Teams > Policy Board

January 28, 1998 Minutes

1. CALL TO ORDER

The meeting was called to order at 7:15 p.m. by Chairperson Reinhardt. The meeting was held at the Metropolitan Council's Mears Park facility in St. Paul.

Board Members Present: Association of Metropolitan Municipalities: Terry Schneider (Minnetonka) and Alternate Donn Wiski (Roseville); Counties: Dennis Berg (Anoka); John Siegfried (Carver); Don Maher (Dakota); Victoria Reinhardt (Ramsey); and Metro Chapter of MN Association of Watershed Districts: Conrad Fiskness (Riley- Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District); Metropolitan Council: Bill Schreiber; Technology Information Education Services (TIES): Thomas Halvorson (Bloomington School District).

Board Members Absent: Counties: Dennis Hegberg (Washington); Randy Johnson (Hennepin); and Edwin Mackie (Scott).

Coordinating Committee Members Present: Data Content Advisory Team Liaisons: David Claypool (Ramsey County); Policy Advisory Team: Margo LaBau (Anoka County); Standards Advisory Team: Ron Wencl (USGS); Chairperson-Coordinating Committee: David Arbeit (LMIC); Vice Chairperson-Coordinating Committee: Brad Henry (Minneapolis); Jay Wittenstock for Gary Stevenson (Dakota County); Rick Gelbmann (Metropolitan Council); Richard Johnson (Metropolitan Council); and Patrick O'Connor and Alt. Gary Caswell (Hennepin County); Data Access Advisory Team Liaison: Jim Sydow and Dick Carlstrom (TIES); Larry Charbeneau (The Lawrence Group); Virginia Erdahl (Washington County); Rick Gelbmann (Metropolitan Council)

Support Staff: Heidi Welsch.

Others: Chuck Ballentine (Metropolitan Council); John Carpenter (The Lawrence Group)

2. ACCEPT AGENDA

MOTION: Member Schneider motioned and Member Fiskness seconded to approve the agenda as submitted. Motion carried unanimously.

3. ACCEPT MEETING MINUTES

MOTION: Member Schneider motioned and Member Fiskness seconded to approve the minutes for the Board's November 19, 1997 meeting, as submitted. Motion carried unanimously.

4. CONSENT ITEMS

Chairperson Reinhardt introduced the consent items: Operational Guidelines for the Coordinating Committee and Advisory Teams; and Metadata Guidelines. She asked that discussion, if necessary, be postponed until the next meeting.

MOTION: Member Halverson motioned, Member Berg seconded to approve both items on the consent agenda. Motion carried unanimously.

5. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS

5A. RELEVANCE OF MetroGIS TO NATIONAL INITIATIVES

Member Johnson was originally scheduled to briefly present the relevance of MetroGIS to national initiatives. However, he was not able to attend the meeting. Chairperson Reinhardt explained that meetings have recently been held with Commissioner Johnson (who is currently the President of the National Association of Counties), Chairperson Reinhardt, leadership of the Coordinating Committee, and staff. The meetings have focused on how MetroGIS might fit in with national initiatives.

David Arbeit explained that 2 weeks ago, the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) held an annual steering committee meeting. Representatives of federal agencies, states with GIS councils, and other important organizations are represented on this committee. Commissioner Johnson was in attendance as well as Chris Cialek of LMIC and the Governor's Council on Geographic Information. Arbeit explained that a study has recently been compiled by the National Academy for Public Administration . The study focuses on how to more proactively engage GIS collaborative approaches around the country. The study proposes creation of a 'National Spatial Data Council'. The proposal closely parallels the efforts of MetroGIS.

Arbeit also noted that the Policy Board should look for a willingness of the federal government to put funds toward efforts such as MetroGIS.

5B. METROGIS FINANCIAL AND STAFFING RESOURCES NEEDS

Chairperson Reinhardt noted that at the first meetings of the Policy Board in 1997, it was decided that decisions related to funding of MetroGIS should be put off until a better understanding of the direction of MetroGIS was gained. The Board asked that issues of funding be brought back to the Board in the beginning of 1998. By holding the first funding discussions in January, it is hoped that county budgeting processes are still in preliminary stages. She also noted that an extra meeting can be scheduled before March, if necessary.

David Arbeit, Chairperson of the Coordinating Committee, presented information to the Board on the benefits of MetroGIS. He began with the original vision of MetroGIS: "Develop an ongoing, stakeholder governed, metropolitan wide mechanism through which participants easily and equitably share geographically referenced data that are: accurate, current, secure, of common benefit, and readily usable."

