|
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Reinhardt called the meeting to order at 6.30 p.m. It was held at the Metropolitan Council’s
Mears Park Offices in St. Paul.
Members Present: Willis Branning (Dakota County), Conrad Fiskness (Metro Watershed Districts), Lee Whitcraft
alternate for Antoinette Johns (TIES), Patrick O'Connor alternate for Randy Johnson (Hennepin County), Jim Kordiak
(Anoka County), Edwin Mackie (Scott County), Victoria Reinhardt (Ramsey County), Terry Schneider (AMM), and Roger
Williams (Metropolitan Council)
Members Absent: Dennis Hegberg (Washington County), Barbara Johnson (AMM), and John Siegfried (Carver County)
Coordinating Committee Members Present: David Arbeit, Larry Charboneau, David Claypool (Vice Chair), Eli
Cooper, Virginia Erdahl, Jim Hentges, Gary Stevenson, Ed Schukle, and Ron Wencl. Visitors: Steve Lehr, CB Richard Ellis
Support Staff: Randall Johnson (MetroGIS); Trudy Richter and Kathie Doty, Business Plan consultant team
members (Richardson, Richter and Associates); and Alison Slaats (Metropolitan Council)
2. ACCEPT AGENDA
Member Fiskness moved and Member Williams seconded to accept the agenda with the addition of Item 5e, MetroGIS
Internet Site – Policy Member Contact Information. Motion carried, ayes all.
3. APPROVE MEETING SUMMARY Member Schneider moved and Member Williams seconded to approve the summary of the
April 26, 2000 meeting as submitted. Motion carried, ayes all.
4. GIS TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION
David Arbeit (LMIC) and Alison Slaats and Eli Cooper (Metropolitan Council) provided the members with: 1) an
overview of the comparison of the functionality between Minnesota GeoData Clearinghouse and MetroGIS Data Finder and
explained how the revisions to Data Finder that are underway will eliminate the need for duplicative metadata records
to search in both environments; 2) a demonstration using the Council’s recently produced 1997 Existing Land Use
dataset as an example of the value of data sharing and collaboration that resulted in a substantially more accurate
dataset over that possible in previous years in significantly less time. In previous years, data obtained from aerial
imagery was the only source. Parcel data, obtained from the counties, was used in conjunction with aerial imagery to
develop the 1997 dataset; and 3) an overview of the Council’s Internet-based tool to provide interactive access to
its Existing Land Use data.
5. ACTION AND DISCUSSION ITEMS
Regional Parcel Dataset: Private Sector Subcommittee Recommendation
Chairperson Reinhardt thanked the members of the subcommittee and staff for their hard work to meet the
Board’s challenge of a broadly supported recommendation at this meeting.
Kathie Doty, consultant staff to the Subcommittee, summarized the Policy Board’s direction to the
Subcommittee at the April 26 meeting, the Subcommittee participants, the deliberation process and the
Subcommittee’s recommendation.
The key points of the recommendation were:
- An annual fee of $0.01/parcel for access to the non-government version of the regional parcel dataset
(parcel geography plus PIN and address attributes). Payment of this fee would include access to quarterly updates when
they are implemented.
- The Metropolitan Council would serve as the assembly and distribution agent.
- Distribution would be by CD-ROM without any customizing of the data delivered until such time that
MetroGIS would choose to implement automated distribution capabilities for its own needs. [If data are desired for less
than the whole dataset, the requester will need to work directly with the affected county(ies)].
- Only one version of the regional dataset, that produced by Dakota County in fall 1999 less attributes
other than the PIN and address, would be distributed in 2000. The target is the end of September, assuming all
necessary agreements are executed.
- Beginning in 2001, the Council would assemble a current version for distribution to the public and private
sectors and work would be undertaken, as resources permit to develop automated assembly and delivery mechanisms,
assuming the public sector stakeholders identify such mechanisms to be desirable.
Doty commented that it will be each of the counties’ responsibility to guarantee that all fees collected
are consistent with the provisions of the Minnesota Data Practices Law and that an annual review process is proposed to
insure the program remains responsive to changing needs.. Member Kordiak commented he believes the Subcommittee’s
recommendation is sound and that all viewpoints were carefully considered. He also noted he believes that this
recommendation, if put into place, will likely result in the counties reviewing the basis for their fees for
non-government access to parcel attribute data.
Larry Charboneau, speaking on behalf of the private sector, thanked the Policy Board for establishing the
Subcommittee and stated that he believes the $0.01/parcel proposal is very fair. He encouraged each of the counties to
execute all of the necessary agreements. Eli Cooper, speaking on behalf the Council, stated that the Council is
committed to moving forward and that it supports the recommendation.
