also acknowledged
that the work to date to evaluate legal organizational options would provide much of the information needed to make a
final recommendation following preparation of the Business plan. Staff agreed to revise the draft staff report for the
July 28th Policy Board meeting accordingly and to forward the revised draft to Chairperson Erdahl for approval.
4b(2). MetroGIS Operational Structure
Team members concurred that direction should be sought from Board members at the July 28th meeting to identify
ways to improve communication between the Policy Board and Coordinating Committee as requested by Chairperson
Reinhardt. All concurred that it will be important for Policy Board members to be knowledgeable of the issues prior to
the October 27th meeting when they will be asked to decide on recommendations that will have a significant impact on
shaping fundamental policy and direction for MetroGIS. The also acknowledged the importance of good communication to
buy-in among broad interests of fundamental policies. Members, however, questioned the workability of Policy Board
members chairing advisory teams, as suggested by Chairperson Reinhardt, but were receptive to Policy Board members
serving as liaisons to the advisory teams and the Coordinating Committee. Several written communication options were
also suggested for staff to include in the report for the July 28th Board meeting.
4c. ESRI Public Access Grant
Welsch moved and Leegard seconded to recommend that the Policy Board authorize the Metropolitan Council to
apply for this grant on behalf of MetroGIS. Motion carried, ayes all.
5. INFORMATION ITEMS
No discussion of the July 28th Policy Board agenda
6. OTHER BUSINESS
None
7. NEXT MEETINGS
- August 4, and September 8th both at the Roseville City Hall, beginning at 8:30 a.m.
8 ADJOURN
Arbeit moved and Leegard seconded to adjourn at 10:30 a.m. Motion carried, ayes all.
Prepared by Randall Johnson, AICP, MetroGIS Staff Coordinator
|