Arbeit continued that GIS provides benefits to organizations whether or not they collaborate in MetroGIS. GIS improves efficiency, data management, customer satisfaction, and decision making. By collaborating through MetroGIS, benefits can be maximized. Building synergy allows reduction of costs; multiple uses of same data; and improved quality of data. It also helps leverage technological investments and resolves data conflicts. MetroGIS is producing tangible benefits already. He especially noted: strengthened working relationships; consensus about priority information needs; address and metadata standards and guidelines that have been adopted; savings from newly available data; development of the access tool DataFinder. More specifically, Arbeit noted that there have been more than 80 documented instances of sharing data as a direct result of the MetroGIS data and cost sharing agreements through the end of 1997. At least 18 organizations have received licenses for the regional street centerline dataset that was developed by The Lawrence Group and made available to participants through MetroGIS. Larry Charboneau, president of The Lawrence Group, stated that before the agreement with Metropolitan Council and MnDOT, the regional coverage would have cost $80,000 per copy. Chairperson Reinhardt noted that there may be many communities that will benefit but are not yet aware that the data is available to them.

Arbeit went on to discuss particular projects that have been enhanced through funds and resources allocated on behalf of MetroGIS including: counties; I35W Corridor Coalition; Ramsey County Users Group; and Water Districts. Lasting benefits will result from the collaborative efforts of MetroGIS participants as GIS is recognized as a basic business tool; common information needs are identified; informal professional networks are enhance; commitment to standards are strengthened; and policy bodies are actively engaged.

Arbeit explained the project expectations for 1998 - 2000. Important work planned for MetroGIS during the next several years includes: identification of specifications and custodians for critical data; more complete development of DataFinder; definition of the range of service functions; definition of the legal structure; solidification of the financing; execution of more permanent data sharing agreements; and formalization of solutions for organizations and financing.

Chairperson Reinhardt asked if there were any questions for Mr. Arbeit. Member Schneider stated that there needs to be a greater effort to get the word out to cities regarding the benefits available through MetroGIS.

Margo LaBau, Chairperson of the Policy Advisory Team, presented preliminary results of the MetroGIS participant satisfaction survey. She explained that the purpose of the survey was to get input from MetroGIS participants and to measure the level of satisfaction with the program, staff, and leadership. She emphasized that the survey was not meant to be a scientific survey and that the results she presented were preliminary. Overall return rate was 43%; however, return rate of the members of teams and committees (core group) was 70%. She explained that on a scale of 1 to 5 (5 being excellent), the following preliminary results:

LaBau noted that the final report for the survey will be available within 6 weeks.

Alternate Member Richard Johnson explained the MetroGIS expenses and revenues as presented in the agenda report. In 1995, the Metropolitan Council began to look into how GIS was being done in the region. Instead of working in isolation, Metropolitan Council chose to work toward collaboration and coordination through MetroGIS. The Council recognized MetroGIS as a major effort and has put significant resources into the project. Johnson noted that the Council intends to continue at least a base level of support equal to the amount that would be allocated to dataset acquisition without MetroGIS. However, he stated that the Council cannot continue to fund the effort at the current level on an on-going basis.

Chairperson Reinhardt asked for clarification of the long-term vs. short-term financial situation. Arbeit explained that there is a 3 year window for the data and cost sharing agreements between the counties and the Metropolitan Council. The agreements will begin expiring in early 2000. There is a need to cover costs of MetroGIS until the year 2000. By that time, it is hoped that long-term financial arrangements can be made.

Member Schneider commented that it may be helpful to consider counties following the same 'formula' as Metropolitan Council in using data acquisition estimates to fund MetroGIS. Member Johnson noted that all participants have contributed to the effort through staff time and other means. Such contributions need to be accounted for as well.

Member Siegfried asked what other sources of revenue exist and what has been accumulated as far as sales date so far. Alt. Member Johnson explained that data sales have not yet been explored. Arbeit noted that there may be potential for data sales in the future -- year 2000 and beyond; but that no agreement for such sales is in place at this time.

Member Schneider expressed concern with the need to wait for long term financial planning until the year 2000. He advocated visionary thinking among the members now and to recognize added value as something that might help keep funding the project.

Member Maher voiced support for selling info that MetroGIS has to finance the project, much as Dakota County has done.

David Arbeit presented some options for addressing supplemental funding for 1999-2000: redirection of expenditures; savings dividend (allocate portion of 'cost avoidance'); and grants. He stated that staff is currently working on applications to two federal grant programs through the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) and the Department of Commerce (TIIAP). Arbeit noted that grants are highly competitive and that we cannot count on them. Other grant options for the future may include: IISAC, Board of Innovation and Cooperation; and private foundations.

Other opportunities for the long-term may include funding through the Land Records Modernization initiative that is being put forward through the Governor's Office. However, Arbeit noted, the best possible scenario would be introduction of legislation in the 1999 session for funding in 2000.