Schneider asked if the Subcommittee had discussed how to compensate the assembly/distribution agent for the
overhead costs associated with providing these services, such as adding a surcharge to the fee received by the
counties. Chairperson Reinhardt noted that the Policy Board had postponed action on a recommendation presented to it on
April 26th as part of the Business Plan to redirect $75,000 currently paid to the counties as a component of
the data sharing agreements to compensate for these expenses, beginning January 2002. The members concurred that the
postponement should remain in effect at least until the proposed regional parcel dataset pilot project is complete.
Motion: Fiskness moved and Branning seconded the following actions:
- That the MetroGIS Policy Board members request their respective county boards and the Metropolitan Council
to direct their staff to work through the MetroGIS to establish an agreement between the counties and the Metropolitan
Council that will:
- Allow for assembly and distribution of a regional parcel dataset (RPD), as specified in the
proposal presented to the Board on July 19, to the private sector by the distribution agent, the Metropolitan
Council;
- Establish a fee of $.01 per parcel to be charged to interested non-government purchasers of the
regional parcel dataset.
- Establish a mechanism for distribution of revenue from sales based on each county’s proportion
of total parcels in the region.
- Address other concerns of the counties and Council, as needed
- That the MetroGIS staff provide updates on progress towards distribution of the RPD to the Private Sector
representatives of the subcommittee and continue to facilitate the resolution of issues regarding distribution of GIS
data to this sector.
Motion carried ayes all.
The members agreed that if all necessary agreements have not agreed upon by staff of all affected
organizations by the first week in August and that the private sector agreements are ready to be acted on by the
parties, that separate the approval for the private and public sector processes is encouraged to maintain the schedule
for the public sector regional parcel dataset pilot project.
O’Connor commented that Hennepin County views this agreement to reduce its fee to $0.01/parcel as a pilot
project and that if enactment significantly reduces fees currently received from the sale of parcel attribute data,
without a compensating improvement in efficiency, Hennepin County will need to reevaluate its participation.
b) 2000-2001 MetroGIS Work Plan
Chairperson Reinhardt commented that she had asked for this topic to be included as a discussion item to
insure the Board member all have a common understanding of the specific tasks involved in accomplishing the next steps
set forth in the Business Plan, accepted by the Board in April. Policy Advisory Team Chairperson Erdahl commented that
2000-2001 work plan is a detailed version of the next steps set forth in the Business Plan that was accepted by the
Policy Board on April 26. Erdahl also noted that no changes are proposed to the general tasks presented in the Business
Plan to maintain a stable environment until the regional parcel dataset pilot projects are complete. Board members
agreed with the Member Schneider’s suggestion that work should begin immediately to register the name "MetroGIS"
with state and federal authorities, rather than delay this work until December as currently presented in the work plan.
c) Regional Parcel Dataset: Public Sector Pilot Project Randall Johnson summarized the objectives of the
public sector regional parcel dataset pilot project. Trudy Richter thanked each of the county members for the
cooperation that she has received from the county attorneys to finalize the necessary agreement and licensing
documents, noting that the process has been very productive and has likely established a strong base from which to gain
the agreement needed to accomplish distribution to the private sector (Agenda Item 5a). Richter also handed out a model
resolution for each county to use to adopt the proposed agreements. Staff agreed to forward an electronic version of
the resolution to county officials.
d) 2000 Data Practices/Access State law: HF3501 David Arbeit summarized several of the major provisions
of data practices law enacted this past spring as part of HF3501. David Claypool informed the Policy Board of a model
data practices policy prepared by the State that is out for comment. It was noted that each unit of local government
must, by law, enact a data practices policy consistent with State guidelines. Staff agreed to forward information to
Board members about how to obtain a copy of the model policy.
e) MetroGIS Internet Site: Board Member Contact Information The members concurred that they do not want
their pictures posted on the MetroGIS Internet site.
6. INFORMATION ITEMS Chairperson Reinhardt stated that she was very pleased and encouraged by the strong
support MetroGIS’ request for continued funding received from the Council on June 5 and subsequently on June 7.
She thanked Member Williams, the Council’s representative to the MetroGIS Policy Board, for his support and
leadership. Member Williams commented that the data and collaboration received by the Council, as a result of the
MetroGIS initiative, is viewed by Council members as very sound investment.
Chairperson Reinhardt also commented that MetroGIS has been invited to be a presenter at the National City
Engineer’s Conference in April 2001 and that she had asked staff to follow-up on the request.
7. NEXT MEETING: October 18, 2000
8. ADJOURN
The meeting concluded at 8:32 p.m.
Prepared by, Randall Johnson MetroGIS Staff Coordinator
|