Chairperson Reinhardt thanked Arbeit for bringing the issues forward. She stated that Ramsey County is very supportive of the MetroGIS effort; however, she mentioned it would not be easy for the county to allocate funds for MetroGIS. She stated that the Board needs to make some decisions about where to go from here in the short and long term. She also noted that decisions do not need to be made until the March meeting. She asked that the Board members identify the information needed for helping to make decision.

Member Wiski noted that if MetroGIS means savings for public, it might be possible to divert the property tax savings to MetroGIS. He thought the Dakota County model of gaining funding from outside organizations (such as utilities) would be worth investigating. Wiski also noted that the cable model of subscription fees might work for MetroGIS.

Member Berg noted that the structure of charging fees, subscriptions, etc. needs to be carefully thought through in order to consider liability and ammunity issues. Member Berg also noted that property records are big winners in the long run with MetroGIS. He suggested looking into a deed tax or fee for the long-term. He noted that the county levy limits makes it difficult for counties to fund an operation such as MetroGIS at this time.

There was some discussion of whether legislation is necessary for a deed tax or fee. The group agreed a deed tax or fee is worth looking into.

Member Schreiber stated that the amount of money require seems small in comparison to the great benefit being gained. He noted that there may be opportunities for interesting legislative debate; but how do we get through 1999? He stated that the value of a project such as MetroGIS is significant and that it would be a shame to have it fall apart due to lack of monetary commitment.

Member Schneider questioned why there was no mention of LCMR funding. David Arbeit stated that staff had considered LCMR but felt that a proposal from MetroGIS would be too metropolitan and too urban to have a good chance.

5C. LEGAL ORGANIZATION AND SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDING

Chairperson Reinhardt introduced this item, noting that the motion is asking to form a committee to review potential legal organization and supplemental funding options. Staff will organize a committee including representatives from each of the Policy Board organizations.

The group agreed to add to the action requested:

e) Investigate user-fee and/or membership fee options for funding MetroGIS.

f) Investigate mortgage deed tax fee and other options for funding MetroGIS.

MOTION: Member Schneider moved, Member Berg seconded to pass the motion as follows:

1. Direct staff to convene a team of persons, with appropriate expertise, from organizations represented on the Policy Board to recommend an interim legal authority and procedures needed to share MetroGIS expenses among key stakeholders until a long term financing program is implemented. This Team shall present its recommendation to the Policy Board before the Board decides a course of action for the projected 1999 budget deficit.
2. Authorize:
   1. Staff to pursue supplemental grant funding from organizations staff deems most appropriate.
   2. The Metropolitan Council, or such other organization(s) as appropriate, to serve as the responsible organization(s) for application and administration of grant funds.
   3. The Policy Board Chairperson to sign the grant application(s) on behalf of the MetroGIS Policy Board.
   4. Each of the Policy Board organizations to be listed on the grant application(s) as cooperators.
   5. Investigate user-fee options for MetroGIS funding.
   6. Investigate mortgage deed tax fee, membership fees, and other options for MetroGIS funding.

Motion carried.

Chairperson Reinhardt noted that the model used for calculating Metropolitan Council's estimated "base cost" contribution will be made available to each member organization. Member Schneider suggested that everything in the formula, including FTE's be converted to dollar amounts.

5D. 1998 MEETING SCHEDULE

MOTION: Member Fiskness motioned, Member Siegfried seconded to adopt the meeting schedule for 1998 as follows:

• March 25
• May 27
• July 22
• September 23
• November 18

The motion carried.

Chairperson Reinhardt noted that elections for Chair and Vice-Chair will be held at the next meeting.

6. OTHER BUSINESS

Member Schneider explained that he and Chairperson Reinhardt had recently attended a meeting of the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC), the Association of Minnesota Counties (AMC), and the Association of County Recorders to discuss how to support the proposed Land Records Modernization effort. He noted the differing perspectives of out-state and metropolitan representatives. A legislative initiative is likely to get discussion of disparities of out-state vs. metro areas. Chairperson Reinhardt also noted that the meeting discussed the Wisconsin model. Member Schneider stated that MetroGIS needs to continue monitoring the LRM effort.

7. ADJOURN

Before adjournment, Chairperson Reinhardt welcomed new Policy Board member Don Maher. Member Siegfried noted that staff should contact Scott County to ensure Commissioner Makie is still the Scott County delegate to MetroGIS. Member Schneider noted that a new Association of Minnesota Municipalities (AMM) representative to replace former member Pat Scott will be announced soon. Alternate Donn Wiski will serve as alternate for both AMM seats.

MOTION: Member Maher moved and Member Fiskness seconded to adjourn at 9:15 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.

Prepared by Heidi Welsch, Assistant GIS Liaison